The Qur'an in Its Historical Context.

Witztum, Joseph

The Qur'an in Its Historical Context. Edited by GABRIEL SAID REYNOLDS. London: ROUTLEDGE, 2008. Pp. xv + 294. $160.

Reactions to Christoph Luxenberg's study (Die syro-aramaische Lesart des Koran [Berlin, 2000; Eng. tr. Berlin, 2007]) vary greatly. To some a seminal turning point in Qur'anic studies, to others a work based on "wayward philology and exegetical caprice" (see review by Simon Hopkins in JSAI 28 [2003]), it has certainly contributed to the revival of scholarly interest in the critical study of the Qur'an. One fruit of this renewed attention is the volume under review, the outcome of a conference held in 2005 at the University of Notre Dame.

The collection strikes a good balance between broad surveys and detailed studies and constitutes an important addition to Qur'anic scholarship. It makes a significant contribution to the study of the Qur'an in the context of late antiquity, especially with regard to (Syriac) Christianity, provides a scholarly overview of the state of the field, and is useful as a bibliographic tool.

Rather than attempt to discuss all thirteen articles, I will briefly describe their contents and comment only on a few, focusing mainly on matters pertaining to the impact of the Syriac language and Christian lore on the Qur'an. More attention will be given to three contributions (by Sidney Griffith, Kevin van Bladel, and Devin J. Stewart), which are among the finest and most interesting in the collection.

After a short foreword by Daniel A. Madigan, the introduction by the editor and organizer of the conference, Gabriel Said Reynolds, surveys the as yet unsuccessful attempts to establish a critical text of the Qur'an and describes the main revisionist theories regarding its origin. The evaluation of these theories is a key concern of many essays in the volume.

Fred M. Donner addresses recent scholarship in the course of his observations concerning five fundamental issues: the existence of an "Ur-Qur'an," its nature, language, transmission, and the codification and canonization of the Qur'an. Donner concludes by advocating the creation of two internet databases: one of early Qur'an manuscripts, the other of variant readings preserved in Islamic literature.

Robert Hoyland uses epigraphic data to argue convincingly, contra Luxenberg, that Syriac was not the main literary language in seventh-century Hijaz, that by this time Arabic had long been used for sacred and literary expression, and that Nabataean, rather than Syriac, was the source of the Arabic script. Hoyland also discusses the possible role of Arab tribes allied to Rome and of Christian missionaries in creating the Arabic script.

Gerhard Bowering provides an overview and analysis of recent scholarship on the composition and codification of the Qur'an, with special attention given to the revisionist theories of Gunter Luling, Luxenberg, and Joseph Azzi, who is less known in the West.

Claude Gilliot builds upon his earlier work on the collective authorship of the Qur'an and examines the evidence for this in the Islamic tradition. His contribution is thought-provoking and contains a wealth of references, although the historical reliability of the traditional accounts adduced by Gilliot is debatable. In addition, in one instance his interpretation of the sources seems highly speculative. He quotes the following account attributed to Zayd b. Thabit: "I was brought to the Messenger of God when he came to Medina. They said: 'Messenger of God, this is a boy of the banu al-Najjar, of what had been revealed unto you he knows seventeen suras.' So I recited to the Messenger of God, and he was pleased with it.' " On this Gilliot comments (p. 92): "Are these suras of the Qur'an? Would they not rather be passages of Jewish writings which Muhammad or others liked and which were used for the composition of the Qur'an?" Gilliot's attempt to substantiate this hypothesis remains unconvincing in my opinion. The latter part of his article is dedicated to the role of Syriac Christianity in shaping the Qur'an.

This attempt to place the Qur'an in the (mainly Christian) context of late antiquity is a theme shared by several essays. An important contribution by Sidney Griffith suggests a methodology for identifying lexical and thematic Syriacisms in the Qur'an and then demonstrates it in a fascinating study of the story of the "Companions of the Cave" (Q 18:9-26) in light of earlier Syriac accounts, especially the liturgical homily by Jacob of Serugh. Griffith highlights the ways in which the Qur'an adapted and Islamicized these accounts using familiar Qur'anic themes and language. Without detracting from the significance of this study, I would like to note a few minor reservations concerning some proposed Syriacisms. Griffith argues (p. 115) that the Arabic phrase thalithu thalathatin (Q 5:73) is awkward and reflects the Syriac epithet for Christ, tlitaya. In fact, there is nothing odd about this structure, which is attested not only in the books of grammar but also in the Qur'an itself (compare thaniya thnayni in Q 9:40). Later (p. 125) Griffith notes that Arabic ashab (Q 18:9) may be considered an apt translation of Syriac habre, although the Arabic phrase does not allude to the friendship between the youths as does the Syriac, but rather refers to them as the "people of the cave" (compare ashab al-kahf to ashab al-jahim or ashab al-janna, for example; see Wright's grammar, 2: 203). Likewise, the suggestion (pp. 126-27) that raqim (Q 18:9) reflects an import of a Syriac form seems unnecessary since Arabic fa'il usually has a passive sense when derived from transitive verbs (see Wright 1: 136).

Griffith's article should be read together with that of Kevin van Bladel which examines the Syriac background of another story in the same sura. In this learned and intriguing study, van Bladel argues that the story of Dhu l-Qarnayn (Q 18:83-102) is a retelling of the Syriac Alexander Legend, itself dated in recent scholarship to 629 or 630 C.E. This raises the question whether a text composed in northern Mesopotamia at such a late date could have "become relevant enough to the followers of Muhammad to warrant a Qur'anic pronouncement upon it" (p. 190). Van Bladel suggests that indeed it could.

This is a fine textual and literary analysis. A minor quibble is that in comparing the texts, van Bladel slightly exaggerates their similarity. Thus, for example, in describing the events that led to the building of the great wall against the Huns, according to the Syriac text, he writes: "Alexander asks the locals if they want a favor, and they answer that they would follow his command ... Together they accomplish the task with the help of the Egyptian metalworkers. This account matches Q 18:92-8 ... in precise detail" (pp. 179-80). Q 18:94-96 indeed contains a conversation between Dhu 1-Qarnayn and the locals in which he agrees to build a wall for them and asks them for assistance, but in the Syriac text Alexander addresses his troops rather than the locals, who seem to take no part in the construction. In the same manner, van Bladel rightly notes the parallel between the repeated phrase atba'a sababan in Q 18, understanding it as "he followed a heavenly course," and the description in the Syriac Alexander Legend of the window of the heaven through which the sun enters when it sets. Nonetheless, the comparison is taken too far when van Bladel (p. 198 n. 12) translates a passage from the Alexander Legend as follows: "And when the sun entered the window of heaven, he (Alexander) immediately bowed down and made obeisance before God his Creator, and he traveled and descended the whole night in the heavens, until at length he came and found himself where it (the sun) rises. He saw the land of the setting sun and found a mountain where he descended, named Great Musas, and they (the troops) descended and arrived with him. And they went forth to mount Qlawdiya (Claudia)." This gives the impression that Alexander traveled from west to east passing through a heavenly course. In fact, according to a more accurate understanding of this passage (slightly modifying Budge's original rendition), only the sun's journey is mentioned: "And when the sun enters the window of heaven, it immediately bows down and makes obeisance before God its creator, and it travels and descends the whole night in the heavens, until at length it comes and finds itself where it rises. Alexander looked towards the West and found a mountain that descends, named Great Musas, and they [Alexander and his troops] descended along it, arrived, and went forth to mount Qlawdiya." That this is a more accurate translation is suggested both by the position of the nouns "sun" and "Alexander" as well as the use of active participles indicating a recurring action to describe the journey through the window of heaven.

A few interesting parallels between the studies of Griffith and van Bladel are noteworthy. Both challenge or at least raise doubts about the traditional dating of their respective portions of Q 18 to the Meccan period. In addition, both consider transmission of the stories via Arabic-speaking Mono-physites likely. On a methodological level, both not only focus on the correspondences between the Syriac texts and the Qur'an, but also note how the latter omitted overtly Christian themes and adapted the stories to its general outlook.

Building on the contributions of Griffith and van Bladel, one could further develop this last line of inquiry towards a study of how the Qur'an molds and reshapes its sources. Griffith and van Bladel do not treat ail the details in which the Qur'an diverges from the Syriac texts, though at times these are instructive. In the first story, for example, when the youths awake they question each other as to how long they have slept. They waver between assuming that only "a day or part of a day" has passed and saying that the Lord knows best (Q 18:19). This discussion seems to imply that they already then suspected that something unusual had taken place. It has no parallel in the Syriac accounts, but is reminiscent of verses such as Q 2:259 and Q 23:112-14, which use the same formulaic language. A similar example is found in the second story. Here the locals offer a tribute (kharj) to Dhu 1-Qarnayn in return for his building a barrier. He rejects the payment saying: "That wherein my Lord has established me is better"; instead he asks for their help in the construction (Q 18:94-95). The tribute and its rejection have no precedent in the Syriac Alexander Legend, but seem to reflect the common Qur'anic theme that prophets generally, and Muhammad especially, ask for no reward in return for their services. Interestingly, the only other occurrence of the word kharj in the Qur'an is with regard to the Prophet: "Or do you ask them for any tribute (kharj)? But the tribute of your Lord is better and He is the best Of providers" (Q 23:72).

Samir Khalil Samir's article intentionally leaves aside obvious narrative parallels and aims to reveal resonances of inexplicit Christian theological themes in the Qur'an. He notes several interesting parallels, but a wider inspection of the Qur'an might weaken some of his arguments. To give but one example, Samir (p. 155) remarks that the theme of Allah's use of trickery (makr) in Q 3:54 "seems strange, if not shocking." Since the context of this verse concerns Jesus, Samir suggests that it reflects the patristic theme of God deceiving Satan by taking on a human form. Samir notes that makr is attributed to Allah elsewhere (Q 8:30), but omits other occurrences (Q 7:99, 10:21, 13:42, 27:50), all of which are unrelated to Jesus and therefore indicate that this is a general theme rather than a specifically Christian one.

Suleiman A. Mourad continues his earlier work on the Qur'anic depiction of Mary, concentrating on three issues: her affiliation with Amram and Aaron, the origins of the narratives of the annunciation and birth of Jesus, and an analysis of Islamic identifications of the hillside on which Mary and Jesus found shelter (Q 23:50).

Manfred Kropp takes up the relatively neglected issue of Ethiopic influence on the Qur'an and examines four words (ma'ida, shaytan, jibt, and taghut) and their counterparts in the Ethiopic Bible. He also compares Q 5:111-15 to an Ethiopic homily that includes the word ma'[partial derivative]d(d)[partial derivative] und suggests that they share a similar atmosphere.

Abdul-Massih Saadi's brief contribution barely touches on the Qur'an and focuses on the portrayal and understanding of the Muslim invaders in seventh-century Syriac sources.

The last two articles situate modern scholarship in the framework of the classical exegetical tradition. Devin Stewart surveys and assesses medieval and modern emendations of the Qur'an, with special attention to the work of James A. Bellamy and Luxenberg. This is a serious and much needed detailed critique that Stewart intends to expand in the future to cover more of Luxenberg's proposals. I would like, however, to venture one comment: I am not sure that "emendation" (as far as it implies conjecture or inference) is always the right term to describe what the medieval scholars were up to. Consider Stewart's first example (p. 230) concerning the alternative reading ya'tuna ma ataw in Q 23:60. Stewart describes this as a "suggestion" reported by al-Suyuti (d. 911/1505). In fact, al-Suyuti cites 'A'isha, the Prophet's wife, as explicitly stating that this was the Prophet's reading. Clearly al-Suyuti is not presenting this as a conjectural correction of the text. But even if it is, in fact, a camouflaged emendation, Stewart grants the medieval Muslim scholars more freedom with the text than they actually had. In discussing the reading tasta'dhinu instead of tasta'nisu in Q 24:27, he notes that "this emendation is attributed to Ibn Abi Hatim (al-Razi, d. 327/938) who is supposed to have remarked, 'In my opinion, this is an instance where the copyists erred' " (p. 230). This reading and statement are indeed found in the commentary of Ibn Abi Hatim, but they are not his own; he merely cites them from Ibn 'Abbas (d. 68/687). Likewise, in discussing the variant reading of Q 6:57 yaqdi bi-l-haqqi (or yaqdi l-haqqa, which is, in fact, the reading followed by al-Suyuti) instead of yaqussu l-haqqa, Stewart (p. 232) notes that al-Suyuti seems to endorse it since he "mentions this variant reading prominently in his commentary while regularly ignoring variant readings with regard to other verses." The prominent place of this reading is probably not, however, due to al-Suyuti's careful weighing of the evidence, but is rather the result of it being part of the reading of Abu 'Amr (d. 154/770), which his commentary usually follows throughout. In addition, Stewart's remark concerning al-Suyuti's practice of "regularly ignoring variant readings" is somewhat overstated.

In the final essay, Andrew Rippin looks into the reasons that led Muslim exegetes and modern scholars to assume a Syriac origin for certain words in the Qur'an. Rippin also attempts to shed light on the scope of two terms used in the sources: "Nabatiyya" and "Suryaniyya," but, as he notes, the evidence is far from conclusive.

There is some overlap between the articles, especially with regard to the description and evaluation of the works of Luling and Luxenberg, but this exposes the reader to different approaches and yet again demonstrates how far the field is from consensus.

One important conviction shared by several authors in this volume is that "Qur'an studies and tafsir studies have gotten all mixed up" (Reynolds, p. 17) and that "the future of Qur'anic studies lies not within the discipline construed as Islamic studies alone but rather that many major historical problems of the Qur'an will be solved by historians of Late Antiquity" (van Bladel, p. 196). That such an approach has much to offer is evident from many of the contributions to this volume. Widening the focus should not, however, result in completely losing sight of the classical exegetical corpus, which preserves, after all, the philological insights of many truly great scholars of Arabic. After being duly studied and critiqued, their views may, of course, often be rejected.

But the same is true of modern scholarship. Some of the new interpretations in this book do not bear up well under close examination. Reynolds (pp. 16-17), for example, regards Luxenberg's re-reading of Q 37:103 as "intellectually compelling." In describing Abraham's attempt to sacrifice his son this verse states wa-tallahu li-l-jabin. This difficult phrase is usually understood along the lines of "and he laid (or threw) him down on his forehead," but Luxenberg and Reynolds suggest reading it in light of Syriac tla ("to hang" and by extension "to tie, bind") and habbin as "and he tied him lo the firewood." Reynolds translates habbin as "firewood," though this is not attested in Syriac, nor did Luxenberg claim that it was. What Luxenberg suggested was that the word be read as the plural active participle of h-b-b in the Peal ("to burn"), literally "burning," with "wood" supplied in parenthesis. Thus this new reading is weaker than might seem. Similarly, according to Samir (p. 147), again following Luxenberg, Q 96:2 (khalaqa l-insana min 'alaqin) affirms that Allah created Adam from sticky mud. The traditional understanding of 'alaq as "clotted blood," a stage in the creation of every man, seems, however, preferable. This is indicated by parallel references to 'alaqa (altered here for rhyme's sake) as a stage in every man's creation following the drop of semen; see Q 22:5, 23:14, 40:67, 75:38. A final example of a not entirely convincing new suggestion concerns the enigmatic Tuwa or tuwan ("... in the sacred valley, Tuwa": Q 20:12, 79:16). According to Stewart (pp. 236-37), this might be "a distorted form of Tur" used for the sake of rhyme in passages that rhyme in -a. But if this were the case, surely Tura would have been sufficient. Moreover, it is unclear why a valley (wadi) should be described as a mountain. Although Stewart adduces parallel verses that refer to the same event taking place at "the right side of Mount (Sinai)," crucial words such as "the right side of" are lacking in Q 20:12 and 79:16.

The volume contains a few inaccurate translations of Qur'anic verses (for example, the rendition of Q 18:21 on pp. 119-20, or the use on p. 178 of "under Me" for win duni [Q 18:102]). Several typographical errors are found, especially in the transliteration of Arabic and Syriac words. In more than thirty instances, hamza (') replaces 'ayn ('). The use of macrons and diacritic marks is occasionally marred by confusions. The latter sometimes cause one word to be split into two. Other noteworthy errors are Quayy instead of Qusayy (p. 91), al-Aqra' b. Shafiy al-Ikki for al-Aqra' b. Shufayy al-'Akki (p. 170), 'abday bise for 'abday bisata (pp. 179 and 181), wa-akhlaqi for wa-akhliqi (p. 214 n. 3), and al-Mutawakkili rather than al-Mutawakkil as the caliph after whom the treatise al-Mutawakkili was named (p. 256). Several mistaken references occur as well. I note only those that might take some effort to find: Matthew 12:23 for 13:23 (p. 99), Q 12:20 for 20:12 (p. 236).

Lest my comments on points of detail give the wrong impression, I recapitulate: the volume under review is a significant and stimulating contribution. All those who take an interest in this field owe the editor and the contributors their gratitude. Hopefully this volume will be the first of many in this vein.

JOSEPH WITZTUM

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY