The most noteworthy characteristic, and indeed the downfall of the Qur'an to me personally—an ignorant unbeliever reading for purposes of personal education—is the sheer amount of fatty repetitiveness within.
I expected a religious treatise and instead got what seemed to be an unrehearsed and unedited yet carefully transcribed rant. Nearly every single surah ("book", in biblical terms) within includes similar diversions into rants on hypocrites, unbelievers, the mercy of god, etc. I suppose perhaps this sort of commonly shared content between surahs reads far more poetically in its original Arabic, but for my reading purposes it served only to wear me out and force my eyes to glaze over. With each surah it became more and more tiresome. I was ever ready for this book to sell me on the beauty its followers constantly profess that it contains, but it never came close. There are, of course, countless moments in the latter half of the Qur'an in which it threatened to dip into poetic verse, only instead to revert back to its comfortable, constantly repeated diatribe against unbelievers, those who don't listen, the hypocrites, and the blasphemers.
I fully believe that were you to rip out everything that...
- has already been told in the Bible
- has already been mentioned once in the Qur'an
- qualifies as a rant and amounts to little more than filler
...that all of the original thoughts and commentary contained in the Qur'an would only add up to about 50 pages. I have no hard metrics or data to confirm this hyperbolic statement, of course, as such a project would require an effort equal to that which created the Jefferson Bible, and I thought about this not until I had actually completed my read of the text and so had no opportunity to do so without rereading the book (which I'm not willing to do at this point). Such would make an interesting project—perhaps something for the future.
It's my belief that there's a significant problem with religious texts taken as the word of god in that every word of them must be taken as sacrosanct. If you accept that the Qur'an was dictated to Muhammad by god, you're powerless to disagree with any of it. You may genuinely feel that a part of it is wrong, but your own internally guiding logic will always be overruled by the call to instead be faithful, and you'll dismiss your own reasoning to instead adopt a view which clashes with your own beliefs. Perhaps this is why religion never appealed to me—I find it impossible not to value logical thinking over all else; something I view as a luxury of being raised in a liberal Western 21st century society.
I expected a religious treatise and instead got what seemed to be an unrehearsed and unedited yet carefully transcribed rant. Nearly every single surah ("book", in biblical terms) within includes similar diversions into rants on hypocrites, unbelievers, the mercy of god, etc. I suppose perhaps this sort of commonly shared content between surahs reads far more poetically in its original Arabic, but for my reading purposes it served only to wear me out and force my eyes to glaze over. With each surah it became more and more tiresome. I was ever ready for this book to sell me on the beauty its followers constantly profess that it contains, but it never came close. There are, of course, countless moments in the latter half of the Qur'an in which it threatened to dip into poetic verse, only instead to revert back to its comfortable, constantly repeated diatribe against unbelievers, those who don't listen, the hypocrites, and the blasphemers.
I fully believe that were you to rip out everything that...
- has already been told in the Bible
- has already been mentioned once in the Qur'an
- qualifies as a rant and amounts to little more than filler
...that all of the original thoughts and commentary contained in the Qur'an would only add up to about 50 pages. I have no hard metrics or data to confirm this hyperbolic statement, of course, as such a project would require an effort equal to that which created the Jefferson Bible, and I thought about this not until I had actually completed my read of the text and so had no opportunity to do so without rereading the book (which I'm not willing to do at this point). Such would make an interesting project—perhaps something for the future.
It's my belief that there's a significant problem with religious texts taken as the word of god in that every word of them must be taken as sacrosanct. If you accept that the Qur'an was dictated to Muhammad by god, you're powerless to disagree with any of it. You may genuinely feel that a part of it is wrong, but your own internally guiding logic will always be overruled by the call to instead be faithful, and you'll dismiss your own reasoning to instead adopt a view which clashes with your own beliefs. Perhaps this is why religion never appealed to me—I find it impossible not to value logical thinking over all else; something I view as a luxury of being raised in a liberal Western 21st century society.
This isn't something unique to the Qur'an, as the Bible suffers from this problem as well. There are many portions of both the New and Old Testament that are genuinely worthwhile; as spiritual guidance for the construction of personal morals, as parables of wisdom, as intriguing storytelling, or just as sheer prosaic beauty (with specific regards to its King James version, which I find quite aesthetically pleasing). But during my read of the Bible these positives were often polluted by instances of lengthy archaic rules of worship, calls to genocidal violence, and extreme punishment for what unbelievers would view as rather minor offenses.
I began reading the Qur'an with the honest intent of allowing it to surprise me (as I did with the Bible), but thus far I (an atheist without a clear bias for either religion) have found fewer redeeming qualities in the Qur'an than I did with my cover-to-cover read of the Bible last year.
Most surprising, perhaps, is that the Qur'an's god is the same as the one found in the Bible. Thus much of the Qur'an ends up being a retelling and a commentary on the events of the Bible, rather than its own independent religious text. I find it amusing to consider the Qur'an somewhat like The Aeneid to the Old and New Testament's Iliad and Odyssey. I was surprised to learn just how much of the Bible is not only mentioned in the Qur'an, but reaffirmed. Adam and the Garden of Eden, Moses, Abraham, Lot, and even Jesus as Mary's son and his status as a prophet are all retold in the Qur'an, which was written 600 years after the New Testament. A key point of the Qur'an is the failure of the people of the book to properly heed the words of god. The Qur'an very early takes shape as more of an admonishment than its own holy book. I found it similar to the Old Testament in this manner, as god spends quite a bit of time being cross with the Jews for failing to adequately follow his laws. Perhaps the largest difference in belief between the Bible and the Qur'an is the level of holiness of Jesus of Nazareth—the Bible, of course, touts him as the son of the Judaeo-Christian god. The Qur'an disagrees, but still considers him a holy figure and a prophet. Aside from that, the Qur'an is actually shockingly similar (in a purely mythological manner) to the Bible.
Noteworthy to me in these early books are just how harsh the Qur'an is against "unbelievers", regularly referring to us as evildoers and constantly reminding us we're destined to burn in hell: "Beware the Fire whose fuel is mankind and stones, made ready for the unbelievers".
These kinds of calls to violence are often quite blatant throughout the Qur'an:
I began reading the Qur'an with the honest intent of allowing it to surprise me (as I did with the Bible), but thus far I (an atheist without a clear bias for either religion) have found fewer redeeming qualities in the Qur'an than I did with my cover-to-cover read of the Bible last year.
Most surprising, perhaps, is that the Qur'an's god is the same as the one found in the Bible. Thus much of the Qur'an ends up being a retelling and a commentary on the events of the Bible, rather than its own independent religious text. I find it amusing to consider the Qur'an somewhat like The Aeneid to the Old and New Testament's Iliad and Odyssey. I was surprised to learn just how much of the Bible is not only mentioned in the Qur'an, but reaffirmed. Adam and the Garden of Eden, Moses, Abraham, Lot, and even Jesus as Mary's son and his status as a prophet are all retold in the Qur'an, which was written 600 years after the New Testament. A key point of the Qur'an is the failure of the people of the book to properly heed the words of god. The Qur'an very early takes shape as more of an admonishment than its own holy book. I found it similar to the Old Testament in this manner, as god spends quite a bit of time being cross with the Jews for failing to adequately follow his laws. Perhaps the largest difference in belief between the Bible and the Qur'an is the level of holiness of Jesus of Nazareth—the Bible, of course, touts him as the son of the Judaeo-Christian god. The Qur'an disagrees, but still considers him a holy figure and a prophet. Aside from that, the Qur'an is actually shockingly similar (in a purely mythological manner) to the Bible.
Noteworthy to me in these early books are just how harsh the Qur'an is against "unbelievers", regularly referring to us as evildoers and constantly reminding us we're destined to burn in hell: "Beware the Fire whose fuel is mankind and stones, made ready for the unbelievers".
These kinds of calls to violence are often quite blatant throughout the Qur'an:
Women 4:87: "Do you wish to guide one whom God had led astray? Whoso Good leads astray, you shall find no path. They long for you to blaspheme as they have blasphemed, thus becoming like them. Do not take them for friends until they emigrate in the cause of God. If they refuse, seize them and kill them wherever you find them..."
Man 76:3: "For the unbelievers We have readied chains, collars and a raging fire"The Qur'an is often not kind to the modern notion of egalitarianism across genders, either:
"Your women are your sowing field: approach your field whenever you please"But, of course, the Old Testament isn't much better. Both clash with classic liberal notions of liberty, and perhaps this is where the Qur'an drew its influence from.
What is the deal, with unbelievers and hypocrites!? |
There's an ever-present tone of combativeness throughout that I found off-putting. I often found my Tarif Khalidi translation wanting, as it includes odd anachronisms such as "What is it with these people?" (a phrase which, each time I read it, would call to mind the voice of Jerry Seinfeld), and lacks any historical annotations, preferring instead to let the text stand on its own. This is a mistake for my purposes, as the book has thus far come off as more of an impatient rant than anything else, and I found myself craving additional historicity the further I got through the book.
The Muslim god does seem to be far more forgiving to his followers than to unbelievers, something more akin to the tone of the New Testament than the god of the Old Testament. It's constantly stressed that he is forgiving so long as his followers repent, and I recall the Old Testament god being far more vengeful and punishing in contrast. This warmth and magnanimity doesn't seem to extend to unbelievers, though, rendering a lot of what is said with an unfortunate air of intolerance.
It's tough to review the Qur'an without comparing it to the Bible. I didn't particularly care for the Bible as a whole, but it's so long and includes so much varied content that it's almost impossible to read through and not find something to like. While the Bible is at times every bit as intolerant, violent, and archaic in its morals as is the Qur'an, there are things that I liked when I read it: I enjoyed analyzing in-depth the morals of Jesus, I enjoyed some of its storytelling, and the King James version in particular features some passages of stunning prose—I'd go as far as to say that I genuinely enjoyed the book of Revelation. Unfortunately, I've found comparably little in the Qur'an to enjoy. There's so much repetition, so much sheer fat in the content included here that I found it rather difficult to bludgeon through the recycled biblical tales and the constant rants against unbelievers and those who feign piousness. It made for a monotonous read in which I constantly found myself to be skimming full chapters, eyes fully glazed over. And that's a problem, because this is an incredibly influential book that deserves a serious, focused analysis. As a non-religious person I'm admittedly a child with swimmies being tossed into the deep end of the pool whenever reading and attempting to analyze religion, and I fear I'm altogether incapable of a quality analysis of this book.
The Muslim god does seem to be far more forgiving to his followers than to unbelievers, something more akin to the tone of the New Testament than the god of the Old Testament. It's constantly stressed that he is forgiving so long as his followers repent, and I recall the Old Testament god being far more vengeful and punishing in contrast. This warmth and magnanimity doesn't seem to extend to unbelievers, though, rendering a lot of what is said with an unfortunate air of intolerance.
It's tough to review the Qur'an without comparing it to the Bible. I didn't particularly care for the Bible as a whole, but it's so long and includes so much varied content that it's almost impossible to read through and not find something to like. While the Bible is at times every bit as intolerant, violent, and archaic in its morals as is the Qur'an, there are things that I liked when I read it: I enjoyed analyzing in-depth the morals of Jesus, I enjoyed some of its storytelling, and the King James version in particular features some passages of stunning prose—I'd go as far as to say that I genuinely enjoyed the book of Revelation. Unfortunately, I've found comparably little in the Qur'an to enjoy. There's so much repetition, so much sheer fat in the content included here that I found it rather difficult to bludgeon through the recycled biblical tales and the constant rants against unbelievers and those who feign piousness. It made for a monotonous read in which I constantly found myself to be skimming full chapters, eyes fully glazed over. And that's a problem, because this is an incredibly influential book that deserves a serious, focused analysis. As a non-religious person I'm admittedly a child with swimmies being tossed into the deep end of the pool whenever reading and attempting to analyze religion, and I fear I'm altogether incapable of a quality analysis of this book.
That said, the book makes it exceedingly difficult for readers such as myself to pick it up and gain an understanding of its religion. Take the excerpt to the left, for example. Sure, it's stylized—I get that. And sure, I can see how it'd come off as poetic, maybe, in the original Arabic. Or how it'd be rendered rather lyrical when read aloud at a mosque. But for my reading purposes, carving through an entire surah of this is an absolute chore. And this portion is topped by the final, closing surahs, which read like little more than an intoxicated man's ramblings with little substance therein. These types of things are not something I enjoy. They give me little of the insight into Islam that I crave. Reading them—either shallowly or with depth—not a fruitful endeavor for me. Perhaps that's not true for you—and more power to you. But I personally can't stand it.
So I think this stuff just really isn't for me, and thus I found little to enjoy here. Maybe this renders my thoughts on the Qur'an worth comparatively little, but I'm glad I read it nonetheless, and I will share my thoughts anyway, if for no other reason than to prove I did, at one point in my life, read these kinds of books that are supposedly so deserving of being read.
So I think this stuff just really isn't for me, and thus I found little to enjoy here. Maybe this renders my thoughts on the Qur'an worth comparatively little, but I'm glad I read it nonetheless, and I will share my thoughts anyway, if for no other reason than to prove I did, at one point in my life, read these kinds of books that are supposedly so deserving of being read.
⭐
No comments:
Post a Comment