Critical Analysis of the Most Important Methods of Orientalists’ Revelation Studies

Document Type : Scholary

Author

Comparative Studies of the Qur’ān, Qur’ān and Hadith Specialized University, Al-Mustafa International University, Qom, Iran

Abstract

The issue of revelation is one of the important and essential concepts of monotheistic religions that has always been considered and discussed by the thinkers of the Qur’ānic sciences. In recent centuries, with the increase of studies exploring Islam in the West, one of the arenas for the activity of the orientalists has been this hypothesis that some of the contents of the Qur’ān have been borrowed from the earlier religious and literary books. Explicating this issue is essential in order to prove the rightfulness of Islam and the Qur’ānic revelation as well as its superiority over all the other divine religions. Using the descriptive-analytical method and with a critical approach along with gathering and analyzing the organized data, the study at hand examines the most important methods of orientalists’ revelation studies, including the historical criticism which has developed in the realm of criticism of the Testaments. It covers a wide range of criticisms such as textual, formal, linguistic, literary, and so on.  To the author of the present article, the methods of orientalists’ revelation studies are contrary to the Islamic thought, and each of their principles faces critical faults. The most comprehensive and firmest hypothesis that has been proposed so far as to the origin of the Qur’ān is propounded by the Qur’ān itself. It is a hypothesis which is supported by many narrative and intellectual reasons, and is the best account and interpretation for the truth (with all of its features) extant in the Qur’ān. Research’s findings show that Western researchers and orientalists have put forward the existing hypotheses about the origins of the Qur’ān by resorting to these principles as well as considering the similarities that exist between the Qur’ān and the former sources like the Torah and the Bible. None of these hypotheses are accepted by Muslims, and their claims contain mythological problems even based on their own foundations.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

The noble Qur’ān
Bellami, J. (2006), «Textual criticism of the Qur’ān». Encyclopaedia of the Quran, edited by J. D. McAuliffe, Leiden, Brill, Vol. 5, 238-252.
Bucaille, M. (1987), Muqāyisi’ī mīyāni Towrāt, Injīl, Qur’ān, wa ‘ilm. Translated by Dh. Dabīr, Tehran, Daftari Nashri Fargangi Islāmī.
Būdlā’ī, Ḥ. (2017), Rawishi taḥqīqi padīdārshināsī. Tehran, Jāmi‘ishināsān.
Collins, J. J. (2005), The Bible after Babel. Michigan, Wm. Β. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
Faqhīzādi, A., & Ḥ. Imāmī Dānālū (2014), «“Musajjal” pīshnahādīyi nā ṣaḥīḥ wa ghayri ‘ālimāni». Pazhūhishnāmiyi Tafsīr wa Zabāni Qur’ān, No. 4, 115-128.
Farāmarz Qarāmalikī, A. (2014), Rawishshināsīyi muṭāli‘āti dīnī. Mashhad, Dānishgāhi ‘Ulūmi Islāmīyi Raḍawī.
Farzāni, B. (2012), «Ḥaṣabu Jahannam: Barrisīyi ma‘nā shinākhtīyi wāzhiyi “ḥaṣab” dar Qur’ān». Muṭāli‘āti Tārīkhīyi Qur’ān wa Ḥadīth, No. 49, 99-112.
Fitzmyer, J. A. (1989), «Historical criticism: It's role in Biblical interpretation and Church life». Theological Studies, Vol. 50, No. 2, 244-259.
Hawting, G. R. (2006), «Worship». Encyclopaedia of the Qur’ān, edited by Jane Dammen McAuliffe, Leiden, Brill, Vol. 5, 555-557.
‘Imādī Ḥā’irī, M. (2014), «Rawishshināsīyi taḥlīli matn – 4 taḥlīli tārīkhī – taḥlīli padīdārshinākhtī». Guzārishi Mīrāth, No. 56 & 57, 11-14.
Iskandarlū, M. J., & M. Amīrī (2012), «Barrisīyi maqāliyi Al-Raqīm wa al-raqūd». Qur’ān Pazhūhīyi Khāwarshināsān, No. 10, 97-126.
Jalīlī Sanzīqī, H. (2013), Pazhūhish dar tafsīr pazhūhīyi Qur’ān. Tehran, Sukhan.
Karīmīnīyā, M. (2008), Sīra pazhūhī dar Gharb. Tehran, Majma‘i Jahānīyi Taqrībi Madhāhibi Islāmī.
Ma‘ārif, M. (2016), Shinākhti Qur’ān. Tehran, Naba’.
Ma‘rifat, M. H. (2010), Naqdi shubahāt pīrāmuni Qur’ān Karīm. Translated by Ḥ. Ḥakīm Bāshī et al., Qom, Dhawi al-Qurbā.
Nawbarī, A. R. (2011), «Rawish shināsīyi mustashriqān dar tafsīri Qur’ān wa barrisīyi sunnat». Qur’ān Pazhūhīyi Khāwarshināsān, No. 8, 13-28.
Noldeke, T. (2004), Tārīkh al-Qur’ān. Translated by J. Tamer et al., Beirut, Mu’assisa Konrad.
Rāmyār, M. (2009), Tārīkh Qur’ān. Tehran, Amīr Kabīr.
Reynolds, G. S. (2010), The Qur’ān and its Biblical subtext. New York, Routledge.
Sa‘īd, A. (2019), Darāmadī bi Qur’ān. Translated by S. Shafī‘ī, Tehran, Ḥikmat.
Small, K. E. (2011), Textual criticism and Qur’ān manuscripts. London, Lexington Books.
Stausberg, M., & S. Engler (2011), The Routledge handbook of research methods in the study of religion. New York, Routledge.
Sulaymānī, A. (2000), «Naqqādīyi Kitābi Muqaddas». Haft Āsimān, No. 8, 97-110.
Ṭabrisī, F. (1994), Majma‘ al-bayān li-‘ulūm al-Qur’ān. Beirut, Mu’assisa al-A‘lamī lil-Maṭbū‘āt.
Wagner, W. H. (2008), Opening the Qur’ān: Introducing Islam's holy book. Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press.
Classical and Contemporary Islamic Studies (formerly known as Journal of Contemporary Islamic Studies)
Volume 5, Issue 1
Winter & Spring
January 2023
Pages 11-21

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics