The story of Hazrat Dhul Qarnayn and the Syriac legend

[Solo_Ta72]

Asalamu Alaikum

I hope all are doing good by the blessings of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)

tomasso tessei in one of his videos made claims that the Story of Hazrat Dhul Qarnayn originated from Syriac legends of Alexander as both the stories share similarities... 

As far as i have read some scholars deny it but some believe the Qurans Story of Hazrat Dhul Qarnayn was influenced by The syriac Legend 

While we reject the idea the Hazrat Dhul Qarnayn was Alexander the great as i have asked before

Why do our stories share similarities to the Syriac legend of Alexander?

 

tomasso tessei also says the the prophecy victory of Romans in Byzantine wars was also a prediction in Romans although pretty weak source's and the claim it self is weak 

But still if someone could guide me through this.

 

W Waiting for your responses 

JazakAllah khair 

[Haji 2003]

7 hours ago, Solo_Ta72 said:

tomasso tessei in one of his videos

Anyone wondering about these videos:

https://youtu.be/1we_XM8S4go

There is a related discussion thread on Reddit:

As for Tessei himself, this is his bio on Youtube:

Quote

Tommaso Tesei is an Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Duke Kunshan University. Before joining DKU he was a Patricia Crone member at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, and a Polonsky research fellow at the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute in Jerusalem. His academic interests mostly center on the emergence of the Islamic movement and faith tradition, and on the consequential establishment of new religious and political authorities in the context of the late antiquity of the Near East. His forthcoming monograph, entitled the Syriac Legend of Alexander’s Gate (under contract with Oxford University Press), examines a branch of apocalyptic traditions which are fundamental to understand the social and political setting from which the early Islamic community emerged and in which it shaped its identity.

The reference to Patrician Crone will be problematic for some. She came up with a revisionist history of Islam and then backtracked on what was considered an Islamophobic effort with criticisms of its scholarhip to boot.

[Solo_Ta72]

3 hours ago, Haji 2003 said:

Anyone wondering about these videos:

https://youtu.be/1we_XM8S4go

There is a related discussion thread on Reddit:

As for Tessei himself, this is his bio on Youtube:

The reference to Patrician Crone will be problematic for some. She came up with a revisionist history of Islam and then backtracked on what was considered an Islamophobic effort with criticisms of its scholarhip to boot.

Regarding the revisionist... Do you have nay platform or website that refutes thesw revisionist historians

They come up with claims that are actually problematic not for some but almost every one

So does tom Holland 

JazakAllah khair 

[Haji 2003]

15 minutes ago, Solo_Ta72 said:

They come up with claims that are actually problematic not for some but almost every one

 

In her preface to her book "Hagarism - the making of the Islamic World", Crone herself says:

Quote

In the first place, the account we have given of the origins of Islam is not one which any believing Muslim can accept ... This is a book written by infidels for infidels

 

 

[Ashvazdanghe]

On 3/17/2023 at 7:41 AM, Solo_Ta72 said:

Why do our stories share similarities to the Syriac legend of Alexander?

Salam

There are some of them who [Edited Out] up their ears at you, but We have cast veils on their hearts lest they should understand it, and a deafness into their ears; and though they should see every sign, they will not believe in it. When they come to you, to dispute with you, the faithless say, ‘These are nothing but myths of the ancients.’ (25)

https://tanzil.net/#trans/en.qarai/6:25

Certainly, we and our fathers were promised this before. [But] these are nothing but myths of the ancients.’ (83)

https://tanzil.net/#trans/en.qarai/23:83

They say, ‘He has taken down myths of the ancients, and they are dictated to him morning and evening.’ (5)

https://tanzil.net/#trans/en.qarai/25:5

 

 

[Ashvazdanghe]

On 3/17/2023 at 7:41 AM, Solo_Ta72 said:

Why do our stories share similarities to the Syriac legend of Alexander?

Salam non of our stories share any similarities to the Syriac legend of Alexander although the Legends of the Jew  (Israeliats)which have been inspired from other nations likewise Syriac legends have been inserted into Sunni sources which also due to enmity of pan Arabs with Iranians & supporting of cursed umayyads & Abbassids from pan Arabs so therfore they have prefered to call Alexander as Hazrat Dhul Qarnayn instead of Cyrus the great .

 

All prophecies about Alexander describes him as a goat with a one strong horn which it doesn't match with Hazrat Dhul Qarnayn but on the other hand king of Iran have described as ram with two horns symbolically .

On 3/17/2023 at 7:41 AM, Solo_Ta72 said:

tomasso tessei also says the the prophecy victory of Romans in Byzantine wars was also a prediction in Romans although pretty weak source's and the claim it self is weak 

Quote

The Jews were not about to defeat Alexander in battle; therefore, the correct way to deal with the matter was to come to an accommodation with him, so they peacefully submitted to him. According to the Talmud, when Alexander the Great reached Judea, Simeon the Just, went to Antipatris to meet him—although Josephus states that Alexander himself came to Jerusalem.

The Talmud describes the drama of that first encounter (Yoma 69a). Simon the Just came forth with other members of the priesthood, as well as the sages of the Sanhedrin(the supreme council and tribunal of the Jews), to greet Alexander at the gates of Jerusalem as he strode in on his famous horse, which he rode throughout the world in his conquests. As claimed, both Alexander and his horse were enormously tall.
Alexander Bows to High Priest, Criticized by Greeks

 According to legend, when Alexander saw him clothed with his sacerdotal garment, he descended from his chariot and bowed respectfully before him. Alexander’s courtiers criticized this act. How could one who ought to be adored by all as king bow to the high priest of the Jews? Alexander responded to his fellow Greeks:

I did not adore him, but the God who hath honored him with this high-priesthood, for I saw this very person in a dream, in this very habit, when I was at Dios in Macedonia, who, when I was considering with myself how I might obtain dominion of Asia, exhorted me to make no delay, but boldly to pass over the sea.

It was then, that the representatives of the Jewish people informed the great King that the Samaritans who stood before him misled him and his generals into destroying the Holy Temple. Alexander the Great handed them over immediately to the Jews.

The great leader then gave the high priest his right hand, and went into the Temple and “offered sacrifice to God according to the high priest’s direction,” treating the whole priesthood magnificently.

When Alexander requested that an image of himself—a statue—be placed in the Temple, the high priest explained that this was impossible. He promised instead that all the sons born of priests in that year would be named Alexander, and from then on, the name “Sander” or “Sender” (Alek-sander) was to become a common Jewish name to this day.

 

Are Daniel’s Prophecies Post-dated and Did Alexander Visit Jerusalem?

Alexander’s visit to Jerusalem is perceived as a fictitious account by the Jewish Encyclopedia, and many scholars do not accept it as historical. Hecataeus of Abdera, a contemporary of Alexander, is also said to have written about Alexander’s visit to Jerusalem, but his writings on the topic did not survive into the modern era.

https://greekreporter.com/2022/09/24/jewish-prophesy-alexander-the-great/

 

In reference to the Book of Daniel, wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks would destroy the empire of the Persians, Alexander supposed that he himself was the person intended.

in Daniel’s 8th chapter of the Book of Daniel, where we can find the highly symbolic passage about a ram and a goat:

Quote

[8:20] As for the ram that you saw with the two horns, these are the kings of Media and Persia. [8:21] And the goat is the king of Greece. And the great horn between his eyes is the first king.

 

Quote

[8:5] As I was considering, behold, a male goat came from the west across the face of the whole earth, without touching the ground. And the goat had a conspicuous horn between his eyes

 

Quote

[8:8] Then the goat became exceedingly great, but when he was strong, the great horn was broken, and instead of it there came up four conspicuous horns toward the four winds of heaven.

https://greekreporter.com/2022/09/24/jewish-prophesy-alexander-the-great/

 

[Ibn Al-Ja'abi]

On 3/17/2023 at 7:33 AM, Haji 2003 said:

The reference to Patrician Crone will be problematic for some. She came up with a revisionist history of Islam and then backtracked on what was considered an Islamophobic effort with criticisms of its scholarhip to boot.

Salams,

I'm on the fence about this comment, personally. I agree with you about her Islamophobia, whether she (and her supporters) recognize it or not. She did come from that old, pre-Edward Said orientalism. Post-colonialism has become the norm in many university departments such that departments are moving away from the term orientalism, opting to use Near and Middle Eastern Studies instead. Modern scholars of Islamic studies have much more enlightened attitudes toward Muslims, even if they have very radically divergent positions on Islam from most Muslims. Javad Hashmi, who has garnered some infamy as of late among the Muslim community, interestingly put it that the biases and presumptions of scholars come out in the theories they have, and he sees how the negative views Patricia Crone had about Arabs are reflected (contrasted with Donner, also a revisionist, but with much more optimistic views about Muslims and Islam and hence this is reflected in his work). One must realize that while her work was very negatively received at that time, and for good reason (on the first page she repeats her teacher, Warnsborough's, now demonstrably false thesis that the Quran did not exist in the 1st century/7th century--about 5 years prior to the publication of this book, the discovery of the Sanaa palimpsest categorically disproved this, the studies would not begin to be published until the 80s and 90s though), she does seem to have had the last laugh. We are definitely in a period of Islamic historiography where the traditional historical and biographical sources are not taken at face value as telling us straightforward facts about the time they purport to-- and they have raised some serious problems that need addressing. Is there anything redeeming about this project? We can say this much, calling for a closer rereading of sources and asking ourselves to be more critical of certain narratives and the theological and sectarian motives behind their origins is what the Shia have been calling for when it comes to Sunni and general Islamic history. I have found that this scholarship has actually shown many of the faults that exist within the Sunni system (not without, intending to at least, take shots at all of Islam). There is also an aspect of making one's career in this that I mentioned to my former professor when we speak about revisionism in religious studies scholarship, though I think it would be too cynical and too unfair to always chalk up revisionism to careerism, even if we have some pretty obvious examples. I fear we Muslims have buried our heads in the sand too long about academia, thinking that we could malign it by calling it western or secular and that would achieve something. Now the revisionists are knocking at our gates in the form of Muslims promoting such theories (and once again, for honest intentions, I do believe that these people, as misguided as they may be, do seriously believe this is how you defend Islam from the issues modern scholarship is presenting, e.g., how can the Prophet (saaw) have been in 'aam al-fil if the only record of a northern war by Abraha was from 30 years before?). We need to fund and engage in serious scholarship of our own, as Jews and Christians have for centuries within western academia, and develop and expound on our own methodologies.

On 3/17/2023 at 11:33 AM, Solo_Ta72 said:

Regarding the revisionist... Do you have nay platform or website that refutes thesw revisionist historians

They come up with claims that are actually problematic not for some but almost every one

So does tom Holland 

JazakAllah khair 

Unfortunately not, and I think this might be the wrong attitude to take when seeing such scholarship. While we obviously need to put forth a defense of our religion, to think solely in these terms when we see anything we aren't used to can kill legitimate intellectual growth and leaves us and our scholarship seeming simply reactionary. Nevertheless, there are two problems here:

1. That western scholarship necessarily starts from a naturalist position to hedge its bets, meaning there is no belief in a God, at least one that actually intervenes with history. This is by default a different starting point than a Muslim. They also tend towards a greater deal of minimalism. However, despite that, we need to answer this question: are the sources trustworthy at all for telling us about the seventh century? And if so, which ones? 

2. Traditional Muslims don't, on the whole, work in these difficult fields of early Islamic history, Quranic studies, or Hadith studies (with some exceptions, e.g. Jonathan Brown, who actually doesn't actually do work on the origins of Hadith and their reliability like Schacht, Motzki, and Juynboll, but how Muslims engaged with hadith/hadith works). 

As a side note, once again, not to be unfair to an individual but Tom Holland is not a scholar, he is an author but he does not do original scholarship and his works are not peer-reviewed. I would not class him as doing the same thing as actual scholars, let alone being on their level of scholarship.

