Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MysticKnight

The Quran Challenge "bring A Surah Like It"

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Here is the issue I'm finding with Quran challenge and people will always feel this challenge is not met.

The Quran challenge is making the sort of impression Quran is so great that a human can't bring the like of the Quran. To me, Quran doesn't really resemble itself everywhere, for example Suratal Kaffirron, doesn't resemble Suratal Noor, Suratal Baqara doesn;t resemble Suratal Yusuf, they're isn't a style that is same through out Quran.

But all if feels like Quran, but do you know why it does? Because it's basically included in Quran. Everything that is included in Quran is going to feel like the Quran. Do they really resemble each other?

And when you believe it's so great, then you going to think it's great, even if it's not. The basic problem is if Quran is not great, and really a lot of is disconnected rambling with no apparent deep literary point, that is not that great, and you are going to make something like it, when people investigate it, it's going to seem like a joke, because it's without the assumption that it's great.

Basically it won't seem great, because it's Surahs are not really that great, that when something is immitated, it's going to feel like "what the heck is this, this is suppose to be great, it's not, how can they say it resembles Quran which is so great and beyond human".

That's how it's going to feel.

Now if someone look at Suratal Kaffiroon and didn't read anything from Quran other then that, and didn't hear about Quran being so great, and basically just looks at the Surah, and say he reads in Arabic, and knows Arabic, do you honestly believe he will be so amazed by that Surah and think no human could have wrote it.

Let's look at it.

bismillah.gif

قُلْ يَا أَيُّهَا الْكَافِرُونَ {1}

[Shakir 109:1] Say: O unbelievers!

[Pickthal 109:1] Say: O disbelievers!

[Yusufali 109:1] Say : O ye that reject Faith!

لَا أَعْبُدُ مَا تَعْبُدُونَ {2}

[Shakir 109:2] I do not serve that which you serve,

[Pickthal 109:2] I worship not that which ye worship;

[Yusufali 109:2] I worship not that which ye worship,

وَلَا أَنْتُمْ عَابِدُونَ مَا أَعْبُدُ {3}

[Shakir 109:3] Nor do you serve Him Whom I serve:

[Pickthal 109:3] Nor worship ye that which I worship.

[Yusufali 109:3] Nor will ye worship that which I worship.

وَلَا أَنَا عَابِدٌ مَا عَبَدْتُمْ {4}

[Shakir 109:4] Nor am I going to serve that which you serve,

[Pickthal 109:4] And I shall not worship that which ye worship.

[Yusufali 109:4] And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship,

وَلَا أَنْتُمْ عَابِدُونَ مَا أَعْبُدُ {5}

[Shakir 109:5] Nor are you going to serve Him Whom I serve:

[Pickthal 109:5] Nor will ye worship that which I worship.

[Yusufali 109:5] Nor will ye worship that which I worship.

لَكُمْ دِينُكُمْ وَلِيَ دِينِ {6}

[Shakir 109:6] You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion.

[Pickthal 109:6] Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.

[Yusufali 109:6] To you be your Way, and to me mine.

What is the point of this Surah. Apparently it's absurd to assume all disbelievers will never worship God and their fates are sealed (something you can deduce from other verses but that's not the point) so first impression he would get is that it's absurd.

Say then he thinks well maybe it was addressed to a speficic group of people that would not believe.. and this is a word of a Prophet whom been informed that...do you really believe he will be so amazed by this Surah then and say this must be from God as it's beyond work of mortals?

I am asking you to think honestly, because I feel it is so absurd to assert this Surah is beyond human. What is so great abou tit? Informing us some people are stubborn and God is telling them they won't believe and worship God, and if so, they don't really care anyways and don't take it as some prophecy since they won't believe.

And what is suppose to indicate to us? What is the super purpose of this Surah. God didn't bring a Surah on how to set up a just government, have a democracy, etc but this Surah is suppose to be something God would want us to read from him. This how he spends the space of his communication.

Think about it.

There is also an inherent problem with the Prophecy. Basically if these people thought about these verses and it was addressed to them, they will find they can't believe, because if they believe, it contradicts the revelation which makes it untrue.

What is the purpose of this Surah really? What is so majestic and great about it.

I will bring also Suratal Asr.

Basically it gives that everyone is in loss but those whom follow the religion of Islam. What does loss mean, apparently since it's absurd to say all souls will be lost that didn't receive revelation, it just means loss of islam. This is not what I think Mohammad intended but for sake of argument assume this is the meaning.

What is so great about telling everyone that doesn't follow Islam is in a loss of not having Islam? Reallly what is so great about that?

If we look at some of the big Surahs, they often skip one subject to another. They're is no flow going, it's very different type of writting. This is suppose to be beautiful, but tell me, what is beautiful about it? Why go subject to subject with no relationship, no coherent flow structure, just random spam of things?

I can quote parts of Quran that I find so pointless for humanity to read about.

But can you tell me what is so great about Suraral Kaffiroon, Suratal Asr?

Let's bring another Surah that supposely too amazing for a human to make:

bismillah.gif

تَبَّتْ يَدَا أَبِي لَهَبٍ وَتَبَّ {1}

[Shakir 111:1] Perdition overtake both hands of Abu Lahab, and he will perish.

[Pickthal 111:1] The power of Abu Lahab will perish, and he will perish.

[Yusufali 111:1] Perish the hands of the Father of Flame! Perish he!

مَا أَغْنَىٰ عَنْهُ مَالُهُ وَمَا كَسَبَ {2}

[Shakir 111:2] His wealth and what he earns will not avail him.

[Pickthal 111:2] His wealth and gains will not exempt him.

[Yusufali 111:2] No profit to him from all his wealth, and all his gains!

سَيَصْلَىٰ نَارًا ذَاتَ لَهَبٍ {3}

[Shakir 111:3] He shall soon burn in fire that flames,

[Pickthal 111:3] He will be plunged in flaming Fire,

[Yusufali 111:3] Burnt soon will he be in a Fire of Blazing Flame!

وَامْرَأَتُهُ حَمَّالَةَ الْحَطَبِ {4}

[Shakir 111:4] And his wife, the bearer of fuel,

[Pickthal 111:4] And his wife, the wood-carrier,

[Yusufali 111:4] His wife shall carry the (crackling) wood - As fuel!-

فِي جِيدِهَا حَبْلٌ مِنْ مَسَدٍ {5}

[Shakir 111:5] Upon her neck a halter of strongly twisted rope.

[Pickthal 111:5] Will have upon her neck a halter of palm-fibre.

[Yusufali 111:5] A twisted rope of palm-leaf fibre round her (own) neck!

What is so great about this Surah?

Telling us about a person whom will go to hell? And his wife...

If someone read this Surah and didn't know it was from Quran, would he assume this is beyond humanity?

Honest to God, you feel you know for sure, each of these Surahs is beyond the capablity of humans?

I don't even see how a person can see this Surah as great let alone so great that a human cannot do.

I think if Suratal Abu Lahab was not in Quran and someone wrote this Surah, and said I brought a Surah like Allah;s, people will laugh at him, and say you call this great? this is a joke! no comparison with God's book.

But I feel basically any Surah of Quran, if you don't believe that it's written by God, you will be able see how not great it is. But basically because you feel it is from Quran, you feel it's great....

If you look Quran, the Surahs don't all resemble each other.

Honestly if someone wrote Suratal Kawthar and Suratal Kawthar was not part of Quran, and told you this is like God's, you would say "what the heck is this...this is nothing like God's writting.."

I'm telling you this basic problem. It's a pointless thing to do. If Quran style was great, then at least if you imitate it, it would seem great. But if you imitate Quran as it is, and people look it with knowledge it's not from God, they will see the humanness in it, and the fabricator behind the words, that make it not so great, because there is obviously no hidden big wisdom in the mumbo jumbo.

But if you read mumbo jumbo of Quran, it must be great, because it's believed to be from God.

Aside from that, how many people can immitate a style? And how many people have tried to immitate Quran?

I don't see anyone trying to do it, to be honest.

And even if we assume it's a unique style, does that prove it's great or beyond human?

And if we assume it's so great that no literature comes closes to it, can't that because Mohamamd was a genius that wrote a unique way that people can't imitate. At most, it would prove Mohammad to be a unique person, but it won't prove that it's beyond human.

How many people can write like harry potter?

I want to know how people really feel they know it's from God. Can they explain what is so amazing about it's Surahs? Take a Surah and explain it why it's so great.

Once you feel you explain why it's so great, explain why you feel it's beyond capability of a human which is a big logical leap from just seeing it as super great.

Edited by MysticKnight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are getting the english version and saying its not great

Read the arabic and you will see the difference.

I read the Arabic and know how it sounds. But it can't be classified as great simply becuase of how it sounds in Arabic. The main beauty of it should on the meaning..the way it sounds should be secondary.

Basically even if you don't know Arabic, you should be able to see it's super greatness because the meaning and flow of the meaning, should be it's main beauty, not just simply how it sounds poetically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the Arabic and know how it sounds. But it can't be classified as great simply becuase of how it sounds in Arabic. The main beauty of it should on the meaning..the way it sounds should be secondary.

Basically even if you don't know Arabic, you should be able to see it's super greatness because the meaning and flow of the meaning, should be it's main beauty, not just simply how it sounds poetically.

I dont know arabic and to know the meaning you cant look at a small translation. You need to get someone who knows arabic to translate it fully because there are somewords that when translated become many meanings which are all valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know arabic and to know the meaning you cant look at a small translation. You need to get someone who knows arabic to translate it fully because there are somewords that when translated become many meanings which are all valid.

Are you asserting you need to know Arabic to know Quran is beyond human capability in greatness?

If so, and you don't know Arabic, why do you believe in Islam?

If you know Quran is super great from reading translations, and know it's beyond human by that, then you shouldn't be using the need to be super good in Arabic.

Basically no one should be Muslim by that standard unless you know Arabic really well, because you basically following a religion with no proof.

If you argue you can tell enough of it's greatness from translations by their meaning, then a person should be also be able to judge if it's not great as well, just he wouldn;t know how it poetically sounds.

Edited by MysticKnight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you asserting you need to know Arabic to know Quran is beyond human capability in greatness?

If so, and you don't know Arabic, why do you believe in Islam?

If you know Quran is super great from reading translations, and know it's beyond human by that, then you shouldn't be using the need to be super good in Arabic.

Basically no one should be Muslim by that standard unless you know Arabic really well, because you basically following a religion with no proof.

If you argue you can tell enough of it's greatness from translations by their meaning, then a person should be also be able to judge if it's not great as well, just he wouldn;t know how it poetically sounds.

Im saying that you cant take any translation and say that is the perfect translation of the Qur'an, also the Qur'an can be known to be beyond human capability without knowing arabic because the literature and poetry and meaning of it arent the only miracles. It has historical, mathmatical, scientific etc. miracles aswell and all these prove that a human could not have made it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok i will explain little bit as any knowledgable brother can destroy you on this topic, as i heard it in a video. Quran was revealed among arabs, who were the masters of arabic language (if you dont know, Arabic is such a huge language extremely difficult to master the grammar and different rules about it). So, the Quran challenge was put forward to the people who were experts of this language and style. The people were doubting Quran was from Allah (as you are right now) so the ayat was revealed that if you think its from anyone other than Allah (swt) then write a chapter like this. The experts failed, miserably.

Basic outline, Quran style is poetic, its organization is perfect (you need to be expert in arabic to know it), some ayats are masculaine some feminine, some switch forms within a sentence. So if you translate it into english obviously it will feel as if Quran is jumping from topic to topic, but within arabic its a consistent flow (again u need to know rules of arabic to see it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has historical, mathmatical, scientific etc. miracles aswell and all these prove that a human could not have made it.

As a scientist i somewhat disagree with the "scientific" excerpt of the statement.

The Quran is very subjective. As you said, its translations have a variety of terms. No matter what translation i have read, the speech remains very broad. The Quran is a book of religion, not a book of science, and so i do not expect it to explain astrophysics for me, nor does it do so. "Its scientific miracles are too broadly subjective to be called such."

Edited by iSilurian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a scientist i somewhat disagree with the "scientific" excerpt of the statement.

The Quran is very subjective. As you said, its translations have a variety of terms. No matter what translation i have read, the speech remains very broad. The Quran is a book of religion, not a book of science, and so i do not expect it to explain astrophysics for me, nor does it do so. "Its scientific miracles are too broadly subjective to be called such."

Well I mean even if through arguements you manage to finally come to the conclusion that personally for you the scientifical miracles are to vague. There are still the mathematical and historical and other various miracles in the Qur'an.

Edited by Shia_Debater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL if you are criticizing the Quran's translations

When I read the Quran in arabic and then the translation I see a big drop in eloquence

if you are really going to start criticizing the quran like this then I suggest you learn arabic and then read it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm telling you the inherent problem, if Suratal Abu Lahab was not in the Quran, and someone wrote it to be bring the Quran challenge, people will say "what is this, this is nothing like Quran, it's junk'.

However when you read in Quran, you assume it must be great, have this big hidden wisdom behind it, that even you can't understand it's greatness or see why God would write it, it is awesome.

Basically you can't see how bad a Surah is, how much rambling it's doing with no flow structure, with no seeming purpose behind it's switch of topics to other topics, telling us randomly of something of Musa people, then something else, then a law, then this, then some bashing of unbelievers, etc..

If someone wrote one of Surahs in Quran but weren't part of Quran, everyone would be able to see the flaw and the none-eloquence.

If Suratal Kaffiroon was not in Quran, and someone wrote it, everyone would say "you call that great, what kind of literature is this, it's nothing like Quran".

Quran doesn't even have one style to immitate. It's all different because there is no universal structure to it.

If someone tries writting a Surah like Quran, he will see there is no universal style to copy, and that it's surahs to copy are not great quality, that if he makes something similar to one of it's surahs, people will be able to see why it's not great because they know already it's human made.

Instead of seeing big hidden unknown wisdom by random changing of topics, hitting there and there with no different facts with no relationship with each other, he will see "what the heck is this, it's just pointless rambling, disconnect mumbo jumbo". If a stories of the past are narrated, they see it as nothing but made up stories which won't seem great.

It looses the "wow" "great" factor, when you don't assume it's from God. When you assume it's from God, you assume it's great because you feel it's God talking.

If I write in English:

In the name of God, The Loving, the Caring

I seek help in the Lord of the universe

Against the bias of myself

Against the falsehood amongst men

And against the evil suggestions of my mind

You will see say this doesn't resemble Suratal Falaq and Suratal Nas... Well it's not the same.

Ofcourse the writting is not that great, but so isn't suratal nass or suratal falaq, but since it's not great, you will say "it comes no where close to the greatness of Quran" and Suratal Falaq and Suratal Nas are a whole different level.

Basically it's the flaw. The writting won't feel on par with Quran, because you have a belief all of Quran is so amazing due to believing it's from God.

But when you see a human makes a writting, it won't feel so great and you can see how not great it is, because it is just a human writting it and you know it, and it feels like that.

That's the problem.If Suratal Falaq was not part of Quran, people will not feel it's great, and will see how silly to put the "from those whom blow knots" out of all the stuff we could have sought refuge from, we seek refuge from people blowing on knots!

Edited by MysticKnight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is going to start a big fight I know.....but the Evangelical Christians claim the prophet was possessed or influenced by shaytan when the qu'ran was revealed even some arab christians think this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the name of God, The Loving, the Caring.

I seek help in the Lord of the universe.

Against the bias of myself

Against the falsehood amongst men

And against the evil suggestions of my self

You've automatically screwed up right there and you haven't even began the attempt yet to write it in Arabic.

One, the qur'an doesn't have a whole sura as a du'a. It says "Qul a'outhu" (SAY: I seek refuge). Of the duas that are in there, it says the prophets or the "people said" "wa qaalu" or "wa qaala" and then the dua' followed. You have just created a major inconsistency.

Even non-Muslim renowned scientists like Hofstadter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Hofstadter have confirmed that the Qur'an lacks any inconsistencies.

Anyways, all the best fabricating a new religion. Take pieces from here, pieces from there, call yourself a prophet, add a name to the edicts, and VWALA, Hubbard eat your heart out.

You really are an utter fool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've automatically screwed up right there and you haven't even began the attempt yet to write it in Arabic.

I'm not good at Arabic to try.

One, the qur'an doesn't have a whole sura as a du'a. It says "Qul a'outhu" (SAY: I seek refuge). Of the duas that are in there, it says the prophets or the people say "wa qaalu" or "wa qaala" and then the dua' followed. You have just created a major inconsistency.

Suratal Fatiha has a du'a, and I didn't it say it's exactly the same, but is Suratal Kaffiroon like Suratal Nass? Why does it have to be exactly the same. Ofcourse it's going to be different. The point it has similarity. Then you can always say "not similar enough" and it's big bias that makes say so. This is basically a inherit problem with the challenge as well.

If I want to write the same thing, I can techcnially just write Suratal Teen without "wal teen and Alzaytoon" but that would be plagerism.

Technically by the challenge, I can just write:

وَطُورِ سِينِينَ {2}

وَهَٰذَا الْبَلَدِ الْأَمِينِ {3}

لَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الْإِنْسَانَ فِي أَحْسَنِ تَقْوِيمٍ {4}

ثُمَّ رَدَدْنَاهُ أَسْفَلَ سَافِلِينَ {5}

إِلَّا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ فَلَهُمْ أَجْرٌ غَيْرُ مَمْنُونٍ {6}

فَمَا يُكَذِّبُكَ بَعْدُ بِالدِّينِ {7}

أَلَيْسَ اللَّهُ بِأَحْكَمِ الْحَاكِمِينَ {8}

But you would say it's copying Quran. So ofcourse it can't be exactly the same. Trying to have words exactly like it, doesn't make sense. But technically, that is Surah different then the Surah of Quran (missing a verse)...

It should just be similar. To me what I wrote seems similar to Suratal Falaq and Suratal Nass. I could add "say" but that would make it look like I am acting as a Prophet, but I'm just saying the writting is similar.

I can re-write it as:

In the name of God, The Loving, the Caring

say: I seek help in the Lord of the universe

Against the bias of myself

Against the falsehood amongst men

And against the evil suggestions of my mind

What is more eloquent of adding the "say" anyways? There is nothing so great about saying "say" sometimes, and not saying say other times.

Even non-Muslim renowned scientists like Hofstadter http://en.wikipedia....glas_Hofstadter have confirmed that the Qur'an lacks any inconsistencies.

Well i disagree, he probably doesn't see all the logical errors and contradictions I found either.

if you are really going to start criticizing the quran like this then I suggest you learn arabic and then read it

I read the Quran in Arabic, and I understand Arabic, just that not great at it. If it is by how it sounds, I read it in Arabic, don't worry I know how it sounds.

But by your standard, no non-Arabic speaker should be Muslims, because he can't determine the greatness of Quran.

Edited by MysticKnight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I said a whole sura, not just an aya.

2. You used I, the aya says 'ihdinaa', not 'ihdinee'

3. Your level of logic is so miniscule that it can't even be compared to Hofstadter's whose whole complex ground-breaking researches revolve around the one topic of logic.

You're a failure, and your heart is evil.

But know God's mercy is always open to those who ask for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm telling you the problem. The Surah I wrote i know is not great. But I don't see how Suratal Falaq is greater then it. It in fact is similar to me, but I know you will put a higher standard of how similar it has to be, which is an inherit problem with the challenge. You can say "that's not similar enough to be called similar".

Basically there is two inherent problems with the challenge. That is why you always feel it's not meant, even it's meant.

1. I said a whole sura, not just an aya.

First you complained about not putting "say", when that doesn't take away it's similarity.

2. You used I, the aya says 'ihdinaa', not 'ihdinee'

You were saying Quran doesn't have a Surah as a du'a.

I can re-write the Surah as we instead of I, so this sort of reasoning is just silly.

Next you will say 'Suratal Falaq" said "with those whom blow knots" and you said "Against falsehood amongst men", not the same...

The point is both Surahs are asking God help against evil things..they are similar in structure... I find the stuff I put to seek help against is better then "darkness of the night" and "those whom blow of knots"..

Can you tell me what is great about Suratal Falaq missing in what I wrote?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you tell me what is great about Suratal Falaq missing in what I wrote?

Suratil Falaq, like Suratil 'Asr, can have volumes of Tafsir written about them. No tafsir can be written about what you wrote. It's inconsistent. It's weak. It can't be related to anything else. You failed miserably. And that's even without writing it in Arabic yet.

The first thing i said was "One, the qur'an doesn't have a whole sura as a du'a.", i said the rest after. So even if you are concentrating on one aspect of what i said about dua's being about me, you are ignoring virtually everything else.

You're a failure, and your heart is evil. And assuming that you even COULD write something else, it's not in Arabic, so you can't even bring a 'sura' like it if it's not in Arabic.

1,400 years and no one has completed the challenge. You're not about to now, especially if you don't know Arabic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suratil Falaq, like Suratil 'Asr, can have volumes of Tafsir written about them. No tafsir can be written about what you wrote.

Because no will assume it's God's wisdom, and there need to be a big huge explanation... people can write big commentaries about anything. If someone wrote a Surah like Quran, and didn't claim it's from God, ofcourse no one is going to write commentaries about it.

If what I wrote was in Quran, I'm sure the commentary of "falsehood" and "bias" would have better commentary then about seeking refuge from the night and people blowing on knots.

It's inconsistent. It's weak. It can't be related to anything else. You failed miserably. And that's even without writing it in Arabic yet.

I told you the problem, I don't find what I wrote great, but the problem is the Surahs of Quran are not that great either. It's just always assumed to be super great. That is why when you write something like it, it doesn't seem great.

The first thing i said was "One, the qur'an doesn't have a whole sura as a du'a.", i said the rest after. So even if you are concentrating on one aspect of what i said about dua's being about me, you are ignoring virtually everything else.

What I wrote doesn't even need to be taken as a du;a, it can be a statement that I seek help of God in these things.

You're a failure, and your heart is evil. And assuming that you even COULD write something else, it's not in Arabic, so you can't even bring a 'sura' like it if it's not in Arabic.

It's like it in English. There is nothing in the challenge that said it can't be in another language and appear similar.

Edited by MysticKnight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not going to waste any more time with deviants.

[2:6] Surely those who disbelieve, it being alike to them whether you warn them, or do not warn them, will not believe.

[2:7] Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing and there is a covering over their eyes, and there is a great punishment for them.

[2:8] And there are some people who say: We believe in Allah and the last day; and they are not at all believers.

[2:9] They desire to deceive Allah and those who believe, and they deceive only themselves and they do not perceive.

[2:10] There is a disease in their hearts, so Allah added to their disease and they shall have a painful chastisement because they lied.

[2:11] And when it is said to them, Do not make mischief in the land, they say: We are but peace-makers.

[2:12] Now surely they themselves are the mischief makers, but they do not perceive.

[2:13] And when it is said to them: Believe as the people believe they say: Shall we believe as the fools believe? Now surely they themselves are the fools, but they do not know.

[2:14] And when they meet those who believe, they say: We believe; and when they are alone with their Shaitans, they say: Surely we are with you, we were only mocking.

