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
by zeca
Today at 06:44 PM
What's happened to the fo...
by zeca
Today at 06:39 PM
New Britain
Today at 05:41 PM
Do humans have needed kno...
Today at 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
Lights on the way
by akay
February 01, 2024, 12:10 PM
Mock Them and Move on., ...
January 30, 2024, 10:44 AM
Pro Israel or Pro Palesti...
January 29, 2024, 01:53 PM
Pakistan: The Nation.....
January 28, 2024, 02:12 PM
Gaza assault
January 27, 2024, 01:08 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 1272461 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 305 306 307308 309 ... 368 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9180 - May 23, 2020, 02:52 PM
    Quote from: yeezevee on May 23, 2020, 01:46 PM
    Well I can not answer Altara Questions on Islam for Hoyland hypothesis  ..that only Hoyland can do... but dear Altara .. I bumped in to this lecture  tube of another "land" The Tom Holland  

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5slk97ss2Q

    what is your opinion on that?


    Many interesting things. Generally right. But (for me...) it can be solved only by the general explication about the emergence of the Quran. If you ask Holland/Hoyland/Donner, etc., they do not have the debut of one as they are such Great Believers (in different way) but they are.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9181 - May 23, 2020, 03:41 PM
    Quote from: Altara on May 23, 2020, 01:28 PM
    It seems to me impossible that: If "The Nabataean inscriptions not only illustrate the gradual emergence of the Arabic script, but they also bear witness to centuries of Arabic-Aramaic language contact and bilingualism." there was no influence of the Syriac script especially when you see what was Nabatean script and Syriac script in the 2nd c.  and what is the 568 Harran inscription which is the proto Quranic one. Im-po-ssible. Telling this (no relation) is taken people for fools. Jallad, Nehmé, MVP and Macdonald can say whatever they want...
    Robin is right about this (DeepL translation) :
     "For my part, I do not believe that the origin of the Arabic alphabet can be explained. only by the study of letters, examined alone or in composition. It social factors must also be taken into consideration and the environment must be sought. who developed this alphabet and the reasons behind it. However, it is not impossible to to make a hypothesis about this environment of origin. It is indeed observed that the initiatives to win the desert Arabs in Syria and Arabia to Christianity come from almost all from a small region of northern Syria, namely the province of  of Euphratesia whose metropolitan seat is in Mabboug (thus in Syriac, Hierapolis in Greek, Manbiǧ in Arabic) and to a lesser extent the provinces neighboring Osrhoene (metropolitan seat Edessa) and Syria First (metropolitan seat Antioch), and that they are particularly numerous during the three first decades of the sixth century"
    Christian Julien Robin, “La réforme de l’écriture arabe à l’époque du califat médinois”, in Mélanges de l’Université Saint-Joseph, 59, 2006, pp. 319-364, p.327.


    Altara - would it be realistic to see the development of the script in previously Nabatean areas in terms of the rise of Christianity leading to a gradual replacement of written Nabatean Aramaic by Syriac (which doesn’t necessarily mean a change in the form of Aramaic that was actually spoken) leaving the Nabatean script to be used only for Arabic, but with its development being influenced by the Syriac script given that, for the literate, bilingualism was probably the norm?
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9182 - May 23, 2020, 04:02 PM
    Quote from: Altara on May 23, 2020, 12:27 AM
    One speaks Syriac/Aramaic in Mecca? Yathrib?
    Why not. Where are the inscriptions?
    Nowhere. There's  (unfortunately ...) nothing.

    Interesting translation of 26:198-199. (7'30) Moreover the first intervention is about it.
    Hoyland translation (?) is that:
    1/the "he" in 199 is Muhammad who had recited in a'jami/Aramaic language. But to whom? The one in 198 or to the people (them) ?
    2/Muhammad  speaks Aramaic? (i.e in the a'jami language) as a'jami is Aramaic as Hoyland says it at the end of the lecture.
    Maybe I miss something here but...


    Altara - putting aside Mecca/Yathrib and Muhammad aside for a moment would you agree with Hoyland that the a’jami is used in the Quran to refer to some form of Aramaic?

    At 39 minutes in Hoyland is asked a question about what assuming Dan Gibson’s Petra thesis would mean for his argument. I think Hoyland says that it would probably make his argument stronger (though he then has an afterthought about the presence of Greek in Petra in the 6th century). Anyway Hoyland doesn’t seem to see his argument for a’jami being Aramaic as depending on the Quran coming from the Hijaz.
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9183 - May 23, 2020, 05:28 PM
    Qibla and the Koran:


    Robert Kerr argues that the roots "qbl"in the Quran do not mean prayer direction but tradition (Uberlieferung).

    If you read 2:118 to 2:144 and substitute Qibla by "tradition"everything works better. The root QBL comes from the Hebrew Kabbala, that still is used today in a wide range of languages.

    https://www.academia.edu/43107732/Die_islamische_Kabbala_eine_Neuorientierung

    Very convincing imo. Would also explain why the proto-muslim's prayer directions were all over the place except towards Mecca. The custom was still being invented...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9184 - May 23, 2020, 05:57 PM
    Quote from: zeca on May 23, 2020, 03:41 PM
    Altara - would it be realistic to see the development of the Nabatean script in previously Nabatean areas in terms of the rise of Christianity leading to a gradual replacement of written Nabatean Aramaic by Syriac


    Possible.
    Quote

     (which doesn’t necessarily mean a change in the form of Aramaic that was actually spoken) leaving the Nabatean script to be used only for Arabic,

     

    Yes It is was what happened.

    Quote
    but with its development being influenced by the Syriac script given that, for the literate, bilingualism was probably the norm?


    Yes. It is what it is contested by the Arabo anglo-saxon school.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9185 - May 23, 2020, 06:19 PM
    Quote from: zeca on May 23, 2020, 04:02 PM
    Altara - putting aside Mecca/Yathrib and Muhammad aside for a moment would you agree with Hoyland that the a’jami is used in the Quran to refer to some form of Aramaic?


    Yes, it is (for me...) East Aramaic. But for Hoyland it is the West one I think. My issue is then how he explains that as there is nothing of Aramaic (which is the West part whereas the East part is the Syriac) in the Hijaz, as he always speak of "Muhammad" therefore Mecca/Yathrib, he can tell this. Because when you state something you must have the sources to validate it. If not it has no scientific value.
    Quote
    At 39 minutes in Hoyland is asked a question about what assuming Dan Gibson’s Petra thesis would mean for his argument. I think Hoyland says that it would probably make his argument stronger (though he then has an afterthought about the presence of Greek in Petra in the 6th century). Anyway Hoyland doesn’t seem to see his argument for a’jami being Aramaic as depending on the Quran coming from the Hijaz.


    Well, then why he speaks of "Muhammad", the Hijaz, etc. from the very beginning of his lecture? In doing so he places mentally his auditors in this paradigm for all what he will say throughout it. And he knows it.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9186 - May 23, 2020, 06:31 PM
    Quote from: mundi on May 23, 2020, 05:28 PM
    Qibla and the Koran:


    Robert Kerr argues that the roots "qbl"in the Quran do not mean prayer direction but tradition (Uberlieferung).

    Yes it has this meaning.
    Quote
    If you read 2:118 to 2:144 and substitute Qibla by "tradition"everything works better. The root QBL comes from the Hebrew Kabbala, that still is used today in a wide range of languages.
    https://www.academia.edu/43107732/Die_islamische_Kabbala_eine_Neuorientierung

    That's correct. 2:144 is therefore a metonymic pun ; playing on the meaning of "tradition" as a physical direction in place of following a tradition.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9187 - May 23, 2020, 06:37 PM
    Quote
    there is nothing of Aramaic (which is the West part whereas the East part is the Syriac) in the Hijaz


    I'm mixed up here. From archeology I encounter 6-7 th C in the West written Greek for the Christians, written Aramaic and Greek for the Jews.

    In the East we find Syriac for the Christians.

    The Hijaz is also Hegra. But not much 6-7th archeological finds there.

    Is this how you see the language situation Altara?
     So maybe the Quranic author(s)  ajami speakers are Jews?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9188 - May 23, 2020, 09:40 PM
    Quote
    So maybe the Quranic author(s)  ajami speakers are Jews?


    The ajami speakers would be the Quranic author(s)?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9189 - May 24, 2020, 06:51 AM
    No, it's the Quranic authors' Ajami speakers...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9190 - May 24, 2020, 08:13 AM
    Why? Elaborate.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9191 - May 24, 2020, 10:31 AM
    Hoyland's talk centered around which language was Ajami. He assumed it was Aramaic bc they were present "in the Hijaz". If Petra was the cult center he would expect Greek to have been " Ajami".

    I'm trying to get a bit what Hoyland was saying... A lot or not much, I'm still in doubt.

    But what Aramaic evidence do we have for 6th C Hijaz? (and I think of the North, bc there is nothing for Mecca/Medina)

    Not much that I know of. The churches to the North of Hijaz (Arabah, Dead Sea region) seemed to ahve Greek as liturgical language. Or is there proof of the contrary?

    I know that the Jews of the Dead sea area seemed to be using rather Aramaic.

