Interpretive Issues in “Solomon and the Queen”

by ahmad | Aug 17, 2015 | Uncategorized

Introduction to Quranica’s Feature Film “Solomon and the Queen”

Quranica’s feature film Solomon and the Queen is, first and foremost, a showcase of the beauty of the Qur’an’s message and narrative style, through a masterful recitation by the renowned Egyptian qari, Hajjaj Ramadan al-Hindawi. When we gave him the stage on the last day of his Scotland tour in 2006, we did not tell him what to recite. He recited those verses from Surat al-Naml, and the rest is history.

Editing and Production for Quranica’s Ten-Year Anniversary

When the time came to edit it to coincide with Quranica’s ten-year anniversary and re-launch, it was clear that the beauty of that original event deserved a fresh approach to editing and production. And so the idea to weave in commentary (as well as providing real-time translation, as we had done in most live events) was born.

The Research and Selection Process for Commentary

Here I shall provide some insight into the process of research and selection of opinions. I consulted a large number of works of tafsir, as well as a few which fall outside that genre but discussed, for example, female personalities in the Qur’an (including Bilqis). I knew that what we needed in this film was not a full tafsir, but a simple commentary which would aid reflection. Although I needed to answer all the questions in my own mind, I did not wish to impose those answers on the viewers.

Filling the Gaps in the Story and Understanding the Significance

In the first place, I was intrigued by so many things in this story, and needed to “fill the gaps”, as it were. I wanted to understand why certain things had taken place, and what was the significance of mentioning them in this narrative. One difficulty I found was that tafsirs in general had not taken this approach. Some had indeed filled gaps, but using narrations taken from those who had a tendency to spread tall tales, with no regard for the status of God’s prophets. When these had no inherent credibility and seemed implausible as explanation of the verses, I avoided them altogether and sought alternative explanations.

Translation Choices and Adaptations

As for translation, I took as a basis that published by Saheeh International, which – I understand – was translated primarily by a woman named Umm Muhammad. Its advantage is that it uses quite a direct style of expression which often follows the word- and phrase-order of the Arabic, thus making it suitable for subtitles. However, I adapted this translation in a number of ways, especially to make it match with the interpretations I preferred in the course of researching the exegesis.

Final Translation and Tafsir Issues

In what follows, I present the final translation and allude to some of the issues which arise in the tafsir works, and how I selected from these. I shall also point out the original ideas which came to me in the process.

The Gratitude and Humility of David and Solomon

1. We certainly gave David and Solomon knowledge, and they said, “All praise is for God, Who has favoured us over many of His believing servants.” 16. And Solomon inherited David, and he said, “O people, we have been taught the language of birds, and we have been given from all things. Indeed, this is evident bounty.”

The mention of knowledge here suggests that it is one of the key issues in what is to follow. Their gratitude and humility also set the tone for the story. The use of the plural here can certainly be in the royal sense, but I prefer to think that Solomon (pbuh) was saying that when this knowledge was possessed by the leader and used for the benefit of the whole society, then it is a shared knowledge. As such, he was inspiring gratitude in the people.

The Gathering of Solomon’s Soldiers

1. And gathered for Solomon were his soldiers among the jinns (spirits), humans and birds, and they were arranged in ranks. 18. Until, when they came upon the valley of the ants, an ant said, “O ants, enter your dwellings, lest you be crushed by Solomon and his soldiers, while they perceive not.”

One of the puzzling aspects of the story is location. Solomon was based in Palestine, and Sheba almost certainly refers to a Yemeni kingdom. Where was this valley, and where were the troops going? Was the palace in Palestine too, in which case they had presumably returned there by the time Solomon requested the throne to be brought? I opted for these conclusions: this was merely a procession of the troops, and the “valley of the ants” is not necessarily the specific one alluded to in the books of exegesis, which goes by that name.

The Discussion About the Ant’s Gender

The exegetes enjoyed discussing the sex of this particular ant. The argument can be made that it was female, based on the feminine word namlatun; but it can also be said that this is simply the way the generic word naml is made singular and has no bearing on its sex. However, modern science informs us that most worker ants – and this would appear to be one – are female. Indeed, it was a great realisation for me that ants live in what I called a “queendom”, just like Sheba! Then the parallels between the two parts of the story suddenly became clear, and this is something I did not find in any of the books.

The Parallels Between the Ant and the Queen of Sheba

It is hugely tempting to suppose that the ant mentioned here was actually their queen, although it seems unlikely, unless she herself was informed by the workers about the impending danger and sounded the alarm to her “subjects”. In this way, the parallels between the two stories would be complete: two queens who wanted nothing but to save their communities from being crushed!

Solomon’s Response and Gratitude to God’s Favor

1. So (Solomon) smiled, amused at its speech, and said, “My Lord, enable me to be grateful for Your favour which You have bestowed upon me and upon my parents and to do righteousness of which You approve. And admit me by Your mercy among Your righteous servants.”

A key question here is what made him smile, and I presented the views of the exegetes in my commentary.

Solomon’s Concern Over the Missing Hoopoe

1. And he took attendance of the birds and said, “What is with me that I do not see the hoopoe – or is he among the absent?
2. I will surely punish him with a severe punishment or slaughter him unless he brings me clear authorization.”

Why was he so severe in his threat against this bird? I presented an explanation found in one or two sources.

The Hoopoe’s Report from Sheba

1. But (the hoopoe) tarried not long (and arrived), saying, “I have encompassed (knowledge) which you have not encompassed, and I have come to you from Sheba with certain news.

The Ruler of Sheba and the People’s Worship

1. Indeed, I found a woman ruling them, and she has been given of all things, and she has a mighty throne.
2. I found her and her people prostrating to the sun instead of God – and Satan has made their deeds pleasing to them and averted them from the Way, so they go not aright –

The Hoopo’s Message and the Divine Truth

1. So they do not prostrate to God, Who brings forth what is hidden within the heavens and the earth and knows what you conceal and what you declare –
2. God – there is no deity but He, Lord of the Mighty Throne!”

I assumed that the whole passage was from the speech of the hoopoe, though an alternative view has it that everything from “Satan has made their deeds…” could be God’s direct speech in the Qur’an.

King Solomon’s Test of Truthfulness

1. (Solomon) said, “We will see whether you were truthful or were of the liars – 28. Take this letter of mine and deliver it to them. Then draw back from them and see how they respond.”
   I found at the end of Imam Alusi’s commentary on this story that he expressed surprise that King Solomon could have been so unaware of Sheba, and he had no explanation for this. However, Amin Ahsan Islahi in his Tadabbur-e-Qur’an addressed this question to an extent I did not find elsewhere. He suggested that Sulaiman did in fact know about them, so the hoopoe’s declaration was – on this understanding – somewhat exaggerated. Yet Islahi argues that it would be strange for the King to send such an ultimatum for no purpose but to test the veracity of a bird’s claim!

The Queen of Sheba’s Response to Solomon’s Letter

1. (So he delivered it to the Queen, and) she said, “O chiefs, indeed, to me has been delivered a noble letter. 30. Indeed, it is from Solomon, and it (reads): {In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful – 31. Be not haughty with me but come to me in submission.”

Context of the Word ‘Submission’ in the Story of Solomon and the Queen

The gloss at the beginning here is somewhat necessary because such details are often left out of the Quranic narrative style. Instead, we are transported instantly to the Queen’s court with the word: “She said”.
The word muslimin (“in submission”) and the concept of islam appears in this story at various places. I have taken every occurrence before the final verse to have a worldly sense of submission, not the religious submission to God. However, it is very plausible in this particular verse that Solomon was inviting the people to become Muslims in that full sense.

Queen’s Strategic Approach to Leadership and Power Dynamics

1. She said, “O chiefs, advise me in my affair. I would not decide a matter until you attend to me.”
2. They said, “We are people possessing strength and great bravery – but the command is yours, so see what you will command.”
3. She said, “Indeed kings – when they enter a city, they ruin it and render the nobles among its people lowly – and likewise they (will) do.”

These verses are interesting in terms of the power dynamics. She is in charge, but she is choosing her words carefully to convince her people. They are also alluding to their preferred course of action.

Female Leadership and Controversial Perspectives

It is also interesting to see how this story is used to support various points of view. A scholar of the calibre of Sh. Yusuf al-Qaradawi has advanced this as an example of female leadership of a nation (a level below the global leadership represented in Islamic history in the caliphate). Some have refuted him by saying that she was actually a dictator, so should not be taken as an example! (Not a convincing refutation.) This could be taken as a recommendation of shura and/or democracy, while it has also been pointed out that unbelievers in Quranic stories are not to be followed as role models. Still, the matter is clearly more nuanced than that.

Analyzing the Meaning of “Wa Kadhalika Yaf’alun”

One more question is the meaning of “wa kadhalika yaf’alun” – I opted for the view that it is the completion of the Queen’s speech, and refers to the (conditional) future. Others have taken it to be a divine statement which confirms what she had said, i.e. “She is right: that is what they always do”.

Solomon’s Response to the Queen’s Gift

1. “But indeed, I will send to them a gift and see with what (reply) the messengers will return.”
2. So when they came to Solomon (bearing the gift) he said, “Would you provide me with wealth? What God has given me is better than what He has given you! Rather, it is you who rejoice in your gift.”
3. Return to them, for we will surely come to them with troops that they will be powerless to counter – and we will surely expel them therefrom in humiliation, and they will be debased!”

Different Interpretations of Solomon’s Statement

The phrase “Bal antum bi-hadiyyatikum tafrahun” (end of v. 36) can be taken in three distinct ways:

• “You are simply showing off your wealth by putting this gift before me!”
• “I am not materialistic like you, but you are the ones who rejoice at receiving gifts!”
• “Take this gift back and enjoy it yourselves!”

Solomon’s Request for the Throne to Be Brought

1. (Solomon) said, “O chiefs, which of you will bring me her throne before they come to me in submission?”
2. A powerful one from among the jinn said, “I will bring it to you before you rise from your place! And indeed, I am for this (task) strong and trustworthy.”
3. The one who had knowledge from the Scripture said: “I will bring it to you in the twinkling of an eye.” So when (Solomon) saw it placed before him, he said, “This is from the favour of my Lord to test me whether I will be grateful or ungrateful. Whoever is grateful, his gratitude is only for his own good. And whoever is ungrateful, then indeed my Lord is Free of need, Generous.”

The Symbolism Behind the Throne Being Taken

There are several key questions in this passage. Why was the throne to be brought? It was for a test, but why did he want to test her intelligence and perception? The answer to the latter question was less clear to me, but I concluded that there was symbolism in snatching her throne from her, distorting it and placing it in a marginal position outside his palace.

Exploring the “Possessor of Knowledge”

Further key questions: who is this “possessor of knowledge”? I mentioned the answers provided in the tafsir works. What was the power used to do it? This can only be a kind of speculation, but I found that Sh. Islahi had again provided a rich discussion of the question, and linked it to the accusations of sorcery levelled falsely at this great Prophet of God (see his commentary on Q 2:102).

The Meaning of “The Twinkling of an Eye”

“The twinkling of an eye” is an idiomatic translation, as a more literal rendering would be difficult to understand.

Solomon’s Test for Bilqis

1. He said, “Disguise her throne for her; we will see whether she will be guided, or among those who are not guided.”
2. So when she arrived, it was said: “Is your throne like this?” She said, “As though it were (the one). But we were given knowledge before (this miracle), and we were (already) submissive.”

Interpreting the Words “We Were Given Knowledge”

As I pointed out in the commentary, there are several ways to understand the words “We were given knowledge…” – were they uttered by Bilqis, or by Sulaiman’s followers, or by the King himself? I opted for the first of these possibilities.

Understanding the “Welcoming Party”

I also took it to be the case that “It was said” refers to other than Solomon, but then “He said” (in v. 44) was his own speech. This is where the idea of the “welcoming party” came from in the commentary; and from the sequence of these events, I took it that her throne had been placed outside the palace.

Interpretation of Verse 43: The Worshipping of Other Than God

1. But that which she was worshipping other than God blocked her (still). Indeed, she was from a disbelieving people. There is another interpretation (see Imam Razi) which holds that the pronouns in this verse mean that he (Solomon) blocked her, through his actions, from that which she worshipped besides God. However, I feel that context makes this implausible. It has also been said (see Imam Ibn Kathir) that it is a quotation of Solomon’s words, following from those spoken in the previous verse.

The Queen’s Reaction to the Palace: A Mistaken Perception

1. She was told, “Enter the palace.” But when she saw it, she thought it was a body of water and uncovered her shins. He said, “Indeed, it is a palace (whose floor is) made smooth with glass.” She said, “My Lord, indeed I have wronged myself, and I submit with Solomon to God, Cherisher of the worlds.”

The Significance of the Queen Lifting Her Skirts: An Intriguing Conclusion

This is a highly intriguing conclusion! I wondered at length why this account of the Queen lifting her skirts is included at all. There is a tale included in some of the books of tafsir, presumably derived from the isra’iliyyat reports, which I cast aside as implausible. Then what is the significance of her mistaking the floor for water, and what about this detail of the exposed shins? Most commentators did not address this, but in my searches, I found a couple of points which seemed plausible enough to include.

Clarifying the Palace Construction: Glass or Floor?

I also took it to be the case that the part made of glass was the floor only, though the wording implies that the palace itself was constructed of glass.

The Room for Interpretation and Divergence of Opinions

As you can see from the above account, there is always plenty of room for interpretation, and divergence of opinions can occur on different levels. In the commentary which forms part of this film, I was not attempting to answer all questions or provide the final say on any matter. Rather, it was designed to promote reflection upon the Qur’an. I pray it was successful to some extent.

The Encounter with a Critic: Answering Questions with Guidance

Postscript: after the film was all finished, and indeed after I wrote all the above, I came across a video on Youtube by somebody who sought to mock the Qur’an by pointing out the “absurdities” of the story of Prophet Sulaiman. It was very interesting to note that most of the critical questions he raised there have been answered in my research and commentary. What this says to me is that asking questions is not the problem, but guidance is for those who seek it.

Tense Discussions… About Tense!

by ahmad | Aug 4, 2015 | Uncategorized

The Challenges of Translating the Qur’an

Anyone who takes on the task of translating the Qur’an (or indeed any lofty and complex literary text) will be faced with innumerable challenges, and throughout the process, he or she will have to make all kinds of choices. On some points, they will diverge widely, and on others, they may agree (or imitate each other), yet not be safe from the critics.

Criticism of Quranic Translations

There are some who seem to take great pleasure in pointing to a particular verse or form of expression in the Qur’an, then declare that all the translators got it wrong. This would be acceptable if they had undertaken the following steps:

• Surveying those translations comprehensively;
• Giving weight to their consensus, and considering their reasoning carefully;
• Considering whether both could be said to be correct;
• Checking that their proposed amendment is safe from critique – for example, does its underlying method work for all such junctures in the Qur’an?

Personal Encounters with Translation Critiques

In the past year, I have attended three lectures in which the speaker declared all the translators wrong on a certain point. One of them is himself an acclaimed translator of the Qur’an, so it may be said simply that he was arguing for his own methodology and preference.

Example 1: Quranic Polysemy and the Word “Kitab”

He emphasised the significance of Quranic polysemy (wujuh), such that the word kitab, for example, has as many as ten different meanings, yet the translators have generally stuck to writing “book”. I would simply point out here that this English word can also handle various metaphorical usages, and that there is a good argument to use the single word as the Qur’an did – at most junctures, if not all – and allow the reader to exercise his mind.

The Use of Tense in Quranic Translations

Speaker 1: Tense in Q 27:88

The other two critiques both happened to concern the use of tense in specific verses. The first speaker was an accomplished academic of Arabic studies who was arguing against the very possibility of translating the Qur’an due to its novel and unique linguistic style. He took the following verse (Q 27:88) as a case study:

The speaker’s contention was that all the translators mistakenly used the future tense to translate the imperfect verb tamurru, upon the assumption that the shifting of the mountains will take place on the Day of Judgement. He insisted that this verse is concerning natural phenomena which exist at the present time, and that the verbs should be taken at face value as referring to the present time, i.e. the mountains are moving as the clouds move: an allusion to the revolution of the globe.

Context and Modern Science in Translation

While declaring them – not only translators (with the exception of Richard Bell!), but exegetes too – as completely wrong, he did make one excuse for them: that they were relying on the knowledge of their day, whereas modern science reveals the “correct” interpretation of the verse. Strangely, he did not acknowledge the following crucial points in his analysis:

• First, that an imperfect verb may very plausibly refer to the future, even without the particle which designates it to the future exclusively.
• Second: that the previous interpreters had a much stronger “excuse”, in the shape of context!

The verse immediately prior to 27:88 refers explicitly to the Day of Judgement: {On the day that the Trumpet will be sounded…}, as does the verse immediately following: {…they will be secure from terror on that day}. One would have to make a detailed argument in order to override this context and relocate the intervening verse in the present, as indeed the modern exegete Ibn ‘Ashur (d. 1973) has done. However, simply pointing to the imperfect verb and insisting on interpretation in the light of modern science cannot suffice; when I raised this with the speaker, I was surprised that he seemed not to have thought about context at all.

Speaker 2: Literal Translation of Q 39:71

The second speaker is a specialist in apologetics, with a strong personal interest in reflection upon the Qur’an. In a lecture delivered to a room full of academics, he made an argument for sticking to “literal” translations of its verses – at least in certain places, which he did not define clearly – in order to allow the reader to reflect on the way the Qur’an has expressed the matter.

The Debate Over Tense Usage

The main example he gave was Q 39:71:

The speaker suggested that we should be “angry” that the translators have unanimously translated these past tense verbs in a way that makes them pertain to the future (except Pickthall, who rendered them into the present). Instead, he argued, it should be translated as follows: “Those who disbelieved were driven to Hell in groups until, when they reached it, its gates were opened and its keepers said…”.

He went so far as to back-translate the popular translation into Arabic (for the largely Arabic-speaking audience), to claim that the translators had arrogated unto themselves to change the Quranic verbs into: سيساق , سيجيئون , ستفتح , سيقول.

The Complexity of Quranic Translation Choices

I have some sympathy for this argument, at least as it pertains to the first verb (سيق), which in fact follows a number of past-tense verbs in the preceding verses; the fact that the temporal setting is the Day of Judgement (which is certainly in the future) is immediately obvious, and made explicit in verse 67, which opens this sequence of verses.

Navigating Reader Comprehension

However, as the speaker himself acknowledged, the translators will “excuse” themselves by saying that the reader would not understand if the verbs were rendered in the past tense in English. This is a very reasonable consideration, since any competent translator knows that it is necessary to keep in mind the respective specialities of the source and target languages.

The Role of Translator Notes and Methodologies

For me, the problem of such objections and critiques stems from the very idea that there is a single “correct” translation in such circumstances, whereas each does have that which recommends it, as well as its limitations by necessity.

Suggestions for Addressing Translation Challenges

A simple solution is to provide the translation which is most likely to be understood by the reader, and provide relevant notes at the foot of the page, e.g. “These verbs are in the perfect tense to indicate the certainty of their occurrence. One may also understand that the arrow of time does not apply to the Creator of time.”

The Future of Quranic Translation

A more thorough solution would be to present multiple possibilities side-by-side, and to take this as a key aspect of translation methodology. Such an extensive project does not yet exist, and would take many years of effort to achieve. However, I believe that this is the future.

In the meantime, the reader should be encouraged to compare multiple translations if he is not in a position to study a work of tafsir. Indeed, any translator of the Qur’an should probably have this expectation of his readers, as he will never be capable of covering all aspects.

Imam Ghazali on Interpreting According to “Opinion”

by ahmad | Jul 16, 2015 | Uncategorized

Excerpt from Ādāb Tilāwat al-Qurʾān (Book XIII of the first quarter of Iḥyāʾ ʿUlūm al-Dīn)
Translated by Sohaib Saeed

Introduction: The Question of Interpreting the Qurʾān Based on Opinion

So what of [God’s Messenger (S)] saying, “Whoever explains the Qurʾān by his opinion (raʾy)…” and prohibiting this, and what of the saying of Abū Bakr (R), “Which earth would carry me, and which sky would shade me if I were to speak of the Qurʾān by my opinion” – and similar reports forbidding interpretation of the Qurʾān according to opinion? There are only two possibilities: either these entail a restriction to transmitted narrations without inference and independent understanding, or they mean something other than that.

The Mistaken Conclusion About Speaking of the Qurʾān

It is categorically mistaken to conclude from them that none may speak of the Qurʾān with anything other than what has been transmitted, for the following reasons:

First Reason: The Condition of Transmission

First: that this would be on the condition that the report be heard directly from the Messenger (S) and narrated in a continuous chain to him, which only obtains with respect to part of the Qurʾān. As for the statements of Ibn ʿAbbās and Ibn Masʿūd themselves, they ought to be rejected on this basis as “interpretation by opinion”, in that they did not receive them from the Messenger of God (S). The same applies to the other Companions.

Second Reason: Differing Explanations by the Companions and Exegetes

Second: that the Companions and the exegetes differed in their explanations of certain verses, offering a variety of irreconcilable opinions. It is impossible that they were all heard from the Messenger (S); if only one were heard, the rest would have been abandoned. Therefore, it is decisively clear that each exegete explained the meaning according to the results of his inference. This is to the extent that seven irreconcilable opinions were offered concerning the opening letters of some sūras. It was said that Alif-Lām-Rā represents the [first] letters of “al-Raḥmān”, or that the letters stand respectively for “Allāh, laṭīf, raḥīm”, and so on. These opinions cannot be simultaneously correct, so how can all have been heard [from the Prophet]?

Third Reason: The Special Prayer for Ibn ʿAbbās (R)

Third: that the Messenger (S) prayed for Ibn ʿAbbās (R), saying: “O God, grant him understanding of religion and teach him interpretation.” If interpretation (taʾwīl) were just like the text of revelation – to be heard and memorised – then what could be meant by singling him out with this [supplication]?

Fourth Reason: The Qurʾān and the People of Investigation

Fourth: that Almighty God says, “The people of investigation would have known it” (Q 4:83), affirming for the people of knowledge [the ability to] infer (istinbāṭ), which is known to be a faculty beyond mere hearing.

Conclusion: The Legitimacy of Deriving Meanings from the Qurʾān

All the traditions we have presented concerning understanding the Qurʾān refute this misconception and expose the falsehood of stipulating transmission for interpretation. Thus it is legitimate for anyone to derive meanings from the Qurʾān according to the limits of his own understanding and intellect.

Introduction to the Prohibition of Interpretation by Opinion

As for the [stated] prohibition, it refers to two cases:

The First Case: Interpreting the Qurʾān Based on Personal Opinion and Desire

One is for a person to have a prior opinion about a matter, an opinion to which his nature and desire are inclined, then he interprets the Qurʾān in accordance with this opinion and desire. This is only to prove the veracity of his claim, since, were it not for his holding that opinion and desire, he would not have perceived that meaning in the Qurʾān.

Deliberate Misinterpretation of the Qurʾān

This is sometimes done knowingly, such as by one who wishes to use verses from the Qurʾān to justify his innovation (bidʿa) while being aware that the meaning of the verse is contrary to what he claims, because he seeks only to outwit his opponent.

Unwitting Misinterpretation of the Qurʾān

Yet other times it is done unwittingly, as when a verse carries several possible meanings and his attention turns to that which suits his purpose. He declares this meaning as the strongest on the basis of his opinion and desire. He has thus interpreted [the Qurʾān] by his opinion, meaning the [prior] opinion which led him to that interpretation; if not for his opinion, that meaning from the verse would not have presented itself to him as the strongest.

Using Qurʾānic Verses Incorrectly to Support Valid Causes

It may also be at times that his cause is valid, but when he seeks evidence in the Qurʾān, he cites something which he knows not to have that intended meaning. An example is someone who advocates seeking forgiveness in the early hours (asḥār), and supports this with the Prophetic saying: “Take suḥūr, for truly there is blessing in suḥūr”, claiming that it refers to remembrance (dhikr) while knowing that it refers to food. Another is someone calling to struggle against the hardened heart, who says: “Almighty God said: ‘Go to Pharaoh, for he has transgressed’”, pointing to his heart to suggest that that is what is meant by “Pharaoh”.

Misinterpretation for Good or Corrupt Purposes

This type is sometimes employed by preachers while promoting correct purposes, seeking to beautify their speech and encourage their listeners; yet it is prohibited. At other times, the Bāṭiniyya (esotericists) employ it for corrupt purposes, to deceive the people and invite them to their false beliefs. In accordance with their desires and beliefs, they make the Qurʾān say things which they know with certainty are not intended.

The Nature of the Prohibition: Opinion Stemming from Desire

These various types constitute one of the aspects of the prohibition of interpretation by opinion. The meaning of “opinion” here is the corrupt opinion stemming from desires rather than proper scholarly endeavour (ijtihād). The term “opinion” encompasses truth and falsehood, but it is possible that it be applied specifically to that which follows desire (hawā).

The Second Case: Hastily Interpreting the Qurʾān Based on Literal Arabic

The second case is of one who hastily interprets the Qurʾān according to the literal Arabic without making recourse to narrated traditions addressing its difficult passages and unclear words as well as its phenomena of concision, ellipsis, implication, and reversed word order.

The Risk of Error in Interpreting the Qurʾān Without Proper Knowledge

Whoever does not master the apparent exegesis, yet rushes to draw out its meanings relying purely on linguistic understanding, will fall into frequent error and be counted among those who interpret according to opinion. This is because transmitted knowledge is essential to establish the apparent exegesis first, in order to avoid such errors; after that, there is scope to pursue deeper understanding and inferences.

The Importance of Mastering Apparent Exegesis Before Seeking the Inner Meaning

The difficult passages [of the Qurʾān] that can only be understood via narrations are many. We shall indicate a portion of these [in the passage following this] so that others of their kind may be identified, and so it may be known that the importance of learning apparent exegesis must not be underestimated, as there is no possibility of reaching the inner aspect (bāṭin) before mastering the outer (ẓāhir). A person who claims to have grasped the inner secrets of the Qurʾān without mastering its exoteric exegesis is like one who claims to have reached the inner sanctuary of a house before passing through the door; or one who claims to have comprehended the discourse of the Turks without learning Turkish. Indeed, the apparent exegesis is akin to the teaching of language in being fundamental to understanding.

Dealing with Difference

by ahmad | Jul 13, 2015 | Uncategorized

Differing and Disagreement: Discord or Divinely-Ordained Diversity?

Philosophical Reflection: The Nature of Difference

Before looking at “difference” from a theological perspective, let us philosophise for a moment about the very idea of difference. When you compare two things and decide that they are different, they must be comparable – on some level – in the first place. Indeed, when we describe two things as “opposites” (say, black and white), they must in another sense be exactly the same thing (in this case, hues). It is not so strange, therefore, that one’s bitterest enemies are sometimes the people with whom one has most in common.

Divine Purpose in Diversity: Lessons from the Qur’an

The Qur’an teaches us that the Almighty has made this universe to be “different” from Him, and made this creation both diverse – as a sign of the magnificent Creator – and inter-dependent (“all things in pairs”), to demonstrate that only He is perfect and free of need. Thus, the alternation of night and day contrasts with divine constancy, and at the same time provides us the variety and relief that we need in order both to work and rest (Qur’an 28:71-72).

Human Diversity: A Divine Sign

On the human level, God has created “the two pair-partners, male and female” (Q 53:45) to complement each other and bring about new manifestations of life. Among His creative signs is the diversity of our languages and colours (Q 30:22), no matter what any racial or linguistic supremacists may allege in the face of divine wisdom.

Nations and Tribes: Unity Through Knowing One Another

We have been made into nations and tribes in order to know one another (Q 49:13) – and this applies to nations and subcultures among the Muslim ummah as well as all descendants of Adam and Eve. The fact that all humans are a family coming from a single mother and father entails an essential equality before God, the appreciation of which is a form of worship!

Variation in Religion: Part of the Divine Plan

Human beings in this life are tested and have varying fortunes and outcomes. Even the variation in religion is a part of the divine plan, while we affirm the unity of truth. God informs us that if He had so willed, He could have gathered all into a single nation, yet they will continue to differ because “to that end He created them” (Q 11:119). In this light, we can understand how the final Prophet (peace be upon him) called the people to a single truth while teaching tolerance towards communities adhering to their chosen faiths.

Differences Among Muslims: A Manifestation of Wisdom and Mercy

It follows that the differences – and disagreements – that occur among Muslims must be part of God’s plan, and even a manifestation of His wisdom and mercy. As human beings, we will naturally be inclined to different preferences, perspectives, and opinions. We have not been created as automatons upon a single program. One person will seek out the simplest explanation for a problem, while another wants to explore its depths. Some people are naturally strict, while others place more emphasis on facilitation, especially for others.

The Nature of Ijtihad: Effort and Intellectual Engagement in Islam

Indeed, it is in the very nature of this religion that there is scope for interpretation, which will inevitably vary, as it has done since the beginning. This variation, when it respects the fundamental sources and follows rigorous methods of understanding and reasoning, falls within the scope of ijtihad, a praiseworthy concept in Islam. It means to exert proper effort in arriving at conclusions in matters of religion. If one should wish for a religion in which no such effort is required, then that is not Islam, in which human intellect and conscience are integral to knowledge and life.

Embracing Difference: A Key to Adaptation and Unity

In the following sections of this article, we will consider the different types of difference among Muslims, and then outline some key factors for Muslim unity. But let us be clear from the outset that eliminating all difference is neither possible nor desirable. If it were possible, it would leave us with a religion unable to adapt to different places and times, cultures, and environments. It would deprive us of a key resource for flexibility and facilitation and the intellectual vitality of truth-seeking and mutual learning in a process of dialogue and debate.

Differences

Many treatments of “etiquettes of disagreement in Islam” focus solely upon one type of disagreement or difference, namely the realm of fiqh – i.e. practical laws pertaining to worship and worldly life. Before coming to that aspect, however, we shall consider a few other significant fields in which Muslims do, in fact, differ.

Creed: Differences in Belief

First comes creed. While there are clear-cut and inviolable principles of belief such as enshrined in the two declarations, there are also secondary matters which allow for diverging opinions without the need to talk about “sects”.

There is also the long-standing debate over how to understand references to God’s “hands”, “eyes” etc. in the Qur’an, with contemporary views being projected (rightly and wrongly) onto either the Salaf (first generations) or Khalaf (later scholars). While both groups declare devoutly that “There is none at all like Him” (Qur’an 42:11), their attitudes towards affirmation and interpretation differ; and this is enough for many in each camp to consider the other as heretical.

Salafi and Sufi: Methodologies and Misconceptions

The term “Salafi” is used not only in the context of creed, but also in a broader sense sometimes termed as “manhaj” (methodology). For the harder-line varieties, this means that other Muslims are deviant to one extent or another. The hardest of them are notorious for throwing fellow Salafis “off the manhaj” and have no concept of tolerating disagreement. Yet these attitudes and bad examples should not cloud our conception of Salafism as essentially meaning the aspiration to follow the authentic sources of Islam as preserved by the earliest generations, eschewing innovation in matters of religion.

For some, the polar opposite is known as “Sufism” – but again, we should recognise (after acknowledging the uncertain origins of the term itself) that the goal of Sufism (taṣawwuf) is to cultivate the inner dimension of Islamic life, purifying the heart and human character in strict adherence to Prophetic guidance. Call this obligation whatever you like, but there is no escaping it.

Cultural Differences Between Salafis and Sufis

I have come to believe that the gulf between contemporary Salafis and Sufis is best described not as a creedal or juristic one, but as cultural. Yes, there are disputes over certain points of belief or law, but what about the dress codes and styles of discourse? When one feels coerced by either group not to take a middle position between them, then this polarisation cannot be explained in purely academic terms.

Accepting Differences in Lifestyle

At the end of the day, human beings are different and incline to different things. It does not bother me to see a Muslim choose a style of life that differs from mine, while I can witness his sincerity and subservience to scripture. There can be all sorts of Muslim subcultures (Sufi/Salafi, conservative/progressive, and so on), and maybe we ought to speak of “Muslim multiculturalism” in this sense.

Political Differences in Islam

Then there is the political sphere. Lest we forget, the biggest Muslim division – Sunnis and Shī‘a – began as a political dispute over who should succeed the Final Messenger (peace be upon him) as leader; then this divergence took on other flavours over time.

We can also class the proliferation of Islamic groups and reform organisations worldwide – with their various strategies and concerns – as representing political differences. Do we fix our societies from the bottom up, or top down? Democratic means, or call to arms? Then within a country like ours you will find many differing ideas about how to work within the political system or alongside it.

Even more than creed or law, these questions are very much open to debate, and indeed such debate is sorely needed. The matter is not helped by confusion over what politics even means, and the immaturity of our collective understanding of Islam’s guidance in this regard. Politics is a dirty word, and yet so often those who plead “no politics” are the ones steeped in its dirtiest realities.

Jurisprudence and the History of Differences in Law

Finally, we come to law and jurisprudence. Because so much has been written on the topic, let me simply emphasise that such differences occurred since the time of the Companions themselves – but they had the luxury of going back to the Prophet (peace be upon him) to settle their arguments.

A famous incident in which they were told to make haste to a military campaign is extremely instructive in this regard. One group took the Prophet’s instruction – “Let none of you pray ‘Aṣr except at Banū Qurayẓa” – literally, thus delaying the prayer until after sunset. The other group understood the purpose of his words as being to hurry them; but when they feared they would not make it in time, they stopped to pray. Now, surely the Prophet (peace be upon him) only meant his words in one way or the other? Yet the authentic reports simply inform us that when they came to him for adjudication, he did not chastise either group.

Nowadays, there are arguments between adherents of different juristic madhhabs (schools), and even over whether a person is required to follow one, or otherwise. History records some rather ugly conflicts and disputations, but also the most lofty of manners in disagreement, particularly from the founders of the madhhabs to which people of lowlier manners claim to adhere.

Unity

The Necessity of Muslim Unity

Here is something on which we must surely agree: Muslim unity is a must. If the exhortations of Scripture and Messenger (pbuh) were not enough to convince of this, then surveying the state of today’s Ummah should make the urgency of coming together upon positive principles abundantly clear.

In a famous and powerful verse, our Lord decrees: {Hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided. And remember the favour of Allah upon you, in that you were enemies and He brought your hearts together and you became, by His favour, brothers. And you were on the edge of a pit of the fire, and He saved you from it. Thus does Allah make clear to you His verses that you may be guided.} (Q 3:103)

Embracing Unity Amidst Diversity

But does unity mean uniformity? We have already ruled that out in principle and in practice. We Muslims are not going to think the same, talk the same or act the same; yet we still turn in one direction to worship the One God. We can speak with one voice and act with one purpose, but only by learning how to disagree.

Principles for Constructive Disagreement

Love for Fellow Muslims

Fill your heart with love for the Muslims. We are one extended family, and here in Britain we come from so many backgrounds and ways of thinking and doing. You love your family even when you disagree, and when you fall out you seek to repair the relationship one way or another. You can love your group or organisation, but never let that supersede the love for your Ummah. [And yes, we can see the whole of humanity as a family too.]

Legitimate and Evil Disagreement

Accept that not all disagreements are evil. The ikhtilāf dispraised in the Qur’an and Sunnah is such that leads to abuse, discord, splitting and weakening of the ranks. It is evil when it stems from lowly desire, not when its source is legitimate scholarly ijtihād based on authentic texts and methods.

Study Religion and Purify the Soul

Study the religion thoroughly and work on purifying the soul. The first allows you to appreciate where different opinions come from, while the second ensures knowledge becomes a tool for unity, not division.

Principles of Reason and Dialogue

Study the principles of reason and dialogue. Learn to define terms clearly, analyze arguments, and present your points while understanding others.

Upholding Islamic Manners

Adopt Islam’s manners of speech and advice, guarding the tongue, assuming well of others, and elevating standards of dialogue (see Q 16:125).

The Quranic Constitution of Coexistence

by ahmad | Jul 7, 2015 | Uncategorized

Watch the first 20 minutes for an explanation of the points below (Article 6 excluded):

The following are some principles extracted from Quranic guidance which are pertinent to Muslims living alongside people of different beliefs and practices. The hope is always to go beyond the mere fact of coexistence, to tolerance and acceptance, and beyond that to mutual respect and celebration of diversity.

Article 1: We are all seekers after One Truth

{Say: the truth is from your Lord, so let whoever wills, believe; and let whoever wills, disbelieve} (18:29)

Article 2: The Creator honoured all humans as trustees

{We have indeed honoured the children of Adam} (17:70)
{Behold, your Lord said to the angels: “I will create a trustee upon earth”} (2:30)

Article 3: Diversity is a marvel of creation

{And among His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the variations in your languages and your colours} (30:22)
{O mankind! We created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes that you may know each other} (49:13)

Article 4: Invite to God’s way with wisdom

{Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching, and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for your Lord knows best who has strayed from His Path, and who is guided} (16:125)

Article 5: Faith is not made by compulsion

{Let there be no compulsion in religion: truth stands out clear from error} (2:256)
{And had your Lord willed, everyone on earth would have believed, all together. Then, would you compel the people in order that they become believers?} (10:99)

Article 6: Build on common ground

{Say: “O people of Scripture! Come to a common word between us and you: that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that we take not one another for lords beside God”} (3:64)

Article 7: A Muslim rushes to peace and honours treaties

{Verily We have granted you a manifest victory!} (48:1)
{Righteous is he who believes in God … and gives wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk, orphans, the needy and the wayfarer and those who ask, and to set slaves free; and observes proper worship and pays the poor-due. And those who keep their treaty when they make one, and the patient in tribulation and adversity and time of stress} (2:177)

Article 8: Conflict is the hated exception

{God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them} (60:8)
{Fight in the way of God against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! God loves not the aggressors} (2:190)

“We Only Feed You For the Sake of God”

by ahmad | Apr 3, 2015 | Uncategorized

Introduction to Quranic Virtues and Righteousness

As a book of guidance for the individual and society, the Qur’an often elaborates on virtues which qualify people as pious, faithful, and righteous, and worthy of being “servants of the Merciful”. Among these most beautiful of Quranic passages is one found in Chapter 76, known both as “The Human Being” (al-Insān) and “Time” (al-Dahr), which was most likely revealed in Makkah in the early phase of the Prophetic mission.

Reward and Character Traits of the Righteous

Our selected verses begin with a glimpse of the reward in store for the righteous, together with some of their most prominent character traits: both towards their fellow man and towards their Lord:

{As to the righteous, they shall drink of a cup mixed with kāfūr; a fountain where the devotees of God do drink, making it flow in unstinted abundance. They perform (their) vows, and they fear a day whose evil flies far and wide.} (Q 76:5-7).

Actions Flowing from Faith: Love and Fear

The actions of these servants of God flow like that stream from the faith in their hearts. It is not only fear, but love as well:

{And they feed, for the love (of God), the indigent, the orphan, and the captive} (76:8)

This is the rendering of Abdullah Yusuf Ali alongside other translators. The verse may also be understood as saying that they give this food “despite their love of it”, i.e. their own need for that food with which the righteous prefer others over themselves. It can also mean that they love giving, as their souls have come to delight in such acts of virtue.

Embodying Islamic Values in Local Communities

It is heartening to see more and more Muslim communities developing new initiatives to embody the values of this verse with respect to their own localities. I would like to believe that nobody would find it unusual or questionable for Muslims to be helping other people regardless of faith; but if anyone should question, then they can find an answer in these verses and many others which exhort the believers to help the needy without any restriction.

Islamic Ethics of War and Captivity

Indeed, the verse above makes an explicit mention of the “captive”, which may have referred in the first instance to Muslims who were imprisoned or enslaved by others, but was applied later to captives who had been engaged in warfare against the Muslims. This provides an insight into Islamic ethics of war.

Sincerity in Actions: Giving for the Sake of God

Full of sincerity, these righteous men and women say (in their hearts, or even aloud to reassure the recipients):

{“We feed you for the sake of God alone: no reward do we desire from you, nor thanks.”} (76:9)

Knowing that the real Provider is the Almighty, Who means to test us through what He has given some over others, they give without any ulterior motive. They do not feed anyone to provoke them to enter Islam, yet they carry the banner of Islam and its message of peace in their very actions and lifestyle.

Motivation for Good Deeds: For God’s Pleasure and Reward

But are they doing it for God’s pleasure, or for His reward (i.e. Paradise)? The verse mentions both, alongside other indications of their fear of punishment, thus demonstrating that there is no conflict between these motivations for good deeds.

“Good for Good’s Sake”: The Highest Aspiration

Yet the expressions of doing good “for God’s sake” (or for His “Face” as in this verse’s wording) have been taken by various scholars as corresponding to the highest aspirations and humblest servitude to the divine. At the same time, they are the Islamic version of what people call “good for good’s sake”.

Positivity Begets Positivity: A Universal Truth

Simply put: positivity begets positivity, whether in earthly or heavenly terms. {Is the reward for good anything but good?} (Q 55:60)