The book and the wisdom (al kitab wa al hikma) argument:
Traditionalist/Sunni Islam Vs Quran alone
Draft article
The argument goes like this: The Quran tells us prophet
Muhammad was given the book (al kitab) and the wisdom (al hikma)
and they say “al kitab” is The Quran and “al hikma” is separated
by “wa” (and) so must be something else, which they take to mean
the prophet’s sunna. Thus using this as a Quranic justification
for following the prophet’s sunna, which they claim is documented
in traditions (e.g. hadith), thus making those traditions a valid
source of law.
There are a number of assumptions in this argument:
1) “al kitab” means the book
2) the kitab/book refers to The Quran
3) the conjunction “wa” (and) means a separate and distinct
thing
4) “al hikma” refers to prophet Muhammad’s sunna
5) this sunna is preserved/documented accurately
6) this documented sunna is authoritative i.e. must be obeyed
This article will address points 1-4.
Part 1) "al kitab means the book"
Firstly, it should be noted according to traditional Muslim
history The Quran was compiled into a book after prophet
Muhammad’s death. So if “al kitab” means the book why does The
Quran regularly refer to itself as "al kitab" when it wasn't a
book at that time? Traditionalists explain this by saying even a
chapter or a verse can be referred to as a book or it is an
ongoing book or that it is preserved as a book in the guarded
tablet mentioned in 85:22. Some may find these explanations
satisfactory.
In modern Arabic “kitab” often means book however in
Classical Arabic (the language of Al Quran) it is not necessarily
the case. The verbal noun can mean "he wrote/prescribed/decreed/appointed/recorded/collected
it". It does not necessarily mean written down (as in a physical
copy), it could be but doesn’t have to be. Thus some sort of
authoritative instruction may be a more apt general meaning e.g.
‘decree’. The definite article "al" before the word "kitab"
usually denotes specificity, e.g. something more well known to the
audience. ?
In these verses it is common for translators to use other
than “book” (2:235, 3:145, 4:24, 4:103, 6:59, 8:68, 8:75, 9:36,
10:61, 13:38-39, 15:4, 17:13, 17:58, 21:104, 23:62, 24:33,
27:28-29, 30:56 and others) some examples shown below:
2:235 ...and do not confirm the knot of marriage until the
prescribed term (kitab) reaches its term
3:145 and not is for a soul that it dies except by permission of
God at a decree (kitab) determined
4:103 ...indeed the salat is on the believers a timed decree
(kitab)
8:68 had not an ordainment (kitab) from God preceded surely would
have touched you a great punishment...
9:36 number of months with God is twelve months in the kitab (of)
God (from) day He created heavens and the earth...
13:38 ...for everything is a term prescribed (kitab)...
15:4 ...but there was for it a decree known...
17:7 ...a record (kitab) which he will find unrolled, read your
record (kitab)...
21:104 the day We will fold the heaven (like) folding a
scroll for records/kutub (plural of kitab)...*
*it may be interesting to consider that the universe can be
thought of as God's canvas/scroll containing His
writings/decrees/records. Note if it was translated as "scroll for
books" it doesn't fit the common conception of what a book looks
like, same for 17:7 above.
24:33 ...and those who seek the writing/decree (al kitab) from
those who possess your right hands then give them the
writing/decree (verb: katibu) if you know in them any good...
27:28 go with my letter/decree (kitab) this and deliver it to
them...
98:2-4 – a messenger from God reciting pages purified wherein
(are) upright writings/decrees/kutub (plural of kitab)
If it is argued "kitab" inherently meant something
written then it may be redundant to describe it as
written/inscribed in verses 17:58, 33:6, 52:2.
As a side note "people of the book” is commonly taken to be
the Jews/Christians but of course they do not follow a single
book. According to Traditionalists the Jews have their own and as
do the Christians, so some may say using the singular book/kitab
doesn’t quite fit.
The above is not considered to be strong enough evidence to
prove "kitab" does not mean "book" in The Quran but it is
sufficient to show that it has varied usage. It could be argued
within context of revelation it means book and we will check this
later. Also I personally did not find one occurrence of its many
occurrences wherein it definitely meant book, but if others are
aware of such please let me know.
Part 2) "the kitab/book refers to The Quran"
Variance among translators with regard to what is "al kitab"
here when it suggests everything is recorded in "al kitab":
6:38 ...nothing We have neglected in the kitab from anything...
6:59 ...but is in a clear kitab
10:61 ...but is in a clear kitab
11:6 ...all in a clear kitab
Most traditional exegetes say this is referring to a master record
with God (85:22) not The Quran. Side note: see similar use of
"imaami" in 17:71 and 36:12.
The following clearly shows that in the context of revelation
"al kitab" and "al quran" are different:
10:37 and not this the quran could be produced by other than God
but is a confirmation of which is between your hands and a
distinguishing/detailing* (of) the kitab no doubt in it...
*to make distinct/clear, to set apart.
The connotation of the word "tafsila" is to make distinct /
delineate / set apart which could suggest The Quran is a part of
"al kitab". This suggestion is confirmed by The Quran elsewhere.
Note the use of the partitive "min" (of/from, i.e. a part of):
18:27 and recite what has been revealed to thee of the
kitab of your Lord...
35:31 and that which We have revealed to thee of the
kitab it is the truth confirming what was between your hands...
29:45 recite what has been revealed to you of the
kitab...
2:174 indeed those who conceal what God has revealed of the
kitab...
2:231 ...remember the favours of God upon you and what is revealed
to you of the kitab and the
wisdom/hikma, He instructs you with it...
Concept explicitly mentioned here:
3:23 have you seen those who were given a portion of the
kitab? They are invited to kitab of God that it should judge
between them...
Also see 4:44 and 4:51.
Also evidenced here:
43:1-4 Ha Meem, by/and the clear/manifest kitab, indeed We have
made it a reading in Arabic so that you may understand, and indeed
it is in the mother/source (of) the kitab with Us, surely exalted
full of wisdom (see 13:39 for similar)
56:77-78 Indeed it is surely a quran/reading noble in a kitab
well-protected
Taking "al kitab" as "al quran" here wouldn’t make much
sense, so exegetes take 1st occurrence of "al kitab" as "al
quran" and the 2nd occurrence "al kitab" (singular) to mean
scriptures (plural) e.g. Tawrat/Injeel/etc, to make it fit.
5:48 and We have revealed to thee the kitab with truth confirming
what is between your hands of the
kitab and a guardian over it...”
After mentioning various prophets it says:
6:89 those are ones whom We gave them the kitab and the
hukm/judgement and the prophethood so if disbelieve in it these
then indeed We have entrusted it to a people who are not in it
disbelievers.
6:90 Those are ones whom God guided so of/in their guidance you
follow
Note: Despite mentioning many prophets, in Traditional Islam only
4 other books have been given to prophets (Abraham, David, Moses,
Jesus), so I assume traditionalist exegetes will claim 6:89 only
refers to those prophets.
Similarly:
3:81 And God took a covenant from the prophets: "For
what I have given you of the kitab
and hikma/wisdom, then a messenger will come to you authenticating
what is with you. You will believe in him and support him...
Did they all receive one kitab/book? No-one thinks this to my
knowledge. Did all prophets receive a book according to
Traditional Islam? No-one thinks this to my knowledge. Tafsir ibn
Kathir says "for what I have given you of the kitab and hikma"
means "if I give you the book and the hikma" - how convenient!
Part 3) the conjunction “wa” (and) means a separate and
distinct thing
The following shows "Wa" does not always mean a separate
different/distinct thing:
55:68 in both of them are fruit AND date-palms AND pomegranates
Date-palms and pomegranates are also fruit.
33:7 ...We took from the prophets their covenant AND from you AND
Noah and Abraham and Moses and Jesus...
The people mentioned are also prophets.
2:98 whoever is an enemy to God and His angels and His messengers
AND Jibreel AND Meekael then...
Jibreel and Meekael are also considered angels.
15:87 ...We have given thee seven of the oft-repeated AND the
great quran
Most exegetes consider "seven of the oft-repeated" to be chapter 1
(al-fatiha) but it is still considered part of Quran.
2:238 guard the salawat (plural) AND the wusta/balanced salat...
"wusta salat" is already included in salawat according to
Traditionalists.
There are likely many more examples but the above should be
sufficient to counter the Traditional argument.
If the argument is "wa" means a separate and distinct thing
then do these examples weaken the "al kitab" is "al quran"
argument?
15:1 A L R these are the signs/verses (of) the kitab AND a
clear/manifest reading/quran...
27:1 T S these are the signs/verses (of) the quran AND a
clear/manifest kitab
If "wa" means a separate and distinct thing then use of "kitab"
above cannot be referring to "quran" thus creating a conflict in
their view. Choosing "kitab=quran" will invalidate their "wa"
claim, and choosing "wa" separates distinct things will invalidate
their "kitab=quran" claim.
This paired expression (al kitab wa al hikma) is mentioned 9
times in Quran (2:129, 151, 231, 3:164, 4:54, 113, 62:2, 3:48,
5:110). The last two references are related to Jesus and it is
mentioned along with the Tawrat and Injil. This creates an obvious
problem for Traditionalists because if they are taken as 4
separate sources (book/kitab + hikma + tawrat + injil) they do not
teach Jesus received another scripture apart from the Injil. We
can see from Traditional tafsirs how they try to get around this
problem with their common tactic of being inconsistent, e.g.
