Compared with only a handful of works on the principles of interpretation of the Qur’an (us??l tafs?r) compiled over the first twelve centuries, the contributions to the field swelled during the last two centuries, reflecting a sudden surge of interest in the modern notion of “method.” Fazlur Rahman (1919-1988) took up the hermeneutical question by putting forth his so-called Double Movement Method (Islam and Modernity 1982; Major Themes of the Qur’an 1980). Fazlur Rahman proposed resolving the contentious issues arising at the intersection of the traditional and the modern, through the binary of interpretation and application. The first movement proceeds from the reader’s locus back to the historical locus of the sacred text, and the second movement is constituted by the return to the readers’ contemporary reality. The first movement takes up the problem, moves to the text and interprets it in the light of the then-existing historical reality (decoding the language, comprehending all relevant passages, examining the occasions of revelation), and thus “distilling” the underlying “moral” principle. The second movement consists of a return to the reader’s contemporary reality in order to apply the “distilled” moral principle to contemporary problems. In cases where the attempt fails, Rahman suggested repeating the process. Although never defined by Rahman himself, it seems that ‘failure’ meant the failure to resolve the mutual alterity of the Qur’an and the condition of modernity. Rahman also found himself in conflict with Hans Georg Gadamer (Wahrheit und Methode) and vigorously defended his position. This conflict also exposed the friction between Rahman’s method and the Muslim tafs?r tradition, as well as between the Aristotelian theoria and phronesis. Later, Fazlur Rahman’s method was adopted by the Muslim feminist scholars, such as Amina Wadud (Qur’an and Women; Inside the Gender Jihad), and was sometimes applied repeatedly to the same issue, as Rahman had suggested. It is interesting to see that the application of the double movement to feminism-related exegetical issues led to modification and extrapolation of the theory itself. The paper examines the double movement theory, attempts to determine its continuity or departure with the classical tafs?r, studies its intersection with Gadamer, and brings out its implications. The paper shows, that despite the limitations of the double movement method, it was a hermeneutical intervention particularly well-suited to Rahman’s larger interpretative objectives, and had the flexibility to enable its evolution in directions Rahman might not have anticipated.

This paper engages the Qur??n’s attitude toward poetic inspiration in the light of Plato’s Ion. In S?rat al-Shu?ar??, the poets are attacked for their character--their roaming idleness in search for inspiration, and the fact that their words do not match their deeds--but it is still strongly implied that they receive their inspiration extrinsically from “daimonic powers” (shay???n) that “descend upon” them (26:221). In casting the poets as vessels for external inspiration, the Qur??n conception of poetry diverges from that of the tightly controlled tékhn? reflected in the later classical definition of kal?m mawz?n muqaff? (metered/balanced speech with a rhyming scheme). In other words, the primary difference between Qur??nic and poetic speech is not at all technical, but strictly inspirational; Mu?ammad, like Homer, receives his speech from a supreme divine force, not minor daimons. The connotations of “reason” and “deliberation” elicited by the word “mawz?n,” should further tip us to the fact that the Qur??n, like Plato’s Ion, well-recognizes the notion of poetic composition as an act of madness. Hence, the non-believers in S?rat al-?af?t ae reported to say: “Are we to leave our gods to a mad poet (sh??ir majn?n)” (37: 36). The adjectival use of the word mad (majn?n) in the latter phrase renders it almost interchangeable with poet (sh??ir). Then again, the Qur??n does not absolutely refute the charge of madness, but ennobles it: Mu?ammad should be believed because it speaks the truth (al-?aq), not because his inspiration could be accounted for by reason. To this end, nominalism becomes the principal tool by which the Qur??n validity as a legal code is upheld in the classical age. The Qur??n becomes separated from poetry insofar as poetry becomes increasingly conceptualized in terms of technicalities. Meanwhile, the madness is shocked back to sense through the teleological apologia of interpretation (t??w?l) and exegesis (tafs?r). Ultimately, this paper questions whether the pronounced metapoeticism of modern Arabic poetry is truly self-reflective of the poetic medium or, as it is, has ever been deeply entangled in the nominalist webs of ?Abb?s?d literary criticism. As the illustrious virtuosos of contemporary Arabic verse set on their paths crafting theorizing poetry that draws on Nietzsche’s subjectivity and Pound’s novelty, one cannot but wonder about the limits of their insight--if they ever saw Nietzsche, Pound, or even Mu?ammad?

Animated by anxieties of European colonialism, Jamal ad-Din Al-Afghani argued for pan-Islamic unity as a political organizing principle to counter growing imperial threats. Al-Afghani’s pan-Islamic message imagined solidarity along creedal lines in opposition to divisions of tribe and ethnicity, in order to etch borderlines between Europe and an imagined “Muslim world.” Through a close reading of Al-Afghani’s writings in al-Urwah al-Wuthqa and Misr, this paper will analyze the role of a constructed territorial homeland at the heart of his political mission. For Al-Afghani, the Muslim world was a geographic place, a homeland of Muslims whose territorial integrity was under threat by European colonialism. Placing Al-Afghani’s writing within the context of the Ottoman Empire’s territorial loss and concession, the desire to preserve an imagined Muslim homeland becomes one of the central objectives of Al-Afghani’s project. Defining the citizen of the Muslim millet in broad civilizational terms, Al-Afghani fashions a modern Muslim world equipped intellectually to grapple with the threat of European colonialism. Islamic unity then is the method by which to maintain and preserve territorial unity even as Al-Afghani imagines the Muslim homeland into being. This paper will provide an intervention into our understanding of the mission of pan-Islamism, its relationship to nationalism, and the role of territorial imagining in political Islam.

This paper attempts to recover parts of the overlooked history of the early period of the Muslim Brotherhood by focusing on some downplayed components of Hasan al-Banna’s ideology. Going beyond the exclusive focus on Islamism, the paper examines how al-Banna positioned his da‘wa or what we now call Islamism in relation to other nationalist, transnationalist, and internationalist ideologies of the first half of the twentieth century. More specifically, it examines how al-Banna placed what he called “the Muslim Brothers’ Islam” against territorial nationalism, Arabism, liberal internationalism, Western modernity and other transnational ideologies like Nazism, Fascism, and Communism. The paper argues that al-Banna’s Islamism was shaped by secular ideologies as much as it was influenced by his informal Islamic education and upbringing. The latter tends to be over-emphasized in the literature at the expense of the former. However, al-Banna probably shared with his contemporaneous “modernists” more than what he shared with successor Islamists. The essentialist approach to studying the Muslim Brotherhood emphasizes what it deems to be an inherent conflict between Islam and modernity and asserts that Islamism emerged as a reaction to this conflict. In doing so, it underplays the crucially important “non-Islamic” factors that shaped al-Banna’s ideology. Furthermore, his writings demonstrate that he himself was not aware of his own “effective history.” Hence, his ideology seems incoherent. For instance, he criticizes territorial nationalism and then embraces it, rejects racial nationalism then develops racial arguments against non-Arabs and blames them for what he labels “the decline of Islam.” The paper also challenges the contextualist approach to studying Islamism, which I argue, added to the provincialization of al-Banna. The paper demonstrates that Al-Banna presented his Islamism as a solution not only to local but also global problems. In developing his internationalist weltanschauung, al-Banna borrowed several elements from other international and transnational ideologies. He also shared the internationalists’ concerns for world safety and prosperity. While his inconsistent nationalist ideas were probably a result of confusion, al-Banna’s internationalism was likely a deliberate synthesis of Islam and modern ideologies. This is another point that has been obscured by essentialism.