KETAB-E-QAYYEM
Year:2019 | Volume:8 | Issue:19 |Papers Count:15

Abstract Usuliun are the most influential thinkers who embark on defining Quran – the important word in history of Islamic culture. They have been one of the first scholars that attempt to do so, embark on changing the constituents and definition of it several times and propose a new introduction for it. In such a way that in fifth and sixth century, they hold priority for the constituents of Naghl and Kitabat (telling and writing) than other constituents. In spite of rival constituents such as “ miracle” , the agreement of Usuliun on this choice was not accidental but has origin in scientific paradigm and cultural-social conditions ruling on their time. The most important duty of this research is to propose the suitable answers for justifying the use of constituents of Naghl and Kitabat in fifth and sixth Usuliunʼ s definitions by means of the method of History of Ideas. Investigations show that the currency of peripheral debates on Ghiraˈ at and Tavatur, the attention to the historical role of Naghl and Kitabat in protection of Quran and the numerous critics about constituents of miracle in this time are the most reasons of Usuliunʼ s choosing the constituents of Naghl and Kitabatin defining Quran in fifth and sixth century.

Islamic jurists have considered ruling verses in understanding decrees of God in Quran from long ago to now but often because of decreeing the juridical paradigm on this group of verses, their theological dimensions about Imamate-researching rarely is considered while in addition to juridical dimensions, they have valuable implications to Imamat. The background of this type of theological version is researchable in juridical-theological saying (Hadiths) of the relatives of prophet (Ahl al-Bayt) about rulings’ verses. Due to lack of attention to Imamat-researching in area of rulings’ verses while this issue is interdisciplinary in fundamental arenas of Hadith, jurisprudence, theology and commentary. In addition, the relatives of prophet (Ahl al-Baytʼ s) use this type of understanding in area of theological debates of Imamat, we try in this research to investigate and make clear the role of rulings’ verses in reasoning of the Ahl al-Bayt about Imamat, by descriptive and analytic method in the Imamiah hadithi and juridical inheritances. As a result the most important theological results of Ahl al-Bayt in invoking to rulings’ verses are: Being offspring of Ahl al-Bayt for Holy Prophet; Guardianship(Vilayat); Imamat; Headship (Ziaˈ mat)of Ahl al-Bayt; Divine installing and determining of Imam; The element of Nass and Visayat; Ismat, the role of the element of Inheritance about Imamat and the process of Imamat in generation of Imam Hussein (pbuh).

Muslim scholars have two-acceptance and rejection approach about the entered words of Quran and this issue has always employed researcher’ s minds. However, it seems that their opinions about some words do not have theoretical basis. In early centuries that they do not access to firm linguistic source to ascertain the language of Quranic words rightly, they would relate those words to Arabic language and somehow would incline to Arabic-supposing the entered words and Quranic proper nouns. Moreover, they make an effort to find the Arabic origin for these words; even theses scholars would relate pre-Islamic proper nouns and names – which employ in more primitive languages than Arabia-to Arabia. In this investigation we try to ascertain the non-Arabic being of these words and their main origin by showing documents from linguistic sources. In this regard we choose some of these proper nouns and show the classic exegetistʼ s incline to Arabic-supposing some of the entered words of Quran by considering the view of classic exegetics and modern researchers and their analyzes.

Doubtless, the best guidance to know the legal status of non-Muslims who are not a part of the People of the Book in Islamic society is the verses of Holy Quran. In present research we have tried to clarify the exact legal status of this group of non-Muslims in Islamic society through the precise analysis of the Quran verses related to this issue-like the verses about Jihad, forgiveness (Safh) and tolerance. Precise research about these verses shows that the Almighty God in Holy Quran has distinguished between two groups. Those non-Muslims who are not a part of the People of the Book and have not accepted the Islamic rule and are somehow in war with it or are obstacles on the Way of God. Moreover, those who are not in war with Muslims and have no enmity with them; for this second group Islam has considered the right of life and living under the Islamic rule according to certain rights and duties. Therefore it seems that to suppose all the non-Muslims who are not People of the Book as Harbi (hostile infidel), and decree to one of the alternatives, killing them or submitting them to Islam, does not conform to the commands of Holy Quran.

Irab is the most prominent feature of Arabic language and play the most important role in Semantic process of text, but grammarian’ s radical attention to this linguistic fact brings about abandoning the attention to other inner-text and outer-text indications that existed in essence of language and lead to understanding the meaning. The exaggerated status of Irab in Arab linguists’ thought forces them formulate powerful syntactic sections and provisos for stabilization of Irab authority. Deviation in Irab (Khafz be Javar) is one of this sections. Deviation in Irab propose a wrong meaning against real meaning and the word in spite of having Gar includes Rafei and Nasbi meanings. This research would prove inability of Irabin perspective of verses of Holy Quran and by means of analyzing the section of Deviation in Irab, by analytic-critical approach. Accordingly: 1-Irab does not the ability of explaining all meanings of text; 2-Sometimes the signs of Irab made to understand wrong meaning and then it need to other sciences such as phonetics, eloquence and terminology; 3-Some syntactic sections has been posited for imposing the supremacy of Irab on language.

