divine justice

This article examines the concept of insight (Basira) in Islamic narrations and its role in understanding divine justice on the Day of Judgment. Insight, as a divine light for believers, provides the ability to perceive deeper and hidden truths. This research analyzes the relationship between insight and related concepts such as wisdom, knowledge, and certainty, emphasizing that insight on the Day of Judgment is not only about physical sight but also about a profound and intrinsic understanding of eschatological realities. Findings indicate that insight enables believers to accurately observe the consequences of their actions and those of others, thus achieving a correct understanding of divine justice. On the Day of Judgment, insight serves as a tool for complete observation of divine rewards and punishments, allowing individuals to grasp God's wisdom in His judgments and evaluations. Additionally, the connection between insight and the spiritual journey and moral development of individuals is explored, illustrating that insight is regarded as a result of self-purification and piety in this world. Finally, suggestions for future research in the realm of insight and the Day of Judgment are presented, which can contribute to expanding the scope of studies and enhancing the spiritual levels of individuals.

In the narrative books of Imamiyah, there are narrations that prove certain immunities in the Afterlife in terms of punishment and reckoning for the deceased and the buried in the Haramain. Some of these hadiths have called the infidels subject to this ruling also. The conflict of these narrations with the verses and narrations that consider man responsible for his own actions and beliefs and negate any injustice in the account, and their incompatibility with the religious knowledge derived from reason, at least has brought about the hypothesis of the weakness of a part of these narrations; and this has caused the formation of this research based on the documentary and content evaluation of these narrations. According to this research, most of these narrations are weak in terms of documentation; and the apparent themes of some of these narrations are not acceptable due to their conflict with certain religious evidences. Only by interpreting the narrations and deviating from their contexts, an acceptable version of them can be rendered.

Incurable diseases cause severe changes in the patient and his family in various economic, family, social and psychological dimensions. These changes in the patient's religious beliefs lead to extensive spiritual conflicts. Spiritual conflicts in the field of incurable diseases have created new beliefs. The emphasis of the World Health Organization on the existence of spiritual health as the fourth dimension of health, along with the dimensions of body, mind and society, doubles the necessity of re-reading the statements of Imam Ali (peace be upon him) in resolving emerging spiritual conflicts. Meanwhile, the issue of "justice" plays a significant role in creating these conflicts. The authors' clinical experiences in examining this category in subtopics such as the cause of disease, God and disease, the wisdom of disease, the evil nature of disease, human actions and disease, in the form of questions such as "Why me?" Why have I been good? why now? Why my child? It is related to spiritual health. Philosophical and religious analysis of the issue of justice, the necessity of natural laws, the mutual relationship between evil and disease; God's immutable laws in getting sick from the perspective of Nahj alBalagheh have been examined in accordance with the spiritual conflicts of the justice of the patients in line with their spiritual health.

The popular opinion among Islamic scholars is that most of God's prophets were men and God did not choose any woman to be a prophet. The proof of this point of view is the Quranic verses and Islamic traditions. Some have claimed the position of prophethood for a number of women by citing some verses and traditions, but what is obtained from those evidences is prophetic prophecy, not legislative prophecy, which is intended as a theological and religious issu. According to the famous view, the suspicion of incompatibility with God's justice has been raised and based on it, the divine origin of prophethood has been denied. In this article, by using the method of reporting and analysis (narrative and reason), the evidence of the famous point of view has been expressed and the doubt has been answered by explaining the philosophy of assigning prophecy to men.

Dunaduni, or the belief in reincarnation, is the second principle of belief within Yarsanism and remains a highly contentious doctrine. Adherents of this creed maintain that dunaduni entails a series of successive lives in one thousand and one bodies, serving to explain the hardships encountered in life. According to their perspective, embracing dunaduni is integral to affirming divine justice, representing the sole pathway to its affirmation. Without embracing dunaduni, they belive, God cannot be deemed just. During the developments of this creed, there have been disagreements among Yarsanists over the construal of dunaduni. Moreover, the doctrine was criticized by non-Yarsanists as well, as many researchers believe this is a belief in the transmigration of the soul. The question in this research is what implications and consequences this belief has for the belief in divine justice within Yarsanism. By collecting library data and deploying the descriptive and analytical method, this research seeks to explain the nature of dunaduni in line with the prevalent interpretation of the doctrine among Yarsanists as well as its implications for divine justice.

Religious task within the limits of one's ability is mentioned in five Quranic verses and has created many challenges in the history of tafsir and theological sciences and has led Muslim scholars to group. Challenges in “tasks as much as possible" are often in four intellectual and auditory issues, possibility and refusal, occurrence and non-occurrence, and its goodness and ugliness. These challenges are answered in two hadiths of Imam Riḍā (as). Despite the importance of these two hadiths, so far no independent research has been published on the conceptual and propositional analysis and their logical components. The main issue of this research is the process of providing evidence and the source of proof in two hadiths of Razavi by examining the effect of the source of proof in these two hadiths on the Shiite exegesis heritage and comparing it with Sunni interpretations. The difference between the source of proof in Imam Riḍā's (as) statement, which is "justice", and the source of proof with Sunni interpretations, which is "mercy", shows the difference in the concept of "religious task within the limits of one's ability". The content of this hadith has a strategic role in the health and efficiency of legal, educational and moral systems. The fairness of the task in this narrative can be used as an indicator for evaluating professional tasks.

Statesmanship has always been formed based on either domination, or testaments, or consensus. The purpose of the present study is to assess the proportion between each of the above principles and the principle of justice. The issue under study is: which method has state legitimacy based on the principle of divine justice? By using descriptive analysis and searching through epistemic data in Islamic Kalām, and also recognizing aspects and features of domination, testaments, and consensus based on historic, political, and legal ideas and reports, it can be asserted that domination by any means can give legitimacy to a government just in case kingdom from God as the divine destiny is accepted and that admittance of that is the result of faith and obedience to God. State legitimacy based on testament relies on the hypothesis that statesmanship is regarded as the transferable right of a prince. The principle of justice considers any cruel command invalid and illegitimate. Imposing a state and a leader on people based on domination or inheritance is great tyranny due to independent reasons. Therefore, the necessity of establishing a state based on people's votes results from the principle of divine justice and that ignoring public opinion and imposing a state by either force or deceit violates the principle of justice.

Job (Arabic: Ayyub) the prophet and his story is very well-known for all Jews, Christians and Muslims. In Islamic culture, Job is the unmatched symbol for patience and endurance in so much as the expression "patience of Job" in Muslim literature has become a permanent combination. However, instead of the symbol of patience, we surprisingly find him in the Bible as a symbol for Impatience; for he complains God by his weeping and moaning. Even he accused God of injustice. Although both biblical and Qur'anic and Islamic texts indicate that he experienced a lot of suffering and misery, however, in the Islamic culture, his character is outcome of patience and enormous suffering, whereas according to the Bible, his personality is the resultant of suffering and impatience that at last it leads in the knowledge of God and submission to His will. An important issue in the story of Job, is why he should have suffered and that what is the implication of the theological aspect of suffering and how it is consistent with the justice of God. In this paper, studying the biblical and Qur’anic texts regarding Job, differences and similarities have been studied. In this paper, studying the biblical and Qur’anic texts regarding Job, differences and similarities have been studied.

The outward manifestation of a statement is a wisely convention. The generalization of such a humanistic convention to the Words of God is formed based on theological foundations. Justice practitioners are of the view that people should not do what Allah deems evil. Given a person thinks out of the context of wise intellects' conventions, it is inappropriate according the judgment of wisdom and God will never speaks in this way. Determinists define God's justice based on the shariah's good and evil which does not imply any evil bearing or requirement about God and His actions and attributes. According to this logic, God is not required to speak according to a specific form and is not obliged to observe any rules and regulations in his speech. To prove the outward manifestation of God's speech, determinists argue over God's habits. By analyzing and studying determinists' and justice practitioners' opinions based on the validity of Qur'anic outwards, it is concluded that only according to the principle of justice one can regard the outward of God's speech as authentic and referable, and referring to the outward Qur'anic speech based on determinism is unsubstantiated.

The problem of evils is a longstanding challenge against divine justice and wisdom. Discrepancies and differences in creatures and its cause is a kind of evil have been discussed in new theology and philosophy of religion. Many accounts and interpretations have been put forward. Some materialists have considered it as an evidence of injustice and prejudice, while Muslim thinkers have sought to explain these discrepancies and prove its consistency with divine justice and wisdom. Asharite’s explanation could not reply the questions and doubts. Nor did early Adliya theologian deal with the matter comprehensively, though we might be able to provide a general and succinct reason based on their principles. The most proper analysis and explanation is the one of some philosophers, mystics and contemporary Imamiyah theologians. The most element of their answers and explanations are: using demonstration from cause to effect for establishment of divine justice, believing that differences of things is inherent, concomitance of the best arranged system with final goal with consideration of necessity of discrepancies, and effect of voluntary and involuntary mediums in creation of discrepancies.

Two Islamic tenets of the Creator of the world are absolute justice and the Best of creators. On the other hand, devastating incidents such as floods and earthquakes seem to be incompatible with those tenets. The article is written in response to this misconception and shows that these incidents are natural and inevitable and are in line with one of the definite Divine precedents, i.e., human trial, in order to reveal what conduct man would show in any situation and incident.
If we have a panoramic look – and not a close-up glance – at the world incidents, we would see that, as implied from the verses of the Qur’an, what we call evil is not only necessary, but is also good in the overall world order; or if it is evil for some, its goodness is generally more than its evil, like the positive and negative poles in an electric circuit.
The real evil comes from Satan and the misleading self, which is “moral evil”, leading families and the society to destruction and worst of all, it is the injustice that the arrogant powers do to other countries with their belligerence, rather than the rare incidents like earthquakes.

Some of what occurred in the world is not in harmony with human feelings and comprehension. In the first place, proofs and believe in the existence of an omnipotent, righteous and all-good God is undeniable. This problem is divided to some sections: contradiction between evil and monotheism, divine wisdom, divine justice and the best possible world, which are considered in this study as contradictory between evils and omnificent God, evils and divine wisdom, evils and divine justice, and evils and the best possible world. In each section, each problem will be met based on Transcendental Wisdom of Mulla Sadra. As we see, in his point of view, evils are of a kind of absence, which is not real and objective being, and when evilness ascribed to a thing this is because of comparison of that thing to others, or because of the effect of absence of that thing on nonbeing of a desired essence or imperfectness of that essence. Thus, evil is relative and is not direct effect of God's will. For Mulla Sadra, evil only pertaining to material world, therefore, can not be a disproof of the existence of the best possible world and perfection of God. Because evil implicit in this world. Otherwise, world of matter is not the very same and this order of things cannot be formed. From Transcendental Wisdom point of view, the only real thing is existence, and existence always is good; so evil can be retraced to good and therefore to the very essence of beings.

The present paper attempts to study three samples of Quran verses on "Divine Justice", "Imamat" (Pontificate) and "Ablution" from three translator's point of view – Makarem – e Shirazi, Elahi Qomshei and Fouladvand in order to express the the effects of religious assumptions on Quran's translations. The results show that the mentioned assumptions clarify the religious views obviously.

Theological thoughts، particularly the belief in God''s justice and wisdom، have great effect on the commentary of the Glorious Quran. An inquiry into this issue can clarify ''Adlities'' approach to the Quran commentary and pave the way for distinguishing between their commentary and the commentaries of other theological-commentary schools. ''Adlities believe that God is just and wise and does not do anything which is considered wrong by intellect. This principle is also applied to God''s words in the Quran. God''s words in Quran are not beyond the addressees'' ability to understand them; rather، His words are at the level of human understanding and follow the rules of the dialog with addressees. The commentary traditions left for us by Infallible Imams belong to the category of this principle. Therefore، if the initial literal meaning of some verses and traditions are incompatible with divine justice and wisdom، they should be interpreted and analyzed in accordance with divine justice and wisdom.

Both Shi’a and the Mu’tazilah to believe in the inherent good and evil deeds, are called Adliya (devotees of Divine Justice); but there are fundamental differences between the two sects, which make them to have different perception of meaning Divine Justice. The most important distinction between the Shi’a and the Mu’tazilah in regard to issue of Divine Justice is debate on monotheistic actions. Mu’tazilah deny the monotheistic actions. They regard it incompatible with the absolute freedom of man in their actions in the world. So, accepting of “opposites makes known each other”, they regard Divine Justice as denial of absolute freedom of man. In other words, presupposition of absolute freedom of man causes denial of Divine Justice. In contrast, by denying absolute freedom of man and believing in “Al- amr bein al-amrein’, Shiite accept monotheistic actions of man and also regard such a thing as Divine Justice. The Shia also with this presumption explain the meaning of Divine Justice. Certainly the best resource for Shia in this case is Nahj al-Balagha, which present such distinct sense of justice for investigators.

Intellectual, religious and ideological presu-ppositions and Understanding of the operation are considered destruction that form an invisible layer of meaning to the translator and then as the fact are introduced to the audience. If all religions and Islamic sects want to translate the Quran on their own presuppositions, the translations differences will have many bad intellectual and practical results for muslims. In the commentary, on a limited basis, it can be expected but this is not consistent with the nature of the translation. Therefore, in this study we tried to analyze the problem With a review of three verses of the Quran about "divine justice", "leadership" and "ablution" from the viewpoint of three Sunni translators who are A. Rashid al-din Meybodi, Shah Waliullah Dehlavi and Najm al-Din Muhammad Nasafi And three Contemporary translations of shia Namely Translation of Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi, Translation of Mehdi Elahi Ghomshei and Translation of fooladvand. The result shows that defaults, impact on the religious orientation of the translations.

There is a dispute among Shi‘a and Ash‘arites over divine justice. Shi‘a and Mu‘tazila accept divine justice – and that is why they are called‘Adliyya (those who believe in ‘adl, i.e., divine justice) as well – but Ash‘arites raise some question as to that. In the present essay, we discuss meanings of divine justice as well as Shiite and Sunni perspectives in this connection referring to the four-fold proofs of intellect, Quran, hadiths, and consensus.

The need for the prophets is worth discussing from two different viewpoints: 1. Man¨s need for prophets. 2. The necessary nature of Divine Grace. Philosophers and theologians have offered different theories concerning the need for the appointment of the prophets. Concerning these theories, criticism has been expressed and questions have been raised. According to philosophers, what is meant by necessity is that it must exist for Him and can not be separated from His essence. Based on this, grace and generosity are essential attributes of God. Most theologians, however, rely on the concepts of good and bad according to the intellect in order to prove the necessity of the dispatch of the prophets. This definition of necessity differs from that of philosophers. The rule of divine grace viewed by Shi¨ah great theologians, like ShaykhMufid and Khawajah Tusi, has been criticized and analyzed. The necessity of dispatch of messengers on the basis of divine justice has also been analyzed.