“The Qur’an is unapproachable as regards convincing power eloquence and even composition.
Hartwig Hirschfield, “New Researches”, London 1902
“As
has been noted, the language of the Qur’an is regarded as supparsing
everything that can be written in Arabic. The Qur’an itself is a miracle
and cannot be imitated by man.”
“The New Encyclopaedia Britannica”, Vol 15, 15th edition
"Balaghah" understanding requires a basic
knowledge of the Arabic language and its grammar. This are just quick clues to this matter which non-Arabic speaking people can appreciate.
Fasahah الفصاحة:
الفصاحة في المفرد خلوصُه من تنافر الحروف والغرابة ومخالفة القياس، وفي الكلام خلوصُه من ضعف التأليف وتنافر الكلمات والتعقيد مع فصاحتها
For al-Qazwini there are: (a) الفصاحة of the single word and (b) الفصاحة of the (compound) utterance.
The الفصاحة of the single word is for it
to be free from (i) mutually repulsive letters (that make the word as a
whole difficult to pronounce), (ii) odd and strange usage, and (iii)
violation/contravention of (morphological) norms,
and the الفصاحة of the
utterance is for it to be free from (i) weak, awkward and clumsy
construction, (ii) mutually repulsive words (like tongue twisters) and
(iii) being (structurally and semanticically) complicated.
Balaghah البلاغة:
البلاغة في الكلام مطابقته لمقتضى الحال مع فصاحته
[Al-Balaghah in speech (or the sentence) is its appropriateness to what the situation requires while at the same time being فصيح .]
From this it follows that البلاغة is the contextual appropriateness of a sentence that is فصيح both as a whole and in its individual parts (i.e. the words that constitute the sentence).
أَما البلاغةُ فهي تأْديةُ المعنى الجليل واضحاً بعبارة صحيحة فصيحة، لها في النفس أَثر خلاب، مع ملاءَمة كلِّ كلام للموطن الذي يُقالُ فيه، والأشخاص الذين يُخاطَبون.ـ
[As for البلاغة it is to convey a sublime meaning via a sound, correct and elonquent expression that has a captivating effect on the heart and mind while at the same time all sentences are in appropriate agreement with the occasion in which they are said / produced and the people addressed in the process].
البلاغة في الكلام مطابقته لمقتضى الحال مع فصاحته
[Al-Balaghah in speech (or the sentence) is its appropriateness to what the situation requires while at the same time being فصيح .]
From this it follows that البلاغة is the contextual appropriateness of a sentence that is فصيح both as a whole and in its individual parts (i.e. the words that constitute the sentence).
أَما البلاغةُ فهي تأْديةُ المعنى الجليل واضحاً بعبارة صحيحة فصيحة، لها في النفس أَثر خلاب، مع ملاءَمة كلِّ كلام للموطن الذي يُقالُ فيه، والأشخاص الذين يُخاطَبون.ـ
[As for البلاغة it is to convey a sublime meaning via a sound, correct and elonquent expression that has a captivating effect on the heart and mind while at the same time all sentences are in appropriate agreement with the occasion in which they are said / produced and the people addressed in the process].
Al-Bayan
البيان: عِلمٌ يُعرفُ بهِ إِيرادُ المعنى الواحدِ بطُرُق مختلفة في وضوحِ الدَّلالةِ عليهِ
"al-Bayan is the science through which is known how to express a single meaning in different ways with respect to clarity of meaning."
In other words, some expressions and constructions are clearer in others than others, and often the more elusive the meaning the greater the impact. Therefore, the simile (tashbih or direct comparison) is clearer in meaning than the metaphor (isti'arah or indirect comparison), which in turn is clearer than metonymy (kinayah or implication), and so on. Compare the following in terms of generosity:
محمَدٌ كالْبَحرِ عَطاءً (Muhammad is like the sea in generosity) = tashbih (simile/direct comparison)
سَعَيْتُ إِلَى الْبَحرِ لِأَنالَ رِفْدَهُ (I travelled to the sea so I could obtain of his generosity) = isti'arah (metaphor/indirect comparison)
مُحمَّدٌ كَثِيرُ الرَّمادِ (Muhammad is profuse in ashes) = kinayah (implication)
The tashbih is by far the clearest. Both the object compared (Muhammad) and the object to which it is compared (sea) are mentioned. To make the comparison even clearer a particle of comparison is used. To make it even much more clearer the actual quality or angle in which Muhammad is likened/compared to the sea is mentioned namely: generosity.
البيان: عِلمٌ يُعرفُ بهِ إِيرادُ المعنى الواحدِ بطُرُق مختلفة في وضوحِ الدَّلالةِ عليهِ
"al-Bayan is the science through which is known how to express a single meaning in different ways with respect to clarity of meaning."
In other words, some expressions and constructions are clearer in others than others, and often the more elusive the meaning the greater the impact. Therefore, the simile (tashbih or direct comparison) is clearer in meaning than the metaphor (isti'arah or indirect comparison), which in turn is clearer than metonymy (kinayah or implication), and so on. Compare the following in terms of generosity:
محمَدٌ كالْبَحرِ عَطاءً (Muhammad is like the sea in generosity) = tashbih (simile/direct comparison)
سَعَيْتُ إِلَى الْبَحرِ لِأَنالَ رِفْدَهُ (I travelled to the sea so I could obtain of his generosity) = isti'arah (metaphor/indirect comparison)
مُحمَّدٌ كَثِيرُ الرَّمادِ (Muhammad is profuse in ashes) = kinayah (implication)
The tashbih is by far the clearest. Both the object compared (Muhammad) and the object to which it is compared (sea) are mentioned. To make the comparison even clearer a particle of comparison is used. To make it even much more clearer the actual quality or angle in which Muhammad is likened/compared to the sea is mentioned namely: generosity.
http://miracleofthequran.wordpress.com/category/examples-of-style-in-the-quran-ilm-ul-bayan/
The isti'arah is less so (i.e. it is less clearer than the tashbih). Muhammad - the object compared - is not mentioned. In fact, I could easily have taken "sea" as being literal had it not been for some textual and contextual factors such as the word رِفْدَهُ (his generosity) which refers to a person, and is reinforced by لِأَنالَ (so I could obtain). Had I just said: سَعَيْتُ إِلَى الْبَحرِ there would not have been any way of knowing whether what is meant is 'sea' in the literal sense or metaphorical sense.
"The interpretation of metaphors is strongly culturally conditioned. This is especially the case with translated metaphor. Adopting a metaphor to a new context a translator can choose among three possibilities: he or she can use an exact equivalent of the original metaphor (M→M procedure); he or she can seek another metaphorical phrase which would express a similar sense (M1→M2 procedure); finally, he or she can replace an untranslatable metaphor of the original with its approximate literal paraphrase (the M→P procedure)." - Elsevier B.V.
Finally, the kinayah is the least clear. Much more work has to be done on the part of the listener to figure out that what is meant by "being profuse in ashes" is 'being generous'. And the way that arrived at is as follows. In order for Muhammad to have lots of ashes, he must be burning lots of wood, which means that he must be cooking a lot of food which in turn means that he must be having lots of guests or travellers over at his house, which in turn means that he must be very generous to feed them all the time. Kinayah, therefore, is an indirect way of saying something such that what you actually want to say is somehow implied in what you are actually saying which the listener should be able to figure out. To often understand kinayah you have to understand the culture in which it is said and produced. Another example of metonymy is the famous saying: "the pen is mightier than the sword" . A very powerful kinayah in the Qur'an is this verse in reference to prophet 'Isa and is mother (may Allah shower his peace and blessings upon them): كَانَا يَأْكُلاَنِ الطَعَامَ (they used to eat food). Two things are understood from this verse: (a) they engaged in eating which is an activity that all human beings partake in, and (b) implied in the first meaning is that if they eat food then it means that they also have to answer the call of nature, and it is this second meaning that is intended in the first place. So how can they believed to be Divine in the sense of being worshipped?
The isti'arah is less so (i.e. it is less clearer than the tashbih). Muhammad - the object compared - is not mentioned. In fact, I could easily have taken "sea" as being literal had it not been for some textual and contextual factors such as the word رِفْدَهُ (his generosity) which refers to a person, and is reinforced by لِأَنالَ (so I could obtain). Had I just said: سَعَيْتُ إِلَى الْبَحرِ there would not have been any way of knowing whether what is meant is 'sea' in the literal sense or metaphorical sense.
"The interpretation of metaphors is strongly culturally conditioned. This is especially the case with translated metaphor. Adopting a metaphor to a new context a translator can choose among three possibilities: he or she can use an exact equivalent of the original metaphor (M→M procedure); he or she can seek another metaphorical phrase which would express a similar sense (M1→M2 procedure); finally, he or she can replace an untranslatable metaphor of the original with its approximate literal paraphrase (the M→P procedure)." - Elsevier B.V.
Finally, the kinayah is the least clear. Much more work has to be done on the part of the listener to figure out that what is meant by "being profuse in ashes" is 'being generous'. And the way that arrived at is as follows. In order for Muhammad to have lots of ashes, he must be burning lots of wood, which means that he must be cooking a lot of food which in turn means that he must be having lots of guests or travellers over at his house, which in turn means that he must be very generous to feed them all the time. Kinayah, therefore, is an indirect way of saying something such that what you actually want to say is somehow implied in what you are actually saying which the listener should be able to figure out. To often understand kinayah you have to understand the culture in which it is said and produced. Another example of metonymy is the famous saying: "the pen is mightier than the sword" . A very powerful kinayah in the Qur'an is this verse in reference to prophet 'Isa and is mother (may Allah shower his peace and blessings upon them): كَانَا يَأْكُلاَنِ الطَعَامَ (they used to eat food). Two things are understood from this verse: (a) they engaged in eating which is an activity that all human beings partake in, and (b) implied in the first meaning is that if they eat food then it means that they also have to answer the call of nature, and it is this second meaning that is intended in the first place. So how can they believed to be Divine in the sense of being worshipped?
Further readings:
No comments:
Post a Comment