فصلنامه اندیشه نوین دینی
پیاپی 68 (بهار 1401)

The issue of research in this article is to examine Mulla Sadra's opinion about the predicative attributes of God and whether he is bound to which of the three theories of tashbih, ta`wil and tanzih. The method of this article is librarian and documentary-analytical. The findings of the research show that Sadr al-Muta'allihin, while criticizing the superficialist, also considers the method of philosophers and theologians who use ta`wil in the divine verses to be incorrect. He believes in preserving the originality of the text and opposes those avoiding appearances, and considers the way to achieve this goal to be the doctrine of special monotheism or personal unity and the theory of spirits of meanings. According to this version of particular monotheism, the pure absoluteess of God causes him to be present in every ta`ayyun, and to accept its rulings, and the very pure absoluteness causes him not to be limited to this determination. Although part of this method can be seen in the opinions of a number of mystics, but like other issues of theoretical mysticism that have been highlighted in the transcendent wisdom, its scientific formulation and order is due to Sadra's efforts.

"Eternity in the hell" is one of the Qur'anic issues related to human beings` end, which is disputed by thinkers in terms of how the words of the verses and reason denote it. Ayatollah Javadi Amoli points to the rational principles in this regard and, based on it, proves immortality and permanence in hell. On the contrary, some mystics believe that such a thing is incompatible with God's vast mercy. The present article tries to use a descriptive-analytical method, while explaining in detail the rational principles and narrative reasons of Javadi Amoli's point of view, to criticize the mystics' opinion in this regard. The findings of the study indicate that the author of Tasnim's commentary with rational principles such as abstraction and originality of the soul, stability and permanence of the soul and embodiment of Qur'anic and narrative deeds and reasons, proved to burn in the fire for certain people and did not accept the view of some mystics. Eternal is not only inconsistent with vast mercy and divine justice, but is compatible with it.

The problem of the present study is to re-read the theological theory of the main components of human body, as a criterion for the oneness of the bodies, with a look at the hadiths concerning human nature. Theologians such as Khawjeh Nasir al-Din al-Tusi have proposed this theory in response to the well-known objection of "akil", the eating, and "ma`kul", the eaten – as one challenging the bodily resurrection; But the interpretation of this answer seems to be ambiguous and requires renewed attention. The findings of this study show that by being inspired by some narrations concerning tinat, the said promise can be read in a way that reduces its ambiguities and increases its efficiency. The research method of this article is interpretive-analytical.

Sheikh Muhammad Nasiruddin al-Albani is one of the most important and prolific scholars of Wahhabism in the contemporary period. He has written several works based on Wahhabi thought, among which is the book "Tahdhir al-Sajid min ettikhaz al-Quburi Masajid" in which, relying on his reading of the prophetic narrations of prohibiting "ettikhaz al-Quburi Masajid" and weakening their opposing narrations, he has opposed the existence of graves in mosques and reciprocally building mosques on graves and has considered this as a kind of polytheism. The purpose of this article is to examine and critique the evidence cited in Albani`s work by a descriptive and analytical method. The findings of the research show that the Albani`s claim in banning mosque-building on graves is contrary to the appearance of the prophetic narration: May God curse the Jews and Christians for taking the graves of their prophets as places of worship”, firstly and secondly, conflict those true traditions denoting the graves of some prophets in the mosque Kheif or making a mosque on the tomb of Abu Basir by the companions.

The issue of the present research is Genealogy of Divine religions as viewed by Allameh Tabatabai; in other words, whether religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism, etc., can be called divine religions or are excluded from the divine religions due to the existence of some monotheistic concepts. What about the legitimacy and salvation of the followers of these religions? The subject of this research has been studied by descriptive-analytical method and the findings of the research show that according to Allameh Tabatabai and with regard to the definition and dimensions of religion and its foundation, religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Brahmanism and Jainism are not among the divine religions. Because they agree with polytheism, denial of prophecy and reincarnation. Without believing in God and monotheism, and by not believing in the divine messengers and the resurrection, the above religions are considered earthly religions. And non-divine religions and sects, given their being of ignorance, will not lead to legitimacy and salvation.

Thinkers have different views on the relationship between reason and religion. In the book Defending Rationality, Mr. Mardiha believes in the precedence of reason over religion in all fields and offers various reasons for his claim. In the discussion of reason and in proving prophecy, he rejected the weakness of reason; In the discussion of reason and truth of the Prophet, he emphasized the precedence of reason over religion, viewed reason only as an instrument and considered all other sources, even revelation, as being dependent on it. Therefore, he did not accept religious knowledge and rejected usuliyun`s view of reason. The main findings of the research, performed by the rational and narrative method may be counted as:1. Instrumental reason differs from reason as a source intellect. Reason acknowledges its weakness and helps the seeker of revelation. In general, reason; 2. The latter has confessed its weakness and seeks support of revelation; 3. One may agree the presedence of reason partly not in all cases; 4. The intellect is taken as a source with regard to essential goodness and badness and coexistence of the intellect and the revelation, and it is an instrument beside others for attaining knowledge. One, regarding getting religious knowledge from various sources, may speak of religious knowledge.

Facing the question of the meaning of life and finding answers to it has been one of the most important human concerns in the history of thought. The aim of the present study is to provide an interpretation of life and meaning and to explain the meaningful factor of life according to Mulla Sadra, which is based on a descriptive-analytical method. The research findings show that in his works, he interpreted "meaning" as a "valuable goal" that can be achieved through "discovery of the existence of meaning". Mulla Sadra as a comprehensively looking philosopher, in addition to considering the supernatural as a meaningful factor of life; He also considers nature and non-nature to be significant during the supernatural, but at lower levels. He considers life as a single stream, including worldly life and the hereafter, and to give meaning to life, he accepts the combined view (God and eternity of the soul) and use the influence of God on the meaning of life in two ways: "God as a valuable goal" and "Love-based communication".

The purpose of this study is to examine Kierkegaard's view of leap of faith and its critique from the perspective of Islamic faith. The method used in this research is analytical-descriptive. Belief in God is the central issue of Kierkegaard's thoughts. On the subject of faith, he pursues two basic points: first, that certainty is unattainable in the humanities. Second, objective research cannot be the basis of faith. Faith directs to decision, and the believer embraces God with the help of the leap of faith. This research, presupposing that Kierkegaard rejects reason and reasoning from the foundations of faith, seeks to answer the question: How can a person seeking faith choose his God from the God of the Jews, the God of Christ, and the God of Islam? Can this person make a choice without a logical flaw? Kierkegaard's alleged faith, in addition to its contradictions and other technical objections, which are devoid of argument, reasoning, and awareness, is like the faith of the common people and children, which is not of any resistance against doubts and challenges and, therefore, of any benefit to its owner.

"Human Knowledge of God" has been the concern of many theologians and philosophers. The basic question after explaining the general subject of knowledge is how can a limitted being that is hidden in matter attain knowledge of an infinite being? The issue of this research is to study and explain the truth of the human knowledge of God from the perspective of the two, considering the differences between the theological and philosophical approaches of Fakhr-e Razi and Sadr al-Muta'allehin. The findings of this descriptive-analytical research show that despite the differences between the theological and philosophical approaches of the two, the answers given are almost the same. Despite the differences in the arguments as well as theological, philosophical and religious views, both philosophers believe in the impossibility of knowing the divine essence, but believe that this is not the only way to know God, but also there is a lower level of knowledge of God that is attainable for man. Both consider the knowledge of God to be of various levels and in some grades as natural, fitri. It is the mode of knowledge made possible by God.

One of the debates in theology, more than any other subject in the modern period, is the discussion of different readings of religion, or as Shabestari puts it, the humanistic reading of religion. The history of such debates in the Arab world goes back to Nasr Hamed Abu Zayd and then to Mr. Soroush and Mr. Shabestari in our country. The main problem of the article is to study Shabestari and his view of religion as not being revealed. His main claim is that God did not reveal any religion, because if God had revealed a religion, it should have been specified in the Qur'an, but there is no such explanation in It. In this article, after stating Shabestari's principles, we have tried to formulate his claims in a logical way and clarify the validity of his arguments and show that Shabestari's interpretation of religion is self-contradictory and his words needs to agree with the holy Quaran in any case as the word of God.