نشریه آینه پژوهش
سال سی‌ام شماره 2 (پیاپی 176، خرداد و تیر 1398)

In Khwaja Abdullah Ansari’s Collection of Persian Rasāel, published by Muhammad Sarvar Mola’ei, there is an article under number 10, titled “Anonymous article”, which is attributed to Khwaja. It has probably been compiled and codified under his name by some of his adherents. In the article, there is one sentence: “chon yār ah last kār sahl ast, sohbat bā ahlbābat-e jān ast, sohbat-e nā-ahl bot-e jān ast”. In the present article, the author is rereading this sentence. He has stated that the right words are “tab-e jān”, not “bot-e jān”. The article also discusses the meaning of this sentence, its exact translation in Arabic, and some examples of this sentence being used in the old texts.

One of the prominent personalities in the neo-superstitious thoughts during 13th century is Shaykh Ahmad al-Ahsá’í who had a great influence on the production of the intellectual currents of this period with writing his works. Releasing his writings and thoughts among Iranian scholars has caused a lot of positive and negative reactions at the same time. Although Sheikh’s thoughts were not revealed in his own days, when they have been presented by his successor, Seyyed Kazem Rashti, they have become more well-known and caused more conflicts among scholars as well as people. As Sheikhiyya group spread their ideas more, the number of their opponents in many Iran’s cities increased, and it led tosuch a serious conflict that sometimes demanded government intervention. Tabriz was one of these cities. Gathering all of the contents which are written about the Sheikhiyya and non- Sheikhiyya intellectual conflicts in the thirteenth century is  a work with many unfinished parts; however, many researchers have attempted to elucidate its aspects. The author of this paper, based on some manuscripts, tries to show religious conflicts during thirteenth century especially in Tabriz.

The study of Hebrew translations of the Qur’an can contribute to the improvement of the level of the Qur’anic studies in the academic community of the country. It should be noted that among the Sami languages, Arabic and Hebrew have the most similarities. These two languages are very consistent at different levels such as phonemes, letters, building words, and syntactic rules. Therefore, Hebrew translators’ finding equivalence for the Qur’anic words can develop the comparative studies of Sami languages. However, if studying the translations of the Qur’an is a one of the necessities, the Hebrew translations are taking priority over the other ones. In the present article, two Hebrew translations of An-Naml Surah have been compared in terms of loyalty to the source text, equivalence finding, literary style: classic or modern, and some reflections. This surah includes several leads to intertextuality; however, since this topic has not been taken into account by either of the authors despite the large number of footnotes (only in this surah, and except Uri Rubin’stranslation, Ᾱyah 82) the present paper’s focus is not on comparing the content with Bible reports, but just on the linguistic issues. One of the innovative features of this research is that it has used Torah’s usages in Hebrew equivalences, which will appeal to those interested in comparative linguistic studies.

One of the most important issues about the miracle of the Qur’an is the question regarding its origin and the formation of this theory and how it can find way into Islamic theology and beliefs. Many of the old and new scholars, referring to some of the Qur’an verses known as Tahaddi verses (verses which invite to challenge), have apparently accepted that this theory, like many other theological theories, has its root in the Qur’an itself. The present paper is an article translated  from Radscheit, in which a further reading of the Tahaddi verses is suggested through reflection on the meaning of the “Ᾱyah” (verse), and examining the Qur’anic prophetic pattern. Accordingly, Tahaddi verses in the context of debating with Maki audience merely point to their inability to challenge the Qur’an, and have nothing to do with the Qur’an uniquenessand miracle.

Abu at-Tayyib al-Mutanabbi is one of the most controversial culture–leaders in Arabic language and Islamic civilization, and his words have always been discussed and studied by others. Despite the numerous books and annotations about his poetry and character, there are still many unsaid things. Tanbih Zawi al-Hemam ala Ma’ākhez Abi al-Tayib min al- She’r va al-Hikam by Abdulaziz Bizāwi, includes some of the annotations and commentaries of Mutanabbi’s Divan. In the present article, in order to evaluate the work overally, the author has studied and criticized this book, which has been published by Library, Museum and Document Center of Iran Parliament along with the research of Sādeq Khorshā, Ganjiyān Khannāriand Ghorbāni Mādwāni in 2018.

Ᾱref Qazvini’s poems, tasnifs, notes, and letters have had many readers since Constitutional Era; however, during his life time, and especially after his death, his published works were disorganized, misrepresented, distorted, and even lacked some parts. This was mostly done intentionally due to several reasons such as removing his caustic comments, censoring his attacks on two branches of religious and political tyranny as well as on his contemporary fellows, his publishers’ ideological differences, and sometimes the inability to read his manuscripts which has made his writings so distorted and meaningless. In recent years, a collection of Ᾱref’s manuscripts titled Memories of Ᾱref-e Qazvini (Sokhan Publication, 1388) and two sets of his correspondence with his friends, titled Vāhid-e Nāmehā-ye Ᾱref-e Qazvini (Negāh Publication, 1391 and Hermes Publication, 1396), were published. A thorough examination of the texts of all three books and comparing them with Ᾱref’s manuscripts or the original sources has revealed many errors in these publications, the deliberate and ideological elimination of some parts of his letters by Negāh publication, and the significant errors made by Hermes Publication in Ᾱref’s new-found letters. The author, in another article titled “It is not a mansion, It has been destroyed”, has criticized both publications of Ᾱref Qazvini’s letters. ((See: Iran Namag, Canada, Toronto University, Third Year, No. 4, winter, 1397, Special Issue for Professor Mohammad Ali Nodooshan). The following paper just deals with ᾹrefQazvini’s memories.

Shahr-Ᾱshūb is one type of the Persian poems in which poet describes and praises, or dispraises the townspeople, the craftsman, and different kinds of profession in the city. This kind of poem, in addition to its general artistic and literal values, is very beneficial from the perspective of historical sociology, the introduction of the words and terminology of the common crafts and industry in past eras, various techniques that were prevalent in that time, and also recognition of the materials and tools used in various professions and industries. Vahid Qazvini’s Shahr- Ᾱshūb , like all the other ones and from some aspects more than many of them, is useful for knowing about the history of jobs and guilds, as well as many other civil issues of ancient Iran. Through Rasool Ja’faryiān’s efforts, this book has recently been published with letter printing by Movarekh publishing house in 2019. The author in the present article, refering to one of the guilds mentionedin Qazvini’s Shahr-ashub, gun maker, studies the recording of the word ‘tofak’ and ‘tofang’ in this book. He prefers the reading “tofak” to Jafarian’s record “Tofang”. The author continues his study with a critical look and mentions thecorrect meanings of some other words in the text.

Shahriyārnāme is one of the long pahlevāni poem (epic poem) about Rostam’s grand-grand-grandchild. This poem has already been published twice by the late professor Homāie and Dr. Bigdeli, yet it was not complete (925, and 5175 verses). Its new correction which is based on three versions and include twelve thousands and sixty nine verses has been published along with detailed introduction and annotations. Introducing this publication, the present article intendsto put forward some suggestions and questions regarding the introduction, annotations, and the text.

Marvi’s Philosophical Collection is a work recently published in 554 pages and imperial octavo size by Rayzan publishing house in cooperation with the Islamic Studies Center of McGill University, and the Center for the Great Islamic Encyclopedia. This version is a transcript of manuscript number 19 in Marvi Library of Tehran. The collection can be divided into twelve parts. The first part, which is the most important part of the collection, includes 53 dissertations from Yaḥyá ibn ʿAdī about various philosophical issues, and 23 articles of them have so far been considered missing. The present article is a translation of Robert Winsnovsky’s article in which he introduces these 23 articles. Gerhard Endress has gathered and analyzed the information of this work and other similar works, and then compares and checks them with a set of available versions in his work named An Analytical Inventory. Among Yaḥyá ibn ʿAdī’s 53 philosophical works which are included in Marvi’s Philosophical Collection, Endress has considered 23 articles as missing works. The author ofthis article has presented a complement to Endress information, by mentioning the first and last parts of these missingtreatises and their page number in the Marvi’s Collection version.

Dr. Gholām Ali Haddād Ᾱdel’s most recent book on Hāfiz is called Wild Dear, which is derived from one of Hāfiz’s mathnawis. This book includes eight articles on studying Hāfiz. They are about Hāfiz’s love, his staying up late and rising early in the morning, rhetorical, mystical, and social meanings of the word ‘Rend’, the connection with the holy Qur’an,some notes on Hāfiz’s Divān and the relationship between his poem and the previous poets’ works, the Persianprose use of Hāfiz’s poems, and finally studying “Wild Deer” mathnavi in terms of meaning, arrangement of verses and typology. In this article, some suggestions have been made about Mr. Haddād’s comments and opinions.