Impact of Sectarian Loyalty on Tafsir: A Study in the Context of Commentaries of Imamite and Sunnite Scholars on Verses Related to the Belief in Raj'a
Özet
The epistemological and theological framework constructed by the sect in the historical process offers its members a certain perception of religion and the world. This perception affects all of the intellectual and social acts. Tafsir is one of the scholarly activities in which sectarian affiliation is effective. However, the activity of Tafsir often emerges as a product of the social framework and the mufass's position within it. The phenomenon of sect is one of the most dominant factors at the moment. Because it serves as an important framework that shapes Muslims' interpretation of verses and their perception of the Qur'an. The members of the sects resort to justifying their views on many issues with the Qur'an, even if they often do not carry religious content and are essentially the product of social, political, and religious warfare. In this context, the verses can be reconstructed by the members of the sect in a way that justifies the goals of the sect! and can be subjected to different interpretations from others on the basis of the sect's understanding of religion. Tafsir, theology (kalam), and fiqh books are filled with dozens of interpretations of verses and have this context. The same verse and had this can be presented to members of different sects with very different Interpretations. The structure of the Qur'an!c language, which is suitable for justifying some beliefs with sectarian affiliation, has made the work of sectarians easier. However, in our opinion, the main problem in this matter is the determining effect of sectarian affiliation rather than the structure of the verses that can be understood differently. This art has tried to concretize the abstract issues mentioned above through the different interpretations of some verses associated with Raj'a, directly or indirectly. In this context, Imami and Sunni scholars were chosen as examples, and it was analyzed how the same verse could be subjected to different interpretations by them due to the influence of sectarian affiliation. Ayyashi, Abu al-Hasan al-Qummi, Abu Ja'far al-Tusi, Abu'Al al-Tabersi, Shaykh Saduq, and Shaykh al-Mufid are the Imam scholars whose interpretations about raj'a are focused on. From Ahl al-Sunnah, the interpretations of Abu Mansur al-Maturidi and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi have been analyzed. The fact that the number of Sunni scholars who criticize the Imam!yya with verses on the issue of raj'ais is very small has led us to focus more on the interpretations of these two scholars. However, we have also tried to discern the opinions of the few other scholars who have expressed an opinion on the issue and to present a more holistic picture. It has been observed that both the Imami and Sunni scholars have resorted to various means to provide Qur'an'c evidence for their beliefs in the rec'a, such as associating some verses with other verses that support their views, establishing an absolute uniformity between the past and the present through this of questionable authenticity, conducting linguistic, contextual, and historical analyses within the framework of presuppositions, and expanding or narrowing the meanings of verses through subjective inferences. The most common evidence used by both Sunni and Imami scholars to legitimize their sectarian views on the raj'a with the Qur'an is exegesis of the Qur'an with the Qur'an. However, the scholars of both sects made serious methodological mistakes, such as not paying attention to the overall meaning of the verses, taking only a part of the verse, and not looking at the syaq and sybaq of the verses, ignoring other related verses, and sometimes linking verses to each other even though they are not related to the same subject. Similar problems were observed in the method of interpreting the verse with heart. They used hadiths of doubtful authenticity as evidence and detached the had!th from its verbal and historical context. Both the Imami and Sunni scholars have seen no harm going beyond the literal meaning of the verse from time to time in order to justify themselves on the issue of Raj'a. In other words, when the meaning of the verse contradicted the views advocated by a sect, the scholars of both sects put the views of the respective sects at the center and tried to adapt the verse to their own systems.
