Martyrs, Virgins and Grapes - NY Times

August 4, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Martyrs, Virgins and Grapes
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

he virgins are calling you," Mohamed Atta wrote reassuringly to his fellow hijackers just before 9/11.

It has long been a staple of Islam that Muslim martyrs will go to paradise and marry 72 black-eyed virgins. But a growing body of rigorous scholarship on the Koran points to a less sensual paradise - and, more important, may offer a step away from fundamentalism and toward a reawakening of the Islamic world.

Some Islamic theologians protest that the point was companionship, never heavenly sex. Others have interpreted the pleasures quite explicitly; one, al-Suyuti, wrote that sex in paradise is pretty much continual and so glorious that “were you to experience it in this world you would faint.”

But now the same tools that historians, linguists and archaeologists have applied to the Bible for about 150 years are beginning to be applied to the Koran. The results are explosive.

The Koran is beautifully written, but often obscure. One reason is that the Arabic language was born as a written language with the Koran, and there’s growing evidence that many of the words were Syriac or Aramaic.

For example, the Koran says martyrs going to heaven will get “hur,” and the word was taken by early commentators to mean “virgins,” hence those 72 consorts. But in Aramaic, hur meant “white” and was commonly used to mean “white grapes.”

Some martyrs arriving in paradise may regard a bunch of grapes as a letdown. But the scholar who pioneered this pathbreaking research, using the pseudonym Christoph Luxenberg for security reasons, noted in an e-mail interview that grapes made more sense in context because the Koran compares them to crystal and pearls, and because contemporary accounts have paradise abounding with fruit, especially white grapes.

Dr. Luxenberg’s analysis, which has drawn raves from many scholars, also transforms the meaning of the verse that is sometimes cited to require women to wear veils. Instead of instructing pious women “to draw their veils over their bosoms,” he says, it advises them to “buckle their belts around their hips.”

Likewise, a reference to Muhammad as “ummi” has been interpreted to mean he was illiterate, making his Koranic revelations all the more astonishing. But some scholars argue that this simply means he was not “of the book,” in the sense that he was neither Christian nor Jewish.

Islam has a tradition of vigorous interpretation and adjustment, called ijtihad, but Koranic interpretation remains frozen in the model of classical commentaries written nearly two centuries after the prophet’s death. The history of the rise and fall of great powers over the last 3,000 years underscores that only when people are able to debate issues freely - when religious taboos fade - can intellectual inquiry lead to scientific discovery, economic revolution and powerful new civilizations. “The taboos are still great” on such Koranic scholarship, notes Gabriel Said Reynolds, an Islam expert at the University of Notre Dame. He called the new scholarship on early Islam “a first step” to an intellectual awakening.

But Muslim fundamentalists regard the Koran - every word of it - as God’s own language, and they have violently attacked freethinking scholars as heretics. So Muslim intellectuals have been intimidated, and Islam has often been transmitted by narrow-minded extremists.

(This problem is not confined to Islam. On my blog, www.nytimes.com/kristofresponds, I’ve been battling with fans of the Christian fundamentalist “Left Behind” series. Some are eager to see me left behind.)

Still, there are encouraging signs. Islamic feminists are emerging to argue for religious interpretations leading to greater gender equality. An Iranian theologian has called for more study of the Koran’s Syriac roots. Tunisian and German scholars are collaborating on a new critical edition of the Koran based on the earliest manuscripts. And just last week, Iran freed Hashem Aghajari, who had been sentenced to death for questioning harsh interpretations of Islam.

“The breaking of the sometimes erroneous bonds in the religious tradition will be the condition for a positive evolution in other scientific and intellectual domains,” Dr. Luxenberg says.

The world has a huge stake in seeing the Islamic world get on its feet again. The obstacle is not the Koran or Islam, but fundamentalism, and I hope that this scholarship is a sign of an incipient Islamic Reformation - and that future terrorist recruits will be promised not 72 black-eyed virgins, but just a plateful of grapes.

Interesting.

Sheiksahib, lets look at this from a present gupshup prespective. Any questioning of Islamic thought is now termed as philosophy and moved to another forum. Unfortunately, Lateral thinking is not one of the strong points of the muslim world at the current time that is why dreams of Virgins supercede collective benefit of the muslim people.

This is pretty dated 'research'. Was in the news atleast an year ago before it fizzled out. I guess they ran out of material or something.

thorough BS.

BS!

Now they will tell us what the Quran says. The Holy Quran is very clear and easy to understand. We even have its practical example given to us by Prophet Muhammad:saw: and those that followed him. There is no doubt about it.

Actually these heretics in the name of enlightenment want to interpret Islam the way they want it, the way satan teaches them. Rest assured they will be laughed and mocked upon. Quran is unchangeable forever.

These so called modern Muslims are not needed. They can simply renounce their faith. In this way these munafiqeen will not have anything to do with Islam.

I dont think its BS... I think its true.. that the Quran is a livingbook and it need to be looked at as that.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ~MuNiYa~: *
I dont think its BS... I think its true.. that the Quran is a livingbook and it need to be looked at as that.
[/QUOTE]

ok....it is true that we need ijtihaad more than ever, but the original text and meanings and the basics remain intact.

the writer obviously has never read Quran otherwise wud not have written such a useless thing…

the article, as someone mentioned, was in circulation in newspapers and then some muslim scholar even wrote an article to show this ‘language expert’ that he has just wasted his time (by writing) and other people’s times (who read his article) with a useless argument…

imagine getting married to grapes… :rolleyes:
or grapes that r of the same age of the person…

I think this is a good discussion point. We do not have to agree with the "alternative" interpretations of Quraan & hadith but this debate is very much needed. And this debate cannot take place whilst we have these taboos in islam. Unfortunately we do not know what it means to be a muslim in the 21st century as we have not had any healthy debate on Ijtihad since the 13th/14th century.

I always feel that islam is at the stage now where christianity was in the 15th century (pre renaissance) and the way we, muslims, are going we will deteriorate further to the point that there will be no alternative but to have a renaissance in islam. That is when we will become prosperous and "world-class" as a religion.

^
we were a prosperous people identified by our religion until people came up with renovations and then from being the world leaders in science and technology, and in all sorts of knowledge and rulng almost the entire world, we slipped to being the most down-trodden nation in the world....

I know exactly what needs to be debated.

How do we define freedom for the Western women. How do we free them from misuse and the illusion they are living in. How do we educate them that they are being used as sex symbols and toys by men.

[QUOTE]
How do we educate them that they are being used as sex symbols and toys by men.
[/QUOTE]

Please explain to me how the concept of getting 72 virgins in the afterlife is NOT men exploiting women as sex toys?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Islamabad: *
I know exactly what needs to be debated.

How do we define freedom for the Western women. How do we free them from misuse and the illusion they are living in. How do we educate them that they are being used as sex symbols and toys by men.
[/QUOTE]
^ Sure. Start a new thread to discuss all that and more.

Ok, back to the topic.

I am no linguisitic. And hardly familiar with Syriac or Aramaic, and not even the original manuscript of the Quran and the Arabic of the Qurayesh. I don't know who Christoph Luxenberg (pseudonym) is, and what are his qualifications or whether he is just full of BS or is onto something or whether he is pursuing some other agenda here.

Having said all that, in my view, we should never close the door on research and knowledge. Human mind is forever evolving and discovering new things. To put certain matters beyond acceptable research is mind-boggling and unworthy of a nation which is declared the "best people on Earth" by the Almighty.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *

and not even the original manuscript of the Quran
[/quote]

Why would the "original manuscript" provide you that say any copy of the Qur'an in Arabic today wouldn't offer?...

I don't know. The original manuscript is in the Arabic of Qureyesh without any airaabs (zer, zabar, paish etc). I have always read Quran with punctuations and airaab, so my knowledge is limited to the Quran we read in present times and those punctuations were put in the time of Hazrat Usman (Peace be upon him). As I said, I am no linguist, but an expert in that original Arabic may have some additional thoughts. All I am saying is, stagnating thought and research would be the end of our development.

^^

You sound confused... the diacritical marks and vowels imitated the way the Qur'an was already being read... they were already inherent in the recitation... adding them at a later date didn't alter the text but simply matched the written words with those memorised and recited...

... a statement like "my knowledge is limited to the Quran we read in present times" is quite bizarre coming from a Muslim... there's no difference in what was read then and what is read now...

... and what's this "original Arabic"? Is the Arabic we now read in the Qur'an not the same Arabic that was revealed? What's changed? You think it's not preserved in its original language?

... very confused as i said...

It might have been better for you to have stopped after the first sentence ("I don't know").

You obviously missed the last sentence in your hurry to post your thoughts. All I am saying is that there should be constant research.

If you believe you already have all the answers, more power to you. I am neither as pompous nor as knowledgable as apparently you are trying to come across as. So spare the "confused" mantra.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Islamabad: *

ok....it is true that we need ijtihaad more than ever, but the original text and meanings and the basics remain intact.
[/QUOTE]

ofcourse they will. they are basic..
I think the article was more geared towards things that can be taken in more then one way. :)

This is a just another attempt by the non muslims and their supporters to further distorte Islam and confuse muslims. Wouldnt be surprised if its the work of christian missionaries.

You can read a Islamic reponse to Christoph Luxenberg (authors?) claims.

Do people really think that the muslim scholars of the past did not study the language of the Quran.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *

You obviously missed the last sentence in your hurry to post your thoughts. All I am saying is that there should be constant research.
[/QUOTE]

"Constant research" on whether the Qur'an that we read today is still the very Qur'an read in the Prophet's (saw) time?? So Allah's promise of preserving the Qur'an obviously means little to you... it's still open to question... you do make me laugh...