The Holy Quran: Never before a Book so unique was made so ordinary and confusing

Image: Recto side of the Stanford '07 folio. The upper text covers Qur’ān 2 (al-Baqarah).265 271.
The exigists of the Quran meant well and they were primed with eevotion and the eagrness to serve but the linguistic abilites of most of them was not sufficient to understand the pecularities of the Quran.
A substantial part of their stock of their stock of vocabulary is different from the Quran’s. Their knowledge of Yemeni Arabic, probably 60% of the stock of words in the Muslim holy book, is mediocre. Their trilateral rooting is wrong. Many of them in so many parts of the Quran didn’t know what they were interpreting.
As a novelist it pains me to read most of the extant English translations of the Quran. Never before a book so unique was made so boring by suffocating adherence to the RIC’s interpreters’ understanding of the Quran but not the Quran itself.
It will be revealed soon that the Quran is probably the most important document of the history of religion. Had the outstanding contributors of the Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (DDD) had a chance to identify just three of the names of the pillars of ancient religions recorded in the Quran their task would have been made much simpler and far more accurate. They cannot be blamed. The thousands of  “scholars” of Islam didn’t know – don’t know, don’t tell.
And where do you think the mono syllabic root morpheme of most of the names of God is cited? In the Holy Quran. The “scholars” of Islam thought otherwise so they changed the name to “adrasin”. This historic mistake alone is sufficient to render most of their books redundant or useless.Image: Recto side of the Stanford ’07 folio. The upper text covers Qur’ān 2 (al-Baqarah).265 271.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here