Abstract

General Background: Contemporary Qur'anic interpretation often finds itself at the crossroads of tradition and modernity. Specific Background: One such tension is observable in the contrast between Mohamed Arkoun’s modernist hermeneutics and the traditional Shi‘i Imami exegetical framework. Knowledge Gap: While Arkoun's secular methodologies challenge established religious paradigms, limited research has critically examined their compatibility with metaphysically grounded Imami thought. Aims: This study critically analyzes Arkoun’s interpretive discourse through the lens of Imami hermeneutics, aiming to assess epistemological and methodological intersections. Results: It reveals fundamental divergences regarding the nature of the Qur’an—Arkoun treating it as a cultural construct subject to historical critique, while Imami thought preserves its divine, miraculous essence through a sacred interpretive tradition. Novelty: The paper juxtaposes Arkoun’s use of linguistics, anthropology, and sociology of knowledge with the theological underpinnings of Imami exegesis, offering an original comparative framework. Implications: The study concludes by evaluating the potential and limits of integrating modernist insights into traditional Islamic interpretation, thereby contributing to the broader discourse on reconciling critical methodologies with religious orthodoxy.

Highlight:

• Contrasts Arkoun’s modernist lens with Imami theological principles.

• Highlights Qur'an’s dual role as sacred and cultural text.

• Assesses integration potential of critical secular tools in traditional hermeneutics.

Keywords: Mohamed Arkoun, Modernist Discourse, Qur'anic Interpretation, Imami Exegesis, Islamic Thought

Introduction

In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate

Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace be upon the noblest of prophets and messengers, Muhammad the truthful, the trustworthy, and his family, the good and the pure.

Contemporary Islamic thought witnessed a wave of modernist readings that sought to reinterpret religious texts, foremost the Holy Quran, from a rational critical perspective grounded in humanities and social science approaches. Mohammed Arkun is one of the most prominent thinkers who challenged this task when he presented an innovative speech that tried dismantling the traditional structure of understanding the Qur'anic text using analytical tools derived from linguistics, anthropology, and the sociology of knowledge. In return, the imamic heritage has a coherent interpretive system based on doctrinal, narrative, and rational controls, which fundamentally questions how these modernist theses can integrate or interact with this heritage without disruption.

Method

A. Importance of the Topic

The importance of this research stems from the fact that it highlights a sharp crossroads between two intellectual trends that represent two different visions of the Qur'anic text: the modernist vision that treats the text as a cultural product capable of deconstruction and reconfiguration, interpreting it within a strict contractual framework. The importance also stands out in the need for a serious and balanced evaluation of Muhammad Arkun's theses, Especially in the context of the increasing intellectual openness to modern approaches, while preserving the specificity of the Imami interpretive perspective.

B. Research Problem

The main problem of this research is centered around the following question:

To what extent can Muhammad Arkun's theses on interpreting the Qur'anic text be approached within the modernist perspective without contradicting the principles and controls of Imami's interpretation based on holiness, the unseen, and miracles?

From this problem arise a number of sub-questions:

C. Research Objectives

This research aims to:

1. Presentation and analysis of the hermeneutic foundations in the Imami curriculum.

2. A study of the modern discourse of Muhammad Arkun in its relation to the Quranic text.

3. Expose the points of convergence and divergence between Arkun's vision and the Imami school of thought.

D. Research Methodology

The research is based on the critical analytical approach of analyzing the texts of Muhammad Arkun and his interpretations of the Holy Quran and comparing them with the Imami interpretation approach, as stated in his primary sources. It is also based on the comparative approach in studying the differences between the starting points of modern thought and the contradictory backgrounds of imamic interpretation. It is documented based on contemporary and heritage scientific sources, Arabic and foreign, while adhering to the standards of academic research in investigation, analysis, and documentation.

Result and Discussion

A. Researcher One

1. Exegesis in the Imamate Curriculum – Origins and Standards

Exegesis is considered one of the fundamental concepts in the science of interpretation. Hazi has taken a special interest in Imami thought, which is seen as a tool for understanding the deeper meanings of Quranic texts while adhering to Legitimate and rational controls. Exegesis differs from interpretation in the Imami approach, as exegesis is considered a heuristic process aimed at revealing the esoteric meanings of the text. In contrast, interpretation means the statement of the apparent meanings. The Imamate's approach to interpretation is based on a set of principles and criteria that ensure the integrity of understanding and its compatibility with doctrine.

The first requirement: the concept of interpretation in the Imamate and its distinction from interpretation

a. First: Exegesis in Language and Idiom

In language, exegesis is derived from "the first," meaning to return to the original or the future.

Al-Raghib Al-Asfahani said: "Interpretation is from the first, meaning returning to the origin, and from it the place to which one returns is called 'Exegesis."

Scholars have differed in defining the term. Some have held that interpretation and interpretation are synonymous. In contrast, others have distinguished between them, considering that interpretation is related to the statement of the apparent meanings of texts. In contrast, interpretation means the revelation of the inner meanings or what the text refers to from the facts. The word is against the phenomenon" [1]

b. Second: Interpretation and Exegesis in Imami Thought

In Imami's thought, interpretation and exegesis are viewed as two complementary processes for understanding the Qur'anic text. Interpretation is concerned with clarifying the apparent meanings of texts based on language and context. In contrast, exegesis is concerned with uncovering hidden meanings that may not be apparent at first glance. Mr. Tabatabaei pointed out that exegesis is the concrete truth emanating from the contents of the Qur'anic statements, and it is present in all Qur'anic verses, both explicit and ambiguous. [2]

c. Third: The Difference Between Interpretation and Exegesis

The differences between interpretation and Exegesis in Imami thought can be summarized as follows:[3]

1. Scope: Interpretation focuses on the apparent meanings of texts, while exegesis aims to uncover hidden meanings.

2. Methods: Interpretation relies on language and context, while exegesis uses rational and narrative tools to understand more profound meanings.

3. Knowledge Required: Interpretation requires a deep understanding of Islamic and rational sciences, while exegesis can be achieved using linguistic and contextual knowledge.

4. Results: Interpretation is considered clearer and more accepted among scholars, while exegesis may be controversial due to its multiple possibilities.

d. Fourth: Controls of Exegesis in Imami Thought

Imami thought lays down a set of controls for exegesis, including:[4]

e. Fifth: The Importance of Exegesis in Imami Thought

Interpretation is an important tool in Imami thought for understanding the deep meanings of Qur'anic texts, especially in doctrinal and jurisprudence matters.

2. The Second Requirement: The Schools of Exegesis in Imami Thought (Rational, Narrative, Esoteric, Intentional)

Imami thought is characterized by an integrated system of dealing with religious texts, foremost among them the Holy Quran. This system does not rely on a monolithic approach but proceeds from a diversity of tools of understanding and interpretation, combining transmission and reason, appearance and subtlety, text and intention. Within the framework of this thought, several schools of exegesis have arisen, the most prominent of which are the mental school, the novelistic school, the esoteric school, and the intentional school. We will review these schools in some detail: [5]

a. First: Mental School

The rational school of exegesis is based on rational inference and the principle that reason is one of the pillars of legislation and the source of understanding. This school is considered an extension of the Shiite theological tradition that sees in the mind "inner argument" as equivalent to "outward argument" (i.e., revelatory texts). Imami scholars, such as Shaykh al-Mufid and Allama Al-Hali, have established this approach in their commentary readings.

In this context, the mind is not seen as a substitute for the text but as a complement to it, helping to understand the meanings behind words, especially in situations where the meaning is similar or multiple meanings. The influence of this approach is clearly seen in the objective interpretation of the Qur'an, where the verses are read through general mental principles such as justice, wisdom, and monotheism.

In his commentary on the balance in the interpretation of the Qur'an, Muhammad Hussein al-Tabatabai called for the necessity of activating the mental dimension in the understanding of the Qur'an, considering that interpretation is the revelation of the truths of the texts that are not perceived by the senses, but reached by the contemplative mind in the divine guidance.

b. Secondly: The Novelistic School

The narrative school represented the traditional foundation in Imamiyyah's interpretation and interpretation, relying on the narrated texts about the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his family (peace be upon them) as the first reference for understanding the Qur'an. This approach is based on the belief in their divine Imamate and, consequently, on their innocence and inner knowledge of the Qur'an.

This school is based on dozens of narrations that explain or explain certain verses, as Imam Sadiq (Peace Be Upon Him) said: "The Qur'an has a back and an inside, and its outside is judgment and its inside is knowledge...". This orientation gives the novel a constitutive rather than an explanatory function and emphasizes that the subconscious of the text can only be understood through this reliable series of infallible.

Imami scholars have compiled entire encyclopedias that adopted the narrative method, such as [6]

c. Thirdly: The Esoteric (Mystical) School

This school is an extension of the mystical understanding of the Qur'an, where the text is seen as containing layers of meaning revealed only to the people of spiritual behavior and taste knowledge. This approach is based on the statement that the Qur'anic text is not perceived in its full dimensions through the appearance or language but through an inner development carried out by purification and spiritual sport.

This trend is represented by Shia mystics, such as Sayyid Haidar al-Amli, who combined jurisprudence, mysticism, and esoteric interpretation. The hopeful distinguished between 'interpretation' and 'Exegesis,' considering the latter to be done only through divine Mystics given by God to his saints.

And count a verse { but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge} (Al-Imran: 7). According to this school, where "the firmly established in knowledge" is interpreted as the people of the household to whom he entrusted the knowledge of the inner.

However, this school does not contradict the general controls of Imami thought but adheres to the reference of the infallible, although it seems more flexible in its tools and methods. [7]

d. Fourth: The Intentional School

This school emerged relatively late within Imami's thought, but it began to crystallize with the development of modern Quranic studies. It is based on the idea that Quranic texts should be understood in the light of the great objectives of Shari'ah, such as justice, dignity, mercy, and human interest.

In this context, he is not satisfied with the linguistic appearance or the narrative. Still, he seeks to discover the "spirit of the text" through the overall context, the legislative purpose, and the circumstances of the revelation.

Contemporary thinkers, such as Shaykh Mohammed Baqir al-Sadr in some of his fundamentalist Assiduousness, and Shaykh Shams al-Din, are influenced by this approach, as they sought to combine the understanding of the text with the realization of its practical ends.

3. The Third Requirement: The Controls of E Xegesis and the Limits of Assiduousness in Dealing With Quranic Texts

Exegesis in Imami thought represents a central tool for understanding the Qur'anic texts at multiple levels, and its legitimacy derives from the belief that the Qur'anic text has a visible and interior, and each semantic level has its conditions and controls. However, this openness in the tools of understanding does not mean escaping from the methodology or exceeding the limits of legitimacy; Rather, the exegesis of the Imamiyyah curriculum is governed by a strict framework of controls that preserve the text for its holiness and prevents falling into the exegesis of opinion or subjective projections. The following is a detail of the most important of these controls and the limits of legitimate Assiduousness:

a. First: The Reference of the Infallible in Understanding the Subcontractor

One of the most important characteristics of the Imami approach is that the interpretation of the Qur'anic text is not practiced individually or arbitrarily but rather is often linked to what was reported by the infallible from the people of the house (peace be upon them). They - according to the novels - are the people.[8]

This is based on the statement of Imam al-Baqir (Peace Be Upon Him):

"No one of the people claimed that he collected the whole Qur'an as it was revealed except as a liar, and what he collected and preserved as God was revealed except Ali bin Abi Talib and the imams after him."

Consequently, any exegesis is not based on the direction of the infallible, which is considered to be in view unless it is consistent with the ideological principles and Quranic constants.

b. Second: Taking Into Account the General Context of the Text

The Imamiyyah believes that one of the most dangerous things that the authors do is to deduct the verse from its context or download it that is not consistent with its public purposes. Therefore, the exegesis is required that:

These controls protect the text from partial interpretations that may lead to amputated or wrong meanings.

c. Third: Not to Exceed the Verbal Structure of the Text

The exegesis is required not to ignore the linguistic data of the Qur'anic text, so it is not permissible to jump above the direct indication of symbolic exegesis that has no linguistic support. This is what some Imami scholars express with "respect for the apparent word," which separates the legitimate Exegesis and the escalating internal Exegesis. [9]

For example, when the word "light" is interpreted in the Almighty saying:{ Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth}Light [: 35]

To the place of the Imamate or guidance, this does not cancel its original significance but rather adds to it a mystical dimension based on a novel or text from the infallible.

d. Fourth: The Integration Between the Mind and the Text

Exegesis in the Imami approach is not practiced by the logic of the struggle between the text and the mind but rather by the logic of integration between them. The mind is used as a way to reveal the hidden meanings, but it is not presented in the text and is not used to exegesis the text in a way that contradicts its appearance or its purpose.

This is what Sheikh Al-Mufid expressed by saying:

"The mind does not contradict the correct transmission, but rather supports and clarifies it."

Mental exegesis - in the Imami approach - is only legitimate if it is consistent with the legal texts, not contradictory to it.

B. The Second Topic

The modernist discourse of Muhammad Arkoun in light of the e xegesis of the Qur ' anic text

1. The First Requirement: Arkoun Intellectual Premises: Historical Mind, Archeological Criticism, Rereading the Founding Text

Muhammad Arkoun (1928-2010) is one of the most prominent symbols of modernist thought in the contemporary Islamic world. His philosophical project was characterized by a radical critical attempt to reconsider the cognitive structure that was formed around the Qur'an and Islamic sciences. Its goal was not to undermine the texts or cancel the heritage but rather to liberate the tools of understanding from traditional restrictions and openness to modern analysis curricula.

Arkoun started his approach with three basic premises, forming the pillar on which the entire exegesis of his speech was based: the historical mind, archaeological criticism, and rereading the founding text. [10]

a. First: the Historical Mind

Arkoun starts from a central hypothesis that Muslims, throughout history, did not succeed in building a historical mind capable of absorbing the religious text in light of its real and social contexts. The prevailing mind - as he sees it - is a theological mind that isolates the text from the conditions of its temporal and spatial production, and it is subject to a closed system of inherited interpretations.

Hence, Arkoun calls for activating the "historical mind," that is, restoring the ability to think about the past through critical analytical tools that take into account the reality in which the text came down and how it was received and circulated through the ages.

This was expressed by saying:

" The liberation of the Qur ' an from the hardness of his textual sanctity does not mean denying his sanctity, but rather it means liberating it from the legendary readings, which hinder it from entering into the space of modernity. "

The historical mind, in the perspective of Arkoun, does not exclude faith. [11]

b. Second: Archial Criticism

Arkoun is inspired by Michelle Foucault's "archeological excavation" approach as a way to detect the cognitive classes that have met about the Quranic text, which transformed it from an open text on exegesis into a closed text subject to the authority of school theology. Arkoun called this process "criticism of the Islamic mind," where it is not satisfied with the accountability of the content but rather goes to analyzing the structure produced for it, including linguistic, symbolic, and social mechanisms that formulated the historical understanding of the text, the archaeological criticism does not stop at the limits of the text but extends beyond: to the conditions of its codification, how to establish its authority, and the role of political and religious authority in stabilizing the Exegesis of the other Exegesis and from other exegeses During this dismantling, Arkoun seeks to displace Muslim women and open the text to a new potential for understanding and meaning, away from the monopoly of exegesis. [12]

c. Third: Rereading the Founding Text

What is meant by Arkoun is the Holy Quran as the center of Islamic cognitive structure and the reference point from which various legislation and concepts emerge. However, Arkoun believes that this text was crowded with layers of contractual and jurisprudence readings, which prevented it from reading a free scientific reading. Hence his call to "reread the founding text" using modern humanities curricula: structuralism, anthropology, discourse analysis, and knowledge sociology.

He sees that the Qur'an can only be understood within a broader text system, taking into account the stages of reception, blogging, and cultural domination, with a focus on the "absentee text" or "the uncomfortable," that is, the aspects that were deliberately excluded from the path of traditional interpretation, Arkoun does not seek to replace the religious interpretation with a position of status, but rather to find a field of convergence between faith and science, between the text The heritage, between the text and reality, believe that any religious reform must pass by re -dismantling the text.

2. The Second Requirement: Arkoun Analytical Tools: Linguistic, Anthropology, Sociology of Knowledge

The modernist discourse adopted by Muhammad Arkoun in his reading of the Quranic text was not a letter sent without specific analytical tools. His most prominent tools were modern linguistics, cultural anthropology, and knowledge sociology.

The first thing Arkoun resorted to, and was the basis for his project, is the linguistic or linguistic analysis, which is drawn from Western structural thought, especially from the works of Ferdinand de Saussure and Jacques Derrida. For him, the Quranic text was not merely a semantic content governed by prior contractual standards but rather a linguistic structure that can be analyzed with internal formats and date of reception and transformation. Through this approach, Arkoun tried to follow how meanings are generated in the Qur'anic discourse, what structural relationships link words and concepts within it, and what is the effect of "silence" - or what was not said - in formulating the understanding of the text. Through linguistic analysis, Arkoun sought to separate "divine saying" and "human reception" to open a horizon for multiple meanings and dismantle the authority of one reading.

Then, Anthropology came to give his reading of the text a cultural and social dimension. Arkoun did not see the religious text as isolated from the culture it produced or from the societies that received it. Rather, it was considered that the text, even if it was a revelation, does not stop interacting with the mental and symbolic structure of the recipients. Therefore, he resorted to anthropological analysis tools to dismantle the symbols and concepts that were formed in the Islamic imagination about some verses and topics - such as revelation, prophecy, king, paradise, and fire - trying to reveal the cultural and social extensions of these symbols. Arkoun's anthropology was not just a description tool but rather a criticism of how to adapt the text in the service of the prevailing cultural pattern and to understand how religious authority intertwines with myth and collective imagination.

As for the third and most controversial tool, it is the sociology of knowledge, which is represented by Arkoun tool to examine the structure of cognitive authority in Islam. He was not satisfied with asking questions about "What was said?" Rather, he went to what is deeper: "How and why was it said?" Here, his deep influence appears on Foucault and Bordeaux's theories, as he sees that religious knowledge was not innocent but rather was always linked to the structure of power, whether political, sectarian, or social. According to this approach, Arkoun was seeking to track the mechanisms of symbolic repression and exclusion that were practiced against the currents and concepts of "marginalized" in Islam, which were absent from calculating a central speech that monopolized understanding and interpretation. [13]

By combining these three tools - linguistic analysis, anthropology, and knowledge sociology - Arkoun formulated an interpretative project that seeks not only to "understand" the Quranic text but also to reformulate his relationship with him. He wanted to remove the Qur'an from the "closed text" of the authority of ideological interpretation to re-enter the space of the "open text," which accepts free and multiple interpretations and dismantles its traditional authority to establish a new Quranic knowledge that responds to the question of the times.

3. The Third Requirement: Arkoun's Position on the Qur ' an: Between the Divine Text and the Cultural Text

Muhammad Arkoun takes in the entirety of his intellectual project a critical position on the traditional reading of the Quranic text, not with the aim of destabilizing the sanctity of revelation or denying its position in the Islamic religious conscience, but rather, motivated by the establishment of a new rational approach that allows thinking about the Qur'an within a contemporary scientific and human horizon. Arkoun has distinguished between two levels in looking at the Qur'an: the divine level that refers to the belief that God inspires the text, and the cultural level that sees the Qur'an as a linguistic speech interacting with specific social, historical, and cultural conditions. [14]

Arkoun believes that the Islamic heritage, from the moment of blogging, dealt with the Qur'an as a complete and closed text and then subject to authoritarian interpretations that devoted one understanding and made other potentials in understanding. This, from his point of view, led to the closure of the interpretative horizon and the stagnation of religious knowledge. Therefore, he sought to restore the dynamic character of the text, as it is a historical-cultural text at the same time; that is, it was issued at a specific historical moment and interacted with a cultural and social environment, and it cannot be isolated from that context, Arkoun introduces the idea of ​​"the oral Qur'an" and "the blogger," and makes this distinction a starting point to rethink how the text is formed. He sees that the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was an oral text interacting with daily facts, responding to the actual needs of society, and it is linguistically formed within a living communication speech. However, after the death of the Prophet, this text turned into a written text and entered the official blogging process during the reign of the two caliphs, Othman bin Affan and Abd al-Malik bin Marwan [15]This made it subject to certain authoritarian and cultural considerations that contributed to the formation of its final structure as we know it today. Consequently, this "blogger text" - in the opinion of Arkoun - is not a pure mirror of the original text, but rather is conditional on the history of blogging and its mechanisms, calls Arkoun to the necessity of reading the Qur'an as a historical and critical reading, which is inseparable from modern curricula in the humanities. He does not see the Qur'an as merely "sacred words" that must be recognized by all its inherited interpretations. Still, it is also seen as a text that can be studied using the mechanisms of linguistic, tongue, anthropological, and social analysis. He believes that the complete separation between faith and science, or between holiness and criticism, does not produce real knowledge. Therefore, he seeks to pair the two approaches: keeping the text on its faith horizon while subjected to objective scientific analysis tools.

In this context, Arkoun raises the concept of "removing holiness," which was often misunderstood. It does not call for the removal of holiness in the sense of the denial of the divine nature of the Qur'an, but rather to the dismantling of its exclusive association with the religious establishment and the enabling researchers to deal with it as a subject that is subject to a critical lesson, just like any cultural discourse founded in history. Arkoun believes that this approach does not detract from the position of the Qur'an but rather restores it to its historical and cognitive effectiveness, and it is reintegrated into the space of general human thought. Arkoun asserts that the Qur'an should not be read as a closed ideological document but rather as an open text on interpretations that reflect the diversity of human experience. Unilateral readings, from his point of view, are only moments of understanding imposed by political or sectarian authority in certain historical stages. The Qur'an - in its essence - carries a profound ability to renew and openness if it is reread within a pluralistic perspective linking the text and society, between meaning and context, and between faith and reality.[13]

C. The Third Topic

1. Critical Reading of Arkoun's Thought From the Perspective of the Imami Interpretation

In this topic, the research highlights the critical dimension in the evaluation of the theses of Muhammad Arkoun through the balance of Imami interpretation, which is one of the most in-depth and deep Islamic explanatory curricula in terms of contractual and cognitive principles.

Suppose Arkoun presented an intellectual project aimed at liberating the Quranic text from traditional readings through analytical tools derived from linguistics, anthropology, and sociology of knowledge. In that case, the Imami interpretation, in return, deals with the text as a divine speech governed by the reference of the infallible and an interpretative framework based on strict mental and narrative controls.

The importance of this topic lies in that it is not satisfied with just reviewing the concepts of Arkoun but rather seeks to test them in the light of the Imami approach as a kind of dialogue reading that balances knowledge openness and preserving nodal constants. The Imami interpretation, although it is committed to firm principles, does not close the door to critical interaction with contemporary intellectual projects as long as it is taught in an objective context that takes into account the dual transport and reason.[16]

2. The First Requirement: The Intersection Between Arkoun's Thought and the Approaches of Imami (Such as the Call to Renew the Consideration of Heritage)

The exegetical thought of Muhammad Arkoun is one of the most prominent intellectual attempts in the modern era to re-read the founding Islamic texts, especially the Holy Qur'an, based on modernist analytical tools based on the curricula of contemporary humanities. Although the Imami approach to interpretation is traditionally considered in its essence in terms of nodal and narrative affiliation, unlike some other doctrines - it expresses clear cognitive flexibility in its dealings with texts. It opens an area of ​​a relative intersection with some of Arkoun's concepts, especially with regard to renewing consideration of heritage and reactivating the role of the mind.

a. First: The Call to Renew the Consideration of Heritage

One of the most prominent points of the meeting between Arkoun and some of the flags of the Imami school is the call to review the Islamic heritage critically without this means denying its value or emptying it from its religious content. While Arkoun focused on the necessity of destabilizing the "closed Salafists" that transformed the text into a cognitive authority, we find in the Imami thought a clear orientation among a number of scholars - such as Mr. Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr and Sheikh Muhammad Mahdi Shams al-Din - to reconsider some heritage statements and subject them to internal criticism, without affecting the principles of belief.

Consequently, Arkoun and the Imami meet a basic principle: that heritage is not a sacred text but a historical product that deserves to be understood and read again in the light of the variables of the times.[17]

b. Second: The Centrality of the Mind in the Process of Understanding and Exegesis

Although Arkoun has exceeded in his project the traditional religious framework to a more liberal cognitive space, his emphasis on the need to restore the mind in understanding the text intersects with the position of the Imamiyyah, who are among the most interesting Islamic groups in the role of the mind and even acknowledged it with authenticity alongside the text.

The fundamentalist school of the Imamiyyah, from the time of Sheikh Al-Mufid and Al-Jali, and even Tabatabaei and Al-Khoei, focused on the importance of using the mind in the interpretation of similar verses, understanding the doctrinal principles, and dealing with jurisprudence issues, which is what Arkoun expresses with "rationalization of the text" in exchange for the inherited indoctrination.

c. Third: Receive the Historical Context of the Texts

Awareness of the historical context is one of Arkoun's curriculum, as he sees that the isolated reading of the text from its time context leads to the limitation of the meaning. In this regard, we find that the Imamiyyah - especially in their fictional interpretations - attributes clear importance to the temporal and social contexts of the revelation of the verses, whether through the reasons for the descent or linking the texts to the historical events in which they were mentioned. This constitutes an important systematic intersection with one of the cornerstones of the Arcony.

d. Fourth: Criticism and Its Impact on the Production of Interpretation

Arkoun directly criticizes the interpretation that was produced in light of the dominance of political and religious authority and believes that this authority practiced a "nationalization" process so that the official reading of the text has become the only acceptable.

Despite the difference in religious background, a number of Imami thinkers did not hesitate to criticize the role of political power - especially in the Umayyad and Abbasid eras - in directing religious and interpretative discourse to serve its interest. This criticism has been recorded in many of their books that dealt with the issue of distorting the meaning or the absence of the indications of some texts

[18] This consensus in the vision shows that there is a critical meeting in the dismantling of the relationship between power and knowledge, even if the ideological fate is different.

3. The Second Requirement is Separation

This requirement represents an analytical pause with the most prominent aspects of separation between the thought of Muhammad Arkoun and the curricula of the Imami interpretation, which are not marginal or technical as much as they affect the nodal and methodological roots on which both projects are based. Despite some of the apparent intersections that may combine the two parties in the desire to renew the consideration of heritage or in activating the tools of understanding, structural differences remain decisive, especially in three central issues: the position on the sanctity of the text, the view of the metaphysical dimension, and the belief in the Quranic miracle.

The first of these breakthroughs is Arkoun's position on the sanctity of the Quranic text. In his modernist project, Arkoun does not deal with the Qur'an as a transcendent divine text that should be recognized but rather is seen as a linguistic text subject to the conditions of reception, blogging, and symbolic conflict throughout Islamic history. Therefore, he calls for what he calls "removing holiness" from the text, that is, re-interminating it into the space of historical and tongue criticism away from the sacred aura that deprives him of examination and analysis. From this standpoint, the Qur'an - in its vision - becomes a document that can be studied like other texts of religious traditions. However, this trend is radically clashed with the position of the Imami interpretation, which sees the Qur'an a divine word preserved, infallible from distortion, and a house of guidance and not the subject of linguistic conflict or pure cultural analysis. The text from the Imami perspective is the source of truth and legislation. It is only subject to the authority of the established mind in science and the reference of the infallible, not to the abstract critical mind alone.[19]

This separation extends to the second dimension, which is Arkoun's position on the unseen. His intellectual project is governed by a clear rational and historical tendency, which makes him tend to explain religious phenomena, including the great Quranic concepts, from a symbolic cultural angle, not metaphysical metaphysics. The unseen, revelation, prophecy, paradise, and fire are all vocabulary - in its perception - fall within the framework of the speech systems and are not necessarily unseen on a stand-alone. This understanding is fundamentally incompatible with the Imami doctrine that makes faith in the unseen one of the pillars of faith and deals with the Qur'an as a text that revives the relationship between the world of martyrdom and the world of the unseen and reveals through its symbols and rulings about the metaphysical reality that is not reduced to its social or cultural function. The unseen in the Imami approach is not an additional concept but rather the essence of the Qur'anic text and its ideological extension.

As for the third separation, it appears in the issue of Quranic miracles. While the miracle is formed - with its graphic, legislative, and cognitive levels - one of the pillars of faith in the Qur'an in Imami's thought, Arkoun goes to question this idea or at least reduce its importance. In his opinion, The Miracle is only one of the historical novels that were proven for theological or authoritarian ends, and this concept is often used to devote the official reading of the text and prevent any different interpretation of it. Hence, Arkoun calls for a miracle as an "anti-action" of free critical understanding and sees dealing with him as an obstacle to activating the tools of contemporary analysis. In the Imami interpretation, the miracle is a sign of the divine source of the Qur'an. This prophetic proof proves the truth of the message and indicates the consistency of the text with reason and reality at the same time.[20]

These three axes—desacralization, denial of the unseen, and transcendence of the miraculous—constitute the greatest divide between Arkoun and the Imami school of thought in an exegesis of the Quranic text. They do not merely reflect differences in mechanisms or approaches but rather reveal a difference in the nature of the view of the text itself.

4. The Third Requirement: Critical Evaluation - Can Arkoun's Theses Be Utilized Within the Confines of Imamiyyah? A Balanced Presentation and Objective Analysis

Mohammed Arkoun's intellectual project is one of the most prominent modernist attempts to rethink the Qur'anic text and Islamic heritage, employing analytical tools drawn from modern human sciences, such as structural linguistics, cultural anthropology, and the sociology of knowledge. Arkoun's goal was not simply linguistic or terminological renewal; rather, he sought to challenge the traditional structure of Islamic thought from within by dismantling historically entrenched systems that, in his view, led to the text's closure and transformation into an entity outside of history.

This approach, with its critical audacity and challenge to established assumptions, opens the door to a legitimate question in the context of Imami interpretation: Can some of Arkoun's theses be utilized without compromising the doctrinal and methodological constants upon which interpretation in the Imami school is based?

To answer this question, it must first be acknowledged that Arkoun does not proceed from the same frame of reference upon which Imami's interpretation is based. His approach belongs to the Western modernist sphere and is entirely subject to the tenets of historical reason and secular textual criticism. Imami interpretation, on the other hand, is based on the belief in the sanctity of the text, the authority of infallible authority in its interpretation, and the existence of an inner meaning within the text that can only be revealed through specific narrative and rational channels.[21]

Despite this clear distinction, some of Arkoun's analytical tools, rather than his doctrinal propositions, can be useful in enriching the Imami reading of the Qur'anic text, provided they are used as means, not ends.

For example, the Imami researcher can benefit from Arkoun's approach to studying the contexts of reception, analyzing how meaning is produced within a historical space, and observing the influence of power and society in shaping accumulated interpretations, provided these observations remain within the umbrella of belief in the stability and sanctity of the text, not as a cultural text open to radical deconstruction.

Furthermore, Arkoun's call to reexamine the heritage, a central pillar of his project, does not necessarily conflict with some of the orientations of scholars and reformers in Imami thought, who sought to open the door to independent reasoning in interpretation and jurisprudence and to purify the heritage of calcified readings, while simultaneously adhering to the essence of the faith. In this context, Arkoun's call for renewal is not rejected in principle but rather in terms of its founding methodology, especially if it excludes elements of belief in the unseen, sanctity, and miracles—foundations that Imami interpretation cannot abandon. Arkoun's warning against the monopolization of meaning and against authoritarian readings that have established a single interpretation of the text also opens space for critical reflection within the Imami field itself in light of the recognition of the existence of diversity within the Imami heritage in the interpretation of verses and differences in the interpretation of certain concepts. This means that the thesis of "exegetical pluralism" may be possible if employed within a controlled framework of Assiduousness that does not permit interpretive chaos or the transgression of established authority.[17]

However, it must be emphasized that the Imami interpretation cannot accept Arkoun's theses as they are, especially those related to the essence of his view of the Qur'anic text as a historical, cultural, rather than a metaphysical, text. From the Imami perspective, the text is a manifestation of divine revelation, inseparable from its transcendent origin, nor subject to an approach that considers the unseen to be merely a symbolic construct. Furthermore, the central concepts that Arkoun transcends—such as miraculous nature, infallibility, and the unity of truth—are fundamental principles of faith that cannot be compromised within the framework of Imami's interpretation.

Conclusion

The subject of interpreting the Qur'anic text is one of the most controversial issues in contemporary Islamic thought, especially with the emergence of modernist movements seeking to reread religious texts in light of the approaches of the humanities and presenting perspectives that differ from those prevalent in the traditional interpretive heritage. In this context, Mohammed Arkoun's project is one of the most prominent of these intellectual projects, sparking widespread debate about the nature of the Qur'anic text, the limits of understanding and interpretation, and the role of reason in engaging with sacred texts.

Arkoun embarked on a radically critical stance toward the classical Islamic intellectual structure, emphasizing the need to subject the Qur'anic text itself—not just its exegeses—to the tools of historical, linguistic, and anthropological analysis.

He called for what he called "desacralizing" the text, not in the sense of denying its divine source, but rather to break the siege imposed on it by the closed traditional reading and to open the way for multiple readings and exegeses, similar to what has occurred in Western thought regarding its founding religious texts. Hence, Arkoun focused on the concepts of "historical reason," "archaeological criticism," and "rereading the founding text," calling for the dismantling of the layers of knowledge and authority that have accumulated around the Qur'anic text from the moment of its codification to the present day.

Comparing these theses with the Imami approach to interpretation, we find that the points of convergence remain limited and conditional, while the points of divergence are fundamental. Although Imami thought has demonstrated clear cognitive flexibility in its interaction with the text and is distinguished by its use of reason as a central tool in interpretation, it remains rooted in the belief in the sanctity of the Qur'anic text as a preserved divine revelation, not subject to rejection or cultural dismantling. Furthermore, the Imami approach is based on a doctrinal system that views the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) as the exclusive authority for interpreting the inner meanings of the Qur'an, making any reading outside this framework highly contentious.

The research has shown that Arkoun approaches the Qur'anic text as a cultural text subject to the history of reception and influenced by the conditions of the political and social context. In contrast, Imami interpretation approaches it as a divine discourse whose meaning is fixed, albeit multifaceted in its connotations and meanings. Concepts such as the unseen, infallibility, and miraculousness are considered axioms in Imami's interpretation, while Arkoun views them as rhetorical components that require critical deconstruction.

Despite these differences, some elements of Arkoun's project can still be leveraged if they are properly employed within a cognitive framework that preserves doctrinal authority. The call to critique heritage, transcend intellectual repetition, and analyze historical contexts are all approaches that can contribute to the development of contemporary interpretive discourse without falling into the trap of Westernization or a break with fundamental principles.

The critical evaluation sought by this research was neither a defensive nor an offensive stance. Rather, it was an attempt to understand what can be learned and what should be ignored or reserved, according to the Imami interpretation system. This evaluation revealed that Arkoun's project, despite raising important questions, can only be adopted within the Imami structure to the extent that it promotes renewal without compromising fundamental principles and enriches understanding without undermining the foundations of reception and authority. Hence, it can be said that the relationship between Imami thought and modernist thought should not be based on absolute rupture or unconscious dependence but rather on calm critical interaction that restores consideration for reason, simultaneously safeguards the sanctity of the text, and establishes a balanced epistemological path capable of keeping pace with the times without losing its roots in faith and certainty.

Recommendations

1. Call for a critical reading of the Imami interpretive heritage, with the aim of separating what is subject to change and what is based on ijtihad from established doctrinal principles. This will enhance the ability of Imami discourse to interact with new developments in modern thought without compromising its authority.

2. Develop a contemporary Imami exegetical approach that draws on modern humanities methods—such as linguistics and discourse analysis—to understand texts provided this occurs within clear frameworks.

3. Open horizons for academic dialogue between Imami thought and modernist schools of thought, not for endorsement or subordination, but rather for mutual understanding, critique, and evaluation.

4. Warn against uncritical Western readings of the Qur'an, especially those based on secular or deconstructive backgrounds that fundamentally conflict with the fundamentals of Islamic doctrine.

5. Encourage young researchers to study modernist projects, such as Arkoun, Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd, or Hassan Hanafi, from an Imami critical perspective. This contributes to building a balanced epistemological bridge between authenticity and renewal.

References

1. The Holy Shrine of Imam Hussain, "Main Sources for Interpreting the Holy Quran," 2020. [Online]. Available: https://imamhussain.org/arabic/28294
2. M. H. Al-Tabatabaei, The Balance in the Interpretation of the Qur'an. Qom, Iran: Society of Teachers in Qom Seminary, 2020.
3. "Sources of Quranic Interpretation from the Perspective of Islamic Schools of Thought," Taghrib News Agency, Jan. 21, 2019. [Accessed: Jun. 17, 2025].
4. T. Qasimi, "Interpretation of the Quranic Text: Taha Abderrahman as a Critic of Mohamed Arkoun," Makalcloud, 2020.
5. Y. El-Ayachi, "Modern Readings of the Quran (8): Mohammed Arkoun and the Epistemological Bet of Reading," Tafsir.net, 2019.
6. Q. A. Al-Thamer, "The Position of Theologians on Interpretation (Ta'wil) in Islamic Thought," Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. of Philosophy, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq, 2001.
7. M. S. Al-Khinn, The Impact of Disagreement in Usuli Rules on the Disagreement of Jurists, 3rd ed. Beirut, Lebanon: Al-Resalah Foundation, 1982.
8. A. Al-Murtada, Al-Fusul Al-Mukhtarah (Selected Chapters), vol. 2, 2nd ed. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar Al-Mufid for Printing, Publishing and Distribution, 1993.
9. M. R. Al-Muzaffar, Aqa'id Al-Imamiyyah (Beliefs of Imamiyyah). Qom, Iran: Ansariyan Publications, 2007.
10. N. E. H. A. Jadid, "Contemporary Arab Thought Between Renewal and Tradition: Mohammed Arkoun as a Model," Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. of Philosophy, Ziane Achour University of Djelfa, Djelfa, Algeria, 2016.
11. M. I. A. Al-Saduq, Al-Amali (The Dictations), 1st ed., Dept. of Islamic Studies, Ed. Qom, Iran: Al-Bi'that Institute, Printing and Publishing Center, 1996.
12. M. O. Rababa'ah, M. A. Omar, and T. L. Shoumar, "Truth, Power, and Discourse in Michel Foucault," Journal of Al-Qadisiyah University for Humanities Sciences, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 119–140, 2024.
13. A. G. Al-Mujtahid, "Mohammed Arkoun's Vision of Religion and Heritage Through His Book: 'Lectures on the Quran'," Mutun, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 137–150, 2020.
14. F. Azhimy, "History of the Quran in the Modernist Perspective (Mohammed Arkoun as a Model)," M.S. thesis, Dept. of Islamic Sciences, Larbi Ben M’hidi University, Oum El Bouaghi, Algeria, 2021.
15. F. Zahir, "Mohammed Arkoun's Stance on the Holy Quran Through His Intellectual Project 'Applied Islamics'," Afaq Fikriyyah (Intellectual Horizons), vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 65–80, 2018.
16. M. Arkoun, Where Is Contemporary Islamic Thought?, H. Saleh, Trans. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar Al-Saqi, 1993, p. 16.
17. M. Arkoun, Islamic Thought: A Scientific Reading, 2nd ed., H. Saleh, Trans. Beirut, Lebanon and Casablanca, Morocco: National Development Center and Arab Cultural Center, 1996, p. 15.
18. M. Barish, "Reflections on Mohammed Arkoun Through His Production and Thought," [Journal Name Unknown], no. 15, pp. 58–59, Dec. 1986.
19. M. Arkoun, Arab Thought, 3rd ed., A. Al-Hawa, Trans. Beirut, Lebanon and Paris, France: Oweidat Publications, 1985, p. 19.
20. M. Arkoun, A Window on Islam, 1st ed., S. Al-Juhaim, Trans. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar Atiyyah, 1996, p. 65.
21. M. Arkoun, The Quran: From Inherited Interpretation to the Analysis of Religious Discourse, 2nd ed., H. Saleh, Trans. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar Al-Tali’ah, 2000.