پژوهش نامه نقد آرای تفسیری
سال سوم شماره 2 (پیاپی 6، پاییز و زمستان 1401)

Al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī explains Quranic concepts in many places in his works. One of these concepts is the heart. He considers the heart as one of the organs of the body, and sometimes he calls it an organ and sometimes it is called a part of body, he places it next to other organs, he talks about its interactions with other organs, and he explains different human behaviors based on the different states of their heart. Sometimes, for such a heart, organs such as eyes, ears, blood vessels, knots, and lust are considered, he explains how Satan finds his way into the heart through his entry into the heart vessels, and he gives other attributes to the heart which are, at least from the dominant view of the commentators of the Qur'an, descriptions of a nature other than the organ of heart. The sum of these descriptions has made it difficult to understand al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī's mental picture of the Quranic concept of heart. In this study, by reviewing and categorizing his scattered explanations, we should reread his understanding of this concept from the heart. The hypothesis of this study is that Al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī attributed immaterial effects such as light, knowledge, wisdom, emotional states and the like to the human physical heart, and explained all these attributes based on his medical knowledge about the human heart as an Iranian Ḥakīm.

The era of the Companions is considered one of the most important periods in the history of interpretation of the Qurʾān. During this period, some companions of the Prophet interpreted the verses based on the teachings they had received from him. One of these companions is Abū Hurayra. He was al-Qāṣṣ (story teller), and he had a close relationship with the Umayyad Caliphate. These two characteristics of his have influenced the way he interprets the Qurʾān. It is necessary to explain his way of confronting the verses of the Qurʾān by studying all opinions and interpretive traditions of him and analyzing them. It seems that Abū Hurayra's interpretative narratives can be divided into three major categories: ontological, anthropological, and Qurʾānic interpretations. Why a personality like Abū Hurayra, in the younger generation of the Companions and in the middle of the 1st century AH, among the many themes of the Qurʾān, involved himself in paying attention to these four types of verses, is a matter that must be analyzed separately.

Muhammad ʿIzza Darwaza is one of the contemporary Sunni commentators and the author of al-Tafsir al-Hadith; A course of complete interpretation of the Holy Qurʾān, which was created based on the tanzīlī method and in accordance with the order of revelation of the verses from the author's point of view, and contains different and noteworthy interpretations. A significant part of these different interpretation opinions have been represented in the explanation and commentary of the Qurʾānic stories. He has criticized the Qurʾānic stories in a different way from other commentators of the meaning, as well as many commentators' statements about the Qurʾānic stories. His method is based on a different way of using historical and hadith sources. In this study, while examining Darwaza's historical and Hadith sources, we are going to criticize them and explore his method of using these sources. The hypothesis of this study is that the main reason for distinguishing Darwaza's method from other commentators is his extensive use of historical sources related to the pre-Islamic period as well as Jewish religious sources, and his relatively less use of authentic sources among Muslims. Also, when referring to Hadith sources, most of the book Al-Tāj al-Jamʿi Lil ʾUsūl fī Aḥādīth al-Rasūl written by Manṣūr ʿAlī Nāṣif is used as the basis for the validation of the ḥadiths, only the Ṣiḥāh Khamsa hadiths mentioned in this book are considered as authentic traditions, and when quoting historical reports, they often only rely on interpretive sources. Finally, his most important criterion in criticizing the historical narratives and reports mentioned in various interpretations was to refer to the Qurʾān itself using innovative methods.

Among the movements of thought in the Islamic world that have presented an interpretation of the Qurʾān and their legacy of interpretation has remained there are those accused of exaggeration (al-Ghuluww). This term refers to those who are accused of exaggeration in beliefs and refusing religious rituals in the old Shiʿa religious sources. They had various activities and among other things they were active in various fields of Islamic knowledge in their era, such as interpretation of Qurʾān, and they had an effective presence in this field. A book of interpretation has been attributed to them, and many exegerical narrations of Shīʿa Imāms have been narrated by them. In addition, they are the founder of a type of interpretation called Tafsīr Bāṭin. Their commentary books are not left behind. However, many interpretive narrations have been reported from them in narrative sources. The special type of Tafsīr Bāṭin that was written only by them, the multitude of exegetical narratives of those accused of exaggeration in Shiʿa exegetical sources, their beliefs and special view of religion which is also reflected in their exegetical narrations make it necessary to know their foundations, sources and method of exegesis. The topic of the upcoming study is extracting the interpretive sources of them. In order to realize this goal, we will first explain the place of understanding in interpretation by using the topics of Translation Studies and the principles of interpretation, then we examine the interpretive legacy of those accused of exaggeration in order to know what are the different levels of understanding in their interpretation.

The word al-Ḥikma is one of more frequently used words in the Qurʾān, which is repeated 20 times in 19 verses, as well as expressions with the theme of teaching al-Ḥikma, imparting al-Ḥikma, reciting al-Ḥikma, calling to monotheism with al-Ḥikma, the descent of al-Ḥikma, imparting al-Ḥikma, and al-Ḥikma al-Bāligha. Various opinions can be seen in the efforts of Muslim scholars to explain the meaning of al-Ḥikma. Among these scholars are the commentators of the Qurʾān. In this study, we want to see to what extent the opinions of Muslim commentators have influenced the interpretation of the meaning of al-Ḥikma from the applications of the word in various Islamic sciences. We will try to reread the meaning of wisdom in the Qurʾān, the older uses of the word in traditions, the understanding of lexicographers of the word's ancient uses in Arabic, and finally, the effect of all these on interpretation of the Qurʾān. It is necessary to defend this hypothesis that gradually the applications of al-Ḥikma in Islamic Sciences have overcome the old meaning of the word, and the interpretation of the commentators has also changed.

One of the important rules of worship that has an inseparable connection with prayer is the rule of ablution. The verse containing the quality of performing ablution, which is called the ablution verse, is found in Sura Māʾida (verse 6); A sura that was revealed at the end of the life of the Prophet Muḥammad in Medina. We know that prayer was legalized in Mecca. Also, according to some evidence, the Prophet always prayed with ablution from the beginning of his Prophethood. Therefore, it is reasonable to ask why the ruling on ablution for prayer and the quality of performing it was revealed late at the end of the prophethood and in Sūra al-Māʾida. Commentators have paid less attention to this issue, and have rarely asked why. In the present study, the scattered comments of some commentators are examined and criticized. The hypothesis of this study is that the legislation of ablution was carried out through a non-Qurʾānic revelation at the beginning of the Prophet's mission in Mecca; But since some Muslims during the period of Medina did not pay attention to the invalidities of ablution or to performing ablution or performing it correctly, especially for the morning prayer, and sometimes they attended the prayer of the Prophet without ablution or with an incomplete ablution, and also, in order to emphasizing the necessity of paying attention to ablution and two other purifications (al-Ghusl and al-Tayammum), the verse of ablution was placed in the last years of the Prophetic period, and in a chapter before the last chapter of the Qurʾān.

Makārem Shīrāzi widely used Ṭabāṭabāʾī's interpretive opinions in his work Tafsīr Nemūne, and in significant cases, he has examined his opinions with a critical point of view. In this study, which was carried out with library tools and descriptive-analytical method, firstly, the types of criticism of Makārem Shīrāzī in relation to Al-Mizan of Ṭabāṭabāʾī were extracted, and then the evaluation and diagnosis of their accuracy and correctness will done. The question of the present study is: in what cases and with what reasons did Makārem Shīrāzī criticize Ṭabāṭabāʾī's opinions and how much is the validity of his criticism. In this study, after expressing Makārem's critics on Ṭabāṭabāʾī's opinions, it is tried to measure the validity of these criticisms by using rational and traditional reasons, the opinions of famous commentators and other evidences. It is necessary to defend this hypothesis that, except in the few cases where critics' objections to Ṭabāṭabāʾī's opinions are valid, most of the criticisms do not have the necessary validity and have many weaknesses.

One of the effective solutions in removing the apparent ambiguity of the verses is the Quranic strategy of referring al-Mutashābihāt to al-Muḥkamāt. By considering this strategy in various verses of the Qurʾān and especially al-Mutashābihāt in the lives of the Prophets, we can find verses that do not have a clear and obvious meaning. Among these verses, the Qurʾānic story of Yūsuf can be cited as an example, where there are ambiguities in some of its Mutashābih verses. Diverse and possibly contradictory interpretations which in some cases contradicting the infallibility (ʿIṣma) of the Prophets indicate the existence of these ambiguities. Part of these ambiguities can be seen in the story of Zulaykhā's relationship with Yūsuf. It is from thiese cases that it is said Wa laqad Hammat Bihi Wa Hamma Biha and the question arises as to what Yūsuf worked hard on; Also, when Yūsuf is quoted as saying about his desire for Egyptian women that Illā taṣrif ʿānnī kaydahūnna āṣbbu ilayhin there is a question as to what Yūsuf's desire was exactly. In the same way, other expressions in other parts of the story are questionable and commentators have given different answers to them based on their theological bases. In this study, relying on the mentioned strategy, we will examine and criticize and evaluate different interpretation opinions. For this purpose, based on the strategy of referring al-Mutashābihāt to al-Muḥkamāt and based on the acceptance of the separation of the Quranic Muḥkamāt in the life of the Prophets into three categories (general, special and more special), we will try to achieve a more realistic understanding and closer to the meaning of the Qurʾān.

Jawāhir al-Tafsīr: Anwār min Bayān al-Tanzīl is one of the exegetical works of the Ibāḍiyya - the only surviving sect of al-Khawārij - authored by the contemporary scholar Aḥmad b. al-Ḥamad al-Khalīlī. The present study is done with the aim of introducing this interpretation, and it is intended to review the most important features of the work and its author's opinions, and to recognize his interpretation method and principles. We want to defend that the author's use of the method of interpreting the Qurʾān with the Qurʾān itself is its most obvious feature; The author pays attention to this method based on his own principles, and in interpreting the Qurʾān with the Qurʾān, he also relies on special techniques such as paying attention to the appropriateness of the verses, the context, and the thematic interpretation. Also, in order to show that the author looks at the interpretation from the point of view of a religious reformer, he believes in the necessity of reinterpreting the Qurʾān for religious reformation, and apart from all this, he criticizes the interpretive theories of many of Muslim sects other than Ibāḍīyya and offers statements in support of the theological ideas of his Ibādī co-religionists; statements in which the different Ibādī understandings of the Quranic verses can be recognized.

One of the most important topics in Islamic theology in recent centuries is the relationship between science and religion. This discussion entered the Islamic world while Christian theologians in the West had not been able to give satisfactory answers to the mysterious questions raised in this field long ago. In recent centuries, Muslim theologians each adopted different approaches about it based on different foundations. This debate was extended to other fields of Islamic knowledge and especially affected the interpretations of the Holy Qurʾān. Among the contemporary Muslim commentators, Makarem Shirazi has also paid attention to this issue in his various books, including Tafsīr Nemūne, and has expressed his interpretive foundations in confronting the modern empirical sciences, and in the interpretation of verses related to this topic he has tried to combine between the concepts of verses and scientific propositions. In this study, an attempt will be made to describe and analyze his foundations in confronting new experimental sciences. It is aimed to defend this hypothesis that, firstly, due to the difference in the basics of the language of science and the language of revelation, matching them together as Makaram has done is questionable; Secondly, considering the impact of metaphysical issues on science, it is possible to uncover the reality of this fundamental conflict; A conflict that common sense and logic are incapable of solving.

The authors of Tafsir al-Manar are of the opinion that taking verses based on their apparent meaning will be correct only if that meaning is not intellectually impossible. Therefore, when dealing with the verses containing the miracles of the prophets and especially the cases related to the resurrection of the dead, which generally include extraordinary works, they interpret the verses in such a way that it can be said that nothing but denying the occurrence of miracles follows. In this study, while criticizing his opinions and by rejecting the claim that the people of Jesus did not request to see a miracle, as well as adding other evidences, we intend to show that based on the Holy Qurʾān, the miracles of Jesus could not have been just a challenge and must have actually happened. Also, in verse 259 of Sūra al-Baqara, which is likely to be related to Prophet ʿUzayr, we will criticize the interpretation of the two words Labth and ʿIẓām in the Shiʿa interpretations, and we will criticize the opinions reflected in this regard in al-Manar and also the opinions reflected in some Shiʿa interpretations. These commentators have considered the way of the dead to come back to life in verse 259 of Sura al-Baqara sometimes similar to what happened to the companions of the cave, and sometimes it means a real death for them. In this study, we are going to defend the opinion that based on the Qurʾān, both opinions have the same probability of occurrence, and therefore the debate will be fruitless; Because in any case, God's purpose in showing how to revive the dead to the mentioned person has been fulfilled in the revival of his vehicle.

Tasnīm written by Javādī Āmolī is considered one of the ijtihādī interpretations of the Qurʾān. Javādī Amolī in this work, following his teacher Sayyid Muḥammad Ḥusayn Ṭabāṭabāyī, he often used the method of Tafsīr al-Qurʾān bil-Qurʾān. Al-Fakhr al-Rāzī's interpretation, Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb is also one of the famous interpretations of the Qurʾān among Sunnī Muslims. These two interpretations are based on two different intellectual and theological systems. However, in different places of Tasnīm, we see different confrontations between Javādī Āmolī and al-Fakhr al-Rāzī's opinions. Among these cases is al-Fakhr al-Rāzī's opinion in the interpretation of Āya al-Wilāya, which is extensively criticized in Tasnīm. In this study, we want to methodologically examine Tasnīm's criticisms about al-Fakhr al-Rāzī's interpretation of Aya al-Wilāya. It is aimed to defend the hypothesis that Javādi Āmolī's main methods of criticizing al-Fakhr al-Rāzī's interpretive opinions are based on the rules of understanding the text.