"Western historians have often argued that Islamic civilization made its greatest mistake in the fifteenth century when it refused to accept the printing press, for this failure supposedly condemned Islamic civilizations to isolation from the mainstream of knowledge. Although Muslims did not use the printing press until the eighteenth century, and then only tentatively, they had other means of transmitting knowledge effectively and broadly, and for the proceeding eight centuries the inhabitants of the Islamic lands- not only Muslims but Christians and Jews as well- controlled the sluicegates of the very same stream of knowledge at which thirsty Europeans repeatedly came to drink."
I was very intrigued by J. Bloom's article "Paper and Books" since I learned much more than I expected to and was so fascinated by what I was reading. Having always known the stories of the Quran, I found it very refreshing to look at it from the perspective of not the stories, but the actual text and the eventual transcription of the words. Due to the reverence of the Quran and its importance for all Muslims, the written word, for the purpose alone of this Holy book, will always be sacred. However, as Bloom mentions, Muslims have learned and experienced the Quran as primarily an oral text, and this holds true for Muslims 1400 years ago and Muslims today.
As is the custom with most Muslims, during Ramadan, every night before we got to break fast, my uncle would find a video from youtube and we would listen to passages from the Quran which were not being read, as one would read the Bible, but were being sung. As important as we find it to read the Quran, people find it more traditional to sing the Quran to audiences as opposed merely reading aloud. This tradition goes back to the very beginning when God told Muhammad, "Recite in the name of thy Lord/ Who taught by pen/ Taught man what he knew not" and the recitation aspect of the Quran has since remained a vital part of Islamic life.
One thing which I found out while talking to my family about this piece was that Muslim teachings state that Muhammad was illiterate and this point is greatly emphasized throughout the Quran. It was explained to me that it is of great importance for Muslims to realize that Muhammad was illiterate and not a man who would be capable of creating or making up stories such as those written in the Quran. Therefore, this makes his recitation of the Quran to people all the more amazing since it could only be through God's help and therefore truly has to be the word of God. In this case, the basis of the religion is actually of Muhammad's lack of ability to read the written word, and instead relies solely on the oral presentation of God's messages.
I found the distinction between the Bible and the Quran in this sense quite interesting since the Bible focuses on "compilation and comparison of manuscript evidence" whereas the Quran puts a much greater emphasis on the oral tradition and views this as the authority for determining the written text, and not the other way around. The authority of orality goes so far in the Quran that God's first message to Muhammad is to "Recite in the name of thy lord," and there is no thought to writing or transcribing the Holy words.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Your comments are clearly from someone who has had an intimate relationship with the Quran, and for this, they are especially appreciated. I read the other Bloom article, on the spread of paper-making throughout Muslim lands, and one of the most fascinating and respect-eliciting aspects of the article, was the adamant importance to Muslims, to not allow the word of Allah to be printed on recycled paper, because what had been previously printed on the paper, was believed (and I am sure such is the case today) to be polluting or contaminating to the Quranic scripture. Such sincerity and genuine faith is pretty antithetical to what we often see pass as "Religious devotion" here in the west. This belief applied also, to the water-marks from Italian paper, once it was being imported into the Muslim lands.
ReplyDeleteSuch sincerity and utter faith is one of the reasons that I have always found the Muslim religion to be beautiful, and also, it makes the half-hearted, only-when-it's-convenient kind of faith we often see here in the west among "Christians" seem pretty shoddy and cheap...
the oral tradition of reciting the Quran is magnificant since most, if not all 1billion+ Muslims around the world are able to recite passages from the Quran by memory. The Quran is always published and read in its original Arabic text due to the reason that its meaning is not lost through translation. there is also a great sense of respect that is needed when reciting/reading the Holy book; muslims have to preform a cleansing process before doing so. All these factors insures a authenticity and originality to the text along with a sense of respect and unity.
ReplyDeleteYour post speaks volumes on the importance of orality and oral cultures in the context of history. I think it is often forgotten, even by Muslims, that Muhammad, was in fact illiterate when the Quran was bestowed upon him. This is quite remarkable considering the Quran is not the easiest of texts even for someone who speaks Arabic. I remember reading an article on the topic of perfect texts and the Quran as well as other texts such as the works of Shakespeare were in the discussion. One point the article highlighted was that the Quran as well as the works of Shakespeare can be considered two of the most perfect texts when it comes to their consistency. By consistency it was referring to the point that any two copies from two different periods of time by different publishers can be so similar in their content. It's remarkable that any text can be so durable throughout history such as the works of Shakespeare but what makes the Quran even more remarkable as a text is that it was initially transmitted through oral traditions. Any one who read the Quran would testify to its length and elaborate content. The works of Shakespeare can be transcribed from original manuscripts that may still exist today, so its not a far stretch that any version encountered today is similar to versions that existed in the past. However, there are no original manuscripts that exist for the Quran. The consistency of its content throughout history is truly a remarkable phenomenon considering that its origins began in a primary oral culture.
ReplyDeleteTanaz,
ReplyDeleteThis beautiful and heart-felt commentary illuminates the readings from this week and last. The emphasis on the /illiteracy/ of Muhammad as a productive feature of his relationship with God, and God's with His people, is fascinating, considering especially the pejorative connotations placed on illiteracy in the West (a theme we will return to). It will also be worth remembering and comparing Islamic history as we start discussing (in the next two weeks) the Christian Church's hold on literacy in medieval Europe.
I'm also intrigued by the use of YouTube during Ramadan. That adds a whole new level of technological interaction to the orality/literacy mix!