2:269 He grants the hikma/wisdom to whom He wills and whoever is
granted the hikma/wisdom then certainly he is granted abundant
good and none pays heed except those of understanding
Interestingly tafsir ibn kathir says "hikma" here is knowledge of
Quran. There is variance in wording when it comes to the hadith
they reference for this understanding, some hadith explicitly
relate it to Quran and some seem to imply knowledge/wisdom in
general.
Does Quran treat kitab and hikma as separate types of
revelation, either explicitly or implicitly?
2:231 ...remember the favours of God upon you* and what is
revealed to you* of the kitab(m) and
the wisdom/hikma(f) He instructs you* with it(m)...
*plural
Note how it uses the singular masculine, i.e. it doesn't say "He
instructs you with them". This seems a critical problem for the
Traditionalist position.
Similar implied here:
3:79 not is for a human that God gives him the kitab and the
hikma and the prophethood then he says to the people "be
servants of me besides God" but (would say) "be devotees (men of
God) with what you have been teaching (of) the kitab and because
you have been studying (it)...
It is always the singular that is used in many Quran verses when
referring to what we should follow, i.e. there is never a dual
pronoun used. Also the phrase "prophet's sunna" does not occur
in Quran. In other words there is no obvious support for the
Traditionalist position.
Update: 20/12/2024
Thoughts and discussion
To my knowledge Al Shaafi (died ~820 CE, about 190 years after
prophet Muhammad) was the first to make this argument in his
work Kitab al-Umm. He was arguing against the prevalent view of
the time which was The Quran as the primary (only?) authority.
Thus a valid question to ask from the outset is who prior to
this understood this phrasing as Shaafi argued? Very few it
seems - see references at end. In Kitab al-Umm when it is
suggested to Shaafi that it could be read as a hendiadys (takrir
al kalam) he says “I prefer the more obvious of the two
readings”, i.e. the more obvious reading, in his view, being two
sources (Quran and sunna), rather than one source. It is
interesting to note it is a preference of Shaafi and not what he
was able to clearly prove. In other words a tacit admission that
it is not a strong argument.
Example definition:
hendiadys: the expression of a single idea by two words
connected with ‘and’, e.g. nice and warm, when one could be used
to modify the other, as in nicely warm.
So what does "kitab" mean?
It is clear from its varied usage shown in 'Part 1' that a more
apt general meaning is authoritative instruction e.g.
decree/writ. Note the examples where it cannot mean book
(e.g. 2:235, 6:89, 8:68, 21:104, 24:33, 98:2-4, 5:48).
Example definitions:
decree: an official order that usually has the force of law, an
order
writ: a form of written command in the name of an authority, a
piece or body of writing.
Even if the connotation of the word kitab is related to writing
there can be no doubt that God's writing is not comparable to
man's writing so whilst they may share similarities they must be
thought of differently, e.g. ‘decree’ may be a more common
translation when it involves God and ‘writ’ may be a more common
translation when it involves man. It doesn’t really matter as
long as one appreciates its general meaning of authoritative
instruction.
The Quran strongly suggests that we have been given revelation
from (i.e. a part of) 'al kitab'. Thus ‘quran’ ‘injil’ ‘zabur’
‘tawrah’ are all from the same pool of revelation source. From a
big picture perspective ‘al kitab’ can be something more all
encompassing as it can contain divine law, records of
deeds/everything so can be thought of as all
information/interaction related to the God-man paradigm, even
natural laws of the universe for example (see the interesting
example of 27:40).
The source of ‘al kitab’ is with God (13:39, 43:4) i.e. in a
divine/different realm, whereas the aspect critical for us in
this world is revelation/guidance hence ‘al quran’ is in our
realm, i.e. it is with us, e.g. we see it, recite it with our
own tongues etc. This is likely why we find in Quran two
expressions:
“dhalika/that (is) al kitab” (2:2) - "dhalika" denotes something
that is relatively further away
&
hadha/this + quran (e.g. 6:19, 10:15, 10:37, 12:3, 17:41,
17:88-89, 18:54, 27:76) - "hadha" denotes something that is
relatively close
In my Quran research I did not find expressions such as
“hadha/this al kitab” or “dhalika/that quran”. Sometimes in the
context hadha/this is used with kitab but it links it to our
realm e.g. 46:12 saying it has been made in an Arabic tongue, or
in 2:79 when people fabricate the kitab with their own hands and
claim this is from God, or the kitab (of deeds) given to people
on the day of judgement in 18:49 which is something they can
see/touch.
Interestingly the use of “dhalika/that” in 2:2 has caused much
debate among Traditional scholars however the above observation
helps shed light on the usage. Unfortunately there is very
little intra-Quran analysis by Traditional scholars.
Since kitab may not mean book this may help resolve a debated
issue regarding 44:3 in which some found it difficult to
understand how the kitab (commonly interpreted as book) was sent
down in one night.
So ‘ahl/people of the kitab/book’ would be understood as people
of the writ/decree, i.e. those who have been given access to
authoritative instruction from the divine realm by way of
revelation i.e. recipients of revelation. These people are
contrasted with those “ummi” in 3:20 “...and say to those who
were given the kitab/writ and the ummiyeen “have you submitted
yourselves?”...”. This suggests the meaning of “ummiyeen” is
those not given the writ. However 7:28 expands upon this “And
among them (people of the kitab?) are ummiyeen who do not know
the kitab/writ except by wishful thinking /desires and they only
guess/assume” – thus we can say with confidence ‘people of the
kitab’ is not just about being recipients of revelation and has
more to do with being familiar with it, albeit there may be some
overlap. This understanding is backed up by 34:44 which shows
that the prophet’s immediate community (i.e. the ummiyeen) had
not studied revelation previously (i.e. they were
unfamiliar/uninformed) nor did the prophet know about the kitab
before (42:52). See also 10:94.
So what does "hikma" mean?
The most common translation for this word is wisdom and there
does not seem to be any obvious reason to doubt this meaning
based on Quran’s usage. Traditional scholars explain various
aspects related to this meaning: intelligence (aql),
understanding (fiqh/fahm), sound judgement, correctness of
speech, knowledge in general and knowledge of Quran, acting in
accordance with it. Early tafsirs show some variance regarding
the extent to which one connects hikma to scripture, i.e. is it
scripture-derived or not, or both.
Example definition:
wisdom: the ability to use your knowledge and experience to make
good decisions and judgments, sensible/wise thinking.
Quite simply wisdom is one of the aspects/attributes of God’s
revelation, just like the reminder, the balance, the criterion
etc all are also. Note that does not necessarily mean wisdom can
only be found in The Quran and nowhere else, as shown in part 4
above. God grants it to whomever He wills. Thus it could be
thought of as revelation-derived and/or more
independently-derived i.e. a natural morality or common sense
although it could be argued even this is an innate type of
God-given guidance (see 7:172, 30:30, 91:8) similar to the idea
of "fitrah" in Arabic.
We can perhaps also demonstrate this line of thinking with The
Quran’s other aspects/attributes, some examples, e.g. 17:82
quran is a mercy but so is prophet 21:107, 17:82 quran is a
healing but so is honey 16:69, 2:185 quran is a guidance but so
is the first shelter setup by Abraham 3:96. There are likely
many more examples like this.
Two commonly quoted verses by Traditionalists:
1)
And remember/mention what is recited in
your homes of the verses of God and the wisdom...
[33:34]
The above instruction is given to the wives of the prophet. It
is claimed by some that they are being requested to
remember/mention recitation of God's verses as well as hikma so
the claim being hikma is something non-Quran that is recited and
should be remembered/mentioned (to others?). This claim actually
conflicts with the widespread understanding of Traditional
scholars that there are two types of wahy/revelation: “wahy al
matlu” (recited revelation, which is Quran) and “wahy al ghayr
al matlu” (revelation not recited, found in traditions). We will
leave this for them to resolve. Also if the wives were meant to
spread what they learned in the household of the prophet's
hadith then this will contradict 66:3 in which the wives were
rebuked for spreading a hadith. 33:53 also tells believers not
to wait around for prophet's hadith when at his house - if his
hadith were critical for us and something that should be spread
why would God say that? That would be like turning away the
blind man seeking knowledge (chapter 80) for which the prophet
was rebuked for.
If "recitation" is a term only used for scripture then this
strongly suggests it also applies to "hikma" in 33:34 i.e. it is
something related to revelation. This position could be
supported by Quran elsewhere:
That (is what) We recite to you from the verses/ayaat and the
wise reminder [3:58]
2)
God has bestowed favour upon the believers
by sending them a messenger from among themselves reciting to
them His verses and purifying them and teaching them the kitab
and the hikma/wisdom, and they were before certainly in clear
error. [3:164]
The claim is that if wisdom can be found in Quran as well as
external to it then does this non-scriptural hikma have validity
as a source of guidance? This is somewhat difficult to answer as
it depends on how far one interprets it. If we were living at
the time of the messenger then the obvious answer would be yes
as we would have direct access to someone who understood and
applied The Quran accordingly. But we also have access to hikma
(2:269). Since the verse implies it was taught to others then we
can learn from them also, just like we can learn from anyone.
However we must remember all human beings are fallible,
including prophet Muhammad (see 66:1, 80:1, 33:37, 9:113,
8:67-69, 9:43). Thus whatever understanding someone has of The
Quran does not make it the true and/or only understanding. Even
if we were to accept this wisdom could be described in another
way as the prophet’s sunna/precedent the big leap comes when it
is claimed this is the only way to understand Quran AND it is
accurately preserved via hearsay reports aka hadith.
Traditionalists go even further and give greater significance to
this man-made source, often over-ruling Quran. This is of course
unacceptable but we can at least see where their reasoning may
come from. What if this hikma component of revelation/guidance
was never meant to be in a fixed form?
The way I see it, al kitab is to do with what is revealed to us
via scripture, whilst al hikma refers to
determining/judgement/wisdom – a correct way of
understanding/thinking. That is why al quran is not simply a
long list of rules/regulations because if it attempted to cover
every situation there would be an endless list! I used to wonder
why al quran had so much content not dedicated to
rules/regulations, at first to me it seemed unnecessary but I
soon realised the genius of it. By providing lessons,
insights/wisdom, reasoning behind the commands, examples, a
message within the stories/examples it relates, asking us
questions, it provides us with a sound framework within which to
base our judgement on. This is key. It is this that equips us to
deal with ANY situation not explicitly mentioned in al quran.
This is used all the time in real life. For example the story
about the boy who cried wolf. If one read it literally and never
thought about the story, all they would get is the al kitab
part, but if they reflect upon and learn the lessons within the
story, they will grasp the al hikma part. Thus, as you can see
an information source can have both components. This in my view
is the safest, simplest and most cogent interpretation of this
phrase (al kitab wa al hikma) because to claim hikma is an
external secondary source to Quran AND claim that source is
obligatory AND claim is accurately preserved via hearsay reports
AND sometimes use it to overrule Quran is dangerous speculation
upon speculation that has no warrant in Quran, or at least
certainly not with this argument of Shaafi.
It is interesting to note that according to Traditional Muslim
history the earliest generations (before Shaafi) seem to have
understood this and utilised the sunna/precedent of the prophet,
as well as the companions, early caliphs, earlier scholars, and
their own sound judgement/understanding in their
decision-making, governance and legal rulings. In fact this was
very common. Relying upon prophetic hadith was not as common as
it is after Shaafi. There was an evolution towards hadith
reliance as time went on - this is fact. Sadly many Muslims are
unaware of this.
An expression that I think is quite fitting to this
understanding of ‘al kitab wa al hikma’ can be found here:
And We have sent down to you the kitab
with the truth, confirming what is between your hands of the
kitab and as a guardian over it. So judge between them by what
God has sent down, and do not follow their desires from what
has come to you of the truth. For each of you We have made
a law/ordainment and an open way/path or method; and if
God had willed, He would have made you all one nation, but He
tests you with what He has given you; so race to do good. To
God you will return all of you, and He will inform you
regarding that in which you dispute. [5:48]
This also alludes to the fact that there will be variance when
it comes to understanding and application of revelation but this
is not necessarily a negative. It can be seen as a test and
whenever there is variance/disagreement The Quran often
recommends to compete with one another in racing to the good
(e.g. 2:148, 3:114). In this is surely a lesson of wisdom for
us.
References:
Wisdom in Quran (PhD thesis):
https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:2644815a-5ac9-4cb0-b263-6d1d4aaa805b/files/dk06988025
The word "hadith" in Quran:
https://mypercept.co.uk/articles/Hadith_in_Quran.htm
The Quran: clear, complete, detailed and explained?
https://mypercept.co.uk/articles/Quran_clear_complete_detailed_explained.htm
Discussion of meaning of kitaab in Quran [
link]
Evolution of Hadith reliance in Sunni Islam [
link]
From:
http://islam-and-muslims.com/islamic-books-online.html
Logic, Rhetoric, Legal Reasoning in The Quran
by Rosalind Ward Gwynne
Rethinking Tradition in Modern Islamic Thought
by Daniel Brown
The Quran's Self Image
by Daniel Madigan
Hadith as Scripture
by Ayesha Musa
Muslim Tradition: Studies in Chronology, Provenance and
Authorship of Early Hadith
Juynboll, G.H.A
#####
More articles:
https://www.mypercept.co.uk/articles
This work
would not have been possible without the many people who
have contributed to this topic, and without the
resources now available to anyone wishing to study The Quran in
detail. For these stepping stones I am indebted and
truly thankful.
IMPORTANT
DISCLAIMER:
This work reflects my personal
understanding, as of 5th July 2024. Seeking knowledge is a
continual process and I will try to improve my
understanding of the signs within 'the reading' (al quran) and out
with it, unless The God wills otherwise. All information is correct
to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be
taken as a fact. One should always seek knowledge and
verify for themselves when possible: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11.
And do not follow what you have
no knowledge of; surely the hearing, the sight and the
heart, all of these, shall be questioned about that. [17:36]