The Prophet is commanded to clarify a certain amount from the Quran, which falls under his apostolic mission. This cannot be concealed. The delivery of the entire legible Quran falls under this mission. Falling under his apostolic mission is only the clarification of the amount of the Quran that is tolerable to people’s minds and that which solves their problems. This is what is meant by the verse: “to clarify to mankind what has been released for them.” The Prophet did not clarify to mankind the entire Quran because, according to monotheism, this is impossible. Thus, it is proper to understand this wording to say: to clarify to mankind the amount of the Quran that descended to them from the top level to the lower level, from the original verses to the subsidiaries. We gave examples of all of this in our previous episodes, that the original verses have been abrogated by the subsidiaries. Thus, the abrogated verse did not descend to the level of the people. Therefore, the Prophet was not ordered to impart its meaning—to clarify it to them. We can even give this example from the Quran: “Those who believe and do not obscure their belief by wrongdoing, theirs is safety and they are rightly guided” (6:82). When this verse was revealed, it was asked: “Who among us has not wronged, O Messenger of God? He replied: The intended meaning is not that which is in your minds. Didn’t you hear the words of the pious Luqman to his son: O my son, do not be a polytheist; indeed, polytheism is a tremendous wrong?” So, the wrongdoing is polytheism. Their understanding of polytheism is at the level of idolatry, because they had recently been heathens worshiping stones. But when they embraced monotheism, they renounced idols and did not apply themselves again to idolatry. So, when the interpretation was suited to the level of their intellect, they understood. This is what the Prophet was enjoined to clarify. But the Prophet said, as for himself, when he read: “Those who believe and do not obscure their belief by wrongdoing, theirs is safety and they are rightly guided” (6:82). He said: “I was told: You are one of them.” It is clear from this verse that the Prophet has a level of understanding that is his exclusively, and he offers an apostolic level of explanation that fits the people—to clarify to mankind.

Thus, according to the above example, we can understand the words of God: “We have revealed to you the Remembrance to clarify to mankind what has been released for them so that they may recall” (16:44). The Remembrance includes the grand lofty meaning that the Prophet is among those who believe and obscure not their belief by wrongdoing, and includes the meaning that descends to the unrefined base at which ordinary practitioners who also do not obscure their belief by wrongdoing, the level of wrongdoing in the sense of stone-worship. The levels vary in the stages of inconspicuous polytheism, which go on indefinitely. The Prophet said in his description of such polytheism: “It is more inconspicuous than the movements of a black ant in the darkest night on a solid rock.” Inconspicuous polytheism ultimately does end. The phrase “indeed, polytheism is a tremendous wrong” includes all of these nuances, starting from the explicit stone-worship that was practiced by people all the way up to the endless levels of polytheism. This is because the eternal existence is existence at the level of servant and Lord. As long as there are two existences, as long as there is an existence of servant opposite the existence of the Lord, no matter how insignificant this existence, it is a form of polytheism. It becomes inconspicuous, insignificant, and subtle, but still does not completely end. This is because the end of this journey means that the servant becomes the Lord. How preposterous!

So, the full understanding of the Quran must be obtained through the use of monotheism and language together. No one should say that expressive language must be disregarded and we must not pay attention to it, and no one should say that expressive language is the only thing we have to understand the Quran. This is the impasse that we are at now. These days, most people believe that expressive language is the only thing we have to understand the Quran, so people are kept away from practice. Expressive language can become a foe to understanding—it can veil meanings, it can be detrimental to understanding, and it therefore has a detrimental effect on monotheism as well. So the golden rule, one can say, is that the true meaning of the Quran is received from God. This is what we mean by practice; the Arabic language is only a set of implements to carry meanings that we form through practice. The intended practice, in the first place, is the practice of worship.

Since expressive language conveys meanings, this means it conveys knowledge. The supreme knowledge is what is received from God, or what is called Divine knowledge. The key to Divine knowledge is worship; for us, Moslems, it is the conscious imitation of the Prophet. This is because the life of the Prophet has been made the key to the Quran. This practice differs in levels, starting from the knowledge of God to the knowledge of worldly things, although knowledge of worldly things is not considered by God as true knowledge—it is not wholesome knowledge. The Quran indicates this point explicitly: “It is a promise of God. God does not fail in His promise, but most of the people are unknowing. They knew a superficial worldly life, but they are unaware of the Hereafter” (30:6-7). God called this knowledge, and at the same time stripped it of the meaning of knowledge, as if marking the knowledge of God: “but most of the people are unknowing. They knew a superficial worldly life, but they are unaware of the Hereafter.” Of course, all knowledge is from God.

God teaches us all knowledge—teaches us about the signs covering the horizons and the signs within the self, and teaches us about the creations and the Creator: “We shall show them Our signs on the horizons (of the physical world) and within themselves until it becomes manifest to them that He is the Truth. Is your Lord not sufficient witness over all things?” (41:53) When the Quran says that God “Taught by the pen,” it went on to say: “He taught man what he did not know” (96:4-5). It did not say, “He taught the believer” or “He taught the Moslem.” Every human being, without exception, who receives knowledge of any kind, is indeed receiving it from God. But remember, practice at different levels gives us different levels of knowledge of the Quran. By worldly knowledge and practices, we can reach a level of understanding. We can also reach a level of knowledge through the practice of worship as well as through the study and familiarity with the ethos of our time.

If we adhere to our practices of individual dexterity in working with our hands and interweave with it the theoretical academic approaches of our literary heritage along with excellent worship, we will be close to understanding a great deal of the Quran. We said this in one of our talks, that the commentators’ interpretation is not equivalent to the Quran. Rather, it is what the commentator understood from the Quran. The understanding of the commentator is subject to many things, including his personal learning experience during his life and practice, his familiarity with the ethos of his time, and most importantly, his practice of worship—the quality of his worship.

The difference in the ethos of era can give us a broad perspective because of the development over a long space of time. For instance, the ethos of the era of the most prominent early astronomers was limited to eyesight. The Quran confirms what was revealed by eyesight. An example of what was revealed by eyesight was the idea that the Earth is flat. You look, with the eye, and see that the Earth is flat. This also happens when you look at the horizon and at outer space on a moonlit night—you see that the stars look like grapes or small ball bearings. Such knowledge affects the commentators’ interpretation of the Quran. The Quran says: “We have built the heavens with might, and We are extending it wide, and the Earth We have spread out, so what an excellent flattener We are! All things We have created in pairs so that you may recall. So, flee to God; I am, from Him, an eloquent harbinger to you” (51:47-50). We find that the commentators are dealing with the words of the Quran according to the ethos of their time.

The ethos of the era of revelation—the practice of people during the time of the revelation of the Quran—was based on a simple means of observation, the naked eye. Thereupon, the apparent meaning of the text of the Quran came in line with the ethos of that time, so as not to go against their customary intuition. Indeed, the faculties by which the mind receives information about the external world are sight, hearing, and the rest of the senses—the knowledge we receive about the external world is through the naked senses. For example, the naked eye perceives that the Earth is flat. You can look, with your eyes, and see that the Earth is spread flat. The apparent meaning of the text of the Quran agrees with the customary knowledge of that time, as in the verses that we have mentioned shortly before: “We have built the heavens with might, and We are extending it wide, and the Earth We have spread out, so what an excellent flattener We are! All things We have created in pairs so that you may recall. So, flee to God; I am, from Him, an eloquent harbinger to you” (51:47-50). We said that it can be understood from the phrase “and the Earth We have spread out” that the Earth is flat. This is the meaning people receive, at first, with the naked eye. Another example from the Quran: “Of what are they questioning? They are in disagreement about the tremendous news. Yet, they will come to know! Yet, again, they will come to know! Have We not made the Earth a cradle?” (78:1-6). Here it can be understood from the “cradle Earth” that it is as a smoothed and even-leveled bed. God, also, says: “God has made the Earth like a rug for you, that you may go about therein on broad routes” (71:19-20). It is clear from these examples that the apparent meaning of the text agrees with what is given by the senses, namely that the Earth is flat.

It is known that the Quran is a book of dogma. It is a book calling for monotheism—a book of sagacity. The Quran holds the profoundest knowledge of God Self —knowledge of God’s names, attributes, and the secrets of His deeds. It is a book of comportment. Thus it starts from the outset—starts with acknowledging the customary intuition that is given by the senses. The senses are the elemental means of observation and collection of information, although they are characterized by illusion. You can say that the Quran follows the sensory illusion in order to save us from it, slowly and gradually, until we are able to purify our information of the optical illusion, and the other illusions of the senses. The Quran takes this direction with great wisdom, for many reasons, including that it is a book of dogma. The dogma, which in itself is a call for monotheism, is problematic for people. So, it is not wise for the Quran to bypass people and go against the customary intuition of their senses, by perhaps saying that the Earth is a sphere—although, of course, it has understated it elsewhere. So, the forefathers received their knowledge of the Quran in accordance with the ethos of their time and said that the Earth is flat.

To this very day, people who rely on the forefathers’ interpretations of the Quran say that the Earth is flat and deny that the Earth is a sphere. This difficulty arises because of the language veiling the meanings of the Quran. The person who insists on perceiving from the apparent meaning of the text only, may have a right to believe that the Earth is flat and even continue to believe so; he upholds and defends this view, and cites supporting texts. This is happening today. But, regardless, the ethos of our time views the Earth as a sphere. There are also texts in the Quran that support this view. However, in most cases, those who are scientifically convinced that the Earth is a sphere are not theologians.

The evident is that, in the long run, practice would greatly appear necessary in understanding the Quran itself. This practice, as we said, includes your individual learning, the ethos of your time, and your worship. If you lag in any of these areas, you are not qualified to understand the Quran at a level appropriate for your time.

Consistent with this point of view is an interpretation attributed to the Savant of the Nation, Abdullah bin Abbas, in the verse: “When the sun is wrapped up [in darkness]; and when the stars are opaque” (81:1-2). He understood that, “their luster vanishes, when they are cloaked and fall into the sea.” This understanding, of course, was appropriate for the ethos of his time. The means of observation and collection of scientific information, in times past, was the naked eye; it appears to the eye when staring into outer space, especially on a dark, moonlit night, that the stars are as small as grapes or ball bearings. At that time, the mind could not accept any other idea except that the millions of stars could fall into the River Nile. So, if bin Abbas said in his time that they would be cloaked, lose their luster, and fall into the sea, he is right. There is no blemish or blame attached to this understanding. But in our time, the Earth is known to be round, and what we have discovered about the signs on the horizon—people at the time of the revelation of the Quran couldn’t even dream of. We came to know the stars that seem small on the horizon are in fact suns. Some of them are bigger than our own sun, which is a lot bigger than the Earth. So, it is absurd, according to the ethos of our time, to maintain or even to literally accept the interpretation of bin Abbas and adopt it for our time. This is only because the ethos of our time left that level of understanding behind and exposed its weaknesses. The interpretation of bin Abbas must be respected in its own context. However, it is but an evolutionary stage in the history of religious thought. Proper value must be attached to bin Abbas and he deserves to be thanked for his interpretation, but we would be naïve if we adopted this interpretation in our time.