Tampering with Qur ' anic True Meanings of Miracles

Lack of reference in the Holy Qur'an to the verses that Allah intended to be taken either literally or allegorically has left the door open for some sectarian interpreters to deliberately ignore the Qur'anic literal meaning and opt only for the allegorical meanings, with a view of distorting the underlying significance of this great book. This paper does not intend to show that the literal meaning is invariably given pre-eminence over the allegorical meaning. Rather, it intends to demonstrate that some interpreters are prone only to allegorical interpretation just to skew the true message of the Qur'an and minimize its worth. The paper will expose the misinterpretations of Ahmad Ali and his fellows concerning miracles of Ibrahim, Moses, David, and Solomon as a representative sample of the study. Then it ends by refuting the metaphorical approach of interpretation, especially when the miracles are in question.


Introduction
While dispute over whether Allah intended His word to be interpreted literally or allegorically is plausibly justifiable when it comes to interpreting His attributes, there is no point of taking His miracles in their allegorical sense, since the Holy Qur'an speaks of the miracles as authentic incidents to prove the omnipresence of the Al mighty.Yet, there are some sectarian interpreters, chiefly Qadians, who take the advantage of the allegorical approach of interpretation just to tamper with the authentic meanings of this great book, especially in the realm of miracles and supernatural incidents to promote the false interpretation of it and prove that it is in harmony with the well-known concepts of science.Since tapping upon all miracles falls beyond the scope of the study, this paper will focus on a limited number of examples to highlight Qadiani distortions against the Qur'an.This will be followed by a refutation of the metaphorical approach of interpretation since miracles are provided as concrete evidence to support the persons upon whom God bestowed His revelations.

Background of the Study
The Qadians consider the founder of their sect the Mirza Gulaam, the Grand reformer and even the promised Messiah.This claim seems to derive from their denial of the finality of prophet-hood.According to Ansāri (1990: 30), the Mirza makes of himself champion of Islam by introducing such a strange theme that the "Divine inspiration has not ceased to exist and should not cease".This view intends to prove that external and internal knowledge originally bestowed upon prophets could pass on to their followers.This intuitive knowledge is not exclusively limited to the companions of the prophet, but may involve any person who has faith in the prophet.
The underlying motive behind such claim is to prove that the early Muslim scholars have no advantage over any other follower in the interpretation of the Qur'an.In other words, the authority of the interpretation, according to Qadians, should not be only seen as vested in the companions of the Prophet, and consequently opinions may come into play in the construal of the verses.According to Ansāri, the Mirza "gave full rein of his fancy to explain Prophetic traditions in such a way that it is even inconceivable that people should take such liberty in explaining the writing or even compositions of writers or poets.To this end, the Mirza claims that the words of traditions are of figurative or metaphorical nature."(p.49).Such distortion against the ordinary fashion of interpretation is intended to show that "this Great Book has been a mystery or puzzle for over 13 centuries" (Annadawi, 1982:154) The metaphorical interpretation of the miracles appears to be identical with the disbelief in the unseen world.It follows that cosmological and personal miracles are unwelcome by major Qadiani interpreters such as Mohammad Ali and Ahmad Ali, who did a lot of hair-splitting to skew the true meanings of the Holy Qur'an.Their ultimate goal is to minimize the underlying significance of this scripture and present it before the modern world tradition as an ordinary book that speaks of normal human experiences.This paper thus will expose their twisted interpretations of the Qur'anic miracles by gauging a reasonable number of miraculous incidents against the Qadiani interpretations and commentaries.The paper ends by refuting the metaphorical approach of interpretation as far as miracles are concerned.
As for the transcription system, the Romanization system is used in the reproduction of the Arabic sounds according to the orthographic rules of Arabic.

Denial of Ibrahim's Miracle
Qadians essentially reject Qur'anic miracles bestowed by God upon His chosen prophets.Apparently, they do not believe in the extraordinary incidents that prophets performed to convince their folks of their true callings.The miraculous incidents have been interpreted in a metaphorical fashion by well known Qadiani interpreters like Maulana Mohammad Ali and Ahmad Ali whose commentaries are lengthy and running counter to the known usages of terms by native Arabic speakers and principles of Qur'anic interpretation known to the early Qur'anic interpreters.
Such religious inclination of interpretation is geared toward proving that prophets are nothing more than normal people whose actions are natural.True though this may be, Qadians play blind to the fact that miracles bestowed upon people by the will of God are not subject to the laws of nature.Rather, they are beyond the rules of nature and their goal is to impoverish people and show their inferiority to God.Some miracles are clearly delineated in the Qur'an as concrete evidence of prophets' declarations and are therefore designated to be understood so.Nevertheless, some Qadiani interpreters tend to disregard the literal sense of these miracles to make them natural and perceptible.
In the case of Ibrahim, God commanded fire to be coolness and peace for Ibrahim after having been cast into it.After Ibrahim had smashed his folk's idols, they had a grudge against him and plotted to either kill him or burn him, but God brought him out of the fire unharmed: famā kāna jawābu Qawmihi illā 'an qālu qtulūhu 'aw arriqūhu fa'anjahu llāhu mina nnār [Qur'an 29:24], which Ali translates as follows "but the answer of his folk was only that they said: "kill him", or "burn him", then Allah saved him from the fire" [Qur'an 29 :82].The way God saved Ibrahim from the fire was by commanding it to be cool and peaceful for him such that Ibrahim was unharmed: ً ‫ْد‬ ‫َﺮ‬ ‫ﺑ‬ ‫ِﻲ‬ ‫ُﻮﻧ‬ ‫آ‬ ُ ‫َﺎر‬ ‫ﻧ‬ ‫َﺎ‬ ‫ﻳ‬ ‫ُﻠﻨﺎ‬ ‫ﻗ‬ ‫ِﻴﻢ‬ ‫َاه‬ ‫ْﺮ‬ ‫ِﺑ‬ ‫إ‬ ‫َﻰ‬ ‫َﻠ‬ ‫ﻋ‬ ‫ًﺎ‬ ‫َﻼﻣ‬ ‫َﺳ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ا‬ qulna yā nāru kūni bardan wasalāman lā ibrāhim.Though Mohammad Ali translates it thus: We said: O fire, be coolness and peace for Abraham", he seems to be casting doubts in his commentary on this verse over whether Ibrahim was actually cast into the fire, claiming that no mention of this was made in the Qur'an.Then he wonders whether God saved Ibrahim before or after being thrown into the fire.Then he decides that God saved Ibrahim before he was thrown into the fire by means of a journey to another land just as He saved Mohammad by means of a journey to Madina "It was a flight to another place like the prophet's flight to Madina" (commentary 69 a).Although he claims Ibrahim's history refers deeply to the history of Prophet Mohammad himself, there is no clear evidence that their folks had similar plots against them.The Holy Qur'an clearly states that God had delivered Ibrahim unharmed from the fire and his journey to another place came later.Almost all prophets had journeyed when they felt their lives were in danger, but this does not mean that their migration was executed by a miracle.
Ali's claim that God delivered Ibrahim from the fire by a means of a journey is Ali's forced interpretation of" َ ‫ِﻴﻦ‬ ‫َﻤ‬ ‫َﺎﻟ‬ ‫ْﻌ‬ ‫ِﻠ‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫َﺎ‬ ‫ِﻴﻬ‬ ‫ﻓ‬ ‫َﺎ‬ ‫ْﻨ‬ ‫َآ‬ ‫َﺎر‬ ‫ﺑ‬ ‫ِﻲ‬ ‫ّﺘ‬ َ ‫اﻟ‬ ِ ‫ْض‬ ‫َر‬ ‫اﻷ‬ ‫َﻰ‬ ‫ِﻟ‬ ‫إ‬ ‫ًﺎ‬ ‫ُﻮﻃ‬ ‫َﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ُ ‫َﺎﻩ‬ ‫ْﻨ‬ ‫ّﻴ‬ َ ‫َﺠ‬ ‫َﻧ‬ ‫و‬ wana ināhu walūtan ilal 'rdi llati bāraknā fihā lilālamin [anbia 71), which he translates as follows: We delivered him and Lot to the land which we had blessed for the nations".He arbitrarily takes this verse as evidence that God saved Ibrahim from the fire by means of a journey to deny the miraculous event of the fire.

Fabrications of Moses' Miraculous Incident
Such disbelief in the supra-natural matters applies to other Qur'anic stories.Ali, for example, denies that Moses split the sea with his staff by the will of God [Qur'an 2: 82].He even disregards the ordinary senses of the words " sā", literally staff "idrib", strike and " a ar", rock and interprets them metaphorically as "a group of people", march or go about, and a mountain" respectively", to prove that there is nothing miraculous about the incident.Let us consider the following verse: In his commentary (96) on the verse, Ali (1984) explains that daraba, to strike' means either strike the rock with your staff or march on or hasten with your folk to a mountain from which water flowed.Ali seems unsure in his commentary of whether Moses actually had struck the rock with a staff or marched with his people to a rock or mountain, though he argues lengthily to prove the metaphorical signification of the incident.His argument, however, is ill founded.He seems to assume that idrib+ an object always signifies" seeking a way or marching on" as in daraba alard or daraba fil ardi," he travelled.Whereas the foregoing combination gives the sense of " marching on" or "going about", it is quite absurd to take idrib bi'sāka al a ar, literally strike the rock, to mean "march on to the rock".Such analogy is arbitrary and forced" Likewise, he takes sā, literally staff, to mean a community or a group of people.The metaphorical sense clearly derives from the hint made of awāri , a deviant Muslim sect, of whom it is said: šuqqū sā l muslimina, literally they broke the staff of the Muslims, which he interpreted they made "a schism in the unity or community of the Muslims".Given that the incident that Moses had experienced was supernatural, it ought to be understood as something that" runs counter to our understanding of physical and geological laws".(Ansā ri, 1990: 122).Thus it is absurd to transfer the metaphorical connotation of staff in one context to another context where the word has an ordinary rather than metaphorical sense.
Elsewhere Ali even ignores the means by which Moses saved his folk from the Pharaoh and his men in an attempt to twist the revelation and bring it in line with the spirit of science that ignores the way the unseen world works.In his commentary (82), Ali (1984) claims that the Qur'an "does not show how the Israelities were made to pass through the sea or in what manner the parting of the sea was brought about", though God revealed to Moses to strike the sea with his staff: Fa'awhaina ila mūsa 'n idrib bi sāka lbahr fanfalaqa fakāna kullu firqin kattawdil dim, Ali translates this verses as follows: God revealed to Moses to strike the sea with his staff, so it parted, and each part was like a huge mountain [Qur'an šua'rā': 63].Despite this clear revelation to Moses, Ali plays blind to the bright fact of this supernatural incident.He claims in his commentary that the wind caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind, thus enabling the Israelities to pass through.When Pharaoh and his men came to pass through, the receded water came back and drowned them.Obviously, there is no mention in his commentary that Moses parted the sea by means of his staff as indicated in the verse.His commentary shows no consistency in the way he interprets the same verse that recurs in different places.While he interprets idrib bi sāka al a ar as "march on with your community to a mountain" in Sūrat 'lbaqara, verse 60, he comes out saying something completely different in interpreting idrib bi'sāka albahr in Sūrat a šurā.The reason might be that he finds it quite hard for any average person to visualize that the sea should part when someone marches on to it with his community, making it possible for them to pass through.
For this reason, Ali came up with the story of the east wind since it is easy to believe and conforms to the laws of nature.He seems to be interpreting the incident in light of his preconceived ideology and expectations that prophets are average people and thus unable to work miracles, simply because there is no reason for miracles to occur in violation of the laws of physics and geology.
Since the concern of the Qadians is to present the Qura'n as palatable and consistent with the laws of science to the detriment of the facts pertaining to the miraculous incidents, they have brought far-fetched interpretations to adjust the Qur'anic significations in line with the geological and physical laws.In his commentary (101) on this verse, for example, Malik Gulām Farid (1969:35) argues that God revealed to Moses "to strike a particular spot where water was just close enough that a strike with a rod would help the water gush out.He considers this within the experience of geologists only to prove that Moses did nothing against the known laws of nature" The use of sā to stand for a group of people is extremely odd.He explains the connection between the "rod" and "people" in terms of the dream language.He attaches importance to dreams and inspiration ‫َﺸ‬ ‫ﻋ‬ ‫َﺎ‬ ‫َﺘ‬ ‫ْﻨ‬ ‫اﺛ‬ ُ ‫ْﻪ‬ ‫ِﻨ‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ْ ‫َت‬ ‫َﺮ‬ ‫َﺠ‬ ‫َﺎﻧﻔ‬ ‫ﻓ‬ َ ‫َﺮ‬ ‫َﺠ‬ ‫ْﺤ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ َ ‫َﺎك‬ ‫َﺼ‬ ‫ﱢﻌ‬ ‫ﺑ‬ ‫ِب‬ ‫ْﺮ‬ ‫اﺿ‬ ‫َﺎ‬ ‫ْﻨ‬ ‫ُﻠ‬ ‫َﻘ‬ ‫ﻓ‬ ِ ‫ِﻪ‬ ‫ْﻣ‬ ‫َﻮ‬ ‫ِﻘ‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫َﻰ‬ ‫ُﻮﺳ‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫َﻰ‬ ‫ْﻘ‬ ‫َﺴ‬ ‫ْﺘ‬ ‫اﺳ‬ ِ