Commentary Studies
Year:2019 | Volume:10 | Issue:39|Papers Count:12

The present descriptive-analytic research has examined and interpreted the commentators’ view on the why of not mentioning Uli ‘ lamr as a source of conflict resolution in the verse 59 of Sura Nisa. In various respects, some have considered lack of innocence as the reason for not mentioning them as a source of dispute resolution, some view the people‘ s obligation in following the first part of the verse as the why, some believe that as Uli ‘ lamr themselves are known to be obliged to follow the book and Sunnah, they may not be taken as the source of conflict solution and, finally, some have known Uli ‘ lamr ‘ s lack of the right for divine legislation, they have not been mentioned as the source for conflict solution. From the in-text and out-of-text analysis of the verse, it is clear that what has been cited as the why for not mentioning them as the source of conflict solution is contrary to what we perceive from the appearance of the verse. An again, as Uli ‘ lamr themselves may be a part in a conflict, they may not be taken as a source for conflict solution.

In some of the verses containing some people‘ s demand of the sight of God, such as verses 55 of Baqarah, 153 Nisa‘ and 143 A‘ raf, a group of the children of Israel and the prophet Moses (as) requested the sight of God. Whether the demand has been form the prophet Moses (as) himself or from the children of Israel, and given the latter, whether the demanded vision has been a visual or a non-visual, difference of view is found among the interpreters; some have taken the vision demanded by Prophet Moses (as) as being visual and originally as being of his people, some believe that the demand for visual vision is from the prophet himself, and the third group has called the vision demanded by prophet Moses (as) to be self-evident knowledge of God. From the study of the verses, it seems that the vision requested by the prophet Moses (as) has been a visual one demanded originally by the people.

All commentators have known all Qur’ anic cases of the word salih as referring to salah in practice and viewed one doing any deed of salah as salih. Some commentators, however, regarding some Quranic cases of salih that describes prophets as salih as well as the demand of some prophet of God to put them among salihan, have known salih as being a particular position, that is essential salah not being available for those only of salih deed. Allameh Tabatabai and Ayatollah Javadi Ameli are among these. This descriptive-analytical research, by examining the above point of view, has made it a solid and firm view and preferred to the public view of commentators. Therefore, the Qur’ an does not refer to anyone who does a righteous deed as a righteous person, but in many verses of the holy Qur’ an is a special status and attribute of a person whose essence is qualified with salah.

The divergence of Qur’ anic readings in some verses has led to divisions in the commentators, translators and jurisprudents‘ understanding and interpretation. Regarding the reasons for unlawfulness of kissing non-mahrams and the commentators and scholars‘ views and relying the verse " ow Laamastum al-Nisa‘ ", this article studies the differences between the readings of the above verse and its effect on the opinions of the commentators and jurisprudents. Explaining the difference of readings of the two words of laamastum and lamastum and surveying the why of the readings, it has been shown that the varieties in jurisprudent rules lie in the readings of the verse. The authors of this article have Ă Ŷ Ă ů LJ nj Ğ Ě  ƚ Ś Ğ  ƚ ƌ Ă Ŷ Ɛ ů Ă Ɵ Ž Ŷ Ɛ  Ž Ĩ  ǀ Ğ ƌ Ɛ Ğ  ϰ ϯ  ŝ Ŷ  Ă Ŷ  Ă Ŷ Ă ů LJ Ɵ Đ Ă ů-comparative manner and have shown the weaknesses and slips of some of the translations and practical jurisprudent rules in the phrase "Laamstam al-Nasa".

The Almighty God, in the verse "Kunu ma‘ a al-Sadiqin, " has absolutely called the believers to accompany with those called "sadiqin". The main question of the study follows as: is the word sadiqin in this verse general or particular? is general or specific? Given the latter, who may be taken as its extension that God has commanded believers to obey them absolutely? Shiite commentators, relying on fariqain narrations and rational proofs, have viewed Imam Ali (as) and his infallible successors as the extensions of sadiqin; Sunni commentators, however, have viewed differently; Muhajiran, muhajiran and Ansar, Khulafa‘ i Rashidin, those refusing of Tabuk and ahli hall wa ‘ aqd and Imam Ali and his companions have been known as the extensions of the word by them. In the present study, different viewpoints have been re-analyzed by descriptive-analytic method and based on narrative and rational arguments, Imam Ali (as) and the Prophet’ s infallible household (as) have been introduced as the extensions of the word.

In the Holy Quran, the verse 22 of the chapter Muddathir, there is found the two synonyms-like words of "abasa" and "basara". The terminologists and commentators have stated the meanings of these two words, three meanings for the former and eleven for the latter, the fact which shows their divergences. In this article, in order to clarify the meaning of these words, while referring to the lexical sources and obtaining the correct meanings of the words, the commentators’ views regarding the verse are discussed. The findings of the study indicate that the most appropriate interpretation in this context for the former is to frown and for the latter is to pause and stand while thinking. The view given here, in addition to its being in agreement with context and views of some terminologists and commentators, may be taken as an argument against their being taken as synonymous.

