Behçet Kemal Ça ^

glar’s Kur’an-ı Ker^ı m’den

I_lhamlar (Inspirations from the Holy Qur’ān):
A Kemalist’s Personal, Poetic Response to the
Qur’ān

Leyla Ozgur Alhassen

University of California at Berkeley

Abstract
Behçet Kemal Ça glar, 1908–1969, is the author of a commentary of the Qur’ān,
Kur’^an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar (‘Inspirations from the Holy Qur’ān’), published in
1966. This work can be described as a poetic reflection on the Qur’ān. It does not
adhere to rendering every line or verse, but instead insists on maintaining a
rhythmic cadence and end-rhyme. Although it resembles a translation in some ways,
Ça
glar refuses to call his work a translation. This paper begins by introducing Ça glar
and his text, a brief history of Turkish translations of the Qur’ān, then Ça glar’s
approach is contrasted with the aims of translators of the Qur’ān. Ça glar’s text is
studied in more detail, providing a sample of the Turkish text and a translation of it
into English, focusing on Ça glar’s reflection on Sūrat T: aha. Through this study, it
becomes clear that as a result of his prioritizing the literary aspects of the Qur’ān in
his reflection, Ça
glar’s book has an advantage over literal translations of the Qur’an
and it can be useful for Qur’ān translation. At the same time, Ça glar’s book is a
reflection of a desire to develop a Turkish Islam—a manifestation of Islam that came
from Turkey, that reflected its language and culture and that was intelligible to its
people.

The author wishes to thank Michael Cooperson, Shawkat Toorawa, Yasmin Amin and the reviewer
of this article for their invaluable feedback.
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
DOI: 10.1111/muwo.12210
511
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

lar’s Kur’an-ı
Introduction to Behçet Kemal Çag ^
_
Ker^ım’den Ilhamlar
urk’s poet”1 and he eulo-

B
ehçet Kemal Ça glar, 1908–1969, was known as “Atat€
gized Mustafa Kemal.2 He is regarded as one of the important poets of the period
of the Republic3 and he was prominent in the Kemalist movement, writing
articles for its journal.4 At the same time, Çaglar is the author of a little-known book on
the Qur’ān, Kur’^ _
an-ı Ker^ım’den I lhamlar, which was initially published in 1966 and
republished in 1995 by the Ministry of Culture.5 This book, whose title can be translated
as Inspirations from the Holy Qur’ān, defies categorization in a number of ways. It has
similarities to translations but its author says it is not one; it is unclear if the author wrote
it as a religious devotional work or if it was meant to serve a political or nationalist
agenda, was an attempt to control religion or was none of these; it is unknown if Ça glar
knew Arabic; and as poetry, it is unclear what appeal these particular poems may have
had. One thing that is clear is that Çaglar’s book is a personal reading with a partial inter-
pretation and a focus on the music, rhyme and rhythm of the Qur’ān. It may reflect a
spiritual desire that compelled him to translate his feelings into a poem using his own
interpretation. It can be seen as an application of the Qur’ān in literature and in daily life.
This book is significant because it was composed by an Atat€ urkist, in addition to being
significant in the history of modern Qur’ānic translation, and in modern Turkey. At the
same time, it can serve as a model for translators of the Qur’ān into English, showing the
benefits of giving priority to the poetic and literary qualities of the Qur’ān when translat-
ing it.
The introductory pages of Ça glar’s book are useful in terms of understanding what
the book is and what its author’s goals are. The publishers of the book write that it is not
a straightforward translation or tefsir (exegesis); they also emphasize that this book is to
inspire the youth.6 In the end of the book, there is an excerpt from a Turkish magazine,
Durum Dergisi, which writes that Ça glar became disheartened by the world of poetry,
but that perhaps he did not realize that he had already created his masterpiece, Kur’^ an-ı
Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar. The book is such a masterpiece that Ça glar has every right to boast
as much as he wants about it and it is a book that people ages seven to 70 can enjoy.7

1
See http://www.gramerimiz.com/behcet-kemal-caglar.htm.
2
M. ހ
ukr€u Hanio €
glu, Ataturk: An Intellectual Biography, (New Jersey: Princeton University Press,
2011), 193.
3
Kerim K. Key, ‘Trends in Modern Turkish Literature’, The Muslim World 47:4 (1957), 318–328: 325.
4
Ertan Aydin, ‘Peculiarities of Turkish Revolutionary Ideology in the 1930s: The U€lku€ Version of
Kemalism, 1933–1936’, Middle Eastern Studies 40 : 5 (2004), 55–82: 55, 65.
5
See A. Vehbi Ecer, ‘Kur’^an-ı Kerim’in Manzum Terc€ ume Denemeleri’ Hikmet Yurdu 2:3 (2009), 211
and http://www.haberakademi.net/haberyaz.asp?hbr58643.
6
Ça an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar, 7.
glar, Kur’^
7
Ça ^
glar, Kur’an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar, 112. The magazine reference given in the book is: Durum
Dergisi, Vol. 65, Jan. 6, 1966.
512 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

According to one author, then, Ça glar’s text holds appeal to a wide audience and is a
masterpiece.
In addition, the book includes an interview with Behçet Kemal Ça glar from the
newspaper, Milliyet Gazetesi, dated Dec. 19, 1965. In the interview, Ça glar discusses his
religious views and the book itself. In expressing his religious perspectives, he says it is
fortunate that people no longer believe that Muslims should obey God’s commands in
Arabic without understanding them.8 At one point, the interviewer asks Ça glar about
9
people calling him irreligious. He replies that one of his motives in writing this book
was “. . .to take the rusty, bigoted weapons of close-minded blind followers and say:
‘See, in God’s book, what we understand are firm suggestions of the noble, social and
humane. Stop telling people about the bogeyman, making them have fictional fears!’”10
Similarly, he says that he would like people to love God, instead of fear Him.11 Ça glar’s
interview concludes with him explaining that as he worked on the book and the mean-
ing of the Qur’ānic chapters settled into him, he saw that the religion of Islam can mesh
with the contemporary; it can engender growth in every kind of mind and knowledge;
and it can teach people brotherhood and sisterhood, hard-work, and the assistance of
those who are destitute or alone. The real lack of understanding or faith is to shrink this
noble religion into a geographic region or a particular mind frame.12 Ça glar also
expresses that his religious faith can mesh with his Turkish nationalism. In a brief note in
the book, he writes that the publisher kept asking to publish this book and the publisher
urk Turk.”13
“is like me, a truly civilized, nationalist, religious, Atat€
No notes or interview in the book explain if Ça glar knew Arabic, or if he wrote this
commentary from translations of the Qur’ān into Turkish. He lived in Jerusalem for a few
months to one year, but we cannot reliably conclude how this may have affected his Ara-
bic linguistic abilities.14 In regards to his approach and process, Ça glar says he worked
on the book for three years, taking the time to make sure that he found the best content
and words: “at night a word would practically be born in my mind and I would wake
up, writing, with its call to me.”15
Ça
glar refuses to call the book a translation: “First of all, this is not a translation!. . .-
Look, I call it Inspiration from the Holy Qur’ān. Not just God’s word, but any great poet’s
work is impossible to translate into another language with the same expression and

8
Ça an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar, 9.
glar, Kur’^
9
Ça an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar, 12.
glar, Kur’^
10
Ça an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar, 13. All translations are mine.
glar, Kur’^
11
Ça an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar, 13.
glar, Kur’^
12
Ça an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar, 13.
glar, Kur’^
13
Ça an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar, 14.
glar, Kur’^
14
See for example, http://www.edebiyatdefteri.gen.tr/anasayfa/yazigoster/Behcet-Kemal-Caglar-
Hayati-Tum-Siirleri-Eserleri.
15
Ça an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar, 10.
glar, Kur’^
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V 513
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

powerful rhythm”.16 At the same time, Ça glar repeatedly emphasizes the poetic nature of
the Qur’ān and the importance of maintaining that in his book: “The Qur’ānic chapters
have an incomparable poetry. As much as possible, I tried not to lose this poetry and I
tried not to separate the spirit of the meaning from the concept.”17 Ça glar believes the
faithful way to express the Qur’ān is poetically, because: “even God chose to deepen the
effect of His Words” with rhythm and almost always, rhyme. “How could I, a faulty
human being, not respect this feature that even God saw necessary? How could I not
meet this great chance and opportunity?”18 During the interview, Ça glar gives some
examples of rhyming verses in the Qur’ān.19 About poetry itself, Ça glar says: “The impor-
tant point is this: poetry, through dry logic and sharp intellect, is a feature that speaks to
the soul. In poetry, everything is a bit symbolic”. . .20 One must stop to wonder why
Ça
glar wants to mimic the poeticity of the Qur’ān in his book, if he does not consider his
book to be a translation of the Qur’ān.
At the same time, the book does not attempt to look like a translation. For example,
in the Turkish text there are no numbers marked to correspond with Qur’ānic verse
numbers. In addition, Ça glar renders only parts of the Qur’ān, as can be easily
apprehended from a glance at the small book of 112 pages in length. Ça glar renders the
following sūrahs or parts of sūrahs, in the following order: Q. 1, 94, 99, 107, 101, 103,
2:183–186, 105, 81, 104, 113, 78, 88, 90, 89, 92, 112, 97, 95, 57, 64, 36, 110, 80, 12:1–100,
76, 75, 108, 2:255, 100, 55:1–69, 93, 20, 48, 23:1–10 and 23:53–68, 96 and 73. He uses the
traditional titles for the sūrahs, although he does not include the sūrah number or a
table of contents. His book does not contain the Arabic text, an index, footnotes or
extra-textual commentary, which gives the impression that it is meant to be a source of
inspiration, rather than a source for academic study.
In this article, I focus on Sūrat T: aha (chapter 20) in Ça
glar’s work. Looking at his
poem reflecting on Sūrat T: aha, it is clear immediately that the author maintains end-
rhyme, with every two lines using the same rhyme, throughout the entire selection. The
existence of end-rhyme in the Turkish thus matches the end-rhyme in the original. When
one examines the Arabic text, all of the verses except one end in a long vowel. Most of
the verses end with the letter alif maqs: ūrah or yā’, which in a text without pointing
diacritics (dots) would look the same. Following is a chart of the end rhyme found in the
Qur’ānic verses:

16
Ça an-ı Ker^ım’den I_lhamlar, 10.
glar, Kur’^
17
Ça an-ı Ker^ım’den I_lhamlar, 10.
glar, Kur’^
18
Ça an-ı Ker^ım’den I_lhamlar, 11.
glar, Kur’^
19
Ça an-ı Ker^ım’den I_lhamlar, 11.
glar, Kur’^
20
Ça an-ı Ker^ım’den I_lhamlar, 12.
glar, Kur’^
514 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

Verse(s) Letter Ending the Verse

20:2–24 (exception: 20:14, yā’) alif maqs: ūrah

20:25–32 yā’
20:33–35 alif
20:36–38 alif maqs: ūrah
20:39 yā’
20:40 alif maqs: ūrah
20:41–42 yā’
20:43–84 (exceptions: 72, alif and 78, hum) alif maqs: ūrah
20:85–90 (exception: 89, alif ) yā’
20:91 alif maqs: ūrah
20:92 (wāw) alif
20:93–96 yā’
20:97–115 alif
20:116–124 alif maqs: ūrah
20:125 alif
20:126–135 alif maqs: ūrah

In addition, throughout the entire selection from Sūrat T: aha, every line of Ça glar’s has
exactly 14 syllables, what is known as hece vezni (7 1 7).21
With a basic idea of the structure of the text, it is now useful to examine it in its his-
torical context, in order to understand its significance as a reflection of the Qur’ān by an
Atat€
urkist, in addition to understanding the significance of this piece of literature in the
history of modern Qur’ānic translation, and in modern Turkey. First of all, we can focus
on the position of religious authorities on translating the Qur’ān into other languages.
According to Travis Zadeh, many jurists argued that translation of the Qur’ān was permis-
sible for people who did not know Arabic, even for use in prayer.22 Modern-day Saudi
Arabia gave an explanation that if one does not know Arabic, other languages are fine
for reciting or memorizing the Qur’ān.23 Additional discussion was about the use of
translations during prayer,24 and Hanafı̄s
: allowed it in “liturgical performance,” although
25
the majority prohibited this. Zadeh explains that for Hanafı̄s,
: this implies that meaning
is more important than form26: “implicit in Abū Hanı̄fa’s
: formulation that the Qur’an can
be recited using a translation is the notion that it is the conveyance of scriptural meaning,
and not linguistic form, that makes a recitation juridically and liturgically valid.”27 Zadeh

21
For more on hece vezni, see M. Brett Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme: Alevi-Bektashi Interpretations and
Translations of the Qur’an (1953–2007),” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 17.3 (2015): 75–99: 90–1.
22
Travis Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an: Translation and the Rise of Persian Exegesis. NY: Oxford
University Press, 2012, 1.
23
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 257.
24
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 53.
25
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 53.
26
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 69.
27
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 92.
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V 515
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

explains that the Qur’ān was translated from early on, in the context of converts,28 and
there was a practical element here: “Abū Hanı̄fa’s
: ruling could have enabled the gradual
transition of Persian-speaking converts into an Arabic liturgical community.”29 However,
centuries later, when Atat€ urk was promoting the use of a Turkish Qur’ān recitation and
30
call to prayer, Rashı̄d Ridā
: said it was not permissible to use translations for prayer, and
31
he advocated the spread of Arabic literacy instead of the use of translations.
The issue of translating the Qur’ān connects to a number of doctrines about the
Qur’ān. First is the doctrine that the Qur’ān is not translatable, due to its nature as a liter-
ary miracle.32 Zadeh explains that “the apologetic doctrine of Qur’anic inimitability
sought to define the boundaries of scripture and its relationship to the vernacular.”33
Here also comes the idea that a translation is meant to “replace the original.”34 Next is
the debate about whether the Qur’ān is created or eternal: “the logic buttressing the doc-
trine was that the linguistic form of the revelation indicated the temporality of scripture.
Thus the Arabic nature of the Qur’an was a sign of its createdness.”35 There are also dis-
cussions about the Qur’ān as an Arabic scripture36 (see for example Qur’ān 12:3) and
“that Arabic was an essential element of the Qur’an”.37 For example, Zadeh writes that
“the promotion of Arabic as the privileged language of the Qur’an and of Islam is the
central theme of Shāfi‘ı̄’s Risāla. . .He claims the Qur’an is fundamentally an Arabic reve-
lation. . .Such a position inevitably holds the meanings of the Qur’an to be inseparable
from their Arabic syntax and rhetoric, both vehicles for divine linguistic inimitability.”38
Arabic is seen as not only the language of the Qur’ān, but as a divine language.39 In fact,
Arabic and Court Persian were believed to be languages spoken in paradise.40 As Arabic
was seen as a sacred language, “access to the sacred language could lead to the elevation
of one’s social standing”.41

28
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 30.
29
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 69.
30
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 9.
31
M. Brett Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism: Print Culture and Modern Islam
in Turkey. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014, 125.
32
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 13. See also, Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 225.
33
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 580.
34
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 16. See also, Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 120.
35
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 61. For more on the issue of translation and the createdness of the
Qur’ān, see Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 187–8.
36
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, p. 120.
37
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 162.
38
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 75.
39
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 167.
40
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 119. About Persian, Zadeh writes: ‘using the same levers of religious
authority, this quest to grant legitimacy to Persian was part of the politics of language which intersected
with issues of scripture, salvation and the constitution of Muslim society.’ Zadeh, The Vernacular
Qur’an, 165.
41
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 215.
516 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

As a language, some argued that Arabic had a special nature. For example, al-Jāhi : z:
“argued that, for purely linguistic reasons, it was impossible to translate scripture. He
believed that Arabic possessed a God-given rhetorical excellence which other languages
simply did not share.”42 However, while some, like al-Zamakhsharı̄, shared the belief in
“the unique literary status of the Qur’an, he also upholds the permissibility of translating
it for prayer.”43

A Brief History of Turkish Translations of the Qur’ān

Placing Ça
glar’s text in the historical context of other Turkish translations of the
Qur’ān gives further insight into it. In this context, Ça glar’s text brings to mind many
interesting issues: translation as a political act; and seeing Ça glar as a Kemalist, as
opposed to seeing this as a religious text, versus seeing this as an attempt at developing
Turkish Islam, which itself can also be seen by some as an attempt to coopt religion. At
the same time, translation can be regarded “as an adaptive tool that facilitates the devel-
opment of new social memories and historical narratives,”44 and one can look at a trans-
lation’s connection to “identity politics,” while a translation itself can be seen as “an
ideological or political tool.”45
In terms of translation of the Qur’ān into Turkish, Zadeh writes that “the conventions
established in Persian exegesis served as a pattern for Turkish translations and commen-
taries in the subsequent centuries. . .[There was a] dizzying array of linguistic engage-
ments with the Qur’an.”46 Directly relevant to Ça glar’s text, for example, is that there
were Persian translations with “internal rhymed prose”.47
M. Brett Wilson writes that there were conflicting ideas about translating the Qur’ān
throughout the Muslim world in the late 1800s. Some felt that Muslims need to under-
stand the meaning of the Qur’ān; some emphasized the importance of Turkish as a lan-
guage, and that Arabic was the language of Arabs; others felt that Arabic was the lingua
Islamica, and that Arabic was the language of ritual and scripture.48
Turkic translations of the Qur’ān date back to at least the 13th or 14th century. These
were interlinear and they made “no suggestion of replacing the Qur’an or of being equal
to it, nor do they appear to have been used for ritual recitation, as most lack any indica-
tion of vowel markings.”49 A 1938 article by J. K. Birge lists a number of Turkish transla-
tions of the Qur’ān, from the years 1830 to 1938. The styles of these translations vary.

42
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 119.
43
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 122.
44
https://translationtheorytoday.wordpress.com/call-for-papers/.
45
https://translationtheorytoday.wordpress.com/call-for-papers/.
46
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 583.
47
Zadeh, The Vernacular Qur’an, 283.
48
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 102–3.
49
M. Brett Wilson, ‘The First Translations of the Qur’an in Modern Turkey (1924–38)’, International
Journal of Middle East Studies 41 (2009), 419–435: 421.
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V 517
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

There are: translations with or without commentaries, in Arabic letters; translations into
new Turkish letters (the first was in 1932); translations from Persian; free translations
with commentary; some without Arabic; a Qur’ān translation published with the New
Testament and some translations including transliteration into Turkish letters.50 One
source mentions that the first Turkish translation was by Mansūr b. Nūh, during the
Selçuk time.51
Meanwhile, there was a French translation of the Qur’ān available in the 19th century
in Istanbul,52 whereas at the same time, one could not publish a translation (tercume) of
the Qur’ān.53 In addition, literary Ottoman Turkish was difficult for Turkish speakers;
thus, some used simpler Turkish that people could understand.54 There were simple,
short Turkish commentaries on particular chapters of the Qur’ān after 1850; which were
seen as emphasizing the “importance of comprehension as opposed to ritual recita-
tion.”55 The refinement of the printing press resulted in more publications; but they were
censored from 1876–1906.56 There was a Turkish translation by someone who did not
know Arabic, which was rejected by the Sultan Abdulhamid II printing press.57 There
were writings for “newly literate classes” in and after 1895.58 Some argued that religion
could not be restricted to Arabic and the alternative was for Turks to be reading
European language translations of the Qur’ān by non-Muslims; in addition, a Turkish
translation does not mean it will replace the Arabic Qur’ān.59 Indeed, there were Protes-
tant missionary Qur’ān translations, “with the intention of demonstrating its inferiority to
the Bible.”60 Meanwhile, Muslim modernists blamed the religious leadership for not
teaching the meaning of the Qur’ān to Muslims.61
According to Wilson, Qur’ān translation and Turkish-language Qur’ānic commentary
“became issues of discussion for Ottoman-Turkish intellectuals” in the late 19th century.
Then, in 1908, after freedom of the press was instated,62 a journal started to publish Turk-
ish renderings of and commentaries on Qur’anic verses, although without referring to
them as translations. A few years later, various authors published Qur’ānic commentaries,
which included translations, but no one published “a full-length translation using the
word ‘translation’ in the title.” In 1914, a publisher tried to distribute an anonymous

50
J. K. Birge, ‘Turkish Translations of the Koran,’ Moslem World 28 (1938), 394–399.
51
€
Kur’an Yolu: Turkçe Meal ve Tefsir, (Ankara: Diyanet I_şleri Başkanlı
gı Yayınları, 2007), 9.
52
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 104.
53
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 105.
54
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 94.
55
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 99.
56
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 97–8.
57
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 108–9.
58
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 100.
59
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 111.
60
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 125.
61
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 133.
62
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 135.
518 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

translation which was written by a Syrian Catholic. This caused controversy and
“authorities prevented its distribution,”63 as people saw it as a missionary attack on
Islam.64
In 1924, three translations were published: all of the authors worked for the Ottoman
state or in journalism; none had worked in the religious sector; none had “professional
training in Qur’anic disciplines”; “all referred openly to their works as ‘translations’ (ter-
cume), and each provoked a deluge of criticism.” In response to these non-specialist
translations, the head of the Ministry of Religious Affairs warned people about mistakes
in the translations and critiqued the Turkish literary expression in them.65
In addition, “opposition to uncontrolled translation of the Qur’an mobilized” and
compelled parliament to fund a project to translate the Qur’ān and hadı̄th and to write a
Turkish Qur’ān commentary. Mehmet Akif Ersoy (1873–1936) was to translate the
Qur’ān. Akif reluctantly accepted the project, but he refused to call it a “translation”: “he
feared that nationalist leaders would attempt to replace the Arabic Qur’an with his trans-
lation and use it for ritual purposes. Moreover, he was concerned that the translation
would be published without a commentary, leading to unsanctioned interpretation by
unqualified persons”. Akif worked on the project between 1926 and 1929, but he eventu-
ally resigned66 and fled to Egypt.67 Perhaps Akif’s fears were justified, because, “in 1932,
President Mustafa Kemal spearheaded an experimental campaign to recite Turkish trans-
lations of the Qur’an at mosques in selected cites around the country.”68
About Atat€ urk’s relation to religion, Wilson explains: “while Atat€urk supported the
Turkification of religion and created a political environment that was favorable to the
emergence of the Turkish Qur’an, it was not his brainchild. . .state involvement in Qur’an
translations occurred only after private publishers printed translations of uneven quality
in 1924 and ignited considerable controversy.”69 In fact, while one may assume that
Turkish nationalism presumed secularism, religiousness also existed in the new national-
ist agenda:
[T]he new regime. . .embraced nationalism and vigorously promoted the forma-
tion of Turkish identity, [and] the use of the Turkish language. . .The institutions,
leadership and nationalist ideology of the new regime not only allowed for non-
traditional approaches to Islam, but actively supported thoroughgoing and, at
times, radical religious reform. In this context, proponents of translating the

63
Wilson, ‘The First Translations of the Qur’an in Modern Turkey’, 421–422.
64
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 147.
65
Wilson, ‘The First Translations of the Qur’an in Modern Turkey’, 426.
66
Wilson, ‘The First Translations of the Qur’an in Modern Turkey’, 428–9.
67
Fazlur Rahman, ‘Translating the Qur’an’, Religion & Literature, 20 : 1, The Literature of Islam (Spring,
1988), 23–30: 26.
68
Wilson, ‘The First Translations of the Qur’an in Modern Turkey’, 431. For an enthusiastic first-hand
account about recitations of the ‘Turkish Qur’an’, see: F. Lyman MacCallum, ‘Turkey Discovers the
Koran’, The Muslim World 23:1 (1933), 24–28.
69
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 158.
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V 519
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

Qur’an, who were previously subject to censorship and considered dangerous

intellectual mavericks, could now publish their works and win the favor of the
government by doing so. In fact, the new Turkish regime made the Turkish
Qur’an a cornerstone of its religious reform policy and sponsored the composi-
tion of a translation which it hoped to canonize as the official Turkish version.70

At the same time, Wilson writes about Atat€ urk’s party (the RPP): “in addition to eviscerat-
ing the Islamic institutions of the country, the RPP censored the press, [and] cracked
down on Islamic intellectuals.”71
In 1918 Ziya Gokalp wrote a poem in which he praised the idea of having the call to
prayer and the Qur’ān recited in Turkish: “A country where in Turkish the call to prayer
is said/. . .A country in whose schools the Turkish Qur’an is read.”72 In 1926, an imam in
Istanbul led prayer, with the takbı̄r in Turkish, and recited the Qur’ān in Turkish. He
chose to do so on his own, and was removed form his position.73 However, in 1925,
there was a campaign for khutbahs (Friday prayer sermons) to be in Turkish.74 Things
changed even further by 1932, when Mustafa Kemal met with a group of Qur’ān reciters,
telling them that they would be reciting the Qur’ān in Turkish in mosques. They were
not happy with the translation they had (and discussed a specific issue in it, about which
Kemal also had an opinion), but Kemal said another translation was being prepared; he
also had them recite the Turkish for him.75 In addition, in 1932, President Mustafa Kemal
gave an order for all mosques to have the call to prayer in Turkish, which was done for
eighteen years76 and was a “deeply unpopular move among pious Sunnı̄s”.77 In 1950,
under a different ruling party, the call to prayer was again performed in Arabic.78
Turkey’s welcome of a Turkish translation of the Qur’ān was followed by other coun-
tries also changing their perspectives on translations. For example, while Egypt in 1925
destroyed Qur’ān translations, in 1938 they printed Yusuf Ali’s translation of the Qur’ān
and they saw this as way to export Islam, with Egypt at its center.79
The use of Turkish for religious worship was a nationalist move for some, who
sought to develop a “Turkish Islam,”80 an idea which kept coming up in subsequent
years. “The 1950s witnessed a reopening of debates about religious nationalism and the

70
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 157.
71
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 80. For more on Turkish laicete and religion, see: D€ ucane C€ undio
glu,
^ Dil ve Siyaset U€zerine S€
Kur’an, oyleşiler, (Istanbul: Kitabevi, 1998), 60–65.
72
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 148. Wilson’s translation.
73
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 221.
74
D€
ucane C€ undio €
glu, Turkce an ve Cumhuriyet Ideolojisi, (Istanbul: Kitabevi, 1998), 50.
Kur’^
75
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 229–30.
76
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 75.
77
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 80.
78
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 81.
79
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 216.
80
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 87.
520 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

nature of Turkish Islam,”81 in which people “valued Arabic as ritual language and appre-
ciated Ottoman Islamic traditions.”82 And then, according to Wilson, in “the late 1990s,
the issue of Turkish language prayer again became a focal point of public debate.”83 In
this context, it is interesting to note that one Alevi sought to “define Alevism as authentic
Turkish Islam versus Sunnı̄sm as a foreign (i.e. Arab) interpretation.”84 In 1997, a histo-
rian “using characteristic Kemalist language. . .argues that the Turks have been religiously
colonised for fourteen centuries, using a foreign language (Arabic) instead of Turkish,
and that Turkish language worship would return Islam to its true form.”85 However, “in
response, the Directorate of Religious Affairs issued a statement that indicated that while
Turkish translations of the Qur’an should be used for studying and understanding the
text, the Qur’an is Arabic by definition and Islamic ritual should be performed only in
Arabic.”86
As for the Qur’ān, itself, eventually, “Turkish Muslims ceased the search for a canon-
ized version and adopted an understanding that translations of the Qur’an would be mul-
tiple and imperfect and, nevertheless, would play an important, ongoing role in the
religious and intellectual life of the country.”87
As for poetry inspired by the Qur’ān, or poetic commentaries of the Qur’ān, a 1927
translation was described as “lack[ing] a poetic touch.”88 The publication of Ça glar’s
work was preceded by one by Enver Tuncalp in 1960 and followed by others in 1984,
1987, 2002 and 2007. Tuncalp translated various sūrahs, which were initially published
in magazines and then in a compilation.89 Wilson mentions the existence of “fully-
rhyming renderings,”90 including one by Bedri Noyan (1912–97), using the hece meter,91
as well as another one by “Vaktidolu” Adil Ali Atalay (b. 1936), which also uses hece
meter.92 The latter is noteworthy in comparison to Ça glar, because it is based on other
Turkish translations, and, “as such, [t]his work is in reality a creative rewriting of Turkish
renderings rather than a translation.”93
A few observations can be made here. First, no works summarizing Turkish Qur’ān
translations mention Ça glar’s work. In addition, there were some translations of selected

81
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 86.
82
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 87.
83
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 75.
84
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 87.
85
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 88.
86
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 88.
87
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 245.
88
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 223.
89
A. Vehbi Ecer, ‘Kur’^an-ı Kerim’in Manzum Terc€ ume Denemeleri’, 211–213. It would be useful to
conduct further research into Tuncalp’s work and to compare it to Ça
glar’s.
90
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 253.
91
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 90.
92
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 91.
93
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 93.
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V 521
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

parts of the Qur’ān, so Ça

glar’s would probably fit into this category. Also, some writers
refused to call their work translations—as is the case with Ça glar—possibly in response
to opposition to translations. Finally, none of the translations during Ça glar’s time are
described as specifically focusing on the literary or poetic features of the Qur’an, except
for Enver Tuncalp’s.

Implicit Choices of Translators of the Qur’ān

In translation studies, scholars have discussed what an effective translation entails—a
literal rendering or one that fits its new linguistic context better. At the same time, one
can examine a translation’s literary merits. While Ça glar’s book is not a translation of the
Qur’ān, it is useful to compare it to the implicit choices Qur’ān translators make—in
terms of their aims to translate with a focus on the literary aspects versus the (presumed)
literal meaning of the Qur’ān— and to see Ça glar’s work in this context. As mentioned
earlier, Çaglar believes the poetic aspects of the Qur’ān are a fundamental part of it and
are a feature that should be maintained, even in his reflection on the text.94 Since I am
proposing that Ça glar’s text can serve as a model for translations into English, I will sur-
vey some translations of the Qur’ān into English, as well as into Turkish.
According to one of the 1924 translators of the Qur’ān into Turkish, “Qur’an transla-
tion is a substitute for the expansive commentary tradition; it is the genre of hard
times.”95 A different translator, Sait, “suggested that translation does not involve interpre-
tation and that his task is to seamlessly transfer information from one language to anoth-
er. . .”96 According to Wilson, “the first full-length rhyming version in Turkish” was
published in 1997.97 The translator, Bedri Noyan, emphasized using the language of the
people, a value which Wilson says other Turkish translators have also mentioned. Noyan
also mentions translating into “rhyming verse in order to make it conducive for reciting
in worship.”98 Wilson writes that “twentieth-century Turkish Qur’an translations have
been rather conservative in style and marked by an overriding preoccupation with
accuracy.”99
If we turn to two mainstream translations of the Qur’ān into Turkish, we can read
about the aims of the translations, as described in their introductions. Kur’an-i Kerim ve
€
Turkçe Açıklamalı Meali was published in 1982, then in 1992 by a committee. Each
translator of the committee translated different pages, then the whole translation was
edited. The committee explains that the Qur’ān’s words and meaning are a miracle and
its unique style is neither prose, nor poetry. In addition, it has rhythm, so it is read with

94
Ça an-ı Ker^ım’den I_lhamlar, 10–12.
glar, Kur’^
95
Wilson, ‘The First Translations of the Qur’an in Modern Turkey’, 422–3, 425.
96
Wilson, ‘The First Translations of the Qur’an in Modern Turkey’, 427.
97
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 88.
98
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 89.
99
Wilson, “Ritual and Rhyme,” 93.
522 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

tajwı̄d and tartı̄l.100 A later translation and commentary, published in 2007 by the same
committee (except one member, who passed away) is called Kur’an Yolu: Turkçe € Meal
ve Tefsir. In terms of their technique, the committee writes that the meaning of the same
word may be translated differently depending on the context and literary taste; this gives
more richness to the translation.101 They assert that this new tefsir was necessary
because it was prepared with the requirements of those who would like to understand
and live by the Qur’ān. They explain that they used a number of commentaries and tried
to give summaries and show the direction that the Qur’ān was leading to.102 It is clear
that neither of these popular translations attempts to focus on or highlight the poetic
aspects of the Qur’ān.
Since Çaglar’s text can serve as a model for translations into English, I will now turn to
some translations of the Qur’ān into English to see how those translators explain their
translation goals. Most translators of the Qur’ān into English include some kind of
disclaimer that the Qur’ān cannot be translated and that they are simply explaining the
meaning of the Qur’ān.103 The majority seems to prefer aiming for a “literal,” “simple” and
“clear” translation of the Qur’ān, usually explaining that this will enable people who do
not know Arabic or who have studied it a bit to be able to gain access to the Qur’ān.104
Some translators acknowledge the beauty and complexity of the linguistic style of
the Qur’ān and various challenges related to translation and this style.105 For example,

100
€
Kur’an-i Kerim ve Turkçe Açıklamalı Meali, (Saudi Arabia: Hadim€ u’l-harameyn eş-şerifeyn Kral
Fehd Mushaf-ı Şerif Basım Kurumu, 1992), 4–6.
101
Kur’an Yolu, 10–12.
102
Kur’an Yolu, 48–50.
103
See for example: Thomas B. Irving (Al-Hajj Ta‘lim ‘Ali), The Noble Qur’an: The First American
Translation and Commentary, (Vermont: Amana Books, 1992), pp. xvii and xix-xx; Mohammed
Marmaduke Pickthall, The Meaning of the Glorious Koran: An Explanatory Translation, (New York:
New American Library), vii; Muhammad Farooq-i-Azam Malik, English Translation of the Meanings of
Al-Qur’an: The Guidance for Mankind, (Texas: The Institute of Islamic Knowledge, 1997), 15; Holy
Qur’an, tr. M.H. Shakir, (New York: Tahrike Tarsile Qur’an, Inc., 1986), v-vi; The Message of the Qur’ān:
The Full Account of the Revealed Arabic Text Accompanied by Parallel Transliteration, tr. Muhammad
Asad, (England: The Book Foundation, 2003), i. For more on the issue of the translatability of the
Qur’ān, see: Rahman, ‘Translating the Qur’an’, 26; and Carl W. Ernst, How to Read the Qur’an: A New
Guide, with Select Translations. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2011, 70.
104
See for example: Irving, The Noble Qur’an: The First American Translation and Commentary, xvii,
xxix; Pickthall, The Meaning of the Glorious Koran: An Explanatory Translation, p. vii; Zaheen Fatima
Baig, Easy to Read and Understand the Holy Qur’an: Word for Word English Transliteration, (Karachi:
Zaheen Publications), iv, vi; Holy Qur’an, tr. M.H. Shakir, v-vi; The Qur’ān: Arabic Text with Corre-
sponding English Meanings, Sa : hee
: h: International, tr., (Riyadh: Abulqasim Publishing House, 1997),
i-iii; Farooq-i-Azam Malik, English Translation of the Meanings of Al-Qur’an, 15. For more on Qur’ān
translation, see Hussein Abdul-Raof, Qur’an Translation: Discourse, Texture and Exegesis, (Surrey:
Curzon Press, 2001), 7–8.
105
See for example: The Qur’ān: Arabic Text with Corresponding English Meanings, Sa : hee
: h: International,
tr., v; Syed Vickar Ahamed, English Translation of the Message of the Quran, (IL: Book of Signs Foundation,
2006), iii; The Holy Quran, tr. Abdullah Yusuf Ali, (MD: Khatoons Inc., 2006), ‘Introduction’.
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V 523
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

Irving explains that he does not attempt a poetic paraphrase, because “. . .I might feel
inclined to take too many liberties with it. . .” Instead, he uses paragraphs, verses and
lines and sometimes rhythmic free verse to convey poetic qualities of the Qur’ānic
language. Although, he also writes, “I have continuously sought the choice poetic figure
which we can all enjoy, plus some word magic if this can be achieved.”106
In regards to literary style, in the Prologue to Muhammad Asad’s translation, Hasan
Gai Eaton explains that it is unwise to try to maintain the Arabic Qur’ānic rhythms in an
English translation, because English and Arabic are too different to successfully
“reproduce the rhythms of the original in English. . . and there is always the danger that
those who aim to honour the original by adopting poetic language in their ‘translation’
will fall short of conveying the meaning in so far as it can be conveyed without extensive
notes”.107 Asad himself explains, “I make no claim to have reproduced anything of the
indescribable rhythm and rhetoric of the Qur’ān. No one who has truly experienced its
majestic beauty could ever be presumptuous enough to make such a claim or even
embark upon such an attempt.”108 Perhaps by asserting that his book is not a translation,
Çaglar is able to freely celebrate the literary aspects of the Qur’ān without feeling that he
has to accurately convey the Qur’ānic meaning or live up to its “majestic beauty.”
Critical of an approach devoid of literary beauty, N.J. Dawood writes that: “In adher-
ing to a rigidly literal rendering of Arabic idioms, previous translations have, in my
opinion, practically failed to convey both the meaning and the rhetorical grandeur of the
original.”109 Another translator, Muhammad Farooq-i-Azam Malik, similarly critiques
literal translation of the Qur’ān.110
One translator who gives priority to the literary features of the Qur’ān, Fazlollah
Nikayin, translates the entire Qur’ān poetically, iambically, but not of a “fixed rhyme
scheme”.111 Nikayin attempts “to carry over, into the English language some of the
beauty and sublimity, elegance and eloquence and the enchanting force of the original,
to echo those captivating, little nuances, which in the Qur’an, are always lying between
prose and poetry, and to let non-Muslims acquaint themselves with a Book that is to
Muslims both scripture and literature at the same time.”112
Another translator, Shawkat Toorawa, clearly explains his giving preference to the lit-
erary features of the Qur’ān. He explains about translating Sūrat Maryam, “translators of
the Qur’an have almost never taken lexical phenomena into account. . .I think it is
essential. . . to offer a translation of Sura 19 that does justice to the important role of
lexical echoes. . .In preparing this translation, I have privileged rhyme and repeating

106
Irving, The Noble Qur’an: The First American Translation and Commentary, xvii, xxx and xxxi.
107
The Message of the Qur’ān, tr. Muhammad Asad, iii.
108
The Message of the Qur’ān, tr. Muhammad Asad, xiii.
109
The Koran, tr. with notes N.J. Dawood, (NY: Penguin Books, 1981), 11.
110
Farooq-i-Azam Malik, English Translation of the Meanings of Al-Qur’an, 15.
111
Fazlollah Nikayin, The Quran: The First Poetic Translation, (IL: The Ultimate Book, Inc., 2000), xii.
112
Nikayin, The Quran: The First Poetic Translation, xi.
524 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

rhyming end words.”113 He continues, “When I was unable to come up with a suitable
word in English, I privileged maintaining the rhyme, and maintaining the lexical echoes,
over the need to find a corresponding meaning. It seems at least possible that this
linguistic consideration played a determining role in the crafting of the sura. . .”114 In
regards to the formatting, he “formatted based on the dialogue in the sura, italicized
rhyming end words, and marked changes in rhyme with spacing.”115
Introducing translations of other sūrahs, Toorawa writes about his approach to saj‘:
“in spite of the fact that all translators attempt to convey in one way or another the con-
tent and feel of the Qur’an—choosing, say, Victorian style, or King James diction, or
poetic turns of phrase—precious few pay attention to saj‘, viz. Qur’anic rhymed or rhym-
ing prose. This disregard is curious indeed, as saj‘ is one of the defining features of
Qur’anic language, sound, aya-structure, and architecture. . .” About a translation of Sūrat
Insān 76, Toorawa not only uses rhyme words and italicizes them, but he also, “where
possible, replicated the long ‘r’ and ‘l’ rhymes.”116
Reflecting on Qur’ān translation, James W. Morris writes that translation is a commu-
nication to readers, and that “(a) many of the most fundamental dimensions of the
Qur’an are simply not getting across to their audiences; and (b) what is coming across,
especially through the use of familiar (but overcharged and grossly misleading) Biblical
English expressions, completely distorts the most essential Qur’anic ideas and
expressions.”117 At the same time, he writes, “One absolutely essential dimension of the
Qur’an can be summarized globally as its music, sound and rhythm. As a teacher, I have
been surprised each year by the extraordinarily lasting spiritual impact, on so many sen-
sitive souls, of their initial encounter with excellent recitations of the Qur’an. . .”118 This is
where one wonders if Ça glar’s work comes into play. As a poet, his focus is on the
rhythm, rhyme, symbolism and beautiful expression in the Qur’ān.
From the above survey, we can see a range of notions amongst translators about trans-
lating the Qur’ān into Turkish and English and about attempting to also convey its literary
beauty. This notion is sometimes set against ideas of accuracy or precision in meaning.
Furthermore, some translators compensate for this by using a King James Biblical style.
(This can be contrasted with Ça glar’s poem, which always feels culturally appropriate and
does not impose a different culture open its audience or text.) Shawkat Toorawa and
Fazlollah Nikayin stand out amongst translators in privileging literary and lexical features

113
Shawkat M. Toorawa, ‘Sūrat Maryam (Q. 19): Lexicon, Lexical Echoes, English Translation’, Journal
of Qur’ānic Studies 13 : 1 (2011), pp. 25–78, pp. 27–31, 62.
114
Toorawa, ‘Sūrat Maryam (Q. 19)’, 63.
115
Toorawa, ‘Sūrat Maryam (Q. 19)’, 64.
116
Shawkat M. Toorawa, ‘Referencing the Qur’an: A Proposal, with Illustrative Translations and Discus-
sion’, Journal of Qur’ānic Studies 9 : 1 (2007), 134–148: 143, 139 and 141.
117
James W. Morris, ‘Qur’an Translation and the Challenges of Communication: Towards a “Literal”
Study-Version of the Qur’an’, Journal of Qur’anic Studies 2 : 2 (2000), 53–67: 54. Similar sentiments are
expressed in Ernst, How to Read the Qur’an, 70.
118
Morris, ‘Qur’an Translation and the Challenges of Communication’, 55.
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V 525
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

of the Qur’ān. Although it may be a reflection and not a translation of the Qur’ān, Behçet
Kemal Ça
glar’s work similarly privileges the Qur’ān’s rhythm, rhyme and literary beauty.

Turkish Text and Translation: Sūrat T: aha

In the following, I present a sample from the Turkish text by Ça glar, with my transla-
tion of the Turkish into English. I present here Ça glar’s reflection on Sūrat T: aha. I indi-
cate the page and line (which is not numbered in the text) as follows: (Page
number.Line number). For example, (91.1) indicates the first line on page 91. I do not
use end-rhyme in my translation, but hope that the reader can see the rhyme and rhythm
of Çaglar’s text. I have also formatted the Turkish lines in pairs—although this is not how
Çaglar’s poem is formatted—so that the paired end-rhyme is more apparent. After each
pair of Turkish lines and translations, I indicate the corresponding verses of the Qur’ān,
if there are any; sometimes there are no corresponding Qur’ānic verses.
T^ah^ € ulmeye
a. . . Sebep yok daha çekinip uz € (91.1)119
Biz Kur’anı indirdik yolu g€ ostersin diye; (91.2)
Taha.
: . . There is no need to further seclude yourself and be sad
We sent the Qur’ān so that it can show the way;
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:1–3)
Yeri-g€ogu€ yaratan Rabbin katından indi. (91.3)
Allah ki içinizden seslenir oldu şimdi, (91.4)
Descended from your Lord’s presence, the Lord who created the
heavens and the earth
It is God who now called out to you from within
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:4)
Yerle g€
ok arasında yaş topra
gın altında (91.5)
Ne varsa boyun e € katında. . . (91.6)
gdi onun yuce
What is in-between the earth and the sky and below the moist dirt
Whatever there is submits itself to His exalted presence. . .
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:6)
€
Sesini yukseltsen de kıssan da sussan da sen (91.7)
Allah senin sırrını senden de eyi bilen. (91.8)
Whether you raise or lower your voice or are silent,
God knows your secret even better than you know it.
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:7)
Kendinden başka il^ah olmayan Allahtır O; (91.9)
Zındanında ışıktır, gecende sabahtır O; (91.10)
God He is, there is no god but Him
In your darkness He is light, in your night He is daylight;
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:8)

