Analysis of the concept of righteous deeds and good deeds in the Holy Qurʼān based on Izutsu theory

Document Type : Scholary

Authors

1 Department of Qur’ān and Ḥadīth Sciences, Faculty of Qur’ān Sciences and Skills, University of Holy Qur’ān Sciences and Education, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Qur’ān and Ḥadīth Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University,Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Human's actions will cause his prosperity or misery in the world and in the hereafter. The Qur’ān has used a vast semantic scope to systematize and evolve the mind of the audience for its guidance. The present article seeks to analyze the semantic scope of Hasanāt[1] (i.e. virtues) and righteous deeds in the Qur’ān in an analytical and descriptive manner, based on the Izutsu’s semantic theory - which, by investigating the vocabulary, reveals the Qur’ānic attitude to them. An examination of the semantic scope of these two words in the Qur’ān reveals that the concepts of virtues and righteous deeds are among the most frequently used Qur’ānic terms, among which the most general public relation is absolute, since the domain of virtues is general and includes righteous deeds and divine rewards. While some goodies are not righteous deeds. That is why words that have a definite role in building the worldview of the Qur’ān are called Qur’ānic keywords, and each of these words has sub-words with which the keyword is associated.
 

Keywords

Main Subjects


The noble Qur’ān.
Abū hayyān, M. (2000), al-Baḥr al-Muhīt fī al-Tafsīr. Beirut, Dār al-Fikr.
Akbarī Rād, Ṭ. (2008), «The Difference between the Commentators' View and the Semantic Perspective on the Concept of Good Practice». Journal of Religious Research, No. 17, 39-60.
Askarī, A. (1998), al-Furūq al-Loghawīyeh. Cairo, Dār al-ʻIlm.
Bāgherī, M. (1999), Moqaddamat Zabān Shenāsī. Tehran, Nashr Qatreh.
Bustānī, F. (1991), al-Monjed al-Abjadī. Tehran, Islamī.
Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī, M. (2000), Mafātīh al-Ghayb. Beirut, Dār al-Iḥyā al-Torāth.
Farāhīdī, Kh. (1989), al-ʻAyn. Qom, Dār al-Hejrat.
Geeraerts, D. (2009), Lexical Semantic Theories. Korosh Safavid Translation, Tehran, Nashre Publication.
Ḥākim Nayshābūrī, M. (2002), al-Mustadrak ʻalā al-Ṣaḥīhayn. Beirut, Dār al-Kotob.
Hāshemī, A.(1992), Jawāher al-Balāghah, Qom, Muṣṭafawī.
Ibn ʻĀshūr, M.Ṭ. (n.d.), al-Taḥrīr wa al-Tanwīr. n.p., n.p.
Ibn Fāris, A .(1984), Muʻjam Maqāʼīs al-Loghat. Tehran, Nashr Islāmī.
Ibn Manẓūr, M. (1994), Lisān al-ʻArab. Beirut, Dār al-Sadr.
Izutsu, T. (1981), Semantic Structure of Ethical Concepts in the Qurʼān. Tehran, Qalam Publishing.
Id. (1982), God and Man in the Qurʼān. Tehran, Farhang Islamī.
Jawādī Āmulī, A. (2009), Tasnīm. Qom, Isrāʼ.
Kulaynī, M. (1987), al-Kāfī. Tehran, Dār al-Kotob al-Islāmīyah.
Makārem Shīrāzī, N. (1995), Tafsīr Nemūneh. Tehran, Dār al-Kutub al-Islamī.
Meshkāt al-Dīnī, M.(1997), Linguistic Course. Mashhad, Ferdowsi University.
Muṣṭafawī, H. (2009), al-Tahqīq Fī al-Kalamāt al-Qurʼān al-Karīm. Tehran, Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance.
Qurashī, ʻA. A. (1998), Qāmūs Al-Qurʼān. Tehran, Dār al-Kotob al-Islāmī.
Rāgheb Isfahānī, H. (1992), Al-Mufradāt fī Gharīb al-Qurʼān. Beirut, al-dār al-Shami.
Sajjādī, S. (2014), «The Natural Transcendental Approach: Assumptions, Concepts and Goals». Journal of Western Iran Language and Dialects Studies, No. 7.
Subhānī, J. (1998), Manshūr Jāvīd. Qom: Imām Sādiq Institute (AS).
Ṭabāṭabāʼī, M. Ḥ. (1997), Al-Mīzān fī tafsīr al-Qur’ān. Qom, Islamic Publication Office.
Ṭabrisī, F. (1993), Majma‘ al-bayān. Tehran, Nāṣir Khusru Publications.
Ṭayyārī Dehāqānī, M.J. (2001), ʻAmal Dar Tarāzūyeh Ḥaq (Iḥbāṭ. Takfīr. Mowāzene). Qom, Daftar Inteshārāt Islāmī.
Ṭayyib, ʻA. (1999), Aṭyab al-bayān fī Tafsīr al-Qurʼān. Tehran, Ketāb forūshī Islām.
Ṭūsī, M. (n.d.), al-Tebyān fī Tafsīr al-Qurʼān. Beirut, Dār al-Torāth.
Wahhābī, M. (1984), Arabic Dictionaries Topics and Words. Beirut, al-Nāsherūn.
Zahmakhsharī, M. (1987), al-Kashshāf ʻan Ḥaqāʼeq Ghawāmez al-Tanzīl. Beirut, Dār al-Ketāb.