پژوهشنامه مذاهب اسلامی
پیاپی 17 (بهار و تابستان 1401)

In this article, after a brief explanation of some key terms, one of Avicenna's reasons for the oldness of the natural world and Ghazali's criticisms of him are examined and analyzed, and in some cases, Mulla Sadra's comments in agreement with Avicenna are mentioned. Furthermore, the problems of each point of view are stated separately and the limits of each view's defense of its own theory are pointed out and judged. In Avicenna's argument, two rules are used, one related to philosophical public affairs and the other belonging to the realm of philosophical theology. In the analysis and explanation of the arguments of each side, the conclusion has been reached that the main problem is the issue of the supreme will, and the key to solving the problem is understanding the nature of the will of the Necessary Being. For this purpose, we presented Avicenna's and Ghazali's views on this matter and tried to reveal the correct and acceptable opinion on the will of the Necessary Being, and the oldness or creation of the natural world, although the effort failed. Finally, an opinion of the early philosophers, from Avicenna to Sabzewari, regarding the unity of knowledge, will, and action in the Necessary Being is proposed. The final result, with these limits of reason, is the incompleteness of all theories about the will of the Necessary Being and the temporary preference of the philosophers' theory about the oldness of the world.

The great interest of the followers of different Islamic denominations in Ahl al-Bayt (the Prophet's household) has not prevented the emergence of differences regarding the determination of their examples and place among Muslim scholars. These differences, which have an ideological and political basis, have been effective in the field of Islamic historiography. Despite the fact that most Muslim historians deal with the issue of Ahl al-Bayt, the historical texts differ from each other in terms of definition and scope of examples, preemption in compilation, the number of works, as well as the method and goals of raising the issue. We believe that Shiite historians, in addition to being pioneers in writing about this topic, have also produced more works. While the followers of the Sunni denominations have paid more attention to the personal and moral virtues of Ahl al-Bayt, the Shia historians, especially the Imamis, in their historical texts, in addition to expressing the personal and moral virtues, have highlighted their social status and the issue of Imamate and leadership. The use of theological foundations by Shiite historians in the historiography of Ahl al-Bayt and the focus of Sunnis on historical reports are other distinctions in this regard, which show that the compilations on this issue were influenced by the ideological and political conditions of different geographical regions in the Islamic society.

This research aims to explain the issue of "God's spatiality", and by examining Imami and Salafi traditions, it seeks to find the answer to the questions: What do the Salafi traditions prove in this regard? And how did the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt (AS) react to them? Using the descriptive approach i.e. explaining and analyzing the traditions and views of Salafi scholars and comparing them with the traditions of Shiite Imams, the article concludes that the traditions accepted by Salafis generally prove God's spatiality and ultimately end up with incarnation and anthropomorphism. But the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt (AS) have always criticized and rejected these traditions. However, there are some traditions in Shiite sources that Salafis have used to confirm their own views. Yet, they are either weak in terms of narration transmission or unreliable for Salafis in terms of connotation and meaning. This is because, according to the intellectual basis of the Shiite Imams regarding the necessity of allegorical interpretation of texts, all of them are taken as figurative, metaphorical, and ironic meanings, just like the verses of narrative attributes. Consequently, this criterion is also obtained that any narration in the Imami sources that agrees with the Salafi view on God's spatiality, is not valid and cannot support the Salafis' point of view.

One of the significant issues that have occupied minds is the purgatory and the characteristics of purgatorial life. Ahmad Ehsai is one of the thinkers who have paid attention to these issues in their works. From his point of view, human life is not limited to this worldly life, but after death, his life will continue in the purgatory and then in the hereafter. Using a descriptive-analytical method and relying on library sources, the present paper aims to achieve a correct understanding of the characteristics of life and people in the purgatory from Ehsai's point of view. Although there are major criticisms of Ahmad Ehsai's view in describing and analyzing the characteristics of life and people in the purgatory, his belief about the general features of these issues -including the pressure of the grave, questions and answers, the existence of day and night, heaven and hell in the purgatory, the purgatorial position, the incarnation of actions, the communication and meeting of the people of purgatory with each other and with the people of the world- can be defended and these matters are according to the theologians' understanding of the verses and narrations.

The status and justice of the Companions are among the most important religious debates between Sunnis and Shiites. Zarghawi, one of the leaders of Salafi Jihadism, while following the majority of Sunnis by expanding the concept of Sahabi (companion), presenting superficial perceptions and opinion-oriented interpretation based on the appearance of some verses of the Quran and hadiths of the Holy Prophet (S), believes that the Sahaba (Companions) based on the Quran and tradition were just. However, after finding a reason for excommunicating the Shiites, he argues that the justice of the Companions is proven through divine verses and prophetic traditions. Therefore, denying the justice of the Companions leads to denying the Quran and tradition and, in turn, leaving the religion. Hence, he excommunicates the Shiites by accusing them of this denial and decrees Jihad against them. Examining the verses and narrations, not only rejects the claim of justice of the Companions but there are many religious texts in which the Companions are criticized. On the other hand, assuming that the verses and narrations indicate the justice of the Companions, denying their justice does not lead to leaving the religion and allowing excommunication, because the obstacles of excommunication, such as the necessity of the denied subject, the existence of certainty, the possibility of interpretation, and ignorance, have not been taken into account. Therefore, it is permissible to excommunicate the Shiites if only the denial of the justice of the Companions leads to a deliberate and conscious denial of the Quran and tradition, and results in the violation of Shahdatayn (two testimonies) or the fundamental Islamic beliefs and practices, and is considered apostasy from the religion.

In recent decades, we have seen wide-ranging Shia-Salafi conflicts, which have provided an opportunity for contemporary Salafism and Wahhabism to create, or at least claim, a unified anti-Shia movement among the Sunnis. This is despite the fact that for a long time, Salafi thought, especially Wahhabi, has been exposed to severe criticism from Sunnis and even some moderate Ahl Hadith (people of hadith), and therefore perhaps the Shiites have made a strategic mistake to turn the conflict between Sunnis and Salafis into a Shia-Salafi conflict. Although before Ibn Taymiyyah, traces of Salafism can be found among Ahl Hadith and Hanbalis, there is no doubt that today's Salafism and Wahhabism are most indebted to and influenced by Ibn Taymiyyah. Since his time, Ibn Taymiyyah has been subjected to serious and severe criticism, the most recent of which was made by Saudi Raed Samhuri. He is one of the contemporary Salafi authors who wrote about the thoughts of Ibn Taymiyyah. In 2010, in the book (Criticism of Salafi Discourse: Ibn Taymiyyah as an Example), he criticized the Salafi discourse by criticizing its leader, Ibn Taymiyyah. What is most evident in his criticisms is the use of the method of contradiction, in a way that introduces the reader to a series of contradictions of Ibn Taymiyyah. This researcher has scientifically analyzed and criticized Ibn Taymiyyah's thoughts and opinions with theological, jurisprudential, interpretive, and lexical methods. The explanation and analysis of Samhuri's refutation of Ibn Taymiyyah's view on excommunicating opponents is the main focus of this article, and it also implicitly criticizes his work.

Jalal al-Din Rumi is the greatest Iranian poet and mystic of the 7th century AH, whose thoughts have always been the focus of attention. In the present article, the approaches to God's attributes from Rumi's point of view have been examined, analyzed and compared with the opinions of Islamic theologians. The mentioned topic is one of the most central issues in the field of theology, for which the history of human thought is full of affirmative and negative positions. This research, using the descriptive and analytical method, with the aim of explaining Rumi's approach to the mentioned subject, and by following and analyzing the six chapters of Masnawi, Rumi's most important work, explains his words about tashbih (anthropomorphism) and tanzih (transcendence) of God and compares them with the views of famous theological sects. The present paper shows that in the matter of knowing God, while believing in God's transcendence to be understood, described, seen, likened, etc., Rumi also accepts anthropomorphism and explains the combination of these two features in different ways in Masnawi. Regarding the narrative attributes and the verses implying anthropomorphism, Rumi's opinions are sometimes in line with Maturidiyyah's thoughts, and sometimes they originate from his independent opinion on this issue.

The second part of verse 33 of Surah al-Ahzab, known as the verse of Tathir (purification), is one of the verses that have brought many theological controversies. Many Shiite and Sunni narrations show a relationship between the Hadith of Kasa and the verse of Tathir, and consider the title Ahl al-Bayt in the mentioned verse to be assigned to Khamsah Tayyabah (the Five Holy Progeny of the Prophet). One of the issues of disagreement between Shiites and Sunnis regarding the Imam's conditions is his infallibility. Sharif Mortaza, unlike Ghazi Abd al-Jabbar, considers the verse of Tathir as clear proof of the Imam's infallibility. Dispersion and instability in the theological arguments of the Mutazili commentator Ghazi Abd al-Jabbar under the verse of Tathir, as well as insufficient evidence, ignoring authentic narrations regarding the revelation of the verse, and the difference in the interpretation of the words of the verse indicate his efforts to prove the basis of his belief in rejecting the infallibility of Ahl al-Bayt (AS). This article shows the alignment of Sharif Mortaza's point of view with the Quran in defense of the Ahl al-Bayt school. In addition, by expressing the difference between Shiite and Mutazilite views on theological beliefs, such as infallibility, the research demonstrates that Shiism did not rely on Mutazila in this regard.

Despite the extinction of most of the Ghali (exaggerating) Shia sects after the lifetime of the Infallible Imams (AS), the influence of their worldview, which was based on the interpretation of Sharia and creation, remained as invisible and poisonous veins on the body of Islam in general, and in particular on some sects of Islam, such as Shiism and Sufism. In addition, their worldview distorted or rejected some doctrines, the effects that we call invisible due to reasons such as the neglect of Muslims on the one hand, and on the other hand, their examination is necessary because of the onslaught of orientalist studies in this field in recent centuries. Therefore, in the present article, with a comparative analytical method, we examine Imamate, the most central theological perspective of Gholat (exaggerators) for the first time in terms of influencing the Sufi worldview, such as the defense of Satan or the interpretation of resurrection. The purpose of this paper is to reject some accusations against Shia by distinguishing Shiites from Shia Gholat, which are caused by confusing the meaning of Shiites with Shia Gholat and also to explain the reason for the ambiguity and strangeness of some Sufi teachings, which are rooted in the worldview of Shia Gholat and the lack of familiarity with them.

Belief in the exoteric and esoteric meanings of the Quran, or in other words, the exegesis and allegorical interpretation of the Quran is one of the controversial topics that the researchers of the Quranic and Islamic sciences have paid special attention to. They have established criteria and standards for mystical interpretation, understanding the truth, and the interior of the Quran. The present research examines three important criteria for the esoteric interpretation of Surah Ghadr as follows: the relationship between the external and internal interpretation of the Quran, the absence of exegetical meanings against religious rules, and the absence of exegetical meanings against enlightened intellect in the esoteric interpretation. The results of this study show that the esoteric meaning of Surah Ghadr corresponds to the principles and rules of mystical interpretation, that is, the exoteric meaning of this Surah is hidden in its esoteric interpretation and does not contradict the rules of Islam and enlightened intellect.

The teachings of Ahl al-Bayt (the Prophet's Household) regarding the journey to Allah are complete and true. Their recommendations are path-breaking and life-saving due to their complete knowledge of the intricacies of the journey and the condition of the seekers, as well as their divine infallibility. The mystics have always been the harvesters of the knowledge of Ahl al-Bayt (AS). In the traditions and supplications, especially the prayers of the infallible Imams (AS.), subtle mystical points and spiritual states are embedded. In mysticism, expressions such as manazel (stages), halat (moods), darajat (degrees), sollam (ladder), and marghat (stile) are used in the words of the Infallibles, which indicate a kind of order and spiritual system. In this article, according to a tradition, which considers Islam, faith, piety, and certainty to be based on each other and assigns degrees to each, we propose a spiritual system that is completely ijtihadi (based on independent reasoning) and unprecedented in its own way. The importance and place of the journey to Allah and the arrangement of spiritual stages in the teachings of Ahl al-Bayt (AS) are not hidden from anyone. According to this system, the seeker first steps on the journey to God in the stage of Islam by verbally acknowledging God's oneness. In the stage of faith, he goes through the levels of heart acknowledgment and practical faith to reach the stage of piety. Then he observes the piety of the tongue, deed, and heart, so that finally in the stage of certainty, which is granted to a small number of seekers, he attains complete certainty and intuitive knowledge, which is the highest position of existence and closeness to God. This knowledge is the encyclopedia of existential transformation and evolution of the mystic.

One of the important topics in the field of Islamic ethics is sincerity which has a direct impact on the material, spiritual, individual, and social life of a person and is closely related to human beliefs in theoretical monotheism. Quranic verses and Islamic traditions give a very high place to the position of sincerity. The true Muslim mystics, whose theoretical and practical origins are derived from these two sources, deem the attainment of this position necessary for all travelers to God, both those on the way and those who have arrived. The mystics have discussed significant matters about the meaning of "sincerity", "sincere", the types of "sincerity", its levels and effects, citing the revelatory evidence. From their point of view, if the traveler achieves "matching the external and internal aspects of things with the truth", he can attain other perfections on the spiritual path. Since each mystical position is dependent on the truth, sincerity is considered the foundation and basis for other mystical positions. One of the many obstacles to reaching this high position of God's mercy is "falsehood". This paper analyzes the role of "the position of sincerity" in the mystical journey to God from the perspective of Muslim mystics of the 4th and 5th centuries.
.

In our religious sources, from the Quran to the sayings of the Imams (AS), there are materials about the position of Khalifatollah (the representative of God). In Islamic mysticism, for the first time, Ibn Arabi, a mystic of the 6th century AH, used the term "perfect human being" and attributed it to Khalifatollah. Now the question arises, is Ibn Arabi's "perfect human being" the same as Khalifatollah that is mentioned in the Quran and narrations? The answer to this question requires extensive research in all narrative texts. The present study aims to first examine the doctrine of the perfect human being from Ibn Arabi's point of view, and then, relying on the sayings of Imam Sajjad (AS), investigate the position of the perfect human being from his viewpoint. In the end, it comes to the conclusion that the perfect human being considered by Ibn Arabi is similar to Khalifatollah expressed by Imam Sajjad (AS) in some features but is different in others.

Knowledge has three characteristics: honest, justified, and believable. Achieving these features depends on supporting resources; for example, in mysticism, the heart and intuition support mystical revelations and make them believable for the revealer and witness. It seems that the uniqueness of the support of knowledge obtained from mystical revelations depends on the two sources of the heart and intuition, which benefit the people of revelation, while Islamic mysticism has capacities from which mystical education can be extracted for all classes. The diversity of mystical education audiences with different talents and abilities requires a variety of sources to support education propositions. These propositions are the same fundamental infrastructures that are extracted from ontology, cosmology, and anthropology of theoretical mysticism under the title of "Fundamentals of Mystical Education". This article, while briefly introducing mystical education and emphasizing the role of the heart and intuition, suggests reason, revelation, sensory perception, memory, and introspection for supporting the propositions of mystical education. Epistemology in mystical education is independent of different definitions in terms of ontology and narration, and therefore considers knowledge to be possible and to have elements and value.

Ibn Torkah is one of the scholars who discussed the topics of Shariat (exoteric path), Tarighat (esoteric path), and Haghighat (mystical truth) under the influence of his mystical tendencies. His most central issues are determining the position of the mentioned terms, the relationship between them, and how to explain the religious teachings based on them. Using the descriptive and analytical method, the present research discusses the position and relationship of Shariat, Tarighat, Haghighat and the levels of each one, as well as Ibn Torkah's mystical attitude to religious teachings. Then it examines his approach to the compatibility of mystical teachings with the Quran and tradition, and to the necessity of adherence to the appearances of the Shariat. The results of the research indicate that he considers the three mentioned terms as levels of a single truth. While combining them, he analyzes and examines religious teachings with a mystical approach. Moreover, he sees the origin of pure mystical teachings only in the Quran and tradition and considers adherence to Shariat essential in all situations.

The fifth century in the history of compiling the principles of Sunni jurisprudence is the era of the formation of comprehensive works based on different schools of thought. One of the important features of this group of compilations is the citation of the fundamental opinions of the scholars of the previous centuries such as Abu Ali Jobbayi, his son Abu Hashem, Abu Abdollah Basri, and Ghazi Abd al-Jabbar, whose books have not reached us, and therefore, there is no other way to know their opinions except to study the fundamental books written in later centuries, especially the fifth century. This century is also considered a turning point in Twelver Shiism. It was the time when the principles of jurisprudence were compiled in an inclusive and comprehensive form, in which there are many citations of Sunni fundamentalists, which can, along with other Sunni sources, be considered as a source for knowing the sayings of Sunni elders, especially those whose writings became impossible to access in later centuries. In this article, by choosing the book "Al-Oddah fi Osul al-Feghh" by Sheikh Tusi, written in the fifth century, and by examining some of the topics of the book, which contain the opinions of Sunni fundamentalists, we have tried to determine the position of the book and the opinions expressed in it from the aforementioned perspective.

Peace and tranquility among humans are two of the ideal teachings of Islam which are emphasized in religious doctrines. Still, considering the current situation between Muslims and infidels who are not people of the book, as for a peace treaty between them, there are two maximal and moderate views among the jurists of Islamic schools of thought. The early scholars consider jihad with infidels who are not people of the book to be obligatory until they convert to Islam or are killed. They do not allow the conclusion of a cease-fire agreement with them except in case of necessity. But some of the later scholars consider it permissible to fight only with infidels who are sedition seekers, aggressors, and treaty breakers and believe that it is permissible to make peace or remain on a compromise agreement with non-seditious infidels and non-treaty violators who want peace and a peaceful life with Muslims. The latter view is more consistent with the totality of Islamic teachings. Therefore, in this research, while presenting the reasons for the former view and its criticisms, the latter view has been proven by citing several reasons from the Quran, hadiths, and traditions.

Destruction and demolition of mosques are forbidden according to the first ruling of the consensus of Shia and Sunni jurists, and the most important evidence is verse 114 of Surah al-Bagharah. But some examples are beyond the general scope of this verse; first, the demolition of mosques that are on the verge of collapse. Different schools of thought have interpreted this failure as "the violation of al-mostahdam", which indicates that this example is out of the generality of the above verse, however, Shafi'i jurists emphasize the necessity of permission and supervision of the ruler. Second, the destruction of mosques that need repair and development, however, the Shia jurists have either remained silent about this example or prohibited it. The most important reason for the prohibition is the generality of the verse. In addition, the title of "the violation of al-mostahdam" cannot justify the destruction. Still, the supporters of this practice, including the Shafi'i jurists, have considered compliance with expediency as the criterion of the ruling. Third, the title of Zerar Mosque, which Hanbali jurisprudence paid more attention to, and then the Wahhabis considered the destruction and burning of the holy shrines as permissible, and even obligatory, due to their priority over it. However, most non-Wahhabi jurists have considered it necessary to honor the graves of the prophets and the righteous. They did not consider it possible to infer the demolition and burning of Zerar Mosque from the mentioned verse, and, in turn, believed that this ruling was based on an uncertain single narration. Using the descriptive and analytical method, this article seeks to investigate the destruction of mosques from the perspective of Shia and Sunni jurisprudence. The article first examines the historical context of the issue, and then, citing the sources of Islamic jurisprudence, analyzes the basics of the prohibition of destroying mosques, and then scrutinizes the opinions of Shia, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali jurists.
,

Divorce was one of the common traditions of Arabs before Islam, which was approved by Islam after correcting its flaws. The legitimacy of some types of divorce is inferred from the Quran, the tradition of the Messenger of God (S), the consensus of scholars, and the intellect. One of the common divorces is "Triple Divorce" in which a man divorces his wife three times in one meeting, or through one statement, he gets three divorces at once. Since the beginning of Islam, there has been a difference of opinion among the Companions, Followers, and jurists of Islamic schools of thought in the exegesis and allegorical interpretation of the verse Al-Talagh-o-Marratan (A divorce is only permissible twice). The jurists of all denominations unanimously consider triple divorce to be heretical, and their difference comes back to different interpretations of the mentioned verse. In this article, the opinions of different schools of jurisprudence on this verse were examined, and finally, by examining the arguments of different schools of thought and expressing the approach of the jurists, the conclusion was reached that the practice of this heresy and the obligation to implement the triple divorce contradict the views of many Companions, Followers, early and late jurists. Moreover, the study of personal status laws in Islamic countries showed that triple divorce is rejected in the courts of these countries and only one retroactive divorce is ruled.

The marriage contract has a special place and particular importance in Islamic jurisprudence. After the conclusion of the marriage contract, many tasks are assigned to the couple. This contract has many legal and jurisprudential points and follows the same rules as other contracts in terms of validity elements and conditions. It also has different effects, the most important of which is undoubtedly the continuation of family foundation. Since the result of the marriage contract is the formation of a family, its continuation is one of the important related effects. The condition of the termination option in the contract negates the apparent and desired effect of marriage and is contrary to its customary meaning. In this article, we examine the views of the five schools of thought regarding "the condition of the termination option" in the marriage contract and consider it to be against the nature of the contract. Therefore, we believe that this condition is invalid and invalidator