can We all read the HOLY QUR'AAN

[Takumi]

Salam
prove that!
only for reading?

The proof has already been given in the beginning of this thread.

 

[Takumi]

Greetings,

Thank you, Khattab, for your interesting post.

I'm familiar with the famous "challenge" verses of the Qur'an, but the challenge itself has always confused me. Who is to decide whether or not a writer's work matches up to it? Also, since Muslims have to believe that nobody can ever rise to the challenge (because this is written in the Qur'an), it surely doesn't matter what anyone writes, because no Muslim would ever be able to admit that the Qur'an had been equalled or bettered.


I could say this about many books - the Qur'an is not at all unique in this respect.

Peace

In Malay there's a proverb that says, "Jauhari juga yang kenal manikam" (Only the jewelers recognize a jewel).

In fact, many people have tried to challenge the prose and poetic style of Al Quran, but as an amateur myself, who has undergone limited training, I can't help but chuckled at those attempts.

For example, in the English Language the word "reveal" denotes a transmission devoid of the methodology that is used. So, if I were to say, the Quran was "revealed", I'd have to add certain qualifiers to actually describe how it was revealed. Observe:

(a) The Quran was revealed.
(b) The Quran was revealed gradually.
(c) The Quran was revealed in its entirety.

Any Arabic language learner will learn the conjugation of the equivalent of reveal as "nazzala" or "anzala" or "nazala".

In Classical Arabic (used in the Quran) the usage of the word "reveal" in sentence (a) does not exist at all. This is due to the fact, that the verb used specifies its methodology.

The equivalent of sentence (b) will be:

(b') Nazzala al Quran . (The Quran was revealed gradually)

The equivalent of sentence (c) will be:

(c') Anzala al Quran. (The Quran was revealed in its entirety)

If a group of people come together and try to make a verse and challenge such specificity, but then used the word nazzala and anzala interchangeably, they clearly have gone astray from the crux of Arabic grammar and morphology.

This has been tried by some people whose challenges have been posted on the net some time ago. I had the opportunity to read these verses and clearly, if a mediocre student like me can point out such grievous error, surely an Arabic scholar can do more.

They have made a sentence describing their Book but they used the word anzala (revealed in its entirety) to describe it. That's not possible since they admitted that it took them 4 years to come up with it.

If you're really interested in the Arabic language, the Arabic Lexicon by Lane is clearly the most authoritative dictionary of the Arabic Language even though it was done 100 years ago.

I hope that simple explanation helps a bit.

Peace.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings Takumi,

Thank you - that was an interesting post.

However, it doesn't really answer my questions. What you've done is explain the difficulties of classical Arabic grammar (which I don't doubt!) but that's tangential to my questions about the challenge.

Peace

 

[Takumi]

Czgibson,

You're most welcome.

Maybe you should try learning the language just for the sake of it and then try to read the Quran in its original form.

You've got nothing to lose.

 

[Farhiya]

a salaamu calikum,

ManshaAllah to all of u that can read the Quran…as for me I can’t because Arabic is not my native language...but I do read the Quran in English and I also try to memorize it…InshaAllah I will learn to read it in Arabic.

 

[life]

I can read quran in arabic but to understand better i read translation as well

 

[Khattab]

Greetings,

Thank you, Khattab, for your interesting post.

I'm familiar with the famous "challenge" verses of the Qur'an, but the challenge itself has always confused me. Who is to decide whether or not a writer's work matches up to it? Also, since Muslims have to believe that nobody can ever rise to the challenge (because this is written in the Qur'an), it surely doesn't matter what anyone writes, because no Muslim would ever be able to admit that the Qur'an had been equalled or bettered.




Peace

Hi Callum,

Apologies for the delayed reply.

From the earlier post:

What is impossible is to achieve literary beauty, nobility, and sublimity of any kind while trying to mimic the Quran's style. It is possible to superficially mimic the style of the Qur'an, but all such attempts prove to be silly and absurd. It is possible for a person to reach a great level of literary excellence and convey noble thoughts and sentiments but nobody ever does so using the Quran's style. Only the Qur'an achieves the highest level of literary excellence so much so that it brings people to ecstasy and tears while maintaining its inimitable style.​

This, then, is the acid test: Write something in the exact same style as the Qur'an and produce something of arguably equal quality and sublimity.

People have attempted to write in the style of the Qur'an. The results have always been so laughable that no one would venture to say that he believes the effort equals the Qur'an in literary merit. The reason why no one would dare do so is not fear of reprisal but fear of looking like a complete idiot.

We should remember that not all Arabic speakers are Muslim. Many are Christians and Jews. Some are, like yourself, atheists. They live all over the world. Among all of these non-Muslim Arabs, there are leading poets and prose writers and important literary critics. None of them have produced any literary efforts that they claim both emulate the Qur'an and rival the Qur'an in quality. This is especially vital evidence in the modern Arabic literary scene wherein free verse proliferates. Free verse is the closest approximate description we can give to the structure of the Qur'an. However, none of the many important Arab free-verse poets have ever tried to copy the Quran's style in the way that Walt Whitman, for instance, emulated the style of the King James rendering of the Psalms.

It simply has not been done, by any great poets/writers of the past or even present, it is one the great miracles and even signs of the Qur'an that it hasnt ever been matched. You said who will decide if any works equals the Qur'an, I'm sure the writer themselves will know if they have equaled the Qur'an, the learned from Ummah ie the scholars and also people who understand the challenge. But like I said it has in over 1400 years never been done, which is one of the miracles of the Qur'an.

I could say this about many books - the Qur'an is not at all unique in this respect.

Look at the number of people the Qur'an brings to tears, eventhough one may know a Surah of by heart and repeat it daily, years on end, yet it still moves them a brings the person to tears, I know of no single book that can do this, okay a book here or there might bring a few to tears but wont ever match number of people the Qur'an has and still continues to do. Old men who where boys when the first started reciting the Qur'an and still they weep like its the first time they have read it, so in this respect it definitely is unique.

.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings Khattab,

Thank you for your interesting post. Don't worry about the delayed response - it's good of you to make time to answer my niggling questions.

This, then, is the acid test: Write something in the exact same style as the Qur'an and produce something of arguably equal quality and sublimity.

OK, but we're talking about literature here. If you put two pieces of writing next to each other, there may be broad outlines indicating that one is superior than the other, but it will always be a subjective judgment. I can mark a piece of work according to mark scheme, but ultimately, that doesn't tell me which is a better piece of writing, outside the criteria of using correct spelling, punctuation and grammar.

If I said Shakespeare was a better writer than Dan Brown, the vast majority of literary critics would agree, but there'd always be people who preferred Dan Brown's writing. It's difficult to compare writing in this way because all writers are different. The only way someone could be said to have 'equalled' another piece of writing is if they used exactly the same words.

Free verse is the closest approximate description we can give to the structure of the Qur'an.

I thought the Qur'an had sections with rhymes?

However, none of the many important Arab free-verse poets have ever tried to copy the Quran's style in the way that Walt Whitman, for instance, emulated the style of the King James rendering of the Psalms.

Is this for fear of looking foolish, do you think?

Look at the number of people the Qur'an brings to tears, eventhough one may know a Surah of by heart and repeat it daily, years on end, yet it still moves them a brings the person to tears, I know of no single book that can do this, okay a book here or there might bring a few to tears but wont ever match number of people the Qur'an has and still continues to do. Old men who where boys when the first started reciting the Qur'an and still they weep like its the first time they have read it, so in this respect it definitely is unique.

I disagree. I'd make the same claims for the works of Shakespeare, for instance.

Anyway, thanks again for your post. It was most thought-provoking.

Peace

 

[------]

I'd make the same claims for the works of Shakespeare, for instance

Shakespeare makes u cry? U gt a sad life...

Peace kay:

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Shakespeare makes u cry? U gt a sad life...

Shakespeare's one of my very favourite writers. Have you read much of his writing?

By the way, I'm an English teacher - knowing about Shakespeare is very useful for my job!

Peace

 

[Khattab]

Hi Callum,

OK, but we're talking about literature here. If you put two pieces of writing next to each other, there may be broad outlines indicating that one is superior than the other, but it will always be a subjective judgment. I can mark a piece of work according to mark scheme, but ultimately, that doesn't tell me which is a better piece of writing, outside the criteria of using correct spelling, punctuation and grammar.

If I said Shakespeare was a better writer than Dan Brown, the vast majority of literary critics would agree, but there'd always be people who preferred Dan Brown's writing. It's difficult to compare writing in this way because all writers are different. The only way someone could be said to have 'equalled' another piece of writing is if they used exactly the same words.

The Qur'an is different to any other book, there has never been work of the Quran's nature produced that anyone, Muslim or non-Muslim, would seriously put forth as an example of literary rivalry to the Qur'an, so that a literary or scholarly debate could even be had about the comparative merits of the two works.

Allah says: "And if you are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down to Our servant, then produce a chapter like it and call your witnesses besides Allah if you be truthful. If you do not do so and you will never do so then fear a fire whose fuel is men and stones prepared for the disbelievers.

For an Arabic speaker, this is an obvious thing. Any Arab who looks at an attempt to write in the Quran's style usually breaks out in laughter at its awkwardness or banality.

Here is one example attributed to Musaylimah:

"God has been gracious to the pregnant woman;
He has brought forth from her a living being that runs;
from between the abdominal skin and the bowels."​

Another example attributed to Qass bin Sa'idah al-`Iyadh wherein he finds himself obliged to lift phrases directly from the Qur'an and intersperse them with his own contributions:

For non-Arabic speakers, though they cannot experience this directly, they can ascertain that no serious literary claims have been made.

So if no writing has met the challenge of the Qur'an and the rules that are to be followed when attempting the challenge then we cant compare the Qur'an with any other piece of writing in the way Dan Brown and Shakespeare can be compared.

Granted, there is subjectivity in any literary evaluation. This would pose a problem in a challenge with a single judge or a panel of judges, or if there is a biased criterion like only Muslims scholars can be judges.

However, there is no such restriction in the challenge.

The general consensus of the international Arabic literary community that nothing exists to meet the challenge is an objective yardstick.

I thought the Qur'an had sections with rhymes?

The definition of free verse has nothing to do with the issue at hand, which is the issue of understanding the nature of the Qur'an’s challenge.

Also I did not say that the Qur’ān is free verse. Rather that free verse is “the closest approximate description that can be given to the structure of the Qur'an.” Indeed, Arabs generally liken the Qur'an to be closer to prose than to their traditional understanding of verse.

In literature, free verse is used to describe verse that does not follow a fixed metrical pattern. It has nothing to do with whether or not the verse rhymes. Both free verse and metrical verse can rhyme or be without rhyme. Metrical verse without rhyme is known as blank verse, which Shakespeare (I dont know why I'm even saying this to someone learned like you:X ) uses quite often in his plays. Rhyme and metre are two entirely separate poetic features. And from what I understand at certain times in English literary history, rhymed metrical verse was the norm.

Is this for fear of looking foolish, do you think?

I think it is both, fear of looking like a fool:rollseyes Seriously, I think it is because it cant be done, people have seen in the past attempts of trying to mimic the Qur'an and on all occasions the one who has attempted the feat has looked like an idiot.

I disagree. I'd make the same claims for the works of Shakespeare, for instance.

Can you honestly say that Shakespeare has in the past and present moved people the way the Qur'an has, it is true that Shakespears works are world renouned, all of us who have gone to school in the UK (and probably abroad) have studied Shakespears works, but does it really bring uncontrollable tears to the eyes. Men like Umar Ibn Al-Khattab (Second Caliph) and Khalid Bin Waleed (The Greatest Fighter in Islamic History), men who actually where men, brought to tears after listening and reciting the Qur'an, hearts that where hard transformed just because of the Qur'an.

Peace