Exploring the Qur'an V: Surah 96
This section will be devoted entirely to Surah 96, both because I discussed it in detail on the forum I was on, and more importantly because in its 19 verses we can find ways of leading into several very important topics.
We do have a problem with variances in translation. Thus while Pickthal, Palmer, and Shakir all refer to it as "The Clot" or "Congealed Blood," Yussuf Ali chooses the opening word, "Iqra" or "Read" (or "proclaim" -- he gives both variants.) Because the translations differ so much, I am going to give each of them, along with the Arabic.
Because this does divide into two parts, here are the first five verses.
1. Iqra/ bi-ismi rabbika allathee khalaqa
2. Khalaqa al-insana min AAalaqin
3. Iqra/ warabbuka al-akramu
4. Allathee AAallama bialqalami
5. AAallama al-insana ma lam yaAAlam
Yussuf Ali gives this as follows:
1. Proclaim! (or read!) in the name of thy Lord and Cherisher, Who created-
2. Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood:
3. Proclaim! And thy Lord is Most Bountiful,-
4. He Who taught (the use of) the pen,-
5. Taught man that which he knew not.
Palmer gives this as:
IN the name of the merciful and compassionate God.
READ, in the name of thy Lord!
Who created man from congealed blood!
Read, for thy Lord is most generous!
Who taught the pen!
Taught man what he did not know!
Shakir:
Read in the name of your Lord Who created.
He created man from a clot.
Read and your Lord is Most Honorable,
Who taught (to write) with the pen
Taught man what he knew not.
And Pickthal:
Read: In the name of thy Lord Who createth,
Createth man from a clot.
Read: And thy Lord is the Most Bounteous,
Who teacheth by the pen,
Teacheth man that which he knew not.
There isn't a great variation, except as far as 'the pen' goes. Did Allah teach man how to write, or does he use the pen to teach man? Perhaps this is a minor, pedantic point, but I am curious.
What is NOT a minor point is that these verses are supposedly the first verses revealed to Mohammed. And yet, here they are in Surah 96, not even standing alone. And then the NEXT revelation -- which occurred sometime later is at the beginning of Surah 74, again not standing alone.
I have never read a satisfactory, or even comprehensible, explanation as to the organization of the Qur'an, not if you give it the importance that Islam does. This is a book that exists in heaven, that is the final revelation of God, that is by its very nature -- if the claims are accepted -- the most important document in the history of mankind. And yet it is arranged, not chronologically, not logically, but simply by the lengths of the Surahs. What's more, if the story of the first two revelations is accepted, the Surahs themselves were not delivered as units. (I have to admit I have this picture of Allah handing the manuscript to Gabriel to deliver to Mohammed and the angel, more used to fighting than to messenger work, dropping it and putting the pages back haphazardly.)
I have to ask, the copy that exists i heaven, is it too in this disarray? Or did Mohammed basically grab a surah at random for his delivery, because we do seem to have some knolwedge of which surahs were delivered at Mecca and which at Medina? (And when there is a conflict between Surahs, it is the later one that rules, at least according to the doctrine of 'abrogation.')
*******I was going to write much more, but I just heard of the bombing at Dahab. (I was also aware that Big Pharaoh was going to the area. Fortunately he didn't and is okay.) Because of this, I'm not in the mood to write anything more tonight. Sorry, but I'm still catching my breath and recovering from the shock.******

3 Comments:
Prup, I don't actually have a comment about your post--I'm also a bit preoccupied by the attacks in Dahab today--but I thought perhaps I could take this opportunity on your blog to say something about AngryLibyan"American". He's the elephant in the room that no one wants to acknowledge. I wrote something directed to him once or twice before I knew just how bizarre he really was. I'm pretty sure he is mildly mentally retarded. As a matter of fact; he's a good (read: scary) example of what happens when people with a hateful doctrine exploit a youth with a low IQ. Anyway...I just had to say something about that elephant!
P.S. You're a good-natured guy and you're always pretty civil. I appreciate that about you and I hope I've never offended you with my little jabs. They've all been in a spirit of fun, but sometimes subtleties like that can get lost in text. :)
Never been offended by you, by well-placed jabs by anyone. In fact, if they are good enough, I revel in them. ("Jim Benton, isn't he the guy who gives a two-page answer to a 'yes or no' question" has become my favorite self-description.)
As for the person you mention, I'd much prefer discussing him with you by e-mail. I find him authentically scary, and don't believe he has a low IQ at all. I really would appreciate you sending me mail, I'd like the chance to discuss him.
A couple of things I think are necessary to understand.
1) Initially there was a strong reluctance to compose it as a book so it is not a book as in one to be read but the name or recitation is a better concept to understand it.
2) Being an oral object it is also crafted in a literay style that was obvious to the people of the time, today it is hard work to get there in the mental frame as well as all the relevant contexts.
3) It is also a both poetry and prose and switches between both forms interchangeably, again i think the affects maybe more demonstrable on the oral scale than the written form.
Just these facts make it a little bit more challenging to follow. I cannot commment on the order or sequence but it maybe it made obvious sense to those of the day but for some reason seems to difficult to grasp today.
Can't help you too much except that in one of the forewords to a Palmer translation it mentioned the ordering as "haqqiqah" signifying formless essence meaning that both the repitition and the wandering material is deliberate artistic form. Sorry cannot help you too much on this or even vouch for the accuracy of this contention.
The most obvious seems to be that the Quran Surahs are arranged purely by their lenghts. This will ofcourse neglect the other question of how are the surahs themselves structed. Probably for an Oral, again this are both personal postulates.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home