Dogmatic Methodology and the Crisis of the Quranic Narrative Study

The Iranian-Arab critical scene in the field of studying narrative discourses and analyzing the Quranic narrative opened up to its Western counterpart, from which it derived most of its theoretical concepts, methods of procedural practice, and critical mechanisms. Each researcher dealt with the studied narrative discourse according to his own inclination and orientation, and on the basis of the approach he adopted in the analysis, and the negative side in this approach is represented in projecting the method on the text and employing it mechanically, as this aspect of employing the method raised a crisis in the Iranian and Arab narrative scene in the study of the Quranic narrative. And he touched - at times - the sanctity of the studied discourse and its divine truth. From this standpoint, our research came to investigate the critical models that adopted the procedures of Narratology criticism in their applied practices on the Quranic discourse in a dogmatic manner, to approach the reality of this criticism, and then shed light on some of the applications made by Arab and Iranian researchers in this field. The research concluded in the end that the method in the understanding of some researchers has turned into engineering tools with limits and dimensions that cannot be touched upon application, so he leads them and devotes their efforts to revealing the textual units and segments that make up the Quranic narrative discourse. So, the problem of employing Narratology in the study of the Qur’anic discourse is mainly due to the difficulty of employing its procedural mechanisms and transferring them from the space of human narrations to a space different from it, which is the Qur’anic narration. It produces a set of ambiguous data that makes the discourse lose its aesthetics, and affects the essence of its function, as criticism eventually turns into a crowd of unreliable judgments, due to its failure to keep pace with an effective analytical critical movement, and this gap is one of the risks that studies have suffered from throughout their critical practice.