Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →
↑ ↓
CEMB → Forum → Life, The Universe & Everything → Religions and Gods → Qur'anic studies today

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

Qur'anic studies today
Today at 06:50 AM
Do humans have needed kno...
April 20, 2024, 12:02 PM
Lights on the way
by akay
April 19, 2024, 04:40 PM
اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
April 19, 2024, 12:50 PM
Do humans have needed kno...
April 19, 2024, 04:17 AM
What's happened to the fo...
by zeca
April 18, 2024, 06:39 PM
New Britain
April 18, 2024, 05:41 PM
Iran launches drones
April 13, 2024, 09:56 PM
عيد مبارك للجميع! ^_^
by akay
April 12, 2024, 04:01 PM
Eid-Al-Fitr
by akay
April 12, 2024, 12:06 PM
Mock Them and Move on., ...
January 30, 2024, 10:44 AM
Pro Israel or Pro Palesti...
January 29, 2024, 01:53 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 1275481 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 202 203 204205 206 ... 368 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6090 - March 17, 2019, 08:05 PM
    48:9

    ... believe in Allah and his messenger....

    Has it been suggested that "his messenger "is a later addition? I think it a bit weird that this messenger would be at the same level as Allah.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6091 - March 17, 2019, 08:21 PM
    Not that I know of. There is even a hadith to that effect. And I don't think that it puts him on par with God.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6092 - March 17, 2019, 08:22 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on March 17, 2019, 07:14 PM
    Or are your simply saying that the leaders of the armies there had uttered the command and so the Arabs obeyed?

     

    This one.

    Quote
    Furthermore, it seems that you don't agree with Gallez that the verb should be read in the imperfect tense, implying that the foundations are yet to be built. Am I correct?

     

    In fact there's not even a need for what's being said by Gallez to understand that the Arabs leaders, having this passage in hand,  and having no relationship with the frame Mecca/Medina/Zem Zem/Kaba as they are leaving between 636 and 700 not a piece of allusion about it, therefore being not aware of what the 9th c. Muslim narrative will make of them (Companions, ennemies of the Prophet, born in Mecca/Medina, etc) decide to built, whatever being the tense used in the passage. They built because they are sons of Ishmael. They ordered that the stuff be built on the Temple Mount like their eponym ancestor did with Abraham.

    Quote
    Lastly, do you agree that the al-bayt and bayt al-ḥarām refer to the Most Holy in Jerusalem?


    In the Quranic paradigm, it refers to both; to the fictionnesque history of Abraham and Ishmael builder in an arid valley , which have never existed, and the Temple of Jerusalem which is destroyed since 70.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6093 - March 17, 2019, 08:26 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on March 17, 2019, 07:35 PM
    Mohammad-Ali Amir-Moezzi:
     


    From where?

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6094 - March 17, 2019, 08:28 PM
    https://bit.ly/2W7teP4

    pp. 51-2, note 66.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6095 - March 17, 2019, 08:37 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on March 17, 2019, 07:35 PM
    Thus, in the “Judeo-Christian” messianic context, the title of “Paraclete” attributed to Muḥammad would have meant the announcer of the Parousia, the advent of the second coming of Jesus Christ.

    Quote
    To my untrained eyes, this sounds very convincing.



    Muhammad = Madhi = Muhammad Ibn al Hanifiyyah
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6096 - March 17, 2019, 10:04 PM
    Next Inarah stuff, guest star Raymond Dequin featuring Muhammad Ibn al Hanifiyyah as Muhammad the prophet of Islam dance
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6097 - March 17, 2019, 10:05 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on March 17, 2019, 08:28 PM
    https://bit.ly/2W7teP4

    pp. 51-2, note 66.


    Thanks.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6098 - March 17, 2019, 10:08 PM
    Quote
    Next Inarah stuff, guest star Raymond Dequin featuring Muhammad Ibn al Hanifiyyah  dance


    Altara makes sure to take jabs at Inarah and Dequin every chance he gets, haha.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6099 - March 17, 2019, 10:08 PM
    Quote
    Thanks.


    My pleasure.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6100 - March 17, 2019, 10:19 PM
    Quote from: Altara on March 17, 2019, 10:04 PM
    Next Inarah stuff, guest star Raymond Dequin featuring Muhammad Ibn al Hanifiyyah as Muhammad the prophet of Islam dance


    What's the name of the 12th imam ?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6101 - March 17, 2019, 10:20 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on March 17, 2019, 10:08 PM
    Altara makes sure to take jabs at Inarah and Dequin every chance he gets, haha.


    But he never read them Huh? Huh? Huh? Huh? Huh? Huh? Huh? Huh? and they don't talk about what I just said  wacko wacko wacko wacko
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6102 - March 17, 2019, 10:24 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on March 17, 2019, 10:08 PM
    Altara makes sure to take jabs at Inarah and Dequin every chance he gets, haha.


    Do not get me wrong haha! It's more to Marc that trust the conjectures of Dequin than the Inarah concept itself. Note that Dye will make a lecture this year.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6103 - March 17, 2019, 10:26 PM
    Quote from: Marc S on March 17, 2019, 10:20 PM
    But he never read them and they don't talk about what I just said


    1/ I do not think that the Muhammad in coins is Jesus.
    2/ I do not think that Muhammad = Madhi = Muhammad Ibn al Hanifiyyah
    I think that "Muhammad " has never existed.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6104 - March 17, 2019, 10:27 PM
    Quote from: Altara on March 17, 2019, 07:05 PM
    And I think, having this passage in hand, the leaders of the 637 Arab armies


    Still statements that have no proof ; this verse belongs to the Mecca/Medina/Kaba fairy tale for obvious reasons.

    A clue https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIu8ZRiFFHw

    Quote
    have ordered to build, since they are sons of Ishmael, on the Temple Mount like their eponym ancestor did with Abraham.

    So Ishamel built something on the Temple Mount ? According to what source that is known before the Arab invasion ?
    Well let me think, NONE.




  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6105 - March 17, 2019, 10:46 PM
    Quote
    this verse belongs to the Mecca/Medina/Kaba fairy tale for obvious reasons.


    Q 2,127.This verse belongs to nothing apart the Quranic text which have nothing to see with the Mecca/Medina/Kaba frame which have not existed... (yawn)...
    Quote
    So Ishmael built something on the Temple Mount ?


     Ishmael as identified by Arab (elites) as their ancestor (since ages...)
    Therefore it is not surprising that Arabs arriving in Jerusalem and having at hands Q 2,127 seeing the destroyed Temple felt allowed to build  since Q ,127 tells that their ancestor (Ishmael) had build something with Abraham in an arid valley, etc.
    This explain why they built on the Temple Mount. They felt allowed.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6106 - March 17, 2019, 11:04 PM
    Carlos A. Segovia:

    Quote
    The vindication of the quranic prophet in v. 129 is most remarkable too. Indeed, vv. 122–41 may be read as an intent to provide him (and hence his “community,” as we read in v. 128) with a legitimate genealogy vis-à-vis the Jews.


    Accompanying footnote:

    Quote
    Cf. Edmund M. Beck, “Die Gestalt des Abraham am Wendepunkt der Entwicklung Muhammeds: Analyse von Sure 2, 118 (124)–135 (141),” Le Muséon 65 (1952): 73–94 (reprinted in Der Koran, ed. Rudi Paret [Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1975] 111–33); Catherina Wenzel, “‘Und als Ibrāhīm und Ismāʿīl die FunDammente des Hauses (der Ka‘ba) legten’ (Sure 2, 127): Abrahamsrezeption und Legitimät im Koran,”ZRGG 45.3 (2002): 193–209; Angelika Neuwirth, “The House of Abraham and the House of Amram: Genealogy, Patriarchal Authority, and Exegetical Professionalism,” in The Qur’ān in Context: Historical and Literary Investigations into the Qur’ānic Milieu, ed. Angelika Neuwirth, Nicolai Sinai, and Michael Marx (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010) 499–531, pp. 501–3; Bertram Schmitz, “Das Spannungsverhältnis zwischen Judentum und Christentum als Grundlage des Entstehungsprozesses des Islams in der Interpretation von Vers 124 bis 141 der zweiten Sure,” in Der Koran und sein religiöses und kulturelles Umfeld, ed. Tilman Nagel (Munich: Oldenbourg, 2010) 217–38.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6107 - March 17, 2019, 11:53 PM
    Quote
    The vindication of the quranic prophet in v. 129 is most remarkable too. Indeed, vv. 122–41 may be read as an intent to provide him (and hence his “community,” as we read in v. 128) with a legitimate genealogy vis-à-vis the Jews


    Of course. The Quranic authors knows the general stuff : Arabs= sons of Ishmael. And use it for their own agenda.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6108 - March 18, 2019, 12:00 AM
    Carlos Segovia:

    Quote
    Interestingly enough, the reference in vv. 125 and 127 to their building of the “House” (البيت al-bayt, an undoubtedly elusive term which has nonetheless been traditionally identified with the Ka‘ba) apparently draws on the Syriac “homiletic” literature on Genesis.


    Accompanying footnote:

    Quote
    See Joseph Witztum, “The Foundation of the House (Q 2:127),” BSOAS 72.1 (2009): 25–40. For an identification of al-bayt, the “House,” with the Jerusalem temple, see Édouard-Marie Gallez, Le messie et son prophète. Aux origines de l’Islam (2 vols; Versailles: Éditions de Paris, 2005) 1:467–76.

     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6109 - March 18, 2019, 12:14 AM
    Thanks to give the reference!
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6110 - March 18, 2019, 09:55 AM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on March 18, 2019, 12:00 AM
    Carlos Segovia:
    Interestingly enough, the reference in vv. 125 and 127 to their building of the “House” (البيت al-bayt, an undoubtedly elusive term which has nonetheless been traditionally identified with the Ka‘ba) apparently draws on the Syriac “homiletic” literature on Genesis.
    Accompanying footnote:
     


    For me, this verse is an addition/alteration that was implemented after the narrative about Muhammad was fixed (the Sira by Ibn Ishaq). It does only relate to the Ka'aba and cannot relate to the Temple of Solomon. Why ? Because of the interpolation in Surah 17 with the addition of verse 1 and the fairy tale about the Night Journey.

    By the way, Q 2: 125/126/127 looks like an altered/conflated copy of 1 Kings 8.

    Just my 2 cents, and Raymond Dequin is not involved here  Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6111 - March 18, 2019, 10:01 AM
    Marc,

    on 2:127

    Quote
    For me, this verse is an addition/alteration that was implemented after the narrative about Muhammad was fixed


    When was the narrative fixed according to you? Have you checked if 2:127 is included in the oldest manuscripts?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6112 - March 18, 2019, 10:38 AM
    Quote
    When was the narrative fixed according to you?


    Beginning of the 9th century

    Quote
    Have you checked if 2:127 is included in the oldest manuscripts?


    No I haven't but I would be surprised if it were.

    I just checked DAM 01.27, 1, DAM 20.33.1, Arab 328a, DAM 01.25.1, DAM 01.29.1, which according to islamic-awareness.org represent the 1st century of Hijra manuscripts (I don't know if this is the complete list though) and surprise, it is not there.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6113 - March 18, 2019, 10:54 AM
    But I have a simple rationale for all this :

    - muslims in the 9/10th had to explain the Dome of the Rock that is un-islamic ; therefore, they created the fairy tale of the Night Journey and added verse 1 in surah 17,

    - if they had used 2:127 to build on the Temple Mount, then they wouldn't have needed the Night Journey and 17:1,

    - therefore they never saw 2:127 as a reason to build on the Temple Mount,

    - However, they needed to explain the Ka'aba and legitimate it ; 2:127 perfectly fit into this, knowing that no Jewish tradition mention Abraham/Ishmael building anything anywhere
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6114 - March 18, 2019, 12:02 PM
    Marc,

    Quote
    I just checked DAM 01.27, 1, DAM 20.33.1, Arab 328a, DAM 01.25.1, DAM 01.29.1, which according to islamic-awareness.org represent the 1st century of Hijra manuscripts (I don't know if this is the complete list though) and surprise, it is not there.


    That is interesting! We should try to find the first mention...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6115 - March 18, 2019, 12:15 PM
    2:127

    I checked Corpus Coranicum. Here is the list of what has 2:127 ( https://corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/127?handschrift=544)

    I think the oldest manuscripts that has 2:127 is Wetzstein II, c14'ed btw 662-745 CE.



  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6116 - March 18, 2019, 12:45 PM
    Quote from: mundi on March 17, 2019, 08:05 PM
    48:9... believe in Allah and his messenger....

    Has it been suggested that "his messenger "is a later addition? I think it a bit weird that this messenger would be at the same level as Allah.

    well dear mundi .. i consider such conclusions as yours...""his messenger "is a later addition? ... is the perfect example of folks reading bad translations.. bad tafsirs ...or or...worse folks reading Quran verse improperly ..

    let me put that   verse in its totality...
    Quote

    لِّتُؤْمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَتُعَزِّرُوهُ وَتُوَقِّرُوهُ وَتُسَبِّحُوهُ بُكْرَةً وَأَصِيلًا

    Transliteration:   Lituminoo biAllahi warasoolihi watuAAazziroohu watuwaqqiroohu watusabbihoohu bukratan waaseelan

    Yusuf Ali:   In order that ye (O men) may believe in Allah and His Messenger, that ye may assist and honour Him, and celebrate His praise morning and evening.

    Shakir:   That you may believe in Allah and His Apostle and may aid him and revere him; and (that) you may declare His glory, morning and evening.

    Pickthall:   That ye (mankind) may believe in Allah and His messenger, and may honour Him, and may revere Him, and may glorify Him at early dawn and at the close of day.

    Mohsin Khan:In order that you (O mankind) may believe in Allah and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), and that you assist and honour him (صلى الله عليه وسلم), and (that you) glorify (Allah's) praises morning and afternoon.

    Saheeh:That you [people] may believe in Allah and His Messenger and honor him and respect the Prophet and exalt Allah morning and afternoon.

    So in that verse mundi has problem...

    "He thinks  because that statement has "you  may believe in Allah and His Messenger"   he thinks Quran makes Messenger   as high as Allah and messenger is glorified as much as they do for Allah.. so essentially messenger is equivalent to Allah.."

    Correct me if I misunderstood you dear mundi.. and let us both  read that verses again carefully in its totality..

    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 #6117 - March 18, 2019, 12:51 PM
    Yeez,

    Thank you for taking my impulsive remark seriously. From the translations you presented I see that Saheeh had the same problem is I had. So he specified here and there who is addressed:

    That you [people] may believe in Allah and His Messenger and honor him and respect the Prophet and exalt Allah morning and afternoon

    Question now what was meant by the author(s)? How to read the rasm correctly? Do you know Yeez?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6118 - March 18, 2019, 12:51 PM
    So what is cooking in Altara  responses..? .. what is new?  what falls in to the radar's wavelength?
    Quote
    Quote from: Altara on March 16, 2019, 11:00 PM
    For me, rasm=Quranic consonantal text.....

    Quote from: Mahgraye on March 17, 2019, 03:32 PM
    1). What I meant was "when the Quran was compiled into a codex, which would be the time when the consonantal skeleton fixed, and the corpus, that is, the content of the Quran, was no longer added to or retracted from."

    2). Very simple. You have to models:

    Uthman or Abd al-Malik. Or, when did the so-called Uthmanic recension really take place, under Uthman or Abd al-Malik? You prefer the latter. As to the San'a palimpsest, it is the exemption that proves the rule. It is a non-Uthmanic manuscript and some of its variants correspond to some so-called Companion codices......


    Quote from: Altara on March 17, 2019, 10:46 PM
    Q 2,127.This verse belongs to nothing apart the Quranic text which have nothing to see with the Mecca/Medina/Kaba frame which have not existed... (yawn)...

    Ishmael as identified by Arab (elites) as their ancestor (since ages...)

    Therefore it is not surprising that Arabs arriving in Jerusalem and having at hands Q 2,127 seeing the destroyed Temple felt allowed to build  since Q ,127 tells that their ancestor (Ishmael) had build something with Abraham in an arid valley, etc.
     
    This explain why they built on the Temple Mount. They felt allowed.

    Quote from: Altara on March 17, 2019, 11:53 PM
    Of course. The Quranic authors knows the general stuff : Arabs= sons of Ishmael. And use it for their own agenda.


    good stuff good stuff..
    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 #6119 - March 18, 2019, 12:59 PM
    Quote from: mundi on March 18, 2019, 12:15 PM
    2:127
    I checked Corpus Coranicum. Here is the list of what has 2:127 ( https://corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/127?handschrift=544)

    I think the oldest manuscripts that has 2:127 is Wetzstein II, c14'ed btw 662-745 CE.


    Weitzstein II is a palimpsest so the text might be much older than the datation of the manuscript itself.
  • Previous page 1 ... 202 203 204205 206 ... 368 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »