What do you think?
Rate this book
The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary
The Study Quran is a historic and ground-breaking work that offers:
A new English translation of the Quran that is accurate, accessible, and reliable in how it renders this sacred text
A wide-ranging verse-by-verse commentary that brings together the most respected and distinguished traditions of metaphysical, spiritual, theological, and legal interpretation of the Quran within Islam
A helpful introduction to each surah that provides an overview and background of its teachings
Essays by fifteen internationally renowned scholars on how to read and understand the Quran and its role in shaping Islamic civilization
A beautiful two-color, two-column design that presents the sacred text and commentary in the spirit of traditional Quran manuscripts
Maps, a time line of historical events, comprehensive indexes, and other features to aid reading
The Study Quran provides a service never before available to readers of English: a scholarly yet accessible resource where one can quickly and easily explore how Muslims have interpreted the Quran through the centuries to the present day. An invaluable resource for scholars and students of all backgrounds, and especially to Muslims who want to deepen their understanding of their own tradition, The Study Quran is a much-needed guide in a time when confusion about the Quran and Islam is so prevalent.
From the Introduction
The message of the Quran is at once sapiential and practical, legal and moral, concerned with everyday problems as well as the spiritual and intellectual life. The Sacred Text deals with every aspect of human concern, from the deepest intellectual questions and the most lofty spiritual issues to the mundane matters of ordinary life. It is at once therapeutic and didactic. It is a message of glad tidings (bishārah) and also of warning (nadhr). That is why it calls the prophets, including the Prophet of Islam, both harbingers or bearers of glad tidings (bashīr) and warners unto humanity (nadhīr). It is a guide for every conceivable aspect of human life, action, and thought and yet also a comfort for the soul of believers. As the central theophany of Islam, a theophany whose every aspect is considered sacred, the Quran is the source of all that is properly speaking Islamic. As the living Word of God, it is the ubiquitous companion of Muslims from the cradle to the grave and provides the spiritual and religious space within which they are born, breathe, live, and die.
I did not want the work to be confined or limited confessionally, ethnically, or geographically. It was to be universal and at the same time traditional, that is, expressing traditional Islamic views and therefore excluding modernistic or fundamentalist interpretations that have appeared in parts of the Islamic world during the past two centuries. I set out to produce a text that reflects how Muslims have understood the Quran during their long history and how those Muslims who remain traditional, which means most of them, do so today.
—Dr. Seyyed Hossein Nasr
A new English translation of the Quran that is accurate, accessible, and reliable in how it renders this sacred text
A wide-ranging verse-by-verse commentary that brings together the most respected and distinguished traditions of metaphysical, spiritual, theological, and legal interpretation of the Quran within Islam
A helpful introduction to each surah that provides an overview and background of its teachings
Essays by fifteen internationally renowned scholars on how to read and understand the Quran and its role in shaping Islamic civilization
A beautiful two-color, two-column design that presents the sacred text and commentary in the spirit of traditional Quran manuscripts
Maps, a time line of historical events, comprehensive indexes, and other features to aid reading
The Study Quran provides a service never before available to readers of English: a scholarly yet accessible resource where one can quickly and easily explore how Muslims have interpreted the Quran through the centuries to the present day. An invaluable resource for scholars and students of all backgrounds, and especially to Muslims who want to deepen their understanding of their own tradition, The Study Quran is a much-needed guide in a time when confusion about the Quran and Islam is so prevalent.
From the Introduction
The message of the Quran is at once sapiential and practical, legal and moral, concerned with everyday problems as well as the spiritual and intellectual life. The Sacred Text deals with every aspect of human concern, from the deepest intellectual questions and the most lofty spiritual issues to the mundane matters of ordinary life. It is at once therapeutic and didactic. It is a message of glad tidings (bishārah) and also of warning (nadhr). That is why it calls the prophets, including the Prophet of Islam, both harbingers or bearers of glad tidings (bashīr) and warners unto humanity (nadhīr). It is a guide for every conceivable aspect of human life, action, and thought and yet also a comfort for the soul of believers. As the central theophany of Islam, a theophany whose every aspect is considered sacred, the Quran is the source of all that is properly speaking Islamic. As the living Word of God, it is the ubiquitous companion of Muslims from the cradle to the grave and provides the spiritual and religious space within which they are born, breathe, live, and die.
I did not want the work to be confined or limited confessionally, ethnically, or geographically. It was to be universal and at the same time traditional, that is, expressing traditional Islamic views and therefore excluding modernistic or fundamentalist interpretations that have appeared in parts of the Islamic world during the past two centuries. I set out to produce a text that reflects how Muslims have understood the Quran during their long history and how those Muslims who remain traditional, which means most of them, do so today.
—Dr. Seyyed Hossein Nasr
2048 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2015
1464 people are currently reading
3626 people want to read
About the author
Seyyed Hossein Nasr
247 books725 followersSeyyed Hossein Nasr was born on April 7, 1933 (19 Farvadin 1312 A.H. solar) in Tehran into a family of distinguished scholars and physicians. His father, Seyyed Valiallah, a man of great learning and piety, was a physician to the Iranian royal family, as was his father before him. The name "Nasr" which means "victory" was conferred on Professor Nasr's grandfather by the King of Persia. Nasr also comes from a family of Sufis. One of his ancestors was Mulla Seyyed Muhammad Taqi Poshtmashhad, who was a famous saint of Kashan, and his mausoleum which is located next to the tomb of the Safavid king Shah Abbas, is still visited by pilgrims to this day.
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, currently University Professor of Islamic Studies at the George Washington University, Washington D.C. is one of the most important and foremost scholars of Islamic, Religious and Comparative Studies in the world today. Author of over fifty books and five hundred articles which have been translated into several major Islamic, European and Asian languages, Professor Nasr is a well known and highly respected intellectual figure both in the West and the Islamic world. An eloquent speaker with a charismatic presence, Nasr is a much sought after speaker at academic conferences and seminars, university and public lectures and also radio and television programs in his area of expertise. Possessor of an impressive academic and intellectual record, his career as a teacher and scholar spans over four decades.
Professor Nasr began his illustrious teaching career in 1955 when he was still a young and promising, doctoral student at Harvard University. Over the years, he has taught and trained an innumerable number of students who have come from the different parts of the world, and many of whom have become important and prominent scholars in their fields of study.
He has trained different generations of students over the years since 1958 when he was a professor at Tehran University and then, in America since the Iranian revolution in 1979, specifically at Temple University in Philadelphia from 1979 to 1984 and at the George Washington University since 1984 to the present day. The range of subjects and areas of study which Professor Nasr has involved and engaged himself with in his academic career and intellectual life are immense. As demonstrated by his numerous writings, lectures and speeches, Professor Nasr speaks and writes with great authority on a wide variety of subjects, ranging from philosophy to religion to spirituality, to music and art and architecture, to science and literature, to civilizational dialogues and the natural environment.
For Professor Seyyed Hossein Nasr, the quest for knowledge, specifically knowledge which enables man to understand the true nature of things and which furthermore, "liberates and delivers him from the fetters and limitations of earthly existence," has been and continues to be the central concern and determinant of his intellectual life.
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, currently University Professor of Islamic Studies at the George Washington University, Washington D.C. is one of the most important and foremost scholars of Islamic, Religious and Comparative Studies in the world today. Author of over fifty books and five hundred articles which have been translated into several major Islamic, European and Asian languages, Professor Nasr is a well known and highly respected intellectual figure both in the West and the Islamic world. An eloquent speaker with a charismatic presence, Nasr is a much sought after speaker at academic conferences and seminars, university and public lectures and also radio and television programs in his area of expertise. Possessor of an impressive academic and intellectual record, his career as a teacher and scholar spans over four decades.
Professor Nasr began his illustrious teaching career in 1955 when he was still a young and promising, doctoral student at Harvard University. Over the years, he has taught and trained an innumerable number of students who have come from the different parts of the world, and many of whom have become important and prominent scholars in their fields of study.
He has trained different generations of students over the years since 1958 when he was a professor at Tehran University and then, in America since the Iranian revolution in 1979, specifically at Temple University in Philadelphia from 1979 to 1984 and at the George Washington University since 1984 to the present day. The range of subjects and areas of study which Professor Nasr has involved and engaged himself with in his academic career and intellectual life are immense. As demonstrated by his numerous writings, lectures and speeches, Professor Nasr speaks and writes with great authority on a wide variety of subjects, ranging from philosophy to religion to spirituality, to music and art and architecture, to science and literature, to civilizational dialogues and the natural environment.
For Professor Seyyed Hossein Nasr, the quest for knowledge, specifically knowledge which enables man to understand the true nature of things and which furthermore, "liberates and delivers him from the fetters and limitations of earthly existence," has been and continues to be the central concern and determinant of his intellectual life.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 79 reviews
December 31, 2015
Like fundamentalists of every flavor, radical Islamists come to their wars of ideas armed with proof-texts—those decontextualized bits of scripture that can be strung together in chains to justify whatever one happens to believe. In the current historical moment, this means acts of violence and cruelty in the name of one of the world’s great religions.
An irony of our age is that most Western opponents of radical Islam use the same proof texts to justify bigotry against all Muslims. Just Google “Islam and Violence,” and you will find hundreds of proof-text pages with quote after quote from the Quran seeming to justify, and even require, acts of violence—which, of course, happens to be the same thing that most Islamist terrorists believe. Rarely do enemies agree so completely on first principles.
The big problem though, is that (like most assertions supported by chains of oversimplified proof texts) the assertion is false. Or, at least, it is not always true, and it is not true in the ways that both violent Muslims and violent anti-Muslims assume when they start mining the Quran for reasons to fight.
Into this rhetorical context comes the long-anticipated, ten-years-in-the-making, Harper Study Quran. Based on the wildly successful Harper Study Bible, and edited by practicing Muslims who are also trained and respected scholars, the Study Quran offers itself as an the first English translation to incorporate significant commentary designed to contextualize nearly every ayah (verse) in the sacred book.
And I’ll be dag-nabbed if it doesn’t do it. By my rough estimates, about 90% of the book consists of verse-by-verse commentary keyed to the text by a practical (and merciful) two-color printing scheme that keys the text to the notes with bright red numbers.
As I read this new Quran (and I read it straight through because I am weird like that), I found that I could not realistically read all of the commentary and still follow any kind of narrative flow. I read most of the text without the commentary, glancing down at the footnotes only when I felt that I needed more context to understand the basic meaning of a passage.
The Study Quran supports this kind of reading, but it is really designed for intensive study of a passage or a theme. The editorial apparatus makes this kind of reading very easy. A comprehensive (and multi-colored) index allows readers to follow themes and ideas through the text, and a set of essays at the end of the volume brings together concepts like “Quranic Ethics, Human Rights, and Society” and “Conquest and Conversion, War and Peace in the Quran.”
But however one reads it, the Study Quran’s overwhelming strength is that it provides, for nearly every verse in the Quran, both the context of its original recitation and a survey of 1400 years of scholarship.
To understand why this is important, consider how the Quran is structured. Unlike the Bible, it contains very little sustained narrative, and the individual surahs (chapters) were not all revealed as discrete units, so each ayah has an independent context of original reception.
The Quran, in other words, lends itself to proof texting even better than the Hebrew or Christian Bibles—and that’s saying something. The editors of the Study Quran patiently and painstakingly reconstruct, to the extent possible, the original context of each recitation in the entire book and make that reconstructed context available to any reader willing to devote the time attention required to understand it.
The results are remarkable, and they have the wonderful added effect of limiting the ability of both adherents and detractors to manipulate the book’s meaning through uncritical prooftexting.
Here is one example (though I wish I had the space for a dozen) of what happens when a passage often used to justify both violence and Islamophobia undergoes the Study Quran’s contextualizing treatment. In the 33rd Ayah of Surah 5 (The Table Spread), we read the following injunction:
Pretty gruesome, to be sure, and also pretty clear. But the editors of the Study Quran want us to know two things that no other single-volume English translation will tell us: 1) that this passage was recited in a specific instance and for a specific purpose; and 2) that there is a long tradition of Muslim scholarship and jurisprudence interpreting this verse.
The context was a specific and extremely bloody attack upon the Muslim community in Madinah. After accepting a group of Bedouins into the community under the pretense of conversion, Mohammad allowed them to depart when they claimed that they were not comfortable with city life. He sent camels with them “for milk and sustenance” and a Muslim camel herder to help them on their way. “Once outside the city, however, they brutally maimed and killed the camelheard and made off with the camels the Prophet had given them to use (293).
In context, then, the punishments in the passage were mandated against specific individuals who had acted with impunity to terrorize the Muslim community. And, the editors explain, the verse has NOT normally been interpreted as a general process for dealing with apostates:
This contextualizing commentary does not erase the violence in the text, of course. But it does limit its application among those willing to consider things like why a passage was originally given and what it has meant to fourteen centuries of devout Muslim scholars. And these are things that both Muslims and non-Muslims need to understand.
For those who believe, as I do, that humanity’s survival into the next century will require us to understand and appreciate each other’s deepest beliefs, The Study Quran is a gift and a treasure. It does not make understanding Islam easy, but it makes it possible—if we are willing to invest the effort it takes to accept the gift and heft the treasure.
And for English-speaking Muslims who are not terrorists and radical Islamists (which is about 99.9% of the total), it provides a valuable tool for deepening faith and demonstrating the shallowness of the proof-texters who constantly attack them.
In an interview with CNN shortly after the volume’s publication, the lead editor, Seyyed Hossein Nasr argued that “the best way to counter extremism in modern Islam is a revival of classical Islam.” That is a tall order for any single book, but I suspect that, if a revival of classical Islam ever happens in the English-speaking world, the revivalists will all carry copies of the Study Quran–and the revolution will be extensively footnoted.
An irony of our age is that most Western opponents of radical Islam use the same proof texts to justify bigotry against all Muslims. Just Google “Islam and Violence,” and you will find hundreds of proof-text pages with quote after quote from the Quran seeming to justify, and even require, acts of violence—which, of course, happens to be the same thing that most Islamist terrorists believe. Rarely do enemies agree so completely on first principles.
The big problem though, is that (like most assertions supported by chains of oversimplified proof texts) the assertion is false. Or, at least, it is not always true, and it is not true in the ways that both violent Muslims and violent anti-Muslims assume when they start mining the Quran for reasons to fight.
Into this rhetorical context comes the long-anticipated, ten-years-in-the-making, Harper Study Quran. Based on the wildly successful Harper Study Bible, and edited by practicing Muslims who are also trained and respected scholars, the Study Quran offers itself as an the first English translation to incorporate significant commentary designed to contextualize nearly every ayah (verse) in the sacred book.
And I’ll be dag-nabbed if it doesn’t do it. By my rough estimates, about 90% of the book consists of verse-by-verse commentary keyed to the text by a practical (and merciful) two-color printing scheme that keys the text to the notes with bright red numbers.
As I read this new Quran (and I read it straight through because I am weird like that), I found that I could not realistically read all of the commentary and still follow any kind of narrative flow. I read most of the text without the commentary, glancing down at the footnotes only when I felt that I needed more context to understand the basic meaning of a passage.
The Study Quran supports this kind of reading, but it is really designed for intensive study of a passage or a theme. The editorial apparatus makes this kind of reading very easy. A comprehensive (and multi-colored) index allows readers to follow themes and ideas through the text, and a set of essays at the end of the volume brings together concepts like “Quranic Ethics, Human Rights, and Society” and “Conquest and Conversion, War and Peace in the Quran.”
But however one reads it, the Study Quran’s overwhelming strength is that it provides, for nearly every verse in the Quran, both the context of its original recitation and a survey of 1400 years of scholarship.
To understand why this is important, consider how the Quran is structured. Unlike the Bible, it contains very little sustained narrative, and the individual surahs (chapters) were not all revealed as discrete units, so each ayah has an independent context of original reception.
The Quran, in other words, lends itself to proof texting even better than the Hebrew or Christian Bibles—and that’s saying something. The editors of the Study Quran patiently and painstakingly reconstruct, to the extent possible, the original context of each recitation in the entire book and make that reconstructed context available to any reader willing to devote the time attention required to understand it.
The results are remarkable, and they have the wonderful added effect of limiting the ability of both adherents and detractors to manipulate the book’s meaning through uncritical prooftexting.
Here is one example (though I wish I had the space for a dozen) of what happens when a passage often used to justify both violence and Islamophobia undergoes the Study Quran’s contextualizing treatment. In the 33rd Ayah of Surah 5 (The Table Spread), we read the following injunction:
Verily, the recompense of those who wage war against God and His Messenger, and endeavor to work corruption upon the earth is that they be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off from opposite sides, or be banished from the land.
Pretty gruesome, to be sure, and also pretty clear. But the editors of the Study Quran want us to know two things that no other single-volume English translation will tell us: 1) that this passage was recited in a specific instance and for a specific purpose; and 2) that there is a long tradition of Muslim scholarship and jurisprudence interpreting this verse.
The context was a specific and extremely bloody attack upon the Muslim community in Madinah. After accepting a group of Bedouins into the community under the pretense of conversion, Mohammad allowed them to depart when they claimed that they were not comfortable with city life. He sent camels with them “for milk and sustenance” and a Muslim camel herder to help them on their way. “Once outside the city, however, they brutally maimed and killed the camelheard and made off with the camels the Prophet had given them to use (293).
In context, then, the punishments in the passage were mandated against specific individuals who had acted with impunity to terrorize the Muslim community. And, the editors explain, the verse has NOT normally been interpreted as a general process for dealing with apostates:
Given that the perpetrators were also, among other things, apostates . . . since they embraced Islam in the presence of the Prophet, then renounced it through their actions, a small minority have considered the verse to apply to apostates in general. It seems clear, however, that the severe punishments in this verse pertain specifically to those who commit various crimes brazenly and with exceptional brutality, violence and terrorization of innocent people. (293)
This contextualizing commentary does not erase the violence in the text, of course. But it does limit its application among those willing to consider things like why a passage was originally given and what it has meant to fourteen centuries of devout Muslim scholars. And these are things that both Muslims and non-Muslims need to understand.
For those who believe, as I do, that humanity’s survival into the next century will require us to understand and appreciate each other’s deepest beliefs, The Study Quran is a gift and a treasure. It does not make understanding Islam easy, but it makes it possible—if we are willing to invest the effort it takes to accept the gift and heft the treasure.
And for English-speaking Muslims who are not terrorists and radical Islamists (which is about 99.9% of the total), it provides a valuable tool for deepening faith and demonstrating the shallowness of the proof-texters who constantly attack them.
In an interview with CNN shortly after the volume’s publication, the lead editor, Seyyed Hossein Nasr argued that “the best way to counter extremism in modern Islam is a revival of classical Islam.” That is a tall order for any single book, but I suspect that, if a revival of classical Islam ever happens in the English-speaking world, the revivalists will all carry copies of the Study Quran–and the revolution will be extensively footnoted.
January 25, 2016
Have you ever had that experience where you meet someone, and within a few minutes of talking to them you know your going to be friends for the rest of your life? That's how I felt after my first few minutes with The Study Quran.
After spending years with Arberry's translation, I still regarded the mighty Quran with equal parts bafflement, alienation, and interest, and now that I've switched over to this as my primary reference, it's easy to see why. The Quran is an extremely complicated text, and for me at least, it demands an extensive commentary for reference, and that's exactly what this volume provides - running commentary several times the length of the work itself. The context in which various statements were made in the various Surahs is necessary for understanding much of the basic sense of the Quran. The commentary is conveniently arranged for easy reference, and is based on a number of prominent commentaries written over several centuries.
I was drawn initially to this edition because of the involvement of the senior editor Seyyed Hossein Nasr, and I have not been disappointed. Working my way through its treasures, the world of the Quran has opened up to me like never before, and I'm regularly overpowered by its force and beauty. I feel a much deeper appreciation of how it works, and what its message is.
In addition to the indispensable commentary, this edition includes introductory materials and several excellent supplemental essays written by major interpreters of Islam, such as William Chittick.
Of the many books I've read on Islam, this one is far and away the most important in terms of bringing me into deep personal dialog with the tradition itself, and understanding the majesty and poetry of this masterpiece of our human heritage.
After spending years with Arberry's translation, I still regarded the mighty Quran with equal parts bafflement, alienation, and interest, and now that I've switched over to this as my primary reference, it's easy to see why. The Quran is an extremely complicated text, and for me at least, it demands an extensive commentary for reference, and that's exactly what this volume provides - running commentary several times the length of the work itself. The context in which various statements were made in the various Surahs is necessary for understanding much of the basic sense of the Quran. The commentary is conveniently arranged for easy reference, and is based on a number of prominent commentaries written over several centuries.
I was drawn initially to this edition because of the involvement of the senior editor Seyyed Hossein Nasr, and I have not been disappointed. Working my way through its treasures, the world of the Quran has opened up to me like never before, and I'm regularly overpowered by its force and beauty. I feel a much deeper appreciation of how it works, and what its message is.
In addition to the indispensable commentary, this edition includes introductory materials and several excellent supplemental essays written by major interpreters of Islam, such as William Chittick.
Of the many books I've read on Islam, this one is far and away the most important in terms of bringing me into deep personal dialog with the tradition itself, and understanding the majesty and poetry of this masterpiece of our human heritage.
June 2, 2025
I thought this was great way for anyone to read, interpret, and gain a deep understanding of the Quran and Islamic thought. The Editor-in-Chief Seyyed Hossein Nasr has richly poured into a single volume a wealth of Islamic commentary, interpretation, and comparative analysis. His colleagues who helped in this endeavor were:
1. Caner K. Dagli (author and Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Holy Cross College)
2. Maria Massi Dakake (Associate Professor of Religious Studies at George Mason University)
3. Joseph Lumbard (Associate Professor of Quranic Studies in the Islamic College at Hamad bin Khalifa University)
4. Mohammed Rostam (Associate Professor of Islamic Studies at Carleton University).
The introduction is a long and very thorough examination of the Quran and its importance in the Muslim world. Topics discussed at length were the Message of the Quran, Language, Structure, and Recitation of the Quran, the Role and Function of the Quran in Muslim Life. The editors gave smaller sections of how to read the Study Quran, translation remarks, commentary, the audience, design, stylistic and technical points, and a final prayer.
The Quran itself is given in its entirety. Each surah opened with an introduction on background, major themes associated with the surah, and topics discussed in the surah (historical, spiritual, theological, legal jurisprudence, metaphysical/cosmological, etc.). Among the commentary was extensively cited information on linguistic, comparative analysis (with Judaism, Christianity, and Zoroastrianism), sectarian inputs from Sunni, Shi'ite, and Sufi exegesis, commentary cross-reference, and cited commentary from forty-one Islamic scholars.
The final section was a collection of essays. These included very helpful and scholarly topics of How to Read the Quran, stylistic harmony, how it the Quran is read, where beginners should begin, and respecting the Quran. The Quran in Translation included Arabic syntax, grammatical structure, and Quranic terms. There were more in-depth essays on
The Islamic View of the Quran
Quranic Arabic
Traditions of Esoteric and Sapiental Quranic Commentary
Scientific Commentary of the Quran
The Quran as Source of Islamic Law
The Quran and Schools of Islamic Theology and Philosophy
The Quran and Sufism
The Quran and Islamic Art
Quranic View on Sacred History and Other Religions
Quranic Ethics, Human Rights, and Society
Conquest and Conversion, War and Peace
Death, Dying, and the Afterlife in the Quran
Overall this was a heavy scholarly tome of Quranic commentary. I would highly recommend this to anyone interested in furthering their knowledge into the many pillars of the Quran and Islamic thought. Thanks!
1. Caner K. Dagli (author and Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Holy Cross College)
2. Maria Massi Dakake (Associate Professor of Religious Studies at George Mason University)
3. Joseph Lumbard (Associate Professor of Quranic Studies in the Islamic College at Hamad bin Khalifa University)
4. Mohammed Rostam (Associate Professor of Islamic Studies at Carleton University).
The introduction is a long and very thorough examination of the Quran and its importance in the Muslim world. Topics discussed at length were the Message of the Quran, Language, Structure, and Recitation of the Quran, the Role and Function of the Quran in Muslim Life. The editors gave smaller sections of how to read the Study Quran, translation remarks, commentary, the audience, design, stylistic and technical points, and a final prayer.
The Quran itself is given in its entirety. Each surah opened with an introduction on background, major themes associated with the surah, and topics discussed in the surah (historical, spiritual, theological, legal jurisprudence, metaphysical/cosmological, etc.). Among the commentary was extensively cited information on linguistic, comparative analysis (with Judaism, Christianity, and Zoroastrianism), sectarian inputs from Sunni, Shi'ite, and Sufi exegesis, commentary cross-reference, and cited commentary from forty-one Islamic scholars.
The final section was a collection of essays. These included very helpful and scholarly topics of How to Read the Quran, stylistic harmony, how it the Quran is read, where beginners should begin, and respecting the Quran. The Quran in Translation included Arabic syntax, grammatical structure, and Quranic terms. There were more in-depth essays on
The Islamic View of the Quran
Quranic Arabic
Traditions of Esoteric and Sapiental Quranic Commentary
Scientific Commentary of the Quran
The Quran as Source of Islamic Law
The Quran and Schools of Islamic Theology and Philosophy
The Quran and Sufism
The Quran and Islamic Art
Quranic View on Sacred History and Other Religions
Quranic Ethics, Human Rights, and Society
Conquest and Conversion, War and Peace
Death, Dying, and the Afterlife in the Quran
Overall this was a heavy scholarly tome of Quranic commentary. I would highly recommend this to anyone interested in furthering their knowledge into the many pillars of the Quran and Islamic thought. Thanks!
Read
March 17, 2017I made it through. I'm no expert on the Quran, but I can say that unlike 99% of USofAians, I'm at least conversant with it, have a basic Quranic literacy. And in today's world, I think it's important to be at least minimally conversant with it.
And to my mind this edition is simply the one you need. The only other edition I'm aware of in English that might rival it is Ali's The Qur'an: Text, Translation, and Commentary. By all means, have both editions on your shelf!
And to my mind this edition is simply the one you need. The only other edition I'm aware of in English that might rival it is Ali's The Qur'an: Text, Translation, and Commentary. By all means, have both editions on your shelf!
November 25, 2016
No better single source in English for studying the Qur'an. Universal, inclusive, incredibly well-researched and accessible. I spent nearly a year reading this, and I plan to turn around and start it again. Hope to have more of an in-depth review soon.
Want to read
December 8, 2015I figure I'd better go ahead and mark this to-read and get on any list Trump is putting together for the camps, because all the cool kids will be hanging out there!
December 26, 2019
Ever since it was released this has remained my primary source for an English translation/commentary on the Qur'an. Dr Nasr and the editors have worked hard to present a broad ecumenical perspective from classical Sunni, Shia and Sufi sources as well as references back through other traditions and have pulled it all together in a way never done before in English.
January 15, 2018
Um... okay, it's weird that this doesn't have a review yet.
Anyways, I'm about 2/3rds of the way through The Study Qu'ran, and so, as someone who's read pretty much every word of that 2/3rds (i.e., as someone who has read more of it than most other folks who've reviewed it thus far) I can say with some confidence that I give it 4 stars. It doesn't get a perfect 5, because in my estimation there are flaws (esp. with the commentary), but comparatively speaking (meaning, as when compared to other Western / Anglo materials on Islam, up to and including other English Qu'ran translations and / or commentaries) this is a much needed and much appreciated effort.
Where the SQ really shines is, surprisingly, in the supplemental material / background information that it provides vis-a-vis the stories of past Prophets in the Qu'ran. So, e.g., in Surah Yusuf and Surah Maryam (i.e., the chapters that relate the story of Mary and Joseph) the editors provided a plethora of heartbreakingly-beautiful background information in their commentary, -background info which fleshed out the overall narrative that Islam puts forth w/r/t these individuals so well that I actually found tears welling in my eyes. I was that moved.
Moving beyond the stories of the Prophets, however, the remaining benefit is to be found sort of scattered, here and there. Some chapter's commentary I enjoyed more than others (e.g., Surah Muhammad [47] had a delightful commentary, even though it wasn't a "story of past Prophets" chapter, per se), and I like the occasional comments the editors provided from non-Qu'ranic exegetes, such as Muhyideen Ibn Arabi (although technically he could be considered a Qu'ranic exegete in a certain sense, even so he's most commonly associated with Islamic mysticism). Here and there, there were some interesting tid-bits relating to the etymology of certain Arabic words being translated, which were insightful. Also, some of the "controversial" verses were adequately dealt with (while others were not... more on that momentarily).
There are a few complaints from readers on some other websites which I find rather picayune. For example, a lot of people complained that the translation was "archaic" or in "King James" English. And, I mean, yeah, technically I guess the translation does use "thee" and "thou," -But that's pretty much it. The actual translation doesn't use that many arcane words besides those, so it seems to me, if I may be blunt (and just a wee-bit sarcastic), that these nit-picky people are just so dadgum terrified of using their brains even the tiniest little bit that when they saw the first "thee" or "thou" their neurons just shut down completely and they took to the internet to leave their butthurt little comments; i.e. they wanted to show us all how mad they were that an ancient book of purported Divine guidance wasn't translated from the grandiose, poetic paleo-Arabic of the 7th century into a modern Young Adult novel. Point being, if you see this particular complaint regarding the translation choice of the authors, ignore it. Unless you are also a complete moron, in which case you might want to take heed and read something less challenging. Like a picture book.
Also, some others complained that the paper / pages that this massive tome was printed upon is too thin. This upsets them because, I assume, they are flummoxed at the notion that they can't turn each page as though they are oblivious, violent gorillas, or that they can't wear their Freddy Kruger glove(s) while perusing this particular Qu'ran. The audacity of the publishers and authors choosing so delicate a vellum! I demand a 7 volume Qu'ran that, in totality, weighs 346 lbs and costs 1,200 U.S. dollars! -Because that's what a super-manly, thick-papered Study Qu'ran would be... so, again, in case you're not picking up my sarcasm, this complaint is otiose nonsense that should be disregarded. The paper thickness is fine, and makes complete sense. Just be a little more scrupulous, is all.
There are, however, some valid criticisms that I have. For starters, the well-known complaint that the authors are all Perennialist Muslims... Now, I didn't make as big a deal out of this as a lot of other Muslims have, mainly because this Perennialist stuff is only salient in a few places in the commentary, but still, that said, yes, it's there, and no, I don't agree with it. I think it's pretty obvious that both the Qu'ran and other Islamic Sacred Texts simply won't abide the notion that all religions are equally valid paths to God. -The authors, if they wished to be inclusive, could've cited any number of authorities -even very early ones- that held to the notion that the punishment of Hell in Islam is temporary for all people (but who nevertheless held the view, the authorities in question I mean, that the practitioners of less valid faiths were susceptible to this possible punishment, however temporary it may be, and pending that Islam was presented to them in a holistic and correct fashion while they were free of any psychological defects, e.g., something akin to an amalgam of the views of Ibn Taymiyyah [who held that hell was temporary for all people] and Imam al-Ghazaali [who held that Christians who had been indoctrinated against Islam were exempt from following it] et. al...) -this would've at least been "orthodox," in addition to being inclusive. But no. Instead they had to add a bunch of modernist malarkey (just my opinion) about how the Qu'ran actually validates all faiths... a notion that any sensible person would reject after an objective reading of enough Islamic source material.
