Beyond the Line: Classical Arabic Literary Critics on the Coherence and Unity of the Poem (Studies in Arabic Literature, 8) 9004068546, 9789004068544

Citation preview

BEYOND THE LINE

STUDIES IN ARABIC LITERATURE SUPPLEMENTS TO THE J OURNAL OF ARABIC LITERAT URE EDITED BY M. M. BADAWI, University of Oxford P. CACHIA, Columbia University, New York M. C. LYONS, University of Cambridge J. N. MATTOCK, University of Glasgow

VO LUM E VI II

LEIDEN

E. J . BRI LL 1982

BEYOND THE LINE Classical Arabic Literary Critics on the Coherence and Unity of the Poem

BY

G.]. H. VAN GELDER

LEIDEN

E.]. BRILL 1982

Published with financial support from the Netherlands Organization for the Advancement of Pure Research (Z.W.O. )

CIP-DATA Gelder, G. J. H. van , Beyond the line: classical Arabic literary critics on the coherence and unity of the poem I by G. J. H. van GeIder. - Leiden : Brill. - (Studies in Arabic literature ; vol. 8).

ISBN 90 04 06854 6 Copyright 1982 by E. ]. Brill, Leiden , The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part ofthis book maybereproduced or translated in anyform, byprint, phatoprint, microfilm, microfiche or any other means without written permissionfrom the publisher. PRI NTED IN TH E NET HE R LANDS

'line upon line, line upon line' (Isa. 28: 10, 13, Authorized Version)

CONTENTS Preface Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.

IX X

Exordium . 1. Classical Arabic Literary Theory and Criticism: a Survey . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. .. .. .. . . .. . . . .. . .. 2. The Coh eren ce and Unity of Arabic Poems. . . . . . . . .

1 14

II .

Beginnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. The Q~ida: Length , Proportion and Coherenc e 2. Opening Lin es 3. Transition Lin es. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. al-j ahiz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Ibn Qutayba 6. Tha'iab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. Ibn al-M u' tazz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. Qudama Ibn Ja'far 9. Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. Ibn T abataba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23 23 29 32 37 42 46 48 51 53 54

III.

Poems and Poets in the balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . al-Arrridi

68 68

2. al-Qjidi 'l-j urjan! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

76

3. al-Hatimi 4. Abu Hil al aI-'Askari 5. fj(u:. al-Qur'1ln . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. al-Baqillani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. al-Marziiqi

82 89 100 107

IV .

West and East and in between 1. Ibn Shuhayd 2. Ibn Rashiq 3. al-K hafaji 4. 'Abd al-Qjihir al-j urjani .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Lesser Critics; H ebr ew and Persian Digressions

110 110 112 127 130 137

V.

Scholastics and Philosophers 1. l)iya' a l-Din Ibn al-Athir

146 146

"

97

VIII

CON TENT S

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. VI.

The School of al-Qazwini . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Koran Again The Philosophers Hazim al-Qartajanni . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ibn Khaldiin : . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . ... . . . . . .. .

152 160 166 171 190

Peroration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. I . In Search of the Poem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2. The Efficacy of Arabic Literary Criti cism

194 194 203

Works Consulted

209

Index of Names

221

Index of Arabic T erms

227

PREFACE

According to some, classical Arabic literary criticism ' is, on the whole, not very interesting... indeed , on e is often tempted to wond er if the Arabs actually liked literature, as such ' U. N . Mattock, in BSOAS, 34 (1971) p. 407). If I agreed with these provocative words this book would not have been written. Parts of it will read like a vindication of Arabic poetics, whereas other parts will no doubt confirm the critics of the critics in their negative opinions, and might annoy those who have sought and found their own standards of criticism in the works of the ancients. But da' dhii wa- e addi ' l-qawla fi Harimln .

I thank Sheila van Gelder-Ottway for having been the Reader Over My Shoulder, my Thesaurus, etc. I thank all the staff of the Institute of Semitic Studies and Near Eastern Archaeology, University of Groningen, who, in their different and sometimes unexpected ways, but without exception, have inspired me to complete this work; and in particular I thank Mrs. N. Horlings-Brandse for her proof-reading of the text. I am indebted to the Netherlands Organization for the Advancement of Pure Research (Z.W.O. ) for the grant that made possible the publication of this work. The transliteration of Arabic names and words is that of the En0'ciopaedia of Islam , New Edition, with the modifications proposed by W. Montgomery Watt in the Foreword of each volume of the series Islamic Surveys, Edinburgh, i.e. with q and j replacing 1), and dj, and without the underlining of digraphs. An apostrophe is used in c ase of ambiguity: is'hiib, etc. (although I did not go as far as to write Is'haq or Taw'hldi). Haren, August, 1982

ABBREVIATIONS BEO BSL BSOA S Ell EI 2 GAL I, II GAL S I, II , III GAS IJM ES JAL JAOS JESHO J N ES J SS M EJ MW OLZ RAAD RSO WI WO Z DMG

Bulletin des Etudes Orientales Bulletin de la Societe Linguistique de Paris Bulletin ofthe School of Oriental and African Studies The Encyclopaedia ofIslam, Leiden, 1913-36. The Encyclopaedia ofIslam, New Edition , Leiden, 1954. Carl Brocke1mann , Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur, zwcite den Supplementband en angepasste Auflage, Leiden, 1943, 49 (references correspond to the pagination of the first edition). id. , Supplernentba nde, Leiden, 1937-42. Fuat Sezgin, Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, Leiden, 1967International J ournal of Middle East Studies J ournal ofArabic Literature J ournal of the American Oriental Society J ournal ofthe Economic and Social History ofthe Orient ]o urnal ofN ear Eastern Studies J ournal ofSemitic Studies Mi ddle East J ournal Muslim World Orientalistische Literaturzeitung Revue de I'Acadimie Arabe de Damas ( Maj allat Majma' al-Lugha al-tArabry) 'a bi-Dimashq) Rivista degli Studi Orientali Die Welt des Islams Die Welt des Orients Zeitschrift der Deutschen M orgenliindischen Gesellschqft

CHAPTER ONE

EXORDIUM

1. Classical Arabic Literary Theory and Criticism: a Survey The collection and preservation of occasional verse would not seem a matter of course, any more than keeping old newspapers, unless one believes that it contains indispensable information or that it is of great literary merit. The case of pre-Islamic and early Islamic poetry forms no exception. Countless rdtois, philologists and historians of the first few centuries of the Islamic era devoted their energy to the handing down, the collection, revision or falsification of early poetry, on the assumption that it is an essential source for the history, the customs, the ideas and the language of the Arabs. In addition to the linguistic or historical value, its poetical qualities must have justified preservation. But whereas linguistic and historical studies developed into disciplines comparatively early, literary criticism and theory took longer to become more than just a side interest. Most of the oldest written sources for our knowledge of early criticism are books dating from the ninth century. They are written by philologists whose main interests were the language, the lives and the 'manners and customs' of the Arabs, or the enumeration and classification of the poets: '[abaqdt alshu'ora' by Ibn Sallarn al-jumahi (d. ca . 230/845), al-Shi'r wa-'l-shu is little more than th e attempt of a linguist to define or illustrate some technical terms that were current in th e description of poetical style . The same method of definition and illustration is employed by Ibn al-Mu'tazz (d . 296/908) in his Kitab al-Badi", written in 887-8. But although Tha'Iab was his teacher and his book continues the tradition of th e philologists to a large extent, yet Ibn alMu'tazz stands for a new trend in Arabic literary th eory. The interest has shifted from philology to poetry, and from early poetry to that of th e muhdathiin, or 'modern' poets , of whom Ibn al-Mu'tazz himself was one of the most important representatives. Among the characteristics of muhdath poetry was th e conscious and frequent use of rh etorical artifices. The new style, especially when used in an extreme form in th e classical qasida as by Abu Tamrnam (d. 231/845 ), gave rise to a fruitful discussion of which the book ofIbn al-Mu'tazz is a reflection. In it, he shows, somewhat apologetically , that the rhetorical figures occur in the Koran, the Hadith, and earl y poetry as well as in modern poetry. The Kitab al-badi' is referred to by almost all later writers on stylistics, and the word badi' , 'new-fangled', 'original' or 'extraordinary' , is from then onwards a technical term denoting 'rhetorical embellishments' or 'figu res of speech'. Abu Tarnmam, who is all but ignored in Tha'Iab's Qgwa'id or in Ibn Qutayba's works, is quoted by Ibn al-Mu'tazz more 1 See the lists, compiled by Sezgin, of works on poets (GAS, ii, 93-102) and on poetry (ibid ., pp . 105-107). A list oflost or unpublished works on criticism and poetry has been compiled on the basis of Yaqirt 's Mu'jam al-udabii' by Salliirn, al-Naqd al-l arabi al-qadim , pp . 287-30 1. 2 Heinrichs, 'Literary Theory', p. 32.

EXORDIUM

3

often than any other poet - not always without criticism. To the unequal style of Abu Tamrnam the less extreme and more natural style of his younger contemporary and pupil al-Buhturi (d . 284/897 ) is favourably compared by many critics, among- them al-Amidi (d . ca. 370/981 ) in his al Muioarana. A contemporary of al-A midi was al-Mutanabbi (d. 354/965 ), controversial already during his lifetime, as a result of his strong personality no less than of his mastery of the po etical art. Numerous treatises were written against him or in his defence, by his contemporaries al-Sahib Ibn 'Abbad (d . 385/995), al-Hatimi (d . 388/998 ), and by later generations, who all drew heavily upon the most important work on the poet, ai-Wasala by 'Ali Ibn 'Abd al-'Aziz al-qadi 'l-jurjani (d . 392/1001 ). His ' M ed iation ' is partial to al-Mutanabbi, as al-Amidi's 'Balance' was tipped in favour of al-Buhturi, but in neither case is the defence fanatical. Both the Wasala and the Miuoiirana - the ultimate form of the answer to the old question man ash "ar al-nds 'Who is the best poet' - were written by authors who were themselves poets, though less important than Ibn alMu'tazz. Whereas Ibn al-Mu'tazz set himselfa limited task in al-Badi", the two others attempted to be exhaustive in their approach : grammar, lexicon, prosody, motifs and themes, figures of speech, plagiary (their hobby-horse), are among the objects of their criticism. This list is another indication that it would be wrong to make too sharp a distinction between the philological, or 'conservative', approach and that of the 'modern' poets . Nevertheless, it is useful to distinguish between the two as different impulses, even when combined in one person, for the development of criticism and theory. Two other important works, dating from the early tenth century, can be called poetics. Both intend to set standards for the distinction of good verse from bad verse; both strangely lack a separate chapter on metaphor ; both were criticized by al-Amidi in separate monographs. Beyond this they have little in common. The first is '!yar al-shi'r by Ibn Tabataba (d . 322/934 ), a poet and an admirer of the poetry of Ibn al-Mu'tazz. However , in the '/;'ar, that consists of a loose collection of essays on 'good' and 'bad ' poetry, the examples are almost all taken from early poetry, with the exception of on e chapter where the muhdathim prevail and which will be studied in more detail in a following chapter. Ibn Tabataba was more concerned with describing poetry in general terms than with the definition of figures of speech - a method that did not warrant popularity. Parts of his works were incorporated in al-Marzubani's (d . 384/993 ) Muuiashshah (a useful compilation of critical opinions on poets and poetry), in the Kitab al-Sinii'atayn by al-Askari (d. after 400 /1010) and in al-Marzuqi's (d . 421/1030 ) introduction to his commentary on the Hamasa, but the '/yar itself is rarely mentioned in later works.

