The Comparative Study For The Relation Between Innate and The Meaning of Life From Viewpoints of Allame Tabatabaee and Soren Kierkegaard

The modern human, from one side, by different causes was involved in running away from the devoutness; and from other side, for getting the more freedom in thought and deed, denied essence and innate in human being.But does the human really lacking essence and innate? Can human sellect every goals and meaning and then any styles of life free from this problem?
Without doubt, purpose and meaning of fortunate life should be setting proportionate to natural structure (for example protection from the equable temperature of body) and instenctive structure (as suitable feeding). But, in addition to nature and instinct, dose human have a innate structure that needs to observe its circumstances for earning happiness?
In Aristotelian philosophy the beings was defined according to their "substance" and accidents (essence and appearance) in ways "complete essential definition" and "complete or defect descriptive definition". For example for human definition it was applied "rational animal" statement and for horse "neighing animal" statement. The assumption of such definitions is accepting "essence" (substance) or special quiddity structure, including natural, instinctive and innate structure in human and other live or no live beings (essentialism). And those people such John Locke and existence philosophies considered the human as a "tabula rasa" or unwritten tablet.
In view of Allame Tabatabaee, that he retrieved it from Islamic tradition and rational and historical documents, because the species of created beings are leaded naturally toward their ideal aims or happiness by God, the human being that was made with innate structure is leading toward resolving the defects and earning the happiness life. Of course the human, because of his free will and power of election, sometimes is ignoring this innate structure and acts opposite it and thus makes damage and misfortune for him. But Kierkegaard, as "the father of existentialism", takes precedence the existence of man on his essence and he originally denies essence, substance and special innate for man.
Allame believed the man have common fortunate and misfortune, because they have common knowledges and tendencies, thus they need common dirrection, tradition and religion. But Kierkegaard believed the paths of fortunate and misfortunate for men are differents, because they have not common essence and innate. Every body make his special essence and substance with his free will. He can ellect one of the triple directions or spheres (aesthetic, moral and religious) and anyone shouldnot be fuss and blame.
In view of Allame, the religion and Sharia law that descended from Heaven is compatible with innate and essence of human and fortunate of whole of human depended on following it. But Kierkegaard, as an fideist christian, believed the way of his fortunate and salvation depended on following Holy Book and he has most recommendated, pointly or clearly, about following this way.
Allame believs that to determine aim and meaning of life without considering the essence and innate is unrealistic deed and harmfull for man's fortunate and safety. But Kierkegaard, in his famous opinion, do not think a limitation about acceptence in electing one of the triple spheres; because he thinks the human is nothing, hollow and pure contengent. However in his non-celebrity opinion, he clearly or explicitly believes the man has a substance and original innate and evantually he respected of his living in religious sphere and maybe his instability in selecting a meaning of life for himself due to such instability and dichotomy in his theory about innate.
In view of Allame the properties of innate matters are non-adventitious public, stableness at the same ability to strenthen and weaken and self-explaining. It is obtained such signs in second view of Kierkegaard.
In most remarks of Allame it is obvious that he believes some innate matters are actually at birth and immediate knwoledge (in presence). And he believes other innate matters are potential. Kierkegaard, in his famous view that repudiates innate and substance, indeed denies it's actuallity and opptionality. But his second view suggests that he accepts actually and involuntary innate that of course human can pass from it's unnecessary items with his free will.
Allame believes the factors as the false education and training remove man from his first primitive innate and involve him following his or other's carnal desires and causes him unfortune. In despite of the acceptence first innate, this changing way suggests man's freedom. Kierkegaard, as other opponents of innate for the purpose of genetic and legislative freedom, disagreed with innate; unaware that the agreement for innate don,t conflict with freedom. Of course he, in his second view, accepted this compatibility within innate and freedom.
Allame agrees with innate acknowledge and tendency to truth, beauty and generality of religion, however in the details of religion he clarifies that the knowning God, tends to God, monotheism in person, adjectives and actions, prophecy, Velaya (guardianship) and Islamic law are innates. Kierkegaard, in his first view, believed the human even is empty of innate of God knowing. But in his second viewpoint and specially in his opinion that agreed with "subjectivism", he confesses the being of God and His attributes as oneness, power, knowledge, mercy and etc. Then with rejection of materialism, he declares that the only way for salvation is christianity.
In view point of Allame, throldom, worship, purification and knowledge of soul are primary and middle meanings of life. The main and final meaning of life is divine knowledge or approach to God. And these are according to man's substance and innate. In this condition human in this world gets tranquility, happiness, hopeness, justice, freedom and security; and in afterlife he gets fotunate. Kierkegaard confesses that the morality is innate and moral is a passage to religiousness and faithfully life and man's fortunate are depending to haltering carnall desires and as a result religiousness. He believes the life in aesthetic sphere and even in moral sphere led to failure and hopelessness.
Thus the most important common points in views of Allameh and Kierkegaard, the material, spirituall, worldly and heavenly fortunate depend on faith to God, religiousness and thraldom to religious teaches and following this way to devine knowlegde and mysthetic nearness to God.