Document Type : Academicm and Research

Authors

• Sayed Mahmood tayebhoseini ¹
• seyyed Ibrahim Mortazavi ²

¹ 1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Religions, The Imam Khomeini Education & Research Institute, Qom,

² Associate Professor, Faculty of Quranic Exegesis and Sciences, The Imam Khomeini Education and Research Institute, Qom, Iran.

Abstract

Highlights

Introduction

In some verses, human-like attributes are attributed to God, which have come to be known as “anthropomorphic attributes.” In the semantics of anthropomorphic verses and how to attribute these qualities to God, various analyses and viewpoints have been proposed: likeness and embodiment, suspension (entrustment), proving attributes without esoteric interpretation, proving attributes without properties, proving attributes with esoteric interpretation, and others. The correct understanding and explanation of anthropomorphic attributes requires reflection and comparative examination of the views of thinkers and evaluation of the claims of experts on this subject. Undoubtedly, Fakhr Razi and Alusi can be considered the most important theorists of exegesis and theology. Tafsīr Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb, known as Tafsīr al-Kabīr, by Fakhr Razi, contains a complete collection of the theological views of the Asharites, Mutazilites, Karamiyyah, and some other Muslim sects. Shahabuddin Mahmoud Alusi’s Rūh al-Maʿānī can be considered the second version of Fakhr Razi’s Tafsīr al-Kabīr. The present study tries to investigate and evaluate the semantics of anthropomorphic attributes – as one of the challenging issues of Islamic theology – in the ideas of these two exegetes, through the method of comparative exegesis.

The questions of this research are: 1) What are Fakhr Razi and Alusi’s views on news attributes? 2) What are the differences and similarities between the views of these two thinkers?

Fakhr Razi’s view

Fakhr Razi presents different approaches when dealing with the verses of anthropomorphic attributes. According to verse seven of Aal-Imran, he clearly considers esoteric interpretation unacceptable because after abandoning the literal meaning, several allegorical meanings are possible, and the criterion of preferring one allegorical meaning over other allegorical meanings, from his point of view, cannot be anything other than verbal evidence. However, in the verse “—the All-beneficent, settled on the Throne” [Taha: 5], while accepting entrustment to God (tafwīḍ; the view that proves these attributes but is silent regarding their meaning and leaves that to God), it also confirms esoteric interpretation. In some cases, he considers esoteric interpretation to be obligatory. For example, in the verses that attribute “accompaniment and closeness” to God, he says that there are verses like this in the Quran regarding which every reasonable person sees no other option but interpretation. There are many traditions like this as well. Fakhr Razi does not explicitly accept delegation in some cases and considers it a weak aspect.

Alusi’s view

Alusi has introduced himself as a follower of the Salafi sect on the topic of anthropomorphic attributes, and has considered esoteric interpretation to be the chosen belief of the Salafi elders. According to Alusi, the Salafis did not predicate similarities on the apparent/literal aspect of verses and believed in entrustment to God. A few thinkers who have predicated these similarities on the apparent/literal aspect have rejected its mental requisites that lead to aspersions on God and entail the attribution of imperfection to God. They believe that these mental requisites are specific to the incidental/occurring attributes of us, the creation, which are inseparable from those attributes, but the truth is that they are not necessary for the attributes of the incomparable divine essence so if someone proves the attributes without these requisites he would have perpetuated a fallacy. Alusi, while accepting the principles governing the prominent opinion of Salafis, has also presented an interpretative-reasoning-like reading – although, with a slight distinction – of the prominent Salafi theory. In addition, he has glorified and praised the opinion of Sufi elders and put it on par with the opinion of the Salafis, and considered the beliefs of the Salafis to be more sound and stable, and following them, he has a tendency toward the view of entrustment to God, and he has asserted his inclination in numerous places and in different occasions toward entrustment and, following the Salafis, toward entrusting the knowledge of homogeneous attributes to God. 

 Assessing and evaluating the two viewpoints

1. Alusi and Fakhr Razi, while being similar in some cases, differ from each other in terms of the chosen approach to the discussed topic. Although Fakhr Razi has shown an inclination toward esoteric interpretation, he has introduced himself as a follower of the Salafis and spoken of his lack of trust in esoteric interpretation; however, in the end, he turned to esoteric interpretation and considered it obligatory and necessary. Alusi has considered entrustment to God as the chosen belief of the Salafi and has introduced himself as a follower of the Salafis and has shown his loyalty to them.
2. The treatment of opponents by these two exegetes is also not the same. Fakhr Razi, by accepting the necessity of esoteric interpretation, considers entrustment to God accompanied by transcendence to be weak and condemned and thus rejects them. However, Alusi, along with the inclination to entrustment to God, accepts esoteric interpretation as an approach and recommends that exegesis be done in such a way that it results in no insult or humiliation to any of the views.
3. They do not have the same way of interacting with the apparent aspect of words either. Fakhr Razi considers predication on the apparent to refer to definite embodiment, necessitating false requisites, and ignorance towards God. However, Alusi accepts the apparent meaning of words as the belief of some Salafis and many of the Sufis – without considering its requisites. At the same time, he does not consider the determination of this meaning to be dogmatic and definitive.
4. From Fakhr Razi’s point of view, the words denoting “descent” (nuzūl), “arrival” (ityān), and “coming” (majīʾ) must be esoterically interpreted because their meanings cannot be valid in any way regarding the essence of Allah. From Alusi’s point of view, these are attributes whose reality should be believed, while believing in the lack of embodiment and transcendence.
5. From the point of view of Fakhr Razi, the license to do esoteric interpretation is a necessity of the intellect, that is, if the intellect does not approve a word of the Quran, it must be esoterically interpreted. Alusi has mentioned the validity of esoteric interpretation from the Salafis, harmony with the Arabic language and literature, and the necessity of dispelling doubt as the justifications for esoteric interpretation.

Conclusion

The findings of this study show that Fakhr Razi’s words about anthropomorphic verses are varied: sometimes he favors entrustment to God (tafwīḍ) combined with esoteric interpretation (taʾwīl), sometimes he rejects esoteric interpretation, and in some cases, while accepting the obligation of esoteric interpretation, he opposes it. However, on the other hand, Alusi is more inclined towards Salafis and prefers the side of entrustment to God. This shows that the validity of reason and narration are different for both of them and both exegetes have accepted the esoteric interpretation of some verses with more or less intensity.

References

Alusi, M. (2015). Ruh al-maʿani fi tafsir al-Qurʾan al-ʿazim wa al-sabʿ al-mathani. Dar al-Risalat al-Ilmiyyah. [In Arabic].

Fakhr Razi, M. (1980). Al-Tafsir al-kabir. Dar al-Fikr. [In Arabic].

Fakhr Razi, M. (1990). Lawamiʿ al-bayyinat, sharh asmaʾ Allah taʿala wa al-sifaat. Dar al-Kitab al-Arabi. [In Arabic].

Fakhr Razi, M. (2011). Taʾsis al-taqdis (A. M. Adnan Sharqawi, Ed.). Dar Nur al-Sabah. [In Arabic].

Imandar, H., & Mostafavi Fard, H. (2017). Alusi and his intermediate position between Ash’ariyyah and Salafiyyah with a focus on his ideas on the issue of narrated attributes. The Mirror of Knowledge, 17(2), 73-96. [In Persian]

Muhammadpour, M. (2011). Barrasi-yi ikhtilafaat-i Abul Hasan Ashʿari va Imam Fakhr Razi. Motaleat-e-Taghribi Mazaheb-e-Eslami (Proximity Studies of Islamic Denominations) (previously Foroughe Vahdat), 26(7), pp. 20-33. [In Persian].

Noori, I., Khakpour, H., & Bozorgzadeh, M. (2022). Measurement and harmony between Fakhr Razi’s opinion and Alusi’s view in the subject matter of the Divine Speech. Islamic Philosophical Doctrines, 16(29), 283-309. https://doi.org/10.30513/ipd.2022.3090.1258 [In Persian].

Razi, A. H. (2011). Gerayesh-ha wa mazahib-i Islami (A. Aghanouri, Trans.). University of Religions and Denominations Press. [In Persian].

Salmani, P. (2003). Tafsir kabir. In G. A. Haddad Adil (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of the world of Islam (vol. 7, pp. 707-712). Encyclopaedia Islamica Foundation. [In Persian].

Shams, M. J. (2010). Tashbih wa tanzih dar maktab-i Vedante va maktab-i Ibn ʿArabi. Adyan Publications. [In Persian].

Keywords

• : verses fifty-five of the Aal-Imran Chapter
• the purification of Jesus
• Jesus in the Quran
• Jesus in Judaism
• unjust accusations against Jesus

Main Subjects

• Islamic