Page 25 of 25

Re: Muhammad -Myth vs Reality.

PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 6:48 pm
by Fernando
Following the above link (http://inarah.net/mission) I came across something that certainly was very new to me: a quite different explanation for the absence of diacritical marks in the early Koran. The claim is that the lack of marks was not a characteristic of written Arabic at the time, but simply due to the original texts being quick notes for a lectionary. It concludes
This explains why the copies of the successive Korans long remained without diacritical signs : their placement was retarded not just by the uncertain meaning of the texts, but by the question of the meaning to give them: it had to obscure the origin of the first leaflets and at the same time to sacralize the Arab rulers installed in Damascus. Faced with such challenges, the copyists could only grope around and use caution – often by not adding any diacritic signs.[emphasis in the text]
http://rootsofislamtruehistory.com/subpages/Coran_&_diacritism-II_EN.htm
I'll broach the subject in the Quranic Composition thread.