Bookwright

THE NOBLE QUR’AN

A New Rendering of its Meaning in English
by Hajj Abdalhaqq and Aisha Bewley

(1999 Madinah Press, pp. 664. Hardback. ISBN 1-874216-36-3)

At last, here is a translation into English of the Qur’an which is easy to read and which gives easy access to the meanings of the original Arabic without compromising or obscuring them in any way. In short, it is a new rendering of its meaning which is not only trustworthy but also a pleasure to read. This is not to belittle or denigrate the classical works of Mohammed Pickthall or Yusuf Ali, but it is clear to anyone remotely conversant with the English language that these earlier translators’ English usage and vocabulary is now outdated and not always intelligible, belonging as it does more to the last century than to the one which lies ahead. Most of those English speaking people who have embraced Islam during the last 25 years, as well as many English speaking Muslims whose mother tongue is not English, will confirm that it is often necessary to ‘translate’ this outmoded English into a more modern equivalent, perhaps with the help of a Qur’anic Arabic/English dictionary such as Penrice, before the meaning appears to be apparent – and often in this process mistakes and misinterpretations are easily made by those whose grasp of Arabic is limited.

Furthermore, those more recent ‘translations’ which have in effect been attempts to modernise the Pickthall and Yusuf Ali translations have on the whole lacked penetration and depth, especially when prepared by authors lacking either a complete education or a proper grasp of English or both. There is of course the Arberry translation, but this while remaining technically faithful to the Arabic, and while succeeding in conveying at least something of the poetical splendour of the original Arabic, does not always convey the actual meaning, simply because the author was not a practising Muslim and therefore did not have experiential access to the subject matter itself. Anyone who has read a literal translation of an instruction manual from, for example Japanese into English, made by someone without a working knowledge of the appliance for which the manual has been written, knows how misleading and often nonsensical and amusing such ‘translations’ can be, even when most of the important words have been translated more or less accurately.

As regards other contemporary translators from Arabic into English, scholars who can translate both accurately and clearly – without being either too profuse and shallow or too dry and academic – are not plentiful. Fortunately Hajj Abdalhaqq and Aisha Bewley are not only scholars but also they have been practising Muslims and prolific translators for the last 30 years. How different their work is to, for example, De Sale’s awful ‘translation’ which was made principally from a deformed Latin translation of the Arabic for the Pope with the express intention of distorting the Qur’an’s meaning so as to ridicule Islam and strengthen what remained of Christendom.

In marked contrast, Hajj Abdalhaqq and Aisha Bewley have utilised their great expertise in translating from Arabic into English, grounded firmly in their knowledge of the deen of Islam and their love for the Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and combined with their deep sincerity towards and fear of Allah. In addition, they have also been guided, as they humbly acknowledge in their Preface, by what has been transmitted as regards the meanings of the Qur’an by “the great mufassirun of the past who spent so much time and energy in unearthing, preserving and passing on the meaning of Allah’s Book and in protecting it from unacceptable interpretation and deviation.” Thus although it may not be immediately apparent to the reader, many of the particular meanings which appear in their translation are not a matter of personal preference or interpretation, but rather are based on what has been directly transmitted by the Prophet Muhammad and his Companions, may the blessings and peace of Allah be on them.

It is clear, from a socio-cultural perspective that what especially hampered the earlier translations was the use of a linguistic mode and tradition which was essentially European Christian, and which therefore was characterised by a variety of concepts which had been repeatedly projected out onto existence by Christian thinkers in the past, and which had been gradually absorbed into the general schema or view of existence of European Christian society during the course of centuries – and which in fact often had very little in common with the actual message of the Qur’an, which is so immediate and straightforward once the traditional misconceptions have been jettisoned and the mind cleared and the heart opened.

It is this freedom from inappropriate terminology and vocabulary which especially characterises Hajj Abdalhaqq and Aisha Bewley’s translation. Indeed as they point out in their helpful Preface, several key terms which appear again and again throughout the Qur’an have not been translated and remain in the text in a transliterated Arabic phonetic form, because: “English speaking Muslims have assimilated into the language various Arabic words which are either untranslatable or words whose English equivalents have become so imbued with a meaning other than that intended by the original Arabic that to use them would be to mislead rather than give the correct significance.” The result is a refreshing mode of expression which rises above traditional misconception on the one hand, and which is untainted by modern doublethink and newspeak on the other. Wherever Arabic terminology is employed in the text, a small Glossary at the end provides concise definitions. It will be interesting to see how long it is before these words begin to appear in English dictionaries.

The two translators also draw attention in their Preface to the fact that their main objective in presenting this new rendering into English was: “to allow the meaning of the original, as far as possible, to come straight through with as little linguistic interface as possible so that the English used does not get in the way of the direct transmission of the meaning.” In this they have succeeded admirably and with humility, for as they themselves point out, “we can only admit along with all our predecessors that the result falls far short of being anything like a complete exposition of the meanings of the Qur’an. Nevertheless, we hope that this rendering will give people of this time, and in particular English speaking Muslims, a more direct access to the meaning of the Book of Allah and encourage them to go further and discover from the original Arabic the inexhaustible fund of light and wisdom it contains.”

To conclude, this is the translation into English of that Book in which there is no doubt for which many of us have been waiting. It is fresh and refreshing. I cannot speak as highly of it as it deserves. I can only recommend that you read it and treasure it and reflect on it and apply it and use it to gain access to the original Arabic so that you can recite the Qur’an as it was revealed with understanding and not like a parrot. This masterpiece is without doubt the definitive translation into English of the Qur’an for this present age and insh’Allah it will help bring the Qur’an to life for generations of English speaking Muslims to come, thereby emphasising through firsthand direct experience the following words of the final Messenger to whom it was revealed, Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace:

“‘Allah sent down this Qur’an to command and prevent, and as a sunna to be followed and a parable. It contains your history, in-formation about what came before you, news about what will come after you and correct judgement between you. Repetition does not wear it out and its wonders do not end. It is the Truth. It is not a jest. Whoever recites it speaks the truth. Whoever judges by it is just. Whoever argues by it wins. Whoever divides by it is equitable. Whoever acts by it is rewarded. Whoever clings to it is guided to a straight path. Allah will misguide whoever seeks guidance from other than it. Allah will destroy whoever judges by other than it. It is the Wise Remembrance, the Clear Light, the Straight Path, the Firm Rope of Allah and the Useful Healing. It is a protection for the one who clings to it and a rescue for the one who follows it. It is not crooked and so puts things straight. It does not deviate so as to be blamed. Its wonders do not cease. It does not wear out with much repetition.” (At-Tirmidhi).

Ahmad Thomson

(Ahmad Thomson is a practising barrister and author, whose more recent works include The Islamic Will, The Difficult Journey, The Way Back, Making History and the revised editions of Jesus, Prophet of Islam, Blood on the Cross (in two parts: For Christ’s Sake and Islam in Andalus), and Dajjal – the AntiChrist.)

The Collapse of the Monetarist Society

Part One

by Shaykh Dr. Abdalqadir as-Sufi
What, firstly, is the venous system of the present world society? The life-blood which activates every organ, limb and sinew of human life on our planet is of course, money. Not real-wealth, not commodities, not minerals and certainly not oil and gas. The money system is not specie, it is neither coin, nor bonds, nor bank-notes. It is pure number. Yet the numbers have been assigned to things. It is the connectedness of number to things that sustains that system which finally is showing itself as unsustainable.

In order that this money system continue to function, it follows from this, the relational pattern of number to thing must be in place.

Now, right away, we discover the hidden protocol on which that relational connection, that necessary relational connection, is dependent for its existence.

At the binding core of the world money system is the human creature, for it is his acceptance of the dynamic which agrees that between thing and number is a link which in turn authorises or licenses the whole global string of activities which propel the movement of things by the mutually agreed instrument of a number sequence unlocking itself from thing to person and from person to thing.

Thus the whole sequence is itself dependent on the activating person. For the monetary system of the current society to function – an accepting individual is necessary.

Now, in order to gain the acquiescence of the person in the sequence of events we have indicated, that person has to have accepted that both the specifics and their activation are real and have meaning. It must, in short, make sense – be reasonable.

The person concerned can be motivated to participate in the money process in two possible modes:

1] He is convinced by verification that:

a) The numbers are real, that is, have value intrinsically, that is, in themselves, prior to the money-thing propulsion.

b) The thing is real, existent, present in a place.

c) That the activating current that ‘assigns’ connection from number to thing is real, makes sense, and has social confirmation.

2] He is compelled by the compulsion that obliges its acceptance:

a) Because of his prior role in the money-thing process which entraps him into going along with the method.

b) Because of an undifferentiated anxiety about both money and thing, as well as any possible linkage.

c) While knowing the sequence is false, he feels helpless to dismantle it.

d) He knows it is unreal and so false, and at the same time continues to practise it.

In the first case it is both known and demonstrable that the number has no intrinsic value and no existence except as abstract. It is also known that things exist in themselves. What cannot be proved is that the dynamic linking of number to thing is real in itself. It takes on existence by the evocation of it by a person who in turn must convince another that the pulsating link has an actual if unprovable reality. Therefore the whole sequence is determined by the convinced individual and by necessary extension a counterpart individual.

Nevertheless since the accepting individual cannot exist in reason, the individual, the activator of the system has to be in the second case: that means

a) compelled

b) in anxiety

c) nihilistic

d) psychotic.

Either one or all of the first three or the last, simply, or as a combination of the first three in crisis.

If man himself is the cause and the effect that energises the present disastrous world system, then man must be diagnosed, his sickness identified and his cure enacted.

In one of the most important medical schemas of our time there is a model of disease that is not reliant uniquely on specifying the viral agent itself, but rather proposes a more complex view that takes into account the social environment, the civic order and then the person as part of that total reality. In an epidemic event, the illness itself is seen not as a virus first, but as a diseased zone. The disease itself is defined as “miasma”. The polluted earth, the poisoned sea, the mineral depleted vegetables, the hormone-pumped meat, the disappearing species, the toxic air – all that is not merely the ambient setting of disease but the disease itself. Put simply, but differently from the accepted model, the sequence tuberculosis virus kills among the overcrowded poor, but penicillin cures it, is replaced by the view – industrial squalor flowers into a lung-destroying entity, which can be n! ursed on the mountain clinic. The viral view far from eliminating the illness has produced a now resistant super-bug, again without a cure.

To read the full article visit: http://www.shaykhabdalqadir.com/content

The event of the Georgian Programme, or rather, its result, the situation, has proved to be one of the pivotal tremors which indicate a profound tectonic shift of the continental plates. The landscape is irrevocably altered. As a result of the incursion into Georgia and that tiny country’s political response, everything has changed. The very foundation of what they might grandly call their political philosophy, and everyone else their imperialist agenda, has collapsed in ruin – I mean the American doctrine of ‘The War on Terror’. That is the radical shift but from it others, too, can be discerned. The myth of an objective media has been simply blown away. The foundational viewpoint was that the Cold War was won by the illiterate American leader (‘Mr Gorbachev, tear down that wall!’) triumphing over the Evil Empire. Both the American appraisal of the enemy and the claim to victory over them have been engulfed by the tsunami that has been caused by this shift in the world situation.

Read the full article

…she wrote in a letter to the poet Thorkild Bjørnvig: “The smallest fragment of a gold coin, even dust scraped from it, is always gold. But a corner snipped off a hundred kroner note, even half of it – is nothing, of less value than a piece of white paper, which at least you can write on.”
The Welcome of Beautiful Flowers, Steen Eiler Rasmussen, from Karen Blixen’s Flowers: nature and art at Rungestedlund, Christian Eilers Publishers

Nothing explains Islamic modernism, the whole rush to Islamic banks, the Islamic state and Islamic democracy, etc., more clearly than this passage by Ibn Khaldun. :

22. The vanquished always want to imitate the victor in his distinctive mark(s), his dress, his occupation, and all his other conditions and customs.
The reason for this is that the soul always sees perfection in the person who is superior to it and to whom it is subservient. It considers him perfect, either because the respect it has for him impresses it, or because it erroneously assumes that its own subservience to him is not due to the nature of defeat but to the perfection of the victor. If that erroneous assumption fixes itself in the soul, it becomes a firm belief. The soul, then, adopts all the manners of the victor and assimilates itself to him. This, then, is imitation.
Or, the soul may possibly think that the superiority of the victor is not the result of his group feeling or great fortitude, but of his customs and manners. This also would be an erroneous concept of superiority, and (the consequence) would be the same as in the former case.
Therefore, the vanquished can always be observed to assimilate themselves to the victor in the use and style of dress, mounts, and weapons, indeed, in everything.
In this connection, one may compare how children constantly imitate their fathers. They do that only because they see perfection in them. One may also compare how almost everywhere people are dominated (in the matter of fashion) by the dress of the militia and the government forces, because they are ruled by them.
This goes so far that a nation dominated by another, neighboring nation will show a great deal of assimilation and imitation.

Few realise that the other key element of Islam, its practice, is as well preserved and impregnable as is the Book of Allah. This has been confused in recent years by an understanding of hadith, the recorded oral transmissions from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, that has created a great lack of clarity and much confusion, both for Muslims and orientalist scholars.
It is important to realise that when the revelation reached the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, he conveyed it to others and put it into practice himself. He kept none of it back, and he did not transmit some of it secretly to a hidden elite, but he transmitted it and embodied it. His transmission is the Book of Allah, and his embodiment is called the Sunnah.
If it had stopped there, later generations would have said that “he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was different, for he was a prophet and we are just ordinary people.” People would have come to believe that the deen of Islam is fundamentally unliveable. However, his contemporaries, his companions the men and women of Madinah, the Emigrants from Makkah and the Helpers of the people of Madinah, being a very representative cross-section of humanity, took on his practice and made it theirs. So later generations have no excuse: a city of perfectly ordinary people successfully took upon themselves the practice of the last of the Messengers, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.
They in their turn transmitted it. Although they did transmit it by teaching it, their great transmission was in their embodiment of it from which embodiment the next generation took their practice. Thus it has been from the very first day of Islam right down to our time, for, much as people learn a great deal from study with scholars and from reading books, the truth is that each generation learns the practice from the previous generation’s practice.
Thus, in spite of racial, linguistic, legal school and geographic differences, the practice of Islam is recognisably the same over vast areas of the earth and has been throughout the last fourteen centuries.
Naturally orientalist scholarship and indeed the scholarship of the legal schools will focus on differences of the texts and legal schools but the truth is that this basic sameness and consistency of practice is utterly stunning.

When people talk about the free market and how it operates, they take as a given the ‘law’ of supply and demand. This is one of their axioms, i.e. self-evident truths that need no proof. But the law of supply and demand is far from axiomatic, indeed many societies for great swathes of their history have not used it at all. Merchants, farmers, pastoralists and craftsmen knew their costs and expenditures and had a rough idea of how much they needed to add on in order to live well, and that was how the price was arrived at. The idea that you can charge a great deal for something because it is in demand leads to the logical conclusion that when there is famine you can charge a fortune for food, which is completely indecent.
The current situation is an extreme logical extension of that, for people who have grown obscenely wealthy, through derivatives trading and managing hedge funds, which are themselves many multiples of total world wealth in this new science fiction view of economy, are now looking for tangible uses to which they can put their intangible and illusory money, and so they are buying commodities: gold, oil and now food, and thus we experience the rise in prices. For middle class Westerners this is bad enough even if merely somewhat constricting, but for the impoverished here and in much of the world this is a genuine danger.
Supply and demand is not a ‘law’ but a strategy of trade when it has gone beyond the limits. Things have their values, and profits have their natural limits. This spurious law is just one example of economics being a pseudo-science erected in order to justify theft.

It is well said, in every sense, that a man’s religion is the chief fact
with regard to him. A man’s, or a nation of men’s. By religion I do not
mean here the church-creed which he professes, the articles of faith which
he will sign and, in words or otherwise, assert; not this wholly, in many
cases not this at all. We see men of all kinds of professed creeds attain
to almost all degrees of worth or worthlessness under each or any of them.
This is not what I call religion, this profession and assertion; which is
often only a profession and assertion from the outworks of the man, from
the mere argumentative region of him, if even so deep as that. But the
thing a man does practically believe (and this is often enough _without_
asserting it even to himself, much less to others); the thing a man does
practically lay to heart, and know for certain, concerning his vital
relations to this mysterious Universe, and his duty and destiny there, that
is in all cases the primary thing for him, and creatively determines all
the rest. That is his _religion_; or, it may be, his mere scepticism and
_no-religion_: the manner it is in which he feels himself to be
spiritually related to the Unseen World or No-World; and I say, if you tell
me what that is, you tell me to a very great extent what the man is, what
the kind of things he will do is. Of a man or of a nation we inquire,
therefore, first of all, What religion they had?

A statesman is an easy man,
He tells his lies by rote.
A journalist makes up his lies,
And takes you by the throat.
So stay at home and do your prayer,
And let the neighbours vote.
(With apologies to W. B. Yeats)