نوع مقاله : پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشیار گروه معارف اهل بیت علیهم السلام دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران.
2 دانش آموختهی پسا دکتری، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
This study is dedicated to a critical examination and evaluation of the propositions put forth by Shariat Sangalaji in his pivotal work, Tawḥīd-e ʿIbādat. The fundamental objective of this article is to assess the extent to which the author’s perspectives align with the theological foundations and ritual practices of the Imami tradition, relying on rigorous religious evidence. Within the discourse of theological studies, the critical refinement and in-depth evaluation of doctrines, aimed at delineating their epistemic standing, constitute a scholarly necessity. To this end, the methodology of this study is grounded in textual criticism and analytical citation, utilizing authentic Shīʿa theological and exegetical sources. In this context, the author's arguments concerning key categories—such as shafāʿa, tawassul, istighātha, ghulū, nadhr, and the veneration of sacred symbols—are subjected to rigorous academic scrutiny. The findings of this research indicate that Sangalaji’s views in these areas conflict with the established principles and fundamental teachings derived from the Holy Qur’an and the authentic Imami tradition, which are predicated upon rigorous criteria of hadith authenticity and the principles of Rijal. By directly engaging with revealed texts and employing methodical analytical tools, this study evaluates the validity of the propositions presented in Tawḥīd-e ʿIbādat, thereby contributing to enhanced scholarly precision within the domain of theological discourse.
Introduction
The present study undertakes a critical examination of the theological doctrines advanced by Shariat Sangalaji in his seminal work, Tawḥīd-e ʿIbādat. Sangalaji ranks among the modern reformist thinkers who, adopting a Salafī-oriented approach and aiming to purge religious belief and practice of what they regarded as superstition, sought to reconstruct the concepts of monotheism (tawḥīd) and polytheism (shirk). The significance of this inquiry derives from the considerable influence that Sangalaji's ideas have exercised upon certain pseudo-intellectual religious currents and upon modern theological discourse in Iran. The central problem is whether his interpretation of the unity of worship and of such concepts as intercession (shafāʿa), mediation (tawassul), and seeking succour (istighātha) is compatible with the firm foundations of the Holy Qur'an and the definitive tradition of the Twelver Imami Shīʿa. The principal aim of the article is, accordingly, to assess the validity of the propositions set forth in the aforementioned book and to demarcate the boundary between authentic monotheism and its extremist or reductionist readings.
Materials & Methods
This research is conducted within a descriptive-analytical framework and is grounded in the methods of textual criticism and isnād (chain-of-transmission) analysis. The primary materials comprise the revealed text (the Holy Qur'an), the authentic Imami tradition, and the principal Shīʿa theological and exegetical sources. Methodologically, Sangalaji's doctrinal propositions were first extracted from Tawḥīd-e ʿIbādat and subsequently subjected to critical evaluation in accordance with the criteria of ḥadīth authenticity, the principles of ʿilm al-rijāl (the biographical evaluation of transmitters), and rational analysis. To enrich the discussion and to identify the intellectual genealogy of his positions, the study further compares his views with those of the early and later Shīʿa theologians as well as with Salafī and Sunnī perspectives, thereby clarifying the degree of originality or indebtedness discernible in his doctrines.
Discussion & Results
The findings indicate that Sangalaji adopted a markedly reductionist position with respect to intercession (shafāʿa), mediation (tawassul), seeking succour (istighātha), and vows (nadhr). By conflating "worship" (ʿibāda) with "veneration" (taʿẓīm), he classified many Shīʿa rites and devotional practices as instances of polytheism (shirk). In regard to intercession, he disregarded the Qur'anic verses affirming intercession by Divine permission (idhn), thereby adopting a position closely akin to that of the Wahhābī movement. Concerning mediation and seeking succour, he drew an unfounded distinction between the condition of the Infallibles (peace be upon them) during their worldly lives and after their passing, treating any appeal to God's chosen ones after death as polytheistic. The authentic Imami tradition, by contrast, grounded in the intermediate-realm existence (ḥayāt barzakhiyya) and the ontological guardianship (al-wilāya al-takwīniyya) of the Infallibles (peace be upon them), regards such acts as among the very manifestations of monotheism. Likewise, with regard to vows (nadhr) and the visitation of graves (ziyāra), the research demonstrates that Sangalaji confined himself to the outward form of the act rather than analysing the underlying intention of the devotee, thereby neglecting the Qur'anic principles governing the veneration of the rites and symbols of God (shaʿāʾir Allāh). The isnād analysis further reveals that, in numerous instances, he relied upon weak traditions or arbitrary, opinion-based exegesis in order to substantiate his preconceived conclusions.
Conclusion
The overall result of this study is that Sangalaji's propositions in Tawḥīd-e ʿIbādat, notwithstanding their reformist pretensions, stand in serious conflict with the established principles of the Holy Qur'an and the fundamental teachings of the Imami tradition. His doctrines derive less from Shīʿa legal-theological reasoning (ijtihād) than from the intellectual milieu of contemporary Salafism, and they are consequently incongruent with the Shīʿa theological foundations concerning the mediators of Divine grace (wasāʾil al-fayḍ) and the spiritual stations of the Infallibles (peace be upon them). This research recommends that a sound understanding of monotheism requires the avoidance of superficial, one-dimensional readings, and calls for a renewed examination of the correlation between the unity of the Divine Lordship and the guardianship (wilāya) of God's chosen ones in the light of the definitive texts. Ultimately, the scholarly validity of Sangalaji's propositions is undermined by methodological deficiencies and by his exclusion of a substantial body of authentic ḥadīth evidence.
کلیدواژهها English
