نشریه پژوهش های قرآنی
سال سیزدهم شماره 1 (پیاپی 57، بهار 1387)

Tafsir-i Tasnīm, written by Ayatollah Jawādī Āmulī, is among the interpretations that have been written in Persian after the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Tafsir-i Tasnīm incorporates three exegetical methods of "the Quran through Quran", "the Quran through traditions", and "the Quran through intellect". The writer of this article has introduced the author and his interpretation, Tafsir-i Tasnīm, as well as the exegetical method employed in it, and displayed some examples of the author's methods in his tafsīr.

It is attempted here to explain the features of Tafsīr al-Kāshif and the exegetical methodology of Muḥammad Jawād Mughniya. First, the writer discusses Mughniya's exegetical tendency. Then, he goes on to address the features of Al-Kāshif under such titles as exegetical refinement, encountering the interpreter's opinions, innovations, writing in simple style and with fluency, comparative (muqārin) jurisprudence, comparative theology, thematic index of works, thematic index of interpretations, thematic exegesis, and exploitation of the structure of questions and answers. Furthermore, he explains the exegetical method of the interpreter of Al-Kāshif, believing that his method is a combination of three methods of tafsīr bi al-ma‘thūr (exegesis of the Quran through Quran and the Quran through traditions); rational exegesis; and scientific exegesis. In conclusion, the writer introduces the interpreter's exegetical and jurisprudential references.

Al-Bayān fī Tafsīr al-Quran written by the contemporary Shī‘a jurist, Ayatollah Sayyid Abū al-Qāsim Khū’ī (d. 1371 Sh./1992) consists of two sections: An introduction to the Quranic sciences and the interpretation of Sūrat al-Fātiḥa. Despite widespread attention to the section on Quranic sciences of this work, its exegetical section has unfortunately not received much attention and in-depth research. Whereas, it seems that in this section, valuable discussions in terms of content and methodology of the interpretation of the Quran have been presented. Thus, it would be proper to explicate its exegetical features and styles with frequent reference to and delving into different aspects of this work. In this article, the writer has tried to delineate the principles and features of Ayatollah Khū’ī's exegetical methodology, which is of individual reasoning (ijtahād) and interpretation of the Quran through Quran.

It is attempted in this article, which is dedicated to a survey of the interpretation Min Waḥy al-Qur'ān, to notice the realistic and social content of this interpretation. After a preliminary discourse on the life of the interpreter, the importance of interpretation, and its bibliographical structure and features, the writer goes on to deal with the exegetical principles of the interpreter and examine the realistic and social approach of the interpreter in eight sections. In conclusion, four points are touched upon in the critical reviewing of this interpretation.

Increase in the number of Quran interpretations in a similar style and context and with the same locution in the current century brings to mind, at the first glance, the existence of an equiponderance among them. The initiation and burnishing quality of critique and review has the art to reveal the outstanding features and deficiencies of each interpretation as compared to the other ones and guide the learned scholars and the researchers in their selection. In this vein, the present research casts a glance at the interpretation Aṭyab al-Bayān, which was written by the Shī‘a jurist and interpreter, the late Ayatollah al-Sayyid ‘Abd al-Ḥusayn Ṭayyib Iṣfahānī in 14 volumes and published and reprinted in Tehran by Kūshānpūr Islamic Culture Foundation and Islām Publications in 1352, 1366, and 1378 Sh. (1931, 1987, and 1999 CE), respectively. The earlier part of this research consists of the late interpreter's scholarly personality, exegetical tendency, writing style, as well as his exegetical and ideological viewpoints; then, the shortcomings overshadowing this writing are given an appraisal evaluation with the existing evidences in it.

This article first provides a lexical and terminological definition of ta’wīl (esoteric interpretation) and explains the status of ta’wīl in the unequivocal and the ambiguous verses; then goes on to examine the principles of ta’wīl of the Holy Quran from the viewpoint of Imam Khumaynī (ra), which include: Necessity of ta’wīl of the Quran; coinage of new terms for the general meanings; the Divine Scripture and Book as being gradational; and the possibility of acquiring ta’wīl knowledge for the non-Ma‘ṣūm [i.e., those other than the infallible Imams (A.S.)].

Getting to know the ambiguities (ambiguology) is among the significant discourses of the linguistics of translation, some of whose dimensions have proportionately and under different titles received much attention in various disciplines and which the scientists have more or less dealt with. Nevertheless, in these researches, the comparative study and simultaneous consideration of the source and the target languages and, particularly, taking the Quran as the pivot and arranging the discourses accordingly, which has a significant role in the translation of the Quran, has not found an appropriate standing. The aforementioned researches, however, have a crucial role in the completion of discourses and the movement toward their perfection, which is dealt with in the present article. It is attempted here to address various dimensions of ambiguity in the source and the target languages in a correspondent way according to the text of the Holy Quran.

Rajm (lapidation or ritual stoning) is recognized as one of the legal punishments in Islamic penal code. As some believe, besides the traditions, some of the Quranic verses also introduce rajm as a punishment for the adulterer. Several misconceptions have been raised about rajm: The first misconception concerns the allusion of the verses to rajm. The second is related to the incompatibility of rajm with Quranic verses. The third is about the incompatibility of rajm with other rulings ordained for rajm. The fourth refers to the incompatibility of rajm with the verses which have ordained flogging for the punishment of the adulterer. The fifth is on the incompatibility of rajm with the Sunna of the Prophet (S.A.W.). The sixth concerns the notion that rajm fuels violence in the society and intensifies social violence. The seventh is on the impossibility of proving the adultery. And the eighth misconception concerns the punishment of the adulterer.

Although the pre-Islamic Arab culture is always recalled as the jāhilī (pagan) culture, naturally not all traditions and socio-ethical systems of the Arabs consisted of evil and blameworthy traditions or objectionable and detestable morality; as, were it so, they were never able to survive. Undoubtedly, however, the wrong culture and indecent habits prevailed more strikingly in most of their lifestyles. We encounter many ethical ideals in the Holy Quran that existed among the Arabs in some form or another, including such virtues as generosity, bravery, forbearance, loyalty, etc.; however, characteristically, the Quran did not revive and bring back these virtues the way they existed among the Bedouin Arabs; rather, in its adoption and acceptance of these virtues, the Quran edified and reconstructed them and set their power and vitality in a new direction that it had provided. My attention in this article is more focused on description of the outstanding traits and virtues of the jāhilī Arabs which have been accepted and improved.