By
Sultan Shahin, Founding Editor, New Age Islam
26
April 2019
Dear
Ghulam Mohiyuddin Saheb,
A
rather acrimonious debate has been going on for some time between you and
Naseer Ahmad Saheb on your expression of a feeling that some verses,
inconvenient to a modern rational mind, have probably been added in Quran and
Muslims should disregard them. Naseer Saheb probably wants you to accept that this
makes you an apostate. However, if apostasy were to be bestowed so liberally
hardly any thinking Muslim would remain a Muslim.
This debate on distortions in Quran is not
new. The controversy over tahreeff il Quran, deletions, additions, a
variety of changes in the wordings or vowels of words used in of Quran, etc has
raged in the past 1400 years of Islam. Even a brief glance at Allama Jalaluddin
Suyuti’s authoritative book on the subject al-Itqan fi Uloom al-Quran, now
easily available on the internet, will reveal that there is no distortion
that has not been claimed, suggested and believed in by Muslims through the
ages, beginning with the companions of the Prophet who had heard Quran from the
Prophet himself and recorded its verses in their memory as well in writing then
and there.
However,
it is also necessary to underline that by and large there is not much of a
controversy among Muslims about verses having been planted in the Holy Quran by
later Muslims to serve their own ends. In general, all Muslims believe in all
of Quran being the word of God as revealed through Prophet Mohammad (saw). If
there is a controversy it is generated by some Hadith narrations that some
verses have been left out or forgotten or caused by God to be forgotten. Surah Ahzab, for instance, is
reported to have been originally double or triple its present size of 73
verses. Some Sahaba (companions of the Prophet) remember it as being almost the
same size as Surah Baqra (286 verses).There is also a report of a whole Surah, as long
and as severe as Surah Bara’at (better known as Surah Taubah) which has 129
verses having disappeared. One report claims that an object on which a Quranic
verse about rajm(stoning to death) of adulterers was written was eaten
up by a goat.
Throughout
the ages some Muslims have found themselves at a loss to explain the presence
of some verses as exhortations from God. As for war verses, not all of them are
problematic. At one-point Muslims were allowed to defend themselves as they
should have been. Even today defence is allowed, not only to established
governments but even to individuals and families in certain situations. However, some verses do pose questions for
Muslims living in the 21st century. For instance, verse 2-193 says:
“Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is
for Allah. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except
against the oppressors.”
Here there can be no objection to the portion: “But if they cease,
then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors,” as it is clear that
it is in the context of aggression and oppression which one has to fight in any
age.However, the first portion is: “Fight them
until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is for Allah.” This becomes problematic, particularly as fitnah is translated
by most acknowledged translators as “shirk” (polytheism, but in Prophet’s Mecca
basically meant idol worship). Then “and
[until] worship is for Allah,” seems to justify the translation of fitnah
as shirk, and thus goes against a moderate Muslim’s mainstay “la ikraha fid Deen
(Let there be on compulsion in religion, لاَ إِكْرَاهَ فِى الدِّينِ. 2-256)” and
verse 18:29 wa man shaa’afalyomin, wamansha’afalyakfur. فَمَنۡ
شَآءَ فَلۡيُؤۡمِنۡ وَّمَنۡ شَآءَ فَلۡيَكۡفُرۡ (“let him who please believe and let him
who please disbelieve.”)
Then, of course,
there are verses from Surah Tauba (9:5, 9:29, etc) that cause disquiet in the
moderate Muslim mind. This sense of foreboding is particularly enhanced by a
strong and repeatedly expressed opinion by classical Islamic theologians,
followed generally by ulema of all sects, that peaceful and pluralistic verses
from early Meccan Islam have all been abrogated by the so-called sword verse
(9:5) alone.
But
none of this has led to a discrediting of these verses as word of God. No one
has said that these verses have been planted in Quran. Indeed, Hadith was created as a parallel
scripture, and given in practice even greater importance than Quran in decades
when virtual enemies of Islam were ruling the land of Islam in the name of
Islam, mainly because it was not possible to plant things in Quran. So those
who had subverted the Islamic democratic system and established monarchy used
hadith narrations to plant new ideas. Muslims had written Quran down and also
memorised it almost as soon as verses were revealed. Hadith started growing in
a natural manner, as people recalled what the Prophet had told them all these
years, but this was also used by the dictatorial kings to plant new ideas more
suitable to their politics.
Different
Muslims, uncomfortable with these violent verses in Quran have tried different
ways of dealing with them. Some have rejected Islam as a divine religion and
become and are now becoming in larger numbers ex-Muslims. Some have taken the
instructions to heart and adopted radical extremism and terrorism, as a way of
quick transition to Heaven through martyrdom. Others engage in what is called taaweelat
or allegorical interpretations. Some Muslims try to change the very meaning
of Arabic words used in these verses and say that Arabs have not understood
Arabic of the Quran in all these centuries. The consensus theology is that it
is every Muslim’s religious duty to help Islam conquer the world and extirpate
all other religions, including those that were brought by previous prophets in
whom all Muslims must believe to be a Muslim. Most mainstream Muslims accept
the consensus theology but do nothing about achieving this religious goal.
However, they do applaud, if not openly, at last in their hearts, when someone
appears to be doing something about it.
You
are alone Ghulam Mohiyuddin Saheb in feeling that these verses have been probably
planted in Quran at some point. You use the expression “overinclusion while
compiling.” The problem is GM Saheb, that Quran was revealed in the glare of
history. Verses used to be revealed in the presence of katibs, usually several,
and other sahaba (companions) of the prophet. They were almost
immediately written down and memorised. Also, the verses in question are in the
distinctive style of the Quran. However, you are not alone in feeling a disquiet
about these and some other verses. There are many other Muslims who do not want
to conquer the world and remove all other religions. Moreover, you are not
alone in not being satisfied with all the taawilat and interpretations
and discovery of new meanings of Arabic words by non-Arabs over 1400 years
after they were revealed. Those who say no one has understood the meaning of
Quran also claim to believe in Quran’s claim of it being The Clear Book (al-Kitab al-Mubeen).
My
own understanding is that we cannot fully comprehend the circumstances in which
it had become necessary for God to give these instructions, if we do not fully
understand the events happening around us today in this age of communication.
Probably half of America still believes that Saddam Hussain possessed weapons
of mass destruction and was hands in gloves with Osama bin Laden. So, any claim
to understand the circumstances that led to these Quranic revelations one and a
half millennia ago will be presumptuous in the extreme. However, as that
context is no longer present today and cannot be repeated in future too, so
these instructions can no longer apply to us. Let us stop giving a variety of taawilaat
and even seeking to understand their purpose. This only leads to further
disquiet and newer taawilaat that have no meaning. In fact, there is no
particular need for us either to try to fully understand things that happened
in the hoary past.
We
should focus on the core message of the Quran which is that all religions have
been sent by God through a long series of messengers who brought essentially
the same message, asking us to remember Him always in gratitude, do good deeds
and live in harmony with other creations of God. Hoqooqullah and Hoqoqul-ibad.
Let us just stick to that.
If illiterate and even ignorant Arab Bedouins,
living in desert villages 1400 years ago, could understand Quran, we too should
be able to understand it. Also, any eternal message is of necessity understood
by different people of different intellectual levels and different eras
differently. No one should be branded an apostate for doing that until he or
she himself or herself declares that he has left Islam. We belong to a
civilisation which did not brand apostate even someone who said:
'Mīr'
Ke dīn-O-Mazhab ko Ab Pūchhte kyā Ho Un
Ne To
Qashqa
Khīñchā Dair Meñ Baithā Kab Kā Tark Islām Kiyā
(What
can I tell you about Mir’s faith or belief? A tilak on his forehead in a temple
he resides, having abandoned Islam long ago).
No comments:
Post a Comment