AL-SHĪ’A AL-IMĀMĪYYA WA ‘AQĀ’IDUHUM AL-IJMĀ’ĪYYA [IMAMI SHI’ISM AND THEIR CONSENSUAL BELIEFS]. By Fathollah Najjārzādeh and Masoumeh Rezvānī. Qom, Iran: Ma’ārif Ahl al-Bayt. 2022. Pp. 164. Paper. 1,650,000 IRR.
Reviewed by Hossein Baqeri
In recent decades, scholarly studies of Twelver Shi’ism have increasingly focused on the diversity of doctrinal positions within the Imamite tradition, often emphasizing the theological, philosophical, and juridical disagreements among Shi’i scholars. Against this backdrop, Al-Shī’a al-Imāmīyya wa ‘Aqā’iduhum al-Ijmā’iyya offers a notably different project: rather than highlighting doctrinal diversity, it seeks to identify and present the beliefs on which Imamite scholars have reached a substantial consensus. Fathollah Najjārzādeh and Masoumeh Rezvānī aim to provide a concise and accessible account of the shared theological foundations of Twelver Shi’ism while responding to widespread misconceptions and sectarian accusations that have frequently shaped public and polemical representations of Shi’i doctrine. By distinguishing consensual doctrines from disputed theological positions, the authors attempt to construct a reliable doctrinal profile of Imamite Shi’ism based on its authoritative scholarly tradition, representing an important methodological intervention in a field often discussed through selective quotations and polemical literature.
The central thesis of the book is that many accusations directed against the Imamite school arise from an inadequate understanding of its doctrinal sources and theological terminology, and that any fair assessment of Imamite beliefs must begin with a systematic examination of the school’s authoritative theological literature. This emphasis on consensus distinguishes the work from traditional creedal manuals such as Shaykh al-Ṣadūq’s al-I’tiqādāt, Khwāja Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī’s Tajrīd al-I’tiqād, and Muẓaffar’s ‘Aqā’id al-Imāmiyya, which present the doctrinal positions of their respective authors. Najjārzādeh and Rezvānī instead attempt to synthesize the views of a broad range of theologians, jurists, exegetes, and hadith scholars across different historical periods, aspiring to represent the collective doctrinal identity of the Imamite tradition rather than the theological system of a single scholar. Written in concise language that avoids technical theological debates, the book is accessible to non-specialists seeking an introduction to Imamite beliefs, while its extensive engagement with primary doctrinal sources also makes it useful for scholars interested in the historical development and doctrinal boundaries of Twelver Shi’ism.
The book’s most significant contribution lies in its methodology. The authors state that they examined more than seventy Imamite doctrinal sources spanning from the earliest extant theological works to contemporary scholarship, extracting what they considered the most certain and widely accepted doctrinal positions while intentionally avoiding detailed philosophical argumentation, refutations of opposing views, and complex theological disputes. This synthetic method offers readers a clear and coherent overview of Imamite theology without becoming entangled in technical controversies, acknowledges the internal diversity of the Shi’i tradition while identifying its shared doctrinal core, and encourages the study of Shi’i theology through primary scholarly sources rather than sectarian polemics. Particularly valuable is the methodological discussion in the first chapter, where the authors explain the epistemological foundations of Imamite theology — including the roles of the Qur’an, the Sunnah, the teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt, and reason — and argue that methodological diversity among Imamite theologians should not be mistaken for doctrinal contradiction, providing an important framework for understanding why different theological texts may appear to conflict while still belonging to the same doctrinal tradition.
The book is organized into three chapters. The first introduces the historical emergence of the Shi’a, the sources of doctrinal authority, and the methodological principles governing Imamite theology, while also clarifying theological terms — such as worship, lordship, intercession, innovation, and divine grace (luṭf) — that have often generated misunderstanding in inter-sectarian discourse. The second chapter, the substantive core of the book, presents the consensual doctrines of the Imamiyya under thematic headings that include the fundamental doctrines of monotheism, prophecy, resurrection, angels, the integrity of the Qur’an, divine justice, and intercession, as well as distinctively Imamite doctrines such as imamate, occultation, raj’a, badā’, and taqiyya, alongside controversial issues including the status of the Companions, the rejection of ghulūw (exaggeration), and the limits of takfīr. The third and final chapter provides brief biographical notices of the theologians whose works were consulted, enhancing the scholarly utility of the book by identifying the historical and intellectual authorities underlying the authors’ synthesis.
Among the book’s greatest strengths is its clarity: the authors consistently avoid unnecessary technicality, making complex theological subjects accessible without reducing them to simplistic formulas, and the concise presentation allows readers to grasp the overall structure of Imamite theology in a relatively short volume. The breadth of the source base — more than seventy doctrinal works spanning different periods of Imamite intellectual history — gives the synthesis a substantial documentary foundation and demonstrates doctrinal continuity across time. The book also makes an important contribution to the study of doctrinal boundaries: by distinguishing between consensual beliefs and disputed theological opinions, it helps clarify what may reasonably be considered representative of the Imamite tradition, a distinction particularly valuable in contemporary discussions where marginal or controversial views are sometimes treated as normative Shi’i doctrine. The treatment of theological terminology — concepts such as intercession, badā’, and taqiyya that have often been misunderstood in both popular and academic literature — is a further notable achievement, contributing to greater terminological precision.
Despite its considerable merits, the book raises several methodological and analytical questions. The first concerns the concept of consensus itself: the authors repeatedly refer to the consensual beliefs of Imamite scholars, yet the criteria for determining consensus are not fully articulated, and it remains unclear how disagreements were evaluated, which authorities were given greater weight, and what threshold of agreement was considered sufficient for inclusion. A more explicit methodology of consensus would have strengthened the book’s scholarly rigor, particularly given the diversity of Imamite theology from early traditionalist scholars to philosophical theologians and contemporary jurists. Second, the decision to avoid detailed theological argumentation, while enhancing accessibility, also limits the analytical depth of the work: readers are often informed that a doctrine is consensual without being shown the historical debates through which that consensus emerged, so that the dynamic intellectual history of Imamite theology sometimes disappears behind the presentation of doctrinal conclusions. Third, the synthetic approach occasionally risks minimizing significant internal differences — the treatment of doctrines such as badā’, the scope of taqiyya, or certain aspects of imamate could benefit from a more nuanced discussion of the range of scholarly interpretations, since consensus in theological traditions is rarely absolute. A further limitation is the book’s limited engagement with contemporary academic scholarship on Shi’ism; while reliance on Imamite theological sources is appropriate for its stated objective, dialogue with modern historical and theological studies could have situated its findings within broader scholarly debates.
Notwithstanding these limitations, the book’s principal contribution lies in providing a reliable reference point for the study of mainstream Imamite doctrine. For scholars of Islamic theology, it offers a concise synthesis grounded in primary Shi’i sources; for specialists in sectarian relations, it provides insight into how Imamite scholars define the doctrinal identity of their own tradition; and for students and non-specialists, it serves as an accessible introduction that avoids many of the distortions associated with polemical literature. The work is especially valuable for comparative theology, facilitating more accurate comparisons between Sunni and Shi’i theological traditions, and it contributes to broader discussions of religious identity, doctrinal authority, and the construction of orthodoxy within Islamic intellectual history. Its insistence on consulting authoritative sources before making doctrinal judgments also carries practical significance for inter-sectarian dialogue — a methodological commitment that, in an era marked by increasing sectarian polarization, deserves serious attention.
