The Verse in the Noble Qur’ân mentioning the month of Ramadhân (2:185) consists of elements telescoped into each other, of which one constitutes the cause of another. Accordingly:

1. The cause of Ramadhân is the Qur’ân.

2. The cause of the Qur’ân is guidance, and that to all humankind.

3. The cause of guidance is “al-Bayyinâh” (i.e. the clear evidences) and “al-Furqân” (i.e. the criterion). It is only with these that guidance happens.

The word Bayyinâh means “very clear evidences sufficient to substantiate one’s thesis”. As for the word Furqân, it means “the quality or ability of choosing and distinguishing between the truth and falsehood, between right and wrong, between justice and oppression, between good and evil”.

The guidance of the Qur’ân is only possible with “al-Bayyinâh” and “al-Furqân”. The former, i.e. Al-Bayyinâh is a quality presented by the Glorious Qur’ân in itself, and the latter, al-Furqân is a quality built by the Noble Qur’ân in its addressees. Only the perception and mind that have been built by the Noble Qur’ân can be qualified as having the quality of “al-Furqân”. A person that looks with such perception and mind sees and comprehends properly the facts that are indicated only by the clear evidences as part of Al-Bayyinâh.

However, its primary and sine qua non condition is the objectification of the Noble Qur’ân, which, regrettably, has been the case. The process of preventing the Divine Revelation from being a subject that builds the mind and character and rendering it ‘a holy object’ took place in three stages:

The first stage: The Divine Revelation, which is composed of word, meaning and purpose, was reduced to word and meaning after “purpose” being the macro-pillar of the Divine Revelation was neglected. Yet, the arbitrator between word and meaning was purpose. Once the arbitrator was excluded, it became difficult to understand the aim of the Divine Revelation. Attempts at understanding it based only on word and meaning gave rise to a great deal of comprehension problems. It was natural that the Divine Revelation, whose purpose had been ruled out, was prevented from being a subject that builds the mind and character. Because being a subject that builds the mind and character was directly connected with the purpose of the Divine Revelation.

The second stage: Understanding the Divine Revelation, which had been reduced to word and meaning, was, this time, reduced to word alone, thus, being deprived of its second pillar too. This was the natural result of the process that started in the way mentioned above. And, this result hindered meaning from producing itself. Instead of establishing dialogue with the Divine Revelation and “reading” it with a dialogic perception, the addressees of the Divine Revelation started to “recite” it. This was actually equivalent to closing with word an opening having arisen out of the absence of meaning.

The third stage: When the Divine Revelation was reduced to word, the Qur’ân (being the Divine Message) too was reduced to being just a “Mushaf” (in the sense of a book containing the text of the Divine Revelation). It was no more the subject that builds the mind and character. Because it was not any more it that “exalted” its addressees, but it was its addressees that “exalted” it. Yet, the Divine Revelation was high by itself and what it needed from man was not to exalt but rather to understand and to live with it. The addressees, who objectified the Divine Revelation, endeavoured to compensate for their objectification by “exalting” it. This almost turned into “hush-money” given to the Divine Revelation, whereby the Divine Revelation would neither destroy anything from its addressees’ lives nor build new things therein, and the addressees would exalt the Divine Revelation as high as they could.

By the way, let me state that the attempts at “reading and understanding the Qur’ân” in recent years have regrettably not been capable of reversing the process depicted above.  Moreover, they became a completely reverse modern version of the process that was prevalent in the classical periods. Because, instead of making the Divine Revelation a subject to build the mind and character, these attempts have caused the Divine Revelation to become “a jigsaw puzzle” on which brainstorming and mental exercises are done. As a result, the modern and classical attitudes have converged on the same source, which is the source of the objectification of the Divine Revelation.

In this process, the direction of the Divine Revelation has changed for one hundred and eighty degrees. The Divine Revelation, when made a subject, has been rendered “a flying carpet” to carry up the spirit from below high above while it is a Divine Address sent down from high above to build the mind and character of its addressees.

This historic turning-point in the perception of the Glorious Qur’ân occurred briefly as follows:

When meaning could no more “be produced” inside the life, form started to be consumed. The form being consumed began to lose its property of building the mind and character. Here, it is necessary to divide the ways of consumption into two depending on the identity of those who consume:

Firstly, sentimental objectification…

Secondly, intellectual objectification…

We all know the sentimental objectification: Once meaning is exhausted, form is exalted. The exalted form becomes the subject matter of not reasonable but special perception. If the subject matter of special perception is a holy form, it is enigmatically recited and treated as a fetish without being applied in life.

As for the intellectual objectification, it is a sort of perception that is beyond being known and that is “established by experience” of our generation: It is not opposite to special perception, as it is not “reasonable”, but merely “rationalist”. It is opposite to another thing, it is at the opposite pole to imbalance, that is to say. Its main weak point is its inability to turn the Divine Revelation into a subject to build its identity. Because, its manner of perception is wrong. The error of this perception is the objectification just as it is the case with the sentimental perception. There is only one difference, which is its being not “sentimental” but “intellectual”.

The story of the Divine Revelation’s objectification is the story of the traveller’s being left without a guide.

To be continued.

(3 September 2005)