We have talked a lot in class lately about the legitimacy of someone who is able to pass along the teachings or readings of the Qur’an. While addressing these topics of the passing of the word, we have avoided the comparisons of Christianity and other religions to Islam. Not in comparison but in relation to Judaism, Christianity ( as we have addressed these the most) and any other religions how do these qualifications to be able to pass on/spread the word (of God, of Muhammad, etc) differ? Are there different levels to this qualification(s) and how does that change how the word/ scripture (etc) is spread as well as heard by its audiences?
By
4 thoughts on “The Spreading of the Word”
ademaio
All the Abrahamic religions at some point had an era of passing down stories orally. I do not see the passing down of things orally as something uniquely beneficial to Islam as the positive features of people knowing and correcting one another while passing things down orally, can benefit Christianity and Judaism and I am sure in many other religions as well. The qualifications and checks and balances that went into learning this information? That I am not sure. Without checks in this system is the result “broken telephone”? Not necessarily. Are checks and qualifications needed to keep original message in tact? With enough people learning the information the loudest voice will probably end up being the correct one and in a system without qualifications that will become problematic, slowly, but surely.
stabakha
Within the Islamic religion, it is apparent that there are hadiths for Muslims to live by, which were passed from Muhammad to others in full exact detail as they were originally passed on by God. It is important to Muslims that they must focus on the Quran and Hadiths to be a good Muslim. Although there are readings and perspectives in Islam, it is important to rely on the Quran and Hadith for morals and ethics in a whole manner. I do not have much knowledge of the morals and ethics within Christianity and Judaism, but I do not know if there are “hadith” like statements made or do those individuals rely on the Bible and Torah solely? It would be interesting to see how individuals within those religions follow the statements made by God, considering that all these religions follow the SAME God. So how come there are so many different beliefs?
aodalton in reply to stabakha
These are just my thoughts/beliefs as a Christian on the comparisons between the Bible and the Quran and hadith. When reading the Quran I notice there is not much “background information.” A lot of the Quran actually references events that happened in the Bible and lessons learned from them. From what I have seen, it seems to me that the Quran is focused less on context and history and more on actual religious teachings. The hadith is used for extra and background information, as well as the context by which certain ayahs were revealed.
By contrast, the Bible will often present teachings within a certain story/historical event/context. Essentially, the Bible contains its own hadith.
As far as why there are so many different beliefs, a lot of it has to do with interpretation. For an example, a Christian will read Isaiah 53 as a prophecy about the coming of Jesus. But an Orthodox Jew will probably read the “suffering servant” as Israel personified. Between Christianity and Islam, both religions have different perspectives on who God is. This comes from differences between the Quran and Bible (ex: the Gospels say Jesus is God, the Quran says He is not).
aodalton
I’m not as knowledgeable as I should be on qualifications in Christianity and Judaism. I do know that the earlier chapters of the Bible were passed down orally because back then it was an oral culture. To preserve the teachings, people eventually wrote them down and continued to make records of history, genealogies, poetry, and more. When copying the Old Testament, scribes had to be almost excessively careful in making sure every word was copied exactly because they didn’t want to change the word of God. In fact, Dead Sea scrolls of various OT books show remarkably little change from our modern copies.
The New Testament was much different in how it was preserved, both from the Quran and the Old Testament. Professional scribes did not copy it- regular people did. When they received a letter from an apostle (basically a teacher who had seen Jesus after He died and rose) or a history book from someone like Luke, multiple people copied it for themselves and spread it around, more and more copies being made. Although this might sound like a recipe for disaster, this is also not “broken telephone.” Because there were so many copies, it became impossible for a person or group to change the original teachings because there were thousands of copies already existing that could be compared. Like with the Dead Sea scrolls, these also show remarkably little error compared to our modern New Testament.
Basically, there are many ways to preserve religious texts. In the case of the Quran, it is through continual recitation/checking to make sure those who memorized it are reciting it correctly (and also writing down the teachings, which came later). The Old Testament was mainly preserved through careful copying. The New Testament was preserved through massive amounts of people copying and spreading manuscripts.