![]() ![]() The first translation to do so by J M Rodwell, rector of St Ethelburga, London was published in 1861. Subsequent translators thought that the only way to make any sense of the Qur'an was to rearrange it into some sort of chronological order. The first direct translation of the Qur'an into English was by George Sale in 1734 this, Sale said, provided clear evidence that the Qur'an was the work of several authors. Some have even gone so far as to say that the Qur'an lacks the necessary structure, logic and rationality to be thought of as a book at all. Given that most European translators have seen the Qur'an in this way, it is not surprising that their translations have left a great deal to be desired. The 18th-century French philosopher and historian Constantin Volney described the Qur'an as "a tissue of vague, contradictory declamations, of ridiculous, dangerous precepts". The otherwise sensible Thomas Carlyle found the "Koran" to be "a wearisome confused jumble", and declared that only "a sense of duty could carry any European through the Koran". It has a specific lattice structure that connects every word and every verse with every other word and verse by rhythm, rhyme and meaning.Įuropean thinkers have frequently used the special structure of the Qur'an to denigrate the Holy Book. It repeats stories in different chapters, often skips from one subject to another, and offers instruction on the same subject in different places. Its chapters can be very short or very long. It is not a "linear" text with a chronological order or a "logical" beginning, middle and end. It cannot, for example, be compared with the Torah or the Bible, simply because it is not a book of narrative records of ancient peoples although it does contain some stories of prophets and earlier nations. It is not just the heightened language and poetic nature of the Qur'an that creates problems for translators. Indeed, some scholars go so far as to argue that the Qur'an cannot be written down in letters other than the original Arabic characters. This is why both classical and contemporary Muslim scholars and jurists agree that translations of the Qur'an cannot be read during daily prayers. It is only an attempt to give the barest suggestion of the meaning of the Qur'an. A translation is not that inimitable symphony, the very sounds of which move men and women to tears and ecstasy. It is an epic poetic text, meant to be read aloud, whose true import can be communicated only in the original. Literally, "qur'an" means "reading", or that which should be read. The most obvious point to be made about any translation of the Qur'an (and the correct spelling is Qur'an, not Koran) is that, strictly speaking, it is not the Qur'an. ![]() ![]() But English translations of the Qur'an have frequently been used to subvert the text as well as its real message. Ostensibly, the purpose of translating the most sacred text of Islam is to make it accessible to those without Arabic Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Translations of the Qur'an have long been a battleground. Ziauddin Sardar on the pitfalls of trying to bring the Qur'an to another language ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |