Surah Like
it
There’s a
claim which comes up again and again and no matter how often it is refuted, beaten
down or ridiculed, seems to periodically resurface. It must be incredibly
tempting for Muslims to have some sort of justification for their belief the
Koran is miraculous in some way and thus, perfectly written by a perfect god.
Well, if that is the case, keep looking elsewhere.
Muslim
apologists usually have only a few thoughts why the faith they have in their
ideology is justified.
They believe the Koran has divine
origins because it is
Scientifically compliant
Inerrant
Unchallenged
The universe and all life is
hand-crafted by their personal creator/god
Some nonsensical points such as
fine-tuning, morality, purpose, existence, etc
All these
claims have been refuted over and over. The Koran is NOT scientifically correct
because eg the creation of mountains and of humans is completely out of whack,
which has been aptly demonstrated. There are lots of mistakes, which I have
demonstrated. The classic god-of-the-gaps arguments when it comes to the
origins of the Universe and life are simply wishful thinking and all attempts by
apologists at bringing up any type of rational argument have been killed. The
other points I mentioned have been shown to be irrelevant or plain wrong, so in
this video I will , for the 2nd time, investigate the claim of the
miraculous nature of the Koran by looking at what apologists claim is the
built-in verification checksum. They love to sound all “sciency”, without understanding
any of it.
Anyway, the
claim is that the Koran, the chapters and the sentences in it are so incredibly
well written and so eloquent and complex that humans could never even come
close to replicating it, hence the “sura-like-it” claim.
As Charles Colton once said: “Imitation is the highest form
of flattery.” Not for the Koran it seems.
Just to
clarify something to avoid any possible misunderstanding - if this is even
possible: even if the Koran were spotless, structured, eloquent, inerrant,
superbly told with amazing word choice, a vast vocabulary and an incredible
amount of rhetorical devices, it would only mean one, single thing: it
is well written. Just because a book, a painting, a song or any piece of art
for that matter is a cut above the rest, this only demonstrates the immense
creativity of humans. It does not in any way indicate divine origins. We
don’t have any divine texts to compare it to. The texts we do have, some
of which are far superior, are written by humans. If a text were divinely
written, it would mean with absolute certainty that challenges and taunts would
be unnecessary as everyone would be completely in awe of this text. As it turns
out, hardly anyone is, when it comes to the Koran.
Humans
appreciate beauty and harmony. But tastes differ. I don’t like coke or
McDonalds. Many others do. I like pizza. Others don’t. We all look different
and our values and views differ as well. So let me raise a couple of points
before delving into the details of this challenge, a challenge which I consider
to be outright funny.
1.
Every
human and every product by a human is unique. What I am writing in this essay has
never – in the entire history of the Universe – been written before. It is totally
unique, yet I make no claim for divinity.
2.
Beauty
and eloquence are subjective, bar any objective method of measurement or
unit.
3.
99.999%
of the population on this planet are unable to read or write ancient Arabic.
4.
There
are 5 different versions of the challenge in the Koran, 17:88, 2:23, 10:37, 11:13, 52:33, each contradicting the others, all lacking
a specification on what the challenge actually is. 11:13 goes so far as to call
the 10 sentences we are to produce forged, fabricated or invented right off the
bat.
5.
Bring something
like it, does not say what
the “like” in “like it” should be.
6.
There
is no specification what the “it” is and
what the “it” is supposed to be.
7.
The
challenge is not clear on what is to be produced.
8.
There
is no requirement regarding language, format or contents.
9.
There
is no specification regarding the wildly fluctuating styles used in
different chapters.
10.
The
entire challenge is flawed logically, as the challenge to produce a Koran when
only 18% have been “revealed” would be impossible. Does that mean the challenge
to produce a Koran was the last sentence to be “revealed”? I’ll demonstrate
this in a few minutes.
11.
Muslims,
unfortunately, are forced to believe all the 5 claims made in the 5 sentences
blindly and they have to believe this is impossible, because the Koran states
in 2:24 that “you will never be able to”and
not believing it would be doubting the contents of the Koran, which is not
permissable in Islam. The Koran is inerrant because the Koran says so.
12.
2:23
states: “call your witnesses”. Who are the witnesses? Can anyone be a witness?
13.
Why
should anyone actually try - when it says any attempt will be futile?
14.
How
can anyone succeed if the attempt itself is punishable by hell?
15.
On
what grounds and by whom have existing submissions been rejected?
16.
There
is no specification whether the abundant mistakes need to be included.
17.
Is
it sufficient to repair faulty sentences to produce something better than the
original Koran?
18.
Would
a similar chapter need to contain contradictions, misogynistic, nonsensical,
awkward and violent parts as well?
This is the
challenge I am talking about. Here are the 5 sentences with their varying and
vague challenges on what is to be produced and some context:
17:88: Koran
2:23: a single chapter (surah)
10:37-38: a single chapter (surah)
11:13: 10 chapters (surahs)
52:33-34: anything (produce a statement like it)
17:88 If the whole of mankind
and Jinns were to gather together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they
could not produce the like thereof
2:23 what we have revealed
from time to time to our servant, then produce a like thereunto
10:37-38 Bring then a like
unto it
11:13 Bring ye then ten suras
forged, like unto it
52:33-34 Let them then
produce a recital like unto it
So what does reality in the here and now have to say to
this?
Apologists often claim that the challenge can only be
fulfilled if delivered in ancient Arabic, or Koranic Arabic. In 17:88 however,
it clearly says: “the whole of mankind and
Jinns”, not only Arabs or Arab-speaking humans. This challenge is for anybody
and everybody in any language. Also, it is a challenge to all non-believers
whether Jinn or humans and not just to Arab-speaking people. What I find odd is
that an all-knowing god would wait for the 3rd edition of his book
before attempting to write it properly. And failing again.
Apologists realise the
childish nature of this challenge and have added some of their own criteria,
not mentioned in the Koran itself. They claim that the actual miracle of the
Koran is that it converted millions and 100s of millions to Islam, whereas a
copy will not be able to do this and declare the copy a failure. By default. It
shows the dishonest attitude of some Muslims, who will not stop at anything to
score some brownie points.
An Egyptian
Arab recently came up with some nasheeds and Muslims agreed there was not a
single mistake in them – until he revealed they were anti-Koran sentences, just
made to sound like a Koran recitation.
There are
100s of examples of people who have accepted the challenge and have placed them
on websites such as these.
www.aperfectquran.org.uk (does not
exist any longer)
www.thebetterquran.com (does not
exist any longer)
Some are in
exquisite poetic style, using 7th century Koranic Arabic. Muslims regularly
protest these sites and try to shut them down in an attempt to silence them. You
can’t have what is not allowed, so Muslims constantly on the lookout for
reasons to be offended, show they prefer censorship to intellectually honest
discussions.
A. F. L.
Beeston, in his book “Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period”,
provides a huge amount of Arabic speaking Arabs who accepted the challenge, some
over 1000 years ago.
Here are some examples:
Ibn al-Mukaffa
Zaydi Imam
al-Qasim b. Ibrahim
Abu'l-'Ala' al-Ma'arri
Yahya b. al-Hakam al-Ghazal
(the sage of al-Andalus)
Sayyid 'Ali Muhammad
Abu'l-'Atahiya
Hamzah ben-Ahed
Nadir ibn Haritha
Bassar bin Burd
They came up with examples
such as "In the name of Compassionate and Merciful light” the Manichaean
variation of the bismilah.
Then we
have the “sura like it” contained and fulfilled in the Koran itself. Chapter 53
contains sentences which were not conceived by the Islamic god - but Islamic satan.
So satan was capable of producing something like the Koran, so realistic and
similar in fact that it fooled the 7th century Arabs around
Muhammad, the first hand experts.
Historically,
on the Arabian peninsula, just over 1000 years ago, the Syriac and Nabataean
used in the North, the Sabaic in the South and the multitude of Bedouin
dialects in the desert in between were vastly different. That is when the Koran
provided a common language for the entire Arabian peninsula. As such, it was
indeed unique.
Muslims
misunderstand comments by Orientalists who describe the Koran as a unique book
and unsurpassed for centuries. How should any book, any chapter or any sentence
appear in this language? Ancient or classic Arabic is no longer used and no
books have appeared in this dead language for hundreds of years.
Can they, the Muslim apologists, answer questions like:
How, in what way exactly, is the Tamil Ramavataram inferior to the Koran? Can they demonstrate
this?
The Sikh “Adi Granth” or “Guru
Granth Sahib” is considered to be the best humans can offer.
Dante codified Italian. A man, not a god.
Cy Twombly, whose paintings, sculptures, drawings and
photographs are like the man: inimitable and irreplaceable.
Aerosyn-Lex is one of those unique artists whose inimitable
calligraphic work and timeless visual style transcends a diverse range of
galleries and artistic platforms.
Quentin Blake's work is called "incomparable",
"inimitable", "unmistakable", "unbeatable".
Velazquez, an inimitable genius of painting.
The inimitable Michael Jackson
Art = idea + technique + person
All I see is that we have a mediocre book at best, which
offers very little in eloquence and harmony, which is why Muslim apologists try
and drag their product into an area of emotional attachment, far away from
facts, logics and objective assessment.
I said earlier, I would come back to the fact that the
challenge is illogical, so because this is frequently misunderstood, let me elucidate
this using a let’s-pretend-drawing.
If I take a timeline and add Muhammad’s lifetime on there,
this is the approximate timespan of 23 years of when the Koran was allegedly and
magically “revealed”.
If I now take a point anywhere during the “revelation” it is
clear that the majority of the text has not been “revealed” yet - and thus,
nobody could possibly “bring something like the Koran” because the Koran was
not complete yet and thus did not exist as such. So nobody could provide a copy
of what did not yet exist, demonstrating the childish and primitive nature of
this challenge.
It’s like
me saying: you can’t lick your elbow and if you can’t lick your elbow a god
exists. Should you now try licking your elbow you will be tortured as
punishment, for trying. And now let me finish building your elbow. That’s how
crazy it is.
In summary, the challenge
1. Makes
ambiguous, varying and contradictory demands
2. Leaves
open what must be delivered in what way and with what consequence
3. Is
illogical (you can’t provide a Koran if it is not revealed yet)
4. States
that it is impossible by definition, no matter what
5. Threatens
the applicant with eternal torture
6. Ignores
that satan made it
The “surah like it” challenge is childish, dishonest,
illogical, downright silly and irrelevant. It is a demonstration of the simple
disposition of Muslim apologists and their craving for some form of acceptance
and looks more like a plea or an emotional appeal than a factual claim or
rational argument.
And remember, even if it did make sense, it would not
provide any kind of evidence for
a.)
a miracle or
b.)
the existence of a god
But just to prove my point how ridiculously easy it actually
is to meet the challenge, I will take what is said in
52:34 Then
let them produce a statement like it, if they should be truthful.
To show
that I am better than the authors of the Koran, I will define what I mean and
what I am doing. I will take
12:1 Alif. Lam. Ra. These are verses of the Scripture that
maketh plain.
and then by using a selection of sentences from different
chapters as guideline and then based on these, create chapter 115 of the Koran.
A L R -
10, 11, 12, 14, 15
A L M - 2,
3, 29, 30, 31, 32
A L M R - 13
A L M S - 7
H M -
40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46
H M A S Q - 42
S -
38
T S -
27
T S M -
26, 28
T H -
20
Q -
50
K H Y A S - 19
N -
68
Y S -
36
115:1 ABC
These are the sentences, which explain it to you.
115:2 WTF
115:3 STFU
115:4 OMG
115:5 LOL
115:6 NOBO
and I know what you don’t know.
There,
challenge matched, fulfilled, delivered and done. Just like in the Koran, but
without a single mistake or any contradictions.
Unfortunately,
only a god will know what they mean, just like in the Koran.
You’re
welcome.
Caveat:
Before you go crazy and women start throwing their hijabs at me, this does not
mean I am a god. This does not mean your god just ceased to exist, in case you
are that way inclined. But non-atheists will have to get used to the fact that
scripture is neither special, nor holy, nor sacrosanct nor are any religious texts
anything near perfect.
Again,
you’re welcome.
