نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 سطح چهار حوزه علمیه و دانش آموخته مرکز فقهی ائمه اطهار ع؛ استاد حوزه علمیه، قم، ایران (نویسنده مسئول)
2 سطح چهار حوزه علمیه و دانش آموخته مرکز فقهی ائمه اطهار ع؛ پژوهشگر گروه اصول فقه مرکز فقهی ائمه اطهار ع، قم، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The issue of various recitations of the Holy Quran represents a significant matter encompassing numerous aspects of theological, jurisprudential, and literary dimensions. One of the facets of this issue is the influence of recitation discrepancies on jurisprudential matters, extensively discussed in the jurisprudential and foundational books of the two major schools of thought (Shia and Sunni). According to the Sunni belief among the general public, all well-known recitations are authoritative, and juridical references can be derived from them. However, scholars from the Shiite perspective deny the legitimacy of conflicting recitations, rejecting reliance on divergent recitations. Given these two distinct approaches, the impact of recitation variations on Shiite jurisprudence significantly differs from its effect on the jurisprudence of the general populace. This article employs a descriptive-analytical method, drawing upon library resources and utilizing assistive software, to compare the impact of recitation discrepancies on Shiite jurisprudence versus that of the general populace. The analysis demonstrates that while multiple recitation variations have led to differences in legal rulings within Sunni jurisprudence and Shiite jurisprudence, despite the potential influence of recitation discrepancies on juridical matters, no instance has been found where recitation variations led to divergent legal verdicts, due to the presence of narrations from the Ahl al-Bayt (Prophet Mohammad's Progeny) in all circumstances.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
فهرست منابع
)