ﻧﻘﺪ دﯾﺪﮔﺎه اﺑﻮاﻟﮑﻼم آزاد در ﻣﻌﺮﻓﯽ ﮐﻮرش ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ذواﻟﻘﺮﻧﯿﻦ

The Criticism on Abolkalam's view in Presenting Sameness between Cyrus and Dhu al-Qarnayn

ﻗﺮآن ﮐﺮﯾﻢ در آﯾﺎت 83 ﺗﺎ 98 ﺳﻮره ﮐﻬﻒ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺨﺼﯿﺖ ذواﻟﻘﺮﻧﯿﻦ اﺷﺎره ﮐﺮدهاﺳﺖ. ﯾﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﻣﺼﺪاق واﻗﻌﯽ ذواﻟﻘﺮﻧﯿﻦ ﻫﻤﻮاره دﻏﺪﻏﻪ ﻣﻔﺴﺮﯾﻦ و ﻗﺮآن ﭘﮋوﻫﺎن ﺑﻮدهاﺳﺖ. اﺑﻮاﻟﮑﻼم آزاد ﺑﺎ ﺗﺘﺒﻊ در ﺗﻮرات و ﺑﺮرﺳﯽ ﺗﺎرﯾﺦ اﯾﺮان ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن ﺑﻪ اﯾﻦ ﻧﺘﯿﺠﻪ رﺳﯿﺪه ﮐﻪ ﮐﻮرش ﮐﺒﯿﺮ ﭘﺎدﺷﺎه اﯾﺮان ﻫﻤﺎن ذواﻟﻘﺮﻧﯿﻦ ﻗﺮآن اﺳﺖ. ﻓﺮازﻫﺎﯾﯽ از ﮐﺘﺎب ﻣﻘﺪس، دﯾﻬﯿﻢ ﺷﺎخ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﺪﯾﺲ دﺷﺖ ﻣﺮﻏﺎب، ﺟﻨﮓﻫﺎي ﮐﻮرش ﮐﺒﯿﺮ در ﻧﺎﺣﯿﻪ ﺷﻤﺎل، ﺟﻨﻮب و ﺷﺮق اﯾﺮان ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه رﻓﺘﺎرﻫﺎي ﺑﻌﻀﺎً ﻣﻼﯾﻤﺖآﻣﯿﺰ او ﺑﺎ دﺷﻤﻨﺎن ﻣﻐﻠﻮب ﺑﻪ وﯾﮋه ﺧﺪﻣﺎﺗﺶ ﺑﻪ ﯾﻬﻮدﯾﺎن ﺑﺎﺑﻞ را از ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﺷﻮاﻫﺪ ﻫﻤﺴﺎناﻧﮕﺎري ﮐﻮرش ﺑﺎ ذواﻟﻘﺮﻧﯿﻦ ﻣﯽداﻧﺪ. وي ﺑﺎ اﺷﺎره ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎرتﻫﺎﯾﯽ از ﺗﻮرات و زرﺗﺸﺘﯽ ﺑﻮدن ﻫﺨﺎﻣﻨﺸﯿﺎن ﺑﺮ ﻣﻮﺣﺪ ﺑﻮدن ﮐﻮرش ﺻﺤﻪ ﻣﯽﮔﺰارد. ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﺧﯽ ﺷﻮاﻫﺪ اراﺋﻪ ﮔﺮدﯾﺪه ﻋﻠﯽ-اﻟﻈﺎﻫﺮ ﺑﺮ وﯾﮋﮔﯽﻫﺎي ذواﻟﻘﺮﻧﯿﻦ در ﻗﺮآن ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻄﺒﯿﻖ اﺳﺖ وﻟﯽ ﻣﻮاردي ﻫﻤﭽﻮن ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﻣﻮﺣﺪ ﺑﻮدن ﮐﻮرش ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪاي ﯾﮑﺘﺎ و اﯾﻤﺎن وي ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﺎد، ﻋﺪم رﻓﺘﺎر ﻋﺪاﻟﺖآﻣﯿﺰ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺠﺮﻣﺎن و ﺛﺒﺖ ﻧﺸﺪن ﺑﻨﺎي ﺳﺪ آﻫﻨﯽ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎم ﮐﻮرش در ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﺗﺎرﯾﺨﯽ از ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﯾﻦ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻠﯽ اﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ آﺷﮑﺎرا ﺑﺮ ﻧﻈﺮﯾﮥ ﻫﻤﺴﺎناﻧﮕﺎري ﮐﻮرش ﮐﺒﯿﺮ ﺑﺎ ذواﻟﻘﺮﻧﯿﻦ ﻗﺮآن ﺧﺪﺷﻪ وارد ﻣﯽﮐﻨﺪ. اﯾﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺿﻤﻦ ﺑﺮرﺳﯽ دﯾﺪﮔﺎه اﺑﻮاﻟﮑﻼم و ﻧﻘﺪ آن ﺑﺮ ﻧﺎرﺳﺎﯾﯽ ﺷﻮاﻫﺪ اراﺋﻪ ﺷﺪه و وﺟﻮد ﺗﻔﺎوت آﺷﮑﺎر ﺑﯿﻦ ذواﻟﻘﺮﻧﯿﻦ و ﮐﻮرش ﺗﺄﮐﯿﺪ ﻣﯽﮐﻨﺪ.

In the holy Qur'an, in Kahf Surah, there has been a reference to Dhu al-Qarnayn. Qur'anic scholars and commentators have been concerned with finding the true meaning of Dhul Qarnain. Abul Kalam Azad tracked the Torah and investigated the history of ancient Iran, and concluded that the great Cyrus was Dhu al-Qarnayn. Cyrus's great wars in the north, south, and west of Iran, the hornlike crown of Morghab plain along with his occasionally mild behavior with his defeated enemies, and especially his services to the Jews of Babylon truly match Cyrus with Dhu al-Qarnayn. Referring to the words of the Torah and Achaemenids being Zoroastrian, he confirms the monolithic religion of Dhu al-Qarnayn. Although some evidence presented here is compatible with his characteristics in Holy Qur'an, his faith in God and the Resurrection, lack of fair treatment of offenders, not registering the Iron Dam foundation in his name in historical resources are issues that doubt his sameness with Cyrus. The present paper highlights the clear difference between Cyrus and Dhu al-Qarnayn through investigating Abul Kalam's views and its criticism on the insufficiency of the presented evidence.