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

Do humans have needed kno...
Today at 05:47 AM
New Britain
April 16, 2024, 12:05 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
What's happened to the fo...
April 11, 2024, 01:00 AM
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
Nawal El Saadawi: Egypt's...
January 27, 2024, 12:24 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 1272266 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 320 321 322323 324 ... 368 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9630 - August 14, 2020, 10:17 PM
    Thinking  that : "The Quran gives us good clues to help understand" whatever is a big mistake. Trust the Quran in what he says the same.

    Quote
    you meant to say


    All.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9631 - August 15, 2020, 11:02 AM
    Jay Smith :
    A final analysis of the Qira'ats which damage the Qur'an

    A good résumé of the qiraat issue...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_v6BkxYtEc
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9632 - August 15, 2020, 01:21 PM
    Quote from: Altara on August 15, 2020, 11:02 AM
    Jay Smith :
    A final analysis of the Qira'ats which damage the Qur'an Quran the present book....

    A good résumé of the qiraat issue...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_v6BkxYtEc

    well I  can not watch 2hr video., but let me modify a bit of his words and let me define that word   "Qira'at" to make sure readers understand it

    Quote
    In Islam, Qira'at   recitation  or reading/singing of Quran  before it became the book.,   Arabic language  around middle east at that time in 5th/6th/7th century had  e different linguistic, lexical, phonetic, morphological and syntactical forms  and they were all permitted in reciting the Quran". Apparently  There are ten different schools of qira'at, each one deriving its name from a noted Quran reciters(https://www.tarteelequran.com/learn-ten-qirat-online/)  .. again one must note this is all comes from hadith..

    Apparently  Abu Bakr Ibn Mujāhid   ((Abū Bakr Aḥmad ibn Mūsā ibn al-ʿAbbās Ibn Mujāhid al-ʿAṭashī,)) who lived around  859/860 – 936  established and delineatedthe seven canonical Quranic readings (qira'at) in his work Kitāb al-sabʿa fī l-qirāʾāt   While these Quran readers lived in the second and third century of Islam, the scholar who first approved of the qira'at lived a century later, so that the people who passed down the readings (the "transmitters") are part of the system of qira'at (qira'at pass to riwaya who have turuq or lines of transmission, and passed down to wujuh i.e. the next line of transmission).
      ..


    with all that story behind Quran reciters ., sure by that time it became a present book.,  ROGUES WHO JOINED IN TO ISLAM.. for loot /booty or keeping their assents intact changed Quran  from that early reciting Quran..  this in fact  one can see from the differences that are there in those early  Quran manuscripts and  present book .,

    THERE WERE NO SURAH NAMES AND NO VERSE NUMBERS with those Quran reciters.,  all that 114 surahs  with  some 6300 verses that became a book NEED TO BE FILTERED to take  it  to that original reciting Quran   ..  otherwise the problems that the Muslim folks are., that the Muslim community is in will continue for ever and in fact it  will become worse in this century...

    So I strongly suggest to that dr. Jay Smith to read your posts or book ..publications.. whatever you have dear Altara..............  otherwise he will be insulting Muslim folks using those  silly stories of Muhammad  that some SCOUNDRELS IN ISLAM PROPAGATED ALONG WITH  THE STORIES OF  his two father in-laws + two son in-laws of present gibberish Islam..

    with best wishes
    yeezevee
    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 #9633 - August 16, 2020, 03:46 PM
    A person that call herself "Disproving Islam, writes this on twitter:

    "So the Furqan was invented before 685 AD, and the Quran was compiled by Al-Hajjaj around 685-714 AD".

    Do any of the scholars support this view?

    In the YouTube channel of Sneaker's Corner, they talk about this and they also point to an article by Robert Hoyland.

    https://youtu.be/Oq7PZQ4AMw0

    https://www.academia.edu/9659746/Correspondence_between_Leo_III_and_Umar_II

    https://twitter.com/DisprovingIslam/status/1294680194654052352?s=20
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9634 - August 16, 2020, 06:10 PM
    Quote from: zeca on July 13, 2020, 02:15 PM
    Altara - what are the arguments that have been made for a 7th century date for Sebeos?


    Quote from: Altara on July 13, 2020, 07:04 PM
    None to my knowledge. And they have named it "pseudo" Sebeos.


    The main reason why this text is allegedly dated from the 7th century is because, apart from the author to whom it is attributed to, the date at which the events told stop  (661) ; the assumption is that if it were a later text then it would tell events later than 661.

    But the origin of the text itself is not that clear especially in terms of authorship, which is a different topic than its reliability. For those speaking French http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/historiens/sebeos/chronique.htm
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9635 - August 16, 2020, 06:36 PM
    Quote from: zeca on July 07, 2020, 11:23 PM
    Thread: https://mobile.twitter.com/ccsahner/status/1280530440877727746

    The Origins of Islam: A Conversation with the German Islamic Scholar Josef van Ess

    http://www.goethe.de/ges/phi/prj/ffs/the/a96/en8626506.htm

    Quote
    and of course they had some kind of Koran text that they adhered to


    Unfortunately he doesn't explain this "of course"and I wonder if he does in his work ; however, I consider him wrong here for many reasons, one being the fact that many islamic beliefs have no link with the Quran, among sunnis but also and especially shi'as.

    Quote
    As far as Kufa is concerned, we have reports from those crazy Gnostics [/b]from the early Islamic period. It was obviously primarily Shiite ideas that flourished there and engendered the strangest fantasies.


    Sounds like Raymond Dequin's ideas  Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

    Quote
    It took some time before it was compiled and people became aware of it. But the moment the Koran was publicised as the authoritative foundation, from then on there was Islam.


    I agree with him here but that is why I find his previous comment about arabs and koranic texts they adhered to even more weird but I guess he doesn't have any other explanation about why the Quran became the sacred text of Islam.

    Quote
    Muslims don’t comprehend the Koran as a ‘sacred text’, but as a way of life, a ‘constitution’....... Muslims believe in the Koran, because they believe it shows them how they should behave in certain situations, how they should live – from an ethical and, if you like, also from a legal point of view.


    Funny because this is more the role of the sunna here at least as far as it goes into details.
    ...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9636 - August 16, 2020, 06:55 PM
    Quote from: Altara on July 27, 2020, 08:15 AM
    3/  Verses (about  an "hajj" ) of the Quran interpreted and understood by Arabs at that time inside the political situation from 685. Some Arabs rebuilt what they thought was the Kaba, claimed that they were the owner of the place of the Prophet, and decreed that an "hajj" should be done here. Proponents of the other side said that there was Jerusalem where the "hajj" should be done.
    You have to do your homework and look carefully to the political situation between Arabs from 685 to 692.
    I will not say more about this: homework is a keyword here!


    You are refering here to the war between Abd al Malik and Abd Allah ibn az-Zubayr ; however, we only have the muslim narrative to "prove" this war of the sanctuaries ; this might be a later construct written under the Abbassids ; this is my opinion based on historical events dated under the Abbassids when Mecca became the sacred destination of the pilgrimmage.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9637 - August 16, 2020, 07:29 PM
    Quote from: zeca on July 31, 2020, 07:19 AM
    Are there indications in the sources for this?


    Quote from: Altara on July 31, 2020, 08:39 AM


    Malik is the son of Marwan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marwan_I which is not an Arabic etymon. It  can be tied with Merv.


    This is one of the theory developped by Inarah and Volker Popp do explain that in details in this book (which unfrotunately cannot be found for free on the internet but I noticed it now has a Kindle version for 11 € so whoknows) https://www.amazon.fr/dp/B00CQZ5MRI/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

    His explanation is quite complicated and I don't have the book with me right now but he argues Marwan designates where he comes from therefore Merv rather than his father's name as the tradition tell us ; This link does review the book and this theory with some counter arguments https://en.qantara.de/content/the-emergence-of-islam-no-prophet-named-muhammad
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9638 - August 16, 2020, 07:41 PM
    Quote from: yeezevee on August 03, 2020, 06:44 PM
    whaaatt........  so  again..... this Karbala massacre story is a story  retold umpteen times and we are doing this

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dF0IGDHpbWY

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFVkTXKg2LI

    self-flagellation in Indian subcontinent  on  Muharram  for the past 1000 years  for a story ....



    Let's put it this way ; there is no external source, to my knowledge, outside the muslim narrative for the battle of the Camel or the battle of Karbala. So it isn't possible to prove those 2 events really happened ; Altara seems to think they did but as battles during the leadership struggle between East and West Arab wars and not as told by muslim tradition. We might never know the real truth of it.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9639 - August 16, 2020, 07:46 PM
    Quote from: Altara on August 03, 2020, 07:18 PM
    What I see is that Zubayr have found an arid valley (idea he found in the Quran) with a ruin, rebuilt it and claimed that it was the city of the "prophet" as "Mecca" (the Quran word) to whom God (in Arabic) have spoken to get legitimacy over Malik who had nothing (regarding this stuff) to oppose him. One way or another "Mecca" became a stake in the war.


    All this is based on muslim tradition and it might be true here but this we don't know ; how can you be sure that it is or what are your arguments for this ? I truly wonder as I don't think it is and I think this was totally made up during the Abbassids when they started writing the Muhammad legend. But I am ready to change my mind if one presents me with compelling arguments.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9640 - August 16, 2020, 08:00 PM
    Quote from: yeezevee on August 07, 2020, 12:19 PM

    but thank you..  and i wonder what is the earliest year that Al-Masjid al-Ḥarām of present  Mecca was built?

    with best wishes
    yeezevee


    Between 749and 809  ; 749 being the potential older date but I think we can narrow down the period between 750 and 767 and we could even be more precise but I haven't have gone that far but maybe that will come .

    PS Sorry I don't know why I wrote in French. 
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9641 - August 16, 2020, 08:15 PM
    Quote from: Asbjoern1958 on August 07, 2020, 02:41 PM
    Hi!
    In this video, around 39,55,, Robert Spencer is referring to a source from the 690s, (witch  he at the moment  didn't remember), saying that "we did't recite the Quran".
    Could this support the idea that in the 7th century, the Quran wasn't well known or in much use? I remember van Putten said that those who wrote the inscriptions in the Dome of the Rock, didn't have a Quran ( they conflated two lines). 



    I think the best wording is to say that the Quranic text was not standardized yet (and here I am not talking about the Arab language) and so the writings on the Dome of the Rock were loggia existing at the time but that people could recite/write differently though conveying the same message ; the same issues does show up in graffiti carved in stones in the first century of Islam where some of the writings do not tie up 100% with texts in the Quran.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9642 - August 16, 2020, 08:19 PM
    Quote from: mundi on August 09, 2020, 02:38 PM
    Yeez,

    Exactly, that seems to have happened. The book was copied in scribal centers but not read in the wider community. Maybe that is why we see this break  between the language of the Quran and the later recitation language. Only in 8th C was the Quran used in prayer houses and schools in the wider society?

    That would also explain the break in understanding of some passages (including legal passages).


    Or it could be that the Quran was a text that was central to a community but that community was quite small and not related to the Arab chiefs who fought against the Sassanians and the Byzantine ; it was only later that this text was picked up, edited and made the central text of the new faith but loosing in the priocess its ties to its origins  hence why the muslims scholars always struggled to understand some of the text meanings.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9643 - August 16, 2020, 10:43 PM
    Quote from: Marc S on August 16, 2020, 08:19 PM
    Or it could be that the Quran was a text that was central to a community but that community was quite small

     That is quite important but for that one must have some sort of proof that Arabic language in written form was flourishing much earlier than what people believe.,  I go for even 4th or 5th century..  Clearly Arabic language  in peninsula was not a single dialect., 

    Other way of understanding of  present Quran origins is .,  present book Quran was edited all the way to the end of so-called golden age of Islam ..  that means The present Arabic Quran has started getting printed some where in the year of 780 to 810 and then it got modified here and there all the way to Mongolian invasion and that is ., year of the Siege of Baghdad / burning books and libraries in 1258  by Mongolian... so-called Muslim converts..

