The Qur'an: Misinterpreted, Mistranslated, and Misread. The Aramaic Language of the Qur'an

Gabriel Sawma has written a book which has one main thesis: The Qur'an was NOT written in Arabic, but in Aramaic!This thesis is not just "controversial" but inflammatory, since it directly implies one of the biggest blunders in the history of religions. You might look at it as The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran: A Contribution to the Decoding of the Language of the Koran on steroids.The author appears to be in control of his sources and his languages. His written English is a bit weak, and the book could use a good editor, but the ideas are explosive and cannot be contained.As just one example, Sawma joins Luxenburg in demolishing the idea of the 72 virgins supposedly waiting for Muslim martyrs. Muslim "scholars" have misread this for centuries. What really is waiting for those suicide bombers? Delicious water and raisins.If nothing else, the book is an excellent reference. We learn with fascination that the first biography of Muhammad appeared some 200 years after his death, while Jesus was the subject of four detailed biographies, beginning some 30 years after his death and resurrection.For language fans, this is not a book to be missed!

The scope of the book is interesting and the task at hand is big. The author of the book needs to republish it with several important changes:1. Research better the etymologies using known dictionalies of Syriac, Aramaic, and other semitic languages. Certainly, some translations and etymologies are not correct in the book.2. Justify arabic interpretations not using the modern translators, such as M. Sher Ali, but authoritative classical commentaries, based on which modern translations render their work3. The book only has transliterations. Instead, it should offer also original wording using Aramaic/Syriac script, arabic script. Perhaps, make the font smaller.4. Is there a website that discusses the material? The suggested one in the back of the book is unfortunately not operational.5 stars nevertheless.

The Qur’an: Misinterpreted, Mistranslated, and Misread. The Aramaic Language of the Qur’an by Gabriel Sawma is a provocative and scholarly work that challenges traditional interpretations of the Quran. Sawma, an expert in Aramaic and Middle Eastern law, argues that many passages of the Quran are better understood when read in the context of Aramaic, rather than Arabic.Sawma’s central thesis is that the Quran, traditionally viewed as a purely Arabic text, contains numerous words and phrases that are more accurately interpreted through the lens of Aramaic. This perspective is significant because Aramaic was widely spoken in the Near East before and during the early Islamic period, and it heavily influenced the Arabic language. Sawma meticulously analyzes various Quranic passages, offering alternative readings that often diverge significantly from classical interpretations.One of the key arguments in the book is that the Quran’s language and structure reflect a strong Aramaic influence. Sawma provides numerous examples where traditional Arabic interpretations of Quranic verses are either unclear or contradictory. By reinterpreting these passages in Aramaic, he claims to uncover meanings that are more coherent and contextually appropriate. For instance, Sawma suggests that certain Quranic terms and phrases, which have been the subject of much debate among scholars, can be better understood when viewed through an Aramaic lens.The book is divided into several chapters, each focusing on different aspects of Sawma’s thesis. He begins with an overview of the historical and linguistic context, explaining the prevalence of Aramaic and its influence on early Arabic. Subsequent chapters delve into specific Quranic verses, providing detailed linguistic analyses and proposing alternative translations. Sawma supports his arguments with extensive references to ancient texts, lexicons, and historical records, demonstrating a deep scholarly rigor.Despite its scholarly approach, The Qur’an: Misinterpreted, Mistranslated, and Misread has been met with mixed reactions. Some scholars and readers appreciate Sawma’s innovative perspective and the light it sheds on obscure Quranic passages. They argue that his work opens new avenues for understanding the Quran’s historical and linguistic background, contributing to a more nuanced appreciation of Islamic scripture.However, the book has also faced significant criticism. Many traditional Islamic scholars reject Sawma’s thesis outright, arguing that it undermines the Quran’s divine nature and the authenticity of its Arabic language. Critics also point out that Sawma’s reliance on Aramaic can sometimes lead to speculative and less convincing interpretations. The book’s controversial nature has made it a focal point of intense academic and theological debate.In conclusion, The Qur’an: Misinterpreted, Mistranslated, and Misread is a thought-provoking and challenging work that invites readers to reconsider long-held assumptions about the Quran’s language and origins. Sawma’s meticulous scholarship and bold reinterpretations offer a fresh perspective on Islamic scripture, making the book a valuable contribution to Quranic studies. Whether one agrees with his conclusions or not, Sawma’s work undeniably enriches the ongoing discourse on the Quran’s historical and linguistic context

The book covers in the first few chapters the location of various languages, for example, that Syriac is a dialect of Aramaic in the northeast region of mesopotamia. It provides an explanation for the name of cities, such as Damascus= Stream of damm= stream of blood, etc.. it is fascinating. It describes the various tribes of antiquities and how they interacted. Then, it delves in to the text in the Quran and it was fascinating to see how many words in it are actually aramaic.

The first few chapters in the book are very informative, but the rest is repeatation. It's more for languag academics. But what's obvious, is that the author is very knowledgable.

Prof. Sawma's work is nothing short of brilliant. His remarks on the influence of Syriac Aramaic on the Arabic text are breathtaking. The academic quality of this book more than warrant a 5 stars rating for this book.However, I really wish that in the future a 2nd edition appears (not only another reprint of the same edition), but with better typesetting and editorial work, so that the text is more appealing to the eyes. Many thanks for your work.

This is an enlightening work. I recommend every Muslim and non-Muslim to read it, scholars and lay people alike. Reading the Quran from a Syriac - Aramaic perspective indeed makes it sound more humane and more respectful of non-Muslims than a contemporary Arabic reading of it. A Syriac - Aramaic reading of the Quran is one way to prove that the literalist Arabic reading of the Quran is the cause of the extremist ideologies that are currently dominant in the Middle East.

Mr. Sawma's argument was not reasonably convincing. He argued that the roots of the arabic words of the Qur'an were based on the Aramaic due to the fact that the Arabic belongs to the Semitic language group. Therefore, the Qur'an should be read and interpreted as an Aramaic written book not the Arabic. This answered below.1) His argument failed when he compared Arabic alphabets with other Semitic ones, since there is no similarity in this case.2) Then, he went back to compare the meaning of some Arabic words with the rest of the Semitic ones. I disagree with his presentation. Even if we assume that words in Arabic language have their roots in the Semitics, we cannot conclude that the meaning of the Arabic words are the same as those words in Semitic. The reason is based on the fact that Arabic language is much younger than other Semitic ones, and when a younger language borrows words from its root basis, in most cases the meaning of words changes. For example, as a Farsi speaking individual, I have seen too many Persian words that have their roots in 2000 - 3000 years back. But their today's meanings are not the same as those old words. Even, among Farsi spoken people in a variety of regions, the same word has many different meanings.3. Arabic language has a through structured grammar. Mr. Sawma failed to compare the Arabic grammar with other Semitic ones. He just mentioned diacritics only.4. Too many words in Arabic have several meanings. Therefore, based on those meanings of the Arabic words of the Qur'an, we see a variety of interpreters in all over the Islamic World, and also from the year of birth of Islam. Due to this fact, we now see too many Islamic sects that each and every of them claims that its interpretation of the Qur'an is the right one.5. It is not proven as to when the Qur'an was formed 1,400 years ago as a book we have, today. There are too many contradictions, flaws and false claims in the Qur'an such as the Man's Creation, Overnight Journey of the Prophet Muhammad to the Al-Aqsa Mosque, Building of the Ka'ba, Queen of Sheba's Visit to Solomon Country and her becoming a Moslem, introducing Solomon as a Monotheist, Distribution of Bequest, Prophet Muhammad's Womanizing, etc.Based on the above, I disagree with Mr. Sawma's argument in "The Qur'an: Misinterpreted, Mistranslated, and Misread." We need a better and solid argument to evaluate the Qur'an.

Very happy with my purchase, this book it's up there amongst the best thank you very much indeed very much appreciated.

Great scholarly opus. In depth study of Koran beginnings including inclusion of original translation Aramaic Christian Hymns, later retranslated loosely into Arabic by orthodox Muslim scholars to hide their source & origin.

Great book

Ótima obra, excelente pesquisa para elucidar as verdadeiras origem linguísticas do Al-Quran, e sua conexão com a Tanakh judaica.

More pieces in the puzzle.