Criticism of the neo-classical salafi understanding forming the discourse of religious exclusivism an evaluation on the specifics of the critiques aimed at fakhr al-din al-razi regarding the epistemological value of language

Abstract

Al-Razi stated that specific criteria should exist for interpreting religious texts, with one of the two in particular prioritizing the conflict of 'aql [reason] and naql [revelation]. Accordingly, he developed the theory of the hypothetical nature of linguistic evidence. According to al-Razi's theory, literary evidence have been exposed to possible errors from transferring al-nahw [lexicography, morphology, and grammar] rules to the present day; different linguistic possibilities such as figurative speech homonymy and transfer of meanings (naql al-lugha) are likely to have occurred in the process. Therefore, religious texts do not express certainty when qarinas [contextual clues] are absent. Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, leading names in the neo-classical Salafi understanding, described the view that literal evidence does not express 'ilm [definitive knowledge] but rather expresses Uann [speculative knowledge] as taghut [an idol], criticizing it to have a marginalizing and exclusionary style. The present article will examine the discourse of religious exclusivism produced within the framework of the hypotheticality of language and will show that this discourse is caused by Ibn Taymiyya's and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya's words being misunderstood. This study will first explain what is meant by religious exclusion and provide the intellectual background of the theory of the hypotheticality of language. Next, it will cover Ibn Taymiyya's and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya's questioning of al-Razi's religiosity, and finish with how the accusations against Razi had stemmed from a misunderstanding of his ideas