جامعه شناسی تاریخی و ارزیابی انتقادی خوانش سکولاریستی از اخباریان

مجموعه پژوهش‌های اخباری‌شناسی اعم از مخالف و موافق، این نکته را مفروض گرفته‌اند که آموزه‌های بنیادین مکتب اخباری دال بر آن است که اخباریان با نقش‌آفرینی سیاسی اجتماعی عالمان دین مخالف بوده‌اند. از نظر مخالفان، نبود نظریۀ سیاسی در این مکتب، علمای اخباری را از ایفای نقش سیاسیاجتماعی در برهه‌های مهم تاریخی باز داشت. در نقطۀ مقابل موافقان، روی‌گردانی علمای اخباری از ایفای نقش سیاسی در جامعه را مثبت ارزیابی می‌کنند و با ترسیم چهره‌ای غیرسیاسی از آن‌ها نقش تاریخی‌شان را تلاشی برای حفظ سامان اجتماعی و مبارزه با قدرت همه‌جاگیر مجتهدان می‌دانند. به هر حال از این نظر که اخباریان هیچ نقش سیاسی برای عالم دینی درنظر نمی‌گرفته‌اند، تفاوتی میان دو گروه به‌ظاهر متعارض وجود ندارد. این درک از نظریۀ اخباری را می‌توان خوانش سکولاریستی از اخباریان نامید. در این مقاله به روش تحلیل متنی و با هدف بررسی و سنجش فهم سکولاریستی از نظریۀ اخباری، پس از مرور مختصر آرای برخی از مشهورترین پژوهشگران حوزۀ شیعه‌شناسی، دو تحقیق دانشگاهی نقد و ارزیابی می‌شود که به فاصلۀ ده سال از یکدیگر و در دو رشتۀ متفاوت تالیف و در دو دانشگاه مختلف دفاع شده‌اند. سیدمحسن آل‌غفور (1379) و روح‌الله اسلامی (1389) به‌رغم تفاوت‌های روشی و نظری، هردو در این فرض و نتیجه‌گیری شریک‌اند که دلالت آموزه‌های مکتب اخباری بر این است که عالم دینی نمی‌تواند و نباید نقش سیاسی برعهده بگیرد. مقالۀ حاضر، به‌خصوص با ارجاع به آثار استرآبادی، به این یافته می‌رسد که ادلۀ این پژوهشگران به‌هیچ‌وجه وافی به مقصود نیست و نمی‌تواند چنین برداشتی از آموزه‌های مکتب اخباری را تایید کند. نتیجه‌گیری نهایی بیانگر آن است که علمای اخباری نه بیشتر و نه کمتر از دیگر علمای امامیه قائل به نقش‌آفرینی سیاسی اجتماعی فقها بوده‌اند.

Sociological Insights into Secularist Reading of Akhbarism: A Critical Consideration

Introduction: Research projects into Akhbārīsm seem to be taking for granted that Akhbārī doctrines imply any refutation of sociopolitical role for the religious scholars. Not only studies concerned with the establishing period of the school but also those devoted to the decline period of the school treat Akhbārīsm as an apolitical fraction in Shi’ite scholarship. This is what might be called secularist notion of the Akhbārī theory. However, the main Akhbārī texts do not leave a room for such an interpretation and moreover the social roles and state functions performed by Akhbārī ulama are strong negations to this understanding. Method: In order to evaluate the secularist notion of the Akhbārī Theory and thus to criticise it, this article makes use of a textual analysis method to examine the ideas and the discussions generated by the most prominent scholars in the field and then focuses on two particular academic researches whose theoretical framework takes root in the existing Akhbārī literature.  Findings: The contesters who evaluate the role and the function of the Akhbārīsm negatively, believe that Akhbārī ulama failed to play a sociopolitical role in decisive episodes of the history because Akhbārīsm lacked a political theory while on the other hand their Uṣūlī counterpart were capable, in theory and practice, to lead the society in fatal events. During the second phase of PersoRussian war, for instance, Uṣūlī mujtahids issued fatwas urging Muslims to defend their homeland. Tobacco fatwa by which Shi’ite Muslims were prohibited from smoking tobacco is another occasion declaring the role and importance of Uṣūlī doctrines. Additionally, Iranian Constitutionalism is a significant event for the glorification of the Uṣūlī School. During victorious Constitutional Revolution the importance of theory of ijtihad and the role of Uṣūlī agenda is far beyond denial. Reportedly, Akhbārī ulama did play no role. Supposedly, they are all scenes wherein Akhbārī ulama were absent.Similarly, the appreciators depict an apolitical portrait of the Akhbārī ulama who, historically, did their best to preserve the social integrity and to oppose the unlimited power of the mujtahids. They suggest that Akhbārī ulama believed in no political role for the religious scholars. Therefore, central to their attention was how to maintain integrity of the society by guaranteeing a life safety for Sufis as well as Sunni minorities. Akhbārī refutation of emulation theory by which they meant an opposition against mujtahids was positive in function because it was capable to accredit laypeople understanding of the sacred texts. This linear epistemology was an absolute threat to social position of mujtahids who defended some hierarchical epistemology based on which the society was divided into two groups: a majority of laypeople who ought to emulate a minority of knowledgeable ulama.     Results & Conclusion: These apparently adversaries seem to share the same idea based on which Akhbārī ulama were propagating a notion of secularism. Reviewing wellknown researchers in this field, this article focuses on two academic theses authored in a tenyearperiod. Relying on different methodological and theoretical bases, Mohsen AleGhafour (2000) and Rouhollah Eslami (2010) share the same idea and conclusion that according to Akhbārī doctrines religious scholars are not allowed and must not be to play any political role. However, referring to Amin Astarābādī himself, this article reaches this conclusion that their argumentations are not documentarily satisfied and fail to confirm their interpretation. Besides, the socalled Akhbārī ulama were in close contacts with the state and people as well which makes us regard this interpretation historically indefensible.