La tradition musulmane rapporte que l’une des caractéristiques les plus fondamentales du Coran est qu’il est un texte polysémique par excellence (ḥammāl dhū wujūh, porteur de plusieurs visages). Si le Coran est polysémique et que ses exégèses ne sont que des lectures possibles, il s’ensuit que ses traductions en sont également autant de lectures possibles et complémentaires. L’accumulation des traductions contribue ainsi à exprimer la polysémie du texte d’origine, même si ces traductions, dans leur diversité, restent en deçà de la diversité des exégèses.La thèse prend la sourate Al-Ḥajj comme exemple de cette problématique. Elle est articulée autour de deux axes de recherche :I. une étude de la polysémie du texte de départ.II. une étude de la polysémie du texte d’arrivée qui montre comment la traduction réduit et/ou modifie la polysémie.Le corpus est constitué de 18 traductions représentatives de toutes les tendances et de toutes les périodes de l’histoire de la traduction française du Coran depuis 1647 jusqu’à 2010.Constituant un espace clos qui évolue indépendamment de l’exégèse vers plus de littéralité, les traductions se rejoignent, se complètent, reflètent dans leur diversité avec légère modification une grande partie de la polysémie réunie et concentrée dans le texte de départ mais sporadique, éparse et dispersée dans les traductions. / According to Islamic tradition, one of the core characteristics of the Quran is that it is a polysemic text par excellence (ḥammāl dhū wujūh, bearer of several faces). To say that the Quranic text is polysemic implies that its various exegeses are as many possible readings of it, which implies in turn that its translations are also as many readings that complete each other. The accumulation of translations is thus another expression of the polysemy of the original text, even if the diversity of these translations does not match that of the exegeses.The thesis deals with the analysis of the Surah of Al-Ḥajj and it is based on two research axes:I. a study of the polysemy of the original text (Surah of Al-Ḥajj).II. A study of the polysemy of the final text (18 French translations) to show how translation reduces and/or modifies polysemy. The corpus of translations (18 translations) covers all the periods of the history of the translation of the Koran from 1647 until 2010 in order to see the evolution of the translation of the Koranic text.As a closed space that evolves independently from exegesis to more literality, the translations meet and complement each other, reflecting in their diversity with slight modification a large part of the polysemy united and concentrated in the original text but sporadic, sparse and Dispersed in the translations.

This study investigates the principles of interpretation in Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn `Abbas, focusing on its approach and method, sources and points of view. To accomplish this purpose, both historical and literary analysis are employed. Nevertheless, this study does not attempt to resolve the well-known dispute over its authenticity or ascription. / Like other Qur'anic commentaries produced in the classical period, Tanwir al-Miqbas relies heavily on philological analysis in the sense that it provides an interpretation of Qur'anic verses based on their literal meaning and in very simple terms. Similarly, it employs sources that were commonly used in classical tafsir, namely, Qur'anic cross-reference, h&dotbelow;adith, Arabic poetry and isra'iliyat. However, due to its simplistic approach, it is difficult to extract any guiding principles behind its interpretation. In fact, there is little to indicate that this Qur'anic exegesis represents the views of any particular Islamic sect, let alone of any individual person. / Nevertheless, with its simple presentation, Tanwir al-Miqbas brings up many interesting and challenging issues which deserve greater scholarly attention. Further and deeper research into these issues may help us to situate the work within the broader exegetical tradition in Islam.

No description available.

Shayk Tabarsi was a Shiite scholar, the only Shiite theologian of importance in the twelfth century A.D. He produced a commentary on the Qur'an which scholars, both Shiite and Sunnite, have acclaimed as the leading work in the field of tafsir. No Western scholar has done any study on Tabarsi or on any of his works. This dissertation is therefore, the first work in a Western language to be devoted to this important Muslim scholer and theologian.

This is a study of Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī’s al-Durr al-manthūr fi-l-tafsīr bi-l-ma’thur (The scattered pearls of tradition-based exegesis), hereinafter al-Durr. In the present study, the distinctiveness of al-Durr becomes evident in comparison with the tafsīrs of al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923) and Ibn Kathīr (d. 774/1373). Al-Suyūṭī surpassed these exegetes by relying entirely on ḥadīth (tradition). Al-Suyūṭī rarely offers a comment of his own. Thus, in terms of its formal features, al-Durr is the culmination of tradition-based exegesis (tafsīr bi-l-ma’thūr). This study also shows that al-Suyūṭī intended in al-Durr to subtly challenge the tradition-based hermeneutics of Ibn Taymīyah (d. 728/1328). According to Ibn Taymīyah, the true, unified, interpretation of the Qurʼān must be sought in the Qurʼān itself, in the traditions of Muḥammad, and in the exegeses of the earliest Muslims. Moreover, Ibn Taymīyah strongly denounced opinion-based exegesis (tafsīr bi-l-ra’y). By means of the traditions in al-Durr, al-Suyūṭī supports several of his views in contradistinction to those of Ibn Taymīyah. Al-Suyūṭī’s traditions support the following views. First, opinion-based exegesis is a valid supplement to tradition-based exegesis. Second, the early Muslim community was not quite unified. Third, the earliest Qur’ānic exegetes did not offer a unified exegesis of the Qur’ān. Fourth, Qur’ānic exegesis is necessarily polyvalent since Muslims accept a number of readings of the Qur’ān, and variant readings give rise to various interpretations. Al-Suyūṭī collected his traditions from a wide variety of sources some of which are now lost. Two major exegetes, al-Shawkānī (d. 1250/1834) and al-Ālūsī (d. 1270/1854), copied some of these traditions from al-Durr into their Qur’ān commentaries. In this way, al-Suyūṭī has succeeded in shedding new light on rare, neglected, and previously scattered traditions.

This is a study of Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī’s al-Durr al-manthūr fi-l-tafsīr bi-l-ma’thur (The scattered pearls of tradition-based exegesis), hereinafter al-Durr. In the present study, the distinctiveness of al-Durr becomes evident in comparison with the tafsīrs of al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923) and Ibn Kathīr (d. 774/1373). Al-Suyūṭī surpassed these exegetes by relying entirely on ḥadīth (tradition). Al-Suyūṭī rarely offers a comment of his own. Thus, in terms of its formal features, al-Durr is the culmination of tradition-based exegesis (tafsīr bi-l-ma’thūr). This study also shows that al-Suyūṭī intended in al-Durr to subtly challenge the tradition-based hermeneutics of Ibn Taymīyah (d. 728/1328). According to Ibn Taymīyah, the true, unified, interpretation of the Qurʼān must be sought in the Qurʼān itself, in the traditions of Muḥammad, and in the exegeses of the earliest Muslims. Moreover, Ibn Taymīyah strongly denounced opinion-based exegesis (tafsīr bi-l-ra’y). By means of the traditions in al-Durr, al-Suyūṭī supports several of his views in contradistinction to those of Ibn Taymīyah. Al-Suyūṭī’s traditions support the following views. First, opinion-based exegesis is a valid supplement to tradition-based exegesis. Second, the early Muslim community was not quite unified. Third, the earliest Qur’ānic exegetes did not offer a unified exegesis of the Qur’ān. Fourth, Qur’ānic exegesis is necessarily polyvalent since Muslims accept a number of readings of the Qur’ān, and variant readings give rise to various interpretations. Al-Suyūṭī collected his traditions from a wide variety of sources some of which are now lost. Two major exegetes, al-Shawkānī (d. 1250/1834) and al-Ālūsī (d. 1270/1854), copied some of these traditions from al-Durr into their Qur’ān commentaries. In this way, al-Suyūṭī has succeeded in shedding new light on rare, neglected, and previously scattered traditions.