2: I approve of Hulusi taking هُوَ as one of the Divine names, and leaving it untranslated for our contemplation--even though the more straightforward "him" is tempting.
3: And, according to a certain interpretation of verse 1, The Bhagavad Gita.
4: Some new vocabulary to parse here:
- Is قَبلُ related etymologically to هُوَ or is it a false cognate? The former has plenty of semantic content, and the latter is merely a pronoun. If there is some connection between the two, Hulusi's emphasis in v2 becomes infinitely more meaningful.
- As usual, when there is some question about the proper translation of an important concept, Hulusi leaves it transliterated with a parenthetical explanation. In this case, الفُرقانَ ۗ is rendered in places as "Criterion" and elsewhere as referring to the Quran itself, so Hulusi's "Furqan" is entirely appropriate.
- A new dyad of attributes here, though عَزيزٌ is familiar from Al-Baqarah. Will it be paired with ذُو انتِقامٍ hereon? Or is this a one time team-up?
5: This exceedingly straightforward verse did not need a paragraph of explication by Hulusi. This exact verse can be found in every holy text.
6: We now have 5 attributes that have filled this slot so far, and there really should be a name for it. The postinvocation?
7: This is truer of theis book than other holy books that I know, and I'm glad it has acknowledged this about itself--Alif Lam Meem.
8-9: The first moment where Hulusi's interpretation of رَبَّنا fails to satisfy, insofar as it is clearly an external force here.
10: The Prophet seems to have a specific groups of "deniers" in mind here, which tracks historically.
11-12: And He addresses them predictably, though it is not clear which of the categories in v7 the Islamic "hell" falls under.
13: It is not clear from the text itself what battle this refers to, though it will likely be made more explicit.
14: Such a lovely verse, and tied in nicely with the ideas in Al-Baqarah.
15: This is one of Hulusi's better moments: the explication that the "pure spouses" here could denote the perfect complement to one's own consciousness, a perfect body. Hulusi also is consistent in his emphasis of such words as بَصيرٌ, leaving it untranslated as "Basir", where other versions force it into the English "all-seeing".
16-17: Fairly straightforward holy book content here, until one notices the wide variation between translations of وَالقانِتينَ variously "content (in Hulusi)" and "obedient (elsewhere)".
18: Hulusi makes an interesting conlfation of the divine names, which he has gone to great lengths to emphasize, and the angels themselves. From a metaphysical perspetive, it is no surprise that angelic beings are somply manifestations of the greater divine self to the Sufi scholar. And also to me.
19: As expected, this book begins to draw attention to the common origins of the three Abrahamic religions, and lay out its case for Islam.
20: There is a hint here that the root of the very word "Islam" is related to "submission", which would be revealing if I'm not imagining it.
21-22: Well, yeah. I'm pretty sure killing prophets is universally looked-down-upon.
23-25: difficult to comment on this situation without knowing to what it refers. Likely we will be informed within a few verses who exactly these people are and the exact nature of their delusions and divisions.
26-27: awfully convenient, as far as accountability goes. I wonder if modern Muslims have forgotten this point as modern Jews and Christians have.
28: So far this book is not offering anything new, and after I had such high expectations.
29: Nearly word for word reiteration of ideas in Al-Baqarah.
30: No doubt referring to the "Day" in 25.
31-32: Something about these verses make me think that they are the end of the introduction section,, and we are about to get into the narrative that I hope for in this book. Many religious texts simply can't seem to rely on their own credibility, and feel compelled to assert their authority in this circular manner.
33-34: And here we are, the eponymous family begins its tale.
35: I wonder about the source of this story. There is no correlate in the canonical Greek scriptures. Wouldn't it just be a hoot if the source of the story was one of those books that some regard as "apocryphal"?
36: Lots to parse here: The detail that Mary's birth was a surprise, the curious statement that "the female is not like the male", and the identification of Satan as "the expelled", rather than "the accuser" or "the rebel". This last point is indicative of a notion that the angel in question was cast out of heaven sometime between Job and Imran. If so, when?
37: All of this adds marvelous detail to the tradition of Mary and Elizabeth, who under this arrangement would have been something of a mother figure to the young child.
38: Hulusi's interpretation of the Rabb being one's own divine nature casts a very different flavor on these verses. It is also rather difficult to reconcile with the way Anne and Zacharaiah refer to it.
