Interpretations of the Qu'ran

[CockneyMafia]

It goes without saying that everyone can read a book and get something different out of it, but I am interested to know how a book that effectively dictates how a Muslim should think, act and behave can be interpreted to such bi-polar extremes.

 

For example, if we take the role of women in Islam. Some interpretations argue that women are little more than slaves for their men, yet other interpretations argue that, on the contrary, women have an equal standing with their male counterparts.

 

Such contradictions were best demonstrated by a programme a few years back (I forget the name), which focused on a young Pakistani Muslim, family where one daughter was very devout, and the other was totally westernised. Interestingly, both argued that they lived their lives by the Qu'ran, only they interpreted the writings differently.

 

To me this is nonsensical kop out. How can you "live by the word of the book" if nobody knows what the word actually is? Furthermore, these sorts of arbitrary notions only serve to fuel extremism - it’s easy to be a rabble-rouser if your intentions are based on an "interpretation" of the holy texts.

 

Is there a definitive understanding or meaning to the Qu'rans writings, or is it more, as I suspect, that certain individuals use it to justify their lifestyle and beliefs by whatever means possible?

[Jabberwocky]

Its the same as the bible from the little I understand about it. People can take two or three interpretations from any of the passages in there and it often seems to contradict itself.

I had a long argument with a muslim once who insisted that the korans description of hell was in fact an early description of a black hole, thus proving that muslims knew about this phenomena centuries before the west did.

I suppose its like the works of Nostradamus, different people see different things in his writings.

[RichC]

but I am interested to know how a book that effectively dictates how a Muslim should think, act and behave can be interpreted to such bi-polar extremes.

 

Have you read the Qu'ran then?

[Titian]

It's the same with anything else in life and a book cannot be blamed for actions of the individual. I'm interested in why you choose the Qu'ran as an example though as there are so many other examples to demonstrate that point, not all faith related?

[CockneyMafia]

It's the same with anything else in life and a book cannot be blamed for actions of the individual. I'm interested in why you choose the Qu'ran as an example though as there are so many other examples to demonstrate that point, not all faith related?

 

I guess Islam is a very vogue topic at the moment on these boards!

[CockneyMafia]

Have you read the Qu'ran then?

 

I have read parts of it yes. Why?

[SupraSteve]

I think it's the same for almost any book - for however many people read it, there will be as many different understandings and viewpoints. Combine that with the fact that some people believe, for example, that the word should be taken literally and some people believe that it is sometimes used to portray an example, and you've got a right old mix-up of views, all from the same source.

 

Ideally - and usually I find - people will embrace this difference and learn form each other ('2 heads are better than 1'), but a minority decide not to and sometimes think that they are SO right that enforcing/acting on their interpretation of what they have read is the right thing to do. Like I say, this difference in views could happen with any book, it's just it gets taken more seriously when we throw religion into the equation.

 

Final point - often people's views - especially extreme views - are based around a particular section/s of a book, taken completely incorrectly in isolation from the rest of the teachings within it. This is what winds me up more than anything when it comes to interpretation but can happen very easily and probably all too frequently.

[SupraSteve]

I have read parts of it yes. Why?

See my final point

[CockneyMafia]

See my final point

 

Ah, but then I wasnt providing my own interpretation or judgement was I? Rather, I was asking how a faith with one omnipotent text can carry so much wild interpretation, and as such have any vailidity, within its following? Yes, there are other books one could cite as an example, but few books have such an incredible dictating stranglehold over nearly 1 billion people on this planet.

[SupraSteve]

Ah, but then I wasnt providing my own interpretation or judgement was I? Rather, I was asking how a faith with one omnipotent text can carry so much wild interpretation, and as such have any vailidity, within its following? Yes, there are other books one could cite as an example, but few books have such an incredible dictating stranglehold over nearly 1 billion people on this planet.

I know you weren't providing an interpretation, which is why I included the smiley.

 

As for why (...I think...) there are different interpretations, I thought I'd covered that in my post?