Semantic Components of "Zawjiyyah (Pairing)" in the Quranic Thought of Ayatollah Khamenei with a Semitic Etymological Approach

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Corresponding Author, Department of Islamic Knowledge, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.

2 Department of Islamic Knowledge, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.

Abstract

Objective: "Zawjiyyah (pairing)" is one of the key concepts of the Holy Quran, which Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei introduced as the first principle in the charter of women in Islam and in explaining it, he contrasted the Quranic concept of Zawjiyyah with the Hegelian and Marxist dialectics. The aim of this research is to identify the semantic components of Zawjiyyah in the Quranic thought of the martyred Imam of the Revolution by using a Semitic etymology approach and explaining its differences with the Hegelian and Marxist dialectics.
Method: The present study was conducted using a descriptive-analytical method. In the first step, the semantic components of Zawjiyyah were extracted from the statements of Ayatollah Khamenei. Then, these components were analyzed by applying a Semitic etymology approach and examining the uses of the root "Z-W-J" in the Semitic sub-branches and compared with the findings of the first part. Finally, the Quranic concept of Zawjiyyah (pairing) was compared with Hegelian and Marxist dialectics.
Results: The research findings showed that the concept of Zawjiyyah in the Quranic thought of the martyred Imam of the Revolution is composed of five semantic components: "being a pair", "being connected", "being of the same rank", "being different" and "being complementary". The findings of the Semitic etymology also confirmed these components and showed that Zawjiyyah expresses the connection of two elements of the same rank that, despite their differences, complement each other. It also became clear that the Quranic concept of Zawjiyyah (pairing), unlike Hegelian and Marxist dialectics, is not based on hostile contradiction and conflict.
Conclusions: The results of the research indicate that Ayatollah Khamenei's Quranic explanation of the concept of Zawjiyyah is consistent with the findings of the Semitic etymology. Accordingly, the Holy Quran introduces the evolutionary process of the universe not as the result of a conflict between opposites, but rather as the result of the connection, companionship, and mutual evolution of two equal but different elements.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Bomhard, A. R. (2014). Afrasian Comparative Phonology and Vocabulary. Charleston, SC: Signum Desktop Publishing.
Brun, S. (1895). Dictionarium Syriaco-Latinum. Beirut: Typographia PP. Soc. Jesu.
Bussmann, H. (2006). Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. London & New York: Routledge.
Campbell, L., & Mixco, M. (2007). A Glossary of Historical Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Costaz, L. (2002). Syriac-English Dictionary. Beirut: Dar El-Machreq.
Dalman, G. (1901). Aramäisch-Neuhebräisches Wörterbuch zu Targum, Talmud und Midrasch. Frankfurt: Kauffmann.
Dillmann, A. (1865). Lexicon Linguae Aethiopicae. Lipsiae: T. O. Weigel.
Drower, E. S., & Macuch, R. (1963). A Mandaic Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Fraenkel, S. (1962). Die Aramäischen Fremdwörter im Arabischen. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung.
Gray, L. (1971). Introduction to Semitic Comparative Linguistics. Amsterdam: Philo Press.
Hartz, P. R. (2009). Daoism. New York: Chelsea House.
Hoftijzer, J., & Jongeling, K. (1995). Dictionary of the North-West Semitic Inscriptions. Leiden: Brill.
Hoobler, D., & Hoobler, T. (2009). Confucianism. New York: Chelsea House.
Huehnergard, J., & Rubin, A. D. (2011). Phyla and Waves: Models of Classification of the Semitic Languages. Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Ed: Stefan Weninger. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Jastrow, M. (1903). A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi and the Midrashic Literature. London / New York: Luzac / Putnam.
Jeffery, A. (1938). The Foreign Vocabulary of the Qur'an. Baroda: Oriental Institute.
Jennings, W. (1926). Lexicon to the Syriac New Testament (Peshiṭta). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Klein, E. (1987). A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language. Jerusalem: The University of Haifa.
Leslau, W. (1991). Comparative Dictionary of Ge'ez. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
Levy, J. (1883). Neuhebräisches und Chaldäisches Wörterbuch über die Talmudim und Midraschim. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus.
Liddell, H. G., & Scott, R. (1996). A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Lipinski, E. (1997). Semitic Languages: Outline of a Comparative Grammar. Leuven: Peeters.
Moscati, S. (1980). An Introduction to the Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
O'Leary, De L. (1923). Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages. London: Kegan Paul.
Orel, V., & Stolbova, O. (1995). Hamito-Semitic Etymological Dictionary. Leiden: Brill.
Payne Smith, R. (1903). A Compendious Syriac Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sokoloff, M. (1992). A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic of the Byzantine Period. Ramat-Gan: Bar Ilan University Press.
Webster, N. (1916). Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster.
Wharton, E. R. (1890). Etyma Graeca: An Etymological Lexicon of Classical Greek. London: Percival & Co.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics