.

.

IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE BENEFICENT, THE MERCIFUL
-------------- --------------- -------------- --------


"O you who believe! Be careful of your duty to Allah, and be with the truthful." [Noble Quran 9:119]

"If you obeyed most of those on earth they would mislead you far from Allah's way." [Noble Quran 6:116]

Return to the QURAN only - the complete and final STAND-ALONE Divine Message which also contains the authentic sunnah of the beloved Prophet Muhammad (SAAW)

-----------------

I bear witness that NONE is worthy of worship except ALLAH, He has NO partner nor partners, and I bear witness that Muhammad is the slave and Final Messenger of Allah.

--------


Zainabs Lounge blog tracker

Thursday, April 29, 2010

There's a difference between Hadith and History. Hadith is NOT History.

Though history isn't totally reliable, it's a lot more dependable than hadith.

History is the study or recounting of past events and activities involving one of the following methods or all:

1) A chronological record of the events of successive years. A periodical journal in which the records and reports are compiled.

2) Narration or story, which is an account or recital of an event or a series of events, either true or fictitious.

3) Version, that is, description or account from one point of view, especially as opposed to another.

For instance, how do historians know of the events that occurred in the Philippines before the time of the Spaniards? How do they know the names of the people who lived then and the things they did if there are almost no authentic written documents from that era?

Traditionally, historians have attempted to answer historical questions through the study of written documents, although historical research is not limited merely to these sources. The sources of historical knowledge can be separated into three categories:

(a) what is written,
(b) what is said,
(c) and what is physically preserved.

Historians must consult all three.

Good historians frequently emphasize the importance of written records, which universally date to the development of writing. This emphasis has led to the term 'prehistory' referring to a time before written sources were available on a particular event or personality etc. Since writing emerged at different times throughout the world, the distinction between prehistory and history often depends on the topic.

The scope of the human past has naturally led scholars to divide time into manageable pieces for study. There are a variety of ways in which the past can be divided, including chronologically, culturally, and topically.

Traditionally, the study of history was limited to written and spoken word. However, the rise of academic professionalism and the creation of new scientific fields in the 19th and 20th centuries brought a flood of new information. Archaeology and other social sciences were providing additional information.

Thus, history has more than one approach for authentication and verification.

As for Hadith, it has only one source which are narrations with only one 'verification' i.e. isnad, the unreliability of which has been detailed in the post "Ever thought of fallibility of Isnad?"

Moreover, history doesn't have a 'fragile ego' like Hadith. Even if certain historical reports are doubted, history does not take that as an infra dig. No data compiled by humankind can be one hundred percent reliable, no matter how carefully it's been acquired (which of course is NOT the case with Hadith). On this very basis, human historical narrations are never made a source of law.

The altered versions of Old & New Testaments and Hadith are human narrations. In connection with history, the only difference between the two are - Hadith narrations are written information of the narrators but without any proof of its reliability except the Isnad, which evidently has been constructed & re-constructed in most cases and cannot be relied upon at all. As for the altered Old & New Testaments, since these started being re-written hundreds of years before Hadith, there's no record of the culprits who began this practice. And obviously because the Jews and Christians brought the changes directly onto their Divine Scriptures, it was still more necessary to conceal the identity of those who did this.

It is the concept of tracking Isnad or the chain of narrators in Hadith that we often hear of as the 'Science of Hadith' or the 'Hadith Methodology.' Unfortunately, these bombastic terms that frequently impress the minds of many a naive faithfuls are just the facade with an ostentatiously lofty style but in reality quite hollow from within. The enormous scope for the Isnad to falter which is far greater than the possibility of its correctness is conveniently concealed in this so-called "Methodology" myth.

It's more than evident that the source of Hadith as history is thoroughly insufficient compared to the various other extensively researched and compiled historical data that involve more than just narrations or chain of narrators.

Sunday, April 25, 2010

Why do 'Muslims' purposely distort the Quran translations?

Tonite I was ashamed to read the comments of the admin of a Facebook 'Islamic' group.

He posts a video-lecture of some Sheikh Feiz in Australia talking about the importance of lowering one's gaze. Then he posts the translation of Verses 31 to 34 of Surah An-Naba (78th Chapter of the Noble Quran). The following is the thoroughly incorrect translation he posted, ruining the beauty of this very nice verse with utter vulgarity that dwells in their own minds.

"Verily, for al-Muttaqoon, there will be a success; gardens and grapeyards and young full-breasted [mature] maidens of equal age." [Qur’an, 78:31-33].

Still more appaling .... he writes below this verse: "The only reason why I have quoted the above verse of the Qur'an is to encourage my brothers to have patience, insha Allah."

Encouraging your brothers to have patience by manipulating such types of lies against Allah ????!! This is largely the effects of Hadith which, apart from its colossal lies, is filled with similar cheapness and inelegance, if not downright perversion.

DEAR SISTERS & BROTHERS, PLEASE NOTE, THE CORRECT TRANSLATION OF VERSES 78:31-34 is:

"Lo! for the duteous is achievement -
Gardens enclosed and vineyards,
And maidens for companions,
And a full cup." 78:31-34


"full cup" refers to the refreshing drink in Paradise. Not "full breasted" women. For the sake of Allah, what's wrong with these people?!!!! They seemed to have forgotten the Day of Judgment completely.

That's why it's so important to pick a real good and reliable translator.

Of course I've quit this group as I don't trust it any longer.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

The term 'Jihad' in Islam

As elucidated by Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall from his biography Loyal Enemy by Anne Fremantle.

Brief and accurate ..

Quote -
The error with regard to the common view regarding Islam arises from misapprehension of the meaning of the word ‘Jihad.'

In English ‘Jihad’ is commonly translated ‘holy war.’ It properly denotes the whole effort, individual and collective, of the true believer against evil, beginning with the conquest of a man’s own passions and ending possibly, but not necessarily, in persecution and exile or upon the battlefield. Every prophet made Jihad in his own way.

That of Moses took the form of emigration to escape from evil.

That of Jesus was of a non-violent and passive kind.

That of Muhammad shows three stages:

- First, a non-violent endurance of hostility and persecution while fulfilling his own mission, like that of Jesus;

- Second, when the persecution threatened to exterminate his people, emigration, the Jihad of Moses; and ..

- Third, when he and his followers formed an independent State, however small and weak, and when the persecutors still persisted in attacking them, then and not till then he was enjoined to fight.

The term ‘Jihad’ applies to all these stages. But in the minds of Westerners it is restricted to the third only. That is the reason for the whole mistake. The sort of Jihad prescribed for people in a subject state (that is, those people under the authority of others) differs from that prescribed for the same people in a state of independence. And the Jihad for subject peoples who are persecuted is the Jihad of Jesus, which was followed by Muhammad during thirteen years at Mecca.
Unquote -

"Subject people" refers to those living under the authority/power of others viz. people who's land has been occupied by outsiders, or separatists within a state wanting an independent homeland, or separatists desiring a de facto state of their own within the larger one they live in.

On Marmaduke Pickthall

The very humble and pious Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall - he is my favorite English translator of the Glorious Quran, and the only reliable one who's works are totally unmotivated.

Pickthall's biography is interesting, diverse and rich. It's inspiring and envious for those who desire to lead a meaningful life with a sincere love for Almighty Allah. This love grew in Pickthall's heart through his own understanding of Allah, and the depth of his insight.

Giving every detail of Pickthall's biography would make this post too lengthy. This has been abridged with only the relevant aspects of Pickthall's life and his remarkable contributions to the English translation of the Quran, despite the initial harassment by several Egyptian scholars.

----------

Source: British Muslim Heritage

Marmaduke Pickthall was born in 1875 in England.

