M.A.S. Abdel Haleem addresses the issue of interpretation of the Qur’an from a different angle,
as he focuses on the physical form of the text rather than just its meaning. Haleem takes into
consideration the fact that the Qur’an has a dual form; on one hand, there is the Qur’an, which is the
preserved word of God, and one the other, there is the Muṣḥaf, an extensive textual arrangement of the
Qur’an compiled by the companions. In contrast to Neuwirth and Dakake, Haleem does not emphasize
the historical context in which the Qur’anic verses were revealed, but instead he looks at the physical
arrangement of the verses within the body of the text as a whole. He suggests that the particular
arrangement of Qur’anic texts in the Muṣḥaf has a great significance when it comes to interpreting the
verses of the Qur’an. M.A.S. Abdel Haleem's method of interpreting the Qur'an focuses on
understanding the context in which the Qur'anic verses were revealed and how it affects their meaning
for us today. According to Haleem, "the basic guiding principle of interpretation is to place each Qur'anic
verse in its contemporary context." He emphasizes the importance of understanding the way the verses
related to their original hearers and the issues they were facing at the time. He also believes that it is
important for scholars to consider how the verses will be applied to modern contexts, as the Qur'an is
not limited to one particular time and place.
To support his method, Haleem gives the example of 4:34, in which the translation of the word
"dharaba" is often taken to mean "beat". He argues that this translation does not take into account that
the revelation came in a specific social context in which it did not necessarily mean "beat". Taking into
account the social context of the time the verse was revealed, he states that the verse could be
interpreted to mean "separate" as a form of divorce rather than beating or abuse.Thus, where the
traditional interpretation of this verse focused on literal translation, Haleem's contextual approach
encourages an exploration of culture and the environment in which the verse was revealed.
Angelika Neuwirth's approach in interpreting the Qur'an recognizes the explicit meaning of the
Qur'an as revealed literature on the one hand and the implicit meaning that is embedded in the text as a
result of the historical context in which the Qur'an was revealed. Neuwirth argues that the implicit or
embedded meaning of the text only appears when it is read in the context in which it was revealed.
Neuwirth applies this method to several verses of the Qur'an, such as 24:30 and 24:32. In 24:30, the
Qur'an speaks of the veil of modesty and the implication is that women must wear it in public settings.
This verse, she argues is not simply a matter of rules and regulations, but of the historical context in
which the Qur'an was revealed. She also explains how 24:32, which speaks of the punishment of theft,
can be understood as a matter of justice rather than simply punishment. Therefore, Neuwirth's
approach to interpreting the Qur'an focuses on understanding the embedded meaning of the verses
through their original context.
Massi Dakake also uses a contextual approach when interpreting the Qur’an, albeit with a
slightly different emphasis compared to Neuwirth. While Neuwirth focuses on examining the source
material and its context of origin in order to understand the original meaning of the Qur’anic verses,
Dakake emphasizes the importance of engaging in the modern textual context, not only in its historical
dimensions but also in its ever-changing and contemporary applications. Dakake argues that an
understanding of the Qur’anic verses can only be complete by accounting for its evolving, modern
understanding and applications in a variety of cultural, religious, and political contexts. Therefore, the
reader is invited to examine the text in its wider setting in order to better grasp its complete message.
Massi Dakake's approach to interpreting the Qur'an is similar to Neuwirth's, in that it also focuses on
understanding the implicit meaning of the verses. However, Dakake goes beyond simply looking at the
historical context in which the verses were revealed and advocates for an understanding of the Qur'an
as a whole. She argues that understanding the Qur'anic verses within the larger ethical framework of the
text can help us better understand and apply the verses to modern contexts.
Dakake applies her method to the verses 4:3, 5:2 and 5:8. In 4:3, Dakake argues that
understanding the verse within the larger framework of family rights, which is a major theme in the
Qur'an, reveals its importance for the preservation of the rights of both wives and of the broader family
unit.10 She makes a similar argument about 5:2, which speaks of the duty of Muslims to uphold charity.
Here, Dakake argues that viewing the verse holistically within the context of the Qur'anic ethical
framework reveals a moral obligation to give to those in need.11 Finally, in 5:8, Dakake argues that the
verse should be read within the larger justice framework of the Qur'an and should be understood as a
statement of people's right to equality before the law, rather than a verse simply prohibiting pork.12
In summary, the three authors discussed in this essay emphasize different methods or
approaches in interpreting Qur'anic verses. M.A.S. Abdel Haleem's approach focuses on understanding
the context in which the verses were revealed and how it affects their meaning for us today. Angelika
Neuwirth's approach is known as the two faces method and recognizes the explicit and implicit meaning
of the text. Finally, Massi Dakake's approach focuses on understanding the implicit meaning of the
Qur'anic verses within the larger ethical framework of the Qur'an.