چکیده:
Hermenutics and the quality of Canonical Understandin of the Quran and Hadith as religion and sacred law are two significant issues in scientific and religious circles، and can be studied from different perspectives. The results of investigation on these two issues have become the source of various researches in social sciences and humanities. The knowledge of the fundamentals of jurisprudence is essential to quality canonical understanding. Issues such as mere verbal utterances، surface meanings، and validity of surface meanings are in direct relation with semantics and important trends in contemporary hemeneutics. Although the roots of hermeneutics in the west are different from the fundamentals of jurisprudence، this paper tends to clarify the position of hermenotics and semantics in the field of canonical understanding of the Quran and Hadith and its relation to fundamentals of the science of jurisprudence. In this regard، the basics of semantics and hermeneutics have been discussed briefly.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Discussions on linguistics, zahir-ology (the study of outward meanings), and the authority of zahir in that science have a close connection with semantics and an important branch of contemporary hermeneutics, although the origin of hermeneutics in the West is different from hermeneutics in Usul al-Fiqh.
In its general and ancient sense, any discussion related to interpretation that introduces principles and regulations for discovering the author's intention in reaching the final meaning of the text, or denies the existence of such matters, falls within the scope of hermeneutic discussions (33).
However, since apparent meanings are the primary context for understanding the intention and purposes of the words of humans and the Holy Legislator, the scholars of Usul have inevitably first addressed the discussion of identifying the Zahir of the speech of the Quran and the Sunnah and after the definitive establishment of Zahir, they have pursued its validity and authority (hujjiyat).
Some scholars of Usul, such as Muhaqqiq Qomi, in the issue of the impossibility of retrieving the intended meaning of the speech in the realm of verses and hadiths (23 and 29), or in the matter of blending two horizons and relying on the Zahir reaching the condition of narrating the issued Zahir (4), have somewhat approached this hermeneutic view, but they have never have not abandoned the final meaning of the Quran and the hadiths, which is the intention and purpose of the Legislator, and they have considered the criterion and validity in this field to be meaningful and rule-based (23).
(
, 
, 
)
