If you're new here, you may want to get regular updates via如果你是新这里，你可能想通过定期更新 RSS feed RSS提要 . 。 Thank you for visiting!谢谢您的访问！

Todd Lawson 托德劳森
Journal of American Oriental Society (JAOS), Volume 122, Number 3, (July-Sept 2002), p. 美国东方学会杂志 （JAOS），122卷，第3期，（7月至2002年9月），第 658 658

This is a collection of articles in Qur'?nic studies by some of the most influential early pioneers in the field: N?ldeke's famous article for the Britannica (9th edition, 1891); Caetani's study of the “Uthm?nic recension tradition” (1915); Mingana's: “Three Ancient Korans” (1914) and “The Transmission of the Koran” (1916); four seemingly idiosyncratically chosen articles by Arthur Jeffery (1935?39); Margoliouth's study of variants (1925); Geiger's “What Did这是在由该领域最有影响力的先驱者一些：古兰经'？网卡的研究文章收集ñ？ldeke对的大英百科全书（第9版，1891年著名的文章）;卡塔尼的研究的“Uthm？网卡的recension传统” （1915年）;明加纳的：“三古可兰经”（1914年）和“可兰经的传承”（1916年）; 4似乎习性选择由阿瑟杰弗里（1935？39）文章;马戈柳思的变异研究（1925年）;盖格的“什么 Muhammad穆罕默德 Borrow from Judaism” (1898) [segments]; W. St. Clair-Tisdall's “The Sources of借用犹太教“（1898）[片段];西街。克莱尔-蒂斯代尔的”来源 Islam伊斯兰教 ” (1901) [segments]; and Torry's “The Jewish Foundations of Islam” (1933) [segments]. “（1901）] [部分;和托里的”伊斯兰教犹太基础“（1933）] [部分。 The collection ends with Andrew Rippin's earnest discussion of the stimulating, controversial, daunting, and ill-starred work of John Wansbrough (1985).收集完与安德鲁Rippin的认真讨论的刺激，争议，令人心悸和不祥的约翰旺斯伯勒（1985年）的工作。 Here, one gets the impression that Wansbrough is the only post-war scholar to have taken the literary presuppositions and findings of the other earlier authors seriously enough to press these to some logical conclusions.在这里，一得到的印象是旺斯伯勒是唯一战后学者采取了文学的前提和其他严重不足早些时候提交这些调查结果向新闻界一些合乎逻辑的结论。 Why this should be so is not addressed.为什么会这样，这不是解决。 But the discussion does yield a salubrious insight: the Qur'?n is first and foremost an instance of “Salvation但讨论并产生一个有益健康的见解：古兰经'？n是首要的“救亡实例 History史 ”, not a book of history qua history, and that stabilization??and therefore a kind of canonization??of the text occurred at a much later period than generally assumed.[1] “，而不是历史书的历史条件，而稳定？？，因此对封样？的文字？在更晚的时间比一般假设发生[1]。

Gathered here together, it will become clear to the reader that each article is important also as a product of a specific time, place and ?lan.这里聚集在一起，就会变成清楚地向读者，每篇文章非常重要，因为一个产品的一个特定的时间，地点和也？网络。 Such is indeed signaled on the dustjacket where it is pointed out that this “penetrating work” begins with “the first truly scientific study of the Koran” (ie, N?ldeke's).这些的确是标志着在那里指出，这种“穿透工作”开始以“第一个真正科学的研究可兰经”（即，氮dustjacket？ldeke的）。 The editor, “Ibn Warraq”, whom the same dustjacket identifies as “the author of “Why I Am Not A Muslim”, has done a service for undergraduates and others who have difficulty in locating the originals of these groundbreaking??and, in some sense??relics of Qur'?nic scholarship.该编辑器，“伊本Warraq”，其中相同的dustjacket为“撰文标识”为什么我不是一个穆斯林“，为本科生做了一个服务和其他定位谁在这些突破性的正本困难？？，并在从某种意义上说？？的古兰经'？网卡奖学金文物。 It will also quickly become clears to the contemporary student of Islam, however, that several of these various essays are about much more than the pure vertical love of Qur'?nic scholarship.它也将很快成为清除伊斯兰教的当代大学生，但是，这些不同的论文数约比纯古兰经'？网卡奖学金垂直更多的爱。

Beyond questioning the motives for publishing such a collection at the end of the twentieth century, the reader is confronted with an “Introduction” distinctive for its repeated lapses in style: “the founder of the Shias” (p. 11), “Heilgeschichte” (p. 34), unreferenced quotations and assertions (eg, pp. 14, 19, 34).除了质疑出版于20世纪末这样一个集合的动机，读者面临着一个“导言”中的一再失误风格鲜明：“对什叶派创始人”（第11页），“Heilgeschichte” （第34页），未引用的报价和断言（如页。14，19，34）。

Arrogance and amateurish deductions abound; and all is sounded in the key of gormless hysteria: ?Some of the stories in the Koran are enormously long; for instance, the story of Joseph takes up a whole chapter of 111 verses.傲慢与业余扣除比比皆是，一切正在gormless歇斯底里关键响起：？在可兰经的故事有些是巨大的长期的，比如，约瑟的故事发生了一整章的经文111。 Are we really to believed that Muhammad remembered it exactly as it was revealed??难道我们真的要相信穆罕默德记得它完全一样显示？？ (p. 13); or even better: ?Most scholars believe that there are interpolations in the Koran.?[2] (p. 17). （第13页），或什至更好：？多数学者认为，在可兰经内插。？[2]（第17页）。 Indeed.的确如此。

This same “Introduction” uses for a motto a statement published in 1933 by that prolific apostle of scientism, Saloman Reinach (1858?1932): ?From the literary point of view, the Koran has little merit.此相同的“导言”为座右铭，1933年出版的科学主义多产使徒一份声明中使用，萨洛曼赖纳赫（1858？1932）：？从文学的角度来看，没有什么值得可兰经。 Declamation, repetition, puerility, a lack of logic and coherence strike the unprepared reader at every turn.朗读，重复，幼稚，逻辑和连贯性的罢工毫无准备读者动辄缺乏。 It is humiliating to the human intellect to think that this mediocre literature has been the subject of innumerable commentaries, and that millions of men are still wasting time absorbing it.?[3] (p. 9).这是一种侮辱人的智慧认为这平庸的文学一直是无数评论的问题，并且以百万计的人仍然在浪费时间吸收它。[3]（第9页）。

It is difficult to see how this characterization improves upon the more famous and better written one by Thomas Carlyle a hundred years earlier, except perhaps in degree of offensiveness.这是很难看到这种定性改进后更知名，更好地为托马斯‧卡莱尔1 100年前也许除了在进攻性程度。 It must be said that it undoubtedly demonstrates the editor's diligence and industry in finding churlish things to say about the Qur'?n in English.应该说，这无疑表明在寻找粗野的事情谈谈古兰经'？在英语n编辑器的勤奋和工业。

It is difficult to recommend this production, except perhaps for antiquarian interests and the archaeology of the study of Islam.这是困难的建议或许除古玩利益和伊斯兰教的考古学研究这个生产。

Tood Lawson, McGill University. Tood劳森，麦吉尔大学。

External Link 外部链接

• Yasin Dutton,亚辛顿， The Origins of the Koran – A Critical Analysis 可兰经的由来-一种批判性分析

Notes ( added by Asif Iqbal ) 债券 （ 伊克巴尔 添加 阿西夫 ）

[1] The excessively skeptical attitude towards the sources and the general conclusions reached at by J. Wansbrough, especially the one cited here, has not been accepted by the serious and mainstream Islamic scholarship. [1]的来源和走向由J.旺斯伯勒，尤其是这里的一个例子达成的一般结论过于怀疑态度，并没有被接受的严重和主流伊斯兰奖学金。 To really understand the position of this argument of Wansbrough, let us reproduce Professor Lawson's above description:要真正理解这种旺斯伯勒参数位置，让我们重现劳森教授的上述描述：

The Qur'?n is first and foremost an instance of “Salvation History”, not a book of history qua history, and that stabilization??and therefore a kind of canonization??of the text occurred at a much later period than generally assumed.古兰经'？n是首要的“救亡史”的实例，而不是历史书的历史条件，而稳定？？，因此对封样？的文字？在更晚的时间比一般假设发生。

Now consider the response of Alford T. Welch to this argument:现在考虑奥尔福德吨韦尔奇这个论点的回应：

A distinctive feature of the Koran that cannot be ignored if the Muslim scripture is to be fully understood is its close relationship to the life of Muhammad and his contemporaries… [T]he Koran is a historical document that reflects the prophetic career of Muhammad and responds constantly to the specific needs and problems of the emerging Muslim community.作者：不可忽视的古兰经的显着特点，如果穆斯林经文是要充分理解是它密切关系到穆罕默德和他同时代的生活... [美国]古兰经是一个历史文件，反映了穆罕默德先知的职业和响应不断的具体需要和新兴穆斯林社区问题。

It abounds in references and allusions to historical events that occurred during the last twenty or so years of Muhammad's lifetime, a period during which it was itself a history making event.它盛产的提法，并发生在过去20人左右，穆罕默德的一生里，在此期间，它本身就是一个创造历史的事件历史事件典故。 ( Qur'anic Studies?Problems and Prospects , in Journal of the American Academy of Religion , Vol. 47, 1980, p. 626) （ 古兰经研究？宗教问题与前景，在美国科学院的杂志 ，第。47，1980，页626）

Moreover, the newly-discovered Qur'?nic manuscripts (for instance the Sana'? manuscripts etc.) suggest the existence of a canonized Qur'?n at the end of the first Islamic century.此外，新发现的古兰经'？网卡例如手稿（在萨那'？手稿等），建议在第一次伊斯兰世纪末的册封古兰经'？ñ存在。 All this is truly troublesome for Wansbrough's theories.所有这一切，真正为旺斯伯勒的理论麻烦。

[2] cf., even N?ldeke's remarks from his Encyclopedia Britannica article: [2]比照。，甚至是n？ 大英百科全书文章ldeke的谈话从他的：

…there is no single verse or clause which can be plausibly made out to be an interpolation by Zaid at the instance of Ab? ...没有一个单一诗句或条文，可以振振有词地提出了将在实例1的抗体由扎伊德插？ Bakr, `Umar or `Uthm?n.贝克尔，欧麦尔`或`Uthm？的翻译 Slight clerical errors there may have been, but the Koran of `Uthm?n contains none but genuine elements…有轻微的文书错误可能是，但`Uthm古兰经？ñ包含没有，但真正的内容...

[3] cf. [3]比照。 Sir HAR Gibb's remarks:主席先生吉勃的讲话：

… years of close study confirm[s] his [ie, Thomas Carlyle's] further judgment that in it [ie, the Qur'?n] “there is a merit quite other than the literary one.近几年研究证实... [的]他[即托马斯卡莱尔的]进一步作出判断，认为它[即古兰经'？ñ]“有一个很值得一比其他文学。 If a book come[s] from the heart, it will contrive to reach other hearts; all art and authorcraft are of small account to that.” Though, to be sure, the question of literary merit is one not to be judged on a priori grounds but in relation to the genius of the Arabic language; and no man in fifteen hundred years has ever played on that deep-toned instrument with such power, such boldness, and such range of emotional effects as Mohammed did.如果一本书来[第07期从心]，将图谋达到其他的心，一切艺术和authorcraft小账了这一点。“虽然，可以肯定，对文学价值的问题是，不应该被一个判断先验的理由，而是涉及到阿拉伯语言天才，以及在一千五百年从来没有人在这起与这种权力，这种大胆的深色调的手段，作为情绪的影响等一系列穆罕默德一样。 (in Mohammedanism , London: Oxford Univ. Press, 2nd ed., 1957, pp. 36?37). （在伊斯兰教 ，伦敦：牛津大学。出版社，第二版。1957年，页。36？37）。