4

EXO R DIUM

Definition was th e forte of th e author of th e second book, the Na qd alshi'r by Qudama Ibn Ja'far (d . after 320/932). Poetry is defin ed and a na lysed into its four constitue n t elements: metre, rh yme, 'wordi ng' (Laf?:, ) and ' meaning' (rna'no'). The quality of any verse d ep ends on th ese ele men ts or their interrelations. Rhetorical figures are classified as pertaining to on e or a com bina tion of two of th ese elements. The poetic 'genres' (aghro'r/) are discu ssed und er th e eleme n t manii. From the terminology emp loyed by Qudama and from his shaioahid it becomes clear th at he - mor e than Ibn T abataba - was influ enced by his predecessors. The novelty of his work lies in its method, which appears to us as a great ste p forward. To his successo rs, however , it was a step sideways. They did not ign ore him ; many lat er works borrow , and some times refute, his d efinition s. But his method of logical d efinition and di vision was obviously too foreign to be adopted. U ntil th e rise of the scholastic app roach to balagha with alSakkaki (d . ca. 626 / 1229) and his followers , critics were not interested in a systematic and logical tr eatment of th eir su bject. T he Na qd al-shi' r is th e first clear exa mp le of H elleni c influ ence on Arabic poetics." More difficult to di scern and to assess than th e influ ence of G reek logic is the impact of Greek poetics and rhetoric on Arabic theo ry and on Arabic poetry itself. A co n tempo rary ofQudama , Abu Bishr Matta Ibn Yiinus (d. 328/940 ) mad e th e oldes t Arabic tran slation (fro m th e Syriac ) of Aristotle's Poetics that we possess; it seem s th at its con ten ts were known a lre ady in th e ninth century: al-K indi (d . ca. 258 /870 ) is said to have written a compe nd ium of th e Poetics." The Rhetoric was tran slated prob ably in th e first half of th e ninth centu ry," The qu ality of th ese tran sla tions and th e for eign su bject-matte r combined to p reclude much interest on the part of the poets or the critics, for who m th e translation s had not been mad e in th e first place. Only th e philosophers, eager to comprehend any thing writte n by Aristotle, could bring them selves to study the two books, and they hardly tried to a pp ly th e ideas contai ned in th em to Ara bic poe try and pr ose." A not able bu t isola ted exce p tion was th e 13thcen tury poet and cr itic H azim al-Qar tajanni, Thus th e Greek concep t of poet ry did not con tribu te greatly to Arabic poetics. O n th e other hand , th e study of figur es and trop es, whi ch undoubtedl y formed part of th e study of rh etoric in the H ellen istic schoo l tra d ition, could well ha ve appealed to th e Arab critics. It has been sug Sec Bonebakker 's introduction to the Na qd al-shi'r, pp. 36-44. Ibn a l-Na dim , Fihrist, p. 250 . 5 Badawi, introd. to Aristiita lis, Khitaba, p. vii. 6 Ibn Rushd atte mpted th is, withou t mu ch success. Not hing is known of the Risiila fi ~ inii'at al-shi'r mumtarija min al-yimimi wa-'l-'arabiby th e ph ysicist and mathemati cian Ibn alHayth am (d . 430/1038), mentioned by Ibn Abi Usaybi'a ClJ.yun al-anbii' ; ii, 94). 3

4

EXORDIUM

5

gested that Ibn al-Mu'tazz and later writers on badi' were influenced by Aristotle's Rhetoric, 7 but this has never been convincingly demonstrated. In early Arabic critical terminology and concepts there are, undeniably, a number of parallels with Greek equivalents. This could be explained as the result of independent origin; it might be easier to believe, though difficult to show in detail, that it was the outcome of contacts of the Arabs with the Christian schools and their tradition of rhetorical training. 8 With the development of the dogma of ijaz al-Quran, later in the tenth century, a new impulse to the study of poetry, more important than the logical or philosophical approach, was added to the combined efforts of poets and philologists. Prose style had been studied alongside with poetry by al-jahiz, who made oratory the main subject of his al-Bayan wa-'l-tabyin, by the author of al-Risala al- 'Adhra,9 who gave directions to the class of 'secretaries', by Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim, who wrote his al-Burhiin (formerly known as Naqd al-nathr and ascribed to Qudama) after 946, and by Qudama in parts of his al-Kharaj that are now lost as well as in the brief introduction to his ]awahir al-alfiiz: Almost all of these freely use poetry to illustrate matters of style, much as the works on poetry use prose examples. Not surprisingly, among these examples carefully chosen parts of the Koran serve as model illustrations.!? But this did not yet amount to a theory of the inimitability of the Koranic style, a dogma stated clearly by al-Rummani (d. 384/994 ) in al-Nukatfi i',jaz al-Quran, by al-Khattabi (d. 386/996 ) in Boyan ijaz al-Quran and soon afterwards by al-Baqillani (d. 403/1013 ) in a more comprehensive work, Ijaz al-Quran. It was the outcome of a long process, the confluence of theological speculations and philological subtleties. The theologians, convinced that the Koran was a mu'jiea, disagreed upon the nature of the ijiiz, which was sought in the contents of the Koran or, externally, in the fact that God had prevented Mohammed's contemporaries from producing a similar work. By alRurnmani's time, the majority, however, had come to believe that the Koran was inimitable as to its composition and style. By that time, too, the philologists had learned how to tackle the stylistic difficulties of the Koran, its syntactical peculiarities, its obscure vocabulary, its erratic narrative 7 Mandiir, al-Naqd al-manhaji, pp . 61 If.; cf. I;Iusayn, introd . to (pseudo-) Qudama Ibn ja'far, Naqd al-nathr, p. 12, Trabu1si, Critique, pp. 781f., 'Ayyad in Kitab Arisiiitdlisfi 'l-shi r, p. 232 f., Von Grunebaum, Medieval Islam , p. 327 f.; but compare, for instance, Bonebakker , 'Aspects', pp. 90-95. 8 Daiber, Placita Philosophorum, pp . 93-101, Heinrichs, 'Literary Theory', p. 32 f., Rundgren, 'Arabische Literatur'. 9 In its two editions (by Zaki Mubarak and Muhammad Kurd 'Ali ) the risala was ascribed to Ibn a1-Mudabbir (d. 279/892-3 ); the author is probably Ibrahim Ibn Muhammad al-Shaybani, a contemporary, see Sourdel , 'Le " Livre des secretaires",' p. 116 n. 2. 10 See, e.g., a1-Mubarrad, 'Epistle', p. 379, Ibn al-Mu'tazz, Badi', at the beginning of five of its chapters, Tha'lab, Q.awa'id, pp. 62, 64, Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim, Burhiin, passim.

6

EXORDIUM

and its tropical language. The way had been paved by Abu 'Ubayda (d . 209/824) in Majaz al-Q.ur'an (in which majaz refers mainly to syntactical phenomena and does not yet have the meaning of 'figu rative speech') 11 and by Ibn Qutayba in his Ta'wil mushkil al-Q.ur'an. 1 2 Al-Rummani, linguist and theologian, lists ten 1 3 rhetorical terms ; not, however, in order to solve problems of Koranic style, but in order to show the eloquence of the Koran; a much easier task, for th e selection of the terms as well as of th e illustrations is his. AI-Baqillani lists more than thirty figures of speech, with examples from Koran and poetry. He admits that the i'jaz cannot be proved conclusively on the basis of the badi" ; but it will be apparent, he claims, when it is realized how full of mistakes and weaknesses even the best po etry is. A substantial portion of his book is devoted to criticism of large sections of two well-known poems by an early and a modern po et : Irnra' al-Qays and al-Buhturi. It is a tour de force in fault-finding and by no means typical of Arabic criticism. Notwithstanding, as a result of al-Rumrnani's and alBaqillani's efforts the dogma of th e stylistic superiority of the Koran became an established fact and the study of style (balagha or badf) was often justified by , or even equated with, the study of Koranic style . This is already apparent in the Kitab al-Sina'atayn, completed in 394fl004 by Abu Hilal al-Askari, who makes the study of balagha a condition for the knowledge ofi'jaz al-Q.ur'an 14 (although he does not enlarge upon this theme). His work is an important compilation that draws upon earlier critics, often without mentioning them : al-jahiz, Ibn al-Mu'tazz, Ibn Tabataba, Qudama, al-Amidi, al-Rummani and others. H e intended his book to be more systematical than al-Bayan ioa-'l-tabyin, an easy task, but instead of adopting Qudarna's system he merely classifies his material in cha pters, the longest of which contains an unstructured list of sections on badi', Although Abu Hilal devotes a chapter to th e differences between po etry and prose.! " it is clear that 'The Two Arts ' deals in fact with only one art, that of baldgha. In th e Sina'atayn po etry is dominant; more verse examples are given than pros e exa mples and po etry is declared sup erior to prose.! " Wansbrough, ' Maj1u;; al-Q.ur' im', esp . p. 254, Almagor, 'The early meanin g of majae', Ibn Qutayba's Ta' ioil has an introduction on Koranic style that can be considered , 'it certains egards ', as a treatis e on i'ja; (Lecomte, Ibn Q.utayba, p. 374). 13 A list of eight terms ascribed to al-Rummani, given by Ibn Rashiq (' Umda, i, 243), must have been taken from a lost work of al-Rummani. 14 al-'Askari, Sinii'atayn, p. 7. 15 Ibid ., pp . 139-59. 1 6 Ibid ., pp. 143 If. The Koran is not mentioned in this discussion. For contemporary discussions on the relati ve merits of prose and poetry , see al-T awhidi, Imtii", ii, 130 ff. , alBaqill ani , !:iiiz, pp . 155 f.; cf. Rundgren, 'Arabische Litera tur', pp . 95-105 . 11 12

EXORDIUM

7

Al-Marziiqi (d. 421/1030) argues the opposite, 17 but this did not keep him from writing an essay on poetic criticism as an introduction to his commentary on the Hamasa. Like Qudama and Ibn Tabataba he sets standards for the distinction of good and bad poetry, by enumerating seven 'touchstones' (the term 'iyar may have been taken from Ibn Tabataba, whom he quotes) that together form the famous 'omiid al-shi'r, a term that crops up now and then in earlier criticism and that altogether seems more popular in 20th-century Arabic studies of classical Arabic theory.IS A work on poetry by al-Hatimi, al-Hali '1- 'iuil, has unfortunately been lost. Extracts have been preserved in his Ifilyat al-muhadara, a poetical anthology with an introduction on bad!' that remained popular in contrast to al-Hali.t? Al-Hatimi is often 20 mentioned by Ibn Rashiq (d. 456 / 1065 or 463/1071 ) in his al-'Umda, an encyclopaedia of poetry and poetics. This work is largely a compilation, but the author, himself a well-known poet, often adds his opinion to the material he selected and arranged. Ibn Rashiq lived to see his native country ravaged by the Bedouin tribes that invaded North Africa and destroyed Qayrawan in 449/1057. This invasion coincided with the rise of the Saljiiqs in the East. In the wake of these events , which marked a new epoch in the political history of Islam, there followed the decline of Shi 'ism and the rise of scholastic orthodoxy with its universities. Not surprisingly, some histories of Arabic literature start a new chapter with or after this period of transition. 21 It is tempting to consider the same period as a transitional one for Arabic literary criticism, if only for the fact that almost simultaneously with Ibn Rashiq's 'Umda three important books were written after which no original contributions were made for more than a century. With those works no wholly new approach to the study ofliterature came into being. Rather, we find a reinforcement of the grammatical impulse, noticeable in Sirr al-fasaha, written in 454/l062 by the Syrian Ibn Sinan al-Khafaji, and in the works of his more influential contemporary 'Abd al-Qahir al-jurjani (d . 471 / 1078). Shari: al-Hamasa, i, 17. The term is used by al-Amidi (M uwazana, i, 6, 12, 18) and by al-qadi 'l-jurjanl (W asata, p. 34). Among modern studies , see Hilal, "Amiid al-shi'r wa-jinayatuhu 'ala '1shi'r al- larabi' al-Katib , 4 (196 1) 15-24; his al-Naqd al-tarabi al-hadith, pp. 166-74: Badawi, Usus al-naqd, pp . 533-36 ; Isma 'il , al-Usus al-jamaliyya , pp . 365-70, Mansour J. Ajami, .. Amud al-Shi'r : Legitimization of Tradition ' , JAL , xii (198 1) 30-48. 19 On th e Hilya and al-Hhli see Bonebakker, Materials. I have used the edition of the lfilya by al-Kattani ; the partial edition by Hilal Naji (Beiru t, 1978) was not available to me. 20 I hav e counted 25 occurrences. 21 For instance, Gibb, Arabic Literature; the volumes of GAS published so far deal with the period until ca . 430/1039; however, no explicit justification is given . 17 18

8

EX OR DIUM

Ibn Sinan, interested in langu age as was his rever ed teach er Abu ' l-' Ala ' a l-Ma'arri, sta rts his d escription off~aba and baliigha with a lon g cha p ter on phonology. The remainder of th e book is structured on the basis of th e distin cti on between laf; and mana. Many figur es of speech that un til then were usuall y enume rated witho ut an y logica l order are given a pl ace in I bn Sinan 's syste m , wh ich is inferi or, however, to th at of Q ud ama (one of his sources).22 E ven less systematica l a t first seems 'Abd al-Qjihir al-j urjani's Dalii 'il ali'jaz; it is a collec tion of essays on one central subject : th e stylistics of syntax. The inimitability of th e K or an lies in its sen tence structure (nazm), th at is his th esis in th e D olii' il as well as in a sma ller tr eatise on i'jaz, alRisala al-Shafiya . In spite of its titl e, he does not demon strat e th e ija:::. exha ustively in the Dala'il; he is far more concerned with ' literary style', for whi ch poetry as well as th e K or an provided him with materi al. Po etry plays an even great er role in his Asrar al-balagha, no less important, the main su bjec ts of which are simi le and tropical speech : meton ym y, met aphor and related figures. Both th e Dala 'il and th e Asrar show th at 'Abd a lQjihir was a n able gra m ma ria n. But wherea s a l-R urnmani, a lso a linguist, seems to be motivated primarily b y th eolo gical considerations, 'Abd alQjihir was led by his extraord inary taste for th e subtle ties of th e langu age of poetry. For us, his impo rtance lies not on ly in his theory as suc h, bu t in the way he presented it as well, because he exp lains a nd ana lyses his exa mp les in great d etail instead of merely a dd uc ing the m as was the custo m . T he va lue of 'A bd al-Qahir's ideas was a pprecia ted by a l-Zarna khshari (d . 538/ 1144 ), the au tho r of the Kashshof, then by a l-M utarriz i (d . 610 / 1213) in his com me nta ry on al-H ariri's Maqam at. By the n th e need had been felt to rewrite th e somewha t disjointed essays of 'Abd a l-Qji hir in a mor e syste matica l fashion. T o th is end Fakhr a l-Din al-Razi (d . 606/ 1209 ), encyclopaed ist and philosopher, wro te Nihiiyat al-ijaz ji diraya! al-ija:::.. H e was soon followed b y a l-Sa kka ki (d . 626 /1229 ) in his Miftah al-iulion (written ca. 1220 ),23 a compend ium of th e ' ilm al-adab, th e third and largest part of wh ich deals with ma'iini and boyan, or th e subject-ma tte r of th e Dala 'il and th e Asrar respectively. The rambling and often p assion at e style of 'Abd a l-Qji hir had by now given way to dry and scho lastic learning. The third part of th e Miftab became far more popula r th an a l-Razi's work and a number of commen tari es and conde nsa tions were th e resu lt. A mo ng the la tt er a re al2 2 Confusing is his use of the ter ms laf; a nd mana . Under th e former not on ly (morp ho-) phonologica l bu t also sema n tic aspects are d iscussed, whereas ma'na , on the who le, refers to pro position s. Consequently, metaphor is treated under a/jlJ::., simi le und er ma'iini. 23 Matliib, al-Balagha ' ind al-Sakkaki , p. 65.

EXORDIUM

9

by Badr al-Din Ibn Malik (d. 686/1287 ) and the very concise Talkhis al-Miftah by al-Qazwini, 'Khatib Dimashq', who died in 739/ 1338. The Talkhis overshadowed the Miftah ; innumerable commentaries, supercommentaries and versifications testify to its popularity, and its influence can be detected in 20th-century schoolbooks. The 'school' of the East, with its scholasticism, its philosophical, ontological and theological digressions, is sometimes contrasted with the tendency in the Western parts of the Arab world to specialize in badi' along the lines ofIbn Rashiq. Ibn Khaldun, the first to point this out, suggests as an explanation that Mi~biib

the non-Arabs (Persians) who constitue the majority of the population of the East occupy themselves with the Qur'an commentary of al-Zamakhshari, which is wholly based upon this discipline [viz. "ilm al-ma'ani ioa-'l-bayan]. 24

There is something to be said for this explanation, for when the Persians took to the study of their own literature in Persian, they too specialized in badi", abandoning the scholastic approach as soon as they abandoned the holy text. This can be seen in Tarjuman al-balagha, written ca. 1100 by Radiiyani, in Hada'iq al-sihr by Rashid al-Din Watwa] (d . 573/1182),25 and in al-Mu 'jam fi ma'iiyir ash 'ar al-'ajam, an encyclopaedia of poetics completed ca. 1233 by Shams-i Qays, to mention the three earliest known Persian works on literary theory. Radiryani's work had as its model the Arabic Kitiib al-Mahasin by the Persian al-Marghinani (first half of the l l th century). 26 So, although it is true that al-Sakkaki was mainly studied in the East, the popularity of badi' was by no means limited to the West. Nor were Koranic stylistics invariably dominated by the' ilm al-ma'ani ioa'l-baydn: the Egyptian Ibn Abi "l-Isba' (d . 654/1256) belongs to the 'West' with his Badi' al-Qur an; badi' prevails in the Kitiib al-Fawii 'id by the

Syrian theologian Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 751/1350 ). The two approaches did not develop completely independently after 'Abd al-Qahir. On the one hand, the ever-growing lists of badt-figures could benefit from the scholastic 'ilm al-ma'iini wa-'l-bayiin that incorporated, in a more systematic way, many rhetorical figures, as is apparent from the two works on badi' by Ibn Abi 'l-Isba', who in his list of works consulted mentions the Dala'il and the Asriir by 'Abd al-Qjihir, alZamakhshari's Kashshiif and al-Razi's Nihayat al-Uiiz. 27 The poet Safi alDin al-Hilll (d. 749jl349), who set a trend with his badi'iyya, quotes the Muqaddima , Rosenthal's translation, iii, 337; cf ibid. , pp . 402 f. Admittedly, among the Arabic examples adduced by Watwa] some are taken from the Koran, but poetry takes precedence over the Koran in his book, as its full title indicates. 26 A. Ates, introd. of Radiryani , Tarjumiin , pp . 34-42 ; GAS, ii, 106. 2' Ibn Abi 'l-Isba', Tahrir, p. 89, Badi' al-Q.ur'iin , p. 5. 24

25

10

EXORDIUM

same list in his commentary and adds the names of al-Sakkaki, Badr al-Din Ibn Malik, al-Qazwini, et al. 28 On the other hand, the school of alSakkaki was influenced by the study of bad!'. Al-Sakkaki dealt only briefly with a relatively small number ~ 29 ~ offigures in an appendix ; they are figures for which he apparently could not find a place in either the ma'imi or the boyan. This, although a concession, did not satisfy everyone. More space to bad!' is given in the digest of the Miftal: by Badr al-Din Ibn Malik. 2~ In the Talkhis by al-Qazwini, who, like Ibn Malik, lived in Syria, the treatment of bam' is a compromise between al-Sakkaki and Ibn Malik. 3 0 The division of bad!', by al-Sakkaki and his followers, into bad!' laf;;;z and bad!' rna'naioi (corresponding, more or less, to the figurae elocutionis and the figurae sententiae respectively) was taken from al-Mathal al-sa'ir by the vizier and kiitib al-inshii' Diya' al-Din Ibn al-Athir (d . 637fl239 ) who spent his life in Syria and Iraq. The Mathal deals once more with the ' two arts ', those of the katib and the shii'ir. Again, the differences between the two are not emphasized and after an introduction the two main sections of the book are devoted to al-sina'« al-lafziyya and al-sind'a al-ma'naioiyya respectively. Ibn al-Athir is one of the last original authors in Arabic criticism, although his originality is not as great as he would have us believe . He owes much to al-Khafaji, whom he mentions, and a great deal to other predecessors, whom he often does not mention. His presumptuous style and lavish use of examples taken from his own professional letters could not but provoke some reaction. But the two ' refuta tions' , al-Falak al-dii'ir, written in 633 /1236 by Ibn Abi 'l-Hadid and the Nusrat al-tha'ir by alSafadi (d . 764/1363 ) are mainly concerned with details and rarely attack the views of Ibn al-Athir. After al-Qazwini and al-Hilli no new developments occur. Commentators of the Miftiil; or the Talkhis are often inclined to lose themselves in the subtleties of the text they are explaining, rather than the subject they are supposed to be studying. One of the results of this was the peculiar mixture of information contained in works such as the Ma'hhid al-tansis, completed in 934 /1528 by 'Abd al-Rahman al-'Abbasi : a commentary upon the verse examples of the 'Talkhis, with sections on the poets concerned. At the same time it elucidates al-Qazwini's text, mainly by giving additional examples ; a method similar to that of al-Hilli's imitators like Sharli al-Badi'iyya, p. 73. Of the 127 pa ges of the iVli~biib, in the edition used by me, 54 are devoted to 59 different kind s of badi' (not counting subdivisions); only lour pages out of the 123 that form the third part of al-Sakkaki's Afijtii(l deal with badi' (a l-Sakkaki does not use this term ). 3 0 Of 126 pages 23 ar e devoted to bam'. 28

29

EXORDIUM

11

Ibn I;I~tia al-Hamawi (d . 837/1434) or