Why Translate Classical Islamic Books?
Responses to the five most common objections against translating the great works of Islamic heritage.
An Essential Endeavour
The translation of major classical Islamic works, such as the Tafsir of at-Tabari or the Majmu' al-Fatawa of Ibn Taymiyya, sparks debate. Is it legitimate? Is it even desirable?
Before addressing the objections, an important distinction must be made. Translating the Quran is not the same as translating a scholarly work. The Quran, as revelation, is the Arabic text itself, and any translation is merely a translation of its meanings. Scholarly works of tafsir, fiqh or fatwas, on the other hand, are human productions, however eminent they may be. This distinction, recalled by many scholars including Imam an-Nawawi, helps avoid confusion: to translate does not mean to alter the status of the revealed text.
This page examines five recurring criticisms, analysed through the lens of classical scholars.
Translation Discourages Arabic Learning
Translating major Islamic texts would discourage readers from learning Arabic, the original language of the Quran and Islamic sciences. If everything is available in translation, the motivation to study Arabic would disappear.
It is undeniable that the Arabic language holds a central place in Islam. Ibn Taymiyya emphasised that 'the Arabic language is part of the religion', and that knowledge of it becomes obligatory insofar as it conditions the understanding of the sources.
However, in the same corpus, he specifies that it is not blameworthy to address people in their language when the need requires it, provided the meaning conveyed is correct. He explicitly mentions the possibility of translating the Quran and hadith for whoever needs them.
In another passage, Ibn Taymiyya distinguishes three degrees in translation and explanation: the simple transposition of a word by an equivalent, the representation and clarification of meaning so that it is understood by the listener, and then the demonstration and validation of that meaning through argumentation and proof. He recalls that the community is charged with transmitting the Quran in both its expression and its meaning, and that its transmission to non-Arabs may require translation according to available capabilities. Not everyone can accomplish these degrees with the same depth, but this does not nullify the legitimacy of the first level: making the text accessible. Translation can thus constitute a foundational step in a broader chain of transmission, where other actors — teachers, authors, institutions — subsequently develop explanation, pedagogy and contextualisation.
Ibn Taymiyya, Majmuʿ al-Fatawa, vol. 4, pp. 115-117The classical position therefore does not oppose Arabic and translation. Arabic remains the source language and the reference. Translation provides initial access to understanding.
The Quran declares: 'We have not sent a Messenger except in the language of his people, so that he may make things clear to them' (14:4). This verse establishes a principle: the message must be understood. It does not eliminate the centrality of Arabic, but it establishes the necessity of clarification in an accessible language.
Islamic history confirms this principle. The Prophet sent a letter to Heraclius containing a Quranic verse (3:64). Zayd ibn Thabit learned the writing of the Jews in order to manage correspondence. The transmission of the message has always taken precedence over linguistic confinement.
Translation can be understood as a bridge. For many, it constitutes a first point of entry. It is not intended to replace the learning of Arabic, but to encourage it. Experience shows that discovering texts in translation often sparks the desire to access the original text.
These Works Are Too Complex for Non-Arabic Speakers
Classical Islamic works are reputed to be complex. Translated, they would be unreadable or a source of confusion.
Two forms of complexity must be distinguished. The first is linguistic: vocabulary, syntax, intertextuality. The second is disciplinary: legal methodology, hierarchy of evidence, differences between schools, context of fatwas.
Translation reduces the linguistic barrier. It does not eliminate disciplinary complexity, which also exists for Arabic speakers. The problem of comprehension is therefore not linked to translation as such, but to the very depth of Islamic sciences.
In the tradition, study has always been conducted gradually. 'Speak to people according to what they know,' it is reported. Ibn Mas'ud also warned against exposing people to matters their minds cannot grasp.
The solution is therefore not to deny access. Translation can exist as a way of making the text itself available. Pedagogical support, introductions, notes and popularisation can then be provided by other actors: teachers, publishing houses, institutes, trainers or authors. Making the text available does not mean claiming to replace teaching; it means providing a reliable foundation upon which others can build. Translation does not necessarily need to incorporate the full explanatory apparatus: it can also serve as an open foundation allowing those with transmission capabilities — even without advanced mastery of Arabic — to produce materials adapted to their audiences.
It is also important to remember that these difficulties exist in Arabic too. A collection of fatwas read without training can be misunderstood, whether in Arabic or in any other language. Translation does not create this risk; it simply makes it visible to a new audience.
Translation Could Confuse the General Public
Translating complex theological or juridical discussions could sow confusion in the general public's religious understanding.
Pedagogical prudence is a recognised value in the tradition. 'Ali ibn Abi Talib advised speaking to people according to their capacity for understanding. This principle concerns teaching, not the prohibition of access.
It is true that certain genres, such as collections of fatwas, are highly contextualised. A fatwa often depends on a place, a time, customs and a specific situation. Ibn al-Qayyim formulated the principle that a fatwa may vary according to circumstances.
But this phenomenon exists independently of language. A fatwa taken out of context can be misunderstood in Arabic just as in any other language. The question is therefore not 'should we translate?' but 'how should we translate?'
The responsibility does not rest solely on the translated object, but on the ecosystem surrounding it. A translation can make the text accessible as it is, while the work of contextualisation, teaching and curriculum development can be undertaken by institutions, teachers and specialised authors. Translation then becomes a structuring resource for the entire educational field, rather than a standalone pedagogical product.
Restricting access to heritage under the pretext of protection would amount to maintaining permanent dependence. The intellectual elevation of a community passes through direct access to the sources, even when they are demanding.
Translation Would Be a Betrayal of the Author
Some speak less of 'sacredness' than of fidelity. To translate would be a form of betrayal. The great works of heritage are seen as precious, almost untouchable assets. Their true nature could only be savoured in Arabic, and any translation would risk impoverishing or distorting them.
It is true that no translation can perfectly reproduce the linguistic density, style, rhetorical nuances or implicit allusions of a classical Arabic text. Translation necessarily involves choice, and every choice is a form of interpretation.
But recognising this limitation does not mean concluding that translation should be prohibited. On the contrary, the intellectual history of Islam shows that texts have always been explained, commented upon, summarised, adapted and transmitted in varied registers. Tafsir itself is a mediation of the Quranic text. The great works of fiqh have been abridged, expanded, versified, commented upon, then commented upon again. Transmission has never been static.
To translate is not to claim to replace the original. It is to provide access to its content for those who would otherwise be entirely deprived of it. The original Arabic remains the ultimate reference. Translation is neither a competitor nor a substitute; it is a bridge.
It must also be remembered that an unread text is a silent text. Preserving a work by keeping it inaccessible to the majority of a linguistic community can paradoxically render it absent from intellectual discourse. Making it readable does not diminish it; it restores its presence.
Love and respect for classical authors are not manifested solely by preserving their words in their original language, but also by the desire to transmit their thought. To translate with seriousness is to recognise the value of a text to the point of wanting it to live beyond its initial linguistic context.
Translation Breaks the Traditional Pedagogical Order
Classical Islamic education follows a methodical progression. Translating major works could incite some to skip steps.
Gradualness is indeed a fundamental pedagogical principle. But the availability of a book does not destroy the method. It is the usage that can be disordered, not the existence of the text.
The well-known adage that 'whoever takes his book as his shaykh, his errors exceed his correct conclusions' recalls the limits of solitary study. This warning applies equally in Arabic and in any other language.
Translation does not abolish the necessity of teachers, nor the importance of a structured path. It simply broadens access to materials.
For a non-Arabic-speaking audience, the absence of translation creates an imbalance: permanent dependence on summaries, excerpts or intermediaries. Making the great works accessible allows the general level to be raised and encourages a more mature relationship with the heritage.
In Conclusion
The translation of classical Islamic works is neither a betrayal of Arabic nor a break with tradition. It is rooted in an ancient principle: making the message intelligible.
Arabic remains the source language and the ultimate reference. But access to the heritage should not be reserved for those who already master it.
Well executed, translation is a bridge between generations, between cultures and between levels of knowledge. It does not replace Arabic; it opens the path towards it.
Explore the library"Addressing people in their own language and according to their terminology is not blameworthy when there is a need and the meanings conveyed are sound; it is even praiseworthy, when necessary, to translate the Qur’an and the hadith for one who needs to understand."
Ibn Taymiyya, Majmu' al-Fatawa, 3/306