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

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
November 30, 2024, 01:32 PM
Lights on the way
by akay
November 30, 2024, 09:01 AM
Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
November 30, 2024, 08:53 AM
New Britain
November 29, 2024, 08:17 AM
Gaza assault
by zeca
November 27, 2024, 07:13 PM
What music are you listen...
by zeca
November 24, 2024, 06:05 PM
Do humans have needed kno...
November 22, 2024, 06:45 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 1503305 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 86 87 8889 90 ... 370 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2610 - July 29, 2018, 03:30 PM
    Quote
    Yes. So Moka is not Mecca. End of story.


    Why not? Maybe Moka was the "sacred town" of the pre-islamic Arabs and the first muslims? The place they directed their first Qiblas to? And contemporary Mecca is the second Mecca, a more convenient location for the later rulers.

    This is of course too simple, the imminent scholars would have thought of that. Marc, you say Crone did associate Moka with Mecca? Do you have a text extract?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2611 - July 29, 2018, 03:30 PM
    Quote from: Altara on July 29, 2018, 03:26 PM
    ....... English.......
    ........ English ........

    Rascals copy/pasted French language and they ruined French as well as France.
    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 #2612 - July 29, 2018, 03:34 PM
    Who are these rascals that stole the French language?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2613 - July 29, 2018, 03:42 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on July 29, 2018, 03:28 PM
    Bakka is not Makka.

    Damn. Gotta try my best then haha. And I see you are talking jabs at English haha.

    How is Moka not Mecca, dear Altara?


    1/ Nope. Bakka seems in the Psalm as someone has said.
    2/ https://www.etymonline.com/
    3/ Read Hagarism.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2614 - July 29, 2018, 03:56 PM
    Exactly! Bakka is mentioned in the Book of Psalms (84:6–7). Bakka is a Palestinian valley of tears.

    Yeah. Crone demonstrated that Macoraba is not Mecca, but she thought that Moka - another location mentioned by Ptolemy which he located in Arabia Petraea - might be Mecca, since Moka is the Græcification of the word Makka. See Meccan Trade.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2615 - July 29, 2018, 04:08 PM
    Quote
    This is of course too simple, the imminent scholars would have thought of that. Marc, you say Crone did associate Moka with Mecca? Do you have a text extract?


    Crone wrote:

    Quote
    From the point of view of the rise of Islam, the problem may be restated as follows: We seem to have all the ingredients for Muḥammad’s career in northwest Arabia. Qurashī trade sounds perfectly viable, indeed more intelligible, without its south Arabian and Ethiopian extensions, and there is a case for a Qurashī trading centre, or at least diaspora, in the north. One might locate it in Ptolemy’s Moka. Somewhere in the north, too, there was a desert sanctuary of pan-Arabian importance, according to Nonnosus. Mecca originated as a desert sanctuary, according to Kalbī; it still sounds like one in the accounts of Muʿāwiya’s building activities there; and the sanctuary Muʿāwiya turned into “towns and palaces” must have been located somewhere in the north. Jewish communities are well attested for northwest Arabia. Even Abrahamic monotheism is documented there, and the prophet who was to make a new religion of this belief was himself a trader in northwest Arabia.


    Crone, Meccan Trade, pp.196-198

    She also wrote:

    Quote
    Jacob of Edessa knew of the Kaʿba toward which the Muslims prayed, locating it in a place considerably closer to Ptolemy’s Moka than to modern Mecca or, in other words, too far north for orthodox accounts of the rise of Islam…”


    Crone, Meccan Trade, p.136


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2616 - July 29, 2018, 05:38 PM
    Thank you Magraye for posting the text extracts!

    Very helpful for having a fruitful discussion. I must say it sounds very convincing. More and more of the Quranic geography is located in the North (eg rqm of the seven sleepers seems to be Petra, Jallad associates Ad in the North, there is a Ptolomaic Moka...).

    The only argument remaining for Hijaz is the linguistic dialectical missing link Van Putten and Jallad speak about for the Quranic Arabic. Since they didnt find it in the north, they assume they will find it in the Hijaz. An argument from the category "evidence of absence is hope of evidence" Huh? Huh?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2617 - July 29, 2018, 05:45 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on July 29, 2018, 03:34 PM
    Who are these rascals that stole the French language?


    The French are at the origin of England, they invaded it in 1066 : Normans, Picard, Breton, Poitevin, Angevins, Tourangeaux, etc. England spoke French until 1400.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2618 - July 29, 2018, 05:47 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on July 29, 2018, 03:56 PM
    Exactly! Bakka is mentioned in the Book of Psalms (84:6–7). Bakka is a Palestinian valley of tears.

    Yeah. Crone demonstrated that Macoraba is not Mecca, but she thought that Moka - another location mentioned by Ptolemy which he located in Arabia Petraea - might be Mecca, since Moka is the Græcification of the word Makka. See Meccan Trade.


    You have (without doubt) remarked that Mecca today in not in Arabia Petraea... So "Moka" is not the "Mecca" of Ibn Ishaq.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2619 - July 29, 2018, 05:56 PM
    Altara,

    It is only logical that finding "the real Mecca"will solidify the argument against the current Mecca, no?

    We know direction of prayer is important from very early on. There must have been something giving this practice some fuel. An ancient Arab/ Nabatean sanctuary would make sense. Otherwise there is no explication for the early wide spread popularity of a Qibla.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2620 - July 29, 2018, 07:04 PM
    1/ The problem is that "we" find nothing. Moka is not the Mecca of Ibn Ishaq in the "Hijaz".
    2/ The fuel is the Quranic texts, thus Arabs have to find a direction of prayer : as they think that the Quran come from a prophet who has lived in a city with a "kaba" they have to find the city in question. That can explain  what Gibson has remarked, namely that in the beginning it was not Mecca in the Hijaz which was the direction.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2621 - July 29, 2018, 07:33 PM
    Altara,

    "the fuel is the Quranic text": I don't buy that. How widely can the Quran have been spread the first century of Islam? It was so much read that a lot of the meanings got lost... No verbatim quotation outside of the Quran is found before 690, Dome of the Rock.

    Big holy books are usually not the fuel for religious devotion but rather short religious slogans.eg God is great? Another example is circumcision, not in the Quran, but an early Islamic practice. What fueled it? Certainly not the absence of the practice in the Quranic text, but probably a pre islamic Arabian custom.

    That is why I thing that this Qibla direction obsession (wherever it points to) must be found in the pre-islamic customs.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2622 - July 29, 2018, 08:43 PM
    Quote from: Altara on July 29, 2018, 05:47 PM
    You have (without doubt) remarked that Mecca today in not in Arabia Petraea... So "Moka" is not the "Mecca" of Ibn Ishaq.


    Well nothing proves that the Mecca of Ibn Ishaq is today's Mecca. And anyway, the Quran doesn't refer to Mecca at all.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2623 - July 29, 2018, 08:46 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on July 29, 2018, 04:08 PM
    She also wrote:
    Quote
    Jacob of Edessa knew of the Kaʿba toward which the Muslims prayed, locating it in a place considerably closer to Ptolemy’s Moka than to modern Mecca or, in other words, too far north for orthodox accounts of the rise of Islam…”
    Crone, Meccan Trade, p.136


    We cannot know from Jacob of Edessa 's writings where that kaaba was located exactly but we know for sure it was not in current Saudi Arabia. It also remains to be proved that, at the time, there was a mecca where that kaaba was. We can doubt this.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2624 - July 29, 2018, 08:59 PM
    Yes, Altara. You are correct. But these reference - assuming we have understood them correctly - indicate that there was a Mecca (albeit in a different place). Thus, the Mecca in Western Arabia is a secondary development.

    Mark S - Not sure what you mean. Ibn Ishaq's Mecca is today Mecca. Not a single person disputes that.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2625 - July 29, 2018, 09:03 PM
    Quote
    "the fuel is the Quranic text": I don't buy that. How widely can the Quran have been spread the first century of Islam? It was so much read that a lot of the meanings got lost... No verbatim quotation outside of the Quran is found before 690, Dome of the Rock. Big holy books are usually not the fuel for religious devotion but rather short religious slogans.


    1/Spread to those who are in charge, the chiefs, the leaders, and their literati. The others obey.
    2/ It seems that the issue of direction of prayer is remarkable in the text.
    3/It means that they have it and they read it heavily before the Dome to make such a theological debate against the Christians as attests the inscription.
    4/ We have no evidence of codex before Abd al Malik (d.705) A codex is text reunited. Quranic texts as no codex, were read before ; the first mosque build in 637 in Jerusalem attests I think of a lecture drawn from the Quran about the building of the House with Ishmael and Abraham. We have the Basmala in the PERF 558 in 643 as well. No codex but read and taught.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2626 - July 29, 2018, 09:08 PM
    There was Codes prior to Abd al-Malik, dear Altara. This is not in dispute.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2627 - July 29, 2018, 09:24 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on July 29, 2018, 08:59 PM
    Yes, Altara. You are correct. But these reference - assuming we have understood them correctly - indicate that there was a Mecca (albeit in a different place). Thus, the Mecca in Western Arabia is a secondary development.


    The Mecca at a different place is easily comprehensible.It comes from non Muslim sources which try with their owns geography  to translate what they heard of  different muhajirun. One place it to Kirman, the other Pharan, the other elsewhere, the other "Arabia". That is the landscape of what one can see. Because "Mecca" is not yet placed in the "Hijaz" by the Arabs. In fact, all what we see is that there is no "Mecca" when the Arabs take over the land and that it is a creation drawn from the Quranic texts which is later placed in the "Hijaz", bona fide. Theses Arabs never come from "Mecca"/Medina/Zem Zem Kaba, when they take over the land.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2628 - July 29, 2018, 09:25 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on July 29, 2018, 09:08 PM
    There was Codes prior to Abd al-Malik, dear Altara. This is not in dispute.


    Not for me, dear Mahgraye.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2629 - July 29, 2018, 09:30 PM
    What is a Codex?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2630 - July 29, 2018, 09:50 PM
    It is folios reunited.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2631 - July 29, 2018, 09:56 PM
    Yeah. Exactly. We have a Codex prior to Abd al-Malik: Codex Parisino-petropolitanus.

    See: François Déroche, La transmission écrite du Coran dans les débuts de l'islam: Le codex Parisino-petropolitanus (Leiden: Brill, 2009).

    CPP is securely dated to the third quarter of the 1st/7th century CE—that is, between 671 and 695 CE.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2632 - July 29, 2018, 10:04 PM
    Quote
    CPP is securely dated to the third quarter of the 1st/7th century CE—that is, between 671 and 695 CE.


    CPP (for me) is not before Abd al-Malik reign. 685-705. It's him who make the codex ; before there was (for me) texts which circulated but not in the form of codex.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2633 - July 29, 2018, 10:47 PM
    Thread: https://mobile.twitter.com/shahanSean/status/1023664516113068033
    Quote
    A common question in the historiography of early Islam: How early did the communities of the 7th-century Near East perceive Arabian conquerors as possessing their own faith community with distinct laws and beliefs? 
    Here’s insights from John bar Penkāyē (ܝܘܚܢܢ ܒܪ ܦܢܟ̈ܝܐ) ...


    Also: https://mobile.twitter.com/shahanSean/status/1023664527303475201
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2634 - July 29, 2018, 10:57 PM
    Codex: I think with all the C14 dating going on, assuming that the canon existed by 650 is rather conservative.

    The spread of the empire was so fast, it is not realistic that Quran and institutions to study it could have followed that pace. Remember, there was no printing press. I think it is much more realistic that indeed the book existed (someone hired a scribe to develop something monotheistic, based on descendence of Abraham), but the spread of the ideology was via short points of belief: 1 God, promised land by God, respect monastaries (now and then), enslave the conquered... More was not needed to rally the troops.

    Only later under the reign of Abu Malik, when the empire was more settled, more finesse in the religion was appropriate. Emphasis on the anti Christian aspect was necessary for differentiation and Jizya...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2635 - July 30, 2018, 01:09 AM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on July 29, 2018, 08:59 PM
    Mark S - Not sure what you mean. Ibn Ishaq's Mecca is today Mecca. Not a single person disputes that.


    The Mecca described in Ibn Ishaq Sira, and in other muslim writings, doesn't look like today's Mecca. Dan Gibson shows this quite well in his book Quranic Geography.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2636 - July 30, 2018, 02:10 AM
    I am aware of the topographical arguments for an extra-Arabia provenance for the Quran. But to claim the Muslims were not agreement about Mecca's location by that time Ibn Ishaq was writing is absurd. Prior to Ibn Ishaq, did writer such as Malik b. Anas going for pilgrimage somewhere in Northwestern Arabia? Of course not.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2637 - July 30, 2018, 02:17 AM
    And I would take Dan Gibson's claims - some of them at least - with a grain of salt. Examples of such are abound. 
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2638 - July 30, 2018, 02:27 AM
    Gibson: agree, we have to be very critical. Has anyone checked the Qiblas he mentions in his Early Mosque table? I think these measurements are elements that can constitute hard evidence. His other assertions are his opinion against someone elses...

    http://www.academia.edu/35664511/ACCESS_TO_DATA
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2639 - July 30, 2018, 02:39 AM
    His arguments concerning the Qibla's has been subjected to criticism by King and Deus. Both make legitimate points, that, if true, would demolish Gibson's claims about the early Mosques.
  • Previous page 1 ... 86 87 8889 90 ... 370 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »