نشریه سلفی پژوهی
پیاپی 8 (پاییز و زمستان 1397)

In this essay, the story of "Abdullah Ibn Saba" narrated by Sayef Ibn Omar is discussed. This story is used by ISIS as a pretext for killing innocents. This story is first used by Wahhabism for their atrocities. After scrutinizing in this story, it is found that this story is fake and we cannot use it as a tool for killing others. This story is a common bound that relates Wahhabism with ISIS against Shia. The current government in Saudi Arabia uses this narration as a pretext for aggression against Shia. If we disprove this story, the pretext of Wahhabism and ISIS will fail. So, for confrontation with ISIS, we must disprove the Wahhabism ideology first, because ISIS has derived its principles from Wahhabism.

Does the polytheism in the prophet Muhammad's age was limited to different deities and they believed in one God or different Gods? Muhammad ibn abd al-wahhab maintains that the pagans at the time of our holy prophet believed in oneness of God but the senses of this God were different. Accepting this theory, Muhammad ibn abd al-wahhab declared Haram all kinds of supplication to God other than the direct way. He considered himself a great reformist to the right path of all prophets throughout the history. Muhammad ibn abd al-wahhab believed that Muslims believed in non-direct ways of calling the God is Pagan, just as the pagans of prophet Muhammad's time. In this essay, his ideas in this issue will be criticized and proved that there are a far difference between the pagans of prophet's time and those calling God indirectly. The result of this research is that the reason that pagans were polytheist was not their exaggeration toward good guys, as claims Ibn ibn abd al-Wahhab, but in believing that they had Godly powers. Pagans had no believe in deity of God in all aspects. There are so many problems in comparing the Muslims, supplicating to God indirectly, with pagans of our prophet's age.

The Sunni and some of the Salafists maintain that the dead can benefit from the good deeds that their inheritors make after their death. But some Wahhabi and Salafi believe that reciting the Holy Quran and praying for the dead is heterodoxy. Although they confess that in some cases such as donation, sacrificing animals, and praying for the dead are allowed and legible in Islam and he dead can benefit from it. Since benefiting the dead from the acts of their inheritors is not clarified from the viewpoint of the Sunni, the Salafi and Wahhabi; in this essay, this issue will be discussed. The results of this research are as it follows: some Sunni scholars such as Navavi and Suyuti maintain that we can recite the Holy Quran for the dead after their deportation from this word. The mainstream Sunni, some Salafi scholars believe and some Wahhabi scholars such as Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Ghayyem, ibn al-Uthaymeen think that the reward of reciting the Quran can benefit the dead after their death. On the other hand, some Salafi and Wahhabi scholars such as al-Albani and Bin baz maintain that doing this act is heresy. The pros defy this idea and bring some proofs to prove their viewpoint. For example, Ibn Omar, a great companion of our Holy prophet, advised that after his death, the inheritors recite the Quran for him.

The main goal of this research is that to evaluate the Salafi view on the infallibility of prophets and its deviance from Quranic viewpoint. in this research, the method is descriptive – analytic. The assumption in this research is that the Salafi view on this issue is derived from some weak narrations and is in contradiction with Quranic verses. In the Holy Quran, prophets are introduced as exemplars and best humans on the earth which are safe from committing any sin and mistakes. If we introduce the prophets as described in the Quran, it will absorb the people and accept them as models in their lives. This standpoint will reduce the disputes among the Islamic denominations and will push them toward oneness. It will also result in congregation of all monotheistic religions.

One of the jurisprudential issues is visiting the graves. in Islam, the is no dispute in visiting the graves for men, but for women there are some disputes between Islamic sects and Wahhabism. Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab in his famous book, "Kitab al-Tawhid", quotes a narration which imply on cursing the women visiting the graves. This narration indicates on forbidding visiting the graves by women. The followers of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab also emphasize on banning of visiting the graves by women. Both Shia and Sunni scholars have no problem in visiting the graves by women. Sunni scholars concerning with the quote banning visiting the grave by women believe that this quote is abrogated and there is no problem in visiting the graves by women. They argue that Fatima (PBH), the daughter of our Holy prophet Muhammad, visited the tomb of Hamza frequently and also Aisha, the wife of our holy prophet, quotes a narration from our prophet that teaches the method of visiting the grave for women. There are some other narrations for proving this case in Islam.

All Islamic sects maintain that prophets after being appointed as messengers of God will become infallible. But whether the prophets are infallible before starting the prophethood or not, there are some disputes. Ibn Taymiyyah thinks that all prophets are infallible just in cases concerning their mission and in other aspects of their lives are just like common people. He believes that prophets are infallible just in receiving the revelation and transforming it safely to others. Ibn Taymiyyah have no believe in absolute infallibility of all prophets, including our holy prophet Muhammad (PBH). In this essay, we are going to discuss the consequences of Ibn Taymiyyah's view on not accepting the absolute infallibility of prophets:1- if the prophets are not infallible, does Ibn Taymiyyah believe in the tradition and acts of Muhammad (PBH)?     2- accepting this idea, the tradition and actions of our Holy prophet Muhammad (PBH) will not be a source in Islam 3- if the prophets are not infallible in all aspects of their lives, can we trust to their teachings?