The Harm of Non-Arabs Dominating the Islamic and Arabic Sciences
The prominence of certain non-Arabs—despite their brilliant intellects, evident talents, and creative contributions in the fields of knowledge and thought—in the disciplines of Islam and the Arabic language has had serious consequences on the trajectory and development of these sciences. These effects are manifest in deep intellectual and methodological shifts. However sincere and diligent these scholars may have been, their lack of firm roots in the Arab tradition led, in some cases, to interpretations and readings that deviated from the spirit of revelation and the beauty of Qurʾānic expression—a beauty that cannot be truly grasped except through full immersion in the breath and secrets of the Arabic language.
Had the reins of these sciences remained in the hands of the people of the language and the environment in which the revelation was sent down—while allowing others to drink from this spring under their guidance and methodology—these disciplines might have retained their original balance and harmony with the aims of the Islamic texts and the soul of the Arabic language. Many of those non-Arabs who took lead in these sciences, despite their commendable efforts, intentionally or otherwise, severed them from their original cultural and linguistic contexts, borrowing intellectual frameworks from their own backgrounds. This led to the rise of interpretations and perspectives that are not fully in harmony with the intrinsic nature and higher purposes of these sciences.
These harms are manifested in many ways, most notably:
1. Excessive Artificiality in Tajwīd (Qurʾānic Phonetics):
The natural and instinctive beauty of Qurʾānic recitation was distorted, as unnecessary complexities and mechanical performances were introduced into the science of tajwīd. Recitation began to resemble artificial delivery rather than divine proclamation, with focus shifting excessively to voice beautification, exaggerated articulation, nasalisation (ghunnah), and musical tones—often at the expense of the actual message and its meaning.
2. Draining Naḥw (Grammar) of Its Spirit:
The science of grammar was reduced to syntactical parsing and verbal analysis, while the semantic and functional aspects of Arabic sentences were neglected. Thus, it lost the vitality it possessed during the early Islamic period, when it served to clarify the intended meanings of speech accurately.
3. Importing Foreign Methodologies:
Principles of rhetoric, logic, and reasoning were borrowed from the Persians, Greeks, and Indians and then applied to the Qurʾān and Arabic language without regard for fundamental differences between cultural environments. The result was the forced insertion of alien concepts into Islamic texts—concepts that neither align with the nature of the texts nor their intended purposes.
4. Detachment from Historical and Environmental Contexts of the Texts:
Qurʾānic and prophetic texts were treated as if they were standalone literary quotations, divorced from their speakers, time, and context. Consequently, interpretation came to resemble literary criticism of poetry and oration, rather than being grounded in the cultural norms and environment in which the texts were revealed.
These harms have infiltrated nearly every Islamic discipline: tafsīr, ḥadīth commentary, fiqh and its principles, grammar, rhetoric—indeed, even modern phenomena such as ideological and political readings of Islam, which have distorted the Islamic discourse and stripped the sacred texts of their divine spirit and noble objectives.
If only the Arabs had maintained their leadership in these sciences and safeguarded them from such deviations. This is not to suggest that every Arab is inherently eloquent or possesses linguistic instinct—many Arabs today are more non-Arab than some non-Arabs themselves. Nevertheless, a non-Arab—regardless of their language proficiency—typically lacks two things:
1. Limited Insight into Authentic Arab Contexts:
This results in a non-Arabic taste and intuition that does not arise from an Arabic disposition.
2. Projection of Native Cultural and Linguistic Frameworks onto Arabic Texts:
Whether consciously or unconsciously, this leads to distortions of meanings and a deviation from intended interpretations.
The sciences inherited from the Persians, Greeks, and Indians are not neutral disciplines that can be universally applied in every context. Rather, they are saturated with the religious, intellectual, and cultural temperaments of their originators. It is not valid to transplant them into another environment without rigorous scrutiny.
The Prophet’s Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) and their successors operated upon a pure Arabic disposition. They understood the texts with an instinctive grasp drawn from their natural milieu. Imām Mālik ibn Anas (may Allah have mercy on him) grasped the precision of this reality and considered the practice of the people of Madinah to be a legal proof in fiqh. This was because they lived in the environment of Prophethood and inherited a practical, living understanding of the texts. The people of Iraq—despite their intelligence—lacked this critical component.
Language is not sought for its own sake; it is a vehicle for meaning. And these meanings cannot be fully grasped except through observing the actions of the people to whom revelation was first sent. For this reason, Imām Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) emphasised, in his foundational work on tafsīr, the importance of understanding the intended meaning—not just the lexical definition. Grasping the intended meaning depends on understanding the context, customs, and environment.
Thus, the problem begins with language, grammar, and rhetoric—and ultimately results in a flawed understanding of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم. It is incumbent upon scholars of our time to return these sciences to their original contexts and liberate them from foreign influences that have obscured their spirit and diminished their impact.
Therefore, it is essential to re-evaluate many of these inherited methodologies—not with a view to rejection or dismissal, but out of a genuine desire to restore methodological balance, to reconnect these sciences with their solid roots, native language, and noble purposes, while maintaining profound appreciation for all those who have contributed to their development across the ages.
Disclaimer: This article was translated by AI. Original post: https://t.me/DrAkramNadwi/6240
