JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE TAFSIR STUDIES
Year:2017 | Volume:3 | Issue:1 (5) |Papers Count:10

Several verses in the holy Quran discuss about "association and interaction with non- Muslims." Most of these verses are in chapters 9 and 60 (Momtahenah, The Examined ones; Tawbah, Repentance, respectively), and few others are in chapters 3, 4, 5, and 58 (Ale-Imran, The Family of Imran; Nisa, The women; Ma'edah, The food; and Mojadilah, The Pleading one, respectively). These verses apparently indicate "the prohibition of interaction and association with non-Muslims", but the questions are what is meant by the "prohibition" and which group of infidels are prohibited from being associated and interacted, which necessitates a more exact and careful analysis of the verses to be answered. Using a descriptive method to describe issues and evidence, and content analysis method, the present paper studies the issue. The findings indicate that "prohibited association" mentioned in these verses means prohibition of establishing any mutual association and relation with non- Muslims based on love, assistance and acceptance of their authority and guardianship, which does not prohibit being good and doing justice towards relative infidels and those infidels who do not fight against Muslims. Furthermore, peaceful relationships such as doing business, political interactions, participating in contracts and treaties are not included in prohibited association, on the condition that they are not against Muslims' interests and Islamic esteem.

Proponents of the occurrence of abrogation in the holy Quran believe that the abrogator and abrogated are among Divine commands which are carried out by God due to His knowledge of His servants' best interest. On the contrary, opponents of abrogation hold that God's Book is an all-comprehensive and everlasting command with no contradiction and falsehood. In fact, they believe that abrogation is a kind of deficit in God's knowledge and a defect. Although Fakhr Razi and Sheikh Tusi have two distinct theological views, they have certain views about abrogation, given their rationalistic approach to exegesis. Their views about abrogation are worth of studying, given Abu Muslim Isfahani's view on commentary issues, who is the most prominent Muslim Scholar denying abrogation. In the introduction of his Tebyan commentary, Sheikh Tusi elaborates on abrogation and its three types, and regards them true, while Fakhr Razi mentions different views about the occurrence of abrogation in some Quranic verses, pays particular attention to Mu'tazilite Abu Muslim Isfahani's views, and regards most of them as correct, which is unexpected as he is an Ash'arite. It seems that Fakhr Razi has tendency towards his views in terms of abrogation. Sheikh Tusi also has a view about some instances of abrogation, which is different from those of other Shia scholars.

Using a descriptive-analytical method, the present paper compares the concept of reprehensible blind partisanship in Shia and Sunni commentaries. Allamah Tabatabaii's Al- Mizan Commentary, Tabarsi's Majma' Al-Bayan Commentary, Makarem Shirazi's Nemooneh Commentary, Fakhr Razi's Mafatih Al-Qayb Commentary, Suyuti's Dorr Al-Manthur Commentary, Barusawi's Rooh Al-Bayan Commentary, and Zamakhshari's Al-Kashshaf Commentary are compared. The results show that all these commentators have unanimously condemned reprehensible blind partisanship and warned against its dangerous consequences and outcomes, such as having veil on the eyes, blasphemy, idolatry, becoming deaf and dumb and being in the darkness, associating with Arabs at the age of ignorance, following Satan, being captured in the fire of Hell, division, and loss of unity among Muslims. In order to be safe from these dire consequences and maintain unity among Muslims in particular, they should avoid aggravating differences which result in irrelevant biases, and use such factors as uprising for Allah, thinking, having piety, considering dire consequences of blind partisanship, directing and guiding reprehensible blind partisanships towards favorable and praiseworthy ones, being patient, submitting to truth, and raising the level of men's culture and faith to prevent the formation of or cure this vice.

Several Quranic verses have mentioned the concept of the "Seven Heavens". There is no unanimity among the scholars about its interpretation and meaning. Mulla Sadra believes that it is impossible to understand the seven heavens through sensory and material tools, and that the only way to understand its truth and essence is to appeal to the holy Quran and Hadith. He considers the seven heavens as the world of imagination. On the other hand, Fakhr Razi appeals to Ptolemaic system of astrology to interpret the seven heavens and provides a definition based on astrologers' view. He believes that the seven heavens are seven material spheres which go around the Earth. Elaborating on Mulla Sadra and Fakhr Razi's view on the issue, the present paper criticizes the latter's view, and approves and emphasizes on the former's view which is based on Quranic verses and hadiths.

The present paper seeks to compare Al- Minar Commentary by 'Abduh and Al-Mizan Commentary by Allamah Tabatabaii in terms of their interpretation of the verse 59 in Chapter 4 (Al-Nisa'- The Women), known as the verse of "Ulel-Amr". For Tabatabaii, the referents of Ulel-Amr are infallible Imams, who should be obeyed unconditionally and absolutely as the Holy Prophet, which proves their infallibility. He believes that the repetition of the imperative verb "Obey" indicates the difference in the domain of obedience not emphasis, and the pronoun "you" in verse which says "then if you quarrel about anything" refers not to Ulel- Amr but to Muslims. In Al-Minar, Abduh accepts the command of absolute obedience to the Holy Prophet and Ulel-Amr, necessitated by their infallibility. However, he believes that the instances of Ulel-Amr are people of hal and 'Aqd (those whose opinions are what count) whose consensus is correct. Rashid Reza, however, does not regard such a consensus as infallible, as he believes that the pronoun "you" refers to Ulel-Amr as well. The paper compares aforementioned commentaries to extracts several mistakes taken by Abduh in Al- Minar, and resolves the doubts he cast on Shia interpretations.

The traditions related to the occasions of revelation have an important and pivotal role in interpreting and explaining Quranic sciences. Unfortunately, these traditions have not been properly reviewed and analyzed in terms of their chain of transmission. Given the direct influence of these traditions on understanding and interpreting the holy Quran, their review and criticism is of particular importance. The present paper analyzes the traditions related to the occasions of revelation of seven key verses in the second chapter of the holy Quran (Al- Baqharah, the Cow). Having mentioned the verses with the occasions of revelation and relevant traditions, the paper reviews and criticizes Shia and Sunni commentators' view about these traditions. The most important reasons to deny traditions related to the occasions of revelation include incompatibility of their text with the text of the holy Quran, the existence of sound traditions, definite history, intellectual axioms, Muslims' theological necessities, and consensus.

Most Shia Commentators such as Feiz Kashani and several Sunni commentators such as Zamakhshari and Haskani have long tried to match some Quranic verses with Holy Prophet's household in their commentaries, based on the traditions related to their occasions of revelation. The present paper seeks to reanalyze such matching in their commentaries. The findings indicate although Zamakhshari have explained the occasions of revelation in details, he has referred and explained only %10 (21 out of 200) of verses related to the virtues of Holy Prophet's household, and very few of infallible Imams' virtues below these verses. He has avoided not only mentioning the verses related to the virtues of the Holy Prophet's household with widely transmitted occasions of revelations, but also analyzing them. On the contrary, Haskani has discussed infallible Imams' virtues and merits through general methods in his Shawahid Al-Tanzil Commentary, using more than 1200 traditions below 210 verses; and Feiz Kashani has explained and clarified infallible Imams' virtues in his Safi Commentary, using particular methods.

Miracle is a supernatural act beyond human power, which proves the truthfulness of prophecy claim. Some Quranic verses have explained miracle and its types in the story of the prophets. Sometimes, these verses have clearly referred to God's agency in fulfilling this extraordinary affair, and other times regard its performance at prophet's request with the permission of God. The present paper studies Shia and Sunni commentators’ views about some of these verses. Some commentators separate these verses and regard God as the performer of miracle in some cases and prophets in other cases. Other commentators, however, have expressed their ideas based on rational and theological arguments, regardless of the clarity of verses. Some of them regard miracles as an act of prophets and argue that the performance of material acts by God is impossibility. Another group believes that the glorious God is the only one who can perform miracles. The author of this paper holds that performance of this superhuman act by the prophets, who are called human beings in the holy Quran, is possible in the light of three principles. First, granting them with the position of existential authority by God; second, the manifestation of divine qualities and attributes in the position of Divine vicegerency; and third, performing miracles in the light of God’s permission.

One of the fundamental questions about Mohammedan revelation is "what is its scope"? In other words, which parts of the Holy Prophet's sayings are rooted in revelation and which parts were based on independent reasoning or according to his everyday life? The third and fourth verses of Chapter 53 (Al-Najm, The Star) provide important data to answer the question, from which Muslim scholars have exerted and provided different information. Representing the correct view about the scope of Mohammadan revelation on the basis of these verses, the present paper reviews and evaluates commentators' view in this regard. Based the interpretation of these verses according to the method of interpreting the holy Quran by the Quran, the findings indicate that these verses only show that the holy Quran is revealed, not the holy Quran and beyond it, as some commentators have regarded Prophet Muhammad's non-Quranic sayings as revealed ones through referring to these verse; not anything more than the holy Quran, as some commentators have identified Holy Prophet's sayings about Imam Ali's succession as revealed.

There are two different views about whether Surah Ma’arej is Meccan or Medinan, one is popular and the other unpopular. The proponents of popular view believe that the whole Surah is Meccan. On the contrary, the proponents of unpopular view emphasize that the whole surah or at least a part of it is Medinan. Each group provides different arguments to prove their view. The present paper seeks to evaluate the claims and arguments of both groups, using a library-descriptive method, reviewing different Shia and Sunni interpretations, reviewing the occasions of revelation of these verses in the Surah, and elaborating on the relationship between the verses. Of course, in doing so, it mainly focuses on Sunni resources. The reviews reveal that the popular opinion has not decisive and absolute arguments, that it is not true to regard the aforementioned Surah as Meccan, and that insistence on Surah Ma’arej as being Meccan by its proponents is based on theological, religious or sectarian motivations.