Pathology of Theological and Religious Fundamentals and Presuppositions of Comparative Commentaries1

Differences between the commentators of the Holy Quran on some interpretive fundamentals have led to the emergence of different schools of exegesis. Meanwhile, Shiites and Sunnis, as the two main groups of Muslims, while sharing many fundamentals and methods of exegesis, have major differences in the interpretation of various verses according to some fundamentals specific to their denomination. Rather than being related to the method of exegesis, these differences are mainly related to their fundamentals and presuppositions in interpretation, which ultimately have led to two schools of exegesis, Shiite and Sunni. However, it seems that the differences in fundamentals and presuppositions are not so great in comparison with the commonalities of the two sects that no more commonalities can be achieved by criticizing them. "Comparative interpretation", which means a methodical comparison of the interpretive opinions of the two sects, can identify weaknesses that, by eliminating them, the sects will reach a more interpretive agreement. In this study, ‌ the most important weaknesses in a number of commentaries in the section of fundamentals and presuppositions have been identified, which are as follows: prejudice against religious presuppositions, considering the interpretive narrations of the opposite sect as falsified, attributing "interpretation by opinion" to the commentaries of other denominations, and exclusion of the opposite sect from Islam.