THE NAME ’ISA 266 THE NAME ’I’SA. [INthe interesting correspondence of Kamil-bin-Aitany, the Moslem convert who took the name of Abdul Messiah, he raised a question which has often perplexed others than converts : “ Will you kindly tell me why Jesus is styled ’I‘sa in the Moslem books, and did this name exist among the Arabs before Mohammed’s time ? ” This question could only arise in the mind of a Beirut Moslem after studying the standard Arabic Bible translation, where the name of our Saviour is uniformly rendered as “ Yesooa” and not in the form of “ ’I’sa,’’ by which He is known among Mohammedans. In earlier Arabic trans- lations, for example that printed by Richard Watson, London, 1820, the name is uniformly given as “ ’I’sa,’’ and this is the name used twenty-five times in the Koran* ; from this use it has passed naturally into all Mohammedan literature and speech, from Morocco to the Philippine Islands. The reason why the name of Jesus took this particular form in Mohammed’s revelation is a disputed point on which neither Moslems nor Oriental scholars have so far come to agreement ; nor is the question of the use of this name by missionaries among Moslems in special Bible translations closed. Some of the translations used in Moslem lands uniformly cling to the term “ ’I’sa ” ; others have adopted. various forms of the Greek ’I~croik (Jesus). Some believe that ’I’sa is a deliberate corruption of the term Yesooa, and consists of its radicals written backward. Baidhawi, the Koran commentator, states * The passages are the following :- 2 : 81, 130, 264 ; 3 : 40, 46, 48, 52, 78 ; 4 : 166, 161, 169 ; 6 : 50, 82, 109, 112, 114, 116 ; 6 : 85 ; 19:35; 33:$; 42:ll; 43:03; 67:27; 61:6, 14. 266 THE MOSLEM WORLD that ’I’sa is the Arabic form for Yesooa ; but Dr. Otto Pautz’ remarks :-“ The Koranic name ‘ ’I’sa ’ on the contrary, represents the Hebrew Esau, the brother of Jacob, and since the descendents of Esau were hostile to the people of the Covenant, the later Jews caricatured the name of Jesus by calling Him Esau. Mohammed doubtless took this form of the name from the Jews without being conscious of the evil significance connected with it.” When the Arabic Bible translation was made by Dr. Smith and Dr. Van Dyck, some would have had its style Koranic, that is, adopting idioms and expressions peculiar to Mohammedans, but in the documentary history of this translation we are told that “ All native Christian scholars decidedly objected to this. It was agreed to adopt a simple but pure Arabic, free from foreign idioms, and never to sacrifice sense to a grammatical quirk or a rhetorical quibble, or a fanciful tinkling of words.” t The question of rendering the name of our Saviour in the more familiar form “ ’I’sa’, for the revised Persian Bible and for the languages used among Moslems in East and West Africa is still being discussed. We believe, therefore, that by reprinting in these coluiiins a scholarly investigation of this subject made half a century ago by the Rev. Isidor Loewenthal, we shall confer a favour upon those who desire a reconsideration of this subject, and afford occasion for those who believe that the right rendering has been adopted to confirm their position by answering its arguments. In any case, Mr. Loewenthal undoubtedly proves, we believe, that in ordinary preach- ing to Moslems the missionary is entitled to use that form of the name which is most familiar to his hearers. The paper that follows was read at a meeting of the American (Presbyterian) Mission at Subathu in November, 1860, and printed as a painplilet at Calcutta by the Baptist Mission Press in 1861.--5. 31. 2.3 * Dr. Otto Pautz, “ Bluhnmmed’s Lehre von der Offenbarung.” Leipzig, 1898, page 191. t “ Documentary History of the Translation of the Scriptures into the Arabic Language.” Mission Press, Beirut, 1900, page 28. THE NAME 'ISA 267 THE NAME 'I'SA. (ANItiurstipfioa 1,y tltc Rev. Isitior Loero~trtl~nl,IlItkioiitrry lo thc Ajjhntts.) Language is tlie niediuni through which the xnis- sionary in every country is forced to carry out the commands to prcnch tlie Gospel and to teach all nations. Language, originally one, has become many ; and the miracle on the day of Pentecost typified the fact that all nations should each in their own tongue hear of the wonderful works of God. All language consists of words, and most languages known to us of words denoting objects, words denoting action, words denoting relation -no others. For the sake of analysis aiid instruction these three classes of words are frequently subdivided, but really there are only these three classes. Words denoting objects, for instance, are subdivided into nouns substantive and nouns adjective, nouns proper and nouns coninion, etc., but really they all form one class. The distinction, for instance, between proper nouns and common nouns is quite factitious, inasmuch as any coiiinion noun may bccoine proper, if the class which it denotes is reduced to a single individual, or if any single individual of the class appropriates the noun, for soine reason, by way of excellence. And indeed all proper nouns are originally coininon nouns, all names are originally mere appellatives : whilst a proper naiiie may again becoiiie a coninion noun. Thus, those whoin the Romans called vulgar or vulgarians, from contempt of their manners, have ever since been known ethno- logically as Bulgarians : and 0x1 the other hand, Frank, the naiiie of a nation, has come to denote a quality generally supposed to have belonged pre-eminently to that nation. So much being settled, tlie next principle to be recog- iiised is that every nation has always claimed, and always exercised, the right of using its own words. No onc dis- putes that what the English 1angua.ge calls heaven, the Persian has a right to call asinan. That the same right is exercised in reference to so-called proper nouns, or names, is evidenced by thousands of instances. The 268 THE MOSLEM WORLD capital of Hungary the Magyar calls Buda, the German calls it Ofen ; one of the principal German rivers the German calls Donau, the Englishman calls it Danube ; the Italian calls his beautiful city Firenze, the English- man calls it Florence ; the Dane calls the capital of his country Kjobenhavn, the Englishman calls it Copenhagen ; the same city is callcd by one nation Genf, by another Geneva, having in sound but one letter in common. It will not do to say that only one can be correct, and all the other designations are corruptions. In one sense, all change, the very principle that produces differences of speech at all, is corruption, in as far as not from any deficiency in the organs of hearing or uttering, but from a deliberate, yet unconscious, preference of the wrong to the right, the confusion of Babel has been perpetuated. But in another, more practical, sense philology knows no more of corruption than chemistry. Each language has its own laws of formation and development, and no language has a right to charge another with corruption. What is euphony to one, is cacophony to another ; the Sanscrit says charman, the Pushto tsarman, the Persian charm, the Hindi chamrti ; which of these is corruption ? Very often, it may be said, it is perfectly plain which is the original, and which the corruption (so-called), from the fact that the original signification of a name or a word cannot be gathered from the latter, when it may be obtained from the former. The capital of Western Poland, for instance, is called in the language of the place, the Polish, Poznccn, “ Recognition,” and a beautiful legend is connected with the origin of this name. Rut on maps published alike in Germany, Britain, France, or Italy, we only find the German corruption (if you please) “ Posen,” which has no sense. Still, it has the sense it is intended to convey ; the German, the Englishman, the Frenchman, the Italian, mean precisely the same place by Posen which the Pole designates by Poxnan ; and for its original signification only patriots and antiquarians care, a small minority, they, in the working-day world ; and millions understand what is meant by Posen, but only a few hundreds what is meant by Poxnun. It is on this principle that when the Western teacher i THE NAME 'I'SA 269 comes to a Mohammedan nation, he calls the Supreme Being not by its English, German, French, Hebrew, or Greek name, but he says Khuda or Allah ; the land of the Israelites' bondage he calls neither Egypt, nor A~~~TOF,nor Mitzrayim, but Misr ; the ancient home of eloquence and poetry he calls neither Hellas nor Greece, but Yunan ; the celebrated conqueror he calls neither Alexander, nor 'AX&$avspos, but Sikandar, if he wishes to be understood. He would waste breath, if he were to begin by telling his hearers that he could not use the name Sikandar, as that was incorrect, or a corrup- tion; the true name was Alexander, and his hearers should bear in mind that every time he said Alexander, he meant Sikandar. He would soon find to his chagrin that the very same causes which originally produced Sikandar out of Alexander, are still at work in the genius of the language which his hearers and pupils use, and he would perceive before his own eyes and ears false Sikandar arising out of correct Alexander. The Christian missionary's work among a heathen nation may most briefly be designated to be the making known of the name of Jesus, a name which God has given Him, and which is above every name, " that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth " ; that men might have their sins remitted, be justified, and obt.ain life through this name ; that this name should he believed on, invoked, obeyed, confessed, held fast, trusted in, revered, honoured, magnified, glorified ; that in this name prayer and thanksgiving should be offered, and that as in ancient times miracles were wronght in this name, so now every thing should be done in this name.