In the Shadows of the Qur'an (2) Sayyid Qutb as it appears in two editions

I mentioned - in last week's article - 3 general references to the difference between the two copies of Sayyid Qutb's book "In the Shadows of the Qur'an", and my references were summarized as follows:

• The first: that the first version accurately expresses Sayed’s approach to contemplating the Qur’an artistically and aesthetically, i.e. literary

  , and it is a unique approach and the form of one of his two major additions.

  As for Qutb's additions and subsequent revisions that appeared in the second edition of The Shadows, they express his second major addition, which is the "kinetic interpretation" of the Qur'anic text, which some Qutbists considered a "discovery."

• The second: that the second version of Shadows did not abrogate the first

  , but rather added to it and built on it, so that the “artistic depiction” that is the rule in the Qur’anic expression became a basis for spreading the kinetic idea that marked the revised version.

• The third: that the shadows in his augmented and revised version became closer to “interpretation” than in the first

  one.

In this article, I will simplify these references, as I promised earlier, by observing the characteristic of the change in Qutb's personality, and the features of the change that occurred in "In the Shadows of the Qur'an", and did those changes bring Syed's book closer to the books of interpretation?

Characteristic change in the personality of Sayyid Qutb

It must be emphasized - again - that change and change are two general characteristics of Sayed, as he passed - according to William Shepard, one of Sayed's scholars - in 4 stages:

• Possible atheism between 1925 and 1935.

• and the "secular Muslim" period between 1935 and 1946.

• and the moderate Islamist between 1946 and 1956.

• And the radical Islamist between 1956 and 1966.

Shepherd had monitored the features and characteristics of each stage through some of Sayyid Qutb's writings, especially the book "Social Justice", which Qutb revised about 4 times, and Shepherd translated it into English and presented it with an extensive study in 1996.

As for Salah Al-Khalidi, he compared in the 1980s between the two editions of Shades and noted some of the differences that appeared to him between them, but from the perspective of his complete bias towards the master of the latter, which he tried to analyze from the perspective of the last version that Shepherd described as radical, and the advisor Tariq Al-Bishri and others described it as the stage of articulation, which is the stage that appeared In it, the society is considered to be atonement after stigmatizing it with ignorance, and this is something that Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, may God Almighty have mercy on him, monitored at length.

Shepard had also monitored this through the amendments that Qutb made to "social justice". In the first edition of it - for example - Syed declares that the current Islamic society is not Islamic, in the sphere of government only, while he tells us in the last edition that abandoning Ruling by God's law in all matters of life means that the existence of Islam has ceased.

Qutb - according to Shepherd - had deleted from "Social Justice" the description of "Muslim", which he had used to refer to secularists in the first edition.

I am not concerned here with monitoring the features of Qutb's changes in his works in general, and I do not want to analyze the changes he made to "Social Justice", which was also a developing and renewed text, but I will confine myself to a partial comparison between the two versions of the book "Shadows", as it is the subject of discussion in these articles.

Features change in shadows

We can monitor the features of the change, starting with the introduction that changed. While he did not see a reason to change the introduction to the first version in his second edition, which was issued by Issa al-Halabi, Sayed modified the introduction in the augmented and revised version.

Looking at the two premises, we realize that we are facing two different visions, without canceling out some of the common features between the two premises.

In the introduction to the first edition, Syed emphasizes two ideas:

• The first idea: the centrality of the subjective religious experience that centers around the conscience in which the belief rests and the sense that is the window of the conscience

  , and depiction with expression that stirs the sense and breathes life into inanimate objects and abstract meanings, making it a living figure that gets excited and we get excited with it.

  Hence, Sayyid did not go beyond recording in the first version his thoughts while he lived in the shadows of the Qur’an, and for this reason he tried not to drown himself in “linguistic, verbal, or jurisprudential researches” that obscure the Qur’an from his soul and his soul from the Qur’an, and he only clung to “what the text suggests in the Qur’an itself of thoughts.” spiritual, social or human.

  That is, Sayda was liberated from the exegetical heritage here, and centered around his own experience with the Qur’anic text, as Adeeb does with the poetic text, but rather above what he does because of the specificity of the Qur’anic text.

  Together, these factors removed the Book of Shadows from the traditions of Qur’anic interpretation on the one hand, and made the emotional aspect a central issue in it on the other hand (an issue that will become clearer in a later article).

