JUST as there is a growing global demand for enlightening modern commentaries of the Quran, there is a persisting dearth of exegetical scholarship, even as the overall body of literature on Islam increases.

In this scenario, it is rewarding to look at Imam Ghazali’s classic theory of Quranic interpretation, presented in one of his most well-known works, Ihya Ulum ud-Din (Revival of the Religious Sciences). Abu Hamid Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Ghazali (1,058-1,111CE), a great philosopher, cosmologist, jurist, psychologist and theologian-turned-mystic, was born and died in Tus (Khorasan). He was a prolific writer. Many of his books are extant to this day.

Ghazali says that the hadith, sayings of the Companions of the Prophet (PBUH) and those of other scholars of early Islam prove that for men of understanding there is a broad scope in the meaning and interpretation of the Quran. Hazrat Ali said, “If I so will I can certainly load 70 camels with the exegesis of the opening surah of the Book.” Since the outward exegesis of this short chapter can be written in a few pages, what is the meaning of this statement? Ghazali explains that the person who thinks that there is no meaning of the Quran except for the outward (or obvious) exegesis, is actually expressing his own shortcomings and he thinks that all other people are at the same level as himself.

Ghazali quotes a religious scholar who says that the Quran encompasses 77,200 forms of knowledge, for every Quranic sentence constitutes one form of knowledge. Since the Prophet is reported to have said that the Quran has an outward aspect, an inward aspect, a limit and a prelude, the above number is multiplied four times. Ibn Masud said, “One who intends to acquire the knowledge of the ancients and the moderns should ponder over the Quran. This knowledge is something that is not achieved by its mere outward exegesis.”

The first requirement of interpreting the Quran is that it should have been heard from the mouth of the Prophet and be supported by a chain of narration going back to him. But, according to Ghazali, this applies only to a small part of the Quran.

Secondly, the Companions of the Prophet, and those after them, the tabiun, gave many varying explanations. The Prophet could not have given all these, sometimes contradictory, explanations of the verses of the Quran, which means that every exegete came to his own conclusion.

Thirdly, Ghazali argues that if the interpretation of the Quran is like revelation and is only heard from the Prophet, and is preserved the way revelation is preserved, then why did the Prophet pray for Ibn Abbas saying, “God, bestow upon him the understanding of the religion and teach him the interpretation of the Quran”? Fourth, Ghazali thinks that it is not a requirement of interpreting the Quran to find that opinion which is expressed by a learned authority, but it is lawful for everyone to elicit a meaning from the Quran in keeping with his understanding and intelligence.

Ghazali quotes a hadith in which it is said, “He who explains the Quran according to his personal opinion shall take his place in Hell” (Tirmidhi). According to Ghazali, the reason for prohibiting the interpretation of the Quran by one’s personal opinion is for two reasons. Firstly, the interpreter has his own opinion (ra’y), which is influenced by his nature (tab’) as well as his desire or passion (hawa). So he interprets the Quran accordingly, citing as evidence an argument which promotes his purpose.

This can happen to those interpreters who are aware of the Sharia as well as to those who are ignorant of it. Thirdly, sometimes a person has a preconceived purpose for which he adduces proof with a verse, knowing fully well that that purpose is not intended in the Quran. This has led to the growth of many sects.

There are many subjects in which transmission from authorities or classical interpreters is necessary for the explanation of the Quran, as in the case of ambiguity, or where a word is omitted in case of conciseness or where a word is understood, etc.

Anyone who hastens to explain the deep meanings of the Quran through the outward aspects (of the rules of grammar) of the Arabic language, without knowing the meaning transmitted from the authorities is a person who “explains the Quran by his personal opinion”. He has merely translated its words or the outward exegesis, which is not sufficient.

There are many depths and secrets in the path to understanding and interpreting the Quran, but outward exegesis based on the knowledge of the meaning of the Arabic words and its grammar alone cannot guide us to them. These secrets are not opposed to outward exegesis, rather they complete it and constitute the essence of the Quran. The secret meanings of the Quran are unveiled, when both academic and spiritual links are made, to “…those established in knowledge, in proportion to the abundance of different forms of their knowledge, the purity of their souls, the fullness of their motives in pondering (over the Quran), and their isolation for seeking (its meaning)”.

In other words, according to Ghazali, there has to be a three-pronged approach: the outward exegesis with a linguistic base, a layering of reference to the classical commentators, and embellishment with the secret meanings, which are exposed to ‘purified souls’ or the Sufis.

nilofar.ahmed58@gmail.com