نشریه پژوهش های قرآنی
سال شانزدهم شماره 2 (پیاپی 64، تابستان و پاییز 1389)

In this article, after mentioning the interpretation styles, the writer proceeds to introduce the method of interpretation by the order of Revelation. In this line, first, he talks about its permissibility and validity and gives various reasons to prove its legitimacy; then, he points out the benefits and positive outcomes of this method in different areas, and mentions the following as the significant outcomes of the order of Revelation 1. Discovering methods of religious development, 2. Discovering the acculturation process of religious concepts, 3. Discovering the outline of the religious development of the audience, 4. Understanding the relation of the challenges to the religious messages, 5. Familiarization with the process of the Prophet’s confirmation of heart, 6. Reinforcing the educational and didactic look at interpretation, and 7. Applications of the order of Revelation method in interpretation and better understanding of the Qur’ān.

This article delves into the fundamentals of the method of interpretation based on the Revelation order. First, a brief reference is made concerning the methods of writing interpretations and the history of the interpretation based on the Revelation order. And then, the following issues are dealt with as the main body of the enumeration of the approaches for the interpretation based on the Revelation order; explanation of the arguments proving the present copy of the Qur’ān (Muṣḥaf) to be subject to individual reasoning (ijtahādī); pointing out the documents and evidences which regard the present order [of the Qur’ān's verses] as impermissible and disapproved by God and the Messenger as the fundamentals of the first approach; and exposition of the positive resultants of interpretation according to the chronological engineering of the Revelation, including the significant role of paying attention to the temporal and spatial circumstances of the Revelation of the verses and chapters of the Quran, which is ranked as the fundamentals of the second approach to this method of interpretation. Some critical reviews of these fundamentals are also carried out during the above discussions.

This article reports and addresses the viewpoints concerning the method of interpretation based on the Revelation order. In this line, the writer has first pointed out the entire ideas brought up in this respect and divided them into three categories: 1. Ideas maintaining the necessity of the method of interpretation based on the Revelation order for easy and fluent understanding of the Qur’ān, 2. Ideas believing in the necessity of the above-mentioned method for creating development in society, 3. Ideas that maintain the chronological order of [the Revelation of] the Qur’ān and regard the reference to the circumstances and occasions of Revelation as the only way to understand it. He then goes on to study each one of the above approaches and criticizes the second and third ones in terms of fundamentals and proofs, denying the necessity of including the two approaches in the method of the Revelation order.

One of the important and at the same time controversial issues in the field of the Qur’ānic sciences is the way this Revealed Book is compiled and authored and then interpreted. A group of scholars and researchers of the Qur’ānic sciences believe that the compilation, authorship, and arrangement of the Quran has been executed during the lifetime of the Prophet (S.A.W.), and another have attributed it to a period after his lifetime, namely, during the caliph's rule, assuming that the present compilation of the Quran is not tawqīfī (subject to scriptural ruling) and carried out after the Prophet, thus what is considered as the basis for comprehension and interpretation of the Quran is the order in which it has been revealed. But the question that arises here is: for what reason is this order, which has been common among the interpreters and a basis for interpretation since the early Islam, is to be put aside and the method of Revelation order be practiced? More importantly, how can it be proved that the traditions related about some sūras are sound and reliable, although very contradictory and different traditions have been related in this regard and the sources are various accordingly? Besides, to what extent is there really a difference between the interpretation based on the order of [the extant compilation] the Quran and the order of the Revelation in terms of meaning and understanding of the āya, so that it can be attributed to the difference in the method of interpretation of āyas and preference of Revelation order? This writing is intended to prove that all the above questions give negative answers to the Revelation [based] interpretation and that there has been some exaggerations in claiming that if interpretation is carried out according to Revelation, it would yield many benefits, and that even if it has some benefit, it is obtainable through the current interpretations and according to the order of the [present compilation of the] Quran (Muṣḥaf).

In this article, the writer examines the theories of the proponents and opponents of the method of "interpretation based on Revelation order." In this line, first he points out the proofs of the proponent's theory, including: the sīra of the prophet (A.S.) and Imam ‘Alī (A.S.), the impact of better understanding, the impact of distinguishing interpretation from non-interpretation traditions, and discovering the procedure of creating social development. Then he goes on to criticize these proofs and after that he points out the opponent's theory and examines the proofs of this theory, which include: lack of definite basis, adverse outcomes, opposition to the Prophet (S.A.W.)'s belief, and lack of considerable result, believing some of these proofs can be answered. In the end, using several premises, the writer comes to the conclusion that the method of interpretation based on Revelation order is not of much benefit.

Rethinking about the Qur’ān demands new approaches. The approach that the Qur’ānic scholars and researchers have come up with is the interpretation of the Qur’ān by the order of Revelation method. The foundation of such great task requires definitions, modeling, and infrastructures dealt with in this essay; and its research background has been pointed out so far as accessible. The perspective of the discussion and the outcome of the work process in such a method included the concerns leading to the pathology of the project and eventually to the criticism of the interpretation based on Revelation order. In order to avoid duplication and working parallel to the traditional interpretation and the “diversity of order” method, the writer has suggested the "thematic interpretation based on Revelation order" as a substitution to "interpretation based on Revelation order" and enumerated its advantages.

In this article, first, the writer takes a look at Darvaza's biography, Qur’ānic tendency, and interest in the interpretation of the Qur’ān based on the Revelation order. Then, he goes on to study the fundamentals and preliminary discourses of his exegetical method, in which he explains the sacredness of the present order of the Qur’ān, the necessity of its arrangement according to the Revelation order for interpretation, the role of traditions concerning occasions of Revelation and the Qur’ān itself in relation to detecting the Revelation order, the importance of context and its applications from the viewpoint of the author. He also studies the loyalty of the author of Al-Tafsīr al-Ḥadīth to his fundamentals. In conclusion, he recounts the weak points of Darvaza's approach and exegetical method.

Fahm al-Qur’ān al-Karīm is a dignified interpretation by Muḥammad ‘Ābid Jābirī. This book of tafsīr is published in three volumes in the order of the chapters (sūra) of the Qur’ān. The first and the second volumes contain interpretations of the Meccan chapters and the third volume includes the Medinan. In the interpretation of each chapter, the writer has presented an introduction, an analysis, and a conclusion. In Jābirī's view, the order of the chapters is different from the order suggested by the orientalists and the Al-Azhar's trusted copy of the Qur’ān. The Meccan chapters are the ones revealed before Ḥijra (Prophet's emigration from Mecca to Medina) and the Medinan are the chapters revealed after Ḥijra. Scrolls, occasion of Revelation, verses, the volume, and styles of the verses, events of the Revelation era, traditions, the type of address, etc. are among the elements that the author of Fahm al-Qur’ān al-Karīm has used for identifying the Meccan and Medinan chapters.

Method of thematic interpretation is one of the modern and efficient methods in Qur’ānic Studies. With the help of thematic interpretation, the Qur’ānic knowledge (ma‘ārif) can be presented in a systematic way and compatible with numerous requirements and issues of any era and thereby practical answers and approaches can be received from the Qur’ān. Intrinsic capabilities of the thematic interpretation have prompted the researchers to think of new approaches to the thematic interpretation. In this article, besides the current thematic interpretation approach, other approaches of thematic interpretation, such as thematic interpretation in terms of Revelation, thematic interpretation according to the order of the Muṣḥaf, thematic interpretation based on the structure of the sūra, thematic interpretation by the scriptural (muṣḥafī)-structural style, and thematic interpretation by the revelatory (nuzūlī)-structural style, are also dealt with and the fundamentals, rules, and principles of each one is reported along with an example. Given that different styles of thematic interpretation each examines the Qur’ān's viewpoint concerning a single theme, none of them presents a thorough and comprehensive view of the Qur’ān's model in analyzing and examining that theme. In conclusion, it is suggested to outline the semantic network of the Qur’ānic themes in order to achieve a comprehensive method, using the capabilities of different styles.

In this article, we have delved into the quality of the interpreter's encounter with the syntactic differences of the two schools of Baṣra and Kūfa. They have passively encountered with some of the controversial rules. That is to say, they have inclined towards the syntactic viewpoint of one of the two schools of Baṣra and Kūfa irrespective of the meaning of the āya, and have encountered actively with some others. The only interpreter that has encountered actively with all the rules is ‘Allāma Ṭabāṭabā’ī.

Due to the decline in resources and the increase of population and needs, productivity as an effective pivot in management and leadership of society has attracted the attention of the scientists in various fields. In this respect, Islam as the last of the revealed religions, which claims to have presented a perfect and inclusive planning for productivity – proper way of doing a sound job, i.e., a combination of efficiency (the output proportionate to the input) and efficacy (comparison of outcome with the purposes) – as required by the contemporary man, has from a cultural point of view and on the basis of a comprehensive system of productivity with an emphasis on human pivotal role on both individual and social levels, provided the Muslims with novel and exclusive tips through the verses of the Quran and the life story of the Infallible Imams (A.S.) so as they may in the first step deliberate on those tips and in the second, put the productivity doctrines into action. The productivity chapter of the Quran is reported in Ṣūrat al-‘Aṣr. Optimal use of one's lifespan as the sole investment of life; faith as a momentum and a source of motivation, which along with knowledge, devotion, and certainty causes unlimited increase of productivity in one' thoughts, conduct, and speech; the outcome of faith productivity manifesting in pious and sincere deeds, which is effective in the uplift of both individual and social productivity; and finally enjoining the truth and forbearance, which are two ingredients of individual and social productivity, are among the most important characteristics of the productive believers in the Holy Quran reported in this short Ṣūrat al-‘Aṣr.

One of the important discourses of hermeneutic approaches is the hermeneutic circle. This circle has taken various forms in different approaches of hermeneutics. Friedrich Ast viewed the circle as functioning between the part of the text and its whole. Understanding the text is subject to understanding the part and understanding the part is subject to understanding the whole. Circle is quite obviously existent in Schleiermacher’s normative and technical hermeneutics, as well. In normative hermeneutics, there appear to be a circle between understanding the vocabulary on the one hand, and understanding the text and the sentence, on the other. In technical hermeneutics, the circle exists between understanding the creators of the text on the one hand, and the culture of their era, on the other. Dilthey also talks in his hermeneutics about the circle between the part and the whole. To his opinion, understanding is the expression of the whole life, as the whole life is obtained from the parts and the parts from the whole life. Heidegger views the circle to be between human being and the universe and in his writings he talks about the circle between understanding and pre-understanding. Similarly, Gadamer regards understanding of the text as a result of the circle between pre-understanding and understanding. The above-mentioned circle exists in interpretations of the Quran, too. For instance, the circle between word and āya, between āya and sūra, between sūra and the Quran, between understanding of the Quran and cognition of the Creator of the text, between understanding of the text and correctness of the text, etc.

Examination of the English translations of the Quran indicates that the main goal of the Qur’ān’s translator is to impart the message of the Qur’ān, irrespective of its style features and discourse patterns. In comparison to the conventional prose texts, the Qur’ān has an artistic structure and elegant eloquence. Many of the English translations of the Qur’ān have not properly worked out the delicate nuances and the Qur’ānic style. Thus, the present research intends to unveil the challenges faced by the translators of the Qur’ān in lexical, structural/style, and rhetorical terms. Also, this article tries, with a look at the reproduction of an appropriate translation in form and content, to mirror the field of Quran translation as doubly dynamic.