نشریه کلام اسلامی
پیاپی 123 (پاییز 1401)

The legitimacy of governance and the authority of an Imam, as to whether it is appointed or elected, is a matter where Sunni Muslims advocate for the selection of an Imam by the community. However, there is a dispute over who the selector should be, leading to two main theories: 1. The Majority Theory, which consists of three subcategories: selection of an Imam by the people of resolution and contract (‘Ahl al-Hall wal-‘Aqd), selection by the preceding Imam, or appointment by force and autocracy; 2. The Sanhuri Theory (selection of an Imam by public vote). This research examines the claim’s consistency with the content of the selection theory to uncover and explain the compatibility or incompatibility of the concept and reality of selection with the Sunni claim in the theory of Imam selection. The study utilizes a qualitative methodology and relies on Quranic verses, traditions, historical events of early Islam, and Sunni scholars’ views. The research concludes that while the Majority Theory is internally conflicted and its claim does not align with the content, the Sanhuri Theory, albeit not internally conflicted, is incompatible with the events of early Islam and the jurists’ and scholars’ views forming the basis of the selection theory. Nonetheless, the Sanhuri Theory can be substantiated and argued based on the initiation of independent reasoning (ijtihad) and the jurisprudence sources of Sunni Islam, and utilized to illustrate the Sunni Islamic political system.

Ash’ari theology is one of the most popular theological schools of thought among Sunni Muslims, founded by Abu al-Hasan al-Ash’ari. Ash’ari discourse is characterized by a rational-transmission approach, although its transmission aspect is more prominent. Ash’ari theologians, utilizing this method, have examined matters of belief. Imamate is among the issues addressed in their theological works. Since they do not believe in the inherent good or evil of things by reason alone, they consider the necessity of an Imamate as transmitted (traditional), viewing it as part of Islamic jurisprudence and secondary Islamic rulings, not as a fundamental principle of faith. Hence, they see its obligation as upon the people, not upon God. According to the Ash’arites, essential qualities of an Imam include being male, mature, just, free, and rational. They believe that the Imam’s duties include managing the Islamic community, establishing security and comfort, ensuring social justice, protecting the borders of the Islamic community, striving in the path of God, and securing the public’s sustenance. According to Ash’arites, textual evidence, selection by the people of resolution and contract, and dominance are methods for determining an Imam. Their views on Imamate have been subject to the critique of other theologians, particularly the Imamiyyah theologians.

One of the most significant anthropological bases for separating spirituality from religion is humanism, which places humanity in the stead of God and does not tolerate any external authority, such as revelation or divine religions. This foundation, leading to spiritual humanism as well, has its roots in monism, where no distinction is made between material and spiritual matters. Therefore, spirituality is defined as entirely earthly and worldly, merging the notion of God Almighty with an inner deity, thus erasing any difference between the visible world and the unseen, and between what is sacred and profane. Consequently, self-deification, the alteration of the value system, and the denial of the unseen realm, are among the potential outcomes of this perspective. This study, adopting a descriptive-analytical approach and relying on library data, aims to critique this base with an emphasis on prophetic narrations. The journey towards spirituality and the attainment of authentic dignity and truth as conveyed by the honorable Prophet of Islam is only achieved through acknowledging and confessing the poverty and dependency of human existence upon its Creator and maintaining a continuous connection with Him in servitude and righteousness. As a result, human independence from God and turning away from divine revelation and heavenly religions will lead to nothing but the loss of one’s authentic identity and entrapment in the valley of alienation from the self. In turn, true spirituality and a spiritual life cannot be formed under such a notion.

New Atheism, which has been proposed by atheists in the Western world in recent decades, can be considered as relying on two elements of Scientism and Naturalism. Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist and one of the leaders of the new atheism, has criticized religion and religiosity by emphasizing the aforementioned two elements and using the theory of evolution. On the other hand, Professor Motahari is one of the Islamic thinkers who has addressed the issue of the relationship between science and religion, and while expressing the harmony of the relationship between science and religion, he is a serious critic of the atheistic approach to the theory of evolution. Professor Motahari Rah's confrontation with atheism, although he initially confronts Old Atheism; However, there is a trace of new atheism in this encounter, which can be used in the criticism of new atheism. In this article, in terms of compilation, we have benefited from the library-document method, and in terms of judgment, we have benefited from the analytical (rational) method. The findings of the research show that Dawkins' atheistic ideas are highly vulnerable in terms of epistemological, theological and theological problems.

One of the ambiguous points of Zoroastrian history is the date of compilation or rewriting of Avesta. Many possibilities and theories have been proposed in this regard; Some consider the original Avesta as a written document presented by Zoroaster, which was destroyed by Alexander the Great and was rewritten in later periods. Others consider this source as an oral document and claim that it was compiled by Zoroastrian priests in later periods. There are also possibilities regarding the date of compilation or rewriting of this document; Some consider it to be the Parthian Balash era and others to the Sassanid Ardeshir era. This chaotic situation in the history of the compilation of Avesta and the uncertainty as well as the existence of some historical clues and evidences have led to the entry of other hypotheses in this regard, which cannot be ignored. One of these hypotheses; Compilation of this document in the post-Islamic era, especially during the Abbasid Caliphate, coincides with the strengthening of religious branches and schools. In this article, we have tried to prove with different proofs and evidences, especially by using the signs from Islamic texts, especially the Imamiyyah tradition, that Zoroastrians did not have any documents with a divine color such as the Avesta book before the Islamic conquests.

Alinqi Taghai is one of the prominent Shiite scholars who, in addition to jurisprudence, was also an expert in theology. In addition to the post of Shaykh al-Islami, he has left outstanding works, some of which are on theological topics. His method in the science of theology has a narrative quality and is based on quoting and explaining hadiths.