درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Semantic analysis of Qur’anic vocabulary, which approaches the text through a modern, systematic methodology, can greatly facilitate the comprehension of Qur’anic verses. Among the words that appear in various contexts in the Qur’an and carry diverse meanings is the term "Despair" and its derivatives. Accordingly, the present study, employing a semantic approach grounded in structuralism, seeks to analyze and explicate the semantic field of despair along the axis of substitution scientifically and systematically. It addresses the key question: ‘What is the denotation of the word despair and its usages in the Qur’an when examined through semantic analysis based on the axis of substitution?’The findings indicate the presence of substitutes such as khawwān (treachery), khattār (grave danger), āthim (sinful), ṣabr (patience), jazaʿ (impatience), qanūṭ (despair), fadhū duʿāʾ ʿarīḍ (one of prolonged supplication), lā yarjūn (those who do not hope), and al-ẓānnīn bi llāh ẓann al-sūʾ (those who harbor evil thoughts about God) as substitutes for despair in the Qur’an. The frequency of these terms in the Qur’anic text is, respectively: two, one, two, one hundred and three, two, one, one, nine, and one occurrences. Based on these substitutes, semantic components such as ingratitude, betrayal, inner sinfulness and covenant-breaking, lack of patience, misguidance, attachment to worldly life, rebellion and arrogance, heedlessness, negligence, and evil suspicion of God are evident for the term despai r . The shared semantic component among all these instances is "Lack of concern (negligence), heedlessness, and indifference". In Qur’anic usage, this concept manifests as: "Awareness of people’s heedlessness and lack of concern toward divine invitation" in relation to the prophets; "Awareness of the negligence of the Aziz of Egypt" in the story of Yūsuf’s brothers; "Indifference toward menstruation and lack of expectation of its occurrence" when referring to postmenopausal women; and "Awareness and certainty of God’s guidance of all humankind" for believers, appearing in a negative (negated) context.

This study examines the pivotal role of belief in Divine Sustenance in motivating the practice of almsgiving, drawing on the perspectives of two major Qur’anic commentaries, al-Mīzān and al-Taḥrīr wa al-Tanwīr , and employing a descriptive-analytical, comparative approach. The findings indicate that although the two exegetes share alignment in their fundamental principles, they differ significantly in their methodologies and emphases. ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī , adopting a philosophical-theological orientation, interprets Sustenance as a manifestation of Divine Unity in action, understanding almsgiving as returning wealth to its true Owner. Ibn ʿĀshūr , however, with a socio-educational outlook, emphasizes human trusteeship and the practical social functions of almsgiving. At the psychological level, the Qur’anic promise of replacing sustenance is interpreted in al-Mīzān as a divine guarantee that reduces economic anxiety, whereas al-Taḥrīr wa al-Tanwīr views it as a catalyst for social participation. ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī considers almsgiving an act of "Seeking the Countenance of God" and a manifestation of the divine, the most excellent order. Ethically and socially, the findings illustrate that Ṭabāṭabāʾī regards almsgiving as a reflection of God’s perfect order, whereas Ibn ʿĀshūr interprets it as a mechanism for wealth redistribution and the realization of social justice. By integrating exegetical insights with the psychology of religion, this research proposes a comprehensive model indicating that the Qur’an simultaneously addresses both individual (reducing economic anxiety) and social (enhancing participation) dimensions to motivate almsgiving.

The terms " ʿInd, Ladun, and Ladayy " are among the frequently recurring concepts in the Qur’an. Despite their high frequency, no systematic and coherent explanation of the underlying meanings of these terms has been provided in existing research. This study, adopting an analytical-critical approach, examines the interpretations of these terms as presented by exegetes from both Sunni and Shiʿi traditions, seeking to extract, classify, and evaluate the most significant views. The findings reveal that while commentators unanimously deny attributing spatiality to God, they identify concepts such as "Special proximity and honor," "Exclusivity," and "Divine absolute knowledge and power" as the primary meanings associated with these terms when used in reference to God. Furthermore, the evaluation of exegetical perspectives demonstrates that some views are entirely untenable, whereas others may be valid in specific contexts; however, their generalization to all verses without due regard for textual indicators and context leads to interpretive inaccuracies. The comprehensive view argued in this study is that the concept of "With God" ( ʿInda Allah ) should be understood as multifaceted and context-dependent, rather than as a fixed and uniform expression. This analysis shows that although earlier interpretations may be defensible in certain cases and in light of specific contexts, their indiscriminate generalization results in semantic weaknesses and interpretive shortcomings.

The present study analyzes the semantic dimensions of the two Qur’anic expressions "Ghulāmin Alīm" (a knowledgeable boy) and "Ghulāmin Ḥalīm" (a forbearing boy) in the verses related to God’s glad tidings about the children of Abraham. The research question is ‘Why the Qur’an uses the word "Alīm" (knowledgeable) to describe one of the sons and the word "Ḥalīm" (forbearing) to describe another?’ ‘What educational implications this difference entails?’ The significance of the research lies in the fact that the semantic study of near-synonymous vocabulary in the Qur’an helps us grasp deeper layers of prophetic upbringing. The main question of the study is: ‘What is the semantic difference between Alīm and Ḥalīm in the Qur’anic context, and what educational implications does it have for nurturing the next generation?’ The research method is comparative, and by drawing on exegetical sources, lexicons, and Qur’anic semantic studies, it examines these two prominent attributes, "Alīm" and "Ḥalīm," in the two parallel verses. The findings indicate that "Alīm" refers to the cognitive and rational dimension of the human being, whereas "Ḥalīm" is related to the dimensions of self-control, ethics, and emotion regulation. The conclusion of this analysis shows that Qur’anic education emphasizes the integration of knowledge and forbearance in forming an ideal personality.