By Sandro Magister
A German scholar of ancient languages takes a new look at
the sacred book of Islam. He maintains that it was created by Syro-Aramaic
speaking Christians, in order to evangelize the Arabs. And he translates it in
a new way.
That Aramaic was the lingua franca of a vast area of the
ancient Middle East is a notion that is by now amply noted by a vast public,
thanks to Mel Gibson´s film "The Passion of the Christ," which
everyone watches in that language.
But that Syro-Aramaic was also the root of the Koran, and of
the Koran of a primitive Christian system, is a more specialized notion, an
almost clandestine one. And it´s more than a little dangerous. The author of
the most important book on the subject - a German professor of ancient Semitic
and Arabic languages - preferred, out of prudence, to write under the pseudonym
of Christoph Luxenberg. A few years ago, one of his colleagues at the
University of Nablus in Palestine, Suliman Bashear, was thrown out of the
window by his scandalized Muslim students.
In the Europe of the 16th and 17th centuries, mangled by the
wars of religion, scholars of the Bible also used to keep a safe distance with
pseudonyms. But if, now, the ones doing so are the scholars of the Koran, this
is a sign that, for the Muslim holy book as well, the era of historical,
linguistic, and philological re-readings has begun.
This is a promising beginning for many reasons. Gerd-Rüdiger
Puin, a professor at Saarland University in Germany and another Koran scholar
on the philological level, maintains that this type of approach to Islam´s holy
book can help to defeat its fundamentalist and Manichean readings, and to bring
into a better light its ties with Judaism and Christianity.
The book by "Christoph Luxenberg" came out in 2000
in Germany with the title "Die Syro-Aramäische Lesart des Koran"
("A Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran"), published in Berlin by Das
Arabische Buch. It is out of print, and there are no translations in other
languages. But a new, updated edition (again in German) is about to arrive in
bookstores.
Here follows an interview with the author, published in
Germany in the newspaper "Süddeutsche Zeitung" and in Italy in
"L´espresso," no. 11, March 12-18, 2004:
From the Gospel to Islam
An interview with "Christoph Luxenberg" by Alfred
Hackensberger
Q. - Professor, why did you think it useful to conduct this
re-reading of the Koran?
A. - "Because, in the Koran, there are many obscure
points that, from the beginning, even the Arab commentators were not able to
explain. Of these passages it is said that only God can comprehend them.
Western research on the Koran, which has been conducted in a systematic manner
only since about the middle of the 19th century, has always taken as its base
the commentaries of the Arab scholars. But these have never gone beyond the
etymological explanation of some terms of foreign origin."
Q. - What makes your method different?
A. - "I began from the idea that the language of the
Koran must be studied from an historical-linguistic point of view. When the
Koran was composed, Arabic did not exist as a written language; thus it seemed
evident to me that it was necessary to take into consideration, above all,
Aramaic, which at the time, between the 4th and 7th centuries, was not only the
language of written communication, but also the lingua franca of that area of
Western Asia."
Q. - Tell us how you proceeded.
A. - "At first I conducted a ´synchronous´ reading. In
other words, I kept in mind both Arabic and Aramaic. Thanks to this procedure,
I was able to discover the extent of the previously unsuspected influence of
Aramaic upon the language of the Koran: in point of fact, much of what now
passes under the name of ´classical Arabic´ is of Aramaic derivation."
Q. - What do you say, then, about the idea, accepted until
now, that the Koran was the first book written in Arabic?
A. - "According to Islamic tradition, the Koran dates
back to the 7th century, while the first examples of Arabic literature in the
full sense of the phrase are found only two centuries later, at the time of the
´Biography of the Prophet´; that is, of the life of Mohammed as written by Ibn
Hisham, who died in 828. We may thus establish that post-Koranic Arabic
literature developed by degrees, in the period following the work of al-Khalil
bin Ahmad, who died in 786, the founder of Arabic lexicography (kitab al-ayn),
and of Sibawwayh, who died in 796, to whom the grammar of classical Arabic is
due. Now, if we assume that the composition of the Koran was brought to an end
in the year of the Prophet Mohammed´s death, in 632, we find before us an
interval of 150 years, during which there is no trace of Arabic literature
worthy of note."
Q. - So at the time of Mohammed Arabic did not have precise
rules, and was not used for written communication. Then how did the Koran come
to be written?
A. - "At that time, there were no Arab schools -
except, perhaps, for the Christian centers of al-Anbar and al-Hira, in southern
Mesopotamia, or what is now Iraq. The Arabs of that region had been
Christianized and instructed by Syrian Christians. Their liturgical language
was Syro-Aramaic. And this was the vehicle of their culture, and more generally
the language of written communication."
Q. - What is the relationship between this language of
culture and the origin of the Koran?
A. - "Beginning in the third century, the Syrian
Christians did not limit themselves to bringing their evangelical mission to
nearby countries, like Armenia or Persia. They pressed on toward distant
territories, all the way to the borders of China and the western coast of
India, in addition to the entire Arabian peninsula all the way to Yemen and
Ethiopia. It is thus rather probable that, in order to proclaim the Christian
message to the Arabic peoples, they would have used (among others) the language
of the Bedouins, or Arabic. In order to spread the Gospel, they necessarily
made use of a mishmash of languages. But in an era in which Arabic was just an
assembly of dialects and had no written form, the missionaries had no choice
but to resort to their own literary language and their own culture; that is, to
Syro-Aramaic. The result was that the language of the Koran was born as a
written Arabic language, but one of Arab-Aramaic derivation."
Q. - Do you mean that anyone who does not keep the
Syro-Aramaic language in mind cannot translate and interpret the Koran
correctly?
A. - "Yes. Anyone who wants to make a thorough study of
the Koran must have a background in the Syro-Aramaic grammar and literature of
that period, the 7th century. Only thus can he identify the original meaning of
Arabic expressions whose semantic interpretation can be established definitively
only by retranslating them into Syro-Aramaic."
Q. - Let´s come to the misunderstandings. One of the most
glaring errors you cite is that of the virgins promised, in the Islamic
paradise, to the suicide bombers.
A. - "We begin from the term ´huri,´ for which the
Arabic commentators could not find any meaning other than those heavenly
virgins. But if one keeps in mind the derivations from Syro-Aramaic, that
expression indicated ´white grapes,´ which is one of the symbolic elements of
the Christian paradise, recalled in the Last Supper of Jesus. There´s another
Koranic expression, falsely interpreted as ´the children´ or ´the youths´ of
paradise: in Aramaic: it designates the fruit of the vine, which in the Koran
is compared to pearls. As for the symbols of paradise, these interpretive
errors are probably connected to the male monopoly in Koranic commentary and
interpretation."
Q. - By the way, what do you think about the Islamic veil?
A. - "There is a passage in Sura 24, verse 31, which in
Arabic reads, ´That they should beat their khumurs against their bags.´ It is
an incomprehensible phrase, for which the following interpretation has been
sought: ´That they should extend their kerchiefs from their heads to their
breasts.´ But if this passage is read in the light of Syro-Aramaic, it simply
means: ´They should fasten their belts around their waists.´"
Q. - Does this mean the veil is really a chastity belt?
A. - "Not exactly. It is true that, in the Christian
tradition, the belt is associated with chastity: Mary is depicted with a belt
fastened around her waist. But in the gospel account of the Last Supper, Christ
also ties an apron around his waist before washing the Apostles´ feet. There
are clearly many parallels with the Christian faith."
Q. - You have discovered that Sura 97 of the Koran mentions
the Nativity. And in your translation of the famous Sura of Mary, her
"birthgiving" is "made legitimate by the Lord." Moreover,
the text contains the invitation to come to the sacred liturgy, to the Mass.
Would the Koran, then, be nothing other than an Arabic version of the Christian
Bible?
A. - "In its origin, the Koran is a Syro-Aramaic
liturgical book, with hymns and extracts from Scriptures which might have been
used in sacred Christian services. In the second place, one may see in the
Koran the beginning of a preaching directed toward transmitting the belief in
the Sacred Scriptures to the pagans of Mecca, in the Arabic language. Its socio-political
sections, which are not especially related to the original Koran, were added
later in Medina. At its beginning, the Koran was not conceived as the
foundation of a new religion. It presupposes belief in the Scriptures, and thus
functioned merely as an inroad into Arabic society."
Q. - To many Muslim believers, for whom the Koran is the
holy book and the only truth, your conclusions could seem blasphemous. What
reactions have you noticed up until now?
A. - "In Pakistan, the sale of the edition of
´Newsweek´ that contained an article on my book was banned. Otherwise, I must
say that, in my encounters with Muslims, I have not noticed any hostile
attitudes. On the contrary, they have appreciated the commitment of a
non-Muslim to studies aimed at an objective comprehension of their sacred text.
My work could be judged as blasphemous only by those who decide to cling to
errors in the interpretation of the word of God. But in the Koran it is
written, ´No one can bring to the right way those whom God induces to
error.´"
Q. - Aren´t you afraid of a fatwa, a death sentence like the
one pronounced against Salman Rushdie?
A. - "I am not a Muslim, so I don´t run that risk.
Besides, I haven´t offended against the Koran"
Q. - But you still preferred to use a pseudonym.
A. - "I did that on the advice of Muslim friends who
were afraid that some enthusiastic fundamentalist would act of his own
initiative, without waiting for a fatwa."
ــــــــــــــــــــ
Divine Verses
Koran, in Arabic Qur´an, means recitation or reading. It is
an essential element of the Islamic faith that it was always with God and
"descended" in its fullness to Mohammed at the moment of his call as
a prophet, called the "night of destiny." It is in Arabic, and it may
be ritually recited only in this language. It is divided into 114 Suras, or
chapters, and each Sura is divided into verses. The first Sura, called
"the unstopping," is a brief prayer that plays an important role in
worship and everyday life. The following Suras are ordered according to length,
from longest to shortest. According to the tradition, Mohammed gradually
communicated to his faithful the parts of the Koran revealed to him. The oldest
Suras are called those "of Mecca"; that later ones, "of
Medina." The most ancient Suras are of a markedly theological character,
while the Suras of Medina are more juridical, dictating the ordering of the
community. For Sunni Islam,.the Koran may not be put to criticism, given its
divine nature: in any case, the "door of interpretation" of the Koran
has been closed since the 11th century.
This article appeared originally on chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it. All rights reserved.