Sura 2:23,24 sura kao ova http://kuran-hadisi-tefsir.blogspot.com/2019/08/sura-kao-ova.html?view=sidebar ​ Drugaciji Tefsir https://answering-islam.org/Quran/Miracle/index.html ​ na ovoj stranici ima puno linkova za ovu temu ove ajete o Sura kao ova: Je li Kur'an čudesan? OVDE je sadrzaj tih linkova Is the Qur'an Miraculous? https://answering-islam.org/Quran/Miracle/index.html ​ ​ Potpuno subjektivni kriterij https://answering-islam.org/Quran/Miracle/subj.html ​ Je li izazov iskren? https://answering-islam.org/Quran/Miracle/mirac3.html ​ Odgovori na islamsku svjesnost Koji je izazov Kur'ana s obzirom na arapsku prozu i poeziju? Responses to Islamic Awareness What Is The Challenge Of The Qur'an With Respect To Arabic Prose & Poetry? https://answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/ijaz.htm ​ Džini i izazov Kur'ana The Jinn and the Challenge of the Qur'an https://answering-islam.org/Wales/jinn_challenge.htm ​ ​ Sura 2:23,24 Sura 10:37-40 Sura 11:13 Muslimani kazu: Sura 2:23,24 Sura 10:37-40 Sura 11:13 Odgovor: Imam pitanje u vezi Sura 10:37-39 TKO odlucuje jeli Kuran od Boga ili ne ? ili drugacije da pitam: TKO odlucuje jeli Kuran izmislljen ili ne? TKO odlucuje jeli ga Muhamed izmislja ili ne? TKO odlucuje jeli Muhamed Bozlji poslanik ili ne? ​ Pa odlucuje sam Muhamed tj danasnji muslimani :) SMJESAN je taj vas autor Kurana kad VI sami odlucujete a ne ON jel neko uspjeo il nije uspjeo napisati JEDNU suru ..... ovako nesto nebi ni neka neznalica napisala ajet a kamoli navodno BOG svemoguci ​ To bi bilo slicno kao kada bi Picasso rekao: >> moja umjetnicka djela su od Boga , napravite jednu slicnu sliku ako tvrdite da nije od Boga ... i JA odlucujem jeste li uspjeli ili ne, a sigruno becete usüjeti << ​ ​ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Komentar muslimana: Kur anu imate dokaz .Bog ih poziva da napisu samo jednu suru ako istinu govore. ​ Odgovor: Nije problem napisati suru ili par ajete , vec je Problem: >>> TKO odlucuje jeli napisano SLICNO kao sura Kurana ili ne ? Sigurno nece Bog sici na zemlju i reci ne ili da ovo je sura ili slicno suri ili isto sura ..... Dakle odlucuju danas Muslimani zar ne?? Ako je tako onda to nije NIKAKAV dokaz , niti je poziv Bozlji vec ljudski to jest Muslimanski ... ​ Evo ja cu napisati par ajeta kao jedna sura MOZE??? ​ Idemo Sura 115: 1 Muslimani neće biti vama zadovoljni sve dok ne prihvatite vjeru njihovu. Sura 115:2 I kažu musloimani: "Nisu kršćani ni na čemu", i kažu muslimnai: "Nisu Jevreji ni na čemu", a oni čitaju Knjigu. Tako su govorili oni koji ne znaju - poput riječi njihove. Pa presudiće Allah među njima na Dan kijameta o onom u čemu su se razilazili. Sura 115:3 Nije bio Ibrahim Musliman, niti kršćanin, nego je bio hanif Jevrej, i nije bio od mušrika. Sura 115:4 O sljedbenici Kurana (muslimani), zašto istinu neistinom zamračujete i svjesno istinu krijete? Sura 115:5 I muslimani kažu: "Mi smo robovi Božij i miljenici Njegovi." Reci: "Pa zašto vas onda On kažnjava zbog grijehova vaših?" A nije tako! I vi ste kao i ostali ljudi koje On stvara: kome hoće On će oprostiti, a koga hoće, On će kazniti. Allahova je vlast na nebesima i na Zemlji i na onome što je između njih, i Njemu će se svi vratiti. ​ hajd sada ,me zanima TKO odlucuje jesu li ovi 5 ajeta SLICNI ili nisu??? ​ ada zamislite neko kaze: Evo dokaz kao poziv da neko napise SLICNO jednu stranicu skypt Micky maus, ALI ja sam taj koji odlucuje jeli slicano ili nije Jasno je da NIKO nece upsjeti napisati slicno skyptu Micky maus dok god ja odlucujem jel slicno ili ne ​ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sura kao ova Ovde čemo o jedmom prostom i smješnom TRIKU Muhameda, kojeg su ondašnji naivni nepismeni i neuki Arapi prihvatili kao Bozlju Rječ. Sura 2:23 A ako sumnjate u ono što objavljujemo robu (Muhamedu) Svome, načinite vi jednu suru sličnu objavljenim njemu, a pozovite i božanstva vaša, osim Allaha, ako istinu govorite. Sura 10:38 A oni govore: "On (Muhamed) ga izmišlja!" Reci (Muhamede): "Pa, dajte vi jednu suru kao što je njemu objavljena, i koga god hoćete, od onih u koje mimo Allaha vjerujete, u pomoć pozovite, ako istinu govorite." Sura 11:13 Zar oni da govore: "On (Muhamed) ga izmišlja!" Reci (Muhamede): "Pa sačinite vi deset Kur'anu sličnih, izmišljenih sura , i koga god hoćete, od onih u koje pored Allaha vjerujete, u pomoć pozovite, ako je istina što tvrdite!" Primječujete i sami u Surai 11:13 rjeci: >>" izmišljenih sura "<< Šta to ustvari znači. I ako neko pokuša sastaviti, još unapred to je određeno da je netačno -to šta još nije ni napisano. Dakle još pre nego šta neko počne sačiniti već nije uspeo :) Autor Kurana izaziva da napisšete sa cilljem >> AKO USPJETE ; A SIGURNO JE DA NEĆETE USPJETI<<< Bez naznake KO odlučuje jel neko uspeo ili nije ,i na kojim osnovama? Zato i ja evo kažem Svim Muslimanima: Napisite vi nešto slično Mobi Dick ili Gorski Vjenac- ILI BILO koju neku drugu od književnih djela . AKO USPJETE ; A SIGURNO JE DA NEĆETE USPJETI I još vam naznačujem da ja odlučujem jel neko uspeo ili nije i po mojim osnovama :) Razmislite o ovom Triku za malu djecu , No sta je još smješnije ne samo drevni rapi u Muhamedovo vrjeme vec dan danas ima Muslimana koji padaju na ovaj prost Trik. Uz sve ovo Interestno je i Sura 10:37 Ovaj Kur'an nije izmišljen, od Allaha je – on potvrđuje istinitost prijašnjih objava i objašnjava propise; u njega nema sumnje, od Gospodara svjetova je! nakon ovaj ajet ide Muhamedov TRIK: Sura 10:38 A oni govore: "On (Muhamed) ga izmišlja!" Reci: "Pa, dajte vi jednu suru kao što je njemu objavljena, Nakon šta DVA puta kaže sam o sebi da je Od Boga: >>Ovaj Kur'an nije izmišljen, od Allaha je....u njega nema sumnje, od Gospodara svjetova je!<< i poziva se na autoritet Biblije Neki Jevreji i Hriscani mu naravno nisu vjerovali , i Zatim Muhmed pokušava i njih prevariti istim trikom sa kojim je prevario Arape .... U tefsir Ibn Kesira za Suru 10: 38-40 stoji: ...Pa ako ne učinite, a sigurno nećete učiniti, ...(2:24) Na donjem videu napavite na opciji CC Jezik koji razumjete A oni govore: "On (Mozart) ga izmišlja!" Reci: "Pa, dajte vi jednu strofu kao što je njemu objavljena. Vi ne verujete da mi je Allah dao Kopozicije? Napisite vi nešto slično Mozart kopozicijsku strofu. AKO USPJETE ; A SIGURNO JE DA NEĆETE USPJETI I još vam naznačujem da ja odlučujem jel neko uspeo ili nije i po mojim osnovama :) Kuran Sura: 2:23 kao i sura: 10:38-40; i sura 11:13 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jedna od najsmiješnih tvrdnji Kurana je da ako mislite da Kuran nije Božja riječ i da ju je Muhamed izmislio, onda smislite nešto slično Kuranu... Osim što je ova tvrdnja pogrešna (jer kao što ne postoje dvije fizički identične osobe na cijelom planetu, misli, ukusi, govor, stil pisanja i druge ljudske kvalitete i osobine nisu slične ni kod blizanaca. Ne postoje...Prema tome, ako Kuran znači verbalnu sličnost, to je smiješna tvrdnja... Ova vrsta rada se zove prepisivanje i plagijat. Ali ako to znači rječitost i značenje Kurana! Mora se reći da niti jedan pisac koji poznaje i vidi umjetnost i Umijeće pisanja Kurana nije niti voljan niti sposoban učiniti takva prepisivanja, proturječnosti i opetovana ponavljanja i nazvati to književnim djelom. Još jednom, ono što me je iznenadilo u ovoj borbi Kurana jeste zbunjenost samog Allaha jer u nekoliko poglavlja Kurana govori o donošenju 1. poglavlja sličnog Kuranu, a na drugom mjestu govori oko deset poglavlja slicnih kuranu i na trecemm mjestu trazi da smislimo cijeli Kuran ........u sljedećim ajetima obratite pažnju: Sura , ajeti 23 i 24, sura Al-Beqarah, 38 Junus: A ako sumnjate u ono što smo poslali Robu Našem, donesite sličnu suru i zamolite sve prisutne osim Allaha, ako govorite. istina; A ako to ne učiniš i ne možeš nikada učiniti, onda se boj vatre koja je pripremljena za nevjernike, a njeno gorivo su ljudi i kamenje. Sura 10 , ajet 13, sura Hud: Kažu li nevjernici da je on sam satkao ovaj Kur'an i pripisao ga Bogu?! Reci: Ako istinu govorite, uz pomoć svih arapskih pashala, bez objave Božije, donesite deset sura 👈 isprepletenih kao ovaj Kur'an. Cijeli Kur'an , ajeti 32 i 33, sura Tur i 88 sura Asra: Reci da ako se džini i ljudi dogovore da donesu knjigu kao što je ovaj Kur'an, nikada neće moći donijeti knjigu kao što je ona, čak i ako svi podržavaju jedni druge. Osnovno pitanje je zašto je Alah od jedne sure prešao na deset sura pa na cijeli Ku'an? Pa ako neko ne može ...po Kuranu donijet jednu suru onda neće ni moći ni cijeli Kuran Svakako ako neće moći donijeti deset sura ili jednu suru kako ce smisliti cijeli Kuran... to je tako smijesno nešto reći ....u biti vrlo smiješno i kontradiktorno..

Sura 24:23 kleveta čedne žene 62. Može li kleveta čedne žene biti oproštena? Sura 24:23 „Uistinu, oni koji okrive poštene bezazlene vjernice, prokleti su na Dunjau i Ahiretu, a imaće oni kaznu strahovitu!“ (Mlivo) Dakle, oprosta nema, ostaju prokleti i na Dunjau i na Ahiretu. Dok prije toga je rečeno: Sura 24:4 „A oni koji okrive poštene žene, zatim ne dovedu četiri svjedoka, tad ih bičujte sa osamdeset udaraca, i nikad ne prihvatajte njihovo svjedočenje; a ti takvi su grješnici; Sura 24:5 „Izuzev onih koji se pokaju poslije toga i poprave. Pa uistinu, Allah je Oprosnik, Milosrdni!“ (Mlivo)

Günter Lüling 1 Izazov islamu za reformaciju Günter Lüling 1 Izazov islamu za reformaciju Izazov islamu za reformaciju Günter Lüling http://www.christoph-heger.de/ar-rabbaniyun.htm A Challenge to Islam for Reformation The Rediscovery and Reliable Reconstruction of a Comprehensive pre-Islamic Christian Hymnal hidden in the Koran under earliest Islamic Reinterpretations Rabbânîya , rabbânîyûn u Kuranu, izvadak iz: GÜNTER LÜLING, Izazov islamu za reformaciju. Ponovno otkriće i pouzdana obnova sveobuhvatnog predislamskog kršćanskog himna skrivenog u Koranu pod najranijim islamskim ponovnim tumačenjima, Delhi (Motilal Banarsidass Publishers) 2003, str.71-87 Trad. Tekst Sura 96:18 sa-nad'u z- zabâniyata سندع ۱ لزّبانية Trad. interpret.: Pozvat ćemo (sa svoje strane) izvršitelje (pakla) (?). (Rudi Paret) Nazvat ćemo im pakao. (Richard Bell) Na ovaj stih Richard Bell daje komentar: " Zabâniya , riječ čija smisao nije jasna; obično se uzima kao oznaka čuvara pakla; ili anđela koji na smrt odvode dušu." Doista je to znatiželjna, čak i zagonetna riječ. Prema arapskim leksikografima, riječ zabâniya kaže se u množini zibniya , isto tako neobična riječ, čije je značenje parafrazirano kao "policijski vojnik, čuvar". No, čini se da ovo objašnjenje nije toliko teorija koliko bijeg mašte, jer prema pravilima arapske tvorbe riječi riječ oblik zabâniya izgleda upravo poput tvorbe apstrakta (slično engleskom sažetku stvorenom produžetkom riječi - brod) od osnovne riječi zabân . Ali takav je osnovni zabân nepoznat na arapskom, starom ili novom. Iza Kurana, ova riječ zibnija je zabânija izuzetno rijetka. U samom Kuranu ova dvojbena „pluralna“ zabanjanija pojavljuje se samo u našem stihu Sura 96:18 i stoga je koranski hapax legomenon kako teolozi nazivaju riječ koja se u cijeloj Bibliji pojavljuje samo jednom. Kad islamska tradicija shvati ovaj osobni "plural" (iako se čini apstraktnim) anđeli čuvari pakla, ovo tumačenje se samo po sebi ne smije odbiti, jer u ajetu staro Arapske pjesnikinje al-Hansâ " (Aghânî XIII.136,7) gdje se može pronaći ova stvarno rijetka zabânija (ako njezin rasm nije mnogo bolje čitati se na isti način kao što ga rekonstruiramo za Sura 96:18 : rabbâniya ) označava najvjerojatnije montirane ratničke anđele na konjima (usporedi također Ibn Hishâm, ed. Wüstenfeld (Pustinjsko polje), I, 201,4). [73] Ipak, iako opći smjer tradicionalne islamske interpretacije - naime da je množinski objekt glagola "pozivati" u S.96:18 , "anđeli" - čini se da približno odgovara kontekstu, ovo tradicionalno značenje, uzimajući u obzir naše dosad konačna i vjerodostojna rekonstrukcija Sure nije prikladna. Umjesto zlobnih anđela pakla, za naš dosad rekonstruirani scenarij trebamo suprotno: anđeli dobronamjerni i korisni prema pobožnim vjernicima, ako anđele uopće treba tražiti u ovom odlomku. Ali doista, riječ nâdî , "Visoko vijeće Božjih najviših anđela kao njegovih savjetnika " iz Sure 96:17 , plače za tim visokim. dobroćudni i mirni Božji anđeli koji će se pojaviti u S. 96,18 . Nije slučajna slučajnost da upravo ova riječ az- zabâniya ۱لزّبانية od S.96:18 sumnjičav je jer je tako rijedak - prema neodrživom okvirnom pripovijedanju koji navodno znači „anđeli čuvari pakla“. Ipak, vrlo lagana promjena dijakritičke interpunkcije rasme ove riječi otkriva upravo ono što je potrebno za nastavak misaone rekonstruirane Sure 96 od 1. stiha do naše ključne točke 96:18 ako čitamo, uklanjanje jedne točke i postavljanje jednog dodatnog znaka za udvostručavanje, ar-râbbaniya لرّّبّانية , [74] imamo ove „vladajuće ili vladajuće ili moćne anđele“ (kratki njemački izraz „Herrschaftsengel“ čini se najprikladnijim) pred nama koji se obično naziva rabbânîyûn (množina) „veliki ili majstorski“ izraz koji odgovara grčkom izrazu NT kyrioi "Gospodari". Može se računati kao mali, ali bez obzira na daljnji element u našem dokazu da se ovi " Herrschaftsengel " pojavljuju u s.96:18 u tvorbi riječi apstraktno ili kolektivno imenica: "Upravljajući-anđeo-brod" koji dobro uklapa u kolektivni izraz nâdiyah "Njegovo (Božje) Visoko vijeće (najviših anđela) "iz stiha s. 96:17 . Za tradicionalnu zabâniju "imps ili izvršitelji pakla" morali smo odbaciti gramatički abstrakt jer u pravilu ne postoje institucionalna vijeća ili grupe ili klase palih anđela ili impova ili vragova pakla poznatih iz biblijske literature i šire, dok su anđeli nebeski institucionalno raspoređeni u posebne klase i legije itd. Stoga samo za nebeske anđele, a posebno za "Herrschaftsengel",rabbânîyûn, apstraktni rabbâniya, što znači institucija ovih " Herrschaftsengel "(AndjeoskoGospodarstvo), sam po sebi je dolikujući izraz. I samo je ovaj sažetak prikladan da se shvati kao hipostaza ili sinonim Boga, koji se odnosi na istu stvar, kao što se čini u Sura 96:18 . Excursus na rabbânîyûn, Anđele Visokog Božjeg vijeća u ranoj bliskoistočnoj teologiji i Kur'anu, kao i u ranoj islamskoj religioznoj literaturi. Jasno nije moguće podnijeti angelologiju Kur'ana, kao i angelologije prethodnih religija, judaizam i kršćanstvo u cjelini, temeljitim kritičkim istraživanjima samo na temelju naših otkrića o korištenju Sure 96:18 . To je tim više jer desetljećima nije bilo ambicioznih istraživanja na ovu temu, a posebno ne s gledišta liberalne historico - i dogmatske kritike. Dakle, možemo samo ukazati na neke bitne uvide koji daju vjerodostojnost našem predloženom tumačenju Sure 96:18 . Samo zbog prevlasti trinitarnih kršćanskih konfesija na našim teološkim fakultetima na svim sveučilištima zanemaruju se jasni dokazi zašto se (grčki) naslov kyrios „Gospod-Gospodar“ primjenjuje na Mesiju. To je naslov koji izvorno drži samo zbog svog statusa jednog (najvišeg) vladajućih anđela. [75] Čak se i grčka transkripcija aramejskog i arapskog naslova Anđeo Visokog Božijeg vijeća rabbouni susreće dva puta u NZ-u (Marko 10,51 i Ivan 20,16) kada se obrati Isusu Kristu. [76] Crkveno-teološka zapreka ovom uvidu u poseban kristološki aspekt opće angelologije, - ako je Krist anđeo, on je stvoreno biće; aspekt koji se mora isključiti iz trinitarnog kršćanstva - istodobno je prepreka većem interesu za opću angelologiju. Tek u suženim točkama, gdje crkveno- dogmatički interes nije odmah ugrožen, stvari su relativno jasne i nesporne (ali i u smislu da se ne osporavaju), naime da kasni judaizam („Spätjudentum“) i ur-kršćanstvo razumiju svijet anđela kao svijet određenih klasa anđela i da oni imenuju i prizivaju najvišu klasu od njih (na grčkom jeziku) abstraktnim kyriotäs "Gospodstvo, Herrschaft " (vidi npr. Ef 1,21; Kol 1,16; 2.Petar 2,10; Jude 8). Svaki je član ovog apstraktnog kyriotäs "gospodstva" kyrios "Lord" čiji su arapski ekvivalenti očito rabbâniya (collectivum) i rabbânî (jednina), rabbânîyûn (množina). Od tih daljnjih klasa anđela [77] samo je to relevantno za naš problem, čiji se članovi u grčkom NT exousiai nazivaju "vlastima ili silama" (vidjeti Ef 3,10; 6,12; Kol 1,16; 2,15; Tit 3,1; 1.Pet. 3,22 ) . Očito se ovi NT exousiai pojavljuju i u Kuranu, tako, na primjer, u Sura 30:35 am anzalnâ ' alaihim sultânan fa huwa yatakallamu bi mâ kânû bihi yusrikûn "ili smo im na njih poslali moć / autoritet, govorio bi o onome što su s njim družili? " Ako detaljno proučimo ovaj tekst, nesporno je da se sultân "moć ili autoritet" shvaća kao osoba koja govori, iako islamska i zapadnjačka orijentalistička tradicija prelaze ovu datu posebnost . Nesumnjivo, u ovom arapskom sultân "Moć" (u Sura 69: 29 koji se pojavljuju i u obliku sažetka: sultâniya), što odgovara grčkoj egzusi , pred nama je daljnji trag posljednjih betonskih ostataka Kasna judajska i ur-kršćanska angelologija opipljiva u Kuranu. No, vratimo se sada ponovo našoj riječi rabbânîya. Taj se apstrakt ne pojavljuje u Kuranu osim u Suri 96:18 jer smo ga sasvim razumno rekonstruirali. Ali postoje tri mjesta (Sura 3:79 ; 5:44 ; 5:63 ) gdje se pojavljuje kognati rabbânîyûn, a ovom se rabbânîyûn mora dodati hapax legomenon ribbîyûn (S.3:146 ). Ako se netko pristupi tim referencama iz radne hipoteze " rabbanîyûn = kyrioi =" Anđeli Visokog Božijeg vijeća "(u smislu kasne judejske i ur- kršćanske angelologije), ispada da su ovi odlomci očito izvorno imali ovu specifičnu angelološku što znači kasnije, islamska redakcija je kasnije reinterpretirana i znatno prepravljena. Od ova četiri teksta najizvjerojatnije je rekonstruirati onaj Sura 3:79 f. Prije, u s.3:78 , tema "falsificiranja Svetoga pisma od strane Židova i kršćana" jest Zatim, s.3:79 f, tekst glasi (stavili smo svoju rekonstrukciju ogledalo-simetrično suprotno tradicionalnom tekstu i njegovom tumačenju) : Zrcalno-simetrični prikaz Sure 3:79-80 rekonstrukcija stihovi Tradicionalno tumačenje ما كان لبشر أن يؤتيه ألكتاب والحكم والنبوّة (a) 79 ما كان لبشر أن يؤتيه ألكتاب و الحكم و النبوّة ثمّ يقول للناس كونو عبادا لى من دون الله (b) ثمّ يقول للناس كونو عبادا لى من دون الله ولكن كانوا ربّنيّن بما كنتم تَعَلَّمُون الكتاب وبما كنتم تَدَرَّسُون (A) ولكن كونوا ربّنيّن بما كنتم تَُعَلَّمُون الكتاب وبما كنتم تدْرُسُون ولا يأمركم أن تتّخذوا الملئكة وانّبيّن أربابا (B) 80 ولا يأمركم أن تتّخذوا الملئكة وانّبيّن أربابا (vidi engl. strnicu ) Tekst smo složili u odjeljcima ab i AB kako bi · logička struktura ovog teksta bila transparentna. Za rekonstrukciju moramo promijeniti samo ono što se tiče rasmskog teksta, كونو ili (neispravno napisano) كنو kûnû „biti ti (imperativ množine)“ u prvom retku (A) na desnoj strani, to jest islamske reinterpretacije, što je očigledno „izmjena“ izvornog teksta, jer je izvorni tekst (vidi prvi red s lijeve strane) od A) nesumnjivo je imao na ovom mjestu, kao što ćemo vidjeti, كان ili كن kâna "bilo je" ili još bolje كانوا ili كنوا kânû "bili su" kao logično potreban nastavak Kanade ili كن kâna "bila je" prvog retka od (a) (prva linija desno i lijevo). Mi ćemo se ovom pitanju vratiti kasnije. Prijevod Sura 3:79-80 rekonstrukcija stihovi Tradicionalno tumačenje Nije bilo ljudsko biće da mu Allah dade knjigu i ovlasti prosuđivanja i proročkog ureda (a) 79 Nije bilo ljudsko biće da mu Allah dade knjigu i ovlasti prosuđivanja i proročkog ureda i taj bi čovjek mogao tada reći ljudima: "Budite mi sluge osim Allaha!" (b) i onaj čovjek tada kaže narodu: "Budite mi sluge osim Allaha", Bilo je / bilo [78] radije vladajući anđeli od koga ste naučili Knjigu [79] i koga ste podučili, (A) Budite više rabini u čemu učite Knjigu i u onome što učite, A On (Bog) vam ne zapovijeda da anđele i proroke uzmete kao (svoje) gospodare. (B) 80 A On (Bog) vam ne zapovijeda da anđele i proroke uzmete kao (svoje) gospodare. (vidi engl. strnicu ) Da bi razumio ovaj tekst, čitatelj se mora sjetiti sličnih odlomaka iz NT: Djela 7:53 "Primili ste zakon koji su dali Božji anđeli ..." Djela 7:38 "(Prorok poput mene ...) Upravo je on držao društvo s anđelom, koji mu je govorio na brdu Sinaj i s našim precima, i primio je živu Božju izreku da nam prenese. „; Ga1. 3:19 "(Zakon ...) i zaredili su ga anđeli u ruci posrednika"; Heb.2:2 "Jer ako je Božja riječ izgovorena kroz anđele imala takvu silu da ...". Ali vidi i Suru 83:20 f "Knjiga s natpisom Sredovječnih (anđeli) svjedoče." Naša se rekonstrukcija pokazala ispravnom ako slijedimo ovu jasnu misaonu ideju: Ideja (a) da čovjeku nije dopušteno primiti Knjigu, a moći ispravnog prosuđivanja i proročanstva od Boga izravno se uravnotežuju u (A) pozitivnom izjavom u vezi s tim: da su samo Visoki Anđeli oni koji svu tu snagu dobivaju izravno od Boga pomoću koje poučavaju čovječanstvo. Ista jasna logička struktura svojstvena je rečenicama (b) i (B): U (b) je objašnjeno zašto je Bog odabrao svoje Visoke Anđele za podučavanje čovječanstva, naime zato što bi u protivnom ljudsko biće dodijeljeno tim moćima moglo postati lukavo i željeti biti štovan od svojih bližnjih. Ova ideja se nastavlja u (B) u smislu da se ni ljudska bića ni anđeli ne bi trebali klanjati, čak i ako su, u skladu sa snagom ispravnog suda i proročanstva, naučili čovječanstvo Knjizi. (Ovo je očito svjesna suprotnost kršćanskoj trinitarnoj koncepciji Isusa Krista!) Ove strukturno uredne misli misli podučavaju nas potpuno istoj središnjoj ideji poruke proroka Muhameda: da se Kristu ne treba štovati kao Bogu iako je Krist, prema Isusovom samorazumijevanju i ur- kršćanstvu i ur-Koraniku vjerovanje, Anđeo Visokog Božijeg vijeća, ideja koja je izražena i u Sura 4:172 , mada se u ovom stihu iz Korana mnogo češće ponavlja ( arapska 8 puta u arapskoj ) arapska riječ koristi za anđele Visokog Božijeg vijeća. al-muqarrabûn "oni koji su postavljeni u blizini (Bog)". [80] S druge strane, izjava Sura 3:79 f predstavlja i prikaz najranijeg islamskog shvaćanja proročatologije (svaki je prorok bio i još uvijek je anđeo; vidjeti AJ Wensinck , Muhammed und die Propheten . Acta Orientalia II [1924] ,168 -198) [81] kao i što je bio credo proroka Muhameda u pogledu vlastitog proročanstva: On je nesumnjivo vjerovao, kao što smo već istaknuli (vidi ovdje, str. 28f, uz napomenu 3) , da je on sam Anđeo Visokog Božijeg vijeća, postojao u ovom Visokom Božjem vijeću prije njegova života i suđeno da se vrati na to istaknuto mjesto u zagrobnom životu ( vidi H. Wehr, Muhammads letzte Worte . WZKM 51 [1952], 283-2286). Ovom je konceptu nestalo rastuće islamsko pravoslavlje i konačno zamijenjeno slikom proroka Muhameda kao pukog ljudskog bića. Gledajući tekst Sure 3:79 f s ove točke gledišta, nemoguće je da je sam prorok Muhammed bio urednik koji je odjenuo originalnu verziju ovog teksta s.3:79 f i ostavio nas lepršavim neusklađenim rečenicama od s.3:79 f čitajte sada prema ortodoksnoj islamskoj i zapadnjačkoj islamističkoj tradiciji. Koliko je korumpiran tradicionalni tekst, lako se vidi iz činjenice da su nakon što su ti kasni urednici riječ rabbânîyîn „vladajući arhanđeli“ interpretirali kao „rabin“, u smislu izuzetno eruditiranog ljudskog bića, bilo koji razlog za završnu riječ „i On ( Bože) ne zapovijeda da Anđele i Proroke uzmete da su (vaši) Gospodari "nestali. Nakon što su se ovi urednici odrekli smislene suprotnosti između (a) "Nije to bilo za ljudsko biće ..." i (A) "To su bili više Anđeli Visokog Božijeg vijeća ...", konstruirali su svoje novo i odstupanje kontrasta promjenom raste -teksta jer su načinjeni od izvornog كان kâna "bilo je" ili كانوا kânû "bio je(množina)" imperativ كونوا kûnû "budi ti" što bi trebalo biti u skladu s imperativom iz točke (b) "budite mi sluge". Ta promjena rask- teksta (vidi kasnije isti postupak prepravljanja u Sura 2:65 i s.7:166 ovdje, str. 86f, s napomenom 92) nije toliko ozbiljna kao što se moglo isprva pomisliti, jer iz najstarijih Kuranskih kodeksa znamo da u najstarije razdoblje pisanja tekstova Kur'ana samoglasnici su u sredini riječi bili neispravno napisani, to jest bez matres lectionis . da je bez umetanja rasma- znak ا za dugo - kao i za و za dugo -û i ي dugo - î . [82] Dakle, ove su riječi ovdje izvorno bile napisane كن i كنوا , U našem su slučaju oba ova različita čitanja kânû (aktivno glasovno savršeno vrijeme) i kûnû (imperativ) obično bila napisana s istim rasmom: كنوا , Bilo je lako pročitati iz ovog osipa ono značenje koje je netko bio sklon. Ali kad je pisanje dugih samoglasnika unutar riječi matres lectionis (ا و ى) postalo je obvezno, čitanje je već jednom bilo fiksirano, iako u ovom slučaju pogrešno. Dakle, kada su urednici Kur'ana namjerno čitali rabbânîyûn -Angele (A) eruditskih rabina ili teologa ili pismoznanaca, suprotstavili su se ovim rabinima (A) lukavim ljudskim bićima iz (b) koja su, zbog svoje slabe ljudske prirode, obično su skloni yeamu štovati ga zbog svoje obdarenosti presudom i proročanstvom. No, ovaj je novi kontrast vrlo sporan otkad su ga izmislili [83] rabini iz (A) su ljudska bića poput lukavih ljudskih bića koja se žele klanjati zbog svog pretpostavljenog ispravnog suda i proročanstva kako je prikazano u (b). Ne postoji li u islamskoj reinterpretaciji samo ta opasnost, koju izvorna proročka verzija ovog teksta teži egzorcizmu, da rabini / ' ulamâ ' kako ljudska bića žele, zbog svog znanja i "ispravne prosudbe ", ako ne budu obožavani (iako se to ponekad i događa!) , ipak, biti svrstani viši od svojih sugrađana i suvjernika? U ovom kontekstu, imajte na umu osudu rabina i stav koji je Isus Krist pozvao prema njima, kako je to artikulirano u Mat. 23:7 od kojih se ovde može citirati samo stih Mat. 23:7f: "Vole da ih na tržnicama pozdravljaju s poštovanjem i da ih ljudi zovu" Rabbi! Rabbi! ". Ali nemojte vas zvati Rabbi, jer samo je jedan vaš gospodar i svi vi su braća. " S ovog gledišta, suštinska poruka grube ortodoksne islamske reinterpretacije izvornog, očito proročkog teksta Sura 3,79f čini se da je u njezinom jezgri od istog značaja kao i ona koja je sadržana u dijametralnom preokretu izvornog značenja Sure 35:28. gdje je izvorna rečenica "Evo, za svoje sluge Bog je najviše zabrinut (zabrinut da ne bi zaradio raj!) Zbog 'ulamâ '(= rabina)" koji je bio neoborivim uređivačkim uređajima (premda ne mijenjajući osip ) preinačen u očigledno pogrešan i, do sada, nesporan oblik: "Evo, među njegovim slugama su teolozi koji se boje (= uvažavati; iako pod arapskim glagolom znači jasno" brinuti se za ") Boga najviše" (o tome ćemo raspravljati očito poslije- Muhamedova reinterpretacija kasnije u širem kontekstu). Daljnja jasna okolnost koja svjedoči protiv ortodoksnog islamskog tumačenja Sure 35:28 je da u vrijeme proroka još nije bilo islamskog „ulamâ“ = teologa, tako da je izvorni tekst proroka Muhammeda , nesumnjivo, bio usmjeren protiv kršćanina ili židovskih teologa ('ulamâ') njegova dana. Ali to nije ometalo ove rane ortodoksne islamske Kur'anske stručnjake koji se krive pohvale zbog ove neodobravajuće izreke svog Poslanika, sigurno protiv njegove namjere. Prorok je držao Isusov položaj kako je gore navedeno. Iza ovih argumenata, našu interpretaciju potkrepljuje i najstarija islamska nauka o Kuranu: U svojoj zbirci nekanonske varijante Korana, u kojoj je čitao poznati arapski filolog Ibn Hâlawaih (umro 370 H. / 980. CE), navodi se kao stara prenesena varijanta čitajući naš tekst Sura 3:79 umjesto tradicionalnog i stoga kanonskog aktivnog glasa bi-mâ kuntum tu'allimûna l-kitâba wa bi-mâ kuntum tadrusûn" u onome što vi (rabini!) predajete Knjizi i u onome što vi proučavate "upravo ovo nekadašnje čitanje pasivnog glasa: bi-mâ kuntum ta'allamûna l-kitâba wa bi-mâ kuntum tadarassûn " po tome što / koga ste učili Knjigu i prema onome / kome ste dobili lekcije ", [84] Stoga je ovo čitanje navedeno kao stara verzija teksta bez ikakve sumnje upravo ono čitanje koje smo dužni da čitamo tekst rasma, ako želimo zadržati ispravno staro razumijevanje rabbânîyûna kao "Anđela Visokog Božijeg vijeća.” Usput: za ta rana čitanja varijanti nismo znali dugo vremena nakon uspostavljanja rekonstrukcije teksta s već prikazanim logičkim, gramatičkim i teološkim argumentima. Međutim, sve dok je vrijedilo ovo ranije čitanje, ovaj raniji tekst morao je imati i napise كان kâna ili كانوا kânû "Bilo je / bili (vladajući anđeli)" umjesto imperativnog كونوا kûnû „ budi ti (rabini)“ kasnije odstupanja i očito pogrešnog ortodoksnog islamskog tumačenja (vidi gore o ranijem manjkavom pisanju obiju ovih varijanti kao كنوا ). Ovo je prvi put da se u našim kritičko- eksgegetskim istraživanjima pojavljuje potkrepljujuće, alternativno, ne-kanonsko čitanje problematičnog dijela teksta Kur'ana, a zabilježile su ga pouzdane stare islamske vlasti. U sadržaju je ur- islamski, proročki i pre-pravoslavni. Islamsko pravoslavlje namjerno zanemaruje njegovo osnovno značenje i od tada više nikada nije prepoznato kao njegovo značenje za ur- islamsku i proročku dogmu. Mnogobrojna čitanja teksta iz Kurana koje nam je prenijela islamska nauka o Kuranu smatraju se od vremena ortodoksne islamske kanonizacije teksta Kur'ana pukim ortografskim kripcima olovke. [85] Ali u mnogim slučajevima naše dogmatske rekonstrukcije, koju tek treba izvesti, postat će jasno da u velikom dijelu ove prenesene varijante Korana čitamo marke pouzdane starijem, a po svom dogmatskom sadržaju u osnovi drugi Koran: vidi, iako ovdje ne možemo detaljno rješavati problem, da su one varijante čitanja, koje su prenesene ili su uopće preživjele unutar toka prijenosa, one koje daju najmanje uvida u prijašnje značenje dotičnih problematičnih odlomaka. a pogotovo ne dogma bivšeg kršćanskog ur -Korana općenito. To postaje očigledno posebno kada naiđemo na niz sličnih odstupajućih reinterpretacija određenog, što je tema jednog i istog skupa tekstualnih problema koji uključuju niz tekstova razbacanih po cijelom Kuranu. Ako postoji uopšte prenesena varijanta čitanja, ona se uvijek prenosi samo za onaj sličan tekst ove serije tekstova iste teme, gdje ovo čitanje s prenesenom varijantom ima najmanje smisla ili daje najmanje uvida u izvorno značenje ovog tekst (vidi posebno ovo poglavlje III, 2 ). Stoga nije iznenađujuće da ovdje imamo tekst Sura 3:79 čitanje pasivnih glasova („bili ste naučeni i dobili su vam lekcije) koji se prenose kao čitanje stare varijante, iako ovo staro čitanje nema smisla, osim ako ovaj tekst nije pročitajte i s varijantom كان kâna ili كانوا "bilo je / bili (vladajući anđeli)" umjesto kasnijeg pravoslavnog islamskog čitanja (كونوا kûnû „ biti ti (rabini)“. Ali ovo je sigurno jednom postojeća varijanta koja čita كان ili كابوا umjesto današnje كونوا nije preneseno muslimanskom tradicijom, razumljivo, jer je ovdje uspostavljeno islamsko pravoslavlje, kao i svugdje, željelo isticati nekadašnji kršćanski strofički oblik i nekadašnje kršćansko značenje znatnih dijelova Kurana i blokirati svaku mogućnost ponovnog otkrića ovoga Christian Koran i povratak na njega. I kasnije ćemo uvijek vidjeti da su najvažnije varijante čitanja, što se tiče njihove vrijednosti za otkrivanje zamišljenog islamskog reinterpretacije izvornog teksta Kur'ana, uvijek namjerno ukinute i ne prenesene. Uvijek su manje važne ili čak beznačajne i zanemarive stare varijante koje su se po mogućnosti prenosile sve do našeg današnjeg vremena. No, srećom oni su u principu dovoljni kao dokaz za rekonstrukciju izvornog teksta. Sura 3:79 f je, dakle, nesumnjivo imala posla s rabbânîyûn , s „Anđelima Visokog Božijeg vijeća“, iako se riječ rabânîyûn ne pojavljuje nepretumačeno u Kuranu i izvan njega, s posljedicom da je velika nacionalna arapska leksika (vidi na primjer, Lane sv .) obično za ovog rabina nabraja samo značenje "onaj koji se posvećuje vjerskim službama; koji posjeduje znanje o Bogu", jer ga je identificirao sa židovskim izrazom Rabbi (ali vidi ovdje bilješku 83) . Ali ako se savjetujemo s kritičkom europskom leksikom arapskog jezika, izvorno angelološko značenje jasno dolazi do izražaja, kao kad Reinhart Dozy u svom " Supplement aux Dictionnaires Arabes " navede sljedeća značenja: rabbânî = " transcendentni "(tri puta): hikmat rabbânîya = "providnost; al-qudrat ar-rabbânîya = simpatija"; as-sirr ar-rabbânî = "simpatija"; ilhâm rabbânî = "nadahnuće céleste ";rabbânîyât =" cantiques a la louange du Seigneur "I pod riječju root bsbs E. Fagnan citira u svom " Additions aux Dictionnaires Arabes "značenje at-tabasbus ar-rabbânî "la faveur božansko". Ove reference na riječ rabbânî prikupljene iz arapske literature izvan Korana jasno pokazuju, iako neizravno, da rabbânî nije ljudsko, već anđeosko, nebesko ili čak božansko pitanje. Mi taj dokaz nazivamo neizravnim jer u tim kritičkim europskim leksikama također ne postoji jasna identifikacija: rabbânî = "Anđeo Visokog Božijeg vijeća". Ali to nije čudo s obzirom da je kasno judajska i ur- kršćanska angelologija bila potisnuta srednjovjekovnim pravoslavnim islamom, koliko je postojala u urbanoj Koreji. A još brže je potisnuo judaizam i samo kršćanstvo - u kršćanstvu je izbrisati arijanski anđeo-kristologiju u korist nove imperijalističke trinitarne dogme kršćanskog carstva. I ova srednjovjekovna situacija traje: Tamo gdje su reakcionarni teološki fakulteti do danas, slijedeći crkveno-političke taktike, bili sposobni prikriti sve susjedne fakultete i posebne grane znanosti, kao i intelektualnu javnost općenito, rezultate dogmatskih kritičnih istraživanja 19. i prve polovice 20. stoljeća rezultirajući činjenicom da je Krist nesumnjivo izvorno bio shvaćen kao najviši anđeo Visokog Božijeg vijeća - i time stvoreno biće - sve dok ta istina nije ugašena. od strane imperijalističkog helenističkog i rimskoga kršćanstva - tamo je to slučaj, ne može se očekivati ​​da bi se zapadnjački orijentalisti (i islamisti ), koji se od 1920-ih nisu pokazali zainteresirani za teološka i dogmatski kritična pitanja, bavili ozbiljna istraživanja istodobno cvjetajuće, ali kasnije istisnute anđeoske kozmologije religija Bliskog Istoka. Kao posljedica ove apatične ravnodušnosti još uvijek nedostaju znanstveni alati (izdanja tekstova, indeksa itd.) Koji bi omogućili brzu zbirku svih referenci, npr. Izraza rabbânîyûn i etimoloških kongenera u ranom arapskom i mirnom jeziku starije židovske i kršćansko-aramejske literature, gdje se ovi pojmovi u pravilu pojavljuju i samo kao u međuvremenu pogrešno protumačene riječi. Stoga ne možemo očekivati ​​više od siromašnih i korumpiranih ostataka nekada veličanstvene angelološke kozmologije o kojoj ovdje možemo navesti neke odlomke: U Targumu Pseudojonathan do Deut. 34;6 postoje četiri anđeoska učitelja mudrosti koji se jasno nazivaju חכמתא רבני " rabbânîm mudrosti" (= Sofija חכמה )”. [86] Što se Novog zavjeta može primijetiti, grčki izraz kyriotäs " Herrschaft , gospodstvo" u 2.Pet. 2:10 prikazano je u starom arapskom rukopisu iz samostana sv. Katarine u Brdo Sinaj kao الرّبّونية ar-rabbôniya . [87] Vrlo zanimljiva referenca su Djela apostolska 26:5 u istoj verziji starog arapskog jezika NT. Čitamo tamo da je apostol Pavao odgajan i podučavan bi afdala ' ilm il-rabbôniyîn [88] (ili: rabbônîn ) "po najboljem znanju Majstorskih Anđela (Visokog Božijeg Savjeta)", umjesto onoga što čitamo u helenističkoj grčkoj tradiciji teksta na ovom mjestu. Djela 26:5 "Ja (Pavao) sam pripadao najstroža skupina u našoj religiji: bio sam farizej. " Ako priznamo s jedne strane da je helenistički razvoj kršćanstva značio stvaranje i dovršavanje trinitarne tvorevine, kao i istodobno istrebljenje kasnog judajskog i ur-(staro) kršćanskog poimanja Mesije kao ''anđela Visokog Božijeg vijeća"(anđeo-kristologija), kao popratna pojava popraćeno demontažom složene opće angelologije, a ako s druge strane priznamo da je semitsko (aramejsko i posebno arapsko kršćanstvo bilo preferencijalno područje povlačenje za progonjenim i zato smanjujućim pristašama ur -kršćanskog anđeo-kristologije i angelologije (njihov posljednji pokret koji vodi u podrijetlo islama), tada moramo ozbiljno uzeti u obzir da su stare arapske verzije biblijskih tekstova, poput one iz Na gore spomenutoj planini Sinaj vjerojatno će se naći najbolja, najstarija i stoga najmanje uznemirena čitanja, posebno što se tiče posebno anđeološke kristologije i angelologije uopće. s njegovog stajališta gotovo je sigurno da je staro arapsko čitanje Djela 26:5 koja se odnosi na apostola Pavla i njegove arhanđeoske učitelje (Visokog Božjeg vijeća) najstarija, istinita biblijska verzija te biblijske rečenice. Helenistička slika Pavla kao bivšeg farizeja, koja do danas nije bila osporavana trinitarnim kršćanstvom, zapravo je zabludna reinterpretacija ovog angelološkog izraza rabbânîyûn / rabbônîyûn / rabbônîn prevodeći ovaj angelološki pojam kao da je sinonim „rabina“ ili pismoznanaca. To je upravo ono što smo vidjeli (ali u mnogo kasnijim vremenima) od urednika post- Muhamedanskih Kur'ana. ili , kao što je slučaj s ranim helenističkim urednicima biblije. kao da je rabbônîn sinonim za „ farizeje “. [89] Čitava stara priča da je i sam apostol Pavao nekad bio farizej čini se da vjerojatno nije bila ništa drugo do jednostavna i sadržajno znatiželjna posljedica tendenciozne (anti-anđeo-kristološke i anti- angelološke) helenističke reinterpretacije izvorno angelološke Izjava koja je unutar semitske tradicije sigurno prenesena, naime prevedena je s izvornog aramejskog jezika na arapsku verziju Acta Apostolorum. A slika ekstatika, koju su učili anđeli, mnogo bolje odgovara osobnom izgledu apostola Pavla nego da ga promatra kao bivšeg erudita židovskog farizeja (vidi također H. Detering, Der gefälschte Paulus, Düsseldorf 1995). Još jedan stari arapski tekst pokazuje da je izvorno značenje rabbânîyûn-a živjelo u krugovima muslimanskog misticizma koje pravoslavni islam često optužuje da su heretički. Knjiga Sûfî Abu Sa'îd Ahmed Ibn Îsâ al-Harrâz al-Bagdâdî s naslovom Kitâb as-Sirr (Knjiga Tajne) bila je osuđena, - tako da se nije srušila k nama - i bio je dužan emigrirati u Transoksaniju, a kasnije u Egipat gdje je umro 286. H./899. No, neke izreke njegove osuđene knjige prenose kasniji autori. I tako nalazimo u knjizi ' Abdallâh as-Sarrâg at-Tüsi (umro 378 H / 988 CE) Kitâb al-luma 'fi t-asawwuf (Knjiga eminentnih citata o misticizmu; izd. Reynold A. Nicholson [Gibb Memorial Series XXII] London 1963; p. ٣٦٨ 1, 6ff) slijedeća rečenica Abu Sa'îda al-Harráza: "Bog je privukao duhove svojih svetaca k sebi i dao im zadovoljstvo da mogu nastaviti s hvaljenjem i da su mu postali bliski ( al - wusûl ilâ qurbihi ; što se jasno sjeća termina al- muqarrabûn "skoro stojeći anđeli" ), ali on se također uključio u pripremu koja je već bila korisna njihovim (smrtnim) tijelima koje uživaju u svim vrstama, jer život njihova tijela je život životinjskih bića ( 'ais al-hayawânîyîn ) i život njihovih duhova je život rabbânîyûn ( 'ais ar-rabbânîyûn) koja se riječ na ovome mjestu ne može tumačiti drugačije nego "Majstori anđeli Visoko Božje vijeće "!) ". Ali još uvijek moramo komentirati preostale Kur'anske reference na rabbânîyûn (Sura 5:44; 5:63 i 3:146), osim Sure 3:79 f ranije analizirane . Koranska tema al- rabbânîyûn = "Anđeli Visokog Božijeg vijeća" zaslužuje zaseban tretman s obzirom na njegovo središnje značenje za razumjevanje ur- kršćanstva i ur- islamskog anđela-kristologije i angelologije koliko za Kur'an za Bibliju, ali ovdje se možemo dotaknuti samo u prenošenju ovih daljnjih referenci Korana , nudeći samo za jednu od njih detaljniju analizu za Sura 5:63 . I riječ rabbânîyûn u s.5:44, kao i ona u s.5:63 imaju wa-l-ahbâr "i pismoznanci (ili: rabini)" stavljeni iza nje, što je dodatak. Budući da već rabbânîyûn u islamskoj reinterpretaciji označava rabine ili pismoznance, to proizvodi tautologiju. Ovaj wa-l-ahbâr "i pismoznanci / rabini" smješteni odmah nakon ar-rabbânîyûn očito nije ništa drugo nego komentar umetnut post- Muhamedovim Koranima urednicima koji podupiru novu islamsku interpretaciju rabbânîyûn koja odstupa od izvornog značenja "Vladajući anđeli Visokog Božijeg vijeća", postupak koji neizbježno proizvodi ovu prilično besmislenu tautologiju. Da je ta manipulacija jednom poduzimana u s.5:63, može se potkrijepiti analizom strukture šireg konteksta s.5:60-64 i prikazati ćemo ove vrlo problematične stihove u zrcalno-simetričnom međusobnom sastavu tradicionalne i konačne rekonstrukcije prvotno značenje. Ali prvo bismo trebali komentirati reference rabbânîyûn u Sura 5:44 i 3:146, skupljajući na taj način neke dokaze koji vrijede i za rekonstrukciju treće vrlo složene reference u s. 5:63 , u njezinu znatno iskrivljenom kontekstu. Kontekst upućivanja na rabbânîyûn u Sura 5:44 vjerojatno je bio još više iskrivljen od strane ortodoksnih islamskih redaktora nego tekst Sura 5,60-64 o kojem će se raspravljati sljedeći, ali jedan. Ali ovdje u Sura 5:44 možemo problem riješiti samo općom diskvalifikacijom značenja koja proizlazi iz uređivačkog umetanja riječi wa-l-ahbâr nakon riječi ar-rabbânîyûn kako bi poduprla pogrešno značenje riječi ar-rabbânîyûn kao " Rabbi ", stvarajući ovom manipulacijom upitnu tautologiju. Ovo očito pogrešno značenje, za koje možemo biti sigurni da nikad nije bilo čitanje proroka Muhammeda, ali da će se za njega morati teretiti kasniji urednici Kur'ana, sastoji se u činjenici da je sada postojeći tekst preradio urednici Kur'ana glasi (navodimo samo središnje riječi): innâ anzalnâ t-taurâ ... yahkumu bihâ l-nabîyûn ... wa r-rabbâniyûna wa-l-ahbâr ... wa kânû 'alaihi ('alâ l-kitâb = "alâ t-taurâ) suhadâ" "Evo! Poslali smo Toru ... po kojoj proroci donose svoje sudove ... a rabbâniyûn i ahbar pisari (teolozi) ... i oni nose svjedočite tome (kitâb = Tore) ", a ovoj rečenici odmah slijedi opomena:" Ne bojte se ljudi (anna u smislu "ljudskih bića"), nego me se bojite! " Ovaj tekst, odražen u trezvenom svjetlu, otkriva da postoje dvije kategorije bića od kojih je prva klasa nebeskih bića, naime proroci koji su prema starim islamskim koncepcijama svi anđeli (ovdje. Bilješka 3; način: "anđeo" znači "glasnik" = rasûl = prorok!) i rabbânîyûn ako ih uzmemo za ono što se smatra starijom židovskom, kršćanskom i islamskom religioznom literaturom. Za njih, i samo za ta nebeska bića, pogodna je ideja da "svjedoče" u (formulaciji) Svetoga pisma. A postoji i druga kategorija "ljudska bića" kojoj samo u ovom tekstu pripadaju ahbâr "pisari". Reći s obzirom na njih da "svjedoče (formulacije) Svetoga pisma" je sa stajališta starije koncepcije bogohuljenje koje su ustanovili muslimanski urednici Korana = 'ulamâ' = ahbâr za sebe radi poboljšanja njihovog religiozno-političkog položaja u ranom islamskom društvu. Možemo biti sigurni da bi prorok Muhammed ljutito zamjerio takvu samoprocjenu pismoznanaca. Čak možemo jasno prepoznati njegov proročki položaj iz prenesenog teksta u sljedećim riječima: "Ne boj se ljudi, nego me se bojiš", i moramo proroke i anđele Visokog Božijeg vijeća uz Božje zamisliti oštro suprotno ljudskim bićima, "pisarima". Dakle, ova posljednja rečenica, koja očito pripada izvornom tekstu, je sjajna kontradikcija u adjectu prethodnoj glavnoj izjavi teksta Kur'ana. Stoga moramo otkazati riječi wa l-ahbâr ovog glavnog teksta i vratiti izvorno značenje riječi ar-rabbânîyûn: "Arhanđeli Visokog Božijeg vijeća". I opet, kao što je već u Suri 3:80 i s.35:28 (vidi ovdje, str. 74ff) , možemo uočiti duh post-Muhamedovih ranih urednika Korana koji su stvorili ovaj tekst uzdižući se na razinu proroka i anđela ako ni viši. Naša sljedeća i posljednja, ali jedna kurbanska referenca na rabbânîyûn koju treba analizirati, je Sura 3:146 [90] iako riječ na ovom mjestu nije rabbânîyûn nego ribbîyûn „tisuće“. Ovo čitanje rasma ربّيّون mora biti odbačen zbog njegovog nepouzdanog značenja u ovom kontekstu, jer tradicionalno tumačenje neposrednog konteksta glasi: "Koliko je proroka (bilo) zajedno s kojima se tisuće borilo ..." ( preveo Richard Bell) , a Izjava koja se čini vrlo tuđom za Koran, kao i za Bibliju, jer je u čitavom Koranu i Bibliji usamljenost i usamljenost proroka usred njihovih naroda zajednička karakteristika njihovog života. Stoga moramo malo promijeniti osip dodavanjem "vodenog vala" da bismo dobili ربّنيّون umjesto prenesenog ربّيّون a zatim pročitati rabbânîyûn : "Koliko je proroka (bilo) nasamo s kojima su se borili mnogi Anđeli (Velikog Božjeg vijeća) ... ". Ideja da se anđeli bore rame uz rame s prorocima bila je vrlo poznata u vrijeme ranog islama [91] 91 i uklapa se u opće mišljenje onog ranog doba da su sami proroci bili anđeli - a u nekim izvanrednim slučajevima čak i anđeli Visokog Božjeg vijeća. U tim bi okolnostima sada trebalo postati jasno da ovdje u tradicionalnom tekstu imamo uređivačku manipulaciju prije nego što smo uklanjali rabbânîyûn-Andjele iz izvornog teksta Kur'ana. I sada do naše posljednje Kuraniceve reference na rabban~yun , koliko ih do sada možemo prepoznati u Kuranu. Širši kontekst s.5:60 -64 vrlo je izobličen na isti način, pokazali su tekst Sure 5:44. Ovo izobličenje je već signalizirano iz činjenice da je Richard Bell pokušao preurediti slijed stihova ovog odjeljka bez uvjerljivog rezultata, a Rudi Paret u svom neuvjerljivom prijevodu daje mnoštvo komentara i ukočenih umetanja, pokušavajući time jasno dati do znanja da je tekst izuzetno teško protumačiti. Nadalje, stari islamski učenjaci Kur'ana prenijeli su ne manje od 20 inačica čitanja samo za ovih pet stihova Korana (MQQ, 1930-1949). Neka od ovih varijanti čitanja pokazuju (npr. MQQ br. 1932) da su neke riječi nakon svega dodali kasniji urednici Korana. Naše je mišljenje da su ti urednici Korana ubacili puno više riječi nego što danas pokazuju i danas prenesena inačica čitanja koja su preživjela u glavnom putu tradicije. Ne možemo očekivati ​​da bi ortodoksni čuvari islamske tradicije dopustili da se prenose ključne riječi za obnavljanje dosadašnjeg teksta, pa u pravilu nisu pročitana zaista ključna varijanta čitanja, već umjesto toga marljivo uklonjena iz toka tradicije, Da bismo iskrivili izobličenje ovog odjeljka, trebali bismo postupiti na način da isprva prikažemo tekst u zrcalno-simetričnom međusobnom spoju prenesenog teksta i njegovo vjerovatno ranije značenje te da o njemu poslije raspravljamo o problemima (podcrtajmo preneseni stari čitanja varijanti od posebnog značaja [lijeva strana] i iscrtana isprekidanom linijom kasne promjene teksta od strane post- Muhamedovih urednika Korana [desna strana]; arapski znakovi problematičnih riječi raspravljat će se samo na mjestima koja su važna): Ogledalo-simetrični prikaz Sura 5:60 - 64 rekonstruirana Čitanje Stihovi i verseline tradicionalan Čitanje qul hal anbiyâ'ukum ba sarun 60 qul hal unabbi'ukum bi-sarrin wa min d âlika ma tâbatan `inda llâh 2 min d âlika ma tû batan `inda llâh čovjek gadiba llâhu `alejhim 3 čovjek la`anahu llâhu wa gadiba `alejhim wa ga`alahum al-qiradata 4 wa ga`ala minhum al-qiradata wa Umetanje `ubbâda t-tawâgît 5 wa l-hanâzîra wa `abada t-tâgûta ulâ'ika sarrun makânan 6 ulâ'ika sarrun makânan wa adallu `an sawâ'i s-sabîl 7 wa adallu `an sawâ'i s-sabîl wa ida gâ'ûkum qâlû âmannâ 61 wa ida gâ'ûkum qâlû âmannâ wa qad dahalû bi l-kufri 2 wa qad dahalû bi l-kufri wa hum qad haragû bihi 3 wa hum qad haragû bihi wa llâhu a`lamu bimâ kânû yaktumûn 4 wa llâhu a`lamu bimâ kânû yaktumûn wa tarâ minhum ka tîran yusâri`ûna 5 wa tarâ minhum ka tîran yusâri`ûna fî l-itmi wa l-`udwâni wa akli s-suht 6 fî l-itmi wa l-`udwâni wa akli s-suh la-bi'sa mâ kânû ya`lamûn 7 la-bi'sa mâ kânû ya`lamûn lau lâ yanhâhumu l-rabbânîyûna 63 lau lâ yanhâhumu l-rabbânîyûna Umetanje wa l-ahbâru `an qaulihimu l-itma 2 `a qaulihimu l-itma wa aklihimu s-suhta 3 wa aklihimu s-suha la- bi'sa mâ kânû yasna`ûn 4 la-bi'sa mâ kânû yasna`ûn wa qâlati l-yahûdu 64 yadu llâhi maglûlatun ..... 2 Novi odjeljak s novom linijom misli ........................ .. 64 wa qâlati l-yahûdu 2 yadu llâhi maglûlatun oporavljen Čitanje Stihovi i verseline tradicionalan Čitanje (R. Bell) Reci : nisu li ti proroci meso 60 Reci : Da vam kažem nešto gore i stoga s Bogom ugledan onima 2 nego u onoj nadoknadi ( koja čeka ) kod Allaha? Onaj 3 koga je (jedinstveno) Allah prokleo i protiv koga (množina) Ljut je protiv koga (jednina) On je ljut i koga je napravio krvoproliće 4 od kojih je neki napravio majmune [ otkaži "svinje"] i sluge idola? 5 i svinje i Tâghûtove sluge - Oni su zli što se tiče (njihovog) stajanja 6 oni su u lošijem položaju I većina griješi s ispravnog puta. 7 i dalje zalutati izravnim putem. A kad dođu k vama, ljudi kažu "Vjerovali smo". 61 A kad dođu kod vas kažu "Vjerovali smo". Ali ušli su u nevjeru 2 iako su ušli u nevjeru i u njemu su se udaljili. 3 i u njemu su se udaljili. Allah dobro zna šta su oni prikrivali. 4 Allah dobro zna šta su oni prikrivali. Mnogi se od njih često vide kako pobjeđuje 62 Mnogi se od njih često vide kako pobjeđuje u krivici i neprijateljstvu 2 u krivici i neprijateljstvu i kako troše loše stečeno bogatstvo 3 i u njihovoj konzumaciji onoga što je zabranjeno ( zvono : vjerojatno uzur) . Sigurno zlo je ono što su radili. 4 Sigurno zlo je ono što su radili. Zašto ih rabbânîyûn ne obuzdava 63 Zašto ih rabini i učenjaci ne obuzdavaju iz njihovog govora o krivici 2 iz njihovog govora o krivici i konzumiranja loše stečenog bogatstva 3 i njihovo konzumiranje onoga što je zabranjeno? Sigurno je zlo ono što su radili. 4 Sigurno je zlo ono što su radili. Židovi kažu: 64 Allahova ruka je ošišana. 2 Novi odjeljak s novom linijom misli 64 Židovi kažu: 2 Allahova ruka je ošišana. (vidi engl. strnicu ) Ovaj odjeljak započinje adresom iz prethodnog stiha s.5:59 (ostavili smo ga po strani jer nema daljnjeg značaja za temu s.5:60-64), ya ahlu l-kitâb "O ljudi knjige". Sadrži, dakle, islamsko sukob sa Židovima i kršćanima. Budući da unaprijed znamo da je rabbânîyûn u s.5:63. stihu ovog konteksta ozbiljno pogrešno interpretiran, moramo se zapitati što možda nije u redu s tradicionalnim tumačenjem ovog konteksta uopće. Prva i općenita stvar je da u tradicionalnom čitanju s.5:60 postoji queer opozicija između "onoga koji je u odšteti" i "onoga koga je Allah prokleo". Očekivali bismo i trebali očekivati ​​suprotstavljanje dviju vrsta iste kategorije: dvije različite osobe ili skupine ljudi. A druga i glavna osobina je ta što, kada u ajetu s.61:1. piše „kad dođu do vas“, kontekst ostaje posve nejasan u pogledu pitanja tko su ti ljudi, proklinjući ih Allah i dolaze ponekad ili često ili uvijek Židovima i kršćanima. Srećom, islamska tradicija prenosi niz varijanti čitanja posebno za uvodne retke ovog teksta koji načelno pokazuju da je početak ovog odjeljka ranije bio iščitan na drugi način. Tako, na primjer, rasm بشّر أنبئكم هل hal unabbi'ukum bi-sarrin "hoću li vam reći nešto gore", prije nije bio čitan na ovaj način, udvostručenjem b u glagolu unabbi ', ali bez (MQQ, 1930) . Stoga osjećamo pravo čitati ovaj osip na posve drugačiji način: بشر أنبيكم هل hal anbiyâ'ukum (ili: anbiyâkum) basarun "nisu li meso vaših proroka?" Ta se izjava tada točno dotiče središnje teme koju je Poslanik posebno isticao u kontekstu s.5:44. stiha sa rabbânîyûnom (vidi gore, str. 81f) . I ovim čitanjem rješavamo glavni problem konteksta s.5:60 -64, naime, nesvjest tih ljudi koji ponekad ili uvijek dolaze k Židovima i kršćanima: to su njihovi proroci. Moramo očito zaključiti da su svi uglavnom anonimni vodeći židovski i kršćanski teolozi tijekom stoljeća koji su propagirali takve doktrine kao o trojstvu i jednakosti Bogu Ezri, kao i oni koji su krivotvorili pismo Biblije, uključeni u ovaj kur'anski izraz "proroci ", barem u ovom slučaju. Nakon što smo se odlučili na ovo čitanje. sve ostale prenesene inačice nagovještavaju raniji alternativni sadržaj za ovaj odjeljak točno odgovara našem uvodnom tekstu: "Nisu li vaši proroci nesh ." Ali za našu obnovu moramo nakon ove uvodne izjave umetnuti wa "i" (vidjeti stih 60. redak 2, dvostruko podcrtano) . A onda umjesto ma t ûbat "nadoknade" prenosi se nekadašnji čitanje ma t wabat (MQQ br. 1931) koji se odvija s ma t âbatom "čin, ugled, priznanje, uvažavanje, procjena itd." Također je vrlo važno da je tradicionalno dodijeljeni la`anahu llâhu wa "Allah ga prokleo i" prije se uopće nije čitao, - doista bi ga položio prejako na ono što su ipak proroci Židova i kršćana! A isto je tako vidljivo da nekadašnja čitanja (MQQ, br. 1932) ovdje imaju s.5:60 dvostruko množinu zamjenica umjesto jedninskih zamjenica tradicionalnog islamskog čitanja koje se stoga moraju otkazati. Ali najveća zabluda koju su postavili urednici Muhammedani Kur'ana bila je u izjavi da je Allah učinio neke od njih, u svojoj reinterpretaciji, "opskurnim" neprijateljskim majmunima i svinjama, što ga opet polaže na previše gust i gotovo sigurno ne jezik poslanika , Prenesena čitanja o varijanti (MQQ, br. 1932.) od zaista velikih autoriteta Ubai ibn Ka`b i Abdallâh ibn Mas`ûd , pokojni prorokovi suvremenici, ukazuju na to da su pročitali ovaj odlomak na znatno drugačiji način, iako ništa nije prenošeno da li su propustili "majmune i svinje". Ali odlučno sumnjam jesu li te stare vlasti Kur'ana zapravo imale "majmune i svinje" u svom tekstu za uređivanje, iako je izraz za riječ "majmuni" barem bio prisutan (iako s potpuno drugim značenjem) u originalu Tekst kao što su ga Poslanik i njegovi suvremenici poznavali, dok je riječ "svinja" zasigurno umetanje od strane kasnijih urednika Kur'ana i zato je ne bi čitali Ubai i Ibn Mas'ûd kao što ćemo sad otkriti. Arapska riječ qiradat un ovdje u Sura 5:60, red 4 je množina i može se izvesti iz dvije različite arapske riječi, naime qird "majmun" i qurd "krpelj (lijepljenje na koži deva, goveda i ovaca itd. I sisavanje krvi od ovih životinja) ". Množina "majmuna" je aqrud ( pluralis paucitatis ) i aqrâd (nomen collectivum) ili qurûd . Koliko je plural qiradat un naveden u staroj arapskoj leksiki za „majmune“, reference za ovaj množinu u načelu su uzete iz pogrešno protumačenog Korana, i vrlo sam sumnjajući da li bi se ovaj množina pojavio u bilo kojem tekstu starog arapskog jezika profana literatura bez pozivanja na koranski religijski rječnik. Dakle, također je vrlo upitno je li qiradat un bio izvorno množina qird "majmuna". Sada drugoj alternativi: Riječ qurd "krpelj" ima nomen collectivum ili pluralis multitudinis qurâd ili qirdân i pluralis paucitatis aqridat un . No, iako množina qiradat un nije navedena u Laneovom iscrpnom rječniku, Reinhart Dozy (1820.-1883.) U svojim „ Dodacima “ navodi qirâdat un „krpelj (i)“, što je, s obzirom na njegovu tvorbu riječi, očito pluralis paucitatis (procjenjivi broj krpelja) . Sasvim je moguće da u tri postojeće korenske reference qiradata uvijek trebamo čitati ovaj qirâdat un .Ali ovo je teško pitanje za odlučiti jer je stari Koran napisan neispravno, bez ikakvih naznaka matres lectionis da li su samoglasnici kratki ili dugi. Bilo kako bilo, na ovom su mjestu nesumnjivo stajali ili qiradat un ili qiradat un sa značenjem " (procjenjivi broj) krpelja". Dakle, sada možemo zaključiti: Dok je majmun bio za Arabija , čak i tada, egzotična životinja koja nije imala zapaženu ulogu u staroj arapskoj literaturi, bila je upravo suprotna krpelju. Krpelj je preferirana metafora za sve aspekte života u staroj arapskoj poeziji i književnosti, jer deve, ovce i goveda igraju takvu sveprisutnu ulogu u starom arapskom životu. Često se može naći i u duhovitim aluzijama, primjerice, kada se govori o žestinoj konoplji: "Uzela je svu vunu sa sobom ne ostavljajući ni krpelj" (u širem kontekstu je Lane sv . Citirao) . Naravno, krpelj služi kao metafora ljudskog krvoprolića, a to je očito namjera ovdje u Sura 5:60, red 4. Zato što ova metafora "krvopijači" u ovom odjeljku korelira s "onima koji troše loše stečeno bogatstvo" u stihu s.5:62, red 3, ne može biti sumnje da je uistinu Poslanik to koristio u svojoj optužbi protiv proroka (u širem smislu „učitelja “: vidi gore) Židova i kršćana. Tek su Poslanikov tekst odgajali samo kasniji urednici Kur'ana. U Kur'anu su samo dvije reference za qiradat i navodno "majmune" (Sura 2:65 i s.7:166), a o njima se na sličan način govori o majmunima: R. Bell čini tradicionalni spoj kûnû qiradatan hâ si'îna , slična tu i tamo, kao "budite ti majmuni odlasci", a R. Paret to prevodi , iako ne bez izražavanja svoje ozbiljne sumnje velikim upitnikom: " Werdet zu menschenscheuen Affen (postanite majmuni sramežljivi prema ljudska bića) " . Ali velike stare vlasti čitaju, kako otkrivaju njihove prenesene varijante, na oba ova mjesta pridjev qiradat un nije kao h âsi'îna „sramežljiv“, nego h âssîna „nizak, nesmotren , zloban, zloban“ (MQQ, br. 211 i 2759) . Ovaj opis odgovara krpelja, ali ne i majmunu. Tako postaje jasno da su sve tri korilske reference qiradat un (ili qirâdat un) izvorno značile „krpelji“, a sve ove reference i njihov kontekst iskrivile su postmuhamedanski Koran o njihovom sasvim prirodnom izvornom značaju, naime sud Poslanika o njegovim protivnicima: "Bili su to sitni krvnici / paraziti!" [92] Ali budući da smo sada zaključili da s.5:60, redak 4 izvorno glasi "koga je stvorio parazitima (= krpelji)", - kao paralelni izraz "koji konzumira loše stečeno bogatstvo" u ajetu 5:63, redak 3 -, slijediti "i svinje" u s.5:60 retku 5 lako se prepoznaju kao kasni umetanje jer "krvoloci i svinje" ne mogu proći kao kompatibilni u izreci. Napokon dolazimo do presudne rečenice iz stiha s.5:63 koja se odnosi na rabbânîyûn za koju je rasprava o stihovima s.5:60-62 samo uvertira: Nakon što smo otkrili izvorno značenje stihova s.5:60-62, postaje jasno da se u stihu s.5:63 wa l-ahbâr "i pismoznanci" također moraju otkazati kao kasni zabludujući sjaj, kao što smo pokazali da je slučaj u kontekstu Sure 5:44 (vidjeti gore str 81f) . Ovaj odlomak sada mora biti protumačen - točno u skladu s tradicionalnim tumačenjem dok su izostavljali sjaj "i pismoznanci" i uzimali ar-rabbânîyûn za ono što je ta riječ izvorno značila -, "Zašto anđeli Visokog Božijeg vijeća ne suzdržati ih od govorenja krivnje i njihovog konzumiranja loše stečenog bogatstva? " Ovo je očito nastavak misaonog stiha koji polazi od stiha s.5:60 "Zašto silni Božji anđeli i stvarni proroci ne sprečavaju ove lažne proroke da čine zlo?" Budući da su urednici post- Muhamedanskog Kur'ana iznašli tekst s.5:60. -63., Posljednji ajet s.5:64, "Židovi kažu:" Allahova ruka je oduzeta ", više nisu imali nikakve veze s iskrivljenom linijom misli iz s.5:60. do s.5:63. Budući da su na ovaj način ponovno protumačili širi kontekst u dijelove, dopuštaju da stih s.5:64 predstavlja početak novog odjeljka s novom misličkom misli. Tako i zapadni islamisti koji vjeruju u tradicionalnu zamagljenu reinterpretaciju također dopuštaju predah, Richard Bell je ovom novom odjeljku dao čak i (zabludu) poseban naslov: "Povratak židovskom gibu, vjerojatno uzrokovan zahtjevima za doprinosima" Ali ajet s.5:64 zapravo je uredan nastavak misli misli Sure 5:60 -63, jer rečenica u ajetu s.5:64 "Židovi kažu: Allahova ruka je oduzeta" direktan je odgovor na pitanje iz s.5:63. stiha "Zašto silni anđeli Visokog Božjeg vijeća ne obuzdavaju lažne proroke?" Treba samo shvatiti da su unutar starog začeća Boga i njegovih najviših anđela, obojica i oni zajedno isti, - Bog i njegova hipostaza - kako bismo mogli promijeniti teme oba ova stiha: "Zašto Bog ne ometa lažne proroke", a Židovi bi odgovorili" "Ruke anđela Visokog Božjeg vijeća su oduzete". Došli smo do kraja puta u našem izletu o izvornom značenju rabbânîyûn u Kuranu i drugdje. Ali trebamo napomenuti da smo s posljednjim pominjanjem rabbânîyûn u Sura 5:63 po prvi put detaljno analizirali i rekonstruirali islamski jednoznačni tekst u ramskom osnovnom sloju od kojeg nikada nije bila sakrivena nekadašnja kršćanska strofička himna. , jer je ovaj tekst očito bio tekst koji je diktirao sam Poslanik. I tako imamo ovdje svoj prvi primjer kako su užasno urednici post- Muhamedanskog Kur'ana odjekivali tekstove vlastitog Poslanika i kako se njihove pogrešne interpretacije poput metastaza raka šire po cijelom tijelu Kurana. Čitalac bi sada mogao shvatiti zašto su od vremena "uređivanja" Kur'ana, pod vodstvom trećeg kalifa Uthmana pa nadalje, svi stari predtomanski kodovi Kur'ana, čak i oni najcjenjenijih ashaba Poslanika, bili oduzeti što je moguće više i izgorio. Kraj ekskurzije na ar-rabbânîyûn . [73] Prema razumnoj tezi SGF-a Brandonu (Isus i Zeloti. 1967, 320f, koju dijele mnogi novozavjetni učenjaci (vidi Brandonovu napomenu 2), Krist je i sam apokaliptični "grozni Jahač na bijelom konju", čije su oči poput vatrenog plamena ... Obučen je u ogrtač natopljen krvlju, a ime po kojem se zove je Riječ Božja"(Otkr. 19:12ff). Budući da je s druge strane Krist nesumnjivo jedan (i najviši) Anđela Visokog Božjeg vijeća, čini se da svi apokaliptični Jahači zajedno pripadaju Visokom vijeću. Ako je to slučaj, moguće je da su ratnički anđeli u citiranom stihu pjesnika al-Hansâ-a sami apokaliptični Jahači ili barem prikazani su prema slici apokaliptičnih Jahača koji su sigurno bili dobro poznati u preislamskoj Arabiji. Zato je ovdje čitanje rabbânija poželjno za jezično fantastičniju zabanuniju. [74] Ako se smatra klasičnom arapskom riječju, trebalo bi je napisati rabbânîya. Ali budući da su predislamski kršćanski tekstovi Kur'ana napisani na arapskom jeziku, a također iz ritmičkih i strofskih metričkih razloga, trebali bismo napisati riječ u obliku rabbâniya kako bi se uskladila s ritmičkim obrascem mawâliya . [75] Pogledajte za ovo M. Werner, Die Entstehung des Christlichen Dogmas, 1954, 302-321, poglavlje "Das Wesen des Christus nach der urchristlichen Lehre (Engelchristologie)" esp. str. 307. Argumenti koje je iznio M. Werner nikada nisu opovrgnuti. Umjesto toga, zataškavaju ih, razumljivo, jer bi u suprotnom ovi argumenti doveli do kraja 19. stoljeća „kršćanske“ trinitarne teologije i vjerovanja. [76] Oba ova epiteta upućena Isusu događaju se tamo gdje je njegova anđeoska kvaliteta važna ako nije središnja: u Marku 10:51 Krist izliječi slijepca, a u Ivanu 20:16 Krist se pojavljuje na svom otvorenom grobu i otkriva se neočekivano kao uskrsli. Ovu adresu Marija Magdalena izgovara na pomalo uplašen način, tako da je njezin usklik mogao zaista biti zapanjen: "Gospodaru moj!" u smislu "Gospodaru moj-Anđeo!" Isus značajno odgovara: "Ne diraj me, jer još nisam uzašao k Ocu! "; zov koji treba shvatiti kao posljedica njegovog pojavljivanja ovdje u nebeskom, tj. njegovom anđeoskom ukazanju. [77] O tim klasama anđela u ranokršćanskoj literaturi vidi Theologisches Wörterbuch zum NT, ed. Gerhard Kittel , Stuttgart 1933ff. sv . angelos i tamo dane reference na znanstvenu raspravu. Treba obratiti pažnju i na Fridolin Stier. Gott und sein Engel im Alten Testament, Münster 1934 . Vidi ovdje i napomenu 72, iako se JE Fossum drži starog, a što se tiče dokaza što ih je prikupio Martin Werner, neporecivo gledište da je NT naslov " kyrios " za Isusa Krista bilo usvajanje OT naziva Jahvea kao "Gospodina" pod utjecajem trinitarne tvorevine. [78] Na arapskom jeziku uvodni glagol obično nije u kongrumentaciji po broju i rodu, tako da je na arapskom ovdje riječ za riječ, rekao je: „prije su to bili vladajući anđeli ...". Ovo je važno pravilno ocijeniti paralelizam dviju kâna ", "predstavljao je prvi redak (a) i (A). [79] Za mâ "što" kao relativni izgovor koji se odnosi na osobe vidi J. Blau , Kristova gramatika. Arapski., § 441. [80] U Sura 3:45. Isus Krist jasno je klasificiran kao "jedan od mukarabera " koji je "jedan od bliskih (Bogu) objavljenih anđela". Usporedite babilonski Talmud, Sanhedrin 43a gdje je Isus klasificiran qarôb le-malkût blizu (objavljeno) Kraljevstvu (Božjem) “. [81] Pretpostavka da su proroci anđeli već se može naći u SZ. Vidi 2.Hronik. 36:15f; Izaja 44:26; Hag. 1:12f. [82] O neispravnom pisanju (= bez matres lectionis ) u najstarijim kuracijama Korana vidi Gerd-Rüdiger Puin, Observations on Early Qur'ân Manuscripts in San'a' u: S.Wild [ed.], Kur'an as Tekst. Leiden 1996., str.107-111. [83] Ono što je dosad napisano (vidi literaturu na koju je Paret, 1971., objavio Sura 5:63 ) o etimologiji rabbanija , teško je pretrpjeti, naime da bi rabbâni trebao potjecati iz aramejskog načina obraćanja učiteljskom rabbanu "naš Učitelj /Učitelj, nastavnik, profesor!". Ali ovaj enlitski -an "naš" ima, što se tiče njegove morfologije, kratak i ne dugačak! I svi su ti pisci znali da takva nagovorna adresa "Našeg Učitelja", koja je sama po sebi semantički neodrživa kao izvor rabljana , nikada ne bi mogla usvojiti arapski nisbet - ili potomku - " :"onaj koji pripada 'našem Učitelju!' „! Karl Ahrens stoga s pravom određuje (ZDMG 84 [1930], 21) ovog rabljana "osebujnog arapskog oblika sa završetkom -"! Zaista, rabbî i rabbânî su prema pravilima semitskih tvorbi riječi dvije različite riječi s posljedično različitim značenjima kao na hebrejskom "drugo" i "zadnje" (ovaj tvornik riječi -on ili -an srodan je postpopozicijskom Starom Članak o južnom arapskom jeziku - ân !) Dakle, kada Adolf Wahrmund u svom Handwörterbuchu daje rabbânî ="božanski", u pravu je. Ali kad doda "množinu rabbânîyûn ="teolog. rabin" ovo je čista fantazija, iako fantazija od više od tisućljeća koju su trinitarno kršćanstvo i islamsko pravoslavlje prodali kao zvučno i navodno dobro utemeljeno značenje! rabbânîyûn je značilo i znači" božanski anđeoski majstori ili upravitelji "i ništa drugo. [84] Gotthelf Bergsträßer, Ibn Halawaihs Sammlung nichtkanonischer Koranlesarten. str. 21. Ova varijantna čitanja, kao što smo ih rekonstruirali kao izvorni tekst ovog Kur'ana, navedena su i u novom voluminoznom zborniku prenesenih ranih čitanja rane Korane MQQ, vol. 2, str. 46 = br. 1104 kako su ih čitali rani stručnjaci islama iz Korana Abû 'Amr. Nâfi', Ibn Katîr,'Âim, Mugâhid, Abû Hâtim i al-Hasan. [85] Taj je ortodoksni tradicionalni pogled opet i, nadamo se, posljednji put zagovarao John Burton. Zbirka Kur'ana. Cambridge UP 1977 u cijeloj svojoj knjizi (npr. 171): "Nijedna od ovih varijanti nije od velikog značaja."). Ali njegov opći stav koji čini razlog za snažnu ortodoksnu islamsku jurisprudenciju na djelu već prije uspostavljanja ortodoksnog teksta Kur'ana čini mi se neodrživim. [86] J. Levy, Chaldäisches Wörterbuch über die Targumim, sv. rabbân; vidi također William F. Albright, Nedavna otkrića u Palestina, str.158 n.2. [87] M. Dunlop Gibson. Arapska verzija Djela apostolskih i sedam katoličkih poslanica ..,London 1899. Studia Sinaitica VII), str. 60,9. [88] rabbûnîyûn ili rabbônîyûn ili čak rabbônîn umjesto rabbânîyûn samo su varijacije u izgovoru i pravopisu jedne te iste riječi povezane s različitim jezicima (pučki, klasični itd.). [89] Riječ " farizej " u principu nije prihvaćena u arapskoj literaturi. Ovo bi objasnilo zašto redaktori Korana nikad nisu stigli do odstupajuće interpretacije rabbânîyûn = farizeji . [90] U Kuranu mogu biti neka dodatna mjesta na kojima najvjerojatnije redaktori nisu komentirali postojeći rabbânîyûn koji je iza njega stavio al-ahbâr ili nešto slično, ali oni su takvim riječima komentirali riječ rabbânîyûn općenito. [91] Vidi npr . J.Wellhausen. Muhamed u Medini. str.49f i 54ff. [92] Na oba ova mjesta (s.2:65 i s.7:166) rečenica je kûnû qiradatan hasi'îna "budi ti majmuni koji klize" (R. Bell). Ali ovaj kûnû „biti ti“ očito treba čitati kao kânû „oni su bili“ baš kao što je to bio slučaj u Sura 3:79 -80 (vidi ovdje, str. 74ff) i svi dodani dokazi za promjenu rasme ovo značenje vrijedi i za ove reference u Sura 2:65 i 7,66. Rečenicu se, dakle, mora čitati kao "bili su neznatni krvnici", a ovo je bila izjava Poslanika o učiteljima nevjernika o kojima je govorio. http://www.christoph-heger.de/ar-rabbaniyun.htm ---------------------------------------------------- http://www.christoph-heger.de/ar-rabbaniyun.htm The rabbânîya, rabbânîyûn in the Koran, an extract from: GÜNTER LÜLING, A Challenge to Islam for Reformation. The Rediscovery and Reliable Reconstruction of a Comprehensive pre-Islamic Christian Hymnal hidden in the Koran under earliest Islamic Reinterpretations, Delhi (Motilal Banarsidass Publishers) 2003, pp. 71-87 Trad. Text 96,18: sa-nad‘u z-zabâniyata سندع ۱لزّبانية Trad.Interpret.: We shall (for our part) call for the bailiffs (of hell) (?). (Rudi Paret) We shall call the imps of hell. (Richard Bell) To this verse Richard Bell gives the commentary: "Zabâniya, a word the sense of which is not clear; it is usually taken as denoting the guards of hell; or the angels which carry off the soul at death." Indeed it is a curious, even an enigmatic word. According to the Arabian lexicographers the word zabâniya is said to be the plural of zibniya, a likewise strange word the significance of which is paraphrased as "police soldier, watchman". But this explanation seems to be not so much theory as a flight of the imagination, since according to the rules of Arabic word formation the word form zabâniya looks exactly like the formation of the abstract (similar to the English abstract created by the word extension -ship) from a basic word zabân. But such a basic zabân is unknown in Arabic, old or new. Beyond the Koran this word zibniya, zabâniya is therefore extremely rare. In the Koran itself this doubtful "plural" zabâniya appears only in our verse Sura 96,18 and is therefore a Koranic hapax legomenon as theologians call a word which only appears once in the whole Bible. When Islamic tradition understands by this personal "plural" (although it seems to be an abstract) the custodian angels of hell, this interpretation is not to be turned down per se, since in a verse of the Old Arabian poetess al-Hansâ‘ (Aghânî XIII.136,7) where this really rare zabâniya is to be found (if its rasm is not much better to be read in the same way as we reconstruct it for 96,18: rabbâniya) it denotes most probably warlike angels mounted on horses (compare also Ibn Hishâm. ed. Wüstenfeld, I,201,4).[73] Nevertheless, although the general direction of traditional Islamic interpretation, – namely that the plural object of the verb "calling for" in 96,18 is "angels" – , seems approximately to fit the context, this traditional meaning, taking into consideration our hitherto conclusive and plausible reconstruction of the Sura, is unsuitable. Instead of malicious angels of hell we need for our hitherto reconstructed scenario the opposite: angels benevolent and helpful towards devout believers, if angels are to be looked for in this passage at all. But indeed, the word nâdî, the "High Council of God's highest angels as his counsellors" of Sura 96,17, cries for these high. benevolent and peaceful angels of God to come up in 96,18. It is not a random coincidence that just this word az-zabâniya ۱لزّبانيةof 96,18 is suspicious because it is so rare – according to the untenable frame-narrative allegedly meaning "the custodian angels of hell". Yet a very slight change in the diacritical punctation of the rasm of this word brings to light just the thing which is needed to continue the line of thought of our reconstructed Sura 96 from verse 1 to our crucial point 96,18: if we read, removing one point and setting one additional doubling sign, ar-râbbaniya لرّّبّانية, [74] we have these "ruling or governing or powerful angels" (the short German expression "Herrschaftsengel" seems most fitting) before us which are commonly called the rabbânîyûn (plural) "the great or masterly ones" a term which corresponds to the Greek NT expression kyrioi "Lords". It can be counted as a small but nonetheless further element in our evidence that these "Herrschaftsengel" appear in 96,18 in the word formation of an abstract or collective noun: "Governing-Angel-ship" fitting well the collective expression nâdiyah "His (God's) High Council (of the highest angels)" of verse 96, 17. For the traditional zabâniya "imps or bailiffs of hell" we had to reject the grammatical abstractum since there are, as a rule, no institutional councils or groups or classes of fallen angels or imps or devils of hell known from biblical literature and beyond, while the angels of heaven are institutionally arranged in special classes and legions etc. Therefore only for the angels of heaven and especially for the "Herrschaftsengel", the rabbânîyûn, the abstract rabbâniya, meaning the institution of these "Herrschaftsengel" per se, is a fitting expression. And only this abstract is suitable to be understood as a hypostasis or a synonym of God, which accounts to the same thing, as seems to be the case in Sura 96, 18. Excursus on the rabbânîyûn, the Angels of the High Council of God in early Near Eastern theology and in the Koran as well as in the early Islamic religious literature. It is clearly not possible to submit the angelology of the Koran as well as the angelologies of the preceding religions Judaism and Christianity as a whole to a thorough critical investigation merely on the basis of our discoveries as to the usage of Sura 96,18. This is the more so because there has been no ambitious research on this topic for decades and especially not from the point of view of liberal historico- and dogma-critical theology. So we can only point to some essential insights which lend credence to our proposed interpretation of Sura 96,18. It is only because of the dominance of trinitarian Christian confessions in our theological faculties at all universities that clear evidence is ignored as to why the (Greek) title kyrios "Lord" is applied to the Messiah. It is a title which he holds originally only on account of his status as one (the highest) of the ruling angels.[75] Even the Greek transcription of the Aramaic and Arabic title of an Angel of the High Council of God rabbouni is encountered twice in the NT (Mark 10,51 and John 20,16) when Jesus Christ is addressed.[76] The church-theological hindrance to this insight into the special Christological aspect of general angelology, – if Christ is an angel he is a created being; an aspect which had to be expunged from trinitarian Christianity – , is at the same time an impediment to a greater interest in general angelology. Only at narrowed down points, where the church-dogmatical interest is not immediately menaced, are things comparatively clear and undisputed (but also in the sense of being not disputed though), namely that Late Judaism ("Spätjudentum") and ur-Christianity understand the world of angels as a world of certain classes of angels and that they name and invoke the highest class of them (in Greek) by the abstractum kyriotäs "Lordship, Herrschaft" (see e.g. Eph. 1,21; Col. 1,16; 2. Peter 2,10; Jude 8). Each member of this abstract kyriotäs "Lordship" is a kyrios "Lord" the Arabic equivalents of which are obviously rabbâniya (collectivum) and rabbânî (singular), rabbânîyûn (plural). Of those further classes of angels[77] only that one is relevant to our problem, the members of which are called in the Greek NT the exousiai, "the authorities or powers" (see Eph. 3,10; 6,12; Col. 1,16; 2,15; Tit. 3,1; 1. Pet. 3,22). Obviously these NT exousiai appear also in the Koran, so for instance in Sura 30,35: am anzalnâ ‘alaihim sultânan fa huwa yatakallamu bi mâ kânû bihi yusrikûn "or have we sent down on them a power/authority, that he would have spoken about what they have been associating with Him?" If we examine this text closely it is unmistakable that the sultân "the power or authority" is understood as a speaking person although the Islamic and Western Orientalist tradition passes over this given speciality. Undoubtedly, in this Arabic sultân "Power" (in Sura 69,29 occurring also in the form of an abstract: sultâniya), corresponding to Greek exousia, we have before us a further trace of the last concrete vestiges of the Late Judaic and ur-Christian angelology tangible in the Koran. But let us now turn again to our word rabbânîya. This abstractum does not occur in the Koran except in Sura 96,18 as we have quite reasonably reconstructed it. But there are three places (Sura 3,79; 5,44; 5,63) where the cognate rabbânîyûn turns up, and to this rabbânîyûn must be added the hapax legomenon ribbîyûn (3,146). If one approaches these references from the working hypothesis "rabbanîyûn = kyrioi = "Angels of the High Council of God" (in the sense of the Late Judaic and ur-Christian angelology), it turns out that these passages clearly had originally this specific angelological meaning but were later reinterpreted and considerably reworked by Islamic redaction. Of these four texts the most conclusively reconstructable one is that of Sura 3,79f. Before, in 3,78, the theme of "the falsification of scripture by Jews and Christians" is touched upon. Then, with 3,79f, the text reads (we put our reconstruction mirror-symmetrically opposite the traditional text and its interpretation): Mirror-symmetrical representation of Sura 3,79-80 Reconstruction Verses Traditional Interpretation ما كان لبشر أن يؤتيه ألكتاب والحكم والنبوّة (a) 79 ما كان لبشر أن يؤتيه ألكتاب و الحكم و النبوّة ثمّ يقول للناس كونو عبادا لى من دون الله (b) ثمّ يقول للناس كونو عبادا لى من دون الله ولكن كانوا ربّنيّن بما كنتم تَعَلَّمُون الكتاب وبما كنتم تَدَرَّسُون (A) ولكن كونوا ربّنيّن بما كنتم تَُعَلَّمُون الكتاب وبما كنتم تدْرُسُون ولا يأمركم أن تتّخذوا الملئكة وانّبيّن أربابا (B) 80 ولا يأمركم أن تتّخذوا الملئكة وانّبيّن أربابا We have arranged the text in the sections a-b and A-B to make the· logical structure of this text transparent. For the reconstruction we have only to change, what concerns the rasm-text, the كونو or (defectively written) كنو kûnû "be you (imperative plural)" in the first line of (A) on the right side, that is of the Islamic reinterpretation, which is obviously an "emendation" of the original text because the original text (see left side first line of A) had undoubtedly had at this place, as we shall see, كان or كن kâna "it was" or even better كانوا or كنوا kânû "they were" as the logically required resumption of the كان or كن kâna "it was" of the first line of (a) (first line right and left). We shall return to this issue later on. Translation of Sura 3,79-80 Reconstruction Verses Traditional Interpretation It was not for a human being that Allah should give him the book and the powers of judgement and the prophetic office (a) 79 It was not for a human being that Allah should give him the book and the powers of judgement and the prophetic office and that man then could say to the people: "Be ye servants to me apart from Allah", (b) and that man then culd say to the people: "Be ye servants to me apart from Allah", It was/were[78] rather Ruling Angels by whom you learned the Book[79] and by whom you were taught, (A) Be ye rather rabbis in what you are teaching the Book and in what you are studying, And He (God) does not command you to take the Angels and the Prophets to be (your) Lords. (B) 80 And He (God) does not command you to take the Angels and the Prophets to be (your) Lords. To understand this text the reader has to remember similar passages of the NT: Acts 7,53: "You received the law given by God's angels ..."; Acts 7,38: "(A prophet like me ...) It was he who kept company with the angel, who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our forefathers, and received the living utterances of God to pass on to us"; Ga1. 3,19: "(The law ...) and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator"; Heb.2,2: "For if God's word spoken through angels had such force that ...". But see also Sura 83,20f: "A book inscribed which the Near-Standing (angels) are witnessing." Our reconstruction proves to be correct if one follows this clear line of thought: The idea (a) that man is not allowed to receive the Book and the powers of right judgement and prophecy from God directly is counterbalanced in (A) by the positive statement on this matter: that it is only the High Angels who get all this power directly from God by which to teach mankind. The same clear logical structure is inherent in the sentences (b) and (B): In (b) is explained why God chose his High Angels to teach mankind, namely because otherwise a human being vested with these powers might become cocky and desire to be worshipped by his fellow human beings. This idea is continued in (B) in the sense that neither human beings nor angels should be worshipped, even if, clad with the power of right judgement and prophecy, they had taught mankind the Book. (This is obviously a conscious opposition to the Christian trinitarian conception of Jesus Christ!) These structurally neat lines of thought teach us exactly the same central idea of the prophet Muhammad's message: that Christ should not be worshipped as God although Christ is, according to the self-understanding of Jesus and to the ur-Christian and the ur-Koranic belief, the Angel of the High Council of God, an idea which is also expressed in Sura 4,172 although in this Koran verse a much more frequent recurring (8 times in the Koran) Arabic word is used for the Angels of the High Council of God: al-muqarrabûn "those posted near (God)".[80] On the other hand the statement of Sura 3,79f is also a presentation of the earliest Islamic conception of prophetology (every prophet has been and is still an angel; see A. J. Wensinck, Muhammad und die Propheten. Acta Orientalia II [1924],168-198)[81] as well as being the credo of the prophet Muhammad as to his own prophetship: He undoubtedly believed, as we have already pointed out (see here p. 28f with note 3), that he is himself an Angel of the High Council of God, preexistent in this High Council of God before his lifetime and destined to return to this eminent place in afterlife (see H. Wehr, Muhammads letzte Worte. WZKM 51 [1952],283-286). This conception was done away with by growing Islamic Orthodoxy and finally replaced by the image of the prophet Muhammad as a mere human being. Looking at the text of Sura 3,79f from this point of view, it is impossible that the prophet Muhammad himself was the redactor who garbled the original version of this text 3,79f and left us with the flimsy incoherent sentences of 3,79f we read now according to orthodox Islamic and Western Islamicist tradition. How corrupted the traditional text is can easily be seen from the fact that after these late redactors had reinterpreted the word rabbânîyîn "ruling archangels" as "rabbis" in the sense of exceptionally erudite human beings, any reason for the closing statement "and He (God) does not command you to take the Angels and the Prophets to be (your) Lords" had disappeared. After these redactors had given up the meaningful contrast between (a) "It was not for a human being ..." and (A) "It were rather Angels of the High Council of God ..." they construed their own new and deviating contrast by a change of the rasm-text because they made out of the original كان kâna "it was" or كانوا kânû "it were (plural)" an imperative كونوا kûnû "be ye" which should accord with the imperative in (b) "be ye servants to me". This alteration of the rasm-text (see later the same reworking operation in Sura 2,65 and 7,166 here p. 86f with note 92) is not as serious as one might at first think because we know from the oldest Koran codices that in the oldest period of writing Koranic texts the vowels in the middle of a word were defectively written, that is without matres lectionis. that is without the insertion of the rasm-sign ا for long -â as well as of a و for long -û and of an ي for a long -î.