جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "readings" در نشریات گروه "علوم قرآن و حدیث"

Among the books of Quranic readings and Quranic sciences and exegesis, there are different indicators to determine the preference of popular readings over each other; indicators that the scholars of this field have always used in reasoning throughout the history of this science. One of the most important indicators is that the readings are inArabic. Adhering to the common laws of Arabic usage and syntax, eloquence and rhetoric are counted as some of the criteria for deciding Arabicness.When counting the aspects of the preference of readings over the Hafs Reading, the aspect that is most statistically preferred is the one related to literary preference based on indisputable Arabic laws, in the sense that in numerous instances, another reading in terms of Arabicness is preferred over the Haf reading. Similarly, a study of the context of verses in some instances expresses the preference of other readings over the Hafs one. These preferences have also led to differences in the exegetic views of interpreters. The focus of this article is to study these aspects of preference and analysis of some of the instances based on the views of Tabarsi and Farra in comparison to other Sunni and Shiite exegetes. Some of the results of this research include: resolving some of the problems in justifying the literary aspect of verses in exegesis considering other popular readings, explaining the semantic aspect more clearly in exegesis, the academic acceptance of both the Sunnis and Shias in this aspect, etc.

After the invention of the theory called the Taṣrīf, some authors have tried to link this theory to the history of collecting the Qurʾan. On the basis of the theory of taṣrīf, the Prophet (pbuh) was encouraging all his companions to alter the sentences structure and vocabulary of the Qurʾan and the Prophet (pbuh) was doing it himself too. The claim of linking this theory to the history of collecting the Qurʾan has been explained that the Prophet's act of expanding the companions' taṣrīf, led to the disagreement about the imagination of some taṣrīf as the Qurʾanic verses and after the death of the Prophet (pbuh), the second caliph offered Abu Bakr to collect the Prophet's taṣrīfs and prevent people from accessing those taṣrīfs and finally ʿUthmān destroyed all the taṣrīfs to make the text of all codices the same. With the aim of preventing the prevalence of false and baseless theories, the article criticizes the claim that the theory of taṣrīf is linked to the history of collecting the Qurʾan and shows that this claim, like the principle of the theory, is based on the Sunnis' foundations, weak narratives, false inferences, contradictory claims and distortion of the many traditions and historical reports.

The characteristic of vocalizing the third person singular masculine pronoun hā’ with -u (ḍamma), in words that the pronoun hā is preceded by -i (kasra) or -ī (yā’) like: “'Akhīhu”, “fīhu” and also the hā’ attached to a jussive (majzūm) verbal form like: “Nu'utihu”, “Nuşlihu” is widely attested in early Qur’an manuscripts.AbstractThe characteristic of vocalizing the third person singular masculine pronoun hā’ with -u (ḍamma), in words that the pronoun hā is preceded by -i (kasra) or -ī (yā’) like: “'Akhīhu”, “fīhu” and also the hā’ attached to a jussive (majzūm) verbal form like: “Nu'utihu”, “Nuşlihu” is widely attested in early Qur’an manuscripts.AbstractThe characteristic of vocalizing the third person singular masculine pronoun hā’ with -u (ḍamma), in words that the pronoun hā is preceded by -i (kasra) or -ī (yā’) like: “'Akhīhu”, “fīhu” and also the hā’ attached to a jussive (majzūm) verbal form like: “Nu'utihu”, “Nuşlihu” is widely attested in early Qur’an manuscripts.

The role of Qera't science (knowledge of reading the Quran) and its direct effect on the interpretation of the verses of the Holy Quran is undeniable. Therefore, the issue of Qera't has always been of interest to the quranic researchers. One of the important aspects in the matter of Qera't is to study the approach of the scholars of the first centuries AH to Qera't, especially their approach to today's common reading (Hafs's narration from Asim's qera't) which can be considered as a historical approach to this reading. Although Akhfash is one of the greats of Arabic literature and the general trend of his book, The Meanings of the Qur'an, is to pay attention to literary issues, in the direction of literary discussions, he has also paid close attention to the issue of reading which we can achieve his principles in the matter of Qera't and his criteria in accepting or choosing a Qera't By researching it. An examination of Akhfash's performance in the face of Hafs's narration from Asim's qera't also shows that , first of all, In prefering and choosing of a recitation, he has repeatedly chosen a recitation contrary to the Hafs's narration and secondly, some authors' Inference from some phrases such as "qera'tolAmmah" (The Public reading) in Akhfash's book is incorrect and contrary to explicit historical reports. that Inference that interpreted the phrases as a common and independent reading among the people. In addition, such phrases are sometimes used contrary to today's reading (Hafs's narration from Asim's qera't).

Abu al-Barakat al-Nasafi, one of the commentators of the eighth century in his commentary ‘Madarik Al-Tanzil and Haqa’iq Al-Ta'wil’, while relying on the seven out of ten famous readers, quotes from Ya'qub and Khalaf. As such he quotes from unknown readers such as Hassan and A’mash. He has referred to the readings of the Companions such as Ibn Mas'ud and Ibn Abbas. From among the most frequently narrated readings, according to the Sunni view, Nasafi prefers Asim's reading to Makki's, Basari and Nafi’s readings. Nasafi has used three types of preferences in his commentary ‘Madarik Al-Tanzil and Haqa’iq Al-Ta'wil’ and has relied on his preferences over Arabic, rhetorical and contextual rules and criteria. He has relied on seven criteria to choose and prefer any reading. In the meantime, he ignores the common standard for accuracy of a reading which is its frequency. Thus, he has sometimes preferred the unknown reading to the most frequently narrated reading.

Reading (the Qur'an) is one of the Qur'anic sciences that plays an important role in understanding the Qur'an, and differences in reading will be effective in receiving different meanings of the Qur'an. Golddecher, an Orientalist (1850-1921), relying on the differences in the readings and attributing it to the ijtihad of the Qaris (Qur'an reciters), seeks to make the Qur'an have an incoherent text and without unity, as well as a text not protected from distortion, and then he has referred to some verses. In this paper, in addition to responding to some of his evidence, an attempt has been made to prove the existence of a single text documented in revelation, referring to great efforts of Muslims in learning the Qur'an from the tongue of the Prophet. However, this single text, at the time of writing, due to the limitations of the official Arabic calligraphy of that time and its lack of full stop, movement and I'rab (the change of the vowel marking on the final letter of the word) has been faced with differences in readings. However, the next Qaris and commentators of the Qur'an only allowed choosing a reading based on personal ijtihad from the narrated readings and not only doesn't this ijtihad have the sense of validity of every reading based on the one's personal wishes and opinions, but also it means finding a reason for autonomy reading, and it does not affect main text of the Qur'an. The paper has been conducted by a descriptive-analytical method and the method of data collection is documentary-library.

Shaykh Tabarsi believes that firstly the sending down and proclamation of the Qur'an is just based on one reading; secondly he does not consider even one letter of the Qur'an as futile, thirdly, he accounts the reading diversity to appear after the proclamation of the Qur'an, and fourthly, does not regard the Qur'an and the readings as two distinct realities but believes in the synoptic knowledge of the divine reading and tries to definitely determine the divine reading or prefer it via conjecture and through adopting a number of principles including some linguistic-literary ones. Using a descriptive-analytical method, the present research analyzed the characteristics of the aforementioned principles and besides explaining their conceptual elements, states the position of their usage from Shaykh Tabarsi's view and eventually scrutinizes these principles.

Analysis of readings attributed to the infallibles (peace be upon them) is one of the most important topics in the field of exegesis. Analyzing and reviewing the exegetical and jurisprudential traditions gives interesting results, the most striking of which is realizing the value of these readings and the related traditions, even though other readings need to be considered in tandem while interpreting the verses. In addition, attention to some of the narrated readings of the infallibles (a) have a significant impact on Shīʿī exegesis. However, Shīʿa commentators and jurists have unfortunately paid little attention to the narrations about the readings just as they have done with other exegetical traditions.
This being despite the fact that these traditions are of great importance and substantially beneficial [in the field of exegesis]. The importance of this is further magnified in the case of Surah al- Māʾidah.

Since the beginning of the Prophet’s mission, the heavenly verses of the Qurʾān have been attacked by the enemies and ignorant people. Orientalists who study the Qurʾānic revelation have considered the variant readings as a good pretext for presenting the text of the Qurʾān as a confused jumble. They sometimes equate it to the presence of distortion in the Qurʾān, and at other times attribute it to the permissibility of abrogation, or as evidence of defects and redactions in the Qurʾān, or the result of
changes introduced into the text of the Qurʾān. Blacher, like other Orientalists, latches on to this idea and has to some extent been caught up in this fallacy. The present paper carefully studies his statements, as well as some of the roots, causes and factors that led
to the variant readings (such as the influence of the centers where [famous] reciters lived on the modes of reading, the different manuscripts and their relation to the variant readings, the large number of reciters, the long time gap from the era of revelation, the
influence of political factors and the preference of a particular reading by certain sovereigns). After a systematic analysis of this, we show that none of these factors could have led to weakness, defects, or distortions in the text of the Qurʾān.

A few ayahs of the Quran appear to violate famous rules of syntax for which different syntacticians have tried to provide explanations. However, the enemies of Islam have taken advantage of this fact, suggesting that the Quran is not a divine book, that it was written by a human being and, as a result, it has many syntactic mistakes. This paper, via a descriptive-analytical method, seeks to provide a sound explanation for the diacritical marks of the abovementioned Quranic words. Having reviewed and criticized opposing views as well as great syntacticians’ views and readings of the Quran, the present study reached the following conclusions None of the objections raised by the opposing side are acceptable insofar as they are all based on the language rules and conventions of pre-Islamic Arabia in its days of Jahiliyyah (ignorance) and, thus, can be explained by linguistic justifications. There is no historical account of any objection about the diacritical marks of Quranic words in the early days of Islam, especially before the emigration of the Prophet, by a pre-Islam rhetorician such as Mughira from among the enemies of Islam. Those who have found fault with the diacritical marks of Quranic words are from among the disbelievers, Christians and Orientalists; they either do not specialize in Arabic or are unaware of its subtleties. The goal of the enemies is to raise doubts among Muslims about their divine scripture.

Quanic Diacritics and analysis of this Holy manuscript based on Arabic rules is one of the most ancient Quranic Islamic sciences. On the other hand sometimes different diacritic may be added to the same word or lexicon in which the need to an appropriate tool in order to check the accuracy or inaccuracy is felt. One of the most important documents and sources to explain these diacritic. But what is the science for explaining the diacritic? The present paper initially and briefly attempts to study the Qauranic sciences semantics and then the Arabic diacritic science in library method and offers samples of their applications in different fields; it tries to answer the related questions and describes how the Quranic sciences aid interpreters to explain these diacritics; and how these explanations removes the doubts in Quran's accuracy.

Based on a number of old Shi’ah resources, some orientalists and the author of present paper in particular imagines that the Qur’an in use at the time of ‘Uthman was accept out of taqiyyah (precautionary dissimulation) by Shi’ah, whilst they never believe that some verses related to the Ahl al-Bait (‘a) were removed from the Qur’an. In addition to the old references, Diana Stager Wald has examined the latter references and has found that their viewpoints are different from the formers’; she holds that the formers did not believe in the change of Qur’an. Presenting precise and faithful translation to the text of the author, the paper seeks to criticize his viewpoints announces that they are based on Shi’ah references.

One of the significant issues in Sharif Lähiji’s interpretation is his utilization of narrations related to differences of readings of the Quran. This article presents various types of these readings together with some evidence on each type providing a short biography of the interpreter. The writer merely explains these readings and leaves their judgment to the readers.

Doubtless، Quranic readings had fundamental influence upon syntax. In order to expound rules of Arabic language، grammarians benefited from readings too much. This fact has created an unbreakable relation between syntax and readings. Since Quranic readings contain purest Arabic accents، they are considered in a special way by syntax experts who composed several books entitled I’rab al-Quran. It may be said that grammarians could not precisely expound rules and points of Arabic language and syntactic evidence without benefiting from readings. In expounding syntactic rules، some later grammarians rejected and negated some readings، but the science of readings shared a lot in expansion and variation of Arabic language rules.

Discussing، investigating، and writing about the Quran commenced shortly after its descend and developed in later centuries. One may classify those works and identify pioneers of any category and science through investing extant writings as well as those mentioned in the earlier sources. Dividing Quranic sciences on the basis of writings، this essay introduces pioneers of writing in each of those sciences and expounds their writings and qualities. Thus، it clarifies what is published in this regard and criticizes existing opinions concerning those who initiated writing on major Quranic sciences.