2 readers online now  |  69 million page views

For Waell and the glorious Qur'an? really?

Reader comment on item: Walid Shoebat: "Palestinian turns from radical Muslim to true Zionist"
in response to reader comment: The truth? what truth? who's qualified to say this is it?

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Feb 23, 2007 at 06:38

My dear Waell rabina yu3alimuka ina al-Qur'an kitaban laysa mubeenan wa la kitab bi 3Arabi faseeh

My dear Waell: How good is your Arabic? I study Arabic and I can read the Qur'an in Arabic and I can tell you that the Qur'an is poor literature. It is no match to the likes of Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, or Virgil's Aenid and it no match to the Tripitaka or the Gita or the Bible or the Shahnemah. It is poor literature and nothing is inspiring about it. It is a violent book period and it is full of drivel (eg: surat al-lahab)!

The Qur'an is badly edited. It is full of mistakes in grammar and syntax (would you like to know more?) It is full of non Arabic words (eg; Tur and Rum from Syriac, Zakat from Hebrew, sarat from Latin, Injill from Greek, nasi from Coptic, ababeel and sijil from Persian), and words that have no meaning (eg: ilaf in Surat Quraish and kalala) but it still claims to be a kitab mubeen maktub bi 3Arabi faseeh (oh I forgot that our dear Waell the Pakistani does not know any Arabic) so much for the glorious Qur'an.

In the 3rd century of Islam when the Muslim masorites started their work on the confusing rasm they had no clue what words like MLK in Surat al-Fatiha can be read and is it Maaliki or Malilki? The owner of or the king of and it cannot be both it is either Muhammad heard it as Maaliki (see the Cairo edition of the Qur'an 1923-1924) or as maliki (see the Tunisian edition of the Qur'an 1969) so much for the unedited Qur'an.

And do you know what is most interesting about the Quranic rasm? It had to be edited by the masorites by adding the missing long vowels (alif, yeh, waw) and by inveting the short vowels (fatha, damma, kasra) and adding the double consonants (shadda) and indicating the no short vowels (sukun). What is most bizarre is that it was non Arabs that exmamined the Arabic grammar the likes of Sibawayhe and the man that invented the short vowles more likey than not was Hunein ibn Ishaq who was not even a Muslim as he was nestorian. He is also credited for intorducing many words (based on Sibawayhe's F3L) in the Arabic language the likes of safra and balgham (and you will find such words as perfect words in Liasn al-3Arab the Qamoos) words that Muhammad and his generation would have had no clue about their meanings. So what were the Arabs doing in the meantime? They were doing what they always did best: loot, enslave, kill, destory and brutalize (your ancestors included here) and claim that these atrocities are in the name of the God of the universe and more bizarre that this God and his rasul will get 1/5 of the loot. Shame.

What is even more funny is that the 3Ulama in the 3rd century had no clue what these strange letters at the begining of some Suras mean. So for a kitab mubeen.

even more funny is that the masorites misread proper names in the Quranic rasm and case in point is al-raqeem in the story of Ahl al-Kahf which more likely than not the name of Decius (In Syriac it is DQS and in the confusing rasm the dal could be read as reh and then we have the qaf and then the seen can be read as meem and now we have RQM) so the raqeem (sic) ani't no dog.

Do you know what this really means our dear Waell who has to depend on a translation to read such a confusing book?

It means that:

1. The Quranic logias and pericopes pre-dated Muhammad.

2. Or the Qur'an was not canonized until the 3rd century of Islam (see QS) and by then no one had any clue what the Qur'an was really saying.

But do you know what this means? Well this detaches Muhammad form the Qur'an and detaches Islam from Arabic and places Islam where it belongs as the product of the great civilizations of the Middle east and that the rule of the Arabs in their own imperialism was marginal at best.

So which one is it our dear Waell?

As for Quranic translations stay away from Pakistani translations. Bofore you can pontificate about Arabic a language that you do not know I suggest that you learn it first.

Now you are no arab and are you aware that your Allah in Q14:4 says that Muhammad was sent to his Hijazi Arabs only. Now you are out to defend the religion of the Arsb and Arabian imperialism which more likely than not brutlaized your ancestors and for this I say shame..

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 For Waell and the glorious Qur'an? really? 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.)