https://serajemonir.darolelam.ir/ Seraj-e Monir en daily 1 Wed, 19 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0330 Wed, 19 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0330 https://serajemonir.darolelam.ir/article_247276.html This article examines ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s interpretation of the concept of Lordship (Rubūbiyyah) and critically analyzes the views of Sulṭān al-ʿUmayrī concerning Tawḥīd al-Rubūbiyyah (the Oneness of Divine Lordship). ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī emphasizes the criterion of independence (istiqlāl) in the divine attributes of Lordship, identifying God's exclusive and independent ownership and governance of creation as the defining characteristic of true Lordship. He maintains that attributing any form of independent causal efficacy to beings other than God constitutes shirk al-rubūbiyyah (associating partners with God in His Lordship). Drawing upon Qur'anic verses, he argues that the essence of polytheism lies in the belief that entities besides God possess intrinsic and independent powers, asserting that the polytheists fell into shirk because they regarded their deities as possessing inherent causal influence. Although Sulṭān al-ʿUmayrī appears to acknowledge independence, perfection, absoluteness, and self-sufficiency as characteristics of Lordship, he distinguishes between the fundamental and subsidiary aspects of Lordship. He contends that belief in God's major divine attributes constitutes the essence of Lordship and argues that the polytheists affirmed the fundamental principles of Divine Lordship, deviating only in its secondary manifestations. Nevertheless, this study raises several criticisms of al-ʿUmayrī’s position. First, he fails to recognize independence as the defining criterion of Lordship. Second, his arguments concerning the beliefs of the polytheists are found to be inaccurate. Employing a descriptive-analytical methodology, the study concludes that ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s interpretation is more consistent with the Qur'an, and that the true nature of Divine Lordship is fundamentally grounded in the belief that all causal efficacy belongs intrinsically and independently to God alone. https://serajemonir.darolelam.ir/article_247278.html Tawassul has long occupied a significant position in Islamic tradition. However, since the emergence of the Wahhabi movement, both the scope and the manner of this practice, particularly tawassul through the status (jāh), rank (maqām), and right (ḥaqq) of God's saints, have become subjects of intense theological controversy. Employing an analytical-comparative approach, this study examines the perspectives of Wahhabism and the Shāfiʿī school, one of the major Sunni schools of Islamic jurisprudence, regarding this form of tawassul. The article seeks to clarify the viewpoints and underlying evidential foundations of both sides while identifying their points of convergence and divergence. The findings indicate that the two perspectives fundamentally differ in their approach to scriptural texts and their juridical conclusions. Wahhabi scholars, by invoking the principle that acts of worship are strictly determined by divine revelation (tawqīfiyyah al-ʿibādāt) and by reinterpreting the relevant scriptural evidence, regard this form of tawassul as an innovation (bidʿah) and a potential precursor to polytheism (shirk). In contrast, the Shāfiʿī school, relying on the Qur'an, the Prophetic Sunnah, and the established practice of the early Muslim generations, considers it a legitimate practice deeply rooted in the authentic Islamic tradition. https://serajemonir.darolelam.ir/article_247279.html The Wahhabi takfīrī movement, through its distinctive interpretation of Tawḥīd (Divine Unity) and Shirk (polytheism), accuses other Muslims of polytheism and disbelief. While numerous studies have sought to critique Wahhabism, relatively little attention has been paid to the methodological deficiencies underlying such critiques, particularly the tendency of some critics to uncritically adopt the Wahhabi conceptual framework of Tawḥīd and Shirk. The findings of this study indicate that concentrating solely on the subsidiary doctrines of Wahhabi theology, while neglecting its constructed theological foundations concerning Tawḥīd and Shirk, has contributed to the persistence and expansion of this ideology. The study argues that the concept of Tawḥīd formulated by Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb, which ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿĪsā al-Tamīmī described as being "contrary to the Tawḥīd preached by the Messenger of God" and comparable to the methodology of the Khawārij, should constitute the primary focus of scholarly criticism. The article further examines several fundamental inconsistencies within Wahhabi theology regarding its understanding of Tawḥīd and Shirk. Among these are its contradictory criteria for evaluating divine acts, particularly the distinction between "major" and "minor" acts, which implicitly attributes partners to God in ordinary affairs. Likewise, its classification of supplication according to whether it is directed to the living or the dead, or to those who are physically present or absent, is identified as another theological inconsistency. The study also criticizes the Wahhabi definition of ʿibādah (worship), arguing that its logical implications would require considering the prostration of the angels before Adam and showing humility toward one's parents as acts of polytheism. Another major inconsistency lies in the Wahhabi assertion that the pre-Islamic polytheists affirmed Tawḥīd al-Rubūbiyyah (the Oneness of Divine Lordship) and Tawḥīd al-Asmāʾ wa al-Ṣifāt (the Oneness of the Divine Names and Attributes), despite explicit Qur'anic verses indicating that they were guilty of shirk in matters of Lordship. The study concludes that a principled and rigorous critique of Wahhabi theological foundations, grounded in exposing their internal contradictions and supported by the Qur'an and the Prophetic Sunnah, can shift Wahhabism from an offensive to a defensive intellectual position and provide a more effective basis for confronting its ideology. https://serajemonir.darolelam.ir/article_247280.html This study examines the claim made by ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Dimashqiyyah that the Imāmī Shīʿa regard Ahl al-Sunnah as unbelievers (kuffār). In his work, al-Dimashqiyyah cites the opinions of the authors of Ṣāḥib al-Ḥadāʾiq, ʿAllāmah al-Majlisī, and Ṣāḥib al-Jawāhir to argue that the Imāmī Shīʿa excommunicate Sunnis. Using a descriptive-analytical approach, the present study examines Shiʿi narrations and the opinions of Shiʿi jurists and concludes that the term kufr (disbelief) mentioned in certain narrations refers to disbelief in contrast to faith (īmān), rather than disbelief in contrast to Islam. In other words, denying the guardianship (wilāyah) of the Imams leads to exclusion from the realm of faith but does not remove a person from the fold of Islam. Accordingly, Ahl al-Sunnah are not considered outside Islam; rather, they are regarded as believers in the essential principles of Divine Unity (Tawḥīd), Prophethood (Nubuwwah), Resurrection (Maʿād), and other core tenets, while their deficiency lies in the doctrine of wilāyah. Furthermore, evidence such as the application of the legal rulings concerning the ritual purity of Muslims (ṭahārat al-muslimīn), the continuous historical practice of social interaction with Sunnis, and narrations distinguishing between Islam and faith all support this position. Prominent Shiʿi scholars, including Khwājah Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī, Shaykh al-Mufīd, Shaykh al-Ṣadūq, Shaykh al-Ṭūsī, ʿAllāmah al-Ḥillī, Shaykh al-Anṣārī, Imam Khomeini, and Sayyid Abū al-Qāsim al-Khūʾī, have explicitly recognized Ahl al-Sunnah as Muslims. According to the Shiʿi perspective, only the Nawāṣib, the Ghulāt (extremists), and the Khawārij are regarded as unbelievers. Therefore, al-Dimashqiyyah's claim that the Imāmī Shīʿa generally excommunicate Ahl al-Sunnah lacks a sound evidential basis and is refuted through a comprehensive examination of Shiʿi jurisprudential and ḥadīth sources. https://serajemonir.darolelam.ir/article_247281.html The issue of seeking intercession (istishfāʿ) from the deceased constitutes one of the most significant and contested subjects in discussions of Tawḥīd al-ʿIbādah (the Oneness of Worship) and the theological status of God's righteous servants in Islamic thought. The Wahhabi movement maintains that seeking the intercession of the dead is an act of shirk in worship, regarding it as fundamentally incompatible with the principles of Tawḥīd. Citing the apparent meanings of certain Qur'anic verses and Prophetic traditions, Wahhabi scholars classify this belief as major shirk (al-shirk al-akbar), one that expels a person from the fold of Islam. Furthermore, they seek to legitimize this position by claiming that it is shared by the other Islamic schools of law.Adopting a critical and analytical approach, the present study reexamines this claim through a close analysis of the authoritative works of leading Mālikī jurists and scholars. It demonstrates that not only does Mālikī jurisprudence reject the Wahhabi interpretation, but that the legal opinions and scholarly practice of eminent Mālikī authorities, including Mālik ibn Anas (d. 179 AH), Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ (d. 544 AH), Ibn al-Ḥājj (d. 737 AH), and Shihāb al-Dīn al-Zurqānī (d. 1122 AH), provide clear evidence for the legitimacy, and indeed the recommendability (istiḥbāb), of seeking intercession through the deceased and invoking them as a means of tawassul. By examining the principal sources of the Mālikī school, this study further establishes that istishfāʿ from the deceased has long formed part of Mālikī juristic doctrine and has been explicitly addressed and endorsed in the school's classical legal literature. https://serajemonir.darolelam.ir/article_247282.html Swearing an oath by other than Allah is one of the issues that has long been debated among Muslim scholars and the various schools of Islamic jurisprudence, giving rise to divergent legal and theological opinions. The findings of this study indicate that the Wahhabi movement regards such oaths as an instance of shirk (polytheism), relying on prophetic traditions such as the ḥadīth: “Whoever swears by other than Allah has committed shirk.” Based on this interpretation, Wahhabi scholars maintain that swearing by anything other than Allah violates the principle of Tawḥīd (Divine Unity). In contrast, the four major Sunni schools of law adopt markedly different positions. The Ḥanafī and Ḥanbalī schools, adhering to the apparent meaning of the relevant scriptural texts, rule that such oaths are prohibited (ḥarām). Meanwhile, the Mālikī and Shāfiʿī schools interpret the prophetic traditions prohibiting oaths by other than Allah as expressions of emphatic discouragement (taghlīẓ) rather than absolute prohibition, and therefore classify the practice as disliked (makrūh). Consequently, none of the Sunni legal schools considers swearing by other than Allah to constitute shirk or to invalidate one's belief in Tawḥīd. Furthermore, the study analyzes a number of internal inconsistencies within Wahhabi discourse, including contradictions in its criteria for defining shirk and inconsistencies regarding the role of intention (niyyah) as a determining factor in legal rulings. Ultimately, the findings highlight the fundamental methodological differences between Wahhabism and the mainstream Sunni legal schools, while offering substantial criticism of the epistemological rigidity and ideological one-sidedness that characterize Wahhabi thought. https://serajemonir.darolelam.ir/article_247283.html The book Al-Radd ‘ala al-Wahhabiyyah refers to two works by Hamadi Al-Raddisi and Asma Nouira, Tunisian scholars of Islamic studies and professors of political science. These works were published under the titles Al-Radd ‘ala al-Wahhabiyyah fi al-Qarn al-Tase‘ ‘Ashar (2008) and Al-Radd ‘ala al-Wahhabiyyah: Nusūs al-Sharq al-Islami (2012). This report, however, focuses on the first book, Al-Radd ‘ala al-Wahhabiyyah fi al-Qarn al-Tase‘ ‘Ashar. Written in Arabic, it comprises 336 pages and was first published by Dar al-Talia‘a in Beirut. A portion of the book, titled Innovators of the East, was translated into Persian by Kazem Hatami Tabari and published in 2016 by Mash‘ar Publishers in 208 pages.The book is divided into two distinct sections. The first section, titled Al-Dirasah (The Study), provides an analytical overview of the correspondence between the Wahhabis and Islamic scholars. It consists of an introduction and five chapters: Chapter One, Rasa’il Aslam Taslam; Chapter Two, Al-Wahhabiyyah; Chapter Three, Responses of Tunisian and Maghrebi Scholars to Wahhabism; Chapter Four, Responses to Wahhabism in the Islamic World; and Chapter Five, Doctrinal Stakes. The second section contains writings of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, scholars from West Africa, and their responses. This structure aims to offer a comprehensive understanding of the intellectual exchanges and theological debates surrounding Wahhabism in the nineteenth century.