جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « اساطیر الاولین » در نشریات گروه « علوم انسانی »

The composition "Asāṭīr al-Awwalīn" is repeated 9 times in Qur'an (6:25, 8:31, 16:24, 23:83, 25:5, 27:68, 46:17, 68:15, 83:13). In 23, 27 and 46 it points to superstition and doctrine of the resurrection. In 5 verses it is understood in 3 meanings: 1- the (invalid) words and writings by the former (generations), 2- mythical stories, and 3- superstition and myth. In the remaining case, verse 68, most of the commentators only express the literal meaning. The above three meanings are based on narrations. Based on those, this phrase is an accusation of denying divine revelation, in opposition to the Qur'an and response to the Tahaddi. But Qur'anic verses about the ancients are not similar to the stories of Rostam and Esfandiar. A critical analysis shows that the part of the narration which introduces it as the descent affair of these verses is probably not part of the text and is the narrator's interpretation because it is equal to the simplicity of challenge. This allegation is against Qur'anic quotes on this subject from associators. Although it is claimed that the narrations cited refer to all the cases of the "Asāṭīr al-Awwalīn", it conflicts with some verses and only the following verses have been used that the meaning has been ambiguous. This paper shows evidence that it refers to the promise of resurrection, exodus, and publication in the writings of the ancients, including the books of Jews and Christians and other divine religions, the Avesta, and the writings of the Copts, Indians, Greeks, etc.

ln this investigation we are going to study and criticize one of the theories which had been raised by some of the contemporary Muslim researchers concerning Quran’s stories. They have claimed that these stories are unreal and legendary- an attitude whose origin seems to be from Western philosophers who call the religious language and propositions “myth”, which bears no relevance to reality and knowledge. These philosophers have declared that these interpretations are basically and originally the intuitions of religious people.
Since our criticism is only concerned with Muslims who make this claim, we are going to judge the truth or fallacy of this theory by studying the verses which are talking about the goal and stance of Quran’s stories. For the first step we will take a look at the meanings and definitions offered for the word “myth”. Then by pointing out the status of this Western philosophers’ thought in its general sense in the realm of religion and that of some people like Dr.Khalf Allah in the realm of Quran, we will counter argue Dr. Khalf Allah and his sympathizers’ reasons and rationales by looking into the relevant Quran verses to find out the meaning of the word “myth” in order to come to the desirable conclusion presented in the Quran.

Studies on the Quran revealthat the disbelievers named the Quran asatir al-avvalin(‘fables of the men of old’) to deny therevealed origin of this holy book and to refute the resurrection.The Arabic word ostureh (singular form of asatir) which may be translated into ‘fable’ in English has been defined differently, but what we may conclude from various definitions is that ostureh is the special worldview of the ancient man. Hence, discovery of the social structure of man’s life in the distant past as well as his thought system counts a lot. However, given the primary nature of the life of the pre-Islamic Arabs, can we say that what they understood fromostureh was exactly what it meant to the ancient people?Investigation into the Quranic verses and reflection upon their context tell us that from the perspective of the pre-Islamic Arabs, whose all walks of life had been influenced by connection with thejinn, ostureh is the same association they had with thejinn. An evaluation of the structure of the life of the pre-Islamic Arabs and the context of verses in question as well as the similar names the disbelievers used to call the Prophet all is evidence of the claim made in this research.

One of the controversial issues concerning the Quran is the claim of the existence of mythical stories in the Quran raised by Muhammad ahmad khalafullah in the contemporary era. Criticizing this view، some scholars have refuted it relying on numorous arguments. The present article has criticized and analyzed the principal argument of khnalafullah،i. e the verses including the phrase "the myths of the ancient one. s" (asātīr ul-avvalīn) from a different perspective and based on his literary method. The outcome of the research and the analysis of the verses based on the literary exegetical method suggest the absence of mythical stories in the Quran، since the verses should be arranged and interpreted chronologically in a literary study. Application of this method indicates that، in spite of the analysis of khalafullah، polytheists had called the Quran frequently the myths of the ancient ones before god revealed any Quranic stories. Even if we concede that the holy Quran has quoted this attribution from the polytheists without denial، the meaning of "myths'" in the Quran can not be the stories of the Quran. However، a curious study of the context of these verses suggests that they firmly refute the claim of the Quranic vevses being mythical.

This paper briefly accounts the relation between Mowlana (Rumi) and his inferences from the Quran. The purpose is to explain that Rumi s mysticism as availabe in his works is stemmed from the core and contents of the Quran, and he himself is assumed to be a sort of the Quran critic. On the other hand. Rumi s belief, faith, and love toward the Quran illustrates the divine and heavenly discourse to reveal that Rumi s mysticism is the flowing mysticism out of revelation and prophesy, inevitably relying on prophetic tradition, staying away from the soul desires, and what has been said by the king of the bests (God) has been put into verse and close to our comprehension, though he suffers from some special misunderstandings of the world today and says.You interpret the intact talkBetter interpret yourself not God, You interpret theQuran on your desire Make the lofty sense as nasty and satire