مهدی نجفی افرا

One of the basic topics in theology is the issue of the quality of the relationship between God's nature and attributes. Muslim theologians and philosophers have expressed different views on it. The negation of attributes from essence can be considered as the most important theory, the objectivity of essence, etc. Famous scholars of the Mu'tazila school, such as Ibn Abi Al-Hadid, Abul Huzail and Abd al-Jabbar believe in objectivity and do not accept Deputy. Among the Shi'ite philosophers, Mulla Sadra, Haji Sabzevari, Tabatabaei and Motahari have attributed the theory of proxy to the Mu'tazila, while Sheikh Mofid and Khawaja Nasir have attributed the objectivity to the Imamia and the Mu'tazila. Javadi Amoli hesitates to attribute the deputy to Mu'tazila and does not accept it. This essay, in a descriptive-analytical way, after expressing the above-mentioned views, has analyzed the arguments of Ibn Abi Al-Hadid in defense of the objectivity of attributes with essence and the inaccuracy of unconditional attributing of belief in “deputy” to the Mu'tazila.

In this research, we are using a descriptive-analytical method to answer that why does Ghazali establish an epistemological system with a taste of phenomenology to deal with the truth of the doctrines of religious life? It seems that Ghazali's skepticism about the validity of the doctrines of religious life and the falsifiability of theoretical reason in this regard leads him to the doctrines of this type of life. This causes Ghazali to deal with Sufism in the context of practical reason to achieve certain knowledge. Therefore, Ghazali's skepticism in the field of common sciences of religious life and deviation from theoretical reason in the context of dogmatic metaphysics leads him to the perceptions of practical reason and ethics and ultimately Sufism. Sufism became a means for Ghazali's serious entry into the field of anagogical exegesis and interpretation of the world of religious life and common texts in this type of life. Therefore, his tendency towards sufism and anagogical exegesis prepared the ground for the phenomenological approach to the aforementioned sciences to organize an intuitive epistemological system in order to prove the truth of the doctrines of religious life.

The soul is one of the most frequently used terms in Descartes’ philosophical works and one of the fundamental concepts employed in the structure of his philosophy. In fact, without considering the meaning and concept of the soul, one cannot perceive the essence of his philosophical system. He views the soul as an immaterial substance that is different from the body in the real sense of the word and can exist without the body. Descartes maintains that the soul is an essentially immaterial and decomposable substance that, after its destruction or the postmortem decomposition of the body, continues its life in the light of its essential immateriality bearing the memory of its union with the body. He has posed certain arguments on the immaterial nature of the human soul, such as the possibility of doubting the existence of bodies, the needlessness of the concept of the soul from corporal attributes, God’s power as to creating two elements with each one being clearly and distinctly perceivable, and the oneness and indecomposability of the soul. Accordingly, he believes in three substances of God, soul, and body in distinction from each other. He intends a true distinction when he refers to distinction of substances; however, this reference has become problematic for him, and he must clarify how two truly distinct substances can affect each other in unison. He has tried to resolve this problem by placing the vapor soul, the “pineal gland”, and the faculty of imagination as intermediaries or by establishing a kind of balance or even substantial unity between them. Nevertheless, the more he has tried to resolve the problem, the more he has been challenged. He has also presented two completely different standpoints regarding the eternity of the soul, which must be demonstrated based on rational and philosophical arguments. However, in his second stance, he introduces the mortality of the soul as a completely religious category and states that the eternity of the soul cannot be realized merely within the framework of the natural intellect and without seeking help from faith. Descartes has also been unsuccessful in this regard and failed to prove his claim.

In this research, based on the views of Plotinus and Ibn Sina about The correlation of love and knowledge in human, their views are examined and analysis these differences and similarities. In The correlation of love and knowledge in human discussed the effect of love for the desire for knowledge for the attainment of goodness and beauty, the attainment of moral properties, and the union with the general forms and God is considered. The most important issue of the research was to test the hypothesis whether Ibn Sina in the foundations and the correlation of love and knowledge in human was influenced by Plotinus's philosophical foundations while discussing the love of knowledge? Relying on a descriptive analytical method, this article finally concludes that in the epistemological view received from Plotinus's views on love, love is the opposite of the path of knowledge, the path to achievement and union with one. Love is able to achieve something that has no limits and no form. But this view is ontological for Ibn Sina because the perfection of the human`s souls is the same as the essence of absolute goodness and the issuance of moderate actions such as human virtues and stimulating the heavenly souls towards the heavenly substances which are due to the likeness of absolute good and the end of this similarity. It is an approximation of absolute goodness through virtue of perfection and virtue. In addition to being influenced by religious views, Ibn Sina was also influenced by Plotinus and directed the flow of Islamic thought towards illumination and mysticism.

In the upcoming research, relying on the descriptive-analytical method, we are trying to answer the question that does the Heidegger's phenomenology of religious life have an epistemological infrastructure? It seems that the basis of the phenomenology of Heidegger's religious life is based on the understanding of Dasein from the reality of religious life and gaining awareness of the essence of religious life based on the mechanism of Dasein's understanding. Investigating the role of human existence (= Dasein) in reaching the truth of religious life in the form of Heidegger's phenomenological approach to religious life is the main motivation of the researcher, which introduces us to the epistemological basis of Heidegger's phenomenology. Based on the evaluation, Dasein is a conscious agent in confronting religious life, and the knowledge that is produced in this way is a certain knowledge that depends on the essence of religious life through the understanding mechanism of Dasein.

One of the important viewpoints in philosophy, especially in moral philosophy, is “relativism”. The critical and rational examination of relativism can lead to the right moral decisions and, accordingly, the right action in different circumstances. Richard Mervyn Hare is one of the prominent moral philosophers, who in his moral philosophy, speaking of relativism and realism, has expressed the criteria for the relativity of moral judgments. By using the rule of “generalizability”, he has tried to justify the moral judgments. Also, considering the role of practicing in using the moral principles according to the circumstances, he has tried to lead the moral agent to a skill that leads to the right moral action. Besides, in explaining his moral theory, Hare considers knowing the circumstances and teaching the moral principles as effective in making moral judgments, and finally, he links the foundations of his viewpoint to intuitive and critical thinking in order to strengthen it and to make it coherent. In this paper, we have tried to examine Hare’s viewpoint about relativism from a theoretical perspective.

Karl Popper is undoubtedly one of the most influential philosophers of science of the 20th century. As far as it can be said, the philosophy of science in the 20th century has been tied to arguments. Presenting a coherent and defensible theory about the methodology of science - as one of the most important cultural achievements of mankind - was one of Popper's most important research programs. This article explains Popper's attempts to criticize the logical positivist. After referring to the point of view of logical positivists, it is pointed out two important objections that Popper puts on this point of view: the problem of induction and the theory of the burden of observation; And thus, Popper challenges the theoretical foundations of logical positivism. After that, the author points to falsificationism as Popper's suitable solution for abandoning logical positivism, and by providing suitable explanations, he clarifies how Popper's falsificationism is a problem for positivism in his new scientific theory. It makes sense. Although this theory brings insights, but while referring to the criticisms of it, it is shown that falsificationism also faces serious weaknesses and could not reasonably observe the flaws related to the theory of observation and Eliminate induction.

Gazali’s perspectives on gnosis and knowledge are so important, because he has known much different knowledge in his era. In this paper, the difference between revealed gnosis, as a particular knowledge that belongs to the Prophets and human knowledge specifically the terrestrial world, has been explained. He has divided the sciences based on the object of knowledge, and its method, and aims to show that revelation is the most transcendent one. He believed that the revelation can be called a gnosis. The value of revealed gnosis has two aspects: firstly, it is a piece of certain knowledge, and second, without it achieving felicity can’t be possible. Never the other sciences can replace it but he has not wanted to humiliate the other sciences. He has applied philosophical and mystical notions to explain the revelation, but has explicitly expressed the revealed gnosis can’t be considered the same as another knowledge.

Causality as an existential cause serves as a basis for Avicenna’s philosophy and is one of the vital principles of philosophical and rational problems. As a rationalist philosopher, Avicenna has proposed some new insights including the idea that causality is based on existence. Proposing the distinction between existence and essence, he has provided a new model for the God-world relationship. He believes that the relationship between the creator and the created can be explained by examining the causality relationship. Among different causes, he prioritizes the efficient cause (Agent) which makes things exist out of nothing. As to the God-world relationship explanation, he argues that God governs the world of beings as the cause of causes. As for its existence and non-existence, the Being as the effect and the possible (non-aseity) needs a preponderance (Murajjih) that is the cause of causes. Avicenna believes that God’s essential aseity entails God’s necessitated existence. Not only he defines the dependency of the caused on the cause as “the necessity by virtue of another” (Wujub Bilghair) or existential possibility in Sadra’s words, but he emphasizes the existential relationship between the caused and the cause. Then he opens a clearer horizon towards the primacy of being which had a great impact on Islamic philosophers as well as Western philosophers like Thomas Aquinas.

This article explains and analyzes quality of eschatology in human Categories based on the type of knowledge and their practice in the world according to the philosophy of illumination and Mulla Sadra. The importance of this issue is due to Suhrawardi's influence on Mulla Sadra in analyzing this issue through the world of ideas. The main issue of the research is some of the problems that have arisen on Suhrawardi's theory in this regard and how Mulla Sadra has followed Suhrawardi to solve these problems. This issue has been explained by analyzing how the eschatology in different Categories of human beings in the opinions of these two philosophers and then the role of the ideal world in their eschatology، and then this issue has been explained in the discussion of how the eschatology in the ideal world with them.

What makes people think and think about death and life after death is the ambiguity of human destiny after the separation of the soul from the body and how to calculate actions, etc., which in the belief of believers in Hinduism and derivative religions It is answered by the law of karma and the endless cycle of the broker. This article seeks to provide a brief overview of the background and process of reincarnation among the people of India, although the belief in reincarnation has somehow created a vacuum of a system of reward and punishment among the ruling mirrors. In the Indian subcontinent, but the contradiction of the principles and principles governing reincarnation with the proofs and principles of Sadra's wisdom, including the proof of power and action and the movement of substance and the principle of inviolability in existence, is undeniable and in the end we will not want anything but the annulment of reincarnation. Receipt

Concerning the issue of God’s knowledge of variable particulars, Fayyaz Lahiji relies on Ibn Sina’s theory of God’s knowledge of particulars, which is based on knowledge of universals, considering the God’s knowledge of objects as imprinted forms and acquired knowledge through causes. So, he tries to refer the change of the world of objects to the relationship of material beings with each other, and he responds the issue of change by the God’s active knowledge, and graduation in existence, and inherent simplicity of the Supreme Being. Finally, he offers a distinct interpretation of imprinted forms which is close to Mulla Sadra’s theory of undetailed knowledge as detailed unveiling. He says absolute perfection of God demands that, with the undetailed knowledge, all the forms are known for the Supreme Being in a detailed and distinct manner from each other. This article tries to investigate and criticize Lahiji’s attempt to solve the issue of change in God’s knowledge of variable particulars with the help of some philosophical foundations by using a descriptive and library method.

In proposing his doctrine of creation, Avicenna is under the influence of Aristotle and Neoplatonian theory of emanation as well as Islamic theologicians and religious texts. This is why his thought is basically different from previous thinkers. While he defines “the agent” as “emanatory” and “cause of existence”, he believes that the relationship between the beings and the agent is based on an existential relationship. With minor amendments, his theory of “creative foreknowledge” can be proposed as a prominent theory about the origin of emanation of beings. He examines divine knowledge by referring to “knowledge by presence” and “unity of the knower and the known”. Given his comments about knowledge by presence, the divine knowledge about the created beings including mubda'at, mukhtara'at and mukawwanat can be explained based on his theory. Particularly, he explains divine knowledge about the created beings through the divine knowledge of his own essence. Then the emanation theory has not been neglected by later philosophers and has been considered as one of the most rational interpreatations of God as the creator and agent and of the creation of world. In this article. We have tried to explain the relationship between the creator and the created based on the emanation theory of Avicenna. The theory of emanation along with We have tried to explain the relationship between the creator and the created based on the emanation theory of Avicenna. The theory of emanation along with the divine knowledge has been proposed as the basis of “creation out of nothing” (creatio ex nihilo).

Since the beginning of his life, man has been looking for a reason for the origin of existence, and this issue has provided the basis for discussion among thinkers. Antony Flew is one of the thinkers who, based on evidentialism and following the analysis of religious worldview, first turns to atheism and then to deism. According to his approach, Flew sought scientific and experimental evidence for his beliefs, which by resorting to this approach and its arrangement in the form of teleological argument, finally leads to deism that the analysis of these evidences is the subject of this article. As a result, it will become clear that these scientific and empirical reasons can be useful evidence for deism to some extent, but the nature of science is the lack of stability, and transformation, which is considered an important weakness for epistemological matters. Also, although Flew does not go beyond deism by appealing to them, he refers to God's intervention in nature after creation, which indicates the lack of sufficient coherence of his thought after the change of belief. Finally, it should be said that considering his deism, his belief in practice is not much different from his atheism.

From the Age of Enlightenment to the present day, modern man has sought to analyze religious beliefs in new epistemological ways. Accordingly, the study of belief in God as the most important religious belief has emerged by examining the evidence of theism and has had a special occurrence among Western thinkers. Antony Flew, a contemporary philosopher based on evidence, is one of the thinkers who paid special attention to the analysis of theism and its rejection based on evidence. So much so that he was called the father of neo-atheism. The subject of this article is the study and analysis of his views in the first period of his scientific life, which he emerged as an atheist. In his atheistic works, Antony Flew states some basic points in rejecting theism, the more basic of which are discussed in this article. To this end, Antony Flew's prominent views on atheism, namely the meaninglessness of the language of religion, the incompatibility of the concept of God, and the principle of atheism, are examined, and then the strengths and weaknesses of each are examined. Thus, it will be revealed that although Flew has presented serious and thought-provoking problems in the field of theism, But many of these cases in the past have been suggested in other ways and of course can be criticized and have drawbacks and weaknesses that are considered.

This paper has tried to deliver a modern discussion on Avicenna’s epistemology on the basis of Husserl’s phenomenology, the main problems in Husserl’s are transcendence and correspondence which are considered by Muslim philosophers like Avicenna who tried to solve them by sensual intuition, knowledge in presence and theory of abstraction. Analysis of sensual perception and mental act due to perceive a phenomenon by mediator of the meaning as an reference for the knowledge with the intentional approach in respect of union between knower and the known parallel with Noema and Noesis can set Avicenna’s epistemology as a phenomenological approach which may be taken into consideration as a modern school in epistemology. Husserl’s phenomenological approach can be compared by Avicenna’s knowledge in presence. This paper tried to have a comparative study on Avicenna and Husserl’s epistemology by using analytical and descriptive method emphasizing on critical approach to the both.As a result it must be mentioned that Avicenna has approached to Husserl’s phenomenology.

The purpose of this research is to compare the meaning of life from the perspective of Arso and Islam. In Aristotle's thought system, the meaningfulness of life is connected with the concept of happiness or eudaimonia.

In this study, a descriptive analytical method with a documentary approach has been used.

Instead of being a mental state, eudaimonia is a part of human life that a person deserving of praise chooses for himself. From Aristotle's point of view, happiness is the virtuous activity of the wise soul in a perfect life. A life with good fortune is an active life, full of all good things and desirable in itself. According to Aristotle, the personal and the spiritual contexts are both effective in creating happiness and meaning in life. These fields include: the goodness of the soul such as moral and intellectual virtues and education. Physical virtues such as strength, health, beauty and healthy senses and external virtues such as wealth, good and faithful friends, good lineage, good children, inheritance and good reputation.

The religion of Islam provides a deep understanding of the world and man and considers man to be God's caliph on earth. Believing in this makes every moment of a person's life meaningful. On the other hand, Islamic teachings are such that it will cause peace and mental health. This issue is related to the meaning of life. One of the most basic teachings of Islam is the remembrance of God, and with the remembrance of God, peace of mind is provided at its highest level. And this has a great impact on giving meaning to life.

The two principles of “donator of something cannot be devoid of that thing” and “the [being with] simple essence is everything and not part of any of them” have a special position among philosophical principles especially among theological discussions. The philosophers generally use the first principle to explain the compatibility between cause and effect and Molla-Sadra uses the second principle to prove the ‘personal unity of being’. Allameh Mohammad-Taqi Ja’fari who disagrees with some accounts of the ‘unity of being’ and does not accept the compatibility [of the two] in metaphysical matters, criticizes the two principles. I have studied his criticisms of the two principles in this article. Recognizing his mistakes in understanding the principles and their domain, I have concluded that he cannot deny the two mentioned principles. His most important mistakes are: examining philosophical rules in natural matters and also confusion of epistemological and ontological matters. Relying on Molla-Sadra’s views, this article uses an analytic method to criticize Allameh Ja’fari’s view.

Love is one of the most important method by which the truth specifically the transcendent affairs will be known. It has been taken into consideration by Plato and Plotinus. It has a vital position in Plotinus’s cosmology, anthropology and epistemology. Accordingly, love linked the oneness as an unknowable thing to human beings as a wise and lover existent. The main issue at this research is to explain this relationship epistemologically. As a result it must be mentioned that the love in epistemological approach because of immediate facing with the truth is the one of the most important way to unify with the oneness and lead human beings to attempt to achieve oneness and unify with it. Love is intuitive path which is emphasized by mystics and most of philosophers particularly phenomenologists who insist on facing the truth without presupposition and precondition. This research by analytical and descriptive method wants to show the importance of love and intuition in Plotinus’s thought by focusing on its important role in the epistemology.

The burhāni ṣiddīqīn, the proof of ṣiddīqīn, is one of the most important proofs of the existence of God. Various interpretations of this argument have been made from the time of Fārābī and Ibn Sīnā to the present day. Mullā Hādī Sabziwārī is one of the commentators of Ṣadrā's thought and sometimes among its critics who tries to open a new way in ilāhiyyāt bi`l ma`n al-akhaṣṣ, theology in its narrowest sense, by proposing four manners of expression for the proof. The purpose of this article is to re-read these manners of explanation to measure them. On the other hand, contemporary philosophers, such as Abdullāh Javādī Āmulī and Muḥammad Taqī Misbāh Yazdī, have also criticized these arguments while quoting them. In this article, we try to explain and analyze these critiques with a descriptive analytical method. As explained in the article, only in two explanations Sabziwārī has taken a step toward the proof on the basis of originality and simplicity of existence, and the step is also a case of objection. That is, both aforementioned bases are theoretical issues and need to be proven, and using such doubtful bases reduces the strength of the proof.

Imagination in the epistemology of Sadr al-Muta’allehin has sometimes tended to Ibn Arabi and its great and superior role, and sometimes it has a tendency towards the peripatetic school and its sub-rational status. Although the special place in the philosophical system of Sadr al-Muta’allehin belongs to the intellect, but where the intellect has failed to understand, it has turned to imagination and through the movement of substance he considers the abstract and soul-based human imagination as the solution to many problems including understanding the affirmative and immanent divine attributes, the revelatory teachings of the prophet and solving the problem of bodily resurrection. Using a descriptive-analytical method this paper seeks to study the challenges of this theologian in facing the mystical and philosophical approaches with imagination. Sadr al-Muta’allehin considers imagination to be a hierarchical essence, and according to the equivocal levels of imagination, he considers the imagination attributed to the senses as the source of image and allegory and the imagination attributed to the realm of the kingdom as the entrance of inspiration and revelation. His commitment to philosophical reason has led him to use the transcendental dimension of imagination only where reason is incapable of comprehending it.

The term “wisdom” is of a remarkable background in intellectual and narrative tradition and owns three important features:  One is the divine which God grants to whomever He wills, the second is the existential cognition that transforms the human being and leads him to deep existential changes and becomes the source of goodness, the third is the wisdom that leads to action that not only does it transform thought but it also transforms human biology in the realm of action. Wisdom has been interpreted as understanding, intellect, prophecy, tradition, Quran’s interpretation etc. from Shiite and Sunnite commentators’ viewpoint; but according to the authors (of the present article) the best example in the Islamic intellectual tradition has been Islamic philosophy. Therefore, in Shiite and Sunnite interpretations by "wisdom" we mean awareness of the interests and corruptions of objects, actions, ethics and beliefs, whether they are worldly or otherworldly. Wisdom also sometimes has a "scientific" aspect which is interpreted as "higher knowledge", sometimes owns practical aspect which is interpreted as "morality and righteous action".