[2:15] Allah shall pay them back their mockery, and He leaves them alone in their inordinacy, blindly wandering on.

[2:16] These are they who buy error for the right direction, so their bargain shall bring no gain, nor are they the followers of the right direction.

[2:17] Their parable is like the parable of one who kindled a fire but when it had illumined all around him, Allah took away their light, and left them in utter darkness-- they do not see.

[2:18] Deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they will not turn back.

[2:19] Or like abundant rain from the cloud in which is utter darkness and thunder and lightning; they put their fingers into their ears because of the thunder peal, for fear of death, and Allah encompasses the unbelievers.

[2:20] The lightning almost takes away their sight; whenever it shines on them they walk in it, and when it becomes dark to them they stand still; and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have taken away their hearing and their sight; surely Allah has power over all things.

If Imam Ali (as) said he's a loser to the fool, who are we to have a chance.

The Day of Judgement is a breath away, soon all truth will be revealed, and God is the best and fairest of Judges :)

May you have plenty of wealth and children in this world. Enjoy it whilst it lasts, it won't last long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres the thing, by the very nature of belief and the cognitive dissonance required it makes it impossible to accept a surah, even if it is of sufficient quality. You don't want to believe it, you can't believe it. It's confirmation bias, if you hold the belief no one can make a similar surah...guess what you'll find....

I bet even if i went back in time and ripped out a sura from every single quran ever and brought it back to today and showed people, guess what, they would still probably deny it because thats what they're looking for. That and theres no objective standads actually laid down on how to judge a surah...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres the thing, by the very nature of belief and the cognitive dissonance required it makes it impossible to accept a surah, even if it is of sufficient quality. You don't want to believe it, you can't believe it. It's confirmation bias, if you hold the belief no one can make a similar surah...guess what you'll find....

I bet even if i went back in time and ripped out a sura from every single quran ever and brought it back to today and showed people, guess what, they would still probably deny it because thats what they're looking for. That and theres no objective standads actually laid down on how to judge a surah...

It's not only that, it's that much of the Quran is really bad quality. Like Suratal Abu Lahab is really bad piece of literature. There is nothing great about it. If someone wrote it and said this is like Quran and Suratal Abu Lahab didn't exist, people will laugh at it, because of how bad it is.

It's not just they will say Suratal Abu Lahab resembles nothing of the Quran, they will say it is very bad quality, because they know a human wrote it, and it's obvious that there is no big wisdom behind it, so it will be obvious it's not great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Let's ask Mr. Science/Ms. Nature . At what age you have designed their physical bodies to start getting attracted to each other for procreation?
    • At one of these meeting, is it possible to ask, listen beloved friends, I have a question. This verse in the quran, النَّبِيُّ أَوْلَىٰ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنْفُسِهِمْ ۖ  [Shakir 33:6] The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, 
      [Pickthal 33:6] The Prophet is closer to the believers than their selves,
      [Yusufali 33:6] The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, What is your understanding, since we are gathered here for a Unity meeting, lets really unite and learn from each other. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his progeny) used it, as a question at Ghadir Khum and asked  "Then the Messenger of Allah continued: "Do I not have more right over the believers than what they have over themselves?"   People cried and answered: "Yes, O' Messenger of God." "For whoever I am his Leader (mawla), 'Ali is his Leader (mawla)." No Muslim disagrees till this point?  So, this should be a easy thing for you, only thing you are asking,  in which capacity do you see the Prophet Muhammad( peace be upon him and his progeny) as Mawla?  What is your understanding of " Greater Right " or as per the verse 33:6 "greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, " You are only reciting the Qur'an and asking for their valued opinion and understanding.  Why would this not be possible? 
    • بسمه تعالى السلام عليكم What’s the علة of praying with a louder voice during Fajr, Maghrib and Isha, and a lower during Thuhr and Asr?
    • Alaikas Salaam brother,  Namaz means Salaat.  You can list all the words you didn't understood InshaAllah we'll reply. 
    • specifically, primary/high school, do you think males and females should be schooled separately ?
×