The Sacred Text and the Hermeneutic Predicament, an essay by Arash Naraghi

Reciting the Quran is not reading a text; it is participating in the process of re-experiencing an event, the event of address.

.

"When he saw a fire and said to his family, 'Stay here; I perceive a fire from afar; perhaps I can bring you a brand from it, or find some guidance at the fire.' When he came to it, he was called: 'O Moses, I am your Lord; take off your sandals, for you are in the sacred valley of Tuwa. And I have chosen you, so listen to what is revealed.'" (The Holy Quran, Surah Ta-Ha, 10-13)

This event is the heart of monotheistic theology: the God of the monotheistic religions speaks to humanity (revelation) and hears their speech (prayer). The word is the window through which He emanates, revealing Himself to humanity within the context of a linguistic relationship. This interpersonal relationship, based on dialogue and listening, is the distinctive feature of the human-divine relationship in the tradition of monotheistic faiths.

In Islamic culture, this experience of address has taken linguistic form in the text of the Quran. From a Muslim's perspective, the Quran is not a "text," but a "sacred text" or "divine speech." The difference between a "text" and a "sacred text" lies not only in the type of content and its semantic structure, but particularly in the type of human response to that linguistic phenomenon. For one who looks upon it dispassionately and from a distance, finding it merely a subject for examination and assessment, the Quran is simply a "text." But for one who views themselves and the world around them through its window, it is not a text to be read, but a world to be lived in. A devout Muslim's approach to the Quran differs from their approach to a literary text, however masterful. A person "reads" a text, dissects its structure, explores its various layers of meaning, analyzes and critiques its claims, and ultimately tries to produce a picture of its structure and an interpretation of its content. But the human approach to a "sacred text" is of another kind. Here, the individual does not read the text, but surrenders to it. They live the text as if it were being revealed upon their heart in the moment, within a personal relationship. Reciting the Quran is not reading a text; it is participating in the process of re-experiencing an event, the event of address. This experience of address becomes the focus of the devout Muslim's life, shaping their thought and existence. However, the nature of the Quranic sacred text can be understood based on several alternative models:

According to the first model, God addresses humanity directly and without mediation, conveying His message to them.

According to the second model, God conveys His message to a mediator, namely the person of the Prophet, and the Prophet transmits that message to other human beings without any verbal or semantic alteration.

According to the third model, God conveys the intended meaning to the person of the Prophet, and the Prophet puts that meaning into his own words and communicates it to other human beings.

According to the common understanding among Muslims, Quranic revelation should be understood according to the second model: the Prophet of Islam received the divine message, i.e., the Quran, verbatim from God and made it available to his followers without any alteration.

Hence, the ultimate goal of a Muslim individual's religious life is to find a way into the world of the sacred text and re-experience the essence of the event of address hidden within the shell of that text, and to bring it into the shell of their own existence. But entering the world of the text depends on an empathetic understanding of the text. The process of understanding and entering the world of the sacred text is a momentous and sometimes perilous process. From a religious perspective, if the sacred text is understood correctly, it is a source of salvation, but if it is misunderstood, it will be a cause of misguidance and perdition. It is in reference to this characteristic of the sacred text that Rumi says:

For many have gone astray because of the Quran: by clinging to this rope, a group fell into the well. The rope has no crime, O obstinate one, since you had no desire to ascend.

(Masnavi, Book Three, verses 4209 onward)

اما فهم درست متن مقدّس و برقراری نسبت مناسب با آن در جهان جدید و برای انسان مدرن به فرآیندی دشوار و چالش برانگیز بدل شده است. مسلمان دین ورز در روزگار مدرن برای ورود به جهان متن مقدّس باید دو نوع مانع را پس پشت نهد: موانع عام و موانع خاص. موانع عام مجموعه عواملی است که هر مسلمان دین ورزی لاجرم باید پس پشت بنهد تا به جهان متن وارد شود. اما موانع خاص منحصر به جهان مدرن است و عبارتست از آن دسته عوامل که فقط در پیش پای انسان مدرن است و او را از ورود به جهان متن مقدّس بازمی دارد.

پاره ای از موانع عام از جنس موانع معرفتی است. فهم قرآن در همه زمانها به فراگیری پاره ای علوم مقدماتی منوط بوده است، از جمله علم بیان، ادبیات عرب، تاریخ قرآن، شأن نزول آیات، تاریخ اسلام و غیره. بی اطلاعی از این مقدمات فرد را از فهم دقیق اشارات و معانی قرآن بازمی دارد.

پاره ای از موانع عام از جنس موانع اخلاقی و سلوکی است. رفع موانع معرفتی شرط لازم ورود به جهان متن مقدّس است اما شرط کافی نیست. ورود به جهان مقدّس در گرو کسب پاره ای آمادگیهای روحی و معنوی است. قرآن خود می آموزد که درک معارف قرآنی و بهره مندی از هدایت آن در گرو چیزی بیش از دانش نظری است. در همان آغاز سوره بقره، خداوند قرآن را فقط برای پرهیزگاران هدایت بخش می داند: "هدی للمتقین"(بقره/۲)، و تماس با حقایق معنوی را در گرو نوعی تقوا و پاکیزگی روحی می داند: "لایمسّه الّا المطهرون" (واقعه/ ۷۹). البته مطابق تعالیم قرآنی، "تقوا" یا پاکیزگی روحی مراتب گوناگون دارد: مرتبه نخست تقوا نوعی تقوای پیشادینی است، یعنی نوعی سلامت روحی و اخلاقی است که فرد نیک سیرت صرفنظر از هرگونه تعلق خاطر دینی واجد است. اما عالیترین مرتبه تقوا نوعی تقوای پسادینی است، یعنی نوعی تقواست که پس از سلوک دینی برای روح سالک دست می دهد ("یا ایهاالذّین امنوا اتّقوالله حقّ تقاته" (آل عمران/ ۱۰۲)). تقوای پیشادینی همان است که قرآن شرط هدایت پذیری از کلام الهی می داند.

مولانا هم شرط هدایت پذیری از کلام الهامی را نوعی پاکیزگی درونی می داند. از منظر او، حقایق قدسی را باگوش آلوده (یا به تعبیر او "گوش خر") نمی توان درک کرد، برای این منظور باید "گوش دیگر" یافت:

گوش خر بفروش و دیگر گوش خر کاین سخن را درنیابد گوش خر

(مثنوی، دفتر اوّل، بیت ۱۰۳۱)

این "گوش خر" گوشی است که اسیر وسوسه ها و شهوات است:

پنبه وسواس بیرون کن ز گوش تا به گوشت آید از گردون خروش (مثنوی، دفتر دوّم، بیت ۱۹۴۳)

آفت این در هوا و شهوت است ورنه اینجا شربت اندر شربت است

(مثنوی، دفتر دوّم، بیت ۱۰)

در عالم معنا قاعده این است که هم جنس هم جنس را جذب می کند؛ پاکان برای پاکان هستند و پلیدان برای پلیدان. حقایق قدسی پاک هستند، و به سراغ روحهای پاک می آیند. از اینروست که تقوا روح انسان را آماده درک حضور مه رویان بستان خداوند می کند:

قسم باطل، باطلان را می کشند باقیان از باقیان هم سرخوش اند ناریان مر ناریان را جاذبند نوریان مر نوریان را طالبند

(مثنوی، دفتر دوّم، ابیات ۸۱و ۸۲)

طیبات آید به سوی طیبین للخبیثین الخبیثات است هین تلخ با تلخان یقین ملحق شود کی دم باطل قرین حق شود

(مثنوی، دفتر دوّم، ابیات ۲۷۱و ۲۷۶)

باطلان را چه رباید؟ باطلی عاطلان را چه خوش آید؟ عاطلی زآنکه هر جنسی رباید جنس خود گاو سوی شیر نر کی رو نهد؟ گرگ یوسف را کجا عشق آورد جز مگر از مکر تا او را خورد

(مثنوی، دفتر دوّم، ابیات ۲۰۵۴ به بعد)

هست هر جزوی ز عالم جفت خواه راست همچون کهربا و برگ کاه

(مثنوی، دفتر سوّم، بیت ۴۴۰۱)

But it seems that in the modern era, overcoming general obstacles, both epistemic and moral, is not sufficient for crossing the threshold of the sacred text. Modern man, in confronting the sacred text, faces a particular predicament that prevents him from entering that world, and reduces the

For example, suppose I am in conversation with a group of Persian speakers who know no language other than Persian, and I wish to dissuade them from a futile endeavor. So I say to them: “Don’t sell refrigerators to Eskimos!” But saying this is no different from not saying it, because they are unfamiliar with the semiotic system in which the message is embedded—namely, the English language. That is, the first condition has not been met here. Now suppose I translate this phrase into Persian and say to them: “یخچال به اسکیمو نفروشید!” This latter phrase satisfies the first condition; that is, it is in a language familiar to my Persian-speaking audience. But can this Persian phrase convey my intended meaning to those listeners? The truth is that the meaning is conveyed only if they are also aware of the cultural background of the phrase—for instance, that Eskimos are inhabitants of the North Pole, that the North Pole is a frozen region, and therefore the inhabitants of the Pole have no need for refrigerators. But a Persian-speaking audience unaware of that background information will not clearly grasp the meaning of the phrase. For this purpose, instead of that English phrase or its Persian translation, I can say to my Persian-speaking audience: “زیره به کرمان نبرید!” Here, not only is the intended meaning expressed in Persian—that is, a semiotic system familiar to the receiver—but, more than that, the level and type of the audience’s information has also been taken into account (meaning that, in addition to the first condition, the second condition has also been met).

The third point is that, according to what has been said, the world of the sacred text—that is, the Qur’an—in fact comprises two distinct worlds:

The first world is the world of the audience, namely the culture of the Arabs at the time of the revelation. God had to presuppose this world so that the immediate recipients of the revelation could understand His intended meaning. The second world is those meanings whose expression was God’s primary purpose in sending down the revelation.

Drawing a distinction between these two worlds is of fundamental importance for understanding and interpreting the content of the revelation. The first world reflects the culture of the Arabs at the time of the revelation, but the second world is a world that reflects divine truths, and the sanctity of the text is grounded in it.

As noted, the first world in the Qurʾān is the world of the Arabs at the time of the revelation. This is an entirely human world and possesses no inherent sanctity. Traces of this human world are evident throughout the Qurʾān: for example, God mentions natural elements in the Qurʾān that were familiar to the Arabs of that era: the camel, the mountain, the plain, the sky, and so on. But one finds no mention in the Qurʾān of (for instance) the kangaroo or the iceberg. The kangaroo and the iceberg, like the camel and the rocky mountain, testify to the Creator’s power and wisdom. Yet they are not mentioned in the Qurʾān simply because they were unfamiliar phenomena to the Arabs at the time of the revelation. In many instances, the Qurʾān adopts the language of commerce to express its concepts and teachings, because the Arabs’ livelihood was largely based on trade, and commercial terms were part of their everyday life—terms such as: profit (ribḥ), loss (khusrān), trade (tijārah), sale (bayʿ), purchase (shirāʾ), loan (qarḍ), servant (ʿabd), and the like. God could, of course, have used the terminology of life in the computer age to convey His intended meanings, but in that case the Qurʾānic meanings would have appeared entirely incomprehensible and meaningless to the Arabs of the revelatory era. Almost all the important terms of Qurʾānic culture had precedents in pre-Islamic Arab culture—terms such as: Allāh, prophet (nabī), resurrection (qiyāmah), paradise (jannah), hell (jahannam), jinn, intercession (shafāʿah), piety (taqwā), dignity (karāmah), unbelief (kufr), submission (islām), faith (īmān), the Day of Reckoning (yawm al-ḥisāb), and the like. The rhymed prose (sajʿ) style of the Qurʾān also largely reflects the mentality of the Arabs of that era. In the pre-Islamic Arab tradition, rhymed prose was considered a sign of the divine or inspired origin of speech, and thus the rhymed prose style of the Qurʾānic verses made it easier for the people to accept the divine origin of the Qurʾān. More importantly, many religious rites and rituals, as well as social and legal institutions and regulations in the Qurʾān, are derived from pre-Islamic traditions and rituals. The majority of Islamic rulings and regulations are confirmatory (imḍāʾī) rather than foundational (taʾsīsī)—that is, they are rulings that were current among the pre-Islamic Arabs and, with certain modifications, found their way into Islamic-Qurʾānic culture—rulings such as the Ḥajj pilgrimage, the sacrificial rites, the standing at ʿArafāt, the stoning of the Jamarāt, the sanctity of the sacred months, the pledge of allegiance (bayʿah), consultation (shūrā), the laws of transactions, marriage, divorce, blood money (diyah), and the like. But perhaps the most important reflection of the Arab world in the Qurʾānic revelation should be seen in the reflection of the people’s mythological cosmology in the sacred text. For example, the Qurʾān speaks of devils eavesdropping at the gates of heaven and being driven away from that threshold by piercing meteors (shihāb thāqib); or in the story of Dhū al-Qarnayn, according to the apparent meaning of the verses, he reached a place where the sun set in a muddy spring. This image corresponded to the ancient Arabs’ belief that in the west there was a well into which the sun descended and from which it rose. Or in Abraham’s argument with Nimrod, he speaks of his God bringing the sun out from the east, and challenges Nimrod to bring it out from the west if he can. Also, the Qurʾān repeatedly speaks of the seven-tiered heavens. These images largely reflect the Ptolemaic cosmology accepted in that era. Likewise, the central phenomenon of “revelation” (waḥy) was also understood within the context of pre-Islamic Arab culture: in the Arab mind, there was a deep connection between the phenomena of poetry and soothsaying (kihānah) and beings called jinn. Within this framework, a human could communicate with supernatural beings. This belief was the cultural backdrop for the phenomenon of religious revelation. Thus, the Arabs did not deny the possibility of revelation; rather, they disputed the content of the revelatory message and the authenticity of the Prophet of Islam’s revelatory experience. Moreover, many of the ethical values of the Bedouin Arabs found an echo, in a modified form, in Qurʾānic ethics. For instance, the virtue of murūwah (manliness), which was the foundation of pre-Islamic Arab ethics, also played a fundamental role in Islamic ethics. Some of the most important virtues of Bedouin Arab life, such as generosity, loyalty, patience, honesty, and courage, were manifested in the structure of virtue-oriented Qurʾānic ethics. In short, the signs of the presence of Arab culture in the Qurʾān are far more numerous than the cases mentioned. But even these examples show how the culture of the people is presupposed in the Qurʾān so that the Qurʾānic message might be conveyed to its audience in the most effective manner. The second world of the text is precisely the message that was God’s primary purpose in sending down the revelation. From the Muslim perspective, the Qurʾān possesses a transhistorical and eternal message that has been sent down for all humankind. This world is the essence of the sacred text and is ultimately the semantic structure that enfolds the manifestation of God within the experience of being addressed. The sanctity of the Qurʾān derives from the sanctity of this world.

Therefore, the first world of the text plays a purely instrumental role and is a bridge that conveys the reader from their own world to the sacred world of the text, that is, the second world. The first world is necessary for transmitting the message, but it is not an essential part of the message. If God had addressed a people other than the Arabs, the first world of the text would have changed entirely, without the second world of the text necessarily undergoing a fundamental change. Hence, a distinction must be made between Arab culture and Quranic culture. Arab culture is a necessary part of conveying the Quranic message, but it is not a necessary part of the Quranic message itself. The condition of being a Muslim is commitment to the second world of the text, that is, Quranic culture, not commitment to the first world of the text, that is, the culture of the Arabs at the time of the revelation. A Muslim can reject the first world of the text entirely without losing their faith and adherence to the second world of the text.

