وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِنْ رَسُولٍ إِلَّا بِلِسَانِ قَوْمِهِ لِيُبَيِّنَ لَهُمْ
And We have not sent a Messenger except with the tongue of his people that he may explain unto them…

ʾIbrāhīm: 4

I have been involved in Islāmic publications for two decades. The unpalatable truth is that the average Muslim scholar does not write in, “the tongue of his people.” An “English” article or book is often Urdu/Arabic in structure, grammar, vocabulary, thought and presentation, with an English veneer.

This is understandable since the graduate has spent years reading in these languages almost exclusively. Sincerity is not at question. What I do question is the lack of effort to improve our message in “the tongue of his people.”

This deficiency is not exclusive to Islamic scholars. Muslim secular “professionals” who limit their reading also damage their linguistic ability. This is sometimes scenario specific. They read badly written religious books and unconsciously adopt the same standard in a religious setting.

The example of a Muslim “journalist” who wrote an entire article in text message abbreviations is not worth addressing.

I neither claim to be a perfect writer, nor am I addressing every issue in the world of Islamic publications. I merely present some common issues which I feel detract from a better service to the faith.

Active Tense

It is natural that a beginner writer-scholar takes inspiration from what he is familiar with – Arabic and Urdu texts. A problem arises in simple word-for-word transfers without improving the English product. Thus the placement of words in foreign texts leads to passive tense if the writer suffices with a direct transfer. Passive tense then becomes the permanent writing style of the scholar.

To write, “The earth was created by Allāh,” instead of “Allāh created the earth,” is not an issue if done occasionally. Passive tense sometimes serves a purpose and can be necessary. However, a page replete with passive tense every few sentences is not good English. It is a clumsy writing style and prevents an easy read.

Sentence Length

We are not the great scholars of the past who could compose ten-line long sentences of lucidity and eloquence. Our readers are not the students of those great ones. Those students could maintain a train of thought for that long, but our readers do not have such attention spans. By the time the reader reaches the end of a long sentence, the beginning has been forgotten. Having to read the sentence over again can be frustrating.

Break such sentences into smaller sentences. I aim to never write a sentence that is two-lines long.

Tautology

Tautology might be a sign of eloquence in other languages, but it is “really, really, really” not valued in English. A message on “ʾimān and faith” or “love and maḥabbah” does not need such awkward repetitions.

Concision & Linguistic Spirit

Allāh’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه و سلم) was concise in speech and that is an excellent model to follow in our writing as well. Islāmic publications contain sentences which add no additional value to the content, and the sentences contain unnecessary words. A 200-page book can easily be reduced to 160 pages. This would save printing costs and a slimmer volume is more accessible to the less adventurous reader.

Simply stringing English words together does not make English literature if the spirit of the composition is that of a foreign language. This spirit will have to learnt from native sources and not publications and translations from eastern lands. Unless you are writing a poem, English is to the point. It is closer to the crisp Arabic wind blowing over the pure Arabian desert, than the flowery Hindi of the meandering Ganges.

A decade ago a world-renowned orator telephoned me. He asked me to compose his oratory in book form. I politely advised that I would love to assist but needed to discuss an issue. His orations might be unsurpassed. However, they would need adjustment if composed in written form, in view of the language issues I have raised in this article. Celebrities have delicate egos. He did not give me the commission.

Piety is not a Dictionary

Some scholars possess a strange character blend of piety, chauvinism and ignorance, which they transmit in their writings. There are practicalities that we must face if we are to live in the west. If one cannot stomach conforming to the rules of the language, then perhaps relocating to a land where English is not spoken would be optimal.

A scholar criticised me for being immodest when writing that a bath becomes compulsory after “sexual intercourse”. He insisted that “conjugal relations” must be used.
Leaving aside the issue that Allāh is not shy about the truth, why should the dictionary conform to such a misplaced sense of propriety? The term “conjugal relations” covers way more than sex. By using it incorrectly we widen the ruling to make a bath compulsory when it is not. Conversely it would mean that someone who has had impermissible sex need not bath, as it is outside the definition of conjugal relations.

I salute those who are more pious than I am, but do not believe that piety should equate to a cocoon mentality.

Applying Knowledge & Mind

The value of scholarly speeches and writings depreciate when the scholar repeats “facts” learnt as a child or from the uninformed. What then was the purpose of study and research?

For example, we learn from authentic books and teachers that the Duʿāʾ after eating ends with, “wa jaʿalanā Muslimīn.” Yet we compile textbooks perpetuating the error we learnt as children, “wa jaʿalanā minal Muslimīn.” We switch off our minds and authenticate what is wrong.
If our teacher has not pointed out the glaring translation error of, “He who revives a Sunnah receives the reward of a martyr,” then surely we have sufficient mental capacity to correctly translate the Ḥadīth ourselves?
Like mindless zombies we repeat a translation of Ḥawqalah which makes no sense. What exactly is the difference between power and might here?

Why study the Tafsīr of Tasbīḥ if we are going to imitate the masses and merely repeat a translation (Glory to Allāh) which is far removed from reality?

What a strange people we have become. One the one hand, we refuse to apply the knowledge of those who are better versed than us in a particular field. On the other hand, we perpetuate the errors of laymen in the fields in which we are qualified. This is an insult to our knowledge, teachers, and predecessors.

Our “Communication” should not be Obstacles

We aim for a more professional product solely that the reader may benefit, i.e. for the pleasure of Allāh. A less professional product is less beneficial.

An epistle addressing contemporary heresies is being circulated. I have been told that the subject matter is much needed. However, the English is such, that I could only glance through two pages. The tone that the writer alone will enter Paradise and the reader can go to Hell for all he cares, is a separate issue.

I have been an avid reader of history since a child. It need not be Islamic history per se. I absorb facts of history daily; it is my mental oxygen without which I cannot live. A young student has contributed a mammoth amount of Islamic history to the internet. Sadly, he does not accept that the English (if it can be called that) should be improved. I cannot read his work, despite my addiction to history.

May Allāh accept our efforts, however deficient, and may He help us to improve as well.

سليمان الكندي
Twitter: @Sulayman_Kindi