Durie's first chapter, I must say, is not as focused as was the introduction.
This chapter ostensibly on "theology" digresses into the state(s) of the Arabic language(s) as of AD 600, as understood as of AD 2015 (via al-Jallad). Which - don't get me wrong - I find fascinating, and vital. But Safaitic and Hismaic graffiti don't show Biblical Reflex, the topic at hand. Any background discussion of the Late Antique milieu could go to an appendix. Maybe even a footnote. Or a separate chapter on How We Got Here.
I'd say the same for Durie's treatment of the earliest codices and their carbon-dating. Here, unlike with al-Jallad, I doubt the premise. I'd not even mention this, myself.
As to the core of this chapter, it's impressionistic - as are most treatments of the Qaric canon which aren't mine. (Sorry.) Durie doesn't give us a methodical listing of which sura preceded what sura. Durie defaults to the neo-Nöldeke timeline currently being bourne by Nicolai Sinai (who has a blurb on the back cover) and Angelika Neuwirth. I'd not talk about a Quranic (or my preferred "Qaric") Theology so much as a sura 40 theology per sura 40, or a sura 75 theology per sura 75. UPDATE 12/6: it doesn't get better.
I do agree, though, that when any one sura cites its predecessant suwar, it does appeal to a wider audience - of believers in those suwar. The average qari found much easier to cite Quran than to quote Bible (although the latter does happen). There arises a Qaric Genius, if you will.
Which goes to the voodoo-matrix. We're not dealing with the community of the Christian Saints, nor even with the Gaonim. The qurra were outsiders.
No comments:
Post a Comment