Some critics argue that while the Qur'an is in fact a literary masterpiece when it comes to the Arabic language, this does not mean that it is supernatural. They claim that every civilization has its unequalled works of literature, such as Shakespeare's sonnets in English, for example, or Homer's Iliad in Greek. They claim that the Qur'an is no different. But what this does is ignore a myriad of major differences between the Prophet Muhammad and someone like Shakespeare, for example. So let's compare, shall we? Number one, while the Prophet Muhammad was unlettered, Shakespeare was school-taught and educated, both in English and in Latin. Number two, Shakespeare earned a living as a professional playwright, and he would refine his craft with each new dramatic production. Contrast that with the Prophet Muhammad, who worked as a shepherd and then a tradesman. This was an unlettered man who never uttered a single full couplet of poetry in his entire life. Nor could he retract a single word of the Qur'an after he uttered it, for quality control purposes after he had spoken it to the vast Muslim and non-Muslim audiences that were listening. Number three, sonnets were known and produced for centuries before Shakespeare. Whereas for the Qur'an, it had its own unique compositional structure that differed from every pattern of language known and used by Arabia's master poets. Number four, Shakespeare's hallmark style permeates all of his writings and plays.
Whereas the words of the Qur'an brought by the Prophet Muhammad even differ from his own personal everyday statements that we know of and have documented in the hadith corpus. The contemporaries of the Prophet Muhammad could easily notice this. But since then, in our modern times, over a dozen stylometric experiments have been performed to prove this objectively. Stylometry is the statistical analysis of literary styles to discriminate between one speaker or author and another. It's been used to distinguish between the authentic and the untraceable letters of Paul, for instance, in the New Testament. And it's also what establishes that these are two different speakers, he who uttered the Qur'an initially and the statements of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, the human prophet. These experiments showed, for instance, that 62% of the terms or the vocabulary in the Qur'an do not appear in a multi-volume hadith collection like Sayyih al-Bukhari. And that over 80% of the words in al-Bukhari are not used in the Qur'an. This caused these researchers to say that it is impossible for Muhammad to be the author of the Qur'an. Why? Because it is humanly impossible for a person to self-police their use of two sets of words for a lifetime like this. Number 5. Shakespeare's sonnets were not uniformly eloquent. Rather, they had segments of distinct brilliance. In contrast, the Arabs who took great pride in their naqd, or literary critique tradition, where they brutally scrutinized each other's words for sub-optimal word choices, never identified a single passage in the Qur'an that could be improved. Number 6.
Shakespeare and his peers never considered his work beyond the reach of human effort. It was but a champion, to some at least, in an arena of worthy competitors. But there is no consensus among experts about Shakespeare being the single greatest English playwright ever. In fact, Professor Hugh Craig, for example, from Newcastle University, ranks Shakespeare as 7th overall in English. In contrast, the Qur'an shamed its deniers and challenged them at every turn to produce something that merely resembled it. A challenge that has yet to be met until this very day. Number 7. Shakespeare enjoyed the creative liberties of fictional storytelling, while the Qur'an was not here for entertainment. It addressed theology, philosophy, history, law, all stiff technical discussions that usually would not garner mass appeal. The Qur'an asserted complex existential truths and taught the world nuanced morality, but with a remarkable blend of precision and graceful elegance that kept the readers coming back for more each time. Number 8. Unlike what could suit a London theatre stage at some point in the 17th century, the Qur'an as a religious text had to appeal to both the young and the old, the pre-modern and post-modern mind, the eastern and western personality, and both the spiritually and intellectually inclined. When analyzing the effect of the Qur'an on the vast spectrum of hearts and minds, across the globe and across generations, no other text in human history has fascinated such a wide range of people.
In America today, for instance, a Qur'an recitation competition will be attended by all segments of the Muslim community. On the other hand, an English play by Shakespeare will find almost no appreciation among the common man, and will only attract the college-educated middle-to-upper-class elite. Number 9. Shakespeare had decades to decide what to include and what to omit from each of his works. Contrast this with the Prophet Muhammad. He would convey verses from the Qur'an in response to people's unscripted inquiries. For instance, 13 passages in the Qur'an begin with, يَسْأَلُونَكَ They ask you, O Prophet of God, about X, Y, and Z, so say to them the following. Furthermore, he would receive fresh Qur'anic revelations, sometimes in the most stressful conditions. At times he would be bleeding from an attack, or mourning his deceased relatives, and yet still speak with new Qur'an that was pertaining to recent events that had just taken place. Shouldn't such spontaneous productions of the Qur'an reflect a huge disparity in eloquence between them and those supposedly written, under a serene candlelight, after the events had unfolded, and after the emotional turbulence had quieted? Number 10. Shakespeare must have written his works in a linear fashion, building from the ground up, and free to decide from the onset how each drama would begin and how it would end. The Qur'an, however, was assembled like a jigsaw puzzle over the span of 23 years. You see, the order of the Qur'an's chapters today do not reflect the actual chronology of the revelation.
Rather, these are the later designated locations of each passage as were identified for the Prophet Muhammad by the Archangel Gabriel. This means that the Qur'an did not just exhibit fascinating consistency in its structure, despite the fact that it was spoken and not written. But add to this, this Qur'an was designed with interspersed editions. Editions that had various themes and lengths, many of which addressed unpredictable external events impromptu. So to any fair judge, could Shakespeare ever be compared with Muhammad?