This paper argues that English translations of the Qur’ān play a pivotal role in shaping interfaith dialogue, either fostering mutual understanding or reinforcing religious division, depending on the translator’s ideological stance. While interreligious relations have historically been marred by conflict, the 1893 Parliament of the World’s Religions marked a turning point toward more inclusive and dialogical engagement. In this context, translating the Qur’ān emerged as a crucial medium through which Islamic teachings could be made accessible to non-Muslim audiences. Several scholars, including Kidwai and Elmarsafy, have explored the Orientalist framing of Qur’ān translation; however, few researchers have examined how modern renderings consciously reposition the text as a site of interfaith ethics. This study critically examines whether George Sale’s influential translation of the Qur’ān—reprinted nearly 200 times—contributes to or hinders interfaith dialogue between Muslims and Christians. It compares Sale’s Qur’ān rendition into English with five contemporary translations. The paper analyzes the translations of five Qur’ānic verses promoting coexistence, with particular attention to key terms such as إِكْرَاهَ ikrah (compulsion), الدِّينِ ad-dīn (religion), تَّقْوَىٰ taqwā (piety), and مُسْلِمُونَ muslimūn (submitters). Guided by Munday’s theory of ideology in translation, the analysis demonstrates that Sale’s rendering adopts a distinctly polemical tone intended to assert Christian superiority. The findings indicate a clear shift from polemical to dialogical translation strategies. Sale’s Orientalist approach—evident in his footnote on Q.4:157, where he characterizes Muslim exegesis as intellectually deficient—ultimately constrains meaningful interfaith engagement. In contrast, Khattab employs an inclusive and ethically grounded approach that actively fosters interreligious dialogue. By positioning Qur’ān translation at the intersection of theology, linguistics, and interfaith relations, this paper demonstrates that translation choices hold significant power: they can either bridge divides or exacerbate tensions between religious communities.
Najlaa Aldeeb (Thu,) studied this question.