fazlurrahman reviews Izutsu

7/30/2019 fazlurrahman reviews Izutsu

1/5


2/5

BOOK REVIEWSToshihiko Izutsu: GOD AND MAN IN THE KORAN: SEMANTICS OFTHE KORANIC WELTANSCHAUUNG ; published by the Institute ofCultural and Linguistic Studies, Keio University, Tokyo, 1964, pp. 244 ;index4 ;price $ 8.00.

This book, which constitutes volume V of the series Studies in theHumanitiesand Social Relations of Keio University iswritten by ProfessorToshihiko Izutsuand has emerged out of his lectures at McGill University, Montreal in thespring of 1962 and 1963 (Preface). Actually, I participated in a seminargivenbyDr. Izutsu atMcGill during the 1960-61 sessionwhere he had triedout someof the ideas contained in this book. These seem to have matured over the yearsand this constitutes not only a welcome addition to the existing literature onIslam but introduces a new approach to the understanding of Islam, particularlyby non-Muslims?the linguistic approach. The Arabic mistakes that appear inthe book (some of whichmust be sheermisprintswhich are also frequent in thebook) must not lead the reader to accuse the writer of inadequacy in Arabicwhich he knows and speaks fluently. Nor is this Dr. Izutsu's first work on theQur'?n :he has already given us a work on the ethical concepts of the Holy Book.

At the outset, Dr. Izutsu gives us his idea of the science of linguistics orsemantics through which he wishes to understand the Qur'Sn, "Semantics as Iunderstand it is an analytic study of the key-terms of a language with a view toarriving eventually at a conceptual grasp of theWeltanschauung or world-view ofthe people who use that language . ..." (p. 11). A semantical study of the

Qur'Sn would, therefore, be an analytical study of the key-terms of the Qur'?n.In the succeeding pages, Dr. Izutsu makes it abundantly clear that by a study ofthe key-terms is not merely meant just a mechanical analysis of these terms orconcepts in isolation or as static units but even more importantly includes theirliving, contextual import, as they are used in the Qur'?n. Thus, although theterm Allah was used by some pre-Islamic Arabs not only to mean a deity amongdeities but even a supreme deity in hierarchy of deities, yet the Qur'Sn wrought amost fundamental change in the Weltanschauung of the Arabs by preciselychanging the contextual use of this term, by charging it with a new import?andthat by eliminating all deities and bringing the concept of Allah to the centre ofthe circle of being. In order, therefore, to understand and even to find out thekey-concepts themselves, one must know first of all the entire basic structure ofthe Qur'Snic world of ideas. A portrayal of this basic structure or total Gestaltis then attempted in Chapter III for,MThe proper position of each individualconceptual field,whether largeor small,will be determined ina definiteway onlyin terms of themultiple relations all themajor fields bear to each otherwithin thetotal Gestalt" (p. 73).

With this we also approach the basic dilemma of Dr. Izutsu's semanticmethodology. The key-terms, which, when grasped, were supposed to yield anunderstanding of the system as a whole (for, Dr. Izutsu assures us that the "key

This content downloaded from 194.214.27.178 on Fri, 23 Aug 2013 12:15:16 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/5

?22 ISLAMIC STUDI?Sterms determine the system"), cannot themselves be understood and even fixedwithout a prior knowledge of that system. This is what is called a vicious circle.There is nothing basically vicious with the approach (which is, indeed, a commonsense approach) that the best way of understanding a system is to study thatsystem (in the present case the Qur'?nic Weltanschauung) as a whole and to payspecial attention to its important concepts. I, therefore, must suspect thatviciousness is the result of the desire to make semantics a science and to makegrandiose claims on behalf of it.

From an Islamic point of view, however, this is only a formal difficulty ; weshall now briefly see what constitutes for Dr. Izutsu, the substantive structureof this Qur'Snic teaching. This teaching our author discovers in the first placein a fourfold relationship between God and man, viz., (i) God is the creator ofman; (ii) He communicates His Will to man throughRevelation; (iii) theresubsists a Lord-servant relationship between God and man and (iv) the concept ofGod as theGod of goodness andmercy (for thosewho are thankful to Him) andtheGod of wrath (for those who reject Him). The believers in this fourfoldrelationship between Allah and man constitute a Community (Ummah Muslimah)by themselves and believe in the Last Day?Paradise and Hell. Dr. Izutsu'sdescription of the historical evolution of these concepts in pre-Islamic Arabiaup to the appearance of Islam is quite rich and valuable.

The main question is whether the basic structure of the Qur'?nic Weltanschauung, as described by Dr. Izutsu, really does adequately tally with theQur'?nic teaching. One cannot help thinkingthat the author has carefully andquite subjectively tailored this "basic structure" to fit what he himself hasdecided to be the "key-concepts" of the Qur'?n. He may have thereby semiconsciously discovered in the Qur'?n the counterparts of his personal religious

Weltanschauung. For, how else explain the fact that in this total picture themoral element is totally wanting ? On p. 117, Dr. Izutsu approvingly quotesProf. Sir Hamilton Gibb to the effect that the main difference between theportrayals of Heaven and Hell by Umayyah Ibn Abi al-Salt and by the Qur'?n isthat in the Qur'?n they are "linked up with the essential moral core of theteaching". But apparently Dr. Izutsu does not understand the implications ofGibb's statementbecause he himself entirely ignores the moral field as thoughit forms no part of the "basic structure of the Qur'Snic Weltanschauung". Indeed,on p. 77, while speaking of the "ethical relation" between God and man,Dr. Izutsu links up the ideas of salvation and damnation with purely personalfaith.

One may raise the general question whether an ethical relationship, properlyspeaking, can be established at all between God and man. To God one canhave only a worshipful attitude and not an ethical or moral attitude which he canhave only towards other men, strictly speaking. One cannot be good to Godbut only to men, To aWeltanschauung like Dr, Izutsu's, therefore, for whichman-God relationships are imperturbable by and indifferent to man-manrelationships, and can be established per se, the Qur'?nic teaching is directlyopposed?far from being adequately described by that Weltanschauung. That the

Qur'an's chief aim is to create a moral-social order, is actually proved if onehistorically studies the process of the revelation of the Qur'?n?the actual



4/5

BOOK REVIEWS 223challenges which the Prophet flung initially to the Meccan society. Thesechallenges were not only to the pantheon of the Meccans at the Ka'bah but alsoto their socio-economic structure. This shows the superiority of the historicalapproach to the approach of the pure semanticist.

Only a historical approach can also do justice to the evolution of concepts,particularly the concept Allah. Dr. Izutsu, on the basis of certain verses of theQur'Sn, thinks (e.g., p. 101 ff.) that the view of One God (Allah) generallyprevalent in pre-Islamic Arabia on the eve of Islam, was "surprisingly close innature to the Islamic one". There is, however, strong evidence to believe thatthis "surprisingly" close concept of All?h was developed by the Meccans underthe impact of the Qur'?nic criticism and, on the basis of this newly evolvedconcept, they wanted to effect a compromise with the Prophet. The Qur'anitself bears testimony to this.

One big trouble with Dr. Izutsu's conception of the Qur'anic teaching onGod-man relationship is that he does not keep the Meccan milieu in view andfor him there is no difference between a bedouin and aMeccan of the Prophet'stime. The bedouin was haughty, proud, unrestrained and boastful beyond anyproper sense of reserve ; he was over-conscious of his individual self-respect?hepossessed the quality of jahl (opposed to hilm). The function of Islam, therefore, consisted, above all?according to him?by humbling this haughtiness andunlimited sense of pride. This was done effectively by projecting an idea ofGod, which is, above all, forbidding and fear-inspiring. The truth, however, isthat the immediate addressees of the Qur'an were the Meccans?more particularlytheir wealthy commercial classes. These people recognized no restraint on theiramassing of wealth ; did not recognize any obligations to their less fortunatefellow-men; regarded themselves "self-sufficient (mustaghni)" i.e., law untothemselves. It is to them that the Qur'?n first threw its challenge and requiredthem to recognize limitations on their "natural rights". It was until they hadrejected the challenge that the Qur'?n backed up its demand by a theology withthe doctrines ofHeaven and Hell.

To make these criticisms, fundamental as they are, is not to deny theintrinsic value of this book which, according to this reviewer, lies in bringing outboth the contrast and the continuity between the Qur'?nic teaching and thepost-Qur'?nic developments in Islam at the hands of Muslims. On such vitalissues as the definition of Islam and Im?n (chapter II, section II) and thefreedom of man vis-?-vis God (chapter VI), how Muslim speculative theologylater deviated from the pre-speculative mood of the Qur'?n has been incisivelybrought out. One wishes the author had shown more elaborately and decisivelythat the Qur'?n, far from being a work of speculative thought interested in systembuilding, was as a living monument of moral and spiritual guidance, interested inkeeping alive all themoral tensionswhich are requisite forgood and fruitful ife.It is because theQur'?n is interested in action that it is not shyofputting sideby side the contradictory and polar terms of the moral tension. But probablythe preoccupation of Dr. Izutsu to build out a system himself from the Qur'Sndid not allow him todo so.

Dr. Izutsu's treatment of the question of wafry or verbal communication fromGod in Chapter VII is good and comprehensive, although it ii somewhat ur?



5/5

224 ISLAMIC STUDIEScritical in the acceptance of the traditional material on the subject and alsonaive in its interpretation. On p. 166 ff.we are told that verbal communicationcan occur only between two beings of the same order of existence?which is, ofcourse, correct. But then Dr. Izutsu tries to rationalize as to how the Prophetcould have actually heard Words of Revelation and he tells us that the Prophet,in his moments of Revelation, was transformed into a higher being "against hisnature" (p. 167). He does not see that this, in fact, explains nothing for thequestion still would remain. How is it possible for a being of one order to getaltogether transformed?even against his own nature?from time to time, into abeing of a different order and how, after the moments of Revelation have passedand the Prophet returns to his normal self,would he keep his identity? On thewhole, Dr. Izutsu's use of the terms "nature" and "supernatural" in this contextclearly smacks of the Christian doctrines about Jesus. The author's differentiation between the Biblical concept of Prophecy and the Qur'Snic concept is,again, very good. Iwould like to add that the Prophecy of thebiblical Prophetswas not always natural but was often an art cultivated in the Jewish temples.In the end, onewould like to underline the fact that this book is from thepen of the first serious Asian non-Muslim scholar and a Japanese. As such, wewelcome Dr. Izutsu's work and hope that it will be the harbinger of a growingtradition of Islamic scholarship in the Far East.RAWALPINDI FAZLUR RAHMAN

AhmadbinMohamed Ibrahim,SOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT OF MUSLIMLAW ;published byMalayan Law Journal, Singapore, 1965 ; pp. 134 ;pricenot mentioned.The author of this slim volume is the State Advocate-General of Singapore.He sought "to reconcile the views of the Orientalists on the one hand and the

Muslim authorities on the other" on Muslim law in a work designed essentiallyfor students. It is doubtful if he has succeeded in this object or indeed whethersuch a reconciliation on fundamentals is possible. But the endeavour to narrowthe areas of disagreement is most welcome. More important, this approach isinfinitely more beneficial than the crude propagandist approach of trying to provehow wrong the other party is as if the search for enduring truth and knowledgewas nothing more than a high school elocution contest. The author approachesthese differences with the attitude of the true scholar seeking to honestly understand these differences without imputing dark motives and setting down thedifferences without distortion.

The book is divided into three main chapters : The Sources of Muslim Law,The Development ofMuslim Law and finally SomeMuslim Jurists and TheirWritings. "Sources" is not used as a translation of usui but rather denotes"theory" hence the inclusion of such topics as 'legal capacity', 'legal fictions'and 'rights and obligations' in such sub-divisions of this chapter.

The second chapter divides Muslim legal history into seven periods andexcludes the pre-Islamic period. It begins thirteen years before the hijrah andexamines the jg^?'ahand thegJjSrij? as well as the Sunn?. There isan unnecessary


fazlurrahman reviews Izutsu

Documents

Transcript of fazlurrahman reviews Izutsu