نشریه قرآن، فقه و حقوق اسلامی
پیاپی 8 (بهار و تابستان 1397)

The verse 228 of the Surah Al-Baqarah points to the issue of revocable divorce and the right of the husband to revoke her wife. It is the most important evidence for the right of the husband to return to his wife in revocable divorce. The aforementioned verse stipulates the right of husband to revoke with the intention to correct his behavior. In addition, the verses such as 229 and 231 of the same surah imply that the husband is assigned with the duty to have a good conduct (Imsākun bi maʻrūf wa tasriḥun bi iḥsān) with her wife after the revocable divorce. However, the famous jurisprudents have not mentioned such a condition. Therefore, even if it is ascertained that the husband has the intention to hurt his wife, he has the right to revoke. The present article studies the theme of the aforementioned verses from a jurisprudential perspective and reviews different views about them. In the view of the author, it is understood from these verses that the husband has the right to revoke her wife in revocable divorce provided that he has the intention to correct his behavior. Otherwise, the husband has no right to revoke and the evidences raised for waiving this matter may be rejected.

The verse 33 of the Surah Al-Isra` is both historically and jurisprudentially well-known. It is historically well-known because Mu'āwiyyah resorting to this verse and under the pretext of being the avenger of the blood of assassinated caliph, Uthmān, refused to give oath of allegiance to Imam Ali (AS). It is jurisprudentially well-known because various jurisprudential rules such as “the principle of unlawfulness of killing any human being regardless of his/her religion or other features”, “lawfulness of retaliation (Qisas)”, and “retaliation standard” can be deduced from it. However, one of the most important phrases of this verse is undoubtedly “And if anyone is slain wrongfully” that its generalization to other cases “the one”, for example, “who has committed a crime for which a fixed punishment has been prescribed by God (Ḥadd) and deserves death that has been killed by a person other than Imam or ruler”, “a murderer who has been killed by a person other than the avenger of the blood or who has permission on his/her behalf” , “one who has been killed and his/her murdered claims that he killed her to legally defend himself/herself, without being able to prove it …” needs reflection. This article discusses the cause of revelation of this verse and the principle of unlawfulness of murder. Meanwhile, it explains the phrase “And if anyone is slain wrongfully” and investigates whether it is applicable to dubious cases or not.

The image of conflicting Quranic verses has been raised from a long time ago. The conflicting verses on marriage with the People of the Book is among these images. Accordingly, the verse 5 of the Surah Al-Ma`idah that implies the lawfulness of marriage of the Muslim with the People of the Book conflicts with those verses that stresses on unlawfulness of marriage with the atheists and pagans. This conflict origins from the image that the People of the Book are atheist and pagan as well as ignoring the relationship among the verses as to the implication of the words and the type of relation among them. The classification of these verses indicates that there is no conflict among them and that the image of conflict results from ignoring many factors including the meaning of the People of the Book, and application of atheist and pagan to them, analytic but not systematic view of the Quran, ignoring the denotations of words and the context of the verses. Consideration of these terms in understanding the verses leaves no space for conflict and shows that the relationship among the related verse is of an absolute general and specific kind and the customary combination of them shows lawfulness of marriage with the People of the Book.

Kharijites were an important and influential deviated sect in Islamic culture and history. The historical evidences show that after the separation and isolation of Kharijites from the community of Muslims and the people they became distrust of the transmitters of narrations and they kept away from the traditional heritage of the common Muslim. They enjoyed a unique rationality and in an anarchist and unsociable manner tried to understand the verses of the Quran through legal reasoning (ijtihad). Their adherence to the Quran and disconformity to the Sunnah resulted in their relying on the generalities of the verses of the Quran and ignoring the limitations and determinations referred to in the traditions. The application of this method in jurisprudence has led sometimes to the freedom of operation and sometimes to the hardship and violence. This study aims to introduce and analyze ten instances of Kharijites' jurisprudential views in order to unveil their adherence to the Quran and at the same time their disconformity to the Sunnah in their system of thought.

The ta'wils (interpretations) of Nu'man Ibn Hayyūn, the judge, of jurisprudential verses reflects his doctrinal view that is completely affected by the teachings of Esma'ili school of thought. Accordingly, he classifies the religious rules into seven bases under the title of da'ā`im including “guardianship”, “purity”, “ritual prayer”, “fasting”, “alms”, “holy war”, and “Hajj pilgrimage”. He relates each of these da'ā`im to one of the verses of the Holy Quran, and ascribes each to one of the messengers of God or Imams and holds that each part of these rules has hidden aspects that merely symbolize the knowledge of Imam. In the exegesis of the jurisprudential verses and rules, he believes in principles such as conformity of the manifest and hidden aspects, similarity between mathal wa mamthūl, knowledge, confession, faith, and the traditions. However, on the one hand he is not adherent to them in his judgments, and on the other hand most of his judgments that results in the statement of manifest and latent meaning or symbol and allusion, based on the difference between tafsir (exegesis) and ta'wil (interpretation), are exegesis but not interpretation. In addition, despite the need for presenting a proper and logical context and reason for deviating from manifest meaning, he has not presented a convincing evidence. It can be concluded that the intervention of his doctrinal view in the interpretation of legal rules has led to extravagant exegesis and taking away from the main purpose of legislation of and therefore weakening of that rule.

The present text seeks to evaluate the Quran to the Quran interpretation method of Al-Mīzān. Most of The Quran researchers' approach to evaluate the aforementioned method, like the holders of this view, is mostly abstract-theological one. Accordingly, the Quran researchers accept or reject the aforementioned method only by reviewing the reasons of the holders of this view regardless of the objective application and the result of practical commitment to it. This study maintains that a number of Āyāt ul-Ahkām can be regarded as one of the important criteria for field evaluation of this method, since considering the clear-cut Shi'a reading of these verses, one can observe the objective function of them. The author believes that the existence of some traditions or other evidences like jurisprudential reconciliation within a number of Āyāt ul- Ahkām is the source of formation of a specific mentality about a holy verse among Shi'a scholars without consideration of which the holy verse has no clear relation with the Shi'a view. The present study investigates this claim within four verses.