محمدکاظم شاکر

  The level of satisfaction of individuals with life is one of the important criteria in the ideal lifestyle, and "mutual satisfaction" is one of the crucial manifestations of "satisfaction with life." Speaking of "satisfaction" in bilateral relationships implies the presence of both "Rāḍī" (well- pleased) and "Marḍīyy" (pleasing) aspects for both sides of these relationships. Considering the presence or absence of these two qualities in interpersonal relationships, three conceivable assumptions are possible: 1) Both parties are "Rāḍī" with each other, hence each party is also "Marḍīyy" with the other; 2) Only one of the parties is pleased with the other, therefore one is "Rāḍī" and the other is "Marḍīyy"; 3) Both parties are not "Rāḍī" with each other, hence neither is "Marḍīyy" with the other. The best case is the first assumption, and the worst case is the third assumption. When we find ourselves in the third situation, we must strive to at least transform it into the second assumption and then elevate the second assumption to the first assumption. But how is this transformation possible? The present study suggests that in one's interactions with others, instead of expecting to find oneself "Rāḍī," one should try to "Rāḍī" the other and let oneself become "Marḍīyy" with the other; because in order to be "Rāḍī" with the other, we do not have control over all the factors that lead to satisfaction, as we cannot determine or change the behaviors of the other party according to our desires. However, everyone has the choice and actions are up to them and can act according to the desires of the other party. If both parties in all bilateral relationships follow this recommendation, they will reach the ideal situation (the first assumption), which means being "Rāḍī and Marḍīyy at the same time."    

In the major encyclopedias of narrative exegesis, over twelve thousand exegetical hadiths attributed to Ahl al-Bayt has been collected. The exegesis presented in most of these narrations is understandable to everyone and can be considered as the meanings of the Qur’anic words. However, in many of these narrations, words, phrases, and Quranic verses have been interpreted in such a way that the reader cannot easily establish a coherent relationship between them and Quranic words. At times, it is suggested that this type of narrative interpretation is not meant to express the exegesis (Tafsīr), but rather to convey the interpretation (Taʼwīl), and it is also posited that the interpretation of the Quran is not confined solely to the linguistic relationship with the words of the Quran, but rather is a meaning that only the Prophet and Ahl al-Bayt can comprehend. The present study aimed to categorize exegetical narratives and examine the linguistic relationship that each category has with their apparent words and meanings. The author contends that any meaning presented as an exegesis or interpretation for the Quran must have a linguistic connection with the Quranic text, and the reader must comprehend this connection through linguistic analysis. Consequently, any meaning offered in the hadiths, whether as exegesis or interpretation, which lacks a linguistic connection with the words of the Quran, loses its credibility and cannot be accepted as the intended meaning of the divine words

The book "The The Qur’an Misinterpreted, Mistranslated, and Misread: the Aramaic Language of the The Qur’an" was published in 2006 by Gabriel Sawma. The author has claimed that the language of the Qur'an is the Syro-Aramaic, and most of its teachings are derived from Jewish-Christian sources. Among his claims, he alleges that Muslims have misunderstood the verse 116 of Surah al-Baqarah:"And they say Allah has taken to Himself a son Glory be to Him…" (Wa Qālūt takhadhal lāhu Waladāan Subĥānahu). He regards the word ‘اتَّخَذ’ (Has taken) as a distortion of the Syriac «اتَّحدَ» (has united) happened by the Qur'anic scribers.  According to this recitation, the meaning of the verse is "They said that God is united with the Son". This meaning is in accordance with the New Testament doctrine of the incarnation of God through the Son. In this paper, Gabriel Sawma's viewpoint is reviewed and criticized by two intra-religious aspects including the Qur'an and Arabic literature and extra-religious features including linguistic historical-comparative in some branches of Sami languages and interfaith research. The authors conclude that the textual and linguistic evidence prove contrary to the Sawma's claim.