>“But the Koran cannot be ignored, as it is a work of genius

Source?

>>8434283
Sure, it can be found at fucking google it you web illiterate nonce.

>>8434282
cuck lmoa

>>8434366
>posting a quote without its source
>expecting to be taken seriously
>being this anal devastated when asked for a source

literally kill yourself, you waste of space

>>8434384
Except had you been paying the slightest attention, the other threads like this didn't need to cite a source.

Try not having a sperg breakdown.

>>8434403
Try not having a sperg breakdown.

/lit

Choose one

He's right. It's important to read it in Arabic or with an interlinear gloss and plenty of commentary, though.

>>8434449
How much commentary? Footnotes or something more substantial.

You'd have to be pretty dumb to think the holy text of a major religion isn't worth studying in at least some detail.

Specifically, though, Bloom's claim that the Quran is marked by an aesthetic of audacity is pretty interesting. I don't know nearly enough about it to argue the point but I wonder if Bloom develops this thought further.

What, for instance, makes Muhammad any more audacious than David, or Moses? It seems most of the prophets in the Abrahamic tradition have a lot of chutzpah.

>>8434462
I read it using the Quranic Arabic Corpus, which includes the several translations and a complete recitation concurrently with The Cambridge Companion to the Qur'an, a monograph on the development of Islamic law, and an important early prayer manual called the Scripture of Imam Sajjad.

Ive heard that in the original Arabic it is a great work of art, but that is from Muslim friends so of course theyre biased. Have an English translation copy and from the bits Ive read it really does just seem like Desert Jews 3. Not that it isnt unique or should be dismissed. It just seems to me very much like the other Abrahamic religious texts. A lot of specific ritual descriptions and vague moral commandments expressed half through story half through explanation.

>>8434282
>h-he's only a genius on m-my terms"

Kill yourself every /pol/ faggot

>>8434449
>learning a literal sandlanguage in order to read the holy book of a bunch of faggot LARPers because my favorite memecritic told me to
nah

>>8434539
Congrats, you've been completely solipsized by the Internet
R.I.P

>>8434539
What is with these shitposters and their inability to comprehend English?

>>8434539
>LARPers
kek
(kys tho)

>>8434566
don't worry about that, already planning on it

It's like a fine vase of pottery

>>8434282

Dude, if your rampant secularism is so fucking blinding that you cannot appreciate religious literature, then you're a pathetic asshole.

I mean, for God's sake, atheists are supposed to be the ones who realize this stuff is human created (whether they believed in their prophecy or not is another matter, see Blake's Marriage of Heaven and Hell). If that's the case, then try your hand at writing a fucking sacred text with such fiery, spectacular prose, one that so beams with intense vision into the very heart of human hearts, that it inspires billions of followers 1400 years after your death.

Refusing to even engage these massive piles of genius because of a minor, contemporary politico-philosophical position is so stupid it makes me want to cry.

>>8434539
The Holy Book is only the beginning, as it is in every religious tradition - there's a lot of faggot larper philosophy, calligraphy, law, poetry, and history you can't appreciate without having learned to appreciate the Qur'an.

>>8434282
*gets murdered*
Wow, this guy is audacious.

The Koran is pretty amazing. A single guy sat down and thought to himself, "Gee, how do I make the most voracious, bellicose religion in the history of mankind?"

Bloom was right. Muhammad designed the first megameme.

>>8434481
He married a 9 year old in his fifties. Pretty audacious, m8

File: 1472009672701.jpg (69KB, 1200x787px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1200x787px

>>8434636
>first

>>8434584
I like the way you think, Anon.
That's all I wish to say.

This guy also thinks rock music ended when The Band broke up.

>>8434667
I don't and I think Anon is at least as much of a faggot as the lolpedoterrorist memeposters

>>8434584
You're a better person than your opponents here. Don't bother with these /pol/-tier faggots, no one else here likes them.

>>8434688
>no one likes them
How come sissies of every kind always fall back on those exact same words, regardless of context?

>>8434682
what a dumdum lol

>>8434696
its what their mamas taught them

post ur dick btw

>>8434696
because no one likes you

>>8434481
Moses was a lil bitch who had to get his brother Aaron to say everything for him.

David was just smarter than everyone else

>>8434715
I don't like any of you and yet I don't feel the need to claim that this opinion extends to every other faggot onboard this ship, nor pretend that this constitutes either an argument of relevance or an effective jab. You don't have to show yourself to be a little bitch all your life either. Some effort!

>>8434729
Moses literally ordered the execution of hundreds of children. He spared the girls who were virgins so that his army could use them as sex slaves.

Pretty audacious, senpai.

>>8434757
doesnt mattr, no1 likes u
mor efrt thn ur worth t b h fag

>>8434481
>what makes an illiterate nymophilic desert warlord audacious?

Ex-muslim here, most of the Quran sounds a rap song when you translate it. 10/10

>>8434584
Great post, I feel exactly the same.

>>8435187
>nymophilic
what is this word?

>>8435826
We do what they like with the Englis language, fuck your comprehension

>>8434282
>muhammad is the author of the koran
The fucking jew.

Then why don't we deport Bloomington to his beloved Arabia?

>>8435947
lol'ed epically @ your post

>>8434282

Carlyle told me all I need to know about the Quran.

Namely, that it is a badly written OT ripoff, but that Mohammad nonetheless accomplished much. I can't go so far as to say I admire the so-called Prophet, however.

He says passages of the Quran appall him like parts of the Book of Deuteronomy.

>>8435970
>being disgusted by the word of G-d
And people take this kike seriously?

File: images.duckduckgo.com.jpg (29KB, 503x335px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 503x335px

"Though necessarily Muhammad has literary debts to Jewish and Christian texts no longer extant, his shattering spiritual and imaginative originality cannot be doubted. No one else in human religious history has given us a text in which God alone is the speaker. Audacity, a crucial characteristic of Muhammad in every way, marks the Koran's achievement of a literary effect unlike any other. We can never relax as we read it, or when we recite it, alone or with others."

>>8434636
Choice of language aside, the idea behind this is what makes the Qu'ran and its religion brilliant in a sort of evil way.

It is engineered as a perfect mindvirus that preserves itself at every level.

>>8434527
>Desert Jews 3

Im actually fucking crying

>We must convert and kill all kafir scum. الحمد لله ربّ العالمين

What did he mean by this?

>>8436461
lol'ed epically @ this epic post!

>>8436469
What did he mean by this?

>>8434481
He actually did everything he did, I suppose. I mean, everything that wasn't miraculous.
>>8435187
The fact that he was wildly successful.

>>8436461
"This is a book of religion"

OP here, I unfortunately failed to remember that /pol/ remnants still lurk here (and pretty much anywhere). From a Christian, apologies to any of our Muslim family that may have been offended.

>>8436809
It's only memes.

It's mostly the even shitter boards that actually fall for them.

File: audacity.jpg (44KB, 340x509px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 340x509px

>>8434282

>>8436809
I have one big issue with Islam.

First, let me say that I have many Muslim friends, and they are some of the kindest, most magnanimous people I know, and it is because of their religion. The religion has the capability to cultivate great generosity and virtue.

However, Muslims must accept that the Qur'an is the verbatim word of God. In this sense, Islam is inextricably fundamentalist. This is not bad in itself, but the problem is that the Qur'an prescribes a jurisprudence that is fundamentally incompatible with the Western principles of equality under the law, and taken together with the Hadith (things Muhammad said that aren't in the Qu'ran) also fundamentally restricts free speech.

This is the reason that the vast majority in Islamic nations support Sharia law, including the majority of Muslims in the US. If given democracy, they would freely vote to have their right to vote taken away for a Sharia theocracy.

The problem with Islam — and this issue is essentially unique to Islam among major religions — is that it is not just a personal belief system. It is also a system of law and government.

>>8436821
This is a meme. From where did it come?

>>8436886
And yet, that is not historically the case.

>>8436902
But it has been, ever since Muhammad. Sharia has its origins directly in the Qur'an and was formalized and instituted shortly after his death. The Qur'an is quite explicit that these are to be government laws, going as far as to enjoin punishments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_criminal_jurisprudence

>>8436886
>>8436896
Is it really a meme? I couldn't find it anywhere else.

>>8436924
How come Turkey's 90+% Muslim population doesn't vote to instill Sharia? ??

Also a religious text doubling as a legal document isn't unique to Islam you big dummy. You're just looking for an excuse to parrot Sean Hannity-tier memes.

>>8436886
>However, Muslims must accept that the Qur'an is the verbatim word of God.
No, the conservative view is that it exists alongside God in that it always was and always will be.

>>8436950
Please don't strawman; I don't even know who that is.

A religious text doubling as an explicit legal actually is unique to the Qur'an among all major religions. The old testament says that certain things are proscribed, but these are entirely amenable to interpretation as injunctions for the faithful in their *personal* lives. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that there must be legal punishment for anything, nowhere in Buddhism is there any such thing, Hinduism is too nebulous, Taoism obviously not, Confucianism no, etc.

Only the Qur'an says "If someone does explicitly this, so-and-so punishment must exacted."

For example, Qur'an 5:38: "[As for] the thief, the male and the female, amputate their hands in recompense for what they committed as a deterrent [punishment] from Allah. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise." You will not find any explicit legal enjoinment like that in any other major religion.

It seems that 90% of Muslims in Turkey explicitly disobey Qur'an 5:38. Its injunction could not be clearer. There is honestly no interpretation for 5:38 but its explicit imperative.

>>8436994
>Nowhere in the Bible does it say that there must be legal punishment for anything
You might want to read the thing.

>>8434584
>for God's sake
I see what you did there.

>>8436994
You literally said Muslims would vote away their rights if given the option. I pointed out that Turks haven't done that. You're the one strawmanning, dummy.

Also:
>the Old Testament
>he thinks this is the sacred text of the Jews

Yeah okay you don't know what you're talking about.

And you have to be kidding about about the Quran verse. You think there's no legal equivalent in other religions?

Half of Leviticus is a list of the specific punishments (including stoning nonbelievers at the gates of Jerusalem) meriting specific crimes.

Have you ever even heard of Hebraic Law?

It's quite literally a plagiarism of Jewish, Christian and Mesopotamian myths. The former two are also plagiarisms of the latter.

If you prefer your desert-people folk stories to be told from the perspective of one man then it might be worth reading. Likewise if you seek to understand the reason there are areas of London and Paris that the police are afraid to police right now it may also be of interest.

>>8437058
>there are areas of London and Paris that the police are afraid to police right now it may also be of interest
Someone's lead a sheltered life. Yes there have always been areas in major cities the police are scared to police but it has nothing to do with Islam.

>>8437058
islam is internationalist judaism with an arab base

>>8437092
So international judaism?

>>8436982
The Qur'an is largely God saying to Muhammad, "O Muhammad, tell them this: so-and-so." The Qur'an is a narrative of the things God said to Muhammad. And God often speaks in the first-person in the Quran (using the royal We), indicating that at least those passages are, well, explicitly the verbatim word of God. And because it was recorded verbatim in the original tongue and God chose specifically to speak in Arabic (God says "Indeed We have sent [the Qur'an] down as an Arabic Qur'an so that you may apply reason"), it must be the verbatim word of God.

Furthermore, the Qur'an explicitly says that the precise prescriptions therein must be interpreted literally, not metaphorically.

Qur'an 3:7: "It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah. But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord."

>>8437051
Per the foregoing, the 90% in Turkey are not following the clear orders of the Qur'an.

>>8437013
I was wrong about the Bible; I had not read Leviticus, which seems to be a very different flavor. I should not have extrapolated.

I wonder how Rabbinical Jews deal with that. How do they deal with that?

>>8437104
>Per the foregoing, the 90% in Turkey are not following the clear orders of the Qur'an.

Maybe they are. 5:39 (literally right after the chopping off of hands quote) says,
>But whoever repents after his wrongdoing and reforms, indeed, Allah will turn to him in forgiveness.

So in most cases, there's no need to chop of hands, since petty theft isn't severe enough to warrant so. Like, that anon was literally taking the quote out of context, wtf.

>>8437115
It says that Allah will turn to him in forgiveness. Not that if they repent you should not chop off their hand.

>>8437118
It can say a lot of things if you wish it so, but common sense says that normally you don't need to chop their hands off, you sick fuck.

>>8437104
>I had not read Leviticus
Exodus... Numbers... Deuteronomy... there are a number of laws and explicit punishments throughout the old testament p much.

>>8437127
It seems that you are "following that which is unspecific, ... seeking an interpretation [suitable to you.]" Seems you're ignoring Qur'an 3:7 (quoted in >>8437104) about following "the precise verses, the foundation of the book", and in your heart "is deviation."

The Qur'an says to follow the precise verses foremost and relegate the imprecise verses/interpretations to a secondary status.

>>8437104
>And because it was recorded verbatim in the original tongue and God chose specifically to speak in Arabic (God says "Indeed We have sent [the Qur'an] down as an Arabic Qur'an so that you may apply reason"), it must be the verbatim word of God.
Mu'tazilite heresy.

>>8437135
A bit interesting; that's a nuanced interpretation of what exactly we mean by "the word of God." Nevertheless, coeternal or not, the Qur'an is quite clear that it is literal.

>>8434366
>Writing a paper
>Put a quote in the paper
>Teacher: "what's the cited source anon?"
>Anon: "fucking google it, bitch"

>>8437104
To answer my own question, it seems orthodox Jews have essentially always dealt with it more or less in the following way:

They interpret the capital punishment as the correct and just law, but that they don't know how to properly try someone in an intrinsically flawed human jurisprudence. They sometimes came up with jurisprudence that attempted to be completely just and amounted to something that was impractical to carry out.

Can this be carried out with the punishments in the Qur'an? No. The Qur'an details a legal system for trial involving either four witnesses or a man swearing to Allah the truth of his accusation four times. In the exact same sentence (in particular, 4:15), it says that if the four witnesses all say the woman committed adultery, she is to be killed.

It is incredibly difficult to wriggle one's way out of following the jurisprudence of the Qur'an.

>>8437194
Difference is most anons here would be my students.

>>8437104
Lmao. Thanks for quoting a verse from the Qu'ran that says only God knows the correct way to interpret its lines. How are men supposed to follow things to the letter if those things ultimately escape his comprehension?

Seriously, if everything is supposed to be taken literally (you won't find that phrasing in the text) why are there Hadiths, you stupid Orientalist bug?

And how are you going to come into this thread (striking a "fair" tone no less) singling out Islam for its incompatibility with muh Western civilization when you've never even heard of Leviticus?

You're not some religious expert. You've read like two full Wikipedia articles. Every time you post you have to admit another error on your part.

Get the fuck out of here and get back to spit blasting Sam Harris' unwashed asshole, you fucking Kaffir

In summary, as the guy who keeps quoting the Qur'an about the inextricable nature of Sharia law from faithful, that is my only point.

The foundations of Sharia law are imperative to the believer. The Qur'an is quite clear that injunctions and warnings are the verbatim word of God speaking in Arabic specifically, specifies that the unambiguous passages must be interpreted literally, and then precisely details both a prosecution and punishment system.

Therefore the foundations of Sharia law are inextricable from faith.

>>8437223
I haven't read the entire Bible, but I did think it was enormously stupid on his part to at least not know about Leviticus to Deuteronomy.

>>8437223
I have read the Qur'an. My point is summarized in >>8437227. I do single out Islam as incompatible with Western values, and that is why.

>>8437232
I knew about it of course, but I hadn't recalled that it also specified punishments, especially since even orthodox Jews do not seem to follow them. >>8437207.

>>8437240
Bullshit you pseud, maybe you should try actually reading it. It was literally a third of the fucking book.

It's a very difficult book to read in Arabic even though I speak the language. I tried to read a translation once and it was hilarious. This shit just can't be translated niggas.
How does /lit/ explain Muhammad being an illiterate fuck writing this huge chunk of dense literature? Niggas didn't even know of the greeks back then. I'm not a muslim but I'm still triggered.

>>8437257
Yes, I was incredibly stupid about that part. I was stupid and wrong.

But I have read the Qur'an and my only point is >>8437227, and I have quoted passages that give an extremely strong testimony to that thesis and how, unlike the punishments in the Torah, those in the Qur'an cannot be wriggled out of. I hope that even if you do not agree, you can see its validity as a stance.

I think the most interesting thing about the Koran is the order of its construction.

The Koran is composed of various revelations communicated to Muhammad on various occasions over a number of decades, with many of said revelations being specifically addressed to said occasions.

However, the Koran as we read it today is not composed of the verses in the order of their revelation - the verses were organized according to the wishes of Muhammad after his death by his companions. It is striking that a collection of disparate verses written over a period of a number of decades came together at the end to form a cohesive piece of poetry

>>8434584
>one that so beams with intense vision into the very heart of human hearts, that it inspires billions of followers 1400 years after your death.

See Scientology. Most people are idiots

>>8437313

Scientology doesn't have even a fraction the number of followers Islam has. Scientology has not inspired empires that have spanned 1/3 of the inhabited earth, as Islam has.

I doubt if Scientology will exist in the next 40 years, let alone the next 1400 years.

File: 1466589853528.jpg (218KB, 1250x1250px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1250x1250px

>westerners arguing about Islam

>>8434636
Muslims were the first memers
>God be praised
>Priase God
>God is Great

Well, every conservative culture is probably like that, but it is nonetheless ridiculous to anyone mildly educated.

File: islamic-jurisprudence.jpg (77KB, 201x300px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 201x300px

>>8437379
This, absolutely atrocious. If you haven't read pic related at least once don't even bother.

>>8437379

I have read the quran twice. Am I still not allowed to talk about Islam because of my blue eyes, üntermensch?

>>8437379
The patrimony of your blood is being a date merchant, why do you hold yourself in a high regard that we cannot even deign to speak about your book?

>>8436809
Cringe

>>8437051
Turks actually are in the process of that.
And Turkey is a piss poor example to anyone with knowledge of its history

>>8438511
snore

>>8434584
Wow. You do realize that most religious texts (the most entrenched ones) are cobbled together from oral traditions, right? It's not like the works were penned by one guy attempting to change the world. Do yourself a favor and investigate the origins of the Abrahamic religious texts and compare them to more recent attempts to fabricate religion, pretentious fuckhole.

>>8436886
>However, Muslims must accept that the Qur'an is the verbatim word of God.
This is true of all Abrahamic bullshit, just because modern Christians and Jews don't parade it around town doesn't mean it isn't necessary.

>>8434282
Prominent western fetishism of Islam coming both from leftist academic circles and from envious right-wing traditionalist circles is a much more fascinating phenomenon than some really old and really long Semitic iron age loli porn.

But yea, on a more serious note, saying that a great religious work that's the main source of meaning and language for a billion people "cannot be ignored" is a truism.

>>8434584
You know Muslims don't read right?

>>8436809
This is the most pathetic post I've read on /lit/

>>8437223
At least he's trying to give a thoughtful response. Everything you just said was bullshit.

>>8435994
The Quran is extremely argumentative and personal. The verses in it are recordings of things Muhammad said, recorded immediately after he said them. Many of these verses were said in response to things other people said, or things they did. So you have less a collection of wisdom stories and more a one sided collection of challenges and responses.