Also, re: the whole Perennialism thing, it's also strangely inconsistent. On the one hand, the commentators state that they only want to present information as it's found in mostly pre-modern commentaries, which is fine, but then they depart from that method when they start commenting on the validity of prior religious dispensations. But then, when it comes to other areas where a more modern view should definitely be included (because, I mean, just because something is "ancient" doesn't mean it's more correct, and just because an interpretation is newer doesn't automatically render it false) -and so verses like 4:34 (i.e., the infamous "beat them" verse) -well, here the authors go out of their way to stick to the "only presenting ancient views" method -which is to say that they basically go out of their way to "prove" that this verse was revealed in order to justify a man striking his wife (and, it should be noted, their "evidence" is an anecdote in the hadith literature that, per my own research, appears to be apocryphal). Although, to be be fair w/r/t Q. 4:34, they do elucidate the whole "yes it says *strike* but still, this *striking* was so restricted in Islamic Law so as to render the point moot" argument pretty well. So, eh, 50/50 as far as their commentary on 4:34 is concerned.
Likewise with the story about Mariyyah the Copt (see: the commentary of 66:1-5), which, to modern eyes, is going to appear rather salacious, meaning, it's going to make the Prophet (s) look rather bad (at least in the eyes of folk from Western societies who are so far removed from polygynous culture so as to easily misunderstand the anecdote [i.e., that of the whole Mariyyah-Hafsah-Ayesha fiasco] as it's found in the commentary, which will be through no fault of the reader, meaning that the entire story, when just given as though it's historical fact [as it is in TSQ], really just renders everything in a fairly immodest light -at least from the Western viewpoint... and however incorrect and anachronistic this might be on the reader's part is, of course, not the issue)... again, their going with the more traditional commentaries (which in this case have relied on an account that isn't rigorously authenticated) and ignoring other ancient materials that give an alternate (and considerably less salacious) explanation as to why these particular verses were revealed -and this latter story (which Muslims will recognize as "the story of the honey,") -is actually more authenticated than the one TSQ authors chose to emphasize (they only give the "honey" account a passing mention, by contrast)... well, I guess my point here is that I really think a lot more could've been done here to clarify this issue.
A final bone of contention: The commentary on those verses regarding "those whom the right hand's possess" (typ. understood -incorrectly, IMO- as "concubines" in English vernacular)... i.e., the commentary on this issue as found in Surah 4 of TSQ... I think, in the age of ISIS, a heck of a lot more should've been done in this portion to establish the fact that such relations had to be consensual, i.e. that Islam in no way justifies "slave rape." In essence, it's my personal opinion that this specific portion was unsatisfactory, given current events.
So, from the above criticism(s), one can see why a more traditional Muslim might be somewhat miffed at the non-ancient Perennialism stuff being in the commentary (however sporadically it shows up... I admit it's not even enough to really complain about, given the overall benefits of TSQ as a whole) -but then, in other places where a more inclusive language is actually needed, they completely forego any newer research or even adequate clarification for the sake of "sticking with the ancient commentators' opinions..." -Like, okay, if that's really what you want to do, fine... but then you need to delete the Perennialist parts of the commentary for the sake of consistency, in that case. You can't have your cake and eat it as well. Pick a lane and stay in it!
One other minor complaint that's not really a complaint: If you read TSQ from beginning to end, the commentary repeats itself a lot and becomes a bit redundant. I don't really consider this a "complaint" per se, I guess, more of just highlighting a potential drawback for some readers. However, I understand the utility of this, in that some people will be using TSQ as a reference book moreso than anything else, and thus it's useful to have some of the info repeat in later portions of the commentary, lest someone be unable to find sufficient research-related info due to a piece of data only being available in one place throughout this whole, massive work... I get it, is what I'm saying... but some folks might find this a tad annoying, even if they recognize the utility of it.
Now, as regards to my "criticisms" above, obviously, some are more serious than others, but overall I still give TSQ a whopping 4 stars because, man, when this work shines, it shines like the sun! It's informative, moving, fascinating, useful, and overall, quite delightful. It's a great Qu'ran to give to a non-Muslim, even with its flaws, because you can easily clear up any possible misconceptions that might arise from the 4 or 5 "problematic" parts of the commentary. This isn't true of any past translation, IMO. There are some "English" versions of the Qu'ran that I'd put in a garbage can before I put it in the hand of a non-Muslim (see the Hilali-Khan "translation" for example). By contrast, I'd give TSQ freely to anyone and feel that they were in *relatively* good hands, more or less. Which, given the dearth of even remotely acceptable "dawah" materials in English, is a HUGE relief.
So, yeah, it has flaws. Most of them have been exaggerated by a few ignorant folk (though some haven't). Overall though, we are indebted to the individuals who labored so hard for God's sake in order to bring us this important first step in the much needed "intellectual" Islamic traditional canon, -a milieu which, until very recently, has been sorely lacking in English. So, again, a big "THANK YOU" to the translators / editors / commentators, and a well-deserved 4 star review here on goodreads, from me to you!
Anyways, I'm about 2/3rds of the way through The Study Qu'ran, and so, as someone who's read pretty much every word of that 2/3rds (i.e., as someone who has read more of it than most other folks who've reviewed it thus far) I can say with some confidence that I give it 4 stars. It doesn't get a perfect 5, because in my estimation there are flaws (esp. with the commentary), but comparatively speaking (meaning, as when compared to other Western / Anglo materials on Islam, up to and including other English Qu'ran translations and / or commentaries) this is a much needed and much appreciated effort.
Where the SQ really shines is, surprisingly, in the supplemental material / background information that it provides vis-a-vis the stories of past Prophets in the Qu'ran. So, e.g., in Surah Yusuf and Surah Maryam (i.e., the chapters that relate the story of Mary and Joseph) the editors provided a plethora of heartbreakingly-beautiful background information in their commentary, -background info which fleshed out the overall narrative that Islam puts forth w/r/t these individuals so well that I actually found tears welling in my eyes. I was that moved.
Moving beyond the stories of the Prophets, however, the remaining benefit is to be found sort of scattered, here and there. Some chapter's commentary I enjoyed more than others (e.g., Surah Muhammad [47] had a delightful commentary, even though it wasn't a "story of past Prophets" chapter, per se), and I like the occasional comments the editors provided from non-Qu'ranic exegetes, such as Muhyideen Ibn Arabi (although technically he could be considered a Qu'ranic exegete in a certain sense, even so he's most commonly associated with Islamic mysticism). Here and there, there were some interesting tid-bits relating to the etymology of certain Arabic words being translated, which were insightful. Also, some of the "controversial" verses were adequately dealt with (while others were not... more on that momentarily).
There are a few complaints from readers on some other websites which I find rather picayune. For example, a lot of people complained that the translation was "archaic" or in "King James" English. And, I mean, yeah, technically I guess the translation does use "thee" and "thou," -But that's pretty much it. The actual translation doesn't use that many arcane words besides those, so it seems to me, if I may be blunt (and just a wee-bit sarcastic), that these nit-picky people are just so dadgum terrified of using their brains even the tiniest little bit that when they saw the first "thee" or "thou" their neurons just shut down completely and they took to the internet to leave their butthurt little comments; i.e. they wanted to show us all how mad they were that an ancient book of purported Divine guidance wasn't translated from the grandiose, poetic paleo-Arabic of the 7th century into a modern Young Adult novel. Point being, if you see this particular complaint regarding the translation choice of the authors, ignore it. Unless you are also a complete moron, in which case you might want to take heed and read something less challenging. Like a picture book.
Also, some others complained that the paper / pages that this massive tome was printed upon is too thin. This upsets them because, I assume, they are flummoxed at the notion that they can't turn each page as though they are oblivious, violent gorillas, or that they can't wear their Freddy Kruger glove(s) while perusing this particular Qu'ran. The audacity of the publishers and authors choosing so delicate a vellum! I demand a 7 volume Qu'ran that, in totality, weighs 346 lbs and costs 1,200 U.S. dollars! -Because that's what a super-manly, thick-papered Study Qu'ran would be... so, again, in case you're not picking up my sarcasm, this complaint is otiose nonsense that should be disregarded. The paper thickness is fine, and makes complete sense. Just be a little more scrupulous, is all.
There are, however, some valid criticisms that I have. For starters, the well-known complaint that the authors are all Perennialist Muslims... Now, I didn't make as big a deal out of this as a lot of other Muslims have, mainly because this Perennialist stuff is only salient in a few places in the commentary, but still, that said, yes, it's there, and no, I don't agree with it. I think it's pretty obvious that both the Qu'ran and other Islamic Sacred Texts simply won't abide the notion that all religions are equally valid paths to God. -The authors, if they wished to be inclusive, could've cited any number of authorities -even very early ones- that held to the notion that the punishment of Hell in Islam is temporary for all people (but who nevertheless held the view, the authorities in question I mean, that the practitioners of less valid faiths were susceptible to this possible punishment, however temporary it may be, and pending that Islam was presented to them in a holistic and correct fashion while they were free of any psychological defects, e.g., something akin to an amalgam of the views of Ibn Taymiyyah [who held that hell was temporary for all people] and Imam al-Ghazaali [who held that Christians who had been indoctrinated against Islam were exempt from following it] et. al...) -this would've at least been "orthodox," in addition to being inclusive. But no. Instead they had to add a bunch of modernist malarkey (just my opinion) about how the Qu'ran actually validates all faiths... a notion that any sensible person would reject after an objective reading of enough Islamic source material.
Also, re: the whole Perennialism thing, it's also strangely inconsistent. On the one hand, the commentators state that they only want to present information as it's found in mostly pre-modern commentaries, which is fine, but then they depart from that method when they start commenting on the validity of prior religious dispensations. But then, when it comes to other areas where a more modern view should definitely be included (because, I mean, just because something is "ancient" doesn't mean it's more correct, and just because an interpretation is newer doesn't automatically render it false) -and so verses like 4:34 (i.e., the infamous "beat them" verse) -well, here the authors go out of their way to stick to the "only presenting ancient views" method -which is to say that they basically go out of their way to "prove" that this verse was revealed in order to justify a man striking his wife (and, it should be noted, their "evidence" is an anecdote in the hadith literature that, per my own research, appears to be apocryphal). Although, to be be fair w/r/t Q. 4:34, they do elucidate the whole "yes it says *strike* but still, this *striking* was so restricted in Islamic Law so as to render the point moot" argument pretty well. So, eh, 50/50 as far as their commentary on 4:34 is concerned.
Likewise with the story about Mariyyah the Copt (see: the commentary of 66:1-5), which, to modern eyes, is going to appear rather salacious, meaning, it's going to make the Prophet (s) look rather bad (at least in the eyes of folk from Western societies who are so far removed from polygynous culture so as to easily misunderstand the anecdote [i.e., that of the whole Mariyyah-Hafsah-Ayesha fiasco] as it's found in the commentary, which will be through no fault of the reader, meaning that the entire story, when just given as though it's historical fact [as it is in TSQ], really just renders everything in a fairly immodest light -at least from the Western viewpoint... and however incorrect and anachronistic this might be on the reader's part is, of course, not the issue)... again, their going with the more traditional commentaries (which in this case have relied on an account that isn't rigorously authenticated) and ignoring other ancient materials that give an alternate (and considerably less salacious) explanation as to why these particular verses were revealed -and this latter story (which Muslims will recognize as "the story of the honey,") -is actually more authenticated than the one TSQ authors chose to emphasize (they only give the "honey" account a passing mention, by contrast)... well, I guess my point here is that I really think a lot more could've been done here to clarify this issue.
A final bone of contention: The commentary on those verses regarding "those whom the right hand's possess" (typ. understood -incorrectly, IMO- as "concubines" in English vernacular)... i.e., the commentary on this issue as found in Surah 4 of TSQ... I think, in the age of ISIS, a heck of a lot more should've been done in this portion to establish the fact that such relations had to be consensual, i.e. that Islam in no way justifies "slave rape." In essence, it's my personal opinion that this specific portion was unsatisfactory, given current events.
So, from the above criticism(s), one can see why a more traditional Muslim might be somewhat miffed at the non-ancient Perennialism stuff being in the commentary (however sporadically it shows up... I admit it's not even enough to really complain about, given the overall benefits of TSQ as a whole) -but then, in other places where a more inclusive language is actually needed, they completely forego any newer research or even adequate clarification for the sake of "sticking with the ancient commentators' opinions..." -Like, okay, if that's really what you want to do, fine... but then you need to delete the Perennialist parts of the commentary for the sake of consistency, in that case. You can't have your cake and eat it as well. Pick a lane and stay in it!
One other minor complaint that's not really a complaint: If you read TSQ from beginning to end, the commentary repeats itself a lot and becomes a bit redundant. I don't really consider this a "complaint" per se, I guess, more of just highlighting a potential drawback for some readers. However, I understand the utility of this, in that some people will be using TSQ as a reference book moreso than anything else, and thus it's useful to have some of the info repeat in later portions of the commentary, lest someone be unable to find sufficient research-related info due to a piece of data only being available in one place throughout this whole, massive work... I get it, is what I'm saying... but some folks might find this a tad annoying, even if they recognize the utility of it.
Now, as regards to my "criticisms" above, obviously, some are more serious than others, but overall I still give TSQ a whopping 4 stars because, man, when this work shines, it shines like the sun! It's informative, moving, fascinating, useful, and overall, quite delightful. It's a great Qu'ran to give to a non-Muslim, even with its flaws, because you can easily clear up any possible misconceptions that might arise from the 4 or 5 "problematic" parts of the commentary. This isn't true of any past translation, IMO. There are some "English" versions of the Qu'ran that I'd put in a garbage can before I put it in the hand of a non-Muslim (see the Hilali-Khan "translation" for example). By contrast, I'd give TSQ freely to anyone and feel that they were in *relatively* good hands, more or less. Which, given the dearth of even remotely acceptable "dawah" materials in English, is a HUGE relief.
So, yeah, it has flaws. Most of them have been exaggerated by a few ignorant folk (though some haven't). Overall though, we are indebted to the individuals who labored so hard for God's sake in order to bring us this important first step in the much needed "intellectual" Islamic traditional canon, -a milieu which, until very recently, has been sorely lacking in English. So, again, a big "THANK YOU" to the translators / editors / commentators, and a well-deserved 4 star review here on goodreads, from me to you!
November 7, 2020
I cannot imagine a better edition for someone outside the tradition - I am not qualified to comment on what this text may be like for believers - but for me the translation, the essays, the maps etc all helped get me closer than ever before. Highly recommended.
September 18, 2017
Finally! Finally! Finally! I finished reading this!
This is the third religious text I have read, the other two being Dianetics (Scientology) and The Holy Bible (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). They've all been brutal reads. Being an atheist, religion and how it is that people can believe in it have always fascinated me. I am still at a loss. I'm probably going to hit Hinduism next, which will hopefully be more interesting. Can anyone suggest a text?
Anyway, reading the Qu'ran did not give me much information about why people believe it, but it did give me some info about what it is that they (ostensibly) believe. The Qu'ran has many references to the Old Testament of The Bible, and a few to the New Testament. In general, the god of the Qu'ran is the Old TEstament god and takes credit for all of his deeds, as he would if they were the same being.
This version of god has just a few main points:
1. There is only one god who has no relatives whatsoever. No child, no parents, no siblings. Never had, never will.
2. God is pretty serious about you believing in him, it is his main criteria for entrance into heaven. Other good points are giving alms, doing good deeds, taking care of orphans and the poor.
3. You can do all the other stuff, but no worship of him is a ticket to hell.
4. Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad are all prophets of more-or-less equal standing.
5. There are a few Old Testament stories that you should really pay attention to, chief of which is the story of exodus, but they are all about how god destroys civilizations who don't worship him.
6. God is a big advocate of peace. It's true, if people actually followed it, this god is pretty concerned about peace.
7. You are not responsible for the religious beliefs of others. God will judge them himself, he doesn't need your help. Again, too bad people don't follow this advice, including non-Muslims.
8. God guides who he will on the straight path, but he also guides who he will on the path to hell. This seems unfair to me, but it is in keeping with the god of the Old Testament.
9. There is a devil. He made some kind of deal with god and many people are led astray by him. This is regardless of point 8 on this list.
10. There is a Day of Judgement, no specific timeframe. Everything is kept in a record and you're going to be held accountable when the day comes.
Obviously, you can't summarize the precepts of an entire religion in ten points, these are just my main takeaways. It is interesting to see how these teachings are reflected in today's worshippers. I'm thinking Islam is no more closely followed than either Christianity or Judaism. It seems everyone claims to be a devote follower without actually following it, or picking and choosing. The Islamic god is not as conflicted about so much as the other versions, so that's good.
At any rate, the book was very, very difficult to read. It only took me about four months though, whereas the Holy Bible took me a year. I'm thinking it might be a lot better in the original Arabic. Possibly this is a terrible translation since the original is supposed to be poetic and this version struggled to be readable.
Maybe someone can recommend a different interpretation that is more readable.
This is the third religious text I have read, the other two being Dianetics (Scientology) and The Holy Bible (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). They've all been brutal reads. Being an atheist, religion and how it is that people can believe in it have always fascinated me. I am still at a loss. I'm probably going to hit Hinduism next, which will hopefully be more interesting. Can anyone suggest a text?
Anyway, reading the Qu'ran did not give me much information about why people believe it, but it did give me some info about what it is that they (ostensibly) believe. The Qu'ran has many references to the Old Testament of The Bible, and a few to the New Testament. In general, the god of the Qu'ran is the Old TEstament god and takes credit for all of his deeds, as he would if they were the same being.
This version of god has just a few main points:
1. There is only one god who has no relatives whatsoever. No child, no parents, no siblings. Never had, never will.
2. God is pretty serious about you believing in him, it is his main criteria for entrance into heaven. Other good points are giving alms, doing good deeds, taking care of orphans and the poor.
3. You can do all the other stuff, but no worship of him is a ticket to hell.
4. Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad are all prophets of more-or-less equal standing.
5. There are a few Old Testament stories that you should really pay attention to, chief of which is the story of exodus, but they are all about how god destroys civilizations who don't worship him.
6. God is a big advocate of peace. It's true, if people actually followed it, this god is pretty concerned about peace.
7. You are not responsible for the religious beliefs of others. God will judge them himself, he doesn't need your help. Again, too bad people don't follow this advice, including non-Muslims.
8. God guides who he will on the straight path, but he also guides who he will on the path to hell. This seems unfair to me, but it is in keeping with the god of the Old Testament.
9. There is a devil. He made some kind of deal with god and many people are led astray by him. This is regardless of point 8 on this list.
10. There is a Day of Judgement, no specific timeframe. Everything is kept in a record and you're going to be held accountable when the day comes.
Obviously, you can't summarize the precepts of an entire religion in ten points, these are just my main takeaways. It is interesting to see how these teachings are reflected in today's worshippers. I'm thinking Islam is no more closely followed than either Christianity or Judaism. It seems everyone claims to be a devote follower without actually following it, or picking and choosing. The Islamic god is not as conflicted about so much as the other versions, so that's good.
At any rate, the book was very, very difficult to read. It only took me about four months though, whereas the Holy Bible took me a year. I'm thinking it might be a lot better in the original Arabic. Possibly this is a terrible translation since the original is supposed to be poetic and this version struggled to be readable.
Maybe someone can recommend a different interpretation that is more readable.
December 1, 2024
The Study Quran has been my pocket companion for more than a year now. My reading was sporadic and at times clandestine: I pilfered surahs on bus rides, during work breaks, in waiting rooms, on airplanes, amid scenes of natural splendor and urban grit, and—more times than I’ll deign to mention—in the drive-thru at Chick-fil-A. I took it straight through from beginning to end: a method by no means required by the text, and which in fact is discouraged by one of the accompanying essays on the basis that the 114 surahs are not arranged thematically or chronologically, but only in a roughly descending order of length. Many of those surahs believed by Islamic tradition to have been revealed earliest—composed of minimalist expressions of the pervasive Quranic themes of the oneness of God, the futility of idol-worship, the surety of the resurrection and the day of judgment, and the vividly divergent fates of the faithful and the impious in the hereafter*—appear near the end, while the lengthier and more expository chapters, mostly dating from the late Makkan and Madinan periods, are among the first encountered by the linear reader. There is a circularity to the Quran akin to that of the Masjid al-Haram, perhaps reflective of a general universalist and perennialist tendency in Islamic theology: one can approach from any direction and find one’s way to the center. The world of the Quran gives expression to an evocative quote attributed by the internet to everyone from Voltaire to Hermes Trismegistus: “God is a circle, the center of which is everywhere and the circumference nowhere.”
The Quran was a source of constancy during a year in which my personal life took some rather unwelcome twists and turns. Peppering my days with these oracles somehow felt entirely appropriate to their purpose: to insinuate themselves, through the sustained repetition of certain core motifs, into the rhythms of quotidian life, therein to serve as a mnemonic device not unlike the regimen of the aspiring lucid dreamer, who takes up patterns in his waking hours which he hopes will repeat themselves in his sleep and bring him to awareness (is this not the practice of salah?). The Quran is “naught but a reminder for the worlds” (6:90). A reminder of what? A reminder of God; a reminder of death; a reminder that life in this dunya is but a dream. The Quran even presents sleep and awakening as a foretaste of death and resurrection:
The nature of God is unity, while the nature of creation is duality. All things are created in pairs of opposites (51:49), appearing to our consciousness—itself always mysteriously unitive—in two forms: what a thing is and what it is not. Male and female, night and day, pleasure and pain, good and evil, mind and body, life and death (at least from the vantage point of the living); the Quran understands these binaries as signs from which to infer the existence of an eternal afterlife counterposed to this temporary existence. More importantly, they serve a purpose analogous to the Buddhist doctrine of interdependent co-origination: to remind us of our relativity and dependency. Everything in existence depends upon everything else in order to be what it is. Only God is absolute and self-sufficient, transcending all dualities and oppositions, including that between subject and object, perhaps the deepest presupposition behind all our activity.
It seems to me that this is why the Quran speaks of death as one’s being “returned" or “gathered” unto God. Death entails the dissolution of the dichotomies that typify our lives under the reign of the egoic consciousness, a reversion to the primordial simplicity and repose that is always with us, but from which we are constantly estranged by waves of psychic chatter—what yogins would identify as vṛttis. Death is a passage beyond the world of relative appearances; but from a theistic perspective, this is not mere obliteration—a decline from being into “nothingness” (a deceptively ambiguous word)—but rather, for those who are reconciled with this innate but ungraspable nonduality, it is a liberation of life from the fetters of what is relative and conditional, and therefore ultimately unreal.
In Christianity, this yielding up of the “small self” on the axis of dichotomies is powerfully represented by the Cross; and for each of the Abrahamic faiths this mysterious survival of death, this intuited possibility of a life purified of limitations and occlusions, is symbolized by the resurrection of the dead. The image of a person who is in some sense embodied and yet immortal suggests a transcendence of the very opposition between life and death, temporality and eternality, earthly life and the afterlife. This may be why the Abrahamic traditions were never content with a mere disembodied afterlife, perhaps to be succeeded by a new birth into mundanity. Further, if the life/death dichotomy is to be superseded, this resurrected life is in some sense attainable even “before” one’s natural death. Many religions and philosophies celebrate those who have died before their deaths: the Muslim wali (“friend of God”), the Christian saints and martyrs (the Christian has in some sense already died and been raised with Christ in the rite of baptism), the Indian jivanmukta (“liberated while living”), and the Stoic sage.
“The Quran,” writes Seyyed Hossein Nasr, “is like a net cast into the world of multiplicity in order to bring us back to the world of Unity, which is infinite”—much as Christ anointed Peter and Andrew “fishers of men,” who would cast the net of the Gospel into the world to gather witnesses (gk. martyron) for the heavenly kingdom. It is both a wakeup call and an invitation into an expanding circle of unity that supersedes ties of kinship, ethnicity, and even to some extent of religion. One of the most remarkable features of the Quran is its magnanimous vision of religious pluralism—at least among the Abrahamic faiths**. Repeatedly it enjoins Muslims to refrain from coercing others in religious matters, to respond to monotheistic critics by appealing to their shared faith in the God of Abraham and encouraging them to adhere to their own inspired scriptures, and to compete with others only in devotion and good deeds.
While much attention has been paid to the relatively few Quranic passages that prescribe warfare against non-Muslim factions—always within a limited context and in response to aggression or the violation of treaties—the “sword verse” (9:5) often cited by critics tends to be emphasized very selectively; to say nothing of the way in which the far more copious acts of violence approvingly portrayed in the Bible are ignored or downplayed by those who would claim that Islam is inherently more belligerent than Christianity or Judaism. The Quran condemns aggressive violence and the oppression of the innocent. Its version of the story of Cain and Abel suggests that it is better, morally and spiritually, for one to be the victim of unjust violence than a perpetrator thereof.
It instructs believers to be forbearing and forgiving of slights, and to avoid returning evil for evil. Violence is considered acceptable only in defense of oneself and other innocents.
As for Quranic ethics in general, they are entirely in accordance with the social conscience of the Torah, the Hebrew prophets, and the Gospels.
This passionate concern for the vulnerable and alienated of society becomes especially poignant when one considers that Muhammad himself was orphaned at a young age in a community in which kinship was everything, forced to rely on the largesse of other relatives to survive. Surah 93 is particularly touching: it was revealed early in Muhammad’s prophetic life as a personal consolation, after a long period in which he hadn’t received any new revelations, prompting mockery from his detractors:
When I first began this reading of the Quran last September, I had the naïve thought that as the War on Terror receded further into history, the Western mind might be able to engage with Islam not as its great antipodal Other and the antithesis of all its values, but rather more objectively as one of the world’s great religious traditions, with which Western culture could engage in good faith to the enrichment of both. Sadly, the aftermath of the October 7th attacks has revealed a deep and continuing psychological need among Western policymakers and intellectuals to understand the Muslim world not merely as a different culture, but as the perfect inversion of its own.
As Jung reminds us, when a civilization considers the Other its polar opposite, one is always dealing with projection. This Western projection has already had devastating consequences for the people of Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iran; and it is likely to cause long-term harm to the West itself as the latter abandons universalism for insularity, no longer appealing to cosmopolitan values but using naked force to brutalize its supposed civilizational enemies and reinforce its own spurious cultural and psychological integrity. This moral degeneration—not the right-wing boogeymen of Muslim “invaders,” feminists, “cultural Marxists,” etc.—is the true nature of the much-ballyhooed “Decline of the West.” The tragic irony is that Islam and Christianity (of which secular Western culture is largely an inheritance), at their best, stand together against this destructive tribalistic thinking. “For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?” These violent and ultimately self-destructive efforts to “Defend the West” are themselves representative of an abandonment of faith in the West, the genius of which has consisted largely in its articulation of universals: a universal humanity, universal rights, universal laws—even universal laws of nature, the foundation of the Scientific Revolution. If the West is to preserve itself, it must withdraw these projections and reorient itself toward the universal—toward the One. As the shared prophetic tradition of the three great Abrahamic faiths teaches us, empires fall when they stand only for themselves.
[Footnotes in comments]
The Quran was a source of constancy during a year in which my personal life took some rather unwelcome twists and turns. Peppering my days with these oracles somehow felt entirely appropriate to their purpose: to insinuate themselves, through the sustained repetition of certain core motifs, into the rhythms of quotidian life, therein to serve as a mnemonic device not unlike the regimen of the aspiring lucid dreamer, who takes up patterns in his waking hours which he hopes will repeat themselves in his sleep and bring him to awareness (is this not the practice of salah?). The Quran is “naught but a reminder for the worlds” (6:90). A reminder of what? A reminder of God; a reminder of death; a reminder that life in this dunya is but a dream. The Quran even presents sleep and awakening as a foretaste of death and resurrection:
He it is Who takes your souls by night, and He knows what you commit by day. Then by day He resurrects you, that a term appointed may be fulfilled. Then unto Him shall be your return, and He shall inform you of that which you used to do.(6:60)
The nature of God is unity, while the nature of creation is duality. All things are created in pairs of opposites (51:49), appearing to our consciousness—itself always mysteriously unitive—in two forms: what a thing is and what it is not. Male and female, night and day, pleasure and pain, good and evil, mind and body, life and death (at least from the vantage point of the living); the Quran understands these binaries as signs from which to infer the existence of an eternal afterlife counterposed to this temporary existence. More importantly, they serve a purpose analogous to the Buddhist doctrine of interdependent co-origination: to remind us of our relativity and dependency. Everything in existence depends upon everything else in order to be what it is. Only God is absolute and self-sufficient, transcending all dualities and oppositions, including that between subject and object, perhaps the deepest presupposition behind all our activity.
It seems to me that this is why the Quran speaks of death as one’s being “returned" or “gathered” unto God. Death entails the dissolution of the dichotomies that typify our lives under the reign of the egoic consciousness, a reversion to the primordial simplicity and repose that is always with us, but from which we are constantly estranged by waves of psychic chatter—what yogins would identify as vṛttis. Death is a passage beyond the world of relative appearances; but from a theistic perspective, this is not mere obliteration—a decline from being into “nothingness” (a deceptively ambiguous word)—but rather, for those who are reconciled with this innate but ungraspable nonduality, it is a liberation of life from the fetters of what is relative and conditional, and therefore ultimately unreal.
In Christianity, this yielding up of the “small self” on the axis of dichotomies is powerfully represented by the Cross; and for each of the Abrahamic faiths this mysterious survival of death, this intuited possibility of a life purified of limitations and occlusions, is symbolized by the resurrection of the dead. The image of a person who is in some sense embodied and yet immortal suggests a transcendence of the very opposition between life and death, temporality and eternality, earthly life and the afterlife. This may be why the Abrahamic traditions were never content with a mere disembodied afterlife, perhaps to be succeeded by a new birth into mundanity. Further, if the life/death dichotomy is to be superseded, this resurrected life is in some sense attainable even “before” one’s natural death. Many religions and philosophies celebrate those who have died before their deaths: the Muslim wali (“friend of God”), the Christian saints and martyrs (the Christian has in some sense already died and been raised with Christ in the rite of baptism), the Indian jivanmukta (“liberated while living”), and the Stoic sage.
“The Quran,” writes Seyyed Hossein Nasr, “is like a net cast into the world of multiplicity in order to bring us back to the world of Unity, which is infinite”—much as Christ anointed Peter and Andrew “fishers of men,” who would cast the net of the Gospel into the world to gather witnesses (gk. martyron) for the heavenly kingdom. It is both a wakeup call and an invitation into an expanding circle of unity that supersedes ties of kinship, ethnicity, and even to some extent of religion. One of the most remarkable features of the Quran is its magnanimous vision of religious pluralism—at least among the Abrahamic faiths**. Repeatedly it enjoins Muslims to refrain from coercing others in religious matters, to respond to monotheistic critics by appealing to their shared faith in the God of Abraham and encouraging them to adhere to their own inspired scriptures, and to compete with others only in devotion and good deeds.
And they say, ‘Be Jews or Christians and you shall be rightly guided.’ Say, ‘Rather, [ours is] the creed of Abraham, a ḥanīf [lit. a “renunciant,” a kind of primitive monotheist with whom the Muslims claimed to be in continuity], and he was not of the idolaters.’ Say, ‘We believe in God, and in that which was sent down unto us, and in that which was sent down unto Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and in what Moses and Jesus were given, and in what the prophets were given from their Lord. We make no distinction among any of them, and unto Him we submit.’ And if they believe in the like of what you believe in, then they shall be rightly guided. And if they turn away, then they are merely in schism and God will suffice you against them, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing. [. . .] Say, ‘Will you dispute with us concerning God, while He is our Lord and your Lord? Unto us our deeds and unto you your deeds, and we are sincere toward Him.’ Or say you that Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes were Jews or Christians? Say, ‘Do you know better, or does God?’(2:135-137, 139-140a)***
Truly those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabeans—whosoever believes in God and the Last Day and works righteousness shall have their reward with their Lord. No fear shall come upon them, nor shall they grieve.(2:62)
And dispute not with the People of the Book, save in the most virtuous manner, unless it be those of them who have done wrong. And say, ‘We believe in that which was sent down unto us and was sent down unto you; our God and your God are one, and unto Him we are submitters.’(29:46)
For each among you We have appointed a law and a way. And had God willed, He would have made you one community, but [He willed otherwise], that He might try you in that which He has given you. So vie with one another in good deeds. Unto God shall be your return all together, and He will inform you of that wherein you differ.(5:48)
While much attention has been paid to the relatively few Quranic passages that prescribe warfare against non-Muslim factions—always within a limited context and in response to aggression or the violation of treaties—the “sword verse” (9:5) often cited by critics tends to be emphasized very selectively; to say nothing of the way in which the far more copious acts of violence approvingly portrayed in the Bible are ignored or downplayed by those who would claim that Islam is inherently more belligerent than Christianity or Judaism. The Quran condemns aggressive violence and the oppression of the innocent. Its version of the story of Cain and Abel suggests that it is better, morally and spiritually, for one to be the victim of unjust violence than a perpetrator thereof.
And recite unto them, with truth, the account of Adam’s two sons, when they each offered a sacrifice, and it was accepted from one of them, though not accepted from the other. One said, ‘I will surely slay you!’ [The other] said, ‘God accepts only from the reverent. Even if you stretch forth your hand against me to slay me, I shall not stretch forth my hand against you to slay you. Truly I fear God, Lord of the worlds. I desire that you should be burdened with my sin and your sin and so become one of the inhabitants of the Fire. Such is the recompense of the wrongdoers. [. . .] For this reason, We prescribed for the Children of Israel that whosoever slays a soul—unless it be for another soul or working corruption upon the earth—it is as though he slew mankind altogether, and whosoever saves the life of one, it is as though he saved the life of mankind altogether.(5:27-29, 32a)
It instructs believers to be forbearing and forgiving of slights, and to avoid returning evil for evil. Violence is considered acceptable only in defense of oneself and other innocents.
The good deed and the evil deed are not equal. Repel by that which is better; then behold, the one between whom and thee there is enmity shall be as if he were a loyal, protecting friend.(41:34)
The recompense of an evil is an evil like unto it. Yet whosoever pardons and sets matters aright, his reward is with God. Truly He loves not the wrongdoers. And whosoever defends himself after having been wronged, for such there is no way against them. There is only a way against those who wrong people and behave tyrannically upon the earth without right. For them, there shall be a painful punishment. And whosoever is patient and forgives, that is indeed a course worthy of resolve.(42:40-43)
As for Quranic ethics in general, they are entirely in accordance with the social conscience of the Torah, the Hebrew prophets, and the Gospels.
Thy Lord decrees that you worship none but Him, and be virtuous to parents. Whether one or both of them reaches old age, say not to them ‘Uff!’ nor chide them, but speak unto them a noble word. Lower unto them the wing of humility out of mercy and say, ‘My Lord! Have mercy upon them, as they raised me when I was small.’ Your Lord knows best that which is in your souls. If you are righteous, then verily He is forgiving toward the penitent. Give unto the kinsman his right, and unto the indigent and the traveler, but do not squander wastefully. Truly the wasteful are the brethren of satans, and Satan is ungrateful to his Lord. But if thou turnest away from them, seeking a mercy from thy Lord, for which thou dost hope, then speak unto them a gentle word. And let not thine hand be shackled to thy neck nor let it be entirely open, lest thou shouldst sit condemned, destitute. Truly thy Lord outspreads and straitens provision for whomsoever He will. Verily of His servants He is Aware, Seeing. And slay not your children for fear of poverty. We shall provide for them and for you. Surely their slaying is a great sin. And approach not adultery; verily it is indecency and an evil way. And slay not the soul that God has made inviolable, save by right. And whosoever is slain unjustly, We have appointed authority unto his heir. Then let him not be excessive in slaying. Verily he shall be helped. And approach not the orphan’s property, save in the most virtuous manner, till he reaches maturity. And fulfill the pact; surely the pact is called to account. And give full measure when you measure, and weigh with the straight balance. That is better and more virtuous in the end. And pursue not that whereof you have no knowledge. Truly hearing, and sight, and the heart—all of these will be called to account. And walk not exultantly upon the earth; surely thou shalt not penetrate the earth, nor reach the mountains in height.(17:23-37)
Worship God, and ascribe not partners unto Him. And be virtuous toward parents and kinsfolk, toward orphans and the indigent, toward the neighbor who is of kin and the neighbor who is not of kin, toward the companion at your side and the traveler, and toward those whom your right hands possess. Truly God loves not one who is a vainglorious boaster, those who are miserly and enjoin people to be miserly, concealing what God has given them from His Bounty. We have prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating punishment. And those who spend their wealth to be seen of men, and believe not in God or the Last Day. Whosoever has Satan for a companion has an evil companion indeed!(4:36-38)
O you who believe! Be steadfast maintainers of justice, witnesses for God, though it be against yourselves, or your parents and kinsfolk, and whether it be someone rich or poor, for God is nearer unto both. So follow not your caprice, that you may act justly. If you distort or turn away, truly God is Aware of whatsoever you do.(4:135)
This passionate concern for the vulnerable and alienated of society becomes especially poignant when one considers that Muhammad himself was orphaned at a young age in a community in which kinship was everything, forced to rely on the largesse of other relatives to survive. Surah 93 is particularly touching: it was revealed early in Muhammad’s prophetic life as a personal consolation, after a long period in which he hadn’t received any new revelations, prompting mockery from his detractors:
By the morning brightness, and by the night when still, thy Lord has not forsaken thee; nor does He despise. And the Hereafter shall be better for thee than this life. And surely thy Lord shall give unto thee, and thou shalt be content. Did He not find thee an orphan and shelter, find thee astray and guide, and find thee in need and enrich? So as for the orphan, scorn not. And as for one who requests, repel not. And as for the blessing of thy Lord, proclaim!(93)
When I first began this reading of the Quran last September, I had the naïve thought that as the War on Terror receded further into history, the Western mind might be able to engage with Islam not as its great antipodal Other and the antithesis of all its values, but rather more objectively as one of the world’s great religious traditions, with which Western culture could engage in good faith to the enrichment of both. Sadly, the aftermath of the October 7th attacks has revealed a deep and continuing psychological need among Western policymakers and intellectuals to understand the Muslim world not merely as a different culture, but as the perfect inversion of its own.
As Jung reminds us, when a civilization considers the Other its polar opposite, one is always dealing with projection. This Western projection has already had devastating consequences for the people of Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iran; and it is likely to cause long-term harm to the West itself as the latter abandons universalism for insularity, no longer appealing to cosmopolitan values but using naked force to brutalize its supposed civilizational enemies and reinforce its own spurious cultural and psychological integrity. This moral degeneration—not the right-wing boogeymen of Muslim “invaders,” feminists, “cultural Marxists,” etc.—is the true nature of the much-ballyhooed “Decline of the West.” The tragic irony is that Islam and Christianity (of which secular Western culture is largely an inheritance), at their best, stand together against this destructive tribalistic thinking. “For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?” These violent and ultimately self-destructive efforts to “Defend the West” are themselves representative of an abandonment of faith in the West, the genius of which has consisted largely in its articulation of universals: a universal humanity, universal rights, universal laws—even universal laws of nature, the foundation of the Scientific Revolution. If the West is to preserve itself, it must withdraw these projections and reorient itself toward the universal—toward the One. As the shared prophetic tradition of the three great Abrahamic faiths teaches us, empires fall when they stand only for themselves.
[Footnotes in comments]
April 9, 2024
were do i start?
i got this quraan as a gift years ago. this year i bought myself a quran study journal and i genuinely fell in love with the concept of a quran journal. although i am adjusting to the fact that i can write in this book, it still pains my heart to do so. but i will definitely use my quran journal more often to make the experience of reading the quran (and understand it) more memorable.
also i loved that this book contains so many sources. the quran is a interesting and beautiful book that speaks about different matter that concern us. With a bittersweet feeling i bid the month of Ramadan 2024 farewell. until next time.
i got this quraan as a gift years ago. this year i bought myself a quran study journal and i genuinely fell in love with the concept of a quran journal. although i am adjusting to the fact that i can write in this book, it still pains my heart to do so. but i will definitely use my quran journal more often to make the experience of reading the quran (and understand it) more memorable.
also i loved that this book contains so many sources. the quran is a interesting and beautiful book that speaks about different matter that concern us. With a bittersweet feeling i bid the month of Ramadan 2024 farewell. until next time.
September 26, 2021
Interesting commentary from various schools of Islamic Theology with an intentional exemption of taking from famous exegetes, e.g. Abdul Rahman Ibn Nasir al-Saadi, Mohammad Amin al-Shanqiti, and more focus on Twelver Shia and Sufi mystic exegetes by hiding it with few takes from Tabari, Qurtubi and ibn Kathir, it's not surprising since the primary author Sayyid Hussein Nasr is an Iranian Twelver Shia. His co-authors are following the Turkish version of Sufism, which is notorious for innovations in religion.
One can say that his commentary is based on Maturidi, Ash'ari & Twelver Shia creeds rather than the pure creed of Ahl al-Sunnah. If you are puritanical who want to understand the verses just like the salaf (our predecessors) understood it, then I would warmly recommend these three Tafsir books for beginners:
1. Tafsir Ibn Kathir
2. Tafsir al-Saadi
3. Adhwa' al-Bayan by Muhammad Amin al-Shanqiti
One can say that his commentary is based on Maturidi, Ash'ari & Twelver Shia creeds rather than the pure creed of Ahl al-Sunnah. If you are puritanical who want to understand the verses just like the salaf (our predecessors) understood it, then I would warmly recommend these three Tafsir books for beginners:
1. Tafsir Ibn Kathir
2. Tafsir al-Saadi
3. Adhwa' al-Bayan by Muhammad Amin al-Shanqiti
January 3, 2016
We finally received this after about a month of waiting and it is truly worth the wait. This is the translation I have hoped to see for a long time, in beautiful English, but also with excerpts from a score of the principle commentaries (tafaasir) in the bottom half of the same page so that a reader can understand how many different perspectives there can be concerning a single verse. The book is printed on what I suppose is onionskin paper and beautifully bound. The only Arabic in the book is hand written basmalas. It is also completed by a number of scholarly essays and an extensive index. That this work is being sold for about 40 dollars is truly amazing. Undying thanks to all those involved. (less)
December 22, 2016
This edition of the Quran is very well done. Excellent introductory material to the study of the Quran from scholars who are also practitioners. Copious footnotes undergird the text, and a very helpful set of essays at the end give the reader a great introduction to an emic perspective on the study of the Quran and its role in the faith life of Muslims.
February 5, 2016
Probably one of, if not, the worst translation I've ever read.
January 26, 2016
Interesting tool of resource and commentary to learn about and from the various schools of Islamic Theology. Not a Quran in my opinion but more of a Tafsir.
January 27, 2016
The Study Quran is exemplary. It is above and beyond everything I could have imagined in regards to translation of the Quran. Seyyed Hossein Nasr takes the complexities of the Arabic grammar used with each of the verses in the Quran and provides the reader with a simple yet profound meaning of verse, its literary context, and its history. Having read Yusuf Ali, Shakir, and Aqa Mahdi Puya's translation and commentaries with utmost respect to those translators, Seyyed Hossein Nasr builds the foundation of the esoteric meaning of each verse tightly coupled with the narrations in the hadiths from both Sunni and Shi'ah school of thought, sparing no details. This book, after 9 years in the making with such vigor, is the ultimate guide (not a one-off) to ensure that the Quran is read and understood as it was meant to be 1400 years ago.
July 2, 2019
I am not comfortable using a star rating on or reviewing other people's religious texts. That's not my place.
That said, the work that went into the translation and notations in this particular Quran is boggling. Years ago I set out to read a paperback copy of a Quran that I'd found in a used book sale and, after a few pages, I realized that I didn't have the cultural background to get anything useful out of it. There are so many things I understand about my own religion just because I grew up with it always in the background and I just did not have that with Islam. So I got this and, while I still am not even slightly qualified to comment on the underlying work, I am deeply impressed by the footnotes, essays, and general care put into this. I read every footnote and it took me years, but I am so glad I put in the effort.
This is a truly impressive text.
That said, the work that went into the translation and notations in this particular Quran is boggling. Years ago I set out to read a paperback copy of a Quran that I'd found in a used book sale and, after a few pages, I realized that I didn't have the cultural background to get anything useful out of it. There are so many things I understand about my own religion just because I grew up with it always in the background and I just did not have that with Islam. So I got this and, while I still am not even slightly qualified to comment on the underlying work, I am deeply impressed by the footnotes, essays, and general care put into this. I read every footnote and it took me years, but I am so glad I put in the effort.
This is a truly impressive text.
July 8, 2022
I won this book in an online raffle. After sitting on my shelf for a year or two I, whole-heartedly devoted myself to it, for over a year. Reading and meditating upon its eternal truths felt like a form of prayer. I had already read The Qur'an, translated by M. A. S. Abdel Haleem (Oxford University Press), but The Study Quran felt like a cross between attending a spiritual retreat and serious academic lectures. Thoroughly well-researched, challenging & illuminating. I still consult this impressive tome (over 2000 pages long) for its extensive footnotes and various perspectives. Exegesis, or critical interpretation, is an art and a science —especially, of holy texts— something this book takes seriously. Highly recommended for those who wish to deepen their understanding of the beauty, peace and inspiration found in Islam as well as better equip themselves to address Islamophobia.
June 28, 2017
This is a wonderful resource in English of Quran translation with number of commentaries. It includes commentaries from diverse branches (Sunni, Shia, Sufi etc) of Islam. What I am really admiring about this book as a reader and as a seeker of knowledge that I am provided different perspectives on the text without any bias or suggestive thought.
May 5, 2016
This was what I was hoping it would be: A very readable translation of the Quran with copious notes to help bridge the cultural gap between me and both the original and modern audiences of the text. It also included a number of essays which were useful background.
Read
June 22, 2022Officially slayed
October 23, 2020
[Please note that my "four star" rating is for the quality of this specific edition of the Qur'an—with a particular focus on its commentary and bonus features—and is not meant as an endorsement or a critique of the teachings of the Qur'an itself.]
Whew! ... I finally finished reading it. It took me forever, because: (a) it's about 2,000 pages long; (b) I read each surah (chapter) twice—first just reading straight through the text, then re-reading it, verse-by-verse, along with the commentary; and (c) with all due respect to those who hold the Qur'an as sacred writ, it's not exactly a "page turner," so I must admit that it was a bit of a struggle to motivate myself to plow my way through it (more on this later). Nonetheless, I eventually did. And I'm glad I did.
I should state up front that I am not Muslim. (I have nothing against Muslims, of course; it's just that Islam is not the religious tradition that I was raised in.) What I am is an amateur student of religion—and particularly of comparative religion. I want to understand the various belief systems of the world: what they teach, how they are practiced, how they are lived out in people's lives, how they are similar to each other, how they differ, etc. So I wanted to read the Qur'an in order to better understand Islam. Now, of course, I realize that scripture is not the same thing as religion. Merely reading the sacred texts of a particular faith tradition will not tell you everything that you might want to know about the teachings and practices of that tradition, much less about the lived experiences of its adherents. Even for the three Abrahamic faiths, which hold their scriptures as foundational, understanding what these religious traditions are all about will require more than simply reading their holy books. For one thing, scripture has to be properly interpreted in order to yield doctrine—and interpretations often differ, resulting in different doctrinal sub-traditions (sects, denominations, etc.) within a larger faith tradition. Also, as religious scholar Reza Aslan has argued, a distinction has to be drawn between the formal teachings of a faith tradition and the actual beliefs and everyday practices of its adherents. A religion as it is taught from the pulpit is one thing; a religion as it is lived out in the daily lives of ordinary believers may be quite another—yet both are aspects of that religion. Neither can simply be ignored if you want a complete picture of what that faith tradition is all about. So, if you want to understand any religion, you can't just read its scriptures and assume that this alone will make you an expert on the subject. However, it is certainly a good place to start.
If you are going to read the sacred texts of any religious tradition—especially one that is not your own and that you have not formally studied—it is probably best to do so with the aid of a good commentary written by someone who knows a lot more about the subject than you do and can help you navigate the text better than you could do on your own. That is why I chose to read this particular edition of the Qur'an, which includes a very thorough verse-by-verse commentary that helps clarify the meaning of ambiguous passages and that discusses the various ways that each verse has traditionally been interpreted by Islamic scholars. This edition also includes a number of expository essays and other supplemental material which are designed to help the reader get the most out of the text. So there are three aspects of this edition that I need to discuss in this review: (1) the text of the Qur'an itself (in English translation); (2) the verse-by-verse commentary; and (3) the essays and other supplemental material that accompany the text and commentary. Since I am not Muslim, I want to be as respectful as possible in my treatment of a sacred text, a faith tradition, and a culture that are not my own and that I cannot even pretend to fully "grok". Yet I also want to be as forthright in my judgment as I am able to be, while still acknowledging the limits of my own comprehension. So, here goes:
Let me begin by discussing the verse-by-verse commentary (I'll save my discussion of the text of the Qur'an itself for last): If you want to read the Qur'an in English translation, and you are neither Muslim yourself nor an expert on Islam, then this is definitely the edition that you want to get. The commentary is truly a godsend. I would not recommend trying to feel your way through the text without the help of a good verse-by-verse commentary like the one in this edition. If you do try to read it on your own, you'll just end up completely lost at sea, because the meaning of many passages is quite opaque, especially to anyone who is not familiar with the historical and cultural context behind those passages, or the Arabic idiom in which they are written. And even if you were able to puzzle out the surface meaning of some passage, that still might not help you understand how Muslims interpret the doctrinal implications of that passage. The exegesis of the Qur'an is not always as straightforward as you might think (or hope).
The advantage of this particular commentary for helping readers understand how Muslims interpret the Qur'an is that it makes every effort to be as ecumenical as possible. Rather than simply presenting one possible interpretation of any given passage—the one favored by the editors—this commentary presents a number of different possible interpretations, representing various schools of thought within Islam: including Sunni, Shi'ite, and even (in some cases) Sufi interpretations. To put that into terms that might be a bit more familiar to non-Muslims, it would be as if a commentary on the New Testament gave an unbiased overview of differing Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox interpretations of various passages, citing the writings of major theologians from each of these traditions. (I would love to find such a commentary on the New Testament, BTW.) Perhaps at this point I ought to mention that this is NOT a "critical" commentary on the Qur'an—its purpose is not to challenge the traditional teachings of Islam or traditional Muslim beliefs about the Qur'an itself; it seeks only to bring clarity to the meaning and doctrinal interpretation of the text. All of the members of the editorial team that produced the commentary are devout Muslims who regard the Qur'an as the Word of God, and they have tried to produce a commentary that faithfully reflects the teachings of their religion (with an acknowledgement of the diversity of views within Islam itself). Some students of religion may see this non-critical approach to the text as a shortcoming. I see it as an asset. After all, if you want to critique something, you first need to understand whatever it is that you're critiquing. If you are critiquing a set of religious beliefs, then you need to try your best to understand those beliefs as they are understood by those who believe them. And who better to learn from than devout believers themselves? (I don't mean to suggest that critical treatments of a subject ought to be avoided, even by beginners; only that it is usually better to hear the "pro" side of any argument before you listen to the "con".) The verse-by-verse commentary that accompanies the text in this edition of the Qur'an does an excellent job of explaining how devout Muslims understand their scriptures—and that is exactly what a novice student of Islam (or comparative religion) needs.
Turning now to the expository essays and other supplemental material included at the end of this edition: I must confess that, for me—a curious outsider who wants to learn more about Islam—the essays were my favorite part of the entire volume. They offer a great deal of insight into various aspects of this fascinating, yet widely misunderstood, religion. Sure, I personally found some of these essays to be more engaging and more informative than others, but I believe that I learned something of value from each of them. My only complaint about the essays is that, at least in my opinion, the first essay—"How to Read the Quran"—should have been placed at the very front of the book, before the text of the Qur'an itself, because it would have been useful to have read that essay before reading the actual Qur'an (and let's face it, most people—including me—are not going to flip to the back of the book to read an essay before plunging into the Qur'anic text itself).
One final note about the bonus materials at the back of the volume before I move on to discuss the text of the Qu'ran proper: There are maps! I love maps! In my opinion, any book that has maps is superior to any book that does not have maps. This book has maps! Yay! Okay, moving on ...
Sadly, I don't read Arabic. (I'd love to learn—languages fascinate me, and Arabic seems like a lovely language—but life is short, there are only so many hours in the day, and choices have to be made. Perhaps one day I'll find the time, but I haven't thus far.) So I've never read the Qur'an in the original Arabic, which means that I cannot comment on the accuracy of this particular translation. Given the amount of care that the editors have so obviously put into this volume, it seems reasonable to me to assume that they made every effort to ensure that the English translation was as reliable as possible. But I am in no position to judge. Assuming, however, that the translation is reasonably accurate, I can comment on how well the English text reads. And frankly, with all due respect to the translators, it's a bit too stilted for my taste. It reads as if the translators were going out of their way to make the text sound as lofty as possible. It's not that the English itself is archaic—as in the King James Bible—it's just that it is very formal, even florid, bordering on poetic, with many word choices that are not common in everyday conversational English. I'm not sure to what extent this was dictated by the original Arabic text itself and to what extent it was a deliberate choice by the translators, but (at least for me) it was rather distracting. It is a bit like looking at a painting in a museum: it can be tempting to pay more attention to the artistry (the brush strokes, the color palate and shading, the perspective and composition) than to the actual subject the artist was trying to depict in the painting. Similarly, as I was reading this translation of the Qur'an, I found that my attention was drawn more to the style of the writing than to its meaning. This had the (presumably unintended) effect of "distancing" me from the text rather than drawing me in and helping me to more fully engage with what I was reading, intellectually and emotionally. Again, I can't be sure if that is the fault of this particular translation or if it is intrinsic to the style of the Qur'an itself, regardless of how it might be translated.
And speaking of the style of the Qur'an itself ... with all due respect to those who hold it as the very Word of God ... honesty compels me to admit that I found it as dull as ditchwater—which is one of the reasons it took me so long to force myself to get all the way through it. The whole thing reads like something out of one of the more tedious of the Old Testament prophets—one of those books that you're always tempted to skip when reading through the Bible, because your eyes start to glaze over after just the first few verses every time you try to read it. The Qur'an is basically just one long, highly repetitive harangue against idolaters, unbelievers, and other assorted unrepentant sinners. There is no real narrative to speak of—at least not the sort of extended narrative, rich in detail, that you find in the Hebrew Bible and in the New Testament gospels. And the text of the Qur'an is extremely repetitive, which is one of the reasons I found it such a slog to get through. There were several occasions when I wondered if I might have somehow lost my place in the text, because the passage I was reading was virtually identical to a passage I had already read. While I'm sure that Islamic scholars are able to find rich nuances of meaning in these repetitions, not having the benefit of their insight, I'm afraid that I couldn't help but find them tedious.
As for the specific teachings found in the Qur'an, I don't feel qualified to offer any commentary of my own. My goal in reading the Qur'an was to better understand Islam, not to critique it. I have my own theological views, of course, but I am not an authority on such matters; I claim no doctrinal infallibility for myself, and thus I am in no position to sit in judgment of the religious beliefs of others—especially those from a faith tradition that is not my own. I will say that reading the Qur'an has not changed my own way of thinking about theological or moral issues in any meaningful way. In fact, although I'm glad that I finally took the time to read the text, I must confess that I did not find it at all appealing, and I certainly didn't find it persuasive. Frankly, I found it rather off-putting. But that might tell you more about my own personal tastes and temperament than it tells you about the Qur'an itself. So, as the saying goes, "your mileage may vary."
Whew! ... I finally finished reading it. It took me forever, because: (a) it's about 2,000 pages long; (b) I read each surah (chapter) twice—first just reading straight through the text, then re-reading it, verse-by-verse, along with the commentary; and (c) with all due respect to those who hold the Qur'an as sacred writ, it's not exactly a "page turner," so I must admit that it was a bit of a struggle to motivate myself to plow my way through it (more on this later). Nonetheless, I eventually did. And I'm glad I did.
I should state up front that I am not Muslim. (I have nothing against Muslims, of course; it's just that Islam is not the religious tradition that I was raised in.) What I am is an amateur student of religion—and particularly of comparative religion. I want to understand the various belief systems of the world: what they teach, how they are practiced, how they are lived out in people's lives, how they are similar to each other, how they differ, etc. So I wanted to read the Qur'an in order to better understand Islam. Now, of course, I realize that scripture is not the same thing as religion. Merely reading the sacred texts of a particular faith tradition will not tell you everything that you might want to know about the teachings and practices of that tradition, much less about the lived experiences of its adherents. Even for the three Abrahamic faiths, which hold their scriptures as foundational, understanding what these religious traditions are all about will require more than simply reading their holy books. For one thing, scripture has to be properly interpreted in order to yield doctrine—and interpretations often differ, resulting in different doctrinal sub-traditions (sects, denominations, etc.) within a larger faith tradition. Also, as religious scholar Reza Aslan has argued, a distinction has to be drawn between the formal teachings of a faith tradition and the actual beliefs and everyday practices of its adherents. A religion as it is taught from the pulpit is one thing; a religion as it is lived out in the daily lives of ordinary believers may be quite another—yet both are aspects of that religion. Neither can simply be ignored if you want a complete picture of what that faith tradition is all about. So, if you want to understand any religion, you can't just read its scriptures and assume that this alone will make you an expert on the subject. However, it is certainly a good place to start.
If you are going to read the sacred texts of any religious tradition—especially one that is not your own and that you have not formally studied—it is probably best to do so with the aid of a good commentary written by someone who knows a lot more about the subject than you do and can help you navigate the text better than you could do on your own. That is why I chose to read this particular edition of the Qur'an, which includes a very thorough verse-by-verse commentary that helps clarify the meaning of ambiguous passages and that discusses the various ways that each verse has traditionally been interpreted by Islamic scholars. This edition also includes a number of expository essays and other supplemental material which are designed to help the reader get the most out of the text. So there are three aspects of this edition that I need to discuss in this review: (1) the text of the Qur'an itself (in English translation); (2) the verse-by-verse commentary; and (3) the essays and other supplemental material that accompany the text and commentary. Since I am not Muslim, I want to be as respectful as possible in my treatment of a sacred text, a faith tradition, and a culture that are not my own and that I cannot even pretend to fully "grok". Yet I also want to be as forthright in my judgment as I am able to be, while still acknowledging the limits of my own comprehension. So, here goes:
Let me begin by discussing the verse-by-verse commentary (I'll save my discussion of the text of the Qur'an itself for last): If you want to read the Qur'an in English translation, and you are neither Muslim yourself nor an expert on Islam, then this is definitely the edition that you want to get. The commentary is truly a godsend. I would not recommend trying to feel your way through the text without the help of a good verse-by-verse commentary like the one in this edition. If you do try to read it on your own, you'll just end up completely lost at sea, because the meaning of many passages is quite opaque, especially to anyone who is not familiar with the historical and cultural context behind those passages, or the Arabic idiom in which they are written. And even if you were able to puzzle out the surface meaning of some passage, that still might not help you understand how Muslims interpret the doctrinal implications of that passage. The exegesis of the Qur'an is not always as straightforward as you might think (or hope).
The advantage of this particular commentary for helping readers understand how Muslims interpret the Qur'an is that it makes every effort to be as ecumenical as possible. Rather than simply presenting one possible interpretation of any given passage—the one favored by the editors—this commentary presents a number of different possible interpretations, representing various schools of thought within Islam: including Sunni, Shi'ite, and even (in some cases) Sufi interpretations. To put that into terms that might be a bit more familiar to non-Muslims, it would be as if a commentary on the New Testament gave an unbiased overview of differing Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox interpretations of various passages, citing the writings of major theologians from each of these traditions. (I would love to find such a commentary on the New Testament, BTW.) Perhaps at this point I ought to mention that this is NOT a "critical" commentary on the Qur'an—its purpose is not to challenge the traditional teachings of Islam or traditional Muslim beliefs about the Qur'an itself; it seeks only to bring clarity to the meaning and doctrinal interpretation of the text. All of the members of the editorial team that produced the commentary are devout Muslims who regard the Qur'an as the Word of God, and they have tried to produce a commentary that faithfully reflects the teachings of their religion (with an acknowledgement of the diversity of views within Islam itself). Some students of religion may see this non-critical approach to the text as a shortcoming. I see it as an asset. After all, if you want to critique something, you first need to understand whatever it is that you're critiquing. If you are critiquing a set of religious beliefs, then you need to try your best to understand those beliefs as they are understood by those who believe them. And who better to learn from than devout believers themselves? (I don't mean to suggest that critical treatments of a subject ought to be avoided, even by beginners; only that it is usually better to hear the "pro" side of any argument before you listen to the "con".) The verse-by-verse commentary that accompanies the text in this edition of the Qur'an does an excellent job of explaining how devout Muslims understand their scriptures—and that is exactly what a novice student of Islam (or comparative religion) needs.
Turning now to the expository essays and other supplemental material included at the end of this edition: I must confess that, for me—a curious outsider who wants to learn more about Islam—the essays were my favorite part of the entire volume. They offer a great deal of insight into various aspects of this fascinating, yet widely misunderstood, religion. Sure, I personally found some of these essays to be more engaging and more informative than others, but I believe that I learned something of value from each of them. My only complaint about the essays is that, at least in my opinion, the first essay—"How to Read the Quran"—should have been placed at the very front of the book, before the text of the Qur'an itself, because it would have been useful to have read that essay before reading the actual Qur'an (and let's face it, most people—including me—are not going to flip to the back of the book to read an essay before plunging into the Qur'anic text itself).
One final note about the bonus materials at the back of the volume before I move on to discuss the text of the Qu'ran proper: There are maps! I love maps! In my opinion, any book that has maps is superior to any book that does not have maps. This book has maps! Yay! Okay, moving on ...
Sadly, I don't read Arabic. (I'd love to learn—languages fascinate me, and Arabic seems like a lovely language—but life is short, there are only so many hours in the day, and choices have to be made. Perhaps one day I'll find the time, but I haven't thus far.) So I've never read the Qur'an in the original Arabic, which means that I cannot comment on the accuracy of this particular translation. Given the amount of care that the editors have so obviously put into this volume, it seems reasonable to me to assume that they made every effort to ensure that the English translation was as reliable as possible. But I am in no position to judge. Assuming, however, that the translation is reasonably accurate, I can comment on how well the English text reads. And frankly, with all due respect to the translators, it's a bit too stilted for my taste. It reads as if the translators were going out of their way to make the text sound as lofty as possible. It's not that the English itself is archaic—as in the King James Bible—it's just that it is very formal, even florid, bordering on poetic, with many word choices that are not common in everyday conversational English. I'm not sure to what extent this was dictated by the original Arabic text itself and to what extent it was a deliberate choice by the translators, but (at least for me) it was rather distracting. It is a bit like looking at a painting in a museum: it can be tempting to pay more attention to the artistry (the brush strokes, the color palate and shading, the perspective and composition) than to the actual subject the artist was trying to depict in the painting. Similarly, as I was reading this translation of the Qur'an, I found that my attention was drawn more to the style of the writing than to its meaning. This had the (presumably unintended) effect of "distancing" me from the text rather than drawing me in and helping me to more fully engage with what I was reading, intellectually and emotionally. Again, I can't be sure if that is the fault of this particular translation or if it is intrinsic to the style of the Qur'an itself, regardless of how it might be translated.
And speaking of the style of the Qur'an itself ... with all due respect to those who hold it as the very Word of God ... honesty compels me to admit that I found it as dull as ditchwater—which is one of the reasons it took me so long to force myself to get all the way through it. The whole thing reads like something out of one of the more tedious of the Old Testament prophets—one of those books that you're always tempted to skip when reading through the Bible, because your eyes start to glaze over after just the first few verses every time you try to read it. The Qur'an is basically just one long, highly repetitive harangue against idolaters, unbelievers, and other assorted unrepentant sinners. There is no real narrative to speak of—at least not the sort of extended narrative, rich in detail, that you find in the Hebrew Bible and in the New Testament gospels. And the text of the Qur'an is extremely repetitive, which is one of the reasons I found it such a slog to get through. There were several occasions when I wondered if I might have somehow lost my place in the text, because the passage I was reading was virtually identical to a passage I had already read. While I'm sure that Islamic scholars are able to find rich nuances of meaning in these repetitions, not having the benefit of their insight, I'm afraid that I couldn't help but find them tedious.
As for the specific teachings found in the Qur'an, I don't feel qualified to offer any commentary of my own. My goal in reading the Qur'an was to better understand Islam, not to critique it. I have my own theological views, of course, but I am not an authority on such matters; I claim no doctrinal infallibility for myself, and thus I am in no position to sit in judgment of the religious beliefs of others—especially those from a faith tradition that is not my own. I will say that reading the Qur'an has not changed my own way of thinking about theological or moral issues in any meaningful way. In fact, although I'm glad that I finally took the time to read the text, I must confess that I did not find it at all appealing, and I certainly didn't find it persuasive. Frankly, I found it rather off-putting. But that might tell you more about my own personal tastes and temperament than it tells you about the Qur'an itself. So, as the saying goes, "your mileage may vary."
June 9, 2025
The books offers a comprehensive and richly diverse compilation of tafsir, drawing upon a broad spectrum of Islamic scholarly traditions and sects. I think the authors did a good job capturing the main arguments of each sect over polemic verses, offering a balanced perspective. Of particular note are the essays appended at the end, which provide insightful reflections on various areas of Islam. Given its length and depth, the book is best approached as a reference work rather than a volume to be read in a single sitting.
May 14, 2025
Big recommendation from me! haven't read the entire book as it's obviously quite extensive but I really appreciate the verse by verse tafsir which is clear, provides necessary context and has a strong spiritual foundation.
The book really helps the reader to reflect and engage with the Qu'ran, an aid in applying it's timeless teachings to our daily lives
The book really helps the reader to reflect and engage with the Qu'ran, an aid in applying it's timeless teachings to our daily lives
Read
April 25, 2025no comment
April 30, 2022
the best resource on all the known and possible meanings, interpretations and contextual significances of each verse🙏🏼
Read
April 8, 2025I have long loved the teaching of Sheikh Hamza Yusuf. Often, he's been the only voice keeping me from going completely off the deep end and believing every Islam-hater on the internet. I would consider him one of the wisest men alive, for his erudition and locution. Like Chesterton and the great apologists, he keeps an invincible positivity and levity, though not a flippant or overly jokey lightness. Rather, one which touches on topics with care and wisdom. He speaks the truth in kindness, and he tempers brute knowledge with mercy.
As a result, I wanted desperately to read a good translation of the Quran. I wanted desperately for the attacks of the anti-muslims to be proven false by this book. I thought that if any edition could give me a clear, positive view of Islam, it would be this edition, which even includes a chapter by Yusuf himself. So, I bought this book just in time for Ramadan, with it arriving March 1st.
Cracking it open, I was shocked that every page had only a few lines of actual verses at the top, and the entire rest of the page was commentary. The book was a softcover, so I had to rest it on a lapdesk (atop a pillow), much like the book-cradles (I don't know the real name) I've seen so often-used by Muslims when reading their holy book. I got an app on my phone to help remind me to do my daily Ramadan reading (among other tasks), and I dutifully read for anywhere from 1-3 hours a day for most of the month. I found a reading schedule online and followed it until very close to the end of the month, which was interrupted by a busy weekend. I breathed in this Quran for an entire month. As one of my brothers quipped, it was as if I went into someone's house, and they offered to cook me their best dish. I sat down, and this is what they served me; this is what I learned.
On a literary note, this is by far the worst-written holy text I have ever encountered. I have read the Bible, the Tao Te Ching, the Bhagavad Gita, the Dhammapada, parts of the Zoroastrian Zend Avesta, and more. I have never encountered anything in print so haphazard, needlessly confusing, arbitrary, befuddled, inaccurate, inconsistent, repetitive, ADHD-brained, or postmodern. In all of the aforementioned books there are moments of boredom, even stretches of repetition (certain books of the bible repeat with variation), lists of names, (genealogies in the Bible, names of deities in the Dhammapada), and places that are objectionable to us as moderns. But, and this is the biggest But I've ever written, they all contain in them profound wisdom, gripping narratives, convincing trains of thought, and revelatory awe. I say this not as a theological universalist, not in the slightest, but as a human being who can appreciate the glimmering of truth in darkness, the groping after the holy and ineffable. But the Quran abjectly lacks this. The closest the Quran gets is brief snatches of mildly interesting phrases and concepts.
Never does it rise to the striking coherence and massive breadth that the Bible's titanic story tells. Never does it rise to the pithy, paradoxical wisdom of the Tao Te Ching. Never does it rise to the Bhagavad Gita's blistering condemnation from Vishnu burning away the complacent, worldly conformists. Never does it rise to the Dhammapada's practical and paradoxical reflections upon meditation and desire-denial. Never does it arise to the pure awe felt when reading the Zend Avesta's ultra-ancient fire worship and refusal to bury corpses in the ground, lest the ground become defiled.
I used all these negations because I learned well from the Quran, a book almost entirely built upon negatives. Islam is not the polytheism of the pagans, it's not the Torah of the Jews nor the Injeel of the Christians. It's not the Trinity, since Allah has no partners. It's not a positive religion, but a negative religion, in the apophatic theology sense. It's philosophically safer to state what God is not rather than what he is, so that's the route the Quran goes. The only positives we learn about Allah is that He is One, and that he is full of hate, seething, lead-sinners-astray-to-the-Final-Judgement hatred. He barely loves, and only is slightly merciful to those who are his spiritual slaves, the submissive Muslims. If he were to deign, he wouldn't forgive any of them. If he had a bad day when he ended the world, he might just throw them all into Hell for the Hell of it.
And boy does he love hell. The details here are far greater than in the Bible: burning off of regenerative skin, eating of putrid, stomach-churning food, drinking of boiling, thirst-causing sludge. The contrast to this hell is Jenna, or paradise, which is full of metaphorical rivers running below, and metaphorical wine which never gets you drunk, and metaphorical virgins which never lose their tightness. I only bring this up in a dismissive, frustrated way because it was mentioned in nearly every single of the 114 Suras. I pity anyone who forced themselves to memorize this book, because it's so deadly repetitious. A good percentage of the footnotes were literally "this verse is identical to _, _, _, _, _, _, _, _, _, _, _, and _". To get the whole content of the book, one could read up to about Sura 12, then read a few in the teens, a few in the 20s, then skip randomly to the end.
The repetition is never enlightening, only ever staying at the exact same level. Mohammed had a lot of haters, they called him "possessed" or challenged his prophethood, asking for a miracle; he utterly refused to do any miracles, and the disbelievers didn't buy his verbal revelation. I can't blame them, because his only "miracle" was the Quran, which, even given this academic and very-well-respected translation, is one of the worst-written books I've read, and I've logged nearly 600 on Goodreads.
The problem is probably because this wasn't a book, it was a recitation. Mohammed was illiterate. Every Sura is a matter of conjecture, a patchwork of various verses from various times and places. Almost none of them are pure "Meccan" or "Medinian" Suras, since every one has certain commentators who claim a few of the verses came from somewhere else. When you read the actual content, this becomes very obvious, as throughout is a total lack of transitions. From verse to verse he will alternate between praising God, condemning the unbelievers, telling a brief story about Moses, giving laws about divorce, and then some. There are no signals to the reader in the text itself to help us follow his train of thought, mostly because there is no coherent train of thought. Hamza Yusuf, bless him, claims this is because the book is "complex" and "nonlinear;" this is false: James Joyce's Ulysses is complex and nonlinear. I have studied that book, and it was carefully written, pretty excessively so. This book, by contrast, was thrown together by an illiterate opportunistic pervert who wanted to have infinite wives and build an empire for himself. Thank God he died before he himself could do that.
I think the point about women is one worth dwelling on briefly, and it relates directly to the (lack of) organization. The first Sura is a short one, basically just the Bismullah. The second is the longest, and they slowly get shorter the further we go along. Sura 2 is a giant mess of a chapter, including laws about various things, calls to attack the unbelievers and kill them, occasional calls to stop doing that, and generally just a lot of randomness. I was able to tolerate this because A) I was fresh to the book and hadn't had my will beaten down yet, and B) I already had read this chapter before. The footnotes were helpful insofar as it became generally comprehensible, and the notes on Muslims seeing themselves as the "middle way" was fascinating. More on that later. But generally, I don't care if people call for my death, it's nothing new. The third Sura was a repeating-yet-confused-because-contradictory attack on other people of the book, meaning Jews and Christians. It's unclear whether Mohammed was attacking a heretical trinity (God the Father, Jesus, and Mary), or whether he was really just that theologically illiterate. Once again, more on that later.
The Sura that broke me was Sura four: Women. If you've read my reviews before, you will know I'm not a modern-minded person, so my objections do not stem from some neoliberal feminism. Instead, I found this the most depressing chapter because of how badly it missed the point. Women gain a few rights in Islam versus the pagan Arabs, sure. But they're still seen as chattel, as animals to be plowed whenever, as items to be collected (up to a maximum of four, plus any slave women you want to rape). They can be beaten, but only as a last resort. I'll repeat that. You can beat a disobedient wife in Islam. The contrast between this half-assed ennobling of women versus the idea of marriage in Christianity is shocking. In fact, there's not even a comparison.
Time and again, Christ is figured as the Bridegroom, and the Church is his Bride. He is willing to die for his bride because he loves her so much. In Christianity, men are to love their women as much as themselves, i.e. to be equal with them in a deep and important way. Similarly, in Christianity, Christ is our Brother, and God is our Father; we are adopted into a holy family, receiving the inheritance that only sons of the king would normally get. This is a profound and empowering thing to hear, something which gives people dignity and makes God a personal, personable God, one full of love and mercy in action, not merely in word. Most importantly, while we were still enemies of God in our sin, God loved us, died for us, forgave us.
There is one verse, and I'm kicking myself because it would take way too long to find it, but there is one verse in the Quran where Mohammed accidentally let this idea slip through. A brief glimmer of beauty shone through, but all the commentators snuffed it out. They found it preposterous that God could ever love us first; we had to love God entirely, and his love in return was only ever partial, grudging, conditional. Hell drips from every page of the Quran, and it uses phrases about God's hatred and condemnation much more often than it does his love and mercy. The Bismullah is totally absent from Sura 9, one of the chronologically latest and most violent Suras.
The only reassuring thing about the book (for those of us who don't want to consider all Muslims as warring enemies) is that it's hopelessly confused. Abrogation abounds, causing verses even within the same book to be cancelled out, such as the evolution of Wine from being praised, to cautioned, to totally forbidden. I will grant that from the Old to the New Testament, there are certain ceremonial laws, especially dietary ones, which change. That's well and fine because it was directly linked to a shift in the overall message, i.e. Christ is not just King of the Jews, but the King of Jews and Gentiles alike. Even more importantly, he was the culmination of prophecies that had been building up for over a couple thousand years before his time. In contrast, Mohammed's prophethood only lasted a few years, and there are more than a few topics where he totally changed his opinion; I mean, Gabriel revealed it conveniently to him. I'm sorry, but it's shocking that people back then and nowadays fell for the charlatanism of Mohammed. You can only have 4 wives, but he can have as many as he wants? It's pretty clear to see how he got annoyed at people and conveniently changed his mind, reciting a new verse to deal with the annoyance.
I'm not aware of Christ ever doing anything like that, either setting up double-standards or plainly changing his opinion on things in a short amount of time. Sometimes Mohammed attempts to do his own impression of Jesus, telling short parables. The problem is that they're such short and obvious things that they don't really help at all. They're at most a sentence or two. "The disbeliever is like an ass." Okay, that doesn't help us at all. Why did you tell that to us like we needed to hear it?
I now thoroughly understand why the common Muslim response was "you need to read it in Arabic;" because it is exceptionally bad to read in English. Even if you take license with the text, it's still incomprehensible without footnotes. The New Testament might be a little confusing without them, for example not knowing who the Sadducees and Pharisees are, but at least it follows a coherent narrative and includes cause and effect. The closest the Quran gets to this is a couple of chapters named after Jewish patriarchs like Joseph and Noah. The problem with these is that they pretty obviously were half-overheard and half-forgotten retellings with some folk additions and generally forgetting how to transition from one part of the story to the next.
Unfortunately, I read this whole thing and I'm not even sure I learned anything. At least with holy texts I disagree with, like those I listed at the start, I can gain some general wisdom or a deeper insight into why a group thinks a certain way. But with this hot mess, I can't really say I learned anything, which is shocking. The only other thing I can think of was that remark about being a "middle people" I mentioned earlier; for some reason, Muslims think their religion is a "middle" one, specifically between the letter of the law of Judaism and the grace of Christianity. There is a slight point to this, as Allah relents from them having to do so many prayers (only giving them 5 a day), and relenting from other restrictions. It's fascinating that Muslims think they're "middle" or "moderate," precisely because the rest of the world complains regularly about them not being either of those things. Maybe it's a problem of not practicing what they preach (which is what I hope), but I fear it's because this religion is hard-baked into a vengeful, puritanical shape. Of course every religious tradition can be abused and in turn lead to abuses, but this one is so ripe for them that it's hard to put into words. Unfortunately, my old quip about comparing the wikipedia pages for the Military career of Muhammad and the Passion of Jesus still stands, honestly all the more starkly.
I do think that if you applied outside wisdom/patience/kindness to this text, it would be at least bearable, but as the root of this religion it's quite rotten from the start. Its literary incompetence precludes nearly any theological wisdom to arise, other than vague insults against people who enjoy this world and thus sacrifice the next. I normally am a huge cheerleader to tell people that, but the Quran does it so badly and repeats the same superficial complaint so often that I rescind that modest praise. There is really nothing to praise here, other than the monumental effort put in by the editors to make this text legible. Even once it is legible, however, it is far from edifying or desirable.
I hope you don't hear a sneer in my voice as I say this. I mean it genuinely. This book is incredibly bad, even just in terms of being a book. Once you get to the actual content, it's a mixed bag tending toward abuse and negativity. It's incredibly demoralizing to read, as if the only parts of the bible you read were the most pessimistic OT prophets, Job, and the angriest Psalms. But even then, you'd have more coherence and complete thoughts than the entirety of this book, so it would actually be way too kind to you as a reader.
I am glad that I read this book, but I am also glad I never have to read it again. I may look through it for some of the underlined or dog-eared parts I wanted to return to, but dear Lord I cannot read another Sura for the rest of the year. I fear my own writing abilities have been permanently crippled as a result of this torture. The closest thing I can liken it to is a post-modern, machine-generated experiment. It seriously was so repetitious that at times it felt like an old, pre-AI random phrase generator trying to make sense out of a litany of prefab cliches. If only it was only that, and not an actual holy text that over a billion people follow. God have mercy on us. Not Allah, but God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the one true God.
As a result, I wanted desperately to read a good translation of the Quran. I wanted desperately for the attacks of the anti-muslims to be proven false by this book. I thought that if any edition could give me a clear, positive view of Islam, it would be this edition, which even includes a chapter by Yusuf himself. So, I bought this book just in time for Ramadan, with it arriving March 1st.
Cracking it open, I was shocked that every page had only a few lines of actual verses at the top, and the entire rest of the page was commentary. The book was a softcover, so I had to rest it on a lapdesk (atop a pillow), much like the book-cradles (I don't know the real name) I've seen so often-used by Muslims when reading their holy book. I got an app on my phone to help remind me to do my daily Ramadan reading (among other tasks), and I dutifully read for anywhere from 1-3 hours a day for most of the month. I found a reading schedule online and followed it until very close to the end of the month, which was interrupted by a busy weekend. I breathed in this Quran for an entire month. As one of my brothers quipped, it was as if I went into someone's house, and they offered to cook me their best dish. I sat down, and this is what they served me; this is what I learned.
On a literary note, this is by far the worst-written holy text I have ever encountered. I have read the Bible, the Tao Te Ching, the Bhagavad Gita, the Dhammapada, parts of the Zoroastrian Zend Avesta, and more. I have never encountered anything in print so haphazard, needlessly confusing, arbitrary, befuddled, inaccurate, inconsistent, repetitive, ADHD-brained, or postmodern. In all of the aforementioned books there are moments of boredom, even stretches of repetition (certain books of the bible repeat with variation), lists of names, (genealogies in the Bible, names of deities in the Dhammapada), and places that are objectionable to us as moderns. But, and this is the biggest But I've ever written, they all contain in them profound wisdom, gripping narratives, convincing trains of thought, and revelatory awe. I say this not as a theological universalist, not in the slightest, but as a human being who can appreciate the glimmering of truth in darkness, the groping after the holy and ineffable. But the Quran abjectly lacks this. The closest the Quran gets is brief snatches of mildly interesting phrases and concepts.
Never does it rise to the striking coherence and massive breadth that the Bible's titanic story tells. Never does it rise to the pithy, paradoxical wisdom of the Tao Te Ching. Never does it rise to the Bhagavad Gita's blistering condemnation from Vishnu burning away the complacent, worldly conformists. Never does it rise to the Dhammapada's practical and paradoxical reflections upon meditation and desire-denial. Never does it arise to the pure awe felt when reading the Zend Avesta's ultra-ancient fire worship and refusal to bury corpses in the ground, lest the ground become defiled.
I used all these negations because I learned well from the Quran, a book almost entirely built upon negatives. Islam is not the polytheism of the pagans, it's not the Torah of the Jews nor the Injeel of the Christians. It's not the Trinity, since Allah has no partners. It's not a positive religion, but a negative religion, in the apophatic theology sense. It's philosophically safer to state what God is not rather than what he is, so that's the route the Quran goes. The only positives we learn about Allah is that He is One, and that he is full of hate, seething, lead-sinners-astray-to-the-Final-Judgement hatred. He barely loves, and only is slightly merciful to those who are his spiritual slaves, the submissive Muslims. If he were to deign, he wouldn't forgive any of them. If he had a bad day when he ended the world, he might just throw them all into Hell for the Hell of it.
And boy does he love hell. The details here are far greater than in the Bible: burning off of regenerative skin, eating of putrid, stomach-churning food, drinking of boiling, thirst-causing sludge. The contrast to this hell is Jenna, or paradise, which is full of metaphorical rivers running below, and metaphorical wine which never gets you drunk, and metaphorical virgins which never lose their tightness. I only bring this up in a dismissive, frustrated way because it was mentioned in nearly every single of the 114 Suras. I pity anyone who forced themselves to memorize this book, because it's so deadly repetitious. A good percentage of the footnotes were literally "this verse is identical to _, _, _, _, _, _, _, _, _, _, _, and _". To get the whole content of the book, one could read up to about Sura 12, then read a few in the teens, a few in the 20s, then skip randomly to the end.
The repetition is never enlightening, only ever staying at the exact same level. Mohammed had a lot of haters, they called him "possessed" or challenged his prophethood, asking for a miracle; he utterly refused to do any miracles, and the disbelievers didn't buy his verbal revelation. I can't blame them, because his only "miracle" was the Quran, which, even given this academic and very-well-respected translation, is one of the worst-written books I've read, and I've logged nearly 600 on Goodreads.
The problem is probably because this wasn't a book, it was a recitation. Mohammed was illiterate. Every Sura is a matter of conjecture, a patchwork of various verses from various times and places. Almost none of them are pure "Meccan" or "Medinian" Suras, since every one has certain commentators who claim a few of the verses came from somewhere else. When you read the actual content, this becomes very obvious, as throughout is a total lack of transitions. From verse to verse he will alternate between praising God, condemning the unbelievers, telling a brief story about Moses, giving laws about divorce, and then some. There are no signals to the reader in the text itself to help us follow his train of thought, mostly because there is no coherent train of thought. Hamza Yusuf, bless him, claims this is because the book is "complex" and "nonlinear;" this is false: James Joyce's Ulysses is complex and nonlinear. I have studied that book, and it was carefully written, pretty excessively so. This book, by contrast, was thrown together by an illiterate opportunistic pervert who wanted to have infinite wives and build an empire for himself. Thank God he died before he himself could do that.
I think the point about women is one worth dwelling on briefly, and it relates directly to the (lack of) organization. The first Sura is a short one, basically just the Bismullah. The second is the longest, and they slowly get shorter the further we go along. Sura 2 is a giant mess of a chapter, including laws about various things, calls to attack the unbelievers and kill them, occasional calls to stop doing that, and generally just a lot of randomness. I was able to tolerate this because A) I was fresh to the book and hadn't had my will beaten down yet, and B) I already had read this chapter before. The footnotes were helpful insofar as it became generally comprehensible, and the notes on Muslims seeing themselves as the "middle way" was fascinating. More on that later. But generally, I don't care if people call for my death, it's nothing new. The third Sura was a repeating-yet-confused-because-contradictory attack on other people of the book, meaning Jews and Christians. It's unclear whether Mohammed was attacking a heretical trinity (God the Father, Jesus, and Mary), or whether he was really just that theologically illiterate. Once again, more on that later.
The Sura that broke me was Sura four: Women. If you've read my reviews before, you will know I'm not a modern-minded person, so my objections do not stem from some neoliberal feminism. Instead, I found this the most depressing chapter because of how badly it missed the point. Women gain a few rights in Islam versus the pagan Arabs, sure. But they're still seen as chattel, as animals to be plowed whenever, as items to be collected (up to a maximum of four, plus any slave women you want to rape). They can be beaten, but only as a last resort. I'll repeat that. You can beat a disobedient wife in Islam. The contrast between this half-assed ennobling of women versus the idea of marriage in Christianity is shocking. In fact, there's not even a comparison.
Time and again, Christ is figured as the Bridegroom, and the Church is his Bride. He is willing to die for his bride because he loves her so much. In Christianity, men are to love their women as much as themselves, i.e. to be equal with them in a deep and important way. Similarly, in Christianity, Christ is our Brother, and God is our Father; we are adopted into a holy family, receiving the inheritance that only sons of the king would normally get. This is a profound and empowering thing to hear, something which gives people dignity and makes God a personal, personable God, one full of love and mercy in action, not merely in word. Most importantly, while we were still enemies of God in our sin, God loved us, died for us, forgave us.
There is one verse, and I'm kicking myself because it would take way too long to find it, but there is one verse in the Quran where Mohammed accidentally let this idea slip through. A brief glimmer of beauty shone through, but all the commentators snuffed it out. They found it preposterous that God could ever love us first; we had to love God entirely, and his love in return was only ever partial, grudging, conditional. Hell drips from every page of the Quran, and it uses phrases about God's hatred and condemnation much more often than it does his love and mercy. The Bismullah is totally absent from Sura 9, one of the chronologically latest and most violent Suras.
The only reassuring thing about the book (for those of us who don't want to consider all Muslims as warring enemies) is that it's hopelessly confused. Abrogation abounds, causing verses even within the same book to be cancelled out, such as the evolution of Wine from being praised, to cautioned, to totally forbidden. I will grant that from the Old to the New Testament, there are certain ceremonial laws, especially dietary ones, which change. That's well and fine because it was directly linked to a shift in the overall message, i.e. Christ is not just King of the Jews, but the King of Jews and Gentiles alike. Even more importantly, he was the culmination of prophecies that had been building up for over a couple thousand years before his time. In contrast, Mohammed's prophethood only lasted a few years, and there are more than a few topics where he totally changed his opinion; I mean, Gabriel revealed it conveniently to him. I'm sorry, but it's shocking that people back then and nowadays fell for the charlatanism of Mohammed. You can only have 4 wives, but he can have as many as he wants? It's pretty clear to see how he got annoyed at people and conveniently changed his mind, reciting a new verse to deal with the annoyance.
I'm not aware of Christ ever doing anything like that, either setting up double-standards or plainly changing his opinion on things in a short amount of time. Sometimes Mohammed attempts to do his own impression of Jesus, telling short parables. The problem is that they're such short and obvious things that they don't really help at all. They're at most a sentence or two. "The disbeliever is like an ass." Okay, that doesn't help us at all. Why did you tell that to us like we needed to hear it?
I now thoroughly understand why the common Muslim response was "you need to read it in Arabic;" because it is exceptionally bad to read in English. Even if you take license with the text, it's still incomprehensible without footnotes. The New Testament might be a little confusing without them, for example not knowing who the Sadducees and Pharisees are, but at least it follows a coherent narrative and includes cause and effect. The closest the Quran gets to this is a couple of chapters named after Jewish patriarchs like Joseph and Noah. The problem with these is that they pretty obviously were half-overheard and half-forgotten retellings with some folk additions and generally forgetting how to transition from one part of the story to the next.
Unfortunately, I read this whole thing and I'm not even sure I learned anything. At least with holy texts I disagree with, like those I listed at the start, I can gain some general wisdom or a deeper insight into why a group thinks a certain way. But with this hot mess, I can't really say I learned anything, which is shocking. The only other thing I can think of was that remark about being a "middle people" I mentioned earlier; for some reason, Muslims think their religion is a "middle" one, specifically between the letter of the law of Judaism and the grace of Christianity. There is a slight point to this, as Allah relents from them having to do so many prayers (only giving them 5 a day), and relenting from other restrictions. It's fascinating that Muslims think they're "middle" or "moderate," precisely because the rest of the world complains regularly about them not being either of those things. Maybe it's a problem of not practicing what they preach (which is what I hope), but I fear it's because this religion is hard-baked into a vengeful, puritanical shape. Of course every religious tradition can be abused and in turn lead to abuses, but this one is so ripe for them that it's hard to put into words. Unfortunately, my old quip about comparing the wikipedia pages for the Military career of Muhammad and the Passion of Jesus still stands, honestly all the more starkly.
I do think that if you applied outside wisdom/patience/kindness to this text, it would be at least bearable, but as the root of this religion it's quite rotten from the start. Its literary incompetence precludes nearly any theological wisdom to arise, other than vague insults against people who enjoy this world and thus sacrifice the next. I normally am a huge cheerleader to tell people that, but the Quran does it so badly and repeats the same superficial complaint so often that I rescind that modest praise. There is really nothing to praise here, other than the monumental effort put in by the editors to make this text legible. Even once it is legible, however, it is far from edifying or desirable.
I hope you don't hear a sneer in my voice as I say this. I mean it genuinely. This book is incredibly bad, even just in terms of being a book. Once you get to the actual content, it's a mixed bag tending toward abuse and negativity. It's incredibly demoralizing to read, as if the only parts of the bible you read were the most pessimistic OT prophets, Job, and the angriest Psalms. But even then, you'd have more coherence and complete thoughts than the entirety of this book, so it would actually be way too kind to you as a reader.
I am glad that I read this book, but I am also glad I never have to read it again. I may look through it for some of the underlined or dog-eared parts I wanted to return to, but dear Lord I cannot read another Sura for the rest of the year. I fear my own writing abilities have been permanently crippled as a result of this torture. The closest thing I can liken it to is a post-modern, machine-generated experiment. It seriously was so repetitious that at times it felt like an old, pre-AI random phrase generator trying to make sense out of a litany of prefab cliches. If only it was only that, and not an actual holy text that over a billion people follow. God have mercy on us. Not Allah, but God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the one true God.
May 18, 2020
After reading the many rave reviews of this commentary I decided to make it my source of reference whilst reading the Quran during this month of Ramadan. Normally I have always used Muhammad Asad's and Abdullah Yousuf Ali, the one by Taqi Usmani is in my opinion is slipshod and careless.
A Quranic commentary must contain the following features:
1) It provides the context for the chapters and important verses.
2) It gives you a succinct and contextual analysis of the Arabic words.
3) The English of the text is good, not idiomatic but reasonably easy to understand.
The Study Quran pretty much satisfies these criteria, but there were quite a few verses where the translations seemed either superfluous or redundant. I have highlighted some of the ones below in which the translators perhaps missed the point.
A) In Surah Imran verse 52, it translates the Arabic word for the helpers of Jesus as 'Hawiriyoon', this is literally translated 'One who whitens clothes by washing them' The Study Quran however translates this words as 'apostles' due to an Ethipian Arabiv verb. Now, I must confess I was somewhat baffled by this tangent. Ethiopians at that time did not speak Arabic.
Muhammad Asad gives what I believe the correct context, he refers to them as the Essenes, for whom the wearing of white robes and immersing them in water was an established practice. In fact Pope Benedict XVI actually stated during his Easter message in 2007, that he believed that Jesus celebrated the Passover supper according to Essene rights. Raising the possiblility that the Propher Jesus may have been part of the Essene brotherhood.
B) In the 38th Chapter (Surah Saad) an incident involving the Prophet David and the complainants with 99 Ewes is described. This does bear a certain similarity to the biblical version. However The Study Quran seems to provide no further analysis.
C) The tribes of Gog and Magog are described twice in the Quran. In Surah Anbiyaa; they are described as:
'Until the Gog and Magog (people) are let through (their barrier), and they swiftly swarm from every hill.'
The context does bear some similarity to their description in the Book of Revelations: 'Gog and Magog, to gather them together to the war: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up over the breadth of the earth.'
This also tallies with some of the Hadith about Gog and Magog but strangely this is not mentioned in any of the commentaries by Asad, Abdullah Yousuf Ali or Study Quran.
That said Study Quran does do the job required and is worth the money you pay for it.
A Quranic commentary must contain the following features:
1) It provides the context for the chapters and important verses.
2) It gives you a succinct and contextual analysis of the Arabic words.
3) The English of the text is good, not idiomatic but reasonably easy to understand.
The Study Quran pretty much satisfies these criteria, but there were quite a few verses where the translations seemed either superfluous or redundant. I have highlighted some of the ones below in which the translators perhaps missed the point.
A) In Surah Imran verse 52, it translates the Arabic word for the helpers of Jesus as 'Hawiriyoon', this is literally translated 'One who whitens clothes by washing them' The Study Quran however translates this words as 'apostles' due to an Ethipian Arabiv verb. Now, I must confess I was somewhat baffled by this tangent. Ethiopians at that time did not speak Arabic.
Muhammad Asad gives what I believe the correct context, he refers to them as the Essenes, for whom the wearing of white robes and immersing them in water was an established practice. In fact Pope Benedict XVI actually stated during his Easter message in 2007, that he believed that Jesus celebrated the Passover supper according to Essene rights. Raising the possiblility that the Propher Jesus may have been part of the Essene brotherhood.
B) In the 38th Chapter (Surah Saad) an incident involving the Prophet David and the complainants with 99 Ewes is described. This does bear a certain similarity to the biblical version. However The Study Quran seems to provide no further analysis.
C) The tribes of Gog and Magog are described twice in the Quran. In Surah Anbiyaa; they are described as:
'Until the Gog and Magog (people) are let through (their barrier), and they swiftly swarm from every hill.'
The context does bear some similarity to their description in the Book of Revelations: 'Gog and Magog, to gather them together to the war: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up over the breadth of the earth.'
This also tallies with some of the Hadith about Gog and Magog but strangely this is not mentioned in any of the commentaries by Asad, Abdullah Yousuf Ali or Study Quran.
That said Study Quran does do the job required and is worth the money you pay for it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 79 reviews