The Problem of Scientific Commentary To Be Tafsir

Abstract

This study is answering the following question. Can the Qur'anic interpretation known as "scientific commentary" take place in the science of tafsir? This approach, which interprets verses in the light of scientific statements, is problematic in the following areas with the tafsir: Definition of tafsir, tafsir's method, Quran language, Qur'anic style, purpose of Qur'an, subject of Qur'an... Tafsir is the activity of uncovering the meanings of God's word. In that sense, it remains true to the meanings of the verses. Scientific tafsir goes out of the real meaning by making distant interpretations. Thus, tafsir scholarship allows the object to be objective in the interpretation of verses. It is a mistake to compare scientific tafsir activity by comparing it with fiqh interpretations. Scientific commentators make this analogy. Scientific commentary does not resemble other Islamic sciences such as fiqh. Because the Qur'an is not a source for the humanities while it is a source for fiqh. For example, the subject of fiqh is not the Qur'an itself first, they are non- Qur'anic. But it goes to the Qur'an to solve his own problems and advocates opinions accordingly. The source of scientific knowledge is not the Qur'an. It has his own methods and resources to access knowledge. Scientific knowledge does not accept the Qur'an as a source of information. For this reason, it can not be compared to the Qur'an commentary on the interpretation of the Qur'an. Scientific commentary tries to interpret the Qur'an by taking the information obtained through scientific studies. Thus, scientific knowledge is made the source of the Qur'an. The methods of tafsir identification are specific. Tafsir scholarship is based on the following; the Qur'anic language, the conditions of the descending period and the circumcision... From this point of view, it is difficult to say that he is doing a commentary activity. Scientific commentators claim that the Qur'an gave notice scientific discoveries. They make this the basis of the Qur'anic miracles. However, from the Qur'an's point of view to the day-no scientific discoveries, including inventions of Muslim scientists, are not based on Qur'an verses. It leaves Muslim scientists under insufficient suspicion by doing this. The subject of the Qur'an is not scientific knowledge. The Qur'an does not contain any information for the technological development of people or for the advancement of scientific knowledge. Because its subject is how people should live. Its subject is his responsibility to God, the responsibility of man to the community, and the responsibility of man to the surroundings. Its purpose is not to develop people technologically. His purpose is to offer a beautiful and peaceful life to human beings. For this reason, no prophet has ever pioneered scientific discoveries. Scientific tafsir is in an effort to incorporate these issues into the interpretations of the mannered that the Qur'an does not deal with. Therefore, both subjective and irrelevant interpretations emerge. The verses, which are the subject of scientific tafsir, in fact mandate to humans to be good servants. It wants believers to be useful to people by doing scientific work. One of the reasons why scientific commentary can not be tafsir is that it is an interpretation contrary to the nature of language. Because this understanding of commentary puts on the meaning of the words used by the Qur'an which came down centuries ago. However, a correspondent speaks while observing the situation of the interlocutors and he uses the language words, concepts of the time he lived. Otherwise he can not agree with his interlocutors. The objective interpretation of the Qur'an is the interpretation made by observing the language of the time of descent. It has no interest in the universe or history. The linguistic nature requires this at the level of words. A word used by my correspondent must be understood in the sense of the time it is used. A word used in a time frame can not express a meaning to be imposed on it in the future. For example, the word "seyyare" in the Qur'an means caravan but nowadays it means car. Accordingly, we can not say that the Qur'an has talked about cars long ago. As such, for example, scientific commentators give the meaning of "alak" in the Qur'an to the embryo. They claim that the Qur'an spoke of the "embryo" centuries ago which was a biology phrase. They load the meanings in the Qur'an with meanings that have emerged today. This article suggests that "scientific commentary" can not be included in the study of commentary, because it does not correspond to the science of tafsir in these matters.