The Glorious Quran: How many Muslims have read it in a language they understand?

[miandadrules]

I’ve always been taken a back by how few Muslims have read, let alone studied the Quran in language they understand.

I’m curious to know how many on here have and what is the cause for so few to do so?

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Are you taken back by how few Jews have read the Old Testament? How few Christians have read the New Testament? How few Buddhist, and Hindus, and Sikhs have read there holy scriptures?

The reason is most people simply follow the religion of there parents, and while they might be religious, they are not necessarily interested in being religious scholars.

 

[miandadrules]

Are you taken back by how few Jews have read the Old Testament? How few Christians have read the New Testament? How few Buddhist, and Hindus, and Sikhs have read there holy scriptures?

The reason is most people simply follow the religion of there parents, and while they might be religious, they are not necessarily interested in being religious scholars.

Yes I am taken a back by them also. Especially, if they want to engage in a theological debate.

To read the primary text in a language you understand is scholastic?

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Yes I am taken a back by them also. Especially, if they want to engage in a theological debate.

To read the primary text in a language you understand is scholastic?

To read it in any language is scholastic because for most people there religion is simply how they choose to express there spirituality. And people prefer following the religion of there parents for the most part, so they don't go into too much detail.

And its a part of there cultural heritage, like the holidays, the architecture, music, the names you give your children. Whether you are buried or cremated. The food you can eat, and the food you cant eat.


The people who want to preach their religion to others, or say that there religion is superior to other religions, should of course have knowledge about it, but for the common man there is no need to go that far.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

If you are going to study the Quran, you should of course read it in a language you understand. Reading or Memorizing the Quran in Arabic, when you cant understand it has zero value in 2020. However there was value in memorizing it before the invention of the printing press.

 

[sweep_shot]

I’ve always been taken a back by how few Muslims have read, let alone studied the Quran in language they understand.

I’m curious to know how many on here have and what is the cause for so few to do so?

I have read it in English. I can also read Arabic (I need translation to understand though).

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Taking in to account transliteration is extremely complex, being able to decipher it in its original form is left to the scholars. Most people know what the main points are. It's why we have schools of thought. Ghazali is often used as the resource for understanding the core of Islamic teachings. There are those who say Hadith is irrelevant. Well theory is nothing without practice.

 

[MenInG]

I’ve always been taken a back by how few Muslims have read, let alone studied the Quran in language they understand.

I’m curious to know how many on here have and what is the cause for so few to do so?

Bro given your background in debates about Islam - may we ask the exact reason for this thread?

 

[miandadrules]

Bro given your background in debates about Islam - may we ask the exact reason for this thread?

Sure. Nothing underhanded, I will make my intentions perfectly clear.

What I have found in these discussion is that very few have actually read the primary text. When I have these discussions I hear a lot of rhetoric which can’t be substantiated.

When I quote verses from the Quran, the response is usually of disbelief and accusations of Islamaphobia.

If the religion is going to shape every aspect of your life, I would think it is imperative that you have at least read the primary text in a language they understand.

There is a reason why such analysis is discouraged.

More than happy to change the language if you feel it is too inflammatory.

 

[miandadrules]

Taking in to account transliteration is extremely complex, being able to decipher it in its original form is left to the scholars. Most people know what the main points are. It's why we have schools of thought. Ghazali is often used as the resource for understanding the core of Islamic teachings. There are those who say Hadith is irrelevant. Well theory is nothing without practice.

I disagree that most know the basics, outside of rituals.

Do you think it’s wise to place the most important part of your life, without question in the hands of scholars, whose entire livelihood is based on them keep the masses indoctrinated?

 

[MenInG]

Sure. Nothing underhanded, I will make my intentions perfectly clear.

What I have found in these discussion is that very few have actually read the primary text. When I have these discussions I hear a lot of rhetoric which can’t be substantiated.

When I quote verses from the Quran, the response is usually of disbelief and accusations of Islamaphobia.

If the religion is going to shape every aspect of your life, I would think it is imperative that you have at least read the primary text in a language they understand.

There is a reason why such analysis is discouraged.

More than happy to change the language if you feel it is too inflammatory.

If some person ( a believer ) asked me this my view would be I am ashamed that I dont know more about this great religion and its text. So the answer on this thread will depend on faith pov.

 

[miandadrules]

If some person ( a believer ) asked me this my view would be I am ashamed that I dont know more about this great religion and its text. So the answer on this thread will depend on faith pov.

That’s my point.

Very few have even read, let alone studied the Quran, let alone the Hadith.

Also, such enquiry is actively discouraged. “Don’t allow doubt to creep in” is something many are told.

To abrogate such responsibility to individuals who have an interest to keep the masses ignorant, doesn’t seem wise.

 

[miandadrules]

Taking in to account transliteration is extremely complex, being able to decipher it in its original form is left to the scholars. Most people know what the main points are. It's why we have schools of thought. Ghazali is often used as the resource for understanding the core of Islamic teachings. There are those who say Hadith is irrelevant. Well theory is nothing without practice.

Quran states that it is simple to understand.

 

[Greenstorm]

The issue is that literal translations do not do justice to the actual text of Quran. One has to read tafaseer (interpretations) for contextual meaning of Arabic words and verses. These tafaseer ,naturally bring with them subjectivity so the reader has to sift through the biases of translators in order to get to truth. Whole exercise becomes scholastic and thus avoided by most.

 

[GoUgandaCranes]

Inherently us humans, like some/many of the species spread around us, are impacted by herd mentality. A lot of Muslims aren't very knowledgable about Islam other than the basic tenants of their faith; and for that reason alone, it's mandatory in Islam to learn about Islam the religion. Ignorance is not a plausible excuse when it comes to Islamic law hence the fault lies on each individual within their intellectual capacity. The families of yesteryear would take time and elders would teach kids Quran and Deen and I'm from the lucky few who got this education from their home.

The entire concept of The Day of Judgment manifests this concept, you and you alone as an individual are answerable for everything that you have done (this includes actions and intent) and what you haven't done (pursued knowledge within your ability etc.). It's important to understand that Islam is clear that a person won't be answerable for things that aren't in their ability to control, hence, if a person loses their mind, they don't have to offer Salat; or if someone doesn't have the financial means, give Zakat and etc.

So to answer your question, it's obligatory for people who have the mental aptitude, to study Quran and understand the tenants of Islam in a language that they understand. If they don't, the fault lies on them. If they do, they should continue to strive for more.

 

[MenInG]

That’s my point.

Very few have even read, let alone studied the Quran, let alone the Hadith.

Also, such enquiry is actively discouraged. “Don’t allow doubt to creep in” is something many are told.

To abrogate such responsibility to individuals who have an interest to keep the masses ignorant, doesn’t seem wise.

Its like this bro - either you are blessed with faith, or you are not. This belief is also part of our faith. When you have no faith, you will look for the slightest doubt.

 

[miandadrules]

Its like this bro - either you are blessed with faith, or you are not. This belief is also part of our faith. When you have no faith, you will look for the slightest doubt.

How one attains such faith is a whole new topic for discussion.

How does what you have said explain why 90-99% of Muslims have never read the Quran in a language they understand? It’s not too difficult to read 300 pages in 70 years. I mean not saying there should be some feel analysis, I’m simply saying it’s never read from cover to cover in once in a lifetime.

If what you say holds true, then surely it would be completely different.

I think it’s actively encouraged not to do so.

 

[KB]

It might well be that only a minority of Muslims today have read the Quran in a language that they understand, yet seen through the longer lens of history we can also point out that never before have so many Muslims engaged in scripture as have done so in the present age.

Oral transmission of the Quran has been a central feature of Muslim education. Even today, in Seyyed Hossein Nasr’s words, the Qur’an is “an auditory reality which touches the deepest chords in the souls of the faithful, even if they are unable to read the Arabic text.”

The transmission of Islamic knowledge had traditionally been oral and person to person. In this system an enormous amount of respect was accorded to teachers. So deep was this tradition and belief in its basis as what constituted trustworthy knowledge that Muslims were in fact quite slow to take to print.

This began changing in the nineteenth century. There were no doubt many reasons but the decline of Muslim power must rank as one. For over a thousand years Islam seemed united with power. In just over hundred or so years this power was swiftly curtailed with the onset of Western colonialism. It now became imperative, as Francis Robinson writes, that “Muslims should know, much more clearly and much more certainly than before, how to behave as Muslims. The printing press was a crucial means to this end.”

Take the ulama of the Deoband in the late nineteenth century. In the absence of Muslim state power, this movement emphasised individual conscience and knowledge of God’s word as the ultimate guarantor of Islamic society. For the ulama personal adherence to the sharia was the bedrock of their imagined Muslim community operating outside the realm of the colonial state. The ulama of course envisaged a special place for themselves as experts and mediators but their efforts led both to a greater emphasis on engaging with scripture and an inward turn, where “Muslims had to ask themselves regularly whether they had done all in their power to submit to God and carry out His will in the world,” to quote Robinson again.

But the impact of print also enabled those outside the religious establishment to speak on behalf of Islam. “I regard it as my duty to do all I can, right or wrong,” so declared Sayyid Ahmed Khan “to defend my religion and to show the people the true, shining countenance of Islam. This is what my conscience dictates and unless I do its bidding, I am a sinner before God.” Sayyid did not belong to the ulama and was attacked mercilessly by them but he represented a new trend which was enabled by easier access to Islamic knowledge, which enabled lay people to engage with scripture and to make arguments on religious grounds.

In this regard, we note that the Pakistan movement was led not by the religious establishment but by the modernist elite that regularly invoked Islam in their speeches. This is true even of Jinnah in the last decade of his life. In one speech in 1945 to mark Eid al-Fitr, Jinnah spoke of Islam as “not merely confined to the spiritual tenets or doctrine or rituals and ceremonies. It is a complete code regulating the whole Muslim society, every department of life, collectively and individually.” Significantly the modernist thrust was revealed by the statement “every Musalman should possess a copy of the Quran and be his own priest.”

I realise I have swerved away from the topic at hand but I think historical context is often useful.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

Started reading and discussing it from the start in Urdu about 2 months ago. Almost half way through it

 

[MenInG]

How one attains such faith is a whole new topic for discussion.

How does what you have said explain why 90-99% of Muslims have never read the Quran in a language they understand? It’s not too difficult to read 300 pages in 70 years. I mean not saying there should be some feel analysis, I’m simply saying it’s never read from cover to cover in once in a lifetime.

If what you say holds true, then surely it would be completely different.

I think it’s actively encouraged not to do so.

One can say that they may not understand the edicts of Quran - and for that Muslims can ask for help from others who can understand and interpret but the faith in the religion and the hereafter is what drives many of us - I for one will not question what is in the Quran - whether I can or cannot understand it by reading the Arabic text (although poor excuse as so much info is available on the internet)

 

[MenInG]

It might well be that only a minority of Muslims today have read the Quran in a language that they understand, yet seen through the longer lens of history we can also point out that never before have so many Muslims engaged in scripture as have done so in the present age.

Oral transmission of the Quran has been a central feature of Muslim education. Even today, in Seyyed Hossein Nasr’s words, the Qur’an is “an auditory reality which touches the deepest chords in the souls of the faithful, even if they are unable to read the Arabic text.”

The transmission of Islamic knowledge had traditionally been oral and person to person. In this system an enormous amount of respect was accorded to teachers. So deep was this tradition and belief in its basis as what constituted trustworthy knowledge that Muslims were in fact quite slow to take to print.

This began changing in the nineteenth century. There were no doubt many reasons but the decline of Muslim power must rank as one. For over a thousand years Islam seemed united with power. In just over hundred or so years this power was swiftly curtailed with the onset of Western colonialism. It now became imperative, as Francis Robinson writes, that “Muslims should know, much more clearly and much more certainly than before, how to behave as Muslims. The printing press was a crucial means to this end.”

Take the ulama of the Deoband in the late nineteenth century. In the absence of Muslim state power, this movement emphasised individual conscience and knowledge of God’s word as the ultimate guarantor of Islamic society. For the ulama personal adherence to the sharia was the bedrock of their imagined Muslim community operating outside the realm of the colonial state. The ulama of course envisaged a special place for themselves as experts and mediators but their efforts led both to a greater emphasis on engaging with scripture and an inward turn, where “Muslims had to ask themselves regularly whether they had done all in their power to submit to God and carry out His will in the world,” to quote Robinson again.

But the impact of print also enabled those outside the religious establishment to speak on behalf of Islam. “I regard it as my duty to do all I can, right or wrong,” so declared Sayyid Ahmed Khan “to defend my religion and to show the people the true, shining countenance of Islam. This is what my conscience dictates and unless I do its bidding, I am a sinner before God.” Sayyid did not belong to the ulama and was attacked mercilessly by them but he represented a new trend which was enabled by easier access to Islamic knowledge, which enabled lay people to engage with scripture and to make arguments on religious grounds.

In this regard, we note that the Pakistan movement was led not by the religious establishment but by the modernist elite that regularly invoked Islam in their speeches. This is true even of Jinnah in the last decade of his life. In one speech in 1945 to mark Eid al-Fitr, Jinnah spoke of Islam as “not merely confined to the spiritual tenets or doctrine or rituals and ceremonies. It is a complete code regulating the whole Muslim society, every department of life, collectively and individually.” Significantly the modernist thrust was revealed by the statement “every Musalman should possess a copy of the Quran and be his own priest.”

I realise I have swerved away from the topic at hand but I think historical context is often useful.

Very informative as usal KB - thanks for this.

 

[kaayal]

I recite Quran along with my Malayalam Tarjama only, unless if i am in a mosque where the translation is not available and Only Quran is there, I recite it in Arabic. I don’t understand the Arabic language tbh and i feel that there is no point in reading something if you don’t understand an ounce of it.

 

[Kroll]

I recite Quran along with my Malayalam Tarjama only, unless if i am in a mosque where the translation is not available and Only Quran is there, I recite it in Arabic. I don’t understand the Arabic language tbh and i feel that there is no point in reading something if you don’t understand an ounce of it.

Let's be honest though, the classical Arabic in the holy Qur'an is beautiful and flows magnificently. If you read it regularly then you can pick up the meaning of certain words and phrases.

Most people will also know the meaning of the namaz and components of it like Surah Al-Fatiha. If you're going to learn the short Surahs by heart, then meaning of these should be studied.

Going back to the topic, if you have read the whole glorious Qur'an in its original form, then yes one should strive to understand the meaning of the verses.

 

[Belawal2014]

Not many I suspect, it's why most of us, including me are cultural/nominal Muslims. Personally there are some stuff in the Qur'an which is troubling for sure, such as the verse allowing sex slaves, the beating of wives by their husbands and semen coming from the backbone and the ribs, etc.

I guess the greatest accomplishment of the Quran is its abstractness (Mountains as pegs, holding up the sky without pillars, sun setting in a murky pool etc etc). For example. Surah Lahab where all 5 verses are just cursing the uncle of prophet Muhammad PBUH. Without any context/tafsir or ahadith, if you simply read the quran alone you wouldn't know what's going on.

A lot of it also non-linear which makes it hard to follow.

My issues with the Quran is wrt to its preservation and compilation and whether that was done accordingly by Abu Bakr.

The second issue I have is with the transmission and propagation of ahadiths that came yeaaaars after the prophet died. There's no way in verifying whether the integrity of ahadiths were preserved since after all, the means of propagation were fallible humans. It's akin to playing the broken telephone in primary school were the end result is completely way off from what was initially intended. In that sense, it's quite possible that the Islam being followed today is way off from what prophet Muhammad practiced.

Now personally, I believe religion is more than anything a personal connection and simply what feels right to a person. Do I know 100% that prophet Muhammad was divinely inspired? Nope. Do I care? Not really. Do I know 100% that Allah exists? Nope. Do I care? Not really. I guess you could call me an agnostic Muslim, if that's even a term

What are your thoughts on Quran/Islam [MENTION=1080]miandadrules[/MENTION] ?

 

[kaayal]

Let's be honest though, the classical Arabic in the holy Qur'an is beautiful and flows magnificently. If you read it regularly then you can pick up the meaning of certain words and phrases.

Most people will also know the meaning of the namaz and components of it like Surah Al-Fatiha. If you're going to learn the short Surahs by heart, then meaning of these should be studied.

Going back to the topic, if you have read the whole glorious Qur'an in its original form, then yes one should strive to understand the meaning of the verses.

I know the meaning of prayers and also the small surahs but while we recite it daily we are often reading the bigger ones, it’s there where I meant I don’t understand. May be because i am very bad or not interested in learning new languages. I just use the easy option of looking into it’s translation.

 

[Kroll]

What I find amusing, probably more irritating is all these do gooder Muslims who think they are morally and spiritually better than you but don't know the meaning of anything.

You will know them as well.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

Not many I suspect, it's why most of us, including me are cultural/nominal Muslims. Personally there are some stuff in the Qur'an which is troubling for sure, such as the verse allowing sex slaves, the beating of wives by their husbands and semen coming from the backbone and the ribs, etc.

I guess the greatest accomplishment of the Quran is its abstractness (Mountains as pegs, holding up the sky without pillars, sun setting in a murky pool etc etc). For example. Surah Lahab where all 5 verses are just cursing the uncle of prophet Muhammad PBUH. Without any context/tafsir or ahadith, if you simply read the quran alone you wouldn't know what's going on.

A lot of it also non-linear which makes it hard to follow.

My issues with the Quran is wrt to its preservation and compilation and whether that was done accordingly by Abu Bakr.

The second issue I have is with the transmission and propagation of ahadiths that came yeaaaars after the prophet died. There's no way in verifying whether the integrity of ahadiths were preserved since after all, the means of propagation were fallible humans. It's akin to playing the broken telephone in primary school were the end result is completely way off from what was initially intended. In that sense, it's quite possible that the Islam being followed today is way off from what prophet Muhammad practiced.

Now personally, I believe religion is more than anything a personal connection and simply what feels right to a person. Do I know 100% that prophet Muhammad was divinely inspired? Nope. Do I care? Not really. Do I know 100% that Allah exists? Nope. Do I care? Not really. I guess you could call me an agnostic Muslim, if that's even a term

What are your thoughts on Quran/Islam [MENTION=1080]miandadrules[/MENTION] ?

What makes you think that the most virtuous person to walk the earth after the prophets wouldn’t be sincere in his compilation of the Quran. All evidence of his relationship with the prophet (pbuh) suggests nothing but undying loyalty.

As for things that you mention which are “troubling”, a lot of it is either lost in translation or misinterpreted.
Here is an explanation of the verse which you say encourages “the beating of wives” which is such a wrong way to put it. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/theconv...m-actually-says-about-domestic-violence-77245
The rights and regard for women in Islam are well known through the actions of the prophet as well.

I do agree that it is important to read not just the translation of the Quran but the Tafsir as well. Because there are people who have a much better understanding than us.

 

[sjahmed23]

I try to listen to the english translation while walking outside. It's very difficult to follow some passages and understand their true meaning. I don't understand everything or as much as I would like to, there is alot of ambiguity which is open for interpretation as with the case of alot of literature written at that time. However, Islam to me is about discipline and values that it enforces, if you follow it in true spirit you will live a pretty good life.

 

[Belawal2014]

What makes you think that the most virtuous person to walk the earth after the prophets wouldn’t be sincere in his compilation of the Quran. All evidence of his relationship with the prophet (pbuh) suggests nothing but undying loyalty.

As for things that you mention which are “troubling”, a lot of it is either lost in translation or misinterpreted.
Here is an explanation of the verse which you say encourages “the beating of wives” which is such a wrong way to put it. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/theconv...m-actually-says-about-domestic-violence-77245
The rights and regard for women in Islam are well known through the actions of the prophet as well.

I do agree that it is important to read not just the translation of the Quran but the Tafsir as well. Because there are people who have a much better understanding than us.

Well I'm certainly not looking to get into a debate with you. Your religion is for yourself, and mine is for myself.

I find it amusing however, that Muslims are quick to label prophet Muhammad PBUH as the best and the most virtuous person to walk the face of the earth even though he lived some 1400 years ago. I struggle to see how they make these conclusions? None of us were alive during his time so we don't have any anecdotal evidence, so we're left to go by what our ancestors say and believe it to be the blind truth.

I think it's perfectly fine not to have an answer for every single thing. So if you ask me whether or not prophet Muhammad PBUH was the most virtuous person EVER? I simply do not know. but i think it's unquestionable that he did some questionable things like having sex slaves (read into Mariya Al Qibtiyaa), trading slaves, the massacre of the Banu Qurayza tribe where boys that had JUST started puberty were all massacred and wives and children were all enslaved. His marriage to Aisha (him being 50+, her 9 according to various ahadiths), and his marriage to his adopted son's ex-wife are quite weird as well.

I bring up the preservation of the Qur'an simply because I feel like it would have been much better if the Quran was compiled under the supervision of Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

I think it's a common excuse that apologists make that whatever is troubling is either "lost in translation or misinterpreted". The Quran, the final word of god SHOULD be easy to read and understand and should be for ALL of mankind not just arabs, so the whole lost in translation is a moot point.

I do agree that Prophet Muhammad for his time was a revolutionary with a lot of virtuous qualities and he did emphasize those through his actions. But I also will not turn a blind eye to all the things he did which make me uneasy.

As I stated earlier, for me, Islam is a more personal connection with god, and I am at peace the most when I prostrate to god. Whether or not that god really exists for certain? I don't know and couldn't care less.

 

[chacha kashmiri]

I've read the Quran in English and it's tafsir
It's difficult to understand certain verses unless reading the context of imam kathir and qurtubi etc

There also tafsir by less classical scholars like sayyid qutb, maududi and the lives of ghamidi which are not concensus based translations but nevertheless have involved huge research

English based Muslims have done good translations including pickthall and yusuf ali


Having read it I wouldn't say I lnow the Quran everytime it's recited I think you need to learn Arabic for that

 

[Bewal Express]

Quran states that it is simple to understand.

And the themes are-For me it's the message of the oneness of God, this is the final message, do good in this earth because to Allah you will return and Allah sees everything. Don't go astray like those that have done before you.

 

[Bewal Express]

Well I'm certainly not looking to get into a debate with you. Your religion is for yourself, and mine is for myself.

I find it amusing however, that Muslims are quick to label prophet Muhammad PBUH as the best and the most virtuous person to walk the face of the earth even though he lived some 1400 years ago. I struggle to see how they make these conclusions? None of us were alive during his time so we don't have any anecdotal evidence, so we're left to go by what our ancestors say and believe it to be the blind truth.

I think it's perfectly fine not to have an answer for every single thing. So if you ask me whether or not prophet Muhammad PBUH was the most virtuous person EVER? I simply do not know. but i think it's unquestionable that he did some questionable things like having sex slaves (read into Mariya Al Qibtiyaa), trading slaves, the massacre of the Banu Qurayza tribe where boys that had JUST started puberty were all massacred and wives and children were all enslaved. His marriage to Aisha (him being 50+, her 9 according to various ahadiths), and his marriage to his adopted son's ex-wife are quite weird as well.

I bring up the preservation of the Qur'an simply because I feel like it would have been much better if the Quran was compiled under the supervision of Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

I think it's a common excuse that apologists make that whatever is troubling is either "lost in translation or misinterpreted". The Quran, the final word of god SHOULD be easy to read and understand and should be for ALL of mankind not just arabs, so the whole lost in translation is a moot point.

I do agree that Prophet Muhammad for his time was a revolutionary with a lot of virtuous qualities and he did emphasize those through his actions. But I also will not turn a blind eye to all the things he did which make me uneasy.

As I stated earlier, for me, Islam is a more personal connection with god, and I am at peace the most when I prostrate to god. Whether or not that god really exists for certain? I don't know and couldn't care less.

Do you find the themes difficult to understand? If the Koran Was written like any other book, you would be the 1st to say that anyone could write this. I think that you need to face the fact that nothing will convince you about our beloved Prophet and the Koran. You just have to hope that you are right, otherwise it will be quite hot.