فصلنامه تحقیقات کلامی
پیاپی 42 (پاییز 1402)

The lofty position of Imamate, along with the difference in the view of the Muslim thinkers about it, created an incentive for the writer “to examine and criticize the process of appointing an Imāms in the view of Ḳāḍī ʿAḍud ul-Dīn al-ʾĪdjī and Saʿd ulDīn Taftāzānī” in the present article. These two theologians have proposed four ways for selecting an Imām, some of which are common and some of which are different. Those four ways consist in: Naṣṣ (literal evidence from the Prophet or the previous Imām), allegiance of the Ahl ul-Ḥalli val-ʿAḳd (people that are qualified for appointing and selecting an Imām), council and dominance. The mentioned methods are encountered by some problems. The existence of Naṣṣ for the Imām is disputed by Sunni scholars. In the same way, the allegiance cited by them is also rejected due to the non-fulfillment of the consensus of the Ahl ul-Ḥalli val-ʿAḳd regarding the first three caliphs. Appointing the successor by the first two caliphs or through the council is also against the way of the Prophet of Islam (SAWA). As the method of conquering and dominance is against the Qurʾān, the Sunnah, and intellect

The discussion of “necessity of a divine ḥudjdjah (guide)” has been dealt with in common theological books, and evidences have been presented for it; But the discussion of “continuing the existence of ḥudjdjah” has been neglected to some extent and a clear analysis of it has not been presented. Despite the fact that the Imāmiyyah scholars agree on the continuity of divine ḥudjdjahs, they did not try to mention the reasons for this belief which is derived from the Mutawātir (frequent) hadiths; Therefore, in this article, in a descriptive-analytical way, we will make it clear that the theologians’ rational arguments in proving the “necessity of ḥudjdjah” are not enough to prove the “continuity of ḥudjdjah”; Unless one concludes the continuity of the existence of the ḥudjdjah through the connection between the necessity of the existence of the ḥudjdjah and its continuity.

Teleological researches about the world of nature provided the ground for different interpretations of the argument from design. By emphasizing purposefulness or the nature as having goals, Anthony Kenny has a major contribution in the development of analytical Thomism. With an analytical-critical method, we intend in this research to answer this question: How can we evaluate Kenny's claims about the teleology of nature and its effect on the premises of the argument from design? From Kenny's point of view, purposefulness means the tendency of living beings to do things to achieve profit or avoid loss. He believes that argument from design takes an unsuccessful step from the goal to the designer through design. The findings of the research show that Kenny’s interpretation of nature’s purposefulness is not philosophical. Also, attributing purposefulness only to beneficial living beings is not acceptable, and purposefulness is not limited to value matters such as benefit or loss. The author is in agreement with Anthony Kenny in distinguishing between the concept of design and the goal and the premises of the argument from design not being tautological.

The discussion of the existence of common innate perceptions among humans, at the top of which is the belief in the existence of God, is one of the important topics among epistemologists. Through qualitative data analysis, this article tries to examine the natural perceptions in the thought of Mīrzā Mahdī Iṣfahānī and Leibniz and then discusses the issue of remembering or processing these perceptions. The findings of the research showed that both were of the opinion that humans have prior concepts from birth. Mīrzā Mahdī considers these perceptions to be actual and of the nature of emergency knowledge and introduces its place as the human heart and believes that they are to be forgotten. Therefore they need to be reminded. Citing narrative arguments, he enumerates various reminders, which this research considers them under the two categories: naturalistic reminders, such as reflection on divine signs and verses, difficulties and hardships, self-knowledge and self-preservation, and religious reminders such as Quran, dhikr (remembrance of God), the prophets and Ahl al-Bayt. According to Leibniz's theory of human constitution, it is inspired by the Christian teachings of divine illumination and God's face, and by dividing perceptual facts into two areas of reason and reality and by forming a system consisting of monads and a system of prior coordination, he considers the innate perceptions not as having the nature of knowledge, but of potential talents that become actual and explicit perception under an internal origin. Leibniz considers the actualizing factors of innate talent to be reflection or reflective perception, learning, and contemplation in sensations and creatures and the design governing them.

Throughout the Islamic history, with various motivations, several political, social and religious activists and religious scholars have always tried to create unity and approximation between Islamic denominations, and in some eras they have pursued projects such as the movement of Nādir Shāh and Sayyid Jamāl ul-Dīn Asadabadi, and the establishment of “Dār al-Taghrīb” and “The World Forum for Proximity of Islamic Schools of Thought” can be considered as the most important. Approximation projects have always faced disadvantages such as: ambiguity in goals and meaning, management and structural challenges, and have suffered from the lack of a clear theory. Also, they have paid less attention to knowledge issues and religious differences that are the main point of division. These damages, alongside with the existence of obstacles such as the disharmony of political elements or the interference of foreigners, the existence of extreme and radical currents, went hand in hand and leaved the approximation projects and Islamic solidarity unsuccessful. Therefore, one should look for a new plan with a comprehensive approach that can overcome these challenges and damages.

One of the disagreement between the Sunni and Shiʿa sects in the field of Kalām and beliefs is the issue of belief or disbelief of the parents of the Prophet of Islam (SAWA). While the Shiites firmly believe in the faith and belief of all the fathers and mothers of the Holy Prophet in monotheism, the majority of the Sunnis believe that some of them were infected with disbelief and polytheism, and a few of the Sunnis believe that the fathers of the Prophet were faithful. With an analytical, descriptive and critical method and by referring to the exegetical and hadith sources of some great scholars of the Sunnis, in this essay we explore the issue of belief or disbelief of the father of prophet Abraham (SA), which is one of the disputed Qur'anic positions between the two sects regarding this doctrine, is in three categories: A) Āzar is Abraham's father and a polytheist, and B) Āzar is the name of an idol or it means curse, and C) Abraham's father is a monotheist person and Āzar is a person other than Abraham's father. The most important finding of the present article is that some of the great Sunni scholars such as Shaʿrāwī, Fakhr al-Rāzī and Ālūsī have in some cases gone as far as admitting the validity of the Shiʿa point of view, although the final confession cannot be deduced from their collection of words.