جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « afterlife punishment » در نشریات گروه « علوم قرآن و حدیث »

The Holy Quran divides human beings into two groups, the people of Paradise and the people of Hell, and promises to fulfill the division on the Day of Resurrection. There are disputes among theologians as to what is the truth of the reward and punishment of the Hereafter and where they come from. One of the issues in psychology is the reality and the source of human happiness and misery. However, theologians and philosophers have expressed different theories about the afterlife punishment. The present study, which is in the field of self-knowledge, was conducted by descriptive-analytical method and using theological and philosophical ideas. The purpose of the study is the ontological analysis of the truth of the afterlife punishments from the perspective of two early and contemporary Shiite figures, Mulla Sadra and Sobhani, and it seeks to answer the fundamental question: "What is the source of Heaven and Hell and the afterlife reward and punishment from the viewpoint of Mulla Sadra and Sobhani?" The research results show similarities and differences. According to similarities, the life and the Resurrection are due to the union between science, practice and the human soul in this world, and the emergence of moral characteristics in the next life makes the afterlife and eternal body. Furthermore, contrary to the belief of many sages, the afterlife punishment is the result of non-existence affairs and worldly shortcomings rooted in sensual desires, and the reward of Paradise is the result of removing them and attaining true perfection with divine teachings and good morals. The difference between the viewpoints of both thinkers about evil is based on the fact that Mulla Sadra emphasizes that evil is inherent and existential, but Sobhani considers evil as a concomitant of the existence of good

Governmental verdict is one of the strategies at the disposal of Shiite jurisprudence to answer various important needs of Islamic society, on the basis of which many social and political problems of the Islamic government have been solved after the Islamic revolution. The problem this paper addresses is whether the act of disagreeing with a governmental verdict is discredited or rewarded in the afterlife. Rational and narrational arguments are put forward in line with the jurisprudential method of inference. As the results show both jurisprudential approaches insist on obeying from governmental verdicts to maintain order in the Islamic society. However, the approach which views obeying the commands of a jurist from a patron-client perspective, believes that disagreeing results in punishment and obeying in reward in the afterlife. But the approach which considers such verdicts as just recommendations, maintains that disagreement results in only legal punishments and is not considered as a sin.