Usenet.com
www.Usenet.com
Group Index
Soc Thread Archive from Usenet.com
<-- __Chronological__ --> <-- __Thread__ -->
Re: A new philological study of Qur'an
* __From__: Christoph Heger
* __Subject__: Re: A new philological study of Qur'an
* __Date__: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 21:11:28 -0600
Greetings to all,
"M.S.M. Saifullah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>...
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
>
> Assalamu-alaykum wa rahamatullahi wa barkatuhu:
>
> > the following inscriptions have occassional use of dots
> > and are very early:
>
> This is true. An article was published some time ago in al-Atlal (Saudi
> Arabian Journal of Archeology), where a pre-Islamic inscription from
> 3rd-4th century CE was reconsidered by two Western scholars. They showed
> that this inscription is in Arabic and has occasional dotting. This
> itself is quite interesting. There are many examples of papyri, coins,
> inscriptions and Qur'anic Mss from 1st century of hijra that show
dotting.
> If we were to consider Syriac, the dotting of it came after the
advent of
> Islam around end of seventh or beginning of 8th century CE. This is
enough
> to turn a part of Luxenberg's thesis upside down.
This is not true. Luxenberg's emendations of some erroneously
attributed diacritical points in the transmitted Koran are of minor
importance for his method. For instance his re-interpretation of surah
96 does without any alteration of these diacritical points. By the
way, Syriac is in much lesser need of "dotting", its letters don't
display the high ambiguity of the Arabic letters (where b, t, th, n
and y are not to differentiate without diacritical points).
> ..., we also have the problem of circular argumentation by Luxenberg.
People who use this reproach of "circular argumentation" seem to be
unaware of the difference between the "circulus viciosus", the
"vicious circle" or "devil's circle", which doesn't show anything,
because it is the logical fault of "petitio principii", and the
"circulus hermeneuticus", the "hermeneutical circle" which is an
legitimate and indispensible means in linguistic scholarship, as
already Aristotle had seen clearly.
> It has been point out by Angelika Neuwirth in her review of Luxenberg's
> work in "Qur'an and History - A Disputed Relationship. Some Reflections
> on Qur'anic History and History in the Qur'an", Journal of Qur'anic
> Studies, 2003, Volume V, Issue I, pp. 1-18.
Angelika Neuwirth lacks any presupposition to judge Luxenberg's work:
She is not familiar with Syriac.
> She says:
>
> "The method (of Luxenberg) presupposes its very results: the
facticity of
> a Syriac layer underlying the Arabic text. Much of his material
relies on
> obvious circular argument.... This is an extremely pretentious
hypothesis
> which is unfortunately relying on rather modest foundations."
Due to her inability in Syriac Neuwirth avoids to deal with any
concrete argument of Luxenberg's.
> http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/luxreview1.html
This review by Angelika Neuwirth is a joke.
You should compare it with the detailed review by Robert R. Phenix Jr.
and Cornelia B. Horn in HUGOYE: JOURNAL OF SYRIAC STUDIES Vol. 6, No.
1, January 2003, which is presented here:
http://syrcom.cua.edu/Hugoye/Vol6No1/HV6N1PRPhenixHorn.html
Or compare it with the review by Rainer Nabielek, "Weintrauben statt
Jungfrauen aïs paradiesische Freude : zu einer neuen Lesart des Korans
und ihrem Stellenwert innerhalb der modemen Koranforschung", INAMO
Informationsprojekt Naher und Mittlerer Osten, 23-24, 2000, p. 66-72,
which unfortunately till now is not to be seen on any website.
> Furthermore, de Blois discusses many examples of 'new readings' of
> Luxenberg and shows the howlers [Journal of Qur'anic Studies, 2003,
> Volume V, Issue 1, pp. 92-97].
François de Blois, who mainly is known in Iranic scholarship, at least
seems to have some knowledge in Syriac linguistic and so he deals with
a few points in Luxenberg's book. Unfortunately, his review is even
more despicable than Neuwirth's - because of its meanness: Already in
his first attempt to discredit Luxenberg as scholar de Blois
intentionally misrepresents Luxenberg's argumentation by omitting a
decisive point (Compare Luxenberg's page 32 with de Blois's
representation of the argument about surah 11:24 and 39:29: hal
yastawiyaani mathalan!).
Even worse: de Blois isn't ashamed to endanger the pseudonym of
Luxenberg, who has all rights to choose such a pseudonym to protect
himself and his family.
For a really enlighted review you may read:
Rémi Brague "Le Coran : sortir du cercle ?" in: Critique n° 671, avril
2003, pp.232-251. You can download it (together with some minor
orthographic mistakes, apparently due to the scanning procedure) from
this site:
http://phronesis.org/IMG/rtf/Brague-Luxenberg-RTF.rtf
Rémi Brague is Professor at the universities of Paris and Munich and
an highly respected expert on Islamic philosophy.
Now once more to de Blois:
> He says:
>
> "[A]ny reader who wants to take the trouble to plough through
Luxenberg's
> 'new reading' of any of the numerous passages discussed in this book
will
> concede that the 'new reading' does not actually make better sense
than a
> straight classical Arabic reading of the traditional text.
Apart from those parts which make no sense at all! To give a minor
example, already known to this forum: words like "qaswarah" which
simply had not been in existence before some fanciful Koran Readers
invented it.
Eventually de Blois has the nerve to tell people that:
> He is someone who evidently speaks some Arabic dialect, has a passable,
> but not flawless command of classical Arabic,
I have the honour to know Christoph Luxenberg personally and can tell
you that his erudition in Arabic, vernacular as well as Classical
Arabic, is undisputed by all collegues of his.
> knows enough Syriac so as to be able to consult a dictionary, but is
> innocent of any real understanding of the methodology of comparative
> Semitic linguistics.
Ridiculous!
> His book is not a work of scholarship but of dilettantism."
These envious dilettanti should be cautious that they will not be
exposed in the course of the further discussion, especially when
Luxenberg will publish his next book, showing documentary evidence.
Kind regards,
Christoph Heger
* A new philological study of Qur'an, John Berg
o Re: A new philological study of Qur'an, Yusuf B Gursey
o Re: A new philological study of Qur'an, SwiftP
o Re: A new philological study of Qur'an, Anjum
o Re: A new philological study of Qur'an, Yusuf B Gursey
+ Re: A new philological study of Qur'an, M.S.M. Saifullah
# Re: A new philological study of Qur'an, M.S.M.
Saifullah
# Re: A new philological study of Qur'an,
Christoph Heger
* Re: A new philological study of Qur'an,
Christoph Heger
o Re: A new philological study of
Qur'an, Anjum
* Re: A new philological study of Qur'an,
Shibli Zaman
o Re: A new philological study of
Qur'an, Mike Craney
+ Re: A new philological study
of Qur'an, Altway
+ Re: A new philological study
of Qur'an, M.S.M. Saifullah
+ Re: A new philological study
of Qur'an, John Berg
+ Re: A new philological study
of Qur'an, Anjum
+ Re: A new philological study
of Qur'an, Yusuf B Gursey
+ Re: A new philological study
of Qur'an, Denis Giron
<-- __Chronological__ --> <-- __Thread__ -->
Usenet.com
Please check out one of the premium Usenet Newsgroup Service Providers
below for access to Usenet.
* News
* usenet information
* binaries search engine
* usenet newsgroup directory
* usenet newsgroup reviews
* newsgroups
* Binaries
Post message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
List owner : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
