| المستخلص: |
This paper examines the differences between an ex¬pository recitation of the Qur'an (Ar. Qira'a tafseeriyah) and the interpolated hadith (Ar. hadith mudraj in which the narrator has included his own words or someone else's in the text) and its impact on practical legal rulings. The aim of the paper lies in the scholarly foundational examination of Imam al-Suyuti's words on the interpolated hadith in the context of the defini¬tion of the modes of Qur'anic recitation wherein he said, "A sixth mode [of recitation] has become appar¬ent to me that is similar to one of the different kinds of hadith- the mudraj. It is that in which additions are made for expository purposes" [Al-Itqan, (1/265)]. The paper mentions secondary juristic issues that jurists may derive from both expository recitations and inter¬polated hadiths. The paper further determines the meaning of the sub¬ject of the research and their implications followed by an explication of the relationship between the ex¬pository recitation of the Qur'an and the interpolated hadith in terms of similarities and differences. The pa¬per then broaches the methodologies of Islamic legal theorists in using either as evidence for derivation of practical rulings for secondary issues. It then address¬es the majority of rulings of juristic issues over which there are scholarly differences due to the scholarly dif¬ferences on the validity of using expository recitation of the Qur'an and the interpolated hadith as evidence. The paper concludes with the most important results reached. The prominent feature of this paper is that it combines between numerous Islamic legal sciences: Qur'anic sciences, the science of Qur'an exegesis, the science of hadith terminology, Islamic legal theory as well as the fruit of all of these disciplines which is the science of Jurisprudence and its recognized methodologies.
|
