Recently an article “The Quranic milieu: where was the Kuran written” was published on http://res... more Recently an article “The Quranic milieu: where was the Kuran written” was published on http://research-islam.blogspot.com. The hypothesis broached in the article is based on the premise that like every piece of literature, the Quran should reflect the cultural milieu of its time. Meccan chapters of Quran frequently allude to grain, olives, wine, pomegranates and orchards so that the pagans of Mecca might ponder on the signs of God and accept the divine message. Since, Mecca has been a barren place which could hardly fit the agriculture milieu of Quran; therefore, Quran may have originated in a fertile region somewhere in the North-West of Arabia. The Quran also alludes to past nations like Aad, Thamud, Saba, Hira, Madyan and the people of Lot. The audience of Quran should have been conversant with the tales of past nations which was possible only if they had lived in the vicinity of their remains. Since, most of the ancient nations were geographically located in the North-West Arabia; therefore, the pagans of Mecca might have been living in the Levant area. There is plenty of evidence, both within the Quran and outside it, to expose the fallacy of the hypothesis advocated in the “Quranic milieu”. Historical sources like, Quran, manuscripts and Non-Muslim accounts published in the works of renowned historians are relied upon as evidence to counter the speculation of the hypothesis. The evidence of early Non-Islamic sources and epigraphic discoveries, mostly corroborated rather than falsified the traditional Islamic accounts, which render the hypothesis of “Quranic milieu” nothing more than a cavil. Moreover, considering the fact that Levant was overwhelmingly Christian and ruled by the Byzantine Empire, how was it possible that Christian Church and Byzantine official accounts missed to record the inception of Islam, an important event happening in their domain under their eyes? Is it enough to posit a radical theory about the inception of Islam by merely relying on disputed construction of the Quranic text, mishmash of some extensions and lots of speculation? No, there has to be supporting contemporary historical accounts and epigraphic evidence so as to make the hypothesis plausible to any degree. The hypothesis in question is a mere speculation, which not only is devoid of evidence but its also contrary to it. The theory in the "Quranic milieu" may sensationalize the debate by appealing to biased audiences but it does no good to the scholarship in the subject.
Recently an article “The Quranic milieu: where was the Kuran written” was published on http://res... more Recently an article “The Quranic milieu: where was the Kuran written” was published on http://research-islam.blogspot.com. The hypothesis broached in the article is based on the premise that like every piece of literature, the Quran should reflect the cultural milieu of its time. Meccan chapters of Quran frequently allude to grain, olives, wine, pomegranates and orchards so that the pagans of Mecca might ponder on the signs of God and accept the divine message. Since, Mecca has been a barren place which could hardly fit the agriculture milieu of Quran; therefore, Quran may have originated in a fertile region somewhere in the North-West of Arabia. The Quran also alludes to past nations like Aad, Thamud, Saba, Hira, Madyan and the people of Lot. The audience of Quran should have been conversant with the tales of past nations which was possible only if they had lived in the vicinity of their remains. Since, most of the ancient nations were geographically located in the North-West Arabia; therefore, the pagans of Mecca might have been living in the Levant area. There is plenty of evidence, both within the Quran and outside it, to expose the fallacy of the hypothesis advocated in the “Quranic milieu”. Historical sources like, Quran, manuscripts and Non-Muslim accounts published in the works of renowned historians are relied upon as evidence to counter the speculation of the hypothesis. The evidence of early Non-Islamic sources and epigraphic discoveries, mostly corroborated rather than falsified the traditional Islamic accounts, which render the hypothesis of “Quranic milieu” nothing more than a cavil. Moreover, considering the fact that Levant was overwhelmingly Christian and ruled by the Byzantine Empire, how was it possible that Christian Church and Byzantine official accounts missed to record the inception of Islam, an important event happening in their domain under their eyes? Is it enough to posit a radical theory about the inception of Islam by merely relying on disputed construction of the Quranic text, mishmash of some extensions and lots of speculation? No, there has to be supporting contemporary historical accounts and epigraphic evidence so as to make the hypothesis plausible to any degree. The hypothesis in question is a mere speculation, which not only is devoid of evidence but its also contrary to it. The theory in the "Quranic milieu" may sensationalize the debate by appealing to biased audiences but it does no good to the scholarship in the subject.
Uploads
Papers by Ijaz Badshah
There is plenty of evidence, both within the Quran and outside it, to expose the fallacy of the hypothesis advocated in the “Quranic milieu”. Historical sources like, Quran, manuscripts and Non-Muslim accounts published in the works of renowned historians are relied upon as evidence to counter the speculation of the hypothesis. The evidence of early Non-Islamic sources and epigraphic discoveries, mostly corroborated rather than falsified the traditional Islamic accounts, which render the hypothesis of “Quranic milieu” nothing more than a cavil. Moreover, considering the fact that Levant was overwhelmingly Christian and ruled by the Byzantine Empire, how was it possible that Christian Church and Byzantine official accounts missed to record the inception of Islam, an important event happening in their domain under their eyes? Is it enough to posit a radical theory about the inception of Islam by merely relying on disputed construction of the Quranic text, mishmash of some extensions and lots of speculation? No, there has to be supporting contemporary historical accounts and epigraphic evidence so as to make the hypothesis plausible to any degree. The hypothesis in question is a mere speculation, which not only is devoid of evidence but its also contrary to it. The theory in the "Quranic milieu" may sensationalize the debate by appealing to biased audiences but it does no good to the scholarship in the subject.
There is plenty of evidence, both within the Quran and outside it, to expose the fallacy of the hypothesis advocated in the “Quranic milieu”. Historical sources like, Quran, manuscripts and Non-Muslim accounts published in the works of renowned historians are relied upon as evidence to counter the speculation of the hypothesis. The evidence of early Non-Islamic sources and epigraphic discoveries, mostly corroborated rather than falsified the traditional Islamic accounts, which render the hypothesis of “Quranic milieu” nothing more than a cavil. Moreover, considering the fact that Levant was overwhelmingly Christian and ruled by the Byzantine Empire, how was it possible that Christian Church and Byzantine official accounts missed to record the inception of Islam, an important event happening in their domain under their eyes? Is it enough to posit a radical theory about the inception of Islam by merely relying on disputed construction of the Quranic text, mishmash of some extensions and lots of speculation? No, there has to be supporting contemporary historical accounts and epigraphic evidence so as to make the hypothesis plausible to any degree. The hypothesis in question is a mere speculation, which not only is devoid of evidence but its also contrary to it. The theory in the "Quranic milieu" may sensationalize the debate by appealing to biased audiences but it does no good to the scholarship in the subject.