قُلْ لَئِنِ اجْتَمَعَتِ الْاِنْسُ وَالْجِنُّ عَلٰٓى اَنْ يَأْتُوا بِمِثْلِ هٰذَا الْقُرْاٰنِ لَا يَأْتُونَ بِمِثْلِهِ وَلَوْ كَانَ بَعْضُهُمْ لِبَعْضٍ ظَهِيراً

اَمْ يَقُولُونَ افْتَرٰيهُ قُلْ فَأْتُوا بِعَشْرِ سُوَرٍ مِثْلِهِ مُفْتَرَيَاتٍ وَادْعُوا مَنِ اسْتَطَعْتُمْ مِنْ دُونِ اللّٰهِ اِنْ كُنْتُمْ صَادِقِينَ

وَاِنْ كُنْتُمْ فِي رَيْبٍ مِمَّا نَزَّلْنَا عَلٰى عَبْدِنَا فَأْتُوا بِسُورَةٍ مِنْ مِثْلِهِ وَادْعُوا شُهَدَاءَكُمْ مِنْ دُونِ اللّٰهِ اِنْ كُنْتُمْ صَادِقِينَ

In the abridged Ibn Kathir text (Isra 17:88): even if humans and jinn gathered and supported one another, they could never bring the like of the Qur'an, for it is the speech of the Creator who has no equal or peer. The same challenge is repeated in the text (Baqara 2:23), scaled down to a single sura; Ibn Kathir notes that this tahaddi rests on the Qur'an's superiority in composition and style, surpassing even the eloquence of the Arabs.

In the Twenty-Fifth Word, Bediüzzaman roots the Qur'an's inimitability first of all in the eloquence of its composition (nazm) and reads the challenge verses within this frame.

1. 1The Qur'an's most brilliant miracle arises from the flawless harmony between its words and meanings, that is, from the elegance and strength of its composition; Bediüzzaman treats this strength and eloquence of composition as one aspect of the Qur'an's inimitability.
2. 2The challenge was addressed to the Arab masters of rhetoric who stood at the summit of eloquence, yet none of them could bring the like of even a single sura.
3. 3Bediüzzaman reads the Arabs' choice of war, at the cost of wealth and life, instead of answering the challenge with a single sura, as evidence that they could not produce its like.

The quotations are verified from the primary texts. This is a modern Risale/tafsir reading of the verses (a human interpretive layer), not identical with the Qur'an's certain declaration.

اِنَّا اَنْزَلْنَاهُ قُرْءٰناً عَرَبِياًّ لَعَلَّـكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ

وَلَقَدْ نَعْلَمُ اَنَّهُمْ يَقُولُونَ اِنَّمَا يُعَلِّمُهُ بَشَرٌ لِسَانُ الَّذِي يُلْحِدُونَ اِلَيْهِ اَعْجَمِيٌّ وَهٰذَا لِسَانٌ عَرَبِيٌّ مُبِينٌ

قُرْاٰناً عَرَبِياًّ غَيْرَ ذِي عِوَجٍ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَّقُونَ

In the abridged Ibn Kathir text (Nahl 16:103): the idolaters' claim that a foreigner was teaching the Prophet the Qur'an is refuted. The one they alluded to had only very limited Arabic, whereas the Qur'an came in clear, eloquent Arabic with perfect meanings and style. Ibn Kathir stresses that no reasonable mind could trace such a superior text to a foreigner of scant language.

This point of the Twenty-Fifth Word takes its heading directly from the Qur'an's wording: the clarity of its expression (fesahat-i harika). Bediüzzaman does not leave that clarity as an abstract compliment; he tries to show it on a single verse at the level of letters, sounds and points of articulation.

1. 1Bediüzzaman treats clarity on two levels: eloquence in meaning and style, and in wording what he calls gayet selis bir fesahat, a wholly fluent clarity. As evidence that this clarity is actually present he points to the text's not wearying its reader, saying that it does not tire even if repeated thousands of times, and he traces this to its being like nourishment, as bread is eaten daily without weariness.
2. 2As his example he takes Âl-i İmrân 3:154. He observes that every letter of the alphabet occurs in the verse, that the fluency is not broken even though all the heavy letters stand together, and he counts one by one how often each letter appears according to shared points of articulation, qualities and sound: letters interchangeable with one another in equal numbers, heavier ones more sparingly.
3. 3He widens the conclusion he draws from this count from wording toward meaning: if such order has been observed in its letters, then an order and coherence must also have been observed in its words, its sentences and its meanings.
4. 4He relates the words of a Qurayshi orator who went to listen to the Qur'an. Faced with the sweetness and freshness (halâvet, tarâvet) of the speech, the man concedes that it does not resemble human speech and stands apart from the words of poets and soothsayers; even so, he says that in order to deceive their own followers they must at most call it sorcery.

The quotations are verified from the text of The Words on erisale.com (Twenty-Fifth Word, pp. 507-509). Bediüzzaman does not cite Yûsuf 12:2, Nahl 16:103 or Zümer 39:28 in this point; his example is Âl-i İmrân 3:154. The connection between his discussion of clarity and these three verses is editorial. This block is a human interpretive layer on the verses; it is not identical with the Qur'an's certain declaration, and the Qur'an's truth depends on no human analysis.

اِنَّ اللّٰهَ لَا يَسْتَحْـيِ اَنْ يَضْرِبَ مَثَلاً مَا بَعُوضَةً فَمَا فَوْقَهَا فَاَمَّا الَّذِينَ اٰمَنُوا فَيَعْلَمُونَ اَنَّهُ الْحَقُّ مِنْ رَبِّهِمْ وَاَمَّا الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَيَقُولُونَ مَاذَا اَرَادَ اللّٰهُ بِهٰذَا مَثَلاً يُضِلُّ بِهِ كَثِيراً وَيَهْدِي بِهِ كَثِيراً وَمَا يُضِلُّ بِهِ اِلَّا الْفَاسِقِينَ

اَلَمْ تَرَ كَيْفَ ضَرَبَ اللّٰهُ مَثَلاً كَلِمَةً طَيِّبَةً كَشَجَرَةٍ طَيِّبَةٍ اَصْلُهَا ثَابِتٌ وَفَرْعُهَا فِي السَّمَاءِ

لَوْ اَنْزَلْنَا هٰذَا الْقُرْاٰنَ عَلٰى جَبَلٍ لَرَاَيْتَهُ خَاشِعاً مُتَصَدِّعاً مِنْ خَشْيَةِ اللّٰهِ وَتِلْكَ الْاَمْثَالُ نَضْرِبُهَا لِلنَّاسِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ

In the abridged Ibn Kathir text (Baqara 2:26): to convey truth effectively, Allah is not ashamed to draw a parable from even the smallest creature, such as a mosquito or what is smaller, for no subject is too lowly for divine instruction. The believers know these examples to be the truth from their Lord, while the deniers object to them and only increase in misguidance; thus the parable becomes a measure that exposes the state of hearts.

The Fifth Point explains the superiority of the Qur'an's exposition by its reaching every level of audience at once. It is exactly here that Bediüzzaman takes up simile and parable, as the road by which the deepest divine truths reach the plainest hearer.

1. 1For Bediüzzaman the Qur'an states deep truths with a plainness that meets the common gaze without offending common feeling. He names this descent with an Arabic phrase glossed in the accompanying footnote as God speaking according to the level of understanding of His servants, and likens it to using a child's expressions when speaking with a child.
2. 2The instrument of that descent is simile and parable: divine truths that the most learned sages cannot reach by their own reasoning are conveyed to the most unlettered listener through similes and parables cast in figurative form. His example is Tâ-Hâ 20:5, where lordship is shown in the image of a sovereign governing from his throne.
3. 3He conveys the way one and the same utterance suffices for both large and small capacity through an image of hearing: the word Elhamdü lillâh fills the cave that is a mountain's ear, and the same word settles fully into the tiny ear of a fly; likewise the Qur'an's meanings satisfy minds as large as mountains and the simplest minds with the same words.
4. 4He also uses parable in his own method and says so openly: in the First Ziya of the Third Şule of the Twenty-Fifth Word he invites the reader to look through what he calls the telescope of comparison (temsil dürbünü), and citing Nahl 16:60 he adds the qualification that there is no fault in the comparison.

The quotations are verified from the text of The Words on erisale.com (Twenty-Fifth Word, pp. 522-523; for the fourth item, pp. 585-586). Bediüzzaman does not cite Bakara 2:26, İbrâhîm 14:24 or Haşr 59:21 in this discussion; his examples are Tâ-Hâ 20:5 and Nahl 16:60. The connection between his treatment of parable and the three verses on this page is editorial. This block is a human interpretive layer, not identical with the Qur'an's certain declaration.

اَوْ زِدْ عَلَيْهِ وَرَتِّلِ الْقُرْاٰنَ تَرْتِيلاً

وَلَقَدْ يَسَّرْنَا الْقُرْاٰنَ لِلذِّكْرِ فَهَلْ مِنْ مُدَّكِرٍ

In the abridged Ibn Kathir text (Qamar 54:17): Allah has made the Qur'an easy both to memorize and to comprehend for those who seek it, so that people may reflect upon it and take heed. The text reinforces this ease as an invitation with the question, 'So is there anyone who will take heed?'

The treatise states its subject at the outset: it is a strong answer to the objections raised against repetition in the Qur'an. Bediüzzaman refuses to count repetition a defect and reads it as required by the Qur'an's being a book of remembrance, supplication and invitation.

1. 1He says that the Qur'an is in one respect a book of supplication, invitation, remembrance and divine unity, and that this requires repetition; each repetition, he adds, teaches different meanings to different levels of hearer within a single sentence and a single narrative.
2. 2He says in the text's own words that repetition is no defect: the repetition of sentences and verses carrying the force of thousands of conclusions is "not a defect, but rather a most powerful inimitability, a most elevated eloquence and a force of expression most fitting to the situation." As examples he counts the basmala occurring one hundred and fourteen times and the repeated verses of Şuarâ and Rahmân.
3. 3He lists separately the aural and mnemonic side of repetition: the Qur'an being written with pleasure in the hearts of millions of memorisers at all times, its not wearying despite abundant repetition, its settling into children's memories together with its easily confused passages, and its coming to the ears of the sick and the dying as pleasantly as the water of Zamzam.
4. 4He says that stating the truth of divine unity twenty times on one page, explicitly and by implication, gives not weariness but strength, eagerness and sweetness; in the same treatise he describes the Qur'an as a kind of recitation of the great book of the universe.

The quotations are verified from the primary text of Sözler (Twenty-Fifth Word, the Emirdağ Flower). The discussion turns on repetition, remembrance and memory; its account of the Qur'an settling into memory coincides with what Kamer 54:17 states, but Bediüzzaman cites neither Kamer 54:17 nor Müzzemmil 73:4 here and does not treat tartil as a separate heading, so no link to tartil has been made. This is a human interpretive layer, not identical with the Qur'an's certain declaration. Other passages from the same treatise are cited on the Society and History and Civilisation pages.

اَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْاٰنَ وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِنْدِ غَيْرِ اللّٰهِ لَوَجَدُوا فِيهِ اخْتِلَافاً كَثِيراً

اَللّٰهُ نَزَّلَ اَحْسَنَ الْحَدِيثِ كِتَاباً مُتَشَابِهاً مَثَانِيَ تَقْشَعِرُّ مِنْهُ جُلُودُ الَّذِينَ يَخْشَوْنَ رَبَّهُمْ ثُمَّ تَلِينُ جُلُودُهُمْ وَقُلُوبُهُمْ اِلٰى ذِكْرِ اللّٰهِ ذٰلِكَ هُدَى اللّٰهِ يَهْدِي بِهِ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَمَنْ يُضْلِلِ اللّٰهُ فَمَا لَهُ مِنْ هَادٍ

In the abridged Ibn Kathir text (Nisa 4:82): the Qur'an carries no inner contradiction because it comes from Allah, the Most Wise and Praiseworthy; had it been from another, they would have found in it much inconsistency. This inner unity shows itself in each part supporting and confirming the others; Ibn Kathir notes that the ambiguous verses are to be understood in the light of the clear ones, so that the Qur'an's own harmony becomes a measure of interpretation.

The second treatise of Muhâkemat is on rhetoric throughout. Its Fourth Mesele grounds the force of an utterance in its parts answering one another, and derives proportion from that.

1. 1For Bediüzzaman the force of an utterance lies in its qualifications answering one another and its features assisting one another, so that all of them point to the same purpose; each qualification lays its finger on the same target. So that the purpose is not blurred in the mind, he requires mutual answering, mutual aid and mutual support among the parts (tecavüb, teavün, istimdad).
2. 2From this he draws a sequence: order gives rise to proportion, and from proportion beauty and comeliness shine out. Order, proportion and beauty are not separate ornaments but links that follow one another.
3. 3He opens his example on Enbiyâ 21:46: the lightening carried by the doubt in the particle in, the mere touching in messet, the reduction in the root, the form and the indefiniteness of the word nefha, the partitive sense of min, the mildness of saying azâb rather than a name for heavy punishment, and the hint of mercy in Rabbike. All of these together present the smallest portion of the chastisement, and when that smallest portion is such, the whole of it strikes the hearer with dread.
4. 4He leaves the analysis to the reader as an exercise, offering it as a copybook model to be practised, and generalises his verdict: all the verses of the Qur'an, he says, manifest this order, proportion and beauty. He adds that purposes are sometimes nested in one another, each with its dependents neighbouring the next without mixing into it, and that a superficial gaze goes wrong in such places.

The quotations are verified from the text of Muhâkemat on erisale.com (Second Makale, Fourth Mesele together with the İşaret and Tenbih that follow it, pp. 105-107). Bediüzzaman does not cite Nisâ 4:82 or Zümer 39:23 in this mesele; the verse he analyses is Enbiyâ 21:46. The connection between his discussion of proportion and the two verses on this page is editorial. This block is a human interpretive layer, not identical with the Qur'an's certain declaration, and the Qur'an's inner consistency stands in no need of endorsement by human analysis.