آراء أبي حيّان الأندلسي في أشكال التراكيب القرآنيّة في تفسيره البحر المحيط، دراسة في ضوء ميزان النحو التقليدي

The opinions of Abu Hayyan Al-Andalusi (d. 745 AH) on the forms of Qur’anic structures in his interpretation of Al-Bahr Al-Muhit, a study in light of the traditional grammar scale.

Abstract
: The most important findings of this thesis can be summarized in the following points
It has proven to me that the Holy Qur’an, although it is one of the sources for establishing grammatical rules, was not the first source on which grammarians relied in establishing these rules. This is what Dr. Abbas Ali Ismail confirmed by saying: The grammarians looked at the Qur’anic texts and the speech of the Arabs with one eye, and did not distinguish in citing between them. Then they applied to these two sources their famous theory, which is to rely on the many constants that predominate from the Holy Qur’an and the speech of the Arabs. That is why they based their bases on the most common and most common of what came from these two sources.
-It would have been better for the rules established by the majority of grammarians to have some flexibility, such that they would accommodate everything related to the Arabic linguistic reality. Because grammar is laws deduced from texts with no restrictions imposed on them, the speech of the Arabs is above all the rules and controls that have been established.
– We find that Abu Hayyan, in his talk about some grammatical issues, did not attribute the opinions to any of the grammarians, but rather dealt with them without mentioning who said them, including (the coming of the ba meaning from.
– In some grammatical issues, Abu Hayyan mentions the opinion of the Basrans and the opinion of the Kufans, but he did not express a specific opinion regarding them. Does he agree with this opinion or not? This silence and lack of comment is evidence of satisfaction, however, on many issues he made clear indications of his support or rejection of them.
Abu Hayyan was visually inclined, but he sometimes abandoned his visual inclination. because of
– His contemplation of the opinions of the two schools, especially when faced with the Qur’anic text. Then we must not forget the influence of the Andalusian environment on him. Because grammar in Andalusia in general is Kufic, even though they said about him: Abu Hayyan in Andalusia was opposed to Kufic opinions, and he was a Basri, and when he migrated and left Andalusia he began attacking the opinions of Sibawayh, and there is no evidence for the validity of this statement; Because the visual tendency continued to surround his thought, and a sign of this is his frequent support of the rules that the majority of grammarians, including Sibawayh, said, and his devotion to them a lot, despite the presence of many apparent Qur’anic texts that contradict their rules.
Although he stated in some places that he was not devoted to the opinions of the grammarians: the Basrans or the Kufans, in reality he could not He gets rid of his worship of the opinions of the majority of grammarians in his consideration of many grammatical issues, and this is clear from our study of the issues of the chapters: the first, the second, and the third .
– It became clear to me from this study that grammar is not static and has not ended, and perhaps those who say the opposite have exaggerated. There is still a fizzy part in it that is subject to discussion, modification and correction, and it can be used to amend some grammatical rules and devise new rules that increase the rules of familiar grammar.
– The Holy Qur’an, in many of its compositions, supports the grammatical rules whose boundaries have been defined by the majority of grammarians, and it contains some compositions that contradict these rules. Hence, the rules of traditional grammar should be reconsidered and corrected. To be consistent with the structures mentioned in the Holy Qur’an, especially since these structures have examples that support them from the speech of the Arabs, taking into consideration that there are grammatical rules that were not declared by the majority of grammarians and Abu Hayyan, such as: the coming of (lamma) as a superfluous one, so such grammatical rules must be adopted, Adopting them and adding them to the rules established by grammarians.

– We did not notice that Abu Hayyan made the Prophetic Hadith evidence of his rejection or acceptance of the grammatical rule. Rather, we noticed that he evaded the Prophetic Hadith and did not comment on it. This is what we found in some grammatical issues, such as: adding the numbers (3-10) to the plural noun. And the plural gender noun.
– Abu Hayyan did not accurately explore the Arabic linguistic reality and its texts. We found that he said in more than one place: I did not know any grammarian who said this, or his saying: This opinion is contrary to the consensus of the Basra and Kufic grammarians, and from that is what he said in the issue (the conjunction of the statement is part of knowledge, and the conjunction is indefinite).
Abu Hayyan followed more than one method in presenting opinions on the grammatical issues that he addressed in his interpretation. We see him sometimes stating the name of the author of the opinion along with his book, sometimes stating the name of the author without mentioning his book, sometimes stating the book without mentioning its author, and sometimes mentioning the opinion without stating the name of its author or the name of the book in which the opinion was stated.
Abu Hayyan employed the semantic aspect in rejecting the grammatical rule, just as he did in prohibiting the coming of (qād) in the meaning of (ḥaḍ), and he also benefited from Qur’anic readings in his explanation of grammatical issues.
When Abu Hayyan rejected a grammatical opinion, he used to describe its owner with various epithets, including weakness in grammar, as happened with Abu Ubaidah, Ibn Atiyya, and Al-Zamakhshari.
All the rules that were mentioned have evidence from the Holy Qur’an, there is a corresponding counterpart in the poetic and prose speech of the Arabs, and this indicates that all the grammatical structures mentioned in the Holy Qur’an have examples from the speech of the Arabs. Hence, I see that everyone who claims that the structures of the Holy Qur’an have properties that contradict the structures of Arab speech has gone too far, and is not correct. – Abu Hayyan rejected some grammatical issues, describing them as few, weak, and anomalous, despite the numerous Qur’anic texts supporting them. Because it conflicted with the rules of traditional grammar, and he took several positions in rejecting it. Some of them are what he described as weak, which are: the adverb coming from the genitive case, the coming of (to) meaning (ba), the coming of (in) an addition, the coming of (from) meaning (at) and (after), and the insertion of (waw) into the sentence described by it; To confirm its attachment to the adjective, the appearance of (except) in the meaning of after, the occurrence of (except) as an addition, the appearance of (if) in the meaning of (if), the appearance of (lamma) as an addition, the occurrence of (waw) in place of (except), and the occurrence of the conjunction of the statement from the indefinite noun. Among them are what he described as few, which are: adding the numbers (3-10) to the plural noun and the plural gender noun, the advent of “jala” meaning “named,” the deletion of the vocative article with the demonstrative noun, and the advent of “in” meaning if.
Among them are what he described as a necessity and an anomaly, which are: the presence of the incomplete predicate of the verb deleted, deleting the infinitive and keeping its direct object, conjunction of the accusative pronoun without a pronoun or a separator, separating the conjunction from the conjunction by adverb and adverb, deleting (that) in the accusative case and keeping the present tense verb after it in the accusative case, and deleting the accusative case. He blamed the assertive request and kept its function, and not coupling the response of the condition with the fa in the places that grammarians stipulated that it be coupled with it, and affirming the interrogative alif (ma) with the introduction of the preposition to it.