It must be a source of some regret to those who spent their professional lives, in the West, ignoring all the fascinating lines of inquiry that Ibn Warraq offers for our inspection, because they were so wedded to the Muslim view, that the origins of the Qur'an, and of Islam, are simply to be accepted in the received version of the truth, and not be to the same kind of analysis that Christianity and Judaism, in the Higher Criticism that some might say begins with��Julius Wellhausen, underwent and are still undergoing. Islam is brittle, and may break, and too many in the West simply parroted Muslim views.

When the history of Western scholarship of the past fifty years is written, it will contain such names as Wansbrough, Crone, Cook, Luxenberg, Rippin, Nevo, Puin, and many others. But those who have finally realized, for example, that Luxenberg cannot be dismissed -- and I suspect that even such a person as Fred Donner has had that dawn on him, and now,realizing he must take Luxenberg seriously, and stop teaching, writing, thinking about Islam only in the way that Muslims would have him so do, will be rethinking, but never quite taking back all of his tendentiousness (and let's leave aside his viciousness about Israel -- that practically comes with the MESA-Nostra territory these days).

Having been so dismissive in the past of those who, ignoring Muslim views, sought as free scholars in the West to subject early Islam to uninhibited study, and having, in a review of Ibn Warraq's anthology of articles on the historical Muhammad (google "Fred Donner" and "Ibn Warraq"), having displayed an intolerable and foolish tendentiousness -- ar review that for all time will remain as a monument as to what has fatally vitiated the life's work of Fred Donner and all the other fred-donners -- he will now have to admit that Luxenberg, and others, are on to something.

It will be amusing, and instructive, to see how he does it, even while refusing to admit that he has been, all his professional life, ignoring the most interesting questions, possibly out of nothing more than fear of offending Muslims.

Let's see how he handles a possible re-thinking of Luxenberg. And while he's at it, he might openly re-consider his unacceptable treatment of Ibn Warraq. Scholarly posterity will�pass its own judgment.

 What happened to the book by Warraq, titled Which Koran?  I cannot find it anywhere.

This book is nowhere to be found. Not on Amazon. Not on used books seach engines.

John Burton's "The Collection of The Quran" gives a totally different version of the origin of today's copies of Quran. Burton states that Quran was compiled in one final copy during Mohammad's life, not after he passed away as ancient muslim sources assert.

Mohammad is reported to have forbidden his companions from narrating his own sayings, and to solely concentrate on collectiong, learning Quran by heart. But later generations of muslims didn't heed his order, and set out on a self-styled mission to collect Mohammad's sayings. Unluckily, our sources on the origin of Quran are traced back to Hadith narration, a tradition Mohammad himself discouraged his companions to follow. But helas...

Despite all flaws, impefections, contradictions, unscientific materials alleged or existing in Quran, I wonder how an ordinary man could compile such elegant texts irrespective of its illogical contents. He should have a master educated in one our contemporary language universities.

Redaction of such texts was surely beyond the ability of an ordinary man. 

I am puzzled by such mystery and need help, e.i. a comprehesive study on this topic, not just sampling a few of literature irregularies in some verses.

Thanks

Thanks.