And The Fundamentals of Modernist Hermeneutics*
Dr. Sherif Abdul Rahman**
Amin Al-Khuli, a prominent Muslim scholar, is one of the pioneers who called for a literary approach to the Quran without depending on any other considerations, and definitely, any religious consideration. Adopting this concept, Al-Khuli established an approach to the Noble Quran which neglects the question about the origin and separates the Quranic text from its sacredness and its relevant pillars and restrictions. He also called for a reason-based reflective reading of the Quran. In fact, this is the same path of the next intellectual trends adopting modernist allegorical interpretation (Ta’weel+) which called for the humanization of the (Sacred) text; dealing with it as a produced text, which can be read from a relative historical perspective neglecting its transcendental source or by considering its transcendental source within the historical movement only! Accordingly, we can affirm that we cannot fully understand Al-Khuli’s project except by reviewing his disciples’ contributions who represented his idea through a school of thought called modernist allegorical interpretation. In addition, we cannot decode many of the allegations of this school of thought except by understanding the premises founded by Amin Al-Khuli in this regard.
To achieve these two goals, we intend, throughout this article, to tackle a number of axes summarizing the outline of Al-Khuli’s renewal project and representing the methodological and intellectual pillars of the school of modernist allegorical interpretation during that time. These axes include the following topics:
- Literary study,
- Thematic Quranic Exegesis,
- Hermeneutics, and
Although these topics are overlapping and many of their details intersect with each other, differentiating among them is a beneficial step to understand Al-Khuli’s renewal project and explain the pillars of the intellectual trend of modernist allegorical interpretation.
1. Literary Study
Regardless all other approaches, Al-Khuli first presented literary study as an approach to understand the Noble Quran. According to him, literary study is the first objective and the farthest purpose of the Quranic exegesis from which other purposes are classified. That’s why it is necessary to focus on it first before achieving any other objective, as it us a neutral objective addressing the believer and the disbeliever, or neglecting the question of faith and avoiding stating the Quranic teleology at the top of the exegetical objectives.
Al-Khuli set rules for his literary study in a different way compared to the classical Quranic exegesis. He desacralized the Quranic text and neutralized its sacredness and paved the way for a free deal with it with no restrictions or standards except that of the literary criticism. This is to allow the text evaluation in a free and open way depending on an approach which makes it refutable. One of the late scholars conveyed the essence of this approach by saying: “Even if we believe in the divinity of the Quranic text, we need to reflectively read this text from an earthly perspective; by desacralizing the text.” 1
By assuming the independence of the literary Quranic text from its transcendental source and its relation with its relative reality, Al-Khuli suggested a contextual study, by including the historical, social, cultural and religious environment in which the Quran was revealed, and by studying the synonyms, phrases and syntactical structures of the text to discover the rhetorical device of the Quranic style and highlight the features of the Arabic syntactic structures.
Indeed, this approach represents the premises on which the advocates of the modernist allegorical interpretation, who came after Al-khuli and adopted his approach, depend. They believe that a correct dealing with the Quran is achieved only through a literary approach regardless any religious consideration2. Accordingly, the Quranic Discourse, similar to any other discourse, becomes a cognitive production which follows the critical conditions indicating the necessity of the historical field, the controversy of text and reality, and the usage of the mechanisms of the historical mind to form a disciplined scientific awareness3.
The (literary) perspective introduced by Al-Khuli does not, theoretically, necessitate the appearance of these serious consequences, because the attempt to discover the declarative and literary “signified” by using the linguistic “signifier” is neutral and objective. However, the allegorical interpretation, due to the following attempts, exceeded the limits. Consequently, it did not distort the conception of the classical works only but its conception and meaning as well. In addition, it revolted against the exegetical heritage.
