SCHOLAP: Scholastic Approach
| SCHOLAP: Scholastic Approach | |
|---|---|
| Category | Linguistic Embellishments (‘ilm al-badī‘) |
| Subcategory | Argumentation & Illustrative Persuasion |
| Balaghascore.com | |
| Code | CE-23 |
| BalaghaBase.org | |
| Code | Q101 |
| OpenAlex.org | |
| ID | W4415376811 |
| Cite this page | |
| 🔗 DOI | 10.64393/balagha.Q101 |
| Download PDF | |
| Taxonomy | |
| ARDT | v0.1.0, v0.1.1 |
Definition
Scholastic Approach (al-madhhab al-kalāmī) is an Arabic rhetorical device in which the communicator adduces a conclusive proof in support of a claim, such that the premises — already accepted by the addressee — necessarily entail the desired conclusion.[1][2][3]
The term derives from al-madhhab al-kalāmī, the method of Islamic scholastic theology (ʿilm al-kalām), which establishes the foundations of religion through decisive rational proofs.[1]
The term's earliest attested use is in Ibn al-Muʿtazz's Kitāb al-Badīʿ (d. 296/908), where he attributes it to al-Jāḥiẓ (d. 255/868–9). The examples adduced in that context point to the imitation of the argumentative style and jargon of the theologians as employed in poetry, rather than to the production of actual theological proof. The term subsequently acquired a more precise rhetorical meaning, namely the use of apodictic argumentation in support of a claim, as found in the definition given by al-Qazwīnī (d. 739/1338).[4][3]
Mechanism
- The proof consists of premises (muqaddimāt) that are accepted by the addressee (musallamah ʿinda al-mukhāṭab).[1][3]
- The accepted premises necessarily entail the desired conclusion (al-maṭlūb).[1]
- The substantiating proof may be implicit rather than explicitly stated, and may be grounded in observable reality or shared reasoning.[5]
- Where the proof operates refutationally, the false or impossible nature of the consequence demonstrates the falsity of the opposing premise, with the rebuttal remaining implicit.[5]
In this encyclopedia, the mechanism is understood to operate in one of two ways, derived from the pattern of examples across the sources:
- The communicator establishes a conditional: if a given premise obtains, a certain consequence follows. The consequence is shown to be false or impossible, and the premise is thereby rejected.
- Alternatively, the communicator establishes a premise already accepted by the audience, and shows that the desired conclusion necessarily follows from it.
Recognition
The following diagnostic tests aid identification:
- The passage contains a proof in which premises are presented as accepted facts or shared beliefs, and a conclusion is drawn from them by necessity.
- A conditional or hypothetical structure may be present (e.g. law… la-; in… fa-), though this is not required.
- In the refutational pattern, a consequence of an opposing claim is shown to be false or impossible, thereby rejecting the claim.
- In the affirmative pattern, a premise already accepted by the audience is shown to entail the desired conclusion.
Diagnostic Rhetorical Effects
- The argument is associated with rational proof and the method of scholastic theology, lending intellectual weight to the claim.[1][2]
- The rebuttal of opposing views may be implicit, requiring the audience to recognise the contradiction themselves.[5]
- Inferential compulsion: By grounding the proof in premises already accepted by the addressee, the device makes resistance to the conclusion appear irrational rather than merely oppositional. Assent arises through the audience’s own commitments rather than through external imposition.
- Argumentative inevitability: The syllogistic or conditional structure creates the impression that the conclusion could not have been otherwise. This gives the claim an effect of necessity and narrows the space for counter-argument without direct confrontation.
- Participatory reasoning: Where part of the proof remains implicit, the audience must complete the inferential movement for itself. This transforms reception into active reasoning and can deepen assent by making the conclusion feel self-derived.
- Transferred rational authority: Because the conclusion is presented as the necessary outcome of accepted principles, the claim acquires the impersonal authority of logical necessity rather than appearing as a merely subjective assertion.
- Intellectual elevation: When employed in poetry or elevated prose, the introduction of demonstrative reasoning can lend the discourse an air of intellectual seriousness, distinguishing it from unsubstantiated assertion or purely ornamental expression, particularly when employed outside strictly argumentative contexts.
Applying the Recognition Framework
The information on this page can be used to evaluate whether this device is present in a candidate lexical item using the Specific Device Recognition part of the Universal Framework for Identifying Arabic Rhetorical Devices:
Examples
- Source Example
لَوْ كَانَ فِيهِمَا آلِهَةٌ إِلَّا اللَّهُ لَفَسَدَتَا
If there were in them (i.e. the heavens and the earth) gods besides God, they would both have been ruined.
- Explanation
- The conditional establishes that multiple gods would entail cosmic ruin (al-fasād). The consequent — ruin — is false, since the heavens and earth demonstrably subsist in order. Therefore the premise — multiple gods — is necessarily false. The substantiating evidence (al-fasād) is implicit rather than explicitly stated.[1][5]
- Source Example
وَهُوَ الَّذِي يَبْدَأُ الْخَلْقَ ثُمَّ يُعِيدُهُ وَهُوَ أَهْوَنُ عَلَيْهِ
And it is He who begins creation; then He repeats it, and that is even easier for Him.
- Explanation
- He who is able to originate creation is necessarily able to repeat it; since recreation is even easier than origination, it falls within the scope of possibility, which is the desired conclusion.[1][5]
- Constructed Example
لَوْ كَانَ هَذَا الْحَاكِمُ ظَالِمًا لَمَا ازْدَهَرَتِ الْبِلَادُ فِي عَهْدِهِ، وَالْبِلَادُ تَزْدَهِرُ، فَلَيْسَ بِظَالِمٍ.
If this ruler were unjust, the country would not have flourished under his rule; but the country is flourishing; therefore he is not unjust.
- Explanation
- The conditional establishes that injustice would entail the absence of flourishing. The consequent — absence of flourishing — is false, since flourishing is observed. Therefore the premise — that the ruler is unjust — is necessarily rejected. The proof rests on a shared premise already accepted by the audience, namely that just governance and flourishing stand or fall together.
- Constructed Example
كُلُّ مَنْ قَدَرَ عَلَى الْخَلْقِ الْأَوَّلِ قَدَرَ عَلَى الْإِعَادَةِ، وَاللهُ قَادِرٌ عَلَى الْخَلْقِ الْأَوَّلِ، فَهُوَ قَادِرٌ عَلَى الْإِعَادَةِ.
Whoever is able to bring about creation for the first time is able to repeat it; God is able to bring about creation for the first time; therefore God is able to repeat it.
- Explanation
- A general principle is stated — that the power to originate entails the power to recreate — and a specific case is shown to fall under it. Since both the principle and its application are premises already accepted by the audience, the conclusion follows necessarily. This example makes explicit the syllogistic structure that is implicit in Qurʾān 30:27.
Notes
- Translation of al-madhhab al-kalāmī: ʿAbd al-Raʾūf (2006) uses "scholastic approach" and "dialectical mannerism." Heinrichs (1998) renders it literally as "the theological approach." [5][4]
- Naming and attribution: Ibn al-Muʿtazz attributes the name to al-Jāḥiẓ. Al-Jāḥiẓ in turn attributed the phenomenon to al-takalluf (studied elaboration), noting that he found it abundantly in the Qurʾān. Abū Hilāl al-ʿAskarī similarly attributed the device to al-takalluf. Ibn Rashīq characterises it as both kalāmī and falsafī (philosophical).[3]
- ;Semantic development: As Heinrichs (1998) notes, the term changes its meaning considerably across the history of rhetoric. In Ibn al-Muʿtazz the term denotes imitation of theological argumentative style and jargon as found in poetry; in al-Qazwīnī and the later tradition it denotes the use of conclusive, logically entailing proof. The definition given on this page reflects the later, narrower sense established by al-Qazwīnī.[4][3]
References
- ↑ a b c d e f g Aḥmad al-Hāshimī, Jawāhir al-Balāgha fī al-Maʿānī wa-al-Bayān wa-al-Badīʿ (Windsor: Hindāwī Foundation, 2019), 368, ISBN 9781527316386.
- ↑ a b Inʿām Fawwāl ʿAkkāwī, Al-Muʿjam al-Mufaṣṣal fī ʿUlūm al-Balāgha: Al-Badīʿ wa-al-Bayān wa-al-Maʿānī (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1996), 643-644.
- ↑ a b c d e ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz Atīq, ʿIlm al-Badīʿ (Beirut: Dār al-Nahḍa al-ʿArabiyya lil-Ṭibāʿa wa-al-Nashr wa-al-Tawzīʿ, 2002), 140-145.
- ↑ a b c W. P. Heinrichs, ‘al-Madhhab al-kalāmī’, in Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature, ed. Julie Scott Meisami and Paul Starkey (London: Routledge, 1998), 482, ISBN 0415068088.
- ↑ a b c d e f Hussein Abdul-Raof, Arabic Rhetoric: A Pragmatic Analysis (Oxford: Routledge, 2006), 257, ISBN 9780415386098. DOI: 10.4324/9780203965399
Page history
- 2026-02-10 - Migration to Semantic Device Identifiers: Renamed from CG-2: Scholastic Approach to SCHOLAP: Scholastic Approach.
- 2025-11-20 - Page incorporated into the Arabic Rhetorical Device Taxonomy (v0.1.1).
- 2024-04-22 - Page created: Scholastic Approach.
