دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723A Comparative Study of the Relationship between Spirit and Divine Command in the Prophetic Experience: Insights from the Qur’an and the Bibleتبیین نسبت «روح» و «امر الهی» در تجربه نبوی: مطالعه تطبیقی قرآن کریم و کتاب مقدس104122078510.22034/csq.2025.502378.1514FAاعظم ساداتشبانیپژوهشگر پسادکترای علوم قرآن و حدیث دانشکده الهیات دانشگاه الزهراء، تهران، ایران0000-0001-5709-865Xفتحیهفتاحی زادهاستاد گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث دانشکده الهیات دانشگاه الزهراء، تهران، ایران0000-0003-1633-0955Journal Article20241127<strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br>Research objective:<br>This study aims to investigate the conceptual and practical relationship between the “Spirit” and the “Divine Command” in the Qur’an and the Bible, and to elucidate the role of this connection in shaping the reception of revelation and the spiritual experiences of prophets, particularly the experience of Mi‘rāj (the Ascension).<br>The central research question is how understanding the “Spirit” as a “divine initiative” can lead to a clearer comprehension of the mechanism of revelation and the transmundane states of the prophet, and to what extent this pattern is shared or differs between the Qur’anic and Biblical traditions.<br>The main hypothesis of the study posits that the “Spirit of God,” in one of its fundamental applications, is essentially identical to the “revelation” or the “divine command” sent down to the prophets, functioning both in the transmission of the divine message and in enabling mystical experiences such as the Mi‘rāj.<br>Methodology:<br>This study follows a comparative-analytical method with an intra-textual approach. The Qur’anic verses and relevant passages from the Bible—including the Tanakh (Old Testament) and the New Testament—containing the keywords “Spirit,” “Command,” “Revelation,” and their equivalents (such as ’emer and dabar in Hebrew, and Logos in Greek) are carefully examined and compared.<br>The primary focus is on analyzing the semantic networks of these concepts within each text and subsequently assessing their similarities and differences across the two religious traditions. Despite the historical distance between the revelations of these texts, this comparative approach is considered valid and methodologically sound due to the Qur’an’s explicit references to previous scriptures and the shared narratives concerning prophetic experiences.<br>Findings:<br>The findings indicate that in both the Qur’an and the Bible, there exists a close and multifaceted relationship between the “Spirit” and the “Divine Command.”<br>In the Qur’an, the Spirit is explicitly described as a “divine initiative” that is immaterial, transcends time and space, and possesses a vitalizing function. This Spirit operates equivalently to revelation, such that in various verses—particularly in the Meccan period close to the Hijrah—the term “Spirit” often substitutes for “revelation” and serves as the primary agent in conveying God’s word to the Prophet (PBUH) and supporting his mission. Furthermore, the possibility of mystical experiences, such as the Mi‘rāj (Ascension), is also explained through this Spirit and its connection with the Divine Command.<br>In the Tanakh, the “Spirit of God” functions as a central agent in the uttering of God’s word to the prophets. This Spirit grants the prophets wisdom, understanding, strength, and the capacity to receive divine revelation. The Hebrew terms ’emer (אֵמֶר) and dabar, meaning “word” or “command,” similarly play a key role alongside the Spirit in shaping the revelatory experiences of the Israelite prophets.<br>In the New Testament, although the concept of prophecy evolved and the focus of the Holy Spirit shifted primarily toward guiding believers and the Church, the revelatory experiences of figures such as Paul and John demonstrate that the Spirit’s guiding role is ultimately analogous to its function in the Qur’an and the Tanakh.<br>Additionally, the concept of the Logos (Word), attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of John, can be partially compared to the “Divine Command” in the Qur’an, with the significant distinction that in the Qur’an, Jesus is a created being and a Word from God, whereas in Trinitarian theology, the Logos is considered an intrinsic part of God’s essence. This study clearly shows that the Qur’an rejects any identification of “God = Spirit” and regards the Spirit as a created entity.<br>This study demonstrates that there exists a reciprocal and equivalent relationship between the “Spirit” and the “Divine Command” in the context of prophecy and revelation. The Spirit, in one of its primary aspects, functions as the divine command, transmitting revelation and empowering the prophet. This pattern is shared between the Qur’an and the Bible, particularly the Tanakh, and understanding both concepts simultaneously provides a clearer explanation of the mechanism of revelation and the experiences associated with it.<br>Accordingly, experiences such as the Prophet’s Mi‘rāj (Ascension) should not be viewed as entirely separate events but as occurring within and based upon this connection between the prophet and the divine Spirit-Command.<br>The main distinction in Qur’anic theology lies in maintaining the boundary between Creator and creation, emphasizing that the Spirit is a created entity. In contrast, in the Christian tradition (New Testament), this boundary is blurred under the influence of Trinitarian doctrine. Furthermore, the direct and addressive style of the Qur’an, compared to the narrative style of the Tanakh, affects the way the audience relates to the concept of God and His command.«امر الهی» در قرآن کریم، مرتبط با وحی و «روح» نیز امری از سوی خداوند است. آیات ناظر به روحِ مرتبط با وحی، مفهوم امر را روشن میکند و به این پرسش پاسخ میدهد که بین «امر» در مصداق وحی با «روح» به معنای امری از سوی خداوند چه رابطهای برقرار است و همچنین نقش آن در تجربۀ نبوی و حالات معنوی نبی، مانند معراج چیست. با توجه به کاربردهای مشابه واژه امر و روح در برخی از فرازهای کتاب مقدس و نقش آن در تجربیات روحانی انبیاء، مقایسه تطبیقی آن با قرآن کریم و ارتباط روح و امر در مقولۀ وحی وضوح بیشتری مییابد. این پژوهش با نگاهی درونمتنی بر قرآن و کتاب مقدس با روش مقایسۀ تحلیلی، ضمن یافتن رابطه امر الهی با روح، نسبت آن را با کیفیت دریافت وحی میسنجد. بر پایۀ این پژوهش مشخص میشود یکی از کاربردهای واژۀ روح در معنای امر الهی، همان وحی است. همچنین بهواسطۀ حقیقت روح در کاربردی همسو با وحی، تجربیات معنوی نبی مانند معراج میسّر میگردد. این نتیجه میان قرآن و کتاب مقدس مشترک است.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_220785_b6d3cfa8a95de93749533230b9dc5c63.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723A Comparative Analysis of Arsh and Kursi in the Views of Sunni and Shi‘a Exegetesمطالعه تطبیقی تفاوت عرش و کرسی از نگاه مفسران فریقین426521996210.22034/csq.2025.508462.1532FAمحمدرضادفتریدانشجوی مقطع دکتری علوم قرآن و حدیث دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران.0009-0001-5548-2663کاوسروحی برندقدانشیار دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، تهران، ایران0000-0003-3474-0421Journal Article20241026Detailed Abstract<br>Research objective:<br>The present study aims to identify and analyze the relationship between two fundamental Qur’anic concepts: Arsh (the Throne) and Kursi (the Footstool). These concepts have long been central to exegetical and theological discussions among Muslim scholars and have consistently raised significant questions in the fields of theology, divine attributes, and the structure of existence.The main question of this research is whether, according to Islamic exegetes and narrations, Arsh and Kursi are considered a single, unified reality with the same meaning, or whether they possess two distinct and independent essences. The significance of this question becomes even clearer when considering that accepting either perspective carries substantial theological and exegetical implications for understanding divine attributes such as sovereignty, knowledge, and providence.
Research method:<br>The research employs an analytical, critical, and comparative approach. Initially, the lexical sources were consulted to examine the basic and etymological meanings of Arsh (the Throne) and Kursi (the Footstool). Subsequently, the views of both Shia and Sunni exegetes were analyzed from historical and content-based perspectives.<br>Following this, prominent narrations concerning these two concepts, as recorded in the hadith collections of both sects, were collected and examined. Finally, by integrating lexical, exegetical, and narrational data, the study formulated its final perspective.<br>A key methodological feature of this research is that, rather than relying solely on the opinions of exegetes, it seeks to evaluate the consistency or contradiction of these opinions with narrations and linguistic foundations, thereby providing a clearer and more nuanced understanding through critical analysis.<br>Findings:<br>1.Proponents of the Unity of Arsh and Kursi;This minority group considers the Arsh (Throne) and Kursi (Footstool) as a single reality. Some, such as al-Tabarani, interpreted both terms literally as “throne” and thus did not distinguish between them. Others, particularly influenced by aniconic and anti-corporeal tendencies, allegorically interpreted both as representing “divine sovereignty and dominion.”<br>2.The main argument of this group rests on lexical similarities and the aim of avoiding attributing corporeality to God. However, careful examination reveals that this approach faces serious challenges. Interpreting Arsh and Kursi literally as thrones implies the acceptance of analogy and corporeal imagery for God, while allegorizing both as “sovereignty” effectively diminishes the evident distinctions present in Qur’anic and narrational texts.<br>3.Opponents of the Unity of Arsh and Kursi:The majority of exegetes fall into this category. While acknowledging lexical similarities, they emphasize the essential distinction between the two concepts. Among them, a variety of perspectives have been proposed: Some, such as al-Tabari and Allameh Tabataba’i, view the Arsh as the manifestation of divine sovereignty and overall providence, and the Kursi as a symbol of divine knowledge. Others describe the Arsh and Kursi as two separate creations, with one encompassing the other. Another group regards them as two immense and independent entities.<br>4.Additionally, some mystics, such as Ibn ‘Arabi, provide an esoteric interpretation, identifying the Arsh with the heart of the Prophet and the Kursi with the hearts of the believers. Each of these views justifies itself based on lexical, Qur’anic, or narrational evidence; however, they also face various critiques and challenges.
