نشریه پژوهش های قرآنی
سال بیست و یکم شماره 2 (پیاپی 79، تابستان 1395)

There are two descriptive and discursive approaches for identifying the intention of the sūra among the interpreters who believe in the existence of a single intention in each sūra of the Qur’ān. In the discursive approach, the interpreter tries to uncover the intention of the sūra with reliance on the intra-textual and extra-textual evidences and explains his quality of gaining access to the intention of the sūra in a well-reasoned and systematical way. The interpreters who have attempted the discursive unveiling of the intention of the sūras have employed six different approaches to this end. Through evaluation and validation of different approaches, the writer tries in this research to specify the degree of validity of each approach in the process of unveiling the purpose of the sūra. In conclusion, he suggests an inclusive approach for unveiling the intention of the sūra.

There is a tradition attributed to the Holy Prophet (S.A.W.) in the Shī‘ī and Sunnī collections of ḥadīth, in which, according to His Holiness, the Holy Qur’ān is divided into four sections called sab‘a ṭiwāl, mi’īn, mathānī, and mufaṣṣal, each one of which have been given to him consecutively instead of the books of the past Prophets, the Torah of Moses, the Gospel of Jesus, and the Psalms of David. The major part of these traditions have been related either through Ibn al-Asqa‘ from the Prophet (S.A.W.) or through Sa‘d al-Iskāf from Imam Muḥammad Bāqir (A.S.) who quoted from the Apostle of Allah (S.A.W.). The large number of traditions along with the inattention to the truth and falsity of this kind of traditions by the scholars of the Qur’ān and ḥadīth and attributing them to the Holy Prophet (S.A.W.), doubles the importance of studying these traditions in terms of their validity. Researching on the sanads of these traditions, the present article shows that some of these sanads contradict the context of the traditions and the sanad of Al-Kāfī’s traditions is sound and the traditions of Wāthilat b. al-Asqa‘ are unreliable (muḍṭarib) in chain of transmission and text. Finally, these traditions are judged to be sound because of their being mustafīḍ (diffused) or mutiwātir (frequently narrated) and due to their conformity of signification (dilāla) with the Qur’ān.

Audience-study and dating the āya 91 of Sūrat al-An‘ām has been one of the exegetical controversies among the Muslims since early centuries up to the present, which has always incited some disputes under this āya. Some have, contrary to the obvious evidences of this admonitory āya, assumed the addressees to be the polytheists and have made reference to the Prophet’s non-interaction with the People of Scripture in Mecca for proving their claim. Whereas, some others have, with reliance on the textual evidences of the āya, assumed its addressees to be the Jews; however, given the above presupposition, they have assumed the Revelation of this āya to have been in Medina. The third group have also regarded the āya’s addressees to be the Jews and its Revelation simultaneous with other parts of the sūra in Mecca, but have got into trouble in reconciling between this historical presupposition and the quality of admonishing the Jews in Mecca. Upon examining the viewpoints, this writing has accepted the Jews as being the addressees of this āya and then, in light of other Meccan āyas, has dealt with the claim of the Prophet’s non-interaction with the People of Scripture in this juncture and while rejecting it, has proved the āya’s being Meccan and the likelihood of admonishing the Jews in this period.

There are traditions and aḥādīth narrated concerning the background and causes for the revelation of the āyas Qur’ān that are called Revelation Occasions. Some of the interpreters and writers of the Qur’ānic sciences have talked about the “effective role of Revelation Occasions in interpretation of the Qur’ān; however, some others have regarded the Book of Allah free from needing the Revelation Occasions in making its intentions understood. The proponents of the effective role admit that most of the traditions concerning the Revelation Occasions are weak in sanad and are also entangled in variation, contradiction, and incompatibility, but they have tried to compensate the weakness of sanads and resolve the contradictions; nevertheless, the opponents have not considered the solutions to be helpful. Since it seemed that the collected evidences indicate the strong view of the opponents of the effective role of the Revelation Occasions in interpretation and understanding of the Qur’ān, while it was also noticed that the theory of effectiveness is included in the textbooks of the Islamic Seminary’s religious students and are promoted, we decided to critique the above theory so that it may not be taken as granted by the religious students. This research is analytical-critical.

In āya 28 of the blessed Sūrat Maryam, the Holy Qur’ān has, in the words of Holy Maryam’s people, addressed her Yā Ukht-i Hārūn (O sister of Aaron!). This issue has been objected to from the very beginning by the Christians and the opponents of the Qur’ān; because no historical sanad has definitely mentioned that Holy Maryam has had a brother named Aaron and if what is meant by Aaron is the Moses’ (A.S.) brother, there is another objection raised as to their being historically almost six centuries distant in time. Interpreters have tried to answer this objection in different ways, but none of the answers are fully convincing. By re-examining the answer that the Prophet (S.A.W.) has briefly given to this objection and relying on the fact that among these peoples a person would have been summoned by the name of the pious and the Prophets, we have tried in this article to find another answer and have finally concluded that Ukht-i Hārūn among the Jews is a nickname with a structure similar to a title of honor for “Maryam”.

Taḥaddī (challenge) is one of the most essential issues concerning miracles, particularly the miracle of the Qur’ān, which has a fundamental role in definition of miracle. The Qur’ān has challenged everyone without any limitation in various āyas; however, there have come up basic discrepancies in terms of the stages and scope of taḥaddī and the qualitative and quantitative properties of the differing text, and certain misconceptions have been raised that need to be resolved by resolving some ambiguities and adopting accurate principles on the basis of the concepts of the āyas of taḥaddī.
The writer is trying in a new research on the āyas of taḥaddī to recognize the stages and scope of taḥaddī with an analysis based on the interrelated evidences of the āyas. With this approach, the following questions are pursued: 1. How is the quality intended by the Qur’ān in constant or variable taḥaddī and in each supposition?
2. With regard to the interrelated evidences of the āyas of taḥaddī, is the revelatory logic apt to come up with?
3. What is the relation of the Revelation course of the āyas of taḥaddī with the revelatory logic of the stages of taḥaddī?
4. Does the intended criterion in taḥaddī change over time or not? And based on each one, what conclusions can be drawn?
5. What is the reason for using different criteria for taḥaddī in āyas?

As the main elements of the scripture of the Qur’ān, words enjoy a sublime position in it and the first step in understanding the text of the Qur’ān is dedicated to their semantics. Presupposing the possibility, necessity, and the urgency of the semantics of the vocabulary of the Qur’ān, this writing is intended to present an inclusive method in the semantics of the vocabulary of the Qur’ān. The semantics method of the Qur’ān is delineated in this writing in such a way that various sources, including the transmitted, scholarly, and rational are identified for semantics and then their application is theoretically and comparatively explained in the process of semantics. Some of them are etymology, philology, the scripture of the Qur’ān, ḥadīth, the two Testaments, the glossaries of other languages, and the sciences related to semantics of the vocabulary of the Qur’ān.