فصلنامه ادبیات و علوم انسانی
پیاپی 22-23 (پاییز و زمستان 1390)

Reason is the power through which one can explain existence and nonexistence and understand what to do and what not to do. So, reason and religion are along each other, and if the range of applying reason is determined, the rules of its proper use are observed, and the theorematic reason holds the position of reviewing Hadiths, first, it is possible to recognize the valid and invalid Hadiths in the realm validity of reason. Second, it will become evident that there exist no inconsistency between reason and valid Hadith.

Peripatetics believe that God created the world apart from himself. With acceptance of diversity in the world and with adopting a series of longitudinal causes, they make God as an efficiency cause at the top of the world. Illuminati also believed in diversity in the universe. Creation in their viewpoint is illumination, and similar to ray of sun, the world is a gleam of gleams from Light of lights. Mystics, unlike peripatetics and illuminati, believe to personal unity of existence. The world, from their viewpoint, is like a mirror which manifests Divine attributes and names in plural forms as the appearances of this Unit existence. In view of mystical, rather than divine efficiency cause, appearance or manifestation is proposed. In transcendent philosophy, mere existence is unit but also diverges in its unity, so that both unity and diversity is true. The universe consists of objective existents, so that inferior existent (effect) dependent to superior (cause) and superior keeps inferior. But at the top of Sadra’s philosophy—where his philosophy reaches to mysticism—the Unity is true and diversity is figurative. Genuineness disproves from other beings (not from appearances of them) and the efficiency cause reverses to the manifestation. This is not turning from early view, because these comments are not only in marked contrast but also in accordance with each other.

Debate is a way of discussion for elaborating and defending thoughts and beliefs. It is to fight the opposite thoughts and ideologies existing in society. Shiites pursue the way of opposing conflicting ideas by applying this method approved by Ahle Beit (i.e., the household of the Prophet). In this study, according to the existing conditions in Imams’ era, and simultaneous with the ruling of the caliphs, Bani Omayeh and Bani Abas, this paper aims at investigating the grounds that made Shiites play an active role in argumentation against opposite thoughts and ideologies. It might be impossible to count upon these parameters, but it seems that the most important parameter shaping these argumentations are factors, such as distortion of thoughts and Islam political bases, modifying Islamic instructions and idiologies, and at the same time, growth and expansion of evil thoughts and ideologies in Islamic societies. The abovementione deviations threaten Shiite scholars. Thus, They defend their idiologies scientifically, both in written and verbal manner, through Aemeh’s encouragements and intellectual support.

Thanks to the human nature and wording of the holy book and its inability to meet the thought and mental needs of the human being, many western thinkers have known it equal and identical to religious experience, in spite of their different inferences of the religious experience. According to various reasons, what is said cannot be factually supported regarding Islamic revelation. However, equalizing revelation and human experience is largely full of problems. In this study, in addition to analyzing various expressions and theories regarding the religious experience, they are criticized, examined, and then our selective idea thereof is drawn. Besides, explaining the prophets’ experience and its difference with the other human beings’ experiences, revelation and its reality are introduced, and finally the difference between revelation and religious experience is meticulously examined and scrutinized.

From Plato’s viewpoint, acquiring knowledge and practicing virtue are tightly connected. To him, virtue mirrors knowledge and includes recognizing and understanding the good and acting according to that. Therefore, those who possess knowledge will never act wickedly. This paper investigates Plato’s views on knowledge and virtue, their connection, and the result of such a connection.

Roomi believes that man’s essence parallels language and narratives which is the story of separation from their original home and enthusiasm to return to it. That is why Roomi calls men a nay (i.e., reed), the meaning of which denotes nonexistence. Nay is nothing but a voice that is the result of its connection to the lips flowing into it. Man is a voice of pain and love. His voice is the language of dialogue, and dialogue depends on sympathy, and sympathy is the result of common attention to original home and essential origin. At the same, language is the most dangerous thing, because it is like a stone and fire which can set a world on fire. Roomi considers the relationship between word and meaning, which is appraiser of language, as the relationship between body and soul or river and water. As body cannot bear soul, meaning always transcends the word. Therefore, the relationship between word and meaning is not viewed as signifier and signified, and the meaning of word depends on where and how it is used. Roomi does not regard language only as a tool to understand others, but he considers the essence of man as language. However, according to him, language, of course, can be changed to mere idle talk. On the contrary to subjective and humanistic modern theories that regard men as the foundation of anything and consider language as something subjective and relate it only to man and merely as expressions of sensations and intentions, Roomi names men as nay because he wants to emphasize that men are not materials, substances, subjects, ego, and so forth. Roomi believes that the real language is the language of truth flowed into nay through another perspective which is only heard and not felt by the superficials.

One of human beings’ concerns has always been how to live or have an ideal living. Apparently, this engaged Aristotle as well. Therefore, he introduced approaches for having a desirable life. He determined or set a preferable benefactor achieved through being virtuous. This is also called happiness defined as ego activity in accordance with perfect virtues. According to his definition, the happiness is available neither accidentally northrough God's endowment, by human beings’ endeavors. So achieving happiness requires struggles and efforts in order to get virtues which are the main bases for happiness. This paper is going to indicate how Aristotle has got happiness through virtues. Therefore, it first concerns with happiness and its definition, then its virtues and types of them. Finally, it deals with obtained results from these two.

Contemporary Orientalists believe that Shiism emerges at a specific time after prophet Muhammad passed away, the accuracy of which is supported by their unbiased attitudes and reliance on Suniis’ written sources about some important events occurring in Shiism period. Oreientalists posit that siezing political power and quarreling over Prophet MUhammad’s succession are the main reasons of Shiism expansion. Also, they renounce Shiites’ recognition of Imam Ali’s right to take over the power which is based on strong Quranic reasons, and Imam Ali’s designation by Prophet Muhammad in different historical phases, especially on Qadir. However, it is evident that Shiism had emerged during the Prophet’s lifespan. Moreover, according to narratives, historical documents, literal beliefs, rationale, and even some Sunnis’ reliable sources, emersion of Shiism dated back to when the prophet was alive.