جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « معانی القرآن » در نشریات گروه « علوم قرآن و حدیث »

Optimality theory is a fundamental constraint approach in the field of modern linguistics that was proposed in 1993 by Alan Prince and Paul Smolensky. Based on this theory, linguistic forms originate from the interaction between mutual and opposite restrictions that are the yardstick to distinguish the output arising from the original input. In this descriptive-analytical research, conformity of the criteria of optimality theory in documentary issues of some ayahs of Surah Al-Fatihah and Surah al- Baqarah centering on the book Maani al-Qur’an by Fara was analyzed. The results indicate that Qur’anic readings as well-founded and reference texts enjoy optimality at the level of lexical usage and representation. However, in accordance with common syntactic criteria, they have different levels of optimality. In examining the evidence of these two surahs, it became clear that the limitations of the reliability are observed and the marked infrangible limitation of fatal violations (*!) rarely occur. Also, most violations of restrictions are located at the places of non-fatal infrangible marked restrictions (*) and optimal outputs from the point of view of Fara are the outputs that justify the marfū reading of the evidence (shāhīd) of the ayah, which is influenced by Fara's tendency for marfū diacritic and his approach to the agency of the subject when it is used in the marfū form. Therefore, in predicative formations, he is more likely to use implicitation, deletion, and interpretation of the predicate. The non-fatal marked limitation of deletion and implicitation show the highest number of violations among the evidences of the ayahs.

Discussion of the topic of modes of recitation of the Qurʾān is one of the important topics in the Qurʾānic sciences that not only deals with the accuracy of Qurʾānic recitation, but also effects the understanding and exegesis of Qurʾānic verses and also impacts the derivation of Islamic law and understanding of theological matters. In spite of numerous historical reports that indicate that there was no single uniform recitation in all the Islamic lands throughout history, some scholars have appealed to phrases such as “Qirāʾat al-ʿĀmmah” (lit. the recitation of the masses) which are found in sources dating back to the first centuries of the Hijrah, especially in al-Farrāʾ’s Maʿānī al-Qurʾān, to try and prove the existence of a single prevalent recitation among the general population throughout history. They claim that the current prevailing recitation (i.e. the narration of Ḥafṣ from ʿĀṣim) is that very same recitation that has always been prevalent. However, we note that these two claims are the result of an incorrect understanding of these expressions, and the neglecting of many other evidences which contradict these claims. A study of the phrase “Qirāʾat al-ʿĀmmah ”
and other similar phrases in al-Farrāʾ’s Maʿānī al-Qurʾān shows that in many instances such phrases are not compatible with recitation of Ḥafṣ from ʿĀṣim. Also, a comprehensive study of the instances where the phrase “Qirāʾat al-ʿĀmmah” and other similar terms in al-Farrāʾ’s work shows that the what is meant by such terms is simply the view of the majority of reciters and as such one cannot use such terms as evidence for the existence of a single prevailing mode of recitation that was accepted by the masses from the first centuries of the Hijrah or as proof that the current recitation has always been accepted as the correct one. Rather, in the exegesis of verses or derivation of religious laws from verses, it is essential that other recitations also be taken into consideration.

There are different approaches toward anomalous readings, one of them belongs to Abu ʾUbaid Qasim bin Sallam. Bin Sallam reported that his masters have used and interpreted anomalous readings to express canonical reading. Since such approach has given literary-semantic dimension to the readings and their being, it can draw attention to reexamine. It is worth noting that a century later – in Ibn Mujahid’s era- the readings have got tradition (Hadith) dimension. A new discourse emerged because of such changing approach, as a result the anomalous readings and their being met new challenges. Consequently, two centuries later, Ibn Hazm reported that the roots of anomalous readings lied in the delusion of Readers and denied any difference between Ibn Masʾud’s and canonical codifications. In order to approve Abu ʾUbaid’s viewpoint, we have examined his reading through Farrā’s Maʾāni al-Qurʾān (who was one of his masters) and concluded that the latter have used Ibn Masʾud’s reading as a literary-semantic aspect. The usage of Ibn Masʾud’s reading to express other literary aspects of a given Qurʾānic verse, considering it as a proof to other readings, reciting it as a specific “meaning” of a given verse letters, and finally approving or denying other reflections based on this reading all are witness to our above-mentioned claim.

Aban ibn Taghlab (d. 141 AH) was one of the Ahl al-Bayt’s elite students who had the honor of being with the Infallible Imams of his time. His skills in a variety of sciences gave him a perfect character that made both Shiite and Sunni praise him. Aban learned many things from Ahl al- Bayt’s pure teachings and at the same time tried to nurture and compile them. Aban’s compilations, like many writings of his time are completely lost. But the content of their works can be tracked and recovered somewhat. This paper tries to express the Taghlab’s status and retell the exegetical features of "Gharib al-Quran" or "Ma`ani al-Quran".

"Ma'ani al-Quran" is the name of Behbudi's translation of Quran. Identifiying Behbudi's methodology in his translation can be accomplished by contemplating on his translation along with his other works such as : 'Contemplating on Quran', 'the </em> </em>teachings of Quran', 'the miracle of Quran', 'fighting against the philosophy of </em> </em>polytheism' </em>, his selection of the four main hadith books(Kutub Arba'e) and his footnotes on Bihar al-Anwar. Accordingly his most significant fundamentals in translating Quran are as fo11owing: considering the time of revelation, the situation of revelation, the introductory addresses of the verses, fo11owing sound traditions, ignoring innovations not justified by Sunna, considering other verses and the context outside the verse, examining different readings of Quran and choosing the ones in accordance with the writing of it, following Arabic rules in linguistic, and considering the original meanings of the words. Behbudi is in no mood of using parantheses while adding extra explanations , claiming that fo11owing the role example of the Quran proper in translation, gives a free translation of Quran. Providing the omitted clauses or embedded ones which equivalent to 'or' is apparent in his translation. In his work we also notice his special exegetical views. In Behbudi's translation of Quran, tendency to esoteric interpretation is not seen ;rather he gives a natural constant image of the events ,employing a materialistic interpretation in narrating events.