نشریه قرآن شناخت
سال دوازدهم شماره 1 (پیاپی 22، بهار و تابستان 1398)

Moderation in Islam has been considered as a value concept. Such a concept can be misunderstood or misused without defining and recognizing its limits and boundaries. The present study seeks to study the Quran's attitude toward the phenomenon of moderation and its criterion with a semantic approach. The review the Quran verses shows that although there is no word for moderation in the Quran, words and phrases such as justice, truth of religion, intention, economy and endurance, in some Quranic applications, convey the concept of moderation; on the contrary, words like exaggeration, cruelty, oppression, and prodigality have a semantic contrast. Semantically examining these words, it is achieved that in the Quran, words equivalent to moderation, have a deeper connection with more fundamental concepts such as monotheism, right and justice. From the perspective of the Quran, the criterion and boundary of moderation, is commitment to monotheism, observing the right and justice, and not going out of the direct righteousness of God's servitude.

One of the rather common words in the Holy Quran is the word "کلا", which has come up 33 times and in 15 suras. Popular current viewpoint considers the meaning of this word as revulsion (ردع), and everywhere in Quran it is translated as “not so”, “never” and words alike. However, syntax experts and commentators have a considerable dispute on the meanings of this word. This study employing descriptive-analytic method using library resources has identified and studied nine views related to the meaning of the word "کلا". The meanings identified are: «ردع و زجر»، «حقا»، «الا»، «لا»ی نافیه، «رد»، «إی»، «نعم»، «قسم»، «سوف». The conclusion of the paper is that first, the main meaning of this word, which is applicable to most of the 33 verses, is warning the audience about the sentence which comes after this word. Second, by confirming the meaning of revulsion, this word has multiple meanings in the Quran, and in eleven verses, it is applicable to both meanings of revulsion and torment over the preceding sentence and the warning about the next sentence.

It’s been a while that some of the Orientalists, having the presupposition of occurring an error in the Ottoman Manuscript of the Quran, have sought to change and reform the text of the Holy Quran. Among these people, James Bellamy can be mentioned who has attempted to readout some parts of the Holy Quran, having the same presupposition. James Bellamy's multiple researches on reforming the vocabulary of the Quran have made him to be considered as one of the pundit Orientalists in this field. The word “ابا” in the verse “وفاکهه و ابا” (`Abasa, 31), is one of the words that James Bellamy has considered it obscure and an error in reading or writing of the word “لبا”, that the hand error of the scriber has mistakenly recorded that. The reasons cited by him to prove this claim are that, the word “ابا” is a Takāmad word (meaning it has only been mentioned once in the Quran), and also the dispute between the commentators on its meaning, and the disproportion of “ابا” with the style of the verses, and appropriateness of “لبا” with the style of the verses, is desired; therefore, in this article, these reasons are being reviewed and criticized.

Current paper, by a descriptive-analytical method, is intended to study the relationship between the semantic field of “marriage” and the topic of “faith” in the verses related to marriage, with a regular process according to semantic field theory (Weisgerber-Trier). The word “marriage” has been used in the Qur'an in the same sense as in the pre-descent era. The vocabulary of the semantic field of marriage in the Quran including “widows, couples, offspring, divorce, adultery, etc.”, and the topic of faith and its semantic fields like “piety, chastity, serenity, villainy, polytheism, etc.” are bonded together, sometimes in the way of companionship, sometimes association, and also sometimes based on semantic contrast, and have a special emotional-moral and legal burden and have gone under semantic development; thus, the contextual context of the verses shows the expansion of the semantic layers of marriage, and the true criterion of Quranic family formation.

Colloquial language of the Quran is one of the most up-to-date discussions in the field of Quran’s linguistics that has brought up many controversies and debates among the experts. The non-Muslim American researcher, Dr. William Albert Graham, has studied the colloquial language of the Quran in a chapter of his book—“Beyond the Written Word: Oral Aspects of Scripture in the History of Religion”. The present study is a descriptive-analytical one and its data are collected by library method, and its purpose is to describe and analyze Graham’s impression from the colloquial language of the Quran. The results denote that the researcher recognizes the Quran, at the same time, as both a spoken set and a written text within a 'category of expression'; but according to some evidences, and especially with regard to its oral function in Islamic society, the researcher considers the main and dominant aspect of Quran to be “colloquial”.

The word "suspicion" is a commonly used word in the Holy Quran and according to its important position in the jurisprudential, religious and ethical verses, performing a research is necessary to discover its exact meaning. This study attempts to explain the meaning of this Quranic word based on the analysis of its semantic relations with the words that have been associated with in different verses of the Holy Quran. Accordingly, the semantic relation of the word “suspicion” with the words "followers", "liars", "estimate", "doubt", "science", "right", "certainty", "sovereign" and "male" («یتبعون»، «کاذبین»، «یخرصون»، «شک»، «علم»، «حق»، «یقین»، «سلطان»، «نری») have been analyzed. The concept of the word “suspicion” due to its semantic relation with the companion vocabulary is: “a dominant thought on the human soul, which has not yet reached the level of science; but has taken the soul under control. It should be noted that overcoming of this idea on the soul does not mean the strength of its evidences and reasons; rather, in many cases, it conveys weakness and invalid evidences”.