2. The book in which is
olive oil: Quran and science
"You [the
doubters] don't study the Quran? If it would
be from other person than God, you would
find many contradictions in it."
Quran, Sura 4:82 |
2.1. The Muhammad dogma is
increasingly accepted in the 20th century
[The Muhammad dogma is accepted: Quran translator
Rudi Paret]
Rudi Paret (1901-1983), prominent Quran translator,
writes in the introduction to his German translation:
"We have no reason to believe that even a single verse
in the entire Quran would not have come from
Muhammad." He, who had to deal with contradictions,
ambiguities, mistakes, inconsistencies of logical as
well as linguistic nature in his translation work
almost every day: how does he know that? How does he
come to this conclusion?
[Since the 1920s it's all a question of
oil and oil profits. Saudi family dictatorship is
ordering that Muhammad and Quran are right -
point!].
[The Muhammad Dogma is accepted: Quran researcher
Tilman Nagel]
Similarly, Tilman Nagel [6]
[6] Tilman Nagel: Mohammed;
Munich 2008
"Research must accept what can be considered a safe
fact, namely, that the words of the Quran were given
from Muhammad ..." [text01] and fills 1000 pages under
this unproven premise.
[The Muhammad dogma is accepted: 20th century since
the Zionist foundation of Israel - translaters are
censoring themselves]
How these two scientists come to such an unscientific
statement? They reflect the meaning of the traditional
orientalistic. After this orientalistic was creating
big names in the 19th century there is no big action
up to the end of the 20th century about Islam science
with some exceptions which should be mentioned.
Typically there was system immanent science and a
question about the sources being a fake or not was
only bothering. For example the translation of the
Quran was according to the Arab model into German. It
was very precise, very conscious, even brilliant, so
the translations came more to the probable meaning
than the Arab model itself. The translations became
even [p.27] interpretations, but the author could but
the author was able to prove that the Arabian editor
(!) was wrong about this or that point - we will come
to some examples later. The alarm bells should have
been ringing at a scientist, because it was not about
a normal text, but a divine message in purportedly
purest Arabic, which made a claim to truth. The
negation of the most obvious contradictions and the
incredibly sloppy handling of sources have so
discredited Oriental studies, reputation is damaged
for ever, so this part of Islam science is a negative
history of science [7].
[7] [Emperor William (Wilhelm,
Germany) against criticism of Islam - Hitler's
remark that Islam already belonged to the world
today]
It might be worth while to examine the connection
between twentieth-century German Islamic scholarship
and politics. Emperor William had prohibited any
criticism of Islam at his academies with a view to
the Ottoman Empire as a military alliance partner.
In the Third Reich, there were increasingly
high-ranking contacts with Islamic dignitaries, in
Dresden was the curiosity of the SS Mufti School.
During "table talks" (book by Henry Picker) Hitler
expressed in these "table talks", if Germany had
received Islam instead of Christianity, today we
already belonged to the world. In the Federal
Republic of Germany (FRG) of the official Islamic
research turned in circles remaining on the spot.
Under a multicultural premise, scientific critique
of Islam is also considered suspect and is not a
"desired research" when it depends from public
funds.
2.2. Invented Islam history: There are NO
proofs for a Caliph Othman
[Invented Islam history: "Othmanic Quran" and the
so called fast distribution from Morocco to Central
Asia]
According to traditional Islamic tradition, the
prophet Muhammad proclaimed between 610 and 632 his
revelations, thereby founding a new religion. In his
lifetime, only oral traditions existed, but -
according to traditional Islamic conception - his
third successor, the Caliph Othman, had gathered the
material 20 years later forming a book, the so-called
"Othmanic Koran". Tradition says that this book had
already the definite and final orthographic and
substantive authority. Tradition says that in just a
few years, the book and religion have spread through
Syria, Arabia, Iraq, Persia, Central Asia, Egypt and
North Africa. This is an epoch-making process of
incredible speed. If it was like that.
Who claims that? Or the other way round: what do the
sources look like?
[Invented history of Islam: The original Quran of
Caliph Othman does not exist - evidence from outside
and evidence of a Caliph Othman are missing]
From the Islamic side, we have no contemporary
evidence. We have no Othmanian original Quran, no
other information from this period, the first known
Quran dates from the end of the 9th century, even the
fragments known so far do not date back to the time of
[cal.28] the claimed Caliph Othman. The editor of the
original Quran, the ominous Caliph Othman, is
historically not present.
There is not a single non-Islamic clue to him, nor any
proof. Only two centuries after the alleged events we
can find the first Islamic accounts of Muhammad and
his book, most of which were written three centuries
later.
[Invented Islam story: 30% of the Quran refers to
the time before Muhammad]
However, science is aware of pre-Prophetic materials
that reappear later in the definitive Quran. According
to the Quran researcher Günter Lüling, the
pre-Muhammadean material accounts for no less than
thirty percent of the later Quran [8].
[8] Günter Lüling: About the original
Quran. Approaches to the reconstruction of
pre-Islamic stanza songs in the Quran (original
German: Über den Urkoran. Ansätze zur Rekonstruktion
der vorislamischen Strophenlieder im Koran);
Erlangen (Germany) 1974
Thus, at least fragments of the later Quran dating
from the time of Muhammad and before are known to
science. So these are Quran scripts from the time
before the founder of Islam?
2.3. Quran Arab language: mixture between
Arab and Syrian Aramaic
Arab writing [2] -- Arameic writing [3]
Theodor Nöldeke [9]
[9] Theodor Nöldeke: History of the Quran
(original German: Geschichte des Qorans), facsimile
of the 1909 edition, Elibron Classic Series, Adamont
Media Corporation 2005
had already created a catalog of numerous mistakes and
peculiarities of the Quran language in 1909. He
mentions overlaps with the Syro-Aramaic language, but
without elaborating on it further. In 1927, the
manuscript researcher Alphonse Hormizd Mingana, who
was a citizen of Iraq, was the first to emphasize the
strong mixing of Quranic Arabic with Syro-Aramaic.
Lüling confirms and deepens these results later.
[The Quranic Arabic: The "dark places" that nobody
can interpret]
There are numerous passages in Quran, the so-called
"dark spots", which are also not well readable to Arab
interpreters. This then led to the many - often
completely different - interpretations that
characterize Islamic teaching. In the Islamic view,
the language of God is Arabic itself. Therefore, those
who can not read these passages simply do not master
the perfect Arabic of God.
2.4. Quranic Arabic: Luxenberg's
research and new translations
[The Quranic Arabic: linguist Luxenberg with a new
interpretation with Syro-Aramaic vocabulary]
This explanation may satisfy believers but not
scientists. The Semitist and linguist Christoph
Luxenberg [10]
[10] Pseudonym of a professor
at a German university
took [p.29] some "dark spots". He began to read
these unclear and seemingly meaningless Quran passages
in the language of the time of origin. This language
was Syro-Aramaic. And he came to very amazing results.
[Quranic Arabic and Luxenberg: The birth of Jesus
is legally corrected]
The sura 19 (Surat Maryam / Marian sura) is such a
passage. First i described the conception of Mary, and
then comes her despair over the illegitimate birth of
her son Jesus, she desires death for it.
In verse 24 of this sura, the traditional translation
says:
"And he called [Jesus] under her: Do not worry, your
Lord has made a little creek flow beneath you!"
In Syro-Aramaic, this verse means:
"Then he [Jesus] called to her after the birth: Do not
be sad, the Lord has made your birth legitimate."
A previously strange sentence suddenly gets its
meaning! (One should not bother with the linguistic
genius of the baby Jesus, there are several passages
in the Quran, and, one has to underline this, then we
find that also in the gospel of Thomas.
[Quranic Arabic and Luxenberg: The paradise virgins
become grapes - fantasy age of 33 for the fantasy
virgins]
Blue and yellow grapes [4] - instead of paradise
virgins!
Even the "Huris", the mermaids being promised in
dozens by the Quran to the martyrs, look very
different at Luxenberg. In the Quran this reads in the
traditional translation:
Sura 44:54: "And we give them [to the believers]
big-eyed huris as wives."
This verse is called in the authorized, Arabic
version: wa-zawwag-nahum bi-hur inin and can be read
according to Luxenberg in classical Arabic as
"married". But only if one puts over the "r" and under
the "h" a diacritical point, which indicates how the
letter is to be read precisely. These diacritical
points did not exist in [S.30] the early texts. And
without the dots, the word as rawwah-nahum reads, and
this means in Arabic "to rest".
"Hur" is undoubtedly the plural of female "hawra",
meaning "white".
"In" is not understandable in Arabic, so the Arabic
editors of the Quran interpret "in" as a plural of
"ain" (eye, well), even though it should read "uyun"
or "ayun" correctly.
"Hur in" would be "white eyes". In Arabic, however,
this is nonsense in this context (elsewhere in the
Quran, sura 12:84, and "white eyes" also means
"blind"). That is why the Arabic Quran interpreters
offer "big-eyed whites". This term became "big-eyed
huris" - and in this way the "paradise virgins" were
invented.
However, Luxenberg shows through Quranic and extra
Quranic cross-references that the "whites" in the
context of a Paradise are meant unquestionably grapes.
The Arabic misunderstood word "in" in Aramaic means
"crystal clear, shiny, magnificent appearance". The
formula of "hur in" are therefore not beings, and
certainly not Huris, but "crystal clear, magnificent
grapes".
And finally "bi" does not mean the Arabic "with" but
the Aramaic "under". The believer is therefore not
linked with the "Huris", but he makes a rest under the
"hur in", this means: "under the grapes".
Sure 44:54 reads to Luxenberg so right:
"We will prepare them a comfortable stay under
magnificent grapes." [text02]
This is a not inconsiderable difference, one has to
state this (and with not insignificant consequences
for the "martyrs").
The interpretations are inventing to the Huris various
characteristics.
Sura 2:25: "In Paradise purified wives wait for them."
In reality there is the indication of "all sorts of
pure fruits."
From Sura 38:52, the Arabic Koran interpretations
derive the age of the Huris. At first they are "of the
same age", then they become "young", "ever young", and
in later interpretations they are even assigned an
age: "33 years". None of this is in the Quran [p.31].
[Supplement: 33 is the age of the fantasy
"Jesus", and 33 is the highest grade of Satanist
Illuminati Freemasons].
It is about the word "atrab", which is
incomprehensible in Arabic and therefore was put into
connection with the above-mentioned interpretations.
The Aramaic root means "juicy, pulp".
From sura 38:52 we see this translation according to
traditional reading:
"While they have Huris of the same age with them
[forever young, 33-year-old], the eyes are downcast
..."
the correct Aramaic translation says:
"With them will be juicy fruits reachable on a low
level."
The interpretations are performing their biggest error
with sura 55:56 and 74, where the Huris are finally
appointed virgins. In other interpretations they even
remain eternal virgins, even if they had already been
available to the believers:
Sura 55:56: "In there [in the gardens] there are also
female beings with their eyes cast down [the" huris
"], who have not been deflowered before [neither men
nor jinn]."
The interpretation of the term "Lam yatmithunna" as
"to deflower" comes from the Quran interpreter
at-Tabari and was uncritically continued, but in
Syro-Aramaic the root means undoubtedly "to
contaminate, to make stains."
Thus the whole phrase means, "There are low hanging
fruits that nobody has touched yet."
