42. On Second Thought (1)

The material in this blog is now available at amazon.com under the title: Ideas Inspired by the Qur’an.

Previous page

The eight verses that introduce us to Adam (peace be upon him), the angels, and Iblis (Q2:30-37) constitute the narrative core of Qur’anic reality. Despite its importance, however, this highly symbolic core is preceded by the first Surah, ‘The Opening’, with its seven oft-repeated verses (as they are referred to in Q15:87), and the initial 29 verses of the second Surah. The reader needs this basic preliminary material to prepare him for the ‘alternate reality’ embedded in those crucial eight verses that begin with And [consider] when your Lord addressed the angels . . .

It is as if GOD is telling us, ‘You want to understand the origin, constitution, and purpose of this world, to see behind the curtain and discover My Grand Plan for humanity. That’s fine, and I will tell you. But what I have to tell you before that is more immediate and important. This Book is for the enlightened few – That is the Book in which there is no doubt, a guide for those who are aware (Q2:2) – and its verses are of no use to the denier (Q2:7), the hypocrite (Q2:10, 15-16), the inveterate doubtful (Q2:24), and the wicked (Q2:26-27). The knowledge I provide does not work automatically. You need faith, discipline, and self-sacrifice (Q2:3), plus devotion (Q2:21) and constant practice (Q2:25) – all of which are rewarded over time (i.e., the flowing streams) (Q2:25) – for these secrets to have their desired effect. Better not to know them than to be informed and then reject them (Q2:39). So reader beware!’

Just before launching into the main narrative, AL-LAH has a vital point to make about symbolism in the Qur’an:

He says that He is not ashamed because, according to Ibni Kathir, the unbelievers who had heard verses referring to the analogy of one who lights a fire (Q2:17), or the fly (Q22:73), or the spider (Q29:41) found it ridiculous that AL-LAH would stoop to such low verbal devices to make a point. GOD’s reply, also in (Q2:26), is that believers know these analogies to be true, i.e., they convey real meaning, whereas the unbelievers are stuck at questioning the motive behind them.

But how does an analogy work? What makes a symbol true? Such metaphorical language can only acquire its right (haqq) and be true (also haqq) if it goes beyond itself, transferring information or meaning from a particular subject (the analog, or source) to another (the target).¹ So when the Qur’an refers to itself as a clear light (Q4:174), we know very well that we cannot consider the Qur’an to be a light in a strictly physical sense; we give the expression its due by extrapolating from it a figurative meaning, attributing to the written or spoken contents of scripture some of the qualities that we associate with ordinary visible light. The Qur’an is full of such targeted transfers of meaning, which are validated here in these opening verses of the second Surah, even more explicitly as metaphors throughout His Book, and by the kind of poetic, allusive language that GOD favours in certain contexts (not all). The proper task of the exegete is to identify these contexts and suggest, based on common sense and knowledge of the Arabic language, which targeted meanings are appropriate and which are not. But to deny this transformative power in His language is an offence to both ‘aql (reason) and naql (revelation).

The language of the Qur’an is more or less symbolic depending on the subject matter. Just as the carefulness of phrasing we find in legal documents is not appropriate for the highly connotative realms of poetry and mysticism, and vice versa, so also in the Qur’an we find a semantic range from explicit discussions of inheritance and penalties for slander to allusive topics that tickle the farthest limits of human understanding. The former type is mentioned in Q3:7 as the muhkamat, the verses of clear and established meaning, while the latter type, the mutashabihat, include whatever is indefinite, but nonetheless resembles things with which we are familiar.* The meaning of symbolic passages should not contradict the established verses, but can help to elaborate on and deepen their import.

* How can the Qur’an be a clear light (Q4:174) and plain Arabic (Q16:103) on the one hand, and yet ambiguous (mutashabih) (Q39:23) on the other?

Qur’anic clarity is of two kinds. One is stylistic and syntactic, and there is nothing else in Arabic that comes close to the crystalline lucidity of the Qur’an. The other is semantic, by which a wide range of meaning is achieved succinctly. And this is where symbolism and analogy are truly at home.

Rather than provide an elaborate disquisition on the multiplicity of divine attributes, for example, AL-LAH prefers to use concrete imagery that is clear to the average reader yet also allusively powerful enough to convey a bounteous treasury of connotations that can vary in depth and width from one context to the next.

The ‘Hand of GOD’, for example, is clear in the sense of being readily imagined, and yet is redolent with the many possible meanings that ‘hand’ conveys – power, care, creativity, generosity, etcetera.

Many scholars have misunderstood clarity to act like a simple equation of one word = one meaning. In the case of the ‘Hand of GOD’, for example, the so-called salafi commentators know that ‘hand’ cannot be a physical hand; GOD does not have a physical body. On the other hand (pun intended), they gag at the thought that ‘hand’ can have more than one meaning at the same time. (Words having multiple meanings and various depths is something that poets know instinctively; for most engineers, however, this simply does not compute.) They fear that if we allow a symbolic meaning for ‘hand’, such as ‘power’, we are automatically denying what they consider to be its only meaning, and hence are denying the truth of GOD’s Word (and so become kafir). It is this kind of fear that has crippled Muslim intellectual advancement in recent years. Underlying this outlook, I believe, is a kind of subtle materialism, which cannot accept that a spiritual entity, such as a meaning or a value (let alone GOD, Who is even more abstract), can be as real as a solid thing, such as a physical hand. Counterintuitively, and without fear of anyone but GOD Himself, I affirm the opposite – GOD’s Hand of Generosity, Power, Sanctity, Presence, etcetera is the original hand, of which our hands of flesh are faint, inaccurate copies.

The truth of the matter is that the ‘Hand of GOD’ is used precisely because it conveys both a primary image – one form of meaning – and extended connotations that enrich the depth and breadth of reference. Those who insist that the ‘Hand of GOD’ is a real hand, in a way that in unknown to us other than to say that it is befitting for Him, and those who say that His Hand signifies a more abstract meaning appropriate to the context are both correct.

Here are some examples. Reputable mufassirun such as Ibni Kathir have supplied various comments from the salaf to amplify the meanings that suit the verse in question.

(Q5:64) Rather His two Hands are openly extended; He spends whatever way He wills. Hands here suggests the act of giving, the generous intent, and unlimited capacity (like the multiple meanings He intends, open for all to find in His Bounty what means the most to them).

(Q48:10) The Hand of GOD is over their hands. Hand here connotes the Sanctity reinforcing the pledge made with human hands, the Judgement that will enforce it lest it be broken, and the Divine Presence Seeing and Hearing at that event.

(Q39:67) . . . and the heavens will be rolled up into His Right Hand. His Right Hand here connotes irresistible Force, total Control, and rightful Authority.

(Q36:71) Do they not see what We created for them out of what Our Hands have made . . . Hands here refers not only to the Power of creation but also the Creativity and Care informing that Power. We are asked to look not only at the animals themselves but also at the Love and Wisdom that produced them, so that we might find their real meaning with AL-LAH.

¹ From the entry in Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy

Next page