KHUTAB II - 12. CATEGORIES OF TAFSĪR (1)

12.  CATEGORIES OF TAFSĪR (1)

  (22 August 2003)

Brothers and sisters in Islam,

          In this khut.bah I would like to talk briefly about the categories of tafsīr. Based on its sources there are three main categories of tafsīr, namely: (1) traditional commentary التَّفْسِْرُ بِالْمَأْثُوْر) , also called  التفسير بِالرِّوَايَة  and التَّفْسِْرُ  (بِالنَّقْل, (2) rational commentary التفسير بِالرَّأْي)), also called  التَّفْسِْرُ  بِالدِّرَايَة and  التَّفْسِْرُ (بِالْمَعْقُوْل   and  (3) symbolic or allegorical commentary  (التَّفْسِْرُ بِاْلإشَارَة) . They will be dealt with briefly as follows:

 (1).  Traditional Commentary. It is either the commentary of the Qur’ān by the Qur’ān itself, by the Sunnah of the Prophet, or by the s.ahābah. An example of the commentary of the Qur’ān by itself is as follows:  One Qur’ānic verse mentions that cattle are lawful to Muslims for food, but not without exception.  It says: أُحِلَّتْ لَكُمْ بَهِيمَةُ الْأَنْعَامِ إِلَّا مَا يُتْلَى عَلَيْكُمْ ... (المائدة : ١). …  “... Lawful to you is the [flesh of every] beast that feeds on plants, save what is mentioned to you [hereafter]: ...” (Q. 5:1, Asad). The commentary of the expression ”save what is mentioned to you [hereafter]” is given in another verse, as follows:   

حُرِّمَتْ عَلَيْكُمُ الْمَيْتَةُ وَالدَّمُ وَلَحْمُ الْخِنْزِيرِ وَمَا أُهِلَّ لِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ بِهِ وَالْمُنْخَنِقَةُ وَالْمَوْقُوذَةُ

وَالْمُتَرَدِّيَةُ وَالنَّطِيحَةُ وَمَا أَكَلَ السَّبُعُ إِلَّا مَا ذَكَّيْتُمْ وَمَا ذُبِحَ عَلَى النُّصُبِ. (المائدة : ٣)

 Forbidden to you is carrion, and blood, and the flesh

 of swine, and that over which any name other than God’s has

 been invoked, and the animal that has been strangled, or beaten

 to death, or killed by a fall, or gored to death, or savaged by

 a beast of prey, save that which you [yourselves] may have

slaughtered while it was still alive; and [forbidden to

 you is] all that has been slaughtered on

idolatrous altars.  (Q. 5:3, Asad).

This is the strongest commentary of this category of tafsīr, since it comes from the Qur’ān itself. It is Allah Who explains what He means in the Qur’ān.

          The example of the commentary of the Qur’ān by the Sunnah of the Prophet is as follows:  When the verse الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا وَلَمْ يَلْبِسُوا إِيمَانَهُمْ بِظُلْمٍ أُولَئِكَ لَهُمُ الْأَمْنُ وَهُمْ مُهْتَدُونَ. (الأنعام  : ٨٢)  “Those who have attained to faith, and who have not obscured their faith by wrongdoing ‑ it is they who shall be secure, since it is they who have found the right path!” (Q. 6:82, Asad) was revealed, it distressed the s.ah.ābah. They asked the Prophet, saying: “O Messenger of Allah, is there any of us who has not obscured his faith by wrongdoing?” The Prophet answered: “Its meaning is not what you think. Haven’t you heard what the pious servant of Allah [i.e., Luqmān the sage] said to his son? He said: يَا بُنَيَّ لَا تُشْرِكْ بِاللَّهِ إِنَّ الشِّرْكَ لَظُلْمٌ عَظِيمٌ (لقمان :١٣)  ‘O my dear son! Do not ascribe divine powers to aught beside God: for, behold, such [a false] ascribing divinity is indeed an awesome wrong!.’ (Q. 31:13, Asad).  It [i.e., the word z.ulm in the verse] means shirk (polytheism).” This Prophetic commentary of the Qur’ān is also strong, since it is the duty of the Prophet to explain what has been revealed to the people, as mentioned in the Qur’ān, as follows:  (النحل : ٤٤)  وَأَنْزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الذِّكْرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ “And upon thee [too] have We bestowed from on high this reminder, so that thou might make clear unto mankind all that has ever been thus bestowed upon them, and that they might take thought.” (Q. 16:44, Asad).  However, the acceptance of this Prophetic commentary is also on condition that it is reported by reliable authorities.

