The collection of the Qur'an and other muslim fantasies

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Dec 7, 2008 at 07:44

Our dear masood the wannabe arab wrote

>>Dhimmi no more writes,>The simple answer is: we just do not know much about how the Qur'an was collected or edited. The story of the collection of the Qur'an as provided to us by the islamic tradtion does not make any sense.<

Oh our dear masood knows how to read

>It is very important thing like Mr. Dhimmi many non- Muslim scholars believe and try to convince others as they speculate but it does not become truth.

Our dear masood we infidels examine the evidence provided by your masters the Arabs. You? you believe anything you are told by your masters the Arabs and this is where the difference lies

The evidence we have about the collection of the Qur'an as transmitted by the Islamic historical tradition does not make any sense. And I challenge you to prove me wrong and here is your bonus for today: we do not have a copy of the Qur'an that could be dated before the year 900CE

>It looks so nonsense to think about validity of Quran when Quran has been in the memory of Muslims and in written form since God started revealing to Mohammad. ( only Quran has this distinction to other scriptures )

Memeory of muslims? Really? then how come we have no clue about what these words really mean?

1. Ilaf in surat quraish, ababbel wa sijeel, kalala and how come we have no clue about what those strange letters in some suras really mean?

2. And did Muhammad the Arabian warlrod and caravan raider hear the word MLK in surat al-fatiha as maaliki (see the Cairo edition of the Qur'an) or maliki (see the Tunisian edition of the Qur'an)?

3. And what ever happened to ayat al-rajm? Oh I forgot it was eaten by a hungry goat and what a joke

Do you know what these simple examples mean? Let me help you:

1. It means that either the Quranic material pre-date Muhammad and by the time of his death no one had a clue what all this drivel really means

2. Or after the death of Muhammad we had circulating logias and pericopes and they were collected by the ulama (in the 3rd century and by the masorites in particular) but by then no one had a clue what the Qur'an is really saying amd here is an example in surat al-tahreem did Muhammad the Arabian warlord and caravan raider eat some bad 3asl nahl (see ibn kathir) or was there really a maria al-qibtiya that caused such havoc in his little abode and you know what? It cannot be both. And this means that we really do not know what the Qur'an is really saying in the case of surat al-tahreem and why is that our dear masood ?

3. Why would the author of the Qur'an use asateer al-qudama' in the Qur'an the likes of al-isra'eeliat (and no there is no historical evidence that Jews indeed existed in Arabic in the late antique period) and the literature of the Greeks and the Syrians as in the case of qissat dhul qaranain and qissat ahl al-kahf and why would the author of the Qur'an palgiarize the likes of qissat al-isra' wa al-mi3raj from the Zoroastrian book Arat Viraf unless this plagiarism indeed took place out side of Arabia as we do not even have sound historical evidence that there was such a thing as Meccan trade.

4. Oh and this is really beyond your madrassa eduaction: and how do we explain the Quranic phenomenon of 'vraiant traditions" as in the case of the two garden tradition and the shu3aib tradition (see JW) unless, and in the words of Michael Cook, these traditions are the product of " independent, possibly regional traditions incorporated more or less intact in the canonical compilation" So much for the word of Allah.

You did not get this one did you?

But you know what? this will detach Muhammad from the Qur'an and Islam from Arabia and place the origin of Islam out side in Arabia and in the civilized Middle East (Iran and Mesopotamia in the late antique period)

I urge you to abandon Islam and be free again

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".