جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « اختلاف قرائت » در نشریات گروه « علوم قرآن و حدیث »

The issue of various recitations of the Holy Quran represents a significant matter encompassing numerous aspects of theological, jurisprudential, and literary dimensions. One of the facets of this issue is the influence of recitation discrepancies on jurisprudential matters, extensively discussed in the jurisprudential and foundational books of the two major schools of thought (Shia and Sunni). According to the Sunni belief among the general public, all well-known recitations are authoritative, and juridical references can be derived from them. However, scholars from the Shiite perspective deny the legitimacy of conflicting recitations, rejecting reliance on divergent recitations. Given these two distinct approaches, the impact of recitation variations on Shiite jurisprudence significantly differs from its effect on the jurisprudence of the general populace. This article employs a descriptive-analytical method, drawing upon library resources and utilizing assistive software, to compare the impact of recitation discrepancies on Shiite jurisprudence versus that of the general populace. The analysis demonstrates that while multiple recitation variations have led to differences in legal rulings within Sunni jurisprudence and Shiite jurisprudence, despite the potential influence of recitation discrepancies on juridical matters, no instance has been found where recitation variations led to divergent legal verdicts, due to the presence of narrations from the Ahl al-Bayt (Prophet Mohammad's Progeny) in all circumstances.

The science of recitation is one of the Quranic sciences that plays significant role in understanding the Quran and differences in recitations will be effective in understanding different meanings of the Quran. According to the importance and connection of the difference of readings with the change and distortion of the words of the Qur'an, Orientalists have researched and raised doubts in this field. Using the descriptive-analytical method and with a critical approach, the present article examines the foundations and origins of certain opinions of famous orientalists .It seems that what forms the intellectual foundation of this group of Orientalists is, firstly, the long-standing hostility of the West towards Muslims, which is also visible in their approach to studying the Qur'an, and on the other hand, the lack of attention to the principles of research. And it can be clearly seen that the aim of Orientalists from such researches was not and is not to know Islam and the Qur'an. The researches of Orientalists on the issue of recitations of the Qur'an, from the point of view of the research method, the lack of investigation of Imamiya sources

One of the most important events in the history of the Holy Quran is the unification of the Qur'anic Mushafs. This event is the product of Muslims' differences in reading the Qur'an and the solution offered to solve it. Although some research has been written on this subject and how to do it, but the background of this incident, the difference between Muslims, has been neglected and we do not see any research on it. This article researches the hadiths about the differences between Muslims in reading the Qur'an with a descriptive-analytical method in order to first get acquainted with the historical background of this event, and secondly when and where did These differences happen, and Third What is the quality and quantity of these differences. By clarifying the quantity and quality of these differences and determining their examples and scope, it is clear whether this unification was necessary or not in relation to the Qur'an, and if it was necessary, it was done successfully or not. According to this research, First, many of the analyzes presented about unification of the Qur'anic Mushafs, although they are reasonable hypotheses, but the narrations we consider in this article do not confirm them; Secondly, in narrating the story of the difference between Muslims before the unification of the Mushafs, we witness the phenomenon of exaggeration; Thirdly, the peak of the differences was in the years 23 to 25 AH and these differences were limited both in terms of quantity and quality; Fourth, sometimes the difference was not due to different recitations, but some of the Companions, after seeing the attribution of the Qur'an to some people, were afraid of a difference like the difference between Jews and Christians among Muslims. fifth, the main reason for the differences between Muslims in the certain period of time was the differences between the Mus'haf of Ibn Mas'ud and others, which led to a severe confrontation between a limited minority and the majority of the Islamic community.

In the advanced religious sources, Shia narrators who lived in the first four centuries of Hijri have been accused of exaggeration. The theme of some of their narrations is the interpretation of the Holy Qur'an quoted by the Shia imams (pbuh). His interpretative narrations can be recovered among various hadith works. The Shiite scholars have not attributed Ghol to all these personalities. However, it should be assumed that sometimes these narrators are accused of exaggeration as a result of the themes they have narrated. Perhaps part of the themes that caused these narrators to be accused of exaggeration are the ones that are reflected in their narratives. In order to test this possibility, we must find out whether they have a common approach in interpreting the Qur'an by reviewing the exegetical traditions passed down from these accused of exaggeration. And if there is such a shared approach, can it distinguish their interpretation method from the general attitudes of Shiites or not? The present study, as the first step of investigating this issue, is an attempt to answer the first question. For this purpose, by accepting the basis that the items of each narrator are the result of his selectiveness and represent his insights, by reviewing the interpretative narratives of those accused of exaggeration, we will try to find out which types of understanding of the text they have reflected in their interpretation, and among them, which types of representation and reflection It is wider. In this study, the hypothesis is to be defended that the interpretation bases of those accused of exaggeration are not significantly different from the attitudes of other advanced Shia scholars; But it is possible to find a significant relationship between the tendency to exaggeration and the use of some interpretation techniques mentioned by Wensbro.

One of the important topics in Quranic sciences is the discussion of different readings of the Quran .Many people think that Muslims' differences in reading the Qur'an began after the death of the Prophet of God .According to this belief, the reason for this difference is the lack of access of Muslims to the Prophet; Hence, Muslims did not differ in reading the Qur'an during the life of the Prophet of God. But according to the hadiths, Muslims disagreed over reading the Qur'an even at the time and place of the Prophet's life. This article wants to study these hadiths from a historical point of view with a descriptive-analytical method. First, describe the historical background of Muslims' differences in reading the Qur'an. Secondly, to determine the quantity and quality of the differences between Muslims in reading the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his innocent family). According to this article, the time of Muslims' disagreement over reading the Qur'an was late in the life of the Prophet of God and mostly after the conquest of Mecca. The Companions differed on matters such as accent, some additions, quotation of synonyms, and even the number of verses of a surah. Most of these differences have continued even after referring to the Prophet.

Al-Burhan by Seyyed Hashem Bahrani is one of the most important interpretations of Shia proverbs in the first half of the 11th century.The interpretation of bel-Ma’thur or narration is one of the oldest types of interpretation that was formed to explain the divine verses.This method reached its peak in the 11th century with the spread of the realm of Akhbarism over Shiite scientific fields. Al-Burhan's interpretation is considered among the purely narrative Interpretations and includes all the surahs of the Quran also the hadiths passed down from the imams (pbuh) have been compiled without the author's comments, and there are narrations from the infallibles (pbuh) regarding differences in reading, pronunciation, or the type of revelation.Categorizing and criticizing different types of narrations of differences in reading in Al-Burhan is the main topic of this research, which is investigated by descriptive-analytical method. The results of the research showed that, firstly: the types of narrations of different readings in this interpretation include changes in the appearance, and advance and delay, or shifting of words, addition or reduction of words or sentences during the verses, addition of the names of imams in the verses, and Mazji interpretations. Secondly: In terms of impact on the meaning, the narrations of difference readings in Al-Burhan are in two categories: readings that do not affect the meaning and readings that are effective in the meaning. Thirdly: The review of al-Burhan shows that the narratives of Mazji's interpretation, which was a source of disagreement in readingin the beginning of Islam, were also reflected in al-Burhan due to its purely narrative nature such as the traditions of adding or subtracting a word or sentence during the verses, or the traditions of adding the names of imams in the verses, which are often distorted from the point of view of the document and are considered among the Mazji's interpretations. Fourthly: Under some verses in this commentary, weak readings have been used, which these recitations do not have the authority of the Qur'an and the Holy Qur'an is immune from any distortion.

According to John Burton, the Qur'an was compiled during the time of the Prophet of God (PBUH) and by the Prophet himself; Hence, the narrations on collecting the Qur'an are all fabricated. He has pointed the finger of blame at Sunni jurists and introduced the first half of the third century as the time of fabrication. This article goes to date the narration of "Hudhayfah’s proposal to unify the Qur’anic Mushafs” to determine whether the claim of this English Orientalist is confirmed by the method invented by the Orientalists themselves or not. According to this research, although this narration has problems such as the small number of narrators and the uncertainty of the main narrator, even according to the opinion of people like Schacht and Juynboll, there is no conclusive evidence that it is fake, especially concerning the time claimed by Burton.

Recitation (Qira’t) the Quran is one of the challenging and wide-ranging issues of the Quranic sciences that Muslim thinkers have had different approaches to it throughout history. Verse 137 of Surah An’am is one of the verses that have been discussed a lot about its recitation (Qira’t). Six of the seven reciters have recited the verse in a single form, and only Ibn Amir has presented a different recitation (Qira’t) of it. His recitation (Qira’t) of this verse has opponents and supporters. Opponents of Ibn Amir do not consider his recitation (Qira’t) of this verse permissible for four reasons: “the ijtihad of his recitation (Qira’t)”, “the ugly distance between the relative and related noun”, “the context” and “the evidence of history”. However, the supporters defend the correctness of his recitation (Qira’t) by citing reasons such as “the frequency of seven recitations (Qira’at)”, “the distance between the related and the relative noun is not ugly”, and “the appearance of I’rab” and “verb ascribing based on intellectual permission. The current research has shown the strength of the popular recitation (Qira’t) and the weakness of Ibn Amir’s recitation (Qira’t) by examining each of the reasons for the supporters and opponents in a descriptive-analytical method.

Followers of Islamic sects differ in the method of ablution. One of the differences is washing or anointing (mash) the feet. Sunnis generally consider washing the feet and Shias consider anointing (mash) obligatory in ablution. The origin of the difference is in the sixth verse of Surah Ma’idah. In this research, with a descriptive-analytical method, he has done a comparative study of the viewpoints of the commentators of the two sects in the mentioned verse and has found the root of the said difference, and the results obtained are: although the source of the said difference is the difference between the two readings (qira’at) of “ارجلکم” in the verse and its literary justification, the influence of the traditions transmitted in Sunni sources on this phenomenon should not be ignored. The witness of this claim is the statement of a group of predecessors such as Ibn Abbas, Hassan, A’krama, Sha’abi and others that anointing (mash) is obligatory, citing the verse and the acknowledgment of prominent Sunni commentators, such as Zamakhshari, Fakhr Razi, Abuhayyan, etc. In the implication of the mentioned verse according to both readings (qira’at) on the obligation of anointing (mash) and the superficial justifications are weak in legitimizing washing the feet in ablution

Explaining the object of leisure and, more importantly, finding the object of “nasb” and the type of recitation of its verb, is one of the concerns of commentators in the interpretation of verse 7 of Surah Sharh. The mentioned difference is important because according to Shiite commentators, the contents of the verse are related to the issue of Imamate, but from the point of view of Sunni scholars, the contents of the verse do not related to this issue at all. Sunni commentators, by denying the recitation of “Fansab” with “kasrah”, believing that the meaning of guardianship and Imamate can be extracted only with the above recitation, have tried to deny the recitation with weak arguments, while this finding even can be extracted and proved based on the findings of the present study with the recitation of “fathah”. Creating a connection between the holy verse and the category of Ghadir and consolidating it is one of the innovations of the article; Because sufficient reasons from the Quran and non-Quran can be carried on this important claim. In the present article, an attempt is made to prove the accuracy of the claim of Shiite commentators with several reasons and its connection with the important issue of Ghadir in a descriptive, analytical and critical method, after examining the arguments of the proponents and opponents.

The movement between the femininity and the masculinity of the verbs is a notable example of the differences between the seven reciters of the Quran, which occurred due to the lack of a dot in the Ottomani Mushaf. This type of difference is seen as a repeated pattern in the recitations of the seven reciters, and its syntactic origin is the permission to mention and feminize the verb due to the virtual femininity or being mukassar plural of the subject. In addition, sometimes the source of the dispute is the possibility of referring to the verb literally feminine or masculine in the context of the verse. The present article, while examining several examples of the movement between femininity and masculinity of verbs in the recitation of the seven reciters, reveals the reflection of syntactic teachings in the recitations of the Quran and reveals the relative tendency of Hamza and Kisai to the masculine form of the verb - unlike the other five reciters. Considering the historical influence of the recitation of Abdullah Ibn Mas’oud in the city of Kufa and his recommendation to recite the Quran with masculinity in the moving between Ta and Ya, it is probable that Hamza and Kisai were influenced by the pioneer of reciting the Kufis

Differences in recitation in some words of the Holy Qurchr('39')an have caused differences in the views of commentators. The verse 249 of Surah Baqarah tells the story of the soldiers of Talut in the face of divine testing and drinking water from the river. The word "ghurfat" in this verse has been recited in two forms, " ghurfatan" and " ghurfatun". In this study the two commentators` view in the field have been examined. As has been made clear, Allameh Tabatabaichr('39')s view in preferring "ghurfatun" is correct. He divided those of trial into three tribes precisely: those who did not drink water at all; Those who became fully watered and those who drank water but not became fully watered. Of these three groups, only the second group was excluded from Talut`s followers, and the fate of the third group is tied to other experiments.

One of the sciences that is rooted in the revelation of the Qur'an is the science of recitations [qira’at]. There are different approaches in this field among Islamic scholars. The discussion of recitations [qira’at] has been studied and researched by researchers since ancient times. Numerous definitions of authentic and unpopular [shazz] recitations [qira’at] have been put forward by scholars and different criteria have been stated in this regard. The followers of the Mu'tazilites - one of the most important schools of thought in the Islamic world and with a strong emphasis on rationalism - have in some cases used unpopular [shazz] recitations [qira’at] to justify their views, which is the subject of this article. The special position of the Qur'an and its original recitation [qira’t] and the necessity of using authentic recitations [qira’at] in the interpretation of the Quran require the necessity of a precise scientific analysis based on the unpopular [shazz] recitations [qira’at]. Thus, the current article endeavors to analyze the Mu'tazila view of unpopular [shazz] recitations [qira’at] using a descriptive-analytical method with a critical approach and using desk research/ library sources. The findings of the research indicate that the Mu'tazilites in some cases have justified the verses that are inconsistent with their intellectual principles and if there is no way to justify them, they have relied on unpopular [shazz] recitations [qira’at]; it should be mentioned that they did not have a single criterion in this regard. In this article, instances of the Mu'tazilites' theological, jurisprudential and interpretive application of unpopular [shazz] recitations [qira’at] have been examined.

In Shiite commentaries, there are recitations attributed to the Infallibles (AS) which are in the position of proving independent readings for the Infallibles (AS). The analysis of this issue is important because the prerequisite and one of the principles in the interpretation of the Qur'an is to know the correct recitation.The present article is a descriptive-analytical method of rational and narrative way and with a historical approach in response to the question of how these readings can be analyzed based on the reflection of the Qiraats of the Infallibles (AS) in Shiite interpretations up to the sixth century. In the sixth century. Majma 'al-Bayan expanded these readings by narrating about 145 recitations from previous interpretations. One of the possible factors in the frequency of these narrations was the effect of Sheikh Tusi's method of reasoning on the interpretation of Majma 'al-Bayan.  Also, the prevailing literary atmosphere in this century and the subsequent expansion of literary interpretations such as Al-Kashaf by Zamakhshari and Al-Muharrar Al-Wajiz by Ibn Atiyah Andalusi have not been unaffected by Tabarsi in this area.

The verse {He said, Our Lord is He who gave everything its creation, then guided it} (Taha / 50) is one of the key verses of the Qur'an in the field of ‘Tawhid al-Ruboubi’ [monotheism in terms of Ruboubiyyet]. The correct interpretation of this verse, like any other verse, depends on attaching to and mastering the rules of interpretation. One of the necessary sciences for interpretation is "the science of reciting the Qur'an", which plays an important role in interpretive interpretations.In this research, with a descriptive-analytical method, an attempt has been made to clarify the role of differences in recitation in the interpretation of verse 50 of Surah Taha by examining the interpretive sources of the two sects. For this regard, the two famous and unpopular readings of the verse and the interpretive work of each have been compared, criticized and studied, and by relying on the arguments and criteria of critique of differences in readings, including literary rules and contexts, etc. as well as reviewing and applying the interpretations of both recitations, one of them is preferred or rejected. In this verse, there are two different readings (famous and unpopular) in the word "khalaqah" [created him]. As a result of these two readings, different combinations are considered for the verse, which also lead to different interpretations. Among these combinations, it is better in terms of the two objects of the verb "a’ta" [gave] in the verse, respectively. Among the meanings, considering the generality of the verse is more consistent with the context. Hence, these two readings are closely related to each other, which is reflected in their comparison in their interpretation. These include: validation of recitations, rejection of an interpretive commentary in unpopular recitation due to its incompatibility with famous recitation, preference of popular recitation over an unpopular one using the standard of Arabic literature, combination of interpretive meanings in both recitations, critique of misinterpretations in the development of both readings, expanding the meaning of the verse with different recitations and confirming an interpretive commentary in a certain recitation.

One of the Qur’anic sciences that have a direct effect on the understanding, translation and interpretation of the divine word is the science of reciting the Quran. For this reason, the commentators have been trying for a long time to consider the different readings and their effect on the understanding of the Qur'an, so that the best interpretation can be presented according to the acceptable reading. In this article, the types of differences in readings from the seven famous readings in chapter of Yusuf have been studied and analyzed. Studies show that the narrations around the axis of chapter of Yusuf are either in the field of differences in readings that do not harm the protection of the Qur'an from distortion or in the position of expressing the meaning and interpretation of the verse which has been proposed as a difference of readings. It can be acknowledged that the difference in readings in most of the disputed words is such as the difference in the quality of reading (in terms of imalah, fath, idgham, izhar, tafkhim, tarqiq, and etc.) or the difference in the i’rab of a word that does not interrupt the meaning. By comparative research method, it is possible to study the context of verses, morphological and syntactic rules, consistency with the meaning of verses, coherence in the words of verses and its harmony, something can lead the researcher to the correct reading, which is the famous reading of the Qur’an.