Now, assuming these premises, a definition of the "hermeneutic predicament" can be offered: the hermeneutic predicament is the profound epistemic gap that has occurred between the reader's world and the first world of the sacred text. In the pre-modern world, the world of the revelation's addressees was largely identical to the first world of the sacred text. Readers of the sacred text lived more or less in the same world as the Arabs at the time of the revelation. The epistemic and value world of the text's readers did not differ fundamentally from the first world of the sacred text. The cosmology assumed in the first world of the Quran was the same cosmology that the text's readers believed in. The livelihood system assumed in the first world of the sacred text was more or less analogous to the livelihood system and lifeworld of the text's reader. In other words, the semantic horizon of the text and the reader were largely congruent. Therefore, the reader could, without any fundamental difficulty, enter from their own world into the first world of the text and from there into the second world of the text. It seemed that no significant epistemic barrier prevented the addressee of revelation from entering the second world of the text. The first world of the text was a transparent window for them that clearly revealed the world beyond it, that is, the second world of the text. Thus, if the reader sat behind that window, they could easily see the world beyond it. But in the modern world, the world of the revelation's addressee has become fundamentally different from the first world of the text. Today's reader does not share many of the epistemic and value beliefs of the Arabs at the time of the revelation. Their way of life and level of knowledge have fundamentally transformed. Therefore, their world has become entirely alien to the first world of the text. It is for this reason that the first world of the text can no longer serve as a bridge between their world and the second world of the sacred text. In this situation, the second condition for transmitting the message, namely the exchange of the message within a shared cultural and lived context, is not fulfilled. It is for this reason that the modern reader of the Quran finds it difficult to step into the inner world of the Quran. Confronting the sacred text confronts the modern reader with a massive volume of difficult questions regarding the issue of women, the system of slavery, scientific and cosmological theories, the issue of human rights, and so on. The modern addressee is alien to the first world of the text, meaning a kind of epistemic rupture has occurred between their world and the first world of the text, and this rupture prevents the modern addressee of the sacred text from stepping into the second world of the sacred text and re-experiencing the experience of revelatory address within the sanctuary of their own life. This epistemic rupture has clouded the window of the text and does not allow modern humanity to clearly behold the world beyond it.

But how should the modern human confront this hermeneutic predicament? It seems that modern readers and interpreters of the Quran must, in the first step, distinguish between Arab culture and Quranic culture, that is, recognize the distinction between the first world and the second world of the sacred text, and note that the abrogation of the culture of the Arabs at the time of the revelation's descent does not mean the abrogation of Quranic culture and message. In the second step, the modern addressees of revelation must know that their goal is to enter the second world of the text and re-experience the event of address; therefore, they must critique the first world of the text, namely the culture of the Arabs at the time of the revelation's descent, so that they can pass through its barrier and find their way into the second world of the text. In the third step, they must strive to separate the Quranic message from the shell of Arab culture and bring it into the historical horizon of the revelation's contemporary addressees. In other words, they must strive to find a common ground between the second world of the text and the world of the contemporary reader, and culturally translate the core message of the revelation into the world of the text's contemporary addressees. The first world of the text was the bridge connecting the second world of the text and the world of the text's reader. But this bridge has, to a large extent, become dilapidated for contemporary addressees, and the modern addressees of the text must strive, through reconstructing this intermediary world, to open the way into the sacred world of the text, and revive the possibility of re-experiencing the revelatory experience of the text within their own world.

Therefore, the flourishing of the religious life of devout Muslims depends on a return to the Quran. But the doctrine of "return to the Quran" is susceptible to misunderstanding. Many Salafi-oriented Muslims consider this doctrine to mean a return to the first world of the sacred text, that is, the reconstruction of the world of the Arabs at the time of the revelation's descent. The Salafist ideal is the recreation of the society of the Arabs in the early days of Islam. But the culture and way of life of the Arabs at the time of the revelation's descent possesses no special advantage, and returning to that era or reconstructing that bygone culture (assuming it is possible) means ignoring the astonishing progress of humanity in various fields of thought and action. The doctrine of "return to the Quran," however, must be understood as a return to the second world of the sacred text, that is, the re-experiencing of the event of address that manifested in the Quran and upon the heart of the Prophet of Islam. The true Muslim is one who, through living in the sacred world of the Quran, experiences the Prophet's revelatory experience within their own being, and ascends with him to the Mi'raj:

Ascend to the Mi'raj, for you are of the Prophet's kin, Kiss the moon's face, for you are upon a lofty roof.

.

---

.

Essay "The Sacred Text and the Hermeneutic Predicament"

Arash Naraghi

.

---

.