So, apparently, this is more analogous to the Bible than it is a C.S. Lewis commentary.
More specifically, this sounds analogous to a book called The Unvarnished New Testament, which I read in an honors English class when I was a sophomore in college. It was anything but prosetylizing; I couldn’t even tell you what the professor’s beliefs were. I, an agnostic at best, and my college roommate, a strong, evolution-denying Christian, both made it through the class with our beliefs intact.
I like what UNC was trying to do, and I wish they could have done it, but there was no way it was going to happen. I wish they hadn’t caved. Oh well, that much sweeter when Kentucky spanks them like whiny little bitches on the basketball court.
Context: The pagans referred to are those that have broken covenants with Muslims and made war against them or allied with their enemies. May be modified by the following passages:
(But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for God loveth the righteous” (Holy Qur’an 9:4)
and…
“If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of God; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge” (Holy Qur’an 9:6).
This deals specifically with apostates to Islam ( “hypocrite” in the Qur’an usually = “apostate” ).
Same context as 9:5 above. To quote:
*It has been shown in the previous section of this article that these verses and other verses of similar meaning specifically pertain to the polytheists, the Jews and the Christians of the Prophet’s times. They had knowingly denied the truth and were as a result given this punishment. Today, in the absence of the Prophet (sws), it cannot be known whether people are knowingly denying it; therefore, no action can be taken against them. Muslims must continue to develop friendly relations with them and cordially invite them to Islam without threatening their existence or authority. *
You’ve actually combined two suras above. Some more translations for you:
*002.190 YUSUFALI: Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. PICKTHAL: Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. SHAKIR: And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.
002:191 YUSUFALI: And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. PICKTHAL: And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. SHAKIR: And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers. *
“idolatry” doesn’t seem a very popular translation in terms of 2:191. “Persecution” or “oppression” seem preferred. I’ve salso seen yet more translations that also agree with that.
context: Don’t fight wars of aggression and/or be moderate in war, defend yourself if oppressed or attacked. Seems straightforward enough and not terribly unreasonable. “Unbelievers” is a bit of an oxymoron in this context as the Qur’an commanded and assumes ( incorrectly of course, as it turned out ) that Muslims would not take up arms against Muslims.
Those are some possible contexts for you. I am sure there are others and I am not a Qur’anic scholar. If you want me to debate the original Arabic you’re talking to the wrong guy.
The OP presupposes that an “education” (a good one) is anything handed to freshman students. The author gives no description of the book, only that it is a book about islam. Well, you and others may overlook the obvious and naively assume that all books are the same. I question what type of book it is and describe (or try to describe) that the book may not include the um, most interesting parts of the koran. If the students had word of this, then they are correct on this fact alone, not to mention that if a theological christian book was forced on the students there would be no question that it would be shot down. That you can’t deny.
Cool, stuff Kimstu, and this is way along the lines of what I was looking for. But basically I get that it’s okay to kill if attacked; "The ones I’ve seen say “You may kill those who wage war against you, and you may evict them whence they evicted you.”. Upon reading some of this site, I’m not sure the the US isn’t the ‘aggressor’ and worthy of being fought against, considering OBL’s definitions.
DD:But basically I get that it’s okay to kill if attacked […] Upon reading some of this site, I’m not sure the the US isn’t the ‘aggressor’ and worthy of being fought against, considering OBL’s definitions.
And just why the bloody hell should we advocate the reading of the Qur’an in the light of the “definitions” of OBL or any other murderous nutball Muslim terrorist, any more than we should advocate the reading of the Bible in light of the “definition” of murderous nutball Christian terrorists such as the Army of God? If a religious text is to be judged on the basis of how murderous nutballs interpret it and the damage they do in its name, we should have burned every last copy of the Bible centuries ago.
Sorry, Monty. Although it certainly seems that way, my rant wasn’t directed solely at you. I’ve heard things in a similar vein from others, so my rant extended beyond what you said (as in, I realize that you didn’t claim the South had a monopoly on bigotry). I apologize for my vitriolic tone.
I meant the “font of tolerance” to be sarcastic. I don’t think tolerance is a bad thing (on the contrary). It’s just that it’s apparent that California, like the rest of us, has its own problems with racism, xenophobia, and the like.
No problem. FWIW, one of the problems is that a huge group of people complain that we California state-tax payers voted against paying for education for illegal aliens because we’re xenophobic AND racist. 'Tain’t true. I, for one, voted against paying for that because it’s BS that our state is forced to provide a free education to illegals. I’m sure some moronic bigots who happen to reside in the Golden State decided to vote against because, well, they’re moronic bigots and they thought that’s the thing to do to “preserve the race” or some such nonsense. But I doubt that’s the majority of those who voted to withold taxpayer provided education to someone who’s intentionally breaking the law. Why does the state have to pay for the failure of the feds?
MPSIMS: Last time I was at the Admissions and Records office of my junior college (in California), there was a young lady who wasn’t too happy that she didn’t qualify for the freebie in-state tuition for illegals–seems she’d only attended a California high school for two years.
Well, since I have actually read the testimony of several posters to this thread regarding their experiences with Christian Scripture and with explanatory books on Christianity, I can deny it quite easily. It is one of the most common lies from the Religious Right that only non-Christian books are included in school curricula.
Okay, I recently posted a thread in IMHO that died a lonely death. In it I asked what English translation of the Koran is considered the best. I’m assuming there is more than one. Since some of you here seem to know the Koran, maybe you can answer.
I read the Yusuf Ali translation, but a large number of scholars will tell you that there is no English translation without significant flaws. I guess it’s time to learn Arabic.
Here is a link that gives a brief breakdown of the various translations, but there are many other sites which will do the same (and many of them disagree with each other).
I liked the Mohammed Marmaduke Pickethall one as that’s the first one I got. And a fun one to read was the one that ordered the suras in the order they were received instead of in the traditional manner.
Why don’t you go get a copy of it from the library or buy it and read it. At the very least, look up the summary of it on www.amazon.com. As far as Sell’s book containing or not containing the most interesting parts of the Qur’an, that is up to debate. What constitutes interesting for you may not be interesting to another. Looking at the introduction to Sells’ text, it would appear that he seeks to show readers what is interesting to Muslims and non-Muslims who live in Muslim societies about select parts of the Qur’an.
Sells writes on pages 3-4 of Approaching the Qur’an: The Early Revelations (1999):
Mods, I apologize if I’ve quoted too much from the text. This is just one paragraph out of Sells’ book. If you feel it violates copyright laws or anything, just delete it.
It appears that Sells wants to present to an audience unfamiliar with Arabic or the Qur’an the beauty of the spoken language and the poetry in a few of the early and best known Suras of the Qur’an. And this is quite a challenge, as Classical Arabic and modern Arabic words have several shades of meaning. Just reading that much from the introduction, I’ve learned a bit about the Qur’an that I didn’t know. If Sells is to be believed–and I imagine someone’s bullshit meter would’ve gone off by now if he’s just blatently lying–the Qur’an’s not just a religious text, but rather it is an oral art form that has influenced the very fabric of many Muslim cultures. If you dare to read the paragraph from Sells’ text that I’ve cited, can you tell me how much more you’ve learned about the Sells’ book and about the Qur’an than you did before you read it?
celestina, well, I don’t get the book from the library because I don’t care to read the book. You may because you find it interesting.
If the book was slanted towards islam should I expect to read in the summary something indicating it so? I’m not saying it is, but I can’t say it isn’t.
**tomndebb[\b]
"Well, since I have actually read the testimony of several posters to this thread regarding their experiences with Christian Scripture and with explanatory books on Christianity, I can deny it quite easily."
I must have missed the post that stated in fact that at UNC other such books, but christian books, were forced onto students. In fact, didn’t Juniper200 say it’s required for all freshmen students and not only for a particular non-required class, as would make more sense and less of a big to do?
"It is one of the most common lies from the Religious Right that only non-Christian books are included in school curricula."
You think UNC is a “right wing” dominated school? If I could I’d give you a tour, we’d start on Franklin St and end on Franklin St, for the food…of course. Kimstu
"And just why the bloody hell should we advocate the reading of the Qur’an…"
Well, kimstu, I understand that the book in question is only a book about the koran. But the advocation part is right. Why should books of any religion be forced on students at a public university? Does this mean that next year a christian book is okay to be forced on the freshmen students?
Neither did I, in the sense of ever being a full-time student there. But I took a class there when I was living and working in Newport News, so I imagine it’s possible for a Va.Beach resident to do the same, if he’s willing to take a break from hanging out with his crew.
No, all it assumes is a reasonably intact system of higher education.
College professors get to be college professors primarily by demonstrating expertise and contributing to new knowledge in their fields. These are the persons who select the course texts, on the basis of that expertise. Someone who goes to college has attained competence in some basic areas of knowledge, but still knows a hell of a lot less than the profs. The student is paying the profs to act as guides into some of that higher learning.
If you’ve chosen a particular outfit to act as your guides on this sort of journey, and they fail you in a sufficiently clear-cut way, you may have a case down the road. But if you’re going to question their judgment from the get-go, why did you choose that outfit to guide you in the first place, rather than the competition down the road at NC State, UNC-Charlotte, or wherever?
I think Fretful’s right: this is about the ‘consumer’ approach to education. The problem is, buying a liberal-arts education (which is what UNC is selling) isn’t like buying a microwave oven. With the microwave, I know exactly what my needs are. But with a liberal-arts education, you don’t, really. A liberal-arts education isn’t just about preparing oneself for a career; it’s about being made to look at and think about things you often wouldn’t have thought about on your own.
Sounds to me like this course is right up that alley. Too bad UNC wussed on it.
Double Darren, I declare I am confused! You said you question Sells’ book, and I have no problem with folks questioning books. However, unless I miss my guess, one cannot effectively question a book or conclude whether or not it is interesting if one does not take the time to read it! Do you understand what I’m saying? :mad: It is intellectually honest and a fundamental of serious critical thinking to read a text that one is trying to question, rather than to be shooting around in the dark and assuming that one knows what the author is talking about.
Now, I took the time to quote for you Sells’ own words about what his purpose is in the book in question. You appear to be interested in Suras, as you’ve been posting in this thread asking folks questions about Suras from the Qur’an, yet you cannot take the time to go to the library and get a copy of Sells’ book, which does contain from the Muslim perspective the most popular and best known Suras from the Qur’an, and it comes with a CD with recordings of folks speaking these select Suras in Arabic.
Also, I asked you after I quoted Sells’ if that paragraph of his prose taught you something that you didn’t know before you read it, and you didn’t answer that question either. Hmmm. I wonder why? I wonder if you really are interested in learning about the Suras in the Qur’an. I’m not saying this book is the only way to do so, but it is a start. I just don’t understand what it is exactly you are doing, but my bullshit meter is going off where your intentions in this thread are concerned, and you need to think about that before you post again.
Why don’t you go get a copy of it from the library or buy it and read it. At the very least, look up the summary of it on