Koran, Episode Three

[atalanta]

I did actually read it all. Nearly 1,000 pages. I found the text extremely repetitive. 100s of mentions of “chastisement” for sinners, and many of “paradise gardens”. There were frequent references to Old Testament/Jewish scripture but I did not grasp how much of the OT (Pentateuch ?) is to be obeyed as the word of god for Muslims. Ten Commandments, circumcision, Ark of the Covenant. . . . . ? No explanation.
Some things I scoured the text for were completely absent: such as demands for women to have bits cut off their bodies to make them less adulterous, and to be stitched up tight for their husbands’ pleasure. No commands for women to marry men they didn’t like, or be killed for honour if they refuse. Do “shameful deeds” mean homosexuality ? My text did not define them.
But the Koran is clearly aimed at men - far, far more than women. A woman has half the value of a man. Women are described as the tilth in which men sow their seed. Men are allowed quite a few sexual partners, – wives, slave-women, and ( apparently ) the sexual booty of war. I can see why some men might want to become Muslims, but I can’t see why any non-Muslim woman would want to convert.
If I have misunderstood anything, it may be because of the edition/translation I was given. Do feel free - Muslims or anyone else - to elaborate on any bits where you think my wires may have got crossed.

[wildwood]

Just as boys are brainwashed from a young age about the annihilation of infidels, girls grow up expecting to become a slave to the menfolk. IMO, these women have been indoctrinated that they are following Allah's wish by staying subservient to the men.

Thank goodness there are now quite a few courageous girls who have stood up against this archaic practice and strive to educate themselves despite the dangers of doing so.

[vetuste_ennemi]

The Koran is not arranged in chronological order, Atalanta. The revelations occurred over a period of twenty odd years, and usually a have relevance to particular events in the life of the Prophet. The chronologically earlier suras were revealed at Mecca when Mohammed was trying to persuade his fellow Meccans to abandon polytheism and accept him as the messenger of the one true God. That's where you find the references to his critics who said that the revelations were Mohammed's own invention. (No man could invent something as sublime as this book is the Koran's response). Then Mohammed migrates to Medina where his efforts at proselytising are far more successful, and he begins a campaign of attacking the camel trains which sustained Meccan commerce. So you get further revelations which deal with his arguments with the Medinan Jews, the division of the spoils (Sura 8 is called "Booty" in my translation) and exhortations and comments on the battles which ensued between the Muslims and the Meccans. Then later still we get the revelations after Mohammed's successful return to and conquest of Mecca. These (such as Sura 9) stress the duty of Muslims to fight in the cause of Allah until the goal of universal submission to the divine will is achieved.
In the absence of this context the book is largely unintelligible, as you correctly observe.
I've read the Koran in the following form. It's author is clearly hostile to Islam and appears (at least to me) to be a rather charmless man, but he has arranged the Koran in chronological order and intersperses selected passages with the important biographical details:

http://www.politicalislam.com/product/an-abridged-koran/

Your assessment reflects that of Thomas Carlyle over 150 years ago:

"I must say, it is as toilsome reading as I ever undertook. A wearisome confused jumble, crude, incondite; endless iterations, long-windedness, entanglement; most crude, incondite; -- insupportable stupidity, in short! Nothing but a sense of duty could carry any European through the Koran.".


Carlyle would approve your sense of duty.

[keyplus90]

Good thing is that you read it. But reading and understanding are two different aspects. I will try to explain a few things with whatever limited knowledge I have and take it as my own opinion.

1 – It is repetitive especially about the factors you mentioned because Quran does not want people to say in the hereafter that “we were not warned” about certain things. However if someone does not believe in hereafter then s/he does not have to worry about it at all.

2 – OT/Jewish or NT/Christian Scriptures – Muslim do not believe “original scriptures” to be Jewish or Christian. In Islam one’s faith is not complete unless S/he does not believe in all of the prophets and their teachings as we believe that the “original” teachings of all of the prophets were same and from a same source. However OT or NT now available are not original however may still have parts of original scriptures.

3 – Circumcision is not mentioned in Quran but is the tradition of Ibrahim (AS) that has been carried forward through his followers and the prophets after him. Female circumcision has nothing to do with Islam and is North African cultural tradition that was there before Muhammad (pbuh) and are still carried on by a few including Muslims as well as Christians in North Africa.

4 – Islam does not allow anyone to marry someone forcefully and that goes to Men and women. However if Muslims do then it is against Islam and are mostly done due to cultural reasons. Honour killing again is a cultural problem and any sort of killing is a major sin (and crime in Islam) punishable with death penalty.

5 – Woman has half – This is a well augmented topic but one has to see what the world was like before that. In short it has only to do with inheritance and the reason is that in Islam the burden of looking after the family is on man and women can just take her share and that’s all her’s. And even husband is not allowed to take anything out of what his wife got from inheritance from her own family.

6 – Sexual partners – Again, Islam limited it to maximum 4 wives whereas before that there was no limit. And that was when you give them their fair share of rights and not just like someone who you used and discarded like it used to happen before that. Sex with slave women has long reasons but in short Islam allowed it to eliminate slavery. Because condition was that any children born will not be the slaves and would be treated as free. And that never used to happen before although people still used to have sex with slaves and used to breed more slaves. And that is the reason slavery was eradicated in Muslim world long (centuries) before Europe even thought about it. In fact Bilal Ibne Rabah, a black slave within his life became leader of the people who were once his masters.

[naomi24]

^Keyplus’ usual failed PR job. I could rip it to shreds but since Atalanta seems to have done pretty well without help, that’s not necessary. The only thing I would say is that whilst, as Keyplus says, the Koran doesn’t mention circumcision, it actually commands that Allah’s creation remain unaltered. However, Mohammed endorses the practise (for both men and women) and therefore, for observant Muslims, his will clearly overrides that of Allah. They’d never admit it though.

[keyplus90]

///I could rip it to shreds ////

Self claimed "know all".

[naomi24]

No need to be nasty, Keyplus. You can hardly hold me responsible for your refusal to tell the truth.

[Khandro]

keyplus;//5 – Woman has half – This is a well augmented topic but one has to see what the world was like before that.//

I think most people know via history something of what the world was like one and a half thousand years ago - other times and other ways, but civilization has continually adapted to newer, better and fairer ways of organizing itself.
The problem for Islam and its adherents (and consequently the rest of us) is its stubborn belief that the mores of that time still have relevance today.

[jomifl]

/And that is the reason slavery was eradicated in Muslim world long (centuries) before Europe even thought about it

/Saudi Arabia abolished slavery in 1962 under pressure from President Kennedy, who accomplished what the Ottoman Empire and the League of Nations had not been able to, but that hasn’t stopped its citizens from selling castrated slaves on Facebook or its princes from beating their black slaves to death in posh London hotels.

The Saudis had clung to their racist privileges longer than anyone else. When rumors reached Mecca that the Ottoman Empire might be considering the abolition of African slavery and equal rights for all, the chief of the Ulema of Mecca issued a fatwa declaring “the ban on slaves is contrary to Sharia (Islamic Law)... with such proposals the Turks have become infidels and it is lawful to make their children slaves."/

[wildwood]

Really? keyplus on the Koran /...any sort of killing is a major sin (and crime in Islam) punishable with death penalty/

This has to be the biggest lie you've told us so far. Oh, that's right. You mean killing non believers is ok then. Wait a minute... muslims killing other muslims seems to be celebrated in some major parts of the muslims world.

[beso]

keplus is prone to lying because the Quran says it is fine to lie and cheat if it is for the furthering of Islam.

[Peter Pedant]

Jesus ( he gets a mench innit ) atalanta
I doff my hat to you
truly truly well done

Tommy Lennoz got converted when he did that
but then seems to have converted back ( true apostate )

I have only done about 50 lines
but I was trying to do it in classical arabic

and yes there are arguments about the accuracy of translation
but there is with the KJV as well ( wh I know is not a variant of the koran )

remember the dictator ( the prophet that is ! pbuh ) didnt have a university degree ( and of course it was written down after his death after arguments over accuracy started )

[Peter Pedant]

Keyplus
can you give me refs pref from the koran for the six points you make ?

I certainly remember ' as for the kufr - kill them all'
but didnt book mark it as it didnt seem that remarkable for the koran

and are you honestly saying that as the 99 hostages at Bataclan were being machinegunned the shooters were saying to themselves - "I am not menat to be doing this and not meant to be here because the book specifically tells me not to"
I kinda think not - but you know I could be wrong

kill - the word used was qatl
and I think it applied to a muslim shouldnt shoot another muslim
and if it were a kufr then it really didnt count

[Peter Pedant]

The difficulty atalanta - which as you have read it on your own - is that the context in which you read it ( v.e. above ) is that there is no context

[ sorry I get high on self reference ]

The book is the word of God as dictated to the prophet pbuh and so there is no discussion allowed. Hence no context ( geddit ) and so there is not tradition of scholarship on the lines of biblical scholarship ( who wrote this and why ? ). There is a tradition of comments from those near him - called haditha - and we dont have anything like it for the bible

I suspect Keyplus points are all ahadith - but you know she will tell us

and lastly...... o god this is the issue about getting old - you cant remember a shopping list let alone .....

[mibn2cweus]

So then, what's next on the reading list? - http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Complete-Idiots-Guide-Dummies/dp/1580081746