A Typology of Imam Rezā’s Argumentative Methods in Theological Debates

The debates of Imam ʿAli ibn Musā al-Rezā (pbuh) constitute one of the richest primary sources for research in theology (kalām) and logic. Beyond their doctrinal content, these debates provide an effective model of principled scholarly dialogue and rational argumentation. The present study seeks to classify the argumentative methods employed by Imam Rezā (pbuh) through a systematic analysis grounded in classical logic. In contrast to earlier works that have largely confined themselves to narrative transmission or thematic exposition, this research adopts a content-analytic methodology to examine the logical foundations of the Imam’s reasoning. The central research question is: “What types of reasoning, and with what structure, did Imam Rizā (pbuh) employ in his debates?" The findings of the study, derived from mapping the debate texts onto logical models, demonstrate that he systematically employed both syllogistic reasoning (qiyās) and analogical argument (tamthil), with syllogism predominating in frequency. This typology thus articulates the Imam’s methodological paradigm as an exemplary model of constructive dialectic (jadal hasan).