Reconstruction of a Source of Ibn IsḼÄqâs Life of the Prophet and Early QurâÄn Exegesis: A Study of Early Ibn âAbbÄs Traditions
Reconstruction of a Source of Ibn IsḼÄqâs Life of the Prophet and Early QurâÄn Exegesis: A Study of Early Ibn âAbbÄs Traditions
This important work is a source-critical study of a group of traditions (aḼÄdÄŤth) found in Ibn IsḼÄq’s Biography (SÄŤra) of the prophet MuḼammad, widely considered one of the most important early historical texts on the Prophet’s life. Through a meticulous isnÄd-cum-matn analysis, the author reveals that Ibn IsḼÄq relied on MuḼammad b. AbÄŤ MuḼammad, a hitherto undocumented source of his. Important new light is also shed on problems with Ibn HishÄmâs recension of Ibn IsḼÄqâs SÄŤra.*
Author: Harold Motzki (retired), is one of the world’s foremost specialists in the field of early and medieval Islamic history and law, on which he has authored multiple groundbreaking books and articles. Together with Professor Gregor Schoeler, Motzki is credited with establishing the isnÄd-cum-matn methodology, which seeks to reconstruct and date historical texts from the early Islamic period.
Series: Islamic History and Thought 3 ISBN: 978-1-4632-0659-8 Publication Date: May, 2017
Š International Qurâanic Studies Association, 2018. All rights reserved.
Reclaiming Islamic Tradition: Modern Interpretations of the Classical Heritage
Edited by Elisabeth Kendall, Ahmad Khan
Recent events in the Islamic world have demonstrated the endurance, neglect and careful reshaping of the classical Islamic heritage. A range of modern Islamic movements and intellectuals has sought to reclaim certain concepts, ideas, persons and trends from the Islamic tradition. Reclaiming Islamic Tradition: Modern Interpretations of the Classical Heritage profiles some of the fundamental debates that have defined the conversation between the past and the present in the Islamic world. Qurâanic exegesis, Islamic law, gender, violence and eschatology are just some of the key themes in this study of the Islamic traditionâs vitality in the modern Islamic world. This book will allow readers to situate modern developments in the Islamic world within the longue durĂŠe of Islamic history and thought.
Table of contents
Acknowledgements
Notes on Contributors
Introduction, Elisabeth Kendall & Ahmad Khan
1. Modern ShiĘżite Legal Theory and the Classical Tradition, Robert Gleave
2. MuḼammad NÄᚣčr al-DÄŤn al-AlbÄnÄŤ and Traditional Hadith Criticism, Christopher Melchert
3. Islamic Tradition in an Age of Print: Editing, Printing, and Publishing the Classical Tradition, Ahmad Khan
4. Reaching into the Obscure Past: The Islamic Legal Heritage and Reform in the Modern Period, Jonathan A. C. Brown
5. Reading SĹŤrat al-AnĘżÄm with MuḼammad RashÄŤd Riá¸Ä and Sayyid Quášb, Nicolai Sinai
6. Contemporary Iranian Interpretations of the Qurâan and Tradition on Womenâs Testimony, Karen Bauer
7. Ibn Taymiyya between Moderation and Radicalism, Jon Hoover
8. The Impact of a Sixteenth-Century Jihad Treatise on Colonial and Modern India, Carole Hillenbrand
9. Jihadist Propaganda and Its Exploitation of the Arab Poetic Tradition, Elisabeth Kendall
10. Contemporary Salafi Literature on Paradise and Hell: The Case of ĘżUmar SulaymÄn al-Ashqar, Christian Lange
Index
Communities of the Qur’an–A Conference & Future Publication
By Emran El-Badawi
Contrary to popular belief there is not merely one reception of the Qur’an. In other words, there is no single method of reading, understanding and interpreting Islamic scripture, but rather many. Islamic civilization today has over 1 billion adherents, a rich medieval scholarly-cultural tradition spanning over 1 millennium, and a growing number of new (Muslim and non-Muslim) confessional as well as reformist movements reading the text for a modern world. Demonstrating the complex layers of this diversity was the subject of an conference I convened on Communities of the Qur’an: Modern and Classical Interpretations of Islamic Scripture.
Communities of the Qurâan was dedicated to intellectual inquiry as well as religious dialogue. At its heart this project asks the question, what is the dialectical relationship between the Qurâan and its “communities of interpretation?” How is the relationship between community and scripture mediated? Can a better understanding of each community’s reception, hermeneutics and cultural assumptions bring about a better understanding of the Qur’an for the 21st century? This project also seeks to revive the âethics of disagreementâ found in Classical Islam. The Qurâan interpreters, jurists and theologians of medieval Baghdad, Cairo and Cordoba serve as examples of peaceful coexistence and tolerance in the face of vehement disagreement. On numerous occasions the historical record shows that Muslims from different legal schools or denominations, as well as Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians and others, agreed to disagree.
There is little disagreement about the authenticity of the Qurâan text we possess today.
