The Koran: A Very Short Introduction 1st Edition
by Michael Cook (Author)
4.1 out of 5 stars 115 ratings
The Koran has constituted a remarkably resilient core of identity and continuity for a religious tradition that is now in its fifteenth century. In this Very Short Introduction, Michael Cook provides a lucid and direct account of the significance of the Koran both in the modern world and in that of traditional Islam. He gives vivid accounts of its role in Muslim civilization, illustrates the diversity of interpretations championed by traditional and modern commentators, discusses the processes by which the book took shape, and compares it to other scriptures and classics of the historic cultures of Eurasia.
About the Series: Combining authority with wit, accessibility, and style, Very Short Introductions offer an introduction to some of life's most interesting topics. Written by experts for the newcomer, they demonstrate the finest contemporary thinking about the central problems and issues in hundreds of key topics, from philosophy to Freud, quantum theory to Islam.
Editorial Reviews
Review
"In a beautifully written, concise, and insightful study... Michael Cook makes clear some of the mysteries of this holy book....Evocative and explanatory.... For anyone, at almost any level of knowledge, wanting to learn more about the Qur'an, this is a wonderful place to start."--First Things
"Professor Cook's book is informative, witty, and rich with insight. The author firmly places the Koran within its broader context, lending his treatment depth and vigor."--Mohamed Mahmoud, Tufts University
About the Author
Michael Cook is Cleveland E. Dodge Professor in the Department of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University.
Product details
Publisher : Oxford University Press; 1st edition (June 15, 2000)
Language : English
Paperback : 176 pages
Customer reviews
4.1 out of 5 stars
==
The Koran: A Very Short Introduction
by Michael A. Cook
3.38 · Rating details · 644 ratings · 72 reviews
The Koran has constituted a remarkably resilient core of identity and continuity for a religious tradition that is now in its fifteenth century. In this Very Short Introduction, Michael Cook provides a lucid and direct account of the significance of the Koran both in the modern world and in
that of traditional Islam. He gives vivid accounts of its role in Muslim civilizatio ...more
GET A COPY
KoboOnline Stores ▾Book Links ▾
Paperback, 176 pages
Published June 15th 2000 by Oxford University Press, USA (first published February 24th 2000)
More Details...Edit Details
FRIEND REVIEWS
Recommend This Book None of your friends have reviewed this book yet.
READER Q&A
Ask the Goodreads community a question about The Koran
54355902. uy100 cr1,0,100,100
Ask anything about the book
Popular Answered Questions
Would you recommend this book to someone who knows nothing about the Koran and its history? Does it come off as impartial? Thanks
Like 4 Years Ago Add Your Answer
Johnny Boy Engraçado, também sou de São João da Talha!! Em relação à questão, o livro é completamente acessível ao leigo e não requer uma prévia familiarização c…more
flag
See 1 question about The Koran…
LISTS WITH THIS BOOK
Consciousness by Susan BlackmoreJung by Anthony StevensMarx by Peter SingerMathematics by Timothy GowersHistory by John H. Arnold
The Oxford Very Short Introductions Series
444 books — 118 voters
Muhammad, the World-Changer by Mohamad JebaraThe Koran by Michael A. CookHow to Read the Qur'an by Carl W. ErnstFables of the Ancients? by Alan DundesQur'ans by Keith E. Small
Academic Books on the Qur'an
87 books — 12 voters
More lists with this book...
COMMUNITY REVIEWS
Showing 1-30
Average rating3.38 · Rating details · 644 ratings · 72 reviews
Search review text
English (72)
More filters | Sort order
Sejin,
Sejin, start your review of The Koran: A Very Short Introduction
Write a review
Riku Sayuj
May 25, 2014Riku Sayuj rated it it was ok
Shelves: history-medieval, books-about-books, vsis, philosophy-eastern, religion, history-civilizations, quran
More like A Very Short Introduction to Classical Arabic: exhausting linguistic analysis peppers the pages, though a lot of good stuff about the Koran and its many meanings are hidden inside. But frankly, I am dazed.
This VSI, while being not so helpful in understanding the Koran itself, gives a good flavor of the centuries old task of deciphering it and the many difficulties thereof, by pointing out the many difficulties attendant on a reading -- with specific verse-examples, with the linguistic difficulties highlighted; but not ignoring the more theological difficulties regarding: the composition of the Koran, pre-existence, satanic verses, struggles with modern values, tolerance vs intolerance, women’s role and treatment, etc. Retrospectively, as I write this review I can see a lot of ground was covered, but I must warn you it is not much fun while actually reading. The reader can feel very lost very quickly in an ocean of divine arabic versification and interpretation. (less)
flag20 likes · Like · 11 comments · see review
Darwin8u
Oct 23, 2016Darwin8u rated it liked it
Shelves: 2016, vsi, nonfiction, religion
"It is surely a noble Koran in a hidden Book - none but the purified touch it - a sending down from the Lord of all Being."
- Q56:77-80
description
I've been thinking of reading/listening to the Koran for a couple years now. I've read various Sura before, and have a fair working knowledge of the book, but have never approached it from beginning to end. Recently, with the publication of The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary, I'm close to taking the plunge. Because of the strong oral tradition of the Koran, however, I also wanted to listen to it. Listening to it in Arabic presents the obvious issue: I don't understand Arabic, so I found a good Modern English reading based on interpretations of the meaning by Dr Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali and Dr Muhammad Muhsin Khan. I've also got a version the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia sent me (I actually have an English AND Turkish translation) once when I wrote requesting it. This translation is fairly dominant in English and from what I've read has a fairly conservative, dare I say fundamentalist, bent to it. Again, I don't read Arabic so when I eventually approach the book I will ALWAYS be dependent on others for their scholarship, interpretation, and thus biases.
That is part of the reasons I wanted to read Cook's VSI to the Koran before I started reading the Koran itself. In broad strokes, I knew much of what he spoke about before, but his details were interesting. I was hoping for more of an overview of the text itself, but Cook's introduction mainly sets the table for reading the text by explaining (going backwards in time): The Koran in the Modern world, the Koran in the traditional Muslim world, and the formation of the Koran. The most interesting part to me was the middle section, which delved into the Koran in the tradition Muslim world. In this section he explored the Koran as codex, text, worship, truth, and object of dogma. That said, I also liked the first section's exploration of the idea of scripture (which extends, obviously beyond the Koran) and the dissemination, translation, and interpretation of the Koran.
So, in many ways this book didn't give me all of what I wanted, but it did give me much that I think I will need to read and better understand the Koran. (less)
flag15 likes · Like · 5 comments · see review
Tariq Mahmood
Sep 03, 2012Tariq Mahmood rated it it was amazing
Shelves: islam
This is book is a very concise and relevant view of issues related to the Koran. The Koran is a scripture, not a treatise or dogmatic theology.
The author points out some of the known issues in the Koran, like the issue of abrogation of verses. How can all powerful Allah not know? The author does not delve too much in the many explanations given by Muslim apologists defending or denying abrogation, but I guess it is very difficult to defend the resulting contradictions due to the many abrogations listed in the Koran.
The other issue was introduced by 13th century scholar of Islam, Ibn Taymiyyah, who argued that all Muslims shall have to learn Arabic in order to really understand Islam. Suffice to say, this completely impractical suggestion is pretty relevant even to this date where a number of scholars argue its many merits, leaving me flabbergasted generally.
The next issue was relevance of Koran when juxtaposed with modernity values of science, religious tolerance and women rights. With science, the author quotes studies profiling Koran in light of modern science. The obvious disadvantage being that science will move on, thus making the Koranic justifications redundant. Religious tolerance is also an issue with many Scholars declaring non-Muslims subservient in the light of Koranic verses. Similar stance is taken when women are considered through the Koranic lens. I think the author has made a pretty valid point as Koran fares very well when compared to the Bible and other scriptures but lacks when judged against modernity. More efforts have to be taken by the Islamic scholars to modernise the Koran, I guess otherwise it could be resigned to obscurity like other previous scriptures.
Other issues discussed are...
- Whether to consider the Koran literally or metaphorically?
- Should the Koran be bought or sold like the Jews?
- How to dispose a worn out or used Koran properly? Wipe off the ink from the paper maybe? But what to do with the inky water? the author cites the example of the Taliban who banned all paper bags in Afghanistan in fear that the paper may contain Koranic verses.
- How to make sure that the text remains accurate? Engrave it on the rock for longevity? The Chinese Hun did it but that too could not last for more than a decade. There are no master copies of the Koran.
All in all the author likes the way Koran was preserved, with all errors intact, the way how the Koran was broadcast across the ages.
Finally the tradition of numbering the verses has been pretty recent and the naming of Surahs is also man made, not divine. (less)
flag8 likes · Like · comment · see review
Ahmad Sharabiani
Jun 01, 2016Ahmad Sharabiani added it
Shelves: philosophy, 21th-century, non-fiction, religion, historical, islam
The Koran: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions #13), Michael Alan Cook
The Koran has constituted a remarkably resilient core of identity and continuity for a religious tradition that is now in its fifteenth century. In this Very Short Introduction, Michael Cook provides a lucid and direct account of the significance of the Koran both in the modern world and in that of traditional Islam.
flag7 likes · Like · comment · see review
Luís
Jul 15, 2020Luís rated it it was ok · review of another edition
Shelves: g-religion, e-2, great-britain
The Koran is the sacred book of the Muslim religion. He believes in the Islamic faith and is the word of God. Or God, as revealed by the angel Gabriel to Mohammed, the last prophet of the Judeo-Christian God. Thus, the book is considered divine. The Koran is Islam as the Torah is Judaism, or the New Testament is Christianity. Most of the Koran (sometimes also called Qur'an) written during the life of Muhammad. The rest thought to have been written shortly after his death from the notes of the scribes. It estimated that Muhammad had over 50 writers scoring his speeches during the 7th century AD. However, in most sects of Islam, it is believed that the Quran exists in its entirety and unchanged today and is not an interpretation of Muhammad's speeches but a transcript. Therefore, the Qur'an is the word of God and establishes how Muslims should live in the world.
Because Arabic initially used was soon lost to other derived languages. Most Muslims see the translation of the Qur'an as interpretations of the original. Muslim scholars return to the original language to resolve interpretive disputes. Some Muslim sects interpret the Qur'an, while others take each word as the word of God and therefore, incontestable. In all Muslim sects, it is forbidding to destroy a Koran or to deface one. Each copy, whether in the original language or not, has inherent holiness. However, there is controversy over the interpretation of the Qur'an, and conflicts tend to be divided by several Muslim sects. Certain things agreed upon. Muhammad is the last prophet of God, who divinely inspired through the Angel Gabriel. His words are the words of God. Just all religions in the world need to figure how to make their texts the sacred work in the modern world, Muslim sects want to be to take on this task by interpreting Muhammad's words for today. Or merely sticking close as possible with the teachings of Muhammad could comparing to fundamentalist Christianity or Judaism. Like many religious works, the Qur'an has some inherent contradictions, which can define theological differences in Muslim sects. For example, a passage from the Koran advocates beating women who misbehave, while several other texts advocate that for women what kind of treatment they should receive from their husbands. A person may use such passages at any time in God's word, suggesting that disobedient women should treat poorly.
On the other hand, it can argue that throughout the Qur'an, Muhammad's convincing argument is for the gentle and loving treatment of women. Some Quranic prophets recount religious texts that are familiar enough to read the Old and New Testaments. The Virgin Mary revered in the Qur'an. Thus, Abraham, Moses, Noah and all have recounted stories. Jesus Christ saw as a prophet and not the son of God, which differs from the beliefs of many Christian sects. However, the key figures of the New and Old Testament are honoured relevant and recognized as the predecessors of the Last Prophet, Muhammad. Their teachings and words have created the fastest-growing company in the world religion. (less)
flag5 likes · Like · see review
Omar Ali
Dec 17, 2013Omar Ali rated it really liked it
Pious Muslims may feel that in the presence of the text and its commentaries, they do not need Professor Michael Cook's "very short introduction" to the Koran. The pious may also wish to stay away because Professor Cook was once associated with the notorious "Hagarene hypothesis" (put forth in the 1977 book: Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World by Patricia Crone and Michael Cook) though he has since backed away from some of the more extreme claims of that book. But "The Koran, a very short introduction" turns out to be a very witty and interesting book, full of insights that the most pious Muslim will find informative and stimulating.
There is a tendency to avoid difficult issues at a time when Likudniks, oil barons and Christian fundamentalists are trying to permanently colonize huge chunks of the Middle East, but it is unlikely that the Binladens of the Islamic world will be able to provide an intellectual framework adequate to the task at hand. Un-nerving as it may be, Muslims have no choice but to re-examine and reconstruct their faith. Professor Cook's "short introduction" may lead on to better and bigger things.
Professor Cook starts by discussing what constitutes a sacred scripture and the forms such scriptures have taken in different civilizations. He then outlines the role the Koran plays in Muslims culture and how this is similar and how it differs from the role played by the Bible or the Vedas in their cultures. A few short selections from the Quran (the Fatiha, surah alfeel, the "throne verse", the "sword verse", among others) are presented in standard translations and used to illustrate the Quranic message and how it is perceived. The treatment is fair and balanced, though with a touch of levity that some Muslims may find initially disconcerting. One can get an idea of professor Cook's tone from his own description of his latest work:
"Recently I have published a monograph on a very Islamic value: al-amr bi`l-ma'ruf - roughly, the duty of each and every Muslim to tell people off for violating God's law".
The sentence is accurate enough, though the tone is one that a pious Muslim may find out of place in a discussion of religion. But professor Cook is not a pious Muslim and may perhaps be excused as long as he is not unfair (and in this book at least, he is generally fair). After discussing the status of the Koran in the Muslim world today, He goes on to discuss its origins, its content, organization, translation, pronunciation, commentaries, and dissemination. As is to be expected in such a small book, he cannot cover any topic in great detail, but he manages to touch on a very large number of issues and manages to convey a sense of the subject surprisingly well. The text is packed with fascinating little nuggets, like a picture of the Quran with Spanish translation in Arabic script! In every chapter, he says enough to spark a desire to learn more. At every step, he also interjects comparisons with other culture and other scriptures; comparisons that are illuminating and enlightening and, generally, even-handed. Currently "hot" topics like "tolerance" and "women's rights" get highlighted, as expected, but he does point out that prior generations did not necessarily look at them through contemporary lenses. What bothered older commenatators about the quranic reference to wife beating may turn out to be very different from what bothers a "modern liberal". On the other hand, at times the older commentators (and the text itself) turn out to have been much more "modern" than we expected.
Professor Cook's little book works very well as an introduction for someone unfamiliar with the Quran, but if anything, it is even more interesting for someone already familiar with Muslim culture and history. He notes the extraordinary hold of "fundamentalist" interpretations in the Muslim world today, but ends by pointing out that this was not always the case and may not be the case in the future. As an example of how things may change, he points to the work of Abdul Karim Surush in Iran, whose book "siraat-haay mustaqeem" (straight paths) raises the possibility that there is more than one straight path and all may co-exist.
In short, almost anyone wanting to learn more about the Qur'an, will find this a wonderful place to start. It may be a very short introduction, but it touches on many important issues and does so with great erudition and unexpected wittiness. Worth a read. (less)
flag10 likes · Like · comment · see review
Ashri
Dec 07, 2017Ashri rated it it was ok
Kinda misleading on some points. But I appreciate the Prof's effort to write about Quran. Yet, it made me more convinced that we can't really know about what Quran is saying without believing in it. ...more
flag2 likes · Like · comment · see review
William
Jun 04, 2019William rated it did not like it
I've read two "A Very Short Introduction" books, both of which I had to do for college and would not have done on my own. Neither was very good but this one was by far the worst.
There is plenty of material on the history of the Qu'ran in the first century or two after the death of Mohammed and in the modern age, but not much in between. There is very little about the meaning of the Qu'ranic verses or how they were perceived by people during Mohammed's time. Cook does however go into extremely h ...more
flag2 likes · Like · comment · see review
Spencer
Mar 09, 2016Spencer rated it liked it
I am a Christian pastor, and I have been slowing going through the Koran on my own time. My hope is to do sermon series or a few lessons with my church so how we can have a balanced, loving perspective of our Muslim neighbors, far from the xenphobia that gets propogated.
As I have been finding, and as Cook notes, unlike the Christian and Hebrew Bible, the Koran is not chronological, no overarching narrative, very little variation in genre and discourse, with no discernible overall editing structure, which makes novice readers like myself a bit lost. So, I began looking for helpful resources to help me navigate through the Koran. I figured this was an accessible place to begin, given that it was a "very short introduction."
This book was helpful in that it not only talked about the Koran, but the history of the Koran, which is something I would not have known: its compilation, its canonization, major schools of interpretation, their accompanying approaches, and major texts in dispute. I thought that was really helpful.
While all of that was good, I felt that he just did not go into enough depth as to the actual teachings of the Koran. I was hoping for something like a brief summary of theology or reader's guide, and really there was just the one chapter on the "message" of the Koran, which I did not think was enough. I suppose more would be in the "Islam: A Very Short Introduction," but for me, as I said, this book was more about the history of the Koran that the teachings of the Koran per se. The book did recommend a few scholarly readers guides to the Koran, which I think I will order. (less)
flag2 likes · Like · 3 comments · see review
Daniel Wright
Mar 03, 2015Daniel Wright rated it liked it
Shelves: religion, vsi, islam
Cook surveys the subject matter and all its aspects, not with the secular snootiness I had expected, but with a frank and generous curiosity. The result is both pleasant and instructive. (Incidentally, this may be the only book I have read in which the author specifically invites communication from his or her readers).
Part One: Introduction
Chapter 1: Preliminaries
Chapter 2: The message of the Koran
Part Two: The Koran in the modern world
Chapter 3: The dissemination of the Koran
Chapter 4: The interpretation of the Koran
Chapter 5: The very idea of scripture
Part Three: The Koran in the traditional Muslim world
Chapter 6: The Koran as codex
Chapter 7: The Koran as text
Chapter 8: The Koran as worship
Chapter 9: The Koran as truth
Chapter 10: The Koran as an object of dogma
Part Four: The formation of the Koran
Chapter 11: The collection of the Koran
Chapter 12: The Koran in the lifetime of the Prophet
Chapter 13: Doubts and puzzles
Chapter 14: Conclusion (less)
flag2 likes · Like · comment · see review
Leo Abrantes
Jul 06, 2012Leo Abrantes rated it did not like it · review of another edition
Shelves: non-fiction, religion, kindle-drm, stop-reading
I would not recommend this book as an introduction to the Koran. It seems difficult for the author to approach the Koran as an historical text and spends half time giving assertions about the present day Islam.
Stopped reading as I realized there is little to gain from his perspective.
flag2 likes · Like · 1 comment · see review
N
Jun 17, 2019N rated it really liked it
I got sucked into this book to read very specifically about the concept of Quranic abrogation, and 2hours later I'd end up finishing the book. It is fast, concise, and insightful, can't see any reason not to read it. Well, a few reasons, I'll give you. I was more interested in the historical context of the Quran and the geopolitics of Islam when it was born. This is not that book. The linguistic analyses were fantastic and thoroughly unintelligible for someone of my knowledge level. I didn't even bother highlighting them in the clippings below, that's how much faith I have in my ability to transform that topic into the zone of intelligibility. As with any topic, reading more deeply shifts me ever so slightly towards the moderate end of the opinions on the topic, and this is no different. Except I did wonder if my directions were messed up and whether it was in fact less moderate to appreciate the complexity of Quranic verses, seriality, the role of authoritative commentaries in filling gaps, and the gaps of translation.
Clippings
‘It is not the propagation but the permanency of his religion that deserves our wonder: the same pure and perfect impression which he engraved at Mecca and Medina, is preserved, after the revolutions of twelve centuries, by the Indian, the African, and the Turkish proselytes of the Koran.’
Some of them are habitually referred to as ‘classics’. As our term for the literary masterpieces of ancient Greece and Rome, this fits the Homeric epics perfectly, and by analogy we have come to speak of ‘the Chinese classics’. We do not, however, feel comfortable applying the term to texts vested with a strongly religious authority. Here the word most often used is ‘scripture’: the Bible is the paradigm case, and by extension we tend to speak of the Zoroastrian, Hindu, and Buddhist ‘scriptures’. But the usage jars, since in their own cultures the Avesta, Vedas, and Tripiṭ aka are conceived as oral, not written, texts.
It has much to say about the moral and legal duties of believers, but contains nothing like the law-code which is the centrepiece of the Book of Deuteronomy.
‘The Straight Path’: al-ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm. The word ṣirāṭ is interesting. The Romans used the Latin ‘strata’ for the kind of paved road they built so straight. From them the word passed to the peoples of their empire and even beyond, so that from ‘strata’ derive both the Arabic ṣirāṭ and the English ‘street’. But whereas ‘street’ has remained a secular term, ṣirāṭ came to be used only in religious contexts. It is a curious feature of the word that it has no plural in Arabic, reinforcing our sense of the uniqueness of the Straight Path.
surrendering oneself to God, or giving oneself entirely to Him (islām);
This communications revolution may not mean much to the Brahmins, who have always made it their business to withhold the Vedas from a significant part of non-Brahmin society. Nor has it been quite so revolutionary for the Chinese, among whom as early as 745 the Emperor required that every household possess a copy of his commentary on a simple Confucian classic. But among monotheists, this aspect of modernity has been a very positive development.
the cultural prestige of Egypt in the modern Islamic world has given that country a disproportionate say in what the Koran should look like and sound like. Either way, the effect is homogenization.
A contemporary Iranian mullah who adopts it makes a point of showing that he too is thoroughly familiar with modern notions like ‘the evolutionary hypothesis’ and ‘mutation’ (he transcribes this latter term from French, rather than translating it). As this indicates, the unbending literalism of such commentators is not the result of any lack of awareness of the pull of modern science.
No compulsion is there in religion. Rectitude has become clear from error. (Q2:256) We can dub this the ‘no compulsion’ verse. It does not compromise the notion of absolute religious truth, but it strongly suggests that the true religion can nonetheless coexist with any and all forms of false religion. For the traditional scholars, as we will see later, such a declaration of unconditional – not to say indiscriminate – tolerance was an embarrassment; they had to find ways and means of getting it out of the way.
As non-Muslims, they will be required to pay a tax in lieu of military service. Should they wish to serve in the army rather than pay the tax, the Muslims will consider this request;
Englishman William Harvey (d. 1657), better known for his work on the circulation of the blood, was of the view that ‘we Europaeans knew not how to order or governe our woemen, and that the Turkes were the only people used them wisely’.
What is striking about the Islamic world is that, of all the major cultural domains, it seems to have been the least penetrated by irreligion; and in the last few decades, it has been the fundamentalists who have increasingly represented the cutting edge of the culture.
Shāfi‘ī (d. 820) argued that when God speaks of the Prophet permitting the eating of ‘nice things’ and forbidding that of ‘nasty things’ (Q7:157), we have to understand these words in terms of the dietary preferences which prevailed among the Arabs at the time. But traditional Islam could never have made the leap from the idea of a scripture which engages the society in which it was revealed to the notion of one which is a product of it.
There was thus a clear and irresolvable conflict between the desire to proclaim God’s word to the unbelievers and the shudder at the thought of them touching it.
The Arabic script, like our own, derives ultimately from that of the Phoenicians. Their alphabet was as well developed in its representation of consonants as it was defective in marking vowels. A major innovation introduced by the Greeks when they borrowed this script was to devise ways of representing vowels on a par with consonants; it is thanks to them that you are now reading a fully vocalized script, as opposed to a purely consonantal (cnsnntl) one. By contrast, the offshoots of the Phoenician script used to write Semitic languages tended to be relatively conservative. Arabic at the time of the rise of Islam had no way of marking short vowels, and only ambiguous ways of marking long ones.
In the Phoenician alphabet each letter was written separately, just as in printed English, and this remains the case with Hebrew in its printed form. But Arabic has evolved a cursive style which must be implemented even in print. The benefit of such a style is that writing becomes more fluent; the cost is that letters written cursively are likely to lose much of their shape, with the result that originally distinct letters can become indistinguishable. The dots are there to remedy this. Thus the single dot above the line in the last word of the verse marks an f; two dots would have made it a q. The next letter consists merely of a ‘tooth’ and two dots below, making it a y; one dot below would make it a b, two above would make it a t, and so forth. These diacritics, as they are called, made their appearance very early in the Islamic period, but for a long time their use was sporadic, even in Koran manuscripts.
‘If God wills!’ (in shā’ Allāh, as in Q2:70).
‘God knows best!’ (Allāhu a‘lam, as in Q3:167).
‘Praise be to God!’ (al-hamdu lillāh, as in the Fātiḥa):
Even unbelievers with whom the Muslims are in a state of war may ask to hear it (Q9:6) – contrast the restrictive attitude of the Brahmins with regard to the recitation of the Vedas. The Buddha told his followers not to chant their scriptures in Vedic style, but they chant them nonetheless. Indeed, not chanting one’s canonical texts is perhaps to be seen as an eccentricity of Protestant Christianity.
From the early Islamic period onwards, we encounter repeated denunciations of the musical recitation of the Koran, combined with occasional voices raised in its favour. The technical term for this is ‘recitation with notes’; Bīrūnī, an eleventh-century Muslim scholar who was also the world’s first Indologist, uses this term in describing Vedic recitation.
What is unusual about Koranic recitation is that it has rules of junction not found in standard pronunciations of Arabic. There is only one instance of this in Sūra 112, but it is quite striking: yakun lahu must be recited yakul lahu. A further reason why Ibn Ḥanbal detested recitation in the tradition of Ḥamza had to do with these junction effects,
Cultures which chant their canonical texts have a natural tendency to develop at least two kinds of chanting. On the one hand, there will be a rather plain style in which the role of melody is limited; this is the appropriate style when the purpose is to articulate the text in a clear and comprehensible fashion. And, on the other hand, there will be a musically more complex style, with elaborate use of melody; this is intended to appeal strongly to the musical sensibilities and religious emotions of the audience. Thus in Gregorian chant, which continues a Jewish liturgical tradition, a plain style is used for normal liturgical readings from the Bible, whereas the Psalms are taken as an invitation to musical virtuosity.
The original languages of the Christian Bible were Hebrew for the Old Testament (with a bit of Aramaic thrown in) and Greek for the New Testament (unless some of it was originally in Aramaic). But for most Christians during most of their history, the language of the Bible, whether or not it was their own, was something other than the original languages. For Muslims matters have been very different. Arabic is not just the original language of the Koran: it is the language of the Koran. Translating scripture was thus an issue for Muslims in a way that it was not for Christians.
For all its relative assertiveness, a translation such as Makārim Shīrāzī’s is still clearly designed to help the reader with the Arabic text, and not as a substitute for it. In this sense it is quite unlike the English Bible, which substitutes for the Latin, which in turn substitutes for the Greek and Hebrew originals. As Ibn Taymiyya put it: ‘One may not recite the Koran in any language other than Arabic, irrespective of whether one is able to recite it in Arabic or not.’ Not surprisingly, there is not and has never been a standard Persian translation.
An English translation appeared in this now common format in 1984, with the authorization of the Azhar. This august body made the adoption of the format a condition of its approval; in the absence of the Arabic original, it was feared that someone might mistakenly think that ‘this translation is the Koran itself’. The Azharite wording is revealing: it would make no sense in a Christian context to speak of mistaking the King James Bible for ‘the Bible itself’.
The Moriscos – Spanish Muslims under Christian rule – often wrote in ‘Aljamiado’, that is Spanish in Arabic script. Their religious literature included translations of the Koran.
Some religions, like Buddhism, take to scriptural translation like ducks to water. The Buddha, we are told, ‘can express everything he wishes in any language whatever’, and not only that, he ‘speaks them all at once’. But such linguistic indifference was not a feature of Islam. The Koran was destined to remain as it had been revealed: We have sent it down an Arabic Koran; haply you will understand. (Q12:2) From this verse Ibn Ḥazm (d. 1064), a formidable scholar of Muslim Spain, drew the laconic inference ‘Non-Arabic isn’t Arabic, so it’s not Koran.’ Yet every cloud has a silver lining: if a translation of the scripture is not Koran, there need be no restrictions on touching it.
The real issue for the commentators was one of moral theology. In its elliptic way, the Koran seems to divide the people of the township into three groups. The first group broke the Sabbath, the second admonished them, and the third thought the admonition pointless. However, in describing God’s response, the Koran mentions only two groups: those who were metamorphosed into monkeys, and those who were saved. Obviously those who broke the Sabbath were metamorphosed, and those who admonished them must surely have been saved. But what became of the third group, those who saw no point in the admonition? This was the issue over which the commentators agonized.
In the last resort they could always argue, as one fourteenth-century Damascene scholar did of the Indians, that if an infidel people was just too numerous to be put to the sword, then it was better to accept tribute from them than to leave them alive and untaxed.
When Homer said something that would better have been left unsaid, one option for the scholars of Hellenistic Alexandria was simply to ‘athetize’ it – to declare it spurious on the ground that Homer could not have said such a thing. It was even possible, without sacrilege, to entertain the notion that Homer might on occasion have dozed off; it is to Horace, as paraphrased by Pope, that we owe the phrase ‘Homer nods’. But in the Muslim context, this was unthinkable: God, as we know from the ‘throne verse’, neither slumbers nor sleeps. Even athetizing, though just thinkable, was much too radical for the Muslim scholars. Within the Islamic framework, the nearest acceptable approach to athetizing was abrogation: the ‘no compulsion’ verse could be declared to be abrogated by, say, the ‘sword verse’. It is standard Muslim doctrine that one verse of the Koran can abrogate another.
Most of them, however, were unwilling to declare the ‘no compulsion’ verse to be abrogated. Their reluctance arose from the sense that, as an exegetical device, abrogation was strong medicine, and not to be resorted to when less drastic solutions were available. This makes sense: one does not want to encourage people to declare passages of scripture dead letter whenever it suits
God had asked the people of the township to give allegiance to ‘Alī, and on their refusal they had been subjected to metamorphosis, some ending up in the sea as eels, others on land as lizards and jerboas. ‘Alī then turned to those present and asked them if they had taken all this in; they replied that indeed they had. He concluded the proceedings with a zoological observation which strongly underlined the human heritage of eels: ‘By Him who sent Muḥammad as a prophet, they menstruate just as your women do!’
The ancient doctrine of the eternity of the Vedas insisted that they were also authorless; their claim to authority was precisely that they were not the word of a mere god, let alone a human. The contrary view, that they were in fact the creation of a god (albeit a rather special one), was powered by the rise of theism, but bore no relation to questions of anthropomorphism. And since the Vedas are an exclusively oral scripture, the central scholastic issue was the eternity of sound. (‘Sound’, said those who argued that the Vedas were created, ‘is non-eternal, because it has the property of being produced, like a
there was a theory that ‘Gabriel brought down to the Prophet only the ideas’ (but, one assumes, all of the ideas); it was Muḥammad who ‘expressed them in the language of the Arabs’. Such views, however, had no place at the Islamic equivalents of the Sorbonne. The Koran was the speech of God; anyone who believed otherwise had lost his religion.
A curious story relates that the written record of a verse laying down the stoning penalty for adultery was lost when it was eaten by a goat at the time of the Prophet’s death.
One later view was that he did everything short of making a codex of the revelation; but we also have it on early authority that, at the time he died, the Koran had not been collected at all. Either way, we have to think of the Koran in the lifetime of the Prophet as revelation ‘in progress’. It is this serial character of the process that makes sense of the idea of abrogation.
We sent not ever any Messenger or Prophet before thee, but that Satan cast into his fancy, when he was fancying; but God annuls what Satan casts, then God confirms His verses. (Q22:52) God seems to be speaking of some process whereby Satan has made attempts to corrupt the text of previous scriptures by interpolation. Moreover, the use of the present (or it could be future) tense in the second part of the verse – God ‘annuls’ and ‘confirms’ – suggests that Satan is continuing his efforts. A narrative describing an attempt by Satan to insinuate something into Muḥammad’s revelation, and God’s timely response, would thus be in place here. And sure enough we have it: this is the story of the Satanic verses. whether it was the occurrence of the event that called forth Q22:52, as the story claims, or whether it was rather the existence of the verse that called forth the story.
The main point in favour of a hypothesis in which the Koran is off the scene for several decades is that it also accounts for another set of puzzles thrown up by research into the early development of Islamic law. Each of these involves an aspect of Islamic law which in some very fundamental way seems to contradict or ignore the Koran. For example, it is notorious that Islam prescribes stoning as the standard penalty for proven adultery (zinā), and accredited traditions about the legal activity of the Prophet portray him as reluctantly implementing this punishment. Yet if we turn to the Koran, this is what we read: The fornicatress (al-zāniya) and the fornicator (al-zānī) – scourge each of them a hundred stripes. (Q24:2) How this discrepancy could have arisen was a question to which the Muslim scholars had their answers, one of which we have already encountered in the shape of a hungry goat; but the solutions put forward were neither simple nor straightforward.
There were four Vedas – each transmitted in different Brahmin lineages – together with a mass of associated material that would be included on a broad definition of the canon. There were two Homeric epics, this time transmitted in the same lineage, though this milieu also gave rise to the Homeric Hymns, whose place in the canon was marginal. When the Biblical canon was eventually settled, there were thirty-nine books of the Old Testament and twenty-seven of the New; there was also a good deal of apocryphal material which appeared in some people’s Bibles but not in others. There was enough of the Buddhist Tripitaka to take up 130,000 blocks when the Chinese printed a translation of it in the late tenth century; today the Pāli canon fills several shelves in a library. In Confucian China there were differing views as to the exact number and identity of the classics. The Koran, in contrast to all this, is a single book of well-defined content between two covers.
the Koran is a remarkably late work to have achieved the canonical status it did. Even the relatively parvenu scriptures of the New Testament are several centuries older. There are, of course, more recent books that enjoy scriptural status among such groups as the Sikhs and Mormons.
Arabic belongs to a closely related family of languages conventionally known as ‘Semitic’; some other members of the family are Akkadian, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Ethiopic. In demographic and cultural terms, Arabic has been by far the most successful of the Semitic languages. It is the only one to become the language of a world civilization, and the only one that has the status of a world language at the present day.
Typical Arabic triconsonantal roots are k-t-b and q-r-’, the former referring to writing and the latter to reading or reciting; the reader who knows that kataba means ‘he wrote’ and kātib (plural kuttāb) One who writes’ can have the instant gratification of correctly translating qara’a as ‘he recited’ and qāri’ (plural qurrā) as ‘reciter’. Like English, Arabic also modifies roots with suffixes and prefixes: qur’ān (’reading’ or ‘recitation’) gives us the English ‘Koran’
(less)
flagLike · comment · see review
Anders Rasmussen
Apr 27, 2018Anders Rasmussen rated it it was ok
By now I have read quite a few non-fiction books about all kinds of different topics. Some authors (e.g., Sam Kean) write in an engaging style that captures the reader and takes them on a journey in which they are entertained and enlightened simultaneously. Other authors are not so good at the capturing part but still manages to provide enough insights to make the book worth your while. However, in some cases, the author offers neither – writing a tedious book that offers little insight, so that even if you do manage to stay awake and pay attention, the reward is small.
This book, unfortunately, belongs to this latter category. Since it is "A very short introduction" I was thinking that the book would describe what the Koran is about and perhaps also go into some of the controversies surrounding the text. Instead, the book almost exclusively discussed linguistics. Time and time again the author will, at length, consider how the meaning of a single word can get lost in translation from say Arabic to Egyptian and English, etc. Sure, this is probably fascinating if you are a linguist, but not if you are someone who wants to know more about the Koran. When reading this book, I did often drift away in my thoughts – which usually only happens when books are boring (yes, I blame the author). So, there is a possibility that somewhere in the book one might also find non-linguistic discussions.
If I could rename this book, I would call it “A short in-depth analysis of different possible meanings of words in the Koran”. This would have the double advantage of being a more accurate title and scaring potential reader away from reading it. If linguistics is your passion in life, then, by all means, read the book. If you want to learn about the Koran, find a different book!
(less)
flag1 like · Like · comment · see review
PolicemanPrawn
Jul 06, 2016PolicemanPrawn rated it it was ok
Shelves: very-short-intros
A significant part of this book is dedicated to analysing the Arabic language, which won’t be appreciated by non-Arabic speakers who I guess would constitute a majority of possible readers of this book. I don’t see the sense of including in a Very Short Introduction (VSI) such content, which is not consigned to a separate chapter but interwoven into the text. Aside from that, this is a wide-ranging introduction, discussing many topics such as dissemination of the Koran, interpretation, position in the Islamic world, and how the Koran was revealed and collected. The whole point of the Koran is its message, but this is only covered briefly, the author preferring to devote space to minor issues. It did start promisingly, with simple and somewhat irreverent statements such as “God has friends and enemies”, belying the dense textual analysis further ahead. This is a VSI to avoid unless, possibly, for those who know some Arabic. (less)
flag1 like · Like · comment · see review
Justin Evans
Jan 16, 2019Justin Evans rated it liked it
Shelves: history-etc
I was initially enthusiastic, but it turns out I was just enthusiastic to be reading something on the topic; a friend and I discussed the book, and he's right, it's just okay. Cook's decision to tell the story backwards is terrible, and makes everything harder to understand. He does deal with a lot of material, and this is probably a solid enough place to start, but most of what I learned was general stuff about Islam, not about the Quran itself. (less)
flag1 like · Like · comment · see review
Terese
Jul 22, 2019Terese rated it did not like it
The linguistics are interesting, much of the rest...problematically apologetic in many ways (he doesn’t seem to have much respect or understanding for other religious traditions or Shia). Basically, only the linguistic portions felt scholarly, the rest can be found in other sources. Can’t understand how this is an Oxford Edition. Will think twice before reading another ”Very short introduction”
flag1 like · Like · comment · see review
Top reviews from the United States
Amazon Customer
2.0 out of 5 stars and most others to be disappointed by the majority of it
Reviewed in the United States on January 13, 2018
Verified Purchase
i was mostly looking for an exposition of the doctrines -- theological, metaphysical, ethical -- contained in the koran, and a discussion of the interpretive questions surrounding them; and i think that's a fair thing to expect from an introduction to the text. this book devotes some space to those topics, but not all that much: far, far more time is spent discussing extremely uninteresting linguistic information about, for example, the intricacies of arabic script, and the extremely uninteresting ambiguities to which it gives rise (eg: 'should suchandsuch a phrase be translated as "he said" or "say!"?').
i would expect linguists to be interested in this book, and most others to be disappointed by the majority of it.
4 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
William G Hart Jr
3.0 out of 5 stars Finished
Reviewed in the United States on November 24, 2015
Verified Purchase
This book was not a detailed book regarding the Koran. It was more concerned with the origins of the Koran and the different interpretations by different people who have studied the Koran since the time of Mohammed . I cannot strongly recommend this book as a starting point for understanding the Koran !
2 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
George C. Higgins
2.0 out of 5 stars Not about the Koran text
Reviewed in the United States on August 7, 2018
Verified Purchase
This book is not about the Koran, but about the history of the Koran. It did not increase my understanding of the Book I have tried to read at all.
2 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
John Conner
5.0 out of 5 stars Cook's Koran Demystifies Fundamentalism
Reviewed in the United States on October 11, 2005
Verified Purchase
There is no better way to learn so much about The Koran in so little time as is possible with Michael Cook's A Very Short Introduction. I own several titles from the series and each has its strengths and weaknesses. This one shares a weakness with several of the other Short Introductions in that the topic is too exhaustive to cover in the less than two hundred pages used by Cook.
Nothing I can offer will add or subtract from the previous reviews, but I will claim that the book is a good one and valuable for understanding the sacred text if you find it foreign. Furthermore, it is a handy reference that I have returned to several times as recent political conversations hover around fundamentalism in general, and Islam in particular. Note that the two practices are no more one and the same than Christianity and fundamentalism, but both sets are often interlinked.
11 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Frank Bunyard
5.0 out of 5 stars a very densely packed book
Reviewed in the United States on March 25, 2007
Verified Purchase
Published in 2000, this is a very interesting and useful book. I expected a brief introduction to the tenets of Islam. But this is actually a history of the Koran as a book. A great deal of noteworthy and even rare information is packed into this mini-encylopedia.
The tenets of Islam are discussed, but only as they relate to the sacredness of the Koran as a scripture. Chapter titles are: The message of the Koran, The dissemination of the Koran, The interpretation of the Koran, The very idea of scripture, The Koran as codex, text, worship, truth, and dogma. (The latter comprising five chapters under the various headings.)
The final section of the book discusses The collection of the Koran, The Koran in the lifetime of the Prophet, and Doubts and Puzzles. The illustrations are plentiful and excellent throughout. There are many examples of various Arabic script. Also included are photographs, a diagram of the physical motions of the believer in prayer, and a very good map showing places mentioned in the text.
Michael Cook is a scholar of Islamic history, educated at Cambridge and the University of London. He has been Professor in the Department of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton since 1986. Since "The Koran: A Very Short Introduction" he has published four major studies of Islamic dogma, culture and tradition.
Professor Cook's attitude toward the Koran will not be appreciated by Islamists. His approach is from the standpoint of logic, reason and history. He occasionally writes with tongue in cheek as he pokes some gentle fun at the casuistry that Muslims resort to in order to reconcile the incongruities contained in the Koran. Of course to Muslims, Allah is above logic and reason. Allah is omnipotent and does as he pleases. (There is an amusing section on how the Koran is recited in a rhythmical singsong - including the musical notation for the recitation. This, in spite of the fact the Koran forbids any form of music.)
Thankfully Michael Cook is rational and lives in the West. He has the freedom to think logically; therefore we can understand Professor Cook. Through the words of the Koran, Allah will continue his semi-coherent rantings and half-thoughts. These diatribes will live on through his followers, as they have since Muhammad started hearing the voice of the Angel Gabriel in a cave early in the 7th Century. Allah doesn't require understanding, just submission; submission to The Koran.
Read less
6 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Will Jerom
3.0 out of 5 stars A short, adequate review
Reviewed in the United States on January 10, 2008
Verified Purchase
In a very short introduction it is often hard to get much done. Cook here succeeds in giving some basic interpretations on significant verses in the Koran - the famous "sword verses", balanced against the verse that there should be no compulsion in Islam. He also dwells (perhaps too much) on the verse reviewing God's curse on Israeli fishermen who violated the Sabbath (that allegedly turned them into apes). Some reference to how Muslims themselves interpret the Koran is made. A reader already initiated in the study of Islam or the Koran might appreciate this more than the novice - as Cook dwells considerably on language and translation issues. The final section discusses possible theories of the formation of the Koran (as well as some comments on the sword verses) from the days of the caliph Uthman or before. Overall it is a quick, adequately informative read, but I would not make it your last stop in searching for the best text on a quick introduction to the Koran.
One person found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
K Johnson
5.0 out of 5 stars A great short book
Reviewed in the United States on October 13, 2015
Verified Purchase
I'm very glad I ordered this book. It is a truly academic and comprehensive introduction to the Koran. If all the books in this "short introduction" series are written as well as this one, then I would read all of them.
One person found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Erica G
4.0 out of 5 stars Good book!
Reviewed in the United States on September 6, 2015
Verified Purchase
Decent intro to the history of the koran, the Arabic language, and discusses some really cool archaeological findings.
One person found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
See all reviews
Top reviews from other countries
Elginson
4.0 out of 5 stars A valuable insight into a different thought-world
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on September 26, 2013
Verified Purchase
With only a general background knowledge of Islam, and coming from a Christian background, I wanted to know more of what the Koran taught: it's themes and teachings and structure.
The first thing I learnt was that the Koran is not an Islamic Bible. The two are not only different in style and content but very different in the way they are used. This is evident from the way that this short introduction is organised. Of its 14 chapters, just one is devoted to the message of the Koran, and that's placed in the Introduction. This whole book is organised into four main sections: Introduction, The Koran in the modern world, the Koran in the traditional Muslim world and the Koran in the lifetime of the Prophet.
What I had to come to terms with is that the Koran does not contain the same kind of narratives and teachings as a Bible and neither is it used in worship in the same way. It is recited rather than read; memorised not referred to, and the detail and organisation of the original Arabic script is really important in a way that never arises in a Bible, which is by its nature a translation from Hebrew and Greek through Latin into English. Most of Michael Cook's work is about the Koran's language and text, as codex, truth and holy object. I realised how important it is to understand that to Muslims the Koran itself is a holy object, not just its teachings. This affects everything in the way it is used and regarded.
If you're looking for a textbook to teach you the contents of the Koran I'm not sure this will help, but if you are prepared to accept the profoundly different way of thinking between Muslims and Christians about their respective holy books then this has much to offer. I'm very glad I read it, and if nothing else I realise how different are the thought-worlds and assumptions of Muslims and Christians. We need to understand each other better. Here is a good start.
Read less
13 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Takeer hussain
5.0 out of 5 stars Impressive
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on January 23, 2020
Verified Purchase
Very easy to read
Report abuse
springfox13
4.0 out of 5 stars Good buy
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on June 23, 2015
Verified Purchase
Very informative. Worth buying as an introduction into an evolving theme and pertinant for today.
Report abuse
Andressa Dotoli
5.0 out of 5 stars Waswhat I was expecting
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on August 22, 2018
Verified Purchase
Just a short introduce very nice
Report abuse
Maccajuk
2.0 out of 5 stars Not what I expected.
Reviewed in Canada on August 28, 2021
Verified Purchase
The author seems intent on avoiding acknowledging differences between Bible (New Testament) and Quran in some of the more controversial passages.
Report abuse
===
