فصلنامه اندیشه نوین دینی
پیاپی 70 (پاییز 1401)

The main issue of this research is to identify and introduce an innovative version of the Seddiqin proof for the existence of God, which was proposed by one of the Imami theologians named Nasir al-Din Kashani Helli, but has not received enough attention so far. In this article, using the analytical-descriptive method, the above-mentioned interpretation of Sadiqin's argument is introduced and analyzed. Identifying the various arguments derived from Kashani's original interpretation of Seddiqin proof in the history of Imami theology and explaining the impact of this interpretation on the proofs of theology of other Imami theologians, as well as negating the attribution of the aforementioned interpretation to Khwaja Nasir al-Din Tusi, include the results and findings of the article.

The issue of God's attributes and the way in which they are attributed to Divine Essence is one of the basic epistemological issues in the knowledge of God. Abu Ali Jaba`i Mu'tazili believes that God's Essence is the representative of God's attributes, because regarding His skillfulness in creation, itqani sun`a, it is not reasonable to deny divine attributes. Yet, as the reality of an attribute is its state of being based on others, not being the same as them, this may not be agreed with. Because it leads to an absolute negation, and some like the Ash'aries and Mu'tazilites, respectively, believe in additionality of what is not of beginning in time or in temporal additionality, and have proved Divine attributes; as, in principle, God's essence should not be considered devoid of existential perfections. These two sayings may not be agreed with either; science they would lead to the multiplicity of what of no temporality or to need. In the meantime, Shia, in addition to proving the attributes, also negated the extraneous and incidental attributes, the view which this article aims to show in a descriptive and analytical way, using a library method, not only as being of no conflict, but as the best theory.

Religious texts have always been an important source of knowledge in divine religions. The difference in the method of learning this knowledge from the same texts has sometimes caused differences in some Islamic rules and beliefs. Even today, there are many controversial issues between the theological and jurisprudential schools of the Islamic religions most of which lies in a lack of the type of reasoning in comparative debates and logic of argument. Therefore, the problem of this research is to reconsider different methods for correct and logical reasoning, when useing religious texts, with analytical-theoretical research method. The findings of the research have been a collection of different methods of reasoning in the debates comparable to those of the Sunnis, and the sum of the discussions shows that the Imamiyyah has used sound and accepted methods of the Sunnis to persuade them. Some Methods in the fields of terminology, literary rules, the method of interpretation of verses, basic rules, and answers to doubts have been described, which should be investigated in the semantic analysis of narrative evidence.

The problem of this article is to examine the distinction between a "true" appeal and a "mentally regarded" appeal. This research has made a distinction between these two types of appeals using a descriptive-analytical method. The findings of this research show that real and mentally regarded appeals differ from each other in at least two main ways: 1) In real appeals, the originator and motivator of the "intermediary" is God Almighty; While in mentally regarded one, the originator and motivator of the "intermediary" is the human being. 2. In the true appeal, in the very reference to the intermediary, the concept of closeness is not included in the closed being, and both believer and unbeliever enjoy such appeals; while in the mentally regarded, in the very reference to the intermediary, the concept of closeness has been included in the closed being. The most important result of the research is: "to make distinction between a true appeal and a mentally regarded appeal". This distinction, while explaining the meaning and concept of appeal, will also solve some of the problems caused by the confusion of these two types of appeal.

In the story of the companionship of Hazrat Musa (a) and Prophet Khizr (a), the Qur'anic verses attribute four behaviors to Moses, which are: breaking promises, forgetting, not having the virtue of patience, and finally attributing actions to Prophet Khizr. (a). This is despite the fact that Moses (a) is one of God's infallible prophets, and infallibility in the definition of theologians contradicts the aforementioned four cases, and this contradiction and inconsistency is the problem of the present research. In this article, the author, using the library research method, tries to first count the responses of Shia theologians and scholars in justifying these four behaviors and then present the four responses that are the result of his reflections. The findings of the research include four defenses, which include performing the duty of forbidding evil, benevolence, conflict between reason and revelation, and negligence of the Prophet, of course, the solution of negligence of the Prophet does not have the necessary strength due to the weakness of the documents.

As the most important personality of the Sheikhyya sect, Sheikh Ahmad Ahsaei believed that the imams (a) do all the affairs of the world, including creating and sustaining creatures in the system of creation, and imams are the true active cause of everything in existence. It seems that the explanation of this emotional point of view and the criticism of his evidence is the problem of this research and it has been addressed in an analytical and critical way. Therefore, after explaining Ahsaei's point of view and analyzing his theory on the effective cause of Imams' (a) knowledge of the foundations, the evidences and proofs cited by him were also examined and it became clear that he has relied on traditions that supported his theory; While they do not prove it, and on the other hand, the fact that he introduced imams as the doers of all world affairs and considered them to be the real active cause in creation, is rooted in the lack of correct emotional analysis of God's agency in the system of creation and his problems in this field.

The two famous sayings of the objective representation and the imaginary representation of Gabriel for Maryam (a) as two competing theories have supporters among contemporary researchers who state reasons for their position and against that of their opponents. In this research, the opinions of Imam Khomeini and Allameh Tabataba'i were selected as representatives of the theorists of objective representation and imaginary representation. The issue of this research lies in a comparative evaluation of their opinions, with intellectual arguments, mystical foundations, and narrative evidence. In this qualitative research, the library method was used to collect data and the comparative analysis method was used to explain the data. The findings of the research show that the explanation of topics such as intended creation, correspondence of the rules of the ascending arc with those of the descending arc in the possibility of becoming spiritualized and reincarnation and the rule of the possibility of what is higher, ashraf, are efforts towards a better understanding of the preference of Imam Khomeini's opinion on objective representation over the theory of imaginary representation from Allameh's point of view. According to this research, the theory of imaginary representation has problems such as the impossibility of justifying joint interaction and the orderly entered objective effects on this inner experience.

Allameh Mohammad Mahdi Asefi, one of the Shia clerics, and Seyyed Qutb, a Sunni thinker, are among the scholars who, having a maximum view of religion and Islamic teachings, consider religion to be useful for all the individual, social and political spheres of man, and believe that in order to solve the problems of humanity, one should turn to true Islam. The most important issue for returning to true Islam is sovereignty, which is the issue of the present article. From the point of view of these two scholars, the rule of Islam is based on the divinity of God and the servitude of servants, and it means ruling based on the laws of Islam and Sharia. The following article expresses the views of these two scholars in the field of governance with a descriptive analytical method and a comparative approach. The findings of the research show that the two scholars think similarly in the fields of the divine sovereignty and its realization, the general outlines of the government, the unity of authority and the government, though there are some differences in issues such as the authority, legitimacy and governor`s conditions.

Mohsen Kadivar, in his treatise criticizing the punishment of the apostate and those exerating the Prophet, while criticizing the opinions of some jurists regarding the punishment of the ruling of the two, considers this issue as being the position of ifta and the enforcement of hudud to be solely the responsibility of the jurist and believes that the enforcement of hudud should be in the court. He is also of the opinion that the execution of the verdict of the apostate degrades the position of religion and is against the verses of the Qur'an and the custom of the wise. Among his other claims, we can mention the change of the subject of apostasy in relation to the beginning of Islam. The problem of this research is whether the punishment of the apostate and those exerating the Prophet would weaken the position of religion and be contrary to the mercy of Islam? The research method is analytical-critical, and findings of the research show that the wise manner of viewing cannot alone be a sufficient reason for the brutality of the punishment of the apostate, moreover such an attitude is in conflict with the rational and narrative evidence, and the change of the subject of apostasy does not have a defensible document either.

One of the issues related to death is the relationship between the soul and the body after death. The question of the research is whether after death the connection between the soul and the body is cut off and the soul has no connection with the body? In this article, with the descriptive-analytical method, the problem of the relationship between the soul and the body after death has been investigated with a philosophical and theological approach. In this matter, while accepting the disconnection of the soul from the body, the author has put forward some points and considerations based on the philosophical and religious approach. The findings of the research show that the relationship between the soul and the body after death is not the same in different people. In perfect souls, because of the strength of the soul, the connection is stronger than in weaker souls and, on the other hand, regarding coexistence of the two during corporeal life,  in the initial time of disconnection of the soul interest from the body, this connection is stronger because of the connection between the soul and the body. In the early hours and days, the attention of the soul to the body is very intense.