جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « Theoretical monotheism » در نشریات گروه « علوم انسانی »

The new construction, ‘practical monotheism,’ has led some to think that the division of monotheism into theoretical and practical should be incorporated into kalām (Islamic theology). In this paper, I draw on a descriptive, analytic, and critical method based on library sources to criticize this claim, and through a critique of the evidence of this idea, I have concluded that monotheism of acts cannot be a subject-matter of kalām in any of its three senses: “monotheistic behavior,” “knowledge culminating in monotheistic behavior,” and “imperative statements derived from theoretical monotheism.” I provide a formulation of the second sense which might be incorporated into kalām, but it is not what is meant by the theorist. Given the contemporary use of the term, it is implausible to treat the idea as theological, and the analogy of the bifurcation of theoretical/practical monotheism to similar bifurcations in philosophy, ethics, mysticism, and that of theoretical/practical reason is arguably a false analogy. Finally, I point to the subject-matter and purpose of kalām as well as the criterion of distinction of sciences to argue that practical monotheism—in the sense of ‘any tendency, temperament, and conduct in accordance with theoretical monotheism or monotheistic disposition, character, and act in accordance with the monotheistic outlook’—cannot be incorporated into kalām, just as monotheism in the sense of belief in God’s oneness at all stages and act in terms of the belief cannot be a subject-matter of kalām

The wise process of revelation of the Qurchr('39')an in 23 years was able to turn a polytheistic society into a united monotheistic nation. The discovery of this process depends on achieving the method of the Qurchr('39')an in raising the issue of monotheism based on the revelation of the Qurchr('39')an. In this research, focusing on the levels of theoretical monotheism, part of this process has been followed and significant results have been achieved by using the new style in interpretation which is called Tanzili thematic. On this basis, the Qurchr('39')anic method in dealing with the topic of monotheism does not start from the zero point of belief; Rather, it has taken the unity of the Divine essence and oneness for granted. And the Quran has widely proposed other levels of monotheism, such as monotheism in divine sovereignty, monotheism in creation, and monotheism in belief/knowledge. Although the study of the process of reasoning on each branch of monotheism is far beyond the scope of an article. But the nullification of the ceremonial and true birth of God Almighty shows that in accordance with the descending order of revelation, a rational policy has been followed in the fight against superstitious beliefs. Using the gradual method, non-detailed and detailed, telling stories and parables are some of the approaches that have been used in this regard.

In their theological work, some contemporary Imami intellectuals have divided stages of monotheism (tawḥīd) into “theoretical” and “practical.” They have proposed definitions and criteria in order to explain the bifurcation. A consideration of this body of work reveals that there are troubles with these definitions and criteria of the division. A more precise inquiry is needed to resolve these troubles. Moreover, that the bifurcation was not deployed in some other works necessitates a reconsideration of its advantages. As a conclusion of this library-analytic research, it turns out that (a) theoretical monotheism is in the realm of insights, whereas practical monotheism is to be found in the realms of desire, character, and deeds, (b) in Imami theology or kalām, the division was innovated by Mutahhari—it cannot be found prior to him, (c) although there might be justifications for why the majority of Imami theologians have refrained from making a division between theoretical and practical kinds of monotheism, the bifurcation has its advantages.

Due to the special status of the topic of "monotheism", the Imamiyyah theologians have always paid special attention to this issue. The breadth of monotheism, and the ongoing challenge of Imamiyyah with the rival’s religious and sectarian thoughts, has made the situation of this debate and its method of structuring very important. The purpose of the knowledge of discourse is summarized in two areas: "education" and "defense of beliefs". In these two areas, materiality has a special place in terms of comprehensiveness, impediment and observance of the logical division criteria. Therefore, in this paper, by means of "library" and "analytical" methods, the structure of a considerable number of theological works of Imamiyyah has been examined in two parts: "privative or intrinsic monotheism" and "degrees of monotheism". As a result of this research, it becomes clear that the term "monotheism" has several different meanings; the structure of monotheistic debates has always been evolving and various structures have been proposed. In these structures, some levels of monotheism are sometimes neglected and sometimes the rational requirements of division are not met. In the proposed structure, it has been tried to pay attention to the monotheistic and rational organization.