Yaser M. Haddara

Last week was a rather slow week for the blog :( . Last weekend was the LTP in Montreal, this weekend was the one at McMaster. Between preparing for these and catching up on work stuff I’m now falling behind again on my emails and on responding to comments. I did get a chance to check out a few wonderful blogs of people that either emailed me or left comments here. Check out Hadeel al-Shalchi, Ali Jafferi, and Jaffer Maniar.

On the bright side, with two LTP’s within one week of each other, a new episode of Little Mosque, and various happenings at McMaster and elsewhere, there is plenty inshaa Allah to blog about!

I wanted to go back to the story of Taloot. I waded through my old files last week trying to find my notes from that interfaith session I mentioned in my very first blog entry. I found so many of my old notes of so many things that were happening at and around Stanford in the early 90’s. (Good source for future blog material :> ). But unfortunately, I couldn’t find notes from that discussion. This actually bothered me a little b/c I am not sure I can remember what I actually said about each mufassir. Nonetheless, with one notable exception these tafaseer are all available. So inshaa Allah what I am going to do is to revisit these tafaseer, and as much as I can remember I will inshaa Allah do it in the same order that I used that first time.

The commentary that I had started with was a contemporary Tunisian scholar by the name of al-Tahir ibn Ashur. Both al-Tahir and his son al-Fadil (who passed away before his father) were leading scholars of Quran and tafseer. Al-Fadil ibn Ashur (the son) has a very short book called al-Tafseer wa raijaaluh (Tafseer and its men). Despite its brevity, it is one of the best analyses of the history of tafseer and the different contributions of the leading commentators. Reading this one short text led me to rethink how I had understood the different schools of tafseer up to then. I then had the blessing of coming across and reading al-Tafseer wal-Mufassiroon (Tafseer and scholars of tafseer) by Sh. Muhammad Hussein al-Dhahaby rahimahullah. This text elaborates on the point of view concisely presented by sh. ibn Ashur.

One of the stories shared with me by some of my friends from Tunis was that al-Fadil ibn Ashur (the son) had attained the status of having a column at al-Zaytouna where he sat to teach in the presence of his father. (This was also the practice for leading scholars in al-Azhar and is the equivalent of a “chair” in modern academia). Reportedly, when he would sometimes go a little farther afield than his father preferred the father would rap his knuckles on the column and say to his son, “Fadil: do not speak in the deen with your (baseless) opinion” :) .

Al-Tahir ibn Ashur (the father) is famous for an incident where he challenged the then Tunisian president Bourgiba. Bourgiba had given a speech to army units instructing them not to fast in Ramadan since they are to be considered engaged in the all-important service of the country and the fast would sap their energies and hinder their work. To counter the objections his remarks engendered he instructed the sheikh to address parliament and endorse his comments. On the designated day Bourgiba addressed parliament in a televised session then invited ibn Ashur to the podium. The sheikh stepped up to the podium, recited the fasting verse from sura al-Baqara, then concluded: صدق الله العظيم وكذب بورقيبة! (Allah the Almighty has told the truth, and Bourgiba lies!)

This scholar wrote a massive commentary on the Quran called al-Tahrir wal-Tanwir (Liberation and Enlightenment). For the particular set of verses that give the story of Taloot (al-Baqara 246-252) ibn Ashur does make a number of very interesting notes on linguistics (e.g. why the Quran uses the name Taloot instead of Saul) and on the order of phrases and how they are linked with each other (e.g. when the people objected to Taloot’s choice as king what did they mean by saying “we are more deserving than he” and why was the most appropriate response one that begins with the statement that “God chose him over you”?)

But the main thing that ibn-Ashur is interested in is to elaborate the lessons of history indicated by these verses. To do this he partly relies on Judaic scriptures to understand the historical context of these events. And to do that he filters the narrative through, and only admits information that is coherent with, the Quranic account.

The most important point highlighted by sh. al-Tahir is that this story appears to have been a turning point for the community of Israel. After the death of Moosa (peace be upon him) he was succeeded in the leadership of the nation of Israel by Joshua. Joshua created a system whereby each small community (town, village, etc.) had an appointed Judge to discharge their affairs. Some of these judges where themselves prophets divinely inspired. And there were also other prophets who did not take a political position with their people. This phase of their communal history is characterized by a government based in scholarship and inherently consultative. Leadership was a matter of scholarly merit, piety, and divine selection. And the processes of leadership did not lend themselves to authoritarianism or to the creation of a privileged class.

The events we’re studying here change all that. The Israelites were defeated by their enemies that occupied a number of their towns, exiled them from these lands, held many of their youth (fighting men) captive, and stole one of their most treasured religious symbols: the Ark of Moosa and Haroon peace be upon them. The Israelites sought to understand their defeat and somehow reconcile it with their understanding of their place in the World (this should sound familiar since Muslims have been in a similar state for quite a while now :( ). Their conclusion was that the power of their enemies lay in their system of government! They wanted a King and a monarchy and all the trappings of that system that they now held to be superior to their own. And in giving us their example the Quran is inviting us to contemplate not only the superiority of consultative government to authoritarian rule but also the trap of interpreting material success as moral superiority. (It hurts sometimes to feel like so many of us are missing the point, continuously; this is not a reference to some nameless others - I am speaking of myself first and my community of which I am part).

Sh. ibn Ashur then points out that while Allah allows the community of Israel to develop into a state similar in its structure and governance to the polities of the time and region, He instructs the community in what they need to do different. And He does this through the simple manner of the designation of the first royal and his successor. Taloot is chosen on merit. Dawood is anointed king and given wisdom (prophethood). In the Judaic scriptures that ibn Ashur consults Dawood peace be upon him is anointed king before he ever meets Taloot. In the Quran no mention is made of a relationship between Dawood and Taloot, rather his status as prophet-king is directly attributed to divine selection. Either way the emphasis is on qualities and character. The values of a hereditary, authoritarian monarchy are rejected even while the authoritative structures it provides to the administration of the state are adopted.

Sh. al-Tahir ibn Ashur discusses much more that is useful, indeed beautiful, in connection with these verses. But when I had 10 minutes I had to be selective with what I said, and here I have to be selective with what I write.

Next up inshaa Allah: al-Tabary and ibn Katheer. (But it’s gonna be a while ).