نشریه سلفی پژوهی
پیاپی 10 (پاییز و زمستان 1398)

One of the best ways to confront the extremists and Takfiri groups is to boost the importance of rationalism rather that literalism. The main problem with the extremist groups is that they have a superficial understanding from religious texts, ignoring the context and historical incidents. These radical groups have no believe in changing the time and context of religious texts. One the famous figures in Neo-Salafism is Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, trying to draw the attentions to the role of reason in inferring the Islamic rules. He maintains the reason has an important role in extracting the Islamic laws. Believing in moderation, he calls for the role of reason in his works. He calls his school "Moderation" and invites to attending to the higher aims of Islamic law alongside the literal meaning of the religious texts. In this essay, with an analytic- descriptive method, his theory about "the goals of sharia" will be explained and criticized. It seems that his views are a small step toward religious rationalism and avoiding extremism.

Since its establishment, 250 years ago, the Wahhabi discourse has seen ups and downs. What is very eye-catching is the metamorphism in Wahhabi discourse in political and religious spheres. In the very beginning this school had a violent approach to religion, affected by Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab ideas in both social and political issues. In fact, the king Muhammad bin Saud was a tool in Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahab's hand, obeying his orders. Gradually, the situation changed and although there is still the famous alliance between the two, it has changed very much. Right now, this is the Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahab's descendants that obey the rules of Muhammad bin Saud dynasty. We can say that the Wahabi ideology has endured a kind of metamorphism. This research, by a descriptive – analytic method will discuss this issue.

Ibn Taymiyyah maintain that the common "construction" is unorthodox and we can not explicate the names and attributes of Allah, mentioning in the Holy Quran. He argue that the Salaf followed this method and did not construe these names and attributes of God, neither can we. But, some other Salaf interpreted these names. The second reason mentioned by Ibn Taymiyyah is that the theologians must not prefer the literal meaning over the reasonal meaning. Sine he believes that reason can not rule over the literal meaning of the text. In his view, if the text or the reason is certain, we must act according to it and we can not do without of anyone. And also, if they are not certain we have no right to prefer reason over the literal meaning. According to Ibn Taymiyyah, logical reasoning cannot rule over the lexical meaning. Therefore, the reason can not judge and interpret the Quranic texts and we must accept the literal meaning of religious text without and interpretation.

One of the best ways to know the different theological views is to compare them. In this essay by descriptive – analytic method the theological views of Maturidi and Salafi school of thought is discussed, referring to their source books. The Maturidi, usually uses from reason and hadith in their theological system, believing that reason is itself an independent source. They maintain that in monotheism and prophethood issues, reason can understand the theological propositions. The Maturidi school also believe that we can interpret the theological propositions and there is allegory in some religious texts. On the other hand, the Salafi views on understanding the goodness and badness in theological propositions are not unanimous. Some, like al-Albani, believe that we cannot discern the meaning of theological propositions. But, Ibn Taymiyyah maintains that we can discern these propositions, negating the Maturidi and Ash'ari views in this case. He says that in some cases we can understand the meaning of these propositions but in some cases not, believing in the views of Salaf and not investigating. In his view, there is no allegory and metaphor in the religious propositions and these issues are created by theologians

Living in "Barzakh" after death is one of the issues that almost all of the Muslims denominations, including Salafi and Wahhabi, believe it. But the difference between Salafi and Wahhabi ideology with other Islamic denominations is in the details of this life. Since these details in ideas of Salafism and other Sunni denomination is not explained properly, in this research a closer look will take on it. Some results are as the following: most of the Salafists and Wahhabis maintain that our Holy prophet in his grave has no corporal life and his soul is separate from his body, although sometimes this body will connect with the soul, for example in the case of responding to the Salam. But some Salafi just like Ibn Taymiyyah and ibn Ghayyem believe that the soul of the prophet is high in the sky but he can see all creatures, just like the sun that overshadows over the earth. So, the holy prophet can hear the voice of his visitors in the grave. Some Sunni scholars maintain that this issue is unanimous among the Sunni, believing in corporal living of the Holy prophet. They mention some reasons for their claims. One of Wahhabi scholars, al-Shawkānī, tend to Sunni view, believing in corporal life of the Holy prophet in his tomb.

In this essay, the Shia view of orthodoxy and unorthodoxywill be discussed. According to the findings of this research the word "Sunnah" means method and there are so many meaning for the technical meaning of this word. One of the technical meanings of "Sunnah" is the opposite of "unorthodoxy" and creating something new that has not been part of religion. The Suni sect also accept this meaning. In the Muslim world, unorthodoxy means entering something new in religion that has not been originally part of that religion. This has a negative meaning. The Shia scholars have determined some criteria for discerning something unorthodox. 1- manipulating in religion 2- entering something new in religion that has no roots in it. From the Shia point of view, the unorthodoxy is haram and forbidden. There are some hadiths that prove this idea.