Tafsir Al Jalalayn translates it as “He will teach him the Book that
is script wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel”
Tafsir ibn Kathir “and when I taught you the Book and the Hikmah (the
power of writing and understanding) and the Tawrah and the
Injil...”
If they were to be consistent and interpret it the same way when
it is used with prophet Muhammad it would obviously refute their
position and/or cause other problems. Contradiction/inconsistency
is a hallmark of man-made works, see the important test Quran
4:82.
Are all the following examples of separate revelation types?
If so what are they and how are they different:
4:113 ...and God has sent down to thee the kitab AND the hikma AND
taught you what you did not know
Can the above be 3 separate things? 42:52 makes it clear the
messenger did not know the kitab before thus would fall under
"what you did not know" proving beyond doubt the "wa" can be
relational/linked to what came before or as some put it a
clarifying/specifying "wa".
Are all these separate types of revelation?
2:185 ...ramadhan is that was revealed in it the quran a guidance
for mankind AND clear proofs of the guidance AND the
criterion/furqan (also see 3:3-4, 25:1)
3:58 that is what We recite to you of the verses/ayat AND the wise
reminder
3:184 messengers from before you came with the clear signs AND the
zubur/scriptures AND the enlightening kitab
Note "zubur" is plural. According to traditional Islam did David
come with the Zabur AND the enlightening kitab/book (i.e. two
separate books)? Not to my knowledge.
57:25 We sent our messengers with the clear proofs AND We sent
down with them the kitab AND the mizan/balance that may establish
the people with justice
42:17 God is the one who sent down the kitab with truth AND the
balance/mizan...
21:48 We gave Musa and Aaron the furqan/criterion AND a light AND
a reminder for the righteous (also see 2:53)
16:125 Call to the way of your Lord with the wisdom AND the good
instruction...
add 38:20 ?
To my knowledge treating them (e.g. al furqan, al mizan, al dhikr
etc) as separate types of revelation, as claimed for kitab and
hikma, is unheard of in Traditional tafsirs. If the reader is
aware of this in Traditional sources please let me know.
As can clearly be seen from the above the Traditional
position is weak, and is inconsistent at best and contradictory at
worst.
4) “al hikma” refers to prophet Muhammad’s sunna
The above argument necessitates that the wisdom/hikma being
spoken of is external to The Quran. However the revelation itself
is described as wise and having wisdom:
17:39 that is from what was revealed to thee from your Lord of the
wisdom...
36:2 ...the wise quran/reading
31:1-3 A L M these are the signs/verses of the wise kitab
3:58 that (is what) We recite to thee of the verses/signs and the
wise reminder
43:1-4 Ha Meem, by/and the clear/manifest kitab, indeed We have
made it a reading in Arabic so that you may understand, and indeed
it is in the mother/source (of) the kitab with Us, surely exalted
full of wisdom
44:1-4 H M and/by the clear/manifest kitab indeed We revealed
it(m) in a night blessed indeed We are (ever) warning, in it(f) is
divided every wise/hakim matter
54:4-5 and certainly has come to them of the information wherein
is deterrence wisdom reached/perfected
Some of the above will depend on how one interprets it but at
the very least we can say some wisdom/hikma can be found in The
Quran and it is an attribute of Quran, so it's possible it could
be referring to that.
In Quran "hikma" is not exclusive to prophet Muhammad, as
many were given wisdom, e.g. 3:81 (prophets), 3:48 / 5:110 / 43:63
(Jesus), 19:12 (Yahya as a child), 26:83 (Abraham), 28:14 (Moses),
2:251 and 38:20 (David), 4:54 (family/people of Abraham), 45:16
(children of israel), 31:12 (Luqman, note that Traditionalists do
not regard him as a prophet e.g. see tafsir ibn kathir).
Some Traditionalists may claim when hikma/wisdom is used with
previous prophets it is referring to their “sunna” e.g. sunna of
Abraham, sunna of Moses, sunna of Jesus etc however we have no
evidence of this whatsoever. I have personally never read an
article or heard a lecture from a Traditional scholar talking
about other prophets and their sunna, not to mention the
preservation of such sunna (since they would presumably consider
it a critical source of guidance). One sign that often exposes a
future made-up view is that there is no trace of discussion in the
past.
The example of Abraham's people/family being given wisdom (4:54)
is interesting because Abraham's people/family would have lived at
the same time or their timelines overlapped thus according to
Traditionalists did they individually receive a sunna, or does it
mean they were following Abraham's sunna? Similar could be asked
for children of israel (45:16). Does this make sense to you?
Quran implies anyone could be granted hikma/wisdom:
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.
The above is a draft article. An update will attempt to
elaborate and harmonise the information in Quran with regards to
this topic and answer some related questions.
#####
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]