Classical Arabic

The Qur’an has been revealed in the classical Arabic spoken in Makkah. It was spoken in the age of ignorance by the tribe of Quraysh. No doubt the Almighty has endowed it with inimitable eloquence and articulacy in the Qur’an, yet as far as its substance is concerned, it is no different from the one spoken by messenger of God and which in those times was the tongue of the people of Makkah:

فَإِنَّمَا يَسَّرْنَاهُ بِلِسَانِكَ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَذَكَّرُونَ (58:44)

Thus We have revealed this [Qur’an] to you in your own tongue so that they may take heed. (44:58)

فَإِنَّمَا يَسَّرْنَاهُ بِلِسَانِكَ لِتُبَشِّرَ بِهِ الْمُتَّقِينَ وَتُنذِرَ بِهِ قَوْمًا لُّدًّا (97:19)

Thus We have revealed to you the Qur’an in your own tongue that you may thereby proclaim good tidings to the upright and give warning to a contentious nation. (19:97)

Consequently, a correct understanding of this book is dependent on the correct knowledge and true appreciation of this language. It is essential that a person who wants to reflect on the Qur’an and attempts to interpret and explain it should be a very competent scholar of this language. He should also be adept in appreciating its styles and linguistic features so that at least the language is not an impediment to him in understanding the Qur’an.

An important fact about the language of the Qur’an which every student of this divine book should be well aware of is that its Arabic is not the Arabic in which poets like Hariri and Mutanabbi composed their poetry nor is it the Arabic in which Zamakhshari and Razi wrote their commentaries on the Qur’an. It is also not the Arabic of the newspapers which are published in current times in Arab countries nor is it the Arabic prose and poetry written by their literati of today. No doubt, all this is Arabic too; however, it is very different from the Arabic of the Qur’an which can rightly be termed as classical Arabic. Thus the difference in the vocabulary, idiom, style and construction of classical Arabic and the one spoken and written today is the same as the difference, for example, between the Urdu and Persian of Ghalib and Mir, and Sa‘di and Khayam and the Urdu and Persian of the newspapers and journals of the Indian sub-continent and Iran. Similarly, this difference can be gauged if one compares the wide difference in the English of Shakespeare and Milton and the one written and spoken today in Britain for example. It is thus an essential reality that not only does contemporary or medieval Arabic has no role in creating an appreciation of the language, this Arabic is in fact detrimental to this appreciation, and if one becomes totally involved in it he may end up losing his understanding of in the Qur’an.

Consequently, the very first thing which one a person must turn to in order to understand the language of the Qur’an is the Qur’an itself. No one can deny the fact that when it was revealed, the people of Makkah did dispute its divinity for a long time; however, no one was able to challenge its language. It said that it was not the work of a non-Arab because it was revealed in the most articulate Arabic. It declared itself to be a miracle of language and literature and that of lucidity and eloquence and dared them to produce a surah like it. So much so, it challenged them to bring to their aid their literati, poets, soothsayers, orators and even their jinn, devils and deities. It is however an irrefutable reality that none among the Arabs could refute the magnificence of its language nor was it possible for any person to respond to this challenge:

وَإِن كُنتُمْ فِي رَيْبٍ مِّمَّا نَزَّلْنَا عَلَى عَبْدِنَا فَأْتُواْ بِسُورَةٍ مِّن مِّثْلِهِ وَادْعُواْ شُهَدَاءكُم مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ صَادِقِينَ (23:2)

And if you doubt what We have revealed to Our servant, produce just one surah like it, and for this call upon all your supporters except God if you are truthful. (2:23)

قُل لَّئِنِ اجْتَمَعَتِ الإِنسُ وَالْجِنُّ عَلَى أَن يَأْتُواْ بِمِثْلِ هَـذَا الْقُرْآنِ لاَ يَأْتُونَ بِمِثْلِهِ وَلَوْ كَانَ بَعْضُهُمْ لِبَعْضٍ ظَهِيرًا (88:17)

Tell them: “If men and jinn combined to produce a book like this Qur’an, they would be unable to do so even if they become helpers of one another.” (17:88)

Moreover, when Walid Ibn Mughirah, one of the finest critics of the language in Makkah at that time heard it, his response was:

والله ما فيكم رجل أعرف بالأشعار مني ولا أعلم برجزه ولا بقصيدة مني ولا بأشعار الجن والله ما يشبه الذي يقول شيئا من هذا والله إن لقوله الذي يقول حلاوة وإن عليه لطلاوة وإنه لمثمر أعلاه مغدق أسفله وأنه ليعلو ولا يعلى عليه وأنه ليحطم ما تحته

By God! None among you is more aware than me of poetry neither martial songs nor eulogies nor the incantation of the jinn. By God! the words spoken by this person resemble none of these. By God! it is very pleasant and lively. Its branches are laden with fruit. Its roots are well-watered. It will definitely dominate and nothing will be able to dominate it, and it will crush everything below it.[1]

From among the poets of the Sab‘a Mu‘allaqat (The Seven Hanging Odes), Labid was alive. He is the same person before whom a poet of the calibre of Farzdaq prostrated on one of his couplets[2]; however, he too was dumbfounded before the Qur’an. When the caliph ‘Umar (rta) wished to hear his poetry from him, he replied: “How can I recite my couplets after Baqarah and Al-i ‘Imran.”[3]

This was not merely the admission of a single person; it meant that the whole eloquence of the Arabs had surrendered before the sublimity of the Qur’an.

Moreover, this is also an established reality that this astounding miracle of language and literature has been transmitted to us without any change whatsoever. Thus, it is an acknowledged fact that the Qur’an is not only the final and ultimate authority in all matters of religion, it also represents the final criterion and standard for the language of its times.

After the Qur’an, we can find this language in the Ahadith of the Prophet (sws) and the Athar of the Companions (rta). No doubt, a very small portion of them has been transmitted verbatim and thus in a position to be presented as a criterion and as a representative of classical Arabic, yet whatever portion we have of it is a great treasure for students of this language. This is the language of the Prophet (sws) whose eloquence is matchless and that of the Companions (rta) who speak in the same diction. Its words and idioms and styles and construction are the best examples of the language in which the Qur’an was revealed. Since original words have been preserved in the supplications of the Prophet (sws), in his conversations with his Companions (rta) and in the various parables that he stated to explain some aspect of religion, the parallels of this language can be observed in these three types of narratives the most. Thus if students of the Qur’an consult these sources, they can gather invaluable samples of classical Arabic which can help them in understanding both difficult words as well as the background and occasions on which they are spoken of the Qur’an.

After these three, the greatest source for classical Arabic is the classical literature of the Arabs. Within the corpus of this literature are the works of celebrated poets like Imru al-Qays, Zuhayr, ‘Amr Ibn Kulthum, Labid, Nabighah, Tarfah, ‘Antarah, A‘sha and Harith Ibn Halizzah and orators like Quss Ibn Sa‘idah. Scholars of this field know that a greater part of this literature is found in the anthologies of the poets and in ‘Asma‘iyat4, Mufaddaliyat5, Hamasah6, Sab‘ al-Mu‘allaqat and in the works of literati like Jahiz and Mubarrad.7 Many collections of the poetical works of those times have now been published which were not available to date. Undoubtedly, a greater part of the Arabic language has been transmitted to us through consensus and tawatur and is preserved in primary works like: al-Tahdhib8, al-Muhkam9, al-Sihah10, al-Jamhurah11 and al-Nihayah12; however, this is also is a fact that the greatest source of the portion of the language which has not been transmitted through tawatur is also the classical Arabic literature of that age. Though it does have some portions which were concocted later and attributed to that age, however just as scholars of Hadith can distinguish between rightly and wrongly reported narratives, in the same manner, critics of the Arabic language can distinguish the original from the concocted on the basis of objective standards of textual criticism.13 Consequently, it is for this very reason that the scholars of language and literature are unanimous on the fact that after the Qur’an it is this classical literature which can be depended upon and which because of its integrity in transmission and verbatim nature of transmission occupies the ultimate standard in research on the language. Khatib writes:

الكلام الذى يستشهد به نوعان : شعر و غيره ، فقائل الاول ؛ قد قسمه العلماء على طبقات اربع. الطبقة الاولى : الشعراء الجاهليون ، وهم قبل الاسلام كامرئ القيس والاعشى ، والثانية : المخضرمون ، وهم الذين ادركوا الجاهلية و الاسلام كلبيد و حسّان ، والثالثة : المتقدمون ، ويقال لهم الاسلاميون ، وهم الذين كانوا فى صدر الاسلام كجرير والفرزدق ، والرابعة : المولدون ، ويقال لهم المحدثون ، وهم من بعدهم الى زماننا كبشار بن برد و ابى نواس : فالطبقتان الاوليان ، يستشهد بشعرهما اجماعا (1/3)

A discourse from which parallels are presented to substantiate the meanings of words and phrases is of two types: poetry and prose. The first of these has been divided by scholars into four categories. The first category is of poets who belonged to the jahili period (age of ignorance) that prevailed in Arabia before Islam, such as Imru’ al-Qays and A‘sha. The second is of the mukhadramun who lived in both pre-Islamic and Islamic times such as Labid and Hassan. The third is the mutaqaddimun who are also called the islamiyyun. These are poets who belonged to the first period of Islam such as Jarir and Farzdaq. The fourth is the muwallidun who are also called the muhaddithun. Included in this category are all poets who belonged to the period after the three categories till our own times such as Bashshar Ibn Bard and Abu Nuwas. There is a consensus that parallels to substantiate the meanings of words and phrases shall be drawn from the poets of the first two categories.14

Quite similarly, ‘Umar (rta) is reported to have said:

عليكم بديوانكم لا تضلوا قالوا وما ديواننا قال شعر الجاهلية فإن قيه تفسير كتابكم ومعاني كلامكم

If you protect your poetry, you will not go astray. People asked: “What are our poetic collections?” He said: “The poetry of the jahiliyyah period because it contains the tafsir of your Book and also the meaning of your language.”15

Ibn ‘Abbas (rta), a celebrated Companion of the Prophet (sws), said:

إذا سألتم عن غريب القرآن فالتمسوه في الشعر فإن الشعر ديوان العرب

If you want to understand the meaning of a Qur’anic word little known to you, search for it in poetry because it is this poetry which is the anthology of the Arabs.16

Another thing which needs to be appreciated is that this classical literature of the jahiliyyah period is not only a source of the language and its various styles, it also reflects the culture and civilization of the Arabs. If a person does not have the right knowledge about these, it becomes impossible for him to understand the various references, allusions and figures of speech which are the real constituents of this masterpiece of literature. What were the characteristics of the society of the Arabs? What were the things they regarded as ma‘ruf and munkar? What were the standards of good and evil in their society? What was the nature of their religion and traditions? What were the foundations of their culture and what were the constituents of their social fabric? What were their political ideologies and daily involvements and hobbies? Were they really a bunch of uncivilized people whom Islam elevated to the status of the conquerors of the world or in spite of their savageness, they did possess certain features and characteristics which made them eligible to receive a book as lofty as the Qur’an, and they were bestowed with the status of witnesses to the truth by the Almighty? The correct answer to all these questions is only found in this Book, and it is this answer through which the various allusions, references, insinuations and implications of the Qur’an become evident to its student with their true literary splendour and meaningfulness.

Thus it is not merely for language but also all these things for which a student of the Qur’an must consult this classical literature.

Eloquence of Language

The Qur’an has not merely been revealed in Arabic: it has been revealed in eloquent Arabic. The language is clear and cogent, and there is no vagueness in it; every word is unambiguous and every style adopted is known to its addressees. The Qur’an says:

نَزَلَ بِهِ الرُّوحُ الْأَمِينُ  عَلَى قَلْبِكَ لِتَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُنذِرِينَ بِلِسَانٍ عَرَبِيٍّ مُّبِينٍ (26: 193-195)

The faithful Spirit has brought it down into your heart [O Prophet] that you may become a warner [for people] in eloquent Arabic. (26:193-195)

قُرآنًا عَرَبِيًّا غَيْرَ ذِي عِوَجٍ لَّعَلَّهُمْ يَتَّقُونَ (28:39)

In the form of an Arabic Qur’an, free from any ambiguity that they may save themselves from punishment. (39:28)

This is an obvious reality about the Qur’an. If this premise is accepted, then it must be conceded that no word used or style adopted by the Qur’an is rare or unknown (shadh). Its words and styles are well known and conventionally understood by its addressees. No aspect of the language has any peculiarity or rarity in it. Consequently, while interpreting the Qur’an, the conventionally understood and known meanings of the words should be taken into consideration. Apart from them, no interpretation is acceptable. Thus in the verses: وَالنَّجْمُ وَالشَّجَرُ يَسْجُدَانِ (6:55), the meaning of the word َالنَّجْمُ can only be “stars”.  In وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ مِن رَّسُولٍ وَلَا نَبِيٍّ إِلَّا إِذَا تَمَنَّى أَلْقَى الشَّيْطَانُ فِي أُمْنِيَّتِهِ (52:22), the word تَمَنَّى can only mean “desire”. In أَفَلَا يَنظُرُونَ إِلَى الْإِبِلِ كَيْفَ خُلِقَتْ (17:88) , the word الْإِبِلِ has only been used for “camel”. The only meaning of the word بَيْضٌ in the verse  كَأَنَّهُنَّ بَيْضٌ مَّكْنُونٌ (49:37) is “eggs”. In the verse فَصَلِّ لِرَبِّكَ وَانْحَرْ (2:108), the word نَحْر only means “sacrifice”. They do not mean “plants”, “recital”, “clouds”, “the hidden sheath of eggs” and “tying hands on the chest” respectively.

Similar is the case with declensions and styles adopted. Scholars of grammar and rhetoric have regarded many such aspects of the Qur’an as rare and as exceptions; however, the truth of the matter is that this conclusion is based on incomprehensive research. In recent times, the works of the two pioneers of the Farahi school: Imam Hamid al-Din Farahi and Imam Amin Ahsan Islahi have fully proven that the declensions and styles adopted by the Qur’an are all in fact well-known and conventionally understood by the Arabs. Students of the Qur’an who have a flare for these aspects of the language of the Qur’an can obtain a lot of guidance from Imam Farahi’s Mufridat al-Qur’an17, Asalib al-Qur’an18, Jamhurah al-Balaghah19 and Majmu‘ah-i Tafasir20 and from Imam Islahi’s Tadabbur-i Qur’an21.

Taking into consideration this principle is a requisite of the eloquence of the Qur’anic language, which as stated above, is mentioned in the Qur’an itself. No explanation of the Qur’an is acceptable while disregarding this principle.

Uniqueness of Style

The Qur’an has a unique style. It has the simplicity and continuity found in prose, yet it is not prose. It has the beat, rhythm and poise of poetry, yet it is not poetry. It is not the book we are usually acquainted with in which there are chapters and sections which deal with a specific topic or topics. The people of Arabia would sometimes call it as poetry and sometimes likened it to rhymed prose of the soothsayers, and it is this uncertainty of theirs which itself shows that they were not satisfied with what they said about it. In reality, the Qur’an is a unique book as per its style. It has the flow of tumultuous torrents and the vigour of pounding seas waves. Its sound reasoning has many variations that cannot be emulated; topics are connected to one another with subtle harmony; it cites stories and anecdotes; the discourse returns to its central theme every now and then; verses which portray threat, intimidation and punishment are found in various styles; other verses depict sorrow and longing; emphatic expressions are another hallmark of its style; similarly, we find verses which express intense emotions of disgust, indifference and unconcern. Instances which reflect warmth and affection are as warm and affectionate as dew drops and instances which reflect wrath and rage, are as fiery and compelling as thunder. The unique ways of address it contains simply enchants a reader to a state of trance. It is because of this unique and inimitable style that it has said about it:

لَوْ أَنزَلْنَا هَذَا الْقُرْآنَ عَلَى جَبَلٍ لَّرَأَيْتَهُ خَاشِعًا مُّتَصَدِّعًا مِّنْ خَشْيَةِ اللَّهِ وَتِلْكَ الْأَمْثَالُ نَضْرِبُهَا لِلنَّاسِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ (21:59)

Had We brought down this Qur’an upon a mountain, [O Prophet!] you would have seen it humble itself and break asunder for fear of God. And we mention these parables to these people that they may deliberate. (59:21)

But what exactly is the genre of the Qur’an? What at best can be said as an answer to this question is that it resembles an oration. No doubt this is only a mere resemblance; it cannot be termed oratory in the strict sense of the word. However, it does come close to it, and on this basis the following things should remain in consideration before a student of the Qur’an:

Firstly, in order to understand the Qur’an, its ambience should be studied; this means that the background, situation and the requisites be determined in which a surah was revealed. Nothing is required for this beyond deliberation on the Qur’an itself, and the light of the Qur’an itself suffices for this. When a person deliberates on the Qur’an, concentrates on each and every word of it, tries to understand the rhythm and beat of the words and the construction of the sentences, the occasions on which a discourse is uttered become fully clear. Such is the extent of this clarity that they become an evidence on themselves and no external argument is required for any corroboration. Imam Amin Ahsan Islahi writes:

The only correct way is to comprehend the background from indications and clues within the Qur’an. Once a person is able to ascertain the addressees of the discourse such that which among them are addressed directly and which indirectly; what is the phase whose circumstances the addressees are facing; what are the questions which have been raised by this phase whose answer is awaited by both friend and foe; what is the nature of the hostility by the enemies and what are the circumstances in which allies and friends find themselves in; what are various groups which have joined forces with the enemies while adopting various measures and tactics and what are the thoughts of the allies and associates, then the whole structure and sequence of the discourse shall become fully evident. All these aspects speak of themselves within the drift of the discourse. Thus if they are ascertained through hard work, the whole sequence and arrangement of the Qur’an becomes fully evident and the effect of reading a surah is the same as that of listening to an apt and timely oration of a great orator.22

Secondly, the direction of address of the Qur’an should be ascertained at each place. The direction of address shifts a number of times in the Qur’an at very short intervals and sometimes even in a single verse. At one instant, Muslims would be addressees and at the next the mushrikun would become the addressees; similarly, the People of the Book would be addressed in a verse and all of a sudden the address would shift to the Muslims. A similar shift is experienced in singular and plural entities. This change occurs both in the speaker and the spoken to. At one instant the speaker would be God and then suddenly Gabriel would assume the speaker’s role. At another instant, the speaker would be Gabriel and the suddenly the discourse would emanate from the mouth of Muhammad (sws). In short, just as an orator shifts from one addressee to another by shift in his tone, facial expressions and words used, in a similar manner, the address in the Qur’an also changes rapidly. Thus it is essential that this aspect must be given full consideration while interpreting and explaining the Qur’an. It should be ascertained whether the speaker for example is God, Gabriel, the Prophet (sws) or the people. Similarly, it should be determined that the spoken to is God, the Prophet (sws) or the people. Among the people, it must be ascertained if they are Muslims or Hypocrites or the People of the Book or the Idolaters among the Ishmaelites or if they are two or three among these or if all of them are spoken to. Then there may be instances of ambiguity in address as well. Sometimes, a verse would apparently address the Prophet (sws); however, in reality the address would be directed at the Muslim ummah. Similarly, an apparent address to him would actually be directed at the leadership of the Quraysh or to the People of the Book. Examples of such addresses abound in the Qur’an. Thus it is essential that this differentiation be made with full caution, and it should be fully ascertained as to who is the actual addressee. Without this, the real purport of the Qur’an cannot be grasped.

Thirdly, general and specific verses should be differentiated. There are many places in the Qur’an where the words are general; however, the context testifies with full certainty that something specific is meant. The Qur’an uses the wordالنَّاس  (people), but it does not refer to all the people of the world; and many a time they do not even refer to all the people of Arabia: the word refers to a group among them. It uses the expression عَلَى  الدِّيْنِ كُلِّهِ(on all the religions), and it does not refer to all religions of the world; it refers toالمُشْركُوْن  (polytheists) but they do not refer to all those who are guilty of polytheism. Similarly, the words إِنْ مِنْ أهْلِ الْكِتَابِ (And from these People of the Book) do not refer to all the People of Book of the world. It mentions the word  الإِنْسَان(man) but it does not refer to mankind. This then is a common style of the Qur’an, and if it is not taken into consideration while explaining and interpreting the Qur’an, then a person can end up misunderstanding the whole purport of the Qur’an. Thus it is of paramount importance that the interpretation of words of the Qur’an must always remain subservient to its context and usage.

The Final Authority

The Qur’an is a mizan (scale that tells good from evil) and a furqan (distinguisher between good and evil) on this earth and a muhaymin (guardian) over other divine scriptures:

اللَّهُ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ وَالْمِيزَانَ (17:42)

It is God who has revealed with truth the Book which is this scale [of justice]. (42:17)

In this verse, the letter waw is for explication, and thus the word mizan is actually used to connote al-kitab. The verse means that the Almighty has revealed the Qur’an which is a scale of justice meant to distinguish good from evil. It is the only scale that weighs every thing else, and there is in no scale in which it can be weighed:

تَبَارَكَ الَّذِي نَزَّلَ الْفُرْقَانَ عَلَى عَبْدِهِ لِيَكُونَ لِلْعَالَمِينَ نَذِيرًا (1:25)

Blessed be He who has revealed al-furqan to His servant that it may warn the whole world. (25:1)

The Qur’an is also a furqan in the same sense, ie a book which the final and absolute verdict to distinguish truth from falsehood. This word also connotes the fact that this Book is the standard on which everything needs to be judged and is a decisive word on matters which relate to religion. Every one must turn to it only to resolve differences of opinion. Nothing can be a judge on it; it shall reign supreme in the dominion of religion and every person is bound not make it subservient to any other thing:

وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَمُهَيْمِنًا عَلَيْهِ فَاحْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءهُمْ عَمَّا جَاءكَ مِنَ الْحَقِّ (5: 48)

 And [O Prophet!] We have revealed to you the Book with the truth in confirmation of the Book before it, and standing as a guardian over it. Therefore, give judgement among men according to the guidance revealed by God and do not yield to their whims by swerving from the truth revealed to you. (5:48)

Here the word used to connote the above sense is muhaymin (guardian). It is an adjective formed from the wordsهَيْمَنَ فُلاَنٌ عَلَى كَذَا which means “a guardian” and “a protector”. In this verse, the Qur’an has been regarded as a muhaymin on the previous scriptures. It means that the Qur’an is the real authentic and trustworthy version of the Book of God. Thus when the texts of other scriptures were lost to posterity and their translations were greatly tampered with, it was this Qur’an which was reposed with the status of judging between the right and wrong of those scriptures. Whatever it declares to be right is right and whatever it declares to be wrong is wrong and must necessarily be rejected.

This is the status of the Qur’an which it has asserted about itself. Thus on the basis of this status, the following principles need to be adhered to:

Firstly, no divine revelation extraneous to the Qur’an and not even the Prophet (sws) to whom this Qur’an was revealed, can specify a general directive of the Qur’an or alter any of its directives. Everything shall be accepted as religion or rejected that it is not on the basis of the Qur’an. Everything accepted in our religion shall be rigorously scrutinized under the light of this Divine Guidance. All basis of belief and faith shall be directly derived from it. Every revelation, inspiration, research and opinion shall be subservient to the Qur’an, and it shall be acknowledged that even the works of great jurists like Abu Hanifah and Shafi‘i, scholars of Hadith like Bukhari and Muslim, theologians like Ash‘ari and Maturidi, sufis like Junayd and Shibli must be weighed in the scales of this mizan, and nothing can be accepted from them which is not in consonance with it.

Secondly, the meaning conveyed by each word of the Qur’an is definitive. Whatever it intends to say, it says with full certainty and there is no ambiguity about it. In no issue is it unable to convey what it wants to. The meanings of its words perfectly match the words and the meanings do not in any way contradict what the words say. The only way to approach the Qur’an in order to understand it is through its words. With fully certainty these words convey what they stand for and there is no question of any doubt or ambiguity in this regard.

Both these things are a natural corollary of the fact that the Qur’an is mizan and furqan. There can be no two opinions about it. However, there are certain questions, which might create doubts in the minds of certain people in this regard:

Firstly, there exist at some places differences of reading the Qur’an. These differences are not only due to a difference in pronouncing words  but at times are also of the sort which effect the meanings they convey. For example, if the word أَرْجُلَكُمْ in (5:5) can be read both in the accusative and in the genitive, then how can it be said that with certainty on the basis of the Qur’an whether in wudu feet need to be washed or just wiped.

Secondly, what we understand from the Qur’an is understood from its words and the way in which its sentences are constructed. The disciplines on which this understanding is dependent – syntax, morphology and lexicography etc – are not definitive (dhanni). How then can it be said that the meanings which words convey are absolutely certain? This question has been raised by Imam Razi in the following words:

دلالة الألفاظ لأنها موقوفة على نقل اللغات ونقل الإعرابات والتصريفات مع أن أول أحوال تلك الناقلين أنهم كانوا آحادا ورواية الآحاد لا تفيد إلا الظن وأيضا فتلك الدلائل موقوفة على عدم الاشتراك وعدم المجاز وعدم النقل وعدم الإجمال وعدم التخصيص وعدم المعارض العقلي فإن بتقدير حصوله يجب صرف اللفظ إلى المجاز ولا شك أن اعتقاد هذه المقدمات ظن محض والموقوف على الظن أولى أن يكون ظنا

The intentionality of a text is speculative because it is dependent on the transmission of words with their meanings, declensions and inflections. Moreover, the transmitters were ahad (few) and it is acknowledged about such transmitters that what they have transmitted cannot be taken to be totally preserved in its original form. Moreover, determining this intentionality of the text is dependent on that fact that the same word may stand for more than one entity, a word may be used figuratively, a word may have changed its meanings, a word may have been used concisely, a word may be used without limiting its meaning or used in contradiction to some logical premise because if there is a such a contradiction, then it is essential that a word be understood to be used figuratively. Undoubtedly, all these premises are accepted because of their speculative natures and what is based on speculation, is all the more speculative. 23

Thirdly, it has been mentioned in the Qur’an that its certain verses are muhkam and certain others are mutashabih, and the Qur’an itself has specified about the latter that only God knows their meaning. This strips the Qur’an of its status of the final judge. If we are not able to distinguish the muhkam from the mutashabih, and are also unable to understand what the mutashabih mean then how can we determine the purport of the Qur’an in these verses, and how can we regard it to be a final authority on the basis of this purport on other things?

Fourthly, there are certain Ahadith which seemingly alter the meaning of the Qur’an. Our scholars at some instances call it naskh (abrogation) and at others call it as tahdid, takhsis or taqyid. If this is accepted then how can the Qur’an have the status of being the mizan and the furqan referred to above?

These are the questions which are generally posed in this regard. Following are the answers:

Variant Readings

The answer to the first question is that the Qur’an is only what is recorded in the mushaf, and which, except for some areas of North Africa, is recited by a vast majority of the Muslim ummah. None else except the reading on which this Qur’an is recited is the Qur’an or can be presented in the capacity and status of the Qur’an. Thus we think that this question does not even arise.

In the following paragraphs, we shall present the details of this view.

The Qur’an says:

سَنُقْرِئُكَ فَلَا تَنسَى إِلَّا مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ إلاَّ مَا شَاءَ اللهُ إنَّهُ يَعْلَمُ الجَهْرَ وَ مَا يخْفَى (87: 6-7)

Soon We shall [finally] recite it to you; then you will not forget except what Allah pleases. He indeed knows what is apparent before [you] at this time, and that also which is concealed [from you]. (87:1-18)

لَا تُحَرِّكْ بِهِ لِسَانَكَ لِتَعْجَلَ بِهِ إِنَّ عَلَيْنَا جَمْعَهُ وَقُرْآنَهُ فَإِذَا قَرَأْنَاهُ فَاتَّبِعْ قُرْآنَهُ  ثُمَّ إِنَّ عَلَيْنَا بَيَانَهُ (76: 16-19)

[To acquire] this [Qur’an] as soon as possible [O Prophet!] do not move your tongue swiftly over it. Verily, upon Us is its collection and recital. So when We have recited it, follow this recital [of Ours]. Then upon Us is to explain it [wherever need be]. (75:16-19)

The scheme of God regarding the revelation and collection of the Qur’an mentioned in these verses can be stated as follows:

Firstly, the Prophet (sws) has been told that the way the Qur’an is being revealed piecemeal to him keeping in view the circumstances is the correct way of revelation; however, he should not worry about its protection and collection and arrangement. A new recital would ensue after this chronological one. At that time, if the Almighty intends to revoke something on the basis of His wisdom, He will do so and then have the Prophet (sws) read it in a manner that he will not forget any part of it and the Qur’an will be consigned to him in its very final form which will remain protected.

Thirdly, it was told that if any directive needed further explanation, it will be done so at this second recital, and in this manner this book will stand completed in every way after collection and arrangement and explanation by the Almighty Himself.

It is this second and final recital of the Qur’an which is also termed as ‘ardah akhirah (the final presentation). It is evident from various narratives that each year Gabriel would read out the Qur’an revealed in that year to the Prophet (sws) during the month of Ramadan. In the last year, in the ‘ardah akhirah, he read out the Qur’an to him twice.

Abu Hurayrah (rta) narrates:

كان يعرض على النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم كل سنة مرة فعرض عليه مرتين في العام الذي قبض فيه (بخاري رقم 4712)

Each year the Prophet Muammad (sws) would be read out the Qur’an once; however, the year he died it was read out to him twice.24

The Prophet (sws) used to read the Qur’an on this recital till he died. After him, the rightly guided caliphs, and all the Companions (rta) from among the muhajirun and the ansar would read the Qur’an on this recital. There was no difference in this regard between them. Later, it was this recital which was called the qira’at al-‘ammah. Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami reports:

كانت قراءة أبى بكر وَعمر و عثمان و زيد بن ثابت و المهاجرين وَالأنصار وَاحدة كانوا بقرءون القراءة العامة وَهى القراءة التى قرأها رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم على جبريل مرتين في العام الذى قبض فيه وكان زيد قد شهد العرْضَة الأخيرة وَكان يقرئ الناس بها حتى مات.

The reading of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and Zayd Ibn Thabit and that of all the muhajirun and the ansar was the same. They would read the Qur’an according to the qira’at al-‘ammah. This is the same reading which was read out twice by the Prophet (sws) to Gabriel in the year of his death Gabriel. Zayd Ibn Thabit was also present in this reading [called] the ‘ardah-i akhirah. It was this very reading that he taught the Qur’an to people till his death.25

Consequently, it is only this recital which possesses oral tawatur from the time of the Companions (rta) to date. Our scholars generally call it the qira’at of Hafs whereas it is actually qira’at al-‘ammah and classical scholars, as pointed out above, actually introduce it by this name. Ibn Sirn narrates:

القراءة التى عُرضت على النَّبىّ  صلى الله عليه وسلم فى العام الذي قُبِص فيه’ هى القراءة التي يقرؤُها النَّاس اليوم.

The reading on which the Qur’an was read out to the Prophet (sws) in the year of his death is the same according to which people are reading the Qur’an today.26

If the Qur’an is deliberated upon in the light of its coherence and arrangement, internal evidence from within the Qur’an also pronounces this very judgement. The work which has been done by the scholars of the Farahi school of thought on the Qur’an in current times speaks volumes that the text of the Qur’an does not accept the variant readings. A person can see examples of this at many instances in Islahi’s Tadabbur-i Qur’an. He writes:

Differences in variant readings have also been resolved in this commentary. The conventional and mutawatir reading is only the one on which the Qur’an has been written, which we have in our hands. In this reading, the interpretation of each and every word and verse of the Qur’an is done in such a manner in the light of classical Arabic literature, coherence and parallels of the Qur’an that no doubt remains. Consequently, I have interpreted each verse on the basis of this reading and can say with full confidence that if this interpretation is done on the basis of some other readings then it can only be done at the expense of sacrificing the eloquence, wisdom and meaningfulness of the Qur’an.27

Here, it is possible that the narrative on the Seven Ahruf might cause some confusion to some people in this regard. The narrative reads:

حدثني يحيى عن مالك عن بن شهاب عن عروة بن الزبير عن عبد الرحمن بن عبد القارىء أنه قال سمعت عمر بن الخطاب يقول   سمعت هشام بن حكيم بن حزام يقرأ سورة الفرقان على غير ما أقرؤها وكان رسول الله أقرأنيها فكدت أن أعجل عليه ثم أمهلته حتى انصرف ثم لببته بردائه فجئت به رسول الله e فقلت يا رسول الله إني سمعت هذا يقرأ سورة الفرقان على غير ما أقرأتنيها فقال رسول الله أرسله ثم قال اقرأ يا هشام فقرأ القراءة التي سمعته يقرأ فقال رسول الله e هكذا أنزلت ثم قال لي اقرأ فقرأتها فقال هكذا أنزلت إن هذا القرآن أنزل على سبعة أحرف فاقرؤوا ما تيسر منه

‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn ‘Abd al-Qari narrated: “ ‘Umar Ibn Khattab said before me: ‘I heard Hisham Ibn Hakim Ibn Hizam reading Surah Furqan in a different way from the one I used to read it, and the Prophet (sws) himself had read out this surah to me. Consequently, as soon as I heard him, I wanted to get hold of him. However, I gave him respite until he had finished the prayer. Then I got hold of his cloak and dragged him to the Prophet (sws). I said to him: “I have heard this person [Hisham Ibn Hakim Ibn Hizam] reading Surah Furqan in a different way from the one you had read it out to me.” The Prophet (sws) said: “Leave him alone [O ‘Umar].” Then he said to Hisham: “Read [it].” [‘Umar said:] “He read it out in the same way as he had done before me.” [At this,] the Prophet (sws) said: “It was revealed thus.” Then the Prophet (sws) asked me to read it out. So I read it out. [At this], he said: “It was revealed thus; this Qur’an has been revealed in Seven Ahruf. You can read it in any of them you find easy from among them.” ’ ”.28

If the following points about this narrative are kept in contemplation, it becomes evident that it is an absolutely meaningless narrative which should not be considered of any worth in this regard:

Firstly, even though this narrative has been recorded in the basic books of Hadith literature, no one in history has ever been able to offer a convincing explanation of it rendering it totally ambiguous. Suyuti29 has recorded about forty interpretations of this narrative, and then while acknowledging the weakness of each of these has confessed that this narrative should be regarded among the mutashabihat, whose meaning is only known to God.

وأرجحها عندي قول من قال : إن هذا من المتشابه الذي لايدري تأويله

And to me the best opinion in this regard is that of the people who say that this Hadith is from among matters of mutashabihat, the meaning of which cannot be understood.30

Secondly, the only plausible of interpretation of the word ahruf is that it connotes pronunciation of words31 the Arabs were used to. However, in this case, the text of the Hadith itself negates this meaning. It is known that both ‘Umar (rta) and Hisham (rta) belonged to the same tribe: the Quraysh. Obviously, people of the same tribe could not have had different pronunciations.

Thirdly, even if it is accepted that this difference was of pronunciation between various tribes and as a result they were allowed to read it variously, the verb unzila (was revealed) is very inappropriate. The Qur’an has specified that it was revealed in the language of the Prophet’s tribe: the Quraysh (See for example: 19:97, 44:58). After this, it can be accepted that the various tribes were allowed to read it according to their own accents, but how can this be accepted that the Almighty Himself revealed the various dialects and pronunciations.

Fourthly, it is known that Hisham had accepted Islam on the day Makkah was conquered. If this Hadith is accepted, it would mean that even after the conquest of Makkah senior Companions and even a close associate like ‘Umar (rta) was unaware of the fact that the Prophet (sws) secretly taught the Qur’an in some other form and reading from the one openly heard from the Prophet (sws) and preserved in writing and in memory. Every person can realize how grave this claim is and how far reaching are its effects.

Same is the case of the narratives which record the collection of the Qur’an in the time of the Caliphs Abu Bakr (rta) and ‘Uthman (rta). The Qur’an specifies that it was arranged and collected in the time of the Prophet (sws) under the direct guidance of the Almighty, as has been referred to earlier. On the other hand, these narratives present an entirely different picture which is not only against the Qur’an but also against common sense. In the six canonical books, these narratives are primarily recorded on the authority of Ibn Shihab Zuhri. Authorities of rijal regard him to be guilty of tadlis and idraj. Besides these, if some other facets of his personality as referred to by Imam Layth Ibn Sa‘d in his letter to Imam Malik are kept in consideration, none of the narratives reported by him especially the ones regarding such an important matter as this is acceptable. He writes:

وكان يكون من ابن شهاب اختلاف كثير إذا لقيناه ، و إذا كاتبه بعضنا فربما كتب إليه فى الشئ الواحد على فضل رأيه وعلمه بثلاثة إنواع ينقض بعضها بعضا، ولا يشعر بالذى مضى من رأيه فى ذلك، فهذا الذى يدعونى إلى ترك ما أنكرت تركى إياه.

And when we would meet Ibn Shihab, there would arise a difference of opinion in many issues. When any one of us would ask him in writing about some issue, he, in spite of being so learned, would give three very different answers, and he would not even be aware of what he had already said. It is because of this that I have left him – something which you did not like.32

This is the reality behind these narratives. Consequently, this is an absolute truth that the Qur’an has one reading only which is found in our codices. Besides this, the readings which are found in commentaries on the Qur’an or are read and taught in our schools of religious instruction or are even in currency in certain areas are the remnants of the malignant campaigns that originated from Persia once it was conquered by the Muslims – campaigns from which no discipline of our knowledge has unfortunately remained protected from.

They might have arisen from the insistence of some on the reading on which the Qur’an was revealed before the arda-i akhirah and from the forgetfulness of the narrators but later owing to the same motives which led to the fabrication of Hadith, they became so rampant that at the end of the Umayyid dynasty that several of them had come to prominence. It is said that Abu ‘Ubayd Qasim Ibn Sallam (d. 224 AH) selected twenty five of them in his book. The seven readings which are famous in current times were selected by Abu Bakr Ibn Mujahid (d. 324 AH) at the end of the third century hijrah. Thus it is generally accepted that their number cannot be ascertained but every reading is Qur’an which has been reported through a correct chain of narration, are found in any way in the masahif prepared by ‘Uthman (rta) and are correct from any aspect as far as the Arabic language is concerned. Some of these readings are regarded as mutawatir; however, a look at their chains of narration which are found in books leaves no doubt that they are ahad (isolate), most narrators of which are suspect in the eyes of the rijal authorities. Consequently, no scholar can even accept them as Hadith, what to speak of the Qur’an.

Intentionality of the Text

The answer to the second question is that whole argument on the intentionality of the text is dubious. In all living languages, the meanings denoted by words and expressions are all based on perpetuation (mutawatirat), and are certain in all respects. Morphology and linguistics and other similar disciplines speak of this tawatur. The genuineness of the narrators and their number has no significance. Words and expressions which are called gharib and shaz (little known) are called so not because their meaning is little known but because they are used sparingly and because those they are little known to those who hear or write them. A word is never isolated from its meaning. As long as a word remains in usage it does so with its meaning. We can be unaware of the meaning of a word and also err in ascertaining it but this cannot be imagined that it is used without being absolutely certain of the meaning it conveys in all or some periods of time. The understanding when a word is used metaphorically and figuratively or when the same word stands for two different entities or when it is used as veiled reference or when there exists a general connotation and when a specific one – all are mutawatir. This is a common heritage of man in every language of the world. A person may falter in determining whether the word lion has been used literally or figuratively in the sentences “Lion is the king of the forest” and “He is a lion” however, the collective comprehension of mankind can never err in this regard and in the light of its understanding we can correct a person who makes a mistake in this regard. It is because of this reality of a language that whatever we read and write, we do so with the confidence that people will understand the very thing that we wanted to intended to convey. If for a single instant one comes to know that in documents which are written every day, judgements which are pronounced, rulings that are enacted, announcements and notices delivered and knowledge and disciplines which are communicated, the meanings conveyed by a word are uncertain then everything will become meaningless. Thus this view is nothing less than skepticism which has no place in the world of knowledge. Shah Isma‘il Shahid while commenting upon it in his ‘Abaqat writes:

A person who has even the slightest skill of appreciating language style blatantly knows that this view point is based on gross and multiple ignorance because the meaning for which a word stands for is based on perpetuation. Thus the question does not even arise for any discussion on the issue of the authenticity of the narratots.33

Muhkam and Mutashabih

The answer to the third question is that it is not correct that we cannot with certainly distinguish the muhkam verses of the Qur’an from the mutashabih or that we are unable to determine the meaning of the mutashabihat. All verses of the Qur’an on which the guidance it delivers is based are muhkam and mutashabih are only those verses which mention certain blessings and torments a person may encounter in the Hereafter, and these are stated through parables or similes. Similarly, such verses state the attributes and actions of God or mention something which is beyond the grasp of our knowledge and observation like God blowing His spirit into Adam, birth of Jesus (sws) without a father or the various places and circumstances one may encounter of Paradise and Hell. All things for which words have not yet been invented can only be stated through parables and similes. The facts of an unknown world are stated through these very means in the literature of all languages of the world. For example, two hundred years ago, if a person had foreknowledge of electricity bulbs but at that time they had not been invented, he would perhaps have said: Lanterns which would neither require oil nor fire will one day light up the world. The nature of mutashabih verses is no different. Neither are they unascertainable nor is there any ambiguity in their meaning. They are set in eloquent Arabic, and we are able to understand their meaning without any difficulty. The only thing is that we are not able to understand what they imply in reality. However, since this lack of understanding has nothing to do with understanding the Qur’an, a believer should not get after determining what they imply. While explaining this, Imam Amin Ahsan Islahi writes:

The reality to which these [mutashbihat point] is itself very clear and obvious. Human intellect can understand that part of it which is essential for it to understand. However, since it belongs to an unseen world, the Qur’an mentions it through parables and similes so that students of the Qur’an can understand it as per their capabilities and consider that only God knows what their real form and shape is. These [mutashbihat] relate to attributes and works of God or to the reward and punishment of the Hereafter. We are able to understand them to the extent we need to understand them, and this increases our knowledge and faith but if we go beyond this and start to seek what is their real form and shape, then this will only lead us astray. The result of this is that while wanting to clear one doubt from the mind, a person ends up gathering many more; so much so, in this quest to know more he loses what he had gained and refutes very clear facts just because he is not able to ascertain their form and shape.34

In the verse of the Qur’an from which people have deduced the fact that no one can understand the meaning of the mutashabihat verses, the Almighty does not say that no one except Him knows the meaning of the mutashabihat verses; on the contrary, He says that no one knows the form and manifestation of what is conveyed in these verses. The Qur’anic word used in ta’wil and it is used in the same meaning here as it is the following verses: وَقَالَ يَا أَبَتِ هَـذَا تَأْوِيلُ رُؤْيَايَ مِن قَبْلُ قَدْ جَعَلَهَا رَبِّي حَقًّا (100:12)  (And Joseph said: “Father, this is the meaning of my dream I saw earlier; my Lord has made a reality.” (12:100))

Everyone knows the meanings in which this dream is stated in the Qur’an. Even an ordinary student of this Book understands without any difficulty the meaning of the verse (12:4) in which this dream is mentioned. However the true manifestation of the sun, the moon and the eleven stars bowing before Joseph (sws) could only have been ascertained by a person once these words manifested themselves in reality. These are the things which the Qur’an calls mutashabih, and as people contend, they do not mean something which is ambiguous and vague. Thus the mutashabihat in no way undermine the status of the Qur’an as the Furqan and the Mizan.

The verse under discussion is:

هُوَ الَّذِيَ أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُّحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ في قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاء الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاء تَأْوِيلِهِ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلاَّ اللّهُ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلاَّ أُوْلُواْ الألْبَابِ (7:3)

It is He who has revealed to you the Book. Some of its verses are muhkam – they are the foundation of the Book – and others mutashabih.35 Then those in whose hearts is a twist go after the mutashabih among them in order to create dissension and in order to know their reality even though no one except God knows their reality. And those who are well-grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in them: all this has come from our Lord.” And only men of understanding take heed from them. (3:7)

Hadith and the Qur’an

The answer to the fourth question is that the issue of abrogation or limiting of the Qur’an by the Hadith has arisen out of a lack of proper understanding and deliberation. In reality, no Hadith has abrogated a Qur’anic verse or limited its scope of application and thus there arises no doubt from this angle on the status of the Qur’an as the Furqan and the Mizan. When people were not able to understand certain stylistic features of the Qur’an and the background and perspective of certain verses, they were also not able to understand the words of the Prophet (sws) regarding these areas. All examples which are presented in this regard are of this type. In the following pages, we shall take up each of these examples and present our view on them.

1. Of the animals which God has created on this earth some are meant to be eaten and others are not. Since these latter type of animals if eaten effect the tazkiyah (purification) of a person, an aversion to them is found in his nature. Generally, human nature provides a person with ample guidance in this matter and, without any hesitation, he is able to decide the right course. He very well knows that lions, tigers, elephants, eagles, crows, vultures, kites, scorpions and human flesh itself are not meant to be eaten. He is also well aware of the fact that horses and mules are a means of transportation and have no role in satisfying one’s hunger. That faeces and urine of animals are impure things are known to him very well also. No doubt, at times, human nature becomes perverted but a study of human behavior shows that a great majority of people does not generally falter in this matter. It is for this reason that the shari‘ah has not given any original guidance on this matter. In this regard, the shari‘ah has provided guidance on animals and on things related to these animals where human beings were liable to falter. The pig is a quadruped beast of the same genre as the goat, sheep, cow and cattle; however, it consumes meat like other carnivores. Should it then be considered forbidden or not? Should animals which are slaughtered in a way that all their blood is not drained out be eaten or not? Is the blood of animals impure as indeed are their faeces and urine? If animals are slaughtered by taking the name of someone other than the Almighty, can they still be eaten? Since man is unable to come up with a decisive answer in these issues, therefore the Almighty guided mankind in this affair through His prophets and informed them that the flesh of the pig, blood, the dead and animals which are slaughtered in the name of someone other than Allah36 are also impure and unclean and therefore people should abstain from them. In this regard, these aforementioned four things have been primarily discussed by the shari‘ah. The Qur’an at some places by using the linguistic expressions قُلْ لَا أَجِدُ فِي مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيَّ  (say: I do not find anything [forbidden] in what [God] has revealed to me), and at some places the word اِنَّمَا (only and only), has unequivocally stated that only and only these four things are prohibited by the Almighty