Numerous English translations of the Quran appeared in the 20th century.
Share It :
This trend continued in the new millennium and many translations were published. From India, too, there have been some significant contributions in this field of Quranic studies.
All the new translations owe a great deal to those published before, but the objective—and the bases for the motivation—of Prof Kidwai’s effort is to promote a wider readership of the Quran among English speaking readers. Kidwai is a well-known author of many works on the Quran and Islam.
The work under review is actually an extension of his previous works. Around 70 English translations of the Quran, according to Prof Kidwai, are currently available. But they are addressed mostly to specialist readerships, presupposing and taking for granted some background knowledge of comparative religion, theology, history, gegraphy, and of Quranic Arabic terms.
Kidwai’s emphatically points out that the present work is neither the literal meaning nor an English translation of the Quran, and in his own words: “The present work is not, strictly speaking, an English translation of the Quran. It attempts to present in simple, fluent English the paraphrase of the meaning and message of the Quran. …[T]his is a modest attempt at presenting the meaning and message of the Quran in a clear, easy to understand language, supplemented with brief explanatory notes especially for those [who are] new to the Quran and Islam”(pp.xi-xii)
To assess and evaluate this argument, I am here presenting, in a comparative way, some selected verses (which are, in some ways, debatable and “variedly” translated verses). Such verses are related to Sura (2:233; 3:159; 42:38), Ulil amr (4:59), Qawamun (4:34), men and women as Libas for each other (2:187) jihad (9:20), Mi’raj/Isra (17:1), Riba (2:275), Prophet ‘Isa’s crucifixion/ raising up (4:157-8), regarding Makr/ plotting (3:54), chastity (24:31), etc. with 3 famous and most widely read English translations of Qur’an, Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s The Holy Qur’an (1977), Marmuduke Pickthall’s Holy Qur’an (1992) and Abdul Majid Daryabadi’s The Glorious Qur’an (2001).
This comparison, on one side, shows that there are both serious as well as minor differences, and sometimes similarity, between Kidiwai’s and other three translations and on the other, it reveals the uniqueness of his effort. For example, 4:34 (“men are the protectors and maintainers of women”; “and (at last) beat them (lightly)” is translated by Kidwai same as that of Yusuf Ali, while Pickthall’s use “incharge” instead of “protectors”. Similarly, 2:275 (“those who devour usury”) is translated same by all of them, except Pickthall, who uses “shallow” instead of “devour”. There are many other such examples of minor and major changes/variations in the translation as well as of similarity between these translations.
There are many other such examples of minor and major changes/variations in the translation as well as of similarity between these translations. Moreover, Kidwai translates Rabb as Lord (1:2); Ruh as spirit (70:4) and in 78:38 the spirit (the angel Gabriel); Nur as light (24:35-6): Taqwa as Fear of God (59:18-19). Kidwai occasionally adds parenthesis—to make clear the meaning of some terms and phrases: e.g., “So repent to your Creator and kill yourselves (the wrongdoers among you)” (2:54); “Do they (these Hypocrites)” not know even this much” (2:77); “(The guided ones are) in houses (mosques) which God has allowed to be raised for mentioning His name” (24:36).
In sum, keeping in view the other features of the work as well, especially the brief explanatory notes, bibliography, and the extensive subject index, it may be said that Kidwai’s translation clearly validates and rationalizes its title. It also justifies his claim that it is not a ‘literal’ English translation, but is the “paraphrase of the meaning and message of the Quran” presented in simple and fluent English. /SR
