A Study of the Qur’
ā
nic Oaths
An English Translation of
Im‘
ā
n F
ī
Aqs
ā
m al-Qur’
ā
n
H
̣
am
ī
d al-D
ī
n Far
ā
h
ī
Translated by Tariq Mahmood Hashmi
AL-MAWRID 51-K Model Town, Lahore
A Study of the Qur’
ā
nic Oaths
2
Contents
Translator’s Note 1 Introduction 5 Three Questions on the Qur’
ā
nic Oaths 7 Im
ā
m R
ā
z
ī
’s Viewpoint 9 Ibn Qayyim’s Viewpoint 16 Plan of the Present Book 21 History, Form, Meaning and Use of Oath 23 Object is not Essential to Oath 31 Meaning of Oath used with the Object 35 Honorific Oath 39 Oath
Sanctifying the Object 42 Argumentative Oath 52 Argumentative Oath in Demosthenes 57 Argumentative Oath in Eupolis 59 Evidentiary Significations of Argumentative Oath 61 Evidence from the Qur’
ā
n 63 Causes of Obscurity of the Correct View 69 Rhetorical Aspect and Intricacies of Oath 73 Desirable and Undesirable Oath 84 Evangelical Prohibition of Oath 87 Wisdom behind Specificness of the Command 92 Proper Use of Different Oath Formulas 96 Conclusion 98
Translator’s Note
This is a translation of a monograph titled
Im‘
ā
n f
ī
Aqs
ā
m al-Qur’
ā
n
by H
̣
am
ī
d al-D
ī
n Far
ā
h
ī
. The author conceived it as one of the introductions to his unfinished commentary on the Holy Qur’
ā
n, later published as
Niz
̣ā
m al-Qur’
ā
n
. This book discusses some issues attending the uses of oaths in the Qur’
ā
n. The Qur’
ā
n employs oaths frequently in order to affirm a claim-statement. In the Qur’
ā
n, the Almighty has sworn by Himself and by many of His creations (for instance the sun, moon, stars, winds, fruits, towns, etc). These occasions in the Qur’
ā
n have engendered questions that have baffled the commentators from the earliest times who, while trying to explain the scriptural text, appear to be grappling with the difficult questions on the nature and significance of these oaths – questions that are rooted either in the Muslim expectation related to the relationship between the oath-taker and the subject of the oaths or in the peculiar semantic conclusions, which almost always accompany an oath in Arabic language. These questions unavoidably force themselves upon the commentators because of a number of reasons: 1. In the ordinary course of language, oaths are taken to emphasize and register the truth of one’s statement, by invoking something holy. Linguistically and religiously, an oath-taker always swears an oath by a higher being that is nobler than and distanced from the oath-taker. The oath draws strength from the grace, sanctity, nobility, taboo or holiness of the being by which it is taken. In other words, an oath-taker implicitly belittles his being in comparison with the being by which he takes an oath. This is apparently done to attach significance and truth-claim to the proposition following the oath by drawing epistemological strength from the unquestioned sanctity or widely accorded reverence for such a being. The ordinary creatures of God are way below the Divine station and it is even blasphemous to compare the Creator with His creations. Therefore, many