Part 29

Ifa word is used to convey two or more meanings, then it will either be considered literal with respect to one of the two meanings and figurative with respect to the other, or each of them may be considered literal with respect to the element that is specific to it alone. In the latter case we have two meanings that are expressed by a single word. Or one might say that each use of the word is literal with respect to the element that is common to both meanings. These are nouns that share some common universal property, and nouns that refer to a general class or category. The first must be considered figurative, while the second must be considered to participate in a common universal meaning, with both of them differing from the original usage or meaning such that they both are seen as sharing in a common universal. On this basis one may recognize the common basis of all nouns describing classes or categories. Otherwise, if someone said that when the word “will” is used to refer to the propensity of an inanimate object, it is used literally, whereas if it refers to the propensity of a living being, it is used figuratively, then there would be no actual distinction between the two usages apart from the fact that the word “will” is used more frequently to refer to the inclinations of living creatures. It may be used in a conditioned manner, which makes clear that what is intended is a reference to the propensity of a living creature, while here it has been used with a restriction, which makes it clear that it refers to the inclination of an inanimate object. The common element among the entities referred to by nouns describing classes or categories is a comprehensive, universal concept that has no existence apart from the mind. It is this same universal concept that is the

source of the divisions among classes of things. However, this general, universal conception was something that philologists felt no need to express, since they only concern themselves with entities that have external existence. As for that which normally exists in the heart and which generally has no external existence unless it is found in conjunction with something else, it does not exist abstracted in the mind; that is, one only conceives of it in association with some other entity. This is to be contrasted with words such as “man” or “mare,” which refer to entities that have independent existence outside the mind and that, for this reason, people have grown accustomed to conceptualizing without necessarily associating them with some other entity. For example, the realities referred to by terms such as ‘will,’ ‘knowledge,’ ‘ability,’ or ‘general, absolute existence’ do not exist in isolation in the mind. For such entities have no independent referents; the word “will,” for example, is never used without being associated in some way with a being that does the willing, just as the word “knowledge” is used only in association with some being who does the knowing, and the word “ability” is found only in association with some entity which is ‘able’. The same is true of all nonessential properties that must necessarily be associated with the entity in which and for which no words exist in the language which would allow them to be spoken of otherwise.

For in no language will you find that words such as ‘blackness,’ ‘whiteness,’ ‘tallness,’ or ‘shortness’ are used without being associated in some manner with actual entities that are black, white, tall, short, and the like. Such words occur free from any restriction only in the writings of those who classify language and its components, since they have understood what philologists mean by al-qadr almushtarak, the common element, among entities in a given class. Allah says: “. . . So Allah made it taste the garment of hunger and fear . . .” (16:112). There are those who say that the word al-dhawg, taste, is literal when it refers to tasting with the mouth, and that the word libas, garment, is literal when it refers to what is worn on the body; as for the usages of these words in the verse quoted above, they are both figurative. But this is not the case. Al-Khalil [Ibn Ahmad al-Farahidi] once said that al-dhawg, taste, in the Arabic language refers to the existence of something’s ta‘m, taste, which is indicated by the ways in which the word is used. Allah says: “And indeed We will make them taste the lighter punishment before the greater punishment . . .” (32:21); and “Taste this! Indeed, you are truly the mighty, the generous” (44:49); and “So that it tasted the ill effects of its conduct

LITERAL MEANING AND FIGURATIVE MEANING 121

...” (65:9); and “. . . Taste the punishment for rejecting belief” (3:106); “So you taste My punishment and My waming” (54:39); and “They will not taste therein death except the first death . . .” (44:56); and “They will not taste therein neither coolness nor [any] drink; except boiling water and a paralyzing cold” (78:24-25). Moreover, the Prophet (pbuh) said: “Whoever accepts Allah as his Lord, Islam as his religion and Muhammad as his Messenger shall know the dhaqa ta‘m al-Iman, taste of belief.” And in one supplication the person praying says to Allah, “allow us to taste the coolness of your pardon and the sweetness of your forgiveness!”

Hence, the word “taste” may be used to describe whatever one feels, whether it be pleasurable or painful, and whoever claims that this term pertains only to what is tasted in the mouth has made an arbitrary judgement in this regard. Rather, the use of the word “taste” to refer specifically to tasting with the mouth is always conditioned in such a way as to make clear that what is being spoken of is tasting with the mouth in particular, as when one says: “I tasted the food,” or “I tasted this drink.” At the same time, this word may also be used to sense what someone experiences inwardly or outwardly; this even includes the temperature of something one drinks. If, for example, a beverage were cold or hot one could say that someone had “tasted” (i.e., felt) its hotness or coldness.

The word libas, garment, is used to refer to anything that covers a person or with which he clothes himself. Allah says: “And We have made the night as a libas, covering” (78:10); and“... But the libas, covering, of righteousness, that is best ... (7:26); and“... They are libas, covering, for you and you are libas, covering, for them . . .” (2:187). Or one might say that someone had labisa al-haqqa bil-batil, clothed truth with falsehood, if he had confused one with the other until truth was “covered” or concealed and therefore unrecognizable. Or hunger may be so severe that its pain envelops the entire person, body and soul. Fear can likewise “clothe” (i.e., envelop) the entire body. Hence if one were to say that Allah causes someone to “taste” hunger and fear, this would not mean that hunger and fear had enveloped all parts of the hungry person. However, this would not be the case if one spoke of “the garment of hunger and fear,” which implies a more comprehensive effect on the individual. And if someone said: “He clothed them,” there would be nothing in this phrase to indicate that they had “tasted” anything painful to them except in the mind, insofar as it is known that the fearful, hungry person experiences pain. This is in contrast to the expression “tasting hunger and fear,” since this phrase points to the experience of what is painful. And if the word is

used in conjunction with something pleasurable, it likewise indicates the experience of what is pleasurable. As the Prophet (pbuh) said: “Whoever accepts Allah as his Lord, Islam as his religion, and Muhammad (pbuh) as his Prophet shall know the taste of belief.”

Someone might ask: Why has not the bliss of Paradise been described by the use of the word “taste”? The reason for this is that the word “taste” indicates the type of sensation experienced. One might say, for example, “he tasted the food,” of someone who had experienced the taste of the food even though he had not necessarily eaten it. Those in Paradise, by contrast, experience a state of blessedness from which nothing is lacking, and which is not limited to tasting. In fact, the word “taste” has been negated both with respect to those in Hell and those in Paradise. It is said of those, ““ Nothing cool shall they taste therein, nor any drink” (78:24); that is, they are not given even a taste of these things. As for those in Paradise, it is said of them: “They will not taste therein death except the first

Some have claimed that the attribution of such things as al-makr, craftiness or deception, al-istihza’, derision, and al-sukhriyyah, scorn, to Allah in the Qur’an is an example of the use of figurative language. However, this is not the case. In fact, if the attitudes referred to by such words are directed toward someone who does not deserve punishment, it is an injustice to him. If, on the other hand, they are directed against someone as a punishment for similar acts or attitudes on his part, then they are just and fair. Allah says: “. .. Thus did We contrive for Joseph ..-” (12:76); that is, Allah plotted against him as his brothers had done when his father said to him: “. . . Tell not your brothers of your vision lest they plot a plot against you . ..” (12:5). Allah also says: “. . . Lo! they plot a plot [against you, Oh, Muhammad]; And I plot a plot [against them]” (86:15—16); and “So they plotted a plot, and We plotted a plot, while they perceived not; then see how was the end of their plot! . . .” (27:50-51); and “Those who defame such of the believers who give charity voluntarily, as well as those who give according to their means, so they mock at them. Allah will throw back their mockery on them . . .” (9:79). Hence, Allah’s “derision” of them deserves this very name. It has been related on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas that: “A gate into Paradise opens up before those who are in the fires of Hell. So they go scurrying toward it, only to have it close in their faces. Then another gate opens for them; once again they go rushing toward it, but it closes, and the believers laugh at them in derision.” Similarly Allah says: “But

LITERAL MEANING AND FIGURATIVE MEANING 123

this Day those who believe will laugh at the unbelievers; on high thrones looking [at all things]. Are not the unbelievers paid for what they used to do?” (83:34-36).