دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 Semantic Analysis of the Arabic Word "Ab" in Verse 74 of Surah al-Anʿām: A Comparative Approach Between "Tafsīr al-Mīzān" and "Tafsīr Min Waḥy al-Qurʾān" معناشناسی واژۀ «أب» در آیۀ 74 سورۀ انعام با رویکرد تطبیق میان تفاسیر المیزان و من وحی القرآن 10 31 191941 10.22034/csq.2024.423501.1352 FA سید میثم موسوی دانشجوی دکتری، گروه قرآن و حدیث، پژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاه، قم، ایران 0009-0007-3964-9068 سید محمود طیب حسینی استاد، گروه قرآن و حدیث، پژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاه، قم، ایران. 0000-0001-5681-0270 Journal Article 2023 11 04 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research Objective:</strong> The primary objective of this study is to examine and analyze verse 74 of Surah al-Anʿām, with a particular focus on the relationship between Prophet Ibrahim and Āzar. The use of the word "Ab" in reference to Āzar in this verse raises fundamental questions regarding the meaning and connotation of the term and its compatibility with theological perspectives. On one hand, if "Ab" is taken to mean "biological father," then considering that Āzar was a polytheist, this interpretation conflicts with Shiʿi theological foundations, and it encounters a problem.  On the other hand, some Sunni Qur’anic exegetes accept this relationship and argue that it poses no contradiction with the prophetic status of Hazrat Ibrahim. As a result, this issue has been a matter of considerable debate among both Sunni and Shiʿi exegetes. This study specifically concentrates on a comparative analysis of two prominent Shiʿi Qur’anic exegeses: Tafsīr al-Mīzān by ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī and Min Waḥy al-Qurʾān by ʿAllāmah Faḍlullāh. The goal is to reach a fair and well-supported judgment concerning the meaning of the term "Ab" and other associated discussions in this verse. The paper seeks to provide a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the topic by analyzing and evaluating various exegetical perspectives.<br /><strong>Research Methodology:</strong> This study employs a comparative method to examine and contrast the two aforementioned Qur’anic exegeses: al-Mīzān and Min Waḥy al-Qurʾān. Although both works are authored by Shiʿi scholars, they present differing views in their interpretations of verse 74 of Surah al-Anʿām. By conducting a detailed comparative analysis, the author aims to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each Qur’anic exegesis and ultimately arrive at a well-reasoned and holistic conclusion regarding the actual meaning of the word "Ab" and the surrounding discussions. Additionally, the study traces the historical development of exegetical opinions on this matter to provide a broader and deeper perspective.<br /><strong>Findings:</strong> The findings reveal that ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī, in his interpretation of verse 74, not only seeks to affirm the Shiʿi theological view regarding the relationship between Prophet Ibrahim and Āzar but also critically engages with opposing views and evaluates them. He utilizes exegetical and theological tools to conduct an in-depth analysis of the term "Ab", correlating it with other Qur’anic verses and reliable narrations to strengthen his arguments with scholarly and interpretive precision. Conversely, ʿAllāmah Faḍlullāh attempts to critique Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s view and presents an alternative interpretation of the verse. He approaches the issue from a fresh perspective and employs distinct analytical methods. Nevertheless, this study contends that Faḍlullāh’s critiques of Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s view are not particularly robust, and some of them face logical and interpretive challenges.<br /><strong>Conclusion:</strong> The conclusion of this study indicates that both Tafsīr al-Mīzān and Min Waḥy al-Qurʾān endeavor to provide reasoned and comprehensive interpretations of verse 74 of Surah al-Anʿām. Despite the differences in the perspectives of these two prominent Shiʿi Qur’anic exegetes, each has striven to carefully examine various dimensions of the issue and reach conclusions based on their theological and scholarly frameworks. These differing interpretations reflect the complexity and multifaceted nature of the issue and underscore the need for precision and attentiveness in Qur’anic interpretation—especially in matters such as the familial relationships of Prophets. Moreover, it appears that historical and contextual factors have influenced the formation of the exegetical perspectives. In particular, ʿAllāmah Faḍlullāh’s critique of Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s view may have been shaped by specific intellectual movements within the Islamic world. These contextual influences may have played a significant role in the divergence of their interpretive approaches.  آیه 74 سورۀ انعام یکی از آیاتی است که با تعبیر «آب» نسبت «آزر» با حضرت ابراهیم را بیان نموده است. این نسبت اگر به معنای پدر حقیقی باشد با توجه به مشرک بودن «آزر» با مبانی کلامی شیعه و همچنین دیدگاه برخی از اهل سنت ناسازگار است. از سوی دیگر برخی از اهل سنت این نسبت را صحیح دانسته و منافاتی میان آن و نبوت پیامبران نمی‌بینند. ذیل آیۀ 74 سورۀ انعام محل بحث و تضارب آرای بسیاری از مفسران در این مسئله بوده است. هدف این نوشتار این است که در میان آراء مطرح‌شده ذیل این آیه به قضاوتی منصفانه و مستدل در مورد واژۀ «أب» و مباحث پیرامون آن برسد. برای نیل به این مقصود ذیل رویکرد تفسیر تطبیقی و با روش توصیفی تحلیلی بین دو تفسیر المیزان و من وحی القرآن که با وجود شیعه بودن مؤلفان، در این موضوع بیانات متفاوتی دارند، مقایسه ‌شده است. این روش به همراه نگاهی اجمالی به سیر تطور دیدگاه مفسران ذیل این آیه نگاه جامعی به ابعاد این مسئله ایجاد می‌کند. این بررسی‌ها نشان می‌دهد علامه طباطبایی در تحلیل خود از این آیه تلاش نموده است تا با نگاهی جامع علاوه بر اثبات دیدگاه کلامی شیعه دلایل مخالفان این دیدگاه را نیز نقد نماید. هرچند علامه فضل‌الله تلاش کرده است دیدگاه علامه طباطبایی را نقد نماید؛ اما در کنار ضعف این نقدها می‌توان شرایط محیطی علامه فضل‌الله را نیز در اتخاذ این رویکرد مؤثر دانست. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_191941_c7ae99a16cef783e09061885c90c5f0c.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 A Comparative Thematic Analysis of the Story of Hazrat Musa and Khidr in Tafsīr al-Tasnīm and Tafsīr al-Nemūneh بررسی تطبیقی داستان موسی و خضر در تفسیر تسنیم و نمونه با روش تحلیل مضمون 32 61 220268 10.22034/csq.2024.472931.1453 FA یحیی راثی دانشجوی دکتری رشته الهیات و معارف اسلامی گرایش علوم قرآن و حدیث، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، زنجان، ایران. 0009-0008-0752-3548 فرهاد ادریسی عضو هیئت علمی گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث دانشکده علوم انسانی دانشگاه آزاد، زنجان، ایران 0009-0073-7754-3400 محمد حسین صائینی دانشیار گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، زنجان، ایران. 0000-0002-0189-3934 حسین مرادی زنجانی استادیار گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، زنجان، ایران. 0009-0073-7754-3400 Journal Article 2024 08 12 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research Objective:</strong> The aim of this research is a comparative study between the Tafsīr Tasnīm and Tafsīr Nemūneh regarding the story of the meeting between Hazrat Musa and Khidr. Due to characteristics such as the contemporaneity of the two Qur’anic exegetes, the fact that both benefited from the teachings of ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī, the temporal and geographical alignment of their scholarly development and also certain distinctions—such as Tafsīr Tasnīm being a single-author work whereas Tafsīr Nemūneh being a group-authored commentary—these two Qur’anic exegeses were selected for a comparative study of the story of Hazrat Musa and Khidr, to examine and compare the views of the respective exegetes.<br /><strong>Research Methodology:</strong> This study, conducted as a comparative analysis between Tafsīr Tasnīm and Tafsir Nemūneh, employs the method of thematic analysis. Relying on the textual content of the two Qur’anic exegeses, the thematic networks related to the story of Hazrat Musa and Khidr in both exegeses were identified and their systematic structures were mapped out. After mapping the thematic networks concerning the story, the weight of the basic themes under each organizing and overarching theme was also determined.<br /><strong>Findings:</strong> Based on the tables obtained in this study, the differences between the basic themes and organizing themes in the two Qur’anic exegeses are clearly evident. The greatest difference in the basic thematic themes and weight between the two exegeses appears under the overarching theme of knowledge. In Tafsir Nemūneh, under the overarching theme of knowledge, there are seven basic themes categorized under three organizing themes: types of knowledge, the importance of knowledge, and the purpose of knowledge. In contrast, Tafsīr Tasnīm contains 28 basic themes under five organizing themes: the importance of knowledge, types of knowledge, the purpose of knowledge, knowledge-centeredness, and characteristics of divine knowledge.<br />The smallest difference in thematic weight occurs under the overarching theme of education and training. Under this theme, Tafsīr Nemūneh includes 26 basic themes, while Tafsīr Tasnīm has 25. The organizing themes under this overarching theme—such as the etiquette of seeking knowledge, the importance of the teacher, the value of education and training, patience in the pursuit of knowledge, teaching methods, and how to interact with students—are identical in both exegeses.<br />Mystical and ethical points in Tafsīr Tasnīm consist of 22 basic themes, compared to 9 in Tafsīr Nemūneh, indicating a broader spiritual focus in Tasnīm. As for the overarching theme of doubts and objections, Tafsīr Tasnīm includes 18 basic themes, while Tafsīr Nemūneh contains only 5, showing a greater emphasis by Javadi Āmuli on addressing theological and exegetical doubts surrounding the story. The organizing themes in Tasnīm under this category include: the story’s reference to determinism, doubts about Musa’s infallibility, the identity of Hazrat Musa and whether he is Hazrat Musa the son of ʿImrān, the role of Satan in forgetfulness, theological responses to criticisms of the story, the objection to the apparently unjust killing, and the issue of forgetfulness in a major prophet. In contrast, Tafsīr Nemūneh addresses only four organizing themes under this category: response to the objection regarding the killing, the role of Satan in forgetfulness, doubts about Musa’s infallibility, and the identity of Hazrat Musa—each of which is associated with only one basic theme. Meanwhile, in Tafsīr Tasnīm, the basic themes under each organizing theme range from two to five.<br /><strong>Conclusion:</strong> This study revealed that Tafsīr Tasnīm addresses a broader range of themes in the story of Hazrat Musa and Khidr and provides a more detailed elaboration of its concepts. Greater attention is given in Tasnīm to the core narrative, its various dimensions, and especially the characterization of Khidr, resulting in a higher thematic weight for the overarching theme of the story. In line with this deeper focus, the Tafsīr Tasnīm also gives considerable attention to the doubts and theological questions surrounding the narrative and its characters.  Another key area where Tafsīr Tasnīm stands out is in its treatment of the theme of knowledge, which showed the greatest difference in the number and depth of basic themes compared to Tafsīr Nemūneh. This indicates a more comprehensive and analytical approach in Tasnīm, particularly regarding foundational and philosophical elements of the narrative. داستان‌های قرآنی فقط جنبه روایت‌گری و تاریخی ندارند بلکه شامل طیف وسیعی از آموزه‌های اخلاقی، عرفانی، اجتماعی، علمی و ... هستند. در این میان داستان موسی و خضر به دلیل ویژگی‌های خاص آن، مورد توجه مفسران قرار گرفته است. در این پژوهش، متن دو تفسیر تسنیم و نمونه با استفاده از روش تحلیل مضمون مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت و شبکه مضامین هر دو تفسیر در ارتباط با داستان موسی و خضر ترسیم ‌شده است. بررسی تفسیر نمونه نشان داد که مضمون فراگیر علم در این تفسیر شامل 7 مضمون پایه و 3 مضمون سازمان‌دهنده است. مضمون نکات عرفانی و اخلاقی در تفسیر نمونه شامل 9 مضمون پایه است. مضمون شبهات پیرامون داستان در تفسیر نمونه 5 مضمون پایه و4 مضمون سازمان‌دهنده است و در نهایت مضمون داستان در تفسیر نمونه شامل 34 مضمون پایه است. بررسی تفسیر تسنیم نشان داد که مضمون فراگیر علم در این تفسیر شامل 28 مضمون پایه و 5 مضمون سازمان‌دهنده است. مضمون نکات عرفانی و اخلاقی در تفسیر تسنیم شامل 22 مضمون پایه است. مضمون شبهات پیرامون داستان در تفسیر تسنیم 18 مضمون پایه و 7 مضمون سازمان‌دهنده است و در نهایت مضمون داستان در تفسیر تسنیم شامل 60 مضمون پایه است. مضمون تعلیم و تربیت، کمترین تفاوت بین دو تفسیر در این مضمون دیده می‌شود،26 مضمون پایه در تفسیر نمونه و 25 مضمون پایه در تسنیم استخراج شد که سازمان‌دهنده‌های آن در هر دو تفسیر یکسان است. بنابراین تفسیر تسنیم دایره وسیع‌تری از مضامین را نسبت به تفسیر نمونه پوشش داده و به جنبه‌های بیشتری از داستان موسی و خضر پرداخته است. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_220268_02973fedc2ac6bed51f9788ca5889d4e.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 A Comparative Evaluation of the Narrative Types Attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās Regarding the Virtues of the Ahl al-Bayt (PBUH) (With an Emphasis on the Exegetical Narrations from Both Sunni and Shiʿi Traditions) ارزیابی تطبیقی گونه‌های روایی منقول از ابن‌عباس در باب فضائل اهل‌بیت‌(ع) (با تأکید بر تفاسیر روایی فریقین) 62 83 193766 10.22034/csq.2024.426092.1363 FA نصرت نیل ساز دانشیار گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران. 0000-0002-8580-5574 الهام زرین کلاه استایار گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، مرکز آموزش عالی اقلید، اقلید، ایران. 0000-0003-0874-7136 Journal Article 2023 11 20 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research Objective:</strong> The objective of this study is to establish the position of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), especially Imam ʿAlī (peace be upon him), within the exegetical narrations transmitted from Ibn ʿAbbās. The significance of this topic stems from the fact that numerous narrations in various fields of Qur’anic exegesis have been attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās in both Sunni and Shiʿi sources. According to Islamic tradition, Ibn ʿAbbās is regarded as the foremost exegete after ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib. Therefore, the perspective of Ibn ʿAbbās—renowned as one of the most eminent Qur’anic exegetes and a translator of the Qur’an—toward the Ahl al-Bayt (PBUH) holds particular importance.<br /><strong>Research Methodology:</strong> This research adopts descriptive and library methods accompanied by data analysis. The statistical corpus includes classical, medieval, and later narrative Qur’anic exegetes from both Sunni and Shiʿi traditions, selected based on the frequency and importance of their reported exegetical narrations. Narrations attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās regarding the virtues of the Ahl al-Bayt were extracted and comparatively evaluated within the context of the relevant verses in these Qur’anic exegetes. A typological categorization of these narrations was then conducted. Additionally, the study examines possible textual variations or transformations between the Sunni and Shiʿi versions of the narrations.<br /><strong>Findings:</strong> The findings indicate a divergence in how Sunni and Shiʿi Qur’anic exegetes transmit narrations on the virtues attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās. Among Shiʿi exegetes, figures such as Furāt al-Kūfī, al-Ḥuwayzī, and al-Baḥrānī actively report narrations supporting the Ahl al-Bayt and affirming their divine guardianship [Wilāyah]. In contrast, other exegetes such as Shaykh al-Ṭūsī and al-Ṭabrisī generally refrain from highlighting these virtues, not due to skepticism about Ibn ʿAbbās himself, but due to their broader conciliatory approach aimed at promoting inter-sectarian unity and avoiding discord. Among early Shiʿi Qur’anic exegetes, the number of narrations in al-Tafsīr ʿAyyāshī is limited, possibly because he prioritized jurisprudential issues and ruling verses [Āyāt al-aḥkām] over the reporting of virtues.<br />Among Sunni Qur’anic exegetes, one group avoids reporting such narrations altogether, while another shows greater fairness and includes more of them. Tafsīr works like those of Muqātil ibn Sulaymān, ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Ṣanʿānī, and al-Ṭabarī’s Jāmiʿ al-Bayān fall into the former category. Meanwhile, Tafsīr al-Kashf and Tafsīr al-Bayān by al-Thaʿlabī belong to the latter, indicating that his approach was more neutral and focused on transmitting exegetical narrations regardless of verifying their authenticity or theological implications.<br /><strong>Conclusion:</strong> This study concludes that the largest number of narrations concerning the virtues of the Ahl al-Bayt attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās in Sunni narrative exegetical works appear in al-Durr al-Manthūr and the Shiʿi Tafsīr of Furāt al-Kūfī. Notably, the chain of transmission in all these narrations generally follows the route: al-Kalbī from Abū Ṣāliḥ from Ibn ʿAbbās. Undoubtedly, the quantity of such narrations in various Qur’anic exegeses is influenced by the theological orientation and exegetical tendencies of the Qur’anic exegetes. For instance, al-ʿAyyāshī focused on jurisprudential narrations, al-Ṭabarī’s omission was rooted in doctrinal bias, and Shaykh al-Ṭūsī and al-Ṭabrisī limited their inclusion of such narrations due to their ecumenical outlook. On the other hand, the Qur’anic exegeses like those of Furāt al-Kūfī (due to theological motives), and of al-Thaʿlabī and al-Suyūṭī (due to their more impartial reporting), offer a broader representation of these narrations.<br />Ultimately, while the number of narrations attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās concerning the virtues of the Ahl al-Bayt varies across Qur’anic exegeses depending on the exegetical approach, the absence or limitation of such narrations does not negate their existence, nor does it undermine Ibn ʿAbbās’s established position. Beyond mere statistics, Ibn ʿAbbās—recognized as one of the most prominent exegetes among the Companions and the interpreter of the Qur’an—clearly understood and conveyed that the Ahl al-Bayt (PBUH) were the referents, intended meaning, and true interpretation of numerous Qur'anic verses. از مهم‌ترین موارد مشهود در روایات تفسیری ابن‌عباس -به‌عنوان یکی از مفسران مشهور صدر اسلام- ذکر فضائل اهل‌بیت (ع) به‌ویژه حضرت علی (ع) است. پژوهش حاضر که با رویکرد تطبیقی و روش توصیفی-تحلیلی و کتابخانه‌ای انجام‌گرفته با مبنا قراردادن اثبات جایگاه اهل‌بیت (ع) در بستر گفتار ابن‌عباس، به دنبال استخراج روایات وی دراین‌باره و گونه شناسی تطبیقی آن در منابع تفسیری فریقین بوده و به این نتیجه دست‌یافته است که غالب روایات فضائل منقول از وی در گونه‌های اسباب نزول، تأویل، تبیین مراد و ذکر صفات نمود می‌یابند. این روایات در اغلب منابع از طریق کلبی از ابی‌صالح از ابن‌عباس نقل‌شده است. فرات کوفی در شیعه و سیوطی در اهل سنت، بیش‌ترین روایت فضائل منقول از ابن‌عباس را آورده‌اند؛ اما برخی مفسران دیگر همچون طبری، شیخ طوسی و طبرسی علی‌رغم نقل میزان قابل‌توجهی از روایات وی در تفاسیر خود، تعداد بسیار محدودی را به ذکر فضائل اختصاص داده‌اند. روشن است که این امر بی‌تأثیر از نوع نگرش مفسر و گرایش‌های تفسیری وی نیست. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_193766_ccaaf241df89164059c93de27e357a12.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 A Study of Objections to the Concept of Religious Dissimulation [Taqiyyah] from the Perspective of Sunni and Shiʿi Exegetes (A Case Study of Āl ʿImrān 3:28, al-Naḥl 16:106, and Ghāfir 40:28) شبهه پژوهی تقیه از منظر مفسران فریقین (مطالعه موردی آیات 28 آل‌عمران، 106 نحل و 28 غافر) 84 105 214838 10.22034/csq.2025.498326.1507 FA محمد مهدوی دانشیار گروه معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران 0000-0002-6644-1082 محمد عظیمی استادیار گروه معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران. 0009-0002-8420-6200 مهدی منزه استادیار، گروه معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران. 0009-0006-3259-3316 Journal Article 2025 01 06 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br />Research Objective: The doctrine of Taqiyyah (Religious dissimulation) is one of the shared beliefs between Shi'a and Sunni Islam and holds a central place in religious texts. Rooted in Qur’anic teachings, this concept has been emphasized in various verses of the Qur’an, and its legitimacy is clearly established. The primary objective of this research is to explore and clarify the concept of Taqiyyah in the Qur’an, analyzing the perspectives of Shi'a and Sunni Qur’anic exegetes, particularly regarding verses 28 of Surah Al-Imrān, 106 of Surah An-Nahl, and 28 of Surah Ghāfir. This study aims to address the objections raised against the Shi'a regarding this doctrine and to identify points of agreement and disagreement between the two Islamic schools of thought concerning the concept and conditions of Taqiyyah.<br /><strong>Research Methodology:</strong> This research employs an analytical-descriptive approach, utilizing reputable library resources to examine and compare the views of Shi'a and Sunni Qur’anic exegetes on the verses related to Taqiyyah. Special attention is given to the perspectives of Sunni Qur’anic exegetes with Salafi and literalist approaches, who have raised objections against the concept of Taqiyyah.