In this post, we will examine what is likely the first Urdu translation produced within a Christian missionary context: ‘The Qurán’. Published in 1844 by the Presbyterian Mission Press of Allahabad, it features Shāh ʿAbd al-Qādir’s very prominent and influential Urdu translation transcribed into Latin script. Shāh ʿAbd al-Qādir’s rendition was completed at the end of the eighteenth century and originally published as ‘Mūḍiḥ-i Qurʾān’ by a publisher located near Calcutta in 1829. A previous post [https://gloqur.de/quran-translation-of-the-week-39-mu%e1%b8%8di%e1%b8%a5-al-qur%ca%bcan-the-first-urdu-quran-translation-in-idiomatic-urdu/] has already introduced this text, in this post we will look at how Christian scholars utilized it for their own purposes to further their missionary agenda of spreading Christianity in British India.
The 1844 edition published by the Presbyterian Mission Press made significant changes to Shāh ʿAbd al-Qādir’s translation, particularly by omitting his original annotations and replacing them with critical footnotes attributed to ‘a Christian author’ (‘Háshiya Nasára Musannif ke’), though the name of this author is not provided. The edition begins with a thirty-page preface, followed by Shāh ʿAbd al-Qādir’s translation, which spans some 400 pages, and which is accompanied by extensive footnotes. Both the preface and the annotations reflect a Christian scholarly, critical stance toward Islam, and clearly aim to repurpose Shāh ʿAbd al-Qādir’s translation to serve Christian missionary objectives.
The preface provides insights into the unnamed Christian author’s perspective on Islam and outline his theological arguments against Muhammad’s claim to prophethood. A central argument is that the success or widespread acceptance of Muhammad’s status as prophet does not necessarily confirm divine approval. The author also claims that Muhammad’s prophetic career fulfills a prophecy in the Book of Daniel (Chapter 8), which speaks of the coming of a deceitful and mighty king. According to the Christian author, this king is Muhammad, whom he describes as a ‘punishment’ sent by God to sinners.
After situating the rise of Islam within a Christological framework, the preface discusses the socio-political conditions during Muhammad’s time in the context of explaining the rapid expansion of Islam. The author concludes this section by presenting a range of criticisms of the Islamic faith that also appear in other Christian missionary works. Among these are the claims that Muhammad lacked familiarity with the New and Old Testaments, and that he could not perform miracles, which the author cites as evidence to deny his prophethood.
The footnotes accompanying the Qur’anic text, written in Urdu and rendered in Latin script, echo the critical tone of the preface. For example, a comment on the disconnected letters (al-muqaṭṭaʿāt) found at the beginning of Sūrat al-Baqara – alif lām mīm – asserts that they are meaningless, as Muslim scholars themselves are unsure about their purport and have proposed sixteen different interpretations. The author further speculates that these letters were not part of the original Qur’anic text, but are later additions by scribes, claiming that they stand for ‘Amr li-Mahammad’(‘Muhammad ordered me’), an interpretation that aligns with George Sale’s English translation. This suggests that the Christian author was influenced by Sale’s work, which was widely read among missionaries in India. However, the Christian scholar responsible for the annotations does not limit himself to Sale’s commentary, but also draws on Persian exegeses, demonstrating a broader engagement with Islamic scholarship.
In addition to criticizing the Qur’an, the footnotes also attempt to validate Christian doctrines. For instance, the Qur’anic term ‘rūḥ al-qudus’ (‘holy spirit’) found in Q 2:87 is interpreted as a direct reference to the Biblical Holy Spirit, and the author argues that the traditional Muslim identification of ‘rūḥ al-qudus’ with Gabriel represents an attempt by Muslim exegetes to counter Christian claims of the Trinity.
One of the main objectives of publishing this edition was to enable readers to compare the Qur’an with Biblical scripture. By emphasizing what he perceives as the Qur’an’s borrowings from earlier scriptures, the author/editor of Shāh ʿAbd al-Qādir’s translation seeks to prove that the Qur’an is not divinely inspired. It appears that no reprints of this edition were ever produced, likely due to its numerous errors, such as the spellings ‘Mahammad’ instead of ‘Muhammad,’ ‘Jabrail’ for ‘Jibril,’ and ‘Moajaza’ for ‘Mujiza.’ Nevertheless, this edition influenced later Christian works on Islam: Elwood Morris Wherry, for example, references it in his influential Qur’an commentary, published in the 1880s.
This annotated edition of Shāh ʿAbd al-Qādir’s Qur’an translation provides an illustrative example of how Christian missionaries engaged with Islamic texts. By reinterpreting and annotating the Qur’an, the Christian author/editor of ‘The Qurán’ sought to challenge Islamic tenets and promote Christian theology. Although the immediate impact of this translation seems to have been limited, it is significant because it played a role in shaping subsequent Christian missionary scholarship on Islam.
Kamran Ahmad Khan