![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
a_kleber«He caused a furor in the 1970s when his research on early Islamic manuscripts, including the analysis of the repeated use of monotheistic Judeo-Christian imagery found in the Qur'an led him to posit that the rise of Islam was a mutation of what was originally a Judeo-Christian sect trying to spread in Arab lands, rather than by simple cultural diffusion. As time evolved the Judeo-Christian scriptures were adapted to an Arab perspective and mutated into what became the Qur'an which was developed over centuries with contributions from various Arab tribal sources. Wansbrough's research suggests that a great deal of the traditional history of Islam appeared to be a fabrication of later generations seeking to forge and justify a unique religious identity. Within this context, the character of Muhammad could be seen as a manufactured myth created to provide the Arab tribes with their own Arab version of the Judeo-Christian prophets.»
Арабы страшно обиделись, иными словами. Тем более в 70'е годы.
Ученого звали John Wansbrough. И это всего лишь одна теория, основанная на солидных исторических изысканиях. Про Христа/христианство таких теорий вагон уже давно. Но на фоне существующих консенсусов в исламоведении, такого рода теории считаются ревизионисткими.
Есть еще такое понятие как "исламизация знания". Это когда религию нельзя изучать извне, а только изнутри - т.е. не выходя за рамки догматов.
Уансбро написал две важные книги:
Quranic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation
The Sectarian Milieu: Content and Composition of Islamic Salvation History
(о сектах в контексте раннего христианства кое-что тут) [чо-то сомнительное]
--------
«Wansbrough applied an antire arsenal of what he called the "instruments and techniques" of biblical criticism - form criticism, source criticism, redaction criticism, and much more - to the Koranic text. He concluded that the Koran evolved only gradually in the seventh and eighth centuries, during a long period of oral transmission when Jewish and Christian sects were arguing volubly with one another well to the north of Mecca and Medina, in what are now parts of Syria, Jordan, Israel, and Iraq. The reason that no Islam source material from the first century or so of Islam has survived, Wansbrough concluded, is that it never existed.»
----------
радио-интервью с коллегой ученого, 2002 год
«Stephen Crittenden: You would expect his views to be controversial amongst Muslims, but are they in fact controversial amongst Western academics as well?
Gerald Hawting: Yes, they are. It’s difficult to see quite why they are controversial, because they’re so much in the mainstream of religious studies I suppose in the ways that people have studied Judaism and Christianity. You have the feeling that sometimes scholars of Islam are very loath to take Islam seriously, and to study it in the same way that they study the other monotheistic religions. I’m not quite sure why that is, maybe something psychological, I don’t know.
Stephen Crittenden: Perhaps because it’s dangerous?
Gerald Hawting: I don’t think many of them are worried in any sort of physical sense. It’s just that I suppose a desire not to offend, a sympathy for Muslims in the modern world, the predicaments that they say from things like that. So you find a lot of drawing back I think in academic approaches to Islam. Wansbrough always insisted that if you take Islam seriously then you’ve got to study it seriously as well.
Stephen Crittenden: Has his kind of historical critical method been taken up anywhere in the Islamic world?
Gerald Hawting: There are one or two scholars who I don’t think have been influenced directly by Wansbrough, but there are certainly some scholars who are prepared to talk of the Koran as they would talk of other texts. The famous case is Nasser Abu Zaid, the Egyptian, who had to leave Egypt because of his views about the Koran.»
Эта странная "боязнь обидеть" - то-бишь политкорректность доведенная до комплекса - видна по википедии. Не обсуждается историчность ключевых персонажей традиции. В случае христианских аналогов всегда есть рассуждение об историчности (там где есть исследовательский материал на этот счет).
Арабы страшно обиделись, иными словами. Тем более в 70'е годы.
Ученого звали John Wansbrough. И это всего лишь одна теория, основанная на солидных исторических изысканиях. Про Христа/христианство таких теорий вагон уже давно. Но на фоне существующих консенсусов в исламоведении, такого рода теории считаются ревизионисткими.
Есть еще такое понятие как "исламизация знания". Это когда религию нельзя изучать извне, а только изнутри - т.е. не выходя за рамки догматов.
Уансбро написал две важные книги:
Quranic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation
The Sectarian Milieu: Content and Composition of Islamic Salvation History
--------
«Wansbrough applied an antire arsenal of what he called the "instruments and techniques" of biblical criticism - form criticism, source criticism, redaction criticism, and much more - to the Koranic text. He concluded that the Koran evolved only gradually in the seventh and eighth centuries, during a long period of oral transmission when Jewish and Christian sects were arguing volubly with one another well to the north of Mecca and Medina, in what are now parts of Syria, Jordan, Israel, and Iraq. The reason that no Islam source material from the first century or so of Islam has survived, Wansbrough concluded, is that it never existed.»
----------
радио-интервью с коллегой ученого, 2002 год
«Stephen Crittenden: You would expect his views to be controversial amongst Muslims, but are they in fact controversial amongst Western academics as well?
Gerald Hawting: Yes, they are. It’s difficult to see quite why they are controversial, because they’re so much in the mainstream of religious studies I suppose in the ways that people have studied Judaism and Christianity. You have the feeling that sometimes scholars of Islam are very loath to take Islam seriously, and to study it in the same way that they study the other monotheistic religions. I’m not quite sure why that is, maybe something psychological, I don’t know.
Stephen Crittenden: Perhaps because it’s dangerous?
Gerald Hawting: I don’t think many of them are worried in any sort of physical sense. It’s just that I suppose a desire not to offend, a sympathy for Muslims in the modern world, the predicaments that they say from things like that. So you find a lot of drawing back I think in academic approaches to Islam. Wansbrough always insisted that if you take Islam seriously then you’ve got to study it seriously as well.
Stephen Crittenden: Has his kind of historical critical method been taken up anywhere in the Islamic world?
Gerald Hawting: There are one or two scholars who I don’t think have been influenced directly by Wansbrough, but there are certainly some scholars who are prepared to talk of the Koran as they would talk of other texts. The famous case is Nasser Abu Zaid, the Egyptian, who had to leave Egypt because of his views about the Koran.»
Эта странная "боязнь обидеть" - то-бишь политкорректность доведенная до комплекса - видна по википедии. Не обсуждается историчность ключевых персонажей традиции. В случае христианских аналогов всегда есть рассуждение об историчности (там где есть исследовательский материал на этот счет).
