Mollā Gūrān？？’s Commentary Criticism of Qā？？？ and Zamakhshar？？ on Their Interpretations of Fāti？a and Baqara Sūras

This work deals with Mollā Gūrān？？’s critique (d. 813/1488) of Qā？？？ al-Bay？aw？？ (d. 596/1200) and Zamakhshar？？ (d. 538/1144). The Fāti？？a and Baqara sūras in his manuscript tafs？？r “Ghāyat al-Amān？？” are chosen as the texts to examplify Mollā Gūrān？？’s critique. His criticism is mostly related to language, qirā？a (recitation and vocalization of Qur’ānic text), conceptual meaning and disagreement in interpretations of the Qur’ānic verses in question. Gūrān？？ primarly criticisez Qā？？？ due to his reputation among Ottoman scholars. Guran？？ has not only criticized Kād？？ and Zamahshar？？ in the commentary of the surahs Fāti？？a and Baqara but also Taftāzān？？ and Kavāsh？？. This clearly shows thah he is a well-versed scholar in researching especially in comperative analysis. In this study, our investigation is limited to, however, Zemakhshar？？ and Qā？？？. This stuyd shows that Zemakhshar？？ is strictly bound to Ahl al-Sunnah. Moreover, the hadith reports are considerably important for him in understanding and interpreting the Qur’ānic verses. He closely follows the interpretive traditions of early Muslim scholars, especially on the matters that Muslim scholars had an argeemnet. Summary: This study discusses the criticism of Mollā Gūrān？？ (d. 813/1488), one of the Ottoman commentary scholars, against Qā？？？ al-Bay？āw？？ (d. 685/1286) and Zamakhshar？？ (d. 538/1144). The two Qur’ānic Surahs Fāti？？a and Baqara are chosen from his critiques in a manuscript of his commentary called Ghāyat al-Amān？？. Mollā Gūrān？？’s manuscript is registered in Sulaymāniye Library, Dāmād Ibrāh？？m Pasha Section at number 146 and consists of 352 pages in total. This copy is one of the oldest among other its existent copies. The main reason of our preference of this copy is that it is both legible and at the end of the book (the farāgh part), it writes that it was proofread by his author himself and that handwriting notes at the margins of the pages belonged to the author. We have examined this copy by comparing another copy which is again in the Sulaymāniye Library, Haji Ma？mūd Efend？？ section at number 162, consisting of 484 pages in total, comparatively. We have examined critiques of 41 verses in total from Fāti？？a and Baqara surahs. Gūrānī’s critiques of Zamakhshar？？ and Qā？？？ are too wide to be discussed within the limits of an article. Therefore, we have tried to briefly introduce these critiques. While presenting the commentators views, we tried to make their inexplicit expressions clear and furthermore elaborate their purposes by making use of some other resources. We have to say that