I have been going through some Quraanic translations lately. Consider the following translations of Surah Al-Qalam, 1-6:
Ahmed Raza Khan: Mohammed Aqib Qadri:
Nuun* – by oath of the pen and by oath of what is written by it. (Alphabet of the Arabic language; Allah and to whomever He reveals, know their precise meanings.) You are not insane, by the munificence of your Lord. And indeed for you is an unlimited reward. And indeed you possess an exemplary character. So very soon, you will see and they too will realise – That who among you was insane.
Yusuf Ali:
Nun. By the Pen and the (Record) which (men) write,- Thou art not, by the Grace of thy Lord, mad or possessed. Nay, verily for thee is a Reward unfailing: And thou (standest) on an exalted standard of character. Soon wilt thou see, and they will see, – Which of you is afflicted with madness.
Pickthal:
Nun. By the pen and that which they write (therewith), Thou art not, for thy Lord’s favour unto thee, a madman. And lo! thine verily will be a reward unfailing. And lo! thou art of a tremendous nature. And thou wilt see and they will see Which of you is the demented.
Do you find a difference in translation?
Anyone who has studied the Arabic language can see that every word has multiple meanings. Hell, even in Urdu there are words with multiple meanings, not to mention English (try learning words for GRE, you’ll go mad!) I’m not a scholar on Arabic but I’ve seen and heard examples of such words. I’ll share one with you on an upcoming post: Rasool-e-Ummi.
So which of the above translations is correct? I mean, in which meaning did Allah reveal the Quraan?
Scholars can gather on one specific translation and declare it to be authentic. What if some scholars gather on one translation and some gather on another? Which is correct? Is the level of knowledge of these translators and scholars enough to decipher the words and intention of God?
Qayaas, as it is popularly known, or unified human opinion on a subject (”unified” might be wrong but “human opinion” isn’t), is spread widely in the Muslim world. Different problems are solved in this way by Muslims. Religion has become the thought of humans, rather than something from God.
And now we have Qayaas on the Quraan. People gather and say “Hey I think this verse means this!”
Notice the word think.
Surely when the Quraan wasn’t here, humans were thinking about idol worship (Laat, Manaat, Uzza, etc). And about Jesus and the Trinity. And Yahweh. And Rama, Krishna, Seeta, etc. They still are. Now that the Quraan is here, would Allah trust humans with thinking about the meaning of the Quraan?
And now that they have thought about it, you can see the result above.
Some will say “the Quraan says it’s an easy book to understand”. But we already see that above, don’t we? There are countless more examples that I’m too lazy to post.
In Surah-e-Namal, the tale of Suleiman and Bilquees is told in which Asif Bine Barkhia promises to bring the throne of Bilquees to Suleiman before he can bat his eyelids, just because he possesses a “little knowledge of the book”. Uh-oh, is the name Asif Bine Barkhia even in the Quraan? Whoops!
Doesn’t matter. What matters is the following verse (it’s actually not the whole verse, only the end part):
Qul Kafa Billahi Shaheedam Bayeni Wa Bayenakum Waman Indahu Ilm-ul-Kitab!
“(O’ Prophet) say: Enough for witness between me and you, is Allah and he who possesses the Knowledge of the Book.”
(Thunder: 43)
Oh-kaayy…..I know Allah and the Prophet. Someone know the third guy?
Asif Bine Barkhia can move a throne in a jiffy if he possesses some of the knowledge of the Book. And then there’s this ‘third guy’ who possesses knowledge of the whole Book. Imagine what he must be able to do. Who is he?
He must know what the Quraan means then. If the above translators could understand the Quraan, they would be moving thrones too, starting with Bush. Bring his desk, throw a shoe, send back. Repeat procedure. Make an infinite loop. America would’ve been in a load of crap…sorry, shoes by now.
So…who’s this guy I’m asking about? Does anyone know here please?
You must be wanting to ask me “Why not consult the Prophet himself?” Well, he must indeed know the knowledge in the Book as he got the Book. And he used it too. Shaq-qul-Qamar, anyone? But since he was an Ummi, I’d rather go for this third guy. Imagine having Knowledge of the Whole Book yet not being able to read and write. Must be pretty hard on the Prophet.
Don’t ask me whether this guy came to this planet or not. If he didn’t, why would Allah use his name as witness to the Holy Prophet’s prophethood in front of the non-believers?
It CANNOT be Gabriel, he couldn’t even go beyond the point of Sidra during the Prophet’s Mairaj. This guy has to be wayyy better!
But sadly, the question remains who? 
Related Stuff
[...] January 16, 2009 — Knowledge Of The Book (100) [...]
[...] January 16, 2009 — Knowledge Of The Book (101) [...]
[...] January 16, 2009 — Knowledge Of The Book (102) [...]
[...] January 16, 2009 — Knowledge Of The Book (103) [...]
[...] 16, 2009 — Knowledge Of The Book [...]