Qom University Comparative Interpretation Research 2476-4191 10 1 2024 04 20 A Comparative Analysis of Tafsīr al-Qommī and Tafsīr Ṣāfī regarding the Issue of the Mustathnayāt Verses* A Comparative Analysis of Tafsīr al-Qommī and Tafsīr Ṣāfī regarding the Issue of the Mustathnayāt Verses* 1 26 2731 10.22091/ptt.2024.10179.2297 FA َAli Ghafarzadeh Assistant Professor, Islamic Teachings Department, Faculty of Theology and Teachings of the Ahlulbayt, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran 0009-0002-5609-8097 Mahdi Pichan Ph.D. Candiddate, Quran and Hadith Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran 0000-0002-2739-317X Journal Article 2023 12 11 A comparative analysis of Tafsīr Qommī and Tafsīr Ṣāfī shows the difference in the stances of their authors regarding the Mustathnayāt Verses (the verses whose revelation is considered different to the revelation of the entire chapter). The importance and necessity of such a comparison is due to the fact that in a superficial and elementary view, it is thought that in the narrative exegeses, the exegetes have only collected narrations related to the words and expressions of the verses without any juristic reasoning (ijtihād). Contrary to this idea, the evidence shows that like other exegetes, the authors of the narrative exegeses, influenced by background conditions, have made juristic efforts to discover the meaning of the verses and have selected and arranged the narrations based on that. The result of this research indicates an increase in the number of Mustathnayāt Verses in Tafsīr Ṣāfī compared to Tafsīr Qommī, which is analyzed in the light of the increase in the number of Mustathnayāt in the works of Quranic scholars and exegetes over time and arises from Fayz’s adaptation of Tabarsi’s Majmaʿ al-Bayān. The confusion between the criteria of place and time in determining the Makkan and Medinite chapters, the incorrect assumptions of Quran scholars, such as the lack of contact between the Prophet (peace be upon him and his household) and the People of the Book before the emigration, and the mention of the causes of revelation whose validity is doubtful, are among the most important factors affecting this difference in outcomes. A comparative analysis of Tafsīr Qommī and Tafsīr Ṣāfī shows the difference in the stances of their authors regarding the Mustathnayāt Verses (the verses whose revelation is considered different to the revelation of the entire chapter). The importance and necessity of such a comparison is due to the fact that in a superficial and elementary view, it is thought that in the narrative exegeses, the exegetes have only collected narrations related to the words and expressions of the verses without any juristic reasoning (ijtihād). Contrary to this idea, the evidence shows that like other exegetes, the authors of the narrative exegeses, influenced by background conditions, have made juristic efforts to discover the meaning of the verses and have selected and arranged the narrations based on that. The result of this research indicates an increase in the number of Mustathnayāt Verses in Tafsīr Ṣāfī compared to Tafsīr Qommī, which is analyzed in the light of the increase in the number of Mustathnayāt in the works of Quranic scholars and exegetes over time and arises from Fayz’s adaptation of Tabarsi’s Majmaʿ al-Bayān. The confusion between the criteria of place and time in determining the Makkan and Medinite chapters, the incorrect assumptions of Quran scholars, such as the lack of contact between the Prophet (peace be upon him and his household) and the People of the Book before the emigration, and the mention of the causes of revelation whose validity is doubtful, are among the most important factors affecting this difference in outcomes.

https://ptt.qom.ac.ir/article_2731_6897a1ebadfad2e36152569c8e189526.pdf