<br /><strong>Findings:</strong> The findings of this research indicate that both sects agree on the prohibition of forming alliances with disbelievers, as emphasized in verse 28 of Surah Al-Imrān while permitting association with them in cases of necessity. Regarding verse 106 of Surah An-Nahl, both sects agree that Taqiyyah is permissible under compulsion or fear of harm, but only to the extent necessary. Both Shi'a and Sunni traditions cite the story of Ammar ibn Yāsir in the context of this verse and narrate the famous saying of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) concerning Ammar. In the case of verse 28 of Surah Ghāfir, Shi'a commentators do not specify a particular context for its revelation, while Sunni Qur’anic exegetes attribute its revelation to Abu Bakr's defense of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Both schools of thought emphasize the legitimacy of Taqiyyah based on this verse and propose similar possibilities regarding the identity of the "believing man" mentioned in the verse. The main difference lies in the fact that Shi'a scholars generally do not consider abandoning Taqiyyah permissible under compulsion, whereas Sunni scholars view such an approach as preferable.<br /><strong>Final Conclusion:</strong> Ultimately, this research demonstrates that Shi'a and Sunni Islam agree on the principles and definition of Taqiyyah to the extent that both schools of thought permit it in cases of necessity and to the degree required. The practice of Taqiyyah can take the form of concealment, verbal dissimulation, or practical compliance. Based on this, commentators from both schools of thought believe that, despite the specific contexts of the verses related to disbelievers, the concept of Taqiyyah can be applied in the face of any opposition where the necessary conditions are met. Additionally, Taqiyyah is permissible for religious leaders unless it leads to harm to the religion. Except for some literalist Qur’anic exegetes, most scholars from both schools of thought have reached a common interpretation of this doctrine. تقیه به‌عنوان یک آموزه اساسی در ساحت اجتماعی - سیاسی اسلام، همواره موردتوجه تحلیل‌گران و مفسران بوده است. درحالی‌که تقریباً تمام مسلمانان بر اصل مشروعیت این مفهوم توافق دارند، برخی از مفسران اهل سنت شبهاتی را نسبت به آن مطرح کرده‌اند. ازجمله ادله بنیادین این آموزه، آیات قرآن کریم است که در این پژوهش به روش تحلیلی و توصیفی و با استفاده از منابع کتابخانه‌ای، تفسیر این آیات از منظر فریقین موردبررسی قرارگرفته است. هدف اصلی این تحقیق، روشن‌سازی وضعیت تفاوت یا اشتراک میان دیدگاه شیعه و اهل سنت در خصوص تقیه است. نتایج حاصل از این بررسی نشان می‌دهد که هم شیعه و هم سنی در تعریف و اصول تقیه، هم‌نظر هستند و هر دو بر اساس آیات قرآن، این عمل را در شرایط اضطراری و به میزان ضرورت مجاز می‌دانند؛ درعین‌حال، این ضرورت تعیین‌کننده کیفیت عمل تقیه است که ممکن است به شکل کتمانی، زبانی یا عملی باشد. به‌جز برخی مفسران با رویکرد ظاهرگرایانه یا سلفی، مفسران دیگر به تفسیر مشترکی از این آموزه دست‌یافته‌اند. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_214838_53d028939aa4260709d7ed7d4c8c8288.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 A Comparative Study of the Originality of the Creation of the Universe and Humanity from the Perspective of the Quran and Philosophers بررسی تطبیقی ابداعی‌بودن آفرینش جهان و انسان از نظر قرآن و فیلسوفان 132 154 214839 10.22034/csq.2025.483123.1479 FA سیدروح الله حسینی علی‌آباد دانش آموخته دکتری علوم قرآن و حدیث موسسه آموزشی و پژوهشی امام خمینی، قم، ایران. 0000-0003-2027-6007 حمید آریان دانشیار گروه تفسیر و علوم قرآن، مؤسسه آموزشی و پژوهشی امام خمینی، قم، ایران 0000-0001-6102-3650 Journal Article 2024 10 12 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research Objective:</strong> This research aims to clarify the Quranic depiction of the originality of the creation of the universe and humanity, and also to demonstrate what philosophers intend by the term "origination" (ibdāʿ) and the conclusions of their thoughts regarding the originality of the creation of the universe and humanity. After presenting the views of the Quran and philosophers on the issue of the original creation of the universe and humanity, the two perspectives are compared, highlighting their points of agreement and divergence, and ultimately demonstrating the superiority and comprehensiveness of one over the other.<br /><strong>Research Method:</strong> The methodology of this study is documentary, and the problem-solving is conducted through a descriptive-exegetical approach to extract the Quranic perspective. In the exploratory phase of the verse analysis, both literal and conceptual search methods were employed, and various verses were collected and examined based on their implications, from which the Quranic viewpoint on the subject was inferred. In reporting and analyzing the views of philosophers, a descriptive-analytical method was used, while the comparison and differentiation between the Qur’anic and philosophical viewpoints on the subject were conducted using a comparative—and at times critical—approach.<br /><strong>Findings:</strong> The findings of the research indicate that in the Quran, "originality" (ibdāʿ) is used to mean unprecedentedness and the absence of a need for a prior model. The relevant verses consistently indicate the original creation of the universe and humanity. However, in philosophical terminology, "originality" refers to the creation of something without the need for pre-existing matter or time. The logical relationship between the Qur’anic concept of originality and its technical meaning among prominent philosophers is one of generality and specificity, with the Qur’anic concept being more comprehensive, encompassing the creation of entities preceded by matter. Philosophers do not agree on the originality of the creation of the universe and humanity; some consider the creation of the material world or the non-material world to be original. Therefore, most philosophers do not regard the creation of humanity as original. Only those philosophers who view originality as the bestowal of existence by God consider the existence of the universe and humanity to be original. Most philosophers regard the matter of human creation as original but consider the creation of the human body to be from pre-existing elements. In contrast, the Qur’an, unlike the prevailing philosophical view, asserts that the creation of the human body is also original. The Quranic perspective differs from that of philosophers in two key points: first, the Qur’an explicitly states the originality of the creation of the universe and clearly indicates the originality of human creation, whereas the philosophers' view on the originality of human creation is ambiguous. Second, according to the Quran, the creation of material entities is original, whereas the majority of the prominent philosophers do not consider it to be so. The issues faced by philosophers include a lack of consensus on the instances of original creation and the use of the term "originality" in a non-literal sense without contextual indicators.<br /><strong>Final Conclusion:</strong>  For the creation of humanity from matter, the Quran does not use the Arabic term "badāʿ" or its derivatives; however, it employs synonymous terms such as "inshāʾ(bringing into being), " "ibd'āʾ(origination)", "faṭr," (primordial creation) and "khalq" (creation) which, in the presence of other contextual indicators, signify a mode of creative origination. Divine creation, according to the Qur’an, is not contingent upon a pre-existing matter or substrate; rather, God brings things into existence ex nihilo ("from nothing"). From the Qur’anic perspective, both the creation of the universe and the creation of the human being—whether in terms of the spiritual or the physical dimension—are considered acts of origination. This is because human creation, either in terms of the combination of matter and form or solely in terms of form, does not require a prior blueprint, and the spiritual dimension is not dependent on any primordial material. Moreover, in light of its unprecedented nature, human creation is considered a unique act of origination even among the various forms of divine creation. این مقاله در صدد بیان دیدگاه قرآن و فلاسفه در موضوع ابداعی‌بودن آفرینش جهان و انسان است و با شیوه مطالعه اسنادی و روش پردازش توصیفی-تحلیلی-تفسیری به بررسی تطبیقی دیدگاه قرآن و فیلسوفان در این باره می‌پردازد. یافته‌های تحقیق حاکی است که ابداع در قرآن به معنای بی‌سابقه‌بودن و عدم نیاز به الگوی قبلی به کار رفته و آیات مرتبط با مسئله، به صورت هماهنگ بر آفرینش ابداعی جهان و انسان دلالت دارند؛ اما ابداع در اصطلاح فلاسفه به‌معنای ایجاد شیء بدون نیاز به ماده و زمان است. نسبت منطقی مفهوم ابداع در قرآن با اصطلاح آن نزد مشهور فلاسفه عام و خاص مطلق است و مفهوم ابداع قرآنی اعم از ابداع فلسفی بوده و شامل خلقت موجودات مسبوق به ماده هم می‌گردد. فلاسفه درباره ابداعی بودن آفرینش جهان و انسان اتفاق‌نظر ندارند؛ برخی خلقت اصل عالم ماده و یا عالم غیرمادی را ابداعی شمرده‌اند و لذا مشهور فلاسفه آفرینش انسان را ابداعی نمی‌دانند. برخی فیلسوفان ابداع را افاضه وجود از طرف خداوند می‌دانند و وجود عالم و انسان را از این باب ابداعی می‌شمارند. فلاسفه ماده آفرینش انسان را ابداعی و خلقت جسم انسان را از مکونات می‌دانند؛ ولی ازنظر قرآن برخلاف دیدگاه مشهور فلاسفه آفرینش جسم انسان نیز ابداعی است. دیدگاه قرآن در دونقطه با نظر فلاسفه تمایز پیدا می‌کند: اول صراحت بیان قرآن در ابداعی بودن آفرینش جهان و ظهور بیان آن در ابداعی بودن خلقت انسان؛ درحالی‌که نظر فلاسفه درباره ابداعی بودن خلقت انسان ابهام دارد. دوم از دیدگاه قرآن آفرینش مخلوقات مادی ابداعی است ولی ازنظر مشهور فلاسفه ابداعی نیست. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_214839_d1451f682ba0beddf389626379ee45ff.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 A Comparative Study of the Views of the Qur’anic Exegetes Ayatollah Javadi Amoli and Seyyed Quṭb on the Theory of Monotheistic Politics بررسی تطبیقی آراء مفسران آیت‌الله جوادی آملی و سید قطب در خصوص نظریه سیاست توحیدی 132 154 193799 10.22034/csq.2024.419989.1346 FA محمد اکبری استادیار گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، قم، ایران. علیرضا کاوند دانشیار گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، تهران، ایران. سید محمود موسوی درچه دانشجوی دکتری رشته تفسیر تطبیقی، دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، قم، ایران. 0009-0002-8705-1347 Journal Article 2023 11 01 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research Objective:</strong> This study aims to examine and compare the theory of monotheistic politics as presented by Seyyed Quṭb and Ayatollah Javadi Amoli. The research seeks to identify and extract the similarities and differences between the two viewpoints to reach a desirable model of monotheistic politics for an Islamic society. In Islam, politics—as well as other practical aspects of human life—revolve around the principle of monotheism (Tawḥīd) and must serve to guide humanity toward the heights of divine unity. This is because the political systems and principles of individuals and societies are founded upon their worldviews and intellectual perspectives. The monotheist and the monotheistic society, based on Qur’anic verses, recognize sovereignty and governance as belonging solely to God and construct their political principles and system on the foundation of monotheism. In contrast, the polytheist and the atheistic society base their political principles on materialism, the pursuit of greater benefit, and dominance over others by any means.<br /><strong>Research Methodology:</strong> This study uses a library-based method and adopts an analytical-comparative approach to examine the religious and exegetical texts of Seyyed Quṭb as a Sunni scholar and Ayatollah Javadi Amoli as a Shi‘i scholar. The study identifies and extracts the similarities and differences in their theories, both in their viewpoints and in their underlying foundations.<br /><strong>Findings:</strong> Seyyed Quṭb and Ayatollah Javadi Amoli share views in certain areas, such as the comprehensiveness of religion, the flow of monotheistic belief through all practical aspects of human life, and the mutual influence of human domains on one another, as well as the idea that the root of politics lies in a monotheistic worldview. However, there are fundamental differences in some issues. Ayatollah Javadi Amoli explains the unity in belief and diversity in action through the concepts of the arc of descent and the arc of ascent. He maintains not only the effect of belief on action but also the reciprocal effect of action on belief, with ethics mediating between the two. He presents this view clearly and systematically. In contrast, Seyyed Quṭb refers to the manifestation of monotheism in laws and actions but does not address the nature of this manifestation or the reasons for unity and diversity. He also does not explain the reciprocal relationship between belief, ethics, and action or the mediating role of ethics between belief and action, which indicates a shortcoming in the analysis and explanation of his theory.<br /><strong>Conclusion:</strong> The foundation and basis of all human orientations in life are rooted in one’s beliefs and convictions. Intellectual perspective and belief play the highest role in shaping and nurturing a person’s ideological system and political policies. Therefore, the human ideological and political system is a product of one’s thinking and belief and a derivative of one’s worldview. Islam is a comprehensive religion encompassing all aspects of human life and provides laws, regulations, commands, and practices for each of these aspects, based on a monotheistic worldview. One of the most important practical areas of human life is the domain of politics and governance, which lies within the scope of Islam’s monotheistic guidance. Thus, monotheistic politics and governance are contingent upon monotheistic belief. Monotheism flows into and is manifested through action; and if someone is a monotheist, their political behavior and governmental laws must align with their monotheistic worldview and belief. Consequently, every law and regulation in Islam has its roots in monotheistic beliefs. All dimensions and domains of human life are intertwined, coordinated, and interconnected. Beliefs influence actions, and actions influence perspectives and beliefs. Politics affects economics, culture, security, education, and health—and vice versa. اسلام برنامه جامع و فراگیر زندگی است که در پرتو قوانین محکم، ثابت و پیوسته، در عرصه‌های گونان حیات بشری گسترده است. امروزه عرصه سیاست با وجود مداخله سیاست‌های استعماری در جوامع اسلامی، بیش از پیش نیازمند تبیین و تدقیق است. آیت‌الله جوادی آملی و سید قطب از مفسران و چهره‌های شناخته‌شده در تفسیرهای اجتماعی سیاسی، در جهان اسلام با نظریه‌پردازی در این زمینه، تأثیر عمیقی بر جریان‌ها و گروه‌های سیاسی جهان اسلام داشته‌اند. نظر به اهمیت این مسئله در این مقله به روش توصیفی-تحلیلی به بررسی تطبیقی آرای این دو مفسر پرداخته شد و چنین به دست آمد که سید قطب و آیت‌الله جوادی آملی، چنانچه در بعضی از موارد، مانند جامعیت دین و جریان اعتقاد توحیدی در همه شئون عملی زندگی انسان و همچنین تأثیر و تأثر شئون و حوزه‌های مختلف انسان در یکدیگر و این‌که اصل و ریشه سیاست در بینش و عقیده توحیدی است، اشتراک دیدگاه دارند؛ اما در برخی مسائل، افتراقات اساسی دارند. آیت‌الله جوادی آملی، چگونگی و چرایی وحدت در عقیده و کثرت در عمل را با تبیین قوس صعود و قوس نزول، بیان می‌کند و همان‌طور که به تأثیر عقیده در عمل معتقد است، به تأثیر عمل در عقیده با واسطه‌گری اخلاق در میان عقیده و عمل نیز باور دارد و آن را کاملاً شفاف و مضبوط تبیین می‌نماید، برخلاف سید قطب که به تجلی توحید در قوانین و اعمال اشاره دارد؛ اما به چگونگی آن و چرایی کثرت‌ها و وحدت‌ها نمی‌پردازد. همچنین ایشان رابطه متقابل عقیده، اخلاق و عمل و تأثیر و تأثر این‌ها در یکدیگر و واسطه‌گری اخلاق مابین عقیده و عمل را تبیین نمی‌کند که نشان از نقص در تحلیل و تبیین نظریه وی خواهد بود. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_193799_96ef6ef5bfa3de272bb85d5e78a3cd89.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 A comparative study of Misbah Yazdi and Rashid Reza's views on how the first human was created from the perspective of the Qur'an بررسی تطبیقی دیدگاه مصباح یزدی و رشید رضا درباره چگونگی آفرینش نخستین انسان از منظر قرآن 154 179 220210 10.22034/csq.2025.483228.1480 FA امیررضا اشرفی دانشیار گروه تفسیر و علوم قرآن، موسسه آموزشی و پژوهشی امام خمینی ره، قم، ایران 0009-0001-9673-4345 مجتبی مستشرق دانشجوی دکتری علوم قرآن و حدیث، موسسه آموزشی و پژوهشی امام خمینی ره، قم، ایران. 0000-0001-6290-8477 Journal Article 2024 10 13 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research objective:</strong> The present article offers a comparative examination of the views of two prominent Islamic thinkers regarding the interpretation of Qur’anic verses related to the creation of the first human being. The study analyzes and evaluates the perspective of Misbāḥ Yazdī as a representative of traditional exegetes, and that of Rashīd Riḍā as a representative of rationalist interpreters influenced by empirical sciences.<br /><strong>Research Method:</strong> The research employs a descriptive-analytical method, and the data has been gathered through library research. In this method, key concepts and Qur’anic verses related to the topic were first identified, followed by a comparative analysis of the perspectives of the two scholars. The use of credible exegetical sources and relevant scholarly works enabled a precise comparative study and provided greater depth to the analysis.<br /><strong>Findings:</strong> According to the findings, Rashīd Riḍā, influenced by the theory of evolution, has attempted to align Qur’anic verses with this theory. He believes that the Qur’an does not explicitly discuss the method of human creation, and some verses can be interpreted in a way consistent with evolutionary theory. By presenting an allegorical interpretation of creation narratives, Rashīd Riḍā justifies his stance and denies the notion of Adam (PBUH) as the father of humanity. He argues that verses related to human creation can have multiple interpretations that align with contemporary scientific and historical findings. From his perspective, the Qur’an speaks in a manner that does not conflict with the theory of evolution and can be reconciled with it.<br />In contrast, Misbāḥ Yazdī, relying on the apparent meanings of the Qur’an and traditional interpretative principles, considers the theory of evolution an unproven hypothesis that cannot serve as a basis for interpreting the Qur’anic text. He believes that the Qur’an clearly refers to the independent and direct creation of the first human from clay. Specifically, verse 59 of Qur’an 3 and verses 7 and 8 of Qur’an 32 are cited as evidence for the miraculous creation of Adam (PBUH). He emphasizes that the Qur’an’s language is realistic, entirely aligned with external reality, and grounded in the principles of rational discourse.<br />The analysis of the factors contributing to these divergent views reveals that interpretive principles, styles, and the degree of influence from empirical sciences play a crucial role in Qur’anic interpretation. Rashid Reza’s approach, characterized by an emphasis on empirical sciences and an allegorical view of Qur’anic stories, results in a more flexible but less rigorous interpretation. Conversely, Misbāḥ Yazdī’s reliance on the apparent meanings of verses and the authoritative nature of the Qur’an’s language leads to a more robust interpretation aligned with traditional Islamic principles. Differences in the use of interpretative evidence, such as contextual clues, authentic narrations, and Qur’anic indications, significantly impact the conclusions drawn by these two scholars.<br />Rashīd Riḍā interprets the term “nafs wahida” (a single soul) as “human essence,” which can be compatible with the theory of evolution. He maintains that Qur’anic verses in this regard are ambiguous and open to various interpretations. However, Misbāḥ Yazdī considers “nafs wahida” to Adam (PBUH), asserting that all humans descend from him and his spouse. Through a detailed analysis of the context of relevant verses, such as those in Qur’an 3, 32, and Qur’an 2, he demonstrates that the creation of the first human was independent and miraculous.<br />The article also explores how differences in utilizing interpretative evidence, such as authentic narrations and principles of rational discourse, shape these scholars’ conclusions. Misbāḥ Yazdī uses narrations related to the occasion of revelation as valid interpretative tools and underscores the methodological differences between his approach and Rashīd Riḍā’s. In contrast, Rashīd Riḍā incorporates historical narrations and allegorical interpretations to frame his perspective within a rationalist and scientific context.<br /><strong>Result:</strong> In conclusion, this comparative analysis reveals that Misbāḥ Yazdī’s interpretation, due to its coherent principles, precise application of interpretative rules, and appropriate use of evidence, demonstrates greater consistency and strength. In contrast, Rashīd Riḍā’s perspective, despite its innovation in addressing contemporary issues, is less precise due to excessive reliance on empirical sciences and allegorical readings. This study highlights the importance of foundational principles and methodology in providing an accurate and reliable interpretation of sacred texts. Furthermore, the findings suggest that traditional interpretative methods, especially in addressing topics such as the creation of the first human, are more capable of offering comprehensive interpretations aligned with Qur’anic teachings. مقاله حاضر به مقایسه دیدگاه مصباح یزدی از برجسته‌ترین اسلام شناسان معاصر و رشید رضا از مفسران عقل‌گرا، درباره چگونگی پیدایش نخستین انسان از منظر قرآن می‌پردازد. این مطالعه تطبیقی می‌تواند ما را در دست‌یابی به دیدگاه قرآن دراین‌باره یاری کند. روش پژوهش در این نوشتار توصیفی-تحلیلی و روش گردآوری اطلاعات، مطالعه کتابخانه‌ای است. بررسی حاضر نشان می‌دهد که رشید رضا با تأثیرپذیری از نظریات دانشمندان علوم تجربی، کوشیده تا با تأویل ظواهر قرآن، راه حلی برای تعارض ظاهر آیات با نظریه تکامل ارائه و آیات قرآن را همسو با این نظریه تفسیر کند، هر چند در این تلاش چندان موفق نبوده است؛ اما مصباح یزدی این نظریه را فرضیه‌ای اثبات نشده برمی‌شمارد که با تکیه بر آن نمی‌توان از ظاهر قرآن دست کشید. از نظر وی با توجه به مبانی و روش صحیح تفسیر قرآن، آیات آن دلالتی نزدیک به صریح بر خلقت مستقل و مستقیم نخستین انسان از خاک دارد. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_220210_2896c078e07a0ef7c0559d3df3243698.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 A Comparative Study of the "Stages of Human Creation" in Scientific Exegeses: A Case Study of Tafsīr Nemūneh and Tafsīr al-Jawāhir مطالعه تطبیقی «مراحل آفرینش انسان» در تفاسیر علمی مطالعه موردی: تفاسیر نمونه و الجواهر 180 207 201172 10.22034/csq.2024.453647.1414 FA زهره اخوان مقدم دانشیار گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، تهران، ایران. 0000-0003-0591-4445 فاطمه نادی زاده دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد علوم قرآن، دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، تهران، ایران. 0009-0001-2198-4171 Journal Article 2024 04 22 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research Objective:</strong> One of the unique characteristics of the Holy Qur'an is its reference to various phenomena at a time when many scientific disciplines had yet to be discovered. These include descriptions of natural events such as wind and rain, entities like the sea, the earth, iron, and plant fertilization, as well as the stages of human creation. These references are collectively considered manifestations of the Qur’an’s scientific miraculousness (iʿjāz ʿilmī). This study focuses on one specific aspect of this scientific miracle: the stages of human creation as discussed in several Qur’anic verses. On the other hand, among the various methods employed in interpreting the Qur'an, the scientific exegesis approach is the only one that deliberately engages with such verses. It is worth noting that some Qur’anic exegetes, particularly classical ones, do not acknowledge the concept of scientific miracles in the Qur’an and consequently do not adopt the scientific exegetical method. This research, however, sets aside such views and instead focuses on exegetes who accept both the notion of scientific miraculousness and the scientific exegetical method. Interestingly, even among those who share this approach, there exist significant differences in interpretation when it comes to the verses on human creation. These discrepancies suggest that beyond the exegetical method itself, other critical factors influence the outcome, such as the exegete’s theological perspective, their familiarity with contemporary scientific developments, their comprehensive understanding of the Qur'an, and their attentiveness to the textual context of the verses. To explore these interpretive differences, this study selects one Shiʿi and one Sunni Qur’anic exegete: Ayatollah Makārim Shīrāzī, author of Tafsir Nemūneh, and Shaykh Ṭanṭāwī, author of Tafsir al-Jawāhir. The objective is a comparative examination of their interpretations of the stages of human creation. The significance of this topic extends beyond empirical sciences into religious disciplines, particularly Qur’anic exegesis, given the explicit mention of human creation in various Qur’anic verses.<br />Given the centrality of interpretive methodology in understanding the Qur’an, this research focuses on comparing how the two aforementioned Qur’anic exegetes engage with the scientific verses related to human creation. Ayatollah Makārim’s approach to scientific verses is characterized by the application of science to understand the Qur'an, rather than deriving science from the Qur'an. In contrast, Shaykh Ṭanṭāwī’s methodology centers on extracting scientific knowledge directly from the Qur'an.<br /><strong>Research Methodology:</strong> This study employs a descriptive-comparative approach. Initially, the interpretations of Ayatollah Makārim and Shaykh Ṭanṭāwī in Tafsir Nemūneh and Tafsir al-Jawāhir respectively are analyzed. Their views are then compared to identify points of similarity and difference.<br /><strong>Findings:</strong> The study reveals that the two Qur’anic exegetes share similar views on some terms such as “tumnūn” and “ʿalaq”; however, in most areas—including the creation of Hazrat Adam and Eve from clay, māʾ dāfiq (gushing fluid), nuṭfah amshāj (mixed sperm-drop), and the concepts of mukhalaqqah (formed) and ghayr mukhalaqqah (unformed) embryo—they differ significantly. The main source of these differences lies in their respective exegetical methodologies. Ayatollah Makārim’s approach involves employing established scientific findings to explain the Qur’an while emphasizing the context of verses and scientific credibility. Shaykh Ṭanṭāwī, on the other hand, seeks to extract scientific knowledge from the Qur’an, often elaborating in detail and including personal reflections, sometimes without regard to the contextual flow of the verses. Another feature of Tafsir al-Jawāhir is its reliance on unverified scientific theories, such as Darwin’s theory of evolution, which further distinguishes it from Tafsir Nemūneh.<br /><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study concludes that the use of a valid and accurate scientific methodology can help clarify general statements in the Qur’an, aid in the interpretation of scientific verses, and unveil aspects of the Qur’an’s scientific miraculousness. Conversely, reliance on unreliable scientific methods may obscure the intended meaning and diminish the illuminating nature of the Qur’an. This research can serve as a valuable resource for scholars interested in the intersection of empirical science and Qur’anic exegesis. در آیاتی از قرآن کریم به مراحل آفرینش انسان اشاره‌شده که در بیشتر موارد با نظریات علم تجربی و زیست‌شناسی موافق است و خود می‌تواند نشانه اعجاز علمی قرآن باشد. یکی از رویکردهای مفسران معاصر نیز در تفسیر آیات خلقت انسان، تفسیر علمی آیات است. باوجود یکسانی در رویکرد، شاهد تفاوت در نتایج تفسیر علمی آیات هستیم. بدین‌جهت مسئله مقاله پیش‌رو مطالعه تطبیقی «مراحل آفرینش انسان» در تفاسیر علمی معاصر همچون تفاسیر نمونه و الجواهر است که به روش توصیفی_ تطبیقی به آن می‌پردازد. بنا بر نتایج تحقیق باوجود استفاده هر دو تفسیر از رویکرد علمی، در موارد کمی مثل معانی «تُمنون» در آیات 59-58 سوره قیامت و واژه «علقه» دارای تشابه و نتیجه یکسان هستند و در غالب موارد مثل موضوع آفرینش حضرت آدم و حوا از خاک، ماء دافق، نطفه أمشاج، مُخَلّقه و غیرمخلقه بودن جنین و مواردی از این قبیل دارای دیدگاه‌های متفاوتی هستند. همچنین طنطاوی با استفاده از نظریات علمی همچون نظریه تکامل داروین که امروزه مخالفان زیادی دارد به تفسیر آیات پرداخته؛ درحالی‌که با سیاق آیات مربوطه سازگاری ندارد. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_201172_cd0f8cafb87fce8f4e300c7eaa551d46.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 An Analysis of the Reasons Behind the Selection and Arrangement of Divine Attributes in Surah al-Nas [Qur’an 114] Based on the Sunni and Shi'i Exegeses واکاوی علل انتخاب و چینش صفات الهی در سوره مبارکه ناس بر اساس تفاسیر فریقین 208 235 220212 10.22034/csq.2025.477190.1466 FA مهیار خانی مقدم استادیار گروه الهیات- قرآن و حدیث، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران 0000-0001-5791-4039 Journal Article 2024 09 06 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research Objective:</strong> This study aims to investigate the reasons behind the selection and arrangement of the divine attributes at the beginning of Surah al-Nas [Qur’an 114]. This is based on the understanding that divine wisdom renders every lexical employment in the Qur’anic discourse meaningful. It is evident that God, the Wise, who possesses numerous blessed names and attributes, has purposefully employed the three attributes “Lord (Rabb),” “God (Ilah)” and “King (Malik)” in this Surah. One of the important elements in human lifestyle is belief, and undoubtedly, the arrangement of words and divine attributes in the Qur’an can influence individuals’ perspectives, inclinations, and actions. Accordingly, analyzing the causes of the selection and ordering of words in the verses of the Holy Qur’an can yield guiding insights for human guidance.<br /><strong>Research Methodology: </strong>This study has been conducted through a library-based method, and the data were analyzed using a descriptive-analytical approach. Initially, over 120 authoritative Qur’anic exegeses from both Shia and Sunni traditions, spanning from the early Islamic centuries to the contemporary period, were selected and studied. Relevant points regarding the opening verses of Surah al-Nas were extracted from them. The data were then categorized and analyzed concerning the two main aspects of the research question: the reasons behind the selection of these three divine names and attributes, and the reasons for their specific ordering.<br /><strong>Findings: </strong>The findings of this study reveal that with the shift in the initial audiences of the Qur’an and the development of societies and sciences, Qur’anic exegesis experienced transformations, leading to the addition of interpretative views and an engagement with new dimensions of Qur’anic knowledge. Reviewing the Qur’anic exegeses of both schools of thought from the early centuries to the modern period shows a gradual increase in attention to the selection and arrangement of the three divine attributes “Rabb,” “Malik,” and “Ilah” in Surah al-Nas [Qur’an 114]. From the sixth century onwards, due to scientific exchange with other regions and the elevation of audience inquiries, the number of Qur’anic exegetes seeking answers to such questions increased. Observing the cultural context of Islamic societies in analyzing the development of interpretive attention to the mentioned verses is considered an appropriate method for understanding exegetical approaches.<br />The analysis of exegetical views indicates that, due to the significance of hidden evils and their crucial role in human perfection, the three divine attributes—“Rabb,” “Malik,” and “Ilah”—which correspond to essential spheres of human life, were selected. These attributes not only respond to the innate call within humans but also remind them of God's constant power, sovereignty, and grace, thereby fostering and enhancing the motivation to seek refuge in Him. However, Satan, through misleading responses to this innate call, seeks to divert humans from the dangers of these hidden evils and to present a deceptive image of false lords, kings, and deities, to mislead them into seeking help from such entities, ultimately rendering their efforts ineffective.