Hassan Ajami : Arab-Islamic Theory of Language

[حسن عجمي]

The Arab-Islamic Theory of Language


Hassan Ajami

The Arab-Islamic theory of language plays an extremely important role in the Arab-Islamic world. In this inquiry, we will see how most Arabs and Muslims accept one single theory of language, and how this theory shapes the Arab-Islamic culture and literature.
Language and Logic

When the Arab-Islamic culture first encountered the discipline of logic as it was presented by the Greeks, many Arabs and Muslims called it Greek logic and rejected it on the basis of a specific argument developed by the 10th century Muslim linguist Al- Sirafi. According to Al- Sirafi's argument, language is logic, and thus, Arabic language is the logic of the Arabs. Therefore, Al- Sirafi concluded, Greek logic is neither necessary nor useful for the Arabs. In other words, logic is relative ; what is logical in a certain language isn't so in other languages. This was the basis of the strong tendency in the Arab-Islamic culture to reject true logic and accept Arabic language as the only reliable tool for obtaining knowledge. The argument of Al- Sirafi is still controlling the Arab-Islamic mind. And it is summarized in the famous and influential Islamic slogan : "whoever uses logic is an atheist". What makes Al- Sirafi's argument very powerful is the fact that in Arabic language the word " al-mantik" means logic, and it also implies the concept of utterance, i.e. "a-notk ". Thus, "al-mantik" means logic, and it refers to language as well. This is probably why the Arab-Islamic mind tends to believe that Arabic language is logic, paving the way for considering Arabic language as the source of knowledge.
Language and Knowledge

Most of the Muslim theologians , linguists and philosophers embraced the same theory of language which implicitly or explicitly stated that language is the source of knowledge. For example , the philosophers Al- Farabi , Ibn Sina , and Ibn Taymiyyah agreed on accepting the same analysis of language. According to their theory, language is the instrument or device which refers to meanings, and meanings refer to facts. Hence language is the device which successfully refers to actual facts. Now, since language is always successful in referring to the facts of the world, it follows that language is the source of knowledge. This is how the previous theory of language implies that language is the source of knowledge. But if language, such as Arabic language, is the provider of knowledge, then Greek logic isn't the source of knowledge. This is how the rejection of logic as a cultural gene survived in the Arab-Islamic mind and became dominant. It survived in virtue of the widely accepted theory of language. Even the 11th century Muslim linguist Al-Jurjani accepted the previous view of language. According to Al-Jurjani , the function of language consists of expressing and communicating meanings. But , for him , meanings actually refer to the facts of the world. It follows , from the perspective of Al-Jurjani's theory , language is always successful in referring to the facts of the world, and hence , language is the source of knowledge. In fact , Al-Jurjani distinguished between mental meanings and imaginary meanings. Yet from his point of view , mental meanings directly refer to facts , while imaginary meanings, such as metaphors, indirectly refer to actual facts because they imply certain mental meanings.
Moreover, since most Arabs and Muslims consciously or unconsciously believe that language, namely Arabic language, is the reliable producer of knowledge, it is natural that they use Arabic language in order to obtain knowledge. And this is exactly what they did and what they usually do. For example, the theologian Ibn Taymiyyah relied on language as a source of knowledge in order to develop and defend many of his theories. In one instance, he presented the following argument against the theory of divine emanation : if the theory of emanation which says that the universe was created through divine emanation is true, then the world was created spontaneously by God. But the concept of spontaneous creation is not part of Arabic language as we know and use it. Therefore, Ibn Taymiyyah concluded, the universe wasn't created through divine emanation. This is a clear example of how Arabs and Muslims use language as the main source of knowledge.
The theory of divine emanation claims that the world has emanated from God, i.e. the world has flowed from God as the river flows into the sea. According to this theory, the world is a natural result of the existence of God. The fact that God exists naturally and immediately led to the creation of the universe, and thus the universe is eternal exactly as God is. In this sense, the world was spontaneously created by God because the world just flowed from Him. But Ibn Taymiyyah rejected this theory of divine emanation on the basis of the fact that the concept of spontaneous creation does not exist in Arabic language. This shows that according to this tradition, which was dominant and which is still dominant today in the Arab-Islamic culture, Arabic language is the criterion of knowledge and truth. And it is natural that this tradition prevails in the Arab-Islamic culture because Muslims believe that Arabic language is divine, i.e. Arabic language is the language of God, and hence Arabic can't err.
The belief that Arabic language is the source of knowledge is still dominant in the Arab-Islamic culture, and it strongly participates in forming the Arab-Islamic world. For example, today most Arabs and Muslims tend to consider the beliefs expressed in Arabic to be certainties, while those beliefs expressed in other languages are considered to be less certain or lacking certainty. This is why the current Arab-Islamic mind tends to reject the scientific theories developed in the West or to accept them just as useful tools for constructing advanced technology instead of accepting them as representing genuine knowledge. Today, according to the Arab-Islamic mind, only the views traditionally expressed by Arabic language are considered to constitute true knowledge. This is due to the fact that most of the Arabs and Muslims believe that Arabic language, as it was used in the past, is the reliable source of knowledge.

Language and Modern Arabic Literature

The belief that Arabic language is the source of knowledge also shapes modern Arabic literature. For instance, the Syrian poet Nizar Qabbani said in one of his poems: "I conquer the world with words, / conquer the mother tongue, / verbs, nouns, syntax." Now, since Arabic language is the reliable tool for obtaining knowledge, and given that knowledge is power, it follows that Arabic language is the source of power exactly as it is the source of knowledge. And since Arabic is the source of power, it follows that it is possible to conquer the world with words, i.e. with language. All of this shows that the previous poetic verses are based on the assumption that language, specifically Arabic language, is the source of knowledge and hence it is the source of power. And also in the previous poetic verses the poet is conquering the mother tongue, namely Arabic language, because knowledge and power reside in Arabic, and thus through controlling Arabic language one gains knowledge and power.

This theme is spread in modern Arabic literature. For example, the Syrian author and poet Adonis said the following in his poetry book "songs of Mihyar": "here he comes / like a pagan spear, / invading the land of letters, / bleeding / and raising to the sun / his bleeding." Mihyar's basic aim is to change the Arab-Islamic culture and the world. And he can do that only through invading the land of letters, i.e. invading language, specifically Arabic language. This is so because through Arabic language one can gain knowledge and power, and hence one can change the world including the Arab-Islamic culture.

Another clear example of the dominance of the previous theory of language in modern Arabic literature is the short story "The Conjurer Made off with the Dish" written by the Egyptian author and novelist Naguib Mahfouz. This story portrays an Egyptian boy who fails in every task even very simple ones such as buying some beans and returning home. The boy in this story is always failing due to the fact that he is not able to use language, namely Arabic language, in an informative way although he is mentally supposed to be able to do so. The boy knows all the necessary Arabic words in order to successfully communicate with others, but he is unable to be informative through the usage of Arabic language. For example, he is not able to specify whether he wants beans alone or with oil and with what kind of oil.
This story shows how the current Arab-Islamic society is collapsing due to the misuse of Arabic language and failure of communication. In fact, this short story assumes that Arabic language is the main factor in forming a healthy and functioning Arab-Islamic society, and thus the inappropriate and uninformative usage of Arabic led to the failure of the Arab-Islamic culture. Arabic language is the source of knowledge and power, and hence misusing Arabic is the basic reason behind the collapse of the Arab-Islamic societies today. The boy in Mahfouz's story doesn't know anything about himself and his surroundings because he isn't able to appropriately express himself in Arabic. This is how the failure of language is a failure of knowledge, and the failure of knowledge is a failure of society.