The Hermeneutics of Religious Reformers Under the Lens of ‎Theological Critique: Reconstructing and Explaining an ‎Authentic Model for Understanding Tradition

Statement of the Problem: Focusing on one of the most foundational epistemological conflicts in the contemporary Islamic world, this paper investigates the relationship between the "science of theology" and the "hermeneutics of religious reformers". Through this analytical confrontation, it seeks to present a theological-ijtihadi model for understanding Islamic tradition. The central problem of the research is the epistemological crisis arising from the introduction of philosophical hermeneutics into the domain of religious interpretation.

Inspired by the ideas of Martin Heidegger and Hans-Georg Gadamer, these reformist readings treat understanding as an inherently historical, fluid process dependent on the interpreter's horizon, thereby undermining the possibility of accessing a stable meaning or the author’s original intent. This approach has manifested as a coherent project for rereading Islamic tradition in the works of prominent figures such as Mohammed Arkoun, Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd, and Abdolkarim Soroush.
Consequently, the core inquiry of this research is whether a systematic theological critique can expose the internal contradictions and theological-methodological vulnerabilities of these hermeneutical projects. Furthermore, it addresses whether the Islamic theological tradition possesses the latent structural capacity to transition from a defensive posture into an active, coherent, and dynamic theory of textual interpretation—one that preserves the authority of revelation while constructively engaging with the shifting epistemic demands of the modern era.

Research Methodology: This study employs a descriptive-analytical methodology combined with a critical, theological approach. First, utilizing a targeted conceptual mapping, the foundational tenets of both philosophical hermeneutics and Islamic theology are defined and contrasted. In the critical phase, the paper applies an internal and external critique to the specific hermeneutical frameworks of Arkoun, Abu Zayd, and Soroush, evaluating their semantic, epistemological, and theological consequences. Finally, utilizing a constructive-synthetic approach, the paper systematically integrates traditional theological principles (such as divine wisdom, inerrancy, and the hermeneutic of muhkam and mutashabih) with contemporary methodological tools to formulate and present a balanced, comprehensive "theological-ijtihadi model" for textual understanding.
Research Results: The findings of this research are structured across three primary dimensions: conceptual mapping, critical deconstruction, and constructive modeling.

Conceptual Mapping and Definitions: Philosophical hermeneutics, by transitioning from an interpretive methodology to a philosophy of understanding, posits three core principles: the historicity of understanding (the hermeneutic circle), the fusion of horizons, and

the historical production of meaning. Within this framework, understanding is viewed not as the objective discovery of a text’s pre-existing meaning, but as an event occurring between the text and the interpreter within a specific historical matrix. Conversely, ilm al-kalam is presented not merely as a defensive discipline, but as a robust epistemological and identity-preserving system. Grounded in reason , transmitted text , and systematic coherence, it presupposes human access to stable religious truths and provides a structured framework for textual interpretation.
Critical Deconstruction of Reformist Hermeneutics: The critical analysis yields distinct conclusions for each examined thinker across three analytical levels (epistemological, theological, and methodological):


Mohammed Arkoun: His rigid demarcation between the "Quranic phenomenon" and the "historical codex" , coupled with his invitation to transcend the "dogmatic enclosure," effectively suspends the normative authority of the interpretive tradition and the textual integrity of the available scripture.
Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd: His emphasis on the concept of "textuality"—reducing revelation to a "cultural product" and shifting the locus of meaning entirely to the interpreter—leads to radical semantic relativism and weakens the theological sovereignty of the Quran.
Abdolkarim Soroush: His theory of the "Theoretical Contraction and Expansion of Shari'ah" distinguishes between immutable religion and mutable religious knowledge. While textually defending the stability of religion in theory, this framework renders human epistemic access to that truth so profoundly historicized that objective evaluation between competing interpretations becomes virtually impossible.

The overarching theological critique demonstrates that these approaches suffer from internal self-contradiction (the fallacy of absolute relativism) and fail to provide objective criteria for distinguishing correct from incorrect interpretations. Philosophically, they cause the dilution of divine revelation, the erosion of prophetic inerrancy (ismah), and the subversion of textual authority. Methodologically, these reformist projects commit a fundamental error by conflating the realm of ontological reality (maqam al-thubut—the religion as it is in itself) with the realm of epistemological manifestation (maqam al-ithbat—historical human understanding of religion).

Constructive Modeling (The Positive Role of Kalam): This paper demonstrates how the internal mechanics of Islamic theology provide effective safeguards against interpretive anarchy. Based on the theological principles of Divine Wisdom and Guidance, a revealed text must be structurally accessible enough to convey valid, transformative guidance to its audience. The principle of prophetic inerrancy acts as an epistemological guarantee for the authentic transmission and exposition of revelation, anchoring the authority of the Prophetic Sunnah. Furthermore, the Quranic paradigm of the "decisive" (muhkam) and the "allegorical" (mutashabih) serves as an internal methodological mechanism to prevent semantic relativism: allegorical verses must be interpreted in the light of the decisive, foundational pillars of the creed.

To demonstrate the contemporary efficacy of this framework, the paper examines practical theological interpretations, such as contextualizing anthropomorphic descriptions of God (sifat al-khabariyyah) through the lens of absolute transcendence (tanzih), and understanding the verses of warfare  within the broader moral system of the Quran—governed by the principles of justice, the prohibition of religious compulsion, and the primacy of peace.

Conclusion and Innovation: The core innovation of this research culminates in the design of a Theological-Ijtihadi Model for Understanding Tradition, which replaces both radical hermeneutical relativism and rigid, anti-rational literalism . This model operates on three distinct pillars: Ultimately, the paper establishes that ilm al-kalam possesses the structural capacity to be formulated as a comprehensive philosophy of language and textual interpretation. By anchoring contemporary human understanding within an objective framework of divine teleology and definitive rational principles, this model successfully bridges the gap between preserving the timeless authority of revelation and addressing the complex epistemic realities of the modern world.