Formulation of the Claim
Revelation is understood within human language and within the horizon of history and interpretation, not as a meaning detached from human understanding.
Explanation
In Mohammed Arkoun’s thought, revelation does not reach human beings as a directly present and complete given; rather, it comes as discourse received through language, whose meaning is formed within the conditions of human understanding. For this reason, revelation in this view is linked to history, meaning, and reading, because whatever is grasped from it always passes through human mediations.
This implies that the religious text is not treated as a closed mass beyond interpretation, but as discourse that enters into a relationship with the recipient and with context. In this sense, understanding revelation becomes part of the work of interpretation, not merely a surrender to the literal wording or a claim to direct access to it.
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This atom appears at the heart of the book’s argument because it touches on the relation between the sacred and interpretation, the relation on which Arkoun builds his call for a historical and critical reading. When revelation is understood as speech apprehended within human language, it becomes possible to examine the conditions of its reception and the transformation of its meanings over time, without removing religion from the domain of lived experience.
This idea also stands alongside the book’s emphasis on language, reading, and context as keys to understanding. It does not stand alone, but connects with the book’s insistence on the need to move beyond literal understanding in favor of an understanding that takes into account the mediations through which religious meaning is formed.
Limits of the Claim
This claim does not mean denying revelation or reducing the religious text to mere ordinary speech; rather, it defines the horizon within which it is understood inside human and historical experience.