The Prophetological Epistemology of the Qur’an
In his entry about ‘Knowledge and Learning’ in the Encyclopedia of the Qur’an, Paul Walker explains as follows:
In the Qurʾan the fact that God is all-knowing (ʿalīm), knows what humans do not, and knows the unseen (ʿālim al-ghayb) is stressed constantly. The term all-knowing (ʿalīm) appears literally again and again, often in combination with all-wise (ḥakīm) but also with all-hearing (samīʿ). One phrase states clearly that “over and above every person who has knowledge is the all-knowing” (Q 12:76). In fact, every Qurʾanic instance (thirteen in all) of the term “knower” (ʿālim), which is the same word as that used later for the learned scholar, is followed by “unseen” (ghayb) and therefore refers unambiguously to God. It is true that there are references (five) to “those with knowledge” in the plural (ʿālimūn, ʿulamāʾ) and several expressions for humans “who know, understand, are aware”. Nevertheless, God’s preponderance and omniscience is overwhelming, so much so as to bring into question what it means to assert that humans, even the prophets, know.1
One can only affirm that Walker’s description of the dominance of God’s wisdom in the Qur’an matches the evidence of Qur’anic proclamation. Consequently, he asks about the epistemological implications of God’s knowledge for the anthropology and prophetology of the Qur’an: What are humans generally able to know and what can prophets specifically know? Walker does not give an answer to both questions, because his entry is not dedicated to the anthropology and prophetology of the Qur’an. The current study focuses on the epistemology of Qur’anic prophetology, especially on the question: What are the limits of prophetic knowledge in the Qur’an?
The Controverse Nature of ʿilm al-ghaib
On several occasions, the Qur’an reacts to expectations about the knowledge of a prophet and his abilities. In verse 50 of sura al-ʾanʿām, the prophet Muhammad says:
The prophet is denying that he possesses knowledge of the unseen, holds an angelic status and has gained access to the treasures of God. After a few verses, Muhammad further reacts to the demand of knowledge of future events and says:
Therefore, the prophet Muhammad is confessing that only God is omniscient and the true bearer of knowledge. This Qur’anic discourse about the epistemology of prophetic knowledge can be summarised and conceptualised using the following model:
God’s divine wisdom includes knowledge of the unseen and the Qur’an is using metaphors, such as keys and treasures, to describe this form of divine knowledge. The audience of the Qur’anic proclamation is expecting angels to come down or prophets to become similar to angels to deliver this divine knowledge as intermediaries. Thus, as typically stated in the Qur’an, the adversaries of Muhammad would demand him to ascend to heaven similar to an angel or to show them that an angel has descended with him. For example, this expectation is verbally quoted in verse 12 of sura Hūd:
However, messengers and prophets before Muhammad previously needed to address the same kind of expectations; for example, Noah confesses the same kind of ignorance to his contemporaries as Muhammad:
I do not say to you
that the treasuries of God are with me (wa-lā ʾaqūlu lakum ʿindī khazāʾinu llāhi)
nor that I have knowledge of the Invisible (wa-lā ʾaʿlamu l-ghaiba);
nor do I say that I am an angel (Q 11:31)
Now, the question that could be asked is: What type of milieu is the Qur’anic proclamation intending to address in this epistemological discourse of prophetic knowledge? Were there, in fact, Arab pagans prior to Islam who were expecting prophets to become angels and to gain access to the divine treasures of knowledge? If this was the case, then where did these concepts of prophetic knowledge originate, and how did these concepts reach the Hijāz at the beginning of the seventh century?3
The Syriac Background of the Qur’anic Nomenclature
Recently, Andrew Hayes proposed to answer these questions.4 He refers to the Syriac theological literature to give context to the Qur’anic discourse. He summarises his main thesis in the following manner:
For the Syriac Christological tradition as expressed in the writings of Philoxenus of Mabbugh, and Jacob of Serugh, with deep roots in the writings of Ephrem the Syrian, one of the foremost arguments for Jesus’ full divinity was distinctly cognitive – that is, it is based on Jesus’ knowledge. These authors argue that we know Jesus is divine because he alone is fully and intimately knowing of what is in his Father, whereas God’s messengers do not have natural access to that knowledge, and can only receive it, in limited form, from Christ.5
Hayes describes how this epistemology of prophetic knowledge in the Syriac tradition proclaims Jesus as the treasury of prophetic knowledge. The exegetical root for this thought was two references in the Gospel of Matthew. In Matt. 11:27, Jesus says:
All things have been handed over to me by my Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. (Matt. 11:27)6
In Matt. 16:13–18, an example is given of how divine knowledge is revealed to others:
Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, ‘Who do people say that the Son of Man is?’ And they said, ‘Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.’ He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’ Simon Peter replied, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ And Jesus answered him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it’. (Matt. 16:13–18)
This study does not intend to examine the details of Hayes’ exploration of the exegetical analysis of these verses in the Syriac tradition as a whole. Instead, I only want to summarise his findings.7 Hayes refers to the striking similarities between the imageries for prophetic knowledge in the Qur’an and in Syriac theological literature. In both cases, divine wisdom is metaphorically described as treasures and keys, which are gained through ascension to heaven. Although the prophetic epistemology in Syriac tradition is Christological, the Qur’an is denying any human or prophetic access to this divine knowledge. Ultimately, Hayes argues that the discourse of prophetic knowledge in Syriac Christianity reached the Hijāz through Christian missionaries and contacts in trade. Accordingly, the audience of the Qur’anic proclamation expected a prophet at the beginning of the seventh century to gain direct or indirect access to divine wisdom. The Qur’an seemingly denies these expectations.
Hayes’ analysis is brilliant and very profound regarding the prophetic epistemology in the Syriac tradition. However, his proposal for an anti-discourse in the Qur’an to the Christological epistemology of prophetic knowledge in that tradition does not suffice every aspect of this theme in the Qur’an. In other words, prophets are not explicitly called and expected to be angels in the Syriac theological tradition. Furthermore, the Qur’anic limitation of prophetic knowledge is especially concerned with eschatological or apocalyptic knowledge, which would be only one aspect of divine wisdom in the Syriac discourse of prophetic knowledge. In addition, other concepts might be the basis for the Qur’anic rejection of prophets having access to divine knowledge rather than being exclusively directed against a Christological model of prophetic knowledge.
The Apocalyptic Background
Prior to Hayes, Patricia Crone has analysed Qur’anic statements about the adversaries of the prophet Muhammad and their expectations of him.8 The author draws the following conclusion:
[…] what was the polytheist conception of a messenger (rasūl)? The answer seems to be that a messenger to them was an angel sent down by God with revealed knowledge, including warning of an imminent disaster such as the flood or the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha. It was probably as an angel bringing such warning that they envisaged a nadhīr. By contrast, a prophet (nabī) was a human being who ascended to heaven in order to receive revelation, as Moses and many other heroes of the apocalyptic literature had done. The polytheists convey a strong sense of being fascinated by the idea of heavenly journeys. Whether an angel came down or a human succeeded in traversing the heavens, the connection with the divine world was expected to show itself in miracles. Moses is the prophet that both the polytheists and the Qur’anic Messenger consistently invoke in their disagreement over the nature of a messenger and the mechanics involved in the revelation of books.9
Crone points to the direct resemblance of the expectations by the adversaries of the prophet Muhammad of a prophet and the heroes of apocalyptic literature, such as Moses and Abraham.10 In this literature, Moses and Abraham ascend to heaven with the help of angels and, in certain cases, even achieve angelic status themselves. They are told the secrets of future events and what will happen at the end of time. Crone admits that she cannot answer how the audience of the Qur’an gained access to this type of apocalyptic concepts and whether the opponents of the prophet were Arab pagans, Christians or Jews.
Imperial Eschatology as a Wider Horizon
In the main part of the paper, I intend to further develop the ideas of Crone and to give a potential scenario, examine why apocalyptic ideas were prevalent at the beginning of the seventh century in the Hijāz and determine their influence on the formation of the Qur’anic discourse about the limits of prophetic knowledge.
In this regard, I want to emphasise three major propositions or theses11 :
Firstly, the Qur’anic proclamation is deeply related to the Roman-Persian war at the beginning of the seventh century.
Secondly, the Qur’an provides a theological response to the political events of the Roman-Persian war.
Thirdly, the genesis of the Qur’an and its eschatology and prophetology is connected to the Byzantine war propaganda and related religious and apocalyptical discourses.
Before presenting the Qur’anic view, I summarise the major outlines of the Roman-Persian war and its religious and political implications.12 In the year 591, the Byzantine Emperor Maurice helped Khosro II to end a civil war in the Sasanian Empire and to secure his thrown. On the basis of this cooperation, both empires committed to a new peace treaty. In the year 602, the rebel Phocas deposed and murdered Maurice. This development marked the beginning of the Roman-Persian war at the beginning of the seventh century. Khosro was enraged at the death of his patron and invaded the Roman Empire. Meanwhile, Phocas was assassinated in 610 and Heraclius was proclaimed as the new emperor. The Sasanian invasion culminated in the conquest of Jerusalem in 614. This event was described as a traumatic one for the Christian population and the Sasanians not only gained access to the Holy Places of Christianity but also took the True Cross of Jesus Christ’s crucifixion with them. Heraclius intensified his counter-offensive in the second decade of the seventh century and ultimately manages to overcome Khosro and the Persian Empire in 628. He also brought back the stolen True Cross of Jesus Christ.
The Roman-Persian war posed far-reaching religious and political implications.13 Especially from the Roman Christian perspective, the Conquest of Jerusalem in 614 was a traumatic event.14 Several indications existed that the Jewish population gained access to the Temple Mount and Jewish expectations emerged regarding the restitution of the Jewish Temple and the Coming of the Messiah. For Christian eschatology, the loss of Jerusalem needed to be contextualised within the traditional apocalyptic world view. In addition, the defeats of the Byzantine Empire challenged the self-understanding of Byzantium as the last empire on earth before the endtime. In response to these challenges, Heraclius seemingly made messianic and eschatological claims of power. In the Byzantine war propaganda, the Roman-Persian war was described as an endtime holy war, in which Khosro and the Sasanian Empire belonged to the powers of evil.
How can this context of war illuminate the Qur’anic discourse about the limits of prophetic knowledge? My thesis is that the Qur’an is denying that a prophet at the beginning of the seventh century could tell, which the last true empire at the endtime was, how long the events of war would proceed, when exactly the evil powers would be defeated and when exactly the resurrection and day of God’s judgement would begin. This type of knowledge belongs to the apocalyptic literature and the prophet Muhammad denied that God would disclose such apocalyptic knowledge to him or to any prophet.
An Arab Prophet in Late Antiquity: Anti-Apocalyptic Oaths in the Qur’an
A distinct Arabic characteristic of the Qur’anic proclamations in early Meccan suras are oaths, which are seemingly a genuine form of speech used by pre-Islamic poets and Arabian diviners. Recently, Nora Schmid analysed the oaths in the Qur’an as structural markers by comparing them with their pre-Islamic usage and within their Late Antique background.15 Schmid summarised the ‘general characteristic of pre-Islamic Arabian oath-taking’ as follows:
(1) Oaths are uttered by an authoritative figure with a pre-eminent position entitled to speak for his access to a hidden truth (the diviner, the poet).
(2) Oaths are sworn by (the muqsam bihi) celestial, cosmic, or meteorological phenomena, by wildlife, and by the Kaʿbah.
(3) Oaths introduce (the muqsam ʿalayhi) a statement of social consequence; they have an inner-worldly dimension exclusively.
(4) Oaths introduce a statement that is propositionally true – Zuhayr is explicit in his understanding that oath-taking is one of three modes of establishing truth.16
Schmid then compared the Qur’anic oaths in early Meccan suras with the abovementioned characteristics and drew the following conclusion:
To sum up, oath series in the early Meccan surahs obviously have a strong eschatological dimension, or at least they point unremittingly toward eschatology by means of the in-built liminality of the muqsam bihi, in combination with the muqsam ʿalayhi. It can only be concluded that oaths in the earliest strata of the Qur’an simultaneously appealed to and subverted the poets’ and the diviners authoritative rhetorical paradigm. They were a new and innovative response to existing pre-Islamic practices of oath-taking. Articulated at the opening of the surah, oaths do not have a merely ornamental function, they do not just ‘provide a lively introduction,’ but they are part of a complex network of functions. Most notably, they assert the truth of the statement that follows, they provide a foil against which statements on Judgment Day are contoured in the course of the proclamation, and they separate prophetic speech from any other kind of everyday discourse, all the while appealing to and emphasizing their own distinctness from oracular and poetic modes of speech. While the structuring force of oaths was inherited from pre-Islamic mantic and poetic discourse, the intent behind the statements themselves had shifted in the early Meccan surahs of the Qur’an. The structural feature oath still had the potential to distinguish and affirm subsequent knowledgeable discourse; however, this knowledge was attributed to a different, namely, divine omnipotent source.17
This study intends to consider another possible aspect of the introduced content (muqsam ʿalaihi) of oaths in pre-Islamic times to further enhance the function of oaths in early Meccan suras and their relationship to the discourse of prophetic epistemology in the Qur’an. Schmid provides ample evidence that pre-Islamic oaths would introduce ‘a statement of social consequence’. However, oracular prophecies about future events and developments may have been a further content of pre-Islamic oaths. An example is the story about two soothsayers, namely, Shiqq and Saṭīḥ, who are summoned by the Yemenite King Rabīʿa b. Naṣr who had a terrifying vision (ruʾyā) that needed interpretation (taʾwīl). This story is preserved in Ibn Hishām’s version of Ibn Isḥāq’s sīra-traditions.18 After having ‘summoned every soothsayer [kāhin], sorcerer [sāḥir], omenmonger [ʿāif] and astrologer [munajjim]’, the Yemenite king asks them about the interpretation of his dream. However, they all fail to describe the content of the dream in advance. Therefore, they recommend the soothsayers Saṭīḥ and Shiqq for this task. Saṭīḥ arrives first and is able to summarise the content of the king’s dream:
The king confirms the content of the dream then asks for the meaning (taʾwīl), which is presented readily by Saṭīḥ:
Saṭīḥ swears his oath by ‘the serpent of the lava plains’ then introduces a prophecy for future events (muqsam ʿalaihi): the Ethiopians will conquer Yemen and will rule it. The soothsayer derives this prophecy as a result of his interpretation of the king’s dream.
The king then asks Saṭīḥ when these events will happen and the soothsayer adds to his prophecy, that is, these events will occur after 60–70 years. However, the Ethiopic dominion will not last forever. Saṭīḥ also refers to the coming of a ‘true prophet’ (nabīy zakkīy) and that ultimately time will end with the eschatological day of judgement. With a final oath, the soothsayer confirms the truth of his interpretations:
The same course of interaction is repeated, when the second soothsayer named Shiqq arrives to the king. He also anticipates the content of the king’s dream and gives the same interpretation, which only slightly differs in wording.22
Discussing the historical authenticity of this story about both soothsayers in Ibn Isḥāq’s sīra-material is irrelevant for this paper. However, considering two interrelated points, which are corroborated by these reports, is important. Firstly, soothsayers were expected to possess a certain degree of access to hidden knowledge. Secondly, they could use this access to prophesy future events. Consequently, one could argue that soothsayers during pre-Islamic times could have also used oaths to introduce prophecies about the future course of (worldly) events.
Now, the early Meccan suras claim to be divinely inspired prophetic speech and are full of oaths and descriptions about future eschatological events. Is it then possible to link the use of oaths in early Meccan suras with the potential function of introducing prophecies? Moreover, is it reasonable to assume that an Arab prophet in the Hijāz at the beginning of the seventh century would have used oaths as a first and native instrument to give apocalyptic prophecies? If Imperial eschatology was very predominant throughout the Near East in Late Antiquity,23 then expecting a prophet in Late Antiquity – even an ‘Arab’ and in the Hijāz – to make apocalyptic prophecies would have made sense.
Before checking the oaths of early Meccan suras and their possible function of introducing apocalyptic prophecies, analysing contemporary Late Antique texts for a framework of apocalyptic prophecies is helpful.
I firstly consider a scene of the Syriac Alexander Legend, the neṣḥānā d-aleksandrōs (‘victory of Alexander’),24 which is now typically dated to the first half of the seventh century25 and contextualised with other apocalyptic texts, which may have been written in the wake of the Roman-Persian war.26
After building a gigantic gate at the ends of the world, Alexander inscribes his apocalyptic prophecy about the eschatological events of war and political dominion till the end on the gate.27
Interestingly, the Persian king Tubarlaq makes a second prophecy after his defeat against Alexander:
And Tubarlaq the king of Persia brought sorcerers [ḥarāšē] and enchanters [āšopē], and the signs of the zodiac [malwāšē], and fire and water, and all his gods, and made divination by them [wa-qṣam b-hon]; and they told him that at the final consummation of the world the kingdom of the Romans would go forth and subdue all the kings of the earth; and that whatever king was found in Persia would be slain, and that Babylon and Assyria would be laid waste by the command of God. Thus did king Tubarlaq make divination [hākanna qṣam tubarlaq malkā], and he gave [it] in his own handwriting to king Alexander. And he put down in writing with Alexander what should befall Persia, that the king and his nobles prophesied [etnabbi] that Persia should be laid waste by the hand of the Romans, and all the kingdoms be laid waste, but that power should stand and rule to the end of time, and should deliver the kingdom of the earth to the Messiah who is to come.28
Thus, Tubarlaq summons sorcerers (ḥarāšē) and enchanters (āšopē) and takes the signs of the zodiac (malwāšē) and water and fire. He calls his gods to make a divination by them all (qṣam b-hon). The actual process of this divination is not explicitly described: Did he ask the sorcerers and enchanters for their prophecies? Did he invoke his gods? Did he or his enchanters invoke the signs of the Zodiac or fire and water? Did they even swear by them? Regardless of the actual process, the result is an apocalyptic prophecy: the Roman empire will prevail till the end and ultimately give all the power to the Messiah. Tubarlaq writes down the prophecy with his hands and gives it to Alexander. The content of the prophecy is described as something that Tubarlaq and his nobles have prophesied (etnabbi).
Another contemporary source reports about a Persian king giving an apocalyptical prophecy about the course of events during war. In his History, the Byzantine Historian Theophylact Simocatta describes how the Persian king Khosro II, at the end of the Roman-Persian war from 572 to 591, makes a prophecy about the events of the following Roman-Persian war at the beginning of the seventh century. He is considered to have made this prophecy with the help of his knowledge about the Chaldeans to interpret stars:
But I will not overlook what Chosroes, who was well versed in the burdensome folly of the Chaldaeans concerning the stars, is said to have prophesied at the height of the war. […] ‘Be assured that troubles will flow back in turn against you Romans. The Babylonian race will hold the Roman state in its power for a threefold cyclic hebdomad of years. Thereafter you Romans will enslave Persians for a fifth hebdomad of years. When these very things have been accomplished, the day without evening will dwell among mortals and the expected fate will achieve power, when the forces of destruction will be handed over to dissolution and those of the better life hold sway.’29
Khosro II prophesies how the peace treaty between the Roman and Persians will be suspended by the Persians after the murder of Maurice by the rebel Phocas in 602 (‘Be assured that troubles will flow back in turn against you Romans’), how the Persians will successfully invade Byzantine territories (‘The Babylonian race will hold the Roman state in its power for a threefold cyclic hebdomad of years’) and how Heraclius will ultimately win against the Persians (‘Thereafter you Romans will enslave Persians for a fifth hebdomad of years’). Afterwards, eschatological events will begin.
This prophecy of Khosro II is apocalyptic in nature, because it prophesies and calculates the course of events with regard to imperial battles and how these events will culminate till the end of this world. The nature and general tendency of this apocalyptic prophecy by Khosro II resemble the prophecy of Alexander, which he inscribes on the gate in the Syriac Alexander Legend.30
As a third example of an apocalyptic prophecy, I want to add the conceptualisation of a prophecy, which Alexander makes after receiving a revelation from an angel. The content of the third prophecy is much more pessimistic about the fate of the Romans in the end of time. However, I only want to consider the description of the nature of this prophecy by Alexander. It is contained in several recensions of a mēmrā (wrongfully) attributed to Jacob of Serugh.31 This text may have also originated at the beginning of the seventh century.32
After building the gate at the ends of the world, an angel appears in a great vision (ḥezwā rabbā) after Alexander falls asleep. The angel tells Alexander about the secrets (kesyātā),33 who then writes down the prophecies:
And after these (things) had been said from the angel, to the knowledgeable king Alexander, the son of Philip, the king said to him with the spirit of prophetic revelation (b-rūḥ gelyānā da-nbyutā), that he wanted to write these (things) down, so that the world would learn, that these (things) would happen. And when all these (things) had been spoken by the angel, the spirit of the Lord dwelled on the king (rūḥeh d-māryā šrāt ʿal malkā), as on Jeremiah. He wrote down the secrets (kesyātā) like Daniel and Isiah. […] And he set down and showed/revealed all future things (w-iteb ḥawwi koll da-ʿtidān) like Daniel.34
Accordingly, Alexander is compared to the prophet Daniel as a receiver of revelation (Dan. 7:1). Similar to Daniel, he receives secret knowledge regarding future events and consequently writes down his apocalyptic prophecies.
The nature of the three abovementioned examples of apocalyptic prophecies at the beginning of the seventh century can be summarised in the following characteristics:
The receiver of apocalyptic knowledge gains access to hidden truths about the worldly course of events till the end of time and can concretely describe them.
Apocalyptic prophecies can present calculations about the beginning and ending of certain events.
Apocalyptic prophecies exhibit an imperial dimension: they identify empires that will or will not prevail till the end time.
In the cases of Alexander and the prophet Daniel, the source of apocalyptical knowledge is an angel seen in a vision. However, pagan individuals, such as the Persian king Khosro II, are also described as gaining apocalyptic knowledge by interpreting stars or using the help of magicians and enchanters and invoking their gods. The Persian king Tubarlaq makes a divination (qṣam) for this knowledge by referring to stars (signs of the zodiac) and to terrestrial phenomena (fire and water).
By observing the application of oaths in early Meccan suras and their relationship with a prophetic discourse about knowledge and revelation, this study argues that the application of oaths aims to deconstruct apocalyptic prophecies. This claim extends beyond the thesis of Tor Andrae, who correctly observed that Qur’anic eschatology is not apocalyptic.35 I believe that the eschatology of the Qur’an is even programmatically anti-apocalyptic and the practice of oath-taking in early Meccan suras serves to tackle an apocalyptic worldview.
Schmid convincingly summarized the characteristic of oaths in the early Meccan suras by explaining that ‘oath series in the early Meccan surahs obviously have a strong eschatological dimension or at least they point unremittingly towards eschatology by means of the in-built liminality of the muqsam bihi, in combination with the muqsam ʿalayhi’.36 To further develop the argument by Schmid, three aspects of oath-taking and related discourse about revelation need to be considered.
Early Meccan suras use stars, terrestrial phenomena and eschatological sceneries as objects of oaths (muqsam bihi).
Eschatological phenomena (e.g. resurrection, paradise and hell) are introduced by oaths (muqsam ʿalaihi) or are connected to oaths later within the sura.
The early Meccan suras describe the prophet Muhammad as the receiver of revelation by visions mediated by an angel or a messenger.
By comparing these three aspects with the context of the apocalyptic prophecies by Persian kings and Alexander, the Qur’an is evidently evoking the expectation that the prophet Muhammad will give apocalyptic prophecies. However, the Qur’an then deconstructs this expectation by denying apocalyptic prophecies and introducing a discourse about prophetic knowledge, which is anti-apocalyptic. I want to exemplify this strategy by analysing a few of the early Meccan suras.
Sura 100 (al-ʿādiyāt) is a good example of how the use of oaths evokes certain apocalyptic expectations then denies it:
1 By the runners that snort,
2 By the strikers of fire,
3 By the raiders at dawn,
4 When they leave a track of dust,
5 When they engage a host,
6 Man is ungrateful to his Lord,
7 And he is a witness to that,
8 And he is violent in his love of good things.
9 Does he not know?
When what is in the graves is poured out
10 And when what is in [men’s] breasts is made apparent -
11 On that day their Lord will be fully informed about them. (Q 100:1–11)
The sura is introduced by oaths sworn by (muqsam bihi) galloping horses, who can be interpreted to signify a raid or even apocalyptic horsemen, which is similar to the angels in the Apocalypse of John (Rev. 9,17–19).37 Now, one could argue, that if the oaths are intended to give an apocalyptic/eschatological imagery, then, finally, the oaths will introduce an apocalyptic prophecy. Instead, the oaths culminate in a statement about the ungratefulness of human beings to their Lord. In addition, at the end of the sura, this is connected to a missing consciousness of humans regarding the eschatological judgement that awaits them.
Several oath series in Early Meccan suras culminate in anthropological statements about humans with regard to their relationship with God such as ‘We created Man in the fairest stature’ (Q 95:4) and ‘We created Man in hardship’ (Q 90:4). Although these statements are connected within the suras to the reality of the resurrection and the final judgement of humans, they deny any form of apocalyptic prophecy. As such, they do not contain calculations about the beginning and ending of certain events, explanations of how history will concretely evolve till the end time, identification of empires and their fates and the coming of the Messiah, among others.
Even in the cases in which an oath series culminates in the introduction of an eschatological scene, it is not apocalyptic (Q 79):
1 By those that pull to destruction,
2 By those that rove,
3 By those that swim,
4 And by those that outstrip,
5 And by those that manage an affair,
6 On the day when the shuddering shudders,
7 Followed by the one that rides behind,
8 There are hearts on that day that will beat painfully,
9 Their looks downcast,
10 They will say, ‘Are we being restored to our original state
11 – when we have become decayed bones?’
12 They will say, ‘That will then be a losing turn.’
13 There will only be a single driving,
14 And see, they will be awake. (Q 79:1–14)
Sura 79 (an-nāziʿāt) begins with an enigmatic series of phenomena, which, in their threatening and ominous character, is seemingly evoking eschatological images.38 The oaths then explicitly culminate into eschatological scenes such as a cosmic catastrophe, terrified humans, sceptical speech of those who denied the resurrection and the suddenness of resurrection.
Although the oaths introduce eschatological phenomena, they fail to culminate in an apocalyptic prophecy. Additionally, I want to argue that this failure is an intended strategy by the Qur’an to deconstruct apocalyptic prophecies. This is also the reason for the existence of a second category of Qur’anic oaths, which Schmid apostrophised as ‘discourse on prophetic discourse’.39 In these cases, the oaths introduce an explicit discourse about the truthfulness of Qur’anic revelation and how it differs from other forms of divination. An oath series in sura al-ḥāqqah is a good example of this discourse:
38 No. I swear by what you see
39 And what you do not see,
40 It is the speech of a noble messenger [qaulu rasūlin karīmin].
41 It is not the speech of a poet [qauli shāʿirin]
– little you believe -
42 Nor is it the speech of a soothsayer [qauli kāhinin]
– little you are reminded –
43 [It is] a revelation from the Lord of all beings [tanzīlun min rabbi l-ʿālamīna]. (Q 69:38–43)
After an oath series by objects, which can and cannot be seen, the divine proclamation of the Qur’an is characterised as the speech of a messenger and distinguished from other forms of divine utterances by soothsayers or poets. The insistence of the Qur’an, that is, it is different from the speech of Arab diviners, is connected to the failed expectation of the audience of the Qur’an. If the Qur’an is using oaths to introduce divine utterances similar to other Arab diviners and claiming to be the revelation from an angelic messenger, then, for the audience at the beginning of the seventh century, the Qur’an is failing to deliver its expectation of apocalyptic prophecies.
A similar discourse about the origin and insistence of the truthfulness of the Qur’anic proclamation is introduced by an oath series in sura 81 (at-takwīr):
15 No! I swear by the [stars] that retreat,
16 Moving and setting,
17 By the night when it closes,
18 By the morning when it breathes,
19 It is indeed the speech a noble messenger,
20 Powerful, secure with the Occupant of the Throne,
21 Obeyed and to be trusted,
22 Your companion is not possessed.
23 He did indeed see Him on the clear horizon.
24 He is not niggardly about the Invisible.
25 This is not the word of a devil that should be stoned.
26 So where are you going?
27 It is nothing less than a reminder to all beings
28 – for whoever of you wishes to follow the straight path. (Q 81:15–28)
The oath series is sworn by astronomical phenomena and introduces a ‘discourse about prophetic discourse’. Once again, the Qur’an is insistent on the fact that it is a speech delivered by a messenger and that the prophet has truly seen this messenger in a vision. In verse 24, although the Qur’an is stating that God ‘is not niggardly about the Invisible (al-ghaibi)’, it is the failure of the Qur’anic proclamation to meet the expectation of the audience that is at stake here: a true and authentic revelation from an angelic vision, which is introduced by eschatological oaths, would give apocalyptic prophecies about the unseen.
Furthermore, in sura 53 (an-najm), a similar ‘discourse about prophetic discourse,’ as in sura 81, can be observed:
1 By the star when it sets,
2 Your comrade has not gone astray,
nor has he erred,
3 Nor does he speak out of caprice.
4 This is simply a revelation that is being revealed,
5 Taught to him by one great in power,
6 Possessed of strength.
He stood straight
7 On the highest horizon;
8 Then he drew near and came down,
9 [Till] he was two bows’ length away or even nearer;
10 Then he inspired his servant with his inspiration.
11 His heart has not lied [about] what he saw.
12 Will you dispute with him about what he sees?
13 Indeed, he saw him on another descent
14 By the sidr-tree of the boundary,
15 Near to which is the garden of refuge,
16 When the sidr-tree was covered by its covering.
17 His eye did not swerve nor turn astray.
18 Indeed, he saw [one] of the greatest signs of his Lord. (Q 81:1–18)
Recently, Saqib Hussain proposes a new interpretation of the first part of the sura.40 He argues that the beginning of the sura, that is, an oath by a star, refers to the Pleaides and that their rising and setting anticipates the manner in which two visions of the prophet are described in the sura. Saqib further explains that the prophet did not see God in these visions, but an angelic messenger, who descended to the prophet in both cases. I want to stress two further points by comparing two aspects of this sura with specific elements of the apocalyptic prophecies, which were discussed earlier.
In the Syriac Alexander Legend, the Persian king Tubarlaq is described to have made divination (qṣam b-) by the signs of the Zodiac (malwāšē) and terrestrial elements such as water and fire. Through this, he achieved his apocalyptic prophecy. Similar to the beginning of sura 53, Qur’anic oaths are also sworn by (muqsam bihi) stars (Q 56:75). In other cases, terrestrial elements (e.g. ocean and mountains) are also the object of oaths (Q 52:1,6; Q 95:2).
Although how Tubarlaq creates divination by the signs of the Zodiac or by terrestrial elements (e.g. invocation and oaths) is not explicitly described, the aspect that a distinct Qur’anic means of introducing oaths is using the IV stem of the root q-s-m and the preposition bi- is worthy of consideration. Schmid even observes that the more prevalent form of oath-taking in pre-Islamic time (aḥlifu bi-, ḥalaftu bi-) is not attested in the Qur’an.41 The Syriac cognate for the Qur’anic root q-s-m is q-ṣ-m.42 The Persian king Tubarlaq is now applying this verb in combination with the preposition bi- to make divination with objects similar to the muqsam bihi in the Qur’an. For this reason, a possibility exists that the oaths in the Qur’an introduced by the form aqsama bi- also exhibited the strong connotation of making divination. I would even argue that the audience of the Qur’an was expecting the prophet to make an apocalyptic prophecy, when he used oaths in the described manner and was connecting them with an eschatological inventory. However, the prophetic speech of the Qur’an then deconstructs this expectation by insisting that the Qur’an represents authentic revelation by a true source. This scenario is perfectly exemplified in sura an-najm. The prophet takes an oath by the Pleiades, while the Qur’an insists that it is a true revelation by a descended messenger, although its contents are not apocalyptic prophecies about hidden truths.
The second point I want to emphasise is the nature of angelic visions. In the abovementioned mēmrā about Alexander, his revelations are compared with those of Daniel. In a dream, Alexander sees an angel in a great vision (ḥezwā rabbā), can receive the spirit of prophetic revelation (b-rūḥ gelyānā da-nbyutā) and write down all hidden mysteries. Using the Arabic cognate ruʾyā for the Syriac term for vision (ḥezwā), the Qur’an is emphasising that the prophet Muhammad is also having true visions (Q 48:27; 37:105). The Qur’an is also reflecting that visions for prophets can be a trial to people (Q 17:60). This aspect of angelic visions is also the theme of sura 53. In verse 13, it insists that the prophet saw the messenger (raʾāhu); in verses 17 and 18, this is again emphasised: ‘17. His eye did not swerve nor turn astray.18. Indeed, he saw [one] of the greatest signs of his Lord. [la-qad raʾā min āyāti rabbihi l-kubrā]’.
As Alexander had a great vision (ḥezwā rabbā) of the angel, the Qur’an claims the same type of vision for the prophet Muhammad: ‘he saw [one] of the greatest signs’ (raʾā min āyāti rabbihi l-kubrā). However, an issue with Qur’anic divinations is that they do not match the expected type of apocalyptic prophecies. Hence, the Qur’an insists on the true and authentic nature of Muhammad’s revelations and visions, although they fail to fulfil the expectations.
Regarding the Qur’anic denial of apocalyptic prophecies, an important aspect to point out is that the Qur’an is not arguing against the possibility of prophecies per se. God can give his servants and prophets knowledge about the unseen and future worldly events. For example, Joseph can interpret (taʾwīl) dreams (ruʾyā/pl. ruʾan) and foretell the future (Q 12:40 f., 46–49,100). However, the Qur’an denies the apocalyptic nature of prophecies: a prophet will not calculate the exact time of the resurrection and will not tell which empire will last till the end, among others. These apocalyptic expectations are explicitly described in early Meccan suras:
6 He asks, ‘When will the Day of Resurrection be?’ [yasʾalu ʾayyāna yaumu l-qiyāmati] (Q 75:6)
1 A questioner has asked questions concerning a punishment about to fall [saʾala sāʾilun bi-ʿadhābin wāqiʿin] (Q 70:1)
1 About what are they questioning one another? [ʿamma yatasāʾalūna] 2 – About the awesome tidings, [ʿani n-nabaʾi l-ʿaẓīmi] 3 Concerning which they differ. [alladhī hum fīhī mukhtalifūna] (Q 78:1–3)
In addition, the Qur’an curses those who are constantly asking and speculating about the exact date of the Judgement:
6 The judgement will indeed happen.
7 By the heaven with its tracks,
8 You speak at variance; [ʾinnakum la-fī qaulin mukhtalifin]
9 Some are involved in lies about it.
10 Perish the conjecturers,
11 Heedless in overwhelming ignorance.
12 They ask, ‘When is the Day of Judgement?’ [yasʾalūna ʾayyāna yaumu d-dīni] (Q 51:6–12)
On another instance, the Qur’an asks the adversaries of the prophet Muhammad whether or not they would have access to divine treasures and whether or not they would be able to write the hidden truths down in a book:
37 Or do they have the treasure of your Lord? [ʾam ʿindahum khazāʾinu rabbika ʾam humu l-muṣaiṭirūna] Or do they have charge?
38 Or do they have a ladder on which they can listen? Let their listener bring clear authority. […]
41 Or have they [knowledge of] the Invisible and so can write it down? [ʾam ʿindahumu l-ghaibu fa-hum yaktubūna] (Q 52:37–41)
Evidently, rhetorical questions exist, because the Qur’an does not expect humans – not even prophets – to have the ability to gain apocalyptic knowledge.
Muhammad’s Anti-Apocalyptic Prophecy Regarding the Roman-Persian War
Although the Qur’an is addressing an apocalyptic worldview43 and denying that Muhammad could make apocalyptic prophecies, a relatively astonishing aspect is that the Qur’an ultimately gave a prophecy about the events of the Roman-Persian war (Q 30:2–6). In the context of this war, people would demand from a prophet that he could prophecy the future course of events and would contextualise them within God’s greater plan in salvation history. At least, this is seemingly the case if sources from the beginning of the seventh century that contain apocalyptic prophecies are considered.
For example, this scenario was described in a passage of the History of Maurice, which was composed by Theophylact Simocatta during the reign of Heraclius (r. 610–641 CE). As previously mentioned, Theophylact reports an apocalyptic prophecy attributed to the Sasanian sovereign Khosro II.44 The events foretold by Khosro in this passage refer to the conflict between the Byzantines and Persians, which would occur immediately after the prophecy had been uttered. In fact, few doubts exist that the description of the initial fortune of the Babylonian race, which was later overturned by the Roman power, refers to the evolution of the Byzantine-Sasanian war.
The prophet Muhammad is now also given a prophecy about the Roman-Persian war in the Qur’an and the adaptation of this prophecy to the Qur’anic concept of prophetic knowledge and its limitations is very interesting. This prophecy is contained at the beginning of sura 30 (ar-rūm):
2 The Byzantines have been defeated [ghulibat ar-rūm]
3 In the nearest part of the land;
but after their being vanquished [ghalabihim] they will be victorious [sa-yaghlibūna],
4 In a few years;
the matter belongs to God before and after
- and on that day the believers will rejoice [wa-yaumaʾidhin yafraḥu l-muʾminūna]
5 In God’s help [bi-naṣri llāhi].
He helps those whom He wishes.
He is the Mighty and the Merciful.
6 The promise of God
– God does not break His promise, but most men do not know. (Q 30:2–6)
A consensus exists in traditional Muslim exegesis and in western scholarship that this Qur’anic prophecy generally refers to the Roman-Persian war.45 According to a canonical reading, it describes the defeat of the Byzantines and that they will be victorious in the future. Although this prophecy poses many relevant aspects that need an appropriate explanation,46 I will only focus my attention to the direct comparison of this prophecy with the previously quoted apocalyptic prophecies from the environment of the Qur’an. Although the prophet Muhammad is predicting the future victory of the Byzantine army and basically invoking the help of God for them, his prophecy is remarkably different from the apocalyptic prophecies.
Firstly, no apocalyptic context exists in the Qur’anic prophecy. The events of the Roman-Persian war are not placed in God’s greater plan of salvation history. In fact, the Qur’anic prophecy more resembles a report of a historian than that of an apocalyptic prophecy. The Qur’an is invoking God’s future help for the Romans and is claiming that they will ultimately win. However, these events of war pose no eschatological or apocalyptic implications.
Secondly, the Qur’anic prophecy about the future win of the Byzantines does not provide an exact time or duration or how long it would take the Roman army to be victorious again (‘In a few years’, fī biḍʿi sinīna). This characteristic of the Qur’anic prophecy matches the overall Qur’anic discourse on prophetic knowledge. Prophets do not know when exactly certain events will occur and how they fit in God’s overall plan for salvation history. For the opponents of the prophet Muhammad, his prophecy of the future win of the Byzantines would have not matched their expectations of what a prophet would do and know. A true prophet would ascend to heaven similar to an angel and would gain direct access to God’s treasures of divine knowledge. He would be able to say the specific manner and time of the occurrence of certain events in history.
The Anti-Apocalyptic Nature of Prophetic Knowledge
The Qur’an also enhances its understanding of prophetic knowledge by adapting and presenting certain narratives such as the story of the Seven sleepers in the Qur’an (Q 18:9–26). A long reception history of this narrative exists, including several variants of this story, which the Qur’an is seemingly aware.47 However, the basic narrative is as follows. In the third century during the reign of the Roman emperor Decius, seven young men are being persecuted due to their Christian faith. They remain firm and refuse to become Roman idolaters. They escape to a mountain cave, where they fall asleep while praying. The mountain of the cave becomes sealed with the seven men. Time passes and Christianity ultimately becomes the state religion of the Roman Empire. In the fifth century, a landowner opens the sealed mountain cave by accident and finds the seven sleepers inside. The seven men wake up and do not realise that they have slept for centuries. They are astonished by the changed Christian imprint of the city of Ephesus when they go out to buy food. As soon as they pay using their old coins, they were identified as being from another century. Thus, they are interviewed by clerics and their miracle story serves as proof in debates about bodily resurrection in the end time and about the life after death.
In the Qur’an, the story of the seven sleepers, which has established a doctrinal background regarding the eschatological question of bodily resurrection, is transformed into an epistemic parable to enhance the Qur’anic view on prophetic knowledge about the end time.48 Remarkably, the Qur’an is not telling the story of the seven sleepers as a narrative about the persecution of the true believers and how God helped them in history. Instead, it describes the narrative as a test of the calculation of eschatological time. Accordingly, verses 11–12 of sura 18 (al-kahf) state the following:
11 Then We sealed up their ears in the cave for a number of years.
12 Then We woke them that We might know (li-naʿlama) which of the two parties would calculate (ʾaḥṣā) better the period they had tarried. (Q 18:11–12)
Later, a few verses cite:
19 Thus We raised them that they might ask questions among themselves. One of them said, ‘How long have you tarried?’ They said, ‘We have tarried a day or part of a day.’ They said, ‘Your Lord is well aware of how long you have tarried.’ […]
21 Likewise We caused [people] to stumble on them that they might know (li-yaʿlamū) that the promise of God is true and that there is no doubt about the Hour.” (Q 18:19–21)
Thus, the Qur’an is giving an apocalyptic context for the duration of their sleep. The story of the seven sleepers is proof of the resurrection of all humans; however, the sleepers fail to calculate the time of their resurrection. The Qur’an is seemingly emphasising that humans cannot access apocalyptic knowledge about the end time: No human or prophet could tell the exact time of the occurrence of the resurrection. The manner in which the Qur’an describes the speculation about the numbers of the sleepers and the duration of their sleep further confirms this view.
Being aware of the variants of the narrative regarding the quantity of the sleepers, the Qur’an describes speculations about them as follows:
22 They will say, ‘Three, and their dog was the fourth of them.’
They will say, ‘Five, and their dog the sixth of them,’
guessing at the Invisible (rajman bi-l-ghaibi).
They will say, ‘Seven, and their dog the eighth of them.’
Say, ‘My Lord is well aware of their number.
Only a few know them.’
So dispute concerning them only on a clear issue; […]. (Q 18:22)
The speculation about the numbers of the sleepers is described as a speculation about the unseen (ghaib). In the Qur’anic discourse about prophetic knowledge, the opponents of the prophet are demanding knowledge of the unseen (ʿilm al-ghaib) to which he confesses to being unaware. A demand seemingly exists for apocalyptic knowledge; in the context of the Roman-Persian war at the beginning of the seventh century, a prophet would be expected to give an apocalyptic interpretation of events. An example of this notion would be the prophecy in the apocalyptic book of Daniel about four monstrous beasts, which represent different empires and their fate contains the secret knowledge about the course of salvation history till the end (Dan. 7). Such an apocalyptic thought was, once again, predominant in the context of the Roman-Persian war and was related to questions, such as ‘Is the Byzantine Empire really the last Empire on earth?’, among others. The Qur’an seemingly mocks this form of apocalyptic speculation in its characterisation of the speculation about the numbers of the sleepers (e.g. Were there three sleepers and the fourth was the dog?). This question is similar to a mockery of someone who speculates about the four beasts in the apocalyptic book of Daniel and which empires they represent.
Another form of apocalyptic knowledge is the exact calculation of time till the end of the world. Once again, the Qur’an denies this kind of knowledge with reference to the seven sleepers. Therefore, verses 25–26 of sura al-kahf state the following:
25 And they tarried in the Cave three hundred years and nine more.
26 Say, ‘God knows best how long they tarried (ʾaʿlamu bi-mā labiṯū).
To Him belongs the Invisible (lahū ghaibu) in the heavens and the earth.
How well He sees and hears. (Q 18:25–26)
The Qur’an is not giving the exact and true chronological details of the narrative but is using the story of the seven sleepers as a parable to emphasise that only God has knowledge of the unseen.
Summary
This paper began with Qur’anic statements about the limits of prophetic knowledge. The Qur’an frequently denies that the prophet Muhammad can be an angel or has access to the divine treasures (khazāʾin) and keys (mafātiḥ) of God’s knowledge about hidden truths (ʿilm al-ghaib). The study then argued that the nature of this knowledge should be qualified as apocalyptic knowledge and should be contextualised within the apocalyptic and eschatological discourses catalysed by the Roman-Persian war at the beginning of the seventh century. The early Meccan suras previously criticise an apocalyptic sentiment, which asks for the beginning of the end time and the coming of the eschaton. The inherent stylistic feature of oaths in these suras seemingly evoke that the prophet Muhammad could make an apocalyptic prophecy. However, these oaths ultimately culminate in Qur’anic statements against any form of apocalyptic prophecy. This tendency remains active, when the prophet Muhammad is given a prophecy about the win of Byzantine. As the study argues, this prophecy is resistant to any kind of apocalyptic discourse.
Finally, the study demonstrates that certain elements of the story of the seven sleepers in the Qur’an contain an epistemic discourse against any type of apocalyptic knowledge about the last empire on earth and about the beginning of the end time.
Walker, “Knowledge and Learning,” 102.
Translations of the Qurʾān are adapted from The Qurʾān, transl. Alan Jones.
Hawting firstly attempted to answer these questions in “Has God Sent a Mortal as a Messenger?’ (Q 17:95).” Hawting argued that the Qurʾānic conceptions potentially refer to Gnostic and Jewish-Christian views.
Hayes, “The Treasury of Prophecy.”
Ibid., 228.
Translations of the Bible are from the English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles 2001.
See Hayes, “The Treasury of Prophecy,” 242–245.
Crone, “Angels versus Humans as Messengers of God,” 102–24.
Ibid., 123f.
See Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses.
For these propositions, see Ghaffar, Der Koran in seinem religions- und weltgeschichtlichen Kontext.
Ibid., 5–13.
Ibid.
Not so for the East-Syriac Christians, see Payne, A State of Mixture, 179f.
Schmid, “Oaths in the Qur’an.”
Ibid., 151.
Ibid., 156.
See Ibn-Isḥāq and Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad, 4ff; Abd el-Malik Ibn Hischâm, Das Leben Muhammed’s nach Muhammed Ibn Ishâk, Part 1, 9–12.
Ibn-Isḥāq and Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad, 5.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid., 5 f.
See Shoemaker, The Apocalypse of Empire; but this view has also been questioned by Cameron, “Late Antique Apocalyptic,” 1–19.
Budge, The History of Alexander the Great, 144–158 (Translation) and 253–275 (Text).
For an earlier dating, see Tesei, The Syriac Legend of Alexander’s Gate.
For an overview regarding the dating, see Ghaffar, Der Koran in seinem religions- und weltgeschichtlichen Kontext, 156–66.
Budge, The History of Alexander the Great, 154ff.
Ibid., 158.
Whitby and Whitby, The History of Theophylact Simocatta, V.15.3–7.
See Budge, The History of Alexander the Great, 154ff.
Reinink, Das Syrische Alexanderlied.
For an overview regarding the dating see Ghaffar, Der Koran in seinem religions- und weltgeschichtlichen Kontext, 156–66.
See Reinink, Das Syrische Alexanderlied, II.521–522.
Ibid., I.536–547.
See Andrae, Der Ursprung des Islams und das Christentum, 61ff.
Schmid, “Oaths in the Qur’an,” 156.
See Neuwirth, Der Koran. Band 1, 168f.
Ibid., 400f.
Schmid, “Oaths in the Qur’an,” 160.
Hussain, “The Prophet’s Visions in Sūrat al-Najm.”
Schmid, “Oaths in the Qur’an,” 152. Ahmad Al-Jallad has demonstrated that the root q-s-m is attested in a Safaitic inscription for an oath (see Al-Jallad, The Religion and Rituals of the Nomads of Pre-Islamic Arabia, 48,53.). In Sabaic Inscriptions, although different verbs are used to ask or apply to oracles (see Multhoff and Stein, “Sabäische Texte,” 394f.), the root q-s-m is attested in one Sabaic inscription (al-ʾUḫdūd 2/8.-11.) for asking/appealing to an oracle (see http://sabaweb.uni-jena.de/SabaWeb/Suche/Suche/SearchResultDetail?idxLemma=9516&showAll=0).
See Zammit, A Comparative Lexical Study of Qur’ānic Arabic, 339.
See Ghaffar, Der Koran in seinem religions- und weltgeschichtlichen Kontext.
See Whitby and Whitby, The History of Theophylact Simocatta, V.15.3–7.
Compare Cheikh, “Sūrat Al-Rūm”; and Tesei, “‘The Romans Will Win!’.”
See Ghaffar, Der Koran in seinem religions- und weltgeschichtlichen Kontext, 167–79.
For a complete commentary of the sura see Koloska, Offenbarung, Ästhetik und Koranexegese; the most recent study of the narratives in the sura is by Griffith, “The Narratives of ‘the Companions of the Cave,’ Moses and His Servant, and Dhū ’l-Qarnayn in Sūrat al-Kahf.”
Compare Ghaffar, Der Koran in seinem religions- und weltgeschichtlichen Kontext, 132–45.