Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 25

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question

of Nam of the Quranic Text


Michel Cuypers
IDEO (Institut Dominicain dtudes Orientales), Cairo

This article is situated in the context of recent research into the coherence and
structure of the Quranic text, introduced at the end of the twentieth century by
Angelika Neuwirth, Pierre Crapon de Caprona, Mustansir Mir, M.A.S. Abdel
1
Haleem, Neal Robinson, Mathias Zahniser and more recently by Salwa El-Awa.
This research resumes, with new insights, the very ancient question of the
composition, or nam, of the Quran. While taking advantage of elements of these
studies, a detour by modern Biblical exegesis allowed me to push them further, by
applying to the Quranic text the different rules and characteristics of the Semitic
rhetoric discovered through the Biblical studies, but commanding, as we will see,
the texts of the Bible as well as those of other sacred texts of the ancient Semitic
world, particularly the Quran.

A brief historical survey of the problem of nam


The well known commonplace in Quranic studies of the apparent disorder of the
Book can be made specific in the following way: is the Quran composed of
originally independent fragments, brought together somewhat randomly when the
final collection of the Muaf was made, after the Prophets death (as the historical
criticism dominating modern Quranic studies in the West claims); or are these
fragments or textual units, despite appearances, arranged into a genuine
composition, to form a logical and coherent whole? But, if so, what kind of
composition?
The question arose very early in the Muslim world itself and was already the subject
of several books in the third/eighth and fourth/ninth centuries, carrying the title of
2
Nam al-Qurn, The Composition of the Quran. Unfortunately these books are
lost, but their content can be deduced from later similar works on the inimitability
of the Quran, ijz al-Qurn. Among other questions, they try to reply to
opponents who denounced the lack of coherence in the composition of the Quranic
3
text. In reply, their authors show how certain verses match up, throughout the
Quran, thus providing a certain unity in the entire Book. They also point out several
characteristics of composition such as parallelisms or repetitions. These replies,
however, remain very partial and do not rest on any general theory of the

Journal of Quranic Studies

composition of the Book. The same applies to the authors of later encyclopedias of
the Quranic sciences, such as Badr al-Dn al-Zarkash (d. 794/1392) (Al-Burhn f
ulm al-Qurn) and Jall al-Dn al-Suy (d. 911/1505) (Al-Itqn f ulm alQurn), or to certain exegetes, such as Fakhr al-Dn al-Rz (d. 606/1209) or
4
Burhn al-Dn al-Biq (d. 885/1480) who also pick out several features of
composition. In particular they show that such a verse is linked to the preceding
verse, or the beginning of a sura is linked to the end of the preceding one. They thus
highlight a certain concatenation of verses and suras (what Mustansir Mir has called
5
a linear-atomistic method ), but without succeeding in finding a genuine organic
structure combining the different parts of a sura or different suras together. The
varied elements of composition which they bring out (parallelism, repetition,
antithesis, etc.) remain isolated, without managing to constitute a system. Abd alQhir al-Jurjn (d. 471/1078) was doubtless the classic author the closest to such
systematization, but his structural theory did not go beyond the study of short textual
units, verses or sentences. The ancients seem to have had little interest in (or
awareness of) the structure of large textual sets.
At the very end of the twentieth century, two Muslim commentators undertook a
kind of systematization of the composition of the whole Quran. The Pakistani
exegete Amn Asan Il (d. 1997) showed that most of the suras, if not all of
them, form pairs, semantically connected by similarity, opposition or
6
complementarity a hypothesis that my personal analysis on the basis of Semitic
rhetoric seems to confidently confirm. On the other hand, the Syrian commentator
Sad awwa (d. 1989) has tried to show the structure of every sura, by dividing it
7
into four different levels of text, composing together a coherent whole, an
achievement which was never attempted before him, according to his own words.
The effort of Sad awwa was very new in Islamic exegesis, but it was not
supported by any solid literary theory: the divisions of the text he proposes are
intuitively made, without well defined criterion. They often remain too subjective.
From Biblical rhetoric to Quranic nam
For centuries Biblical scholars have been confronted with the same question as
Quran scholars, of yesterday and today: like the Quran, certain texts of the Bible
also appear effectively as a collection of more or less independent fragments,
without clear logical coherence between them. This is true of the prophetic books,
but also of the four latest books of the Pentateuch, of the Psalms, and even of the
Gospels (a mixture of brief narratives, parables, teachings and polemical debates).
Today, alongside the majority of scholars holding to the historical-critical method,
which deconstructs the text to understand its historical genesis, in a diachronic
perspective, other scholars, taking up a synchronic viewpoint, pose the question of
the coherence and composition of the Biblical texts as they appear in their final

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text

canonical version, whatever might be their historical development. Instead of


assuming an incoherent text made up of independent fragments, one starts with the
inverse hypothesis, of a coherent text, the various parts of which are organically and
deliberately connected.
The first discovery, which was to be the starting point of a systematic theory, took
two and a half centuries to develop. It was mainly made by an English Biblical
scholar, Robert Lowth (17101787), who in 1753 published his Readings on the
sacred poetry of the Hebrews (De sacra poesi Hebraeorum). In this book he shows
that the Psalms and other poetical texts of the Bible are composed of parallel verses,
which maintain between them a relationship of synonymy, of antithesis, or
complementarity. This theory has become classical in Biblical studies. But a few
years before, the German scholar Johann Albrecht Bengel (16871752), noticed in
his Gnomon Novi Testamenti or Exegetical Annotations on the New Testament
(1742) the great frequency in the New Testament of the feature of chiasmus
(AB/BA) or inverse parallelism which sometimes takes the form of a concentric or
ring composition, when, between the two sides of the inverse parallelism, a central
element is inserted (AB/x/BA).
Subsequently it was perceived that these features of composition existed throughout
the Bible, not only in relation to verses, but also on a much wider scale, between
groups of verses, and thus at several levels, even in an entire book. It was again two
Englishmen who, around 1820, were foremost in continuing the work of the
8
9
pioneers just mentioned: John Jebb (17751833) and Thomas Boys (17921880).
These principles of composition are now well systematized in a theory which was at
first known as Biblical rhetoric and more recently as Semitic rhetoric when it
appeared that it applied equally to ancient non-Biblical Semitic texts: Akkadian
10
(third millennium BC), Ugaritic (second millennium BC) Pharaonic texts (around
11
1000 BC), and Islamic adth(s). In the 1980s a team of four researchers in Beirut,
analysed, in accordance with these principles, some Biblical texts and some
12
adth(s). They showed that these texts are all constructed on the same principle of
symmetry, typical of Semitic rhetoric and very different from the Greek rhetoric of
which we are all heirs, in both the Western and the Arab world. The term rhetoric
here must be taken in the restricted sense of the art of composition of speech or
the arrangement of the parts of speech, which corresponds to only one of the parts
13
of classical Greek-Latin rhetoric, the dispositio. Just as the composition of the
word or sentence follows rules of grammar, speech as a whole also follows rules of
composition. And as every author has a certain freedom in the choice of the words
and the rules of syntax, according to the purpose which he is seeking, it will be the
same for the Semitic author with the principles of rhetorical composition. It is thus
not about fixed forms compulsory for the text, as in the ancient poetry, but about a
kind of grammar of speech or rhetoric of composition. While Greek rhetoric uses

Journal of Quranic Studies

a linear and continuous manner of composing speech, Semitic rhetoric for its part
proceeds by way of semantic correspondences, in complex games of symmetries.
The principal theoretician of this Semitic rhetoric today is Roland Meynet, professor
of Biblical exegesis at the Gregorian University in Rome, who has set out his
systematization in two books: Rhetorical Analysis. An Introduction to Biblical
14
15
Rhetoric, and Trait de rhtorique biblique.
Over the past fifteen years, I have published in various articles in French the
analysis of the composition of some thirty suras, following this system, and recently
16
a book, which analyses the whole of the long sura 5, al-Mida. It turns out that
this rhetorical analysis can be applied perfectly, in accordance with all its
principles, to the Quranic text. My research is therefore totally interdisciplinary,
since it applies to the Quran a method developed entirely within the framework of
Biblical studies.
A sketch of rhetorical analysis
The basic principle of composition in Semitic rhetoric is symmetry. The aim of the
analysis will, therefore, essentially be to pinpoint the various forms of symmetry
which make up the text, defining the relationships which the different textual units
have with one another. As we have seen above, there are three of these symmetries
or three figures of composition parallelism, or parallel construction, where
related units of text reappear in the same order (ABC//ABC); ring or concentric
composition, when the units of text are arranged concentrically around a centre
(ABC/x/CBA, but sometimes simply A/x/A); and mirror composition, when the
central element is missing (ABC/CBA).
These symmetries are total when all the elements of the text or most of them,
correspond to each other. But mostly, symmetries are only partial, indicated in the
text by compositional indicators: outer terms, at the beginning and the end of the
unit they frame (the traditional inclusion); initial terms, central terms and final
terms, respectively at the beginning, middle or end of symmetrical units; median
terms, at the end of one unit and the start of the next (what Biblical scholars call the
link-word). The relationship between these terms can be a relationship of identity,
synonymy (in its broad sense of terms of similar meaning), antithesis, homophony,
paronymy (or near-homonymy, which is quite frequent in the Quran).
These indicators and symmetries exist at different levels of the text, which must be
carefully distinguished from each other, starting from the lower levels and working
up to the higher levels:
the member (or stich, in Greek) is the primary rhetorical level, usually
corresponding to a syntagma;
the segment consists of one, two or three members (never more);

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text

the piece consists of one, two or three segments (never more);


the part consists of one, two or three pieces (never more).
The same goes for the four superior levels: the passage, the sequence, the section
and the book, each made up of one or more units (here in any quantity) of the level
which immediately precedes them. Sometimes intermediary levels sub-part, subsequence and sub-section are added.
The rhetorical analysis carried out on about thirty suras, of diverse literary genres
(eschatological oracle, as in the sura 101, the first example below; prayer, as the
Ftia, the third example; narrative, as the sura Joseph, fourth example; polemic, as
the second and fifth examples, extracted from the sura 5), of different datings
(Mekkan or Medinan), and whatever their style, poetical or prosaical, shows that
these principles of Semitic rhetoric apply to all the suras analysed. This allows one
to extrapolate reasonably by asserting that the totality of the Quranic text is most
likely composed in this way. It is too early to create precise statistics, but it seems
that the parallel composition appears mostly at the lower levels of composition
(segments and pieces), that the concentric or ring compositions dominate at the
medium levels (parts, passages and sequences), and that the mirror composition
appears more frequently at the upper level of the sections. It is necessary to
underline the frequency of the concentric composition, at the intermediate levels,
which are also the most significant for the interpretation of the text: the centre of
these compositions plays indeed a quite particular role as key of the interpretation. It
is often a question (as in the sura Joseph) or a moral or theological assertion (also in
the sura Joseph, and in the example of the sura 5:69), or a quotation, something
which has to make the reader/listener think and take up a position.
We understand now why the Quranic text seems often so disordered, at a simple
reading: the ideas do not succeed one another in a progressive linear continuity, as
we are used to in the logical and rhetorical tradition inherited from the Greeks, but
they match at a distance, in a complicated set of symmetries. The apparent disorder
is not the result of a lack of composition, but on the contrary the result of a very
sophisticated composition, according to a rhetoric wide-spread in the antique world
of the Middle East, but later forgotten, including by the Arabs, most probably under
the influence of the Hellenistic culture.
An interpretation of the text according to its literary context
The rhetorical analysis has not only an aesthetic purpose: as with any exegetical
method, it aims above all at a better understanding of the text. The traditional
commentaries proceed mostly by comment verse by verse: every verse is explained
for itself, usually without taking into account the immediate literary context of the
verse. Now we know the danger of taking a sentence or a verse out of its context. In

Journal of Quranic Studies

the Quranic commentaries, the literary context is generally replaced by the


historical or supposed historical context of the asbb al-nuzl. At best, the whole
Quran is considered as the literary context of a verse, according to the method of
the comment on the Quran by the Quran (tafsr al-Qurn bi-l-Qurn): a verse
is explained by another verse taken somewhere else in the Book. The relevance of
such an explanation depends obviously on the ingenuity and perspicacity of the
commentator.
As an example, let us here indicate a particularly important case, where the nonconsideration of the literary context of a verse brought the classical exegetical
tradition and even the modern one, to interpret this verse in a totally erroneous way.
Verse 2:106 is repeatedly instanced as the Quranic foundation of the exegetical
theory of abrogation (nsikh wa manskh) according to which a Quranic verse can
abrogate another Quranic verse, supposed to be chronologically earlier: For
whatsoever verse We cancel or cause to forget We bring a better or the like (transl.
R. Bell). But if this verse is read in its literary context, it can immediately be seen
that it is part of a long polemic with the Jews who refuse to believe that God could
send a prophet and a revelation outside of the one chosen people, the Jewish people.
Not only did Muhammad pretend to be a prophet, but he also claimed authority to
quote the Torah and modify it. Thus it is that God, in verse 2:106, backs his prophet
up by affirming that he can very well abrogate or ignore certain passages of the
Torah because something better will be sent down i.e. the verses of the Quran. The
abrogation here does not mean replacing one verse of the Quran by another verse of
the Quran but rather replacing certain verses of the Torah by those of the Quran.
The other two verses (16:101, 13:39) which are also invoked to justify the
abrogation method are in a similar situation; their context is that of a polemic with
the Jews regarding the Torah and do not refer to the Quran. Several Muslim
commentators of the late nineteen century (Sayyid Amad Khn, d. 1898) and the
twentieth century (Abdullh Ysuf Al, d. 1953; Ab al-Al Mawdd, d. 1979;
Muammad Asad, d. 1992) denounced the misinterpretation of verse 2:106... but in
vain. This doctrine continues to circulate as a quasi-dogmatic certitude. A Muslim
researcher, Amad asan, in an article on the question of abrogation published in
1962, expresses his astonishment: In view of the evident context of the verse under
reference [2:106]... it looks strange that some of the most eminent authorities of
17
tafsr have missed the central point of this verse. We must conclude that the
abrogation theory has no foundation in the Quran; it is an innovation of the jurists
(fuqah), belonging to the fiqh, not to the tafsr. The example of verse 2:106
demonstrates the weakness of interpreting a verse in isolation, without considering
its literary context, and also the shortcomings of many of the occasions of
revelation; those invoked to explain verse 2:106 are obviously artificial.

