Formulation of the Claim

Arkoun clearly distinguishes between the Qur’anic event and the Islamic event.

Explanation

This distinction makes the Qur’an a foundational event in its own right, with its own energy and significance, not merely a prelude to later Islamic history. The point is that the Qur’anic text is to be understood within its own horizon, before being reduced to its historical uses and to the subsequent formation of meaning and institutions.

From this perspective, the emergence of the Qur’an does not coincide with what later became established as historical Islam. Arkoun therefore separates the moment of revelation or foundation from the path subsequently taken by the community, institutions, and discourses, without thereby severing the connection between them.

Its Place in the Book’s Argument

This atom falls within Arkoun’s attempt to reopen the history that surrounded the Qur’an, so that the text is not read as material whose meaning was complete from the outset, but rather as an event with a history of reception and transformation. It converges with the book’s theses, which seek to distinguish levels of discourse: the level of the founding event, and the level of later recording, interpretation, and codification.

Limits of the Claim

This atom does not imply a sharp separation between the Qur’an and Islam, nor does it deny the text’s influence in the formation of historical Islam. Nor does it offer a final judgment on the validity or invalidity of either of the two events; rather, it points to the difference in level between them.

Brief Evidence Passage

“We must acknowledge that, thanks to the Qur’anic text, the scattered passages whose soundness is recognized in the biography and the Prophetic hadith, we can form some idea of the development of this experience and of the results it reached—historical and human results far greater than the pillars, course, and first executors of that experience. Who would have expected an experience confined to the Arabian Peninsula, or even to only one of its regions, to spread and reach the four corners of the world? We shall not repeat here that familiar narrative account of how Islam emerged and spread, because it has become stereotyped and tedious, even in its ‘Orientalist’ version; rather, it will be…”