/his/
I'm trying to start reading into the history of the Quran, validity of the verses and just the general study of Islam itself. I need a non biased book, any recommendations?
Is the Quran itself too biased for you?
>>369667
Try reading the Quran.
>>369691
No. Reading any ancient or medieval source without context is an exercise in masturbation. All you'll get out of it is to be able to say you read it.
>>369711
You should read what the religion is built on to understand the religion. You need to have the base to work from if you want to get further into analysis and historical examination by others.
You need the claims of someone first if you wish to argue with them.
>>369711
The Quran has its context in itself you retard. It's entirely self contained
>>369711
1. Quran
2. Sirah
3. Sunnah
4. Hadith
everything else will just be 20th century sanitization efforts.
>>369719
>You need the claims of someone first if you wish to argue with them.
You're not even going to be able to sort out the claims effectively.
>>369720
>The Quran has its context in itself you retard. It's entirely self contained
Well then I guess Islam is the light, any the Quran really is a miracle.
>>369728
If the Quran provides the context you need, why bother with a translation?
>>369739
>If the Quran provides the context you need, why bother with a translation?
Probably because you can't read or understand Arabic?
>>369739
Are you really incapable of looking at the Quran through the lens of your own life experience?
>>369740
You don't need that to understand it. The Quran provides that.
>>369744
Stop being a child.
>>369743
No. I, like everyone else, am fucking great at that. It's a terrible fucking way to read any ancient or medieval text, especially from a foreign culture.
The question is, are you really capable of looking at the Quran through the lens of a 7th century Arabic compiler?
>>369747
>Stop taking my claims seriously
Then stop making stupid claims.
>>369754
Why would you want to do that unless you want to understand the Quran in the context of a 7th century Arabic comiler?
>>369761
>Why would I want to understand the significance of a text to it's author and it's intended audience?
Because OP wanted to start reading into the history of the Quran.
>>369754
Stop being a faggot. You need to read the Quran first if you want to understand Islam.
>>369786
Are you one of those Islamic Fundamentalist, Islam was the first religion types?
>>369800
No I'm one of those insane people who think that if you want to understand a religion you should start with its core holy text.
>>369800
Is that what is says in your copy of the Quran?
>>369806
You're not insane. You're just stupid and ignoran, like midwestern protestants who think clearly a 1st century Jew, and a bunch of prior Jewish Oral traditions, were written with your stupid midwestern protestant perspective in mind.
Also, you've already dismissed the idea that you'd actually want to understand the core holy text as it pertains to the religion, so it's a bit late for that.
>>369807
I dunno. It lacks context on that matter.
>>369667
Studying it now myself.
Read this: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1999/01/what-is-the-koran/304024/
Buy this: http://www.amazon.com/Cambridge-Companion-Qur-101n-Companions-Religion/dp/052153934X
And this too if you can: http://www.amazon.com/Emergence-Islam-Traditions-Contemporary-Perspective/dp/0800698592/
Most scholarly English-language Quran: http://www.amazon.com/The-Quran-Annotated-Translation-Comparative/dp/1845539451
Most popular interpretation of Islamic law (note: IS disagrees with this): http://www.amazon.com/Lawful-Prohibited-Islam-Al-Halal-Haram/dp/0892590165/
>>369825
atheist btw
>>369825
damn that mosque is beautiful.
>>369825
Thank you! very helpful.
>>369820
I believe the misjudgment is in you believing that to understand Islam you need to look at it from the perspective of a 7th century Arabian nomad which is pretty hard to do. But to understand Islam you really need the perspective of the people who live the religion today which is a lot easier to obtain. Islam is organic like all human instatutions it changes with time and Islam in the 7th century is not 21st century Islam. So I would say it worth reading the books that modern Islamic communities see as important to gain a perspective on there thought. Obviously, there will subconscious differences in how you reed and interpret the Quran, but that doesn't mean you can't gain knowledge and perspective of modern Islamic thought from it.
>>369825
>http://www.amazon.com/Cambridge-Companion-Qur-101n-Companions-Religion/dp/052153934X
one review says;
>I agree with one of the earlier reviews. It makes no sense to have no Muslim contributors to a book dealing primarily with the Quran. It seriously compromise the quality of the book.
Do you agree?
>>369848
>I believe the misjudgment is in you believing that to understand Islam you need to look at it from the perspective of a 7th century Arabian nomad which is pretty hard to do.
"The study of history is hard, so it's a mistake to do it."
>But to understand Islam you really need the perspective of the people who live the religion today which is a lot easier to obtain.
"Furthermore, only understanding the present is important anyway."
>Islam is organic like all human instatutions it changes with time and Islam in the 7th century is not 21st century Islam.
This pretty much fucking throws your "Red the Quran, lel" idea out the window. If the Quran provides context, what the fuck do you need to know anything about the 21st century to know how 21st century Muslims will read it? And more importantly, what the fuck does THAT have to do with the History of Islam?
>>369858
It doesn't make sense if the book is meant to be comprehensive, but since the book is trying to be academic then it makes sense to only include academic writers. Whether they happen to be Muslim or not is irrelevant.
>>369871
I understand, thanks again for the recommendations.
>>369820
Yes its stupid and ignorant to think you should read the religious book of that religion to help understand that religion.
You are crazy man.
>>369865
Op said the study of Islam not it's history, you also inferred a lot of things I didn't say.
>>370187
>just the general study of Islam itself.
I would've thought the general study of Islam would include it's history.
