Difficulties with the Traditional Historical Account of the Quran's Origins

From WikiIslam, the online resource on Islam
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination

This article or section is being renovated.

Lead = 4 / 4
Structure = 3 / 4
Content = 3 / 4
Language = 4 / 4
References = 4 / 4
Lead
4 / 4
 Structure
3 / 4
 Content
3 / 4
 Language
4 / 4
 References
4 / 4


Modern Academic Scholarship has questioned the traditional Islamic account (from the sirah (biographies), tafsirs (commentaries) and hadith (sayings/traditions of the prophet), which were recorded far later than the time of revelation) of the Quran's creation to varying degrees. While these are heavily debated in academia, those scholars who propose the largest differences are roughly categorised as the Revisionist school of Islamic studies. While these are not typical historical errors in the sense of the Quran contradicting historical fact, they do undermine the reliability of both Sunni and Shia traditions on the interpretation of the Quran. Some of their issues with the traditional account, particularly around the area of preaching are mentioned below.

Sodom and Gomorrah being located near Mecca and Medina

The prophet Lūṭ,/(Biblical 'Lot') is a Jewish prophet also mentioned in the Bible as well as the Qur'an, who warns the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (סְדֹם (Səḏōm) and עֲמֹרָה ('Ămōrā)) of imminent destruction if they do not repent their sinful ways, who do not and so are quickly destroyed by God (as well as Admah, Zeboiim and Zoar (Bela) in the Bible, making up the five "cities of the plain"). These are believed to be located in North-West Arabia[1] for example, near the "Lot's Wife" pillar of salt, on Mount Sodom, Israel (as in the biblical account his wife is turned into a pillar of salt), and placing Gomorrah located near the southern end of the Dead Sea, south of the peninsula of Al-Lisan.[2]

Traditional Islamic scholars have seemingly agreed with the placement in Northern Arabia too, as Patricia Crone notes in her 2008 article What do we actually know about Muhammad?'...the Qur'an twice describes its opponents as living in the site of a vanished nation, that is to say a town destroyed by God for its sins. There were many such ruined sites in northwest Arabia. The prophet frequently tells his opponents to consider their significance and on one occasion remarks, with reference to the remains of Lot's people, that "you pass by them in the morning and in the evening". This takes us to somewhere in the Dead Sea region. Respect for the traditional account has prevailed to such an extent among modern historians that the first two points have passed unnoticed until quite recently, while the third has been ignored. The exegetes said that the Quraysh passed by Lot's remains on their annual journeys to Syria, but the only way in which one can pass by a place in the morning and the evening is evidently by living somewhere in the vicinity.'[3]

and We made its topmost part its nethermost, and rained on them stones of shale.

There are indeed signs in that for the percipient. This (city) lies on a road that still survives,

and there is indeed a sign in that for the faithful.
Quran 15:74-77
And indeed, Lot was among the messengers.

[So mention] when We saved him and his family, all, Then We destroyed the others. And indeed, you pass by them in the morning And at night.

Then will you not use reason?
Quran 37:133-138

In relation to other cities

The following verse also mentions the destruction of other towns from previous prophets with Hūd who preached to ʿĀd and Ṣāliḥ to Thamūd. ʿĀd and Thamūd are associated with northern and mid- Arabia, but it is only (the ruins of) the people of Lūṭ (Lot), located much further near the Dead Sea, which are stated as being 'not far from you'. A simple reading of this would imply that ʿĀd and Thamūd (and therefore the Arabian peninsula), were further away than the Dead Sea from this verse's initial preaching/audience.

O my people, do not let your defiance toward me lead you to be visited by the like of what was visited on the people of Noah, or the people of Hūd, or the people of Ṣāliḥ, and the people of Lot are not distant from you.
Quran 11:89

So the claim is that for this to make sense to those being spoken to at the time of revelation, this would place at least part of Muhammad's preaching in that vicinity (as many in the Revisionist school of Islamic Studies do), rather than strictly in Mecca and Medina where orthodox Islamic views found in the biographies and hadith place him.

The Romans in a nearby land

The Quran claims that the Romans (Byzantines) have been defeated in the nearest (part of) the land.

The Byzantines have been defeated in the nearest land. But they, after their defeat, will overcome.
Quran 30:2-3

To be notable enough to have gained a mention in the Quran, this could refer to large scale defeats by the Persians at Jerusalem in 614 CE or Damascus in 613 CE, and many other battles in the Byzantine-Sasanian War of 602-628, which primarily took place in Northern Arabia/Africa/Mesopotamia. But neither of these locations can be considered to be “nearest” land to Mecca or Medina, which are both hundreds of miles away.[4] Leaving a site much further North the more fitting to this verse.

Destroyed towns nearby Mecca

In addition to Lot above, in a surah said to be revealed in Mecca in the traditional account,[5] a verse brings the attention of the audience to the destruction of the towns and peoples around them.

Certainly We have destroyed the towns that were around you, and We have variously paraphrased the signs so that they may come back.
Quran 46:27

And as Patricia Crone mentioned in her 2008 article What do we actually know about Mohammed? 'There were many such ruined sites in northwest Arabia.', while they are not known to be around Mecca, though archaeological digs there are currently limited.[6]

The Battle of Badr

Muslim tradition expands upon vague mentions in the Quran to create an extremely important and detailed historical memory of the 'Battle of Badr', with 'Badr' being mentioned once by name in the Quran (Quran 3:123).

Certainly Allah helped you at Badr, when you were weak [in the enemy’s eyes]. So be wary of Allah so that you may give thanks.
Quran 3:123

According to Islamic Traditions:

Nearly two years after the Hijrah, in the middle of the month of Ramadan, a major raid was organized against a particularly wealthy caravan escorted by Abū Sufyān, head of the Umayyad clan of the Quraysh. According to the traditional accounts, when word of the caravan reached Muhammad, he arranged a raiding party of about 300, consisting of both muhājirūn and anṣār (Muhammad’s Medinese supporters), to be led by Muhammad himself. By filling the wells on the caravan route near Medina with sand, Muhammad’s army lured Abū Sufyān’s army into battle at Badr, near Medina. There the two parties clashed in traditional fashion: three men from each side were chosen to fight an initial skirmish, and then the armies charged toward one another for full combat. As his army charged forward, Muhammad threw a handful of dust, which flew into the eyes and noses of many of the opposing Meccans. Despite the superior numbers of the Meccan forces (about 1,000 men), Muhammad’s army scored a complete victory, and many prominent Meccans were killed.
Battle of Badr. Islamic History. Britannica Entry

Traditional exegetes commenting on this verse unanimously date the battle falling during Ramadan,[7] and link it to other verses such as Quran 8:41 (which it is not mentioned by name in). However, as British historian Tom Holland notes (citation 50: refencing Crone (1987a), pp. 226–30: The papyrus fragment is Text 71 in Grohmann), an earlier (than the Islamic historians/exegetes) manuscript mentions the Battle of Badr, but does not lists a date in Ramadan, which raises questions on the traditional interpretation of these verses.

Why, when the savage Northumbrians were capable of preserving the writings of a scholar such as Bede, do we have no Muslim records from the age of Muhammad? Why not a single Arab account of his life, nor of his followers’ conquests, nor of the progress of his religion, from the whole of the near two centuries that followed his death? Even the sole exception to the rule – a tiny shred of papyrus discovered in Palestine and dated to around AD 740 – serves only to compound the puzzle. Reading it is like overhearing a game of Chinese whispers. Over the course of only eight lines, it provides something truly startling: a date for the Battle of Badr that is not in the holy month of Ramadan. 50 Why should this come as a surprise? Because later Muslim scholars, writing their learned and definitive commentaries on the Qur’an, confidently identified Badr with an otherwise cryptic allusion to ‘the day the two armies clashed’ – a date that fell in Ramadan.51 Perhaps, then, on this one point, the scholars were wrong? Perhaps. But if so, then why should they have been right in anything else that they wrote? What if the entire account of the victory at Badr were nothing but a fiction, a dramatic just-so story, fashioned to explain allusions within the Qur’an that would otherwise have remained beyond explanation?
Holland, Tom. In The Shadow Of The Sword: The Battle for Global Empire and the End of the Ancient World (pp. 39-40). Little, Brown Book Group.

Academic scholar Gerard Hawting also discusses these issues in his 2015 paper 'Qur’ān and sīra: the relationship between Sūrat al-Anfāl and muslim traditional accounts of the Battle of Badr'.[8]

Other scholars have noted parallels between the details from previous Judeo-Christians stories, e.g. Austrian orientalist Hans Mzik, notes the similarities in his 1915 paper 'The Gideon-Saul Legend and the Tradition of the Battle of Badr', which may have been used to shape the account, such as the number of fighters for Muhammad.

The number of Muslims in the Battle of Badr in the year 2 AH as it is handed down in Arab tradition varies. The smallest figure of 300 is to be found in the poems attributed to amza, the largest emerges from Ibn Sa‘d, who puts the number of Muammad's Meccan fighters at 863 and those of the Medina fighters as 238, giving a total of 324 combatants at Badr, without counting those undecided. In general, the sources speak of 313 or 314, or “310 and several more, and also of 307, 317, or 318 fighters at Badr. The details at first create the impression that we are dealing with a genuine historical account. We know, however, a tradition according to which the number of fighters at Badr is as great as the number of people of Jālūt (Gideon-Saul). According to a variant, the prophet is supposed to have said to his people on the day of Badr: “You are the same number as the people of Tālūt on the day that he clashed with Jālūt.”
Original title: Hans Mzik, “Die Gideon-Saul-Legende und die überlieferung der Schlacht bei Badr. Ein Beitrag zur ältesten Geschichte des Islam, in WZKM 29 (1915): 371–83. Quoted in Warraq, Ibn. Koranic Allusions: The Biblical, Qumranian, and Pre-Islamic Background to the Koran (pp 239 Hans von Mzik ). Prometheus.

The battle is introduced in a prophetic dream in reports with similar details and symbolism,[9] and other parallels are found in reports surrounding the battle.

Immediately before the battle, a crowd of Qurayshites approached until they came to the prophet's watering place. Among them was akīm ibn izām. Then the prophet spoke: “Let them [drink]! And no one drank at that time who would not be killed, except for akīm ibn izām, for he was not killed….”18 Wāqidī adds to this: “Twice akīm escaped ruin through God's mercy: once when Muammad, after the recitation of sura 36, threw dust at the heads of a number of Qurayshites that were hostile to him, among whom he was also to be found the second time at the Badr drinking place.” On its own, it is not possible to infer why simply “drinking” is supposed to have been wrong and entailed death. The reason originates from the ālūt legend: he who drank was an unbeliever, and the unbeliever deserved to die. In a further elaboration of this thought process, the “drinking ones” = the unbelievers, naturally had to be killed in the battle. The whole episode is nothing more than a reshaping and elaboration of Aswad ibn ‘Abd al-Asad al-Makhzūmī’s story corresponding to the prevailing mind-set, an event neutral in itself which is supposed to have taken place at the beginning of the Battle of Badr.
Original title: Hans Mzik, “Die Gideon-Saul-Legende und die überlieferung der Schlacht bei Badr. Ein Beitrag zur ältesten Geschichte des Islam, in WZKM 29 (1915): 371–83. Quoted in Warraq, Ibn. Koranic Allusions: The Biblical, Qumranian, and Pre-Islamic Background to the Koran (pp 241) Hans von Mzik. Prometheus.

Mismatches in law between the Quran and later Islamic texts

As academic scholar Michael Cook notes, there are many differences in religious law between the Quran and the later recorded biographies and 'sahih/authentic' traditions. For example, in regards to stoning adulterers (read the primary texts in: Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Stoning), where there are many recordings of the prophet ordering stoning as punishment, whilst the Quran only prescribes 100 lashes.

The main point in favour of a hypothesis in which the Koran is off the scene for several decades is that it also accounts for another set of puzzles thrown up by research into the early development of Islamic law. Each of these involves an aspect of Islamic law which in some very fundamental way seems to contradict or ignore the Koran. For example, it is notorious that Islam prescribes stoning as the standard penalty for proven adultery (zinā), and accredited traditions about the legal activity of the Prophet portray him as reluctantly implementing implementing this punishment. Yet if we turn to the Koran, this is what we read:

The fornicatress (al-zāniya) and the fornicator (al-zānī) – scourge each of them a hundred stripes. (Q24:2)

How this discrepancy could have arisen was a question to which the Muslim scholars had their answers, one of which we have already encountered in the shape of a hungry goat; but the solutions put forward were neither simple nor straightforward.
Cook, Michael. The Koran: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions Book 13) (p. 138). OUP Oxford.

Unknown words in the Quran

The traditional account contains an extremely detailed and comprehensive collection of oral tradition of biographical reports, hadith and other traditions, supposedly originating from the time of the prophet with unbroken isnads (chains of narrations), from the statement being said to being recorded in writing, to explain the Quran's meaning. However not only are there often contradictory explanations for verses among classical Islamic scholars, there are even unknown words in the Quran. Michael Cook notes that taking the traditional account as history, this should not have happened.

The strange thing about these words is that the student who goes on to make a scholarly career in Islamic studies will still not know what they mean decades later. We met similar obscurities in the verses on the Sabbath-breakers (Q7:163–6). They are typical of a whole cluster of linguistic puzzles in the text of the Koran, and translations can do no more than gloss over them by picking and choosing among a welter of competing guesses. These guesses are usually the work of the Muslim commentators, but Western scholars have not hesitated to contribute new ones of their own.

Sometimes, of course, the obscurity is in place. Sūra 101, as we have seen, begins: ‘The Clatterer! What is the Clatterer? And what shall teach thee what is the Clatterer?’ In such a context it would be presumptuous to rush in too quickly with an explanation; God is making the point that He knows something we don’t. There are also cases where the exigencies of rhyme must be borne in mind: abābīl, sijjīl, and ṣamad are cases in point.

But in other instances there are no such extenuating circumstances. The ‘tribute verse’, which is of fundamental legal importance for the Islamic state, lays down that the unbelievers in question are to pay the tribute ‘out of hand’ (‘an yadin, Q9:29); what this simple phrase intends remains as elusive to modern scholars as it was to the medieval commentators. Two long Medinan verses set out a complex law of inheritance (Q4:11–12), again a very practical matter. The second includes an account of what happens in the event that ‘a man is inherited from by kalāla’; this word, which also occurs in Q4:176, seems to have bothered the commentators from the earliest times, and remains obscure to this day. Something without any such practical significance, but very strange nonetheless, is the fact that about a quarter of the Sūras of the Koran begin with concatenations of mysterious letters to which no meaning can be attached. The first verse of Sūra 19, for example, is k-h-y-’ṣ (this is read by reciting the names of the Arabic letters).

Each such item is a puzzle. Somebody must once have known what it meant, and yet that knowledge did not reach the earliest commentators whose views have come down to us, let alone ourselves. It is only natural that modern scholars should continue to search for solutions.

But the larger puzzle is why obscurities of this kind should be so salient a feature of the Koran. It is not in general surprising that scriptures and classics should be like this. Often a long period separates the culture in which such a work originated from that of the oldest scholarly traditions which interpret its meaning for us. But on any conventional account of the early history of Islam, there should not have been such a gap in the case of the Koran.
Cook, Michael. The Koran: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions Book 13) (p. 136 - 137). OUP Oxford.

It should be noted that even in the cases that Cook notes may be used for rhyme, this purpose and meaning is still debated, as one can see in Angelika Neuwirth's 2022 commentary on the Qur'an.

V. 3 wa-arsala ʿalayhim ṭayran abābīl] Abābīl, a word that is not attested elsewhere, cannot be explained etymologically (for the hypotheses up to now, see FVQ, 44f.). An instance in Umayya ibn abī l-Ṣalt (Schulthess 1911: fragment 4.3) appears to draw from the Qur’an, and therefore should be considered inauthentic. The translation “herds, swarms” would correspond most probably to the intended sense of the verse (cf. Bell 1991: 585). V. 4 tarmīhim bi-ḥijāratin min sijjīl] The defense of the opponents from Mecca, which is presented in the Qur’an as a miracle, has no parallels in the historical tradition. Sijjīl, another hapaxlegomenon in the Qur’an, is a loan formation according to Jeffery (FVQ, 164), derived from Liat sigillum (cf. Robinson 2001; Frolov 2005). The recourse to a loan word serves to enigmatize, and thus heighten the significance of, the act of annihilation, which is presented in sura’s text as a miraculous intervention by the God worshipped in the local sanctuary.
Neuwirth, Angelika. The Qur'an: Text and Commentary, Volume 1: Early Meccan Suras: Poetic Prophecy (p. 61-62). Yale University Press.

In many cases we see completely contradictory reports of the meaning of words, often with the origin of the alleged meaning being ascribed to the same member of earlier generations of early Islamic figures, showing these are personal inferences being extrapolated back to earlier respected figures rather than genuine historical memory.[10]

Unknown religion in the Qur'an

Just as puzzling is a religious group called the 'sabians/sabeans' الصابئون al-Ṣābiʾūn. They are mentioned three times in the Quran, twice listed as being able to enter paradise, alongside the 'people of the book', i,e. the Jews and Christians.

Indeed, those who have believed [in Prophet Muhammad] and those [before Him] who were Jews or Sabeans or Christians – those [among them] who believed in Allah and the Last Day and did righteousness – no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve.
Quran 5:69
Indeed the faithful, the Jews, the Christians and the Sabaeans—those of them who have faith in Allah and the Last Day and act righteously—they shall have their reward from their Lord, and they will have no fear, nor will they grieve.
Quran 2:62

And once generically alongside all other religions, see Quran 22:17.

We are not told of any of their religious practices in the Quran itself, however as 'people of the book' Islamic rights and laws apply differently to them than those who are not (see: Dhimma). They are a theologically distinct group who may have a chance of reaching paradise. So despite their identity being of high importance even to law, it does not seem to have reliably reached the earliest commentators, who have heavily disputed it since. In fact the ambiguity over their identity allowed many different groups to self-identify as Sabian's for self-legitimisation and avoid persecution under Muslim rule.[11] [12]

Both classical Islamic scholars and modern academics have searched for a clear identity to this religious group, with no consensus yet found. We see candidates from pagans, polytheists, angel worshippers and those who leave and enter their religion,[13] Jewish-Christian sects (such as the Elchasites),[14] Manichaeans,[15] Samaritans,[16] among many others, e.g. see Ibn Kathir's commentary on them.[17] This would suggest that the historical context of the Qur'an (and therefore meaning), initially passed through oral methods, is not as well preserved as traditionalist scholars believe, with even the religious environment of preaching being unknown.


See Also

References

  1. ↑ Sodom and Gomorrah. Britannica Entry. 2023.
  2. ↑ Gomorrah. The British Museum Entry.
  3. ↑ What do we actually know about Mohammed? Patricia Crone. 2008. opendemocracy.net
  4. ↑ Byzantine Empire. Historical empire, Eurasia. Geography & Travel. Britannica Entry (this page shows the map of the empire in Northern Arabia, where you can see the lowest border is hundreds of miles from Medina, and even more from Mecca)
  5. ↑ Traditional Revelation Order (Taken from The History of the Quran by Abu Abd Allah al-Zanjani). Tanzil Project. (Tanzil is an international Quranic project aimed at providing a highly verified precise Quran text in Unicode.)
  6. ↑ Schick, Robert, “Archaeology and the Qurʾān”, in: Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān, General Editor: Johanna Pink, University of Freiburg. Consulted online on 09 March 2024 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1875-3922_q3_EQSIM_00031>
  7. ↑ E.g. Tafsir Ibn Kathir Verse 3:123. Ibn Kathir d. 1373.
  8. ↑ Hawting, Gerald. “QUR’ĀN AND SĪRA: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SŪRAT AL-ANFĀL AND MUSLIM TRADITIONAL ACCOUNTS OF THE BATTLE OF BADR.” In Les Origines Du Coran, Le Coran Des Origines, edited by François Déroche, Christian Julien Robin, and Michel Zink, 75–92. Editions de Boccard, 2015. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvbtznq1.6.
  9. ↑ Original title: Hans Mzik, “Die Gideon-Saul-Legende und die überlieferung der Schlacht bei Badr. Ein Beitrag zur ältesten Geschichte des Islam, in WZKM 29 (1915): 371–83. Quoted in Warraq, Ibn. Koranic Allusions: The Biblical, Qumranian, and Pre-Islamic Background to the Koran (Chapter 2.1 The Gideon-Saul Legend and the Tradition of the Battle of Badr) A Contribution to Islam’s Oldest Story. Hans von Mzik. Prometheus.
  10. ↑ Explaining Contradictions in Exegetical Hadith. Islamic Origins Blog. Joshua Little. 2023.
  11. ↑ Elukin, Jonathan. “Maimonides and the Rise and Fall of the Sabians: Explaining Mosaic Laws and the Limits of Scholarship.” Journal of the History of Ideas, vol. 63, no. 4, 2002, pp. 619–37. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3654163. Accessed 18 June 2024.
  12. ↑ From Sasanian Mandaeans to Ṣābians of the Marshes. Kevin T. Van Bladel. Pp 5. Brill. 2017.
  13. ↑ For example a variety of views from traditional Islamic scholars on IslamQA. Who are the Sabians? 2004. IslamQA.com.
  14. ↑ Elukin, Jonathan. “Maimonides and the Rise and Fall of the Sabians: Explaining Mosaic Laws and the Limits of Scholarship.” Journal of the History of Ideas, vol. 63, no. 4, 2002, pp. 619–37. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3654163.
  15. ↑ Sabi’ entry in Encyclopaedia Of The Qur’an. pp. 511-512. Francois de Blois. 2001.
  16. ↑ Adam Silverstein. Samaritans and Early Islamic Ideas. Pp 328. The Institute of Asian and African Studies. The Max Schloessinger Memorial Foundation. Offprint from JERUSALEM STUDIES IN ARABIC AND ISLAM 53 (2022)
  17. ↑ Tafsir Ibn Kathir on verse 2:62. Ibn Kathir d.1373 CE. The Sabi'un or Sabians There is a difference of opinion over the identity of the Sabians. Sufyan Ath-Thawri said that Layth bin Abu Sulaym said that Mujahid said that, "The Sabians are between the Majus, the Jews and the Christians. They do not have a specific religion.'' Similar is reported from Ibn Abi Najih. Similar statements were attributed to `Ata' and Sa`id bin Jubayr. They (others) say that the Sabians are a sect among the People of the Book who used to read the Zabur (Psalms), others say that they are a people who worshipped the angels or the stars. It appears that the closest opinion to the truth, and Allah knows best, is Mujahid's statement and those who agree with him like Wahb bin Munabbih, that the Sabians are neither Jews nor Christians nor Majus nor polytheists. Rather, they did not have a specific religion that they followed and enforced, because they remained living according to their Fitrah (instinctual nature). This is why the idolators used to call whoever embraced Islam a `Sabi', meaning, that he abandoned all religions that existed on the earth. Some scholars stated that the Sabians are those who never received a message by any Prophet. And Allah knows best.'
Retrieved from "http://wikiislamica.net/index.php?title=Difficulties_with_the_Traditional_Historical_Account_of_the_Quran%27s_Origins&oldid=139599"