Introduction
Al-laff wa-l-nashr (Arabic: اللفّ والنشر)1It is also known as al-ṭayy wa-l-nashr following Ibn Ḥijja al-Ḥamawī, Khizānat al-adab (ed. Shaʿītū), 2: 149–155; also see Matloub, Muʿjam al-muṣṭalaḥāt al-balāghiyya wa-taṭawwuruhā, 525–527. is a rhetorical figure of arrangement in classical Arabic poetics. The term is transliterated in Persian as laff va nashr (also laff-o-nashr) and in Turkish as leff ü neşr. The term consists of a pair of words that literally denote “to fold,” “to roll up,” or “to wrap” (laff) and “to spread out,” “to unfold,” “to open” (nashr), evoking the image of folding a cloth or rolling up a scroll and then subsequently unfolding the cloth or unrolling the scroll.2al-ʿAlawī, al-Ṭirāz al-mutaḍammin (ed. Dār al-Kutub), 2: 404–408.
Sīrāj al-Dīn al-Sakkākī (d. 626/1229) was the first scholar to classify laff wa-nashr as one of the “meaning-based” devices (wujūh) employed for the purpose of beautifying speech (li-qaṣd taḥsīn al-kalām). He defines it as a device that “wraps up two elements in a single utterance, followed by an expression that refers to each of them without explicit designation, relying on the hearer to connect each reference to its proper antecedent.”3al-Sakkākī, Miftāḥ al-ʿulūm (ed. Zarzur), 425.
هما أن تلف بین شيئين في الذكر ثم تتبعهما كلاما مشتملا على متعلق بواحد وبآخر من غير تعيين ثقة بأن السامع يرد کلا منهما الی ما هو له.
Al-laff wa-l-nashr is a figure of distribution and symmetry that establishes sequential cross-references between two or more semantically corresponding elements, whether within a single sentence or across two hemistiches (miṣrāʿ) or two verses (bayt) of a poem. In this figure, several elements are first mentioned together (laff), and their corresponding explanations or attributes are then provided (nashr).
In this article, laff wa-nashr is treated as a figure of distributive arrangement, moving from typology to a historical account of its formation and transformations. Wansbrough’s thesis that laff wa-nashr emerged through the exegetical adaptation of an earlier rhetorical figure formerly designated tafsīr is also addressed. Then, after tracing the continuation of this figure in Persian rhetoric, the conclusion explores structural parallels with European correlative verse forms, providing insight into varieties of distributive and symmetrical expression. The key sources for this study are listed first, followed by the typological analysis and historical developments.
Corpus
Through the examination of Arabic rhetorical catalogues, grammatical writing, and Qurʾanic exegesis, this study identifies three distinct phases in the development of laff wa-nashr, of which the most significant representatives are showcased: a formative stage (ninth–eleventh centuries CE) in which the function appeared without a fixed technical name, that is, in al-Mubarrad’s al-Kāmil fī l-lugha, Ibn Jinnī’s al-Munṣif, Ibn Sinān al-Khafājī’s Sirr al-faṣāḥa, and al-Zamakhsharī’s Kashshāf; a stage of explicit definition (twelfth–thirteenth centuries CE) in theories of naẓm and systematic badīʿ in works such as al-Rāzī’s Nihāyat al-ījāz, al-Sakkākī’s Miftāḥ al-ʿulūm, and al-Qazwīnī’s Talkhīṣ al-Miftāḥ and al-Īḍāḥ fī ʿulūm al-balāgha; and a post-classical stage (fourteenth–fifteenth centuries CE) in which al-Qazwīnī’s typology became standard and was refined by later commentators: al-Zamlakānī in Tibyān, al-ʿAlawī in al-Ṭirāz al-mutaḍammin, al-Taftāzānī in his Mukhtaṣar and al-Muṭawwal, al-Suyūṭī in Sharḥ ʿUqūd al-jumān, and Ibn Ḥijja al-Ḥamawī in Khizānat al-adab wa-ghāyat al-arab. This study is based on a consultation of the standard editions of the texts mentioned.
Terminological Analysis and Historical Semantics
Classification and Illustrative Examples
Jalāl al-Dīn al-Qazwīnī (d. 739/1338) offered a systematic classification of laff wa-nashr that was subsequently adopted by later scholars. He divided laff wa-nashr into two principal types: separated (mufaṣṣal), in which the elements are mentioned individually, and composite (mujmal), in which the elements are not distinguished and are presented collectively. The separated type is further subdivided into ordered (murattab) and unordered (ghayr murattab), depending on whether the elements in the nashr sequence follow the same order as those in the laff sequence.4al-Qazwīnī, Talkhīṣ al-miftāḥ (ed. Beirut), 82–83; also al-Qazwīnī, al-Īḍāḥ (ed. Shams al-Din), 268–269. Later scholars, including Saʿd al-Dīn al-Taftāzānī (d. 792/1390) and Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), further subdivided the unordered type into reversed (maʿkūs) and mixed (mushawwash or mukhtalaṭ) categories.5al-Taftāzānī, Mukhtaṣar (ed. Barhash), 696–698; al-Taftāzānī, al-Muṭawwal (ed. Hindawi), 654–656; al-Suyūṭī, ʿUqūd al-jumān, 100; al-Suyūṭī, Sharḥ ʿuqūd al-jumān ed. al-Hamdani/al-Habbar, 269–271.
An oft-cited example of the separated-ordered (mufaṣṣal murattab) type is Q 28/Qaṣaṣ: 73:
وَمِنْ رَحْمَتِهِ جَعَلَ لَكُمُ اللَّيْلَ وَالنَّهَارَ لِتَسْكُنُوا فِيهِ وَلِتَبْتَغُوا مِنْ فَضْلِهِ
“Of His mercy has He appointed for you night and day, that in that you may rest, and that you may seek His bounty.”6McAuliffe, Qurʾān (trans. McAuliffe), 208.
Here, the paired elements “night” and “day” are mentioned first (laff) and are subsequently modified (nashr) by the phrases “that you may rest therein” and “that you may seek His bounty,” respectively.
A bayt ascribed to Ibn Ḥayyūs exemplifies the reversed subcategory of separated laff wa-nashr:7Quoted in al-Taftāzānī, Mukhtaṣar (ed. Barghash), 697.
كَيفَ أَسلو وَأَنتَ حِقفٌ وَغُصنٌ وَغَزالٌ لَحظاً وَقَدّاً وَرِدفا
“How can I forget, when you are a sandhill, and a branch
and a gazelle, in glance, in stature, and in hips.”
Here, the elements in the nashr sequence (glance, stature, hips) appear in the opposite order of their corresponding elements in the laff sequence (gazelle, branch, sandhill). For an example of the mixed subcategory of separated laff wa-nashr, an anonymous line reads:8Quoted in al-Taftāzānī, Mukhtaṣar (ed. Barghash), 697.
هو شمس وأسد وبحر جودا وبهاء وشجاعة
“He is a sun, a lion, and a sea
in generosity, splendor, and courage.”
In this instance, the corresponding elements in the laff and nashr sequences (sun–splendor, lion–courage, sea–generosity) are neither presented in the same order nor in reverse order.
The composite category is traditionally exemplified by Q 2/Baqara: 111:
وَقَالُوا لَنْ يَدْخُلَ الْجَنَّةَ إِلَّا مَنْ كَانَ هُودًا أَوْ نَصَٰرَىٰ
“And they say: “None enters Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian.””9McAuliffe, Qurʾān (trans. McAuliffe), 13.
In this example, the composite pronoun “they” is interpreted distributively to refer separately to Jews and Christians, with the verse implying that the Jews say “None enters Paradise unless he be a Jew” and the Christians say “None enters Paradise unless he be a Christian.”
A fourth type of laff wa-nashr has been the subject of scholarly debate in connection with al-Zamakhsharī’s (d. 538/1144) interpretation of Q 30/Rūm: 23:
وَمِنْ آياتِهِ مَنامُكُمْ بِاللَّيْلِ وَالنَّهارِ وَابْتِغاؤُكُمْ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ
“And among His signs is your slumber by night and by day, and your seeking of His bounty.”10McAuliffe, Qurʾān (trans. McAuliffe), 215.
The interpretation that allows this verse to be considered an instance of laff wa-nashr rests on a nonstandard arrangement of its elements. In this reading, the first pair (“night” and “day”) separates the second pair (“your slumber” and “your seeking of His bounty”), rather than following the conventional pattern in which the laff elements are introduced first and then succeeded by those of the nashr. Al-Zamakhsharī rearranges the verse as: “And among His signs is your sleep and your seeking of His bounty by night and by day.” He explains this structure by noting that time and what occurs within it are treated as a single conceptual unit, with the wrapping-up device (laff) serving to reinforce this unity.11al-Zamakhsharī, al-Kashshāf (ed. Abd al-Mawjud and Muawwad), 4: 572. al-Subkī finds this interpretation highly problematic. See al-Subkī, ʿArūs al-afrāḥ fī sharḥ talkhīṣ al-miftāḥ (ed. Hindawi), 2: 246–250. Such exegetical endeavors provide a point of departure for modern accounts of the figure’s historical development.
Laff wa-nashr and Qur’anic Exegesis
John Wansbrough situates the emergence of laff wa-nashr within the historical development of Arabic rhetorical terminology, arguing that its later formalization in scholastic discourse was closely tied to exegetical usage rather than purely aesthetic concerns. He suggests that Qurʾanic exegetes adopted and adapted an earlier rhetorical figure, previously designated tafsīr (explication) and employed in non-scriptural discourse, while gradually replacing the older terminology with the designation laff wa-nashr. In Wansbrough’s account, this terminological shift reflects the evolution of technical rhetorical vocabulary, through which the earlier label tafsīr became increasingly ambiguous and eventually obsolete within exegetical and rhetorical discourse.12Wansbrough, “Arabic Rhetoric and Qurʾanic Exegesis,” 469–485.
Although Wansbrough describes the earlier designation as having been “discarded,” laff wa-nashr did not entirely supplant tafsīr in later rhetorical manuals and commentarial traditions, despite the decisive role played by exegetes and the incorporation of Qurʾanic shawāhid (textual evidence) in shaping rhetorical terminology and its functions. The ambiguities arising from their coexistence in rhetorical works, as well as from the overlap in their illustrative examples, therefore merit further study.
Historical Development
Notwithstanding theoretical speculation concerning the emergence of laff wa-nashr from tafsīr, close examination of the term and of its associated functions of distribution and symmetry suggests a development that may be traced in three stages up to modern times.
Formative Phase
In the first stage, the function is attested without being explicitly named. The grammarian and philologist al-Mubarrad (d. 285/898) cited Q 28/Qaṣaṣ: 73 in his al-Kāmil in a context ambiguously related to laff. Before quoting the verse (discussed above as the paradigmatic example of the separated–ordered type of laff wa-nashr), al-Mubarrad observes that “the Arabs wrap up (taluffu) two different subjects and then add an explicative, relying on the listener to refer each element to its proper subject.”13al-Mubarrad, al-Kāmil (ed. Ibrahim), 1: 107.
Ibn Jinnī (d. 392/1002) also cites this verse to illustrate what he terms “the composite (al-mujmal) that is separated (yufaṣṣiluhu) by the knowledge of it,”14Ibn Jinnī, al-Munṣif (ed. Amin and Mustafa), 2: 117. employing attributes that were later used by al-Qazwīnī in his systematic subdivision of laff wa-nashr.
Ibn Jinnī analyses and reorders Q 28/Qaṣaṣ: 73 as:
وَمِنْ رَحْمَتِهِ جَعَلَ لَكُمُ اللَّيْلَ لِتَسْكُنُوا فِيهِ وَالنَّهَارَ لِتَبْتَغُوا مِنْ فَضْلِهِ
The reordered verse can be literally translated as “Of His mercy has He appointed for you night, that in that you may rest; and day, and that you may seek His bounty.”
He explains that “the details were left to the knowledge of the audience regarding the time of seeking (His bounty) from the time of rest.”
In another example from Imruʾ al-Qays:15Quoted in Ibn Jinnī, al-Munṣif (ed. Amin and Mustafa), 2: 117.
كأنّ قلوب الطير رطبا ويابسا لدى وكرها العنّاب والحشف البالي
“As if the hearts of birds, fresh and dry,
at their nests, were jujubes and withered dates.”
He analyses the verse as “as fresh as jujubes” and “as dry as withered dates,” noting that it “just combines the wet and the dry.” He concludes that this pattern “is abundant in the Qur’an and poetry; if one pays attention, it will be found.”16Ibn Jinnī, al-Munṣif (ed. Amin and Mustafa), 2: 117.
An earlier and less precise reference to the device appears in Sirr al-faṣāḥa by Ibn Sinān al-Khafājī (d. 466/1073) in connection with the rhetorical concept of proportion (tanāsub). He observes: “Another aspect of proportionality is the correspondence of words in order, so that what pertains to the earlier element is placed first, and what pertains to the latter element is placed last.” As an example, he cites al-Sharīf al-Raḍī’s verse:
قلبي وطرفي منك هذا في حمى قيظ وهذا في رياض ربيع
“My heart and my eyes, from you; this one is in the heat of summer, and this one is in the gardens of spring.”17al-Khafājī, Sirr al-faṣāḥa (ed. al-Saidi), 225.
This phase in the development of the device culminates in al-Zamakhsharī’s discussions of the exegetical phenomenon of laff as a means of explaining Qurʾanic ambiguities. In his interpretation of several Qurʾanic verses, he identifies instances of a technique he terms al-laff (as discussed above), illustrating how the arrangement of elements can convey subtle rhetorical and semantic effects. An example is Q 2/Baqara: 185, concerning the obligation of fasting in Ramadan and its exceptions:
فَمَنْ شَهِدَ مِنْكُمُ الشَّهْرَ فَلْيَصُمْهُ وَمَنْ كَانَ مَرِيضًا أَوْ عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ فَعِدَّةٌ مِنْ أَيَّامٍ أُخَرَ […] وَلِتُكْمِلُوا الْعِدَّةَ وَلِتُكَبِّرُوا اللَّهَ عَلَىٰ مَا هَدَاكُمْ وَلَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ
“And whoever of you is present, let fast the month, and whoever of you is sick or on a journey, (let him fast the same) number of other days; […] and (he desires) that you should complete the period, and that you should magnify God for having guided you, and that perhaps you may be thankful.”18McAuliffe, Qurʾān (trans. McAuliffe), 18.
Al-Zamakhsharī explains that the final clauses are distributed across the earlier injunctions through a subtle form of laff, whose discernment belongs to the specialists of bayān, that is, the science of elucidation: the phrase “that you should complete the period [prescribed number]” refers to those granted a concession—namely “whoever of you is sick or on a journey”—who must make up the days of fasting they missed. “That you should magnify God” concerns those “present” during Ramadan who observe the fast in full, while “that you may be thankful” points to God’s concession allowing those with valid excuses to break the fast.19al-Zamakhsharī, al-Kashshāf (ed. Abd al-Mawjud and Muawwad), 1: 384. In this way, al-Zamakhsharī presents laff as both an exegetical and rhetorical device that reveals the precise correspondence between legal rulings and the wisdom underlying them.
Classical Systematization
In the second phase the device is explicitly named laff wa-nashr and clearly defined with illustrative examples. Al-Rāzī (d. 606/1209) introduces laff wa-al-nashr as one of the types of naẓm (construction; order), which he defines as “the deliberate consideration of the syntactic meanings between words.” Under the various types of naẓm, he enumerates rhetorical figures that are now traditionally studied—following al-Sakkākī—as elements of embellishment (badīʿ). His definition of the device closely parallels that of al-Mubarrad: “It is to wrap up two things and then offer a sentence to explain them, trusting that the listener will return to each one of the two its due.”20al-Rāzī, Nihāyat al-ījāz (ed. Müftüoğlu), 174.
هو ان تلف شیئین ثم ترمي بتفسيرهما جملة ثقة بأن السامع يرد إلى كل واحد منهما ماله
In al-Sakkākī’s Miftāḥ al-ʿulūm the device is defined in more precise terms (as noted above) and is classified as a semantic embellishment. This dichotomous approach to laff wa-nashr was largely maintained by later rhetoricians, who treated the device either as a category of naẓm, as in al-Rāzī’s analyses of discourse in relation to the inimitability of the Qurʾan, or, following al-Sakkākī, as a meaning-based figure of speech within the framework of stylistic embellishments.
However, not all rhetoricians adhered strictly to either model. For instance, Ibn Mālik (d. 672/1274), while summarizing al-Sakkākī, categorized the device neither under wording-based (al-faṣāḥa al-lafẓiyya) nor meaning-based (al-faṣāḥa al-maʿnawiyya) eloquence, but rather as “eloquence peculiar to improving and beautifying speech (al-fasāḥa al-mukhtaṣṣa bi-taḥsīn al-kalām wa-tazyīnih),” which, he explains, reflects “the speaker’s argumentative power and ability (al-dālla ʿalā quwwa ʿāriḍat al-mutakallim wa-tamakkunih).”21Ibn Mālik al-Ṭāʾī al-Jayyānī, al-Miṣbāḥ fī al-maʿānī (ed. Yusuf), 246.
Another variation in the taxonomy of laff wa-nashr appears in Ibn al‐Bannāʾ al‐Marrākushī’s (d. 721/1321) al-Rawḍ al-murīʿ fī ṣināʿat al- badīʿ, where he addresses the device in a chapter on similes—“likening things to things”—and treats it as a form of proportionality between two things (munāsaba) or between two pairs (mutanāsaba), that is, four elements. He distinguishes four subcategories, three of which correspond to ordered, reversed, and mixed (mukhtalaṭ) proportionality. Only the mixed type is explicitly designated as laff, while one of the subcategories falls outside laff wa-nashr proper, since each antecedent is paired directly with its corresponding consequent, without separation into folding antecedents and unfolding consequent pairs.22Ibn al-Bannāʾ al-Marrākushī, al-Rawḍ al-marīʿ (ed. Ben Shaqrun), 108. He illustrates this non-laff wa-nashr type of proportionality with Q 78/Nabaʾ: 10–11:
وَجَعَلْنَا اللَّيْلَ لِبَاسًا وَجَعَلْنَا ٱلنَّهَارَ مَعَاشًا
“And have appointed the night as a cloak, and have appointed the day for livelihood.”23McAuliffe, Qurʾān (trans. McAuliffe), 326.
The second phase of the development reaches its culmination in al-Qazwīnī’s work, which provides a systematic definition of the device and subdivides it into separated/composite and ordered/unordered types, illustrated with clear examples (mentioned above).
Post-Classical Expansion
Al-Qazwīnī’s subdivisions were adopted by subsequent commentators and rhetoricians, marking the third phase in the development of laff wa-nashr. This phase is characterized not only by imitation but also by the expansion of the device into other languages and its incorporation into additional rhetorical traditions, such as Persian. This process reflects the conception of Islamic rhetoric (balāgha) as a multilingual system. During this period, variations emerge in the definition, classification, and subdivision of the device, and rhetoricians include more illustrative examples drawn from poetry and prophetic traditions.
The author of al-Burhān al-kāshif ʿan iʿjāz al-Qurʾān examines the inimitability of the Qurʾan on two levels: (1) individual significations (al-dalālāt al-afrādiyya), and (2) composition (murāʿāt aḥwāl al-taʾlīf). Laff wa-nashr is discussed within the second category, in connection with topics conventionally associated with syntax (ʿilm al-maʿānī).24al-Zamlakānī, al-Burhān al-kāshif ʿan iʿjāz al-qurʾān (ed. Matlub and Al-Hadithi), 9: 313. In contrast, in Tibyān, al-Zamlakānī (d. 651/1253) introduces laff wa-nashr under the rubric of aḥwāl al-lafẓ (aspects of the word)—which in his work encompasses badīʿ figures—rather than in the section on aḥwāl al-taʾlīf (aspects of composition), which addresses most conventional topics of ʿilm al-maʿānī. 25al-Zamlakānī, al-Tibyān (ed. Matlub and Al-Hadithi), 177.
Retaining al-Zamlakānī’s distinction between individual and compositional significations, and treating badīʿ figures as a category separate from the two, al-ʿAlawī (d. 745 or 749/1344 or 48) lists laff wa-nashr as one of the twenty types of badīʿ, describing it as containing “subtleties of summarization and detail (laṭāʾif al-ijmāl wa-l-tafṣīl).”26al-ʿAlawī, al-Ṭirāz al-mutaḍammin (ed. Dār al-Kutub), 2: 406. In many Arabic manuals of rhetorical terms, laff wa-nashr is typically introduced in close proximity to devices of combination, separation, and division (taqsīm), which are named after arithmetic operations and concern the various rearrangements of ideas within a line of verse, thereby emphasizing their functional similarities. Importantly, al-ʿAlawī identifies the device as “essentially a combination (jamʿ) followed by a separation (tafrīq).” 27al-ʿAlawī, al-Ṭirāz al-mutaḍammin (ed. Dār al-Kutub), 2: 404.
Al-Taftāzānī identifies an exceptional category of laff wa-nashr involving a composite nashr, which he defines as “to mention multiple elements and then, in a single nashr, mention what pertains to each of them individually.”28al-Taftāzānī, Mukhtaṣar (ed. Barghash), 696–698. The example he provides is:
الراحة والتعب والعدل والظلم قد سد من ابوابها ما كان مفتوحا وفتح من طرقها ما كان مسدودا
“Comfort and hardship, justice and injustice have closed doors that were once open and opened paths that were once closed.”
In this construction, “comfort” and “hardship” constitute the first laff, and “justice” and “injustice” constitute the second laff. The remainder of the sentence functions as a single nashr, in which “comfort” and “justice” correspond to “have closed doors that were once open,” while “hardship” and “injustice” correspond to “opened paths that were once closed.”29For interpretations of this kind of laff wa-nashr, see al-Maghribī, Mawāhib al-faṭṭāḥ (ed. Khalil), 2: 523–528; and Dasūqī, Ḥāshiyah ʿalā mukhtaṣar al-maʿānī, 4: 58–62.
Other innovations in the post-classical phase include Ibn Ḥijja al-Ḥamawī (d. 837/1434), who classifies and illustrates types of laff wa-nashr according to the number of elements that are cross-referenced (e.g., two and two, three and three, etc.).30Ibn Ḥijja al-Ḥamawī, Khizānat al-adab (ed. Shaʿītū), 1: 149–155. Al-Suyūṭī, in turn, provides a definition of the device in verse and further refines the unordered type by distinguishing between the reversed and mixed subcategories.31al-Suyūṭī, ʿUqūd al-jumān (ed. Duha), 100.
Persian Variation
The adaptation of laff wa-nashr within other rhetorical traditions of the Islamicate world introduced new nuances and typological refinements shaped by the grammatical requirements of those languages. Kāshifī Sabzavārī (d. 910/1504), in his Persian manual of rhetorical figures, further subdivides the device into “explicit (muṣarraḥ)” and “implicit (mubham)” subtypes, based on whether the laff word is repeated in the nashr.32Kāshifī Sabzavārī, Badāyiʿ al-afkār (ed. Kazzazi), 144. This subdivision reflects the definition and typology of tafsīr in the Persian rhetorical tradition, inspired by Muḥammad b. ʿUmar Rādūyānī (date of death unknown) in Tarjumān al-balāgha (written between 1088 and 1114), who introduced explicit (jalī) and implicit (khafī) subtypes of tafsīr, a distinction unprecedented in Arabic balāgha. Implicit explication (tafsīr-i khafī) refers to “when the poet […] mentions several themes in succession without explication, and then explicates those ambiguous themes in another hemistich, but in an obscure manner.” Explicit explication (tafsīr-i jalī), by contrast, involves clear, direct explanation, often through repetition of the ambiguous theme.33Rādūyānī, Tarjumān al-balāgha (ed. Ates), 86. For the development of tafsīr and laff wa-nashr in Persian rhetoric, see Tahmasebian, “From Explication to Order,” 346–374.
This additional subdivision in Persian was necessitated by the absence of grammatical designation (taʿyīn) in the language. In Arabic analyses of laff wa-nashr, grammatical designation plays an important role in guiding the reader to identify cross-references.34For the use of taʿyīn to distinguish between taqsīm al-mukhtall and laff wa-nashr, see al-Asfarāyīnī, al-Aṭwal (ed. Hindawi), 2: 400. What Abū l-Baqāʾ al-Kafawī (d. 1094/1683–4) describes as al-laff al-taqdīrī (implicit wrapping up)—that is, “combining two statements and making them one, with brevity and eloquence”35Kafawī, al-Kulliyāt (ed. Darwīsh/al-Miṣrī), 798.—does not correspond to Kāshifī Sabzavārī’s variant of laff wa-nashr, as it constitutes a type of nashr for an implicit laff, exemplified by Q 6/Anʿām: 158:
لَا يَنْفَعُ نَفْسًا إِيمَانُهَا لَمْ تَكُنْ آمَنَتْ مِنْ قَبْلُ أَوْ كَسَبَتْ فِي إِيمَانِهَا خَيْرًا
“Its belief does not avail a soul which did not believe before, and in its belief did not earn good (by works).”36McAuliffe, Qurʾān (trans. McAuliffe), 77.
Al-Kafawī paraphrases the verse as:
لَا يَنْفَعُ نَفْسًا إِيمَانُهَا ولا کسبها فِي الايمَانِ لَمْ تَكُنْ آمَنَتْ مِنْ قَبْلُ أَوْ كَسَبَتْ فیه خَيْرًا
“Its belief does not avail a soul––nor its earning in the belief––which did not believe before or earn good in it.”
In al-Kafawī’s interpretation, the verse implicitly combines two propositions into a single compact expression: “its belief does not avail a soul which did not believe before” and “its earning in belief does not avail a soul which did not earn good in it.” His paraphrase unpacks the implicit pairing embedded in the Qur’anic wording by explicitly restating the second element that is only understood through ellipsis in the original verse. Further opportunities to compare this rhetorical device arise when one moves beyond the domain of Islamicate literatures.
Conclusion
From a cross-cultural comparative perspective, laff wa-nashr shows notable affinities with correlative verse found in European poetic traditions. Wansbrough observes that laff wa-nashr combines elements of the mannerist figure known as versus rapportati with the exegetical device subnexio, or gloss.37Wansbrough, “Arabic Rhetoric and Qurʾanic Exegesis,” 470. The figure versus rapportati refers to a literary style and subgenre in which lines or stanzas present two (or more) series of elements, with each element in the first series corresponding systematically to an element in the second series.38Preminger and Brogan, The New Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, 242. For instance, in classical Greek literature, one encounters constructions such as “You [wine, are] boldness, youth, strength, wealth, country / To the shy, the old, the weak, the poor, the foreigner,” where attributes and their corresponding recipients are neatly paired. A comparable example appears in Philip Sidney’s Arcadia: “Vertue, beautie, and speech, did strike, wound, charme / My heart, eyes, ears, with wonder, love, delight.”39Quoted from Preminger and Brogan, The New Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, 242. Wansbrough emphasizes, however, that versus rapportati corresponds most closely to the ordered subtype of laff wa-nashr.
The emergence of laff wa-nashr from the rhetorical figure tafsīr, through exegetical efforts to resolve ambiguities in the Qur’an, and the subsequent coexistence of the two terms in later catalogues of rhetorical figures, raises the question of how to distinguish between them. While this issue is underexplored within the manuals themselves, research indicates that a meaningful distinction can be drawn. Both figures present information moving from summarization (ijmāl) to elaboration (tafṣīl), but they differ in orientation and purpose. Tafsīr, as a rhetorical device, is primarily hermeneutic and author-centered: the author presents incomplete information and provides the explanation or clarification themselves. In contrast, laff wa-nashr is organizational and reader-centered, requiring the audience to establish relationships between dispersed reference elements.40See Tahmasebian, “From Explication to Order.” This distributive arrangement serves a semantic function of guided explication, while simultaneously achieving aesthetic effects of concision, balance, and symmetry. Presenting information in this non-straightforward way allows the audience to play a role in discovering these relationships. The reader’s discovery lies at the heart of aesthetic experience in classical Arabic poetics.41Harb, Arabic Poetics, 71. Moreover, it facilitates the incorporation of a greater number of analogies within a single verse, enabling poets to introduce diversity into the pool of standardized and formulaic similes and metaphors inherited from literary tradition.42See Tahmasebian, “From Explication to Order.” This combination of semantic clarity, aesthetic economy, and readerly participation defines laff wa-nashr’s distinctive role in classical Arabic poetics and underlies its cross-cultural comparability.
