قاسم درزی

This study explores the emotional landscape of the Qur’an through the lens of Plutchik's psychological model of emotions, which categorizes emotions into eight primary types: joy, sadness, trust, anticipation, surprise, disgust, anger, and fear. It identifies how various types of emotions are represented and utilized in different contexts. By applying a comparative and interdisciplinary approach, the study demonstrates the Qur’an’s unique perspective on emotions, offering insights into its approach to emotional expression, regulation, and guidance. The analysis reveals that while Plutchik’s primary emotions are present in the Qur’an, their subcategories differ significantly, reflecting the Qur’an’s divine origin and guidance-oriented objectives. The findings highlight the Qur’an's distinctive emotional framework, which not only confirms but also extends beyond human-centered psychological models, reflecting its divine purpose and focus on holistic human development.

One of the fallacies raised by some critics, especially orientalists, is that the Prophet of Islam's behavior underwent a fundamental change from the Meccan to the Medinan period. They claim that his messages in the Meccan period were peaceful and mercy-oriented, but in the Medinan period, upon gaining power, he adopted a violent approach, and this is evident in the Meccan and Medinan surahs. To investigate this issue, a statistical study was conducted comparing the frequency of concepts related to violence and mercy in the Meccan and Medinan surahs of the Quran. The phrases related to mercy and violence were scored, and then the obtained values were normalized for analysis. The results show that the values for violence-based concepts are (0.20) in the Meccan surahs and (0.19) in the Medinan surahs. Furthermore, the concepts related to mercy are (0.24) in the Medinan surahs and (0.21) in the Meccan surahs. These findings indicate that the raised claim is not only unverifiable but that during the Medinan period, which was a time of establishing and expanding the government, a greater emphasis on mercy is observed. The content differences between the Meccan and Medinan surahs are attributed to the historical and social circumstances of each period. These results highlight the need for a re-evaluation of such interpretations and for attention to statistical methods for the analysis of religious and historical concepts.