Talk:I'jaz

May 2013

5 verses including 17:88, 11:33, 10:38, 52:34, 2:23 are considered 'challenge verses'. one of the references states that there are 6 challenge verses? Kiatdd (talk) 17:03, 18 May 2013 (UTC) I'jaz al-Qur'an is translated to 'inimitability of the Qur'an' or 'the miraculousness of the Qur'an', here miraculousness is closely linked to the concept 'inimitability', we are told that the Qur'an is a miracle because it is inimitable i.e. nobody has been or will be able to produce a rival text. It is more appropriate to follow this terminology.Kiatdd (talk) 17:23, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

VANDALISM ON SECTION ON IJAZ LITERATURE The edits made by some unidentified user had deleted the section on Ijaz Literature. Ijaz literature is the most popular form of Islamic Literature. Changes have been reversed. The links and references have been vandalized as well.--182.68.174.151 (talk) 00:26, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Sir, I removed some of your additions, specifically this unverifiable claim: Calling a book "Divine" such as the Bible or Koran is idolatry.Kiatdd (talk) 19:30, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

it looks like works on I'jaz al-Quran can be classified into classical medieval books and contemporary books, the classical works are always practical, that is they take qur'an being a miracle as granted and then analyze and prove it. Contemporary works are quite different, sometimes they review existing literature and sometimes they follow the same methodology of classical Muslim scholars but in a less assertive tone.Kiatdd (talk) 12:59, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I removed

Category:Pseudoscience on the grounds that this is religion, not pseudoscience; even if the way in which the Quran is ‘inimtiable’ is not made clear. Religion is not meant to be scientific; so the epithet ‘pseudoscience’ does not apply to most religious beliefs. Okay?--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 02:41, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Not particularly. Yes, religion is not meant to be scientific. But it obviously doesn't stop some, very devout people, probably with the best of intentions, from trying to produce science to conform with religion. A religious scientist is not a good combination in the same way as a philosophical one. Nuttyskin (talk) 00:40, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Qoraan & Miracles vs. The Inamitability

These are two different issues. The inamitability is one of the miracles of Qoraan. Among others is the miracles of science (http://www.speed-light.info/miracles_of_quran/)(http://kaheel7.com/eng/) in it. Among others is the miracles of numbers in it. Among others is the miracles in usage of language. Among others are the undiscovered miracles as the time passes & new things are discovered, they will be contained in the Quraan as the Prophet has said; "Its wonders (miracles) are ceaseless" (تنقطع عجائيه) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.127.49.158 (talk) 12:23, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

POV

This is all massively in contravention of Wikipedia's principle of NPOV. The style of the Qur'an is unbelieveably imitable! In fact, arguably any work in Classical Arabic is bound to imitate it, if only because of the Qur'an's gigantic influence on Arabic literature and culture.

Somebody get out here and write up a neutral exploration of this subject, dammit! Nuttyskin (talk) 01:01, 28 May 2018 (UTC)