    So I am missing a bit of an overview here of the language situation in the area of interest. Did Hoyland presume this was a given to his audience?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9192 - May 24, 2020, 01:21 PM
    Quote from: mundi on May 24, 2020, 10:31 AM
    Hoyland's talk centered around which language was Ajami. He assumed it was Aramaic bc they were present "in the Hijaz". If Petra was the cult center he would expect Greek to have been " Ajami".


    My understanding of what Hoyland was saying about Petra was that he would have to consider the possibility of Ajami being Greek, not that it wasn’t more likely to be Aramaic.

    Quote
    But what Aramaic evidence do we have for 6th C Hijaz? (and I think of the North, bc there is nothing for Mecca/Medina)

    Not much that I know of. The churches to the North of Hijaz (Arabah, Dead Sea region) seemed to ahve Greek as liturgical language. Or is there proof of the contrary?


    I thought there was a difference here between Monophysites and Melkites with Monophysites less likely to be using Greek. I’m not certain about this though.
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9193 - May 24, 2020, 02:16 PM
    Quote
    I thought there was a difference here between Monophysites and Melkites with Monophysites less likely to be using Greek. I’m not certain about this though.


    Yes, probably, that makes sense. We assume that, but do we know? Too bad Hoyland didnt grab the opportunity to explain the language situation. I think it would have been highly relevant in the talk.

    I've been reading quite a lot of archeology reports of the region, and from memory, I can only recall Greek scribal remains for Christians. For Jews there is indeed Aramaic. No doubt I have an incomplete picture of the situation...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9194 - May 24, 2020, 02:27 PM
    Quote from: mundi on May 24, 2020, 02:16 PM
    Yes, probably, that makes sense. We assume that, but do we know?


    It’s certainly the case for a later period. I suppose the question is whether it would have been true in the early 7th century - or late 6th century if we’re considering an earlier date for the Quran as I think Altara would argue.
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9195 - May 24, 2020, 02:31 PM
    Quote
    Hoyland's talk centered around which language was Ajami. He assumed it was Aramaic bc they were present "in the Hijaz".


    Yes, according to him.

    Quote
    If Petra was the cult center he would expect Greek to have been " Ajami".


    Yes.

    Quote
    'm trying to get a bit what Hoyland was saying... A lot or not much, I'm still in doubt.


    It is not really clear, especially his translation of 2:198-99.

    Quote
    Not much that I know of. The churches to the North of Hijaz (Arabah, Dead Sea region) seemed to have Greek as liturgical language. Or is there proof of the contrary?


    Never heard of Arabah. In Nessana, Arabs are Chalcedonians and the liturgical language is Greek.

    Quote
    I know that the Jews of the Dead sea area seemed to be using rather Aramaic.

    The Jews were in the north : Tiberias and used Aramaic.
    Quote
    Did Hoyland presume this was a given to his audience?

    he probably thinks so.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9196 - May 24, 2020, 02:39 PM
    Quote
    Jews were in the North


    Jews were also present in Dead Sea area. A lot of tombstones in Jewish Aramaic found there (Zoar, 4th C), I assume they remained present later on too.

    Apparently there were Jews in Ayla too: https://books.google.be/books?id=V-A9DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA135&lpg=PA135&dq=jews+in+ayla&source=bl&ots=EB9ui_O9oO&sig=ACfU3U3sYPhjJ8gU4pLQkZvKZRqtSYKkeQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi1vZHy3czpAhUSMewKHQjLCJAQ6AEwAXoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=jews%20in%20ayla&f=false

    Quote
    Arabah


    I mean wadi Arabah, the region starting in Ayla, up to the Dead sea.

    So where was the Aramaic in North Hijaz? Is there any material evidence?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9197 - May 24, 2020, 03:18 PM
    An old article by Hoyland: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LKt8AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA51&lpg=PA51&dq=aramaic+in+the+hijaz&source=bl&ots=X1nsV4UBrE&sig=ACfU3U0XX8-i8QZHYXMq5NUeJyKVfT0XGw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjstZq45MzpAhWKQEEAHYY8DDsQ6AEwD3oECAYQAQ#v=onepage&q=aramaic%20in%20the%20hijaz&f=false

    He says here that no pre-Islamic Syriac inscriptions have been found in west Arabia.
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9198 - May 24, 2020, 03:51 PM
    Quote
    Jews were also present in Dead Sea area.

    Not any more after Constantine (337)
    Quote
    Apparently there were Jews in Ayla too: https://books.google.be/books?id=V-A9DwAAQBAJ&pg=P

    I cannot get the page. Implausible. With the Christianization as a political power Jews are more and more pulling out of the region of Jerusalem. Would be surprising to see them in the south of this city.

    Quote
    So where was the Aramaic in North Hijaz? Is there any material evidence?


    That's the problem. There's Aramaic but elsewhere. And Hoyland omits to tell where.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9199 - May 24, 2020, 03:58 PM
    Quote from: zeca on May 24, 2020, 03:18 PM
    An old article by Hoyland: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LKt8AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA51&lpg=PA51&dq=aramaic+in+the+hijaz&source=bl&ots=X1nsV4UBrE&sig=ACfU3U0XX8-i8QZHYXMq5NUeJyKVfT0XGw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjstZq45MzpAhWKQEEAHYY8DDsQ6AEwD3oECAYQAQ#v=onepage&q=aramaic%20in%20the%20hijaz&f=false

    He says here that no pre-Islamic Syriac inscriptions have been found in west Arabia.


    Yet I understand the contrary in his lecture. Not inscriptions, but Aramaic language presence in Mecca since he considers the paradigm Mecca/Zemzem as true. It seems curious at that time that a language presence do not have any inscriptions...this guy muddy the waters.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9200 - May 24, 2020, 04:20 PM
    But isn’t that why he’s looking to Jewish Aramaic for the A’jami in the Hijaz?
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9201 - May 24, 2020, 04:39 PM
    Well I do not think so as he very knows that there is no Aramaic inscription there. Then how could he says that A’jami is Aramaic? It seems curious at that time that a language presence do not have any inscriptions...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9202 - May 24, 2020, 06:10 PM
    Quote
    Not inscriptions, but Aramaic language presence in Mecca since he considers the paradigm Mecca/Zemzem as true.


    Hoyland was remarkably quiet about Mecca... So I dont know if it is true what you say. He didnt treat Petra as heresy either.

    The latest Jewish Aramaic tombstone found in Zoar is 518 CE, that brings us to the 6th C for the presence of Jews and Jewish Aramaic.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9203 - May 24, 2020, 06:25 PM
    Quote
    Hoyland was remarkably quiet about Mecca... So I dont know if it is true what you say.


    Replay the first 15 min. When you speak of Muhammad, you speak of him where?
    Quote
    The latest Jewish Aramaic tombstone found in Zoar is 518 CE, that brings us to the 6th C for the presence of Jews and Jewish Aramaic.

    Interesting thanks. Source?
    The Jews speak Aramaic as their mother tongue, Hebrew concerns only the literati .
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9204 - May 24, 2020, 06:33 PM
    Zoar

    https://www.academia.edu/2232770/Two_Jewish_Tombstones_from_Zoar
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9205 - May 24, 2020, 06:48 PM
    Thanks. Interesting.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9206 - May 25, 2020, 08:58 AM
    A nice overview of Jewish presence in Arabia:

    https://jewishstudies.rutgers.edu/docman/rendsburg/714-03-sydney-jews-in-arabia/file
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9207 - May 25, 2020, 02:08 PM
    Thanks Mundi. I see there nothing which contradicts what I say. From Hegra to Yemen, there are no Jews in the Western Peninsula such as described by the narrative in the 5,6,7th c.

    The Echoes of Fitna: Developing Historiographical Interpretations of the Battle of Siffin (PhD) thesis.

    https://www.academia.edu/1928227/The_Echoes_of_Fitna_Developing_Historiographical_Interpretations_of_the_Battle_of_Siffin
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9208 - May 25, 2020, 03:09 PM
    Quote from: Altara on May 25, 2020, 02:08 PM
    Thanks Mundi. I see there nothing which contradicts what I say From Hegra to Yemen, there are no Jews in the Western Peninsula such as described by the narrative in the 5,6,7th c.

    The Echoes of Fitna: Developing Historiographical Interpretations of the Battle of Siffin (PhD) thesis.

    https://www.academia.edu/1928227/The_Echoes_of_Fitna_Developing_Historiographical_Interpretations_of_the_Battle_of_Siffin


    well I am not sure about that....,  Jewish folks had/have many different sects all over middle east.. they are not monolithic...., If what you wrote is true then that Jewish History need to rewrite their story....

    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 #9209 - May 25, 2020, 04:15 PM
    Quote
    Jewish folks had/have many different sects all over middle east

    Rabbanites-Samaritans (Samaria in Palestine) and later (7-8th c.) Karaites. There is no Rabbanites apart in Yemen.  From Hegra to Yemen, there are no Jews (Rabbanites-Samaritans) in the Western Peninsula such as described by the narrative in the 5,6,7th c.
  • Previous page 1 ... 305 306 307308 309 ... 368 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »