|
“Prophetic Experience” and “Hermeneutic Interpretation”
By: Ayatullah Muhammad Taqi Misbah Yazdi
So far, we have covered many subjects about faith. We said that, as inferred many Qur'anic verses, faith is the essence of the invitation of all the prophets of God. In particular, there were discussions about three subjects, viz. “the truth behind faith,” “the degrees of faith” and “the jurisdiction of faith.” Regarding the jurisdiction of faith, we said that faith mentioned in the Book and the Sunnah and leads to man’s success in this world and the Hereafter, while the lack of which leads to eternal damnation, is not faith in anything. From the viewpoint of the Book and the Sunnah, the jurisdiction of faith in the first degree is faith in God and the Messenger: Indeed the faithful are those who have faith in Allah and His Apostle. (24:62)
In discussing the degrees of faith, we said that just as faith has degrees and levels, unbelief which is its opposite, also has degrees and levels. In the same vein, we mentioned the obstacles to faith and the factors weakening it. One of these hindrances is the intellectual and academic skepticisms about God, the Prophet and the Resurrection, and in general, religion and religious issues. Because of the importance of this discussion, it is appropriate to embark on this discussion further.
“Prophetic Experience” and “Hermeneutic Interpretation” as Misgivings Aimed at Weakening the Faith
The discussion begins here when they say, “A prophet, whoever he is, is a human after all, and the human perceptions and understandings are prone to err. So, the perceptions of a prophet are subject to error and are thus not reliable.”
On the contrary, it is said that the perceptions and knowledge of a prophet (at least in the realm of issues pertaining to religion) is through the way of the divine revelation and since it comes from God the Exalted and that He has Absolute Knowledge and ignorance has no place in His Essence, it is free from error and is reliable.
The deniers of the reliability of the perceptions of the Prophet (S) advance the issue of “prophetic experience” in reply. This is the explanation of their contention: Revelation is a kind of demonstrative knowledge, and an extensive mental state is experienced by the Prophet. This is the same thing which is called “prophetic experience.” In the demonstrative knowledge, word and concept do not exist; rather, the known thing itself (and not its concept) will be present to the knowing person.
So, in revelation which is a kind of demonstrative knowledge, there is no word and concept. Those perceptions called “revelation’ which the Prophet acquires and have no word and concept must come out in the form of utterances, concepts and words in order to be expressed to others. Here, discussion on “prophetic interpretation” comes in. What the Prophet perceives as revelation is a demonstrative knowledge and totally personal and individual inner “experience” which is never accessible to others. In order for us to understand what transpired in himself and what perceptions he acquired, the Prophet embarks on speaking so as to bring out the non-transferable demonstrative knowledge in the form of transferable resultant knowledge (concepts and words).
This “interpretation” no longer comes from God; it is a product of the Prophet himself. That which comes from God is that inner experience which only the Prophet “feels.” The “Qur’an” is nothing but “a set of the Prophet’s interpretations of the revelation” because the Qur’an consists of concepts and words, and as we have stated, there is neither word nor concept in the revelation. The Qur’an, therefore, is the product and pursuit of the Prophet’s mind and the interpretation of the psychic perceptions, mental state, “feeling” and “experience” which the Prophet has acquired.
Now, as it became clear that the Qur’an is the interpretation of revelation and not the revelation itself, the additional point here is that every interpretation is affected by “the interpreter’s way of thinking.” A manifestation of this point is that you observe a lot that different, and even conflicting and contradictory interpretations of a thing or phenomenon will be presented. This is because “interpretation is affected by the interpreter’s way of thinking.”
Furthermore, the way of thinking of a person is a product of the time, society and environment of him and the individuals he deals with. The mindset of the Prophet is not exempted from this rule; it has taken form under the influence of the knowledge, learning and culture of that time and society. It is clear that the knowledge and learning of that time, especially in the Bedouin society of the Arabian Peninsula, was very defective in relation to the knowledge and learning of this time. Many superstitious and false elements existed at that time whose falsehood was established with the advancement of science and the progress and perfection of human civilization. Given this, the definite conclusion of these preliminary talks is that the Qur’an and its content are unreliable.
During these days, you heard or read elsewhere that some say that the Qur’an, like any other book and speech, can be criticized. Regarding this statement, we have to test the content of the Qur’an by means of knowledge and experience so as to know its truth or falsehood, or we have to see if the Qur’an is responsive and proportionate to the needs of society and humanity at this time, or not. If it is responsive, we will act upon it, and if not, it is clear that its consumption period has expired and must be set aside!
These are the contentions of the so-called religious or non-religious intellectuals during the recent years. All these statements and their likes are based on the same analysis that regards the revelation as the “prophetic experience” and the Qur’an as “interpretation of the revelation” and saying of the Prophet himself, and holds that the perceptions of the Prophet, like all other human perceptions, are prone to error.
A Concise Reply to these Two Misgivings
As we have mentioned earlier, these accounts are baseless and untenable. We explained that in all the stages from the time of its issuance from the Source up to the time of having been sent down to the blessed heart of the Prophet (S) and the Prophet’s communication of it to the people, the divine revelations are under full protection. There is no doubt or skepticism about it and no force can bring disorder along this path. How could the Prophet memorize the entire Qur’an, and in the words of these gentlemen, interpret by himself while the Qur’an says that if he attributes to God even a letter, word, or verse, “We shall cut off his aorta and no one can hinder Us from doing so:”
It is indeed the speech of a noble apostle, and it is not the speech of a poet. Little is the faith that you have! Nor is it the speech of a soothsayer. Little is the admonition that you take! Gradually sent down from the Lord of all the worlds. Had he faked any sayings in Our name, We would have surely seized him by the right hand and then cut off his aorta, and none of you could have held Us off from him (69:40-47)
The other skepticism in this context is related to a stage prior to this stage (i.e. the stage of interpretation) and about the principle of the apostleship of the Prophet. They say, “To which we have access are the same words and utterances which, as we said, are not the revelation itself but only its interpretation. Revelation is that demonstrative knowledge and personal experience happening to the Prophet, and we have no access to it negatively or affirmatively.
Practically, there is no essential difference whether we believe in his apostleship or not. What is tangible and accessible to us from his apostleship is this Qur’an which is supposed to be open to criticism, and if it wins in an acid test of knowledge and experience, we shall accept it and if not, we shall set it aside. That which exists in the demonstrative knowledge and the self of the Prophet from his apostleship is inaccessible to us, and in confirming and criticizing it we can say anything and pass a judgment. Therefore, the Prophet is at most like a scholar for us. So long as his presented ideas and views are not tested by means of common human knowledge, he will remain unacceptable to us. That is, in any case, the acceptance or non-acceptance of his apostleship has nothing to do with this issue.”
What we have said in reply to the previous skepticism is applicable here. The Qur’an says to the effect: “That which issues forth from the Divine Sacred Essence is identically, without any addition or lacking, transmitted to the heart of the Prophet, and the Prophet, in turn, recites exactly the same to the people, and in doing so, if he falsely attributes even a single letter or word to Us, We shall cut off his aorta.”
The Alleged Contradiction between Revelation, and Knowledge and Reason
Yet, another skepticism in this context is related to the Qur’an and its content. They say, “Whenever we refer to the content of the Qur’an or some narrations reported from the Prophet, we encounter some subjects which are not harmonious with science or reason. The same wrong facts inconsistent with science and reason are enough for us to doubt the correctness of all the verses and narrations and not to have faith in them.”
Similar to this skepticism existed from the very early period of Islam when there were devils from among humans and jinn who strived hard through different ways to cast doubt on the authenticity of the Qur’an. One of these ways which were employed during the time of the infallible Imams (‘a) was to look for alleged contradictions among the verses of the Qur’an. In doing so, they wanted to prove the Qur’an to lack credibility. We are doing a similar thing with respect to the New and Old Testaments, especially regarding the Four Gospels. For example, we say that there is something in the Gospel of Luke whose opposite exists in the Gospel of Matthew or Mark. So, it is obvious that none of them can be reliable.
At any rate, throughout history, some people strived to find such contradictions in the verses of the Qur’an, thus putting into question its credibility. Nowadays, the venture continues and many books with the subject of contradictions in the Qur’an have been written. The same skepticism is advanced in a different form and the main point they emphasize more today is the subjects in the Qur’an which are allegedly inharmonious with science and reason and are thus false. In this regard, they have a general proposition and then they embark on citing its manifestations and examples.
The gist of their general proposition is that the scientific subjects mentioned in the Qur’an are based on illusions and fancies of the scholars at the time, the falsity of many of which has been proven today. It is from here that all the subjects and content of the Qur’an will be deprived of credibility.
In mentioning the manifestations, they have enumerated numerous cases all of which cannot be covered here. We shall suffice ourselves to mention only one or two cases.
One of these cases is the issue of seven heavens which has been mentioned in numerous verses of the Holy Qur’an: “The seven heavens glorify Him (17:44)”
and “He created seven heavens in layers. (67:3)”
Some people came out to say that these seven heavens are consistent with the Ptolemaic astronomy and planets. As you know, until prior to the new astronomy which is well-known as the Copernican astronomy, for a long time extending to many centuries, the prevalent and dominant theory in the science of astronomy was the Ptolemaic astronomical. The followers of Ptolemy believed that the universe is in the form of an extremely huge plan in which the earth is located in the center and there are nine spheres surrounding it and encompassing one another. The similitude they always used to cite is the different layers of the onion each of which is located over the other and surrounding it.
The Qur’an was revealed at the time when the Ptolemaic theory had absolute dominance in astronomy and no one doubted its accuracy. Anyone who expressed a contrary view would be ridiculed as if he had denied the day as day. As such, the Qur’an also makes mention of seven heavens.
The objection which usually comes to the mind is this: If it is such, the Qur’an is supposed to use the expression nine heavens, and since it has used the expression seven heavens which is inharmonious whatsoever with Ptolemaic astronomy, it follows that the said justification cannot be true.
In reply, they say, “Apart from the seven heavens, the Qur’an has also made mention of another thing called “Throne” [‘arsh]: Say, ‘Who is the Lord of the seven heavens and the Lord of the Great Throne? (23:86)
Similarly, it has mentioned another thing called “seat” [kursi]: His seat embraces the heavens and the earth. (2:255)
Given this, the seven heavens plus the “throne” and the “seat” become “the nine Ptolemaic spheres.
Many Muslim scholars who were influenced by the Ptolemaic astronomy at the time used to receive such statements and explanations with acceptance. Of course, later on and through the research of scientists such as Kepler, Copernicus and Galileo, it became clear that neither the earth is the center of the universe nor the nine spheres ever exist.
Now, today’s “intellectuals” say that the Qur’anic expression seven heavens was based on the acceptance of the science of astronomy at the time and for years, Muslim scholars have interpreted this verse on the same basis. Now, since the falsity of the Ptolemaic theory is proved, the falsity of the view of the Qur’an and these Muslim scholars will become clear.
Another example to be mentioned in this context is related to Darwin’s theory of “the evolution of species.” As you know, Charles Darwin has a hypothesis in biology which holds that as the effect of mutation and leaps that have taken place in their chromosomes, animals have changed throughout the past millions of years, and the emergence of new generations of animals has been based on these leaps. For example, man has been regarded as originating from the monkey race.
In some cases, they have found manifestations to confirm this theory. Of course, this subject has not yet been accepted in biology itself, and at most it is regarded as a hypothesis and probability. Anyway, some have desired to cite this theory as one of the examples of the alleged conflict between science and religion regarding the Qur’an. According to them, what the Qur’an states about the origin of Adam and human beings is totally in conflict with this “scientific” theory, and this itself is the proof of the falsity of the Qur’an.
|
