2 readers online now  |  69 million page views

The problems of the Qur'an as a literary text! Persians, al-Kalam al-Mukarrar and the Mountain!

Reader comment on item: How Fares Western Civ?
in response to reader comment: Modern Philology – Differing Prolegomenas for Differing Approaches

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Aug 18, 2020 at 08:03

You wrote:

>Now, as this is being written, some remarks of yours are coming back, not the least of which, knowing who in actuality wrote the Quran.

The truth is we just do not know. However, there is a literary phenomenon in the Qur'an that has been called by al-Mufasereen: al-Kalam al-Mukarrar and this is from an old post of mine:

_______________________________________________________________________________________
1. al-kalam al-mukarrar or الكلم المكرر is really the fact that Allah is in the habit of repeating himself ad nauseum and here is what Sheikh al-Azhar tells us (for those of you that can read Arabic) about it http://elazhar.com/qadaiaux/8.asp and what he tells us that this phenomenon can be explained on the basis of what is called asbab al-nuzul (reasons for revelations) or Allah must have had a reason to reveal the same literary material more than once

But the problem is this is far from the truth and here is an example

If we read Q16:66 it says

وان لكم في الانعام لعبرة نسقيكم في نطونه

Now let us read Q23:22 it says

وان لكم في الانعام لعبرة نسقيكم في نطونها

Notice that we have the same words word for word except the last word on the left where in the first literary version it is butunih (sic) and in the second literary version it is butuniha and by the way the first version is a mistake in grammar as the word al-an3am is supposed to be a feminine word and therefore the last word should also be in the feminine case or butuniha

Now you can see why it is embarrassing to Muslims because it is a mistake in Arabic grammar but the real explanations here is: We have two transmissions of almost the same literary material which really means that it is either Allah made a mistake in grammar then later on he fixed it or that we have two authors both familiar with the pericope but one was familiar with proper Arabic grammar and the second one was not which really means that the Qur'an must have multiple authors

Now what really happened here is that the persons who collected the Qur'an in the way we have it now just stitched such literary material without editing and I do believe that this is indeed what really happened and John Wansbrough is very correct

This means that the Qur'an must have multiple authors. This also explains why the Qur'an is such a heterogeneous book
_____________________________________________________________________________________

>Debates about this has been contentious for many over the centuries but as you have alluded, the Persian influence makes more sense now than in the past.

Most likely that the Muslim Mobeds (or Zoroastrian priests that converted to Islam) brought their old religion with them to Islam. Remember, history is about continuity. Without the Persians scholars that wrote the earliest books of Islam, we would not have the Islam we have today. Islam is an invention of the very sophisticated Persian minds.

>The connectivity of Arabic in its survivorship of things Aramaic/Syriac, blended with the Persian embrace (which actually has some intersection with Biblical inferences of nations under scrutiny for interfering with Israel and Judea), has now come into view with the what is happening in the region. It is, as they say, now coming together.

BTW: We know at least the meaning of two of the 9 Arabic words in my previous post, and here is the meaning of the word Tuud.
______________________________________________________________________________________

1. We can find the word طود in Q26:63! The verse talks about Moses splitting the Red Sea and the end result is:

فَكَانَ كُلُّ فِرْقٍ كَالطَّوْدِ الْعَظِيمِ

Or: And each division became like a great طود (Tuud)

Notice that I left the word طود or Tuud untranslated because there is no such Arabic word

If we turn to al-Tabari he tells us that the word طود means الجبل or the mountain which is not true. In actual fact the word طود must be a misreading of the Quranic word طور or Tuur.

al-Tabari also tells us that the word طور is a loan word from السريانية or from the Syriac language where the word mountain is Tura or ܛܘܪܐ

http://www.assyrianlanguages.org/sureth/dosearch.php?searchkey=5051&language=id

This is what really happened: The Syriac letter R is: ܪ Notice the dot above the slope. Syriac letter D is: ܕ or the dot is below the slope. To untrained eye the Syriac letter R can be read as D and now we have the Arabic طود or Tuud in the verse instead of the correct (but still Syriac) طور or Tuur

Why did this happen? The editor who was reading the verse must have been reading a Syriac text and he misread the letter R and read it as D!

And more evidence that the claim by the Islamic historical tradition that the Qur'an was first memorized is just not true..
______________________________________________________________________________________

The real tragedy of Islam is that their revered scholars reject the past and call it the age of ignorance, when in actual fact if these scholars are familiar with the pre-Islamic civilizations and languages they will be able to understand what the Quanic text is really saying.

Submitting....

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".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to The problems of the Qur'an as a literary text! Persians, al-Kalam al-Mukarrar and the Mountain! by dhimmi no more

Email me if someone replies to my comment

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".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)