نشریه پژوهش های قرآنی
سال بیست و چهارم شماره 3 (پیاپی 92، پاییز 1398)

Understanding the meaning of the Qur’anic terminology is the first and foremost step in Qur’an interpretation, as testified by authoring various works in this field since early Islamic centuries. Yaḥyā b. Salām is among the second century Qur’anic scholars, whose closeness to the Revelation era would double the importance of his methodology in the field of the semantics of the Qur’an’s terms (mufradāt). We have, therefore, undertaken to study two of his works in the present article; the first, Taṣārīf, which is on the semantic aspects of the Qur’anic terminology and the second one, which accounts for his Tafsīr book. These two works are replete with the semantics of the Qur’anic terms. Undoubtedly, one of the characteristics of exegetical tradition in early Islamic centuries is the prevalence of narration, which is clearly seen in the above-mentioned two works. Nevertheless, it seems that Yaḥyā b. Salām has in various instances dealt with the semantics of the Qur’anic terminology. Thus, the present article is intended to describe and semantically analyze the Qur’anic terminology in the above-mentioned two works through application of some semantic concepts and expressions in order to unveil the methodology of one of the earliest Qur’anic scholars in this field. This research demonstrates that in his enunciation of the meaning of the Qur’anic trms, Yaḥyā b. Salām has taken into consideration the “situation’s context”, “etymology”, “juxtaposition-substitution relations”, “homographs”, “semantics inclusiveness”, and “semantics contrast”. In the semantics of the Qur’anic terminology related to the intangible, he refers to the metaphorical meaning of these terms, which reminds one of the “conceptual metaphors” in linguistics.

The renowned thinkers among the Muslims have accepted the idea of the Hell-fire punishment and some have viewed it as subject to consensus. Among them, however, some thinkers like Ibn Arabi, Ibn Taymiya, Ibn Qayyim Jawziya, Rashid Reza, and Dr. Sadeqi Tehrani have opted for the theory of the cessation of Hell-fire punishment. Yet from among them, Dr. Sadeqi Tehrani has made a special attempt in examining this theory; while criticizing the theory of the eternality of Hell-fire punishment, he has widely studied various aspects of the theory of punishment cessation in his interpretation and theological discourses. The present writing has undertaken to organize and evaluate his viewpoint. Through this research, it is clarified that in Dr. Sadeqi Tehrani’s belief the word khulūd, not only in its lexicological meaning but also in the Qur’anic verses is interpreted as “lengthy duration” rather than “eternity” and what is implied from the Qur’anic verses by eternity is “eternity in the fire” rather than “eternity of fire”. However, this theory, having been borrowed from earlier scholars such as Ibn Taymiya, Ibn Qayyim Jawziya, Rashid Reza, et all, sounds to be unacceptable and is not only lacking in valid rational reasons, but also incompatible with the Qur’anic culture.

Critical discourse is considered as a kind of evolutionary process of discourse analysis, in which, the processes influential in the formation of discourse are noticed through mere description of lingual data. In this respect, with a descriptive-analysis approach and on the basis of Norman Fairclough Model, the present research has attempted to critically explore into the discourse concerning the story of the Prophet Moses (A.S.) on three levels of description, interpretation, and elucidation and while examining the literal and rhetorical aspect of the above-mentioned story, examine the dominant discourses and the secondary and hidden concepts of the text that are less noticed. The results suggest that, on interpretation level, emphasis has been placed more on word selection and especially on their metaphorical aspects, application of negative sentences, distancing of the introgative sentences from their main meaning, and the tone of the dialogues. What is noteworthy on the interpretation level is that the discourse of power and authority seeking dominates over the popular and freedom-seeking discourse, in contrast to which the Divine, counter-arrogance and critical discourse stands up and the Almighty God, as the narrator of the story, presents it to the addressee in a direct way or in the form of the words of the story’s main character and thus challenges the formal discourse in the form of domination and subordination. On the elucidation level, the effects of formal discourse on social institutions and their people are examined and it is clarified how the formal discourse indexes are cristalized in the story’s characters and their prospect.

Seven verses of the Holy Qur’an have stated the creation of the world in six stages. In verses 9 to 12 of Sūrat Fuṣṣilat, apparently eight stages have been specified. This has prompted the Muslim interpreters and thinkers to try to resolve the apparent contradition between the above-mentioned verses and the other seven verses and provide different viewpoints in line with this necessity. In this respect, what has caused disagreement amonng the interpretation opinions, is the interpretation of the phrase arba‘ati ayyām.The findings suggest that the thinkers’ viewpoints can be divided into six categories. In this library research, various views have been examined and critiqued and finally, the writers have presented a new viewpoint that is a different interpretation of arba‘ati ayyām in verse ten of Sūrat Fuṣṣilat.
Although they have resolved all the views of apparent contradiction and have properly answered the misconceptions about it, they have failed to pay attention to its other aspects. The importance of dealing with all the exegetical aspects of the above-mentioned verses has prompted the writers to look at it from the scholarly point of view.

Different viewpoints have been stated concerning the reason for the repetition of the stories of the Qur’an, such as expressive inimitability (i‘jāz), completion of images and scenes of a story, emphasis with the aim of more efficacy and attraction of the addressees with various polishings of the story. These viewpoints are subject to challenge. Deliberation on the subject or subjects of the stories, especially the socio-psychological atmosphere of their Revelation, the context of the verses, and the comparison of various polishings of a story shows that the main purpose for different repetition of the stories is utilizing them for the purpose of the Sūra. One of these stories is that the folk of Thamūd. This story is narratted in 21 Sūras, of which two Sūras are Medinan and the rest are Meccan. It has been revealed during different time spans concerning various conditions of the Prophet (S.A.W.), the Muslims, and the enemies of the Muslims and each has had a separate goal. Among these purposes are the following: strong warning to polytheists, hypocrites, and deniers of the divine verses and doctrines on various occasions; consolation of the Prophet and the Muslims in different situations; proposing and instructing inportant theological and escatological doctrines; and stating Divine precedents and responding to the polytheists and defending the monotheisting call to faith. The story of Thamūd and its various parts are recalled and reported in proportion to these purposes.

“Hadithocracy” or preference of exigencies of aḥādith to those of the external aspects of the Holy Qur’an’s verses is seen in some statements of transmitters of ḥadīth, which needs to be examined in theoretical concept and in terms of evidence and example. In terms of evidence, perhaps the interpretation of ẓulm (oppression) to shirk (polytheism) in Sūrat al-An‘ām can be considered as one of the clearest evidences rooted in hadithocracy. Ẓulm in verse 82 of Sūrat al-An‘ām is used as indefinite noun in the context of negation and implicates the generalization of the meaning but by relying on narrations it is implied as shirk. In this article, the reasons of both viewpoints, i.e. “generalization” and “specification” of the meaning of ẓulm is introduced and evaluated and through the discourse, the impressionability of the “specification” viewpoint from “hadithocracy” is brought up and critiqued. The research method in this inquiry is qualitative of descriptive-analytical type and is carried out with the aim of examining and proving the generalization of meaning for the term ẓulm in Sūrat al-An‘ām and contravention of its specification to a single evidence.

The present article is a translation and critique of the article “Contracts and Alliances” of the Leiden Encyclopedia of the Qur’an. The writer has addressed the two terms “contracts” and “alliances” in the Holy Qur’an and their differences, general discourses related to contract of sale, examples of contract, cancellation right, and different interpretation of the concept of “contract” and “alliance”. Contracts and alliances are among the important discourses of legal books, especially sale (bay‘), which, according to the writer’s assertion, comprises the core of all legal obligations and most contracts are based on bay‘. The writer of the article has properly elucidated the concepts of “contracts” and “alliances” and their difference. In contrast, he has excessively dealt with explanation of related terms, such as mīthaq “covenant” or such terms as walī and wālī, which are not directly related to the topic. In the present article the above-mentioned problems and some other faults have been critically reviewed.