semantics of attributes

Allameh Tabatabaei and Qāḍī Saʿīd Qummī are two important representatives of apophatic and cataphatic theology. With a negative approach, Qāḍī Saʿīd turns to the impossibility of recognizing the Divine Attributes, denying the existence of any attributes as well as those conceivable by human for the Almighty. In contrast, Allameh rejects the negative approach and turns to apophatic theology by emphasizing the cognitive nature of the language of religion and the existence of attributes. However, referring to the inherent imperfection of concepts and the inability of the human mind to purify concepts from defects, he considers the description of the infinite nature of God with these conceivable and comprehensible concepts to be flawed, although he ascribes the root and principle of the attributes to God due to his specific ontological principles. In this paper, by comparatively evaluating the two perspectives in a comparative and analytical manner, we have analyzed the quality and extent of their success in escaping the problems of both tashbīh (assimilating) and taʿṭīl (divesting God of all attributes), and, of course, have emphasized the necessity of avoiding the two extremes.

The knowledge of God or the knowledge of the Principle of Existence has been one of the main human concerns. In response to that concern, a major part of the doctrines of revealed religions has been dedicated to His description. As knowledge of the Divine Essence, however, is not possible according to rational and textual arguments, theosophers and theologians as well as the revealed doctrines limit the knowledge of God to the attributes realm, dividing the Divine attributes into two categories: the essential attributes and the active attributes. The essential attributes, taken from the perfect Divine Essence, have characteristics. Similarly, the active attributes, taken from the Divine Acts, have their own features.