No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The current thesis is concerned with proving the theory of the inconsistency of constitutionalism and democracy with Islam, which is mainly accomplished through the analysis of the ideas of two Iranian Qajarid thinkers; i.e. Mirza Fath-Ali Akhondzadeh 1229-1295 AH /1812-1879 CE and Sheykh Fadhl-allah Kojouri Nouri 1259-1327 AH /1843-1909 CE. Despite that at the beginning, the ideas of these two appear diametrically opposed since the former was a secularist, while the latter was an Islamist; both of them finally arrived at the same conclusion that is the title of this thesis. The reason of choosing these two thinkers, who could properly be viewed as representative of both the secular and Islamic wings, was their extraordinary frankness in advancing their opinions. In order to prove my theory, through critical study of the manuscripts, lectures, documents, primary and secondary sources, I have sought to analyse: 1- the ideas of Akhondzadeh, who by imitating the West and ancient Iran, tried to present constitutionalism and democracy as the only remedy for saving the people from despotism and backwardness and also as Iran's definitive fate, while making the recommendation for retaining constitutionalism and democracy and abandoning Islam; 2- the ideas of Sheykh Fadhl-allah Nouri, who as a member of the 'ulamii demonstrated the incompatibility of constitutionalism and democracy with Islam from the viewpoint of Islamic laws, whilst believing in the necessity of preserving Islam and abandoning constitutionalism.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This dissertation is primarily a study of the idea of temporary Hell-fire punishment for the grave sinners of the Muslim community. The doctrine is taught by Islamic orthodoxy, both Sunni and Shi'i, but its historical development has not been examined by modern scholars. The present study is offered as a preliminary investigation of this concept. Probably under influence from the Judaeo-Christian tradition, the concept of temporary Hell-fire punishment found its way into the nascent Muslim theology of the early second century A.H. But at the time of its emergence (c. 700-750 A.D.), and for many decades afterwards, the idea faced resistance from 'scripturalists' within Muslim society who found no explicit support for it in the Qur'an. Muslim traditionalists sought to reconcile it with the text of the Qur'an, and eventually adopted it as a theological solution to the divisive and long-standing question of the fate of the Muslim grave sinner in the next world. Within the early Muslim community, however, there also existed the belief, first attested on a Dome of the Rock inscription (c. 691-2 AD), of the eschatological intercession (shafa'a) of the Prophet. The Qur'an had not explicitly granted the Prophet such a privilege, but given the 'monotheistic' precedent of prophets and holy men as intercessors, and a widely-held esteem among pre-Islamic Arabs for the figure of the 'intercessor' (shafi'), it was not long before Muhammad was acknowledged as the intercessor par excellence on the Day of Resurrection. For the first 150 years, there were almost no discussions about the Prophet's shafdca, but sometime between the second and third century A.H., the issue, according to the our Iraqi historical sources, became a point of controversy. This was probably because Muslim scripturalists, who had opposed the idea of temporary Hell-fire, were now resisting the traditionalist doctrine that the Prophet's shafa'a would help grave sinners exit from Hell.