پژوهشنامه مذاهب اسلامی
پیاپی 14 (پاییز و زمستان 1399)

One of most important and challenging issues between the Muslim theologians is the topic of divine essential narrated attributes. There are different thoughts between them, even some of them are contrast with some other. This present paper analyzes and evaluates views of Abu Mansour Maturidi as founder of Maturidieh theology school about semantic this topic by using the tow important works of him that he has written certainly and other works that are written probably by him and his follower. In opining of Abu Mansour Maturidi and his followers topic of divine essential narrated attributes is an ambiguous issue (Mutashabih). They believe these attributes only have figurative usage. They don’t believe to words appearance of the attributes because that culminates in anthropomorphism (tashbīh and tajsīm (. Mutoridi in AL-Tohid advocates the thought of delegation because there are cultural and intellectual attitudes in Mavaro AL-Nahr influenced by traditionalism. Hanafian choose attitude of rationalism and prefer analogy which that lead him in Tavilat Ahl AL-Sunnah to interpret words appearance of the attributes base on rational dates, explicit verses (muÎkamāt) and views of linguists and from each attribute he interpret meaning of monotheism.

Bada (alteration in the divine will) literally has two meanings: "emergence after concealment" and "emergence of a new theory". In Imami theology, it means the generative developments of the field of "elimination & confirmation", which is predetermined in the secret knowledge of God. In fact, following Ahl al-Bayt (AS), it is metaphorically used for the secret knowledge of God. All of the following indicate the rational and incidental possibility of bada in the field of "elimination & confirmation": verses related to the predeterminations of the tablet of "elimination & confirmation", narrations related to such topics as prayer, repentance, kinship ties, kindness to parents, alms of faith, cooperation in righteousness, God wariness and avoidance of cooperation in sin and transgression, and their positive effects such as increasing of life and sustenance, turning misery into happiness, as well as the negative effects of leaving them such as shortening of life and sustenance, manifestation of misery, calamities and worldly torments, which have been accepted by Shiites and Sunnis and agreed upon in their tradition and commentary collections. However Sunni researchers, in spite of accepting all of the said matters and their generative effects, avoid calling them as bada. The present research demonstrates that the conflict between the two sects is verbal; because whoever admits the acceptance of repentance, the healing of the sick, the answer to prayer, the change of misery to happiness, the transformation of evil into good, etc. has to accept their intellectual concomitances too.

Among the salient features of Imam Reza's (AS) biography, along with all his outstanding moral qualities, are debates with representatives of various religions and denominations to counter their doubts, which contain many instructive and strategic points both in terms of content and debate techniques. The present paper seeks to address these debates from a discursive perspective. Therefore, we try to examine the content of these debates and explain their discourse elements by depicting the characteristics of Laclau and Mouffe's discourse theory as the theoretical framework of the research. The main question is what were the discourse signs of the Imam's debates and how he succeeded in questioning the hegemony of the ruling discourse with his own particular articulation. The hypothesis that is being tested indicates that the debates of Imam (AS) by articulating signs such as the legitimacy of the prophecy of the Holy Prophet (S), the chosenness and infallibility of the Prophet's family around the central signifier of Imamate, were able to form a rival discourse, which was a worthy answer to social demands, and by disrupting the cohesion and unity of the Abbasid discourse, put it in crisis, wavering and restless, and finally questioned its hegemony.

Monotheism and related issues, such as names and attributes of God, are among the most controversial issues between Islamic sects. The Sefat Khabari (Narrated Attributes) mentioned in the verses and narrations have a special position among the various Islamic sects and have sometimes made the subject of Moshabbehah (Anthropomorphism) or Mojassemah (Corporealism) a means of expelling people from the field of Islam. Apart from many Islamic denominations that differ in the Sefat Khabari, some schools of thought such as theologians and philosophers, despite the similarity of some of their intellectual and doctrinal principles, have expressed different views. In the meantime, we have selected a theologian (Seyyed Morteza) and a philosopher (Nasir al-Din al-Tusi) from the Shiites and a theologian (Ghazi Abdol Jabbar al-Mutazili) from the Sunnis to examine and compare their use of philosophical and theological intellect in discussing the Sefat Khabari. Although these scholars accepted the Sefat Khabari and believed in interpreting them, the methods of each in starting and ending issues, as well as reasoning and interpreting are different and have very subtle differences that are examined in this article. The method used in this paper is descriptive-analytical.

Indeed, some sect-researchers have considered Abuzar Ghaffari as one of the pillars of the first Shiism. Along with like-minded people such as Salman, Ammar and Meghdad, he laid the foundation stone of Shiism from the time of the Prophet (S) with his orientations, positions, behavior and speech on the axis of the biography of Imam Ali and the Ahl al-Bayt (the household of the Prophet) (AS). Most of the existing works deal with the dimensions of his asceticism, struggle and seeking justice, but in this paper, his theological thoughts and positions are examined. He, who was one of the main members of Ali's Shiites during the time of the Messenger of God (S), after the departure of the Prophet carried out important activities in support of Imam Ali (AS) and the Ahl al-Bayt (AS) as follows: not swearing allegiance to Abubakr, narrating the hadiths of the Prophet and quoting verses from the Quran on the virtue of the Imam, uttering words focusing on the Imamate and leadership of Imam Ali (AS) and the Ahl al-Bayt (AS), confronting the opponents and denying their views on the interpretation of the Quran and opposing their lifestyle.

The inseparability of faith from action is one of the fundamental principles of Islam, and the separation of faith from action leads to the emptiness of religion, the abyss of antinomian and destruction. Some Muslims in the early days of Islam, by opinion-oriented interpretation and philosophical and theological justifications, were persuaded to deny the connection between faith and action, and to say that they did not have to carry the burden of duty. This attitude is known as "The Idea of Erjaʼ". This idea in Islam initially had a political approach and sought to unite Muslims by acknowledging all opposing sects, but in the second century it took a theological approach and, by separating action from faith, came to the belief that committing a sin or abandoning duties would not harm faith and salvation in the Hereafter. The present study seeks to study and critique the idea with an analytical approach and clarifies that the Murjiah's views including the ineffectiveness of action, lack of increase and decrease of faith, and the equality of believers in faith are in conflict with the philosophy of the sending the prophets and also with many explicit verses of the holy Quran.

After the assassination of Uthman, a current called the Ottomans appeared in the Muslim community, who not only considered Ali (AS) a partner in the blood of the slain caliph, but also denied the legitimacy of his caliphate while the general Muslim community had pledged allegiance to him as caliph, and thus they spread the seeds of hatred towards him in society. Ahmad ibn Hanbal, as the leader of the Baghdad Ahl al-Hadith movement in the third century AH, was able to institutionalize the legitimacy of the caliphate of Ali (AS) in the Muslim community through the theory of Tarbi‘ (squaring). This success can be regarded as the beginning of the recognition of the Ahl al-Hadith movement with the new name of "Ahl Sunnah wa Jamaat" and as the greatest sign of Ahmad's confrontation with the Ottoman movement. In addition, it can be said that Ahmad had a loving and devoted view of Ali (AS) and the reasons for his attribution to the Ottoman current had transmission and textual problems that could not prove his accusation of being Ottoman.

One of the central issues regarding the imamate is the relationship between the imam and the ummah (community). Following many Sunni theologians, Ghazi Baghelani believes that the "Imam" is a kind of apparent government official who, in addition to examining social and political issues such as establishing hodud (boundaries), collecting religious funds and taking care of the country, preserves and implements religion. On the other hand, the ummah also has duties such as loyalty and steadfastness in allegiance and commitment to its imam and ruler. According to Ghazi Baghelani, the position of imamate is one of the branches of religion and a secondary and social position that the Islamic community is free to select and conclude, and the philosophy of its election is to implement the divine rules, for the implementation of rules and jihad in the way of God is not possible without the imam. In this view, although infallibility is not a condition of the imam, obedience to him is obligatory, a belief that goes back to the Sunni view of the principles and methods of selecting the imam. Using an analytical method, the present paper after stating the necessity of imamate in the religion of Islam, specifically explains the view of Ghazi Baghelani in this regard.

Adil Shahi was a Shiite religious government that was established as a local government in Deccan at the same time as the establishment of the Safavid government. The founder of this government declared the Shiite religion as the official religion of his territory. Since the Muslims of Adil Shah's dominion were mostly Sunnis, Adil Shah adopted peaceful attitudes towards them after declaring Shiism as the official religion of his government. During the reign of Yusof Adil Shah's successors, various Islamic denominations were supported due to the existing political currents. In this study, using library sources, the support of the kings of this dynasty of different Islamic denominations, their strategies to create unity between Sunnis and Shiites, the peaceful coexistence of these two Muslim sects in the dominion of the Adil Shahs and the consequences of these policies in the political and social life of Muslims of different denominations in Adil Shahi period are examined. The adoption of such policies allowed the Shiites and the Sunnis to live well together in the realm of Adil Shahs. The rivalries between the two religious sects were more influenced by the current political situation than religious competitions.

Considering the current situation in the world and the plans of the enemies of Islam to create divisions between the Islamic denominations, it is necessary to bring them closer together and to explain the relevant solutions that neither deviate from the correct Shiite positions nor address issues that disrupt unity among Muslims. Mohammad Hadi Marefat is one of the symbols of religious convergence in the present age among Shiite scholars, while preserving his beliefs and principles, the fact that is evident in his works particularly Al-Tafsir Al-Athari Al-Jame. The present article explains the religious convergence model of Mohammad Hadi Marefat on the basis of his last and most important interpretive work, Al-Tafsir Al-Athari Al-Jame. Different approaches (i.e. political, explanatory and separative) have been proposed for religious convergence. This research, based on induction and contemplation in Al-Tafsir Al-Athari Al-Jame, has considered Mohammad Hadi Marefat's religious convergence model as a combined style called "Separative-Explanatory". The most important religious convergence aspects of the book are as follows: choosing the appropriate title, fair criticism combined with politeness, a new definition of the Companions, gentle language in promoting Shiite beliefs, each of which in this paper is accompanied by concrete examples from the text of the book being explained and analyzed.

Mystics have organized the ways and levels of the journey and closeness to God the Almighty in the form of three general categories: ascetic-pious, romantic-scholarly, and mystical-romantic. From another point of view, the followers of Ibn Arabi School have divided the journey to God into two types: A. Indirect journey through hierarchy; B. Direct journey through a special face. Seyyed Heydar Amoli, as one of the followers and commentators of the mystical school of Ibn Arabi who has a Shiite approach, believes that among the mentioned methods, "The journey based on the divine passions", which in other words is called "beloved journey", is the easiest and closest way towards God. He has used the mystical literature of Ibn Arabi School in depicting mystical maghamat (stations) and manzel (destinations). According to him, this type of spiritual journey and its levels are related to the levels of facial and spiritual revelation. This journey eventually leads to the station of "Aw Adna" and spiritual revelation in the station of "Akhfa" which is beyond description. Examining the path of Seyyed Heydar Amoli in spiritual journey, in addition to providing us with a more accurate account of Ibn Arabi's journey path, will introduce us one of the journey paths confirmed by Shiite texts and beliefs. In this article, the data are collected based on library research and are analyzed by descriptive-analytical method.

Sufism has been widely criticized by jurists since its inception in the Islamic world. Ibn Jawzi and Ibn Taymiyyah are among the most prominent of these jurists. This article explores the views of Ibn Jawzi and Ibn Taymiyyah in the critique of Sufism through a descriptive-analytical method. Ibn Jawzi divided Sufism into two groups: Early Sufism and Late Sufism. He considered the early Sufis to be devoted to the Sharia and classified them as ascetics, but condemned the asceticism, science-avoiding, love, and hearing of the later Sufis. According to Ibn Taymiyyah, Sufism is divided into two groups: Sufis of religious sciences and Sufis of philosophy. He did not consider the Sufis of religious sciences as heretics, but attributed infidelity to the belief of Sufis of philosophy due to being influenced by philosophers, the superiority of Wilayah (guardianship) over Nubuwwah (prophecy), Fana (annihilation), and Wahdat Wojud (the unity of existence). Finally, Ibn Taymiyyah had a positive view of Sufism compared to Ibn Jawzi..

One of the issues that arises among scholars about God's names and attributes is whether they are confined or not, in other words, can we ascribe any names and attributes to God or only the names and attributes mentioned in religious texts are allowed to ascribe to Him? There are four views on this issue: 1. The confinement of the names and attributes, in which most Asharites, Sheikh Mofid of Imamiyyah as well as Ibadiyyah and Maturidiyyah believe 2. The non-confinement of the names and attributes, which most Twelver Shias, Mutazilites, philosophers and mystics maintain 3. The confinement of the names and non-confinement of the attributes, which is stated by some of the Asharites, such as al-Ghazali and Fakhr al-Razi, as well as Allameh Helli and Mir Damad of Imamiyyah. This view can also be deduced from Maturidi's words 4. Those who believe in prevention such as Jovini of the Asharites. In the terminology of philosophers and mystics, Esm (name) means the external truths that are interpreted as Esm Takwini (generative names) and the meaning of Tawghifiyat (confinement) is that no truth exceeds its homeland and rank. This research has achieved the above results by descriptive-analytical method.

Criteria and principles of recognizing the parallels of the starting points of Hajj, as one of the first issues in the book of Al-Hajj, is a topic on which the views are not very clear from the perspective of Islamic denominations jurisprudence and no comprehensive and integrated research has been done. Therefore, the question of the criteria and principles for recognizing the parallels of the starting points of Hajj and Umrah from the perspective of Islamic denominations jurisprudence is an issue that needs to be explored until a suitable answer is found. The discrepancy between Islamic jurists in adopting different principles and criteria for imagining the parallels of the starting points of Hajj has led to differences in their rulings about distinguishing the parallels of the starting points of Hajj. According to the author's reviews, there are seven principles and criteria in this regard. Analysis of these theories and also the review and critique of their arguments show that a combination of the criteria of circles and valleys can be the best and only way to explain the parallels of the starting points of Hajj correctly, of course, by knowing the latitude and longitude and expert guidance. This research has been carried out with the aim of understanding the statements and views of the jurists of Islamic denominations and the limits of the principles by correctly explaining the parallels of the starting points of Hajj. Achieving this goal is possible in the light of describing and analyzing the propositions of the jurisprudence of Islamic denominations by collecting library data, the result of which is to identify a correct and accurate criterion of the parallels of the starting points of Hajj, and to explain it in the form of some geometric shapes.

If the contract of mozarebah is absolute in terms of the time of ownership of the agent over the profit, Islamic jurists have expressed different views regarding the time of ownership of the agent over the earned profit; 1. Ownership after earning profit 2. Ownership after division of shares 3. Ownership after conversion of property into money. Most Imami, Hanbali, and Hanafi jurists believe that as soon as the profit arises, mozareb (agent) becomes the owner of its share, although this ownership will be shaky. To prove their claim, this group provides various arguments such as the absoluteness of the narrations concerning the partnership of agents and owners in the profit, the prevention of unknown ownership of the profit, the requirements of initial terms and conditions between mozarebah correspondents, the requirement of the partnership aspect of mozarebah, the explicitness of Muhammad ibn Gheys's narration, concomitance between the establishment of the right to claim the division of shares with the acquisition of previous ownership, ijma (consensus) and qiyas (deductive analogy). On the other hand, the majority of Shafei jurists have chosen the second view based on arguments such as the legality of the debt contract, the preservation of capital by interest, the reliance of profit ownership on the permission of the partner and the incompleteness of the mozarebah contract before the division of property. Assuming that the profit is imaginary before liquidation, most of the Maleki jurists have also voted for the acquisition of ownership after Enzaz i.e. conversion of the profit into the common currency and its liquidation. This issue entails very important jurisprudential consequences such as the validity or invalidity of the purchase of a part of mozarebah property by the agent, the obligation of khoms (one-fifth of annual surplus income), zakat (almsgiving) and affordability. The findings of the present study, which is done by descriptive-analytical method based on library sources, shows the correctness of the view of ownership acquisition after the profit arises.

Pre-emption right means that if one of the two partners sells his immovable share to a third party, the other partner has the right to take it into his property by paying the same price as the customer paid, given the circumstances. Pre-emption right goes for possessions, so it can be inherited like any other property, to which the generality of the verses of inheritance, the narrations that have absolutely included the rights in inheritance and other similar reasons refer. Among the Sunni jurists, the Maleki and Shafei scholars and the people of Hejaz consider pre-emption to be hereditary and believe that it is inherited like other financial rights; of course, the opposite statement exists both among Imami and Sunni jurists. According to the results of the present study, which is done by using descriptive-analytical method in the form of library research, the pre-emption right is not subordinate to what it goes for, but it is an independent financial right and, like other inherited property, is inherited independently. In order to prove this, in addition to the generality of the evidence, the ruling in relation to the inheritance of the right of choice and primogeniture can also be invoked. Regarding the division of the pre-emptive property, some have commented based on the shares and some based on the equality between the heirs.