Chronological Order of the Qur'an: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
[checked revision][checked revision]
(Have added some academic material on Qur'anic chronology, just covering the Meccan-Medinan split - it's very minimal for now but I plan to add significantly more to cover the 'plot' of the Quran and it's chronology going forwards.)
No edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
{{QualityScore|Lead=3|Structure=3|Content=2|Language=4|References=3}}The [[Qur'an]] is not in chronological order, but arranged roughly longest [[surah]] (chapter) to the shortest. The table in this article provides the traditional chronological order as set out by medieval Islamic scholars, ostensibly reported from the Companion, Ibn 'Abbas, though such traditions date to the early 8th century CE according to Neal Robinson, which he says "would make them roughly contemporary with the early discussions about [[Naskh (Abrogation)|abrogation]] and the [[Sirat Rasul Allah|''sῑra-maghāzī'']] literature", leading him to suspect that they are merely the opinions of the scholars of the time rather than authentic oral traditions from Companions.<ref name="Robinson2003">Neal Robinson, "Discovering the Qurʼan: A Contemporary Approach to a Veiled Text", Georgetown University Press, 2003, pp. 62-74. ISBN 1589010248</ref> It is furthermore well known by Islamic scholars that the traditional reports of [[Asbab al-Nuzul (Revelational Circumstances of the Quran)|Asbab al-Nuzul (revelational circumstances of the Quran)]] are often contradictory, and are treated with considerable caution by academic scholars.<ref name="Robinson2003" />
{{QualityScore|Lead=3|Structure=3|Content=2|Language=4|References=3}}The [[Qur'an]] is not in chronological order, but arranged roughly longest [[surah]] (chapter) to the shortest. The table in this article provides the traditional chronological order as set out by medieval Islamic scholars, ostensibly reported from the Companion, Ibn 'Abbas, though such traditions date to the early 8th century CE according to Neal Robinson, which he says "would make them roughly contemporary with the early discussions about [[Naskh (Abrogation)|abrogation]] and the [[Sirat Rasul Allah|''sῑra-maghāzī'']] literature", leading him to suspect that they are merely the opinions of the scholars of the time rather than authentic oral traditions from Companions.<ref name="Robinson2003">Neal Robinson, "Discovering the Qurʼan: A Contemporary Approach to a Veiled Text", Georgetown University Press, 2003, pp. 62-74. ISBN 1589010248</ref> It is furthermore well known by Islamic scholars that the traditional reports of [[Asbab al-Nuzul (Revelational Circumstances of the Quran)|Asbab al-Nuzul (revelational circumstances of the Quran)]] are often contradictory, and are treated with considerable caution by academic scholars.<ref name="Robinson2003" />


The chronological sequence of the Quran, including elements within individual surahs, is an active area of research for academic scholars. Surahs identified with the Meccan phase of Muhammad's career are sometimes further sub-divided into a number of periods. Theodor Nöldeke (d. 1930), whose sequence produced with his pupil Friedrich Schwally (d. 1919) differs slightly from the traditional chronological order, divided the Meccan surahs into early, middle, and late Meccan periods.<ref name="Robinson2003" /> Sometimes, internal evidence such as references to external events helps with the relative dating. Alongside literary style, internal evidence such as references to external events helps with the relative dating, and documenting the changing relationship between Muhammad, his Community and the Unbelievers, such as Mark Durie (2018)<ref>Durie, Mark. 2018. Lexington Books. ''The Qur’an and Its Biblical Reflexes: Investigations into the Genesis of a Religion''</ref> and David Marshall (1999).<ref>Marshall, David. ''God, Muhammad and the Unbeliever''s. 1999. ISBN 9780415759946</ref> An interesting example of more recent research is the work of Joseph Witztum to derive a relative chronology between certain surahs based on the differences between versions of the same repeated stories.<ref>See for example Joseph Witztum. “Thrice upon a Time: Abraham’s Guests and the Study of Intra-Quranic Parallels”. In Holger Zellentin (ed.), The Quran’s Reformation of Judaism and Christianity: Return to the Origins. London: Routledge, 2019, pp. 277–302.</ref>
The chronological sequence of the Quran, including elements within individual surahs, is an active area of research for academic scholars. Surahs identified with the Meccan phase of Muhammad's career are sometimes further sub-divided into a number of periods. Theodor Nöldeke (d. 1930), whose sequence produced with his pupil Friedrich Schwally (d. 1919) differs slightly from the traditional chronological order, divided the Meccan surahs into early, middle, and late Meccan periods.<ref name="Robinson2003" /> Sometimes, internal evidence helps with the relative dating, such as references to external events, changing literary style, and the changing relationship between Muhammad, his community and the disbelievers.<ref>Durie, Mark. 2018. Lexington Books. ''The Qur’an and Its Biblical Reflexes: Investigations into the Genesis of a Religion''</ref><ref>Marshall, David. ''God, Muhammad and the Unbeliever's. 1999. ISBN 9780415759946</ref> An interesting example of more recent research is the work of Joseph Witztum to derive a relative chronology between certain surahs based on the differences between versions of the same repeated stories.<ref>See for example Joseph Witztum. “Thrice upon a Time: Abraham’s Guests and the Study of Intra-Quranic Parallels”. In Holger Zellentin (ed.), The Quran’s Reformation of Judaism and Christianity: Return to the Origins. London: Routledge, 2019, pp. 277–302.</ref>


The traditional chronological order has been passed down in slightly varying versions. The version shown here is reported in a fifteenth century work by 'Abd al-Kafi<ref name="Robinson2003" />, and is commonly reproduced on websites today.<ref>https://tanzil.net/docs/revelation_order</ref><ref>http://www.qran.org/q-chrono.htm</ref> It is also the main source (along with the other slightly different versions) drawn upon for the very similar ordering included in the 1925 Standard Egyptian Quran.<ref name="Robinson2003" /> In the case of many of the Meccan surahs some specific verses are traditionally attributed to the Medinan phase.
The traditional chronological order has been passed down in slightly varying versions. The version shown here is reported in a fifteenth century work by 'Abd al-Kafi<ref name="Robinson2003" />, and is commonly reproduced on websites today.<ref>https://tanzil.net/docs/revelation_order</ref><ref>http://www.qran.org/q-chrono.htm</ref> It is also the main source (along with the other slightly different versions) drawn upon for the very similar ordering included in the 1925 Standard Egyptian Quran.<ref name="Robinson2003" /> In the case of many of the Meccan surahs some specific verses are traditionally attributed to the Medinan phase.
Line 255: Line 255:
The Qur'an begins to directly criticize key doctrines of the Jews and Christians.
The Qur'an begins to directly criticize key doctrines of the Jews and Christians.
{{Quote|Sinai, Nicolai. Qur'an: A Historical-Critical Introduction (The New Edinburgh Islamic Surveys) (pp. 196-197). Edinburgh University Press. Kindle Edition.|...they betray an explicit demarcation of the Qur’anic community from Judaism and Christianity and harshly criticise Jewish and Christian beliefs (for example, Q 5: 12–19, 5: 41–86, and 5: 116–118).<sup>38</sup> This forms a contrast to surahs that do not allude to the Medinan constellation. To be sure, non-Medinan texts do occasionally feature critical references to disunity among the post-Mosaic Israelites and to schisms among the followers of Jesus,<sup>39</sup> casually accuse some of them of ‘wrongdoing’ (Q 29: 46), and insist that Jesus is not God’s ‘child’ but only His ‘servant’ (Q 19: 34–40 and 43: 57–65).<sup>40</sup> Nonetheless, texts lacking references to the Medinan constellation are generally devoid of explicit, targeted, and sustained anti-Jewish and anti-Christian polemics. Instead, their polemical attention is squarely focused on the pagan Associators, against whom the ‘Israelites’ or earlier recipients of ‘the Scripture’ are occasionally invoked as witnesses who would confirm the truth of Muhammad’s revelations (for example, Q 6: 20.114, 10: 94, 17: 101, and 26: 197). Indeed, it is only in surahs that form core texts of the Medinan subcorpus (Q 2–5, 9, and 22) that we even come across the Qur’anic expressions for ‘Christians’ (al-naārā, ‘Nazoraeans’) and ‘Jews’ (alladhīna hādū, al-yahūd).<sup>41</sup>}}
{{Quote|Sinai, Nicolai. Qur'an: A Historical-Critical Introduction (The New Edinburgh Islamic Surveys) (pp. 196-197). Edinburgh University Press. Kindle Edition.|...they betray an explicit demarcation of the Qur’anic community from Judaism and Christianity and harshly criticise Jewish and Christian beliefs (for example, Q 5: 12–19, 5: 41–86, and 5: 116–118).<sup>38</sup> This forms a contrast to surahs that do not allude to the Medinan constellation. To be sure, non-Medinan texts do occasionally feature critical references to disunity among the post-Mosaic Israelites and to schisms among the followers of Jesus,<sup>39</sup> casually accuse some of them of ‘wrongdoing’ (Q 29: 46), and insist that Jesus is not God’s ‘child’ but only His ‘servant’ (Q 19: 34–40 and 43: 57–65).<sup>40</sup> Nonetheless, texts lacking references to the Medinan constellation are generally devoid of explicit, targeted, and sustained anti-Jewish and anti-Christian polemics. Instead, their polemical attention is squarely focused on the pagan Associators, against whom the ‘Israelites’ or earlier recipients of ‘the Scripture’ are occasionally invoked as witnesses who would confirm the truth of Muhammad’s revelations (for example, Q 6: 20.114, 10: 94, 17: 101, and 26: 197). Indeed, it is only in surahs that form core texts of the Medinan subcorpus (Q 2–5, 9, and 22) that we even come across the Qur’anic expressions for ‘Christians’ (al-naārā, ‘Nazoraeans’) and ‘Jews’ (alladhīna hādū, al-yahūd).<sup>41</sup>}}
The authority and status of Muhammad is severely elevated from being simply a 'warner' to having complete authority over his community; also see Sinai (2018) on this.<ref>Sinai, Nicolai. “''[https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:34ef078e-0bb9-422e-8fd7-a42c8d1bdf1b/files/m73f645bb4eda180c5d419565b2b19ce0 Muhammad as an Episcopal Figure.]''” Arabica, vol. 65, no. 1-2, Brill Academic Publishers, 2018, pp. 1–30. ''PP13.'' <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1163/15700585-12341480</nowiki></ref>
The authority and status of Muhammad is severely elevated from being simply a 'warner' providing the revelations from God, to having complete authority over his community; also see Sinai (2018),<ref>Sinai, Nicolai. “''[https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:34ef078e-0bb9-422e-8fd7-a42c8d1bdf1b/files/m73f645bb4eda180c5d419565b2b19ce0 Muhammad as an Episcopal Figure.]''” Arabica, vol. 65, no. 1-2, Brill Academic Publishers, 2018, pp. 1–30. ''PP13.'' <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1163/15700585-12341480</nowiki></ref> and Durie (2018)<ref>Durie, Mark. ''The Qur’an and Its Biblical Reflexes: Investigations into the Genesis of a Religion (pp. 174-177)''. Lexington Books. Kindle Edition
{{Quote|Sinai, Nicolai. Qur'an: A Historical-Critical Introduction (The New Edinburgh Islamic Surveys) (p. 197). Edinburgh University Press. Kindle Edition.|Another key doctrinal trait of the Medinan proclamations is their heightened emphasis on the status and far-reaching authority of the Qur’anic Messenger: whereas non-Medinan texts limit themselves to presenting him as a divinely sent ‘warner’ and ‘bringer of good tidings’ (for example, Q 17: 105, 25: 56, 51: 50–51, and 79: 45), Medinan surahs additionally cast him as a ‘prophet’ (nabiyy; for example, Q 33: 1.6.13), a title that non-Medinan texts reserve for figures from Biblical history.<sup>42</sup> Moreover, Medinan texts over and over again enjoin their audience to obey ‘God and His Messenger’ (for example, Q 3: 32, 4: 13, and 5: 92).}}
 
A summary can be read here: [[Quranism#Differences%20between%20the%20Meccan%20-%20Medinan%20Split|Quranism - Differences between the Meccan - Medinan Split]]</ref> on this.
{{Quote|Sinai, Nicolai. Qur'an: A Historical-Critical Introduction (The New Edinburgh Islamic Surveys) (p. 197). Edinburgh University Press. Kindle Edition.|Another key doctrinal trait of the Medinan proclamations is their heightened emphasis on the status and far-reaching authority of the Qur’anic Messenger: whereas non-Medinan texts limit themselves to presenting him as a divinely sent ‘warner’ and ‘bringer of good tidings’ (for example, Q 17: 105, 25: 56, 51: 50–51, and 79: 45), Medinan surahs additionally cast him as a ‘prophet’ (nabiyy; for example, Q 33: 1.6.13), a title that non-Medinan texts reserve for figures from Biblical history.<sup>42</sup> Moreover, Medinan texts over and over again enjoin their audience to obey ‘God and His Messenger’ (for example, Q 3: 32, 4: 13, and 5: 92).}}Unlike in the Meccan Qur'an which instructs his followers to engage in righteous behaviors, but is ultimately not responsible for them or their actions, O'Connor (2022) notes in the Medinan Qur'an for the first time he is in charge of enforcing those behaviors in the new community, with Muhammad's authority asserted in legal matters, warfare, theology/eschatology, communal negotiation, and domestic affairs.<ref>''"[https://www.academia.edu/81912959/_Preview_Obeying_God_and_His_Messenger_Medinan_Prophetology_in_the_Meccan_Quran_Unlocking_the_Medinan_Quran_edited_by_Nicolai_Sinai_Leiden_Brill_2022_288_312?email_work_card=title Obeying God and His Messenger: Medinan Prophetology in the Meccan Qur'an?]"'' Andrew O’Connor. Unlocking the Medinan Qur'an, edited by Nicolai Sinai. Leiden: Brill, 2022. 288-312
 
DOI: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004509702_009</nowiki></ref>
 
The previous calls in the Meccan verses of Allah destroying unbelievers who rejected Gods messengers in the '[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punishment_narratives_in_the_Quran punishment narratives]' are replaced with calls of military activism to carry out the punishment themselves. As Durie (2018) notes, "''...the key aspect of the marked developments traditionally associated with the contrast between “Meccan” and “Medinan” sūrahs, is a shift in eschatology from an expectation of future punishment of rejectors in this world to a “realized eschatology” (Ladd 1993, 56) of judgment in the here and now, at the hands of believers. This critical change in the Qurʾan’s message takes place in the context of an emerging crisis of confidence caused by an apparent delay in divine punishment of disbelievers, combined with growing opposition to, and persecution of believers.''"<ref>Durie, Mark. ''The Qur’an and Its Biblical Reflexes: Investigations into the Genesis of a Religion. pp. 47-48 (Kindle Edition pp. 149).'' 2018. Lexington Books.
 
''See also Chapter 2: The Eschatological Crisis & 3: A Nonbiographical Qurʾanic Chronology.''</ref>
{{Quote|Sinai, Nicolai. Qur'an: A Historical-Critical Introduction (The New Edinburgh Islamic Surveys) (pp. 293-294). Edinburgh University Press. Kindle Edition.|That the Believers’ recourse to military violence against the Associators was a turning point is openly acknowledged by the Qur’an itself. According to Q 4: 77, the members of the Qur’anic community were first instructed to ‘restrain your hands, perform prayer, and pay the alms’ and only subsequently was ‘fighting prescribed for them’. Not everyone in the community appears to have been keen to follow this command: ‘Our Lord, why have you prescribed fighting for us? Why have you not granted us a short delay?’, some of the addressees are quoted as saying.
Yet the Medinan Qur’an unwaveringly upholds the duty to combat the Associators. Henceforth it was the military victories of the Believers by means of which God was believed to exact His punishment of the Meccan Unbelievers, rather than by a natural disaster of the sort that had befallen the people of Noah, the Ād, or the Thamūd. As David Marshall has emphasised, we are here confronted with two different paradigms of divine punishment, one Meccan, the other Medinan.<sup>1</sup>
The Medinan surah’s general lack of punishment legends, pointed out in Chapter 5, is obviously linked to the replacement of one paradigm by the other.<sup>2</sup> Interestingly, the Qur’an itself endeavours to reduce the appearance of a disjuncture between the two by integrating the new doctrine that God’s retribution is meted out via the Believers’ military victories with the earlier Meccan expectation of a direct divine intervention. Thus, surah 8 describes the Believers’ military victory at Badr in a manner that presents it as the fulfillment of the Qur’an’s earlier threats of a divine chastisement.}}


==References==
==References==
Editors, em-bypass-2, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
2,770

edits