Return to Main Page
Return to List of Readings

Supplement to the Notes:
Additional Points on the Case
against UNC & Approaching the Qur'an

In a brief supplement to the notes and the controversy surrounding UNC-Chapel Hill's choice of summer reading in 2002, I would like to comment on some additional aspects of Approaching the Qur'an by Michael Sells and the suit against UNC for assigning the book to 1st-year students.  It it is no surprise that the Qur'an is front and center in both debates dealt with in this unit's readings--its importance to the Islamic faith is central and profound.  For Muslims, the "word," the holy word conveyed to the prophet Muhammad and "recited" by him, are of vital importance in forming their worldview or frame of reference--the perspective or context in which they see the world and their role and position therein.  The Qur'an's significance is reflected in the fact that caligraphy develops as one of the most important forms of Islamic art (along with architecture).  Writing--the written word--as seen in the Qur'an, is the most divine form of expression, whereas painting or sculpture have often been interpreted in the Islamic tradition as competing with God's creation and thus frowned upon. 

The Case Against UNC.  In the video clip from PBS News Hour, Mr. Glover from the Family Policy Network, the organization that sued the University for assigning the book, articulates the case against UNC.  He emphasizes three points:

·       That reading this book a form of "religious indoctrination" and that by law the University “cannot force students to submit to religious indoctrination”; he calls this book by Sells “a religious text.”

·        That if UNC or some other school had assigned a similar book on the Bible, the ACLU would be quick to sue.

·        That this book covers only the early revelations and thus leaves out the much harsher, militaristic aspects of Islam from the latter phase of Muhammad’s career, giving students a one-sided (rosy) view of Islam. 

What Sells Omitted.  Obviously Sells’ book leaves out a lot of the Qur’an (as he concedes), both “peaceful” and “militaristic” passages.  In the wake of September 11th, I think it important to point out that:

·        Specific passages in the Qur’an forbid the murder of innocent civilians in war—even forbid the destruction of buildings!

·        The Qur’an obligates Muslims to protect Christian and Jewish places of worship, i.e. churches and synagogues, as well as mosques.

·        Suicide is also forbidden, etc. etc.

But the Qur’an clearly contains a militaristic side as well, just as both Judaic and Christian traditions do as well.  Here are passages to consider that are not in Sells’ book (the 8th Sura or chapter):

·        [8.12] When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe.  I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve.  Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.  

·        [8.13] This is because they acted adversely to Allah and His Apostle; and whoever acts adversely to Allah and His Apostle—then surely Allah is severe in requiting (evil). 

·        [8.14] This—taste it, and (know) that for the unbelievers is the chastisement of fire. 

·        [8.15] O you who believe! When you meet those who disbelieve marching for war, then turn not your backs to them.  

·        [8.16] And whoever shall turn his back to them on that day—unless he turn aside for the sake of fighting or withdraws to accompany—then he, indeed, becomes deserving of Allah’s wrath, and his abode is hell; and an evil destination shall it be. 

·        [8.17] So you did not slay them, but it was Allah Who slew them, and you did not smite when you smote (the enemy), but it was Allah Who smote, and that He might confer upon the believers a good gift from Himself; surely Allah is Hearing, Knowing.

It is important to emphasize that the "disbelievers"--or "infidels" as they often referred to--in the context of the Qur’an referred primarily to the pagan Arab Bedouin tribes with which the early Muslims were at war.  The problem is that these passages allow for broad interpretation by the likes of Bin Laden & Co. in later contexts.  That leads to another point of emphasis: any canonical text for any religion is first and foremost open to interpretation, and the interpretation(s) of it change with time.  The Qur'an, like the old and new testaments of the Bible, is complex and full of contradicitions, which is true of any textual body we use as historical evidence, religious or otherwise (i.e the writings of Karl Marx).  The important point is how Muslims interpret the Qur'an and apply its message in everyday life, which obviously varies greatly.

Other Issues/Themes

A militaristic and intolerant side.  Whereas the Qur’an repeatedly calls for tolerance for “people of the book” (Jews and Christians), it also contains tirades against them, especially in the Medina phase and parts of Suras 4 and 5, as Glover points out.  For example in “The Noble Qur’an” passages 5.073-5.075, available below.  Thus while the overarching message of Islam is a message of peace, tolerance, and kindness, there is also a militaristic and intolerant side to the religion and Muhammad’s words too.

WEBLINK:  The Noble Qu’ran; check out passages 5.073–5.075
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/

Continuity.  The Qur’an reflects elements of continuity—the more things change the more they stay the same!—with pre-Islamic society, which is apparent in several ways, such as importance of the oral tradition, the spoken word itself--poetry--but also some of the specific historical references (i.e. Hud and Salih, prophets from the Arabic tradition, and Thamud, a fallen pre-Islamic civilization in Arabia, etc.). 

Change.  Also, along with cultural continuity the Qur’an reflects change, i.e. the pre-Islamic concept of karim (generosity), the warrior-hero sharing his wealth with the community as a whole through the ritual sacrifice of his camel and feast, etc.  This concept is carried over but modified with generosity for God the central act, etc.

Differences from the Judaic-Christian tradition.  For one, the Qur’an itself is a very different type of text from the Hebrew Bible and Christian New Testament.  Unlike those texts, which uphold a narrative structure with a clearly defined beginning, middle, and end, the Qur’an does not have nor does it seem to strive to maintain such a structure.  Also, and perhaps more importantly from a philosophical point of view, the Qur’an—and by extension Islam—does not propound a doctrine of the original sin or of the essential sinfulness of humanity.  As Sells points out, “Human beings are not born sinful, but they are forgetful.”  Humanity’s forgetfulness replaces the notion of “original sin” in Islam, because humans must be reminded by prophets that there is only one God, otherwise they will forget and fall into idol worship and sinfulness.  Muslims believe that Muhammad was the final prophet God will send to remind humans not to worship idols.

Translations inherently flawed.  The other aspect of importance is captured in the title of Sells' book—Approaching the Qur’an.  Why does Sells say he gave the book precisely this title?  Because translations are inherently flawed and incomplete, and thus are merely an approach to the Qur’an, not a definitive rendition thereof.  Sells notes that the Qur’an, first of all, is inherently vague and understood variously even in its original Arabic, and secondly, very, very difficult to translate, especially into a gender neutral/male language like English.  As noted on the aforementioned web site The Noble Qur'an, which includes three separate translations of the Qur'an: "any translation of the Qur'an immediately ceases to be the literal word of Allah, and hence cannot be equated with the Qur'an in its original Arabic form. In fact, each of the translations on this site is actually an interpretation which has been translated."

Gendered language.  Finally, along those same lines, Sells makes a very interesting point regarding the gendered language of the Qur'an that is totally lost in English translation.  He asserts that the gendered language of the Qur’an exhibits far greater sensitivity to gender equality (and grants women a central role throughout) than is conveyed in Western stereotypes of the religion that focus on the male-dominated aspects of the Qur’an and of Islam in general.  Specifically, he says the three most formative moments of the Qur’an, the revelation of the prophecy to Muhammad on the “night of power,” creation, and the “day of reckoning,” are linked through the gendered language of the text to “the feminine spirit,” so to speak (through the personification of women that is lost in translation)—to women conceiving, giving birth, and losing their children through premature death. 

To sum it up in his words:

The loss of the Qur’anic gender dynamic in translations reinforces one of the most misleading stereotypes about Islam and the Qur’an—that the Qur’an is based on rigid, male-centered language.  Yet this stereotype of a language of “he-God and he-man” is at odds not only with Islamic theology (which denies that God is male or female) but also with the intricate and beautiful gender dynamic that is a fundamental part of Qur’anic language. [Michael Sells, Approaching the Qur’an, p. 202.]

Sells' Approaching the Qur'an, like any text--which is perhaps the central lesson in this first unit--is also open to interpretation.  In the Discussion Board relay your thoughts on the book candidly.  What did you think of his argument?  Does he make a convincing case, in your opinion?  Why or why not?