Examination of Critiques against the Mohaghghegh Isfahani Arguments to Prove the Existence of God (With Distinguishing the Various Versions of the Argument)

One of the arguments to prove the existence of God is the argument that Mohaghghegh Isfahani has explained. Among the contemporary scholars, there are serious advocates and critics for this argument and totally five versions in three general axes are put up for it: the first point is the notion of necessary existence from the perspective which it is a mental concept; the second point is the notion of necessary existence from the perspective which it denotes a thing behind it; and finally the fact of the necessary existence or the self-existent entity out of the mind. Each of these explanations are somehow criticized. Confusion between the early and current ascribe, confiscation of the desirable, confusion between the definitive and nondefinitive propositions, and the contradiction with the partner of the Creator (shrik ul-Bari) are the main drawbacks of this argument in the three axes. In the present work, the foregoing drawbacks and their responses are examined and judged, and it is finally proved that this argument has been criticized in all its versions and it is inefficient in proving God's existence.