Abstract

In medieval Islam, traditional primary educational practices laid special emphasis on learning the Qurʾān by heart. Ideally, a pupil was primed to memorize the entirety of the Holy Book―a feat known as khatma or ḥadhqa. The successful learner would earn the prestigious sobriquet of “ḥāfiẓ”, for which he/she was to be proudly known for the rest of his/her life. Muslim youngsters continue up to present times to memorize the Qurʾān, in conceivably more or less the same way, in traditional Qurʾānic schools. In a sense, this practice developed into a symbol of Islamic conservatism and nationalism in the face of modern non-Islamic ideological forces. Against this backdrop, recent pedagogical trends tend to lay blame on rote learning as a markedly ineffective teaching method. The pedagogical issues of contemporary educational apparatus in the Muslim countries and the traditional Qurʾānic preschools in and beyond the Muslim world are usually ascribed to persistence of “abortive” medieval practices in such institutions. However, this hypothesis and the lingering presumptions related to it are based on defective modern applications of such medieval educational practices and inaccurate conceptions of how these practices are described by the sources. Generally, the intrinsic characteristics of traditional Islamic pedagogy have been explored, albeit partly, by only a limited number of Western surveys. This paper seeks to re-evaluate the efficiency of the pedagogies related to memorizing the Qurʾān in medieval Muslim primary schools. It opens the vista to explore the extent to which such pedagogies resonated with the educational and cultural milieus of the time. To that end, the paper applies literature and theoretical analysis of classical scholars. It also examines primary and secondary Islamic texts as well as the Qurʾān, ḥadīth and fragments of poetry. The main finding is that, contrary to modern misconceptions and generalizations, rote memorization was intertwined in the classical Islamic pedagogy with the ability to contemplate, reflect and understand. It was a multidimensional learning experience that was set to advance a plethora of cognitive, linguistic and intellectual abilities.

Highlights

  • Religions 2022, 13, 179 reasons, many pupils could fall behind in this aspirational vocation, aAnrtdiclwe ould satisfy themselves, and their parents, with memorizing only a part this eodfuthcaeWtHioonhl,yydBuoDeotkoi.dtChhethinldeereedEntgoofyulonpwdteeirratasnokceiNoec-eoocnboonlmoemiwciacocsttimavtiuteisenshtaCodsuluesptspTsocrhotpteheietroir

  • reeligions interpretation calls for re-evPalāunaītpinagtīs2o0m0e7c

  • Atrhtiaclte was gathered in childhood was set to be processed

Read more

Summary

Traditional Muslim Interpretation of Qurān 12:31

The generally accepted answer to the2.qTureasdtiiotnionjuasltMpousseldimisInthteartptrheetawtioomn eonf Qwuerreān 12:31. The women, dazzled by Joseph’s beauty, thought that they were usinTghkengiveensertoalclyutascocmepetefdooadnistwemer, ltiokethferuqitu,estion just posed is6thoaf t19the women but accidentally cut their hands. Others lea“vsteutnhneedfoboyd hitiesm[Joosuetpahn’sd] bsiemauptlyy.”saAyctchoartdtihneg to some interpreters, the women, da women, awestruck by Joseph’s beauty, cubtythJoesirephha’nsdbse.aBuutyt ,tthheoduigfhfetrtehnactethbeeytwweeerne tuhseing knives to cut some food item, like. Why an Noblewomen Cut Amīn Aḥsan Iṣlāḥīs of Qurān 12:31. According to some i by Joseph’s beauty, thought that they were using knives but accidentally cut their hands. AKmatīhnīrA(ḥds.a1n3I7ṣ3lā)ḥ(īIbdnisfhfKeorausthlfdrīrosm1u9f8tfhi3ci,se4vt:o2ie3sw–h2.o4Hw)e; Btahuragrtuhteāhsnetahsla-tDidtīhnienAtwebroūpmrlee-nḤtaatsioann ihbansꜤpUrmacatrically the whole weight of the wished to succeed wRheelirgeioZnsau2ll-0aB2y1ik,qh1ā2āꜤ,īhx(.adhd.tt1pfa4si:8l//e0dd)Ko,(i.Baonenrixogqde/āw,1gꜤ0uīe.3ln2te3ia0c9db0al/3lgex,txetr4xoax:i3dxps4ie–tnri3soou5n)at;dbMweehJuhoiḥnsaaedtpmihatm.ibnaodthoiebknbceaꜤgAsinleīniimbnnga,Myucḥoanmtmaiand;ailt- is whwwatw.imsdkpie.cpomt /ijonuronanl/ere’lsigicohnsest. They they wtherereatseenreiodutsoinkicllatrhryeminS1sge8hol5avu4wet)stkhi(āfᾹenJotlīhūs(ersdepīa,.ht1,1wt83ho3:e2u4y2)l3d9d.(–SenI2lhṣoi3blat0āewlḥ)ir;sakītt’eRāesnlnayItīsnoch1tuetī9hḍtr9etp6hmRr,ee,ii3ḍrtaa:ā2hnt6adio(n),d;ndto.As c1wbo9ūin3thv5l-i)RknTnech(leiiRagvJinaeoosnsās.sheT2pīMḍ0hh2i1satR,hḥa1iarm2ḍ-t,āūx.dnht.tadpl.s-,:Ᾱ//1dlū2o:is.2oī9r(g3d/)1.;0.3390/xxxxx ticle gives details of IṣRleālḥigīiosnMisn2tu0e2rḥ1pa,r1me2t,maxt.iaohdnttposTf:/ht/hdaeoniQ.āoruugr/l1lā0āTn.h3ih3c9eva0Pe/lx-raMxskxexiaisxnẓthaqnaurieīQstauiolrn-ʾPāaānnnidcīpdeaxistecīgues(dste.s, Ah18om1w0īnt)hAa(tTḥhsaannāIṣulālḥlāīh(d.a1l-418/199w7w),win.mhdipsi.mcouml/tjoivuornlaulm/reeligions interpretation calls for re-evPalāunaītpinagtīs2o0m0e7c, r4u:2cHi4a)lUe;aArswdpbeuūhctMosQouuefḥrnthaātmenrQuimcusarctdosānmꜤAkicmnbsdteoounwrt’yla-lorḤeyfad,JqogTsqeaepHdhata.boqbqupāran-irī c(Qdhu.mr1ʾ9āe1n1n)(t“(sḤRaweqflqoeācuntilīodn boen wthaestQinurgāint”.),Vdeirfifleyrs parchn.d., 4:262); Muḥammfermnoamtds—aalor-reṬrāaahtnihreirbl,ln-raeꜤᾹjdecsvthsiū—sret(dhde.r1ae9fso7er3er)sv(tIaobtinerdꜤfᾹionsrtheūkrprnr1oe9tw8a4til,oe1nd2:ag2n6ed3.)p; resents his own understand-.

24 May 2021
The Problem Stated
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call