Development of a Jamʿ al-Āyāt Procedure in Mawḍūʿī Tafsir: An Integrated Model of Syntagmatic Analysis, Tafsir Verification, and Corpus Selection

Yedi Kuswandi; Dalpa Rahmawati; Desi Hasninadia; Irma Riyani

doi:10.24256/jiis.v6i1.12815

Authors

Yedi Kuswandi UIN SGD Bandung, Indonesia
Dalpa Rahmawati UIN SGD Bandung, Indonesia
Desi Hasninadia UIN SGD Bandung, Indonesia
Irma Riyani UIN SGD Bandung, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24256/jiis.v6i1.12815

Keywords:

mawḍūʿī tafsir, jamʿ al-āyāt, syntagmatic analysis, tafsir verification, corpus selection

Abstract

Verse collection (jamʿ al-āyāt) is the second of seven steps in al-Farmāwī's mawḍūʿī tafsir, but the step does not specify how the thematic relevance of an individual candidate verse is to be assessed once it has been identified. This article develops a four-stage procedure — textual and syntagmatic analysis, preliminary thematic evaluation, tafsir verification, and synthesis and position determination — that operationalizes this step while keeping it within al-Farmāwī's seven-step framework. The procedure assigns each candidate verse one of five corpus positions — Primary, Supporting, Contextual, Irrelevant, or Undetermined — defined by explicit indicators tied to a stated research proposition rather than by the mere presence of a keyword. It is demonstrated, as a purposive illustration rather than an exhaustive corpus, on six analytical units comprising eight verses on environmental damage, selected through two pathways: forms derived from the root f-s-d (QS. al-Rūm 30:41, QS. al-Baqarah 2:205, QS. Muḥammad 47:22) and the conceptual pathway of mīzān (QS. al-Anʿām 6:152, QS. Hūd 11:85, QS. al-Raḥmān 55:7–9), cross-referenced against three tafsir works of differing period, language, and orientation (al-Tafsīr al-Munīr, Tafsir al-Mishbah, Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb). The demonstration produced three of the five proposed positions — Supporting, Contextual, and Irrelevant — illustrating that neither keyword presence nor its absence determines a verse's position: QS. al-Rūm 30:41 and QS. al-Baqarah 2:205 both contain fasād but receive different positions, while QS. Hūd 11:85, reached through the mīzān pathway, receives the same Supporting position as QS. al-Rūm 30:41 once the same explicit indicator is applied to both. The contribution of the procedure lies in making verse-inclusion and verse-exclusion decisions explicit and traceable to textual and exegetical evidence; inter-researcher consistency and applicability to other mawḍūʿī themes remain to be tested.

References

Al-Ayyubi, M. Z. (2026). Konsep sikap ekologis manusia terhadap lingkungan hidup perspektif Al-Qur’an: Pendekatan tafsir mawḍūʿī. JIPSI: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan dan Sains Islam Interdisipliner, 5(3), 1407–1420. https://doi.org/10.59944/jipsi.v5i3.1253

Alddajah, O. O. K. (2021). Jawāb al-syarṭ al-muqaddar bayna bunyatayhi al-ta’wīliyyah wa al-saṭḥiyyah: Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī anmūdhajan. Journal of the College of Education for Women, 32(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.36231/coedw.v32i3.1511

al-Farmāwī, ʿA. Ḥ. (2005). Al-bidāyah fī al-tafsīr al-mawḍūʿī: Dirāsah manhajiyyah mawḍūʿiyyah (2nd ed.). Maktabat Wahbah.

al-Rāzī, F. al-D. (1981). Tafsīr al-Fakhr al-Rāzī al-mushtahir bi-al-tafsīr al-kabīr wa Mafātīḥ al-ghayb (Vols. 1–32). Dār al-Fikr.

al-Zuḥaylī, W. (2009). Al-tafsīr al-munīr fī al-ʿaqīdah wa al-sharīʿah wa al-manhaj (Vols. 1–16). Dār al-Fikr.

Darmawan, D., Riyani, I., & Husaini, Y. M. (2020). Desain analisis semantik Alquran model ensiklopedik: Kritik atas model semantik Toshihiko Izutsu. Al-Quds: Jurnal Studi Alquran dan Hadis, 4(2), 181–200. https://doi.org/10.29240/alquds.v4i2.1701

Eser, K. (2024). Bir anakronizm örneği: el-Bakara sûresi 205. âyeti ile er-Rûm sûresi 41. âyetinin çevre sorunlarıyla ilişkilendirilmesi. Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 65(1), 149–190. https://doi.org/10.33227/auifd.1352314

Fatah, A., & Taufiq, I. (2019). Environmental interpretation: Hermeneutic analysis of the interpretation of anthropocentric verses in Al-Qur’an. Jurnal Ushuluddin, 27(2), 191–210. https://doi.org/10.24014/jush.v27i2.6409

