3,454
edits
Satanic Verses (Gharaniq Incident): Difference between revisions
→Historicity
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) (Rewritten/expanded with academic discussion and the account replaced with one from the major sira sources.) |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
Nicolai Sinai points out that the purported satanic verses praising the three deities mentioned in verses 19-20 would not have made sense if inserted before any of the polemical verses that immediately follow.<ref>Sinai, Nicolai (2011). "An Interpretation of Sūrat al-Najm (Q. 53)". Journal of Qurʾanic Studies. 13 (2): 1–28. doi:10.3366/jqs.2011.0018 See pp.10-11</ref> Patricia Crone, instead looking at the verses preceding the above quoted passage, argues that "Have you seen al-Lat...?" in verse 19 should be taken as a hostile question about literally seeing the three deities, particularly given that the previous verse and four others in the first half of the surah claim that Allah's servant "saw" the heavenly being (with the same Arabic verb meaning "see" as verse 19). She undelines this point using ({{Quran|35|40}} and {{Quran|46|4}} where a similar hostile question is asked. Given the hostility of the question in Q. 53:19-20, Crone argues that the purported Satanic verses praising the deities would not fit if inserted after such a context.<ref>Crone, Patricia (2015). [Problems in sura 53 https://www.jstor.org/stable/24692173] Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies. 78 (1): 15–23. doi:10.1017/S0041977X15000014 (See pp. 18-22)</ref> | Nicolai Sinai points out that the purported satanic verses praising the three deities mentioned in verses 19-20 would not have made sense if inserted before any of the polemical verses that immediately follow.<ref>Sinai, Nicolai (2011). "An Interpretation of Sūrat al-Najm (Q. 53)". Journal of Qurʾanic Studies. 13 (2): 1–28. doi:10.3366/jqs.2011.0018 See pp.10-11</ref> Patricia Crone, instead looking at the verses preceding the above quoted passage, argues that "Have you seen al-Lat...?" in verse 19 should be taken as a hostile question about literally seeing the three deities, particularly given that the previous verse and four others in the first half of the surah claim that Allah's servant "saw" the heavenly being (with the same Arabic verb meaning "see" as verse 19). She undelines this point using ({{Quran|35|40}} and {{Quran|46|4}} where a similar hostile question is asked. Given the hostility of the question in Q. 53:19-20, Crone argues that the purported Satanic verses praising the deities would not fit if inserted after such a context.<ref>Crone, Patricia (2015). [Problems in sura 53 https://www.jstor.org/stable/24692173] Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies. 78 (1): 15–23. doi:10.1017/S0041977X15000014 (See pp. 18-22)</ref> | ||
On the other hand, Tommaso Tesei builds on the common observation (also agreed by Crone as the general scholarly view) that verses 23 and 26-32 appear to be an interpolation of long verses into a surah of otherwise short verses. Tesei argues that those verses display stylistic incoherence as well as a theological tension with the rest of Q. 53, a surah which is otherwise consistent with evidence external to the Islamic tradition regarding pre-Islamic deities and star worship. It could be noted that these long verses with all their difficulties commence after verses 20-21, so Sinai's argument is not entirely eliminated. | On the other hand, Tommaso Tesei builds on the common observation (also agreed by Crone as the general scholarly view) that verses 23 and 26-32 appear to be an interpolation of long verses into a surah of otherwise short verses. Tesei argues that those verses display stylistic incoherence as well as a theological tension with the rest of Q. 53, a surah which is otherwise consistent with evidence external to the Islamic tradition regarding pre-Islamic deities and star worship. It could be noted that these long verses with all their difficulties commence after verses 20-21, so Sinai's argument is not entirely eliminated (though some have suggested that 20-21 could also have be part of the interpolation, if the incident occurred<ref>Devin Stewart, "Introductory Oaths and Composite Surahs" in Marianna Klar (Ed.) "Structural Dividers in the Quran", Routledge, 2020, pp. 272-4</ref>). | ||
In further support of his argument that the long verses are interpolations, Tesei notes that the apparent interpolation coincides with the traditional account that an explanatory comment was inserted to rectify the identification of the pagan deities as divine intercessors, which may support the possibility of historical elements to the Satanic verses story, though not in every detail (since he argues that the interpolations were by a separate author).<ref>Tesei, Tommaso (2021). [https://www.academia.edu/75302962 The Qurʾān(s) in Context(s)] Journal Asiatique. 309 (2): 185–202. (see pp. 192-196)</ref> | In further support of his argument that the long verses are interpolations, Tesei notes that the apparent interpolation coincides with the traditional account that an explanatory comment was inserted to rectify the identification of the pagan deities as divine intercessors, which may support the possibility of historical elements to the Satanic verses story, though not in every detail (since he argues that the interpolations were by a separate author).<ref>Tesei, Tommaso (2021). [https://www.academia.edu/75302962 The Qurʾān(s) in Context(s)] Journal Asiatique. 309 (2): 185–202. (see pp. 192-196)</ref> | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||