Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →


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


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

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts

Qur'anic studies today
Today at 02:06 PM

المياة النقية%%%%
Today at 09:14 AM

Tunisia tensions boil ove...
by zeca
Yesterday at 12:15 PM

Western Islam and Scholar...
Yesterday at 12:09 PM

Iran uprising - is the en...
by zeca
Yesterday at 11:56 AM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
January 17, 2018, 07:55 PM

January 17, 2018, 05:19 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
January 16, 2018, 06:08 PM

Muslims......& Women!
January 14, 2018, 05:17 PM

‘When a daughter is kille...
January 14, 2018, 05:04 PM

Ask me Anything
January 14, 2018, 04:38 PM

Change this Website *For ...
January 13, 2018, 04:14 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 130661 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 56 57 58« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1710 - January 11, 2018, 09:53 PM

    Islamic history:

    Well, all these newly found inscriptions prove that the traditional narrative is, if not 100 percent true, at least 90 percent true. I don't see any critical by-thought coming from any expert so I guess there is no reason to doubt these inscriptions.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1711 - January 12, 2018, 01:16 PM

    Islamic history:

    Well, all these newly found inscriptions prove that the traditional narrative is, if not 100 percent true, at least 90 percent true. I don't see any critical by-thought coming from any expert so I guess there is no reason to doubt these inscriptions.

    Those  inscriptions  are Islamic miracles...  like these


      the only difference is those newly found inscriptions  are sold to faith heads from tax payers money from educationalist  where as the tube miracle come from   tax exempted  funds....

    look  at that fool  in that first video.... he put together some 5 hrs of youtube...

    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 #1712 - January 12, 2018, 02:51 PM

    Jeez, love your sarcasm!
    As it is now, I am waiting for the first find of an inscription dating from the time Mohammed was still alive. Maybe one written by his first wife?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1713 - January 12, 2018, 05:30 PM

    I hadn’t really given it much thought - other than that I’d take Peter Webb to be a good guide to interpreting early Arabic literature independent of later religious or academic assumptions. From your reaction I take it you disagree with him. I’d be interested to read your reasons if you feel like giving them.

     Zeca Akhi, sorry for taking long to honour my promise of sharing my thoughts on this.

    Like I believe I have told you privately, I don’t know Peter Webb and don’t know of Peter Webb for there to be any suggestion of an axe to grind in what I’ve said. I’m generally keen on clicking and reading up on what you post, so it’s only natural that I went to where the link took me to.

    I don’t disagree with Peter Webb per se; I just do not applaud his reasoning process or lack thereof, to be more accurate.

    The blog post makes some big claims without the author seeming to even bother to back them up. So, the chief issue I have with the post is its lack of evidence.

    One quick example would be that the author seems to be trying, perhaps a little too hard, to see what “classical Arabic literature” has to say about issues he describes as “central to modern militant thinking”. This is in spite of the concept the author uses as particularly relevant -- Al-Jāhiliyya – being an Islamic one and one on which “classical Arabic literature” does not comment as far as I know. Also Webb lumps ‘Arabic literature’ and Islamic texts together in his references which I find quite problematic because contemporary Islamic militants do not tend to accord these two sources commensurate weight. 

    And as I read on, a conviction began to steal over me that the sketchy blog post must be relying in terms of evidence & reasoned arguments on an earlier work of the author. So, I looked up Peter Webb online and found his Al-Jāhiliyya: Uncertain Times of Uncertain Meanings here

    This article seems more appropriate a medium through which to scrutinise the author’s big claims as found in the subsequent blog post. (I find it somewhat deficient, indolent and lacking in rigour for a researcher to casually write on complicated matters without the slightest reference to his sources or fuller arguments elsewhere. In my experience, such a researcher tends to be talking to their in-agreement audience and preaching to the converted.  Still, my reasoning went along the lines of ‘it’s only natural for Webb to be building on previous things which he has discussed and exhausted’.) So, I explored the first item in Webb’s article and this is under the banner of “Al-Jahiliyya and Arabic lexicography”. Here are three points which stood out for me:

    1. There, Webb accurately notes that the lexicographer Al-Khalil ibn Ahmed Al-Farahidi (d.170 H) defines Jahl (Arabic: جهل) as the opposite of ‘ilm (Arabic: “الجهل نقيض العلم”). Webb then comments that this definition doesn’t link it [Jahl, presumably] to “the era of Al-Jahiliyya as an age of ignorance per se” as if this finding carries any significance about how Al-Khalil defines concepts in his purported book. As a matter of fact, Al-Khalil in his Al-Ayn defines what hundreds of concepts mean by referring to their opposites and antonyms (admittedly in a circular fashion which should usually be tolerable in moderation, even in modern dictionaries).

    So, it would’ve been more appropriate if Webb referenced what Al-khalil said about Al-Jahiliyya instead of Webb’s over-reliance on the derivative root ‘Jahl’ as not connoting “the era of Al-Jahiliyya per se” – this is because no one, as far as I know, argues to the contrary i.e. that Al-Jahl in Arabic necessarily denotes a Pre-Islamic period. In other words, this finding is prematurely made on the linguistic basis of the Arabic root word instead of the Islamic concept itself, and this is what I didn’t find palatable in the blog post either.

    2. Webb then cites what Al-Khalil said about Al-Jahiliyya itself as “the time of Al-Fatra” and Al-Fatra for Webb is “.. defined as any period of time between two prophets”. Webb’s definition of Al-Fatra is referenced in the footnote as mirroring that of Al-Khalil’s in the same book.

    However, since Webb’s is an original translation, it did not come across as fantastically rigorous of Webb to not fully translate whilst quoting Al-Khalil’s definition of Al-Jahiliyya exactly as the definition is found in Al-Ayn. Al-khalil’s full definition in Al-Ayn is “the time of Al-Fatra before Islam” – my own underlining. (Arabic: “الجاهلية الجهلاء: زمان الفترة قبل الإسلام” -- here's the hyperlink to Al-Ayn:

    Now, it does strike me as rather improper that Webb excludes “before Islam” from the short translated definition he cites; such an omission raises suspicions especially because the left-out part of Al-Khalili’s definition directly contradicts his argument.

    That argument, of course, is Webb trying to survey that the term did not periodise a time during what he doesn’t tires of referring to as “early Arabic literature” but that this periodization has taken place later on, so that as far as he is concerned, the term which ‘ought to’ have been referencing a state of being and particular practices had instead been hijacked by later conservative Islam to demarcate its own civilisation from the ‘generalised barbarity’ of the period which conservative Islam claims to have come before its inception.

    I personally suspect that this claimed act of codification on the part of the later Muslims might well be the case. But where I insist on taking issue with Webb’s conclusion is the way in which Webb is asserting it via early Arabic lexicography; I’m open to accept the validity of what Webb is saying, though not how Webb is saying it here.

    3. Whilst offering to trace what he considers a semantic ‘paradigm shift’ in the lexicographic meaning of Al-Jahiliyya after the time of Al-Khalil bin Ahmed (d. 170 H), Webb appears yet again to be committing the same omitting trick, that of offering a partial translation and thus risking in the process of opening himself to a fair accusation of misquoting early Arabic lexicographers. To wit, Webb seems to do that with Ibn Manẓūr’s (d. 711 H) definition of Al-Jahiliyya. Here's how Web quotes from Ibn Manẓūr's Lisān al-ʿArab:

    “Ibn Manẓūr’s own expanded definition is instructive:
    [al-Jāhiliyya] is the condition of the Arabs before Islam, consisting of an ignorance of God Almighty and the religious laws, and [a time] of boasting about genealogy, arrogance, despotism and the like.⁴¹
    Ibn Manẓūr’s definition departs from equating al-Jāhiliyya with al-Fatra and suggests a more generalized time “before Islam” without a specific beginning, akin toal-Zamakhsharī’s “old times”. Ibn Manẓūr adds the additional territorial connection to Arabia, which marks the first time a dictionary expressly links al-Jāhiliyya with pre-Islamic Arabs and specific habits of their community. His definition turns Al-Jāhiliyya away from a precise period of years, and by focusing on the activities of the Arabs, he makes the era synonymous with its inhabitants’ undesirable characteristics. Ibn Manẓūr’s al-Jāhiliyya is not about when, but about how the Arabs lived, and, as such, Lisān al-ʿArab is the first classical dictionary that defines al-Jāhiliyya as the colligatory concept expressed in dictionaries today.”

