By: Prof. Dr. Abdul Fattah al-‘Awari
Dean of Usul al-Din Faculty, al-Azhar University
Introduction
“Religious Discourse” is a wide-spread term between those who call for renewal and modernization, despite their different approaches and objectives. Indeed, this term has been spreading among the intellectuals, the visual, broadcast and print media, as well as in the writings of reformers in generals.
Despite the fact that “Religious Discourse” is a familiar term, however, its dimensions, uses and consequences are not defined.
In fact, the religious duty obliges us to define the concepts, clarify the role they play in renewing the religious discourse; indeed, many of the concepts should be defined accurately, while taking into account their context and apprehending the semantics of the concepts’ meanings in the language. Again, it should be taken into concern the intended meaning of the uttered term, is it the explicit or the implicit one, and what type of analogy shall be used, the initial or the equivalent one, and whether it shall be used in the formalist or non-formalist form… etc. indeed, there are so many uses and indications for every single concept.
Unfortunately, the most misinterpreted concepts, that threw their shadows on our religious discourse and disturbed it, are: the concept of Jihad, Caliphate, the Abode of Islam (Dar al-Salam” and the Abode of Disbelief (Dar al-Kufr). Indeed, these misinterpreted concepts have been disseminated by the extremist intolerant groups that do not enjoy any of the scientific tools or methodologies; if these concepts had been correctly used within its righteous and lawful framework, it would have played a magnificent role in renewing the religious discourse. Grievously, these misinterpreted concepts have become part of the intolerant extremist religious discourse, a discourse that gravely harmed and defamed Islam, and gave its enemies the opportunity to judge the Islamic religious discourse in a biased way.
Indeed, al-Azhar scholars in the different specializations are concerned with defining the exact interpretations of these concepts, clarifying the meanings of the lawful evidences, as well as the lingual connotations that support such evidences.
As a matter of fact, “Religious Discourse” is the intellectual production, the scientific and jurisprudential wealth that senior Muslim scholars had left us; indeed, they studied, in depth, the texts of the Islamic Shari’ah and deducted several concepts and views.
Thus, renewing religious discourse, that is intended here, is not that related to lawful texts, whether the holy Quran or the authentic Prophetic Sunnah. If lawful duty requires careful examination of texts that were transmitted to us by imams (RA), it should be taken into consideration that the examiner should be neutral and impartial with regards to opinions of different scholars and expose their pros and cons.
An example of renewing religious discourse (renewing methodologies and heritage of commentators). I am totally convinced that sufficing with repeating opinions of former scholars without commentating on them hinder effluence of Quran “And if all the trees on earth were pens, and the sea replenished with seven more seas, the Words of God would not be spent. Truly Allah is Mighty, Wise.” [Q. 31: 27]
Regarding opinions of ancient scholars, people are divided into two groups: The first group strongly clings to what ancient scholars mentioned. The second group is in total contradiction with what ancient scholars mentioned. Both groups constitute a great danger.
Then, what could be done in the domain of renewing methodologies of commentators so that we do not belong to one of the above-mentioned groups. We represent a third group that examines opinions and texts of ancient scholars, further explains and clarifies what they mentioned. At the same time, this group eliminates intruded ideas. Thus, light is shed on the authentic. Owing to this moderate approach for renovation, nobody can accuse us with destroying or changing heritage since we shed light on its authenticity and well-established aspects.
It is worth mentioning that calls for renovation emerged on the hands of great sincere reformers after a while of claiming that the doors of ijtihad were closed and that there was no hope for renewing. As a result, scholars sufficed with imitating their formers with few explanations and clarifications.
However, some investigated Imams such as Hujjat al-Islam “proof of Islam” Al-Ghazali (May Allah be merciful to him) is an exception. He said in his book “The Revival of the Religious Sciences”: “Reflection on reciting the Quran, namely, to reconsider the verse and understand it; to seek clarification from each verse what is appropriate to reveal the hidden meanings that are revealed only to the fortunate.”
Imam Al-Ghazali (May Allah be merciful to him) said that one of the barriers of understanding the Quran is to read an interpretation and think that the only meaning of the Quran’s words is what was transmitted by Ibn Abbas and Mojahed and to think that there are no other interpretations; this is one of the great veils.
It is worth mentioning that Fakhr al-Din al-Razi said in interpreting the following verse: “Consort with them in kindness;” [Q. 4:19], it has been proven in the principles of the Islamic law that the interpretation of the predecessors of a verse from one perspective does not prevent the successors to mention another perspective in its interpretation, otherwise the specifics of the interpretation that had been derived by ancestors, will be rejected.
Furthermore, Sufyan ibn ʽUyaynah said in the interpretation of the following verse: “But whoever makes a breach with the Messenger after guidance has become clear to him, and follows other than the way of the believers, we shall turn him over to what he has turned to, and We shall expose him in Hell – an evil journey’s end.” [Q. 4:115], beware of .the lure of the debauched scholar and the ignorant worshiper, because both of them constitute a temptation for all intrigued.
Besides, Sharaf ad-Din at-Tibi said in his book “Fotoh al-Ghaib” that the conditions of the correct interpretation are to be identical to the term in terms of good use, simplicity and accuracy, otherwise it will be as Zamakhshari called, a heresy (bidah) of interpretation.
It is worth mentioning that the interpretations and discoveries of the meanings of the Quran expanded as a result of the Quran’s understanding of those who have been given knowledge.
Was the saying of our scholars right, when they said that “Quran has endless wonders” except by expanding its interpretation? Otherwise, the interpretation of the Qur’an would be brief in a few papers?
The multiple interpretations are considered a kind of renewal that achieves the sublime objective of the guidance of the Quran.
The renewal is open to all who are eligible for this in terms of knowledge and tools that make them capable of diligence and deduction. In this regard, Judge Al-Baydawi said, it is only appropriate to discuss and tackle the problem of renewal by those who have excelled in all religious sciences; foundations and branches, and all disciplines of arts as well.
This is my vision for renewal and defining the concepts.
