Dialectical Techniques and Logical and Psychological Critiques in the Work of Imam al-Tufi: An Analytical Study of 'Commentary on the Four Gospels and the Twelve Books' from a Jurisprudential Perspective

This study examines the dialectical methods and logical fallacies employed by Imam al-Ṭūfī in his refutation of the Christians through his work al-Taʿlīq ʿalā al-Anājīl al-Arbaʿa wa-al-Kutub al-Ithnay ʿAshar. The research seeks to identify the types of dialectical fallacies extracted by the Imam and to explain how he employed them in defending Islamic creed and refuting the claims of his opponents with a solid rational methodology, rendering his work worthy of scholarly attention from both uṣūlī (legal-theoretical) and dialectical perspectives. The study adopts an inductive method first, followed by deductive and analytical approaches. Among its key findings is that Imam al-Ṭūfī built his refutation upon a coherent dialectical framework that encompassed most types of logical fallacies, employing several implicit techniques without direct declaration, while maintaining a balance between rational argumentation and psychological refutation. This reflects his profound expertise in theological disputation and his wide erudition in jurisprudence and logic, demonstrating the integrative nature of his scholarly formation. The study recommends further comparative research between al-Ṭūfī and other scholars of Islamic logic, as well as a renewed critical-analytical reading of the uṣūlī heritage.