The Most Plausible of Islam's Claims: The Qur'an's Linguistic Prowess

[Debater Slayer]

Since Islam's inception, a lot of people have claimed that the Qur'an's most renowned quality, its linguistic prowess, has been matched or surpassed, with the idea that doing so "refutes" Islam's claimed divine origin. In this thread I will delve deeper into some aspects that, in my opinion, render said claim rather mistaken.

Regardless of what one has to say about the theological, philosophical, or legislative content of the Qur'an, it remains the single most distinguished linguistic work in the Arabic language and, quite possibly, in any language as well, especially in terms of poetry. I will cite some examples as to why.

• First, the Qur'an is not all poetry, as it contains a considerable portion of prose, so poetic strength is not all it has going for it. Throughout its 114 surahs, the grammar, choice of words, and syntax are all concise, correct, and precise to the point of managing to be the primary reference in the Arabic language for all three. This is despite the fact that the Arab world has had some magnificent poetry over the centuries, dating all the way back to before Islam even appeared.

While not exhaustive in the slightest, three of the primary factors of what makes an Arabic poem well-written are (in no particular order)

1) sound grammar

2) contextually proper use of rhetorical and poetic devices, and

3) being able to express vivid and/or precise meanings without using many words.

Again, the Qur'an fulfills all three criteria to the point where it is the Arabic language's primary reference thereof. For example, the shortest surah in the Qur'an, Surat al-Kawthar, has only three verses but more poetic devices than some poems of much greater length. This is without taking poetic liberty either, since the grammar and syntax are perfectly sound as well.

• Second, the Qur'an wasn't just an excellent linguistic work for its time; it has also stood the test of time to this day. The Arabic language has had some extremely talented and skilled poets and writers, so it is more than a little difficult for a single book to remain the magnum opus among a language's poetic and literary endeavors for over 1,400 years. And with how long it is, the fact that its grammar is as sound as it is all throughout makes it stand out further.

• Third, Arabic has a diacritical system that relies on grammar: the pronunciation of words can change depending on where they are in a sentence or what meaning they serve—the same word could be pronounced differently depending on whether it functions as a subject or an object in a sentence, for example. This has led some poets to take poetic liberty with grammar in order to maintain rhyme, but the Qur'an doesn't do that: it manages to maintain both rhyme and grammatical soundness. So it also excels in terms of how it employs words, not just in how it chooses them.

Since the Qur'an basically can't be translated without sacrificing many of the qualities I mentioned above, this post only scratches the surface of what's there. One would need to understand Arabic and be familiar with Arabic grammar in order to fully appreciate the Qur'an's linguistic excellence. It seems to me that the most plausible of all of Islam's claims is indeed that the Qur'an is linguistically unparalleled.

Discuss.

 

[George-ananda]

Discuss.

Mohammed was illiterate and could not even write His own name it is said.

I believe the most reasonable explanation for the sophistication of His recital was inspiration from spiritual sources.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I don't know if I can see any weakness in your argument, but perhaps the Qu'ran only has to cover limited subject matter. Also how do we know the diacritical marks are older than the Qu'ran? Maybe someone used word frequency studies to select diacritical marks that would work best. That could give the Qu'ran an unfair advantage. I also observe that the culture is about the words of the Qu'ran. That is another advantage comparable to the way English culture surrounds the KJV Bible, and it always sounds classy with its Thees and Thou's. In other words sometimes the shoe fits nicely once your foot is broken in to it.

 

[Revoltingest]

3) being able to express vivid and/or precise meanings without using many words.

Vivid & precise meaning?
This is at odds with the differing interpretations inferred by Muslims.

 

[sayak83]

Since Islam's inception, a lot of people have claimed that the Qur'an's most renowned quality, its linguistic prowess, has been matched or surpassed, with the idea that doing so "refutes" Islam's claimed divine origin. In this thread I will delve deeper into some aspects that, in my opinion, render said claim rather mistaken.

Regardless of what one has to say about the theological, philosophical, or legislative content of the Qur'an, it remains the single most distinguished linguistic work in the Arabic language and, quite possibly, in any language as well, especially in terms of poetry. I will cite some examples as to why.

• First, the Qur'an is not all poetry, as it contains a considerable portion of prose, so poetic strength is not all it has going for it. Throughout its 114 surahs, the grammar, choice of words, and syntax are all concise, correct, and precise to the point of managing to be the primary reference in the Arabic language for all three. This is despite the fact that the Arab world has had some magnificent poetry over the centuries, dating all the way back to before Islam even appeared.

While not exhaustive in the slightest, three of the primary factors of what makes an Arabic poem well-written are (in no particular order)

1) sound grammar

2) contextually proper use of rhetorical and poetic devices, and

3) being able to express vivid and/or precise meanings without using many words.

Again, the Qur'an fulfills all three criteria to the point where it is the Arabic language's primary reference thereof. For example, the shortest surah in the Qur'an, Surat al-Kawthar, has only three verses but more poetic devices than some poems of much greater length. This is without taking poetic liberty either, since the grammar and syntax are perfectly sound as well.

• Second, the Qur'an wasn't just an excellent linguistic work for its time; it has also stood the test of time to this day. The Arabic language has had some extremely talented and skilled poets and writers, so it is more than a little difficult for a single book to remain the magnum opus among a language's poetic and literary endeavors for over 1,400 years. And with how long it is, the fact that its grammar is as sound as it is all throughout makes it stand out further.

• Third, Arabic has a diacritical system that relies on grammar: the pronunciation of words can change depending on where they are in a sentence or what meaning they serve—the same word could be pronounced differently depending on whether it functions as a subject or an object in a sentence, for example. This has led some poets to take poetic liberty with grammar in order to maintain rhyme, but the Qur'an doesn't do that: it manages to maintain both rhyme and grammatical soundness. So it also excels in terms of how it employs words, not just in how it chooses them.

Since the Qur'an basically can't be translated without sacrificing many of the qualities I mentioned above, this post only scratches the surface of what's there. One would need to understand Arabic and be familiar with Arabic grammar in order to fully appreciate the Qur'an's linguistic excellence. It seems to me that the most plausible of all of Islam's claims is indeed that the Qur'an is linguistically unparalleled.

Discuss.

This is impossible to discuss without knowing Arabic. How does it compare with Iliad, Aenid, Rig Veda etc.?

 

[sun rise]

Vivid & precise meaning?
This is at odds with the differing interpretations inferred by Muslims.

Part of the problem is human nature with people seeing what they want to see - confirmation bias or simple misreading. That's why the written word is so tricky and leads to misunderstanding. That's just the start.

I know that the translations are all over the map given some that I've seen.

How many are familiar with Arabic, especially Quranic Arabic? We know that Shakespeare's plays have a lot of topical references in them that are utterly lost to modern audiences unless they carefully study history surrounding the time of the play and how meanings of words have changed since then.

 

[Revoltingest]

Part of the problem is human nature with people seeing what they want to see - confirmation bias or simple misreading. That's why the written word is so tricky and leads to misunderstanding. That's just the start.

I know that the translations are all over the map given some that I've seen.

How many are familiar with Arabic, especially Quranic Arabic? We know that Shakespeare's plays have a lot of topical references in them that are utterly lost to modern audiences unless they carefully study history surrounding the time of the play and how meanings of words have changed since then.

Fans of Shakespeare aren't claiming extraordinary clarity of meaning though.

 

[shunyadragon]

Mohammed was illiterate and could not even write His own name it is said.

I believe the most reasonable explanation for the sophistication of His recital was inspiration from spiritual sources.

Traditional version: It was dictated and written down by his early followers who were literate.

Some sources claim Mohammed was literate.

From: Is it True that Prophet Muhammad Was Illiterate? | About Islam

As-salamu Alaikum, some Orientalists said that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was literate. They've mentioned two examples: The Treaty of Hudaibiah and two versions I've read: A. The prophet signed “son of Abdullah” B. The prophet omitted the word “apostle of God”. Another story is that at his death bed, the prophet asked for a pen and ink to write who was to be his successor.

 

[columbus]

the Qur'an, it remains the single most distinguished linguistic work in the Arabic language and, quite possibly, in any language as well, especially in terms of poetry.

I used to occasionally attend the mosque in Bloomington, Indiana. I have heard the Qur'an sung by talented and trained people. No doubt about it, it's superb. Hauntingly beautiful, you don't need a word of Arabic to appreciate that.

I don't find that especially difficult to explain. Muhammad was a brilliant, ambitious, discerning, and very successful man. He traveled widely and met all kinds of people, especially as a young trader.

Oral poetry was high art, in his own culture and all the ones around him. I can well imagine him collecting poems and ideas from all around, then practicing and honing his own skills during long hours traveling. I would expect him to be very accomplished, with a large collection of works memorized.
Then in his later years he was a rich and powerful ruler holding court. People sharing gifts of the best poetry in his land and from other places would have easily turned into a fabulous art collection, in the style of 7th century Arabic culture.
Then, when he was drawing near the end of his life, he had his very favorites committed to writing. Then, during the tumult that followed, the creme de la creme of that was preserved long enough to be collated into a body of work that was attributed to him by devoted followers.
This long process of winnowing resulted in a spectacularly beautiful collection known as the Qur'an.

I realize that people 14 centuries ago told a different, less plausible, version of events. But I don't believe much of what the followers of legendary prophets claim after said prophets aren't around, about the details. Especially things like parting of seas, resurrections, or angels delivering Scripture.
Tom

 

[George-ananda]

Traditional version: It was dictated and written down by his early followers who were literate.

Some sources claim Mohammed was literate.

From: Is it True that Prophet Muhammad Was Illiterate? | About Islam

As-salamu Alaikum, some Orientalists said that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was literate. They've mentioned two examples: The Treaty of Hudaibiah and two versions I've read: A. The prophet signed “son of Abdullah” B. The prophet omitted the word “apostle of God”. Another story is that at his death bed, the prophet asked for a pen and ink to write who was to be his successor.

I clicked on your link and if you continue to read the answers to that claim you find:

Short Answer: Yes, Prophet Muhammad was, indeed, illiterate. Like the vast majority of people during his time in his area, he could neither read nor write. In situations when some history recorded him requesting pen and paper to write, he was actually requesting someone to write for him.

I have to agree with the Baha'is on this one: Bahá'ís believe in Muhammad as a prophet of God, and in the Qur’an as the word of God. Baha'i teachings 'affirm that Islam is a true religion revealed by Allah'; (Wikipedia Link)

 

[George-ananda]

Fans of Shakespeare aren't claiming extraordinary clarity of meaning though.

But they do claim him to be a great literary genius (not an illiterate). That analogy doesn't work I believe.

 

[columbus]

Being functionally illiterate just wasn't a big deal then. It was a technical skill that most people simply didn't bother with.
It was more like writing computer code is today. Some people can do it, with varying degrees of proficientcy. Few are really very good, certainly not world leaders and top business people. They have other things to do, and it's easier to use the skills of other people for that sort of task.
Tom

 

[Augustus]

being able to express vivid and/or precise meanings without using many words.

If you have a look at early exegesis, it is perfectly clear that the exegete has no idea about how to interpret the specific passage and they are literally guessing. Tabari often mentions 5-10 mutually incompatible interpretations of passages. Over time these disputes disappeared as people got more confident the further removed the actual historical context they were.

The precision of meaning was thus something that was established long after the fact.

An example would be in this verse. To protect a rhyme scheme, Abraham's wife laughs before rather than after hearing the surprising news of her pregnancy (as she does in the Bible).

They said, “Do not fear. We have been sent to the people of Lot.” (71) His wife was standing by, then she laughed. We gave her the good news of Isaac and, after Isaac, Jacob. “Woe is me! Shall I give birth as an old woman, when my master is aged? This is truly a strange thing.”

This led to a range of interpretation from she laughed as she was worried that the guests were sodomites, or that she was annoyed they wouldn't eat the food on the table, or even that, in this case, the word laugh meant menstruated (GS Reynolds: The Quran and its biblical Subtext)

There are also numerous hapax legomena, often loanwords, that have caused problems for historical exegetes.

This has led some poets to take poetic liberty with grammar in order to maintain rhyme, but the Qur'an doesn't do that: it manages to maintain both rhyme and grammatical soundness.

I don't now much about Arabic grammar, but was grammatical soundness, again, something that was established after the fact? It can't break the rules because it establishes the rules so to speak.

What are your thoughts on these as you obviously know a lot more about Arabic than I do?

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Since Islam's inception, a lot of people have claimed that the Qur'an's most renowned quality, its linguistic prowess, has been matched or surpassed, with the idea that doing so "refutes" Islam's claimed divine origin. In this thread I will delve deeper into some aspects that, in my opinion, render said claim rather mistaken.

Regardless of what one has to say about the theological, philosophical, or legislative content of the Qur'an, it remains the single most distinguished linguistic work in the Arabic language and, quite possibly, in any language as well, especially in terms of poetry. I will cite some examples as to why.

• First, the Qur'an is not all poetry, as it contains a considerable portion of prose, so poetic strength is not all it has going for it. Throughout its 114 surahs, the grammar, choice of words, and syntax are all concise, correct, and precise to the point of managing to be the primary reference in the Arabic language for all three. This is despite the fact that the Arab world has had some magnificent poetry over the centuries, dating all the way back to before Islam even appeared.

While not exhaustive in the slightest, three of the primary factors of what makes an Arabic poem well-written are (in no particular order)

1) sound grammar

2) contextually proper use of rhetorical and poetic devices, and

3) being able to express vivid and/or precise meanings without using many words.

Again, the Qur'an fulfills all three criteria to the point where it is the Arabic language's primary reference thereof. For example, the shortest surah in the Qur'an, Surat al-Kawthar, has only three verses but more poetic devices than some poems of much greater length. This is without taking poetic liberty either, since the grammar and syntax are perfectly sound as well.

• Second, the Qur'an wasn't just an excellent linguistic work for its time; it has also stood the test of time to this day. The Arabic language has had some extremely talented and skilled poets and writers, so it is more than a little difficult for a single book to remain the magnum opus among a language's poetic and literary endeavors for over 1,400 years. And with how long it is, the fact that its grammar is as sound as it is all throughout makes it stand out further.

• Third, Arabic has a diacritical system that relies on grammar: the pronunciation of words can change depending on where they are in a sentence or what meaning they serve—the same word could be pronounced differently depending on whether it functions as a subject or an object in a sentence, for example. This has led some poets to take poetic liberty with grammar in order to maintain rhyme, but the Qur'an doesn't do that: it manages to maintain both rhyme and grammatical soundness. So it also excels in terms of how it employs words, not just in how it chooses them.

Since the Qur'an basically can't be translated without sacrificing many of the qualities I mentioned above, this post only scratches the surface of what's there. One would need to understand Arabic and be familiar with Arabic grammar in order to fully appreciate the Qur'an's linguistic excellence. It seems to me that the most plausible of all of Islam's claims is indeed that the Qur'an is linguistically unparalleled.

Discuss.

So I assume you have read the Qur'an in Arabic?

 

[George-ananda]

So I assume you have read the Qur'an in Arabic?

I've communicated with him before on RF. He's from Egypt so I'm betting he has.

 

[Sakeenah]

Since Islam's inception, a lot of people have claimed that the Qur'an's most renowned quality, its linguistic prowess, has been matched or surpassed, with the idea that doing so "refutes" Islam's claimed divine origin. In this thread I will delve deeper into some aspects that, in my opinion, render said claim rather mistaken.

Regardless of what one has to say about the theological, philosophical, or legislative content of the Qur'an, it remains the single most distinguished linguistic work in the Arabic language and, quite possibly, in any language as well, especially in terms of poetry. I will cite some examples as to why.

• First, the Qur'an is not all poetry, as it contains a considerable portion of prose, so poetic strength is not all it has going for it. Throughout its 114 surahs, the grammar, choice of words, and syntax are all concise, correct, and precise to the point of managing to be the primary reference in the Arabic language for all three. This is despite the fact that the Arab world has had some magnificent poetry over the centuries, dating all the way back to before Islam even appeared.

While not exhaustive in the slightest, three of the primary factors of what makes an Arabic poem well-written are (in no particular order)

1) sound grammar

2) contextually proper use of rhetorical and poetic devices, and

3) being able to express vivid and/or precise meanings without using many words.

Again, the Qur'an fulfills all three criteria to the point where it is the Arabic language's primary reference thereof. For example, the shortest surah in the Qur'an, Surat al-Kawthar, has only three verses but more poetic devices than some poems of much greater length. This is without taking poetic liberty either, since the grammar and syntax are perfectly sound as well.

• Second, the Qur'an wasn't just an excellent linguistic work for its time; it has also stood the test of time to this day. The Arabic language has had some extremely talented and skilled poets and writers, so it is more than a little difficult for a single book to remain the magnum opus among a language's poetic and literary endeavors for over 1,400 years. And with how long it is, the fact that its grammar is as sound as it is all throughout makes it stand out further.

• Third, Arabic has a diacritical system that relies on grammar: the pronunciation of words can change depending on where they are in a sentence or what meaning they serve—the same word could be pronounced differently depending on whether it functions as a subject or an object in a sentence, for example. This has led some poets to take poetic liberty with grammar in order to maintain rhyme, but the Qur'an doesn't do that: it manages to maintain both rhyme and grammatical soundness. So it also excels in terms of how it employs words, not just in how it chooses them.

You're right, that's one of the reasons I started studying Arabic. Because only by understanding classical Arabic can you really appreciate the Quran's linguistic excellence. The linguistic beauty of the Quran gets lost in the translation.

 

[Jumi]

I think the Kalevala is plausibly the world's most spiritual text in this regard, since it's perfect in my native tongue. It's the national epic here for that reason. No translation even begins to do justice to how wonderful the text of the Kalevala is. I've sometimes wanted to quote from it, but the English translations lose much of the meaning. Most Finnish people love the Kalevala for this reason if their linguistic skills aren't too much detoriated by Android and iPhone. I don't see anything special in the Qu'ran being difficult to translate.

I've been told by believers in the text that I don't understand the Qu'ran when I've asked about something in it, because I don't know Arabic. I think this and the fact that Arabic is hard to learn counters that this text was meant for everyone.

 

[Looncall]

Since Islam's inception, a lot of people have claimed that the Qur'an's most renowned quality, its linguistic prowess, has been matched or surpassed, with the idea that doing so "refutes" Islam's claimed divine origin. In this thread I will delve deeper into some aspects that, in my opinion, render said claim rather mistaken.


Regardless of what one has to say about the theological, philosophical, or legislative content of the Qur'an, it remains the single most distinguished linguistic work in the Arabic language and, quite possibly, in any language as well, especially in terms of poetry. I will cite some examples as to why.

• First, the Qur'an is not all poetry, as it contains a considerable portion of prose, so poetic strength is not all it has going for it. Throughout its 114 surahs, the grammar, choice of words, and syntax are all concise, correct, and precise to the point of managing to be the primary reference in the Arabic language for all three. This is despite the fact that the Arab world has had some magnificent poetry over the centuries, dating all the way back to before Islam even appeared.

While not exhaustive in the slightest, three of the primary factors of what makes an Arabic poem well-written are (in no particular order)

1) sound grammar

2) contextually proper use of rhetorical and poetic devices, and

3) being able to express vivid and/or precise meanings without using many words.

Again, the Qur'an fulfills all three criteria to the point where it is the Arabic language's primary reference thereof. For example, the shortest surah in the Qur'an, Surat al-Kawthar, has only three verses but more poetic devices than some poems of much greater length. This is without taking poetic liberty either, since the grammar and syntax are perfectly sound as well.

• Second, the Qur'an wasn't just an excellent linguistic work for its time; it has also stood the test of time to this day. The Arabic language has had some extremely talented and skilled poets and writers, so it is more than a little difficult for a single book to remain the magnum opus among a language's poetic and literary endeavors for over 1,400 years. And with how long it is, the fact that its grammar is as sound as it is all throughout makes it stand out further.

• Third, Arabic has a diacritical system that relies on grammar: the pronunciation of words can change depending on where they are in a sentence or what meaning they serve—the same word could be pronounced differently depending on whether it functions as a subject or an object in a sentence, for example. This has led some poets to take poetic liberty with grammar in order to maintain rhyme, but the Qur'an doesn't do that: it manages to maintain both rhyme and grammatical soundness. So it also excels in terms of how it employs words, not just in how it chooses them.

Since the Qur'an basically can't be translated without sacrificing many of the qualities I mentioned above, this post only scratches the surface of what's there. One would need to understand Arabic and be familiar with Arabic grammar in order to fully appreciate the Qur'an's linguistic excellence. It seems to me that the most plausible of all of Islam's claims is indeed that the Qur'an is linguistically unparalleled.

Discuss.

How does literary excellence imply divine providence? This is just silly apologetics.

 

[Muslimman]

You don't have to personally fight against Muhammad Ali to realise that he was a great boxer. Just watch some of his matches with the masters.

 

[Augustus]

You don't have to personally fight against Muhammad Ali to realise that he was a great boxer. Just watch some of his matches with the masters.

So you don't have to personally read the Quran to appreciate it, just watch other people reading it?