Altara, how are you
Fine thank you.
The Quranic authors and the audience had to have a deep knowledge of Christian stories in order to compose the text, but most important to understand it properly.
It is what (rightfully) Dye says in his paper about more the authors than the audience. In fact, he has many difficulties to speak about both. He is unable to describe, and identified them precisely. I am able to do it. I know (for me... and I shall not telling it here) who are the authors and the audience. Of course, to be able to do it, I set aside all the Mecca/Kaba frame. Whatever he thinks, Dye is obliged to follow it because it is risky (for his job, life) to do the contrary.
All academics are trapped. As I said he is obliged to separate the writing of the text because of the absence of Christianity in 'Mecca' as he considers (rightfully) that (some parts, not all) of the text address Christians. Therefore he put the writing in Palestine after the conquest.
So it is right that the text was written for Christianized Arabs.
Of course.
About the rest I see your point.
Good.
The qur'anic texts could be composed anywhere, if the sources to compose it are either available in the memory of the author(s) or if the author(s) could access material to get their inspiration.
(For me...) it is the second option.
What I wonder is why we have Christianized Arabs from north (Edessa) to south (Persian Gulf), and Dye ignores them pointing to Palestine. Surah Miriam? Kathisma?
Because he wants to follow the Muslim narrative (as he is more or less obliged to do so ) i.e, the line of the conquest: from Mecca/Kaba to Palestine. As we have much more data about Palestine before Islam, we suppose that it is not surely there that Islam has emerged. Thus Palestine cannot be suspected to be the place where Islam has emerged. Whereas Iraq where the data are less clear, allows us to think so. Dye wants/is obliged to follow the narrative.
The Kathisma stuff he developed serves his Palestinian narrative. Yet, it is (for me...),refutable: the Kathisma pilgrimage was very famous and brought many people from all the Orient. It was not stuck to Palestine place and people. Therefore the Quranic traditions (Q19) could have been written elsewhere than Palestine. So the link between 'Palestine' as such and the traditions developed in the Quran is not at all (for me...) granted.
All these places may have been the final intended audience of the text. As you pointed out it does not look like to be a coincidence that the texts appear in the hands of Arabs arriving from Iraq to Palestine
1/ That's correct.
2/ To my knowledge, I'm the only one to say this. It is a clear departure from the Mecca/Kaba traditional narrative.
I was recently working on one of your points
When we argue that the Quran has nothing to do with Mecca/Medina/Zam Zam/companions and that we must move out from west Arabia, then we are in areas with higher scribal presence.
That's correct.
Therefore a man called Muhammad, preaching Allah for 22 years would not have escaped the writings of Jews or Christians or others.
It seems plausible that he "would not have escaped the writings of Jews or Christians or others.".
I was wondering- How can we demonstrate that such an individual would not have escaped this? - And assuming the story of Islamic tradition is false, we may wonder if the Quran could originate by the hand of a simple preacher who did not operate for 22 years and did not wage any war nor any other peculiar action, but in a way more limited way. How do we know that a more simple situation could not actually escape from being put down into paper/rock or else
It is a rationale, logical deduction grounded with what we know of the Orient of Late Antiquity. The Biblical God speaking to someone and that event does not spread one way or another? It does not appears to me really plausible, considering the supposed 'Muslim' conquest as depicted by the Muslim narrative.
It can be easily demonstrated that Ibn Ishaq work is hagiography, but its core, a man preaching for a more limited time and without the exaggerated political and military role as depicted by Islamic sources may have existed.
Why not. Where preaching such an event, to be totally unknown by the sources? The event is so great (direct live with the God of Abraham) that it does not seems plausible to me, having a good knowledge of Late Antiquity.
Your point is clear that any of the supposed early witnesses of Muhammad is no more than Arabs reading the Quran who spoke of Muhammad to others who thought that he was real.
Indeed the line here in thin (for me)
When did you see Moses the last time? Jesus? Yet, they are names from books/texts repeated by others that you trust, pronounced every day during 2000 years. It is exactly the same thing. There has been a 'prophet', an Arab one, it is what people believe in the 7th c. because of Quranic texts, nothing else. Nobody saw him, ate with him, spoke with him, ride with him, etc. There is nothing. The sole 'connection' is to be the nephews of the 'prophet' wife (Zubayr family, rival of Abd al Malik) and saying holding the 'place of the Prophet' (Mecca/Kaba) that nobody knew before. Nobody. The inventor of Mecca/Kaba is Zubayr, the so called nephew of the wife. And all of this is drawn from the narrative allusions of the Quran: Makka/kaba/wife.
I hope my question is clear. I am trying to understand what was the capacity of writers/scribes etc.. of 550 to 650 to catch news of what was happening and put them on paper or onto any other document. (Paper I mean write them down...)
Their capacity is the one of their contemporaries scribes who wrote many books.
Of course if we can demonstrate that most of these preachers, no matter how relevant they were, more or less they were reported in chronicles, then we can argue that someone who composed the Quran and preached it must have been recorded somewhere, and if he was not, then he did not exist
Thanks
There is the work of Epiphanius of Salamis (d.403). He recorded many people. I add that there is no inscription of a 'prophet' speaking to God, etc., before Islam, there is nothing. I add again that nobody has preached the Quran publicly like the narrative says it. Re read the Quran, and search to what specific public he was destined.
Topic: Qur'anic studies today