2.6.
The consonant script and the interpretations
[The consonant script and interpretations]
Semitic writings consisted only of consonants. In the
pronunciation vocals were put according to the
experience. Translated to German, you could read "Rst"
depending on the context as "Rast", "Rost", "Rest",
"Rist", "Erst", "Erste" and what else is there in
terms.
What does "Lbnstnlst" mean? - "Lieben ist eine Lust"
(translated: "Love is a pleasure!" Or rather: "Leben
ist eine Last?" (translated: "Life is a burden"?)
[The consonant writing: early Arabic with 15
characters, 7 of them ambiguous]
But it gets worse yet. The early Arabic alphabet
consisted of 15 characters, of which only seven were
exactly defined. Of the remaining signs, six were
ambiguous with two possible meanings, one sign had
three and another one could have 5 different meanings.
In the early manuscripts can not be differed between
"f" and "q", "j" and "kh", "s" [p.36] and "d", "r" and
"z", "s" and "sh", "d" and "dah", "t" and "z". So the
writing consisted only of consonants and three
semivowels, which in turn were not at all clearly
defined, and short vowels were read according to
context and experience.
Thus this framework of consonants ("Rasm") was
extremely weakly defined. One could not read it
reasonably without the knowledge of the described
events.
[The consonant writing: doubt or olive oil in the
book - the development of additional signs as
reading aids]
This explains a nice story: a long time ago a Quran
scholar walked in the streets in Basra and heard
through a window a boy reciting: "This is the book in
which there is no olive oil ..." This text was known
to the scholar, but it seemed also strange and he went
into the house. A boy was reciting the second sura of
the Quran. But this begins right "This is the book in
which there is no doubt ..." doubt is called "rayba",
olive oil "zeita". In the consonant writing without
reading aids, however, these two words are completely
identical, only the sense determines the meaning. This
was a highly unsatisfactory state of facts, and
therefore the scholar sought relief by the clear
definition of the scripture.
Even in real life, Arab philologists tried to specify
this rudimentary Arabic script. This was done by
placing characters above and below the letters, the
so-called diacritical points; later signs were added
for short vowels, doubling, lack of vocals and
stretching. These reading aids indicate how to read
the consonant framework as a whole: as "pleasure,"
"load," "rest," "rust," "doubt," or "olive oil."
In our example of olive oil, the correct meaning is
easy to guess, but the mystery is great in abstract
(that is, religious) contents, where the meaning is
not at all a common property.
There are also cases with misplaced characters in
medicinal remedy recipes leading to deaths because the
mixture was unexpectedly quite different. [16]
[16] cf. Rotraud Wieland: Revelation and
history in the thinking of modern Muslims (original
German: Offenbarung und Geschichte im Denken
moderner Muslime); Wiesbaden 1971
[The early Koran with consonant writing WITHOUT
additional symbols - the Syro-Aramaic in the Quran -
the Arab Quran researchers fail]
These reading aids did not exist in any of the early
Quran texts, these consisted only of the "Rasm", the
framework, without vowels and with highly ambiguous
consonants. In addition, Aramaic sayings were written
sometimes in early Arabic characters - and vice versa.
It is now clear which errors could be made by the
subsequent setting of the reading aids, and all this
happened a long time ago understanding the the old
languages only insufficiently. And it is clear that
the "detour" over the main language, the Syro-Aramaic,
in many cases provides the right results.
Here we also find the solution of the mystery why the
Arab Quran exegetes made so catastrophic mistakes.
They could not read the text material properly which
they were editing. They no longer understood the old
languages and their mixed forms correctly, and they
were often confronted with very difficult texts -
which they wanted to make accessible to all Arabs.
Because a defined Arabic language and writing were
missing, they had to be created. This happened mainly
in the 9th century, carried out by a group of editors
whose most prominent members we know by name,
especially the already mentioned Tabari. It now
becomes clear that these people actually did not
interpret the Quran, as the saying goes, but actually
translated it and, in addition, defined the language
rules for the translation itself.
2.7. The early Quran: versions and copying
errors
[Versions and copying errors: Al Aykah or Laykah?]
Besides these systematic errors, there were a lot of
errors with versions and copying work. That is, in the
handwritten dissemination appeared different versions,
and there were spelling mistakes.
Let's take the suras 50: 12-14 and 26: 176-177, where
the unbelievers being punished are listed: besides Lut
(the biblical Lot), there are among others the "people
of the thicket" (Ashab al Aykah) and the "people of
the fountain "(Ashab ar-Rass).
[17] See: Gerd-r. puin; In:
"The Dark Beginnings".
"Al Aykah" means "thicket". But with this "people of
the thicket", as it's written in the Quran, no Quran
scholar can really find a real sense with them.
In the official Cairo version of the Quran this word
occurs four times. Twice it is coming "correctly" with
the article "al" (in the suras 15:78 and 50:14), for
example "Al Aykah", but twice (in the suras 26: 176
and 38:13), is missing the "a" from the article "al".
The word is then read as Laykah.
"Al Aykah"? Or "Laykah"?
[Versions and copying errors: Laykah = a place or
apostasy of belief?]
In an early manuscript from Sana'a there is the
writing "Laykah" at the place where the Cairo edition
writes "Al Aykah". Mr. Abu Ubaydah (9th century)
considers Laykah a geographic location, as also Mr.
Abu Hayyan al-Garnati does (14th century). The latter
even considers another reading of this word as "almost
an apostasy of belief what God shall forbid".
It is precisely this other blasphemous reading that
the currently official Quran has adopted.
The Koran scholars are thus twice in a dilemma,
because they should confess that the "correct" version
in the official Cairo Quran is wrong, or that the "non
correct" version would be right. Both possibilities
are not foreseen because the Quran is without any
mistake as the traditional official meaning about
Muhammad is until today: handed down flawlessly. And
this example makes clear what difference a set or
omitted line or diacritical point can make.
The modern - non-Islamic - research tells us that
"Laykah" represents the meaningful reading, because
that means nothing else than the famous ancient Red
Sea port "Leuke Kome". The "Ashab ar-Rass", the
"people of the fountain", would be then the "Arsae"
(Arser) already mentioned by the geographer Ptolemy
north of Yanbu on the Red Sea coast.
[Versions and copying errors: Abraham or Ibrahim]
Not even in the much-known ancestor Abraham there is a
uniform spelling: In the Quran he is mentioned 15
times as an "Abraham", and 54 times as "Ibrahim". This
suggests a different origin of the texts.
[Versions and copying errors: fragments of Quran
manuscripts - palimpsests (scraping texts)]
There are numerous fragments of Quran manuscripts from
the early Islamic period (Leide, Berlin, Paris,
Sanaa), which have corrections. Letters and whole
words were erased, corrected or reinstated. And among
the manuscript researchers there are also the
well-known [p.39] Palimpsests. A palimpsest is a
parchment whose first writing was washed out for
reasons of lack of money and then the parchment was
re-inscribed. Modern methods can make visible the
underlying first writing. With the palimpsests
of the Sanaans from the eighth century we can state
the will that there were as many corrections as
possible. When these corrections became too many the
sheet was deleted and the sheet was rewritten. Thus
there were always differences between the first and
the second writing, mostly only little differences in
spelling, but sometimes changed also the meanings of
the words, or missing passages were added or passages
were deleted.
[Versions and copying errors: transcription errors
unintentionally alter the Quran - rulers
deliberately alter the Quran as they like]
Errors are a well-known and normal phenomenon in
handwritten copies - especially in Arabic texts, where
a false or unclear line, or an omitted or misplaced
point, can make a substantial difference in meaning.
There are deliberate changes to the errors, because
rulers of all times were interested in finding their
view of things represented in the divine scriptures.
Ubaydallah, the governor of Mesopotamia, has corrected
by his own admission 2000 Alif ("a") into a Quran
text.
The whole history of the Quran is up to this day a
dispute over the correct reading. The reason for this
is that the original texts of the Quran were not
written in a clear "Quranic Arabic". The fact that
this is constantly and persistently asserted, does not
make things right.
[Photo]
Sheet from the oldest known Quran fragment (around
720) from Sanaa, in the Hijaz style without a
character set. It is a palimetry test, that is to say
a multiple-described parchment. The UV light makes the
older font visible under the current font. There are
numerous differences between the two writings and the
standard Quran, which proves the evolutionary creation
of the Quran. [P.41]
2.8. Arbitrary interpretation in the
Koran
[Arbitrary interpretation: The Christmas story in
the Quran: The Quran has come]
Luxenberg provided further evidence when he came
across an arch-Christian tradition in the Aramaic
reading of the Quran. He sees in sure 97 the Christmas
story.
The sura contains five verses and the traditional
translation says:
1: We sent him down during the night of the ordinance.
2: But how can you know which the Night of Destiny is?
3: The night of Destiny is better than a thousand
months.
4: The angels and the Spirit come down in this night
with the permission of their Lord, all are logos
beings.
5: This night is (full of) salvation until the dawn
becomes visible. [p.40]
Tabari's summary commentary: "The Quran has come down
in this night into the lower sphere of the sky.
Depending on its purpose, God sent a part of it down
to Earth until the Quran was completed. Between the
beginning and the end of the revelation were 20 years.
The beginning of the Quran came down in this night."
Tabari means that "him" means "it," the Quran. How
does he come to this opinion, which can not be deduced
from the context?
Luxenberg is proving now that in the Aramaic language
the word "determination" means fate by birth, birth
star, Christmas. Anyone sent down on Christmas would
be "Jesus" and not the "Quran". Tabari must have
realized this that there is a star in the game,
because he lets the Koran descend into the lower level
of the sky, that is, into the star sphere of the Quran
sky.
Verse 3: The night of determination is better than a
thousand months
According to Luxenberg the word of "Leyla" (night) is
in Aramaic not only a normal word for "night", but
also a liturgical term in the sense of "night prayer",
corresponding to the Latin "nocturn". The term of
"months" would not at all mean the Arab word of
"schahr" (month), but more the Aramaic liturgic word
of "schara", which means "Vivilien", thus the night
guards before a high holiday.
In verse 4 of the same sura, "the angels come down,
all logos (!) beings".
According to Luxenberg, angels come down and they are
accompanied by the logos, the spirit, with their
"hymns": that is, the well-known "choir of the angels"
[resp. these are further extraterrestrials].
The whole sura reads according to Luxenberg in the
following way:
1. We let him (= the fantasy boy "Jesus") descend on
the night of Destiny (= the birth star, Christmas
[[respectively there was a UFO]]).
2. What do you know, what is the night of Destiny?
3. The night (= the nocturn) of destiny is more rich
than a thousand vigils. [p.42]
4. The angels [[the extraterrestrials]], accompanied
by the spirit [[wisdom]], bring down with them, with
the permission of their Lord, all kinds of hymns.
5. Peace is this night until down is beginning.
One only needs to read "he / she" in the context of
Luxenberg's word meanings, this means: "Jesus" instead
of "Quran", and an entirely different meaning comes
out: the Christmas story (which, incidentally, several
researchers suspected before Luxenberg had).
[Arbitrary interpretation: tanazzalu - tunazzilu]
Incidentally, Luxenberg correctly states that the
Quranic "tanazzalu" (angel [[extraterrestrials]]) are
correctly the "tunazzilu" - again the devil is in the
detail of tiny, subsequently incorrectly set signs.
[Arbitrary interpretation: Peter's Letter in the
Quran]
Another "dark", that is, not understood sura is the
sura 108. For Mr. Luxenberg [18]
[18] Christoph Luxenberg: The Syro-Aramaic
Reading of Quran (original German: Die
syro-aramäische Lesart des Korans); Berlin 2007,
p.304ff.
it is a misreading of the Aramaic version of the
Peter's Letter (chapter 5, verses 8-9) and,
undoubtedly, pre-quranic. The text "belongs to the
foundation from which the Quran originally existed as
a Christian-liturgical book". According to Luxenberg's
opinion, everything has to be rated like this - what
is traditionally rated as "first Meccan period".
[Arbitrary interpretation: Summary]
The sending down of the Quran in the fateful night
shows as clearly as the complete mistranslation of the
states in paradise and the emergence of the headscarf
claim, on how shaky legs the traditional Quran
interpretation stands: in many cases it concerns
nothing more than the private opinion of the men like
Mr. Tabari and others - today absolutized as the word
of God.
It also becomes clear that for any Quran science the
knowledge of Arabic language is not enough because the
original language of big parts of the Quran is not
Arabic but Aramaic.
2.9. The Quran comes from a Bible
summary (Qeryan)
[The Quran has Christian roots: comparing names]
And it is becoming always clearer that the Quran has
Christian roots.
In this Quran Moses is mentioned 136 times, Mary 34
times, Jesus 24 times, and Muhammad 4 times. In 1999,
a Viking discovery discovered an Arab coin dating back
to 766 - 130 years after "Muhammad" - with the
inscription "Musa rasul Allah" [p.43] ("Moses is the
Messenger of God") [p. 43-44]. Moses, Jesus and Mary
(altogether 194 times mentioned) are very present in
the theological part of the Quran. Researchers
conclude that there is a great deal of Christian
thought in the theological part of the Quran.
[The Quran has Christian roots: The Quran is "part
of the scripture"]
The original Quran itself does not see itself as a
proper script in the sense of a holy book of a new
religion. Several suras make it clear that the Quran
understood itself as "part of Scripture," but never as
"Scripture itself."
In the sura 75:17 it says: "It is up to us to compose
and teach the lesson with parts of this scripture for
teaching."
41:3: "A script that we have translated into an Arabic
reading."
5:68 demands: "You people of scripture, you have no
foundation ... until you have delivered the Torah and
the Gospel, and what has been sent down to you from
your ... Lord."
The suras 3:4, 15:1, 9:111 are presenting their way of
thinking a similar way.
That means, the original program of the Quran was to
confirm "the scriptures," the Torah and the Gospel.
Sura 2, already familiar to us, begins with the words:
"This is the book in which there is no doubt ..."
Anyone who can read the sura knows that it is
precisely not "this", but "that". But "this" does not
mean "that", and with "that" is not meant something
immediately obvious. Again, this is a clear reference
to a "different" book, though none of the hundreds of
thousands of daily recitators would like to accept
this.
[The Quran has Christian roots: the word "Quran"
and the mentioned biblical figures - the original
Quran is "Qeryan" and was a summary Bible version]
"Quran" comes from the Aramaic "Qeryan," which means
"Lectionary," a liturgical book containing selected
texts from the "Scriptures", Old and New Testaments.
One may assume as a starting material the Diatessaron,
a liturgical book of the Sysian Christians, in which,
however, the four Gospels were quasi pulled together
in one short form. The Quran also often speaks of the
"gospel," though there were several.
The Quran is also a summary, like the Diatessaron.
This is evidenced by numerous passages, such as where
are [S.44] warnings from the bad luck of Lot. It is
referred to an incident, but there is no explanation
of the connections. This means that the knowledge of
the corresponding story was presupposed as known.
The structural names of the "Quran" are borrowed from
the word "Qeryan": "sura" (sura), "aya" (verse). And
as a small but fine detail on the edge also typical
separation signs of Syrian liturgical scriptures can
be found, a 4 pointed cross made of 4 points
which comes also in the
Quran as a 4 pointed cross
. In the early days, "Quran"
should not be understood as the holy book of Islam, as
we are used to, but simply as a term for a liturgical
book of the Syriac Christian Arabs.
[The Quran has Christian roots: the old Bible
version "Queryan" and added radical suras from
Medina]
The Qeryan, the liturgical book, was originally an
excerpt of the Old and New Testaments for the Arab
Christians. In the course of time, numerous local
traditions were added to the basic Christian theme,
such as the extensive legal discussions in the
so-called suras of Medina.
[The Quran has Christian roots: the chapters were
sorted by size and interpreted as suras - that's how
the confused chaos "Quran" was born]
The original theological statement was deformed by the
editorial processing of later Arab editors - almost
beyond recognition. They collected everything that was
available about literature and oral traditions, but
they left a innumberable plenty of interpretation
possibilities. This is a clear indication that the
texts in their possession were written in a language
that they did no longer understand sufficiently. At
the same time these exegetes were grammarians. What
they created in their schools in Kufa and Basra was
nothing less than the Quranic Arabic and the Arabic
writing.
What we find in early Quran scripts are the texts of
the Arab Christians and their theology. What we have
in our later Arabic edits is the book of a separate
religion. Now the "Queryan" had become the "Quran",
only now the Quran was born with it's writing and
content in the world. However, in a kind of reading
which could not be proved in the texts.
[The Quran has Christian roots: the different
versions of the confused Quran]
But with the various interpretations it was not over,
too big was the scope that the editors had left open.
There was no "official" version, there were soon
hundreds of competing Quran editions, and they still
exist today.
2.10. The Quran versions: Othman did
not exist - Istanbul - Cairo
[Koran versions: Othmanian Quran does NOT exist -
and rumors report about a book burning under a
Caliph Othman]
So, what [p.45] is the real holy book of Islam, to be
literally followed?
In 1924, the Al-Azhar University of Cairo issued an
edition of the Quran that should be identical to the
"Othmanian Quran." This "Othmanian Quran" is named
after the 3rd Caliph Othman (644-656), who - according
to tradition - put together the first valid version of
the Quran and burned all other circulating versions as
false. According to the Islamic dogma [according to
the dictatorship of Saudi Arabia], this "Othmanian
Quran" already should have the spelling that is still
valid today, including the vowel signs and diacritic
punctuation. However, an "Othmanian Quran", that is a
proven version of Othman, does not exist.
[Quran versions: The "Standard Quran" from Istanbul
- the "New Fantasy Quran" from Egypt - the Quran
dictatorship from Egypt since 1924]
For centuries, the Ottoman-Turkish interpretation of
the correct reading dominated [the Islamic world]. The
standard Quran of the 19th century, for example, was a
version produced in large numbers in Istanbul being
printed in lithography. However, this version was
different so far from the traditional reading thus
vehement protest aroused, especially in Egypt. In
response to this blasphemous script, the Al-Azhar
Quranic school began working on its own version.
The basis was an unspecified version of the Quran from
1886. After the text "of this noble Quran" the Cairo
Committee provides the source in traditional Islamic
style: It is called a chain of authorities to stand
for the correctness of the text, referring back to the
Caliph Othman himself as well as a secretary of the
Prophet. (Some other editors, as witnesses to the
correctness, call on the Archangel Gabriel
[[extraterrestrial]] himself). The proof of the
correctness is thus here as usual with "guarantees"
and not with investigations of the text itself. It
should be emphasized that not one of the existing
older manuscripts was consulted for continuing at
least with the earliest texts - an independent age
determination of existing texts did not exist anyway.
One took only a contemporary Quran and a revision was
proceeded on the basis of orthography rules. These
were the rules of [[Mr.]] al-Sigistani (died in 928)
and of the Spaniard al-Dani (died 1053). Based on
these rules, the "correct reading" of the Othmanian
original should be found out. It was far from reaching
the 9th century [p.46], in the time of Othman there
was nothing of this, because the texts to revise were
well revised with the rules which were followed by
themselves. A wonderful conclusion without any effect
turning in a circle.
The "Othmanian Quran" thus remains pure fiction, the
Cairo Quran can not claim the authenticity of the
prophetic tradition.
In 1924, the authentic Quran of Cairo was proclaimed
the only authorized model for all other prints of the
Sunni Muslim Quran.
[Quran versions: Quran texts without vowel sign]
We do not know any Othmanian Quran, but we know many
early Quran texts. None of them has vocal signs, none
is written in Quranic Arabic of the today's Muslim
understanding, and all Quran texts are different. In
the 1970s in Sanaa, Quran fragments from the 8th
century were found with a different order than that
found in the official Quran of Cairo. Even from the
10th century, numerous versions of the Quran have been
proven to be different from the official version [19].
[19] Bayard Dodge: The
Fihrist of al-Nadim; New York 1979
The oldest Koran texts known to us date back to the
early 8th century, but the exact dating raises certain
problems [20].
[20] Radiocarbon dating (C14) only says
something about the age of the parchment, nothing
about the time of its inscription.
[Quran versions: Cairo Quran is younger than from
the 7th century - the first four caliphs are nowhere
mentioned outside of Islam]
There is no doubt that the Cairo Quran version can not
date back to the 7th century, but goes back to a
younger version. This must be seen in the context that
we are not aware of either an "Othmanian Koran" nor
any trace of the Caliph Othman himself. These first
four caliphs have only data registered in religious
texts of Islam but nowhere else in other cultures
[[and thus seem absolutely fictitious, because a
caliph as head of government is always mentioned in
the documents of neighbors]].
2.11. Forbidden Quran research in
Islam - the "unbelievers" are the Quran researchers
[Forbidden Quran research in Islam: Iranian
cultural department "knows" that the Quran comes
from Muhammad]
In the Islamic public and literature, the difference
from Quranic passages and Quranic editions is
completely ignored. "We know" can be read in a
document published by the Iranian cultural department
[21],
[21] Tabataba'i, Sayyid:
Cultural Department of the Islamic Republic of Iran;
Bonn 1986
"that the Quran that is at our disposal today [p.47]
is the same that was gradually revealed to the prophet
14 centuries ago, so the Quran in itself needs no
history as confirmation of its credibility and
authenticity."
The next circular conclusion. And in other words,
research on the Quran is as superfluous as a goiter,
since the result is already established.
Source research is avoided by Islamic scientists as
far as possible, when the danger of a backward
crossing of the timeline of the ominous "Othmanian
Koran" threatens, because it [[Islamic science]] has
only the task to confirm dogmas. For the Islamic
theology the "Othmanian Koran" is a taboo.
[Forbidden Quran research in Islam: Altikulac in
Istanbul calls two different versions "similar" and
wants to "adapt" them one to each other and then he
wants to prohibit any further research]
The Turkish scholar Tayyar Altikulac compared a
certain modern Quran edition which he considered as
correct with a manuscript which was stored in the
Topkapi Palace of Istanbul, which is also attributed
to Caliph Othman. The investigation was carried out
according to the scientific normal procedure. But
there came out so many deviations that the two texts
could not be identical, so the manuscript could not be
the original of Othman, as hoped. Instead of all this,
Dr. Altikulac declared the editions as "similar" and
pointed out that the verses were always passed on by a
"competent mouth" ("fam muhsin"), who always knew how
to read them correctly.
The affirmation that written differences would be
unimportant because only the pronunciation would count
(which can no be proved any more) is a popular
explanation for the differences of the versions. In
the meantime, there is no doubt that despite of the
existence of an oral tradition, the tradition also
took place in writing. The loyal researcher must have
felt a bit scary, because he suggested that the two
versions "would be similar" and then he even suggested
to "prohibit further investigation". This is called
scientificity.
[Forbidden Quran Research: German universities
refuse independent research on confused Quran]
But you do not necessarily have to travel to an
Islamic country to find similar thinking. Mrs.
Angelika Neuwirth, director of the project [S.48]
"Corpus Coranicum" [22]
[22] See the English CIA Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_Coranicum
(German CIA Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_Coranicum)
said in an interview that it would be a waste,
"ignoring the inestimable knowledge and experience of
Islamic Quran scholars that we as outsiders hardly
ever fully appropriate." This can be agreed, as long
as we do not lose the fact that the people of whom she
speaks see their task to search only respecting
present dogmas and the transgression of the Othmanian
limit lies beyond the imaginable for them.
Furthermore, Ms. Neuwirth underlines that her team
also respects the "divine founding myth of the Quran".
It's as if Darwin did his evolutionary research with a
Bible under his arm.
[Prohibited Quran research: German universities see
Quran researchers as "outside of science" (!!!)]
[Mr.] Neuwirth-Adlatus Marx does not even bother with
such hair-splitting. He considers people with basic
historical source analysis being applied also for
Islamic texts, really as "outside of science" [23].
In: The Mirror (original
German: Der Spiegel), 17.9.2008
Is this orientalism? Or Orient?
[Forbidden Quran research - but Bible criticism is
allowed]
Biblical criticism has existed for centuries. Aware of
the problem of the handwritten dissemination of a book
over a long period of time, there has long been a
desire to tap into the original content of the faith.
To this end, efforts were made to find timely texts as
possible. Throughout the centuries, explorers,
scholars, believers in the faith, and adventurers in
search of the original scriptures searched the culture
of the Orient. For example, the Saxon nobleman
Constantine of Tischendorf, on behalf of and on behalf
of the Tsar on the way, found a biblical manuscript
from the 4th century in the Sinai monastery in 1844
[24].
[24] [A fake protector of Muhammad]
He also found a protection letter from the Prophet
Muhammad for the convent, signed with his handprint.
The document turned out to be pure forgery, but this
helped the monastery to survive in the midst of its
not so friendly environment.
Highly educated monks compared the different texts and
tried to filter out the original meaning.
[Forbidden Quran research: Christian leader Mr.
Cusanus mentioning gospel content]
Mr. Nicolaus Cusanus (1400-1458) proposed to study the
Quran for original [copied] contents from the Gospels.
[Forbidden Quran research: Luther considers Quran
research impossible because of confusion]
Mr. Martin Luther thought [p.49] little of it because
the texts were already inseparably mixed. This shows
that in the scientific corpus of the Church, the grass
roots of the Quran were always considered as
Christian, but it also makes it clear that in biblical
research it was considered as essential to get as
close to the real events as possible by means of texts
from this time. That should be a matter of course for
any religious research.
[Forbidden Quran research: The Cairo dictatorship
continues - source research is prohibited - only
"unbelievers" are Quran scholars]
In contrast, Quran research, disregarding factual
objections, still refers to the issue of Cairo today.
However, this is, as has been shown, the summary or
sorting out of fonts in the 9th century. Source
research, one of the most fundamental scientific
instruments, is still non-existent in the Islamic
world today. What is operated is a show for self
esteem and not critical analysis on a scientific
level, which counts also for religions considering
historical questions. As the only book religion, Islam
has the luxury of ignoring newly emerged texts and new
research findings.
[[Supplement: Judaism and Christianity
must also rewrite Bible and Torah since a long time
already. Book about the fake of the Old Testament: The
Bible Unearthed - and the fake of the New
Testament is proved with the "Jesus"
line in Jerusalem]].
When things get tough, they defend with absurd
explanations or explain the superfluity of any further
discussion. The result is that the historical
expertise is now outside the religious community with
"nonbelievers".
The Quran did not come into the world from one day to
another, as the pious legend wants to make us believe
it. Like all sacred books, the Quran has a long
history with many modifications behind it.
Syro-Aramaic original texts, Aramaic-Arabic
transitional forms, the "Qeryan" of the Arab
Christians, Persian influences, local traditions,
various Arabic arrangements: all this makes up the
"Quran ". About 25 percent of the text is, as we
already know, completely misinterpreted. As one may
assume from the few, but simply spectacular, results
of the just beginning scientific Quran research, the
false readings should make up a large percentage of
the Quran . There is a multitude of manuscripts that
have not been studied at all, and one can expect the
appearance of even more previously unknown texts.
[p.50]
[Forbidden Quran research: the manuscripts - first
printing in Kazan in Russia in 1802]
The first printed version of the Quran was in 1802 in
Kazan in Russia. Because over three quarters of its
history, the Quran was handwritten - with the typical
errors. Not two handwritten texts of such size are
identical. This is not a special Quranic case. All
books of this kind, which have been handed down over
such a long period, have the same fate.
Now there is a huge problem when a perfect text with
identity without errors is claimed for this old text
being created by Muhammad until the Cairo version of
1924. There was proven many times that this is not the
case. But the Islamic credo is going on like this, and
this is the core of criticism in this matter.
[Forbidden Quran research: changes are "blasphemy"
- the Quran version from Cairo is blasphemy]
There are proven thousands of changes, errors,
forgeries and mistakes. According to Islamic
teachings, any change to the original text is a
blasphemy. If you take this statement seriously, then
the official Quran of today is just only a blasphemy.
[p.51]
