Al-Mustafa International University Theology Journal 2476-5325 12 22 2025 08 23 Scope of Iḥbāṭ: A Critical Perspective from Imami and Sunni Viewpoints Scope of Iḥbāṭ: A Critical Perspective from Imami and Sunni Viewpoints 97 118 10378 10.22034/pke.2025.21130.1983 FA Davuod Khoshbavar Assistant Professor Department of Islamic Studies, Farhangian University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran (Corresponding Author). 0000-0001-5557-697X Hossein Ziaee Graduate of the level of Four Jurisprudence and Principles of Qom Seminary, Qom, Iran. Journal Article 2025 05 05 The issue of iḥbāṭ (nullification of deeds) is a foundational topic in the field of Islamic theology (kalām) that elucidates the relationship between faith (īmān), righteous deeds (‘amal ṣāliḥ), and eschatological felicity. It stands in contrast to the eternal damnation resulting from disbelief (kufr) and sin (ma‘ṣiyat). The central point of disagreement in this domain concerns the nature and modality of how iḥbāṭ is actualized. The objective of this research is to analyze and examine three theological perspectives on the issue of iḥbāṭ in relation to the reckoning of deeds, divine wisdom (ḥikmah), and divine justice (‘adl)—a subject that has perpetually been a site of debate and discourse among theologians (mutakallimūn). Accordingly, this article emphasizes the Imāmī perspective and compares it with the views of the Ahl al-Sunnah, particularly the Mu‘tazilah. The research methodology is descriptive-analytical, grounded in documentary sources and library-based data. The findings indicate that, according to the Imāmī view, the denial of iḥbāṭ and its metaphorical interpretation (tafsīr majāzī) possess greater soundness (itqān), based on arguments from the Qur’an and narrative traditions (riwāyāt). Conversely, the Mu‘tazilah affirm the literal meaning of iḥbāṭ and are divided into two factions: one that upholds the total nullification (iḥbāṭ kullī) of deeds, and another that proposes the theory of partial nullification (iḥbāṭ juz’ī) and a counterbalancing (muwāzanah) between good deeds (ḥasanāt) and evil deeds (sayyi’āt). Through a documented analysis of these three viewpoints, the final conclusion affirms the Imāmī position, which involves the negation of the total nullification of deeds and an emphasis on divine justice and wisdom in matters of reward and punishment. The issue of iḥbāṭ (nullification of deeds) is a foundational topic in the field of Islamic theology (kalām) that elucidates the relationship between faith (īmān), righteous deeds (‘amal ṣāliḥ), and eschatological felicity. It stands in contrast to the eternal damnation resulting from disbelief (kufr) and sin (ma‘ṣiyat). The central point of disagreement in this domain concerns the nature and modality of how iḥbāṭ is actualized. The objective of this research is to analyze and examine three theological perspectives on the issue of iḥbāṭ in relation to the reckoning of deeds, divine wisdom (ḥikmah), and divine justice (‘adl)—a subject that has perpetually been a site of debate and discourse among theologians (mutakallimūn). Accordingly, this article emphasizes the Imāmī perspective and compares it with the views of the Ahl al-Sunnah, particularly the Mu‘tazilah. The research methodology is descriptive-analytical, grounded in documentary sources and library-based data. The findings indicate that, according to the Imāmī view, the denial of iḥbāṭ and its metaphorical interpretation (tafsīr majāzī) possess greater soundness (itqān), based on arguments from the Qur’an and narrative traditions (riwāyāt). Conversely, the Mu‘tazilah affirm the literal meaning of iḥbāṭ and are divided into two factions: one that upholds the total nullification (iḥbāṭ kullī) of deeds, and another that proposes the theory of partial nullification (iḥbāṭ juz’ī) and a counterbalancing (muwāzanah) between good deeds (ḥasanāt) and evil deeds (sayyi’āt). Through a documented analysis of these three viewpoints, the final conclusion affirms the Imāmī position, which involves the negation of the total nullification of deeds and an emphasis on divine justice and wisdom in matters of reward and punishment. http://pke.journals.miu.ac.ir/article_10378_a32525a736eff6fc28e6fa7739ce6923.pdf