التناقض في دعاوى التجنيد الأصولية المعاصرة : حسن الترابي نموذجا

Abstract EN

This research aims to study the extent to which the claims of renewal in the principles of jurisprudence are close or far, through studying them from the inside, and clarifying the accepted and unacceptable fundamentalist renewal, presenting it to oneself with a Quranic criterion, represented in its safety from contradiction and difference.

This criterion can be applied to the theory of renewal that Al-Turabi has presented in his books, and studying the important aspects that he called for renewal in the principles of jurisprudence.

The researcher followed the comparative analytical inductive method.

He concluded that the renewal in Sharia has controls, including non-contradiction and contradiction.

The rules of renewal are not heresy; rather all the innovators throughout history have followed them.

In fact, what Al-Turabi wrote is not a theory of the renewal of the principles of jurisprudence, and he did not have an integrated renewal view.

The fair reader can find his words are general, and most of them are a claim for renewal, not a theory of renewal.

It is widely blamed for his lack of knowledge of the principles of jurisprudence in a comprehensive and broad way.

Because he often confuses some terms such as jurisprudence, assets, analogies, and purposes, and sometimes he calls for finding what is found in the principles of jurisprudence.

There are approximately thirty-five forms of contradiction and disagreement with Al-Turabi in his claim for the renewal of consensus, approval, fundamental analogy and Ijtihad only, and I did not address everything that Al-Turabi's claims for renewal.