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


Qur'anic studies today
Yesterday at 09:59 PM

مدهش----- لماذا؟؟؟؟
by akay
Yesterday at 10:22 AM

Nominal from Bedfordshire
July 16, 2019, 10:54 PM

Pro Israel or Pro Palesti...
July 16, 2019, 11:38 AM

Scientists and .............
by akay
July 16, 2019, 07:13 AM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
July 14, 2019, 09:23 PM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
July 14, 2019, 05:19 PM

Hamza Tzortzis vs Profess...
July 14, 2019, 04:16 PM

Reading Quran And Inquiri...
July 06, 2019, 01:55 PM

Burkini nudist showdown i...
July 05, 2019, 09:52 PM

Imam hurt in shooting out...
June 29, 2019, 11:11 AM

Muslim heritage?
June 29, 2019, 07:22 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 312147 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 220 221 222223 224 ... 238 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6630 - May 08, 2019, 04:22 AM

    what are you saying Mahgraye ?  why Mahgraye ?  why there is`NO PROGRESS in your thinking on early Islam and origins of Islam  dear Mahgraye ??
    Altara is really going against established knowledge.... everyone is literally wrong

    what Altara doing  is a good thing.,  that is exactly what is needed  to crack the codes  dear Mahgraye .,  You are right.. i am right everyone is right is not the way dear Mahgraye,, Fields gets stagnated and no  progress will be made in  any field by no questioning and by stagnation ...

     
    Quote
    did not know hagarims was majmu3 al-fatawa by ibn taymiyya... again, alatara comes decades later when he has access to new materail and hypothesis and ergo comlains that hagarism was not revisionis enought. in hagarism, crone & cook proposed a marwanid era redaction, and granted, they did not discuss the quran. crone did that later on.


    Quote
    revisonism started in the 70s by Luling, Wansbrough, and Crone & Cook. end  of story. this is descriptive and not semantics. and yeah, azami was not a traditionist....

     
    ibn taymiyya ??  who??  this  guy?
    Quote
    Ibn Taymiyyah, in full Taqī al-Dīn Abū al-ʿAbbās Aḥmad ibn ʿAbd al-Salām ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad ibn Taymiyyah, (born 1263, Harran, Mesopotamia—died September 26, 1328, Damascus, Syria), one of Islam’s most forceful theologians, who, as a member of the Pietist school founded by Ibn Ḥanbal, sought the return of the Islamic religion to its sources: the Qurʾān and the sunnah, revealed writing and the prophetic tradition. He is also the source of the Wahhābiyyah, a mid-18th-century traditionalist movement of Islam.

    marwanid era redaction,??  what?....  are you talking about these guys??
    Quote
    The Marwanids (990–1085)  he  Kurdish Muslim dynasty in the Diyar Bakr region of Upper Mesopotamia (present day northern Iraq/southeastern Turkey) and Armenia,

    what  azami ?? what not a traditionalist?? which Azami?? who??  are you talking about this guy..


    Quote
    Muhammad Mustafa Al-A'zami (Arabic: محمد مصطفى الأعظمي) was a contemporary hadith scholar ..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e9TwCTZieA

    He was born in Mau, India in the early part of the year1930
      Al-A'zami received his education successively at Darul Uloom Deoband (1952), Al-Azhar University (M.A., 1955), and the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom (Ph.D., 1966). 

    He is Professor Emeritus at King Saud University where he also chaired the department of Islamic Studies. Al-A'zami served as curator of the National Public Library of Qatar, Associate Professor at Umm al-Qura University, Visiting Scholar at the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor), Visiting Fellow at St Cross College, Oxford, King Faisal Visiting Professor for Islamic Studies at Princeton University, and Visiting Scholar at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He is also an Honorary Fellow in Islamic Studies at the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David


    . why  are you talking about these guys??  Why are you going in to  history  some 600..700..1000  years after that book Quran""??

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6631 - May 08, 2019, 05:19 AM

    Koranic Criticism: 700 C.E. to 825 C.E. by Ibn Warraq (Oct. 2007)
     
    The Significance Of Non-Muslim Evidence For Koranic Studies by Ibn Warraq (Nov. 2007)  This is part two in a three-part series on Koranic exegesis

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Re: Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6632 - May 08, 2019, 08:35 AM

    I wouldnt go as far as to say Crone is a great believer

    It's a figure of speech, nothing else (yawn...)
    Quote
    but she does believe the main frame narrative of "an arab guy", hearing God, reciting it, and having people falling in shock and awe hearing these divine words and then forgetting them  for a century or so (explained in her article about legal issues).


    Yes. And in the same time more than this : she believed the Muhammad/Mecca/Medina/Kaba/ (and Zem zem) frame. Suffice to read her articles; she never goes outside of it. She could have done it if she had  been a "revisionnist", like me. As she was not she did nothing when she was dealing with the Quranic text.
    Quote
    I think we indeed need to disconnect the Quran of this "arab guy"we know as Mohammed to advance in our understanding.

    Mohammed has never existed, there was no "Mecca"/"Medina"/"Zem zem"/"Hijaz"/"Kaba" before Islam.  Nobody talking to God, there, or further north like Crone said. Because there was none "body" to do so.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6633 - May 08, 2019, 09:10 AM


    you have NOT read that book dear mundi.,   you seem to have problem in differentiating  between belief & hypothesis
    well we know nothing about that word " Mohammed"  and please read this that is first paragraph of that book.. what do you get from that dear mundi??

    Virtually all accounts of the early development of Islam take it as axiomatic that it is possible to elicit at least the outlines of the process from the Islamic sources. It is however well-known that these sources are not demonstrably early. There is no hard evidence for the existence of the Koran in  any form before the last decade of the seventh century, and the tradition which places this rather opaque revelation in its historical context is not  attested before the middle of the eighth. The historicity of the Islamic tradition is thus to some degree problematic: ......

    The only way out of the· dilemma is thus to step outside the Islamic tradition altogether and start again.....

    Quote
    that is first paragraph of that book.. what do you get from that dear mundi??


    I get just the following : Muhammad has existed (therefore he is the author of the Quran coming from Mecca/Medina/Kaba) since she does not say otherwise:

    If we choose to start again, we begin with the Doctrina Jacobi, a Greek
    anti-Jewish tract spawned by the Heraclean persecution. It is cast in the
    form of a dialogue between Jews set in Carthage in the year 634 ; it was in
    all probability written in Palestine within a few years of that date. 3 At one
    point in the argument reference is made to current events in Palestine in the
    form of a· letter from a certain Abraham, a Palestinian Jew. A false prophet has appeared among the Saracens ...
    p.3
    [...]
    She adds p.4 : The point is not of great intrinsic interest, but it does suggest that we have in the Doctrina a stratum of belief older than the Islamic tradition itself. Of greater historical significance is the fact that the Prophet (under statemented as the author of the Quran coming from Mecca) is represented as alive at the time of the conquest of Palestine.
    But the really startling thing about the Doctrina is its report that the[/i] Prophet was preaching

    Identifying the Doctrina prophet with the Prophet (under statemented as the author of the Quran coming from Mecca) that's,  that she says it or not, adhesion to the  Mecca/Medina/Kaba frame. She was nor sceptic, nor revisionist. She never left this position in her articles. Never. End of story.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6634 - May 08, 2019, 10:28 AM

    Crone and the legal problems:

    She doesn't give an explanation for what she describes namely the discrepancy btw the text of the Quran and the legal practice in the first centuries.


    The game of Crone (hahaha!) seems clear, it is to state (not so much, see my previous post) that there is some problems (but never go outside the frontier "Prophet Muhammad" has existed one is sure of that because of the Doctrina Jacobi) that she does not draw the consequences: perfect example is this article.



    Quote
    I think the very early fixed Quran, not accessible to most fits rather well with the "legal problems"(Sinai also mentions her article). The rasm was there amongst some "literati" or "illuminati"I would say, and was only spread to the plebs decades later.

     

    Yes, there was no Muhammad at all.

    Quote
    Then the intellectuals began to adapt their rules according to this holy text that was quite difficult to understand since there was no continuity in the understanding.


    The non continuity in the understanding is a key point to put aside the "oral" proclamation of the text and the "oral" tradition of qiraat. There's no proclamation, no oral tradition, there's only the rasm, incomprehensible for those who own the text.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6635 - May 08, 2019, 12:33 PM

    The game of Crone (hahaha!) seems clear,..........................

    what game are you talking about dear Altara?    what game she played dear Altara   "great believer"  game..

    nonsense..  rubbish...  i will get back to your responses .. but let me clean some stuff .. meanwhile  please  read this article... Koranic Criticism: 700 C.E. to 825 C.E. by Ibn Warraq (Oct. 2007)   

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6636 - May 08, 2019, 01:20 PM

    Yeez,

    Thank you for defending the radical ideas, wrong, right or crazy. This group is quite unique, no group thinking!


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6637 - May 08, 2019, 01:35 PM

    Quote
    The game of Crone (hahaha!) seems clear,..........................

    what game are you talking about dear Altara?    what game she played dear Altara   "great believer"  game..


    It's a figure of speech, nothing else (yawn...) Cheesy
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6638 - May 08, 2019, 04:33 PM

    Dye:

    https://www.academia.edu/12358270/The_Quran_and_its_Hypertextuality_in_Light_of_Redaction_Criticism

    Quite convincing link of Surah 19 with Jerusalem area. What I dont understand is his conclusion that it must have been written post Mohammed.

    That would imply that the conquerors started off without holy book or defined ideology. History tells us they didnt go up in the existing communities but instead developed their ideology further, including maintaining/starting their own impractical calendar.

    Imo a new ideology must have existed  at the start of the conquest (proto-islam). That means we should let go of link Hijaz-conquerors. I do think there was a link conquerors (at least the literati-illuminati) and Quran.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6639 - May 08, 2019, 08:25 PM

    Quote
    Quite convincing link of Surah 19 with Jerusalem area. What I dont understand is his conclusion that it must have been written post Mohammed.


    Because, he considers that  Surah 19 is written by monks. There is no known monks in the Hijaz.

    Quote
    That would imply that the conquerors started off without holy book or defined ideology.


    For one part, yes.

    Quote
    Imo a new ideology must have existed  at the start of the conquest (proto-islam).

     
    For me in Quranic texts. Exemplified in the construction of a house of prayer in 637 Jerusalem.


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6640 - May 09, 2019, 08:42 AM

    You probably know, but there are at the time, very interesting Twitter threads going on. Here are Dye, Hythem Sidky and van Putten discussing Christian presens in Hijaz. They are also mentioning surah 19 in the thread:

    Hythem Sidky:


    "My model is not compatible with all of the proposed scenarios. However, the Hijaz having significant Christian presence (and not a pagan bubble as suggested by the tradition) is fully compatible with my results, and there’s a growing body of epigraphical evidence to support that."

    Guillaume Dye:


    "There is not the slightest evidence of a Christian presence in the Hijaz at the time"



    Marijn van Putten:

    "
    Tābūk isn't the Hijaz anymore? There's christian inscriptions there...
    Dūmat al-Jandal idem (although you could plausibly call that not the Hijaz...)"
     

    Dye:


    "How far is Dūmat al-Jandal from Medina and Mecca? You clearly know the point, namely the almost absence of a clear Christian presence (and this is a significant absence from variant criteria) south of a line Ayla-Kilwa"

    https://twitter.com/therealsidky/status/1126101786996215808

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6641 - May 09, 2019, 08:48 AM

    Gabriel S. Reynolds, Sean W. Anthony, Juan Cole and van Putten is discussing Petra and Gibson:

    Reynolds:
    "As for Gibson my understanding having corresponded w/Robert Hoyland is that there are some interesting variations in early Mihrabs but that this need not have any serious implications. On the other hand @iandavidmorris argues convincingly that Ptolemy’s Makoraba is not Mecca."





    https://twitter.com/GabrielSaidR/status/1126236639825682432

    Do any of you have any comments on these recent twitter threads?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6642 - May 09, 2019, 12:41 PM

    You probably know, but there are at the time, very interesting Twitter threads going on. Here are Dye, Hythem Sidky and van Putten discussing Christian presens in Hijaz. They are also mentioning surah 19 in the thread:

    Hythem Sidky:


    "My model is not compatible with all of the proposed scenarios. However, the Hijaz having significant Christian presence (and not a pagan bubble as suggested by the tradition) is fully compatible with my results, and there’s a growing body of epigraphical evidence to support that."
    Guillaume Dye:
    "There is not the slightest evidence of a Christian presence in the Hijaz at the time"
    Marijn van Putten:

    "
    Tābūk isn't the Hijaz anymore? There's christian inscriptions there...
    Dūmat al-Jandal idem (although you could plausibly call that not the Hijaz...)"

    Dye:
    "How far is Dūmat al-Jandal from Medina and Mecca? You clearly know the point, namely the almost absence of a clear Christian presence (and this is a significant absence from variant criteria) south of a line Ayla-Kilwa"

    https://twitter.com/therealsidky/status/1126101786996215808


    Yawn...
    Dye is right. MVP cannot respond. It's logic, he's a linguist, not an historian.Or I'm either an astronaut...
    But... But... I have an issue with Dye assertion... Locate Q 19 in Jerusalem area because "For Q 19 to make sense, you need: a strong Christian presence, and an author who is an expert in very precise Christian traditions (not simply things known by hearsay)" as if he considered that only Jerusalem area got literati Christians able to write this, seems to me curious.
    There is no literati Christians in Egypt? No, where one speaks Arabic meaning from the East Arabian coast Gulf to Beth Arabayé (Mesopotamia)? Place where Christianity is installed since the middle of the 3rd c. and the 5-6 in the East coast?
    Yes there are. A lot.
    It is not because you know Jerusalem Christian stuff that you write necessarily  in Jerusalem area. It is not as simple as that. That is why the insistence of Dye to locate a part of Q19 there, is not convincing (for me...) as one I have just shown, where Christianity is installed,  is not really only Palestine...And literati centres (monasteries) are great many elsewhere.
    But (of course...) not in the barren Western peninsula...
    Therefore That the part of Q19 (1-33) be post conquest is not granted (at all...) It could have been written before as the Kathisma church remembering the Nativity is dating from... 450. And the Jeremy texts read for the Mary's feast (about Aaron brother of Mary... that one finds in  Q 19, as "sister of Aaron") is before the 7th c. In fact, nothing stuck specifically Q19 ( 1-33), Protoevangelium of James, the Gospel of Luke (and pseudo Matthew), to a post conquest time in Palestine. There is no obligation with what Dye brings, to see Q 19 1-33 written in the middle of the 7th.c by literati . It could have been written before and elsewhere.
    All historical affirmation regarding a time and place must be specific; one shouldn't be able to find another possible time and place. Unfortunately, this is not the case with what Dye says about Q19:1-33.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6643 - May 09, 2019, 01:53 PM

    Altara,

    On Dye Surah 19:

    I agree with Dye on the locality. The info is so specific that it is really the logical and only place for the author to have composed such a text. Of course, it is possible that the monk just moved to Iraq coming from Jerusalem but I think that is unlikely or it doesnt really matter in the discussion.

    Bjorn,

    Thank you for bringing the Mecca discussion to our attention. Maybe it is time that we all make an effort and read King's rebuttal of Gibson?

    https://t.co/kaXNMgiWvW
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6644 - May 09, 2019, 01:56 PM

    Yawn...
    Dye is right. MVP cannot respond. It's logic, he's a linguist, not an historian.Or I'm either an astronaut...
    But... But... I have an issue with Dye

    You have an issue and you have problem with everyone you know dear Altara.. I am sure if you have pet dog., you also have problem with it..BECAUSE YOU ARE HYPERCRITICAL OF EVERYTHING  Cheesy

    one way it is good thing to the field of inquiry you are working for,  but your personal progress in that field will be Zero ....
     
    anyway  what is your opinion on Michael Cook the other author of that book...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hCX6E9YXj8

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PB3jAPSRKkI

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekjERfZ_g7s
    Holberg Prize 2014: Michael Cook

     https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLT_xhNe-3QJ--cw9uIIqFmHwf5KX2aHC1
    Michael Cook at the CCHS
    Quote

     
    ..Michael Cook: Was the Rise of Islam a Black Swan Event?

    oh my goodness  that last one is 1 1/2  hr lecture by him .,  indeed  9/11 popularized investigations on Islamic history...

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6645 - May 09, 2019, 02:42 PM


    Altara,


    Yes.

    Quote
    On Dye Surah 19:
    I agree with Dye on the locality.


    Locality has no importance, in fact. That is why I (rightfully) said that it could be in another Christian centre as the Kathisma is build in ...450. Time has one importance; Dye gives no reason why he must be in the (middle?) of the 7th c. None. Then, it could be earlier, he gives no reason because he cannot.
    All historical affirmation regarding a time and place must be specific; one shouldn't be able to find another possible time and place. Unfortunately, this is not the case with what Dye says about Q19:1-33

    Quote
    The info is so specific that it is really the logical and only place for the author to have composed such a text

    .
    Nope, unfortunately. Such traditions might have been disseminated in Christian milieu since ages. This world is small.
    Locality has no importance, in fact; read above.

    Quote
    Of course, it is possible that the monk just moved to Iraq coming from Jerusalem but I think that is unlikely or it doesnt really matter in the discussion.


    Dye says : in the middle of the 7th c.
    I say : could have been wrote before. Therefore, since the middle of the 7th c. is a key point of his theory to support the fact that Q 19:1-33 was written by post conquest monks, I note that it is a conjecture as he fails to specifically demonstrated it.


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6646 - May 09, 2019, 04:31 PM

    Quote
    Dye gives no reason why he must be in the (middle?) of the 7th c.


    He does give a reason and I don't agree with it. Dye seems to be a believer.  dance He believes Mohammed came from the Hijaz, conquered Jerusalem, and had a convert monk write Surah 19! That's why he needs it to be from the mid 7th C!!

    My scenario would be: Quran (Surah 19) developed in Jerusalem area, was part of the new ideology that was sponsored by some mecenas, got elevated to Holy book by the literati/illuminati, of course pre existed the conquest since the ideology was present in the nucleus of heretics that would be raising a mercenary army to take power.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6647 - May 09, 2019, 04:50 PM

    No problem, Mundi, but you know a lot more about Gibson and the Petra question than I do.
    Also thanks to Altara and yeezevee for their response!
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6648 - May 09, 2019, 04:51 PM

    He does give a reason and I don't agree with it. Dye seems to be a believer.  dance He believes Mohammed came from the Hijaz, conquered Jerusalem, and had a convert monk write Surah 19! That's why he needs it to be from the mid 7th C!!..............

    zeee...  again believer.....you guys are sick..  you guys make everyone faith heads ...  

    "believer" is a specific word for those who follow some belief systems such as faiths/religions/cults  .. whatever.,  

    Exploring an idea in early Islam that a Muhammad might have come from some area of Arabian peninsula does not make a person a believer/faith head dear mundi..

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6649 - May 09, 2019, 05:45 PM

    So i said to Altara
    what game are you talking about dear Altara?   
    nonsense..  rubbish...  i will get back to your responses .. .......

    let me get back at Altara THE BELIEVER..  who believes that everyone is believer and I am a Muslim  along with Mahgraye ..

    Altara  says on  Dye and  that 44th Surah... Aka Surah 19  "Maraym"..   from https://twitter.com/therealsidky/status/1126101786996215808   tweet thread
    Yawn...
    Dye is right. MVP cannot respond. It's logic, he's a linguist, not an historian.Or I'm either an astronaut...

      that potshot at  Guillaume Dye  not needed   Cheesy Cheesy
    Quote
    @GuillaumeDye
     May 8

    ...........................
    1.  Therefore That the part of Q19 (1-33) be post conquest is not granted (at all...) It could have been written before as the Kathisma church remembering the Nativity is dating from... 450. And the Jeremy texts read for the Mary's feast (about Aaron brother of Mary... that one finds in  Q 19, as "sister of Aaron") is before the 7th c.

    2. In fact, nothing stuck specifically Q19 ( 1-33), Protoevangelium of James, the Gospel of Luke (and pseudo Matthew), to a post conquest time in Palestine. There is no obligation with what Dye brings, to see Q 19 1-33 written in the middle of the 7th.c by literati . It could have been written before and elsewhere. [/font]


    those two points are very very good points dear Altara  .. indeed  many of those verses in that surah could have been written any where in the middle east and  at any time from 1st century to all  the way to the time that Quran became book that we see to day..in fact I  commented on that surah in this very forum at

    https://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=16106.180
    https://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=16106.msg847232#msg847232

    and I said ..
    Quote
    .....I am certain they(THE VERSES IN THAT SURAH) are VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH The preacher "Muhammad-1" .. These fools who put Quran together just copy/pasted  all those 25 verses  that you read in that Surah  MARYAM from that Bible book  "Luke" .. The story is essentially Birth of John without SPERM DONOR......

    So dear Alatar you are indeed right in your comments except  these two words "Yawn" and "believer"

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6650 - May 09, 2019, 06:51 PM

    He does give a reason and I don't agree with it. Dye seems to be a believer.  dance He believes Mohammed came from the Hijaz, conquered Jerusalem, and had a convert monk write Surah 19! That's why he needs it to be from the mid 7th C!!


    I think he does not think a piece of that, but he is obliged to do as if he adhered to the narrative. Moreover,  he can engage only to the fact that there is "not the slightest evidence of a Christian presence in the Hijaz at the time " this allows him to bypass the frame Mecca:Medina/Zem zem/Kaba about this topic (but this one only). It is his only way to bypass it because he cannot putting it aside as it is a religious dogma. It is the weak point of the narrative; the heavily presence of Christianity in Mecca/Zem zem whereas nobody in the Orient time have recorded Christian presence in the Western peninsula. It is confrontation between real source and the supposed context of the Quranic text hold by the narrative where it says that there is no Christianity in Mecca/Zem zem. It is perfectly understandable why it says that. Because all would have say that the Prophet was informed by Christians therefore it was a false Prophet. In denying it the narrative save the Prophet of this accusation. But it is trapped; there is no explication to the heavily presence of Christianity in the Quran. It allows Dye to put forth his Palestinian monks post conquest theory. But it is only conjecture easily destroyable as I've shown it.

    Quote
    My scenario would be: Quran (Surah 19) developed in Jerusalem area, was part of the new ideology that was sponsored by some patron, got elevated to Holy book by the literati/illuminati, of course pre existed the conquest since the ideology was present in the nucleus of heretics that would be raising a mercenary army to take power.


    I think it is the authors of the Quran who have written Q 19. Before 637. Not after. I think the conquerors had not all the Quranic texts.  That Q 19 was modified (like many sura), why not, but lightly (beginning/end of sura) But not  Q 19,1-33 which is their genuine composition, as they are literati, they do not need new ones in Jerusalem or elsewhere.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6651 - May 09, 2019, 07:35 PM

    Altara,

    I think we agree here on the broad lines. To explain what happened and also to explain the coherence of the conquerors, a strong ideology must have been present from the beginning. If only greed was the driver, the conquerors would have blended in the established institutions and at most tried to dominate them, not erect new religious institutions.

    Because we know the Quran is early, it is logical it was there from the beginning to carry this new ideology. Content of book not that important, a book was enough. Most of it pre 630.

    But with this scenario, you cant have Mohammed storming out of the Hijaz as an unwashed barbarian. He or this mercenary army's leader(s) must have known the world they were conquering very well.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6652 - May 09, 2019, 07:52 PM

    Quote
    There is no hard evidence for the existence of the Koran in  any form before the last decade of the seventh century.


    She retracted.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6653 - May 09, 2019, 08:35 PM

    and I said ..So dear Alatar you are indeed right in your comments except  these two words "Yawn" and "believer"

    Yawn  Cheesy
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6654 - May 09, 2019, 08:49 PM

    Altara,

    I think we agree here on the broad lines.


    In the line I say here, which is not my entire line. Wink


    Quote
    To explain what happened and also to explain the coherence of the conquerors, a strong ideology must have been present from the beginning.


    Hold by very few people (literati) inside them and not yet disseminated to all the Arabs. Stemmed in the Quranic texts (not all).


    Quote
    If only greed was the driver, the conquerors would have blended in the established institutions and at most tried to dominate them, not erect new religious institutions.


    Yes. They would not have built what they built in 637. But. Private Arab soldier obey and build. This does not come from him, but the literati around the leaders.literati who had already started to decipher the rasm.

    Quote
    Because we know the Quran is early,


    Yes. Probably more ancient that one thought.
    Quote
    it is logical it was there from the beginning to carry this new ideology.

    The literati , not the combatants leaders.

    Quote
    But with this scenario, you cant have Mohammed storming out of the Hijaz as an unwashed barbarian.

     

    There's no Hijaz, therefore no Muhammad

    Quote
    He or this mercenary army's leader(s) must have known the world they were conquering very well.


    Arabs knew very well this world. Because they lived in.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6655 - May 09, 2019, 09:13 PM

    ..well we know nothing about that word " Mohammed"  and please read this
    Quote
    Virtually all accounts of the early development of Islam take it as axiomatic that it is possible to elicit at least the outlines of the process from the Islamic sources. It is however well-known that these sources are not demonstrably early. There is no hard evidence for the existence of the Koran in  any form before the last decade of the seventh century, and the tradition which places this rather opaque revelation in its historical context is not  attested before the middle of the eighth. The historicity of the Islamic tradition is thus to some degree problematic: ......

    The only way out of the· dilemma is thus to step outside the Islamic tradition altogether and start again.....

    that is first paragraph of that book.. what do you get from that dear mundi??

      and Mahgraye   picks up a statement from that book  and says
    Quote
    There is no hard evidence for the existence of the Koran in  any form before the last decade of the seventh century, and the tradition which places this rather opaque revelation in its historical context is not  attested before the middle of the eighth.

    She retracted.

    Hellooooo..  Mahgraye.,  Could you please give a link of her work where and when she retracted that statement..??

    but even if she retracted it.,  what is the big deal..??  they are not Allah words and it is not the end of the road..we can always re-investigate.

    You  know   many  times i sweared and retracted many things  in the name of  Allah with  Quran  in hand..   and i also retracted  that   I am not yeezevee  and  some guy was using my pc to write some nonsense...

    It is not big deal dear Mahgraye... EVERYTHING IS OPEN TO  QUESTION  AND OPEN TO INQUIRY

    with best wishes..
    yeezevee

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6656 - May 10, 2019, 12:06 AM

    Crone, "Author's Preface", xiii, in The Qurʾānic Pagans and Related Matters, Leiden, 2016, ed. Siurua.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6657 - May 10, 2019, 07:26 AM

    Quote
    Hold by very few people (literati) inside them and not yet disseminated to all the Arabs. Stemmed in the Quranic texts (not all).


    Yes, I agree that the ideology must have been limited to a small nucleus of litterati/illuminati. That's why I talk of a mercenary army. They were not driven by the ideology, the soldiers were as most soldiers in most times, paid for their services and hopeful to get part of the loot.

    I keep mentioning illuminati because if you have such a small ideologically driven group, I think that this term could be better than litterati. Not everyone able to read arabic rasm shared the ideology.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6658 - May 10, 2019, 12:41 PM

    Quote
    I keep mentioning illuminati because if you have such a small ideologically driven group, I think that this term could be better than litterati.


    Scholarly speaking you're wrong. Literati is the appellation for this kind of people in Late Antiquity, whatever they come from, hidden or not. Moreover, illuminati is an anachronism and means nothing except modern sectarian esoteric movement(s) ; there's nothing esoteric in the Quran...

    Quote
    Not everyone able to read arabic rasm shared the ideology.


    Of course.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #6659 - May 10, 2019, 01:08 PM

    Literati:

    https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/literati


    Do you have info on a definition for late antiquity?
  • Previous page 1 ... 220 221 222223 224 ... 238 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »