نشریه قرآن پژوهی خاورشناسان (قرآن و مستشرقان)
سال هفتم شماره 1 (پیاپی 12، بهار و تابستان 1391)

Some of the orientalists are of the opinion that the Qur’an is not divinely revealed book. They believe that Muhammad has compiled the Qur’an from various cultures, religions, people and books or the Qur’an is the result of the experience and thought of Muhammad or [God forbid] a satanic inspiration and does not contain any divinity. In this paper, the arguments of orientalists concerning the source of the Qur’an have been scrutinized and the conclusion has been derived that alone having similarity with the Bible does not establish the theory that the Qur’an has been derived from that. Principally, all revealed religions in their teachings have a common nature of guidance to mankind and in general they share the same teachings while differ in minor issues. Furthermore, the Qur’anic criticism of the Biblical teachings and its differences with that shows that it has not been derived from it. The culture and some of the etiquettes of the people of the time of revelation and their poems cannot be considered as the source of the Qur’an because the Qur’an has protested and criticised them and their culture and poems and has changed all these from the base. Rather, it should be said that the presence of the Qur’anic verse in the poetry of Ummyah bin Salt shows that how they were influenced by the Qur’an. Besides, the articulacy of the prophet was lower than the Qur’an from the view point of Arabic eloquence and rhetoric. This indicates that the Qur’an was not the result of the Prophet contemplation or experience and neither he took it from someone in journeys rather, the Qur’an has been revealed from the Lord of the worlds that the Qur’an says, “(This is) a Message sent down from the Lord of the Worlds” (al Haqqa 69:43).

Some Orientalists have assumed that there is contradiction between the Quran and the natural sciences. Thus, they have posed many doubts particularly in regard with the so-called contradictions of the Quran with cosmos and astronomy. In the Leiden Encyclopedia of the Quran, the Orientalists such as Angelika Neuwirth, Paul Konitech, Ahmad Dallal and Maher Jarrar compare the Quranic cosmic version with Ptolemaic system about the seven heavens, God’s creation of the heavens and the earth in six days, the course movements of the sun, the earth and the shooting stars; and concluded that the Quranic points are not in harmony with the new cosmic theories. This article after studying the Orientalists’ views proves that there is no contradiction between the Quran and natural sciences; for most of these contradictions trace back to the theories of the Muslim intellectuals rather than contradiction between the Quran and science. However, in some cases there are apparent contradictions because they propounded contradictions between the Quran and the unsubstantiated hypotheses. The empirical sciences do not give us a certain knowledge that should completely represent the facts in the ground, nor do these sciences have such a claim. Empirical sciences are erroneous. Thus it would berational to give priority to the certain argument of the Quran rather than the probable reasoning of the empirical sciences [scientific theories]. It is to be kept in mind that the Quranic cosmic model is in explicit contradiction with most of the propositions cited in the Aristotelian- Ptolemaic system.

One of the worthwhile debates in the Quranic Sciences is the correlation of the Quranic verses and their consistent and coherent relationship. Not only each of the Quranic vocabularies enjoys of internal harmony but also the whole chapter is provided with an amazing consistency. The discussion of correlation and harmony between the Quranic verses and its style is a fundamental discussion that affects our deduction from the Quranic content. The Orientalists have raised the doubt of inconsistency between the Quranic verses. Though it seems that the Quranic chapters are dispersed and each of them covers different issues, the content of the Quran like the components of a building are closely related and connected with each other. In addition, considering the divine omnipotence, wisdom and purposefulness, Allah sends a text that its themes and contents are in complete harmony with one another so that the people should be ledand guided. The present article cites and criticizes the orientalists’ (such as Regis Blachere, Richard Bill and Theodor Noldekes) doubts on correlation of the Quranic verses. The writer made it clear that the Orientalists have failed to differentiate between conversational [colloquial] and written styles of the Quran, and paid no attention to artistic subtleties and various Quranic subjects that all are to guide and educate the human.

One of the most important discussions related to the history of the Quran is the Meccan and Medinan verses and chapters. The Muslim intellectuals and the Orientalists have posed several accounts in this regard. The writer in this article reviews and criticizes the theories of the following orientalists such Lammens (d. 1937), Regis Blachere (1973) and Theodor Noldekes (1930). He tries to analyze and review different classifications made by the orientalists. Lammens divided the whole Quran into the Meccan chapters prior and after interval and the Medinan chapters and verses. Theodor Noldekes has his own arrangement such as revelation prior and after interval and the final revelations prior migration.

William Montgomery Watt, a Christian Orientalist, explores about the personality and conduct of the prophet (PBUH and his progeny) and the early history of Islam only from analytic and historical perspectives. His critical analyses are based on the early sources. His remarkable works such as “Muhammad in Mecca”, “Muhammad in Medina” and “the prophet Muhammad and politician” had been noteworthy efforts drawing the prophet’s image in the eyes of the Europeans. One of the important topics that some inconstant historians and exegetes have dealt with in regard with the early history of Islamand the conduct of the prophet is “the story of the cranes” or “the story of the maidens”. The Orientalists have paid overriding attention to this story and highlighted it extremely. The article at hand tries to review. Montgomery Watt’s theory on the very fake and fabricated story of the cranes or satanic verses. The most important challenges this story face with are as following: the chain of traditions transmitting this story is very weak, variety of differences are visible in quoting all those traditions, lack of harmony with the context of verses from chapter al-Najm, contradiction with other Quranic verses, being in sheer contrast with the prophet’s infallibility, being in complete inconsistency with the prophet’s conduct and the rational criteria. The research has put forth the most important Quranic, traditional, rational and historical arguments to refute the fabricated story.

The current research introduces and reviews the article of apostasy written in the Leiden Encyclopedia of the Quran. Wael Hallaq is the writer of the very article and deals with the following subjects: the concept of apostasy, the historical and conceptual relation of disbelief and apostasy, disbelief from perspective of the Quran, the fate of the apostates vary in the Quran, wars of apostasy, predicting death penalty for the apostate after the holy prophet’ lifetime, those who commit apostasy and their punishment. Notwithstanding many positive points in the article, there are some arguable points that can be debated and criticized. The present article reviews and criticizes those questionable points. The writer tries to review the following materials of the article: the three cognitive concepts such as disbelief, apostasy and debauchery [fisq], various kinds of faith for the apostates in the Quran and their punishments. According to him the writer of the article has failed to characterize and mention different kinds of apostasy.