فصلنامه قبسات
پیاپی 105 (پاییز 1401)

The existence of reason in the essence and nature of man and its growth with the development of human life is accepted by all thinkers, in which man comes to the knowledge of God, the prophets and religious teachings; But most of the Tafkik school denied the inner and connected reason, and instead, they believed in the external and separated reason that it’s truth is the external light be granted by God. This article designs and criticizes their claim and criticism by critical method of the Tafkik’s ideas and their rational arguments, and it becomes clear that their theory is both faced with rational ambiguities and their arguments can be criticized, and rational and arguments emphasize their rejection.

The issue of religion has always been of interest to researchers and has been raised about it; On the other hand, the teachings of religion are often accessible to human in the form of I'tibāri words. Accordingly, the past has often identified religion as a I'tibāri. Ayatollah Javadi Amoli has meant that mere i'tibāri cannot be -like the religion- the source of many effects. Some of creation supports of religion are: adaptation to the creation system of the world and the stages of human existence; adapting the rulings of religion with the real expediencies and mischiefs of affairs; the creation effects of commitment and non -compliance with religion in the human spirit and in worldly life and their embodiment in the Hereafter. After separating the religion from mere i'tibāri, Ayatollah Javadi presents new idea and that the existence of religion's i'tibāri is not only mere i'tibāri, but it is a part of the real existence and the division of existence into a true and i'tibāri division of a philosophical division from divisions of existence. The present article, while describing the opinions of the Ayatollah Javadi in these two areas, concludes that the dimensions and correlatives of knowing the real of i'tibāri existence of religion are not very clear.

Faitheists consider faith to be self-founded and based on internal components, which derives its validity from sources of knowledge other than reason. Whether faith does not need reason or is in conflict with reason, or whether the epistemological and metaphysical domains of faith and reason are separate. C. S. Lewis proposes another kind of faithism, according to which, although faith is rational based on rational reasoning in the first step, after the realization of faith and person’s devotion to God, he no longer is not interested in reason and evidence against faith, and is right in this matter; Because there, one should listen to the unseen and faith is no longer a part of scientific issues which scientist must always be aware of the agreeable or opposed evidence. The most important challenge of this approach in escape from reason of faith is the failure to explain the two stages of faith, and it is not clear what the essential and existential relationship between faith based on reason and faith based on stubbornness. If the truth of faith is the belief based on rationality, the faith of the second stage does not have an independent truth. If the truth of faith is disregarding the opposite evidence, then its initial rationality is meaningless. This article seeks to explain and analyze Lewis's point of view by rereading his foundations and claims. This research is organized in a descriptive-analytical way and based on the analysis of the theory's internal coherence and its consistency with previous philosophical foundations.

Faitheists consider faith to be self-founded and based on internal components, which derives its validity from sources of knowledge other than reason. Whether faith does not need reason or is in conflict with reason, or whether the epistemological and metaphysical domains of faith and reason are separate. C. S. Lewis proposes another kind of faithism, according to which, although faith is rational based on rational reasoning in the first step, after the realization of faith and person’s devotion to God, he no longer is not interested in reason and evidence against faith, and is right in this matter; Because there, one should listen to the unseen and faith is no longer a part of scientific issues which scientist must always be aware of the agreeable or opposed evidence. The most important challenge of this approach in escape from reason of faith is the failure to explain the two stages of faith, and it is not clear what the essential and existential relationship between faith based on reason and faith based on stubbornness. If the truth of faith is the belief based on rationality, the faith of the second stage does not have an independent truth. If the truth of faith is disregarding the opposite evidence, then its initial rationality is meaningless. This article seeks to explain and analyze Lewis's point of view by rereading his foundations and claims. This research is organized in a descriptive-analytical way and based on the analysis of the theory's internal coherence and its consistency with previous philosophical foundations.

The “rationality of progress” explains what, why and how “progress”. Because essence of rationality creates by speculation and practice of human and society, and speculation and practice is subordinate on thinker, active and creative existence of the “human as human, in order to understand the dimensions of "rationality of progress", it is logically necessary to examine the existential and originational foundations of human speculation and practice referred to progress. In the ontological perspective of Islamic philosophy and epistemology, human speculation and practice, and following human, society have intertwined truths; As a result, the explanation of the foundations of rationality in the existential connection with the rational essence and the exalting origination of the human type, along with the existential and epistemic understanding, will be combined. Corresponding to existential and epistemic principles, the method of progress is identified. With understanding this meaning, the present article attempts to explain rationality of progress by utilizing the rational analysis of issues and problems within the conceptual and theoretical framework of Islamic philosophical and epistemic foundations. In this regard, in explaining the epistemological reinforcement and the way of social and historical extension of progress thinking, attention to nature of uncertainty understanding of the reality of progress, explaining the layers of knowledge and reality in correspondence to the existential stage of human and human world, identifying nature of excellence and the way of it’s speculation and practical realization, and the stage of  intellectual completion of the Dimensions of souls (cultural) and universality (civilization) excellence of human society and the process of realization of human society and the process of realizing progress in the light of obedience, excellence and rational prosperity of human beings and has attempted to present an image of "rationality of progress" from the perspective of Islamic philosophy and knowledge.

The philosophical theology is an approach in the knowledge of Islamic theology that is more widespread in the present era than in the past. This article has reported and analyzed the existing perceptions of the philosophical theology and analyzed its relationship with related terms and fields of knowledge and validated the positive and negative judgments regarding the philosophical theology. The most important results of this research are as follows: the origin of this term is the methodological issues of the theology, and philosophical theology is a branch of rational theology, which is particular to theology -in the general sense- in terms of issues and methods; But it is different from "theological philosophy" and compared to the philosophy of religion and the new theology - based on different perceptions of these two - sometimes it conceptually reaches the border of  be the same and sometimes it is clearly different; In terms of instance, sometimes the product of intellectual reflections of thinkers in the field of philosophical theology with other fields - namely philosophical theology, natural theology, philosophy of religion, new theology and philosophy - are similar works with common results. The value and necessity of the philosophical theology is also subject to the understanding that comes from this theological approach, and according to chosen definition, in terms of value and necessity, it is equal to non-philosophical rational theology and narrative theology.

Al-Shaykh al-Saduq and al-Shaykh al-Mufid have played an effective role in the dynamics of Shia teachings by presenting ideas and innovations in hadith studies and theology. By preserving the epistemological realms of reason and narration, they considered both sources effective and necessary in religious knowledge and adopted different methods in using them; In such a way that al-Shaykh al-Saduq, with the predominance of the textual method, also used hadiths containing rational arguments, and al-Shaykh al-Mufid, with special attention to reason and rational approach, proved religious propositions and defended them. He has been interested in examining the document and the content of religious texts; However, al-Shaykh al-Mufid prioritizes the coordination of content of tradition with definite intellectual propositions over its documentary review. Despite the commonalities of these two theologians in the foundations and principles of religious beliefs, their differences can be seen in choosing the method of explaining and proving theological rules and teachings. Although in some fundamental differences, al-Shaykh al-Mufid 's rational method in examining the contents and documents of religious texts can be defended. In general, al-Shaykh al-Saduq's approach in paying attention to the narrative sciences can be considered as beginning of establishment of al-Shaykh al-Mufid 's rationalistic method and the basis for the development of rational sciences. In this research, an attempt is made to analyze the various dimensions and angles of epistemological and methodological differences in Sheikhin's theological approach with a comprehensive analytical-descriptive method, which is one of the innovations and advantages of this work compared to similar works written in this field.