Nafise Faghihi Moghadas, Ph.D. ,

The aim of this article is to briefly introduce and to examine the views of the founders of thfour Sunni schools of Islamic jurisprudence (namely, Abū Hanīfa Nuʻmān ibn Thābit, Mālik ibn Anas, Muhammad ibn Idrīs al-Shāfʻī, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal) and that of their renowned students and followers, regarding the legitimacy of engaging in the study of Islamic doctrinabeliefs or Kalām. Different, and often conflicting, views have been postulated on this matterSome Sunni thinkers have condemned the pursuit of theology as an act of heresy and denounced its practitioners as apostates. Other Sunni thinkers have extolled this disciplinas the noblest of sciences whose learning and teaching are, at least under certain circumstances, incumbent. This fundamental dispute regarding the legitimacy of thdiscipline of theology has resulted in a rather contentious and opaque scholarly environmentIn addition to the inherent importance of the discipline of theology as such, the significancof this dispute is compounded by the impact that the attitude one adopts toward thidiscipline can have on the development of the intellectual and rational aspects of Islam. A negative attitude toward theology, for example, can hamper the application of rationaelements to Islamic doctrine. Our focus in this article is on analysing the views of the leading thinkers and jurists of the Sunni school and investigating the most authoritative sources odoctrinal tradition within this major denomination of Islam. Our study leads us to concludthat the disapproving views of the preeminent Sunni figures should be construed, not as denunciation of the discipline of theology per se, but as a refutation of certain theologicaprinciples and persuasions that are viewed as incompatible with orthodox Islamic faith. In addition to and preceding that conclusion, this article provides a survey of the literaturconcerning the views of Muslim scholars on the legitimacy of Kalām. After categorising these views into the two opposite camps of Kalam’s legitimacy and illegitimacy, the articlthen proceeds to evaluate and critically analyse them, and to resolve some of their initiaincompatibilities. Contribution: The article sheds new light on the historical development of the discipline otheology within the Sunni schools of Islam. This is a little-studied and often overlooked subject that can help in attaining a better understanding of how this critical field within religious studies has emerged into its present form. © 2021. The Authors.

2019

An analysis of the meaning of the ‘Reports of subjection’ and an examination of their practical application in identifying fabricated reports

( Article . )

Faghihi moghadas, N., Ghafarallahi, S., Bankipoorfard, A.

Publication Date: 2019

Journal of Shi'a Islamic Studies (17489423)12(1-2)pp. 29-67

The present article investigates the scope of applicability of the ‘Reports of Subjection’ (ahādīth ard) in determining the origin (sudūr), signification (dilālah), and true intention (jahat) of reports in the corpus of tradition. We cite verses of the Qur’an in examining the possibility of relying on the Qur’an in determining the authenticity of the reports in the corpus of tradition. The conclusion we arrive at is that the Qur’an cannot help in determining with certainty if a given report is authentic, in the sense of having indisputably originated in an infallible Imam of the Shia faith; but it can help us conclude with confidence whether a dubious report is inauthentic. Another way in which the contents of the verses of the Qur’an can be brought to bear on the study of the reports in the corpus of tradition is in ascertaining the true intent underlying the content of a given report and the genuine meaning intended by the authority the report is purportedly quoting. Drawing on the example of the Imams in how they would invoke the Qur’an in assessing a report in the corpus of tradition, we are led to a set of parameters that we describe as ‘the Qur’anic elements bearing on the verificatory process of subjecting the reports in the corpus of tradition to the Qur’an’, which can effectively guide the researcher in how to proceed in ascertaining the authenticity of a given report with recourse to the Qur’an. The ‘Qur’anic elements’ we have enumerated are (1) the authority of the standard manuscript of the Qur’an, (2) the authority of the standard pronunciational format of the Qur’an, (3) the occasion and environment of revelation of the Qur’anic verses, (4) the time and sequence of revelation of the Qur’anic verses, (5) the context (sīyāq) of a given Qur’anic verse, (6) the apparent signification (sibāq) of a given Qur’anic verse, and (7) the multiple significations inferable from a given Qur’anic verse. The latter three are the most practically useful elements in the exercise of ‘subjecting’ the reports of the corpus of tradition to the Qur’an. © 2019 The Islamic College. All rights reserved.