MS Or. 2251 at @theUL is yet another interesting copy of the Dalāʾil al-Ḫayrāt from the northern end of sub-saharan africa. It's fully vocalised, and as is typical of manuscripts from the region, it seems to have an actual recitation tradition associated.
cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-OR-022… Image
First, it vocalises things in ways that we normally associate with copies of the Quran.
1. Yellow dots for hamzah (instead of hamzah sign)
2. Subtle use of doubled sign orientation to mark assimlation or non-assimilation of tanwīn. ImageImageImage
It also marks madd when across word boundaries. When a word ends in a long vowel, and the next starts with a hamzah, the vowel is made overlong. While the maddah sign is common in Classical Arabic mss, usually only word-internally.
ṣallā ḷḷāhu ʿalayhi wa-ʿalāā ʾālihī Image
The plural forms of nabiyy 'prophet', have a hamzah as the third root consonant. Interestingly the singular is always nabiyy without hamzah, except when quoting the Quran.

1. ḫātim al-ambiʾāāʾi
2. wa-n-nabīīʾīna
3. nabiyyun
4. Q33:56 ... ʿalā n-nabīīʾi ... ImageImageImageImage
The use of hamzah in forms derived from this root is typical for the recitation of Nāfiʿ, the dominant recitation of the Quran among the Malikis.

The distinction between prose/Quranic quotation in the singular but not the plural is typical for Dalāʾil al-Ḫayrāt copies.
That is not the only thing similar to Nāfiʿ's recitation. Another typical feature of this manuscript is that plural pronouns have long allomorphs before hamzah, same as the Warš transmission of Nāfiʿ.
1. maʿahumūū ʾaǧmaʿīna
But: 2. ʿalayhim ʿadada ImageImage
All these things are things I've noticed before in other African copies of Dalāʾil al-Ḫayrāt. But this one has more things. It frequently marks ʾimālah (or perhaps taqlīl?) on: ʾalif maqṣūrah:
1. wa-mūsē wa-ʿīsē
2. al-ʾaʿlē
3. ad-dunyē
4. ʾiḏā yaġšē ImageImageImageImage
But also on al-Kēfirīna and on nouns whose stem ends in -ār followed by the genitive, and in the name of the prophet, ṭāhē.

1. al-qahhēri
2. an-nahēri
3. al-Kēfirīna
4. ṭā-hē

All words where Warš in his Quranic recitation would have taqlīl. ImageImageImageImage
There are plenty of other small details, almost without exception agreeing with the recitation of Warš. That I'll leave the reader to find.
But all of this shows that clearly the vocaliser of this manuscript recited Dalāʾil al-Ḫayrāt in a mode very similar to Quranic recitation.
Even taking up highly idiosyncratic details of the typical Warš recitation of the region.

Modern print editions of the Dalāʾil al-Ḫayrāt are classicized to standard Arabic, which utterly obliterates this aspect of the performance of the text. Looking at manuscripts uncovers it.
The Cambridge University Library details are not particularly informative about this ms's provenance: "Africa".
My sense is this style of Arabic writing is slightly more typical for the east (Chad/Sudan) than Mali
.
What do you think @dimabondarevs?
I have an article coming out soon on the topic of reconstructing the regional recitation styles of the Dalāʾil al-Ḫayrāt. I don't discuss this manuscript, because I wasn't aware of it, but it would have been a nice addition. But it really shows how much there's still to uncover.
If you enjoyed this thread and want me to do more of it, please consider buying me a coffee.
ko-fi.com/phdnix.
If you want to support me in a more integral way, you can become a patron on Patreon!
patreon.com/PhDniX

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Marijn "i before j" van Putten

Marijn

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @PhDniX

29 Oct
Sūrat Maryam (Q19) is well-known among scholars of the Quran for having a highly conspicuous passage (quran.com/19/34-40) which must be an interpolation.
The question however is: when was this section interpolated into the Quran? Manuscript evidence can give us some hints.🧵
Many scholars as early as Nöldeke and as recent as Guillaume Dye have pointed to these verses as looking like a conspicuous interpolation. And indeed the section really stands out for several reasons:
1. The rhyme scheme of Maryam is:
1-33: -iyyā
34-40: -UM (ūn/īm/īn)
35-74: -iyyā
75-98: -dā

In other words our passage abruptly disrupts the consistent (and unique to this Sūrah) rhyme -iyyā.

This is atypical for the Quran and makes the section stand out.
Read 24 tweets
25 Oct
The story of Lot and his people in the Quran recurs strikingly often throughout the Quran (Q11:77-83; Q15:51-77; Q26:160-75; Q27:54; Q37:133-8; Q51:24-37; Q54:33-9; Q80:33-42), and finds clear parallels with the story as told in Gen. 19.
A thread on a specific reading variant. 🧵 Image
It's been noted that a pivotal moment in the original story about Lot's wife is told quite differently in the Quran than how it is in the Genesis. In Genesis, as Lot and his family leave Sodom & Gomorrah, his wife looks back and turns into a pillar of salt. Image
In the Quran, the pillar of salt is missing entirely, and generally it's not the wife's looking back that causes her perdition. Instead she is said to be left behind, or even decreed to be left behind, e.g. Q15:60; Q27:57; Q37:135. But Q11:81 forms a confounding factor. ImageImageImageImage
Read 19 tweets
21 Oct
This verse of the Sanaa palimpsest needed a bit more study rather than discuss on the spot. The variant in the Sanaa palimpsest at Q9:18 is interesting, but the context is important. This 'variant' when taken out of context looks spectacular, but it's clearly an error. 🧵 Image
To understand what is happening with the Sanaa lower text, we actually need to look at the context of Q9:18, and specifically the verse that follows Q9:19. Here's the standard text: As you can see the jāhada (not jihād!) fī sabīli llāhi actually occurs in the following verse. Image
The transcription in the video was technically correct, but it should be clear that all of the material that appears to replace the standard text, is actually material present right in the next verse. Image
Read 9 tweets
19 Oct
The name of God in the Quran is Aḷḷāh, that much is clear. We also know that the Quran explicitly equates its God with the God the Christians and Jews follow. Today Arabic Christian and Jews alike will indeed call their God that. But where does this name come from? 🧵
It is frequently (and not unreasonably) assumed that Aḷḷāh is a contraction of the definite article al- "the" + ʾilāh "deity". And this is indeed likely its origin, but it is not without its problems. This loss of hamzah and kasrah (and addition of velarization) is irregular.
In Classical Arabic, the expected outcome of al-+ ʾilāh would simply be al-ʾilāh, not Aḷḷāh. So while its etymology might be "The God", the name does not mean "The God", just like "Peter" to an English speaker would not mean "stone".

en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CF%80%CE…
Read 24 tweets
18 Oct
While of course, the Quran is not talking about Soap, it would actually solve a vexing textual problem in Q5:69!

A short thread about the grammatical error of the Sabians. 🧵 Image
The verse starts with ʾinna llaḏīna ʾāmanū wa-llaḏīna hādū wa-ṣ-ṣāb(iʾ)ūna wa-n-naṣārā "Indeed, those who have believed, and those who were Jews or Sabians or Christians". The sentence is introduced with ʾinna "indeed", which should be followed by a noun in the accusative.
Thus, we would not expect wa-ṣ-ṣābiʾūna, but rather wa-ṣ-ṣābiʾīna.

(The joke here is, had we read it not as a nominative plural but as the noun aṣ-ṣābūna "the soap", it would be in the accusative and grammatical unproblematic! But this is just silly of course).
Read 17 tweets
4 Oct
All canonical Quranic readers today read the second word of Q43:61 as la-ʿilmun: "And indeed, he will be knowledge of the Hour, so be not in doubt of it, and follow Me. This is a straight path".
But despite this canonical consensus, there is also a significant variant reading. 🧵 Image
Ibn Ḫālawayh tells us that the non-canonical reading la-ʿalamun "a sign [of the Hour]" was adhered to by a whole slew of famous companions of the prophet: ʾAbū Hurayrah, Ibn ʿAbbās, Qatādah, as well as the successor al-Ḍaḥḥāk.

viewer.cbl.ie/viewer/image/A… Image
From the literary evidence this reading appears to have been popular.
However, either because the reading lost popularity over la-ʿilmun, or just by the sheer coincidence of which readers were eventually canonised in the 10th century, this reading has disappeared in recitation.
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(