نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی
نویسنده
استادیار گروه کلام اسلامی، مجتمع حکمت ومطالعات ادیان، جامعه المصطفی العالمیة قم، قم، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
The report of the falta—“kānat bayʿat Abī Bakr falta(tan)” (“The allegiance to Abū Bakr was a sudden/unplanned event”)—which is unanimously accepted among Sunnīs and transmitted through multiple chains, carries clear implications that conflict with certain fundamental Sunnī doctrines. Among these are the legitimacy of the caliphate emerging from the Saqīfa episode and the claim that this caliphate was grounded in consensus (ijmāʿ). Consequently, Sunnī scholars, particularly their theologians (mutakallimūn), have made considerable efforts to reinterpret (taʾwīl) this report.Since inconsistency between word and deed, as well as forced reinterpretation against the apparent meaning, are neither commendable nor acceptable within common scholarly convention, some Sunnī scholars have found themselves compelled either to deny the very occurrence of the report or to cast doubt upon its plausibility. This article examines both the implications of the khabar al-falta and the responses offered by Sunnī scholars. The analysis demonstrates that the principal actors in the Saqīfa event, along with their followers, implicitly acknowledged the inadequacy of this method of designating a caliph. In attempting to escape the problematic consequences of this mode of succession, they resorted to strained justifications, but these efforts ultimately failed to resolve the inherent contradictions.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)