جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « سوره زخرف » در نشریات گروه « علوم قرآن و حدیث »

This article criticizes the view of the authors of the book "Another Prophet, Jesus (a) in the Holy Quran" regarding the verse 35 of Maryam, who consider the main addressee of the verse to be the polytheists of Mecca and not the Christians. Considering that Muslim commentators consider the main addressee of the verse to be Christians, this view is a new interpretation. In this regard, this point of view is criticized =0with the method of historical-content analysis of Surah Maryam by referring to historical evidence and other verses and examining the evidence presented by the authors. Their main reason is a sympathetical approach of the Holy Quran with Christians in this chapter. By accepting this principle, it became clear that the audience of the verse cannot be other than Christians. Surah Maryam was revealed in one of the critical times of Islamic history to communicate with Christians, and during the migration of Muslims to Habesha, it was the basis of their communication with Najashi and victory over polytheists. Although the content of the Surah is in harmony with the main beliefs of Christians, which is approved by the Holy Quran, but the Holy Quran has also criticized their false beliefs with an indirect sympathetic approach. Examining the verses surrounding Maryam verse 35, as well as Nisa verse 171 and the verses of Surah Zukhruf which the authors have argued, also show that the main audience of this verse are Christians

Differences in translations and descriptions of the Quran can be attributed to variances in grammar usage and the understanding of Arabic literature. This, in turn, can influence the interpretation of verses. One such verse, “Anakom felazabe moshtarekon” (Zokhrof/39), demonstrates variations in translation and interpretation. Although it is unlikely that all interpretations are correct, an investigation into the meaning of “Anna” and its comparison with translations and interpretations was necessary. Additionally, the connection between the meaning of “Anna” and the proposed syntactic combinations for this verse needed evaluation, to determine the most accurate explanation based on literary rules. Through this evaluation, the most accurate combination was identified, indicating that the phrase should be translated as follows: “because of the injustice you have done in the world, it will not benefit you to share in the punishment on that day.” However, other interpretations that perceive “Anna” as a non-infinitive, denoting explanation, present issues such as lacking literary support, the presence of two explanation symbols in the same phrase, and choosing incorrect meanings for “ez” and the subject of the verb “Lan Yanfakom.” This article adopts a descriptive analytical method, supported by library sources, to critically assess the usage and impact of the explanatory sense of “Anna” in existing interpretations and translations of this verse.

James Bellamy, one of the revisionist orientalists, believes that mistakes have occurred in the text of the Quran, which is the result of the mistakes of the writers of revelation. In his articles based on the “textual criticism” method, he has examined and corrected these written errors. Citing the existence of a difference in the reading of “Wa Qilihi” in verse 88 of Surah Zukhruf and the unsuccessful attempt of commentators to determine its syntactic role, he claims that its correct form is “wa qiblahu”. According to him, the writer or editor realized the replacement of this verse with the previous verse and by adding this phrase and noting the correct order of these two verses. In the current study, Bellami’s point of view is investigated with the analytical-critical method and it is proved that not only for all the reported readings, but there is also a correct syntactic combination; rather, the application of his hypothesis the context of the verses of this surah will be damaged. Also, by tracing the sources of readings and manuscript differences and examining the possibility of additions to the text of the Quran and the spread of errors in copying, it is shown that his proposal does not have the necessary stability and mastery