فهرست مطالب فریده حکیمی

The main purpose of this research is to examine the views of Ghazali and Ibn Sina on one of the most controversial theological issues in the field of Islamic philosophy, namely the attributes of God and how these two thinkers explain the divine attributes. Due to the fact that Ibn Sina considers it impossible to understand the nature of God, therefore, he considers it possible to know him only through the knowledge of divine attributes.Because Ibn Sina considers God's attributes to be the same as His essence, so whoever can know His attributes is as if he has understood His essence. Contrary to Ibn Sina's opinion, Ghazali's approach regarding God's attributes has undergone many changes during different stages of his life. Because according to him, we can only attribute attributes to God that God has described Himself to. So, based on this, he considers God's attributes neither as his nor as other than him, and he believes that we should not ask any questions about this at all. The present article analyzed this issue with a library method and sought to resolve the ambiguities raised in this regard

In his critique of theoretical reason, Kant holds that all the arguments are proof of the existence of God as an existential argument. He criticizes this argument a lot, so he expresses it in the form of an innate argument. Kant's sense of nature actually means the kind of talent that one acquires. Al-Ghazali, after expressing the proof of hadith, in the second round of his life, discusses the nature of nature and uses it in various meanings such as instinct and reason. He also does not consider nature to be achieved by rational reasoning. Ghazali believes that God exists in our nature, while Kant believes that we gain it throughout our lives, not that it exists in our imagination from day one.