Reading the Quran by Ziauddin Sardar
-
http//static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Books/Pix/covers/2011/6/29/1309345028136/Reading-the-Quran.jpg
Reading the Qur'an by Ziauddin Sardar ? review
Ziauddin Sardar's progressive reading of the Qur'an is to be welcomedIn the summer of 2002, responding to the 9/11 atrocity, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill made a selection of verses from the Qur'an a mandatory text for new students. A conservative forum called the Family Policy Network then sued the university for violating the US constitution by forcing "incoming freshmen and transfer students to study Islam against their will". Although the university eventually won in court (after conceding an opt-out which very few students took up), in the resulting furore TV commentators across the US compared the Qur'an to Hitler's Mein Kampf. The same charge has been made by the Dutch MP Geert Wilders, who has called for the book to be banned. As Ziauddin Sardar explains in his preface, what the Qur'an actually says is shrouded in veils of assumptions and received opinions among Muslims the text is invoked to support directly contradictory positions. A majority insists it is a book of peace, while extremists use it to legitimise mass murder.
In today's climate, few books are more deserving of study. As Harold Bloom, the veteran literary critic, has remarked, "ignorance of the Qur'an is foolish and increasingly dangerous". For people wise enough to heed Bloom's warning, Sardar's book ? an extended meditation built around the Qur'an's first two chapters ? is a good place to start.
No one would claim that the Qur'an is an easy text, even in translation. At first reading, the western reader familiar with biblical narratives may be inclined to agree with Thomas Carlyle on reading George Sale's English translation of 1734 that the book is a "wearisome confused jumble, crude, incondite; endless iterations, long-windedness, entanglement . . . insupportable stupidity, in short!" Modern readers of English fortunately have the advantage of the fine poetic rendering by the Palestinian scholar Tarif Khalidi, published by Penguin, and the scholarly translation with commentary by Muhammad Asad, an Austrian convert who lived for many years in Saudi Arabia and made a special study of the Hijazi dialect, which he saw as essential to understanding the Qur'an's often obscure locutions.
Sardar, an Urdu speaker who brings a useful south Asian perspective to his study, makes use of both these translations, along with a new version by the classically trained Egyptian scholar Muhammad Abdel-Haleem as well as older, long-established versions by the Cambridge scholar AJ Arberry, the British convert Marmaduke Pickthall and the Indian Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1872-1953) whose translation and commentary, censored in places to accommodate the kingdom's prejudices, is one of the most widely distributed, thanks to Saudi munificence.
For Sardar, the Qur'an is above all an "open" book, a spiritual and moral resource that, properly understood, provides Muslims with useful guidance through the complexities of modern life. He notes that "human perversity as well as ignorance can turn what is open and available to all into intricate, complicated means to divide people". Instead of divine consciousness and guidance being the moral principles which bring people together, it becomes the embodiment of the most irreducible differences. The Qur'an should be seen as a "training manual for human nature". Submitting ourselves to its wisdom, he insists, "should mean testing and interrogating all our ideas and experiences afresh". Muslims, he argues, must "teach themselves to read the Qur'an liberated from the weight of tradition and classical commentaries". Divine revelation demands that "we constantly think outside the box of our earthly concerns by keeping in mind the intersection of time and timelessness".
Writing as "Every Muslim" with a deep love of a text he learned at his mother's knee, Sardar rises to this challenge, wrestling with problematic passages that would seem to run counter to his generally progressive and enlightened outlook. An example is the seemingly patronising or misogynistic passage stating that the testimony of one man is worth that of two women in certain legal proceedings ? a rubric that has made it virtually impossible for a woman in some Muslim countries to bring an accusation of rape against a man without herself incurring a charge of zina or sexual misconduct. Sardar argues that where the specific conditions that determined the circumstances of this revelation ? a higher rate of illiteracy or innumeracy among females than males ? have changed, the requirement no longer need apply. All that the Qur'an is suggesting is "that different situations require different kinds of witnesses".
He arrives at similar progressive readings on such controversial contemporary issues as homosexuality and the Qur'anic punishment of amputation for theft. The interpretation of specificities must depend on the historic context. In 7th-century Arabia, where Muhammad dictated the revelations "sent down" to him by God, there were no prisons. Today, circumstances are different. On another highly controversial rubric, allowing (or urging) men to beat recalcitrant wives, he follows the Iranian-American translator Laleh Bakhtiar in finding a different meaning ? "go away from" ? for the word usually translated as "smack" or "strike". This interpretation could even suggest a sensible anger-management approach to domestic strife.
Sardar does not engage with recent revisionist views of early Islamic history suggesting that the Qur'an may have originated in the strophic hymns of Aramaic-speaking Christians in Palestine rather than Arabia. He is to be commended, however, for opening the doors of a text of uncertain origin that, understood comprehensively, celebrates the divine in nature and emphasises social justice, human responsibility and the wholehearted pursuit of knowledge. His efforts to dispose of problematic issues such as intolerance and gender inequality will not satisfy everyone, and there will always be people who will say "why not just ditch the whole business?" But before doing so they should take the trouble to read Sardar's book. At least they would then have some idea of what they would be missing.
Malise Ruthven's Fundamentalism is published by OUP.
Source
http//www.theguardian.com/books/2011/jul/01/reading-quran-ziauddin-sardar-review
-
In the book "Reading the Quran" the author talks about many interesting Quranic concepts and ideas. I found this book last summer and have read many pages in it, but unfortunately I haven't read the whole book yet.
From what I have read so far, I think it is a very good book. Ziauddin Sardar is pakistani scholar and traditional muslim. Even though the author is a traditional muslim, I think his approach towards islam/quran is intelligent and enlightening. I especially like the fact that he uses a psychological/philosophical approach towards some Quranic concepts and ideas in his book. For those who want to learn more about the teachings of the Quran, I deeply recommend this book.
A few paragraps from page 191-193 in the book
The Quran is concerned that we understand the nature and purpose of charity there are right and wrong ways in which it can be dispensed. For believers it is an 'affirmation of their own faith.' Charity is accepting an obligation towards and responsibility for the living conditions of our fellow citizens.
...The entire thrust of the etiquette of charity set out in this passage is that it must operate to undermine, rather than emphasise, the divisions in society. Charity should not highlight the distinction between haves and have nots; it should be conducted not just to eradicate those differences but by submerging and ignoring those distinctions. This is achieved as much through how charity is delivered as in the effects that giving has on the lives of its recipients. The Quran suggests something very profound charity should consist of the best we have to give, not the kind of things we would ourselves disdain to possess. Charity is not about giving away our cast-offs; it is not about a paternalistic attitude that looks down on those in need and suggests that second best is good enough for the poor; charity is not about hand me downs it is offering a helping hand up.
...Charity is solely to earn God's pleasure, whose Compassion is Infinite; our duty is to try and mirror this unending compassion, on which we depend, in all activities including charity. It is an act of worship that connects us directly to God. It remains a duty, a constant obligation until such time as we eradicate poverty and the causes of poverty, and need and the causes of need. It is a double imperative on the one hand to appreciate its true meaning; and on the other hand, to operate it in an appropriate manner to serve the real interests of its recipients, not our assesment of what is good enough for them.
I love the similes used in this passage. We have 'grains of corn', 'gardens on a hill; arable land that benefits from rainfall, and rocky land that cannot grow anything. The similes introduce a new kind of logic where things increase by subtraction. So spending one's wealth to support humanity and humane causes is like 'grains of corn that produce seven ears, each bearing a hundred grains' (v.261). Thus one adds to one's wealth by actually subtracting from it.In his book, Ziauddin Sardar has written a chapter about the quranic stance on "sex." From his interpretations of the Quranic verses regarding sex, it seems that he suggests that sex is allowed for pleasure (without a higher purpose). On the other hand, there are some muslim thinkers who claim that sex is only intended for procreation (a higher purpose). For example the pakistani Scholar Ghulam Ahmed Parwez, in his book "Family Planning", seems to suggest that sex is only intended for procreation. If anyone wants to read his book, it can be downloaded from the link below.
http//resurgentislam.com/wp-content/uploads/Family-Planning-By-Parwez.pdf
Honestly, I haven't made up my mind on who is right and who is wrong when it comes to the Quranic stance on sex. I plan to reflect more about this topic and study it more thoroughly before I make up my on which author is right and which author is wrong when it comes to the Quranic stance on sex.
By the way, below is a link to a webpage for those who wish to purchase Ziauddin Sardar's book.
http//www.alibris.co.uk/Reading-the-Quran-Ziauddin-Sardar/book/16881783
-
Peace.
I have always wondered
Why study books that ask you to read/study Qoran?
Why not use that time to study Qoran directly?My opinion is that Qoran invites us directly , to study it,with " no mediator" ,just wear a sincere heart and trust in God!
In fact Qoran warns us not to rely on anyone else to understand it!!!!Of course one can read what they want to read ,if they stay loyal to God and realise He is the only teacher of Qoran.
One needs to "take" what is best from other books and reject what does not agree with Qoran.
It is "fatal" to take in what "other books" say while rejecting Qoran( sometimes without realising!!). That is why studying Qoran and trusting only on God to explain it is vital.
GOD bless .
Peace. -
Why study books that ask you to read/study Qoran?
Why not use that time to study Qoran directly?Why not do both?
-
Peace to all,
I would like to share a few paragraphs with you from the chapter Crime and Punishment in the book "Reading the Quran." I think the information in this chapter is interesting and eye-opening. Therefore I would like to share it with you all.
A few paragraphs from page 255-256 in the book
Crime and punishment are not a major theme of the Qur'an. Out of the 6200 verses in the Quran, Abdel Haleem tells us, '70 verses discuss personal law, 70 verses civil law, and 20 judiciary matters and testimony'. Moreover, these tend to deal with general principles such as justice, kindness and charity, rather than detailed laws; even legal matters are explained in language that appeals to the emotions, conscience and belief in God. In verses dealing with retaliation (2178-9), once the principles are established, the text goes on to soften the hearts of both parties offender and victims . Despite the fact that only a handful of verses deal with punitive injunctions, the issue of crime and punishment has become controversial, not because of what the Qur'an says, but how the matter is treated in Islamic law, or Shari'a. It is thus assumed, by Muslims and non-Muslims alike, that the Qur'an must devote considerable space to offences and sentence this is why it is worth examining the theme here.
The main concept associated with the Qura'nic view of criminal justice is hadd (plural hudud); it literally means 'limit' or 'boundary', and signifies the limit of what is tolerable and permissible and what is not. In Islamic legal parlance, hudud has come to signify 'fixed punishments', which cannot be changed because they are designed to prevent crime. However, when we examine the term in the Qur'an and compare it with how it has come to be used in Islamic law, we immediately come across a discrepancy.
The word hadd is mentioned fourteen times in the Qur'an. Indeed, we have already encountered the term in 2229-30, where it is mentioned no less than six times, in our discussion about divorce. After instructing the believers that divorce can only happen twice, and laying down guidance about how wives should be treated, the verse tells us that 'these are (hudud) the bounds, set by God do not overstep them', and concludes 'these are hudud Allah which he makes clear for a people who know'. The obvious point to note here is that there is no reference to punishment of any kind! When we examine the occurence of the term elsewhere in the Qur'an (as in 2187, 997, 651, 412-13, 583-5), it becomes clear that it is intended as a moral guideline it describes the boundary within which good and virtuous human conduct is located, where decency resides. This becomes quite clear in the chapter entitled 'Repentance', 9112 'The believers are those who turn to God in repentance; who worship and praise Him; who bow down and prostrate themselves; who order what is good and forbid what is wrong and who observe (hudud Alllah) God's limits.'
Thus, from the perspective of the Qur'an, hadd has nothing to do with punishment and everything to do with establishing the moral tone of the Muslim community. Nevertheless, this did not prevent classical jurists from establishing hadd punishments, particularly for adultery, theft and murder. The Hudud ordinance of Pakistan, for example, is all about such punishments .
-
I would like to share a few more paragraphs from the book "Reading the Quran." The paragraphs I am about to share are from the chapter Approach and Interpretations in Ziauddin Sardar's book.
A few paragraphs from chapter 21-23 in the book
One on level, the Qur'an is an easy book to read. Most pious Muslims read it every day as a devotional exercise. But devotional reading, while a form of prayer, does not take us very far in understanding what we read. Overemphasis on devotion can also lead to a rather simplistic position on the Qur'an. As Mona Siddiqui notes in How to read the Qur'an, most Muslims believe that the Qur'an is 'a closed book which one can only read, recite and obey' . But obedience requires knowing what kind of society the Qur'an seeks, appreciating the distinction between the universal and particular, and understanding how a society adjusts and maintains its basic outlook in the face of rapid social, cultural and environmental changes. The power and guidance of the Qur'an, as Siddiqui notes, emerges when it is read and interpreted in the light of new and changing situations. But reading the Qur'an from the viewpoint of changing situations is rare indeed. On the whole, traditional interpretations of the Qur'an pay little attention to changes in society.
A complex text, particularly one that is seen as eternal, can be interpreted in a number of different ways. Not surprisingly, Muslims have approached and interpreted the Qur'an from a host of different perspectives theological, devotional, literary, literal, legal, allegorical, rhetorical, mystical or philosophical as well as from purely sectarian outlooks. Western scholars have approached the Sacred Text critically, sympathetically, caustically, and sometimes with the intention of undermining it.
New circumstances would raise a host of new questions, all of them leading to new arguments. But the Qur'an does not give definite, yes no answers to our questions. It provides certain principles, the essentials of a moral and ethical framework, allegory and metaphors that hint at direction as a guide to discovering viable solutions. Beyond question, not everything is settled and laid out in the Qur'an. It is up to the reader to wrestle with the text and find the answers.
Yet today there are Muslims who advocate, or allow themselves to be convinced by, a literal reading of the Qur'an; worse, they insist that this literalism contains all the answers necessary to live in the twenty-first century. This belief is not just limited to narrow-minded circles and particular strains of thought. It is also a common position of most intellectuals who support various strands of the 'Islamic movements' as well as various various conservative and traditionalist brands of Islam.
-
Peace everyone,
I deeply recommend the book "Reading the Quran" by Ziauddin Sardar. I consider it one of the best books about islam (from a quranic perspective).
By the way, has anybody read the above-mentioned book? If anybody has read it, it would be interesting to hear your thoughts about it.
-
peace TH,
I have the book and read some of it, it's decent. I intend on reading it all at some point. He writes for The Guardian http//www.theguardian.com/profile/ziauddinsardarI also agree with your comment to gl
Those who listen to what is being said, then follow the best of it.
These are the ones God has guided, and these are the ones who possess intelligence.There are loads of good books here. A little known gem is 'discovering quran' by neal robinson, also the works of toshihiko izutsu are good.
http//www.islam-and-muslims.com/islamic-books-online.html -
Peace Wakas.
I have already said the same if you read my post? Quote from my post
Of course one can read what they want to read ,if they stay loyal to God and realise He is the only teacher of Qoran.
One needs to "take" what is best from other books and reject what does not agree with Qoran.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Peace Wakas,
Thank you for your post. In my view, Ziauddin Sardar's book is not the best book about quran-oriented islam. And I think that there are several books about islam that are much better than his book. That being said, I still think that "Reading the Quran" is one of the best books about islam (from a quranic perspective). And the reason why I think it is one of the best books about quran-oriented islam, is because the author of the book has used a rational and evidence-based approach to the principles, laws and teachings of the quran. The author of the book has used several methods; from traditional exegesis to hermeneutics, critical theory and cultural analysis to draw contemporary lessons from the scripture on a wide range of topics. And I think that is impressive.
I agree that Toshihiko Izutzu's works are good. And I think that Toshihiko Izutzu's book "God and Man in the Quran" is better than Ziauddin Sardar's book. Because Toshihiko Izutzu seems to let the quran explain itself (to a high degree) in his book. And because his analysis focuses on the meaning of quranic words according to their usage in the quran's original language. In some places in the book "Reading the Quran", the author of the book seems to add a lot of his own opinions to the sacred text. If he had let "the quran explain itself" to a higher degree and had mainly focused on the meaning of the quranic words according to their usage in quran's original language, then I think that his book would have been better than it already is.
I have tried to find "Reading the Quran" on the internet. But no one seems to have scanned and uploaded the book yet. I think that it would be good if this book was available for free on the internet. Because then it would reach a much wider audience.
By the way, thank you for mentioning/recommending the book "Discovering Qur'an" by Neal Robinson. I will take a look at it in the future.
