فهرست مطالب ابوالفضل خراسانی

The correct analysis and explanation of intellect and quotation relation based on the principles and foundations of the Ibn tamiyah and Javadi Amoli thought, as representatives of the two intellectualism and text adherence movements in the field of religious knowledge, have significant Results. Ibn Taymiyyah by rigidity on texts Appearances Even in the belief principles, beleives that the reason for the difference between philosophers and theologians, is the lack of inherent authority and independence of intellect. Therefore, he say the preceding of reasonable on fixed is baseless, and the only way of true faith is to believe decisively in the Prophet. He offer a Definition for intellect, according which intellect is accident and reduces it to the limit of instinct and common Sense; by confuse of quotation with Islamic Law, Ibn Taymiyyah absolutely defending the precede of quotation on intellect;and by  acceptance of intellect multiplicity and Epistemic Relativity, he tries to solve the conflict of intellect and quotation , and  beleives the revocation of a kind of intellect does not means the revocation of the whole intellect. But Javadi Amoli By leveling up rational and traditional  knowledges,  believes Each of the intellect and quotation is confirm one another,  and by the separation of revelation from the quotation, he introduces  quotative understanding such as Rational understanding, which is vulnerable, Unprotected from the fault and right and Conflict,  And defends interpretation as a solution to the conflict of reason and quotation; Javadi considers the preceding of rational reason on Unexplained verbal reason, to be necessary. He believes the product of empirical intellect, semi-abstractintellect, abstract intellect, and pure intellect is Valid , if it is a type of dogmatization, certainty, or led to rational assurance,  And while differentiate between intellect and the conduct of the wise ( bin’ al-‘uqala’),  he consider the  Rational argument a kind of knowledge that its reliability and validity is  inherent, not fake. According to him, it is necessary to discuss the intellect, quotation and the related topics in the epistemological domain of religion, in the principles knowledge.

The principle of imamate, as the continuity of prophethood, is the preeminent principle of the Shias. The latter envisage imamate to be properly theological, and thereby as prefiguring politics. The philosophy of imamate delineates the Islamic social order, and the fact that it includes man’s existential dimension not only guarantees his worldly and otherworldly felicity, but explains the wisdom behind the universality of Islam. Imamate directly pertains to the nature of governments, their legitimacy, as well as their politico-religious status—alluding to the reality that politics arises from theology and can, on that account, be called political theology. Imamate is the continuity of the bond engendered between religion and politics and is the realization of God’s kingdom on earth as well as the legitimacy of man’s vicegerency of God. Religious rule is contingent upon the Imam, while obedience to the Imam becomes necessary so as to bring about the realization of his political leadership of society. The acceptance of this leadership by the people does not in any way affect the nature of imamate and the religious authority of the Imam—something which is a divine appointment. This is because the legitimacy of the Imam is contingent upon him being appointed by God and is conditional upon him being infallible; the latter is so that the goal for such appointment, which is complete obedience and following, can be achieved. Hence it becomes evident that imamate is one of the most pertinent topics of theology, and that it gives rise in every age to different consequences. Determining the place of imamate in the realm of theology has a decisive role to play in delineating these consequences and results.