39: وَسَيِّدًا is evidently rather difficult to translate, being rendered "noble", "eminent", "masterful", and "honorable" in the various translations I'm referencing. Hulusi wisely leaves it untranslated as "sayyid". We also get introduced to the curious بِكَلِمَةٍ , a connection to the power of the letter ب.
40: It is less miracuous than one might think for Elizabeth to bear a child at a late age. My own grandmother was among those who never went through menopause, and continued menstruating up until her death.
41: One of my favorite bits from this account. Be careful what you ask for, you cheeky priest! this version is slightly different than the one I remember, sentencing Zacharaiah to a mrere three days of muteness.
42: Suspiciously close to Greek accounts of the annunciation, and by extention the Ave Maria.
43: One could interpret this to mean that Mary worshipped with the men, an extention of her exceptionality in v36.
44: The image of the angels casting lots in heaven to see who would deliver this news, and Gabriel winning, gives me great snickers.
45: All of this gives rise to a line of metaphysical questioning. Mary, John, and Jesus are all mentioned as being predestined for closeness to the Divinity, and therefore of special quality. This sort of determinism is rather discouraging, rather than the opposite. Is it possible for me to draw close to the Divine as well? Or am I a prisoner of my birth? And again we see بِكَلِمَةٍ from v39, which Hulusi emphasizes. Perhaps there is some solace in the fact that I am also a ب by birth.
46-48: the miracle of Jesus' birth is well publicized. What might deserve additional notice is the miracle of his being able to read and write. No doubt these were skills that Mary and Joseph did not have. Do we see Zachariah's hand here?
49: The admonition in v7 to not take everything in this book literally is well-remembered here. The clay bird would be a nice miracle indeed, but it's an even better allegory. The tagline "there is a sign in this for you, if you believe" (which all three translations seem to agree on) makes a metaphorical reading almost irresistible.
50: The narrative point of view of this book weakens it for me a little. Framing everything in terms of reminding the narrator to remind the listener of things they alraedy know leaves a lot of gaps for this reader.
51: Lest we forget, this is actually a third hand account, at least, removing us from the narrative by multiple steps:
from the Divine, to the speaking messenger
from the messenger to the writer
from the writer to intended audience
from the intended audience to their own existing knowledge of the narrative
From that existing knowledge to the modern reader
52-53: The concept of رَبَّنا (Rabb) begins to take shape here. It is not a title, as LORD is used in the Hebrew and Greek scriptures. Rather, it is a description of a relationship, one of submission that can be maintained in multiple directions simultaneously: from the messenger of this book to the divine, from the appostles to the prophet, and as so often pointed out in Al-Baqarah, from each of us to her or his own Divine nature.
54: Do I detect a sense of humor here?
55: Hulusi's explication here is eminently useful. The taking of Jesus to himself is a specific example of the Divine thwarting the plans of the "schemers" in 54. Of course, the subsequent resurrection is the punchline of the joke on them.
56-57: This threat is reminiscent of similar ones in other holy books, but the addition of "they will have no helpers" is an escalation, especially in communal societies.
58: On the surface, a filler verse. But in light of v7, it is also a reminder of the "signatory" and symbolic aspect of this narrative.
59-60: The book definitely came for me in this moment. Even as I was thinking that the account in v59 was rather dubious, v60 came behind to smack me in the face.
61: Which reality is not to be disputed though? The reality of the Divine conception? Or the entirety of reality? I prefer the latter.
62-63: I'm reminded of the old ladies in the marketplace who cajole you to come to their stall for your business. The more urgently they insist on their own credibility, the less I tend to believe it.
64: It's a well-taken point that, at some level, there is nothing for one to do but submit. The path of inquiry can only take us so far, and beyond that point remains only what some would call "faith", but is more usefully called "submission" here.
65-66: There is a hint of controversy from which the modern reader is excluded. The Quran is not the only holy book to have moments like this: specific to the time in which they were written, but consequently opaque today.
67: On reflection, this really is Abraham's striking point. His faith and sincerity are the points that we emulate today, but at that time his monotheism was altogether more remarkable.
68: More emphasis on "submission", which if one were looking for a narrative framework would serve nicely.
69-71: More period-specific admonition, but the emphasis on "people of the book" reveals a distinction between knowledge and submission that the Prophet is drawing at every chance.
72: difficult to parse without knowing exactly whom and for what the Prophet is accusing, but the context seems to imply, "you disregard revealed truth to suit your own preconceived notions," a sentiment perfectly applicable to the Jews in the time of Christ, as well as here. If new truth is revealed, perhaps through Sufi teaching, would the Shia clerics listen?
73-74: The most relevant perspective on this controversy so far. Truth is Truth, regardless of its source. It may be a bitter pill to swallow, but don't be one who lets that be a deterrent.
75: Undeniably reminiscent of Christ's parable of the talents, though it remains unclear if he who returns the sum "as is" (without increase) is as culpable here as in that parable.
76: This would seem to indicate that the above mentioned is rather praiseworthy-an important departure.
77: If (as we are encouraged to in v7) we take this section metaphorically, the implication is that Truth is entrusted to us for a time, and must be returned eventually.
78: Not a terribly helpful verse, though. These people exist. But how are they to be identified? What is to prevent us from numbering the Prophet of this book among them?
79-80: This is how. If any "prophet" draws people to himself, he is one of those "deliberately lying" in v78. By extension, to the extent that we venerate prophets and angels, as opposed to the Divine in all Its names, we have been misled.
81: Is this covenant recorded elsewhere? It is reffered to as though it were. At any rate, the Prophet is cleary here establishing his authority for practical, rather than spiritual purposes. One would hope he is careful not to draw followers to himself.
82-83: The corruption here is well in line with the Sufi idea that the only true heresy, the only real corruption is to live out of sync with one's Rabb. It is impossible to endure the friction of such resistance indefinitely, and all will eventually submit to the natural order of the Divine as it is expressed in each one's self.
84: The key phrase here seems to be, and it appears in all three translations, "we make no distinction between/among them," namely the manifestions of the Divine as they were revealed to all the prophets from Abraham down to "us", presumably the current writer. I find this difficult to reconcile with Islam as it is practiced today.
85: The principle in v83 is not limited to application in this life. The nature of existence is such that resistance to it is unsustainable, and submission is the only possible, let alone reasonable, course of action.
86: This is not entirely true, based on preceding verses. The very nature of the Divine is that it guides all; whether they submit to that guidance now or later is immaterial.
87: The curse being the aforementioned corruption, an unavoidable result of resistance to the Divine order.
88-89: and that curse will be in effect as the natural result of their resistance, for as long as such resistance continues.
90-91: This verse seems to go back on the verse immediately preceding it, and one would be tempted to level an accusation of pragmatism against it. Fortunately, both verses begin with our old friend إِنَّ, which I have come to see as a promise of immediate explication, rather than a reference to preceding ideas.
92: As promised, the explanation: the way of submission in summary. To give, and to give specifically of what is dear. The opposite course, that of attachment, is the course of friction and resistance. It is impossible indeed to retain anything; such is simply not the natural way of the universe. The only possible course, that of submission, is to accept with one hand, and to divest with the other.
93: Rather an indictment of Jacob, despite a promise to adhere to his words in v84.
94: Not entirely a useful verse, to be frank. The caveat "what is untrue" to the proscription against adding to the Torah leaves it entirely open.
95-96: Some further calculation is in order, but it is still unclear when Abraham and Ishmael could possibly have done this, if one puts any stock in the Torah.
97: this verse introduces a fabulous concept: to be غَنِيٌّ of somebody or something, which Hulusi wisely leaves transliterated as "ghani". Those who fail to operate in submission to the Divine order hurt only themselves. Allah is ghani of them. As are each of us ghani from such individuals. I have a particular individual in mind here, which is probably my own "resistance" in action.
98-99: I'm influenced by the fact that I'm concurrently reading Sartre to see a manifestion of his "bad faith" here. The reality as it is revealed is vertiginous. It is no wonder that some pretend not to see it.
100: To follow that path, denial of reality, though it is undeniably easier and simpler in the short run, leads nowhere.
101: It is really this simple, and this difficult. To submit to the Divine reality, be it ever so terrifying, is the straight path, but it is not the easy one.
102: The best protection from the wrath of the Divine, as it is manifested in friction as a response to resistance, is to reverse course. The Divine nature is a perpetual motion machine, and only in it can one experience contact between surfaces without resistance.
No comments:
Post a Comment