However, given Islamâs long history, several confessional, scholastic and reformist
communities developed in the shadow of scripture, and arrived at sometimes diverging interpretations of its key passages. These communities include Shia, Sunni, Ahmadi, Feminist and other interpretive traditions. When the text commands, âask the people of remembrance if you know notâ (Q 16:43; 21:7), is it referring to the guided Imams of the prophet Muhammadâs house, to Jews and Christians or another group? Similarly, are there modern re-interpretations of Q 4:34 which states, âmen are greater than womenâ on account of their wealth? Does the textâs identification of its own narratives as the âSunnah of Godâ (Q 33:38, 62; 40:23) and His âHadithâ (Q 45:6; 56:81; 77:50) facilitate or forbid the development of a new prophetic Hadith and Sunnah? These are some of the questions and key passages around which have gathered the Communities of the Qurâan.
The challenges of today’s political climate seem greater than that of our predecessors. The religious, social and cultural diversity of the global Muslim community and the richness of its peopleâs traditions are under threat by extremist fundamentalism. It is Muslims themselves who have paid the greatest price for the intolerance, violence and ‘sectarianism’ undertaken in the name of religion. Furthermore, the discourse surrounding global terrorism and Islamophobia, which has spread in the wake of the September 11th attacks, 2001 and the Arab uprisings of 2011, has only polarized members on both sides of the debate. As a result, the Qurâan, Islamâs sacred scripture and an integral part of world literature, has become the subject of misuse and misunderstanding. More than ever before, leaders from within and without the global Muslim ummah have the opportunity to protect the diversity of Islamic civilization and promote religious tolerance as well as peaceful coexistence broadly speaking.
The conference was hosted by The Boniuk Institute for the Study and Advancement of Religious Tolerance. It hosted presentations by eight  international speakers (in order of presentations: Dr. Ingrid Mattson, Dr. Sajjad Rizvi, Dr. Ali Asani, Dr. Ahmed Subhy Mansour, Dr. Amina Wadud, Councelor Mujeeb Ur Rahman, Dr. Todd Lawson, Dr. Aminah Beverly McCloud), three panel chairs (Dr. Hina Azam, Dr. David Cook and Dr. Emran El-Badawi), welcoming remarks by Boniuk director and Rice University Professor, Dr. Paula Sanders, and parting words by philanthropist, Dr. Milton Boniuk. The conference took place March 10-11, 2016, and will eventually turn into a book. Visitors can access VIDEO to all eight presentations at the official conference website HERE.
Š International Qurâanic Studies Association, 2016. All rights reserved.
Claiming Tradition Colloquium at Pembroke College, Oxford
By Nicolai Sinai
OXFORDâIn doing modern Islamic intellectual history, it is easy to succumb to the temptation to concentrate oneâs analytic efforts mainly on the specifically âmodernâ aspects of the thinkers and texts in question. In part, this may simply result from identifying oneâs subject as âmodern Islamic and/or Arabic thought,â extending, as it does, an implicit invitation to think primarily about the novel themes, ideas, and modes of communication that distinguish the intellectual production of the 19th and 20th centuries from earlier ages. In addition, apologetic presentations of modern values and ideas as already enshrined in the canonical sources of Islam often trigger predictable interventions by Western scholarsâinsisting, for example, that the Qurâanic reference to shĹŤrÄ cannot really be equated with a call for democracy. However, to primarily position writers of the colonial and post-colonial periods against the background of contemporary events and modern Western thought entails the risk of viewing their moorings in the pre-modern tradition as superficial and rhetorical, or as precluding the exercise of any agency over it. Thus modern writers emerge either as strategically employing traditional concepts and ideas in order to serve as transparent guises for what are âreallyâ imported Western notions, or as compulsively (and sometimes aggressively) parroting ancient traditions in an act of intellectual resistance.
Studying the intellectual history of the modern Islamic world, then, requires a difficult hermeneutical balancing act: without overlooking contemporary references, it is imperative to accord appropriate weight to the manifold and often complex ways in which Islamâs canonical texts and the pre-modern interpretive tradition are invoked, redirected and reconfiguredâeven where this does not directly contribute to locating an author on an ideal spectrum running from âmodernismâ to âIslamism.â
That such an approach can potentially facilitate a perception of modern Islamic texts and thinkers as more sophisticated and intellectually serious than they are often presented to beâthis was the underlying conjecture throughout the colloquium âClaiming Tradition: Modern Re-Readings of the Classical Islamic Heritage,â which was held at Pembroke College, Oxford, on 27â28 September 2013.
After a keynote lecture delivered by Prof. Carole Hillenbrand dealing with classical and modern understandings of the term jihÄd, ten scholars based in the UK and Europe examined modern re-appropriations of pre-modern texts, genres, and figures. The topics discussed included modern Shiâite legal theory (Robert Gleave) and Sunni hadithcriticism (Christopher Melchert), modern contestations over the status of AbĹŤ ḤanÄŤfa (Ahmad Khan) and over the significance of Ibn Taymiyyaâs anti-Mongol fatwas (John Hoover), 20th-century Qurâanic exegesis (Islam Dayeh, Nicolai Sinai, Karen Bauer), the use of classical Arabic poetry by Yemeni Jihadists (Elisabeth Kendall) and of the Islamic biographical and historiographical tradition in Zaynab FawwÄzâs (d. 1914) dictionary of famous women (Marilyn Booth), and finally the selection and arrangement of ʿUmar SulaymÄn al-Ashqarâs (d. 2012) popular compilation of eschatological traditions (Christian Lange).
From different angles, all the papers illustrated the need for an in-depth mastery of pre-modern sources by students of the intellectual history of the modern Islamic world, as well as the intrinsic interest of modern debates even for scholars of classical Islam.
Š International Qurâanic Studies Association, 2013. All rights reserved.
Coming soon: The 110th volume of Ătudes Arabes
Thanks to PISAI
Ătudes Arabes is one of the publications of Rome’s Pontifical Institute for Arabic and Islamic Studies (PISAI), along with Islamochristiana and Encounter. The latter two periodicals deal with different aspects of Muslim-Christian discourseâIslamochristiana  printing research articles and Encounter having a more pastoral scope. Ătudes Arabes, on the other hand, focuses on a single topic, which is treated as a monograph. As such, it aims to be a resource for students and scholars of Arabic and Islamic sciences, by providing a wide introduction to the chosen topic, enriched by an updated bibliography and a series of texts in Arabic (with  translations provided in either English, French, or Italian).
Ătudes Arabesâ upcoming issue is devoted to the concept of “Ĺ ahÄŤd.” It explores if and how the meaning of the term evolved from the initial Qurâanic occurrence to the current useâboth in common and journalistic language as well as in the juridical debate, where the legal status of the “Ĺ ahÄŤd” does not seem to reach a consensus among the âulamÄ and Muslim religious authorities.
Special attention is devoted to the âlegalâ status of the “Ĺ ahÄŤd.” On one hand, such a status is analyzed with reference to its mention in several different places in the Qurâan as well as in the hadith, where the principal meaning is that of witnessing/giving evidence (both in the juridical sense of giving witness in trial, as well as in the eschatological sense belonging to prophets). On the other, the term seems to recur mainly in association with reasons for death, certainly on the path of God (fÄŤsabÄŤl AllÄh) and possibly in battle (ĹĄahÄŤd al-maâraka), but also for many other causes  (ĹĄahÄŤd al-dunyÄ wa-l-Äáşira): certain illnesses, fires, etc.  We recall, for example, that according to a very famous tradition, death while giving birth entitles a women to be âĹ ahÄŤdâ (not âĹ ahÄŤda,” and this is something to think about). Consequences of being acknowledged as âĹ ahÄŤdâ were mostly related to mourning and burial rituals.
On the other hand, whether or not one is legally âĹ ahÄŤdâ seems to have assumed a much greater importance in these troublesome times, when suicidal attacks have greatly increased and the consequences of a death being considered martyrdom (âamaliyyÄt istiĹĄhÄdiyya) or suicide (âamaliyyÄt intiḼÄriyya) can be very crucial for political choices and popular support, as well as for the families of the supposed âĹ ahÄŤd.â
Keeping in mind its mainly didactic character, Etudes Arabes 110 includes a basic but comprehensive overview of its specific theme. To this end, both the introductory essay and the texts offered in translation[1] are organized in the following way:
Definition of the term âĹ ahÄŤdâ (classical grammar, ancient common use)
The meaning of the term âĹ ahÄŤdâ from the classic Muslim tradition to the contemporary common use
âĹ ahÄŤdâ as a legal status
Contemporary debate: âĹ ahÄŤdââmartyrdom or suicide (and, as such, condemned)
All themes are treated with ample reference to the Qurâan, classical and âmodernâ TafsÄŤr, fiqh, and contemporary jurisprudence.
For more info on PISAI, its activities and how to subscribe to its publications, see www.pisai.it, which features pages in Arabic, English, French, and Italian.
[1] Taken from âAbd al-RaḼmÄn b. Ä urmÄn b. âAbd AllÄh al-KarÄŤmÄŤ al-âUmarÄŤ, AḼkÄm al-ĹĄahÄŤd fÄŤ l-fiqh al-islÄmÄŤ, DÄr al-bayÄn al-Ḽadčᚯ, al-ᚏÄâif  (al-Mamlaka al-âarabiyya al-saâĹŤdiyya), 1422/2001, pp. 379.Â
Š International Qurâanic Studies Association, 2013. All rights reserved.
A Course on the Qur’an as Literature
By Emran El-Badawi
I offered an undergraduate course last spring for the first time on the Qurâan as Literature. My goal was simple, I wanted my students to read the text closely and interpret its verses themselves. Their apprehension, at first, to commit to this bold exercise soon gave way to an ease and skill with handling the text.
Framing this course on the Qurâan as âliteratureâ emphasized the literary qualities of the text and de-emphasized a theological approach. It meant going deep into the rhyme, rhetoric and homiletic nature of the text. It also entailed divorcing the text, to some extent, from Tafsir. I took some cautionary notes from Andrew Rippinâs article on the pitfalls of âThe Qurâan as Literature,â[1], but some of this was new territory for me.
(greenzblog.com)
Part of the course description reads:
This course examines the content and literary style of the Qurâan and in the context of the late antique Near East, ca. 2nd-7th centuries CE. We will read the text alongside the texts belonging to the âPeople of the Scriptureâ (ahl al-kitab), i.e. Christians and Jews, and other religious groups explicitly mentioned in the Qurâan. Their scriptures include the Hebrew Bible (al-Tawrah), the New Testament (al-Injil), Zoroastrian texts (cf. al-majus) and Arabian prophetic speech (shiâr kahin). This comparative approach will provide students with a rich understanding of the Qurâan as an integral part of world literature, and challenge contemporary and traditional assumptions about the text. This approach will also allow the Qurâan to speak for itself, rather than reading it through the eyes of medieval interpretation (Tafsir) or prophetic tradition (Hadith) which began in the 9th century CE. This course also exposes students to some of the scholarly challenges of studying the different layers of a text (Meccan vs. Medinan), identifying its audience, trying to construct the history of its transmission (oral vs. written) without much evidence, and to the limits of translation.
Fortunately, the class size was fairly small, 15 or so, and students came from different religious as well as cultural backgrounds, which made for much lively discussion and debate. Students were pushed to think critically and in a systematic function about the Qurâan, as well as challenge their own assumptions about the text. For students I find two principle barriers that stand between them and the Qurâan. These are the âpoliticization of the textâ on the one hand, and the âconfusion of the text with traditional interpretationâ on theother. More broadly speaking, I wanted them to appreciate scripture not just as a religious text, but as an integral part of world literature that holds value in the academy.
For an undergraduate course like this, all instruction and materials were in English. Reading materials included  How to Read the Qur’an by Carl Ernst(who incidentally has a terrific course on this subject!) [2] and several supplementary articles including: a rhyming translation of Q 93-114 by Shawkat Toorawa, a qurâanic reading of the Psalms by Angelika Neuwirth, and a humanistic reception of the text by me.[3] Students were encouraged but not required to buy a translation of the Qurâan, given the plethora of translations online. (Although for practical purposes we used Yusuf Aliâs translation during class time). Finally, included in the course materials were sections of the Hebrew Bible, New Testament, post-biblical exhortations (e.g. Ephrem the Syrian), Zoroastrian texts and Pre-Islamic poetry. For some students it was the first time they had read the Qurâan; for others the first time they read the Bible. In both cases, students expressed how pleased they were at this eye-opening experience and fruitful exchange.
The course benefited a great deal from following stories posted on the IQSA blog (thatâs right, this blog!) and the Qurâan Seminar at the University of Notre Dame, which was still running at the time. To my surprise, students were both curious and welcoming of the technical dimensions of Qurâan study. Some of our best discussions, for example, involved scrutinizing the rhyme of Arabic poetry or considering a particular Syriac word. The course naturally explored a number of qurâanic themes like apocalypticism, prophecy, law, etc, as well as introduced students to debates concerning the textâs chronology, speaker and structure. My happiest moment was when a student expressed to me how the course âmade the Qurâan part of a much more intellectual conversation.â
Teaching this course was a tremendous learning experience for both the students and myself. The students learned how to navigate a sometimes unwieldy text and appreciate its tremendous contribution to the world in which they live. Collectively, we learned that as long as one approaches any scripture respectfully as well as critically, the task of understanding it becomes that much easier.
[1] Andrew Rippin, âThe Qur’an as literature: perils, pitfalls and prospects,â Bulletin of the British Society for Middle Eastern Studies, 10.1, 1983.
[2] Carl Ernst, How to Read the Qurâan: A New Guide with Select Translations, Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2011.
[3] Shawkat Toorawa, ââThe Inimitable Roseâ, being Qurâanic sajâ from Surat al-Duhâ to Surat al-Nâs (Q. 93â114) in English rhyming prose,â Journal of Qurâanic Studies, 8.2, 2006; Angelika Neuwirth, âQurâanic readings of the Psalmsâ in Ed. Angelika Neuwirth et al. (eds.), The Qurâan in Context, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2009; Emran El-Badawi, âA humanistic reception of the Qurâan,â Scriptural Margins: On the Boundaries of Sacred Texts, English Language Notes, 50.2, 2012.
Š International Qurâanic Studies Association, 2013. All rights reserved.
Upcoming Colloquia in the UK
Thanks to Nicolai Sinai and Mehdi Azaiez
Islamic Studies Colloquium
CLAIMING TRADITION: MODERN REREADINGS OF THE CLASSICAL ISLAMIC HERITAGE
Organisers: Elisabeth Kendall, Ahmad Khan, Christopher Melchert, Nicolai Sinai
Venue: Pembroke College, Oxford. OX1 1DW
Date: 27-28 September 2013
Both the resurgence of Islamist politics and the political, social, and intellectual upheaval accompanying the Arab Spring challenge us to reconsider the interplay between the pre-modern Islamic tradition and modern proponents of continuity, reform, and change in the Muslim world. The colloquium therefore invites scholars with an in-depth knowledge of the classical Islamicate heritage to explore modern texts that stake out some sort of claim to pre-modern traditions in disciplines as diverse as Islamic law, hadith, Qurâanic exegesis, politics, and literature. The colloquium will encourage specialists to embark on a hermeneutically sophisticated exercise that avoids some of the extremes to which an examination of how the classical heritage functions in the modern Islamic world has often been subjected. The colloquium aims to move beyond works that contain the tacit assumption that modern Muslims are subconsciously steered by the Islamic tradition, without exerting any sort of agency or control over it, and studies that suggest that modern Muslim thinkers arbitrarily distort elements of the tradition to which they lay claim. Instead, we invite scholars to consider modern re-appropriations of pre-modern concepts, texts, persons, and events, and thereby to transcend an increasing bifurcation between classical and contemporary Islamic studies.
Participants:
Carole Hillenbrand (University of Edinburgh), Robert Gleave (University of Exeter), Christopher Melchert (University of Oxford), Ahmad Khan (University of Oxford), Nicolai Sinai (University of Oxford), Islam Dayeh (Freie Universitat Berlin), Karen Bauer (Institute of Ismaili Studies), Elisabeth Kendall (University of Oxford), Marilyn Booth (University of Edinburgh), Jon Hoover (University of Nottingham), Christian Lange (Utrecht University)
Acknowledgement:
This colloquium has been made possible thanks to the generosity of Brian Wilson, a long-standing benefactor of Arabic studies at Pembroke.
Fragmentation and Compilation : The Making of Religious Texts in Islam A Comparative Perspective II (30 septembre – 1er octobre)
Workshop
30 Septemberâ1 October 2013
The Institute of Ismaili Studies, London
2nd Floor, Room 2.3
Convenor : Asma Hilali
Abstracts
Fragmentation and Variation in the First Islamic Graffiti (1stâ2nd century AH)
FrĂŠdĂŠric Imbert, Aix-Marseille University, France
The latest research in the field of Islamic graffiti in the first two centuries AH in the Middle East is uncovering new information about Muslim society at the dawn of Islam. Most of this information concerns the Islamic faith, the place of the Qurâan and the figure of the Prophet Muhammad, but the oldest graffiti also allow us to reflect on the status of writing during the same period. Thousands of Arabic Kufic graffiti recently discovered in Saudi Arabia and in the wider Middle East reflect an extreme fragmentation due to the quantity of inscriptions scattered all over the area. These Arabic graffiti, which were not subjected to any kind of censorship, are the expression of variation and repetition at the same time : variation of the Qurâanic text and of the attitude of people towards the new religion and the Prophet, and repetition of the religious prayers and invocations. The picture of early Islam emanating from the first Islamic graffiti is one of fragmentation.
Repetitions and Variations, and the Problem of âQurâanic Variantsâ
Asma Hilali, The Institute of Ismaili Studies, London, UK
The field of Qurâanic Studies has been greatly influenced by the medieval reception of the Qurâan text manifested in the exegetical literature and by the theories related to the âQurâanic variantsâ. The concept of âQurâanic variantsâ is deeply rooted in the history of the canonisation of the Qurâan and in the various assumptions made about scribal errors and falsification. My paper will provide a critique of the conceptual tools used in Qurâanic Studies in the last two decades and will propose a new perspective in the study of the textual features interpreted by the medieval and modern scholars as âQurâanic variantsâ. The new perspective takes the fragmented aspect of the text to be inseparable from the history of its transmission.
Fragmentation, Compilation and Discourse : A Comparison of Three Arbaʿōn Collections on JihÄd and Martyrdom Compiled in the Late Mamluk Period
Stephen Burge, The Institute of Ismaili Studies, London, UK
This paper examines the ways in which hadith scholars went about compiling hadith collections by undertaking a comparative analysis of three similar works written in the same period. The three collections are all arbaʿōn collections â short collections of around forty hadith â which focus on the themes of jihÄd and martyrdom. The three studied are Suyutiâs AbwÄb al-suĘżadÄĘž fÄŤ asbÄb al-shuhadÄĘž (âThe Gates of the Lucky in the Occasions of Martyrdomâ) and his Arbaʿōn ḼadÄŤthan fÄŤ faá¸l al-jihÄd (âForty Hadith on the Merits of Jihadâ) and al-BiqÄʿčâs Dhayl al-istishhÄd bi-ÄyÄt al-jihÄd (âThe Appendix to Martyrdom in the Verses on JihÄdâ). I will argue that by closely analysing the material included and excluded from a hadith collection, as well as the ways in which the hadith have been arranged, it is possible to gain a deeper understanding of particular nuances within a text in which a compiler does not give his views openly to his reader. This paper will argue that the âhadith literatureâ contains a vast, almost infinite, body of texts and the job of the hadith compiler is to fragment this wider body of texts, to reconstitute them, and then to arrange them in order to provide a specific discourse on a subject. This process can be seen in the different ways the three works under consideration in this paper respond to the subjects of jihÄd and martyrdom.
The Qurâanâs Fragmentation and Realignment of Gospel and Talmud
Holger Zellentin, The University of Nottingham, UK
The unique ways in which the Qurâan âheardâ select stories from the Aramaic Gospel tradition has been considered by generations of scholars. Yet, only the most rudimentary consensus has been established about the nature of the texts with which the Qurâanâs audience was familiar, let alone the ways in which the Qurâan used these texts. The Qurâanâs utilisation of Talmudic material has received even less attention, and a consensus is even more remote. The present paper seeks to advance, one small step, our understanding of the deployment of both corpora in the Qurâan by considering them jointly. More than occasionally, the Qurâan fragments and realigns demonstrable elements of the (likely oral) Gospel and the Talmudic traditions together in order to solidify its claim of being a correction to the shortcomings of both.
Unity and Fragmentation in the Standard Text of the Qurâan : The Prophet as First Addressee and Dialogic Argumentation. Mehdi Azaiez, CNRS/IREMAM, FRANCE
As defined in discourse analysis, first addressee (or interlocutor) is the person involved in a conversation or dialogue. The figure of the Qurâanâs first addressee is a textual phenomenon linked to the structure of the text and its argumentative dimension. In my contribution, I will define the notion of the first addressee in the Qurâan, its linguistic forms and functions within the entire Qurâan. I will explore the following questions : The variety of the notions of âthe first addresseeâ ; the double aspect of fragmentation/unity of text after its collection and the role of the first addressee in the argumentative shape of the text. My contribution aims to show (i) how the dialogic relation between a Qurâanic enunciator and its first addressee reveals one of the main aspects of Qurâanic argumentation ; (ii) how the Qurâan legitimates the status of its first addressee as a prophet.
Programme
Day 1Â : Monday, 30 September 2013
12:00 Arrival of speakers at hotel and lunch
14:00 Welcome
Asma Hilali, The Institute of Ismaili Studies, London
14:00â16:00 Session 1 : Qurâanic Studies : From a Fragmentary Approach to an Approach about Fragmentation
Speakers : Stephen Burge, The Institute of Ismaili Studies, London
Asma Hilali, The Institute of Ismaili Studies, London
Holger Zellentine, The University of Nottingham
Discussant : Prof. Aziz al-Azmeh
This session will examine the state of the field of Qurâanic Studies. It will cover the following topics :
(i) Qurâanic manuscripts : A tool or an aim ?
(ii) Intertextuality : Methodological remarks
(iii) Fragmentation/Compilation perspectives on the Qurâan text in the context of the history of its transmission.
16:00 Break
16:20â17:50 Session 2Â : Variation and Repetition in Qurâanic Texts
Chair : Holger Zellentin
Fragmentation and Variation in the First Islamic Graffiti (1stâ2nd century AH)
FrĂŠdĂŠric Imbert, Aix-Marseille University
Repetitions and Variations, and the Problem of âQurâanic Variantsâ
Asma Hilali, The Institute of Ismaili Studies
Chair : Mehdi Azaiez, University of Notre Dame, Indiana
Fragmentation, Compilation and Discourse : A Comparison of Three Arbaâun Collections on Jihad and Martyrdom Compiled in the Late Mamluk Period
Stephen Burge, The Institute of Ismaili Studies
The Qurâanâs Fragmentation and Realignment of Gospel and Talmud
Holger Zellentine, The University of Nottingham
Unity and Fragmentation in the Standard Text of the Qurâan : The Prophet as First Addressee and the Dialogic Argumentation
Mehdi Azaiez, LabexResmed, Paris
Š International Qurâanic Studies Association, 2013. All rights reserved.
The Traditions on the Composition of âUthmÄnâs muᚣḼaf.
By Viviane Comerro
Viviane Comerro is Professor of Islamic Studies at INALCO (Paris). This blog is a synopsis of its French book titled âLes traditions sur la composition du muᚣḼaf de âUthmÄnâ, Orient-Institut Beirut, 2012
When and how did the Quran become a book? Even though paleography and codicology provide us with useful elements that shed light on this question, we should not overlook the study of Islamic literary sources which, through the diversity of their accounts on the writing of the Quran and the richness of their glosses on the Quranic text itself, remain bolder and more informed testimonies than any collection of manuscripts.
(ukaz.com.sa)
How should we address Islamic sources which provide us with numerous pieces of information on this issue? An initial historical approach based on the transmission of texts could lead us to follow the Ancients in their investigative endeavor by privileging the historical veracity of the version adopted by al-BukhÄrÄŤ (d. 256/870) in his ᚢaḼčḼ.
A second, historical and critical approach has already achieved its full potential: drawing out a core that is common to the various versions of the account of the event so as to gain some certainty or extracting this historical core from its legendary, theological or ideological gangue.
Reflection upon the literary nature of sources that has developed alongside this approach has resulted in a transitory suspension of the ânaivelyâ historical approach. In fact, a tradition always provides the event and its interpretation as closely related. This is a khabar, information, as well as a hadith, an event set as an account. Thus, it is in taking into consideration the twofold nature of a tradition that I have read afresh the totality of the accounts on the writing of the Quran by paying very close attention to the variants and their meanings.
By placing back the received version of the event â the one BukhÄrÄŤ kept in his ᚢaḼčh â in this totality, it appears as made up of several motifs that also exist in isolation as independent traditions. This version is therefore the result of a combination that selects some pieces of information while discarding others.
The author of this combination, or common link in the vernacular of the modern specialists of transmission, is Ibn ShihÄb al-ZuhrÄŤ (d. 124/742), who certainly did not invent this story but combined different pieces of information on the writing of the Quran, as he did for other accounts.
Beyond this stage, the hadith of ZuhrÄŤ evolved even further since a version that is quite different from BukhÄrÄŤâs is to be found in the introduction to his TafsÄŤr by the great compiler of the 3rd century of Hegira, ᚏabarÄŤ (d. 310/923).
Apart from the issue of authenticity, wherever we place this version in the chain of transmission, what seems to matter is the reason why such a well-informed exegete as TabarÄŤ chose this version of ZuhrÄŤâs account rather than another one. This question led me to question BukhÄrÄŤâs stance and ᚏabarÄŤâs regarding the status of Quranic recitation in the intellectual debates of their time. I came to the conclusion that, to some extent, the issue of the isnÄd was of secondary importance. What really matters is the content of each account.
For ᚏabarÄŤ, who claims that âUthmÄn reduced the various recitations of the Quran to a single Ḽarf in the official muᚣḼaf, it is important to note that the Quranic text is not the result of a collection but the writing of a single man, Zayd b. ThÄbit.
For BukhÄrÄŤ, it is important to take a stand in a critical debate of his time: that of the created or uncreated Quran, which goes on long after the end of the MiḼna by claiming that the writing of the Quran is created, in contrast with the Hanbali scholars.
Besides, the stance differs from one ᚢaḼčḼ to the other. Muslim (d. 261/875), BukhÄrÄŤâs contemporary, who frequented the same circles as him, apparently avoids to take a stand in this debate. Nowhere does he mention the account transmitted by al-ZuhrÄŤ. On the other hand, he mentions traditions on the various recitations of the Companions Ubayy, Ibn MasâĹŤd and AbĹŤ MĹŤsÄ. In this selection of information, one can detect a stand in another significant debate that lasted for centuries about the diversity of Quranic recitations theorized in the form of a prophetic hadith: Unzila l-qurâÄn âalÄ sabâati ahruf. In this controversy, a stance became more and more a minority, yet it lasted for a long time: it was allowed to liturgically recite ancient qirÄâÄt, especially that of Ibn MasâĹŤd, due to the fact that the companions of the Prophet and the Successors did it, even though these âreadingsâ were not in keeping with the âUthmÄnian rasm. It seems that in the 3rd century, prior to Ibn MujÄhidâs reform, the traditionist Muslim was inclined to favor such a stance.
The discrepancies between the accounts about the writing of the Quran, which are already impressive regarding what comes from Zuhrč, are even more so when all the traditions are taken into consideration. They are so not only for the researcher who considers he should not side with the traditionists, now as in the past, but also because all these accounts excluded by the strict selection of the ᚢaḼčḼ reappear in the margin of a commentary or an argumentation by the early (or modern) authors among the most interested in orthodoxy.
Historical description is not the main goal of traditionists, who rather try to solve theological/juridical problems. The diversity of the accounts related to the writing of the Quran, which mostly took place under âUthmÄnâs caliphate, could result from the traditionistsâ worry about the composition of the muᚣḼaf in an unfavorable historical context: a challenged caliphate in a time troubled by strong dissensions. The attested circulation of different maᚣÄḼif of the Quran, one of the sources of legitimacy and authority in the fullest sense of this dÄŤn as the foundation of the new community, represented a danger for Medinaâs power. After the historical situation changed, though it was never forgotten, the prime preoccupation concerned the conditions of transmission of the prophetic proclamation. The selection of the Ḽarf of Zayd, a man related to âUthmÄn, had not been consensual. And what to do with the maᚣÄḼif of Ubayy, Ibn MasâĹŤd, AbĹŤ MĹŤsÄ, MiqdÄd and others? Several responses to these unexpressed worries arose in the large corpus of narrative traditions on the writing of the Quran. I have suggested classifying these accounts according to the kind of solution they provided to ensure the faultless transmission of the muᚣḼaf.
After this investigation in literary sources, it is to be noted that there is no received version of the writing of the muᚣḼaf despite the status acquired by the ᚢaḼčḼ of BukhÄrÄŤ and the repetition, book after book, century after century, of his hadith on the collection of the Quran, a âthing the Prophet had not done.â In this way, although a 12th century traditionist such as AbĹŤ MuḼammad Ḥusayn al-BaghawÄŤÂ reports BukhÄrÄŤâs account in his SharḼ al-Sunna, inhis commentary he carries out a rewriting of the event with the memory of other accounts. He claims that the composition of the muᚣḼaf is an act involving the Companions as a collective actor of the ijmÄâ: they are those who decided together with âUthmÄn and those who wrote. This rewriting is as perceptible in the 15th century when al-SuyĹŤášÄŤ began his chapter of the ItqÄn devoted to the collection of the Quran by the blunt assertion that at the time of the Prophetâs death âthe Quran had not been collected.â Throughout the text and in the conclusion of the chapter, it appears that the âthing the Prophet had not doneâ had in fact been accomplished since the muᚣḼaf, organized as verses and suras, is exactly the same as that instituted by MuḼammad after the angelâs dictation.
In my book, I left the question of the writing of the Quran at the time of the Prophet open-ended owing to the scarcity of traditions that mention it. This question pertains to another kind of investigation on the oral/written composition of the Quranic text (Angelika Neuwirth) and could rest on the works of linguists and anthropologists dealing with orality and writing.
In conclusion, the study of traditions informs us on some crucial elements of the history of the text: the plasticity of its composition and oral transmission; the antiquity of its writing; the fixation of a model written under âUthmÄn; its gradual canonization; the preservation of textual variants as a reflection of the original oral diversity and then the philologistsâ interest; the parallel theologizing of the history of transmission.
Yet this study chiefly enables us to understand the Tradition that lends their full weight to the actors of transmission. Through selection, combination, additions or deletions, and when the text is permanently fixed in its letter, through their glosses, commentaries and interpretations, these actors contribute to the fluctuation in meaning in the preservation of religion.
Translation and Exegesis: Travis Zadehâs The Vernacular Qurâan
By Michael Pregill
The claim that Muslims do not translate the Qur’an, or rather that a translation of the Qur’an is not⨠really the Qur’an at all but only a dim approximation of the basic sense of the text, has often been â¨repeated by scholars. This notion has even informed the production of translations by Muslims â¨themselves at times, as in the case of Marmaduke Pickthallâs famous The Meaning of the â¨Glorious Koran (1930)âthe title implying that the text in English represents only the meaning,⨠with something substantial literally having been lost in translation. It is difficult to escape the⨠conclusion that any rendition of the Qur’an into the vernacularâthat is, into any language other â¨than the original Arabicâshould and must have a secondary and marginal status in Islamicâ¨society.
But there is a paradox here, inasmuch as the public recitation and explanation of the Qur’an hasâ¨played a significant role in attracting converts to Islam since the earliest days of the communityâs⨠expansion after the Arab conquests. Historically, the process of reciting and explaining the â¨Qur’an surely involved some element of translation; the parallel with the reading of the Torah â¨and exposition of targum in Jewish synagogue services is obvious here. Further, scholars have⨠often asserted (at least since the time of Goldziherâs seminal Die Richtungen der islamischen⨠Koranauslegung, 1920) that tafsir (Qur’an commentary) most likely originated in this context, â¨built upon the most ancient understandings of the Qur’an that had circulated among the earliestâ¨followers of the Prophet. Initially grounded in the need to interpret the Qur’anâs essential messageâ¨for convertsâoften with considerable mythological and homiletic expansionsâthis tradition â¨eventually coalesced into one of the core disciplines within the ulum al-Quran or “Qur’anic â¨sciences.” All of this implies that translation of the Qur’an has in fact been central to Islamic â¨society, at least at times, and that such translation has been absolutely vital for the survival and⨠expansion of the community at numerous junctures in Islamâs long history.
The complex relationship between translation of and commentary upon the Qur’an is explored in⨠depth in Travis Zadehâs magesterial and far-ranging study, The Vernacular Qurâan: Translationâ¨and the Rise of Persian Exegesis (Oxford University Press in association with the Institute of⨠Ismaili Studies, 2012), which specifically examines the phenomenon of translation as it lies atâ¨the foundation of both Persian literary and Iranian Islamic religious tradition. The significance â¨of this study cannot be overstated. Iran was most likely the first region or culture area outside⨠of Arabia proper to achieve a Muslim majority. Further, several of Iranâs urban centers becameâ¨preeminent centers of religious learning in the ninth and tenth centuries, producing ulama whose â¨works became critical for the further development of the religious sciences, especially hadith; â¨and, as is well known, by the high Middle Ages, so-called New Persian came to rivalâand â¨eventually surpassâArabic as the preeminent literary language of Islamic society, at least in the â¨eastern regions of the Dar al-Islam.
Zadehâs study explores the intersections between theological and juridical controversies,⨠devotional practice, and an emerging Persian literary culture, informed both by an admirable command of the theoretical literature on translation and a nuanced understanding of the complex â¨conjunction of factors that contributed to the misrepresentation of Qur’an translation as somehow⨠inferior or illegitimate. In Western scholarly discourse, the claim of the Qur’anâs untranslatability â¨originates in medieval Christian polemic, in which Muslimsâ supposed insistence that the Qur’an⨠can only be approached in the original Arabic was caricatured as proof of Muslim “rigidity” â¨and legalism â ritual rectitude purportedly being more important in Islam than rational â¨understanding. This gross oversimplification of Muslim attitudes was then reinforced by the⨠misapprehensions of more contemporary (and well-meaning) scholars such as Wilfred Cantwell⨠Smith, who inadvertently conflated theological assertions of the Qur’anâs inimitability with some⨠juristsâ opposition to the use of verses of the Qur’an in other languages in the devotional contextâ¨into a blanket prohibition on translation that somehow applied to all times, places, and contexts.
Smith thus characterized an opposition to translation as somehow essential to Islam, but as â¨Zadeh demonstrates, the translation of the Qur’an into Persian, even for devotional purposes,⨠appears to have been a basic fact in the Iranian milieu; the âearly pattern of wrapping the sacred â¨language of the Qurâan in Persian reflects the practical hermeneutic, if not liturgical, importance⨠of approaching scripture through a linguistic medium other than Arabicâ (133). Moreover,â¨translation into Persian was not simply driven by the practical considerations of disseminating â¨the Qur’an in a recently converted, and thus only superficially acculturated, population. â¨Rather, Zadehâs theoretically sophisticated approach shows that the general recognition of the⨠polyvalence of scriptureâfor example, the idea that the Qur’an was revealed in seven ahruf â¨(modes or recitations)âopened up a wide discursive space in which many scholars not only â¨tolerated but even explicitly sanctioned the ongoing use of the Qur’an in Persian and otherâ¨languages for a variety of purposes.
Astonishingly, Zadehâs treatment of his subject stretches from the period just after the Arab⨠conquests of the seventh century all the way to the flourishing of Persian tafsir in the eleventh â¨and twelfth centuries with figures such as Abuâl-Futuh al-Razi, Surabadi, and Isfaraâini, as well⨠as discussing the later reception of this tradition in subsequent centuries. Even as the use of⨠Persian renditions of Qur’anic verses was largely abandoned in specifically devotional contexts,⨠the dynamic interplay between the Arab and Iranian cultural and linguistic milieux continued to â¨inform the evolution of Islam in the Persian-speaking world. As their tradition matured, Iranian â¨scholars continued to have a complicated relationship with Arab Islamic religious authority and⨠exegetical discourseâespecially the latter, as âexegesis served as a platform for the articulation⨠of religious commitmentsâ (448), particularly as attitudes towards Persian came to inform and in⨠turn be inflected by sectarian considerations.
This brief notice hardly does justice to Zadehâs wide-ranging, yet lucidly argued and eloquently written, treatment of the Qur’an in Persian and the Persianate world. We may hope that his nuanced and imaginative study draws attention to this long-neglected subject and inspires new scholarly research in this area in the future.
Š International Qur’anic Studies Association, 2013. All rights reserved.
