r/AcademicQuran

Was wondering if any scholars studied the question or idea of more than a single author or ‘voice’ of the Quran.

Today, in many mosques, the experience can sometimes feel very “dry" or individualistic: people come in, pray behind the imam, maybe listen to a khutbah or short lesson, then leave. There often isn't much broader communal interaction, collective discussion, reconciliation, or social bonding beyond prayer itself.

So my question is:

* In the Prophet’s mosque in Madina and the early Rāshidūn masjid system and Islam later how integrated were social, educational, and communal functions with prayer?

* Did early mosques already function like later tekkes/zāwiyas in practice, or is that a later institutional development?

* Is there evidence in early historical sources (Sīra, ḥadīth, early chronicles) showing structured community life inside the mosque beyond worship and teaching circles?

However, when I compare this with later historical institutions like Sufi tekkes/zāwiyas (and in some modern analogies, spaces like cemevis), those seem to function much more explicitly as full community hubs — places for remembrance (dhikr), teaching, spiritual training, eating together, hospitality, and social support structures alongside worship.

​

1. Quran 2:243

"Have you not considered those who left their homes in many thousands, fearing death? Allah said to them, 'Die'; then He restored them to life. And Allah is full of bounty to the people, but most of the people do not show gratitude."

This parallels the story of Ezekiel 37. The story where prophet Hizqeel/Ezekiel commands the dead bones to rise.

2. Quran 2:246-247

"Have you not considered the assembly of the Children of Israel after [the time of] Moses when they said to a prophet of theirs, 'Send to us a king, and we will fight in the way of Allah '? He said, 'Would you perhaps refrain from fighting if fighting was prescribed for you?' They said, 'And why should we not fight in the way of Allah when we have been driven out from our homes and from our children?' But when fighting was prescribed for you, they turned away, except for a few of them. And Allah is knowing the wrongdoers."

"And their prophet said to them, 'Indeed, Allah has sent to you Saul as a king.' They said, 'How can he have kingship over us while we are more worthy of kingship than him and he has not been given any exception of wealth?' He said, 'Indeed, Allah has chosen him over you and has increased him abundantly in knowledge and stature. And Allah gives His kingship to whom He wills. And Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing.'"

This is a parallel to 1 Samuel 8:5, where children of Israel ask the prophet Shamvil/Samuel for a king like the other nations have.

3. Quran 2:259

"Or ˹are you not aware of˺ the one who passed by a city which was in ruins. He wondered, “How could Allah bring this back to life after its destruction?” So Allah caused him to die for a hundred years then brought him back to life..."

Now many think this is prophet Uzayr/Ezra, but I think it is about prophet Jeremiah/Irmiya. As far as I know it does not paralell any biblical passage, but we know that Jeremiah was prisoned in dungeon during the attack of Nebuchadnezzar II. when king exiled a large portions of Jews to Babylon ,some of the remaining people helped Jeremiah to escape. And then he saw his city fully destroyed.

Also Uzayr/Ezra was born much later the exile.

So I think it is about prophet Jeremiah/Irmiya.

There is one passage in the Quran that attempts to make a prophecy concerning contemporary events: the "Romans will win!" prophecy in Surah 30:2-5. This passage is also notoriously ambiguous, and so I thought I'd make a quick post outlining all of its ambiguities, which I believe highlights an important avenue for further research.

To be sure, there has been some work in recent years aimed at better understanding the passage by comparing it to similar sayings and prophecies written in pre-Islamic, contemporary, and immediately post-Islamic times. I have collected these in a post titled Parallels to the "Romans will win!" prophecy in Surah 30. The most important studies here have been written by Tommaso Tesei, Adam Silverstein, and Zishan Ghaffar, but we have not really seen progress on this front since around 2020.

The first ambiguity is, shockingly, in whether this is a "Romans will win!" prophecy at all! It is well-known that there are some grammatical variants in this passage of the Quran, and depending on the grammatical reading you go with, the passage either reads that the Romans will ultimately win or that the Romans will ultimately lose. It could go either way. This problem has been covered several times, including in this thread by Marijn van Putten and in this thread by Sean Anthony. The debate over the reading of this passage persisted within Islamic tradition for centuries. Some arguments have been occasionally raised for one reading or the other; for example, some argue that the Romans will lose sounds a bit like it might be retroactively predicting the Arab conquests of Byzantine territory. This argument, however, is hardly concrete or decisive, and Mehdy Shaddel has recently suggested exactly that: that in his view, this passage is describing a temporary brief Roman victory over the Muslims that will be followed by their (the Romans') final defeat.

The next ambiguity: if we go with the Romans will win, well ... win what? The passage does not say! It is often connected to the Byzantine-Sassanid wars of 602-628, and so an obvious way to interpret the passage is an attempt to predict the final outcome of the series of clashes and wars between the Roman and Persian empires that concluded in 628. However, this interpretation benefits from the reader's hindsight: as Van Putten notes, the passage could very well be referring to a Roman victory of a specific battle that, for all we know, may have been highly salient to Muhammad's community as the events were transpiring. There is little, if anything, that guarantees that the passage is referring to the final outcome of the protracted, decades-long conflict. Several traditions and literature support this. Zishan Ghaffar's 2020 essay in his book Der koran in seinem religions argues that the passage was about events that ultimately transpired c. 614-615 during the larger series of battles/wars, as opposed to the final conclusion of the battles/wars in 628. A similar view is found in Muqatil ibn Sulayman, the oldest exegete of the Quran whose writings survive (see Juan Cole, Rethinking the Quran in Late Antiquity, pg. 34). Apart from their own scholarship, I wonder if some support for this can be found in the proposition that (1) This is from a Meccan surah (2) The passage says that the Romans will win (lose?) in a "few" years, a term of time that is classically quantified as being 3-5 or 3-10 years (bit more info on this here). And yet, the conclusion of the Byzantine-Sassanid wars in 628 is, by this account, well after a "few" years after the Meccan period.

What about the date of the passage? We don't know this either! Unfortunately, we have no concrete evidence surrounding when (what year) it was composed nor even whether it was composed before or after the precise event it was predicting; this is not surprising, since, as we discussed above, we do not know exactly what the passage is trying to predict or even whose victory it tries to predict. Tesei considers the passage to have been composed after Muhammad's death on the basis of the passage's parallels with texts written in the decades after Muhammad died, but both Silverstein and Ghaffar have rebutted this position on the basis that there are writings and texts that are contemporary to Muhammad, or even predate Muhammad, that also proffer predictions about whether the Romans will win or lose their battles against the Persians.

Virtually all of the aforementioned points of interpretation have differing opinions within Islamic tradition as well, even on the question of whether the passage was composed before or after the event that the passage is trying to predict.

Another ambiguity is why the believers rejoice when the romans (presumably) win? All sorts of answers are possible. Perhaps Muhammad's faction was allied with some Arab tribes in Medina who, in turn, were allied with the Romans (for a few examples of these, see Ehsan Roohi's new paper "The Purported Role of the Ghassānids and the Byzantines in Muhammad's Migration to Medina: A Reappraisal"). Perhaps it is because the Christian Byzantines were closer to Muhammad's vision of monotheism than the Zoroastrian Persians. Perhaps it is because the Quran has a pro-Byzantine bias in general, a view that is supported by Juan Cole (see Rethinking the Quran in Late Antiquity) but is denied by Mehdy Shaddel.

I have seen that within this community there are no meaningful discussions on different theological schools and historical theological development of Islamic tradition

While it is preferred that the tone of this community is academic, many times it gets too technical. It seems more like Islam is being approached as a subject rather than as a living tradition that encapsulates various philosophies of consciousness, life and civilizations

Recently, I came across a post on this community that was an inquiry about theological development of Sunni orthodoxy. It was refreshing to see such discourse being approached and explored here

One important thing I see is that instead of seeming like a community of scholars this seems more like a community of citing scholars. I personally like to see people's own views, study, interpretation and synthesis

Let's discuss Islamic Theology under this post. You can ask me questions. You can provide your own theological positions and analysis. You can narrate your own theological developments too. We can discuss how Islamic Theology should be approached methodologically. I invite knowledgeable people of this Reddit community to join the discussion and give their input

Hello !

The Quran's familiarity with the texts of the Bible, the Talmud, or the Syriac writings is well known. But what about Greek mythology and philosophy?

Arabia and Ancient Greece

Claiming that there are elements of Greek origin in the Quran may seem counter-intuitive at first glance. The question that arises is how such elements could have made their way into the Quranic text. Obviously, the point is not to suggest that the author(s) of the Quran had direct access to the books of Aristotle or Plato! Rather, we must consider that Greek culture had penetrated the Arabian Peninsula before Islam. Indeed, contrary to the myth of the Jāhiliyya (the Age of Ignorance) imposed by Muslim tradition, pre-Islamic Arabia was largely integrated into the cultural and religious dynamics of the Near East. In particular, Greek — the official language of the Byzantine Empire — was known to the Arabs, as shown by the numerous inscriptions in Greek, or sometimes bilingual (Arabic / Greek), unearthed in the Peninsula. As the archaeologist Leah Di Segni notes, "Greek was the dominant written language in late antique Palestine and Arabia, especially among Christians, who made up the majority of the population in the region from the late 6th century onwards."

Another point worth noting: according to Ernst Knauf, around 10% of Arabs had at least a partial command of the greek language, and even 35% among the populations of northern Arabia.

Let us now return to the Quran. Several scholars have stressed the influence of Greek culture on the Quranic text. Among them is the great Senegalese Hellenist Oumar Sankharé, author of the book The Quran and Greek Culture, who had been awarded the title of "the only African to hold the agrégation in Grammar." Unfortunately, his work came under a fatwā, and the author had to make a public apology. He would die a few months later, probably as a result of the anguish caused by the torrents of hatred and threats he received. Below, we will present a small selection of interesting (and at times unsettling) parallels between Greek culture and the Quran.

The Sleepers of Ephesus

The first example is well known: the legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus, also known as the "People of the Cave" in Sura 18. A group of young men, persecuted because of their faith, take refuge in a cave where they fall asleep for (roughly) 300 years. Upon waking, they have the impression of having slept only a few hours, and it is only by going into the town that they realize what has just happened to them. Historians have long shown that this Quranic story draws on a myth: that of the Sleepers of Ephesus. This myth, very popular in Antiquity, was written down by Bishop Stephen of Ephesus in the 5th century. The author incorporated into it many elements drawn from Greek folklore. For example, the theme of miraculous sleep appears in several legends of the Greco-Roman world. Each time, the story is the same: a man (or a group of men) plunges into a deep sleep for an abnormally long period (sometimes centuries). Upon waking, he has the impression of having slept very little, like the protagonists of the Quran.

Another interesting element in the Quranic account is the dog that remains at the entrance of the cave. This detail is far from trivial. In Ancient Greece, the dog was indeed seen as occupying the threshold between life and death. One thinks in particular of Cerberus, the dog of Hades and guardian of the underworld. When Theseus finds himself on the Chair of Forgetfulness, guarded by Cerberus, he becomes frozen and unable to move. Does this not recall the People of the Cave during their sleep, who are, so to speak, immobilized? The dog is also the symbol of the goddess Hecate (here represented in a 4th-century BCE relief), who represents the cave that allows time and life to be regenerated. In short, the story of the "People of the Cave" in the Quran has its roots in Greek folklore. The historian Michel Tardieu thus rightly stresses that the Quranic account "represents the stratum of the legend closest to the pagan cultural environment in which it took shape as a tale of oral tradition."

Jesus, Apollo, and the palm tree

Another interesting example: the birth of Jesus according to the Quran. We know that in the canonical Gospels, Jesus is born in a farmstead in Bethlehem. But according to the Quran, Jesus was born in the desert, at the foot of a palm tree under which Mary, his mother, had lain down. The historian Suleiman Mourad points out that a similar story is found in Greek mythology. According to the legend, Leto, the mother of Apollo, takes refuge under a palm tree located near a river to give birth to her son, offering a setting comparable to that of the Quran. Thus, both accounts depict a pregnant woman in search of a secluded place, who lies down beneath the trunk of a palm tree by the bank of a river, then brings a sacred child into the world. For Mourad, the Nativity of Jesus in the Quran is therefore an "obvious reworking of Leto's delivery in the Greek tradition."

The youths of paradise

You have all surely heard of the youths and the virgins (the houris) who, according to the Quran, will be offered in paradise. For Walid Saleh, these creatures are inspired by Greek mythology. The Quran describes the youths as eternally young boys who bring the inhabitants cups filled with the finest beverages. This description is not unlike that of Ganymede in Greek mythology — a young youth of splendid beauty who serves cups of wine to the gods. Walid Saleh writes on this subject: "The similarities between the youths of the Quran and Ganymede are too striking to be due to chance. Both are servants who bring drink, reside in the heavens, are eternally young […], and are of exceptional beauty (like hidden pearls, as the youths of paradise are described)."

As for the "wide-eyed" houris described in the Quran, Saleh proposes a comparison with Hera, the goddess of marriage and the lover of Zeus. Interestingly, Hera is described as having large eyes (in Greek: Boôpis, "cow-eyed / wide-eyed"), like her Quranic counterparts. Moreover, she too possesses the power to remain eternally a virgin — once again like the houris! As Walid Saleh notes regarding the Quranic depiction of paradise, "we must admit that there is here a significant parallel between two mythical universes, that of the Quran and that of Greek mythology."

Let us linger a moment longer in paradise. Besides the young boys and the houris, the Quran also promises food and drink in abundance, while one reclines leaning on pleasant cushions. These paradisiacal scenes recall the banquets of the Greco-Roman world. These banquets, called symposium, were large gatherings in which "the participants, all male aristocrats, wore garlands of flowers and reclined on their left elbow on couches, and a great deal of wine was drunk, served by young slaves." This is, almost word for word, the paradise described in the Quran. It is also interesting to note that the word "cup" in the Quran — kūb, plural akwāb — comes from the Greek kéō ("to pour"), which also gave rise to the Latin word cuppa.

The torture of Crassus

After paradise, here is hell! In Sura 44, the Quran evokes one of the punishments the inhabitants of hell will face: "Indeed, the tree of Zaqqūm will be the food of the great sinner. Like molten metal, it will boil in the belly." Oumar Sankharé sees in this an echo of the torture inflicted on the Roman general Crassus, one of the richest men in the empire. Captured by the Parthians during an expedition, he was tortured and then put to death. His executioners poured molten gold into his mouth, taunting him thus: "Since you love gold so much, here is some." We do indeed find here the idea of molten metal forcibly made to be swallowed by the tortured man, but the tree to which the Quran refers is absent from it. Its origin probably comes from the rabbinic writings, which mention two palm trees at the entrance of hell.

Plato's cave

Of all the Greek philosophers, Plato is undoubtedly the most famous. We know in particular his famous Allegory of the Cave. Now, as several historians have noted, an echo of this story is found in Sura 36 of the Quran: "Indeed, the Word against most of them has come true: so they will not believe. We have placed yokes upon their necks, reaching up to the chins, so that their heads are forced up. And We have set a barrier before them and a barrier behind them; We have covered them with a veil, so that they cannot see." As we can see, the Quran here mentions men held in chains — "We have placed yokes upon their necks" — in the same way that Plato's men are bound in the cave: "The men are in a cave […], their legs and necks bound in such a way." Admittedly, in the Quran it is not specified that the individuals are in a cave, but the text speaks of "a barrier before them and a barrier behind them." Thus, the spatial arrangement is the same, and the protagonists are consequently shut up in an enclosed place. The Republic and the Quran together insist on the fact that the captives are unable to see: the men of Plato's cave cannot turn their faces to look outside, while Allāh has placed a veil before their faces. Finally, the threat of stoning in the Quran — "if you do not stop, we will stone you" (36:18) — once again finds an echo in Plato: "And if anyone tries to release them and lead them upwards […], will they not kill him?" (Republic, VII, 517a).

Pythagoras's tetractys

In Sura 89, "The Dawn," we read the following passage: "By the Dawn! And by the ten nights! By the even and the odd!" This short passage raises several questions to which Muslim commentators find no convincing answer: what are the ten nights? What does "the even and the odd" mean? Oumar Sankharé sees in it a reference to the famous tetractys of Pythagoras, which is the sum of the first 4 numbers: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10. The Pythagoreans worshipped numbers and swore by the tetractys. This could explain the mention, in this passage of the Quran (which belongs to the genre of the oath), of the even and the odd and of the "ten" nights. Although the hypothesis is interesting, it remains speculative. The number "ten" is probably used here for the constraints of rhyme.

Conclusion

In this thread, we have brought to light interesting parallels between elements drawn from Greek folklore, mythology, and philosophy, and the Quran. As stated in the introduction, one must be careful not to see in this the trace of a direct "influence." Rather, it shows that the Quran is a product of Late Antiquity, which has preserved traces of the environment in which it was composed. And this environment was not entirely foreign to Greek culture, which had largely penetrated the Near East — and even Arabia — before Islam.

https://preview.redd.it/3r7n1qee352h1.png?width=712&format=png&auto=webp&s=1d8e37232930133ed6b79e5d5add4f7def596880

Conclusion

In a very fine study, Geneviève Gobillot observed that the proofs of the existence of God given by the Quran are already found in certain texts of Greco-Roman Antiquity. A first argument concerns the perfection of the human body. The Quran places great emphasis on the creation of man and his perfection, presented as proof of the existence of God and of His mercy. This theme had already been developed in the Corpus Hermeticum attributed to the legendary Hermes Trismegistus. The table below (which reproduces the one from G. Gobillot's article) brings to light the parallels between the two texts. As Gobillot rightly notes, the Quran here seems to "answer point by point the rhetorical questions posed by the Corpus Hermeticum."

For more information and academic resources : https://al-kalam.fr/le-coran/les-sources-du-coran/le-coran-et-la-culture-grecque/ (in French, but very soon in English !)

Some people argue that when Muhammad was called a “magician/سَـٰحِرٌۭ" (Q38:4) it only referred to his speech... meaning that his opponents thought he was using persuasive words, poetry or rhetoric to mislead people.

I find this explanation incomplete when compared with the story of Moses in the Quran. Moses was also called a "magician/سَـٰحِرٌۭ" (Q7:109) but in his case, he performed visible signs and miracles that people witnessed directly. His opponents saw something extraordinary yet they still rejected him and described him as practicing magic.

This makes me wonder whether the same possibility exists in Muhammad’s case. For example, regarding the splitting of the moon (or whatever event is being referred to in that passage) did Muhammad’s opponents believe that he had caused that event or performed some kind of miracle? In other words, when they accused him of being a magician, could it have been because they thought he was doing extraordinary acts — similar to Moses rather than only because of his speech?

Today, in many mosques (especially in urban settings), the experience can sometimes feel very “dry” or individualistic: people come in, pray behind the imam, maybe listen to a khutbah or short lesson, then leave. There often isn’t much broader communal interaction, collective discussion, reconciliation, or social bonding beyond prayer itself.did the sahaba time and early generations of Islam masjids have social judgment occurs, difficulties are resolved, consent is given and given, morsels are eaten, and sharing is ensured and cultural acts like dhikr, singing.

But when I read about the Prophet’s mosque in Medina, I get the impression it was much more than a ritual prayer space. It seems like it functioned as:

* a communal gathering place

* a political and legal space

* a place for education and discussion

* a welfare center

* a place where disputes were resolved

* a place where delegations met

* a place where people simply sat together socially

Historically, were early mosques in Islam closer to this kind of socially integrated communal model than many modern mosques are today?

The 99 names of Allah are just titles/descriptions. Why?

When reading the Quran, it gives the impression that the God speaking in the Quran is the same God who revealed scripture to Moses and other biblical prophets. The Quran also seems to present itself as part of the same monotheistic tradition found in Judaism and Christianity.

So I’m curious: before Islam.. did Arabs already believe that Allah was the same God worshipped by Jews and Christians and that they shared a common religious tradition with them? Or was this understanding something that Muhammad introduced?

Why is it considered legitimate in academic scholarship to exclude supernatural explanations rather than treating them as open possibilities?