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

The evaluation of exegetical traditions for determining significance and authenticity are normally carried out through the invocational method. However, the method followed in this article is evaluation and analysis of the opinions of interpreters in using these traditions and examination of their function based on typology of exegetical traditions within Nūr al-Thaqalayn, by fieldwork method. It seems that this method has more power in uncovering the existing reality of traditions and the quality of their problem-solving in comprehension. Thereby, the viewpoints have been presented in the field of function. The difference in viewpoint of the scholars of narration (atharī) interpretation is in the traditions that have directly dealt with the meaning of the verse. The issue has been examined for an accurate analysis of the disagreed position, “the traditions as being advisory or obligatory”, explanation of the pivotal topics of the verse and tradition”, and “the degree of the coverage of the verse by the tradition.” With a statistical study of the above-mentioned traditions, its typology, and evaluation of each viewpoint based on the typology, the viewpoint of ‘Allāma Ṭabāṭabā’ī is selected.

The role of Iranians in the flourishing of Islamic civilization is deniable; the growth of Islamic sciences is due to the efforts of Iranians and roles of some Iranian prominent intellectuals have a significant effect on Islamic civilization; many commentators, historians, theologians, and traditionists of the Islamic world are Iranian. In the fifth century (AH), one of the reasons for the development of Islamic sciences is its history of Islamic civilization. It should be noted that the science of tradition is so important among the Islamic sciences in which the Iranians played a significant and also a decisive role. In this short article, the Iranian efforts to cultivate and expand the sciences of tradition (hadith) in the fifth century (AH) are reviewed by examining the status of the traditionists and their works.

Ignaz Goldziher، a famous western orientalist، believes that Muslims'' approach to criticize narrations is mostly limited to the critique of the chain of transmission (isnad). In addition، he argues that judgment about the content of narrations depends on the validity of the chain of transmission. After Goldziher، some orientalists have mentioned similar results and confirmed his views. Criticizing these viewpoints، Muslim researchers have cited some rules referring to the critique of the text. They have assumed that Sunni hadith scholars have usually criticized the text beside the critique of the chain of transmission. The present article tries to study Goldziher''s views، Muslim critics، and also Jonathan Brown who is a contemporary Muslim researcher. Strong and weak viewpoints are also studied. Brown believes that until the fourth century AH the critique of the text was implicit and hidden in the critique of the chain of transmission. In the fifth and sixth century AH، some scholars have started criticizing the text explicitly. However، it seems that some earlier hadith scholars have explicitly criticized the text of hadith. Finally، some samples of narrations are presented. Then، the study reports outcomes of a new research in the west about a historical topic in Sahih-al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim which has been carried out through criticism of text.