JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE TAFSIR STUDIES
Year:2022 | Volume:7 | Issue:2 (14)|Papers Count:12

Although many Islamic narrations have emphasized the love of Ahl al-Bayt (prophetic household) and expressed its results and yields as well, however, the superficial look at the meaning of some of which may lead to ibā, ḥ, a (religious libertinism). One of these narrations, to which the present article is devoted, says "Ḥ, ubbu ʿ, Alī,b. Abī,-Ṭ, ā, lib Ḥ, asanatun lā,Taḍ, urru Maʿ, ahā,Sayyiʾ, a wa bughḍ, uhu Sayyiʾ, atu lā,Tanfaʿ, u Maʿ, ahā,Ḥ, asana". According to this narration, the love of ʿ, Alī,(PBUH) is a good deed that any bad deed does not harm with it at all, and his hatred is a bad deed that any good deed does not benefit with it at all. Taking a descriptive-analytical approach, the present article seeks to deliver a valid reception from the mentioned narrative. The result of the research is that true religious love requires entirely religious obedience. The reliable understanding of the narration is that the word sayyiʾ, a (evil) in it is about to mean “, small sins”, . Thus, the love of ʿ, Alī,(PBUH) only causes the forgiveness of these monor ones, God Willing. Of course, it seems that there is another valid interpretation, according to which, ʿ, Alī, ’, s friendship is a good deed that no sin can make ineffective, because every kind of complete faith is achieved through the love of Ahl al-Bayt (PBUT).

As the worse of aftermaths of thaqī, fa turmoil, the seeds of discord and disagreement were sown in all Islamic thoughts and teachings, even tawḥ, ī, d (monotheism), nubuwwa (prophecy), and maʿ, ā, d (resurrection). There were serious differences, especially in the case of Imamate, which could guarantee the survival of Islam. It can be said that the controversy has escalated so much that both Sunni and Shi’, ite scholars have never written about anything as much as the Imamate to reject each other. In such a way, the verses Wilaya (guardianship) have always been the most challenging issue between both Islamic schools throughout their history, which seems full of vicissitudes. (Q. 2: 207) is one of the most famed Qur’, anic verses that the Shi’, ite exegetes, as well as some Sunni ones, emphasize that its occasion of the revelation concerns Imam ʿ, Alī,b. Abī,-Ṭ, ā, lib (PBUH) and his self-devotion for Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in layla al-mabī, t) the night of asleep). Although some research has been organized about (Q. 2: 207) so far, the present study, while respecting all, has studied and analyzed the occasion of the revelation of the mentioned verse only from the viewpoints of the narrations remained of the two major Islamic schools. While answering the doubts, the present study has concluded that the narrations of the revelation of the verse about ʿ, Alī,(PBUH) in layla al-mabī, t have a considerable frequency and have a definite indication of his absolute virtue and immediate succession. Hence, there is no place for doubt and suspicion concerning its historical implications.

The Muslim interpretive heritage, which is left from the predecessors, includes enduring views that can greatly influence the Qur’, anic exegetes in later periods. As a matter of fact, it seems that some dominant exegetical discourses have emerged within the traditional interpretive viewpoints, as far as the subsequent readings have been somehow formed by the suggested ones. However, achieving a better understanding and reading of the Qur’, anic verses depends on examining, analyzing, and criticizing the traditional interpretive products, using the interpretive principles and rules. The present article, which has been organized with a descriptive-analytical research method, has re-read the Qur’, anic usage of the word hidā, ya (guidance), which has occurred twice in (Q. 14: 21). After examining and criticizing the exegetical viewpoints, it attempts to reach in an innovative way to give a new interpretive insight concerning the implication of the mentioned word in the verse in question, applying some criteria such as context, symmetry of confrontation, proportion of question and answer, semantic degradation and exaltation, and avoiding the affectation from the realm of divine word. Finally, answering in advance the most significant problems and ambiguities in front of the preferred viewpoint of the present article concerning the mentioned word is another part of it.

There are some literal and interpretive differences concerning Qur’, anic exegetes about the typology of the preposition "mā, ", and therefore concerning the phrase "mā,undhira", which has occurred in (Q. 36: 6) as well. Some have considered it as nā, fī, a (negative), while others have tended to count it as mawṣ, ū, la (connective), or even in some cases maṣ, darī, yya (infinitive). Moreover, it seems that there are two different viewpoints among the first group of the mentioned Qur’, anic exegetes, who have considered "mā, " as a negative preposition, concerning the total implication of the phrase "mā,undhira". Hence, the question brings to ones, mind is that which of the proposed viewpoints can truly lead to a correct interpretation of the verse? Besides, the second relevant question concerns the identity of the referent of the Qur’, anic word "nadhī, r". Is it a reference to people other than the prophets, as well as their successors? Do the usual warners, who are not essentially innocent ones, play a considerable role in completing the divine ultimatum over the people? According to the surveyings have been made by the authors of the present article, it seems that no research has been prepared yet with the suggested attitude. Anyhow, through the present article, which is organized by descriptive-analytical method, it was found that, in verse in question, "mā, " is negative, and the phrase "mā,undhira" means "they were not warned". Furthermore, the Qur’, anic usages of the word "nadhī, r" in verse under discussion, namely (Q. 36: 6), or in other verses of the Qur’, an, do not refer to innocent people at all. It was also found that, in the period of absence of the prophets and the infallible men, the divine ultimatum is done only by sending revelation from God and through its original and comprehensive message. Therefore, if the undistorted message of the prophets does not reach the people of other times correctly, the divine ultimatum can not be considered a completed and convincing one.

Both early and later Qur’, anic exegetes have always held diverse and challenging viewpoints concerning the concept of bidʿ, a (heresy), as well as its essence. Thus, they have paved the way for many instrumental uses for the different Islamic theological sects and schools on the subject of bidʿ, a. However, what are the viewpoints of the Qur’, anic exegetes concerning the essence and components of bidʿ, a? What caused some considerable diversities or conflicts within their religious attitudes? These are the main questions that the present article is about to pursue. Accordingly, the authors attempt to analyze and review the conceptual components of bidʿ, a, as well as the reasons of its implications, diversity, considering the viewpoints of both Shi’, ite and Sunni Qur’, anic exegetes on its literal and idiomatic meanings. The achievements of this study show that the Qur’, anic exegetes have considered bidʿ, a as an equal concept to some other relevant ones such as “, emerging order”, , “, secular proposition”, , “, legislation”, , “, occurrence”,and “, opposition”, , which should all be seen in their own specific context to be meaningful and intelligible. The diversity of their viewpoints seems to be rooted in their contradictory divisions, as well as their confusion between the concept of bidʿ, a and some other different ones, such as invention, innovation, tradition, and legislation. Moreover, one should consider great importance for the doctrinal and religious differences between Qur’, anic exegetes, which has caused the formation and growth of Salafi ideas within the Islamic societies, and the tragic sphere of accusation each other for heresy among the different religious schools and denominations as well.

Ibn-ʿ, Ā, dil Dimashqī,is a nineth-century Interpreter of the Qur’, an and an expert scholar in various scientific fields, including Arabic literature, Islamic jurisprudence, principles of Islamic jurisprudence, as well as Islamic Hadith and narrations. Benefiting the viewpoints of dozens of the Qur’, anic interpreters and other Islamic scholars, in some cases, he has criticized or refuted them in his own interpretation, namely al-Lubā, b fī,ʿ, Ulū, m al-Kitā, b, which should be considered as a large encyclopedia of various Islamic sciences. One of the most famous Qur’, anic interpreters who has been criticized by Ibn-ʿ, Ā, dil is Zamakhsharī, , the early sixth-century author of a prominent Qur’, anic interpretation, namely al-Kashshā, f. Despite acknowledging the importance and prominence of the work and referring it widely and frequently, Ibn-ʿ, Ā, dil has emerged notable controversies over it in terms of theological thoughts based on his Ash’, arite presuppositions. One can consider in this regard, for example, their contradictory interpretations concerning some divine attributes that have been mentioned by the Qur’, an, such as deceive, anger, mock, arrogance, as well as other Islamic conceptions including intercession and human free will. Using a speculative approach and desk research method, as well as introducing both interpretative works, the present article suggests some examples of Ibn-ʿ, Ā, dil’, s theological and literary critiques of Zamakhsharī,and analyzes the effects of his preferred religious beliefs on his perceptions of the Qur’, anic verses, especially in the field of their conflict points.

There are three viewpoints regarding the occasion of (Q. 16: 126)’, s revelation, as well as identifying its direct audiences. According to the first viewpoint, which seems the most popular one within Muslim scholars, the verse was revealed during the Uḥ, ud battlefield, and its only addressee is the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) himself. The narration explains that the Prophet wanted to take revenge on the Quraysh pagans, mutilating bodies of thirty or seventy of their slains, for the bloodlust of Ḥ, amza and other Muslim martyrs who were tragically mutilated by them. Thus, according to the first viewpoint, the mentioned versed was revealed and forbade Muhammad from doing so. of course, it is referred to two narrations from Ibn ʿ, Abbā, s and Abu Ḥ, urayra to prove it. Nonetheless, these narrationes are weak ones in terms of isnā, d and unreliable in terms of content as well. Moreover, they seem incompatible with the well-known personality of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), as well as his religious teachings. However, there is another viewpoint that refers to a narration from Ubayy b. Kaʿ, b, according to which, the verse in question was related to the words of anṣ, ā, r and was revealed in the occasion of the conquest of Mecca. Although this second narration seems correct in terms of isnad, its content should be considered vague and false. Besides, the literal meaning of the verse gives no such an indication. The present article, which suggest the third viewpoint in this regard, attempts to indicate that this verse was revealed before the Prophet’, s migration to Medina, and its revelation was not affected by any special occasion, including the above mentioned suggested ones. On the basis of the textual appearances of the verse, it seems that (Q. 16: 126) is stating a general ruling, like many other Qur’, anic verses, without limiting its audience to any specific individual.

One of the most important requirements of research in the field of interpretation is to study and analyze the contents of Qur’, anic verses based on various interpretive principles and rules, including context, text structure, lexical implications, as well as interpretive narrations. The present article seeks re-reading the viewpoints of the Qur’, anic exegetes in explaining (Q. 3: 42), which reads “, And when the angels said: O Mary! Surely Allah has chosen you, and has purified you, and has chosen you over women of the world”, . Therefore, considering the repetition of the determining word Iṣ, ṭ, ifā, ʾ,in this verse, its other Qur’, anic applications have been conceptualized, and the different viewpoints of the Qur’, anic exegetes about explaining the concept of Iṣ, ṭ, ifā, ʾ,and ascertaining its various examples have been studied. In this regard, according to the various uses of the word Iṣ, ṭ, ifā, ʾ,within different Qur’, anic contexts, it has been suggested that some of the Qur’, anic exegetes have specified that, due to its literal absoluteness, the first occurence of the word in this verse refers to the divine choice and the infallible personality of St. Mary (PBUH). However, the second one, due to being bound to the preposition ʿ, alā, , indicates the superiority of St. Maryam (PBUH) over other human beings, as well as her specific characteristics and privileges.

(Q. 13: 11) introduces taghyī, r (change) as a divine tradition. Indeed, it has specific importance due to its connection with human destiny, which is based on the individual free will to take the path of felicity or fall into the chasm of misery. The present article demonstrates that the Qur’, anic exegetes of two major Islamic sects, namely Sunni and Shi’, a, have suggested two approaches concerning this type of change. In the first approach, that the present article is seeking to prove, what the relating pronoun "mā, " implies in the Qur’, anic phrase “, mā,bi qawmin”,can include both blessing and cursing. However, there is another approach that dedicates the mentioned "mā, " exclusively to blessings and, for example, has been adopted by Muḥ, ammad-Ḥ, usayn Ṭ, abā, ṭ, abā, ʾ, ī, , the famous Shi’, i scholar and exegete. In this research, the second one has been criticized through a descriptive-analytical method. Additionally, it is emphasized that the change meant by the Qur’, an is an inner and real transition, not an apparent and external one. Moreover, such a change may be reached through the purification of the human soul. It seems proper to suggest as well that all divine traditions, especially the tradition of change that has the main role in human destiny, are regarded as one of the significant factors in the training of men.

