Journal of Researches of Quran and Hadith Sciences
Year:2019 | Volume:16 | Issue:1 (41) |Papers Count:8

The term “ Ba'l” occurs five times in the Holy Qur'an. Muslim exegetes consider it as “ husband” , “ lordship” , and “ the name of a type of idol” . The fact that the term "Ba'l" simultaneously means both a husband and a type of a type of idol makes its exact meaning complicated and ambiguous. It is argued that the exegetes’ views, suggesting its meaning as a type of idol, are considerable and the same idol has been commonly worshiped among different Sami tribes. The question here is “ why did Sami peoples have such an idol? ” . In other words, “ why did husband have such a sanctuary in Sami cultures so that an idol was named on him and he became a myth? ” In the context of the semantic convergence of the two words "Ba'l" and "Hubal", it is possible to identify and recognize the additional names as "Ba'l" in the vocabulary and legacy of Sami languages, mostly are the names of Arabic cities. Moreover, the word “ Ba'l” has two meanings in the Holy Qur’ an: a proper name (a Kan'ā nī idol) and a spouse (husband) who had been in trouble with his wife for some reasons. In Arabic poetry, almost the same indication is apparent with the conquest of the general meaning of “ husband” .

Najā shī and Sheikh Ṭ ū sī are among the most well-known Shiite biographers (rijā lī s), whose rijā lī views were of great importance of consideration, especially following the establishment of the Hilla School and the improvement of Hadith validation on the basis of its chain of transmitters (sand). They referred to some attributions of narrators in their books, according to the task of Rijā l science, which is the determination of the authenticity and weakness of narrators. Nevertheless, sometimes their views about a narrator are contradictory. The present paper, based on the descriptive-analytical method, attempts to investigate “ how Asef-Mohseni, a contemporary rijā l scholar, interacts with such contradictions” . Consequently, the results show that the interaction with contradictions of Najā shī and Sheikh Ṭ ū sī does not follow a single method, but it depends on the view of a rijā lī scholar, regarding to the situation of a narrator. Additionally, it is argued that there is no solid reason to prefer Najā shī to Sheikh Ṭ ū sī on a certain case and hence the quality of interactions with narrators are different, based on the confidence that a researcher obtains.

Questions are being asked about the term “ al-'Ā lamī n” , which have not yet received reasonable responses; e. g. “ why has the root ‘ 'ilm’ (knowledge) been mentioned for the meanings of ‘ peoples of the world’ or ‘ worlds’ ? ” Although Muslim philologists have considered it as “ Arabic” and the western Qur’ anic scholars have described it as Hebrew or Syriac, they did not present a clear meaning for it. The method of this research is word analysis, based on semantic components; first, “ al-'Ā lamī n” is analyzed, based on its components in Arabic and non-Arabic lexicons as diachronic semantics. Then it goes ahead as a synchronic semantics in the Qur’ anic textures. Finally, both methods are compared to clarify if the result of a diachronic analysis on “ al-'Ā lamī n” is consistent with synchronic analysis. Findings show that the term “ al-'Ā lamī n” is originally related to Sabaic and Phoenician languages, as well as to “ ע ל ם ” in Aramaic and ܡ ܠ ܥ in Syriac. It is closed to Arabic word » غُلام «, as well. The best meaning for the word in many Qur’ anic verses is “ men” , sometimes “ the youth” (boys), and in some verses “ creatures” , which adding the place component and then making the meaning of “ world” are another explanation of the Qur’ anic verses. Also, in contrast to the opinions of some orientalists, this word has no connection with Jewish and Christian sources.

The explanation of content integrity inside the Qur’ anic sū rahs is an effective approach to reject orientalists’ misconception about the dispersion and discontinuity of the text of the holy Qur’ an. The present paper aims to study the content coherence of the verses of Sū rah al-Luqmā n and discover its basic conceptions in order to clarify the connection between the verses of this sū rah. Accordingly, based on the qualitative content analysis method and through extracting and categorizing the concepts of verses, it is argued that although seemingly various different topics are discussed in this sū rah, the main focus of all concepts is “ praising wisdom and how to achieve it” , consisting of three sub-topics: “ the Qur’ an is a book of wisdom and bringing up the wise” , “ Luqmā n and his competency of getting wisdom” , and “ the means for achieving Monotheistic wisdom” . In addition, it contains a number of concepts concerning the wisdom, including: gratefulness, Monotheism, obedience, guidance, mercifulness, salvation, in contrary to some other concepts related to amusement (lahw) such as: infidelity, Polytheism, ignorance, oppression, and deviation.

Due to the specific orthographic features of Arabic, a piece of writing in that language may be pronounced differently. This is linguistically referred to as “ reading transformation” . In the case of documented Hadiths (traditions), correct understanding of meanings depends on reading the texts as intended by the author in his original manuscript. This fact, if ignored, as happens sometimes, leads to mistaken understanding of certain religious texts. Different readings of the same text often lead to contradictory meanings and arguments on whether to accept the text or reject it. This is why it has traditionally been preferable to receive a Hadith orally rather than in a written form. This paper aims at the factors that affect different readings of written Hadiths. Indeed, it typologically introduces the factors that create misunderstanding. The study is a descriptive-analytical one, focusing on several examples of Hadiths that suffer from a lack of auditory versions. The results indicate that the most critical factors involved in reading transformation are “ lack of punctuations” , “ cutting Hadiths” , “ lack of vowel markers” , “ neglecting the stock collocations or word combinations” , and “ the derivative nature of Arabic” . Careful consideration of these factors is specifically highlighted for dealing with the words quoted from the Imams.

The Early biographers (rijā lis) usually mention “ the book of al-Rijā l” among the works of Ahmad bin Mohammad Al-Barqī ; Ibn Nadī m is of the first scholars who ascribed this book to Ahmad’ s father, Muhammad ibn Khā lid Barqī , and even ascribed Ahamd’ s another book, Al-Maḥ ā sin, to the father, as well. Afterwards, some contemporary scholars including Ā qā Buzurg Tehrani repeated this claim in another way. Among all, the theory of Shū shtarī , who proposed the last idea and attributed al-Rijā l to Ahmad’ s grandson, today is accepted and argued to be true. However, he made mistake of comprehending a phrase used by Barqī in his book and hence that’ s why Shū shtarī had such an idea; for the phrase “ Sa'd’ s book” refers to the book of “ Sa'd bin Sa'd” , not the book of “ Sa'd bin Abdullah” , as Shū shtarī claimed. The early biographers’ clear statements, referring the name of Barqī to Ahmad Barqī in Rijā l books, as well as, the general reputation of Ahmad al-Barqī , are some reasons which ascribe al-Rijā l to him.

The study of the Qur’ an, especially due to the common subjects with the content of the former scriptures, has always been of interest for Orientalists. As the way in which the Qur’ anic verses and their content composition are in contrast to the pattern of both Testaments, the most distinctive style of the Qur’ an, which is presented unconventionally at the first glance, is its incoherence and lack of apparent coherence. In this research, the historical process of the western approaches on the coherence of the Qur’ an, as well as, the characteristics, factors and backgrounds of these approaches are studied and analyzed. The chronological evolution shows a three-stage process: the complete negation of the coherence of the Qur’ an, the admission of the coherence of Meccan sū rahs and falling doubt on the existence of coherence in Madanī sū rahs, and the emphasis on the necessity of examining Madanī sū rahs with the supposition of coherence in them. In addition, the features of these approaches have undergone some changes: change of the polemical approach into the scientific one, the alteration from understanding the Qur’ an in a process of historical development to the understanding it in a canonical version, the transformation of the notion of a random combination to the hypothesis of sū rah unity.