fundamentals of interpretation

The commentators have interpreted the Qur'an according to their own principles, some of which are common among the commentators and some are specific to one or more commentators. Ayatollah Khamenei has interpreted the Qur'an for many years with an emphasis on social issues;Sayyid Qutb also tries to show a way to create a society based on Islam by emphasizing the same tendency in the interpretation of "Fi Zalal Al-Quran". Although these two commentators have commonalities in general interpretive principles, there is a fundamental difference in how the principles are applied in their works.The present study, in a comparative-analytical method, while pointing out the commonalities of the two commentators in the basics, talks about their different principles and bases, in order to find the differences between the interpretive views of the two in comparative comparisons and analysis. Examining the interpretations received from both commentators, it can be seen that both have similar views on the use of narrations, belief in the miracle of the Qur'an, and the use of the means of revelation, history, and manners, but there is a clear difference in how they are used and how much they are used. There is between them; In addition, they have completely different views on the authority or non-authority of the sayings of the Companions and their followers and the abrogation of the Qur'an.

The way of the wise for explaining and understanding means their way in their conversations, transactions and social relations, regardless of religion, language, geographical area, etc. Using the intra-religious approach along with the analytical-logical method, this study seeks to explain the reasons for the basis of this method in the revelation and the process of understanding the verses of revelation. This issue is of great importance in the way of understanding and determining God’s intention to express the verses of the Qur’an. For this purpose, after getting acquainted with the concept of the construction of reason and its difference from similar concepts such as custom and rational judgment, rational and narrative reasons are stated to prove the claim. The results explain the basics of Qur’anic exegesis and emphasize its correct methods, permitting more accurate evaluation of interpretive schools. Emphasis on determining the meaning in a way that makes the meaning unique or narrows the range of possible meanings of the words and phrases of the Qur’an, is the other result of the research. Any method of interpreting the text that does not adhere to the rational structure is contrary to the autonomous theory, which may be called the unbridled semantic pluralism of landscape-oriented hermeneutics or the lack of attention of the narrators to the authority of the apparent verses of revelation. The commentator’s adherence to the construction of reason can shake the foundations of doubts related to the way of understanding religious texts.