خلافت انسان در آیه ۳۰ سوره بقره: بررسی تطبیقی دیدگاه طباطبایی و صادقی تهرانی (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
براساس آیه 30 سوره بقره، خداوند خلیفه ای را در زمین قرار داده است، اما مفسران درباره کیستی خلیفه و مستخلف عنه اختلاف نظر دارند. این مقاله، با روش تفسیر تطبیقی، نظر و ادله تفسیری علامه طباطبایی و صادقی تهرانی را دراین باره بررسی و میان آنها داوری می کند. یافته های پژوهش حاکی است که این دو مفسر در مورد کیستی خلیفه هم نظرند و خلیفه را نوع انسان می دانند و به آیاتی از قرآن (اعراف: 69، یونس: 1۴، نمل: 62) برای عمومیت خلافت استناد می کنند که قابل دفاع به نظر نمی رسد؛ اما سیاق امتنانی آیه 29 بقره، به قرینه مقابله «من یفسد» با «نحن نسبح» و آیه 11 سوره اعراف درباره سجده فرشتگان بر جانشینی نوع انسان از خدا دلالت دارد. طباطبایی با بیان دو دلیل مستخلف عنه در آیه را خداوند متعال می داند، اما نظر صادقی تهرانی دلالت آیه بر خلافت انسان از غیر خداست و پنج دلیل دراین باره اقامه می کند که، برخلاف ادله متقن طباطبایی، همگی مخدوش است. در نهایت، دیدگاه طباطبایی در این موضوع متقن و اکثر استدلال های وی تمام است.Human Vicegerency in Verse 30 of the al-Baqarah Chapter: A Comparative Analysis of the Perspectives of Tabatabai and Sadeqi Tehrani
According to verse 30 of the al-Baqarah Chapter, God placed a vicegerent on Earth, but commentators differ on the identity of the vicegerent and the entity for who they act as a representative. This article, using the method of comparative interpretation, examines the views and exegetic evidence of Allamah Tabatabai and Sadeqi Tehrani on this matter and adjudicates between them. The research findings indicate that both commentators agree on the identity of the vicegerent, considering it to be humanity as a whole. They reference Quranic verses (Aʿrāf: 69, Yūnus: 14, Naml: 62) to support the universality of the vicegerency, though this stance does not seem to be defendable. However, the appreciative context of verse 29 of the al-Baqarah Chapter, accompanied by the contrast between “who cause corruption” and “we celebrate your praise,” as well as verse 11 of the al-Aʿrāf Chapter regarding the angels prostrating, denotes the human species’ vicegerency of God. Tabatabai, providing two reasons, identifies the represented entity in the verse as Almighty God. In contrast, Sadeqi Tehrani interprets the verse as indicating humanity’s vicegerency of other than God, presenting five reasons for this view, which, unlike Tabatabai’s convincing arguments, are flawed. Ultimately, Tabatabai’s perspective on the subject is convincing, with most of his arguments being well-founded.
Keywords: verse 30 of the al-Baqarah Chapter, interpretation of the vicegerency verse, vicegerency in the Quran, vicegerent in the Quran
Introduction
The vicegerency of humanity is one of the important topics discussed in anthropology, and Quranic commentators have presented various interpretative perspectives on the related verses. Among the verses related to this topic, verse 30 of the al-Baqarah Chapter is the most central, and most debates among commentators regarding human vicegerency are centered on this verse. Based on the apparent proofs of this verse, there is no doubt about the act of appointing and establishing a vicegerent by God on Earth. However, there is disagreement among commentators about who this vicegerent is, on whose behalf they act, as well as the matters of vicegerency and the scope of their vicegerency in terms of individuals, time, and place. This article focuses on answering the first two questions. Some commentators have derived the concept of the vicegerency of the human species on behalf of Almighty God from this verse, while others believe it refers to the succession of human generations over one another. Among contemporary commentators, two prominent figures who have addressed these two questions with supporting arguments are Allamah Tabatabai and Muhammad Sadeqi Tehrani. Using the comparative interpretation method, this article examines the views of these two commentators, evaluates the validity of their interpretations, and ultimately judges the superiority of their interpretative opinions.
1. Allameh Tabatabai’s Perspective on the Identity of the Vicegerent and the Represented Entity
Allameh Tabatabai believes that verse 30 of the al-Baqarah Chapter indicates humanity’s vicegerency on behalf of God. Two reasons can be derived from his commentary: 1) The implication of the angels’ words regarding their own suitability for divine vicegerency. 2) The incompatibility of teaching Adam the Divine Names as a criterion for vicegerency for representing other beings. He argues that, since God did not refute the angels’ statement about the corruption and bloodshed of the vicegerent, and given the universality of vicegerency mentioned in verses 69 of the al-Aʿrāf Chapter, 14 of the al-Yūnus Chapter, and 62 of the an-Naml Chapter, vicegerency is not limited to Prophet Adam. Instead, the vicegerent referred to in this verse is the human species as a whole.
Sadeqi Tehrani’s Perspective on the Identity of the Vicegerent and the Represented Entity
According to Sadeqi Tehrani, verse 30 of the al-Baqarah Chapter does not indicate humanity’s vicegerency on behalf of God. His primary argument against this interpretation is that representing God would imply His absence from managing the universe or His inability to do so—an invalid conclusion based on Quranic principles. Moreover, vicegerency requires a similarity or congruence between the vicegerent and the represented entity, which is impossible, as stated in verses like “Nothing is like Him” (Laysa kamithlihi shayʾ). He identifies the vicegerent mentioned in the verse as humankind. Although he does not explicitly provide a clear reason for the vicegerency of the human species, his reliance on the same verses cited by Allamah Tabatabai regarding the universality of vicegerency can be considered as his reasoning.
Evaluation and Adjudication between the Two Perspectives
Sadeqi Tehrani’s arguments for non-divine vicegerency are inadequate, while Allamah Tabatabai’s arguments for divine vicegerency are solid. Additional evidence supporting divine vicegerency can also be derived from analysis of this verse, such as the meaning of the statement “Indeed I am going to set a viceroy on the earth” and the role of vicegerency as a prelude to God’s command for the angels to prostrate to humanity.
Allamah Tabatabai’s first argument for humankind’s vicegerency is well-founded. However, regarding his second argument and his citation of verses 69 of al-Aʿrāf Chapter, 14 of the al-Yūnus Chapter, and 62 of the an-Naml Chapter to assert the universality of vicegerency—and consequently the vicegerency of humanity as a species, which can also be understood implicitly from the words of Sadeqi Tehrani—it must be said that the basis for this interpretation in his commentary is unclear. The apparent meaning of these verses suggests the succession of humans from one another, with no evidence to the contrary.
It appears that Allamah Tabatabai does not mean that, because the mentioned verses imply vicegerency on behalf of God and because this vicegerency is expressed with the pronoun “you” (kum: you plural), it is not exclusive to Prophet Adam. Instead, he argues that, just as these verses use the pronoun “you” to refer to humankind and do not intend specific individuals, the term “vicegerent” in verse 30 of the Al-Baqarah Chapter also refers to humanity as a species, with Adam being its initial referent. Therefore, if Allamah Tabatabai cited these verses to support divine vicegerency, it is not acceptable. However, if he cited them to support the vicegerency of humankind with the above clarification, it is valid but insufficient.
Sadeqi Tehrani may have intended, by referencing verses 69 of the al-Aʿrāf Chapter, 14 of the al-Yūnus Chapter, and 62 of the an-Naml Chapter regarding the identity of the vicegerent, to present these verses as contextual evidence for understanding the meaning of vicegerent (khalīfah) in verse 30 of the al-Baqarah Chapter. If so, it must be said that the thematic connection between verses is an important condition for using them as contextual evidence in interpretation. However, the thematic connection between these verses and verse 30 of the al-Baqarah Chapter is debatable. Moreover, while similarity and congruence between the vicegerent and the represented entity are necessary, this does not imply similarity in divinity; congruence is only required concerning the matters entrusted to the vicegerent.
Conclusion
This study revealed that both commentators agree on the identity of the vicegerent, considering it to be the human species, but they disagree on the identity of the represented entity. Based on the evaluation conducted, Allamah Tabatabai’s perspective on the identity of the vicegerent and the represented entity is well-founded, with most of his arguments being complete.
تبلیغات
