نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه شیعه شناسی ، دانشگاه ادیان و مذاهب قم، قم، ایران
2 دانشیار گروه شیعه شناسی، دانشکده شیعه شناسی، دانشگاه ادیان و مذاهب قم، قم، ایران
3 استادیار، گروه تاریخ، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Bibliographic compilation has been a significant area of interest for Muslim scholars across various historical periods. Evaluating their bibliographic methodologies in the contemporary era can illuminate the scientific growth and the epistemological, social, and religious dimensions of Islamic intellectual ecosystems. Motivated by this imperative, the present article critically examines a bibliographic work in the domain of sectarian polemics—Muʿjam al-Muʾallafāt fī al-Radd ʿalā al-Shiʿa al-Ithnā ʿAshariyya—within the academic landscape of Saudi Arabia. Employing a descriptive-analytical methodology, the research interrogates the extent to which the authors of Muʿjam al-Muʾallafāt adhered to scientific and technical bibliographic practices, particularly in concept definition and substantiation, during the documentation of anti-Twelver Shiʿi works across the first four Islamic centuries. The findings reveal significant methodological deficiencies: the work suffers from imprecise definitional parameters regarding key concepts such as “Twelver Shiʿism,” methodological transgressions, inclusion of heterogeneous materials incongruent with Imami Shiʿi scholarship, and substantive weaknesses in citations and attributions. Moreover, numerous works cited are not inherently polemical texts, and the analytical approach demonstrates a pronounced departure from scholarly objectivity. Through a critical examination of representative examples of the work's errors and limitations, this article emphasizes the urgent necessity for comprehensive revision and methodological recalibration.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)