| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
The Fatiha (Opening) is the first sura (chapter) of the Qur’an and most common prayer of Islam. If you’re a pious Muslim who prays the five requisite daily prayers of Islam, you will recite the Fatiha seventeen times in the course of those prayers. According to an Islamic tradition, the Muslim prophet Muhammad said that the Fatiha surpassed anything revealed by Allah (“the God” in Arabic, and the word for God used by Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews, as well as Muslims) in the Torah, the Gospel, or the rest of the Qur’an. And indeed, it efficiently and eloquently encapsulates many of the principal themes of the Qur’an and Islam in general: Allah as the “Lord of the Worlds,” who alone is to be worshiped and asked for help, the merciful judge of every soul on the Last Day.
In Islamic theology, Allah is the speaker of every word of the Qur’an. Some have found it strange that Allah would say something like “praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds,” but the traditional Islamic understanding is that Allah revealed this prayer to Muhammad early in his career as a prophet (which began in the year 610 AD, when he received his first revelation from Allah through the angel Gabriel – a revelation that is now contained in the Qur’an’s 96th chapter) so that the Muslims would know how to pray.
It is for its last two verses that the Fatiha is of most concern to non-Muslims, and for which it has been in the news lately. A Shi’ite imam, Husham Al-Husainy, ignited controversy by paraphrasing this passage during a prayer at a Democratic National Committee winter meeting, giving the impression that he was praying that the assembled pols convert to Islam. Then Imam Yusuf Kavakci of the Dallas Central Mosque prayed the Fatiha at the Texas State Senate, giving rise to the same concerns.
The final two verses of the Fatiha asks Allah: “Show us the straight path, the path of those whom Thou hast favoured; not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray.” The traditional Islamic understanding of this is that the “straight path” is Islam — cf. Islamic apologist John Esposito’s book Islam: The Straight Path. The path of those who have earned Allah’s anger are the Jews, and those who have gone astray are the Christians.
The classic Qur’anic commentator Ibn Kathir explains that “the two paths He described here are both misguided,” and that those “two paths are the paths of the Christians and Jews, a fact that the believer should beware of so that he avoids them. The path of the believers is knowledge of the truth and abiding by it. In comparison, the Jews abandoned practicing the religion, while the Christians lost the true knowledge. This is why ‘anger’ descended upon the Jews, while being described as ‘led astray’ is more appropriate of the Christians.”
Ibn Kathir’s understanding of this passage is not a lone “extremist” interpretation. In fact, most Muslim commentators believe that the Jews are those who have earned Allah’s wrath and the Christians are those who have gone astray. This is the view of Tabari, Zamakhshari, the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, the Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas, and Ibn Arabi, as well as Ibn Kathir. One contrasting, but not majority view, is that of Nisaburi, who says that “those who have incurred Allah’s wrath are the people of negligence, and those who have gone astray are the people of immoderation.”
Wahhabis drew criticism a few years back for adding “such as the Jews” and “such as the Christians” into parenthetical glosses on this passage in Qur’ans printed in Saudi Arabia. Some Western commentators imagined that the Saudis originated this interpretation, and indeed the whole idea of Qur’anic hostility toward Jews and Christians. Muslims all over the world learn as a matter of course that the central prayer of their faith anathematizes Jews and Christians.
But unfortunately, this interpretation is venerable and mainstream in Islamic theology. The printing of the interpretation in parenthetical glosses into a translation would be unlikely to affect Muslim attitudes, since the Arabic text is always and everywhere normative in any case, and since so many mainstream commentaries contain the idea that the Jews and Christians are being criticized here. Seventeen times a day, by the pious.
Please note that I am not saying that the anti-Jewish and anti-Christian interpretation of the Fatiha is the “correct” one. While I don’t believe that religious texts are infinitely malleable and can be made to mean whatever the reader wants them to mean, as some apparently do, in this case Nisaburi’s reading has as much to commend it as the other: there is nothing in the text itself that absolutely compels one to believe that it is talking about Jews and Christians. And it is noteworthy that in his massive and evocatively named 30-volume commentary on the Qur’an, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an (In the Shade of the Qur’an), the twentieth-century jihad theorist Sayyid Qutb doesn’t mention Jews or Christians in connection with this passage. At the same time, however, the idea in Islam that Jews have earned Allah’s anger and Christians have gone astray doesn’t depend on this passage alone. The Jews have earned Allah’s anger by rejecting Muhammad (2:87-90), and the Christians have gone astray by holding to the divinity of Christ (5:72).
The Hadith, the traditions of the words and deeds of Muhammad and the early Muslims, also contains material linking Jews to Allah’s anger and Christians to his curse, which resulting from their straying from the true path. (The Jews are accursed also, according to Qur’an 2:89, and both are accursed according to 9:30). One hadith recounts that an early Muslim, Zaid bin ‘Amr bin Nufail, in his travels met with Jewish and Christian scholars. The Jewish scholar told him, “You will not embrace our religion unless you receive your share of Allah’s Anger,” and the Christian said, “You will not embrace our religion unless you get a share of Allah’s Curse.” Zaid, needless to say, became a Muslim.
In light of these and similar passages it shouldn’t be surprising that many Muslim commentators have understood the Fatiha to be encapsulating these views.
Next week: An introduction to the longest chapter of the Qur’an, Sura 2, “The Cow,” and a brief overview of verses 1-39.
(Here you can find links to all the earlier "Blogging the Qur'an" segments. Here is a good Arabic Qur’an, with English translations available; here are two popular Muslim translations, those of Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, along with a third by M. H. Shakir. Here is another popular translation, that of Muhammad Asad. And here is an omnibus of ten Qur’an translations.)
Posted by Robert at June 4, 2007 6:45 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Excellent!
I'm eagerly looking forward to following this series. Having read some of the comments I have two points of interest . . .
Commenter "Zorro" asked:
"One thing however, I could use a pronunciation guide for some of the words"
. . . perhaps something like that could be included with a link to the Islam 101.
At least three comments refer to Craig Winn's "Prophet of Doom". I don't recall reading any reference to this author here in JW/DW.
JW/DW comments?
Posted by: justamomof4![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at June 4, 2007 9:11 AM
Sure wish they'd open registration again at Hot Air!
I assume then that "allah" (lowercase "a") as the chief pagan deity in pre-Islamic times meant "the god."
As for "allah's" wife the Sun goddess and their 3 daughters - Muhammed simply threw them out in the trash along with the other 300 + pagan deities. I believe "the satanic verses" event involved the 3 daughters.
Posted by: darcy at June 4, 2007 9:21 AM
Good blog, good idea, keep it up...thanx
Posted by: duh_swami at June 4, 2007 12:22 PM
May I suggest links between consecutive postings. For example, one cannot go from the opening at http://hotair.com/archives/2007/05/27/blogging-the-quran/
to "The Opening" at http://hotair.com/archives/2007/06/03/blogging-the-quran-sura-1-the-opening/
at June 4, 2007 12:28 PM
An online "Critic's Annotated Quran"--or whatever one may call it--is certainly needed. Robert's Blogging the Quran is a helpful resource for educating the general public about Islam's core teachings. It's also a handy commentary for Islam critics. To my knowledge there is nothing of this quality, written from a non-Muslim and critical perspective, on the internet. Craig Winn's commentary has some dubious elements (e.g., his practice of altering and editing quotations), and the skepticsannotatedquran remains amateurish and incomplete.
Re: the Fatiha, and the issue of whether the unspecified "those who are astray" and "those who have earned [Allah's] wrath" refers to Christians and Jews, respectively, it is important first to look at the rest of the Quran to get an overall sense of what those phrases mean. It is also important to...
...consider similar words and concepts, e.g., someone who is "in error" is astray; and someone who has received or is threatened with Allah's punishments (and fury, anger, terror, doom, chastisement, etc.) can be said to have earned Allah's wrath
...understand what constitutes being astray/in error, and what qualifies as earning Allah's wrath/punishment
...get an idea of what punishments Allah gives or approves
...find out about how Muslims are supposed to deal with those who are astray/who have earned Allah's wrath.
A thorough search of http://www.quranbrowser.com/ in light of the above issues reveals that anyone who deviates from Islam is astray, and anyone who deviates from Islam has earned Allah's wrath/punishment. That is, those who are astray have earned Allah's wrath. Those are not two separate categories; for there are no people who remain astray (from Islam) who Allah tolerates; all of them have earned his wrath. In short, the basic message Islam is truth, everything deviant from that is error, the worst sin/crime is disbelief in Islam, and those disbelievers are to be punished in the life of the world and in the hereafter. The phrases "those who are astray" and "those who have earned [Allah's] wrath" certainly are used in reference to the Christians and Jews, respectively, in multiple instances, but the phrases (or their similars) are also used in reference to many other kinds of disbelievers, polytheists/idolators, hypocrites, and apostates. Note again that the Quran also refers to Jews and Christians as having ascribed partners to Allah, 9:30. The Jews are also said to have earned Allah's wrath because they made friends with those who disbelieve (5:80).
The underlying issue regarding the inclusion of Christians and Jews in the two categories (astray and recipient of wrath) is simply whether or not Christians and Jews are accepted in Islam. Inspection of the Quran again shows that the true believers are only those who accept Muhammad and his revelations, obey him, submit to him, and believe as he believes (including sharing his idiosyncratic perspectives about Christianity and Judaism). Islam is a package deal, and Muhammad is the key distinguishing part of that package. Verses such as 2:62 and 5:69, which Islamic apologists often cite as showing an acceptance of Christians and Jews, do not specify exactly what is meant by believing in Allah and the Last Day and "doeth right." But it is clear from the Quran that those who reject Muhammad's revelations are rejecting the word of Allah and will be punished for it.
48:13. "And so for him who believeth not in Allah and His messenger - Lo! We have prepared a flame for disbelievers."
6:33. "We know well how their talk grieveth thee, though in truth they deny not thee (Muhammad) but evil-doers flout the revelations of Allah."
Some other large stumbling blocks for Muslim reformists:
-Allah himself sends people astray (4:88), who then have earned his anger for being astray.
-the good works of disbelievers will be canceled by Allah (e.g., 18:104).
-Muslims who turn back from battle when it is obligatory will incur Allah's wrath upon them (8:16; 9:38-39).
at June 4, 2007 3:24 PM
I read what you wrote, Khaybar Oasis.
Right, it's clear that ANY "disbeliever" has incurred Allah's wrath. ANY. So, obviously Jews and Christians are included in that group.
Posted by: darcy at June 4, 2007 4:18 PM
justamomof4, RS has had "differences" with Craig Winn. The POD used to be linked with JW, but is not now.
Posted by: interestinconundrum at June 4, 2007 10:19 PM
interestinconundrum, thank you.
at June 4, 2007 11:19 PM
Thanks for doing this.
I've read Craig Winn's "Prophet of Doom", so I know what to expect.
Posted by: YshaYahuw at June 5, 2007 1:37 AM
Silightly off topic but how do I restrict my print out of the article? I only wanted to print Robert's two pages but ended up with sixteen pages including all the Blowback, Trackback/Pings as well. Or are the comments part of the study course that I am setting myself?
Advice from some more intelligent/computer literate poster would be appreciated.
Remember: 'If one can help somebody as one stumbles along, then, in turn, someone special shall lift them up.' (Old adage)
Posted by: meekee at June 5, 2007 7:06 AM
When I attempt to log in at Hot Air I am directed to a login page at WordPress. So I go through the steps to create a WordPress account, including giving my email address. I am then promised that I will receive a password. The password never arrives, and I am not registered.
What gives?
Are these folks just mining emails? I don't have time for such nonsense.
-----------
Anyway, sorry for the vent. Since I can't get on there I'll post a couple of things here in response to the installments on the introduction and Surah 1.
I'd be interested in some commentary on exactly what is considered "part of the Qur'an. In particular, what about:
- The numbering of the Ayats
- The names of each Surah "the cow", etc.
- The prologue to each Surah except #9, vis "In the name of..."
Along the same line, what of the apparent treatment of the Qur'an as inviolable? I find it remarkable that this doesn't seem widely addressed. Here I speak not only of the apparent idolatrous view of the physical books and their pages -- to the extent that harm done to one such book might lead a muslim into a murderous (literally) rage.
I'm thinking more of what happens when one takes the logical extension of this view. For instance:
1. apparently an "ink and paper" quran is considered holy, and harming one is sacrilige. But is this view supportable? During the lifetime of Mohammed there was NO SUCH THING! (The Qur'an was a purely oral tradition.) So how can this attitude be inferred from anything Mohammed said or did, or anything in the Quran or Hadith?
2. What about other forms? We saw the recent furor over "desecration" of a Turkish flag because it had a symbol of Islam on it, and of art with Qur'anic verses printed on it. Is the Qur'an sacred in any form it occurs? What about on a web page? If one deletes a webpage with Qur'anic verses, is that the same as burning a Qur'an? What if one writes a commentary and intersperses text by cutting and pasting? How is this any different from taking the CAIR-distributed Qur'an and cutting out passages with scissors and pasting it onto a physical page on which other things are written? What about digital media with copies of the Qur'an? Is it sacrilege to erase or modify them?
--------
I really like the translation distributed by Middle East Web, which is clearly hagiographic, and hastily constructed, but it is very easy to use, quite readable in English though inconsistent and a bit sloppy grammatically, but best of all it is a searchable pdf -- very helpful in many ways, such as for quickly navigating by topic. The occasional section on commentary also gives a good idea of the Islamic perspective on historical things connected to the Qur'an; it seems pretty "orthodox". You can find it at:
http://www.mideastweb.org/quran.htm
But I cannot discern which translation it is. I wonder if someone knows if it is standard or an independent translation, and if the latter I wouldn't mind an expert opinion on how accurate it is, in comparison to others?
-------------
Finally, a request for Surah 2: Will Robert be able to give us a definitive Islamic explanation for the three meaningless Arabic alphabetic characters that appear at the beginning? My own theory is that Mohammed was rather proud of what little literacy he had, and to show his great scholarship, scrawled these three characters on a parchment on which someone had taken notes on the Surah as he recited. I think he intended them to spell "COW", but sounded it out wrong...
Posted by: Archimedes2 at June 7, 2007 11:30 PM
Okay, I just got the belated email from Wordpress, with a password with which I was able to log in. But I was still unable to comment on the Hot Air Qur'an blog -- it tells me that my username does not exist!
-------
Perhaps more disturbing is that the protocol is not https, but http. All information, including passwords, is sent in the plain.
Come to think of it, the same is true on jihadwatch. Our comments and identities, IP addresses and so on, are not secure, and could easily be hacked. I think I may be a bit reluctant to continue to post ...
Posted by: Archimedes2 at June 7, 2007 11:38 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)