فصلنامه اندیشه نوین دینی
پیاپی 29 (تابستان 1391)

Seddiqin proof was firstly established by Avicenna, relying on nothing but the very existence and, then, different accounts of the proof were put forth Supporting the standards given in recent shools, one of his methods has been opposed to objection. However, regarding the proofs along with their precedents from both aspects of logical forms and philosophical contents and noticing the two states of being proof and seddiqin, it has been made clear that there is no place for the objection. In the paper, Avicenna`s accounts of the proof and the critiques in the field have been studied.

Molla Sadra and Spinoza`s ontological monism can be counted as a considerable topic to be studied comparatively; the philosophers have some similitudes in certain aspects of personality and method of philosophizing. In addition, there can be found such concepts as essential necessity, self-subsistent being, real unification of essence and qualities, uniqueness, highest grade of simplicity, unchangeability, eternality and limitlessness in both. Sadra attributes the concepts to existence itself, while Spinoza to substance. The philosophers, both, know it to be God. When considering what in common, one cannot view Spinoza to be pantheist.

Human life is in vital need of daily bread, and, as is said in Quran, God has guaranteed human daily bread. Yet, as is seen, there is not equality in daily bread of people. How can we explain such a disparity with regard to the absolute justice of God? Without a reasonable answer to this question, Divine justice would remain unexplained. Regarding the close relation between daily bread and Divine justice, the paper has presented a reasonable explanation on human daily bread and Divine justice. In this way, the differences in daily bread have been philosophically justified.

Belief is an inner agreement of something already known and by the unseen is meant what beyond sensation. Belief in the unseen, therefore, can be viewed as ascending knowledge beyond sensation and penetrating the heart. God`s existence and attributes, revelation and revealed knowledge, hereafter and its properties are well-known as religious cases of the unseen in and upon which religious people believe and act. This paper has explained the possibility of belief in the unseen on Sadr al-Mutuallihin and Imam Khomeini`s views in the fields of knowledge and action.

Today some philosophical schools have been founded on the problem of death; they, however, have not intended to give an idea of the next worlds. Without any doubt, making human beings aware of death has formed one of the most important teachings of religions. Shiite prayers have included some considerable statements on death. This paper, therefore, has intended to study the problem of death in Imam Sajjad`s complete prayer book. As is understood, this collection of prayers has known death to be a desireable stage of human life.

Man has been known as the caliphate of God in some Quranic verses. For Molla Sadra, human weakness in creation as well as human tyranny and foolishness form the foundation of his being caliphate alone. Quran has known such states of man as main origin for human`s competency in getting Divine trust. Sadra has viewed the trust as a light presented to all beings; yet, only human being was able to get and carry it. He has distinguished two kinds of caliphate, one in the earth and the other in the world. The former belong to human kind and the latter to Prophet Mohammad, being the medium for all creation and the origin of all knowledge.

The discussion of predicative attributes was taken place in the fields of theology (kalam) and commentary when revelation began. In explaining predicative attributes and the way in which they are related to God, different points of view such as similitude, tashbih, embodiment, tajsim, stoppage, tawaqquf, proving without interpretation, ithbati bila ta`wil, proving without quality, ithbati bila keif, and proving with interpretation, ithbati ba ta`wil, have been presented by commentators and theologians. Seyyed Morteza and Qazi Abduljabbar have been among those believing in the last. Their thought has stablished on the basis of unity of attributes and essence, einiyyate sifat ba dhat, and the theory of purification, tanzih. Reffering the allegorical verses to the clear ones, using reasoning, literal and confirmative designation, Seyyed Morteza seeks to interpreat Quranic verses. Qazi Abduljabbar, however, using pure reason and in some cases, without any sign for ta`wil, interpreats them.

Divine Names, including the greatest Name, have formed one important problem in Islamic theology and Islamic mysticism. They have been considered to be Divine manifestations in the invisible and the visible, both. For Muslims, to mention the Names, particularly the greatest Name, is effective in opposing difficulties of human life. As for the greatest Name, if it is verbal or nonverbal, if it is found only in a special religion or not, it is a place for study. The problem of Divine Names has been centered on in sikh. Its followers mention the Names frequently everyday. For them, such mentioning would deliver man from the pains of reincarnation. In other words, the followers of sikh know everything originated from the Names. Divine Names, therefore, are limitless and inattainable. Many of Divine Names found in other religions are also called the Names of God.

One of the most important discussion of young Hegelians and Hegel`s commentators is concerned with the place of religion in Hehel`s system of thought and his approach on religion during all his philosophical life. In the paper, it has been proved firstly that in Hegel`s philosophical system a special place has been given to religion as a necessary fact in human social life, secondly that he may not be considered an atheist philosopher, and thirdly that though deterministic state of current reading of Judaism and Christianity has led to a deep distortion in their followers, one cannot consider revealed religion, in particular Islam, as deterministic, opposite to reason, freedom and citizen rights.

Many mystics have known reason as an obstacle against mystical intuition; particularly they make a distinction between knowledge and intuition, the former being concerned with an awareness of God and His manifestations perceived by heart and the latter by reasoning. Ibn Arabi views reason as being of two positions: one is the position of understanding and the other of acceptance. For him, reason is unable to intuit Divine Essence and some of Divine modes and manifestations; while he views reason absolutely able to perceive the True in the position of acceptance. In this paper, the place of reason with regard to its two positions has been justified at first and, then, its failures in knowing God has been demonstrated.