Page 1 of 2

Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:14 am
by Islamic_Science2
There is on Youtube a 10 part series of a video National Geographic documentary named Inside the Koran. What I found interesting is the 9 of 10 part.



I'll be back later with some comments.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:01 am
by abdullahinislam
Islamic_Science2 wrote:There is on Youtube a 10 part series of a video National Geographic documentary named Inside the Koran. What I found interesting is the 9 of 10 part.

I'll be back later with some comments.


Nice video, it is interesting indeed.

Comment I have is that like your math book in School, you make a mistake and erase it and replace it with a better version of what you had intended.
It is also possible that the paper was left behind or found, seen to be wrong and fixed.
Maybe even someone was trying to write it from memory and had found mistakes after showing it to another knowledgable person.
It is also possible that none of these things happened.

Either way, it had Quraan recited in the video, so I pray you recieve blessing for that, even if you are non Muslim.

Thanks and I look forward to watching the other parts and reading your comments.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:49 am
by crazymonkie_
I've seen that part of the series before.

Abdullah: Pay very close attention to 1:40 to about a minute further along. What Dr. Puin is saying is in *direct contradiction* to Islamic claims of perfect transliteration of the Quran. The mere existence of radically different readings underneath the "final" versions that were found in Sanaa — and which were NOT due to local dialect — completely annihilates the claim that the Quran that we have today is precisely the same that was finalized after Muhammad's death. The Quran was *not* given to humans and transmitted, without a modicum of change, for centuries; rather, the earliest copies were RADICALLY different than the later copies. Once the Cairo text was finalized, sure, things settled down. But you're really not giving credence to how much this changes your religion, and how much the evidence undercuts orthodox beliefs about perfect transmission.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:15 am
by expozIslam
crazymonkie_ wrote:But you're really not giving credence to how much this changes your religion,.

Crazy, you are being very generous here. It does not just change but destroys the cult called islam.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:38 am
by crazymonkie_
Yeah, I was being generous. Also assuming that Islam can be as flexible to change as Christianity. Which is truly doubtful. So... yeah, I wasn't really thinking about Islam when I wrote that.

Still looking forward to that Puin edited book- I contacted Prometheus Books and they said it's going to be released November. Woo!!!

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:49 pm
by piscohot
a fifth of the koran contain words which have been misunderstood or words that may no sense.......


aren't muslims interested to find out what they were?

obviously not! and for very good reasons! :D

More than 15,000 sheets of the Yemeni Qur'ans have been flattened, cleaned, treated, sorted, and assembled. They await further examination in Yemen's House of Manuscripts. Yet that is something Islamic authorities seem unwilling to allow. Puin suggests, "They want to keep this thing low-profile, as we do, although for different reasons."

Puin, and his colleague Graf von Bothmer, an Islamic historian, have published short essays on what they discovered. They felt that when the Yemeni authorities realize the implications of the find, they would refuse further access - a prediction that soon came through. Von Bothmer, however, in 1997 shot 35,000 microfilm pictures of the fragments, and has brought the pictures back to Germany. The texts will soon be scrutinized and the findings published freely - a prospect that pleases Puin. "So many Muslims have this belief that everything between the two covers of the Qur'an is Allah's unaltered word. They like to quote the textual work that shows that the Bible has a history and did not fall straight out of the sky, but until now the Qur'an has been out of this discussion. The only way to break through this wall is to prove that the Qur'an has a history too. The Sana'a fragments will help us accomplish this."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sana'a_manuscripts

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 8:00 pm
by Islamic_Science2
Fanatical Muslims don't want to know the truth. Any research be it archeology or textual criticism of the Qur'an is dismissed. After all the Qur'an is the final authority and the absolute truth. Science and any reality contridicting the Qur'an must be dismissed.

I started doubting the Islamic tradition which includes the hadiths, Ahadith is plural for hadith in Arabic. The ahadith about Uthman commisioning the collection of Qur'anic verses and standardization of the Qur'an is false. There is no manuscript evidence for the existance of the Qur'an before 690 CE. The oldest Qur'ans in existance today are the Sana'a manuscripts. They show that the Qur'an was an evolving text at least decades into a century after Uthman.

I don't believe that the Qur'an or Islam originated in Mecca and Medina but much further north in Palestine. or Jordan. The earliest pre-Islamic Classical Arabic texts, as in Qur'anic Arabic, were discovered in Syria. Now I have a problem. Why is it that these early Qur'ans were discovered far south in Yemen where the pre-Islamic language was South Arabian and not Classical Arabic?

Christoph Luxenburg's theory about Syriac origins of the Qur'an fits very well with the revisionist model that I find most plausible. If the Classical Arabic of the Qur'an originated in Syria then most certainly Syriac words will be found in the Qur'an. Much of the video above is about Luxenburg's Syro-Aramaic reading of the Qur'an.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 11:51 pm
by crazymonkie_
It really does feel to me like Islam is in a place now very similar to Christianity a thousand years ago: The majority of adherents are horrifically close-minded and ignorant (and often the ignorance is cultivated, for many reasons); and yet... there is a small, gradually growing (or at least it seems- and unfortunately not growing at the same rate as the orthodoxy) group, or movement, toward reassessment of the Quran and how Islam itself is approached. It's based, as the Christian change was, on new methods of human relating and new technologies: In Christianity's case, it was the gradual revival of learning, at least for the wealthy, and the influx of rediscovered ideas from the slow Reconquista and the Crusades.

In Islam's case, it's the efforts of (mostly) non-believing Arabic experts, historians and etymologists to figure out whether the stories are true; not based on the handed-down traditions, but on empirical methodologies. The information is spread via the Internet, the new technology that makes it much more difficult to silence the differences. At least when it gets out; the places and people who still have power over the documents can simply hold on to them and keep them from ever getting out.

Though maybe this is just a cyclical thing. Maybe this has all happened before and I'm not aware of it. I won't pretend to know anything much at all about Islamic history, let alone any dissident opinions.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 12:16 am
by expozIslam
crazymonkie_ wrote:It really does feel to me like Islam is in a place now very similar to Christianity a thousand years ago: The majority of adherents are horrifically close-minded and ignorant (and often the ignorance is cultivated, for many reasons); and yet... there is a small, gradually growing (or at least it seems- and unfortunately not growing at the same rate as the orthodoxy) group, or movement, toward reassessment of the Quran and how Islam itself is approached. It's based, as the Christian change was, on new methods of human relating and new technologies: In Christianity's case, it was the gradual revival of learning, at least for the wealthy, and the influx of rediscovered ideas from the slow Reconquista and the Crusades.

In Islam's case, it's the efforts of (mostly) non-believing Arabic experts, historians and etymologists to figure out whether the stories are true; not based on the handed-down traditions, but on empirical methodologies. The information is spread via the Internet, the new technology that makes it much more difficult to silence the differences. At least when it gets out; the places and people who still have power over the documents can simply hold on to them and keep them from ever getting out.

Though maybe this is just a cyclical thing. Maybe this has all happened before and I'm not aware of it. I won't pretend to know anything much at all about Islamic history, let alone any dissident opinions.

islam is so fragile that muslims are unwilling to allow any excavations in ME. It is like a bubble and they know it. A slight prick and it will burst and that is why muslims leave no opportunity to silence anyone who criticized islam.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 11:53 pm
by Ibn Rushd
Excellent video.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 11:56 pm
by crazymonkie_
That part, yeah. But parts 1-3.... oy. :shock:

I had to stop watching.

They were good for a lot of laughs, but only in that "I have to laugh, or else I'll cry" sorts of ways.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 1:06 am
by Islamic_Science2
Archaeology and critical examination of ancient texts and manuscripts do not have the same effect on Judaism and Christianity as they have on Islam. Jews and Christians are not as offended when the history of their religions is examined as Muslims are when the histories of Islam and the Qur'an are examined. For example there are ancient copies of the Qur'an, one in Egypt and one in Istanbul and no one has permission to examine them. Now the same is true for the Sana'a manuscripts because the Yemeni authorities stopped any further examinations. Orthodox Muslims do not want to find out if their tradition is wrong and they don't want the rest of the world to find out.

At least Puin and his associate took tens of thousands of photographs. The rest of the world knows that what we have of the standard text of the Qur'an is not what was in existence in the 7th and 8th centuries.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 7:30 pm
by Ibn Rushd
I am currently reading the book by Mohendar Sfar about the original purpose of the Koran: early muslims said that there were thousands of interpretations because of the points on the letters, and only as long as you didn't change the word to mean the opposite, then any reading was fine. I think the "Koran as Book in Heaven" is a 18th-20th century view, it was not there from 7th-16th centuries. They viewed the Koran as the reading/lectionary acceptable for humans while there was an unchanging Book in Heaven that the Angels guarded.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:40 pm
by Islamic_Science2
Here is 10/10 of the National Geographic "Inside the Quran".



I will be back later for comments.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:50 am
by debunker
recycling the same old stories:

1- Quran is not written in Arabic (very funny),
2- Quran can mean a million things because of the lack of dots (a ridiculous lie) and finally
3- the conspiracy theory about other versions of the Quran.

Well, at least the claim of different versions (SAME meanings, *slightly* different words) is endorsed by Islamic history (and some quite laughable Hadiths). In other words, Puin's claims might actually match historians/Hadith claims. I personally could locate Islamic web pages discussing some Quranic text of different version. Tradition has it that there were 7 versions of the Quran, all with the same meaning but slightly different words-- which matches Puin's claim... In other words, Puin won't be surprising Muslims with his findings (well, at least not the Muslim scholars).


I am currently reading the book by Mohendar Sfar about the original purpose of the Koran: early muslims said that there were thousands of interpretations because of the points on the letters, and only as long as you didn't change the word to mean the opposite, then any reading was fine. I think the "Koran as Book in Heaven" is a 18th-20th century view, it was not there from 7th-16th centuries. They viewed the Koran as the reading/lectionary acceptable for humans while there was an unchanging Book in Heaven that the Angels guarded.


look here:
viewtopic.php?f=18&t=4626&start=0#p76199

And "Koran is a book in heaven" is merely a speculation of Tafsir writers.

The phrase: guarded tablet is

لَوْحٍ مَّحْفُوظٍ

without the dots, this can still have only one meaning: guarded tablet.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 4:02 am
by Islamic_Science2
Guarded tablet is another tradition copied from the Torah. The ten commandments were carved on a stone tablet. Then the ten commandments were on 2 stone tablets kept or guarded in the ark of the covenant.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 7:08 pm
by Islamic_Science2
From the video 3:44, 10/10 Inside the Quran:

We Muslims have been ordered to do brainwashing.

Equality of women is a bunch of foolishness.

The summit of Islam is Jihad.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 8:53 pm
by Ibn Rushd
Yes I found that odd too.

PS. The youtubes don't seem to show up on my screen anymore. I'll go to the source and check them again.

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:13 am
by piscohot
Well, Christoph Luxemburg certainly gave a better and more rational translation of the quran in 'Inside the koran part 9'. (at 6.27mins of the video)

Re: Inside the Koran

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:49 am
by Islamic_Science2
piscohot wrote:Well, Christoph Luxemburg certainly gave a better and more rational translation of the quran in 'Inside the koran part 9'. (at 6.27mins of the video)

Not only that. But it appears as if Christoph Luxenberg may have resolved a contradiction. About 8:00 min. into the video the commentator stated that its Luxenberg's reference to paradise that causes the greatest offense. Its offensive to traditional Muslims that instead of being wedded to wide eyed maidens called houris the faithful will be made comfortable with white crystal clear grapes. There are verses in the Qur'an stating that the faithful will enter the garden and rejoice with their wives. See inside the spoiler. The traditional Islamic interpretation of being paired with houris may contradict these verses.

Spoiler! :
036.056
YUSUFALI: They and their associates will be in groves of (cool) shade, reclining on Thrones (of dignity);
PICKTHAL: They and their wives, in pleasant shade, on thrones reclining;
SHAKIR: They and their wives shall be in shades, reclining on raised couches.


043.070
YUSUFALI: Enter ye the Garden, ye and your wives, in (beauty and) rejoicing.
PICKTHAL: Enter the Garden, ye and your wives, to be made glad.
SHAKIR: Enter the garden, you and your wives; you shall be made happy.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------