Minding Scripture, Part 9: Qur'an Criticism

Episode Topic: Qur'an Criticism  

What importance do developments in critical scholarship on the Qur’an have for the life of faith? How have Muslims traditionally understood the Qur’an? What were the nineteenth- and twentieth-century beginnings of Western critical scholarship on the Qur’an, and what are its motivating questions today? Where do Western critical scholarship and traditional reading of the Qur’an converge? Do the findings of Western critical scholarship fundamentally challenge traditional Muslim understandings of the Qur’an, and how, more generally, does critical study of the Qur’an affect Muslims’ lives of faith?

Featured Speakers:

• Gabriel Said Reynolds, professor, University of Notre Dame
• Mun’im Sirry, professor, University of Notre Dame

Read this episode's recap over on the University of Notre Dame's open online learning community platform, ThinkND: https://go.nd.edu/1e7b78.

This podcast is a part of the ThinkND Series titled Minding Scripture. 

Thanks for listening! The ThinkND Podcast is brought to you by ThinkND, the University of Notre Dame's online learning community. We connect you with videos, podcasts, articles, courses, and other resources to inspire minds and spark conversations on topics that matter to you — everything from faith and politics, to science, technology, and your career.

• Learn more about ThinkND and register for upcoming live events at think.nd.edu.
• Join our LinkedIn community for updates, episode clips, and more.

Transcript

What Qur'an Is

1 0:15

Scripture shapes the lives of billions of people around the world, yet scriptures, both the Bible and the Quran only gain meaning when they're interpreted by the human mind. Minding scripture, a podcast from the Department of Theology at the University of Notre Dame explores the meeting of reason with the Scriptures of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. I am Gabriels Reynolds, professor of Islamic Studies and Theology in the World Religions World Church Program at Notre Dame. Joining me are the co-founders of the podcast, professor Francesca Murphy.

Speaker 2 0:47

Hello,

1 0:48

SVI Novik.

Speaker 3 0:49

Good to be here

1 0:49

and Moon Siri.

Speaker 3 0:50

Hi.

1 0:52

Friends. In our previous episode, we considered developments in biblical criticism and asked what importance these developments have for the life of faith. Today we turn to the Holy Scripture of Islam, the Quran, and ask similar questions as I work principally in kran studies. I turn over the job of interviewing to Francesca Svi and I will be on the hot seat next to Moon. Together, we will do our best to answer some of their questions.

Speaker 2 1:18

Okay. Well to start off with then, m could you explain what is the traditional Islamic approach to the Curran? Uh, what kind of book is the Curran for Muslims? What pre historical critical scholarship, what is the basic Islamic idea of the Curran?

Speaker 3 1:37

Sure. for Muslim, the Quran is the Book of Guardian. God revealed the Quran to guide people to the start path. So Muslim believe that the Quran is the word of God, word for word. So in the traditional Muslim scholarship, the Quran is often divine as God speech, which was sent down to Muhammad through the Angel Gabriel. So the word of the Quran for Muslims are considered as divine. So the Kuran in Arabic is at the center of Muslim faith. Perhaps the centrality of the Quran to Muslim is like Jesus to Christians. In fact, some Muslim argue that the Quran can be compared to Jesus instead of the Bible. However, the idea that the Quran will verbally not in its meaning its complicated issue. Some Muslim scholars, both classical and modern, have recognized a problem inherent in the idea that God reveal his divine word in human language like Arabic.

1 2:55

I just, I just wanted to add in here can is. Okay, sure. If I jump in, just to add a thought, there are proof texts in the Quran for this idea of. The sending down of the book. So, I mean, when articulating these ideas in English, most Muslim scholars would sort of, uh, differentiate between inspiration and the sending down the, the right, right. The typical, um, Quranic, um, verb to describe the revelation of Quran is Neah or nla, or neah, meaning the sending down. And in Quran 56, for example, we see the Quran itself saying about itself. It is surely a Noble Quran in a hidden book. And then in Quran 85 verse 21, we read nay, but it is a glorious Quran in the next verse on a guarded tablet. So I don't know if that's he helpful sort of visually. There's some illuminated manuscripts that right you, you might know from the Persian Iranian tradition, which have an image of the angel Gabriel sort of coming down from the heavens with the Quran in his hand.

Speaker 4 3:59

Maybe you could say more about that. I'm curious, uh, and also perhaps link this to the, the, the meaning of Koran. What is it to say that this is a Koran, what it actually does Koran mean? and this idea of a book. So in the traditional understanding, is it that Mohamed receives a book, a, a, a literal text, or is he hearing words? Uh, what, what are the traditional understandings on these kinds of questions?

Speaker 3 4:22

Right, right. The idea that the Koran is associated with guided tablets, I think it's interesting. Because in Muslim understanding, the Quran is inscribed in the preserved tablet in the heaven, and therefore, you know, Muslim develop a theory of two levels of sending down in the first place that the, the Quran proceed from God to the tablet. And in the second from there, the angel Gabrielle brought the Quran to Muhammad. So in the tradit, unending, the UN was transmitted in it linguistic form. So it's the Koran, like, you know, preserve in the, in the tablet,

1 5:11

right? Yeah. And this is why sometimes you'll see, I mean it varies a little, a little bit, but I mean, generally you, you'll see that English translations of the Quran or other non-Arabic languages will often say an interpretation of the Holy Quran. Or a rendering of the words of the Holy Quran, but sometimes not a translation of the Holy Quran reflecting the idea that once you move the Quran out of Arabic into another language, it's no longer Quran. It's no

Speaker 3 5:37

longer the

5:38

Quran.

