essence

According to the originality of existence, the fundamental reality lies in existence and the real base for all things is existence. The existing facts are divided into existential facts and essential facts. Since this division is a philosophical division, it must be rooted in reality. Among the words of sages, there are differences for how these two categories are realized; as viewing the nature to be the limit of existence or the mode of existence etc. Therefore, in this article, considering the importance of this division in philosophy, the truth of these criteria and the arguments that led to the expression of these differences have been investigated. The method of collecting information was librarian through data collection, and the writing and editing of the material was done using a descriptive-analytical method. The conclusion reached in this article by examining these evidences is that none of these criteria can represent a comprehensive criterion and an obstacle to express the correct and accurate difference between these two types. Because either the criteria are not correct and in accordance with the reality, or if they are correct, they cannot be a positive difference between these two types of reality. In other words, reasonable proofs and breach are against the proposed criteria, so none of them can be considered a precise philosophical criterion

The issue of substance is one of the most important topics of Aristotle's philosophy, and understanding it can lead to a better understanding of the thought system of this great Greek philosopher. Aristotle has built his philosophy on the basis of knowledge of essence or essence, and all the pillars of his thought system, including existentialism, epistemology, theology, and cosmology, depend on essence and form - which in his philosophical system are equivalent to essence and essence - so that Aristotle's philosophy can rightly be called essential metaphysics. In Aristotle's metaphysical thought, essence and essence always indicate a type of essence or in other words, "this thing here", so essence and essence apply absolutely to essence. As Aristotle says in the discussion of definition, the definition belongs only to the essence and the definition of other categories follows it. In this sense, it can be said that; What and what is only belongs to essence, which of course means essence in its first meaning. Therefore, in the current research, we are trying to answer the question of whether the essence of an object is exactly the object itself or something else by analyzing the Aristotelian thought about the scope and essence of an object and showing the requirements of its theory in physics and metaphysics.

The primordial inner nature (fiṭra) of man means the nature with which God created man. One of the important issues in this regard is whether human nature at the beginning of creation was contaminated with evil or pure and flawless. The verses of the Holy Qur’an, which are one of the best sources in this discussion, although not specifying the purity of the original human fiṭra, they implicitly show that the primary human fiṭra is not only pure and free from corruption, but also good and well-guided. The Qur’anic contents that ‘testify the purity of the original human fiṭra are: Man’s vicegerency and succession from God, man’s creation in the most perfect form possible, man’s initial guidance by God, the gift and blessing of fiṭra to man, man’s “saying yes” before entering this world, attributing man’s good deeds to God, and domination of Satan over man only if he changes his original nature.

Both early and later Qur’anic exegetes have always held diverse and challenging viewpoints concerning the concept of bidʿa (heresy), as well as its essence. Thus, they have paved the way for many instrumental uses for the different Islamic theological sects and schools on the subject of bidʿa. However, what are the viewpoints of the Qur’anic exegetes concerning the essence and components of bidʿa? What caused some considerable diversities or conflicts within their religious attitudes? These are the main questions that the present article is about to pursue. Accordingly, the authors attempt to analyze and review the conceptual components of bidʿa, as well as the reasons of its implications, diversity, considering the viewpoints of both Shi’ite and Sunni Qur’anic exegetes on its literal and idiomatic meanings. The achievements of this study show that the Qur’anic exegetes have considered bidʿa as an equal concept to some other relevant ones such as “emerging order”, “secular proposition”, “legislation”, “occurrence” and “opposition”, which should all be seen in their own specific context to be meaningful and intelligible. The diversity of their viewpoints seems to be rooted in their contradictory divisions, as well as their confusion between the concept of bidʿa and some other different ones, such as invention, innovation, tradition, and legislation. Moreover, one should consider great importance for the doctrinal and religious differences between Qur’anic exegetes, which has caused the formation and growth of Salafi ideas within the Islamic societies, and the tragic sphere of accusation each other for heresy among the different religious schools and denominations as well. Javeri, M.J; Ayazi, S.M.A. (2022) Qur’anic Exegetes on Recognizing the Essence and Components of bidʿa (heresy).

The term "Narrative Transmitted" refers to a narration which, in the first consideration, is a narration narrated from the Infallible (pbuh) and according to the evidence, after being transferred from Sunni sources (Caliphate School) to Shiite books (Ahlul Bayt School), it is considered as a Shiite hadith. And later scholars have often considered it as an infallible narration (PBUH) due to accepting tolerance in the reasons of the Sonan or trusting in the earlier sources of other Shiite narrators and commentators. It does not matter that as a result of research on it, it leads to the conclusion that that narration leads to another infallible and not to the infallible mentioned in the Shiite source or to doubt its issuance by any infallible or be sure of not issuing it from the infallible. But whether this narration, which has been proven to be "Narrative Transmitted", is valid or not, whether it is valid or not, is the next stage of research on "Narrative Transmitted". However, scholars such as Allamah Tostari and some contemporary writers have referred to the narrations transmitted in their works with other interpretations; But Specifically, Allamah Askari is the first researcher to enter into this field in more detail. In short, the absence of narration in the original and ancient Shiite sources and quoting through non-Shiite narrators, the existence of common narrators and existence of Sheikh Permission among the professors with the earliest Shiite source, The non-Shiite nature of the author of the book, absence in other authentic Shiite books even in similar words, The author of the book should think about the approximation of religions, The narrators are less sensitive to quotations in the non-jurisprudential field, these are the criteria for "Narrative Transmitted". Uncertainty about the attribution of the book in which the hadith is contained to its author, anxiety of the text, falsehood of the narration, inconsistency with a proven or famous definite date, incompatibility with the requirements of religion and strong theological foundations, Incompatibility with the rule of obvious reason or having a rational exclusion, Opposing the Qur'an or a definite or reassuring tradition, preferring a narration that contradicts it, and generally not having a narration in a reliable source, the narrator not being known for being truthful in narrating a hadith, or his reputation for lying and betrayal, these are among the reasons for the instability of a "Narrative Transmitted" and its critique

In the paper it has been intended to explain the how of human being`s knowledge of God with regard to the former`s limitations and the Latter`s absoluteness and the limit of the knowledge as understood in Almizan. As viewed in the paper, many verses of the holy Quran not only signify such a human knowledge as possible but emphasize it as being necessary. The knowledge, however, is limited to the Essence and Attributes. God is infinite and limitless, and other beings, including human beings, are finite and limited. It is clear that a limited being may not be superior to an unlimited being. Therefore, it is not possible for the creatures to attain knowledge of his essence, and essentially such a knowledge is impossible. As for the Attributes there is found a disagreement between theologians and Muslim philosophers. Allameh Tabatabai, in Al-Mizan, while refuting the views of ta`til and tashbih, believes that the Qualities of God, though being a case of human knowledge, but the meaning of these Qualities in God is different from those of the creatures.

According to the belief of Islamic philosophers (hukama’), it is impossible to separate the essence from “essential” (dhātī). But by adducing 69th verse of Al-Anbya (the Prophet) which God makes fire be coolness and peace for Abraham, some Islamic philosophers have debated on the issue. In contrast, those who believe this principle has planned to answer this issue and different answers have been replied to this question by them. It is criticized and studied the exegetes’ and experts’ ideas by collecting their opinions. At the end with debating some of these opinions and believing some others being insufficient, it is determined the accepted answers. According to the accepted idea, answering this issue is embodied in paying attention to the permission of God and its effect on agents of the “world of contingencies”. It means that the permission and will of God is the condition for every essence effect, action and motion either the effect being intrinsic or accidental or (aradhi). In spite of frequent declaring in the holy Quran and Islamic traditions (hadith), it is an issue that has been neglected by the majority of the exegetes and it has not been regarded by any above answers.

There is a teaching in Shi’ite fundamental doctrines as “the features of Imams” which is apparently similar to the ancient Persians’ doctrines about their kings. Such a similarity caused some orientalists to pose the claim that the Imami doctrines have been influenced from the beliefs of ancient Persians, so this claim has been explained and then criticized according the following four reasons:Firstly: These similarities are apparent similarities while there are essential and fundamental differences.
Secondly: If – assumedly - there were not essential differences between two beliefs and the both essentially were equal, but again to prove the influence of one from another would not be possible; because the Shi’ite beliefs about the features of Imams have been established in the first decade of Hijrah and before the connections of Iranian and Muslims.
Thirdly: the texts and sources which convey the beliefs of ancient Persians are mostly unauthentic and their authority can not be proved according to the scientific criteria.
Fourthly: many of these sources have been compiled and gathered years after the arrival of Islam to Iran, so not only the claim of the influence of Imami doctrines can not be accepted but the possibility of the influence of the beliefs scribed to the ancient Persians is stronger.

Islamc, besides its appearance, has internal, essential decrees, and sharia, though it is a knowledge of appearance, does not hinder the acquisition of internal knowledge such as doctrine and truth, as the relationship between appearance and the essence is a real relationship, not an artificial and contrived one. The essence guides and nourishes apparent actions, just as faith requires the internal actions of the heart, and intent is the spirit and origin of all actions. Seyyed Heidar Amoli has demonstrated that Sharia and its five ancillaries, namely, Prayer, Fasting, Hajj, Zakat and Jihad fall within three categories of Sharia, Doctrine and Truth. He, like other mystics such as Raseed ol-din Meibodi in Kashf ol-Asrar or Abu Saeed Abu al-Kheir, in proving this link uses this hadith from Prophet Muhammad, “Sharia is my saying, Doctrine is my actions and Truth is my Status.” As a result, mystics consider as one of the principles of conduct the harmony of the mystic’s conduct with the Quran and the hadiths.

The importance of the discussion regarding the essence of Quran arises primarily from the fact that part of the meanings and teachings of Quran are related to the essence of verses, and, also, the eternity of Quran has a collateral relationship with its essence. The essence of Quran can be studied from different aspects, though the first step in this regard is to understand the nature of Quran’s essence; an action which not only is efficient in understanding the range and levels of Quran’s essence but also plays an important role in understanding a correct way to interpret Quran and deal correctly with interpretive narrations. In different eras, scholars in various fields of Islamic sciences have proposed different definitions for the essence of Quran, but it can be derived from hadiths that this essence is both the concealed meanings of the verses and the teachings which cannot be initially understood. The present paper aims to investigate the conceptology of the essence of Quran based on narrations. As a result of this research, it can be concluded that the essence of Quran in narrations has been proposed in three forms: the evidence of verses, different meanings concealed from the words of verses and the deep meanings of Quran.

All Divine Attributes, regarding their referent, are the very essence of God and the same as other names, but concerning their meanings, they are different from the essence of God and His other names. Thus, each name has two significations: one signifies the essence; the other signifies a specific attribute which differentiates it from other names. Thus, God, the Unified Truth, has multiple attributes due to His manifold qualities. For instance, because He has created the creatures, He is the “Creator” and for His all-embracing knowledge, He is the “Knowing”; since He manages the universe, He is the “Director” and for His affection and mercy, He is “the Compassionate, the Merciful”. Then, from among the ninety-nine or according to another estimate, a thousand and one attributes ascribed to Him, we want to know which one is the Supreme Name of God and based on what criterion it is considered supreme. Some have deemed “Allah” the Supreme Name, have set out reasons for their choice and have attributed certain functions and characteristics to it. Some others believe that “in the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful” is the Supreme Name and still another group vote for yā hayyu yā qayoum (“the Eternal Live”) and dhul-Jalāl wal ikrām (“the Lord of Majesty and Generosity”). Some refer us to the Holy Qur’an for the indicators of the Supreme Name and mention a few names; prayers of invocation have also been mentioned to contain a number of functions for the Supreme Name.