نشریه معارف عقلی
پیاپی 35 (پاییز و زمستان 1396)

In their two important works, namely, Sharh-e- Tawhid-e Saduq and DilÁlat al- HÁ’erin, Qazi Sa'id Qomi, a Shiite scholar, and Musa bin Meimoon , a Jewish scholar, emphasize on the enormous difference between the creator and the creature; thus, they regard the Divine Essence devoid of any attribute, and reject the existence of any kind of positive attribute for the Divine Essence. According to them, believing in any attribute for the Divine Essence, whether it is the very essence, or something additive to the essence, leads to what the early philosophers call a kind of anthropomorphism, composition in essence and multiplicity, and may result in heresy and polytheism. The views of both scholars on the ontology of attributes can be considered identical with the theory of deputation and exclusion of the essence from attributes, although there are slight differences between them in arguing for this claim. According to Qazi Sa'id, this theory is required to be taken valid on
the basis of Ahl al-Bayt's guidelines in the knowledge of divine essence, and is also established by rational arguments. From his point of view, having observing the human capacity to understand the issue in question the prophets and infallible Imams have stated some attributes for Allah Almighty in religious texts; and indeed God is devoid of any attribute. It should be noted that the basis for the negation of attributes in the divine essence has caused both thinkers to interpret the attributes introduced in religious texts in a negative way, interpret the positive attributes in the light of negative attributes, and choose the negative divine approach in the semantics of attributes.

Knowledge of the truth of revelation and its descent has always been a concern for scholars and thinkers. Although it may be impossible to have knowledge of the nature of the revelation and provide a real definition of it, theorists have tried to explain and describe it to the extent of their understanding and ability. In this regard, various views have been raised, including the view of "religious experience." Based on this view, which is, in fact, rooted in Christianity and favored by some Muslim intellectuals such as Abdul Karim Soroush, the Prophet encounters God. In this encounter, no words or propositions are uttered; rather, revelation is the interpretation and the Prophet's account of his personal experience. Soroush seeks to solve the problems of revelation and tries to provide a natural explanation for it. In this explanation, the Prophet both formulates the revelation and interferes with the themes of the revelation. Since this theory leads to the identification of
revelation with religious experience, and reduces the revelation to a religious experience, it has indefensible requirements that have been faced by criticisms of many theologians and traditional believers. By presenting various perspectives on revelation, the present paper addresses the critique of Soroush's views and, finally, proposes a view that is both consistent with the Qur'an and tradition and accepted by Muslims philosophers and scholars.

After the unity of the Divine Essence and Attributes, Unity of the Divine Acts has become one of the most important and most challenging beliefs of Muslims this belief has even led to the formation of some sects and denominations in Islam. Using the descriptive-analytic method, the present paper deals with examining the Unity of the Divine Acts and expressing its levels as stated in the traditions from Imam Sadeq (AS). In his view, Unity of the Divine Acts means that there is no independent cause in the world other than the Supreme God, and the self-subsistence of existence, creation, ownership, divine lordship, being providing, and authority, which all appear in sequential relations, belong exclusively to God. In the face of those who believe in dualism, he has valid and authentic narrations according to which the Imamite theologians have developed the Shi'i belief system.

Sadr al-Muta’llehin has comprehensively studied and explained the philosophy of prophecy through various approaches. Using an ontological approach, he has analyzed the position of prophecy in the realm of existence and explained the necessity and the existential states of the prophet's position with arguments such as the argument from noblest possibility, argument from mediation in the Divine Grace, the argument from the ultimate causality (of beings and the manifestation of Names and Divine Attributes. Using the epistemological approach, and with regard to the limitations and error in human perceptual powers, he has explained the philosophy of prophecy; he has also studied the social dimensions of prophecy with two approaches in focus: justice-oriented approach in the light of the rule of law and the utopia or virtuous city-oriented approach. Using the descriptive- analytical method, the present paper explores and analyzes the philosophy of prophecy in the
thoughts of Sadr al-Muta’llehin.

Sheikh Mofid (born in 413 AH) from the Baghdad theological School, and 'AllÁmeh Hilli (born in 726 AH) from the theological school of Hillah, are prominent Shi'i theologians. Although they are both rationalist theologians, they have two different approaches to theological issues. In the present paper, we have tried to analyze the changes and developments in the position and structure of the issue of resurrection, which is one of the important theological questions for these two great Shi'i theologians. In terms of method, both theologians have used the two sources of reason and tradition to know the resurrection. However, there are much more general and rational discussions in the works of 'AllÁmeh than in those of the Sheikh Mofid. For example, although they both believe in the incorporeity of the human soul, Sheikh Mofid offers textual reasons to prove this theory, while 'AllÁmeh Hilli has recourse to rational and philosophical reasons. Regarding the issues of
resurrection, Sheikh Mofid, unlike 'AllÁmeh, has elaborated on the issue of the resurrection mainly through textual evidence. One of the main causes of this difference is the introduction of philosophy into theology.

Scientific authority which includes explaining and interpreting the ambiguous verses of the Holy Qur'an and expressing the teachings and rules that have not been stated clearly and explicitly in the holy Quran (to prevent misunderstandings and scientific controversy among Muslims) is vested with the Prophet (pbuh). Contrary to the political rule on which Shia and Sunni disagree, all Muslims agree on the fact that after the Prophet, Ahl- al-Bayt take on this duty. The present paper seeks to prove this issue in light of the traditions and sayings of the traditionalists of the first three centuries of Islam, including the Companions, the Successors and the students of the Successors, given the importance of their views among Muslims, in particular the Sunnis. However, the oral traditions by the infallibles Imams, studying in their schools, and referring to their lifestyle in making inferences from religious rules bring ample evidence for the acceptance of their scientific authority, which we will discuss in this paper. Although most of the words of the Companions are about the superiority and the scientific status of Imam Ali, traditions such as the Hadith of Thaqalain and the formal propositions of some of the successors about the scientific position and authority of the other Imams indicate the scientific position of them. In addition, we have tried to use non-Imamite sources in the first three centuries of Islam to extract the narratives and traditional works in the field of the scientific authority of Ahl al-Bayt, which results in admitting this issue by non-Imamite companions and traditionalists whose ideas have been accepted by the Sunnis.