نوع مقاله : پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشیار، گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، دانشکدۀ الهیات، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران. و دانشیار، گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، دانشکدۀ الهیات و معارف اهلبیت(ع)، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران
2 طلبۀ سطح 4، رشتۀ تفسیر تطبیقی، حوزۀ علمیۀ فاطمةالزهرا(س)، اصفهان، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
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.
کلیدواژهها [English]
قرآن کریم، (مترجم: ناصر مکارم شیرازی)