A Critical Approach To Qur’an Translations İn The Context Of The General And Special Uses Of The Word “İnsan” İn The Qur’an

Abstract

            Allah has addressed the people to whom he has given responsibility in order to test and see their obedience and, in return for this, made them the most honorable being on earth, on various occasions and in different styles throughout the Quran. It is seen that the word insân, is used in a significant part of these kinds of addresses. Linguists have put forward different opinions when determining the etymological origin of the word insân.  All of the ideas put forward by them remarkably point to the qualities that characterize human being. In this context, it is said that the word insân is derived from ins meaning “forgetful entity” or from inâs meaning “taught entity” or from nvs meaning “to move a lot”. In addition, there are evaluations indicating that it is derived from the infinitive üns meaning, “becoming friendly or adapting” and stating that the definition of human beings as innate social being is based on this derivation.

        The word insân is used by the Qur'an in sixty-five verses, all but one of which are used in definite (marife) form. While four usages of the word in question, refer to Adam, considered as the very first ancestor of humankind, fourty-there passages refer to infidel/polytheist man; and also while fifteen other passages refer to humankind, the remaining there passages refer to believer man.   It is stated that some of the verses that mention the phases of man's existence express that human being is created from mud and is derivates, which seem to point to Adam. It seems that other verses, which express that man is created from water, sperm and a drop of water, mean all humanity, namely Adam’s generation. On the other hand, the exegetes particularly emphasize the above two different categories of meaning in their evaluations of the relevant verses. However, none of the meals analysed in this study, with a few exceptions, reflected this distinction in their translations.  For this reason, we consider that it would be more correct to point out “first man” or “Adam” while translating the verses in question within the parentheses or at least to state that real intention is the first man in the footnote.

        One of the meanings meant by the word insân in the Qur'an is the human being as species. The word in question has been used in fifteen verses in the meaning of human species. The first one of these usages in the Qur'an according to the Mushaf order is, as far as we can determine, the twenty-eighth verse of the fourth chapter (al-Nisâ) and this verse refers to males. In our view, the approach of the meals for the verses other than this verse (al-Nisâ 4:28), in which the word insân is used in the meaning of whole human species, is appropriate. It is true but not complete to translate the word mentioned in verse (al-Nisâ 4:28) saying: "man is weakly created". We think that this shortcoming should be eliminated by adding a statement like “inclination of males to females” in brackets or by making a brief explanation in footnote that they are males who are meant by this sentence.

        Looking at verses by which a polytheist/infidel man is meant, it is seen that, generally, negative personality traits such as ungratefulness, arrogance, stinginess and constant dissatisfaction, are foregrounded. And, also, it is pointed out that they have serious belief problems about areas such as Tawheed, Nubuvvah and Meâd. The most remarkable of these is the verse al-Ahzâb 33:71. It is seen that meals translate the word insân in this verse as "all people" without any distinction. However, the context of the verse and linguists’ explanations that one of the meanings of hamele is “to betray”, indicate that this translation is not appropriate. On the other hand, the preferred meaning in these meals requires that all believers, especially the prophets, are described as cruel and ignorant. For these reasons, we hold that the relevant part of the verse should to be translated saying "the disbelievers and the hypocrites did not fulfil the trust (their responsibilities) and betrayed. Indeed, they are very cruel and very ignorant”. It is seen that nearly none of the meals are successful in translating of this verse except Mustafa Öztürk’s meal; just as in most of the verses about this subject.  

        One of the passages where the word insân is used in a different way is the verses containing messages to the believers. Three verses, consisting of al-`Ankabut 29:8, Luqman 31:14 and al-Ahqaf 46:15,  contain messages on how the believer will behave to their idolatry parents in particular and arrangements for all believers to treat their parents well, in general. These above-cited verses draw the boundaries of obedience to the parents by saying that no one can be obeyed when it is a matter of association for Allah. Considering the context of the verses and the reasons of the revelations (Asbâb al-Nuzûl) as well as the evaluations of the commenters, it becomes clear that they are believers who are meant by these verses and the address is directed towards believers. For if one is a polytheist, his parents will not be expected to ask him to attribute a partner to or deny Allah. For the reasons put forward here, we think that the translation of the relevant verses would be more accurate saying “We have enjoined on (a believer) man kindness to parents (even if they are idolaters)”, or at least it would be more accurate to state this explanation in the footnote. However, when we applied to the meals, we have found that the word insân in these three verses are given a meaning goes "all human species”, and that the context of the verses as well as the reasons for revelation are not taken into consideration.

        In this study, which is given a broad summary above, while insân words, mentioned in verses sent down in the twenty-three-year period, are classified, particularly the historical conditions of the environment to which the verses were descended, and the context, the language rules  and the reasons of revalation were taken into consideration. On the other hand, it has been demonstrated with examples how important it is to determine who is firstly meant by insân words in order to grasp the messages of a verse and the approach of the meals to the meaning of words in question was analysed.

Keywords

• Commentary,Human,Context,Qur’an Translation,Meaning

İnsan Kelimesinin Kur'an'daki Genel ve Özel Kullanımları Bağlamında Meallere Eleştirel Bir Yaklaşım

Abstract

        Allah imtihan etmek ve teslimiyetini görmek için sorumluluk yüklediği ve buna mukabil yeryüzünün en değerli varlığı kıldığı insana Kur’an’da çeşitli vesilelerle farklı üsluplarda hitap etmiştir. Dilbilimciler insan kelimesinin etimolojik kökenini tespit ederken farklı görüşler ileri sürmüşlerdir. Kelimenin aslına dair ortaya koydukları görüşlerin hepsi dikkat çekici bir şekilde insanı tanımlayan niteliklere işaret etmektedir. Bu çerçevede insan kelimesinin; “unutan varlık anlamında” ins kökünden, kendisine öğretilen varlık anlamında înâs mastarından veya “çok hareket etmek” manasındaki nvs kökünden türediği söylenmektedir. Ayrıca “cana yakın olmak, uyum sağlamak” anlamındaki üns mastarından türediği “yaratılış itibariyle sosyal varlık” olarak tanımlamasının da buradan kaynaklandığını ifade eden değerlendirmeler de bulunmaktadır.

        Bu çalışmada yirmi üç yıllık nüzul sürecinde farklı bağlamlarda inen ayetlerde yer alan insan kelimesinin sınıflandırılmasında, ayetlerin indiği ortamın tarihi bağlamı başta olmak üzere siyak-sibak ilişkisi, dil kuralları ve nüzul sebepleri dikkate alınmıştır. Diğer yandan insan kelimelerinden ilk kastedilenin kim olduğunu tespit etmenin ayetin mesajını anlamada ne denli önemli olduğu örneklerle ortaya konulmuş ve söz konusu kelimenin anlamlandırılmasına dönük meallerin yaklaşımları analiz edilmiştir.

Keywords

• Tefsir,İnsan,Bağlam,Meal,Anlam

References

1. ABDÜLBÂKÎ, Muhammed Fuat, el-Mu‘cemü’l-Müfehras li Elfâzİ’l-Kurani’l-Kerîm, Dâru İhyâi’t-Türâsi’l Arabî, Beyrut, 1945.
2. AHMED B. HANBEL, Ebû AbdiLlâh, Müsnedü Ahmed (Thk. Şuayb Arnavut), Müessesetü’r-Risâle, Beyrut, 2001.
3. AKDEMİR, Salih, Son Çağrı Kur’an, Ankara Okulu yay., Ankara, 2015.
4. AKPINAR, Ali, Kur'an Tercüme Teknikleri, Serhat yay., Konya, 2011
5. BEYHAKÎ, Ebubekir, es-Sünenü’l-Kübra (Thk. Muhammed Abdülkadir Ata), Daru’l-Kütübi’l-İlmiyye, Beyrut, 2003.
6. BEYZÂVÎ, Ömer b. Muhammed Nasıruddîn, Envâru’t-Tenzîl ve Esrâru’t-Te’vîl, Dâru İhyâi’t-Türâsi’l-Arabî, Beyrut, tsz.
7. BİK‘î, Burhanüddîn Ebi’l-Hasen, Nazmü’d-Dürer fî Tenâsübi’l-Âyâti ve’s-Süver, Dâru’l-Kütübi’l-İslâmî, Kahire.
8. BUHÂRÎ, Muhammed b. İsmail, el-Câmius-Sahîh (Thk. Fazlurrahmân es-Sevrî), el-Mektebetü’s-Selefiyye, byy, 1980.

9. ______, Sahihu’l-Edebü’l-Müfred (Thk. Muhammed Nasıruddîn el-Elbânî), Mektebetü’t-Delîl, byy, 1997.
10. DERVEZE, Muhammed İzzet, et-Tefsîru’l-Hadîs, Dâru’l-Ğarbi’l-İslâmî, Kahire, 2000.
11. DUMAN, M. Zeki, Beyânü’l-Hak, Fecr Yay. Ankara; 2008.
12. DURMUŞ, Zülfikar, Kur'an'ın Türkçe Tercümeleri “Aziz Kur'an ” ve “İnsanlığa Son Çağrı” Örneği, Rağbet yay., İstanbul, 2007.
13. EBÛ HAYYÂN, Muhammed b. Yûsuf el-Endelûsî, el-Bahru’l-Muhît (Thk. Adil Ahmed Abdü’l-Mevcûd vd.), Dâru’l- Kütübi’l-İslamiyye, Kahire.
14. ERSÖZ, Muhammed, “Hatalı Tefsir Sebebi Olarak Yerel Unsurların İhmal Edilmesi ve Lafızların Istılâh Anlamlarının Kullanılması”, Şırnak Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, (149-166) 2016/1 yıl: 7 cilt: VII sayı: 13.İSFEHÂNÎ, Râgıp, el-Müfredât fî Ğarîbi’l-Kur'an (Thk. Safvan Adnan ed-Davudî), Dâru’l-Kalem, Beyrut.EZHERÎ, Muhammed b. Ahmet, Tehzibü’l-Lüğa (Thk. Muhammed ‘Ivad), Dâru İhyâit-Türâsi’l-Arabî, Beyrut, 2001.
15. FERRÂ, Ebû Zekeriyyâ Yahya b., Me‘ani’l-Kur’an, Âlemü’l-Kütüb, Beyrut, 1983.
16. FÎRUZÂBÂDÎ, Muhammmed b. Yakub, el-Kâmûsü’l- Muhît (Thk. Heyet), Müesssetür’-Risale, Beyrut, 2005.
17. HALİL B. AHMED, Ebû Abdurrahman, Kitabü’l-Ayn (Thk. Mehdî Mahzûmî-İbrahim es-Sâmirrâî), Dâru Mektebeti’l-Hilâl, byy, tsz.
18. HEYET, Kur’an Yolu Türkçe Meal ve Tefsir, Ankara 2006-2008.
19. İBN ÂŞÛR, Muhammed et-Tâhir, et-Tahrîr ve’t-Tenvîr, Dâru’t-Tûnûsiyye li’n-Neşr, Tunus, 1984.
20. İBN ATIYYE, Abdülhâk b. Ğâlib, Muharraru’l-Vecîz fî Tefsîri Kitâbi’l- ‘Azîz (thk. Abdüsselâm Abdüşşâfî Muhammed), Dâru’l-Kütübi’l-İlmiyye, Beyrut.
21. İBN HIBBÂN, Muhammed b. Hıbbân, Sahih-i İbn Hıbbân (thk. Şuayp el-Arnavut), Müessesetü’r-Risale, Beyrut, 1993.
22. İBN KESÎR, Ebü’l-Fidâ İsmail b. Ömer, Tefsîru’l-Kur'ani’l-‘Âzîm (Sâmi Muhammed Selâme) Dâru Taybe Riyad, 1999.
23. İBN MANZÛR, Cemalüddîn, Lisanü’l-Arab, Dâru Sâdır, Beyrut, 1414.
24. İBNÜ’L-ARABİ, Ebubekir Muhammed b. Abdillah, Ahkamü’l-Kur’an, Daru’l-Kütübi’l-İlmiyye, Beyrut, 2003.
25. İBNÜ’L-CEVZÎ, Ebü’l-Ferac Cemâlüddîn, Zâdü’l-Mesîr fî ‘İlmi’t-Tefsîr, Mektebetü’l-İslâmî, Beyrut, 1984.
26. KISA, Mahmut, Kısa Açıklamalı Kur’an-ı Kerim Meali, Konya 2008, Şener vd., Yüce Kur’an ve Açıklamalı-Yorumlu Meali, İzmir 2008.
27. KURTUBÎ, Ebû Abdillah Muhammed b. Ahmed b. Ebî Bekr, el-Câmi‘ li-Ahkâmi’l-Kur'an (Thk. Abdullah b. Abdülmuhsin et-Türkî), Müessesetü’r-Risâle, Beyrut, 2006.KUTLUER, İlhan, DİA, İstanbul, 2000.
28. MÂVERDÎ, Ebü’l-Hasen Ali b. Muhammed el-Basrî, en-Nüket ve’l-Uyûn (Thk. Hıdr Muhammed Hıdr), Vezâratü’l-Evkâf ve’ş-Şüûni’l-İslâmiyye, Kuveyt, 1982.
29. MUKÂTİL B. SÜLEYMAN, Ebü’l-Hasen, Tefsîru Mukâtil b. Süleyman (Thk. Ahmed Ferîd), Dâru’l-Kütübi’l- İmiyye, Beyrut, 2003.
30. MÜSLİM, Haccâc Ebü’l-Hasen, el-Müsnedüs-Sahîh (thk. Muhammed Fuâd Abdülbâki), Dâru İhyâi’t-Türâsi’l-Arabî, Beyrut, tsz.
31. NESÂÎ, Ebû Abdirrahman Ahmed, es-Süneni’s-Suğrâ (Thk. Abdülfettâh Ebû Ğudde), Mektebetül Matbûâtil İslâmiyye, Halep, 1986.
32. NESEFÎ, Ebü’l-Berekât Abdullah b. Ahmed b. Mahmûd, Medârikü’t-Tenzîl (Thk. Yusuf Ali Beydûn), Dâru’l-Kelimi’t-Tayyib, Beyrut, 1998.
33. ÖZTÜRK, Mustafa; Kur’an-ı Kerim Meali Anlam ve Yorum Merkezli Çeviri, Ankara Okulu yay., Ankara, 2016. Işıcık, Yusuf Kur’an ve Meali, Kervan yay., Konya, 2010.
34. RÂZÎ, Fahruddîn b. Allâme Ziyâüddîn Ömer, Mefâtihu’l-Ğayb, Dâru’l-Fikr, Beyrut, 1981.
35. SA‘LEBÎ, Ebû İshâk Ahmed, el-Keşf ve’l-Beyân (Ebû Muhammed b. Âşûr), Dâru İhyâi’t-Türâsi’l-Arabî, Beyrut, 2002.
36. SANÂNÎ, Ebubekir Abdürrezzâk b. Hemmâm b. Nâfi‘, Tefsiru’s-San‘ânî (Thk. Dr. Mustafa Müslim Muhammed), Dâru’l-Marife, Beyrut, 1411.
37. ŞENKITİ, Muhammed el-Muhtâr, Advâü’l-Beyan fî Îzâhi’l-Kur'an bi’l-Kur'an, Dâru’l-Âlemi’l-Fevâid, byy, tsz.
38. ŞİMŞEK, M. Sait, Hayat Kaynağı Kur'an Tefsiri, Beyan yay., İstanbul, 2012.
39. TABATABÂÎ, Muhammed Hüseyin, el-Mîzân fî Tefsîri’l-Kur'an, Messesetü’l-‘Alâ li’l-Matbûât, Beyrut, 1997.
40. TABERÎ, İbn Cerîr, el-Câmiü’l-Beyân ‘an Te’vil-i Âyi’l-Kur’an (Thk. Abdullah b. Abdülmuhsin et-Türkî), Hicr yay., Kahire, 2001.
41. TABERSÎ, Ebû Ali Fadl b. Hasen, Mecmeu’l-Beyân fî Tefsîri’l-Kur'an, Dâru’l-Murtezâ, Beyrut, 2006.
42. TANTÂVÎ, Muhammed Seyyid, et-Tefsîru’l-Vasît li’l-Kur'ani’l-Kerim, Kahire, 1998. VAHIDİ, el-Vasit fî Tefsîri Kur'ani’l-Mecîd (Thk. Adil Ahmed Abdülmevcud vd.), Darul-Kütübi’l-İlmiyye. Beyrut, 1994.
43. YAHYA B. SELLÂM, Ebû Sa‘lebe et-Teymî, Tefsiru Yahya b. Sellâm (Thk. Hind Şelebî), Dâru’l-Kütübi’l-İlmiyye, Beyrut, 2004.
44. ZECCÂC, Ebû İshak, Meâni’l-Kur'an ve ‘İrâbüh (Abdülcelîl Abduh Şelebî), Âlemü’l-Kütüb, Beyrut, 1988. ZEMAHŞERÎ, Ebü’l-Kasım Mahmud b. Amr, el-Keşşâf ‘an-Hakaik-i Ğavâmizi’t-Tenzîl (Thk. Adil AhmedAbdü’l-Mevcûd-Ali Ahmed Mu‘avvıd), Mektebetü’l- ‘Ubeykân, Beyrut, 1404.
45. WEB SAYFASI:http://www.kuranmeali.org (Erişim Tarihi:14.01.2018)
46. http://www.kuranmeali.org/15/hicr_suresi/26.ayet/kurani_kerim_mealleri.aspx (14.01.2018)
47. http://www.kuranmeali.org/29/ankebut_suresi/8.ayet/kurani_kerim_mealleri.aspx;(06.03.2018) http://www.kuranmeali.org/31/lokman_suresi/14.ayet/kurani_kerim_mealleri.aspx(06.03.2018) http://www.kuranmeali.org/46/ahkaf_suresi/15.ayet/kurani_kerim_meall eri.aspx (06.03.2018)
48. http://www.kuranmeali.org/4/nisa_suresi/28.ayet/kurani_kerim_mealleri.aspx (15.01. 2018)
49. http://www.kuranmeali.org/79/naziat_suresi/35.ayet/kurani_kerimmeal leri.aspx (15.01.2018)