نشریه کلام اسلامی
پیاپی 94 (تابستان 1394)

Muslim scholars do not have the same view concerning conflict or lack of conflict between evolution and Qur’anic verses about creation. This article tries to explain that the religious theory of human creation dose not contradict the scientific theory. In a special manner, Adam was created miraculously from dust and following humans are his offspring. Evolution, even if it is correct, unable to prove the process of evolution for a special human like Adam. Science can never reject the miracle in Adam’s creation. Neither religious theory wants to offer a scientific explanation of human creation nor do scientific theories aim to deny the religious view because empirical sciences are alien to the scope of miracle. In this article, Qur’anic verses that can be used as proofs of our claim are posed and then verses that are used as testimonies are presented. As the discussion goes, the verses that spoke about similar cases of miracles are alluded to and then the verses used as evidence for adherents of evolution are posed and responded to. In the end, some scientists will be mentioned as opponents of evolution. The most important verses referred to in support of evolution are verses that regard the creation of Adam from dust and the creation of his offspring from water; also the verses that likened Jesus (p.h.) to Adam and introduce Adam as the father of all mankind.

One of the ways to prove the truthfulness of the one who claims prophecy is declaration and assertion of a prophet -whose prophecy has been proved- about the prophecy of another one. There are some doubts posed concerning the validity of this way. The present article has explained the way that declaration signifies the truthfulness of the claimant of prophecy and has studied the mentioned doubts and has discovered the extent of its validity. The outcome of this article concerning the way of declaration is the necessity of separation between the station of realization and the station of confirmation. In the station of realization, the declaration of the previous prophet – if it enjoys the qualifications of authority like certainty of the prophecy of the previous prophet, certainty about issuance of the declaration itself, the deceleration lack of synopsis, ambiguity and generalization etc. - brings certainty and can prove the prophecy of the following prophet. But concerning the station of affirmation, while the prophecy of previous prophets are not provable without relying on Islamic texts, the way of declaration can not be used to prove the prophecy of the Prophet of Islam and relying on Qur’an and Islamic narrations afflict the argument with vicious circle. Of course, the facts existed in torah and Gospel applicable to the prophet of Islam, can be used as a testimony in the way of “gathering evidences and testimonies” and also in the station of dialectic.

Shiite Imams have a high degree of knowledge which transcends human knowledge although this knowledge is not an innate and independent one but an effusion so the Imams receive these kinds of knowledge from a different source. Inspiration and angelic talk are among the important sources of the knowledge of the Imams that attention to them and exploration of them shows their relation to each other. The question of the present article is that while inspiration and angelic talk are kinds of mystic unveiling and intuition, so what is the difference between these two? Perhaps inspiration and angelic talk have a single originality and only because of different observations and attitudes from different angels, they have been considered differently. Also, the essential doubt according to which to use from these two sources are incoherent with the inherence of the knowledge of Imams from the noble Prophet and nessasitates the knowledge of the household of prophet to be more than the prophet himself, will be answered.

As the first document to prove the guardianship and caliphate of the commander of the faithful Ali (p.h), the narration of yawm al-dar has an especial importance. Ibn Taimiyyah in his book –Menhaj al-Sunnah- has posed several doubts about the chain of transmitters and signification of the narration from among which is his doubts about the chain of transmitters of this narration because of “Abd al-Ghaffar Ibn al-Ghasim Abu Maryam al-Kufi) being among them. Concerning the signification, Ibn Taimiyyah posed five doubts the most important of which is his doubts about this part of the narration that reads: “who will support me in this affair to be my brother, my trustee and my caliphate among you?”, according to which mere helping and supporting the prophet does not cause one’s accessibility to the status of caliphate and vicegerency; because those who accepted the prophet’s invitation and helped him with their souls and property are not few. In the present article, Ibn Taymiyyeh’s six doubts about the chain of transmitters and signification of the narration has been posed, studied and analyzed.

Religious knowledge that is the deep knowledge of religion is one of basic agents in the geometry of thought that it can be claimed that it cover human reflections because of its practical role in intellectual developments. Human being always somehow ignored a fundamental approach to the life and to the triplet of God, human and nature and this very agent was enough to hold human being in simple ignorance. Studying the role of deepening religious knowledge in the first stage and increasing effectiveness of philosophical deepening of religious knowledge on geometry of thought and also on bodily health of human and secondarily on society in the second stage, the present article tries to indicate to a meaningful relationship among them which by posing a re-engineering of intellectual designs responds to a part of the major goal of explaining the pattern of religious life. It seems that the matter of religious knowledge is the missing link for human being who makes attempt at everything but the knowledge of his religion which is the knowledge of himself and the call of his internal nature.

Sayyid Ibn Tawous relys on tradition and natural reason in doctrinal discussions. He regards the admonitions of reason and qur’anic indications and godly and prophetic directions as supporters of the way of original nature. According to Sayyid, natural reason can show God to the servants without complicated theological arguments but he warns about fallowing theological reason and falling into disputes of theology. He avoids writing a theological book although does not totally refuse the method of theologians. Sayyed regards reason as independent for detailed discovery of God’s notion and regards reason necessary but not enough in some cases. Despite his anti-theological method (especially about rational theology), he uses theological arguments practically in some cases. He accepts transmitted theology instead of rational arguments and expresses some reasons in support of that. The discussion of leadership (imamah) has an especial importance in his view and he mentioned many rational and traditional discussions in this field. Sayyid considers philosophers as devious people who have some void sayings and yet sometimes he presents philosophical or semi-philosophical arguments to refuse the word of opponents.