مجله پژوهش های تفسیر تطبیقی
پیاپی 14 (پاییز و زمستان 1400)

Although many Islamic narrations have emphasized the love of Ahl al-Bayt (prophetic household) and expressed its results and yields as well, however, the superficial look at the meaning of some of which may lead to ibāḥa (religious libertinism). One of these narrations, to which the present article is devoted, says "Ḥubbu ʿAlī b. Abī-Ṭālib Ḥasanatun lā Taḍurru Maʿahā Sayyiʾa wa bughḍuhu Sayyiʾatu lā Tanfaʿu Maʿahā Ḥasana". According to this narration, the love of ʿAlī (PBUH) is a good deed that any bad deed does not harm with it at all, and his hatred is a bad deed that any good deed does not benefit with it at all. Taking a descriptive-analytical approach, the present article seeks to deliver a valid reception from the mentioned narrative. The result of the research is that true religious love requires entirely religious obedience. The reliable understanding of the narration is that the word sayyiʾa (evil) in it is about to mean “small sins”. Thus, the love of ʿAlī (PBUH) only causes the forgiveness of these monor ones, God Willing. Of course, it seems that there is another valid interpretation, according to which, ʿAlī’s friendship is a good deed that no sin can make ineffective, because every kind of complete faith is achieved through the love of Ahl al-Bayt (PBUT).

As the worse of aftermaths of thaqīfa turmoil, the seeds of discord and disagreement were sown in all Islamic thoughts and teachings, even tawḥīd (monotheism), nubuwwa (prophecy), and maʿād (resurrection). There were serious differences, especially in the case of Imamate, which could guarantee the survival of Islam. It can be said that the controversy has escalated so much that both Sunni and Shi’ite scholars have never written about anything as much as the Imamate to reject each other. In such a way, the verses Wilaya (guardianship) have always been the most challenging issue between both Islamic schools throughout their history, which seems full of vicissitudes. (Q. 2:207) is one of the most famed Qur’anic verses that the Shi’ite exegetes, as well as some Sunni ones, emphasize that its occasion of the revelation concerns Imam ʿAlī b. Abī-Ṭālib (PBUH) and his self-devotion for Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in layla al-mabīt) the night of asleep). Although some research has been organized about (Q. 2:207) so far, the present study, while respecting all, has studied and analyzed the occasion of the revelation of the mentioned verse only from the viewpoints of the narrations remained of the two major Islamic schools. While answering the doubts, the present study has concluded that the narrations of the revelation of the verse about ʿAlī (PBUH) in layla al-mabīt have a considerable frequency and have a definite indication of his absolute virtue and immediate succession. Hence, there is no place for doubt and suspicion concerning its historical implications.

The Muslim interpretive heritage, which is left from the predecessors, includes enduring views that can greatly influence the Qur’anic exegetes in later periods. As a matter of fact, it seems that some dominant exegetical discourses have emerged within the traditional interpretive viewpoints, as far as the subsequent readings have been somehow formed by the suggested ones. However, achieving a better understanding and reading of the Qur’anic verses depends on examining, analyzing, and criticizing the traditional interpretive products, using the interpretive principles and rules. The present article, which has been organized with a descriptive-analytical research method, has re-read the Qur’anic usage of the word hidāya (guidance), which has occurred twice in (Q. 14:21). After examining and criticizing the exegetical viewpoints, it attempts to reach in an innovative way to give a new interpretive insight concerning the implication of the mentioned word in the verse in question, applying some criteria such as context, symmetry of confrontation, proportion of question and answer, semantic degradation and exaltation, and avoiding the affectation from the realm of divine word. Finally, answering in advance the most significant problems and ambiguities in front of the preferred viewpoint of the present article concerning the mentioned word is another part of it

There are some literal and interpretive differences concerning Qur’anic exegetes about the typology of the preposition "mā", and therefore concerning the phrase "mā undhira", which has occurred in (Q. 36:6) as well. Some have considered it as nāfīa (negative), while others have tended to count it as mawṣūla (connective), or even in some cases maṣdarīyya (infinitive). Moreover, it seems that there are two different viewpoints among the first group of the mentioned Qur’anic exegetes, who have considered "mā" as a negative preposition, concerning the total implication of the phrase "mā undhira". Hence, the question brings to ones, mind is that which of the proposed viewpoints can truly lead to a correct interpretation of the verse? Besides, the second relevant question concerns the identity of the referent of the Qur’anic word "nadhīr". Is it a reference to people other than the prophets, as well as their successors? Do the usual warners, who are not essentially innocent ones, play a considerable role in completing the divine ultimatum over the people? According to the surveyings have been made by the authors of the present article, it seems that no research has been prepared yet with the suggested attitude. Anyhow, through the present article, which is organized by descriptive-analytical method, it was found that, in verse in question, "mā" is negative, and the phrase "mā undhira" means "they were not warned". Furthermore, the Qur’anic usages of the word "nadhīr" in verse under discussion, namely (Q. 36:6), or in other verses of the Qur’an, do not refer to innocent people at all. It was also found that, in the period of absence of the prophets and the infallible men, the divine ultimatum is done only by sending revelation from God and through its original and comprehensive message. Therefore, if the undistorted message of the prophets does not reach the people of other times correctly, the divine ultimatum can not be considered a completed and convincing one.

Both early and later Qur’anic exegetes have always held diverse and challenging viewpoints concerning the concept of bidʿa (heresy), as well as its essence. Thus, they have paved the way for many instrumental uses for the different Islamic theological sects and schools on the subject of bidʿa. However, what are the viewpoints of the Qur’anic exegetes concerning the essence and components of bidʿa? What caused some considerable diversities or conflicts within their religious attitudes? These are the main questions that the present article is about to pursue. Accordingly, the authors attempt to analyze and review the conceptual components of bidʿa, as well as the reasons of its implications, diversity, considering the viewpoints of both Shi’ite and Sunni Qur’anic exegetes on its literal and idiomatic meanings. The achievements of this study show that the Qur’anic exegetes have considered bidʿa as an equal concept to some other relevant ones such as “emerging order”, “secular proposition”, “legislation”, “occurrence” and “opposition”, which should all be seen in their own specific context to be meaningful and intelligible. The diversity of their viewpoints seems to be rooted in their contradictory divisions, as well as their confusion between the concept of bidʿa and some other different ones, such as invention, innovation, tradition, and legislation. Moreover, one should consider great importance for the doctrinal and religious differences between Qur’anic exegetes, which has caused the formation and growth of Salafi ideas within the Islamic societies, and the tragic sphere of accusation each other for heresy among the different religious schools and denominations as well. Javeri, M.J; Ayazi, S.M.A. (2022) Qur’anic Exegetes on Recognizing the Essence and Components of bidʿa (heresy).

Ibn-ʿĀdil Dimashqī is a nineth-century Interpreter of the Qur’an and an expert scholar in various scientific fields, including Arabic literature, Islamic jurisprudence, principles of Islamic jurisprudence, as well as Islamic Hadith and narrations. Benefiting the viewpoints of dozens of the Qur’anic interpreters and other Islamic scholars, in some cases, he has criticized or refuted them in his own interpretation, namely al-Lubāb fī ʿUlūm al-Kitāb, which should be considered as a large encyclopedia of various Islamic sciences. One of the most famous Qur’anic interpreters who has been criticized by Ibn-ʿĀdil is Zamakhsharī, the early sixth-century author of a prominent Qur’anic interpretation, namely al-Kashshāf. Despite acknowledging the importance and prominence of the work and referring it widely and frequently, Ibn-ʿĀdil has emerged notable controversies over it in terms of theological thoughts based on his Ash’arite presuppositions. One can consider in this regard, for example, their contradictory interpretations concerning some divine attributes that have been mentioned by the Qur’an, such as deceive, anger, mock, arrogance, as well as other Islamic conceptions including intercession and human free will. Using a speculative approach and desk research method, as well as introducing both interpretative works, the present article suggests some examples of Ibn-ʿĀdil’s theological and literary critiques of Zamakhsharī and analyzes the effects of his preferred religious beliefs on his perceptions of the Qur’anic verses, especially in the field of their conflict points.

here are three viewpoints regarding the occasion of (Q. 16:126)’s revelation, as well as identifying its direct audiences. According to the first viewpoint, which seems the most popular one within Muslim scholars, the verse was revealed during the Uḥud battlefield, and its only addressee is the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) himself. The narration explains that the Prophet wanted to take revenge on the Quraysh pagans, mutilating bodies of thirty or seventy of their slains, for the bloodlust of Ḥamza and other Muslim martyrs who were tragically mutilated by them. Thus, according to the first viewpoint, the mentioned versed was revealed and forbade Muhammad from doing so. of course, it is referred to two narrations from Ibn ʿAbbās and Abu Ḥurayra to prove it. Nonetheless, these narrationes are weak ones in terms of isnād and unreliable in terms of content as well. Moreover, they seem incompatible with the well-known personality of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), as well as his religious teachings. However, there is another viewpoint that refers to a narration from Ubayy b. Kaʿb, according to which, the verse in question was related to the words of anṣār and was revealed in the occasion of the conquest of Mecca. Although this second narration seems correct in terms of isnad, its content should be considered vague and false. Besides, the literal meaning of the verse gives no such an indication. The present article, which suggest the third viewpoint in this regard, attempts to indicate that this verse was revealed before the Prophet’s migration to Medina, and its revelation was not affected by any special occasion, including the above mentioned suggested ones. On the basis of the textual appearances of the verse, it seems that (Q. 16:126) is stating a general ruling, like many other Qur’anic verses, without limiting its audience to any specific individual.

eceived: 2021/5/19  |   Accepted: 2021/8/28One of the most important requirements of research in the field of interpretation is to study and analyze the contents of Qur’anic verses based on various interpretive principles and rules, including context, text structure, lexical implications, as well as interpretive narrations. The present article seeks re-reading the viewpoints of the Qur’anic exegetes in explaining (Q. 3:42), which reads “And when the angels said: O Mary! Surely Allah has chosen you, and has purified you, and has chosen you over women of the world”. Therefore, considering the repetition of the determining word Iṣṭifāʾ in this verse, its other Qur’anic applications have been conceptualized, and the different viewpoints of the Qur’anic exegetes about explaining the concept of Iṣṭifāʾ and ascertaining its various examples have been studied. In this regard, according to the various uses of the word Iṣṭifāʾ within different Qur’anic contexts, it has been suggested that some of the Qur’anic exegetes have specified that, due to its literal absoluteness, the first occurence of the word in this verse refers to the divine choice and the infallible personality of St. Mary (PBUH). However, the second one, due to being bound to the preposition ʿalā, indicates the superiority of St. Maryam (PBUH) over other human beings, as well as her specific characteristics and privileges. Davoud, E (2021) The Concepts of Iṣṭifāʾ (choose) and ʿĀlamīn (people-of-the-world) in (Q. 3:42); A study and analysis of the Qur’anic Exegete’s viewpoints. 

Changing tradition is mentioned clearly in aya 11 of sura Ra'd. Its special importance is because of its relation to man's destiny based on the individual willing in the path of happiness or misery.In this paper, the perspective of shia and sunnite interpreters explained as to the changing tradition based on aya 11 of sura Ra'd. Then the inherence between good deeds and increasing of blessing and also between commission of sins and privation of blessings proved through descriptive -analytical method. Hence Allama Tabatabai's theory critisied in this respect. Additionally it is mentioned that the changing meant in the Holy Quran is inner and real changing not apparant and external one.It is suitable to mention that all of the divine traditions, specially the tradition of changing that has main role in the destiny of the human beings, it is regarded as one of the significant factors in education of men.In this research, it is critisized the second perspective discriptively and analytically, and reached to theses conclusions The comprehensive view to the Quranic verses demonstrate the oposite of Allamah Tabatabai.secondly, changing tradition means inner and real changings of man that may been reached by purification of soul.

It is of special importance to study the validity of hadiths that are in the position of expressing examples of Quranic verses that are sometimes accompanied by changes or distortions. To introduce the instances of verse 101 of Surah Al-Anbiya, which speaks of those who have been promised goodness and will be kept away from the fire, Hadiths have been quoted in Shiite and Sunni sources. Sunni sources have narrated a narration that Ali (AS) mentioned the third caliph or other people whose number in some sources reaches ten (Asharah Mobash’sharah). Shiite sources have quoted hadiths from the Holy Prophet (PBUH) according to which he has introduced Ali (AS) and his Shiites as instances of this verse. Sunni narrations are severely weak from the point of view of documentation and from the textual point of view they are in conflict with authentic narrations and definite history. The present study has been carried out with the aim of helping to correctly explain the instances of the verse, after enumerating the above narrations from library sources and with the tools of document critique and critical analysis of the text of narrations narrated in the sources of Shiite and Sunni sources.

Some commentators consider "expression" in meaning of the power of speech, some have suggested it as the expression of everything, the names of objects and creatures, and others have introduced it as the power of reason, and some have meant it as Holy Qur'an. Given the differences in the meaning of expression and lack of independent research in this regard, this article tries to analyze the correct meaning of "expression" in this verse. the opinion of those who consider "expression" in the meaning of speech seems correct. Because first meaning of expression that comes to mind in the context of the verses of first al-Rahman is speech. There is evidence in earlier literary, historical and narrative texts that expression is used in the meaning of speech. Also in the fourth verse of Ibrahim, explanation is attributed to language. On the other hand, Almighty God calls Qur'an an expression for the people, and since the nature of Qur'an at the time of revelation was nothing but the nature of speech and language, it becomes clear that the meaning of expression is speaking. On the other hand, the other meanings mentioned by commentators for expression are somehow related to language and speech.

“Precedence of honor " is a good tiding from God that has a completely different structure from the other good news and is mentioned only in the end verse of Surah Yunus. The commentators have expressed many different views and in some cases different from each other; Votes such as good reward, good record, status, velayah, intercession and…. They have never reached a single statement about this phrase, while most of them have confused the literal meaning with its interpretation. Now the main question is which one is closer to the God's purpose? The present research, with documentary, historical method and with the help of descriptive-analytical method, has categorized the opinions of commentators. Then, while analyzing and evaluating the views, it has explained the correct opinions with the help of documents in two separate sections of context and the narrative section. And in the end, by stating the rational and narrative reasons, it has expressed the chosen view. The most important finding is that among the opinions expressed, the two words “velayah and intercession are fully consistent with the context of the verses and hadiths. Both are attached to each other and have no meaning without each other.