نشریه جستارهایی در فلسفه و کلام
سال چهل و هفتم شماره 2 (پیاپی 95، پاییز و زمستان 1394)

Two meanings regarding the principality of existence (isālat al-wujūd) can be inferred from the works and words of Mulla Sadra. One meaning is the objectivity of existence and essence on which many issues of transcendental philosophy are based. This meaning has deep philosophical consequences and implications. It seems that this meaning causes certain problems which make its acceptance tricky. The present article applies a systematic approach to transcendental philosophy as a whole in order to examine the above-mentioned theory, its functions, its knowledge-based implications and the possibility of a philosophical support for this meaning. As a result, accepting this meaning as the ultimate idea of Mulla Sadra about the principality of existence will philosophically have numerous weaknesses and problems.

In analyzing and explaining seal of prophethood as a doctrine, almost all scholars who have dealt with this issue considerhuman intellectual maturityas the main criterion and the secret of the emergent finality.The present article explains and analyzes the proposed approaches and perceptions regarding intellectual maturity and thus aims toreview this idea critically.As a result,the study shows that the idea of human intellectual maturity is merely a subjective theorization intended to organize the philosophy of seal of prophethood. Hence, no clear reason or objective piece of evidence can be discerned in the context of its external reality that will however support or confirm it. A more fundamental critique targeted at the idea of human intellectual maturity in this regard is that accepting this notion on the basis of the various analyses given so far will lead to the termination of religiosity or to the finality and rejection of imamate; and these two conclusions are to be rejected and denied based on clear and unmistakable evidencesforthe philosophy of prophethood and imamate. In the final part of this study, after an analysis and examination of four approaches to the relationship between seal of prophethood and imamate, a fifth approach is introduced: imamate as the main secret of the seal of prophethood. According to this perspective, imamate is not considered as a marginal complementary doctrine side by side the seal of prophethood, but as providing the basic foundations of belief in the seal of prophethood and as the criterion for it. Therefore, the article finds the notion of the seal of prophethood as only understandable on the basis of the imamate doctrine, rather than the intellectual maturity of humanity or his capabilities with regard to ihtihād in religion. This idea is founded on a specific reading of the revelational scriptures (Holy texts) especially the Glorious Qur’an as the Final Revelation. In addition, the author believes that this new understanding can be supported and confirmed through all rational and scriptural arguments and historical and objectiveevidences.

One of the issues always debated in the history of Shi‘ism is the conjecture about the imamate of Ismā‘īl after the martyrdom of Imam Sādiq (AS), expressed in Ismā‘īlī books and sometimes the Imāmī. The reasons that led to the conjecture about the imamate of Ismā‘īl include: the narrations indicating thatimamate belongs to an older child, the attention and affection of the sixth Imam to Ismā‘īl, the availability of bogus text, lack of understanding regardingthe concept of Bidā’, rumors about the survival of Ismā‘īl, and the throbbing effect during theAbbasid rulein preventing public introduction and announcement ofthe Imam. These reasons will be examined and critiquedin the present study.In this paper, for the identification of possible causes of forgery, traditions from the Imams following Imam Bāqir (AS) with the content of introducing the names of the twelve Imams are analyzed and explained. These traditions cited bythose opposing the imamate of Ismā‘īl along with a chart of narrators will show that none of the factors mentioned indicate the imamate of Ismā‘īl, that no error had occurred on the part of Imam Sādiq (AS) in nominating the next imam, and thatthe traditions of thetwelve imams cannot be considered as having been forged by narrators. In this context, the conjecture regardingthe imamate of Ismā‘īl should be seenas public speculations by ordinarypeople and as a consequence of the impediments the Imam (AS) faced in terms introducing Imam Kāzim (AS) as the new imam due to the sociopolitical suffocation conditions during the reign of the Abbasid.

The present study aims to examine the boundaries and criteria for exaggeration and degradation from the views of Allameh Majlesi and Sheikh Mufid. Both theologians have referred to similar notions as limits and criteria for exaggeration, including a belief in the divinity and prophecy of the infallible imams, a belief in the reincarnation and union of the infallibles with God, or believing that because of the knowledge of the Imams, religious obligations are not incumbent upon them. In addition, the common criterion of delegation is that infallibles (independently and in the same rank and line with the Lord) carry attributes such as creation, sustenance, causing birth, health and death.
The disagreement between the two theologians as regards a determination of the boundaries and criteria for exaggeration and degradation become clear in terms of issues including the knowledge of the imam, infallibility regarding minor or unintentional sins, the primordial creation of the fourteen infallibles, their miracles and supernatural virtues, their dignity and status in the universe, and the like. The vast range of these disagreements leads to their different views pertaining to people who commit exaggeration and degradation. An attention to these differences is important because from a jurisprudential perspective, one who exaggerates (ghālī) is associated with disbelief and the implications of infidelity follow him. Hence, it is crucially important to come closer to issues of agreement with regard to the determination of the boundaries and criteria for exaggeration and degradation. Moreover, in relation to calling the ones who exaggerate as infidels, it is a vital issue to consider views such as ‘exaggeration will entail infidelity only if it leads to the (conscious and deliberate) denial of divinity, and the Oneness of God, and the prophethood.’ Therefore, in matters of conflict and antinomy, and in minor and detailed affairs, one should not accuse people of exaggeration and degradation based on personal or minimum criteria and limits.

The Ideal theory is Plato’s most important philosophical view involving his Allegory of the Cave. He tried much to explain this theory and present arguments in order to prove it. However, his views on the proof arguments and the concrete materials with ideals suffer from shortcomings. The present paper argues that the critiques of Aristotle, Avicenna, and Allamah Tabatabaee against this theory had been untrue, and that the views of Augustine, Anselm, and Kant about the theory had been incomplete and open to criticism. Suhrawardi and Mulla Sadra believed in the non-principality of intellects and thought that any kind of material has the Ideal. The Ideal theory is provable through the rules of transcendental philosophy and not that of the illumination. This theory is closely related to art, aesthetics, politics, law, ethics, education, architecture, and computer sciences.

In religious thought, the miracle as a phenomenon is one of the most important reasons for proving prophethood. There are two broad views among Islamic thinkers about the type of indications of miracles to prove prophethood. Some consider the indications of miracles as rational ones. In contrast, some others hold that there is no logical connection between a miracle and its implied referent and that a miracle is considered as convincing indication pertaining to the truth of a claim for prophethood. The present study aims to examine and criticize the views of those who consider miracles as convincing reasons for proving prophethood and thus deny the logical connection between miracles and the truth of a claim for prophethood.

Muslim scholars differ widely on the meaning of the pure word ‘Lā Illāha Illa Allāh’ (There is no god expect for God) and its indication to monotheism. A number of possibilities have been raised pertaining to this exalted verse and if some of them are accepted as true, the word Tawhīd will not signify complete unity and monotheism. After thoroughly examining the meanings claimed for the words employed in this monotheistic verse and the effects of each word on conveying a complete notion of monotheism, the present paper tends to review different perspectives and introduce plausible ideas regarding the meaning of the ‘Lā Illāha Illa Allāh’ expression as the word of devotion and sincerity (kalimah al-Ikhlās).