سیدمحمدحسن جواهری

One of the recurring doubts of virtual networks is about the lack of obligation to wear the hijab in the prophetic age and the consequence of not being allowed to wear the hijab or the so-called" compulsory hijab "in the current era. The insignificance of hijab, and the adequacy of the minimum hijab due to the delay in the revelation of the verses of hijab, and the revelation of the maximum hijab) jilbab (after the revelation of the minimum hijab) khimar (from the point of view ofsome according to most narrations, - which is the immunity of women from sick-hearted people – are other challenges and doubts about the hijab, which are subjects to the study of the verses of the hijab and how it is realized and spread in the age of revelation despite the survival of ignorant culture. According to the author, despite the many efforts that have been made so far to dispel doubts about the law of hijab and its surrounding issues, there are still unexplored angles and opportunities for new efforts, and in addition to what others have presented with jurisprudential tendencies, verse-based answers can be given. It is natural that the answer based on the verses of the Qur'an is very important due to the source of the verses for any religious research and its priority. And in the case of a number of doubts, the main origin of which is the false use of incorrect interpretations or wrong impressions of the verses of hijab, it has a key, privileged and often unique role. In this article, with methodical research on the verses of hijab and the contemporary conditions of the revelation of the Qur'an and focusing on the four axes of why the hijab is delayed, the wisdom of its two-stage revelation, intelligent bedding between the two stages of revelation, and maximum use of space in the Prophetic society suitable answers to the above doubts can be found; Answers that are perfectly in line with the evidence of the verses and in accordance with the method of the wise in analyzing the verses of the hijab, which in turn will be the basis for some secondary and governmental rulings.

Aesthetic interpretation is one of the relatively new approaches in Qur’an interpretation. This kind of interpretation, which is followed in six types of tendentious, methodical, intra-sūra (structural), extra-sūra, inter-sūra and extra-Qur’anic, with a descriptive look at rhetorical interpretations, has an absolute generality and peculiarity relation with the rhetorical interpretation, and with a scientific look at them, a relation of generality and peculiarity in some respect. Most of the difference between these two types of interpretation is, in addition to the difference in terms of conceptology, from the hermeneutic perspective, the intention of the speaker, and in terms of the territory. From among the above-mentioned types of aesthetic interpretation, two types of tendency and intra-sūra (structural) are of interest to the interpreters and the Qur’an scholars, but other types, especially the methodical and inter-sūra types, have received less attention and can be considered as approaches absent in the interpretative process of most of interpretations. The important point in this field of study is the presence of methodical aesthetic interpretation as the interpretative evidence, relying on which, one can achieve a correct understanding of the text or turn to the criticism and review of interpretation probabilities. This article tries to explain different types of aesthetic interpretations and examine their relationship with rhetorical interpretation from various dimensions.

One of the important and influential theories in the field of readings (qirā’āt) is "the same the single reading (vāhedeh), common (āme) and Ḥafṣ' from ‘Āṣim. Based on this reading theory, that Gabriel come down to the Prophet, it was only one reading, and it is a reading that remained nameless for hundreds of years and was known by titles such as “the general reading” (qirā’āt l āme) and “the people’s reading” (qirā’āt l nās). On the other hand, among the seven reciters (qurrā), only Āṣim and among his narrators only Ḥafṣ' have tried to reading the Qur'an like the general reading and they had no problem with it. This caused in a process and due to some factors, the general reading, which for hundreds of years was the common reading of the people without a name or sign, ‘Āṣim should be named after Ḥafṣ'. Against this theory, there are other theories that consider “the general reading) to be the reading of the general public at any time and in any place, or they refer to specific people such as the seven reciters. The theory of "This is the same..." - which is one of the important foundations of interpretation and is effective in some jurisprudential issues (such as reciting prayers) as well as the criticism of the suspicion of reading distortion is works well - is faced with ambiguities and doubts in front of competing theories, which are necessary to be disposed; Therefore, this article tries to correct the damage and answer the doubts, reread and prove it with a new expression and analyze the factors involved in it. In writing this article, the author used the method appropriate to the research in historical sources, which is mainly based on the collection of evidences and the study of a historical statement in the context and space of its realization, and in addition, to the field study of some remaining works of manuscripts of Qur'an has also turned.

The revelation time is one of the significant exegetical evidences that has since long ago been occasionally of interest to the interpreters and has drawn more attention in the present era. This exegetical evidence (and not basis) can be obtained in various ways. One of the major ways of attaining it, according to a number of interpreters' attitude, is the narrations of revelation order. Obviously, if the list reporting these narrations is damaged, the impressions of the interpreters who refer to the Qur'an with reliance on them would face disruption. Therefore, in the first step, the validity and authenticity of these narrations should be examined from various aspects, including the content. In this research, the writer tries to put these narrations to critique in terms of content and to assess their validity by contextual exploration. To this end, he puts the study of intra-chapter and inter-chapter arrangement of some verses on the agenda, especially the verses of ḥijāb (due to the transparency and consistency of the evidences in them). The author's assumption is that the arrangement of the verses within some chapters do not comply with the status of the chapters in the revelation list with respect to their revelation occasion and themes as well as the clear evidences of the verses of ḥijab in two chapters of al-Nūr and al-Aḥzāb, and denotes the non-validity of the list of the narrations of the revelation order of the chapters.

One of the issues raised about the reasons for the difference in Qur’anic readings is the issue of expertion (ijtihad), which is raised under the title of ijtihad of reciters and companions. Great figures such as Ayatollah Khoei and Ayatollah Maarefat have raised the issue of ijtihad in recitation. In this article, which is written in a descriptive-analytical method, the reasons for and against the discussion of ijtihad on the issue of differences in readings were examined. The main reason for the agreement was the practice of the tastes of the companions and the reciters, which has been mentioned as one of the important factors in influencing the difference of readings. While the opponents have considered the recitations as evidence based on listening and narration and have stated that ijtihad in recitation has been confused with the word ikhtiar in recitation. But by referring to the history of recitations, it becomes clear that ijtihad existed in recitations and these ijtihads are not done only by a few unknown people whom that most Muslims has ignored.

One of the important aspects of the miracle of Qur'an is the "legislation miracle". For many years, Qur'anic scholars have tried to explain this aspect and present it with a rational and somewhat demonstrative and acceptable face. But some have opposed this aspect of miracles with the induction of doubts, based on some of the dilemmas in the origin, area, or scope of these arguments and explanations. In this article, the author proposes that legislation miracles can be introduced into a new stage and a new field that both raises doubts and adds to its function, hence provided a new explanation of aspects of the miracle. The author's perspective opens up a new space that can be considered a more complete and, of course, easier to reach of legislation miracles. The hypothesis of research this theory, revisited by with the title “miracle of the learning and legislation network”, is the possibility of drawing a harmonious and comprehensive network of the Divine learning and legislation that is beyond of time, out of place and eternal, and it has complete control and manages over all aspects of human life until the end of human life. The compilation and legislation of such a network is beyond the power of the jinn and man, and that is the it’s aspect of miracle.

The study of the position of "the Universe" as the material world has a special significance in its purposefulness or instrumentalism in politics; is acquiring of different dimensions of Universe, the purpose of politics, or is it the mean by which politicians approach it to the goals of politics? In this research, it is shown that a viewpoint has an independent view of the universe, it considers it the "goal of politics"; another group does not value the existence of the universe, and the third group considers it as "the mean" of achieving the goals beyond the prosperity of the eternal life. This study, by examining the verses of the Quran, attempts to show which group is accepted in the Qur'an and which is criticized.

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?

God has manifested in the Holy Quran, as asserted in tradition. This manifestation may be textual or spiritual. The spiritual manifestation is postponed to other articles with the subject of "impressive miracle" and this article will only deal with textual manifestation. God's manifestation in the text has some signs which may be found through understanding these signs. Some have named this process 'ascription of text to God' shortly called "the theory of ascription". The mentioned theoretician believes the miracle of Quran is related to God's textual signs and explaining and proving his view, poses some criticisms about the common view which relates the miracle of Quran to its superhuman** text in terms of its expression and content; he believes his theory is the only solution. Investigating this theory according to the words of the theoretician, the author of this article has revealed some of its problems and has answered his criticisms. The author has also tried to properly elaborate the form of theory acceptable to himself (the textual manifestation of God in the Holy Quran).

One of the most important theories about Qur’an miracle is “Effective Miracle” that was propounded, first of all, by khattabi - of Sunni great author of “Bayan I’jaz al-Qur’an” and commentator of “Sahih al- Bukhari” and “Sunan Abu Dawud” with available resources, and many scholars follow him. According to this theory, Qur’anic attractions have beyond the nature of human and its own special signs, and also, it is different from known attractions in material world. Khattabi has left its origin and process ambiguously by referring to some documentations and signs of “Effective Miracle”. In this article, we try to consider and analyze his remarks, and present it, by proper refinement,

One of the famous theories regarding Quran's miracle is the theory of "Sarfeh". This theory has had pros and cons from the very past and each have presented some reasons to prove their idea. On the other hand this theory is related with some theological ideas which should be investigated. Although there are many centuries after its birth, the theory of sarfeh was gradually criticized by Quran researchers and has created a discourse which is still in process. The new efforts of some writers – on the press or in the internet – who pose some questions and present some new reasons to prove this theory, and also the questions mentioned by Seyyed Mortaza in his Al-Moozeh – first printed ten years ago – has drawn me to repose this subject. Thus this article will investigate and criticize the latest reasons of the defenders of this theory and will try to find the reality; the approach of this article is to answer the posed questions and to complete some of the answers of previous scholars. I have also paid attention to the most important questions of the ancestors which are, in some cases, the base of contemporary questions.

In order to evaluate the translation of the Quran, the writer of the present article first touches upon such principles and criteria as distinctiveness of the type of translation and the level of the addressees; strength of the translation and proper exegetical implications made by the translator; establishment of lexical and structural equilibrium; observance of morphological, syntactic, and rhetorical points; giving necessary explanations; technical editing; making consistent; and creativity and innovation. With the above considerations, he then goes on to review and evaluate Ayatollah Yazdī's translation, maintaining that in this translation most of these principles and criteria are not observed.