An Analysis of Esoteric Interpretation From the Viewpoint of Qāḍī ‘Abd al-Jabbār and Naṣr Ḥāmid Abū Zayd

Document Type : Scholary

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Department of Qur’ān and Ḥadīth Sciences, Faculty of Islamic Theology and Knowledge, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran

2 Level-four seminarian in comparative interpretation, Seminary of Ahwaz, Ahwaz, Iran

Abstract

One of the principles accepted by the majority of Islamic sects is esoteric interpretation. Of the main issues common between Mu‘tazila and neo-Mu‘tazila movements is esoteric interpretation. The Mu‘tazila esoteric interpretation is based on intellect, by which they esoterically interpret the verses that are seemingly against intellect. There is another principle that has roots in Islamic legislation. This principle regards dividing the qur’ānic verses into ambiguous and non-ambiguous verses and then esoterically interpreting the ambiguous ones. In these cases, they try to accord the intellect with the narrations; however sometimes due to the lack of accurate understanding of the narrations or mistakes in the intellectual rules, they try esoteric interpretation of the narration. The neo-Mu‘tazila intellectual movement is one of the outstanding theological trends in the Islamic world. Its roots can be traced back to the old Mu‘tazila thinkers, who tried to found the basis of Islamic knowledge on intellectualism. They tried to use esoteric interpretation and figurative expression in the interpretation of texts and also use intellect in understanding Islamic knowledge and sciences. The study at hand adopts a descriptive-critical approach to analyze the viewpoints of Qāḍī ‘Abd al-Jabbār Hamdānī – an old Mu‘tazila member – and Naṣr Ḥāmid Abū Zayd – the most important neo- Mu‘tazila figure. ‘Abd al-Jabbār uses a completely theological and doctrinal basis to conduct esoteric interpretation for the outward of the verses. However, Naṣr Ḥāmid Abū Zayd believes that esoteric interpretation is a method or instrument for understanding the phenomena. He believes that from an ideological perspective, esoteric interpretation cannot be defined, and the esoteric interpretation of religious texts is not possible.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

The noble Qur’ān
Abū Zayd, N. (2008). Intellectualism in exegesis. Translated by A. Mūsawī Khalkhālī, Tehran, Nīlūfar.
Id. (2001), The Concept of the text: A study of the qur'anic sciences. Translated by M. Karīmīnīā, Tehran, Naw Publications.
‘Alīakbarzāda, Ḥ., & M. Sulṭānī, (2014), “Semantics of interpretation and its epistemological authenticity in the ideas of Abū Zayd.” The Epistemological Research, no. 8, 109-138.
Āriyān, Ḥ. (2013), “The meaning and principle of the Mu‘tazila intellectualism in the interpretation of the Qur’ān.” Qur’ān Shinākht, no. 11, 1-22.
Bahjatpūr, A. (2013), Farīqayn exegesis. Qom, Āthār Nafīs Publications.
Dhahabī, M. (1976), Al-Tafsīr wa al-mufassirūn. Beirut, Dār al-Iḥyā’ al-Turāth al-‘Arabī.
Gulī, J., & Ḥ. Yūsifiyān, (2010), “A study of Neo-Mu‘tazila movement.” Ma‘rifat-i Kalāmī,  no. 3, 113-140.
Humāmī, A., & Ḥ. Rajabzāda, (2009), “nterpretation principles and methods Of Mu‘tazilites.” Journal of Religious Studies (Pazhūhish Dīnī), no. 19, 7-22.
Hūshangī, Ḥ. (2006), Ta’wīl entry in the great Islamic encyclopedia. Supervised by M. K. Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, Tehran, Center for the Great Islamic Encyclopedia.
Ibn Manẓūr, M. (1985), Lisān al-‘Arab. Beirut, Dār al-Iḥyā’ al-Turāth al-‘Arabī.
‘Idālatnizhād, S. (2001), Criticism and evaluation of Naṣr Ḥāmid Abū Zayd’s thoughts. Tehran, Mashq Imrūz.
Khayrjūy, Ṣ. (2020), “To study the basis of Abū Zayd’s interpretive theory of understanding the Qur’ān.” The Knowledge Studies in the Islamic University, no. 82, 151-168.
Muṭahharī, M. (1979), An introduction to Islamic sciences. n.p., Fiqāhat School Library.
Muṭī‘ī, Ḥ., Muḥammad Riḍā’ī, M., & A. Allāh Badashtī, (2020), “An examination of the Naṣr Ḥāmid Abū Zayd’s stance toward the esoteric interpretation and Its criticism based on the viewpoint of Allāma Ṭabāṭabā’ī.” Philosophy of Religion, no. 1, 1-22.
Naibiyān, P., & M. Pahlawānīnizhād, (2015), “The comparative analysis of esoteric interpretation from the viewpoints of Mullā Ṣadrā and Qāḍī ‘Abd al-Jabbār Hamdānī.” A Research Quarterly in Isalmic Theology (Kalām) and Religious Studies, no. 41, 147-164.
Qāḍī ‘Abd al-Jabbār, A. (1962), Al-Mughnī fī abwāb al-tawḥīd wa al-‘adl. Cairo, Dār al-Miṣriyya.
Id. (2006), Tanzīh al-Qur’ān ‘an al-maṭā‘in. Cairo, Al-Maktabat al-Azhariyya lil-Turāth.
Id. (1969), Mutashābih al-Qur’ān. Edited by A. M. Zarzūr, Cairo, Dār al-Turāth.
Id. (1965), Sharḥ al-uṣūl al-khamsa. Beirut, Dār Iḥyā’ al-Turāth al-‘Arabī.
Rāghib Iṣfahānī, ῌ. (1992), Mufradāt alfāẓ al-Qur’ān. Beirut, Dār al-‘Ilm.
Rajabī, A. (2019), “Analysis of Āyatullāh Subhānī‘s critical confrontation with the method of Mu‘tazila interpretation.” Biannual Journal of Research in Shī‘a Comparative Theology, no. 2, 255-281.
Ṣafarī, A., & S. Muruwwatī, (2008), “The evaluation and criticism of Doctor Naṣr Ḥāmid Abū Zayd’s opinions about interpretation and esoteric interpretation.” International Conference of Religious Culture and Thought, n.p., n.p.
Ṣāwī Juwaynī, M. (2008), Exegetic methods of the noble Qur’ān. Translated by M. Dānish & Ḥ. Rawḥānī, Mashhad, Islamic Studies Foundations.
Shahristānī, M. (1983), Al-Milal wa al-niḥal. Translated by M. Khāliq Dād Hāshimī (Tawḍīh al-Milal), edited by M. R. Jalālī Nā’īnī, Tehran, Iqbāl.
Subḥānī, J. (1996), Buḥūth fī al-Milal wa al-niḥal. Qom, Office of Islamic Publications affiliated to the Jāmi’a Mudarrisīn of Qom ῌawza.
Id. (2001), Wahhabism: Intellectual principles and practical records. Qom, Imām Ṣādiq (a) Institute.
Ṭabāṭabā’ī, M. (1996), Al-Mīzān fī tafsīr al-Qur’ān. Qom, Islamic Publication Office.
Waṣafī, M. (2008), Neo-Mu‘tazilaists. Tehran, Nigāh Mu‘āṣir.
Zamakhsharī, M. (1992), Al-Kashshāf ‘an ḥaqā’iq ghawāmiḍ al-tanzīl. Qom, Al-Balāgha Publications.
Zarnūsha, Ḥ., Kāshānīhā, Z., & Ḥ. Īmāndār, (2018), “Naṣr Ḥāmid Abū Zayd’s esoteric interpretation in comparison to the esoteric interpretation approach of the Mu‘tazila.”Qur’ān Shinākht, no. 1, 23-40.
Zībā Kalām, Ṣ. (2011), How did we become what we are? Tehran, Rawzana Publications.
Classical and Contemporary Islamic Studies (formerly known as Journal of Contemporary Islamic Studies)
Volume 4, Issue 2
Summer & Autumn
July 2022
Pages 207-219

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics