Fwd: Radical New Views of Islam and the Origins of the Koran

From: Wade T.Smith (wade_smith@harvard.edu)
Date: Sat Mar 02 2002 - 15:34:46 GMT

  • Next message: Steve Drew: "Re: Example of an aggresive irrational meme"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA15571 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 2 Mar 2002 15:40:11 GMT
    Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:34:46 -0500
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed
    Subject: Fwd: Radical New Views of Islam and the Origins of the Koran
    From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Message-Id: <079C6374-2DF3-11D6-A5FB-003065B9A95A@harvard.edu>
    X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    Radical New Views of Islam and the Origins of the Koran



    To Muslims the Koran is the very word of God, who spoke through the
    Angel Gabriel to Muhammad: "This book is not to be doubted," the Koran
    declares unequivocally at its beginning. Scholars and writers in Islamic
    countries who have ignored that warning have sometimes found themselves
    the target of death threats and violence, sending a chill through
    universities around the world.

    Yet despite the fear, a handful of experts have been quietly
    investigating the origins of the Koran, offering radically new theories
    about the text's meaning and the rise of Islam.

    Christoph Luxenberg, a scholar of ancient Semitic languages in Germany,
    argues that the Koran has been misread and mistranslated for centuries.
    His work, based on the earliest copies of the Koran, maintains that
    parts of Islam's holy book are derived from pre-existing Christian
    Aramaic texts that were misinterpreted by later Islamic scholars who
    prepared the editions of the Koran commonly read today.

    So, for example, the virgins who are supposedly awaiting good Islamic
    martyrs as their reward in paradise are in reality "white raisins" of
    crystal clarity rather than fair maidens.

    Christoph Luxenberg, however, is a pseudonym, and his scholarly tome
    ""The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran" had trouble finding a
    publisher, although it is considered a major new work by several leading
    scholars in the field. Verlag Das Arabische Buch in Berlin ultimately
    published the book.

    The caution is not surprising. Salman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses"
    received a fatwa because it appeared to mock Muhammad. The Egyptian
    novelist Naguib Mahfouz was stabbed because one of his books was thought
    to be irreligious. And when the Arab scholar Suliman Bashear argued that
    Islam developed as a religion gradually rather than emerging fully
    formed from the mouth of the Prophet, he was injured after being thrown
    from a second- story window by his students at the University of Nablus
    in the West Bank. Even many broad-minded liberal Muslims become upset
    when the historical veracity and authenticity of the Koran is questioned.

    The reverberations have affected non-Muslim scholars in Western
    countries. "Between fear and political correctness, it's not possible to
    say anything other than sugary nonsense about Islam," said one scholar
    at an American university who asked not to be named, referring to the
    threatened violence as well as the widespread reluctance on United
    States college campuses to criticize other cultures.

    While scriptural interpretation may seem like a remote and innocuous
    activity, close textual study of Jewish and Christian scripture played
    no small role in loosening the Church's domination on the intellectual
    and cultural life of Europe, and paving the way for unfettered secular
    thought. "The Muslims have the benefit of hindsight of the European
    experience, and they know very well that once you start questioning the
    holy scriptures, you don't know where it will stop," the scholar

    The touchiness about questioning the Koran predates the latest rise of
    Islamic militancy. As long ago as 1977, John Wansbrough of the School of
    Oriental and African Studies in London wrote that subjecting the Koran
    to "analysis by the instruments and techniques of biblical criticism is
    virtually unknown."

    Mr. Wansbrough insisted that the text of the Koran appeared to be a
    composite of different voices or texts compiled over dozens if not
    hundreds of years. After all, scholars agree that there is no evidence
    of the Koran until 691 59 years after Muhammad's death when the Dome
    of the Rock mosque in Jerusalem was built, carrying several Koranic

    These inscriptions differ to some degree from the version of the Koran
    that has been handed down through the centuries, suggesting, scholars
    say, that the Koran may have still been evolving in the last decade of
    the seventh century. Moreover, much of what we know as Islam the lives
    and sayings of the Prophet is based on texts from between 130 and 300
    years after Muhammad's death.

    In 1977 two other scholars from the School for Oriental and African
    Studies at London University Patricia Crone (a professor of history at
    the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton) and Michael Cook (a
    professor of Near Eastern history at Princeton University) suggested a
    radically new approach in their book "Hagarism: The Making of the
    Islamic World."

    Since there are no Arabic chronicles from the first century of Islam,
    the two looked at several non-Muslim, seventh-century accounts that
    suggested Muhammad was perceived not as the founder of a new religion
    but as a preacher in the Old Testament tradition, hailing the coming of
    a Messiah. Many of the early documents refer to the followers of
    Muhammad as "hagarenes," and the "tribe of Ishmael," in other words as
    descendants of Hagar, the servant girl that the Jewish patriarch Abraham
    used to father his son Ishmael.

    In its earliest form, Ms. Crone and Mr. Cook argued, the followers of
    Muhammad may have seen themselves as retaking their place in the Holy
    Land alongside their Jewish cousins. (And many Jews appear to have
    welcomed the Arabs as liberators when they entered Jerusalem in 638.)

    The idea that Jewish messianism animated the early followers of the
    Prophet is not widely accepted in the field, but "Hagarism" is credited
    with opening up the field. "Crone and Cook came up with some very
    interesting revisionist ideas," says Fred M. Donner of the University of
    Chicago and author of the recent book "Narratives of Islamic Origins:
    The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing." "I think in trying to
    reconstruct what happened, they went off the deep end, but they were
    asking the right questions."

    The revisionist school of early Islam has quietly picked up momentum in
    the last few years as historians began to apply rational standards of
    proof to this material.

    Mr. Cook and Ms. Crone have revised some of their early hypotheses while
    sticking to others. "We were certainly wrong about quite a lot of
    things," Ms. Crone said. "But I stick to the basic point we made: that
    Islamic history did not arise as the classic tradition says it does."

    Ms. Crone insists that the Koran and the Islamic tradition present a
    fundamental paradox. The Koran is a text soaked in monotheistic
    thinking, filled with stories and references to Abraham, Isaac, Joseph
    and Jesus, and yet the official history insists that Muhammad, an
    illiterate camel merchant, received the revelation in Mecca, a remote,
    sparsely populated part of Arabia, far from the centers of monotheistic
    thought, in an environment of idol-worshiping Arab Bedouins. Unless one
    accepts the idea of the angel Gabriel, Ms. Crone says, historians must
    somehow explain how all these monotheistic stories and ideas found their
    way into the Koran.

    "There are only two possibilities," Ms. Crone said. "Either there had to
    be substantial numbers of Jews and Christians in Mecca or the Koran had
    to have been composed somewhere else."

    Indeed, many scholars who are not revisionists agree that Islam must be
    placed back into the wider historical context of the religions of the
    Middle East rather than seeing it as the spontaneous product of the
    pristine Arabian desert. "I think there is increasing acceptance, even
    on the part of many Muslims, that Islam emerged out of the wider
    monotheistic soup of the Middle East," says Roy Mottahedeh, a professor
    of Islamic history at Harvard University.

    Scholars like Mr. Luxenberg and Gerd- R. Puin, who teaches at Saarland
    University in Germany, have returned to the earliest known copies of the
    Koran in order to grasp what it says about the document's origins and
    composition. Mr. Luxenberg explains these copies are written without
    vowels and diacritical dots that modern Arabic uses to make it clear
    what letter is intended. In the eighth and ninth centuries, more than a
    century after the death of Muhammad, Islamic commentators added
    diacritical marks to clear up the ambiguities of the text, giving
    precise meanings to passages based on what they considered to be their
    proper context. Mr. Luxenberg's radical theory is that many of the
    text's difficulties can be clarified when it is seen as closely related
    to Aramaic, the language group of most Middle Eastern Jews and
    Christians at the time.

    For example, the famous passage about the virgins is based on the word
    hur, which is an adjective in the feminine plural meaning simply
    "white." Islamic tradition insists the term hur stands for "houri,"
    which means virgin, but Mr. Luxenberg insists that this is a forced
    misreading of the text. In both ancient Aramaic and in at least one
    respected dictionary of early Arabic, hur means "white raisin."

    Mr. Luxenberg has traced the passages dealing with paradise to a
    Christian text called Hymns of Paradise by a fourth-century author. Mr.
    Luxenberg said the word paradise was derived from the Aramaic word for
    garden and all the descriptions of paradise described it as a garden of
    flowing waters, abundant fruits and white raisins, a prized delicacy in
    the ancient Near East. In this context, white raisins, mentioned often
    as hur, Mr. Luxenberg said, makes more sense than a reward of sexual

    In many cases, the differences can be quite significant. Mr. Puin points
    out that in the early archaic copies of the Koran, it is impossible to
    distinguish between the words "to fight" and "to kill." In many cases,
    he said, Islamic exegetes added diacritical marks that yielded the
    harsher meaning, perhaps reflecting a period in which the Islamic Empire
    was often at war.

    A return to the earliest Koran, Mr. Puin and others suggest, might lead
    to a more tolerant brand of Islam, as well as one that is more conscious
    of its close ties to both Judaism and Christianity.

    "It is serious and exciting work," Ms. Crone said of Mr. Luxenberg's
    work. Jane McAuliffe, a professor of Islamic studies at Georgetown
    University, has asked Mr. Luxenberg to contribute an essay to the
    Encyclopedia of the Koran, which she is editing.

    Mr. Puin would love to see a "critical edition" of the Koran produced,
    one based on recent philological work, but, he says, "the word critical
    is misunderstood in the Islamic world it is seen as criticizing or
    attacking the text."

    Some Muslim authors have begun to publish skeptical, revisionist work on
    the Koran as well. Several new volumes of revisionist scholarship, "The
    Origins of the Koran," and "The Quest for the Historical Muhammad," have
    been edited by a former Muslim who writes under the pen name Ibn Warraq.
    Mr. Warraq, who heads a group called the Institute for the
    Secularization of Islamic Society, makes no bones about having a
    political agenda. "Biblical scholarship has made people less dogmatic,
    more open," he said, "and I hope that happens to Muslim society as well."

    But many Muslims find the tone and claims of revisionism offensive. "I
    think the broader implications of some of the revisionist scholarship is
    to say that the Koran is not an authentic book, that it was fabricated
    150 years later," says Ebrahim Moosa, a professor of religious studies
    at Duke University, as well as a Muslim cleric whose liberal theological
    leanings earned him the animosity of fundamentalists in South Africa,
    which he left after his house was firebombed.

    Andrew Rippin, an Islamicist at the University of Victoria in British
    Columbia, Canada, says that freedom of speech in the Islamic world is
    more likely to evolve from within the Islamic interpretative tradition
    than from outside attacks on it. Approaches to the Koran that are now
    branded as heretical interpreting the text metaphorically rather than
    literally were widely practiced in mainstream Islam a thousand years

    "When I teach the history of the interpretation it is eye-opening to
    students the amount of independent thought and diversity of
    interpretation that existed in the early centuries of Islam," Mr. Rippin
    says. "It was only in more recent centuries that there was a need for
    limiting interpretation."

    Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information

    ===============================This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 02 2002 - 15:50:12 GMT