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
Yesterday at 08:44 PM
Lights on the way
by akay
Yesterday at 04:40 PM
اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
Yesterday at 12:50 PM
Do humans have needed kno...
Yesterday at 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
Do humans have needed kno...
April 18, 2024, 05:47 AM
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 1274144 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 204 205 206207 208 ... 368 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6150 - March 18, 2019, 08:15 PM
    Marc,

    I agree that a reliable table with verse number and manuscripts would be very handy. It is a pity that corpus Coranicum doesnt provide it. There are ways to go about it but it is tedious.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6151 - March 18, 2019, 08:16 PM
    Altara,

    Why do you think the Arabs needed verse 2:127 to start building? They could have known the tradition and they just did it. Without consulting the rasm.

    I do agree with you that rasm is much earlier than Marc says. I also think 630's is quite realistic for big parts of it.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6152 - March 18, 2019, 08:24 PM
    Quote
    Altara,


    Yes.

    Quote
    Why do you think the Arabs needed verse 2:127 to start building They could have known the tradition and they just did it? Without consulting the rasm.


    Because written things have much more impact.

    Quote
    I do agree with you that rasm is much earlier than Marc says. I also think 630's is quite realistic for big parts of it.


    It is my feeling ; of course I have no indisputable evidence. I'm not H.G. Wells.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6153 - March 18, 2019, 08:33 PM
    Altara,

    Quote
    Because written things have much more impact.


    That's not enough reason for it to be factually true. 2:127 could also be written as a consequence of the cultural belief that something was built there. Or based on earlier texts that were much more clear on the subject.
  • Re: Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6154 - March 18, 2019, 08:52 PM
    On 48:9, addition of "his messenger"

    Yeez,

    You were going to help me read this verse. I thought Allah and the prophet were put on the same level here and both needed to be respected etc... You gave me different readings to counter my arguments. So I remind you...

    Quote from: mundi on 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 #6155 - March 18, 2019, 09:19 PM
    Secret societies:

    I came across this review of a book about secret Jewish societies that apparently were quite popular in antiquity. http://www.ancientjewreview.com/articles/2019/3/18/book-note-secret-groups-in-ancient-judaism

    Could Islam have started as a "secret society"with its own revelations and rites? They consecutively managed to round up troops who were not insiders at the beginning but were gradually included in the no-more-secret society?

    That could explain why so little traces are found pre-conquest and why the origins seem so hidden...
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6156 - March 18, 2019, 09:22 PM
    Robert Kerr is also part of the so-called Gallez "galaxy".
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6157 - March 18, 2019, 10:11 PM
    Suppose I am going to apply to university, should I choose a program where I will study Arabic? It will then be my primary focus.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6158 - March 18, 2019, 10:27 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on March 18, 2019, 06:43 PM
    Marc S' proposal is, in my humble opinion, very improbable and does not do the topic any justice. The verse simply can't be an interpolation added sometime in the ninth century. That is just precluded by all the evidence. If anything, Altara's suggestion, following Gallez and others, is more probably and has some explanatory scope.


    You have the right to disagree with me my friend ; everyone share his opinion.

    I read Witzum paper but I am not convinced :

    - he put his review in the frame of Abraham/Ishmael building the Ka'aba,

    - that allows him not to address one issue in verse 126 so, I am asking you dear Maghraye, what is the city mentionned in that verse ? I cannot really place the context,

    - he also seems to link 2:127 and the trial of Abraham by God with the sacrifice of Isaac ; however, to my knowledge, the earliest and the majority of the Quran scholars did recognize that this trial involved Isaac and not Ismael.

    But, Allah knows best.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6159 - March 18, 2019, 10:52 PM
    Quote
    that allows him not to address one issue in verse 126 so, I am asking you dear Maghraye, what is the city mentionned in that verse ? I cannot really place the context


    Given that the speaker Abraham, it is reasonable that the city in question might be Jerusalem, especially given that the next verse deals with Abraham and his son, Ishmael, building the foundations of the “House”, possibly an identification of the Most Holy when compared with other usages of the word in the corpus together with the expression bayt al-haram.

    Mudi, citing Bonnet-Eymard, proposed that the word might be misread from Hebrew for boy, referring to Ishmael. This is possible, but the reading seems unlikely and extraordinary, considering that Ishmael is named in the next verse. So I think the first possibility of it referring to Jerusalem to be the most plausible explanation.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6160 - March 18, 2019, 11:01 PM
    Yeah but Jerusalem didn't exist at the time of Abraham ; that is why this is fitting the Mecca fairy tale much better by the way ; this is why I am not convinced by the Jerusalem assulption, and Witzum just says the biblical narrative was used by Islam for its own narrative.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6161 - March 18, 2019, 11:02 PM
    Quote
    Yeah but Jerusalem didn't exist at the time of Abraham ; that is why this is fitting the Mecca fairy tale much better by the way ; this is why I am not convinced by the Jerusalem assulption, and Witzum just says the biblical narrative was used by Islam for its own narrative.

     

    My apologies. I meant the Holy Land in general. The Hebrew Bible puts emphasis on the region in relation to Abraham despite the specific city of Jerusalem not existing at his time.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6162 - March 18, 2019, 11:04 PM
    Quote
    however, to my knowledge, the earliest and the majority of the Quran scholars did recognize that this trial involved Isaac and not Ismael.


    They were certainly aware of it. Most early commentators identified the sacrificed with Isaac. Only later did the most prefer Ishmael for religious reasons pertaining to their unique identity. Suleiman Bashear has a paper discussing this in detail.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6163 - March 19, 2019, 12:44 AM
    Quote from: mundi on March 18, 2019, 08:33 PM
    Altara,


    Yes.

    Quote
    That's not enough reason for it to be factually true.

     

    It is. Stop to be anachronic, thinking with your XXIth  c. mind.
    For 6/7th c. people what counts is written.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6164 - March 19, 2019, 12:45 AM
    Quote from: mundi on March 18, 2019, 09:19 PM
    Secret societies:

    I came across this review of a book about secret Jewish societies that apparently were quite popular in antiquity. http://www.ancientjewreview.com/articles/2019/3/18/book-note-secret-groups-in-ancient-judaism
    Could Islam have started as a "secret society"with its own revelations and rites? They consecutively managed to round up troops who were not insiders at the beginning but were gradually included in the no-more-secret society?
    That could explain why so little traces are found pre-conquest and why the origins seem so hidden...


    Yes it could.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6165 - March 19, 2019, 12:49 AM
    Quote from: Marc S on March 18, 2019, 11:01 PM
    Yeah but Jerusalem didn't exist at the time of Abraham


     The Quran does not care of what exist or not (yawn...)


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6166 - March 19, 2019, 01:24 AM
    I think I agree. Jerusalem did not exist at that time is no convincing proof. Arabs did not exist at the time of Ishmael but that does not mean that Arabs are said to be the descendants of Ishmael in the Quran. What matters is what the text itself says and beliefs and views as historical truth.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6167 - March 19, 2019, 07:03 AM
    Altara,

    Quote
    For 6/7th c. people what counts is written.


    If "written" is so important to the conquest Arabs and we know the Ishmael story was present amongst them for centuries, then there must have been other written material than the Quranic rasm.

    The focus in this discussion is too much on 2:127 which is at best an unclear reference to whatever. Why would 2:127 be more than what a lot of other verses of the Quran are: a group of phonemes makings sense half of the time, and half of the time not?

    I would again refer to the Bonnet reading which seems as plausible as the traditional one. He also frames it in the biblical context and notes arguments why his reading is correct. It is all relative.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6168 - March 19, 2019, 11:27 AM
    Quote
    If "written" is so important to the conquest Arabs and we know the Ishmael story was present amongst them for centuries, then there must have been other written material than the Quranic rasm.


    For the episode of the building on the Mount? No need apart Q 2,127

    Quote
    I would again refer to the Bonnet reading which seems as plausible as the traditional one. He also frames it in the biblical context and notes arguments why his reading is correct.


    Bonnet-Eymard is right but especially Gallez who, in term of lexicology, draw from him about a future tense. But even if both are wrong, that it is not a future tense,  it change nothing (for me...) about  the fact  already said (by Gallez first...) and me here in previous post(s) that :

    The verse read by the 637 elite Arabs to think that they have the permission to build, as it corresponds and validates to what they knew since ages, namely that they were sons of Ishmael. It was then normal for them to build on the place where the Temple/Bayt got foundations, a House of prayer, believing what 2,127 said : that the Temple before had been constructed  by Abraham and Ishmael or that Abraham and  Ishmael had, one way or another, built something to pray God.
    All of this being based on the postulate that Quranic texts existed before 637 and that those Quranic texts have nothing to see with the frame Kaba/Zem Zem. That Quranic texts probably existed before 637 one knows it by the C14 radio carbon results  . Therefore one can think that  (some) Quranic texts probably existed before 637. I'd tend to think that (some) if not all are far more ancient that generally thought. So it does not surprise me that the  637 elite Arabs could have been inspired by 2,127 to build in Jerusalem.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6169 - March 19, 2019, 11:49 AM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on March 19, 2019, 01:24 AM
    I think I agree. Jerusalem did not exist at that time is no convincing proof. Arabs did not exist at the time of Ishmael but that does not mean that Arabs are said to be the descendants of Ishmael in the Quran. What matters is what the text itself says and beliefs and views as historical truth.


    I don't mind if Jerusalem existed or not ; I was just asking for an explanation of the context of this verse (126), in order to better understand your rationale ; I understand that no one can provide any ; no problem ; let's move on.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6170 - March 19, 2019, 12:05 PM
    Altara,

    I think I can agree on your resumé. If 2:127 was a direct inspiration or other texts/lore that were written before, doesnt matter that much. Important here is that Quran is probably pre-conquest and part of an older tradition that indeed didnt start with Mohammed hearing stuff.

    C 14, like you say, points in the direction of your thesis, I agree with that too. "Half of it is wrong"is just not good enough an argument for me.

    But then what do you say about these early Qiblas? In the Levant there seems to be a  "south" direction for them. (Usually it is some degrees off, which is strange since South is very easy to determine.) Eg there is the Kathisma church Qibla south of Jerusalem that is pointing South again, so No pointing to Jerusalem, opposite is true. Would these pre-Mecca orientations be part of these pre-conquest beliefs? Propagated in one of these "secret societies"I mentioned before?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6171 - March 19, 2019, 12:16 PM
    Quote
    C 14, like you say, points in the direction of your thesis


    Points to what thesis?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6172 - March 19, 2019, 12:19 PM
    Mayghraye,

    Altara says that the Quranic texts are very old and circulated pre-conquest. C14 is in line with that.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6173 - March 19, 2019, 12:20 PM
    No one is disputing that the Quran is old and that parts of it are pre-Muhammadan... What C14 had to do with it, I don't know. The issue of redaction has no bearing on the age of the actual contents. It is actually those who support a Marwanid-era codification date that usually argue that the Quran, or parts of it, are pre-Muhammad and not the other way around.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6174 - March 19, 2019, 12:29 PM
    Mahgraye,

    Having several manuscripts dated by C14 to around 630 (or earlier) matters. Theses like some verses were added in 9th C can be discarded right away. The tradition that Quran was first transmitted orally and canonised unde Uthman flies out the window too.

    The dates matter here, history is a lot about dates, you can't have it without.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6175 - March 19, 2019, 12:30 PM
    I agree that no verse was added after the late seventh century. Everyone agrees on this. There is a consensus.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6176 - March 19, 2019, 12:37 PM
    consensus: we had Mark here saying 2:127 was added in 9th C. I dont think the consensus reaches as far as you think.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6177 - March 19, 2019, 12:37 PM
    A consensus among critical scholars.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6178 - March 19, 2019, 12:56 PM
    Quote from: mundi on March 19, 2019, 12:37 PM
    consensus: we had Mark here saying 2:127 was added in 9th C. I dont think the consensus reaches as far as you think.


    I didn't say it was added in the 9th century. I said, for me, it was added when the Sira was finalised, and we know the Sira was finalised in the 9th century ; it doesn't mean this verse was added at that exact time but that is the terminus ad quem. C14 doesn't prove me wrong as far as I know.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6179 - March 19, 2019, 12:58 PM
    C14, along with findings from other disciplines, preclude the possibility of additions after the late seventh century.
  • Previous page 1 ... 204 205 206207 208 ... 368 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »