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

New Britain
Today at 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
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
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 1498021 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 150 151 152153 154 ... 370 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4530 - October 04, 2018, 07:25 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on October 04, 2018, 06:39 PM
    I will abstain from entering another pointless back-and-forth.

      oops  .. you are absolutely right  Mahgraye .. in fact  me writing  IN TO THIS FOLDER is wasting  your time  and readers time.. So No more posting from me in folders  like these where Scholars are exchanging exciting  ideas on early Islam , Islamic origins and  Origins of Quran..

    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 #4531 - October 04, 2018, 07:53 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on October 04, 2018, 10:38 AM
    Marc S - where was he killed then, Ibn al-Zubayr, that is? And did he not rebel against the Umayyads?


    "A coin dated 692 that bore al-Malik’s name was made of the same stamp series but said “partisan of the Caliph” and bore also the imprint “Muhammad, Apostle of God.” Al-Malik had been used on a coin dated 685 once before in connection with the prophet Muhammad. There, he was branded “governor” of his (future) enemy az-Zubair.  The version purporting that al-Malik was a Ghassanid Saracen caliph from 685 to 705 seems misleading. The coins suggest that al-Malik had to submit to the Quraysh caliph and that he may have been a usurper."

    A. J. Deus. The Great Leap-Fraud:Social Economics of Religious Terrorism, Volume II: Islam and Secularization (p. 241).
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4532 - October 04, 2018, 07:54 PM
    That Abd al-Malik was the actual usurper is what the Muslim traditions also claims. Seems to me to be semantics.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4533 - October 04, 2018, 07:55 PM
    And that he was killed in Mecca is supported by near-contemporary sources.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4534 - October 04, 2018, 07:59 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on October 04, 2018, 05:58 PM
    But we do know. People exaggerate on this point, claiming that Ibn Ishaq (the contents, not the physical book) is lost and that we do not know what Ibn Hisham altered.


    How do you know that they exagerate ? You don't. We only know what the approved edited version let us know.

    "Ibn Hisham admits in the preface that he omitted matters from Ibn Ishaq's biography that "would distress certain people"

    Apart from the Satanic verses and Muhammad attempted suicide when Gabriel stopped the revelation at the beginning, what else do we know of that original text alteration that would distress certain people ?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4535 - October 04, 2018, 08:03 PM
    This is getting to be an intellectual trio btw Marc, Maggraye, Altara...

    It would be nice that you guys expand a bit your arguments so the rest of us can follow (unless you dont want "the rest" to follow..)

    Question:
    Quote
    So they departed, taking the road through the desert to Tachkastan


    Are there any suggestions where Tachkastan is?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4536 - October 04, 2018, 08:12 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on October 04, 2018, 07:55 PM
    And that he was killed in Mecca is supported by near-contemporary sources.


    Yes in the Chronicle of 741 " in the desert between Ur, the city of the Chaldeans, and Carras the city of Mesopotamia’ (Carrhae or Harrān in the upper Jazīra). This is not Mecca in Saudi Arabia.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4537 - October 04, 2018, 08:16 PM
    Quote from: mundi on October 04, 2018, 08:03 PM
    Question:
    Are there any suggestions where Tachkastan is?


     In 428, the Armenian Arshakuni monarchy was abolished and Nakhchivan was annexed by Sassanid Persia. In 623, possession of the region passed to the Byzantine Empire but was soon left to its own rule. Sebeos referred to the area as Tachkastan. Nakhchivan is said by his pupil, Koriun Vardapet, to be the place where the Armenian scholar and theologian Mesrob Mashtots finished the creation of the Armenian Alphabet and opened the first Armenian schools. It happened in the province of Gokhtan, which corresponds to Nakhchivan's modern Ordubad district.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakhchivan_Autonomous_Republic
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4538 - October 04, 2018, 08:20 PM
    Quote
    Yes in the Chronicle of 741 "in the desert between Ur, the city in the desert between Ur, the city of the Chaldeans, and Carras the city of Mesopotamia’ (Carrhae or Harrān in the upper Jazīra). This is not Mecca in Saudi Arabia.


    Yes. That the Byzantine-Arab Chronicle of 741 erroneously locates Mecca in Sâmarrâ is irrelevant. What concerns us is that the Chronicle places Ibn al-Zubayr's death in the city of Mecca. It is thus reasonable to presume that he did actually die in Mecca.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4539 - October 04, 2018, 08:33 PM
    Quote from: Altara on October 04, 2018, 06:47 PM
    Of course. Sebeos is a Christian. He tries to understand what happened and give, with some Arabic informations, (merchant, etc) is own explication of what happened.

    Sebeos try to understand what happened with the Arabs. He states his own theory.


    I can only say that this text bothers you as much as myself because we think Muhammad never existed.

    The only personal touch of Sebeos in his text is when he says " Then all of them assembled together, from Havilah to Shur, which is opposite Egypt [The text is corrupt here. The citation is from Genesis 25.18 {Shur is the area inhabited by Ishmaelites immediately to the east of the Nile Delta bordering Sinai}, and they set out from the P’arhan desert {the Paran desert is the desert area stretching from Wadi Feiran (“Paran”) at the foot of Mount Serbal in western Sinai to Petra between the Dead Sea and the Gulf of Akaba in the east} [being] twelve tribes [moving] in the order [of precedence] of the Houses of the patriarchs of their tribe. They were divided into 12,000 men, of which the sons of Israel were in their own tribes, 1,000 to a tribe, to lead them to the country of Israel. They traveled army by army in the order [of precedence] of each patriarchy: Nebaioth, Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, Mishma, Dumah, Massa, Hadad, Tema, Jetur, Naphish and Kedemah [Genesis 25. 13-16]. These are the peoples of Ishmael.

    He obviously here try and tie up the arabs rise with biblical story of Ishmael.


    Quote
    Reread the Quran. There is a covenant between one "Jewish" representative and one person which is an "Arab" one united in a common project.


    Ishmael and Abraham building the house ?

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4540 - October 04, 2018, 08:39 PM
    Quote
    I can only say that this text bothers you as much as myself because we think Muhammad never existed.

     

    Am I right in assuming that you think Sebeos is somewhat an obstacle to the non-existence of prophet theory?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4541 - October 04, 2018, 08:39 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on October 04, 2018, 08:20 PM
    Yes. That the Byzantine-Arab Chronicle of 741 erroneously locates Mecca in Sâmarrâ is irrelevant. What concerns us is that the Chronicle places Ibn al-Zubayr's death in the city of Mecca. It is thus reasonable to presume that he did actually die in Mecca.


    I have a different view on this. I used to think Mecca was originally somewhere else than in its present location but I was wrong.

    I think this chronicle relies on muslim tradition to discuss Ibn al-Zubayr's death. We know that in the muslim tradition that Ibn al-Zubayr claimed to have discovered the house of Abraham. My take is that the author of this Chronicle uses Bible background to deduct that Mecca is between Harran and Ur rather than receiving the information about it.

    In summary, I think this source is already corrupted by muslim tradition and therefore doesn't have any value but just adds confusion.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4542 - October 04, 2018, 08:41 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on October 04, 2018, 08:39 PM


    Am I right in assuming that you think Sebeos is somewhat an obstacle to the non-existence of prophet theory?


    Yes
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4543 - October 04, 2018, 08:44 PM
    Quote
    My take is that the author of this Chronicle uses Bible background to deduct that Mecca is between Harran and Ur.


    Exactly! This is why I said that the location is irrelevant.

    Quote
    We know that in the Muslim tradition that Ibn al-Zubayr claimed to have discovered the house of Abraham.


    Discovered? My understanding is that he only took refuge in the city (or established it. Gallez, relying on Gibson, thinks so). Non-Muslim sources indicate that this might be accurate. For me, it seems that Mecca, as it is today, was established by Ibn al-Zubayr.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4544 - October 04, 2018, 08:47 PM
    Quote
    Yes.


    Certainly not the only one. You have also the relatively early chronicle of John Bar Penkaye, often mentioned together with that of Sebeos.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4545 - October 04, 2018, 09:25 PM
    Dear Marc S - Let us assume that scholars managed to convincingly date an corpus of traditions back to the early ‘historian’ ʿUrwa b. al-Zubayr (d. 94/712–13). Said traditions include: the first revelation, the slander about ʿĀʾishah, Muḥammad’s arrival in Medina after the hijra, and the treaty of al-Ḥudaybiya. If we assume that the dating is indeed accurate (there are good reasons to presume so), then it also reasonable, in my opinion, to trust some of the biographical facts about ʿUrwa himself. For instance, he said to have been the son of a cousin of Muḥammad and one of the earliest ‘beleivers’ and a nephew of Muḥammad’s wife, ʿĀʾishah. This means that ʿUrwa was in contact with actual eyewitnesses of the events of Muḥammad’s life. This would also entail that there is only a gap of 30 years between ʿUrwa and the events reported on. Granting for the sake of argument that everything here is true, what does that tell you, dear Marc S? The gap is supposedly only 30 year.


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4546 - October 04, 2018, 09:28 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on October 04, 2018, 08:44 PM
    Exactly! This is why I said that the location is irrelevant.

    Discovered? My understanding is that he only took refuge in the city (or established it. Gallez, relying on Gibson, thinks so). Non-Muslim sources indicate that this might be accurate. For me, it seems that Mecca, as it is today, was established by Ibn al-Zubayr.


    To be more precise, he claimed to have discovered the original foundations on which Abraham built the kaaba.

    But we know, from Jacob of Edessa's testimony, that the kaaba was not in today's Mecca so, like I said, the 741 Chronicle is already corrupted by muslim sources.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4547 - October 04, 2018, 09:34 PM
    As for Jacob of Edessa, there are different ways of interpreting his account, one being, as you said, that Mecca, or more precisely, the Kaʿbah, was somewhere further north; and the other one is in line with the standard Muslim account of things.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4548 - October 04, 2018, 09:41 PM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on October 04, 2018, 09:25 PM
    Dear Marc S - Let us assume that scholars managed to convincingly date an corpus of traditions back to the early ‘historian’ ʿUrwa b. al-Zubayr (d. 94/712–13).


    Unfortunately this won't happen I can already tell you. Do you have any link to a paper reviewing this ?
    This is not the first claim to early ahadith collection.


    Quote
    Muḥammad’s arrival in Medina after the hijra,


    The Hijra date deserves a whole discussion on its own. This is my next focus. Can anyone suggest some papers/books about it from a non believer of course  Wink

    Quote
    Granting for the sake of argument that everything here is true, what does that tell you, dear Marc S? The gap is supposedly only 30 year.


    Too many if for my non believer mindset
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4549 - October 04, 2018, 09:51 PM
    For ʿUrwa b. al-Zubayr, see Andreas Görke (2000) ‘The historical tradition about : A study of b. al-Zubayr’s account’, in Motzki (2000: 240–75); Görke and Gregor Schoeler, (2005) ‘Reconstructing the earliest sira texts: The Hiğra in the corpus of b. al-Zubayr’, Der Islam, 82: 209–20; Schoeler, (2002b) ‘Character and authenticity of the Muslim tradition on the life of ’, Arabica, 48: 360–6; Schoeler, (2003) ‘Foundations for a new biography of : The production and evaluation of the corpus of traditions according to b. al-Zubayr’, in Berg (2003a: 21–8); Gregor Schoeler, The Biography of Muḥammad: Nature and Authenticity, James E. Montgomery (ed.) & Uwe Vagelpohl (trans.), London, 2011 (complete monograph).
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4550 - October 04, 2018, 09:52 PM
    Quote
    This is not the first claim to early ahadith collection.


    This is not an argument for an early hadith collection.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4551 - October 04, 2018, 09:55 PM
    Quote
    Too many if for my non-believer mindset.


    But assuming it is true, does that not increase the probability that Muhammad existed? If an Chronicle from the 660s do, surely traditions only 30 years apart from the event must do the same if not more. This is hardly something a non-believer like yourself can't accept. Besides, I am only talking about probabilities and not certainties.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4552 - October 05, 2018, 07:07 AM
    Quote from: Marc S on October 04, 2018, 07:53 PM
    "A coin dated 692 that bore al-Malik’s name was made of the same stamp series but said “partisan of the Caliph” and bore also the imprint “Muhammad, Apostle of God.”

    Never seen this coin, source?
    Quote
    Al-Malik had been used on a coin dated 685 once before in connection with the prophet Muhammad. There, he was branded “governor” of his (future) enemy az-Zubair.

    Never seen this coin, source?
     
    Quote
    The version purporting that al-Malik was a Ghassanid Saracen caliph from 685 to 705 seems misleading. The coins suggest that al-Malik had to submit to the Quraysh caliph and that he may have been a usurper."

    What coins?

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4553 - October 05, 2018, 08:19 AM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on October 04, 2018, 07:54 PM
    That Abd al-Malik was the actual usurper is what the Muslim traditions also claims. Seems to me to be semantics.


    "Usurper" of what? There's nothing to "usurp" apart the power in Iraq hold  by the Syrians of Damascus. What else? Muawiya has usurped what? When, exactly, the supposed "caliph" Ali, supposed chief of the Arabs from Damascus to Al Hira has been travelling to Syria, Egypt, etc to visit his great Empire whose he is the supposed chief? Never.  And the supposed "caliph" Utman when did he do  the same? Never. These guys were "caliph" of nothing. Ali  like Utman was the chief of Iraq and that's all, struggling to prevent that the Syrians control Iraq. And he lose.The 9th c. narratives clothed this period with words and a context that did not exist (Mecca/Medina/Kaba) for the people involved.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4554 - October 05, 2018, 10:27 AM
    Quote from: Altara on October 05, 2018, 07:07 AM
    Never seen this coin, source?Never seen this coin, source?


    Album/Goodwin, Sylloge of Islamic Coins in the Ashmolean 2002 p 22. Year 66 is Walker Sch. 5 (p 97) for year 67, see Spink Zurich, 17 March 1987, lot 376

    Quote
    What coins?


    The coins mentionned above.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4555 - October 05, 2018, 10:35 AM
    Quote from: Marc S on October 04, 2018, 08:33 PM
    I can only say that this text bothers you as much as myself because we think Muhammad never existed.


    It is not bothers me anymore as I always knew that its datation is problematic. In addition to that , if it was not the sole text recounting approximatively  the same thing, it would have been just another text writing the same story. But it is not (at all) the case. None text of the 7th (and there are a number of them) recounts one way or another the core story (merchant+Jews, etc) of what Sebeos recounts. None. Therefore, I set it aside as an interesting text (of course) but written at a later time (end of the 8 beginning of the 9th) and not a testimony of what was known in the 7th c as a mainstream story.

    Quote
    The only personal touch of Sebeos in his text is when he


    gives his own understanding of what happened. Who are these guys? Where do they come from? From where come this cult? What the Arabs say about it? Is it possible that they are responsible of it? If not, who is?  That are the question he attempts to respond, in giving what he thinks because he is a literati.  He tries to understand and write his own theory about it like any scholar of today.

    Quote
    He obviously here try and tie up the arabs rise with biblical story of Ishmael.


    Nope, that the Arabs are tied to Ishmael it a topos, a common view of all the literati of the time since ages. The Arabs are viewed by all the literati   as the descendants of Ishmael : academia is your friend about this specific topic.

    Quote
    Ishmael and Abraham building the house ?


    You see you knew it.


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4556 - October 05, 2018, 10:38 AM
    Quote from: Altara on October 05, 2018, 08:19 AM
    "Usurper" of what?


    Of the power held by Ibn Al Zubayr.



  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4557 - October 05, 2018, 10:40 AM
    Quote from: Marc S on October 05, 2018, 10:27 AM
    Album/Goodwin, Sylloge of Islamic Coins in the Ashmolean 2002 p 22. Year 66 is Walker Sch. 5 (p 97) for year 67, see Spink Zurich, 17 March 1987, lot 376

    The coins mentionned above.




    It seems important to see both. Can you link image/article?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4558 - October 05, 2018, 10:48 AM
    Unfortunately I don't have it. AJ Deus quotes it in his book and I haven't been able to find that book for free on the internet yet. Walker catalog  is available but it is an old book compared to Album/Goodwin.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4559 - October 05, 2018, 10:53 AM
    Quote from: Marc S on October 05, 2018, 10:38 AM
    Of the power held by Ibn Al Zubayr.


    Of the power held by Ibn Al Zubayr in Iraq only as Iraq was hold by Muawiya II . As such Malik was "usurper" of anything. But  Zubayr at the death of  Muawiya II revolted against the power based in Damascus therefore Malik the" successor" of  Muawiya II. Zubayr revolted as Iraq was hold by the Arabs based in Damascus since the victory of Muawiya against Ali the amir of al Hira  at the death of Utman. It seems clear to me. We have a clear battle from the  the Arabs based in Damascus to control and to not lost Iraq each time they can 1/ death of "Utman" vs Ali and 2/ to keep Iraq : death of Muawiya II.
  • Previous page 1 ... 150 151 152153 154 ... 370 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »