پژوهش نامه قرآن و حدیث
پیاپی 29 (پاییز و زمستان 1400)

An issue entitled “mobhamāt al-Quran” has been raised in the books of Quranic sciences. In dealing with this issue, researchers have used some words which inadvertently make the Quran and its words seem to be vague. In this study, following an examination of the meaning of the word “mobham” in philology, linguistics, Arabic syntax and comparing them with the meaning of “mobham” in Quranic sciences, it was found out that, in some cases, the meaning of “mobham” in Quranic sciences matches its definition in syntax. A study of the stream of scholars' definitions of “mobham” in Quranic sciences reveals that the phrase “the unclear terms of the Quran” has been used in them. Also, “the interpretation of mobhamāt al-Quran” does not refer to the interpretation of the ambiguous words of the Quran, butthe nouns not mentioned in the Quran have been called “mobhamāt”, and mentioning them has been termed “the interpretation of mobhamāt al-Quran”. It has also been revealed that dealing with “mobhamāt al-Quran” is not in contradiction with the explanatory and illustrative nature of the Quran, and ambiguity in this discipline does not mean that the words of the Quran are vague. Therefore, it is suggested that instead of using the term “mobhamāt” in Persian, the phrase “the nouns not clearly mentioned in the Quran” be used to avoid misunderstanding the intent of this discipline and confusion between lexical, morphological and linguistic definitions of the word “mobham” and its definition in Quranic sciences, as is seen in some of the later books.

“Baghiy” is a word common to three areas, including religion, jurisprudence and law. This word, despite its great importance in all three areas, does not have a suitable definition in any of these areas, and there are no specific instances of it in them. In the definitions provided in jurisprudence and law, most words need to be assigned specific instances and delimited, so that any likely abuse can be prevented. In the present research, in order to extract the meaning of “baghiy”, in addition to paying attention to the jurisprudential status of this word, Quranic verses and the narrations of the Infallibles (p. b. u. t.) have been considered. From the perspective of Quranic verses, narrations or their interpretations, baghiy has certain effects and bāghi has its own instances. In some uses of the word “baghiy”, the effects of baghiy have been replaced with its meaning. In contrast to jurisprudence and law, which consider the occurrence of baghiy to be possible only against a just Imam and an Islamic state, Quranic verses and narrations have considered the occurrence of baghiy to be possible against anyone, including Imams (a.s.), caliphs and even ordinary people. The real and basic meaning of baghiy, which arises from what it has been made for, is “demanding something along with transgression”, which is consistent with all its relative uses in the verses of the holy Quran and the hadiths of the Infallibles (a.s.).

Aiming to investigate the relationship between the two izāiyyah surahs “al-Munāfiqun and al-Nasr” using semantic analysis and narrational analysis approach, the present study compares the effective dimensions and components in the semantic and thematic analyses of these two surahs. Although both surahs begin with the contextual-conditional “izā”, it seems that, due to the difference in the form and content of the verses of these two surahs, there is no significant relationship between them. However, the commonalities and thematic meaningful relationship between these two surahs can be discovered by comparing the most important dimensions of semantic and thematic analyses, referring to the context similarity of the verses of these two surahs and finally by relying on the narrations from the Infallibles (a.s.) as the important components of relationship evaluation. Accordingly, the common axis in the thematic-semantic and narrational relationship between these two surahs is the certainty of the fulfillment of the divine promise in final assistance and victory and the demonstration of divine honor for the believers (in Surah al-Nasr) and the decline of hypocrites and opponents of religion (in Surah al-Munāfiqun), which are manifested in accepting welāyah

The fundamentals of the authority of khabar-e wāhid, as one of the pillars of inference and ijtihad in Shiite jurisprudence, is common grounds between the science of hadith and the science of the principles of Islamic jurisprudence. One of the important proofs of the validity of khabar-e wāhid, about which, unlike other evidence, there is considerably common agreement, is that reason signifies its authority. Since this issue has been considered from the three hadithi, Akhbāri and Usuli perspectives, the establishment of a common discourse among them appears to be difficult. The theory of the proponents of the rational validity of khabar-e wāhid, in both its meanings, that is, the reading of Sheikh Tusi denoting the symmetry of reason and the reading of Mohaghegh Helli recognizing the expediency of rationality as a document of rational validity, was faced with constraints and openings after them, especially among the later scholars, and the later scholars and contemporaries have considered acting upon khabar-e wāhid binding in the form of three theories: the theory of ilm ijmāli about the issuance of khabar-e wāhid and emphasis on acting according to it depending on the authority of ilm ijmāli, the eternality theory of Fazil Tuni denoting the inevitability of relying on khabar-e wahid for the sake of preserving religious obligations and rulings and Sheikh Mohammad Taghi Isfahāni’s theory of reliance on conjectures considering the obstruction of the gate of knowledge and the impossibility of obtaining a final verdict, on the one hand, and the necessity of performing religious obligations, on the other. After reviewing all these three theories, the view of martyrs Sayyid Mohammad Bāqer Sadr and Sayyid Mohammad Kazem Yazdi, i.e. in the absence of rational prohibition, khabar-e wāhid has rational validity, was proved to be well-founded.

One of the most important words in the field of Quranic sciences is the word “sultān”. Most scholars believe that the words “ayah, bayyinah, borh an and sultān” have been used instead of the word “mujizah” in the Quran, but so far no one has offered specific examples for these words, and no one can give a clear answer if they are asked, ‘What kind of mujizah is sultān?’. In the works of interpretation, this word has often been interpreted to mean authority and reason. The importance of this issue is doubled as there is no consensus on the originality, lexical origin and meaning of this word. One of the disciplines that can be used to deal with this issue is semantics. In this science, the semantic changes of words over time and within texts are examined based on syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations. In this article, the word “sultān” is examined in three different semantic areas: “political government, authority and proof, and miracle”, and finally it is determined that the main / dictionary meaning of this word is “a dominant obstacle to others, which dissuades them from their purpose”. The relative meanings that were obtained for sultān based on the main meaning in the semantic system of the Quran are “the splitting of the sea by Prophet Moses (p.b.u.h.), having a valid excuse or a valid document, the power and ability that one has over their property and the power and authority that the avenger of blood has to kill the killer.

In this study, “moral good” and “moral evil” refer to those moral concepts that suggest a moral value (not moral obligation) and include the six concepts “good and bad”, “right and wrong” and “decent and indecent”. They are usually used in the predicate of “moral statements and propositions”. Given the lack of methodological research in the field of ethics and philosophy of ethics in the Quran, this study, using the descriptive-analytical method, determined how the existing moral good and evil or moral, value-based concepts in the verses of the Quran in the form of “moral propositions” can be inferred. The results indicate that “moral good” manifests itself in the form of such positive concepts as “good”, “right” and “decent”, and “moral evil” manifests itself with negative concepts such as “bad”, “wrong” and “indecent”. In the Quran, “moral good” indicating the concept of “good” is represented through verbs of praise (ne’ma’) and words such as “khair”, “hosn”, “berr”, “sāleh”, “mohsen” and “tayyab”, “moral good” showing the concept of “right” can be deduced through the verses indicating the denial of error and sin and reward and words such as “sādeq”, and the “decent” manifestation of “moral good” can be attained from the good position that some people have before God. “Moral evil” indicating the concept of “bad” is revealed by verbs of denunciation (be’sa’ and sā’a) and words such as sharr, su’, fāheshah, mofsed, khabith and najes, “moral evil” revealing the concept of “wrong” is expressed through concepts representing error, sin, retribution and punishment or representing “rejection”, “denial” and “falsification” of something, and “moral evil” expressing the concept of “indecent” is recognizable by the position that some people have before God.

Some of the circumstances of revelation mentioned about Surah al-Tahrim have documentation problems, and some others, which are documentationally acceptable, cannot elucidate the main purport of the surah and the meaning of the secret that the Messenger of God (p.b.u.h.) shared with his wife. In this article, first, the circumstances of the revelation of the verses have been examined, and their weakness and unreliability have been proved. A comparison of the context of Surah al-Tahrim and that of the verses of Surah al-Ahzab about the Battle of the Trench and the wives of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) indicates they have similar contexts. It is likely that the revelation of Surah al-Tahrim has followed that of Surah al-Ahzab, and they have single circumstances of revelation. According to the context of Surah al-Tahrim, it is required that the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) first share that secret with his family, but the jealousy of some of his wives was aroused, which then affected the entire Islamic community. A historical study of the year of the revelation of Surah al-Ahzab suggests that the marriage of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) to Zaynab bint Jahsh took place under these conditions. This incident is completely compatible with the context of Surah al-Tahrim, the rational criteria and the definite date.

In the present age, typology is one of the research tools, especially in studies related to humanities, which is considered a framework and guideline for the researcher, and according to its rules, phenomena are categorized based on a logical pattern of categorization for better understanding and cognition. One of the areas of study in the field of Quranic research in which typing matters is the doubts and denials about the Quran. Despite the effective efforts made in the field of Quranic doubt research, the presentation of a comprehensive classification of doubts has been marginalized due to the focus of most authors on responding to doubts. Given that the scientific classification of doubts is one of the tools of doubt research and is a prerequisite for a methodical response to doubts, it is necessary to address it before offering any kind of defense and denial. Examining some of the classifications presented in the works of Quranic doubt research and considering the pattern of doubts of challengers against the Quran, especially Orientalists and Christians missionaries, this descriptive-analytical study presents a scheme including six general types of doubts: source doubts, revelation doubts, the doubts related to citing the Quran, the doubts related to understanding the Quran, text doubts and the doubts related to the carriers of revelation, and offers examples for each subcategory considering the rules of classification. The theological basis in this article is defending the Quran as a revelatory and infallible book, the scientific basis is the element of similarity in doubts and the classification is based on a pyramidal pattern. The strong point of this scheme is that it collects scattered doubts by placing them in homogeneous main and sub-categories, which in itself will be a great help in repelling the illusion of the multiplicity of doubts.

One of the most important aspects of the Prophetic conduct is how the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) behaved in the war and how he interacted with various enemies. On the other hand, making use of modern sciences can help to expand the interpretation of an event. One of the modern scientific concepts is various models of “narratology”. Grimas is one of the theorists in this field, who considers the structure of a narrative close to the grammatical structure of language. He believes stories have a general structure regardless of their content differences and introduces a general model with six factors to explain this structure. Using the descriptive-analytical method, this research seeks to compare the different parts of this model with the Quranic narration of the Battle of Badr in detail and provide a more systematic understanding of the events of the Battle of Badr. The findings of this study reveal that the Quran has put forward important propositions in all six parts of Grimas' action model. The pursuit of Quranic propositions shows that the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) himself is the main actor in the Battle of Badr, and the actions of other people revolve around him.

The history of ideas is one of the new methods with a historical approach that examines a specific concept and idea, identifies the changes in its components and shows the broadness and restriction it has had and the changes it has undergone throughout the history. The concept of Satan as a historical idea is intertwined with semantics and etymology and has experienced historical changes. The way the lexical substitutes of this concept have been used in the Bible, its various functions of deception, intelligence and experimentation and its dual concrete and abstract quality is a representation of the interaction between believers in this text and other heterogeneous cultures and how it has been transformed. Meanwhile, the holy Quran has provided a special meaning of the concept of Satan in connection with a special discourse system through coherent narration. Using the descriptive and general text analysis methods and focusing on the condition of the practical application of the substitutes of the word Satan in the diachronic narration of the Tanakh and the holy Quran, this study reviews the way this concept has changed.

Wasā’il al-Shi’ah by Sheikh Hurr Amili is one of the late Shiite hadith collections that has been written using a jurisprudential approach. The author of this book, which is one of the most important sources of Shiite jurisprudence, has selected reliable and credible sources from among various narration sources considering certain criteria. One of these sources is Ali ibn Ja'far's “Masā’il”, which is considered as one of the reliable sources of Shiite narrations. The early, late and contemporary scholars have different approaches towards this book. While the earlier ones have validated it by referring to the correct ways of this book in their writings, the later ones have got access to only a copy of this book which is said not to be valid enough. The approach of contemporaries to this book has been different. Some of them have accepted it, but some others have questioned the validity and authenticity of the current version. An enquiry into the views of the scholars of different periods on the validity of the current version of this book indicates that this book does not conform to the criteria of reliable books even from the viewpoint of Sheikh Hurr Amili, and this shows the author of Wasā’il al-Shi’ah has been indulgent in choosing this hadith source.

In Tafsir al-Manār, some Quranic verses have been interpreted allegorically. In Abduh's belief, natural events have been used as allegories to express transcendent truths, and every word and action attributed to someone in an unconventional way is allegorical. According to Abduh, the phenomena of the universe basically come into existence through ordinary causes, and anything indicating the occurrence of a phenomenon contrary to this system is principally false. He believes the scope of miracle is very limited and subject to the explicit text of the Quran. Therefore, if Abduh does not find the appearance of the verse compatible with his rational analysis, he interprets it esoterically or allegorically, such as the transfiguration of the offenders of the Israelites, the mass death and coming to life of thousands, the miracle of the death and resurrection of one of the prophets and the sacrifice of four birds by Prophet Ibrahim (a.s.). This article uses the library method and aims to explore the allegorical dimensions of the miracles of the prophets (p.b.u.t) and their consequences. To this end, first, the principles of al-Manār interpreters in allegorical interpretation and some of its examples are mentioned. Then the allegorical dimensions of the prophets’ (p.b.u.t) miracles in this interpretation are examined. Finally, it is concluded that allegorical interpretation of some Quranic verses by referring to their analogues is permissible, provided that it does not contradict the truthfulness of the Quranic messages and does not lead to the negation of the external reality of the incident. Although Abduh, in his allegorical interpretation, has not specifically pointed out that those miracles did not take place, this theory laid the groundwork for Rashid Reza to consider some of the stories of the Quran unreal and for Khalafallah to consider them myth.

The famous narration of Abi Khadijeh is among the most important evidence on welāyat-e-faqih and judgment, and many rulings in the field of judgement are based on this narration. The legitimacy of these rulings depends on the documentation authenticity of this narration and the attention the Islamic jurists have paid to it. The document of this narration includes a character with the kunyah Abu al-Jahm, which, according to rijāl sources, corresponds to only two characters, Thawir ibn Abu Fākhetah and Bokair ibn A'yan. The problem with this theory is the time interval between the narrator from Abu al-Jahm, i.e., Hussein ibn Sa’eed al-Ahwāzi, and Abu al-Jahm himself as Hussein ibn Sa’eed, according to various sources, was one of the companions of Imams Kāzem, Rezā, Javād and Hādi (a.s.) while Thawir ibn Abu Fākhetah and Bokair ibn A'yan lived until the time of Imam Sadiq (a.s.). To solve this problem, some scholars have suggested the possible eliminated intermediaries between Hussein ibn Sa’eed and Abu al-Jahm. Some others do not consider Abu al-Jahm to be exclusive to these two individuals, but they have not reached a definite conclusion about the referent of Abu al-Jahm. Using the documents of narrations in narration books, this study has tried to compensate for the shortcomings in rijāl books to some extent and has proved that although this kunyah in that hadith category corresponds only to these two characters, it has been used for another character in the books of narrations and documents of some narrations, as well, and that person is Harun ibn al-Jahm.