International Qur’an Conference: “Recent Trends in Qur’anic Studies”

by Mun’im Sirry

IQSA and State Islamic University (UIN) Sunan Kalijaga in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, are co-hosting an international conference on “Recent Trends in Qur’anic Studies,” to be held in Yogyakarta on 4-7 August 2015.

This international Qur’an conference will be a forum where the Islamic tradition and rigorous academic study of the Qur’an will meet, and various approaches to the Qur’an will be critically discussed. In the spirit of learning from, and enriching, one another, we are working on a conference that will introduce our unique model of collaboration between IQSA and UIN Sunan Kalijaga to enhance the field of Qur’anic studies.

Over the last few decades, Qur’anic studies emerged as an exciting and vibrant field of research among scholars both in the West and in the Muslim-majority countries. This is evident not only in the flurry of books and articles that deal with the Qur’an and in the convening of various workshops and seminars on the subject, but also in the controversies that this field engenders. Diverse methodologies are currently applied to Qur’anic studies, and various issues are raised. Some of these methodologies and issues are new discoveries, while others revive older researches. As a result, many assumptions that for years have been taken for granted are now under rigorous scrutiny and often disputed to such an extent that, as Fred Donner has rightly noted, the field of Qur’anic studies seems today “to be in a state of disarray,” in the sense that there is little consensus among scholars. Questions such as the milieu within which the Qur’an emerged, the Qur’an’s relation to the Biblical tradition, its chronology, textual integration, and literary features are hotly debated today.

This international conference aims to explore major methodological and thematic issues in recent scholarly studies of the Qur’an in different parts of the world. We also wish to engage in scholarly conversations about the possibility of collaborative works to enhance the field of Qur’anic studies by bringing together scholars who may have little other chance to directly interact. There clearly needs to be closer collaboration among scholars of different perspectives and backgrounds. Rather than deepening conflicting approaches to the Qur’an, these scholars will explore the extent to which they may learn from one another in terms of methodological/hermeneutical approaches as they will also address current issues being debated in the field.

Among scholars in the field who will participate in the conference, to mention a few names (in alphabetical order), are: Fred Donner, Ali Mabrouk, Daniel Madigan, Jane McAuliffe, Gabriel Reynolds, Andrew Rippin, Abdullah Saeed, Nayla Tabbara, along with Indonesian scholars such as Amin Abdullah, Noorhaidi Hasan, Moch. Nur Ichwan, Syafaatun el-Mirzanah, Yusuf Rahman, Quraish Shihab, Sahiron Syamsuddin.

If you are interested in presenting your research on any of the following topics, please send your abstract (250 words) to Mun’im Sirry (msirry@nd.edu).

Possible topics:

Critical Approaches to the Qur’an
Qur’anic Milieu
Intertextuality: The Qur’an and the Biblical tradition
The Qur’an and Other Religions
Re-assessing the Exegetical Tradition of the Qur’an
Modern Trends in the Tafsir Tradition
The Indigenization of the Qur’an: Is there an Indonesian Tafsir

Please note that abstracts, papers and presentation must be in English.

Important Dates:

Deadline for submission of abstract: November 1, 2014
Notification of acceptance: November 15, 2014
Confirmation of attendance: December 1, 2014
Submission of full paper: June 1, 2015
Conference dates: August 4-7, 2015

On the Qur’an and Modern Standard Arabic

by Gabriel Said Reynolds*

Moses Set Out on the Nile in a Reed Basket. Engraving by Bernhard Rode, ca. 1775; photo accessed via Wikimedia Commons.

Qurʾan 20:39 recalls how God instructed Moses’ mother to place her infant son in a tābūt and set him upon a river, that he might escape Pharaoh. In Modern Standard Arabic, tābūt can mean “box, case, chest, coffer” or “casket, coffin, sarcophagus,” and many translators render tābūt in the Qur’an in light of one or another of these meanings. Asad (“chest”), Hilali-Khan (“a box or a case or a chest”), Yusuf Ali (“chest”), Hamidullah (“coffret”), and Paret (“Kasten”) all choose the first meaning; Quli Qaraʾi (“casket”) chooses the second.

The awkward image of the infant Moses floating on the Nile in a casket illustrates the problem of understanding Qurʾanic terms in light of their meanings in Modern Standard Arabic. Not all translators do so. Pickthall and Arberry, among others, render tābūt, “ark.” This dramatically different translation presumably reflects the influence of Qurʾan 2:248, where the Qurʾan uses tābūt for the Ark of the Covenant.

In fact, Q 2:248 is the key to understanding tābūt in Q 20:39. Tābūt reflects the Hebrew term tebā (itself a borrowing from Egyptian), the term used for the basket in which Moses’ mother places him (Exodus 2:3; tebā evidently means “basket” here because it is made out of reeds). Tebā is also used for the ark that Noah builds (Genesis 6:14, 15, passim). As Arthur Jeffery (Foreign Vocabulary, 88-89) notes, Qurʾanic tābūt is closer in form to Aramaic tībū (used in Targum Onkelos for both Noah’s ark and Moses’ basket) and even more so to Ethiopic tābot. The connection with Ethiopic tābot might be particularly important since it (like Syriac qebūtā) is used for Noah’s ark, Moses’ basket, and the Ark of the Covenant.

In any case, my point here is not to make an argument about a particular etymology for tābūt but rather to illustrate the danger of relying on Modern Standard Arabic in our reading of the Qurʾan. The way in which the Qurʾan uses tābūt for both Moses’ basket (Q 20:39) and the Ark of the Covenant (Q 2:248) reflects the Biblical background of this term. Therefore, in Qurʾan 20:39, tābūt might be understood in light of this background to mean simply “basket” (even if this meaning is not found in Hans Wehr’s dictionary).

Tābūt is not the only example of the problem of Modern Standard Arabic understandings of the Qurʾan. Qur’an 3:44 alludes to the account of the contest between the widowers of Israel over Mary. In the version of this account in the (2^nd century) Protoevangelium of James, all of the widows hand their staffs (as lots) to the priest Zechariah, in whose care Mary has been kept in the Jerusalem Temple. From the last staff, that of Joseph, a dove emerges, indicating that he is God’s choice. The term that the Qurʾan uses for these staffs is qalam (pl. aqlām), from Greek kalamos (“reed”). Yet qalam also came to mean “pen,” and indeed this is its common meaning in Modern Standard Arabic. Thus if one reads the Qurʾan in light of Modern Standard Arabic, Q 3:44 would seem to involve throwing pens around.

A final case, the term dīn, has theological consequences. As Mun’im Sirry points out in his recent work Scriptural Polemics: The Qurʾan and Other Religions (esp. 66-89), many modern commentators understand Qurʾanic occurrences of dīn to denote “religion,” and indeed translators almost always render dīn “religion” (for Q 3:19 I did not find any cases where it is translated otherwise). This has important consequences, especially with verses such as Q 3:19 and 85, which can be read to mean that Islam is the only acceptable religion. Yet in light of Semitic and non-Semitic cognates (such as Syriac dīnā), Qurʾanic dīn might have—in some instances at least—a more general meaning of “judgment” (hence the phrase yawm al-dīn). In other instances, dīn might mean something closer to religious disposition, rather than religion in the modern sense of a communal system of faith and worship. Accordingly, students of the Qurʾan should be wary of reading dīn, or any Qurʾanic term, through the lens of Modern Standard Arabic.

* Gabriel Said Reynolds researches the Qur’an and Muslim/Christian relations and is Professor of Islamic Studies and Theology in the Department of Theology at Notre Dame.

Qur’anic Cross References and Tafsir al-qur’an bi-l-qur’an

By Mun’im Sirry

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zneH1g3U8cg]

A part of the Qur’an Seminar, a year-long initiative directed by Gabriel S. Reynolds from the University of Notre Dame, is to develop a project on cross-references of the Qur’an. This cross-references project will provide for nearly every verse in the Qur’an a selection of other verses which shed light upon, clarify, or explain the verse you are reading.

As is known, the Qur’an in its printed edition has not yet been cross-referenced, in spite of the fact that al-mufassirūn (Qur’an commentators) realized quite early on the central importance of tafsīr al-Qur’an bi al-Qur’an (interpreting the Qur’an through the Qur’an itself). Even some modern Qur’an exegetes like the Iranian scholar Muḥammad Ḥusayn Ṭabaṭabā’ī (d. 1981) claim to follow this method. It must be pointed out, however, that the way Ṭabaṭabā’ī interprets the Qur’an in his al-Mīzān shows that his reliance on the internal evidence of the Qur’an is much less than his use of other sources as he offers not only an explication (bayān) of a given verse, but also an extensive discussion of various aspects such as historical, philosophical, and social aspects. It seems safe to say that in the long history of tafsīr, this tafsīr Qur’an bi al-Qur’an has not been dealt with as an important topic in its own right.

There are only few tafsīrs which bear the title of tafsīr al-Qur’an bi al-Qur’an, two of which are Aḍwa’ al-bayan fi iḍaḥa al-Qur’an bi al-Qur’an by Muḥammad al-Shinqīṭī, and Al-Tafsīr al-Qur’anī li al-Qur’an by ‘Abd al-Karīm Khaṭīb. However, upon close reading, these two tafsīrs are not really tafsīr al-Qur’an bi al-Qur’an as the title seems to suppose. In 1930, the Egyptian scholar Muḥammad Abū Zaid wrote Al-Hidāya wa al-‘irfān fi tafsīr al-Qur’an bi al-Qur’an, which provides references to other passages which in the opinion of the author seems to shed some light on the verse under discussion. However, the cross-references he provided are very limited. In addition, because of his unorthodox interpretations of the Qur’an, his tafsīr was suppressed and he was declared as an atheist by Rashīd Riḍā.

Perhaps, the most extensive treatment and pioneered work on tafsīr al-Qur’an bi al-Qur’an is that composed by Rudi Paret entitled Der Koran: Kommentar und Konkordanz. Paret’s work is certainly very rich, which includes – in addition to possible cross-references – interpretations of and alternate renderings for a given verse or passage. Furthermore, as the term “Konkordanz” may indicate, his Der Koran provides all identical or similar phraseology and usage in different places of the Qur’an, a model that will not be followed in this cross-references project.

Instead, in this project the cross-references are based on connection between words, phrases, themes, concepts, events, and characters. One word may occur several times in the Qur’an, but the cross references will be made only where there is connection in meaning between two or more verses or passages. In doing this cross-references project, several models and methods used for the cross-references of the Bible are consulted, including The New Scofield Reference Bible, The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, The Bible Self-Explained, and The Thompson Chain-Reference Bible. As is well-known, the Bible cross-reference has been a long established tradition, while the Qur’an, at least in its printed edition, has not been cross-referenced.

The need of such a work, therefore, is obvious to all readers of the Qur’an, because in the current available printed editions of the Qur’an there is nothing to indicate that certain passages shed light upon, clarify, or explain other passages.

A sample of cross-references of the Suras al-Fātiḥa and al-Baqara

International Qur’an Conference: “Recent Trends in Qur’anic Studies”

International Qur’an Conference: “Recent Trends in Qur’anic Studies”

On the Qur’an and Modern Standard Arabic

Qur’anic Cross References and Tafsir al-qur’an bi-l-qur’an

Follow Us