    Quote
    and not related to the Arab chiefs who fought against the Sassanians and the Byzantine ; it was only later that this text was picked up, edited and made the central text of the new faith but loosing in the priocess its ties to its origins  hence why the muslims scholars always struggled to understand some of the text meanings.

     THERE IS LITTLE DOUBT ON  YOUR STATEMENT .. "on text modifications".. but question is .. WHEN?? WHAT YEAR  TO WHAT YEAR did such modification occurred? 

    And I  have a problem there in that    "Arab chiefs who fought against the Sassanian and the Byzantine" ....

      if history of early Islam goes that way .. then I say.,    THOSE ARAB CHIEFS WERE NOT ARAB PAGANS .. ARAB NOMADS ..ARAB VAGABONDS but THEY WERE  MULTI LINGUAL  ARAB CHRISTIANS & ARAB JEWS THAT WERE PRESENT WITH-IN THE Sassanian  as well as in Byzantine" empires

    Off course what I wrote above is simple gedanken experiment that closely follows publication of various hadith and its timings.. which I think is fairly well established unlike the publication dates of Quran manuscripts
    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 #9644 - August 16, 2020, 11:01 PM
    Quote
    Quote from: yeezevee on August 07, 2020, 12:19 PM
    .......................

    but thank you..  and i wonder what is the earliest year that Al-Masjid al-Ḥarām of present  Mecca was built?
    ..

    Quote from: Marc S on August 16, 2020, 08:00 PM
    Between 749 and 809  ; 749 being the potential older date but I think we can narrow down the period between 750 and 767 and we could even be more precise but I haven't have gone that far but maybe that will come .

    PS Sorry I don't know why I wrote in French.


    My goodness you are French and you are a polite guy  Cheesy  unlike me..  Cheesy .,    Actually if there is any country that I would like to live at the end of my  life., It  is France .....  Hope  it stays that way((NOT SURE))

    and No  no.. you do not need to be sorry for that ....we are in 21st century....,  thanks for that response dear Marc.,   but I greatly appreciate any reference  on those dates you are giving on the construction of    that Al-Masjid al-Ḥarām of present  Mecca..

    And I am glad to read you again
    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 #9645 - August 17, 2020, 06:35 AM

    From Marc:

    Quote
    Or it could be that the Quran was a text that was central to a community but that community was quite small and not related to the Arab chiefs who fought against the Sassanians and the Byzantine ; it was only later that this text was picked up, edited and made the central text of the new faith but loosing in the priocess its ties to its origins  hence why the muslims scholars always struggled to understand some of the text meanings.


    The early (proto) muslim community indeed seems to have been very small. They left very few archeological traces compared to the Christian community. An example is Humeima, that must have been occupied by muslims very early on (before 630?). Archeology shows around 6-7 churches and 1 tiny- tiny mosque, fitting in maybe maximum 10 people.

    Looking at the early Quranic manuscripts, we see a lay-out absolutely not promoting easy legibility or eay memorisation. I doubt that it was used much for these purposes.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9646 - August 17, 2020, 10:05 AM
    Quote
    But the origin of the text itself is not that clear especially in terms of authorship, which is a different topic than its reliability.

    All is tied. Reliability depends also from authorship

    Quote
    however, we only have the muslim narrative to "prove" this war of the sanctuaries ;


    From the moment where the Muslim narrative does not serve the  Master narrative (Mecca/Kaba) thing that it believes historical, I consider that it has no reason to invent (why would it did it?) specific events it recounts. This war of the sanctuaries does not serve the Master narrative.
    Quote
    this might be a later construct written under the Abbassids ; this is my opinion based on historical events dated under the Abbassids when Mecca became the sacred destination of the pilgrimage.


    Of course; all can be a later construct. However I have no specific reason to think it is. "Mecca" became the sacred destination of the pilgrimage under Malik.

    Quote
    All this is based on muslim tradition and it might be true here but this we don't know ; how can you be sure that it is or what are your arguments for this ?


    Because it does not serve the Master narrative. Therefore it is (for me...) plausible (since one does not have any external sources), I do not see why one could not consider it as such.

    Quote
    I truly wonder as I don't think it is and I think this was totally made up during the Abbassids when they started writing the Muhammad legend.


    The Muhammad legend (for me...) is the necessary context to 1/ understand the Quranic texts 2/ to explain its origins. It predates the Abbassids : go over the Muslim sources... But, of course, it is written in Abbassid time, as one have nothing before.
    Quote
    Or it could be that the Quran was a text that was central to a community but that community was quite small and not related to the Arab chiefs who fought against the Sassanians and the Byzantine ;


    Then, the question is: how it be that this  (Arab) community did not pass any hints to the others about the understanding of the text for example...

    Quote
    it was only later that this text was picked up, edited and made the central text of the new faith but loosing in the process its ties to its origins  hence why the Muslims scholars always struggled to understand some of the text meanings.


    Many things to elaborate here...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9647 - August 17, 2020, 11:48 AM
    Quote from: yeezevee on August 16, 2020, 11:01 PM
    My goodness you are French and you are a polite guy  Cheesy  unlike me..  Cheesy .,    Actually if there is any country that I would like to live at the end of my  life., It  is France .....  Hope  it stays that way((NOT SURE))

    and No  no.. you do not need to be sorry for that ....we are in 21st century....,  thanks for that response dear Marc.,   but I greatly appreciate any reference  on those dates you are giving on the construction of    that Al-Masjid al-Ḥarām of present  Mecca..

    And I am glad to read you again


    The dates I gave are for 749/750 the beginning of the reign of Al Saffah the first Abbassid and 767 is the death of Ibn Ishaq the first maghazi writer ; I assume, but I might be wrong, that when the first written story of Muhammad was made up, it already included Mecca and therefore Mecca had already been "chosen".
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9648 - August 17, 2020, 11:56 AM
    Quote from: yeezevee on August 16, 2020, 10:43 PM
    That is quite important but for that one must have some sort of proof that Arabic language in written form was flourishing much earlier than what people believe.,  I go for even 4th or 5th century..  Clearly Arabic language  in peninsula was not a single dialect., 

    Other way of understanding of  present Quran origins is .,  present book Quran was edited all the way to the end of so-called golden age of Islam ..  that means The present Arabic Quran has started getting printed some where in the year of 780 to 810 and then it got modified here and there all the way to Mongolian invasion and that is ., year of the Siege of Baghdad / burning books and libraries in 1258  by Mongolian... so-called Muslim converts..
     THERE IS LITTLE DOUBT ON  YOUR STATEMENT .. "on text modifications".. but question is .. WHEN?? WHAT YEAR  TO WHAT YEAR did such modification occurred? 


    Given the fact that Muhammad and Mecca are not widely quoted by name in the text, I would say the text was standardized in its content quite early but for the arabic grammar editing process. This is why ahadith are so important in Islam.

    Quote
    And I  have a problem there in that    "Arab chiefs who fought against the Sassanian and the Byzantine" ....


    What is exactly your issue here ?
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9649 - August 17, 2020, 12:01 PM
    Quote from: mundi on August 17, 2020, 06:35 AM
    From Marc:

    The early (proto) muslim community indeed seems to have been very small. They left very few archeological traces compared to the Christian community. An example is Humeima, that must have been occupied by muslims very early on (before 630?). Archeology shows around 6-7 churches and 1 tiny- tiny mosque, fitting in maybe maximum 10 people.


