Being in the World: Dialogue and Cosmopolis

12. Opening the Doors of Interpretation: In Memory of Nasr Abu Zayd and Mohammed al-Jabri

177 12. Opening the Doors of Interpretation In Memory of Nasr Abu Zayd and Mohammed al-Jabri We need to construct on open democratic hermeneutic. —Nasr Abu Zayd, Rethinking the Qur’an Interpretation is sometimes greatly underrated or undervalued; frequently it is seen as a mere method or subordinate tool of research. This view is seriously mistaken—as I shall try to show here mainly with regard to religious faith. As we know, the so-called Abrahamic religions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—are based in large measure on divine revelation, that is, on a message reaching human beings from “another shore.” In the case of Islam, the Qur’an is even considered by most pious Muslims as the direct and unmediated “word” of God. Nor is this assumption restricted to the three cited world religions . In the case of Hinduism, the Vedic scriptures are called shruti, that is, a message transmitted to, and “heard” by, ancient sages and seers. Probably, a similar assumption also prevails in many other traditions of religious belief. For agnostics or radical secularists, the notion of divine revelation or inspiration is devoid of sense, because for them all meaning is humanly constructed or fabricated. I do not share this agnostic view (most famously articulated by Ludwig Feuerbach) but rather take seriously the possibility of a divine message or revelation. The point I want to raise here, however, is that divine revelation—no matter how elevated or “transcendent”—cannot operate without, and in ef- 178 Being in the World fect would misfire in the absence of, interpretation. Put differently: confronted with a divine message, human beings have to be able to see themselves as genuine addressees and hence to make sense of the message in their lives. Otherwise the message simply goes astray. This means that, in order for the divine message to make sense, human beings have to be able to relate it to their “framework of significance” (Charles Taylor), their “pre-understandings” (Gadamer), or their ongoing “language game” (Wittgenstein). In order to live, human beings have to understand—at least dimly—what is happening, and this understanding is provided by their concrete life context and customary vocabulary. This does not mean, of course, that vocabularies and language games cannot be expanded, that frames of significance cannot be broadened or deepened. The very idea of “learning” depends on such expansion. However, where the frame of significance is stretched to the breaking point, beyond any form of intelligibility, the presumed message becomes gibberish and, in fact, a mode of external imposition or violence. In its genuine sense, divine revelation never moves to this breaking point or beyond the frame of possible human meaning . This point is powerfully illustrated by the words of Moses when he promulgated the divine commandments (Deuteronomy 30:11): “For this commandment which I command you this day is not too hard for you, nor is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you might say: ‘Who will go up for us to heaven and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ Neither is it beyond the sea, that you might say: ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ But the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.” The same point is also illustrated by the name “Israel,” which Jacob received after wrestling with the angel of God (Genesis 32:28); for he could not have wrestled with God if God was utterly “transcendent” or unreachable. Being named Israel means that Jacob’s life had been transformed through the humandivine encounter. Now, it is important to note that in the divine-human encounter not only are human beings transformed (their understanding deepened and enlarged), but the meaning of the divine is also transformed: from a magical idol or shibboleth into a personally experienced God (or divine presence). This means that the divine has been powerfully Opening the Doors of Interpretation 179 reinterpreted and rethought. As a result, the interpreter is no longer a target of external (possibly clerical) control or manipulation, but he/she becomes a partner or participant in the transmission of the divine message. In the language of the Christian/Protestant Reformation , interpretation undercuts the exclusive privilege of a priestly elite, making room instead for the...