چکیده:
The author reviews "Al-Tafsir Al-Mofaseron" from two perspectives. First the author studies the methodology of the book and how it mingles the rational interpretation with the scientific one، criticizing Zahabi's ideas about scientific interpretation method. Zahabi has mingled Shiite and Motazelah beliefs and methods that are studies thoroughly in this article. Second perspective deals with the principles of interpretation. Claimed Shiite and Sunnite interpretation references are studies. Charge of alternation of Quran and the status of Ahlulbayt in interpretation are the other discussed issues in this article.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Abstract In this writing, the author proceeds to critique and review the book Al-Tafsir wa al-Mufassirun by Dr. Dhahabi from two perspectives: First; from a methodological standpoint, he addresses the confusion between the method of Tafsir bi al-Ra'y (interpretation based on opinion) and the method of Ijtihad (independent reasoning).
3 He then finds himself at a crossroads, because on one hand, based on narrations, Tafsir bi al-Ra'y is forbidden and prohibited, and on the other hand, Ijtihad in the interpretation of the Quran is permissible; therefore, after mentioning the arguments of proponents and opponents, he divides Tafsir bi al-Ra'y into two categories and writes: الرأی قسمان: قسم جار علی موافقة کلام العرب و مناحیهم فی القول مع موافقة الکتاب و السنة و مراعاة سائر شروط التفسیرو هذا القسم جائز لا شک فیه و علیه یحمل کلام المجیزین للتفسیر بالرأی.
10 Then, Sunni scholars quoted it in their books of Quranic sciences11 and took it as an accepted basis, even though it contradicts the absolute wording of the narrations of Tafsir bi al-Ra'y.
2. Regarding the linguistic reason—the change in linguistic meaning and the irrationality of interpreting verses with new meanings of words that Dr. Dhahabi has provided to reject interpretation—it must be said: this reason is correct in cases where the first and second types of scientific interpretation are used and new meanings are imposed on the verses of the Quran, but in cases where the meaning of the word of the verse includes both old and new instances, there is no problem.
These hadiths have been rejected by both Shiite and Sunni scholars (as previously mentioned) and, based on important rational, Quranic, and other reasons, they have considered the Quran immune to distortion.
(
, 
, 
)
