نشریه پژوهش های قرآنی
سال بیست و هشتم شماره 4 (پیاپی 109، زمستان 1402)

In the verses of inheritance distribution, in many combinations of heirs, the sum of the fractional numbers expressed for their share of inheritance is less than or greater than one; that is, if the same amount stated in the Qur'an is allocated to each of the heirs, a portion of the inheritance remains undivided or is not enough to be divided among them. Throughout history, Shias and Sunnis, with the help of their approved traditions, have determined what to do with the remaining or additional amount of inheritance. The general drawback of these methods is that none of them are by themselves extracted from the Qur'an; whereas, in the statement of the verses of inheritance, there is a certainty that it is expected that the share of all heirs will be extracted from the Qur'an itself. This article, considering the Qur'an as a precise and coherent text, and with the method of thematic interpretation of the Qur'an through Qur'an, presents a new procedure for dividing the heritage, which is extracted from the Qur'an without using any other source. The article seeks to prove that the deductions stated for each person's inheritance share in the Qur'an are not the amount of that person's share of the inheritance, but the ratio of that person's share to the share of other heirs; in other words, the stated method for dividing the inheritance in the Qur'an is proportional sharing.

The main source of the well-known rule "consorting in an honorable manner" is the Qur’anic command, "Wa ‘āshirūhunna bi al-ma‘rūf (Consort with them in an honorable manner)". With the lexical analysis of the term ma’rūf we find that the meaning of the mentioned command is consorting in a conventional way, not good socializing in the sense of socializing with purity and sincerity. What confirms this view is the contrast established in the Qur'an between honorable manner and harmful (ḍirārī) manner. The authors of jurisprudence rulings have given two main definitions for ḍirār. Some have translated it with the same meaning as harm, and others have translated it as harm and restrain (ḍīq) and constriction (ḥaraj). The result of this inference is that in married life, the creation of an executive guarantee and the legal responsibility of abandoning a “consorting in an honorable manner” is conditional on an unconventional consorting or ḍirārī consorting. As a result, contrary to the definition of honorable consorting provided by jurists and considering it to mean kindness and intimacy in the family, it does not have a guarantee in its application; unless abandoning the good company leads to marital ill-conduct or harmful behavior. This research, with the aim of providing a new definition of the ma‘rūf rule, after collecting the sources in a library manner, has analyzed the data conceptually with a descriptive method.

This article examines the grammar of narration in a selection of Qur’an’s punishment-oriented stories. The general structure of these stories is based on the fact that God sends a Prophet to guide a nation or a group; the deniers oppose the call of the Prophet; the Prophet endures many hardships and sufferings; the opponents keep on being stubborn and opposing; the Prophet asks God for help; God answers the Prophet's prayers and punishes that nation and group in different ways. The question is whether it is possible to provide a general model of the analysis of the narrative deep structures of these stories? The main events of these stories are based on the three main structures of monotheism, denial, and justice, which are performed by the three practitioners: God, the Prophet, and the people. According to the semiotic square of Greimas, monotheism (life) comes against disbelief (non-life): from disbelief come oppression and injustice, and subsequently, oppression turns into non-oppression or justice. In the light of the revelation context, the inter-narrative relationship between the story of the Prophets of the past times and the biography of the Prophet (S.A.W.) can also be seen. These stories have the criterion for measuring the actions of the addressees. Therefore, these stories leave mere history and, in terms of discourse, enter the continuous flow of time.

Image processing is one of the arts of creating and conveying meaning, and metaphor is one of its strongest forms. Although semantic impression of metaphor and its image processing often requires a difficult course of action, this method has been used abundantly in the Qur'an. To answer the reason for this matter, the purpose of the revelation of the Qur'an, that is, humanization in all dimensions of its existence should be taken into consideration. In this research, metaphors are analyzed and then the goals of image processing are deduced. Accordingly, this article is a fundamental, theoretical and heuristic research, and the research method is descriptive-analytical. In the meantime, not understanding the meanings and purposes of these images hinders achievement of the goal of the Qur'an’s guidance. It should be noted that, until now, the image processing of metaphors in the Qur’an has not been examined with such an approach. This image processing does not directly target actions among the three dimensions of human beings, but takes insights and tendencies into consideration. These targets can be listed in the creation, modification and completion of these two dimensions.

According to Muslims, there is an equal relationship between the revealed Qur'an and the present Qur'an, and everything that was revealed as the Qur'an is in the present Qur'an; however, according to some traditions, a small group of companions have claimed to remember phrases as the Qur'an that are not in the Muṣḥaf (i.e. the Qur'an)! The most famous of these phrases is the alleged verse of rajm (stoning), “When an old man or a woman commits adultery, stone them for sure”). Such a claim has been attributed to seven of the Companions, especially ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭāb. In this article, with library tools and a descriptive-analytical-critical method, the possibility of this phrase as being Qur'anic was examined from a literary and historical point of view, and the conclusion was made that: 1. This claim would not have been made by more than one person from among the Companions. 2. The phrase rajm cannot be from the Qur'an due to various problems, such as the multiplicity of takāmud (hapax legomenon), lack of eloquence, posteriority, and conflict with other verses, and it is probably an adaptation of verse 38 of Sūrat al-Mā’ida. 3. Mistaking this phrase for a verse does not contradict the miracle and inimitability of the Qur'an.

The issue of praying to God to change the preordainment (qaḍā) and the issue of being content with God's preordainment and predestination may from a certain perspective be considered incompatible and conflicting; because praying to God is either to change the existing conditions and remove difficulties or to reach desired and missing conditions, and this apparently involves dissatisfaction with the existing situation. For this reason, two rival views have been formed among the people of knowledge. The first point of view, which belongs to "Ibn ‘Arabī", maintains that absolute submission to divine predestinations and not complaining about calamities before God is a form of rudeness in the manners of servitude, and it contains the slave's secret conflict with God's lordship. In contrast, another rival theory has been proposed which considers refraining from asking for specific needs and avoiding insisting on one's desires as a requirement of pure submission to divine preordainment and considers it more compatible with the ethics of servitude. This article, in a descriptive-analytical way, with the aim of introducing a more comprehensive theory, has identified and expressed the main components and axes of these two theories separately and evaluated each of them in the scales of the Qur'anic verses. One of the findings of the discussion is that paying attention to the levels and types of prayer can reconcile and resolve the conflict between these two theories in some aspects. Another outcome of the discussion is that by comparative analysis of these two theories, it tried to prove with several reasons the superiority of Ibn Arabi's view from the perspective of the ethics of servitude.

In recent years, some heterodox writers have presented critical questions and new misconceptions about some Qur'anic verses with incorrect assumptions. Analyzing these misconception and answering some of them, which are raised in the verses ﴾Indeed it is on a standing road * and there is indeed a sign in that for the faithful﴿ (Al-Ḥijr: 76-77), also provides the possibility of correct understanding of the said verses in the realm of interpretation. However, this article, by adopting an analytical-critical approach, while separating the dimensions of the established misconceptions into two general parts, has presented the answers of each part under the headings: "the translation of the verses and not its text as being the basis", "carelessness in the reference of the object (muta‘allaq) of the pronoun hā in innahā" , "the generalization of lesson-learners and the object of lesson-learning", "discovering the works and remains of the folk of Lot", "human knowledge as not being limited to empirical knowledge", "the lack of contemporaneity of lesson-learning with the observation of punishments", "internal contradiction of the claims made", "attention to unity of Divine actions", "that Divine punishment is not a personal settlement", "lack of sufficient reasons to separate the folk of Lot", "the diversity and variety of punishments" and "the reason for the punishment of the good people of the society."