Journal of Researches of Quran and Hadith Sciences
Year:2020 | Volume:16 | Issue:4 (44) |Papers Count:8

The verse 275 of Surah al-Baqara, in contrast to the previous verses speaking of charity, points to usury and describes the usurers as those who have been struck (khabṭ ) by Satan’ s impact (mass: touch). The present article attempts to clarify this description through the exact meaning of the word “ khabṭ ” . Most exegetes believe that this word is the same as mass, dementia and epilepsy, and hence the description used in this verse shows madness of usurers. They have doubts only about the real or virtual creation of insanity by Satan. Regarding the literal meaning of the words “ qawama” , “ khabṭ ” and “ mass” and the use of these words in other verses and narratives, it is proved that the purpose of the verse of striking the usurers with the Satan’ s impact is not dementia of usurers, but is to depict their rising that is in opposite direction to the nature of human (faṭ rah) and will change their mind and cause to their downward move.

Among the verses that have long been discussed among commentators is the verse 37 of Surah al-Alahzab, which refers to the story of Zayd’ s separation from Zaynab bint Jahsh and then the Prophet’ s (PBUH) marriage to her. Inaccurate approaches of some commentators, influenced by the fake narratives, made the Prophet’ s (PBUH) love for Zaynab the main cause of Zayd and Zaynab’ s divorce. Such misconceptions provide the basis for the enemies of Islam to make a romance out of it, to contaminate the Holy Prophet (PBUH) with it, and to question the infidelity and purity of the prophets. This study, with an analytical and critical approach, examines the documentary content of the narratives and evaluates the views of Shi’ a and Sunni commentators. Findings show that because of opposition to the verses, weakness of the narrative, anxiety in the narrative context, existence of Israeli narrations, opposition to infallibility, etc., the approach of some interpreters is wrong. On the other hand, the indications available in the verse, the cause of the verse, the historical debates, and the correct traditions make it clear that the Prophet’ s (PBUH) marriage to Zaynab has been at the command of God and with the aim of breaking an ignorant tradition regarding the prohibition of marriage with son-in-law’ s divorced wife. Therefore, the Qur’ anic phrase “ and hide in your soul what God has shown” means that the Prophet (PBUH) concealed the decree of marrying Zaynab, revealed to him through revelation.

There is a mutual connection between interpretation of the Holy Qur’ an and theological beliefs: in one side, the latter is proved by the Qur’ anic verses, and on the other, as ṣ ā rifah indications, such beliefs lead to uncover some verses and pass from the true meanings to virtual meanings. Analyzing the scope of the influence of the bases of theology in interpretation reveals disadvantages. In his theological works, Sayed Murtaḍ ā (d. 436 AH) has explained some verses. Expressing the extent of the Prophet’ s infallibility and answer to the questions, he interpreted the first verses of Surah al-‘ Abas. He believed that since sulk is a despicable deed which is away of the infallibility of the prophets, the moody person in the first verses of the Surah al-‘ Abas must be someone other than the Prophet (PBUH). He did not, of course, ascribe the punitive words in these verses to the Prophet (PBUH). Many Shiite commentators have followed Sayed’ s view. Analysis and critique of Sayed’ s words will reveal that there have been made some mistakes in adapting the theological beliefs to ‘ Abas verses, including: disregard for the meaning and the form of “ 'Abas” , ignorance of the mazī dun fī h bā b (yazzakkā ), ignorance of the indications in the verses, ignorance of the narrations reporting the cause of the descent, and mistake in the premises of the theological reasoning. These mistakes come from the dominance of theological bases on the rules and principles of the knowledge of interpretation. Focus on them paves the way for the preservation of the limits and rules of each area of interpretation and theology and reduces the possible mistakes of the theological interpretation of the Qur’ anic verses.

Interacting with hadiths, authenticating and weakening of narrators, and describing some hadith terms such as ṣ aḥ ī ḥ , ḥ asan, shā dh, mursal, muwqū f, etc. Hakim Nayshā bū rī differs from others: He verifies some hadiths that are not authentic according to other traditionists, and even according to his own bases in his other books such as ma'rifat ‘ Ulū m al-Hadith. Accordingly, he was accused of being mutasā hil (lenient in hadith). This paper, based on descriptive-analytical method, attempts to firstly reveal his opinions on hadiths of Ṣ aḥ ī ḥ , Ḥ asan, Ḍ a'ī f, Mawqū f, Mursal, Shā dh, Zī yā dā t al-Thiqah, citing from a heretic narrator, report of sanad and text of narrations, Jarḥ and Ta'dī l. Secondly, it compares Hakim’ s views and method to other traditionists. Thirdly, it shows how much Hakim, in his al-Mustadrak, adhered to his bases. It is intended to reveal his bases and views, as well as his own adherence to them. As such, the basic features of Hakim’ s hadith school would be detected. Based on the reviews and comparisons, it can be said that it is not acceptable to ascribe tasā hul to Hakim’ s method in verifying hadiths of Mustadrak, justified by some evidences including his old age, memory weakness, lack of time to edit his book. Also, it is notable that to use his hadiths in Mustadrak, one must review both sanad and text.

The term “ Ḥ adī th” ) حدیث ( is of the commonly used vocabulary of the Holy Qur’ an, and the term “ Aḥ ā dī th” ) احادیث ( also occurs in several verses and, of course, only in the form of two expressions of “ Jaʻ alnā hum Aḥ ā dī th” جعلناهم احادیث( (and “ Taʼ wī l al-Aḥ ā dī th” ) تاویل الاحادیث (. Based on the literal analytical descriptive method, the present paper examined the two words “ Ḥ adī th” and “ Aḥ ā dī th” in Arabian culture and the Holy Qur’ an and concluded that the word “ Ḥ adī th” does not mean absolute speech, but also it involves a speech containing an event or incident, found in all Qur’ anic usages. The term “ Aḥ ā dī th” is also put originally as the analogical plural of the term “ Uḥ dū thah” احدوثه (, which means an event or incident that has been famous among people. In the Holy Qur’ an, the expression “ Jaʻ alnā hum Aḥ ā dī th” ) جعلناهم احادیث (, in negative context, refers to the torment of some nations and their transformation into well-known stories and tales, and the expression “ Taʼ wī l al-Aḥ ā dī th” ) تاااویاال الاحااادیااث ( on contrary to the popular interpretation translating it into dreams, is intended for the end and outcome of events.

Holliday and Hassan (1976), two linguists of text filed, believed that the “ Repetition” phenomenon, as a lexical factor, besides collocation and grammatical elements (reference, ellipsis, substitution, and conjunction) makes the text totally integrated. The existence of the same units and patterns in Surah al-Hū d is so evident that makes it necessary to investigate the role of repetition in its cohesion based on new patterns of text analysis, as well as to identify the degree of this proposition relation with key concepts of the Surah. To this goal, based on the descriptive-analytical method, the paper examined the data and used statistical tables in order to show that among the triple components of repetition (the same word, synonym and hyponymy), the same word has the most important role in the Surah cohesion. Secondly, it was also showed that the two independent semantic fields (disbelief and belief) of this Surah, which have different and opposite directions, organize a same axis, i. e. “ Allah” . In other words, each of these two fields is a part of a wider whole, giving the reader a unified understanding of the total verses.

In 2006 Gabriel Sawma compiled the book “ The Qur'an, Misinterpreted, Mistranslated, and Misread: The Aramaic Language of the Qur'an” . In his book, he claims that the language of the Qur’ an is Aramaic Syriac, trying to prove the adoption of the Qur’ an from Jewish-Christian sources. By reviewing the Surahs of the Qur’ an, he mentions many vocabulary as witnesses and then analyzes them. He begins by examining the first chapter of the Qur’ an with the term Fā tiḥ ah, believing that the shadow of the adaptation has even fallen behind the name of the first chapter of the Qur’ an. He cites evidences from the Testaments and the Hebrew and Syriac language, in order to prove that it is not an Arabic word but goes back to the Aramaic Syriac language. In this paper, while presenting Gabriel Sawma’ s views, they would be reviewed and criticized from the aspect of comparative historical linguistics in three Hebrew, Arabic and Syriac languages. The existence of the Qur’ anic word in Ignorance Age’ s poems and the structural and semantic similarities between the word in Arabic, Hebrew, and Syriac Languages prove the fact that it has its root in Sami language, contrary to Sawma’ s claims.