• The second idea: that the artistic depiction in the Qur’an dominated him in the first version, especially since his theory is based on the “clear rule in the Qur’anic expression

  .” One of his hopes was that God would grant him success in presenting the entire Qur’an in the light of this idea that he looked at in the book “Depiction.” Artistic in the Qur’an”, and because of the controversy aroused by the idea of ​​the book at the time.

  In the first version of Shadows, he expressed what he felt of "a sense of the wondrous artistic beauty in this miraculous book, and a sense of consistency in expression and imagery."

As for the introduction to the second edition of Shadows, it puts us before two central ideas:

• The first idea: that the centralism moved from “artistic depiction” to “ignorance”

  , which is frequent in the second edition, and may even be crowded to remind and confirm.

  The artistic and emotional emotion and spiritual gain transformed in the revised version into the following formula that appears in the second introduction: “I lived in the shadows of the Qur’an, looking from a height at the ignorance that ripples in the earth… I look at the exclamation of the people of this ignorance with what they have… and I measure the perceptions of ignorance in which humanity lives.” .

• The second idea: that the great rule of Qur’anic expression, which is imagery, has become a servant of a new idea, which is governance

  .

  In the introduction to the second version, he says: “I finished the period of life in the shadows of the Qur’an to a firm and decisive certainty. There is no righteousness for this earth except by returning to God.” It is the arbitration of this book alone in her life and the arbitration of it alone in her affairs, otherwise it is corruption and ignorance.

  And this arbitration is “it is faith or there is no faith.” The removal of Islam from the leadership of humanity was a massive event that we removed from it, so that it would be taken over by ignorance again. It is intended to contribute to the building of the Muslim community, and it is integrated with the entire Islamic conception of existence.

But Sayeda insists - in the two introductions - on the centrality of the individual religious experience "in the shadows of the Qur'an", and that the book is "thoughts" that flowed because of living in the shadows of the Qur'an, and that it is a statement of what he tasted and was affected by during this experience.

In the first introduction, he says: “I used to find in myself a hidden desire to live in the shadow of the Qur’an for a period that would prove my feet on the ground, and make me feel that I was standing on solid ground” (Does this refer to previous doubts that I had?).

In the second introduction, he says: “I used to hear God - Glory be to Him - speaking to me with this Qur’an.” The effect of this aspect will appear in his weighting of the meaning that he understood and came to his mind over the meaning inherited from Ibn Abbas or others (as we find, for example, in 5:33 of the Jusoor edition). .

About 10 years after Sayyid was executed, Rajaa al-Naqqash called in 1977 to revive Qutb’s interpreter approach so as not to fall victim to the political conflict with the July 23 revolution. The modern, correct, mature version of the Qur’an

This literary and sentimental characteristic was realized by some of those who interacted with Sayyid's theory of artistic depiction in the mid-1940s, such as Abdel Moneim Khallaf, who said: Sayyid succeeded in "revealing features of artistic beauty in the Qur'an that he reveals, and that he describes its effects on the soul, its amazement at it, and its excitement towards it." And that he had revealed "a picture of the Qur'an in the mind of a poet presented beautifully in a prose style that is accurate in expression, bright in style, and has taste, sensitivity, and statement."

Rather, Naguib Mahfouz picked up the addition made by Sayyid when he wrote, addressing him in the forties: “The Qur’an blessed your effort, and it raised you to a height that a critic cannot reach, without the blessing of the Qur’an. Explaining the places of beauty in the text itself.

Qutb began living with the Qur’an early in the late thirties when he began publishing chapters from his book “Artistic Imagery in the Qur’an” in Al-Muqtataf magazine before publishing them as a book later. Issuing several books in what he called in 1947 "The New Qur'an Library".

Sayed mentioned in an article written by Sayed in 1945 that he had a copy of the Qur’an that was his reference during the preparation of his book “Artistic Imagery”, and its pages bear his “signatures” on the places of imagery in the Qur’an, to prove that the rule of artistic imagery in the Qur’an is fixed by his study and statistics.

He says: "And here I can hardly find one page devoid of a place - bearing a reference to artistic photography - except that it is legislation. And this is sufficient for me to report this fact that I decided in my book, after saturation with the method of the Qur'an, and life in its atmosphere as much as possible."

This Qur’anic experience, extending from the late 1930s until his execution, may violate the division set by Shepard and I referred to it before, and his individual religious experience and the search for solid ground may confirm the existence of previous doubts.

Then, Sida is always reminded of the side of the religious experience that he lived, so here he confirms - in his discussion with some of his critics - that what he recorded in the book of artistic photography "is a summary of my faith, my opinion, and my own philosophy based on all my psychological and mental experiences in my journey on this earth."

All of this brings us back again to the human and historical character of Sayyid's thought, which is usually ignored by Qutbists who are fond of Qutb's ideology without his historicity.

Is "ghosting" an explanation?

It is not possible to ignore Sayyid Qutb's accuracy in expression, naming his book "In the Shadows of the Qur'an", and his steadfastness in expressing it as "thoughts", and that he did not intend to make it an interpretation or something other than thoughts.

Rather, Sida wrote in 1944 distinguishing between “meanings and shadows.” Meanings refer to “the language of science,” which means what is in the lines or searches for the meaning of expression, while shadows refer to “the language of art,” which is concerned with what is between the lines or the shadow cast by expression.

It is clear that the word “shadows” here was carefully chosen to denote “the expression that paints a picture or a shadow for the meaning that addresses the sense and conscience, and imprints in the soul a picture made by the imagination,” because this method is “closer to the nature of the arts,” which occupied Sayed’s focus in the first version. From "In the Shadows of the Qur'an".

This is despite the fact that Syeda used in 1946 the expression “lessons in interpretation according to the method of artistic depiction.” He called his method of artistic analysis of the Qur’anic text an interpretation. However, it seems that he retracted that in 1952 when he issued the first part of “In the Shadows of the Qur’an” and avoided naming it. - Whether in the title or in the introduction - an explanation.

However, his additions and revisions to the latest version of "In the Shadows of the Qur'an" brought him very close to interpretation, and yet this did not prompt him to change its title or even to define his book as a type of interpretation, to maintain his old distinction between meaning and shades, between the language of science and the language of art, and between Religious research and artistic research.

Perhaps Muhammad Yusuf Musa was a pioneer in describing Qutb's book as an interpretation, and that was in 1953, that is, the first version of it, but he saw it as an interpretation "in a way other than the way we used it," which means that Syed's violation of the familiar in interpretation is what made him refrain from calling it an interpretation.

After he was executed about 10 years ago, Raja al-Naqqash called in 1977 for the revival of the Qutb al-Mufasir approach so that he would not fall victim to the political conflict with the July 23 revolution, and considered his approach in the shadows of the Qur’an “the best of modern approaches in looking at and understanding the Qur’an,” and that it is suitable as a model for “modern interpretation.” The mature authenticity of the Qur'an.

Then Salah al-Din al-Khalidi came in the eighties and took the time to prove that “In the Shadows of the Qur’an” is an interpretation, based on some of Qutb’s references during his writing to other places of “interpretation” of a verse or such and such surah, to conclude that he called it an interpretation, but he does not tell us why he rejected that in the introduction And he chose the name "Shadows", which is completely different from the interpretation.

Al-Khalidi was Qutb according to the last edition of Qutb, as he believes that a master, may God grant him success - in the first stage of his imprisonment - "to realize the real, serious nature of this religion, to get acquainted with his jihadist mission, and to discover the dynamic approach of the Holy Qur'an," after he reached Part 27 of it, So it was necessary to "guarantee him with his new understanding of Islam, his perception of the call to it, and his approach to movement with it."

For this reason, Syed interpreted the last three volumes "according to his new movement approach", then decided to reconsider the interpretation of the first volumes, so he wrote the first ten volumes of the second edition "with intense focus and on a new approach and in a new way", in which he presented "to talk about the issues it suggests in Doctrine and movement, jurisprudence and legislation, politics and economics, or history and society... His longest, deepest, and most mature pauses were those related to belief, movement, divinity, servitude, governance, and legislation.” This is the conclusion reached by al-Khalidi.

I compared different parts of the two copies of the shadows and concluded that the change in the book included 3 things:

• Interpretative technical aspects.

• and editorial aspects.

• Conceptual and intellectual aspects.

However, it must be reminded again that the change was partial and did not include all parts of the interpretation, as there is a similarity between the versions in the middle parts, and this continues until the 26th part.

It should also be noted that Sayyid published an interpretation of Surat Al-Haqqa in 1946 that differs from what is found in Al-Dilal, which was printed in both versions.

Although he called his artistic commentary on Surat Al-Haqqa an "interpretation on the method of artistic depiction," as he made the surah an applied model for his theory of artistic depiction, he separated the scenes included in the surah more than he understood the commentary on the surah, section by section, as he did in the shadows later in the fifties.

As for interpretation techniques:

We can notice common features between the two versions, and changes that bring the shadows closer towards the traditions of interpretation.

Let's start with the commonality between the two versions, which can be summed up in two things:

• The first: dividing the Qur’an into passages that he calls lessons, so that he links the verses of each passage with a special reason that he investigates according to his interpretation. phrase phrase.

  And if it did not appear to me from the divisions of Abi Hayyan rigor in cutting and searching for a comprehensive reason, but that needs to be deepened.

• The second: Sayeda put punctuation marks inside the Qur’anic text that he interprets, whether in the beginning of the surah or during his interpretation of it, and the edition issued by Dar Al-Shorouk changed that in the opening of the surah or in the opening of the chapters of the surah, as it copied the Ottoman drawing, but it kept the modern spelling writing And the punctuation marks in the verses that appear during the interpretation, and there is no doubt that the punctuation marks are part of the interpretation techniques.

And if we focus on the changes that Syed made to the second version, starting with Al-Fatihah and Al-Baqara, we will find that he used interpretive techniques, of which I note 3:

Regarding editorial matters

With regard to editorial matters, the second version seemed more solid in terms of wording, sometimes replacing one word with another, such as replacing “mutifala” with “volunteer” in Al-Fatihah, and as amending some wordings and adding many explanatory additions with more explanation and literary detail.

For example, he added in the place of a paragraph related to the characteristics of the Qur’anic expression, in which he said: “It becomes evident in the word taking the place of line and color, as soon the images are drawn through the words, then these images soon come to life as if they are rippling with life” (1: 37), and this confirms -Again- that Sida did not abandon his theory of artistic photography, which formed the focus of the first version, but rather pleaded with it in the second version to confirm his kinetic ideology.

As for the conceptual and intellectual matters, they can be summed up in the following 3 matters:

• The first: that the word Jahiliyyah spreads in the amended and revised version and interjects it remarkably, so that - for example - he contented himself with saying in the first version: “Westerners have become accustomed”, then he added in the second version: “the heirs of the Romanian Jahiliyyah”, and he also added phrases such as : "The beliefs of the Jahiliyyah prevalent in the whole earth on the day Islam came," and "The rubble of Jahiliyya from beliefs, perceptions, myths and philosophies."

  And he began to talk about "comprehensive deity", "absolute deism" and "complete, pure, abstract and comprehensive monotheism", and "submission to the perceptions of the earth, its values ​​and scales, attachment to divine values, and arrogance over the logic of ignorance."

• The second: He began to use the expression “Islamic conception” a lot, which he seems to prefer over the expression “philosophy.” For example, we find phrases such as “rules of conceptualization,” “basic colleges in the Islamic conception,” and “emotional orientations emanating from that conception.” And so on.

• Third: He moved from the conciliatory approach in some of his previous works, to emphasizing the idea of ​​the uniqueness of Islam and its distinction over all other beliefs, perceptions and philosophies, and its supremacy as well, and the uniqueness of the Muslim nation that is “the inheritor of heavenly beliefs and prophecies since the dawn of mankind, and the guardian of The legacy of faith and the heritage of prophecy, and the unity of faith’s procession on earth until the end of time” (1:41).

Here we finish talking about the characteristics of the two prints of shadows, and I will leave for the next article the details of the saying in the vision of Qutb, in whose womb he was born and with whom he lived for a long time from the late thirties until his execution, and it shows the first intention that is an artistic critical intent, given the formation and experience of Sayyid before he turned In the revised version to the second intent, which is intellectual and movement, where we will witness a shift from the artistic approach to the religious approach, after he clearly distinguished between them in his previous years, and it must be said that Sida has raised controversy in both his visions (or his two central additions), and I will leave the detail In this for the next article, but it suffices me here to point out that each argument is appropriate to the nature of the idea and the addition that he presented.