نشریه کلام اسلامی
پیاپی 134 (تابستان 1404)

God has promised reward to the believers and the righteous, and threatened punishment to the disbelievers and wrongdoers. One of the wise divine methods for distinguishing believers and the righteous from disbelievers and wrongdoers is the testimony of exalted witnesses from every nation and community regarding their good and evil deeds. Prophets, their successors, and the Imams (peace be upon them) are the most prominent and evident examples of such witnesses to deeds. Human actions have two aspects: external and internal. Intention, motive, and purpose in performing a good or bad act play a crucial role in determining its value, lack of value, or anti-value, and consequently the degree of reward or punishment. Therefore, the witnesses to deeds on the Day of Resurrection, in addition to being aware of the apparent aspects of individuals’ actions, are also aware of their inner and hidden dimensions. Thus, they possess knowledge of the unseen aspect of the deeds of those upon whom they testify. Undoubtedly, they enjoy a special existential capacity that enables them to attain such extensive knowledge. This criterion also applies to their awareness of other unseen realities of the world. Hence, the scope of the knowledge of these witnesses to deeds is extremely vast and profound.

The hadith “God and His Messenger refuse anyone but Abu Bakr” is among the most important narrations cited by some Sunni scholars to prove Abu Bakr’s superiority and rightful claim to immediate succession after the Prophet (PBUH). Often narrated alongside the incident of Abu Bakr leading prayers during the Prophet’s illness, proponents view it as evidence of divine approval and consensus of believers on his caliphate, considering it a form of explicit or implicit designation for his leadership. This study employs an analytical-critical method to examine various aspects of this hadith. Findings indicate serious challenges to its authenticity in terms of chain of transmission and text. Furthermore, its implication for supreme leadership is refuted on theological and jurisprudential grounds—showing no necessary correlation between leading congregational prayer and supreme Imamate—as well as historical evidence such as the Prophet’s command for Usama’s army and the absence of reference to this text at Saqifah. Ultimately, the study concludes that this hadith is a distorted version of the incident of the Prophet’s request for pen and paper, fabricated to establish Abu Bakr’s caliphate against the explicit designation of Amir al-Mu’minin (AS).

rationally explaining and epistemologically defending the creedal principles of Muslims. With the Muslim world’s entry into modernity and the emergence of new epistemological and philosophical challenges, the need to reconsider the identity and function of this discipline became more pressing. In this context, Egyptian philosopher and thinker Hassan Hanafi, in his extensive intellectual project “Heritage and Renewal” and especially in his major work “From Creed to Revolution,” critiqued the foundations of traditional kalam and reinterpreted it as a practical philosophy for human liberation and social transformation. This study, using an analytical-critical method, examines the epistemological and methodological foundations of Hanafi’s view on the principles and foundations of kalam, analyzing the implications of shifting its subject from “divine essence and attributes” to “human being and history.” Findings show that while Hanafi’s critiques of traditional kalam demonstrate notable analytical boldness and methodological significance, his approach suffers from conceptual reductionism, dominance of ideological presuppositions, and neglect of the historical and epistemological dimensions of kalam, lacking sufficient theoretical coherence. Moreover, replacing kalam’s theological mission with a revolutionary and humanistic one paves the way for gradual secularization of religious knowledge and transformation of kalam into a tool serving political-social objectives. Consequently, Hanafi’s reconstruction project cannot be regarded as a revival of kalam but rather a transition from theology to ideology—a shift that endangers the transcendent and authentic identity of Islamic kalam.

Abstract At the dawn of the twentieth century, amid intellectual turmoil caused by Western colonialism and Christian missionary activities, the Muslim world faced unprecedented challenges in identity and thought. In this context, Allamah Mohammad Javad Balaghi, one of the guardians of reason and faith in the Najaf Seminary, played a foundational role as an influential theologian. His engagement with Christianity exemplified a scholarly, fair, and impactful encounter, defending Islamic identity as an aware theologian. This study, using a descriptive-analytical method, explores the dimensions and implications of this engagement, demonstrating that Balaghi’s approach to Christianity established a “critical-comparative theological paradigm.” The findings indicate that Balaghi’s interactions with Christianity were intellectually groundbreaking, leading to the formation of a new intellectual tradition in Shiite seminaries. This paradigm—based on textual-historical deconstruction of the Bible, rational critique of core Christian doctrines, establishment of the Qur’an as an epistemological reference, and systematic comparative methodology—elevated Islamic theology from a defensive stance to an active and critical position, leaving a lasting legacy for theologians and exegetes.

The issue of “non-resistant nonbelief” has long been discussed in Islamic theology, where traditional theologians primarily focused on its “possibility” and its “eschatological ruling” (salvation or damnation). Although the relationship of this phenomenon with divine attributes was not central in classical works, contemporary philosophers of religion have seriously pursued it. The significance of the issue is evident in that some contemporary philosophers, such as J.L. Schellenberg, regard it as an argument against God’s existence. This study, recognizing its importance in modern theology, aims to re-examine this doctrine in Islamic theology using a descriptive-analytical method, analyzing the relation of non-resistant nonbelief to divine attributes of love and benevolence, guidance, wisdom, and justice. The research reveals that Schellenberg’s perceived incompatibility between non-resistant nonbelief and divine attributes stems from a one-dimensional view of divine attributes. He appears to reduce all divine attributes to love, considering the removal of all non-voluntary obstacles and establishing personal relationships with all humans as its necessary consequence. In contrast, a comprehensive view of the full set of divine attributes properly delineates their implications and scopes. This issue—reflecting the hierarchical governance of divine active names and attributes and, consequently, of creational laws—is the preferred framework for relating this phenomenon to divine attributes, as elaborated in the article.

The emergence of revisionist readings of the Qur’an, borrowing from the “hermeneutics of suspicion” to deconstruct the sacred text in favor of women-centered interpretations, has posed profound epistemological challenges to Islamic theology. This study, employing a descriptive-analytical method and relying on kalam principles, assesses the feasibility of transferring this methodology in light of the doctrine of “inerrancy of revelation.” Findings reveal that applying the biblical criticism model to Qur’anic studies involves a fundamental categorical error; the hermeneutics of suspicion presupposes the “human construction of the text” and its influence by patriarchal culture, whereas analyses demonstrate an irreconcilable conflict between this presupposition and the nature of “spoken revelation” and the theological principle of “non-contradiction.” The results show that adopting this method logically leads to denying divine wisdom, attributing deception through ignorance to God, and replacing “revelation” with “historical experience.” Ultimately, moving beyond a negative approach, the study proposes the kalam model of “proportional justice” as an alternative framework. According to this model, the Islamic legislative system—by distinguishing between “absolute equality in human dignity” and “proportionality in social roles”—provides a realistic and just response to innate differences between men and women without desacralizing the text.