نشریه معرفت ادیان
سال هفتم شماره 2 (پیاپی 26، بهار 1395)

Creation, According to Islam and Hinduism, is a kind of originating plurality from unity. The holy Qur’an attributes this act to the divine command and Vedanta’s tradition (Upanishads’ tradition) considers it as a product of the Maya power of Brahman. The concept of divine command is defined in the holy Qur’an and Shia and Sunni commentaries. Referring to Ismaili works, some researchers consider the Qur’anic concept of ‘’divine command’’ as equivalent to Shakta and Maya in Hindu tradition. This research seeks to evaluate this view by comparing the two concepts of ‘’command’’ and ‘’Maya’’. It, therefore, reviews some of Upanishads and erudite works of Islamic sects including Ismailis. The research findings show that the differences between command and Maya are so broad that we cannot consider these two concepts to be identical.

The two topics of ‘’infallibility’’ and ‘authority of the holy texts of Ibrahimic religion have been the special concern of the scholars of these religions. One of the reasons behind their concern is that Islam, Judaism and Christianity are among the text-based religions. When a Muslim, Jewish or Christian knows that his holy Book has no error and becomes sure that there are no probable errors in his Book, which can impair its validity, he/she will base his thoughts and deeds on the Book and lead a peaceful religious life.
Every Muslim and fair scholar absolutely agree that the holy Qur’an is impeccable because all agree about its authenticity. Also, it represents a great challenge and it is free from substantial differences. The certainty of the infallibility of the holy Qur’an’ dispels and doubts about its authenticity.
The Christians and the Jews tried hard to buck this strong trend and verify the authenticity of their Books. The Jewis consider the Old Testament as holy and heavenly, but their perception of the holiness of the Old Testament is different from Muslim's perception of the holiness of the holy Quran. They believe that the scribes of the Old Testament received divine providence while writing these Books and that these Books are reliable authoritative sources.
Likewise, the Christians believe that God is the author of the holy book and that this work was written by scribes. Accordingly, they consider the Bible to be authentic. However, this authenticity is not confirmed by evidence about the infallibility of the two holy texts. This is because the authenticity the Old Testament and the New Testament is not agreed upon by all authorities, these Books do not represent a challenge and they consist a lot of differences and contradictions.

Augustine is a theologian who has mystical states and a mystic who holds theological ideas. In his mysticism, wisdom is combined with mysticism, and asceticism with holding religious and social positions. Practically, love of God and His creatures constitutes the basis of his mystical thoughts. He considers humility as an important prerequisite for achieving perfection in love i.e. dissatisfaction with the current position and the need to move towards perfection. This objective can be accomplished through self-purification, and by having religious virtues and supplicating. With these three things, a mystic starts his mystical journey from the vegetative, sensory and cognitive (reasoning) stage, and passes through the stage of morality and serenity of mind to reach the ultimate goal, that is, the stage of contemplation. Those who pass through these stages have, in fact, passed imaginary, sensory, material and spiritual perception and have achieved an unchanging luminous knowledge through their intellectual perception. At this stage, man considers God as a ubiquitous viewer and as the source of all realities.

The emergence of humanism and reform movement which gave rise to a new perception of individualism of man and the kind of man's relationship with God and forgiveness is the focal point of Luther's theology. Considering the new circumstances, Luther offered a new paradigm about man, freedom of will, and the kind of man's relationship with God and faith. From early, the medieval church used to consider God as a being to whom man has no access. Rejecting the intermediary role of the church, Luther declares that it is possible for man to have access to God and he is allowed to have direct conversation with Him. The conceptual modification that Luther made to the concept of forgiveness is based on the principle that God has apparently forgiven man and God's forgiveness lies in outside the sinner's existence. Therefore, forgiveness is something acquired, not granted. This new paradigm opposes the common Augustinian view which was prevailing in the Middle Ages and which considers forgiveness lies within man; a view that the church adopted and used it for the guidance of man. However, the essence of Luther’s paradigm about man giving man the freedom of which the church and religious law deprived him; therefore, man cannot worship God freely when he has only free will.

The question of the relationship between faith and rationality and marking the boundaries between them has long been the subject of inquiry in Christianity; an important subject which is concerned with individual's religious beliefs and which has been a matter of serious dispute among great Christian scholars. Since Thomas Aquinas is among the greatest theologians of Catholic Church and Martin Luther is one of the most effective figures of the Protestant Church, and because they have exerted great influence on the thoughts of the followers of these two schools, it is necessary to make a comparison between the thoughts of each of them on this issue. Using an analytical approach and citing documentary proofs, this paper seeks to make a comparative study of the question of faith and rationality according to the views of each of these two distinguished Christian figures. Undoubtedly, understanding their approaches can contribute enormously to forming a very accurate picture of these eminent and important Christian Churches. The findings of this paper suggest that Aquinas is a non-extremist rationalist and Luther is a non-extremist fideist. Although in general they accept the two elements of faith and rationality, they have serious differences over the intellectual principles.

“Solomon's Ecclesiastes” is attributed to Prophet Solomon. As the Bible testifies, Solomon’s theosophy was a God-given theosophy. However, unwise viewpoints, such as determinism, nihilism, hedonism, pessimism, and hopelessness are attributed to him in this book. By making a semantic review and analysis of the term "theosophy" together with the inspiration of pure Islamic culture and adding the element of beauty we can get a more precise meaning of “theosophy”. According to this semantic change, “Solomon's Ecclesiastes” can be screened and the meaning of the theosophy, which Prophet Solomon requested from God, can be reread. Thus, the two kinds of theosophy, i.e. emanating theosophy and instructive theosophy constitute the origin of beauty and beauty constitute the manifestation of theosophy. In fact a real theosopher views the whole universe with respect and the whole system of creation seems to him beautiful and best. Therefore, the idea of attributing unwise attitudes to Prophet Solomon in this book is unacceptable because it does not conform with the idea that theosophy was bestowed upon him through divine grace.

Feminist theology, which is a branch of Christian theology that took form in reaction to the discriminatory measures adopted by traditional Christian theology against women, has undergone fundamental changes. Using a descriptive-analytical method, the present paper gives an account of the history, causes of formation and characteristics of feminist theology, and elaborates on the main teachings of Christianity in the view of this theological school. The findings indicate that, due to the influence of feminist movement and requirements of modern age, feminist theology altered course in such a way that its pioneers had never imagined and they might not be pleased with it.

The first and second chapters of Genesis are among the most challenging texts for feminist commentators. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the representative of the liberal school of feminist interpretation and Gilbert Bilezikian, the representative of the evangelical school of feminist interpretation have interpreted these two chapters. The present paper investigates the similarities and differences between the two commentator's interpretation of the text of Genesis. Both of them try to affirm their commitment to Christianity and feminism. Stanton who divides the story of creation into two parts, proves the idea of equality in creation as shown in the first part and rejects the second part about God's words, is less committed to the text. Bilezikian, the representative of the evangelical school, who believes that the entire Bible has been revealed, tries to interpret the Bible on the basis of equality between the sexes and use of women's experiences and in accordance with the principles of feminism.