          With regard to the commentary of the s.ah.ābah, although not so strong as the two commentaries mentioned earlier, it is also accepted by the Muslims.  This is because the s.ah.ābah were people who met the Prophet, witnessed the revelation, knew the asbāb al‑nuzūl and knew more of the Arabic language and its eloquence which enabled them to better understand the divine texts.

       Although the traditionist al‑H.ākim accepted the commentary of the s.ah.ābah and raised it to the same level of the Prophetic commentary, one has to be careful in accepting this commentary of the s.ah.ābah or the tābi‘īn for the following reasons:  There are many commentaries attributed to the s.ah.ābah or tābi‘īn without isnād (chains of authority), so that we cannot make a distinction between the genuine and the fabricated ones. Moreover, many isrā’ilīyāt (Jewish legends) were spread among Muslims, some of which contained legends and beliefs contradictory to the teachings of Islam. There were also some extremists who fabricated sayings and attributed them to the s.ah.ābah to support their views, or to flatter the rulers. There is also the possibility that the atheists (zanādiqah) fabricated sayings and attributed them to the s.ah.ābah or  the tābi‘īn in order to destroy Islam.

(2). Rational commentary.  It is a commentary based exclusively on the commentator’s ability to grasp the meanings of the Qur’ānic verses due to the absence of traditional commentary on the verses in question.  This can be accomplished only if he possesses and exercises the knowledge of the sciences of the Qur’ān and the Arabic language, such as naskh (abrogation of legal passages of the Qur’ān), asbāb al‑nuzūl, ah.kām (laws contained in the Qur’ān), i‘rāb (desinential inflection), balāghah (eloquence), and classical Arabic poetry.

       The commentary of this genre, however, was opposed by a group of Muslim scholars for the following reasons: (a) They said that rational commentary was a statement concerning Allah without knowledge, an act which was prohibited by Allah, as mentioned in Q. 2:169 and 7:33. (b) They contended that it was the duty of the Prophet to explain the Qur’ān as mentioned in Q. 16:44, and this duty was exclusively the Prophet’s privilege.  (c) The Prophet warned people from giving interpretation of the Qur’ān based on their personal opinion. In a tradition on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbās the Prophet said: “Whoever speaks on the Qur’ān without knowledge (‘ilm) let him make his place in Hell.”(d) The s.ah.ābah and the tābi‘īn refrained from giving their interpretation of the Qur’ān with their personal opinion. Abū Bakr, for example, was reported to have said: “Any land may carry me, and any sky may overshadow me if I spoke on the Qur’ān with my personal opinion or with what I have no knowledge.”

On the other hand, Muslim scholars en masse accept the rational interpretation for the following reasons: (a) Allah urges Muslims to contemplate the contents of the Qur’ān when He said: كِتَابٌ أَنْزَلْنَاهُ إِلَيْكَ مُبَارَكٌ لِيَدَّبَّرُوا آَيَاتِهِ وَلِيَتَذَكَّرَ أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ.(ص : ٢٩) “[All this have We expounded in this] blessed divine writ which We have revealed unto thee, [O Muhammad,] so that men may ponder over its messages, and that those who are endowed with insight may take them to heart.” (Q. 38:29, Asad). They maintain that pondering over the Qur’ān can be achieved only be searching its deeper meanings and mysteries, and therefore, giving one’s personal opinion in the interpretation of the Qur'an is justified. (b) Muslim scholars are urged to discover the laws in the Qur'an by searching and finding its deeper meanings, based on Q. 4:83, and this can only be carried out by giving one’s independent judgement. (c) If rational interpretation were prohibited because it is based on independent judgement, then the use of independent judgement in Islamic laws would also have been prohibited.  Consequently, many of these Islamic laws would have been ineffective.  This is contrary to what has been established among Muslim scholars that a mujtahid (a legist who exercises ijtihād, i.e., independent judgement in a legal question based upon the interpretation of the Qur’ān and the Sunnah) is always rewarded, whether his judgement is right or wrong. (d) The s.ah.ābah themselves have different interpretations on some Qur’anic verses, as the Prophet did not explain all the verses of the Qur’ān.  He explained only those that needed explanation, leaving the rest to be understood by the s.ah.ābah themselves. If personal opinion was not allowed on the Qur’ān, the Prophet would have explained the whole Qur’ān, and the s.ah.ābah would not have given their personal opinion. (e) The Prophet prayed for his cousin Ibn ‘Abbās that Allah would teach him the ta’wīl of the Qur’ān.  If the term ta’wīl here means the interpretation based on what have been reported from the Prophet rather than Ibn ‘Abbās’  own personal opinion, then singling him out with this prayer would have been futile.

Conclusion: There are three main categories of tafsīr: traditional, rational and symbolic or allegorical commentaries.