119
Ça ^ Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar, 91–99.
glar, Kur’an-ı
526 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

€ duşen,
Rahmetce duze € Şimşekce da
ga inen; (91.11)
Musa’ya ateş gibi, ışık gibi g€ €
orunen. . . (91.12)
He descends mercifully; He descends on a mountain as lightening;
He appeared to Mūsā like a fire, like light. . .
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:10)
€ uş
Musa, uzak illerden Mısr’a duşm € bir çoban; (92.1)
Yıldızların altında uzanır zaman zaman (92.2)
Mūsā, from far away lands, was a shepherd who found himself in Egypt
He would sometimes lie down under the stars
€
Bir uyanık, ruyaya dalardı derin derin; (92.3)
G€ € u€ yakan bir şey kumlarında ç€
onlun ollerin; (92.4)
Awake, he would lose himself deeply in dreams;
In the desert sands, something ignited his heart
K^
ah koyunlarını, k^
ah yıldızları yayardı; (92.5)
Dururken birden sıçrar, garip sesler duyardı. (92.6)
Sometimes he would pasture his sheep and sometimes the stars
While this was happening he was startled when he suddenly heard strange sounds
€ bir da
Birgun g dibinde, evden-barktan uzaktı, (92.7)
G€ € u€ bilinmezin yuce
onlun € o€zlemi yaktı. (92.8)
One day when he was at the base of a mountain, far from his home and dwelling
An enlightened desire, previously unknown to his heart, was lit
G€ € u€ kamaştıran şimşekle yandı içi; (92.9)
ozun
Ya hasret ateşi, ya haberleşme sevinci. (92.10)
Lightning ignited his soul and dazzled his eyes
It was the fire of longing or the joy of communicating.
I_çinde yanan ateş g€ € u g€
orund€ ozlerine; (93.1)
Bir umut parıltısı renk verdi s€
ozlerine: (93.2)
The fire burning inside appeared before his eyes
A flash of hope gave color to his words
–Neden aşa € unerek
gılarda sur € o€leyim? (93.3)
Yukardaki ateşe do
gru gidip geleyim. (93.4)
–Why should I die a life of misery down below?
Why don’t I go to the fire above?
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:10)
Ya s€
onen oca gımı yakmaya k€ oz alayım (93.5)
Ya ateşin başında bir yol bilen bulayım. . . (93.6)
Either I can get some ashes to light my dying embers
Or I might find someone who knows the way at the fire
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:10)
As^
asına dayanıp tırmanırken yukarı (94.1)
G€
okten kopan bir sesle çınladı kulakları; (94.2)
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V 527
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

While leaning on his staff and climbing up,

A sound breaking forth from the sky rang in his ears
Yagdı ışık ya € arı esti; (94.3)
gmuru, yıldız ruzg^
G€okten kopup g€ €
onulden başa vuran bir sesti. (94.4)
The rain of light poured down, a wind of stars blew
It was a sound that broke from the sky and hit from the heart to the mind
Yalnızdı g€
ok yolcusu, yalınayak, baş açık. (94.5)
– Daha yaklaş Rabbine, çık ya Mus^a, daha çık (94.6)
He was alone, a traveler of the heavens, bare-foot and bareheaded
– Come closer to your Lord, climb, Mūsā, come higher
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:11)
Korkma seni ben seçtim, ben elinden tutanım; (94.7)
Ben Allah’ım; ben seni, herkesi yaratan’ım. (94.8)
Don’t be scared, I chose you, I am the One holding your hand
I am God. I am the Creator of you and of everyone.
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:13–14)
€
Nedir o guvenerek dayandı gın ya Mus^^ a? (94.9)
^ a şaşkın; tedirgin, kekeledi: ‘Bir as^
Mus^ a;’ (94.10)
What is that that you rely on and lean on, Mūsā?
Mūsā, confused and nervous, stammered, ‘A staff’
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:17–18)
‘Daldan yaprak silkerim onunla ben sur € ume!’
€ (94.11)
G€ € ume!’
okten kopan ses dedi ‘—Onu boşa sur € (94.12)
‘I shake off leaves from branches with it for my flock!’
The sound that broke from the sky said, ‘Don’t let it drag along for nothing.’
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:18)
Benizde renk kalmadı, dizde derman kesildi; (94.13)
€ u€ as^
Elinden duşt a, sanki yılan kesildi. (94.14)
His face drained of color, his knees lost their strength
The staff fell from his hands, as if it suddenly became a snake
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:19)
Kıvrandı gını g€ € sandı da korktu Mus^
ordum ^ a. (94.15)
Ses. ‘Al’ dedi; aldı ki yılan de
gildi as^
a. . . (94.16)
Mūsā became scared, thinking he saw it slithering
The voice said, ‘Take it.’ He picked it up and it was not a snake, but a staff. . .
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:20–21)
Girdi yanan koynuna donmuşa d€ onen eli; (95.1)
€
C¸ıkardı baktı: Beyaz ateşin en guzeli. (95.2)
His hand that had turned frozen entered his burning breast
He removed it and looked: the most beautiful white fire
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:22)
528 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

Ermiş elinde as^

a yılana eş kesilir; (95.3)
Ermiş el koyna girer, beyaz ateş kesilir (95.4)
In a saintly hand a staff partners with a snake
A saintly hand enters a breast and suddenly turns into white fire
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:22–23)
G€okten gelen ses dedi: ‘Al H^ ^ yanına; (95.5)
arunu
€ € €
‘Surunup kalma ç€ olde, git şehrin meydanına; (95.6)
The sound coming from the sky said: ‘Take Hārūn with you
‘Don’t live a life of misery in the desert, go to the city center,
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:42–43)
‘Uyarın o fir’avun olacak baş azgını; (95.7)
‘B€oyle giderse yakın, sonu gelmez bozgunu! (95.8)
‘Warn the transgressing Fir‘awn,
‘If he continues as is, his defeat will never end!
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:43 and 20:48)
‘Onun, benim sesimi duyacak vicdanı yok; (95.9)
‘Sizi de dinlemezse kurtuluş imk^ anı yok!. . .’ (95.10)
‘He doesn’t have the conscience to hear me
‘If he doesn’t listen to you either he has no hope for escape!’
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:44)
‘O zaman size uyan, sizden olan kim varsa, (96.1)
€ unmeden
‘Duş € ne para, ne ev, ne bark, ne arsa (96.2)
‘Therefore let them arise, whoever is with you,
‘Without thinking of money, or homes, dwellings or land,
‘Bırakın bu bel^alar, cezalar b€
olgesini, (96.3)
‘Arayın o€telerde huzurun ulkesini.
€ . .’ (96.4)
‘Leave the evils, the realm of punishment
‘Search on the other side for the land of tranquility. . .’
Dalkavuklara kanıp da avuna avuna (96.5)
Kendisini Tanrıyla bir tutan Fir’avuna (96.6)
Fooled by talebearers,
Fir‘awn, who held himself one with God,
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:56)
K^
ar etmedi Mus^ ^ anın hikmet dolu s€
ozleri (96.7)
H^al^
a buy€ uc
€ ulerin
€ €
hunerinde g€
ozleri. (96.8)
Mūsā’s words of wisdom had no effect on him
His eyes were still on the magicians’ skills
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:56 and 20:64)
Bir kez uymuş şeytana, e € um
gri yola yur € uş;
€ (96.9)
Basireti ba
glanmış, g€ € u€ kan bur
ozun € um
€ uş;
€ (96.10)
Once he listened to Satan, he walked along a crooked road,
His vision became limited, his eyes were clouded with blood.
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V 529
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

Ne kumlarda kıvranan as^ € u€ kolunu (96.11)

a durtt
Ne ak ateş kesilen el g€
osterdi yolunu. . . (96.12)
Neither did the staff that slithered in the sands prod him
Nor did the fiery white hand show him the way. . .
^ a aldı kavmini yur
Mus^ € ud
€ u€ ç€
ole do
gru; (97.1)
€ [sic: g€
Va’dedilmiş toprakta açacak gule ole] do
gru. . . (97.2)
Mūsā took his people and walked towards the desert;
Towards the land that was a valley and would open up into a lake
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:77)
Fir’avun anladı ki gitti makb^ul kulları; (97.3)
Arkadan yetişmeli, kesilmeli yolları; (97.4)
Fir‘awn understood that his much-welcome slaves were gone
He had to reach them from behind, to cut off their path
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:78)
Vermemeli yurdunun boşalmasına izin; (97.5)
Ulaştı kafileye kıyısında denizin. . . (97.6)
He couldn’t give permission for his nation to be emptied
He reached the hosts at the water’s shore
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:78)
Mus^ a vurdu as^ ayı, sular yarıldı sanki; (97.7)
Fir’avunun g€ €
ozunde denizdi her zamanki. (97.8)
Mūsā hit his staff and it was as if the waters parted
It was the same water as always, in Fir‘awn’s eyes
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:78)
I_sr^
ail o
gulları suları yara yara (97.9)
Sa g-salim çıka dursun yemyeşil bir kenara (97.10)
The Children of Israel emerged out of those waters
Safe and sound at a green shore.
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:78)
Fir’avun ordusuyla suda g€ omul€ u€ kaldı (98.1)
Bu herkesin unutup gittigi bir masaldı. (98.2)
Fir‘awn was buried with his armies in the water
This was a story that people had forgotten
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:78 and 20:99)
€
Şimdi geçmiş gunlerden sana ibret haberi. (98.3)
Sen de g€ € do
onlune gan sese do
gru gel beri; (98.4)
Now it is a lesson from days past.
You should come towards the sound that rises from within
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:99)
Kavra seni yaratan Allahın birli
gini; (98.5)
Sapmadan, sapıtmadan bul g€ onul€ dirli
gini. (98.6)
Understand the Oneness of God who created you
Without turning or losing your way, find the order of your soul
530 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

€ diller tutulup da

Bir gun € uz
glar dumd € olunca; (98.7)
K€
or gece, g€ € uz olunca; (98.8)120
orene sonsuz gund€
One day tongues will be tied and mountains straight
A sightless night will be infinite light to the one who can see
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:105–108)
€ unde
Gelince yeryuz € hayatın nihayeti (99.1)
K^
ar etmez hiç kimsenin yardımı, şefaati; (99.2)
When life comes to an end on earth
Neither help nor intercession will be of benefit
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:109)
Eyilerle k€ € belli olur ansızın; (99.3)
otuler
€ kudret hakkından gelir her imansızın! (99.4)
Yuce
Suddenly good people and bad people will be apparent
The Almighty God will overcome every faithless person
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:110–111)
Hep kan denizi bo
gmaz her zaman Fir’avunu, (99.5)
Kendi kanında bo € gelir Allah onu! (99.6)
gar gun
Blood does not always drown Fir‘awn in the sea
A day comes when God drowns him in his own blood
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:127)
Allaha dayanmazsan k^ aretmez hiçbir as^ a; (99.7)
^ a!. (99.8)
Allahın hikmeti bu: her Fir’avna bir Mus^
If you do not lean on God, no staff will carry you;
The wisdom of God is this: that for every Fir‘awn there is a Mūsā! (99.8)
(Corresponds to Qur’ān 20:130, 20:132 and 20:128)

Comments on the Poem

I will now analyze Ça glar’s poem, paying some attention to how it compares to the
Qur’ānic text. First I look at literary devices Ça
glar uses in the poem, and then differences
and similarities between his poem and the Qur’ān. One literary feature evident in the
text is alliteration in lines 91.7–8 with an ‘s’ sound. Later in the story we see Ça
glar uses a

120
This may be an inversion of the following verses (translated by Muhammad Abdel Haleem, The
Qur’ān: English Translation and Parallel Arabic Text, (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2010):
but whoever turns away from it will have a life of great hardship. We shall
bring him blind to the Assembly on the Day of Resurrection (20:124) and he
will say, ‘Lord, why did You bring me here blind? I was sighted before!’
(20:125)
God will say, ‘This is how it is: You ignored Our revelations when they came
to you, so today you will be ignored.’ (20:126)

C 2017 Hartford Seminary.

V 531
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

quick pace to reflect the action of the poem: Mūsā leads his people to freedom (97.1–5)
and the pace of the language feels like an actual race.
Throughout the poem, there is repeated use of the theme of nature—darkness, light,
night, daylight—sometimes metaphorically. Early on, the words for darkness, light, night,
daylight and lightening are visually striking (91.10–11). These lines 91.10–11 are not in
the Arabic, but are a transition into the story of Mūsā. Allusions to fire, light, stars and
desert continue in lines 91.12–92.5. In the next set of lines, 92.6–93.2, we see Mūsā and a
fire, which is a physical, external one. The poem continues to use language reflecting
nature in order to show Mūsā’s spirituality and his spiritual growth. Lines 92.8–9 show
the mixing of the concepts of light and its physical and spiritual effects and manifesta-
tions. Line 92.10 feels like a prelude to the Qur’ānic verse 20:10, in which there is some
ambiguity about whether Mūsā wants to find spiritual or mundane guidance. Lines 93.1–
2 metaphorically explore the fluidity of fire and light coming from within or without, and
the idea that God’s call to Mūsā was internal and external at the same time. Here we see
clearly a reflection of what Ça glar says in his interview, that poetry has a symbolic ele-
ment (see introduction and footnote 20). In portraying the beginning of God’s talk with
Mūsā (lines 94.1–8), Ça
glar’s language continues to use motifs from nature: he expresses
spiritual concepts through nature and mixes the boundaries between these areas. In his
use of nature in the poem, it seems that Ça glar noticed the nature motif in Sūrat T: aha
and highlighted them in his poem.
There are a number of similarities between Ça glar’s poem and the Qur’ān, some-
times with slight differences. For example, with the fire that Mūsā sees, both allow it to
seem as if guidance can be mundane or spiritual (lines 92.10 and 93.4–6). We see much
of the same plot development; for example, we see the miracle of Mūsā’s hand becom-
ing white (lines 95.1–4). Fir‘awn and his rejection of the message are the subjects of the
next section (96.5–96.12). The Turkish in lines 96.5–7 is eloquently and concisely
expressed. The Turkish reverses the order in the phrasing, mentioning Fir‘awn first and
then the fact that the message had no effect on him; this emphasizes Fir‘awn’s arrogance.
In line 96.8, the Turkish loosely reflects the Arabic in that both reveal Fir‘awn’s focus on
the magicians’ power and his hopes to maintain his status through them. It also hints at
the Qur’ānic detail of Fir‘awn gathering his forces (20:57–60).
While there are a number of similarities between the poem and the Qur’ān, there are
also some differences. For example, the Turkish inserts an obvious subject into line 91.2,
‘biz,’ we. This does not correspond to the Arabic, although it is something one could
read elsewhere in the Qur’ān.121 Similarly, there are no corresponding lines for 91.4 in
the Arabic original; this line seems to be addressing the Prophet, referring to the revela-
tion of the Qur’ān. This addition does not seem unfaithful to the Qur’ān in general, and it
introduces verse 20:7. Additionally, the Turkish substitutes the concept of submission for
the concept of possession in lines 91.5–6 (everything submits to God as opposed to

121
See for example 2:23 and 2:99.
532 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

everything belongs to God). This is different than the Qur’ānic original, but again, one
could find similar verses in other parts of the Qur’ān,122 so it is still reflective of the over-
all spirit of the Qur’ān. It is noteworthy that even though the rendering of one Qur’ānic
verse is split into two lines, they rhyme with each other. Ça glar thus maintains the unity
of the āya to some extent. In lines 91.7–8, again, Ça glar maintains the unity of the
Qur’ānic verse by having the two lines rhyme with each other. Later, the poem moves on
to address an unnamed second person (98.4–6). Although this does not clearly corre-
spond to a Qur’ānic verse in the sūrah, this style is common in the Qur’ān.123 Sometimes
when we have this second person addressee in the Qur’ān, it is not clear if the addressee
is Prophet Muhammad,
: although people often assume this to be the case. The poet
leaves it ambiguous in the Turkish poem, as it is in the Arabic.
Although there is no Qur’ānic equivalent, lines 92.2–4 round out Mūsā’s character
and life-story: he would observe and ponder the skies. These lines explore an interesting
spiritual and human question—what was Mūsā like before he was called to become a
prophet? Did he spiritually connect with God? How? In addition, line 92.5, while it is
nowhere to be found in the Qur’ānic text, the phrasing here reflects classical Arabic liter-
ature in a striking manner with the phrase: “he would pasture the stars.”
In line 94.1, Ça
glar includes a prelude or foreshadowing of the staff that will soon
play a role in the story. This line adds to the drama and visualization of the story. Line
94.6 is a striking one, in which Mūsā is told to continue climbing. It conveys the immen-
sity of the situation: Mūsā needs to be encouraged, because what is happening is
awesome. The next set of lines portrays God’s conversation with Mūsā, about his staff
(94.9–16). Line 94.12 includes an interesting addition, encouraging Mūsā not to underes-
timate the staff. He will soon see the importance of this, when he learns the miracles his
staff will perform. Lines 95.3–4 give more detail and dramatize the story, presenting the
nature of messengers and saints. Line 95.3 shows that the two miracles fit together: a
saintly hand pairs with a staff that is a staff and a snake simultaneously. Later, in line 96.8,
the Turkish seems to possibly imply that Fir‘awn himself was misled by the magicians.
In the end of the poem, Ça glar brings back the staff, in a metaphorical way: if one does
not rely on God, even a staff will not carry his/her weight (99.7). He concludes by
reminding the reader that for every Fir‘awn there is a Mūsā (99.8), which asserts revela-
tion in general through the specific story of Mūsā and Fir‘awn. This line may be a corre-
sponding line to verse 20:128.
There are some details from the Qur’ānic text that are excluded from the poem. For
example, Mūsā’s supplications to God (20:25–20:35) are excluded from the Turkish.
Excluded in line 95.5 is most of God’s response to Mūsā’s prayer (Qur’ān 20:36–41);
these Qur’ānic verses include a telling of Mūsā’s life, which adds a personal element to
the story. Next, missing from the Turkish in lines 97.1–2 is when Mūsā and the magicians

122
See for example 55:5–6.
123
Some examples amongst many are: 17:26, 25:58 and 50:39.
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V 533
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

throw their staffs and the magicians realize that what Mūsā has done is beyond magic, so
they believe in his miracle and message (20:65–76). Also, the Turkish does not render
20:79 which sums up the story, showing that Fir‘awn misled his people in spiritual and
worldly dimensions, drowning them in eternal punishment and causing them to drown
literally. In addition, Ça
glar excludes the story of Mūsā meeting with God again, while
his people are worshipping the golden calf, and then his confronting them (lines 98.2–3;
Qur’ān 20:80–98). Also missing from the poem are the Qur’ānic verses about the nature
of the Qur’ān and revelation (20:113–114) and verses telling the story of Adam and his
wife (20:115–123). Perhaps these later parts are excluded in order to maintain the focus
on Mūsā.
There are some parts of the poem that add content to the poem. For example, the
detail in line 94.5 about Mūsā being barefooted contradicts Qur’ānic verse 20:12: “I am
your Lord. Take off your shoes: you are in the sacred valley of Tuwa.”124 Also, in the
Turkish in line 94.14, the staff falls from his hands, instead of him being told to throw it
and he obeys.
Throughout Ça glar’s poem, sometimes he follows the Qur’ānic text closely and at
times he does not. Sometimes, when Ça glar’s lines of poetry do not correspond to the
Qur’ān, he emphasizes a particular motif found in the story. However, sometimes he
removes or contradicts details in the Qur’ānic text. Overall, he conveys the Qur’ānic story
in an effective, poetic manner that is close to the original and therefore close to a
translation.

Comparison to Mehmet Akif Ersoy’s Translation of the

Qur’ān
As mentioned earlier, Atat€ urkist poet Mehmet Akif Ersoy agreed to translate the
125
Qur’ān for the state in 1925, but after having second thoughts, most of it was
destroyed.126 Recently, a publication of the first through ninth chapters of the Qur’ān
came out, attributed to Mehmet Akif Ersoy.127 Whether this translation is authentic or
not, it is at least an imitation of his style and thus proves to be a useful comparison to
Ça
glar’s poem. First to note in Ersoy’s translation is that it clearly is a translation and is
formatted accordingly. The text has one page of the Arabic and then one page of the
translation. The translation includes verse numbers and is formatted with the text filling
the page; there are no paragraphs. In addition, there is no rhyme of any kind in the
translation.
I will now turn to look at a few different verses in Ersoy’s translation. First, we can
turn to āyat al-kursı̄ (2:255), to see the rendering of a verse that is often recited in prayer.

124
Translation by: Abdel Haleem, The Qur’ān: English Translation and Parallel Arabic Text.
125
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 179–80.
126
Wilson, Translating the Qur’an in an Age of Nationalism, 229–30; 242.
127
Mehmed Akif Ersoy, Kur’an Meali: Fatiha Suresi – Berae Suresi, (Istanbul: Mahya Yayinlari, 2013).
534 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V
 Ç A GLAR
 ’ S K UR ’ A^N - I K ERIˆM ’ DEN I_LHAMLAR

As mentioned before, there is no end-rhyme. Also, we see differences in the translation,

from the Qur’ānic text; most noticeably, there is no mention of a throne.128 If we move
to the last two verses of the chapter (2:285–6),129 in verse 2:286, we find God referred to
€
as “Allahu Zulcelal,” although the Arabic just mentions Allah. Moving to a translation of
a story, we can turn to 3:33–58.130 Interesting here is that Ersoy translates two verses
€
together: 3:33–34. He again uses “Allahu Zulcelal” for Allah. Where 3:34 mentions a list
of people that are descendants of each other, Ersoy translates this as: “o ayni tevhid
dininden olan nesli,” specifying that they are all descendants in tawhı̄d, : belief in the
131 132
oneness of God. In 3:37, he translates “rizq” as things to eat, thus cementing the
meaning as Maryam being provided with food (which is a standard interpretation in
commentaries on the story), rather than the Arabic, which more generally could be trans-
lated as “provisions.”
What we see if we compare the Ersoy and Ça glar works is that, although both are
Atat€
urkist poets from the same time period, only Ça glar brings his poetic talent to his
text. Both texts at times insert things into the Qur’ānic text. Certainly, Ersoy’s attempts to
be and is a translation, whereas Ça glar’s does not and is not. Both use a register of lan-
guage that is easy to understand.

Conclusion
Behçet Kemal Ça glar has accomplished something that few translators of the Qur’ān
can boast: a thought-provoking, beautiful poem based on a long chapter of the Qur’ān.
Even more, it is a text that one would enjoy reading on its own and for its own sake. But
what is the text? What should a text that corresponds line by line in some places, but not
in others; that adds ideas at times and removes them at other times; that freely reflects
and elaborates on the poetic and literary beauty of the original; and that seems to be true
to the overall spirit of the original text be called? Ça
glar’s text is a poetic reflection on the
Qur’ān; it comes close to being a translation, but is not one. In writing about translations,
Walter Benjamin emphasizes that a translation should not obscure the original. Ironically,
while Ça an-ı Ker^ım’den I_lhamlar is not a translation, it seems to abide by
glar’s Kur’^
Benjamin’s statement: “A real translation is transparent; it does not cover the original,
does not block its light, but allows the pure language, as though reinforced by its own
medium to shine upon the original all the more fully.”133
Ça
glar’s decision to write a poetic reflection on the Qur’ān gave him the flexibility to
work with the Qur’ān and make it more accessible to people (in this case readers of

128
Ersoy, Kur’an Meali, 87.
129
Ersoy, Kur’an Meali, 100.
130
Ersoy, Kur’an Meali, 111–116.
131
Ersoy, Kur’an Meali, 111.
132
Ersoy, Kur’an Meali, 111.
133
Walter Benjamin, Illuminations: Essays and Reflections, ed. Hannah Arendt, tr. Harry Zohn, (NY:
Schocken Books, 1969), 79.
C 2017 Hartford Seminary.
V 535
 THE MUSLIM WORLD  VOLUME 107  JULY 2017

Turkish), while also giving him the freedom to leave out verses or add to them, make
implications and to focus on certain parts while obscuring others. The result is a text that
is poetic and is distinct from literal translations of the Qur’ān, which try hard to render
every word and every thought of the Qur’ān (assuming this can be done) while crushing
the literary beauty of the text. It seems that for Ça glar, a poet, the starting point was to
maintain the Qur’ān’s literary beauty, rather than maintaining the literal meaning of the
text. Of course one might argue that Ça glar has changed the text and is thus unfaithful to
it; however, one might respond that others are instead unfaithful to the beauty of the
text. In addition, Ça glar adheres closely to the general meanings, plot and feeling of the
Qur’ānic text. Kur’^ an-ı Ker^ım’den I_lhamlar demonstrates to those who are interested in
translating, rendering, paraphrasing, reflecting or commenting on the Qur’ān the useful-
ness of working with the Qur’ānic literary qualities as a starting point and then moving
from there. At the same time, Kur’^ an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar is an example of a personal
response to the Qur’ān—in this case, a poetic response—and through its existence, it
reflects on the Islamic doctrine that the Qur’ān addresses all people, at all times and in all
places.
In its historical context, Ça
glar’s text is remarkable in that it is an Atat€
urkist reflection
on the Qur’ān. Not only that, but it is beautiful and is easy to understand. It therefore fits
well into goals of other translators, who sought to create translations that newly-literate
people could understand. Kur’^ an-ı Ker^ı m’den I_lhamlar is a reflection of a desire to
develop a Turkish Islam—a manifestation of Islam that came from Turkey, that reflected
its language and culture and that was intelligible to its people, and at the same time, it is
a useful model for translators of the Qur’ān.

536 C 2017 Hartford Seminary.

V