Formulation of the claim

The author emphasizes that the surah does not rest on a single linear continuity, but is composed of multiple units that stand side by side and overlap.

Explanation

The author reads the surah as a composite structure, in which more than one passage or internal unit can be distinguished, while the verses remain interconnected in their present form. This means that the organization of the surah is understood not only as a sequential progression, but as a composition that brings together adjacent units that support one another.

Its place in the book’s argument

This idea falls within a reading based on analyzing the text’s internal structure, and shows that understanding the surah requires paying attention to its constituent units, not only to its apparent sequence.

What the atom does not say

This reading does not deny the surah’s unity in its final form, nor does it claim that its arrangement is without significance. It also does not go so far as to specify the number of units or the boundaries of each one.

Brief evidence passage

The essential point is the discovery of the true history of the Qur’anic text: how was it actually formed? We are still living with the idea that every surah is linked to an original textual unit that can be described as Meccan or Medinan, but the truth is far more complex than that. Scientific historical analysis should use formal criteria (such as rhythmic patterning, syntactic structure, and distinctive vocabulary), as well as thematic and historical criteria, if we are to hope to arrive at other textual units within the composite surah. Most of the large surahs do not form a coherent textual unity, contrary to what we imagine; rather, they are composed of several pieces that are sometimes very disparate and lack any connection. Thus we observe that the work of Régis Blachère, who drew on the research of his predecessors, i