نشریه کلام اسلامی
پیاپی 132 (زمستان 1403)

In religious terminology, a miracle is an extraordinary event that occurs by special divine grace to prove the truthfulness of prophethood. The extraordinary nature of miracles has led to examining their relationship with the principle of causality in general and natural laws in particular. Some consider miracles as violations of the general or specific principle of causality and, since violation of causality is considered impossible by reason, they seek to interpret miracles metaphorically. Others believe in the exceptionality of natural laws, stating that natural laws are based on divine will and God can change His will whenever He deems it necessary. According to another viewpoint, miracles have unknown natural causes, and what is violated in miracles are known natural causes, not all natural causes. Another opinion holds that known natural causes that are violated in miracles are only apparent causes of events, not the real causes; the real causes are unknown and known only to the miracle bringers. Criticisms of these views are discussed in this article. The correct view is that miracles represent the dominance of one natural law over another. Natural laws are conditional upon a higher law not obstructing their effect, and the non-realization of a law due to unmet conditions does not constitute a violation of the law.

The issue of divine concealment, known in modern theology as "divine hiddenness," "God's absence," or "divine eclipse," is one of the major theological challenges of our time, considered by some as the defining feature of modern theology. Various aspects of this doctrine have been mentioned in traditions but have received little attention from theologians, especially contemporary ones. This article, recognizing the importance and necessity of the issue and its place in modern theology, seeks to reinterpret this doctrine within the culture of traditions using a descriptive-analytical method. It reveals that traditions on divine concealment are fourfold: a) epistemological concealment; b) ontological concealment; c) punitive concealment; d) spiritual concealment. The first category itself has two types: "true" and "created." The Necessary Being, despite partial intellectual concealment, is knowable and not completely hidden; the lack of experience of God's presence today is generally acceptable. On the other hand, the cause of divine concealment is the intensity of divine manifestation and the deficiency of human perceptive faculties.

The doctrine of Tawhid (monotheism) is the most fundamental belief in Islam and the cornerstone of Islamic unity. However, the Wahhabi interpretation of Tawhid, with its exclusionary and takfiri approach, has stripped this doctrine of its unifying role, transforming it into a source of division and religious violence. The core issue of this study is not merely the behavioral or jurisprudential consequences of this interpretation, but its roots in the epistemological and theological structure. The article aims to analyze this structure and demonstrate that Wahhabi Tawhid inherently contains a form of structural disbelief that distorts the Quranic meaning of Tawhid and turns it into its antithesis. The research methodology relies on a critical-theological analysis of primary Wahhabi texts and their comparison with the principles of Tawhid in the Quran and Sunnah. The findings reveal that this approach, by absolutizing a specific understanding of God, negating mystical and ethical dimensions, reducing Tawhid to formal rituals, and reproducing a discourse of domination, has effectively led to the obstruction of Islamic unity and the deepening of division within the Muslim community.

Imamate is one of the fundamental Shiite beliefs and involves several issues including the necessity of appointing or installing an Imam. Imamiyyah theologians, through various proofs, believe in the rational obligation of God’s appointment of an Imam, one of which is the “proof of the necessity to preserve and clarify the Sharia.” This proof has faced objections, to which theologians and thinkers of Imamiyyah have responded. Using a rational-analytical method, this article presents the proof, answers five objections raised in the book “Theory of Imamate in the Scale of Criticism,” and demonstrates that considering the finality of Islam, after the Prophet’s passing, the Sharia necessarily requires a preserver and clarifier. No one except the infallible Imam can undertake this responsibility. Therefore, for every era, the appointment of an Imam by God is obligatory. This proof and other rational arguments do not express opinions regarding the number of Imams, nor is the occultation of the Imam incompatible with this proof; because the Imam can fulfill the responsibility of preserving the Sharia through means consistent with the philosophy of occultation.

Each thinker’s worldview is based on their cosmology, and without analyzing their cosmological system, an accurate understanding of their worldview is difficult or sometimes impossible. Therefore, to introduce the worldview of Martyr Ayatollah Morteza Motahhari, one must first examine the structured system of his cosmology, which arises from questions such as: what is the world, how did it originate, what is its geometric and physical structure, who inhabit this world, and what laws govern it Accordingly, this article uses a descriptive-analytical method and documentary approach to study Motahhari’s writings and reconstruct his cosmological system. The findings show that Motahhari, adopting a rationalistic approach and drawing on the philosophy of Transcendent Theosophy, while remaining faithful to Quranic teachings and the Ahl al-Bayt, considered the "world" as a contingent phenomenon "other than God," but emanating from the Necessary Being. He accepted the structure of seven heavens and seven earths, and considered humans, angels, and jinn as the free inhabitants of this world. In his view, traditions such as causality and free will are fundamental laws governing this world and its inhabitants.

The second century was the period of formation and expansion of theological knowledge and emerging intellectual currents. Theological, hadithic, and historical data show two apparently contradictory approaches of Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) towards theology—from prohibition to emphasis—so much so that some of his companions noted this discrepancy. This interdisciplinary study, using a descriptive-analytical method, explores this approach and finds that Imam Sadiq’s stance was not contradictory but a wise, multifaceted, and intelligent management according to the subject, audience, and method: On one hand, he severely condemned metaphysical theological discourse beyond reason, such as the essence of God and the use of invalid methods like analogy. On the other hand, by training theologians like Hisham ibn Hakam and encouraging systematic debates based on Quran and Sunnah, he emphasized the need to explain and defend the authentic Shiite view rationally against others. Consequently, Imam Sadiq established a principled and balanced framework for Imamiyyah theology, founded on rationality and revelation, profoundly influencing its later developments.