Final conlusion:<br>Ultimately, the research concludes that although there are lexical similarities between Arsh (the Throne) and Kursi (the Footstool), they exhibit a clear ontological and epistemological distinction. The Arsh symbolizes divine sovereignty and the overarching dominion of God, serving as the source of cosmic governance, whereas the Kursi reflects detailed divine knowledge and encompasses the physical worlds.<br>This conclusion is fully consistent with the narrations of the Imami tradition, confirming the distinction between the two concepts while emphasizing the superiority and encompassing nature of the Arsh over the Kursi. Therefore, the comparative analysis demonstrates that the Imami perspective is more comprehensive and closer to the narrational texts, providing a reliable framework for correctly understanding the relationship between Arsh and Kursi in Islamic thought.مطالعه و تحقیق مفسران فریقین به هدف فهم معنای صحیح و قرآنی دو واژه مهم عرش و کرسی، موجب پیدایش مسائل متنوعی حول محور این دو کلمه گشته است و بر این اساس، یکی از این مسائل مهم حوزه عرش و کرسی، توجه مفسران و محققان مسلمان به اتحاد و افتراق آن دو کلمه ازنظر لغوی و ماهوی است. پژوهش حاضر به هدف تبیین اتحاد یا تفاوت دو مفهوم عرش و کرسی، ضمن مراجعه به منابع تفسیری و روایی فریقین با استفاده از روش تحلیلی- انتقادی، دیدگاهها و دلایل مفسران موافق اتحاد عرش و کرسی (حمل عرش و کرسی به معنای ظاهری و لغوی تخت، تعبیر عرش و کرسی به مالکیت الهی) و مخالف اتحاد آن دو کلمه (حمل عرش و کرسی به صفات الهی مُلک و علم یا مالکیت و قدرت همراه با تدبیر، تعبیر عرش و کرسی به قلب پیامبر و مؤمنان، صرف تأکید بر تفاوت عرش و کرسی بهعنوان دو مخلوق متفاوت یا دو جسم عظیم محاط) را تحلیل و نقد نموده است و در ادامه با بررسی و تحلیل روایات مرتبط با موضوع تحقیق در جوامع حدیثی فریقین، دریافته است این دو کلمه ضمن برخی مشابهتهای لغوی، ازنظر ماهوی دو حقیقت جداگانه محسوب میشوند به این معنا که عرش مظهر کلی مُلک الهی و منشأ تدبیر و اداره عالم توسط باریتعالی است؛ ازاینرو محیط بر کرسی است و از جهتی دیگر، کرسی مظهر علم جزئی الهی بوده که متعلق به کیفیت عالم است و درنتیجه توسط عرش احاطهشده است.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_219962_4837f85825c6430888a5c51d5a26b0b1.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723An Analytical Review and Critique of Commentators’ Views on the Term “Adribuhunna” in Surah An-Nisā’ (34)بررسی و نقد آراء مفسران پیرامون مدلول «اضربوهن» در آیۀ 34 سورۀ نساء669122187010.22034/csq.2025.469374.1448FAمحمدشریفیوابستگی سازمانی اول: دانشیار، گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، دانشکده الهیات، دانشگاه یزد، ایران.
وابستگی سازمانی دوم(مأمور): دانشیار گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اهل بیت علیهم السلام، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران.0000-0002-5127-5042زهرامحمدیطلبه سطح 3، مرکز تخصصی ریحانه الرسول جویبار، جویبار، ایران.محمد صادقحیدریاستادیار گروه معارف اسلامی دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری، ساری، ایران.Journal Article20240922Research objective:<br>Although Islam, as a comprehensive religion, provides guidance in the Qur’an for regulating familial and marital relationships, certain Qur’anic expressions are today often misunderstood, leading critics to accuse the text of condoning violence against women. One such expression is the term “wa-aḍribūhunna” in Qur’an 4:34. This verse, in the context of male authority (qiwāmah) and the three-tiered approach to dealing with a wife’s nushūz (disobedience), has long been the subject of discussion and debate among jurists and exegetes, while also attracting criticism from opponents of Islam.<br>The present study aims to answer the following questions: What is the precise meaning of the term “wa-aḍribūhunna” in Qur’an 34? What interpretation of the root verb ḍ-r-b can address and refute the aforementioned objections? How does the use of ḍ-r-b and its derivatives in the Qur’an, especially in conjunction with terms such as waʿiẓ (admonition) and hajr (separation or withdrawal), illuminate a new and contextually appropriate understanding of the verse?<br>Methodology:<br>This study was conducted using a descriptive–analytical approach, involving the comparative examination and critical analysis of the interpretations of various exegetes. In addition, the study critically reviewed and evaluated both well-known Persian and non-Persian translations of the verse, as well as the commentaries of classical and contemporary scholars, employing a comparative methodology to highlight differences in interpretation and assess their accuracy.<br>Researche findings:<br>This study, considering the sequential stages mentioned in the verse, interprets “ḍarb” not as physical striking, but rather as admonition and corrective measures, excluding any form of absolute or conditional harm or abuse toward women, which would be contrary to their dignity and Islamic teachings. According to this verse, the recommended steps to improve marital relations are as follows: first, admonition (waʿiẓ); second, separation in bed or turning away from the spouse (hajr); and third, ḍarb, understood as a pedagogical, ordered, and corrective measure, implying a temporary withdrawal from the marital bed rather than any form of physical violence.<br> <br>Final concolusion:<br>Based on the foregoing analysis, this noble verse not only safeguards women’s rights but also serves to protect the family structure from potential disintegration. It provides sequential strategies aimed at preventing divorce and restoring harmony within the marital relationship. The verse emphasizes a process of gradual correction to revive affection (mawaddah) and mercy (raḥmah) in the household. Importantly, both sound reason and Islamic law do not consider the cultivation of marital harmony to involve violence, as indicated by the context of the verse, which seeks to prevent the occurrence of divorce. This is further underscored in the concluding part of the verse: “If they obey you thereafter, do not seek a way against them”—highlighting that the ultimate goal is reconciliation and the preservation of family unity rather than coercion or harm.<br>Most related studies on the subject of disciplining women interpret the term “wa-aḍribūhunna” as permitting physical chastisement of a wife in response to her nushūz (disobedience), following the first two stages of admonition (waʿiẓ) and separation in bed (hajr), as an effective strategy in marital relations. However, the conditions prescribed for such physical discipline in these interpretations are inconsistent with the spirit of Islamic teachings and divine mercy, with women’s dignity and legal rights, with the educational methods of the Prophets and the saints, and even with sound reasoning.In the present study, the stages of a husband’s response to the fear of a wife’s nushūz (disobedience) are explained according to the sequential process outlined in Qur’an 4:34: admonition and advice (waʿiẓ), turning away from the wife in bed (hajr), and finally, separation from the marital bed. The term “ḍarb” is interpreted here as the last stage of this three-tiered process—a gradual, corrective, and advisory measure aimed at family cohesion and the internal reformation of the wife. This method is presented as an appropriate strategy to restore the wife to the center of affection and marital harmony. Certain Prophetic traditions support this understanding, and with this interpretation, there is no need for unnecessary or unacceptable conditions. Moreover, this approach removes grounds for objections or misunderstandings propagated by critics of Islam regarding the verse in question.عدم درک صحیح از برخی تعابیر قرآنی، باعث شده است تا افرادی، این کتاب را به تجویز خشونت علیه زنان متهم کنند. یکی از این تعابیر، «وَاضْرِبُوهُنَّ» در آیه 34 سورۀ نساء است. این آیه با توجه به مباحث قوامیت مرد و مراحل سهگانۀ مقابله با نشوز زن، همواره مدنظر فقها و مفسران از یکسو و مناقشۀ منتقدانِ قرآن از سوی دیگر بوده است. نتایج این پژوهش که به روش توصیفی و با تحلیل انتقادیِ آراء مفسران انجامشده، گویای آن است که گفتمان این آیه، متفاوت از گفتمانی است که پژوهشگران در پژوهشهای پیشین به آن رسیده و مفسران به تفسیر و تحلیل مراحل آن پرداختهاند. نوشتار پیشرو با توجه به سِیر مراحل «ضَرب» در آیۀ مذکور، «ضربِ زن» را غیر از زدن، تنبیه و آزار زن به هر شکلِ مطلق و مقیّد آن دانسته و این مسئله، برخلاف کرامت زن و در تعارض با آموزههای دینی است. بر اساس این آیه، راهکارهای بهبودِ روابط زناشویی به ترتیب: وَعظ، هجر (دوری در بستر خواب و پُشت کردن به همسر) و پسازآن مرحلۀ ضرب (دوری از بستر خواب) بهعنوان یک امر ارشادی، ترتیبی و تربیتی معرفیشده است.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_221870_3df4b8a48f4fa42393cc06183ed2f025.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723A Comparative Study of Allameh Tabataba’i and Allameh Fazlallah on the Qur’anic Verse “Al-Ladhī Yatakhabbatu-hu al-Shayṭānu min al-Mass”ارزیابی تطبیقی آرای علامه طباطبایی و علامه فضلالله در آیه «الَّذی یتَخَبَّطُهُ الشَّیطانُ مِنَ الْمَسِّ»9211322016210.22034/csq.2025.459889.1431FAرحمانعشریهدانشیاردانشگاه علوم ومعارف قرآن کریم. قم. ایران0000-0001-5558-3221زینباحمدیاندانشجوی دکتری تفسیر تطبیقی دانشگاه علوم ومعارف قرآن کریم. قم. ایران0000-0002-2781-5694حامدعشریهدانش آموخته سطح چهار حوزه علمیه قم. قم. ایرانJournal Article20241128Detailed Abstract<br>Research objective:<br>This study aims to conduct a comparative examination of the interpretations of two prominent Shia exegetes, Allameh Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabataba’i and Allameh Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Fadlallah, regarding Qur’an 275<br>"Those who consume interest will not stand except as one whom Satan has caused to stagger by [his] touch."<br>The main focus of this research is to clarify the meaning of “staggering caused by the touch of Satan” and to address the fundamental question of whether this expression refers to an external reality in its literal sense or serves merely as a metaphorical and figurative description of the psychological state of usurers. By critically examining and comparing the reasoning of these two exegetes, the study seeks to evaluate their arguments and identify the interpretation that is most plausible and accurate.<br>Methodology:<br>This study was conducted using a descriptive–analytical approach with a comparative perspective. In the first step, key lexical terms—“khabṭ” (staggering), “Shayṭān” (Satan), and “mass” (touch)—were carefully analyzed through reference to classical linguistic sources. Next, opinions of exegetes from both Shia and Sunni traditions were collected and categorized into two groups: those advocating a literal interpretation and those supporting a metaphorical interpretation. Subsequently, the interpretations of Allameh Tabataba’i in Al-Mizan and Allameh Fadlallah in Min Wahy al-Qur’an were extracted and analyzed in depth. Finally, using a critical methodology, the foundations, evidence, and conclusions of both scholars’ viewpoints were compared, and their strengths and weaknesses were evaluated.<br>Research findings:<br>Allameh Tabataba’i, adhering to the literal interpretation of the verse, argues that the phrase “yatakhabbatuhu al-Shayṭānu min al-mass” refers to an external reality, according to which Satan can, through natural means, disturb human rational faculties and induce a state of madness. He rejects the metaphorical interpretation, asserting that attributing the verse to a false belief would be incompatible with the divine authority and truth of the Qur’an. Additionally, he addresses the potential objection that this interpretation conflicts with God’s justice through two arguments: naqḍī (a negating argument, pointing out that the same issue applies to all natural causes of disease) and ḥillī (a resolving argument, noting that divine accountability is lifted when the intellect is impaired.<br>Allameh Fadlallah, while acknowledging that this interpretation does not conflict with divine justice, advocates a metaphorical understanding of the verse. In his view, the existential nature of Satan, characterized by temptation and seduction, along with human dignity—which is realized through the gift of intellect—does not permit Satan to exert physical control over the human mind. Therefore, the term “Shayṭān” in this verse is metaphorically understood as hidden pathogenic factors (such as microbes), and “mass” refers to the onset of illness. Consequently, the verse merely compares the usurer to a person whose mind has been disturbed, illustrating the moral and psychological consequences of engaging in usury.<br>comparison of the arguments indicates that Allameh Fadlallah’s rationale for interpreting the verse metaphorically, rather than literally, lacks sufficient plausibility. Other Qur’anic verses (e.g., 7:201) affirm the potential influence of Satan, and no conclusive evidence restricts the concept of “Shayṭān” to merely Iblis or temptation. Moreover, if the literal interpretation were a false belief, the Qur’an would have explicitly refuted it. On the other hand, equating “Shayṭān” with microbes or natural causes lacks both rational and textual support and is inconsistent with the nature of the mental disturbances described in the verse. Accepting the metaphorical view could also provide a pretext for endorsing problematic theories, such as the claim that the Qur’an is influenced by the cultural context of its time.جستار پیش رو عهدهدار بررسی چیستی «مسّ شیطان» در آیه ۲۷۵ سوره بقره، از نگاه دو اندیشمند معاصر، علامه طباطبایی و علامه فضلالله است. در این آیه، رباخواران به کسانی تشبیه شدهاند که در اثر مس شیطان دچار خبط شدهاند. اصطلاح «خبط ناشی از مس شیطان» به حالتی از جنون و ذهاب عقل دلالت دارد که مسبب آن، شیطان است؛ اما سخن در آن است که آیا میتوان از دلالت التزامی آیه، واقعی بودن این پدیده و حقیقی بودن تخبط ناشی از مس شیطان را برداشت نمود یا آیه متضمن مجاز در استعمال بوده و واژگان در معنای مجازی بهکاررفتهاند؟ مقاله حاضر بر مبنای روش توصیفی و تحلیلی به ارزیابی و تطبیق دیدگاه علامه طباطبایی و علامه فضلالله پرداخته و از رهگذر سنجش مبانی آرای ایشان به این نتیجه رسیده است که دلایل علامه فضلالله برای اثبات تنافی آثار مس شیطان با ماهیت و فلسفه وجودی او، قدرت انصراف آیه از معنای حقیقیاش را ندارد تا بر معنای مجازی آن حمل شود؛ ازاینرو دیدگاه علامه طباطبایی مبنی بر ضرورت التزام به معنای ظاهری آیه و پذیرش حقیقت آن، به صواب نزدیکتر است.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_220162_23d5a25e0ddd5acf5a137b340b7c0201.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723Exegetical Perspectives on the Accusation of Theft Against Joseph’s Brothers: A Critical Evaluationدیدگاههای تفسیری درخصوص اتهام سرقت به برادران یوسف (ع) در سنجه نقد11413922879610.22034/csq.2025.452260.1408FAمحسندیمه کاردانشیار گروه علوم قرآن و تفسیر، دانشگاه علوم ومعارف قرآن کریم، مشهد، ایران، دانشکده علوم قرآنی مشهد.0009-0001-0870-2942حانیه ساداتسیدیدانش آموخته مقطع کارشناسی ارشد تفسیر و علوم قرآن، مشهد، ایران، دانشکده علوم قرآنی مشهد.0000-0001-5473-8754Journal Article20240413Detailed Abstract<br>Research objective:<br>The possibility of the accusation of theft against the sons of Jacob (peace be upon him) by Joseph (peace be upon him) is one of the exegetical ambiguities in Surah Yusuf, which has led to some erroneous interpretations. This study aims to examine how such an accusation can be justified, taking into account the infallibility of Joseph (PBUH) and the impropriety of accusing individuals who have committed no theft. Another objective of this research is to investigate and critique the use of incorrect methods to achieve seemingly valid conclusions, based on a misreading of this narrative.
Research method:<br>The present study employs a descriptive-analytical method, examining and critically evaluating exegetical opinions and narrations on this topic in order to achieve a more accurate understanding of the verse.
Findings:<br>The main exegetical interpretations of verse 70 of Surah Yusuf, such as the “interrogative sentence,” “double entendre (tawriyah),” “white lie,” “accusation from Joseph,” and “accusation by the court announcer under Joseph’s instruction,” appear weak and unlikely, as they are inconsistent with the apparent meaning and context of the verses as well as with ethical standards; therefore, they are not supported.<br>Among these, Jebai’s view, despite its brevity and shortcomings, has been refined and developed through the exegetical innovations of Sayyid Morteza, including: “informing Benjamin of the plot to gain his consent,” “Joseph placing the cup in his brother’s saddlebag,” “Joseph’s stratagem does not necessarily imply a theft accusation, as other possibilities are conceivable,” “assuming theft without evidence results from haste and error,” and “the announcer’s declaration of theft reflects his own hasty judgment.” These refinements provide a more nuanced and coherent understanding of the verse.
Conclusion:<br>By incorporating additional exegetical innovations derived from the context of the verses, Sayyid Morteza’s interpretation can be presented more comprehensively: Joseph’s (PBUH) primary objective was to retain Benjamin, with whom he had coordinated the plan; therefore, he acted in accordance with divine command to achieve this purpose. Although Joseph placed the cup in Benjamin’s saddlebag, he never intended to accuse his brothers of theft. Furthermore, Joseph’s action itself does not imply the possibility of theft, as other interpretations are conceivable.<br>However, the court announcer did not find the cup and, considering that only the Canaanite brothers had entered the palace at that time, presumed that they had committed theft. Thus, the error lies with the palace announcer, whose arbitrary judgment led him to accuse the Canaanite brothers without evidence or Joseph’s consent. Joseph (PBUH) neither committed a fault nor acted improperly; rather, he carried out the divine command to keep Benjamin close, facilitate the continuation of trials for his father and brothers, and create the conditions for reuniting with his father. Placing the cup in the brother’s saddlebag was done with Benjamin’s consent and, more importantly, in accordance with divine command. Moreover, there is no phrase in the verses indicating “informing the palace announcer of the plan” or “Joseph instructing the announcer to accuse of theft.” There is no evidence that Joseph (PBUH) ambiguously communicated with the announcer.The brevity of the Qur’anic style in mentioning proper names, as well as the contrast between the mention of “Joseph” and the “announcer” in the verse, indicates that the announcer is not Joseph (PBUH) himself but one of the palace heralds. Upon discovering the cup missing and observing the presence of the Canaanite brothers in the palace, the announcer made a hasty and wrongful judgment. However, the hesitation and conditional expressions in the conversation of other palace officials with the brothers, as well as their reference to the missing cup, indicate that they refrained from the theft accusation and addressed the Canaanite brothers more courteously.احتمال اتهام سرقت به فرزندان یعقوب (ع) از سوی یوسف (ع) یکی از شبهات تفسیری در سوره یوسف بوده که سبب برداشتهای ناروایی شده است. مسئله پژوهش این است که نظر به عصمت یوسف (ع) و قبح اتهام به افرادی که سرقتی مرتکب نشدهاند، اتهام به فرزندان یعقوب (ع) چگونه توجیه میشود؟ ازاینرو این مقاله بر پایه روش توصیفی-تحلیلی، آراء و روایات تفسیری در این موضوع را در بوته بررسی و نقد قرار داده تا به خوانش بهتری از این آیه دست یابد. بررسیها نشان میدهد دیدگاههای تفسیری ذیل آیه 70 سوره یوسف ازجمله «جمله پرسشی»، «توریه»، «دروغ مصلحتی»، «بیان اتهام از سوی یوسف»، «بیان اتهام از سوی منادی دربار به دستور یوسف» ضعیف و با سیاق آیات همخوانی ندارد. در این میان دیدگاه ابوعلی جبائی که با ابتکارات سید مرتضی توسعهیافته، بهتر مینماید بدین صو رت که یوسف (ع) به امر خداوند بهمنظور نگهداشتن برادرش جام را در رحل او گذاشت و او را از آن آگاه کرده بود. همچنین او را در معرض اتهام سرقت نگذاشت؛ زیرا وجود جام در رحل برادر، احتمالات دیگری بهجز سرقت را در بردارد؛ پس انصراف آن به سرقت جز با دلیل ممکن نیست، ندا منادی که آنها سارق هستند نیز به امر یوسف (ع) نبود. یکی از درباریان چنین ندا کرد آنگاهکه جام را نیافتند و چنین پنداشتند که آنها جام را دزدیدهاند. لیکن با افزودن نوآوریهای تفسیری از سیاق میتوان این دیدگاه را مستدل و کاملتر مطرح نمود. همچنانکه از این رهگذر میتوان به شبهه عدم جواز بهرهگیری از روش نادرست برای رسیدن به مقاصد مطلوب پاسخ داد.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_228796_52516618e5566acb89568411f035a091.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723Assessing the Social Orientation in Martyr Morteza Motahhari’s and Sayyid Qutb’s Interpretations of Surah Al-Mumtahanahارزیابی مؤلفههای گرایش اجتماعی شهید مطهری و سید قطب در تفسیر سوره ممتحنه14016320002010.22034/csq.2024.455774.1420FAمحمدجوادشیرمردیدانشآموخته سطح سه تفسیر و علوم قرآن، بنیاد بینالمللی علوم وحیانی اسراء، قم، ایران0009-0003-8617-0296محمدجوادجعفرملکدانشآموخته سطح سه تفسیر و علوم قرآن، بنیاد بینالمللی علوم وحیانی اسراء، قم، ایران.علی اصغرشعاعیدانشیار گروه تفسیر و علوم قرآن، دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، قم، ایران0000-0001-9502-4686Journal Article20240712Detailed Abstract<br>Research objevtive: <br>The present study aims to compare the social orientation of Martyr Morteza Motahhari and Sayyid Qutb in their exegesis of Surah Al-Mumtahanah, which contains significant social themes, based on the components of social interpretation. These components have been addressed in various books and articles, with some points of divergence but largely points of consensus.<br>This study seeks to evaluate the social orientation in the interpretations of Motahhari and Qutb regarding Surah Al-Mumtahanah by relying on the widely agreed-upon components. Given the expansion of social issues and societal transformations over the past century, the need for a social reading of the Qur’an has become increasingly apparent, leading to significant growth in social exegesis. Among the scholars contributing to this field, Ayatollah Motahhari and Sayyid Qutb are recognized as prominent social interpreters of the Qur’an.
Methodology:<br>This study employs a descriptive-analytical approach. First, the concept of exegesis was examined with reference to lexical sources, and the nature of social interpretation was explored through valuable works in Qur’anic and exegetical studies. Subsequently, Motahhari’s exegesis in Familiarity with the Qur’an (Ashna’i ba Qur’an), specifically his commentary on Surah Al-Mumtahanah, and Sayyid Qutb’s exegesis in In the Shade of the Qur’an (Fi Zilal al-Qur’an) were studied.<br>Each scholar’s commentary was analyzed according to relevant social interpretation components, and then the two interpretations were compared from the perspective of social orientation, highlighting their respective strengths and weaknesses. Most of the components were determined based on the content of Surah Al-Mumtahanah.<br>Findings:<br>The findings of this study indicate that a social interpretation should include components appropriate to its purpose. For Surah Al-Mumtahanah, the following components can be used to evaluate the social exegesis of Martyr Motahhari and Sayyid Qutb:<br>1. Defining the principles of Muslims’ relations with non-Muslims<br>2. Employing clear and eloquent expression<br>3. Explaining the philosophy behind the rulings<br>4. Addressing doubts and questions<br>5. Adopting a society-building and civilizational perspective on the Qur’anic teachings<br>These components are derived from the content of Surah Al-Mumtahanah, although they can also be applied to other surahs with similar themes.<br>According to the study, Motahhari paid considerable attention—both quantitatively and qualitatively—to the component of “defining the principles of Muslims’ relations with non-Muslims.” He also extensively employed the component of “clear and eloquent expression,” which is characteristic of all his works, not only in exegesis, but in a style accessible to the general public while appealing to scholars. Additionally, he focused heavily on “explaining the philosophy behind the rulings” within verses of legislation, which significantly contributes to addressing doubts and questions among youth, as many of their doubts arise when Qur’anic rulings are explained to them. This emphasis enriches the component of “addressing doubts” within social interpretation.<br>Sayyid Qutb also aimed to enrich his social exegesis by addressing each of these components. Notably, he placed particular emphasis on the component of “adopting a society-building and civilizational perspective on Qur’anic teachings,” which distinguishes his social orientation from that of Motahhari.بهموازات گسترش مباحث اجتماعی و تحولات جامعه در صدسال اخیر، نیاز به تفسیر اجتماعی قرآن کریم بیشازپیش احساس شد و این گرایش تفسیری رشد چشمگیری کرد که در این میان آیتالله مطهری و سید قطب از اندیشمندان و مفسران اجتماعی قرآن کریم شناخته شدند. مقاله حاضر به روش توصیفی ـ تحلیلی و با هدف ارزیابی گرایش اجتماعی این دو عالم در تفسیر سوره ممتحنه ـ که مضامین اجتماعی دارد ـ تدوینشده است. در این نوشتار پس از تبیین مؤلفههای گرایش اجتماعیِ دو مفسر در تفسیر سوره ممتحنه، دیدگاههای ایشان بر پایه مؤلفههای یادشده مورد ارزیابی قرارگرفته است. از مهمترین نتایج پژوهش حاضر این است که شهید مطهری در توجه به مؤلفههای چهارگانه «تعیین اصول روابط مسلمانان با کفار»، «برخورداری از بیان شیوا و رسا»، «تبیین فلسفه احکام» و «پاسخ به شبهات» موفقتر و قویتر عمل کرده است؛ اما در مؤلفه «نگاه جامعهساز و تمدنی به آموزههای قرآن» بیانات سید قطب جامعتر از سخنان استاد مطهری است. درمجموع میتوان گفت رویکرد اجتماعی شهید مطهری به دلیل بهرهمندی بیشتر از مؤلفههای تفسیر اجتماعی، برتر و کاملتر از گرایش اجتماعی سید قطب است.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_200020_26d0beedea4450d8ef9e8f4799badaff.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723A Comparative Study of Sunni and Shia Perspectives on the Authority of Custom in Qur’anic Interpretationتحلیل تطبیقی دیدگاه قرآنپژوهان فریقین پیرامون اعتبار عرف در فرایند تفسیر آیات قرآن16418522078610.22034/csq.2025.476819.1467FAمحمدرضاحقیقت سمنانیاستادیار گروه تفسیر مجتمع قرآن و حدیث جامعه المصطفی العالمیه، قم، ایران.0000-0003-2482-7806Journal Article20240907Detailed Abstract<br>Research objective:<br>The present study aims to provide a comparative analysis of the views of Sunni and Shia Qur’anic scholars regarding the authority of custom (‘urf) in the process of interpreting Qur’anic verses. Understanding and interpreting the Qur’an, as the foundational text of divine revelation, has always required the use of reliable sources and tools to correctly grasp God’s intended meaning. Among these tools, ‘urf—understood as the set of prevailing beliefs, behaviors, and practices of rational individuals in social and linguistic life—holds particular significance.<br>This study seeks to address the central question of whether the authority of ‘urf in Qur’anic exegesis is limited solely to the level of “comprehending the concepts of the verses” (practical or conventional meaning), or whether it also plays a role in “identifying specific instances and the intended meanings” (serious or intended reference).
Methodology:<br>The research in this study adopts a comparative approach based on descriptive and critical analysis. To this end, the views and arguments of prominent Sunni and Shia Qur’anic scholars were carefully examined and compared. The primary sources of data include authoritative Qur’anic exegeses and works of notable scholars such as Allameh Tabataba’i and Ayatollah Ma‘refat. After collection, these sources were critically analyzed to identify and clarify the precise points of convergence and divergence among the different approaches.
Findings:<br>The findings of this study indicate that at the basic level and in terms of conventional meaning, ‘urf (custom) is recognized as a valid and widely accepted criterion in the views of scholars from both sects. This authority arises from the connection between the language of the Qur’an and the colloquial Arabic, as well as the rational modes of human speech. At this level, ‘urf plays a central role in understanding and explaining the apparent meanings and fundamental concepts of the text.Most exegetes hold that the conventional understanding of Qur’anic vocabulary forms the basis for the validity of interpretation and cannot be disregarded.<br>However, the first major divergence occurs at the level of intended meaning and the identification of specific instances of the verses. Some Shia exegetes and Qur’anic scholars, such as Allameh Tabataba’i, by emphasizing the distinction between “conventional meaning” (marad-e estemali) and “intended meaning” (marad-e jeddi), do not accept the role of ‘urf in identifying the specific referents of the verses. Others, such as Shahid Sadr, limit its applicability to cases where the concepts are perceptible, experiential, and tangible, such as social rulings and matters comprehensible to reason and custom.<br>This is because many Qur’anic truths—including unseen realities, divine attributes, the afterlife, and supra-sensory meanings—are beyond conventional understanding, and comprehending the specialized terminology of the Qur’an requires reflection on the entirety of its verses and relevant narrations.<br>In contrast, the views of Sunni exegetes are generally more comprehensive and inclusive, recognizing ‘urf (custom) as authoritative at both the levels of conceptual meaning and identification of specific instances. They only set aside the use of ‘urf when there is conclusive textual or rational evidence to the contrary.<br>This approach allows ‘urf to function as the primary criterion for understanding and interpreting Qur’anic verses to the greatest possible extent. The fundamental difference between the two sects does not lie in the validity of ‘urf itself, but rather in the scope and domain of its applicability at the level of intended meaning (marad-e jeddi).<br>One of the most important findings of the study is the classification of Qur’anic concepts into two main groups: “ontological–real” (haqiqi–takwini) and “conventional–legislative” (‘itibari–tashri‘i). Ontological concepts include perceptible and tangible truths that can be comprehended by ‘urf, as well as supra-sensory knowledge such as divine attributes and the afterlife.<br>Conventional concepts pertain to legal or religious truths with specific Qur’anic terminology, as well as general conventional concepts without specialized terminology. The role of ‘urf is evaluated differently in the exegesis of these two categories, reflecting variations in how customary understanding can inform interpretation across different types of Qur’anic concepts.
Final conclusion:<br>The study emphasizes that rational custom (‘urf) can serve as a valid interpretive criterion in the exegesis of the Qur’an across three domains:<br>1.Fully and reliably understanding general concepts and the primary meaning of all verses (conventional meaning, marad-e estemali).<br>2. Clarifying the specific instances and intended meanings (marad-e jeddi) of verses that contain perceptible, experiential, and tangible concepts, such as social, ethical, and legal matters.<br>3. Interpreting verses that lack specialized or technical Qur’anic terminology and are comprehensible to the general public.<br>These three domains constitute the context in which ‘urf can play an effective role in approximating divine understanding.<br>However, in cases where the verses refer to supra-sensory knowledge, specialized terminology, profound doctrinal truths, or unseen realities, exclusive reliance on ‘urf is not justified. In such cases, it is necessary to employ rational reflection (both theoretical and practical), definitive sciences, authentic narrations, and other certain sources. Attention to this principle prevents the imposition of subjective interpretations and safeguards the exegesis from potential distortions.عرف بهعنوان منبع یا ابزاری در فرآیند تفسیر قرآن، بهصورت کلی از دیدگاه فریقین دارای اعتبار است؛ اما محدوده و قلمرو اعتبار آن، مورد اختلافنظر قرآنپژوهان است. تبیین جایگاه عرف و اعتبار آن در دو سطح «درک مفاهیم» و «مصادیق آیات» در فرایند تفسیر، هدف اصلی این پژوهش است. بدین منظور، نوشتار حاضر با روش تطبیقی و به شیوه تحلیلی-توصیفی، دیدگاهها و ادله قرآنپژوهان فریقین را در اعتبارسنجی عرف در تفسیر مفاهیم و مصادیق آیات بررسی کرده و نشان میدهد اگرچه برخی عرف را در هر دو سطح معتبر میدانند اما اندیشمندانی مانند علامه طباطبایی با تمایز میان «مراد استعمالی» و «مراد جدی»، فهم عرفی را صرفاً در سطح مفاهیم (مراد استعمالی) پذیرفته و در سطح مصادیق (مراد جدی) با استناد به فراحسی بودن برخی حقایق قرآنی، آن را نفی میکنند. همچنین یافتههای کلیدی حاکی از آن است که مفاهیم قرآنی در دو گروه اصلی «حقیقی-تکوینی» و «اعتباری-تشریعی» جای میگیرند. مفاهیم تکوینی به «محسوس و ملموس» (قابلدرک برای عرف) و «فراحسی» (مانند صفات الهی و معاد) تقسیم میشوند. در مقابل، مفاهیم اعتباری قرآن شامل «حقائق شرعیه» (دارای اصطلاحات خاص قرآنی) و «مفاهیم اعتباری عام» (بدون اصطلاح خاص) است. بر این اساس، نتایج تحقیق تأکید دارد که عرف عقلایی در سه حوزه زیر میتواند بهعنوان قرینهای معتبر در تفسیر عمل کند: ۱. در سطح مفاهیم کلیه آیات؛ ۲. در سطح مصادیق و مراد جدی آیاتی با مفاهیم محسوس و تجربه پذیر (مانند احکام اجتماعی)؛ ۳. در تفسیر آیات فاقد اصطلاح خاص قرآنی.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_220786_894fdff42c90b845164b4182a6835c47.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723A critical analysis of Yousefi Eshkevari's view on the theory of evolution with emphasis on the interpretative views of ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾīتحلیل انتقادی دیدگاه یوسفی اشکوری در خصوص تکامل انواع با تاکید بر آرای تفسیری علامۀ طباطبائی (ره)18621123558810.22034/csq.2025.563122.1614FAسید کریمخوب بین خوش نظراستادیار گروه تفسیر و علوم قرآن، دانشگاه علوم ومعارف قرآن کریم، قم، ایرانJournal Article20250127Detailed Abstract<br>Purpose of the Study:<br>The present study aims to examine and analyze Yousofi Ashkevari’s position regarding the hypothesis of the evolution of species. Similar to some of his predecessors, he adopts this hypothesis as a definitive conclusion—rather than a mere possibility—in an attempt to reconcile science and religion. This is despite the fact that most contemporary Qur’anic exegetes maintain that even if, hypothetically, science were to prove the theory of evolution in the future, such a proof would never conflict with revealed doctrines. What renders Ashkevari’s acceptance of this hypothesis problematic is his personal and inaccurate interpretation of certain Qur’anic verses and parts of the first sermon of Nahj al Balāghah. Accordingly, the central concern of this study is to evaluate and critique his claims on the basis of both transmitted (naqlī) and rational (ʿaqlī) evidence. By engaging with the exegetical opinions of several contemporary scholars—particularly ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī—the author seeks to demonstrate the inadequacy of Ashkevari’s personal interpretations.<br>Methodology:<br>The methodology employed in this study is descriptive analytical. The author first presents Ashkevari’s arguments, as articulated in his book Re reading the Story of Creation, without initially engaging in evaluative judgment. This is followed by a critical analysis based on the exegetical perspectives of contemporary commentators. It is worth noting that the critique is not confined to transmitted evidence; rather, the author also utilizes philosophical arguments—such as the principle of imkān al ashraf (the possibility of the nobler)—to evaluate Ashkevari’s assertions. Furthermore, by drawing on the scientific analyses of several scholars who share similar intellectual orientations, the study demonstrates that the evolution of species, as proposed by Ashkevari, lacks the essential characteristics of a scientific theory and is therefore unfounded.<br>Findings:<br>The findings indicate that the claim of lacking any rational or textual basis for the independent creation of humankind from clay is untenable, and that considerable scriptural and rational evidence contradicts such a claim. Moreover, the near explicit (ẓuhūr qarīb bi l naṣṣ) import of several textual sources—including the clarity of Qur’an 3:59—affirms the independent creation of humanity, contrary to the position endorsed by Ashkevari. It is evident that the theory of evolution remains probabilistic and non definitive; therefore, the apparent meaning of Qur’anic verses that reject the evolutionary development of species does not constitute a genuine instance of conflict between religion and science. According to Ṭabāṭabāʾī, the claim that Qur’anic descriptions of human creation are merely metaphorical or allegorical in reference to biological evolution is, for three reasons—linguistic foundations, the misapplication of the Qur’an’s metaphorical method to the example rather than what is exemplified, and the near explicit nature of the verses—devoid of substantiation and unsupported by both internal and external textual evidence. Additionally, the philosophical principle of imkān al ashraf stands in conflict with the unproven hypothesis of the transformation and evolution of species.<br>Conclusion:<br>Drawing upon both the transmitted and rational arguments of Ṭabāṭabāʾī, and based on the epistemic authority of Qur’anic outward meanings (ẓawāhir), this study upholds the principle that the apparent meaning of any speaker’s words constitutes valid evidence for the listener, unless an unequivocal counter proof establishes otherwise. Once such decisive evidence is demonstrated, the outward meaning loses its evidentiary status; this is in contrast to explicit texts (naṣṣ), which admit no possibility of contrary interpretation. Consequently, the evidentiary force of the Qur’an’s apparent statements affirming the independent creation of humanity—as relied upon by ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī—remains valid in the absence of any definitive contrary proof. Yet Ashkevari asserts the certainty of the evolutionary hypothesis solely on the basis of two or three Qur’anic verses and a passage from the first sermon of Nahj al Balāghah. It is evident, however, that claiming certainty in a matter as significant as the evolution of species—an issue requiring comprehensive interdisciplinary research—is methodologically and scientifically untenable.حسن یوسفی اشکوری از دغدغه مندان و قرآن پژوهان معاصر است که فارغ از دیدگاه های سیاسی مورد مناقشه، بنابر آن چه خود در مقدمۀ کتاب «بازخوانی قصۀ خلقت» مرقوم داشته، در صدد بر افروختن دو چراغ پر فروغ و خدائی «ایمان» و «تفکر» با تمام قامت و در اوج درخشندگی است. وی اذعان می دارد که نگارش کتاب یادشده به صورت تحقیقی و با نقد و بررسی آرای این و آن سامان نیافته، گرچه گاه بنابر ضرورت برخی از آرای دیگران را هم نقل کرده است، اما اصل کتاب یادشده، محصول مطالعات، تاملات و تجربیات فکری و عملی شخص نویسنده است، و به واقع ما با فهم و برداشت فردی و شخصی او مواجهیم. یوسفی اشکوری در بخش نخست از مجموعه دو بخش کتاب خویش، تحت عنوان «داستان آدم در قرآن»، با بیان نکاتی، فرضیۀ تکامل انواع را در مورد خلقت انسان مطرح ساخته و به استناد آیاتی از قرآن و نهج البلاغه می کوشد تا آن را مُستدَل نماید. در نقطۀ مقابل دیدگاه وی، نگارنده با روش توصیفی و تحلیلی و استفاده از منابع کتابخانهای و با استناد به ادلۀ نقلی و عقلی علامۀ طباطبائی صاحب تفسیر شریف المیزان ، به نقد و تحلیل تأملات و آرای شخصی یوسفی اشکوری مبادرت ورزیده است. برخی از نتایج پژوهش حاضر، بیانگر این حقیقت است که فرضیۀ تکامل مورد پذیرش وی، ظنی و غیر قطعی میباشد؛ زیرا قابلیت اثبات پذیری با تجربه بشری را ندارد و دست بشر از آزمودن مسائلی که در میلیون ها سال قبل ریشه دارد، کوتاه است. همچنین ادعای استعاری و یا تمثیلی بودن خلقت انسان در مرحلۀ تکامل زیستی و بیولوژیک، از جهات سه گانۀ مورد نظر طباطبائی(مبنای زبان شناختی، راجع بودن تعمیم روش تمثیلی استفاده شده در آیات به «مَثَل» و نه «مُمَثَّل»، و ظهور قریب به نص آیات قرآن) بی پایه و اساس بوده، فاقد هر گونه ادلۀ درون و برون نصی می باشد. https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_235588_28018805e91a7777aebd52420120e105.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723Critical Reexamination of Interpretations Concerning the Reality of “Azwāj” in the Afterlife: Tracing Mulla Ṣadrā’s Account of the Corporealization of Deedsبازخوانی انتقادی دیدگاه مفسران پیرامون حقیقت «ازواج» در آخرت و واژگان مرتبط با آن، با تکیهبر دیدگاه ملاصدرا درباره تجسم اعمال21223722297010.22034/csq.2025.511649.1539FAزهرهنریمانیاستادیار گروه تفسیر و علوم قرآن، دانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم، کرمانشاه. ایران0000-0001-9757-7225Journal Article20250208Detailed Abstract<br>Research objective:<br>The aim of this study is to address common objections that arise from Qur’anic references to the presence of azwāj muṭahharah, ḥūr al-ʿayn, and similar concepts in Paradise. The mention of multiple purified spouses or houris as companions for men in the afterlife has led some critics to argue that actions deemed unethical in this world are, paradoxically, permitted and even promised as rewards in Paradise. Based on certain verses and interpretations, they claim that Islam assures believers that if they live righteously in this world, they will be granted unrestricted sensual pleasures of the highest degree in the Hereafter.Another frequently raised objection concerns the claim that such privileges are granted exclusively to men. The Qur’an is said to describe men as enjoying the company of ḥūr al-ʿayn, while offering no comparable blessing for women; instead, it mentions ghilmān or youthful servants, which some interpret as a sign of continued gender inequality in the afterlife, where women are once again deprived of equal status and complementary companionship.This study seeks to respond to these objections by focusing on the term azwāj, its linguistic dimensions, the contextual meaning of relevant verses, and—most importantly—by grounding the discussion in Mulla Ṣadrā’s doctrine of the embodiment of deeds (tajassum al-aʿmāl). Through this approach, the research aims to clarify the true nature of companionship in the Hereafter and address the broader questions associated with these interpretations.
Methods:<br>To carry out this study, we first examined the literal and lexical meanings of the relevant Qur’anic terms, relying on their usage in lexicons compiled close to the time of revelation. This linguistic analysis served as the foundation for uncovering the authentic meanings of these expressions. Subsequently, by reflecting on the Qur’anic verses, consulting classical and modern exegetical works, and considering the overarching spirit and fundamental principles of the Qur’an—particularly the doctrine of the embodiment of deeds (tajassum al-aʿmāl)—we analyzed the verses in question and explored the relationship between the concept of azwāj in the Hereafter and the notion of embodied actions.
Findings:<br>Based on the foregoing analysis, the findings of this study can be summarized as follows:<br>1. The term azwāj—along with its various descriptions applied in the Qur’an to both the inhabitants of Paradise and Hell—is derived from zawj in the sense of pairedness or duality. It is used for both the masculine and feminine and therefore cannot be restricted to the meaning of “female spouses” alone.<br>2. Considering the commonly raised objections about the presence of unethical elements in Paradise and claims of gender discrimination, it appears—contrary to what many exegetes have assumed—that interpreting azwāj, ḥūr al-ʿayn, and similar terms as conventional worldly spouses with their familiar functions is inconsistent with Qur’anic verses, the philosophy of marriage, and the Qur’anic conception of Paradise. Thus, azwāj cannot plausibly denote ordinary human or angelic spouses in the customary sense.<br>3. In light of the Qur’anic and transmitted (riwāyī) doctrine of the embodiment of deeds (tajassum al-aʿmāl)—a doctrine both rationally and scripturally grounded—there is strong evidence indicating a direct connection between the azwāj of Paradise and Hell and the embodied forms of human actions. According to this perspective, azwāj represent the malakūtī (supersensory) forms of one’s deeds, which God manifests in the Hereafter as a supreme expression of His grace and justice.<br>4. Based on this interpretation, the Qur’anic descriptors such as:<br>“wa-kawāʿiba atrāban; wa-furushin marfūʿah; innā ansha’nāhunna inshā’a; fa-jaʿalnāhunna abkāran; ʿuruban atrāba… waʿindahum qāsirātu al-ṭarfi ʿīn… ka-annahunna bayḍun maknūn… ka-amthāli al-lu’lu’i al-maknūn… lam yaṭmithhunna insun qablahum wa-lā jān.”<br>—are not literal descriptions of physical spouses, but symbolic depictions of the purity, radiance, and untainted nature of those deeds. These are deeds that believers cultivated in this world, safeguarding them from the corrupting influence of human and jinn devils, until they appear on the Day of Resurrection in their fully realized and perfected forms.<br>5. Mullā Ṣadrā, when discussing the embodiment of deeds, explicitly refers to ḥūr al-ʿayn as an example of this doctrine. However, he does not elaborate on the detailed mechanics or full implications of this relationship.
Final conclusion:<br>It can be concluded that the Qur’anic references to azwāj in Paradise and Hell do not primarily pertain to marital companionship or conjugal relationships, but rather focus on the principle of the embodiment of deeds (tajassum al-aʿmāl). Accordingly, this does not negate the possibility of marriage in Paradise; it simply indicates that the verses containing the term azwāj may not necessarily refer to the marital relationships of the inhabitants of Paradise or Hell.برخی از ابهامهای موجود درباره کم و کیف معاد، گاه موجب ایجاد شبهات است. حقیقت تزویج و ماهیت ازواج ازجملهی آنهاست. مفسران، ازدواج اهل بهشت را مبرهن و همسران را انسان یا فرشته دانستهاند. یکی از کارکردهای آن را نیز همان کارکرد نکاح یعنی برقراری ارتباط جنسی در دنیا آوردهاند. این پژوهش با روش توصیفی-تحلیلی و رویکردی انتقادی با عنایت به ورود شبهات در آن باره، با تکیهبر آیات و کتب لغت و آراء مفسران به بررسی حقیقت و ماهیت ازواج بهشتی و جهنمی میپردازد. با عنایت و تکیهبر دیدگاه ملاصدرا و دیگر بررسیها اینگونه حاصل شد که احتمال اینکه تزویج و قرین شدن در بهشت و جهنم، تعبیر دیگری از تجسم اعمال باشد؛ بعید نیست. خداوند با برشمردن اوصاف آنها، درصدد تبیین حقیقت و به فهم بشری نزدیک کردن آن است. این مقاله درصدد نفی اصل و وجود ازدواج در بهشت نبوده و اساساً برای نفی ازدواج در بهشت و جهنم، دلیل قرآنی و عقلی وجود ندارد بلکه بر آن است تا تفسیر و مفهومی دقیقتر و هماهنگ با مجموعهی قرآن درباره واژگان ازواج، حور عین و...ارائه دهد بهگونهای که هم قابلیت شبههپراکنی در آن کم شود و هم حقیقت تجسم اعمال را به گونهی دیگر تبیین نماید.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_222970_743d0b45b8ded4422396eb8119937f97.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723The Qur’anic Approach to Cultural Formation of Women in Specific, Shared, and Interactive Legal Verses of the Medinan Surahsروشفرهنگسازی قرآنکریم در آیاتالاحکام اختصاصی، مشترک و تعاملی زنان در سورههای مدنی23826521482310.22034/csq.2025.487118.1487FAخدیجهاحمدی بیغشاستادیار گروه قرآن و حدیث دانشکده علوم انسانی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس. تهران. ایران0000-0002-7900-7103Journal Article20241104<strong>Detailed Abstract</strong><br>Research objective:<br>The present study examines the method of Qur’anic cultural formation in relation to the legal verses (Āyāt al-Aḥkām) concerning women across three domains: specific, shared, and interactive with men, particularly in the Medinan surahs. This issue represents a significant aspect of the divine discourse on women.<br>The analysis aims to uncover the network of Qur’anic legal verses concerning women and the developmental trajectory of their subjects, illustrating how the Qur’an employs methods to create greater influence and engagement among its audience with these rulings. Based on these considerations, the objective of this study is to investigate the evolutionary process of Qur’anic cultural formation through the revelation of explicit legal verses related to women.<br>This study employs a descriptive-analytical approach. The research universe consists of the Qur’anic verses, and the research sample focuses on the explicit legal verses (Āyāt al-Aḥkām) specifically pertaining to women.<br>To examine the developmental trajectory of the revelation of women-specific legal verses, the study first collected all relevant explicit legal verses from the Qur’an. Subsequently, these verses were analyzed through library-based sources, including exegetical, narrational, and historical references, in order to investigate the Qur’anic method of cultural formation in addressing this category of verses related specifically to women.
methodology:<br>This study employs a descriptive-analytical approach. The research universe consists of the Qur’anic verses, and the research sample focuses on the explicit legal verses (Āyāt al-Aḥkām) specifically pertaining to women.<br>To examine the developmental trajectory of the revelation of women-specific legal verses, the study first collected all relevant explicit legal verses from the Qur’an. Subsequently, these verses were analyzed through library-based sources, including exegetical, narrational, and historical references, in order to investigate the Qur’anic method of cultural formation in addressing this category of verses related specifically to women.
Findings:<br>In this study, the legal verses (Āyāt al-Aḥkām) concerning women in the Medinan surahs—where their juridical capacity is explicit and clear—were examined. The findings indicate that the primary audience of the Qur’an consisted of the people of the time of revelation, and the verses were revealed in response to their positive and negative behaviors. Subsequently, the audience extends to people after the time of revelation until the Day of Judgment, who are obligated to read and act upon the Qur’anic messages.<br>In contrast, the women-related legal verses in the Meccan surahs are scattered and implicit, even appearing in narrative passages such as in the Āyāt al-Qiṣaṣ. The propagation of Islam in Mecca concluded in an environment dominated by the struggle against idolatry, limited interaction with the People of the Book, and an unfavorable context for social implementation of certain issues—including women’s legal rulings. Consequently, these matters were not explicitly addressed in the Meccan verses but were instead revealed explicitly in the Medinan surahs.<br>Analysis of the Medinan surahs regarding women’s legal verses (Āyāt al-Aḥkām) across the three domains—specific to women, shared with men, and interactive with men—indicates that in Medina, the social environment allowed for the implementation of religious culture. The divine legislation and the teachings of the Prophet (PBUH) provided the necessary groundwork for the formation of a faith-based society.<br>Consequently, issues such as women-specific legal verses, which are important and require cultural embedding, are explicitly addressed in these verses. The process of cultural formation and their transformation into social norms can thus be clearly understood.قرآن، کتاب جهانشمول برای هدایت همه بشر است که در فرآیند نزول محتوای خود روش را نیز به مخاطب ارائه نموده تا با فرهنگسازی، ابعاد تربیتی و غیره آن بهخوبی محقق گردد. یکی از مهمترین مسائل قرآن آیاتالاحکام زنان است که بهصورت غیرمستقیم در سور مکی و بهصورت مستقیم و غیرمستقیم در سور مدنی مورداشاره قرارگرفتهاند. این پژوهش درصدد پاسخگویی به این سؤال است که روش قرآن کریم در فرهنگسازی آیاتالاحکام زنان در چه حیطههایی قابلتحلیل است. بررسی توصیفی و تحلیل دادهها بر اساس روش سیر تنزیلی این آیات نشان میدهد قرآن کریم آیاتالاحکام زنان را بهصورت مستقیم در سور مدنی با سه حیطه: آیات اختصاصی، آیات مشترک و آیات تعاملی با مردان ارائه نموده است. تمرکز نزول آیاتالاحکام زنان بر آیات تعاملی زنان با مردان و به دنبال فرهنگسازی در ابعادی چون: ایجاد، حفظ و ارتقاء شخصیت و کرامت انسانی زنان، بطلان عقاید خرافی و جاهلی از سادهترین تا سختترین آنها در عصر نزول بوده است.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_214823_1a73acbe990606347067cebee0223e4d.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723Analysis of the Conceptual Integration of the Straight Path from the Perspective of Sunni and Shia Exegesesتحلیل تلفیق مفهومی صراط مستقیم از دیدگاه تفاسیر فریقین26628523128510.22034/csq.2025.516563.1546FAحسنعلیدادی سلیمانیاستادیار گروه حقوق و معارف دانشگاه باهنر، کرمان، ایراننسیم ساداتمرتضویدانشآموخته سطح 4 رشته تفسیر تطبیقی، مرکز تخصصی رکن الهدی، کرمان، ایران.Journal Article20250122Detailed Abstract<br>Research objective:<br>This article aims to demonstrate that the Straight Path (ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm) is a unified reality belonging to the domain of meaning—not a concrete external instance—and that it is composed of several integral elements. Its structure is formed by seven components: the method of the path, the guide of the path, the traveler on the path, the companion of the path, the goal of the path, and the laws and regulations governing the path. The totality of these meanings presents a novel conceptual model of this term, articulated on the basis of interpretations offered by exegetes from both Sunni and Shia traditions. The absence of any one of these components results in a disruption of the intended meaning of this concept.
Methodology:<br>The methodology of this article is descriptive, analytical, and inferential. By deriving the contextual elements related to the Straight Path (ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm) and describing the views of exegetes from both Sunni and Shia traditions regarding its meanings, the study proceeds to analyze and evaluate the conceptual integration of this term based on the intellectual frameworks of their commentaries. Through this process, the true semantic reality of the Straight Path is delineated.
Findings:<br>In this article, after analyzing the theory of conceptual integration, eight key points concerning the Straight Path (ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm) were clarified. The first point established that all creatures have a path leading toward God. In the second and third points, various types of paths and the conceptual dimensions of the Straight Path were examined. The fourth point addressed the qualities of the followers of the Straight Path. Subsequently, the fifth and sixth points discussed the rank and status of these followers, emphasizing that they are the possessors of divine knowledge.The seventh point explored the relationship between the Straight Path and the divine paths (subul Allāh) as well as the deviating paths. The eighth and final point explained the relation of the Straight Path to God Himself and that of the “straight way” (sabīl mustaqīm) to God’s servants.Following this, the interpretations of the Straight Path from the perspective of Sunni and Shia exegetes were presented, elaborating the meanings of the term—such as Islam, the religion in its absolute sense, the Prophet and the Imam, the Qur’an, truth, and the path to Paradise—as understood by exegetes of both traditions. The key points of convergence and divergence in their epistemological frameworks were highlighted. Finally, the conceptual integration of this term was evaluated and analyzed in light of the exegetical views discussed.<br>Following the analysis of the research data within the framework of Conceptual Integration Theory and based on the epistemological system of Sunni and Shia exegesis, it was determined that the term ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm is a composite concept whose full meaning depends on a set of indispensable sub-meanings. In other words, the Straight Path is a unified reality belonging to the category of meaning, not mere external instance, and its structure is formed through seven constituent elements.<br>These elements are as follows:<br>1. The method of the path, which is the ḥanīfī religion and constitutes the core of the meaning of the Straight Path;<br>2. The laws and regulations articulated in the divine scriptures, through which this method is read and interpreted;<br>3. The guides of the path—the prophets and the Imams—who direct the wayfarer along this straight course;<br>4. The traveler (sālik) who, as the essential link in the chain, must journey upon this path;<br>5. The companions of the path, with whom the traveler must walk;<br>6. The final goal of the path, which is the promised Paradise and the pleasure of the Lord;<br>7. (The integrative relation among all these elements).<br>Taken together, all preceding and subsequent links of this path complete and perfect the meaning of the Straight Path. Accordingly, it must be acknowledged that the central axis of the Straight Path (ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm) is the wayfarer (sālik), who— in order to traverse this path— requires a guide, namely the prophets and Imams, as explicitly affirmed in the exegeses of both Sunni and Shiʿi traditions. For the path to remain relevant and functional, the sālik must also rely on a set of laws and regulations instituted by the Divine Legislator through creation (takwīn) and command (tashrīʿ). Within the exegetical perspectives of both groups of commentators, these divine norms manifest in the form of religion, the heavenly religions, the revealed scriptures, and most prominently the luminous Book of the Qur’an.Moreover, the method of the path is delineated through a precise explanation of the ṣirāṭ as the upright and unaltered dīn ḥanīf, a path that deviates neither to the right nor to the left— a straight way upon which all believers walk in a unified direction. Ultimately, Paradise and the pleasure of the Lord constitute the supreme goal of this path, without which the meaning of the Straight Path remains incomplete.تلفیق مفهومی ازچارچوب های معناشناسی است که بر پیدایش و تبیین مفهوم یا ساختار نوظهور تأکید دارد. در این پژوهش با روش توصیفی، تحلیلی تلاش بر این است که با استفاده از نظریه تلفیق مفهومی در سایه تفاسیر فریقین واژه صراط مستقیم مورد واکاوی دقیق قرار گیرد و خلأ پژوهشی در این زمینه بر ضرورت این تحقیق میافزاید. پس از تحلیل دادههای پژوهش در چهارچوب نظریه تلفیق مفهومی و بر اساس منظومه معرفتی تفاسیر فریقین مشخص گردید که این واژه مرکبی است که برای معنا و مفهوم یافتن آن نیازمند معانی جزئیتر و درعینحال بیبدیل است؛ به عبارتی صراط مستقیم حقیقت واحدی از سنخ معنا است نه مصداق که از اجزایی تشکیل یافته و شاکله آن با هفت سازه؛ روش راه، راهنمای راه، رونده راه، رفیق راه، هدف راه و قانون و مقررات راه ساخته میشود که جمع این معانی، انگارهای بدیع از این واژه را بر اساس نظرات مفسرین فریقین روایتگری میکند که نبود یکی از این سازهها در معنای این واژه خلل ایجاد میکند. روش راه همان دین حنیفی است که هسته مرکزی معنای صراط مستقیم است که خوانش آن با کمک قوانین و مقرراتی که در کتب آسمانی تصویرگری شده است؛ توسط راهنمایان راه مستقیم (پیامبران و امامان) صورت میپذیرد و سالک مسیر بهمثابه حلقه واصلی است که باید در این راه مستقیم با رفیقان راه قدم بردارد و در پایان به هدف نهایی راه که بهشت موعود و رضایت پروردگار است خواهد رسید؛ به عبارتی تمامی حلقههای پیشینی و پسینی این راه تکمیل گر معنای صراط مستقیم هستند.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_231285_75669cc057c8672347de7b01bac6a38d.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723A Comparative Analysis of Allamah Fadlallah and Ibn ‘Ashur on Qur’anic Verses Pertaining to Womenبررسی تطبیقی مبانی «علامه فضلالله» و «ابنعاشور» در مسائل (آیات) زنان28631321499010.22034/csq.2025.487361.1488FAمریمقوجائی خامنهدانشآموخته سطح 4 رشته تفسیر تطبیقی، مؤسسه آموزش عالی- حوزوی معصومیه، قم، ایران.صالحقنادیاستادیار گروه جامعهشناسی مؤسسه آموزشی و پژوهشی امام خمینی. قم، ایران.اسماعیلچراغی کوتیانیاستادیار - مدرس سطوح عالی تفسیر-مرکز تخصصی تفسیر و علوم قرآنی. حوزه علمیه قم، قم، ایران.Journal Article20241106Detailed Abstract<br>Research objective:<br>The primary aim of this study is to identify, extract, and comparatively examine the foundational approaches of two prominent contemporary exegetes: Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Fadlallah (a Lebanese Shia scholar) and Sheikh Muhammad al-Tahir Ibn ‘Ashur (a Tunisian Maliki Sunni scholar) regarding Qur’anic verses on women’s issues.Given that women-related verses represent one of the most significant areas of interpretive divergence in the contemporary Islamic world, and that religious, cultural, social, and temporal factors deeply influence exegetical approaches, this study seeks to answer the central question: What are the strategic, cognitive, and practical foundations of these two scholars in addressing women-related Qur’anic verses (such as verses on Qiwamah, polygyny, inheritance, hijab, testimony, disciplinary measures, and similar issues), and what are the similarities and differences between them? Furthermore, to what extent are these similarities and differences shaped by their religious, cultural, and methodological presuppositions?
Methodology:<br>This study adopts a qualitative approach with a comparative-analytical method. In the first stage, Allamah Fadlallah’s Min Wahy al-Qur’an and Ibn ‘Ashur’s al-Tahrir wa al-Tanwir, along with other relevant works by the two exegetes (such as Fadlallah’s Nathariyat al-Mar’ah fi al-Islam and Ibn ‘Ashur’s Maqasid al-Shari‘ah al-Islamiyyah), were thoroughly examined and compared with respect to key Qur’anic verses concerning women.Subsequently, using content analysis, the foundational approaches of both exegetes were extracted, categorized, and juxtaposed. Finally, the strengths and weaknesses of each perspective were evaluated with reference to the Qur’anic text and established principles of exegesis.<br>Findings:<br>The findings indicate that the foundations of the two exegetes regarding women’s issues can be categorized into three main areas:<br>1. Strategic Foundations: Both exegetes emphasize the necessity of reinterpreting women-related rulings according to the demands of time and place and consideration of the objectives of Shariah (Maqasid al-Shari‘ah). Ibn ‘Ashur explicitly articulates this principle as a theoretical framework under the title Maqasid al-Shari‘ah, whereas Allamah Fadlallah, without explicitly naming it, practically applies the same approach in his exegesis.<br>2. Cognitive Foundations: A significant commonality between the two scholars lies in the equality of men and women in humanity and inherent dignity and the importance of the family as the nucleus of society. However, serious differences emerge regarding the extent of women’s intellectual capacity, the scope of innate differences between men and women, and the nature and limits of Qiwamah. Ibn ‘Ashur affirms the general superiority of men in intellect and broad authority in Qiwamah, whereas Fadlallah considers this superiority limited, relative, and contingent upon specific circumstances.<br>3. Behavioral Foundations: In matters such as hijab, polygyny, disciplinary measures, and women’s social participation, both exegetes adopt a reformist and lenient approach compared to traditional interpretations. However, Allamah Fadlallah, due to his greater attention to the emotional and psychological characteristics of women, offers more audacious and women-centered perspectives.<br>The study also demonstrates that there exists a systematic cause-and-effect relationship among the various foundations of these two exegetes, allowing the compilation of a coherent “system of women’s issues in the Qur’an” derived from their combined insights.<br>Ultimately, this study demonstrates that despite religious differences (Shia and Sunni) and geographical and cultural variations, the foundational similarities between the two exegetes regarding women and related issues outweigh their differences. Both scholars have contributed to religious reform and the reinterpretation of women’s role within fiqh and exegesis.Ibn ‘Ashur’s views in certain areas (such as the intellectual superiority of men) and some of Allamah Fadlallah’s perspectives (such as his specific interpretation of disciplinary measures) remain open to critique and further detailed examination.This study, as a foundational comparative research, provides a basis for subsequent investigations into the detailed rulings and specific women-related issues in the exegesis of these two scholars. It can serve as a reliable resource for researchers in Qur’anic studies, Islamic women’s studies, comparative jurisprudence, and inter-sectarian studies. The findings are also valuable for policymakers in the fields of women and family, as well as for advocates of religious reform within the Islamic world.مسائل زنان در طول تاریخ همواره از مهمترین دغدغههای مطالعاتی- تحقیقاتی اندیشمندان با رویکردهای مختلف بوده است. در عصر حاضر به جهت ورود اندیشه و سبک زندگی غربی به جوامع مسلمان و دور شدن جوامع اسلامی از سرچشمههای اصیل معرفتی خود، بازخوانی اندیشههای اسلامی ضروری مینماید. در پژوهش حاضر به هدف دستیابی به مبانی دو مفسر معاصر «علامه فضلالله» و «ابنعاشور» و تشابه و تفاوتها؛ در مسائل (آیات) زنان به روش تطبیقی- تحلیلی دادههای منتج از تفاسیر «من وحیالقرآن» و «التحریر والتنویر» و سایر تألیفات این دو مفسر، موردبررسی قرار گرفت. یافتههای پژوهش را چنین میتوان تقریر نمود: مبانی موجود در دیدگاه هر دو مفسر قابلارائه در مبانیِ راهبردی، شناختی و رفتاری است و «اشتراک زن و مرد در انسانیت» و «لزوم بازخوانی و نواندیشی در مسائل زنان» از مبانی مشترک دو مفسر است و مواردی مانند «میزان بهرهمندی زنان و مردان از قوه تعقل»، «تفاوت مردان و زنان در برخی ساحتها» و «معنا و مفهوم قوامیت» از مبانی اختلافی دو مفسر در مسائل زنان است که در ذیل آیات مرتبط به آنها پرداختهشده است.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_214990_227a5ff5ba2c1130581d02ff997e5477.pdfدانشگاه علوم و معارف قرآن کریم،مطالعات تفسیر تطبیقی3115-789010120250723An Analytical Comparison of Sunni and Shia Interpretations of the Earth Being Radiant with the Light of the Lord in Qur’an 39:69مقایسه تطبیقی و ارزیابی دیدگاه مفسران فریقین درباره نورانیشدن زمین به نور پروردگار در آیه 69 زمر31434022191310.22034/csq.2025.476888.1464FAصمدبهروزاستادیار گروه معارف اسلامی دانشکده الهیات دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران0009-0007-2131-485Xعمرانعباسپوراستادیار گروه معارف اسلامی دانشکده الهیات دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران.سید احسنحسینیدانشجوی دکتری دانشگاه ادیان و مذاهب اسلامی، تهران، ایرانJournal Article20240904Detailed Abstract
Research objective:<br>The aim of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis and evaluation of the views expressed by Sunni and Shia exegetes (the two major Islamic traditions) regarding the meaning and interpretation of the Qur’anic phrase “the earth will be illuminated by the light of its Lord” in Qur’an 39:69 (“wa-ashraqat al-arḍu bi-nūri rabbihā”). Exegetes from both traditions have presented diverse perspectives on what is intended by this expression—whether its meaning is literal or metaphorical, and whether it refers to a phenomenon in this world or in the Hereafter. Some of these interpretations are shared by exegetes of both groups, while others are exclusive either to Shia commentators or to Sunni commentators. Clarifying this issue helps remove the existing ambiguities surrounding the vocabulary of the verse and provides a more precise understanding of its expressions—an understanding that can have significant practical implications for human life.
Methodology:<br>This study employs a qualitative, descriptive–analytical approach. The views of Sunni and Shia exegetes regarding the meaning of the verse “wa-ashraqat al-arḍu bi-nūri rabbihā” (“the earth will be illuminated by the light of its Lord”) and their interpretations of what is intended by the earth’s illumination through God’s light have been extracted from their respective commentaries. The research aims to analyze, compare, and evaluate these interpretations, and to identify the view that best aligns with Qur’anic and hadith-based evidence.
findings:<br>The findings of this study indicate that, regarding the meaning of “the earth will be illuminated by the light of its Lord” in Qur’an 39:69, ten distinct interpretations have been presented by Sunni and Shia exegetes. Among these, three views are shared by both groups, five are exclusive to Sunni commentators, and two are exclusive to Shia commentators.The first shared interpretation (establishment of justice, truth, and proof) considers “truth” and “proof” to be synonymous. However, based on their Qur’anic usage, this equivalence appears incorrect; the term nūr (light) is never used metaphorically for “proof” or in the sense of “truth” in the Qur’an. Moreover, although ḥaqq (truth) and ʿadl (justice) may overlap in certain contexts, they represent two distinct concepts.The second shared interpretation (a light other than sunlight) merely paraphrases or translates the verse without offering an interpretive explanation, leaving the central ambiguity unresolved. The third shared interpretation is the view favored by this study.The well-known exclusive Sunni interpretation (God’s theophany to judge among people) does not clarify what is meant by tajallī (divine manifestation), and thus fails to resolve the verse’s ambiguity. Furthermore, some exegetes who support this view claim that God descends and sits upon a throne to judge humanity—a notion that implies anthropomorphism, from which God is exalted. Additionally, this interpretation seems to confuse the illumination mentioned in the first part of the verse with the judgment expressed later in the same verse—“and judgment will be passed between them in truth”—and for this reason is unlikely to be correct.The four lesser-known Sunni-exclusive interpretations (the light of God’s power; the light of the Prophet’s monotheism; the illumination of the human soul; and the light of God’s Shin) involve assigning meanings to the term light that contradict the apparent wording of the verse without supporting evidence, and may constitute tafsīr bi’l-ra’y (interpretation based on personal opinion). The last of these interpretations, in particular, suggests anthropomorphism and likening God to creation.The first Shia-exclusive interpretation (the light of justice through the rise of Imam al-Mahdī, may God hasten his reappearance) essentially reiterates the first shared view but applies the establishment of justice to this world rather than the Hereafter. The same critiques of that earlier view apply here as well. Moreover, this interpretation does not accord with the context of Qur’an 39:69 or the surrounding verses, which clearly pertain to the Day of Resurrection—unless it is taken as a deeper, allegorical layer (ta’wīl) premised on the idea that the rise of the Mahdī represents a reflection of the Resurrection within this world.The second Shia-exclusive interpretation (the light of a believer’s faith) is also incompatible with the verse’s attribution of light directly to God, even though in certain Qur’anic contexts, based on specific clues, light may indeed be used metaphorically for a believer’s faith.
Final conclusion:<br>This study concludes that among the ten interpretations proposed by Sunni and Shia exegetes concerning the meaning of Qur’an 39:69 — “And the earth will shine with the light of its Lord” — the shared view held by both groups, which interprets this illumination as the manifestation of the true reality of all things and human deeds on the Day of Resurrection, is the most plausible. This interpretation is supported by contextual clues within the verse, as well as by additional evidence from other Qur’anic verses and chapters. In contrast, each of the remaining nine interpretations—whether exclusive to Shia exegetes, exclusive to Sunni exegetes, or shared—faces significant critiques.کلمه نور از واژگان کلیدی در آیات قرآن است که در موارد متعدد تکرارشده و در برخی موارد، معنای حقیقی (نور محسوس) و در برخی موارد دیگر، معنای مجازی از آن، اراده شده است. ازجمله این آیات، آیه 69 سوره زمر است که در آن، از روشن شدن زمین بهواسطه نور پروردگار، سخن به میان آمده است «وَ أَشرَقَتِ الغرض بِنورِ رَبّها». در اینکه مراد از این اصطلاح قرآنی چیست و آیا معنای حقیقی از آن اراده شده یا مجازی و اشاره به پدیدهای در دنیا دارد یا آخرت، مفسران فریقین، دیدگاههای مختلفی مطرح کردهاند که برخی از این دیدگاهها مشترک بین مفسران فریقین، برخی، مختص مفسران شیعه و برخی دیگر، مختص مفسران اهل سنت است. روشن شدن این موضوع، ابهامات موجود در واژگان آیه را برطرف نموده، مفهوم دقیقی از عبارات آن، ارائه میدهد که علم به آن، میتواند تأثیرات عملی زیادی در زندگی انسان داشته باشد. این پژوهش که به روش توصیفی- تحلیلی و در بستر مطالعات کتابخانهای صورت گرفته، این دیدگاهها را تحلیل، مقایسه و مورد ارزیابی قرار داده و درنهایت به این نتیجه منتهی شده که از میان 10 دیدگاه مطرحشده در این خصوص، دیدگاه مشترک ظهور حقیقت اشیاء و اعمال انسان در قیامت، به خاطر وجود قرائن سیاقی و قرائن و شواهد موجود در آیات دیگر قرآن، بر دیدگاههای دیگر برتری دارد.https://cis.quran.ac.ir/article_221913_ecffc6f27a8e99696a11cac3e0e1bcae.pdf