By: Abdullah A. Khan
One of the most important objectives of Muḥammad al-Ṭāhir ibn ʿĀshūr (d. 1394/1973) in his tafsīr, al-Taḥrīr wa al-tanwīr, and which he gives significant attention to, is to uncover and detail the various aspects of the iʿjāz (inimitability) of the Qurʾān that is born out of a fundamental Islamic principle—the Qurʾān is the greatest muʿjizah (miracle) of the Prophet ﷺ, it will continue to be a muʿjizah till the last day, and it is that muʿjizah which he clearly challenged his opponents with. It is the type of miracle established without a doubt: experienced firsthand by the Arabs and specialists, and for the rest, through their historically established inability to respond to the challenge.
The last of Ibn ʿĀshūr’s muqaddimāt (of ten which preface his tafsīr) is dedicated to this topic, which this article aims to summarise. Ibn ʿĀshūr points out that the subtleties of the Qurʾān and its finer details are infinite, but, for the ‘pondering reader’ to get only a glimpse of it, he discusses three essential aspects of the iʿjāz of the Qurʾān: its insurmountable eloquence (balāghah), its innovative style of prose (ibdāʿ al-naẓm), and its sagacious meanings (maʿānī ḥikmiyyah). He includes knowledge of the unseen as a fourth, but only due to precedent from the previous ʿulamāʾ.
He then states that a tafsīr which does not include explanations of the minutiae aspects of balāghah, whether in brief or at length, would not have achieved completion nor perfection. Rather, the mufassir is required to explain the methods of Arab usage and the special characteristics of its eloquence and then show how the Qurʾān supersedes that, to which only a few tafāsīr have given importance. He explains all of this, as Haddad comments, “with a Zamakhsharīan flourish.”
He dismisses the theory of ṣarfah (diversion) held by many of the Muʿtazilah and Ibn Ḥazm, which states that Allah diverted them from taking up the challenge by snatching away their ability or motivation. However, he says the accepted view is that the reason for their inability is that the Qurʾān reached such levels of eloquence and style that incapacitated the bulaghāʾ (those who were regarded as eloquent by the Arabs) from imitating such. The inimitability cannot be judged by any metric; rather, it is perceivable by those with the dhawq: an innate recognition in understanding the iʿjāz which one perceives through the subtleties and the hidden beauties of eloquent speech.
He states that the nature of the challenge was regarding a complete sūrah no matter how short (and not just a group of verses) since the various parts of balāghah revert to the entire naẓm (compositional structure) of the speech, its formulation (ṣawgh) and in relation to the intention behind its revelation. This can only be assessed over an entire chapter.
He then discusses the three essential characteristics which lead to iʿjāz, the first two of which were directed to the Arabs and Arabic specialists, and the third to all of mankind:
1- Balāghah and Faṣāḥah (Inimitable Eloquence)
The Qurʾānic eloquence is at such a level that the most eloquent from the Arabs could not measure up to it. It is able to convey intricate meanings and subtle points which the word was not merely placed for (waḍʿ). Rather, these meanings are the khuṣūṣiyyāt (peculiarities and specificities) of eloquent speech intended by Allah to incapacitate the Arab poets and orators since they used to compete in this manner. However, the extent to which the Qurʾān contained these aspects far superseded the most eloquent of the Arabs, which led to their inability to reproduce a chapter like it.
It is not possible to encapsulate the iʿjāz, but via the sciences (ʿilm) of al-maʿānī and al-bayān, one can uncover the balāghah (eloquence) of the Qurʾān, compare it with the Arabs’ best works (i.e. poetry), and, accordingly, glimpse the iʿjāz.
Some of the characteristics of eloquent speech Ibn ʿĀshūr lists include: taqsīm (division), tajnīs (paronomasia)—these two fall within the category of al-muḥassināt al-badīʿiyyah—muṭābaqah (parallelism), iltifāṭ (redirection), tashbīh (simile), istiʿārah (metaphor), and iḥtirās (preclusion).[1] Ibn ʿĀshūr finds many of these aspects far more prevalent in the Qurʾān than in Arabic poetry (even amongst the most eloquent).
In addition, the naẓm (structural composition) provided numerous dalālah (indications), including balāghiyyah—meanings alluded to through its balāghah. The Arabs incorporated this into their poetry, yet not to the extent found in the Qurʾān.
Another angle to the eloquence of the Qurʾān is the faṣāḥah (purity) of its language and the fluidity of its naẓm. Despite the eloquence of the Arabs, their works were not free of awkward phrasing and tongue-twisters. Whilst the Qurʾān contained an abundance of words and aimed to tackle a vast number of topics, it is free of this blemish. Furthermore, the Qurʾānic diction precisely conveys its intended meaning and, through its phrasing, encompasses multiple intended meanings.
Ibn ʿĀshūr concludes this aspect of eloquence by reiterating that all the above aspects are not at odds with the styles found in eloquent speech. On the contrary, it is rather counted among the intricacies which are minimally reflected in the Arab’s (and specifically, the eloquent from amongst them) speech due to their inherent human inability. What is important to note is that, as pointed out by Ibn ʿĀshūr, explaining the balāghah and explaining the iʿjāz are separate aims; the first is a medium to achieve the second.
2-Ibdāʿ (Invention)
Arabic literature is of two types: poetry and prose. The highest medium for conveying words among the Arabs was poetry, with rhymed prose coming second. Poetry—with its specific styles, diction and unique content—was easy to memorise and flowed smoothly off the tongue, causing it to spread far and wide among the people. Umar raḍiyallāhu ʿanh described it as “the knowledge of the people” and stated that “they did not possess any knowledge sounder than it.” [Ibn Salām states in his Ṭabaqāt fuḥūl al-shuʿarāʾ that in al-Jāhiliyyah, poetry was the repository of their knowledge and the ultimate expression of their wisdom.] Prose and other forms of speech were neither as easily memorised nor intended to be committed to memory.
Despite the elevated status of poetry, even the master poets were not above making basic errors that were overlooked, as well as including words and phrases that caused the tongue to stumble—flaws such that were they given time to correct, it would still not be completely free of them. Yet, this did not affect the overall eloquence of their poetry.
Then, when the Qurʾān came in prose form (fresh and new), appropriate for all intellects, covering all the requirements of living, encompassing a multitude of literary styles familiar to the Arabs from their poetry and other forms of eloquent speech together with innovating specific aspects of Arabic style, whilst also being easier to memorise than poetry, flowed more naturally from the tongue, and free of shortcomings and limitations found within the works of even the most eloquent Arabs, it not only added to the weight of the challenge but also showcased its miraculous nature. All this is based purely on the naẓm of the Qurʾān (structural approach), which, while unfamiliar to the Arabs in its originality, remained within the boundaries of the Arabic language.[2]
The miraculous nature as such can be gleaned from the famous statement of al-Walīd ibn al-Mughīrah (and others) at the time when he heard the Prophet ﷺ reciting Qurʾān, “By Allah, he is not a kāhin (soothsayer); it does not contain its style nor its rhymes. We know poetry in its entirety: rajaz, hazaj, qarīḍ, mabsūṭ, and maqbūḍ. He is not a poet.”
Amongst the Qurʾānic styles which Ibn ʿĀsḥur identifies as most significantly divergent from the Arabs is combining two objectives at once: mawʿiẓah (admonition) and tashrīʿ (legislation). This is accomplished by the ẓāhir proffering a particular meaning, and by further reflection, additional meanings are deduced.
Another Qurʾānic style is what he terms tafannun (shifting from one fann to another) via iʿtirāḍ (parenthesis), tanẓīr (comparisons), tadhyīl (supplementation), mutarādifāt (synonyms), and iltifāt (redirection). Amazingly, with all these stylistic shifts, the Qurʾān is able to maintain tanāsub (correlation) running through them, further exemplifying its beauty. As such, this will assist the reader in listening to the Qurʾān, stave off any boredom, and retain their attention, which will lead to the increased frequency in the recitation of the Qurʾān—one of its objectives. Furthermore, the Qurʾān avoids repetition without variation, whether in words or forms (ṣīghah), and alternates between genders and particles when the language allows for it.[3] The slight variations when repeating support the aim of talwīn al-maʿānī (polysemy).
This aspect of iʿjāz, although focused purely on the naẓm of the Qurʾān, is equally as important as the Qurʾānic diction. Hence, al-Rāzī states, “The Qurʾān, just as it is inimitable due to the eloquence of its words and the distinction of its meanings, it is also inimitable because of its arrangement and the compositional structure of its verses. Perhaps, those who said that it is inimitable by its style meant that.”
Ibn ʿĀshūr ends by saying that in addition to the above, its substance was true reality devoid of false exaggerations and fabricated boasts resulting in the dominance of truth and delight for its listener. That is a spiritual influence and not merely verbal or semantic.
Both aspects, 1 and 2, are directed towards the Arabs; the challenge is specifically targeted at their eloquent poets and orators, and consequently a muʿjizah against the rest of them since the inability of the best amongst them despite sufficient motivation is decisive against all their ability. Then, those who gained expertise in Arabic and were able to compete with the eloquent Arabs were equally addressed by this challenge.
As for those whom the Arabs’ failure to reproduce a chapter reached convincingly, i.e., through tawātur or historical absence, this is also sufficient as an iʿjāz iqnāʿī (satisfactory) and ijmālī (overall).
2.1- Mubtakarāt al-Qurʾān (Qurʾānic firsts)
Ibn ʿĀshūr discusses (and restates) some of the stylistic firsts of the Qurʾān: after reiterating that the Qurʾānic style distinctly differs from the Arabs’ poetic and oratory styles, he asserts that part of its purpose was to memorise and recite (tilāwah). Others he includes are:
- the precise structure and syntax;
- its division into sūrahs and intra-stylistic subdivisions;
- the narrative style (qaṣaṣī) in describing the Hereafter as well as past events, rarely found amongst the Arab poets;
- paraphrasing and translating quotations according to the Qurʾānic inimitable style;
- pithiness (ījāz), a hallmark of eloquent speech, which the Qurʾān executed flawlessly without ambiguity;
- in addition to varied ellipsis (ḥadhf);
- inclusion of additional meanings in a singular expression due to a word inclusion;
- and coupling firm speech (jazālah) with compassionate speech (riqqah) found in almost every sūrah.
2.2- ʿĀdāt al-Qurān (Qurʾānic customs)
Ibn ʿĀsḥur then mentions the necessity for a mufassir to recognise the stylistic and semantic customs of the Qurʾān, some of which have been noted by the salaf, such as kaʾs being used in the meaning of khamr. He then lists further examples based on the observations of mufassirūn as well as his own:
- pairs of words which are rarely separated, like ṣalāh and zakāh, jūʿ and khawf, Jannah and Jahannam, jinn and ins, muhājirūn and anṣār, nafʿ and ḍarr, samāʾ and arḍ, etc.;
- mentioning a promise or warning and following it up with a threat or glad tidings via istiṭrād and iʿtirāḍ (digressive and parenthetical clauses);
- using past tense verbs to inform of events taking place in the Hereafter;
- following up legislation and commandments with a mention of ilāhiyyāt (divine attributes) or an explanation of the states of the Prophets and conditions of the Hereafter to reinforce;
- using the demonstrative pronoun hāʾulāʾ without an ʿaṭf bayān, it refers to the mushrikūn;
- omitting particles of ʿaṭf before qāla and its permutations when relating dialogues and responses except when shifting from one dialogue to another.
He alerts the reader to other instances in his tafsīr.
3- Maʾānī Ḥikmiyyah and Ishārāt ʾIlmiyyah (Sagacious Meanings and Sciential Indications)
The third aspect of iʿjāz, which, according to Ibn ʿĀshūr, was overlooked by previous ʿulamāʾ, is the profound meanings and indications of rational and learned realities and truths. This, firstly, contrasts with the Arabs, whose only source of information was their poetry and the material contained within. Second, such meanings of the Qurʾān could not be conceived by the human intellect by those at the time of its revelation nor in the times after.
Ibn ʿĀshūr divides knowledge into two categories: iṣṭilāḥī and ḥaqīqī. Iṣṭilāḥī is cultural and temporal knowledge such that the person who possesses it is considered knowledgeable amongst his people. It is a type of knowledge that is era-dependent, changing with civilisation. Ḥaqīqī is knowledge through which one reaches the peak of knowledge and perceives realities that benefit them in this life and the Hereafter. Both types of knowledge lead to human perfection and are means to become leaders of the time, and both are found in the Qurʾān.
The first type of knowledge does not require great deliberation and prolonged periods of reflection; it is easily understood. During the Companions raḍiyallāhu ʿanhum’s time, the pinnacle of expertise was with the ahl al-kitāb, which comprised knowledge of religious laws, stories of the prophets and historical incidents, all of which the Qurʾān contains. This knowledge was only known to the extremely learned scholars from them, those who spent their lives learning it. Yet, despite this knowledge not being common amongst the Arabs and the Prophet ﷺ being unlettered (that he could not have merely read some works), he attained this knowledge and argued against them with it, all of which indicates the iʿjāz of the Qurʾān.
The second type of knowledge is further subdivided into two. The first is by merely listening and comprehending, one can grasp the iʿjāz of the Qurʾān. The second subdivision requires one to know the fundamentals of the various sciences (qawāʿid al-ʿulūm) to understand this aspect of the iʿjāz, after which it becomes clearer bit-by-bit according to the limits of the people’s understanding and the development of the science. Both subdivisions are proof enough that the Qurʾān is from Allah since an unlettered individual (ummī) brought it to such a place whose people were not familiar with the particulars of the various sciences, whilst the Prophet ﷺ resided with them and did not leave. Ibn ʿĀshūr claims that the iʿjāz of both knowledge types are alluded to in the Qurʾān.[4]
Thereafter, Ibn ʿĀshūr states that among the methods of the Qurʾānic sciential iʿjāz is that it calls towards reflection (naẓar) and reasoning (istidlāl). Paraphrasing al-Shifā, he says, “Among them is its gathering of information and knowledge which the Arabs were not acquainted with, nor any of the ʿulamāʾ of the previous nations, and none of their books included it. It gathered in it an explanation of the knowledge of religious laws, points out methods of logical proofs and refutes various sects with strong conclusive arguments (burhān) and proofs such as Qurʾān 21:22 and 36:81.” He also quotes Ibn ʿArafah who says, “Some of them (mufassirūn) say that the Qurʾān includes statements which the common people understand, statements which experts understand and that which both groups understand—this is the stature of eloquent, concise speech.”
This third aspect of iʿjāz is established for the Qurʾān by its totality and not by individual verses or sūrahs. Therefore, the resultant iʿjāz is not accomplished through the challenge of the Qurʾān, but it is a result of being the Qurʾān, although it is indicated in Qurʾān, 4:82. This aspect of the iʿjāz, to the Arabs, is in having access to knowledge not available to them. To the ahl al-kitāb in particular, it is in informing them on aspects of their religion despite being an ummī. Likewise, for the rest of the people, it is that such knowledge came from an unlettered individual who grew up amongst illiterates. It is a muʿjizah in this regard for all of mankind till the end of time since its iʿjāz can be perceived by intellectuals outside the Arab nation through the translation of its legislative (tashrīʿī), wise (ḥikmī), scientific (ʿilmī), and moral (akhlāqī) meanings. It serves as dalīl tafṣīlī for the intellectuals and a dalīl ijmālī for those who receive their testimony.
There is no basis to the claim that someone taught the Prophet ﷺ this since he was in the public eye of his community, far from the people of the Book. Furthermore, he propagated the abrogation of Judaism and Christianity and the distortions of their books.
4- Ikhbār bi al-Maghībāt (Informing of the Unseen)
This final aspect of iʿjāz Ibn ʿĀshūr includes following the precedent set by those before even though it does not have, according to him, additional relevance to the naẓm of the Qurʾān, its faṣāḥah and balāghah, and there are not many instances for it. Among the examples he includes are the foretelling of the victory of Rūm (Byzantines) after their defeat to the Persians (Sassanians) in Qurʾān, 30:1-4, and the conquest of Makkah as foretold in Sūrat al-Fatḥ. Foretelling an outcome is proof that the Qurʾān is from Allah and provides an additional layer to the challenge levelled against the Arabs.
Ibn ʿĀshūr concludes this muqaddimah with the view that reflecting over the balāghah of the Qurʾān, its faṣāḥah, its beautiful composition, and the plethora of finer points of Qurʾānic eloquence, one can only deduce that it is from the Knower of the Unseen as is the madhhab of the later ʿulamāʾ and not as some ʿulamāʾ claimed that it was within their ability, but were merely diverted away from taking up the challenge (ṣarfah).
Selected Bibliography
Al-ʿAskar, ʿAbd al-Muḥsin. Al-Azhār al-mutanāthirah ʿalā al-muqaddimah al-ʿāshirah. Riyadh: Dār al-Tawḥīd li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzīʿ, 1439/2018.
Haddad, Gibril Fouad. “Tropology and Inimitability: Ibn ʿĀshūr’s Theory of tafsīr in the Ten Prolegomena to al-Taḥrīr wa’l-tanwīr.” In Journal of Qur’anic Studies, 21, no. 1 (2019): 77-88.
Ibn ʿĀshūr, al-Ṭāhir. Al-muqaddimāt. In al-Taḥrīr wa al-tanwīr. Vol. 1:103–131. Beirūt: Dār Ibn Ḥazm, 2021.
[1] The translation of terms has been adapted from Haddad, Tropology and Inimitability, (2019).
[2] The difference between no. 1 and no. 2 is that the first is linked with meanings and textual implications whereas the latter is primarily focussed on structure. The latter is the medium to achieve the former.
[3] What is meant by number is singular, dual and plural. Examples of each respectively are Qurʾān, 66:4, 6:139, and 2:58 with 7:161.
[4] For type 1, see Qurʾān, 6:155-7 and 11:49, and for type 2, see 28:49-50.
“`