نوع مقاله : مقاله ترویجی
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
Detailed Abstract
Research Objective:
The aim of this article is to undertake a comparative study of non-Quranic revelation from the perspectives of Allameh Tabataba’i and Mahmoud Abu Rayyah. In Shia sources, this type of revelation is referred to as declarative revelation (waḥy bayānī), whereas in Sunni sources it is designated as the revelation of the Sunnah (waḥy al-sunnah) or unrecited revelation (waḥy ghayr matluww).
Research Methodology:
This article has been prepared on the basis of a descriptive-analytical method and through the use of library-based sources. In developing the discussion, both Shia and Sunni exegetical and hadith sources have been consulted. The earliest source to address this issue is al-Shafi‘i’s al-Risalah, a work that occupies an important position within the Sunni tradition.
Research Findings:
Allameh Tabataba’i, a contemporary exegete, in his commentary on «أَطِیعُوا اللَّهَ وَ أَطِیعُوا الرَّسُول» (al-Nisa’/59), maintains with regard to the source of the Noble Prophet’s knowledge that there is no doubt that, by commanding people to obey the Messenger, God intends nothing other than that they obey Him through what He has revealed to them by means of His Noble Messenger and that they put His teachings and laws into practice. At the same time, the Messenger of God possesses two dimensions: one is the station of legislation, and the other is the station of implementing rulings and exercising judgment. His discussion points to the descent of a form of non-Quranic revelation upon the Noble Prophet alongside Quranic revelation in the sphere of legislation, in a manner comparable to the content of the Arikah tradition, and reflects attention to the fact that God granted him the Quran as well as something like the Quran together with it.
Mahmoud Abu Rayyah, in Adwa’ ‘ala al-Sunnah al-Muhammadiyyah, writes concerning non-Quranic revelation:
“It is necessary to refer here to a hadith in which it is reported that all hadiths [of the Noble Prophet] are of the nature of divine revelation to him, just like the Noble Quran. This tradition reads: «ألا و إنی أوتیت الکتاب و مثله معه», and in another narration it is stated: «ألا إنی أوتیت القرآن و مثله معه». This narration has been engulfed in a whirlpool of accusations. For when it is said that the Noble Prophet was given ‘something like the Book’ or ‘something like the Quran,’ this necessarily implies that such a thing was granted to him in order to complete the Quran or to perfect the exposition of his religion and law. Yet no command from the Noble Prophet has reached us concerning the writing down of this ‘something like the Quran’ during his lifetime, in the way that such instructions have come down to us regarding the writing of the Quran. Did he ever appoint scribes for it who were obliged to write it down at the time of its descent, just as he appointed scribes for the Quran? Is it reasonable to suppose that the Noble Prophet should have departed from this world while leaving behind half of what God had revealed to him—preserving one part while consigning the other to oblivion? Is it not the case that the Noble Prophet, through his knowledge, conveyed the message in the best possible manner and delivered the divine trust to those entitled to it…?” (Abu Rayyah, 1383 Sh., pp. 54–55)
In this passage, Abu Rayyah calls into question the claim that the Prophet received a binding form of non-Quranic revelation alongside the Quran. His principal objection is that, had such a revelation truly existed as a complement to the Quran or as a completion of the exposition of religion and law, there should have been explicit prophetic instructions for its writing and preservation comparable to those issued for the Quran.
Final Conclusion:
From the perspective of Shia and Sunni scholars, three principal sources have been proposed for the knowledge of the Noble Prophet. First, there is Quranic revelation, namely the revealed verses of the Noble Quran. Second, there is the Prophet’s ijtihad, which Allameh Tabataba’i presents under the heading of ṣawāb al-ra’y and associates with the domains of authority, governance, and adjudication. Third, there is non-Quranic revelation, which in Sunni scholarship is discussed under such designations as waḥy al-sunnah and waḥy ghayr matluww, and in Shia scholarship under the titles waḥy lays bi-Qur’an and waḥy bayānī.
Scholars of both schools have generally cited the Arikah tradition in discussions concerning the authoritative status of the Prophetic hadith in the legislation of religious rulings, the abrogation of the Book by the Sunnah, or in connection with relevant Quranic verses such as Qur’an 16:44, 75:19, and 20:114. On the basis of this tradition, they have maintained that two forms of revelation descended upon the Noble Prophet: the first, Quranic revelation, namely the verses of the Quran; and the second, non-Quranic revelation. Thus, the origin of the discussion of non-Quranic revelation with respect to the source of Prophetic knowledge is shared by scholars of both traditions.
کلیدواژهها English
