نشریه انسان پژوهی دینی
پیاپی 28 (پاییز و زمستان 1391)

Knowing God and relationship with him is one of the important theological issues in Abraham`s religions. Christianity believes that invisible God reflects in the incarnation of Christ. In the Christians` view, the Jesus Christ is the revelation of God. As a result, incarnation is one of the most important principles of Christianity. The Jews are opposed to incarnation but believe in anthropomorphism. However, belief in incarnation is sometimes considered. Islam neither accepts incarnation nor anthropomorphism of God; although anthropomorphism of angles and Satan are accepted but God may have theophanic manifestation in humans with his characteristics. The present paper describes anthropomorphism, incarnation, and theophany in three religions of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism.

Given analyses on shakila in Quranic commentaries lead us to philosopher`s statement on human species form. So viewed, perceptions are regarded as the main element for making and transforming shakila and partial cause for its function. This paper, relying on Quranic commentaries and philosophical works, has studied Allameh Tabataba’I and Fakhr Razi`s views in the field comparatively. In this way, the meaning of shakila has been presented and, then, it has been proved that shakila is the same as what is meant by species form in philosophy. Again the cases of human soul`s actions and passions have been proved to include all perceptions.

Then main purpose of the present study was to develop the existential psychotherapy components in accordance with Mowlana’s thoughts. The research design was qualitative one and the methodology applied was Inductive Analysis. According to the meaning frame extracted, the main incentive in human species life is proximity of the divine other- God. The psychotherapical components proposed by the present study claims that any interruption in the divine relationships can be the major cause of mental disorders. The components derived are: 1) types of neglect; 2) personal worldview; 3) exploration of angst/ angoisse, anxiety, depression, and their ontological relatives; 4) attention in awareness levels; 5) explanation of life pain; 6) freedom and responsibility; 7) intervention in vivo. Now it can be concluded according to the results from the present study that in addition to opening new directions in different fields of psychology, namely, religion psychology, and psychopathology, this work can be considered as a multidisciplinary study which helps to have an understanding of human on religious basis.

Ghazzali has viewed pleasure as perceiving what is desirable and has given it in different types of: sensible and hearty, sensible and non sensible, external and internal, sensible and intellectual, intellectual and bodily. He has viewed human pleasure growth to be in five steps and known five elements for distinguishing them including those of the faculty of perception, perceptions, the meanings perceived, species difference and difference in power and weakness. Abu Hamid has followed Farabi in his view on pleasure and his little attention to Avicenna`s two definitions of pleasure can be regarded as a defect in his study. Furthermore, different divisions of pleasure in Ghazzali may be reduced into one. Lack of distinction between heart and intellect in his view can be regarded as a failure.

The expression “corporeality of Soul” in Sadra’s works can be interpreted on the basis of two different views: that of corporeality origination of soul according to which the soul in its initial stages of existence is “imprinted’’ and immanent in matter. In the second view, however, the soul is of “essential relatedness” in virtue of which it has a relative being and thus is existentially related to matter. It seems that without distinguishing between these two views one cannot have a clear understanding of the term “corporeality” as it is used in Mulla Sadra. Moreover, with this distinction one can reach two different interpretations of corporeal origination and spiritual immortality of soul of Sadra both of which seem to have been emphasized by him.

The expression “corporeality of Soul” in Sadra’s works can be interpreted on the basis of two different views: that of corporeality origination of soul according to which the soul in its initial stages of existence is “imprinted’’ and immanent in matter. In the second view, however, the soul is of “essential relatedness” in virtue of which it has a relative being and thus is existentially related to matter. It seems that without distinguishing between these two views one cannot have a clear understanding of the term “corporeality” as it is used in Mulla Sadra. Moreover, with this distinction one can reach two different interpretations of corporeal origination and spiritual immortality of soul of Sadra both of which seem to have been emphasized by him.

Imamiyyah jurisprudents have given various views on the meaning of justice. Generally viewed, their deference can be proposed in three essential fields: 1- those jurisprudents like Sheikh Ansari and Imam Kkomeini have known justice as a fully rooted and stable property, malakah; while some like Vahid Behbahani and the late khoyi have disagreed with them and known their view of many objections; 2- on the famous view of jurisprudents, small sins not being insisted on cannot be counted as a breach against justice; while some like Sheikh Abdolkarim Ha`iri and the late Khoyi have known small sins against justice absolutely; 3- it has been well-known for recent jurisprudents to consider compassion as an essential part of meaning in justice, while some like the author of Jawahir and Imam Khomeini disagree with it as a condition of justice. This paper, studying the proofs of the problem in Quranic verses, traditional and principles and the proofs of the jurisprudents, has proved firstly that justice is malakah, secondly that small sins do not break justice and secondly that compassion cannot be counted a condition for justice.