[82] So these words here had originally been written كن and كنوا. In our case both of these different readings kânû (active voice perfect tense) and kûnû (imperative) had usually been written with the same rasm: كنوا. It was therefore easy to read out of this rasm the meaning one was inclined to prefer. But when the writing of long vowels within the words by matres lectionis (ا و ى) became obligatory, the reading was already fixed once and for all, although wrongly in this case. So when the Koran editors deliberately read into the rabbânîyûn-Angels of (A) erudite rabbis or theologians or scribes, they opposed these rabbis of (A) to the cocky human beings of (b) who, in consequence of their weak human nature, are usually prone to yeam to be worshipped because of their endowment with judgement and prophecy. But this new contrast is a very disputable one since these invented[83] rabbis of (A) are human beings like the cocky human beings eager to be worshipped on account of their pretended right judgement and prophecy as depicted in (b). Is not there in the Islamic reinterpretation just this danger, which the original Prophetic version of this text tends to exorcise, that the rabbis/‘ulamâ’ as human beings want, because of their knowledge and "right judgement", to be if not worshipped (although this sometimes happened and happens!), nevertheless to be classed higher than their fellow citizens and fellow believers? Regard in this context the condemnation of the rabbis and the attitude called for by Jesus Christ towards them as articulated in Matth. 23 of which only verse 7f may here be cited: "They like to be greeted respectfully in the markets and to be called by people 'Rabbi! Rabbi!'. But be not ye called Rabbi, for only one is your master and all ye are brethren." From this point of view the essential message of the crude orthodox Islamic reinterpretation of the original, obviously Prophetic text Sura 3,79f appears to be in its kernel of the same significance as that contained in the diametrical reversal of the original meaning of Sura 35,28 where the original sentence "Behold, as for his servants God is most worried (worried that they might not earn paradise!) about the ‘ulamâ’ (= rabbis)" has by untenable editorial devices (although not altering the rasm) been recast into the clearly wrong and, until now, uncontested form: "Behold, among his servants it is the theologians who fear (= revere; although the underlying Arabic verb means clearly "are worried about") God most" (we shall discuss this obviously post-Muhammadan reinterpretation later in its broader context). A further clear circumstance which testifies against the orthodox Islamic interpretation of Sura 35,28 is that at the time of the Prophet there were no Islamic ‘ulamâ’ = theologians yet, so that the prophet Muhammad`s original text was undoubtedly directed against the Christian or Jewish theologians (‘ulamâ’) of his day. But that did not hinder these early orthodox Islamic Koran experts forging self-praise out of this disapproving saying of their Prophet, certainly against his intention. The Prophet held the position of Jesus as cited above. Beyond these arguments, our interpretation is corroborated by the oldest Islamic Koran scholarship itself: In his collection of non-canonical Koran variant readings the well-known Arabian philologist Ibn Hâlawaih (died 370 H. / 980 CE) lists as a transmitted old variant reading for our text Sura 3,79 instead of the traditional and therefore canonical active voice bi-mâ kuntum tu‘allimûna l-kitâba wa bi-mâ kuntum tadrusûn "in what you (the rabbis!) are teaching the Book and in what you are studying" just this former reading of the passive voice: bi-mâ kuntum ta‘allamûna l-kitâba wa bi-mâ kuntum tadarassûn "by what/whom you have been taught the Book and by what/whom you have been given lessons".[84] This reading listed as an old version of the text is therefore without any doubt just that reading we are obliged to read the rasm-text with, if we are to retain the correct old understanding of rabbânîyûn as "the Angels of the High Council of God". By the way: we did not know of these early variant readings until a long time after establishing the reconstruction of the text with the logical, grammatical and theological arguments already displayed above. However, as long as this earlier reading was valid, this earlier text must have had also the writing كان kâna or كانوا kânû "It was/were (the ruling angels)" instead of the imperative كونوا kûnû "be ye (rabbis)" of the later deviating and obviously wrong orthodox Islamic interpretation (see above about the earlier defective writing of both of these variants as كنوا). This is the first time in our critico-exegetical research that there occurs a corroborating, alternative, non-canonical reading for a problematic part of the Koran text, recorded by trustworthy old Islamic authorities. It is in content ur-Islamic, Prophetic and pre-orthodox. Its essential meaning has been deliberately neglected by Islamic Orthodoxy and has from then on never again been recognized as to its significance for the ur-Islamic and Prophetic dogma. The great many variant readings of the Koran text handed down to us by Islamic Koran scholarship have been regarded since the time of orthodox Islamic canonization of the Koran text as mere orthographic slips of the pen.[85] But in many cases of our dogma-critical reconstruction still to be performed, it will become clear that we have in a great deal of these transmitted Koranic variant readings the trustworthy markers to an older, and in its dogmatical content essentially other Koran: We shall see, although we cannot deal with the problem here in detail, that those variant readings, which have been transmitted or have anyway survived at all within the stream of transmission, are those which yield the least insight into the former meaning of the concerned problematic passages and especially not the dogma of the former Christian ur-Koran in general. This becomes apparent especially when we come across a series of similarly deviating reinterpretations of a certain, as to theme one and the same set of textual problems involving a series of texts scattered all over the Koran. If there is then a variant reading transmitted at all, it is always only transmitted for that similar text of this series of texts of the same theme, where this transmitted variant reading makes the least sense or gives the least insight into the original meaning of this text (see for this especially here Chapter III,2). It is therefore also not surprising that we have here for our text Sura 3,79 the reading of passive voices ('you were taught and you were given lessons) transmitted as old variant readings although this old reading does not make sense unless this text was read also with the variant كان kâna or كانوا "it was/were (the ruling angels)" instead of the later orthodox Islamic reading (كونوا kûnû "be ye (rabbis)". But this certainly once extant variant reading كان or كابوا instead of today's كونوا is not transmitted by Muslim tradition, understandably, because the established Islamic Orthodoxy was naturally here as everywhere keen to stamp out the erstwhile Christian strophic form and the formerly Christian meaning of considerable parts of the Koran, and on blocking all possibility of a rediscovery of this Christian Koran and of a return to it. And we shall later on always see that the most important variant readings, as to their value for the unmasking of the opinionated Islamic reinterpretation of the original Koran text, have always purposely been done away with and not transmitted. It is always the less important or even insignificant and negligible old variants which have preferably been transmitted until our present time. But fortunately they suffice in principle as evidence for the reconstruction of the original text. Sura 3,79f had therefore undoubtedly dealt with the rabbânîyûn, with the "Angels of the High Council of God", although the word rabânîyûn does not occur unreinterpreted in the Koran and beyond it, with the consequence that the great National Arabic Lexica (see for instance Lane s.v.) normally list for this rabbânî only the meaning "one who devotes himself to religious services; who possesses a knowledge of God" because of having identified it with the Jewish term Rabbi (but see here note 83). But if we consult critical European Arabic lexica the original angelological meaning clearly comes to light, as when Reinhart Dozy lists in his "Supplement aux Dictionnaires Arabes" the following meanings: rabbânî = "transcendant" (three times): hikmat rabbânîya = "providence"; al-qudrat ar-rabbânîya = "sympathie"; as-sirr ar-rabbânî = "sympathie"; ilhâm rabbânî = "inspiration céleste"; rabbânîyât = "cantiques a la louange du Seigneur". And under the word root bsbs E. Fagnan quotes in his "Additions aux Dictionnaires Arabes" the meaning at-tabasbus ar-rabbânî "la faveur divine". These references to the word rabbânî collected from the Arabic literature beyond the Koran show clearly, although indirectly, that rabbânî is not a human, but an angelic, celestial or even divine issue. We call this evidence indirect because in these critical European lexica there is also no clear identification to be found: rabbânî = "Angel of the High Council of God". But this is no wonder since the Late Judaic and ur-Christian angelology was suppressed by medieval orthodox Islam as far as it existed in the ur-Koran. And it was even more urgently suppressed by Judaism and Christianity itself – in Christianity to wipe out the Arianic angel-Christology in favour of the new imperialistic trinitarian dogma of the Christian empire. And this medieval situation lingers on: Where reactionary theological faculties have until today, following church-political tactics, been capable of concealing to all neighbouring faculties and special branches of science as well as to the intellectual public in general the results of the dogma-critical research of the 19th and the first half of the 20th century summing up to the fact that Christ had undoubtedly originally been understood to be the highest Angel of the High Council of God, – and thus a created being – , until this truth had been extinguished by the imperialist Hellenistic and Roman Christianity – where this is the case, it cannot be expected that Western Orientalists (and Islamicists), who anyhow since the 1920s have not shown themselves to be interested in theological and dogma-critical matters, would have engaged in earnest research into the erstwhile blossoming but later superseded angelic cosmology of the religions of the Near East. As a consequence of this apathetic indifference there are still missing the scholarly tools (editions of texts, indices etc.) which would enable a speedy collection of all references e.g. of the term rabbânîyûn and etymological congeners in the early Arabic as well as in the still earlier Jewish- and Christian-Aramaic literature, where these terms as a rule appear also only as meanwhile misinterpreted words. So we cannot expect more than the poor and corrupted remnants of a formerly magnificent angelological cosmology of which we might cite here some splinters: In the Targum Pseudojonathan to Deut. 34,6 there are the four angelic teachers of wisdom clearly called חכמתא רבני the "rabbânîm of the wisdom (= of the Sophia חכמה)".[86] As to the New Testament we can note that the Greek term kyriotäs "Herrschaft, Lordship" in 2. Pet. 2,10 is rendered in an old Arabic manuscript from the St. Catherine Monastery at Mount Sinai as الرّبّونية ar-rabbôniya.[87] A very interesting reference is Acts 26,5 in the same Old Arabic NT version. We read there that the Apostle Paul had been raised and taught bi afdala ‘ilm il-rabbôniyîn[88] (or: rabbônîn) "by the best knowledge of the Masterly Angels (of the High Council of God)" instead of what we read in the Hellenistic Greek text tradition at this place Acts 26,5: "I (Paul) belonged to the strictest group in our religion: I was a Pharisee." If we concede on the one hand that the Hellenistic development of Christianity meant the creation and completion of the trinitarian creed as well as, at the same time, the extinction of the Late Judaic and ur-Christian conception of the Messiah as the ''Angel of the High Council of God" (angel-Christology), accompanied by, as a side effect, the dismantling of the elaborate general angelology, and if we acknowledge on the other hand that Semitic (Aramaic and especially Arabian Christianity was a preferential area of retreat for the persecuted and therefore decreasing adherents to the ur-Christian angel-Christology and angelology (their last movement leading into the origin of Islam), then we must seriously take into consideration that the Old Arabic versions of Biblical texts, like the one from Mount Sinai cited above, are likely to contain the best, oldest and therefore least disturbed readings, especially as concerns angel-Christology in particular and angelology in general. From this point of view it is almost certain that the Old Arabic reading of Acts 26,5 concerning the apostle Paul and his archangelic teachers (of the High Council of God) is the oldest, truest biblical version of that biblical sentence. The Hellenistic image of Paul as a former Pharisee, uncontested by trinitarian Christianity to this day, is actually a misleading reinterpretation of this angelological term rabbânîyûn/rabbônîyûn/rabbônîn translating this angelological term as if it were a synonym of "rabbis" or scribes. This is exactly what we have seen done (but in much later times) by the post-Muhammadan Koran editors. or, as with the early Hellenistic bible redactors. as if rabbônîn were a synonym of "pharisees".[89] The whole old story that the apostle Paul himself was once a pharisee seems then most probably to have been nothing else than the simple and in content curious result of a tendentious (anti-angel-Christological and anti-angelological) Hellenistic reinterpretation of an originally angelological statement which was within Semitic tradition safely transmitted, namely translated from the original Aramaic into an Arabic version of the Acta Apostolorum. And the image of an ecstatic, taught by angels, fits the personal appearance of the apostle Paul as a whole much better than to view him as a former erudite Jewish Pharisee (see also H. Detering, Der gefälschte Paulus, Düsseldorf 1995). Another old Arabic text shows that the original meaning of rabbânîyûn lived on in the circles of Muslim mysticism so often accused by orthodox Islam of being heretical. The book of the Sûfî Abu Sa‘îd Ahmed Ibn ‘Îsâ al-Harrâz al-Bagdâdî with the title Kitâb as-Sirr (The Book of the Secret) was condemned, – so that it has not come down to us – , and he was obliged to emigrate to Transoxania and later to Egypt where he died in 286 H./899 CE. But some of the sayings of his condemned book are transmitted by later authors. And so we find in the book of ‘Abdallâh as-Sarrâg at-Tûsi (died 378 H/988 CE) Kitâb al-luma‘ fi t-tasawwuf (Book of Eminent Citations on Mysticism; ed. Reynold A. Nicholson [Gibb Memorial Series XXII] London 1963; p. ٣٦٨ 1, 6ff) the following sentence of Abu Sa‘îd al-Harrâz: "God has drawn the spirits of His Saints unto Himself and has granted them the delight of being able to continue His praise and of having become near to Him (al-wusûl ilâ qurbihi; which clearly recalls the term al-muqarrabûn "the near standing angels"). But He had also been engaged in preparing already as beneficial to their (mortal) bodies delight of every kind, because the life of their bodies is the life of animal beings (‘ais al-hayawânîyîn) and the life of their spirits is the life of the rabbânîyûn (‘ais ar-rabbânîyûn which word can at this place not be interpreted otherwise than "the Master Angels of the High Council of God"!)". But we have still to comment on the remaining Koranic references to the rabbânîyûn (Sura 5,44; 5,63 and 3,146), other than Sura 3,79f analysed earlier. The Koranic theme al- rabbânîyûn = "the Angels of the High Council of God" deserves a separate treatment in view of its central significance for the reunderstanding of the ur-Christian and ur-Islamic angel-Christology and angelology as much for the Koran as for the Bible, but we can only touch here in passing on these further Koranic references, offering only for one of them, for Sura 5,63, a more detailed analysis. Both the word rabbânîyûn in 5,44 as well as that in 5,63 have a wa-l-ahbâr "and the scribes (or: rabbis)" placed after it, which is an addition. Since already rabbânîyûn denotes rabbis or scribes in the Islamic reinterpretation, this produces a tautology. This wa-l-ahbâr "and the scribes/rabbis" placed immediately after ar-rabbânîyûn is obviously nothing else but a commentary inserted by the post-Muhammadan Koran redactors to underpin the new Islamic interpretation of rabbânîyûn deviating from the original meaning "Ruling Angels of the High Council of God", a procedure which unavoidably produces this rather meaningless tautology. That this manipulation was once undertaken in 5,63 can be corroborated by an analysis of the structure of the broader context 5,60-64 and we shall display these highly problematic verses in a mirror-symmetrical juxtaposition of the traditional and the conclusive reconstruction of its original meaning. But we should comment first on the rabbânîyûn references in Sura 5,44 and 3;146 accumulating thereby some evidence valid also for the reconstruction of the third highly complicated reference in 5,63 within its considerably distorted context. The context of the reference to rabbânîyûn in Sura 5,44 was probably even more distorted at the hands of orthodox Islamic redactors than the text of Sura 5,60-64 to be discussed next but one. But here in Sura 5,44 we can deal with the problem only by a general disqualification of the meaning which results from the editorial insertion of the word wa-l-ahbâr after the word ar-rabbânîyûn to underpin the wrong meaning of the word ar-rabbânîyûn as "Rabbis", creating by this manipulation a questionable tautology. This obviously wrong meaning, of which we can be sure that it has never been a reading of the Prophet Muhammad, but that the later Koran editors are to be charged with it, consists in the fact that the now existing text reworked by the Koran editors reads (we cite only the central words): innâ anzalnâ t-taurâ ... yahkumu bihâ l-nabîyûn ... wa r-rabbâniyûna wa-l-ahbâr ... wa kânû ‘alaihi (‘alâ l-kitâb = ‘alâ t-taurâ) suhadâ’ "Behold! We have sent down the Torah ... by which the prophets make their judgments ... and the rabbâniyûn and the ahbâr scribes (theologians) ... and they bear witness to it (the kitâb =Torah)" and this sentence is immediately followed by the admonition: "Fear ye not the people (an-nâs in the sense of "human beings") but fear ye Me!" This text, reflected on in a sober light, reveals that there are two categories of beings of which the first is the class of celestial beings, namely the prophets who are altogether angels according to old Islamic conception (s. here note 3; by the way: "angel" means "messenger" = rasûl = prophet!) and the rabbânîyûn if we take them for what they are understood to be in the older Jewish, Christian and Islamic religious literature. For these, and only for these celestial beings the idea is appropriate that they "bear witness" to (the wording of) the Holy Scriptures. And there is the other category "human beings" to which in this text alone belong the ahbâr "the scribes". To say with regard to them that "they bear witness to (the wording of) the Holy Scriptures" is from the point of view of the older conception a blasphemy established by the Muslim Koran editors = ‘ulamâ’ = ahbâr themselves for the sake of enhancement of their religio-politcal position in early Islamic society. We can be sure that the prophet Muhammad would have angrily rebuked such a self-evaluation of the scribes. We can even clearly recognize his Prophetic position from the transmitted text in the following words "Fear ye not human beings but fear ye Me", and we have to imagine the prophets and angels of the High Council of God at the side of God in sharp contrast to human beings, "the scribes". So this last sentence, which obviously belongs to the original text, is a glaring contradiction in adjecto to the preceding main statement of the Koran text. We have therefore to cancel the words wa l-ahbâr of this main text and to restore the original meaning of the word ar-rabbânîyûn: "the Archangels of the High Council of God". And again, as already in of Sura 3,80 and 35,28 (See here p. 74ff), we can perceive the spirit of the post-Muhammad early Koran editors who produced this text elevating themselves to the level of prophets and angels if not even higher. Our next and last but one Koranic reference to rabbânîyûn to be analysed is Sura 3,146[90] although the word at this place is not rabbânîyûn but ribbîyûn "thousands". This reading of the rasm ربّيّون must be dismissed because of its untrustworthy meaning in this context, for the traditional interpretation of the immediate context is: "How many a prophet (has there been) along with whom many thousands fought ..." (transl. Richard Bell), a statement which seems very alien to the Koran as well as to the Bible, because throughout Koran and Bible the loneliness and forlornness of the prophets in the midst of their nations is a common characteristic of their lives. We therefore have to change the rasm slightly by the addition of a "water wave" to get ربّنيّون instead of the transmitted ربّيّون and then to read rabbânîyûn: "How many a prophet (has there been) alone with whom many Angels (of the High Council of God) fought ...". The idea that angels are fighting side by side with the prophets was very familiar at the time of early Islam[91] 91 and it fits the general opinion of that early time that the prophets themselves were angels – and in some extraordinary cases even angels of the High Council of God. Under these circumstances it should now have become clear that we have here in the traditional text an editorial manipulation before us eliminating the rabbânîyûn-angels from the original Koran text. And now to our last Koranic reference to the rabban~yun , as far as we can recognize them in the Koran thus far. The broader context of 5,60-64 is very distorted in the same way have shown the text of Sura 5,44 to be. This distortion is already signalled from the fact that Richard Bell tried a rearrangement of the sequence of the verses of this section without a convincing result, and Rudi Paret gives in his not-assuring-translation a lot of comments and bracketed insertions, trying thereby to make clear that the text is extremely difficult to interpret. Furthermore, old Islamic Koran scholars have transmitted no less than 20 variant readings just for these five Koranic verses (MQQ No. 1930-1949). Some of these variant readings indicate (e.g. MQQ No. 1932) that some words after all have been inserted by later Koran editors. Our opinion is that these Koran editors inserted a lot more words than even the transmitted variant readings show today which have survived in the mainstream of tradition. We cannot expect that the orthodox guardians of Islamic tradition would have allowed the key words for the restoration of the former text to be transmitted and so, as a rule, the really crucial variant readings were not transmitted but instead diligently eliminated from the stream of tradition. To make the distortion of this section clear we should proceed in such a way that at first we display the text in a mirror-symmetrical juxtaposition of the transmitted text and its probable earlier meaning and shall discuss the problems afterwards (we shall underline the transmitted old variant readings of special importance [left side] and underline with a dotted line the late changes of the text by the post-Muhammadan Koran editors [right side]; the Arabic characters of the problematic words will only be discussed at places of importance): Mirror-symmetrical Representation of Sura 5,60-64 Reconstructed Reading Verses & verselines Traditional Reading qul hal anbiyâ'ukum basarun 60 qul hal unabbi'ukum bi-sarrin wa min dâlika matâbatan `inda llâh 2 min dâlika matûbatan `inda llâh man gadiba llâhu `alaihim 3 man la`anahu llâhu wa gadiba `alaihim wa ga`alahum al-qiradata 4 wa ga`ala minhum al-qiradata wa Insertion `ubbâda t-tawâgît 5 wa l-hanâzîra wa `abada t-tâgûta ulâ'ika sarrun makânan 6 ulâ'ika sarrun makânan wa adallu `an sawâ'i s-sabîl 7 wa adallu `an sawâ'i s-sabîl wa ida gâ'ûkum qâlû âmannâ 61 wa ida gâ'ûkum qâlû âmannâ wa qad dahalû bi l-kufri 2 wa qad dahalû bi l-kufri wa hum qad haragû bihi 3 wa hum qad haragû bihi wa llâhu a`lamu bimâ kânû yaktumûn 4 wa llâhu a`lamu bimâ kânû yaktumûn wa tarâ minhum katîran yusâri`ûna 5 wa tarâ minhum katîran yusâri`ûna fî l-itmi wa l-`udwâni wa akli s-suht 6 fî l-itmi wa l-`udwâni wa akli s-suht la-bi'sa mâ kânû ya`lamûn 7 la-bi'sa mâ kânû ya`lamûn lau lâ yanhâhumu l-rabbânîyûna 63 lau lâ yanhâhumu l-rabbânîyûna Insertion wa l-ahbâru `an qaulihimu l-itma 2 `an qaulihimu l-itma wa aklihimu s-suhta 3 wa aklihimu s-suhta la-bi'sa mâ kânû yasna`ûn 4 la-bi'sa mâ kânû yasna`ûn wa qâlati l-yahûdu 64 yadu llâhi maglûlatun ..... 2 New section with new line of thought …………………….. 64 wa qâlati l-yahûdu 2 yadu llâhi maglûlatun Recovered Reading Verses & verselines Traditional Reading (R. Bell) Say: Aren't your prophets flesh 60 Say: Shall I tell you of something worse and therefore with God in reputation of those 2 than that in the recompense (that awaits) with Allah? The one 3 whom (singular) Allah has cursed and against whom (plural) He is angry against whom (singular) He is angry and whom He made bloodsuckers 4 some of whom He hath made apes [cancel "swine"] and servants of idols? 5 and swine and servants of Tâghût – They are wicked as to (their) standing 6 they are in the worse position And most erring from the right way. 7 and further astray from the direct way. And when they come to you people say "We have believed". 61 And when they come to you they say "We have believed". But they have entered in unbelief 2 though they have entered in unbelief and in it they have departed. 3 and in it have departed. Allah knoweth very well what they have been concealing. 4 Allah knoweth very well what they have been concealing. Many oft hem does one see vying 62 Many oft hem does one see vying in guilt and enmity 2 in guilt and enmity and how they consume ill-gotten wealth 3 and in their consuming of what is prohibited (Bell: probably usury). Surely evil is what they have been working. 4 Surely evil is what they have been working. Why do the rabbânîyûn not restrain them 63 Why do the rabbis and scholars not restrain them from their speaking of guilt 2 from their speaking of guilt and of consuming ill-gotten wealth 3 and their consuming of what is prohibited? Surely, evil is what they have been doing. 4 Surely, evil is what they have been doing. The Jews say: 64 The hand of Allah is fettered. 2 New section with new line of thought 64 The Jews say: 2 The hand of Allah is fettered. This section starts with the address in the preceding verse 59 (we left it aside because of no further significance for the theme of 5,60-64) yâ ahlu l-kitâb "Oh people of the Book". It contains therefore an Islamic confrontation with the Jews and Christians. Because we know beforehand that the rabbânîyûn in verse 63 of this context have been seriously misinterpreted, we have to ask ourselves what might be wrong with the traditional interpretation of this context in general. The first and general thing is that in the traditional reading of 5,60 there is a queer opposition between "that in the recompense" and "the one whom Allah has cursed". We would and should expect the juxtaposition of two kinds of the same category: two different persons or groups of people. And the second and main peculiarity is that, when in verse 61 line 1 it says "when they come to you", the context remains totally obscure as to the question of who these people are, being cursed by Allah and coming sometimes or often or always to the Jews and Christians. Fortunately, the Islamic tradition has transmitted a string of variant readings especially for the opening lines of this text which show on principle that the beginning of this section had formerly been read in another way. So, for instance, the rasm بشّر أنبّئكم هل hal unabbi'ukum bi-sarrin "shall I tell you of something worse" was formerly not read in this way with a doubling of the b in the verb unabbi' but without (MQQ No. 1930). So we feel entitled to read this rasm in a totally different way: بشر أنبيكم هل hal anbiyâ'ukum (or: anbiyâkum) basarun "aren't your prophets flesh?" This statement touches then exactly on the central theme which the Prophet is stressing just before in the context around verse 5,44 with its rabbânîyûn there (see above p. 81f). And with this reading we get rid of the main problem of the context 5,60-64 namely the obscurity of these people who come sometimes or always to the Jews and Christians: It is their prophets. We must obviously conclude that all the mostly anonymous leading Jewish and Christian theologians over the centuries who propagated such doctrines as the trinity and the equality to God of Ezra as well as those who falsified the scripture of the Bible are included in this Koranic term "prophets", at least in this instance. Once we have decided on this reading. all the other transmitted variants hintind at an earlier alternative content for this section fit our opening text exactly: "Aren't your prophets nesh". But for our reconstruction we have to insert a wa "and" after this introductory statement (see verse 60 line 2 double underlined). And then instead of matûbat "recompense" there is transmitted the former reading matwabat (MQQ No. 1931) which runs with matâbat "rank, reputation, recognition, appreciation, estimation etc." It is also very important that the traditionally given la`anahu llâhu wa "Allah has cursed him and" was formerly not read at all, – it would indeed have been laying it on too thick against what are nevertheless prophets of the Jews and Christians! And likewise conspicuous is that the former readings (MQQ No. 1932) have here in 5,60 twice plural pronouns instead of the singular pronouns of the traditional Islamic reading which therefore have to be cancelled. But the greatest blunder the post-Muhammadan Koran editors made was in declaring that Allah had made some of these, in their reinterpretation, "obscure" enemies apes and swine which is again laying it on too thick and almost certainly not the language of the Prophet. The transmitted variant readings (MQQ No. 1932) from the really great authorities Ubai ibn Ka`b and Abdallâh ibn Mas`ûd, late contemporaries of the Prophet, indicate that they had read this passage in a considerably different way although there is nothing transmitted as to whether they omitted "apes and swine". But I doubt decidedly whether these old Koran authorities actually did have "apes and swine" in their text to be edited, even though the rasm for the word for "apes" at least was present (although with a totally other meaning) in the original text as the Prophet and his contemporary companions knew it, while the word "swine" is certainly an insertion by the later Koran editors and would therefore not have been read by Ubai and Ibn Mas`ûd as we shall now reveal. The Arabic word qiradatun here in Sura 5,60 line 4 is a plural and can be derived from two different Arabic words namely qird "ape" and qurd "tick (sticking to the skin of camels, cattle and sheep etc. and sucking blood from these animals)". The plural of "apes" is aqrud (pluralis paucitatis) and aqrâd (nomen collectivum) or qurûd. As far as a plural qiradatun is listed in the old Arabic lexica for "apes" the references for this plural are on principle taken from the misinterpreted Koran, and I am very doubtful whether this plural would occur in any of the texts of old Arabic profane literature without reference to the Koranic religious vocabulary. So it is also highly questionable whether qiradatun was originally a plural of qird "ape". Now to the other alternative: The word qurd "tick" has the nomen collectivum or pluralis multitudinis qurâd or qirdân and the pluralis paucitatis aqridatun. But although the plural qiradatun is not listed in Lane's exhaustive dictionary, Reinhart Dozy (1820-1883) quotes in his "Additions" a qirâdatun "tick(s)" which is, with regard to its word formation, obviously a pluralis paucitatis (an assessable number of ticks). It is quite possible that in the three extant Koranic references of qiradatun we should always read this qirâdatun. But this is a difficult question to decide because the old Koran was written defectively with no indication from matres lectionis as to whether vowels were short or long. Anyhow, at this place had undoubtedly stood either qiradatun or qiradatun with the meaning "(an assessable number of) ticks". So we can now conclude: While the ape was for Arabia, even then, an exotic animal with no noteworthy role in old Arabic literature, it was just the opposite with the tick. The tick is a preferred metaphor for all aspects of life in old Arabic poetry and literature, because camels, sheep and cattle play such an ubiquitous role in old Arabian life. It is often also found in witty allusions as for instance when it is said of a stingy spinner woman: "She took all her wool with her not leaving even a tick" (cited by Lane s.v. in a broader context). Naturally the tick serves as a metaphor for a human bloodsucker, and this is obviously the intention here in Sura 5,60 line 4. Because this metaphor "bloodsuckers" correlates in this section with "those who consume ill-gotten wealth" in verse 62 line 3, there can be no doubt that indeed the Prophet used it in his accusation against the prophets (in a broader sense of"teachers": see above) of the Jews and Christians. It is only the later Koran editors who garbled the text of the Prophet. There are in the Koran only two more references for qiradatun allegedly "apes" (Sura 2,65 and 7,166) in both of which these "apes" are spoken of similarly in a curious way: R. Bell renders the traditional compound kûnû qiradatan hâsi'îna, similar here and there, as "be ye apes slinking away" and R. Paret tranlates this, though not without expressing his grave doubt with a big question mark: "Werdet zu menschenscheuen Affen (become ye apes shy as to human beings)". But great old authorities read, as their transmitted variants reveal, at both of these places the adjective of qiradatun not as hâsi'îna "shy" but hâssîna "low, ignoble, vile, mean. paltry" (MQQ No. 211 and 2759). This description fits the tick, but not the ape. So it becomes clear that all the three Koranic references of qiradatun (or qirâdatun) originally meant "ticks" and all of these references and their context have been distorted by post-Muhammadan Koran editors as to their quite natural original significance, namely the judgement of the Prophet about his adversaries: "They were paltry bloodsuckers/parasites!"[92] But since we have come now to the conclusion that 5,60 line 4 reads originally "whom He made parasites (= ticks)", – as a parallel expression to "who consume ill-gotten wealth" in verse 63 line 3 –, the following "and swine" in 60 line 5 can easily be recognized as a late insertion because "bloodsuckers and swine" cannot pass as compatible in a saying. At long last we are coming to the crucial sentence of verse 5,63 concerning the rabbânîyûn for which the discussion of verses 5,60-62 has only been the overture: After we have uncovered the original meaning of verses 5,60-62 it becomes clear that in verse 5,63 the wa l-ahbâr "and the scribes" also has to be cancelled as a late misleading gloss, as we have shown to be the case for the context of Sura 5,44 (see above p. 81f). This passage now has to be interpreted, – exactly according to the traditional interpretation while omitting the gloss "and the scribes" and taking ar-rabbânîyûn for what this word had originally meant – , "Why do the angels of the High Council of God not restrain them from their speaking of guilt and their consuming ill-gotten wealth?" This is clearly the continuation of the line of thought starting from verse 5,60: "Why do the mighty angels of God and real prophets not hinder these false prophets from doing evil?" Since the post-Muhammadan Koran editors had disfigured the text of 5,60-63 the last verse 64, "the Jews say: 'The hand of Allah is fettered'", no longer had any relation to the distorted line of thought from 5,60 to 63. And since they had in this way reinterpreted the broader context to pieces, they let verse 5,64 be the beginning of a new section with a new line of thought. So also the Western Islamicists trusting to the traditional blurred reinterpretation also allow a break here, Richard Bell even giving this new section a (misleading) special headline: "Retort to a Jewish gibe, probably occasioned by demands for contributions But verse 5,64 is actually the neat continuation of the line of thought from Sura 5,60-63 since the sentence in verse 64 "The Jews say: The hand of Allah is fettered" is the direct answer to the question of verse 63 "Why do the mighty angels of the High Council of God not restrain the false prophets?" One has only to understand that within the old conception of God and his highest angels, both of them and they together are the same, – God and his hypostasis – , so that we could change the subjects of both of these verses: "Why does God not hinder the false Prophets" and the Jews would answer '"The hands of the angels of the High Council of God are fettered". We have come to the end of the road in our excursus on the original meaning of rabbânîyûn in the Koran and elsewhere. But we should remark that with the last reference to rabbânîyûn in Sura 5,63 we have for the first time analysed in minute detail and reconstructed an Islamic single-sense text in the rasm-groundlayer of which had never been hidden a formerly Christian strophic hymn, because this text was obviously a text dictated by the Prophet himself. And so we have here our first example of how horribly the post-Muhammadan Koran editors garbled texts of their own Prophet and how their misinterpretations spread like the metastases of a cancer through the whole body of the Koran. The reader might now understand why from the time of the "redaction" of the Koran under the guidance of the third caliph Uthman onward all old pre-Uthmanic Koran codices, even those of most honoured companions of the Prophet, were as completely as possible confiscated and burned. End of the excursus on ar-rabbânîyûn. [73] According to the reasonable thesis of S. G. F. Brandon (Jesus and the Zealots. 1967, 320f shared by many New Testament scholars (see Brandon's note 2) Christ is himself the apocalyptic "terrible Rider on the White Horse, whose eyes are like a flame of fire ... He is clad in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God" (Rev. 19,12ff). Since Christ is on the other hand undoubtedly one (and the highest one) of the Angels of the High Council of God all the apocalyptic Riders together seem to belong to the High Council. If this is the case then it is possible that the warlike angels in the cited verse of the poetess al-Hansâ‘ are themselves the apocalyptic Riders or at least are depicted according to an image of the apocalyptic Riders who were certainly well-known in Pre-Islamic Arabia. The reading rabbâniya is therefore preferable here to the linguistically more phantastic zabâniya. [74] If regarded as a classical Arabic word it should be written rabbânîya. But because the pre-Islamic Christian texts of the Koran were written in vernacular Arabic, and also for rhythmic and strophe metrical reasons, we should write the word in the form rabbâniya to accord with the rhythmic pattern mawâliya. [75] See for this M. Werner, Die Entstehung des Christlichen Dogmas, 1954, 302-321 the Chapter "Das Wesen des Christus nach der urchristlichen Lehre (Engelchristologie)" esp. p. 307. The arguments brought forward by M. Werner have never been disproved. They are hushed up instead, understandably because otherwise these arguments would bring the end of 19 centuries of "Christian" trinitarian theology and belief. [76] Both of these epithets addressed to Jesus occur where his angelic quality is important if not central: in Mark 10,51 Christ is healing a blind man and in John 20,16 Christ appears at his open grave and reveals himself unexpectedly as the Resurrected One. This address is uttered by Mary Magdalene in a somewhat frightened way, so that her exclamation could have been indeed an astonished: "My Lord!" in the sense of "My Lord-Angel!" Significantly Jesus answers immediately: "Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father!"; an exhortation which is to be understood as a consequence of his appearing here in his celestial i.e. his angelic apparition. [77] About these classes of angels in the early Christian literature see Theologisches Wörterbuch zum NT, ed. Gerhard Kittel, Stuttgart 1933ff. s.v. angelos and there the given references to the scholarly discussion. Attention should also be paid to Fridolin Stier. Gott und sein Engel im Alten Testament, Münster 1934. See here also note 72 although J. E. Fossum sticks to the old and as against the evidence amassed by Martin Werner, untenable view that the NT title "kyrios" for Jesus Christ was an adoption of the OT appellation of Yahweh as "Lord" under the influence of the trinitarian creed. [78] In Arabic the introductory verb is normally not congruent in number and gender so that in Arabic here is word-for-word said "it was rather Ruling Angels ..." .This is important to estimate appropriately the parallelism of the two kâna "it was" introducing the first line of (a) as well as of (A). [79] For mâ "what" as relative pronoun referring to persons see J. Blau, Grammar of Christ. Arab., § 441. [80] In Sura 3,45 Jesus Christ is clearly classed as "one of the muqarrabûn" that is "one of the near (to God) posted angels". Compare the Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 43a where Jesus is classed qarôb le-malkût near (posted) to the Kingdom (of God)". [81] The conception that prophets are angels is already to be found in the OT. See 2. Chron. 36,15f; Isa. 44,26; Hag. 1,12f. [82] On the defective writing (= without matres lectionis) in the oldest Koran codices see Gerd-Rüdiger Puin, Observations on Early Qur'ân Manuscripts in San‘a’, in: S. Wild [ed.], The Qur'an as Text. Leiden 1996, p. 107-111. [83] What has hitherto been written (see the literature pointed at by Paret, 1971, on Sura 5,63) about the etymology of rabbâni is hard to endure, namely that rabbâni should be derived from the Aramaic mode of addressing a teacher rabban "our Master/Teacher!". But this enclitic -an "our" has, as to its morphology, a short a and not a long one! And all these writers knew that such an interjectory address "Our Master", per se even semantically untenable as source for rabbâni, could never adopt the Arabic nisbet- or descent-ending -î: "'one who belongs to 'our Master!'"! Karl Ahrens chracterizes therefore rightly (ZDMG 84 [1930], 21) this rabbânî as "the peculiar Arabic form with the ending -î"! Indeed, rabbî and rabbânî are according to the rules of semitic word formation two different words with consequently different meanings like in Hebrew âhar "other" and âharôn "last" (this word-forming element -on or -an is akin to the postpositional Old South Arabic article –ân !) So when Adolf Wahrmund in his Handwörterbuch gives rabbânî = "divine" he is right. But when he adds "plural rabbânîyûn = "theologian. rabbi" this is pure fantasy, although a fantasy since more than a millennium sold by trinitarian Christianity and Islamic Orthodoxy as a sound and alledgedly well founded meaning ! rabbânîyûn meant and means "the divine angelic masters or governors" and nothing else. [84] Gotthelf Bergsträßer, Ibn Halawaihs Sammlung nichtkanonischer Koranlesarten. p. 21. These variant readings, as we have reconstructed them as the original text of this Koran text, are listed also in the new voluminous compendium of transmitted early Koranic variant readings MQQ, vol. 2, p. 46 = No. 1104 as having been read by the early Islamic Koran experts Abû ’Amr. Nâfi‘, Ibn Katîr, ’Âsim, Mugâhid, Abû Hâtim and al-Hasan. [85] This orthodox traditional view has again and hopefully for the last time been advocated by John Burton. The Collection of the Qur'an. Cambridge UP 1977 all over his book (e.g. p. 171): "None of these variants is of great import."). But his general view which makes a case for a vigorous orthodox Islamic jurisprudence in action already before the establishment of the orthodox Koran text seems to me untenable. [86] J. Levy, Chaldäisches Wörterbuch über die Targumim, s.v. rabbân; see also William F. Albright, Recent Discoveries in Palestine. p. 158 n. 2. [87] M. Dunlop Gibson. An Arabic version of the Acts of the Apostles and the Seven Catholic Epistles .., London 1899 Studia Sinaitica VII), p. 60,9. [88] rabbûnîyûn or rabbônîyûn or even rabbônîn instead of rabbânîyûn are only variations in pronunciation and orthography of one and the same word related to different languages (vernacular, classical etc.). [89] The word "pharisee" has on principle not been adopted in Arabic literature. This would explain why the Koran redactors did never arrive at the deviating interpretation rabbânîyûn = pharisees. [90] There may be some additional places in the Koran where most probably the redactors have not commented on an existent rabbânîyûn placing after it an al-ahbâr or something similar, but they have replaced the word rabbânîyûn in general by such commenting words. [91] See e.g. J. Wellhausen. Muhammed in Medina. p.49f and 54ff. [92] At both of these places (2,65 and 7,166) the sentence is kûnû qiradatan hasi'îna "be ye apes slinking away" (R. Bell). But this kûnû "be ye" has obviously to be read as kânû "they were" just like it has been the case in Sura 3,79-80 (see here p. 74ff) and all adduced evidence for the alteration of the rasm of this kûnû unto kânû is valid also for these references in Sura 2,65 and 7,66. The sentence has therefore to be read as "they were ignoble bloodsuckers" and this was a statement of the Prophet about the teachers of the unbelievers about whom he was speaking. http://www.christoph-heger.de/ar-rabbaniyun.htm ------------------------------------- Izvorno značenje gihâd i fî sabîli llâh ( Günter Lüling , Izazov islamu za reformaciju ..., Delhi 2003, str. 354f. u vezi sa str. 242) The original meaning of gihâd and fî sabîli llâh http://www.christoph-heger.de/fi_sabili_llah.htm Ali postoji jedan završni aspekt koji se mora razmotriti prije nego što se obratimo osobnim aktivnostima Poslanika Medina , To se odnosi na očiglednu i temeljnu promjenu značenja dva izraza s kojima se treba sresti u Islamskom Kuranu: Izraz gihâd , koji u islamskom Kuranu uglavnom znači "sveti rat" i izraz fî sabîli llâh "na Allahovom putu" što u islamskom Kuranu praktički uvijek ima značenje "na Allahovom putu". U našoj rekonstrukciji fragmenta himne Sura 25,48-52 (vidi gore, str. 242 s komentarom) već smo pokazali da rekonstruirani ajet 25,52, prema svojim kršćanskim kontekstima, stihovi 48-52, jasno daje biblijsko značenje kao izraženo u 1 Tim 6.12 i 2. Tim 4.7 "boriti se protiv dobre borbe vjere", to jest, izraz gihâd ne znači "rat" ili čak "sveti rat", već namjerava mirnom težnjom da se pobijedi kao i netko drugo preko dobre volje. To je najvjerojatnije jedino značenje gihada koje treba susresti u kršćanskim himnama sadržanim u Kuranu (vidi također Sura 38.17; 20.130; 50.39; 73.10 koje su fraze očito himnotske ) ; a ovo mirno značenje gihâda očito je i jedino prikladno ako se uzme u obzir njegova etimologija, jer je korijen ghd odmah srodan korijenu gwd što znači "biti dobar" (engleski "dobar" kao i njemački "gut" su sasvim sigurno pogodan semitskim, pravno inferiornim „unifijatorima“ u neolitiku i brončanom dobu Europe) . Sličan razvoj od religiozno mirnog značenja do borilačkog odvijao se s frazom fî sabîli llâh : Arapska riječ sabîl znači "put", kao i "(javno) dobro". Na prvi pogled moglo bi se pomisliti da su ta dva značenja prilično nepovezana. Ali etimologija pokazuje da to nije slučaj: korijenski sbl treba analizirati kao s + b -l gdje je s dodatak da bi sljedeće bikosonantalni korijen uzrokovao, a bl ili bwl ili byl je verbalni korijen što znači "moliti se "koja je stvorena uzročno" natjerati (nekoga ili nešto) maziti ". Sabîl je dakle samo ona vrsta bunara u kojoj su magarac, deva ili čak osoba zaposlena da izvuku kantu konopom iz dubine bušotine do površine, gdje će konobar ili tehnički uređaj natjerati kantu da prosipa svoj sadržaj u kanal za navodnjavanje, cijev ili nešto drugo; i hodanjem i napred ovamo životinja stvara stazu. To je vrsta bunara i vrsta staze koja se naziva sabîl . [38] Ići ili raditi za sabîli llâh znači izvorno i doslovno „raditi u božici za navodnjavanje“. Teško da može postojati veća suprotnost „ići božnom bojom“. I vjerojatno nije slučajno da gore spomenuti fragment predislamske himne Sura 25,48-52, gdje smo pronašli jasno biblijsko značenje gihâda kao "velike borbe vjere", započinje: Sura 25,48c-49 (rekonstruiran) 48c "i On (Bog) ga je poslao (Isusa) s neba kao besprijekornu vodu" و أنزله من ١ لسماء ماء طهورا 49a "da se njime može oživjeti mrtvo tlo" ليحى به بلدة ميّتا 49b "i dajte mu svježe piće svome stvorenju" و يسقيه ما خلقه 49c "mnogo nježnih i susretljivih ljudi" أنعاما و أناسيّا كثيرا (vidi str. 242). Izraz fî sabîli llâh izvorno spada u ovaj kontekst. [38] Pogledajte o različitim vrstama bunara u Arabiji Erich Bräunlich, Der Brunnen in alten Arabien, u: Jahrbuch der Phil., Fak Leipzig 1 (1921), 35-37 i u: Islamica 1 (1925), 41-76, 288- 343 i 454-528. http://www.christoph-heger.de/fi_sabili_llah.htm

Sura 3:21 Ubijati Poslanike-Proroke Ich bin ein Textabschnitt. Klicken Sie hier, um Ihren eigenen Text hinzuzufügen und mich zu bearbeiten. Pitajte muslimane da vam pokazu iz Kuran KOJE su to tacno poslanike Jevreji ubijali. Sura 3:21 Onima koji ne vjeruju u Allahove dokaze i koji su vjerovjesnike, ni krive ni dužne, ubijali , a ubijaju i ljude koji traže da se postupa pravedno, navijesti bolnu patnju. s.3:112 Ma gdje se našli, biće poniženi, ako se ne stave pod Allahovu zaštitu i zaštitu muslimana, i zaslužiće Allahovu srdžbu i snaći će ih bijeda, zato što u Allahove dokaze ne vjeruju i što su, ni krive ni dužne, vjerovjesnike ubijali , i zato što protiv Boga ustaju i što u zlu svaku mjeru prekoračuju. s.3:181 Allah je čuo riječi onih koji su rekli: "Allah je siromašan, a mi smo bogati!" Naredićemo Mi da se pribilježi ono što su oni rekli, kao i što su, ni krive ni dužne, vjerovjesnike ubijali, i reći ćemo: "Iskusite patnju u ognju s.3:183 (Isti su) oni koji govore: "Uistinu! Allah nas je obavezao da ne vjerujemo Poslaniku dok nam ne donese kurban kojeg će progutati vatra." Reci: "Već su vam dolazili poslanici prije mene s jasnim znacima i onim šta rekoste, pa zašto ste ih ubijali , ako istinu govorite?" s.4:155 Ali zato što su zavjet prekršili i što u Allahove dokaze nisu povjerovali, što su ni krive ni dužne vjerovjesnike ubijali i što su govorili: "Naša su srca okorjela" – Allah im je, zbog nevjerovanja, njihova srca zapečatio, pa ih je samo malo vjerovalo – s.5:70 Mi smo od sinova Israilovih zavjet uzeli i poslanike im slali. Kad god bi im koji poslanik donio ono što nije godilo dušama njihovim, jedne su u laž utjerivali, a druge ubijali. 1. Kraljevima 18,13 Nisu li izvijestili mog gospodara što sam ja učinio kad Jezabel ubijaše proroke GOSPODOVE? Ja sam sakrio stotinu proroka, po pedeset u dvije pećine i snabdjevao ih kruhom i vodom. Nehemija 9,26 Ali su se bunili i odvrgli tebe, i Zakon su tvoj bacili za leđa, ubijali su proroke , koji su ih obraćali da se tebi vrate, i grdno su hulili. Matej 23:30-39 Matej 23,30 te govorite: `Da smo mi živjeli u dane otaca svojih, ne bismo bili njihovi sudionici u prolijevanju krvi proročke.` Matej 23,31 Tako sami protiv sebe svjedočite da ste sinovi ubojica proroka. Matej 23,32 Dopunite samo mjeru otaca svojih! Matej 23,33 " Zmije! Leglo gujinje! Kako ćete uteći osudi paklenoj? Matej 23,34 Zato evo ja šaljem vama proroke i mudrace i pismoznance. Jedne ćete od njih ubiti i raspeti, druge bičevati po svojim sinagogama i progoniti od grada do grada Matej 23,35 da tako na vas dođe sva pravedna krv, prolivena na zemlji od krvi Abela pravednoga pa do krvi Zaharije, sina Barahijina, kojega ubiste između Hrama i žrtvenika. Matej 23,36 Zaista, kažem vam, sve će to doći na ovaj naraštaj! Matej 23,37 " Jeruzaleme, Jeruzaleme, koji ubijaš proroke i kamenuješ one što su tebi poslani! Koliko li puta htjedoh okupiti djecu tvoju kao što kvočka okuplja piliće pod krila, i ne htjedoste. Matej 23,38 Evo, napuštena vam kuća. Matej 23,39 Doista, kažem vam, odsada me nećete vidjeti dok ne reknete: Blagoslovljen Onaj koji dolazi u ime Gospodnje! ​ ​ Komentar muslimana: Matej 23:30-39 Luka 13:31-35 Odgovor: Da nacrtam? IZ KURANA !!!! Ovo nije iz kuran, a tu Isus prica o SEBI, dakle potvrdjujete da je su Jevreji Isusa ubii -Hvala na potvrdi ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

Mala zelena knjiga Ich bin ein Textabschnitt. Klicke hier, um deinen eigenen Text hinzuzufügen und mich zu bearbeiten. Mala zelena knjiga Mala zelena knjiga zbirka je fetava koje su prenijeli najistaknutiji i vjerojatno jedan od najutjecajnijih muslimanskih klerika u modernoj povijesti; veliki ajatolah Seyyed Ruhollah Mosavi Homeini, poznatiji kao ajatolah Homeini. Fatava (množina od fetve ) su islamski vjerski dekreti koje šalju muslimanski vjerski vođe. Budući da islam zahtijeva da se muslimani pridržavaju šerijata – islamskog zakona kao pojedinci i kao društvo, ove fetave nisu samo vjerski uvidi ili savjeti. One su pravne izjave i definiraju zakon zemlje u islamskoj zemlji. U svojoj nenadmašnoj ulozi iranskog vrhovnog vođe i najvišeg klerika šiitskih muslimana, ajatolah Homeini jefetava je vodila živote više šiitskih muslimana nego bilo koji drugi islamski vođa kroz povijest. Bilo bi osuđujuće za islam da su ovi besmisleni, apsurdni i izopačeni izgovori došli od bilo kojeg muslimana, jer bi služili kao primjer kako islam kvari nečiji um. Osim toga, međutim, svatko tko odvoji vrijeme za analizu islamskih svetih spisa i onoga što je zabilježeno u islamu o Muhamedu, čovjeku čiji život postavlja standard kojem muslimani moraju težiti, uvidjet će da ajatolah Homeini nije bio neispravan u svojoj islamskoj jurisprudencija. Ova verzija Male zelene knjige, prijevod je Harolda Salemsona, čiji je izvor bio francuski prijevod ajatolahove fetave koju je sastavio Perzijanac po imenu Jean-Marie Xaviere. Knjiga je podijeljena u dva toma. Prvi svezak bavi se pitanjima koja se tiču ​​upravljanja i toliko je prepun nevjerojatnih citata da smo morali odustati od pokušaja da istaknemo one najbolje. Drugi se svezak usredotočuje na smjernice o načinu života i obično je pomalo svakodnevni. Međutim, u ovom odjeljku nalaze se neki od zapanjujuće vrijednijih ljudi. Osim toga, naglasak stavljen na definiranje čak i najsitnijih detalja koje musliman treba slijediti služi kao sjajan primjer kako islam uspijeva zamijeniti svaku zadnju jotu neovisne misli bezumnim ropstvom. Naravno, to nikoga ne bi trebalo čuditi, budući da je religija'podnesite " (Muslimani). Mala zelena knjiga se brzo čita. Mnogo toga je toliko apsurdno, da je prilično zabavno. Odnosno, sve dok ne shvatite da ovo nije šala i ne sjetite se da su milijarde ljudi pogođene ovim fetavama i još tisuće poput njih od mnoštva drugih islamskih vođa. Poglavlje Stranice PDF I1Islam kao revolucionarna religija2 I2Islam i kolonijalizam4 I3Islamska Republika3 I4Vladavina klera2 I5Imam2 I6Islamska pravda2 I7Mladost1 I8Mediji i propaganda1 II9O mokrenju i defekaciji2 II10O jelu i piću2 II11O čistim i nečistim stvarima4 II12Pročišćavanje4 II13O prirodi vode2 II14Na abdestu3 II15Na pet namaza3 II16O molitvama u slučaju prirodnog fenomena1 II17Na post2 II18O ženi i njezinim razdobljima3 II19O braku, preljubu i bračnim odnosima7 II20O razvodu2 II21O obredu mrtvačnice2 II22O financijama i porezima3 II23Dodatak2 Cijela Knjiga61 Ostale knjige Yada Yah Razgovor s Bogom Ispitivanje Paula Apostol ili lažni prorok? Uvod u Boga Tko je on i što želi? U društvu dobra i zla Od nule do 3 milijarde dolara i natrag

Sadržaj predgovora ​ ​ ​ PREDGOVOR Raspored i prezentacija materijala u ovom svesku jednaki su onome u I. svesku. U oba su mi napora usmjerena na što potpunije okupljanje zbirke židovskih legendi koje se bave biblijskim ličnostima i događajima. Izvori tih legendi i objašnjenja nekih od njih bit će dati u posljednjem svesku cjelokupnog djela, a brojevi u cijelom radu odnose se na bilješke u završnom svesku. Moja prvotna namjera bila je nastaviti svezak II sve do Mojsijeve smrti, ali legendarno skupljanje materijala oko Mojsijeva života i smrti toliko je bogato da su praktična razmatranja zahtijevala podjelu ovog materijala kako drugi dio ne bi bio previše glomazan. . Odabrana je podjela prirodna. Ovaj se svezak zatvara Izlaskom i sadrži djela Mojsijeva u Egiptu, dok će se sljedeći svezak baviti Mojsijem u pustinji. Činjenica da je Job smješten između Jakovljevih sinova i Mojsija može se nekim čitateljima činiti čudnom, jer je u Bibliji Job jedna od posljednjih knjiga; ali "legenda je iznad vremena i prostora", i zato sam dao Jobu mjesto koje mu je legenda pripisala. LOUIS GINZBERG. NEW YORK, 28. ožujka 1910. Legende o Židovima [Sadržaj] Odgovaranje na početnoj stranici islama ​ ​

Kur'anska korupcija nasuprot biblijskoj korupciji ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Korupcija Biblije nasuprot Kur'anu Tko čini korupciju? Nigdje se u Kur'anu Biblija ne naziva tekstualno korumpiranom. Ajeti u Kur'anu kojima muslimani optužuju Bibliju za tekstualnu korupciju samo su pokušaji koje neki muslimani koriste za obranu islama. Čak i kad bi Kur'an optužio Bibliju za korupciju, to bi bilo potkrijepiti bilo bi izuzetno teško u svjetlu onoga što danas imamo u rukopisu i arheološkim dokazima. Bez obzira na optužbe koje ljudi iznose, je li Kuran ili Biblija korumpirana, svaka mora stajati samostalno. Kuran, kako bi se dokazao božanskim, mora stajati pod svjetlom i biti ispitan i pouzdan u povijesti, arheološki, proročki, znanstveno i tekstualno. Isto ispitivanje treba obaviti i na Bibliji. Na te se optužbe, međutim, može odgovoriti jednostavnim ispitivanjem nekih od ovih stihova; "Možete li vi (ljudi vjere) dobiti nadu da će oni vjerovati u vas? Vidjevši da je neka od njih čula Allahovu Riječ. I to izopačeno svjesno nakon što su to shvatili . "(Al-Baqarah [2]: 75)." Od Židova ima onih koji premještaju riječi sa svojih (desnih) mjesta i kažu: ` Čujemo i ne pokoravamo se '; I `Čujte da možda nećete čuti '; i uz uvrtanje jezika i klevetu na vjeru ... "(Al-Nisa [4]: ​​46a). Uobičajena je stvar kada će u raspravi s muslimanima o korupciji tražiti riječ" korupcija", dajte izjavu i zanemarite ostatak konteksta. Danas je poznata činjenica da ljudi čuju Kur'an ili Bibliju i mijenjaju riječi izgovorene uvrtanjem jezika, ali nigdje nisu promijenili tekst. Tumačenja se uvijek zloupotrebljavaju Mnogi ostaju zaštićeni, ali tekst je u Bibliji lako otkriti jer su dostupni izvornici. U slučaju gornjeg ajeta, odnosi se na svađu između Muhammeda i Židova iz Medine. Kur'an tvrdi da su Židovi pokušavali da sakrije Muhamedova proročanstva u Bibliji, ali ih je izopačio nakon što su ih čuli (razumjeli). Među muslimanima je dogovoreno da je tekstualna korupcija ( Al-Tahreef Al-Lafthi), dodavanjem, brisanjem i zamjenom riječi u Kur'anu je nemoguće. Međutim, moguće je vršiti verbalne promjene, izostavljati i izvrtati stihove tijekom čitanja i recitiranja Božje riječi. Nitko ne može pronaći stihove u Kur'anu koji se odnose na tekstualnu korupciju Biblije. Da je to istina, muslimanski učenjaci bi ih stvorili. Mogli bismo se zapitati: Zašto se u Kur'anu ne spominje tekstualna korupcija ? Nekoliko je razloga za to: (1) Muhammed je vjerovao da ga se spominje u Bibliji. Kako se mogao pozvati na knjigu koja je bila pokvarena i kad je o njemu govorio. (2) Muhammed je pokušavao doći do Židova i nekih kršćanskih sekti. Bilo bi nemoguće doći do tih ljudi ako on optuži njihovu Bibliju kao pokvarenu. (3) Bilo bi teško reći da se Božja riječ može pokvariti, jer Kur'an svjedoči da Božje riječi štiti Bog. Zbog toga je biblijska cjelovitost i čistoća vidljiva onog trenutka kad se čita Arapski Kuran. Možete pitati: Zašto samo arapski ? Jer prevoditelji Kur'ana na engleski i druge jezike imaju namjeru izvoziti ono što vjeruju na Zapad, a da bi Zapad usvojio islam, moraju naučiti Zapad da skloni svoju Bibliju, budući da Biblija (prema Muslimani) je korumpiran. Dakle, uvrtanje riječi i primjena tekstualne korupcije u prevedenom Kur'anu je jedini način. Možete reći: Takva optužba zahtijeva dokaze! Budući da se tema odnosi na dokaze, evo je: Uzmimo za primjer suru El-Ahkaf [46], ajet 30, u vašim glavnim prijevodima muslimana. Uzmi prijevod Abdullaha Jusufa Alija. Kaže: " Rekli su:" O ljudi naši, čuli smo knjigu objavljenu nakon Mojsija, koja potvrđuje ono što je bilo prije nje ; vodi (ljude) do istine i pravim putem. „Pogledajte gore istaknute riječi koje kažu„ prije njega “. Na arapskom riječi nisu„ prije njega “. Napravimo riječ za prijevod riječi, a arapskom čitatelju prepuštam da bude iskren prema sebi kad čita ova riječ za riječ prijevod: Arapski:kaloo ya kawmana inna sami'ina kitaban unzila loše Musa Engleski:rekli su O naši ljudi mi Čuo sam knjiga otkrio nakon Mojsije Arapski:Musadekan Lima BaynaYadayehe Engleski:potvrđujući što je izmeđunjegove ruke Arapski:Yahdee ela al-hak wa-ela tareekin mustakeem Engleski:vodi do istina i na ravnu stazu Pogledajte istaknute riječi koje kažu " između njegovih ruku ". Te su riječi zamijenjene " prije toga ". To je učinjeno kako bi se nadjačale izvorne riječi "bayna yadayehe" (između njegovih ruku). Ako su riječi prevedene ispravno, čitatelj će zaključiti da je Biblija koja je bila u Muhamedovo vrijeme (između njegovih ruku) točna i da se može koristiti kao vodič za istinu, koju muslimani žele prikriti, budući da znaju da je Biblija koja je u rukama Muhammeda, ista kao i Biblija koju imamo danas, ali islamski ponos ih tjera da zanemaruju činjenice. Riječi (između njegovih ruku) su svugdje u Kur'anu, a izmijenjeno je u cijelom engleskom Kur'anu da bi se reklo (prije njega), stavljajući Bibliju u nepoznato vrijeme u prošlosti prije Kur'ana. Evo još jednog od Abdullaha Jusufa Alija; „ On je onaj koji ti je poslao u istini Knjigu, potvrđujući ono što je prošlo prije nje, i poslao je Zakon (Mojsijev) i Evanđelje (Isusov) ". (Al-Imran [3]: 3) . Evo riječi za prijevod riječi: Arapski:nazzala alayka alkitabu bel-hakkee musaddekan lima baynayadayehe Engleski:Poslao je tebi knjiga u istini potvrđujući što je izmeđunjegove ruke Arapski:wa-anzala al-tawratah wal-enjeel Engleski:i On je poslao Tore i Evanđelje U načinu na koji prevodi stih, mi smo ga "između njegovih ruku" preveli u "prije njega", a njegovo dodavanje riječi (O Isusu) nakon Evanđelja upućuje na poznatu modernu muslimansku tvrdnju, odnosno: ime izvornog Evanđelja, koje se izgubilo, i zato je ime (Isusa) stavio iza riječi Evanđelje. Muslimani tvrde da su Evanđelje po Mateju, Evanđelje po Luki ... izvještaji ljudi, pitat će se: što se dogodilo s Isusovim Evanđeljem ? (Za više vidi Fatir: 31, Yunus: 37, Yusuf: 111 i Al-Maida: 51). Moramo odgovoriti na ovo pitanje Isusova Evanđelja, jednostavno je: Ako vam otac u dalekoj zemlji piše dugi niz godina, a on pošalje poruku nakon poruke o njegovom skorom dolasku. Jednog dana pokuca na vaša vrata. Treba li sa sobom nositi poruku ? Ne, on je poruka! A nakon što dođe, posjeti i vrati se u svoju daleku zemlju, mogao bi poslati više poruka kako bi ispričao o svom prvom i drugom posjetu u budućnosti. Evanđelja po Luki, Ivanu i Marku su ono na što je Kur'an mislio, Kur'an je govorio o Bibliji u njegovo (Muhammedovo) vrijeme, što je on potvrdio i poštovao. Mogli bismo se zapitati: Šta je Kuran značio kad se u sljedećim ajetima pozivao na Bibliju; „ O Yahya (Ivan Krstitelj) snažno se uhvati za Knjigu, a mi smo mu dali mudrost kao dijete. “ (Marija: 12). „ I on će ga (Bog) naučiti knjizi i mudrosti i Tori i Evanđelju. " (El-Imran [3]: 48). " i Marija je vjerovala u riječi svoga Gospodara i Njegove knjige. " (El-Tahrim [66]: 12). Deseci drugih stihova u Kur'anu visoko govore o Bibliji, a nitko je ne optužuje za korupciju. Sadržaj: Dragi Muslimane, dopustite mi da vam kažem zašto sam vjerovao da odgovaram na islamsku početnu stranicu ​ ​ ​

Allahovo "zadovoljstvo"? The "pleasure" of Allah? https://answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/qi015.html Kažnjava koga hoće i milost daje kome hoće, ... - Sura 29:21 Allah zaluta kome hoće, i uputi koga hoće, ... - Sura 14: 4 Da li Allah „uživa“ kažnjavanjem ljudi i njihovim zalutanjem? Musliman je odgovor od strane Randy Desmond Datum: uto, 1. listopada 1996 13:07:27 PDT Arapska riječ koja se koristi u ovim stihovima znači "hoće" (NE želi). Znači li tada to da njegova vlastita volja nije ugodna Allahu? Kako god okrenete, Allahovo postupanje u gornjim ajetima izgleda vrlo proizvoljno i Allahova je volja ili zadovoljstvo zalutati i kazniti ih, a na našoj strani se ništa ne može suprotstaviti ovoj odluci. Pitanje slobodne volje i predodređenja teško je i u kršćanskoj teologiji. Ali muslimani moraju sami pronaći odgovor i ne mogu se utješiti da se kršćani bore i na ovom području. Napokon se postavlja pitanje: Tko je odgovoran za moj život i kažnjava me zbog nečega što me Bog "natjerao" da učinim i dalje moguće nazvati "pravdom"? I kršćanstvo i islam podržavaju da je Bog suveren i da je Bog pravedan. Kontradikcije u početnoj stranici Kur'ana koji odgovara islamu Posljednje uređivanje: 8. siječnja 1997

-----

Global Što je Kuran? Global Što je Koran? Što je Koran? Global https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1999/01/what-is-the-koran/304024/ Istraživači s različitim akademskim i teološkim interesima predlažu kontroverzne teorije o povijesti Korana i islama, a teže ponovnom tumačenju islama za moderni svijet. Ovo je, kako jedan znanstvenik kaže, "osjetljiv posao" 1972. godine, tijekom obnove Velike džamije Sane, u Jemenu, radnici koji su radili u potkrovlju između unutarnjeg i vanjskog krovova građevine naišli su na izvanredan grobni prostor, iako to tada nisu shvatili. Njihovo je neznanje bilo opravdano: džamije obično ne postavljaju grobove, a na ovom mjestu nije bilo nadgrobnih spomenika, ljudskih ostataka, pogrebnog nakita. U stvari nije sadržavao ništa više od neupadljive buhe starih pergamenta i papirnatih dokumenata - oštećene knjige i pojedine stranice arapskog teksta, spojene stoljećima kiše i vlage, stvorene u godinama štakorima i insektima. Namjerajući izvršavanju zadatka, radnici su skupili rukopise, utisnuli ih u dvadesetak vreća krumpira i odložili ih na stubište jedne od minareta džamije, gdje su bili zaključani - i gdje bi vjerojatno bili još jednom zaboravljeno, nije li to bio Qadhi Isma'il al-Akwa ', tadašnji predsjednik jemenske uprave za starine, koji je shvatio potencijalnu važnost ovog nalaza. Al-Akwa 'je potražio međunarodnu pomoć u ispitivanju i očuvanju fragmenata, a 1979. uspio je zainteresirati gostujućeg njemačkog znanstvenika, koji je zauzvrat uvjerio njemačku vladu da organizira i financira projekt obnove. Ubrzo nakon što je započeo projekt, postalo je jasno da je ostava nevjerojatan primjer onoga što se ponekad naziva "papirnati grob" - u ovom slučaju odmorište, između ostalog, desetaka tisuća fragmenata iz blizine tisuću različitih pergamentnih kodova Kur'ana, muslimansko sveto pismo. U nekim pobožnim muslimanskim krugovima smatra se da dotrajale ili oštećene kopije Korana moraju biti uklonjene iz prometa; otuda ideja o grobu, koja oba čuva svetost tekstova koji su počivani i osigurava da će se čitati samo cjelovita i nepouzdana izdanja Svetoga pisma. Činilo se da su neke stranice pergamenta u jemenskom dvorištu bile iz sedmog i osmog stoljeća nove ere, ili prva dva stoljeća islama - bili su to fragmenti, drugim riječima možda najstariji Korani koji su postojali. Štoviše, neki od ovih fragmenata otkrili su male, ali intrigantne aberacije iz standardnog teksta Korana. Takve aberacije iako nisu iznenađujuće za tekstualne povjesničare, zabrinjavajuće su u suprotnosti s ortodoksnim muslimanskim uvjerenjem da je Koran kakav je danas stigao do nas jednostavno jednostavno savršena, bezvremenska i nepromjenjiva Božja Riječ. Uglavnom sekularni napor da se reinterpretira Koran - dijelom temeljen na tekstualnim dokazima poput onih koji su dali jemenski fragmenti - uznemirujuće je i uvredljivo za mnoge muslimane, baš kao što su pokušaji reinterpretacije Biblije i Isusova života zabrinjavajući i uvredljivi za mnoge konzervativni kršćani. Ipak, među njima ima učenjaka, muslimana, koji smatraju da će takav napor, koji u biti znači stavljanje Kur'ana u povijest, osigurati gorivo za islamski preporod vrsta - ponovno prihvaćanje tradicije, ići naprijed gledajući unatrag. Do sada ograničena na znanstvene argumente, ova vrsta razmišljanja može biti ipak vrlo snažna i - kao što pokazuju povijesti Renesanse i Reformacije pokazuju - može dovesti do velikih društvenih promjena. Koran, na kraju krajeva, trenutno je najutjecajniji tekst na svijetu. Gledajući FragmentePrva osoba koja je provela značajnu količinu vremena istražujući jemenske fragmente, 1981. godine, bila je Gerd-R. Puin, specijalist arapske kaligrafije i kronične paleografije sa Sveučilišta Saarland, u Saarbrückenu, Njemačka. Puin, kojeg je njemačka vlada uputila da organizira i nadgleda projekt restauracije, prepoznao je antiku nekih fragmenata pergamenta, a njegova preliminarna inspekcija također je otkrila nekonvencionalne redoslijede stihova, manje tekstualne varijacije i rijetke stilove pravopisa i umjetničkog ukrašavanja. , Primamljivi su i listovi spisa napisani rijetkom i ranom hijazijskom arapskom pismom: dijelovi najranijih Koranaca za koje se znalo da postoje, također su bili palimpsesti - verzije vrlo jasno napisane u ranijim, ispraznim verzijama. Činilo se da je jemenski Koranci sugerisao, Puin je počeo osjećati da je evoluirajući tekst, a ne samo Božja Riječ kako je u cijelosti otkrivena proroku Muhamedu u sedmom stoljeću nove ere Od ranih 1980-ih više od 15 000 listova jemenskih Korana bio je marljivo spljošten, očišćen, obrađen, sortiran i sastavljen; oni sada sjede ("sačuvani još tisuću godina", kaže Puin) u jemenskoj Kući rukopisa i čekaju detaljno ispitivanje. Međutim, čini se da jemenske vlasti to nerado dopuštaju. "Žele zadržati tu stvar nisko postavljenu kao i mi, iako iz različitih razloga", objašnjava Puin. "Oni ne žele da im se skrene pažnja na činjenicu da postoje Nijemci i drugi koji rade na Koranima. Ne žele da se obznani da se tu uopće radi , jer je muslimanski stav da sve što treba biti o povijesti Kur'ana rečeno je prije tisuću godina. " Do danas su samo dva učenjaka dobila široki pristup jemenskim fragmentima: Puin i njegov kolega H.-C. Graf von Bothmer, islamski povjesničar umjetnosti također sa sjedištem na Sveučilištu Saarland. Puin i Von Bothmer su u znanstvenim publikacijama objavili samo nekoliko nevjerojatno kratkih članaka o onome što su otkrili u jemenskim fragmentima. Nerado su ih dijelom objavili jer su se donedavno više bavili razvrstavanjem i klasifikacijom fragmenata nego sustavnim proučavanjem, a dijelom i zato što su smatrali da bi jemenske vlasti, ako shvate moguće implikacije otkrića, mogle dodatno odbiti pristup. Von Bothmer je, međutim, 1997. godine završio snimanje više od 35.000 slika fragmenata mikrofilma, a nedavno ih je vratio u Njemačku. To znači da će uskoro Von Bothmer, Puin i drugi učenjaci napokon imati priliku pomno pregledati tekstove i slobodno objaviti svoja otkrića - što će oduševiti Puina. "Toliko muslimana vjeruje da je sve između dviju korita Kur'ana samo Božja nepromijenjena riječ", kaže on. "Oni vole citirati tekstualno djelo koje pokazuje da Biblija ima povijest i da nije pala ravno s neba, ali do sada je Koran bio izvan ove rasprave. Jedini način da se probije taj zid je dokazati da Koran također ima svoju povijest. Sana'a fragmenti pomoći će nam u tome. " Puin nije sam u svom entuzijazmu. "Utjecaj jemenskih rukopisa još uvijek se osjeća", kaže Andrew Rippin , profesor religioznih studija na Sveučilištu u Calgaryju, koji je danas na čelu studija Korana. "Čitanja s verzijama i redovi stihova vrlo su značajni. S tim su se svi složili. Ovi rukopisi govore da je rana povijest teksta Kur'ana mnogo više otvoreno pitanje nego što su mnogi sumnjali: tekst je bio manje stabilan i zato je imao manje autoritet nego što se oduvijek tvrdilo. " Kopiranje Boga Prema standardima suvremene biblijske učenja, većina pitanja koja postavljaju učenjaci poput Puina i Rippina prilično je skromna; izvan islamskog konteksta, sugerirajući da Koran ima povijest i sugerirajući da se on može metaforički protumačiti, nisu radikalni koraci. Ali islamski kontekst - i muslimanska senzibiliteta - ne mogu se zanemariti. "Povijesnost Korana zapravo bi delegitimiziralo čitavo povijesno iskustvo muslimanske zajednice", kaže R. Stephen Humphreys , profesor islamskih studija na Sveučilištu Kalifornija u Santa Barbari. "Koran je povelja za zajednicu, dokument koji ju je pozvao na postojanje. I u idealnom slučaju - iako očito nije uvijek u stvarnosti - islamska povijest je nastojala slijediti i izvršavati zapovijedi Korana u ljudskom životu. Koran je povijesni dokument, tada je cjelokupna islamska borba u četrnaest stoljeća zapravo besmislena. " Pravoslavni muslimanski pogled na Koran kao očigledno Božju Riječ, savršen i neponovljiv u poruci, jeziku, stilu i obliku, nevjerojatno je sličan fundamentalističkom kršćanskom pojmu biblijske "inerrancije" i "verbalnog nadahnuća" koji je još uvijek uobičajena na mnogim mjestima danas. Koncept je klasični izraz dobio prije nešto više od jednog stoljeća od strane biblijskog znanstvenika Johna Williama Burgona. Biblija nije ništa drugo do glas Onoga koji sjedi na Prijestolju! Svaka knjiga, svako poglavlje, svaki njezin stih, svaka njegova riječ, svaki njen slog ... svako njegovo pismo, izravna je izreka Svevišnjeg! Međutim, svi kršćani ne razmišljaju na ovaj način o Bibliji, a zapravo, kao što ističe Enciklopedija islama (1981.), "najbliži analogan kršćanskom vjerovanju ulozi Kur'ana u vjerovanju muslimana nije Biblija" , ali Kriste. " Ako je Krist Božja Riječ načinjena tijelom, Kuran je Božja riječ napisala tekst, a propitivanje njene svetosti ili autoriteta smatra se izravnim napadom na islam - kao što Salman Rushdie previše dobro zna. Izgledi da muslimanski odjek nisu odvratili kritičko-povijesnu studiju Korana, kao što pokazuje postojanje eseja u nastanku Kurana (1998.). Čak i nakon afere Rushdie, rad se nastavlja: 1996. godine, koranski učenjak Günter Lüling napisao je u časopisu The Higher Criticism o "širokoj mjeri u kojoj su iskrivljeni i tekst Kur'ana i naučeni islamski prikaz islamskog podrijetla. , deformacija koju su zapadni islamisti do sada nesumnjivo prihvatili. " U časopisu Jerusalem Studies u arapskom i islamu je 1994. godine objavljena posthumna studija Yehude D. Nevo, sa hebrejskog sveučilišta u Jeruzalemu, u kojoj su detaljno opisani vjerski natpisi na kamenju u pustinji Negev iz sedmog i osmog stoljeća, a koji, kako sugerira Nevo, predstavljaju "značajnu problemi za tradicionalni muslimanski prikaz povijesti islama. " Iste godine, a u istom je časopisu Patricia Crone, povjesničarka ranog islama, trenutno sa sjedištem na Institutu za napredne studije, u Princetonu, New Jersey, objavila članak u kojem tvrdi da je razjašnjavanje problematičnih odlomaka u tekstu Kur'ana što je moguće samo "napuštanjem konvencionalnog prikaza o tome kako se Kur'an rodio". A od 1991. godine James Bellamy sa Sveučilišta u Michiganu predložio je u časopisu American Oriental Society niz "izmjena i dopuna teksta Korana" - izmjene koje iz ortodoksne muslimanske perspektive predstavljaju kopiranje Boga. Crone je jedan od ikonoklastičnih od ovih učenjaka. Tijekom 1970-ih i 1980-ih napisala je i surađivala na nekoliko knjiga - najznačajnije je s Michaelom Cookom, Hagarism: Stvaranje islamskog svijeta (1977) - koja je iznijela radikalne argumente o podrijetlu islama i pisanju islamske povijesti. Među kontroverznim tvrdnjama hagarizma bile su sugestije da je tekst Kur'ana nastao kasnije nego što se sada vjeruje ("Nema čvrstih dokaza za postojanje Korana u bilo kojem obliku prije posljednjeg desetljeća sedmog stoljeća"); da Meka nije bila prvotno islamsko svetište ("[dokazi] ukazuju nedvosmisleno na svetište na sjeverozapadu Arabije ... Meka je bila sekundarna"); da su arapska osvajanja prethodila institucionalizaciji islama ("židovska mesijanska fantazija izvedena je u obliku arapskog osvajanja Svete zemlje"); da je ideja o hidžri, odnosno migraciji Muhammeda i njegovih sljedbenika iz Meke u Medinu 622. godine, mogla evoluirati dugo nakon što je Muhamed umro ("Nijedan izvor iz sedmog stoljeća ne identificira arapsko doba kao hidžru "); i da se izraz "musliman" nije rabio u ranom islamu ("Nema dobrog razloga za pretpostaviti da su nosioci ovog primitivnog identiteta sebe nazivali" muslimanima "[ali] izvori ... otkrivaju ranije označavanje zajednice [koja se u grčkom pojavljuje kao „Magaritai“ u papirusu od 642, a u sirijskom kao „Mahgre“ ili „Mahgraye“ od 640-ih “). Hagarizam je bio pod izravnim napadom podjednako od muslimanskih i nemuslimanskih učenjaka zbog svoje snažne ovisnosti o neprijateljskim izvorima. ("Ovo je knjiga", napisali su autori, "na temelju onoga što iz bilo koje muslimanske perspektive mora izgledati neodređeno s obzirom na svjedočanstvo nevjernih izvora.") Crone i Cook od tada su odustali od nekih svojih najradikalnijih prijedloga - takvih kao što je, na primjer, to što je prorok Muhammed živio dvije godine duže nego što muslimanska tradicija tvrdi da je to učinio, i da je povijesnost njegove migracije u Medinu upitna. Ali Crone je nastavio osporavati i muslimanske i zapadnjačke pravoslavne poglede na islamsku povijest. U Mekanskoj trgovini i porastu islama (1987.) iznijela je detaljan argument osporavajući prevladavajući stav zapadnih (i nekih muslimanskih) učenjaka da je islam nastao kao odgovor na arapsku trgovinu začinima. Gerd-R. Puinovo trenutačno razmišljanje o povijesti Kurana sudjeluje u ovom suvremenom revizionizmu. "Moja ideja je da je Kur'an svojevrsni koktel tekstova koji nisu svi razumjeli ni u vrijeme Muhameda", kaže on. "Mnogi od njih mogu biti i stotinu godina stariji od samog islama. Čak i unutar islamske tradicije postoji ogromno mnoštvo kontradiktornih informacija, uključujući značajan kršćanski supstrat; iz njih se može izvući čitava islamska antiistorija. " Patricia Crone brani ciljeve takve vrste razmišljanja. "Kur'an je pismo sa poviješću poput bilo koje druge - osim što mi tu povijest ne poznajemo i skloni su izazvati zavijanje protesta kad je proučavamo. Nitko ne bi smetao zavijanja ako su došli iz zapadnjaka, ali zapadnjaci se osjećaju defenitivno kad zavijaju drugi ljudi: tko ste vi da biste ukrotili njihovo naslijeđe? Ali mi islamisti ne pokušavamo uništiti nečiju vjeru. " Ne slažu se svi s tom procjenom - posebno jer se stipendija zapadne Korane tradicionalno odvijala u kontekstu otvoreno deklarisanog neprijateljstva između kršćanstva i islama . (Doista, široki pokret na Zapadu u posljednja dva stoljeća kako bi "objasnio" Istok, često nazvan orijentalizmom , posljednjih je godina zapao zbog iskazivanja sličnih religijskih i kulturnih pristranosti.) Čini se da je Koran, za kršćanina posebno židovski učenjaci, da posjeduju aure krivovjerja; npr. orijentalist devetnaestog stoljeća William Muir, na primjer, tvrdio je da je Koran jedan od "najtvrđih neprijatelja civilizacije, slobode i istine koju je svijet još znao". I rani sovjetski znanstvenici poduzimali su ideološki motivirano istraživanje podrijetla islama, s gotovo misionarskom revnošću: 1920-ih i 1930. sovjetska publikacija pod naslovom Ateist objavila je niz članaka koji su objašnjavali porast islama marksističko-lenjinističkim terminima. U Islamu i Rusiji (1956.) Ann KS Lambton je sažela velik dio ovog rada i napisala da je nekoliko sovjetskih učenjaka teoretiziralo da je "pokretačku silu urođene religije osiguravala merkantilna buržoazija Meke i Medine"; da je izvjesni SP Tolstov smatrao da je "islam socijalno-religijski pokret koji je poticao iz ropskog, a ne feudalnog oblika arapskog društva"; i da je NA Morozov tvrdio da se "sve do križarskih ratova islam nije razlikovao od judaizma i ... tek tada je stekao svoj neovisni karakter, dok su Muhammad i prvi kalifi mitski likovi." Čini se da je Morozov bio posebno vatreni teoretičar: Lambton je napisao da je, također, u svojoj knjizi Krist (1930) tvrdio da je "u srednjem vijeku islam bio samo pucanje arijanizma izazvanog meteorološkim događajem u području Crvenog mora u blizini Meke". Ne čudi stoga što su, s obzirom na pristranost mnogo neislamskog kritičkog proučavanja Korana, muslimani skloni to odbaciti u potpunosti. Posebno elokventan protest dogodio se 1987. u časopisu Muslim World Book Review, u radu pod naslovom "Metoda protiv istine: orijentalizam i kur'anske studije", muslimanskog kritičara S. Parveza Manzoora . Stavljajući ishodište učenja zapadne Korane u „polemične močvare srednjovjekovnog kršćanstva“ i opisujući njegovo suvremeno stanje kao „vrhunac vlastitog stvaranja“, Manzoor je orkestrirao složen i slojevit napad na cjelokupni zapadni pristup islamu. Otvorio je svoj bijes. Orijentalističko podučavanje kur'anskih studija, bez obzira na ostale njegove zasluge i usluge, bio je projekt rođen bez riječi, uzgojen u frustraciji i hranjen osvetom: usprkos moćnim za nemoćne, frustracija "racionalnog" prema " praznovjeran "i osveta" ortodoksnih "protiv" nekonformista ". U najvećem času svog svjetskog trijumfa zapadnjački čovjek, koordinirajući ovlasti države, crkve i akademije, pokrenuo je svoj najodlučniji napad na citadele muslimanske vjere. Svi nesavjesni tragovi njegove arogantne ličnosti - njezin nesmotreni racionalizam, njegova fantastika koja dominira svijetom i sektaški fanatizam - spojili su se u nečasnu zavjeru za uklanjanje muslimanskog Pisma iz njegova čvrsto ukorijenjenog položaja kao epiteta povijesne autentičnosti i moralne nepristupačnosti. Konačni trofej koji je zapadnjački čovjek tražio svojim pothvatom od vraga bio je sam muslimanski um. Da bi zauvijek oslobodio Zapad "problema" islama, obrazložio je, muslimanska svijest mora biti očajna od kognitivne izvjesnosti Božanske poruke otkrivene Poslaniku. Samo musliman zbunjen povijesnom autentičnošću ili doktrinarnom autonomijom kur'anske objave odustao bi od njegove univerzalne misije i stoga ne bi predstavljao izazov globalnoj dominaciji Zapada. Takva je, barem čini se, prećutna, ako ne i eksplicitna, obrazloženje orijentalističkog napada na Kur'an. Unatoč takvom otporu, zapadni istraživači s raznim akademskim i teološkim interesima nastavljaju koristiti, primjenjujući moderne tehnike tekstualne i povijesne kritike za proučavanje Korana. Da sada postoji znatan dio ove stipendije, ukazuje na nedavnu odluku europske tvrtke Brill Publishers - dugogodišnjeg izdavača tako velikih djela kao što su Enciklopedija islama i Studija izdanja svitaka s Mrtvog mora - da naruče prvo mjesto Enciklopedija Kur'ana. Jane McAuliffe, profesorica islamskih studija na Sveučilištu u Torontu i glavna urednica enciklopedije, nada se da će ona funkcionirati kao "grubi analog" biblijskim enciklopedijama i da će biti "sumativni rad na prijelazu milenijuma za stipendiju države Koranića. " Članci za prvi dio enciklopedije trenutno se uređuju i pripremaju za objavljivanje kasnije ove godine. Enciklopedija Kur'ana bit će zaista suradnički poduhvat, koji provode muslimani i nemuslimani, a njegovi će članci predstaviti višestruke pristupe tumačenju Kur'ana, od kojih će neki vjerojatno osporiti tradicionalna islamska stajališta - uznemirujući i na taj način mnogi u islamskom svijetu, gdje je vrijeme izrazito manje zrelo za revizionističku studiju Korana. Stanje Nasr Abu Zaida , neumornog egipatskog profesora arapskog jezika koji sjedi u savjetodavnom odboru enciklopedije, ilustrira poteškoće s kojima su muslimanski učenjaci pokušali reinterpretirati svoju tradiciju. Kur'an je tekst, književni tekst, a jedini način da se shvati, objasni i analizira to je književnim pristupom ", kaže Abu Zaid." Ovo je ključno teološko pitanje. "Za izražavanje takvih stavova u tisku - u biti, za osporavanje ideje da se Koran mora čitati doslovno kao apsolutna i nepromjenjiva Riječ Božja - Abu Zaid je 1995. godine službeno nazvao otpadnik, presudu koju je 1996. podržao najviši sud u Egiptu. Sud je nastavio, na osnovu islamskog zakona koji je zabranio brak s otpadnikom muslimanom, da naredi Abu Zaidu da se razvede od svoje supruge Ibtihal Yunis (presuda koju je šokirani i sretno oženjeni Yunis tada opisao kao da dolazi "poput udarca glava s opekom "). Abu Zaid odlučno tvrdi da je pobožni musliman, ali tvrdi da je Koranov manifestni sadržaj - na primjer, često arhaični zakoni o postupanju sa ženama za koje je islam sramotan - mnogo manje važan od njegovog složenog, regenerativnog i duhovno hranljivog. latentni sadržaj. Pravoslavni islamski pogled, tvrdi Abu Zaid, djeluje mučno; ono smanjuje božanski, vječni i dinamičan tekst na fiksnu ljudsku interpretaciju bez ikakvog života i smisla od "sitnice ... talismana ... ili ukrasa". Jedno je vrijeme Abu Zaid ostao u Egiptu i pokušavao pobiti optužbe za otpadništvo, ali suočen s prijetnjama smrću i nemilosrdnim javnim uznemiravanjem, pobjegao je sa svojom ženom iz Kaira u Nizozemsku, nazvavši cijelu aferu "nesnosnom farsom". Šeik Youssef al-Badri, svećenik čija su propovijedanja potaknula velik dio protivljenja Abu Zaidu, bio je izvrsan. "Nismo teroristi; nismo koristili metke ni mitraljeze, ali zaustavili smo neprijatelja islama da se zabavlja na našoj religiji ... Nitko se neće usuditi ponovo pomisliti da našteti islamu." Čini se da je Abu Zaid bio opravdan u strahu za svoj život i bijeg: 1992. godine egipatski novinar Farag Foda islamisti su ubili zbog njegovih kritičkih napisa o egipatskom Muslimanskom bratstvu, a 1994. godine nobelovac Naguib Mahfouz uboden je za pisanje , između ostalih djela, alegorijska Djeca iz Gabavija (1959.) - roman, strukturiran poput Korana, koji prikazuje "heretičke" koncepcije Boga i proroka Muhameda. Odstupanje od ortodoksnog tumačenja Kur'ana, kaže Alžirac Mohammed Arkoun, profesor emeritus islamske misli na Sveučilištu u Parizu, " vrlo osjetljiv posao" s velikim implikacijama. "Milijuni i milijuni ljudi svakodnevno se obraćaju Kuranu kako bi objasnili svoje postupke i opravdali svoje težnje", kaže Arkoun. "Ova je referentna skala mnogo veća nego ikad prije." Muhammed u pećini MECCA sjedi u jakoj šupljini između dva niza strmih brežuljaka na zapadu današnje Saudijske Arabije. Na njegov neposredni zapad nalazi se ravna i blistava obala Crvenog mora; na istok se prostire veliki Rub 'al-Khali, ili Prazna četvrt - najveće kontinuirano tijelo pijeska na planeti. Grad je okruženje nezanimljivo: zemlja je suha i prašnjava, a tinja pod nemilosrdnim suncem; čitav kraj razgledavaju vrući, lupljivi pustinjski vjetrovi. Iako kiša ponekad ne pada godinama, a kad dođe može biti jaka, stvarajući bujice vode koje izviru iz brda i preplavljuju bazen u kojem leži grad. Kao pozadina božanskog otkrivenja, ovo područje je jednako prikladno kao planine Sinaj ili Judejska pustinja. Jedini stvarni izvor povijesnih podataka o predislamskoj Meki i okolnostima objave Kur'ana je klasična islamska priča o osnivanju religije, čija destilacija slijedi. U stoljećima koja su došla do islama, Meka je bila lokalno pogansko svetište značajne antike. Religiozni obredi vršili su se oko Ka'be - svetilišta, koje je i danas islamsko u središtu islama, za koje muslimani vjeruju da su ga prvotno sagradili Ibrahim (kršćani i Židovi poznati kao Abraham) i njegov sin Isma'il (Ishmael). Kako je Meka postajala sve naprednija u šestom stoljeću nakon Krista, širili su se poganski idoli različitih veličina i oblika. Tradicionalna priča kaže da je do ranog sedmog stoljeća panteon od oko 360 kipova i ikona okruživao Ka'bu (unutar koje su pronađeni prikaz Isusa i Djevice Marije, između ostalih idola). Takva je pozadina prema kojoj su, kako se navodi, otkriveni prvi obroci Kur'ana, 610. godine, obilnom, ali nezadovoljnom trgovcu po imenu Muhammed bin Abdullah. Muhammad je razvio naviku da se povremeno povlači iz Mekkinog poganskog oskudica u obližnju planinsku špilju, gdje će se reflektirati u samoći. Tijekom jednog od tih povlačenja posjetio ga je Anđeo Gabrijel - isti taj anđeo koji je najavio dolazak Isusa k Djevici Mariji u Nazaret nekih 600 godina ranije. Otvarajući zapovijed "Recitiraj!", Gabrijel je Muhamedu dao do znanja da će služiti kao Božji glasnik. Nakon toga, sve do svoje smrti, navodno nepismeni Muhammed primio je kroz Gabrijela božanske objave na arapskom jeziku koje su bile poznate pod nazivom qur'an ("recitacija") i koje su u početku u izrazito poetičnom i retoričkom stilu najavile novu, beskompromisnu marku monoteizma poznatu kao islam, ili "pokornost" (Božjoj volji). Muhammad je ova otkrivenja doslovno izvijestio simpatične članove obitelji i prijatelje, koji su ih upamtili ili zapisali. Snažni Mekanci ubrzo su počeli progoniti Muhammeda i njegovu malu skupinu odanih sljedbenika, čija je nova vjera odbacila pogansku jezgru mekanskog kulturnog i ekonomskog života, a kao rezultat toga 622. skupina je prešla oko 200 milja sjeverno, u grad Yathrib, koji je nakon toga postala je poznata kao Medina (skraćeno za Medinat al-Nabi, ili Grad proroka). (Ova selidba, u islamu poznata kao hidžra, smatra se rođenjem neovisne islamske zajednice, pa je 622. tako prva godina islamskog kalendara.) U Medini je Muhammed i dalje primao božanska otkrivenja, sve više pragmatičnih i prozaične prirode, a do 630. razvio je dovoljno podrške u medinanskoj zajednici da napadne i osvoji Meku. Posljednje dvije godine svog života proveo je prozno, konsolidirajući političku moć i nastavljajući primati otkrivenja. Islamska tradicija kaže da kad je Muhammed umro 632. godine, objave Kur'ana nisu bile sakupljene u jednoj knjizi; zabilježeni su samo "na lišću palme i ravnom kamenju i u srcima ljudi." (To nije iznenađujuće: usmena tradicija bila je snažna i dobro uspostavljena, a arapsko pismo, koje je napisano bez oznaka samoglasnika i konsonantalnih točaka, koristilo se uglavnom kao pomoć pri pamćenju.) Ni uspostavljanje takvog teksta od primarne brige: Medinanski Arapi - malo vjerojatna koalicija bivših trgovaca, pustinjskih nomada i poljoprivrednika ujedinjenih u snažnoj novoj vjeri i nadahnuti životom i izrekama proroka Muhameda - u to su vrijeme pratili fantastično uspješan niz međunarodnih osvajanja u ime islama. Do 640-ih Arapi su posjedovali većinu Sirije, Iraka, Perzije i Egipta, a trideset godina kasnije bili su zauzeti dijelovima Europe, sjeverne Afrike i središnje Azije. U ranim desetljećima arapskih osvajanja ubijeni su mnogi pripadnici Muhammedovih koterija i s njima su umrla dragocjena saznanja o objavama Kur'ana. Muslimani na rubovima carstva počeli su se svađati oko toga što je Koraničko pismo, a što nije. Vojni general koji se vraćao iz Azerbejdžana izrazio je bojazan zbog sektaške prepirke sa halifom Uthmanom (644-656) - trećim islamskim vladarom koji je naslijedio Muhameda - i kaže se da ga je zamolio da "prestigne ovaj narod prije nego što se oni razlikuju od Kurana način na koji se Židovi i kršćani razlikuju u odnosu na njihovo Pismo «. 'Uthman je sazvao redakcijski odbor vrsta koji je pažljivo prikupljao razne dijelove svetog pisma koje su Muhammedovi drugovi pamtili ili zapisali. Rezultat je bila standardna pisana verzija Korana. 'Uthman je naredio da se sve nepotpune i "nesavršene" zbirke pisma Kur'ana unište i nova verzija je brzo distribuirana glavnim središtima carstva koje se brzo razvija. Tijekom sljedećih nekoliko stoljeća, dok se islam učvrstio kao vjerski i politički entitet, razvijalo se ogromno tijelo eksegetičke i povijesne literature koja je objasnila Kuran i porast islama, čiji su najvažniji elementi hadis, ili prikupljene izreke i djela od poslanika Muhammeda; sunna ili tijelo islamskog društvenog i pravnog običaja; sira, ili biografije Poslanika; i tafsir, ili komentari i objašnjenje Kur'ana. Iz tih tradicionalnih izvora - sastavljenih u pisanom obliku uglavnom od sredine osmog do sredine desetog stoljeća - na kraju se izvode svi izvještaji o otkrivenju Kurana i ranih godina islama. "Za ljude koji razumiju" Otprilike ekvivalentne Novom zavjetu, Koran je podijeljen na 114 odjeljaka, poznatih kao sure, koji se po duljini i obliku značajno razlikuju. Načelo organiziranja knjige nije ni kronološko ni tematsko - u većini slučajeva sure su raspoređene od početka do kraja u silaznom redoslijedu. Unatoč neobičnoj strukturi, no, novopridošli Kuranu, ono što općenito iznenađuje je stupanj na kojem počiva na istim vjerovanjima i pričama koje se pojavljuju u Bibliji. Bog ( Allah na arapskom) vlada vrhovnim: on je svemoćno, sveznajuće i svemilosrdno Biće koje je stvorilo svijet i njegova stvorenja; on preko proroka šalje poruke i zakone kako bi pomogao voditi ljudsko postojanje; i, u vrijeme koje će mu biti poznato samo u budućnosti, on će donijeti kraj svijeta i Sudnji dan. Adam, prvi čovjek, protjeran je iz Raja jer je jeo sa zabranjenog stabla. Noa gradi arku kako bi spasio odabrane nekolicine od poplave koju je izazvao gnjev Božji. Abraham se priprema da žrtvuje svog sina na Božju ponudu. Mojsije vodi Izraelce iz Egipta i prima otkrovenje na brdu Sinaj. Isus - rođen od Djevice Marije i nazivan Mesijom - čini čuda, ima učenike i uzdiže se do neba. Koran jako pazi na naglašavanje ove zajedničke monoteističke baštine, ali podjednako teško razlikuje islam od židovstva i kršćanstva. Na primjer, u njemu se spominju proroci - Hud, Salih, Shu'ayb, Luqman i drugi - čije podrijetlo izgleda isključivo arapsko, a podsjeća čitatelje da je "Koran na arapskom jeziku / za ljude koji razumiju." Unatoč svojim opetovanim tvrdnjama o suprotnom, međutim, Koran je suvremenim čitateljima - čak i visokoobrazovani govornici arapskog jezika - izuzetno teško razumjeti. Ponekad izvrši dramatične promjene u stilu, glasu i temi iz stiha u stih, a pretpostavlja poznavanje jezika, priča i događaja za koje se čini da su izgubljeni čak i najraniji muslimanski egzegeti (tipično za tekst koji u početku evoluirao u usmenoj tradiciji). Lako je pronaći njegove prividne nedosljednosti: u prvoj i trećoj osobi Bog se može spominjati u istoj rečenici; divergentne verzije iste priče ponavljaju se na različitim točkama teksta; božanske odluke povremeno se suprotstavljaju jedna drugoj. U ovom posljednjem slučaju Kur'an predviđa kritiku i brani se tvrdeći pravo da ukine svoju vlastitu poruku ("Bog briše / Ili potvrdi ono što mu se sviđa"). Kritika je došla. Kako su muslimani sve više dolazili u kontakt s kršćanima tijekom osmog stoljeća, osvajački su ratovi bili popraćeni teološkom polemikom, u kojoj su se kršćani i drugi zalagali za zbunjujuće književno stanje Korana kao dokaz ljudskog porijekla. Sami muslimanski učenjaci žustro su katalogizirali problematične aspekte Kurana - nepoznati vokabular, naizgled propuste teksta, gramatičke nesuglasice, devijantna čitanja i tako dalje. Velika teološka rasprava u stvari nastala je unutar islama krajem osamnaestog stoljeća, postavljajući one koji su vjerovali u Koran kao "nestvorenu" i vječnu Božju riječ protiv onih koji su u njega vjerovali kao stvoreno u vremenu, kao i sve što nije Bog sam. Pod halifom Ma'munom (813-833) ovo je drugo gledište nakratko postalo ortodoksna doktrina. Podržalo ga je nekoliko škola mišljenja, uključujući i utjecajnu koja je poznata pod nazivom mu'tazilizam, koja je razvila složenu teologiju koja se dijelom temelji na metaforičkom, a ne na jednostavnom razumijevanju Korana. Krajem 10. stoljeća utjecaj škole Mu'tazili je nestao, iz kompliciranih političkih razloga, a službena doktrina postala je i'jaz, ili " nepobjedivost " Kur'ana. (Kao rezultat toga, Koran tradicionalno muslimani nisu prevedeni za muslimane koji ne govore arapski jezik. Umjesto toga, muslimani ga čitaju i recitiraju u originalu, od kojih većina ne govori arapski jezik. Postoje prijevodi koji postoje koji se smatra ništa više od biblijskih pomagala i parafraza.) Usvajanje nauke o nepobjedivosti bilo je glavni prekretnica u islamskoj povijesti, a od desetog stoljeća do danas glavno shvatanje muslimana Korana kao doslovne i nestvorene Riječi od Bog je ostao stalan. Psihopatski vandalizam? GERD-R. Puin s prezirom govori o tradicionalnoj spremnosti muslimanskih i zapadnih učenjaka da prihvate konvencionalno razumijevanje Kurana. "Kuran za sebe tvrdi da je 'mubeen' ili 'jasan'", kaže on. "Ali ako pogledate, primijetit ćete da svaka peta rečenica ili tako jednostavno nema smisla. Mnogi muslimani - i orijentalisti - naravno, reći će vam drugačije, ali činjenica je da je petina teksta Kur'ana jednostavno nerazumljivo. To je ono što je uzrokovalo tradicionalnu anksioznost u vezi s prijevodom. Ako Kur'an nije razumljiv - ako se ne može razumjeti ni na arapskom - onda nije prenosiv. Ljudi se toga boje, a budući da Koran više puta tvrdi da je jasan ali očito nije - kao što će vam reći čak i govornici arapskog jezika - postoji kontradikcija. Mora se nešto drugo nastaviti. " Pokušaj shvatiti da je "nešto drugo" stvarno počelo tek u ovom stoljeću. "Donedavno", kaže Patricia Crone, povjesničarka ranog islama, "svi su uzimali zdravo za gotovo da je sve što muslimani tvrde da pamte o podrijetlu i značenju Kurana tačno. Ako odbacite tu pretpostavku, morate počnite iznova. " To, naravno, nije zloban podvig; Kuran je sišao na nas čvrsto obuhvaćen povijesnom tradicijom koja je izuzetno otporna na kritike i analize. Dok ga je Crone ubacio u Robove on Horses, Biblijski urednici nude nam dijelove izraelske tradicije u različitim fazama kristalizacije, pa se njihova svjedočanstva mogu profitabilno usporediti i odmjeriti jedni s drugima. Ali muslimanska tradicija nije bila posljedica, ne sporog kristalizacije, već eksplozije; prvi sastavljači nisu bili urednici, već skupljači krhotina čija su djela upečatljivo lišena ukupnog jedinstva; a iz njihove usporedbe ne proizlaze određena osvjetljenja. Nije iznenađujuće, s obzirom na eksplozivnu ekspanziju ranog islama i prolazak vremena između rođenja religije i prvog sustavnog dokumentiranja njezine povijesti, Muhamedov svijet i svjetovi povjesničara koji su o njemu kasnije pisali bili su dramatično različiti. Tijekom prvog islamskog stoljeća, provincijski bend poganskih pustinjskih plemena postao je čuvarima golemog međunarodnog carstva institucionalnog monoteizma koje je krojilo dosad neviđenom književnom i znanstvenom aktivnošću. Mnogi suvremeni povjesničari tvrde da se ne može očekivati ​​da će islamske priče o njegovom podrijetlu - posebno s obzirom na usmenu tradiciju ranih stoljeća - preživjeti netaknutu ovu ogromnu društvenu transformaciju. Niti se može očekivati ​​da će muslimanski povjesničar koji je pisao u Iraku iz devetnog ili desetog stoljeća odbaciti svoju socijalnu i intelektualnu pozadinu (i teološka uvjerenja) kako bi točno opisao duboko nepoznati arapski kontekst iz sedmog stoljeća. R. Stephen Humphreys, pišući u časopisu Islam History: A Framework for Anquiry (1988.), sažeto je sažeo pitanje s kojim se povjesničari suočavaju u proučavanju ranog islama. Ako nam je cilj shvatiti način na koji su muslimani kasnog 2. / 8. i 3. / 9. stoljeća [islamski kalendar / kršćanski kalendar] shvatili porijeklo svog društva, tada smo zaista dobro raspoloženi. Ali ako je naš cilj saznati "što se stvarno dogodilo", u smislu pouzdano dokumentiranih odgovora na moderna pitanja o najranijim desetljećima islamskog društva, tada smo u nevolji. Osoba koja je u posljednjih nekoliko desetljeća više od bilo koga drugoga uzdrmala studije o Koraniću je John Wansbrough, koji je prethodno bio na Sveučilištu za orijentalne i afričke studije Sveučilišta u Londonu. Puin ga "sada ponovno čita", dok se priprema za analizu jemenskih fragmenata. Patricia Crone kaže da ona i Michael Cook "nisu mnogo rekli o Koranu u hagarizmu koji se nije temeljio na Wansbroughu." Ostali znanstvenici manje se dive, nazivajući Wansbroughovo djelo "drastično pogrešnim glavama", "bjesomučno neprozirnim" i "kolosalnom samoobmanjom". Sviđalo se to ili ne, svatko tko se danas bavi kritičkim proučavanjem Korana mora se suprotstaviti Wansbroughovim glavnim djelima - Kur'anske studije: Izvori i metode tumačenja biblijskih tekstova (1977) i Sektarski milje : Sadržaj i sastav islamske povijesti spasenja (1978 ). Wansbrough je primijenio čitav arsenal onoga što je nazvao "instrumentima i tehnikama" biblijske kritike - oblik kritike, kritike izvora, kritike redakcije i puno više - na tekst Kur'ana. Zaključio je da se Kur'an evoluirao postupno u sedmom i osmom stoljeću, tijekom dugog perioda usmenog prijenosa, kad su se židovske i kršćanske sekte dobrovoljno svađale jedna s drugom dobro na sjeveru Meke i Medine, u sadašnjim dijelovima Sirije, Jordan, Izrael i Irak. Razlog što nije preživio niti jedan izvor islamskog izvora iz prvog ili više stoljeća islama, zaključio je Wansbrough, je taj što on nikada nije postojao. Za Wansbrough je islamska tradicija primjer onoga što je biblijskim učenjacima poznato kao "povijest spasenja": teološki i evanđeoski motivirana priča o podrijetlu religije izmišljena kasno u dan i projicirana unatrag. Drugim riječima, kao što je Wansbrough naveo u proučavanju Kur'ana, kanonizacija Korana - i islamske tradicije koje su se pojavile kako bi to objasnile - uključivale su pripisivanje nekoliko, djelomično preklapajućih se, zbirki logije (s izrazito mozaičkim otiskom) slici biblijskog proroka (modificirano materijalom evangelija Muhameda u arapskog čovjeka Božjega) s tradicionalnom porukom spasenja (izmijenio utjecaj rabinskog židovstva na neizrecivu i konačno nepromjenljivu Božju riječ). Wansbroughove tajne teorije bile su zarazne u određenim znanstvenim krugovima, ali mnogi su ih muslimani shvatili duboko uvredljivim. S. Parvez Manzoor, na primjer, opisao je studije Koranica o Wansbroughu i drugima kao "goli diskurs moći" i "izliv psihopatskog vandalizma". Ali čak se ni Manzoor ne trudi povući se od kritičkog poduhvata studija Kuranića; umjesto toga, on poziva muslimane da pobijede zapadne revizioniste na "epistemološkom bojnom polju", priznajući da će se "prije ili kasnije [mi muslimani] morati približiti Koranu iz metodoloških pretpostavki i parametara koji se radikalno podudaraju s onima posvećenima u našoj tradiciji. " Revizionizam u islamskom svijetu INDEKIRANO, više od jednog stoljeća u islamskom su svijetu postojale javne osobe koje su pokušavale revizionističko proučavanje Korana i islamske povijesti - prognani egipatski profesor Nasr Abu Zaid nije jedinstven. Možda je najpoznatiji prethodnik Abu Zaida bio ugledni ministar egipatske vlade, sveučilišni profesor i pisac Taha Hussein . Odlučan modernist, Husein se početkom 1920-ih posvetio proučavanju predislamske arapske poezije i na kraju je zaključio da je velik dio tog djela izrađen znatno nakon uspostavljanja islama kako bi pružio vanjsku potporu mamiji Korana. Novijeg primjera je iranski novinar i diplomata Ali Dashti, koji je u svojoj Dvadeset tri godine: Studija proročke karijere Mohameda (1985.) više puta poveo svoje kolege muslimane na zadatak da ne dovode u pitanje tradicionalne priče o Muhamedovom životu, koju je nazvao "stvaranjem mitova i čudo". Ebu Zaid takođe navodi izuzetno utjecajnog Muhammeda 'Abduha kao prethodnika. Otac egipatskog modernizma iz devetnaestog stoljeća, 'Abduh je potencijal nove islamske teologije vidio u teorijama Mu'tazilisa iz devetog stoljeća. Ideje Mu'tazilisa stekle su popularnost u nekim muslimanskim krugovima početkom ovog stoljeća (vodeći važnog egipatskog pisca i intelektualca Ahmada Amina na 1936. napomenuo da je "propast mu'tazilizma bila najveća nesreća koju su pogodili muslimani; počinili zločin protiv sebe "). Pokojni pakistanski učenjak Fazlur Rahman dobro je nosio mu'tazilitsku baklju u današnje doba; kasnije godine svog života, od šezdesetih do smrti 1988. godine, živio je i predavao u Sjedinjenim Državama, gdje je trenirao mnoge studente islama - i muslimane i nemuslimane - u tradiciji mu'tazilita. Međutim, takav rad nije prošao bez troškova: Taha Husein je poput Nasra Abu Zaida u Egiptu proglašen otpadnikom; Ali Dashti je misteriozno umro neposredno nakon iranske revolucije 1979. godine; a Fazlur Rahman bio je prisiljen napustiti Pakistan u 1960-ima. Muslimani zainteresirani za izazovnu ortodoksnu doktrinu moraju pažljivo koračati. "Želio bih izvući Koran iz ovog zatvora", rekao je Abu Zaid o prevladavajućem islamskom neprijateljstvu prema reinterpretaciji Kur'ana modernog doba, "tako da ponovno postane produktivan za suštinu naše kulture i umjetnosti, koji su zadavljeni u našem društvu. " Unatoč brojnim neprijateljima u Egiptu, Abu Zaid možda napreduje u tom cilju: postoje pokazatelji da se njegovo djelo široko, ako tiho, čita s arapskim svijetom. Na primjer, Abu Zaid kaže da je njegov Koncept teksta (1990.) - knjiga koja je uglavnom odgovorna za njegovo progonstvo iz Egipta - prošao kroz najmanje osam podzemnih tiska u Kairu i Bejrutu. Drugi učenjak sa širokim čitateljstvom koji se zalaže za preispitivanje Korana je Mohammed Arkoun, alžirski profesor sa Sveučilišta u Parizu. Arkoun je, primjerice, u Lectures du Coran (1982.) tvrdio da je „vrijeme [za islam] preuzeti, uz sve velike kulturne tradicije, moderne rizike znanstvenog znanja“, i sugerirao da je „problem božanska autentičnost Kur'ana može poslužiti za reaktiviranje islamske misli i uključivanje u glavne rasprave našeg doba. " Arkoun žali zbog toga što većina muslimana nije svjesna da različita koncepcija Kur'ana postoji unutar njihove povijesne tradicije. Ono što preispitivanje islamske povijesti nudi muslimanima, Arkoun i drugi tvrde, prilika je da se iznutra ospori muslimansko pravoslavlje, a ne da se mora osloniti na "neprijateljske" vanjske izvore. Arkoun, Abu Zaid i drugi nadaju se da bi ovaj izazov mogao u konačnici dovesti do islamskog preporoda. Raskorak između takvih akademskih teorija i svakodnevne prakse islama širom svijeta, naravno, ogroman je - većina muslimana danas vjerojatno neće dovoditi u pitanje pravoslavno razumijevanje Kurana i islamske povijesti. Ipak, islam je postao jedna od velikih svjetskih religija, dijelom i zbog otvorenosti prema društvenim promjenama i novim idejama. (Stoljećima prije, kada je Europu umakla njezina feudalna mračna vijeka, mudraci procvatajuće islamske civilizacije otvorili su doba velikih znanstvenih i filozofskih otkrića. Ideje starih Grka i Rimljana možda nikada nisu bile uvedene u Europu, da nije bilo islamski povjesničari i filozofi koji su ih ponovno otkrili i oživjeli.) Sama povijest islama pokazuje da prevladavajuća koncepcija Kur'ana nije jedina koja je ikada postojala, a novija povijest biblijske nauke pokazuje da nisu sve kritičko-povijesne studije o sveto pismo su neprijateljski. Oni se umjesto toga mogu provoditi s ciljem duhovne i kulturne obnove. Oni mogu, kako kaže Mohammed Arkoun, demistificirati tekst, potvrđujući "relevantnost njegovih većih intuicija". Sve više raznolika tumačenja povijesti Korana i islama neizbježno će biti predložena u narednim desetljećima, kako se tradicionalne kulturne razlike između istoka, zapada, sjevera i juga i dalje rastvaraju, kako stanovništvo muslimanskog svijeta i dalje raste, kao rani povijesni izvori i dalje se pomno promatra i kako feminizam susreće Kur'an. Različitošću interpretacija zasigurno će doći do povećane nepristojnosti, možda pojačane činjenicom da islam sada postoji u tako velikom broju društvenih i intelektualnih okruženja - Bosna, Iran, Malezija, Nigerija, Saudijska Arabija, Južna Afrika, Sjedinjene Države i tako dalje. Više nego ikad prije, svatko tko želi razumjeti globalne stvari morat će razumjeti islamsku civilizaciju, u svim njezinim permutacijama. Zasigurno je najbolji način za početak proučavanje Korana - koji obećava u narednim godinama barem toliko sadržajan, fascinantan i važan kao što je proučavanje Biblije u ovom stoljeću. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1999/01/what-is-the-koran/304024/

Ibn Warraq 7 Potraga za povijesnim Muhammedom Ibn Warraq 7 Potraga za povijesnim Muhammedom Potraga za povijesnim Muhammedom Ibn Warraq http://almuslih.org/Library/Jeffery,%20A%20-%20The%20Quest%20of%20the%20Historical%20Muhammad.pdf The Quest of the Historical Muhammad Arthur Jeffery Muslimanski svijet , god. 16: 327-48,1926 Godine 1906. u Njemačkoj se pojavilo djelo o Kristovom životu o epohi, naslovljeno „Von Reimarus zu Wrede, "mladog i do tada gotovo nepoznatog znanstvenika, Alberta Schweitzera, godine 1910. preveo je na engleski jezik Montgomery pod naslovom „Potraga za povijesnim“ Isuse. "Schweizterova knjiga bila je vrlo sjajna anketa o različitim vrstama" Kristovih života " koje su proizvele različite škole teološke misli u Europi, u rasponu od pobožni, ortodoksni, nekritički tip, do najluđih ekscesoloških, pa i mitskih tumačenje. Cilj mu je bio ispitati različite pokušaje da se protumači život našeg Gospodara i, ako se može upotrijebiti frazu, izvršite aktuarsko istraživanje položaja učenja o ovom pitanju i procijeniti vrijednost godina strpljivih, kritičkih istraživanja koja su imala bio posvećen svojim problemima. Nedavno je sugerirano da je došlo vrijeme za sličnu anketu o životu Arapski Poslanik, da bismo mogli pregledati obavljeni posao, prikupi uvjereni osvojenim rezultatima i bilježite trendove kritičkih stipendija koje ukazuju na crte istraga koju će budućnost morati slijediti. Možda ćemo dugo čekati na porast Islamski učenjak s genijalnošću i znanstvenom pripremom Schweitzera da preuzme ovaj zadatak, ali možda ćemo nastojati s više ili manje uspjeha ukratko ocrtati obrise takvog istraga. izvori Naše prvo razmišljanje je o izvorima i, naravno, gledamo muslimansku literaturu za Muslimani su vjerovatno bili prvi koji su napisali živote svog Poslanika. Ovdje na na prvi pogled studentsko srce ga bi moglo gotovo iznevjeriti prije zbunjujućeg niza muslimanskih života Poslanika, jer ih ima doslovno stotine na arapskom, perzijskom, turskom, urdu, malajskom, pa čak i na kineskom i manjem istočnom jeziku. Međutim, dovoljna je najkraća istraga otkrivaju da je problem izvora relativno jednostavan, za svih tih stotina svezaka predstavljaju, ali rade s nevjerojatnim i nebitnim dodacima i preinakama možda pola tuceta arapskog teksta od primarne važnosti. Najraniji život Muhammeda, o kojem imamo bilo kakav trag, napisao je Muhammed Ibn Ishaq, koji je umro 768. godine tj. Sto trideset godina nakon smrti Poslanika. knjiga Ibn Ishaka, međutim, je propala i sve što znamo o njoj je ono što je iz nje citirano (i ovi su navodi srećom znatni) u djelima kasnijih pisaca, posebno Ibn Hisham i al-Tabari. Ovo djelo Ibn Ishaka, osim što je bio najraniji poznati pokušaj biografija, u tome ima daljnju važnost, bilo zato što je pisac bio pomalo slobodan mislilac, ili zato što nije bio pod utjecajem kasnijih idealizacijskih tendencija, svoga rada sadrži jako puno podataka o liku koji je izrazito nepovoljan za Poslanika. Do citirati dr. Margoliouth: Lik koji se u biografiji Ibn Ishaka pripisuje Muhammedu izuzetno je nepovoljni. Da bi postigao svoje krajeve, on se odjednom povlači i nije odobrio slična beskrupuloznost njegovih sljedbenika, kada se vrše u njegovom interesu. On profitira u najvećoj mjeri od viteštva Mekkanaca, ali rijetko ga zahtijeva sa sličnim. Stranica 2 On organizira ubojstva i masakre u cijeloj prodaji. Njegova karijera je medinskog tiranina onoga pljačkaškog šefa, čija se politička ekonomija sastoji u osiguravanju i podjeli pljačke, a njihova se distribucija ponekad vrši na principima koji ne zadovoljavaju ideje njegovih pravednika o pravdi. On je i sam neobuzdani slobodnjak i potiče ga ista strast u njegovim sljedbenicima. Za sve što čini spreman je da se izjasni za ekspres ovlaštenje božanstva. Međutim, nemoguće je pronaći bilo kakvu doktrinu kakva on nije spremni odustati kako bi osigurali politički kraj. U različitim trenucima u karijeri on odustaje od Božjeg jedinstva i svoje tvrdnje za naslov Poslanika. To se ne slaže slika utemeljitelja religije i ne može se tvrditi da je slika koju je nacrtao neprijatelj; i iako je ime Ibn Ishaqa iz nekog razloga nisko cijenjeno od strane tog klasični tradicionalisti trećeg islamskog stoljeća, oni ne pokušavaju diskreditirati one dijelove biografije koji su najteži po karakteru njihovog Poslanika. ( Enciklopedija religije i etike , svezak 8, str. 878.) Margoliouth također ukazuje na to u prilog ovoj biografiji koju rijetko koristi natprirodno, pa čak i kada se nadnaravno uvodi, čini se da ne utječe na uzročnost. Prvi važan izvor koji se zapravo srušio na nas je, dakle, Waqidijev Kitab al- Maghazi , ili Knjiga ratova . Al-Waqidi je umro 822. godine CE i najbolje je konzultirati njegovu knjigu prijevod njegovih važnih dijelova dan u Wellhausenovom Muhamedu u Medini (Berlin, 1882). Al-Waqidijevo djelo, međutim, ima ozbiljno ograničenje jer se bavi samo Muhammedovim kampanje. Nešto kasnije su Ibn Hishamov Sirat un-Nabi (ur. Wüstenfeld, Göttingen 1859, i Weil, Des Leban Mohammeds , 2 sveska, Stuttgart, 1864) preveden na njemački rak s njemačkog jezika i Ibn Sa'd's Kitab ul-Tabaqat ul-Kabir (izd. Edward Sachau, uz pomoć brojnih ostali učenjaci, u devet svezaka objavljenih između 90.-1990. u Leidenu). Ibn Hisham umro je 833. godine CE, i Ibn Sa'd 844. godine poslije. Arapski životi su od vrlo sekundarne vrijednosti u odnosu na ove. Ta djela, međutim, nisu primarni izvori i sama se temelje na dva izvora, Tradicija i Kuran. Najvažnije zbirke predaja su one Buharije (koji umro 870. godine CE) i Muslim (koji je umro 874. godine). Koja se vrijednost može staviti na Tradiciju bit će prikazano potonje; sada je važno spomenuti datume zbirki, koji su jednoliki kasnije od onih iz života. Koran koji je otprilike zapisan u što ga imamo unutar generacije smrti Muhameda, tako će se smatrati našim jedinim primarni izvor života Poslanika. To će, naravno, biti vidljivo svakome tko je čitao Kur'an, koliko je on bezazlen biografski materijal koji sadrži. Važnost o dokazima iz ovog izvora Nöldeke je prvo razradio u prvom izdanju (1860) "Geschichte des Qorans", a može se proučavati u jednostavnom obliku u sažetku koji je sastavio Canon Sell u svojem povijesnom razvoju Korana , (Madras, 1909) iz rukopisa prijevod Nöldekeove knjige napravljene za njega u Indiji. Odličan sažetak o pitanju izvora naći će se u članku Sachaua danom kao Uvod u treći svezak Leiden-ovog izdanja Ibn Sa'da ili stariji sažetak u časopisu Uvod u život Mahaometova života Williama Muira. RANI KRISTIČKI RAČUNOVI Čini se da je najranija referenca na Muhameda u kršćanskoj literaturi ona u armenskoj "Kronika Sebeosa", napisana u sedmom stoljeću, a koja govori malo više od toga da je on bio Ismaelita, koji je tvrdio da je Poslanik i učio svoje sunarodnjake da se vrate u religija Abrahama. Kod vizantijskih pisaca nemamo malo nikakve vrijednosti, iako to mora biti priznao da islamski učenjaci taj izvor nisu temeljito ispitali. Nicetas, od Vizantija, napisao je "Refutatio Mohammadis" (Migne PG cv), a Bartolomej, iz Edesse, a. Stranica 3 traktat "Contra Mohammadem" (Migne PG civ), koji se može uzeti kao uzorci ovog djela, koja je izrasla iz kontakta s islamskom silom u ratovima koji su pljačkali Bizant jedna za drugom njezine poštene istočne provincije. Latinski pisci srednjeg vijeka dobili su svoje podatke iz dva izvora, iz bizantskog računa i iz osobnog kontakta s islamom tijekom križarskih ratova. Bilo bi zanimljivo studija kako bi se pratio razvoj divljih bajki koje su se tijekom ove godine proširile u inozemstvo razdoblje u kojem je Muhamed postao jedan od tri velika idola, Apollina, Tergavana i Mahon, za koga se pretpostavlja da ga muslimani štuju. Te su legende prešle u Englesku, a na jeziku naših predaka ime Muhammed, u svom pokvarenom obliku "mawmet", postala redovna riječ za "idol." Tako u „Legendi o sv. Andriji“ čitamo: Wharlo mi kaže na mene Bacićeš se u Jesu fre. I ostavite svojim mahunarkama više i manje I moli se Jesu iz forgifnesa. I opet u "Životu svete Julijane", napisanom oko 1200. godine prije Krista, govori nam se o caru Maximinius iz Rima da je „heinde i heriende hedhene mawmetovi s neobrijanom muchelom hird i unduhti duhedhe. "Međutim, među crkvenim piscima tog razdoblja Muhammed na njega se gledalo kao na luka heretika, na drugog Ariusa, goreg od prvog, i njegova je legenda bila oblikovan prema onom velikih legendarnih heretika, Šimuna Magusa i đakona Nikole. Renan ukazuje na razlog u svom članku u Atti della Academia dei Lincei iz 1889. godine, gdje piše: "Dans les écrits populaires, il s'y joint d'atroces calomnies, destinées à couvrir d'ignominie l'auteur du grand mal que la chrétienté voulait a'tout prix supprimer "[" U popularnim spisima postoji dodani su grozni kalumiji dizajnirani da sakriju sramotu autora velikog zla koje je kršćanstvo željelo suzbiti po svaku cijenu "]. Međutim, da su postojali plemeniti izuzeci to gotovo univerzalno neznanje i zabluda može se vidjeti iz slučajeva takvih ljudi kao Petrus Venerabilis, koji je umro 1157., i fragmenti čija je polemika objavljena autor Thoma ("Zwei Bücher gegen den Muhammedanismus" [Dvije knjige protiv Muhammadanism], Leipzig, 1896) i dominikanski redovnik Ricoldus, koji je umro 1320, i čiji "Confutatio Alcorani", koji je toliko impresionirao Martina Luthera, pokazuje neobično točnu upoznavanje s temom. PREDKRITIČKI PERIOD Nakon renesanse nalazimo pitanje koje opet privlači pažnju. Takva djela poput Raleighovih "Život i smrt Mohameta" (London, 1637.) i Prideauxova "Vie de Mahomet, ou l'on" découvre amplement la verité de l'imposture "Život Mahomet, ili Tamo gdje obilato Otkriva istinu nemira (Amsterdam, 1698), temelje se na arapskom materijalu biti dostupan na latinskom prijevodu, ali Hottingerov opis Muhammedovog učenja u njegovu "Historia Orientalis" (Zurich, 1651.) i Marracciove strikture koje prolaze kroz njegovo "Pobijanje" (Padova, 1698) započinje tradicija oslanjanja na same izvorne izvore. Većina ovog ranog djela gorko je neprijateljska i predrasudna, iako se Hottinger tome trudio donijeti nepristrani sud. Ipak, s nizozemskim učenjakom Reylandom ulazimo u a novi tretman teme. U svojoj „de Religione Mahommedica“ (Utrecht, 1704.) Nastoji odmakni se od neprijateljskog stava prema Muhammedu i teži ka pravednom uvažavanju njegovog povijesni značaj. Njegov je rad, međutim, imao nesreću da ga je pratio H. de Boulainvillierove "Vie de Mahomed" (London, 1739.), koja je bila bombastična hvale Muhammeda u interesu omalovažavanja kršćanstva. Hurgronje ga naziva "anticleričnom romantikom, čiji je materijal dostavljen površnim znanjem islama izvučenim iz sekundarnog izvori. "Na Gibbonovom računu može se otkriti malo katrana iz Boulainvillierove četke Muhammad u svom "Padu i padu" (London. 1776). Bilo je to da bi se borio protiv izrazite borbe pogrešan dojam proizveden Boulainvillierovim radom da je Gagnier napisao svoj "Vie de Mahomet" Stranica 4 (Amsterdam, 1748.), koji se zalagao za srednji tok između Boulainvilliersa ruku i Prideaux s druge strane. Međutim, nije se moglo postići daljnji napredak dok još više rad je obavljen na arapskim izvorima. POČETI KRITIKA To je buđenje interesa za orijentalne studije početkom devetnaestog stoljeća bilo to omogućio je novi odlazak u pokušaju pravednosti problema. Novo razdoblje možda rekao da su započeli radom Gustava Weila, čiji je "Muhammed der Poslanik, sein Leben und seine Lehre "(Stuttgart, 1843.) prvi je u bilo kojem stvarnom smislu primijenio povijesno-kritičku metodu na problem života Muhammeda. Weil možda nije bio daleko u ovoj istrazi, zbog njegovi su resursi još uvijek bili ograničeni, ali on je pronašao i primijenio metodu i u svom prijevodu Ibn Hisham je 1864. napravio još jedan veliki napredak. Caussin de Perceval "Essai sur l'Histoire des Arabes, "71 (3 sveska, Pariz, 1847), očito je bio napisan sasvim neovisno od Weila i sadrži prikaz života i djela Muhameda, koji iako nisu od neke velike vrijednosti u on je, međutim, od stvarnog značaja za masu materijala iz arapskih izvora koji donosi zajedno. Wüstenfeld je još jedan učenjak u ovom razdoblju čiji veliki doprinos nije bio u njegovom "Das Leben Muhammad" (3 sveska, Göttingen, l857-l859), ali u izvrsnim izdanjima ranih Arapskih tekstova i njegovih majstorskih studija, poput svog "Genealogische Tabellen der Arabischen" Stämme und Familien "(Göttingen, 1852.-1885.)," Chroniken der Stadt Mekka "(4 sves., Leipzig 1861.), "Das Gebiet von Medina" (Göttingen, 1873.), "Die Geschichtsschreiber der Araber und Ihre Werke "(Göttingen, 1882.), koji su toliko osvijetlili ranu povijest. Mnogo više Važno je, međutim, djela Spregera, Nöldekea i Muira. Sprenger će svoje radove razmatrati u drugom odjeljku, ovdje moramo samo spomenuti da je pored svog vrlo važnog „Leben Muhammada“ napravio i on, poput Wüstenfelda važan doprinos proučavanju pozadine poslanikovog života u njegove dvije studije "Die Post und Reiserouten des Orients" (Leipzig, 1864.) i "Die Alte Geographic Arabiens" (Bern, 1875.). Veliki doprinos Nöldekea bio je njegov esej "Geschichte des Qorans" (Göttingen). 1860), što zaista spada izvan opsega ovog eseja, ali koji je bio prvi kritički pokušaj procijeniti najvažniji izvor za našu rekonstrukciju života Muhammeda. Nöldeke je daleko najoštriji i najozbiljniji kritičar ovog ranog razdoblja, i općenito je vrlo oprezan u njegov povijesni sud. Njegov "Das Leben Muhammads nach den Quellen populär dargestellt" (Hanover, 1863.) mnogo je blaže i popularnije djelo, koje je sada postalo gotovo zaboravio. Muirov život Mahomet , koji se u Londonu pojavio u četiri sveska, između godina 1885 - 1861, kruna je ovo prvo kritičko razdoblje. Sir William Muir bio je dugo u državnoj službi u Indiji imao je široko upoznavanje s muhamedanskom literaturom u Arapski, perzijski i urdu, i posjedovao je veličanstvenu orijentalnu biblioteku. Njegov rad zasnovan je na a pomno proučavanje najboljeg raspoloživog materijala u to vrijeme i vrlo je cjelovito i lucidno napisano računa, izvanredno bez predrasuda s obje strane. U svom uvodu daje izjavu od načela kritike izvora, koja još uvijek uzvraća čitanje, predmet koji je opet elaborira u eseju na temu „Vrijednost ranih povijesnih izvora Mahometana“ tiskanom u sv knjiga Mohammedan Controvery (London, 1897). Muirovo djelo prošlo je kroz mnoge izdanja, a najnovije i najpovoljnije je jednojezično izdanje, pod nazivom TH Weir (Edinburgh, 1912.). Brojna manja, popularna djela uvelike se temelje na djelima ovog razdoblja počeci kritike. Najpoznatiji među takvima su Johnstone, "Muhammed i njegova moć" (Edinburgh 1901), Prodaja, "Život Mohameda" (Madras 1913). Wollaston, "Mohamed, njegov život i doktrine "(London, 1904); St. Hilaire," Mohamet et le Coran "(Pariz, 1865); Scholl, "L'Islam et son Fondateur: étude morale" (Pariz, 1874.): Delaporte. "Vie de Mahomet" (Pariz, 1874); Albert Fua, "La Vie et la Morale de Mahomet" (Pariz, 1912.); Reiner, "Muhammed und der Islam "(Leipzig, 1905); Reckendorf," Mohammed und die Seinen "(Leipzig, 1907); Krehl, "Das Leben des Muhammad" (Leipzig, 1884.). Stranica 5 PATOLOŠKE ŽIVOTE Europski istražitelji nisu mogli biti na udaru s izjavama koje su pronađene u izvorima o neobična uklapanja kojima je Muhammed bio podložan, posebno u vrijeme njegovih objava. Čvrsta ... da je podvrgnuta epilepsiji pronalazi znatiželjnu potvrdu u obavijestima zabilježeni iz njegovih iskustava tijekom poeme otkrivenja - čija je važnost ne umanjuje vjerojatnost da su simptomi često umjetno proizvedeni. Da Procesu je prisustvovao prizor nesvjesnosti, popraćen (ili prethodi) s vremena na vrijeme zvuk zvona u ušima ili vjerovanje da je netko bio prisutan: zbog straha, kao što je da bi pacijent izbio u znoju: okretanjem glave u jednu strana: pjenom na ustima: crvenilo ili izbjeljivanje lica: po osjećaju glavobolja. (Margoliouth. Mohammed , str. 46) O tim se činjenicama nisu mnogo izjasnili orijentalni pisci, već Sprenger, koji je bio doktor Medicina vrsta, pričvršćena na ove dokaze epilepsije, kao ključ rješenja Muhamedova ličnost. Prvo je to radio u svojoj indijskoj knjizi "Život Muhameda od Izvorni izvori "(Allahabad, 1851.), što je oskudna skica, zaustavljajući se nakratko pri Letu iz Meka, kasnije u svom monumentalnom traktatu, "Das Leben und die Lehre des Muhammads" (3 sveska, Berlin, 1861.-1865.) I konačno u "Mohammed und der Koran: eine Psychologische Studie" (Hamburg, 1889.). Spregerov rad u tom smjeru zanimljiv je nego uvjerljiv i naišao je na mnogo toga oštre kritike. Sir William Muir u eseju u pregledu Calcutta za 1868. karakterizira njegovo djeluju kao "obilježen ljubavlju paradoksa i sklonosti isticanja teorija utemeljenih, ali vitkih osnova. "Hirschfeld napominje", on sigurno griješi pripisujući veći udio u stvaranju islama do stanja njegovih (Muhamedovih) živaca nego što im je stvarno nastalo. Halucinacije i histerična bjesnoća nisu dovoljno jaki faktori da bi proizveli tako opći preokret kakav je bio izazvan ovom novom vjerom "(" Nova istraživanja ", str. 20)., a Hurgronje je okarakterizira kao" pretjeranu prikaz sigurnosti na temelju njegovih prijašnjih medicinskih studija "(" Mohamedanstvo ", str. 22) sljedbenici, međutim, glavni među kojima je seminijski učenjak iz Kopenhagena, dr. Franz Buhl, koji je u svom "Muhammedovom životu" (Kopenhagen. 1903) izmijenio modificirani oblik ista teorija. Buhl uvelike utječe na činjenicu da su primijećene histerične naravi neobična poteškoća i često potpuna nesposobnost razlikovanja lažnog od istinskog. Takvi ljudi, upravljani uvjerljivim idejama, nemoguće je gledati stvari u njihovom pravom svjetlu, i to on misli da je najsigurniji način za tumačenje čudnih nedosljednosti u životu Poslanika. znatiželjna izjava ovog patološkog pogleda može se naći i u eseju „O halucinaciji Mohammeda, "u malom djelu jednog Williama Irske," Ulomak na mozgu: Studije u Povijest i psihologija "(New York, 1886). Daljnji razvoj tog posebnog stajališta je psihoanalitičar koji zagovara Dr. Macdonald iz Hartforda u svom "Aspekti islama" (New York, 1911.), gdje nam govori kako traži da buduća plodonosna istraga Poslanikovog života nastavi pod pretpostavkom da on je u osnovi bio patološki slučaj i to "kako je napokon prešao u taj nemir ponovo je problem za one koji su napravili studiju o tome kako mogu postati najiskreniji transi u bilo kojem trenutku početi varati "(op. cit., str. 74) Još jednu riječ, prije napuštanja ovog odjeljka, treba reći o Spregerovu djelu, "Lebenu Mohammeds. "Nepoštivanje teorije ne bi trebalo dovesti studenta da zanemari ovo djelo, zbog njega jedno je od najimpresivnijih od svih djela koja imamo o životu Muhammeda, a moje je od materijala, prikupljeno s velikom marljivošću i izvrsnošću. Stranica 6 POLITIČKE I EKONOMSKE ŽIVOTE Sasvim je drugačije polazište sugerirano od strane ostalih znanstvenika od strane političkih i društvenih uvjeti Arabije u Muhamedovo vrijeme. Društveni i politički uvjeti Arabije u Zagrebu vrijeme rane muškosti Muhameda bile su loše. Arabija nije najbolje plodna u najboljim vremenima, i upravo u ovom razdoblju praktički sva plodna granica bila je pod dominacijom stranih sila - Bizantinci, Perzijci i Abesinci - koji su arapska plemena ikada potjerali dalje u svoja pustinja. Ni kontakt bez civilizacije ovih progresivnijih naroda nije bio bez njen učinak u tome što će potrebne Arape okrenuti čežljive oči prema boljim stvarima koje su dosad imali jedva da sanjam. Sama plemena bila su nemirna i nezadovoljna, ekonomski uvjeti bili su loši i bili su spremni skupiti sve natpise koji bi im davali nadu nacionalno izbavljenje. Muhamed je pružio transparent i trudio se da ih zavari u moćna nacionalna sila koja bi Arabiju osigurala Arapima. Mohamed dr. Margoliouth i uspon islama (London, 1905.), vjerojatno najbriljantniji Studija o životu Muhameda koja se još pojavila reprezentativna je za ovo gledište, koje možda također se vidi u člancima istog autora o "Mohammedu" u Encyclopedia Britannica (11 ur.) i Enciklopedija religije i etike , svezak 8. Prema ovom tumačenju, Muhammad je bio domoljub, živahno pružao mogućnostima vremena, koji su se razvijali metodom ujedinjujući Arape kako bi se suočili sa zajedničkom opasnošću i iskoristili zlatne prilike toga doba. Čovjek koji može organizirati oružanu silu i voditi je do pobjede može se uzdići iz nejasnoće u autokracija bilo gdje. Vjerojatno je svako stoljeće islama imalo svoju priču o takvim osobama. Abasid, Fatimid, Buwaihid, Seljuk i Osmanske dinastije nastali su na ovaj način; i u u većini je slučajeva religiozni apel igrao važnu ulogu. Uspjeh osnivača očigledno zbog neobjektivne istine doktrina s kojima su povezan s njihovom vještinom kao organizatori i vođe .... Njegovo (Muhammedovo) sposobnost odmjeravanja kapaciteta drugih bila je nenormalna: otuda u izboru podređeni čini se da nije pogriješio. Na drugom mjestu je temeljito upoznati s arapskim dosjetkama i iskoristili ih do najveće prednosti. priče o njegovim uspjesima, kako ih je ispričao Ibn Ishaq, ukazuju na potpunu odsutnost morala skrupula; ali pokazuju i kombinaciju strpljenja, hrabrosti i opreza; sposobnost za iskoristiti prilike i nepovjerenje odanosti ako nije potpomognuto kamatama, što u potpunosti objasnite sigurnost s kojom su se rezultati dobili. ( Enciklopedija religije i etike , vol. 7, str. 873. U Medini je bio ono što neko može s pravom nazvati pljačkaškim poglavarom, baš kao što je bio i David, kralj Izraela njegovih ranih dana. Kad je ušao u Meku, ušao je u nju kao politički vođa, a ne kao religiozni proroka, a Mekani su je prepoznali kao takvu. Njegovi su odnosi s Židovima i kršćanima bili uvelike diktirano političkim razmatranjima: bavio se poganskim plemenima kao suveren i svoj čitav odnos prema okolnim carstvima bio je onaj državnika. „Činjenica primarna Važno za uspon islama je da je pokret postao značajan tek kad tvorac je mogao izvući mač i uspješno se nositi s njim. "Dakle, u nastojanju da procijenim značaj Muhammeda, ipak ga ne smijemo prosuđivati ​​kao mističnog ili religioznog reformatora možda je imao elemente i jednog i drugog, ali više kao državnik suočen s neobičnim političkim pritiscima problemi među pomalo varvarskim ljudima i u kritičnom trenutku povijesti. Sličan je stav i talijanskog učenjaka Leonea Caetanija, iako nažalost nismo imajući u našim rukama njegovu cjelovitu sliku Poslanika. U prvom i drugom svesku njegova monumentalnog "Annali dell 'Islam" (Milan, 1905-l907.), a u trećem svesku svog "Studi di Storia Orientale "(Milan, 1914.), međutim, imamo njegove obrise. Caetani drži da je veliki proboj koji je poslao arapske vojske u osvajanje okolnih plodnih zemalja samo najnoviji u nizu sličnih ispada semitskih naroda kojih u povijesnim vremenima ima je Arapska osramotila zbog gospodarskog stresa koji je uslijedio postupnim isušivanjem Stranica 7 Arabija. Muhammed tako postaje vođa ovog pokreta, religiozan, ako hoćete. po do tadašnjih ideja religije u Arabiji, ali prije svega političara i oportunista. Si fatto karattere impulsivo Associato con esimie kvalitativna politika politiche di uomo di stato e di pasiore di popoli rese Maometto uomo eminentemente oportunista, il quale animato da una cieca, immensa fiducia se, si getto alla cieca nelle piu ardite imprese e si trascino appresso tutti i seguaci, inebbriati i sodotti dalla superiorita morale del Maestro. ("Annali." I.205) [Njegov impulzivan karakter, u kombinaciji s rijetkom političkom kvalitetom državnog čovjeka i a Vodič za ljude, učinio je Muhammeda vrhovnim oportunistom, animiran od strane ogromnih samopouzdanje, omogućujući mu da se slijepo i s nepristojnošću baci u an avantura u koju je utjelovio one koji su ga slijedili, opijeni i zavedeni superiorni moral Učitelja.] Ovo je gledište i drugog velikog znanstvenika dr. CH Beckera, nekada urednika Der Islama , koji piše u svom "Islamu i kršćanstvu" (London. 1909, str. 29): Muhamedanski fanatici osvajačkih ratova, čiji je ugled bio poznat među kasnije generacije, osjećale su, ali vrlo mali interes za religiju, i povremeno su prikazale an nepoznavanje njegovih temeljnih načela koje teško možemo pretjerati. Činjenica je u potpunosti u skladu s impulsima kojima su nastale arapske migracije. Ti impulsi bili su ekonomski, a nova religija nije bila ništa drugo do stranački krik ujedinjavanja moć, jer nema razloga pretpostaviti da nije bila prava moralna sila u životu od Muhameda i njegovih neposrednih suvremenika. Zanimljiv razvoj ovog odjeljka je ekonomska teorija profesora Huberta Grimmea. Ovaj je pisac napisao dva zanimljiva djela o Muhammedu. Prvi je njegov "Mohammed" (Münster 1892) u kojem nastoji objasniti razvoj islama kao socijalističkog fenomen. Nakon razmatranja i odbacivanja Spregerove teorije da je hanifizam izvornik izvor islama, on ističe da se islam može jednostavnije objasniti kao socijalistički nego kao religijski sustav. Uvjeti pod kojima smo u povijesti navikli gledati socijalističke pokrete izgleda, postojali su u Meki u vrijeme Muhameda. Uvjeti oporbe u društveni je organizam sazrio do te mjere da je došlo do rupture. Bogati klase koja je imala svu vlast u svojim rukama, stajala je protiv brojnih imanja klase koji su trpjeli pritisak nemilosrdne lažne uprave. Protiv bivša klasa Kuran baca svoje bogato zaslužene optužbe za njihovu nezdravu veliki imetak, njihova prevara, upotreba lažnih utega i mjera, njihovo glupo rasipanje tvar s jedne strane, i kontinuirano nigdar-nagomilavanje s druge, i na kraju njihovo nezadovoljstvo čak i usprkos njihovom obilju. S druge strane je bolno je vidljivo kako gladni gladuju, prosjak se odbija milostinju, siročad se čuvaju svoga nasljeđa, a robovi uzalud teže slobodi i manirizmu. Bilo je u redu staviti kraj takvim nepovoljnim uvjetima da, pod aspektom kompenzacijske pravde, Muhammed, koji je u mladosti i sam okusio gorak gubitak sirote siročadi (premda kasnije je postao jedna od valjanih klasa), postavio je strogo zakonodavstvo koje svaki čovjek treba platiti ustaljeni iznos za pomoć potrebitima. Na taj način jednakost bila bi uspostavljena na miran način, potpuno drugačiji od svih ostalih socijalističkih nastojanja antike, koja se uvijek očitovala snažnom sklonošću prisilnim preinakama društvenih odnosa. Takva pothvatna teza teško je našla prihvat, a po njenom se pojavljivanju i događalo oštro kritiziran, osobito iz Snoucka Hurgronjea u Revue de l'Histoire des Religions , Stranica 8 svezak 30, str. 48 ff. koji napominje oboje na netočnost Grimmeova djela, pokazujući ograničenja njegove stipendije, a također i nesigurnost temelja na kojima je njegova teorija gradi se. Profesor Grimme, nažalost, ima reputaciju divljih teorija, svjedoči o svojim nedavnim događajima identificiranje određenih vremenskih oznaka (kako ih Petrie naziva) na nekim sinajskim kamenjem kao Mojsijev rukopis, pa čak i ako je njegova teorija imala temelj duše, malo je vjerojatno da bi socijalistički motiv mogao bi biti objašnjenje svih činjenica koje treba uzeti u obzir. NAPREDNI KRITIZAM Već smo imali prilike primijetiti da osim Kur'ana i ranih "života" Ibn Ishaka i Ibn Hisham itd. važan izvor za život Muhameda je Tradicija. U stvari nalazimo da su se rani "životi" većinom temeljili na Tradiciji, i to u razdoblju od Weila do Europski pisci Muir nastavili su s pretpostavkom da ako je riječ o određenoj količini pažljivog prosijavanja Učinjeno, znatno tijelo pouzdane Tradicije moglo se pronaći na koje se može osloniti u biografske svrhe. Bio je to Ignaz Goldziher u svom "Muhammedanische Studien" (Halle, 1889., 1890.), posebno drugi svezak, koji je ovom pretpostavkom zadao prvi nepristojni šok. Čak i nakon pažljivijeg prosijavanja ustanovimo da nas najstarije tradicije vraćaju samo na prvo stoljeću nakon Muhammeda, a upravo je ta najstarija tradicija vrlo neizvjesnog karaktera, pošto je obojen teološkom predrasudom, pomiješan s legendarnim materijalom, i izobličen u korist favorita interesi određenih obitelji i političkih stranaka. Moglo bi se pomisliti da pažljiva kritika i dalje može pronaći neku sigurnu osnovu, ali razvoj Goldziherovog djela iz ruke Caetanija, a činilo bi se i Henri Lammens natjera nas na zaključak da: Čak su i podaci koji su se prilično općenito smatrali objektivnim, uglavnom zadržani tendenciozna fikcija. I generacije koje su to radile biografiju Poslanika daleko od svog vremena da bi imao istinite podatke ili pojmove; i, štoviše, nije bio njihov cilj je poznavati prošlost kakva je bila, ali stvoriti sliku o njoj kakva je trebala biti, prema njihovom mišljenju. Na golom platnu stihova Kur'ana koji trebaju Objašnjenje, tradicionari su izveli sjajne scene smjelosti želje ili ideali; njihove posebne skupine: ili upotrijebiti Lammensovu omiljenu metaforu, oni prazne prostore popunjavaju postupkom stereotipizacije koji dopušta kritičkom promatraču prepoznati podrijetlo svake slike. (Hurgronje, "Muhamedanizam", str. 23, 24) Caetanijevo djelo o kojem smo već govorili. Lammens nam još nije dao svoj "Život", koji treba biti epoha kada se pojavi. Do sada se zadovoljavao izdavanjem časopisa broj preliminarnih studija, koje naziva "Sira-studijama", radeći svoju metodu, prosijavajući svoju materijal, i kao što bi se moglo reći, raščišćavanje temelja na kojem treba graditi. "Notre procédé", rekao je piše, "sera donc plus monographique que biographique. L'ensemble - si nous devons en voir la fin - formera une nouvelle Vie de Mahomet "[" Naša će metoda biti više monografska nego biografski. Cjelokupnost - ako ikad budemo vidjeli njezin kraj - formirat će novi život Muhameda "] (" Le Berceau de l'Islam, "p. Vi.). Možda je najbolji uvod u njegovo djelo esej" Koran et Tradicija: komentiraj fut skladé la vie de Mahomet "[Koran i tradicija: Kako život Muhammad Composed] (Pariz, 1910.), gdje pokazuje kako iznova i iznova tra- dicije su jednostavno obrade neke fraze ili riječi u Kuranu i nemaju neovisnost autoritet i, naravno, ne mogu se koristiti kao neovisni izvori u biografske svrhe. U 1911. pojavila se daljnja studija "Age of Mahomet et la Chronologie de la Sira" Muhammad and the Chronology of the Sira], u časopisu Asiatique , i sljedeće godine vrlo važna studija, „Fatima et les Filles de Mahomet“ (Rim, 1912.). U ovom se radu zauzima legenda o Fatimi u muslimanskim spisima i detaljno pokazuje kako se iz obitelji sukobljavaju a ljubomora i sukobljeni pokreti mišljenja u ranom islamu tamo su se postepeno razvijali ova detaljna biografija Fatime, koja je uglavnom skup heterogenih elemenata Stranica 9 apokrifni i često oprečni. Ali to je samo odskočna daska prema daljnjem zaključak: Ista metoda i analogni principi upravljali su svjetovnom razradom Sira. Oko jezgra, nastala interpretacijom Kur'ana, postalo se superponirane nedosljedne političke teorije s teokratskim snovima, mišljenjima škola teologije i prava, s tendencijama asketskih krugova i težnjama sufiizma. Dakle, kako Goldziher primjećuje ("Vorlesungen.", Str. 20): "To nije povijesna slika utjecati na Vjeran osjećaj. Na njegovom mjestu rano je bila zamijenjena pobožna legenda, sa svojim idealom Muhammed.” Daljnje važne studije Lammensa su "Mahomet fut il iskren?" [Je li Muhammed bio iskren?] (Pariz, 1914.): "La République merchandise de la Mecque uključuje l'an 600 de notre ére" [ Trgovačka republika Meka oko 600. godine prije Krista] (Alexandria, 1910); "Le Triumvirat Abou Bakr, Omar et Abou Obaida "[Trijumvirat Abou Bakr, 'Umar i Abu Ubayda] (Bejrut, 1909.): „Le Califat de Yezid I“ [Kalifat Jezida I] (Bejrut, 1921.); i "La cité arabe de Taif "[Arapski grad Taif] (Bejrut, 1922.). Student bi također trebao konzultirati članak dr. Becker iz Der Islama , vol. 4, 263-69 o "Prinzipielles zu Lammens 'Sirastudien." Dominantna nota ove napredne kritike je „povratak Koranu“. Kao osnova za kritičku biografija Tradicije su praktički bezvrijedne (Hurgronje, op. cit., str. 25, 26; Goldziher in "Kultur der Gegenwart" I. iiii, str. 100 slijeda; i ZDMG. 1907; Caetani, I, 197, Lammens, "Berceau, 17 str. Vi;" Fatima ", 97. str. 139; Nöldeke, ZDMG, vol. Lii, WZKM, xxi, str. 298); u Za samo Koran možemo reći da ima čvrsto tlo pod nogama. Kao Snouck Hurgronje, koji uzima iznosi njegovo stajalište s tim naprednim kritičarima ("Muhamedanstvo", str. 24): Iako je možda istina da su tu i tamo pregledali najnoviji suci Muhamedanske tradicije su previše skeptične i sumnjičave; ipak ostaje sigurna je da u svjetlu njihovih istraživanja metoda ispitivanja ne može ostati nepromijenjen. Moramo se truditi da naša objašnjenja Kur'ana budu neovisna tradicija i u odnosu na dijelove gdje je to nemoguće, moramo biti sumnjičavi objašnjenja, koliko god vjerojatna. Ako će nam Kur'an biti osnovni temelj, slijedeće je pitanje utvrditi koliko je čvrsto utemeljen pruža. Obično se pretpostavljalo da smo ovdje barem bili sigurni, ali u novije vrijeme, poput Casanova i Mingana, postavili su ozbiljne sumnje u pouzdanost ovoga izvor, ali to je preveliko pitanje koje bi se moglo zasad postavljati. MITOLOGIJA Već je primijećeno kako je sliku povijesnog Muhameda zamijenila an idealna i legendarna slika. Uzorci takvih uzvišenih slika Muhameda mogu se vidjeti u "Hyat ul-Qulub" (tr. Merrick, Boston, 1850.), i u "Borda du Cheikh el Bousiri, poème en l'honneur du Mahomet "(tr. Basset, Komentar, Pariz, 1894). Zanimljivo je primijetiti da Kršćanski utjecaj očito je bio u korijenu ovog legendarnog razvoja (Becker "Kršćanstvo i islam", str. 62), i prirodno je da bi znanstvenici trebali tražiti postupak razvoja ove slike koja je jedina poznata ogromnoj većini muslimana na današnji dan. Koelle, u drugom dijelu svog "Muhameda i mohamedanstva" (London, 1889.), popularno je opisao glavne crte legendarnog razvoja, ali za a kritičko proučavanje problema koji student treba započeti esejem Meza o „Umri Geschichte der Wunder Muhammeds "u Verhandlungenu drugog kongresa o Povijest religije (Basle, 1905.), a jedan je napisao Horovitz "Zur Muhammadlegende", u Der Islamu , vol. iv. No veliko je djelo na ovoj fazi teme ono što je napisao Tor Andrae, "Umri ličnost Stranica 10 Muhammads in Lehre und Glauben Seiner Gemeinde "(Stockholm, 1918.) metoda je data u njegovom eseju "Die Legenden von der Berufung Muhammads", u Le Monde Orientale , god. vi, ali u većoj knjizi detaljno razrađuje razvoj i posljedice o Poslanikovu legendu i pokazuje njegove paralele u predodžbama o božanskom čovjeku Zoroastrije i Helenistička religiozna misao. ESHATOLOŠKE ŽIVOTE Često se isticalo da eshatologija čini možda dominirajući interes za Kuran. Ne može se pročitati više stranica bez navođenja na neke druge radosti vjernika u raj ili patnje nevjernika u paklu ili prijetnji strašnog suda od Boga da se odmjeri nevjernicima. Čini se da je stvar bila opsesija Muhammed. Dr. Macdonald ističe: Koncepcija je progonila Muhammeda da dolazi pred Sudnji dan kada svi mora se suditi i da bi na taj Dan Sudnje vladao i sudio - Allah. Nekoliko tada bi bili spašeni. Za Muhameda je tada taj osjećaj zla bio nadmoćan. Nevidljivi svijet grozna stvar koja leži iza ovog svijeta na koji mi gledamo, koji ga uvjetuje i djeluje kroz i kroz nju, bio je strašno blizu. Na svakom koraku osjetio je ono što je tako dobro postavljeno "osjećaj gnjeva koji dolazi." ( Aspekti , str. 70, 62) Neki suvremeni pisci, npr. Casanova i Horovitz, u tome su vidjeli ključ problema Muhamedova ličnost. Nikakav stvarni život Muhameda nije napisan s ove točke gledišta ali se koristio za napad mnogih pojedinačnih problema, posebno onih koji nastaju u pokušajima Koranska egzegeza. Položaj je iznio Casanova u svojoj studiji "Mohammed et la Fin du Monde "(Pariz, 1911.-1921.) Tajna Muhamedove misije za koju tvrdi da se nalazi u činjenici da je njegova temeljna doktrina bila da su "stigla vremena koja su najavili Daniel i Isus: Muhammed je bio posljednji poslanik kojeg je Bog odabrao da zajedno predsjeda s Mesijom koji je bio vratiti se na zemlju u tu svrhu, na kraju svijeta i konačnom sudu "(op. cit., str. 8). Čvrsto je vjerovao i podučavao da su njegov dolazak i kraj svijeta uzročno povezani i on mora vidjeti konačni raspust prije nego što umre. Kad ga je smrt obuzela, i on je osjetio i sam preminuo, bio je u strašnoj nevolji, a dobro je poznato da je njegov neposredniji sljedbenici su isprva odbili povjerovati vijestima o njegovoj smrti. Casanova misli da su neki od znatiželjne pojave Kurana mogu se objasniti činjenicom da su objave morale biti ponovljene uredio na kvadrat sa činjenicom da je umro i da mnoge stvari u ranom islamskom razvoju teološki i na neki drugi način se vratite na to isto stajalište. APOLOGETIČKE ŽIVOTE Već smo primijetili da je vrlo rano oživio zanimanje za orijentalne studije, Boulainvilliers je napisao pohvalnu knjigu Muhammeda, koju je kasnije upotrijebio Gibbon. njegov rad se nije temeljio na bilo kojem točnom proučavanju izvora iz prve ruke, a isto vrijedi i za dva druge poznate isprike, naime one Carlyle, u svom eseju "Heroj kao prorok", u "Heroji i Hero Worship ", i Bosworth Smith," Mohammed i Mohammedanism "(London, 1873, 3d ed. revidirana i proširena, 1889). Carlylein esej ponovno je tiskan i široko rasprostranjen moderna muslimanska škola u Indiji, kao reprezentacija Engleske najbolje misli o Muhamedu, ali oni zaboravite napomenuti da Carlyle vraća praktički sve svoje lijepe riječi u eseju "Heroj" kao Pjesnik «. Bilo je za očekivati ​​da će vođe engleske obrazovane modernističke škole u islamu biti marljiv u iznošenju takvih izvinjenja. Obojica su napisali čelnici škole Aligarh u Indiji apologetski životi s njihova osebujnog stajališta. Syed Ahmad Khan u svojim „Esejima o životu Stranica 11 o Muhamedu i podložnicima podružnice tome "(Aligarh, 1870.), a Syed Ameer Ali u sv. "Život i učenje Muhameda", koja je prvo objavljena 1873., a kasnije i kao prvi dio njegov "Duh islama" (posljednje izdanje, London, 1923.). Procjena dr. Margolioutta o ovoj školi s posebnom primjerenošću na rad Ameera Alija: Ovi apologeti nastoje diskreditirati biografiju Ibn Ishaka tamo gdje to šokira Europski čitatelj, i ako se to jednostavno ne može učiniti, predlažu časne motive, ili pretpostavimo da je smjer kojeg slijedi Poslanik bio najmanje prigovor one koje su mu tada bile otvorene. Tako je proglašena njegova tolerancija poligamije bili su ograničenje s pogledom na krajnje potiskivanje i njegov stav prema ropstvo se smatra na sličan način koji ima za cilj da dovede do njegovog ukidanja. Čak je napravljen dati primjer monogamije, ali potrebna je iznajdljivost za to toliko velika da je rezultat je neuvjerljiv. ( Enciklopedija religije i etike , svezak 8, str. 878) An primjer pokušaja iz druge škole naći ćemo u MH Kidwai's "Čudo od Mohameda, a prethodio mu je prikaz Mohamedovog života" (London, 1906); ali daleko zanimljiviji je noviji rad još jedne modernističke skupine, u raskošnoj količini koju je proizveo Pariški klub knjiga, ograničena na hiljadu kompleta, 125 na carskom japanskom Vellumu po 18 funti po kopiji i 875 na papiru ručne izrade po 8 funti po kopirati. Ovaj je u velikom kvartu s trideset i pet veličanstvenih ploča u boji i brojne ukrasne ukrase, a naslovljen je „Život Muhameda, proroka o Allahu "(Pariz, 1920.) To je zajednička produkcija francuskog umjetnika, E. Dinet-a, i jedne Sliman ben Ibrahim, a zamišljen je kao "protuteža mnogim klevetnicima, životopisni životi Muhameda koji su se pojavili u europskim zemljama tijekom tečaja stoljeća. "Isti su autori izradili i malu brošuru" L'Orient vu de 'Slučaj' (Pariz, 1921.), prepuštajući se snažnoj, ali poprilično bezopasnoj kritici djela Lammensa, Casanove, Hurgronje i drugih učenjaka napredne kritičke škole. MISTICIZAM Nedavni je pokušaj da se smisli novi princip tumačenja za Muhamedov život ona profesora JC Archera u monografiji objavljenoj u istočnjačkoj seriji Yale, i pod naslovom, "Mistični elementi u Muhamedu" (New Haven, 1924.). Ovaj pisac započinje snažno kritika patološke teorije i pritom priznajući da je možda bilo patoloških elemenata u njegovom životu, inzistira na tome da je ono što je u njegovom iskustvu bilo najvažnije da je mistik, dakle njegova knjiga treba dokazati da je "Muhamed Muhamed veći lik nego što smo sanjali." "Muhammad", tvrdi, "bio je mistik u tehničkom smislu i to, ne samo u mentalnom smislu stav, ali u uobičajenoj praksi. "Ali kada potražimo njegove dokaze za ovu nevjerojatnu izjavu, sve što nalazimo je vrlo napeta interpretacija vrlo malo koranskih tekstova, od kojih je većina nažalost sumnjiva i vrlo nesigurna teorija o utjecaju kršćanskih askeza na rani život Poslanika. Teorija se gotovo u potpunosti temelji na Kuranu i suvremenim istraživanjima sigurno bi trebao jasno reći da se Koran teško može uzeti po novoj cijeni za pokušaje psihološka interpretacija. Štoviše, kako je Massignon istaknuo ( RMM , lix. 337) - „na peut affirmer que plusieurs des versets qui ont une portée mističnost pour certains lecteurs, ont pu n'avoir pour Muhammad que l'academisme d'une citiranje. "[" Možemo ustvrditi da je nekoliko stihova koje imaju mističnu konotaciju za određene čitatelje, mogle su imati samo banalnost a citat za Muhammeda ".] Najnoviji pokušaj pružanja točke gledišta za tumačenje Muhammadov život i podučavanje je onaj u Gantilnim predavanjima Richarda Bela prije Sveučilišta u Ljubljani Edinburgh, "Podrijetlo islama u njegovom kršćanskom okruženju" (London, 1926.). Bell je djelo samo preliminarna studija; on se u potpunosti zasniva na Kuranu, ne vodeći računa o tradiciji ili Sira, i on misli da iz samog Kurana možemo pronaći glavna načela koja će se kasnije vodi nas kroz labirint Tradicije. Bell misli da je problem u tome što je malo prije dolazak Muhameda, Arabija je bila prožeta novim idejama religije, dijelom od Stranica 12 Židovski, ali uglavnom kršćanski izvori, koji rade u Arabiji iz tri smjera, prema dolje Sirija sjeverozapadno od Mezopotamije na sjeveroistoku i gore od Abesinije kroz Južna Arabija. Jedan dokaz za to je da je i jedan i drugi njegov religijski rječnik posuđen iz bilo kojeg Etiopski ili sirijski, čak i židovski izrazi i praktički svi perzijski religijski izrazi koji prolaze sirijski. Tako su Allah, Koran, Furqan, Salawat, Jahannam, Janna, Firdaus, Zakat, Din itd. sve riječi ovog podrijetla, i velike ličnosti koje se kreću Kuranom - Ibrahim, Junus, Musa, 'Isa, Idris su svi sirijskog porijekla. Muhamed je bio u kontaktu s tim novim svijetom religijskih ideja, u početku samo u onoj mjeri u kojoj je to imao postati arabizirani prije njegova vremena, ali kasnije i samim židovskim i kršćanskim izvorima, i Bell tvrdi da ga i u samom Kuranu možemo vidjeti kako postepeno dobiva sve više i više informacije o tim religijama, posebno o kršćanstvu, i razvijanje njegova učenja pari passu svojim sve većim znanjem. Tako u ranim surama nalazimo njegov religijski vokabu- lair ograničen na ono što se može ilustrirati od ranih pjesnika; riječi, tj. to je bilo naturaliziranog na arapskom prije nego što je došao. U ovom ranom periodu nalazimo vrlo malo o Poslanicima ili kult velikih religija. Nakon toga uči i koristi nove vjerske pojmove od kojih je posuđena Kršćanskih i židovskih izvora i započinje razgovor o prorocima. U ovom trenutku očito nije znao da Židovi i kršćani nisu jedan narod. Kasnije to sazna i svoje jezik se odmah mijenja. Dakle, Bell ga ne bi tumačio kao mistika, niti apoplektika, niti patološki slučaj bilo koje vrste. Da, političar, ali religioznog karaktera, koji je bio ožalošćen zbog nedostatka religije među svojim narodom, i svoju je misiju zamislio da podari Arapima takvu poruku kakvu su poslanici dali velikim nacijama koje su ih okruživale. To nam sigurno pruža obećavajuće polazište, ono koje se čini boljim od bilo kojeg do sada predložio da se uklopi u činjenice koje se pojavljuju iz Korana, a može se dogoditi da je to Bellova aplikacija prijedlog nam može pružiti trag za povratkom, bar onoliko koliko možemo očekivati potraga za povijesnim Muhammedom. Čini se da bi zaključak iz ovog kratkog istraživanja trebao još čekati daljnje istraživanje treba obaviti među prvim izvorima i daljnja rasprava dopustiti određeno kristaliziranje mišljenja o tome gdje se mogu postaviti zdravi temelji prije nego što se može puno toga učiniti pokušao je dalje u biografskoj obnovi. Međutim, vrijedno je napomenuti da su učenjaci koji su najpoznatiji iz arapskih izvora i najbliže su razumijevanju života razdoblje, učenjaci poput Margoliotith, Hurgronje, Lammens, Caetini, su najodlučniji protiv proročkih tvrdnji Muhameda i treba priznati da ide dalje vlastito proučavanje izvora utoliko teže postaje vlastito razmišljanje zaključke ovih učenjaka. http://almuslih.org/Library/Jeffery,%20A%20-%20The%20Quest%20of%20the%20Historical%20Muhammad.pdf ---------------------------------

English Good Bye Muhamed Ich bin ein Textabschnitt. Klicke hier, um deinen eigenen Text hinzuzufügen und mich zu bearbeiten. Norbert G. Pressburg Goodbye Mohammed The new image of Islam Bibliographic information from the German National Library The German National Library lists this publication in the German National Bibliography; detailed bibliographic data is available on the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de . ​ © 2012 Norbert G. Pressburg 3rd revised edition Cover design, typesetting, production and publishing: Books on Demand GmbH, Norderstedt ISBN 978-3-8448-5372-8 ​ "We can't prove the truth. But we can prove the untruth and thus approach the truth." Karl Popper table of contents preliminary remark: Islamic research has only just begun................................................. ..... 9 The Traditional Qur'an: The Flawless Copy from Heaven........................................ .................. 15 The Book That Olive Oil Is In: The Quran of Science......................................... ................................ 27 From the people for the people: Hadith: Sayings and deeds of the Prophet ....................... 53 A Perfect Man: The Prophet Muhamad According to Traditional Accounts......................................... 65 200 Years Absence: The Historical Muhamad................................................. .................................... 79 Excursus: The Church on the Temple Mount ............................................ ....................... 99 The Metamorphosis: From Jesus to Muhammad ...................................... 107 The “Golden Age” of Islam: Transfigured Views of a Non-Existing Past ........................................ 147 The Arabian Nights: The Tales of al-Andalus........................................ ....................... 179 "Who did this to us?" Memories of reality................................................. .......................... 217 Literature list .................................................. ....................................... 239 Register of persons and subjects ................................................ ............................ 243 preliminary remark: Research into Islam has only just begun Europe got its first closer contact with Islam, with the “followers of Mahomet”, with the Crusades. The Holy Land with Jerusalem as the origin of the Christian faith was occupied by false believers, an unbearable thought for deeply religious medieval Europe. Pilgrims reported harassment and atrocities, the desecration of holy places. The Holy Land had to be snatched from the false believers, the access routes had to be secured, and so the first - unsuccessful - crusade began in 1096. Three more followed, the end result was the destruction not of the Islamic, but of the Christian-Byzantine Empire. This made possible the rise of the Ottoman Empire, the largest Islamic power bloc in history. In its expansion, the Ottomans got as far as Vienna, but this was seen more as a problem for the Austrian Habsburgs than a problem for Europe. Unlike Buddhism, for example, Islam has never been a respected religion in the West. The strange habits were ridiculed: no wine, no pork, praying five times a day, and the polygamy was sneered at, not entirely without envy. The Turkish sultan is said to have had hundreds of wives! But for a long time hardly anyone really knew anything about this religion, and hardly anyone was interested. There were closer contacts only with the advent of tourism, but even then it was more the relics of earlier cultures between the Nile and the Tigris and the oriental bazaars that were the focus of interest. The stories of “The Arabian Nights” added a romantic component to the European image of Islam: the mysterious, sensuous Baghdad of the Middle Ages with its legendary ruler Harun al-Rashid. The influence of Karl May may not have been insignificant for the generation of our grandfathers and great-grandfathers. Just like he the picture of 9 North American Indians as noble savages, at least in German-speaking countries, he also shaped the image of the oriental for generations. Complicated, backward, sly, so completely different, but somehow nice in its own way - Greetings from Hajji Halef Omar. Although Islamic armies and fleets had threatened Europe on several occasions, the Muslim inhabitants south and east of the Mediterranean were more likely to be seen in Europe as destroyers of ancient buildings and as sophisticated carpet dealers than as dangerous conquerors. Yes, the Orient was interesting - as long as you didn't have oriental conditions yourself. It was far enough away, and they're so far behind the modern world, so just let them do it. Oil played a minor role. This changed abruptly when, with the oil shock of 1973, the Middle East, as the Orient was now known, penetrated the consciousness of all Europeans. The Sunday driving ban on cars affected almost everyone, but the problem remained confined to a few economic issues. The events at the end of the 20th and early 21st centuries: Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, the religiously motivated attacks in New York, Tunis, London, Madrid, the Hamburg Mosque, the “Caliph of Cologne”, al-Qaeda, Ahmadinejad. Islamic bombers in the centers of the western world, weapons of mass destruction in the hands of people who feel legitimized by their Holy Book and its author Mohammed to carry out every bloody deed, no matter how horrific. Hailed by many Muslims, quietly condoned by a great many, and hailed as the beginning of the global, definitive jihad, this kind of bloodshed aroused revulsion and concern in the non-Islamic world. What is this holy book that covers such slaughter? What kind of prophet is that calling for such deeds? What kind of religion is it that wants to either convert or destroy people of other faiths? Although young adventurers joined the camp of the bearded warriors, most of the population of Europe and the world viewed this religion with rejection or even hostility: 10 "Islamophobia". The attacks turned into a catastrophe not for the countries affected but for the Islamic world. However, there were voices on the Islamic side that said these atrocities contradicted "real" Islam, that they were "un-Islamic" and not covered by the Koran. However, both sides were able to substantiate their point of view with quotations from the Koran. On closer inspection, it turned out that the Muslims were divided into very contrary factions, but were nevertheless able to support their points of view with appropriate passages from the Koran. While some read the mandate to produce nuclear weapons from the Holy Book, others saw in the same book the very embodiment of tolerance. This caused even greater insecurity in the non-Islamic world. Now who is right? How can one read such different things from one and the same text? How does it work? Around the same time as the events, but completely independent of them, Christoph Luxenberg, an expert on ancient Semitic languages, answered the question by reading the Koran not as pure Arabic but as a mixed language with Syro-Aramaic elements. With such resounding success that he made the front page of the New York Times as the author of a specialist book that was only published in German. His claim: the original texts of the Koran, some of which were created long before Mohammed, were not written in Arabic, but in part in Aramaic; later Arabic editors would have delivered catastrophic misinterpretations out of ignorance. Other scholars from other disciplines refuted essential claims of the traditional Islamic depiction of history. Scholarly uneasiness about the sources of the Koran and the historicity of Muhammad has existed for some time, but has received almost no attention from classical Orientalists and the general public. Gustav Weil (1808 - 1889) was the first to deal historically and critically with the subject'. For him, the purely oral traditions Gustav Weil, "Mohammed the Prophet, His Life and His Teaching", Stuttgart 1843. 11 of the life of the prophet, his deeds and sayings, handed down over generations, are worthless as a source for historical events. Around the same time, the biographies of Muhammad by Ibn Hisham (d. 834) and at-Tabari (d. 922) were being translated into various European languages. In his book "Life of Mahomet", published in four volumes between 1856 and 1861, William Muir states that the structure of Islamic traditions is entirely legendary and calls sources that appeal to storytellers as completely worthless. In his "Muhammedan Studies" (Halle 1889), Ignaz Goldziher (1850 - 1921), the doyen of Islam research, describes the hadiths (anecdotal collections of sayings and deeds of Mohammed) as pure forgeries from later times. The Italian early Islam specialist Leone Caetani (1869 - 1935) and the Belgian Henri Lammens (1862 - 1937), who lived in Lebanon and spoke both the new and the old oriental languages, are of the same opinion. According to the Soviet Islamic scholar Morozow, the Koran was not completed before the 11th century, and Islam only acquired its own identity with the Crusades. His colleague Lucjan Klimowitsch calls Mohammed and the caliphs mystical figures that were subsequently established. His article "Has Muhammad really lived?" (1930) could probably only be published in the godless Soviet Union at that time. The Frenchman Regis Blachere (1900 - 1973), translator of the Koran and specialist in Arabic literature, sums up his attempt to reconstruct the life of Mohamed as follows: In the final result, there are no sources that would make this possible. The traditional traditions are scientifically useless, the Koran itself says nothing on this subject. There were also Muslim scholars who were critical of the historical sources of Islam. About Dr. Suliman Bashear (1947 - 1991), Professor at the University of Nablus. At one of his lectures, angry students threw him out of the second floor window, the publication of his "Introduction to the Other History" 12 (in Arabic) cost him his job in 1984. He had dared to say that certain traditions had simply been invented in order to move the founding of the religion to Mecca. So there was enough researchers and research that approached Islam and its founder from the facts and drew a very different picture than the conventional tradition. But how could it be that an enlightened, educated public didn't take any notice of it? Probably because the issue wasn't an issue until the collapse of the World Trade Center towers in New York on September 11, 2001. The reservations were also presented discreetly, almost bashfully. The classical orientalists continued to dominate, for whom the traditional Islamic tradition was a solid source. Apparently they were unable or unwilling to recognize that they had only secondary sources in the Islamic sources. However, primary sources are the indispensable basis of all historical research. The absolute minimum of any scientific work is to check existing material for authenticity. Classical Islam research failed to do either of these things, and one shouldn't even have expected it from Muslim commentators. When referring to a script, for example the Koran, it is of crucial importance to get as close as possible to the original. Where does this writing come from? Who wrote them? When was it written? In which language ? In which font? The assessment must be made exclusively on the basis of primary sources. It is in no way about the interpretation of the content, that is a matter for religion. What is at stake again and again are precisely these primary sources. And we note with great astonishment that oriental studies in turn regarded later versions as the original. This is nothing short of a scientific declaration of bankruptcy. German Islam Research 19th century was progressive and worked historically-critically. It is associated with names such as Sprenger, Nöldeke, Wellhausen and Goldziher. Apart from the fact that the latter died in the early 20th century, it can be said that German research on Islam in the course of 13 19 to the 20th Century experienced a frightening decline. Only with Günter Lüling in the 1970s did things turn around. Oriental studies had become accustomed to adopting the traditional Islamic religious legends 1:1 and selling them as facts, as if there had never been a gold ziher. Once caught in this scientific meltdown, the gentlemen and ladies, with a few exceptions, were unable to retire from this impasse because there was a risk of loss of reputation or even their life's work. The fate of Günter Lüling, who was literally destroyed, shows what happened to scientists who opposed the academic current. Ordinarius Anton Spitaler, after consultation with Rudi Paret and others, reported that The internationally best-known Islam researcher from Germany, Christoph Luxenberg, was cut off and excluded. A Berlin “colleague” even circulated his real name and address in the Middle East - Luxenberg is a pseudonym, he himself is an ethnic Arab. Prof. Muhamad Kalisch can also sing a song about how to deal with politically incorrect Islam researchers. What these people, representative of many others, have more in common is the critical approach. Traditional positions are no longer nodded, but are questioned, no more, no less. The way this early history is described from a traditional Islamic point of view certainly did not take place, we know that. But how it really happened is something that research has only just begun. The history of the emergence of Islam, the Prophet and the origin of his book must be rewritten. We are only at the beginning of this development. This book reflects the current state of knowledge. The findings are already breathtaking: far from being complete, the new picture of the emergence of Islam, based on facts and only on facts, will no longer have anything to do with what is traditionally conveyed to us. 14 The traditional Quran: The flawless copy from heaven “Qur'anic speech is clearly superhuman, we find everywhere a present plan that no human could have invented. " Abdallah Draz, Qur'an scholar, Kai For the devout Muslim, the Koran is the holy book in which God communicates his revelations to people through the prophet Muhammad2. According to tradition, the Prophet raised himself in a cave Mount Hira near Mecca, where he received the so-called Meccan suras. He received later suras in Medina. They all came directly from God and were transmitted orally to Muhammad by the angel Gabriel. Later, Muhamad passed the messages on to companions who memorized or wrote them down. The central dogma to this day is: The Qur'an is uncreated. Muhammad received the text from God through the mediation of the Archangel Gabriel and passed it on to posterity 1:1. Every word is correct, authentic and immutable, sacred and eternal. There is nothing in the world, past, present or future, that is not contained in the Qur'an. The Koran in the version of Caliph Othman is the only authentic Koran as communicated to the Prophet Muhammad. The Cairo version of 1924 corresponds perfectly to the Koran of Othman and is thus the identical copy of the original preserved in paradise. This is the claim that still applies today and against which the Koran must be measured. This claim should always be kept in mind as you continue reading. "Mohammed" is the classic German spelling. "Muhamad" comes closest to the Arabic spelling. The h is pronounced as an implied ch, the first a as an implied ä. 15 The Koran consists of 114 suras, made up of a number of verses, 4 to 286 per sura, put together. According to the traditional account, these suras were imparted to those around him by Muhammad over a period of 23 years. This was done verbally. Various people around him tried to memorize the verses, some were written down: on animal bones, pieces of leather, leaves, whatever was available. There was no systematic collection of the individual sayings during Muhammad's lifetime. Muhamad never saw his book, according to Islamic accounts he could neither read nor write. With this handling of materials, losses were inevitable. The Prophet himself sometimes withdrew suras or changed them, and verses disappeared. So the scribe Ubay testifies that Sura 33 (al-Ahzab) has It comprised 200 verses, but in the end there were only 73 left. Aisha, the Prophet's favorite wife, reported that she had kept a few verses under the bed, but they had been eaten by a goat. Shortly after Muhammad's death, his literate companion Ibn Thabit began compiling the existing documents, but there were soon seven different versions. On the orders of the third Caliph Othman (reign 644-656), Ibn Thabit again, together with selected helpers from the Kuraish tribe, created a version corrected from errors, which was distributed to the four capitals of the Islamic Empire, Medina, Damascus, Kufa and Basra , were sent. This is the "Othman Koran", according to Islamic tradition the only valid version. However, it was not recognized by everyone who complained, for example, to the Shiites that Othman suppressed and falsified suras in order to oust the actual legitimate caliph Ali, to whom the Shiites refer. Today, mainstream Islam, by no means all Muslims, refers to the so-called 1924 Cairo edition of the Koran, which is said to be based on the versions of Ibn Thabit and Othman. This Cairo edition is postulated to be 100 percent true to what was imparted to Muhammad by God, with no errors or deviations. 16 The Koran is difficult to read, many things make no sense to the reader, please see for yourself. The standard answer from Muslims is that it only seems so because the Koran is untranslatable, it can only be meaningfully read in Arabic. But the fact is that the Koran cannot be better understood in Arabic either. Even for Arabs it is only understandable on the basis of the comments, not at all for non-Arab Muslims. There are thousands of comments with thousands of subcomments. Some passages are interpreted dozens of times differently. The 10th-century classic commentary by at-Tabari consists of 30 volumes, explaining verse by verse. Tabari is one of the recognized commentators. But even he offers different interpretations, and other commentators come to very different readings. According to God's own statement, the divine message was sent to earth "clearly and distinctly in Arabic" for the Arabs. Then why the confusion? Because Allah's words cannot of course be understood by humans in every case, is the traditional answer. Which did not prevent the Koran scholars of all times from calling their respective interpretations the only true word of God with ultimate meaning. But there are other peculiarities. The Koran is teeming with foreign words from Syro-Aramaic, Persian, Greek and Hebrew, for example the frequently used terms dschehennam (hell, Persian) or taurah (Torah, the law, Hebrew) or logos (the word that Embassy, ​​Greek). However, by definition, foreign words should not appear, and any devout Muslim would be indignant to reject such a claim. However, the languages ​​that were spoken in the region at that time are undoubtedly represented in the Koran. Arabic linguists also confirm the existence of non-Arabic words in the Koran, but the official doctrine remains that the Koran cannot have used foreign words because it was given in pure Arabic by God's will. 17 Abdallah Draz, interpreter of the Koran at Cairo's Al-Azhar University, ruled out any possibility of foreign influence on principle. Not even Muhammad had the opportunity to misunderstand the words brought by the angel Gabriel or even to falsify them through his own reflection. Because Muhamad himself had no idea about the matter, he was ignorant of reading and writing, a pure tool of God, how could he have brought in his opinion as an ignoramus? He might have known the falsity of idolatry, but could never have known the truth of right faith. He could not have known of earlier events by mere thought, and yet the Koran agrees with the Bible on many things. The Koran scholar did not believe that Muhammad was capable of knowledge of the Bible. There is agreement with the Bible, but there are also major discrepancies. For example, Islam recognizes the existence of Jesus but not his death on the cross. The crucifixion of Jesus is one of the very few religious episodes that is historically documented. The chronological sequence is also sometimes out of kilter: Thus, in Sura 19, the Koran moves Aaron’s sister Maryam (meaning Mary) from the Egyptian-Pharaonic environment of the Old Testament without any problems to the Roman period of Palestine and mutates her into the mother of Jesus: "O sister of Aaron [note: Aaron is the Old Testament brother of Moses], your father was not a villain and your mother was not a whore..." (Surat 19:28) And she pointed at him. They said: "How shall we speak to him, a child, in the cradle?" (Surah 19:29) "And he [Jesus in the manger] said: I am Allah's servant; he gave me the book3 and he made me a prophet..." (Surah 19:30) The fact that Allah is said to have given Jesus “the book” also contains theological explosives. 18 No Muslim would ever think of questioning this or any other assertion in the Koran, no matter how many historical facts or practical impossibilities stand in the way of doing so. Furthermore, the reader of the Koran notices the illogicality and unrelatedness of many verses. Some are obviously not where they belong in the context, and there are numerous contradictions. For example, in one place wine is a gift from God (Surah 16:67), in another it is forbidden to come to prayer drunk (Surah 4:43), while in yet another place (Surah 2:219) wine is for Muslims in general is forbidden. In Sura 47:15, however, the believers are again promised wine in paradise ("rivers of water, milk and wine, delicious to those who drink"). So what now? The numerous contradictions are, of course, well known and are officially referred to by Qur'anic scholars as annulled and annulling verses. So one verse can be canceled out by another. Depending on the doctrine, there are up to 500 such contradicting verses. Example 1: Verse 2 of Sura 73: "Get up for prayer all night except for a small part..." It is canceled by verse 20 of the same sura: "The Lord knows that you rise to prayer nearly two thirds of the night, or half, or a third of it..." As a consequence, it is deduced that night prayers may be severely limited in time. Example 2: Sura 4:7: "Men are entitled to a share of what their parents and relatives leave behind, and women are entitled to a portion of what their parents and relatives leave behind..." The passage is superseded by verse 11 of the same sura: “God enjoins you as to your children: A male child stands 19 twice the proportion of a female too. If there are only women, more than two in number, they are entitled to two-thirds of what he leaves; if it is only one, half is due to her. Each of them is entitled to one sixth of what they leave behind if they have children. If he has no children... This is a duty on the part of God.” This means a modification of the inheritance law. Example 3: Sura 2:190: "Fight those who fight you with God's will, but do not exaggerate. God does not love the transgressors.” Repeal in Sura 2:191: "And kill them [the disbelievers] wherever you find them..." Further abrogation in Sura 9:5: "When the holy months are up, kill the unbelievers wherever you find them, seize them, besiege them and ambush them in every way..." Koran 2:190 only speaks of fighting, 2:191 speaks of killing. Koran 9:5 repeats the order to kill, but limits it in time. This means that the infidels may be killed, but the war must be suspended during Ramadan, although the naming of months instead of a month leaves room for interpretation. contradictions upon contradictions. However, the devout Muslim has no logical problem with it, because everything is possible and permitted for God: Sura 2:106: "Whatever verses we save, we bring better or equal ones in their place. Don't you know that Allah has power over all things?" Common practice is to give preference to the later suras, the so-called Medina suras, because they are the more up-to-date ones. But who really knows what the later suras were, since they were simply numbered lengthwise? The Medinan suras are much more radical and practical than the Meccan, which are more theological. In many cases, this makes the more radical statement the valid one, even if a more liberal passage may be present elsewhere. 20 Measured against a divine, perfect claim, these are rather irritating practices. For a believer, however, they do not pose a problem, for this methodology is again covered by Sura 13:39: "Allah erases what he wills and confirms what he wills, for he is the mother of the book." Often verses are also semantically ambiguous - their meaning depends on their intonation. For example, a verse reads, "There is no compulsion in religion." This is read by some in such a way that everyone can choose their own religion. Other interpretations, however, insist the verse must be read as "There is no compulsion in religion." Accordingly, Islam would be the only possible religion, but within that certain tolerances are possible. The Koran scholar Abdallah Draz continues: "The sentences are expressed in the most dignified form, using the smallest possible number of words to express thoughts of the utmost richness. Quranic speech is clearly superhuman because it breaks the psychological law that intellect and emotion are always inversely related. Moving on to the structure of a sura and the whole Qur'an, we find a plan present everywhere that no man could have invented.” The superhuman plan is that all suras are arranged in descending order of longitude. The longest suras are at the beginning, the shortest at the end. Surah Two has 286 verses and Surah Four has 175 verses. For example, sura one hundred eleven has only 5 verses, and sura one hundred twelve only 44. 4 Sura 1, the "opening", does not count as an actual sura because it is addressed to God and therefore cannot come from God. However, if one puts God's command "Speak!" in front of it, a sura can be read as an instruction and still come from God. This trick is found 350 times in the Koran. 21 With this arrangement, all temporal and thematic context is lost, and this results in an illogical effect that is not conducive to understanding the text. Unbelievers in the Koran have reconstructed the chronological sequence and logical assignment with some success and thus made sense of many passages, but met with little attention from the Islamic clergy. The main Muslim argument for the divinity of the Koran lies on a completely different level, namely on an emotional level: the form, i.e. the rhymed prose of the suras and verses, is so perfect that it could never have come from a human pen. For every Muslim, the aesthetics of poetry alone is irrefutable proof of the divine origin of the Qur'an. There are countless hymns of praise for the perfection of the verses, every believer will attest to the breathtaking poetry - even if he cannot understand it. It is now pointless to judge the aesthetics of a language that is not the mother tongue. But at all times there have been Arab personalities who simply denied the Koran the aesthetic quality of the language attributed to it - and often paid for it with their lives. Numerous grammatical errors are also known. Ali Dashti5 details a whole bunch of grammatical errors and syntactical impossibilities. He writes: “The Qur'an contains incomplete sentences... There are foreign language terms, unfamiliar Arabic expressions and words used with a different meaning than the usual one. He disregards the rules of grammar, whether it's feminine, masculine, verb or subject, adjectives or adverbs. 5 Ali Dashti (1896-1981), Iranian. Studied theology and history in Nedschaf. Shiite cleric, later journalist. Prominent opposition politician with multiple imprisonments. Imprisoned by Khomeini in 1979, where he died in 1981. 22 Every Muslim should have read the Koran at least once in their lifetime, and most have, starting between the ages of three and six. This is done in such a way that the teacher reads a verse in Arabic and the student repeats what he has heard. After a certain time he is able to speak the verses independently. When asked what the meaning of what he has just read is, however, he cannot provide any information. He has learned to recite the Koran but not to understand it. For this he would need training in Koranic Arabic. The Koran is by no means written in a commonly used Arabic, because "the" Arabic does not exist. There is the respective colloquial language like Moroccan, Syrian, Egyptian, Yemeni, Gulf Arabic and so on. These Arabic dialects can be extremely different and in turn differ more or less strongly from the Arabiya, standard Arabic. The Arabiya is the official language, it is only highly imperfectly mastered by the people. Former Egyptian President Nasser, a great orator, is known to often begin his speeches in Arabiya but switch to Ammiya, the colloquial language, at key passages. Those were the moments when he made people's souls overflow. The language of the Koran, however, differs again from the Arabiya and is not understood by anyone outside the circle of scholars. Even a Saudi Arabian, ie one from the land of the prophet himself, is unable to cope with this. Egyptians, Iraqis or Moroccans have only a rudimentary understanding, while non-Arab Muslims have a complete lack of understanding. How does a Turk, Afghan, Pakistani, Iranian, Maldivian or Indonesian understand the Arabic content of the Koran? Literally nothing - even if he can recite it. He is not even expected to understand it, because the believer learns the content from imams and prayer leaders, who in most cases have been informed of it in turn. Hence the many different beliefs within the religion, often based on local traditions, and it explains why Muslim masses are so easily inflammable: 24 News is circulating that in a European newspaper the Prophet was badly offended by blasphemous caricatures. He was even depicted with a pig's snout. Hundreds of thousands of people take to the streets, mainly after the Friday sermons, set buildings on fire, there are injured and dead. Yet not a single one of the demonstrators, not even the preachers who whipped them up, ever saw one of these cartoons to form an opinion. It is not the general practice to develop religious facts originally, the right opinion is always given. There is no formal supreme theological authority in Islam, but traditionally Al-Azhar University in Cairo has the authority to interpret the Koran. The 1924 version goes back to them, claiming to be the only valid one for Muslims. For some time, however, Saudi Arabia has been the main exporter of Islamic development aid. At the expense of the royal family, armies of devout bearded men flock to all parts of the Islamic world to spread the Saudi understanding of the correct interpretation of the Koran, Wah Habism. Muslims who turn to Wahhabism usually receive financial benefits. This is why long beards and totally veiled women appear in the streets of Male, the capital of the Maldives, for example, which would have been unthinkable just a few years ago. Wahhabism, this extreme form of once only local importance, has blossomed into a major branch of Islam thanks to the petrodollars. We want to summarize the traditional understanding of the origin of the Koran once more: 114 suras with up to 286 verses per sura, which corresponds to around 600 pages in the Reclam edition, were transmitted to Muhammad by the Archangel Gabriel according to traditional doctrine, which he passed on to his followers verbatim without error or error. However, not as a book, but like an imaginary record, because, according to tradition, it was passed on orally. The followers memorized the suras or wrote them down provisionally, sometimes being right about the material 24 was carelessly handled. But here, too, there were no mistakes and no mistakes. Several "official" and very profound edits followed over the years. The completely pure Arabic language of the Koran in terms of its claims contains many foreign words and is also unreadable for Arabs without commentary. Many verses obviously do not belong where they are. The arrangement of the suras, in descending order of length from the longest to the shortest, makes classification difficult. Nevertheless, the claim still stands that every word in today's canonical Koran, the reference edition of Cairo 1924, is God's word without mistake or error and is therefore eternal and immovable. Let's see what the science says about this in the next chapter. The book where olive oil is: The Quran of Science "Don't they [the doubters] study the Koran? If it were from anyone but God, they would find much contradiction in it. " Qur'an, Sura 4:82 Rudi Paret (1901 - 1983), a prominent translator of the Koran, writes in the introduction to his German translation: "We have no reason to assume that even a single verse in the entire Koran does not come from Mohammed." had to grapple with contradictions, ambiguities, mistakes and inconsistencies of a logical and linguistic nature almost every day: How does he know ? How does he come to this conclusion? Similarly, Tilman Nagel6 thinks, “Research must stick to what can be considered certain, namely that the words of the Koran came from Mohammed ...”, and fills a whopping 1000 pages under this not even remotely certain premise . How did the two scientists come to such an unscientific statement? They reflect the opinion of traditional oriental studies. After 19th-century oriental studies had brought forth great names, no glorious deeds can be reported, at least in its branch of Islamic studies, until the end of the 20th century, with a few notable exceptions. Typically, the research was system-immanent and did not seem to want to bother in the least with the question of the creditworthiness of sources. For example, the Koran was translated into German, true to the Arabic original. Very precise, very conscientious, even so brilliant that some translations are closer to the probable meaning than the Arabic original itself. The translations sometimes turned out well 6 Tilman Nagel, Mohammed, Munich 2008. 27 for interpretation, but the author was able to prove that the Arabic arranger (!) was probably wrong on this or that point - we will come to some examples later. The alarm bells should have been ringing for a scientist, because it was not just any text, but a divine message in supposedly the purest Arabic, which claimed to be true. The negation of the most obvious inconsistencies and the unbelievably sloppy handling of sources have brought oriental studies into such disrepute that it has written negative scientific history in Islamic studies.7 According to traditional Islamic tradition, the prophet Muhammad proclaimed revelations between 610 and 632 and founded a new religion at the same time. Only oral traditions existed during his lifetime, but according to traditional Islamic belief his third successor, the Caliph Othman, compiled the material 20 years later into a book, the so-called “Othman Koran”. This is said to have already represented the final orthographic and content-related authority. In a few years, the book and religion are said to have spread across Syria, Arabia, Iraq, Persia, Central Asia, Egypt and North Africa. An epochal process of unbelievable speed. If so. Who claims that? Or the other way around: What do the sources look like? We have no contemporary evidence from the Islamic side. We have no original Othmanic Koran, no other contemporary information, the first known Koran dates from the end of the 9th century, and the fragments known so far do not date back to that time either 7 It could be worthwhile to examine the connection between German research on Islam and the · Century to examine with politics. Kaiser Wilhelm had forbidden criticism of Islam at his academies with a view to the Ottoman ally. In the Third Reich there were increasingly high-ranking contacts with Islamic dignitaries, and in Dresden the oddity of the SS Mufti School arose. Hitler said in the “table talk” (Henry Picker) that if Germany had gotten Islam instead of Christianity, the world would already belong to us today. Official Islam research continued to go in circles in the Federal Republic. Under a multicultural premise, academic criticism of Islam is also considered suspect and is not a "research desideratum" dependent on public funds. 28 claimed Caliph Othman back. The publisher of the original Koran, the ominous Caliph Othman, is historically incomprehensible. There is not a single extra-Islamic reference to him, not to speak of proof. The first Islamic accounts of Muhammad and his book only begin two centuries after the alleged events, most of which came about three centuries later. However, scholars are aware of materials from before the Prophet that later reappear in the definitive Qur'an. According to the estimate of the Koran researcher Günter Lüling, the pre-Mo Hammedan material makes up no less than thirty percent of the later Koran8. So at least fragments of the later Koran are known to science, which date from the time of Muhammad and before. Koran writings from the time before the founder of Islam ? As early as 1909, Theodor Nöldeke9 had compiled a catalog of numerous errors and peculiarities in the language of the Koran. He mentions overlaps with the Syro-Aramaic language, but does not elaborate further. In 1927, the Iraqi-born manuscript researcher Alphonse Hormizd Mingana was the first to point out the strong mixing of Koranic Arabic with Syro-Aramaic. Lüling later confirmed and deepened these results. There are numerous passages in the Koran, the so-called “dark passages”, which are not legible even for Arabic interpreters. This then led to the many - often completely different - interpretations that characterize Islamic teaching. According to Islamic opinion, the language of God is Arabic. Anyone who cannot read these passages simply does not master God's perfect Arabic. This explanation may satisfy believers, but not scientists. The Semitist and linguist Christoph Luxenberg10 took 8 Günter Lüling, “About the Urkoran. Approaches to the reconstruction of the pre-Islamic strophic songs in the Koran”, Erlangen 1974. 9 Theodor Nöldeke, "History of the Qoran", facsimile of the 1909 edition, Elibron Classic Series, Adamont Media Corporation 2005. 10 Pseudonym of a professor at a German university. 29 some of the "dark spots". He began to read these unclear and seemingly meaningless passages of the Koran in the language of the original time. That language was Syro-Aramaic. And he got very amazing results. Sura 19 (Surat Maryam / Marien-Sura) is such a passage. First she describes the conception of Mary and then comes to her despair about the illegitimate birth of her son Jesus, which is why she wishes for death. In verse 24 of this sura, the traditional translation says: “And he [Jesus] cried out from under her, Do not worry, your Lord has caused a brook to flow under you!” In Syro-Aramaic, however, the verse reads: "Then he [Jesus] cried out to her after childbirth: Do not be sad, the Lord has made your childbirth legitimate." A once strange sentence suddenly makes sense! (You shouldn't be bothered by the linguistic genius of Baby Jesus, it is mentioned in several places in the Koran. And if you paint that spiritually red, we also find it in the Gospel of Thomas) Even the houris, the virgins of paradise, whom the Koran promises the martyrs by the dozen, look very different in Luxenberg. The traditional translation of the Qur'an reads as follows: Sura 44:54: "And We give them [the believers] wide-eyed houris as wives." In the authorized Arabic version, this verse is called: wa-zawwag-nahum bi-hur inin and, according to Luxenberg, can be read in classical Arabic as married. But only if you put a diacritic point above the r and below the h, which shows how the letter is to be read precisely. However, these diacritical points did not exist in 30 the early texts. And without the dots, the word reads rawwah-nahum, which means to rest in Arabic. Hur is undoubtedly the plural of the feminine hawra, meaning white. In is not understandable in Arabic, so the Arabic compilers of the Koran interpret in as the plural form of ain (eye, well), although it should correctly be called uyun or ayun. So hur in would be white eyes. But this is also nonsense in Arabic in this context (elsewhere in the Koran, Sura 12:84, white eyes means blind). That is why the Arabic interpreters of the Koran offer “big-eyed whites”. This became "big-eyed houris" - the "paradise virgins" were born. However, Luxenberg proves through Koranic and non-Koranic cross-references that the “white people” in the context of paradise undoubtedly mean grapes. The word in, which is not understood in Arabic, means crystal clear, shiny, magnificent appearance in Aramaic. The hur in are not beings, let alone huris, but crystal clear, magnificent grapes. And lastly, bi doesn't mean the Arabic with, but the Aramaic under. The believer is not mated with the houris, but he rests under the hur in, i.e. under the grapes. Sura 44:54 reads correctly according to Luxenberg: "We'll make them comfortable under gorgeous bunches of grapes." A not inconsiderable difference, one has to state (and with not inconsiderable consequences for the "martyrs"). The interpreters ascribe various attributes to the houris in various verses. Sura 2:25: "In paradise cleansed wives await them." In reality, the talk is of "all kinds of pure fruits". The Arabic interpreters of the Koran derive the age of the houris from Sura 38:52. They are first "of the same age", then they become "young", "forever young", and in later interpretations they are even assigned an age: "33 years". None of this is in the Koran. 31 It is about the word atrab, which is not understandable in Arabic and was therefore provided with the interpretations mentioned. The Aramaic root means juicy, pulp. From Sura 38:52 according to the traditional reading: "While they have [forever young, 33-year-old] houris with them their own age, eyes downcast..." becomes in the correct Aramaic translation: "With them will be hanging juicy fruits." The interpreters shoot off the bird with Sura 55:56 and 74, where the houris are finally proclaimed virgins. In further interpretations they even remain virgins forever, even if they had already been available to the believers: Surah 55:56: "Therein [in the gardens] are also, with their eyes cast down, female beings [the houris], whom no one [neither man nor jinn] has deflowered before them." The interpretation of the expression lam yatmithunna as "to deflower" comes from the Koran interpreter at-Tabari and was continued without criticism, whereby the Syro-Aramaic root no doubt simply means to defile, to defile. The whole sentence is therefore: "There are hanging fruits that nobody has touched yet." Luxenberg notes at this point: “The summit has been reached with the interpretation of deflowering. Whoever reads the Koran with a little understanding has to throw up their hands over their heads at this point. It's not just ignorance that's to blame, it takes a good deal of audacity to come up with something like this from a scripture and to base it on the Koran." One would like to add: The dirty imagination with the bearded men got away with it. But it goes on in this style. 32 We already know from the houris that they are beautiful, 33 years old and virgins forever. In Sura 78:33 we learn another detail - they are busty: "[The godly await] young houris with swelling breasts and a cup of wine filled to the brim." The swelling breasts are actually lush, juicy fruits, as Luxenberg shows in detail. So the houris come entirely from the realm of the imagination, but that's not all, there are also eternally young boys in paradise who are available to the pious. Sura 76:19: "Forever young boys [wildanun muhalladuna] make the rounds among them [the believers]..." Luxenberg shows the “boys” to be Aramaic for “juice” or “wine” (“child of the grapevine” = product of the grapevine = juice or wine). Muhalladuna gets its original Aramaic meaning, namely ice-cold, ice-cooled, by converting a single dot (lower dot instead of upper dot, h becomes g). So instead of eternally young boys, it's actually ice-cold fruit that's doing the rounds. Blatant mistranslations by the Arabic editors created a picture of paradise that not only prompted lewd remarks from non-believers, not only caused hundreds of thousands of fighters to die expectantly, but also stands diametrically opposed to the original and real statement of the Koran. In addition, the mixing of Syrian-Christian and Eastern ideas in the Koran also becomes clear here. The symbolic fruit par excellence of the Syrian-Christian paradise was the bunch of grapes, as depicted a thousand times. This was at the same time the paradise of the original Koranic materials. In the later version, this rather modest paradise takes on Persian proportions: there is no paradise without wide-eyed maidens, and no Persian festival worthy of the name is conceivable without the hierodules, the boys responsible for song and other favors 33 were responsible. The Persian fairidaez (paradise) becomes the Arabic faradis, and this is a sexist paradise n. It's really just about the fulfillment of male sexual dreams.12 This alteration of the original texts is not only a catastrophic translational blunder, but a change in the overall concept of paradise. Luxenberg resolves the entire “headscarf problem” with a further specification of Aramaic. There is only one passage in the Koran that appears to refer to the headscarf. It is sura 24, verse 31: The whole sentence in question is: "And tell the believing women to lower their eyes and guard their modesty, and not to display their charms except what is on the outside, and to cover their bosom with their kerchief and their charms only to their husbands or their fathers, or the fathers of their spouses, or their sons, or their spouses' sons, or their brothers, or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their wives, or those who have a right over them, or their servants who do not have any have instincts, or children who ignore their nakedness.” Max Henning13 has already freely translated the core passage with "to fold her cloth over her bosom". Literally translated, this passage in the Arabic Koran means: "They should fold their chumur over their pockets." What are these humurs, and what is the purpose of the bags? Tabari translates chumur as headscarf and, without naming any references or giving reasons, adds that this headscarf has to cover hair, neck and earrings. 11 Helmut Werner, "Das Islamisches Totenbuch", Cologne 2009, substantiates the central male-sexist notions of the afterlife with numerous passages from the Koran. 12 In this tradition, 9/11 leader Muhamad Atta left the pre-suicide directive, which included bandaging the penis for special, symbolic protection. 1. The Koran, Reclam, 2006 Edition. 34 Luxenberg now proves the ominous chumur (singular chimar) as the prescribed Aramaic gmar - band, belt. He also proves that the word "beat" was used in connection with the terms "band, belt", i.e. it formed a phrase that is still in use in today's Aramaic: "The band, the cloth belt turn over" Namely around the loins and not around the “pockets”. So the sentence actually means: "They should tie their belts around their loins." The Persian and Arabic philologist Tabari subsequently, around the year 900, i.e. 300 years after the rumored time of its origin, simply did not understand the word chu mur/ chimar in his commentary on the Koran14, which does not exist in Arabic. Without providing any explanation, he interprets it as a "headscarf" and adds that this headscarf "should cover the neck, hair and earrings". From then on, the Islamic world accepted the headscarf as a command from God. In fact, it is nothing more than at-Tabari's personal opinion. The change in meaning of this term is presented in a remarkable way in a hadith15. According to this, Aisha, the youngest wife of the Prophet, and other women were said to have fashioned their cloth belts into headscarves when the relevant verse was revealed. The historical-etymological distortion of the term chimar is reflected here in fast motion: from a cloth belt to a headscarf. According to Luxenberg, "Muslim women would be entitled to restore the authenticity of the Koranic wording and to make belts out of the headscarves that have been unjustly forced on them for centuries." How can it happen that Arabic editors obviously have such big problems with an Arabic text? With a text that 14 at-Tabari, “Tafsir al-Quran”, Vol. XVIII, Cairo 1968. 15 Ibn Manzur, “Lisan al-Arab”, X, 355a, Beirut 1955. 35 supposedly "came to the people in pure and clear Arabic"? How is it that virtually every verse must be interpreted to be understood, and that many verses easily yield to a dozen different interpretations? If you ask a linguist about the language "Arabic", the counter question will certainly come up: "Which Arabic?" Then as now, there was a multitude of Arabic dialects. In addition, there is classical Arabic, the Arabiya. The Koran, however, is written in another variety: the Koran in Arabic, which only specialists can read (we better skip the question of how far they understand it, based on the examples given above). The unifying language of the time was Aramaic. The Koran is so heavily interspersed with Aramaic that Luxenberg assumes the existence of an original Aramaic Koran. We do not know whether this original Aramaic Koran existed, but it is certain that the writings on which the Koran is based are largely Aramaic texts. In the Arabia of that time, Aramaic and/or the respective Arabic dialect was spoken, and Aramaic was written throughout. In addition, Greek was quite common in the educated class. The Arabic script developed from the Aramaic script with Nabatean elements. The traditional Koran Arabic has it in the 6th or 7th century, the time of Muhamad and the alleged descent of the Koran, not given. Semitic writing consisted only of consonants. In the pronunciation one uses vowels according to experience. Translated into German, depending on the context, Rst could be read as Rast, Rost, Rest, Rist, Erst, Erste and whatever other possibilities there are. What is Lbnstnlst? Loving is a lust! Or rather life is a burden? But it gets even worse. The early Arabic alphabet consisted of 15 characters, of which only seven characters were unique. Of the remaining characters, six were ambiguous, one had three meanings, and another had pentads. In the early manuscripts it is not possible to distinguish between f and q, j and kh, s 36 and d, r and z, s and sh, d and dah, t and z. Script thus consisted of only consonants and three semivowels, not all of which were clearly defined themselves, and short vowels were read in reading according to context and experience. This consonant framework (“Rasm”) was therefore extremely poorly defined. One could not read it rationally without knowledge of the facts. This explains a nice little story: A long, long time ago in Basra, a Koran scholar was walking the streets and through a window he heard a boy reciting: "This is the book in which there is no olive oil..." This struck the scholar at the same time , but also strange and he went into the house. A boy was reciting the 2nd sura of the Koran. But it begins correctly "This is the book in which there is no doubt ..." Doubt is called rayba, olive oil zeita. In the consonant ten sentence without reading aids, however, these two words are completely identical, only the sense decides the meaning.This was a highly unsatisfactory state of affairs and therefore the scholar sought a remedy by clearly defining the writing. In real life, too, Arabic philologists tried to make this rudimentary Arabic script more precise. This was done by placing characters above and below the letters, the so-called diacritics; later signs for short vowels, doubling, vowellessness and elongation were added. These reading aids indicate how the consonant framework is to be read as a whole: as pleasure, burden, remainder, rust. doubt or olive oil. In our olive oil example, the correct meaning is easy to guess, but the guesswork is great for abstract (read: religious) content, where the meaning is by no means common knowledge. Cases are also known where incorrectly placed signs in prescriptions of remedies led to deaths because the mixture was unexpectedly completely different.16 16 Cf. Rotraud Wieland, "Revelation and history in the thinking of modern Muslims", Wiesbaden 1971. 37 These reading aids were not present in any of the early Koranic texts, these consisted only of the "Rasm", the framework, without vowels and highly ambiguous consonants. In addition, sometimes Aramaic idioms were written with early Arabic characters - and vice versa. It is now clearly visible which mistakes could be made by the subsequent setting of the reading aids, not to mention the great chronological distance, if the ancient languages ​​were only insufficiently understood. And it becomes clear that the "detour" via the main language, Syro-Aramaic, delivers the right results in many cases. Here we also find the solution to the riddle of why the Arabic Koran exegetes made such catastrophic mistakes. They could no longer properly read the text material they were editing. They no longer understood the ancient languages ​​and their mixed forms properly and were often confronted with texts that were very difficult to read - which they wanted to make accessible to all Arabs. Because a defined Arabic language and script was missing, these had to be created. This happened primarily in the 9th century, carried out by a group of editors whose most prominent members we know by name, above all the aforementioned Tabari. It is now clear that these people did not actually interpret the Koran, as the saying goes, but in fact translated it and, moreover, determined the language rules for the translation themselves. In addition to these systematic errors, there were a lot of version and copy errors. This means that different versions appeared in the handwritten distribution and spelling mistakes were made. Let us take Sura 50:12-14 and 26:176-177, where those punished for disbelief are listed: In addition to Lut (the biblical Lot), these include the “people of the thicket” (Ashab al Aykah) and the "People of the Well" (Ashab ar-Rass~).17 17 See Gerd-R. Puin in: "The Dark Beginnings" 38 Al Aykah means thicket, but no Koran scholar really knows what to do with the “people of the thicket”, as it says in the Koran. The word occurs four times in the official version of the Cairo Koran. Twice "correct" with the article al (Suras 15:78 and 50:14), i.e. Al Aykah, but twice (Suras 26:176 and 38:13) the a from the article al is missing. The word is then read as Laykah. Al Aykah ? Or Laykah1 In an early manuscript from Sana'a the spelling Lay kah is found where the Cairo edition writes Al Aykah. Abu Ubaydah (9th century) sees Laykah as a place, as does Abu Hayyan al-Garnati (14th century). The latter even considers a different reading "almost as falling away from the faith, which may God forbid." It is precisely this other blasphemous reading that the current official Koran has adopted. The Koran scholars are thus doubly in a quandary, because they would have to admit that the "correct" version in the official Cairo Koran is wrong or that the "incorrect" version is correct. This is not intended, because according to the official reading of Muhamad, the Koran has been handed down flawlessly to this day. Again, the example makes it clear what difference a set or omitted dash or diacritic point can make. Modern - non-Islamic - research tells us that Laykah is the sensible reading, since it means nothing other than the well-known ancient Red Sea port of Leuke Kome. The Ashab ar-Rass, the "People of the Well", are then the "Arsae" (Arser) already mentioned by the geographer Ptolemy north of Yanbu on the Red Sea coast. There is not even a uniform spelling for the much-cited progenitor Abraham: he appears 15 times as Abraham in the Koran and 54 times as Ibrahim. This suggests a different origin of the texts. There are numerous fragments of Koran manuscripts from the early Islamic period (Leiden, Berlin, Paris, Sanaa) that show corrections. Letters and whole words have been erased, corrected or re-inserted. Also well known to the manuscript researchers 39 “palimpsests” are among them. A palimpsest is a parchment whose first inscription has been washed off for the sake of economy and then a new inscription has been added. Modern methods can reveal the underlying first label. In the 8th-century Sanaan palimpsests we see a striving to make as many corrections as possible to a text. If these corrections got the upper hand, the sheet was erased and written on again. There have always been differences between the first and second inscriptions, mostly only minor in spelling, but sometimes also in word meanings and missing or added passages. Errors are a well-known and common occurrence in handwritten copies—especially in Arabic texts, where a wrong or unclear stroke, or an omitted or misplaced period can make a substantial difference in meaning. Along with the errors come conscious changes, for rulers of all ages have been interested in having their view of things represented in the divine scriptures. Ubaydallah, the governor of Mesopotamia, claims to have corrected 2000 Alif ("a") in a text of the Koran. The entire history of the Koran, up to the present day, is a dispute over the correct reading. The reason for this is that the original texts of the Koran were not written in a clear "Koran Arabic". The fact that this is constantly and obtrusively asserted does not make the matter any more correct. Luxenberg provided further evidence when he encountered an arch-Christian tradition in the Aramaic reading of the Koran. He sees the Christmas story in Sura 97. The sura contains five verses and reads in traditional translation: 1: We sent him down on the night of destiny. 2: But how can you know what the Night of Destiny is? 3: The night of determination is better than a thousand months. 4: The angels and the Spirit come down in her by the permission of her Lord, all Logos beings. 5: She is (full of) salvation until the dawn appears. 40 IMAGE 1 Leaf from the oldest known fragment of the Koran (around 720) from Sanaa, in hijaz style without character set. It is a palimsest, i.e. a piece of parchment that has been written on several times. The UV light reveals the older writing underneath the current writing. There are numerous differences between the two scripts and the standard Koran, which proves the evolutionary origin of the Koran 41 Tabari's summary comment: “The Qur'an descended into the lower heavens that night. Depending on the destiny, God would send some of it down to earth until the Qur'an was completed. Twenty years passed between the beginning and end of Revelation. The beginning of the Quran came down that night.” So Tabari means that "he", the Koran, is meant by him. How does he come to this opinion, which cannot be deduced from the context? Luxenberg now proves that in Aramaic "determination" means destiny through birth, birth star, Christmas. So whoever was sent down at Christmas would be Jesus and not the Koran. Tabari must have noticed that a star is involved, because he lets the Koran descend into the lower heaven, i.e. into the starry sphere of the Koranic heaven. Verse 3: The night of determination is better than a thousand months According to Luxenberg, Leyla (night) is not only a general word for “night” in Aramaic, but also a liturgical term in the sense of “night prayer”, corresponding to the Latin “nocturn”. The months do not mean the Arabic shahr (month), but rather the Aramaic liturgical term shara, which means vigils, i.e. the night watches before a high holiday. In verse 4 of the same sura "the angels come down, all Logos(!) beings". Angels accompanied by the Logos, the spirit, come to Luxenberg “Hymns” down: that is, the well-known “Choir of Angels”. So the whole surah reads according to Luxenberg: 1 We let him (= the child Jesus) come down on the night of fate (= the birth star, Christmas). 2 How do you know what Destiny Night is? 1. The night (= the nocturne) of destiny is more merciful than a thousand vigils. 42 4 The angels, accompanied by the Spirit, bring down in it all kinds of hymns by the permission of their Lord. 5 She is peaceful until the break of dawn. One only has to read “he/him” in the context of the word meanings postulated by Luxenberg, i.e. “Jesus” instead of “Koran”, and a completely different meaning appears: namely the Christmas story (which, by the way, was already suggested by several researchers before Luxenberg had suspected). Incidentally, Luxenberg corrects that the Koranic tanazzalu (angels) are correctly the timazzilu - the devil is again in the details of tiny characters that are subsequently set incorrectly. Another "dark", meaning not understood sura is the sura 108. For Luxenberg18 it is a misreading of the Aramaic version of Peter (chapter 5, verses 8-9) and undoubtedly pre-Quranic. The text "belongs to the foundation from which the Koran originally consisted as a Christian liturgical book". In Luxenberg's opinion, this includes everything that is traditionally counted as part of the "first Meccan period". The sending down of the Koran on that fateful night shows just as clearly as the complete mistranslation of the conditions in paradise and the emergence of the headscarf requirement how shaky the traditional interpretation of the Koran stands: In many cases it is nothing more than the private opinion of Messrs Tabari and others - today made absolute as the Word of God. It also becomes clear that knowledge of Arabic language forms is by no means sufficient for research into the Koran, since the original language of large parts of the Koran is not Arabic but Aramaic. And it is becoming increasingly clear that the Koran has Christian roots. Moses is mentioned 136 times in the Koran, Mary 34 times, Jesus 24 times, and Muhammad 4 times. In 1999, a Viking find discovered an Arabic coin from the year 766 - i.e. minted 130 years after "Muhamad" - with the inscription Musa rasul Allah ("Moses is the messenger 18 Christoph Luxenberg, “The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran”, Berlin 2007, p. 304 ff. 43 of God"). Moses, Jesus and Mary (together 194 mentions) are present to a very large extent in the theological part of the Koran. Researchers come to the conclusion that there is a great deal of Christian thought in the theological part of the Koran. The original Koran does not see itself as an independent script in the sense of a holy book of a new religion. Several suras make it clear that the Koran saw itself as part of the scriptures, but never as the scriptures themselves. Sura 75:17 says: "It is incumbent on us to compile and teach the lectionary by excerpts from the Scriptures." 41:3: "A writing which we have translated into an Arabic reading." 5:68 demands: "O people of the Scripture, you lack ... foundation unless you keep the Torah and the Gospel and what has been revealed to you from your ... Lord." Sura 3:4, 15:1, 9:111 and others speak in a similar way. That is, the original program of the Koran was to confirm “the scriptures”, Torah and Gospel. Sura 2, which we are already familiar with, begins with the words: “This is the book in which there is no doubt. Anyone who can read the sura knows, however, that it is not precisely called this, but that. But this does not mean that, and that does not mean something immediately present. This, too, is a clear reference to another book, even if none of the hundred thousand daily reciters cares to acknowledge it. Quran comes from the Aramaic qeryan, meaning "lecturer," a liturgical book containing selected texts from Scripture, the Old and New Testaments. The starting material can be assumed to be the Diatessaron, a liturgical book of the Syrian Christians, in which the four gospels were drawn together into one in short form. The Koran also often speaks of the “Gospel”, although there were several. The Koran, like the Diatessaron, is also a summary. This is evidenced by numerous places, such as where before the 44 fate of Lot is warned. An incident is referred to, but the context is not explained. This means that the corresponding story was assumed to be known to the reader. The structure names of the Qur'an are borrowed from the Qeryan: sura (sura), aya (verse). And as a small but fine detail on the edge, there are also the typical mistakes made in Syrian liturgical writings, a 4th Points formed cross, again in the Koran. One may Quran in the early period not as a holy book of Islam, as we are used to, but simply as a term for a liturgical book of the Syriac Christian Arabs. The Qeryan, the liturgical book, was originally an excerpt of the Old and New Testaments for Arab Christians. Over the course of time, numerous local traditions were added to the basic Christian pattern, such as the detailed legal explanations in the so-called Medinan suras. The original theological statement was distorted almost beyond recognition by the editing of later Arabic editors. They collected everything that was available in the form of written and oral traditions, but left a tangle of interpretations. A clear indication that the texts in front of them were written in a language that they no longer understood sufficiently. These exegetes were also grammarians. What they created in their schools in Kufa and Basra, What we find in early Koran writings are the texts of the Arab Christians and their theology. What we have before us in the later Arabic versions is the book of a religion of its own. Now the Qeryan had become the Quran, only now was the writing and content of the Koran in the world. However, in a reading that the texts often did not give. But that was not the end of the various explanations and interpretations; the scope left open by the editors was too great. After all, there was no “official” version; there were soon hundreds of competing editions of the Koran, and they still exist today. which 45 Version is therefore the real holy book of Islam, which is to be followed verbatim? In 1924, Cairo's Al-Azhar University published an edition of the Qur'an intended to be identical to the "Othman Qur'an". This "Othmanic Koran" is named after the 3rd Caliph Othman (644 - 656), who, according to tradition, compiled the first valid version of the Koran and had all other circulating versions burned as false. According to Islamic dogma, this "Othmanic Koran" already showed the spelling that is still valid today, including the vowel signs and the diacritic punctuation. However, an "Othmanic Koran", ie a proven version going back to Othman, does not exist. For centuries, the Ottoman-Turkish view of the correct reading was dominant. The standard 19th-century Koran, for example, was a lithographed version made in large numbers in Istanbul. However, this deviated so far from the traditional reading that violent protests arose, especially in Egypt. In response to this blasphemous scripture, the Al-Azhar Koran School began working on its own version. The basis was an unspecified version of the Koran from 1886. Following the text of “this noble Koran”, the Cairo committee provides the source in traditional Islamic style: a chain of authorities is named who stand for the correctness of the text should, leading back to the Caliph Othman himself and a secretary of the Prophet. (Some other editors call on the archangel Gabriel himself as a witness of the correctness). The proof of the correctness lies here as usual with "informed men" and not with investigations of the text itself. It must be emphasized that not a single one of the existing older manuscripts was consulted in order to be able to start at least with the earliest texts - there was no independent determination of the age of the existing texts anyway. They just took a contemporary Koran and revised it using spelling rules. These were the rules of al-Sigistani (d.928) and the Spaniard al-Dani (d.1053). Based on these rules, the "correct reading" of the Othmanic original can be deduced. About 46 The ninth century, in the time of Othman, was still a long way off, because those to be examined were checked precisely with the rules that they themselves had drawn up. A wonderful circular argument. The “Othmanic Koran” thus remains pure fiction, the Cairo Koran cannot lay claim to the authenticity of the tradition of the prophets. In 1924 Cairo appointed this Koran, which was claimed to be authentic, as the only authorized model for all further prints of the Koran by Sunni Muslims. While we are not aware of any Othmanic Qur'an, we do know of numerous early Qur'anic texts. None of them have reading aids, none is written in the Koran Arabic as Muslims understand it today, and they all differ from one another. In the 1970s, fragments of the Koran from the 8th century with a different sequence of suras than found in the official Koran of Cairo. Even as far back as the 10th century, there are numerous versions of the Koran with a sequence of suras other than the official one19. The oldest Koranic texts known to us date from the early 8th century, although the exact dating poses certain problems20. There is no doubt that the Cairo version of the Koran is not from the 7th century, but goes back to a younger editing. This is to be seen against the background that neither of us "Othman Koran" is known any trace of Caliph Othman himself. There is no religiously independent trace of any of the first four caliphs. In the Islamic public and literature, the divergence between Koran passages and Koran editions is completely ignored, “We know”, one can read in a document published by the Iranian cultural department21, “that the Koran, which we use today 19 Bayard Dodge, The Leader of al-Nadim, New York 1979. 20 The radiocarbon dating (C14) tells only something about the age of the parchment, nothing about the time of its inscription. 21 Tabataba'i, Sayyid, Cultural Department of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Bonn 1986. 47 available is the same that was gradually revealed to the Prophet fourteen centuries ago. Therefore, the Koran itself does not require any history as confirmation of its credibility and authenticity.” The next circular argument. In other words, research on the Koran is as superfluous as a goiter, since the result is already certain. Islamic scholars do their best to avoid source research when there is a risk of crossing back the timeline of the ominous "Othmanic Koran", because it only has the task of confirming dogmas. For Islamic theology, "Othman Qur'an" a taboo. The Turkish scholar Tayyar Altikulac compared a certain modern edition of the Koran, believed to be correct, with a manuscript preserved in Istanbul's Topkapi Palace, also attributed to the said caliph Othman. The examination was carried out according to the usual scientific procedure. However, there were so many discrepancies that the two texts could not possibly be identical, so the manuscript could not be Othman's original as hoped, and the modern text could not be a copy of the original. Despite this, Dr. Altikulac described the editions as "similar" and pointed out that the verses were always passed on by a "competent mouth" (fam muhsiri), who always knew how to read them correctly. Claiming that written differences are unimportant because only the pronunciation counts (which can no longer be verified) is a popular explanation for version differences. Meanwhile, there is no doubt that despite the existence of an oral tradition, the transmission also took place in writing. But the loyal researcher must have felt a little eerie, because he suggested "aligning" the two versions and then "prohibiting further investigations". That's called science. But you don't necessarily have to travel to an Islamic country, to find similar approaches. Angelika Neuwirth, head of the 48 jekts Corpus Coranicum22, said in an interview that it would be a waste "to simply ignore the invaluable knowledge and experience of Islamic Koran scholars, which we as outsiders can hardly ever fully acquire". We agree with that, as long as we do not lose sight of the fact that the people she is talking about see their task in confirming current dogmas and for whom crossing the Ottoman Rubicon, for example, is beyond imagining. Furthermore, Ms. Neuwirth emphasizes that her team also respect the "divine founding myth of the Koran". It's like Darwin doing his evolutionary research with the Bible under his arm. Neuwirth-Adlatus Marx doesn't even bother with such hair-splitting. He sees people for whom a critical historical source analysis, including for Islamic texts, is a matter of course, decidedly “outside of academia”23. Is that orientalism? Or Orient? Bible criticism has existed for centuries. Aware of the problems involved in handwritten distribution of a book over a long period of time, efforts have long been made to make the original beliefs accessible. Efforts were made to find texts that were as up-to-date as possible. Over the centuries, explorers, scholars, believers and adventurers combed the Orient in search of the original Holy Scriptures. Through a targeted search, the Saxon nobleman Konstantin von Tischendorf, who was traveling on behalf and on the account of the Tsar, found a Bible manuscript from the Sinai Monastery in 1844 4th century24. Highly trained monks compared the different texts and tried to filter out the original meaning. Nicolaus Cusanus (1400-1458) suggested examining the Koran for original content from the Gospels. Martin Luther held 22 See the English http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_Coranicum 23 In “Der Spiegel”, September 17th. 2008 24 He also found a letter of protection from the Prophet Mohammed for the monastery, signed with his handprint. The document turned out to be pure forgery, but has helped the monastery survive amidst its hostile environment. 49 little of it because the texts are already inextricably mixed. This shows that in the scientific corpus of the Church the foundations of the Koran were always seen as Christian, but it also makes it clear that in Bible research it was considered essential to get as close as possible to the events by using texts that were as up-to-date as possible. This should be a matter of course for any religious research. In contrast, exegesis of the Koran, disregarding factual objections, still refers to the Cairo edition today. However, as has been shown, this is the summary or sorting out of writings in the 9th century. Source research, one of the basic scientific tools, does not exist in the Islamic world to this day. What is being done is self-satisfied navel-gazing and not critical observation on a scientific level, which is also to be expected of a religion when it comes to historical questions. As the only religion of the book, Islam affords the luxury of ignoring newly emerged texts and new research results. When things get tricky, one retreats to absurd explanations or immediately declares that further discussion is superfluous. The result is The Koran did not come into the world from one day to the next, as the pious legend would have us believe. Like all holy books, the Koran has had a long history with many modifications. Syro-Aramaic original texts, Aramaic-Arabic transition forms, the Qeryan of the Arab Christians, Persian influences, local traditions, diverse Arabic adaptations: all of this makes up the Koran. As we already know, about 25 percent of the text is completely mistranslated. As one may assume based on the few, but simply spectacular results of the scientific research into the Koran that is just beginning, the misreadings are likely to make up a large percentage of the Koran. There are a large number of manuscripts that have not yet been examined at all, 50 The first printed version of the Koran was in Kazan, Russia, in 1802. This means that the Koran was distributed in handwritten form for more than three quarters of its history - with the typical errors. No two handwritten copies of texts of this size are identical. This is not a special case in the Qur'an, all books of this type that have been handed down over such a long period of time have the same fate. However, one has a huge problem if one claims complete identity and flawlessness for the text that has come down to us - from Muhammad to Cairo 1924. This has been proven many times not to be the case. But it is still the Islamic creed, and this is the crux of the criticism. Changes, mistakes, forgeries and mistakes are documented by the thousands. According to Islamic teachings, any change to the original text is blasphemy. If you take this statement seriously, then today's official Koran is pure blasphemy. 51 By the people for the people: Hadith: Sayings and deeds of the Prophet "No one serious about studying Islam would dare to use the sayings attributed to Muhammad and his companions as a source to form a picture of the early state and original teachings of Islam." Ignaz Goldziher, doyen of Koran research at the 1st International Congress of the history of religion, Paris 1900 Along with the Qur'an, the hadith (stress on the second syllable, -th pronounced as s) are the most important religious scriptures in Islam. Hadiths are sayings and actions of the Prophet: what he said on this or that matter, what verdict he gave on this or that case, who his favorite wife was, what his favorite food was and who he did when he visited heaven and hell encountered There is hardly a conceivable or unthinkable event in Muhammad's life that is not described in detail. Most of the sayings are reproduced verbatim. The biography of the Prophet (Sira) in its thousands of variants and all the details on the Hadith. The number of hadiths exceeds the million mark. Six collections are canonized, that is, officially recognized as authentic and true by the Sunni clergy. (But not from the Shiites, who for their part present five collections of their own.) The authors of these six official collections are al-Buhari (d. 870), Muslim (d. 875), Ibn Maja (d. 886), Abu Dawud ( d. 888), Tirmidhi (d. 892), and Nasa'i (d. 915). The earliest, occasionally quoted collection of biographical data of Ibn Ishak (d. c. 770) is unattested, the collection of Ibn Hisham (d. 834) is curiously not canonized. As a reminder, the Prophet died in 632. That means the hadiths were written 150 to 250 years after his death, some even much later. Until then they were oral 53 passed on, primarily by quassas, professional storytellers. The stories about the sayings and deeds of the Prophet Muhammad traveled verbatim from tea fire to tea fire, from market to market, from one generation to the next, until they ended up with one of the scribes. Let's look at some hadiths. They come from the official Buhari collection and are numbered according to the Reclam edition. Only the original informant is named in each case. In reality, you have to think of the entire "trading chain" over five or six generations. This would look like this: "This is what A told me, adding that B mentioned that C told him D mentioned that he heard from E that F said G asked Aisha (one of Muhammad's wives): 'What happened the prophet of the Lord liked to eat V Whereupon Aisha said: 'Truly I tell you, he liked candied fruit and honey, and he especially liked pumpkin.' II, 11 Ibn Abbas reports: The Prophet narrated: “Hell was shown to me. And the majority of its residents were women.” Someone asked him, “Didn't they believe in God?” “They were ungrateful to their companions, ungrateful for the favors bestowed upon them. If you do nothing but good to such a woman, but she discovers something in you that displeases her, she will say, 'I have never seen anything good in you.' II, 17 Abu Hurairah reports that the Messenger of God said to him: "Whoever sincerely professes Islam, his good deed will be credited ten to seven hundred times, while a bad deed will be credited only once." III, 19 Abu Huraira reports: I said, "O Messenger of God, I hear so many hadiths from you, but I often forget them." The Prophet replied, "Spread your cloak." I complied with this request. After that, the Prophet moved his hands as if he were scooping something into my coat. Then he said: "Now put it back on." I did what he said and haven't forgotten a thing since! IV, 2nd Hammam ibn Munabbih reports: Narrated Abu Huraira: The Messenger of Allah said: "The prayer of a person who is unclean is not accepted until he performs the minor ablution." A man from Hadramaut asked him: "O Abu Huraira, what makes one impure I" "For example, flatulence." IV, 5 Anas reports: When the Prophet went away to relieve himself, he would say: "Oh God, I take refuge in you from the forces of evil and impurity." iv, 6 Abu Aiyub al-Ansari narrates that the Messenger of Allah said: “When you relieve yourself, your face or back must not be turned towards the Kaaba. Rather turn to the west or to the east.” IV, 24 Abu Huraira reports: The Messenger of Allah said, "Don't urinate in standing water. Because later you may need this water to wash yourself.” v, 3 Qatada reports: Anas ibn Malik narrated: “In the course of one night and one day, the Prophet entered into all his wives. And he had eleven!” I asked him, “Did he have that much strength?” “Yes, he had the strength of 30 men.” v, 10 Ubai ibn Kab reports: I asked the Prophet, 'O Messenger of God, how should a man wash himself who has been with his wife but has not ejaculated?' Then he is to perform the minor ablution. Then he can perform the prayer.” vii, 1 Anas reports: The prophet related that he had met Enoch, Moses, Jesus and Abraham in the heavens - may God bless them - but gave no further information as to their whereabouts. However, he pointed out that he saw Adam in the first heaven and Abraham in the sixth heaven. When Gabriel and the prophet passed Enoch, he said, "Welcome, O sincere prophet and pious brother in faith!" Then I saw Moses. He said, "Welcome, O sincere prophet and pious brother in faith!" Then I met Jesus. He also said: "Welcome, O sincere prophet and pious brother in faith!" Finally I met Abraham. He said, "Welcome, O sincere prophet and devout fellow believer!" x, 14 Abdullah ibn Umar narrates that the Messenger of Allah said: "Praying together is twenty-seven times the value of praying alone." XI, 4th Salman al-Farsi reports that the Prophet said: "Whoever takes a bath on Friday and washes himself thoroughly, oils his hair or perfumes his hair, then goes to prayer and does not crowd between the worshipers who have already taken their places before him, then performs the prayer according to the regulations and the sermon If you listen carefully, you will be forgiven for the transgressions you committed between that day and the previous Friday.” XV, 1 Abu Darr reports: The Prophet said, “From my Lord came the good news that all the members of my church who serve God alone and ascribe no partaker in His divinity to Him after their death will enter Paradise.” I asked him, “Does this also apply to those who committed adultery or stole "Yes!" XV, 13 Abu Huraira reports: The Messenger of God said: “Every newborn child has a natural disposition for right faith. It is the parents who bring it up to be a Jew, a Christian or a magician.” XX, 15 Nah, the Maular of Ibn Umar narrates: "If date palms are sold that have already been pollinated and no further arrangements have been made, the harvest goes to whoever pollinated the palms." XXIV, 3 Ibn Umar reports: "The Prophet forbade eating two dates at the same time before asking the others for permission." XXVI, 7 Abu Sail al-Khudri reports: The Prophet said to the women: "Is it not so that a woman's testimony carries only half the weight of a man's testimony?" They replied: "Yes, O Messenger of God!" - "The reason for this is your defective understanding !“ XXVIII, 18 Abdullah ibn Umar narrates that the Messenger of Allah said: I will fight the Jews until one of them takes refuge behind a rock. And this stone will call: "Come here, this Jew has hidden behind me! Kill him!" XXIX, 5 Abdullah reports: We were on a war campaign and we didn't have any women with us. So we said to the Prophet, "Isn't it better to be castrated?" He forbade us to do so, but allowed women to be married for a limited time. XXIX, 7 Gabir ibn Abdullah reports: As we neared our destination, the Prophet said, "Take your time and ride slowly so that you arrive in Medina before nightfall." Because women should still find time to comb their hair and shave their pubic hair!” XXXIV, 15 Abu Huraira reports: The Prophet said, "The evil eye is reality!" And he forbade tattooing. XXXI, 14 Abdul Aziz reports: Someone asked Anas, "Did the Prophet say anything about garlic?" Yes, he said, "Anyone who has eaten garlic should not come near our mosque!" So these hadiths have been written down hundreds of thousands of times around 200 years and later after the alleged events. Of course, it is obvious to everyone that the authenticity of quotes that have been passed down orally over centuries, and that on a huge scale, should be viewed with the greatest skepticism. In the 9th and 10th centuries there was a veritable hadith industry. Hadi the were issued against order and payment, those in power had them made for their legitimacy. A certain al-Audja admitted to fabricating 4,000 Hadith25. He was executed for it, but that didn't solve the real problem. Abu Dawud, author of one of the official collections, stated that out of 500,000 hadiths he had only adopted the 4,800 "which appear authentic, or almost". Al-Buhari, the most prominent hadith editor, recognized "only 7400" out of 600,000 narrations as authentic. With a conservative estimate of 1.5 million Hadith as raw material from only the official publishers, hundreds of thousands of individual reviews of the transmitters would be necessary, going back "only" 150 years in the best case... The recognition of a hadith as "genuine" is conditional. The guarantor must · be trustworthy and of good repute; · to be blameless in faith and religious conduct; · offer the guarantee that the information has been correctly understood; · narrated more than one hadith. The lore must: · expressly state that what was reported came from Muhamad personally; · have an unbroken chain of guarantors; · in terms of content, fit into the time of Muhammad. 25 McDonald, Development of Muslim Theology, Jurisprudence and Constitutional Theory. New York 1903. The quality of a hadith is always determined by the isnad, that is the chain of transmission. If the isnad is in order, so is the hadith itself, no matter how questionable it may be in terms of content or logic. A proven chain of narration results in a solid ("sound") hadith. Criticism of a hadith is therefore never criticism of the content, because according to the basic assumption it always comes from the prophet himself, but it is only criticism of the isnad and its tradents (transmitters). In addition to the Prophet, Hadith readers were his “comrades” and their “successors”, a total of several thousand people. Your statements about the prophet are considered to be a certificate of authenticity with a guarantee of origin. For a long time there was no verification of hadith, each one was "genuine", only when the hadith got out of hand were criteria created, but by then the dams had already been broken. Hadiths have almost the same meaning to Muslims as verses from the Qur'an because God speaks through the Prophet in them. Because they have been handed down in the vernacular, they are written in a way that everyone can understand, and the great, reverent distance that exists from the Koran is missing. The editor of the Buhari hadith collection (Reclam) writes in his introduction: “Non-Muslim readers will learn many things while reading that may seem strange and strange to them. You are approaching the intimate sphere of a foreign culture.” True, they approach the private sphere, but not one step closer to the facts. Hadiths reflect trivialities of everyday life for long stretches. But they are all the more important for the believer, because they provide instructions for the situation to which he is looking for an answer. In every Islamic country there are newspaper columns, radio and television programs in which the audience can ask questions about specific life situations and the author or moderator provides the appropriate hadith. However, today's questions have yesterday's answers - the fundamental problem of Islamic thought. Hadith are the main basis of the Sharia, Islamic jurisprudence, since the Koran itself has a maximum of 500 passages that are legally relevant and the numerous, contradictory verses of the Koran pose major problems in practice. Since the Koran itself is not sufficient as a legal basis, not only the deeds and sayings of the Prophet, but also those of his companions and even their successors are used and weighed in gold. Countless heads have rolled and countless hands have fallen on the sand, severed on the basis of Hadith. Apostasy from Islam carries the death penalty. This is based on a single hadith: "Kill anyone who changes his religion." There is no corresponding passage in the Koran itself. A single "spell" appearing from somewhere can make the difference between life and death. Koran scholars are also aware of the problems of the hadiths. At all times, work was done to clean it up. The "Islamic science" um al-ridzhal, which is also currently practiced, deals with the mediators of hadiths. It has the task of checking “the living conditions and the scientific qualifications” of the narrators from back then. That means sorting out the false hadiths and keeping the right ones. But according to which scientific criteria? At this point one has to ask oneself what “science” is supposed to mean in the Islamic context. In any case, it doesn't seem to have much to do with a generally accepted definition of science. It should be remembered that we are talking about the need for a hundred thousand fold verification of a chain of people with regard to biographical data and character traits, dating back around 1400 years, which, over five to six generations, contained a large amount of information mainly as quotations in verbatim speech and without any written information should have passed on the document in an unadulterated manner. Call it a miracle if you like, and leave the term science out of the game. The historical correctness of hadiths is just as if today we were describing the life and deeds of Napoleon, including his verbatim speeches, solely on the basis of tales written about the passed down to us for generations ("My great-uncle told me his father told him that the grandfather of an acquaintance whose grandfather knew someone whose uncle served with Napoleon learned that he said the following: What historical reliability would that have? But that's how Hadith works. And such a "chain" should, then as now, be seriously verifiable? We do not yet know anything about the truth of the message itself, because the content of a hadith is not questioned, as is well known. In principle, whatever the naïve believer felt was right became hadith as a saying of the Prophet. It is not just about individual passages, but about the entire construct of the life and work of the Prophet, because the Sira, the biography of the Prophet, is nothing more than biographically lined up Hadith material. This is where the fundamental problem of sources inherent in Islam comes to the fore: stories from hearsay are presented as facts. Source research is non-existent. Wikipedia states: "However, Sira literature differs from Hadith literature in that it is generally not secured by the chain of narration." Is the "chain of traditions" supposed to be a seal of approval? If one considers the "chain of tradition" to be "secured," then what is "unsecured" anyway? A fairy tale comes in through the entrance and leaves the exit as a secure fact? And: “According to the current state of research, the core of the Sira is considered to be a largely authentic, historical source; except for a few passages.” Just the opposite is the case. The scientist should get in touch, who in the Sira, i.e. in the hadiths and their derivatives, one "authentic and historical source". Because the sources are completely obscure and unverifiable, the hadiths can safely be called a collection of fairy tales. They do not meet the criteria for a historically usable source - with one exception: hadiths excellently depict the history of the origins of Islam. The different directions that the developing religion took, the battles of position, the dynastic disputes, the theological formations, they were all reflected in the Hadith. Likewise, the influences of the different regions and schools - Damascus, Basra, Kufa, Medina, Persian theologians versus Arabic - are clearly evident, because the right hadith was available for every occasion to strengthen one's own position and to support the opposing position weaknesses. The influences of the surrounding religions also manifest themselves in the hadiths, as they do in the Koran. Borrowing from the gospel of Matthias 5:3 (“blessed are the poor in spirit”), the prophet is told in a completely un-Islamic way that the majority of the inhabitants of Para are the simple-minded (whereas annoying wives form the majority in hell). In the canonical collection of Abu Dawud, the tradent Abu-l-Darda testifies that he heard Muhammad say the following prayer: "Our God in heaven, hallowed be thy name, thy will be done in heaven and on earth, as thy mercy is in heaven is, be she also on earth. Forgive us our debts and our sins..." The hadiths had far-reaching consequences for the administration of justice. While the early schools of Abu Hanifa and Malik bin Anas dispensed with hadiths - that is, Muhammad was not mentioned at all - later schools essentially only relied on hadiths. So it was no longer about creating legal principles, but only about the comparison. What did the prophet say about this? What has he done ? If no adequate answer could be found, the search continued among the “comrades” and their “successors”. And if that didn't lead to success either, the question arose: What would the prophet say? Because there was no longer anything to order without a suitable Hadith, the originally quite rational Hanifites, for example, turned into the most keen Hadith producers and falsifiers. That was the time when Hadith regulated the life of the believers and their society in detail. The umbrella term of Hadith and Sira is the Sunna, the "tradition". The entirety of all traditions relating to the Prophet is Sunna, with the hadiths being of the greatest importance. Sunna is what the Prophet said, what he did and what was reported about him. In accordance with the tradition of the prophets, the Sunna regulated the manner of greeting and what was to be wished on when someone sneezed, as well as the number of women, the beard, the length of their clothes and food bans. Sunna is the form of government and the judiciary and ultimately the most important normative principle of all private and public life. As early as the third Islamic century, the Koran and Sunna were of equal value. The saying “The Sunna is the judge of the Koran and not vice versa” applied. Salafi, the "copycat of tradition" — the tradition of Muhammad — was the greatest title of glory for a ninth-century believer. These “Imitators of tradition”, known as “Salafists”, are still an important trend in Islam in the 21st century. Of course, in circumstances where the supreme virtue was imitation and comparison, no theology could develop. What's more, the original Islamic motives were reversed. If the earliest Islam was rooted in the striving for clarity and simplicity, and therefore in the rejection of flamboyant Greek Christianity with its miracles and saints, this excessive cult of personality was precisely the hallmark of the new religion as early as the third Islamic century. In contradiction to the Koran and the Arabic Sunna, a paragon without fault or blame was created, a perfect human being who performed miracles and was soon the subject of thousands of legends: Muhammad. A perfect human: The Prophet Muhammad according to traditional accounts “We are talking about a person with the most excellent character traits and unusual but extremely exemplary ways of acting. The calm and patience itself. Is there a person in your area or in your relatives and family circle of whom you can say something like that? Do you know someone who never scolds, shouts or gets angry? Always stay patient, loving and calm ? I know a person We are talking about the Prophet Mohammad - peace and blessings be upon him. How I wish I had had the honor of knowing this wonderful man and of having lived in his time. By the grace of Allah I may belong to the ummah of Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him). There is no greater grace for me. Allah sent us such a loving, kind and caring Prophet. He was just like no other and was always keen to do good. He was popular among his companions, but humble and even needy in spite of everything. He didn't have much in the way of material things, but despite everything he was grateful and content. There were days when he was starving or just ate a date. Once the Prophet sat and recited the Qur'an and cried at a point where the saying of the Prophet Issa came into play: 'If you, Allah, forgive them, it is because you are all-forgiving. 'Allah sent down to him the angel Gabriel (peace be upon him) and he asked why he was crying. The Prophet Mohammad - peace and blessings be upon him - said that he was crying for his ummah. He cried for his ummah! He feared for us. How important his ummah was to him!” Quoted from: muhamad.islam.de, 2009 PICTURE 2 Muhammad as a preacher. Depiction from East Persia (now Tajikistan or Uzbekistan) from the 13th century According to Islamic tradition, and as can be read almost everywhere else, Muhammad was born in Mecca in 570 AD and died in Medina in 632. He came from the Hashemite clan of the Kuraish (quraish) tribe. His father's name was Abd Allah and he was a great-great-grandson of Qusayy, the founder of Makkah. His mother's name was Amina. Like most other boys, he tended goats and sheep, but the first occurrence is soon to be reported. When he was twelve years old, accompanying a caravan to Syria, a Christian monk prophesied that he would one day become a great man. Little else is recorded of his early years, save that he led caravans north and south with such genius that the richest woman in Makkah, Khadija, caught the eye of him. At the age of 39 he married 55-year-old Khadija, with who had six children. Already the fact that Khadija still 66 gave birth to children by Muhamad at the age of 60 is the first miracle to be rated. The Arabia of that time was ruled by Bedouin tribes, there were only a few cities. Mecca at the crossroads of trade routes is said to have been one of the important centers of the Arabian Peninsula. The region's tribes worshiped a variety of nature deities, but there were also Christian and Jewish communities. The Kuraish tribe, to which Muhammad belonged, was the most important. He settled in and around Mecca and worshiped as main deities Allat and Uzza - the goddesses of the moon, the morning star and fertility. The religious center was a black stone, said to have originally been white but darkened by the absorption of people's sins. It is assumed today that it is a meteorite, although it has so far not been accessible to scientific investigation. Annual pilgrimages were held to this holy stone, which was an important source of income for Mecca. The pilgrims circumnavigated the sacred stone seven times against the sun and performed other ritual ceremonies. Since the goddesses were also responsible for fertility, Pilgrims are said to have circled the stone naked in earlier times, later a special ritual robe was ordered. The symbol of Allat was the crescent moon, that of the sister goddess Uzza the morning star. Freed from all financial worries by marrying Khadija, Muhamad devoted himself to religion. He began to roam the desert, fasting and composing mystical verses. He only came home occasionally to get food. "In the heat of the day and during the clear desert nights, when the stars shone sharply enough to pierce the eye, his being was saturated with the signs of the heavenly bodies, so that even then he was considered a quite fitting instrument of a revelation such as these times chen inherent, could have served. At that time he was being prepared for a tremendous task that was to be entrusted to him, the task of prophethood and the transmission of the true religion of God to his people and the rest of mankind.”26 One day during the holy month of Ramadan, while he was sleeping in a cave on Mount Hira - in some traditions the cave is called Hira - an angel appeared to him. Muhammad identified him as the archangel Gabriel, who had already appeared to Mary, the mother of Jesus. From now on, this night was to be called the "Night of Determination" by the Muslims. Muhammad describes this encounter as follows: “While I was sleeping, Gabriel came to me with a silk brocade coverlet, inside which was a book. He spoke: IQRA. [Read!]27 I said: I don't read! Then he choked me with the cloth so that I thought I was going to die.” This was repeated twice until Muhamad read. The first surah, Koran 96:1-5, was thus born: “Read in the name of your Lord who created. He created man from a clot of blood. Read, for your Lord is all good. He who teaches with the pen teaches man what he did not know.” Then he continued: "But I awoke, and it seemed to me as if writing had been engraved in my heart." This experience put him in a state of mind that even made him consider suicide. But then he had another experience: “While I was walking, I suddenly heard a voice from heaven and recognized the angel who had come to me that day on Hira. Terrified, I ran home and shouted: Cover me up!" 26 From: islamreligion.com, 2009. 27 According to other traditions, Muhammad could neither read nor write. PICTURE 3 The footprint of the Prophet Muhamad as displayed along with a whisker, a tooth, and the sword of David and the staff of Moses at the Topkapi Museum in Istanbul. However, there is no trace of the historical Muhamad [because the terror had seized him - or did he want to hide ?] Then God revealed the words: “Arise, thou who have covered thyself, and warn, and glorify the greatness of thy Lord, and cleanse thy clothes, and remove thyself from the uncleanness of idolatry.” (Surah 74:1-5) The revelations became more frequent, and the pain associated with them increased. The disbelieving Kuraish sneered, "Muhamad has been abandoned by his master." Then Allah sent down the suras 93:1-5 to refute the disbelievers: "By morning and by night when she is still! Your Lord has not bid you farewell and does not hate you. Verily, the hereafter is 69 better for you than this world. And verily, your Lord will give you and you will be satisfied.” At intervals of three to six months (depending on the narrator), Muhamad received the revelations of God. His followers were meticulous about his words, separating them depending on the occasion. Those words that came from revelations formed the later Koran. His other words were summarized in the hadith (sayings) and the sira (life story). But at first the revelations of Allah were either memorized or provisionally written down on materials that happened to be available. At the heart of Muhammad's sermons was the belief in the one and only God. However, his success was limited. His wife Khadija, his friend Abu Bakr, his former slave and a few other followers belonged to his first community. Although the band was small, the persecutions by the Meccans and other Kuraishites steadily increased - after all, Muhammad preached against their gods. There are very detailed descriptions of this difficult time. The persecution eventually became so unbearable that Muhamad decided to go into exile with his group of now 80 followers in Abyssinia (according to other accounts he only sent followers there, he himself stayed in Mecca). There he was warmly received by the king, the "Christian Negus". The Meccans, however, suspected that Muhammad wanted to ally with the Abyssinians and sent a delegation demanding Muhammad's extradition. At the hearing, Muhamad convinced the king that he and his community worshiped the same God as Christians, and was able to back this up with verses from the Koran. The king was moved to tears, and with his exclamation, "Truly, the same God wrote that!" the tug-of-war was won. The Muslims were not handed over The Prophet's congregation grew in size, and the disputes between it and the pagan Meccans grew more violent. Finally, the Meccans banned all contact with the Prophet's clan, the Hashemites, and posted the decree on the Kaaba, which was still pagan at the time. The next day the entire paper was eaten by white ants except for the words "Bismillah Allahu" - another miracle had happened. People from Yathrib, now known as Medina, also came for the Hajj that followed, the annual pilgrimage to Mecca to worship the black stone and circumambulate the Kaaba. Muhammad secretly met them and converted them to Islam. The Medins were predominantly Jews and Christians, had a script and were therefore much more open to the new faith than the backward Meccans. On the occasion of Hajj the following year, they were able to bring Muhammad the good news that he already had a sizeable following in Medina. This was not likely to improve relations with the Meccans, who suspected a hostile alliance behind it. Conditions got so bad Muhammad himself endured because he wanted without the command of God do nothing. Finally the order came and Muhammad told his cousin Ali to put on his cloak and lie on his bed in his house disguised as a prophet. He himself snuck away with Abu Bakr, and they rode away on their racing camels towards Medina. This happened on September 23, 622. It is the Hijra - the "Exodus from Mecca to Medina" and the beginning of the Islamic calendar. Along the way, in Qubaa, Muhamad built Islam's first mosque, the faithful Ali had somehow made it there by now. In Medina the Prophet was enthusiastically received. Here, too, he first built a mosque, then returned to revelations and teaching. His time in Medina was to be the most fulfilling of his life. Difficulties soon arose between his old supporters, the Muhajirun, and the new Muslims from Medina, the Ansar. Thanks to his diplomatic skills, Muhammad brought about a covenant between the two parties and the first community of believers (ummah) was formed. From then on, the rules of this community were regarded as a model for later Islamic communities and states up to the present day. In view of the irreconcilable differences between the two groups, this agreement also falls under the category of “miracles” for some biographers. But the problems didn't end there. The dissidents, especially the Jews, were still the great majority in Medina and the Prophet tried intensively to convert them to the correct faith. But they turned out to be recalcitrant and had good reasons for it: “The Jews had also benefited wonderfully from the quarrels among the Arab tribes, for it had been the volatility in that region that had given them the upper hand in trade and supply. Peace between the tribes of Medina was a threat to the Jews.”28 Muhammad argued that he shared the same monotheism as they did and also referred to Jerusalem as the direction of prayer for Muslims. However, the Jews did not recognize his authenticity as a prophet, and tensions between the two population groups increased. Then Muhammad angrily turned away from Jews and Christians, he no longer referred to their prophets, but, covered by a new revelation, to the progenitor Abraham: "Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but a follower of the purest faith, a devotee, and he does not belong to the polytheists." (Surah 3:67) At the same time he changed the direction of prayer (qiblah) from Jerusalem to Mecca, because it had also been revealed to him that the Kaaba, the pagan sanctuary of this city, was actually built by Abraham for the 28 From: islamreligion.com, 2009. Muslims had been built. It is reported in Sura al-Baqarah (“The Cow”). From then on, the Muslims could no longer trust the Jews. Other problems to be solved were with another section of Medina's population, led by Muhammad's most stubborn adversary, the notorious Ubayy. He and his people had indeed accepted Islam - but only for appearances! In secret they fought the prophet in the pay of the Jews and Meccans. That is why the "Jews" and the "hypocrites" are often held accountable in the Medinan suras of the Koran. The Hijra marks a clear dividing line in the history of the Prophet, as can be seen in the Qur'an. The suras are becoming shorter and shorter and relate primarily to law and general instructions. Muhammad's problems with the unbelievers in Medina are also reflected in the Medinan suras. Until then he had only been a preacher. From now on he was a warlord and statesman. The leader of a small state that would grow into an Arab empire within a few years. Meanwhile, the situation in Mecca continued to deteriorate. Muslims were now openly persecuted and tortured. Moreover, the Meccans had allied themselves with the hypocrite Ubayy and now extended their anti-Muslim actions to Medina. Then God gave permission for the Muslims to take up arms against the unbelievers29. For 13 years they had been pacifists. But now they embarked on small expeditions, led either by the Prophet himself or by one of his subordinates, to track down and plunder Meccan caravans, but also to ally themselves with other tribes. The Muslims wanted to put economic pressure on the Kuraish to give up their persecution of the Muslims in Mecca and Medina. 29 Sura 22:39. One day the Prophet was informed of the approach of a large caravan coming from Syria. He called his people together and said: “A caravan of Kuraishi is coming laden with their goods, go towards it! Perhaps Allah will give them to you as booty.”30 This coup also succeeded, and the Muslims were so successful with their tactics that the Meccans finally marched against Medina with an army of 1000 men to eliminate the nuisance. At Badr there was a fight on March 17, 642, "one of the most important battles in human history" 31,1000 Meccans faced 300 Muslims with 17 camels and three horses. Despondency spread among the Muslims, but a message from God reached Muhammad: "I will help you with a thousand angels" (Surah 54:45). Thus secured and fueled, the Muslims won the battle. All of Mecca staggered under the shock and, terrified, numerous tribes hastily converted to Islam. But the Meccans, in league with the Jews and the hypocrites, did not give up, the next year they appeared with triple the number of warriors. Another battle, the well-known Battle of Uhud, ended in a draw, it was indeed on the razor's edge because the Bedouins and the hypocrites under Ubayy switched sides, but thanks to the ingenious intervention of Muhamad, disaster was averted. Two more battles were victorious for the Muslims. The Meccans finally agreed to a ten-year truce, the famous "Agreement of Hudaibiyyah." But the Meccans did not comply, and two years later Muhamad had no choice but to attack and conquer Mecca. A series of other battles ensued - some under his personal leadership, some under that of his seasoned generals - which eventually spread Islam throughout the peninsula and into Syria. 30 From: answering-islam.de, 2009. 31 From: islamreligion.com, 2009. Muhammad also wrote letters to the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius, the Persian Great King, and the Emperor of Abyssinia, urging them to convert to Islam. The delivery of the letter to Heraclius in Jerusalem is described in detail32. Then Abdullah ibn Abbas reports how Abu Sufyan ibn Harb describes his meeting with the Byzantine emperor in Jerusalem. Abu Sufyan was non-Muslim but entrusted by the Prophet with delivering the letter: "The first question Heraclius put to me was, 'What is the status of his family among you?' I replied, 'He belongs to a very respectable family.' Heraclius continued: 'Has any other man before him ever claimed to be a prophet among you?' ,No.' 'Was one of his ancestors king?' ,No.' 'Are the noble people his followers or the common people?' 'It's the latter.' 'Is the number of his followers increasing or decreasing?' ,It's getting more.' 'Has any of his followers turned away from his religion out of dissatisfaction?' ,No.' 'Did you ever suspect him of untruth before he called himself a prophet?' ,No.' 'Has he ever broken his promise?' 'No, but we haven't known what he's doing for a while now.' 32 Al-Bukhari, “The Beginning of Divine Revelation”. (Abu Sufyan notes that this may have been the only unfavorable answer.) 'Did you fight him?' ,Yes.' 'What was the course of these arguments?' 'Sometimes he succeeded, sometimes we.' 'What rules did he give you?' 'He said: Worship God alone, and associate no one with him as a partaker of his divinity. Turn away from what your ancestors believed. He has also made prayer, sincerity, modesty and charity obligatory for us.' In a long reply, Heraclius, impressed, interprets what he has heard, predicts the possession of the Byzantine Empire for the prophet and concludes with the words: 'I knew that a prophet would appear, but I did not think that it would be one of you. If I knew I could get to him, I would do anything to meet him. If I were with him, I would wash his feet.' He then demanded to see Muhamad's letter and read the text: 'In the name of the merciful and gracious God! From Muhammad, the servant and messenger of God, to Heraclius, Emperor of Byzantium. Peace be upon the one who follows the right line! I urge you to convert to Islam. Become a Muslim and God will reward you twice! But if you refuse, you will have to answer for the offenses of your subjects. God the Exalted said: O people of the Scripture! Come to a word of reconciliation between us and you, namely, that we serve God alone, and associate nothing with him as partakers in his divinity, lest some of us take the other for lords in the place of God. But if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we submit to the will of God.'” Great terror spread in the emperor's entourage, and the latter sent the letter to his advisers to Constantinople for their opinion to catch up In this it was then confirmed that the prophet had appeared and that it was in fact a prophet. Then Heraclius said to those assembled: "You Byzantines! Do you seek happiness and right guidance? Do you want your reign to continue? Then you must follow this prophet!” Observing the reaction of his dignitaries, he gave up all hope that they would convert to Islam. (But there is also an opinion that Heraclius only wanted to test the loyalty of his dignitaries.) In any case, Heraclius, Emperor of Byzantium, had his chance and he blew it. Returning to Medina from a pilgrimage from Mecca, Muhamad was busy preparing campaigns against Byzantium, Syria, Persia, Egypt and North Africa when he unexpectedly fell ill and died, aged 60, 63 or 65, depending on tradition. According to tradition, he left 9 to 23 wives, numerous slaves and a large fortune. Oddly enough, despite the large number of women, there was no son, which was to cause great problems for the religious community. Immediately after Muhammad's death, inheritance disputes broke out, and his wives and daughter Fatima were denied the right to inherit. Ali, first heir candidate, was assassinated by a rival faction. That was the first split in Islam, because from then on Ali's party, the Shia, was its own religious community in the form of the Shiites. This is a very brief outline of the life of the Prophet. The traditional descriptions do not withhold a single detail from his life from us, they fill entire libraries. However, the differences in the individual representations are considerable. It is therefore time to turn to the facts. 200 years of absence: The historical Muhammad “Archaeology has no friends among the pious. " Volker Popp, Islam researcher and numismatist Muawiya is the first caliph of the famous Umayad dynasty. He began his reign in 641, nine years after the death of Muhammad, and belonged to the generation of glorious Islamic conquerors who are said to have subdued the entire Orient at that time in a few decades and attached it to an Islamic empire. At least that is what the traditional Islamic account says. There is an inscription of Muawiyah in Taif, southeast of Mecca. In it he describes himself as Amir al-Muminin. In Islamic tradition, Ali, the son-in-law of the Prophet and predecessor of Muawiyah, used this title. He is traditionally translated as prince of the faithful. Among the believers, the Muslims are understood as a matter of course. There is another inscription of Muawiyah in the Baths of Hamat Gader (Israel), in Greek. IMAGE 4 Dedication by the alleged Islamic Caliph Muawiyah on the occasion of the renovation of the Roman Baths of Gadara, Israel. (Transcription on next page) 79 IMAGE 5 "In the days of Maavia the servant of God, chief of protectors, the thermal baths were saved and renovated ... in the sixth year of the indication, in the year 726 of the founding of the city, in the 42nd year after the Arabs, to heal the sick, under supervision of John, the magistrate of Gadara.” The text begins with a sign of the cross. Religious introductory phrases were common, often replaced by a symbol, in this case a cross. In addition to this symbol, which is rather irritating for a Muslim ruler, the historian is struck by the fact that the Amir al-Muminin, the "prince of the believers", in the Greek version is the "head of the protectors" - no trace of the prince of the Muslims. There is something special about this “principal of the protectors” in the ancient Orient. All the potentates of the time attributed their right to rule to a function of “granting protection”. Of course, the respective personality had to be able to guarantee the subjects and their belongings security. But there is more: Connected with this position of granting protection was always a holy site that also had to be protected. The protection of a sanctuary was legitimation for the exercise of power. This applied to the entire Orient, whether Byzantine, Persian or Arabic - without a grant of protection there was no legitimate rule33. There has always been a great deal of pilgrimage to shrines in Arabia, which is also an important economic factor. 33 The Saudi dynasty also currently bears the most important title of “Protector and Keeper of the Holy Places”, meaning Mecca and Medina. 80 What was Muawiya's holy place? It was his residence city of Damascus, which housed the tomb of John the Baptist as a sanctuary. The main attraction at the time was the head of the Baptist, which was kept as a valuable relic in the crypt of St. John's Basilica. Damascus, along with Jerusalem, was the most important pilgrimage destination in Muawiyah's time, as we know from numerous sources. Why did Caliph Muawiya rule in Damascus and not Mecca, the navel of the Islamic world? That may have had practical reasons. But why not exercise its prestigious protective function through Islamic sanctuary number one, namely the Kaaba in Mecca, the supreme justification for a Muslim caliph? Why the Sanctuary of John the Baptist? There are coin finds from Muawiyah from Darabgerd, the Iranian province of Fars, which also belonged to his sphere of influence. The writing on these coins follows the Persian tradition. Muawiya does not appear in Arabic here, but rather under his original Syriac-Aramaic name Maavia, as in the Gadara inscription. His title in Pahlavi is Amir-i Wlwyshnyk'n, which means "Head of the Protectors". That is exactly his official title in Persian, Greek and Aramaic. The interpretation as "Prince of the Muslims" is nowhere documented and haunts the books unchecked. "At this point," says the researcher Volker Popp, "it becomes clear how much the Islamic use of this title blocks access to the specifically Arabic elements of the early history of Islam." Islam labels on purely Arabic subjects run through the entirety of Islamic historiography, as we shall see many times. Maavia obviously had no problem manifesting in Aramaic, Persian, and Greek. After all, he lived in a Greek-Persian environment, was born in Syria, so his mother tongue was Aramaic, but he will also have spoken Greek and Persian. His empire included today's states of Syria, Iraq and Iran. In Islamic tradition, he, the first Umayad caliph, is of course a Muslim. According to the inscriptions on monuments and coins, Maavia called himself "servant of God" and "protector", but never caliph, as he is listed today. And he had the sign of the cross on several of his archaeological remains. The date is given three times in the Hamat Gader inscription: · the Byzantine fiscal year · the period after the founding of the city · the time after the Arabs The dating is therefore unequivocal because it is secured three times. However, the 42nd year of Kata Araba, “after the Arabs”, mentioned by Maavia, aroused particular attention among researchers. Year 1 of the Arabic calendar would therefore be year 622 of our calendar. As a reminder: The Islamic calendar also begins in this year, the time after the Hijra, which is the flight of the Prophet from Mecca to Medina in 622. Why doesn't Maavia refer to this Islamic Hijra period - which for a Muslim caliph should be absolutely self-evident? The year 622 is a significant year in Arabian history. It is the year in which the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius crushed the Persian army. In the dictated peace that followed, Persia lost its western provinces from Mesopotamia to Egypt. At the same time, however, Heraclius continued the complete restructuring of the empire that had already begun in the "Theme Conference", during the course of which Byzantium gave up positions in Syria and Egypt. He left these areas to Arab emirs as feudal lords. We know from Maavia that in the first half of his reign he had a very close relationship with Byzantium, he was governor. The Persians had already occupied Jerusalem in 614 and Egypt in 618. They too had appointed Arab allies as governors. However, these Arab vassals in the west, in Syria, Egypt and Palestine, not only survived the Persian catastrophe of 622 unscathed, they became warlords of their own account practically overnight. As a result of the Persian invasions, Byzantium had withdrawn from an area that it had never really controlled to about the northern border of modern-day Syria. The "Limes Arabicus", the old Roman southern border, had already been abandoned in the 5th century. Even after the great but actually surprising victory against the Persians, and with the permanent strain on the northern frontier, Byzantium was forced to confine itself to core interests. This Byzantine retreat also freed the Arabs from the second of the millstones between which they had found themselves. They only needed to fill the power vacuum left by the Persian collapse and the Byzantine retreat. They did, and a great Arab era began, which was only to be ended by the Mongols in the 13th century. That is the political side, but it is incomplete without the theological component: the Persians had taken Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine and even Cilicia from the Christian Byzantine Empire and carried the cross of Jesus from Jerusalem. No doubt Persia was the Antichrist whose total triumph in the vision and logic of the time would be followed by the end of the world. According to the prophecies, however, the katechon, the “stopper of the Antichrist”, would also have to appear as the last chance. After the glorious victory of 622, this could only be Byzantium. This victory had turned everything upside down: the doom was averted, the coming of the biblical Gog and Magog (in the Koran yajj and majj) was prevented, that last plague of mankind, the Dhul I-Qarnain, (the Alexander the Major of the Koran, Sura 18:83-93) locked away until the end of time. What's more, Christ would return and bring about justice. The year 622, at the time of the deepest depression, opened the beginning of a new era, also for the Christian Arab allies, without whom this victory would not have been possible. This is the "Year of the Arabs" in the inscription of Hamat Gader. We also find this dating on coins of that time. This calendar, based on the solar calendar, was used by the Arabs for centuries before it was reinterpreted as the legendary hijra of a prophet Muhamad. However, the resulting Islamic calendar is a lunar calendar, and the subsequent conversion from solar to lunar time led to a hopeless confusion of historical dates that characterizes Islamic tradition to this day. Practically none of the dates of the first centuries of the Hijra calendar are therefore correct. Maavia is an Islamic caliph in Islamic tradition. But nothing that we know of him has an Islamic connection. He paid his dues to the emperor in Byzantium, his interest in the renovation of Roman thermal baths shows him to be a member of the Syrian-Byzantine Mediterranean culture, and he was quite obviously not a Bedouin from the Arabian desert. He knew nothing of an Islamic prophet named Muhamad, who is said to have lived in his kingdom a few decades before him and on whose behalf he was allegedly building an Islamic kingdom. He would have told us about it on his inscriptions or coins. Maavia tells us his titles: but not once does the Islamic “Caliph” appear. He gives us a date: but it does not correspond to the time after Hijra. He tells us his sanctuary: but it is not the Kaaba in Mecca, but the basilica in Damascus that houses the head of John the Baptist as a relic. The coins of his time show Christian-Jewish symbols such as the cross, the Agnus Dei (Lamb of God), the head reliquary of John the Baptist, the rock of Jacob or the word "Zion". But how one wants to reasonably ascribe Christian-Jewish symbols to an Islamic caliph remains the secret of traditional interpreters. Archeology leaves no doubt: the Aramean Maavia was a Christian ruler, not a caliph and not an "Omayade". By the way, we don't know his real name either, Maavia is just his ruler's name. Around the year 60 of the Arabs, i.e. in the year 682 of our era, Abd al-Malik began his reign. He was Arab Emir from Marw in today's Turkmenistan, then a Persian province, and initially resided at his ancestral home. Due to the collapse of the Sassanid dynasty, the Marwanids, i.e. the emirs from Marw, had come to power in the east. As a result of this replacement, Zoroastrianism also fell behind, and Syrian and Nestorian Christianity now became the dominant religions34. Consequently, the coins from the time of Abd al-Malik also bear Christian symbols35. But of course Abd al-Malik was also the caliph of the traditional doctrine. The word muhamad appears frequently on Malik's coins. According to the traditional interpretation, this of course means the prophet "Muhamad". But the facts speak a different language. As Christoph Luxenberg, a specialist in ancient oriental languages, convincingly explains, muhamad is by no means to be read as a proper name. It is a gerund in Arabic as well as in the main language of the time, Syro-Aramaic, and means “the one to be praised, the praised one”. Muhammad was a title and not a name. The same is true of the equally common abd Allah, which means “servant of God” in the sense of an attribute and cannot be read as a name in this context. Then as now, God means Allah to Arab Christians and has nothing to do with the specifically Islamic Allah. The muhamad motto can be proven in many cases; it originated in Persia and spread from there to the Arabic world. As an interim summary, it remains to state what hard facts we have collected so far about the "Islamic caliphs" Maavia and Abd al-Malik: Both used the head of the protectors as their most important title. They saw themselves in a thoroughly Byzantine tradition as servus dei, abd Allah in Arabic, as "servants of God". Their coins and inscriptions bore the sign of the cross and other Christian symbols. 34 In the east of the Persian Empire there were also Buddhist influences, as evidenced by the Buddha statues in Bamiyan, Afghanistan, which were blown up by the Taliban in 2001. 35 The dominance of Christian symbols and references on the coins of the 7th and 8th centuries, according to the numismatist Volker Popp, can only surprise people who describe Arabic history based on secondary literary sources of the 9th century. And they reckoned according to the "Year of the Arabs", which followed the solar year and began with the year 622, the year of Arab independence. Abd al-Malik” worshiped a muhamad, one “to be praised”. But who was the muhamad who should be praised? The answer can be found, among other things, in a building that nobody would suspect: in the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, after Mecca and Medina the third holiest place for Muslims, built according to tradition over the place from which Muhamad on his with wings and human face equipped mold Buraq is said to have ascended into the sky. According to his inscription, Abd al-Malik completed the Dome of the Rock in the year 72 of the Arabs, i.e. in the year 694 of our era. The construction and layout correspond to that of a Byzantine-Syrian church, provided with Roman columns and a dome, the typical element of Roman-Byzantine magnificent buildings. The innermost part has largely been preserved in its original form, especially the inscription that wraps around the octagon twice over a length of 240 metres. In this inscription one traditionally sees the basic Islamic formulae, although even a superficial - but unbiased - look should raise doubts. For a long time, however, apparently nobody looked at it impartially. The linguist Christoph Luxenberg unleashed a tsunami in Islamic studies when he read the inscriptions in the language and word meanings of the time in which they were written. In the language of the founder, including Syro-Aramaic, he arrived at a reading that differs from the traditional translation in key points. The traditional translation is: “In the name of the gracious and merciful God. There is no god but God alone, he has no partner, he is dominion and praise is his. He revives and lets die. He has power over all things. Muhammad son of Abd Allah is his messenger. God and his angels shower blessings on the prophet. Ye believers ask blessings for him and greets him with dignity. Blessings and peace of God be upon him and may God have mercy on him. You People of the Book, do not exaggerate in your faith and speak only the truth of God. The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, is only the messenger of God and his word which he put in Mary, and a spirit of him. So believe in God and His Messenger and do not say three. Stop it, it's better for you. God is only one God, His supernatural majesty needs no son. His is everything in heaven and earth, and God is sufficient as protector. The Messiah is not too proud to be a servant of God, nor are the angels near. And whoever is too high-spirited and too proud, he will gather to himself. God bless your messenger and servant Jesus son of Mary. Peace be upon him on the day of his birth, death and resurrection. Such is Jesus, the son of Mary, that is the truth you doubt. It does not befit the greatness of God to beget a son, praise him! When he decides on a thing, he only says to it: So be it! And it is. God is my Lord and your Lord. So serve him, that is the right way. God testified that there is no god but Him. And the angels and Sages can attest to that. He ensures justice, he is the only mighty and wise god. Behold, the religion of Allah is Islam. And those who received the Scripture were divided by disobedience after knowledge came to them. And whoever denies the signs of God, God is swift in his reckoning." The inscriptions in the Dome of the Rock are older than any edition of the Koran known to us. The script is an early form of the Arabic script and therefore only has a minimal set of reading aids. Reading even the traditional version arouses wonder. The speech is essentially about Mary, Jesus and the one God. Were it not for the word Muhamad and Islam - one would not come in the distance test for the thought of having an Islamic creed in front of you. This is where Christoph Luxenberg comes in. He does nothing more than give the words the meaning they had at the time they were posted. Here too, as we have already seen with some passages in the Qur'an, his translation suddenly makes a coherent sense. The core passages in comparison: Traditional translation: "In the name of the gracious and merciful God..." Scientific translation - here Luxenberg only specifies: "In the name of the loving and beloved God". But then comes the first key point. Traditional translation: "Muhamad, son of Abd Allah, is his Messenger..." Scientific translation: "Blessed be the servant of God and his messenger..." Luxenberg proves in detail36 that muhamad is a gerund and not a first name, which would be a grammatical impossibility. The semantic impossibility of the name Muhamad is also supported by historians from other disciplines, according to which this proper name is nowhere to be found at that time. Numerous coin finds prove the title, but not the name "Muhammad". The same is true of abd Allah, the "Servant of God." He was an attribute but not a name. There are also numerous references to Jesus under this name going back to early Christianity. Sura 19:30 makes a very clear assignment, in which the baby Jesus says of himself in the cradle: "I am the servant of God ["abd All lah"], he gave me the scriptures and made me a prophet." No one will assume that Jesus said of himself that his name was abd Allah. 36 Christoph Luxenberg, "Reinterpretation of the Arabic Inscription in the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem", in: "The Dark Beginnings", Berlin 2005. At the time of writing, however, Muhamad abdallah was not Muhamad, son of abd Allah - that came much later, but rather the praised servant of God. But who is the praised servant of God? The explanation is given later in the inscription: It is Isa bin Maryam, Jesus, son of Mary. "The Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, is the messenger of God." According to Luxenberg, the traditional translation (namely: "The Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, was only a messenger of God") is not just a simple misreading, it is a linguistically unjustifiable manipulation. A wrong sentence! Of particular interest is the continuation of the sentence in the inscription: "Believe in God and His Messenger, and do not say three... for God is one... How should he have a child, for all things in heaven and on earth belong to him." Here the author Malik turns against the trinity (“three”), which is why Jesus is also regarded as a messenger, but not as the son of God. The second key passage of the inscription marks the following literal sentence: "in(na) d-din(a) llah(i) l-islam ..." In the traditional Islamic translation, the sentence reads: "Behold, the religion of Allah is Islam..." Din is interpreted as "religion" and Islam as the name of that religion. Luxenberg and many others see this as a typical misinterpretation tation of later centuries. Arabic din derives formally and meaningfully from Persian den. And this din means that in the understanding of the time "True, the right", in contrast to the Latin religio, religion. While religio describes a formal relationship with God, din is the spirit of faith that makes it possible to do the right thing, even the right thing religion to recognize. So Din is not the religion itself, rather the religion is a function of the Din. Islam did not exist as the name of a religion in Malik's time, as we know it today. Islam is nowhere to be found as a religious designation in contemporary reports, regardless of their origin. Islam in Malik's time meant "accordance": namely, agreement with the Scriptures, and by these is meant the Old Testament and the Gospels. In order to bring about agreement with the Holy Scriptures, i.e. "to recognize what is right and not to be confused", the din is required. Religio is only formed as a consequence of this. It was only when the individual scriptures, brought together into an Arabic gospel, later became the Koran of their own and resulted in a religion of their own, that one can speak of Islam as Islam. There can be no talk of that in Malik's time. The current understanding of "religion" and "Islam" is not contained in Malik's message, so the sentence is correct in the understanding of the time when it was written: "What is right with God is agreement with the Scriptures..." And further: "...for those to whom the Scriptures were given first came into contradiction with revealed knowledge by disputing..." This expresses the rejection of the numerous interpretations and constructions at the councils, which would have watered down the original message and in which the view of the imperial church always dominated. "So don't say three" - this is the great topic of the time37: What is the nature of Jesus like? Was he the son of God? Or only messenger? He was 37 The key question was: Is Jesus man, God, or both? The Monophysites ("one nature") saw in Jesus a person who had only one, namely a divine, nature. This is the position of the Coptic Church. While dyophysimus (dyo = two) attributed Jesus to two natures, one divine and one human, monotheletism restricted Christ's human nature to the extent that his will was completely controlled by God. The monarchs, on the other hand, saw Jesus as a person ... (continued on next page) human or god? Or was he both? How could the logos, the divine word, enter a human body? Questions over questions! This is how the construct of the Trinity, which was actually logical and progressive in Greek ways of thinking, came into being. Several councils38 argued about it and split Eastern Christianity. The Byzantine Church and the Roman Church adopted this dogma, but not the Arab and Egyptian Churches. That is why Abd al-Malik warns against the "three" in his confession. God does not need a son and mediating spirit to reach people. The following sentence rounds off Abd al-Malik's creed with the well-known depiction of Jesus' birth, death and resurrection: “Lord God, bless your Messenger and Servant Jesus, son of Mary. Hail to him on the day he was born, on the day he die, and on the day he is raised to life The confession of Abd al-Malik from the year 694 now reads in full as follows: “In the name of the loving and beloved God. There is no god but God alone, he has no partner, he owns the dominion and he deserves the praise, he gives life and he causes death, he is omnipotent. Blessed be the servant of God and his messenger. God and his angels bless the prophet. You who believe speak blessings and salvation over him. God bless him, salvation be upon him and God's love. 36 NEXT:...which, while closely related to God, is not therefore divine. This is the concept of a prophet (rasul) and herald of God (caliphateAllah). In the opinion of most, however, this did not adequately describe the closeness of Jesus to God and was therefore rejected as heresy. Greek Orthodoxy and others also saw in Jesus a divine and a human nature, but posited a spiritual force, the "Holy Spirit", as the mediator between the divine and human realms. This "trinity", a possible construction from the ancient point of view, solved logical problems and at the same time was able to maintain the One God. The whole discussion was essentially about semantic problems, in which the content was blurred and eluded a precise definition. 38 Nicaea (325), Constantinople (381), Ephesus (431), Chalcedon (451). Believers of the Scriptures, do not err in your judgment and speak only what is right about God. For Jesus Christ, son of Mary, is the messenger of God and his word, which he gave to Mary and his spirit from him. So believe in God and His Messenger and don't say three, stop it, it would be better for you. For God is one - praised be he - how should he have a child, since everything in heaven and on earth belongs to him. And God alone is sufficient as a succor. Christ will not disregard being God's servant, nor will the angels who are close to God. But whoever disregards serving him and behaves arrogantly, he will one day summon all of them to himself. Lord God, bless Your Messenger and Servant Jesus, son of Mary, Word of Truth, about which you dispute. It is not God's place to adopt a child, praise him: if he decides anything, all he has to do is say, be, and it will be. God is my Lord and your Lord so serve him, that's a straight line. God has admonished that there is no god but him, and the angels, like the scribes, affirm truthfully: There is no god but he, the mighty and wise. What is right with God is agreement with the Scriptures: for those to whom the Scriptures were given first came into conflict with them when they disputed among themselves. But whoever denies the words of God recorded in the Scriptures, God will quickly call them to account.” This inscription is the creed of Abd al-Malik - the typically monarchical, i.e. strictly monotheistic creed of the Christian-Arab Church. It turns against the creed of the Byzantine state church. Heraclius had his confession of the Trinity affixed to his basilica, the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople. Abd al-Malik now posted his creed in his basilica, the Church on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Abd al-Malik was an Arab Christian, not a caliph and not an “omayad”. The mere proof that muhamad is a gerundive and in no way a proper name, which can also be proven by inscriptions on coins and other texts, is a finding with enormous consequences. For Muhammad the praised is nothing but the Arabic version of the Greek Krastos and the Latin Christ the Anointed: Krastos, Christ, muhamad: the same, the same, namely Jesus. muhamad abd Allah is the "blessed servant of God." The reading "Muhammad is the servant of God" would be just as absurd as the reading benedictus qui venit in nomine domini ("Blessed is he who came in the name of the Lord") as "Benedict, who came in the name of the Lord." According to Islamic tradition, these inscriptions are verses from the Koran. Just the opposite is correct. They are older than any previously known Koran or fragments of it. They were in turn included as verses in the Koran - unless one assumes, with Luxenberg, that there was an original Aramaic Koran in which these texts were already contained. This chapter is actually dedicated to the historical Muhamad, but so far there has been nothing to report about his person. The reason is that it is historically incomprehensible. We know absolutely nothing about him. On the other hand, there are entire libraries of religious writings in the sense of the chapter “The Prophet Mohammed according to traditional reports.” The earliest mentions of Muhammad appear 150 years after the rumored death, the majority 200-300 years later. Oral traditions are the basis. Even if one has to be satisfied with evidence instead of proof in the case of people who lived a long time ago, oral tradition exclusively from the religious corner is not enough evidence itself. In the Koran, Muhammad is practically not mentioned, hadiths and the Sira (life story) based on them are, according to almost unanimous opinion, indisputable as authentic sources. We have numerous archaeological remains from the Time. Coins, inscriptions, buildings, literature. But nowhere finds there is even a trace of the mention of the Prophet Muhammad from Mecca. Muhammad's troops take away his holy Jerusalem from Herakleios while he is still alive. But he doesn't even notice. His successors, from whom Muhamad took Syria and Egypt, obviously don't know who they are dealing with, just like later the Spaniards and all the others. The millions of subjugated people of different religions also tell us nothing about a Prophet Muhammad. A single uncertainly dated mention of "Mamahd" - that is all we know of the Prophet. All of this is too little and incomprehensible for a personality who is said to have thrown the entire existing order of the Orient, both politically and religiously, upside down in just a few years. How do you explain that please? The personified Muhammad thus only appears in the literature of the 9th century. after dr Abdallah Moussa from the Sorbonne, Muhamad as a proper name is nowhere to be found before Islamization. He considers the existence of a proper name Muhammad to be unlikely by then39. The root MHMD can already be found on clay tablets from the 13th century BC in Ugarit. Muhamad(un) denoted the highest purity for gold. From this developed the meaning chosen, praised, which was still valid for centuries. Ahmad also goes back to the same root. The Koran uses muhamad and ahmad synonymously. The first religious manifestation of the title appears in the east of the Persian Empire, where coins with a muahamad logo appear around the year 660. There, in modern-day Turkmenistan and Afghanistan, the muhamad was the "Blessed One," the "Servant of God" (abd Allah) and the "Speaker of God" (caliphate Allah). No trace whatsoever of Muhammad's presence in the Arabian Peninsula at the same time. We can say with great certainty that the muhamad, the "Praised", had originated far to the east of the Persian Empire. and 39 Claude Gilliot, “On the Origin of the Prophet’s Informants”, in: “The Dark Beginnings”, Berlin 2005. according to overwhelming evidence, this "blessed one" was Jesus. Abd al-Malik brought this muhamad abd Allah, the praised servant of God, with him to the west of his kingdom and built him a monument on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, where he was to come back as mahdi, as redeemer, on the last day to adjudicate. There are numerous coin depictions of it (more in a later chapter). "Muhamad" was a title before it became a name, and Islamic scriptures also reflect this awareness. According to Ibn Saad40 the original name of the Prophet was Qutham. He later had six different nicknames: Muhammad (the praised one), Ahmad (the praised one), Kahtim (the seal), Hashir (the awakener), Akib (the last of the prophets), Machiy (the annihilator of sins). This is a very clear title concept. Alois Sprenger wrote as early as 186941: "In these traditions, Muhammad1 appears, just like the other names, as an epithet [attribute] of the prophet and not as a proper name." According to Volker Popp, the New Testament Paraclete also belongs in the concept of attributes. This is the comforter, derived from the Greek parakletos. Jesus repeatedly promised his disciples a paraclete as a consolation for his temporary absence. The paraclete is in Aramaic, the language of Jesus, the mhamda. Based on the same consonant root MHMD, the Aramaic mhamda is easily read as muhamad in Arabic. In this way, muhamad could also fit seamlessly into the gospels in person and be understood as a prophecy. It would then look like this: John 14:16. “... and he (my father) will give you another Send Muhammad..." 14.26. "But the spirit, the Muhammad, whom my father will send you in my name, will teach you every thing..." John 16:13. “...It is good that I am going because if I don't go, Muhamad will not come to you. But as soon as I am gone, I will send you Muhammad" 40 Ibn Saad (d. 845), “Annals”. 41 Alois Sprenger, "The life and teachings of Mohammad according to sources that have hitherto been largely unused", Berlin 1869. Although in Christian theology the paraclete means the Holy Spirit, the step from mhamda to muhamad is all in one "heretical" environment quickly done. Especially at a time that lusted after the prophesied Arabian prophet. The question about the historical prophet Muhamad answered itself in a roundabout way via muhamad. The hadiths and the vita of the prophet based on them are excluded as historical sources for the proof of Muhamad, there is the greatest possible agreement on this outside of religion. The Koran says next to nothing about the Prophet. However, to cite the existence of the Koran itself as proof of the existence of Muhammad makes a mockery of any scientific approach, logic and methodology. There are no extra-religious sources about Muhammad. And that with a personality who is said to have thrown the religious and political order of half the world upside down in just a few years. Millions of those affected and contemporary witnesses tell us nothing about it? How do you imagine that? In order to believe that, one has to work on miracles, as many Islamic historians do with great implicitness. And that brings us back to hadith qualities. We have no evidence whatsoever for the existence of a prophet named Muhamad, who lived from 570 to 632 (or similar) and is said to have preached the Koran. The muhamad-Jesus concept, on the other hand, can be proven in many ways. One may well accept a religious figure, such as a preacher, in the Arabian desert. But his name wasn't Muhammad and it probably has very little to do with the rumored CV of the Prophet. It's possible that he sometimes shows us his handwriting, for example in the Medinan suras, but we still don't get any information about his person. It could just as well be a team, even a sect, hiding behind the label "Muhamad", or simply an invented symbolic figure. The denial of the physical existence of the Prophet Muhammad may seem shocking at first. But the shock is quickly put into perspective if you only look at the genesis of the Koran: A single person as the exclusive presenter is absent. There is no doubt that the Koran had a varied history of development over a long period of time and thus “many fathers”. We cannot, of course, prove the non-existence of a person. But we can examine the evidence of a person's existence. And this test turns out negative in the case of Muhamad. Even today, we still have nothing in our hands that scientists from Weil to Goldziher and Blachere to Luxenberg have stated. Beyond the religious assertions, not even the slightest traces of the prophet's real walk on earth can be discerned. The prophet is not cut down with ax blows, as some may wrongly assume, but rather the unraveling of a tangle of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic, in short, Semitic, conceptions of a savior, redeemer, savior, judge, or prophet. It is always about the same expectation - packaged in different names and traditions. The person "Muhamad" is not at all essential for the creation of the book or the teaching. Many (very) old and modern Muslims also see it that way. The development of Islam is primarily to be seen as a process and not as a person, although in the course of religious formation people seem to be unavoidable as messengers and figures of identification. The longing of the Arab Christians for their own writing culminated in the Koran after a long and involved history of origin. At the same time, the transformation from muhamad to muhamad took place. This was a necessity because we would have our own - finally our own! - Have revelations otherwise justified? And finally, a separate Arabian prophet from the house of Abraham was prophesied, that is promised from the very top. The entire tradition related to this was narratively shifted to the desert of Arabia, Muhamad, the prophet of the Arabs from the Kuraish tribe, was born - 200 years after his "birth". 97 IMAGE 6 Photo: Dymon Lynch The Dome of the Rock on the site of Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem 98 Norbert G. Pressburg | Goodbye Mohammed digression: The Church on the Temple Mount II To the east of the Old City of Jerusalem is a rocky plateau of about 300 by 450 meters, on which only the al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock are located in addition to a few small buildings. Most of the area is empty. In the 7th century the area was a single field of rubble: remains of the Herodian temple, remains of a temple to Jupiter, remains of a thousand years of religious use. Nevertheless, this inhospitable place was associated with religious emotions like no other: Here Abraham is said to have been ready to give his son Isaac to God to sacrifice, and here stood the temple of Solomon. According to its inscription, the "Dome of the Rock" was completed in the year 72 of the Arabic calendar: "The servant of God, the Imam al-Mamun, supreme protector, built this sanctuary in the year 72. May God accept it and take pleasure in it, amen. Kings of the world, praise God.” IMAGE 7 According to the kata Araba, the year 72 corresponds to the year 694. However, other dates are also mentioned. These were created by converting from the Hijra period, which is based on a lunar calendar and has the corresponding inaccuracies. It is undisputed that Mamun was not the builder. Rather, more than 100 years later he had the name of the real builder Abd al-Malik removed and used his instead, he kept the year42. So the builder was Abd al-Malik, and he completed his project in 694. 42 The change may not have come from Mamun himself, but was made even later. 99 The choice of location was clear: the exact site of Solomon's Temple. The architectural style represents the typical Syrian-Byzantine church architecture. The basic structure is a cylinder resting on columns, one storey or, depending on the height, with an additional column circuit. The cylinder is vaulted with a dome, and additional extensions can be added if necessary. In the case of the Dome of the Rock, the cylinder encloses a piece of bare rock that may have been thought to be the rock of the sacrifice of Isaac. This core is surrounded on the outside by two colonnades that define the octagonal floor plan of the building. The columns are designed in different antique styles and sometimes even of different lengths. This means that it is a matter of secondary uses from existing buildings or from ruins. Originally the building may have been open. The believers were in the large area around the building and could follow the ceremonies from there, because the crowd of visitors must have been very large on certain occasions, such as the annual pilgrimage. The cathedral is not an original architectural design, but is based on numerous existing predecessors. There is the Church of the Resurrection on the Mount of Olives, the Church of Maria Theotokos on Mount Gerizim near Nablus, the Church of the Virgin Mary near Jerusalem (also built around a stone), a church in Busra, Syria, others in Caesarea and at Capernaum on the Sea of ​​Galilee, presumably on the site of Peter's house. This type of church spread as far as Italy (San Vitale in Ravenna) and even Spain (Las Vegas de Pueblanueva). The Church of Sergios and Bacchus in Istanbul (“Little Hagia Sophia”), which is said to have been a model for the great Hagia Sophia, is also built in this style. It is therefore a type common in the Roman-Byzantine world. All these churches were built between the 3rd and 6th centuries, they have the same architectural elements, The octagon comes from religious numerical mysticism and symbolizes the resurrection of Jesus on the day after the Sabbath, completing creation as the eighth day of creation. The Eight was therefore in the medieval IMAGE 8 Theology the number of completion. Accordingly, the believers under this symbol were on the way to consummation. The Palatine Chapel of Emperor Charlemagne in Aachen from the year 790 has exactly the same octagonal basic structure with a domed cylinder above it. Both rulers, Abd al-Malik and Charlemagne, saw themselves in the style of early medieval Christian rulers as successors to David in the place of Christ. Even if the master builder of the Palatine Chapel had a closer study object available in the almost identical church of San Vitale in Ravenna, he must have been familiar with the Dome of the Rock, because he built the chapel as an "effigy of the heavenly Jerusalem". Left: Ground plan of the chapel above Petrus' house in Kapern au m Right: Ground plan of the Church of the Resurrection on the Mount of Olives (4th century) PICTURE 9 Left: Ground plan of "Kathisma of the Virgin" (near Jerusalem, 5th century) Right: Ground plan of the Dome of the Rock (7th century) In Islamic tradition, the Islamic Caliph and Umayade Abd al-Malik built the Dome of the Rock as a mosque. However, the latest research sees Abd al-Malik as a Christian Arab ruler and the Dome of the Rock 101 accordingly as a Christian sacred building. Oleg Grabar43, one of the best experts on the Dome of the Rock, rules out a mosque as the purpose of the building and sees it as "a kind of sacred building". He speaks of one "Paradox" because contradictions in the interpretation as an Islamic building could not be resolved. They dissolve when you see a Christian building in the Dome of the Rock. Jerusalem was then as now a city of churches. But the churches at that time were those of the "false believers" from Abd al-Malik's point of view. He, who, as has been documented, saw himself in the true tradition of Zion, wanted to oppose them with a monument of true faith, a haram, in a conspicuous place, on the Temple Mount. In the church, as an answer to the ekthesis, to the confession of faith of the Byzantine imperial church with the confession of the Trinity, which was affixed in the Hagia Sophia, he had his view of the correct faith presented. Traditionally seen as verses from the Koran, modern scholars see the 240-meter-long scroll of writing on either side of the octagon as a clear Christian Arabic commitment to monarchical orientation. With the establishment of Islam, the importance of the haram on the Temple Mount decreased and took a back seat to Mecca and Medina. Despite this, Islamic legends began to be associated with Jerusalem. in the In the 11th century the tradition arose according to which Muhammad ascended from the site of the Dome of the Rock with his horse buraq with the human head and wings into the sky. Probably also in In the 11th century the haram received the obligatory mihrab, in which case a plate showing the direction to Mecca. However, the mihrab was not installed in the mosque itself, but in a cave in the rock below. So far there is no satisfactory explanation for this. For the Crusaders, the building was simply the "temple of God" (templum dominf) to which Old Testament memories were attached and which designated a place where Jesus had also worked. The cathedral was not perceived as an original mosque; people believed that this was the original temple from the time of Christ. influenced them 43 Oleg Grabar, "The Dome of the Rock", London 2006. Little Crusaders, the second rock of Jerusalem, Golgotha ​​with the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, had a higher status. Under the Ayyubids who replaced the Crusaders, the Dome of the Rock became an Islamic sanctuary. Little changed in the years that followed under the Fatimids and Mamluks; any renovations were carried out, but nothing changed in the structure. In the Mamluk period, it was believed that the Crusaders built the cathedral to tame the rock that, according to a widespread legend, hung below. Under the Ottomans, especially under Suleiman the Magnificent (1520 - 1566), major transformations took place. So the sultan completely replaced the outer facade and covered it with tiles. Much elaboration has also been carried out on the inside, but the substance has not been changed. From 1875 to 1960 nothing happened at all. As the Dome of the Rock is presented today, it is a work of the 20th century. We do not know to what extent this appearance corresponds to that at the time of its founding. Probably not very much. However, the basic structure and the only preserved part from Malik's time were not changed: the columns with the mosaic-covered support structure on which the original scroll runs - the creed of Abd al-Malik. The Dome of the Rock was certainly not built as a mosque, but as a church. But not as a church for everyday life, rather the Dome of the Rock as the central point of Christian-Arab religiosity designated the place where the Redeemer would descend. Even in the time of Islamic rule, the cathedral was not perceived as a house of prayer. Steeped in many mysteries and myths, the Haram al-Sharif was primarily the site of Muhammad's ascension. The general place of prayer was always opposite the al-Aqsa Mosque. Until recently, tourists were shown the true location of the cradle of Jesus (namely in the south-east corner of the area) and told them other secrets from the biblical and Christian past of the place - this has now been stopped. For about a decade, the Dome of the Rock has been what it never was in its history: an active mosque. And he became the symbol of Palestinian nationalism. PICTURE 10 Supporting element of the octagon with the Kufic inscription of Abd al-Malik. The mosaics are typically Roman-Byzantine in style, but the motifs are Persian. IMAGE 11 The interior of the Dome of the Rock (left) and the Palatine Chapel of Charlemagne in Aachen (right). The basic structure is identical. picture 12 Castle dwelling from Marv, Turkmenistan, /century (above). East Persian Marw, which emerged from ancient Antiochia Margiane, was the ancestral seat of the Christian Marwanids, who became known as the "Omayads". Rulers of their dynasty built the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, the Basilica of St. John in Damascus, now called the "Omayad Mosque" (below) and the Mezquita in Cordoba (see St.205). PICTURE 13 The Metamorphosis: From Jesus to Muhammad “Ink runs in the veins of the prophet - also that of the European orientalists. " Karl-Heinz Ohlig, religious scholar The history of the Middle East in the first half of the post-Christian millennium was shaped by the ongoing conflict between Persia and the Byzantine Empire. There were direct encounters on the battlefield, but mostly it was proxy wars, for both powers maintained a network of Arab allies, who often enough switched sides. By Arabia today we mean the Arabian Peninsula. In ancient and medieval times, Arabia included Syria, Palestine, and Mesopotamia, sometimes more, sometimes less. The Arabian Peninsula was not meant by that. However, the northwestern part was connected to the Mediterranean culture through the empire of the Nabataeans, Hellenized Arabs. This ancient Arabia was a political and religious pressure cooker. It is no coincidence that three of the five world religions emerged here. Jews, Greeks, Babylonians, Asiatic Gentiles, Melkites, Jacobins, Syrian Christians, Coptic Christians, Catholics, Nestorians, Zoroastrians, Buddhists and others were in constant competition. Every day, so to speak, a herald of salvation, a messenger from God, a messiah, a new prophet appeared on every corner. One was constantly under the pressure of the imminent end of the world, for which one had to be properly prepared. The individual factions had their own religious texts, which were discussed, attacked and defended. These arguments about the “true doctrine” between the individual Christian factions were particularly fierce. The central point here was the question of the nature of Jesus. The discussion was carried out both on a Greek philosophical needlepoint level and in a palpable manner44. For the Monophysites, Jesus had only a divine nature, for others, the monarchs, Jesus was a messenger of God but still only human, and for still others, Jesus was the son of God and had a divine nature alongside his human nature. These were the questions that occupied the people of the Middle East for centuries with an intensity that we today can hardly understand, since the salvation of their souls depended on the constantly expected return of the Messiah, who would judge them with the flaming sword. The attitude towards life was to live in the end times. In numerous councils at which these questions of faith were hotly debated, namely Nicaea in 325 and Chalcedon in 451, the “doctrine of the Trinity”, the doctrine of the “Holy Trinity”, was elevated to official dogma. This separated the Arab Christians from the main stream. A certain spatial separation had, however, already taken place earlier. General war practice in the Orient was the murder and/or abduction of the conquered. Those who survived the battles and the subsequent slaughter were taken away and used for various work projects in their own provinces. Nebuchadnezzar carried off the Israelites to Babylon. Shapur I's three major wars ended in huge waves of deportation of the population from what is now Syria and Iraq: The bishop of Antioch on the Syrian Mediterranean coast was deported along with his community to Khuzistan and used to build the new city of Gundeschabur. Another destroyed and resettled 44 For example, at the Council of Ephesus (431), which went down in history as the "robbers' synod". Venerable church fathers attacked each other with fists and sticks, and gangs of thugs were hired to enforce the true doctrine. The city was the northern Mesopotamian center of Hatra, situated between the Euphrates and Tigris45. The inhabitants of this area, the Jazeera ("island"), were called Arabi, "the inhabitants of the West", as seen from the land across the Tigris. This is where the term "Arab" first appears, but it is not congruent with the term we are familiar with today. The Arabi spoke Syro-Aramaic. It is safe to assume that on the way to the Persian diaspora they also took their holy books with them, the Peshitta, the Aramaic Bible and such "Diatessaron", the Aramaic Gospel. Another wave of deportations took place under Khosrau I, who in 540 again deported the entire population of Antioch to the east and had them build the city of Veh-Antiokh-i-Khosrau ("The better Antioch of Khosrau"). The deportees continued their religious life in Persia. In the 7th century the disputes between Persia and Byzantium took on the character of a religious war. In 613 there was a new push by Persia towards the west. Khosrau II occupied Syria and conquered Jerusalem in 614. He demonstratively destroyed the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, taking the relic of the Holy Cross with him as a trophy. In 619 he conquered Egypt. Byzantium could not accept this. Emperor Heraclius set out with an army against Persia. Under the personal leadership of the emperor - an absolute rarity in late antiquity - a battle broke out in Armenia in 622, in which the Persian army was crushed. The following year, Heraclius took the city of Ganjak and had the fire temple there destroyed in revenge for Jerusalem. More battles followed, leading to the complete and triumphant victory of Byzantium. Khosrau, who was still unwilling to make peace, was murdered by his own people, and his son Siroe made peace with Byzantium. In the “Compromise” that followed, the emperor got back his Arabic territories – which he had never really ruled – nominally. But within reason 45 The gaps, in turn, were often filled by more or less forced resettlements from Greece and the Balkans. By the time of the complete reorganization of the Byzantine Empire (the “Theme Conference”), Heraclius had already decided to give up Syria and Mesopotamia as imperial territory, but kept some cities and all ports under his control. The urgently needed consolidation of its core area had absolute priority, because in the west the empire was fighting for its existence. As early as 618, Heraclius, who came from North Africa, had considered giving up Constantinople as the capital and ruling from Sicily. A popular uprising and the clergy dissuaded him; However, the church had to finance his campaign, which he concluded victoriously in 628 and crowned in 630 with the ceremonial and personal return of the relic of the cross to Jerusalem. It was no ordinary campaign, but the first crusade in history, the battle of the Christians against the fire worshipers. Despite certain religious differences, the Arabi had sympathized with Heraclius. Comparisons, documented several times, made the rounds with Khosrau as a pharaoh in the Old Testament sense, who kidnapped the children of Ishmael and who were now being taken home46. The Christians of Persia therefore saw Heraclius as their natural ally. After the defeat, the Persian Empire disintegrated into principalities, including those of the Arabi. On the one hand, the authority of the Persian central power was in tatters, on the other hand, with the death of Heraclius in 641, the alliance situation from the great, glorious war came to an end. The Arab emirs, all Christians, now held the real power in Persia. Numerous archaeological evidence can be found for this, such as the coinage of the various emirs, many with a Christian reference in the coin design. Persian hegemony in Mesopotamia, Syria and Egypt had been based on regional vassals. The defeat of the emperor had destroyed the main Persian power and the Sassanid ruling house, but left the emirs from Mesopotamia to Egypt undamaged. As a strong sea power, Byzantium only retained the ports and a few religiously important places such as Jerusalem and Damascus 46 The Koran also erroneously (?) refers to the Persian king as "Pharaoh". and concluded vassal treaties with local princes in the style of the well-known foederati. Heraclius had also tried to reach a theological agreement with the East, but his compromise formulas had been rejected. It also didn't help that his successor Constant II had the ecthesis, the formulas of faith that had even led to uprisings in North Africa in 646, removed from Hagia Sophia. Practically from one day to the next, the Arab emirs were now their own masters, they were suddenly part of a great power, and without much struggle. No wonder the Christians in Egypt or Syria cooperated: they were no longer dealing with fire worshipers or the hated imperial church, but with people who shared their religion. The country from Egypt to Persia was now suddenly dominated by Arabs, miraculously escaping the vices of Byzantium and Persia. The Antichrist was defeated, the end of the world was postponed, a new era had dawned, which would culminate in the return of Christ. The year 622 thus became the most important year in early Arabia. It was understood to be so important and incisive that the year of the victory of the Christians over the fire worshipers and the concomitant rise of the Arabs was set as the beginning of a new era (while continuing the Byzantine fiscal year, which provided scholarship with an invaluable tool hand delivered). This Arabic calendar (Greek: kata Araba) followed the solar calendar. According to Islamic tradition, an Arab prophet named Mohammed fled from the city of Mecca to Medina in 622, and that date marked the beginning of a new Islamic era. This followed the lunar calendar. Only, nobody used this lunar calendar, but the solar calendar "after the time of the Arabs". Nowhere is the name of the prophet mentioned that of his new religion. According to Islamic tradition, Muhammad had sent a letter to Emperor Heraclius asking him to convert to Islam. We know nothing about this offering from Byzantine sources. Not surprising, since we can assume with great certainty that Heraclius was inspired by the founder of a completely new religion who is said to have taken away half his empire and its holy places while he was still alive, had never heard of. His writers and those affected would certainly have told us about it. After the collapse and retreat of the main powers, a turbulent time ensued, which was characterized by the individual emirs struggling for position. Islamic historiography stylizes these internal positioning skirmishes into a glorious war of conquest by the Muslims. However, scientific historical research knows nothing about the Muslim victory at Gabitha, and there is also no evidence of the “great decisive battle” on the Jordan (Yarmuk) by the Muslims against Byzantium. In 639, when Heraclius was still alive(!), Muhammad's desert warriors are said to have conquered Damascus - there is not the slightest historical evidence for this either. According to Islamic tradition, 640 Amr ibn As is said to have entered Cairo with the green flag of the Prophet at the head of a Muslim army - and the sources of the time are also silent about this. However, there is an inscription on a bridge in Fustat (Old Cairo) by Abd al-Malik's brother Aziz, Emir in Egypt, dated to the year 690, which ends with the phrase "Amen". Maavia was the first to seize the opportunity to found a new empire that would include Persia and Byzantium's former Arab possessions. A revival of the Persian Empire to include the Arabs, he aspired to no less, naturally involved the resumption of the Sasanian struggle against Byzantium. In 662 Emperor Constantine II turned his back on his capital, Byzantium. Not only was he at odds with all of Eastern Christianity, his highly imperial views were dismissed as heresy by Maximus the Confessor, the most prominent theologian of his time (although he paid for this with lifelong banishment to the Crimea ). Constans II carried out Heraclius' threat and moved his residence to Syracuse in Sicily - the Eastern Empire was threatened with neglect. In the same year, 662, Maavia was elected Amir al-Muminin in Darabgerd, southern Iran. In this capacity he soon ruled over Persia and the formerly Byzantine East. In 663 he resumed campaigns against the West in Persian tradition. Maavia's residence was Damascus with the most important sanctuary and pilgrimage center of the time, the Basilica of St. John with the head of John the Baptist as a relic. The most important inscription that has survived from Maavia we have already met above, the Stone of Gadara (Israel), a Greek inscription beginning with the Sign of the Cross, giving his title: Amir al-Muminin. Exactly the same title is found of him in Persia in the Persian language. As we have seen, it means "Supreme Protector", the common translation "leader of the believers", meaning Muslims as a matter of course, is without any basis. Maavia was originally an ally and liege lord of the emperor, but became a traitor because, as a friend of the Byzantines, he would have lost support in the Persian part of his empire. Under the name of Muawiya, Maavia is one of the few historically comprehensible people in the colorful dance of traditional depictions of early Islam. Science knows nothing for certain about his origins, but Islamic historiography does: Muawiya was born in 603 into the influential clan of the "Omayads" of the Kuraish tribe in Mecca, in 630 he converted to Islam and served the Prophet as secretary. He was then named caliph of Medina and appointed governor of Damascus by caliph Umar in 639. Under his leadership, the enemies of Islam were defeated, and he emerged victorious in several battles, which brought him the caliphate, but also led to the Shiites splitting off under the "rightful caliph" Ali... To the facts: The weakness of the Persians had been naval warfare, which is why they always failed in the end before Constantinople - as they had before Athens. By holding Egypt and coastal Syria, Maavia now had the ability to deploy a fleet. After the gradual conquest of individual islands on the way to Constantinople, he built In 672 he set up a naval base near the Byzantine capital, and when he attacked in 674 he suffered a terrible defeat outside the city walls. The campaign ended in disaster, but according to the Islamic account, the "Caliph Muawiyah" made the Byzantine Empire tributary to the Muslims. Exactly the opposite is true. Maavia had to buy peace with Byzantium and agreed to an annual tribute of 3,000 pieces of gold along with slaves and horses. This brought about strong opposition in the east, which deposed Maavia. Maavia retained some areas to the west, fell into insignificance, and nothing is known of its demise (although Islamic tradition can provide details). The Aramean Maavia, the Muslim "Caliph Muawiya" of tradition, was actually an Arab Christian. Maavia's successor, Abd al-Malik, came from Marw in the eastern Persian province of Khorasan (modern-day Turkmenistan). Marv was ancient Antioch Margiana and fell to Persia in the 5th century AD. After the collapse of the Persian Sassanid Empire as a result of defeat by Byzantium, Arabs based in the region came to power. The traditionally claimed Islamic conquest of Marw and the other Central Asian oases did not take place. Christian and Buddhist monasteries were founded as early as the 9th century, as well as proselytizing along the Silk Road. Only after the destruction by the Mongols in 1221 can one safely assume that Marw was Islamized. According to coin inscriptions, Abd al-Malik came to power in 681, but must have been of importance in the region before that. His reign was aimed at internal consolidation, so he renewed the tribute treaty with Byzantium for higher payments. Malik wanted to defy the emperor in the religious field, perhaps out of conviction, perhaps for lack of military options. His reign was relatively peaceful, and so-called "Muhamadism" flourished during his time. According to Sasanian tradition, coins always symbolized the ideology of the ruler. For Abd al-Malik, that was the muhamad, the praised one. From the year 660, coins from Persia appeared with the logo muhamad, in combination with Christian symbols or other names such as abd Allah (servant of God) or nam (blessed). Certainly muhamad was not meant as a person, it was more of a title. Abd al-Malik himself tells us unequivocally in the inscription in his sanctuary in Jerusalem, in the "Dome of the Rock", who the muhamad was: Isa bin Maryam - Jesus, son of Mary. The Emperor of Byzantium, as head of the Imperial Church, had the Hagia Sophia, Abd al-Malik, as head of the Arab Church, had no monumental sacred building. Time was pressing because the end of the world and the return of the Messiah were expected for the turn of the year 699/700. He wanted to await him in the new basilica on the site of the old Solomon temple in Jerusalem. He started the construction of the "rock dome", which he completed in 694. The building with its octagonal, Christologically symbolic basic pattern47 corresponds to Syrian-Byzantine church architecture and was undoubtedly built as a Christian sanctuary. (The assumption that Charlemagne copied a Muslim mosque when building his Palatine Chapel in Aachen, which was identical in its basic elements, Inside the Hagia Sophia, Heraclius had his creed affixed in the sense of the Trinity, and Malik immortalized his creed in his church on the site of the temple (we already got to know the full word of it above): "There is no god but God alone, he has no partner." "Blessed be the servant of God and his messenger." "Jesus Christ, son of Mary, is the messenger of God." "So believe in God and His Messenger and say not three." This is a Christian pre-Nicensian creed of the purest water. Abd al-Malik rejects the Trinity (“do not say three”), for him Jesus is the muhamad rasul, the “blessed prophet”, but not the Son of God. A coin of Malik underscores the religious foundation of his church on the site of the old temple: it depicts the seven-branched candlestick together with the inscription "There is only one God" (la ilaha 47 See “The Church on the Temple Mount”. illa'lah). He sees himself as the restorer of Zion in the true tradition of David. This tradition has remained in later Islam, only David was endowed with the all-purpose title "Prophet". The candlestick with the seven arms of the prime number 7 soon changed to five arms of the prime number 5, probably to create a distance to the Jewish complex. So Abd al-Malik had left the east of his empire and gone west to Jerusalem. The muhamad motto, which was brought to the East with the abducted Arabi, migrated with him from East to West and subsequently appeared on coins in Syria and Palestine. The muhamad also spread in North Africa, only in Egypt, in the area of ​​the Coptic Church, did the mufiamad concept have difficulties. “Muhammadism” in the sense of the praised one (Jesus) was the defining characteristic of Malik's time. His followers became the “Muhamedans”, which at that time did not mean Muslims at all. In Abd al-Malik's coins in particular one traditionally sees evidence that he was an Islamic caliph. The appearance of muhamad clearly means the prophet, and a frequently appearing figure with a sword (“Standing caliph”) and the inscription kalfat Allah is the representation of the respective caliph. There is a whole series of such "standing caliphs". They are typed representations, and the ruler is only occasionally named, but the mention MHMD or muhamad(un) in full is a regular occurrence. The "Standing Caliph" is actually the "Praised One", namely Jesus. He always holds an oversized sword in his hand, the directional sword, clearly recognizable as a flaming sword in some depictions. This is the role he plays in the understanding of time: A "ladder" is often found on Malik's coins, according to some interpreters. This structure is also found on Byzantine coins with the Byzantine cross on top. This cross is absent from Malik's coins, sometimes replaced by a sphere or circle. This will now traditionally interpreted as meaning that Malik, as a Muslim ruler, had the cross removed. According to a new interpretation, the disappearance of the Byzantine cross is not only part of the ideological confrontation with Byzantium, but also a return to the old Semitic tradition of aniconic stone idols. Because the "ladder" undoubtedly represents the Yegar Sahadutha, the Old Testament cairn related to the legend of Jacob, which leads to the Holy of Holies. Also in the west of his empire, in North Africa, Malik's coins feature the Yegar Sahadutha, along with his Monophysite program in Latin: In nomine domini non deus nisi deus solus non est alius. (In the name of the Lord, there is only one God and he has no associate). PICTURE 14 Standing Caliph There are numerous coins with this motif. Traditionally, a caliph or Muhammad himself is seen in it. In reality, the figure represents the eschatological Jesus with the judgment sword, whose return was expected in the near future. The presentation always follows the same principle. Top left: next to the figure, the mention of muhamad and the Harran mint. Second from left: The same motif from Edessa (today Urfa, southern Turkey) To the right: coin from the year 669 in Persian style. It shows Jesus with the flaming sword and the title "Halfat Allah" (Proclaimer of God). Far right: The first gold coin of the Arab Empire, currently from Abd al-Malik, depicting the eschatological Jesus. Below: Detail from a coin of Abd al-Malik from the year 696, also depicting the eschatological Jesus. The flame structure of the sword can be clearly seen. PICTURE 15 At the top left on an issue from Palestine, the arch-Christian symbol of the fish with an extended muhamad motto: "Blessed be the Apostle of God". Pechts above the ruler carries the reliquary vessel with the head of John the Baptist. On the reverse, above the indication of value, instead of the usual cross, the Christian-Arabic symbol of the palm tree. It represents the birth of Jesus under the palm tree. Below left is a figure in the Byzantine tradition with a cross and the inscription Amman. On the reverse the value M (= 40 Nummia) with the cross above it, below it the muhamad motto of the praised one. Bottom right: Christian-Arab ruler with globe cruciger and the cross above the denomination. All the coins shown are from the "Omayad" period. The question also arises as to why titles are often mentioned (muha mad, abd Allah etc.) without immediately naming the person who was meant. It is the shyness of the times, dictated by respect, not to pronounce great holy names lightly. This is already known from the Old Testament, we do not even know the name of the highest god of the Nabataeans, only the title (Dusares). The "anointed one" ("Christ") is a title as much as "muhamad" is. Secular rulers of the time also preferred such titles, deliberately derogatory ones. In 629, Heraclius gave up the title of "autocrator" and left 118________ Norbert G. Pressburg | Goodbye Mohammed to modestly call himself "basileus" (king). Justinian II even took "Servus Christi" (Servant of Christ) as the main title, as well as the "Servants of God" Maavia and Abd al-Malik. A number of rulers are known to us only by title, which expresses their spiritual motto, but not by name. And finally, the coins of the "Omayads" depicted the range of common Christian symbols: fish, cross, palm tree, Agnus Dei (Lamb of God)48 and, albeit with a somewhat ideological distance, the stone pyramid of the Old Testament. The cross generally played a much smaller role in the Oriental churches than in the Western ones. We have a large number of clearly Christian coins from times and regions which traditional accounts have long been said to have been Islamic. How can this be explained ? There is no explanation other than that the issuers were Christians. Muslims could not have been present, because coins were far too important a means of demonstrating power and ideology for anyone to allow the subjugated to mint sovereignty - and that was for centuries. As soon as Muslims appear, they express it in their coins. What we find with astonishment is that the numismatics of the past tried to adapt their interpretation to religious views of history instead of the religious view of history to the facts. The result is often exhilarating twists. Nowhere in relics or documents of the 7th and 8th centuries, Islamic or non-Islamic, does the mention of Muslims or Islam in the sense of a new religion in Arabia occur. And that despite the fact that, according to Islamic tradition, the entire Orient was said to have been Islamic by this time. John Damascene is often cited as proof of the existence of Islam in the 8th century. But he doesn't speak - you just have to look - of "Muslims", but of the "heresy of the Ismaelites". Heretics are those who have left the official line of faith - from the point of view of the imperial church this was the case with the Arab church of Malik - but they are 48 Called “four-legged” in a traditional coin description. never adherents of another religion. It has become common practice to equate "Arabs" with "Muslims" although there is no historical justification for doing so. The term "Muslim" is first documented on a Persian coin for the year 753. However, these “Muslims” are not the members of the religion of Islam, as we take it for granted today, but they are the Aramaic meshlem, the orthodox, the true believers (which the Greek orthodox also claimed). In his call for the first crusade in 1096, Pope Urban II spoke of the recovery of the Holy Land and its resettlement. He outlined Palestine as the land of the Bible "where milk and honey flow." Many crusaders took their families with them and were almost struck by shock when they saw the hot stone desert. Urban talked about "godless" in general, but didn't say anything specific about Muslims and their religion. Had he perceived them as the main opponents, one might expect he would have named horse and rider. Many terms that seem typically Muslim to us are simply Arabic; they had nothing specifically Islamic about them until the end of the first millennium: Allah: very early Aramaic term for "God" in general and still used today by Arab Christians. Muhamad: The praised one, Christ. Abd Allah: Servus Dei, servants of God. Rasul: Prophet. Mahdi: Messiah. Bismillah: in the name of God. Bismillah rahman rahim: in the name of the gracious and merciful God. (In nomine dominis miseriscordis), a common Christian Latin formula. La illah ilallah: There is no god but God alone. This is the Arabic translation of the Latin formula Non deus nisi deus solus. Both statements can be found on Arabic coins, which have been flippantly dubbed Islamic. These formulas and many others are originally terms of Arabic Christianity. One has to get rid of the notion that the appearance of any of these words necessarily has something to do with the religion of Islam or actually proves their existence. It was only later that these terms were given a specifically Islamic classification, often in a strangely undifferentiated form, as the example of the mahdi shows. For Arab Christians, the Mahdi, the Redeemer, was Jesus then, just as he is today. In the Qur'an, the Mahdi is also Isa bin Maryam. Although the chain of prophets is supposed to end with Muhammad, the mainstream of Sunni Islam nevertheless expects another coming of a messiah, without specifying him and without defining his relation to the final prophet Muhammad. There have been numerous Mahdis, but they have never risen above local importance, several dozen in Africa alone. The most famous was Muhamad Ahmad, who set up a theocracy in the Sudan, which was crushed by the English in 189849. The last known Sunni Mahdi was Master Wallace Fard Muhammad, founder of the "Black Muslims" in the USA in 1930. Among the Shiites (the "Twelver Shiites") the awaited Mahdi is on tied to a specific person: to the hidden twelfth Imam Muhamad al-Mahdi, the official head of state under Iran's 1979 constitution, represented by the ayatollahs until his arrival. Muhamad al-Mahdi - or maybe the praised Messiah after all? According to the Iranian-Shiite view, however, the Mahdi could only appear in the midst of chaos. It can therefore be a godly act to create chaos in order to hasten the coming of the Messiah. A rocket presented in August 2010 was given the name “Mahdi” in these trains of thought. President Ahmadinejad repeatedly prophesied that Jesus and (!) him would appear soon 49 This episode tells the film "Khartoum", 1966. Mahdi Muhammad. 7 years (again the prime number) after the appearance of the two, the Last Judgment would take place50. While Paul, with his interpretation, dismissed Christianity from the Orient and romanized it, while Byzantium founded orthodoxy, Abd al-Malik created an independent Arab church. Of course he was a Christian, as were all the Marwanids (vulgo "Omayads") and the first of the subsequent "Abbasids". The muhamad was his household saint, the Dome of the Rock his haram. In the Islamic historical literature of the 9th century, al-Walid of Mecca had conquered Mesopotamia and, following in the footsteps of Abraham, had conquered Syria and Palestine, fighting the legendary Battle of the Yarmuk. The Islamic tradition assumes a south-north direction of the expansion of the Muhamad, in fact the muhamad migrated from the east to the west. With him, numerous Christian Arabs, who had once been kidnapped or who had had to leave their country under pressure from the Byzantine imperial church, returned to their ancestral homeland to Medina. Al-Walid (the "Gröfaz" of conquest literature) was a son of Abd al-Malik. He created his own residence in the Persian tradition, namely in Damascus. He enlarged the precincts of the Maavian sanctuary of John the Baptist and built a new sacred precinct. What is now known as the "Omayad Mosque" was undoubtedly built by Walid as an Arab-Christian place of worship. Among other things, he brought up the so thoroughly misunderstood saying: "There is no compulsion in religion." This was not a verse from the Qur'an as tradition has it; rather, this saying made its way into the Qur'an later, unless one agrees again Luxenbergs of the existence of a 50 See the Iranian website on preparing for the Mahdi 's appearance : www.mahdaviat-conference.com/ . Aramaic Urkoran. Walid thus turned against the imperial religious dictate - and probably also moved away from his father's zealotry. His brother Hisham took over the sanctuary of Sergios, a popular Syrian soldier saint, in Rusafa. With Hisham, the rule of the Marwanids came to an end around 750 in the east. A 250-year aftermath followed in the west, in al-Andalus. In the Islamic tradition, the Marwanids are the "Omayads/Umayyids" from Mecca, going back to an Omar/Umar. Again there is no evidence for this. However, the Islamic tradition does not seem to have been entirely comfortable with the Umayads, as some of them are described as not exactly exemplary Muslims. The "Caliph Abd al-Malik" is said to have tried to guide the participants in the Muslim pilgrimage, the Hajj, away from Mecca to Jerusalem. Of course, pilgrimages in Malik's time led to Jerusalem; with its Dome of the Rock, it was the religious center of Arab Christians. Abd al-Malik's overall objective, which he also followed personally, was to return to the Promised Land51, where the end of the world was to be awaited. In order to be prepared for this, the Christians of Islam should endeavor to agree with the Scriptures in order not to have to face the Messiah in a dispute. According to Islamic historiography, another “Omayad caliph”, Umar II, left us with instructions on what non-believers could and could not do towards Muslims. However, research has no sign of life from Umar and he too can almost certainly be referred to the realm of legends. According to the current status, at least eight of the 14 "Omayad caliphs" listed in the traditional literature can be deleted from the list as not proven. The invention of the caliphs Marwan I and Marwan II in the traditional report shows the fundamental lack of understanding of the basic dynastic concept. The Persian root MRW was misunderstood or deliberately twisted, and the dynasty's place of origin, Marv in eastern Persia, was made into a person named Marwan, of course from Mecca and from 51 Zion, Falastin in coin legends. coming from the circle of the Prophet. The reason for such mistakes was the desire for a corroborating representation at any price, i.e. simply a falsification of history, but also the discrepancies that arose when retrospectively calculating back from the Arabic solar calendar to the lunar calendar of the Hijra period, and which had to be concealed. Gaps were filled in at will, which is absolutely not an isolated case in the historiography of earlier days.52 The transition from the "Omayads" to the "Abbasids" can also be seen as a religious transitional period, although the great turning point only came after al-Mamun (d. 833). The first "Abbaside" built a sanctuary in Medina in 756, today's "prophet's tomb". He also added Christological confessions, but Mary and Jesus are already taking a back seat. According to Karl-Heinz Ohlig, the inscriptions of Medina show muhamad as a Christological predicate, perhaps for the last time. Gradually the sanctuary of Medina surpassed that of Damascus in importance. The 7th and 8th centuries, i.e. precisely the time of the alleged Islamic conquests, were the heyday of the Arab-Syrian Church. Numerous new church buildings were built, the best known being the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem and St. John's Basilica in Damascus. Missionaries reached beyond the borders of Persia to China. Theologically, a detachment from the God-man Jesus and the associated philosophical problems of the Greek way of thinking took place in the Arab Church. Rather, God speaks through the various prophets, of which Jesus is one. The Greek Church was quasi-nationalized step by step. Arabic Christianity was characterized by Semitic religiosity and was therefore always close to the tradition of Abraham. In this tradition came the gradual rejection of Hellenistic Christianity with its pomp, its cult of images and its philosophical-theological constructs that were not understandable to everyone. 52 Some personalities in the Bible reach an enormous “biblical age” because the exact genealogy had been forgotten and the gaps were filled with expanded lifetimes. For the ancient understanding, it was about the absolute minimum that a son of God, if not divinely begotten, at least had to come from a virgin birth. Consequently, in the Christian tradition, Mary's husband Joseph was pushed almost to the point of invisibility on the sidelines of the events, but the mother herself was placed in the status of a saint. Joseph is not mentioned by a syllable in the Koran either, but the Arabs had another problem: in their understanding, a woman could not possibly be as central as the Roman Maria, and for a significant personality and her legitimacy only an absolutely impressive family tree came in Ask. By reinterpreting the abd Allah, muhamad's father was identified as Abd Allah, and in the further course of the process, Muhamad was provided with an impressive line of ancestors, which leads him back through Abraham and Noah no less than to Adam himself. Muhamad is thus linked to progenitor Abraham, who appointed the Persian “Ali” as his son-in-law, who "Omayads" go back to an Omar, the "Abbasids" to one Abbas and both come from the immediate circle of the Prophet. If that isn't legitimation that transcends space and time!53 However, the designers owe us any proof. In the culturally disparate space, the Syro-Aramaic language was the main language and the unifying element. This went so far that even in Persia numerous official documents were written in Aramaic. Politically, too, the area was differentiated and mostly restless. The central authority did not extend much beyond the larger cities; the smaller and larger emirs carried out their power struggles in the provinces. As the power of the Marwanids eroded, so did the position of muhamad. A major reason for this may have been the disappointed expectation of the Messiah: the muhamad al-mahdi was 53 Saddam Hussein caused a stir in the Arab world when he once addressed King Hussein of Jordan as “cousin”. This was interpreted as an attempt to infiltrate the Prophet's family, to which King Hussein's Hashemite dynasty can be traced back. stayed away, he hadn't turned up for the Last Judgment on the Temple Mount as expected. Perhaps that was even the decisive moment for the disappearance of the muhamad Jesus concept. In the east of the kingdom, the concept of Jesus as wali-Allah, the "Representative of God," dominated. The wali-Allah is associated with the title of "eminent" (a/z) and becomes the executor of the will of God in the style of a Persian knight. Just as muhamad became a person of his own, so did ali. This sparked a dispute that led to the split (“shia”) of the party of ali: today's Shiites. Like Muhamad, Ali also originated in Persia54, but up to the present day it has never really got beyond its homeland. The first post-Marvinid ruler may have been an Alide. We know his coins, but he won't tell us his name. The Islamic tradition, however, knows him: it is an Abbas who, of course, comes from the family of the Prophet. The muhamad motto of the Marwanids was superseded by a number of other titles under the motto of which rulership for the hidden Jesus was exercised. The regent placed his often anonymous rule under a predicate of Jesus: al-hadi (saviour), mardi (the beloved son), harun (the righteous), mansur (the victorious), mahdi (the redeemer) and other titles. Because of his power of speech, Moses was assigned Aaron as caliph, as “herald” by God, an attribute that was now used again. They are deeply christological and biblical programs and titles, which the Islamic tradition has summarily converted into the names of rulers. There were certainly no caliphs al-Mansur, al-Mahdi, Musa al-Mahdi or al-Saffah, and the first "Ab basids" were certainly Christians. 54 The ali in the south, the muhamad in the east. 55 They called themselves the Hashim, the noble ones, who may be the first to be resurrected. They ended the traditions of Marv and Jerusalem and established Mecca as a religious center, initially with the Abrahamic tradition in the foreground. The historicity of the prototype of a fairytale Islamic potentate, the famous Harun al-Rashid, is also under threat. After all, a woman, a Zubayda, issued her own coins for 13 years during the period of his supposed reign. Has them under the motto of "Harun al-Raschid", the "Righteous Herald Aaron" reigns? The Barmacids represented a significant power factor at the court of the “Abbasids” for generations. They were Buddhist temple officials in Baghdad, who had immigrated from the Buddhist eastern provinces of the Persian Empire; her name derives from the title "Parmak", the head of the main Buddhist monastery of Nawbahr. They acted as viziers under several rulers and were significant participants in power - if some of them were not the rulers themselves. There are still many mysteries to be solved. A notable regent was Zubayda's successor, al-Mamun (786 - 833). Having originally resided in Marv, eastern Persia, he moved to Baghdad in 825 and eliminated the regent, his half-brother Amin(?). Al-Mamun found a spiritually lively city. There was a strong Jewish community, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Manichaeans, Persian, Arabic, Hellenistic Christians - who probably also discussed the writings of an Arabic prophet, which gradually came into circulation. As a Persian, Mamun had never reached the western half of the empire. He now made up for this extensively. With a large scientific staff, he moved first to Harran, the place of Abraham, which was also a scientific center of the Sabians56, and from there on to Damascus. He visited the Basilica of St. John, the buildings of the Marwa niden. From there it went to the Nile. Theories about the origin of the river were discussed, he saw with his own eyes where the prophet Moses was floating in the raffia basket. He stopped in Jerusalem and inspected the inscriptions of Abd al-Malik in the Church on the Temple Mount with his staff. And they found evidence of a prophet of the Arabs. Here it was in black and white: muhamad abd Allah. What was called "blessed be the servant of God" under Abd al-Malik has now become modern 56 “Star Worshipers”, adherents of the ancient Babylonian religion. Arabic to "Muhamad son of Abd Allah". A way of reading that was previously impossible suddenly became possible in the changing times with the new language and writing convention and a little good will. Mamun is said to have removed Malik's name and inserted his own57, although he retained the year 72 kata Araba. We have coins of al-Mamun on which he refers to himself as the caliphate of Allah, the first use of that title since Abd al-Malik, but with a different meaning. While in Malik the caliphate was Allah, God's herald, Jesus, Mamun as "Caliph" and "Imam" is the first representative of his god. But which god? Certainly the one God, Allah, who had sent the Prophet Muhammad to the Arabs. Nevertheless, Mamun did not see himself as a "Muslim" under any circumstances - what we understand today as "Islam" had not yet become independent in his time. Mamun gathered the best minds of the time at his court: scientists of all disciplines and shades, intellectual freedom reigned. For example, when he heard that the Koran postulated that the earth was flat as a carpet, but that the Arab astronomers of the time defined it as a sphere, he immediately got to the bottom of the matter. In the steppe near Mosul, he had a geographical degree staked out at different angles of the sun and thus calculated the circumference of the earth. His expedition came to the conclusion: the circumference of the globe is 40,075 kilometers (the exact number is 40,235). Qur'an texts were already known and under discussion, from the late The first summarized text in Arabic dates from the 9th century. There was very soon a radical trend, represented by Ibn Hanbal (“Hanbalism”), whose followers pursued a literal interpretation. Mamun made himself the leader of the Mutazilites, whose spirit was closely related to ancient philosophies and sciences. He stated that the Koran had also been created and could therefore be discussed. By emphasizing the ratio, by the demand for logic and open sources of knowledge, the Mutazilites were in stark contrast to the orthodox demand 57 There is no evidence that Mamun himself made the change. It may have been made at even later times. Recognition of the Koran as the exclusive source and literal observance. Islamic tradition celebrates the time of al-Mamun as the heyday of Islam. Nothing is wrong. As a Mutazilite, Mamun was much closer to an Arab Enlightenment than to the Islamic Koran doctrine. He fought against Hanbalism, i.e. something that would later become orthodox Islam. The Egyptian theologian Ahmad Amin (1878-1954) believed that the defeat of Mutacilism was the greatest catastrophe in the history of Islam. After al-Mamun came a great upheaval. The muhamad and the ali were on the way to personification, the caliphate - although only used by Malik and Mamun in a completely different sense - was retroactively applied to all rulers since "Muhamad": pretending to be an unbroken theocratic chain that never existed. The Koran came into being, and at the same time the Arabic language and script. The muhamad got his grave in Medina, the ali was defeated in the programmatic dispute and got a martyr legend imposed on him. The enigmatic Koranic Bakka (Surah 3:96) was eventually "identified" and codified as the Arabic Mecca. This constantly sought-after "major commercial center of Mecca at the crossroads of important roads" is in fact unknown. A historical place called Mecca in the 6th or 7th century has not been documented to this day. Only a "Bakka" is mentioned in the Koran, the location of which is said to be identical to Abraham's first house of prayer. However, because all non-Islamic traditions place Abraham in Mesopotamia, Bakka was still described as a place in Mesopotamia in the 8th century. Tabari (Tabari again) is the first to speak of a “Mecca” in the Arabian Desert. Luxenberg (Luxenberg again) sees in Bakka the Syro-Aramaic meaning of "fenced, bounded". Accordingly, Bakka/Mecca would not mean a specific place, but a circumscribed, sacred area in general. The fact is that Mecca was never a city. There was there in the 7th Century a church like many others in Arabia, but was otherwise of no particular importance. Mecca as the cradle of Islam is a reinvention of the pious literature of later centuries. Mecca was, as Volker Popp puts it, the "Island of Thule" of the Arabs. As far as Tabari, there is also no information about the Kuraish tribe of prophets, and not even about Badr, the site of one of the “most decisive battles of mankind”58. Although when you call Google, for example Creating 2 million results no one has identified this place Badr yet. (Nevertheless, sketches, deployment plans and photos of war graves are listed.) In the Koran, "Badr" is mentioned in Sura 3:123 as a word that stands alone and is not understood. In the absence of an alternative, the word Tabari was named the place "Badr", although this destroys the logical connection to the preceding and following verses. Luxenberg brings context into the section by proving "Badr" as another misreading. Bi-badr becomes bi-'idr, which means "heavenly help", by omitting a single point that was obviously added later, and gives the verses a consistent sense.59 The entire history of the first 250 years was legendary in the Arabian desert or completely reinvented. What was possibly the first original mosque (masjid) was built in the new residential city of Samarra, with a modeled Old Babylonian ziggurat as its landmark and the mother of all minarets (the steps were originally on the outside and later migrated inwards). We are on the threshold of the 10th century. When do we still have to speak of “church” and when of "Mosque" cannot be precisely dated. “Masjid” was, and still is, a place of worship in Aramaic in general. Only much later did it become the term for the specifically Islamic house of worship. One can only speak of a mosque if the masjid has a mihrab (prayer niche) facing Mecca. 88 www.islamreligion.com/de . 59 Other events in the Muhamad legends seem to have their historical basis in the great war between Byzantium and the Persian enemy of the faith. The victorious "trench battle" of Muhammad in the year 627 falls on the year of the Byzantine/Arab victory at Nineveh, the year 628 of the Byzantine/Persian peace treaty corresponds to that "Agreement of Huhdaibiyyah". In the year 630, the year of the return of the cross and the ceremonial reopening of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem, the cleaning and opening of the Kaaba took place according to the Islamic interpretation. PICTURE 16 Mosque or Temple of Abraham? The Great Mosque of Samarra was built around 850 by AI Mutawakkil. It is possibly the first original mosque to be built at all. The minaret is modeled on an old Babylonian ziggurat. Islam means "accordance" and it means agreement with the Holy Books. These were Christian books, the Old Testament, the Gospels, Apocrypha60. An Arab-Christian church began to emerge as early as the 2nd or 3rd century, and this continued to develop constantly. Originally, Jews and Jewish Christians may have lived side by side without much differentiation. However, the individual groups gradually developed their own theology, and the various councils, including that of Nicaea (325), drew deep dividing lines through oriental Christianity. The Arab Christians did not follow the theology of the imperial church and thus stuck to the theological standard before Nicaea. 60 "Apocrypha" are texts that are not recognized by the sovereignty of the faith. The Copts, for example, still use a Gospel of Peter today that was not recognized by the Orthodox and Western Roman churches. They had wanted nothing more than to find true Christianity. They saw themselves as the Ishmaelites, the sons of Ishmael in the true tradition of Israel, which had been corrupted over time. One sought Islam, agreement with the "scripture". A few centuries after Christ, Eastern Christianity had almost degenerated into a religion of saints, amulets and miracles. That was, like the high value placed on pictorial representation, the influence of the ancient world, one can definitely recognize pagan traits in it. In addition, there were the constructs of Greek theological thinking, such as the cult of the Immaculate Conception and the Trinity. The Arab Christians, on the other hand, were still close to the Jewish Christians and were therefore much closer to the world of the Old Testament than the Romanized or Hellenized Christians of the Mediterranean culture. The Arab Christians therefore wanted nothing to do with the dictated Byzantine Church, nothing with its construction of a trinity, in Christian-Arab eyes a turning away from the belief in a single God. In fact, nothing is more emphasized in the Qur'an than the One God. From the point of view of the imperial church, this was of course "heresy", the apostasy from the right faith. And the Arab Christians were described as heretics in contemporary sources. As false Christians, but by no means as followers of a new religion. Conversely, the Arab Christians saw the others as heretics, Arabic musrikun. Traditionally - and here we are again dealing with one of the countless misreadings - the musrikun scolded in the Koran are interpreted as "heathens". However, the word derives from sarik, the "comrade" and "companion". It was about these associates who wanted to place another divine person, namely Jesus, at the side of God. The lunar cult was dominant on the Arabian Peninsula in the pre-Christian/pre-Islamic period, spread from Syria to Yemen, with deities that differed from region to region. Moon cults are typical of pastoral societies, all conceivable positive properties were ascribed to the moon, the sun was considered more of a destroyer (very good understandable with desert dwellers, sun worship is also the cult of agrarian societies). These desert traditions had a major impact on the developing religion that is still clearly visible today. Allat and Uzza, a pair of siblings who were occasionally joined by Manat, who charted the fate of the people, were particularly popular in central and northern Arabia. Allat (short form of al-Ilahah, "Goddess") was the goddess of the moon, Uzza the goddess of the morning star, which is why Hellenistic sources also equated them with Venus. The goddesses were also in charge of water and fertility, and human sacrifices are said to have been offered to Uzza at least. They were worshiped in sacred trees, springs and above all in black stones. Allat owned stones in present-day Mecca, Taif, and Petra; Uzza sacred trees also near modern-day Mecca and a spring not far from her sister's sacred stone in Mecca. Djinnis, malicious spirits, were up to mischief in the desert. That the moon and star cult among the Bedouins was apparently very tough was alive is reflected in the Koran, where reference is made to these idolaters in several passages61. Muhammad was the first to drive the idols out of the Kaaba, but they have nevertheless become well established in his religion: Even today, the black stone of the Allat, set in a silver frame, is worshiped around the source of the Uzza Known today as Zamzam to Muslims, it is a must-visit on every pilgrimage. The Djinnis, the evil god spirits, are also well represented in the Koran62 and are still feared by believers. The crescent moon of the pagan moon goddess Allat has proven to be the symbol of Islam immortalized; on flags of some Islamic countries in unity with the morning star of the sister goddess Uzza. The dark period of the pagan gods, which Muhammad is said to have defeated, was by no means followed by Islam, as tradition has it. It 61 Especially Sura 5:19-23. 62 Sura 72, "The Djinni", Sura 55:33, 56, 74 etc. There was a centuries-long Christian interlude that is completely concealed. The Arabian Peninsula was almost entirely Christianized in the 7th century63, and there were also significant Jewish communities. Trinitarian Christianity was widespread in the kingdom of the Nabataeans, which included Mecca in the south. The south, today's Yemen 64, was influenced by the Ethiopian Church, the east of the peninsula on the Gulf was under Persian influence, where Nestorian Christianity was dominant. There is ample archaeological evidence of churches, monasteries and sacred buildings throughout the Arabian Peninsula. However, no research is allowed into this 65> even more than relics assumed to be pre-Islamic are being rigorously destroyed in 21st-century Saudi Arabia. It seems to have been forgotten that the Kaaba itself is of Christian origin. “Kaabas”, which are “cube-shaped” buildings, have a tradition in southern Arabia that goes back to the 4th century BC. Numerous Kaabas have been found in Yemen that were built as temples or churches. The Kaaba of Mecca is the northernmost such structure. The block of 10 by 12 meters was part of a church. In front of the north-west side of the cube is a square that is closed off by a semi-circular wall base (see photo on page 136). These are the foundation walls of the apse of the former church, the extension to today's Kaaba. According to ecclesiastical usage, a crypt for particularly prominent dead lay below in this sanctuary. This part is called higr in Arabic, the "womb"; According to Islamic tradition, the progenitor Ismael and his mother Hagar are buried here. (Another name of the higr is al-hatim, "that laid in ruins.") 63 CDG Müller, "Church and mission among the Arabs in pre-Islamic times", Tübingen 1967 64 Even on the remote island of Socotra in the Indian Ocean there are remains of a church which, according to H. Waldmann (Tübingen), could go back to the mission of the Apostle Thomas. 65 That reads politically correct with Dr. Barbara Finster (“Arabia in Late Antiquity”) like this:................................ a Judeo-Christian culture or, in the broadest sense, a monotheistic epoch means there is no research desideratum there.'' PICTURE 17 The pre-Islamic Kaaba as a Christian church (according to G. Lüling / al-Azraqi) The Kaaba thus formed a structural unit with the apse, with a baptismal font to the right of the entrance and numerous murals.66 After the occupation of Mecca in 693 by al-Haggag, Abd al-Malik's governor, this apse is said to have been torn down building served until the beginning of the 9th century still as a church. In early Islamic times, the Kaaba, which originally had windows and doors, was led back to an empty, windowless, almost closed building. Researchers also see in this the reversal from Hellenistic to Semitic Christianity, symbolized in the sense of an oversized Ark of the Covenant its strong Old Testament reference; the Kaaba was therefore a temple of Abraham before it finally became a mosque. The disappearance of crosses on coins, replaced by the stone pyramid of the Old Testament, can also be seen in this context. This is an expression of the turn towards aniconic worship, in the course of which the black stone of the Allat has probably become socially acceptable again. According to Islamic claims, there have never been Christian communities around Mecca and Medina. The Kaaba is the striking evidence to the contrary, other relics of the area around the church rest 66 There are reports that two of these images (Abraham, Mary and Jesus) were still present in the recent past. And rumors persist that they still exist. PICTURE 18 The site of the Kaaba was the place of worship of the pagan moon goddess Allat and the goddess of the morning star, Uzza. Their symbols, the star and crescent moon, still adorn the today Flags of several Muslim countries. The stone of Allat, who was also the goddess of fertility, is walled in at one corner of the Kaaba. The semi-circular foundation wall of the earlier apse, which is still clearly visible, dates from the Christian period of the Kaaba. under the pavement of the mosque district, but like all other non-Islamic sites in Saudi Arabia are not open to research. The 7th and 8th centuries is a period of mystery to many scholars of Islam because no Islamic writings from this period exist. The Koran expert Rudi Paret calls it a "gap in the tradition"67. Couldn't the early Muslims write? You could and have proven it many times. They wrote - but not in classical Arabic, nor did they speak in the way the Koran scholars expected of them. From the middle of the 9th century, writing suddenly started again with great intensity. Reports reach us from the late 6th century, whose actors suddenly speak Koranic Arabic and give us detailed accounts of events from 200 years ago and even earlier. Why didn't they tell you about it then? The answer of the Islamic scholars is that the Arabic culture was oral with a great storytelling tradition. There would have been numerous people who could have memorized the entire Qur'an without error. Respect for the intellectual giants, but why should the Arabs have written before Muhammad, then not anymore, and then suddenly again after 200 years? This exalted meaning of the oral tradition has long been refuted, we have numerous proofs of the written tradition. What was now produced after the "gap in the tradition" was a lot of material in scope, but thematically very poor. It consisted essentially of the texts of a holy book called the Koran and a vast amount of material about a prophet named Muhammad. At the beginning of the gap, there was no mention of either of them, at the end there was no other topic. All literature now seems to outdo itself in the proof of the prophet and his new religion. Fragments of scriptures, cross-references, or indexes also turned up from a number of books that no longer exist but are known to have existed and not be included in the chorus of 67 Rudi Paret, "The Gap in the Traditions About the Ur-Koran", Wiesbaden 1954. Prophet cheerleaders had joined in. A whole series of variants of the Koran had also disappeared, although their former existence is known. For a long time, European oriental studies believed in the usual traditional explanations that the reason for the phasing out was problems with spelling or dialects, although the stories of the prophets themselves report on book burnings. No, we know today that censorship and the destruction of books on a large scale took place. Sometimes no effort was made to hide it. The oldest life story of the Prophet is said to be from Ibn Ishak, but it no longer exists. Ibn Hisham (d. 834) bases his descriptions on this story, but writes in his introduction: "I will omit some of what Ibn Ishak mentioned in this book if there is no mention of the Prophet, nothing of it is found in the Qur'an... and if it can serve neither as explanation nor as evidence..." That's straight to the point. In all of early Islamic literature, historical information has its only justification in evidencing the Prophet. The traditional credo is that the Koran is unique, inconceivable without precursors and without its herald Muhammad. But poems and poets have come down to us from ancient Arabian, pre-Islamic times. We know their poetry, their idioms, their formal design. Their content is of religious, biblical and Christian origin. The form and content of these ancient Arabic strophic songs are often found in the Koran. That is, the Qur'an is not unique, as tradition claims. He had demonstrable predecessors in terms of content and style. This also cannot be reconciled with the assertion that the Koranic rhyming prose is inconceivable without its interpreter Muhammad. One is not dependent on the other, as research shows. Koranic poetry is an integral part of the chain of Arabic poetic tradition and did not first appear with the Koran and its proclaimer. Attempting to sever any connection with pre-Islamic poetry and tradition stems from tradition's silly claim that Prophet could neither read nor write. One should not even think later that the prophet could have taken over something that already existed. After all, the Qur'an was to come fresh and exclusive from heaven and not from the past. According to Islamic opinion, before Muhamad there was nothing, at least nothing clever, officially called dschhiliyya, "the time of ignorance, of barbarism". And suddenly everything in one fell swoop: the Prophet, Revelation, the Koran, and lots of fiction on the subject. But all this 200 years later! In reality, the "gap in the tradition" did not exist. The Arabs did narrate and write. Namely the Koran, step by step, version by version, we have numerous manuscripts that document this process. But they didn't write a word about the prophet. So they could write on their Holy Book, but not on its Author, the Prophet? The reason is that there was nothing to write about a prophet. Where there were no Muslims, they could not write any Islamic scriptures. What could then have happened in the meantime, the roughly 200 years between the alleged events and their proclamation? Nothing less than the birth of Islam. But without a rabid archangel, inspirations on mountain top, strike forces from heaven and God-sent sandstorms. It was a process. But because, according to the good old Semitic tradition, a major religious event can only be initiated by a veritable revelation, Islamic historiography ignored the first two centuries of process and placed a prophet at the beginning. In fact, the 7th century continued with the 9th century - which had already been noticed by several researchers. Inimitable is the sovereignty of the renowned Islam researcher Josef van Ess, who starts his theological history of Islam in the 2nd Islamic century: there is nothing reliable to report from the 1st century (i.e. the time of Muhammad and the main events). As already shown, Luxenberg was able to prove that many passages of the Koran were not written in Arabic. He has about 400 so far Aramaic words found in the Koran. At first glance, that doesn't seem like much. But as it turned out, not understanding 400 words already created blatant misreadings, to which the world owes the headscarf and the heavenly virgins. It will be interesting to see how things will continue. The Koran writings originally consisted of the consonant structure of an Aramaic-Arabic mixed language. This Koran was constantly being worked on, as the numerous manuscripts show. This Koran was the continuation of the Qeryan for a specific Arab community, and it was clearly a Christian Koran. If you had an Arab, for example, around the year 700, i.e. a hundred years later "Muhamad", asked about his faith, the answer (unless he was a Jew) would have been unequivocal: Christian. If surveyed in different regions, different traditions would have become apparent. For example, different attitudes towards Moses, Abraham or Jesus, who was seen as God, the son of God, as a prophet, as a messenger. We would have found that the main difference in views was the role attributed to Jesus. The accents were different, but no one saw a new religion approaching because of it or had any reason to change their religion. For two or three centuries there were only fluid borders, no one was faced with the choice of having to choose between Christianity and Islam. This is also the reason why the Christians in Syria, Persia or Spain did not report the appearance of a new religion. Christianity was widespread, and through a gradual transition, the Arab Christians had of course also become widespread Muslims. The conquest legends fabricated afterwards had to find an explanation as to why the "subdued" Christians and countries happily cooperated with their conquerors - the fairy tale of the tolerance of Islam arose. On the way from the Qeryan to the Qur'an, it wasn't so much the theology that changed, it was mainly the role of Jesus that changed. Only when this was no longer a central figure, but also a prophet among others, only when the proclaimed became the proclaimer, did the Koran become a book become another religion. The Muhamad abd Allah is the product of this shift in meaning and not the cause. Theologically, no sufficient reason and justification for a new religion was visible. But no religion without a justification - and it was added later in the founding myth of Muhamad. It is this Mohammedan initial myth that makes Islam what it is. The burning desire for his own gospel seemed fulfilled, but the longing for his own prophet was still unfulfilled - after all, he had been predicted often enough. The Jews had their prophets, the Christians had theirs, and now, in the 9th century, the Arabs were to have their own prophet too. Rumors will have arisen of an Arabian prophet, but unfortunately, by the time of his earthwalking, they have 200 years ago or more and no records existed, one had to resort to oral accounts, which began to flow like a most fertile spring and would not end. These stories also proved that the prophet was the author of the Koran, which was already available as tangible proof, at least in part. The result was a reverse interpretation of the Holy Book and the history of the last 200 years as a whole. This reinvention, which it really was, took place mainly in Mesopotamia in the 9th century. The editors gathered whatever lore they could get and wrote it down. However, as it turned out, they no longer understood the language and meaning of the word at the time it was created. That is why they hinted, assumed, tumbled, interpreted from the very beginning - which has remained the hallmark of a Koran reading to this day ("interpretations"). They appointed caliphs and fought battles where there were none, and augmented them with miracles when the tales got too out of hand. It is safe to assume that tales of real actors - a sheikh or a prominent local preacher - found their way into their reports, but then with the label "Muhamad" were provided. The numerous instructions included in the Koran and legal regulations, which often go into the last detail, are those of a Bedouin society at the time. One can assume that elements specific to the desert found their way into religion early on. But even more may have been written into it in the comprehensive reverse interpretation. The difference alone between the Meccan suras (roughly the theological part of the Koran) and the Medinan suras (roughly the implementing regulations) is too great to be assigned to one person and one epoch - they bear a completely different handwriting. The editors also did not shy away from situating the legendary Abraham of the Old Testament as Ibrahim in Mecca and appointing him the first "true believer", which, implicitly, but of course only a Muslim could be. In line with relevant tradition, the Lebanese Kamal Salibi moved the entire Old Testament to today's Arabia and tried to confiscate it for Islam.68 Of course, the language of the new book was supposed to be Arabic, but there was no comprehensive Arabic. And above all: There was only a rudimentary Arabic script - so a script that was legible and binding for everyone had to be defined first. Therefore, the compilers of the Koran were also grammarians and they created nothing less than the Arabic of the Koran. It is assumed with certainty that the Koran was the first text in this new language version. No sooner had the book appeared than attempts were made to establish it as the only truth and all-encompassing. Anyone who has this book does not need anything else, it contains everything past, present and future, it regulates all areas of life. This laid the seed for the mixture of private, public, civil and state that characterized Islam from then on. And even the donkey Luqman from the Akhikar, the Indian book of wisdom, found its own sura in the Koran, as a souvenir from the homeland of muhamad, the Buddhist-influenced East Persian region. 68 Kamal Salibi, "The Bible came from the land of Asir", Hamburg 1985. The editors thus reinvented language, writing and history, thereby losing touch with the reality of their past. Nothing documents Islam's shattered relationship with its own past better than the symbols of the hated pagan deities on its flags and prayer houses: the crescent moon and the morning star. An important stage from history to legend undoubtedly occupies al-Hira, a site in southern Mesopotamia. Here lived a federation of Arab tribes, united under religion as a uniting, cross-tribal element. The Hirenser saw themselves as the community of the Ibad, the "servants" (meaning "servants of God"). The Koran also speaks of Ibad. However, it should correctly be called Abid (the plural form of Abd), the Ibad only exists as a Mesopotamian special form, related to the community in question. only prescribed ? Recall that Hira is also the name of the place near Mecca (a mountain or a cave) where, in Islamic tradition, Muhamad received his first revelations. An accident ? In fact, there is good reason to believe that this real place al-Hira was transferred by tradition from one location to another with appropriate meaning, a process for which there are numerous historical equivalents. Are we dealing with the “Ur-Muslims” with the Hirensian Christians?69 (We will deal with these Hiringensian Christians or Ibadis again in a later chapter, where they come to Spain as Christian Arabs and there become Muslims .) As Semites by birth and Christians by training, the Arabs were not only familiar with the great tradition of the Old Testament and the Torah. Yes, they lived these old myths of Moses and Abraham, the expulsion of the progenitors by the pharaoh, the prophecies, the conquest, the 69 A legend speaks of a trader and preacher who accepted Arabic Christianity in al-Hira and spread it in southern Arabia. His name was Qutham and later became known as Muhammad. inevitable apocalypse and the hope of ultimate redemption. One made comparisons with events of the present, looked for parallels, looked for signs. The same sequence of events can be found again and again in the treasury of myths of the Semitic religions. A prophet is about announced. He appears, his birth is a mystery, at the age of 12 he gives scholarly lectures, has apparitions, is misjudged, persecuted, goes into the desert, preaches, works miracles and finally ascends to heaven. We find all this again in the Prophet of the Arabs. Even in the minority, the right ones always win, and when an ordinary miracle is not enough, angelic hosts come to their aid. In the Old Testament, in the Koran, in the ancient Orient. If you enter a foreign country, then already with fire and sword. One destroys, murders and pillages, in the Old Testament as in the Koran. Everyone knows the story of how the Israelites (with the help of a miracle, of course) destroyed Jericho and caused a bloodbath. However, we know from archeology that Jericho was not inhabited at the time in question. There is also no archaeological equivalent for the described bloody conquest of all of Palestine. The same applies to the Islamic conquests in the name of the Prophet, which are described in great detail. Research and archeology know nothing of a conquest of Syria, Persia or Egypt by Muslims at the time in question. The Arab Empire was not the result of Islam, it was already there. Large-scale Islamization could happen because the Arab Empire already existed and provided a broad base for the developing Arab religion. In hindsight, legends of glorious battles and heroic conquerors were added to the legend of the prophet. Al-Walid, for example, the alleged jihadist and glorious conqueror, actually built St. John's Cathedral in Damascus around 710, instead of waging wars for the Prophet. The writers of the traditional report had no relation to either history in today's sense. Her ideas moved in the pictures and in the epic tradition of the Middle East. We are not dealing with historical descriptions here, but with the fulfillment of expectations and the marking of territories on identity formation: "Our religion, our superiority, our connection to the top." So listen up! The Qeryan, the Aramaic liturgical book of the Arab Christians, ended after half a millennium, after many intermediate stages, changes, additions and omissions in the Arabic Quran, the book of a new religion. The Koran had started as a Christian book and then became the Islamic Koran when Jesus lost his special status. Theologically the book is very emaciated, but the old core is still there. The fact that it is no longer immediately recognizable as an Arabic-Christian book is due to the subsequent editing. It was only in the course of these edits that Muhammad received existence and a profile. And it was only the interpretations imposed on the original message and their Bedouinization that gave the new religion its typical character. Islam with its Holy Book did not happen overnight in the world. Nor did it spread to more than half of the then world in a few years, as religious legends would have us believe. Islam has a long, complicated history and its origins in Arabic Christianity. Christianity is a split from Judaism, Islam a split from Christianity. This split prepared itself in the 7th and 8th century and was only completed in the 9th or even 10th century, only then do we have the conditions as they are from the tradition for the 7th century to be described. The widespread establishment of what we now understand by "Islam" did not take place before the 12th century. The depictions of the Prophet and his book in the Islamic tradition, especially those of the first 200 years, belong in the category "Tales from the East". That would be like claiming truth for the Nibelungen saga. True history is taking shape step by step thanks to science, even if, as said in the introduction, we are only at the beginning of this process. The "Golden Age" of Islam: Transfigured views into a non-existent past “Moses, Jesus, Muhamad - these criminals. " The "Islamic" philosopher ar-Razi (865-925) "The source of disbelief is to have even heard such horrid names as Socrates, Hippocrates, Plato, and Aristotle. " The Islamic "philosopher" al-Ghazali (1058-1111) O b the former Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, whether Saddam Hussein, whether any preacher at the Friday service, whether a believing journalist in a newspaper office or Osama bin Shop in the Afghan mountains: everyone refers to the "golden age" of Islam. What is meant by these "golden ages"? First of all, the “golden age” means the lifetime of the Prophet and the time of his immediate successors, the "Rightly Guided Caliphs". "Golden" because at that time the revelations of the prophet, i.e. the word of God, are said to have been law. The Prophet himself watched over compliance and served as a shining example himself - simply the ideal situation for a devout Muslim. The social circumstances were also ideal. This also continued among the immediate successors of the Prophet, who all came from his circle of relatives. As we know, there are no hard facts that come from the Scriptures exclusively religious sources and are therefore to be regarded as a matter of faith. So it is faith that constructs ideal conditions. The pious tales are said to have taken place in the Arabian Desert, more or less between Mecca and Medina. As we now also know, this region played no role in the emergence of Islam. It therefore seems pointless to reason deeply about the conditions in the Arabian Desert at that time... Nevertheless: the external circumstances in the Arabian desert of the 7th century must have been difficult. People lived on the edge of subsistence, often on the edge of starvation. Up until the 19th century there were repeated outbreaks of war from the Arabian sand desert to the cultivated Mesopotamian land and North Africa, dictated by sheer need70. One can assume that simple Bedouin raids were later reworked into Islamic religious expeditions. What could this society have looked like? A starving but highly ideologized society of men, in which the law of the strongest prevailed. According to traditional accounts, Muhammad himself is the best example of this: once in power, he ordered assassinations for people he didn't like and started dozens of skirmishes and wars. (These are now celebrated, or at least presented as inevitable, by the umma, the “community of believers”.) The events that are said to have been "golden" took place in the "Middle Ages" - but in which Middle Ages? The Byzantine Empire was certainly furthest along in this period, as were the Arab heartlands. Europe clearly lagged behind these two regions in the Middle Ages. But in the Arabian Desert, despite the use of iron, Bronze Age conditions prevailed - if at all. In the midst of wretched external circumstances, believers may posit ideal conditions within. In fact, however, it is of secondary importance what these conditions may have looked like. A problem only arises when the conditions that are perceived as ideal have long been 70 In Egypt there are still villages of former Arab looters from the 19th century who never returned, which are avoided by the local population and with whom marriages do not take place. seeks to transfer past epochs into other habitats and epochs; in our case Bronze Age conditions of a desert society in the 21st century of a globalizing world. This is tantamount to refusing to recognize historical, social and technical developments, i.e. simply the passage of time. This is exactly what the fairly modern Islamic ideology of salafiyya does. This fixation on a bygone era in an extreme living environment, with actors we actually know nothing about, is a stumbling block for today's Muslims - at least for those parts that want these conditions back. The “Golden Age” also includes the mighty conquests under the green flag of the Prophet. Within 10 years, the Islamic army from the desert is said to have conquered the Arabian Peninsula as well as Syria, Palestine, Iraq, Egypt, North Africa and Persia. The Caucasus, Spain, parts of France, Russia, India and China followed. A lot of wood in a short time. It is said to have started when the Prophet's troops invaded Palestine in 629. As early as 633, another Muslim army advanced from Mecca into Syria. In a brief synopsis of Muslim representations, it reads as follows: The army advanced slowly until Caliph Abu Bakr summoned other troops, who simultaneously conquered Mesopotamia, with the words: "Hurry up, hurry up, conquering a Syrian village costs me more than conquering all of Iraq." Thus reinforced, the army was able to "beat the Byzantines south of Jerusalem". You don't know the exact location, you don't know the year, but you do know the details, the commander is a certain Khaled al-Walid, "the greatest commander of all time". Numerical ratio: Muslims 32,000, Byzantines 90,000. To get in the mood, Walid sent a well-known champion to the front. He stood in front of the ranks of the Romans and shouted: "I am the death of your ashen heads. I am the murderer of the Romans. I am the scourge sent to you, I am Zarrar son of Azwar. When a Roman officer moved to the challenge accepting it, Zarrar tore off his armor and threw away his shield. The Romans recognized him. They knew he had killed dozens of veterans, including the generals of Tiberias and Amman. Immediately a larger group moved towards Zarrar, when General Walid recognized this cowardly move he immediately threw himself into the fight, it was truly an unfair fight, only ten Romans against the greatest swordsman of all times. They were no challenge to Khaled, he killed them quickly and mercilessly.”71 In 637, 638 or 639 the "decisive battle of Kadesia" took place in Iraq. The Islamic sources do not know the exact year, but the details do: 100,000 Persians with war elephants faced 30,000 Muslims. It was a tough struggle, but when a desert storm finally blew towards the Persians, it was all over for them72. In 636 the "all decisive battle" at the Yarmuk (Jordan) took place: 200,000 Byzantines against 25,000 Muslims. She was won because the "Persians and Romans" were at odds and a strong south wind threw dust in their faces. In 638, according to other Islamic sources 634, the Muslims conquered Jerusalem. In 639 they conquered the Persian province of Khuzistan, 640 Cairo and 642 Alexandria. Also in 642, another "all-important" battle took place at Nehawend in Iran. 150,000 Persians faced less than 10,000 Muslims, the wind direction is not known this time. But the Muslims defeated the Persians, who fled in all directions in terror73. The victorious Islamic armies pushed on in two marches 71 From: islamreligion.com, 2009. 72 What is most interesting about the alleged Battle of Kadesia is that in 1980 Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was to use this event to set a shining example for his war against Iran. 73 A forum post on the politik.de website from 2009 states: “It can’t be a coincidence that you’re always inferior, but you’re still able to win successfully.” advance to India and China. On the way, at the Talas River, the Chinese were dealt with in "another decisive battle in world history" (this time Wikipedia, 2009) and - one is amazed - by the "Abbasid Caliphate". The astonishment is even greater when, in the same year, Islamic historiography had a legendary Abu Muslim drive the Umayads out of precisely this area, suppressed a “Shiite revolt” and even fell out with the caliph. Punitive expedition, internal religious war, annihilation of the Chinese army: all in the same place at the same time. At the same time, an Islamic army was on its way to subjugate North Africa, Spain and southern France. We want to save ourselves the occupation of Russia up to the Volga. In fulfillment of a prophecy of the prophet under the caliph Umar ibn al-Chattab (vulgo: the drawn sword of God), the Muslims also acted as a sea power and, according to the Islamic account, hit “the lifeblood of Byzantium”. In the naval battle of Phoenix, also known as the "War of the Masts", they won a glorious victory. After that, the Byzantines acted very clumsily, because they sailed in too close a formation and therefore gave the Muslims an opportunity to jump from boat to boat and turn the naval battle into a land battle. The Muslim fleet was made up of Christians, but they were enthusiastic and willing to serve among the Muslims. The fleet then failed in front of Byzantium "by Greek fire", although the emperor had become obliged to pay tribute to the Muslims. As a reminder of reality: exactly the opposite is the case. Muawiya/Maavia was tributary and deposed due to failure. As we know, his successor Malik also continued to make payments to Byzantium. Incidentally, the author of the mentioned incident is the fairy tale uncle Tabari, who we already know, he wrote this around 900, i.e. around 200 years after the alleged events74. It is almost superfluous to mention that the good Umar ibn al-Chattab is not historically documented and, like many of his colleagues, never existed.75 Not one of these numerous “decisive battles” of Muslims is historically documented. Of course, a reclaiming or repossession of territory or privilege cannot have happened without struggle. Independent sources report numerous skirmishes from this period, with no further details about the opponents, battles over positioning between former Persian and Byzantine partisans, between emirs who have become independent and old owners. No mention of Muslims. After 627, the final defeat of Chosrau II at Nineveh against Heraclius, there was no longer any Persian power that could have destroyed the Muslims on their conquest towards China, and Heraclius himself was at the peak of his military power. The big problem here, as in all of early Islamic history, are the sources. All of them are Islamic sources and all of them are later accounts. All of these well-known authors76, who are referred to again and again, wrote their detailed, quote-strewn stories much later - and on the basis of unproven sources. These stories are about events ("decisive battles") or people ("caliphs") that cannot be proven. None of the year numbers are correct because they relate to 74 It looks like we'll also have to say goodbye to our favorite fairy tale uncle, Tabari. As the latest analyzes have shown, the Tabari texts available to us must date from Cairo in the 12th or 13th century. Future research may reveal that "Tabari" was not a person, but the generic term for a collection of texts of various origins and authors. 75 Nevertheless, there is a dissertation about his almost superhuman achievements at the Philosophical Faculty of Cologne: Halte Uenal, "The Justification of the Legal Judgments of the Second Caliph 'Umar Ibn Al-Hattab'", Cologne 1982. According to other opinions, however, Omar was a very bad thing: "Omar ibn Khattab was actually an agent for the Jews and from that time onwards the Jewish infiltration of the Muslims began" (alhaq.de/biographies/, 2009). 76 "Annales" by Tabari (d. 922), the collection of Hadith by Buhari (d. 870), "History of Warfare" by AI Wakidi (d. 822), "Generations" by Ibn Saad (d. 845). Legends relate and because the subsequent back interpretation in the lunar calendar is a frequently proven source of error. All the sources these authors offer are the known ones “Respondents” in the tradition of a chain of oral tales. From the first two centuries, i.e. the time of Muhammad and of the conquests, not even Islamic sources exist. Anyone who regards subsequent stories without proven sources as history agrees with Sayyid Qutb77, who claimed that history does not happen for Islam because it moves in "extra-historical dimensions". The following quote shows how flexibly one deals with historical facts from an Islamic point of view: "But the actual historical events, the presentation of the events and their explanation will be different, depending on whether the historian allows a direct divine working in his imagination or not."78 And: “In the Muslim tradition, the tendency has prevailed that tries to solve this problem (note: the problem of the lack of refutability) not by dogmatically ignoring everything miraculous, but by strict standards for the credibility of reporting”. In other words, miracles in history are allowed. Does the quoted gentleman speak of historians or of quassas, the oriental storytellers? Of course, thinking believers realize that what happened is not logically possible. Therefore there is no choice but to postulate the existence of miracles or to claim that historical processes are inapplicable to Islam. Perhaps one should stick to the Western bad habit of limiting research and history to facts and verifiable facts. 77 Islamic theorist, Egypt 1906-1966. More about this in the chapter "Who did this to us I" 70 Mohammed Laabdallaoui at: muhamad.islam.de, 2009. At the same time, however, the Christians of the same area not only left behind a wealth of literature, but also developed far-reaching missionary activity. Consider the passionate arguments among themselves, the subjects that heated their spirits and found rich literary expression. Subjects that were highly academic and absolutely marginal compared to the confrontation and threat in entirely different dimensions from another religion. As the events are described in the traditional report, Islam swept through half of the world at that time like a whirlwind. Why aren't the main victims, the Christians and the many members of other religions, telling us about this? Because they welcomed the Muslims as liberators? Because the liberators were so tolerant There are now attempts to substantiate these events with non-Islamic sources. The names usually mentioned are Sophronius, Maximus the Confessor, Thomas the Presbyter, Sebeos of Armenia, John of Damascus and a few others. Insofar as the texts can be reliably assigned to the authors and in terms of time, a very clear picture emerges79: Much is said about "Saracens, Ismailites, Hagarites", then common synonyms for "Arabs". These are perceived as “heretics”, but in no case as members of another religion, let alone Islam. This religious designation does not exist in the period described. Heretics are deviants from their own religion - that is exactly what the Arab Christians of the 7th to 9th centuries and, to a lesser extent, even later were. The Syrian Johannes bar Penkaye wrote at the end of the 7th century in his 15-volume book Ktäbä d-res melle: "Among the Arabs there are quite a few Christians, some of whom belong to the heretics, some to us". He says nothing about a Muhamad or Islam. Anastasius of Sinai (610-701), Jacob of Edessa (633-708), or the patriarch Isojahb III. (d. 79 Karl-Heinz Ohlig, “Indications of a new religion in Christian literature 'under Islamic rule'?, “Oer early Islam”, Berlin 2007. ten and his religion. A conversation between the patriarch John and an emir from the year 644, i.e. shortly after Maavia’s assumption of power80, points in the same direction. What is discussed? In addition to administrative questions about the differences between the individual denominations, about Abraham, Moses and Mary - and of course about the nature of Jesus. The Emir could have been Ibn As or Ibn Saad. According to Nevo and Koren81 "The Emir is certainly not a Muslim. He shows no knowledge or adherence whatsoever, he never mentions Muhammad, Quran or Islam.” For such cases, however, the Islamic representation has the Taqiyya club at hand: Taqiyya is the religious dissimulation sanctioned in the Koran82 to save oneself from an emergency situation or to take advantage of a feigned friendship with an unbeliever. For tactical reasons, the Emir then only pretended not to be a Muslim. Even the sober consideration of numbers should suffice83. Where are the armies supposed to come from in an almost deserted desert? Egypt and Mesopotamia alone had millions of inhabitants, the proverbial club in hand would have been enough for defense. Tradition knows this too and provides the explanation with the story of the naked Muslim, armed only with a reed, who suddenly faced a heavily armed Persian horseman. Trembling with fear, he threw the horse over and hid his arrows in his robe so that it would appear to the others that they had been shot. Only between 639 and 641 (contradictory statements aside) are said to have been conquered Syria, Mesopotamia, Persia, Egypt. And this in parallel, and including several fortresses, One does not need to have studied Clausewitz to understand that the entire conquest complex is complete nonsense from a purely mathematical point of view 80 F. Nau, “Un colloque de Patriarche Jean avec l'emir des Agareens”, in: Journal Asiatique, 1915. 81 Yehuda D Nevo/Judith Koren, “Crossroads to Islam”, New York, 2003. 82 Among others Sura 3:28,29. 83 Waldmann's “Clausewitz Argument” is. That is why the Islamic tradition deals officially with miracles and tries to anchor them as a legitimate instrument in the writing of history. And just imagine half of the empire being taken from the obsessively religious Byzantium by desert warriors in the name of a new religion. The Persians lose their entire dominion. And you don't notice? Both have a sophisticated bureaucratic apparatus, both are busy recorders. And they say nothing about it? Millions of affected Christians, heathens, Zoroastrians, Buddhists from the Nile to the Indus and the Volga do not notice the overpowering by a new religion? Monks, priests, bishops, highly intellectual theologians, well-travelled personalities - they should not have been able to recognize a new religion? Or have been too cowardly to oppose it? Most of them would have died joyfully for their faith! A utterly absurd notion, all of it. The only possible explanation is that the events depicted in the traditional account never took place. One cannot, without doing someone injustice, speak of the writing of history in the Islamic reports. They are stories, fairy tales from the Orient. The spooky thing about it is that these essentially shaped the western public's view of history. Is there even a new miracle to report? The "golden years" of Islamic conquests - they never existed. But there were the golden years of Arab self-determination, disengagement from the region's two mighty power blocs, which laid the foundations of an Arab empire and consciousness. Only later was this specifically Arab success story reinterpreted as an Islamic story. In 1377 the Arab historian Ibn Chaldun sat on a mountain fortress in the North African desert and reasoned about the intellectual decline in the Islamic kingdoms and its causes. It was at the same time that the northern Italian commercial cities experienced a significant economic boom and at the same time ushered in a tremendous upswing in the arts and sciences - what we now call the Renaissance. “We hear that the philosophical sciences are now much cultivated in the land of Rome and along the adjoining northern shores in the land of the European Christians. The existing systematic presentations should be comprehensive, and the people who know about them should be numerous, the students many.”84 The comprehensive systematic accounts of which Chaldun speaks were received by the "northern lands" from the Arabs. They were mostly Latin translations of Arabic writings, which in turn had been translated from Greek into Aramaic and Arabic. Ibn Chaldun sees himself as a member of a culture that has combined and further developed the knowledge of past cultures. It irritates him that the infidel barbarians might now be assuming this legacy. He suspects that the heyday of Arabic science is coming to an end. But he does not know that he is the last of his guild. The power of the Marwanids had come to an end around 750, and their successors, the “Abbasids”, established their residences further east, primarily in Baghdad and Samarra. Science flourished under the reigns of some of its rulers. Here the foundation was laid for the widely shared opinion that the Islamic Middle Ages were far superior to the European ones: these are the “golden ages” of Islamic science. Jakub ibn Ishak al-Kindi was born around 800 in the cultural city of Kufa in Mesopotamia. It was the reign of the inquisitive and enlightened ruler Sher al-Mamun in Baghdad. We know about the educational path of al-Kindi 84 Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah, New York, 1958. not know more, but he was appointed private tutor of a nephew of Mamun, who later ruled Mutasim. Some of his teaching materials have come down to us. For example, a discussion about why the earth could float freely in space as a sphere. Another treatise deals with arithmetic with “Indic numbers”. This is exactly the number system that we refer to as "Arabic numerals". In fact, it originated in India and reached Europe through Arab mediation. Al-Kindi tried to explain the ebb and flow by the frictional heat of the moon during orbit. Elsewhere he tried to build a logical bridge to statements in the Koran, such as that of stars and trees prostrating themselves before God. He sees the principle of absolute law behind it - although he ascribes the sense of sight and hearing to the stars. He dedicated his work on "Cause and Effect" to Mamun. In doing so, he stands in stark contrast to one of the main tenets of the Koranic doctrine, which strictly rejects causality and postulates the will of God instead. His approaches are based on Aristotle and Ptolemy, interspersed with ancient oriental traditions; he seems to have been particularly close to the old Babylonian star worshipers. Al-Kindi left more than 200 writings. He seems confused and unfinished at times, but his main focus is the propagation of independent thinking. He called himself the foreign word "philosopher" and constantly underlined the importance of knowing the truth, regardless of where it came from. He marked the beginning of a line of Arab philosophers. His thinking is diametrically opposed to the Koranic teaching. Hunain ibn Ishak (808-873) was from al-Hira in southern Mesopotamia. His father was a pharmacist, the son wanted to be a doctor and ended up in Baghdad. He attended the lectures of a certain Juhana ibn Masawahai, like Hunain also a Syrian Christian and the Caliph's personal physician. The teaching material was, as usual, the Greek authors, especially the famous physician Galen from Pergamon. For some reason (he was said to be too cheeky) Hunain was expelled from the lectures by his teacher, a journey through various ones Cities followed, including probably Byzantium. Returning to Baghdad after six years, he began translating standard scientific works from antiquity into Arabic or into the language desired by his respective client. He mastered ancient and all common regional languages. Due to his medical training, he had the very best qualifications for subject-specific translations, but his spectrum covered all of the sciences of the time. He once sent one of his works to his former teacher Ibn Masawahai without mentioning his name. "Whoever produced it must have been supported by the Holy Spirit!" he is said to have exclaimed, deeply impressed. Hunain became such a busy man that he soon trained his son and nephew as translators of the standard texts. He himself took care of the main scientific work. This began with the discovery of old manuscripts. Numerous incomplete works were available, as fragments in different languages, or by different copyists. Once Hunain had collected a certain material, he set about comparing it. Of course, he was well aware that manuscripts always contained errors: misspellings, mistranslations, forgeries. Based on the comparison, he then made the best possible translations, of which he made a catalog (which was not found until 1918). He cultivated the peculiarity that the old gods, when they appeared in a text, in the One God, to be renamed angels or saints. Unlike others, he was not satisfied with the Greek technical terms, but created Arabic words for them. He also did not fail to order extra heavy paper from Samarkand, where Chinese papermaking technology was well known. His work has since been outweighed in silver. Hunain ibn Ishak was what would today be called a scholarly editor and publisher. He died in 873 and bequeathed an important legacy of ancient authors to posterity. He was a great Arab scientist, but not a Muslim. “Who made the ports and the canals, who made known the secret sciences? To whom has the deity revealed itself, to whom has it given the oracles and taught things to come, if not to the wise among the heathen? They have studied all this, they have explained the healing of souls and made known their salvation, they have also explored the healing of the body, and they have filled the world with wisdom, the supreme virtue.” The one who wrote that was himself a heathen: the Sabier85 Thabit ibn Kurra, born 834 in Harran, in today's eastern Turkey. And he was a convinced pagan. When he discussed with followers of the new religion that was just emerging and they focused on the omnipotence of God, he asked back: "Can your God also ensure that five times five does not equal twenty-five?" For him, the newfangled god had at best omnipotence over creatures, but not over creation itself. He was a creature himself. Their belief was rooted in the ancient Babylonian star cult, modified by the influence of ancient Greek thought. As prophets, the Sabians revered wise men of the past, including Greek philosophers86. A traditional motto was: "Plato said: He who knows himself becomes divine."87 Passing through the city of Harran, a high-ranking personage noticed the educated Sabier and took him to Baghdad. There Thabit wrote treatises under her name for this person, who was a dilettante in the sciences, and also became something of a freelancer for astronomical questions in Hunain's literary business. He was later accepted into the circle of court astronomers and became a confidante and close friend of the ruler al-Mutatid. Without exception, all the important scientists and philosophers were employed at court, at least for a time. A career was otherwise not possible at that time. Thabit mastered Greek perfectly, studied philosophy, mathematics and medicine. Under 85 Sabians, followers of a Babylonian-Chaldean star cult. 86 As you can see, there was still a variety of religions in the empire of the so-called caliphs in the 9th century. Islam was by no means the established, dominant religion. 87 Inscription on the door knocker of a Sabian house in Harran (according to al-Masudi). Among other things, he left us a book on the questions a doctor should ask the patient. He felt that behind the name "Hippocrates" actually had to be four authors. As a Sabian, however, his strength lay in the field of astronomy. Among other things, he liked the slightly different length of the years. Starting from the Ptolemaic system, he assumed a slight movement of the fixed star sphere, the so-called trepidation, which was also used by Copernicus. Thabit comes in Wolfram von Eschenbachs "Perzival" as Thebit. He died in 901. There is also a report of a medical authority who began his career as a lute player: Muhamad ibn Zakarija ar-Razi, born 865 in Rajj, modern-day Tehran. We know very little about his biography, except that he managed hospitals in Baghdad and Rajj and was good friends with the local Emir al-Mansur ibn Ishak. But his professional legacy is all the greater, ar-Razi was the largest clinician in the Arab world and well known in Europe as Rhazes. He dedicated a medical encyclopedia to his patron Mansur. The Latin translation of Chapter 9, which was very popular in Europe, was called Liber Nonus Almansurus. It contained a guide to remedies, assigned to the individual diseases from head to toe, and was even available in some European vernaculars. Another treatise on measles and smallpox, very famous in Europe, was still being printed in England in the eighteenth century own observations and experiences. This legacy was systematized by students and was printed in Brescia in 1486 under the title “Liber Continens”, filling two huge folios. Like every famous doctor of his time, Rhazes also had a great deal of philosophical knowledge, because philosophy led to 88 Ar-Razi, "About Smallpox and Measles", German reprint and translation by K. Opitz, Leipzig 1911. a good part of the medical theory. The Greek philosophers as well as Hippocrates89 and Galen90 were very familiar to him. Rhazes showed a great deal of independent thinking, but he never innovated without paying tribute to the great Galen: "Indeed, it has been painful for me to rebel against the one who, of all men, showered me with the greatest blessings and was the most helpful to me, by whom I let myself be guided, whom I followed step by step. But medicine is a philosophy that cannot stand still.”91 While Galen held that the soul is dependent on the condition of the body, Rhazes said that the physical condition is determined by the soul. The practical consequence of this was that he recommended that doctors always encourage patients, even if they were not sure of themselves. Ar-Razi also went his own way in philosophy. Following Democritus, he assumed an atomic matter (earth, fire, air and water). He also placed God, the world soul, absolute space and absolute time, so he saw the cosmos more dimensionally. The Creator of the Bible and the Qur'an is only coordinating and not truly omnipotent. Rhazes recognized the prophets as necessary mediators of the substance of God and man, but not "the three impostors Moses, Jesus and Mohammed"92, who would only sow discord. His "Imam" (he uses that term literally) is Socrates. Is that how a Muslim speaks when the ar-Razi is taken in as a matter of course? Rhazes died in 925, having gone blind in the last years of his life. 89 Hippocrates of Kos, physician, ca.460-370 BC Chr. 90 Rom. Physician, AD 129-216; together with Hippocrates the most important physician of antiquity. 91 In contrast, Avicenna abused Galen at every opportunity. 92 This is a much-discussed saying. Although it may not have come from ar-Razi himself, he represented and popularized it. Most of the Arab scholars were also physicians, either full-time or part-time. Al-Farabi was "only" a scientist - mainly an interpreter of Aristotle and other Greek philosophers, to which he added his own variant. He consciously distinguished medicine from philosophy because its purpose is to bring about a practical change in the body, but it has nothing to do with finding the truth. "Al-Farabi" means nothing other than "He from Farab", a city in modern-day Kazakhstan, where he was born in 870. Farabi was probably ethnic Kazakh. He is said to have walked around all his life, disregarding his appearance, in a shabby Kazakh-style caftan. We know little of his youth. Except that at a young age he made his way to the Persian Harran and then on to Baghdad where Christian teachers took care of him. He spent most of his time here, in the last part of his life he went to Aleppo in Syria to the court of Emir Saif al-Daula. He went to Cairo shortly and died soon after his return to Syria in 950. The Islamic clergy demonstratively did not attend his funeral. There were good reasons for this: because Farabi taught many things that the imams did not like, although he always tried to find a balance between philosophy and religion. In the main, however, he continued to develop his Aristotle. He presented the world as a coherent unit: its origin is God, but not as the creator, as the Koran and the Bible see him, but as the impersonated source of being. It is the source of emanating movement, the so-called emanation, to which the lower levels owe their existence. The lowest level of the hierarchy is the matter in which man is involved. This can only reach the higher worlds through thinking, mystical immersion or death. to become one with the universal intellect by comprehending the world and the universe. But this happiness can only be reached by a few - religion is made for the rest93. Farabi thus viewed religion as an artificial product but a necessity for the majority of people. 93 Ibn Rushd formulated it similarly with his "two truths". In this way of thinking, he designs an ideal state. Similar to Plato, he calls for a philosophical king who should have a prophet at his side to give instructions to the people who lack common sense. His philosophy is anti-religious, yet for everyday practice he provides for clergymen to influence the uneducated masses. Al-Farabi was not in the limelight like others, preferring to spend his time in the garden by the water pond. 965 was the year of birth of a certain Ibn al-Haitham, who would become known in Europe as Alhazen. He came from Basra and initially embarked on a civil service career. However, he soon gave this up and devoted himself to scientific studies in Baghdad and Persia. One day he was noticed by the anti-Caliph in Cairo, and when Alhazen suggested the possibility of damming the Nile and irrigating the fields all year round, he was summoned to Egypt and entrusted with the project. With a large crew and equipment, he pulled up the Nile to tackle the dam project. But very soon, at the sight of the massive ancient Egyptian structures along the river, doubts crept over him. If the people who made those structures couldn't build a dam, how could he? In Aswan, there where the dam stands today, he found a suitable spot, but soon realized that this project was not feasible. He returned to Cairo without having achieved anything and could be glad that he survived this bankruptcy. He then turned to what was typical of many scientists of the time Earning a living: He translated ancient writings. Over the years he completed an edition of the complete Euclid, Ptolemy's Almagest, and writings by other Greek authors. Over time, this made him so financially independent that he was able to turn to his favorite field: physics, and optics in particular94. 94 His main work in Latin, entitled Thesaurus Opticus, was widely recognized in Europe. But while most ancient and Arab physicists were pure theoreticians, Alhazen turned to experiments, a novelty at the time. He cast the first lens out of glass, which interestingly he used for experiments, but apparently never for any practical purpose, such as a magnifying glass or a telescope. Contrary to Euclid, he stated that the rays of light enter the eye from an object and not a visual ray from the eye scans the environment. Using a metal concave mirror, he set himself a specific mathematical problem, which is still known today as Alhazen's problem, and which he himself solved with difficulty, but for which Huygens only gave advice in the middle of the 19th century found an elegant solution in the 17th century. Fundamental laws of perspective as a result of light spreading in a straight line also go back to Alhazen. His work with light rays consequently led him to the field of astronomy. He viewed the starry worlds quite soberly as physical entities that could be understood and calculated. He miscalculated the thickness of the atmosphere at five miles due to refraction, assuming a sharp boundary rather than a gradual thinning of the air. The appreciation of his work can be expressed with Alexander von Humboldt, who described the Arabs as the actual founders of physics. Ibn al-Haitham alias Alhazen was their most important representative in this field, although only parts of his complete works have survived, Under the name of Avicerma, Abu Ali ibn Sina became one of the most famous Arab personalities in Europe. In the Orient it is still popular today; Iran, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan vie for the honor of incorporating him as one of their own. There are still many mysteries in Avicenna's Biography. The first is the year of his birth. It is known that Avicenna died in 1037. There are four different statements about his age, although it is not even certain whether it is lunar or solar years - that makes eight dates to choose from. According to Lüling, the most likely age is 58 years, which means that Avicenna was born in the year 979. His family was from from the Buddhist stronghold of Balch95 in modern-day Afghanistan, but moved to the Samnidian residence of Kharmitan near Bukhara (Uzbekistan), where Avicenna was born. His father was a senior official at the Samnid Buddhist court. Coming from a well-to-do family ensured the best education at the time. the Porphyry's "Eisagoge" and other classical writings were part of his basic training, and of course he also studied mathematics, geometry, physics and medicine. He did not call the latter a difficult science. He was a tremendously diligent worker who, by his own admission, studied all nights long. At the age of 22, peace was over. The newly Islamized Turkic tribe of the Qara-Khanids destroyed the Samnid empire and deported the surviving members of the ruling house. Avicenna (“when the need asked me to move away”) flees to Urgench, the capital of the province of Khorezmia. Meanwhile, the Samanid prince al-Muntasir tried to regain power in a five-year struggle, but failed. And Avicenna was his follower. The doors that had previously been open to him closed again for political reasons. “Needs of necessity called me to move away”: Avicenna left Urgench with his longtime teacher and companion Abu Sahl al-Masihi, the highly famous scholar and former personal physician of the Samnids, and his lifelong wandering from residence to residence continued. "Then necessity called me to move away." The formula became the common thread in Avicenna's life. He was a lifelong political refugee from a Buddhist world coming under Islamic pressure. Avicenna moved from Urgentsch via Nisa, Abiward and other stations to Gurgan on the Caspian Sea, his teacher and companion survived 95 The bacterium of Hellenistic times. Balkh included parts of present-day Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. During Avicenna's lifetime, the province was the Buddhist stronghold in the east of the Persian Empire. In 2001, the Taliban government blew up two monumental statues of the Buddha in Bamiyan. 96 The name is derived from the main residence Saman/Suman. Hence comes Sumaniyya, the term for Buddhism at the time. PICTURE 19 Monument to Avicennas in Dushanbe (Tajikistan) Leaf from Avicenna's "Canon of Medicine" not the hardships. On the way, Avicenna ordained under a false name, and his hope of employment with Sheikh Kabus of Gurgan was not fulfilled. So he moved to the Persian Hamadan to the court of Shams-ad-Daula, from which he received a ministerial post. One day, a military revolt directed against him got him into serious trouble, the reason being his ministerial treatise, which was probably not particularly popular "About the food and pay of the army, the military slaves and soldiers and the land tax on the estates". He barely survived this, but soon spent four months in prison because he is said to have made an agreement with the hostile Emir of Isfahan. He used his time in prison to write various writings. After further long and detailed entanglements, he finally secretly fled to Isfahan in a monk's habit. We can only speculate as to what the real political background was. Towards the end of his life, Avicenna was one of the closest confidants of the Emir of Isfahan and accompanied him in this capacity and as a doctor on his campaigns. On one such, in 1037, he died at the age of 58. The circumstances of his death have been handed down: In order to prepare for his escape after the defeat he expected, he instructed an accompanying doctor to mix a strengthening medicine. It mistakenly contained an overdose of parsley seeds and opium. Avicenna led a very intense life. During the day he was busy with his various day jobs, in the evenings there were lectures and writing. But that was not the end of the day, as his student and collaborator al-Guzgani97 reports: "When we were done, singers of all kinds appeared, a wine party with everything that goes with it was prepared, and we dealt with it." And: "With the master, all powers were strongly developed, whereby among the powers of the desiring part of the soul, the sexual was the strongest and most overpowering." Avicenna, as was known nationwide, lived a dissolute life. Avicenna probably saw his vocation in politics, his bread and butter jobs were doctor, judge and scholar, in the latter function he created his philosophical work. His life was marked by the collapse of the Samnid empire, which went hand in hand with the collapse of the "Eastern Iranian Renaissance" as a whole. Avicenna's roots are undoubtedly Buddhist. He himself says nothing to us directly and carefully avoids taking sides. He was never conspicuous for being religious of any kind and he led a notoriously un-Islamic life. This includes the fact that he must have performed the dissections on the dead that are forbidden in the Koran. A constant offense to orthodoxy had been Avicenna's refusal to recognize the need for a prophet to mediate revelation98. (This is precisely a core tenet of Sumaniyah, Buddhism). Avicenna left an extensive body of philosophical and medical writings, although the assessment of his humanities works may seem exaggerated. "The book of 97 The first half of his autobiography probably comes from Avicenna himself, the second half from his pupil and companion al-Guzgani. 98 There is a nice tradition from the 15th century, according to which the prophet Mohammed complained to al-Magribi in an apparition that Ibn Sina had come into contact with God without his mediation. The Cure” or the “Canon”, a systematic presentation of medicine, was one of the standard works that made him famous in medieval Europe. In doing so, he was "arrogant", we would say arrogant today, and showed little consideration. Avicenna wrote of Rhazes that he should have stuck to the “examination of skin diseases, urine and stool”. It can be considered certain that he edited the works of his companion and teacher al-Masihi than published them. Science records a great leap from Hippocrates to Galen, but an even greater leap from Galen to Avicenna. It dominated the medicine of the Orient and Europe for 500 years, precisely until Paracelsus ushered in a new era of medicine in 1530. Avicenna was a great humanist and the greatest physician of the Middle Ages. He wasn't a Muslim either. Scholars today tend to rank another Uzbek even higher than Avicenna in the non-medical sciences: al-Biruni. He remained relatively unknown in Europe, perhaps also because there was no biography of him for a long time. He was a compatriot and contemporary of the slightly younger Avicenna. The two also met, but friends - which obviously wasn't easy with Avicenna - they never became. Biruni was born in Kath, south of the Aral Sea, in 976 and came from a humble background. He owed his ascent to the local princely family, who took him in and gave him the best possible upbringing. At the age of 16 he carried out a determination of the geographical position of his home town and also built a hemispherical globe of the northern hemisphere very early on. For political reasons, Biruni had to leave his hometown in 995, one can assume that the reasons were the same as Avicenna's flight. Without his devices, he moved to Rajj, now Tehran. There he made the acquaintance of an astronomer who was building an instrument to measure the height of the sun. Agreed for the lunar eclipse calculated in the year 997 99 The next earth model was only to be made by Martin Behaim from Nuremberg in 1492. Biruni wrote to an astronomer in Baghdad in order to measure the event simultaneously and thus determine the angle between the two points of view. Then he temporarily moved to Gurgan on the Caspian Sea, where he met Avicenna. Biruni soon received a call to the court of Urgench. However, the city was conquered by an enemy prince who is said to have kidnapped Biruni with him to Ghazna in present-day Afghanistan. In reality, Biruni may have been part of a ransom payment. Ghazna was a Hindu stronghold and Prince Masud was very interested in science.100 Al-Biruni had found a new patron, and he gave him the Masud Canon, the largest astronomical encyclopedia of the Middle Ages. He also had to accompany his ruler on the numerous campaigns that took him to India. This resulted in his unique book, a cultural history of India: "On the Examination of What is Said of India". To understand Indian mathematics and astronomy, he learned Sanskrit and reports very sensitively about Indian culture. It was all the easier for him because he, like Avicenna, came from a Buddhist background. Biruni was the only one in terms of his fortune who was able, at least in part, to shatter the overpowering Aristotelian system. He was an astronomer, physicist, geographer and philosopher - but for once he wasn't a doctor. He died in 1048 while discussing a legal problem, and he was not a Muslim either. Geographer and philosopher - but for once he wasn't a doctor. He died in 1048 while discussing a legal problem, and he was not a Muslim either. Geographer and philosopher - but for once he wasn't a doctor. He died in 1048 while discussing a legal problem, and he was not a Muslim either. We now move from the extreme eastern end of the Arabian empires to the extreme west, “al Gharb”:101 to Andalusia. There ibn Ruschd was born in Cordoba in 1126, who became famous in European universities as Averroes. He went unnoticed in the Arab world, and it was his fame in Europe that made him famous 100 Masud was probably a Hindu, which is almost certain given the fact that Islamic historiography defames him as a “drunkard”. 101 AI Gharb, "the West." This is where the name Algarve comes from. known there in modern times. At that time he received the best education that we already know: philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, medicine and, as a member of the judiciary, he was also a lawyer. In 1148 the Berber dynasty of the Almohads under the caliph Abu Jakub Yussuf conquered Cordoba, in 1153 Ibn Rushd was ordered to Marrakesh to the ruler's residence, a meeting which he looked forward to with great concern. It was introduced at court by a certain Ibn Tufail, who is also no stranger to Europe: he had written the philosophical novel "Der Naturmensch", in which the characters are cast away on a lonely island in the ocean and through observations and logical deductions get to know the worldl02. As a result, Ibn Ruschd took up positions as a Qadi in Seville and Cordoba, but his main work was always his philosophical work. He was particularly committed to opposing the teachings of al-Ghazali because, in his opinion, they were destroying Islam. Fate struck him in 1195: the imams had incited the people against him, who had been a thorn in their side for a long time, and forced the ruler to take formal action against him. The tribunal denied Ibn Rushd's orthodoxy, his books were demonstratively burned and philosophy as a whole was banned by edict. He himself was banned from Cordoba and was banned from teaching. Three years later he was dead. It is no coincidence that there is almost nothing written by Ibn Rushd in Arabic: it was handed down in Hebrew translation, and sometimes Averroes himself wrote in Arabic using Hebrew letters. A kind of insider language that shows the tolerant environment in which he lived. His legal approach already belonged to a bygone era. While the Qadi Ibn Rushd was looking for general legal principles, in Spain the jurisprudence based on applicable precedents from the life of the Prophet set in. In the increasingly orthodox Islamic kingdoms, jurisprudence, philosophy and the sciences came to an end. North of the Mediterranean, however, his statements became heated 102 Ibn Tufail, Hajj ibn Jaqzan, The Man of Nature, Cologne 1983. discussed, Thomas Aquinas took great pains to refute Averroes. He had spoken out against free will, which ultimately only followed an overriding necessity: he had postulated that the intellect of all human beings is only one common one, that there could never have been a first human and that the soul was not in hellfire could stew because she died with her body. On the one hand, Averroes was celebrated, but on the other he was also mocked, for example because of his belief in authority. On the one hand, he defended the Koran because, in his opinion, it required rational research; on the other hand, he demanded its reinterpretation when statements contradicted scientific findings. However, this is only reserved for educated personalities. The masses who cannot follow a logical line of argument must stick to the pictorial comparisons of revelation - only the philosophers can get to the heart of the matter. This is the system of "double truths" of Ibn Rushd. He probably saw himself as a Muslim. However, his contemporaries saw things differently, and this was his undoing. With Ibn Rushd the time of independent thinkers in Arabic intellectual history came to an end. So it only remains to introduce the person who lets this end be put into dates: al-Ghazali, born around 1058 in Tuz in eastern Iran, died there in 1111. His two main works are "The Nothingness of Philosophy" and "The Revival of the Religious Sciences". In Islamic literature, Ghazali is celebrated as a great philosopher. In reality he had absolutely nothing to do with philosophy itself. On the contrary, his life's work was their abolition. This is also the content of "nullity". In it he explains why philosophy has no right to exist. In stark contrast to Aristotle and all his Arab predecessors, Ghazali rejects the principle of causality, i.e. the principle of cause and effect. There is therefore no logic and no laws of nature, everything happens through a special act of God's will. Ghazali gives the example that it is a mistake to think that you have a piece of cotton to burn brought by keeping fire underneath. In reality, God ordered the cotton to burn. Similarly, in autumn the leaves did not fall from the tree by themselves, but by God's express command to each leaf. Friedrich Dieterici, Prussian scholar in oriental languages ​​and philosophy, commented in 1903: "It would be as if every letter with the stamp of the Imperial Reichspost had to be delivered personally by His Majesty."103 Because there are no laws of nature, only the will of God, Ghazali postulates the existence of miracles that may contradict any logic. Accordingly, he denied man's free will, every single step of man is directed by God. He solved the problem that human beings without free will would also have to be innocent of their sins and crimes by simply excluding sins by referring to the omnipotence of God and the non-existence of logic. Philosophy and science could not contribute anything to the truth. They are therefore not only superfluous, but even harmful because they could dissuade people from religion. He therefore demanded the death penalty for representing philosophical content. In his writing "The Savior from Error" he formulated 20 points, based on which philosophers are to be convicted of heresy. He names Avicenna and al-Farabi as the heretics convicted by name. It is a matter of fact that al-Ghazali is still regarded as a great scholar in the Islamic world today. The fact that he is occasionally referred to as a philosopher in Europe must be due to a misunderstanding: the Spanish Dominican Nicolas Eymerich counted the “18 heresies and errors of the 103 Friedrich Dieterici, "On the Connection between Greek and Arabic Philosophy", Munich 2004. 104 "The teachings of al-Ghazali had immense repercussions and exerted considerable influence on the history of thought, in both East and West, among the elites of Europe", Haim Zafrani at http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0011 /001144/114426eo.pdf. Although Mr. Zafrani does not provide us with proof of the “significant influence” of al-Ghazali on western intellectual life, he does provide another sample of his very personal historiography in the next chapter. Philosophers Algazel” on. He derived these from the Latin translation of an Arabic scripture entitled Maqasid al-falasifa ('The Intentions of the Philosophers') under the name of al-Ghazalis. This writing, however, is an Arabic translation of Avicenna's Book of Knowledge written in Persian, with Ghazali's name and an introduction by him. Where Ghazali was written, Avicenna was actually inside. How this error came about is not clear, but it did give Ghazali an entirely undeserved credit. The assessment of al-Ghazali as a scientist is therefore catastrophic, with the exception of Islamic authors, his second book, the "Resurgence of the Religious Sciences", is seen as his main work in the Islamic world. It contains nothing more than the defense of the literal Qur'an. Only what is in the Koran is science. For example, if Avicenna saw the drowning of ignorance and the triumph of knowledge in the legend of the Flood, symbolized as Noah's Ark on the floods, it was to be taken literally according to Ghazali. Anything else is heresy worthy of death. Whereas with al-Kindi and Ibn Rushd the Koran was only acceptable to the ignorant and uneducated masses, with Ghazali it became an iron law and the only possible source of all knowledge. His writing shows how closely he was connected to ultra-Orthodox circles "Counselor for Kings" (Nasihat al Muluk). In it he lists 18 points that are intended to prove the inferiority of women with reference to Sura 4:34: · the menstruation. · The pregnancy. · The birth. · Separation from their parents upon marriage. · The inability to control yourself. · The lesser inheritance. · The possibility of being cast out without getting divorced yourself. · Men's right to four wives, who can only have one husband themselves. 9. The confinement in the house. 10. The commandment to cover the head. 11. Her voice in court, which counts half as much as a man's. 12. The command not to leave the house alone. 13. The ban on attending Friday prayers. 14. The exclusion from government and judicial offices. 15. The fact that out of 1000 meritorious deeds, 999 were committed by men and only one by women. 16. A lump sum penalty on the Day of Resurrection instead of individual accountability. 17. The waiting period of four months and ten days after death her husband to remarry. 18. The waiting period of three menstrual cycles after divorce upon remarriage. This is al-Ghazali, as he lives and breathes: the mixing of cause and effect, of natural law and human law, does not seem to bother him, because he has already broken with logic and causality in his "futilities of philosophy". To call him a philosopher or scientist would be the greatest insult to all of his Arab predecessors from al-Kindi to Ibn Rushd. Nor was he the "innovator of Islam" he is celebrated as in the Islamic world. He was much more a representative of the most radical movement of the time, which later established itself as "Islam". With al-Ghazali comes what Dan Diner calls the “sealed time”105: the spiritual standstill of the Islamic world from the 12th century to the present. While al-Ghazali is Muslim in today's understanding of "Islam" was, this is not the case with all the others mentioned. Hunain was a Christian and Thabit was a pagan. Avicenna and Biruni had a Buddhist background, as can be assumed from Farabi. With al-Kindi, Alhazen 105 Dan Diner, "The Sealed Time", Berlin 2007. and Rhazes (the one with the "three criminals") we have the typical freethinkers who were in total opposition to the Qur'an. Despite hostilities, all of those named were still able to afford their independence, even if Biruni and Avicenna had to be careful, for Ibn Ruschd it was already too late. From the beginning of his teaching career he was persecuted by the orthodox imams, to which he finally succumbed. Despite certain differences, the premises of Aristotle and other Greek philosophers were common to all of them. With their commitment to logic, causality and science, they all found themselves in a blatant opposition to the Koran, although some, with a certain arrogance, only granted this right to themselves and a handpicked few more. But with what justification can one call them Muslims? Not one of the main characters featured was, perhaps with the exception of Ibn Rushd, whose understanding of Islam was diametrically opposed to that of the mosque. The poet Omar Chayyam (1048 - 1123) from Nishapur, East Persia, should be briefly mentioned in this context. A follower of Avicenna, he was known in his lifetime as a philosopher and mathematician. At the time, his four-line poems (Rubaiyat), with which he later became famous in the West, were completely unknown106. This fame radiated back to his Persian homeland, where he was then stylized as an Islamic poet, including a monument in Laleh Park in Tehran (Biruni is also there). The outspoken blasphemy in many of his verses does not seem disturbing, but suggests that Chayyam was not a Muslim either. A letter from Khomeini to Gorbachev from January 1989 shows how far-reaching the ignorance in the Muslim world often is towards its hard-working thinkers, in which he described Islam as the way to solve current problems and Gorbachev described reading al-Farabis 106 English translation by Edward Fitzgerald around 1850, several German editions from 1880 onwards. and recommended Avicennas instead of western thinkers107. Obviously, Khomeini did not know that his parade philosophers weren't Muslims at all, and that they were consequently condemned as heretics by the parade Muslim al-Ghazali, and their writings were burned by Muslims. Or should he have recommended the two as a kind of diplomatic gesture, since both were former citizens of the then still existing Soviet Union? Khomeini probably didn't know either of these and was disappointed when Gorbachev didn't reply. The personalities mentioned had achieved great things for their time. Alhazen advanced optics, Avicenna medicine, others further developed their Aristotle, but most of them, only the most prominent ones have been outlined, have remained at the level of antiquity. Without diminishing their merit in any way, it must also be put into perspective insofar as their main merit was not always the works themselves, but the fact that the ancient authors had passed them on. In the West, the Church initially did its best to banish the Greek and Latin writings of the ancient philosophers. But not long after her death and sometimes even while she was still alive, the writings of the Arab scholars met the same fate: They were consigned to the fire as un-Islamic. We have only a fraction of their works, those that reached Europe in time and thus escaped destruction. The reason for the blossoming of intellectual life in medieval Arabia, and particularly in Persia, is to be seen in the continuation of ancient tradition. From the time of Alexander the Great, Greek cultural influence reached as far as Central Asia, right up to the borders of China and India. It was there that ancient spiritual life survived the longest and encountered a Buddhist-influenced culture. These were the prerequisites for intellectual and cultural flowering. The centers were in the oasis cities of Central Asia, in what is now Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, 107 "If Your Excellency wished to guide research on such subjects, She should have students consult the writings of al-Farabi and Avicenna instead of the books of Western philosophers." Uzbekistan and Afghanistan - a completely unbelievable idea for us today. In the west of the empire, this eastern mélange met the spiritual world shaped by Byzantium. Based on the ethnic origin of the individual personalities alone, one could doubt the existence of an “Arab” intellectual life. But you shouldn't do this, because despite all the differences in origin, these people were united by the Arabic language, just as Latin was the connecting element in the Roman Empire. The majority of the rulers at that time were by no means the Muslim caliphs and emirs, as tradition tells us, but rulers who lived in the sphere of influence of these cultures and were therefore bound to the tradition of intellectual freedom and the exchange of ideas. Of course, they bore Arabic titles. However, it is inadmissible to automatically interpret these as Islamic. The “Golden Age” of Islamic Sciences ? She never existed. But there was a golden age of Arabic science. This came to an abrupt end when Islam established itself as the dominant religion. He drove knowledge from the Orient to the West, where it has remained to this day. The Arabian Nights: The tales of al-Andalus “Muslims entered Spain not as aggressors or oppressors, but as liberators. " Maryam Noor Beig108 Sometime in the year 89 after the flight of the Prophet to Medina, and thus in the year 711 of the Lord, the Arab general Tariq ibn Ziyad stood on the African side of the "Pillars of Hercules", as the Straits of Gibraltar were also called at that time, and looked across to Hispania to be conquered for the Prophet of the Arabs and his religion. But it wasn't that easy, because directing the play required tragedy and complications. This was provided by a certain Julian, Byzantine (or Gothic?) governor of Ceuta, a city on the African side of the Meere. He had sent his little daughter Florida to Toledo to the court of the Gothic king Roderich to be educated. So far, so good, until one day Florida accused King Roderich of raping him. Although he denied the accusation, his father was so angry that he planned revenge, made common cause with the Muslims in North Africa and encouraged them to adventure in Andalus. But even that would probably not have been enough for a catastrophe if Roderich had not made another major mistake: in the palace of Toledo there was a room that even the king was forbidden to use. Whoever entered it, it was said, would call down great disaster for himself and his kingdom. The unfortunate Roderich entered the room. He saw paintings of Arabs - and read the prophecy that these men would invade his kingdom that very day and end his reign. So it happened. Tariq, with 7,000 Berbers in 4 boats, landed at the rock that would henceforth bear his name, Gebel www.hispanicmuslims.com , 2010. Tariq, Gibraltar. A little later, on the 28th of Ramadan in the year 89 of the Hijra (711), he defeated Roderich and his army in the battle on the Guadalete river (the Barbate river also counts) devastatingly and finally. (The invaders obviously did not care about the Prophet's command to kill the infidels, but not in the holy month of Ramadan). The highly unlikely victory came about because the vengeful Julian had persuaded a considerable part of the Christian Gothic army to defect to the Muslims. Arab historiography provides us with these details and many more, including verbatim speeches by the actors. But events don't end there. The very next year, Musa Ibn Nusair, the Prophet's general in North Africa, crossed over to Hispania with 18,000 men and occupied the entire country, which henceforth was called al-Andalus. The whole country ? No, in the far north, in the Cantabrian mountains, in the cave of Covadogna, a Gothic nobleman named Pelayo had settled, who had no intention of giving up. In the year 718 (or was it 748?), the recalcitrant Christian defeated the Islamic army under the Arab commander Qama. 124,000 Muslims lost their lives in the battle, the rest (63,000 dead) were caused by a landslide. These are almost the miraculous dimensions of the Muslim victories of Yarmuk or Nehawend. Some believe the tales, some believe they contain a kernel of truth, some consider them mere legends. In any case, we have no idea whether the battles of Covadogna or Guadalete ever took place or not. Even if they didn't take place, they were necessary for directing: Betrayal, with the participation of a woman at that, led to the conquista, the Islamic conquest of Spain. The refusal to capitulate and the courage of a Gothic nobleman in an apparently lost position formed the nucleus of the reconquista, the reconquest of territory stolen by the Muslims under the sign of the cross. Add to this the famous Umayyad dynasty, whose superior Islamic culture made al-Andalus a sun-drenched paradise and a haven of science and tolerance for 800 years, one has encompassed the entire arc of suspense of the piece called al-Andalus and conforms to the common historical view. Here, as in the entire complex of early Islam, the catch is the sources. We do have, for example, the text of an agreement between the aforementioned Julian and Tariq, in which the author gives the impression of having been there himself. However, the text dates from the 14th century. According to the storyteller Ibn al-Kuttiya, Tariq urged his troops to fight for Islam and Allah and promised them rewards in Paradise for martyrdom. Kuttiya is considered by some to be an extremely reliable source simply because of its Gothic ancestry (as evidenced by its name) - although the subject of jihad against infidels has only been around since the 11th century, and the oldest version of Kuttiya is also from the 14th century. The work of the Egyptian al-Hakam (d. 870), another much-troubled scribe who by his own admission has never been to Spain, exists largely in only one seventeenth-century text. Although such texts were always subject to the strong cosmetics of the later - Islamic - centuries, nothing about Islam or a holy war can be read in Hakam (its main theme is the booty and its problematic distribution). Muhamad only makes one brief appearance; Hakam sees him as a leader of robbers and not as a founder of a religion, he speaks of Palestine as the "Holy Land", he does not perceive the Ibadites (more on this later) as Muslims: in the middle of the 9th century the official and today common one was in Egypt Mohammedvita obviously not yet known. The oldest known document is a capitulation treaty from 713 between the Goth Theodomir and the Arab Abd el-Aziz, which is often cited as an example of the generosity of the conquering Muslims. However, this contract is not available to us in its contemporary version, but only in an explanation from the 13th century - i.e. 500 years later. Know the writings of the Cordobeser Al-Razi we only get it from a Portuguese editing around 1400. This is the case with all the sources used, and interestingly enough, the more the reporter is away from the events in time, the greater the abundance of details and verbatim. The Akhbar Magmua story collection, preserved in a 14th-century version, has Abd al-Rahman telling the adventures of his escape from Syria to Spain in first-person form. It should also be remembered here that Arabic traditions are a separate genre of literature for edification and entertainment, and are not intended to depict facts in a historically correct manner. The Arabic scholar Johannes Thomas: "As a rule, Arabic descriptions show little or no interest in chronology." Certain narrative elements, which are already known from the Bible, are a recurring theme throughout Arabic literature. For example, the story of the conquest of Cordoba, which succeeded because a shepherd revealed a crack in the city wall. We find the same element in the "Muslim conquest" of Damascus, Caesarea, Alexandria, Cairo and Tustan. Tripoli was conquered because the water receded and rose again, smashing the opponents. There are, of course, the city walls collapsing in the style of Jericho as a result of the sound of trumpets, as well as the leader who knocked water out of the rock and thus saved his army. We find typical name symbolism in the case of the troop leader Tarif, a name that is probably derived from the real place Tarifa and transferred to a personality to be created. Similarly the commander Tariq. "Tariq" means the "way" and is often used in Arabic literature in the sense of "nomen est omen", a so-called "speaking name", which became a legendary person of this name. In the various stories, Tariq is portrayed first as an Arab, then as a Persian, and then as a Berber again. This shows the unreliability of the reports, because we have no evidence of the existence of the persons Tariq and Tarif. It is far more likely that "Tariq" took its name from "Gibraltar" than vice versa. On the non-Arab side, there are the Spanish chronicles of 741 and 754, written in Latin. Neither mentions Islam or a religious clash with the conquerors. The chronicle of 754 does not even mention the battle of Tours and Poitiers (732), which the French understand as fateful, in a religious context, in which Karl Martell is said to have gloriously saved the West from Islam. It's quite possible, it's preferable that the Franks burned their fingers trying to cook their own soup on the intra-Gothic conflicts in Hispania and at Poitiers were only able to fend off the tit-for-tat of those people with whom they were contesting the booty wanted to. Karl Martell was then stylized as the savior of the West in the tradition of later religious search for motifs. (Under Charlemagne, however, the Franks took a piece of Spain, the Marca Hispanica, from which Catalonia emerged.) Anybody from Islam, Muslims or the much-claimed Holy War if no trace in the temporally assignable sources. Like the whole of Europe, Spain has an extremely complex history of settlement. From the last Neanderthals in Europe, who lived 30,000 years ago on the coasts of the Iberian Peninsula from history, we jump to the 1st millennium BC to an unspecified Iberian native population. Already from 800 v. The Phoenicians founded a number of settlements on the coast of the Iberian Peninsula - the most important being Cadiz - followed by the Greeks, who founded Rosas and Malaga, among other places. mixed with the ethnic groups already present to form the Celtiberians. With the growth of the Phoenician foundation of Carthage, the south of the Iberian Peninsula also came under Carthaginian rule, but in 201 B.C. BC, after the great defeat against the Romans in the Second Punic War, Rome acceded to the rights of Carthage. However, it was to be almost 200 years before Rome had complete control of the peninsula. This happened in 19 BC. under Emperor Augustus. "Hispania" was divided into three provinces and took on all the characteristics of ancient Roman culture. A network of roads connected the individual provinces and cities, which were connected to an equally effective water system that supplied baths, gardens, and agriculture. The population grew rapidly, traffic, trade and public life flourished. Under Emperor Vespasian, the inhabitants of the Hispanic provinces received citizenship, completing Romanization. The emperors Trajan, Marcus Aurelius and Hadrian were Hispanic, as was the philosopher Seneca. The Germanic tribes that had started to move during the migration of peoples did not stop at the Iberian Peninsula either. The Vandals appeared at the beginning of the 5th century, but in 429 they, 80,000 strong, crossed over to North Africa and founded a kingdom there under Genseric. This was destroyed in 534 by the Byzantine general Belisarius, the Vandal nobility was deported to Constantinople, but the foot soldiers remained and formed another facet in the ethnic and religious puzzle of North Africa. Rome assigned the Visigoths a territory in Gaul. However, they came under increasing pressure from the Franks and, after losing the Battle of Vouille in 507, retreated to Spain. The Visigoth Empire with the capital Toledo came into being. Although the Goths were a minority in Spain, they made up the royal house and the nobility. They were very soon romanized and spoke Latin. On the other side of the straits in North Africa, things were not much different. Both sides of the Mediterranean had been Punic, later incorporated into the Roman Empire and unified in its culture. Eastern Rome (Byzantium) in turn replaced Western Rome as ruler of North Africa, and in between episodes Berbers and Germans made a name for themselves. Just like Spain, North Africa had also become a melting pot of different ethnic groups, who were always in mutual contact across the strait through political, cultural or even family ties. In general, the Mediterranean Sea was not separating, as we feel today, but a connecting element. With the emergence of the Arab Empire after 622, Arab influence also made itself felt, but it remained limited to eastern North Africa, i.e. Egypt and Libya. Western North Africa, roughly what is now Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco, was inhabited by Berbers. “The Berbers” is a vague collective term for a number of ethnic groups, made up of an unspecified indigenous population, immigrated Celts, Phoenicians and Germans, as well as a black portion of the population, who are probably Tubus, the former rulers of the Sahara Ethiopian origin, should act. They intermixed or kept to themselves in tribal communities. In addition to tribal dialects, the Berbers spoke Latin and were either Christian or Jewish. In the 10th century there were still 48 bishoprics in North Africa, and there can be no question of Islamization at that time (i.e. 200 years after the conquest claimed in the tradition). Their counterparts on the Spanish side were also Christians, regardless of whether they were Hispano-Romans or Goths. However, they were Christians of different denominations. Like all Germanic tribes, the Goths were initially Arian Christians. However, when King Rekkared I (586-601) accepted Catholicism for political reasons, this led to a deep rift between the royal family and the nobility, who did not generally take this step and remained Arian. To make matters worse, there was no clear rule of succession in the Gothic tradition, the king became the one with the greatest power. At 710 it was time again. A certain Roderich had himself crowned king, but had the opposition of the nobility against him. But he also had connections to North Africa and called relatives, allies or mercenaries from there for support, with the help of which Roderich was defeated. Already at this point the traditional literature runs into difficulties. Because it was undisputedly "Berber" who crossed the straits, and no "Arabs". Therefore, in the stories, the Berbers are given "very few Arabs" or only "Arab officers" to make the conquest by the Prophet's troops somehow plausible. It also remains to be explained how the Berbers suddenly became "Muslims", because they were clearly Christian or Jewish and there were no Muslims anywhere in the near or far vicinity at that time. Musa Ibn Nusair109, Umayad governor of Tripolitania already under Abd al-Malik, the builder of the Jerusalem Dome of the Rock, is one of the few tangible and verifiable figures in the scenario of the conquest of Spain. He came with a regular army and conquered all but the extreme north of the Spanish peninsula. Maybe he was called to help, maybe he just took advantage of the moment to expand the empire of his masters, the "Omayads" in Damascus, to Europe; In any case, what was initially a limited military action turned into a solid campaign of conquest. At Musa's side was a bishop Oppa, son of the former Goth king Egica, as well as Urban, a North African leader of Musa's Christian faith. This casts a strange light on a supposedly Islamic company. Musa's full name is Musa Ibn Nusair al Lahmi. That means he was Lahmid, that is, a member of an ethnic group that came from Al Hira in Mesopotamia. Among the Hirenser it was a question of Christians of anti-Trinitarian, East Syriac character under the collective name "Ibadites" (see page 143). They had already come to Egypt as Arab allies with the troops of the Persian king Chosrau II as conquerors in 619 and later belonged to the troops of Abd al-Malik. They built numerous places of worship, “masjid”, which are taken for granted as “Islamic”. However, since, like the oldest mosque in Cairo, today's Ibn As Mosque, it does not follow 109 We also meet Musa Ibn Nasir in the tales of the Thousand and One Nights (566th-578th Nights). In it, however, he does not conquer Spain for the true faith, but sets out in search of a legendary “brass city” somewhere in the southern Sahara, which adventurers in connection with the oasis of Zarzura are still looking for today. aligned with Mecca, one cannot speak of Islamic mosques. They were places of worship for the Ibadite Arab Christians. In a North African "mosque"110 we read the following saying: We believe in God and what was sent down to us and what was sent down to Abraham and Ishmael, Isaac and Jacob and to the tribes and what was handed over to Moses and Jesus and what was delivered to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between them and are godly. We find the same verse later in the Koran, but with one difference: the mention of Jesus is missing. No wonder, the saying does not come from a "mosque" but from a "masjid". The well-known al-Azhar college in Fustat (Cairo) also goes back to the Ibadites and their Syro-Aramaic roots. Azhar is by no means Arabic, but Aramaic and means light. Numerous coins have been preserved from the time of Ibn Nusair. They are written in Latin and bear inscriptions such as: Non est deus nisi unus cui non est alius similis, deus eternus deus magnus deus omnium creator ("God is one, he has no equal beside him. God is great and almighty creator of everything"). Non est deus nisi unus cui non socius alius similis (God is one, no one is associated with him). In nomine domini misericordis (“In the name of the merciful God”). The version of this Latin saying translated into Arabic is the so-called "Basmallha", the opening formula of most suras. The dates on the coins are by Byzantine Tax year (feritus in Africa indictione ...). Why? For reasons of internationality? Or, 10 years after Tariq's alleged coup, should the responsible tax authority still have been Byzantium? In any case, the Hijra period of an Arab prophet does not appear; Africa had quite obviously not yet become Ifriqiya. 110 Sharwas, Gebel Nafusa. The question naturally arises as to why a leading representative of the Prophet Muhammad had Latin coins minted, especially as coins were an enormously important medium of legitimation, demonstration of power and programmatic. The question arises as to why a follower of the Prophet uses the Byzantine calendar and not the time after the Prophet's hijra, which is said to have been the only valid one among Muslims from 622 onwards. (There is no post-Hijrah dating in any contemporary remains). And the question arises as to why the inscriptions on the coins show early Christian formulas. They are Latin translations of Greek precursors translated into Arabic, and not the other way around, as tradition has it. The classification of these coins as Islamic is completely arbitrary and unsupported. Some North African (and later Spanish) coins bore a star. It is probably the "Star of Bethlehem", another possibility discussed is a Punic origin. The star is certainly not a symbol of Islam that would actually prove its presence. The Spanish coins of the first half of the 9th century were by no means Islamic coins either. Nothing, absolutely nothing, in the form of facts, artefacts or contemporary written material that can be clearly dated proves an Islamic conquest. When you look at it in detail, no one claims that - with the exception of later, sometimes much later, secondary sources, and it is claimed by much later historians who consider secondary sources from the wide field of Arabic entertainment literature to be primary sources. So there was no Tariq looking longingly from Africa to the rocks opposite with a burning desire for the land beyond to become Islamic. According to the current state of knowledge, the most probable explanation for the events of the early 8th century in Spain is that Berber tribes took sides in a dispute over the succession of the Gothic royal family. The opposition party had forces from the on the other side of the strait (unless there were already Berber tribes in Spain). At the same time, Arian Christians from North Africa supported Arian co-religionists in Spain against their Catholic rulers. So there is a religious aspect to what is happening, but not an Islamic one. However, one could not get rid of the spirits that had been summoned, and an aid expedition turned into a war of conquest at the latest when Umayad-Arab troops under Musa Ibn Nusair entered the peninsula. This invasion had little to do with religion and nothing to do with Islam. At this point there are already four Christian factions at the table, namely the Arian, the Athanasian (Catholic), the Orthodox and the Arab Christians. (Further subgroups not excluded.) Northern Spain, with the relatively stable border of the Duero River, was a refuge for those sections of the Gothic and Hispanic population who felt the need to flee. The southern three quarters of the Spanish peninsula already belonged to the empire of al-Walid, des "Omayyad" ruler in Damascus. The course for the coming events in Spain was therefore set in Syria. However, the "Omayads" were already in decline at this time, around 750 their dynasty was overtaken by the following ones Eliminated "Abbasids". As one of the few survivors, an Abd er-Rahman was able to flee with his family and seek safety in the western part of the empire, first in North Africa and then in Spain in a monastery (!). Rahman was in Rusafa, the court of his grandfather, the ruler Hisham (724-743) and the site of the Basilica of St. Sergios grew up, of course he must have known the imperial center of Damascus. Rahman therefore brought the style of Persian palaces 111 with their magnificent gardens and the typical Syrian church architecture to Spain. (Combined with 111 As a reminder: The dynasty of the Marwanids (commonly known as “Omayads”) originated in Marv, eastern Persia. Their palace concept ("paradise gardens") was Persian. From this, the so-called court mosques developed. PICTURE 20 Approximate overview of the change in the border of al-Andalus. "Repoblacion" means a buffer zone kept uninhabited against incursions from the south. Roman elements, this style should once be called the "Moorish"). In the style of his Syrian homeland, Rahman built a shrine in Cordoba, the "Mezquita", the "mosque" of Cordoba, whose qibla (direction of prayer) did not point to Mecca, to the astonishment of some historians. No wonder, because it was not a mosque, but a Christian-Arabic church in the style of his homeland. Er-Rahman and his successors ruled as emirs for almost 200 years. In 929 Abd er-Rahman III. proclaimed caliph, under his successor Hakam II (915-976) this was achieved Umayad Empire at its peak. Hakam is described as an educated ruler and his library is said to have numbered 400,000 volumes. His son Hisham was only nominally the ruler, real power was exercised by his vizier Abi Amir (938 - 1002). Under the name Al Mansur (Spanish "Almanzor"), he became the epitome of the hated foreign rule. He boasted that he would wage a campaign against the infidels every year. It was in fact 52 operations in which he made war on, burned and plundered the territories of the north. The sacking of San tiago de Compostella in 997 caused a particular stir, when the inhabitants had to carry the bells of the basilica on foot to Cordoba as a form of humiliation112. Hakam II library set Al Mansur on fire according to the prevailing creed, that one book makes all the others superfluous. He is said to have carried a Koran specially made for him with him at all times. That on the rager Almanzor in less than 30 years six caliphs followed shows the state in which the empire was already. In 1031, just 100 years after the proclamation of the Caliphate of Cordoba, the emirs and caliphs of the dynasty of Marw, Turkmenistan, commonly known as the "Omayads", finally came to an end. Her reign in al-Andalus is described as extremely troubled: revolutions, popular uprisings, intrigues, disputes over the throne, secessions, wars. At any given point in time, there were acts of violence of the kind mentioned in some corner of the empire. Almost in desperation, Arnold Hottinger113, who was moved to Andalusia, accuses the chroniclers of exaggeration and says soothingly that the regions of unrest were often far apart, so that not everyone was always affected at the same time. .. In any case, the unrest was so massive that the entire state form in the year 1031 flew apart. As is studiously emphasized, there are no arguments 112 In 1236 Ferdinand III. after the conquest of Cordoba, the Moorish population carried the bells back to Santiago de Compostella. 1.3 Arnold Hottinger, "The Moors", Zurich 2005. between "Muslims" and "Christians", but ethnic conflicts within the invaders, the front between Arabs and Berbers, as well as inner-Arab conflicts between "Syrians" and "Yemenis". These are described in great detail, and the Arabist Johannes Thomas considers these stories to be narrative models and even late reckonings. Of course, religious conflicts increasingly came to the fore, but there could not have been any simple conflicts between "Christians" and "Muslims", because the situation in the 8th and 9th and partly also in the 10th century was much too complicated for such simplifications. Which Christians should we speak of? From the Eastern Arians? By the western Arians? Of Ibero-Roman Catholicism? From the orthodoxy of Byzantine provenance? From the various oriental Christians? Which Muslims should we talk about? From the Ibadites? The "Muhamedans"? The Malikites? Or are we talking about the Karmats or Kharidjites? These and many more bustled about on the Iberian Peninsula as well as on the other side of the strait and shaped the religious image of the time. Who dares to speak of "Christians" and "Muslims"? The main inner-Christian blocs, the Catholic and Orthodox Christians on the one hand and the Arian or Arabic on the other, were separated by nothing less than the central question of five centuries, the question that divided families, divided tribes and pitted empires against each other: What nature did jesus have Hence it was that anti-Trinitarians, such as the Germanic and Arab Christians, were much closer spiritually than the Catholics or Orthodox. As mentioned, North African invaders and locals could share a place of worship in Cordoba. For their theological differences were initially small. As early as the end of the 7th century, a series of councils began in Toledo that opposed each other in the discussion about the true nature of Christ various heresies. The “Manichaeans”114 often appear, but over time they are no longer seen clearly, but, like the “Nestorians”, are used as a collective term for all kinds of deviants. In 839, Abd er-Rahman II convened a synod because, like the bishops, he was worried about religious proliferation. According to the council acts, the “Casians” were condemned, who were accused of all sorts of misconduct: Manichaeanism, cave dwelling , rejection of the veneration of saints, polygamy, unusual fasting rules and much more. These "Casians" had a bit of everything. They had things in common with the religious traditions of the Arabic or Roman type, but they also had differences, and therefore neither the Orientals nor the Catholics knew how to classify them. Clearly, however, they were "Akephalic," meaning believers who would bow only to God and not to human authority, and therefore were unacceptable to any of the mainstream parties. As the council documents clearly show, in 839 nothing was known of a founder of a religion, Muhamad, in al-Andalus. Otherwise, how could it be that bishops discuss anything but the religion that threatens them? This should not change until the year 850, when we get the first written evidence of Islam in Spain. The “Arures” are also mentioned in the Council acts. They are known in Arabic literature as “Haruri”, as the inhabitants of the cave-rich Syrian town of Harura, where according to the Koran the dead will crawl out of the earth at the Last Judgment, and these Haruri are, of course, Muslims. In fact, it was another misreading, namely the Syriac hrora, "cave". The Arures/Haruri were nothing more than "cave dwellers", namely hermits. Hermitism was very widespread at that time because the end of the age was again expected, and it was not welcomed by those in power because these hermits were difficult to control as “Akephale”. 1.4 Manichaeism. Named after the Persian Mani (216-277). This religion was widespread and represented a mixture of Zoroastrian, Christian and Buddhist elements on the basis of ancient Gnosis. The Kharidjites were also reviled as "Arures". In the Islamic tradition, however, the Kharidjites are regarded as the first Muslim sect, although they too, apart from the completely un-Islamic contemplative hermitism, got by without a prophet Muhamad. To make matters worse, the Kharidjites are attributed to the Ibadites, the latter divided into a more Christian and a more Muslim variety. What Islamic scholars call “Islamic gnosis” also played a major role in Spain. But how Islamic were these Gnostics like Ismailis, Nusairians, Alevites, Karmatians really, since their tradition was rooted in Neo-Platonic, Jewish and Iranian views? They were not familiar with the Koranic tradition, or only marginally so, in late antiquity, they were seen by theology as Christian heretics. In an increasingly Meccan-intolerant environment, however, over time it seemed advisable for them to cross the green border into Islamic sectarian territory, where they remain as crypto-Christians or narrow-gauge Muslims to this day. The first philosopher of al-Andalus, Ibn Masarra (883 - 931) was a Gnostic in the tradition of the early Mesopotamian Ismailis, which were particularly influenced by Neoplatonic ideas. So he cannot have been a Muslim. In the tradition of the first “Abbasid” rulers in Baghdad, Mutacilism was also the leading current in al-Andalus for a time. The Mutazilites drew on verses from the Koran as well as on the Old and New Testaments and, above all, cultivated rationalism. The religious situation in al-Andalus, like in the entire Orient, was complex. There was a great abundance of religious views and communities, which often defined themselves completely differently from what is usual today - if their definitions and affiliations are already sufficiently clarified. The Arab invaders had been Christian Ibadites. By the middle of the 9th century, however, we were in a state of upheaval, in the transitional area between Christianity and Islam, if you will. The other way around: Islam begins from the middle of the 9th century the identity of a accept your own religion. The conquerors came as Christians and turned into Muslims. This corresponds to the historical development in the Orient, to which Marwinian Spain was linked. Hadith literature reached Spain in the second half of the 9th century. This led to heated arguments in the emirate because the strong Maliki legal tradition rejected the hadiths. However, Muhamad I (852 - 886) sided with the "Sunna", that is, he imported the prevailing Meccan main stream of Islam. The first reports of unequal treatment and harassment of other believers are known from the time of Muhamad I. The widespread establishment in al-Andalus of what we call "Islam" today was probably completed at about the same time as the introduction of the caliphate in 929. A dividing line between Christianity and Islam before the 9th century To draw a different conclusion is not in keeping with the circumstances and is completely unhistorical. The "Omayad" caliphate was only granted 100 years. In line with the guidelines from the East, there was also an organized revolution against the “Omayads” in Spain. The ethnic groups may have had problems with one another, but the mental turmoil must have weighed even more heavily. This and the increasing experience of the native population of occupation and religious coercion caused Arab-Islamic dominated Spain, i.e. around three quarters of the Iberian Peninsula, to explode. The official year for this is 1031, the dissolution of the caliphate. The structure didn't shatter into the proverbial thousand pieces, but there were a few dozen: the taifas, the "little kingdoms". The central power, which was already dwindling in the last days of the “Omayads”, made possible the emergence of numerous small and tiny kingdoms and principalities. There were 60 in the best of times, but their number and size was constantly changing. The regents were Arabs of various clans, Berbers of various tribes, Romans, Normans, Goths, pirates, to name but a few. Also all religious shades were present. This makes it clear that there were no "natural" alliances, everyone made pacts with everyone and everyone against everyone else. The small empires tried to keep or expand their territories in constant wars. In this confusion acted the Castilian knight Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar, who became a Spanish national hero under the name El Cid and who, in the best Taifa tradition, switched sides several times between Spaniards, Arabs, Berbers, Christians and Muslims and in between also acted as a warlord worked on his own account. While the petty empires of al-Andalus steadily weakened one another, the Christian empires in the north steadily increased in power. A number of Taifas could no longer exist without aid from the north, but that aid or non-aggression pact did not come for free. It cost protection money and tributes. In addition, as compensation for their insignificance, the house and court of the petty regents got out of hand, which led to an artistic blossoming but ended in ruin. Al-Andalus was bleeding dry, and the balance shifted imperceptibly but steadily to the north. But that was only part of the problem. One of the little princes with the big name al-Mutamid115 from Seville called on the rulers of North Africa for help. They were the Almoravids, a dynasty of militant Muslims from the Sahara. They turned against everything that did not correspond to their conception of religion. They fought the Christians, of course, but also cleaned up their Muslim allies. The princes Mutamid and Mutawakkil were summarily killed when they showed tendencies to cooperate with their Spanish opponents rather than with their fellow believers from the desert. The dissolute life, the wine feasts and dance performances in Cordoba, Seville and elsewhere were over. Now for the second time: the Spaniards, albeit now the Andalusians, could not get rid of the spirits they called. The Almoravids were no longer interested in mere aid, they wanted al-Andalus 115 Muhammad al-Mutamid bin Abbad (Abbad = the Ibadit). got under their rule and the adjoining Christian kingdoms at that. The submission of al-Andalus to the Almoravid yoke took place in the years 1090-1094. Strictly speaking, this was already the end of al-Andalus and some contemporaries seem to have been well aware of this. The fundamentalists from North Africa brought a completely new quality of conflict to Spain: religious warfare, jihad and the Africanization of Andalusian Islam. Cross-religious pacts, normal in the Taifa era, had become the exception; what mattered was conquest in the name of Allah. But a lot had also happened on the Christian side. In 1071 the Clunensian movement116 gained a foothold in Spain, which meant that the Spanish Church came under the direct influence of Rome (from 1076 the Gothic rite was replaced by the Roman one). In 1095 Pope Urban II called for a crusade, in 1099 Jerusalem was conquered, almost at the same time Granada, Seville, Valencia and Mallorca fell into the hands of the jihadists from North Africa. The turn of the 11th to the 12th century was marked by a serious conflict between East and West in the Orient and South and North on the Spanish peninsula. Against this background, the Europeanization of Spanish Christianity took place just like the Africanization of Spanish Islam. The mega-trends were thus imported from abroad on both sides, putting an end to a specifically Spanish path. There was a jihad on one side and a crusade on the other. Strictly speaking, it is only now that one can speak of conquista and reconquista in the sense of an Islamic conquest and a Christian reconquest. The Almoravid spell lasted less than a century, ending again in numerous small principalities, the second 116 The movement goes back to the Benedictine monastery of Cluny in France. Cluny stood for a tight organization of monasticism and was one of the most influential religious centers in Europe until the 12th century. Taifas. In North Africa, however, another movement gained power: that of the Almohads. Their name said it all, namely the defenders of the belief in one god (a\-muwahidun, from wahd, one). They represented the “U-Islam” that is often associated with them, in that the fanatical monotheism of the early Islamic form was also their central concern and the Prophet Muhammad played no role. The year 1147 marks the final seizure of power by the Almohads in North Africa, and in 1161 they crossed over to Spain for the first time. Like the Almoravids, they ruled from Marrakesh and had to contend with constant revolts and resistance. Although they could still withstand the great uprisings of Ibn Mardanish (an Arabized "Martinez") and Geraldo sem Pavor ("Gerhard without fear"), but on July 16, 1212, the great showdown took place, the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa. Led by the kings of Castile, Navarre and Aragon, a formidable force of knights marched from all over Europe, while on the other side a pan-Muslim force of about the same size, with jihadists from North Africa to Central Asia, marched up. A total of half a million warriors are said to have faced each other. The Islamic armies suffered a total defeat, the Almohad caliph fled to North Africa, and the power of the Muslims in Spain was broken. However, it was another 40 years before most of the Spanish peninsula, including the Balearic Islands and Portugal, came under the rule of Christian kings. Yusuf Ibn Nasr, petty ruler from Arjona, had the Castilian king Ferdinand III. 1236 supported in the capture of Cordoba and was given a free hand in Granada, which he brought into his possession. After all, the kingdom covered the coast from Almeria to Tarifa and thus included the important Gibraltar. In 1246 Ferdinand officially recognized Ibn Nasr as ruler of Granada - the beginning of the last chapter of Muslim rulers in Spain, which would be closed 250 years later. Ibn Nasr was perfectly clear that there could be no more meaningful resistance against the superior empires from the north and signed a vassal treaty, for that was nothing else Treaty of 1246. The Muslim enclave of Granada bought its existence by paying tribute and services, entirely dependent on the favor of the Christian overlord. Despite all the huge external difficulties, the lords of Granada afforded constant internal quarrels, which only did not bring about an earlier end because the Christian rulers at that time were not doing much better either. The latter were also in no hurry to slaughter the cow called Granada while she was still giving plenty of milk. Granada, which was increasingly in danger, looked to North Africa, Egypt and Istanbul for allies and carried out a daring seesaw policy. Meanwhile, the Hafsids, who ruled in Tunis, controlled the lucrative trade from inner Africa to Spain and maintained close trade relations with Castile and Barcelona. They didn't want to jeopardize this through adventure - Granada was just a nuisance. Of decisive importance for the end of the last Muslim empire in Spain was the marriage of Ferdinand of Aragon to Isabel of Castile in 1469, which ten years later led to the amalgamation of the kingdoms and thus to the unification of Spain. The conquest of fortresses and cities in the kingdom of Granada began immediately, until the troops of Ferdinand and Isabel in 1491 stood at the gates of Granada itself. According to traditional belief, the devout Catholic drove Isabel Ferdinand to conquer Granada for religious reasons. In fact, however, Ferdinand saw the situation from a power-political point of view and had delayed a decision for a long time, also for financial reasons - i.e. tributes, which accounted for up to 50% of the state budget. His reasons for liquidating the enclave were prosaic: Granada had continually given refuge to Muslim pirates in its ports, and tribute payments were also becoming increasingly slow. But what was most disturbing was the repeated contact with the new terror force in the east, the Turks. The "Turkish threat" was the big topic of the time, and it seemed to be quite immanent, because when an Ottoman expedition landed in southern Italy in 1481, Italy fled. The Turks were becoming a serious threat and Spain could not afford an alliance on its own territory. That was the end of Granada. But it was an ending that history has few parallels for: Ferdinand's terms were so favorable that Emir Abu Abdallah had no choice but to accept them. At the On January 2, 1492 he handed over the keys of the city to the Spanish royal couple. Ferdinand promised him and the inhabitants of Granada, who in the end consisted almost exclusively of Muslims, that they would protect their property and personal integrity. Anyone who wanted to move out could do so unhindered, take their possessions with them or sell them without restrictions within 2 years. Almost everyone who had wealth chose the latter option and left Spain as wealthy people for Morocco.117 The architecture, culture and art of the Alhambra, Granada's castle, which has survived to posterity intact, is praised everywhere. 39 years earlier, a city of incomparably higher architectural, cultural and art-historical importance suffered a completely different fate: in 1453 Sultan Mehmed II conquered Constantinople. Emperor Constantine XI. did not enjoy conditions similar to those given to Emir Abdallah of Granada, he ended up unrecognized in a mass grave. Mehmed's troops caused a bloodbath and destruction of unimaginable proportions, of which only a few walls and a building suitable for a grand mosque remained for posterity. The whole world at the time was horrified, and Abdallah certainly had these events in mind when he surrendered the city. With the capitulation of Granada, the time of the Islamic Empire on Spanish soil finally came to an end, but not the history of the 1:7 On a gentle rise south of Granada, which offers a last glimpse of the city, the last Muslim ruler of Spain, according to legend, did the "sigh of the Moor". A highway sign draws attention to this. Muslims. An edict for forced conversion was issued as early as 1507: All adult Muslims were left with the choice between baptism and emigration. However, complications arose because Islam provides taqiyya, deliberate dissimulation, for its followers. So how should one distinguish among the remaining Muslims between a genuine convert and one who is merely pretending "Crypto-Muslim" ? The Santo Oficio, the Holy Inquisition, began work in Spain in 1529 for this task as well. Their work was by no means cruel for the time,118 but it was remarkably ineffective. As a consequence, the last 100,000 Moriscos (Muslims) were expelled from Spain in 1609. There is controversy as to what damage Spain has suffered as a result or not. Conversely, however, it can be stated that North Africa did not derive any significant benefit from it. Usually there is talk of 800 years of Muslim rule in Spain, during which the sciences and arts flourished unimaginably, where religious tolerance and generally peace, joy and pancakes reigned. Sometimes 900 years also circulate and certain Muslim circles derive real claims of ownership from this119. Because that, conversely, would result in Western claims to Turkey, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, North Africa with far more valid reasons, we don't even want to go into the nonsense. But how do you arrive at 800 years of Muslim rule in Spain? The occupation of southern Spain by Berbers and Arabs 118 Proceedings were opened for ten percent of the charges. Thirty percent of the trials ended in acquittals, and the death penalty was imposed in less than two percent. Imprisonment could mean galley service or house arrest and was usually limited to three years. With very few exceptions, the notorious burnings at the so-called auto-da-fes were “in effigy”, i.e. burning of straw dolls. In the case of torture, broken bones and permanent mutilation were forbidden. The Spanish Inquisition was committed to an extensive set of rules, and government agencies were much more radical. 119 The terrorists who caused a bloodbath on Madrid trains on March 11, 2004, killing 191 people teten, referred to the demand that Spain must belong to Dar al-Islam again. in the early 8th century had no religious motives. A religion called "Islam" corresponding to the East does not exist at this time. The conquerors of Spain were Arian Berbers and Ibadi Arabs of Christian faith, who placed Spain under the sphere of power of the "Omayads" incorporated with their capital Damascus. In the course of the destruction of this dynasty in the Orient, a scion of the family fled to Spain and continued the Christian-Syrian tradition there. Parallel to the development in the Orient, a religious process also began in al-Andalus in the middle of the 9th century, during the course of which Arabic Christianity developed into a religion of its own. This process only progressed so far in the 9th century that the existence of a “Islam” can speak in al-Andalus. Although there are reports of repressions by the caliphate against those of other faiths, religion as a dividing element played only a subordinate role in the time of the Taifas (1031 - 1086). With the emergence of the North African dynasties of the Almoravids and Almohads (1090-1248), Andalusian Muslims were soon made aware that there could also be other views about the correct faith. These fundamentalist movements not only fought the infidels, but also taught the local Muslims Mores. They brought jihad to al-Andalus, which met the crusade idea that was developing at the same time. The religiously motivated conquista opposed the religiously motivated reconquista. Until now, disputes had only been for the purpose of shifting borders, but now they have taken on a new quality. The reconquista was so successful that by the mid-13th century Granada was the only Muslim kingdom left in Spain. It was a vassal existence by the grace of the Catholic rulers from the north. In 1482 King Ferdinand initiated the gradual liquidation of Granada, which he completed in 1492 with the triumphant entry into the Alhambra. As you can see, history is anything but continuous, there can be no question of 800 years of Muslim rule, let alone dominance. In retrospect, it becomes clear that the political decline of Muslim Spain had already started with the death of Hakam II (976), so Islam had hardly been established. Muslim rule over al-Andalus is reduced to around 250 years, namely the brief period of the Umayad caliphate and the period of North African foreign rule. Granada was an ever-shrinking enclave in terms of territory and importance, which in the end consisted only of the city itself. Their importance was inversely proportional to the view commonly taken today. Current literature is full of praise for Moorish cultural achievements. According to this, the conquering Arabs must have invaded a developing country and would have shaken the backward Spaniards from a cultural and civilizational point of view. The sons of the desert, known for their agrarian and water management heyday, would have implanted an unparalleled field economy. Accordingly, the bathing culture, which was completely unknown in the Roman provinces, was also imported by Arab Bedouins. According to a travel guide, baths and houses were covered with the “typical Arabian air bricks” (i.e. those pan-Mediterranean bricks that can be seen in Pompeii and even older cities, for example). The architectural substance found in Spain must apparently have been a loam building culture; only the magnificent Moorish buildings that were suddenly being thrown out of the ground, such as the Alhambra, were evidently suitable for manifesting culture in Spain. As the UNESCO website tells us, the conquerors also brought tolerance and rationalism with them. So the Spaniards must have experienced a great moment in their history. In reality, the conquerors came from Africa, the edge of the Roman world to Hispania, in a heartland of the Roman world with all the infrastructural achievements of antiquity, such as the best road network and water supply system in the world, temples, palaces, baths, theaters, spacious cities with fresh water and waste water systems. There was a whole lot of usability, even after the official end of Rome. (The first mezquita consists almost entirely of antique loot, or "second uses," as the saying goes.) Oleg Grabar, the excellent expert on Islamic architecture and building history, points out the similarities between Andalusian palaces and ancient architecture. The dream templates were not ominous "Islamic" palaces, but Nero's Domus Aurea or Hadrian's villa. Direct architectural models were the palaces of Roman provincial magnates in Spain and North Africa. With their arcades, colonnaded arches, double windows and patios, these dictate the elements that were typical of Andalusian palaces. The element of water gardens, like the Generalife, is very Persian. The walled courtyards with their gardens and water features can be seen as miniature representations of paradise, a rather licentious, pre-Islamic Persian paradise. "Omayads" to Spain. The quality of the Andalusian stone carvings does not come close to that of Gothic or Antiquity. Instead of laborious processing of the stone itself, the supporting substructure was covered with stucco. The typical forms of decoration, the muqarnas (“stalactites”, “honeycombs”, etc.), are also of Persian origin. Andalusian magnificent and monumental architecture goes back primarily to Roman antiquity and to a lesser extent to Persian models. "Islamic" predecessors - whatever that may be - do not exist. Today's Alhambra, in the eyes of many the most Islamic of all Islamic buildings, was built at a time when Spain could no longer be called Islamic with the best will in the world. A similar picture emerges with the sacred buildings. As we know, the North African invaders used the Church of San Vicente in Cordoba in harmony with the inhabitants before Abd er-Rahman, who fled from Syria, built his sanctuary over it. This was a church in the style of his homeland, with arches resting on antique columns as the defining element. The arches were typically segmented ochre/red, dictated by the color of the original materials, namely brick and stone. About PICTURE 21 Mezquita, Cordoba. Mlhrab and dome of the AI ​​Hakam II extension circa 965. The work, materials and finish is a gift from the Byzantine Emperor Nikephorus II Phocas. It represents a completely new style. PICTURE 22 The oldest part of the Mezquita, Cordoba, from the 8th century. It was not a mosque but a masjid, a Christian-Arabic place of worship in a Syrian church style. The mezqita of Cordoba served as an Arabic church for 100 years before gradually transforming into a mosque. Externally there were hardly any differences, with the exception of the addition of a prayer niche (mih rab), which made the difference between churches and early mosques. The building was constantly expanded, but the basic elements remained the same. The building of Abd er-Rahman I (756 - 788) and the extension Abd er-Rahman II (822-852) are large halls with a forest of various ancient columns and red and white double arches above. The extension of Hakam II (961-976), the first caliph, shows a completely new style and an artistically incomparably higher level. The execution of the prayer niche is particularly impressive, but at the same time it arouses astonishment, because it is covered by a magnificent Byzantine dome, which is known to be based on a cruciform plan. This expansion is a gift from the Byzantine Emperor Nikephorus II Phocas, who sent the artists to Cordoba with their tools and all the material. What could have been the reason? Well cultivated relationships: because Byzantium, which had previously been present in Hispania, repeatedly tried to win over the caliphate as an ally. The final addition of Al Mansur, which soon followed, is a return to the Forest of Columns, but in a much worse execution. Probably due to the lack of alternatives, inferior and damaged ancient columns were often used, the arches were no longer made of stone and brick, but simply painted in a brick look. The styles of the Mezquita, the Syrian arch architecture and the Byzantine extension Hakam II, are not Andalusian. There is absolutely nothing "Islamic" about the origin of the sacred architecture of Islamic Spain, because there were no Islamic models. The importance of philosophy and science in al-Andalus and their influence on Europe is generally greatly overestimated. As already pointed out in the previous chapter, it is completely incorrect to speak of Islamic sciences in late antiquity at all (see St. 177). There have been numerous scientists of different nationalities and different mentalities in the Arab Empire. They were all united in the Arabic language, which is why one definitely thinks of “Arab scientists” can speak. Of these, however, Muslims were the absolute exception. What's more, the establishment of Islam ended the heyday of Arabic science in a very short time. This flowering of Arabic intellectual life took place primarily in the Persian Orient. Without wanting to belittle the achievements of the Arab scientists in any way, it was primarily a question of handing down Indian (“Arabic”) numbers or ancient philosophers. This handing down also took place without al-Andalus, the country was never the often rumored center of science. The story of the medical writings of Dioscorides, which Abd er-Rahman III. (912-929) received as a gift from the Byzantine Emperor. The library of Hakam II (961 - 976) was already set ablaze by al-Mansur (938 - 1002) as a conscious act of the Koran. Almost all authors from the East were destroyed, for al-Andalus had not yet produced a leading figure in the field of science and philosophy except for Ibn Masarra. This was not the case until the 12th century with Ibn Rushd, Ibn Maymun (Maimonides) and a few others. With these names, however, philosophy and science disappeared from al-Andalus after a brief flicker. Al-Ghazali had asserted itself across the board, from then on knowledge and thinking in al-Andalus were limited to what was in the Koran. Or, as the historian al-Maqqari put it: “Philosophy is a science hated in Spain, which can only be studied in secret.” In the best Alhambraism, however, Pierre Phillippe Rey120 teaches us that Europe actually got rationalism from “North and West Africa and from al-Andalus”. Unfortunately, there is no justification for this highly interesting thesis, but for the time being one can assume that al-Andalus was neither the mediator nor the cradle of European rationalism. 120 Pierre Phillippe Rey at http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0011/001144/114426eo.pdf . The greatest and universally celebrated achievement of al-Andalus is said to have been tolerance: tolerating other ways of life, other ways of thinking and the respective other religion. This created an unprecedented way of living together, the legendary convivencia. Mohamed Benchrifa also writes on the UNESCO homepage page 121: “Throughout Islamic rule, Andalusia was home to forms of tolerance unseen until modern times. It was a land of dialogue, a dialogue that was both cheerful and lively.” Let us take a brief look at the cheerful and lively dialogue that al-Andalus had with its greatest minds, Ibn Rushd and Maimonides, and which Maimonides summarizes in his own words: “The Arabs persecuted us very severely and passed banning and discriminatory laws against us. Never has a nation tormented, humiliated, degraded and hated us as they did.” The merry dialogue that Ibn Rushd had to have before the court in his native city of Cordoba was a matter of life and death. He got away with banishment because of his closeness to the ruler, received a lifelong ban on speaking and writing, his works were banned, he was hushed up in the Islamic world and only experienced his appreciation in Christian Europe as Averroes. Ibn Rushd was born in Cordoba in 1126 to a distinguished family of Qadis. Qadi, judge, was not just a job title, it was an honorary rank. As a young man, Ruschd witnessed the transition from the Almoravids to the Almohads. His bread and butter was medicine, but his main occupation was physics and philosophy. In 1153 he was ordered to the Almohad court in Marrakesh. For the prince and later caliph Yussef Abu Jakub he undertook 121 http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0011 /001144/114426eo.pdf. various physical investigations and prepared an Aristotle translation. He spent most of his time in Spain in the service of the ruler. There, too, disaster loomed. The days of free speech and free writing were over. Al-Ghazali and the ultra-Orthodox were advancing everywhere and they fought Ibn Rushd with all their might. In his theory of causality he opposed Ghazali and his literal observance of the Koran and accused him of destroying not only philosophy but also Islam. This was not without consequences. A formal trial against Ibn Rushd in 1195 denied his orthodoxy, banning not only his writings but philosophy as a whole. Only the closeness to the ruler, whose personal physician he had advanced to, saved him from the death sentence. Instead, he was banished from Cordoba and later taken to Marrakesh, where he died shortly afterwards, in 1198. Averroes' life was saved by his medical knowledge. So it was with Maimonides, the second great thinker of al-Andalus. In 1135, nine years after Ibn Rushd, Mosche ben Maymon, as his real name was, was also born in Cordoba, the son of a respected Jewish rabbi. He grew up in an atmosphere of Jewish learning, which, however, came to an abrupt end around 1148. The Almohads ruled in al-Andalus, they forced all non-Muslims to convert or emigrate - if not worse. The wandering life of the ben Maymon family began, which took them all over Spain. Nowhere could they feel safe, eventually they crossed over to North Africa and settled in Fes around 1160. This move into the lion's den has fueled much speculation. The real reasons are unknown, but Morocco must have been safer than Andalusia. Or did Maimonides feel safe because he had converted to Islam? It looks like it, although his conversion is undetectable. Strikingly, however, Maimonides advocates conversion in several expert opinions, albeit in the sense of Islamic Taqiyya122. 122 Taqiyya, the disguise sanctioned in the Qur'an to gain an advantage over unbelievers. Maimonides dealt with metaphysics, astronomy and of course Aristotle, but his main work was texts on Jewish faith and law. In the main profession Maimonides was a doctor. But the arm of religious persecution also reached the ben Maymon. When the Chief Rabbi of Fez was executed for his refusal to convert to Islam, the family fled to Palestine in 1165 and from there moved on to Egypt. In Cairo, Moshe became a respected member of the Jewish community and a sought-after doctor at the Sultan's court. However, the shadows of the past caught up with him at the peak of his work, because a former employee suddenly appeared on the scene who claimed that the current Rabbi Mosche was a Muslim in Fes. Ultimately, Maimonides also escaped this life-threatening situation, his closeness to the Sultan as a doctor may have saved his life. Maimonides died in Cairo in 1204 and his body was taken to Tiberias in Palestine, where it was buried in the earth of his fathers. Maimonides and Ibn Rushd are celebrated today as the most important thinkers of al-Andalus. Both were pursued and hunted, both lived under death threats, both had to leave the oh so tolerant Andalusia. And that wasn't the exception in al-Andalus, it was the rule. It seems downright grotesque that the very denomination of Muslims that sought Ibn Rushd's life now, after centuries of complete ignorance, included him as one of their own. Ibn Rushd can no longer defend himself against it. In Spain lived according to population Ibero-Romans, Goths, Jews, "new" Berbers, "old" Berbers, Arabs. Regionally, however, the composition was completely different, and the majority situation could turn into the exact opposite. The reason was the constant conquests, expulsions, deportations, enslavement, and resettlement. The maps with demarcations only represent snapshots. These ethnic groups spoke standard Arabic, vernacular Arabic, various Berber dialects, various Romance dialects, Hebrew and Latin. Arabic evolved into the common one in the 9th century colloquial language between the individual groups. In addition to the Christians and Muslims living in their territories, there were always special groups: Christians who had converted to Islam (Muladeri), Christians who lived under Islam (Mozarabs), Muslims who had converted to Christianity (Morisques) and Muslims who lived under Christianity (Mudecharen). The conversions were never voluntary. They always took place under coercion or pressure, ranging from legal discrimination to physical violence. At the time of the conquest, land grabbing was in the foreground from an ethnic point of view, there were no significant religious conflicts, because the individual denominations were still much too close in the 8th century - despite violent theological disputes. This began to change under Muhammad I. Eulogius of Cordoba writes to Bishop Wilesindus of Pamplona: "In that year (851) the frenzy of the tyrant was kindled against the Church of God, overturning all, laying waste to all, scattering all, imprisoning bishops, presbyters, abbots, deacons, and all the clergy." Those who did not convert were second-class citizens (dhimmi). For them, in al-Andalus, the only options were tribute, exile, or death. Professor Maria Rosa Menocal shows in her book "The Ornament of the World" that one can actually see this actually undeniable alternative differently when she says "Islamic politics not only made it possible for Christians and Jews to survive, but also for them according to the Korani - protected by and large as part of a commission." In the period of the Taifa patchwork, the situation was completely different. In general, religion did not seem to have been a priority, but the first major slaughter of Jews took place in Cordoba in 1066. This was preceded by a memorandum by the pious jurist Abu Ishaq: “These Jews, who used to look for a rag of colored cloth on the rubbish heaps to bury their dead, ... have now divided Granada among themselves ... They collect tribute and clothe himself very elegant..., and the monkey Joseph has laid out his house with marble... Hurry to him to cut the throat; he is a fat mutton, take his money away from him, because you deserve it better than he does!” The tolerance that is said to have characterized al-Andalus is a fairy tale. Nowhere, not only in Spain, is tolerance to be found in our understanding in medieval Europe. The concept of tolerance dates back to the Renaissance. This tolerance is based on the concepts of truth and freedom. In the case of revealed religions, each of which claims a truth claim for itself, tolerance is not far off as soon as they are able to implement this truth claim politically. Freedom and tolerance very soon end with religious regulations. Let alone being a tolerant society, al-Andalus was not even a pluralistic one. Pluralism includes the consensus on the basic equality of all cultures. That was out of the question in al-Andalus. Tolerance and pluralism there were compliance with circumstances that could not be changed at the moment - but they were working on it. This is the "pragmatic tolerance" of the Andalusian tolerance admirers. Religious tolerance has never been a concept in al-Andalus. The religious groups always pursued a policy of takeover or separation, which only paused when it was not politically enforceable. That was the legendary convivencia, the intimate togetherness of three cultures. It was said to be the hallmark of al-Andalus, but in reality it was the exception. All three cultures overlapped and were closely interlinked, but the will to separate or conquer always dominated. The convivencia perhaps saw its best time in the short period of the Taifas and in Christian Toledo, when Christians, Muslims and Jews fled in large numbers from the onslaught of the North Africans to the Christian parts of the country and stayed there at least temporarily until the death of Alfonso the Wise (1284), created a common culture undisturbed. At the same time, the religious zealots in the south destroyed all traces of Christian-Jewish building activity such as churches, synagogues, cemeteries, schools, community facilities. Therefore, for ruin tourism today, the superiority of the Moorish culture seems to be quite clear. Unfortunately, some historians have lost the archaeological evidence of convivencia under Islamic rule. Coexistence can only work if the cultures involved are at the same time. They have to come from the same era to be on an equal footing. Until the 10th century, most of the Iberian Peninsula was a fairly homogeneous cultural entity under the main Syrian-Arabic culture. This continued with smears even in the Taifa period. A first break in simultaneity came with the fundamentalist Almoravids and Almohads. They came to Spain from Africa's past into the modern age, with which they had no connection. They were eventually absorbed by this modernity, but the next wave, with its ominous pull into the past, was already on its way: the new, radical interpretation of the faith that had established itself in the East and was sweeping over al-Andalus. It wasn't just the North African zealots that cut al-Andalus off from modernity, it was also developments in the east that al-Andalus was always heavily influenced by. From the Almoravid foreign rule to the end of Granada one can no longer speak of simultaneity. Don't be fooled by the magnificent stucco work in a small part of the Alhambra. The cathedral of Burgos was completed, the Cologne cathedral was under construction, pompous churches and enchanting palazzi had been built in Florence, which Pisano adorned with his incomparable sculptures. What inspires developments is the spirit. But with the elimination of Ibn Rushd, the spiritual petrification in the Islamic world "sealed time" after Dan Diner '23, occurred. Nothing could illustrate the change of sides of modernism in Spain more than the coincidence of two events: 1492, the same year that Ferdinand and Isabel surrendered Granada 123 Dan Diner, "The Sealed Time", Berlin 2007. received and the last Muslim ruler left Spain, they bid farewell to a captain named Christopher Columbus, who went on their behalf on his voyage of discovery into a new world that was supposed to be beyond the horizon of the round globe. Once upon a time, the Arab (non-Islamic) ruler al-Mamun had the globe measured to within a few kilometers. Now the Europeans sent ships to circumnavigate this sphere, while in the now Islamized Arab world the earth was supposed to be flat, as the Holy Book commanded. By moving into the Alham bra, the royal dominions from the north initially carried out Castilian reasons of state. But they also brought modernity into the past. "However, the Alhambra can certainly be a symbolic model for a new, united Europe, in which different religions and cultures can and must come together like never before."124 Why the Alhambra? Which cultures and religions should have come together in it in an exemplary manner? If you really want to name a symbol for the coexistence of the three cultures, it is Toledo. If there is one building that must be identified as emblematic of al-Andalus, it can only be the Mezquita of Cordoba. This Mezquita is a bizarre building. It begins its existence on an exploited temple of Jupiter and a Gothic church. This was followed by a Christian-Arabic place of worship in a Syrian church style, with extensions as a mosque, which finds its artistic climax in an extension drawn entirely from abroad, namely Byzantium. The relapse into an artistically inferior last extension follows immediately. And then a cathedral is placed in the middle of the mosque. It fits like a glove, but: the mosque was not flattened by the victors, as one would actually expect, but "supplemented" by a cathedral in the middle of it. Of course, the cathedral dominates, the minaret is from 124 Lubisch, FAZ, August 12, 2004. Church tower encased - but what could symbolize the historical zigzag course better than this building, which combines the basic elements of the history of al-Andalus? Appeals and reminiscences to the so tolerant time of Islam in Spain come mainly from the Islamic side. More caution would be appropriate since non-Islamic citizens were subject to special taxes everywhere and at all times and had to make do with reduced rights. All non-Muslims in al-Andalus were second-class citizens with dhimmi status. Is this what tolerance looks like? The third group, the Jews, has not yet been spoken of at all. They immigrated to Spain, mainly after the Romans conquered Judea, which they called Sepharad, and were therefore later called Sephardic Jews. In the Alhambra pathos they are the “mediators between cultures”. That's a euphemism for someone caught between the chairs. For most of the time, the Jews were alternately marginalized, disenfranchised, plundered, expelled, or murdered by the two main cultures. Examples are given of Jews who had risen to high positions, such as Ibn Shaprut from Cordoba or Ibn Negrella from Granada. But those were the big exceptions. Ibn Negrella, builder of the first Alhambra and creator of the lion's fountain, was brutally murdered during the Muslim pogrom of 1066. The fate of Maimonides has already been discussed. The Spain-wide pogroms of 1391 wiped out two-thirds of the Jewish community. In 1492, shortly after the capture of Granada, all Jews in Spain were asked to be baptized or to leave the country. The majority did the latter, and with that the history of the Jews in Spain was largely over. Again: the convivencia was the exception and dictated by the political circumstances, not by tolerance or the desire for pluralism. Finally, let’s take a look at what else the UNESCO homepage has to offer: “Jews, Christians and Muslims were perfectly free to engage in activities in theological, even religious activities ... in administration and the judiciary.” Haim Zafrani And: “Al-Andalus was a remarkable and outstanding model of tolerance. It began with the conquest when the Muslims began to protect the liberty and property of their subjects and to respect and defend their churches” (Mohamed Benchrifa). One would like to see the churches that the Muslims defended. But where are they? These are the tales of al-Andalus. The historical reality looks different. In al-Andalus there was no tolerance. There was slashing and stabbing. And where this paused, apartheid reigned, exercised by whoever was politically in a position to do so. The beautifully sung convivencia only took place when the opponents were in stalemate and could not do otherwise. That's how al-Andalus worked. "Who did this to us?" Memories of reality "We're only repaying them a small part of what they did to us!" Osama bin Laden on his terrorist actions D he Islamic world is in bad shape. Especially its core, the Arab countries. In all sociological data, they rank at the end of the world rankings, surpassed only by some African countries. And that despite the oil income. Contrary to popular stereotypes, the Arab states as a whole are poor. Together they all generate on average just as much as the much smaller Spain, with the exception of oil. The production, which takes place in their own countries, is essentially based on foreign licences. Almost nothing is created originally. The entire Arab world achieved 370 patents in the period from 1980 to 2000, in comparison Israel had 7,650 and South Korea, which is often used as a comparison country because of parallel developments over time, had 16,300 excluding oil, four times as much as the entire Arab world. Why do they need the work, one might object, they have the oil. This seems obvious, but it is also part of the problem. Although the oil throws off enormous profits, but the wealth does not arrive. The extravagance and ostentation of Arab billionaires is already a legend. But even a country like Iran, which is not known for its lavish upper class, is not making any headway economically. The only exceptions are the Emirates, a few small Gulf States and exotic countries like Brunei. All Arab countries are completely defeated in education, a key sector for future development. The high - for women dramatically high - percentage of illiterates is reflected in book production: With a world population of five In 2005, just one percent of global book production went to Arab countries, and the lion's share of that was religious titles. These figures can be found in the Arab Human Development Report (IAH DR). This is a regular report on the state of the Arab States, written by Arab authors. It is a report of considerable frankness, but it is also not free of clichés. American policy in the Middle East and Israel are given as reasons for the problems in the Arab world. Sure, Israel is a psychological trauma to the region. But was the situation better before the founding of Israel? Not really. It is obvious that the Arab world, like the entire Islamic world, is in a deep crisis, including for those affected. When something has gone so badly wrong, the obvious questions should be: "What went wrong ?" "Why did that go wrong?" "What did we do wrong?" Not so in the Islamic world. The key question here is: "Who did this to us?" The answers are the same to this day: the Franks, the Crusaders, the Mongols, the French, the English, the missionaries, the Soviets; and currently the US, the Israelis, the West. You can read about it in any publication of an Islamic country. At the same time, the glorious time, the “Golden Years of Islam”, is invoked. How could the fall from the golden past into the dreary present come about? the Muslims ask themselves. Has Allah turned away, and if so, why? The time of the Arabian empires, starting from the year 622, are the sworn and often quoted "Golden Years of Islam". As we know, the times of the Prophet, with their detailed accounts, are but pious legends, as is the explosive expansion of religion. The real political development of the 7th century culminated in an Arab empire, by no means an Islamic one, and had absolutely nothing to do with the person of the Prophet and with the legendary ruling dynasties of the early caliphs artificially grafted onto him. The cultural diversity in this Arab empire, with its diverse ethnic groups and religions, led to an impressive cultural and scientific flourishing in the courts of Baghdad, Samarra, Damascus, Tehran and even those in present-day Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Afghanistan. With the collapse of Rome, not only did ancient culture disappear from Europe, but also its intellectual legacy. The Occident sank into the “Dark Middle Ages”. The Orient is completely different. Here the Arab scientists picked up the Greek philosophers, discussed them and tried to develop them further. New ground was broken in the fields of astronomy, medicine, physics and especially in optics. Antiquity lasted much longer in the East, together with Buddhism it led to a cultural flowering in the Central Asian countries; the "mutacilism" of an al-Mamun was nothing less than an Arab humanism; his time already had the prerequisites for a "renaissance". However, things turned out differently: Al-Ghazali succeeded in outlawing reason and free thought, which succumbed to mutacilism, the ultra-religious prevailed, and Islam became the state religion. Any intellectual activity beyond religious books was punishable - and the Renaissance took place in Europe with a delay. The intellectual blossoming of the Middle Ages in the Orient was Arabic, but not Islamic. What's more, the establishment of Islam ended this Arab heyday in a very short time. The decline of the Arabian Empire began with intellectual life and continued in all areas. Three centuries later, the Arab Empire was unrecognizable. The cities were in decline, the fertile countryside unproductive, and people had emigrated en masse from the former cultural centres. How could this happen ? A popular explanation is the plague. But that was the same in Europe. Then the Mongol invasion of 1258. Sure, the Mongols did big ones destruction, but they soon withdrew - as Muslims. The Crusades? The First Crusade of 1096 was a naïve and rather idealistic movement of a new entry into the Promised Land, where milk and honey would flow. The region was ruled by Arab and especially Turkish tribes, and central authority in Baghdad was in decline. Jerusalem was inhabited mostly by Christians and Jews and also defended by the latter together with Egyptian troops, who by no means must have been Muslims. The Jews were the main victims of the bloodbaths that are reported. In 1106 a returnee from the Holy Land, the Norman prince Bohemond, met Pope Paschalis II and explained to him who the real enemy was: Byzantium. The Pope immediately issued orders to preach against Byzantium: this was the early turning point in the history of the Crusades. The Crusades that followed developed into a strange mixture of religion, politics and business with the main aim of destroying Byzantium, the great enemy of the faith. Islam was only marginally noticed. The capture of Byzantium finally succeeded in April 1204 with the help of the Venetian fleet. The annihilation of the Byzantine Empire was the basis for the rise of the Ottomans, and if the Crusades had any effect beyond that, it was a unifying effect for the Muslims who, according to Morozov, found their identity in it in the first place. The Crusades are also completely useless as an explanation for the decline of the Arab empires. The phenomenon of decline is evident throughout the once prosperous countries from Central Asia to Morocco. Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt and North Africa were once the granaries and bearers of culture in the world of that time. There are no external influences that would offer a reasonable explanation for the Arab crash. The explanation lies within. Although Islam arose as an offshoot of Christianity in the core Arab countries of today's Iraq and Syria, it dominated finally, desert Arabian influences the religion. Bedouin traditions soon overtook the Hellenistic world and with them the laws of the desert and Bronze Age traditions that had long been thought to have been overcome came into force. European travelers repeatedly reported with astonishment the observation that the wheel was not in use in the Orient - a matter of course in ancient Arabia. Hardly any wagons, hardly any carts, almost only beasts of burden. In fact, with the advent of desert culture in the rich agricultural countries between the Tigris and the Nile, the camel also made its entrance and gained central importance125. This remained so until the advent of automobiles and railroads - entirely Western engineering. One can appreciate the slump that this step backwards alone must have caused in the transport sector. The ancient road network decayed, the generous colonnades and wide streets of the ancient cities narrowed so much that, in accordance with Islamic jurisprudence, there was just room for two pack animals next to each other. With the establishment of the Koran, the suppression of other books followed, a suppression that very soon led to a total ban. While al-Mamun only had the ancient writings destroyed after they had been translated into Arabic, later successors rigorously eradicated everything that was non-Islamic. The rumored tolerance is pure legend. For centuries, the elimination of non-Islamic thought and deviant culture was an essential part of politics, especially in India cultural assets were destroyed on an unimaginable scale. But ultimately only fragments of the works of the Arab authors themselves made it to Europe, which were still sufficient for participation in the European Renaissance. For a long time, reading non-Islamic books was punishable by death, and at best, owning other books was despised. The Koran is God's direct word and contains answers to all questions 125 For 3000 years the camel was the epitome of wealth for the desert dwellers. For 2 decades it has been the symbol of poverty, replaced by pick-ups from Asia. in perfection. All further knowledge is therefore harmful and blasphemous. With no new inflow, knowledge died out, and from then on the Islamic world stood intellectually still. Non-Muslim subjects, the "infidels," became second-class citizens. If they were not forcibly converted, they often had to pay such horrendous special taxes that the only way out was to convert or emigrate, especially as they were denied many jobs that were only open to Muslims. This desert-specific ideology, with its contempt for different cultures and knowledge, not only found its way into the Qur'anic teachings, but became its essence. It brought knowledge and progress to a complete standstill within a few generations; productive trades and even agriculture were severely affected. The only thing that remained was trade. Where are the agricultural areas that supplied the world at that time? Where did the flowering of the Roman, Greek and Arabic Orient disappear to? What unimaginable descent did ancient Bactria take to present-day Afghanistan? It wasn't climate change that brought about this complete change - it was the desert mentality of the new religion126. As soon as the existing infrastructure was used up, cultural and economic rigidity set in. Nothing illustrates the Islamic return more clearly than the reckoning of time. 622, "the year of the Arabs", kata Araba, as the Gadara inscription reads with the cross as an introduction. It was the year when Arab independence began. This year was set as the beginning of an Arabic calendar, which of course followed the usual solar calendar. Suddenly we find this date turned into the year of Hijra, the Prophet's exodus from Mecca! It was the beginning of an Islamic calendar based on legends, a lunar calendar in the Bronze Age tradition of inner Arabia. So the moon goddess Allat came back to her ancestral calendar. 126 There are no rational reasons for tabooing pork, but is more to be seen in the ideological complex of a nomadic culture compared to the despised peasant culture. A completely useless calendar. For example, someone born in June celebrates their next birthday and the one after that in May, the next in April and so on, the difference ultimately adding up to years. Muhammad's birthday or the month of fasting Ramadan is celebrated at a different time every year. Because recurring appointments cannot be defined with a lunar calendar and it is therefore useless for developed states, it had already been abandoned in Roman times127. The Muslims have now again often demonized it as a "Christian calendar", although they too have no choice but to use the common solar calendar in everyday life. The largest Islamic empire was that of the Ottomans. Founded in 1299, it expanded steadily, and in 1453 Constantinople was taken. In the further course, the Ottomans conquered the entire Arabian Peninsula, parts of Russia, the Balkans, Romania, Hungary and finally stood twice in front of Vienna. They were defeated there in 1683 and it was all downhill from there. The Habsburgs reconquered almost the entire Balkans, the Russians took back all areas beyond the Black Sea from the Ottomans, Yemen and all of Arabia were lost. In 1918, “the sick man on the Bosporus” had shrunk back to its core area, today's Turkey. How could such a complete collapse happen? One reason was the overstretching of forces. The real reasons, in turn, have deeper roots. The military and the economy were no longer able to keep up with the technical developments of the Europeans. They bought a lot of cannons, muskets and the watches, which the Orient was crazy about, from the infidels, but their own production only materialized with a time lag, mostly as copies based on the standards of the previous century. This was the case in every field of business, science and technology. 127 Under Julius Caesar the "Julian calendar" was introduced, which was introduced in 1582 under Pope Gregory XIII. slightly modified to this day as the "Gregorian calendar". At that time, travel always took place from west to east, almost never in the other direction. Europeans traveled to the Orient, but Muslims hardly ever traveled to Europe. Apart from possible conquests, the Islamic world was not in the least interested in the West, they literally didn't know much more about it than that infidels lived there. The Renaissance, the new ideas about the state, the scientific advances, the new picture of the earth and the sky went completely unnoticed in the Islamic world. According to the Koran, the earth is like a carpet spread out, with seven layers of heaven above it. Officially, nothing has changed in this image to this day, in the days of Google Earth. The theory of evolution is taboo. Intermediary trade between Asia and Europe was a fertile source of income for the Islamic countries - and soon the only one. The discovery of America, the sea route around the Cape of Good Hope, the advance to East Asia went almost unnoticed in the years that followed and were not worthy of any comment, except that the newly discovered people may soon find the right faith. The only surviving copy of the Map of Columbus was in Ottoman possession, but nobody knew of its existence until it was discovered in 1920 in Topkapi Palace in Istanbul. This centuries-old arrogance and the feeling of superiority, which was no longer justified for a very long time, soon took bitter revenge. Because without it being registered at all in Constantinople and the Islamic world, the Europeans had opened up their own sea trade routes: to the New World, but also to South and East Asia. The trade monopoly of the Islamic world as the interface between Europe and Asia had thus collapsed. With tremendous consequences. This can be illustrated with a simple cup of coffee. Coffee, originally from Ethiopia, was cultivated in Yemen and found its way to Europe via Arabia and Turkey. Coffee was sweetened with sugar from Mesopotamia or Egypt, which was also exported to Europe. When the Europeans got both cheaper from Latin America, the tables turned. Subsequently Arabs and Turks drank coffee imported from Europe and sweetened it with imported sugar. Only the water was still hers, and that's only partially the case these days. It was the same in all areas. There were warnings from the few Muslims who knew Europe - mostly diplomats - but they went unheeded. A return to the old Ottoman and Islamic values ​​was preached as a remedy for overcoming the well-recognized weaknesses. At that time like today. Even the few attempts to transplant European technology into the Islamic world, such as those made by the Egyptian Khedive Muhamad Ali at the beginning of the 19th century, failed because then, as now, people limited themselves to consumption and reproduction and produced little or nothing originally. Despite this, the Islamic world still felt vastly superior and refused even to appraise the knowledge of the despised infidels. The printing press found its way into the Islamic world a whopping 300 years late, and only very hesitantly. And it was a European who installed the first printing press in the Islamic world, almost by force - namely Napoleon. The Muslim countries have still not been able to catch up, as the Arab Human Development Report makes clear. There is no other reason for this self-destructive educational catastrophe than Islam. His holy book, it is said, encompasses and regulates all aspects of human life, it comes, mediated by the prophet, directly from God, nothing can be added to it, not a word can be changed. The possession of books other than the Koran was mostly forbidden, and at all times the use of non-religious books was disregarded. The timetable of Saudi medical students still has to include 30% religion today, in other branches of study it is even 50%. This attitude has implications for the Muslim world on a tremendous scale. Because it hinders knowledge and thus development. But the Koran also claims all areas of life such as law, to regulate government, education - in the way they would ideally have existed during the lifetime of the Prophet. That is why the Islamic thinking and system is normatively fixed on the times of the Prophet and his successors. As if there hadn't been a 1400-year history from then to now. A serious technical barrier to knowledge transfer is the Arabic language and script. The "Arabic" does not exist. There are colloquial Arabic languages, and there is a generally binding Standard Arabic, the Arabiya, which, however, is only imperfectly understood by the people on the street. It is a formal language which, because it is not used in everyday life, has not adapted to the constantly changing demands of a living language. Modern facts and themes are difficult to express in standard Arabic. But it is only written in High Arabic - with the catastrophic result that the AHDR complains about. For the Muslims, the standard Arabic language and script are the language and script of their Holy Book. They are therefore nothing colloquial, nothing profane, but always something sacred. This is a concept that doesn't work in the modern world. Language and writing must be accessible to all citizens and to all areas in order to fulfill their function as knowledge mediators. The AHDR explicitly draws attention to this difficulty, but hesitates to name the consequence, which can only be the limitation of Scripture to religious applications. A utopia for a long time to come (the Latin script is called "English", although like so many cultural assets it actually comes from the ancient Orient) and a step that has so far only been taken by Turkey and, no wonder, the former Islamic Soviet republics have done. An Islamic state must be a theocracy, otherwise by definition it is not one. Of course, this cannot be a republic, as Iran absurdly calls itself, because there is no separation of powers, one of the most important prerequisites for this. All power emanates from the Koran, from God, that is, it is exercised by the clergy on behalf of them. One there is therefore no civil society, there is only the community of believers (umma) living in the “House of Islam” (Beit Islam). For unbelievers, there is only room in this house as tolerated domestics (dhimmi), they rank right behind the slaves expressly provided for in the Koran. Only women have even fewer rights than dhimmi or slaves, who could change their fate by converting. The Koran scholars (Ulema) exercise control and legislation, and the caliph is above all. He is not subject to any control except that of Allah, he can switch and rule as he sees fit, as long as he only moves on the basis of the Koran. The Islamic culture is therefore the perfect breeding ground for all kinds of despots to this day. This is because, based on their traditional self-understanding, they are not owed any accountability to their people, with the exception of following the rules of the Koran (or at least claiming to do so). Therefore there can be no civil law, only religious law, derived from the Koran. This is Sharia. However, it is by no means a defined legal system as we understand it, but essentially only the command that justice must be done exclusively on the basis of religion and its books. As is the case in most Islamic countries, there is no need to change the existing body of law in order to make Sharia law valid. It is sufficient to add that a legal ruling must not contradict the Koran or the Hadith. In practice, this means that a legal dispute can probably be judged according to most existing civil laws. However, the losing party can undo the verdict with a reference to the Koran - the mosque is ultimately the final legal authority. Sharia courts have recently been established in Muslim countries alongside the existing civil chambers, which means there are two parallel instances, which has led to a complete lack of transparency in the legal system. In Malaysia, the Indian and Chinese communities have opposed Sharia treatment. The consequence of this is that there are regionally different jurisdictions depending on the proportion of the population. There is therefore no legal certainty in any Islamic country. This goes so far that Muslim states only recognize international treaties, such as the UN human rights, with the standard restriction of Sharia compatibility. That means: not at all. A particular problem of Sharia is its derivation of legal cases from the Hadith, the collected deeds and sayings of the Prophet. One believes to be close to the source of justice, but ignores the completely obscure source situation of the hadiths and the time distance to the conditions at that time. All of the above is nothing more than the concept of a desert society 1400 years ago - and it is precisely this concept that one wants to use to master the present and create a future. In principle, this is still (or again) the current situation in most Islamic countries. The caliph may call himself president today - whether he's elected, whether he won the elections or whether he hyped himself up hardly matters, as long as he is at least outwardly a believing leader of the state in the sense of the Koran. The word "Freedom" in the Koranic Arabic does not mean civil liberty, but merely means the opposite of slavery. For this reason, the vast majority of Muslims lack the basic understanding of a free state order, not to speak of democracy at all. Democracy allegedly contradicts the teachings of the Koran, so a democratic attitude is un-Islamic. Even if some are toying with the idea of ​​Islamic democracy, you don't need to be a prophet to predict how attempts to reconcile Islamic law and thought with democracy will end. Democracy can never be denominational. The hostility to knowledge and the insistence on medieval concepts, both enshrined if not in the Qur'an at least in mainstream doctrine, are the lead weights on Muslims' feet that are dragging them down and have so thoroughly prevented them from moving forward . Everywhere these days, passages from the Koran that call for the pursuit of knowledge are being propagated. But it is Koran-compliant, i.e. permitted knowledge. Biology, for example, is not included. Consequently, Muslims in Germany applied for their children to be exempted from biology classes. The Islamic world therefore also rejects evolution in unison, usually with the statement in the media that this has long been scientifically refuted, but no proof of the claim is given later. Whatever the case - dealing with it is outlawed or forbidden depending on the country, again in Turkey in 2009128. Until the 1920s, Turkey was an Islamic state like any other in the region. Today it ranks far ahead of all other Islamic states in all areas, and that without oil. Already in the middle of In the 19th century, an opposition movement called the “Young Turks” began to form in the Ottoman Empire, demanding fundamental reforms. The movement culminated in Kemal Pasha. He recognized Islam as the cause of his country's depravity and backwardness. In 1924 he abolished the sultanate, abolished Sharia, revoked all privileges for the Islamic clergy and had the Koran schools closed. He took over the system of state organization, administration, constitution and law from various European states and formed an organizationally modern state. The core of his reforms was the separation of religion and state, that unfortunate unity anchored in all Islamic countries. To make a mark He banned men from wearing the culturally typical turban and gave girls access to schools and universities for the first time - albeit without headscarves and veils. He led his country from the deepest backwardness into the modern age, he rightly bears the nickname Atatürk, "Father of the Turks". A little noticed but important point of his reforms was the replacement of the Arabic script with the Latin one. Atatürk replaced the Ottoman-Muslim identity with an exaggerated Turkish nationalism. Nevertheless, Turkey made a quantum leap in its development thanks to Atatürk's reforms 128 In March 2009, “Bilim ve Teknik”, Turkey's most well-known scientific magazine, had to remove a story about Darwin and the theory of evolution from the cover under pressure from a government agency. Softening of civil state principles under the Erdogan government in the process of jeopardizing them again. One should not forget that Turkey's success was its secularization. In the Islamic world, the question was repeatedly raised as to why, after such a glorious past, the “Golden Age of Islam”, the gap to most parts of the world had become so great. In almost every respect, the Arab-Islamic world occupies a position at the bottom, as the AHDR also stated. "Who did this to us?" The answer was and is always the same: "The Franks, the West, the USA..." But, and this is the second part of the answer: “This could only happen because we have distanced ourselves from the original Islam. Everything will be fine if we just restore the conditions of the 'golden years'.” This is how the salafiyya expresses it, the basic attitude that has become modern again in large parts of the Islamic world: an idealized look back into a non-existent past. Sayyid Qutb was an Egyptian Muslim brother executed under Nasser in 1966. More clearly than any other modern Islamic theorist, he called for a return to salafiyya, observing the Koran to the letter as a panacea for all of the world's problems, and he added one more thing: the content of the Koran should not even be considered, let alone discussed. Muslims live in a timeless world, so a comparison with other cultures is neither possible nor permissible. Timeless because the ideal society existed at the time of the Prophet and the Caliphs and it must be restored. History is a European invention, it doesn't happen for Islam. For Qutb it is "an undisputed fact" that modern civilization is based on traditional Islamic knowledge, which in turn results from following the Koran to the letter. From the fundamental non-understanding of the acquired knowledge in Europe “result in the cursed separation of religion and civilization Renaissance". You have to ask yourself who didn't understand something here and on what level of knowledge the man was actually moving. Qutb, this prototype of the backward-looking radical, did nothing less than abolish, even ban, thought, knowledge, reason. Greetings from Al-Ghazali. Qutb did this because he knew very well that Islam, in its traditional form, has nothing intellectually or philosophically to oppose to the modern world. So comparisons must be presented as inadmissible and historical processes must be described as inventions. Foreign powers are to blame for the miserable state of affairs in the Islamic world, which he states: Europe, America, the Soviet Union, Israel, as usual. The only remedy is to follow the Koran literally. Mind you, the salafiyya is a modern movement and Qutb is not just anyone. It would be wrong to claim that the majority of Muslims are Qutbists, i.e. radicals. But nothing- PICTURE 23 Sayyid Qutb (left) and Mahmud Muhammad Taha the less his ideas represent a significant trend in the Islamic world. Sayyid Qutb's foster father was the Pakistani al-Maududi (1903 - 1979), who contributed to the chaos in his country like no other through his sermons and publications because he had more influence on the people's soul than any president of the aloof political caste. Qutb's path leads directly to bin Laden. Under pressure from the persecution under Nasser, numerous Muslim Brothers emigrated from Egypt to Saudi Arabia, including Mohammed Qutb, Sayyid's brother, after his release in 1972. There they encountered a Saudi-Wahhabi system. The founder of the sect, Abdel Wahhab (1703-1791), had signed a treaty with the Al Saud clan, according to which the Wahhabi ulema (clergy) would support the Sauds, while the Sauds would accept the Wahhabi interpretation of the Koran as the only valid one. Over time, the Sauds gained power so completely that the country was even named after the family, and Wahhabism became the dominant current. There was thus a close entanglement between the interests of the royal house and those of the Wahhabi ulema, but also a great deal of dissatisfaction among people who were neither connected to either. These found a new haven with the immigrant Muslim brothers, who propagated an even more radical way of life based on the example of the prophet in the sense of Sayyid Qutb. In 1979, an event rocked the kingdom: the storming of the mosque in Mecca by an ultra-religious Salafist group that wanted to hit both the royal family and the Wahhabi ulema. The same year saw the Iranian Revolution and the Red Army's invasion of Afghanistan. As a result of these events, a competitive struggle began in Saudi Arabia between the Wahhabis and Qutbists, who outbid each other in radicalism. Then came the mega shock for the kingdom: on August 2, 1990, Saddam Hussein occupied Kuwait. No one expected Saddam to settle for Kuwait and panic broke out in Saudi Arabia. Already on August 7, King Fahd called the USA for help and asked for help stationing of troops. The plan to station infidel troops on holy ground led to an enormous internal test and could not be carried out without the approval of the Wahhabi ulema. The royal family had no alternative to survive, but the departure of the Saud dynasty would also have ended the state-supporting influence of the Wahhabis. The ulema therefore agreed to the stationing of foreign troops, but this consent was gilded with billions of petrodollars, which flowed into an unprecedented, worldwide proselytizing. The young, radical Salafists were not satisfied with that, but they found another solution: A jihadist scene had developed in Afghanistan, and the radical faith fighters were sworn away there, provided with many millions of dollars as start-up capital. So the Saudis exported their problems to Afghanistan. One of those exported - who was then promptly stripped of his Saudi citizenship - was bin Laden. He and his Egyptian ideologues understood the situation of the Islamic world very well, which cannot be said of the umma, the community of believers. Bin Laden chose the armed variant because he saw himself in the position of the defender of the religion: the West, especially the USA, is to blame for the Islamic misery. Again, the right insight, the wrong conclusions. Who did all this to them? Herself. The deepest reason is the historical rejection of knowledge. From early on, things were twisted, forbidden, forged, excluded, punished. This fear of knowledge, often criminalizing it, became part of the system. Criticism turned into personal insult, blasphemy and crime. This resulted in a cult of offending and a media anger and conspiracy industry so typical of Islamic and especially Arab countries. When asked correctly, the initial question can only be: "What has Islam done to us?" The Islamic world is not doing well at all, appearances are deceptive. But there are bright spots. One is the amalgamation of small emirates on the Persian Gulf, the "United Arab Emirates": Listed as the "Pirate Coast" on maps that are not that old, that's where the world meets today. Completely insignificant, located on the edge of the Arabian Peninsula, equipped with comparatively modest oil deposits, Sheikh Maktoum Rashid bin Maktoum (1943 - 2006) started an oriental fairy tale. In 1971, the emirates were created from the merger of Dubai and Abu Dhabi, later other sheikhdoms were added. These mini-countries embarked on a conscious development towards modernity. For this purpose, foreign specialists were brought in to plan a country on the drawing board. A separate airline was founded specifically to connect to the world, favorable economic conditions soon made the desert town of Dubai a popular shopping paradise and ensured that practically every well-known company in the world founded a branch here. This created jobs, people from all over the world have now settled there, with descendants already in the second generation: a mixture of cultures, colours, languages ​​and religions. Mosques stand alongside churches of all denominations, temples and pagodas. This is what Baghdad must have looked like in its Arab heyday! But like old Baghdad, the Emirates are an Arab and not an Islamic success story. Its very secularity is the basis of its blossoming. The Emirates have tremendous appeal for the Arab world. Saudis stream across the border for their - often little Islamic - activities, the tough and reliable Yemenis make up a large part of the police force, Lebanese are successful in gastronomy, Palestinians, Jordanians, Egyptians in the business world. In addition, there are non-Arabs from almost all nations. All Arabs envy the Emirates and hold them up to their governments as an example, a yardstick by which to prove themselves. Qatar has taken the first step in the same direction. It began in 2007 with the inconspicuous announcement that a church was being built there. The country has the ambition to establish itself as an international science center and is making great efforts to do so. This is quite simply a breathtaking development. All that glitters in the Emirates is by no means gold, it remains to be seen how they will fare in difficult times and how they will cope with the increasing religious pressure from outside. And one should think of Lebanon, which has fallen from a model Arab country into chaos. But one shouldn't constantly stare at the exaggerations produced in exuberance and comment maliciously on them. In reality, these Islamic rulers from the furthest corner of Arabia jumped over their own shadows. A process of truly historic proportions. The second glimmer of hope for the Muslim world is less spectacular, but possibly even more promising: it is the diaspora. Almost all Muslims have traditionally lived in a country in which they constituted the majority and where their laws applied. Today, however, many Muslims live in non-Muslim countries as a minority; such as Turks in Germany, Algerians in France, Pakistanis in England. Minority life in a non-Islamic country is a relatively new experience for Muslims and not intended. Since the defeat of the Spanish caliphate, there have been discussions among Koran scholars as to whether Muslims are allowed to live in a non-Islamic country at all. The answer derived from the Koran is an unequivocal no. A Muslim is not allowed to live in a non-believing country, and if so, then only to work for Islam there. When asked about the Muslim victims in the collapsed World Trade Center, bin Laden replied that believers had no place there. They would have stayed there contrary to the commandments of the Koran and thus also deserved death.129 129 Interview with the Pakistani newspaper “Dawn”, November 10, 2007. A special warning is given against so-called tolerant countries, because they represent the greatest danger for believers. Only in Dar al-Islam, the common kingdom of Muslims, could the commandments of the Koran and Sharia be fulfilled. If a Muslim has to live in a non-Islamic country, it is only to work for Islam. This is not just theory, as experience since September 11, 2001 shows. Sure, the average Muslim worker in Europe or elsewhere shouldn't be particularly bothered by such considerations. But the demands are known, present in the subconscious and secret poison for successful socialization, because they create a latent guilty conscience. In fact, no one finds it harder than Muslims to adapt to their host country. Islam is closely related to Judaism, it has the same roots and makes similarly radical demands on its devout members. Nevertheless, the Jews have mostly adapted well to their host countries. The reason lies in the Jewish commandment dina demalhuta dina: "The law of the respective country is law." Jesus put it similarly: "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." Basically, this already means the privatization of religion in the sense of the separation of state and religion that emerged much later in Europe. In addition, Judaism had 19th century passed its reformation, the Haskala ("education"), which could well be a model for the inevitable reformation of Islam. In the Islamic understanding, religion is still public, all areas of life are subordinate to it, the "real" law is religious law, and there is no provision for a separation of religion and state. That is why Islam is political. And that is why it is so difficult for his followers to cope and accept in a non-Islamic world. Apart from emigration again, the only long-term option for Muslims who live as a minority in a non-Islamic country is integration, in order to be able to lead a peaceful, successful existence. The host country must put all its effort into integration throb. Because it requires the adoption of the respective laws and norms, which ultimately means the privatization of religion. If the diaspora is in a Western country, the educational standard of Muslims will increase as a result of the unavoidable need to attend school. One day it will no longer satisfy merely reciting the Qur'an instead of understanding and regurgitating interpretations that are centuries old. The self-developed content will come to the fore in a knowledge-oriented environment, and sooner or later the respective national language must also become the language of religion. As hopefully has become clear, the historical foundations of Islam have nothing to do with traditional presentation. The Islamic world itself knows little or nothing about its own historical roots, it is still stuck in the dogmatic view of history of the 9th century. But even the Islamic world cannot evade advancing knowledge in the long run. Sooner or later, this makes a re-evaluation of the Koran and other scriptures unavoidable. To continue what appears to be a utopia: the focus of efforts could shift to separating theological content from implementing regulations that were added later and the peripheral oral traditions that only obscure the view of what is essential. That means concentrating on the theologically relevant "Meccan suras", and thus an end to the extremely obstructive fixation on the social conditions of a medieval Bedouin society as a central part of the teaching. It may also turn out that the theology and intention of the Qur'an have been overgrown almost to the point of invisibility by later executive regulations. A coherent theology is missing to this day, in its place is the obedience to the letter of quotations, fed from sometimes incomprehensible sources. These are undeniable in current Muslim practice, but research will not stop at taboos. The Sudanese theologian Mahmud Muhammad Taha had called for the "Medanic suras" to be postponed because they were only time-related would be valid for the 7th century. He was executed as an "apostate" in Khartoum in 1985. Islam is generally held to be incapable of reform. That may be true of its classic distribution countries. In the western diaspora, on the other hand, Islam is under pressure to reform itself or, depending on the case, to degenerate into a sect that is either ridiculed or fought against. The classic, bearded Koran scholars have failed and become obsolete. The theological shock of an inevitable reformation will be tremendous. But who else could solve the problems at hand than educated, knowledge-oriented Muslims in the western diaspora? bibliography AL-BUHARI SAHIH, "News of deeds and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad", Stuttgart 2006. ALLEBRAND RAIMUND (ed.), "Terror or Tolerance?", Bad Honnef, 2004. ARAB HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORTS 2002-2009, United Nations Development Program, New York. BARTH JAKOB, "Studies on the criticism and exegesis of the Qur'an", Strasbourg 1915. BARTSCH GERHARD (ed.), "De tribus impostoribus" (about the three impostors), Berlin 1960. BOSSONG GEORG, "The Moorish Spain", Munich 2007. BURGMER CHRISTOPH (ed.), "Dispute about the Koran. the Luxenberg Debate”, Berlin 2007. DIETERICI FRIEDRICH, "On the connection between Greek and Arabic philosophy", Leiden 1903. Reprint Munich 2004. DINER DAN, "Sealed Time", Berlin 2007. FINSTER BARBARA, "Arabia in Late Antiquity", in: Archaeological Gazette 1996. FINSTER BARBARA, "Cubical Yemeni Mosques", Seminar for Arabian Studies, London 1991. Bibliography 239 GERICKE WOFGANG, "When did the book 'Of the Three Deceivers' come about? "In: Theological Attempts 8, Berlin 1977. GOLDZIHER, IGNAZ, "Muhammadan Studies", Halle 1888. Reprinted by Olms, 2004. GOPAL JAYA, "Gabriels Einflüsterungen", Freiburg 2006. GRA BAR OLEG, "The Dome of the Rock", London 2006. GRABAR OLEG, "The Alhambra", Cologne, 1981. GREAT MARKUS/OHLIG KARL-HEINZ (eds.), “From the Koran to Islam”, Berlin 2009. GROSS MARKUS/OHLIG KARL-HEINZ (eds.), "Schlaglichter", Berlin 2008. HENNING MAX, "The Koran", Stuttgart 1998. HOTTINGER ARNOLD, "The Moors", Zurich 2005. IBN TUFAIL, “Hajj ibn Jaqzan. The natural man", Cologne 1983. IBN WARRAQ, "Why I am not a Muslim", Berlin 2004. KEPEL GILES, "The New Crusades", Munich 2004. KOLTER BONIFATIUS (ed.), "The Writings of John of Damascus", Berlin 1981. LEWIS BERNARD, "Emperors and Caliphs", Munich 1996. LEWIS BERNARD, "The Fall of the Orient", Bergisch Gladbach 2002. 240 Norbert G. Pressburg | Goodbye Mohammed LUXENBERG CHRISTOPH, "The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran", Berlin 2007. LÜLING GÜNTER, “About the Urkoran. Approaches to the reconstruction of the pre-Islamic strophic songs in the Koran”, Erlangen 1974. LÜLING GÜNTER, "The Rediscovery of the Prophet Muhammad: A Criticism of the Christian Occident", Erlangen 1981. LÜLING GÜNTER, "Avicenna and its Buddhist origins", in "Two essays on the history of religion and ideas", Erlangen 1977. MÜLLER CDG, "Church and mission among the Arabs in pre-Islamic times", Tübingen 1967. NÖLDEKE THEODOR, "History of the Qoran", Leipzig 1909, reprint Elibron Classics, New York 2004. OHLIG KARL-HEINZ (ed.), "Early Islam", Berlin 2007. OHLIG KARL-HEINZ/PUIN GERD-R. (Ed.), “The dark ones Beginnings”, Berlin 2007. MEZZOMORTO MAVRO, "Mohammed going astray", Mainz 2002. PARET RUDI, "The Koran", Stuttgart 2006. PARET RUDI, "The gap in the traditions about the Urkoran", Wiesbaden 1954. QUTB SAYYID, "Signs on the Way", Cologne 2005. RUNCIMAN STEVEN, "History of the Crusades", Munich 1989. Bibliography 241 SALIBI KAMAL, "The Bible came from the land of Asir", Hamburg 1985. SPRENGER ALOYS, "The life and teachings of Mohammad according to previously largely unused sources", Berlin 1869. STROHMAIER GOTTHARD, "Thinkers in the Empire of the Caliphs", Leipzig 1979. STROHMAIER GOTTHARD, "Avicenna", Munich 1999. THOMAS JOHANNES, "Arabo-Islamic historiography and its effects on historical images of al-Andalus (8th century)", Saarbrücken 2010. TIBI BASSAM, "Fundamentalism in Islam", Darmstadt 2002. TORREY CH. C., The Jewish Foundation of Islam, New York 1933. WALDMANN HELMUT, "The emergence of Zurvanism in the old Iran followed by a sketch of its influence on today's Islam", Tübingen 1994. WEIL GUSTAV, "Mohammed the Prophet, His Life and His Teaching", Stuttgart 1843. WIELAND ROTRAUT, "Revelation and history in the thinking of modern Muslims", Wiesbaden 1971. WERNER HELMUT, "The Islamic Book of the Dead", Cologne 2009. YEHUDA D. NEVO/JUDITH KOREN, "Crossroads to Islam", New York, 2003. Index of persons and subjects A Aachen, Palatine Chapel 101 Aaron 126 Abbasids 124, 125, 126 Abdullah 88, 120 Abd al-Malik, Marw 84, 114, 122 Abd al-Malik, Khorasan 114 Abd al-Malik, coins 84, 114, 117 Abd al-Malik, Dome of the Rock 86 Abd al-Malik, Creed 91 Abd al-Malik, Muhammadism 114, 116 Abd er-Rahman 189 Abu Dawud, hadith collector 52:59 Abu Hanifa 63 Abraham 39:135 Abraham, Ibrahim 39, 72 Ahmed 94 Ahmadinejad 121 Aisha 16 Akefale 193 Akhbar Magmua 182 Akhikar 142 Alexander the Great 83 Alfonso the Wise 212 Alhambra 200 Alhambra, Lion Fountain 215 Alhazen 164 Ali 126 Ali, legendary 71 alif 40 Almohads 171, 198, 213 Almoravids 196, 213 Allat 133 Al-Andalus, Legend 179, Al-Andalus, Rationalism 207 Al Andalus, Tolerance 208, 210, 212,215,216 Al-Andalus, Sciences 206 Al-Aykah 38 Al Azhar 24, 46, 187 Al Azraqi 135 Al-Biruni 169 Al-Buhari 53 Al-Dani 46 Al-Farabi 163 A Gharb 170 Al-Ghazali 147,171,172ff, 174,175, 219 Al Ghazali, Avicenna 174 Al Ghazali, Women 174 Al-Ghazali, Logic 173 Al-Guzgani 168 Al-Haitham see Alhazen Al-Hakam 181 Al Hatim 134 Al-Hira 143, 158, 186 Al Kindi 157 Al-Mamun 127, 129, 157, 214 Al-Mansur 191, 206 Al Masihi 166 Al-Masud 170 Al-Maududi 232 Al Mutawakkil 130 Al-Sigistani 46 Al-Walid 122, 144, 149 Amir al-Muminin 79, 112, Amiribn As 112 Ammiya 23 Anastasius 154 Ansar 71 Antioch 108 Antioch Margiana 114 Apartheid 216 Aramaic see Syro Aramaic Arabs, year of the Arabs 83 Arabiya 23, 36 Arabic 142, 226 Arab Human Development Report 217, 225, 226 Arians 185, 192 Aristotle 158, 176 Ar-Razi 147, 161 Arser 39 Ataturk 229 Atta, Muhammad 34 Alticulac Tayyar 48 At-Tabari 17, 42, 151, 152 At-Tabari, headscarf 35 Autodafe 201 Averroes 170ff, 207ff Averroes, ban on teaching 208 Avicenna 165ff Avicenna Biography 165 Avicenna, Buddhism 167 aya 45 B Bakka 129 Bactria 166, 222 Badr 74, 129 Balh 166 Bamiyan 166 Bashear Suliman 12 barbate 180 Behaim Martin 169 Beit Islam 227 Benchrifa Mohamed 208 Berbers 179, 184, 186, 189 Bible criticism 49 Education, Arab countries 217 Bin Laden Osama 217, 232, 235 Bismillah 120 Blachere Regis 12 Black Muslim's 120 Bohemian 220 Buddhism 127, 166, 177 Byzantium 83,220 Byzantium, Persia, permanent conflict 107 C Caetani Leone 12 Chalcedon, Council 91, 108 Chayyam Omar 176 Chimar.chumur 34 Khosrau II. 109, 152, 186 Christ 93 Christianity, Arabic 132, 145 Christianity, oriental 132 Christ, Muhammad 118 Clausewitz 155 Clunensians 197 Columbus Christopher 214 Conquest 180, 197, 202 Convivencia 208, 212 Cordoba 170, 190 Corpus Coranicum 48 Covadogna 180 Cusanus Nicholas 49 D Darabgerd 81 Dar al Islam 236 Dashti, Ali 22 Democracy 228 Dhimmi 214, 227 Diacritical points 30, 37 Diaspora 235 Diatessaron 44 Dioscurides 207 Diner Dan 213 The three impostors 162 Dieterici Friedrich 173 Draz Abdallah 15, 18, 21, Trinity 89, 91 Jazeera 109 Jibril, Gabriel 67 Jihad 181, 197, 232 Jihilliyya 139 Jehennam 17 Duero 189 Dyophysism 90 E Ekthesis, Hagia Sophia 102, 109, 111 El Cid 196 Emirates 234 Ephesus, Council 91 Erdogan 230 Circumference of the Earth 128 Ess Josef van 139 Gospel 44, 63 Evolution 229 f Dome of the Rock, Abd al-Malik 99 Dome of the Rock, building 115 Dome of the Rock, Trinity 89 Dome of the Rock, photos 104 Dome of the Rock, floor plan 101 Dome of the Rock, Inscriptions 86, Dome of the Rock Jerusalem 86, 99, Dome of the Rock, Mihrab 102 Dome of the Rock, Muhamad Heaven ride 102 Dome of the Rock, Octagon 100 Dome of the Rock, Palatine Chapel 101 Dome of the Rock, Volume 86 Dome of the Rock, precursor 100 Fire Worshiper 110 Ferdinand of Aragon 198,199 Florida 179 Fustat, inscription 112 G Gabitha, Battle 112 Gabriel, Archangel 67 Gadara 79 Galen 158, 162, 169 Ganjak, Fire Temple 109 informants 46 Gibraltar 180 Gnosis 194 Gog and Magog 83 Goldziher Ignaz 12, 53 Gorbachev 176 Theocracy 226 Goths 179 trench battle 130 Grabar Oleg 102,204 Grenada 198 Founding Myth 140 Guadelete 180 Gurgan 166, 170 H hajj 71 Heresy 119, 132 Heretic 154 Hamath Gader 79 Harun al-Rashid 127 Haran 127 Haskalah 236 Hierodules 33 Hadith 53ff Hadith, examples 54ff hadith, age 59 Hadith jurisprudence 63 Hadith, Review 59, 61 Hadith, tradition 60 Hadith, Isnad 60 Hadith, Collections 53 Hadith, Sharia 61 Hadith, Reliability 61, 63 Hagarites 154 Manuscript, Sanaa 39, 41, 47 Haruri 193 Herakleios 82, 118 Herakleios, Campaign 109 Hijra 71, 122 High 134 Hippocrates 162 Hira, mountain, cave 68 Hisham, Rufasa 123 Hispania 183, 203 Hottinger Arnold 191 Hudaibiyyah 74, 130 Hunain inb Ishak 158 Huri 30 I Ibad, Ibadites 143, 187, 194 Ibn As 155 Ibn Khaldun 156 Ibn Hisham 138 Ibn Ishak 138 Ibn Kuttiyah 181 Ibn Maja, hadith collector 52 Ibn Masawahai 159 Ibn Mazarra 194 Ibn Maymun see Maimonides Ibn Nasai, Hadith collector 52 Ibn Nusair 180, 186, 189 Ibn Rushd see Averroes Ibn Sina see Avicenna Ibrahim, Abraham 39, 72 Ifriqiya 187 Ilm al-Ridzhal 61 Indian numbers 158 Inquisition 201 Isabel of Castile 199 Isa bin Maryam 89 Ishmaelites 119, 154 Isnad 60 Islam 97, 131, 144, 154 Islamization 144 Islam criticism 28 Islam, architectural style 204 Islam, Genesis 97, 139, 145 Islam, conquests 149, 156 Islam, golden times” 147 Islam, political 236 Islam, Spain 183 Islam, Tolerance 140, 208, 221 Islam, Sciences 157,178, 228, 229, 238 Isojab III 154 J Yemen 134 Jericho 144 jesus 140 Jesus, Quran 43 Jesus crucifixion 17 Jesus, manger 18 Jesus, Dome of the Rock 89 Jesus, flaming sword 116 Jesus, Last Judgment 116 Jesus, nature Jesus 91, 108, Jesus, Predicates 126, 127 John's Basilica 144 John's Basilica, photo 105 John bar Penyake 154 John Damascene 119,154 John the Baptist 84 Joseph 125 Jews 72, 211, 215 Julian 179 K Kaaba 134, 136 Kaaba, Ground Plan 135 Kaaba, Black Stone 136 Kadesia 150 Caliph, Caliphate 126, 128, 129, 141, 195 Cairo Quran 16, 46 Kalish Muhammad 15 camel 220 Karl Martell 183 Carthage 183 Kazakhstan 163 Qatar 235 Katechon 83 Khadija 66 Kharidjiten 192, 194 Klimovich Lucjan 12 Servant of God 118 consonant framework 73 Constant II. 112 Constantinople 91, 200 Councils 91 headscarf 34 Qur'an, Aesthetics 22 Koran, Alexander the Great 83 Koran, confirming Scripture 44 Koran, dogma 15 Qur'an, print 51 Koran, foreign words 17 Quran, grammar 22 Qur'an, descent 40 Quran, Othman 28, 46 Qur'an, Peter 43 Qur'an, sources 28 Quran, language 17, 23, 144 Koran, Cairo 16, 46 Koran, Kazan 50 Koran, Sanaa 41, 47 Koran, traditional story 16ff Koran, commandment to kill 20 Quran, unbelievers 20 Qur'an, original language 43 Qur'an, precursor 138 Quran, Christmas Story 40 Koran, wine 19 Quranic Arabic 36, 37 Quran exegesis 50 Crusader 103 Crusades 12, 120, 197, 220 Kuraish 66, 129 L Lammens Henri 12 Las Navas de Tolosa 198 Laykah 38 Luqman, donkey 142 Latin, Latin formulas 120, 187 Leuke Korne 39 Liber continents 161 Limes Arabicus 83 Logos 17, 42 Lion Fountain 215 Lüling Günter 14, 28, 135, 165 Lut, lot 38, 45, 91 Luther Martin 49 Luxenberg Chr. 11, 14, 15, 29, 35 Luxenberg Chr. Christmas story 42 Luxenberg Chr. Inscriptions Felsen dom 86 Luxenberg Chr., muhamad Gerundiv 88 Luxenberg Chr., Din, Islam, Definition 89 M Storytellers 54 Malik bin Anas 63 Malikiten 192 Maavia 81, 84 Maavia, Christian 113:114 Maavia, Byzantium 114, Maavia, Caliph 84, 113 Maavia, Umayads 113 Mahdi 95, 120, 121,125 Maimonides 207, 208ff Maktoum Raschid 234 Mamluks 103 Manichean 193 Marv, Antioch Margiana 114 Marv, photo 105 Marw, Marwan 123 Marwanids see Umayads Marx Michael 49 Maria, Koran 18, 43 Maryam, Sura 18, 30 Masjid 130, 187 Moors, Culture 203, 213 Maximus the Confessor 112,154 Medina 71, 129 Mehmed II. 200 Mecca, legendary 66 Mecca 129, 133, 134 Menocal Maria 211 Messiah 89 Mezquita 190,205,214 Mihrab 102, 130 Mingana Alphonse Hormicide 29 Monarchism 90 Lunar calendar 111, 222 Moon cult 132 Monophysitism 90 Monotheletism 90 Moriscos 201,211 Morozov Nikolai 12 Morning Star 133, 143 Moses, Quran 43 Mozaraber 211 Muawiyah 80, 118, 151 Mudecharen 211 Muhammad 86, 94, 124, 125, 127 Muhammad, Dome of the Rock 86 muhammad, Jesus 95 muhammad, title 95 muhamad, origin 94 muhamad, meaning 85, 94 Muhammad Abdullah 140 Muhammad Ali 223 Muhamad, letter to Heraclius 75 Muhamad, proper noun 94 Muhammad, footprint 69 Muhamad, wars 73, Muhamad, legendary 66ff Muhammad, Ascension 102 Muhammad, historicity 93, 95 Muhammad, Revelation 28, 70 Muhamad, letter of protection 49 Muhamad, traditionally 65ff Muhamad Taha 231, 238 Muhammad I. 195 Muhajirun 71 Muir William 12 Mulade 211 Muqarna 204 Muskun 132 Muslim, hadith collector 53 Muslim, first mention 120 Mutacilism 129, 194 N Nagel Tilman 22 Naming symbolism 182 Nearly 150 Neuwirth Angelika 14, 48 Nicaea 131 Nicaea, Council 91, 108, Nikephoros II. Phocas 206 Nile 127 Nöldeke Theodor 29 O Ohlig Karl-Heinz 107, 124 Umayads 122, 123, 125 Umayyad Mosque 122 Umayyad Mosque, photo 105 Umayads, coins 118 Umayyads, Spain 185, 191, 202 Optics 164 Oriental Studies 13:27 Ottoman Empire 223, 229 Othman, Caliph 16, 29 Othman, Quran 28, 46, 48 P Palimpsest, Sanaa 40, 41 Paracelsus 169 paradise 34 Paradise Maidens 31 Paraclete 95 Paret Rudi 27, 137 Paschal II. 220 Parchment, manuscript 41 Persia 155 Persia, war with Byzantium 83, 107 Peter 133 Philosophy, Greek 160, 177 Plato 160, 164 Phoenix 151 Phoenician 183 Polis 221 Popp Volker 79, 81, 129 Primary sources 12 Prophet 140,141 Q Qassas 54, 153 Qeryan 44, 45, 50, 140 Qiblah 72, 190 Quran 44, 45, 144 Qutub Sayyid 153, 230, 231, 232 Source Zamzam 133 Sources, non-Islamic 154 source research 13,48,50,152, 181 R Rajj 161 Ram 37 Rasul 91, 120 Raids 148 Reconquista 180, 197, 202 Renaissance 157.219 Renaissance, East Iranian 168 Rey Phillippe 207 Roderich 179, 185 Rufasa 123 S Sanaa, Manuscript 39, 47 Sabier 127, 160 Saddam Hussein 125, 232 Salafists 64, Salafiyah 147, 230 Salibi Kamal 142 Solomon 99 Samarra 130 Saracens 154 Sassanid 110 Saudi Arabia 134 Sebeo's 154 Shapur I, abductions 108 Sharia 61, 227 Shia, Twelver Shia 121 Writings, Semitic 36 grant of protection 80 Silk Road 114 Crescent Moon 133, 143 Sinai Monastery 49 Sira 62, 64 Sophronius 154 Socotra 134 Sprenger Aloys 95 SS, mufti school 28 Standing Caliph 116,117 Stone of Gadara 79 Suleiman the Magnificent, 103 Sunna 63, 64 Sura 20, 33, 16, 45 Suras, lengths, number 16, 21 Suras, Medinan 142, 237 Suras, Meccan 142, 237 Syro Aramaic 30, 36, 38, 125, 140 Syro Aramaic, Peter 43 T Taif 79, 133 Taifa 195.202 alas, river 151 Taqiyya 155, 201 Tariff 182 Tariq ibn Ziyad 179 Tariq 182 Taurah 17 Tehran 161 Thabit ibn Kurra 160 Theme Conference 110 theology 140 Thomas John 182, 192 Tirmidhi, hadith collector 52 Tischendorf Konstantin, from 49 Topkapi 48, 69 Tours and Poitiers 183 Turkish threat 199 Trepidation 161 Trinity Doctrine 108 Turkmenistan 94 u Ubay 73 Ubaydallah 40 gap in tradition 137, 139 Ulema 227, 232 Umar ibn al-Khatab 151,152 Ummah 71 'Umar II. 123 UNESCO 207, 215 UN Human Rights 228 unbelievers 20 Unbelievers, commandment to kill 20 Urban II. 120 Urgentschl66, 170 Urquran 122 Uzza 133 V Vandals 184 Our Father 63 United Emirates 234 Verses, canceled and canceling 19 Venus 133 Disconnector 45 migration of peoples 184 W Wahhab Abdel 232 Wahhabism 24 Waldman Helmut 134 christmas story 40 Because Gustav 11 Wine, Quran 19 Visigoths 184 World Trade Center 13 Wonders 153, 155, 173 Y Yarmuk, Battle 112,150 Yegar Sahaduta 117 Z Zafrani Haim 216 Zamzam 133 Central Asia 177 Calendar, Arabic 82,111 Calendar Hijra 84:111, 187, 222 Calendar, kata Araba 82, 222 Censorship 138 Ziggurat 130, 131 ​ IMAGE