فصلنامه سراج منیر
پیاپی 4 (پاییز 1390)

Although agnate's authority has no place in Twelver's traditions and jurisprudence, many of the commentators of Nahj al-Balāgha, based on the wise saying, إِذَا بَلَغَ النِّسَاءُ نَصَّ الْحَقَائقِ فَالْعَصَبَةُ أَوْلَى have discussed the priority of agnates, in the act of marriage, over the maternal authority. While opposing traditions in this regard are more than enumeration limit and the brevity of this tradition causes the imposition of their own opinion on Nahj al-Balāgha. Moreover, this tradition has an explicit, clear and correct meaning to which the commentators and translators have been oblivious; this unnoticed meanings is pertinent to the terms haqā’iq ('حقائق') and asaba ('agnates'). haqā’iq is the plural of haqiqa ('حقیقه') and refers to a person who needs to be protected and 'agnate's refers to those who provide this protection.

The philosophical principle of 'unity', applying this principle to God as one of its referents, and the first creature emanated from God, are among the issues that have a special status in Islamic philosophy and numerous philosophers have concerned themselves, widely and deeply, with these issues. An important question here is whether this principle and other issues relevant to it, particularly the way the universe is emanated from God, have any origin in the Quran and narrations or not. This paper investigates and assesses the views of some Islamic hakims (sages) and mystics (‘ārifs), particularly the views of the contemporary hakim, Mirzā Mehdi Modarres Āshtiani (RIP) about a number of Quranic verses which are concerned with this issue as well as the ideas of the author of the paper.

All Divine Attributes, regarding their referent, are the very essence of God and the same as other names, but concerning their meanings, they are different from the essence of God and His other names. Thus, each name has two significations: one signifies the essence; the other signifies a specific attribute which differentiates it from other names. Thus, God, the Unified Truth, has multiple attributes due to His manifold qualities. For instance, because He has created the creatures, He is the “Creator” and for His all-embracing knowledge, He is the “Knowing”; since He manages the universe, He is the “Director” and for His affection and mercy, He is “the Compassionate, the Merciful”. Then, from among the ninety-nine or according to another estimate, a thousand and one attributes ascribed to Him, we want to know which one is the Supreme Name of God and based on what criterion it is considered supreme. Some have deemed “Allah” the Supreme Name, have set out reasons for their choice and have attributed certain functions and characteristics to it. Some others believe that “in the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful” is the Supreme Name and still another group vote for yā hayyu yā qayoum (“the Eternal Live”) and dhul-Jalāl wal ikrām (“the Lord of Majesty and Generosity”). Some refer us to the Holy Qur’an for the indicators of the Supreme Name and mention a few names; prayers of invocation have also been mentioned to contain a number of functions for the Supreme Name.

One of the fundamental issues in exegetic interpretation of the Quran by the Quran is that this method of interpretation is based upon Quranic verses and the exegetist has to interpret the verses based on other verses; therefore, some exegetists, in their act of interpreting the Quran, claim independence from anything other than the Quran itself and advocate "Quran- adequacy" or "text-adequacy". With such a view about interpretation, some have attacked all fabricated narrations and see this large collection of narrations as invalid, and thus set aside sunna (normative custom of the Prophet) in the field of interpretation.The exegetists who interpret the Quran by the Quran have different attitudes toward the value of sunna and the narrations of the immaculate Imams (PBUT) in the field of interpretation. Although they have a similar interpretive methodology, their approach to the value of sound narrations can affect their interaction with narrations; examination of the interpretive works of contemporary exegetists shows this clearly.The present paper introduces the exegetic interpretation of the Quran by the Quran, examines the place of narrations in this method of interpretation and the approach of exegetists toward this method. In the next part, the paper tries to find out whether the exegetists have relied on narrations in their interpretations or not. The answer to this question is that most of the exegetists who use this method of interpretation have made use of narrations, but with differing approaches: some have employed narrations only to lend credence to their interpretation and others have ignored them altogether.

Secondary meanings of a sentence, whether declarative or imperative, refer to the intentions and purposes of producing that sentence and they are different from its literal meaning. For instance, the holy verse "My Lord, surely I have brought it forth a female" (رَبِّ إِنِّي وَضَعْتُهَا أُنثَى) which is an utterance by the mother of Jesus Christ (PBUH), refers, on the surface, to the female sex of the infant, whereas the ultimate purpose of this utterance is to express sorrow at the birth of this female infant. The present paper examines the verses of the holy chapter "The Cow" from this perspective.

The fairness of all the Companions of the God's Apostle (PBUH) is a theory put forth and advocated strongly by Sunni scholars; according to this theory, all the Companions are just and are committed to the requirements of justice. Since this theory has serious consequences for Islamic sciences, particularly for the validity of the words of the Companions, the present paper examines this theory based on the performance of the Companions themselves. In brief, the belief of the Sunni scholars that all the Companions are just (especially 'Companion' in the sense that all traditionists agree upon) is not correct. Because, beside other reasons provided in their own place, the performance of a substantial number of the Companions and many of their deeds which are against justice, do not confirm this theory in general; that is, they do not confirm the justice of all the Companions. Moreover, traditionist's definition of a 'Companion' as a Muslim who had had association with the Holy Messenger (PBUH) or had seen the Prophet, even for a moment, and had died while believing in Islam, is not linguistically acceptable and has no legitimate proof either; rather, 'Companion' is a term introduced in periods after Islam. Therefore, we cannot pass a judicial decree on the basis of this term. The result of the discussion is that the Companions of the Prophet, just like other people, can be either just or unjust. Hence, regarding the acceptance or rejection of narrators of Hadīth, they are no different from other people.

Translation which means interpretation from one language into another is of enormous significance and gains even more importance when the text to be translated is a divine book. Conveying the meanings of the Holy Quran while preserving the elegance of the word of God seems impossible in translation; in effect, translation of the Holy Quran reproduces merely a small proportion of the profound meanings of this Book and hence does not enjoy the divine aspect of the original Book – translation is the word of the translator, and the Quran is the word of God; however, since translation of the Quran is an indisputable requirement for propagating Islam, religious authorities, in spite of various conflicts, have deemed it necessary and since long ago, there have been various translations of the Quran; since these translations are the productions of human beings, however, they are not devoid of error.One of the contemporary scholarly translations of the Quran is done by Rezaei Esfahani, together with a group of other professors; many errors of the previous translations have disappeared in this translation; however, since it is a task done by human beings, again there are some errors and reminding them will contribute to a more correct interpretation of the word of God. The errors of this translation are sometimes lexical, related to the phonetics, syntax and morphology of Arabic language; other errors are due to additional explanations given in parentheses which may mislead the reader; some others are related to unusual readings of the Quran based on which this translation is done; and there are still some other errors pertinent to the style of writing, removal of which improves the quality of the translation.