@Debater Slayer ,
@columbus and
@George-ananda the Qur'an is arguably the pre-eminent literary masterpiece in classical Arabic, yes indeed. When sung, the emotive power of the text is deeply moving and soul-stirring, even to listeners without a modicum of linguistic capability in the mother tongue.
But it is important to stress, contrary to the traditional Islamic accounts based upon spurious
hadith from at least two centuries after the reputed lifetime of Muhammad, that we don't actually know "
who" composed its
surahs and
ayats. The one fact I am absolutely certain of, beyond all reasonable doubt, is that the Muhammad of the traditional narrations is a "heroic fiction".
Critical Qur'anic scholarship has been severely restricted by verbal (and sadly physical) violence from Muslim fundamentalists convinced that the the holy book - ever since the wholesale repression of the more rationalist
Mu'tazila during the
Mina (Islamic inquisition under the Abbasids) - is an "eternal", uncreated revelation effectively co-eternal with
Allah.
The Qur'an is thereby treated as something exempt from any historical contextualization within the intellectual milieu of a given time period, and as not being subject to mediation through the fallible minds of time-bound human beings - as Christians have traditionally accepted with regards to the Bible.
If one subjects the Qur'an to criticism as a literary text with a historiographical perspective, it becomes clear that the
Sunnah massively diverges from the internal evidence of the holy book itself. Muslims locate the Qur'anic revelation in the arid deserts of Mecca and Medina, interpreting the
Mushrikun (disbelievers) - those characterised in the scriptural accounts as the opponents and permanent interlocutors of the prophet - as Arabian, idol-worshipping pagans.
By contrast the Qur'an, if read in isolation from the much later but traditional backgrounds assumed by the
hadith, would not lead the objective reader to presuppose the identity of the author as being an Arabian prophet preaching in a desert to polytheists. Rather the text makes it abundantly and incontrovertibly clear that the
mushrikun are agriculturalists (
Sura 6:141):
(6:141) It is He Who has brought into being gardens - the trellised and untrellised - and the palm trees, and crops, all varying in taste, and the olive and pomegranates, all resembling one another and yet so different. Eat of their fruits when they come to fruition and pay His due on the day of harvesting. And do not exceed the proper limits, for He does not love those who exceed the proper limits.
The author (I'm refraining from calling him Muhammad) is clearly at home in the agricultural setting described in the above
ayat, reflected in the wealth of local attention to detail which he is able to bring to the fore in addressing himself to people whose livelihoods consist in their fields, harvests and fruits. Note how the speaker invites his listeners to "
eat of their fruits" on the day of "
harvest".
So we know, from a plethora of similar details, the Qur'an was not delivered to a desert-dwelling audience.
Neither were the
mushrikun pagans as the traditional Islamic accounts would have one believe. They are extremely familiar with the biblical narratives about Abraham, Moses, David, Jesus and the like. Their
shirk (ascribing partners to God) should be understood in this context.
A final point to note is that the Qur'an even provides the reader with an implicit but highly significant geographical detail as to its setting which, once again, conflicts hugely with the
Sunnah, in 26:172 where the author (in some versions) refers to the remains of Sodom which are on a well-travelled route which the
mushrikun "
pass by night and day" - that is, the Dead Sea. Pretty far removed from Mecca.
The Qur'an is actually an apocalyptic work originating from a milieu populated by unorthodox Jewish-Christian sects on the outskirts of the Eastern Roman Empire, likely among a group of Arabs living in Syria near to Palestine, around the time of Byzantine Emperor Heraclius' campaigns in Persian lands from 613 to 626 which are celebrated in the text as a victory for Abrahamic monotheism, namely in the 30th surah entitled
Al-Rum - "
The Romans".
In this chapter, the author reflects on the Byzantine defeat by the Persians at the Battle of Antioch in 613 and predicts that the Christian Roman forces will ultimately prevail over the Zoroastrians, something that will give heart to Abrahamic monotheists like the author: "
The Romans [Byzantines] have been defeated. In a land close by; but they will soon be victorious-Within a few years. Allah's is the command before and after; and on that day the believers shall rejoice."[
Quran 30:2-4]
Note how Antioch in Syria is described as "
close by".