Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

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


Gaza assault
by zeca
Today at 07:13 PM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
November 24, 2024, 06:05 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
November 22, 2024, 02:51 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
November 22, 2024, 06:45 AM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
November 21, 2024, 05:07 PM

New Britain
November 20, 2024, 05:41 PM

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
November 20, 2024, 09:02 AM

Marcion and the introduct...
by zeca
November 19, 2024, 11:36 PM

Dutch elections
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 10:11 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 08:46 PM

AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
November 07, 2024, 09:56 AM

The origins of Judaism
by zeca
November 02, 2024, 12:56 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 1494716 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 13 14 1516 17 ... 370 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #420 - July 23, 2015, 08:06 PM

    https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/world/2015/07/22/koran-fragments-found-britain-are-dated-birth-islam/PQQiQnYA5WwytSMIBDdiNN/story.html#

    "But Saud Al Sarhan, director of research at the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, said he doubted that the manuscript was as old as the researchers said, noting that its Arabic script included dots and separated chapters, features that were introduced later.

    He also said that dating the skin on which the text was written did not prove when it was written. Manuscript skins were sometimes washed and reused later for new writings, he said."



  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #421 - July 23, 2015, 08:16 PM

    https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/world/2015/07/22/koran-fragments-found-britain-are-dated-birth-islam/PQQiQnYA5WwytSMIBDdiNN/story.html#

    "But Saud Al Sarhan, director of research at the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, said he doubted that the manuscript was as old as the researchers said, noting that its Arabic script included dots and separated chapters, features that were introduced later.

    He also said that dating the skin on which the text was written did not prove when it was written. Manuscript skins were sometimes washed and reused later for new writings, he said."

    That fool is a  director of research  in Islamic Studies that too under the king saud  and he is nothing nothing to do with radiocarbon dating., Moreover Sand Land Sauds and their supporters have ulterior motives of proving that manuscript is NOT as Old as 7th century.   I have to agree with him that it is important to those who dated that skin,  they must also have to date the ink on top of the skin.   More important is  to find out whether it has same verses that we read in the present Quran or not..

    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 #422 - July 23, 2015, 08:27 PM

    That all said, to my mind the fatal problem with the carbon dating of this manuscript is that (as Zim says above) Q 18 in its present form clearly was composed after the 630s, due to its incorporation of the Syriac Legend of Alexander, so I think the carbon dating needs to be improved --- not rejected, improved. 


    Please explain this. I'm not too involved with Islamic history, but why couldn't have the Islamic version of the story inspired the Syriac legend (and not the other way around)? Also, just because the legend was composed in writing in approximately 630, it doesn't mean that the legend wasn't circulating around much before that (perhaps orally?), so an earlier version of the Qur'aan could still have been inspired by the legend, no? Again, I'm not an expert in Islamic history by no means, and have literally zero to little knowledge. However, I am interested in an explanation, thanks!
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #423 - July 23, 2015, 08:46 PM

    The explanation for the date comes from the fact that the Syriac legend is based on the Emperor Heraclius, who is likened to Alexander.  Here's the monumental article on the subject, which discusses the various alternative hypotheses.

    https://www.academia.edu/10863446/_The_prophecy_of_%E1%B8%8E%C5%AB-l-Qarnayn_Q_18_83-102_and_the_Origins_of_the_Qur%CA%BE%C4%81nic_Corpus_._Miscellanea_arabica_2013_2014_273-90
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #424 - July 23, 2015, 10:22 PM

    God revealed the Alexander story to Muhammad.

    Accept Islam now, before its too late.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #425 - July 23, 2015, 10:26 PM

    Repeat after me:

    لا اله الا جيمي هندركس ومحمد رسوله

    Welcome brothers and sisters.

    *hugs*
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #426 - July 23, 2015, 10:48 PM

    يا كافر! يا مرتد! اعترف بأن بوب مارلي رسول الله
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #427 - July 23, 2015, 10:52 PM

    ابدا

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #428 - July 23, 2015, 11:34 PM

    That fool is a  director of research  in Islamic Studies that too under the king saud  and he is nothing nothing to do with radiocarbon dating.,

    The Saudis have made a mess of Madinan and Meccan antiquity, yes. I have delivered one or two rants on that topic here before.

    But they have also sponsored expeditions around the deserts to note down Arabic and para-Arabic graffiti. And then they've published the findings even where the text is variant from the text of the received Qur'an. Uthman bin Wahran's texts of Q. 38:26 - the anti-Davidic verse - are particularly interesting (to me).

    Our Saudi here is casting doubt on the claims of Muhammad Isa Waley which really are "out there". I think Saud's making good points. It may well be because he expects some retractions, which will leave Waley looking like a, er, wally; and he doesn't want to be spattered. Whatever his motives I'm glad he's provided a wet blanket here.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #429 - July 23, 2015, 11:40 PM

    يا كافر! يا مرتد! اعترف بأن بوب مارلي رسول الله


    يا خائن من هو بوب مارلي الا المسيح الدجال
    النصر لاهل هندركس ورسوله محمد صلى جيمي عليه وسلم

    إطلب العلم ولو في الصين

    Es sitzt keine Krone so fest und so hoch,
    Der mutige Springer erreicht sie doch.

    I don't give a fuck about your war, or your President.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #430 - July 24, 2015, 12:48 AM

    رج
    إن أرسلنا بوب مارلي بآياتنا ليكون من المرسلين
    بلسان كاريبي مبين
    و إذ بكت امرأته فنهاها عن البكاء إنه كان من المحسنين
    و علمناه من لدنا أغاني كثيرة و أطلنا له شعره و كذلك نجزي الصالحين
    و أوحينا إليه أنما الحب حب واحد و أن ليس لكم من دون الحب دين
    و قالوا آمنا بما أنزل على جيمي هندركس إنه كان رسول رب العالمين
    و إذا قيل لهم آمنوا بما أنزل على مارلي قالوا لن نؤمن به أبدا بل اللذين كفروا بآياتنا لفي ضلال مبين
    قل كل من عند ربكم إن ربكم لرؤوف رحيم
    واستمعوا لما انزنا عليهما وانصطوا والله يحب المستمعين
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #431 - July 24, 2015, 12:51 AM

    sqoogily woogily poogily! What does that say julien and HM?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #432 - July 24, 2015, 11:53 AM

    sqoogily woogily poogily! What does that say julien and HM?

    hello Lilyesque  would you like to know what sqoogily woogily poogily says ??

     
    Quote from: sqoogily  says  link=topic=27568.msg829069#msg829069 date=1437690368
    Repeat after me:

    لا اله الا جيمي هندركس ومحمد رسوله

    Welcome brothers and sisters.

    *hugs*

    يا كافر! يا مرتد! اعترف بأن بوب مارلي رسول الله

    ابدا

    Quote from: poogily explains sqoogily's version  link=topic=27568.msg829083#msg829083 date=1437694823
    يا خائن من هو بوب مارلي الا المسيح الدجال
    النصر لاهل هندركس ورسوله محمد صلى جيمي عليه وسلم

    رج
    إن أرسلنا بوب مارلي بآياتنا ليكون من المرسلين
    بلسان كاريبي مبين
    و إذ بكت امرأته فنهاها عن البكاء إنه كان من المحسنين
    و علمناه من لدنا أغاني كثيرة و أطلنا له شعره و كذلك نجزي الصالحين
    و أوحينا إليه أنما الحب حب واحد و أن ليس لكم من دون الحب دين
    و قالوا آمنا بما أنزل على جيمي هندركس إنه كان رسول رب العالمين
    قل كل من عند ربكم إن ربكم لرؤوف رحيم
    واستمعوا لما انزنا إليهما وانصطوا والله يحب المستمعين


    That is all what these sqoogily woogily poogily doing......  Confusing Muslim folks who reading the forum about Allah hence about Islam.  It appears that is all what they are doing  through out their lives. I think Designer designed them  to do that job....

    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 #433 - July 24, 2015, 01:27 PM

    "و أوحينا إليه أنما الحب حب واحد و أن ليس لكم من دون الحب دين"


    LOVE THIS!
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #434 - July 24, 2015, 03:06 PM

    Me too. It reminds of the verse of ibn Arabi's poem:

    ادين بدين الحب

    Watch "لِقد صارَ قَلبي / هبة قوّاس" on YouTube
    https://youtu.be/N_yS0t_Y7CM
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #435 - July 24, 2015, 03:12 PM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Mb9MTE61e0

    "Just smile when you sleep
    Hold my hand and sleep"


    beautiful....... beautiful.........

    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 #436 - July 24, 2015, 03:37 PM

    well let us go back to the thread..  "Quranic Discussions" .. specially on those recently discovered manuscripts ...

    Quote


    So what is there in that recently discovered 1400 year old Quran??

    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 #437 - July 24, 2015, 05:17 PM

    ^ so according to the first video, the guy talks about how this finding comes at a "timely fashion" that "silences the outspoken critics worldwide" on the authencity of preservation of quran, it "testifies to the authencity of preservation", and indicates the "unprecedented certainty" of the preservation of the quran.

    is there any merit to what this guy said? That the discovery did all those things?

    "we stand firm calling to allah all the time,
    we let them know - bang! bang! - coz it's dawah time!"
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #438 - July 24, 2015, 05:23 PM

    This thread isn't the place for videos like that.  File under dawah not scholarship.

    Yeez, you listening?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #439 - July 24, 2015, 06:28 PM

    This thread isn't the place for videos like that.  File under dawah not scholarship.

    Yeez, you listening?

    yes I am listening David..,    Done David  done....  So what did we find in those 1400 year old manuscripts?  any thing new.. or same old stuff?

    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 #440 - July 24, 2015, 10:50 PM


    - This just in! carbon-dating is affected by climate-change. I suppose deniers / skeptics might laugh at this specific claim. But the subtext is, carbon-dating isn't trustworthy. It hasn't been trustworthy my whole life, beyond the general century.
    http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/07/22/3683293/now-carbon-dating-could-suffer-from-fossil-fuel-emissions/



     

    This has been know since the 60s and has been correct by tree-ring correlation. This is just repeating arguments against dating from decades ago. All of which failed to refuting the method as it is used now. Sorry but this is a quasi-creationist argument rehashed as if it was something new.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #441 - July 25, 2015, 10:55 AM

    Quote
    The origins of the Koran: From revelation to holy book

    By Behnam Sadeghi
    Stanford University

    What may be the world's oldest fragments of the Koran have been found by the University of Birmingham

    The Prophet Muhammad disseminated the Koran in a piecemeal and gradual manner from AD610 to 632, the year in which he passed away.

    The evidence indicates that he recited the text and scribes wrote down what they heard.

    Some of the Prophet's associates set out to collect into single volumes all the "suras" (chapters) that had been disseminated in this fashion.

    This endeavour yielded a number of versions of the scripture belonging to different "Companions" of the Prophet, versions which today we call "Companion codices".

    Shortly after the Prophet's death, different Companion codices became popular in different parts of the Muslim lands.

    For example, in Kufa, a new town in southern Iraq, the popular codex was that of the Companion Ibn Masud who had gone to live there.

    Standardization

    The Companion codices were highly similar. For example, the sequences of verses within the suras were the same, and so were most of the words within the verses.

    Nonetheless, some words and phrases were different.

    The differences reflected the partially oral transmission of the text, which is to say they are of the sort we expect to see when an oral text is written down.

    These differences sometimes affected the meaning, but they did not change the basic ideas of the Koran.

    For example, they did not affect the scripture's notions about the nature of God or change major religious obligations.

    Around AD650, the Caliph Uthman, who himself had been a close associate of the Prophet, had a committee establish an official version of the Koran based on the existing copies of the scripture and the knowledge of experts.

    It is reasonable to conjecture that he worried about textual diversity and wanted to promote textual uniformity.

    He sent this official version to different cities and people began copying it.

    This Uthmanic textual tradition dwarfed and ultimately replaced the traditions of Ibn Masud and other Companion codices everywhere in the Muslim world, thus fulfilling Uthman's aim of greater textual uniformity from place to place.

    Different readings

    Uthman's act of standardization succeeded in reducing textual variation, but did not eliminate it altogether. The text established by Uthman accommodated multiple readings.

    Because the script in which the early Korans were written lacked most of the vowels and marks that could distinguish several of the consonants, it was possible to read the text in different ways.

    To be sure, oral tradition placed a check on variation, disallowing many otherwise feasible readings.

    Nonetheless, numerous variant readings arose. Some of these affect the meaning, but none change the basic ideas of the Koran.

    For example, reciters disagreed over whether verse 57 in sura 6 says God "tells" the truth (yaqussu) or "judges" truthfully (yaqdi), two words that look similar in the Arabic script. But since both ideas are ubiquitous in the Koran, the overall message of the scripture is not affected by either reading.

    From the above, it is evident that Muslims have lived with a measure of diversity within an otherwise largely stable and uniform text since the beginnings of Islam.

    Muslim theologies have assimilated this historical reality in various ways.

    While opposing opinions have always existed and persist today, the predominant view has been that the different versions and readings of the Koran that are traceable to early Islam all enjoy God's endorsement.

    This idea was embodied in the early statement that God revealed the Koran in multiple forms, and it was fleshed out later by authors such as the 15th-Century scholar, Ibn al-Jazari.

    New insights

    For many centuries, there has been a rich and sophisticated tradition of Koranic scholarship. However, it is in the nature of knowledge to evolve.

    Early Koranic manuscripts present one of the resources that can add new insights and nuance to our knowledge of the text's history.

    Radiocarbon dating, thanks to technical advances in recent decades and the rigorous efforts of numerous scientists, has developed into an effective and accurate way of dating manuscripts, particularly when performed at the best labs, such as those in Oxford, Arizona, and Zurich.

    However, experimental error can creep into the work of the best scientists.

    One can control for error by testing more than one sample from a manuscript.

    Several tests on a Koranic manuscript called "Sanaa 1" (including a new test that Mohsen Goudarzi and I will publish soon) have dated it to the first half of the 7th Century.

    Researchers continue to test more and more manuscripts, many of them datable to the first century of Islam. All of this presents a pleasing prospect for Koranic scholarship.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33631745


    "we stand firm calling to allah all the time,
    we let them know - bang! bang! - coz it's dawah time!"
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #442 - July 25, 2015, 10:59 AM

    Quote
    New Light on the History of the Quranic Text?


    Joseph E. B. Lumbard Assistant professor of classical Islam, Brandeis University. General Editor for The Study Quran (HarperOne, 2015)

    The recent discovery of an early manuscript of the Quran has received extensive media attention, appearing on BBC, CNN and even above the fold on the front page of the New York Times. But in the broader context of recent scholarship on early manuscripts of the Quran, Birmingham M 1572 does not radically change the field. Combined with other manuscripts, however, it contributes to a growing body of evidence that the early Islamic sources, as Carl Ernst observes, "still provide a more compelling framework for understanding the Qurʾan than any alternative yet proposed."

    In recent years, the field of Quranic Studies in the West has been undergoing a paradigm shift brought about by the discovery and scholarly analysis of the earliest Quranic manuscripts. The most recent scientific analysis of the earliest available Quranic manuscripts conducted by Behnam Sadeghi of Stanford University demonstrates that much of what we know to be the Quran today can be dated to the year 670 AD, or earlier. For the earliest extant manuscript to have undergone extensive analysis, radiocarbon dating gives "a 68% probability of belonging to the period between AD 614 to AD 656. It has a 95% probability of belonging to the period between AD 578 and AD 669."

    Behnam Sadeghi has also revealed that these manuscripts have an earlier "under text," that is, the text that was erased from the parchment upon which the text of the earliest manuscripts is written. Given the cost and labor of producing parchment in early seventh century Arabia, when a new text was written, it was often more expedient and cost effective to wash the older texts from the parchment and begin anew. Because the ink employed in the seventh century was metal based, a residue remained that can now be read by subjecting the extant parchment to infrared photography. This is the "under text." For the Sana'a manuscripts, it reveals occasional variations in the ordering of the sūrahs (or chapters) of the Quran, and slight variations in reading that correspond to the variations that had been preserved in the extensive Islamic material detailing variant readings of the Quran. But all of these variations had already been and recorded in the Islamic historiographical tradition. In other words, analysis of the "under text" confirms the accuracy of early Islamic historiography.

    This changes the field of Quranic Studies because it provides empirical support for the accuracy of the traditional Islamic accounts that many western scholars have previously claimed to be anachronistic and unreliable, such as the existence of variant manuscripts of the Quran before the collation of the text in 650. Furthermore, statistical analysis of the variants within the earliest manuscripts suggests that the final version that came to be the accepted text of the Quran "is overall a better reproduction of the common source." Even minor textual variations that were reported by early Islamic scholars and transmitted in the Quranic commentary tradition find substantiation in the "under text" of the earliest manuscripts of the Quran.

    In addition, recent studies have demonstrated that the earliest Islamic literature on variant readings of the Quran is for the most part reliable and that the historicity of the received data is, as Michael Cook of Princeton University observes, "a testimony to the continuing accuracy of the transmission of the variants." Such findings correspond with the most recent anthropological studies that confirm the historical reliability of oral transmission traditions.

    These recent empirical findings are of fundamental importance. They establish that as regards the broad outlines of the history of the compilation and codification of the Quranic text, the classical Islamic sources are far more reliable than had hitherto been assumed. Such findings thus render the vast majority of Western revisionist theories regarding the historical origins of the Quran untenable.

    According to early Islamic sources, the Quran was revealed over a twenty-three-year period between AD 610-632, and the consonantal skeleton, or rasm, of the text that we have today was collated by AD 650. Efforts to determine alternative historical origins for the Quran have led to a plethora of incompatible and contradictory theories, ranging from the notion that much of the Quran developed as a proto Syro-Aramaic text before the period Muslim historiographers have established to the idea that it did not develop until the late eighth century or early ninth century. Most revisionist theories now place the development of the text some time in the eighth century under the Umayyad caliph ʿAbd al-Malik b. Marwān (685-705). While such hypotheses gave rise to extensive discussion, they often ignore much of the available historical data and are not based upon the earliest extant manuscripts of the Quran. As such, they have too often obscured rather than clarified the very questions they seek to answer.

    As the German scholar Harald Motzki writes in comparing classical Islamic accounts of the history of the Quranic text to source-critical analyses of the Quran promoted in Western scholarship,

    Muslim accounts are much earlier and thus much nearer in time to the time of the alleged events than hitherto assumed in Western scholarship. Admittedly, these accounts contain some details which seem to be implausible or, to put it more cautiously, await explanation, but the Western views which claim to replace them by more plausible and historically more reliable accounts are obviously far from what they make themselves out to be. (emphasis mine)Modern source-critical textual analysis attempts to answer the question, "Where did this text come from?" So too, the Islamic exegetical tradition has been obsessed with this question from its earliest days. As a result, the classical Islamic sources developed an extensive tradition of source-critical analysis that in its main contours has held up to scrutiny. As Montgomery Watt observes regarding the classical Muslim historical tradition, "In so far as it is consistent it gives a rough idea of the chronology of the Qurʾān; and any modern attempt to find a basis for dating must by and large be in agreement with the traditional views, even if in one or two points it contradicts them." In a similar vein, Neal Robinson maintains that early Islamic biographical literature provides a "plausible chronological framework for the revelations."

    Indeed, the question of how the text of the Quran came into being during the life of Muhammad and how it was recorded and codified after the death of Muhammad was discussed by Islamic scholars not only as a matter of faith, but also as a matter of historiography. Much of this material is preserved in the commentary tradition and in Islamic historiographical materials, but has too often been discarded in the academic study of the Quran in the West. In analyzing the arguments of scholars who challenge the account of the Islamic sources, Nicolai Sinai of Oxford University observes that epigraphic data and historical evidence "would allow us to take most of what the Islamic sources say at face value, and it is not clear why, in the absence of compelling evidence to the contrary, this should not be our default position."

    Ultimately, what we learn from this most recent manuscript discovery in Birmingham and the analysis of several previously discovered manuscripts is that the Islamic historiographical and exegetical traditions have provided honest and accurate information regarding the history of the Quranic text. Like all historical accounts it must be subject to analysis. But to benefit from them, Western academia must, as Nicholai Sinai observes, move beyond the "hermeneutics of suspicion that has become such an instinctive part of modern scholarly habits of reading," and cease to approach Islamic materials with a prejudice that often leads to choosing the most iconoclastic alternatives.

    If Western scholarship wishes to establish a viable empirical approach to the historicity and meaning of the Quranic text, it must first account for the vast literature on these topics in the classical Islamic tradition. Anything less is academically irresponsible. If modern scholarship does not fully engage the results of over one thousand years of critical historical and philological engagement with the Quranic text, then where should the scholarship begin? What foundations can it claim to have?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-e-b-lumbard/new-light-on-the-history-_b_7864930.html


    "we stand firm calling to allah all the time,
    we let them know - bang! bang! - coz it's dawah time!"
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #443 - July 25, 2015, 11:04 AM

    Would love to hear what you guys think of the two articles above, as they seem to support the traditionalist accounts of the history of the quran.

    "we stand firm calling to allah all the time,
    we let them know - bang! bang! - coz it's dawah time!"
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #444 - July 25, 2015, 11:15 AM



    Is it even possible to squeeze any more shit into one article?


    I guess it is.

    Hi
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #445 - July 25, 2015, 12:05 PM

    What reasons are there to produce standardised versions?  Might this be a consequence of theological assertions?  If you believe the last prophet has heard God's word, would you not go out of your way to create an authorised versions?

    When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.


    A.A. Milne,

    "We cannot slaughter each other out of the human impasse"
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #446 - July 25, 2015, 02:04 PM

    Would love to hear what you guys think of the two articles above, as they seem to support the traditionalist accounts of the history of the quran.


    They are sort of an assembly of statements by the most conservative school of modern scholars -- Sinai, Sadeghi, Motzki.  However all three are first-rank scholars, so their opinions hold considerable weight.  And I do have to say, I have long had serious reservations about the 'long composition process' school.  One of my biggest reasons for this is that the Qur'an, to my mind, looks nothing like what one would expect to be *intentionally* written to be consistent with the traditional Islamic story about Muhammad and Islamic origins.  So I don't see how it can have been cribbed together to further that purpose until the very last layers (the four uses of the name Muhammad, the one mention of the name Makkah).  It looks spectacularly archaic to me except for a layer of relatively late interpolations that made it fit "Islam" better.

    That said, they are cherry picking their data pretty hard.  For example, Sadeghi has made a determined effort (that article credits the discovery of the 'under-text' of the Sanaa palimpsest to him, which is ridiculous btw, it was discovered long before him) to argue that the Sanaa I palimpsest was a 'companion codex' and that this proves the reality of the traditional account of companion codices.  This is sort of true and sort of not.  The palimpsest does not fit any of the companion codices reported by Islamic tradition.  It has far more variants, and does not match any particular report of an particular codex.  Some of those variants were reported as being in one or the other companion codex, so this does show that Islamic tradition was reporting SOME of the variant codices.  But some of these variant Qur'ans would have lingered in collections for centuries anyways under any account, so it's not surprising -- centuries later we have firsthand reports of them.  Also, the report that Uthman collated the Qur'an to standardize recitation makes no sense given that the script wasn't, at that time, detailed enough to accomplish that purpose.  So there is little indication that Islamic tradition understood where these variant codices came from, what they represent, and what/why Uthman would have put a stop to them.  And that would have been the easiest part to get right, because Islamic tradition at least had some of the physical documents to work off ... not just oral tradition and stories.

    It's certainly possible that Islamic tradition correctly remembered Uthman as assembling the final rasm of the standard Qur'anic text.  But it didn't remember how the predecessor texts had developed, it had a poor understanding of where variant Qur'ans came from and what they consisted of, and it incorrectly reported why Uthman compiled the final rasm.  Also, if the date ranges are correct, this manuscript is basically full-on Uthmanic and yet precedes Uthman (!)

    The other thing is that the carbon date ranges are much earlier than Islamic tradition generally contends, often predating Muhammad.  This is studiously ignored by the pro-tradition crowd!  The dates are accepted when helpful, and ignored when they make the entire Qur'anic origins story look completely incoherent.  This is not a genuinely critical attitude.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #447 - July 25, 2015, 02:32 PM

    Zaotar has there ever been islamic stuffs that was carbon dated earlier than Mo himself?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #448 - July 25, 2015, 02:40 PM

    Yes, the Sanaa I palimpsest itself has been dated significantly before Mo's birth, with several sets of wildly conflicting dates.  The very early date ranges have been dismissed by conservative scholars (such as Sadeghi) as 'laboratory error' because they make a mockery of traditional Islamic origin narratives, but we can't just keep the results we like and dismiss those we don't.  It may well be that the origins of the Qur'an are much earlier and very different than anybody has thought to date.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #449 - July 25, 2015, 03:43 PM

    I read in Tom Holland tweet he admitted that it was a mistake (Sanaa manuscript that predates Mo).


    https://mobile.twitter.com/holland_tom/status/623750830450180096


    Any credible source? Wikipedia is useless =(
  • Previous page 1 ... 13 14 1516 17 ... 370 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »