The Syro-Aramaic Reading Of The Koran: A Contribution to the Decoding of the Language of the Koran

I have read the Quran in Arabic multiple times, and found it very daunting (besides boring) and confusing due to its incoherence and usage of weird word and expressions. It turns out the Quran was originally written in a much more comprehensive language, a hybrid of Arabic and Syriac, but then it was mis-read into what we have today after introducing the diacritical marks and "upgrading the font".I would have given a 5, because the research and information it contains is gold! The book is quite technical, containing a lot of latin expressions to explain grammar. Features Arabic, Syriac and Hebrew scripts. I am an Arabic speaker, very familiar with the Quran, I know Biblical Hebrew very well and basics of Western Syriac, and yet I found it not so easy to follow in certain pages. I think it could have been structured and simplified a bit more.

I have been studying the Koran for the last seven years. Christoph Luxenberg's well written book comments on many things in the Koran with which various scholars have problems.I am specially interested in two problems. In the six translations I have of the Koran, in sora 3:07 there is a statement about uncertainty of meaning, and that only the Lord knows the meaning of parts of the Koran. In his introductory book "The Islamic Qur'an: for Humanity?", page 17, John Rightson suggests that Muhammad knew the meaning and the later writers of the Qur'an after he died did not. Christoph Luxenberg clears this up and points out that the writers of the Koran used a different dialect and did not understand the Arabic dialect Muhammad used. This was in any case at a time when Arabic writing was not standardized. Arabic consisted of various spoken dialects. (Luxenberg p. 68,70 107,107). The other problem is with the way young men are taught that various murders will be rewarded by virgins to rape in Paradise. Others have suggested that that is based on a mistranslation. In chapter 15 Luxenberg discusses possible meanings at length. He gives the impression that "white grapes" is probably correct and not "virgins".I give only four stars because Luxenberg seems only to be interested in the linguistics and to be writing in great detail for philologists. I would prefer a bold statement for the benefit of mankind, "white grapes" are your reward, not "virgins to rape".

Important book which needs to be longer - it's long enough! - so some sequels are needed. And then a break down of all their contents into a digest would be good. Why it's taken 1,000 years to do such an obvious piece of scholarship requires critiquing.

For an alternate view on the translations, this is a must for scholars.

Very good quality material, I have not read it yet.

This is not a lightweight read. One has to persevere and plod through it but its contents could not be more significant.

This was a highly specialised book for philologist without sufficient explanation of how the key words appear to mean in the different languages and related background for non-specialist readers. Perhaps some more examples of how classical and poetic Arabic differs from Koranic Arabic might be helpful to follow the arguments.In short not for the ordinary reader but perhaps extremely useful for the specialist.

... this book is very important, but not for the fainthearted and I guess it's not meant to be. First and foremost it's a scientific, linguistic exercise (reference book) and should be taken as such, meant as a serious "food for thought" stating the obvious that a written language just about to be established through Islamic texts, classical Arabic, by tribes people traveling and dealing with civilizations and traditions literally much more advanced, must have been affected by likes as the addressed Syro-Aramaic language. Syro-Aramaic was a major language among communities of that time, and much earlier, the Middle East, Central Asia and Kerala and must have had some impact in writing and speech of Islamic texts ... and since there are, admittedly, many verses and texts in the Qur'an that can't be translated and understood properly, as they are written, it's worth the try to look somewhere else, like the bespoken Syro-Aramaic. I can't judge if all of Christoph Luxemburgs interpretations withstand stringent (scientific) criticism, but they sure make sens of the nonsensical ... therefore no one should be surprise that the 72 virgins, promised to the just in heaven, in Christoph Luxenbergs reading are always fresh "white raisins" of crystal clarity ... which is, incidentally, a religious "tradition" documented in a Coptic fresco, from the 5th century, on the southern wall of the ancient Coptic (Syrian) church in Dair al-Suryan ... as I said: this is a very important book and worth the consideration of its findings.