Fawaid, M. A. (2026). The concept of fasād as an ecological crisis in Surat Ar-Rum: 41: A comparative study of Tafsir Al-Azhar and Tafsir Al-Misbah. TAFASIR: Journal of Quranic Studies, 4(1), 152–178. https://doi.org/10.62376/tafasir.v4i1.125

Harahap, A. T., Windra, A., Paridatussaudiah, & Harahap, A. M. S. (2024). The effects of electric vehicle consumption on the environment in the perspective of the Qur’an: M. Qurasy Shihab, Al-Zuhaili, and Al-Qurthubi’s interpretation of QS. Ar-Rum verse 41. Al-Dzikra: Jurnal Studi Ilmu Al-Qur’an dan al-Hadits, 18(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.24042/002024181889000

Irsan, Abubakar, A., & Parhani, A. (2021). Kajian tematik ayat-ayat mengenai degradasi, konservasi, dan etika lingkungan. KURIOSITAS: Media Komunikasi Sosial dan Keagamaan, 14(2), 161–181. https://doi.org/10.35905/kur.v14i2.2063

Izutsu, T. (2002). Ethico-religious concepts in the Qur’an. Islamic Book Trust. (Original work published 1959)

Jumrotunisak, Anwar, K., Mahfuzh, T. W., & Zahidah, H. A. (2025). The expansion of oil palm plantations and ecological degradation in Borneo: A thematic (mawḍūʿī) exegetical analysis of Qur’anic verses on the environment. AJIS: Academic Journal of Islamic Studies, 10(2), 569–590. https://doi.org/10.29240/ajis.v10i2.16052

Kamil, M. N. (2025). A review study: Critique and review of Izutsu’s Qur’anic semantic methodology. Manar Elsharq Journal for Literature and Language Studies, 3(1), 36–42. https://doi.org/10.56961/mejlls.v3i1.871

Kuswandi, Y., Karimah, S. A., Maulana, M. E., & Rusmana, D. (2026). Jaringan makna kufr dalam Al-Qur’an dan resepsinya dalam Tafsir Sunda Kemenag. Siyaq: Jurnal Studi Al-Qur'an dan Budaya, 1(1), 1–24.

Muchlis, A. F., Larasati, D., & Triyadi, S. (2021). Reaching the understanding of the green building concept in Islamic value: Thematic tafseer study. Journal of Islamic Architecture, 6(4), 321–330. https://doi.org/10.18860/jia.v6i4.12742

Mubarok, M. R., & Nasrulloh. (2024). Interpretasi kontekstual dalam menangani krisis lingkungan: Kajian Surat Al-Baqarah ayat 11 dan 205 dalam Tafsir Ibnu Katsir. Holistik Analisis Nexus, 2(10), 45–51. https://doi.org/10.62504/nexus929

Putri, L. D. F., Ahmadi, B. Z. R., & Aulia’, K. K. (2025). Membaca krisis lingkungan melalui lensa tafsir ekologi: Analisis QS. al-Rūm [30]: 41. Canonia Religia: Jurnal Studi Teks Agama dan Sosial, 3(1), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.30762/cr.v3i1.3143

Rohman, A. (2022). Epistemologi ilmu munāsabah Al-Qur’an. Bayani: Jurnal Studi Islam, 2(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.52496/bayaniv.2i.1pp25-42

Shihab, M. Q. (2017). Tafsir al-Mishbah: Pesan, kesan, dan keserasian Al-Qur’an (Edisi revisi, 15 jilid). Lentera Hati.

Syukkur, A. (2020). Metode tafsir Al-Qur’an komprehensif perspektif Abdul Hay al-Farmawi. El-Furqania: Jurnal Ushuluddin dan Ilmu-Ilmu Keislaman, 6(1), 114–136. https://doi.org/10.54625/elfurqania.v6i01.3779

Tarto, T., Azizah, N. U., & Suyuti, M. H. (2025). Interpretasi fasād dan eksploitasi sumber daya alam (Analisis semantik Toshihiko Izutsu terhadap Q.S. Ar-Rum ayat 41). El-Mu’Jam: Jurnal Kajian Al Qur’an dan Al-Hadis, 5(2), 184–202. https://doi.org/10.33507/el-mujam.v5i2.3639

Zeghad, L., & Bennebri, M. (2020). Al-imtināʿī li-(law-lā) wa atharuhu fī tawjīh al-maʿnā al-siyāqī: Dirāsah lughawiyyah li-l-sharṭ fī qiṣṣah Yūsuf ʿalayhi al-salām. Majallat al-Iḥyāʾ, 20(1), 335–360.