"A Comparative Study of the Arguments for Proving 'Prophethood' from the Perspective of Maturidi and Imami Schools"

Abstract

This article examines the arguments for proving "Prophethood" from the perspectives of the Maturidi and Imami schools. Using a descriptive-analytical method, it gathers both rational and scriptural evidence that has been presented on this topic. Through analysis, the study addresses the question of which rational and scriptural arguments these two major theological schools of Islam provide to affirm "Prophethood" as a fundamental tenet of faith. The study of arguments from both schools reveals that Prophethood is an undeniable concept, supported by rational and scriptural evidence. Both schools validate the principle of sending messengers based on a set of principles and rules, recognizing that while humans can comprehend certain matters through rational investigation, understanding many aspects is beyond their capacity. The Imami school views the doctrine of grace as the strongest justification for the sending of messengers and holds that reason alone does not necessitate punishment. However, the Maturidi school, in addition to considering reason sufficient for punishment and destruction, sees the sending of messengers as essential for the establishment and completion of proof. The Holy Qur'an reinforces this by emphasizing humanity’s struggles in resolving issues without the guidance of prophets and by presenting the sending of messengers as a means to eliminate disputes and as a conclusive proof upon humankind.