نشریه سلفی پژوهی
پیاپی 16 (پاییز و زمستان 1401)

Al-Qaeda in the international arena and Boko Haram in the borders of Nigeria, are engaging in terrorist activities with an almost similar approach. The terrorist actions of these two groups are so widespread and violent that they have been noticed in almost all countries, even in non-Muslim countries. One of the most important and characteristic features of Al-Qaeda and Boko Haram is their emphasis on religion and political approach. There are many commonalities in the goals, foundations, method and religious approach of these two organizations. Some of these commonalities are the superiority of one's own point of view, a new reading of Islamic concepts, emphasis on Jihad and inviting others, forming a political government, killing one's opponents, and establishing an independent government. The two mentioned sects call only themselves and their followers as Muslims, and with false promises and using the tools of religion, politics and money, they bring many people into their group. Al-Qaeda has a more up-to-date and wider organization; while Boko Haram has a weaker and smaller organization. This essay has made a comparison between the approach of these two organizations with descriptive-analytical method to clarify the differences and similarities between them.

The word Jihad is one of the general words that has many meanings in the Quranic verses and Hadiths. The pseudo Salafi (Takfiris) have distorted the general meaning of Jihad. Generally, Jihad means struggle, its specific meaning is fighting. These pseudo Salafi groups misinterpreted the meaning of the verse (9:73): "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites". They plunder the properties of people and kill them, considering the Islamic rules and their citizens disbelievers. In this essay, we have found that fighting is the last stage of Jihad. The Sunni scholars have interpreted the verse (9:73) in a peaceful way, maintaining that we are not allowed to use preliminary Jihad against Muslims and non-Muslims.

One of the challenging issues in the Islamic world, which has been the focus of Islamic sects for a long time, is the issue of takfir. Ibn Taymiyyah is one of the figures that have been taken into consideration in the history of theology in general and at the issue of takfir particularly. Each Islamic sect has interpreted Ibn Taymiyyah's words at his own benefit. This research, with a descriptive-analytical approach and using library sources consider Ibn Taymiyyah's thoughts, trying to investigate and explain the basics of takfir from his point of view.  it has come to the conclusion that Ibn Taymiyyah, although conceptually, in a correct way has put the concept of Takfir correctly, but contrary to his principles in practice, he has convicted so many people and Islamic sects. This research is going to clarify the meaning of Takfir in order to prevent religious violence. Of course, we should not neglect from the political and historical conditions of his time (such as the fall of the Islamic caliphate and extreme religious prejudices at that time) affecting on Ibn Taymiyyah viewpoint.

Heydar Ali Qalmadaran is one of the contemporary Shiite Qur'anists in Iran who criticizes Shiite ideas. The present research, using a descriptive-analytical method and using library tools, has considered the views of Islamic scholars on the issue of visiting graves and building monuments on them. This research found that he calls the issue of visiting graves as superstitions and Shiite heresy and believes that this ritual is not one of the Sharia rules. Qalmadaran is against the construction of domes and shrines on graves and considers it as polytheism. He wrote a entitled as "visiting the graves between truth and superstition", facing many problems to this work. His most important reasons are as the following: lack of mentioning visiting the graves in the Holy Qur'an, the prohibition of visiting graves by the Holy Prophet (PBH), the order of Hazrat Fatima to be buried secretly, banning from visiting the graves in the verse 84 of Surah Toba, the existence of a hadith prohibiting visiting graves, The existence of hadith from the Holy prophet denoting on levelling the graves. In this essay, the views of Islamic scholars in the field of visiting graves have been discussed and clarified. Finally, we can say that according to Quranic verses, narrative texts, historical documents and Shia and Sunni reasons, the views of Qalmadaran is not correct and visiting the graves and building monuments on them is permissible and legitimate.

One of the main creeds of Salafi Jihadi theorizers like Sayed Imam Sharif (Dr. Fazl), Maghdesi, and Abu-musab Al-Suri is "Ruling other than what God revealed". From Salafi Jihadi point of view, this issue is not a secondary issue, but rather if refers to the gist of faith. So, if someone break this rule, he or she is and apostate. From Salafi jihadi point of view, one of the major criteria for "Ruling other than what God revealed" is legislating new rules. Resorting to some Quranic verses, they make some proofs for their claims. Some of the verses are as the following: Q: (42:31), (18:26), (6:137), (5:103), (9:31,32), (3:64), (40:12). Considering the above verses, we will notice that the Salafi Jihadi interpretation of these verses are wrong and their claims are false because the new rules are legislated by governors or parliaments. The aim of these rules is to regulate the affairs of Muslims and do not contrast with the general principles of Islam. These legislators do  not deny the Islamic rules. just in some cases, they might do not obey from these rules. it seems that they don not bad  intentions and we can not excommunicate them. In this essay and with a descriptive analytic method the proofs of Salafi Jihadi is analyzed and criticized.

The aim of this essay is analyzing and evaluating Mustafa Tabatabai's view on "intercession". Intercession is one of the important religious principles of Muslims, which despite some differences in its scope, is widely accepted by Muslims. Tabatabaei, who is referred to as the most important figure of pseudo-Salafism and the movement of the so-called "the Quranists". In a new reading of the verses, Tabatabaei refers to the verses that negate the intercession of idols. In his opinion, no one can intercede between man and God. He maintains that God   does not recognize a position with the title of "intercessor". By presenting the wrong meaning of intercession and attributing it to the "Shia leaders", he compared this idea with the belief of "redemption" in Christianity and the polytheists' belief about the intercession of idols. He calls the Muslims "grave worshippers". This essay, with a descriptive-analytical method, is going to explain the correct Islamic teaching in this case and answer to the doubts of "Qur'anists". The results show that Tabatabaei's double standards in comparing Islamic intercession with redemption in Christianity is against the verses of the Holy Qur'an, authentic Shia and Sunni hadiths, and the consensus of Muslims.