In reference to considering the word ru’ya as signifying seeing something while awake, evidence is derived from a verse by Abu Tayyib al-Mutanabbi. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani has based his argument on this verse in his explanation of the verse of Isra in the book Fath al-Bari:
And those who have used ‘al-ru’ya’ in the sense of wakefulness, among them is a poet. His saying goes: ‘Wa ru’yak ahla fi al-‘uyun min al-ghamad.’ (Your vision is sweeter to the eyes than sleep). (5/673)
The argument about this verse revolves around the fact that here, the word ru’ya is not associated with a dream. That is, it is not about an imaginary scene witnessed during sleep but rather refers to perception while being fully conscious. In our view, Ibn Hajar's assertion that the term ru’ya in this context does not mean a dream and hence should imply seeing with open eyes is unequivocally accurate. However, the question remains: does this argument lead to the conclusion drawn by Ibn Hajar and other scholars, that the word ru’ya is used both for seeing in sleep and for seeing in wakefulness, and that in Surah Al-Isra it is used in the latter sense? We consider the response to this query to be negative.
To unravel this, it is essential to evaluate the following three aspects:
Addressing these three queries is vital for grasping the matter thoroughly. Neglecting them while building an argument is not in alignment with the established methodologies for Qur’anic exegesis and linguistic principles. In our assessment, the answer to all three questions is negative, therefore the verse by Al-Mutanabbi cannot be considered valid evidence.
The verse from Surah Al-Isra does not require an interpretation that necessitates the confirmation from Classical Arabic to comprehend the word or style. The need for such a confirmation might arise when the word or style is unfamiliar, ambiguous, susceptible to multiple interpretations, lacks a clear indication of its meaning, or is used in a metaphorical manner. In the preceding discussions, it has been conclusively demonstrated that the word ru’ya is not unusual, ambiguous, or conjectural in its denotation. It is a commonly known term in the Arabic lexicon, with a singular meaning of 'dream.' Its usage is always explicit, unambiguously conveying its meaning and relevance. In the Qur’an and hadith, whenever ru’ya is mentioned, it conveys this particular and customary meaning. Additionally, in the aforementioned verse, it is employed in its literal sense and not as a metaphor. Consequently, there is no obscurity in the employment of ru’ya in the verse that would necessitate external linguistic evidence to grasp its meaning.
Regarding Al-Mutanabbi, it is acknowledged that his poetic works are not applicable for facilitating the understanding of the Qur’an. He is a poet from the Abbasid period and is categorized among the fourth category (out of a total of four categories) of Arabic poets, whereas it is established that for linguistic clarification regarding the Qur’an and Hadith, only works from the foremost two categories of Arab poets are valid. Abdul Qadir bin Umar al-Baghdadi states in the renowned text on Arabic language and literature, Khizanat al-Adab wa Lubb Lubab Lisan al-Arab:
The texts used as evidence for linguistic matters can be divided into two categories: those in poetic form and those that are not. The first category, poetry, has been classified by scholars into four groups: The first group consists of the pre-Islamic poets (Shu‘ara al-Jahiliyyah), such as Imru’ al-Qais and Al-A‘sha.The second group includes the Mukhadramin, those who lived during both the pre-Islamic and Islamic periods, such as Labid and Hassan ibn Thabit. The third group comprises the early Islamic poets (Mutaqaddimin), also known as Islamiyyin. These are individuals from the early Islamic era, such as Jarir and Al-Farazdaq. The fourth group includes the later poets (Muwalladin), also referred to as Muhdithin. This group includes all poets who came after the first three groups up until our present time, such as Bashar ibn Burd and Abu Nuwas.
There is consensus regarding the first two groups that their poetry can be used as a basis for linguistic evidence.
The existence or resemblance of compositional style between a poem and a Qur’anic verse holds no weight. The reason being that the term ru’ya in the verse is utilized in its actual meaning, whilst Al-Mutanabbi has employed it metaphorically. Anyone well-versed in expression and rhetorical art would know that a term’s literal and metaphorical applications cannot serve as dependable illustrations for one another. This is because the metaphorical usage renders the word’s significance and application vastly different from its literal context. It signifies an alternate application of the word, which stands distinct and separate from its original meaning. Hence, the metaphorical context does not provide a reliable basis for logical reasoning or exemplification when compared to the literal context. This concept can be illustrated with a few instances from Urdu poetry.
Take for example the opening lines of Allama Iqbal’s poem Mother’s Dream where dream is denoted with literal significance:
Main soyi jo ik shab to dekha yeh khwaab
Barha aur jis se mera iztirāb
Yeh dekha ke main ja rahi hoon kahin
Andhera hai aur raah milti nahin
I slept one night and had this dream (Khwab),
Which escalated my restlessness even more.
I saw that I am going somewhere,
It’s dark, and the path is not found.
Now, notice the metaphorical use of ‘dream’ in another verse from Allama’s Khizr-e-Rah:
عام حریت کا جو دیکھا تھا خواب اسلام نے
اے مسلماں، آج تو اُس خواب کی تعبیر دیکھ
The dream (khwab) of general freedom Islam saw,
O Muslim, witness today the interpretation of that dream.
Here, the Poet of the East has anthropomorphized the faith of Islam and articulated that it envisioned a ‘dream’ about human freedom. Evidently, Islam is not an entity that slumbers and experiences dreams. Thus, in this instance, ‘dream’ is not literal but serves as a metaphor to convey a vision or ideology. Consider the lines by Mir Taqi Mir:
ہوا ہے خواب ملنا اُس سے شب کا
کبھو آتا ہے وہ مہ خواب میں اب
The meeting her at night was a mere dream,
Now she sometimes appears in the moonlight of dreams.
Here, Mir employs ‘dream’ in two contexts – metaphorically to imply ‘unattainable’ and then literally meaning ‘experienced during sleep’.
From these examples, any individual fluent in a language can discern the difference between a term’s literal and metaphorical usage, and why the latter cannot be used for explanation or as evidence when discussing the former. This principle holds for any word in any language that possesses both literal and metaphorical connotations.
After this explanation, let us now try to understand how the word ru’ya in the verse of Abu Tayyib al-Mutanabbi is used in a metaphorical sense. For this purpose, it would be appropriate to consider the verse in its context:
إذا اعتل سيف الدولة اعتلت الأرض
ومن فوقها والناس والكرم المحض
When Saif al-Dawlah falls ill, it is as if the earth itself becomes unwell, and everything upon it is overcome with grief and sorrow — including both the people and the pure benevolence and generosity (which also seem to fall ill).
وكيف انتفاعي بالرقاد وإنما
بعلته يعتل في الأعين الغمض
How can I find solace in sleep when his (Saif Al-Dawlah’s) illness has even sickened sleep in the eyes? (Hence sleep did not come, and I stayed awake all night gazing at you, Saif Al-Dawlah).
مضى الليل والفضل الذي لك لا يمضي
ورؤياك أحلى في العيون من الغمض
Now the night has passed, but the generosity of your (presence) continues (if I had slept tonight, surely the dreams of your visage would have sweetened my sleep), but this waking dream (in which I see you with open eyes), is far sweeter to my eyes than sleep (those dreams).
When you read the verse, it itself tells us that here ru’ya is used in a metaphorical meaning. In sleep, a person sees sweet dreams (ru’ya) that make the sleep delightful. From this common experience, the poet alludes to and says about his patron that instead of dreaming sweet dreams in sleep, I have stayed awake gazing at you, and this waking dream (sweet vision) is sweeter than the dreams (ru’ya) in sleep. This is the meaning of the verse, and it is supported by the previous verses as well.
The metaphorical use of words is a common practice in language and expression. Every language is adorned with it. We elevate the word from its literal meaning and, based on some commonality, adopt the method of simile, metaphor, or allusion, and use it in a completely different meaning. When we say to our nation that Pakistan is the dream of the Poet of the East, or when we tell our son that I have dreamed a lot for you, it doesn’t mean the dreams we have while asleep. For further understanding, let’s look at some Urdu verses that use the word dream. You will realize how varied and diverse the metaphorical use of the word can be:
Allama Iqbal says:
یہ حکم تھا کہ گلشن کن کی بہار دیکھ
ایک آنکھ لے کے خوابِ ِپریشاں ہزار دیکھ
This was the command: to behold the spring of ‘Gulshan Kon.’
With one eye, perceive a thousand troubled dreams.
Here, Iqbal has used the word ‘dream’ to mean ‘seeing with the eye’. This technique of allusion is roughly the same as the one Al-Mutanabbi used in his verse. It means that nature has provided the human eyes to see terrifying dreams, as the poet here adopts the depiction of seeing dreams with eyes.
In another verse by Iqbal, youth has been metaphorically referred to as a dream:
لکھی جائیں گی کتاب دل کی تفسیریں بہت
ہوں گی اے خواب جوانی، تیری تعبیریں بہت
Many interpretations of the heart’s book will be written,
Oh dream of youth, you will have many interpretations.
Here is Mirza Ghalib’s famous verse:
ہے غیبِ غیب جس کو سمجھتے ہیں ہم شہود
ہیں خواب میں ہنوز، جو جاگے ہیں خواب میں
What we think of as presence is still mysterious and unseen,
Those who are awake in dreams are still in a dream while awake.
Here, Ghalib has illustrated the unique situations of waking up in a dream and dreaming within a dream.
In the following verse of Mir, the word ‘dream’ has been used metaphorically to mean sleep:
گزری ہے شب خیال میں خوباں کے جاگتے
آنکھیں لگا کے اُس سے میں ترسوں ہوں خواب کو
I have spent the night awake, lost in thoughts of the beloveds,
Fixing my gaze upon them, I now yearn for dreams to come.
See an interesting usage of the word in the following two verses of Mir where the word ‘dream’ is literally in its actual sense, but figuratively it is used for metaphorical meaning:
سن کان کھول کر کہ تنک جلد آنکھ کھول
غافل یہ زندگانی فسانہ ہے، خواب ہے
جو کچھ نظر پڑے ہے، حقیقت میں کچھ نہیں
عالم میں خوب دیکھو تو عالم ہے خواب کا
Listen carefully, open your ears swiftly those eyes,
Careless one, this life is but a tale, a dream.
Whatever seems apparent, there is nothing in reality,
If you look carefully in the world, the world is nothing more than a dream.
Respected Dr. Khurshid Rizvi used ‘dream’ in its actual sense in one of his verses and clarified its condition with excellent skill:
عالم خواب کا عقدہ نہیں کھلتا، یعنی
آنکھ باقی نہ رہے اور تماشا رہ جائے
The knot of the dream world does not unravel, as if ,
The eye no longer remains and the spectacle persists.
In another verse, he has considered the tasks of open eyes for vision and perception to be effective for the world of dreams and ineffective for the world of awakeness, thus creating a unique meanings of self-awareness.
مری نگاہ نے خوابوں میں خود کو پہچانا
کہ جاگتے میں جو گزری، وہ بے بصرگزری
My vision recognized itself in dreams,
For what passed while awake was without sight.
Consider a verse from the poem by the Javed Ahmed Ghamidi. Here, the dream is utilized both literally and metaphorically, artistically merging the concepts of the dream world and the waking world to express the inner emotions of the heart:
مرے ندیم، کئی بار آخرِ شب میں
مرے چراغ کی لو میں بنی تری تصویر
کنارِ آب چناروں میں ڈوب کر ابھری
خیالِ خواب میں خوابِ خیال کی تعبیر
My friend, many a time at the conclusion of night,
Beneath the flickering light of my lamp, your figure took shape.
Immersed in the currents beneath the Chinar trees, it appeared
A dream within contemplation, deciphered in the reverie of thought.
It’s a frequent occurrence that upon awakening, dreams dissolve from memory. Hence, matters forgotten are often likened to dreams metaphorically. In the Urdu language, the phrase ‘khwab o khayal’ (dream and thought) is regularly used. The esteemed teacher has this to say in a verse:
نہ وہ زماں ہے، نہ وہ مکاں ہے، عجیب منظر بدل رہا ہے
ہوا ہے خواب و خیال وہ بھی، جو تھا کبھی دیدہ و شنیدہ
Neither that time remains, nor that place—the scene is strangely shifting.
Even what was once seen and heard has now become mere dream and illusion.
These instances serve to demonstrate the entwining of metaphor with reality. Were we to delve deeply, we could endlessly populate pages with discourse. To wrap up, here are two couplets by the contemporary poetess Parveen Shakir in her ghazal, where dream is a metaphor for enchanting visions. This mirrors Al-Mutanabbi’s style, where the word ru’ya hints at the attractive features of a person she admired:
آنکھوں سے میری، کون مرے خواب لے گیا
چشم صدف سے گوہر نایاب لے گیا
کچھ کھوئی کھوئی آنکھیں بھی موجوں کے ساتھ تھیں
شاید اُنھیں بہا کے کوئی خواب لے گیا
Who has plucked the dream from my eyes?
From the mollusk’s stare, a precious pearl was purloined.
There, amidst the waves, were lost-looking eyes,
It seems someone has snatched them away with the dream.
From this explanation, it’s abundantly clear that interpreting a word differently from its conventional and known meaning and using it in variant contexts as proof is linguistically unsound. If we were to adopt this practice in text interpretation, based on the above verses, we would be compelled to augment the meanings of ‘dream’ to encompass ‘sight’, ‘alertness in slumber’, ‘futility of effort’, ‘vanishing of entities’, ‘forgetfulness’, amongst numerous other implications.
It would be akin to construing Ghalib’s verse,
غالب کو برا کہتے ہو، اچھا مرے آگے
“You call Ghalib bad, but praise him in my presence” - as if it meant to speak ill of Ghalib behind his back yet praise him before the speaker. Or interpreting Iqbal’s declaration, ‘Life is a surge of milk, chisel, and massive rock’ as if the essence of life includes, apart from existence, a stream of milk, a sculptor’s tool, and a hefty stone. This would amount to a massacre of language and articulation, achievable only by one who deciphers language through logic rather than conversational use.
Furthermore, it’s paramount in our discourse to acknowledge that the text itself dictates whether a word is intended literally or metaphorically. The authority to discern the meaning doesn’t belong to the listener, reader, annotator, translator, or interpreter based on personal perspective or opinion. To assume otherwise is tantamount to attributing one’s own words to the speaker and distorting their intent, an act devoid of any legitimacy in linguistic articulation.
One might then inquire: how do we deduce a word’s implied meaning within a text? The answer is through context, coherence, sentence structure, and the written expression. These elements offer clear signals about the intended message and utilization of the word. These very signals serve as the cornerstone in disputes around interpretations. Using these criteria, we discern the denotations of nouns and verbs in the text, stating, for instance, that ‘lion’ in one sentence signifies the jungle beast and in another symbolizes courage, that Aftab (sun) and Mahtab (moon) sometimes denote celestial bodies, and other times beloved or exalted individuals, and that ‘dream’ can mean a vision in one context, ideation in another, or sleep in yet another. Much like verbs, where ‘sleeping’ and ‘awakening’ might not merely indicate the physical states but could also metaphorically imply negligence and proactiveness.
The excerpt from Meezan could be helpful in understanding aspects of language and expression:
The words and styles of every living language in the world, which indicate certain meanings, are all based on continuous use and are absolutely definite in every respect. Dictionaries, grammar, and other such sciences describe this continuity. When considering these elements, the truthfulness or falsehood of those transmitting the language, and their number, is not a topic of discussion. Words and expressions that are considered rare or uncommon are described as such not because of their intrinsic meaning, but due to their infrequent or abundant usage, and in light of the knowledge and awareness of the audience. The usage of a word and the evolution of its meaning are inseparable; as long as a word is in use, its meaning accompanies it. We might be ignorant of a word’s meaning and we can err in its interpretation, but it is inconceivable that it has ever been used without a defined meaning or that it has been utilized arbitrarily in any era. The understanding of devices such as metaphor, euphemism, generality, and specificity continues concurrently as well. In all world languages, this is a shared legacy of human culture. Consider the sentences ‘The lion is the king of the jungle’ and ‘Which lion’s arrival makes the desert shiver—an individual might mistake metaphor for reality, but this collective human consciousness is unwavering. It is this collective understanding that corrects an individual’s mistakes. This is the fundamental truth about language that enables us to communicate with assurance, confident that others will comprehend our intended message. Consider the documents that are written every day, the verdicts handed down, directives issued, information shared, and knowledge conveyed—if even for a moment we doubt that the relationship between words and their meanings is definite, then everything would become entirely nonsensical. (32-33)