جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "حفص از عاصم" در نشریات گروه "علوم قرآن و حدیث"

The selection of the seven canonical recitations by Ibn Mujahid (d. 324 AH), followed by the subsequent selections of ten and fourteen recitations by later scholars, significantly distinguished these recitations from others. This distinction led some Sunni scholars to regard the seven, and others the ten recitations, as mutawatir (massively transmitted). As these classifications gained prominence after Ibn Mujahid, it becomes essential to analyze the earlier written works to evaluate the legitimacy of these recitations, as they remain unaffected by the categorizations introduced by Ibn Mujahid and his successors. A notable example of such an early work is the extensive commentary Jami’ al-Bayan by Mohammad bin Jarir al-Tabari (d. 310 AH), which is free from the biases of later classifications. This research aims to elucidate Tabari’s perspective on various recitations by employing a library-based methodology to explore how he addressed the different recitations of the Quran in his Jami’ al-Bayan, particularly focusing on his treatment of the narration of Hafs from Asim. The results suggest that Tabari did not endorse the tawatur (massively transmission) of the ten canonical recitations. In fact, he often deemed the recitations of certain ten reciters as impermissible in various verses. Additionally, an analysis of Tabari’s stance on the Hafs narration indicates that he did not recognize it as mutawatir or as a reliable narration; he did not even equate it with lesser-known or anomalous recitations and intentionally avoided acknowledging or transmitting it.

Translations such as “Qiraat al-A’mmah”, “Qiraat al-Nas” and “Qiraat al-Jumhur” have been used in some historical reports. Some have provided incorrect interpretations of them by selective quoting. What readings do the mentioned interpretations refer to and in each case do they correspond with the how many readings of several reciters and how much did each of the famous reciters disagree with this general reading? The problem of the current research is that considering the importance of the first centuries of Hijrah and the fame of the seven reciters, the interpretations of public recitations in the first five centuries of Hijrah have been collected and compared with the recitations of the seven reciters. Considering the cases of the use of such general interpretations in the first five centuries of Hijrah shows that these interpretations were never used according to the individual reading of a reciter; Rather, in 95% of cases, these interpretations match at least with the reading of five reciters of the seven reciters and in 98.8% of cases, at least with the reading of four reciters of the seven reciters. This statistic shows that such interpretations either refer to the recitation of the majority of reciters or to the recitation of the majority of people who were subordinate to the reciters. Also, the comparison of the number of objections of each reciter with the cases of using the interpretations of public recitation in the first five centuries of Hijrah, shows that the most opposition to public recitation is in the recitation of the reciters of the city of Kufa (Kisai, Hamzah, and Asim narrated from Hafs) and the least opposition to public recitation is observed in the recitations of Hijaz reciters (Nafi’ and Ibn Kathir).

In Shiite commentaries, there are recitations attributed to the Infallibles (AS) which are in the position of proving independent readings for the Infallibles (AS). The analysis of this issue is important because the prerequisite and one of the principles in the interpretation of the Qur'an is to know the correct recitation. Throughout the history of Islam, various recitations [qira’at] have been narrated for the Holy Quran, but not all of them have validity and authority, and none of the famous recitations [qira’at] have been narrated and quoted from the Prophet (PBUH) in a massive [mutawatir] manner and with a completely reliable document. Scholars of Quranic sciences have mentioned various causes and factors for differences in recitations [qira’at]. In this article, only the most important factor in order to limit the subject of research; i.e., the ijtihad and personal opinion of the reciters [qurra’] have been studied using the descriptive-analytical and critical methods. One of the aspects of the significance and necessity of this discussion is the correct inference [instinbat] of the jurists from the jurisprudential verses and also perceiving the interpretive points as some of those words have been recited in a different way. In the present study, the phenomenon of differences in recitations [qira’at] has been pathologically examined and the negative role of personal ijtihad of reciters [qurra’] in differences in recitations [qira’at] has been discussed both from the perspective of Muslim scholars and from the perspective of Régis Blachère. Then, the arguments of the pros and cons are mentioned as to whether the recitation [qira’t] of Hafs by A’sim can be an example of a single and common recitation [qira’t] among Muslims throughout the history of Islam. The results of research show that although the narrations of Hafs from A’sim have not been accepted by all Quranic scholars in terms of documents and there is no single consensus in this regard, but in any case, A’sim's recitation [qira’t], like other famous recitations [qira’at], is applicable to all people and is of great significanceScholars of Quranic sciences have mentioned various reasons and factors for differences in readings. In this article, only the most important factor, namely ijtihad and personal opinion of readers, has been examined using descriptive-analytical and critical methods. One of the aspects of the importance and necessity of such a discussion is the correct inference of the jurists from the jurisprudential verses and also receiving interpretive points, some of whose words have been read differently. In the present study, the phenomenon of differences in readings has been pathologized and the negative role of readers' personal ijtihad in differences in readings has been discussed both from the perspective of Muslim scholars and from the perspective of Reggie Blascher. Then, the arguments of the proponents and the opponents are mentioned as to whether the recitation of Hafs by Asim is an example of a single and common recitation among Muslims throughout the history of Islam. Not all Quranic scholars have been included and there is no single consensus in this regard, but in any case, Asim's recitation, like other famous recitations, is applicable to all people and is of great importance.

The fame and popularity of Hafs from Asem method of Qurān recitation and its conformity with the most of available versions of the Qurān has made its evidence authenticity and validity very significant. Deploying an analytical-descriptive method, the present paper attempts to criticize the available views in this regard. In some references of the Shia and Sunni biographies of the narrators of traditions, Abdarrahman Selmi, Asem and Hafs are weakened while Othman is regarded as among Abu Abdarrahman’s scholars. The investigations showed that proving the affiliation of Abdarrahman to Othman demands a strong documentation and evidence. The reasons led to Asem’s weakening in transmitting traditions are in contradiction to his consolidations and focus to the Qurān recitation. The origin for Haf’s weakening was that he was mistaken with Hafs Basari and Azadi and not narrating the ancients’ sayings correctly. Likewise, Othman’s presence in this recitation’s evidence is null due to some reasons. Using historic and biographies of the narrators of traditions references, this writing proves that the weak evidence of this recitation is not reliable.

The narratives permitting common reading of Quran، despite differences in the readings of Imams and those of common ones، allow people to read as common reading. Some persons regard seven readings as the proof of their permissibility. Others، based on periods، have considered them as permissible only in the Imams era. And some jurists have regarded only Hafs’ narrative as the proof of these traditions. This research، based on seven readings’ currency in the past and some terms such as “peoples’ reading” and “common reading” in regard to Quranic and historical texts، has tried to demonstrate the currency of each reading in the given period can be considered as its’ permissibility. Thus، in the contemporary period in the eastern Islamic world only the Asems’ narrative by Hafs ones is in currency. In these lands، Hafs’ reading is the only proof in regard to the permissibility of peoples’ reading.