نشریه رهیافت هایی در علوم قرآن و حدیث
سال چهل و ششم شماره 2 (پیاپی 93، پاییز و زمستان 1393)

Attention to the past, present, and future of human history has an outstanding place in the holy texts of the Abrahamic religions. The books existing in the Old Testament begin the human story, with a relatively history-like structure, from the beginning of creation of the world and man and continues until getting to the emergence of the people of Banī Isrā’īl. From this point on, this history takes on an ethnic tone and finally casts a glance at the apocalyptic assumptions and concepts, which are sometimes ethnic and at other times universal. The New Testament needs to be examined in two separate sections of the Gospels and the Epistles. The Gospels section lacks the history-like outlook of the Old Testament; however, the viewpoint of its writer foretells the actualization of the Messianic promises of the Old Testaments. The Epistles section (Paul’s Epistles in particular) has borrowed some concepts from the Old Testament and, with a specific interpretation of them, presented a kind of theology of its own and a type of philosophy of history. Crucifixion of the Prophet Jesus (A.S.) and his Ascension to heaven is an important “turning point” in the philosophy of history. Although not having a history-like report mode, the arrangement of the material in the Qur’ān as well as the content of the verses of the Qur’ān, the past and present are implied and the future of man is attended to in a serious and emphatic way in the Qur’ānic concepts. The differences concerning historic periods in the above-mentioned three texts have specific manifestations in two places: in the theology section existing in Paul’s Epistles, in which we witness a special philosophy of history; and in the Old Testament, in which theology has taken on an ethnic tone.

Identifying the chain of transmitters mentioned in the sanads for the verification of the sanad is necessary for employment of ḥadīth. One of the problems observed in the chains of transmission is the repetition of the names applicable to two or more transmitters. On the other hands, some transmitters have been referred to by various names and titles in chains of transmission; various titles that are all denoting one single person. The discourse of distinguishing the commonalities and unity of differences and the equalization of various transmitters in identification of the transmitter and analyzing and evaluating the chain of transmission by the scholars is done in special procedures. Rijāl experts have dedicated part of their attempts to this issue and have considered some procedures as among the procedures for distinction of commonalities and unity of differences, including paying attention to the transmitter’s class; the existence of titles independently in rijālī books, especially in Najāshī rijāl; difference in ṭarīq (chain of transmission) and being the transmitter of the book; existence of difference in the transmitter and the one from whom the ḥadīth is transmitted; knowledge of the nicknames, entitlements, and the geographical situation of cities; attention to the probable misrepresentations (taṣḥīfs) etc.

The written works of Ibn Bābawayh (Shaykh Ṣadūq), head of the traditionists and the distinguished figure of Shī‘ī ḥadīth in fourth/tenth century, had amounted to 300 books and treatises. A proficient scholar, he has standards and criteria in the field of ḥadīth in general and in criticizing ḥadīth in particular that incorporate approaches and patterns as a guide map and a role model. In order to obtain a relatively more precise and complete image of the nature of the eminent scholarly personality of Ibn Bābawayh, the cognition of his patterns, standards, and methods in the realm of criticizing ḥadīth and its academic study is useful and of importance in the field of ḥadīth studies; because the above study and cognition can, among other things, contain useful lessons, applicable models, and excellent approaches for a better and more accurate understanding of ḥadīth. Ibn Bābawayh’s critical ideas concerning traditions and narrations can be uncovered throughout his works. In this article, Shaykh Ṣadūq’s ideas and critical method and approach in the expanse of “criticizing ḥadīth” are studied, examined, and evaluated in such instances as “dissimulative traditions”, “extras of traditions”, “distortions created in traditions”, “the mutifarrid traditions (narrated by only one narrator) and unrecorded traditions in the early shī‘a principles”, “sectarian tendencies and the narrators’ school of thought”, “some narrators’ mutifarridāt (traditions narrated by only one narrator)”, “the category of sanad of some famous traditions”, etc.

The present writing seeks to explain the concepts of ummas and the ethnic exclusivism in light of the Holy Scripture and the concept of ummī (illiterate) and ummiyūn, in the Holy Qur’ān. Is the title ummī equivalent to polytheist and idolater or is it applied to the gentile people? Similarly, does the Prophet Muḥammad’s (S.A.W.) being called ummī in the Qur’ān concern his being illiterate, or, in light of the background of the Holy Scripture, can this title be regarded as meaning the gentiles or any unfamiliar person with the Testaments? Reviewing the application of this term in the Old and New Testament and also with a general look at the order of different books of the Testaments, this article concludes that the term umma, has been applied to all communities, including the Jews, but it has gradually been applied to the gentiles. In the New Testament, the term ummī has been just applied to non-Jewish and non-Christian communities. Given the background of the concept in the Testament and with a review of the verses in which the terms ummī and ummiyūn are used, it is understood that what is meant in the Holy Qur’ān by ummī is not illiterate or unable to read and write; rather, it means the one unfamiliar with the Torah and Gospel, even though being a Jew or Christian.

Humor is the beautiful melody of art proceeding toward the cultural sublimation of a society. Delving into its related components is among the great duties of the compassionate researchers of society, because using this unique art leads to deepening of understanding the subject in the addressee’s mind and on the other hand, it would state the society’s inefficiencies with a sarcastic and bitter language and by creating apprehension and fear, it would warn the wrongdoers of their own errors and thus removes the deficiencies and defects created in the social life. This research is intended to bring to light the way this issue has been actualized from among the eloquent sayings of the Infallibles (A.S.) by means of documentary and library method. To this end, first the concept of ṭanz is examined; then, from a historical perspective, its applications in the words of the Imams of guidance (A.S.) is explained in four humorous manifestation models, including humor through derision (tahakkum), parable, assimilation to animals, and allusive remark. It is included in the end that the ultimate goal of the humors existing in traditions is to set aright the individual and the society, and their taking lessons from the context from which the humor has been originated.

One of the significant discourses of principles of jurisprudence is the study of the ruling for tajarrī according to the dictate of intellect and that the uṣūlīs have been disagreed as to whether tajarrī is unlawful or not. Terminologically, tajarrī is practical opposition (insolence) to the master’s command, either obligatory or unlawful according to the perpetrator’s opinion; whereas, their presumption has been untrue and no opposition has taken place. In this research, after stating the dictate of intellect concerning the mutijarrī (insolent), the writers have sought to identify the ruling for tajarrī from the viewpoint of textual proofs and after examination of the sanads and the textual proofs on this discourse, they have found that tajarrī would undoubtedly not be textually deserving retribution. Of course, according to the generally accepted view on justice, the insolent person is not just because they do not possess the faculty of staying away from sin.