The wonderful book is, of course, full of strange readings. The Prophet himself warned his hearers that there were dyat that no mere human being could fully understand (111.5), and aside from these deeper mysteries there are difficulties that every student of the Qur'an encounters. The new dress of new ideas, and the background of shifting conditions, provide obscurities enough; just what was it, we ask in this or that case, that the Prophet had in mind?
The example here to be considered is of quite another character. We seem to be sufficiently informed about the circumstances, and the matter treated is one of a familiar nature. It concerns the duty and the behavior of Muslims in times when the cause of Islam calls for the active service of all its able-bodied men. Muhammad's practical wisdom is unfailing, and the advice, or command, to be issued in this case seems, by whatever knowledge we possess, to be definitely suggested; that which is actually said, however, leaves us in some bewilderment.
The passage in question is LXIV.14,1 near the end of a short sura that is built around the command to believe and obey God and his messenger (verses 8 and 12). In the concluding portion of this sura, verses 14-18, the Prophet introduces again a subject upon which he touches in numerous other places, namely, the danger that the cares and joys of family life will turn aside the Muslim from his duty to the Muhammadan cause.
It is a typical situation, illustrated in many places. An especially familiar example is afforded by the advice given by the apostle Paul to his converts in Corinth. Persuaded that the time was short, while much remained to be done, he would prefer that the men in his churches should not marry. "The unmarried man," he says, "is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided" (1 Cor. 7:32-34).
Muhammad's treatment of the matter, in the present context, is typically just and considerate. Worldly goods and children are a temptation (verse 15); but if a man is saved from his own self-seeking, he is one of the really prosperous. The true believer must give both himself and his substance to the holy cause, serving God "as much as he can" (verse 16). That which is lacking of his achievement will be mercifully overlooked, for "If you lend to God a goodly loan, he will double it for you, and will forgive you: for God is gratefid and element" (verse 17).
But in verse 14 we find the following singular utterance: yd ayyuha 'lladhina dmanu inna min azwajikum wa aulddikum 'aduwwan lakum fa 'hdharuhum wa-in tofu wa tasfahu wa taghfiru fa-inna 'llaha ghafurun rahimun. "0 you who believe! Verily among your wives and children are foes of yours, so beware of them! But if you forgive, and overlook, and pardon, verily God is forgiving and merciful." I am not aware that any commentator, ancient or modern, has found difficulty in this last sentence, though some undertake to explain it. Every utterance of sacred scripture that is clearly expressed in unequivocal and familiar language, with the text of the passage under no suspicion of corruption, is readily accepted and easily "explained," as we all know. But the sentence before us, if it were in a less sacred book than the Qur'an, would be pronounced mere nonsense.
The wives and children of many a Muslim were dangerous "enemies" to him, it is true, but simply because they were so strong a temptation, as verse 15 reiterates. Temptation can be resisted. The man with a wife and family, with a duty to his home, must inevitably fall short of his full effort for the common cause, at the time when active service for Islam is demanded of all those who can render it; but if he turns away from the temptation, doing for God and his Prophet "as much as he can," (verse 16, he can be pardoned.
The woman commits no crime by marrying a true believer, nor by continuing to perform the duties and enjoy the privileges of a wife; nor are the children to blame for being born into the Muslim world and continuing for years to be a burden of care and expense. They do not require to be "forgiven" for the strong attraction they exert. They are enemies to loyal Muslims in the same way that strong drink is an enemy to the man addicted to it. He could not acquire merit by "forgiving" his bottle. Nor would it follow, by any means, that the delinquent and self-indulgent Muslim who should "pardon" his wife and children for keeping him from his duty, would be let off, inasmuch as "God is forgiving and merciful"; neither Muhammad nor any other leader in his place ever uttered such folly. The apostle Paul did not say that if the Christian would forgive his wife, all would be well.
In view of this plain condition of things, it is all the more noticeable that three successive words meaning "forgive" are employed here (where there is nothing to forgive!), as though for special emphasis. Muhammad very frequently uses two synonyms in emphatic statement: indeed, two of the three verbs now before us, 'afa and safaha, are thus joined in three other passages in the Qur'an, always with the same meaning, "forgive" (or, "forgive and pass over"). In 11.103 (B 108) the form is the plural of the imperative, wa fu wa'sfahu; in V.16 (B 12) it is the imperative singular, wa fu wa'sfah; and in XXIV.22 (B 21), the jussive plural, wa'l- ya fu wa'l-yasfahu. The phrase was evidently fixed in the mind of the Prophet. In each of the three cases the reason for emphasis is obvious, but in no one of the three could a student of the Qur'an imagine the Prophet employing three verbs.
There are still other points of difficulty in the passage. The fa-inna clause enters rather abruptly, and its meaning is not made quite clear. It appears to say that if the Muslim will forgive his wife and children for their evil influence, Allah also will forgive them; but we know that this cannot be the meaning, for the person to be forgiven (if he deserves it) is the householder himself, no one else.
In short, as was said above, the verse as it stands is bewildering. It does not sound like an utterance of the Prophet, either in its rhetoric or in its practical content.
In Sura VIII, with its atmosphere of the battle of Badr, Muhammad gives to his followers the same warning that is given in Sura LXIV. Islam needs all its men and all their resources, and there must be no paltering; it is no time for a Muslim to be taking his ease at home. Verse 27 (B 26), "0 you who believe! Do not play false (la takhunu) with God and his messenger, nor betray your trust! Know that your possessions and your children are a temptation (wa'lamu innama amwalukum wa auladukum fitnatun)," the same words which occur in LXIV: 15. And he concludes by saying in effect: "If you will serve God, he will repay, and forgive."
The situation is serious enough. The Prophet's words to his adherents are not a mere recommendation, they are a stern warning. The Muslim who is the head of a family is at best handicapped in the effort to do his duty, and is in real danger of betraying his trust and playing false with Allah and his Prophet. "Beware of the foes in your own household!" Thereupon would be expected: "But if you restrain yourselves, and turn away (from the temptation), you will be forgiven" (wa-in ta'iffu wa tasfahu yughfar lakum).
The two verbs in the protasis of this conditional sentence are precisely the ones to expect, neither one could be improved upon. The verb `affa is typical in classical Arabic for the expression of abstinence, and safaha, "turn away, retrain, refuse," and the like, is definitely the verb to be asso- ciatcd with it in the present context. The resemblance of this phrase to the words of LXIV. 14, wa in tofu wa tasfahu wa taghfiru, is startling, and the temptation to examine the matter further is too strong to be resisted.
As far as the Qur'anic usage is concerned there is very little that needs to be said. Muhammad does not happen to use the first stem of the verb `affa, elsewhere in the Qur'an, but employs other stems (the fifth and tenth) several times, of course with the usual meaning. Aside from the examples already mentioned, the verb safaha occurs in the Qur'an in two passages, XV.85 and XLIII.4. In both of these, the verb appears to have its original signification, "turn away," rather than the derived meaning, "forgive."
Sura XLIII is a fairly early utterance, belonging to the Meccan period. A Qur'an in the Arabic language is announced in the first verses, and the Prophet is istructed to say: "Shall we, then, turn away from you utterly (safhan) the admonition?" The meaning of the complementary object (al-maf'ul al-mutlaq) is assured.
Sura XV, also of the Meccan period and of about the same time as the preceeding, is concerned with those peoples who in the past had rejected the message of Islam; and the Prophet is instructed how to deal with the obdurate and scoffing Meccans. The unbelievers of old met their fate, in spite of all that they had relied upon (verse 84, B 83). Those who now do not receive the truth, and accept Islam, are in the same grievous error. The Meccans mock, as did their predecessors, at the messenger of God who preaches to them (verses 6-15); but his possessions are greater than theirs. He who created the heavens and the earth had determined all things, and the day of reckoning is surely coming (verse 85). The injunction is laid upon Muhammad: fa'sfahi 's-safha 'l jamila.
Regarding the meaning of safaha in this phrase, there has been difference of opinion. Al-Baidawi, whose word is law, chose "forgive"; and accordingly all the modern translations of the Qur'an render: "So forgive with a gracious forgiveness."
It must be said, however, that this rendering seems out of keeping with the character of the Sura. Muhammad is being heckled by some of the leading men of the city, who do their best to prevent the truth from gaining converts; who make sport of the Prophet's teaching and pronounce him a lunatic (verse 6). The whole chapter is a rebuke and a threat directed against such men. Verse 94 gives to the Prophet the final instruction: "So do what you have been bidden to do, and turn away from the mushriks." This command seems much better suited to the circumstances.
One might conjecture that al-Baidawi's choice was more than a little influenced by the pleasing word jamil and by the ancient and wellfounded tradition that XV.85 was abrogated by "the verse of the sword" (IX.5). Neither of these considerations can he given weight, however, as will appear. There are other commentators whose judgment should be taken into account.
We read in Jalalain, as the paraphrase of XV.85: acrid 'anhum i'radan la jaza'a fihi, that is, "Turn away from them, but without inipatience." In the face of persecution and ridicule the Prophet is to maintain his equanimity; here the word jamil has its rightful meaning. The Ka..af says the same thing, more explicitly: fa`rid `anhum fa'htamil ma talga minhum i'radan jamilan bi-hilmin wa idda'in. It is what the circumstances required; the Prophet was not to pay attention to these men, nor to envy them (verse 88), nor to show irritation. Much earlier, in at-Tabari's great Tafsir, the interpretation "turn away" is given the foremost place, and more than one of the commentators he quotes make the connection of verse 85 with verse 94.
Instead of the translation "So forgive (your people) with a gracious forgiveness," the authorities above quoted would suggest "So turn away (from the unbelievers) in calm avoidance." Permitting the Prophet to interpret himself, this rendering of safhan jamilan is given very strong support by the two passages LXX.5 and LXXIII.10, in which the same adjective is used in the same way, under the same circumstances. The modem renderings of XV.85 need to be revised.
In any case, and by any interpretation, the verse XV.85 is certainly abrogated by the ayatu 's-sayfi, in which there could be no place for the idea expressed by the adjective jamil.
Before returning to the passage LXIV. 14, there may be mentioned a derivative of the root safaha that has its bearing on the present inquiry. The verbal adjective safuh describes the woman who turns away from the man, forsaking his society (Qamus: al-mar'atu 'l-mu'ridatu 's-saddatu 'l- hdjiratu). The stereotyped use shows how the verb would naturally be suggested in speaking of the man who (as far as is reasonable) turns away from the society of his wife and children and gives himself to the service of Islam.
Let us suppose that the original reading of LXIV.14 was the following: ya ayyuha 'lladhina amanu inna min azwajikum wa auladikum `aduwwan lakum fa'hdharuhum wa-in ta'iffu wa tasfahu yughfar lakum fa-inna 'llaha ghafurun rahimun. "0 you who believe! Verily among your wives and children are foes of yours, so beware of them! But if you restrain yourselves and turn away from them, you will have pardon, for God is forgiving and merciful." Here is an ayat that at least reflects the Prophet's practical wisdom and his justice.
The question now is, whether the present reading of the Qur'anic text is readily explained as derived, in the ordinary process of manuscript copying, from this original. The answer is that the explanation is easy and natural if it is assumed that the alteration took place in the earliest period, while there were still Muslim scribes who could make a mistake in copying and allow the slip to pass. The script at that time was continuous, there was no interval between words. The copyist wrote wa tasfahu wa, under the influence of the waw just preceding. Once written, the w made it necessary to continue with taghfiru and to omit lakum: unless the copyist was willing to discard the quire and take a new one. A waw introduced by mistake has proved a fatal error in very many Semitic transcriptions.
We have need to bear in mind what Noldeke wrote in his Geschichte des Qorans (1860), page 203: "Die Muslimen legen der ersten Sammlung des Qorans eine zu grosse Bedeutung bei. Denn vor Allem Miissen wir anerkennen, dassjene durchaus keine offentliche Auktoritat hatte, sondern eine blosse Privatsache Omar's and Abu Bekr's war. Nur dadurch ward ihr Ansehen so gross, dass sie unter `Othman der, kanonischen Gestaltung des heiligen Buchs zur Grundlage diente." A false reading, such as the one here supposed, could easily have gained its place in the sacred book in the time of Abu Bekr, or even of Omar. This is all that can be said.
Our revered teacher and mentor, Professor Goldziher, in his Muhammedanische Studien, II, 242 f., made passing mention of those Muslim scholars-not a few-who would remove the difficulty of this or that verse in the Qur'an by rewriting it: and he cited the remark of Ibn Jinni, that such "improved" readings are, after all, only designed to interpret, not to emend (dass sie "nur commentirende, nicht corrigirende Bedeutung haben wollen"). It is needless to say that the present criticism of Sura LXIV, verse 14 (13), is offered merely as comment.
NOTE
1. I use the verse numbers of Fliigel's edition, generally appending to them the numbers given in the official Bulaq edition of 1342 A.H., designated by the letter B. In the present case, the verse number in the latter edition is 13.