||"dawnbreak in the west"|
Saturday, October 20, 2018
Not dead yet
I took 26 September off from work. On 3 October I was diagnosed with "diverticulitis" and prescribed the antibiotic Cipro - and took more days off work. That Friday morning, since nothing had helped much, I went back to that doctor's office and was further (tentatively) diagnosed with a "bolus" and referred to a radiologist, who x-rayed my lower belly. It was a proto-abscess which had perforated my limbic colon - the part further down from the appendix, near the rectum.
(No, Westworld readers; small rodents were not involved, nor were any other foreign mammals nor even inanimate objects. It was just, literally, Shit That Happens. Except usually to older guys. Like when I got the shingles early, at 28-29.)
I got out of hospital 9 October, took the rest of the week off, and returned Monday this week. The last of the new antibiotics, more serious than the Cipro, got swallowed yesterday.
Current weight is holding steady at the high 150s - which is the ideal for my slight height and median figure, the one silver-lining in all this darkness. I am trying to rethink my diet. Also, I am learning to walk again. I succeeded in a trot to the local-ish mall from here, and back (7ish miles); but it hurt my tendons and hips a bit. So I napped out for three hours this afternoon.
In the spirit of Paul bin Raja'
There's a book out, Arab Christians and the Qur’an from the Origins of Islam to the Medieval Period, which Charles L. Tieszen has reviewed. It seems the last chapter concerns Ibn Raja': an Egyptian Muslim, perhaps not particularly Coptic by birth, who converted to the faith of Egypt, and renamed himself "Bûlus" - Paul, to us. He concluded that the Bible isn't corrupt; the Qur'an is.
In that spirit I should like to consider which parts of the Qur'an are not corrupt.
Since 2003 I've been looking at the suras 2-71, out of 114. I accept Ibn Mas'ud that suras 1, 113, and 114 are not suras; but prayers, to be inscribed on the "two boards" of the codex as hardcover. Also the suras 72 to 112 are very short, so I have not managed much of a handle on what sources they used. These mostly sound to my ear like slogans and/or adaptations of Syriac Christian psalmody. I've been leaving these to Munther Younes, Daniel Beck and others - except for the sura of the 'Asr with which I dealt in The Arabs and Their Qur'an.
Suras 2-71 are longer and so potentially offer more data on the Arab Prophet and his successors. That last is important: sura 3 assumes that "a muhammad" (sic) had already died (or, was slain). The exegetes assume that this was, indeed, that Prophet who by 10/630 was teaching the Saracens of Palaestina Salutaris that the keys to Paradise were swords. This means that anything postdating sura 3 - I start with sura 6, and then suras 4, 7 and 8 - wasn't his. I think that sura 6 belongs to the 'Uthman régime, specifically (Garden for the Poets); and that sura 69 belongs here as well.
That accounts for many of the suras in block 2-71. But not for all of them. Which suras haven't I yet ruled out as post sura 3 / sura 69? My public demands to know!! (Or not. But I'ma tell y'all anyways.)
So far I've come up with suras 10, 15, 17, 18, 20, 30, 36, 45, 47, 49, 53 (orig.), 54, 55, 56, and 59. At least one of these - sura 53 - has been adulterated... just like sura 103. Fortunately I think I've sufficiently isolated such encrustatations in The Arabs.
That isn't many; and as time goes by, I might, or someone else might, find that some of these are also post sura 3 / 6 / 69. Or someone might find reason to ascribe one of these to another post-Muhammadan qari.
But if I ever felt like writing something about Muhammad's faith, I would start with these fifteen.
On this site
Property of author; All Rights Reserved