پژوهشنامه مذاهب کلامی
سال سوم شماره 2 (پیاپی 4، زمستان 1401)

"Knowing God" is the highest desired knowledge of every Muslim and has always been the focus of special attention of researchers, but the difference in epistemological foundations and theology has led to diversity of cognitions. In order to discover the truth in this matter, the present article tries to obtain the prevailing view in each of the Islamic schools of thought about the nature and scope of cognition of God and then compares the Islamic schools with each other.
For this purpose, firstly the concept of "cognition of God" has been explained from both quantitative and qualitative aspects. Then, by examining recognizability of God and its extent, we have come to the conclusion that Islamic schools consider it impossible to know the truth of the essence and essential attributes due to His incomprehensibility and also the inability of human cognitive tools to encompass Him, but knowing God through remnants (Āṡār) and proving attributes is possible. Of course, the Esmā'ili school denies even this amount of knowledge of God.

The claimants of following the Salaf have always emphasized their attribution to the Salaf; But in various matters, they have acted against the principles and approach of the Salaf; The issue of takfir (excommunicating - declaring that sb is infidel) is one of these issues that, in addition to opposing the Salaf, also differ with other theological schools. Theological schools took the side of caution in excommunicating the people of the Qibla and avoided hastening the excommunication;
However, based on factors such as confusing the literal and terminology meaning of "worship", the incorrect understanding of the issue of creational guardianship (Welāyate Takwini) and the expansion of the range of reversals of Islam (Nawāqeẕe Eslām), the Salafyyeh have widely excommunicated many Muslims. This research, according to the views and foundations of the Salaf and scholars of Islamic schools of thought on the issue of takfir of the people of the Qibla, has explained the opposition of takfir stream with other schools of thought, and has criticized the views of the takfiris.

Contrary to the researches that insist on the complete separation or complete continuity of the religious foundations of Wahhabism with b. Teymyyeh, the verification of the legitimizing claim of attributing Wahhabism to b. Teymyyeh in the issue of faith and atheism is through the twin attention to the intellectual indicators and different origins of this issue in the two political and preparatory perspectives of b. Teymyyeh and establishment of Wahhabism.The results showed that the viewpoint of Wahhabism has serious differences with b. Teymyyeh in the four examined indicators.Wahhabism with [the necessary concomitance (Talāzom) and union (Ettaḥād) between faith and Islam - the synonymy of "faith" with "approval" (Taṣdiq) - the unprecedented development and narrowing of the concept of "atheism" and "faith" in two ways of considering the action as a component of the concept of religious faith (Imāne Shar'i) and the expansion of the concept of "atheism" to every type of mediation] has separated its way from b. Teymyyeh in the issue of atheism and faith. Finally, after comparing the characteristics of Wahhabism in the issue of faith and atheism with b. Teymyyeh, while rejecting the correctness of attributing Wahhabism to b. Teymyyeh in the issue of faith and atheism, the claim of legitimizing their attribution to b. Teymyyeh can be criticized.

In the view of Wahhabism and Ḥanbalism, there are commonalities in the issue of benefiting the dead from the living. Both of them believe that man consists of two dimensions, soul and body, and although physical life ends with death, the life of the soul continues and the dead can benefit from the actions of the living.However, their difference is based on the interpretation that Wahhabis have of verses such as verse 39 of Surah Najm: " and that nothing belongs to man except what he strives for", and traditions such as "when a person dies, his work will cease except for three things...". They deny the gainful relationship (Rābeṭeye Entefā'i) of the dead from the living, except where there is a specific text that except some cases from  these verses and traditions, but the Ḥanbalis do not have such an interpretation, and not only do they not consider the verses and traditions as the reason for denying the gainful relationship of the dead, but also they believe that the traditions which narrate the gainful relationship are merely for making examples for stating the possibility of the dead to benefit from the living in all good matters.In the issue of benefiting the living from the dead, Wahhabis consider those who believe in benefiting as deviation maker (Mobtade') or polytheists due to its type, for example, b. 'Oṡaymin considers recourse (Tawassol) to the dead to be illegitimate (Gheyre Mashru') and deviation (Bed'at), and b. Baz calls recourse to the prayers of the Prophet and supplicating (Esteghāṡeh) to the Prophet as great polytheism. The famous view of Ḥanbalism not only indicates the permissibility of recourse, intercession (Shafā'at) and supplication (Esteghāṡeh), but there are even sayings accepting the recommendation (Esteḥbāb) of these issues. This article compares the gainful relationship between the dead and the living among Wahhabis and Ḥanbalis and explains in detail why the dead do not benefit from the living from the point of view of the Wahhabis.

The concept of worship is one of the challenging concepts in the theology of Islamic denominations and Wahhabism. The rigid standpoint of Wahhabism in defining this concept is confronted by other groups. By presenting a simple definition of worship, Wahhabis have defined it as submission, humility and love. With this definition, they have put this concept as one of the foundations of defining monotheism and polytheism. Therefore, the have considered Istiqathah, seeking intercession, vows and slaughtering not to Allah as shirk, and the person who performs them has been called a polytheist. Imamis, Ashʻarites and Maturidis have opposed Wahhabis in this definition. The believe that worship is a combination of submission and humility to someone, along with belief in his/her as a lord, divine, creator, and other attributes of a deity. The Wahhabis' definition of worship suffers from the inclusion of a baseless condition which is ultimate love, and the lack of proper inclusivity and exclusivity; for many kinds of worship are excluded, while many acts which has nothing to do with worship are included.

One of the doubts about physical resurrection is the eater and eaten doubt (Shobheye Ākel wa Makul). Sometimes the human body is eaten by wild animals, or in today's age, the organs of one body are transplanted to different bodies and become the second body organ. Now the question is: if the human body is destroyed or becomes a part of someone else's body, how on the Day of Judgment will people get present with this physical body? Are they incomplete or will this person get a new organ? What answers have Islamic schools given to these questions?Have they denied physical resurrection (Ma'āde Jesmāni) or have they answered this question in another way? By examining the reliable sources of Islamic schools of thought, we come to the conclusion that the great Ahl al-Hadith, the theologians of Mātoridiyeh, Zeydyyeh, and Esmāiliyeh schools did not mention the doubt of eater and eaten (Shobheye Ākel wa Makul) in their works, but the majority of Ash'ari and Emāmyyeh theologians believe that what enters the body of Ākel are secondary and surplus components which is possible that it has no effect on his resurrection in the resurrection day, and a few Emāmyyeh and Ash'ari scholars believe that the body is a tool for the soul, and the real tormented and pleased in man is his soul, and the body is nothing more than a tool.