LESAANE SEDGH
Year:2012 | Volume:- | Issue:1|Papers Count:7

Following an exploration into the character of Ahmad ibn-Mohammad ibn-Khalid Barqi and his father, Mohammad ibn-Khalid, in rejal (study of hadith narrators) and fehrest (a book review) books and a comparative study of the documents of the remaining part of al-Mahasen with those of al-Kafi, it was concluded that Barqi, Jr. was among the reliable and trustworthy scholars in the field of hadith and, at least in the remaining part of al-Mahasen, he hasn’t narrated a lot from the weak narrators. It was further concluded that the collection of al-Mahasen books is among the reliable hadith sources and reduction of its narrations has only made a change in the number of books and not affected its textual content. On the other hand, a comparison of the quantity of Barq’s narrations from Sheikhs in al-Kafi and al-Mahasen can be considered an indication of the authenticity of the remaining part of al-Mahasen.

Following the entry of religious and philosophical thoughts into the field of Islamic studies, which was a corollary of the translation movement in Muslim world, Muslim scholars got into a dispute with each other and were sectionalized into different theological schools. The first theological issue emanating from “the impossibility of abrogation in Divine Word”, which was debated among Jews, was called “qedam va huduth-e Quran” (eternity and temporal contingency of the Quran). And following the intervention of (Abbasid) politicians, this issue (which had a scholastic nature and had to be followed likewise) was turned into a wide sedition, which was later labeled “mehnat-e Quran” in the history. Islamic thinkers, particularly Ash’arites, theorized qedam-e Quran (eternity of the Quran) as kalam-e nafsi (spiritual theology). Explicating different aspects of this issue, we claim, in this paper, that ta’vil of the Quran from Allameh Tabatabaee’s viewpoint in al-Mizan is an evolved form of Ash’arites’s spiritual theology. And some of the criticisms that Shiite and Mu’tazilite scholars have leveled against spiritual theology concern this theory too.

Ablution is an act of worship which was practiced by the Prophet in the presence of Muslims. Since performance of ablution was not limited to a specific period, its procedure could not be obscure for Muslims. If so, why do we witness differences of opinion about its performance procedure? And how did the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) actually perform it? In this paper, an attempt has made to review the literal and technical meanings of ablution, its performance procedure and the differences of opinion in the five Islamic schools of thought. The main difference between the Twelvers and the other four Islamic schools of thought concerns washing hands and forearms and washing and wiping the feet with wet hand (mas-h). In this paper, explicating the interpretive views of the Shiite and Sunnite scholars on the sixth verse of Surah al-Ma’idah, we have reflected upon ablution and traced the beginning of dissimilarities on performing ablution in the history of Islam.

An attempt has been made in this paper to look into Allameh Tabatabaee’s theoretical and basic principles on the authority and trustworthiness of akhbar (traditions) – including narrations from the Prophet (p.b.u.h.), Ahl al-Beyt (the Prophet’s household), the Companions and the Successors – as well as his practical conduct in discussions on narrations in Tafsir al-Mizan. Almost all that Allameh has done with regard to the trustworthiness or lack of trustworthiness of single traditions, authenticity of narrations or narrators in the process of transmission have been surveyed and their various applications in Islamic jurisprudence and other areas have been identified. On the basis of his main and usual approach, Allameh does not mention the documents of narrations and only analyzes their content. Here, however, he mentions the complete documentation of narrations, at times, and, in some other cases, he gives the name of the last narrator, traces the narration to its main source and may declare some narrators weak; he doesn’t consider single traditions authoritative in non-jurisprudential questions, is cautious towards Cause-of-Revelation narrations due the frequency of forgery and distortion among them and considers People of the Book as the main agents who paved the way for Isra’iliyat to find their way into the field of hadith.

This paper deals with the domain of the Quran and sciences and examines three approaches related to this topic. The first approach, which considers a maximal relationship between the Quran and sciences, insists on the existence of all sciences in the Quran. The manifestations of this approach are observed in Ghazali and Abolfazl Morsi’s works which have been surveyed in this study. The 89th verse in Surah Nahl (tebyanan lekoll-e shay (an exposition of all things)) is considered the most significant reason for this approach. This verse is related to guidance issues and does not speak of the existence of all details of sciences in the Quran. According to the second approach, which has been cited from Shatebi, there is a minimal relationship between the Quran and sciences. The third approach adopts the way in between and suggests that the general issues of sciences (such as fundamentals, objectives and principles), particularly those of the humanities, have been raised in the Quran but details of sciences are not apparently seen in this book.

The Quran frequently uses ‘the promise and threat language’. It threatens some groups with endless torment and promises some others everlasting Paradise. Islamic theologians have pondered upon the threats of the Quran and have offered various views on their meanings and intentions. Va’eediyyeh scholars consider them all binding. Shiite and Ash’arite theologians consider the breaking of threat not only allowable but also obligatory. The most important challenge facing this group is that considering the breaking of threat permissible denotes the falsehood of God’s word. This question has received different answers which have, then, been scrutinized. In this paper, different answers are given to this question and they are, then examined and criticized. The outcome of this survey suggests that none of the given answers is acceptable. Then, a different point is raised: contrary to the conception of theologians, ‘the promise and threat language’ in the Quran is a special discourse with its own special features and since it does not have a descriptive nature, it does not lend itself to descriptive language. The paper further examines the features of ‘the promise and threat language’ in three parts:1. ‘The promise and threat language’ is the language of fear and hope; hence any interpretation of it that is not compatible with ‘the fear and doctrine’ is not acceptable.2. Accordingly, this is a general language and is far away from particularity; thus, interpretations that consider threats and even promises conditional in order to solve the falsehood of God’s word deny the function of this language.3. And, accordingly, this is an ambiguity-oriented language in denoting realities and is far from vividness in this respect. Thus, insistence on its denoting realities or being symbolic is incompatible with its function.

Allusion is one of the frequently-used rhetorical devices in the Quran. This mode of expression, with all its special beauty, is one of the elements of inimitability in the language of the Quran. Since allusion makes an indirect reference to something or somebody, undoubtedly, to understand the non-manifest and deeper layers of meaning in the Quran, one has to refer to the narrations from the Ahl al-Beyt (a.s.) who were the real interpreters of the Quran. Hence, an attempt has been made in this article, first, to discuss the importance, types and advantages of allusion and, next, to draw the meanings of the allusive expressions of the Quran by getting assistance from the narrations from the Imams (a.s.).