Dhana hili lililotolewa na Imamu mwenye elimu kubwa linalinganishwa na lile lililomo katika baadhi ya riwaya, zinazoeleza kwamba mawe yaliyorushwa na ndege yalisababisha vichwa na miili ya Waabyssinia kupasuka. Riwaya hizo husema kwamba mawe yalipenya miili yao na kuwaacha kama mabaki ya majani makavu. Kwetu sisi, hakuna maelezo kati ya haya mawili yanayozidi lingine katika kudhihirisha uwezo wa Mwenyezi Mungu, wala yanayotoa ufafanuzi bora wa tukio hilo. Yote mawili ni sawa kwa kuwezekana kwake na kwa kuonyesha uwezo wa Mwenyezi Mungu. Iwe matukio ya kimaumbile yanayojulikana na kufahamika kwa binadamu yalifanya kazi kuwaangamiza watu ambao Mwenyezi Mungu alitaka waangamizwe, au lengo Lake lilitimia kupitia kanuni fulani ya kimungu na matukio ambayo binadamu hayajui, kwa mtazamo wetu hayo mawili ni sawa kabisa.
This assumption [of smallpox or measles resulting from clay infected with the germs of those diseases] advanced by the well-versed Imam is contrasted with one included in some narratives, describing the stones thrown by the birds as causing the heads and bodies of the Abyssinians to split. They speak of the stones boring through their bodies, leaving them like remnants of dry leaves. To us, neither of the two explanations outweighs the other in manifesting God’s might, or provides a better explanation of the event. Both are the same with regard to their possibility and the demonstration of God’s power. Whether the natural phenomena known and familiar to man operated to destroy the people God willed to be destroyed, or His purpose was accomplished through some divine rule and phenomena of which man has no knowledge, are in our view exactly the same.
Sheria za kimungu za maumbile hazifungwi na mipaka ya ujuzi wa binadamu wala na yale anayoyafahamu. Kwa maana binadamu hujua sehemu ndogo tu ambayo Mungu huiweka mbele yake, na yale tu yanayolingana na ufahamu na fikra zake. Kwa hiyo, yale yanayoitwa miujiza ni sehemu ya sheria za maumbile zilizowekwa na Mungu, lakini ni miujiza tu inapopimwa kwa ujuzi na uzoefu wa binadamu.
The divine rules of nature are not circumscribed by the boundaries of man’s knowledge or what is familiar to him. For man knows only the fraction which God puts before him, and only that which suits his understanding and thought. Hence, so-called miracles are part of the rules of nature laid down by God, but they are miracles only when measured by human knowledge and experience.
Kwa hiyo, hakuna haja ya wasiwasi wala shaka pale mtu anapokabiliwa na tukio la kiajabu la kimaumbile.
Hence, there is no need for unease or doubt when faced with a supernatural event.
Wala haja yoyote ya kutafuta maelezo kwa jambo hilo, ikiwa riwaya zinazolitaja ni sahihi, au kuna sababu za kutosha, kulingana na yaliyomo katika maandiko, za kudhani kwamba lilikuwa la kimiujiza, likipita sheria zinazojulikana za kimaumbile. Kwamba tukio fulani litendeke kwa kufuata sheria za kimaumbile zinazojulikana si jambo lisilo na umuhimu wala lisilo na athari kuliko kwamba lifuate sheria zisizo za kawaida. Kwa kweli, sheria za kimaumbile zinazojulikana kwa wanadamu ni za ajabu zinapopimwa kwa nguvu na uwezo wa binadamu. Kuchomoza kwa jua ni muujiza, ingawa hutokea kila siku, na kuzaliwa kwa kila mtoto ni jambo lililo juu ya uwezo wa binadamu, ingawa hutokea kila dakika. Ikiwa mtu yeyote anataka kulipinga hili, na ajaribu kubuni kuzaliwa! Kutumia ndege wa aina yoyote kubeba mawe yaliyosagwa yaliyoambukizwa vijidudu, na kuyarusha juu ya jeshi la uvamizi wakati lilipokaribia kuiteka mji na kuiharibu Nyumba, ni kweli muujiza mkubwa. Kwamba mapenzi ya Mwenyezi Mungu yatimie kwa namna hiyo yangejumuisha miujiza kadhaa, kila moja ikichukuliwa kuwa dhihirisho wazi na la kustaajabisha la uweza wake na mapenzi yake. Lau njia hii ingefuatwa, isingekuwa duni wala ya kustaajabisha kidogo kuliko kutuma aina fulani ya ndege, akibeba mawe ya aina zisizojulikana, ili kuwaadhibu miili ya binadamu kwa ugonjwa wa kipekee wakati huo mahsusi. Njia hizo mbili ni sawa; zote mbili ni za kimiujiza na zilizo juu ya uwezo wa binadamu.
Nor is there any need to seek an explanation for it, if the reports mentioning it are authentic, or there are enough reasons, based on what is in the texts, to suggest that it was supernatural, going beyond known natural laws. That a certain event should run according to familiar natural laws is no less significant or less effective than its following supernatural laws. Natural rules familiar to men are in fact miraculous when measured against human power and ability. Sunrise is a miracle, though it occurs every day, and the birth of every child is superhuman in spite of its happening every minute. If anyone wants to challenge this, let him try to devise a birth! The employment of birds of any kind to carry crushed stones infected with germs, and cast them at the raiding army the moment it was about to overwhelm the city and destroy the House, is indeed a great miracle. That God’s will should have been realized in that way would comprise several miracles, with each regarded as a clear and spectacular manifestation of His might and will. Had this course been followed, it would not have been less significant or less striking than sending a certain kind of bird, carrying unfamiliar kinds of stones, to afflict human bodies with a peculiar sort of affliction at that particular time. The two courses are the same; both are miraculous and superhuman.
Kuhusu tukio hilo, maoni yanayopendekeza mwendo usiojulikana, usio wa kawaida, yana uzito zaidi. Maoni haya yanaonyesha kwamba Mwenyezi Mungu alituma makundi ya ndege wasiojulikana, wakibeba mawe ya ajabu, ambayo yalisababisha madhara makubwa ya ajabu kwa miili ya watu. Kukubali maoni haya hakulazimishi kukubali zile simulizi zinazoelezea ndege hao kwa maneno ya kuvutia sana, yanayofanana na maelezo ya matukio ya kihistoria yenye hadithi, ambayo yanaonyesha kutia chumvi.
As for the event in question, the opinion advocating an unfamiliar, preternatural course carries more weight. This opinion visualizes that God sent groups of unfamiliar birds, carrying strange stones which caused extraordinary affliction to human bodies. To accept this opinion does not necessitate the acceptance of those narratives which describe the birds in most fascinating terms, similar to descriptions of legendary incidents that betray exaggeration.
Mungu alikuwa na mpango kuhusu Nyumba hii: alitaka kuihifadhi kuwa kimbilio la wanadamu wote, mahali ambapo kila mtu hupata amani, na kuifanya kuwa kitovu cha kukusanyika kwa wafuasi wa imani mpya, ili waweze kutoka humo kwa usalama katika nchi huru, isiyo chini ya nguvu yoyote ya nje wala serikali yoyote dhalimu ambayo ingeweza kujaribu kuiponda ujumbe mpya tangu mwanzo wake. Mungu pia alitaka tukio hili liwe funzo la kudumu, lililo wazi kwa kila mtu katika kila zama, kiasi kwamba katika sura hii anawakumbusha Quraysh, hata baada ya Muhammad ﷺ kupewa ujumbe wake, neema hii aliyowajalia, na kuifanya kuwa mfano wa jinsi anavyolinda maeneo yake matakatifu na kuyahifadhi. Hakuna haja ya jaribio lolote la kulifanya tukio hili lionekane kama jambo la kawaida, ingawa kiini chake na mazingira yake ni ya kipekee. Hili ni la msingi zaidi tunapozingatia kwamba tunachojua kuhusu ndui na surua na athari zake kwa binadamu hakilingani na kilichoripotiwa kuhusu athari za tukio hili kwenye miili ya askari na kamanda wao. Hakuna kati ya magonjwa hayo mawili humfanya mtu kupoteza viungo vyake, kidole kwa kidole na kiungo kwa kiungo, wala humfanya kifua chake kupasuka. Simulizi la Qur'ani linaonyesha wazi kwamba hivyo ndivyo lilivyotokea: {Basi Akawafanya kama majani yaliyoliwa.} (Aya ya 5)
God had a scheme for the House: He wanted to preserve it as a refuge for mankind where everyone finds peace, and to make it a gathering point for the followers of the new faith to march out in security in a free land, not subject to any external force or to any tyrannical government which might try to smother the new message in its cradle. God also wanted to make this event a permanent lesson, clear to everyone in all ages, so much so that in this sūrah He reminds the Quraysh, even after Muĥammad (peace be upon him) is given his message, of this grace He bestowed on them, making it an example of how He protects His sanctuaries and preserves them. There is no need for any attempt to impart a familiar image to this event, exceptional as it is in essence and circumstances. This is all the more so when we take into consideration the fact that what we know of smallpox and measles and their effects on man does not fit with what was reported of the effects of the incident on the soldiers’ and their commander’s bodies. Neither of the two diseases causes man’s limbs to fall off, finger by finger and organ by organ. Nor does either disease cause the cleaving of one’s chest. The Qur’ānic narrative suggests very clearly that this is what happened: “Thus He made them like stalks of devoured leaves.” (Verse 5)
Zaidi, hizi ripoti za ‘Ikrimah na Ya`qūb ibn ‘Utbah hazisemi kwamba ndui ilishambulia jeshi. Hakuna ripoti hata moja inayosema zaidi ya kwamba ndui ilizuka mwaka huo kwa mara ya kwanza katika Rasi ya Arabia. Wala mmoja wa watu hao wawili hasemi kwamba Abrahah na jeshi lake hasa waliangukia katika janga hili. Zaidi ya hayo, ikiwa jeshi pekee ndilo lililoathiriwa na magonjwa wakati Waarabu waliokuwa karibu wakibaki salama — yaani, ikiwa ndege walikusudiwa kulipiga jeshi tu — basi hili pia ni jambo la nje ya kawaida. Kwa kuwa tukio hilo ni la kimiujiza kwa vyovyote vile, kwa nini tujisumbue kulifungia katika maelezo fulani pekee kwa sababu maelezo hayo yanatokana na yale tunayoyafahamu?
Moreover, the reports of ‘Ikrimah and Ya`qūb ibn ‘Utbah do not state that smallpox hit the army. Neither report says anything more than that smallpox broke out that year for the first time in the Arabian Peninsula. Neither of the two men suggests that Abrahah and his army in particular fell victim to this epidemic. Besides, if only the army was affected by the diseases while the Arabs around remained safe — that is, if the birds were meant to strike only the army — then this is again preternatural. Since the event is in any case supernatural, why trouble ourselves in limiting it to a certain explanation only because this explanation is based on what is familiar to us?
Nia na sababu za Shule ya Kiakili (Rationalist School), ambayo Imam Muhammad `Abduh alikuwa kiongozi wake mkuu, za kupunguza upeo wa mambo ya kimaajabu na yasiyoonekana kwa hisi zetu katika kufafanua Qur'ani, zote mbili zinaeleweka na zinastahili kusifiwa. Shule hii ilijaribu kueleza matukio hayo ndani ya mipaka ya sheria za kimaumbile zinazojulikana na kufahamika. Ilikabiliana na mwelekeo wa kishirikina ambao wakati ule ulikuwa unazidi kuwashika akili za watu wengi. Zaidi ya hayo, ilikabiliana na mafuriko ya hadithi za kubuni na simulizi za Talmud ambazo vitabu vya tafsiri ya Qur'ani vilikuwa vimejaa navyo, huku, upande mmoja, shauku ya teknolojia na sayansi ya kisasa, na upande mwingine, shaka katika misingi ya dini, vikifikia kilele chake. Kwa hiyo, Shule ya Kiakili ilijaribu kuhifadhi nafasi ya dini, ikichukua msimamo kwamba kila isemacho kinapatana na akili. Hivyo basi, shule hii ilijitahidi kuiweka dini safi, isihusishwe na aina yoyote ya hadithi za kubuni au ushirikina. Pia ilijaribu kuanzisha mtazamo wa kidini unaoelewa sheria za kimaumbile na kutambua kwamba ni thabiti na haziwezi kukosea, na unaozihusisha kazi na shughuli zote za binadamu na za ulimwengu kwa sheria hizi za kimaumbile. Mtazamo huu, kwa asili yake, ndio mtazamo wa Qur'ani. Kwani Qur'ani huwaelekeza watu kwenye sheria za kimaumbile kwa kuwa ndizo kanuni ya kudumu na isiyokosea inayopanga shughuli za kila mmoja na matukio mbalimbali.
The motives of the Rationalist School, of which Imām Muĥammad `Abduh was the leading figure, to limit the field of the supernatural and the imperceptible to our senses when explaining the Qur’ān, are both understandable and commendable. This school tried to explain such events within the bounds of the known and familiar natural laws. It was confronted with a superstitious trend which tightened its grip on the minds of the masses at that time. Moreover, it faced a flood of legends and Talmudic narratives which books explaining the Qur’ān were overburdened with, while fascination with modern technology and science on the one hand, and doubt in the principles of religion on the other, were reaching their zenith. The Rationalist School tried, therefore, to preserve the place of religion taking the standpoint that whatever it says is compatible with reason. Hence, this school strived to keep religion pure from any association with any kind of legend and superstition. It also tried to establish a religious mentality which understood natural laws and recognized that they were constant and infallible, and which attributed all human and universal functions and operations to these natural laws. This mentality is, in essence, the Qur’ānic mentality. For the Qur’ān refers people to natural laws as they constitute the permanent and infallible rule which organizes individual operations and diverse phenomena.
Lakini kupinga shinikizo la ushirikina upande mmoja na mvuto wa teknolojia upande mwingine kuliacha alama zake shuleni. Shule ikawa makini zaidi kupita kiasi, ikielekea kufanya sheria zinazojulikana za maumbile kuwa msingi pekee wa sheria za kiungu za maumbile.
Yet resisting the pressures of superstition on the one hand and fascination with technology on the other left their stamps on the school. It became extra cautious, tending to make familiar natural laws the only basis for the divine laws of nature.
Hivyo basi, maelezo ya Qur'ani ya Shaikh Muĥammad `Abduh na wanafunzi wake wawili, Shaikh Rashīd Riđā na Shaikh `Abd al-Qādir al-Maghribī, yanaonyesha wazi hamu kubwa ya kupunguza idadi kubwa ya miujiza hadi kubaki katika sheria za asili za Mwenyezi Mungu zinazojulikana zaidi, badala ya zile za kawaida (zisizo za kawaida za kimaumbile). Wanaeleza baadhi ya miujiza hii kwa namna inayolingana na kile kinachoitwa 'cha kiakili', na wanakuwa waangalifu kupita kiasi katika kukubali kile ambacho hakionekani kwa hisia za binadamu.
Hence the Qur’ānic explanations of Shaikh Muĥammad `Abduh and his two disciples Shaikh Rashīd Riđā and Shaikh `Abd al-Qādir al-Maghribī clearly show a strong desire to reduce the greater number of miracles to only the more familiar of God’s natural laws rather than the preternatural. They explain some of these miracles in a way that would be in line with what is called ‘rational’, and they are excessively cautious in accepting what is imperceptible to human senses.
Kwa kuzingatia uelewa huu wa mambo ya kimazingira yaliyosababisha mwelekeo wa Shule ya Kiakili (Rationalist School), inapaswa kutambuliwa kwamba shule hiyo imekwenda mbali mno katika kupuuza upande mwingine wa dhana kamili ambayo Qur’ani inakusudia kuipandikiza katika akili za Waislamu. Upande huo ni kwamba mapenzi na uwezo wa Mungu ni wa kiwango cha juu kabisa, hauna mipaka, na unavuka kanuni na sheria za jumla alizoziweka, iwe zinajulikana kwa binadamu au hazijulikani. Ukamilifu huu hauikubali akili ya binadamu kuwa hakimu wa mwisho. Pia hauikubali mipaka ya akili ya binadamu kuwa ni lazima kiasi cha kuufanya tu uwezekano ule unaokubalika kwa akili ya kibinadamu kuwa ndio unaoaminika, na kudai maelezo ya ‘kiakili’ kwa kila kisichokubalika nayo. Madai haya mara nyingi hutolewa na wafuasi wa shule hii.
With this understanding of the environmental factors behind the Rationalist School’s trend, it should be noted that it has gone too far in overlooking the other side of the comprehensive concept which the Qur’ān aims to implant in Muslim minds. This is that God’s will and power are absolute, limitless and go far beyond the universal rules and laws He ordained, whether familiar to man or not. This absoluteness does not accept the human mind as a final arbiter. Neither does it accept the limits of the human mind as binding in such a way as to classify as probable only that which may be acceptable to human reason, and to demand ‘rational’ explanations for all that is unacceptable to it. This demand is frequently stated by advocates of this school.
Zaidi ya hayo, sheria za kiungu za ulimwengu si zile tu zinazofahamika kwa binadamu.
Moreover, the divine laws of the universe are not only those familiar to man.
Kwa hakika, kile kinachofahamika kwa mwanadamu ni sehemu ndogo tu ya sheria hizi. Sheria hizi zinazojulikana na zisizojulikana zinafanana katika kudhihirisha ukuu wa uweza wa Mungu na usahihi na ukamilifu wa mipango ya Mungu.
Indeed, what is familiar to man is only a fraction of these laws. Both these and the unfamiliar laws are the same in manifesting the greatness of divine power and the exactness and precision of God’s designs.
Hata hivyo, lazima tujilinde vizuri dhidi ya ushirikina na wakati huo huo tukatae hadithi zisizo na msingi kwa kiasi cha makusudi, ili tusiwe wahanga wa athari za mazingira fulani, wala tusijisikie kusukumwa na haja ya kupinga mila ya kawaida ya zama fulani.
Nevertheless, we must be well guarded against superstition and at the same time reject any unfounded legend with conscious moderation, so that we neither succumb to the influence of particular environments nor feel urged by a need to resist a common tradition of a certain age.
Kuna kanuni salama ya kufuatwa katika kuikaribia matini za Qur'ani, ambayo inafaa kutajwa hapa. Hatuwezi kuikaribia kile Qur'ani inachosema kwa akili zenye chuki na mawazo yaliyotangulia, iwe kwa ujumla au kuhusiana na mada ya kauli zinazochunguzwa. Njia sahihi ni kinyume chake: lazima tuikaribie kauli za Qur'ani kwa namna inayotusaidia kupata dhana zetu kutoka kwazo na kuunda mawazo yetu juu ya msingi wake. Kile Qur'ani inachosema ni cha mwisho kama kilivyo. Kwa sababu kile tunachokiita 'akili' na hukumu yake juu ya yale Qur'ani inayoeleza kuhusu matukio ya ulimwengu au historia, katika ulimwengu wetu wenyewe au katika ulimwengu wa yasiyoonekana, si chochote zaidi ya matokeo ya jumla ya kuwepo kwetu kwa binadamu wenye mipaka na uzoefu wetu.
There is a safe rule for approaching Qur’ānic texts, which may be appropriately stated here. We cannot approach what the Qur’ān states with prejudiced minds and preconceived ideas, whether generally or in relation to the subject matter of the statements under study. The opposite is the correct way: we must approach Qur’ānic statements in such a way that helps us to derive our concepts from them and formulate our ideas on their basis. What the Qur’ān states is final as it is. For what we call ‘reason’ and its adjudication on what the Qur’ān relates of events in the universe or of history, in our own world or in the realm of the imperceptible, is no more than the net result of our finite human existence and experience.
Ingawa akili ya binadamu, kwa asili yake, ni nguvu kamili isiyo chini ya wala kufungwa na uzoefu au matukio ya mtu binafsi, bado imefungwa ndani ya uwepo wa kibinadamu. Uwepo huu hauakisi yasiyo na kikomo, kwani hilo ni la Mwenyezi Mungu. Qur’ani inatoka kwa Mwenyezi Mungu, Aliye Mkamilifu. Kwa hiyo, inatulazimu kwa maana kwamba chochote inachokisema ndicho msingi wa dhana zetu hizo za 'kiakili'. Basi, hakuna mtu anayeweza kusema kuhusu kauli fulani ya Qur’ani: 'Haikubaliki kwa akili, kwa hiyo ni lazima kutafutwa maelezo ya kimantiki kwake,' kama wafuasi wa Madhehebu ya Kiakili (Rationalist School) mara nyingi wanavyosema. Hii haimaanishi kwamba tunapaswa kukubali ushirikina; inasisitiza tu kwamba akili ya binadamu si hakimu wa yale ambayo Qur’ani inayasema. Maneno ya andiko la Qur’ani yanapokuwa wazi na moja kwa moja, yanaamua jinsi akili yetu inavyopaswa kulikaribia andiko hilo ili kuunda mitazamo yetu kuhusu mada yake, pamoja na ukweli mwingine wa kiulimwengu.
Although human reason is, in essence an absolute force, not subject to, or limited by, individual experiences or events, it is, after all, confined to human existence. This existence does not reflect the absolute, as this belongs to God. The Qur’ān comes from God, the Absolute. Hence, it is binding on us in the sense that whatever it states is the basis of our very ‘rational’ concepts. Then, no one can say of a certain Qur’ānic statement: ‘It is unacceptable to reason, so a logical explanation must be sought for it,’ as advocates of the Rationalist School frequently say. This does not mean that we should accept superstitions, it only stresses that human reason is not the arbiter of what the Qur’ān states. When the expressions of a Qur’ānic text are clear and straightforward, they determine how our reason should approach that text in order to formulate our views concerning its subject matter as well as regarding other universal facts.