1 5:38

Yeah. It's not even a translation,

Speaker 4 5:39

so, so what then is the role of Muhammad in articulating the message of the Koran then? Is he receiving a book? Is he speaking out the Quran, as we might think, say a biblical prophet does speaking the word of God, or is it simply receiving it?

Speaker 3 5:56

So in the traditional understanding, Muhammad is often considered as passive recipient of the revelation. So Muslim scholars did not consider that Muhammad and his community would play any part in the revelation in the regulatory. But of course, you know, modern Muslim scholars like Rahman, Pakistani, uh, Muslim thinker who spend most of his academic, career teaching in the west, uh, develop different understanding of the Muslim of Revelation. So for Fa Rahman, for instance, that the Kuan is entirely the word I've got, but also in a general sense, it's entirely the word of Muhammad. So for. Quran is entirely the word of God in sofar, that it's infallible. It's absolutely free from falsehood, but it's the word of Muhammad in sofar that it come to the heart of Muhammad and his tongue. So it's the word of meaning that for Rahman, the divine word of God was formless. It is. Give it the form, the language to make it understandable to people.

Speaker 4 7:16

That's striking. I mean, it certainly is evocative of a Christology that Jesus of, of Jesus being fully divine and fully human and even, right. It's a notion of formlessness and form corresponding to Right. The idea of, of an incarnation. So that's a, that's a, a striking,

1 7:30

I I ha I have heard people though, reflecting the more traditional view, comparing the prophet Muhammad in Islamic thought. To the Virgin Mary in Christian thought, as the vessel of the divine word, the pure vessel, you know, and incidentally, depending on your theology, the sinless vessel in both cases. Sure. Yeah. So that carries the word of God.

Speaker 2 7:53

Can I just get clear here, am I hearing that for some Muslims, the Koran literally is the word of God, Inkin. But other Muslims, as it were distinguished between the divine and human natures of the Koran. And so for some Muslims, the Koran has a human side, which is Muhammad speaking. But for other Muslims who are, as it were, more conservative as it were, it's just purely divine through and through, and somehow it's a peace of God in this earth.

Speaker 3 8:33

Yes. So for some Muslim, traditional Muslim, the Quran is the word of God, FISM. So it's nothing about Muhammad. So in that sense, the Quran is perhaps like Jesus in Christianity. One of of the differences is that what in Christianity, God reveal himself in the person of Jesus, and therefore Jesus is the fullness of revelation in Islam. The word of God become the text of the Quran. Yeah. And therefore we can understand how, why the text of Theran is, is so central in the Muslim faith, because the, the text of the Quran is, is the word of God.

Speaker 2 9:16

I have heard it said, I don't know if it's true, there's a tradition in Islam that Muhammad didn't know Arabic. So the, the whole thing was just, or didn't

1 9:25

know how to read and write, maybe

Speaker 2 9:26

couldn't read and write, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah. So the whole thing is just purely a divine creation that flows through him. He's a channel and there are, just following up from what Svi said, there are doctrines about the Virgin Mary, which do the same work as it were, you know, where she is just a vessel. She just contributes blood.

1 9:47

Yeah, I mean this is an interesting place where there is contrast between Western and and Islamic scholarship, but then also contrast within, within Islam and

Speaker 4 9:58

Right.

1 9:58

You know, there's an Iranian scholar named ABM Rou, a Muslim, who spoke about the the conceptions of prophecy and a sophisticated understanding thereof. And alludes to, um, a more robust role for the prophet Muhammad in that, that process. So it's not just sort of the Western scholars versus the Muslim scholars. Right, right. Um, but within Islamic tradition, there's debate on this one. There's the difference,

Speaker 3 10:21

and in fact, I think the view of ramad is very close to the Christian notion of revelation. Mm-hmm. Right. The rule of Muhammad in the regulatory events.

Western Qur'an Criticism

Speaker 4 10:31

So, well, it seems like we've gotten out a sense of the, of the traditional Islamic view or the, a range of traditional, Muslim views on what the Koran is and the role of the prophet Muhammad in articulating it. Uh, maybe we can turn at this point to the tradition of critical scholarship on the Koran in the West. How does that begin? Uh, what were the questions that interested early scholars, and who were some of its, uh, important early figures.

1 11:00

I could start, with, with that, I mean, it begins as with this, the history of critical biblical scholarship. Largely in the German language, German language scholars and, um, Gustav Vile wrote an important work on the Quran, dividing the text into three periods revealed. Or proclaimed by the prophet Muhammad when he was in Mecca between the year six 10 and 6 22, and then a fourth period when he was in the city of Medina to the north between 6 22 and 6 32. I'll return to that question in a moment, but in some ways, the seminal work of critical scholarship on Theran was out of Abraham Geiger, who in 1833 wrote a book entitled, what Has Muhammad taken out from Judaism? And I understand Geiger was also an important figure within, within Judaism, maybe

Speaker 4 11:47

reform.

1 11:47

He

Speaker 4 11:47

was indeed, yeah. A foundational figure in a reformed Judaism, correct? Mm-hmm.

1 11:51

So, and his of course, optic in looking at the Quran was that of a non-Muslim. And so he simply observed that the Quran has all this information about biblical prophets, speaks about Adam, speaks about Abraham, Noah, Moses. he, he was particularly interested in the figures of the Hebrew Bible. And yet the tradition tells us that Mecca was a pagan city and some of this material is in verses that should have been proclaimed in Mecca. So we start to ask the question, okay, how can we figure this out? Where did, who are Mohammad sort of sources or informants or, yeah.

Speaker 2 12:22

Right.

1 12:23

Yeah. And so that work is still significant for research on the relationship between the Bible in the Quran at this stage. Western scholars who are sometimes called orientalists, were basically working completely independently from the ongoing scholarship of Muslims in the Islamic world. I'll just mention one, one more thing, and I dunno if Unim has things to add on this point, but there was a competition in the 1850s, um, run by I think the Academy of Be in Paris, which had a number of important submissions. The, the competition was advertised to ask contributors to come up with a scientific chronology of Quranic passages, and the prize was given to three scholars, but the one that everyone remembers. Is a young German who was teaching at Strasberg, of course, part of France named, who wrote a book called History of the Quran. I could, I don't wanna go on forever here, but by history he meant basically how can we take the bits of the Quran as they appear now and rearrange them and put them in the order in which Muhammad originally proclaimed them. And that work is still, he established sort of the canonical chronology that people still look to today.

Speaker 3 13:37

I think Gabriel is right that the critical study of the Quran in the west perhaps began in the 19th century. Although it can also be pointed out that, you know, Western interest in the study of the Quran begin quite early, even in the 12th century. The Koran has been studied and translated into Latin,

Speaker 2 13:54

right?

Speaker 3 13:54

Although that kind of work may not be called critical. perhaps the purpose of translating the URA into Latin was for poly purpose. It's only in the 19th century that we, we witnessed, uh, the development of critical study of the Quran, that, that Western Scholars began to study the Quran seriously in order to understand it using, uh, a method that commonly, applied to the Bible. So Abraham Gigger was one of the pioneering figure in this, uh, context concerning the origin and the environment within which the Koran emerged. And in his book, he, he, he tried to prove. The Jewish influence on the Quran by examining, parallel dreams between the Bible and the Quran.

1 14:34

And people have said that there are waves of interest in Jewish sources and Christian sources of the Quran. Right, right,

Speaker 4 14:40

right. I wanted to follow up about that. Yes. Right. I mean, right. To to what extent. I mean, of course the Quran, uh, has, has so much to say about Mary, who we mentioned, uh, as, as a parallel. But in the Quran itself, you have so much about, uh, and it mentions Jesus of course, uh, but what was there debate in this early period about is. Koran, more Jewish, more Christian. How do we account for Jewish and Christian elements in the Koran? What did that debate look like?

Speaker 3 15:03

Yeah, I think even in the 19th century where at the same time, you know, uh, Geiger, work, provoke a rich discussion, there were also, a series of publication arguing for the predominant of the Christian influence on the Quran. So the Quran lesson to the Bible is, is really interesting and exciting field of, of, of research.

Muslim Reactions Today

1 15:24

Yeah. I mean that takes off especially with figures like to Andre, who I believe was Swedish, and then the Scottish, um, Richard Bell, who really argue that, um, listen, tradition tells us that the second city in which Muhammad worked the city of Medina. Was in part Jewish. And so we might be tempted to think that um, the Jewish influence on the Quran was more significant. Um, but actually if we look at the larger context of late antique near East, Christianity is everywhere, right? Yeah. It's. It's in the West, in Egypt, the southwest in Ethiopia. It's in Syria and Palestine. It's even in Arabia in Southern Arabia. So scholars like Torre and Richard Bell said, um, no. If we place a Quran in, its sort of larger context and also just some basic points like lu around. Is intensely interested in eschatology, argues time and again for the resurrection of the body and the retribution of people and heaven and hell. Obviously these concepts are important to Judaism as well, but the centrality of eschatology was seen as a marker of greater Christian influence. I don't know if that seems right to you or on face value, but

Speaker 4 16:34

Right,

1 16:35

right. That that was one of the arguments. Right.

Speaker 2 16:37

So how did Muslims react to this Western historical critical approach to the Quran?

Speaker 3 16:43

Well, in the 19th century, I'm not aware of any Muslim, reaction to a western study of the Quran. But the, there was discussion contact between Muslim and and Western scholars in the 19th century. In the early 10 century, there were Muslim who responded to Western study, but mostly focusing on. The presentation of Muhammad in the Western work. I think it's only in the second part of the 20th century that Muslim scholars began engaging western study of the Quran. If I can mention one, uh, one important scholar in this field is Fa Rahman, who in his work entitled Major Teams of the Quran. He expressed his disagreement with the British revisionist scholar, John Wabo. Today we, we witness various, uh, reaction of Muslim from dismissive, to more kind of more appreciation. Uh, one example of the negative reaction among Muslim is the work of Mustafa, who is a Saudi, uh, scholar, wrote interesting book in title, the history. The Kuran attacks in which he discussed the work of Western Scholars about the Quran, but he dismissed altogether. There were some scholars who responded to Western, uh, study of the Quran in more positive way. For instance, the work of, uh, to zuzu, I guess, has been widely received in the Muslim war.

1 18:11

Everyone loves Zuzu. The Ja, the Japanese scholar of

Speaker 3 18:14

the Japanese scholar of the Quran use semantic, uh, reading

1 18:17

right,

Speaker 3 18:18

uh, of the Quran,

1 18:19

right?

Speaker 3 18:19

So, uh, as well among, uh, among Turki scholars that his work is very

1 18:23

much is popular. I remember an anecdote where, when I was in graduate school and a colleague of mine said. The problem with chronic scholarship is there are all these Christians involved who are seeking to deconstruct the Quran, and it took, it took a, a Japanese scholar, I don't knowto Buddhist, I don't know what his religious background was, to have a more objective view. Yeah. Yeah. I, can I add one, just one comment about Muslim reactions. I mean, this, this is a very live topic even today. Yeah. Mm-hmm. Maybe in more intense, in some ways. And so I held a conference here at Notre Dame. In the early two thousands, I think it was 2005 on the Quran, we produced a book, the Quran, in its historical context, and several people encouraged me to get this translated into Arabic. Mm-hmm. Which I did, but then you need a publisher. So I went to Beirut one summer looking for a publisher there, and I finally found this fellow who everyone said, this guy will publish anything. He's a communist. He has, um, no, sort of, concern for religion and therefore he's happy to publish sort of critical, critical scholarship. So I went down to this publisher, I won't mention it. The name and he said, okay, I, I think I'll do it, but lemme just check with some people. And he came back eventually, he said, well, I've, I've re reviewed this, uh, book with a Muslim scholar who says that, uh, it has a lot of problems, so I'm willing to publish it if I can add a refutation to the book at the opening of it.

Speaker 3 19:44

It's interesting.

1 19:45

So there continues to be some contention.

Speaker 2 19:48

So was that attitude there from the very beginning or is this something kind of relatively recent?

Speaker 4 19:56

You know, I mean, you mean, uh, was there a kind of a reactionary move?

Speaker 2 19:59

Yes. Yes. Was that reaction the greater receptivity in the beginning right from the 19th century to today? Or is this from the past 30 or 40 years?

Speaker 3 20:09

I think this kind of reaction, you know, of course, you know, Muslim reaction to the Western study of Deran are diverse, is not. but as far as. I'm concerned. It, it seemed to me that, uh, Muslim reacted to Western study of the Quran only taking place in the second half of the 20th century. I'm not aware of any Muslim accent in the 19th century about the Quran, but of course, even today, you know, as, as Gabriel just mentioned, there are Muslim who react negatively. But of course there are other people who positively

1 20:41

there are, there's great attention to. The work of Christian missionaries in the Islamic world who are advancing arguments in favor of Christianity, vis-a-vis Islam. I mean, the case of Rashid Ri, for example, who wrote a book called, is that the title? Yeah. Which is sort of the, the empty arguments or the distractions of the Christians could be rendered. Something like that. But that was not dealing with sort of the serious German critical scholarship going on by Geiger and Nka that was dealing with, I think, principally American missionaries in Egypt.

Speaker 4 21:14

I mean, so these are, these are, these are are Christian missionaries who are offering arguments in favor of Christianity by cherry picking some historical scholarship on the Quran. Is that the

1 21:24

idea? Some, some of them are in India to move to the east a bit. There's Carl Gottlieb founder wrote a book Yeah. Called The Balance of the Truth. Which sort of denigrates Islam in, in order to advance Christianity. So there's awareness of that, but I think there's less awareness of the work that Nka and others are doing. in Europe, back in Europe.

Speaker 3 21:43

That will be interesting to see, you know, how Muslim will react to NCA's work because Yeah. Has been translated Arabic.

1 21:49

Right.

Speaker 3 21:50

mark, my colleague in Indonesia is Rahman recently wrote an essay. Examining, Indonesian Muslim responses to Western study of the Quran, and he identify both positive and negative, uh, responses among Indonesian Muslim scholars. So it's really complicated and very exciting.

Speaker 4 22:06

Well, why don't, why don't turn actually two, uh, specific cases or concrete cases where Western scholarship, uh, has differed from traditional Islamic scholarship, but now might be a good time too. Take a break, a good time to rate and or review minding scripture and we'll return and follow up with Francesca's question and further on these differences between Western scholarship and traditional Islamic scholarship. Welcome back to minding scripture. Francesca, you wanted to follow up with a question?

Speaker 2 22:52

Yes. There was one thing where I just wasn't clear, and that is that you said that there was a, a kind of periodization of the IC text that this was one finding of historical critics from Geiger on. There's a periodization. You've got the Medan period, and then the mein period. And then I'm not sure what the third period is, but they always have three periods. Just, just there's never two. Well, there are, there are

1 23:22

three mein and one medan. So

Speaker 2 23:24

there is three

1 23:25

in

Speaker 2 23:25

there. Okay. So what, what's the, what are the periods and what's the significance and is that something which traditional Muslims and scholars agree about?

Speaker 3 23:35

The Koran can be divided into Macan, and Madan is arid, mostly by, uh, Muslim and, and and Russian scholars. So the idea that the koan can be divided into Muan, andan is based on the Islamic tradition that Moham spent some of his time in Mecca, as well as in Medina. So the Macan of the Macan. Are those revelation that Mohammad claimed to receive while he was in Mecca? Well, the Madian, uh, chapters are associated with his, uh, life in Medina. So there is, you know, general disagreement, uh, among scholars concerning the Macan Medina divide. Although the basis for dividing the Quran into Macan and Madina could be different,

Why Chronology Matters

Speaker 4 24:25

why is this distinction so important? I mean, say for a traditional Muslim or for Western scholars? Why does it matter whether a particular surah, was delivered, or was revealed rather in Mecca or in Medina? What's the difference?

Speaker 3 24:38

It's, it's matter for Muslim or study of the Quran, because the Quran can be understood through the life of the prophet.

Speaker 4 24:47

Mm-hmm.

Speaker 3 24:48

So it is commonly understood that the Quran can be interpreted in light of Mohammad life, both in Mucca and in Madina. So traditionally Muslim understand that the divide of Macan and Medina is based primarily on the Muslim sources, which were written much later, and perhaps was intended to show that the, that Muhammad received revelation from God Western tend to develop their theory about the, and Madian Surro on the basis of the internal evidence from the Quran itself. I

1 25:28

mean, I would agree with Unim that this is an area of agreement generally, right? In general terms. And one sort of marker of that is that in a lot of the Arabic printings of the Quran, at the header of the Surah, which is one of the chapter of the Quran's divided into 114 Surahs roughly chapter, but that you'll see, you know, the name of the soda, and then you often see the word illa or Madia. Labeling that sort of as Mena Medina, and then in modern translations of the Quran done by non-Muslims, you find something similar either in the header, in the footnote, for example, the translation, the excellent translation of Arthur Droge of the Quran, who's not a Muslim critical scholar, not really interested for religious reasons. In the text, he'll still add a note saying this was revealed or proclaimed in the Melan Meina period. So Western Scholars had a particular interest in this chronological schema that Muslims didn't share, which is that people such as Theo writing, he published his book, history of the Quran in 1860, were interested in the psychological development of Muhammad, right? Muhammad wasn't a prophet. He didn't hear voices of an angel from his perspective. Even though he was sincere, he also was not an imposter. He had a sincere conviction, but he wasn't actually a prophet. And we being sort of critical rationalist sorts of people, we have to understand what was happening in the prophet's mind. How that, um, his mind changed in between Mecca and Medina. Keep in your mind that the traditional history has a very different context for Mecca and Medina and Mecca Muhammad is the leader of a small band of faithful ardent believers being persecuted by the pagan majority of the city. And maybe with a sort of apocalyptic passion. And so there's this sort of vibrant, intense, poetic quality,

Speaker 3 27:18

right,

1 27:18

for these mechan passages. Mm-hmm. And then in Medina, in Medina, everything settles down because, um, Mohammed now was worried about running a state and an army and has his own family and wives. And, um, so there is a different quality of these revelations, which is connected to his new psychological state as administer statesmen general.

Speaker 4 27:40

So, so you have this kind of consensus that it's important to divide the Quran into Mechan and Medina revelations, but on different grounds, but even on the traditional grounds, there is a kind of historical work, uh, historical logic at work in this division, in the sense that dividing these surahs into different locations enables us to understand why they were revealed at that point, what the context is, and then if that's the case. It's interesting that that coincides in a traditional perspective with this understanding of the Koran as already existing in heaven, entirely the word of God, and Muhammad simply as vessel, when this division between Mechan and Medina seems to attribute significance to these very specific historical circumstances of Muhammad. So how does that work on a traditional perspective? How do those two things kind of hold together?

Speaker 3 28:34

The way that Muslim understand the divide between do and Madina is in order to appreciate why, you know, certain verse, uh, describe, something in the way it described. So in order to understand that, you have to know the context in which the verse was revealed. So from quite early on, Muslim scholars develop a sophist gender on this. It's called asba, which can be rendered as the occasion of revelation. To provide the historical contact of certain verse in the Quran. Yes. Uh, Muslim believe that the Quran is the word of God. It's inscribed in the tablet in the heaven, but it was revealed to Muhammad in different period of time. So in order to understand certain in Johnson in the Quran, we. Also to understand the context in which certain verse was proclaimed by. That's very

1 29:28

interesting. Yeah. And it's complicated because there's also a concept of abrogation,

Speaker 3 29:33

right?

1 29:33

Which we, maybe we don't have to get into. But

Speaker 2 29:35

what does abrogation

1 29:36

mean? So it means that God can, um, replace an earlier verse with the later verse in the Quran itself in 22 and elsewhere speaks about God's ability to abrogate or replace a verse. And so it could lead to a certain priority to the medan revelations as later. Yeah, but I hesitate, I mean, I should let you, speak authoritatively.

Speaker 2 30:00

So for the historical critics, the earliest stuff is more authentic and for the traditional view, the latest stuff is more authentic'cause it's abrogating the earlier stuff.

1 30:08

Yes. I think to part B, part A, that is for the historical critics. I don't think they, they would consider everything to be authentic and interesting. In terms of the theological reading, for some, I would say the Medina material has a certain primacy, but not for all, because others, especially South Asian tradition, you look at the Quran as as a unity and, um, the mechan is just as important as a Medina.

Speaker 3 30:33

Yeah, that, that, this theory of abration is complicated. One, because even those who develop this theory don't agree among each other. Which was Abrogate agate.

1 30:42

So it's,

Speaker 3 30:42

it's very complic. Yeah.

Speaker 4 30:44

Well, so, but here though, that this is a case where we have a certain common ground, an interest, both on the part of Western critical scholarship and on the part of traditional Islam in distinguishing or the possibility of distinguishing between Mechan and Medina. What about, can you give an example of a case where there's, a kind of a, a more fundamental divide or, uh, findings or assertions of Western critical scholarship that fundamentally challenges traditional Muslim understandings of the Quran?

1 31:14

So I, I'm happy to, to start with that. I mean, the fundamental difference is something I alluded to with a bit about the psychology of the prophet, right? It's the notion that who's the author of the text, keeping in mind that for traditional Muslim, for example, in traditional Muslim or um, certain traditional Muslims, quote the text, they will say, and God said x. Whereas these, uh, Western scholars would come and say, no, Muhammad is the author, and so Muhammad said X. Today, in Quranic studies, very often people avoid the question altogether, and they just say, the Quran says X to make things. Can't argue with that. Exactly. Can't argue with that. Yeah. But Western scholars, particularly in the earlier so-called Orientalist scholarship, debated the idea of the sincerity of Muhammad. Noka was in, was generally in favor of his sincerity. That is that he was not consciously framing his own thoughts in the words of divine revelation in order to manipulate his followers or to promote his own cause. But others were, were less, um, certain about that and, uh, accused him of, especially in the Medina period, of advancing certain messages such as obeying the prophet, seeking his intercession. Your disposition when you're in his presence there different, for example, sort of 33 other verse 48. there are sort of 48. There are some messages like that which could suggest, which suggest is to some western scholars. That, um, maybe Muhammad was less than sincere. So from an Islamic point of view, this, this is all impossible. Macron is the voice of God. And indeed this, this sort of speculation is, is offensive and, uh, contentious.

Speaker 4 33:03

But could I ask, I mean, coming from the perspective of the Bible and Judaism and Christianity. That seems to me a rather subtle kind of difference when it comes to, say, traditional Jewish and Christian perspectives on the Bible and then the confrontation with historical scholarship. You have say the notion that Moses wrote, wrote the Bible and then comes historical scholarship and says. Maybe Moses didn't exist. He did exist. He probably had very little to do with the Bible. The Bible was probably written 600 years mainly, after Moses lived. This. These are, these are radically different kind of frameworks, whereas the, the, the differences that you're pointing to are relative, seem relatively subtle by comparison.

1 33:38

So yeah, that's an excellent point, point well taken. And the difference is modest vis-a-vis biblical scholarship for the earlier orientalist, but with the rise of the revisionist school that appears. Basically with a publication 1977 of a book called Quranic Studies by the American Scholar who worked in London, John sbo. Things change. So there we have a more radical departure in, um, theoretical grounds where SBO says, listen, basically the tools of New Testament scholarship. Help us to identify, uh, multiple sources for the text. And the implication is that whether Mohammed existed or not, we're not really sure, but it doesn't really matter. We can't recapture the history. All we can do is detect multiple logo or sayings. Which were gathered to and redacted into the Quranic text. So there you get some serious departure.

Speaker 2 34:31

So they dropped the whole idea of the periodization and they just say there are many sources. And it was written a long time after

1 34:37

Muhammad with redaction that that with the process of redaction, that means that. To imagine unitary and serial proclamation, S-E-R-I-A-L, um, of the Quran, um, is is sim simplistic and misleading.

Speaker 2 34:52

So the 19th century view is a sort of 19th century great man idea, and you've got Muhammad mm-hmm. As a genius who comes up with this and he doesn't, these romantic

Speaker 4 35:02

kind of conception

Speaker 2 35:03

and that it's just broken down in the 1970s. With an idea of many sources written long time afterwards, no. Great man behind it. And maybe when do they think the Koran was actually written?

1 35:17

I think that's a good point. It's That's for another episode.

Speaker 2 35:19

Another episode.

1 35:20

Another episode. Yes. But definitely Mohammed was a great man or the hero in a lot of sort of enlightenment era scholarship.

Speaker 2 35:27

Yes.

1 35:27

Yeah. So SBO thinks Koran, I mean, at least he proposed in his 1977 book, was. Codified and redacted quite late. That is rejected by almost everyone now, which sort of brings us to manuscript studies, and so even scholars who have revisionist ideas about the Quran's origins would hold that the Quran is an ancient text and that the traditional dates are. Correct or close to correct, I think is that,

Muslim Reception Today

Speaker 3 35:53

yeah, I, I think, you know, even we disagree with, uh, one's argument that the Quran, has been codified into a single book, caught late, perhaps in the late eight or early ninth century during the ABBA time. But I think he, he raised very important question concerning how do we know that the Quran was codified quite early in the Islamic tradition? Because. According to, uh, you know, intelligence and Muslim, that the Quran has been codified into a single book quite early. I mean, during the first and third century and third, Cali after the death of the prophet. So we don't have sources that give conclusive evidence concerning when exactly this scripture has been codified into a single book. So once Bro asked this very important question, what evident do we have? The Quran has been codified quite early. While the evidence from the Quran itself seemed to suggest that not only that, that it might be codified later, but also it include materials that cannot be imagined that the Kuran emerge in Maka and Medina, in which, you know, you know, the Koran engage with Jews and Christians, you know, in the seven eighth century. That kind of discussion could. Place in myopia, in Iraq rather than, in Hijas. In Maka and Madina where Moham live. So for once, the Q has nothing to do with Moham, so emerged somewhere else, not in the, in, in Central Arabia.

Speaker 2 37:25

And do traditional Muslims interact well with these kinds of ideas, or do they simply reject them all together?

Speaker 3 37:34

I don't know of any, serious work among trans Muslim, uh, engaging in scholarly discussion with Swansboro, but there are Muslims in the West in particular who engage critically with, with this kind of work.

1 37:47

There's a radical transformation in the context of contemporary chronic studies in the west. I mean, the younger generation are principally, uh, Muslim scholars who are engaged. Quran, so the sort of. Division between the Islamic Scholarship and Western Scholarship doesn't really work anymore. I

Speaker 3 38:08

agree. Yes, I

Speaker 4 38:09

agree. But does that, uh, and is that true? I mean, you, you mentioned Muslims in Western Muslims in Muslim. Um, is, is that true also of Islamic universities or or universities in the Muslim world? Is there that this kind of engagement with. Critical scholarship there as well, or does it remain a very kind

1 38:24

of more controversial off limits

Speaker 4 38:25

there? That's where you

1 38:27

could,

Speaker 3 38:27

you could address that. Yeah. It's, it certainly remain controversial. I mean, even among, uh, educated Muslim. I can't speak of controversy in this, in the Islamic War in general, but I, I can't tell you, you know, about my own experience introducing this kind of revisionist, uh, approach to the Quran. When I introduce, uh, this kind of, uh, ideas to readers in Indonesia, in Malaysia,

Speaker 4 38:49

Waynesboro, or something like that,

Speaker 3 38:50

right. Waynesboro idea about, uh, the origin of the Quran. Yeah. So, um, when I publish a book, uh, introducing Wabo idea and other thing to Indonesian readers, it generate, uh, some controversy. Even the publisher, one of the biggest, you know, publishing house in the country. Decided to, to write their own introduction to the book, warning the reader about some dangerous ideas about the book.

Speaker 4 39:12

Sort of like, uh, the Gabriel's experience in the translation of his conference

Speaker 3 39:16

book. Right, right.

1 39:16

Although I think that was a surprise for you that it showed up, or is that right?

Speaker 3 39:20

So yes, it's surprise, but also I think that it's, you know, blessing in disguise, perhaps because of the controversy that the book sold out in just few months. So, but despite, you know, the fear on the part of the publisher, the book was well received. you know, of course there, there was some disagreement. What surprised me is that some of these revisions ideas are. Relatively unowned among Indonesian readers, and therefore they seem eager to learn more about, you know, new ideas developed in the West. So even when I, you know, give a talk in, in Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia, which just like in Indonesia, it's still some controversy. When I gave this talk, it was attended by ati, uh, religiou leader appointed by the government to, to legitimize certain version of Islam. There. He continued interrupting me, every word I, I said. Then one day later the government issued a statement condemning my talk. You know, despite the negative response of the government malice and Ian, I think some of them would love to hear this kind of new ideas. So I think there, there's a lot of thing that, you know, that we can do, but I think we in the west. Continue to enhance the academic study of the Quran and perhaps also, you know, build some bridge with the Islamic world.

Speaker 4 40:52

Though, as, as Gabriel said, perhaps this, this growing cadre of younger, of a younger generation of Muslim scholars who are themselves in the West, who are engaged in this sort of historical critical work, can themselves represent a, uh, a bridge.

1 41:05

Right.

Speaker 4 41:05

I think, uh, moon, in your discussion, you had mentioned the question of attestation and e evidence, and that brings us around to. Manuscripts and the question of, you know, what data we have in terms of reconstructing the earliest history of the Koran perhaps, and Gabriel, you could comment on, uh, what the critical study of the Koran looks like today, what the critical questions are, how manuscript study is informing, uh, discussions nowadays.

1 41:35

I can, uh, address that a bit. So the, the conversation we're just having about the early origins of the Quran that reflects basically research and manuscript studies. There, there are other ways, other arguments made for the early origin of the Quran, but there's been carbon dating now when a lot of early manuscripts, which all are written in a certain distinctive script known as hi jazzy, um, which are thought to represent the early stratum of the Arabic script. And carbon dating is sort of all over the place, but it's all very early. Some of it is much too early. I've written about this, some of the dates are, um, are confusing because they, they're so early. But the really interesting point to note about the manuscripts, and I think quite unlike biblical scholarship, is that the skeletal text of the Quran is quite consistent in all of the early manuscripts. There is only one exception to this basic skeletal text. That is an aest, which means a manuscript that has upper writing and then lower writing that had been erased. And when we recapture that lower writing, this is a text discovered. Through a dramatic finding of manuscripts in the roof of a mosque in Senna, Yemen in 1973. So the Senna Pal says, as it's known, that lower text that had been destroyed through erasure actually has variance to the skeletal text. So that's the only exception. I mean, that's our one manuscript. Now it's a little more complicated'cause the way you develop the skeletal text into a fold text leads to many variants. In terms of the skeleton of the Arabic, there's great consistency.

Speaker 4 43:07

What do you mean by the skeletal text?

1 43:09

What does that mean? So, you know, Arabic is, um, written in a very, basic, basically a shorthand, um, known as Raam in Arabic that doesn't fully represent the consonants. And, in the manuscripts usually doesn't show the vowels at all. So, so it would be like, that's skeleton, a

Speaker 2 43:25

Hebrew Bible that's not pointed,

Speaker 4 43:27

but even, but even more skeleton.

1 43:27

It's even more skeletal. It's very skeletal. It's extremely skeleton. Yeah. So, and just one thing to add about this is that, to some scholars, this has confirmed the traditional Islamic narrative that the third kph. Destroyed all variant versions. This is Offman who reigned between 6 44 and 6 56, destroyed all variant versions of the Quran, and kept just one and distributed that. And so the evidence of manuscripts with this consistent skeleton would seem to confirm that we don't really have outside attestation that would allow us to confirm the story itself. So whether that is completely established is still an open question, but it is, the manuscript evidence is early and consistent,

Faith and Critical Study

Speaker 3 44:10

right. So the, the, so yes, uh, manuscript studies is in an emerging subfield in IC studies. I think the discovery of the, well-known ana manuscript, a deepened, scholarly interest in, uh, manuscript studies, but there were some effort, even in early dentist century. You mentioned in your, in your work about, the possibility of, of establishing a critical edition of the Quran. Although, you know, this project, uh, uh, didn't come to fruition. Uh, but, but scholar interest in, in manuscript studies didn't die out. and, and recently, this task of establishing critical edition of the Quran has again undertaken by group of researchers in Berlin under the projects called As You The Corpus Veronica. Yeah, right. It's really an exciting, you know, field of word.

Speaker 2 45:00

If I could ask a final question then for both Muni, perhaps, how does the work of critical scholarship impact the life of faith for Muslims? How do Muslims reconcile historical critical scholarship with their faith?

Speaker 3 45:14

I think Muslims should welcome this new development in the critical scholarship on the Quran. The question is not whether Muslim can or cannot study the Quran. Critically, I think faith, which is best on knowledge. Will be much firmer, stronger, and solid than without knowledge. I have been asked even by Muslim friends, you know, how do I engage critical scholarship in the Quran? that even suggest that, you know, Western, critical scholarship is intended to, uh, undermine the Islamic faith. So my response to them was that these Western critical scholars. Are critical only in the study of the Quran, even on their own, uh, scripture. And the whole enterprise of Western study of the Quran is based on the idea among other thing, whether it is impossible to apply rigorous examination to the Quran as has been applied to the Bible. I also told my Indonesian my, my, uh, Muslim friends. That there's nothing to fear and, and to be afraid of critical scholarship. One important lesson that I mentioned to them, about the history of Christianity is that after having, you know, gone through the good wave of critical scholarship, Christianity continue to to, to strive and grow. So it doesn't mean that, you know, when the Bible criticize, um, through different kind of method. That it was, it, it, its sacredness. So it's

Speaker 4 46:56

interesting though. But you're comparing, if I may, uh, is there nothing to, you're comparing in this conversation the Koran to the Bible, but as you mentioned at the outset, the proper, uh, comparison of the Koran in Islam might be more to Jesus, uh, to to to to Jesus himself. And so is it comfort enough to the, to say traditional Muslims that Christianity survived? historical scholarship if, if the Quran really is, is closer in its place for Muslims to Christ within Christianity.

Speaker 3 47:25

Well, my point is, um, is, is to show them how important it is to develop critical approach to the Quran. I don't think that, you know, Muslim need to reconcile critical scholarship with their faith. what is needed, in my humble opinion, is critical thinking, which is, you know, strongly encouraged in the Quran itself.

Speaker 2 47:47

Hmm. Well, friends, thank you very much for joining us. Please spread the news about minding scripture and don't forget to review the podcast. Be sure to be with us for the next episode of Minding Scripture where Divine Word and human reason meet.