elL-.]l ql\s,ilr iA.

Jill

Lower-Plane Qur'an Translation: Exegetical Inroads into

Translation

Dr: waleed Al Amri

Department of Languages and Translation
Taibah University
Saudi Arabia

A relationship of confluence holds between eurran translation and

commentary. On the one hand, there is a great exegetical tradition built around
this most sacred Islamic Text, which cannot be simply ignored if the end
product of a translation is to be of any success. This tradition arose from either
different interpretational stand points of this hyper sensitive Text or from
sincere intentions of making explicit and penetrable its language which is
shrouded in the veil of time, On the other hand, the translator, while drawing
on this wealth of scholarly subtexts that run along the prime Texl should not
fall in the trap of getting himself captive to thern nor allow his translation to get
overloaded or the representation to be permeated by them to the extent that it
would only be seen through their kaleidoscope. Such awareness, if existent in
the first place, is seldom realized in the actual mentally demanding act of
translating. The line is thin indeed and has to be clearly demtrcated. This
long
tradition of commeraary is not to be ignored altogethei but its flow in the finai
product of the translation has to be filtcred and checked if the originat text
is to
be better represented ard lower-plane translations are to be avoided.

Keywords: the Qur,an, tafslr (commentary, exegesis, interp.etation),

eur,an translation,
su btexts, par a I I e I texts

Scene-setting:
History of Qur'an translation proper can be traced back to the year t 143
when
Robert of Ketton produced the first complete Latin version at the
behest of his
patron, the Abbot of Cluny.i Ever since this beginning it
has phenomenally
expanded. in terms of both quantity
- within -uny u oni given linguage or in
different languages - and in terms of methodology and app-roach.,i ,i t
ito.y u.
ancient and vibrant as this inevitably saw the encroachment of the
essentially
explicatory act ofexegesis on the essentially imitative act ofkansration
as they botir
share an element of interpretation. In fact, this is so much so that
one would always
find a fly in the ointment. The reasons behind this state of affairs are legion,
but,
generally,.they can categorised into necessary, manipulative and inadvertent
lnroaos. rhts cnttcal_besltuation lead to the so-called Monotheist Group producing
their very recent translation which they dubbed, ,/re
eur'an: A pure and Literal
Translation, with the following decrial:
With so many English translations of the eur'an available, it is
inevitable that the reader would ask: why make another one?
The
answer to this question lies in the cunent structure ofthe Islamic

23
 Lower-Plane Qur'an Translation: Exegetical Inroads into Translation

faith, and the fact that, for many centuries, Islam has been
primarily sub-categorized either as Sunni or Shia or one of the
many other denominations that have emerged over the years. As
such, all translations have belonged to one school of thought or
another which clearly comes across in the interpretation of and
choice of translation for specific words or verses.... Also, while
many translators have been sincere in their rendering of the
Arabic meaning of the words, they have been unable to refrain
from adding cofilments in the form ofparenthesis within the text
of the translation or in the form of footnotes and apoendices to
reflect therr views on certain verses or the vi'&s of the
denomination they adhere to. The eur,an is unique in the fact
that it uses neither footnotes nor comments lettins the text sDeak
for itself and delivering to the reader as close a iendition oi the
pure message ofthe Qur'an as physically possible. (Blurb)

Although they manage to bring to the fore the issue of the prevalence of certain
exegetical acts in translation practice, it remains to be seen whether they were
successful in freeing translation from exegetical encroachments and really making
"the text speak for itself'. However, this is besides the point, what is of ielevance
within the remit of the current paper is that this relationship indeed merits serious
explorative srudy.

Preliminary discussion:
The starting question is; can the eur,an be separated from its interpretation? And,
more mportantly; is Qur'an translation separable from commentary? Although
related, the answers to these two questions bring into sharp focus that translation
and exegesis are too different; wh e the fnst enia s only understanding the Text,
the second merges the subtext with it to, in some cases, an inseparable exrcnt.
The answer to the first part of the question is nvofold. physiJally the two are
very
separate indeed-all sorts of ways have been employed by Muslim copyists
throughout the ages to set the divine eur'an apart from its human interpretaiion.
Prominent among these are simply by using the
eur,an's unique tJthmanic
orthography, beautiful hand,iii and by allocating it the pride ofplace on the page (or
folio) while the exegesis runs on its margins.i" In other instances the part of tire
Qur'an to be interpreted is quoted, set apart from the interpretation that comes below
it by the graphic features of the Uthmanic orthography and beautiful hand. In other
instances colours, illuminations, flowering brackets,' ornate bu ets, and
different
calligraphy and font size are also made use of. Mixing the two is indeed out of the
question;'the interpretation comes onry second to thJeutan and subordinate to
it,
thus the physical representation as such. With the advent of modern printin!
technologies, this time-honoured tradition has been underlined rather than
unde.rmined. Cognitively, that the reading of the Text will be affected
by these
parallel texts is two obvious to be ignored. Exegesis is very important for

24
 elt-Jl r:llS.iJr iaJsll

understanding the Qur'an. MuqAtil (2003: 1,27), a forefather of eur'an commentary,

further expounds on what is at stake in understanding the Qur,an:
The Qur'an contains references to particular and general things
(&lra.sp and "dmm), paticular references to
Muslims and
particular references to polytheists, general references to all
people; it contains unequivocal and ambiguous passages
(muhkam and mutashdbih), explained and unexplained passages
(mufassar and, mubham); it contains deletions and exolicit
utterances (idhmdr and tamdm); it contains connective items;
abrogating and abrogated dyahs (nasikh and, mansikh); it
contains changes in word order; it contains similar unerances
with many different xpects (ashbdh); it contains passages that
are continued in a different sirah; it contains accounts of earlier
generations and accounts ofwhat is there is in paradise and Hell;
it contains reference to one particular polytheist; it contains
commandments; laws, ordinances; it contains parables by which
God Alrnighty refers to Himsel{ parables by which He refers to
unbelievers and idols, and parables by which He refers to this
world, to resurrection and to the world to come; it contains
accounts ofwhat is in the hearts of the believers, and accounts of
what is in the hearts of the unbelievers, polemics asainst the
Arabian polyrheisrs: and it contains explanations, anJ for each
explanation there is an explanation.

To answer the second part of the starting question above (ls

eur'an hanslation
separ. able from commentary?), one has to recognise that basically
exegesis is
explicatory in nature while translation is imitative or quasi-imitative. Tradition has it
that with the Original will always be there overhanging and overarching.
_exeg_esis
The act ofreading is linear: first the original is read, according toiet rules ofrecita-i,
and then the interpretation is read as a helping aid for understanding and gaining
insight. Nobody is liable to fall into the trap of intellectually delusive'iy mixing th!
Text with the subtext: the segregation of the two is too obvious to miss. within the
Muslim context, the separation is further emphasised by a longstanding tradition of
public explanation of cerlain Qur'an passages, whereby the
eur'an is read first and
then explained.
This dimension is lost in translation. Here the original is practica y replaced by
the
translation/imitation. Thus strict rules have been put in plice lest that the translation
of the Qur'an is to be taken for the eur'an itself."iAmong these are the emphasis on
in^cluding the Arabic Original in the translation and inciuding the word',meanings
of in the title, or a variant of it to the same effect. Needless-to say, however, th-at
these precautionary measures are not followed to the letter by all translators.
Besides, even ifthese rules where adhered to, by virtue ofposing as a representation
of the Original, translation will be seen as a reflection oi it no matter how
subordinate it may be taken to be. Further explanatory additions, not all ofwhich
are

25
 Lower-Plane Qur'an Translation: Exegetical Inroads into Translation

exegetical in nature, as we will see shortly, are often added in translations by means
of: parentheses, footnotes (endnotes), prefatory notes, glossaries and appendices.
Yet, the superimposition of exegesis on translation is fairly common. Additionally,
exegesis is quintessentially different from translation in that it directly quotes
references from other religious disciplines, such as Prophetic Traditions and
biography, jurisprudence, and science of zsril while translation most likely relies on
ftese in the stage ofthe analysis ofthe Original more than in that ofthe synthesis of
the target text. Some translations may, very well, include references to these in out-
of-the-text annotations, yet still there afe some that may superimpose some ofthese
within the text ofthe translation itself.'ii

An immediate question arses here: what does the translator need the exegetical
corpus for? Just like any other reader, modern-day readers in particular, the
translator needs fa.Eir in order to decode the eur'an and understand its message.
However, unlike any other reader, translators are required to commit their
understanding in writing into a different language. The exigencies of the act of
translating arc indeed enonnous in both the stages of analysii of the original text
and synthesis of the target text. Moreover, unlike any other translator, the
eur,an
translator, is to fulfil the monumental task of translating a Text unlike any other both
in terms of its source and multi-faceted uniqueness. Fazlur Rahman contends:
There is a consensus among those who know Arabic well, and
who appreciate the genius of the language, that in the beauty of
its language and the style and power of its expression the
eur'an
is a superb document. The linguistic nuances simply defy
translation. Although all inspired language is untranslatable, this
rs even more the case with the Qur'an. (Moosa: 14)

The pressure, not counting exha-textual pressures, is much greater in the case of the
Qur'an translator thus in their loneliness translators do find support and solace in the
exegetical corpus. M.M. Pickthall ([1930] 1999: xiii] sums up the dilemma in the
introduction to his Qur,an:
The Qur'an cannot be translated. That is the belief of old_
fashioned Sheykhs and the view of the present writer. The Book
is here rendered almost literally and every effort has been made
to choose befitting language. But the result is not the glorious
Qur'an, that inimitable symphony, the very sounds of which
move men to tears and ecstasy. It is only an attempt to
present the meaning of the eur,an-and peradventure
something of the charm-in English. It can never take the place
of the Qur'an in Arabic, nor is it meant to do so.

Another translator, who decided to take up the gauntlet, puts it so:

Briefly, the rhetoric and rhyhm ofthe Arabic ofthe Koran are so
characteristic, so powerful, so highly emotive, that any version

26
 elt Jl qls,ilJ iajl

whatsoever is bound in the nature ofthings to be but a poor copy

of the glittering splendour of the original.... My chief reason for
offering this new version of a book which has been "translated',
many times already is that in no previous rendering has a serious
attempt been made to imitate, however imperfectly, those
rhetorical and rhythmical pattems which are the glory and the
sublimity of the Koran. (Arberry:24-45)

In the face of this, and in order to produce a translation that is acceptable both in
form and style, translators are very likely to intervene while carrying out their task.
Two types of intervention are identifiable:
1- Translational intervention: can take place both within the body ofthe
text and outside it. Examples of translational intervention take shape in the
form of: accounting for cultural and linguistic equivalence; compensating
for loss; aiding reading; pronouncing pronoun referents; explaining
translational choice (as in the case of diverting from certain inherited
translation choices); answering for failings in translation.
2- Exegetical intervention: may materialise in the following examples:
expounding more the meanings ofcenain lexical items; providing asbdb an_
nuzul (reasons of revelation); explaining a slarT ruling; highlighting the
relevance between dyahs and, sfirahs; explaining the ambiguous (tard;b al_
mubham); spelling out the inclusive (tagtl al-mujmal); precisely identi$ing
the unrestricted (taqtd al-mutlaq); pinpointing the generalized (tafuri aI_
'dmm); adding their own exegetical remarks.

One may divide intervention into two types:

3- Further random intervention: involves putting a tsfslr jn place of a
direct translation serving no obvious agenda. Futher they can be divided
into:-(a) necessary transposition dictated by the nature of the
eur,anic text
itself-as in the case ofnot being able to actually visualize the meaning and
having a mental picture of it. And (b) unnecessary transposition attribuied to
carelessness or incompetence on the part of the translator.
4- Pre-meditated intervention: mostly aimed at controlling the Text and
to manipulate its authority. These either come as part of the translator,s
strategy; or as a part of his bias (impartiality).

No claim here is made that the dependency of eur'an translation on /d/.slr is to be

undermined or that the t',vo can by any means be prised apart, but to be a the more
aware of the nomenclature and nature of this relationship. This should prove
of
benefit to on-going and up-coming translation projects in iheir attempt to raise the
standard and to better reflect the
eur'an through translation. eurbn translators
should beware not to let the commentary seep into the translation, the aim must
be
to let the Qur'an speak for itself as much as possible and disengage it fiom subtexts
and check the subtcxts in place, that is in annotationsnii but not in the body of
the

27
 Lower-Plane Qur'an Translation: Exegetical Inroads into Translation

text itself. The aim must be to overcome, as much as possible, the intermediary rule
of the exegetical corpus - whose importance in understanding the Original is
undeniable - in the actual representation available in the product oftranslation.

Illustrations:
I give the following examples as illustration:i* the first being the translation of a;alr
15:99:

al-Hilali and And worship your Lord until there comes unto you the
Khan certainty (i.e. death).
Muhammad Ali And serve thy Lord, until there comes to thee that which is
certain.
M.M. Pickthall And serve thy Lord till the Inevitable comerh unto thee.
Rashad And worship your Lord, in order to attain certainty.
Khalifah
Sheikh Worship your Lord until you achieve the ultimate certainty.
Muhammad
Sawar
M.H. Shakir And serve your Lord until there comes to you that which is
certain.
Sher Ali And continue worshiping thy Lord till death comes to thee.
A. Yusuf Ali And serve thy Lord until there come unto thee the Hour that
is Certain.

Muhammd Ali, Pickthall, Shakir provide a literal translation of the Original (yqln).
Al-Hilali and Khan intervene exegetically by explaining that what isrn"unt by
"certainty" is "death". Going a step further Sher Ali actually replaces with liter;l
with the exegetical "death". It is helpful to note here tha;t yaqtn (the certain) in this
dyah is interpreted by almost all mainstream Muslim authorities as ',death", yet there
is a different understanding of in some quarters. Extreme stands ofsufism intemret
it as a certain station which they call yaqln, if attained by some awtil.a' they wi[lbe
relived from the obligation of performing acts of worship. S.M. Sarwar's translation,
to "achieve the ultimate certainty", reflects this interpretation. unlike the rest of the
translators, Rashad Khalifah, who has been known for his disregard for the
exegetical corpus, found his own interpretation, ,,to attain certainty". which
subscribes to no standard exegetical stand.x

Another example of a more linguistic nature occurs in ayah g:7, which has been
translated as follows:
al-Hilali and And (remember) when Allah promised you (Muslims) one of
Khan the two parties (of the enemy i.e. either the army or the
caravan) that it should be yours, you wished that the one not
armed (the caravan) should be yours, but Allah willed to
ify the truth by His Words and to cut off the roots of the

28
 elL-Jl lllS.ilr iaJill

disbelievers (i.e. in the battle ofBadr).

Muhammad Ali And when Allah promised you one of the two parties that it
should be yours, and you loved that the one not armed should
be yours, and Allah desired to establish the Truth by His
words, and to cut offthe root of the disbelievers-
M.M. Pickthall And when Allah promised you one of the two bands (of the
enemy) that it should be yours, and ye longed that other than
the armed one might be yours. And Allah willed that He
should cause the Truth to triumph by His words, and cut the
root of the disbelievers;
Rashad Recall that GOD promised you victory over a certain group,
Khalifah but you still wanted to face the weaker group. It was GOD,s
plan to establish the truth with His words, and to defeat the
disbelievers.
Sheikh When God promised to grant you (believers) victory over
Muhammad either one of the two groups, you wished to have control over
Sarwar the unarmed one. God decided to prove (to you) the truth of
His promises and to destroy the unbelievers
M.H. Shakir And when Allah promised you one of the two parties that it
shall be yours and you loved that the one not armed should he
yours and Allah desired to manifest the truth of what was truE
by His words and to cut offthe root ofthe unbelievers.
Sher Ali And remember when ALLAH promised you one of the two
parties that it should be yours, and you wished that the one
unarmed should be yours, but ALLAH desired to establish thE
Truth by HIS words and to cut offthe root ofthe disbelievers
A. Yusuf Ali Behold! Allah promised you one of the two lenemy; partia,
that it should be yours: Ye wished that the one unarmed
should be yours, but Allah willed to justify the Truth
according to His words and to cut off the roots of the
Unbelievers;-

The expression ghayra dhat-i sh-shat*ah (lit. not that of the thorn), involves a
figure of speech where ash-shav*<ah (thorn) is metaphorically ur.d to ."p."r,
fi_fficulty This metaphor can be perfectly easily translaied into English as the word
"thorn" both in the literal and the figurative senses correspond with the Arabic
shavirah. All of the above translators actually sensed a problem and resorted to the
much toned down overall literal sense of it, which is based on their understanding
of
its interpretation i.e. ghayra dhdt-i sh-shav&ai (lit. not that of the thom) being"an
unarmed easy to capture caravan as opposed to the more thorny dispatch ofsoldiers.

le of this nature is found in a

al-Hilali and When, behold, they find themselves over ihiiartfialive after
Khan

29
 Lower-P lane Qur' an Translation: Exegetical Inroads into Translation

Muhammad Ali When lo! they will be awakened.

M.M. Pickthall And lo! they will be awakened.
Rashad Whereupon they get up.
Khalifah
Sheikh to bring them out of their graves and back to life on the
Muhammad earth's surface.
Sarwar
M.H. Shakir When lo! they shall be wakeful.
Sher Ali And behold ! tbey will all come out in tbe open.
A. Yusuf Ali When, behold, they will be in the (fult) awakening (to
Judgment).
The lexical item as-sahirah proved problematic to all of these translators. Their
dependence on tafstr is brought to the full in this example. Both Ibn Faris (1991:
3/108-109) and ar-Rdghib al-IsfahdnT (1992: 430) have it that what is meant by it is
the earth which is metaphorically spoken of as "the ever-awaking", as it never
sleeps, because of peoples' constant tramping and treading as they walk, or because
of it works day and night without cease about producing plant. The ayah replies to
those who deny thar they will be brought to life after their death. This image is lost
in all these translations. Not a single translator was able to capture it, though some
of them were wider off the mark lhan others.

ursrruau term features in 2:138

al-Hilali and [Our Sibghah (religion) is] the SilgiaD @eligion) of Allah
Khan (Islam) and which Sibghah (religion) can be better than
Allah's? And we are His worshippers.
Muhammad Ali (We take) Allah's colour, and who is better than Allah at
colouring, and we are His worshippers.
M.M. Pickthall (We take our) colour fiom Allah, and who is better than Allah
at colouring. We are His worshippers.
Rashad Such is GOD's system, and whose system is EEtter-if,an
Khalifah GOD's? "Him alone we worshio."
Sheikh Say, "Belief in God and fotlowing the guidance of Islarn .are
Muhammad God's means of purification for us. Islam is the baptism of
Sarwar God. No one is a better baptizer than He and we Muslims
worship Him. "
M.H. Shakir (Receive) the baptism of Allah, and who is Uetter ttran .lttatr
in baptising? and Him do we serve.
Shcr Ali Say, 'We have adopted the religion of al-t-Ag; a"d wtro is
better than ALLAH in teaching religion, and him alone do we
worshio.'
A. Yusuf Ali (Our religion is) the Baptism of Allah: ena wno can Uaptize
better than Allah? And it is He Whom we worship.

30
 e]t-Jl iltls.ilr iall

it means ,'colouring,', but it

The word sibghah is multi-stratal in meaning. Literally
is applied here, by extension, to "religion", which is Islam, as contrasted to
Christianity in which the act of immersion (colouring) in water, baptism, is taken as
an indicator of one's initiation into the religion. So Islam is the colouring ofGod, as
opposed to Christianity which the colouring of man. There is also the dimension if
Islam being a religion that colours one's life in all states. Although Muhammad Ali
and Picthall managed to capture the essence of the meaning, other translators,
particularly, al-Hilali and Khan who using a double technique of transliteration and
bracketing, went a step further towards superimposing the explicatory on the
imitative. Others did not do much better, especially Khalifah who, by imposing the
word "system", broke offfrom even the exegetical corpus.

Besides the linguistically, there is the exegetically and conceptually problematic.

The lexical item rsta
rsfa qaz
w{z ls
is a te e. It occurs in awh 7:54:
al-Hilali and Indeed your Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the
Khan earth in Six Days, and then He Istawa (rose over) the Throne
(really in a manner that suits His Majesty).
Muhammad Ali Surely your Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the
earth in six periods, and He is established on the Tlrone of
Power.
M.M. Pickthall Lo! your Lord is Allah Who created the heavens and the earth
in six D4ys, then mounted He the Throne.
Rashad Your Lord is the one GOD, who created the heavens and the
Khalifah earth i! six days, then assumed all authoritv.
Sheikh Your Lord is God who established IIis dominion o.,er th"
Muhammad Throne (of the realm) after having created the heavens and
Sarwar the earth in six days.
M.H. Shakir Surely your Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the
earth in six periods of time, and He is firm in power;
Sher Ali Surely, your Lord is ALLAH, who created the heavens and the
earth in six periods, then HE settled Himself firmly on the
Throne.
A. Yusuf Ali Your Guardian-Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and.
the earth in six days, and is firmly established on the throne
(of autlority):

God's Attributes have been a source of great contention among Muslims. All this
division finds its source in anthropomorphism and the caution oi otherwise to apply
human attributes to God. This division cannot be over-emphasised. In fact, certain
Muslim denominations like the Mutazilites and the Ash"arites came into beins
mainly because of their views on this issue. The problem is perceptual pai
excellence. Early Muslim stance on it was that of not really touching otr it in uny
way as peoples belief was in a pristine state. When Imam Mdlik (quoted in ai_
Qurtubi: 7/218) was asked about it he replied: "The manner is inconceivable, belief

31
 Lower-Plane Qur'an Translation: Exegetical Imoads into Translation

in it is mandatory, asking about it is a bidah (ungrounded innovation in religion),

and I think you are a man of mischief. Get him out of here!" Sufoan al-Thawrls
reply to the same question was: "He did an act on the Throne. He called al-istiwd",
(al-Ghazdli: 102). At-Tehir ibn .Ashiir (2004: 43-50) goes into details on the
meaning of al-istiwd'and how it was perceived by different schools throughout the
ages. Little wonder then is how our translators differed in their interpretatiron based
on the school ofthought they follow. Some would have it that in sucli a case the line
of distinction between the stages of analysis and synthesis of translation becomes
very thin indeed.
In fact the issue of Divine Attributes proved to be so much a translational problem
that the translators of a recent English version, widely known as Saheeh
International (1997: vi) addressed it:
As for the names and attributes of Allah (suhdnahu wa ta"dld\.
their translation is surely an impossibility, for even in Arabic
they cannot represent more than an approximation limited by
human understanding. To any description given by Allah to
Himself in human terminology, the mind is required to apply the
concept oi absoluteness and perfection befitting Him. Ibn
Taymiyyah stated concisely thar true belief in ettah
1i.e., the
conect Islamic "qeedah of Ahl as_Sunnah) includes belief in
whatever is described of Him in His Book (the
eur,an) or
through His Prophet...-belief that is free iom distortion
(taftreefr, suspension (ta"1eel), qualification (takyeef or
comparison ( ta mth eel).

Ani case is found in 8l : l7:

al-Hilali and I Ano Dy rne nlght as tt departs;
Khan I

Muhammad Ali I Ano rne ntght when lt deDarts

M.M. Pickthall I And the close of nisht--
Rashad By the night as it falls.
Khalifah
Sheikh and sit during the day. or@
Muhammad
Sarwar
M.H. Shakir
Sher Ali And I call to witness the as it draws to a
A. Yusuf Ali
The word "af asa in ttt

T9,'d"p*" F Arabic linguistics such items are rermed u4aao. fhi, is how it is
spoken_of in rhe - corpus and, by the same toten, reneclea in the translations
tafslr
above. However, a major chunk ofthe meaning
of caf:asa is scooped out in such a
simplistic approach. There is an element of imigery
to it- Ib; Farii (ibid.: 42) says
that this word is componentially made of the tnu'o
oi-1a; approaching and
"t.rn.nr.

32
 e]t Jl 1i.lS.j,jr iaJill

seeking, and (b) sneaking and stealth. A beautiful imagery characteristically applied
to night, especially as it is contrasted with the day which is described as "breathing,,
in the following dyah. Fvthermore, the phonic composition of the word also back
the added meaning of stealth.i None of this wealth of meaning is reflected in the
translations above, and the result is feeble representation of the Original. Total
dependence on certain tafstrs, which are not concerned with linguistic issues, does
not help in reaching a better understanding of the Original and thus producing a
better translation.

Discussion:
As we have seen in the examples above, certain exegetical views were, advertently
or otherwise, grafted on the primary text ofthe translation. To put it otherwise, they
were not checked outside the text and limited to the annotations. By virrue ofbeing
a "representation" of the original, this should have negative refleciions by the neri
readership's perception of it. There is a marked change in the conditions ofreception
for the Text in its translation-many translations are merely periphrastic, a form of
inter-lingual exegesis which have profound implications for its reception bv
its new
readers. These translations, furthermore, by heavily relying on the ra6rr
corpus,
wittingly or not, in the stages ofthe analysis ofthe Origind ina the synthesis oithe
translation, retain only a fraction of the Original,s for& and message.
As we have
seen in the examples above, this case is not unavoidable-
The relationship of the original and to its translation can be represented
as in the
figure below:

R|Tccted ir:

Wcton:

33
 Lower-Plane Qur'an Translation: Exegetical Inroads into Translation

The basic tenet here is that Qur'an translations do not really reflect directly the
Original, but they are, in many cases, mer€ inter-lingual reflections of a middle
Iayer, which, on its own, is reflective of the Original. In more cases than not, eur'an
translations do not directly reflect the original, but rely heavily on its body of
explicatory corpus and then represent this in a new linguistic code. Thus the relation
between the Qur'an and its supposed translations is that of an Original and a poor
Replica-retaining only the shadow of the depth of the Original.
There are a number ofreasons for this. The present researcher holds the following as
pertinent:
l- The nature of certain passages of Qur,an being open for more than one
mter?retation. Abu d-Dardl' is reported to have said: ,'you will not be fully
knowledgeable until you see different facets of the eur'an',. When "Ali ibn Abi
ldlib sent "Abdullah in al-"Abbds to the Kharijites, he cautioned him: ',Go to
them and engage them in debate. Do not argue with them on the basis of the
Qur'an as it is of probabilities and facets, but dispute with them on the basis of
_Sunnah".*"
Although we acknowledge this fact, yet overemphasizing it is not
healthy in tmnslation as this fact is of more significance to interpretation than it
is to translation. However, translators will always find certain readings more
suitable than others. By the same token, translators' bias in a major cause of
permeating translation wilh ta&ltr.
2- Of relevance to the previous point but more applicable to translators, is that
certain passages of the Qur'an are not easily comprehended without the aid of
tafslr. Their structure could also play a part in their intricacy and hence certain
portions of tafsr have to be reflected in translation.
3- Another relevant point is that in the case of lexical items more than any higher
ranking portion of text, their meaning is not easily graspable and a'defirite
perception of them is not easily available. This results in the translators,
resorting to ta_87, which finds reflection in their translations.
4- The common perception of Islam being a religion for everyone and the time-
honored_ practice of explaining its tenets, as exemplified in preaching it
to in
public places such as mosques, and basicaly its original oral tradition read to the
spnng somewhat sirnplistic discussions for the benefit of laymen. This deeply_
entrenched background lead to a tendency for giving easily graspable .ynony-,
of colourful lexical elements of the originar sources ;f Islam: rn. qr.'un und tt.
sunnah. The effects of this notion on the practice of fa6lr were carried on the
dependent practice of translation.
5- The overwhelming nanatives and eur'an translation discourse which are
possessed by the notion ofthe
eur'an's "untranslatablity". This has had profound
implications for the practice of eur,an translaiing. The tradition of
"untranslatablity" is as over drawn is it is prevalent, that it has impressed an
effect so profound in the minds of translitors that they consciouily or not
succumbed to the notion and did not, in their endeavours, ponder on the
possibilities and venues of the eur'an's "translatability", and juit how
feasible
this notion is. Another equally influential notion is that transiations are. to no

34
 ejr--rt aJ. ls.ilr :.AJxt

small measure, thought of as those of the "meanings" of the eur'an or

"interpretations" of it.
6- Recent research in Translation Studies identified the so-called universals of
translation. These are recurrent features typically occurring in translated texts.
Prominent among these universals is the tendency for simplification, of which
there are: lexical, sl.ntactic and stylistic types of simplification. Theorists are of
the opinion that lexical simplification operates according to six principles or
strategies, which are: use of subordinate terms when there are no equivalent
hyponyrns in the target language, approximation of the concepts expressed in the
source language text, use of common-level; or familiar synonyrns, transfer of all
functions of a source language word to its target language equivalent, use of
circumlocutions instead of conceptually matching highJevel words or
expressions (especially theological, culture -specific or technical terms), and use
of paraphrase where cultural gaps exist between the source and the target
languages. Although, proving that Qur'an translators resort to these strategies
ments a separate study of its own, we are able to identify some of them in the
prevrous examples. What is particular to eur,an translators, by contrast to
translators of other texts, is that this simplification tendency is found in
exegetical corpus itself The exegetical "difference of congruence" (ikhtikf
tanawwuc), as opposed to iMttilaf ta/add (difference of incongruence), in which
a certain Qw'anic word, rich in meaning, is said to be equivalent to a set less
meaningful near-s)monyrns, is but on manifestation of this exesetical
simplifi cation tendency.

Concluding Remarks:
This paper does not constitute a call for literalism. Far from it, what it urges is
freeing up Qur'an translations from gratuitous exegetical intrusions in order to -better
represent the original and bring out some of its richness in translation. Althoush the
importance ofexegesis to Qur'an translation is acknowledged, but being all the-more
aware of the scope and limits of the relationship between the trvo is a very
productive, healthy pursuit. As things siand now, there is a real danger of the very
deep. Qur'anic message being made two-dimensional and flattened up. ,The
translation ofthe Qur'an was slightly less pleasant and active in emotional tone than
everyday English and also less concrete. It contained an unusual number of
negatives and was repetitive but did not contain many rare or long words", is the
result of a psychological shrdy carried on a particular English
eur,an translation
(Whissell: 2004).
one of the main reasons for this lamentable state of affairs is that translators have
been so profoundly influenced by tafstr that their translations have become
overwhelmed by it. Trarslations have become representations not of the Original
but, in many instances, of the interpretative corpus leading to the emergeni of
lower-plane translations. This paper is a f'st it"p to*uid. understanding this
troubled relationship, and furthcr studies raising more questions and followine

35
 Lower-Plane Qur'an Translation: Exegetical Inroads into Translation

different methodologies need to be undertaken. They should address these serious

questions: should exegesis find its place in the final product ofthe translation, after
it has been utilized in understanding the Text? How much exegesis should seep
through into the final product of the translation? What are the instances in which
this the flow of exegesis is inevitable in the translation? What can we do about it-
are there altemative ways of handling it? What exactly are the reasons behind the
confluence ofthe two?

36
 etl"-Jr ill" tsiJr iaJnl

References

al-Amri, Waleed Bleyhesh (2007) "Qur'an Translatability at the phonic

Level". In Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, vol. 15:3.
Arberry, A.J. ( 1 980) Ttre Korun Interpreted. London: George Allen &
Unwin.
Ar-Reghib al-Isfahdru- (1992) Mufradat Alfuz al-eur'an. D6r al-ealam:
Damascus.
Az-Zarqdnt, Muhammad cAbdul-"Azr-m (1999\ Manahil at-clrJdn fi
"Ulum
al-Qur'dn. Dtu al-Ma"rifah: Berrut.
Fetdwda ash-Shaikh al-Imdm Muhammad at-Tahir ibn ". shur (2004).
Compiled and edited by Muhammd Buzghaibah. Markaz Jumcah al-Majid li
ath-Thaqdfah wa at-Turath: Dubai.
Ibn Faris (1991) Mrfjan Maqayiis al-Lughah. Ddr al-Jil: Beirut.
Hill, H. (2006) The Bible at Cultwal Crossroads: From Translation to
Communication. St. Jerome Publishing: Manchester.
Khader Salamah (2001) The Qur'an Manuscripts in the al-Haram al-Sharif
Islamic Museum, Jerusalem. UNESCO: paris.
Kidwai, Abdur-Rahim (2007) Bibliography of the Translations of the
Meanings of the Glorious eur,an into Engtish- 1649-2002: A Critical
Survey King Fahd Glorious Qur'an printing Complex: Madinah.
Laviosa-Braithwaite, S. (2001) ',Universals of translation,'. ln M. Baker
Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studes. Routledse: London
M. N_. Seferciollu and E. Ihsanollu 12000), World Bibliography of
Translations oJ'the Holy Qur'an in Manuscript Form,I. Istanbul: IRCICA.
Moosa, E. (2003) Introduction ofF. Rahnai, Revival and Reform in Islam.
Oneworld: Oxford.
Picthall, M. (1999) me Glorious ew'an. Cagri yayinlari: Istanbul.
Sulaimdn al-Qar"awl (1413 AH) al-LItujuh wa li-Na4.r
Kartm. Maktabat ar-Rushd: Riyadh.
fi al_eur,dn al_
The Qur'an (1997) (translation of the Meaning of the
eur,an, by Saheeh
Intemational. Abulqasim Publishing House: Riyadh.
Whissell, C. (2004) ',Emotion and Style in an English Translation of the
Qur'an". In Psychological Reports, 2004, 94, 523-544.

' tn lact all atten.pts in this regard prior to rhis first Latio ve^ion were &agrnentary, none of which was
a conrplele

" unfbrrunatcry' this s?arc of Qtr'a. transrarion actjvily was nor $pplcrncnrcd by an adcquarc
numbcr of $udies,
aimed at examining and probing irs different facers.
rnoie_-9n
]:^19: lhc fhysicat appearancc of rhc eur,an uz_,_v,'.z cxcgesis, cr M. N. scfcrciogtu and E. rhsanoEtu
(2000), and Khader Salamah r200t)
rhe appcannce of exesetical note alonsside rhe js d.r.
l]t i:iT:o:" "*o " "xprcas efan b.,r (b.iraMiariri),
' the nitwe of hununs, some manuscnpt copisrs and bool-rnakers have divefted iiom
or-Given
somefimes rrundanc reasons. How€ver, rhis is very much lhe e\ceplion
rh,s rule for sons a
rarher rhan rhe n e
'' Al-A2har's Qur'an translarion crireria ir az-Zarqani (tggg:,tot.2,;p. 624t1
"' Wc^havc to reoahizs rhar .xcgcsis hcrc is msnl to includc tho$ th3r arc an teeuages orhcr lhd Arabic. Thus
the diff€renc€s between transtation and exegesis are limitcd to (he
ones srudi"a i" tf,i"
"i....

37
 Lower-Plane Qur'an Translation: Exegetical Inroads into Translation

'"' Harriet Hill (2006) sets a disrilcrion bdween insidc rhc text ard oulside of rhe text contexrualization. By
contcxtualization sbe rncans traoslators' addirions.
'' Exarples in this anicle are provided liom Clay Smiri's para €t eur'!n: hirp://wMp.clay.snirh.name, accessed:
20M.O3.21
' In fact the choices of thes€ translarors arc very much infom€d by rheir backgrounds. For background
inforrnation about tbe translarors discuss€d in this articte, see Kidwai (200?).
n For a detailed discuision of how the phonetic and rhe i€rnanlic are inreriependent in certain
eur,anic rerrns, and
how this rcflccrs in nanslarior! scc al-Anri (2007).
x' Both of th€s€ reports are documented in al-Qafewl (14t3 AH: 2l-22)

38