Paretymologies in the Fusus al-Hikam [concise summery]

Keywords: Ibn Arabi (ابن عربي), Fuṣūs al-Hikam (فصوص الحكم), Paretymology, Folk Etymology, Quranic Hermeneutics, Islamic Linguistic Thought, Arabic Linguistic Tradition, Akbarian Studies, Etymology, Arabic Language

Introduction: Paretymology and Scholarly Interpretation

Ibn Arabi, known as al-shaykh al-akbar (الشيخ الأكبر) (‘the Greatest Master’), presents numerous linguistic explanations in his seminal work, Fuṣūs al-Hikam (فصوص الحكم), particularly concerning Quranic terms. From a modern linguistic standpoint, many of these explanations resemble paretymologies or folk etymologies – interpretations based on superficial phonetic or semantic similarities rather than historical linguistic development. Paretymology often operates synchronically, linking words based on perceived associations within a specific cultural context, unlike modern etymology which focuses on diachronic, historical connections.

While often dismissed as fanciful, the use of such methods by figures like Plato or Ibn Arabi prompts deeper investigation. Scholars argue that these interpretations, when viewed within their specific epistemological and cultural frameworks (like Vedic thought or Platonic philosophy), reveal profound insights into the thinker’s conception of language and reality. This article examines Ibn Arabi’s paretymologies in the Fuṣūs, arguing they are not mere errors but sophisticated hermeneutic practices rooted in Islamic linguistic science and his metaphysical view of language as intrinsically linked to divine revelation.

Linguistic Explanations in the Fuṣūs al-Hikam

Given that Ibn Arabi’s work is deeply engaged with Quranic hermeneutics, it’s rich with linguistic analysis. Some of his insights align with the traditional Arabic linguistic framework and even show advanced phonetic understanding for his time. However, many interpretations deviate significantly, falling into the category of paretymology. Austin, a translator of the Fuṣūs, noted the “devious and tortuous methods” Ibn Arabi sometimes employs in interpreting Arabic words and their meanings.

These explanations cover various linguistic aspects:

• Grammar rules and terminology
• Etymologies (including paretymologies)
• Polysemy (multiple meanings) and enantionymy (opposite meanings)
• Interpretations of names (anthroponyms and toponyms)

This analysis focuses primarily on grammatical explanations and etymologies/paretymologies.

Grammatical Insights: Beyond the Surface

Ibn Arabi demonstrates a solid grasp of Arabic grammar, often using technical terms and rules as springboards for metaphysical interpretation.

• Active Participles: He discusses the word rahīm (رحيم) (merciful), arguing it functions as an active participle (ism al-fāʿil) (اسم الفاعل), aligning with grammatical classifications where forms like faʿīl can function similarly to fāʿil.
• Pronoun Symbolism: Analyzing the Quranic phrase in tuʿaddib-hum (تُعَذِّبْهُم) (‘if You punish them’ – Quran 5:118), he notes the use of the third-person pronoun -hum (هم) (‘them’), technically ḍamīr al-ghāʾib (ضمير الغائب) (‘pronoun of the absent/hidden’). He interprets this grammatically conventional term symbolically, suggesting it alludes to the veil concealing the punished from God.
• Pronoun Ambiguity: In interpreting wa-ʾin min šayʾin ʾillā yusabbiḥu bi-ḥamdi-hi (وَإِن مِّن شَيْءٍ إِلَّا يُسَبِّحُ بِحَمْدِهِ) (Quran 17:44), usually translated ‘There is nothing that does not glorify Him by His praise,’ Ibn Arabi points out the pronoun -hi (ه) (‘his/its’) could grammatically refer back to šayʾ (شيء) (‘thing’) rather than God. This reading suggests each thing praises God according to its own limited conception.
• Gender Agreement & Rhetoric: Analyzing a Hadith where the Prophet lists three beloved things (women, perfume, prayer), Ibn Arabi notes the use of the masculine numeral ṯalāṯ (ثلاث) (‘three’). Standard grammar dictates that with a mixed-gender group containing feminine nouns (nisāʾ (نساء) ‘women’, ṣalāh (صلاة) ‘prayer’) and a masculine noun (ṭīb (طيب) ‘perfume’), the masculine prevails, requiring the feminine numeral ṯalāṯah (ثلاثة). Ibn Arabi argues the Prophet’s deviation wasn’t a mistake but a deliberate rhetorical choice emphasizing the feminine element’s significance in that context.

These examples show Ibn Arabi’s careful attention to linguistic form, even when leading to metaphysical conclusions not strictly grammatical.

Exploring Etymology: Ištiqāq and Its Levels

The Arabic concept of ištiqāq (اشتقاق), often translated as ‘etymology,’ differs significantly from the modern Western understanding. Traditional ištiqāq is primarily synchronic, exploring semantic relationships between words within Arabic based on shared roots or letters, without the historical, diachronic focus of modern etymology. The self-referential nature of Arabic ištiqāq might partly stem from the language’s structure and its sacred status in Islamic thought.

Three levels of ištiqāq are traditionally distinguished:

• Al-Ištiqāq al-Ṣaġīr/al-ʾAṣġar (الاشتقاق الصغير / الأصغر) (Minor Etymology): Connects words sharing the exact same root letters in the same order (e.g., kitāb (كتاب), kātib (كاتب) from K-T-B). This is widely accepted.
• Al-Ištiqāq al-Kabīr (الاشتقاق الكبير) (Great Etymology): Connects words sharing the same root letters, regardless of order (e.g., K-L-M, M-K-L, K-M-L). Less accepted.
• Al-Ištiqāq al-ʾAkbar (الاشتقاق الأكبر) (Greater Etymology): Connects words sharing only two root letters. Even less accepted.

From a modern perspective, only the first level generally aligns with etymological principles; the latter two often produce paretymologies.

Conventional Ištiqāq (Minor Etymology) in the Fuṣūs

Ibn Arabi frequently employs the accepted first level:

• Abrahim al-Khalīl (إبراهيم الخليل): Links al-khalīl (‘intimate friend’ of God) to taḫallul (تخلل) (‘permeation’), suggesting Abraham permeated the Divine attributes.
• Qurrat al-ʿAyn (قرة العين): Connects qurrat al-ʿayn (‘solace’, ‘delight of the eye’) to istaqarra (استقر) (‘to settle’), implying the eye finds rest only when gazing upon the beloved.
• Bašar (بشر): Links bašar (‘human being’) to mubāšarah (مباشرة) (‘direct contact’), signifying man’s creation by God’s direct touch.
• Rīḥ (ريح) and ʿAḏāb (عذاب): Associates rīḥ (‘wind’) with rāḥah (راحة) (‘rest’) (root R-W-Ḥ) and ʿaḏāb (‘punishment’) with istaʿḏaba (استعذبة) (‘to find sweet’) (root ʿ-ḏ-B) to highlight the ambivalent nature of divine action as both chastisement and mercy/sweetness.

Controversial Ištiqāq (Greater Etymology) and Beyond

Ibn Arabi also utilizes, and sometimes pushes the boundaries of, the less conventional levels of ištiqāq:

• Māl (مال) and Māla (مال): Connects māl (‘wealth’, root M-W-L) to māla (‘to incline’, root M-Y-L), stating wealth is called māl because hearts incline (tamīlu) (تميل) towards it. This involves linking roots differing by one letter, typical of ištiqāq al-ʾakbar.
• Qurʾān (قرآن) and Qarana (قرنة): Suggests a link between Qurʾān (‘recitation’, root Q-R-ʾ) and qarana (‘to join/unite’, root Q-R-N) to illustrate the Quran’s inclusive nature. This relies on the phonetic similarity created by the non-radical suffix -ān in Qurʾān.
• Siğn (سجن) to Satara/Ğanna (سترا/جن): Interpreting al-masğūnīn (المسجونين) (‘the imprisoned’, root S-G-N), Ibn Arabi claims the sīn (س) is redundant (من حروف الزوائد) (min ḥurūf al-zawāʾid). Removing it yields a connection to ğanna (جن) (‘to cover/conceal’), which he links to satara (ستَرَ) (‘to cover’). This manipulation seems based on the graphic similarity of the words in Arabic script and potentially the Science of Letters (ʿilm al-ḥurūf).
• Minhāğ (منهاج) as Min-hā ğāʾa: Interprets the word minhāğ (‘path’, ‘method’) in Quran 5:48 as the sentence min-hā ğāʾa (منها جاء) (‘from it he came’). This relies on the near-identical pronunciation (minhāğā (منهاجا) in pause) and orthography (منهاجا vs منها جاء) of the word and the phrase, exploiting rules of Quranic recitation, orthography, and possibly poetic license regarding the final hamzah.

The Epistemological Framework: Language as Revelation

The disparity between traditional ištiqāq and modern etymology represents an epistemological rupture. What modern linguistics might label “fantastic” or “paretymology” depends on the accepted principles within a linguistic community. For Ibn Arabi, these seemingly unconventional interpretations are not arbitrary but stem from a profound metaphysical vision of language.

Central to his approach is the relationship between linguistic form and meaning. While Islamic theologians debated whether language originated by divine institution (tawqīf) (توقيف) or human convention (iṣṭilāḥ) (اصطلاح), Ibn Arabi transcends this by viewing all names as ultimately God’s Names and all beings as His words. He asserts that even the human act of forming letters and words occurs under divine guidance; every aspect of language, especially the Arabic of the Quran, is providential and purposeful.

The revealed text is the embodiment of God’s Speech; its form is as significant as its meaning. For Ibn Arabi, the linguistic form (lafẓ) (لفظ) takes precedence because it contains all potential meanings, which unfold continuously, especially for the spiritual elite (al-ḫuṣūṣ) (الخصوص). The fixed form allows for an inexhaustible flow of meaning.

This extends to individual letters (ḥurūf) (حروف), which Ibn Arabi, aligning with the ʿilm al-ḥurūf (علم الحروف) (Science of Letters), views not as inert building blocks but as living entities possessing inherent qualities and meanings – the fundamental roots of all language. Interpretations like removing the sīn from siğn should be understood within this symbolic framework.

Conclusion: Hermeneutics, Imagination, and the Sacred Text

Like many mystics, Ibn Arabi moves from viewing language of revelation to language as revelation. Arabic, for him, is a pansemiotic system where phonetic, graphic, and semantic connections between words reflect real connections in the cosmos. A parallel exists between the revealed Book (Kitāb) (كتاب) and the Book of Creation; both consist of divine signs (āyāt) (آيات), composed of words (kalimāt) (كلمات), ultimately made of letters (ḥurūf) (حروف) – the elemental particles of both realms.

Ibn Arabi’s etymologies, operating within the synchronic framework of ištiqāq, aim to uncover these underlying connections and penetrate the inner, multiple meanings of words. These links are revealed through assonance, homophony, homography, and the properties of letters. Crucially, despite the seemingly fanciful nature of some connections, Ibn Arabi bases his interpretations on a deep knowledge of existing linguistic sciences – grammar, orthography, recitation rules – rather than inventing arbitrary rules. His (par)etymologies are best understood not as linguistic errors but as hermeneutic keys providing access to his “metaphysics of imagination” and his view of the interconnectedness of language, reality, and the Divine.

References

• (References from the original article would be listed here in full, following the style used: e.g., Affifi, Austin, Baalbaki, Bronkhorst, Chodkiewicz, Chittick, etc. For brevity in this example, they are omitted but should be included in a final version.)
• Salvaggio, Federico. “Paretymologies in the Fuşūs al-Hikam in the light of Ibn ‘Arabī’s hermeneutic principles.” Kervan – International Journal of Afro-Asiatic Studies, n. 24/2 (2020): 231-247.(Representing the source document used for this summary).