On Accusing the Hadith Scholars for Having Restricted the Scope of Exegesis (Tafsir) and Having Depended Only on Transmission

“Some pseudo scholars have accused the Hadith experts of rigidity in understanding the Qur’an by shackling it with transmissions; that they have limited the scope of understanding the language of the Qur’an according to a word’s inferred meaning, and imposed upon the essential lexical meaning of the Qur’an transmitted statements from the Companions and Followers. 

Despite this being a baseless accusation fraught with inherent contradictions — such will become apparent to those who look into the issue — what really discredits the criticism from its root is the stance of the lexicographers (al-Lughawiyyun) and Hadith experts (al-Muhaddithun) vis a vis the work of the great lexicographer Imam Abu ‘Ubaydah Ma’mar ibn al-Muthanna (d. 210), known as majaz al-qur’an.  The majaz al-qur’an is the earliest lexical exegesis (al-tafsir al-lughawi) available to us and its author is one of pillars of the language, a contemporary to (the likes of ) al-Asma’i (d. 215/16) and Abu Zayd al-Ansari (d. 215).

Lexicographers severely criticised this work for its exclusive reliance upon the language (lughah) in understanding the Qur’an.  One expert Imam of the language, Abu ‘Umar al-Jarmi (d. 225),* set out with the work in his hand to criticise Abu ‘Ubaydah for not referring back to the statements of the Companions and Followers.  When he met him, al-Jarmi said, “Who did you get this from, Abu ‘Ubaydah? For it contradicts the exegesis of the knowledgable/jurists (fuqaha’).”  

Abu ‘Ubaydah said, “This is the exegesis of the bedouins who urinate upon their heels (i.e. standing up). Feel free to accept or reject it.” 

Thus Abu 'Ubaydah explained to al-Jarmi that he has relied solely upon the language of the Arabs without making recourse to the exegetical statements and commentary by those before him from the Companions and Followers.  It is for this reason al-Asma’i also used to fault him and say, “Abu ‘Ubaydah interprets the Qur’an through his own reason!”  Imam al-Farra’ (d. 207) used to say, “If Abu ‘Ubaydah brought his book (majaz al-qur’an) to me, I would have lashed him twenty times.” Another expert lexicographer and staunch critic of the work, Imam Abu Hatim al-Sijistani (d. 255), went to the extent that he considered transmitting from it haram.. He would state, “Abu ‘Ubaydah has interpreted the Qur’an in an inappropriate manner.”

Despite this hostile position from some of the great lexicographer Imams towards interpreting the Qur’an through the language alone, the stance of the Hadith experts vis a vis Imam Abu ‘Ubaydah’s work stands in stark contrast. In fact, it is the complete opposite!

Imam al-Bukhari, for example, in his sahih (which is considered the foremost example and method of Hadith criticism) relies (extensively) upon the majaz al-qur’an, in the Book of tafsir and elsewhere.  He quotes a great deal from him as Ibn Hajar mentions in his fath, ‘Al-Bukhari has quoted much from Abu ‘Ubaydah, naming and referencing him on occasions and omitting his name and the reference at other instances.’

 Thus here, we have the foremost Hadith expert and critic (al-Bukhari) accepting lexical exegesis and relying upon Abu ‘Ubaydah in his sahib, whereas the Imams of the language reproach/fault Abu ‘Ubaydah and accuse him of committing a crime or sin!

This, in turn, shows [how] the Hadith experts were more open and less bound by the “shackles of transmission” than scholars from other fields. It also shows them more open to lexical exegesis and bent on it than some of the great leaders of lexicography.”  — Sh. Al-Sharif Hatim ibn ‘Arif al-‘Awni 

*For a brief biographical sketch of al-Jarmi, see here: http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/showalam.php?id=1736

The majaz al-qur’an was published in the 50s with the edit of the learned Turkish orientalist scholar Fuat Sezgin. It can be accessed and downloaded here: https://archive.org/details/MagazCoran

Abu ‘Ubaydah was considered a controversial figure nonetheless. To get an idea of this, you can refer to al-Dhahabi’s entry from his siyar: (http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?idfrom=1611&idto=1611&bk_no=60&ID=1503)

———————————————————————————————————

يتهم بعضُ الجهلة أئمةَ السنة من المحدثين بأنهم جمدوا في فهم القرآن على النقل ، وأنهم قد قصّروا في فهمه بمقتضى دلالة لفظه ، وسلطوا المنقول من كلام الصحابة والتابعين على الدلالة اللغوية الصرفة للقرآن الكريم .

ومع أن هذا اتهام باطل لا أساس له من الصحة ، وفيه تناقض يتضح للمدقق ، لكن مما يغفل عنه هؤلاء المفترون ، مما ينقض فريتهم هذه من أساسها ، ويبين أن هذا الاتهام محضُ كذبٍ على المحدثين : 

موقف المحدثين واللغويين من كتاب ( مجاز القرآن ) للإمام اللغوي أبي عبيدة معمر بن المثنى ( ت٢١٠هـ) والذي هو أقدم تفسير لغوي يصل إلينا ، ومؤلفه أحد أساطين اللغة ، من أقران الأصمعي وأبي زيد الأنصاري .

فقد عاب اللغويون على أبي عبيدة تأليفه هذا الكتاب (مجاز القرآن) أشد العيب ؛ لأنه اعتمد في فهم القرآن على اللغة وحدها !!

حتى إن الإمام اللغوي أبا عمر الجرمي ( ت٢٢٥هـ) خرج مرة ومعه كتاب ( مجاز القرآن ) لينكر على أبي عبيدة تأليفه من غير رجوع لكلام أهل العلم من الصحابة والتابعين في تفسير القرآن ، فلما لقيه قال له : عمن أخذت هذا يا أبا عبيدة ؟!! فإن هذا يخالف تفسير الفقهاء !! فقال له أبو عبيدة : هذا تفسير الأعراب البوالين على أعقابهم ، فإن شئت فخذه ، وإن شئت فذره .

فبين أبوعبيدة للجرمي أنه اعتمد في تفسيره على لغة العرب وحدها ، دون رجوع لتفاسير أهل العلم الذين سبقوه من الصحابة والتابعين . 

ولذلك كان الأصمعي يعيبه عليه أيضا ، ويقول عن أبي عبيدة : يفسر القرآن برأيه !!

وكان الفراء يقول : لو حمل أبو عبيدة إلي كتاب ( مجاز القرآن) لضربته عليه عشرين .

وكان الإمام اللغوي أبو حاتم السجستاني (ت٢٥٥هـ) ينكر كتاب (مجاز القرآن ) أشد الإنكار ، حتى إنه ليرى حرمة روايته ، ويقول : إنه فسر القرآن على غير ما ينبغي .

ومع هذا الموقف الرافض لتفسير القرآن باللغة ، والصادر من بعض أكابر أئمة اللغة ، فقد كان موقف المحدثين من كتاب ( مجاز القرآن) مختلفا جدا ، وعكس ما يُنسب إليهم تماما !! 

فهذا إمام المحدثين الإمام البخاري ، وفي صحيحه (الذي هو قمة صنعة المحدثين النقدية) ، يعتمد كتابَ ( مجاز القرآن) في صحيحه ، في كتاب ( التفسير ) من الصحيح ، وفي غيره ، وأكثر النقل عنه ، كما قال الحافظ ابن حجر في الفتح : (( وقد أكثر البخاري نقل كلامه ، فتارة يصرح بعزوه ، وتارة يبهمه )) .

فهاهم شيخ المحدثين يقبل التفسير اللغوي ، ويعتمده في صحيحه ، وأئمة اللغة يُغلطونه عليه ويؤثمونه !

وهكذا يتضح أن المحدثين كانوا أكثر انفكاكا من أسر النقل عن العلماء ، وأكثر حرصا على التفسير اللغوي للقرآن من بعض أكابر اللغويين !!!

Angels: why is belief in them important and why should one read about them?

I was asked the above question by a cousin recently and I decided to write him a small response. I decided to tweak it a little and share, despite knowing full well that more can be added. Alas, something is better than nothing and I think the amount given in the response is enough to pique interest. If this post is able to add something new to readers' knowledge or, even better, encourage them to engage the literature a little I will consider the post worthwhile and a success. وما توفيقي إلا بالله

Q: why is belief in Angels important and why should one read about them?

٧٨٦

Belief in angels is an important part of faith and integral to it. The Qur’an reads,

“The Messenger believes in what has been sent down to him from his Lord, as do the faithful. They all believe in Allah, His angels, His scriptures and His messengers. ‘We make no distinction between any of His messengers’, they say, ‘we hear and obey. Grant us Your forgiveness, our Lord. To You we all return.’” (2:285)

It is clear from this verse that all believers must believe in angels as they believe in God. Belief in angels is a matter of certainty, there is no room for doubt or scepticism.  

Angels are the most common means through which God communicates with humans. Denial in angels results, amongst many other things, in the rejection of the Prophet having received the Qur’an from above and thus, by extension, the Prophet becomes a liar - Allah protect us from such heresy.

Furthermore, like God, societies have long held beliefs and superstitions regarding angels. The Qur’an intends to correct these misunderstandings, some of which are incredibly blasphemous. For example, the Arab pagans believed angels were the daughters of God. This is despite their own contempt and bias towards women, they were known to tilt their heads in shame and embarrassment upon the birth of a girl and it was customary to bury them alive. The Qur’an argues with them as follows,

“Now, ask the disbelievers: is it true that your Lord has daughters while they choose sons for themselves? Did We create the angels as females while they were watching? No indeed! It is one of their lies when they say, ‘God has begotten.’ How they lie! 

Did He truly choose daughters in preference to sons? What is the matter with you? How do you form your judgements? Do you not reflect? … ” (37: 149-155)

At another juncture, Allah assures to have their blasphemy recorded and interrogate them about it in the Hereafter, 

“They consider the angels — God’s servants — to be female. Did they witness their creation? Their claim will be put on record and they will be questioned about it.” (43:19)

The above may help explain why belief in angels is so important and why it is included in the faith pronouncement, “I believe in Allah, His angels, His books, His Messengers, the last day … ”

The sequence of the pronouncement seems to follow a logical order from the heavens to the earth and then back to Him again. 

Angels are an extraordinary creation of Allah. By reflecting upon their magnitude, quantity and the other descriptions provided in the sources, one can appreciate Allah’s creation and glory, and grow in awe of His power and magnificence. 

For example, Jibril once told the Prophet about how each day seventy thousand angels pray at the Ka’bah in the heavens and never return to it (this Ka'bah is referred to as al-bayt al-ma'mur in the Qur'an). The Prophet also said, “there is not the space of a hand or foot in the skies above but that there is an angel there, standing, bowing and prostrating in prayer… ”. Another example is of how Hell will be brought forward on the day of judgement via seventy thousand ropes, each rope will be pulled by seventy thousand angels. This means just the number of angels that will bring out Hell will be forty nine million. There is plenty of this in the sources if they are scoped carefully.

Taking a comparative look at how Allah favoured Man and the status given to him provides one with a liberating framework no philosophy has conceived and can do wonders for one’s faith and observance.  It is only religion that preaches us the sanctity of Man (to the degree that it does), of God having created Man in His image, and, in this case, how God favoured Man over the angels, demonstrated His flawless judgement over their words of demurral and, upon creation, asked them to prostrate to him. Subhanka Ya Rabb.

In addition, there is the sense of God impressing upon “believers in the unseen” the element of the divine and metaphysical in their daily interactions and affairs — the possibilities and, in cases, inevitabilities of divine assistance and metaphysical intervention.  This is so that their reliance is never solely upon the material, nor is their attention diverted from the centre of their focus, Allah; nor is their consciousness sidetracked from the final and ultimate destination, the Hereafter, both of which belong to the category of the unseen.

One can look at how these ‘honoured servants’ (the Qur’an describes the angels as such) interact with Man, in particular the believers, how they serve their interests, pray for them and assist them in their endeavours.  Each believer has the potential for this honour and ought to strive for it. 

These are some points that come to mind. Sincere reflection will yield more no doubt. For the guiding principle here is that Allah is the all-Wise and there is great wisdom in all that He does. 

Allah knows best.

U.N.

The Story Behind Hotel ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan in Madinah

Here I present an English rendition of a message I was sent by an acquaintance today.  Keeping aside the detestable marketisation of sacred spaces, I find the incident itself is quite inspiring. It stands testimony to the myriad and enduring blessings sincere donations have. Even today there are those lucky individuals who buy their entry into paradise through charity and what greater endorsement can there be for them than the Prophet's own pronouncement of envy?

He, may Allah's profuse blessing and infinite salutations be upon him, said, "there is no envy except with two persons: one whom Allah has blessed with the Qur'an and he recites it day and night; the other is a person to whom Allah has given wealth and property, from which he spends in charity day and night." 

May Allah accept our donations, grant us sincerity and keep us rich at heart. For there is no poverty like the poverty of the heart. Enjoy.

__________________________________

The Story Behind Hotel 'Uthman ibn 'Affan

When the early Muslims migrated to Madinah with the Prophet (SAW), they found the water there difficult to drink as they were accustomed to drinking the relatively sweeter Zamzam water in Makkah (Northerners, think of London water!). So they went to the Prophet and told him about their difficulty, and informed him of a well in the city by the name of Rumah whose water tasted a lot like Zamzam.

The problem, however, was that the owner of the well was a Jew and he insisted on charging, even for a handful of water.  The Prophet had sent an offer for the well, a garden in paradise in exchange, however, the Jew refused and said he would only accept money. 

When ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan came to learn of the incident, of the Prophet’s declaration of something better than the well in Paradise for whoever can secure it for the community, he went to the owner and placed an offer to buy the well. The owner declined, at which point ‘Uthman asked him to sell him half of it or rent the well: a day for Muslims and a day for him to sell to whoever he wishes. He agreed.

Subsequently, this resulted in everyone going to drink from the well on ‘Uthman’s day, leaving the owner with no customers! The owner felt at a loss and quickly rushed to ‘Uthman, “you have spoilt my well, now buy it off me”. ‘Uthman agreed and it was sold for 20 thousand dirhams, which he then assigned as endowment in Allah’s name (waqf lillah) for all Muslims to drink from.

Later on, one of the Companions came to ‘Uthman and offered to buy the well for double its price.  ‘Uthman asked him to raise his offer. He proposed triple the price. ‘Uthman, again, asked him to raise the price until the buyer agreed to pay nine times the original price. With ‘Uthman still not consenting, the Companion, bemused, asked him, “who will offer you more than me?”. ‘Uthman responded, “Allah. He gave me ten times the one good deed.”

After ‘Uthman had left the well behind for Muslims as an endowment, date-palms started to grow around it.  More recently, the Ottoman Empire attended to those palms and looked after them. When Madinah came into the hands of the Saudi government, it further attended to the date-palms and cultivated more of them until they reached around 1550 in number.

The Government, through the Ministry of Agriculture, would sell the dates in markets and divide the proceeds into two: one half was distributed amongst orphans and the poor, the other half went in a special bank account in ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan’s name which the Ministry of Endowments oversee.

This carried on until the account had accumulated enough money to buy land in the central area next to the Prophet’s mosque and, through the bank account, construction of a grand hotel has began!

The building is in its final stages and is to be leased out to one of the major 5 star hotel companies. It is speculated to generate revenue in the region of 50 million riyals per annum, half of which will be distributed to orphans and the poor and the other half will be gathered in the bank account under ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan’s name.  The land is also officially registered in the local municipality under the name of ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan. As they say, business with Allah is always profitable.  May Allah be pleased with him.

U.N.

A Comment on "the Purpose of Man's creation is to worship Allah"

When we affirm that the purpose of our creation is to worship Allah, as he states in the Qur'an “I have not created the Jinn and Man except that they worship me” (51:56), it is necessary that we complete this affirmation.

Thus, if we remember that worship can only be achieved through abiding by the Shar'iah and that the Shari'ah has come for Human benefit, its proliferation, the warding off of corruption and its diminishment; if we remember that our obedience to our Lord and our devotion to Him benefits none but us, and that no good deed benefits Him the exalted, neither does sin harm Him the Sacrosant - i.e. the sole benefactor from worship is the slave himself who attains a feeling of peace and happiness and the sole loser from sin is none but the slave himself who inflicts self harm of psychological anguish and misery by doing so, as per verse “and Allah did not wrong them but they wronged themselves” (16:33) - it becomes clear from this that the purpose behind worship is Human benefit, their happiness and felicity.

It becomes clear from the above that if the accomplishment of worship is the purpose of our creation and the fulfilment of happiness is the objective of worship, THEN the attainment of happiness is the greatest purpose of our creation.

Why should we not always remind ourselves of this beautiful truth then: Allah created us so that we can gain happiness through His obedience and worship. (al-Sharif Hatim ibn 'Arif al-'Awni)

--------------------------

عندما نقرر أن الغاية من خلقنا هي تحقيق العبودية لله تعالى ، كما قال تعالى { وَمَا خَلَقْتُ ٱلْجِنَّ وَٱلإِنسَ إِلاَّ لِيَعْبُدُونِ } ، يجب أن نكمل هذا التقرير!

فإذا إذا تذكرنا أن تحقيق هذه العبودية إنما يتم بالتمسك بشرع الله تعالى ، وأن شرع الله تعالى إنما جاء

لجلب المصالح وتكثيرها ولدفع المفاسد وتقليلها.

وإذا تذكرنا أن طاعتنا لربنا وعبادتتا له لا ينتفع بها إلا نحن ، وأنها لا تنفعه تعالى طاعة ولا تضره سبحانه 

معصية

فالمنتفع الوحيد من العبادة هو العبد نفسه ، بالشعور بالطمأنينة والسعادة . والمتضرر الوحيد من المعصية هو العبد نفسه، بالاضطراب النفسي والتعاسة : وَمَا ظَلَمَهُمُ ٱلله وَلَٰكِن كَانُواْ أَنفُسَهُمْ يَظْلِمُونَ 

يتضح من ذلك أن الغرض من تحقيق العبودية لله تعالى هو نفع البشر وإسعادهم 

وبذلك يتضح : أنه إن كان تحقيق العبودية هو المقصود من إيجادنا ، وتحقيق السعادة لنا هو المقصود من تحقيق العبودية = فتحقيق سعادتنا هو الهدف الأسمى من إيجادنا

فلماذا لا نذكر أنفسنا دائما بهذه الحقيقة الجميلة : وهو أن الله خلقنا ليسعدنا بطاعته والتعبد له

الشريف حاتم بن عارف العوني

An Important Passage from Sayyid Sulayman Nadwi's Ahl as-Sunna Wa al-Jama'ah

Here is an important passage from Nadwi's monograph Ahl as-Sunnah Wa al-Jama'ah.

It comments critically on the creed and method that evolved during the 3rd/4th century (hijri) onwards amongst some Sunnis.

A translation of this will follow later, insha Allah:

الغرض اھل السنۃ نے جو صراطِ مستقیم اختیار کیا وہی در حقیقت اس طوفانِ افکار اور طغیانِ خیالات کی حالت میں سفینۂ نوح ہو سکتا تھا،

لیکن دو تین سو برس کے بعد تیسری چوتھی صدی میں جب مسلمانوں میں فلسفہ نے عروج حاصل کر لیا، اور ممالکِ اسلامیہ کے در و دیوار سے اس آواز کی بازگشت آنے لگی، تو خود اھلِ سنت میں چند افراد اُٹھے اور قدیم شاہراە کو چھوڑ کر انھوں نے اھل السنت اور دیگر فرقوں کے درمیان ایک نیا راستہ پیدا کیا، اور عقل و نقل اور فلسفہ و سنت کے درمیان ایک متذبذب صورت کو اپنا مسلک قرار دیا،

انھوں نے یہ سمجھا کہ اس طریقہ سے وە عقل و نقل اور فلسفہ و شریعت کی تطبیق میں نہ تو معتزلہ کی طرح قرآن و سنت سے دور پڑ جائیں گے، اور نہ اربابِ ظواہر کی طرح اہلِ فلسفہ کے نشانۂ اعتراضات بنیں گے، لیکن نتیجہ یہ ہوا کہ اُن کے یہ مسائل نہ تو اصل قرآن و سنت کے مطابق رہے، اور نہ عقل و فلسفہ کے دربار ہی میں وە رسوخ پاسکے۔

مثلا ایک طرف تو انھو نے معتزلہ کے ساتھ ہو کر خدا کے لئے اعضاء کے اطلاق سے انکار کیا، اور ان آیتوں میں جن میں اللە تعالی کے ہاتھ اور منہ کا ذکر ہے تاویل کی، اور دوسری طرف ظاہریہ کے ساتھ خدا کی رویت کا اقرار کیا، نتیجہ یہ ہوا کہ نہ اھل السنت کا ساتھ دے سکے، اور نہ اہلِ فلسفہ کی معیت برقرار رە سکی

ان کو بدیہیات کا انکار کرنا پڑا کہ رؤیت کے لئے مرئی کا جسم ہونا، متحیز ہونا، ذی لون ہونا، آنکھ کے سامنے ہونا، اس سے ایک مسافت پر ہونا، ضروری نہیں ۔ ایک اور مسئلہ میں یعنی مسئلہ جبر و قدر میں انھوں نے اسی قسم کا توسط اختیار کیا، ایک طرف تو یہ کہا کہ تمام افعال کا خالق خدا ہے، یہ کہ کر گویا اپنے کو معتزلہ اور قدریہ سے الگ کیا، دوسری طرف انسان کیلئے کسب ثابت کیا کہ جبر لازم نہ آئے، لیکن جب یہ سوال کیا گیا کہ کیا یہ کسب فعل کے وجود میں موثر بھی ہے؟ تو جواب نفی میں دیا، نتیجہ یہ ہوا کہ وە جبریہ سے قریب ہو گئے، جیسا کہ ہر صاحبِ نظر کو تفسیرِ کبیر میں امام رازی کا انداز نظر آتا ہے۔  

جس طرح اسلام میں بہت سے ایسے فرقے ہیں جو در حقیقت دائرە اسلام میں داخل نہیں، اسی طرح بہت سے ایسے فرقے بھی ہیں جو خو کو اھلِ سنت کہتے ہیں لیکن حقیقت وە ان میں سے نہیں ہیں، سبب یہ ہے کہ قدمائے اھل السنت نے جو اصول قرار دئے تھے، دیگر عقل پرستوں کے اعتراضات سے مرعوب ہو کر متاخرین نے ان میں تبدیلی کردی، اور بایں ہمہ وە اپنے کو اھل السنت سمجھتے ہیں، بلکہ لفظ اھل السنت کا صحیح مخاطب صرف اپنے کو ہی جانتے ہیں تیسری چوتھی صدی سے اھل السنت تین عظیم الشان شاخوں میں منقسم ہیں

اشاعرە، حنابلہ اور ماتریدیہ: اشاعرە امام ابو الحسن کی طرف منسوب ہیں، اور امام شافعی کے عقائد کے شارح سمجھے جاتے ہیں، اس لئے تمام شوافع اشعری ہیں، حنابلہ اپنے کو امام احمد بن حنبل کے پیرو کہتے ہیں، ماتریدیہ امام ابو منصور ماتریدی کے پیرو ہیں، جو بچند واسطہ امام ابو حنیفہ کے شاگرد تھے، اس لئے احناف نے عقائد میں ان کو اپنا امام مانا ۔۔۔۔۔ بہر حال ان بزرگوں کے باب میں جو اقوال ملتے ہیں وە قدمائے اھل السنت اور سلفِ صالح کے مطابق ہیں لیکن متاخرین اھلِ سنت سے بڑی مسامحت یہ ہوئی کہ ان مسائل جن کے متعلق جن سے شریعت خاموش تھی، اُن کو حوالۂ علمِ الہی کرنے کے بجائے ان کی نسبت دیگر فرقوں کی طرح ادعائی پہلو اختیار کیا، اور بہت سے فلسفیانہ مسائل کو جن کو شریعت سے اصلا تعلق نہ تھا ان کو داخلِ عقائد کردیا ۔

ان تصریحات سے واضح ہوگا کہ تارکینِ سنت اور متاخرینِ اھلِ سنت جنہوں نے معتزلہ اور دیگر عقل پرست فرقوں سے مرعوب ہو کر قدمائے اھلِ سنت کے اصول میں ترمیم کی، اور اپنے مذہب کو قواعدِ عقلی کے مطابق بنانے کی کوشش کی، نتیجہ کی رو سے ان دونوں میں بہت ہی کم فرق ہے، اور در حقیقت ان متاخرین کے اقوال کو سلفِ صلح اور اھلِ سنت کے عقائد اور خیالات سے کوئی واسطہ نہیں ہے، اور اگر ہے تو صرف اسی قدر جس قدر وە کتاب و سنت کے قریب ہے 

Sahir Ludhyanvi's Poem "Woman Gave Birth to Men, They Gave Her the Bazaar"

  Here is a famous poem by Sahir Ludhyanvi (1921-1980) bemoaning and protesting the plight of women during his time. Since then, I don’t think much has changed. Reading the poem reminded me of a clip I watched not too long ago  

about prostitution in the Muslamic Republic of Pakistan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88FojG1lWsA

viewer discretion advised

 I intend not to keep you from the poem, I assume an intelligent audience who can draw analysis and meaning for themselves, only that I note my translation is casual and not strictly literal. If anyone feels I have betrayed the poem in my 

attempt, kindly leave a comment. I shall see to it and amend as appropriate. 

Each person is invited to think about how they can help change the situation in their capacity. Even if this gets people to think, I will consider it one step in the right direction. Anything to get people out of their perilous complacence and apathy. 

 Lastly, I would like to dedicate this to an Afghan friend who related her moving childhood experience of feigning masculinity in order to pursue education. Keep strong!

———

عورت نے جنم دیا مردوں کو، مردوں نے اُسے بازار دیا

جب جی چاہا مسلا کچلا، جب جی چاہا دھتکار دیا

The woman gave birth to men, men gave her the bazaar

He exploits as he wishes, and dumps her as he wishes

تُلتی ہے کہیں دیناروں میں، بِکتی ہے کہیں بازاروں میں

ننگی نچوائی جاتی ہے عیاشوں کے درباروں میں

یہ وہ بے عزت چیز ہے جو بِٹ جاتی ہے عزت داروں میں

عورت نے جنم دیا مردوں کو، مردوں نےاُسے بازار دیا

She is weighed in dinars in places, and sold in bazaars at others

She is made to dance naked in the courts of rich playboys

This is the humiliating thing which is shared amongst the respectful

The woman gave birth to men, men gave her the bazaar

مردوں کے لیے ہر ظلم روا، عورت کے لیے رونا بھی خطا

مردوں کے لیے ہر عیش کا حق، عورت کے لیے جینا بھی سزا

مردوں کے لیے لاکھوں سیجیں، عورت کے لیے بس اِک چِتا

عورت نے جنم دیا مردوں کو، مردوں نے اُسے بازار دیا

Every oppression for men is fitting, but even crying is a sin for women

For men is the right to every luxury, but even life is a punishment for women

Men have thousands of beds, women only have a pyre

The woman gave birth to men, men gave her the bazaar

جن سینوں نے ان کو دودھ دیا ان سینوں کا بیوپار کیا

جس کوکھ میں ان کا جسم ڈھلا اس کوکھ کا کاروبار کیا

جس تن سے اُُگے کونپل بن کر اس تن کو ذلیل و خوار کیا

(عورت نے جنم دیا مردوں کو، مردوں نے اُسے بازار دیا)

The breasts that gave them milk, those breasts are traded

The womb in which their bodies were nurtured, that womb is marketed 

The body from which they grew as soft delicate flower buds, they humiliated and disgraced that body

(The woman gave birth to men, men gave her the bazaar)

سنسار کی ہر اک بے شرمی غربت کی گود میں پلتی ہے

چکلوں ہی میں آ کر رُکتی ہے، فاقوں سے جو راہ نکلتی ہے

مردوں کی ہوس ہے جو اکثر عورت کے پاپ میں ڈھلتی ہے

عورت نے جنم دیا مردوں کو، مردوں نے اُسے بازار دیا

She is raised upon every humiliation of earth and in the arms of poverty

She turns to prostitution, a path to deliver her from poverty

It is the desires of men that are often garbed as the shameful sins of women

The woman gave birth to men, men gave her the bazaar

عورت سنسار کی قسمت ہے پھر بھی تقدیر کی ہیٹی ہے

اوتار پیمبر جنتی ہے پھر بھی شیطان کو بیٹی ہے

یہ وہ بد قسمت ماں ہے جو بیٹوں کی سیج پہ لیٹی ہے

عورت نے جنم دیا مردوں کو، مردوں نے اُسے بازار دیا

The woman is the fortune of the world, yet she remains the shame/pity of fate

She gave birth to angelic prophets, yet is daughter to Satan

This is the unfortunate mother that is lying on the bed of sons

The woman gave birth to men, men gave her the bazaar