Formulation of the Claim
Some Qur’anic expressions function as word-symbols rather than as neutral vocabulary.
Explanation
Arkoun holds that these expressions derive their meaning from their relation to the sacred relationship between God and human beings; they are therefore not understood as lexical items detached from their semantic horizon. They carry a symbolic charge that makes their presence in the text broader than mere direct denotation.
Accordingly, these words are not read simply as names of things or as independent descriptions, but as signs that refer to a network of meanings connected to religious experience and to the construction of meaning within the Qur’an. This is what makes them different from a neutral reading that reduces the word to its dictionary meaning alone.
Their Place in the Book’s Argument
This atom belongs to Arkoun’s attempt to understand Qur’anic language as language of semantic density that cannot be reduced to direct lexical explanation. It is connected to his broader thesis about the need to read Qur’anic discourse in its historical and symbolic structure, not within the limits of a verbal interpretation detached from its context.
It also supports his critique of readings that treat the religious text as though it were a set of fixed terms with a single meaning. Drawing attention to word-symbols opens the way to a fuller understanding of how meaning is formed in the Qur’an, and of the relation between the word and the overall structure of discourse.
Limits of the Claim
This claim does not mean that all Qur’anic words are symbolic to the same degree, nor that it entirely cancels direct meaning. Nor should it be burdened with more than it can bear in detailed interpretive judgments.