Razavi University of Islamic Sciences Quranic Doctrines 2251-9378 22 42 2025 12 22 Comparative and Rapprochement-Based Exegesis: From Distinction to Interaction Comparative and Rapprochement-Based Exegesis: From Distinction to Interaction 7 37 2012 10.30513/qd.2025.6841.2510 FA Mohammad Sharifi Associate Professor, Dept. of Qur’an and Hadith Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran. And Associate Professor, Dept. of Qur’an and Hadith Sciences, Faculty of Theology and Ahl al-Bayt Studies, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran Maryam Ja‘far-Koupaei Level Four Seminary Student in Comparative Exegesis, Fatimah al-Zahra Seminary, Isfahan, Iran. Journal Article 2025 02 26 Despite their longstanding practical application in classical exegesis and renewed contemporary interest, comparative (taṭbīqī) and rapprochement-based (taqrībī) exegesis have been undertheorized. Given that comparison focuses on differences in interpretive opinions while rapprochement seeks common ground, a precise analysis is needed to determine their compatibility. Using a descriptive-analytical method, this study finds that combining the two approaches is untenable in two scenarios: first, when comparative exegesis adopts a polemical or sectarian approach; second, when an extremist rapprochement-based stance leads to silence on verses subject to sectarian disagreement. However, if comparative exegesis employs a balanced rapprochement-based orientation to examine and critique interpretive opinions, the two approaches can synergistically achieve their goals without incurring methodological harms. Since the incompatible scenarios exacerbate differences and deviate from the core aims of exegesis, the only path to an effective comparative and rapprochement-based interpretation is their integrated application. Despite their longstanding practical application in classical exegesis and renewed contemporary interest, comparative (taṭbīqī) and rapprochement-based (taqrībī) exegesis have been undertheorized. Given that comparison focuses on differences in interpretive opinions while rapprochement seeks common ground, a precise analysis is needed to determine their compatibility. Using a descriptive-analytical method, this study finds that combining the two approaches is untenable in two scenarios: first, when comparative exegesis adopts a polemical or sectarian approach; second, when an extremist rapprochement-based stance leads to silence on verses subject to sectarian disagreement. However, if comparative exegesis employs a balanced rapprochement-based orientation to examine and critique interpretive opinions, the two approaches can synergistically achieve their goals without incurring methodological harms. Since the incompatible scenarios exacerbate differences and deviate from the core aims of exegesis, the only path to an effective comparative and rapprochement-based interpretation is their integrated application. https://qd.razavi.ac.ir/article_2012_6815a833f3f2d3ece7f0ea46cf0493fc.pdf