The literary image is one of the fundamental concepts in literary criticism, playing a central role in the understanding and interpretation of texts. Al-Jurjani is among the critics who examined the literary image through detailed analysis and definition. In his view, it is manifested through the coherence and harmony among the components of a text. In this regard, he converges with the ideas of the Russian Formalists, as emphasized by the contemporary academic critic Mohammad Reza Shafi‘i Kadkani. Using a descriptive-analytical approach, this study aims to explore the concept of the literary image in classical criticism as developed by Al-Jurjani from the perspective of Shafi‘i Kadkani, who highlights the points of convergence between Al-Jurjani and the Russian Formalists in his book The Resurrection of Words (Rastakhiz-e Kalamat). The findings indicate that formalism in Al-Jurjani’s thought, as interpreted by Shafi‘i Kadkani, is characterized by flexibility and renewal, making literary criticism a dynamic and living process that transcends rigid traditional interpretations. The common ground between Al-Jurjani and the Russian Formalists is reflected in coherence, defamiliarization, and dynamism. This study contributes to a broader understanding of the literary image and the theory of nazm (textual organization), while offering a renewed critical perspective based on the interaction between form and content.
Keywords: Literary Criticism, Literary Image, Nazm (Theory of Composition), Formalism, Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani, Mohammad Reza Shafi‘i Kadkani.

Introduction
Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani was among the earliest critics to focus on the study of the internal structure of literary texts and the analysis of the elements that contribute to their aesthetic impact. His studies encompassed various aspects of literary criticism, ranging from language and meaning to style and artistic construction. These studies were distinguished by their precision and depth, as al-Jurjani revealed subtle elements within literary texts, moving beyond the superficial descriptions that characterized some earlier critical approaches. The significance of his work lies in the innovative insights it provided into the relationship between form and content, insights that may be regarded as an early foundation for formalist concepts. Despite the centuries that separate us from his writings, his views continue to serve as an important reference for the study of literary texts and the analysis of their internal structures. Significance, Necessity, and Objectives of the Study This study aims to achieve a number of fundamental objectives that contribute to a deeper critical understanding of Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani’s intellectual legacy, as follows: To analyze al-Jurjani’s conception of Nazm and literary textuality. To examine the concept of the literary image and its dimensions in al-Jurjani’s thought. To explore Mohammad Reza Shafi‘i Kadkani’s approach to interpreting Islamic formalism. To compare al-Jurjani’s theory with the theories of the Russian Formalists. Research Questions How does Shafi‘i Kadkani analyze and critique al-Jurjani’s ideas? How do the principles of formalist criticism correspond to al-Jurjani’s theory of Nazm and literary image from Shafi‘i Kadkani’s perspective? What are the most important points of convergence between al-Jurjani and the Russian Formalists according to Shafi‘i Kadkani? Literature Review Numerous studies have examined Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani’s thought through the lenses of structuralism and modern formalism. While previous research has primarily focused on comparing al-Jurjani’s theory of Nazm with structuralist or Russian formalist approaches, the present study is distinguished by its examination of formalism in al-Jurjani’s thought from the perspective of the contemporary critic and scholar Mohammad Reza Shafi‘i Kadkani. This perspective has not previously been subjected to a detailed and systematic analysis, which constitutes the distinctive contribution of the current research.

Materials & methods
He was not satisfied with limiting criticism to words merely as words; rather, he sought to connect words with their meanings within context insofar as they contribute to the formation of the literary image. “Al-Jurjani did not confine himself to words as isolated linguistic units; instead, he aimed to relate words to their semantic functions within context in the construction of the literary image” (Ghunaymi Hilal, 1962, p. 313). Here, Ghunaymi Hilal gives the idea a clearer dimension, demonstrating that al-Jurjani moved beyond the individual word to consider its network of relations within context, where words cooperate to create the literary image. At this point, it becomes easy to understand how his vision converged with the views of earlier major critics. “Thus, Abd al-Qahir agrees with al-Jahiz that the basis of distinction among creators of discourse does not lie in the meaning conveyed by the writer; rather, they differ through excellence of expression, metrical harmony, careful choice of words, and quality of composition” (Ahmad Badawi, 1962, p. 129). This intellectual convergence between al-Jurjani and al-Jahiz confirms a shared principle: the uniqueness of a text lies in its mode of presentation, organization, and rhythm, rather than in the meaning itself, which may be common to many texts. Just as a jewel may be fashioned by different craftsmen and thereby vary in value and beauty, the same meaning may be expressed through different styles, elevating one text while diminishing another. This means that the distinction among writers and poets does not rest solely on meaning, but also on skillful formulation, appropriate word choice, and stylistic excellence. Literature is therefore a combination of content and linguistic artistry; meaning alone is insufficient for evaluating a literary work. However, al-Jurjani does not place meaning in opposition to image, as some critics do, nor does he analyze them as separate elements: “Know that if you examine the views of those who claim that when what is expressed is one and the same, but there are two expressions, and one expression is more eloquent and better than the other, the reason for its superiority must lie in the word itself, you will find that they arrived at this conclusion because they compared two pieces of discourse to two individual words. Since they observed that when two words have the same meaning there is no difference between them in meaning, they assumed that the same applies to two utterances. But they have erred gravely, for it is impossible that the image of meaning in one utterance or verse should be exactly the same as its image in another, unless someone deliberately replaces every word in a verse with a synonymous word without altering its arrangement and composition.” (Al-Jurjani, 2001, p. 307) In this passage, al-Jurjani criticizes the opinion of certain linguists who believed that eloquence depends exclusively on the quality of words without considering meaning. He argues that eloquence is determined not only by the excellence of words but also by the semantic image formed through their arrangement. Thus, within the literary image, word and meaning are inseparable. Up to this point, much of what has been said about al-Jurjani’s conception of the literary image may also be observed in the writings of other classical critics. Nevertheless, al-Jurjani explained this concept with remarkable precision and comprehensiveness, while also adding new dimensions to it. It is important to note that he moved beyond the prevailing definitions of the literary image and offered it a technical meaning that may initially appear somewhat unfamiliar: “Know that when we speak of ‘image,’ we are employing an analogy, comparing what we perceive with our intellects to what we see with our eyes.
Just as distinctions among members of a species arise from differences in form—one person differing from another, one horse from another, through characteristics present in one form but absent in another—and likewise among crafted objects, where one ring differs from another and one bracelet from another because of its form, so too we find distinctions and differences between meanings in one verse and meanings in another. We therefore express this distinction by saying that the meaning in this instance has an image different from its image in that instance.” (Ibid., p. 330) Al-Jurjani thus offered a new understanding of the literary image. His formulation is highly precise: the image is not the thing itself, but rather the distinguishing features that differentiate it from other things. These features may belong to form or to content, since the concept of image encompasses both. For this reason, what al-Jurjani proposed can be regarded as a foundational nucleus for the critical concept of the literary image as it later developed among modern critics. As Saghir observes, “Al-Jurjani provided the image with a new vision. What he proposed was highly precise, for the image is not the object itself but its distinguishing characteristics. These characteristics may pertain to form or content, since the image embraces both. Therefore, Abd al-Qahir’s contribution may be considered a nucleus for the authentic critical concept of the literary image established by modern critics” (Saghir, 1981, p. 29).

Discussion & Result
Understanding a text through the analysis of its internal elements enables the reader to discover its artistic structure. As Shafi‘i Kadkani states: “There is a set of factors that foreground or revive words, which fall within the domains of linguistics and stylistics. These include metaphor, figurative expression, archaism (old words), brevity, ellipsis, and others. These principles are well known in the field of the revival of words within rhetoric and modern linguistics.” (Shafi‘i Kadkani, 1373 [1994], p. 10) Defamiliarization (ostranenie) is considered one of the most important principles of formalism. It is often realized through syntactic meanings and the arrangement of words according to context. From Shafi‘i Kadkani’s perspective, this is precisely what al-Jurjani emphasizes. The analysis thus concludes with a fundamental principle: defamiliarization, or artistic composition, does not arise from isolated elements but from the way those elements interact within the text to produce meaning and beauty. This reflects the continuity of al-Jurjani’s thought in approaching literary texts in a manner that makes the reader an active participant in the aesthetic experience. Staticity and Dynamism In his book The Resurrection of Words (Rastakhiz-e Kalamat), Shafi‘i Kadkani examines formalism and al-Jurjani’s theory of Nazm through analysis and comparison. However, the principal focus of the book is formalism itself, while his references to al-Jurjani are brief and occasional. These discussions are generally theoretical rather than applied. In this particular context, Kadkani limits himself to a few statements and observations. Nevertheless, these remarks reveal his deep familiarity with both the classical heritage, including al-Jurjani, and the Formalist school, enabling him to identify significant points of convergence between them. The static approach represents a fixed view of language and literature, concentrating on the analysis of linguistic and literary phenomena at a specific moment in time without considering their development. In contrast, the dynamic approach represents a vital and evolving view of language and literature. As Fadl explains: “The fundamental premise upon which the rhetoric of discourse and the emergence of text linguistics are based is the clear distinction between two axes. The methodological separation of these axes constitutes one of the most significant achievements of modern scientific thought, especially within the human sciences, after it had long been established in the natural sciences. These are: the diachronic axis, which is concerned with the development of phenomena and the evolution of their conditions across successive periods of time, focusing on issues of origin, transformation, growth, and decline; and the synchronic descriptive axis, which analyzes phenomena through the totality of their relationships and interconnected structures, and their organization within a dynamic system, before integrating the two axes and examining phenomena functionally.” (Fadl, 2005, pp. 7–8)

conclusion
Through his writings, one can observe how Shafi‘i Kadkani’s critical vision evolved over time, moving from classical rhetoric toward formalism and structuralism. Although he became critical of certain aspects of traditional Islamic rhetoric, he continued to express a deep appreciation for its achievements and never overlooked its strengths. Consequently, in his book The Resurrection of Words (Rastakhiz-e Kalamat), he searches for the roots of formalism in al-Jurjani’s Dala’il al-I‘jaz, demonstrating both his profound familiarity with the classical heritage and his engagement with Western critical thought. Shafi‘i Kadkani did not write The Resurrection of Words with the primary aim of comparing al-Jurjani and the Russian Formalists. Rather, the book is principally concerned with the Formalist movement itself, its historical development, and the analysis of its theories and critical assumptions. Shafi‘i Kadkani emphasizes that al-Jurjani anticipated the Russian Formalists—such as Viktor Shklovsky—in asserting that “form” is not merely an external shell or decorative covering. Rather, it is a complex network of internal relations that generates the meaning and aesthetic value of a literary text. Shafi‘i Kadkani also establishes a connection between the Formalist concept of “defamiliarization” (ostranenie), which seeks to make the familiar appear strange, and al-Jurjani’s observation that the beauty of a metaphor lies not simply in its figurative nature but in the rarity of its usage and its appropriateness to the context. In both cases, aesthetic effect arises from the renewal of perception and the disruption of habitual ways of seeing. Furthermore, Shafi‘i Kadkani distinguishes between al-Jurjani’s “dynamic” perspective—which views the beauty of words as dependent upon context, arrangement, and textual relationships—and the “static” perspective that came to dominate Arabic rhetoric after al-Jurjani, where rhetorical principles were transformed into fixed and rigid rules detached from their original creative function. Through this approach, Shafi‘i Kadkani offers a contemporary and innovative reading of al-Jurjani’s thought, demonstrating how the theory of Nazm can be developed into the foundation of a vibrant literary criticism capable of engaging productively with modern critical methodologies. His interpretation presents al-Jurjani not merely as a classical rhetorician but as a thinker whose insights remain relevant to contemporary debates on form, textuality, and literary interpretation.