It is of specific importance to study the validity of the religious narrations that may sometimes be accompanied by some changes or even distortions, which at the same time are about to express and identify the examples of Qur’, anic verses. As a case study, the present article addresses the narrations that have been quoted in both Shi’, ite and Sunni sources to identify the examples of (Q. 21: 101). The mentioned narrations speak of those who have been promised good tidings of being kept away from the fire of Hell. Sunni sources have conveyed a single narration that ʿ, Alī,b. Abī,-Ṭ, ā, lib (PBUH) has mentioned the third Caliph, Uthmā, n b. ʿ, Affā, n, or even other people, whose number in some sources reaches ten,a case that usually associates with ʿ, ashara mubashshara (the ten promised ones). Nevertheless, Shi’, ite sources have quoted Hadiths from the Holy Prophet (PBUH), according to which he has introduced ʿ, Alī,(PBUH) and his true followers as the original examples of the verse in question. Sice in such conflicts, isnā, ds of the different narrations should be examined and evaluated, it seems that same way should be proceeded here. In the present case, Sunni narrations have weak isnā, ds, and from the textual point of view, they are in conflict with authentic narrations, as well as definite historical reports. However, the isnā, ds of Shi’, ite narrations seem valid, and its content is confirmed by the authentic reports of the sources of both Sunni and Shi’, ite schools. The present study has been carried out with the aim of helping to correctly identify the examples of the verse in question, after surveying the above-mentioned narrations from their original sources and with the necessary critical instruments.

A survey of Qur’, anic exegetes reveals that they have five main viewpoints on the meaning of the word “, al-bayā, n”,in (Q. 55: 4). Some consider it to mean the human faculty of speech, some to the expression of everything, some to the human faculty of reason, some to the names of objects and creatures, and some to the Holy Qur’, an itself. Given the mentioned differences concerning the meaning of the Qur’, anic word “, al-bayā, n”, , as well as the lack of independent research in this regard, the present article attempts to analyze its true meaning, seeking a suitable connection with the context of the verse in question. According to the achievements, the opinion of those Qur’, anic exegetes, either Sunni or Shi’, ite, who consider “, al-bayā, n”,in a semantic correlation with the meaning of human faculty of speech seems more satisfactory, comprehensive, and convincing. It should be pointed out that the first meaning of the word that comes to mind from observing the context of the verses is “, speech”, . In the same way, there is exact evidence in earlier literary, historical, and narrative texts that illustrate the application of the Arabic word “, bayā, n”,in the meaning of speech. Furthermore, according to (Q. 14: 4), the Qur’, an attributes the human faculty of explanation to language. On the other hand, it should not be neglected that God Almighty has called the Qur’, an a general expression for the people. Since the material and apparent nature of the Qur’, an at the time of its revelation was nothing but the nature of speech and language, it becomes clear that the meaning of "al-bayā, n" is speech. Seemingly, the other meanings mentioned by the Qur’, anic exegetes for the word in question seem somehow related to language and the human faculty of speech. Karimi, A,Aslani-Alavar, F. (2022) The Qur’, anic Word “, al-bayā, n”,in (Q. 55: 4) and its Semantic Correlation with the Human Faculty of Speech,A Comparative study of Sunni and Shi’, ite Exegetes’,Viewpoints.

The Qur’, anic “, qadama ṣ, idq”,(sure footing), which is occurred once in (Q. 10: 2), is a good tiding from God that has a completely different structure, albeit in terms of literal form, from the other ones. Indeed, Muslim exegetes have expressed many different viewpoints, and even in some cases contradictory opinions, concerning the phrase in question. For example, one can assess their viewpoint as divine good reward, records, or statures, as well as wilā, ya (guardianship) and shafā, ʿ, a) intercession. (Anyhow, they have never reached a single word about the phrase. Moreover, it seems that most of them have confused its literal meaning with the interpretive one. However, one can ask which one is closer to the divine purpose from the verse? The viewpoints of the Qur’, anic exegetes concerning this crucial question have been categorized by the present article, with the documentaryhistorical method, as well as the descriptive-analytical approach. Then, while analyzing and evaluating the viewpoints, it has explained the reliable ones, with the help of textual and interpretive documents, in two separate sections, namely contextual and narrative. Finally, by stating both rational and narrative reasons, it has expressed the chosen viewpoint. In short, the most significant achievement of the present article is that the two words wilā, ya and shifā, ʿ, a are most consistent with the context of the verses, as well as Islamic narrations. Besides, both religious concepts are mutually attached and have no meaning without each other.