altmuslimah.com - Language: Part 1: What a difference a kasrah makes

Ṭabarī remains the scholar everyone loves to quote and invoke. Ṭabarī’s tafsīr is considered one of the greats, and academic giants like al-Qurṭubī (d. 1272) relied on this text as a basis for their own works. But Ṭabarī borrowed a lot from the writers who came before him, in particular an expert on grammar named Abū Zakaria Yaḥyā ibn Ziyād al-Farrā’ (d. 826). So, although you assumed I was going to launch into a snide diatribe about the evils of beauty pageants, I really want to discuss Arabic grammar.

Sisters! Know this: In fighting for intellectual space within our religion, we cannot pay enough attention to grammar. Take it as an axiom, embroider it on a pillow, or tattoo it on a discreetly-covered limb: The believer with the best grammar wins. I’m talking about winning liberation from erroneous and oppressive interpretations, winning room to breathe, think and soar.

Scholars began to pore over the language of the Qur’ān when it became evident that there were differences of opinion emerging from attempts to understand the text. Early on, the Qur’ānic text was written with only a vague consonantal outline. Vowels and dots were inserted based on the opinions of scholars. Differences in vowels and differences in where dots were placed on or under letters, meant differences in meaning. The Arabic script that we encounter when we open the Qur’ān today was not hammered out until grammarians in the late-9th century defined a precise system of marks - fatḥahs, kasrahs and dammahs - to indicate the different vowel sounds .

An eminent expert in the early variant readings of the Qur’ān was the sister of the scholar, Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn (d. 728), Ḥafṣa. Her brother would often refer his intellectual peers to her as the definitive voice on the subject of variant readings. What would Ḥafṣa bint Sīrīn say if she learned that all other readings had been forgotten and Muslims have been left with just one? What would she have to say about our Qur’ān, “preserved perfectly,” in the form which sits in the top shelves of our mosques and homes, the source of many well-intentioned sermons and policies by earnest, God-fearing men? In this version, there is a verse that has been used as a weapon against our sisters in places like Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Houston and West Philly.

Wa qarna fī buyūtikunna wa lā tatabarrajna tabarruj al-jāhilīyah al-ūlā... (33:33).

Abdullah Yusuf Ali translates: “And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former times of ignorance...”

The rest of the verse goes on to command women to pray, give charity, obey God and the Messenger, and so forth. These commands are followed by “Truly the Muslim men and the Muslim women, the believing men and the believing women...” (33:35). This verse stands as an awesome affirmation of our spiritual equality with men. Why then is it preceded by a verse that instructs us to “Stay home”?

Mr. Sunnī Universe (Ṭabarī) thinks that’s bunk, and so does Mr. Grammar (al-Farrā’) before him. Both believed that this verse does not say, “Stay home” but instead translates into, “Behave with dignity in your homes.”

Now for the grammar - with which you have to be armed, because if we can’t explain it like these guys did, no one will listen to us. For most men, 33:33 has nullified 33:35 before their eyes can even travel down the page.

At the heart of the debate is the root word waqara, which means to be dignified. It is a “weak” verb in Arabic, which means that it drops its first radical (i.e., the letter waw here in the command form). Here’s how al-Farrā‘ explains it:

“’Wa-qirna fī buyūtikunna’ comes from waqār, dignity. You say for men, ‘he has behaved with dignity within his home’ or ‘qad waqara fī manzilihi’.”

Sisters! “Stay home” (qarna), the word we find in our reading of the Qur’ān, is not the word that some of the most learned and renowned early experts believed was correct (“be dignified” - qirna). Al-Farrā’ does not even suggest that his interpretation is a variant. It is the BASIS from which others depart.

He goes on to address the alternate reading:

“ʿĀṣim and the Medinans have read it with a fatḥah. This is not from waqār (dignity). We see that they intend [its meaning to be]: ‘And stay in your homes,’ (w-a-qrarna fī buyūtikunna), so they have dropped the [first] ‘rāʾ’, and its fatḥah has transferred to the ‘qāf.'”

The root here is from qarr, (to remain, to be sedentary, to settle). Even if the root word were qarr, al-Farrā’ shows us what the command form would look like: aqrarna, not qarna. In other words, if you want to use the root verb which means to remain sedentary, it takes a lot of dodgy grammatical wiggling to get it to match the consonantal outline found in the early Qur’āns.

Who is the one espousing this iffy approach - who is this ʿĀṣim? He is one of the famous “Seven Readers” of the Qur’ān from the eighth century. Considered a “Follower” (one of the pious first generation which followed on the heels of the Companions), he headed the renowned school of Qur’ānic study in Kufa, Iraq, and died around 745. The majority of our Qur’āns are, according to his reading, via his pupil named Ḥafṣ. Ḥafṣ died around 805, some 70 years after his teacher.

In the early 10th century, a fellow named Ibn Mujāhid used the agreed upon script system to limit the ever-expanding number of readings of the Qur’ānic text to just the seven from the “Seven Readers.” By rejecting all other readings, even those of other famous scholars (such as ‘Abd Allāh ibn Mas‘ūd and ‘Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib), Ibn Mujāhid hoped to curtail bickering over what this or that meant based on how it was read. ‘Āṣim was one of the lucky Seven, and his is the version most popular today.

But the question remains: if, in the instance of 33:33, ‘Āṣim’s reading was deemed grammatically incorrect by early experts, why can’t we press their same point here and now?

Consider this: one little word, voweled differently from the way these early experts suggested, has made countless women prisoners of their homes... One little kasrah.

(Photo: DigitalParadox)

Carolyn Baugh is a PhD candidate in Arabic and Islamic Studies at the University of Pennsylvania, where she is writing her doctoral dissertation on the subject of forced prepubescent marriage in early Islamic legal texts. She is also the author of a novel entitled “The View from Garden City” (Forge, 2008). This article was originally published on AltMuslimah on June 9, 2010.

This comment is actually copied from something I posted on facebook in response to a discussion I had with someone on this article.

Basically the kasra is found in 7/10 canonical recitations of the Qur’an. One of the quoted sources states that Asim (Hafs and Shu’ba) and the Medinans (aka Imam Nafi’ and his recitations - transmitted by Imams Warsh and Qalun) use a fatha, so that is 2/10 recitations. I used some tajweed manuals by Shaikh Tawfiq Dhamra of Jordan who has tables comparing the recitations to Hafs, to check if there was a difference in the other recitations. I could not find any reference to there being a difference for the recitation of Abu Ja’far, so I assumed it to be the same (have a fatha) as for the recitations of Asim and Nafi’. I found that the remaining 7 recitations contained a kasra (khalaf, Hamza, Al kisa’ee, Ibn Amir, Abu Amr, Ya’qoob, Ibn Kathir)

If the author would like copies of these manuals, they are freely available on the internet in the form of pdfs, or I can email her, or anyone else interested the links.

Everything below the line is copied from my facebook comments.
__________________________________________________________________

It was the likes of Ibn Mujahid, Imam Ash Shatibi and Ibn AL Jazari and similar scholars who actually preserved this knowledge of there being a kasra, and they didn’t block it or hide it.

The kasra being there is actually part of the canonical recitations, and 7/10 in fact. I also do believe that the fatha is also an authentic way of reading, despite the suggestions on grammar and meanings, because it has been transmitted by 3 of the different reciters, and it has been examined by plenty of masters of grammar in previous centuries. Ibn Mujahid, Imam Ash SHatibi and Ibn AL Jazari transmitted all seven of these recitations, and were well aware of the differences. In order to compose the works that these scholars did (such as Hirz al amani wa wajh at tahani - tajweed poem), they had to be masters of Arabic.

Shaikh Ibn Al Jazari added the recitations of Imams Khalaf, Ya’qoob and Abu Ja’far, additionally to the seven recitations included by Shaikh Ibn Mujahid and Imam Ash SHatibi.

I am saying verses can be misunderstood.

What I am referring to on YouTube is a verse from Surat (Chapter) Ar-Rahman (The Most Gracious).

On Youtube, the translation says that the guilty will be known by their marks.

Perhaps we’ve already learned common knowledge. People may get prayer marks on their foreheads, may leave a mark on the world, get stretch marks, have birthmarks, or even injuries.

Still you are disturbed and start to doubt.

So you read your translation of the Quran and it says (55:41)
“All who were lost in sin shall by their marks be known.”

Then you read the Arabic, the verses around it, and another translation/tafseer and are starting to understand it and the context.

First comes the Final Day of Judgement, and we already established that Allah (God) has many attributes, among them being Al-Hakim (the Most Just) as well as Al-Ghafir (The Most Forgiving). In the afterlife, the wrongdoings will become known accordingly, without even the need to ask.


			Thursday, May 17, 2012 \| 26 Jumada al-Thani 1433