The Hermeneutical Dance: How Readers and Tools Shape the Meaning of Religious Texts
By Adis Duderija, New
Age Islam
1 August
2024
“the meaning of religious texts are heavily affected by the moral and
ethical predispositions and commitments made by the readers of those texts, but
they are also affected by the technical tools that people use to understand the
text”,
Abou El Fadl, The
Great Theft 2005,203.
In the
modern world, the study and interpretation of religious texts has become an
increasingly complex and fraught endeavour. As one of the leading scholars of
progressive Muslim thought, Professor Khaled Abou El Fadl, eloquently observes, the meaning
we derive from sacred scriptures is not solely a function of the texts
themselves, but is heavily influenced by the moral, ethical, and philosophical
leanings of the reader, as well as the technical tools and methods they employ
in the interpretative process.
This
fundamental insight speaks to the inherently hermeneutical nature of engaging
with religious literature. The act of reading and understanding a text is not a
passive, objective process, but an active dance between the reader and the
text, mediated by a host of cultural, historical, and cognitive factors. The
reader approaches the text not as a blank slate, but as an individual shaped by
their own lived experiences, ideological commitments, and epistemological
frameworks. These subjective elements inevitably colour and constrain the range
of possible meanings that can be extracted from the text.
At the same
time, the tools
and methods used to study and interpret
religious texts - from the linguistic and philological to the historical and
literary-critical - also play a vital role in shaping textual meaning. The
choice of translation, the application of certain exegetical techniques, the
weight given to contextual factors - all of these technical decisions have a
profound impact on the conclusions drawn from the text. As Abou El Fadl notes,
the technical tools employed by the reader are not neutral or objective, but
are themselves imbued with their own set of assumptions and biases.
The
interplay between the reader’s subjectivity and the technical tools of
interpretation is perhaps most evident in the field of Qur’anic exegesis, where
the stakes are particularly high. For many Muslims, the Quran is the literal
word of God, and its proper understanding is a matter of profound spiritual and
ethical importance. Yet the diversity of interpretations that have emerged over
the centuries, often shaped by the social and political interests of the
interpreter, underscores the hermeneutical
complexity inherent in the process.
Take, for
example, the question of gender relations in the Quran. A reader approaching
the text with a deeply patriarchal worldview may interpret certain verses as
endorsing male authority and female subordination. Conversely, a reader
committed to gender equality may emphasize the Quran’s repeated emphasis on the
equal moral worth and spiritual status of men and women. Both readers may be
operating in good faith, but their divergent moral commitments and
interpretative frameworks lead them to quite different conclusions about the
text’s meaning.
Similarly,
the choice of translation can have a significant impact on how a Quranic verse
is understood. The seemingly innocuous decision to render a particular Arabic
word as “men” or “people,” for instance, can subtly alter the perceived scope
and applicability of the verse. And the deployment of certain exegetical
techniques, such as privileging the “plain meaning” of the text or emphasizing
historical context, can further shape the interpretative outcome.
This is not
to say that there is no objective truth to be found in religious texts, or that
all interpretations are equally valid. The texts themselves, with their complex
literary structures, historical contexts, and theological concepts, inevitably
place certain limits on the range of plausible readings. A truly unhinged or wilfully
distorted interpretation that flagrantly contradicts the core tenets of the
tradition is rightly viewed as invalid by the scholarly community.
But within
the bounds of reasonable and responsible interpretation, the role of the
reader’s subjectivity and the chosen tools of analysis cannot be ignored.
Religious texts, like all forms of complex human communication, are inherently
polysemous - capable of containing multiple, sometimes contradictory, layers of
meaning. And it is the reader, armed with their own moral, ethical, and
intellectual predispositions, as well as the technical apparatus of textual
analysis, who ultimately determines which of these layers are emphasized and
which are obscured.
This
hermeneutical dance between reader and text has profound implications, not just
for the field of religious studies, but for the way in which individuals and
communities engage with their sacred traditions. For if the meaning of
religious texts is so heavily dependent on the subjective and technical factors
brought to bear by the reader, then questions of authority, authenticity, and legitimacy
in religious discourse become highly fraught.
When rival
interpretations of a text can be justified based on the
differing moral commitments and exegetical methods of the interpreters, the
very foundation of religious truth claims is called into question. Competing
visions of piety, justice, and social order,
all claiming scriptural warrant, can lead to bitter conflicts and the
fragmentation of religious communities.
And yet,
this hermeneutical insight also offers a path towards greater humility, nuance,
and pluralism in the realm of religious thought and practice. If we acknowledge
that our understanding of sacred texts is inextricably linked to our own
subjective lenses and technical tools, then we are compelled to approach these
texts, and the traditions they underpin, with a greater openness to alternative
perspectives. We must be willing to critically examine our own biases and
methodological assumptions, and to engage in genuine dialogue with those whose
readings differ from our own.
In doing
so, we may find that the apparent contradictions and tensions within religious
traditions are not simply the result of interpretative error or wilful
distortion but reflect the inherent complexity and multivocality of the texts
themselves. And by embracing this complexity, we may discover new and enriching
ways of engaging with our traditions - ways that honour both the objective
truth-claims of the texts and the subjective lenses through which those truths
are refracted.
Ultimately,
the hermeneutical dance between reader and text is a testament to the richness
and depth of our religious heritage, and a reminder that the meaning of these
texts is not static or predetermined, but an ongoing, dynamic process of
engagement, interpretation, and re-interpretation. By embracing this dance, we
may find that the true meaning of our sacred texts lies not in any single,
definitive reading, but in the very act of wrestling with them, side by side,
in a spirit of humility, curiosity, and mutual understanding.
------
Checkout Dr. Adis Duderija’s personal website
at: https://dradisduderija.com/
----
A decades old patron of New Age Islam, Dr Adis
Duderija is a Senior Lecturer in the Study of Islam and Society, School of
Humanities, Languages and Social Science; Senior Fellow Centre for Interfaith
and Intercultural Dialogue, Griffith University | Nathan | Queensland |
Australia. His forthcoming books are ( co-edited)- Shame, Modesty, and Honora in Islam and Interfaith Engagement Beyond the
Divide (Springer)
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic
Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism