[بيسميكا] [ألّلهوما]

[أسف] [إيقبل]

هناك أوّلا اثنان عاملات أنّ يدعو للتفسير من [قور]' وحي [نيك]. أوّلا [إيتس] [قور]' لغة [نيك]. كان اللغة في أيّ [قور]' [ن] كان كشفت ال [هيغست لفل] من اللغة أدبيّة ([هوشسبرش]) من الشعر كلاسيكيّة [أربيك]. هو ليس الالعربية أيّ الرغبات [هريري], [موتنبّي], [زمكهشري] ورازي يستعمل في أعمالهم أو الالعربية أيّ يكون أسّست [ثس دس] في الجرائد سوريا ومصر أو أنّ أيّ ينبعث من القلم من الشاعرات وكاتبات من هذا أراضي. ما من شك هذا إظهارات من اللغة أيضا العربية, غير أنّ يجد الفرق في الأسلوب وأسلوب من هذا العربية وفي أنّ من [قور]' العربية [نيك], أيّ يستطيع بشكل مناسب كنت دعات كالالعربية كلاسيكيّة من ال [هيغست لفل], يكون شيء مثل الفرق في اللغة [شكسبر] أو [ميلتون] أو [كتس] أو [ديكنس] واللغة واحدة [ثس دس] في [نوسويك] أو وقت أو الإقتصادية. [كمبريز] الأدب من الالعربية كلاسيكيّة, أيّ يكون من قيمة حقيقيّة إلى التفهم من [قور]' لغة [نيك], تعبير, استعارة وعلم تأويل, أعمال من الشاعرات كلاسيكيّة ك [إيمرو] [أل-قس], [زوهر], [أمر] ابن [كولثوم], [لبيد], [نبيغه], [ترفه], [أنتره], [أشا] و [هريث] ابن [هليزّه] وفنون من [أرتورس] ك [قوسّ] ابن [سيده]. ليس هذا مشروع عادة يمكن لعلمانية و [ه/ش] ينبغي أحلت تعليقات أصيلة أن يحصل المساعدة لازمة.

ثانيّا هو الرقم [إفر-ينكرسنغ] حالات لا يعالج مع في الأدب سابقة, أيّ يدعو ل [د] [نوفو] أعمال تأويليّة. [فور ينستنس], يحبّ إصدارات يستنسخ, جنوسة, [جنتيكلّ-موديفيد] طعام, [إينترنت ثيكس], [إتك.], كلّ يتطلّب تفسير واسعة من [قور] موافقة' وحي [نيك] ل [تودس] [موسليم] جماعة.

فرق أساسيّة بين المسيحية توراتيّة تفسير والمسلمة [قور]' تأويل [نيك] ينبغي كنت حافظت في عقل: [إينتربرتتور] مسيحية توراتيّة أساسا [سنسوليست] ويقولب ال [سكريبتثرس] بما أنّ [ه/ش] يعتبر نوبة ل ه/بنفسي. [فور ينستنس] [ه/ش] يمكن تماما تخطّيت ال [ألد تستمنت] طعام نظام تعديل ([أس يف] أنّ تكراريّة لا يتواجد فصول وبيت شعر ببساطة في كلّ في الكتاب مقدّس) أو يمكن لا يتلقّى سكروبلات حول يختار مرشح لكنيسة كلية بإقتراع [إينستد وف] جانبا كثيرا بعد المثال من الرسل (أعمال 1:26). He/she may be a “Blue-Ribbonist” despite the Old Testament�s frequent craving for wine (e.g., Judges 9:13). It has to be born in mind that a gross over-stepping of the scripture of this sort is not possible for a Muslim.

In the following I shall briefly mention two outstanding and epoch-making Qur’�nic commentaries which, owing to their original work, had (and continue to have) enormous impact on directing the 20th century Qur’�nic scholarship.

TAFSIR AL-MANAR
By Muhammad Abduh (1849-1905) and his pupil Rashid Rida (1865-1935), which was published from Cairo (1954-1961) in 12 volumes, each approximately 500 pages, covers the 12/30th of the Qur’�n.

The uniqueness in Abduh�s approach springs from the fresh emphasis he puts on the Qur’�n as a source of spiritual and worldly guidance (”hidaya”). Abduh views the Qur’�n not primarily the source of law or dogmatics, or an occasion for philologists to display their ingenuity, but a book from which Muslims ought to derive guidance for this world and the next.

This approach of Abduh is illustrated by the following example: In Qur’�n, 2:58, God speaks to the Jews, under the leadership of Joshua, saying: “Enter this town, and eat of the plenty therein as ye wish; but enter the gate with humility�”

Abduh writes on this verse: “We shall not try to determine which town is meant in this verse since the Qur’�n did not try to determine this either. The importance of this verse does not depend on the exact geographical location of this town, but lies in the admonition to thankfulness towards the Almighty.” (Vol. I, p. 324)

Abduh�s approach to the Qur’�n is wholly rationalistic. He renders the Qur’�nic term �Furqan??? (Qur’�n, 3:3) as “reason by which men discern between right & wrong”.

In order to determine the meaning of a certain word or verse, Abduh makes ample use of its context rather than the relevant views expressed by previous scholars, and often gives a very satisfactory explanation. Likewise, Abduh does not recognize the relevance of the traditions, as was recognized by the previous scholars, in the Qur’�nic interpretation.[1]

TADABBUR-E-QUR�AN
By Ameen Ehsen Islahi (1904-1997, sub-continent), published in Lahore in 9 volumes.

This monumental commentary is indeed an original approach to the comprehension of the Qur’�n begun by Islahi�s teacher Hamid-ud-din Farahi (1863-1930, sub continent).

Islahi asserts that it�s incorrect to say that the Qur’�n is a disjointed jumble of revelations and successfully establishes that the Qur’�n possessed overall structural and thematic coherence (”nazm”).

He has presented conclusive evidence that the Qur’�n is divided into seven discrete groups. Each group has a distinct theme. Every group begins with one or more Meccan Surah and ends with one or more Medinan Surah. In each group, the Meccan Surahs always precede the Medinan ones. The relationship between the Meccan Surahs and Medinan Surahs of each group is that of the root of a tree and its branches. In every group, all the phases of the Prophet�s mission are depicted.

Two surahs of each group form a pair so that each member of the pair complements the other in various ways. Surah 1, however, is an exception to this pattern: it is an introduction to the whole of the Qur’�n as well as to the first group which begins with it. There are also some surahs which have a specific purpose and fall in this paired-surah scheme in a particular way.

Each surah has specific addressees and a central theme round which the contents of the surah revolve. The central theme highlights a particular aspect of the central theme of the group of which the particular surah is a part. Every surah has distinct subsections to mark thematic shifts, and every subsection is paragraphed to mark smaller shifts.

Following is a brief description of the seven Qur’�nic groups according to Islahi:

Group I [Surah 1 - Surah 5]
Central Theme: Islamic Law

Group II [Surah 6 � Surah 9]
Central Theme: The consequences of denying the Prophet(P) for the Mushrikin of Mecca

Group III [Surah 10 - Surah 24]
Central Theme: Glad tidings of the Prophet�s domination.

Group IV [Surah 25 - Surah 33]
Central Theme: Arguments on the Prophethood of Muhammad(P) and the requirements of faith in him

Group V [Surah 34 - Surah 49]
Central Theme: Arguments on the Oneness of God and the requirements of faith in it

Group VI [Surah 50 - Surah 66]
Central Theme: Arguments on the Day of Judgment and the requirements of faith in it

Group VII [Surah 67 - Surah 114]
Central Theme: Admonition to the Quraysh about their fate in the Herein and the Hereafter if they deny the Prophet(P)

Islahi�s way of understanding the Qur’�nic coherence is being studied and analyzed by scholars of the sub-continent and in England as well.[2]

References

[1] J. Jomier, Le Commentaire Coranique du Manar, Paris 1954

[2] Mustansir Mir, Coherence In The Qur’�n: A Study Of Islahi’s Concept Of Nazm In Tadabbur-i-Qur’an, (Indianapolis: American Trust Publications, 1986)