عنوان مقاله [English]
The interpretive legacy of Muslims is a plural, diverse and fluid area. The methodological, objective, and academic explanation and interpretation of this multifaceted and diverse field is the subject of interpretative research. One of the aspects and aspects of the interpretation of the study is the proper explanation of the "phenomenon of interpretation". Muslim commentators and commentators have had varied and varied interpretations of the phenomenon of "commentary" throughout history, but what appears to be a flaw in interpretations of commentary on "interpretation". The study of most of these perceptions of 'interpretation' shows that they have turned to lexical analysis of 'interpretation' rather than explaining the phenomenon of interpretation, and attempt to differentiate between 'interpretation' and 'non-interpretation'. It does not answer today's questions and needs, and these definitions have not been successful in explaining the reality of 'interpretation'.
The main issue of this study is to what extent have the definitions of the commentators and the commentators been successful in explaining the reality of the “interpretation”? How have scholars interpreted, understood, and interpreted the interpretation of "interpretation", and what is their understanding of the "phenomenon of interpretation"? What mechanisms and rules do you employ in this way? How clear and efficient is the terminology and set of concepts provided as epistemic tools for analyzing and interpreting interpretations?