In fact, it was not difficult for Al-Khuli to expect those consequences. He actually faced a scientific dilemma (a dilemma of the message of narratives in the Quran introduced by Muhammad Ahmad Khalafullah, his disciple) through which those consequences were obvious, so it was necessary to express his opinion about it. Then, Al-Khuli explicitly declared his complete support and adoption to the allegorical interpretation represented in the attempt of Khalafullah. In fact, this attempt violates the classical frame of exegesis and developed till considering Quranic narratives as myths conveying literary meanings. In fact, this affirms that Al-Khuli is the main reason of the consequences resulted from this literary approach. It also affirms his responsibility of the intellectual product developed and credited to him by the advocates of the school of modernist allegorical interpretation.
Al-Khuli adopted an evolutionary approach in studying auxiliary sciences which help in understanding the language, grammar and rhetorical style of the Noble Quran. He intended to facilitate those sciences for their seekers and help them understand the contemporary Arabic language. Al-Khuli was affected by the idea of evolution to the extent that setting it as a reference for the renewal of the Islamic knowledges and Arabic literatures and sciences. He also used the word renewal and evolution interchangeably. He thought that while evolution based on the idea of genetic mutations, renewal, throughout the ages, has been a huge revolutionary effort necessary for the Muslim nation (Ummah), as if it is a periodical social revolution.
In fact, Al-Khuli is a strong advocate of the theory of evolution. He assumed that it does not contradict the context in which the Muslim mind developed and it includes testimonies and proofs similar to the essence of the Islamic history, especially in The Epistles of the Brethren of Purity (Ikhwan Aṣ-Ṣafa’) and the writings of Ibn Miskawayh, Ibn Sina and Ibn Aṭ-Ṭufayl. They, implicitly and explicitly, classified the creatures in a hierarchy stating human at its top, then animals, and then plants till reaching the lowest level which is the inanimate beings.
Furthermore, Al-Khuli broadly applied and generalized the idea of evolution. He regraded evolution as the comprehensive Law of creation and existence and the comprehensive path in fundamentals: creeds, worshipping acts and social relationships and transactions. According to the two latter fundamentals, the Islamic Shariah (Divine Law) is the election of what we see more easily to be done and more suitable to guarantee our survival. This is to the extent that he dared to say that “the evolution of creeds is possible, and nowadays, it is inevitable for life and religion to protect the religion and prove its eternal validity and capability of adaptation; an adaptation by which faith does not contradict a reason or a deed4.”
The idea of evolution adopted by Al-khuli’s renewal project influenced him to develop the grammatical, rhetorical and declarative (Arabic) rules depending on an approach which chooses the easiest and the simplest. We can observe the consequences of practically using these (modified) rules under the claim that it familiarize the written language with the spoken one. There are several threats faced by responding to this call because it modifies the auxiliary sciences needed for Quranic exegesis. At the top of these threats is that it may lead to a full separation between the Quran and the tools needed for its exegesis and understanding. For example, the simplified Arabic Grammar (Naḥw), which suits the everyday spoken language, is not a useful tool to understand a text which was formulated depending on the classical Arabic grammar. In addition, the rules of rhetoric (Balaghah) and diction (Bayān) has a similar situation5.
The contradiction in calling for adopting evolution and making it obligatory raises significant cognitive questions. In fact, evolution is a spontaneous plan which cannot be obligatory, because it appears in a media of free interaction. Therefore, calling for the confinement of evolution leads to an interference in the course of the present and the history although it contradicts the spontaneity of the process. In other words, the confinement of the evolution and drawing a helping plan to gain its results somehow contradicts its evolutionary nature and the philosophy of evolution itself. This is because it (this claim) depends on a voluntary action which suppresses the change and guides it to a certain direction and closes all possible ways and alternatives towards growth and change. It guides people towards just one path. In such case, how evolution can be achieved?6
The modernist allegorical interpretation, in general, and the allegorical literary interpretation, in particular, implanted the theory of positivism in the Quranic exegesis. This means that they established rules for Quranic exegesis apart from its Divine source. In fact, the literary study deals with the Quranic text as an absolute linguistic subject neglecting its metaphysical dimension. Within this context, renewal conveys the meaning of modernization more than conveying the meaning of revival, and requires positivist maxims which deal with the tangible and avoid the intangible.
In addition, the relation between Al-khuli’s renewal project and the spirit of western modernization and its major maxims appears in many ways, at the top of which is that which is related to the right of the individual to criticize his reality and question the contemporary spreading maxims even if they are religious (absolute). Within the frame of this modernist reason-based project, religion (the common understanding of religion according to Al-Khuli’s statement) is a phenomenon that can be studied and subjected to the philosophical questions and scientific thinking (which is apart from the theological/ intangible perception with all its different manifestations). Through this, it turns from being an explainer of any phenomenon to a subject that can be explained and doubted.
The influence of the positivist approach appears in Al-Khuli’s renewal perspective in reading the Islamic Arab heritage, in general, and the Quranic text, in particular. For example, he separated between the how-to-question and the question about the purpose. Then, the question raised is: “How to explain the text?” (and the suggested answer is that (we can explain the text) depending on the literary approach), instead of asking: “What is the purpose or objective of the text?” (denying its teleology). The positivist approach has the same influence, as it tries to understand how universe works without asking about the purpose of its existence, considering this question “out of the scientific scope”, as science does not believe in teleology. Accordingly, whatever the purpose is, the question is about what we can study to answer the How-to question.
Perhaps, this positivist attitude influenced Al-Khuli’s literary study in having the same approach and objective. The positivist attitude claims that it explains the materialistic universe from a scientific approach, in order to SERVE science, without affirming, for example, the Power of the Creator who has created this universe. Thus, Quran, in the light of the literary study, is studied depending on a literary perspective to SERVE the literary study and not to guide others to the Creator who revealed this Scripture to mankind. In fact, positivist attitude denies teleology, and the literary study also rejects the fact that the Quranic exegesis is teleological, and focuses on the tangible earthly literary objective7.
4. Thematic Exegesis
Al-Khuli did not believe in the possibility or the usefulness of explaining the Quran depending on its narration-based arrangement8. Thus, he adopted a thematic approach in explaining the Quran which depends on statistically collecting all Quranic Verses (Ayāt) tackling a specific topic, then arranging them in a chronological order, then finding the reasons of their revelations and reflecting on them to interpret them according to the previous deduction. In fact, that’s why it has been placed in the opposite position of the classical exegetical approaches of the Islamic heritage9.
This study shows that Al-khuli did not publish many of these studies which can be classified under the so-called “Thematic Exegesis”. He had no contributions in exegetical writings, except his exegetical lessons on the Egyptian Radio, through which he tackled many topics such as the Quranic guidance during Ramadan, (Islamic Rulings) in their properties, (Islamic Rulings) during peace times and (Islamic Rulings) for leaders and Messengers. The study also shows that those lessons were influenced by the classical spirit, may be because it is more suitable for a discourse delivered to the populace. However, this does not explain that Al-Khuli neglected most of the restrictions and conditions he set for the thematic exegesis. However, he was very close to the spirit of the classical exegesis which he totally rejected10!
Similar to Al-Khuli, the intellectual trend of the modernist allegorical interpretation rejected the classical Quranic exegesis with all its kinds. Yet, it did not imply that this “rejection of the classical contributions” is a call to interpret the Quran depending on the thematic approach only. In fact, this new intellectual trend spread under other slogans such as: re-reading, dismantling the religious thinking, getting rid of the authoritarian Quranic Exegesis, reviving the religious duality, returning to the essence of the text and not its literal meaning, breaking the chains of the unreasonable exegeses, sacredness and stiffness, achieving enlightenment, freeing the text, humanizing the text, revolting against the theological authority, tackling the abandoned issues as well as calling for moving from the narrow-ended exegesis into the broad-ended allegorical interpretation, refuting the religious and historical dogma and dismantling the medieval Islamic mentality11.
The common factor of all previous calls is that they reject the classical exegetical approaches under the claim that “those approaches are old”, from one side, and “totally neglect the reader”; claiming that he is a main party in deducing the meaning intended by the text, from the other side. The reader, here, means the human whom some adopters of this trend described as the actual writer (of the Quran). According to them, Allah Almighty revealed the meaning only and not the wording. Throughout the history, when the Divine Revelation was compiled into a written language, it becomes the speaker, while the language becomes the speaking subject12.
Furthermore, the concept of humanization emphasizes the call for dealing with the Quranic text like any produced texts; by neglecting its narration-based sacredness which, as claimed, hinders the scientific reading. Consequently, it is regarded only as a pure text, following Al-Khuli’s call for a free literary approach to the Qur’an without any other considerations.
In fact, many of the advocates of the school of the modernist allegorical interpretation sincerely adopted humanization as a way to achieve the two concepts of contemporaneity and relativity and a way to go beyond the boundaries of heritage and the absolute in one fell swoop. Accordingly, acceptance depends on the present moment and legitimacy requires no objection with the prevailing understandings. Humanization also has been related to the desire of the advocates of interpretation-based reading to deny the sacredness of the Quran and equalize it with the produced texts. For example, they use expressions which do not (necessarily) denote the sacredness side when referring to the Quran. For example, they use terms like Muṣḥaf (pronounced muṣ ḥaf and it means a codex), book, text and other names which aim to desacralize the Quran, the Divine Book, and degenerate its level to reach the level of produced texts depending on so many supportive arguments13.
Furthermore, humanization is related to desacralization (center substitution). Instead of depending on a non-refutable absolute center, it depends on the relative center (or let’s say the decentralization) by which human can freely deal with the text. Through this, there is no mediator between human and the text; neglecting the fact that the text is a Divine Revelation and a message delivered to the creatures for a reason. According to the advocates of the modernist interpretation, text itself addresses man, while man can approach the text depending on reason and intuition, as his compass, and language and signs, as his tools. In fact, he depends on something which its meanings encounter a development over time and gain connotations different than the original one!
The meaning of humanization is related to the meaning of duality which indicates possibility of reading the Quranic text in different ways, and accordingly the possibility of having more than one exegesis and interpretation. In fact, this is the technique of the literary study which depends on the sense changing from one person to another. This is to the extent that some (of the advocates of the movement of modernist interpretation) claim that Islam itself has several versions due to the possibility of having more than one way in reading the text14.
Some argue that duality and diversity constitutes an idea that aims to dismantle the centralization of the idea of the original text and the original meaning. Through this, the text is understood by the number of people who read it and not by depending on the one who revealed it. In addition, it neglects the fundamentals of the Arabic discourse on which the exegesis mainly depend. In fact, the allegorical interpretation paves the way for independent reasoning, while literary approach subjugates the text for its reader, as the text becomes his mirror at the first place, instead of reflecting first on the intended meaning of its Owner.
Normally, this exegetical perspective evokes many methodological problems, because the exegetical process should be controlled by a group of restrictions and standards and a set of conditions which merges between the thematic, cultural, historical and linguistic sense (i.e. this is what is strictly applied by the exegetical approaches in the Books of Tafsir (exegesis) and Usul Al-Fiqh (fundamentals of Islamic Jurisprudence)). However, the intellectual trend adopting allegorical interpretation neglects all these premises under the pretext of renewal and modernization. It also has developed modernist projects in reading and interpreting the Quranic text; considering them the only methodological alterative for all previous contributions in the Quranic exegesis15.
According to hermeneutics, “word” is formed by the accumulation of layers like the geological layers. In fact, many semantic significations, over time, is added to the nucleus of the original meaning. In fact, there is a quantitative and qualitative coherence between those layers and the age of the word16. Through this concept, the hermeneutical approach is like a geological study which aims to discover the layers of understanding accumulated to hide the intended meaning. In addition, it aims to determine the origin and chronological roots of each layer of understanding and discover how it developed to conceal the meaning. It also discovers its age and the nature of the era witnessing the coining of each semantic signification. Accordingly, it shows the semantic signification of words across time and the way by which the meaning is developed during each stage relating to authority and knowledge and the horizon of the recipient and his prejudices, beliefs, cultures, environment and the nature of diverse compulsions which direct the process of coining the semantic signification and formulate the type of understanding17.
