Applying the Canon in Islam The Authorization and Maintenance of Interpretive Reasoning in Hanafi Scholarship by Brannon M. Wheeler. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996, 340 pp.

Abstract

According to Smith, the Ndembu diviner applies a "canon" of twenty-four fixed
objects to a client's situation, first selecting a few of the objects by shaking the basket,
interpreting the selected objects according to a range of meanings fixed by pub­
lic convention, and matching the meanings to the client's particular condition.
Brannon Wheeler, in his Introduction to Applying the Canon in Islam
When the idolaters inimical to the message of Muhammad, upon him be
peace, attempted to criticize the Qur'an for its use of the lowly and the trivial in
its rhetorical repertoire, the following verse was revealed in reply.
Behold, God does not disdain to propound a parable of a gnat, or of something even
less than that. Now, as for those who have attained to faith, they know that it is the
truth from their Sustainer whereas those who are bent on denying the truth say,
What could God mean by this parable? (2:26)
This exchange then became the basis for djscussion and debate among the
classical Arabic rhetoricians on the subject of what might and what might not be
suitable for use in similes, metaphors, and other comparative ljterary devices.
That this debate shouJd be recalled at the outset of a review of a work dealing
with Hanafi fiqh scholarship might seem slrangely out of place. Yet, once one
has acqurunted oneself with the underlying premise of this work, one cannot
help but recall the classical debate and the verses of Qur'anic scripture so often
cited in regard to it. What lies at the heart of the matter is that comparisons
drawn between disparate and remote subjects are sometimes delightful and
sometimes awful. This, after all, is the stuff of literature. There are some comparisons,
however, that are simply offensive.
In fact, there are some things people just don't like to see compared at all.
Period. Things held near and dear often fall under this category, things like one's
religion, ethnicity, culture, and so on. This is human nature. And that is dangerous
ground.
Of course, I've oversimplified the matter. ln fact, I'm going in a direction that
was certrunly not intended by the author for his readership. Wheeler's Applying
the Canon in Islam is not a work of literature. Likewise, hjs use of models and
examples from other disciplines, like anthropology and the history of religion,
is a methodological rather than a literary choice. But the fact remains that the
choice Professor Wheeler has made in this matter is one that will not likely be
met with objectivity by Muslims. If I may venture a comparison of my own, this
is rather akin to inviting a Muslim to partake of a meal, a sumptuous and hearty ...