The Qur’an must be understood in the background in which it was revealed. According to established history, it was revealed to Muhammad (sws) in the seventh century in Arabia. It is evident from this history that Muhammad (sws) explained the Qur’an wherever and whenever a need arose, and so did the scholars among his Companions and the scholars and researchers after them. This history of the Qur’an is an established fact and demands the following from its students:
Firstly, he must be well aware of the history of the period and place in which the Qur’an was revealed. Every student of the Qur’an knows that it mentions the destruction of previous Arab nations like the ‘Ād, the Thamūd and the people of Madyan. The views held by these peoples are alluded to by the Qur’an. It also mentions the preaching of their respective prophets and the way these people reacted to it. Also depicted in the Qur’an is the arrival of Abraham (sws) into Arabia, the sacrifice of his son Ishmael (sws) and the construction of the Baytullāh. The Qur’an also refers to the influence of Abraham (sws) and Ishmael (sws) on the cultural, moral, social and economic conditions of Arabia. Also portrayed in the Qur’an are the alterations done by the Quraysh in the religion constituted by Abraham (sws) and Ishmael (sws) and the way they transformed the Baytullāh, the centre of monotheism into a centre of idol-worship and the religious innovations and rituals which as a result of this made way into their religion. Similarly, discussed in the Qur’an are the circumstances in which the Qur’an was revealed, the incidents which took place at that time, as well as the political and religious views which were in vogue at that time. In order to understand all this, it is essential that the available history of that period be fully benefited from while keeping it subservient to the words of the Qur’an and its coherence. Through this, many aspects which the Qur’an refers to can be understood better, and it is also helpful in unfolding many complexities of the Qur’an.
Secondly, full importance should be given to whatever is mentioned in Ahādīth and Āthār literature with reference to the Prophet (sws) and his Companions (rta). No doubt they contain many spurious things, and since the original words have not always been preserved and a narrator has relied on his own intellect to transmit these words, a lot of changes have come about in the original words, yet this literature still contains many valuable gems. While pointing out the correct attitude in this regard, Imām Amīn Ahsan Iṣlāhī, writes:
Among the dhannī [speculative; non-definite] sources of tafsīr, Ahādīth and Āthār occupy the highest status. If their authenticity could have been fully relied upon, they would have had the same importance in tafsīr as the Sunnat-i Mutawātirah. However, since Ahādīth and Āthār do not possess this degree of authenticity, they can only be benefited from as far as they are found to be in conformity with the absolute principles of interpreting the Qur’an delineated above. Those who give such importance to the Hadīth that they make the Qur’ān subservient to it are neither aware of the status of the Qur’an nor that of the Hadīth. On other hand, people who don’t even refer to theAhādīth and Āthār in interpreting the Qur’an deprive themselves of a great treasure second only to the Qur’an. I consider the Hadīth to be totally derived from the Qur’an; thus I have not confined myself to Ahādīth which are mentioned in relation to a verse of the Qur’an; as far as I could, I have tried to benefit from the whole corpus of the Hadīth. They have helped me the most in understanding the wisdom of the Qur’an. If I have found a Hadīth which is not in harmony with the Qur’an, I have deliberated upon it for a long period, and I have only rejected it when it became abundantly clear to me that it was against the Qur’an or it was in conflict with some principle of religion. As far as correct Ahādīth are concerned, seldom has there arisen a case in which they contradict the Qur’an; however, when this was the case, I have preferred the Qur’an to them, and have written my reasons of this preference in detail.[1]
Thirdly, whatever scholars and exegetes have written must be given due consideration. It is only by benefiting from the works of previous scholars that new dimensions are added in such disciplines; this cannot be done by ignoring them. True knowledge does not come through arrogance and haughtiness; it comes with humility and a sincere love for the truth. Thus it is essential that students of the Qur’an must always study the primary exegetical works on the Qur’an when they are forming an opinion or deliberating on and teaching a verse. Prior to the leading scholars of the Farāhī school who have worked on Qur’anic exegesis, three primary works on the exegesis of the Qur’an can be identified: Jāmi‘ al-Bayān of Ibn Jarīr, Tafsīr al-Kabīr of Rāzī and al-Kashshāf of Zamakhsharī. The first of these is a compendium of the opinions of authorities of the past; the second mostly deals with theological issues and third with declensions and syntax. From among these primary works, though a student of the Qur’an should only take what is in harmony with the words of the Qur’an and its coherence and arrangement; however, he should never ignore these works.
[1]. Amīn Ahsan Iṣlāhī, Tadabbur-i Qur’an, 2nd ed., vol. 1 (Lahore: Faran Foundation, 1986), 30.
No comments:
Post a Comment