Receive the Exegetical discourse of the verses of the revelation

Abstract

This study examines the revelation of the Holy Qur’an and its interpretation in the exegetical discourse. It traces the places of the occurrence of the word ‘revelation’ in the Holy Qur’an and finds out the verses that include it. It also studies and analyzes these verses in the books of Qur’an Interpretation in order to reveal the meanings, patterns, phenomena and the epistemological characteristics of the ‘revelation’ which is manifested in the Holy Qur’an, its reflection in the exegetical discourse in light of the epistemology and explain the meaning of ‘revelation’ in a context in the books of interpretation; to know the interpretation of the verses on the one hand, and how the interpreters receive and reproduce the Qur’anic knowledge carried by the verses that contain the word ‘revelation’ on the other hand. It explores and explains the epistemological reasons for the differences in interpretation between the interpreters, and inference the proofs in the Holy Qur’an to consider revelation as a source of knowledge. The descriptive approach is adopted in this study, through tracing, describing and analyzing examples of Qur’an verses that contain the word ‘revelation’, and describing how they are received in the exegetical discourse in the light of the epistemology. The study concludes with several results, the most important of which are: The act of the revelation in the Holy Qur’an is attributed mostly to Almighty Allah, as it was assigned to humans and to demons. Thus, the revelation, in the Holy Qur’an, is divided into divine, human, and satanic revelations. Every human or satanic revelation in the Holy Qur’an comes with the linguistic meanings of revelation, while the divine revelation denotes the specialized terminological meaning of revelation. Through analyzing the verses, the study proofs revelation as a source of the knowledge, the unity of the revealed knowledge that all prophets call for and represented in monotheism. This indicates the unity of the source of the knowledge. The multiplicity of interpretation in the interpretive discourse is due to the difference in the nature of receiving and understanding the knowledge, and the way it is reproduced from one interpreter to another. The study shows that following in the interpretation prevails over creativity. The holiness of the Qur’an makes diligence in interpretation fraught with dangers and that may question the doctrine of the interpreter.