Shi’ ite commentators have always proved Imam Ali‘ s succession for the Prophet based on the 55 verses of Maidah known as the verse of wilayat. Some Sunnite commentators have put some objections forward against this interpretative approach. Alusi, one Sunni commentator, states that: The Shi’ a interpretation of the ǀ Ğ ƌ Ɛ Ğ  ϱ ϱ  Ž Ĩ  DĂ ŝ Ě Ă Ś  ů Ğ Ă Ě Ɛ  ƚ Ž  ƚ Ś Ğ  Ŷ Ğ Ő Ă Ɵ Ž Ŷ  Ž Ĩ  ƚ Ś Ğ  Ă Ƶ ƚ Ś Ž ƌ ŝ ƚ LJ  Ž Ĩ  ƚ Ś Ğ  other Shi’ a Imams. Shi’ ite commentators have responded to this objection; yet, for the author of this paper, their responses have not been systematic. The latest written response to Alusi‘ s objection from the aspect of lubbi state of the meaning facing the verse of wilayat and lack of modification possibility, viewing what not established as established and … may not be taken as agreed with. With this attempt it has been made clear that the solution of the objection depends on the role of the word "innama" in this verse. It is noteworthy that Alusi‘ s objection and the response given to it both are based on true restriction, while noting the usages of the word innama shows that the restriction is relative. Therefore, one may not take the verse as a proof against Imamate.

The Wahhabi Salafists, on the basis of their superficial understanding of the verse 80 of Naml, have disagreed the current view of the dead as being hearing and, then, opposed resorting to and seeking help of them. While, an all-encompassing interpretation based on the Qur’ anic evidence of this verse shows that it is intended by the verse to resemble the unbelievers to the dead as not being able of using their sensible finding and led. The verse, therefore, does not carry such a falsely claimed meaning. This interpretation is an appropriate and perfect answer to the Wahhabi Salafists‘ objections on this verse and on the famous narration known as Badr narration, one of the most important narrative proof for the dead‘ s state of being hearing. It is also a rejection of Aisha’ s false interpretation of Badr’ s narration on which those Salafists based their claims in this field. Therefore, the opponents of the deads‘ state of being heraing have no proof of the Qur’ an and the Sunnah in their claims, while some verses and many valid narrations also confirm such an ability for the deads.

The comment of the concept of "hukm bi ghayri ma anzalallah" in verse " wa man lam yahkum bima anzalallah fa ula‘ ika humu ‘ lkafirun" by all Fariqain commentators differs greatly with that of Takfiri Salafists with regard to the concept and extension both. Most Sunni commentators, restricting the concept of "hukm bi ghayri ma anzalallah" viewed kufr as what understood in Fiqh. It should be pointed out that most of the Sunnite commentators, relying on numerous exegetic narrations under the verse have avoided Takfiri approach. Neo-Salafists, however, leaving the three current exegetic approaches of Sunni scholars and emphasizing some particular cases of the hukm, following khavarij and relying on some opinions of great Salafists accepted a radical interpretation of the concept that, of course, has no root in the interpretive views of the Sunni thought.

Hakim Dashtaki has viewed human being as spacio-temporal being and future etrnal but not past eternal. He has proved the view by relying on the verse: Hath there come Upon man (ever) any period of time in which he was a thing unremembered? Ibn Arabi, however, views human being as both past eternal and future eternal. The article has intended to study some commenators‘ opinions of the verse and Dashtaki and Ibn Arabi‘ s proofs in the field as well. Briefly invanssing the verse, one views as Dashtaki and commentatrs view, while deep study would support exposes their view to doubt. It should be stated that what meant here by the word huduth is the one pertaining to time; that is, human being is essentially hadith but temporally qadim, non temporal. And again, what is meant here by human being is human truth, namely human rational soul and primary matter not human form.

Human guidance is the common claim of all religions; this truth has been formed in Islam around the axis of sirati mustaqi, straight path. The importance and the necessity of understanding the meaning of sirat is equal to human guidance and any misinterpretation that leads it to multiplicity and relativity would be against the Qur’ an and the Prophet’ s revelation. Mulla Sadra, commenting sirat and its whatness in the verses of the holy Quran philosophically, opens a new horizon for minds; He view is found in his: Tafsir al-Quran al-Karim and Asrar al-Ayat wa Anwar alBayyinat and in his other works. This article has studied his principles for commenting the truth of sirat at first and then, examines the verses in which he has been analyzing and interpreting this matter, and finally, by summarizing the exegetical material, a definition of sirat and sirati mustaqim has been given that is essentially unique.

In the last few decades, scholars of the Qur’ an, with the structural interpretation approach, believe that this new method will significantly contribute to the understanding of the concepts of the Qur’ an. This method primarily seeks to discover the primary and secondary aims of the surahs, and then to discover the relationship of the sentences and the verses to each other in drawing the secondary aims and to a higher space the overall purpose of the surahs. On the basis of this approach, the present article has examined the surah Sad by looking at numerous commentaries of Shiites and Sunnis, including al-Mizan. The results of the structural analysis of the surah Sad show that the focal point of this surah focuses on education and concentration of the Prophet (s) and consequently religious missionaries in their various duties in guiding and threatening the polytheists in the matter of mabda‘ , ma‘ ad and nubuwwat. And it is a prophecy, and these duties are mentioned in numerous cases. Praising some of the prophets and removing heavy accusations and preventing people from damaging their reputation has also been considered as well.