Did the Quran exist early as a book? A discussion with Dr. Asma Hilali

Special guest Dr. Asma Hilali joins Dr. Brubaker for a discussion of her latest research as well as her earlier research related to the Sanaa Palimpsest, and of the topic of variants, variations, and the fragmentary nature of the evidence and state of the field of Quran and Quran manuscript studies. 0:15 Introduction 1:05 Intro 1:15 Q: “What are the big questions?” 1:22 A: 1) The original text, 2) The quranic variants, 3) The chronology of the Qurʾan. Searching for the oldest mushaf is based upon assumptions given to us by the secondary sources. We now have greatly improved source material, but we are still operating on the mindset of past generations. The field of quranic studies is in need of renewal of the conceptual framework for studying the Qurʾan 4:55 Q: “What are some of the surprising features that you have found in early Quran manuscripts?“ 5:10 A: Dr. Hilali clarifies that she is not primarily a manuscript scholar; manuscripts for her are a tool, rather than an objective. Her study of the Quran manuscripts has spanned the past ten years and stemmed from a concern that the transmission of religious material should be considered as a whole. Somehow in this process she found herself in front of the Sanaa Palimpsest and editing quranic material. What surprises her most (7:30) is that, despite this deep interest and activity related to the manuscripts, we still do not have the Uthmanic muṣḥaf. The muṣḥafs do not exist, or at least we don’t have them, nor do we have the Companion codices. This is true for both Sunni and Shia Qurans. So, we have to think about the meaning of this absence. We are referring to concepts, but we still do not have the material Quran. But there also there remain many non-edited manuscripts. 9:30 Q: “What can we make of the absence of the exemplary codices/muṣḥafs?“ 11:07 A: Hilali mentions Michael Cook’s article which establishes the probable existence of the regional muṣḥafs. So, the issue is that we don’t have the material Qurʾan. 11:50 Q: What questions are prominent in Hilali’s research now? 12:06 A: Most interested in the relationship between the different religious genres. We are talking about the pre-canonical period, during which the transmission of the material all took place in the same context and was carried by the same actors. Knowing about this might also inform us about the tools of canonization. The Quran has never been isolated (14:50) from other texts. We debate about the relationship of the Quran to the biblical material, etc., but there is a larger pool of material too. 15:20 Q: Is there anything beyond that general pool of biblical material (e.g. Christian and Jewish, and its various sects, literatures, and variations), that you believe is relevant when we come to the Qurʾan? 16:42 A: I am very curious to learn how the various materials interact beyond the levels of composition and textual analysis, but rather at the level of the people and the actors, and how the learned milieu grew, and where, and in relation to which kinds of political decisions or institutions. Among other things (18:30) we may want to know who were the translators [i.e. of the biblical materials into Arabic (19:20)]. 19:50 Transition to discussion of the Sanaa Palimpsest 20:50 What is a palimpsest? 22:00 Nature of the variance in the upper and lower texts of the Sanaa Palimpsest, and nature of the variance between these and later manuscripts. Hilali’s book an edition, not full development of a new theory. Others (including Elisabeth Puin and also Behnam Sadeghi) have also made editions of the Sanaa Palimpsest. 26:20 Hilali talks about her opinion of the Sanaa Palimpsest as not intended to be part of a codex in the first place. She did not succeed (27:15) in reconstructing various passages in ways that aligned with (for example) the codex of Ibn Mas’ud, as did some colleagues. 28:55 Discussion of the term “variations” versus the term “variants.” The term “variant” implies a standard, a reference point. 29:25 Hilali’s opinion that the Sanaa Palimpsest page was not intended to be conserved. In addition to the quality of the page, there were orthographic errors made on fols 6a and 9b (30:5). 30:20 Discussion of the “reading instruction” la-taqul bismilla (Don’t say bismillah) on 5a, at the beginning of Sura 9. She believes context was dictation, and that this page was not intended to be conserved in a codex. 31:45 Brubaker comments and response. Product links to Dr. Hilali’s books: Making of Religious Texts in Islam: The Sanaa Palimpsest: Thank you for your support of this channel and the work of Daniel Brubaker. Dan Brubaker Patreon page: Tax deductible gifts: ​​​​ (“donate“) Parler: ​​​​ Facebook: ​​​​ Twitter: ​​​​ As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualified purchases