Knowing the context of verses lets you see that Muhammad really was an audacious motherfucker, not just what was said but the cultural context of the period. However distorted his vision was, he swung old testament religious authority around like a blunt hammer in an environment where religion was more largely a formal function of social class and tribes. Arabs had their poetry battles, and sophistry, and duels, but this largely conformed to the conventions of the time. After a poetry duel, the winner would simply earn his reward and things would move on, maybe some well regarded lines would be remembered or recited again by others but not really acted upon, poets who criticized society would not go on to begin actively rebelling against that society. Muhammad would draw on the grand imagery of Abrahamic faith, and then ACT upon it. He quickly became a nuisance and pain in the ass for some powerful people because of his explicitness.

Another thing to note is that Muhammad spoke Quran verses in the third person as if he's directly communicating words of god like a satellite beacon, Muhammad styles himself as merely the messenger of God, just consider how much of a pretentious cunt you would look like if someone said something bad about you and you responded like that. Not much has changed. The levels of ">>>>>>implying" that was triggered in his opponents were off the charts.

>>8439208
>just consider how much of a pretentious cunt you would look like if someone said something bad about you and you responded like that.
Was it autism?

>>8434584
>Implying that The God Delusion is not a fiery spectacular sacred text will inspire billions of followers for 1400 years

File: 1469560688565.jpg (347KB, 571x540px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 571x540px

>>8438254
>I've read the Quran twice
Do you actually think this lends you any credence in an argument? That's not even a prerequisite to understanding the Quran itself, let alone how Muslims derive their law from it.

>>8439037
Except everything he said is right and everything said in response is wrong.

>>8439208
He also ordered the execution of people who criticized him.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Killings_Ordered_or_Supported_by_Muhammad

He also regularly tortured people.

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Muhammad_and_Torture#Hadith

It's bizarre. Muslims revere him as some kind of saint. He was, in fact, a brutal warlord who regularly tortured his enemies.

>>8434584
>fiery, spectacular prose, one that so beams with intense vision into the very heart of human hearts,

lmao

>>8438974
When it comes to idiots, people tend to be apathetic.

File: 1385998145188.png (400KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 640x480px

>>8439554
>the execution of people

"Persons", actually.

>Saints are beta pacifists

Whew lad. Anyway he's revered as a prophet, also not especially known for being pussies about their restructuring of society.

>wikiislam

>>8439905
Wikiislam has the verbatim Hadith quotes for every. single. thing.

The wiki is obviously anti-Islam, but it is absolutely a reputable source for the hard facts of Islamic doctrine.

The reason it is anti-Islam is that frankly the hard facts are anti-Islam. Their own mouths testify against them.

Muhammad was a brutal warlord who tortured and mutilated his enemies.

>>8439930
>Muhammad was a brutal warlord
just like any other historical leader?

>>8439938
Unlike any other founder of a major religion.

>>8439985
The rest are pussy-religions.

>>8439930
>the hard facts are anti-Islam
Here's a hard fact for you: you're constructing a resentment in your head that doesn't actually translate into an argument. Muhammad can be ethically /worse/ than even your pee-brain can imagine, and that wouldn't discredit him or his religion from being true. In fact, there's nothing particularly interesting about even the worst rumors about him.
>b-b-but someone says he's holy/true
And in the classical world holiness has nothing to do with strict non-violence. In fact, very often holiness is linked directly to violence, and certainly so is truth (this should be interesting, both because of its nature and because it disturbs you). Even Jains, the most extreme non-violence oriented religion, flip-flopped hard on the issue and certainly the Abrahamic religions always, at best, occupied a middle position, which is in fact exactly where Islam and the Qur'an fall. What is your point, that he did terrible things? Why don't we take this back to the topic at hand and ask: what does this have to do with the quality of the Qur'an as a text?

Nothing. Not only because it doesn't serve as literary criticism but because it very clearly is an ideological sniping that betrays a complete unfamiliarity with the text, never mind the hermeneutics around it. We know this because of your blind faith in a known ideologue website.
>muh citations
>muh hadith
It's like you don't even know that this substratum of social literature was basically a joke until the rise of nationalism and fundamentalism. The only thing it was ever used for was pillowing legal arguments, and even then only in reservation since it was well known 99.99% of them were probably made up if not definitely made up.

>>8439985
Or, you know, the vast majority of them.

>>8440018
I give credence to the Hadith due to three factors:

1) The careful bookkeeping by Muslims that assigns reliability to the Hadith, tracing the precise lineage of the oral tradition until it was written about a century later.

2) The consistency of the depiction of his personality and actions

3) Perhaps the most telling: the fact that people would not make up embarrassing stories about their prophet. For example, according to the Hadith Muhammad died with a boner.

You are right that the fact that Muhammad was a brutal warlord who tortured those who criticized him has nothing to do with the literary quality of the Qur'an. But what it does do is testify that the religion was founded by an objectively evil person, and this presages the religion's core nature.

Now, let me remark on what a bellicose person you are, and on your juvenile greentext tactics from /b/. I am going to be very curt: This is /lit/. Please grow up.

>>8440082
>The careful bookkeeping by Muslims that assigns reliability to the Hadith
>tracing the precise lineage of the oral tradition
>until it was written about a century later.
>a century
Loving every laugh. All of the hadith collectors (sunni and shi`i, who don't share collections which is itself telling) themselves confessed that what they ended up publishing really was questionable at best.
Why do you think their use in fiqh falls below the Qur'an, the Sira, and the Sunna?
>consistency
kek
>people wouldn't make up stories that support their own agendas
>objectively evil person
>and this presages the religion's core nature.
Absolutely spooked

>greentext hurts my feelings please no bully
Piss off back to your home board, pseud.

>>8440119
The sunnah is composed of the hadith. The sunnah is meant to provide a model for good living through the example of the prophet. That the sunnah detail that Muhammad was a brutal warlord who tortured his enemies, and that this is meant to be a normative example of goodness, is disgusting.

Dozens of hadith from nine different sources all indicate that he mutilated his enemies.

And of course, the Qur'an says in 52:2-3 that Muhammad has never done anything wrong -- i.e. that he is an example of righteousness.

>>8440214
>The sunnah is composed of the hadith.
No, Hadith literature makes up a portion of Sunnah, but Sunnah is a broader field than it is.

>the Qur'an says in 52:2-3 that Muhammad has never done anything wrong
>52:2-3
>52.2: And [by] a Book inscribed
>52.3: In parchment spread open
Try actually reading the damn thing instead of regurgitating what those shitty sites tell you to think. There's nothing even in the rest of the sura that says what you think it says.

>>8440214
You are absolutely BTFO right now

>>8440243
Wrong number. Sura 53:2-3.

"Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred, nor does he speak to his own inclination."

Oddly, according to the Qur'an he also personally kept the booties of war from his plundering of villages.

8:1 "The spoils of war belong to Allah and the messenger."

Muhammad was objectively a warlord, and no good religion can be founded by a warlord.

>>8440264
You are getting extremely defensive.

>>8434282

Yes it is worth studying. And yes it is a work of genius. That asshole is still important over 1000 years later.

This, however, doesn't mean that he was a good person or that his legacy was good. Genghis Khan and Hitler were geniuses too. Bloodthirsty, but brilliant.

Don't see anyone looking up to them, but no one denies that they ought to be studied.

>>8440274
>"Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred, nor does he speak to his own inclination."
You realize that this doesn't say that Muhammad "has never done anything wrong", but that his revelations are objectively correct? Also this is an early revelation when Muhammad was still in Makka, long before the war between Makka and Madina. This should be a standard note in your copy.

>Muhammad was objectively a warlord
>and no good religion can be founded by a warlord.
That is spectacularly bad logic

>>8440291
Both are still revered desu, though Genghis is the only one that is revered by normies, only losers latch onto Hitler. Then again Hitler wasn't brilliant, just had charisma up the wazoo.

>>8440309
It is my personal opinion that no good religion can be founded by a warlord. I believe this because I believe that the founder of a religion lives his religion more fully than anyone. This is why Muslims apotheosize Muhammad.

>>8440375
>It is my personal opinion
Found your problem.

>>8440389
>It is my personal opinion that a warlord can found a good religion.
Found your problem.

>>8440402
Not that guy, but you are retarded.
Think about what you're saying.

>>8440402
When did I give my personal opinion on anything? You're the one confusing your misplaced resentment with "facts". And now you're confusing my thinking with yours? Please refrain from this.

>>8434584
The same shit could be said for Mein Kampf, it's still a piece of shit book though.

>>8440412
What I am saying is that when one is a member of a religion that apotheosizes a warlord, it is very difficult to have a proper moral compass.

Compare to Christ, Gautama, Abraham, etc. None of these founders wantonly murdered. But when you call evil good, there is no hope of moral rectitude.

>>8440422
If you disagree with my stance that "No good religion can be founded by a warlord", it is your stance that it is possible for a good religion to be founded a warlord.

Perhaps you neither agree nor disagree. Then we are likewise at an impasse.

My ethical common sense tells me that:

1) Being a warlord is unrighteous
2) A righteous religion cannot be founded by an unrighteous person, let alone apotheosize an unrighteous person

This is my ethical common sense. We have thus reduced our differences to a fundamental difference in ethics.

I believe that by apotheosizing unrighteousness, Islam necessarily screws up ethics. The Muslim cannot see that Muhammad was unrighteous. When you call evil good, there is no good.

>>8440316
>Then again Hitler wasn't brilliant, just had charisma up the wazoo.
Most people (those not desperately trying to be edgy through Hitler) don't think of him as charismatic. His speeches were shit in aesthetics and rhetoric, he was just very angry at a time where people latched onto that.

Trump is not a bad comparison really except that Americans have no real problems, are not disenfranchised etc etc. It's interesting that the plumpest and most milquetoast rally around him.

>>8440483
Not to mention he did fucked up shit which God then conveniently revealed was alright, so it was clear he was "special" and thus someone Allah had no qualms with using as a messenger. You're absolutely right that sheds a bad light on the religion and it's morals.

One example is him getting special marriage privileges through divine revelation when he wanted another broad to bang
>"O Prophet (Muhammad)! Verily, We have made lawful to you your wives, to whom you have paid their Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage), and those (captives or slaves) whom your right hand possesses -- whom God has given to you, and the daughters of your 'Amm (paternal uncles) and the daughters of your 'Ammah (paternal aunts) and the daughters of your Khâl (maternal uncles) and the daughters of your Khâlah (maternal aunts) who migrated (from Makkah) with you, and a believing woman if she offers herself to the Prophet, and the Prophet wishes to marry her; a privilege for you only, not for the (rest of) the believers."

>>8440483
Abraham was a warlord you fucking mong, do you even read?

>>8440526
>Most people (those not desperately trying to be edgy through Hitler) don't think of him as charismatic. His speeches were shit in aesthetics and rhetoric, he was just very angry at a time where people latched onto that.
You are SO wrong on this. I live in politically correct Sweden and even here he's touted as an excellent orator and a charismatic leader. A prime example of someone who lead by personality, can't say the perception is wrong either. I know German and watching his speeches almost gives me shills at times (I'm not a nazi by any means, I've got a million friend cards I can pull etc, but he definitely had a way with words).

>>8434584
Holy shit that was passionate.

>>8440547
>I live in politically correct Sweden and even here he's touted as an excellent orator and a charismatic leader.
That's the standard line in the UK to rationalise it but not in Germany. And Austrians have said the same to me. The whole uprising/revolution thing was happening and Hitler managed to ride it by being very shouty.

Would you say your German is better, worse or the same level as your English?

>>8440483
>My ethical common sense
You did it again, kek, just stop. You're under-read and use exclusively tertiary information, you keep moving goalposts, you keep confusing your feelings for logical formulas, you abuse freshman level words you just discovered (and misuse). You're just an ideologue with a chip on your should and little idea what you're talking about. Don't even bother @ing me again until you can see that something as simple as "1) Being a warlord is unrighteous" isn't necessarily founded and that none of your "logic" follows. This is embarrassing, honestly. I mean we get it, you don't like the mozlems, you want a justification, we get it.

>>8440483
Your post made me want to become a Muslim, I'm not even joking.

>>8440536
Yes.

And note that that particular verse also says that raping captives is lawful.

>>8440573
Any belief system is either circular or has unfounded tenants, often in the form of ethical convictions. It is my ethical conviction that being a plundering warlord is unrighteous.

I do not dislike Muslims. I dislike Islam. And I did not dislike Islam until I read the facts.

>>8440618
>unfounded tenants
I love malapropisms.

I'm too tired to stick one in here tho.

>>8436886
I love you lit.

Fuck I keep looking at Koran and keep thinking it says Korean. Then again, where are great works of Korean literature? Peninsula of gosus my foot.

>>8436886
>democratic vote to renounce democracy
nothing wrong with this tbqh

>>8441211
That guy had no idea what he was talking about and didn't make any good points.

He didn't know there were (((imperative sentences))) in the Torah.

You don't love /lit/, you love /pol/.

>>8440571
It's definitely worse than my English, in terms of comprehension it's pretty solid though. In any case, I'm surprised they've said that. I had my schooling in Sweden so I can't really compare, though here several teachers who despised Hitler still listed his charisma and oration skills as top notch. I mean, they kind of were. Being angry is one thing, stirring up anger in others and have them join you is another.

>>8441917
>He didn't know there were (((imperative sentences))) in the Torah.
Irrelevant to the point he was making, which was that
>Muslims must accept that the Qur'an is the verbatim word of God.
Which most Jews DON'T. Most don't even believe in God or the Torah.Shit, just look at Maajid Nawaz (a former fundamentalist I may add) or anyone else trying to reinterpret scripture as to not allow barbaric practices, they get called lapdogs, not real muslims and all kinds of other names. Not to mention the endless amount of death threats. Just have a look at this shit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7GZNaZkkio

>>8437223
>Thanks for quoting a verse from the Qu'ran that says only God knows the correct way to interpret its lines. How are men supposed to follow things to the letter if those things ultimately escape his comprehension?


>Mohammed is his messenger
>What Mohammed says is thus Gods word and interpretation
>These are recorded in the Hadiths

It's not hard.

>>8441949
>this much ideology

Geez. You actually think all 1+ billion Muslim people believe everything in the Qu'ran is 100% true and must be acted upon at all times?

That's not how any religion works in the real world, senpai. And spare me your neocon propaganda, you Richard Dawkins toadstool. Whenever you denounce Islam as le most dangerous religion ever you further the interests of the imperialists making war and making money in the Middle East.

It wasn't imams who built the atom bomb. I don't recall Fatah setting up any gas chambers. Western civilization is the most violent enterprise in human history. Moral qualms with Islam that present Muslims as 'more dangerous' than anybody else amount to nothing more than Bush-tier propaganda.

>>8441957
How can men interpret the words that Mohammed delivers if only Allah can interpret the words?

The verse in question reveals nothing except that human beings can never fully attain to truth, which is a standard and profound tenet of the mystic traditions of every religion.

>>8441979
>You actually think all 1+ billion Muslim people believe everything in the Qu'ran is 100% true and must be acted upon at all times?
No, not at all. I never said this. Just a scary number of them, and pretty much all their leaders and public figures. I will willingly admit a lot of westernized muslims have "abandoned" their religion to a large extent because the western lifestyle is so much more appealing. I know a lot of these types of muslims personally. They're no concern, what's concerning are the imams, public leaders, the original texts if someone suddenly decides to become a "good muslim" and actually follow the book (and the right interpretations as interpreted in the hadiths by the contemporaries who lived with Mohamed, which are also shit for the most part).

Everything else you wrote was irrelevant, as if we can't discuss reality because it might further someones interests, please. Also nobody gives a shit about human history, I care about what's happening NOW.

>>8441986
>Never fully attain to truth
Nobody needs this. They'll be perfectly happy being close enough, having the most reasonable interpretation based on the available information and going with that. So it doesn't really change anything.

File: 1472105239636.gif (729KB, 267x200px) Image search: [Google]

729KB, 267x200px

>>8442012
>no one gives a shit about human history, I care about what's happening NOW

>>8442047
>Looking into wrongs that happened generations ago to justify wrongs happening today
Shiggy diggy, most of the world has civilized since then and moved away from such barbarism.

>>8441979

Noam Chomsky detected.

>>8437104
>I wonder how Rabbinical Jews deal with that. How do they deal with that?
Rabbinical Jews believe that the Oral Torah was given to the Jewish people simultaneously with the written Torah. The Oral Torah does much to ameliorate the harshness of the Written, and offers a multitude of positions on any given issue besides. In Rabbinical jurisprudence the vast majority of the argumentation comes out of the Oral Torah. Actual Jewish scholarship focuses much more on the Oral than the Written. It's longer, more detailed, and incredibly complex.

>>8441979
>Western civilization is the most violent enterprise in human history.
Damn, you sound fucking stupid. I suppose the word "enterprise" is good enough to describe several dozen civilizations for extremely stupid people. So is hanging.

>>8441943
>stirring up anger in others
Again, he didn't. They were already rising up.

His actual rise to power is multilevelled, but the public thing that you call charisma was just him being angry a lot. He also used a lot of deception and violence to make his way into power.

Your English is not all that good either (gave you shills... lol) so maybe have a think about how limited your direct experience of German is.

File: 1458188131165.gif (1MB, 245x280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 245x280px

>>8441979

Great satire anon.

>>8434283
not Harold Bloom

>>8441949
>Which most Jews DON'T
"Jews" can refer to a people, a race, a set of cultures and a religion all at once or individually. Not everyone believes in the verbatim written word of God because their mother's mother's mother's etc mother was supposedly fucked by Abraham or similar. Others do, and many "orthodox" Jews have some real nutty beliefs because of this.

>>8442117
>The Oral Torah does much to ameliorate the harshness of the Written, and offers a multitude of positions on any given issue besides.
The equivalent in Islam would be the Imam system and shariah. Much of shariah is based upon precedence, in many ways similar to the common law and jury system.

>>8437269
gtfo "nigga"

>>8442364
great argument

>>8442333
I think the difference would be that the bulk of the Oral Torah is considered on equal footing with the Written in terms of divine provenance. The Imam system and shariah appear to be more similar to later rabbinical regulations in that they are less authoritative and what authority they possess is incredibly diffuse.

>>8438659
Point the place in this person's post where they said it was penned by an author, or that it is important to think that way. Nothing you said refutes anything they said, which makes you seem really dumb when you say "pretentious fuckhole"

>>8443553
>The Imam system and shariah appear to be more similar to later rabbinical regulations in that they are less authoritative and what authority they possess is incredibly diffuse.
It depends who you look at, but the thing as a general whole has a lot of power by virtue of interpretation, similar to the common law system and precedence. So for example, avove the whole cutting hands off for stealing is posted. But what does it mean to steal, to cut and what constitutes the word translated as "hands"? In the majority of cases not only is it incredibly difficult to steal something it's also incredibly difficult to demonstrate that that is what happened. Even where stealing is more straightforward, many take the hands as something like "cut off from God" rather than literally. And even if it comes to an actual hand cutting thing, it'll be the fingers of one hand or something usually. Quite an interesting debate on all points btw concerns stealing office supplies from work.

Inb4 ISIS and their mutiliation shit, they're obviously horrible people. But also not representative of Islam, sharia or anything really.

>>8434282
Well there 1.5 billion people who venerate the Quran so much they will rip out your guts and strangle you with them if you tear/burn it. So yeah, that's something unlike anything else.