Document Type : علمی- ترویجی
Author
Assistant Professor and faculty member, Department of Qur’an and Islamic Sources, Faculty of Maʿāref and Islamic Thought, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
The nature of revelation in the Holy Quran is considered one of the challenging topics of Muslim thinkers. Although the denial of language revelation has been discussed since the revelation of the Holy Quran, but now it has become more prominent due to the creation of the prophetic experience in the Prophet (PBUH). Some believe that relying on linguistics, the Holy Qur'an must have a human speaker, and on the other hand, there is no reason to prove that the revelation from the Prophet (PBUH) is linguistic in the Qur'an. While referring to the linguistics of the Qur'an as well as numerous Qur'anic reasons, it can be proven that the revelation in the Qur'an was a linguistic revelation.This research examines the proofs of linguistic revelation with the linguistic approach of the Qur'an using descriptive and analytical methods. The result of this research shows that linguistic revelation in the Qur'an can be proven based on linguistics and emphasis on the existence of the theologian and the characteristics of the audience, as well as numerous Qur'anic reasons.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
The Qur’an, as the final revealed scripture, was sent down to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). The majority of Muslims maintain that the words of this book constitute the literal speech of God, conveyed directly to the Prophet, who then recited them to the people. Accordingly, everything contained in the Qur’an—both wording and meaning—originates from the Almighty, and the Prophet’s role was limited to conveying that revelation to others.
Nevertheless, some contend that the Qur’an represents a prophetic experience: that is, the Prophet (PBUH) attained a distinctive awareness through his interaction with God, and in turn, clothed the revealed meanings in his own verbal expressions. The thesis that the Qur’an’s wording is human in origin is a relatively recent position. Because it carries significant implications—such as vulnerability to critique, the possibility of error, and the erosion of the Qur’an’s sanctity and normative authority—this claim warrants careful examination.
Muhammad Mojtahed Shabestari supports the human-origin thesis. He argues that God lacks linguistic faculties and uses linguistics to support his view. He holds that the Qur’an’s wording is not revelatory (Mojtahed Shabestari, 2016: 14). He further claims that neither the Qur’an nor other religious sources prove the Prophet ever denied that the Qur’an was his own speech (ibid: 158). This claim stems from debates about religious experience and has been challenged elsewhere (cf. Alizadeh et al., 2021: 99). Nevertheless, linguistic analysis plays a significant role in understanding verbal revelation. Many Qur’anic verses indicate that their wording is revealed. This study, therefore, focuses on linguistic discussions within the Qur’an and its many indications to clarify and support the divine nature of its language.
Research Question(s)
This study’s main research question is: Which linguistic arguments support the view that Qur’anic revelation is verbal in both wording and meaning?
Subsidiary research questions include:
What general linguistic arguments support the verbal nature of Qur’anic revelation?
What are the arguments for the verbal nature of revelation in the Qur’an, specifically from a Qur’anic linguistic (language-in-the-Qur’an) perspective?
Literature Review
Hesam Danalu and Ali Sharifi, in "An Analysis of the Principle of Conformity in the Phenomenon of Verbal Revelation," examine the approach verbal revelation philosophically. They argue that the principle of conformity does not contradict the idea that Qur’anic wording is divine. Drawing on unity of being and gradation in existence, they contend that the Qur’anic words are created directly by God.
In another article, "Demonstrating the Divine Origin of the Qur’anic Text through an Analysis of the Meaning‑Construction Process," the authors highlight the element of the Qur’an’s progressive revelation and its impact on how recipients responded during the meaning-construction process, thereby arguing for the text’s divine origin. Although the first article approaches the issue philosophically and the second relies primarily on the dynamics of meaning formation to demonstrate verbal revelation, neither work engages with linguistic scholarship nor examines the Qur’an’s internal (intra‑textual) evidences concerning the reception and linguistic nature of revelation.
Reza Rouhani’s paper, "An Examination of the Issues and Dimensions of the Qur’an’s Verbal Revelation," analyzes Inzāl and Tanazzul in the Qur’an to address semantic and theoretical aspects of revelation. However, it does not address recent reformist objections to verbal revelation by contemporary thinkers.
Methodology
Because Mojtahed Shabestari, relying on linguistic arguments, asserts that neither the Qur’an nor the religious sources furnishes evidence for verbal revelation, it appears that linguistic dimensions and intra‑textual evidence have not been adequately examined in peer studies. Therefore, the present study—employing a descriptive‑analytical method and centering on Qur’anic verses while drawing on discussions in Qur’anic linguistics—aims to critique Mojtahed Shabestari’s position and to substantiate the verbal nature of the Qur’anic revelation.
Conclusion
The following is an academic, formal, and fluent English translation of your Persian paragraph:
By examining linguistic discussions within the Qur’an and numerous relevant verses, this study concludes that the fundamental modality of a discourse is verbal communication. For such a vertical (divine‑to‑human) exchange, the presence of a speaker is indispensable; this speaker need not be merely human, but the Prophet, as the addressee of that exchange, must possess certain psychological capacities enabling him to receive divine speech. Several Qur’anic verses, corroborated by lexical indicators such as the Word of God, recitation, and the imperative particle word, demonstrate that the Qur’an is the speech of God and that the Prophet’s role was confined to transmitting it to the people; because the Qur’an’s pedagogical method corresponds to human dispositions and conditions, it is natural that instruction be conveyed in human language. Indeed, since human beings are the intended recipients of God’s address, conceiving revelation in any form other than human linguistic expression is implausible. Thus God is able, through the act of speaking, to convey truths in language intelligible to the Prophet—who is himself human—so that he may communicate them to others, just as God can produce numerous material creatures through the act of creating
Keywords
Main Subjects
)