NationStates Jolt Archive

I mean ... really read it? Sat down with it, cover to cover, and read it? Including any commentary and referrence that goes along with it?

There's a lot of Islam bashing on this forum and has been since the day I signed on to these forums. I'm curious to know if the people bashing have actually *read* the book or if they just take someone's word for its contents.

I have enough uni textbooks to read without reading more fiction, thanks.

I've never read it and so I try not to get involved in any discussions about it. Would you recommend it?

Nope. It's backwards, so I could never read it.

Trilby63;11707856']Would you recommend it?

It's nice. Like any religious text, it's a little strange to read if you don't believe what it's saying.

Since we live in a time where Islam is on the lips of the "enemy" (as it were), it's often a good idea to know if what they believe is really what their religion teaches them.

Friends close, enemies closer. That sort of thing.

So, yeah, I recommend it. If you find a new path in life out of it, kudos! If not, at least you'll be armed with the knowledge that neither the terrorists nor the bashers know fuck-all of what they're spewing. :)

Um, the "No" options on that poll are really only for bashers, not for "normal" people. *mopes*

I haven't read it, but not for some evil reason. I haven't read the bible, either.

Guess I'll have to vote for Pie (because Allah/God forbid I ever don't vote on a poll :rolleyes:).

Nope. It's backwards, so I could never read it.

Turn it upside down, silly.

I mean ... really read it? Sat down with it, cover to cover, and read it? Including any commentary and referrence that goes along with it?

There's a lot of Islam bashing on this forum and has been since the day I signed on to these forums. I'm curious to know if the people bashing have actually *read* the book or if they just take someone's word for its contents.

No, but I've got a site that contains an english translation bookmarked in case I ever want to look something up.

Um, the "No" options on that poll are really only for bashers, not for "normal" people. *mopes*

The 2nd "No" option is for folks like you. :)

I've only read passages. People have told me it translates poorly into English though and that it's better in Arabic. I know nothing of Arabic and I don't have time or reason to learn it so I feel fine reading the occasional passage here and there.

Greek mythology is better, why read something inferior? Hell Norse is better. Mead of Poetry!

The 2nd "No" option is for folks like you. :)

Ah, but it most certainly isn't.
First, "I just don't want to" is not the same as "I haven't".
Second, using "nothing against XY" is in 99% of cases nothing but a huge honking caveat.

BUT - it's okay, you're interested in the bashers' reading prowess, after all.
Plus, you gave us other folks some pie. ;)

I have a tradition of not reading religious books, on the grounds that they're really boring. I still haven't gotten through Genesis. (read quite a few other books)

I'm currently trudging through the Bible but once I've finished that (and recuperated) I'll probably make time to read the Qur'an.

Is the Qur'an as repetitive as the Old Testament?

I mean ... really read it? Sat down with it, cover to cover, and read it? Including any commentary and referrence that goes along with it?

There's a lot of Islam bashing on this forum and has been since the day I signed on to these forums. I'm curious to know if the people bashing have actually *read* the book or if they just take someone's word for its contents.

I've read some of it. I have a copy somewhere. I also have a couple of Bibles, the book of Mormon, Dianetics, a couple copies of the Bhagavad Gita, the Tao Te Ching, the Analects, and several other religious texts. And that's all in addition to quite a few Buddhist texts.

Oh, and I'll point out that I've not read any cover to cover.

Plus, you gave us other folks some pie. ;)

Ah ... point taken. Not my intention, though.

Pie is good. Yes. Mmmmmm pie!

Yes, I've read it and studied it - well, that is an english translation of it anyways.

Is the Qur'an as repetitive as the Old Testament?

Not so much, no. It's also a bit more poetic. I'd suggest getting one with a *lot* of commentary. I mean ... a lot. The commentary in mine is as long as the book itself.

I guess I'll have to pick the pie option.

I recently bought a copy of the Qur'an and have all intentions of sitting down and reading it. I just haven't yet. =)

Of course, it is an English translation of the Qur'an, so I guess there are those who would say that I don't actually have a copy at all.

Of course, it is an English translation of the Qur'an, so I guess there are those who would say that I don't actually have a copy at all.

The Yusuf Ali translation is widely acknowledged in Muslim circles as perfectly fine for non-Arab speaking people. It's the one nearly all Mosques in the U.S. give to anyone for the asking. :)

Just out of curiousity, is there any reason you said 'read Qur'an', without a 'the'?

The Yusuf Ali translation is widely acknowledged in Muslim circles as perfectly fine for non-Arab speaking people. It's the one nearly all Mosques in the U.S. give to anyone for the asking. :)

IIRC, that's the one I got. I seem to remember you suggesting it a while back. =)

The cover described it as being a widely recognized translation because it is more of a direct translation, rather than one that incorporates Shariah (sp?) law and other things that came after the Qur'an itself.

No, and so I don't claim to know anything about it.

Here everyone go read it:
http://www.islam101.com/quran/yusufAli/

I recomend the part about Jesus, where he pops out of Mary and starts telling people things right away. Somehow I imagine people in that era running screaming from a talking baby who says : "I am indeed a servant of Allah. He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet"

I mean seriously I would be like WTF even if it was baby Jesus.

Just out of curiousity, is there any reason you said 'read Qur'an', without a 'the'?

Because there's only 1 Qur'an. I wouldn't say 'the Jurrasic Park' either.

I do say 'the Bible', because the Bible is a compilation of books. Qur'an isn't.

Because there's only 1 Qur'an. I wouldn't say 'the Jurrasic Park' either.

I do say 'the Bible', because the Bible is a compilation of books. Qur'an isn't.
Interesting.

It's nice. Like any religious text, it's a little strange to read if you don't believe what it's saying.

Since we live in a time where Islam is on the lips of the "enemy" (as it were), it's often a good idea to know if what they believe is really what their religion teaches them.

Friends close, enemies closer. That sort of thing.

So, yeah, I recommend it. If you find a new path in life out of it, kudos! If not, at least you'll be armed with the knowledge that neither the terrorists nor the bashers know fuck-all of what they're spewing. :)

I'll add it to my reading list.

Actually, I don't have such a list. I'll endevour to make a reading list and then add it. Somewhere near the top.

I mean ... really read it? Sat down with it, cover to cover, and read it? Including any commentary and referrence that goes along with it?

There's a lot of Islam bashing on this forum and has been since the day I signed on to these forums. I'm curious to know if the people bashing have actually *read* the book or if they just take someone's word for its contents.

There has been plenty of Jew bashing and Christian bashing too, A shedload of scientologist bashing. Not a little bit of wiccan pagan and satanist bashing.

In fact the only group who seems to not get nearly as much crap as they start and give are the aethiests.

The Buddhists dont take much stick from anyone but they dont go out all red faced and screaming for justice and a bit of understanding either. They seem a pretty calm and self assured rather than ego driven group those Biddhists do.

Anyway Im not sure whether Im advocating a religious counterattack on the atheists or advocating that all learn from the Buddha's subtler and humbler ways. either way would be fine. I think however that the way to get people to understand the kind and calm and wise side of Islam then you need to show that side. Nobody wants to be told that they are ignorant and must read and understand all of Islamic scripture and ancilliary papers before they have earned the privilige of talking to a Muslim. As I recall you dont tend to read before you shout out an opinion. Must we all feed from the same filthy plate of disrespect until it spoils further and turns to hate??

Because there's only 1 Qur'an. I wouldn't say 'the Jurrasic Park' either.

I do say 'the Bible', because the Bible is a compilation of books. Qur'an isn't.

Shouldn't you use 'The' rather than 'the' or nothing at all then if there is only one Qur'an

I mean seriously I would be like WTF even if it was baby Jesus.

I don't know which is worse ... the talking baby Jesus or the zombie Jesus of the NT.

...
I do say 'the Bible', because the Bible is a compilation of books. Qur'an isn't.

Yes it is. Is was written as individual sections separated by different names, written over a period of many years. Why would you say it wasn't a compilation?

I don't know which is worse ... the talking baby Jesus or the zombie Jesus of the NT.

Zombie Jesus has the strength of the undead whilst all talking baby Jesus can do is whine and cry and piss and poop. Zombie Jesus wins.

Shouldn't you use 'The' rather than 'the' or nothing at all then if there is only one Qur'an

Nothing at all suffices.

I would say "You should read Torah" or "You should read Atlas Shrugged" or "You should read Penthouse" or "You should read Qur'an". All in the same capacity.

Yes it is. Is was written as individual sections separated by different names, written over a period of many years. Why would you say it wasn't a compilation?

Same author. Any book may have chapters of differing titles, written over a period of time, but that doesn't change that it's just 1 book.

The Bible is various authors and various books jammed together.

Same author. Any book may have chapters of differing titles, written over a period of time, but that doesn't change that it's just 1 book.

The Bible is various authors and various books jammed together.

So if I compile one hardcover book with all of the Tolkien books in it, they suddenly become Lord of the Rings and now they are not different books?

So if I compile one hardcover book with all of the Tolkien books in it, they suddenly become Lord of the Rings and now they are not different books?

No, becuase the compilation is titled "The Lord of the Rings" ... would you say "the The Lord of the Rings"? No, you wouldn't.

Has something happened to NSG? Keruvalia makes a post about that islamic holy book and instead of the usual bashing I've come to expect you people are argueing about the name of the damn thing? I can honestly say I did not see that coming.

There has been plenty of Jew bashing and Christian bashing too, A shedload of scientologist bashing. Not a little bit of wiccan pagan and satanist bashing.

This thread isn't about them.

The Buddhists dont take much stick from anyone but they dont go out all red faced and screaming for justice and a bit of understanding either.

They prefer to set themselves on fire. To each their own.

I think however that the way to get people to understand the kind and calm and wise side of Islam then you need to show that side.

It's been shown. Lots. Just doesn't garner media attention.

Nobody wants to be told that they are ignorant and must read and understand all of Islamic scripture and ancilliary papers before they have earned the privilige of talking to a Muslim.

Nobody is saying that. However, I don't believe anyone should have the right to bash a religion in a copy/paste capacity without actually knowing what they're even talking about. People who do that should have their ass handed to them.

As I recall you dont tend to read before you shout out an opinion.

I give everything its due attention.

Trilby63;11708117']Has something happened to NSG? Keruvalia makes a post about that islamic holy book and instead of the usual bashing I've come to expect you people are argueing about the name of the damn thing? I can honestly say I did not see that coming.

I didn't see it coming either, but not much surprises me around here anymore. :)

The Yusuf Ali translation is widely acknowledged in Muslim circles as perfectly fine for non-Arab speaking people. It's the one nearly all Mosques in the U.S. give to anyone for the asking. :)

I thought that once any transliteration of the Quran occured the result was no longer considered to be the direct word of Allah . Translations downgrade it to maybe the level of the Sunnah. I guess though that as you said a translation is close enough for non Arabs.

Same author. Any book may have chapters of differing titles, written over a period of time, but that doesn't change that it's just 1 book.

The Bible is various authors and various books jammed together.

"jammed".... I like this none to subtle slight. :rolleyes:

I thought that once any transliteration of the Quran was not considered to be the direct word of Allah were not deemed the direct word of Allah. Translations downgrade it to maybe the level of the Sunnah. I guess though that as you said a translation is close enough for non Arabs.

That attitude has been changing since the abolishment of the Caliphate. Considering less than 15% of the world's Muslim population is Arab ... well ... you get the idea.

Yes I have read a lot of it. I have an english copy, and an arabic copy. The arabic copy is for the purpose of teaching me how to read and write in that said language. I find it a very interesting text, one that, with the right ammount of "evidence", can be used to spread violence, or one that can be used to promote peace beyond end. Sort of like the Bible. I recommend it to anyone that has any interest in Islam, or just someone that has a few free minutes on their hands. I think that for any one new to it, they should read the last few Surahs(chapters/books) as they are rather poetic almost like the Psalms of the Bible.

"jammed".... I like this none to subtle slight. :rolleyes:

Not a slight unless you're overly tender in your sensibilities.

'Jammed' is actually an appropriate term considering that the Bible we know today was decided upon a very long time ago (possibly in a galaxy far, far away) by various Catholic councils on the basis of marketability and control.

Otherwise, suit yourself.

I read the more controversial areas of the Qur'an, like Al-Nisa(women) and the suras about warfare. I just started reading it cover to cover 2 days ago, I'm on the second sura(its ssssoooo long!:( )

i haven't read the qu'ran, but I want to at some point. I do get into discussions about islam anyway for one main reason- I've lived in saudi arabi (therefore, I know many islamic people and have heard a lot about islam from them and for one of my class we learnt a bunch about islam). I tend to think that i have some knowledge about the Qu'ran

No, becuase the compilation is titled "The Lord of the Rings" ... would you say "the The Lord of the Rings"? No, you wouldn't.

None of the individual books are called "The Lord of the Rings" the parts of books Tolkien called 1-6 are called "The Lord of the Rings" but if I made a card cover book with all of Tolkien’s writings in it, including the Hobbit and the Similarian, the Lost books and the new one his son just published in his name etc., this new singular book would match what you called a book by one author and being one story. But I disagree, the singular compilation would not remove the fact that the individual sections were separated at their time of release. The Qur’an was released in the sections it was written in. The entire book we have today was a compilation of all the previous public releases.

The Qur’an was released in the sections it was written in. The entire book we have today was a compilation of all the previous public releases.

The novels "David Copperfield" and "Oliver Twist" were also released chapter by chapter in magazines. We don't put "the" in front of them either.

Why? Same Author!

The novels "David Copperfield" and "Oliver Twist" were also released chapter by chapter in magazines. We don't put "the" in front of them either.

Why? Same Author!

The cover of my copy says "The Noble Qur'an" you can argue with that if you want.

The cover of my copy says "The Noble Qur'an" you can argue with that if you want.

Your copy is, then, titled "The Noble Qur'an". Hence, you wouldn't say, "Have you read the The Noble Qur'an?"

Your copy, however, is based on the original "Qur'an". Probably as read by Imam Hafs.

Somebody may have already said this, but I believe there is a belief out there among Muslims that the Qu'ran only makes sense when read in Arabic. I believe there was a big deal when American converts to Islam translated it to English back in the day.

As to the question, I have read passages of it when required by my school classes, though I have only a passing interest in reading the rest.

Yes I have read a lot of it. I have an english copy, and an arabic copy. The arabic copy is for the purpose of teaching me how to read and write in that said language. I find it a very interesting text, one that, with the right ammount of "evidence", can be used to spread violence, or one that can be used to promote peace beyond end. Sort of like the Bible. I recommend it to anyone that has any interest in Islam, or just someone that has a few free minutes on their hands. I think that for any one new to it, they should read the last few Surahs(chapters/books) as they are rather poetic almost like the Psalms of the Bible.
I've seen several different translations, including one meant for Wahhabis.

It's title is the Noble Quran. It has "extras" in it.

Apparently wildly popular in Saudi Arabia, it has an extra emphasis on killing Jews and Christians.

The Hadith are worth reading as well, as are anything you can find from old Islamic scholars like Zangi.

I've seen several different translations, including one meant for Wahhabis.

It's title is the Noble Quran. It has "extras" in it.

Apparently wildly popular in Saudi Arabia, it has an extra emphasis on killing Jews and Christians.

The Hadith are worth reading as well, as are anything you can find from old Islamic scholars like Zangi.

Mine is titled "The meanings of the Illustrious Qur'an" Before each Surah, it has a little about it, and when it was written, very insightful.

I mean ... really read it? Sat down with it, cover to cover, and read it? Including any commentary and referrence that goes along with it?

There's a lot of Islam bashing on this forum and has been since the day I signed on to these forums. I'm curious to know if the people bashing have actually *read* the book or if they just take someone's word for its contents.

I have only read Qur'an in English translation... which, according to a muslim friend, means I have never read it at all, really.

From what I've seen on the forum, that puts me in a very small minority... even smaller (though, not by much) than the group of people that have ACTUALLY read the Bible from cover to cover.

People don't like to read these big books, it seems. They'd rather have someone explain to them what they think it means.

"jammed".... I like this none to subtle slight. :rolleyes:

Jammed describes it, though. If you have ever actually read Hebrew scripture separately from Greek scripture, without assuming that the two are somehow connected, they are almost irreconcilable.

Greek mythology is better, why read something inferior? Hell Norse is better. Mead of Poetry!
Hail the Gods of old times!

HEIL THE ASIR!
HEIL THE GODS!
HEIL MIGHTY WOTAN!

WOTAN MIT UNS!
WOTAN UBER ALLES!

DRINK THE MEAD OF WAR AND POETRY!


Stanza #*140

Lee M. Hollander:

From the son of Bolthorn, Bestla's father,
I mastered mighty songs nine,
and a drink I had of the dearest mead,
got from out of Othroerir.

Modern Suggestion:

From the Well of Mimir, son of Bolthorn,

who Bestla's* father be,
I mastered nine mighty songs,
and I had a drink of the mead,
I drank from a horn called Othroerir,

the mead of inspiration it be.

*Bestla, by Buri, is Odin's mother

I mean ... really read it? Sat down with it, cover to cover, and read it? Including any commentary and referrence that goes along with it?

There's a lot of Islam bashing on this forum and has been since the day I signed on to these forums. I'm curious to know if the people bashing have actually *read* the book or if they just take someone's word for its contents.

I read it, from an appologetics standpoint, so I suppose that doesn't count for you?

I read it, from an appologetics standpoint, so I suppose that doesn't count for you?

A new smunkee? I confuse. :(

I'll be damned then America and Islam both have something in common after all. Bashing.

I am starting to feel like some people here are living miserable lives so they have nothing better to do than to bicker and bash, bicker and bash.

I actually have come to the conclusion that there is still more good in this world than bad. It's just that the bad seems to be much louder than the good. Just my two cents. thanks :D

A new smunkee? I confuse. :(

it's a new one, but the same one......uh.......smunkeeville was messed up the other day so I created a puppet because I was in heated debate, and now I am sometimes too lazy to type the "ville" portion.

Not a slight unless you're overly tender in your sensibilities.

'Jammed' is actually an appropriate term considering that the Bible we know today was decided upon a very long time ago (possibly in a galaxy far, far away) by various Catholic councils on the basis of marketability and control.

Otherwise, suit yourself.

Nah- not tender at all. Just observant.

You're always slick in your condescension.

Nope, never read it. Also never been in a discussion about it or based on it, though.

it's a new one, but the same one......uh.......smunkeeville was messed up the other day so I created a puppet because I was in heated debate, and now I am sometimes too lazy to type the "ville" portion.

All Smunkees are good smunkees. Now I just need to come up with something quoteworthy for the marionette version... :)

You're always slick in your condescension.

It's well lubricated, yes, but not my intention with that particular wording.

I haven't reading it, though when I have time I would. I'm not a Muslim-bashing moron, btw. What option should I vote?

Greek mythology is better, why read something inferior? Hell Norse is better. Mead of Poetry!

why not read both?

I haven't reading it, though when I have time I would. What option should I vote?

Pie ... when in doubt, always go with Pie.

Jammed describes it, though. If you have ever actually read Hebrew scripture separately from Greek scripture, without assuming that the two are somehow connected, they are almost irreconcilable.

you may be right, Grave_n_idle, but there was more to that. You've been around long enough to know I'm not crazy. Or "tender".

It's well lubricated, yes, but not my intention with that particular wording.

Ok. Most likely it was subconsious. I've been a student long enough, I dont miss much of what a teacher says. Or wants to say.

You've been around long enough to know I'm not crazy. Or "tender".

Perhaps you just need to cook longer. Mmmm ... slow roast CL ... pass the gravy.

Prefer to rely on other's interpretation of it - recently, worldwide protests against free speech, the odd riot/arson attack, and nun slaying.

I do know a fair bit about the historical Mohammed however, which has kept me from wanting to read anything based on his teachings. I'd read it in translation if I wanted to debate it in depth, though.

Prefer to rely on other's interpretation of it - recently, worldwide protests against free speech, the odd riot/arson attack, and nun slaying.

So who's word do you take? The frothing at the mouth terrorists who do such things as scream "Death to Jews" or, say, Muhammed himself who said "Anyone who is an advesary to the Jews and Christians will be my advesary at Judgement."

Which one of them is right?

There's a lot of Islam bashing on this forum and has been since the day I signed on to these forums. I'm curious to know if the people bashing have actually *read* the book or if they just take someone's word for its contents.

You know, most of the bashing I see around doesn't focus as much on the book and its direct teachings as it doesn on the various interpretations and/or actions/words of those who call themselves / are perceived as Muslims 'in their capacity as Muslims', so to speak.

IMHO, it's a very important difference; the same difference it makes to me whether one criticizes the Christina faith, the Bible, or extremists who call their actions Christian.

That said, I don't think one'll have to have read the Qur'an in order to criticize (one will not have to bash in any case, with whatever target) the actions or words of people who profess themselves as Muslims and still call oneself knowledgeable enough on the topic to make one's point. It's only when I start talking about how their actions are bad *because* they are Muslim, and not because of what they say or do no matter their religious faith, and/or when I talk about their 'not adhering to the true teachings of Qur'an' that I better shut up and read first.

P.S. A thread accumulating Keruvalia, Uncle Gravy, and CL? Must stay awake!

So who's word do you take? The frothing at the mouth terrorists who do such things as scream "Death to Jews" or, say, Muhammed himself who said "Anyone who is an advesary to the Jews and Christians will be my advesary at Judgement."

Which one of them is right?

? I'm not judging by terrorists' actions! I'm judging islam by the actions of muslims, and islam is not portrayed well by them.

Actually, you can almost excuse terrorists - they are, as you say, frothing at the mouth (or at least at the brain).

You know, most of the bashing I see around doesn't focus as much on the book and its direct teaching as on the various interpretations and/or actions/words of those who call themselves / are perceived as Muslims 'in their capacity as Muslims', so to speak.

I think the problem is that many of those bashers will tell you that the Qur'an orders Muslims to "convert by the sword" and to wage war on those of other religions, simply because they do it. Most such people have either never read Qur'an at all, or have read only bits and pieces (and you can find just about anything if you take things out of context, I'm sure).

Basically, they have never read it, so they assume that the militant interpretations are the text itself.

? I'm not judging by terrorists' actions! I'm judging islam by the actions of muslims, and islam is not portrayed well by them.

I would have to disagree. All of the Muslims I have known have portrayed Islam quite well. I actually have a great deal of respect for them and I cannot remember ever seeing any of them act disrespectfully towards another.

I'm judging islam by the actions of muslims

I suspect you're judging Islam by the actions of Muslims that the media shows.

If you were to judge Islam by the actual actions of the vast majority of Muslims, you'd find it a nice, peaceable way to exist.

Perhaps you just need to cook longer. Mmmm ... slow roast CL ... pass the gravy.

I've been cooking a while, Keruvalia-you know that by now. I'm not one of your impressionable youths.

There's no reason to believe that a word of it is true. So why should I waste my time?

I suspect you're judging Islam by the actions of Muslims that the media shows.

If you were to judge Islam by the actual actions of the vast majority of Muslims, you'd find it a nice, peaceable way to exist.

And the same is absolutely true of the vast majority of Christians and Jews. Its when defects try to justify their own cockeyed views by slanted interpretations do we have extremism.

Its funny that extremists dont practice the charity or treating others as you'd have them treat you aspects- They instead choose to preach intolerance of others and encourage others to violence.

In me experience, if I have seen someone so enraged by another that they are thinking or talking about harming the offender, I have tended to make attempts at calming and difusing the situation. I'm really good at making homicidal people stop and take a deep breath-clear their head.

I cant imagine going along with it and saying-"You take that? I would kill that bastard and his family and everone he knows,burn down his house and where he works!!!!"

I've been cooking a while, Keruvalia-you know that by now. I'm not one of your impressionable youths.

Bah ... then you should be plenty tender by now!

There's no reason to believe that a word of it is true. So why should I waste my time?

Why not ...

There is no reason to believe that the Foundation series by asmov was true but I read it out of intrest

I dont believe the bible is true ... its still intresting to read it and see what motivates people and what all the fuss is about

And the same is absolutely true of the vast majority of Christians and Jews. Its when defects try to justify their own cockeyed views by slanted interpretations do we have extremism.

Its funny that extremists dont practice the charity or treating others as you'd have them treat you aspects- They instead choose to preach intolerance of others and encourage others to violence.

In me experience, if I have seen someone so enraged by another that they are thinking or talking about harming the offender, I have tended to make attempts at calming and difusing the situation. I'm really good at making homicidal people stop and take a deep breath-clear their head.

I cant imagine going along with it and saying-"You take that? I would kill that bastard and his family and everone he knows,burn down his house and where he works!!!!"


You know ... I think that's the longest post I've ever seen you make.

Also, I agree with it 100%.

I think the problem is that many of those bashers will tell you that the Qur'an orders Muslims to "convert by the sword" and to wage war on those of other religions, simply because they do it. Most such people have either never read Qur'an at all, or have read only bits and pieces (and you can find just about anything if you take things out of context, I'm sure).

Basically, they have never read it, so they assume that the militant interpretations are the text itself.

As I said, the moment you talk about how a Muslim's actions are (not) a reflection of the Qur'an's teachings, Keruvalia's implication you better pick up that book and read is the correct answer.

Yet while I admit that I tired of them and only read the Muslim bashing thread rather sparingly these days, I rerember them as mostly just criticizing the words/actions and only using the name 'Islam' instead of 'these Muslims I saw on TV', but rarely ever talking about the teachings themselves.

Why not ...

There is no reason to believe that the Foundation series by asmov was true but I read it out of intrest

I dont believe the bible is true ... its still intresting to read it and see what motivates people and what all the fuss is about

Well sure, if you find reading archaic texts fun, I'm not going to stop you :P

Well sure, if you find reading archaic texts fun, I'm not going to stop you :P

I find reading fiction in general fun … but you asked why if you don’t think it’s true. I just used to Socratic Method to answer your question.

There are plenty of interesting things out there one does not have to believe a single word of them to read them.

I have read Qur'an. I started at the last sura and worked my way to the first. While I have to admit I didn't like it much, I did enjoy it far more than say, the book of Isaiah from the OT. Was that ever a yawner. Abrahamic mythology is not the most interesting reading. Though the translation I read was not the Yusuf Ali, it was quite poetic. But not as poetic as the Tao te Ching.

I have to say that like other religious texts, it is one that can be used to support all sorts of things, both good and bad. For this reason, I assume there are Muslim creationists out there.:eek:

For this reason, I assume there are Muslim creationists out there.:eek:

Oddly enough, yes. It kinda floored me, too. But what really got me - and this is true - I've met Jewish (practicing) Creationists! Seriously.

I suspect you're judging Islam by the actions of Muslims that the media shows.

If you were to judge Islam by the actual actions of the vast majority of Muslims, you'd find it a nice, peaceable way to exist.

Yes, that wicked old media, eh!

I'm actually sorry I can't be more conciliatory, but your religion really _has_ been pretty soured by the actions of its adherents in recent times. Whatever the Book says, and however nicely the vast majority plays with others, the religion is being buggered; and not by terrorists or weird holocaust deniers, but violent mobs, protesters against freedom of speech, countries that live under religous law or government, support for political parties espousing a move towards religion in government, people born in western countries who could support terrorism as a valid response due to the religion of the terrorists...

In any large group, the majority are quiet, peacable, let's-get-on-with-living types, that's a given, of course - you don't judge individuals by the group they happen to belong to. But you can get an insight on the group by looking at the extraordinary actions of its members - the swing voters, if you will. In the case of islam, the swing voters paint an unpretty picture.

Yes, that wicked old media, eh!

Well ... it does only show what people want to see. Happened the minute news became all about advertisors and ratings.

I'm actually sorry I can't be more conciliatory, but your religion

I'm Buddhist. I do agree that Islam has been pretty soured as of late. I have high hopes for it, though. It's a nice religion.

Oddly enough, yes. It kinda floored me, too. But what really got me - and this is true - I've met Jewish (practicing) Creationists! Seriously.

That's easier for me to believe as I live right between the greek neighbourhood and the Hassidic neighbourhood. Every day I see a whole community of people living one of the most fundamentalist lifestyles...in downtown Montreal.

Mind you, it proves multiculturalism works.

