جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « المیزان و تسنیم » در نشریات گروه « علوم قرآن و حدیث »

How words relate to meanings has always been the source of differences in the interpretation of a text. This issue is strongly seen in the interpretation of the Holy Quran. The lack of research in this field led the writer to the subject of "comparative study of the relationship between words and meanings in the Qur'an with an emphasis on interpretations; to examine Majmaal Bayan, Al Mizan and Tasnim" with a descriptive-analytical method. In the end, it was found that the main difference can be traced in the two theories of "Truth and Permissibility" and "Spirit of Meaning". Some like Tabarsi, by accepting the theory of "truth and permission" have considered all the uses of words in non-topics as metaphorical, but after the emergence of the theory of the spirit of meaning and its acceptance by Allameh Tabatabaei, the existence of permission in Quranic expressions decreased significantly because he considered the meanings of the Quran to have Taweel knew that in the application of concepts they refer to all words in a real way, but he considered the application of those meanings in the senses to be virtual. On the other hand, Javadi Amoli, by denying the permission in the Qur'an, believes that words have been established for the souls of meanings and their use in general concepts and the application of those concepts to any perceptible or sensible example is "real". He compares the Qur'an to a hanging rope that the spirit of meaning in all stages including; The word, meaning, concept, external and internal and developmental facts, etc., indicate them in a real way.

The miraculousness of the Quran is one of the most important exegetic foundations of Allamah Tabatabai and Ayatollah Javadi Amoli. Allamah Tabatabai considers the miraculousness of the Quran to be based on two principles: miraculousness certainly exists and the Quran is one of the instances of miracles. In contrast, Javadi Amoli derives the miraculousness of the Quran through syllogism. Similarly, Javadi Amoli believes that no language can translate the Quran and translation ruins and reduces its subtleties. Thus, he has replaced the translation of the verses with selected exegesis. The other difference between the two exegetes is that Allamah Tabatabai does not consider eloquence to be limited merely to words; rather, it includes both words and meanings. However, Javadi Amoli in a way emphasizes only the meaning and acknowledges that the Arabs had words but the words did not have these exalted meanings. Comparing the foundations of these two exegetes shows that they share a common view regarding the miraculous nature of the Quran; however, there is a difference in the explanation and details of these exegetic foundations between the student and teacher. The most important goal of this article is to probe and analyze the source of this difference in opinion. In this paper, the views of the abovementioned exegetes regarding the basis of the miraculousness of the Quran have been studied using a comparative method.

The immunity of the Qurʾan from distortion is one of the most important interpretive bases of most commentators (including Allameh Tabatabaie and Ayatollah Javadi Amoli). Allameh Tabatabaie has explained the interpretive basis of "non-distortion of the Qurʾan " in seven sections, which are: The similarity of the current Qurʾan  with the Qurʾan  of the time of the Messenger of Allah, validating the narratives of the non-distortion of the Qurʾan, criticism of the reasons of those who believe in distortion of the Qurʾan, analyzing the unification of the Qur'anic Musḥafs during the period of Uthman, analysis of the collection of the Qur'an between two volumes at the time of the Companions and criticism of the narratives leading to distortion. On the other hand, Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, in explaining this interpretive basis, emphasizes things such as rational reasons, narrational reasons, the frequency of the Qurʾan, the testimony of history, the harmony of the Qurʾan with ʿItrat, the fame achieved by the testimony of scholars of the two sects. The comparison of the bases of two commentators shows that they both agree on the principle of immunity of the Holy Qurʾan from distortion, and this is one of the common bases of interpretational principles of the two commentators in the interpretation of the Qurʾan. But on the other hand, in explaining the details of the issue, they have differences of opinion with each other, and the analysis of these commonalities and differences shows an innovation in the views of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli. In this article, the view of the two mentioned commentators regarding the basis of incorruptibility has been discussed with a descriptive-analytical method and in a comparative manner. The result shows that one of the principles of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli is that he considers the order of the verses in the surahs and the order of the surahs to be a divine command, and he attributes the collection and editing of the Muṣḥaf to the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah the Almighty. While Allameh Tabatabaie does not believe that the Qurʾan was compiled in full complete version during the lifetime of the Prophet (pbuh), and believes that the efforts to arrange the surahs are individual. This issue is the root of the difference of opinion of two commentators in explaining the immunity of the Qurʾan from distortion, which seems Ayatollah Javadi Amoli’s statement to be more correct in this regard. Also, Ayatollah Javadi Amoli considered Allameh Tabatabaie's argument in proving the incorruptibility of the Qurʾan as requiring a thin distance and criticized his words, which seems to be an accurate observation.

Comparative or comparative studies have been considered in the present century, because in this type of studies, the advantages and disadvantages of theories are revealed. The present study, in order to obtain the differences and commonalities of the three interpretations of Majma 'al-Bayyan, Al-Mizan and Tasnim, verses 83-81 of Surah Al-Imran in a descriptive-analytical and comparative method from the point of view of three commentators, namely Sheikh Tabarsi, Allameh Tabatabai And Ayatollah Javadi Amoli examines. In this research, first Surah Al-Imran and the desired interpretations will be introduced and then the relevant verses of all three interpretations will be considered and the theories of the commentators will be compared and compared with each other. The results of the article indicate that; While all three commentators have tried to interpret the verses that are in the same context, in one section and not separately, there is also a parallel between the comments of the commentators. Also, one of the best ways to deeply understand the verses of the Holy Quran and the influence of the divine verses in the heart and soul, is to use comparative interpretation.

Verse 34 of Surah An-Nisa 'is one of the most challenging topics in the field of women, which the commentators have sometimes commented on, sometimes in line with each other.The present study examines the differences in the verse of consistency, which are the nature and scope of consistency, the concept of grace, inviolability and corporal punishment of women in the interpretations of Al-Mizan,Makhzan Al-Irfan , Al-Furqan, Tasnim in a comparative manner .In this way, the differences and commonalities of the selected interpretations have been identified, which pave the way for solving the challenges in the verses.Among the special approaches in the verse of consistency, we can mention the scope of consistency that interpretations such as Al-Mizan, Al-Irfan and Al-Farqan reservoirs have been generalized to social affairs and believe in the application of men's consistency to women's type and some such as Tasnim have limited it. In the rulings, the couple knows.

Ayatollah Javadi Amoli is one of the most prominent students of the Allameh Tabatabaier School of Interpretation, the author of "The Interpretation of Al-Mizan". He joined the Order of Interpretation by writing a commentary titled "Tasnim". Interpretation, while sharing many with al-Mizan in philosophical and mystical contexts, has used the same method of Allamere, the "Interpretation of the Qur'an to the Qur'an". Tasnim's interpreter, despite his master's praise and admiration for the excellence of the Quran's interpretation of the Qur'an, has found an angle in the interpretation of some basic verses and beliefs with the commentator al-Mizan. Reflection in differentiating the interpretive views of these two commentators helps us to reach the finer points of the Qur'anic interpretation of the Qur'an. Weaknesses that originate either in failing to explain how to apply this method, or in observing the nature of the ijtihadic nature that requires the use of reason at all stages of interpretation.

Al-Mizan and Tasnim are two valuable interpretations of the contemporary era that have been presented to the Islamic society by Professor Allameh Tabatabai and his prominent and educated student, Ayatollah Javadi Amoli. Studies show that there is no fundamental difference in the interpretation of Al-Mizan and Tasnim, but in situations such as the lexical concept, the pronunciation of words or the determination of examples in some words, there are differences, which help the researcher to understand the verses, resolve the differences or choose the right position. In the present study, the conflicting positions of Al-Mizan and Tasnim's commentaries on the five words of the controversial cases have been compared and with scientific reasons, the best view has been selected to achieve a better understanding of the Qur'an. "Al-Jamal" in Al-aaraf / 40, "Sri'a" in Maryam / 24, "Oloof" in Al-baqarah / 243, "Waredoha" in Maryam / 71 and "Ma" in Yasin / .35.

Al –Mizan and Tasnim Interpretations of Quran are among contemporary, all-inclusive interpretations, with similar approaches toward the holy Quran. An outstanding feature of these two works is the quantity and quality of utilizing narrative sources in their interpretations, while respecting Quran’s independence in meaning and teachings. Besides Quran – to – Quran interpretations, narrations have also been widely used in these two works. The present study, through a descriptive – analytic approach, and with referring to library sources aims at finding similarities between the two works. Findings of the study show that authors of both works have made logical use of narrations in their interpretations of Quran without overemphasizing or neglecting it. The two authors have tried to present unreachable ideas based on the holy Quran. Some of the common grounds between the two interpretations in relation to the use of narrations are: referring to the examples of verses, referring to the interpretation of verses and making use of narrations to exemplify and clarify the generalities in Quran. The results of this study are applicable for future studies focusing on the methodology of Quran – to – Quran interpretation.

Causes of descent is any sort of questions, and any incident that happened in the era of the Prophet (pbuh) and caused the revelation of a verse or verses or a chapter of the Quran and in which refers to the accident or question. Most of Quranic scholars and scientists pay a great attention to these series of narrations. Meanwhile, some of Shia exegetes such as Allamah Tabatabai, Ayatollah Javadi Amoli and Ayatollah Marifat has narrated and investigated the narrations in a critical manner. Although Allamh Tabatabai accounts most of the narration as an outcome of narrators Ijthad but he mentions and criticises many of them. Ayatollah Javadi Amoli mentions the cause of descent of a verse apart from the sphere of the revelation. Javadi Amoli Like his teacher, Tabatabai, considers a part of the traditions of the descent which narrated by some of companions or followers only the underlying conceptions of interpretation and could not be considered as a proof. But only the traditions which has an accepted and valid evidence is able to be used in the way of declaring the cause of revelation. Unlike them, Ayatollah Marifat gives a great scientific and practical value to the exegeses of the Companions and consequently the cause of descent traditions narrated by them. Of course there are differences in their expressions and layout in this regard which will be mentioned in this article.