    Webb seems to claim that Ibn Manẓūr’s definition of Al-Jahiliyya in the latter’s book, Lisān al-ʿArab, is what Webb quotes it to be above. I dispute the factualness and accuracy of this claim; notwithstanding the fact that Webb uses square-brackets to what I take it to indicate Webb’s own insertion of the term [Al-Jahiliyya] into that of Ibn Manẓūr’s definition. But the fact remains that what Webb puts forward above as constituting Ibn Manẓūr’s own “instructive” contribution or addition (as being above and beyond that of al-Azharī’s, whose work Webb says Ibn Manẓūr copied) is simply taken out of its context by Webb.

    Let me back this one up. Here’s the actual entry of Ibn Manẓūr on Al-Jahiliyya in his Lisān al-ʿArab in its original language:

    " والجاهِلِيَّة زمن الفَتْرة ولا إِسلامَ؛ وقالوا الجاهِلِيَّة الجَهْلاء، فبالَغوا.
    والمَجْهَل: المَفازة لا أَعْلام فيها، يقال: رَكِبْتُها على مَجْهولها؛ قال سويد بن أَبي كاهل: فَرَكِبْناها على مَجْهُولِها، بِصِلابِ الأَرْضِ فيهِنَّ شَجَع وقولهم: كان ذلك في الجاهِلِيَّة الجَهْلاء، هو توكيد للأَول، يشتق له من اسمه ما يؤكد به كما يقال وَتِدٌ واتِدٌ وهَمَجٌ هامِجٌ ولَيْلة لَيْلاء ويَوْمٌ أَيْوَم.
    وفي الحديث: إِنك امرؤ فيك جاهِلِيَّة؛ هي الحال التي كانت عليها العرب قبل الإِسلام من الجَهْل بالله سبحانه ورسوله وشرائع الدين والمُفاخَرَة بالأَنساب والكِبْر والتَّجَبُّر وغير ذلك."

    The issue I take with what Webb claims to be Ibn Manẓūr’s own definition of “[Al-Jahiliyya]” is that Ibn Manẓūr’s definition in the quotation is of an indefinite “Jahiliyya” (Arabic “جاهِلِيَّة”) and not Al-Jahiliyya (Arabic: الجاهلية) as Webb claims. Further, Ibn Manẓūr’s “Jahiliyya” occurs in a specific hadith, so that what Webb says “is the condition of the Arabs before Islam, consisting of an ignorance of God Almighty and the religious laws, and [a time] of boasting about genealogy, arrogance, despotism and the like” is what the hadith Ibn Manẓūr included as a usage example denotes. Thus, Ibn Manẓūr’s words are commenting on what the word in the particular hadith means. The way Ibn Manẓūr worded it, (“and in the hadith” – Arabic: وفي الحديث) with the addition of a semicolon, does not cohere with the claim of it being the linguistic meaning Peter Webb has attributed to the lexicographer and then went on to injudiciously declare it as “the first classical dictionary etc.”

    Again, it seems that one has good reason to wonder whether or not Webb simply made an error of overlooking the significance of the context by partially translating the entry on Al-Jahiliyya and not including a material fact which – incidentally – has the theoretical force to challenging his argument against the lexicohrapher engaging in periodising the term ‘for the first time ever’ in the manner Webb seems to assert. I don’t know about you, but it takes more substantiation than what Webb has shown here to convince me (for little that’s worth).
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1714 - January 12, 2018, 07:01 PM

    Thanks Wahhabist.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1715 - January 13, 2018, 11:45 PM

    Video: Holger Zellentin in conversation with Musharraf Hussain (a Muslim’s take on Qur’anic studies for the most part)
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1716 - January 14, 2018, 05:29 PM

    Video: Holger Zellentin in conversation with Musharraf Hussain (a Muslim’s take on Qur’anic studies for the most part)

    Friday Speech by Dr Musharraf Hussain Al Azhari 07 04 2017

    Miracles of RasoolAllah (SAW)- Dr. Musharraf Hussain Al-Azhari


    Musharraf Hussain is an Islamic scholar and the chief Executive of Karimia institute Nottingham, a trustee of Muslim hands and was awarded an OBE by Her Majesty the Queen in 2008 for his services to community relations in Britain.

    Formerly he was the chairman of the Christian Muslim forum (2008-10), the director of the PGCE teacher training course and vice chair of the association of Muslim schools (2000-2003) and he trained and worked as a research scientist before becoming a fulltime Imam and Islamic teacher.

    Scholarly work published and recognised

    He has a passion for teaching Islam, and has written and published a series of comprehensive textbooks and work books for Quran schools; 'let's learn Islam' series. This is the most popular series of textbooks taught in the Quran schools in UK.

    He has translated and written twenty books about traditional Islamic teachings to help Muslims practice their religion and three hundred articles. His book on introduction to Islam has been published by Nelson and Thornes and is taught in secondary schools in England.

    He has developed a programme for character development and written two book on this topic, 'Seven steps to moral intelligence' and 'Seven steps to spiritual intelligence'. This has been adopted for character building module in several universities in Nigeria. Dr Hussain frequently runs workshops on this topic.

    His new translation of the Quran, 'Majestic Reading' in plain English will be published in July 2017. The University of Al Azhar has formerly approved this translation, and hailed it as a 'trend setter' and a 'paradigm shift' in the genre of Quran translation.

    that  sounds like Quran of   Musharraf Hussain  and this stuff says


    Musharraf Hussain is a scientist, educator and religious scholar in Nottinghamshire, UK.

    Born in 1958, he came to Britain from Pakistan in 1966 with his parents to the town of Halifax, where he memorised the Quran learnt Tajweed and basic Quranic Arabic. After completing a degree in Biochemistry at Aston University, he went on to gain a Science doctorate. He worked as a Scientist till 1990 and then decided to dedicate himself to serving the Muslim community. He studied Islamic studies at a seminary in Pakistan under the guidance of Justice Pir Muhammad Karam Shah and then at Al-Azhar University, Cairo

    what happened to Science ?? head is still in sand?? ..nothing went in to  brain ??  

    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 #1717 - January 15, 2018, 12:25 AM

    This seems to me to be one of the bettter and more realistic summaries of the issues around the origins of the Qur’an.

    Tommaso Tesei - The Qurʾān(s) in Context(s)ʾān_s_in_Context_s_
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1718 - January 15, 2018, 03:08 AM

    Furthermore, from very early times, non-Islamic sources associate the new
    religious movement with the Hijaz.

    Sources ?

    It might be observed that, if Islam had arisen elsewhere and the identification of the latter as its cradle was just an element within an idealized Islamic salvation history, one should assume that by the end of 7th c. this salvation history was already established

    It is. Tesei does not read the sources.

    and so widespread to influence 

    1) No need to be widespread. Only among the leaders facing a mass of analphabetic  but monotheistic Arabs ready to believe that there was an Arab (like them) prophet.

    also writers from outside the community of believers.

    What non Arabs writers speak of the Hijaz ? In what  scriptures of non Arabs people the word "Hijaz" is used ? What is exactly the "Hijaz", the lunar landscape of Mecca/Medina (a swamp at that time) ?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1719 - January 15, 2018, 09:39 AM

    Ilkka Lindstedt - Religious warfare and martyrdom in Arabic graffiti (70s–110s AH/690s–730s CE)
    In a recent history of Rome in antiquity, Mary Beard writes that the “Romans did not start out with a grand plan of world conquest. Although eventually they did parade their empire in terms of some manifest destiny, the motivations that originally lay behind their military expansion through the Mediterranean world and beyond are still one of history's great puzzles.”1

    Change the word “Romans” to “Muslims” or “Arabs” (depending on your viewpoint and emphasis), and the question and the debate is transferred to the early Islamic-era Middle East. Whereas most or all scholars agree that the early Muslims did not envisage a world conquest or empire building at the outset of their conquests, this is where the agreement ends. Modern researchers have put forward a wide variety of interpretations – for example, material, climatic, religious, and nativist – of the original impetuses of the conquests as well as the reasons for their success.2 It has also been recently suggested that instead of military conquests we should discuss the spread and settling of early or proto-Muslims in new areas of the Middle East in different, more nonviolent, terms since many areas were incorporated into the nascent empire through more or less peaceful treaties.3

    The reason that the modern explanations diverge so much is at least partly because our sources are very problematic: most scholars have relied on Arabic and non-Arabic literary evidence, which is in many cases much later and full of dogmatic and tendentious biases. This article endeavors to do something novel. It surveys the available epigraphic evidence related to concepts of warfare and martyrdom. While I cannot claim that this will clinch the debate in the favor of any of the scholarly points of views, I will argue that the Arabic graffiti show that the early Muslims in general viewed fighting and falling in God’s path in religious terms and as religiously inspired. However, all the epigraphic data surveyed here seems to be connected with a specific, Marwānid, period in history, so it remains open what, if any, conclusions can be drawn about the earlier era on the basis of it.

    I have argued elsewhere that Arabic graffiti form an important and still rather underused corpus for the study of the social history of the early Islamic Middle East.4 In an online text5 I have analyzed graffiti that show that early Muslims were eager to put into writing their statements of piety which were then read aloud by people passing by; another article looks in particular at the development of Muslim religious identity.6 The latter study uses as its main evidence around 100 Arabic inscriptions dated to the 640s–740s CE. Although the epigraphic corpus creates interpretative difficulties because of repetitive formulae and so on, this set of data was selected because it is explicitly dated and written by the ingroup (proto- or early Muslims) themselves and thus proffers unique evidence for the processes of identity construction and maintenance in the Middle East of that era.

    To recapitulate the findings of that article, we can give the following simplified timeline for the development of the Muslim identity as reflected in Arabic epigraphy: inscriptions evince indeterminate monotheist formulae up to the 70s/690s when the first instances of emphasis on the Prophet Muḥammad surface. Designations referring to different religious groups outside the nascent Muslim ingroup appear around the same time, in the 70s–90s/690s–710s. Following this, in the 80s–100s/700s–720s, we have references to specifically Muslim rites such as pilgrimage, prayer, and fasting. The processes of marking the boundary are brought to a close around the 100s/720s, when “Muslims” and “Islam” begin to solidify as words that refer to a specific religious community distinct from others. The current study follows the same avenues of inquiry, employing first– second/seventh–eighth-century Arabic graffiti to study expressions of willingness to participate in religious warfare (jihād fī sabīl allāh) and to achieve martyrdom (shahāda, istishhād).

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1720 - January 16, 2018, 12:36 AM

    Free online course from Gabriel Said Reynolds - Introduction to the Quran: The Scripture of Islam
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1721 - Yesterday at 12:28 PM

    Another free online course:
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1722 - Today at 12:47 PM

    Islamic history:

    Well, all these newly found inscriptions prove that the traditional narrative is, if not 100 percent true, at least 90 percent true. I don't see any critical by-thought coming from any expert so I guess there is no reason to doubt these inscriptions.

    I read this.

    Do we know which passages were not true in the Quran? People keep saying that it is 90 percent accurate. But the mere changing of one single word in a sentence can change the whole meaning of what is being said. So while a small percentage of change, it can be a significant percentage of change.

    "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men (and women) to do nothing" -Edmund Burke
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1723 - Today at 01:03 PM

    I am really liking this thread. See my question above.

    "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men (and women) to do nothing" -Edmund Burke
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #1724 - Today at 02:06 PM

    hmm... I  like that course  dear zeca  ..may be i will register for it to teach   the teachers on the history & origins of Quran..

    just curious zeca..   do  you know anything about  that  Mourad Takawi  ....

    Is he Lebanese  Christian ? 

    with best wishes

    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
  • Previous page 1 ... 56 57 58« Previous thread | Next thread »