change of ideas between the scholars of Kufah and  The Conflict of Theory in Basra, for FarÉ` -- considered the leader of the Kufan school – had at the time of his death Arabic Grammar Sibaway’s KitÉbiv found under his pillowv. Thus, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Solehah Hj. Yaacob to suggest that BaÎra was completely free from Arabic Dept. Language & Literature International Islamic University Malaysia Kufan ideas is not correct. The analogists’ system

of grammar needs to be verified using the anomaly Abstract: The conflicts between schools of grammar among approach such as Sibawayh and JumhËr al-Nuhah Arab traditional grammarians indicated that the differences on intellectual approaches occurred in modifying the Arabic Grammar allowed the use of the system of samÉÑ in the system. For example that the Basra school used the philosophy and question of ‘state’ (hal)vi. Both agreed the word logic approaches in their analyzing, critique, modifying and replacing the system in Arabic Grammar. Otherwise, the Kufa in was a gerund describing manner. In school more concentrated on reading Holy Quran, Hadith and another case, they accepted the qirÉ`Éh shÉdhah in Arabic poetry such as Asim bin Abi Nujud, Hamzah Zayyat and vii Kisaai whose from Qura` Sab`ah among the thinkers of the school because the BaÎran school allowed the worked on informant sources meant they associated with something unexpected or different what normally happens. The views above system in this verses based on qiyÉs in verse had been discussed and clarified by some researchers, historians, viii This means that the BaÎran scholars used linguists and grammarians that Basra school based on analogy and the Kufa school on anomaly approach. However, this research aims analogy. A number of propagators of anomaly to verify the approach of Basra and Kufa schools in order to accepted the use of analogy in some cases, for investigate their principles in implementing the linguistic argumentation. example with reference to tawkÊd, , ,

The Rivals on Both Schools and which became dual , , and as al-RaÌi stated in his Sharh al-KÉfiah: Kufa school split from the Basran school after an argument between Sibawayh and KisÉ`i over the case of ZanbËriahi. The differences of views in regard to a grammar system continued until the arrival of FarÉ` who based most of his analysis on Another case is their acceptance of the accusative analogy. Many historians of linguistics assert that case in fiÑil muÌÉriÑ such as also mentioned by he was influenced by Basran scholars but this claim al-RaÌix: has been refuted by ShawqÊ Öaifii, who argued that In this case Ignaz Goldziher added at this point the FarÉ was a scholar in his own right and original in following statement: “I would like to highlight one his thought. Indeed, if looking at the sources which provides in itself a very ample source for the Sibawayh referred to in his KitÉb, we have to study of the theoretical tendencies of the two confirm that some of them were from Kufah iii. schools, this is the book of Ibn al-Anbari entitled There is no doubt that there did occur a healthy Al-InsÉf FÊ MasÉili al-KhilÉf Bayna NahwiyyÊna

al-BaÎriyÊna wal-KËfiyyÊna” xi . Later on he grammar not only according to the forms that explains that the “two above-mentioned schools remain on the highroad of regularity but also those are distinguished by almost the same criteria that forms which are used according to the individual divide the analogists from the anomalists in the will of poets” xviii . He continues: “What, quiet field of classical grammar” xii . Ibn al-AnbÉri’s wrongly, used to be called grammarians’ work consists of 121 problems which need to be `exceptions` are called by Arab grammarians revised and its content thoroughly analyzed. al-ShÉÐ (plur. as-ShawÉÐ) or properly speaking According to Gotthold Weil xiii the rival theory that is a form not conforming to grammatical between Basra and Kufa has to be dismissed analogy (al-qiyÉs), but which appears in ancient because of a lack of evidence that a full-fledged poetry” xix , In response to the above mentioned Kufan school actually existed. He argues that Ibn allegations made by Goldziher, we ought to al-AnbÉri did not propagate Kufan thought because investigate how far the acceptance of analogy the latter agreed only in four of his 121 problems (qias) went in the BaÎran school. This has been with Kufan scholarsxiv. It is thus more likely that it illustrated by al-Akhfash al-AwsÉt who noted that was Kufa which looked to Basra for answers and Sibawayh accepted most of the qirÉt shÉdhahxx in orientation, but the two schools were not on equal his qiyas as he said xxi . Let us footing and thus could not have been rivals. examine some of the cases of analogy (qias) and

anomaly (samÉÑ) and qirÉt shÉdhah. Grammatical Analogy and Anomaly As A Linguistics` anomalies were found in the classical Arab poem Argumentations means . In case the Ñamil

SaÑid JÉsim al-Zubayr xv highlighted the is not from the same root of , by analogy importance of using qiÉs and sama` in Arabic there should be added the particle of jÉr ) grammar for the BaÎran and Kufan school by meaning xxii .which makes this a quoting questions raised by al-SuyuÏixvi: case of anomaly. Ibn Malik hinted at another case of anomalyxxiii.

Shaykh TantÉwÊxvii stressed the positive aspect of the differing modes of approach of both schools. The case study here is the existence of which Ignaz Goldziher on the other hand persisted in cannot be regarded as a standard for forming the claiming that “the BaÎran school represents system of qiyas. Golziher quoted at this point analogy which likes to treat everything by the same SuyËÏÊ`s opinionxxiv: “One of the most well known standard, while the Kufan school represents the differences between the two grammatical schools is prerogative of individuality in grammar, and related to these ShawÉÐ, when the unimaginative allows the regulation and arrangement of BaÎran grammarian comes across ShÉÐ, he holds and the accusative case. Both readings are his ground and asserts that such an exceptional acceptable. form should remain what it is, that is, an exception In summary, is was not exclusively the BaÎran which cannot be regarded as a standard for school which applied the prerogative of originality forming other words” xxv . Arab grammarians in grammar generally represented by the Kufan accepted the sama` used by Kufan scholars in order school. Kufan grammarians like KisÉ`i and FarÉ` to support qiyas, such as in instances like are known to have used analogy ascribed to the meaning ‘to become smaller’ not in the function of Basran school. This was already mentioned by a verb but of a gerund, as explained by KhalÊl: ٍSuyËÏyxxxv . MahdÊ xxvi al-MakhzËmÊ xxxvi supports SuyËty in this matter . The manner (hal) in gerund form has also been when he remarks . accepted by Mubarrid who gives the example of There are cases of analogy established by the the keyword being as a gerund in Kufan school, such as the verb for taÑajub in the anomalyxxvii: form of xxxvii based on and , with the

particle derived from and xxxviii. Sa’id Jasim

al-Zubayr, states in his al-qiyÉs fÊ al-Nahwi

al-‘ArabÊ – Nash’atuhu wa Tatowwuruhu

Here is indicated that the BaÎran school accepted . This idea is supported an abnormal (shÉdh) form based on the precedent by MahdÊ al-MakhzËmÊ xl who asserts that the xxix where the existence of before Kufan school did not only distinguished itself the pronoun is analogous to the Qur’anic through the application of anomaly but also

xxx . Al-Mubarrid xxxi accepted the through the intellectual aptitude of its grammarians. FarÉ`, for example, based his morphology and as qiyas in the grammatical principles on philosophical ones and xxxii diminutive , as exemplified by Sibawayh in did not hesitate to formulate his own ideas on invisible ÑawÉmil, sometimes refuted anomaly and xli xxxiii . There is an used qiyÉs where he saw appropriate . Despite all textual evidence to the contrary, Golziher persisted instance where the majority of scholars accepted a in his theory of the two rivaling schools by case of anomaly from YunËs Ibn HabÊb referring to a completely separate field of scholarly xxxiv , where two ways of enquiry, namely that of Islamic jurisdiction. He reading of ‘Zayd’ are possible, in the nominative alleges as follows: “On the basis of what I expounded in another study about the school of grammatical theories developed by Kufan and AbË HanÊfa, the great jurist, it can very easily be Basran grammarians did indeed complement and understood why this imam felt attracted to the not rival each other. Kufan school of grammar” xlii. His study of AbË HanÊfah’s legal thought consisted of a very general Assoc. Prof. Dr. Solehah Hj. Yaacob comparison with that of its BaÎran counterpart, such as their differing views in regard to ‘sale’ which Goldziher only discussed preliminarily and Email: [email protected] or without including a thorough study of the general [email protected] principles of jurisdiction (usËl) or any detailed All the degrees from International Islamic studies of more complex issues.xliii The fact that University Malaysia, working experience 16 years, specialization on philosophy of Arabic Grammar, Kufan scholars were generally found more some articles are published in: Majma` Lughawy enthusiastic and industrious in the transmission of Jordan, journal of social sciences , Singapore, CommonGround Melbourne Australia, at-Tajdid classical poetry than their BaÎran colleagues is IIUM, Kulliyah Darul Ulum, Egypt, Majallah irrelevant at this point. The issue here is whether al-Mahakkamah al-MaÑÉrif al-JÉmiÑyah, Anbar Iraq, Sino English Teaching New York USA, the Kufan system could be utilized by future Journal of Asia IIUM, Journal Linguistic al-adÉad, generations of scholars who referred to the Malaya University and etc. She presented her paper in her field in various countries such as transmitted poems as precedents which thus Istanbul Turkey,Cairo Egypt, New York USA and furnished them with more examples for analogy in Istanbul Turkey her paper obtained the highest score of the evaluation 2009 by Common Ground and in the process extend grammatical knowledge. Melbourne Australia and in Tehran Iran being It is unquestioned that analogy also needed to be awarded as the best paper award in Iran 2008.

xliv accompanied by anomalies such as in :

iShawqÊ Öaif, Al-MadÉris al-Nahwiyah, p.174 ii Ibid, pp 192 - 195 iii Sibawayh, Al-KitÉb, 1/38, 92,119,122, 134, 149, 201, The case study here is .Analogically it was 228,241, 341, 2/58, 65, 141, 156, 173,265, 265, 275,3/24, 105, 127, 171,178, 529, 349, 429, 4/6, 102, 198, 203,266, permissible to allow the precedent of mafËlun bih 592. iv The major reference of the Basran School. mahsËran than fÉÑil. v Abu TayÊb al-LughawÊ, Al-MarÉtÊb al-Nahwiyah, p.87 vi Ibn `AqÊl, Sharh Ibn `AqÊl, vol. 1. DÉrul al-Fikr: Beirut, Conclusion 1998, 1/500 vii YËnËs 58 The evidence of opposing or differing views on viii Al-AnkabËt 12 ix grammar produced in BaÎra and Kufa does by no Ibn HÉjib, KitÉb al-KÉfiah FÊ an-NahwÊ, Sharh Al-RÉÌi, Beirut: DÉr Kutub al-ÑIlmiah, 1986, 1/334 means necessitate the assumption that both schools x Ibid, final chapter on nawÉÎib al-muÌÉriÑ. xi Ignaz Goldziher, History of Grammar Among The Arabs, were actively engaged in an intellectual battle with p.34 xii Ibid, p.35 each other. Different methodologies and xiii The first editor of Al-InsÉf fÊ MasÉili al-KhilÉf Bayna approaches did not develop isolated from each NahwiyyÊna al-BaÎriyÊna wal KËfiyyÊna and the first orientalist who doubted the existence of the School of KËfah; other but alongside each other. Different see ShawqÊ Öaif, al-MadÉris al-Nahwiyah, p.155 xiv ShawqÊ Öaif, Al-MadÉris al-Nahwiyah, p.155 xv Sa’id JÉsim al-Zubayr, al-qiyÉs fÊ al-Nahwi al-‘ArabÊ – Nash’atuhu wa Tatowwuruhu, DÉr al-ShurËq: ‘AmmÉn, 1997, p.48 xvi Al-SuyËÏÊ, al-IktirÉh FÊ UÎËl an-NahwÊ, ed. Muhammad Hassan as-ShÉfiÑi, Beirut:DÉr al-Kutub al-Ñilmiah, 1998, p.201 xvii M.al-TantÉwÊ, Nash’atu al-NahwÊ wa TÉrikh AshhËr al-NuhÉh, Beirut:‘Alim al-Kutub, 1997, p.89 xviii Ignaz Goldziher, History of Grammar Among The Arabs, p.35 xix Ibid, p.35 xx Within the Kufan school, this reading variant was accepted. xxi ShawqÊ Öaif, Al-MadÉris al-Nahwiyah, p.80 xxii Ibn ÑAqÊl, (d.769h) Sharh Ibn `AqÊl, DÉrul al-Fikr: Beirut, 1998, 1/459 xxiii Ibid 1/167 xxiv Al-SuyËÏÊ, al-MuÐhir FÊ ÑUlËm al-Lughah Wa AnwÉÑuhÉ, Beirut: DÉr al-Kutub al-ÑIlmiah, 1998, 1/114 xxv Ignaz Goldzihar, History of Grammar Among the Arabs, p.35 xxvi Sibawayh, al-KitÉb, 3/477-478 xxvii Ibn ÑAqÊl, Sharh Ibn ÑAqÊl, 1/500 xxviii Al-Mubarrid. Al-MuqtaÌab, edi. Hassan Hamad, Beirut: DÉr al-Kutub al-ÑIlmiah, 1999, 3/234; al-AshmËnÊ, Sharhu al-AshmËnÊ ÑAlÉ alfiyah Ibn.MÉlik, Cairo: DÉr al-Kutub al-ÑArabiyah, 1918, 1/245 xxix YËnËs 58. xxx Al-AnkabËt 12. xxxi Al-AshmËnÊ, Sharhu al-AshmËnÊ ÑAlÉ alfiyah Ibn.Malik, 3/161-162. xxxii NaÎabiyah. xxxiii Sibawayh, al-KitÉb, 3/381 xxxiv Ibid, 2/185 xxxv Al-SuyËÏÊ, Bughyat al-WiÑat FÊ TabaqÉt al-LughawiyÊna Wa NuhÉh, p.337 xxxvi MahdÊ al-MakhzËmi, Madrasah al-KËfah wa ManhajuhÉ FÊ Dirsati al-Lughati al-ÑArabiyah, p.115 xxxvii Ibn HÉjib, KitÉb al-KÉfiah FÊ an-NahwÊ, Sharh Al-RÉÌi, 2/311 xxxviii Ibn HishÉm, Al-MughnÊ al-LabÊb, 1/314 xxxix Sa’id JÉsim al-Zubayr, al-qiyÉs fÊ al-Nahwi al-‘ArabÊ – Nash’atuhu wa Tatowwuruhu,p.76 xl MahdÊ al-MakhzËmÊ, Madrasah al-KËfah, p.394 xli ShawqÊ Öaif, Al-MadÉris al-Nahwiyah p.157 xlii Ignaz Golziher 1877a, pp.23-33, 1963-64, pp.95-105, 1967-73 pp. 1, 388-399 see xliiiShawqÊ Öaif, Al-MadÉris Al-Nahwiyah, p. xlivIbn ÑAqÊl, Sharh Ibn ‘AqÊl 1/383