Mudejar scholars held the Koran’s literal sense accessible to all readers

Evidence

In his description of “the infidelity of the Saracens,” Fidentius gives a largely accurate (if extremely hostile) description of the differences between Muslim and Christian beliefs about Jesus and the Trinity. He, like William of Tripoli and the author of De statu, cites the Koran, in a fairly faithful Latin translation, to illustrate his points. But for De statu the similarities were more important than the differences: they showed that the Saracens “believed in their hearts.” For Fidentius, these differences are crucial and irreparable: he emphasizes their hostility to Christian doctrine and to Christian ritual objects: These very same Saracens greatly abhor images, and they destroy pictures, and trample them, and fling them into filthy places. — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1082 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: A pilgrim read the Koran directly to report Muslim beliefs fairly — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1869; Thirteenth-century Christian pilgrims read the Koran and stressed its affinity with Christian doctrine — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1071; Orientalists claimed textual reading revealed the fixed essence of Muslims — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of…, 179 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Mudejar doctrine divided Koranic language into three levels for different readers #corroborates (0.95)
• Medieval polemicists cited an accurate Koran while inverting its emphasis #complicates (0.75) — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1082