Ketemu pakai google..
Saya fwd buat yang mau mikir...
----------
Reconstruction of Surah 96 (suratu l-`alaq)
-- according to Günter Lüling, Erlangen --
Surah 96 falling into three pieces?
According to the traditional Islamic interpretation Surah 96 falls
into three pieces: three thematic parts totally independent of each
other. This odd peculiarity was effected by two traditional and well
known frame narratives giving the alleged "circumstances of the
revelation" (asbaabu l-nuzool) for the first section as well as for a
third section respectively. These frame narratives have no basis
within the wording of the text of these sections themselves.
Nevertheless, in Islamic tradition both frame narratives have become
the alleged historical background of their corresponding sections.
In the first case the non-Qur'anic frame, from which the traditional
Islamic interpretation gets its pivotal idea consists in the pseudo-
historical narrative that on the occasion of the initial heavenly
appointment of Muhammad as prophet the archangel Gabriel appeared to
him presenting him a script and urging him to read. From this
narrative the interpretation of the introductory two imperatives
"iqra´", understood as "read!", in 96:1-5 is pinned down. The text
immediately following after these two imperatives is then taken for
the text which the archangel Gabriel allegedly presented to the eyes
of the prophet-to-be to recite.
But this orthodox Islamic division of Surah 96:1-5 in such a way as to
give us only these two imperatives "read!" as having been spoken by
the archangel Gabriel while all the rest is the script exposed by the
archangel to be read by the prophet-to-be, is a crude assertion. If
this were actually the case why then is there no indication for this
division of the text at all, for instance that the first imperative
might at least have been introduced by some words like "The archangel
Gabriel said to Muhammad: Recite these words here exposed to your
eyes..." Since such introductory words are missing from the text and
since the frame-narrative, - taken or even invented from beyond the
Qur'an to form the core of this text 96:1-5 -, is the only
compensation for this missing introduction to the two imperatives, we
can imagine by what a weak thread the frame-narrative of the Islamic
tradition is connected with the Qur'anic text (1).
The other frame-narrative of Surah 96 imputed by Muslim Qur'an
scholarship to its third section, verses 9-19, to procure also for
this text section a core by which to interpret it, is the following: A
member of the developing Meccan Muslim community, a nameless slave
(`abd) or else even Muhammad himself is supposed to have tried to
perform the ritual prayer, but is said to have been hindered from
doing so (2). The section, - grammatically and lexicographically
problematic to the highest degree -, closes with the announcement of
God's punishment for the alleged sacrilege of hindering a believer
from performing his ritual prayer.
Because there is no specific tradition about such an incident, this
frame-narrative must be supposed to be a fictitious tradition
elaborated to give this section a new meaning deviating from the
originally intended reading of its rasm-text (i.e. nearly the
consonantal text, but with greater ambiguity due to the fact that some
consonants look the same apart from diacritical points which were
added much later).
Between these two larger sections 96:1-5 and 96:9-19 with their
respective curious frame-narratives there is finally the short
passage 96:6-8. It is, with regard to its content, of such broad
significance, that it can be set in relation not only to its preceding
and following text sections, but to every religious idea in general.
Because then no connection at all can be noted between the "scene of
appointment to the prophet" (96:1-5) and the incident of the hindrance
of a nameless Muslim believer or of Muhammad himself from his ritual
prayer, the content of this middle section 96:6-8 could be brought
into relation with the content of either the preceding or the
following section, or this middle section could be considered as
independent of both.
The curiosity is that although this middle section can, because of its
only general relevance, easily be understood as a proem to the third
section, it is instead joined by Muslim tradition to the preceding
section, the "scene of initial appointment", to which it is much less
fitting, the more so because of then being placed in a postponed
position. Furthermore, it is a strange rule of the Arabian grammarians
(in fact deduced from this crude Qur'anic interpretation itself) that
the Arabic expression "kallaa", "not at all", which introduces this
middle section, is only ever used as a negation of a preceding
sentence. This merely compounds the hardly understandable connection
between the middle and the preceding first section of Surah 96.
In view of these textual and compositional problems of Surah 96 and
the embarrassment of the Muslim Qur'an commentators to dissolve them
it is advisable resolutely to leave aside these two frame-narratives
only added from outside the Qur'an by Muslim tradition to make their
re-interpretation possible and to tie it to the rasm-text of the
Surah.
96:1-5: Starting with Abu `Ubaidah
To understand surah 96:1-5 let's take as a starting point a remark of
the eminent Muslim scholar Abu `Ubaida (died in 818 AD). According to
a citation of his work "Majaz al Qur'an" by Koran commentator Fakhr
ad-Dîn ar-Râzî (* 543 AH/ 1149 AD, + 606 AH/ 1209 AD; see Noeldeke,
Geschichte des Qorans, I, 81) in his "at-tafsîr al-kabîr" Abu `Ubaida
held that the verb "qara'a" in surah 96:1 (which is traditionally
interpreted as "read" "recite") has the same meaning as the verb
"dhakara", namely "invoke", "laud", "praise".
The text as handed down to posterity goes as:
(1) iqra' bi-smi rabbika lladhee khalaqa (2) khalaqa l-insaana min
`alaqin (3) iqra' wa rabbuka l-akramu (4)lladhee `allama bi l-qalami
(5) `allama l-insaana maa lam ya`lam And according to the traditional
understanding one has to translate like: (1) Read in the name of your
Lord who created (2) created man out of a clot [understood as an
embryo] (3) Read! For your Lord is most noble-minded, (4) who taught
by the writing cane (5) taught man what he didn't know. It really is
odd that a book should appeal to the reader to read when he already is
reading it -- and that even twice! Therefore Abu `Ubaida's instruction
seems rather sound. Additionally, already Gustav Weil (1808-1889) and
Hartwig Hirschfeld, a contemporary of Weil, have stressed the point
that the Hebrew expression "qaara' be- shem Yahwe" ("to invoke the
name of Yahwe") is widespread in Old Testament scriptures as a formula
for kind of ceremonial worship and must be taken into account for the
interpretation of surah 96:1.
Then we have to understand/translate:
(1) Invoke the name of your Lord who created (2) created man out of a
clot [understood as an embryo] (3) Invoke! For your Lord is most
noble-minded, (4) who taught by the writing cane (5) taught man what
he didn't know. This understanding of "iqra' bi-smi rabbika" in the
sense of a ceremonial, cultic "invoke the name of your Lord" is
corroborated further by the following consideration: "'alladhee" is by
no means always simply tantamount to a mere "the one who" (or "that
which"), but in many circumstances has causal connotations. For
instance till today the khutba (Friday prayer/speech) begins with the
formula "Al- Hamdulillah alladhee..."; instead of simply translating
"Praise to God who [did so and so]" it would be better to understand
"Praise to God for that [He did so and so]". Similarly we better would
translate: (1) Invoke the name of your Lord for that He created [or
perhaps in better English: for having created] (2) created man out of
a clot [understood as an embryo] (3) Invoke! For your Lord is most
noble- minded, (4) for that He taught [or: for having taught] by the
writing cane (5) taught man what he didn't know. It was (and is) a
very common pattern of traditional (Christian) prayer that the one who
prays thanks God first for His creation and then for His revelation.
This line of thought, of course, would be impossible with "iqra'"
understood as "read!".
Now the repetition of "Invoke!" is seen to be a deliberately used
means of structuring the text into two sequences of three parts - the
first sequence thanking for the creation, the second one for the
revelation. To diplay this structure we may write: Invoke the name of
your Lord for that He created [= for having created] created man out
of a clot [understood as an embryo]
Invoke! For your Lord is most noble-minded
for that He taught [= for having taught] by the writing cane
taught man what he didn't know.
Or in Arabic:
iqra' bi-smi rabbika
lladhee khalaqa
khalaqa l-insaana min `alaqin
iqra' wa rabbuka l-akramu
lladhee `allama bi l-qalami
`allama l-insaana maa lam ya`lam
That we are on the right path immediately becomes clear if we omit
case endings (in the pausa position) etc., as it is and always was
usual in vernacular Arabic, popular poetry etc.: iqra' bi-smi rabbak
alladhee khalaq khalaqa l-insaana min `alaq
iqra' wa rabbuka l-akram
alladhee `allama bi l-qalam
`allama l-insaana maa lam ya`lam
Obviously a clear rhyme scheme with two strophes! One has to be
curious whether one may retrieve the same rhyme scheme in the other
parts of surah 96.
If this idea should prove successful - and it will prove successful -
our above guess would be confirmed: Forget the familiar story, used as
a frame narrative for surah 96:1-5, about angel Gabriel pressing
Muhammad in the cave of the mountain Hira to "read" the Qur'an, namely
surah 96:1-5!
Eventually, we should add another point: Contrary to the noun
`alaqah, which is a nomen unitatis (ism al-waHdah, noun for a
singular unit) and normally used in the Qur'an, the noun `alaq is a
noun with collective sense (nomen collectivum) and cannot be
understood as (a single) clot [interpreted as an embryo]. The correct
understanding of `alaq is simply "something sticking together". So it
is no remote idea that `alaq in the third line of the first strophe is
used instead of the usual Arabic word Teen for "clay", "loam", namely
for the sake of rhyme, thus reflecting the old idea that man was
created from clay -- an idea which is not confined to the Bible.
So we eventually may understand/translate surah 96:1-5 as follows:
Invoke the name of your Lord for having created created man from clay.
Invoke! For your Lord is most noble-minded
for having taught by the writing cane
taught man what he didn't know.
96:6-8: Correcting Gross Grammatical Errors
One has to be curious whether one can retrieve the same rhyme scheme
in the other parts of surah 96.
At first glance it appears simple to answer this question in the
affirmative. Look at surah 96:6-8! The nowadays Arabic text in kind of
English transcription goes as: (6) Kallaa 'inna-l-'insaana la-yaTghaa
(7) 'an ra'aahu-staghnaa (8) inna ilaa rabbika r-rug'aa The rhyme
scheme, indeed, is continued. But what about the train of thought?
All English (or German) translations we know - whether of muslim or
non-muslim scholars - follow traditional Muslim commentaries and
translate 96, 6.7 as "Day, but man doth transgress all bounds in that
he looketh upon himself as self-sufficient" (Yusuf Ali), "Nay, but
verily man acts presumptuously because he thinks himself independent"
(Richard Bell) or alike.
96:8 is translated as
"Behold, to God is the return".
So, the train of thought seems not to be continued in vv. 6-8.
(Actually, it would appear even more leaping when we had retained the
traditional understanding of vv. 1-5 with "read!" for iqraa.) But
let's look into the details!
This understanding/these translations interpret the individual words
as follows:
Kallaa "No" - or when used for an oath -->"Indeed", "nay" or alike
'inna "look", like "voila" in French - used for "is" with emphasis
al-'insaana "the man", "the human" la-yaTghaa "he (really)
transgresses" 'an "that", "in that" ra'aahu "he saw himself" instead
of correctly: "he saw him" (i)staghnaa "he/she/it considered
him/her/itself as rich [therefore: independent, souvereign]"
Though the understanding of verses 6 and 8, too, may be questionable,
I restrict myself to a discussion verse 7. As you may realize, the
above understanding of verse 7 depends on four grammatical mistakes:
1. To render the consecutive conjunction "'an" with "because" is not
quite correct. In correct Arabic "because" would have been expressed
in another way.
2. "ra'aahu" is perfect tense, not imperfect tense (or in European
grammatical terminology: present tense) meaning.
3. "ra'aahu" has no reflexive meaning. It cannot be translated by "he
looked upon himself" or "he thought of himself", but only by "he
looked upon him" or "he thought of him".
4. "(i)staghnaa" is perfect tense, not imperfect tense (or in
European grammatical terminology: present tense) meaning.
It is, however, possible to get rid of these problems by taking care
of the Arabic grammar and by realizing a peculiarity of the Arabic
script, namely that we only can more or less trust the rasm
(approximately: consonantal script). The old Qur'an mss. are without
vowelling and diacritical marks. Vowelling signs and diacritical marks
are later comment. So we are absolutely entitled to read the Arabic
text as follows: (6) Kallaa 'anna-l-'insaana la-yaTghaa (7) 'in
ra'aahu-staghnaa (8) inna ilaa rabbika r-rug'aa with:
'anna "that" (if a noun follows)
'in "when", "whenever"
Now the verses are in perfect accordance with the Arabic grammar and
to be translated as: (6) No, that man shall be presumptuous, (7)
whenever he [man] sees Him [God] as souvereign. (8) Behold, to God is
the return. The above grammatical mistakes now are corrected:
1. The consecutive conjunction "'an" has been replaced by the
conditional conjunction "'in", which poses no problem.
2. The perfect tense in "ra'aahu" is absolutely correct, because
according to the rules of Arabic in a conditional sentence the perfect
tense has a timeless (and in this case imperfect or present- times)
meaning.
3. "ra'aahu" no more is erroneously translated as rendering a
reflexive sense.
4. The perfect tense in "(i)staghnaa" is correct as the so
called "prophetic perfect" in (timeless) assertions about God.
Putting together what we have achieved so far we arrive at this
rather familiar scheme of popular Arabic poetry:
iqra' bi-smi rabbak
alladhee khalaq
khalaqa l-insaana min `alaq
iqra' wa rabbuka l-akram
alladhee `allama bi l-qalam
`allama l-insaana maa lam ya`lam
Kallaa 'anna-l-'insaana la-yaTghaa
'in ra'aahu-staghnaa
inna ilaa rabbika r-rug'aa
Or in English:
Invoke the name of your Lord
for having created
created man from clay.
Invoke! For your Lord is most noble-minded
for having taught by the writing cane
taught man what he didn't know.
No, that man shall be presumptuous,
whenever he [man] sees Him [God] as souvereign.
Behold, to God is the return.
We may be even more curious than before whether we can retrieve the
same rhyme scheme in the other parts of surah 96. The Result of the
Criticism Instead of presenting all further steps and deliberations in
regaining the original text and meaning of Surah 96 we eventually
present only the result: a fine strophic hymn in vernacular Arabic,
not falling into disconnected pieces any more and with a clear rhyme
scheme:
* Traditional and Reconstructed Reading (Arabic Text) of Surah 96
* Reconstructed Reading (Arabic Text Transliterated) of Surah 96
A translation of the reconstructed vernacular Arabic text of Surah 96
goes as follows: Invoke the name of your Lord who created (=for having
created), created man from clay.
Invoke! For thy Lord is the most generous
who taught (=for having taught) by the writing cane,
taught man what he didn't know.
Not at all that man shall be presumptuous
when ever he sees Him overbearingly independent!
Behold, to God is the recourse!
Have you ever seen
that He denies
a servant (of God) when he prays?
Have you ever seen?
- when he clung firmly to the creed?
- or spoke as a God-fearer?
Have you ever seen
that He betrayed and turned away?
Have you not learned that God sees?
Not at all! If He is not given peace (by prayers),
truly He will be seized
by His forelock (=by His honour)!
(Late gloss "a lying sinful forelock" to be cancelled.)
So call for His High Council!
You will then call up the High Angelship!
Not at all! Be you not presumptuous against Him!
Prostrate (for prayer) and approach!
(=Summary or title of Surah 96)
Please realize the numerous repetions of words as skillful device of
the poet to set the different parts of this his poem willfully in neat
relation to each other creating thereby an extraordinary, artistically
intertwined web of lines of thought binding the whole structure of the
hymn together. Considering the given - unchanged - rasm-text this
really astonishing poem could never have been achieved at by wilful
re-interpretation.
There has therefore been furnished the irrefutable evidence that a
transmitted rasm-text of some length, and if conserved under and
because of a wrong re-interpretation for more than a millennium,
concedes only and alone the originally intended interpretation.
Notes
(1) The frame-narrative of the initial appointment of Muhammad to
prophetship (allegedly being at the bottom of verses 96:1-5) was
submitted to a thorough criticism by the Swedish theologian and
islamicist Tor Andrae already in 1912 in his article "Die Legenden von
der Berufung Muhammeds" ("The legends of Muhammad's vocation"), Le
Monde Oriental 6 (1912), 5-18. It became obvious that these and
similar frame-narratives were the subject of invention and legend by
Muslim tradition. Further research on the iqra'-tale was published by
Gregor Schoeler in 1996.
(2) Muhammad Taqi ud-Din Al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan in their
well-known Qur'an translation identify this alleged troublemaker as
Abu Jahl.
Zurück zu Koranische Textkritik versweise / Back to Textual Criticism
applied to the Koran versewise
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Life without art & music? Keep the arts alive today at Network for Good!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/FXrMlA/dnQLAA/Zx0JAA/uTGrlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Post message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
List owner : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
