Hur El 3ein
-
Peace s2s
who or what ...
here's one possible interpretation, but before you read i would like to make one point clear
even though i follow luxenberg on his etymological interpretaion, i don't at all when he says that quran was a "christian" text...
i do see it as a new revelation of the never changing system of godpeace
elkeChallenging the Quran
Item 3797 ? Posted Sat, Jul. 26 2003 ? Weblogged by ReligionNewsBlog.com
Permalink to this article (Click link to copy to clipboard)A German scholar contends that the Islamic text has been mistranscribed and promises raisins, not virgins
Newsweek International, July 28, 2003
http//www.msnbc.com/news/940974.asp
By Stefan Theil, NEWSWEEK INTERNATIONALIn a note of encouragement to his fellow hijackers, September 11 ringleader Muhammad Atta cheered their impending ?marriage in Paradise? to the 72 wide-eyed virgins the Qur?an promises to the departed faithful. Palestinian newspapers have been known to describe the death of a suicide bomber as a ?wedding to the black-eyed in eternal Paradise.? But if a German expert on Middle Eastern languages is correct, these hopes of sexual reward in the afterlife are based on a terrible misunderstanding.
Arguing that today's version of the Qur?an has been mistranscribed from the original text, scholar Christoph Luxenberg says that what are described as ?houris? with ?swelling breasts? refer to nothing more than ?white raisins? and ?juicy fruits.?
Luxenberg?a pseudonym?is one of a small but growing group of scholars, most of them working in non-Muslim countries, studying the language and history of the Qur?an. When his new book is published this fall, it?s likely to be the most far-reaching scholarly commentary on the Qur?an?s early genesis, taking this infant discipline far into uncharted?and highly controversial?territory. That?s because Islamic orthodoxy considers the holy book to be the verbatim revelation of Allah, speaking to his prophet, Muhammad, through the Angel Gabriel, in Arabic. Therefore, critical study of God?s undiluted word has been off-limits in much of the Islamic world. (For the same reason, translations of the Qur?an are never considered authentic.) Islamic scholars who have dared ignore this taboo have often found themselves labeled heretics and targeted with death threats and violence. Luxenberg, a professor of Semitic languages at one of Germany?s leading universities, has chosen to remain anonymous because he fears a fatwa by enraged Islamic extremists.
Luxenberg?s chief hypothesis is that the original language of the Qur?an was not Arabic but something closer to Aramaic. He says the copy of the Qur?an used today is a mistranscription of the original text from Muhammad?s time, which according to Islamic tradition was destroyed by the third caliph, Osman, in the seventh century. But Arabic did not turn up as a written language until 150 years after Muhammad?s death, and most learned Arabs at that time spoke a version of Aramaic. Rereading the Paradise passage in Aramaic, the mysterious houris turn into raisins and fruit?much more common components of the Paradise myth.
The forthcoming book contains plenty of other bombshells. It claims that the Qur?an?s commandment for women to cover themselves is based on a similar misreading; in Sura 24, the verse that calls for women to ?snap their scarves over their bags? becomes in Aramaic ?snap their belts around their waists.? Even more explosive are readings that strengthen scholars? views that the Qur?an had Christian origins. Sura 33 calls Muhammad the ?seal of the prophets,? taken to mean the final and ultimate prophet of God. But an Aramaic reading, says Luxenberg, turns Muhammad into a ?witness of the prophets??i.e., someone who bears witness to the established Judeo-Christian texts. The Qur?an, in Arabic, talks about the ?revelation? of Allah, but in Aramaic that term turns into ?teaching? of the ancient Scriptures. The original Qur?an, Luxenberg contends, was in fact a Christian liturgical document?before an expanding Arab empire turned Muhammad?s teachings into the basis for its new religion long after the Prophet?s death.
Such interpretations will undoubtedly draw the ire of many Muslims?and not just extremists. After all, revisionist scholars have been persecuted for much less; in 2001, Egypt?s Constitutional Court confirmed the ?apostasy? of former University of Cairo scholar Nasr Hamid Abu-Zayd, for considering the Qur?an a document written by humans.
Still, Luxenberg may be ushering in a whole new era of Qur?anic study. ?Luxenberg?s findings are very relevant and convincing,? says Mondher Sfar, a Tunisian specialist on the historic origins of the Qur?an in exile in Paris. ?They make possible a new interpretation of the Qur?an.? In the West, questioning the literal veracity of the Bible was a crucial step in breaking the church?s grip on power?and in developing a modern, secular society. That experience, as much as the questioning itself, is no doubt what concerns conservative Muslims as they struggle over the meaning and influence of Islam in the 21st century. But if Luxenberg?s work is any indication, the questioning is just getting underway.
-
Peace Elke,
That's an interesting take on the term hur el3ein. I have some issues with his idea that the quran was originally in Aramaic though. Although there are no old qurans available today from the period before Osman's reign, there are remnants of objects that ayat were written on during the time of the Prophet. These include bones and hides. According to "history" (may or may not even be true), these were all gathered along with people's memory of the suras and put together in one book. So it's a far stretch to believe that it was a different language if these bones and hides have been preserved with Arabic writing on them.
In 4454 , kathalika wa zawwajnahom be huren aayn.
zawwajnahom = marriage unless it has another meaning?My real question is if God ever mentioned something of equal value for believing women who enter paradise. Perhaps the translations I came across were tainted with testosterone ) and that's why I couldn't find anything? One major dispute non-Muslims have with the quran is that it addresses men alot more than women. It's something I'm struggling to come to grips with myself.
Any thoughts?
Peace -
Peace s2s
it's not about another language. Syro arama?c is a precursor of the arab language, as roman to italian - just to give na example - a real linguist might have some objection though.
I have the whole book by this luxenberg, but unfortunately it exists only in german - at least i think.
his methods is to apply syro-aramaen roots to those passages of quran where the message is not really evident like - when mary gives birth to jesus and the verse says - don't worry, god made a river flow beneath you.....in syro aramaen this becomes don't worry, god has made this birth legitimate !
one also should take into account that the now existing arabi al fossha, is actually derived from quran and as such didn't exist before, so, IMO, his analysis is plausible
but back to your other concerns - i believe that it is often a matter of interpretation that it addresses mostly men. one possible lecture is the symbolical one also
lk
-
Peace
but back to your other concerns - i believe that it is often a matter of interpretation that it addresses mostly men. one possible lecture is the symbolical one also
That paradise and its rewards are symbolic? That's a great possiblity... I tend to believe that the experience of heaven and hell are unexplainable to humans or perhaps to the humans on earth at the time the quran was revealed. And so instead of confusing people or giving them more than they can chew, the use of metaphors was used. But that still means it's one - sided if all the metaphors had male characters.
This idea of beautiful women untouched, like pearls is in many ayat and not always given the label hur el 3ein. Are there any ayat that refer to rewards for women that I'm over-looking?
-
I think you have already discussed here brother yaseen?s ideas about Hur El 3ein. (http//www.free-minds.org/articles/science/hur.htm) Just to remember
The inmates of the garden will sit
Wearing velvet and satin; facing each other (4453).
Yalbasoona min sundusin wa-istabraqin mutaqabileenaWe match them with pure springs (4454).
Kathalika wazawwajnahum bihoorin AAeeninThe pronun hum-them stands for the silk and satin clothes mentioned in the previous verse.
Brother yaseen explians
The verb ?zawwaja? in verse 4454 could mean ?matched?, ?paired? or ?granted?. This is not about joining two different types of beings together, it is about granting one type of God?s gifts (pure springs) further to what was granted in the previous verse (Silk and Satin clothing). The believers will be granted pure springs 4454) to go with the garments of silk satin (4453) and furthermore, they will have plentiful fruits in serine tranquillity and peace (4455).
From the root ?za wa ja?, we can find the noun ?azwaaja? in plural which does not always carry the meaning of ?spouses?. Verse 3858 shows an alternative meaning similar to the one we are exploring in verse 4454 (of the verb form), but in the negative sense. It is about ?compounding?/?increasing?/?doubling? the retribution of hell of the transgressors, the hellish drink and the bitter food with similar/same kind of penalties.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Peace Brook
Thanks for the link and your input. I'll get thru it and post if I'm still not getting it. I actually love the idea of springs or fruit, as mentioned earlier, alot more than wide-eyed virgins. So base... God forgive me if I'm wrong but to me it is too base of instincts and almost animalistic to be attributed to Paradise!
God Bless -
Peace be upon you, Wakas
I did use the search function.
Unfortunately, if you don't have exact spelling of an arabic word transliterated into English, you may not get what you're looking for.
Thanks for the articles I'll be sure to read them.