However, the views praising the sacred text, which is described, according to the hermeneutical perspective, as a living organism encountering a development whenever it is read, claim that it is the best method to harmonize between the text and the spirit of the era, discover the Quranic objectives, and enlighten our minds with the Revelation sent to human in the light of our historical horizon18. Furthermore, these views implicitly denote a very critical meaning; assuming that the era or the trendy reading is the independent variable, while the meaning is the inferior variable. In another words, the meaning is affected by the change of the era and, consequently, the reading approach despite of the constancy of the linguistic sign of this meaning.
Here, the hermeneutical interpretation exceeds its limits when assuming that the geological accumulation is a general approach which can be applied to both the obvious and the ambiguous and the precise “Muḥkam” and figurative “Mutashabih“. Yet, who believes in the necessity of the interpretation of the obvious? Does not the allegorical interpretation, in this case, exceed the natural limits and deviate from the correct understanding? Is it really important to allegorically interpret the (obvious) meanings such as Tawḥīd (Oneness of Allah Almighty), īmān (faith) or Ṣalah (Islamic Ritual Prayer)19?.
Allegorical interpretation seems to be a way to escape the apparent semantic signification of the text, and get rid of the restrictions which, according to some claims, are imposed by opinion and reason. It seems also to be an excuse to get rid of language authority under the pretext that evolution depends on usage and application. In fact, this intends to deviate the text from its objectives and purposes. More dangerously, it turns it to be fragile; its meaning changes by time and that the truth has many ways or, as some argue, it (truth) does not exist because “There is no truths…but allegorical interpretations20“.
Historicism means to neglect the core of the text to reach its historical context. To put it mildly, it is an attempt to connect between the text and its cultural, political and social context in order to discover the objective components which controlled its production and determined the links between the text and the values, from one side, and other foundations and cultural practices, from the other side21. This means that the text is not an isolated cultural or symbolic structure but it is a text which is connected with the contextual backgrounds. Consequently, the text or the discourse should be allegorically interpreted to reflect this background and know its impact on the text.22
When applying this definition to the Sacred Books, it implicitly assumes that when the text survives, it becomes part of the history and is affected by the relativity of human history. That’s why, it no longer has one meaning, but different meanings due to various truths which one can reach when reading the same text. Some claim that the texts are ordained for this; to be produced in history so that each meaning is connected to a certain historical period23.
In this regard, many contributions, belonging to the school of modernist allegorical interpretation, emphasized that the sacred text addresses a certain audience and uses, for this purpose, a certain language. Thus, it is a part of a social, historical and linguistic environment; following its traditions, beliefs and practices. Hence, knowing the reasons of revelation (Asbab An-Nuzul), according to this thought, is a top-priority in producing (a modernist) Quranic exegesis. In fact, it determines the situational context which witnessed the Quranic revelation and through which the Quran was understood. Therefore, the ignorance of the reasons of revelation blocks the way towards understanding many of the Quranic Verses24!
However, the term historicism does not refer only to the historical purpose of the Quranic text, but it states that Quran achieved a harmony with the environment witnessing its revelation; by respecting its perceptions and preventing any disputes. For Example, the Quran talks about Ibrahim and Ismael (according to the author of a book entitled الشعر الجاهلي” ” (Ash-Shi’r Al-Jahely) -English: Pre-Islamic poetry) not because they really exist but because they were in the hearts of the pre-Islamic Arabs. Perhaps, the Quranic phraseology intended not to reform but to refine Arab’s insights. Similarly, when declaring the ruling of fair retribution for the murdered, stoning for the adulterer and other rulings, Quran followed the Bedouin lifestyle, witnessing its revelation, and took into account the traditions and customs of the Arab tribal society25!
According to the previous analysis, the contemporary Quranic exegesis should take into account the modern social customs which, for example, do not accept the ruling of fair retribution or physical punishments, and do not regard all kinds of usury (Ribā) impermissible, and which also promote gender equality…etc. The Quran, at the time of its revelation, achieved a harmony with the Arab’s cultures, traditions and customs. So, how to claim that it cannot achieve a harmony with its reader anytime? Therefore, Quran should be reflectively read and interpreted within its context depending on an approach which achieves a harmony with the recent generations too. In order to achieve this, it is necessary to deal with it by following human standards and not Divine ones. According to their claim, the Originator formulated His text by taking into account this feature, so He Almighty sent His Revelation in Arabic language which is flexible and changeable. That’s why it is possible to reach different understandings suitable for every situation and take into account the context, human lifestyle and social customs.
In addition, if the Quran is fully and perfectly revealed and is the seal (of all Divine Messages), Historicism, as an approach, can be the way out, as it does not require a change in the Quranic letters and words to fit the new situations, customs and lifestyle. Yet, it is enough to change the reflective reading and the way of understanding. It is all about how to reflectively read the text and how to normalize it, and this is the aim of modernization and renewal.
These are the major features of Al-Khuli’s renewal project and other modernist reflective reading projects developed under the tutelage of Al–Khuli. Although it, generally, presents new scopes that can be tackled by the science of exegesis; it hinders the Quranic teleology; at the same time, and changes its nature; by paving the way for its humanization and reflective reading in the light of a relative historical perspective by considering it a literal text.
The literal study and the next modernist reflective readings necessitate the neutralization of the element of sacredness in order to achieve an objective scientific study. However, neutralizing the sacredness builds a cognitive barrier between the researcher and the nature of the text. In addition, neutralizing the sacredness (absolutely or assumingly) was not set directly for the sake of achieving an “objective study”. In fact, sacredness was substituted by another hypothesis; the literary text, which is firmly adopted by its advocates. Through this, they add to the Quranic text some restrictions and characteristics related to a conceptual and methodological system apart from the essence of the text, as they depend on cognitive scopes with different nature, contents and sources.
As previously mentioned, the modernist reflective reading can be literary, historical, humanitarian or psychological, while its approach can be evolutionary, hermeneutic or lingual. Yet, its ultimate goal is always to re-produce the meanings of the text by depending on a defiant perspective or an allegorical interpretation which is apart from the intended meanings. This can be achieved by a revolutionary concept which refutes the classical contributions, revolts against them and refuses their authority, tools, approaches and understanding. It even denies, from the first place, the presence of an agreed-upon referential “meaning” and also supports the idea stating that the text has several meanings which differ from one reader to another and from one context to another, under the pretext that this understanding is the only ultimate way to achieve renewal!
Translated by: Rehab Jamal Bakri***
Revised by: Prof. Neamat Mashhour****
* a study paraphrasing the conclusion of a book entitled ” “أمين الخولي من أدبية التفسير إلى إشكالات التأويل cited:
مدحت ماهر، شريف عبد الرحمن (2019). أمين الخولي من أدبية التفسير إلى إشكالات التأويل. القاهرة: دار الكتاب المصري. 206 ص.
** Instructor at the Faculty of Economics and Political Science- Cairo University.
+A note by the Translator: Allegorical Interpretation refers to Ta’weel which differs than Tafsir referred to, here, as exegesis.
1 حيدر حب الله، الوحي والظاهرة القرآنية (بيروت: مركز البحوث المعاصرة، 2012) ص 20.
2 Ibid, pp.13-14.
3 Ibid, p 14.
4 Check the link: (shorturl.at/fvST9) for:
عبد الجبار الرفاعي، الشيخ أمين الخولي رائدا للدرس الهرمينوطيقي بالعربية.
5 Check the link: (shorturl.at/eoIP0) for:
محمد علواش، مناهج تحليل الخطاب القرآني في الفكر العربي المعاصر، دراسة نقدية (دمشق: صفحات للدراسات والنشر، 2017).
6 جوزيف مسعد، اشتهاء العرب، (القاهرة: دار الشروق، 2013)، ص ص 82، 83.
7 أمين الخولي، التفسير: معالم حياته – منهجه اليوم (القاهرة: الهيئة المصرية العامة للكتاب، 2003)، ص ص35، 36.
8 Although this school of thought claimed that it is a pioneer in this field, we can find some authenticated evidences proving the usage of this objective approach in the early writings, especially the writings in the field of Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence) and some contemporary writings for those who do not belong to Al-Khuli’s school of thought, such as “La Morale du coran” (Ethics of Quran), a doctoral dissertation by Muhammad Abdullah Draz (1894-1958) and many others.
9 Some argue that there is a relationship between Amin Al-Khuli, and the school of Umanaa’ in general, and the tendency of the Thematic criticism which thoroughly study the literary text to reach its intended meaning, by focusing on the themes which seem to be scattered inside it; considering them indicators of the interests collected by one origin.
For more information, read:
سامر رشواني، منهج التفسير الموضوعي للقرآن الكريم: دراسة نقدية (حلب: دار الملتقى، 2009)
غسان بديع السيد، النقد الموضوعاتي: علامات في النقد، مجلد 6، جزء 24، (يونيو 1997)، ص 249.
10 for an opposite point of view, read:
سامر رشواني، منهج التفسير الموضوعي للقرآن الكريم: دراسة نقدية، ص 115.
11 check the link (shorturl.at/bcFOT) for:
وليد قصاب، من اختراقات الحداثة للنص القرآني.
Read also, for example:
محمد أركون، معارك من أجل الأنسنة في السياقات الإسلامية، ترجمة: هاشم صالح (بيروت: دار الساقي، 2001).
12وليد قصاب، من اختراقات الحداثة للنص القرآني.
13 check the link (shorturl.at/AFPQ9) for:
أحميدة النيفر، الإنسان والقرآن وجها لوجه، (بيروت: دار الفكر للطباعة والنشر، 2000)، وليد قصاب، من اختراقات الحداثة للنص القرآني..
محمد أركون، الفكر الأصولي واستحالة التأصيل، ترجمة هاشم صالح، ص .199.
14كيحل مصطفى، الأنسنة والتأويل في فكر محمد أركون (الرباط: دار الأمان، 2011).
15 check the link (shorturl.at/ghpzT) for:
محمد علواش، مناهج تحليل الخطاب القرآني في الفكر العربي المعاصر، دراسة نقدية
16 check the link (shorturl.at/noOX5) for:
عبد الجبار الرفاعي، الشيخ أمين الخولي، رائدا للدرس الهرمنيوطيقي بالعربية.
مصطفى ناصف، مسئولية التأويل (القاهرة: دار السلام للطباعة والنشر، 2004).
18 عبد الجبار الرفاعي، الشيخ أمين الخولي، رائدا للدرس الهرمينوطيقي بالعربية
19 عبد الولي بن عبد الواحد الشلفي، القراءات المعاصرة والفقه الإسلامي: مقدمات في الخطاب والمنهج (بيروت: مركز نماء للبحوث والدراسات، 2013).
20 عادل مصطفى، فهم الفهم: مدخل إلى الهيرمينوطيقا – نظرية التأويل من أفلاطون إلى جادامر (وندسور: هنداوي، 2017)، ص9.
21 check the link (shorturl.at/hoER2) for:
جميل حمداوي، التاريخانية الجديدة.
23 عادل مصطفي ، فهم الفهم: مدخل إلى الهيرمينوطيقا، ص 13.
24 روي جاكسون، نيتشه والإسلام، ترجمة حمود حمود، (بيروت: جداول، 2015)، ص 121
English Source: Roy Jackson, Nietzsche and Islam.
In fact, this book adds another requirement in order to achieve the appropriate historical understanding which is to know the abrogating and the abrogated (Islamic rulings).
25 عبد الولي بن عبد الواحد الشلفي، القراءات المعاصرة والفقه الإسلامي: مقدمات في الخطاب والمنهج، ص ص 105 – 109.
*** Egyptian Researcher and Translator.
**** Professor of Islamic Economics and Islamic Finance. Faculty of Commerce, Al-Azhar University.