Formulation of the Claim
The Qur’an is an oral discourse that precedes the written muṣḥaf.
Explanation
Arkoun places this distinction at the heart of understanding the formation of the Qur’anic text within history. What is meant is that the Qur’an, as discourse, comes before its fixation in written form, and that the transition to the muṣḥaf represents a later stage of codification.
For him, this difference is not read as a formal detail, but as a key to understanding the relationship between revelation and its becoming a circulated text. Arkoun therefore does not equate the moment of oral utterance with the moment of transcription; rather, he distinguishes between them within the process by which the text took shape.
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This atom falls within the broader project in Readings in the Qur’an of reconsidering how the Qur’an was formed and fixed within history. It is directly connected to the question of the muṣḥaf, and to the difference between the original discourse and the written form that later stabilized.
Limits of the Claim
This atom does not deny the sacredness of the text or reduce it to a mere historical document, nor does it provide a full account of the history of collection and codification. It is limited to highlighting the distinction between the oral and the written as a structural distinction in Arkoun’s reading.