The Qur’an

Well, that was… disappointing? I’m not entirely sure what I expected, since I didn’t have a deep existing knowledge of the Qur’an’s actual contents. But maybe I thought there would be a little more narrative development, philosophical depth, or literary appeal. Instead, it felt mostly like a repetitive reaffirmation of biblical material, with an intense emphasis on absolute monotheism and some additional religious/legal framework.

The structure made it difficult to enjoy as literature. Unlike the Old Testament, there aren't any sweeping story arcs. The surahs (chapters) are arranged roughly from longest to shortest, not chronologically or narratively. And the text circles around the same themes again and again: God is merciful and forgiving; God is all-knowing and all-powerful; there is only one true God; judgment is coming; believers will be rewarded; and disbelievers will regret rejecting the message.

Biblical figures like Moses, Abraham, Noah, and Jesus appear repeatedly, usually as part of a recurring pattern: God sends a messenger, people reject him, judgment follows, and the faithful are vindicated. These stories often seem to be told in large part as a way of introducing Muhammad as the latest prophet in that same line of authority. Very Joseph Smith-like.

There is a very strong emphasis on helping orphans, the poor, and the vulnerable. The focus on orphans was so frequent that I eventually had to look it up and confirm that, yes, Muhammad himself was orphaned.

I thought the text left a concerning amount of room for problematic interpretation, particularly on the subjects of women and violence. I was trying to figure out what makes these elements of the Qur'an feel even more unsettling than the Bible, because the Bible also has a lot of questionable material related to women and violence. And I think the reasons are that (1) the Qur'an more frequently frames its problematic passages as direct guidance rather than just as part of historical narrative; and (2) the Qur'an tends to be implemented in a more literal and unchanging way than the Bible in modern practice.

For example, there are multiple passages that imply that one man is equivalent to two women in various legal circumstances, such as in matters of inheritance or as contract witnesses. This may have actually been fairly progressive guidance in the medieval middle east, but it doesn’t give women a lot of room for advancement in the modern era.

There are other passages that might make sense when read with the full context, but that leave a whole lot of room for uncomfortable interpretation. For example, in Surah 2, it says, "Fight in God's cause against those who fight you, but do not overstep the limits: God does not love those who overstep the limits. Kill them wherever you encounter them, and drive them out from where they drove you out, for persecution is more serious than killing." This passage is framed with instruction not to be the one to initiate violence, and to only fight those who are actively persecuting you, but it clearly leaves a lot of room for interpretation about what "persecution" is and what it means to "overstep the limits".

Some of the verses related to the treatment of women are even less defensible. Another passage in Surah 2 says, "Your wives are like your fields, so go into your fields whichever way you like", with the only missing context here being that it also instructs men to avoid sex with women during menstruation until they are clean. And a passage in Surah 4 says, "If you fear high-handedness from your wives, remind them of the teachings of God, then ignore them in bed, then hit them," which allows for a lot of leeway for interpretation on what constitutes "high-handedness" or how severe the hitting should be.

Maybe my biggest takeaway is that there really does not seem to be enough substance to the Qur'an alone to form the basis for the entire basis for the Islamic religion as it exists today. A lot of Islamic belief and practice seems to depend more on cultural systems, traditions, and texts that were later developed to supplement the Qur'an. Based on the Qur'an alone, I would think Islam would look a lot more like Judaism, because Muhammed spends most of his time confirming the example and teachings of previous Judeo-Christian prophets. I’m no expert though. Just another Joe Rogan commenting on things I’m unqualified to assess.

Book author: Muhammad