مجله مطالعات تطبیقی قرآن و حدیث
پیاپی 5 (پاییز و زمستان 1394)

One of the sources of derivation of Islamic laws is the Holy Quran. According to scholars of jurisprudence and exegetes of Ayat al-Ahkam or the Quranic verses that pertain to legal rulings, the verses have been categorized into two parts one dealing with the legal rulings and another unrelated to this area. The verses of the Quran that have a legal content are called Ayat al-Ahkam, i.e. the verses that form the basis of legal rules on a specific subject. The verses that are unrelated to legal rules deal with other religious doctrines such as the origin of existence, resurrection, the stories of prophets, the previous nations etc. This article aims to prove the inefficiency of this type of categorization of verses. Describing and analyzing some of traditions of the two major sects (i.e. the Shiite and Sunni schools of jurisprudence) which signify the possibility of deriving legal rulings from the second category of verses, the foregoing categorization can be changed to some extent. Perhaps, with inspiration from the Ahlulbayt's method, it can be said that legal rulings can be deduced even from those verses which are apparently unrelated to legal rulings. Breaking up some of those verses into parts and generalizing them to other cases increase their capacity to be used as a rule in various jurisprudential areas.

Correct interpretation and understanding of the Quran is based on certain rules that are applied in an exegetic process. The extent to which the exegete adheres to these rules and how he applies them directly determines how far he is able to explore the true divine purpose. Among various Quranic topics, the subject of "wilayah and imamate" (Governance and Leadership) is among the key contentious issues about which there are different readings and interpretations in Shiite and Sunnite scholarly circles. These differences are due, mainly, to the use or incorrect use of the exegetic rules. Hence, the object of this of this article is to study the status and role of exegetic rules in commentary works such as Majmaul Bayan and Mafatih al-Ghaib especially in the interpretation of the verse of wilayah. Using a descriptive – analytic method, this article seeks to examine how far the authors of these two commentary works have made use of exegetic rules so that by so doing the root cause of the contention and differences that have existed between Shiite and Sunnite schools about the subject of wilayah could be verified. As per the finding of this research, the most important rules that have been used in these two commentary works in the process of interpreting the verse of wilayah are the following: paying attention to Arabic grammar, context of verses, occasion of revelation, and relevance of other verses.

Sunni jurisprudents have resorted to a reported tradition "There is no will for the heir" to negate any will for the heir. This juridical stand has been contradicted by Shiite scholars. We have examined this jurisprudential topic from various aspects including the authenticity of the narration, chain of transmission and sources as well as the wordings and significations of the tradition. The conclusion we have drawn is that this tradition cannot be relied upon in any areas of jurisprudential verdicts or in the area of the abrogation of the Book because the tradition is inauthentic. Even if it is assumed to be authentic, it cannot restrict what is purported and signified by other reports and narrations that denote the possibility of a will for the heir.

One of the Quranic concepts about resurrection and life in the hereafter is the term Araf and the people of Araf (ashab al-a`raf) as mentioned in verses 46 to 49 of Chapter al-Araf. What is A’raf? Who are the people called Ashab al-A`raf? What is their next home (if any)? The interpretations of the Holy Qur’an are replete with differences, because the word A’raf has different connotations. This brief study explains the Qur’anic term al-A’raf, in the light of different interpretations of the word, albeit relying on a comparative study within the commentaries and works authored by researchers and exegetes. One of the important findings of this research is that Araf refers, literally, to the heights or prominent places or elevated surfaces between the hell and the heaven. These heights are inhabited by some people having the facility to observe the companions in paradise and those who are in the hell. The men on the heights are such souls as are not decidedly on the side of merit or decidedly on the side of sin, but evenly balanced on a partition between heaven and hell. Their case is yet to be decided, but they hope for God’s Mercy and intercession of the Infallibles and those near to Allah expecting to be allowed to enter Paradise.

The reverential miracle is one of the miracles of the Quran that has serious but silent presence in the works authored by ancient and modern writers. In its general sense, reverential miracle has a vast scope and has been the focus of attention from various psychological, spiritual, literary and physical dimensions. In fact, some of those dimensions have no relevance to miracle, though they do add to the numerous merits of the Quran. A study of the views of scholars from the fourth century onward leads to perceptions in explaining the nature and structures of the reverential miracle of the Holy Quran, the great and untouched legacy of the Great Prophet of Islam.
The present study seeks to examine and positively analyze the reverential miracle of the Holy Quran in the research of the Two Sects (Shia and Sunni schools). The writer explaining reverential miracle examines the proofs and indications of such miracle in the Quran, narrations and historical reports. Although none of them decisively signify reverential miracle, by relying on numerous signs and proofs one can on the whole reach decisive knowledge about reverential miracle.

Knowing God through God has been a point emphasized in textual sources with different and multiple interpretations presented for it the most important of which are the following: First interpretation: Knowing God with divine creation and construction; Second interpretation: knowing God with divine power; Third interpretation: Knowing God by utilizing divine ways; Fourth interpretation: Knowing God through divine statements; Fifth interpretation: Knowing God through creatures; Sixth interpretation: Knowing God through the existential status of creatures; Seventh interpretation: Knowing God through negating the attributes of creatures; Eighth interpretation: Precedence of knowing God over knowing creatures; Ninth interpretation: Knowing God with the agency of God; Tenth interpretation: Intuitive cognition of God what is generally referred to as knowledge by presence. According to the preferred interpretation, these traditions are of two types: 1. Traditions in an imperative mode 2. Traditions in a non-imperative mode. When it comes to the first category of verses, the first, second and third interpretations are not acceptable. Because according to these interpretations knowing God through God is the only way of cognition of God and ordering someone to gain such knowledge is futile and against wisdom of the one who issues the order. However, the remaining interpretations can be understood as the multiple semantic layers of perception. As for the traditions in the second category most of these interpretations can be accepted and brought forth as the semantic degrees or multiple layers of understanding this theme. Keywords: acquired knowledge, knowledge by presence, knowing God through God, the proof of the Truthful.