The Qur’?n contains a rich terminology for different aspects of time, used in concrete practical ways, rather than systematically constituting a theoretical notion of time. Furthermore, the Qur’?n includes a large number of stories about past figures and events with important implications for the present time of the early Muslim community. Another relevant aspect of time in the Qur’?n is to be found in prophetic statements about the future, both worldly and eschatological, made in the past tense suggesting the already completed fulfillment of the statement. The highly interesting data presented in these various ways, thus, constitute a multilayered concept of time, fundamentally relevant for the Qur’?nic worldview. The Qur’?nic concept of time, in general, was developed against the background of the perception of time in pre-Islamic Arabic poetry. There, time is personified and considered as a universal acting power of obliteration that dominates human destiny and is deeply interrelated with death. Especially dahr, the personified idea of endless time, plays a major role in pre-Islamic Arabic poetry as a mighty destructive power. Compared to aion, the personified concept of endless time in Greek literature, particularly in late antique poetry flourishing in the Mediterranean region in the 5th and 6th Century AD, dahr seems to be the Arabic equivalent to aion. The idea of time as a universal power of destruction, paramount in pre-Islamic Arabic poetry, has been picked up and consistently annihilated in the Qur’?n. There, time is atomized, divided into periods that conform to physical laws and into restricted segments. It becomes a transparent container of actions, mainly those of God who dominates absolutely time and history. The very idea of turning times is also used in the Qur’?n, but it is here that no other power apart from God turns days and nights. It is extremely important to note that whereas this idea is completely absent in the Bible as well as in Jewish and Christian writings, it does exist in the Qur’?n as well as in the pre-Islamic Arabic and Hellenistic poetry of Late Antiquity. By analyzing Qur’anic images of time, the paper will show an Arabic form of Hellenism in which Islam arose and the concept of time in the Qur’?n has been developed.

Some notes on the Historical Evolution of the Qur’anic Term “qarn” In modern standard Arabic the word qarn (pl. qur?n), whose root is q-r-n, has two primary meanings: a horn or a century. An examination of the attestations of the term qarn in early Islamic sources demonstrates that it underwent different lexical transformations that reflect certain need of the early Islamic community. This analysis also shows that the period of time it designates was a controversial issue among early Muslim scholars. Modern scholarship lacks a serious discussion of the lexical implications of qarn, whereas its meanings as unit of time are almost entirely neglected. Even the Encyclopedia of Islam does not include an entry on the term qarn. This paper aims to examine the lexical meanings and evolution that the term qarn underwent in early Islamic religious and historical thought. This investigation also gives insights into the scholarly concerns of the early Islamic community. Thus, the treatment of this term reflects, I argue, the crucial role the prophetic tradition has played in defining the scholarly and religious discourses that prevailed in early Islamic society. Before the figure of one hundred years became to be finally the standard temporal meaning of qarn there were ten versions on this subject. Thus, one of the main contributions of this paper is to show why one hundred years eventually became to be the standard temporal meaning of qarn. In so doing, this investigation also contributes to better understand certain aspects of the evolution of early Islamic historical thought. As for the methodology, I apply a comparative textual analysis of the appearances of the term qarn in early Islamic sources; to the relevant narratives. As for the sources, this study starts with the appearances of the term qarn in the Qur’?n and the prophetic tradition. It is based, however, on the occurrences of this term in early Islamic exegetical literature.

Many Qur’an scholars contend that due to the process of canonizing the Qur’an several of its chapters (suras, sgl. sura) do not reflect deliberate composition. Such suras are viewed as an incoherent mosaic of juxtaposed text units that lack any logical or thematic interconnectedness. In a surface reading, Chapter Eleven of the Qur’an (surat Hud) would seem to belong to this category of suras. Nevertheless, by employing both textual and intertextual perspectives within a framework of structural analysis, the suggested study will argue that surat Hud is a coherent text with a unified thesis. Particular attention will be paid to “intra-Qur’anic referentiality” and in unison my analysis will be situated within the text’s initial literary tradition. However, in order to situate the analysis of surat Hud within the Qur’an’s initial literary tradition I shall, contrary to Andrew Rippin, consider the Qur’an as more than a unique reading of Biblical traditions. I propose, through examining surat Hud, that the Qur’an was not only responding to earlier Biblical and Apocryphal lore, but also thickened its own earlier texts, particularly narrative texts, as it expanded. Ultimately, the study will suggest that the several passages of surat Hud contribute to refuting the accusations of fabricating the revelations levelled against the prophet, chiefly, by means of asserting the authority of Qur’anic narratives over older Biblical and Apocryphal traditions.

Ibn Kathir's (d. 774/1373) Qur’anic exegesis is one of the most popular tafsirs is modern times. Multiple editions have been published, several abridgments are available and an English translation has recently been released. Yet, there is little research on the work’s exegetical methodology. Previous scholarship conflates Ibn Kathir’s exegesis and theory of exegesis or hermeneutics. By relying on the exegesis’s introduction, earlier scholars argue that Ibn Kathir interprets the Qur’an through the Prophet, the companions and the successors. This hermeneutic privileges transmitted reports since it assumes that the early community explained most of the Qur’an. It also stands in contrast to the dominant philological approach that opens the Qur’an to a multitude of meanings throughout time. But in his actual exegesis, Ibn Kathir is unable to fully implement this hermeneutic. Ibn Kathir first rearranges the exegetical tradition based on his worldview that he adopts from his teacher Ibn Taymiyya. Ibn Taymiyya’s emphasis on the primary sources and his literalist interpretations are apparent throughout the exegesis. Ibn Kathir then inserts relevant Prophetic hadiths that previous exegetes do not mention. In other words, Ibn Kathir tries to raise the significance of Prophetic hadiths within the exegetical tradition. Much of the exegetical tradition is based on akhbar or reports from various religious authorities and previous religious communities. Ibn Kathir sought to deemphasize akhbari reports in favor of Prophetic traditions. Ibn Kathir frequently cites Prophetic hadiths first and omits akhbari reports that do not conform to his worldview. However, despite his efforts, Ibn Kathir was bound to the tradition that he worked to reform. Ibn Kathir was unable to alter the tradition’s themes, authority structure and philological approach. Ibn Kathir’s hermeneutic should thus be differentiated from his exegesis in that his hermeneutic is far more ambitious than what his exegesis is able to produce.