Abstract
In a superficial and elementary view, it seems that the authors of the narrative interpretations, without any ijtihad, have only collected narrations that often directly refer to some of the words and expressions of the verses. Contrary to this idea, the evidence shows that these commentators, like other commentators, have ijtehad to discover the meaning of the verses and expressed their interpretive views in the form of selecting and arranging narrations. In this article, with a descriptive-analytical method, through the comparison of the most important Shia narrative interpretations, their differences in the face of Israeli narratives have been analyzed. One of the most prominent aspects of distinguishing these commentaries in the mentioned category is the narration of narrations that contradict the infallibility of the prophets in Qomi's interpretation and in contrast to the critical approach of other commentators, especially the authors of late Shia narrative commentaries; Faiz Kashani, Huweizi and Bahrani are faced with these traditions. The critical tendency to generalize Israeli stories to the field of virtue writing about imams and their Shiites is another distinguishing aspect of these interpretations. The development and tolerance in the validity criteria of interpretative traditions, the course of structural evolution and the approach of theological issues over time, and the generalization of the rule of tolerance in the arguments of the traditions to the traditions of the virtues of the imams are among the most important fields affecting such a distinction.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)