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


Hi!
Today at 04:19 AM

Pakistan: The Nation.....
Yesterday at 08:53 PM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
Yesterday at 04:16 PM

The Golden Age of Islam a...
by zeca
Yesterday at 11:29 AM

Sos
by zeca
Yesterday at 11:19 AM

BLM and Black Ex-Muslims
Yesterday at 10:06 AM

Join Liberty, the Ex-Musl...
Yesterday at 09:14 AM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
July 11, 2020, 04:38 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
July 10, 2020, 12:43 PM

The essence of the facts
by akay
July 10, 2020, 08:01 AM

مدهش----- لماذا؟؟؟؟
by akay
July 08, 2020, 09:49 AM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
June 30, 2020, 01:14 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 576550 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 306 307 308309 310 ... 316 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9210 - May 25, 2020, 04:21 PM

    Atara,

    Jews in Hegra:

    There are grave inscriptions in Nabatean Aramaic for Jews, but that is 1-2-3 CE. I guess you know that but mean later Jewish presence?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9211 - May 25, 2020, 04:24 PM

    Yes, I meant : no later presence exposed as such by the narrative,  except in Yemen.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9212 - May 25, 2020, 10:57 PM

    A good complement to Hoyland’s talk/presentation (esp. on ʿarabī, aʿjamī, and fuṣṣilat): Claude Gilliot, “The ‘Collections’ of the Meccan Arabic Lectionary”, in Nicolet Boekhoff-van der Voort, Kees Versteegh & Joas Wagemakers (ed.), The Transmission and Dynamics of the Textual Sources of Islam, Leiden, 2011, pp. 105–33.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9213 - May 25, 2020, 11:08 PM

    The return of Magraye ;-) Yes, Gilliot is interesting. A great mufassirun.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9214 - May 25, 2020, 11:21 PM

    Thanks, haha. I did post something (references) every now and then but didn’t receive a response, so I shied away a bit.  

    [Good mufassir as in having a good eye for what the text says, or a jab? (haha)]
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9215 - May 25, 2020, 11:23 PM

    Altara - Do you agree with Hoyland and Gilliot on ʿarabī, aʿjamī, and fuṣṣilat?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9216 - May 25, 2020, 11:51 PM

    Thanks, haha. I did post something (references) every now and then but didn’t receive a response, so I shied away a bit. 

    [Good mufassir as in having a good eye for what the text says, or a backhanded compliment? (haha)]


    Haha both! (yawn...)
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9217 - May 26, 2020, 12:05 AM

    Altara - Do you agree with Hoyland and Gilliot on ʿarabī, aʿjamī, and fuṣṣilat?


    I have a different vision of the use of these words in the Quran than Gilliot and Hoyland as they are great Believers. I do not understand how Hoyland can say that aʿjamī, is Syriac whereas he continues to talk of Muhammad as the author of the corpus In Mecca where one knows that there was no Christian people there. When he resolve this contradiction, I'll give maybe some clues...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9218 - May 26, 2020, 12:20 AM

    Quote
    I have a different vision of the use of these words in the Quran than Gilliot and Hoyland as they are great Believers. I do not understand how Hoyland can say that aʿjamī, is Syriac whereas he continues to talk of Muhammad as the author of the corpus In Mecca where one knows that there was no Christian people there. When he resolve this contradiction, I'll give maybe some clues...


    So, the suggestion itself, that aʿjamī is referring to Syriac, is plausible, only the setting where this usage is envisioned — Mecca and Medina — is improbable, given the scarcity of evidence for a Christian community in the region?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9219 - May 26, 2020, 05:59 AM

    Mahgraye,

    1/To promote the discussion, can you summarize what Gilliot claims the definition of the 3 words is?

    2/ Did Hoyland use the term Syriac or Aramaic for Ajami? I still dont understand what concrete elements he has to back it up.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9220 - May 26, 2020, 07:28 AM

    So, the suggestion itself, that aʿjamī is referring to Syriac, is plausible, only the setting where this usage is envisioned — Mecca and Medina — is improbable, given the scarcity of evidence for a Christian community in the region?


    How Hoyland explains that (It is the first answer that he have to give...)
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9221 - May 26, 2020, 08:01 AM

    Did Hoyland use the term Syriac or Aramaic for Ajami?


    What he actually says is “some form of Aramaic” (32 minutes into the video).
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9222 - May 26, 2020, 08:21 AM

    How Hoyland explains that (It is the first answer that he have to give...)


    We agree on this point. Still, do you think the suggestion (aʿjamī = Syriac) is plausible, given the right geographic context?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9223 - May 26, 2020, 08:25 AM

    Quote
    Still, do you think the suggestion (aʿjamī = Syriac) is plausible, given the right geographic context?


    It could be Greek, Middle-Persian or Syriac.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9224 - May 26, 2020, 08:39 AM

    Mahgraye,

    1/To promote the discussion, can you summarize what Gilliot claims the definition of the 3 words is?

    2/ Did Hoyland use the term Syriac or Aramaic for Ajami? I still dont understand what concrete elements he has to back it up.


    Basically, if I’m not mistaken, Gilliot argues that the Meccan Quran is “a kind of commentary or exegesis in Arabic of a non-Arabic book, or of non-Arabic collections of ‘texts’ of logia, or portions of a non-Arabic lectionary” (pace Günther Lüling and Christoph Luxenberg). He bases this assertion the passages dealing with the language of the Quran and Muhammad’s informants, passages where the following expressions are found and discussed: lisān ʿarabī, qurʾān mubīn, fuṣṣilat, lisān, yulḥidūna, aʿjamī, etc. These are the same passages and key terms discussed by Hoyland in his presentation. Gilliot goes on to discuss texts composed after the fact to supplement his reading of the above-mentioned terms.

    This is a poor summary (if one can call it that) and does not do Gilliot’s paper justice. I recommend you read the actual paper (not too long) yourself.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9225 - May 26, 2020, 08:40 AM

    It could be Greek, Middle-Persian or Syriac.


    I see. Do you lean toward any of these specifically?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9226 - May 26, 2020, 10:53 AM

    Hoyland's talk:

    Surprising how confused everyone is on what actually has been said and what the actual arguments are.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9227 - May 26, 2020, 11:14 AM

    What he actually says is “some form of Aramaic” (32 minutes into the video).


    1/Yes and he adds that there were "certainly" a Jewish community in the Hijaz  he continues to explain and it is incomprehensible because it is not contextualized as if the words he talking about were not from the Quran.
    2/ Mohammad ask a good question : he understand 2:198-99 more or less like Blachère and not like Hoyland. This one says moreover that it is possible as well to understand the verses like that. But he considers that it is not a problem of comprehension of the language but of its "quality". Here Hoyland see the danger ; if it is a comprehension of a foreign language, how could that fit in Mecca/Zem zem/Medina as one knows very well that the narrative never state that there were foreign people there. Therefore he shifts from "incomprehension" to "quality" and then to the mufassirun, "Rumi" for the informers of Muhammad, etc. He seems to me rather embarrassed...
    3/ Of course what states the authors of the Quran is logical : each people have to get in their language a communication of the Biblical God: Hoyland points rightfully that all at that time had the Bible in their vernacular tongues. That is why I think that if the Bible had been translated in the Arabic script (512-568) there would not have been the Quran.
    Moreover what says Jallad (53') is interesting because he says that the translation of Biblical passages in Arabic would have been not in a "very good kind of Arabic" because of non native speakers... Curious... it would mean that Arabic is not learnable by other people and that the missionaries would have product "crooked" Arabic?
    Well... I'm not convinced.  
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9228 - May 26, 2020, 11:18 AM

    I see. Do you lean toward any of these specifically?

    You will read it. Wink
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9229 - May 26, 2020, 11:32 AM

    Moreover what says Jallad (53') is interesting because he says that the translation of Biblical passages in Arabic would have been not in a "very good kind of Arabic" because of non native speakers... Curious... it would mean that Arabic is not learnable by other people and that the missionaries would have product "crooked" Arabic?


    As I understood this the reference was to a kind of word for word translation that tries hard to keep to the meaning of the original text but ends up sounding unnatural in the target language. That isn’t necessarily anything to do wIth native or non-native speakers. It may just come from an unwillingness to alter the phrasing or syntax of a sacred text to avoid any possible change to the meaning.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9230 - May 26, 2020, 12:04 PM

    Quote
    As I understood this the reference was to a kind of word for word translation that tries hard to keep to the meaning of the original text but ends up sounding unnatural in the target language. 
    It may just come from an unwillingness to alter the phrasing or syntax of a sacred text to avoid any possible change to the meaning.

    The explication of Jallad seems to me (very) far-fetched.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9231 - May 26, 2020, 12:25 PM

    I don’t think it’s an unusual issue in pre-modern attempts at translation though. If there were early Arabic translations of biblical texts there’s a good chance that they would have butchered the language.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9232 - May 26, 2020, 01:21 PM

    Any idea what the etymology of Ajami is? Wouldn't that be a good starting point in the discussion?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9233 - May 26, 2020, 03:24 PM

    I don’t think it’s an unusual issue in pre-modern attempts at translation though. If there were early Arabic translations of biblical texts there’s a good chance that they would have butchered the language.

    This is not just any text. What can happen with 'normal' ones can be an "usual issue in pre-modern attempts at translation". I agree with that. But here it deals with Biblical passages. The weight of those texts prevents (for me...) this type of explication.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9234 - May 26, 2020, 03:27 PM

    Any idea what the etymology of Ajami is? Wouldn't that be a good starting point in the discussion?


    Good point. It seems that nobody knows where it comes from; its means then depends of the deduction made from the context.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9235 - May 26, 2020, 03:50 PM

    etymology:

    Has anyone tried? Seems to me that that would be the first point of departure that proves there is no etymological connection.

    I think the whole discussion is shallow.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9236 - May 26, 2020, 03:59 PM

    Quote
    I think the whole discussion is shallow.


    I do not think so since its unsaid departure is the unknown meaning.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9237 - May 27, 2020, 01:11 PM

    Hoyland's talk:

    Surprising how confused everyone is on what actually has been said and what the actual arguments are.


     Cheesy Cheesy  ....how confused everyone is on what actually has been said .....

    hi mundi that not only goes to Hoyland's talk ..... but it goes to all the way to Quran..... and to many of those who try explain Quran.,  It is the problem dealing with ...SACRED SCARY BOOKS....

    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 #9238 - May 29, 2020, 10:48 AM

    .........................That is why I think that if the Bible had been translated in the Arabic script (512-568) there would not have been the Quran................

    that is an interesting statement from Altara .. I am under the impression If not all books but  some books of OT as well as NT were translated in to Arabic long ago between  8th century - 10th century ., So question is ..

    Why Quran became more popular than bible in the middle east?  why Islam took over middle east and  became a major religion in the middle east  with Quran being its bedrock scripture?

    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 #9239 - May 29, 2020, 11:18 PM

    Ahmad al-Jallad - The Damascus Psalm Fragment: Middle Arabic and the Legacy of Old Ḥigāzī

    https://www.academia.edu/43189829/Al-Jallad._2020._The_Damascus_Psalm_Fragment_Middle_Arabic_and_the_Legacy_of_Old_Ḥigāzī_w._a_contribution_by_R._Vollandt

    Thread: https://mobile.twitter.com/Safaitic/status/1266224607348101122
  • Previous page 1 ... 306 307 308309 310 ... 316 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »