The Review and Investigation of “Separation School” with an Emphasis on their View of Religion’s Opposition to Philosophy

Traditionalism is a formalist approach that recommends giving up the rational independent discussions in inferring jurisprudential precepts. Applying this method in doctrinal discussions is called “separation school”. The traditional version of separation school is completely opposing to reason and reasoning, not tolerating their accompaniment to tradition. The new version, however, dignifies reason, while introducing its achievement as human and alien to religion. The proponents of separation school present various reasons for the opposition of religion to philosophy, some of which are as follows: (1) the caliphs’ vicious goals in translating philosophy, (2) existence of some anti-philosophical traditions, and (3) the jurists’ opposition to philosophy. The present article offers a synoptic introduction of the separation school to answer the abovementioned critics. According to those answers, (a) the origin and motive for developing an idea is not its rightness or wrongness; (b) in the Shiite collections of traditions, there are just two anti-philosophical traditions, one of whom is about pseudo-philosophers and the other is about the world-seeking philosophers. There are, however, many traditions admiring the philosophical method (independent reasoning); and (c) the necessity of referring to an expert in specialized issues shows that the opposition of some great jurists with no complete familiarity with philosophy does not support the claim made by the proponents of separation.