Formulation of the claim
The word “reason” does not appear in the Qur’an in the form of a noun or verbal noun.
Explanation
This claim rests on a linguistic observation concerning the verbal form itself, not on denying the presence of the root or its derivatives in the text. It therefore draws attention to the fact that the use of “reason” as a nominal concept is not a direct Qur’anic given.
For Arkoun, this observation is mobilized to reconsider the concept of reason within the Qur’an, and to caution against projecting a later philosophical meaning onto the text’s vocabulary.
Its place in the book’s argument
This atom appears within Arkoun’s broader line of argument, which distinguishes between Qur’anic vocabulary and its formulations, and the concepts that accumulated later in the history of Islamic thought. It serves his larger thesis of reading the Qur’an as a text whose meaning is completed only through examining its language and terminological limits, not by assuming the fixed presence of later concepts within it.
Limits of the claim
This atom should not be burdened with more than it says: it does not deny the presence of thinking or reflection in the Qur’an, nor does it establish a final judgment on the value of reason in Islam; it merely concerns a specific verbal form.
Brief evidence passage
Arkoun insists that the word “reason” itself is not present in the Qur’an. This is a linguistic observation concerning the verbal form itself, not a denial of the presence of the root or its derivatives. It thus draws attention to the fact that the use of “reason” as a nominal concept is not a direct Qur’anic given.
Related links
- Arkoun
- the Qur’an
- reason