The Qur'an is a text with no context

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Jun 12, 2011 at 07:56

Musa wrote

>The koran is not comprehensive at all,, because it depends on hundreds of Books of Hadith,(starting from sahih,(alBukhari,Muslem,Ibn majah,Al'Nissa'ee,Abu Da'wood,Al'Tu'rmouzee,) Musaned Ahmad, etc...

Thank you Musa and you are very correct. The Qur'an is really a confused and confusing book (why would the author of the Qura'n has the likes of al-nasikh wa al-mansukh as in why would we have la ikrah fi al-deen but also iqtoloo al-mushrikeen). And even if we assume that the ulama did agree on what the rasm really says (and the truth they did not because is it maaliki or maliki in surat al-fatiha) and how about the missing parts of the Qur'an as in the case of ayat al-rajm and ayat rida3at al-kabeer and both of them we are told are not in the Qur'an because they were written on palm leaf that was eaten by a hungry goat)

Without the ahadith and al-sirat al-nabawiyya wa 3ilm al-maghazi we would have no clue what the Qur'an is really saying. And we know now that the ahadith are all bogus and made up in the 3rd century by the ulama to explain what the Qur'an is saying and the sira is unhistorical.

And if you read the Qur'an alone you will realize that no one would be able to reconstruct the life of Muhammad by reading the Qur'an only (You will find his name mentioned only 4 times and one time as Ahmad and even this Muhammad is not linked with the so called Muhammad of that place called Mecca) and what is most bizarre is that you will find the name of Musa about 124 times!

In the words of Peters the Qur'an is a text with no context

And why would an Arabic book that calls itself a mikab mubeen when this is really far from the truth and why would a Quranan 3arabiyan has its share of non Arabic words and most of them are Syriac words?

We will never know because the islamic historical tradition is the most destructive tradition of its past

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".