<br />Qur’anic exegetes generally regard the current arrangement of the three attributes in Surah al-Nas as reflecting divine wisdom aimed at using familiar human concepts to facilitate understanding. Moreover, given the alignment of this order with the gradual process of human material and spiritual development—both from an intellectual and mystical standpoint—there exists an inherent acceptance in humans of the presence of a divine benefactor and guide throughout all stages of life. This, once again, supports seeking refuge in the sole omnipotent and generous Being to intelligently confront hidden evils. Another significant point is the emphasis on the stepwise relationship between these attributes, suggesting that they function complementarily to exert a complete influence on human life. Just as a person realizes that to witness the effect of something, it must be followed by another element, so too does he comprehend that accepting divine Lordship alongside acknowledging God's sovereignty and kingship yields quantitative and qualitative impact. Furthermore, recognizing God's kingship and sovereignty, coupled with the acceptance of His divinity, effectively guides one in the proper management of hidden evils.<br /><strong>Conclusion:</strong> Among the reasons for the selection of the three attributes “Rabb,” “Malik,” and “Ilah” in this Surah are the critical nature of hidden evils, responding to the innate human call, fostering and enhancing the motivation to seek divine refuge, and preventing deviation in the path of seeking protection. Additionally, the reasons behind the specific order of these three attributes can be attributed to their relevance to ordinary human life, their alignment with the gradual process of material and spiritual growth, and the complementary function of each attribute as influenced by its predecessor. حکمت الهی، هرگونه استخدام واژه‌ها در کلام الهی را معنادار می‌نماید و بر این اساس، تحلیل علل برگزیدن و ترتیب کلمات در آیات قرآن کریم، می‌تواند داده‌های رهگشایی را برای هدایت بشر، به دست بدهد. بدین رو، پژوهش حاضر با روش توصیفی- تحلیلی و بر مبنای تأمّل در تفاسیر فریقین به دنبال فهم چراییِ انتخاب و ترتیب صفات الهی در سوره ناس است. پس از بررسی سیر تطور رویکرد مفسران فریقین، تحلیل آراء ایشان انجام پذیرفت و بر اساس نتایج آن، می‌توان از خطیر بودن شرور پنهانی، پاسخگویی به ندای فطری انسان‌ها، ایجاد و ارتقای انگیزه برای پناه بردن به خدا و جلوگیری از انحراف در مسیر پناه جُستن به‌عنوان دلایل انتخاب سه صفت «رب»، «ملک» و «اله» در این سوره نام برد. همچنین می‌توان دلایل چینش این سه صفت به ترتیب حاضر را ناظر بودن آن به زندگی معمول انسان‌ها، فرایند تدریجی رشد مادی و معنوی انسان و تکمیل نقش صفات با تأثیر از صفات پیشین دانست. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_220212_d99010d3c59b39845a57b466c2a77860.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 A Critical Analysis of James Bellamy’s Revisionist View on the Term “Jibt”: An Approach Based on Sunni and Shiʿi Tafsīr Traditions تحلیل انتقادی دیدگاه اصلاحی جیمز بلمی درباره واژه «جِبْتِ» با رویکرد تفاسیر فریقین 236 257 220215 10.22034/csq.2025.488407.1491 FA باقر ریاحی مهر استادیار، گروه قرآن و مستشرقان، مجتمع آموزش عالی قرآن و حدیث جامعة‌المصطفی العالمیة، قم، ایران. 0000-0002-6476-0776 Journal Article 2024 11 12 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research Objective:</strong> The central issue of this study is to examine the validity of James Bellamy’s claim concerning the Arabic word jibt. By utilizing the viewpoints of both Sunni and Shi‘i Qur’anic exegetes along with linguistic principles, the accuracy or inaccuracy of Bellamy’s assertion can be determined. Through precise academic analysis and recourse to Qur’anic lexicons, Qur’anic exegeses, and historical records, the fallacy and inadequacy of Bellamy’s assumption can be demonstrated. This reveals that the most accurate and effective terms and expressions are those authentically found in the Qur’an and its conventional orthography. Replacing such terms yields no result other than supporting the notion of verbal distortion in the Qur’an. Furthermore, Bellamy’s theory aligns with his presuppositions and parallels with the scriptures of the Bible and the Torah, but cannot be fully applied to the Qur’an. It must be noted that Bellamy’s views are not entirely in agreement with the Muslim discourse on orthographic irregularities.<br /><strong>Research Methodology:</strong> This research employs a descriptive-analytical methodology with a critical approach, involving the collection and analysis of relevant data to examine Bellamy’s reformist view regarding the word jibt.<br /><strong>Findings:</strong> The findings reveal that no alteration or distortion has occurred concerning this word that would necessitate emendation. Bellamy’s perspective lacks credibility due to its reliance on the assumption that the Qur’an is comparable to the previous scriptures and due to its incompatibility with the historical facts of the Qur’an’s transmission, its oral mutawātir nature, and the foundational principles of Islamic and linguistic thought as upheld by Muslim exegetes and lexicographers. Various interpretations have been offered by lexicographers, exegetes, and traditionists regarding the word jibt, including meanings such as idol, magician, magic, soothsayer, Iblis, Satan, polytheism, a certain Jewish scholar, a group of Jewish scholars, disbeliever, obstinate opponent, and anything or anyone obeyed in disobedience to God. Therefore, the meaning of jibt cannot be confined to any one of these alone. It may refer to any object of worship other than God or anything set in opposition to Him in acts of worship. As shown, Qur’anic exegetes and lexicographers differ only in the origin, meaning, and referents of jibt, which is an accepted type of scholarly divergence; however, there is no disagreement among them concerning the reading, orthography, or any scribal error regarding this term. Thus, no modification has occurred, and the expression used in the Qur’an and the standard orthographic traditions is correct and meaningful.<br /><strong>Conclusion:</strong> The words used in the Qur’an are authentic and original, and based on Islamic principles (especially the doctrine of non-distortion), any replacement is inadmissible. Bellamy’s proposals to substitute, add, or remove words—often resulting from his assumptions and personal interpretations—are inaccurate and invalid, especially concerning specific Qur’anic terms like jibt. Moreover, Bellamy’s reliance on alleged errors by certain Qur’anic exegetes and Companions in understanding Qur’anic meanings lacks the precision and credibility needed to critique the Qur’anic text. Semantic disagreements among Muslim scholars concerning meanings and concepts of Qur’anic vocabulary are widely accepted and do not, by themselves, indicate scribal errors or verbal distortion. The oral transmission of the Qur’an and the precedence of recitation overwriting are among the most significant historical considerations negating the possibility of such distortions. Since the Qur’an has been transmitted word for word through continuous oral recitation, Qur’anic recitation (Qirā’ah) holds a distinct status in Islamic tradition—an aspect overlooked in Bellamy’s studies. جیمز بلَمی از مستشرقان قرآن‌پژوه با شیوه نقد متن، به تغییر و اصلاح واژگانی از قرآن اقدام نموده است. وی در مقاله «نقد متنی قرآن» در دائره‌المعارف قرآن لیدن با پیش‌فرض وقوع خطای نوشتاری در متن قرآن، مدعی است که واژه‌هایی در قرآن وجود دارد که براثر اشتباه ناسخان و کاتبان وحی از حالت نخستین تغییر کرده است و درنتیجه باید اصلاح گردد و به اصل خود بازگردد. واژه «الجِبت» یکی از این واژه‌هاست که بلمی «الجِّنت» را اصل آن دانسته است. بررسی درستی و نادرستی ادعای بلمی در این خصوص مسئله اصلی در این مقاله است. این مقاله در صدد است با استفاده از روش توصیفی ـ تحلیلی دیدگاه‌های مفسران فریقین را با مبانی زبانشناختی بررسی کند و میزان دقیق و غیردقیق بودن ادعای بلمی را اثبات نماید. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که در مورد این واژه، هیچ‌گونه تغییر و تصحیفی اتفاق نیفتاده است که نیاز به اصلاح باشد. دیدگاه بلمی به دلیل اینکه با پیش‌فرض همسان انگاری قرآن با کتب مقدس همراه است و از دیگر سو با حقایقی از تاریخ قرآن، تواتر شفاهی متن قرآن و درمجموع با مبانی اسلامی و زبان‌شناختی لغت شناسان و مفسران اسلامی تطابق کامل ندارد، بدین ترتیب نمی‌تواند از اعتبار لازم برخوردار باشد. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_220215_5848ee71217e12cbde861d293916aab3.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 A Critical Analysis of Sunni and Shiʿi Exegetes’ Views on the Type of Divorce (Revocable or Irrevocable) Following an Oath of Abstinence (ʾĪlāʾ) in Verses 226 and 227 of Surah Al-Baqarah نقد دیدگاه مفسران فریقین درباره نوع طلاق پس از ایلاء (بائن یا رجعی) در آیات 226 و 227 سوره بقره 258 283 220216 10.22034/csq.2025.477071.1465 FA احسان ابراهیمی استادیار گروه تفسیر، جامعة المصطفی العالمیة، قم، ایران. 0000-0002-8477-8287 سکینه میرزایی طلبه سطح 4، تفسیر تطبیقی، مرکز تربیت مدرس صدیقه کبری (سلام الله علیها)، قم، ایران. 0009-0003-5830-5253 نرجس السادات محسنی دانش آموخته سطح 4، تفسیر تطبیقی، مدرسه عالی معصومیه (سلام الله علیها) خواهران، قم، ایران. 0009-0000-0012-7210 Journal Article 2024 09 05 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Purpose of the Research:</strong> The present study seeks to criticize the views of the Shia and Sunni Qur’anic exegetes on the type of divorce after the oath of abstinence (ʾĪlāʾ) in verses 226 and 227 of Surah Al-Baqarah. The oath of abstinence (ʾĪlāʾ) was one of the challenges of living together in the pre-Islamic Arab era, committed by men to harm women. Therefore, the Holy Qur’an promulgated laws against it so that women could gain their rightful value and rights in society. Given the importance of this issue as an interpretative, jurisprudential, and legal challenge to women in today's society, it is necessary to determine the type of divorce that occurred in the oath of abstinence (ʾĪlāʾ). Is it considered irrevocable, so that the man has no right of recourse, or is it considered a revocable divorce, which leaves the man with the right of recourse? Re-examining the issue of the type of divorce in the oath of abstinence (ʾĪlāʾ)  from the perspective of the Qur’anic verses and delving into the functions and goals of divorce in the Qur’an can resolve unknown dimensions and doubts surrounding this issue and explain the correct perspective of the Holy Qur’an in this regard. In this way, the rights and duties of each man and woman in such problems can be explained and many of the tyrannies and rebellions of some men in the family system in today's society can be prevented.<br /><strong>Research Method:</strong> To conduct this research, library and documentary methods were used to collect research data. In addition, the descriptive-analytical method is used for converting the collected data into information and to reach the desired outcomes. First, the opinions of the Qur’anic exegetes were collected from the reliable exegetical sources of both the Shia and the Sunni. Thereafter, the opinions raised regarding the research topic were criticized for using content analysis, relying on Qur’anic, narrative, and literary evidence, as well as citing Shia and Sunni exegetical and jurisprudential sources.<br /><strong>Findings:</strong> The findings of this study show that the view of realizing irrevocable divorce after the oath of abstinence (ʾĪlāʾ) faces challenges because the argument based on the contrast between the expressions "they return" and " they resolve upon divorce " in the Qur’anic verses is incomplete. On the other hand, divorce after the oath of abstinence (ʾĪlāʾ) is outside the realm of irrevocable divorce. In addition, in contrast to the hadiths indicating irrevocable divorce, there are conflicting hadiths that this group of hadiths does not have the authority to resist. The view that the realization of revocable divorce is based on the principle of revocability also does not seem accurate, because the argument based on this principle depends on the absence of reason to the contrary. While the cases covered by irrevocable divorce are ignored in the issue of the oath of abstinence (ʾĪlāʾ), the possibility of such conditions being fulfilled is not ruled out. According to the chosen view, the verse in question and the narrations interpreting it are applicable; therefore, the aforementioned divorce is absolute and must be considered in detail. This means that divorce after the oath of abstinence (ʾĪlāʾ) can be irrevocable or revocable, depending on conditions such as the woman's minor age, the number of divorces, and the woman's payment of donations and ransom.<br /><strong>Final result:</strong> Finally, this research shows that the divorce mentioned in the verse in question and the narrations interpreting it is applicable and the issue should be considered in detail. This means that divorce after the oath of abstinence (ʾĪlāʾ) can be irrevocable or revocable, depending on conditions such as the woman's minor age, the number of divorces, and the woman's payment of donations and ransom. This research can be cited as a reliable source for researchers in the field of studying the type of divorce in the oath of abstinence (ʾĪlāʾ), to explain the correct view of the Holy Qur’an in this field and to explain the rights and duties of each man and woman in such problems, and as a result, important effects can be achieved in improving the legal conditions of women in today's civil society.<br />  ایلاء در عرب جاهلی، دست‌آویزی برای آزار زنان بود که مرد سوگند یاد می‌کرد بیشتر از چهار ماه یا تا ابد با همسر خود همبستر نشود؛ بدین‌گونه زن در سرگردانی شوهردار بودن یا بی‌شوهری می‌ماند. خداوند برای دفاع از حقوق زن، در آیات 226 و 227 سوره «بقره» در مسئله ایلاء به مردان چهار ماه مهلت داده و آنان را میان رجوع یا طلاق زن مخیر ساخت. مسئله اصلی در این پژوهش، نقد دیدگاه مفسران درباره نوع طلاق پس از ایلاء در این آیات با روش توصیفی-تحلیلی است. یافته‌های تحقیق نشان می‌دهد دیدگاه تحقق طلاق بائن پس از ایلاء با چالش‌هایی روبه‌روست؛ زیرا استدلال به تقابل واژگان «فاؤُا» و «عَزَمُوا الطَّلاقَ» در آیات، ناتمام است؛ از سویی طلاق پس از ایلاء از قلمرو طلاق بائن خارج است. همچنین در مقابل احادیث بیانگر طلاق بائن، روایات معارضی است که این دسته از روایات، صلاحیت مقاومت در برابر آن را ندارند. دیدگاه تحقق طلاق رجعی نیز با استدلال به قاعده اصل رجعی بودن، دقیق به نظر نمی‌رسد؛ زیرا استدلال به این اصل، در گرو عدم وجود دلیل مخالف است؛ درحالی‌که موارد مشمول طلاق بائن در بحث ایلاء نادیده گرفته شده و امکان تحقق چنین شرایطی نفی نمی‌گردد. بر اساس دیدگاه برگزیده، آیه محل بحث و روایات مفسر آن، اطلاق دارند؛ بنابراین طلاق مذکور، مطلق است و باید به تفصیل قائل شد؛ یعنی طلاق پس از ایلاء با توجه به شرایطی همچون صغیره بودن زن، عدد طلاق، بذل و فدیه دادن زن، می‌تواند بائن یا رجعی باشد. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_220216_de3dade165c6a3b73a017098b95aadd9.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 A comparative study of Al-Mizan and Al-Furqan interpretation methods based on some verses related to women بررسی تطبیقی روش تفسیری المیزان و الفرقان در برخی از آیات مربوط به زنان 284 309 193800 10.22034/csq.2024.388838.1282 FA نفیسه آذربایجانی استادیار گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، قم، اصفهان، ایران. 0009-0006-2208-2109 هدی صادق زادگان دانش آموخته کارشناس ارشد علوم قرآن و حدیث دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران. 0009-0007-8558-9772 Journal Article 2023 03 13 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research Objective:</strong> This article conducts a comparative study of the Quranic hermeneutical method known as the "Quran-by-Quran exegetical method" in two prominent Qur’anic exegeses: Tafsīr al-Mīzān by Allamah Ṭabāṭabāī and Tafsīr al-Furqān by Ayatollah Ṣādiqī Tehrānī. Although both exegetes employed the Quran-by-Quran method, their interpretive outcomes in certain cases differ and at times, contradict one another. The primary aim of this research is to address the following questions:  <br />- Are the interpretive results of these two exegetes consistent despite their shared methodology?  <br />- What are the points of convergence and divergence between these two exegeses in interpreting specific verses?  <br />- On what exegetical foundations and interpretive styles are these differences based?  <br /><strong>Research Methodology:</strong> This study adopts a comparative and analytical approach to examine the Tafsīr al-Mīzān and the Tafsīr al-Furqān. For this purpose, Qur’anic verses related to women (namely verses 222 and 223 of Surah Al-Baqarah and verses 34 and 128 of Surah An-Nisa) were selected as case studies. The interpretations of these verses in both al-Mīzān and al-Furqān were meticulously analyzed word by word. The analysis focused on identifying points of convergence and divergence in interpretive methods, the use of similar verses, attention to variant readings (qirāʾāt), and interpretive outcomes.  <br /><strong>Research Findings:</strong> <br />- Points of Convergences: Both exegetes utilize the Quran-by-Quran method and acknowledge the role of hadith alongside the Quran in interpretation. Additionally, both exegetes address social and jurisprudential issues and maintain independence from the opinions of other commentators.  <br />- Points of Divergences: Significant differences are observed in the interpretive styles and outcomes of the two exegetes. For instance, Allamah Ṭabāṭabāī places greater emphasis on the context of the verses, while Ṣādiqī Tehrānī maximizes the lexical potential of the words. Furthermore, Ṣādiqī Tehrānī presents unique and, at times, unconventional jurisprudential opinions that are absent in Tafsīr al-Mīzān.<br />- Interpretation of the Verses: In interpreting verses related to women, notable differences emerge between the two exegeses. For example, in interpreting verse 222 of Surah Al-Baqarah, Allamah Ṭabāṭabāī views the isolation of women during menstruation as a prohibition on sexual intercourse, whereas Ṣādiqī Tehrānī extends this prohibition to include any form of physical intimacy, including touching and stimulation. Similarly, in interpreting verse 34 of Surah An-Nisa, both exegetes affirm the guardianship of men over women, but Ṣādiqī Tehrānī conditions this guardianship on the man's ability to fulfill his responsibilities.  <br /><strong>Final Conclusion:</strong> This article sought to examine the Quran-by-Quran interpretive method and demonstrate that, although contemporary exegetes such as Allamah Ṭabāṭabāī and Ayatollah Ṣādiqī Tehrānī are proponents of this method, their shared methodology does not lead to identical interpretive outcomes. In many cases, their interpretations diverge or even contradict each other, addressing the first research question.  <br />The second research question was answered by examining four verses related to women, highlighting the points of convergence and divergence between the two exegetes. Reiterating these findings would unnecessarily extend the discussion.  <br />Regarding the third research question, it can be concluded that while the foundational principles of both exegetes are largely similar, differences in their application lead to divergent conclusions. For example, Ṣādiqī Tehrānī's approach includes: maximizing the lexical potential of Qur’anic words, occasionally presenting jurisprudential opinions without detailed reasoning, placing greater emphasis on variant readings (qirāʾāt), Attention to the different meanings of synonymous words in the Qur’an, utilizing the causes mentioned in certain verses—without examining whether these causes are sufficient (sufficient cause) or incomplete (incomplete cause)—and presenting an interpretation based on assuming them to be sufficient causes, Unique and, at times, unconventional jurisprudential opinions, and so on. یکی از پرسابقه‌ترین روش‌های تفسیر قرآن کریم، روش تفسیری قرآن‌به‌قرآن است. هرچند که سابقه این روش به زمان پیامبر بازمی‌گردد؛ اما مفسران معاصری همچون علامه طباطبایی و شاگرد ایشان آیت‌الله صادقی تهرانی این روش را در تفاسیرشان احیا نمودند. باآنکه روش تفسیری هر دوی این مفسرین، روش قرآن‌به‌قرآن اعلام‌شده؛ اما باوجود اشتراکات زیاد، تفاوت‌های بسیاری نیز در تفاسیر آنان دیده می‌شود. هدف در این مقاله پی‌جویی روش تفسیر قرآن به قرآن در این دو تفسیر و پاسخ به این سؤالات است که باوجود ثابت بودن روش تفسیری این دو مفسر، آیا نتایج به‌دست‌آمده از تفسیر آیات نیز در اثر هر دو مفسر یکسان است؟ نقاط افتراق و اشتراک این دو تفسیر در یک آیه مشخص چیست و بر اساس چه مبنایی به وجود آمده است؟ بر این اساس، تحقیق حاضر با روش تحلیلی و استفاده از منابع کتابخانه‌ای و به‌منظور مصداقی شدن مقاله، آیات پر چالش 222 و 223 بقره و نیز آیات 34 و 128 سوره نساء را بررسی و تفسیر این دو مفسر از آیات را بازگو و آن‌ها را بررسی تطبیقی نموده است. بهره‌گیری از آیات مشابه برای فهم معنای لغوی کلمات و ارائه معنا برای برخی از واژه‌ها بدون ارجاع به کتب لغت دو مورد از مشترکات و استفاده صادقی تهرانی از ظرفیت لغوی کلمات به‌کاررفته در آیات و حمل بر معنای حداکثری، عدم استدلال در برخی از نتیجه‌گیری‌ها، عنایت بیشتر به قرائات و تأثیر آن‌ها در تفسیر، نظریات فقهی منحصربه‌فرد و بعضاً شاذ و ... ازجمله تفاوت‌هایی است که می‌توان میان الفرقان و المیزان مشاهده نمود. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_193800_c90fa91e9c76fee3f3dfd93b1cfda707.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 Comparative Narrative Exegesis of Sūrat al-ʿAṣr [Qur’an 103] from the Perspective of Sunni and Shiʿi Qur’anic Exegetes تفسیر تطبیقی روایی سوره عصر از دیدگاه مفسران فریقین 310 339 214840 10.22034/csq.2025.482659.1477 FA فاطمه پورمحمدی طلبه سطح 4، تفسیر تطبیقی، مدرسه علمیه رفیعه المصطفی، تهران، ایران. 0009-0001-0869-3687 Journal Article 2024 10 09 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research Objective:</strong> This study aims to conduct a comparative analysis of the exegetical narrations from both Sunni and Shiʿi traditions concerning Sūrat al-ʿAṣr [Qur’an 103]. As one of the shortest chapters in the Qur’an, this surah conveys profound and significant themes related to the necessity of faith, righteous action, exhortation to truth, and perseverance. The primary objective is to identify the points of convergence and divergence between the two schools of thought in interpreting this Surah—particularly with respect to the context of revelation (shaʾn al-nuzūl), variant readings, and the interpretation of key terms and concepts. Additionally, this study seeks to present the more substantiated exegetical perspective based on rigorous analysis of relevant narrations, thereby clarifying the role of transmitted reports in understanding the divine intent behind the verses of the Surah.<br /><strong>Research Methodology:</strong> This research employs a descriptive-comparative approach, incorporating data collection from narrative sources, and analysis of both the chains of transmission (isnād) and content (matn) of the narrations. It assesses available contextual evidence to determine their reliability. The study compares various narrative-based Qur’anic exegeses on Sūrat al-ʿAṣr from authoritative Shiʿi and Sunni sources. Narrations attributed to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family), the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), the Companions, and the Followers (Tābiʿūn) are examined with regard to their authenticity and interpretive implications. Both classical and contemporary sources are used to identify and analyze the key similarities and differences in the interpretive approaches of the two traditions.<br /><strong>Findings:</strong> The findings show that while both Shiʿi and Sunni exegetes agree on the importance of faith, righteous deeds, enjoining the truth, and perseverance in the interpretation of this Surah, there are significant differences in their identification of the referents and meanings of these concepts. Shiʿi Qur’anic exegeses often associate Sūrat al-ʿAṣr with the time of the reappearance of Imam al-Mahdī (may Allah hasten his reappearance) and emphasize the divine guardianship of Imam ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib (peace be upon him). In contrast, Sunni Qur’anic exegeses typically regard the Surah as a general admonition to believers, with figures such as Abū Jahl and Abū Lahab being cited as examples of those in loss. Regarding the term ʿAṣr, Shiʿi exegeses interpret it as a reference to the era of the Mahdī’s reappearance or a special period in Islamic history. Sunni exegeses, however, interpret it as time in general, the passage of ages, or specifically the time of the afternoon prayer. In interpreting the verse “Indeed, man is in loss”, Shiʿi Qur’anic exegetes attribute this “loss” primarily to the enemies of the Ahl al-Bayt, while Sunni Qur’anic exegetes interpret it more generally, applying it to all humanity except those who believe and do righteous deeds.<br /><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This research concludes that although there are areas of agreement between Sunni and Shiʿi Qur’anic exegeses of Sūrat al-ʿAṣr [Qur’an 103], substantial differences exist, rooted in the theological and jurisprudential orientations of the two traditions. These differences are evident not only in lexical and conceptual interpretation but also in identifying the practical referents of the terms. Ultimately, the study emphasizes that a deeper understanding of the Qur’anic message necessitates engagement with a range of narrations and interpretive perspectives, which collectively contribute to a more comprehensive apprehension of the divine intent. سوره عصر یکی از سوره‌های مکی قرآن کریم است که در جزء سی‌ام قرار دارد و به‌طور مختصر و مفید به راه‌های دستیابی انسان به سعادت و رستگاری اشاره می‌کند. اهل سنت و شیعه با استفاده از منابع و روایات مختلف، تفاسیر متفاوتی از این سوره ارائه داده‌اند. بر اساس تفسیر اهل سنت، سوره عصر بر اصول معروف مانند ایمان، عمل صالح، توصیه به حق و بهره‌مندی از صبر و استقامت تأکید دارد و بیانگر اهمیت عمل به معروف و نیکی در راستای سعادت دنیوی و اخروی است. در مقابل، تفسیر شیعه این سوره را به موضوع امامت مرتبط می‌داند و معتقد است که سوره عصر به وعده‌های الهی در خصوص ظهور امام مهدی (عج) اشاره دارد. در این مقاله با استفاده از روش توصیفی- تطبیقی، روایات موجود در منابع شیعه و اهل سنت ذیل سوره عصر با یکدیگر مقایسه شدند تا شباهت‌ها و تفاوت‌های موجود در این روایات و نقاط تمایز و اشتراک آن‌ها مشخص شود. نتایج تحقیق نشان داد که تفاوت تفسیر سوره عصر در اهل سنت و شیعه ناشی از تفاوت دیدگاه‌ها در خصوص جانشینی پیامبر و رهبری امت اسلامی است. اهل سنت این سوره را به‌عنوان تذکری عمومی برای ایمان و عمل صالح می‌بینند؛ درحالی‌که شیعه آن را مرتبط با امامت و ظهور امام مهدی (عج) تفسیر می‌کند. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_214840_c0325331c3e6d4a6bc2299307deeba2b.pdf

دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی 3115-7890 9 2 2025 03 15 Typology of the Use of the Bible in the Qur’anic Exegeses of al-Mīzān, al-Atharī al-Jāmiʿ, and al-Furqān with an Emphasis on Surah al-Baqarah گونه‌شناسی بهره‌گیری از عهدین در تفاسیر المیزان، الاثری الجامع و الفرقان با تأکید بر سوره بقره 340 364 220221 10.22034/csq.2025.460177.1432 FA علی بیژن نژاد دانش‌آموخته سطح چهار حوزه، تفسیر و علوم قرآن/ فقه و اصول، مرکز تخصصی آخوند خراسانی (ره)، مشهد مقدس، ایران 0009-0002-8565-2907 مهدی برزگر دانش‌آموخته سطح چهار حوزه، تفسیر و علوم قرآن/ فقه و اصول، مرکز تخصصی آخوند خراسانی (ره)، مشهد مقدس، ایران. 0009-0009-7099-1851 مهدی قدوسی دانش‌آموخته سطح چهار حوزه، تفسیر و علوم قرآن/ فقه و اصول، مرکز تخصصی آخوند خراسانی (ره)، مشهد مقدس، ایران. 0009-0009-7099-1851 Journal Article 2024 05 29 <strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br /><strong>Research Objective:</strong> This research aims to examine the types of applications of the existing Torah and Gospel in the interpretation of the Holy Qur’an, with the goal of quantitatively and qualitatively developing the resources for the interpretation of the Holy Qur’an. The interpretation of historical verses, especially those related to Christianity and Judaism and their holy scriptures, sometimes necessitates referring to the Old and New Testaments, or at least referring to them can help in a more accurate understanding. For example, Islamic sources and even historical sources alone cannot adequately examine the verses related to the Israelites and their Prophets or even the nations and Prophets before them, or they face serious limitations and issues. Additionally, the possibility of scholarly examination of verses that directly pertain to the Torah and the Gospel and their texts cannot be achieved without referring to the texts of the Torah and the Gospel. Therefore, the main question is: What applications can be found for the claimed Torah and Gospel in the interpretation of the Holy Qur’an? Naturally, other preliminary questions arise, such as: Do these three Qur’anic exegetes fundamentally believe in the distortion of the Old and New Testaments? Or, is it permissible from their perspective to use the Old and New Testaments in the interpretation of the Qur’an, which they have utilized in their interpretations ؛or, like Allamah Ṭabāṭabāī's approach to narrations, he has used them for other reasons despite their assertion of their invalidity and impermissibility?<br /><strong>Research Methodology:</strong> This study uses a descriptive-analytical method drawing upon library resources to compare three Qur’anic Exegeses. The Tafsīr of al-Mīzān and al-Atharī al-Jāmiʿ, as the pioneers of two contemporary Shia exegetical trends, and the Tafsīr of al-Furqān, which have made the most use of the Old and New Testaments, are the focus of this research. In addition, due to the space limitations of the article and the unfinished status of the Tafsīr al-Atharī al-Jāmiʿ after Surah Al-Baqarah, as well as the presence of a considerable number of verses related to the Israelites in this blessed Chapter, Surah Al-Baqarah was chosen as the scope of this research. After determining the scope, to answer the preliminary questions, the views of these three Qur’anic exegetes in their various works were examined, and finally, by extracting the instances of using the Old and New Testaments in their exegesis books, they were classified and organized.<br /><strong>Research Findings:</strong> The results of the research show that despite the serious differences in the type of distortion of the Old and New Testaments between Allamah Ṭabāṭabāī and Ayatollah Sadiqi Tehrani, who believe in the verbal distortion of the Torah and the Gospel, and Ayatollah Ma’rifat, who differentiates between the distortion of the original version of the Torah and the distortion of the existing versions, all three exegetes agree on the possibility of using the Old and New Testaments in the interpretation of the Qur’an. They consider the Old and New Testaments at least as a referable historical source, although they set conditions for it. Ultimately, by examining the performance of these three Qur’anic exegetes in Surah Al-Baqarah alone, a total of nine types of applications were identified for the use of the Old and New Testaments in the interpretation of the Holy Qur’an: "Using to identify fabrications in Islamic sources, mutual affirmation of the Qur’an and the Old and New Testaments, refutation against the Old and New Testaments, effort to determine the instances of verses, detailing a historical process mentioned in the Qur’an, preferring an exegesis opinion, mutual understanding of narrations and the Old and New Testaments, mutual understanding of the Qur’an and the Old and New Testaments, understanding words and their etymology."<br /><strong>Final Conclusion:</strong> In addition to accepting the distortion of the Old and New Testaments in any verbal or semantic form, the possibility and permissibility of using them in the interpretation of the Qur’an were established in these three Qur’anic exegeses. By reviewing and organizing them, nine types of applications of the Old and New Testaments in the interpretation of the Qur’an were identified, which can naturally be completed with more comprehensive studies in all Surahs of the Qur’an. تفسیر آیات تاریخی به‌خصوص آیات مربوط به مسیحیت و یهودیت و کتب مقدس آنان، در مواردی نیازمند مراجعه به عهدین است و یا دست‌کم مراجعه به آن‌ها به فهم دقیق‌تر کمک می‌کند. پرسش آن است که آیا رجوع به عهدین برای تفسیر قرآن کریم با توجه به تحریف شدن آن‌ها ممکن است و اگر ممکن است چه کاربردهایی برای استفاده از عهدین در تفسیر قرآن کریم متصور است؟ این اثر تلاش دارد با استفاده از منابع کتابخانه‌ای و روش توصیفی-تحلیلی و در مقایسه میان سه تفسیر مهم معاصر شیعی که بعضاً بیشترین موارد استفاده از عهدین را هم داشته‌اند به این دو پرسش پاسخ دهد. نتایج پژوهش نشان می‌دهد علی‌رغم اختلاف جدی در نوع تحریف عهدین میان آیت‌الله معرفت با علامه طباطبایی و آیت‌الله صادقی تهرانی، هر سه قائل به امکان استفاده از عهدین در تفسیر قرآن بوده هرچند برای آن ضوابطی قائل‌اند. درنهایت و با بررسی عملکرد این سه تفسیر تنها در سوره مبارکه بقره، درمجموع نه قسم کاربرد برای استفاده از عهدین در تفسیر قرآن کریم شناسایی شد که با بررسی‌های کامل‌تر در همه سور قرآن کریم می‌توان آن را تکمیل کرد. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_220221_381885947218b782532381e453b6649a.pdf