The significance of Religious Texts according to Neo- Mutazilites

From the beginning, religious text including the holy book (holy Quran) and tradition were considered as two main and major cognition sources of Islam and there were consensus over theauthority of the holy book and the authority of the real tradition (against narrated tradition) among the Shia and Sunni scholars (although Akhbari scholars consider the understanding of the bookrestricted to the Infallibles). But while we perceive the book and tradition in the view of many Neo-Mutazilites, we can see that it received criticisms form many sides, both in the quality of formingand survival; and not only many doubts were raised for the authority of many of its teachings, at least after the time of the holy prophet, but it has been denied. In this article, we only criticize andexamine the fluidity respect of the signification and the meaning of religious texts from Neo-Mutazilites’ perspective. It is only the divine book and narrative texts available for us which is carrying and narrating the tradition. From their perspective, the signification of the texts, including religious texts, are fluid and dependent to the time context not to the state and intention of the author, and the meaning of the text will change during the pass of time and thus religious teachings would be bound to historicism and time. Examining this problem in philosophical hermeneutics and mentioning Neo-Mutazilites’ remarks, this article is to express criticisms against this Idea for its influences on some Neo- Mutazilites. Explaining the main source of some of these Ideas which can be found in philosophical hermeneutics, it has been tried, in this article, to draw appropriate responses. It is noteworthy that some of the Neo-Mutazilites who hold the signification as to be fluid, in addition to hermeneutics, are influenced by linguistics and semiotics and other discussions in language which are not investigated in this article.