“tafsīr的来源”一词并不是指注释者依据其所持的观念来解释《古兰经》时所凭借的学科，例如独一论（tawheed）、教法学（fiqh）、修辞学（balaagha）、历史等。这些都不是tafsīr的来源。相反，它们是对注释者产生影响的因素，使他在tafsīr中倾向于某种特定的观点。所谓“tafsīr的来源”，指的是注释者所引用的权威依据。无论其在tafsīr上的取向如何，他们引述了什么，就在其注释中记录什么。如果我们考察tafsīr的来源，会发现它们仅限于三种。

The word “sources of Tafsīr” does not mean the disciplines the mufassirun used to rely on when explaining the Qur’ān according to the idea they carried such as tawheed, jurisprudence (fiqh), rhetorics (balaagha), history etc. These are not the sources of tafsīr. Rather, they are matters which had an effect on the mufassir which led him to lean towards a specific matter in tafsīr. What is intended by 'sources of tafsīr' are the authoritative sources that the mufassirun qouted. What they quoted they wrote down in their tafsīrs, irrespective of their orientation in tafsīr. If we study the sources of tafsīr we find that they are confined to three:

首先：从安拉的使者ﷺ传述的tafsīr（经注），例如安拉的使者ﷺ所说的那段圣训：

First: Tafsīr which has been transmitted from the Messenger of Allah  such as the narration that the Messenger  said:

例如，阿里所传述的，他说：

For instance what has been narrated by 'Ali that he said:

以及有关所传述的内容；

And what has been reported ;

然而，这一类的tafsīr（经注）不能作为传述依据，除非是《圣训六大部》（如《布哈里圣训实录》和《穆斯林圣训实录》等圣训集）中所记载的内容，因为故事讲述者和捏造者在这类材料中大量增添内容。因此，这类资料必须加以考证，因为针对安拉的使者ﷺ的谎言数量极多。早期学者（Salaf）对这一类tafsīr的审查极为严格，以至于他们中的许多人完全拒绝这一整类著作，认为从安拉的使者ﷺ那里并没有传下任何tafsīr。据传艾哈迈德·本·罕百勒曾说：

However this genre of tafsīr cannot be relied upon as a source of transmission save what has been reported in the books of Sihah (books of hadīth such as Bukhari and Muslim) because the storytellers and fabricators greatly added to the material. That is why this type of source material has to be investigated due to the great number of lies against the Messenger of Allah . The scrutiny of the Salaf (early generations of scholars) of this genre of tafsīr reached the point where many of them rejected the whole genre altogether...They held that no tafsīr had been transmitted from the Messenger of Allah . It has been reported about Ahmad bin Hanbal that he said:

因此我们发现，mufassirun（注释者）由于对所传述之物缺乏信任，并没有止步于已传述的范围，而是在此之上加入他们通过自身ijtihād（独立思考）所得的见解。他们没有停留在文本的界限之内。关于Sahabah（圣门弟子）在tafsīr方面的记载，被加入到关于Messenger of Allah ﷺ的圣训之中。它始于传述而来的tafsīr，tabi'un（再传弟子）的tafsīr亦是如此。这类传述性的tafsīr变得非常庞大，并开始包含关于Messenger of Allah ﷺ、Sahabah与Tabi'un的传述。每一项传述各自足以作为一种tafsīr。早期所撰写的绝大多数tafsīr典籍，都局限于这一方式的tafsīr。

That is why we find the mufassirun due to their lack of trust for what is mentioned did not stop at the limit of what has been reported. Rather, they followed that with what they reached through their own Ijtihād. They did not stop at the limit of the text. What has been mentioned about the Sahabah in terms of tafsīr was added to the ahadīth about the Messenger of Allah . It began with the transmitted tafsīr and likewise with the tafsīr of the tabi'un. This genre of transmitted tafsīr became huge and it began to include what has been transmitted about the Messenger of Allah , the Sahabah and Tabi'un. Each one came to suffice as a tafsīr. Nearly all the books of tafsīr written in the early ages were restricted to this manner of tafsīr.

其次：tafsīr的来源之一是个人见解（ra'y），也就是tafsīr中所谓的Ijtihād（独立推理）。这是因为注释者了解阿拉伯人的言语及其口语中的习惯用法。他通过熟悉jahili诗歌、散文等中的同类内容，了解阿拉伯语的表达及其含义。他还会熟悉经文降示原因的正确记载。借助这些工具，他依据自己通过Ijtihād所得出的结论来解释《古兰经》经文。以见解进行的tafsīr，并不是说随心所欲地谈论经文，或按照自己的私欲来解释。相反，tafsīr所依据的见解，取决于jahili时代的文学，包括诗歌、散文，以及阿拉伯人的习俗和言语。同时，它也依赖于先知ﷺ在世时所发生的事件，以及先知ﷺ所遭遇的敌对、冲突、迁徙（hijra）、战争和磨难，还有那一时期发生的、需要降示律例（hukm）并促使《古兰经》降示的种种事情。因此，所谓以见解进行tafsīr，就是借助注释者在语言和事件方面所掌握的信息，理解经文所指示的含义，从而领会其句子。至于关于圣门弟子阿里·伊本·艾比·still塔利卜（愿真主喜悦他）所传述的那段话：

Second: One of the sources of tafsīr is the opinion (ra'y) or what is termed as Ijtihād in tafsīr. This is because the mufassir knows the speech of the Arabs and their mannerisms in the spoken language. He knows the Arabic expressions and their meanings by being acquainted with the same thing in jahili poetry, prose etc. And he familiarises himself with what he finds to be correct from the cause of revelation of a verse. Using these tools he explains the Qur’ānic verses in accordance with what he has reached through his Ijtihād. Tafsīr by opinion does not mean saying whatever one likes about the verse or whatever our own desires demand. Rather, the opinion according to which the tafsīr takes place depends on the jahili literature in terms of poetry, prose, the customs and speech of the Arabs. At the same time it relies on the events that took place in the days of the Messenger  and whatever the Prophet  faced in terms of hostility, conflicts, migration (hijra), wars and afflictions. And whatever happened during that period which required hukms and demanded the revelation of the Qur’ān. Therefore, what is meant by performing tafsīr by opinion is to understand the sentences by understanding its meanings which are indicated by the information the mufassir has at his disposal in terms of the language and events. As for what has been narrated about sayyidina 'Ali ibn Abi Talib that he said:

这并不意味着《古兰经》对你想要从任何角度进行的解释都是开放的。恰恰相反，其含义是：在注释学（tafsīr）中，任何一个词语或句子都可以容纳多种观点，但这些观点仅限于该词语或句子所能承载的含义范围，而不会超出这一界限。因此，“以见解注释”（tafsīr bi-ar-ra'y）指的是在词语所能承载的含义范围之内去理解一个句子。正因如此，学者们将其称为“以创制（Ijtihād）进行的注释”。

This does not mean that the Qur’ān is open to any viewpoint you wish to explain it from. Rather, what is meant is that any one expression or sentence is open to a number of viewpoints in tafsīr but the viewpoints are restricted to the meanings the expression or sentence is open to, which does not overstep that limit. Consequently, tafsīr by opinion means the understanding of a sentence within the limits of the meanings its expressions are open to. That is why they called it tafsīr by Ijtihād.

绝大多数来自圣门弟子的经注学家,在注释《古兰经》时,往往首先依靠个人见解。他们在解释同一个词时也常常意见不一,这表明他们依赖的是各自的理解,正如关于伊本·阿拔斯、伊本·麦斯欧德、穆扎希德等人的大量记载所显示的那样。例如,他们对如下经文中的"Tur"(土尔,山)一词所作的解释:

The great majority of the mufassirun from the Sahabah used to explain the Qur’ān by opinion and rely on it in the first degree while performing tafsīr. They used to disagree in tafsīr even in the explanation of a single word which indicates that they used to rely on their own particular understanding like much of what has been reported about Ibn 'Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, Mujahid and others. For example they used to explain the word Tur in His  saying:

不同的解释。穆贾希德将“Tur”解释为一座山的名称，伊本·阿拔斯将其解释为那座山本身，还有人说“Tur”指从山中涌出的东西，而凡不涌出的，就不是“Tur”。这种tafsīr上的分歧，源于见解的不同，而非传闻内容的差异。尽管这一表述属于语言层面，但当分歧涉及句子的含义而非某个词语的含义时又当如何呢？正因如此，他们除了在词语含义上存在分歧，在经文的含义上也有分歧。通过研究圣门弟子的tafsīr，尤其是那些著名的注释家，可以明显看出，他们总体上都依靠（个人）见解来进行tafsīr。至于有些人的传述说，他们曾避免凭见解进行tafsīr，只局限于依据传述（manqul）进行tafsīr，这应当理解为：指的是那些未具备tafsīr工具的人的见解，例如不掌握阿拉伯语的表达方式、他想要阐明的内容，以及经文降示相关事件的知识。这并不意味着人们应当停止理解《古兰经》，因为《古兰经》降示是为了让人们理解，而不是让人们把自己局限于已有传述的tafsīr范围之内。因此，我们不能说圣门弟子分成两派：一派对《古兰经》凭见解不置一词，另一派则依自己的见解谈论《古兰经》。事实上，他们所有人都凭自己的见解谈论《古兰经》。他们只是警惕那些在没有确切知识的情况下，就凭自己的见解对《古兰经》妄加言说的人，所谓确切知识，指的是对所要解释的词语以及从《古兰经》经文中阐明的句子有确切的把握。这也是再传弟子（Tabi'un）的立场。 然而，在他们之后，出现了一些人，他们了解到这些言论，并将其理解为对以个人见解解释《古兰经》的告诫，因此他们避免就《古兰经》发表任何出于己见的言论。也有一些人接触到了圣门弟子的以见解解释经文（tafsīr）的做法，并主张以见解解释经文。因此，后来的学者在经文解释问题上分成了两派：一派避免以己见发表任何言论，只限于传承下来的内容；另一派则提出自己的见解。至于圣门弟子和再传弟子，他们并不分为两派。相反，他们依据所知的传述和见解来谈论《古兰经》，对于自己所不知道的则保持缄默，并告诫人们不要在没有知识的情况下以己见解释《古兰经》。

with different explanations. Mujahid explained Tur as the name of a mountain, Ibn 'Abbas explained it as the mountain itself and some said that Tur is what emanates from the mountain and as for what does not spread, it is not Tur. This difference in tafsīr is a result of a difference of opinion and not attributable to the difference in what has been transmitted. Although the expression is linguistic so what about when the opinion concerns the meaning of the sentence and not the meaning of an expression, this is why in addition to their disagreement in the meanings of expressions they also disagreed with regards to the meanings of verses. It is apparent from studying the tafsīrs of the Sahabah especially the well known mufassirin that on a whole they would rely on (individual) opinion when making tafsīr. As for what has been narrated about some of them that they would refrain from making tafsīr by opinion and confined themselves to making tafsīr by what has been transmitted (manqul), it is taken to refer to the opinion of somebody who has not acquired the tools of tafsīr such as having knowledge of the Arabic expression, he wishes to clarify and knowledge of the events pertaining to which the verses were revealed. It is not taken to mean that one should refrain from understanding the Qur’ān since it has been revealed so that people may understand it and not so that they restrict themselves to the limit of the transmitted tafsīr. Therefore, we cannot say that the Sahabah were divided into two groups, one group refraining from saying anything about the Qur’ān by opinion and the other speaking about the Qur’ān according to their opinion. Rather, all of them used to speak about the Qur’ān with their opinion. They used to be wary of someone saying anything about the Qur’ān by his opinion without having sure knowledge of the expression being explained and the sentence being elucidated from the ayāt of the Qur’ān. Also, this was the position of the Tabi'un. However, after them there were people who came to know about these sayings and understood them as admonition for speaking about the Qur’ān with one’s own opinion, so they avoided saying anything about the Qur’ān from their own opinion. And there were also people who became acquainted with the the tafsīr of the Sahabah by opinion and they advocated tafsīr by opinion. That is why later scholars became divided into two groups regarding the tafsīr. One group would avoid saying anything with their own opinion and restrict themselves to what has been transmitted and a group that would give its own opinions. As for the Sahabah and the Tabi'un they were not two groups. Rather, they used to speak about the Qur’ān with what they knew in terms of the narrations and opinion and they refrained from that which they did not know and they warned people from speaking about the Qur’ān with their own opinions without having knowledge.

他们询问那块用来击打死者的肉块究竟是什么。当他们读到:

They inquired as to what was that piece with which they struck the dead man? When they read:

他们问我们:与穆萨相遇并请求他教导的那位正直的仆人是谁?由此产生了希德尔的故事。因此,每当有故事传到他们那里时,他们都会询问。于是他们问起那位正直的仆人所杀的男孩、所凿沉的船,以及不接待他的那个村庄。他们还打听穆萨与舒阿伊布的故事、努哈方舟的大小等等。满足他们这类求知欲、解答这些问题的,是《讨拉特》及其注释和阐述。那些被掺入的传说,无论是犹太人出于善意还是恶意传给他们的,还有一些皈依伊斯兰教的基督徒掺入了一些来自《圣经》的故事和传闻,但与犹太人所掺入的相比,数量很少。如此一来,故事和传闻的数量大大增加,以致超过了经过传述的解经内容。许多解经著作中充斥着大量的以色列传说、故事和其他传闻。掺入以色列传说最多、最为著名的,是卡卜·艾哈巴尔、旺哈卜·本·穆纳比赫、阿卜杜拉·本·赛拉姆以及其他许多人。由于这些活动,这些以色列传说、故事和其他传闻成为了注释学家解经的来源之一。

They asked us, who is the righteous servant that Musa met and requested to teach him. From here the story of Khidr arose. So whenever a story would reach them they would ask about it. So they asked about the boy the righteous servant had killed and the boat he had scuttled and about the village that did not entertain him. They inquired about the story of Musa and Shu'ayb and the size of Noah's ark etc. What answered these questions and satiated their greed for this kind of information was the Torah and its commentaries and exposition. And whatever fables were inserted which were transmitted to them by the Jews whether through good or bad intention, some Christians who had embraced Islam inserted certain stories and reports from the Bible but that was little compared to what the Jews had interpolated. In this manner the volume of stories and reports expanded greatly until it exceeded the reports of the transmitted tafsīr. Many books of tafsīr came to be loaded with huge amounts of israilyyat, stories and other reports. The ones who inserted the greatest amount of israilyyat and the most famous were Ka'b al-Ahbar, Wahb ibn Munabbih, 'Abd Allah ibn Salam and many others. Due to this activity these israilyyyat, stories and other reports became one of the sources of tafsīr for the mufasssrun.