The role of lingual acts such as saying and listening – as one of the areas of human’ s acting-in other practical orientations and actions is one of the new issues that can be raised and spread in Ethics and Educational Sciences. This issue, which can propose in functional Semantics also, has not been studied by a Qur’ an approach yet. The results of thematic research and inner-texted analysis in Holy Quran, endorse the “ making behavior of language". We can show some Quranic titles that endorse the making behavior of language. " The correlation and proportion of acts and sayings"; "The contrast of functions pertaining to contrasting sayings"; "Priority of reading on action"; "Forbidding one saying for preventing one act; "causal analysis of acts by sayings"; "Changing behavior for the sake of changing the reading "; "lingual training in order to practical training and at last, "speech stabilization to stabilizing the act".

Thematic exegesis is one of the interpretation methods that came to vogue in recent century in Islamic world seriously. Because of numerous questions in contemporary time, this method of interpretation was established. In spite of relatively short antecedent of this method, it improves among Muslims and western scholars considerably. The fundamental problem of this interpretation method is the technique of interpretation. The loss of certain way that has precise and clear stage has brought about diversity of definitions of thematic exegesis. Thematic exegesis has not been defined correctly and commonly yet and any exegetes define it on its own preference and available need and even embark on Thematic Exegesis without defining it. In this essay, we criticize all available definitions and at last propose a chosen definition of it. Then we would explain necessary suitable constituents in scientific approach to thematic exegesis based on that chosen definition.

Context as inner-textual, connected to speech and linguistic indication, is a frame and place that divine messages has been happened in it and has a fundamental function for understanding the verses. Being Indicative the context for understanding the speech is one of the reasonable principles that all wises and scholars attend to it and has a basic role in interpretation of Quran. Therefore, the interpretation of Quran without attending to context can bring about mistaking and distancing from purpose of Quran. Quranic exegetics always intend to this important subject and use from it more or less. Mohammad Javad Moghnieh is one of the Quranic contemporary exegetics who has special attention to context in understanding Quran. He believe that although context is one of the main and initial indications in understanding the divine word, but sometimes we should neglect context for the sake of existence of more powerful reasons. According to him, the condition of using context consists of fulfillment of the descending relation of verses, their connection in meaning and compatibility with more powerful indications. Moghnieh says if context do not achieve these conditions it lack authenticity and credibility. This research tries to explain – by means of analytical descriptive method-the Moghnieʼ s exegetic methods and foundations in using context, the kinds of context, the conditions of using it and its practical cases in his exegesis.

The Analysis of the history of collecting Quran and the quality of its transfer from the time of Holy Prophet (P. b. u. h) to His companions and followers and next generations, has always been one of the challenging issues in different moments of the history of development of Holy Quran, and Muslim and non-Muslim researchers have tried to analyze this issue. Fred Donner-the director of the club of Middle East Studies in North America-believes that thinkers and researchers do not have commonly such a belief that the writing of Quran and its collecting were at the time of the Prophet (P. b. u. h) himself, but he believes that the first time, actually Uthman ibn Affan did it. Also according to his belief, transferring of Quran to next times through verbal saying brings about Muslim’ s fundamental disputes concerning the text of the Quran and hence was established the problem of disputing on reading (Ghiraˈ at) of It. In this essay we have criticized the views of Fred Donner by reference to original and agreed sources of Islam, particularly the news of gathering the Quran and accounts concerning to uniting texts of the Quran(Tohid Masahif).

Some of women and men do so in their covering, behavior and saying that bring about arousing the others and hence their commission of a sin. the main problem is that what the Shariatʼ s judgment of such doing is. For studying this problem, we use descriptive-analytic method and referee to sources of religious law. Finally concluded that what jurists and criminologists come to it about prohibition of sexual arousals nowadays – which would refer as a new achievement so called “ the influence of victim in crimes against chastity”-is not a new subject but is a subject that is considered by holy lawgiver, and relatives of prophet (Ahl al-Bayt). In addition, religious scholars from previous centuries, and has judgments that can entail conditional influences. According to holy religious law of Islam, these acts and behaviors that bring about arousing brings about prohibition (Hurmat) and therefore it is necessary to avoid from them.

“ Ghiyath Ibn Ibrahim Tamimi Asidi Basari” is one of the narrators of Imam Sadiq (Pbuh) and Imam Kazim (Pbuh) that numerous narrations have been retold from him. By attention to confirming the reliability of Ghiyath Ibn Ibrahim by Nagashi, his reliability is confirmed but we doubt about his being Imamieh. Some Jurists recognize this narrator the same Ghiyath Ibn Ibrahim of Batarieh sect that SheykhTusi has known him as one of the companions of Imam Baghir (Pbuh). We in this research explain that Ghiyath Ibn Ibrahim doesnʼ t have retell any narration from Imam Baghir or from one of the narrators seen Imam Bagher in any Shiʼ ite available hadithi book. Moreover, if he was a companion of Imam Baqir, he should have narrated some narrations from Imam. Accordingly, Ghiyath Ibn Ibrahim Tamimi could not be the same Ghiyath Ibn Ibrahim of Batarieh sect as one of the companions of Imam Baghir. Considering this subject and reasons such as not stating the religion of this narrator in Nagashiʼ sRijal, we can conclude that he was Imami.

Abstract Hatam Ibn Ismaeile Kufie Madani is one of the Sunni narrators in transmission’ s chains of Sunni and Shiʼ ite narrations that retell very Hadiths from Imam Sadiq (Pbuh). Sunny Rijali scholars has introduced Imam Sadiq (Pbuh) as rectors of Hatam and shieh Rijalun enumerate him as companions of Imam and considered his hadiths of him as Musnad. This research by means of descriptive-analytic method intend to answer the question of the Rijali situation of Hatam Ibn Ismaeil and the position of his Musnad’ s hadiths from Imam Sadiq (Pbuh). It seems that Hatam has not retold from Imam Sadiq (Pbuh) immediately but in Mursal (cut off) way. In spite of the correct content of many Hatamʼ s hadiths, doubtless some of them are forged or distorted, although it is probable that Hatam forges or distorts the hadiths. In general, it seems that the suitable approach is that we should be cautious in confront with Hatamʼ s hadiths from Imam Sadiq (Pbuh) and consider his hadiths as Mursalat.

Ibn Ghazaeri is one of the important Rijalun (Men of narrators) that he is famous for numerous and fast weakening of narrators. He has weakened many reliable narrators in his book named Al Zuˈ afa. One of the contemporary narrators men ( Rijali), Sheikh Mohammad Tagh iShushtari in the book Ghamus Al Rijal, has defended him and trust very much to his weakening and preferred his viewpoints on other Rijalunʼ s viewpoints. In this essay we intend to analyze and criticize the Shushtari‘ s viewpoint about the measure of credibility of Ibn Ghazaeriʼ s weakening and then his confidences. First, we have searched the origin of weakening the narrators, then paid to recognize Ibn Al Ghazaeriʼ sRijali method and thereby criticized his Rijali method in weakening and confidences. Finally, we have assessed Shushtari‘ s opinion concerning his Rijali viewpoints in detail. The results of this essay are first recognizing the measure of validity of Ibn Ghazaeriʼ s method and his viewpoints in modifying the narrators. Particularly in contradiction of his views with other early Rijalunsʼ views. Second showing that attributing exaggeration and lie to narrators, has root in identifying the text of their hadiths. This should be meditated and antecedents have not similar view about it and this lead to doubt on absolute acceptance of them; third, showing the broad using the method of Identifying the text of narrators’ hadiths by Ibn Ghazaeri and exhibiting the cases of opposition of its results with fact.

The book Asmaˈ e mosonafial-shiˈ eh (the names of writers of shiˈ eh )by Abu al-Abbas Ahmad Ibn Ali Nagashi famed to Nagashiʼ s Rijal is one of the most important Imamieh works that has been written numerous works including books and essays about it up to now. Nevertheless, there are ambiguities about various dimensions of Nagashiʼ s scientific life such as works, masters, students, his reliability and scientific situation that this essay has studied them. These debates consist of: Does Nagashi have many works? Does Nagashi have an exegesis to Quran? Is Seyysd Mortaza one of the masters of Nagashi? Is al-Seyysd al-sharif in introduction of Nagashiʼ sRijal the same Seyysd Mortaza? Does “ Abu al-Abbas” alone intend to Ibn Nuh or Ibn Oghdeh? Is Nagashi in his weakening the narrators influenced by Ibn Ghazaeri and Hosein Ibn Obeidollah Ghazaeri? Can we hold reliability for all masters of Nagashi? Is Nagashi one of the masters of Abu GafarTusi? Moreover, the book “ Al-Ijtehadva Al-Taghlid fi Ilm Al-Rijal” and the essay “ A Glance to Reliability of Abu al-Abbas Nagashi” criticize reliability of Nagashiand his scientific character that we have reply them.

After killing Ghebti by Moses (Pbuh), sayings, which are remained from him, their appearance is incompatible with prophet’ s Ismat (chastity) situation: “ Haza min amal al-shaytan… Ghala rabi inizalamtu nafsi fa eghfer li… ” (This is a work of Satan… He prayed: O my Lord! I have indeed wronged my soul. Do Thou then forgive me… )(Ghisas: 15-16); “ Ghala faˈ altuh aizan vaana min al-zallin” (Moses said: I did it then, when I was in error) (Shuˈ ara: 20). In first verse, according to Ayatollah Sobhani “ haza” (this) refers to killing and propose two justifications for it, which both are incomplete. In second verse, he considers the literal meaning for two words of “ zulm” (wrong) and “ Ghufran” (forgiveness), but thereafter uses the terminological meaning that it seems his intention has been literal meaning. Ayatollah Sobhani consider the phrase “ said: I did it then, when I was in error” by Moses (Pbuh) as an apology beside Ghebtian about happened killing, but define “ zalal” to neglect and oblivion from serious effects derived from act, that this meaning is not compatible with position of apology. Therefore, his attempt in removing suspicion of commission to sin deserves appreciation but it seems that in some cases his debates are incomplete and should be meditated seriously.