tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29566846.post7277171352271892426..comments2023-11-05T01:45:58.784-07:00Comments on The Hesperado: Islamic “culture”Hesperadohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10394374828751466705noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29566846.post-74625311624490739372009-05-28T12:43:32.162-07:002009-05-28T12:43:32.162-07:00Nobody, Thanks; I'm glad you liked the revision.
...Nobody, Thanks; I'm glad you liked the revision.<br /><br />Pre-911 sometime in the late 90s, I read about 3/4 of the 1,001 Nights in the first Western translation ever done, in French by Antoine Galland. Somewhere in the middle of that I read the Sinbad the Sailor part. I don't recall the content specifically. I wasn't all that PC even in the late 90s, and while I was fascinated by "oriental" culture, and had read the fanciful stories about ancient Middle Eastern and Islamic Middle Eastern culture written by the French novelists Flaubert and Gauthier (both had travelled and lived in the Middle East for periods of time), I usually imbibed stuff about Islamic culture with a wry sense of amusement about how serpentinely ornate their manners were juxtaposed with their backwardness. <br /><br />Some day I should re-read the 1,001 Nights, since now they are a blur in my mind. I don't doubt they are riddled with Islamic fanaticism of one sort or another.Hesperadohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10394374828751466705noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29566846.post-46886500996592227092009-05-28T06:45:53.410-07:002009-05-28T06:45:53.410-07:00Erich
Thanks for posting the clarifications that ...Erich<br /><br />Thanks for posting the clarifications that straightened things out. Incidentally, have you ever read the 'Seven voyages of Sindbad' or any of the Sindbad stories? If so, did you notice the Mohammedan fanatical undertones to some of the voyages?<br /><br />Erich: <I>This also undermines the typical tendency of the Islam apologist (whether Muslim or PC MC) to exculpate such barbarity on the basis that “well, everybody was that way back in those times”—for here we have the same Hindu literature reflecting a far more humane moral contrasted with the Muslim version of that literature twisted with a grotesque moral, and the Hindu literature is even older than the Muslim version, and centuries older than the Muslim version in its popular revival!<br /></I>Purrrrfekkkkttttt!!!!<br /><br />After I posted, I was afraid that the meaning of what I wrote might be lost, but you captured it beautifully!!!<br /><br />'Everyone was like that <I>in those times</I>' is just another tu quoque/ego quoque argument - which simply goes on to defame good people of the time - both East and West and even Infidels in the Islamic empire - who are not around to defend themselves, and whose descendents are drenched in pcmc.Nobodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15936731686633423188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29566846.post-88395758029324073332009-05-26T12:38:40.725-07:002009-05-26T12:38:40.725-07:00Nobody, I also integrated your "interesting sideno...Nobody, I also integrated your "interesting sidenote" into my Conclusion.Hesperadohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10394374828751466705noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29566846.post-46905890499851508282009-05-26T12:29:46.652-07:002009-05-26T12:29:46.652-07:00Thanks Nobody,
I've straightened or clarified out...Thanks Nobody,<br /><br />I've straightened or clarified out the problems you called attention to:<br /><br />1. "Moghul India was not 14th century."<br /><br />What Lehmann meant, and what I failed to convey, is that while Nakshabi was a 14th-century poet, his "work enjoyed a great revival of interest during the Mughal period". Thus, his poetic work done in the 14th century became a "best seller" in at least the 16th century, if not also following centuries.<br /><br />2. "Hindu literature was normally exclusively Sanskrit, and was more existant in pre-Islamic India, as in the Panchatantra example (the Hindu equivalent to Aesop's Fables) and the Shukasaptati."<br /><br />Yes, Nakshabi took Hindu literature, translated it and reworked it.<br /><br />"Kalila wa Dimna looks more like an Urdu/Farsi work done by Muslims, it's not a Hindu work."<br /><br />Lehmann doesn't specify as she is listing these various works, so it's probably a good guess.<br /><br />"Also, Sindhbad-nama seems to be a Farsi term meaning the story of Sindbad, as in Sindbad the sailor - by no stretch of imagination is this a Hindu work."<br /><br />Actually, I have read some scholars have conjectured that the 1,001 Nights saga has a pre-Islamic provenance -- thus going through the same process as Nakshabi did to the Shukasaptati: i.e., translated, reworked it and recast it with more Islamic themes. These scholars conjecture an original provenance of the 1,001 Nights saga in pre-Islamic Indonesia, moving then to pre-Islamic India, then "Islamicized" during Islamic India and moving to Persia then to Arabia. Nevertheless, this particular "Sindhbad-nama" could well be an Islamic work which Nakshabi used, along with the Hindu works he also used.<br /><br />"One interesting sidenote to your conclusion is that no-one can demonstrate that the Muslim barbarity here was simply the norm of the time - as the stories demonstrate, the Hindu merchant was perfectly happy to take back his wife, while the Mohammedan chose to behead her."<br /><br />Exactly.Hesperadohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10394374828751466705noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29566846.post-38646029534564157962009-05-26T04:52:15.375-07:002009-05-26T04:52:15.375-07:00Erich
A very good article, but a few things worth...Erich<br /><br />A very good article, but a few things worth noting - I dunno whether the things I point out below are errors on Prof Lehmann's part, or yours:<br /><br />1. Moghul India was not 14th century. The Mughal empire existed for all practical purposes between 1526 to 1761.<br /><br />2. Hindu literature was normally exclusively Sanskrit, and was more existant in pre-Islamic India, as in the <I>Panchatantra</I> example (the Hindu equivalent to Aesop's Fables) and the <I>Shukasaptati</I>.<br /><br />Kalila wa Dimna looks more like an Urdu/Farsi work done by Muslims, it's not a Hindu work.<br /><br />Also, Sindhbad-nama seems to be a Farsi term meaning the story of Sindbad, as in Sindbad the sailor - by no stretch of imagination is this a Hindu work. Also, the voyages of Sindbad is a part of the 1001 nights, and has no sources in Hindu literature. (Also, anybody who has read the Sindbad stories would note his Islamic fanaticism).<br /><br />One interesting sidenote to your conclusion is that no-one can demonstrate that the Muslim barbarity here was simply the norm of the time - as the stories demonstrate, the Hindu merchant was perfectly happy to take back his wife, while the Mohammedan chose to behead her.Nobodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15936731686633423188noreply@blogger.com