eynollah khademi

Thaddeus Metz has tried to show that the meaning in life, like morality and happiness, is one of the normative categories of life and emphasizes the distinction between the meaning in life and happiness. According to Metz's definition, happiness consists of "positive experiences" and pleasure is basically connected with happiness. Why is happiness different from meaningfulness and what are their differences? These are the main questions that this article addresses. By searching in Metz's works, we can provide some witnesses and reasons why Metz makes a distinction between happiness and meaningfulness. According to Metz's view, happiness is related to the animal realm of the individual, while meaningfulness is related to the human realm, so that although pleasure can increase happiness, but it will not necessarily lead to meaningfulness increase. He makes six distinctions between happiness and meaningfulness: 1. The source of meaning is "relational", but the source of happiness is "intrinsic"; 2. The bearer of meaning is "action", but the bearer of happiness is "sensation"; 3. The greater impact of happiness from “luck” than meaningfulness; 4. The desire to "continue" the state of happiness, wanting "esteem" to be meaningful; 5. The possibility of happiness, only "during the lifetime" in contrast to the possibility of meaningfulness "posthumously"; 6. bias towards the future v lack of bias. Although Metz has mentioned six important distinctions between happiness and meaning, his statement is not comprehensive and other distinctions can be added to Metz's list.

The main question of this research is: What is Fakhr Razi's view on the nature of divine speech? To answer this question, Fakhr Razi's view on speech in general, including the speech of God and creatures, and the speech of God in particular was examined. To understand the nature of God's speech in particular, we have shown that there is no disagreement among Muslim thinkers about the verbal speech of God, but there is disagreement about the self-speech (Fakhr al-Din Razi's belief). Fakhr Razi is known to believe in the self-speech, but in various works he has proposed other views i.e. the speech meaning creation, the knowledge of God and the wonders of creation. He believes that verbal speech is temporal, but self-speech is pre-eternal. He is somewhat influenced by Ibn Sina about the divine speech. His view of the self-speech was criticized by thinkers after him. Unlike the Mutazilites, he believes that the Quran is uncreated and pre-eternal.

The pains and afflictions caused by the covid-19, are a kind of cognitive evils, and are an existential thing. cognitive evils are in conflict with God’s wisdom and justice and knowledge and the goodness of the creation. here is a question that, if cognitive evils are not in conflict with these divine qualities, why they are created by God, and why not have God created a world without evils. There are some responses to this question based on God’s wisdom: Evils are necessary in creation of world and have some benefits. We consider them evil, because of their relation with us. Too, evils are not because of God’s creation but they are belonging to corporal aspects of the world and its weakness and abilities. The goodness of world is very much as evils. Too, the evils are necessary for human free will. Human science is based to fixed laws and the stirring of emotions and goodness depends on the presence of evil. then we can justify the existence of evil without resorting to non-existence. and we can say that cognitive evils of covid-19 did not conflict with divine wisdom. Now we have opportunity given by covid-19 to think about a better world after coronavirus.

In Suhrawardi's opinion, soul is a light of ‘triumphal’ or ‘victorial’ lights that while is from east world, has belonged to material body; involved to its possession and trapped to the dark world. seeker's soul finds his true position after knowledge itself and seeks to achieve it. Main theme of Sheikh Eshragh's writing in symbolic languages include the way back to real home, obstacles ahead and following steps with guidance of leader. Suhrewardiin symbolic form, occasionally, express some clauses for entering into soul world and spiritual experiences.Based on Sohrawardi’s Mystical opinions, highperfection of soul is his more sameness to Allah. This is what the mystical writings are preparing premises for its explanation.

The theory of over abstraction- intellectuality of the soul، according to Molla Sadra، is the abstraction of the soul from the essence in addition to its abstraction from matter. Accordingly، the characteristics of the soul in this rank are that it is never stable and is an integrated gem، a shadow of existence، a pure existence over the category، which is neither substance nor accident، neither genus nor differentia and not even intellectually notable. The structure and formation of this theory is also the result of the principality of existence and a consideration of other Sadraian principles such as the unity of existence، degrees in the stages of existence، the unity of intellect and intellectual، and trans-substance motion. Also، for the first time، the present study refers to the interaction between the theory of over abstraction- intellectuality and Molla Sadra’s firm belief in the rejection of the principality of quiddity and his return to the principality of existence theory، and in taking this position، Molla Sadra talks about noticing a divine proof and revelation which is maybe the same as Sheikh Eshragh’s rejection of the credibility of existence over the mere identically and pure existence of the soul in over abstraction. Therefore، the proposition of the theory of over abstraction in transcendent wisdom without admitting these principles is impossible and incomplete and does not lead us to a precise understanding and correct knowledge of the issue.

It is clear that Ghazali opposed philosophers. Considering the arguments of the intellectuals about the clarity of this opposition, the most popular explanation is the opposition of religion with wisdom, religion with philosophy, or theology with philosophy. Probably the reason for this interpretation is that Ghazali regarded himself as the defendant of Islam, so he excommunicated philosophers. The final inference out of his books reveals that he, as one of the standard-bearers of Islam considered some philosophers’ ideas, particularly Ibn Sina and Faraby as blasphemy, but it does not mean he believed wisdom, thought and philosophy were totally disbelief. His recognition, of course, as a single issue without extension can be true. While Ghazali introduces Ibn Sina and Farabi’s ideas as aspects of disbelief, there are doubts about the accuracy of this view, and the use of excommunication as the only solution to the problem. The discussion here is not for investigating the truth or falsity of these doubts, but preventing confused reasoning. The aim of this study is to clarify the issue that the opposition is mainly between a theological and a philosophical deduction of Islam.

Happiness has been regarded as an old problem in the field of ethics. Avicenna has known it as something demanded in itself and aimed for itself; the ways offered by him includes becoming aware of moral and immoral qualities, breeding all powers of the soul, acting in a moderate manner, leaving earthly wishes, having pure intention, putting all beings other than Allah away, mentioning Allah, paying attention to prayer, bing in agreement with angle in action, conquest of spiritual powers over other ones and Divinly accepted actions and believes. When studying happiness, he is affected by Divine law. His view has little been desireably documented upon The Book and Tradition and it is the reason why it has been critcised.

In the time of information-explosion, producing knowledge directly leads to powerful living. Many verses of the holy Qoran including the verses 1-5 in Alaq, 28 in Faater, 269 in Baqareh, 9 in zomar and 11 in Mojadeleh as well as many passages by the Prophet and his household have given the most weight to learning and teaching. By many verses and traditions we understand the ways of showing respect and love to teacher; of them can be referred to as: esteeming teacher, expressing humility to teacher, observing the moral of speech and deeds before him or her and overlooking his or her probable infraction.

This paper has dealt with the theory of religious experience in an analytico-historical approach. Schleier Macher, the main theorist of this theory, presented and developed it to keep Christianity against fundamental demurs of experimental sciences and epistemology. Upon the theory, religion has an independent identity and its essence consists of an inner sensation toward and a direct dependence upon the Absolute. Soren Kierkegaard, an existentialist philosopher, has denied every intellectual treatment on the problem of faith and we are necessitated to accept it unquestionably. In his view, the only way for supporting Christianity is a leap of faith, that is, believing in it without any reasonable proof. Rudolf Otto has also brought into consideration the intuitional, mental and spiritual aspect of religion. Then William James, a pragmatist philosopher, argued that one should defend religion relying on experience and actual effects. And finally Walter Terence Stace, an analytic philosopher, has emphasized on intuitively perceiving of the Absolute and Max Weber has dealt with the theory in a sociological approach.

Faced with the rule "Only one is generated from one", Muslim theologians are divided into two camps. Those who had more powerful philosophical leanings and orientations defended this rule and accepted one version of the theory of emanation. For example Nassir al-Din Tusi formulated the rule in terms of a mathematic and symbolic language. Over against this trend, a great majority of Muslim theologians opposed the rule. The latter camp's rejection of the emanation deserves reflection from two perspectives a-psychologically it seems that the theory of emanation contradicts the omnipotence and free will of God and b- logically the peripatetic philosopher's analysis of the first intellect mostly proves erroneous.