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text

Sura 101, The Crashing Blow


In this first example, we shall follow step by step the work of analysis of the
structure of the text, in several successive stages.
Table 1. Sura 101, the Members

18

The Crashing Blow.


What is the Crashing Blow?
3
And what will explain to you what is the Crashing Blow?
4
On a day when people will be like scattered moths,
5
and the mountains will be like carded wool.
67
Then as for him whose balance is heavy, he will be in a pleasant life,
89
but as for him whose balance is light, his mother will be the abyss.
10
And what will explain to you what it is?
11
A blazing fire.
2

On the first table, the text has been rewritten, its members superimposed in the style
of poetry. A member is a short unit of sense, usually a syntagma, but sometimes,
like here, a single word (verse 1: al-qria) or two words (verse 11).
At a second level (table 2) it is noticed that certain members can be regrouped in
parallel pairs.

Table 2. Sura 101, the Segments


1

The Crashing Blow.

2
3

and what will explain to you

On a day when
and

6-7
8-9

Then
but

WHAT IS THE CRASHING BLOW?


WHAT IS THE CRASHING BLOW?

PEOPLE

WILL BE LIKE

SCATTERED MOTHS,

THE MOUNTAINS

WILL BE LIKE

CARDED WOOL.

AS FOR HIM WHOSE BALANCE IS HEAVY,

HE WILL BE IN A PLEASANT LIFE,

AS FOR HIM WHOSE BALANCE IS LIGHT,

HIS MOTHER WILL BE THE ABYSS.

10

And what will explain to you

11

A blazing fire.

what it is?

The members 1, 10 and 11 remain isolated, the others form parallel pairs or
bimember segments: verses 1 and 11 contain only one or two terms (not a sentence);
verses 2 and 3 take up a similar question, slightly modified; verses 4 and 5 are
constructed grammatically in the same manner, and have a similar meaning: on the

Journal of Quranic Studies

Day of Judgment, the people are scattered just as the mountains explode; verses 67
and 89 are equally of the same grammatical construction but of opposite meaning.
The whole is thus composed of six segments: three of a single member, and three of
two. Now it is a rule of Semitic rhetoric that the higher level of segments, to be
called the piece, cannot contain more than three segments. In fact it is seen (table 3)
that these six segments can regroup themselves in two pieces of three segments.
Table 3. Sura 101, the Pieces
1

A The Crashing Blow


B

2
3

4
5

WHAT IS
AND

WHAT WILL EXPLAIN TO YOU

On a day when
and

people
will be like
the mountains will be like

the Crashing Blow?


WHAT IS
the Crashing Blow?
scattered moths,
carded wool.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A

6-7
8-9

B
C

10
11

Then
but

as for him whose balance is heavy,


as for him whose balance is light,

he will be in a pleasant life,


his mother will be the abyss.

AND

WHAT WILL EXPLAIN TO YOU

WHAT

it IS?

A blazing fire.

At first, the two pieces seem to be composed in a parallel composition


(ABC/ABC): one term appears in the first segments AA (the Crashing Blow /
the abyss, at the end of verse 9), followed by a question in the second segments B
B (what will explain to you) and its reply in the third segments CC (a day /
a blazing fire).
But more numerous signs of composition show that the two pieces are above all set
out in inverted parallelism (ABC/CBA) (see table 4). At the two ends (AA)
isolated terms appear: the Crashing Blow (evoking a cosmic upheaval) / a blazing
fire (evoking Hell). The correspondence of these two extreme terms which frame
the whole sura is emphasized by their assonance: qrIA/mIyA. In median
position BB appear questions, partly identical. In central position, CC, appear
two segments, each one of strictly parallel structure. Moreover, the two segments
form between them a complementary parallelism: the first (C) describes the
cataclysm of the Last Day, the second (C) the Judgment. From the point of view of
rhetoric, the sura is thus constituted of a single part, evoking the Day of Judgment in
two complementary pieces, set out in a mirror composition or chiasmus, the first
describing the cosmic upheaval of this day, the second the Judgment and its
retribution.

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text

Table 4. Sura 101, the Mirror Composition


1

A THE CRASHING BLOW (qrIA)


2

B = What is
3
= AND
WHAT WILL EXPLAIN TO YOU
4

+ On a day when
5
+ and

people
the mountains

the Crashing Blow?


WHAT IS
the Crashing Blow?
will be like
will be like

scattered moths,
carded wool.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6-7

+ Then as for him whose balance is heavy,


8-9
+ but as for him whose balance is light,

B =
A

10

11

AND

he will be in a pleasant life,


his mother will be the abyss.

WHAT WILL EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT IT IS?

A BLAZING FIRE (mIyA)!

To show the difference between the synchronic approach of the rhetorical analysis
and the diachronic approach of the historical criticism, let us quote Richard Bells
19
comment to this sura:
This surah is a fragment, or a collection of fragments. Vv. 14 [=15
in Vulgate version] were probably an explanation of the word alqria which occurs in 69,4. Whether vv. 5, 6 [69] originally formed
part of the passage is doubtful. They may have been added later or
they may have been removed from Surah 69, being replaced by what
now stands there at v. 19 ff. []. Vv. 7, 8 [10, 11] are certainly of the
nature of a gloss to the word wiya, v. 8 [11], whether added by
Muhammad himself, or by a later hand, may be left undecided [].
From the point of view of the Semitic rhetoric, this sura is perfectly built and forms
very clearly a coherent unity. There seems to be no need to deconstruct it in several
fragments. As regards the rhetorical characteristics of this sura, we have
distinguished four textual levels: nine members, six segments, two pieces, one part.
We met two of the three figures of composition used in Semitic rhetoric: the
parallelism (at the level of the segments and the pieces) and the mirror composition
(at the level of the part). We saw close symmetries: two synonymic (23; 45) and
one antithetic (69); and two remote symmetries (1//11 and 3//10).

10

Journal of Quranic Studies

Sura 5, The Table, v. 15-19


The long fifth sura approaches highly varied subjects. It consists, at the upper level,
in two large sections (171/72120), each containing three sub-sections, arranged
according to a mirror composition, in the following way:
A (126)
B (2750)
C (5171)
C (7286)
B (87108)
A (109120)
20

As it is not possible to show here the detailed analysis of all the fifth sura, we will
only analyse an extract (verses 1519), but a theologically important one, since it
presents Muhammad as the messenger sent by God to the people of the Book, Jews
and Christians, to rectify their doctrinal errors on God, on Christ, and on themselves.
Without entering into too much technical detail at the lower textual levels
21
(segments, pieces), we will examine the upper level of the passage. It consists of
three parts, arranged in a ring composition: two short parts frame a larger central
part (see table 5).
The three parts (1516/1718/19) are arranged concentrically: the outer parts (15
16 and 19) match one another, as do the two sub-parts of the central part (17 and
18). The outer parts (1516 and 19) share the following correspondences: each is of
two pieces; the first pieces (15ad and 19ae) begin in exactly the same way:
People of the Book! Our Messenger has come to you; he clarifies to you (15ab;
19ab). The subject of the sending of the Prophet for a mission of explanation,
introduced at the beginning of the passage, thus reappears at the end. The second
pieces (15e16 and 19fg) begin with came to you, each time followed by two
terms qualifying the Messenger (Muhammad) in connection with the message which
he brings: a light and a clear Scripture (15e) and a herald and a warner (19f).
Both extreme parts thus concern the mission of the Prophet as Messenger of God to
clarify the Scriptures. We can read them very well in a logical continuity. But the
first part is suddenly interrupted by a central part (1718) which changes the theme:
later the theme of the first part is resumed in the third part.
The central part (1718) is formed by two parallel sub-parts (17 and 18), each of two
pieces. The first segment of each of the first pieces contains a profession of faith by
the People of the Book: the Christians affirm the divinity of the Messiah, son of
Mary (17b), and Jews and Christians claim to be children of God and his beloved
(18ab). The Prophet is then called to reply, Say, by reminding his interlocutors

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text

11

both of their human frailty (18cd) and of the Messiahs weakness (if God so
wished, he could be annihilated, 17d). Then follows theological assertions: Gods
universal sovereignty is repeated in an identical formula (17e and 18g): And Gods
is the possession of the heavens and the earth and what is between them. Gods free
will is attested, first as Creator (He creates what he wills, 17f), and then as Judge
(He pardons who he will, and he chastises who he will, 18e-f). The central part
thus expresses clearly what the initial piece of the passage announced: that the
Prophet clarifies things hidden by the people of the Book (the omnipotence of the
divine will), and that he effaces other things (as the divine filiation of Christ and of
the Jewish and Christian believers).
Table 5. Sura 5:1519
15a

PEOPLE OF THE BOOK, OUR MESSENGER HAS COME TO YOU; HE CLARIFIES TO YOU
d
much of what you have hidden of the Scriptures and effaces many things.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------e
16a
Surely, CAME TO YOU from God A LIGHT AND A CLEAR SCRIPTURE; through this, God
b
guides those who observe his good pleasure on the ways of peace, and he brings them from
c
darkness out into light with his permission, and he guides them to a straight path.
17a

Surely, they have misbelieved, who said,


God is the Messiah, the son of Mary!
c
d
Say, Who could prevent God, if He wishes to destroy the Messiah, the son of Mary,
and his mother, and all those who are on earth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------e
AND GODS IS THE POSSESSION OF THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH AND WHAT IS BETWEEN THEM.
f
He creates what He will,
g
AND GOD IS OVER EVERYTHING POWERFUL.
b

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
18a

And the Jews and the Christians have said,


We are children of God and His beloved.
c
d
Say, So why does He chastise you for your sins? No, you are human beings, of His
creation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------e
f
He forgives those he will, and he chastises those he will.
g
AND GODS IS THE POSSESSION OF THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH AND WHAT IS BETWEEN THEM.
h
And to him is what is to come.
b

19a

PEOPLE OF THE BOOK, NOW THERE HAS COME TO YOU OUR MESSENGER. HE MAKES
d
e
CLEAR TO YOU, after a break of the messengers, so that you will not say, There came not
to us a herald or a warner!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------f
However, CAME TO YOU A HERALD AND A WARNER.
g
AND GOD IS POWERFUL OVER EVERYTHING.

12

Journal of Quranic Studies

Finally, the whole passage can also be presented in a mirror way (see table 6): the
central part 1718 is framed by both extreme parts, but as this central part consists
itself of two parallel subsections, the whole passage can be represented as a mirror
composition or chiasmus (AB/BA). A repetition underlines this composition: at the
end of the first side of the chiasmus (17g) appears a theological assertion identically
repeated at the end of the second side (19g): and God is over everything powerful.
This sentence concludes each of both sides arranged in mirror.
Table 6. Sura 5:1519, the Mirror Composition
A
15a

PEOPLE OF THE SCRIPTURE, HAS COME TO YOU OUR MESSENGER; HE CLARIFIES TO YOU
d
much of what you have hidden of the Scriptures and effaces many things.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------e
16a
Surely, CAME TO YOU from God A LIGHT AND A CLEAR SCRIPTURE; through this, God guides
b
those who observe his good pleasure on the ways of peace, and he brings them from
c
darkness out into light with his permission, and he guides them to a straight path.
B
17a

Surely, they have misbelieved, who said,


God is the Messiah, the son of Mary!
c
d
Say, Who could prevent God, if He wishes to destroy the Messiah, the son of Mary,
and his mother, and all those who are on earth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------e
AND GODS IS THE POSSESSION OF THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH AND WHAT IS BETWEEN THEM.
f
He creates what He will,
g
AND GOD IS OVER EVERYTHING POWERFUL.
b

B
18a

And the Jews and the Christians have said,


We are children of God and His beloved.
c
d
Say, So why does He chastise you for your sins? No, you are human beings, of his
creation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------e
f
He forgives those he will, and he chastises those he will.
g
AND GODS IS THE POSSESSION OF THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH AND WHAT IS BETWEEN THEM.
h
And to him is what is to come.
b

A
19a

PEOPLE OF THE BOOK, NOW THERE HAS COME TO YOU OUR MESSENGER. HE MAKES
d
e
CLEAR TO YOU, after a break of the messengers, so that you will not say, There came not
to us a herald or a warner!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------f
However, CAME TO YOU A HERALD AND A WARNER.
g
AND GOD IS POWERFUL OVER EVERYTHING.

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text

13

The Ftia
Grammatically, the sura al-Ftia is divided in three parts: a first part of nominal
sentences (14), a second of two verbs of the same shape (5), and a third one,
entirely commanded by the initial verb ihdin. These three parts group together
members which are semantically related to each other. They are the three rhetorical
pieces of the sura.

Table 7. The Ftia, first Piece


1

A In the name of God,


2
B = Praise to God,
3

A
4
B =

the Mercyful,
Lord

the Compassionate.
of the worlds,

the Merciful,
Master

the Compassionate,
of the Day of Judgment.

In the first piece (table 7), we notice a correspondence between members 1 and 3,
partially identical, and members 2 and 4 which contain a term of divine sovereignty
(Lord/Master) followed by a complement. The piece thus consists of two parallel
segments, the first members of which correspond to each other, and also the second
members.

Table 8. The Ftia, third Piece


6

Guide us to the straight path,


7a
the path of those whom You have blessed,
b

= not [ghayr] [of those] who incur anger,


c
= nor [wa l] are astray.

The members 6 and 7a of the third piece (table 8) form a complementary parallel
segment; the second member explains the first one: the straight path is the one of
those whom God has blessed. The members 7b and 7c both begin with a negation
(ghayr/wa l) and are synonymic. Both members thus form a piece of two
antithetical segments: the first one speaking about the straight path, the second of
that of the misled. But other correspondences allow the appearance of a mirror
composition (table 9).

14

Journal of Quranic Studies

Table 9. The Ftia, the Mirror Composition of the third Piece


6

A GUIDE us to the straight path,


7a
B = the path of those whom You have blessed [alay-him],
b

B = not
[of those] who incur anger
c
A nor ARE ASTRAY.

[alay-him],

Those who are astray (A) corresponds, by antithesis, to the first term: guide us
(A). The terms of the closer members, B and B, have antithetical terms (those
whom You have blessed / those who incur anger), and end by the same formula
alay-him.
Table 10. The Ftia, central Piece.
5a

+
b
+ and

You we worship,
You we ask for help.

The central piece (table 10) is made of one single segment. Each of the two
members begins with the same term You, and continues with two verbs of the
same form and same semantic field: to worship and to ask for help are both
fundamental forms of the prayer.
The structure of every level of the text appears through indicators of composition
which are:
identical terms: God, repeated twice (1 and 2), the Merciful, the
Compassionate (1 and 3), You (5a and b), the path (6 and 7a), alay-him
(7a and b);
or synonymic terms: Lord (2) / Master (4). Both negations at the beginning of
the last two members: ghayr (7b) / wa l (7c);
or antithetical terms: guide us (6) are astray (7c); those whom you have
blessed (7a) who incur anger (7b);
or paronymical terms (= almost homonymous): AR-RAMn / AR-RAM (the
diverse forms derived of the same Arabic root form easily paronymes);
or assonant terms: both extreme pieces (14 and 67c) have final assonant
terms: iD-DN // a-llN.
We thus obtain a sura consisting of three pieces disposed in a ring composition (see
table 11): two pieces of two segments frame a piece of a single segment. The central
piece connects perfectly both extreme pieces: its first member (we worship) refers
to what precedes, which is entirely a prayer of worship of God with some of his
most beautiful names, and its second member announces what follows, which is

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text

15

entirely a demand to be guided on the straight path and protected from the path of
those who are astray.
As we have seen before, the centre of ring compositions always contains particular
features, that the Biblical exegete Nils W. Lund has theorized in a series of laws in
22
his reference book Chiasmus in the New Testament (1942). The first one of these
laws is that the centre is always the turning point, which is revealed to be perfectly
true in the Ftia, since the centre makes the transition between the first piece and
the third one. But the centre has generally also a particular importance as a key to
understanding the entire text. Here, the centre declares clearly what the Ftia is: a
prayer, in its two fundamental forms, worship and demand. It opens the Quran with
a prayer, corresponding to both final prayers of suras 113 and 114, which enclose
the Book by a liturgical inclusion.

Table 11. The Ring Composition of the Ftia


1

A In the name of God,


2
B = Praise to God,
3

A
4
B =
5a

+
b
+ and

the Mercyful,
Lord

the Compassionate.
of the worlds,

the Merciful,
Master

the Compassionate,
of the Day of Judgment. [iD-DN]

You we worship,
You we ask for help. [-N]

A GUIDE us to the straight path,


7a
B = the path of those whom You have blessed [alay-him],
b

B = not
[of those] who incur anger
c
A nor ARE ASTRAY. [a-llN]

[alay-him],

16

Journal of Quranic Studies

Sura 12, Joseph, v. 35-42


The sura Joseph is entirely composed according to a mirror composition (table
23
12) .
Table 12. The Mirror Composition of Sura 12
A Prologue

1-3

B Vision of Joseph
C Joseph's disputes with his brothers: guile of the brothers against Joseph
D Josephs relative promotion
E Attempt of Josephs seduction by the woman

8-18
19-22
23-34

F Joseph in prison, interpreter of the visions of both prisoners,


and prophet of monotheism

35-42

F Joseph in prison, interpreter of the visions of the king

43-49

E Outcome of the seduction of the woman: Joseph rehabilitated

50-53

D Josephs definitive promotion


C Josephs disputes with his brothers: Josephs guile to his brothers
B Fulfillment of Josephs vision
A Epilogue

4-7

54-57
58-98
99-101
102-111

We shall examine here only the passage F, quasi-centre in the structure of the
narrative, before this one again follows the curve towards its outcome (see table 13).
Passage F is bounded by the synonymic extreme terms: they should imprison him
for a time (35c) / he remained in the prison for several years (42d). The passage
consists of three parts, arranged in ring composition (A/X/A): A- both dreams of
the prisoners and their request of interpretation (3537d); X- the propheticmonotheist preaching of Joseph (37e40); A- the interpretation of both dreams by
Joseph (4142).

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text


Table 13. The quasi-central Passage of Sura 12
35a Then it appeared to them,
b after they had seen the signs,
c that THEY SHOULD IMPRISON HIM FOR A TIME.
= 36a And entered the prison with him two youths.
= b Said one of them: I see myself pressing wine,
= c and said the other: I see myself carrying bread on my head from which the birds are eating.
+ d INFORM US OF THE INTERPRETATION THEREOF
+ e for indeed we see you to be a virtuous man.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 37a He said: There will not come to you any food with which you are provided
b but I SHALL INFORM YOU OF THE INTERPRETATION THEREOF
c before it comes to you.
= d THAT is among what my Lord has taught me.
= 37e Verily I have forsaken THE CREED of a people who do not believe in God
= f and
who in the hereafter do disbelieve.
+ 38a And I have followed THE CREED of MY FATHERS, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
+ b It was not for us to associate with God anything.
c THAT is part of the bounty of God to us and to the people.
d BUT MOST OF THE PEOPLE DO NOT SHOW GRATITUDE.
-------------------------------------------= 39a O my two prison mates!
= b Are diverse lords better
= c or God the One, the Victorious?
------------------------------------------+ 40a What you worship instead of Him are mere names
+ b which you and YOUR FATHERS have named,
+ c for which God has sent down no authority.
= d The decision belongs to God alone.
= e He has commanded that you serve non but Himself.
+ f THAT is the upright RELIGION.
+ g BUT MOST OF THE PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW.
+ 41a O my two prison mates!
+ b AS FOR ONE OF YOU,
+ c he will serve wine to his MASTER
d and AS FOR THE OTHER,
e he will be crucified
f and birds will eat from his head.
= e The matter is decided
= f concerning which you inquire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------42a And he said to the one of them who he thought was to escape :
b MENTION ME TO YOUR MASTER.
= c But Satan caused him to forget to MENTION HIM TO HIS MASTER.
= d So HE REMAINED IN THE PRISON FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

17

18

Journal of Quranic Studies

Both extreme parts will not be analysed here in detail. The reader will see for
himself the correspondences between the symmetric terms: in small italic, the
corresponding terms in the members of a same segment; in small capitals, the
corresponding terms between the segments or the pieces; in big capitals, the
corresponding terms between the parts. Let us notice simply a symmetry of
composition of both extreme parts, each built in two pieces, the first pieces (3536
and 41) counting three segments, the second (37ad and 42) two segments. Both
extreme parts are in continuity, but the stream of the narrative is interrupted by the
central part, whose theme is quite different. This corresponds to the second law of
Lund according to which at the centre there is often a change in the trend of
24
thought, and an antithetical idea is introduced. After this the original trend is
resumed and continued until the system is concluded. For want of a better term, we
25
shall designate this feature the law of the shift at the centre. This discontinuity led
26
certain scholars, partisans of historical criticism, as Richard Bell, to consider the
central passage as a later editorial addition. Numerous centres of concentric
constructions in the Quran have been considered in the same way, and for the same
reason, while it is a very common process in Semitic rhetoric, to place in the centre
of a system an idea which interrupts the thread of the speech, so as better to draw the
attention of the reader/listener to a particularly important point.
The composition of the central part (37e40) is particularly well polished. It is
arranged in its turn in ring composition: two pieces frame a brief central piece made
of a single segment (39). The whole part is bounded by the synonymic extreme
terms: creed (milla, 37e and 38a) / religion (dn, 40f). These terms announce the
entire meaning of the preaching, which is an invitation to abandon the creed of a
people who do not believe in God (37e), and to convert to the upright religion
(40f). The name of God appears once in every segment of the part (with the
exception of the last segment 40fg). Both extreme pieces end with synonymic final
terms: But most of the people do not show gratitude (38d) / But most of the
people do not know (40g). My fathers, in the central segment of the first piece
(38a) corresponds to your fathers, in the first segment of the third piece (40b). We
can consider it as an application of the fourth law of Lund, according to which
There are also many instances of ideas, occurring at the centre of one system and
recurring in the extremes of a corresponding system, the second system evidently
having been constructed to match the first. We shall call this feature the law of shift
27
from centre to the extremes. Here, Joseph strongly sets out the religion of his
fathers against that of the fathers of his prison companions.
In the first piece, Joseph tells his conversion to the only God; in the third piece, he
invites his prison mates to do the same. In the centre, Joseph asks them the question
which has to determine their choice: are multiple gods better that the Only,
Almighty God? Two frequent features of the centres of rhetorical ring compositions

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text

19

are that they often contain a question, or a solemn moral or theological assertion,
which invites the reader/listener to take a position. Now, we have here a clear
theological question about monotheism, which concerns the core of the Quran and
the Islamic faith. Placed in the centre of a passage situated itself in the quasi-centre
of the sura, before the curve of the narrative goes up again, this question is thus
emphasized particularly, and it gives its specifically Quranic meaning to Josephs
narrative. In the book of Genesis, Joseph is one of the twelve patriarchs of the
Jewish people, but not a prophet. By his monotheistic preaching, he undoubtedly
takes on the features of a prophet, in the Quran. Far from being a piece introduced
later on, somewhat artificially in Josephs Quranic narrative, this monotheist speech
retells the narrative of Genesis, reorienting it according to a typically Quranic
theological perspective. Our rhetorical analysis confirms thus what the Finnish
researcher Jaakko Hmeen-Anttila had already seen perfectly:
The Prison episode which is the lowest point in the career of Joseph
marks the turning point of the Story. It is around this episode that the
whole story seems to have been composed. It is both thematically and
structurally the central point; Thematically, it has of course
enormous weight, as it propagates the same message as the whole of
the Qurn, viz. monotheism (the Prison Sermon, vv. 3740). The
weight of this sermon is also seen in that here the person of
Muammad shines through in the story of Joseph It is also the only
scene in which Joseph acts as a prophet and not a mere, though
divinely inspired, interpreter of dreams. This scene is the raison dtre
of the whole Surah, without which it would merely be one of asr al28
awwaln.
Let us finally notice a repetition of terms. At the end of the first part (37d) and at the
end of both symmetric extreme pieces of the central part (38c and 40f) appears a
member introduced by that (dhlika): in the first case, the member underlines
Josephs charisma as interpreter of dreams (That is among what my Lord taught
me), in the second case, he underlines the monotheist faith of Joseph (That is part
of the bounty of God to us and to the people), and in the third case, its monotheist
prophetic preaching (That is the upright religion). So are underlined, by the same
final term in three rhetorical units of the passage, the three characteristics of Joseph
in the Quran: the interpreter of the dreams, the believer and the prophet of
monotheism.

20

Journal of Quranic Studies

Sura 5, The Table, v. 6571


Table 14. Sura 5:6571
65a

If THE PEOPLE OF THE BOOK had believed and been pious, we would have wiped
c
out from them their bad actions, and we would have let them enter to the gardens of delight.
66a
b
And if they had followed the Torah and the Gospel and what has BEEN SENT DOWN TO
c
THEM from their Lord, they would have eaten of what is above them and of what is under
d
e
their feet. Among them is A MODERATE COMMUNITY, but [for] MANY AMONG
THEM, WHAT THEY DO is bad!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------67a
b
Prophet, communicate what has been sent down to you from your Lord! And
c
d
if you did not do this, you would not communicate his message! And God will
e
protect you from men. Surely, God does not guide the unbelieving people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------68a
b
Say, O people of the Book, you do not rely on anything as long as you do not follow the
c
d
Torah and the Gospel and what HAS BEEN SENT DOWN TO YOU from your Lord. And
e
certainly makes MANY AMONG THEM grow what has been sent down to you from your
f
g
Lord, in rebellion and unbelief. And do not torment yourself for unbelieving people.
69a

Surely, those who believe, and THOSE WHO PRACTICE-JUDAISM, AND


c
THE SABIANS AND THE CHRISTIANS, whoever believes in God and the Last
d
e
f
Day and does good works there is no fear for them, and they will not be
afflicted.
70a

Surely, we have received the covenant of the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, and we have
c
d
SENT TO THEM messengers. Each time CAME TO THEM a messenger with what their souls
e
f
did not want, some they treated as liars, and some they killed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------71a
b
c
They reckoned there would be no test, and they became blind and deaf. Then God
d
e
CAME BACK TO THEM. Then became blind and deaf MANY AMONG THEM. But God is
well-seeing WHAT THEY DO.

Like the preceding example, these verses of the fifth sura, al-Mida, form a
passage of three parts where the outer parts, which are in correspondence, frame a
central part. The People of the Book appear at the start of each part: in 65a as such;
in more detail in the central part (69b) and, finally, reduced to the children of Israel
in the third part (70a). In the outer parts, the People of the Book and the children of
Israel are the ungrateful beneficiaries of Gods care. In the first part, God sends
down the Quran to them (66b, 68c); in the third part he sends messengers (70bc)
and he himself came back to them after their first act of infidelity (71c).
Nevertheless they have not responded to the divine benevolence but rather rebelled
and not believed (65a, 68fg), treated the prophets as liars and killed them (70ef).

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text

21

The outer parts of the passage end with the words what they do: the way the
People of the Book act is condemned (66e) for God knows well what they do and
sees it is wrong (71e). However, the outer pieces as well as the outer parts have the
words many among them (66e, 68d, 71d) as their last or penultimate terms. Not all
the People of the Book or the children of Israel, therefore, are rebels, but only many
of them. There are some who are a faithful moderate community (66d). This is
what the central part (69) vigorously affirms: the Jews, the Sabians and the
Christians have all access to salvation (there is no fear for them, and they will not
be afflicted, 69ef), just as the Muslim believers, provided that they believe in God
and the Last Day and do good works. This solemn assertion is a theological, transhistorical one, while the parts which frame it allude to particular situations and
attitudes based on the contingency of history: If the People of the Book had
believed... if they had followed the Torah and the Gospel... for many among them
what they do is bad..., the Quran stirs up the rebellion and unbelief of many of
them, treating the prophets as liars and killing some of them etc. The same verse
29
5:69 is also found in sura 2:62. According to the classical commentators, verse
2:62 has been abrogated by verse 3:85: And whoever desires a religion other than
Islam, it will not be received by him, and in the hereafter he will be among the
losers. Rhetorical analysis, however, demonstrates the opposite by pointing out the
importance of this verse because of its central situation in 5:69. Fazlur Rahman
strongly rejects the traditional interpretation:
In both these verses [2:62, 5:69], the vast majority of Muslim
commentators exercise themselves fruitlessly to avoid having to admit
the obvious meaning: that those from any section of mankind
30
who believe in God and the Last Day and do good deeds are saved.
There is a frequent tendency in classical exegesis to minimize the importance of
verses which seem to contradict those which frame them, or even to abrogate these
verses. But the fact that they are found at the centre of ring compositions, gives
them, on the contrary, enhanced importance. These are the central verses meant to
explain the others, and not the other way around!
Since the Medinan suras are later than the Mekkan verses, Medinan verses are
thought to abrogate Mekkan verses according to the abrogation theory. However the
Sudanese reformist Mamd Muammad aha had proposed turning things around;
since the Mekkan verses have a more universal, theological and broad-minded
perspective, these verses should abrogate the Medinan verses which are profoundly
influenced by the very special historical context of the foundation of the first
Muslim State. But it can be seen that both types of verses are also found in the
Medinan suras, such as the fifth sura, al-Mida, which is, in my opinion, the final
31
word of the Quranic revelation. Textual analysis, according to Semitic rhetoric,

22

Journal of Quranic Studies

enables us to distinguish the different semantic levels in the suras: certain verses
have a universal ethical or theological significance and a timeless value. These
verses seem to appear mostly (if not always) at the centre of concentric rhetorical
compositions. The peripheral verses have a more limited significance and are
marked by concrete historical circumstances those surrounding the foundation of
the first Muslim community and have a cultural context extremely different from
our times. These verses should not be abrogated but they should be understood in
the historical context of the foundation of the Muslim community and not be given
an absolute and permanent validity. I agree with the opinion of the late Nar Ab
Zayd (d. 2010): The confusion between what is dated, whose meaning is linked to a
specific historical event, and what is stable and permanent in religious texts always
32
leads to aberrations.

Conclusion
The application of rhetorical analysis to the Quran demonstrates clearly that the
sacred book of Islam is composed in accordance with literary rules known by the
Arab society addressed by the muhammadian preaching. The Quran expresses itself
not only in the Arabic language of its public, but also according to the mental and
literary categories which were familiar to them, and which were common, as it
seems, in all the Semitic world of Antiquity. Quranic studies here join
anthropology. In her latest work, the English anthropologist, Mary Douglas,
investigates in particular the ring composition in diverse cultures of Antiquity of the
oriental Mediterranean Sea, showing it as a very wide-spread mode of expression in
this area, in high times.33 Biblical studies made the most detailed analysis of it, but
recent research reveals that this rhetoric long predated the Bible (present in
Pharaonic, Mesopotamian and other texts of the Middle East) and that it is also
subsequent to it (present in the Quran and the adth(s)).
This mode of composition constitutes a real rhetorical system which can resolve in a
new and satisfactory way the enigma of the composition or nam of the Quran. The
few examples analysed in this article are not exceptions: all the Quranic texts which
34
I have analysed until now follow the same rules of composition. This observation
opens obviously new perspectives for the interpretation of the text: the context of
every verse, defined by the rhetorical analysis of the text, must play a more essential
role in the determination of its sense. That is particularly important with regard to
the concentric compositions, with the characteristics of the centre, as a privileged
place in the sense.

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text

23

NOTES
1

See Angelika Neuwirth, Studien zur Komposition der mekkanischen Suren, Studien zur
Sprache, Geschichte und Kultur des islamischen Orients 10, Berlin/New York, Walter de
Gruyter,1981. Pierre Crapon de Caprona, Le Coran : aux sources de la parole oraculaire.
Structures rythmiques des sourates mecquoises, Publications Orientalistes de France,
Arabiyya 2, Paris,1981. Mustansir Mir, Coherence in the Qurn. A Study of Ils Concept
of Nam in Taddabur-i Qurn, Indianapolis, American Trust Publications, 1986; The sra
as a unity. A twentieth century development in Qurn exegesis, in G.R. Hawting and AdulKaher A. Shareef (ed.), Approaches to the Qurn, London/New York, Routledge, 1993,
pp. 21124. M.A.S. Abdel Haleem, Context and internal relationships: keys to quranic
exegesis. A study of Srat al-Ramn (Qurn chapter 55), in G.R. Hawting and Adul-Kaher
A. Shareef (ed.), Approaches to the Qurn, pp. 7197. Neal Robinson, Discovering the
Quran. A Contemporary Approach to a Veiled Text, London, SCM-Press, 2003; Hands
Outstretched: Towards a Re-reading of Srat al-Mida, in Journal of Quranic Studies, vol.
3,1, 2001, pp. 119. A.H. Mathias Zahniser, Sra as Guidance and Exhortation: The
Composition of Srat al-Nis in A. Afsaruddin and A.H.M. Zahniser (ed.), Humanism,
Culture and Language in the Near East : Studies in Honor of Georg Krotkoff, Winona
Lake/Indiana, Eisenbrauns, 1997, pp. 7185; Major Transitions and thematic Borders in two
long Sras: al-Baqara and al-Nis, in I.J. Boullata (ed.), Literary Structures of Religious
Meaning in the Qurn, London/Richmond, Curzon Press, 2000, pp. 2655. Salwa M.S. ElAwa, Textual Relations in the Quran: Relevance, Coherence and Structure, London-New
York, Routledge Taylor, 2006.
2

See Claude-France Audebert, Al-ab et linimitabilit du Coran. Traduction et


introduction au Bayn ijz al-Qurn, Damas, Institut franais de Damas, 1982, pp. 5871.
For a more detailed historical survey of the question, see the appendix The question of the
Qurans coherence in the history of its exegesis, in Michel Cuypers, The Banquet. A
Reading of the fifth Sura of the Quran, Rhetorica Semitica, Miami, Convivium Press, 2009,
pp. 493512.
3

See Audebert, Al-ab et linimitabilit du Coran, pp. 130, 13839.

Ibrahm Burhn al-Dn al-Biq, Nam al-durar f tansub al-ayt wa l-suwar, 22 vols.,
Cairo, Dr al-kitb al-islm, 1992.
5

Mir, The sra as a unity, p. 212.

See Mir, Coherence in the Qurn, pp. 7584.

Sad awwa, Al-Ass f l-tafsr, Cairo, Dr al-Islm, 2003 (6th ed.), pp. 301.

In 1820, Jebb published Sacred Literature.

In 1824 Boys published Tactica Sacra. An attempt to develop, and to exhibit to the eye by
tabular arrangements, a general rule of composition prevailing in the Holy Scriptures.
10

See an example of each one in Roland Meynet, Rhetorical Analysis. An Introduction to


Biblical Rhetoric, JSOT.S 256, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1998, pp. 35758.

24

Journal of Quranic Studies

11

See Laetitia Coilliot, Michel Cuypers and Yvan Koenig, La composition rhtorique de
trois textes pharaoniques, BIFAO (Bulletin de lInstitut Franais dArchologie Orientale)
109, 2009, pp. 2359.
12

Roland Meynet, Louis Pouzet, Nayla Farouki and Ahyaf Sinno, Tarqat al-tall al-balgh
wa l-tafsr. Tallt nuu min al-kitb al-muqaddas wa min al-adth al-nabaw al-sharf,
Beyrouth, Dar el-Machreq, 1993 (in Arabic); French translation : Rhtorique smitique.
Textes de la Bible et de la Tradition musulmane, Paris, d. du Cerf, 1998.
13

Quintilius divides rhetoric in five parts: Inventio, Dispositio (or structure), Elocutio (style
and figures of speech), Memoria (memorizing of the discourse), Actio (recitation of the
discourse).
14

See above note 10.

15

Roland Meynet, Trait de rhtorique biblique, Rhtorique smitique 4, Paris, Lethielleux,


2007. An English translation is in progress.
16

Cuypers, The Banquet (see note 2). Translated from French : Le Festin. Une lecture de la
sourate al-Mida, Rhtorique smitique, Paris, Lethielleux, 2007.
17

Let us add that the authors above-mentioned, while recognizing the common error of
interpretation of the verse 2:106, commit another error, claiming that this verse means the
abrogation by the Quran of the entire Torah (and the other Scriptures previous to the Quran)
whereas in many places the Quran recognizes the value of the previous revelations of which
it considers itself the authorized interpreter. The abrogation thus means no more than the
replacement of certain verses or passages of the Torah by those of the Quran, and not the
abolition of the entire Torah! For a detailed study of the question of abrogation see Genevive
Gobillot, Labrogation (nsikh et manskh) dans le Coran la lumire dune lecture
interculturelle et intertextuelle and Cuypers, Lanalyse rhtorique, une nouvelle mthode
pour lexgse du Coran in Al-Mawqif, Actes du premier colloque international sur : Le
Phnomne religieux, nouvelles Lectures des Sciences sociales et humaines, Mascara 14-16
avril 2008, Publications du Centre Universitaire de Mascara, Algrie, pp. 527.
18

This personal translation of the Quranic text is here no more than a tool: it follows as much
as possible the letter of the Arabic text as much as possible.
19

Richard Bell, The Qurn. Translation, with a critical re-arrangement of the Surahs,
Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, 1950 (first ed. 193739), p. 674.
20

For such a detailed analysis, see Cuypers, The Banquet. For the general composition of the
sura, see chap. 13.
21

See Cuypers, The Banquet, pp. 1447.

22

These laws are listed in Cuypers, The Banquet, p. 36. The original text is in N.W. Lund,
Chiasmus in the New Testament, Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press, 1942,
pp. 401. Reprinted as Chiasmus in the New Testament. A Study in the Form and Function of
Chiastic Structures, Hendrickson, Peabody MA, 1992.
23

For a discussion and justification of this mirror composition, see Cuypers, Structures
rhtoriques dans le Coran. Une analyse structurelle de la sourate Joseph et de quelques

Semitic Rhetoric as a Key to the Question of Nam of the Quranic Text

25

sourates brves, MIDEO (Mlanges de lInstitut Dominicain dtudes Orientales) 22, 1995,
pp. 1345.
24

In this case, the idea is not strictly speaking antithetical, but totally different. The difference
represents both Josephs charismas: interpreter of the dreams in the extreme parts, prophet in
the central part.
25

See Cuypers, The Banquet, p. 36.

26

See Bell, The Qurn, p. 217 (Vv. 37-41 have certainly also been revised).

27

See Cuypers, The Banquet, p. 36.

28

J. Hmeen-Anttila, We will tell you the best of Storie. A study on surah XII, Studia
Orientalia 67, Helsinki, 1991, pp. 278. The same opinion in Alfred-Louis de Prmare,
Joseph et Muhammad. Le chapitre 12 du Coran, Publications de lUniversit de Provence,
1989, p. 96.
29

See Ibn Kathr, Tafsr, Beyrouth, 2000, p.74.

30

Fazlur Rahman, Major Themes of the Quran, p.166, quoted in J. D. Mc Auliffe, Quranic
Christians, p.121. The same interpretation of salvation granted equally to Muslims,
Christians, Jews and Unitarians (Sabians) by the contemporary Pakistani legal scholar,
Nasira Iqbal in One World for All, Foundations of a socio-political and cultural Pluralism
from Christian and Muslim Perspectives, A. Bsteh (ed.), Delhi : Vikas Publishing House
PVT. Ltd., 1999, p.148.
31

See M. Cuypers, The Banquet, p. 4817.

32

Nasr Abou Zeid, Critique du discours religieux, Sinbad Actes Sud, Paris, 1999, p.72
(quotation translated from this French edition).
33

Mary Douglas, Thinking in Circles. An Essay on Ring Composition. Yale University Press,
New Haven and London, 2007.
34

See my bibliography in The Banquet, p. 517.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi