Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


What music are you listen...
by zeca
Yesterday at 07:38 PM

Qur'anic studies today
Yesterday at 04:20 PM

مدهش----- لماذا؟؟؟؟
by akay
October 17, 2021, 04:40 PM

The essence of the facts
October 17, 2021, 11:53 AM

MP murdered
October 17, 2021, 11:45 AM

France Muslims were in d...
October 17, 2021, 09:41 AM

Freely down loadable Boo...
October 15, 2021, 11:44 AM

Afghanistan
October 13, 2021, 08:24 AM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
October 12, 2021, 05:40 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
October 11, 2021, 08:59 PM

Tommy Robinson is a refor...
October 08, 2021, 09:16 AM

I disapprove of what you ...
October 08, 2021, 02:09 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 811189 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 340 341 342343 344 ... 349 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10230 - June 05, 2021, 06:56 PM

    Dr. Javad T Hashmi is a new liberal Muslim theologian and a coming superstar, I believe. He and Dr. Kha Andani seem to more or less openly accept that the Quran isn't Allah's word verbatim, but " inspired".  Does this open up for new tendencies among Muslim researchers and a more open debate about the origins of the Quran?
    Here he is in debate with van Putten about comparing the hadiths with the Quran:

    "I don't think the early period of Qur'anic transmission can be equated to that of Ḥadīth, the latter of which was subject to dramatic & drastic mutation/shift due to the nature of its largely oral transmission. Here are reasons why I think this".

    https://twitter.com/DrJavadTHashmi/status/1401246151077138433?s=20
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10231 - June 05, 2021, 07:09 PM

    Here is another very long twitter thread by Hashmi where he discusses a lot of subjects:

    ....."This is the case whether we take the more accepted view that the Qur'an was first canonized in the era of ʿUthmān (d.656), a mere decades after the Prophet's death, or even the revisionist views of more skeptical scholars like Stephen Shoemaker, who puts it at the end of the seventh century, holding it to be in the early Umayyad rule during the reign of ʿAbd al-Mālik (d.705). As Shoemaker himself concedes, the extreme revisionist position--that puts it at the ninth century--is now dead, due to a number of reasons".....

    "Using the Qur'an as our historically reliable source for the words & thought of Muḥammad (irrespective of whether we think these to be divinely inspired or not!), we can simply compare the two (Qur'an & ḥadīth)."..........

    "Shoemaker writes, "As both Donner and Ayoub observe, Muhammad's apparent failure to designate a clear successor & the Qur'an's silence regarding such matters as political succession are 'most cogently explained' by a primitive Islamic belief that the world would come to an end before such issues could arise: in light of the world's imminent judgment & destruction, 'worrying about long-term leadership...was simply irrelevant'" (Death 178). The promised end was not far in the future, but rather it was on their heads in the now."
    https://twitter.com/DrJavadTHashmi/status/1401023553097584642?s=20

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10232 - June 05, 2021, 07:36 PM

    Dr. Javad T Hashmi is a new liberal Muslim theologian and a coming superstar, I believe. He and Dr. Kha Andani seem to more or less openly accept that the Quran isn't Allah's word verbatim, but " inspired".  Does this open up for new tendencies among Muslim researchers and a more open debate about the origins of the Quran?

    Why not.
    It just goes against a point settled 1400 years ago which is the base of Muslim theology.

    Quote
    Here he is in debate with van Putten about comparing the hadiths with the Quran:

    "I don't think the early period of Qur'anic transmission can be equated to that of Ḥadīth, the latter of which was subject to dramatic & drastic mutation/shift due to the nature of its largely oral transmission. Here are reasons why I think this".

    https://twitter.com/DrJavadTHashmi/status/1401246151077138433?s=20

    Interesting. Thanks Asbjoern.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10233 - June 05, 2021, 08:03 PM

    Here is another very long twitter thread by Hashmi where he discusses a lot of subjects:

    ....."This is the case whether we take the more accepted view that the Qur'an was first canonized in the era of ʿUthmān (d.656), a mere decades after the Prophet's death, or even the revisionist views of more skeptical scholars like Stephen Shoemaker, who puts it at the end of the seventh century, holding it to be in the early Umayyad rule during the reign of ʿAbd al-Mālik (d.705). As Shoemaker himself concedes, the extreme revisionist position--that puts it at the ninth century--is now dead, due to a number of reasons".....

    "Using the Qur'an as our historically reliable source for the words & thought of Muḥammad (irrespective of whether we think these to be divinely inspired or not!), we can simply compare the two (Qur'an & ḥadīth)."..........

    "Shoemaker writes, "As both Donner and Ayoub observe, Muhammad's apparent failure to designate a clear successor & the Qur'an's silence regarding such matters as political succession are 'most cogently explained' by a primitive Islamic belief that the world would come to an end before such issues could arise: in light of the world's imminent judgment & destruction, 'worrying about long-term leadership...was simply irrelevant'" (Death 178). The promised end was not far in the future, but rather it was on their heads in the now."
    https://twitter.com/DrJavadTHashmi/status/1401023553097584642?s=20


    There is no 'Muhammad'.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10234 - June 06, 2021, 07:40 AM

    There is WAS no 'Muhammad'.

      says Altara to Asbjoern1958  post
    Dr. Javad T Hashmi is a new liberal Muslim theologian and a coming superstar, I believe. He and Dr. Kha Andani seem to more or less openly accept that the Quran isn't Allah's word verbatim, but " inspired".  Does this open up for new tendencies among Muslim researchers and a more open debate about the origins of the Quran?
    Here he is in debate with van Putten about comparing the hadiths with the Quran:...........

    https://twitter.com/DrJavadTHashmi/status/1401246151077138433?s=20

    this is what that   Dr Javad Hashmi  says in  one of  his tweets
    Quote

    Dr. Javad T Hashmi @DrJavadTHashmi

     
    Worse yet, the terms "ḥadīth" & "sunna" *are* used in the Qur'an but for very different things. In other words, the Qur'an is worse than oblivious to the Ḥadīth & Sunna. Compare that to ḥadīths themselves, which *will* mention these concepts. 3/


    I wonder where and what verses in Quran mentions/talks about the terms "ḥadīth" & "sunna"?

    I don't think that  fellow  Javad Hashmi reading Quran  ,, he is reading something else

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh5D3HpPVnk

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCP5UesSyWUrnmodUEClJLZA

    Hmm worth watching some of those tubes in the above link

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10235 - June 06, 2021, 01:28 PM

    Oops I missed that one from Altara ..
    I do not understand what you said.

      well I was responding with  some cryptic/obscure  words when I said this dear Altara..
    Quote
    i guess you did not read  the post properly ..  read this again................. .

    Hmm... THAT IS SUCH  A MYSOGENIC STATEMENT FROM YOU   dear Altara.,    and it is because you did not  air the same opinion on a person who happened to be woman as well as Islam's historian ., .....................

     
    Huh??

     


    Well all that was about this post of yours ., 
    Aware of the threats Holland is now a great believer. I do not blame him.

     I was comparing your views on Holland Vs Patricia Crone .,   You are NOT blaming Dr. Holland., because he became a great believer because of threats.... but you did not say same thing   to Late dr. Patricia Crone ...

    that is all what I meant Cheesy   never mind all that stuff..  but Tell me .. Your Views On Prophet of Islam "Muhammad"  .. YOU SAY HE DID NOT EXIST ., and it appears you are right., Question to you..is about the  word "Muhammad:"

    1). Is it a Arabic word?
    2). what are its roots?
    3). It  is clearly an "Adjective"  Muhammad= Praised one  Or  "A GLORIFIED PERSONALITY .,  So  was that word "Muhammad"  was attached to any other name in and Around Arabia  say in the 6th century??

    with best wishes
    yeezevee

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10236 - June 06, 2021, 02:32 PM

    The element that could solve many of these discussions is the carbondating.

    Dye and Shoemaker make it end 7th C to explain the Palestinian influence (cfr Kathisma...). But then that creates new problems bc that is in full fledge Umayyad rule and there are no clear political additions.

    I think it is time to take the c14 results seriously (+/- 630 so redaction of Ur-Quran even earlier), and construct a narrative congruent with these results. At least as a hypothesis.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10237 - June 06, 2021, 02:39 PM

    Quote
    Well all that was about this post of yours .,
    Quote from: Altara on Yesterday at 08:48 AM
    Aware of the threats Holland is now a great believer. I do not blame him.

     I was comparing your views on Holland Vs Patricia Crone .,   You are NOT blaming Dr. Holland., because he became a great believer because of threats.... but you did not say same thing   to Late dr. Patricia Crone …


    Ok. Atmosphere was not the same.

    Quote
    but Tell me .. Your Views On Prophet of Islam "Muhammad"  .. YOU SAY HE DID NOT EXIST ., and it appears you are right., Question to you..is about the  word "Muhammad:"

    1). Is it a Arabic word?
    2). what are its roots?
    3). It  is clearly an "Adjective"  Muhammad= Praised one  Or  "A GLORIFIED PERSONALITY .,  So  was that word "Muhammad"  was attached to any other name in and Around Arabia  say in the 6th century??


    1/ Yes it is.
    2/ Same as the Hebrew one: hmd : praise, etc.
    3/ 'mu' in Arabic is : 'the one who is/do/make, etc.' Hence 'the one praised'. Cf. S. Dost (Academia is your friend) "AN ARABIAN QUR’ĀN: TOWARDS A THEORY OF PENINSULAR ORIGINS" (2017. p.84.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10238 - June 06, 2021, 03:09 PM

    The element that could solve many of these discussions is the carbon dating.

    Dye and Shoemaker make it end 7th C to explain the Palestinian influence (cfr Kathisma...). But then that creates new problems bc that is in full fledge Umayyad rule and there are no clear political additions.

    The Kathisma church is built in 450: the pilgrimage starts soon after. All what Dye locate in 650 Palestine (Q,3,5,19, etc.) can be dated earlier and especially elsewhere in the Levant because of the pilgrimage.


    Quote
    I think it is time to take the c14 results seriously (+/- 630 so redaction of Ur-Quran even earlier), and construct a narrative congruent with these results. At least as a hypothesis.


    I consider that the Quranic texts do not come from anything or Apocalyptic stuff (it uses it but that's all). Check the last Dye lecture I gave (if you know French...), he does not give any explanation to the emergence of these texts as if they might have appeared in the 1,2,3,4,5,6 th. c. I do not think they might. There is specific reason(s).
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10239 - June 06, 2021, 03:16 PM

    I listened to Dye and remember he had 4 scenarios. He explained why people like Sinai are wrong in their scenario choice but I didn t hear him saying clearly which scenario he thinks is most probable. Maybe I need to re-listen.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10240 - June 06, 2021, 04:07 PM

    ..........Dost (Academia is your friend) "AN ARABIAN QUR’ĀN: TOWARDS A THEORY OF PENINSULAR ORIGINS" (2017. p.84..........



    thank you for that reference ... let ,me  read it and let me put that Suleyman  Dost  Thesis pdf file here

    AN ARABIAN QUR’ĀN: TOWARDS A THEORY OF PENINSULAR ORIGINS Pdf file of  Thesis submitted by Suleyman  Dost.. 2017

     

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10241 - June 06, 2021, 07:09 PM

    I listened to Dye and remember he had 4 scenarios. He explained why people like Sinai are wrong in their scenario choice but I didn t hear him saying clearly which scenario he thinks is most probable. Maybe I need to re-listen.

     Dye does not give any explanation in the lecture (except more or less the Apocalyptic tropism) to the emergence of the Quranic texts as if they might have been appeared in the 1,2,3,4,5,6 th. c.  Moreover one should ask him if the emergence of Quranic text could have appeared at those times. I'm curious of his response (if there had one... I think he'd change of topic...)
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10242 - June 06, 2021, 10:23 PM


    .........................

    AN ARABIAN QUR’ĀN: TOWARDS A THEORY OF PENINSULAR ORIGINS[/url] Pdf file of  Thesis submitted by Suleyman  Dost.. 2017

    So dear Altara.. going back to that thesis  of Dost and  casually reading through these pages
    Quote
    State of the Research: “The Etymological Fallacy” 86
    Jāhilī Religious Terms and Practices in the Qur’ān and Epigraphy 95
    Approaching the Divine Properly: From ʿlmqh to al-Raḥmān 102
    ḥmd, “praising God”: 104
    šrk, “associating partners with god”: 112
    nṣr, “divine assistance and victory”: 123
    ʿdhb, “God’s punishment”: 132
    twb, “divine recompense”: 136


    That "hmd"  is  “praising God”:?? Or  “praising  prophet of Islam Muhammad??

    To me it appears some one added stuff in to original Quran Manuscripts.,

    Could it not be possible that the original manuscripts   might have been just short cut stories along with morals & rituals of praying Jewish GD  which comes out of OT  and were in Arabic  but  later the Quranic  authors/compilers of the present book.....  added/modified using Christology along with their  Muhammadology  at a later time?? say some 50/100 years later...

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10243 - June 07, 2021, 11:20 AM

    Altara,

    Before I heard Dye contest early dating of Quran bc he needed a Palestinian milieu for certain surahs (eg 19). Now he was very unclear with his conclusion. You noticed too apparently.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10244 - June 07, 2021, 03:13 PM

    Each time (orally like in the lecture or in articles) Dye uses the excuse that he does not have time, that it would take too long, that it is a side issue, etc. to avoid giving his opinion on the questions he asks or keys ones. With theses pretexts in hand, he  can afford not to make real conclusions. Moreover, as if by chance, one can constate that he has never written a monography where he would not be able to give theses pretexts to avoid addressing some of these questions.
    The only thing that he wants to talk is his Kathisma Palestinian tropism about  Q,3,5,19, etc. I already said that this tropism is not right because it is not specific to Palestinian mid 7th c. It could be, East Syrian/ North Iraqi/North East Coast Peninsula mid 6th. c. (because of the success of the pilgrimage of the Kathisma whose traditions could have voyaged in these regions) so not being the production of Palestinian literati Arabophone scribes of the 650's.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10245 - June 10, 2021, 11:45 PM

    Kavad I, Khosrow I and the Wars with the Roman Empire

    In the fall of 502 CE, the sahan sah Kavad I (488 to 531), 1 ruler of the Sasanian Empire,' invaded
    the Roman Empire. Despite the fact that there had previously been growing tensions between
    the two great powers of Late Antiquity,3 this invasion came as a surprise, because in the
    125 years since 377, when the emperor Valens had concluded a treaty (foedus) with the Sasanians,
    armed conflicts between the Romans and Iranians had occurred only very rarely. The
    only time intense fighting took place had been around 420;4 another brief war had ended in
    441 after only a few weeks without any major battles,' while in the sixty years before 502 undisturbed
    peace had prevailed between the Sasanians and the Roman Empire. Tensions and
    conflicts were resolved diplomatically; officials and generals of both empires cooperated at the
    local level," the rulers called each other 'brother',' and envoys were exchanged regularly.8 The
    cultural and economic exchange between Iran and Rome also seems to have intensified noticeably
    during this long period of peace.9 Against this background, the question of why this
    period of peace, from which both empires had profited, ended, is of great relevance, because
    one could argue that the endless wars that the Sasanians and Romans waged against each other
    between 502 and 630 significantly contributed to the fall of pre-Islamic Iran and the end of
    the Ancient World.

    https://www.academia.edu/43443767/Kavad_I_Khosrow_I_and_the_Wars_with_the_Roman_Empire_in_J_Hyland_K_Rezakhani_eds_Brills_Companion_to_War_in_Ancient_Iran_Leiden_Boston_Brill_2022_yet_unpublished_
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10246 - June 12, 2021, 08:01 PM

    Thread: https://mobile.twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1403651123492360198
    Quote
    An interesting set of questions which seemed big enough to make a little thread out of it. What can manuscripts tell us in terms of text criticism of the Quran? What can it tell us about the history of the reading traditions? Is it comparable to the bible?

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10247 - June 13, 2021, 06:31 AM

    Quote
    At the same time, many manuscripts occur that fall completely out of the system of the 7 (or even the additional 3 canonized later)..I show this with one manuscript (Arabe 334a), which in its system and specific variants does not agree with any canonical reader. As such, the canonical readers tend to cover quite a lot of the variation that was around, but not in the specific configuration we see in many manuscripts.
    On occasion you do find specific variants that are today considered 'non-canonical'.   In the general principles -- the specifications of  phonology and morphology -- we frequently find systems that do not agree with any canonical reading, and this continues until quite late. The Quran of Amajur (ca. 262 AH) has min baʿdihū; Canonical readers all read min baʿdihī.  These kinds of non-canonical systems of general principles are quite frequent and the present a rather interesting picture of the pre-canonical period of reading: people were clearly experimenting with different options, and that was considered to be fine.   A study that would include other features or a combination of features is no doubt going to find many more of these. Thus, a very large portion of the manuscripts in the pre-canonization period showed deviations from the canonical seven and ten.  These manuscripts are not likely to contain world-shocking readings that will totally overturn the way we understand the text. But they tell us a lot about the performance art and freedom reciters had in this period, which also reveals things about the process of canonization.


    It is perfectly normal, as there is no 'oral' tradition but a textual (with the rasm)  one. Nothing surprising/amazing here. Each literati deciphered the rasm in his own way and transmitted it as being the 'good' one.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10248 - June 13, 2021, 03:44 PM

    Altara,

    To decipher the rasm and copy it perfectly, this Arabic standard must have been a living language. We also do not see a lot of variation in early diacriticals, meaning every literatus understood about the same thing.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10249 - June 13, 2021, 07:23 PM

    Very interesting article especially the description of LA Judaism. Hutt proves that besides the rabbis, their was also a priestly active Jewish class. Sacrifice was common in Judaism (and Christianity) and was the source of  the animal sacrifice iof Islam.

    https://www.academia.edu/38361253/A_Threefold_Heresy_Reassessing_Jewish_Christian_and_Islamic_Animal_Sacrifice_in_Late_Antiquity?email_work_card=title

    The part of the zodiac and Sol Invictus shows the diversity of LA Judaism. Relying on the rabbinic literature for a complete picture is just wrong. Lots seem to have been possible in LA Judaism. So Altara, I ask the Question again, why couldn t a particular Jewish group have Jesus as a lower prophet?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10250 - June 13, 2021, 07:35 PM

    Quote
    To decipher the rasm and copy it perfectly, this Arabic standard must have been a living language.

    It is a living literary language. Not ever necessarily spoken by real specific people.

    Quote
    We also do not see a lot of variation in early diacriticals, meaning every literatus understood about the same thing.


    A part some differences, yes.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10251 - June 13, 2021, 08:25 PM

    Altara,

    Quote
    It is a living literary language. Not ever necessarily spoken by real specific people.


    We see that the early papyri use exactly the same language as the Quranic language. That means there must have been an active broad mechanism of transfer of the language. Could it have been a commercial "lingua Franca" developed end6th/beginning 7th C? Durie seems to think it was a commercial standard. His argument is: we see written Arabic script/language appear 5/6 th C, we see it mid 7th C, it must have been used in between too... There is a lot of logic in that.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10252 - June 13, 2021, 09:20 PM

    So Altara, I ask the Question again, why couldn t a particular Jewish group have Jesus as a lower prophet?


    There is no figure of Jesus in any synagogue Mundi. In what building your "particular Jewish group with Jesus as a lower prophet" would have prayed? Where it is mentioned? There is no trace of all of this. Read the Pseudo Clementines Homilies, are those who have written this are ethnic Jews? Posing the question is responding it.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10253 - June 13, 2021, 09:42 PM

    Altara,

    We see that the early papyri use exactly the same language as the Quranic language.


    Why not. Then why mufassirun does not get the Quran, if its language was a spoken one? Why they disagree all times about words meaning and passages?


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10254 - June 14, 2021, 07:23 AM

    Why not. Then
    Quote

    1). why mufassirun does not get the Quran, if its language was a spoken one?

    2). Why they disagree all times about words meaning and passages?



    helllo  Altara in those highlighted pointers ..

    1). who are these mufassirun??  how many are out there starting from  Ibn Yazeed Al-Tabari  around the year  850 CE or later??

    2). what do they   disagree  on??   do they really change over all meaning of those Quran verses??   Any publications on that subject??

    https://guides.lib.uw.edu/c.php?g=868699&p=6238439

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10255 - June 14, 2021, 01:29 PM

    Dye (translated from French)
    “Q 30:2-7” in M. Azaiez, G. S. Reynolds, T. Tesei, H.M. Zafer (eds), The Qur’an Seminar Commentary – Le Qur’an Seminar, A Collaborative Study of 50 Qur’anic Passages, Commentaire collaboratif de 50 passages coraniques, de Gruyter, 2016, p.288-289.

    According to many translations, the Koran would be a clear and unambiguous book: it is indeed quite rare that the translators report a difficulty, an uncertainty, or the existence of profound disagreements that can be encountered, both among mufassirūn1 [commentators] and among Western philologists, on the meaning of this or that passage. It was even possible to recommend a recent English translation, stressing that it rendered the original text in a fluid and accessible prose, which would be a very important asset, because “the original Koran is written in clear and easy-to-understand Arabic”. Yet the attentive reader encounters serious difficulties on each page, due to the presence of many hapax legomena and obscure or ambiguous passages—not to mention the very allusive character of many Koranic verses. Naturally, the orientalists have addressed some of these difficulties—in general those on which the Muslim tradition was the most divided.
    There are also, of course, passages that do not seem to pose a major problem. However, some of these passages, on which the Muslim tradition can display a beautiful unanimity, are revealed on reflection to be much less clear than what our reading habits would lead us to believe.

    A. Jeffery, The Foreign Vocabulary of The Quʾrān, (with a foreword by Gerhard Böwering and Jane Dammen Mc Auliffe), Texts And Studies On The Qurʾān, vol.3, G. Böwering and J. D. Mc Auliffe, (eds), 2007, p.3.Reprint: (Gaekwad's Oriental Series, no. lxxix), Baroda: Oriental Institute, 1938.
    Now it is conceivable that there may have been correct tradition from the Prophet himself in many cases as to the interpretation of some of the strange words that meet us in the Qur’an, but if so, it is evident that this tradition was soon lost, for by the time the classical exegetes came to compile their works there was a bewildering entanglement of elaborate lines of conflicting tradition as to the meaning of these words, all emanating from the same small circle of the Prophet’s immediate Companions
    We have, however, all that the early Muslim community had, and we have fair assurance that what that early community was able to preserve of the pronouncements of its founder has been on the whole faithfully transmitted to us, even though in a fragmentary and curiously jumbled condition. Neither the Sira nor Tradition is of much help to us in this matter, and though the exegetes have preserved in their work good evidence of what was thought in their day to be the meaning of words and phrases in the Qur'an, the bewildering array of variant opinions they record on almost every crucial point of interpretation, makes it quite clear than even the very early circle of exegetes was as much in doubt as we are as to the exact meaning of many of the terms that interest us the most.


    P. Crone, “Two Legal Problems Bearing on the Early History of the Qur'ān,”Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 18, 1994, pp. 1-37 (= From Kavād to al-Ghazālī [Variorum], Aldershot 2005, no. V), p.37.
    Three legal terms of the Qurʾān (kālala, jizya ʿan yad, kitāb in 24:33) were unintelligible to the early commentators, as were several non-legal phrases and passages (al-ṣamad, possibly al-rajīm, the mysterious letters and Sūrat Quraysh).

    D. Madigan, The Qur’ân’s Self Image: Writing and Authority in Islam’s Scripture, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2001, p. 51.
    This gap between the (relatively few) legal prescriptions in the Qur'an and some of the actual laws that became established among the Muslims raises a serious question about the early history of the text or at least about the role it played in the community. If we add to this the gap in comprehension represented by the fawatih, by textual difficulties, and by various terms that
    were no longer understood by the commentators, we are drawn to conclude that the full text of the Qur' an played quite a limited role in the early decades of Islam.

    G.S. Reynolds,“Qur’anic studies and its controversies”, in G.S. Reynolds, ed., The Qurʾān in Its Historical Context, London and New York : Routledge, 2008, p.8.
    In early exegetical works Muslim scholars carry out speculative, and often unresolved, conversations on the meaning of numerous Qur’anic passages. They are usually forthright about the extent of their disagreement, often concluding their analysis with the simple admission: “The exegetes disagree on the meaning.” Elsewhere they use the marvelous Arabic elative term “asahh” or “more correct,” to introduce their own view while not entirely dismissing that of others. Or they resign themselves with the refrain: “God knows best.

    The standard response to this perspective (much like Watt’s reproach of Bell) is that there is no need to throw out the baby with the bath water. The works of the mufassirūn [commentators]can still connect us with the time of the Qurʾān’s origins.[…] The problem with this view is that the mufassirūn, even the earliest mufassirūn, are unable to understand basic elements of the Qurʾān.[…] First is the case of the disconnected letters (Ar. al-aḥruf al-muqaṭṭaʿ or fawātiḥ al-suwar) that appear at the opening of 29 Sūras. These letters seem to play an important role in the organization of the Qurʾān. […]  They do not demonstrate any memory of the role these letters played in the Qurʾān’s organization. Instead their commentary reflects both confusion and creative speculation.

    The case studies of the previous chapter serve in part to illustrate the struggles of the classical mufassirūn to understand significant elements of the Qurʾān.[…] … it should be noticed that these case studies, for the most part, are not limited to isolated phrases, hapax legomena, or foreign vocabulary. Instead they largely address narratives or themes that lie at the heart of the Qurʾān’s discourse. The struggles of the exegetes are therefore all the more curious.


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10256 - June 14, 2021, 02:39 PM

    well dear Altara ., I am not sure all that text you wrote below answers those simple points., I was asking for the names of those mufassiruns and their disagreements with each other with respect to their tafsir.,

    But .....but your references on that subject very useful...  Thank you 
    1). Dye (translated from French)....“Q 30:2-7” in M. Azaiez, G. S. Reynolds, T. Tesei, H.M. Zafer (eds), The Qur’an Seminar Commentary – Le Qur’an Seminar, A Collaborative Study of 50 Qur’anic Passages, Commentaire collaboratif de 50 passages coraniques, de Gruyter, 2016, p.288-289..........

     2). A. Jeffery, The Foreign Vocabulary of The Quʾrān, (with a foreword by Gerhard Böwering and Jane Dammen Mc Auliffe), Texts And Studies On The Qurʾān, vol.3, G. Böwering and J. D. Mc Auliffe, (eds), 2007, p.3.Reprint: (Gaekwad's Oriental Series, no. lxxix), Baroda: Oriental Institute, 1938.
     
    3). P. Crone, “Two Legal Problems Bearing on the Early History of the Qur'ān,”Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 18, 1994, pp. 1-37 (= From Kavād to al-Ghazālī [Variorum], Aldershot 2005, no. V), p.37.

    4).   D. Madigan, The Qur’ân’s Self Image: Writing and Authority in Islam’s Scripture, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2001, p. 51.
     
    5). G.S. Reynolds,“Qur’anic studies and its controversies”, in G.S. Reynolds, ed., The Qurʾān in Its Historical Context, London and New York : Routledge, 2008, p.8.




    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10257 - June 14, 2021, 03:23 PM

     Dear yeezevee

    this book asnwers your question.

    much before any other argument proposed by Altara by reading this i got the point that Muhammad is the summa of stories, rather than historical

    https://www.routledge.com/The-Quran-and-its-Biblical-Subtext/Reynolds/p/book/9780415524247

    Professor Reynolds makes 12 cases listing the muffassirun and their conflicting ideas from Muqatil sulaiman to Tabari, Ibn Kathir etc..

    his "exercise" made on 12 cases can be easily extended to many more in the quran
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10258 - June 14, 2021, 03:33 PM

    Altara

    I was studying on the topic of the praised one in the south arabic inscription at Najran siege

    Daniel is praised by the Persian KIng in the book of Daniel.

    Daniel bears also the prophecy about the 4 kingdoms and the last one, moved by God, which would destroy and reaplace the other Kingdoms as God driven Kingdom

    May I assume that if Daniel is the referred one here, and by his help the conquest of najran is achieved, those who wrote the text may have felt themselves as those representative of that kingdom

    and if that idea evolved into the quranic muhammad then the "messenger" to whom allah speaks and "muahmmad" of the quran may not be the same person, but Islam associated them (so to say)


    A second question.
    About the sanaa palimpsest

    how can we see if the lower text is a scribe trying to rebuild a damaged copy of it?
    And if this is the case, how do we see if that rebuilding of the text is made upon a text which is 50 years old and not 5 years old?

    Just to understand how to analyzing the text of the lower one we can see how old is the written copy from which it was copied.

    thanks

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #10259 - June 15, 2021, 05:53 AM

    Quote
    I was asking for the names of those mufassiruns and their disagreements with each other with respect to their tafsir.,


    It is doable but it would necessitate a work that has never be done in detail because nobody did engage it.
  • Previous page 1 ... 340 341 342343 344 ... 349 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »