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
, 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.