A video of him went viral where he can be seen saying, “Why are you following Nabi (Mohammad, Prophet of Islam) when he did not know how to read and write?”
“The one (Mohammad) who is presenting the Quran (holy book of Islam), did not even write a single word and called others to write for him, which led to grammatical mistakes,” he added.
“No corrections were done because Mohammad did not know there were grammatical errors, which continue till today,” the Maulana said highlighting grammatical errors in the Quran.
Notably, the Maulana used to urge Muslims to kill anyone ‘immediately’ who disrespects Mohammad or Quran, without taking the case to court.
That’s just an incredible level of stupidity that I don’t even have words for.
“No corrections were done because Mohammad did not know there were grammatical errors, which continue till today,” the Maulana said highlighting grammatical errors in the Quran.
Huh??? Okay this has to be the most absurd criticism of Islam I’ve ever seen.
Honestly, this is pretty mild compared to other criticisms of the religion you can find online lol.
I mean it is, but others at least make sense. I of course don’t think they’re correct, being a Muslim, but I can at least understand why someone would think that way. Meanwhile this is just… uh… What? Does this guy even understand that the study of Arabic grammar studied so non-Muslims could understand the Quran. It’s literally impossible for the Quran to contain Arabic grammar mistakes (let alone how Islam would have never spread if the core of its beliefs was such sloppy work).
Some Quran books have minor “corrections” in the sense that certain letters or accents on letters are changed. I believe it was meant to accommodate the dialect(s) at the time and was accepted since it didn’t actually change the meaning. Definitely doesn’t justify this guys stupidity though.
So I’ll ramble a bit here.
We call those readings of the Quran, and they’re all proven (up to sahih hadith standards) to come from Muhammed himself. These aren’t changes that came with dialect (all of Quran is written in Classical Arabic, or the dialect of Arabic spoken in Mecca and its surroundings at the time of Muhammed), and in fact there was more diversity in how the Quran was recited in the past before Caliph Othman ordered everyone to burn down all Qurans that don’t follow the Meccan dialect to avoid strife in the Caliphate. I can go into more detail if you want, but what I want to say that these differences are “built in” so to speak, and are not any sort of gotcha.
That guy: Man, I never thought that leopard would eat MY face!
On some level, he isn’t wrong. It’s all transcribed speeches, sort of like how we have no surviving writings of Aristotle, only notes taken by students during his lectures, or of course like the new testament which is a compendium of books written by people ranging from a few years after Jesus’ death all the way out to a century thereafter.
deleted by creator
Since this article is about pedantry I’d like to point out that I believe you meant to reference Socrates not Aristotle there - Socrates believed that education came through dialog and committing words to paper made them “dead” and open to misinterpretation. Socrates was essentially afraid that people would read words of his and pick apart technicalities so he preferred to teach people orally and then have those people teach others.
Plato may have committed some of these conversations to writing after the fact, though Plato may have also just used Socrates as a mouth piece to express his own idea. I’d classify both Plato and Socrates as chill… Aristotle on the other hand absolutely lacked any chill.
Aristotle wrote a lot and wrote it to achieve political gains - his philosophy was the one primarily embraced by Western Europe and is deeply flawed with a lot of extra built in misogyny (Plato was relatively progressive but still has some built in misogyny) and other bullshit. We do have surviving writing as notes from his students but most of his writing is actually his own.
Aristotle wrote a lot
He did, but none of those writings survived to make it to us. All of his extant “works” are in fact lecture notes taken by his students. The Penguin translation of Nicomachean Ethics for example is beautifully done in a way that makes that very evident.
What writings should I read to see examples of “built-in misogyny” (I’ve only read The Republic way back in undergrad)?
Pretty sure I’ve heard or read that the Quran is supposed to be the literal word of God and any human who was holding the pen was merely a conduit.
Therefore any mistakes are not, in fact, mistakes because God is infallible and that would be impossible. As such, we should amend our own grammar to match the Quran and not the other way around.
Anyone who suggests otherwise should be dealt with accordingly.
I’m not saying I agree with this logic, only that there is a perverse kind of sense to it.
As for “but it’s written one way in one paragraph and in another way in another paragraph” well you’ll just have to derive what context is responsible for the change in grammar and adjust yourself accordingly. Consult your local mullah. But be careful how you ask your question or you might end up on the run.
(May I suggest claiming you were confused by a different dialect of Arabic.)
So sad when what goes around comes around. /s
Satire is stone cold dead. Reality jumped the shark.
Satire wouldn’t be satire if it wasn’t based on reality.
Removed by mod