Luxenberg notes to this point:
"With the interpretation 'deflower' the summit is
reached. Whoever reads the Quran with some
understanding, has to bang his hands over his head at
this point. The guilt is not only ignorance, but it
takes a good dose of audacity to invent such a thing
in a holy scripture defaming Quran with such an
interpretation." [text03 - The exact source is
missing].
One might add: The dirty fantasy of the bearded men
has bolted here [got an aggressive panic].
But it continues in this style [p.32].
We already know from the Huris that they are pretty,
33 years old and eternally virginal.
In sura 78:33 we learn another detail - they are
busty:
"[The god believers expect] young huris with swelling
breasts and a cup of wine, filled to the brim."
The swelling breasts are in fact "big, juicy fruits,"
as Luxenberg demonstrates in detail.
So the Huris are born entirely of the Empire of
fantasy, but that's not all, there are also young boys
in Paradise who are available to the pious believers.
Sura 76:19:
"Eternally young boys [wildanun mhalladuna] make the
rounds among them [among the believers] ..."
According to Luxenberg the "boys" stand in Aramaic for
"juice" or "wine" after "child of the grapevine" -
product of grapevine - juice or wine).
"Muhalladuna" gets its Aramaic original meaning by
shifting one single point (lower point instead of
upper point, "h" becomes "g"), thus the Aramaic
meaning is "iced cold, iced".
Thus there are not "ever young boys" making the round,
but in fact, "ice-cold fruits".
[Quranic Paradise: The Interpretation of the Erotic
Paradise for Men]
Flagrant mistranslation of the Arab editors created a
picture of paradise, which not only made lewd remarks
from unbelievers, not only led hundreds of thousands
of faith believer fighters to die with wrong ideas,
but also stands diametrically against the original and
real statement of the Koran.
In addition, the mixture of Syriac-Christian and
Eastern ideas in the Quran becomes clear. The fruit is
the symbol par excellence of the Syriac-Christian
paradise and this was the grape, as it's shown
thousands of times. This was also the paradise of the
Quranic original materials.
In the later version, this rather modest paradise
assumes Persian proportions: without large-eyed
virgins this paradise is none, and Persian festivals
have to have hierodules, the boys, who
were responsible for singing and other services
[p.33]. The Persian "fairidaez" (Paradise) becomes the
Arabic "faradis" and this is a sexy paradise with
sexism [11]. It is really only about the fulfillment
of sexual men's dreams. [12]
[11] Helmut Werner: The Islamic Book of
the Dead (original German: Das Islamische
Totenbuch); Cologne (Germany) 2009, is proving this
central male-sexist ideas of the afterlife with
numerous Quran passages.
[12] In this tradition, the 9/11 leader Muhammad
Atta left the instruction to prepare for the
suicide, which included bandaging the penis for
special, symbolic protection.
[Supplement: WTC was destroyed with atomic bombs
70m in the ground
The WTC towers were
blasted 70m below the ground with small atomic
bombs. These small atomic bombs were
prescribed as a quick demolition method for
skyscrapers in the 1960s. The films are wrong and the
holes are empty. No Arab ever attacked the
"USA". Atta is defamed for nothing].
This change of the original text is not only a
catastrophic wrong translation, but this is a change
of the whole Paradise concept.
[Quran Arabic and Luxenberg: The headscarf of
Tabari becomes a belt around the loins]
Woman from North Africa with a cloth belt [5]
For the entire "headscarf problematic" Luxenberg finds
the solution with a translation in Aramaic.
There is only one place in the Quran that seems to
refer to the headscarf. It is sura 24, verse 31. The
whole sentence is:
"And speak to the believing women that they should
cast down their eyes and cure their shame, and that
they should not show their charms, except that which
is outside, and that they should put their cloth over
their breasts, showing their charms only to their
spouses or their fathers or to the fathers of their
spouses or to their sons or to the sons of their
spouses or to their brothers or the their sons of
their brothers or to the sons of their sisters or to
their wives or to those who have a right to them, or
to their servants who have no potence or have no
children who do not pay attention to their nakedness."
The core passage has Max Henning [13]
[13] The Koran (original German: Der
Koran); Reclam, edition 2006
already translated quite freely with "to put her cloth
over her breast".
Literally translated, this passage means in the Arabic
Quran: "They should put their chumur over their bags."
What are these "chumur", so, and what is the sense of
the bags? Tabari translates "chumur" with "headscarf"
and adds, without giving any references or giving
reasons, that this headscarf has to cover hair, neck
and ear pendants [p.34].
Luxenberg now identifies the ominous "chumur"
(singular "chimar") as the prescribed Aramaic "gmar =
band, belt". He also shows that the word "beat" was
used in connection with the terms of "band, belt",
thus formed a phrase that is still in use in the
Aramaic language of today: "Put the band, the cloth
belt around". Covering the loins and not the "bags".
The sentence actually means: "They should tie their
belts around their loins."
The Persian and Arabic philologist Tabari had later,
around the year of 900, so, 300 years after the time
of the rumored original edition, made an own
commentary on the Quran [14]
[14] at-Tabari: Tafsir al-Quran; Volume
XVIII; Cairo 1968
and he simply does not understand the word "chumur /
chimar", which does not exist in Arabic. Without
providing an explanation, he interprets it as a
"headscarf" and adds that this headscarf "should cover
the neck, hair and earrings". From then on, the
Islamic world accepted the commandment to the
headscarf as the command of God. It is in reality
nothing more than the personal opinion of At-Tabari.
The change of meaning of this term is remarkably
represented in a Hadith [[Muhammad saying]] [15].
[15] Ibn Manzur: Lisan al-Arab; X, 355a;
Beirut 1955
After that, Aisha, the prophet's youngest wife, and
other women should change their cloth belts into
headscarves, when the corresponding verse was
published. Here we have the wrong translation of the
word "chimar": first it was a cloth belt, then a
headscarf.
According to Luxenberg, "Muslim women have the right
to reinstall the original text of the Quran
retransforming the headscarves into cloth belts ending
the torture which was imposed since centuries to
them." [Precise source is missing unfortunately].
[Quranic Arabic and interpretations without end]
How is it possible that Arab editors obviously have
such big problems with an Arabic text? With a text
that [p.35] supposedly "came to the people in pure and
clear Arabic"? How does it happen that practically
every verse has to be interpreted for understanding
and that many verses easily bring it to a dozen
different interpretations?
If you ask a linguists for the "Arabic" language,
there will come the counter question for sure: "Which
Arabic?"
Then as now there were a variety of Arabic dialects.
In addition there is the classical Arabic, the
"Arabiya". The Quran, however, is again written in a
different style: the Quranic Arabic, which only
specialists can read (the question of how they
understand it, we skip better on the basis of the
examples above).
2.5. The language mixture at the time
of the alleged Muhammad
[The languages mixture: Quranic Arabic, Aramaic,
and Greek]
The unifying language of the time was Aramaic. The
Quran is so strongly interspersed with the Aramaic
that Luxenberg assumes that there must exist an
original Quran in Aramaic. We do not know whether this
original Quran in Aramaic existed, but it's certain
that the basic writings of the Quran are to a large
extent in Aramaic.
In Arabia of those times there was spoken Aramaic and
/ or the respective Arabic dialect. The written
language was throughout the Aramaic. In addition,
Greek was quite common in the educational layer. The
Arabic script developed with Nabataean elements from
the Aramaic script. The traditional Quranic Arabic did
not exist in the 6th or 7th century, the alleged time
of Muhammad and the claimed descent of the Quran.
[p.36]
![Olive grove with olive trees [1], this is the
culture in the Mediterranean climate](../d/002a-olivenoel-d/001-olivenhain-m-olivenbaeumen.jpg "Olive grove with olive trees [1], this is
the culture in the Mediterranean climate")
