Amir Suhail Wani

Kassim Ahmad occupies a distinctive and controversial place in the history of modern Muslim thought in Southeast Asia. A Malaysian writer, poet, philosopher, educator and political activist, he began his career in literature and politics before turning increasingly towards questions of Islam, revelation, religious authority and Qur’anic interpretation.

Born in Kedah in 1930 and educated at the University of Malaya, Kassim developed an intellectual temperament shaped by literature, socialism, political activism and a questioning attitude towards established institutions. His later writings on Islam brought him into sharp conflict with Malaysia’s religious establishment. He died in Kulim, Kedah, in 2017.

Kassim Ahmad’s importance lies not simply in the fact that he questioned established religious opinions. Islamic history has always contained debates about interpretation, authority and reform. What made Kassim distinctive was his question: what would happen if the Qur’an were treated as the supreme criterion of religious understanding and inherited religious authorities were subjected to systematic critical examination?

His answer was expressed most forcefully through his call for a “return to the Qur’an”. His book Hadis: Satu Penilaian Semula, generally translated as Hadith: A Re-evaluation, published in the 1980s, became the principal vehicle through which his ideas entered public debate in Malaysia. Academic studies have consequently associated him with the Qur’an-centred or Qur’anist tendency.

At the centre of Kassim’s religious thought was his conviction that Muslims should return to the Qur’an for belief and practice. He questioned the traditional understanding that canonical Hadith collections possess an independent normative authority comparable to the Qur’an. This was where he departed most sharply from mainstream Sunni scholarship, which regards the Qur’an and Sunnah as interconnected foundations of Islam.

In the traditional framework, authenticated Prophetic reports are indispensable for explaining, specifying and demonstrating the practical application of many Qur’anic injunctions.

Kassim’s position should therefore not be confused with the ordinary criticism of individual Hadith reports practised by classical Muslim scholars. Muslim scholars themselves developed sophisticated methods for examining narrations, their chains of transmission, transmitters, textual content, chronology and corroboration. Kassim’s question was more fundamental: should Hadith collections possess independent normative authority at all? His argument therefore concerned the very nature of religious authority and the relationship between revelation and later human transmission.

Kassim’s project was his attempt to develop a systematic methodology for understanding the Qur’an. Although his approach is sometimes described as an “eight-point strategy”, the fuller formulation contains nine principles. Taken together, these principles reveal an attempt to combine textual analysis, reason, context, ethical consciousness and practical applicability.

His first principle is the distinction between clear and ambiguous or metaphorical verses, corresponding broadly to the Qur’anic distinction between muhkam and mutashabih. Not every Qur’anic statement, in his view, should be approached in the same manner. Some verses communicate their meaning directly, while others use metaphorical or symbolic language. The interpreter must therefore distinguish between literal and figurative expressions and avoid turning every statement into a literal proposition.

The second principle is the internal harmony of the Qur’an. Apparently contradictory passages should be examined in relation to the Qur’an as a whole rather than immediately treated as genuine contradictions. The Qur’an, in this approach, is a coherent text in which different passages illuminate one another. This principle has parallels within the wider Islamic tradition of Qur’anic interpretation, but Kassim makes the internal consistency of the Qur’an a particularly important foundation of his methodology.

His third principle gives reason and knowledge an important place in interpretation. Kassim argues that a sound understanding of revelation should not contradict sound reason or established knowledge. Revelation and rationality need not be treated as enemies; genuine truth should ultimately possess an underlying harmony. This reflects the broader modern Muslim concern with restoring reason, intellectual inquiry and ijtihad to the interpretation of revelation.

The fourth principle is that the Qur’an should be allowed to explain itself. A verse should be read alongside other verses dealing with the same subject, concept or linguistic theme. Instead of imposing an external theological framework upon the text, the interpreter should first explore how the Qur’an itself develops a particular idea. This resembles the classical principle of tafsir al-Qur’an bi’l-Qur’an, although Kassim gives it a central place in his Qur’an-centred approach.

The fifth principle concerns the interpreter's interpretation. Kassim maintains that Qur’anic interpretation is not simply a technical exercise. The interpreter must approach the text with intellectual honesty and good intention. Prejudice, sectarian loyalty or the desire to prove a predetermined conclusion can distort interpretation. Understanding revelation therefore has an ethical as well as an intellectual dimension.

The sixth principle is attention to topical context. A Qur’anic verse should not be isolated from the subject or argument within which it appears. The Qur’an moves between narrative, theology, moral instruction, legislation and historical reflection. Removing a statement from its surrounding discussion can therefore produce an incomplete or distorted understanding. Kassim’s approach calls for a more holistic reading of the text.

ALSO READ: Beyond survival: The future of Indian Muslims

The seventh principle is historical context. The Qur’an emerged within history and addressed actual communities, social practices, conflicts and moral circumstances. Where a verse responds to a particular historical situation, understanding that situation can help clarify its meaning and purpose. This principle places Kassim within the broader movement of contextual approaches to modern Qur’anic interpretation.