The only part of the Qu'ran I know about is the part that talks about how the world will end. Go to www.exitmundi.nl for the Exit Mundi version of it. According to the Qu'ran, Jesus (or as he's called in the Qu'ran, "Isa") will return to break a struggle between good and evil, but despite the anticipation of Christians, he will call upon everyone to become Muslims. Later on, the sky will go dark for three days, and then the Sun will rise in the West. If you haven't repented by that point and become a Muslim, you're SOL.

However, at the end, people who were not Muslim will be judged according to their works. Those who did badly will go to the Muslim hell (I believe it's called Na'ar, but my source is a post-9/11 Onion article.) Those who did good go to heaven, which is basically a super-nice version of Earth.

One part I noticed that was kind of odd was that it refers to all the Muslims of the world suffering terribly and dying. That doesn't strike me as an incentive to become a Muslim. It seems like, on Earth, the Muslims are worse off with some of these plagues (before the Earth goes dark, there's thick fog, which gives Muslims terrible colds but knocks non-Muslims unconscious. I'll take unconsciousness, thank you very much.) Maybe that's something that's specific to the Abrahamic religions, since the Apocalypse points to a time where all but the chosen 144,000 are stung mercilessly by scorpions for five months. Those who try to die during that time fail.

Incidentally, the only book of the Bible I know anything about is the Book of Revelation. My fiancee, a born-and-raised Catholic, seems to know more about every book of the Bible than me - with the exception of Revelation, and all I know is the Exit Mundi version. Which is easier to read anyway.

You know ... I think that's the longest post I've ever seen you make.

Also, I agree with it 100%.

You havent been around that much.

You havent been around that much.


True ... I've gotten really addicted to World of Warcraft (quiet, you) as of late.

Our family are Russian Orthodox (which I note solely for context).

I started to read the Qu'ran on the 12th of September, 2001, writing marginalia of my own where I wanted to make a comment to myself.

Five years later, I still haven't finished, but then I haven't made a concerted effort to read it from cover to cover. I tend to dip in when the mood so takes me.

As I lack commentary or insight from a dedicated Muslim theologian, I can't claim that any insights I might or might not have gained are consistent with any one of the many mainstream branches of Islamic scholarship, and it could well be that Muslims would strongly disagree with what I've taken my occasional reading of their holy book.

But I feel better for reading it myself, however slowly gradually, rather than accepting the usual lazy Western media interpretations.

I mean ... really read it? Sat down with it, cover to cover, and read it? Including any commentary and referrence that goes along with it?

There's a lot of Islam bashing on this forum and has been since the day I signed on to these forums. I'm curious to know if the people bashing have actually *read* the book or if they just take someone's word for its contents.

I have in fact read the entire Koran (Everyman's The Koran, translated by J.M. Rodwell--and don't bother with, "You haven't read it in Arabic so you haven't read it." There is nothing whatsoever special about 7th century Arabic, and I sure as hell am not going to waste time and energy learning it, or any other form of it). I am now in the process of annotating it, having reached Sura 37 as of this writing.

I have also read large portions of the Bukhari Hadith ( http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/hadeeth/bukhari/index.htm ) and other Hadith.

I have also referred to various other Islamic sites and resources, such as http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/

I also had a humanities concentration in college in the field of medieval history, in the course of which I studied Arab and Islamic history.

I have also read critiques of Islam, including Why I Am Not a Muslim by Ibn Warraq (Prometheus Books, 1995), a recovering Muslim (who btw has little good to say about Christianity as well).

While I don't have a degree in comparative religions or the like, I submit that I have more than adequate knowledge of the subject to opine on it.

So don't presume that you somehow are more "enlightened" about the nature and teachings of Islam than those who oppose that ideology.

I have read Yusuf Ali's translation (printed copy) many years back, when I was studying at a muslim school. I also used to go to mosques and attend sermons, mainly for the iftar party :p :D

Same author. Any book may have chapters of differing titles, written over a period of time, but that doesn't change that it's just 1 book.

The Bible is various authors and various books jammed together.

Actually, there is a similarity between the way Bible was compiled and the Qur'an was.

Although Muhammed is alleged to be the author, he did not leave behind a single copy of the whole Qur'an as we have it today.

The Qur'an we now have is from the Caliph Uthman who destroyed other versions (like how the Council of Nicea destroyed other gospels) and he also ordered the compilers to make up for the gaps due to the death of many companions in the internecine wars following the death of Muhammed.

I agree that the Bible has got way more discrepancies and "corruption" but it does not mean that the Qur'an is "miraculously preserved direct word of God" as muslims claim.

Where's the "No, but I might one day", option? I probably will when I get time.

*notices there's no "No, but am going to" option.* Bah.

I mean ... really read it? Sat down with it, cover to cover, and read it? Including any commentary and referrence that goes along with it?

There's a lot of Islam bashing on this forum and has been since the day I signed on to these forums. I'm curious to know if the people bashing have actually *read* the book or if they just take someone's word for its contents.

It's rather difficult to read it if one doesn't speak Arabic. Most translations are incomplete. I read an abbreviated version in English.

All in all, not a fun read.

Your copy is, then, titled "The Noble Qur'an". Hence, you wouldn't say, "Have you read the The Noble Qur'an?"

Your copy, however, is based on the original "Qur'an". Probably as read by Imam Hafs.

There seem to be multiple versions and compilations over the years. It's not as though there's only one "Qur'an".

I have an idea. Go to Saudi Arabia for the Haj, and tell the first Wahhab cleric you see that their version of the Qur'an is spurious, and contains extra material not written by Mohammed.

Is the Qur'an as repetitive as the Old Testament?
Even more, as much as this may seem unlikely.

There seem to be multiple versions and compilations over the years. It's not as though there's only one "Qur'an".

I have an idea. Go to Saudi Arabia for the Haj, and tell the first Wahhab cleric you see that their version of the Qur'an is spurious, and contains extra material not written by Mohammed.

and maybe slip in there that you feel some additional text was "jammed" in there somehwere along the line.

Is the Quran as hard to read as the Bible? The English version, I mean. I'm reasonably sure the Arabic version would be somewhat harder to read, since I don't speak Arabic. ;)

I would advise the english translation of Arberry:

Arberry retains much of the wonder and mystery of the original, recreating a poetic structure. I regard this translation as a good option; it has a poetic, yet understandable wording and has a nice flow when chanting it aloud. Moreover it leaves room for the ambiguities that are part of the religious text, leaving these open to multiple interpretation as in the original. It succeeds in taking the reader to the text, while retaining its readability. While at the same time his wording recreates some of the beauty and poetic nature of the original.

I would advise the english translation of Arberry:

Arberry retains much of the wonder and mystery of the original, recreating a poetic structure. I regard this translation as a good option; it has a poetic, yet understandable wording and has a nice flow when chanting it aloud. Moreover it leaves room for the ambiguities that are part of the religious text, leaving these open to multiple interpretation as in the original. It succeeds in taking the reader to the text, while retaining its readability. While at the same time his wording recreates some of the beauty and poetic nature of the original.

What I find interesting about both the Qur'an and the Old Testament is the use of poetic form in the original texts. There seems to be a great emphasis on rhyme and meter, wordplay, and in many cases, numerological games.

All of which is usually lost in translation.

As an example, in the OT, if you read Lamentations in any modern translation, it's difficult to grasp the time the author (Jeremiah) took to cast the whole book as a poem with specific numbers of verses, etc. You could analyze the original all day long.

I believe that a lot of this in the OT and the Qur'an stems from a practice of oral tradition - I get the impression that many people originally learned the OT books by chanting (as people still learn the Qur'an today, who cannot read).

The rhyme, meter, and wordplay makes it more accessible and easier to memorize.

What I find interesting about both the Qur'an and the Old Testament is the use of poetic form in the original texts. There seems to be a great emphasis on rhyme and meter, wordplay, and in many cases, numerological games.

All of which is usually lost in translation.

As an example, in the OT, if you read Lamentations in any modern translation, it's difficult to grasp the time the author (Jeremiah) took to cast the whole book as a poem with specific numbers of verses, etc. You could analyze the original all day long.

I believe that a lot of this in the OT and the Qur'an stems from a practice of oral tradition - I get the impression that many people originally learned the OT books by chanting (as people still learn the Qur'an today, who cannot read).

The rhyme, meter, and wordplay makes it more accessible and easier to memorize.

Yeah in Islam there has always been a strong oral tradition; the words of another man were considered to be more trustworthy than an anonymous text. We can see this in the Hadith and Sunna, which come with a tree the people that have related the story. The more trustworthy the people which could have been in contact with each other, the more trustworthy the account is considered to be.

I have enough uni textbooks to read without reading more fiction, thanks.

Nice flame. :rolleyes:

I've read some of it. I have a copy somewhere. I also have a couple of Bibles, the book of Mormon, Dianetics, a couple copies of the Bhagavad Gita, the Tao Te Ching, the Analects, and several other religious texts. And that's all in addition to quite a few Buddhist texts.

Oh, and I'll point out that I've not read any cover to cover.

I'd suggest trying the Zhuangzi, one of the major works of Daoism, to anyone. That old man had a really quirky way of looking at the world; I think I would have liked to have met him. Some of his stuff is a rather sly pointing out of the pretentiousness and authoritarianism of the Analects, and a lot of the rest can be boiled down to "Don't sweat the big stuff. Live your life, enjoy what's there, do what you can and let the rest take care of itself."

I've read the Qu'ran, the Bible, the Bhagavad-Gita, the Analects...most of the major works. But that old man - he was the only one I could call wise.