"Challenging the Qur’an" by Stefan Theil

Newsweek (original link "scrubbed" from MSNBC.com) ^ | July 2003 | Stefan Theil

[NewJerseyJoe]

Challenging the Qur’an
A German scholar contends that the Islamic text has been mistranscribed and promises raisins, not virgins

By Stefan Theil
NEWSWEEK INTERNATIONAL

July 28 issue — In a note of encouragement to his fellow hijackers, September 11 ringleader Muhammad Atta cheered their impending “marriage in Paradise” to the 72 wide-eyed virgins the Qur’an promises to the departed faithful. Palestinian newspapers have been known to describe the death of a suicide bomber as a “wedding to the black-eyed in eternal Paradise.” But if a German expert on Middle Eastern languages is correct, these hopes of sexual reward in the afterlife are based on a terrible misunderstanding.

ARGUING THAT TODAY’S version of the Qur’an has been mistranscribed from the original text, scholar Christoph Luxenberg says that what are described as “houris” with “swelling breasts” refer to nothing more than “white raisins” and “juicy fruits.”

Luxenberg—a pseudonym—is one of a small but growing group of scholars, most of them working in non-Muslim countries, studying the language and history of the Qur’an. When his new book is published this fall, it’s likely to be the most far-reaching scholarly commentary on the Qur’an’s early genesis, taking this infant discipline far into uncharted—and highly controversial—territory. That’s because Islamic orthodoxy considers the holy book to be the verbatim revelation of Allah, speaking to his prophet, Muhammad, through the Angel Gabriel, in Arabic. Therefore, critical study of God’s undiluted word has been off-limits in much of the Islamic world. (For the same reason, translations of the Qur’an are never considered authentic.) Islamic scholars who have dared ignore this taboo have often found themselves labeled heretics and targeted with death threats and violence. Luxenberg, a professor of Semitic languages at one of Germany’s leading universities, has chosen to remain anonymous because he fears a fatwa by enraged Islamic extremists.

Luxenberg’s chief hypothesis is that the original language of the Qur’an was not Arabic but something closer to Aramaic. He says the copy of the Qur’an used today is a mistranscription of the original text from Muhammad’s time, which according to Islamic tradition was destroyed by the third caliph, Osman, in the seventh century. But Arabic did not turn up as a written language until 150 years after Muhammad’s death, and most learned Arabs at that time spoke a version of Aramaic. Rereading the Paradise passage in Aramaic, the mysterious houris turn into raisins and fruit—much more common components of the Paradise myth.

The forthcoming book contains plenty of other bombshells. It claims that the Qur’an’s commandment for women to cover themselves is based on a similar misreading; in Sura 24, the verse that calls for women to “snap their scarves over their bags” becomes in Aramaic “snap their belts around their waists.” Even more explosive are readings that strengthen scholars’ views that the Qur’an had Christian origins. Sura 33 calls Muhammad the “seal of the prophets,” taken to mean the final and ultimate prophet of God. But an Aramaic reading, says Luxenberg, turns Muhammad into a “witness of the prophets”—i.e., someone who bears witness to the established Judeo-Christian texts. The Qur’an, in Arabic, talks about the “revelation” of Allah, but in Aramaic that term turns into “teaching” of the ancient Scriptures. The original Qur’an, Luxenberg contends, was in fact a Christian liturgical document—before an expanding Arab empire turned Muhammad’s teachings into the basis for its new religion long after the Prophet’s death.

Such interpretations will undoubtedly draw the ire of many Muslims—and not just extremists. After all, revisionist scholars have been persecuted for much less; in 2001, Egypt’s Constitutional Court confirmed the “apostasy” of former University of Cairo scholar Nasr Hamid Abu-Zayd, for considering the Qur’an a document written by humans.

Still, Luxenberg may be ushering in a whole new era of Qur’anic study. “Luxenberg’s findings are very relevant and convincing,” says Mondher Sfar, a Tunisian specialist on the historic origins of the Qur’an in exile in Paris. “They make possible a new interpretation of the Qur’an.” In the West, questioning the literal veracity of the Bible was a crucial step in breaking the church’s grip on power—and in developing a modern, secular society. That experience, as much as the questioning itself, is no doubt what concerns conservative Muslims as they struggle over the meaning and influence of Islam in the 21st century. But if Luxenberg’s work is any indication, the questioning is just getting underway.

[NewJerseyJoe]

Both MSNBC and Newsweek websites have been scrubbed clean of any mention of this article. (I know -- big surprise, right?) Additionally, Google doesn't have a cache of the page, and the Wayback Machine, although it has several crawled dates, has been similarly scrubbed.

The article is posted above. Here is a second link to download the article for purchase:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_kmnew/is_200307/ai_kepm307669

[garyhope]

I wonder if the raisins are soaked in gin?

[FerdieMurphy]

The Qur'an was not written by Allah but, rather, by some selfish greedy man who wanted only his own comfort.
When reading the Hadith, the words of Muhammed, you'll find different events of Prophet Muhammed' s life in which, when he had problems, Allah solved them right away.

For example, he was sexually aroused by seeing his daughter-in-law, so Allah sent him a message saying he could marry her because his son was adopted and not a real son, so the marriage was therefore justified. Further, he created a new rule, that Muslims would not be allowed to adopt any children.

Muhammed married thirteen times, one of his brides being six-year-old Ayesha.

Allah, he said, told him that he was only allowed to enjoy captive women, and he put Ayesha in a veil because he was jealous and did not want his friends looking admiringly at her when they went to his house. Allah, he said, told his friends they could go to the Prophet' s house any time they wanted but if they went they should not look at any of his wives or ask any of them for anything. He was so jealous of his wives that he introduced the veil for his wives and, ultimately, for all Muslim women.

Even though widow-marriage was legal, he made it illegal for men to marry any of his own wives when he himself died.

It becomes clear that Muhammed had written the Qur'an for his own interest, for his own comfort, for his own fun. So why all the mooselimbs?

I know.

Few can read and the ones that can are extremely gullible or want to live like Muhammed and go to muslim heaven. If we lived like that we know we'd go to hell.

[timsbella]

Prune Danish.

[Paloma_55]

Since you will know a tree by the fruit it bears, we can only conclude that Islam is toadstool and biting from it will bring on death.

It is unfortunate that some people have been pulled into it, but then it seduces those people with worldly desires. The concept that death will bring sexual gratification is absurd, yet it seems to work.

[uptoolate]

"what are described as “houris” with “swelling breasts” refer to nothing more than “white raisins” and “juicy fruits.”

"houris" sounds like "whores"

"swelling breasts" sounds like pregnancy

They are not getting 70 virgins. They are getting 70 pregnant whores!!!!

[Vinnie]

'There will be a nice basket of fruit waiting for you'

[CaptRon]

a mistranscription of the original text from Muhammad’s time, which according to Islamic tradition was destroyed by the third caliph, Osman, in the seventh century.

I have read that Osman collected all of the known copies of the Koran and had them redacted, erasing many of Mohammeds more serious depradations.

[Graymatter]

White raisins! Where? Straight ahead, m'dear...

[kokonut]

Aye. How about a $50,000 challenge to Muslims to disprove charges against Mohammed portraying to be a rapist, etc..?

http://kokonutpundits.blogspot.com/2006/02/50000-challenge-against-mohammed-and.html

[EASYACES]

Great post. Any idea when this book will be published?

[ShadowAce]

...scholar Christoph Luxenberg says that what are described as “houris” with “swelling breasts” refer to nothing more than “white raisins” and “juicy fruits.”

So the terrorists flew the planes into the WTC, and all they got was a Welcome Wagon basket?

[CatoRenasci]

Interesting that the book, which is in print in Germany for about Euro 30 has not been translated into English and is almost unobtainable here (1 copy on Amazon for $117+shipping).

I'd love to read the argument carefully, as the reviews are very mixed, both in English and on the Amazon.de website. At the very least I get the sense that serious scholarship on the Koran would be at least as interesting as the biblical scholarship of the past 200 years, and far more devastating for Islam than the higher criticism was for fundamentalist Christianity.

[p. henry]

Actually, the Koran refers to the terrorists meeting 72
Virginians in the afterlife. It will not be pleasant.

[OB1kNOb]

A German scholar contends that the Islamic text has been mistranscribed and promises raisins, not virgins...

So let me get this straight, the original text had inadvertantly been changed over the years to promising martyrs 72 Sweet Maidens when what the original text really said was that they would get 72 Sun Maids? Oops! Lost a little in the transcribing, eh? BWUAHAHAHAAAAA......!!

[CatoRenasci]

Indeed, hopefully all of them alumni of the Virigina Military Institute....

[Bull Man]

I’m confused though…if the original Aramaic text is not available to be studied, how can he know what it originally said?

[NearlyNormal]

Why wait for the afterlife? The citizens of Virginia are very well armed ... many concealed, many not ... and quite a few of a much higher caliber!