Yep those reviews are good reads too. I must say that I entirely disagree with Madelung, who is far too credulous of Muslim tradition, and who takes for granted that the Qur'an cannot possibly have been subjected to later interpolations because ... of some unstated reason. Here's Madelung's claim:
"Muhammad, according to Powers, considered Zayd b. Haritha, his adopted son, as his legitimate successor. The Prophet’s Companions, however, prevented the legitimate hereditary succession of Zayd (or, if he was dead, of Zayd’s son Usama), and later Muslims claimed that the Qur’an had revoked the legality of Zayd’s adoption. Powers’ argument is hardly sustainable since the verses abolishing adoption, verses 4 - 6, would also have to be considered a late addition to the Qur’an."
My God, who could imagine such a thing! What one wants is an explanation of *why* these are not late additions, not an assumption that they are *not* late additions, since David Powers makes a compelling case that they *are* late additions. Simply pounding your fist and saying no, no, no, as Madelung does, is not much of an argument.
Actually it is undeniable that Surah 4 has late additions, and even *Muslim tradition itself holds this*. What do I mean? Surah 4:176, the last aya, is an incredibly crude interpolation that could not possibly have been written at the same time as its preceding ayas. It has no relation to them, and is crudely jammed in at the end -- go read it yourself. Muslim tradition recognized this by, in at least one hadith, holding that 4:176 was *the very last revealed aya.* And this was simply the Muslim way of trying to explain away its awkward and interpolated nature.
Here are the traditional hadith accounts -- note that they explicitly hold that Surah 4 was the last revealed surah, and 4:176 the very last revelation to Mohammed. This was the Muslim way of dealing with the fact that they were still being interpolated at a very late date, and that the interpolations were relatively crude (as with the two kalala ayas).
http://islamqa.info/en/21916So Madelung's argument that these verses in Surah 4 regarding adoption/Zayd/Mohammed's sonlessness cannot be later interpolations is, in my view, pathetically weak dogma, and presents no argument against Powers' detailed technical analysis.
Further quoting Madelung:
"The delegitimisation of adoption was part of the general legislation of the Qur’an, much of which was promulgated a year earlier and collected in Sura 4 al-Nisa’. A basic aim of this early Medinan legislation was to foster cohesion and mutual material support in the Muslim community, to aid orphans and the poor and to provide appropriately for women. Such social justice and material welfare was primarily to be achieved by the existing traditional kinship groups based on blood relationship, who were responsible for the well - being of their members."
Rank nonsense. Far from 'early Medinan legislation,' the traditional Muslim accounts correctly perceived that these ayas emerged *extremely late relative to the rest of the Qur'an*. Far from being directed at 'social reform,' this was theological argument regarding Mohammed's PROPHETIC STATUS which is exactly why the 33:40 verse is ENTIRELY ABOUT prophetic status -- "Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things." Shoemaker makes a mockery of these 'social reform' arguments in his book. To re-interpret these Surah 4 hijinks as a social justice reform is hilariously ridiculous, and illustrates the catastrophic failure of traditional Western scholarship to approach Islamic history in a critical and objective fashion.
Fortunately that has FINALLY changed, and the new generation of scholars is finally bringing critical discipline and integrity to Qur'anic studies, integrating it within the larger world of academic scholarship.
I really think that if you compare Madelung and Powers you will get a dramatic illustration of the gulf between (1) the uncritical traditional Orientalist scholars and (2) the modern critical scholars that have taken over the field during the last decade. Incidentally, Madelung is 84 years old. He is the embodiment of classic Orientalism.
Topic: Early Christianity and the Islamic Jesus