On 3/17/2023 at 12:11 AM, Solo_Ta72 said:

While we reject the idea the Hazrat Dhul Qarnayn was Alexander the great as i have asked before

Why do our stories share similarities to the Syriac legend of Alexander?

I've studied Syriac on and off for the past few years and had an interest in the Nes7ono/Tash3itho (Dleh) Dalekhsandrus. I remember some years ago when I looked at it, while there are many similarities between these two texts and the general structure of the account presented there, there are also some pretty clear differences as well. Hence, I don't think one text took from the other but that, at most within the minimalist system they are working in, they come out of the same Alexander Romance tradition. Wallahu A'lam personally. Regarding the historicity of the Quranic stories (are these literal history or art being used for moral lessons?), your answer to this might affect how much you see this as a problem. This also isn't nearly as outside of the Muslim norm as you might think, I have seen Shia ulama express this sentiment (though I won't say their name because I don't know if they would like the public to know what they think). If you want a very in-depth argument for this based solely on a Quranic analysis (not even looking at these non-Islamic texts and archeology), there is Muhammad Ahmad Khalafallah's al-Fann al-Qasasi fi l-Quran al-Karim about this topic. Personally, I don't subscribe to this. I do think that many of these Quranic stories can be demonstrated to have some historical background to them even if not the way they are depicted in movies. The Exodus, for example, is not completely thrown out but some American schools still accept it even if German schools don't, look at biblical studies scholars like Gary Rendsburg. And I don't think any serious scholar will try to deny that Jesus exists. We also have pretty reasonable evidence for the existence of David and his dynasty. Once again, if you don't actively believe in God in your scholarship it offers some limitations about how easily you can prove the existence of a random shepherd 4000 years ago, like Nabi Ibrahim (عليه السلام), but these are the limitations of the tool. Other stories are quite perplexing. Dhul-Qarnayn is one and I can't pretend to have figured out the theological answer to this.

I will recommend you check out this article on the topic:

https://ponderingislam.com/2020/02/15/did-the-qurʾan-borrow-from-the-syriac-legend-of-alexander/

The author, Taha Somro, has done extensive work in Syriac literature and within a formal institutional setting. All the same, I think it's far from being the last word on the subject but I remember this being an interesting read that added some good nuance to the conversation. Also bear in mind that Taha addresses Kevin van Bladel's scholarship on the matter primarily, not Tesei's.

Wallahu a'lam

Wassalam

[Haji 2003]

6 minutes ago, Ibn Al-Ja'abi said:

One must realize that while her work was very negatively received at that time,

Yes.

The following post that I made in another thread (started by the same OP) picked up on reviews written by academics at the time.

 

[Guest lay opinion]

“Such are some of the stories of the unseen, which We have revealed unto you, before this neither you nor your people knew them. So persevere patiently, for the end is for those who are righteous”. (11:49).

 

“And they ask you about Dhul-Qarnayn. Say: ‘I will recite unto you a remembrance of him’.”

The beginning phrase of this verse shows that the story of Dhul-Qarnayn had been being discussed among people before they came to the Prophet (S) and asked their differences and ambiguities from him.

Who is Dhul-Qarnayn?
 

c) Cyrus the Great: This is a relatively new theory presented by the famous Islamic scholar AbulMakarem Azad that most experts tend to accept as the true identity of Dhul-Qarnayn.[13] Cyrus was a Persian king and descendant of Achaemenes (Hakhamanish) living in the sixth century b.c. In contrast to the other two theories, there are chances that Dhul-Qarnayn was actually Cyrus the Great. He was a monotheist (Zoroastrian) with an unaltered religion that could easily be found in both East and West Persia.[14]

Some of the reasons for why Dhul-Qarnayn can be Cyrus the Great:

1- He was a monotheistic believer that was familiar with God

2- He was a just and kind king that cared for his people

3- He was hard on transgressors and enemies

4- Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) had given him the means to all things

5- He bore religion, intellect, good deeds, virtues, wealth and glory

6- He had an expedition to the West and conquered Lidya as well

7- He travelled to the East and reached "مطلع الشمس" (where the sun rises) and met a wild desert dweller there

 

8- Cyrus built a dam in the Daryal Gorge that lies in the Caucasus Mountains, near the city of Tiflis.[15]

 

It should be noted that the title of Dhul-Qarnayn has been mentioned in both the Quran and the Torah.  Basically, what these two books have to do with Dhul-Qarnayn is that according to hadiths, those asking the prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) about Dhul-Qarnayn were either the Jews themselves or the Quraysh with the encouragement of the Jews, trying to put him on the spot with a hard question and prove that he isn't a prophet. Therefore, the Dhul-Qarnayn the Quran speaks of is the same Dhul-Qarnayn that the Torah speaks of.

 

It is clear that in the Torah, Dhul-Qarnayn is Cyrus the Great, because he dreamed of Daniel as a ram plowing the West with one horn and the East with another, meaning that he would take over both, as according to the prophecy of Isaiah, Cyrus would become the “Eagle of the East”, meaning that he was the fierce warrior of the East.[16]

 

Abul-Makarem Azad Hindi says: “It is possible that the story of Daniel is only a myth, yet what the Quran mentions is surely true and has taken place. Contemporary historians have attested to Cyrus’s great, just and virtuous personality.”[17]

 

The link between two horns and Cyrus:

 

In the 19^th century, a statue of Cyrus was discovered near the river of “Morghab” relatively the size of a full-sized human, depicting Cyrus with two spread wings like those of an eagle, and a crown with two horns like those of a ram. A group of German scientists travelled all the way to Iran just to see this statue, which is a great specimen and sample of ancient stone-carving. After comparing traits mentioned in the Holy Book with those seen in the statue, these historians reached a conclusion about why Cyrus was called Dhul-Qarnayn (The bearer of two horns), and also why his statue had wings like those of an eagle. All of these clues led to the conclusion about who Dhul-Qarnayn was in history (Cyrus the Great).[18]

 

Historians have also listed some moral attributes for Cyrus. For instance, Herodotus, the Greek historian writes: “Cyrus was a generous and very kind and gentle king, not thinking of accumulating wealth like other kings.”[19]

 

Others have also written: “Cyrus was a smart and kind king, possessing both the greatness of kings and the virtues of the wise. He had high determination and a dominant being, his slogan was to serve humanity and [one of] his characteristics was to be just; humility and humbleness had taken the place of pride and arrogance in him.”[20]

 

On this basis, there is no doubt that Dhul-Qarnayn was Cyrus the Great and today, many Islamic researchers and commentators have reached the same conclusion; that the Dhul-Qarnayn mentioned in the Quran is none other than the Dhul-Qarnayn mentioned in the Torah.

 

Was Cyrus a Prophet?

 

There is also a difference of opinion here amongst Islamic scholars as well. According to Allamah Tabatabai, in some hadiths, he has been introduced as a human[21], while in others he has been considered a heavenly angel.[22] Nevertheless, most scholars believe him to be a human. Many hadiths tell us that he wasn’t a prophet, but a righteous servant of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

 

Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) has said: “Dhul-Qarnayn wasn’t a prophet, but was a righteous servant that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) loved.”[23]


Who are the people of Gog and Magog? Where did they end up? What were the actions taken by Dhul-Qarnayn against them?

 

[Guest truth_seeker]

 

6 hours ago, Ibn Al-Ja'abi said:

https://ponderingislam.com/2020/02/15/did-the-qurʾan-borrow-from-the-syriac-legend-of-alexander/

The author, Taha Somro, has done extensive work in Syriac literature and within a formal institutional setting. All the same, I think it's far from being the last word on the subject but I remember this being an interesting read that added some good nuance to the conversation. Also bear in mind that Taha addresses Kevin van Bladel's scholarship on the matter primarily, not Tesei's.

Wallahu a'lam

Wassalam

Im hesitant to suggest yaqeen but this guy also wrote a piece about quranic stories generally -

https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/the-qurans-engagement-with-christian-and-jewish-literature

The article touches on the Alexander Romance (not the dhul qarnayn issue though). Ignoring the sunni stuff I think the way he lays it out is plausible at least IMO.