    I am surprised by your mention of muslims as early as 630  ; any link to backup what you are saying ? The Humeina mosk seems to be from 699 from what I have read.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9650 - August 17, 2020, 12:12 PM
    Quote from: Altara on August 17, 2020, 10:05 AM
    All is tied. Reliability depends also from authorship


    That really depend on each specific case ; this is not a rule carved in stone.

    Quote
    From the moment where the Muslim narrative does not serve the  Master narrative (Mecca/Kaba) thing that it believes historical, I consider that it has no reason to invent (why would it did it?) specific events it recounts. This war of the sanctuaries does not serve the Master narrative.

    The war of the sanctuaries does serve the master narrative because the issue with the writers of the Muhammad legend is to explain why muslims like Abd Al Malik were not in Mecca and the answer is "because they were bad muslims" thanks to these War of the sanctuaries stories.

    Quote
    Of course; all can be a later construct. However I have no specific reason to think it is. "Mecca" became the sacred destination of the pilgrimage under Malik.


    What are your sources to backup this assumption ?

    Quote
    Then, the question is: how it be that this  (Arab) community did not pass any hints to the others about the understanding of the text for example...


    Because they were wiped out, because they were not on the winning side, because the meaning of the original text was totally made up to create the Muhammad legend.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9651 - August 17, 2020, 12:15 PM
    Quote from: Marc S on August 17, 2020, 12:01 PM
    I am surprised by your mention of muslims as early as 630  ; any link to backup what you are saying ? The Humeina mosk seems to be from 699 from what I have read.

    hello Marcus ..... what is Muslim?? .. who is Muslim? who is not Muslim in your thoughts?  in your neck of the world??..and it appears you have not read my post because your response to me did not address the issues...
    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 #9652 - August 17, 2020, 03:52 PM

    From the moment where the Muslim narrative does not serve the  Master narrative (Mecca/Kaba) thing that it believes historical, I consider that it has no reason to invent (why would it did it?) specific events it recounts. This war of the sanctuaries does not serve the Master narrative.

    Quote
    The war of the sanctuaries does serve the master narrative because the issue with the writers of the Muhammad legend is to explain why muslims like Abd Al Malik were not in Mecca and the answer is "because they were bad muslims" thanks to these War of the sanctuaries stories.


    You forget that, for the Master narrative, those installed in Damascus since 636 were the enemies of the Prophet and that they falsely converted : they were still more or less pagans. So, contrary to what you say,  Abd Al Malik (and all those installed in Damascus since 636) were not considered as a straight Muslim. So, this story (war of the sanctuaries) (for me...)  does not serve the Master one and is perfectly plausible.
    But as soon as Zubayr is defeated, Malik champion Mecca/Medina and abandon Jerusalem as the "pilgrimage".

    "Mecca" became the sacred destination of the pilgrimage under Malik.

    Quote
    What are your sources to backup this assumption ?


    Articles on academia about the history of the hajj. I consider that this topic is not priority for me as I know that it has no importance about the authors of the Quran (which is my topic).

    Then, the question is: how it be that this  (Arab) community did not pass any hints to the others about the understanding of the text for example...


    Quote
    Because they were wiped out, because they were not on the winning side, because the meaning of the original text was totally made up to create the Muhammad legend.


    Hmmm...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9653 - August 17, 2020, 04:14 PM
    Marc,

    Quote
    I am surprised by your mention of muslims as early as 630  ; any link to backup what you are saying ? The Humeina mosk seems to be from 699 from what I have read.


    In my post I mentioned "proto"muslims.

    We have the documantary evidence (pseudo sebeos...), the early islamic calendar (the egyptian papyrus of 644), early mosques, early manuscripts (c14 as early as 630 (?).... clear the new order had a separate ideology from judaism and christianity. Like I said, I doubt the 5 pillars were already developed, but something was definitely brewing from the start of the conquests.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9654 - August 17, 2020, 06:27 PM
    Quote from: yeezevee on August 17, 2020, 12:15 PM
    and it appears you have not read my post because your response to me did not address the issues...


    I did. For me , Mecca was chosen under the Abbassids at the time when the Maghazi story was written down ; it cannot have been before, meaning under the Umayyads, as their actions show they didn't care about Mecca/Medina not only historically but also in the muslim sources.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9655 - August 17, 2020, 06:28 PM
    Quote from: mundi on August 17, 2020, 04:14 PM
    Marc,

    In my post I mentioned "proto"muslims.

    We have the documantary evidence (pseudo sebeos...), the early islamic calendar (the egyptian papyrus of 644), early mosques, early manuscripts (c14 as early as 630 (?).... clear the new order had a separate ideology from judaism and christianity. Like I said, I doubt the 5 pillars were already developed, but something was definitely brewing from the start of the conquests.


    Ok I get your point.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9656 - August 17, 2020, 06:45 PM
    Quote from: Altara on August 17, 2020, 03:52 PM
    You forget that, for the Master narrative, those installed in Damascus since 636 were the enemies of the Prophet and that they falsely converted :


    I understand where your rationale is wrong. You take the muslim tradition and that is wrong here. No one was enemy of the prophet who converted by force or at the last minute ; the reality is you had people who conquered an empire ; when the Abbassids took over against them and wanted to build their legitimacy above everyone, they couldn't cut off the link with the Umayyads in the building of the Muhammad legend so they found different ways of putting them down (enemy, late convert though Mu'awiya was one of the writers of the revelation, no care towards the prophet family, etc,etc ) ;  the sanctuaries war was just one episode of this.

    Quote
    So, contrary to what you say,  Abd Al Malik (and all those installed in Damascus since 636) were not considered as a straight Muslim.


    I said they were described as bad muslims (it obviously depends on the sources on this, the sunnis seeing them more muslims than the shi'as) and it obviously depends who (Amr Ibn Al As wasn't a bad muslim in the sources) but because they had nothing to do with Islam and needed to included in the narrative.

    Quote
    "Mecca" became the sacred destination of the pilgrimage under Malik.


    His main actions historically proven showed the opposite.


    Quote
    Articles on academia about the history of the hajj.


    You mean articles based on the muslim narrative. I don't see this as any kind of proof.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9657 - August 18, 2020, 07:46 AM
    You forget that, for the Master narrative, those installed in Damascus since 636 were the enemies of the Prophet and that they falsely converted :
    Quote
    I understand where your rationale is wrong. You take the muslim tradition and that is wrong here.


    I take muslim tradition as plausible when it does not concern Mecca/Kaba.  I think that when Abbassid writers tells that those installed in Damascus since 636 were the enemies of the Prophet and that they falsely converted I think they wrote this because they believed (in good faith) that it was historical. Was it? I do not think so : 636 Arabs installed in Damascus were not enemies of the Prophet, etc.
    Quote
    when the Abbassids took over against them and wanted to build their legitimacy above everyone, they couldn't cut off the link with the Umayyads in the building of the Muhammad legend so they found different ways of putting them down


    They had the Umayyad wiped out. They did not need to build a fake story to get legitimacy. Syria never rebelled before the publication of Ibn Hicham (830).
    It is you who need this story of " build their legitimacy above everyone, they couldn't cut off the link with the Umayyads in the building of the Muhammad legend" to fit your theory about the Quran.
    The legend of Muhammad predates the Abbassids tells the Abbassids themselves. You still did not see who has taken this story from his hat.
    Quote
    You mean articles based on the muslim narrative. I don't see this as any kind of proof.


    Not only (there's papyri...) Check them.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #9658 - August 18, 2020, 07:58 AM
    well  Marcus seem to  be shifting the discussion from Quran to hadith .. which I consider as "GARBAGE STORIES OF ISLAM"  ..it is ok to read them as stories  but as authentic early history of Islam  during the times of Prophet of Islam??   I don't think so...  and my head is spinning as posts are talking about many different historical issues

    anyway let me clarify a bit and get clarifications from Marc_S....  So in those two posts between me and Marc S.,   we were literally talking about three  different issues  that is complicating in understanding of these posts  

    1)  Quran  the book and Quran  early manuscripts

    2) Mecca..Medina and that    Al-Masjid al-Ḥarām of present  Mecca Mosque  or Humeina mosque  that Marc A mentions ...

    and  and  3),  that ibn Isḥāq .. Sīrat Rasūl Allāh ((THE ALLEGED BOOK THAT DID NOT SURVIVE))  and and whole lot of hadith  enchiladas that Marc  S thinks is important to Islam  and which I consider them as garbage or at best stories of early Islam on  Muhammad of classical Islam ..

     well let us separate those  issues  as there is literally 200 years gap between them ...

    ******************************************************************

    on point-3  Marc S says
    Quote
    https://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=27568.msg889000#msg889000

    Given the fact that Muhammad and Mecca are not widely quoted by name in the text, I would say the text was standardized in its content quite early but for the arabic grammar editing process. This is why ahadith are so important in Islam.

    Hadith  is important for what??

    1). for exploring origins of Quran ,, origins of early Islam??  

    2) Or for Muslims telling silly stories to their children

    3). and for non Muslims ,,,Insulting  Muhammad using those silly hadith junk??

    what is so important about hadith  dear Marc??  Is it more important than Quran for Islam??

    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 #9659 - August 18, 2020, 08:30 AM
    So point number 2...
    Quote from: yeezevee on August 18, 2020, 07:58 AM
    .............................

    2) Mecca..Medina and that    Al-Masjid al-Ḥarām of present  Mecca Mosque  or Humeina mosque  that Marc A mentions .........

    So on that  Al-Masjid al-Ḥarām of present  Mecca Mosque  and Marc   mentions another  important place and  mosque  in that town Humeina.....Humeima

    Quote
    Quote from: Marc S on August 17, 2020, 12:01 PM
    I am surprised by your mention of muslims as early as 630  ; any link to backup what you are saying ? The Humeina mosk seems to be from 699 from what I have read.

    Quote
    Quote from: yeezevee on August 16, 2020, 11:01 PM
    ........I greatly appreciate any reference  on those dates you are giving on the construction of    that Al-Masjid al-Ḥarām of present  Mecca.........     

    Quote from: Marc S on August 17, 2020, 11:48 AM
    The dates I gave are for 749/750 the beginning of the reign of Al Saffah the first Abbassid and 767 is the death of Ibn Ishaq the first maghazi writer ; I assume, but I might be wrong, that when the first written story of Muhammad was made up, it already included Mecca and therefore Mecca had already been "chosen".



    The dates Marc gave on the construction  and history  of those  two mosques in those  two towns .. 1) Al-Masjid al-Ḥarām of present  Mecca  and  2) Mosque  at That  Nabataean city of ancient Hawara presently called as  Humeima is very important ...

    after all these two places and their mosques appear  almost 200 years  after  those Quran manuscripts(NOT THE BOOK) were printed..

    So Marc just to clarify ... you think that   

    Al-Masjid al-Ḥarām of present  Mecca    was built around 749/750 by   the   first Abbassid dynasty??

    and The Humeima (( old Nabataean city  ancient Hawara)_  mosque   was built in 699  ....


    So assuming those dates are correct then.,   don't you think Muhammad of Quranic Mecca  and Islam of Quran is different from Islam of these towns  during Abbassid regime??

    After all  Quran MANUSCRIPTS   were published way earlier than  these Mosques... 

     would it not tell us  that ., Mecca and Muhammad of Quran(whose names are hardly mentioned in Quran)  are different from  Mecca and Muhammad of   Abbassid regime  / hadith  story Mecca and Muhammad??

    and I am glad you mentioned that old Nabataean city ..... ancient Hawara....  and its relation to Islam
    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     
  • Previous page 1 ... 320 321 322323 324 ... 368 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »