A DISCUSSION ON “Why Islam Is Against Antisemitism?”
A DISCUSSION
ON
Why Islam Is Against Antisemitism?
Following exchange between myself and “being_there” occurred at this blog. It is being reposted for the interest of readers. (KS)
________________________
Peace be unto those who follow right guidance.
Your article conflates the terms ‘race’ and ‘ethnicity’ without defining either term and incorrectly renders the Arabic words shu’ooban wa qabaa’ilan in (49:13) as “nations and tribes”.
being_there
January 27, 2010
________________________
Thank you for pointing out the shortcomings. I shall endeavor to include definitions in future updates. Whilst I have not personally checked the inflection and dictionary meanings of the Arabic words you pointed out, please note that the translation of (49:13) is not mine but I have quoted the one by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, which is among the most popular translations of the Qur’an in the English language. Yusuf Ali along with almost all English translators that I am aware of render the passage in the same sense.
If you think “Shu’ooban” and “Qabaa’ilan” have been incorrectly translated by these scholars, then by all means share what in your view is the required meaning preferably by:
(a) citing references of the original three letter roots of these words,
(b) citing the meaning of the roots and their derived words by referencing from credible Arabic to English dictionaries, as well as in reverse i.e. English to Arabic dictionaries, e.g. Arabic to English Dictionary: “Bayt” (Arabic) = “House” (English) and English to Arabic Dictionary: “House” (English) = “Bayt” (Arabic)
(c) their usage in all other passages of the Qur’an, where the roots or their derivative forms have occurred to demonstrate that the meaning you have selected fits in, in all locations of the Qur’an and does not create conflict with any theme or statement.
Best wishes,
Kashif Shahzada
January 28, 2010
_______________________________
Peace be unto those who follow right guidance.
The ‘credible’ lexicons and dictionaries I consulted were Lane’s Lexicon and The Dictionary of The Holy Qur’an by Abdul Mannan Omar.
Peace
being_there
February 1, 2010
__________________________
Peace be unto those who follow right guidance.
I am not concerned with how Abdullah Yusuf Ali, who was not a scholar of the Arabic language, translates these expressions.
I should also like to point out that in addition to consulting Lane’s Lexicon, I have investigated all occurrences of the triliteral roots sheen-’ayn-ba and qaaf-ba-laam as they occur in The Qur’an using the concordance Al-Mu’ajam-al-Mufhaaris by Fuad ‘Abdul Baqi in order to construct a map of the meaning/semantic space associated with these terms. I have also looked at various renderings by individuals such as Paul Hardy and Abdul Aziz Kamel, each of whom separately authored a tract entitled “Islam and The Race Question”, to see how they have understood these terms.
The Bandung2 blog articles whose links you removed from my previous post contained a summary position based on this exhaustive research.
Peace
being_there
February 1, 2010
_________________________________________
You have asserted that the words in 49:13 have been wrongly translated. You have also claimed that Abdullah Yusuf Ali wasn’t scholarly enough in Arabic. You further claim to have done a lot of study yourself. These are your claims. But you haven’t directly given meaning of the words “Shaoob” and “Qabail”.
Now you need to justify your assertions and give what is the the correct translation.
I repeat once again. You need to demonstrate the correct meaning by (1) Quoting the root & derivatives in ALL Qur’anic inflections (2) Meaning in Arabic to English as well as English to Arabic dictionaries, and (3) demonstrate that your implied meaning fits well within ALL passages of the Qur’an where the root or its derivative forms have occurred.
If you fail to do that, then I am sorry, your comments do not carry any weight at all but are just your personal opinions.
Please reply to myself directly rather than referring me to some article or external publication.
Kashif Shahzada
February 7, 2010
___________________________________
Peace be unto those who follow right guidance.
There is no word for ‘race’ in either Jahili (i.e. pre-Qur’anic) or classical Arabic. The Qur’an does not mention ‘race’ – a concept which you have not defined in your article. The Qur’an refers to diversity in tongues (alsaan) and colours (alwaan). To equate ‘race’ with ‘colour’ is a socio-political/ideological act which is not sanctioned by The Qur’an.
Peace
being_there
February 1, 2010
__________________________
(1) You said: that the “…The Qur’an does not mention ‘race’ …”. It is not an English Book, but one in Arabic.
(2) You claim that: “…There is no word for ‘race’ in either Jahili (i.e. pre-Qur’anic) or classical Arabic…” Really? By your assertion it appears you are someone very knowledgeable in classical Arabic, such that you can confidently make an assertion about a term being non existent in a language. And earlier on you had even commented that a translator of the Qur’an wasn’t scholarly enough in Arabic. A person can only make such assertions if he is more knowledgeable and scholarly, so as to dismiss other people’s work.
What qualifications can you give me to cite *your* proficiency in classical Arabic? Do you teach the language somewhere? Where did you obtain your degree in classical Arabic from?
(3) You said: “… ‘race’ – a concept which you have not defined in your article….”
Definitions of Race:
“A category of humankind that shares certain distinctive physical traits.”
“A family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock.”
“Any of the different varieties or populations of human beings distinguished by physical traits such as hair, eyes, skin color, body shape, etc.”
(Merriam-Webster)
“A group, especially of people, with particular similar physical characteristics, who are considered as belonging to the same type, or the fact of belonging to such a group .”
(Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary)
“Each of the major divisions of humankind, having distinct physical characteristics.”
“A distinct population within a species; a subspecies.”
(Oxford)
“A group of people who are similar because they have the same skin colour or other physical features.”
(Macmillan)
“A group of people of common ancestry with distinguishing physical features, such as skin colour or build.”
(Collins)
We can see from above definitions that race is distinctive physical feature that distinguish human beings. E.g. people in Africa have a distinct complexion from people in the Far East. This is a fact that is clearly observable, and is also supported by the Qur’an when it says that the variation of our colours is among God’s signs.
To deny that people are different colours is to deny the Qur’an as well as common sense.
Kashif Shahzada
February 7, 2010
_____________________________
Peace Be Unto Those Who Follow Right Guidance.
>To deny that people are different colours is to deny the Qur’an as well as common sense.
Your arguments are directed at straw men and/or are non sequiturs.
Firstly, I did not – and do not – deny that people are of different colours/hues (Arabic alwaan);
Secondly, the link between hue/colour (Arabic lawn) and ‘race’ is both contingent and extra-Qur’anic;
Thirdly, the dictionary definitions you cite obscure, intentionally or otherwise, the socio-political and socially-constructed nature of ‘race’;
Fourthly, the dictionaries you appeal to are themselves embedded within the context of Racism (White Supremacy) as a globally operating system of power-relations. From a counter-Racist perspective, ‘mainstream’ dictionaries function in the area of people activity known as LANGUAGE (i.e. classification) and are inherently socio-political in nature.
Peace
being_there
March 8, 2010
_____________________________
Peace Be Unto Those Who Follow Right Guidance.
>What qualifications can you give me to cite *your* proficiency in classical Arabic? Do you teach the language somewhere? Where did you obtain your degree in classical Arabic from?
I make no claim to authoritativeness, nor do I hold a degree in classical Arabic.
The correctness or otherwise of my assertions is not dependant upon appeals to my authoritativeness, linguistic or otherwise; I merely report on my own research findings which is informed by the work of others, Muslim and non-Muslim, linguists and non-linguists.
I have no time for indulging in power-games with other non-white attempted Muslim victims of the globally operating system of Racism (White Supremacy).
Peace
being_there
March 8, 2010
_____________________________
Peace Be Unto Those Who Follow Right Guidance.
>earlier on you had even commented that a translator of the Qur’an wasn’t scholarly enough in Arabic
This statement is incorrect.
I stated that “Abdullah Yusuf Ali … was not a scholar of the Arabic language.”
In this connection, I would refer you to Searching for Solace: A Biography of Abdullah Yuruf Ali, Interpreter of The Qur’an, (Malaysia: IBT Press, 1994), pp.173-187 for evidence in support of my assertion. In particular, there is mention on p.178 of Ali’s “lack of training in the formal Islamic disciplines”, which would certainly include knowledge of the Arabic language considered from the perspective of etymology, grammar, morphology, rhetoric etc.
Abdullah Yusuf Ali was a loyal non-white subject of the British Empire, deeply enamoured with Hellenistic thought and the English literary canon. As indicated in the aforementioned biography, he advocated a depoliticised interpretion of Al- Qur’an and Al-Islam, reducing the power-relation of Deen to ‘religion’.
Peace
being_there
March 8, 2010
_____________________________
“Being there” has demonstrated very interesting phenomena indeed.
1. On January 27, 2010, he/she stated that:
“Your article …. incorrectly renders the Arabic words shu’ooban wa qabaa’ilan in (49:13)…”
2. In response to this comment I requested him/her on January 28, 2010:
“If you think “Shu’ooban” and “Qabaa’ilan” have been incorrectly translated by these scholars, then by all means share… …citing references of the original three letter roots of these words…. the meaning …from credible Arabic to English dictionaries, as well as in reverse i.e. English to Arabic ….their usage in all other passages of the Qur’an …”
3. “Being there” replied with many other things, but he/she failed to give what in his/her view is the correct meaning by citing the roots, dictionary definitions and verse inflections of the words.
4. Noticing that my original request was not met, I repeated the same request on February 7, 2010:
“I repeat once again. You need to demonstrate the correct meaning by (1) Quoting the root & derivatives in ALL Qur’anic inflections (2) Meaning in Arabic to English as well as English to Arabic dictionaries, and (3) demonstrate that your implied meaning fits well within ALL passages of the Qur’an where the root or its derivative forms have occurred….Please reply to myself directly rather than referring me to some article or external publication.”
5. As the meanings given in Yusuf Ali are the same in all the English translations of the Qur’an that I am aware of, his/her criticism goes to almost all the English translators, and he can’t get away with it by alleging that Yusuf Ali was a cronie of the British!.
In other words if “being there” is right, then they i.e. almost all the English translators of the Qur’an, all of them are all wrong!
So this is indeed a very very serious claim, and one which the gentleman or the lady certainly needs to prove.
6. It is March 18, 2010 today and regrettably despite the repeated polite requests, “being there” has not been there at all! Why he/she has failed to give and prove the meaning of the words, or is avoiding the answer though he/she claims to have done so much study, is indeed strange!
7. Moreover, not only has he/she so far failed to substantiate his/her allegation, instead of proving his or her case he/she even suggests that people are playing games here!
“…I have no time for indulging in power-games with other non-white attempted Muslim victims…”
I want to assure the gentleman or the lady, that demanding proof and evidence for one’s claims is not a game, but adherence to a command of the Qur’an (c.f. 2:111 etc).
8. Qur’anic study is not a pastime, or something that one can make a mere passing remark about. When anyone makes a claim related to the Book, then they should also be prepared to justify their claim otherwise they should remember the divine warnings given to the speculators.
If one does not have knowledge, and evidence in possession then they should refrain from speculating, and honestly acknowledge their ignorance. If they claim that something is wrong, it follows by default that they know the right. If that right is deliberately withheld, then according to the Qur’an (2:159), Allah’s curse is incumbent on the withholder. Therefore it is extremely important that an honest acknowledgement be made of my original request. This should be either the supply of the meanings of the words in the manner required or an admission of mistake or an acknowledgement of ignorance.
Kashif Shahzada
March 18, 2010