In 1913, Lady Evelyn Cobbold, the Sutherland heiress and traveller, tried to convert him to Islam during a dinner at Claridges, explaining that the waiters would do perfectly well as witnesses. He politely demurred; but he could marshal no argument against hers. What he had seen and described, she had lived. As an English Muslim woman familiar with the heart of Asia, she knew that his love for Islam was grounded deep in his heart. On 29 November 1914, during a lecture on ‘Islam and Progress’, he converted to Islam joining countless others of his kind. From now on, Pickthall's life would be lived in the light of the One God of Islam. His loving wife, Muriel, followed him soon afterwards.

Pickthall had travelled widely across the Middle-East from the age of 18. He was quick at learning foreign languages and had a passion for Arabic. He was deeply engrossed in the politics of the then Muslim world and was particularly close to the Turkish community. Pickthall also spent many years among the Muslim community of undivided India. His services to the Muslims of India were immense.

As he noted: "All Muslim India seems to be possessed with the idea that I ought to translate the Qur’an into real English." He was anxious that this should be the most accurate, as well as the most literate, version of the Scripture. As well as mastering the classical Islamic sources, he travelled to Germany to consult with leading Orientalists, and studied the groundbreaking work of Nöldeke and Schwally, the Geschichte des Qorans, to which his notes frequently refer.

When the work was completed, Pickthall realised that it was unlikely to gain wide acceptance among Muslims unless approved by Al-Azhar, which, with the abolition of the Ottoman post of Shaykh al-Islam, had become the leading religious authority in the Muslim world. So to Egypt he went, only to discover that powerful sections of the ulema considered unlawful any attempt to render ‘the meanings of the Book’ into a language other than Arabic. The controversy soon broke, as Shaykh Muhammad Shakir wrote in the newspaper Al-Ahram that "all who aided such a project would burn in Hell." The Shaykh recommended that Pickthall translate Tabari’s commentary instead, a work that would amount to at least one hundred volumes in English. Other ulemas demanded that his translation be retranslated into Arabic, to see if it differed from the original in any respect, however small.

Pickthall published, in Islamic Culture, a long account of his battle with the Shaykh and the mentality which he represented. He included this reflection:

Quote
Many Egyptian Muslims were as surprised as I was at the extraordinary ignorance of present world conditions of men who claimed to be the thinking heads of the Islamic world – men who think that the Arabs are still ‘the patrons,’ and the non-Arabs their ‘freedmen’; who cannot see that the positions have become reversed, that the Arabs are no longer the fighters and the non-Arabs the stay-at-homes but it is the non-Arabs who at present bear the brunt of the Jihâd; that the problems of the non-Arabs are not identical with those of the Arabs; that translation of the Qur’ân is for the non-Arabs a necessity, which, of course, it is not for Arabs; men who cannot conceive that there are Muslims in India as learned and devout, as capable as judgment and as careful for the safety of Islam, as any to be found in Egypt.
Unquote

The battle was won when Pickthall addressed, in Arabic, a large gathering of the ulema, including Rashid Rida, explaining the current situation of Islam in the world, and the enormous possibilities for the spread of Islam among the English-speaking people. He won the argument entirely. The wiser heads of al-Azhar, recognising their inability to understand the situation of English speakers and the subtle urgencies of da‘wah, accepted his translation. The former Shaykh al-Azhar, al-Maraghi, who could see his sincerity and his erudition, offered him these parting words: "If you feel so strongly convinced that you are right, go on in God’s name in the way that is clear to you, and pay no heed to what any of us say."

The translation duly appeared, in 1930, and was hailed by the Times Literary Supplement as ‘a great literary achievement.’ Avoiding both the Jacobean archaisms of Sale, and the baroque flourishes and expansions of Yusuf Ali (whose translation Pickthall regarded as too free), it was recognised as the best translation ever of the Book, and, indeed, as a monument in the history of translation. Unusually for a translation, it was further translated into several other languages, including Tagalog, Turkish and Portuguese.

One of Pickthall's most outstanding qualities was his humility. The huge success of his work never made him conceited or arrogant, not even a bit. Commenting on his English translation of the Quran, he wrote:

Quote
.. The Qur'an cannot be translated. ..The book is here rendered almost literally and every effort has been made to choose befitting language. But the result is not the Glorious Qur'an, that inimitable symphony, the very sounds of which move men to tears and ecstasy. It is only an attempt to present the meaning of the Qur'an - and peradventure something of the charm in English. It can never take the place of the Qur'an in Arabic, nor is it meant to do so... [Marmaduke Pickthall, 1930]
Unquote

These words of Pickhall are one of the most popular and famous ones quoted to describe the infinite beauty of the Glorious Quran.

In 1935, Pickthall left Hyderabad (India) and returned to England where he set up a new society for Islamic work, and delivered a series of lectures. Despite this new activity, however, his health was failing.

He died in a cottage in the West Country on May 19 1936, of coronary thrombosis, and was laid to rest in the Muslim cemetery at Brookwood. After his death, his wife cleared his desk, where he had been revising his lectures the night before he died, and she found that the last lines he had written were from the Qur’an:

"Whosoever surrendereth his purpose to Allah, while doing good, his reward is with his Lord, and there shall no fear come upon them, neither shall they grieve."

Thursday, April 15, 2010

Grapes are healthy for the heart, NOT wine

Be careful not to get trapped into that deceitful net that claims "a glass of wine a day is good for the heart." Western medical experts have themselves acknowledged that alcohol can never be "good" for health in any way at all.

Those who think "a glass of wine is good for the heart" forget the important fact that if they want the benefits of a glass of wine, all they need to do instead is go to the grocery store, buy a bunch of fresh grapes and eat it. This is not from me, it's from the doctors. According to professional study, a small bunch of fresh grapes has the same nutrients and more, minus the alcohol contained in wine and its intoxicating affect. It has also been confirmed that whatever heart benefit wine drinkers boast of, comes from the grapes used in making wine, NOT from the alcoholic contents of wine.

Dr. Sears website states "Red wine has recently been touted as a health food because of studies showing a lower incidence of cardiovascular disease in cultures that drink a lot of red wine. Red wine may help to lower cholesterol. Yet, the health properties are not in the alcohol , but in the grapes. Grape skins contain resveratrol, a substance that can lower cholesterol and prevent fats in the bloodstream from sticking together and clogging arteries. Eating grapes, drinking grape juice that is made with skins, or eating raisins is just as heart-healthy as drinking wine, without the health hazards of alcohol."

Alcohol is plainly deadly for the health. It harms the entire body. Looking specifically on its effect on the heart,

- it weakens the heart muscle and ability to pump blood

- causes abnormal heart signals, irregular heart beat and heart enlargement

- increases blood pressure, risk of heart attack and stroke

- inhibits production of both red and white blood cells

Wine is stated to have an alcohol content of 14% which is high. And various makes of wine contain even more. Wine labeled as 'port' has an alcohol content of 20%. A glass of wine is fully into the human blood stream within an hour.

Needless to mention, there are tons of natural foods excellent for the heart. Blueberries, almonds, walnuts, tuna, oatmeal, pumpkin seeds, beans, all citrus fruits, green, orange and red veggies, skinless chicken, lean ground mince .. you name it. The list can go on and on. And yet, is it necessary to keep hankering after something as negative as wine "for the benefit of heart health"?? What a lame excuse. It only displays the depth of human weakness and obstinacy in quitting hurtful habits .. hurtful for the heart, for the health and for family relations.

"They question thee about strong drink and games of chance. Say: In both is great sin, and (some) utility for men; but the sin of them is greater than their usefulness." 2:219 (Al-Baqrah)

Whatever medical science is asserting at present concerning alcohol, the Glorious Quran expressed the same centuries ago.

Monday, April 12, 2010

On Sufiism / Mystisism

Keeping a complicated topic brief and to the point, I personally view sufisim as against the idealogy of the Glorious Quran. It's a lot more in line with the concept of monasticism in Christianity, and also somewhat similar to the mystic values of non-Divine religions like buddhism and hinduism.

On monasticism Allah mentions concerning the People of the Book

"But monasticism they invented - We ordained it not for them - only seeking Allah's pleasure, and they observed it not with right observance." 57:27 Al-Hadid

Broadly speaking, sufiism depicts the concept of retiring from worldly life into a
reclusive existence. Islam, on the contrary, upholds that religion/spiritualism and worldy responsibilities go hand in hand. Definitely, Islam commands a strict control on one's morals and ethics while indulging in worldly affairs. To prove one's worth and quality,it's incumbent upon every human being to maintain a balance between their responsibilities toward Allah Almighty and their duties towards family & community. After all, it's the challenges of this earthly life that carve our personality, determine our character and the level of our perseverence, which is eventually for Allah to judge. Obviously a person who is a recluse with the minimal of contact with the outside world has not given themselves as much opportunity to face the trials & tribulations of life as those who have been exposed to the harshness of the world and yet held on to their duties toward Allah.

There are certain Muslim societies where the concept of sufiism has deviated from a complete hermit like existence to something between seclusion and participation in worldly life. But it all depends upon their interpretation of merging both sides of
life to make it compatible in a broader sense with Quranic precepts.

I'm completely against the expression 'Islamic mysticism.' It's thoroughly inappropriate. The Glorious Quran underscores no such ideas. Keeping this in mind, the accusations against sufiism trying to distract Muslims from the Quran and move them towards the sevitude of the sheiks could have a big element of truth. And this is a good reason to discard Sufiism altogether. Already enough lies have been manufactured over the past centuries uptil present by our self-appointed leaders which have mercilessly hidden the truth and beauty of Islam based on the Quran alone. The last thing we need is another annexation.

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Ever thought of the fallibility of 'isnad?'

'Isnad' is the term given to the chain of narrators of every Hadith. It is often known as the "methodology" or "scientific compilation of Hadith." In other words, it refers to the verification of the chain of narrators ('isnad') for authenticity. If this chain of narrators is considered reliable by the ulemas then the hadith is recognized as 'authentic' or 'sahih.'

Our scholars say that the 'isnad' of every "authentic" or "sahih" Hadith has been studied and found "true." Unfortunately, this claim itself exhibits the biggest falsehood.

According to the rules of the Hadith doctors, Hadith requires to be examined for authenticity on the basis of:

1) its chain of narrators
2) its body text

But even according to their own criteria of applying these two rules, the ulemas often find themselves in a quagmire. There are many Ahadith which according to them appear to have a "sound" or "reliable" chain of narrators, but the substance or the meaning is not acceptable. As Brother Muhammad Asadi explains, "One example of this and their whole system collapses. The Koran gives us the standard for judging anything that is presented. If the Koran confirms it in total its true. If the material adds to or contradicts the Quran, its source is not God or His Messenger."

Big claims of "scientific compilation" of Hadith are not unusual. But if the contents of a Hadith are unacceptable (which is very often so), the "scientific compilation" or whatever impressive term one may like to use, is rendered useless. In that case it simply means that that Hadith is false and must be trashed. No amount of "scientific compilation" can turn falsehood into truth. No matter how "truthful" the chain of narrators may appear, that's insignificant and serves no purpose unless the contents are in conformity with the Glorious Quran. Again quoting Br. Muhammad Asadi on what the scientific method demands is "how truthful a person was be ignored, and the item be tested on objective criteria. What does the content say?"

This is by far the most important aspect. If the substance of a narration goes against the Quranic principles (and always remember, the Prophet's [SAAW] teachings were based meticulously on Quranic values), the acceptance of 'isnad' is of NO value.

Furthermore, if one concentrates on the concept of the term "isnad" as a criterion, the word itself refers to little beyond hearsay. It defines it's own self as a flimsy and not a foolproof evidence of any claims whatsoever, symbolising the travelling path of gossip or calculated bluff. The only simple requirement to concoct a false yet irrefutable chain of narrators is to have some information on the family & social relationships of the person in focus and perhaps the political setup of the era. Anyone determined to lie on a particular issue can construct a phoney chain of narrtors to support that lie in a few minutes. That's nothing difficult, and it could be virtually impossible to refute that chain on the basis of practical logic.

In any court of law, is the plaintiff or the defendant or any witnesses allowed to testify by mentioning the "chain of narrators" as the sole evidence to their dispute? That would surely be a mockery of justice. But our ulemas are compelled to use "isnad" for this purpose by giving it a dozen different titles because this is the only tool available that can be twisted to masquerade as some sort of "proof" for authentcity.

Although God Amighty has plainly and firmly stated that only the Quran is to be taken as the Criterion (refer to Verse 25:1 - Surah Al Furqan) for judging all matters, yet according to the rules of our ulemas, the fractured and deeply suspicious ideology of "isnad" has bypassed the Quran and established itself as the 'criterion' in this field. It amounts to betrayal of public trust and is a very serious issue. On the Day of Judgment each one of us will be questioned on what basis we accepted human writings in preference to the Divine Message for which God Almighty gave us no warrant.

May Allah grant us an independent sense of perception, constantly keeping in mind the norms & principles of the Glorious Quran as our only Criterion. Allah has given each one of us a degree of common sense and surely He expects us to use it.

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Does the Quran refer to the story of David and "Bathsheba?"

Prophet David (Dawud) was also a king to whom God Almighty revealed the Zabur (Book of Psalms) as guidance for the Israelites. The Glorious Quran says "We gave to Dawud Zabur." (4: 163)

Verses 38:21-26 of Surah S'ad contain references to a historical incident in the life of David. Quoting the verses:

"And has the story of the litigants come unto you? How they climbed the wall into the royal chamber; 38:21

How they burst in upon David, and he was afraid of them! They said: Be not afraid! (We are) two litigants, one of whom has wronged the other, therefor judge aright between us; be not unjust; and show us the fair way. 38:22

Lo! this my brother has ninety and nine ewes while I had one ewe; and he said: Entrust it to me, and he conquered me in speech. 38:23

(David) said: He has wronged you in demanding your ewe in addition to his ewes, and lo! many partners oppress one another, save such as believe and do good works, and they are few. And David guessed that We had tried him, and he sought forgiveness of his Lord, and he bowed himself and fell down prostrate and repented. 38:24

So We forgave him that; and lo! he had access to Our presence and a happy journey's end. 38:25

(And it was said unto him): O David! Lo! We have set you as a viceroy in the earth; therefor judge aright between humankind, and follow not desire that it beguile you from the way of Allah. Lo! those who wander from the way of Allah have an awful doom, forasmuch as they forgot the Day of Reckoning. 38:26


One might wonder what the incident was.

Biblical version of the story of Prophet David -
The altered Old and New Testaments have given plenty of absurd spins and twisted a portion of David's biography. Before discussing the story of Prophet David in the light of the Quranic verses of Surah Sa'd, it might be useful to expose the earlier fabrications from the altered Scriptures.

According to the biblical account, one day while the men were at war, David spied a beautiful woman, "Bathsheba", from his rooftop while she was bathing in the courtyard of her home. He discovered that she was married to Uriah the Hittite (a soldier in David's army according to the Hebrew Bible) but this did not stop him from sending for her and getting her pregnant. He then called Uriah back from battle to pretend that he was the father of his wife's unborn child. Uriah refused to return home. David then sent Uriah to the front lines of battle where he was killed, and David married Bathsheba. When confronted by Nathan (a prophet in the Jewish scripture not mentioned in the Quran) David admitted his sin. Bathsheba’s child didn't survive and David was cursed with the promise of a rebellion from within his own house. After her marriage to David, Bathsheba conceived a second son, Solomon, also a Prophet as confirmed in the Glorious Quran.

Also, according to the Hebrew Scripture, Nathan narrated to David the story of 'a rich man and a poor man' while he rebuked him. The rich man had many sheep (ewes) while the poor man had only one ewe for which he cared much. When a hungry traveller approached the rich man for food, instead of taking a sheep from his own herd, the rich man took the poor man's sheep. This narration bears resemblance to the contents of the Quranic verses quoted above. But the backdrop of the story of the ewes carries a very different connotation in the Quran which will be discussed shortly.

In plain terms, the altered Hebrew Bible accuses Prophet David of committing adultery with the wife of Uriah the Hittite and then marrying her after having Uriah intentionally slain in a battle. It also alleges that this same woman who had surrendered herself to Prophet David while being another man's wife, was the mother of the Prophet Solomon. This story is found with all its details in 2 Samuel 11,12; Psalm 51,32.

Quranic reference to the incident in the life of Prophet David -
The actual event as one clearly understands from the aforesaid verses of Surah Sa'd was .. David had expressed his desire to Uriah (or whatever be the name of the man) that he should divorce his wife as David wanted her for himself. And because David was the king, his demand put Uriah in a helpless situation feeling compelled to yield. At this time, before Uriah could act as David had desired, two righteous men of the nation suddenly appeared in the presence of David and presented their story which (in terms of violation of justice) was similar to the story of David and Uriah. On hearing it, David gave his decision as king, asserting that the man with "99 ewes" had wronged the other man with one ewe. Soon after, David's conscience made him realize his violation. He became aware that this incident was a reminder to him of his own act of injustice. David immediately repented, fell down prostrate before God Almighty and reversed his decision. On the basis of his sincere repentence, David was granted forgivness by the Divine Power and his status remained unaffected. On accepting his repentence, Verse 38:26 of the Quran is also a warning to David from God Almighty along with giving him the good news of exalting his rank, being evidence of the fact that David never again stumbled into similar temptations / errors arising from personal desires.

Saturday, April 3, 2010

Can there be a universal tafsir of the Quran?

Quranic tafsir or explanation (also often referred to as 'Quranic exegesis') initially emerged as a branch of the science of Hadith, in an attempt to gather elucidations of Quranic passages which the medieval imams considered 'obscure.' Later on, it developed into a separate branch of study with the inclusion of etymology.

The fact is that no one has been able to compile the complete explanations or tafsirs of Quranic verses recognized universally as the a 'book of tafsirs.' Most tafsir writers have actually gone quite awry with their explanations. And as we have seen, Hadith, which is widely looked upon as an institution that "explains the Quran" has in truth made a complete mess of matters with its thoroughly incorrect explanations.

But most importantly, the Glorious Quran is not supposed to have a universal explanation or tafsir. The answer for this is contained within the Quran itself. "None knows its explanation save Allah." (3:7) And, "Each one does according to his rule of conduct, and your Lord is best aware of him whose way is right." (17:84) These assertions from the Divine Power are clear indications of the freedom granted by Him to the human mind to perceive and interpret His Words as they sincerely deem right. Eventually, God Almighty will be the Judge for NONE besides Him has the ultimate authority on Quranic explanations.

Last but not least, the term "exegesis" which refers to a 'critical explication' by definition stays best if avoided. It has a far from humble connotation - a concept largely coming from various orientalists - and frankly using such terms in connection with the study of the Glorious Quran makes me awfully uncomfortable and deeply critical of my own self.