فصلنامه تحقیقات کلامی
پیاپی 18 (پاییز 1396)

One of the wide issues discussed by the major philosophers of the ancient Greece is the eternity of the world. The religious tradition and, consequently, the Muslim theologians opposed it and tried to reject it. Sheikh Mufid is one of the first theologians to discuss the temporal occurrence (huduth) and limitedness of the world. Because of his opposition to the Mutazilites, he brings about a clear line between the type of Shiite and the Mutazilite beliefs and considers the Mutazilites to be in the line of philosophers for belief in the consistent entities (al-'Ayan al-thabetah). His student, Seyyed al-Mortaza, is also trying to explain the temporal limitedness of the world by offering the rational and mathematical reasons. The reasons for limitedness of the temporal past have been followed in the works of Syed al-Mortaza's disciple that is Abu al-Fath Karajaki that he even has written letters and changed ideas to Seyyed al-Mortaza in this regard. In the writings of the theologians, rejection of temporal occurence of the world is considered as polytheism and eternalism, but it seems that some of the mathematical reasons raised by them do not corresponds the modern mathematics, but one can offer them with an acceptable explanation.

One of the current views on determinism and freedom is the theory of "tafwiz" (abdicationism) that accordingly God, after the creation of man, has given up to the human being the activism and the power of doing acts. In the Asharite and Imāmī sources, the Mutazilah is mentioned as the case for Mufawwizah (Abdicationists). In this article, after referring to four definitions for tafwiz and three definitions for Mufawwizah, the author has explained the causes and reasons for the attribution of "tafwiz" to the Mutazilites and then criticizes it. Another part of the article is devoted to the development and classification of the attribution of "tafwiz" to the Mutazilites, which is presented for the first time in this article. The article will come to this conclusion that the above attribution is incompatible with the principles and views of the Mutazilites, and finally it can be the views of some of the early Mutazilites who were influenced by Kadariyya.

Paying attention to the deep roots of the discussion of salvation for the followers of the various religions and the existence of different views in this regard and its relation to Resurrection as well as the concerns of many individuals in this regard, it is necessary to determine the right and correct viewpoint in this regard by a comprehensive examination of the Quranic verses and the infallible Imam's narrations. According to the holy Quran and the Ahl al-Bayt (AS) narrations, the human beings, based on their own religious traditions, are divided to different groups in the Resurrection and, on the basis of faith, actions and other factors they are placed in different levels of salvation, happiness and/or misery. These levels in a hierarchal way includes from the lowest levels of misery to the highest levels of happiness and between these two types are those who neither enter the promised heaven nor the promised hell. Thus, the way to salvation is open for the most follower of different religions, although it is possible that the way of salvation to be closed to many.

The hadith "If AbuDhar had known what was in the heart of Salman, he would kill him" is one of the difficult narrations and there are two different approaches about its denotation and meaning: the negative-esoteric approach and the positive approach. Of course this approach has not been immune from misuse, as if the Sufis put it in the sense of correctness of their apparent and personal perceptions of the Sharia, and the religious pluralists considered it as a reason for rightness of all thoughts and necessity of tolerance for every conception of religion. While examining the documentation and denotation of this hadith, in this writing we try to explain the arguments of each of the present approaches in interpreting it in order to show that the uses of the Sufis and the modern religious pluralists are not methodical and are not consistent with the principles of hadith understanding.

The issue of determinism and freedom is one of earliest kalami issues that have arose between the Muslims and the most important kalami sects such as Kadariyyah, Imamiyyah, Mutazilah and Ashaerah have reacted to it. Regarding the literal meaning of the Quranic verses that refers to the divine activeness in the acts attributed to human beings as well as considering the action monotheism, the Sunni traditionist and, afterwards, the Asharites trend to determinism and emphasized on the divine activeness in the acts attributed to human beings. In this regard, by an inspiration of the refulgent teachings of the Ahl ul-Bayt (AS), the Imamis refused both determinist and tafwizi (Abdicationist) beliefs and choose a middle way in interpreting the human activeness that is known as "the thing between the two" (amrun bayn al-amrayn). Opposing intensively with the beliefs of the determinists and Asharites on the human non-activeness, Rashid Reza considered the thought of absolute human freedom and tafwiz (abdication) as incorrect and tries to choose middle way in this regard. In this direction, he predicates his point of view to sense, consciousness, the totality of the Quranic verses and the teachings of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the righteous predecessors.

There are two epistemological and ontological views on the nature of tawill (esoteric interpretation). The question of this research is the nature of tawill from the point of view of Ibn Timiyyah and Allamah Tababai. Thus, after examining the literal and terminological meanings of tawill and its usages in the Quranic applications, this research introduces these two views and then explains the ontological view from the viewpoint of Ibn Timiyyah and Allamah Tababai in detail. In the continuation, Ayatullah Marefat criticisms of these two views have been examined. This article results in that the proposed ontological criticisms against the ontological view are unable to prove the incorrectness and unacceptability of this view as well as its deficiency with both its two explanation is that it does not include all the usecases of tawill in the Qurnic usages. It is the common deficiency which the epistemological view also suffers from.

In The Method of Text Criticism from the Perspective of the Prophetic Hadith Scholars, Salah ul-Din al-Edlebi has examined some narrated hadiths from the holy Prophet (SA) and, on the basis of the criteria for criticizing the hadith texts, considers some of these hadiths as counterfeit. From amongst, in accordance to the (dependent) reason criterion, he considers the Caliphate of Imam 'Ali (AS) essentially as counterfeit and contradictory to reason. He considers the Shia belief in the Caliphate of Imam 'Ali (AS) after the holy Prophet (SA) as incorrect and contradictory to reason and opposite to common habit; on the same basis, he regards this Shii belief as counterfeit and made by the hadith counterfeiters. From al-Edlebi's perspective, the Shia claim about Ghadire Khom and the companions not protesting against Abu Bakr is opposite to common habit and contradictory to reason. The present research has challenged al-Edlebi's view in three points of criticizing his bases, methodology and content. It results in that al-Edlebi's view in this case is incorrect and Imam 'Ali's Caliphate not only is not in contrary to the reason criterion on the basis of Quran and definite tradition, but also the (dependent and independent) reason and the wise people's custom confirm it.