It might be said: Translating the religious knowledge from Arabic into English.
Being merciful to the believers and to ourselves and helping the nation of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ to understand the correct creed and to be safer rather than just safe in the matters of the creed.
The linguistic meaning of the word translation is to give meaning to a word in a respective language. The purpose of translating the words of the scholars from the Arabic language into English or other languages is to convey a meaning.
Hence, if a person does not convey the meaning of a word or a sentence into the language that he is translating, then he cannot claim to be translating or conveying a meaning. By the Grace of `Allaah this principal is well known to each of us and is exemplified in its worst form by the methodology of the wahhaabiyys with respect to their claiming to translate the mutashaabihaat aayahs of the Qur`aan.
To address some issues that have arisen and to explain with examples the ‘safe and safer approach’.
In the matters of the creed one wants to be safe oneself, but also for others to also be safe. If a person uses a word with respect to the attributes of `Allaah in front of a group of 10 people and if 8 of them understand the wrong meaning, what would one conclude about such a teacher? One would say that he is not a good teacher in that language, he is not someone who is truly helping the nation of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ to understand the matters of creed so that they be safe.
The issue here is not just about whether a particular word has a linguistically a valid meaning or not. Rather the issue is whether one has most appropriately conveyed a meaning that is accurate and safe.
An example of this is with respect to the usage of the word hand, which according to the Oxford English Dictionary has more than 65 different meanings. Some people say the statement, ‘it is in the hands of God’, in which ‘hands’ linguistically has a befitting meaning to God. This statement could equally have been expressed as, ‘it is under the control of God’. Now why is it that we, AICP, choose to use a statement similar to the second example, it is because we believe it is accurate and safer. The main issue in this particular example is not of whether it is kufr or not or about what is the judgement upon the one who says one of the above in preference to the other, but rather which is the accurate and safer statement.
Some words that have been used in translations which are in need of change:
These words or statements fall into 2 categories.
Some come under the issue of what is right and what is wrong and the others fall into what is being termed ‘the safe and safer approach’.
With respect to the first category the issue is simple we follow that which is right and leave that which is wrong. An example of this is if somebody said, ‘apostasy is the most abhorrent type of blasphemy’. Linguistically this means, ‘apostasy is the worst type of kufr without exception’, and this is also the most common understood linguistic meaning of this statement. Hence, one should not use this phrase.
An example to further illustrate the safe and safer approach.
The term af^aal:
this refers to the creating of `Allaah that is not like the actions of the creation. Some may translate the term af^aal with the word actions. However the most common association of this word is in relation to bringing about of an alteration by force or through movement or through exerting energy or effort to produce an effect. Therefore it is safer to avoid this translation, even if there is a befitting meaning of this word to be found in its deeper layers. Indeed the term af^aal in relation to `Allaah does not mean a physical action, since `Allaah is neither moving nor stationary. Nor is He sometimes moving and sometimes stationary. When a person says, ‘actions of `Allaah’ to a native speaker of the English language, he or she has to exert him/herself to direct their mind towards the understood and befitting meaning, and some may unfortunately fall short in this exertion and as a result potentially fall into blasphemy, wal ^iyaadhu billaahi ta^aalaa. If one said, ‘Allah’s creating’, the correct meaning is understood and the danger is avoided. Hence, instead of saying, ‘things that happen are as a result of `Allaah’s actions’ one says, ‘things that happen are as a result of `Allaah’s creating’.
To present a method to work with using an example.
The word yuhibbu, often translated as love. Is this a permissible word to use in relation to `Allaah – A question to be answered:
The most comprehensive dictionary in the English language is the ‘Oxford English Dictionary’. The most comprehensive Arabic English dictionary is ‘Lane’s lexicon’. The first stage in finding an appropriate word in the English language is to determine the linguistically appropriate equivalent and this can be done by consulting for example both of these texts. In most cases this will lead to finding an appropriate term. If one was unable to find an appropriate equivalent, then one can simply stick to the Arabic, for example to say wajhullaah or yuhibbu and write in brackets a brief explanation of this word, whether it be in one sentence or more than that, until one can find an appropriate equivalent. This method is permissible, it is safe and it prevents unnecessary delays in the production and publication of texts. One should not be overly concerned about finding one word equivalents, because we are not trying to win the prize for ‘best novel’ or to satisfy a desire on the part of one or more individuals, we are trying to convey the teachings of the Prophet ﷺ as were narrated through the reliable scholars in this religion. If one uses a single word equivalent that does not convey the correct meaning, then one does not do justice to the job of translation, which is to convey a meaning.
The other method of dealing with the above example is to seek for a word that, it might be said, represents a detailed ta`weel and to go accordingly, for example to consider using the word acceptance, rather than love; to use the word creating instead of actions; to use the term, ‘does not accept’ instead of wrath or anger; to use ‘reality’ instead of ‘self’.
Note: It is not acceptable for someone to claim about these words that this issue of befitting and non-befitting meanings also exists for some of these words in the Arabic language and thus we can use any close English equivalent. Like for someone to say that word af^aal in the Arabic language is understood by many people to mean ‘actions’, or the word ‘kalaam’ to mean ‘speech’ and to say, ‘if this issue also exists in the English language it is no different’. Do the wahhabies not say, but `Allaah says in the Qur`aan that he has a hand, a face or the like!? One of the first things that we respond to them is that `Allaah did not use the word hand or face in the Qur`aan, this is your mistranslation for these words that are used in the religious texts. Hence, with respect to ourselves we cannot claim to take the same starting point given to us by exact the words of the Qur`aan and the hadeeth and then claim to be safe by proceeding from there. Thus we are not guaranteed the same initial safety in using the word ‘actions’ as we are when we use the word, ‘af^aal’ and hence, we cannot start with the word ‘actions’ if it is not appropriate and then try to explain what we mean by it, as ultimately Allah nor His Prophet ﷺ mentioned ‘actions’. As for using the word, act as in ‘the act of God’, first of all this is a different word, one of the most common meanings of this word is ‘something done’, and this is also the most commonly understood meaning amongst the natives for this word, the same cannot be said for ‘the actions of God’, even though a befitting meaning might exist according to an English lexicon.
A final note: one should not be overly worried by the possibility of adding possibly 10 new Arabic words to the English language and to the vocabulary of people. Even if things reach this stage, still the benefits massively outweigh any possible disadvantages that someone might cite. In other words, one is always sure and safe with the fact that they are not attributing to `Allaah something that He did not attribute to Himself. Furthermore the English lexicons readily allow for new words to be added to them, examples of words like hajj, salaam, fatwa, hijra, Imam and Ramadan are just a few examples.
This method might need some work, but inshaa` `Allaah it is a good and safe starting point.
One can try this method, by taking any word in any language.
Let’s take the word, Kalaam to illustrate and if one should use the word speech.
Step 1: Does the word speech have a befitting meaning in the English language?
Answer: determine by consulting lexicons.
If yes, then go to step two, if not then one CANNOT use it.
Step 2: do most people in the English language understand this befitting meaning?
If yes, use it, if no, go to step 3.
Step 3: Is there a safer alternative that can be used?
If yes, use it, if no go to step 4.
Step 4: Use the Arabic word and write in brackets after it the explanation.
E.g. Kalaam (that with which `Allaah orders and forbids, and is not a letter, a language or a sound).
[In the month of July 2004 in the USA, these principles were discussed & agreed upon by all the following: Shaykh Samir Al-Kadi, Hajj ^Umar Dimachque, Hajj ^Aliyy Al-Ghazawiyy and Hajj Riyad Nachef].
Hence, in summary if the issue is about what is right and wrong then this can ultimately be determined by referring to the various lexicons, and it is a matter of greater importance when it comes to determining the issues of hukm man yaqool. Then thereafter there is the issue of having two linguistically valid alternatives, one word conveys an inappropriate meaning to many of the laity and another word which conveys an appropriate meaning, when this issue arises in the matters of the creed, it becomes extremely important to select the safer alternative, so as to be merciful to the believers as well as ourselves.