Part 31

LITERAL MEANING AND FIGURATIVE MEANING 127

it is not permitted when one seeks to infer or derive the meanings of words. For example, it may be permissible for someone to use a given word to convey a meaning that is comparable or similar to the meaning that the word has been used to convey before. One may do so since the word’s prior meaning has become clear, notwithstanding the fact that this meaning may be subject to some dispute. However, it is not permissible for one to take up the use of words that are known to have been used to express certain meanings, then invest them with meanings that differ from those, saying that those who used these words before must have intended such and such a meaning by analogy with the meaning that he has now introduced. To so do is considered an illegitimate alteration and distortion of the language. So if someone were to say: “The neighbor is the most deserving because of his nearness,” then the word jar, neighbor, here refers in fact to a neighbor, not to a sharik, partner, since the latter meaning of the word was not recognized in the language at that time. At the same time, there is nothing in the word that necessitates that he merits the right of preemption; rather, it indicates that it is more fitting to sell to him. If one takes the word khamr, wine, for example, ithas been established through numerous texts and reliable transmissions of accounts that this word was originally used to refer to any muskkir, intoxicating beverage. Hence, the beverage we now know as nabith, wine, was not called ‘khamr’ [wine or any kind of spirits] by analogy. Similarly, the habbash, graverobber, used to be referred to merely asa sariq, thief: As ‘A?ishah once said: “He who robs our dead is like the one who robs our living.” As for the word 1a’t, pederast, it was considered more offensive to them than one who commits fornication with a woman. And in interpreting the Qur’dn and the hadith, it is imperative that one be familiar with those words that express the intent of Allah and His Messenger and know how to understand their words. For knowledge of the Arabic language with which we have been addressed, as well of the way in which words express meanings, can aid us in understanding the intent behind the words of Allah and the Prophet and can also aid us in knowing the connotation of the words and their meanings. For the majority of the errors into which heretical sects have fallen may be traced back to this area. Such sects began interpreting the words of Allah and His Messenger to mean what they themselves claimed to be their meanings, but the matter cannot be what they wished, labeling one phrase as literal and another as figurative when in fact, their entire interpretation was mistaken. An example of such an error is the way in which the Murji”ites took the

word Iman, belief, to be literal when it refers to mere tasdiq, assent, while claiming that it is used figuratively when it includes works.

Someone might have said [to the Murji”ites] that if the division of speech into literal and figurative is not valid, then there is no basis for their interpretation of belief, whereas if it is a valid distinction, then it is more harmful to them than it is helpful. For a word that is used literally is said to convey its meaning when employed without any restrictions or surrounding context; whereas a word used figuratively is said to convey its meaning only with the aid of an accompanying context. Moreover, it has become clear that the word ‘belief,’ when used in an absolute sense in the Qur’an and in the Sunnah, includes works, and that works are excluded from it only when it is used in a conditioned sense. This in turn indicates the truth of the Prophet’s saying: “Belief consists of seventy-odd branches.”

As for the hadith of the Angel Gabriel, if what he meant by ‘belief? was a condition that is associated with Islam, then so be it. For this is indubitably the meaning intended by the Prophet (pbuh). Likewise when he mentioned doing ihsan, perfection of (religion), he was referring to good works along with belief and Islam. He did not intend to say that doing good can be divorced from belief and Islam. And if it were assumed that what was meant by the word “belief” was mere assent, then this would require it to be accompanied by a context, in which case it would have to be considered figurative. This is something we affirm by necessity, and which admits of no dispute once one has contemplated the Qur’an and the hadith. Such, however, is not the case concerning the claim that the word “belief” in the Arabic language is a synonym for mere tasdiq, assent, or the claim that the Prophet did not change or transmit the word [on someone else’s authority], but rather meant to convey the same meaning that had been conveyed through it by other speakers of the language without further specification or restriction. For neither of the above claims can be affirmed with certainty. How could they be when we have ascertained the invalidity of both of them?

Moreover, the word ‘belief’ implies works that believers are commanded to perform, including prayer, fasting, giving zakah, and going on pilgrimage. The word ‘belief’ implies within itself such activities as these just as much as the words ‘prayer,’ ‘fasting,’ ‘giving zakah,’ and ‘pilgrimage’ do. This is true whether one says that the Prophet passed down the use of these words from those who

LITERAL MEANING AND FIGURATIVE MEANING 129

came before him or that he intended to issue a judgment without using the name, or that he used the names [of such activities], treating them in the same manner as was customary, or that he used the names in a conditioned rather than an absolute sense.

that whoever has in his heart an atom’s weight of belief shall be delivered from the fires of Hell.

On this topic the Murjiites have departed from what is clearly taught in the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the sayings of the Prophet’s Companions and their Successors. Instead they rely on their own opinions and the interpretations, at which they have arrived based on their understanding of language, which is the same approach followed by heretical sects. For this reason the Imam Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] used to say: “Most errors that people commit have to do with allegorical interpretations and the application of the principle of analogy.”

For this reason we find that the Mu‘tazilites, the Murji?ites, the Rafidites, and other heretical sects interpreted the Qur’an on the basis of their own opinions, what they themselves found to be reasonable, and conclusions that they reached concerning language. Therefore you will find that they did not rely on the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh), his Companions, their Successors, or Muslim leaders. For neither did they depend on the Sunnah, nor on the consensus or writings passed down by the pious ancestors. They relied on reason and language, not on the well-known books of tafsir, interpretation, hadith, and the traditions of early Muslims; they relied rather on books of literature and scholastic theology that were the products of their own minds. This is what atheists themselves do; they take what is found in books on philosophy, literature, and language, while not paying the least attention to the Qur’4n, the hadith, or the writings of the pious ancestors. Such people shun the texts of the prophets since, in their view, these add nothing to knowledge. Then they interpret the Qur’4n on the basis of their own opinion and understanding without reference to the traditions that have come down from the Prophet (pbuh) and his Companions. And as we have mentioned, the words of Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] and others have decried this approach, considering it to be no different from that of innovators and heretical thinkers.