A Rational Interpretation of the Issues of Functional Monotheism (Tawḥīd al-Fiʿlī) in the Holy Quran: A Comparative Study of al-Rāzī and al-Ṭabāṭabāʾī

Authors

  • Ahmed Ali Doushi, M.A. PhD Student, University of Tehran / Faculty of Islamic Studies and Thought
  • Javad Eshaqian Darcheh (Corresponding Author) University of Tehran / Faculty of Islamic Studies and Thought
  • . Hossein Hashemnejad University of Tehran / Faculty of Islamic Studies and Thought
  • Saber Akbari Jadi University of Tehran / Faculty of Islamic Studies and Thought

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.66026/nf7bhz26

Keywords:

Issues of Tawhid (monotheism), rational issues, theological foundations, and Islamic creed.

Abstract

This study examines the rational interpretation of issues related to Divine Active Unity (al-Tawhid al-Fi‘li) in the Holy Qur’an, through a comparative analysis of the approaches of Fakhr al-Din al-Razi and Muhammad Husayn al-Tabataba’i. The research aims to identify the rational foundations employed by both exegetes in understanding Qur’anic verses concerning the acts of God and their relationship to the principle of Divine Unity. It also seeks to examine the points of agreement and difference between them in addressing issues such as creation, Lordship, divine governance, guidance, misguidance, divine will, and divine decree.

The significance of this study lies in the fact that Divine Active Unity constitutes a fundamental aspect of Islamic theology, as it concerns the affirmation of God’s exclusive agency and His governance of the universe. It is also closely connected with several theological and philosophical discussions. The study adopts an analytical and comparative methodology by examining selected passages from the Qur’anic interpretations of al-Razi and al-Tabataba’i and analyzing the rational, theological, and philosophical foundations underlying their interpretations.

The study concludes that both al-Razi and al-Tabataba’i employed rational reasoning in interpreting issues of Divine Active Unity, although their methods differed according to their respective theological, philosophical, and exegetical foundations. The two exegetes share several aspects, particularly their reliance on rational argumentation and their affirmation of Divine Unity in relation to God’s acts. Nevertheless, differences can be observed in their treatment of certain issues, particularly the relationship between Divine action and human actions, as well as the concepts of divine will, decree, and governance.

References

Downloads

Published

2026-11-05