فهرست مطالب jabbar amini

Apostasy is cutting off from the old form, beliefs and way of life and inclination towards religious groups, way of life, belief systems and a new way of communicating with divinity. In the Abrahamic religions, "Judaism and Christianity", this concept is used in the form of neo-paganism, heresy and apostasy and its related components. Such a phenomenon has been unpleasant in the eyes of the religious and religious leaders of Judaism and Christianity, and the approach to it has been different.The concept of apostasy is also discussed in the discourse of the Holy Quran, in addition to the imposition of worldly and otherworldly punishments. The concept of apostasy in the narration of the holy text means leaving the circle of faith and its statements are expressed violently by a sentence and the method of execution of apostasy rulings throughout history by readers and religious authorities has been in connection with the hypertextual elements and the component of power. This study examines apostasy in the Abrahamic religions and re-examines its existence in the narration of the Holy Qur'an with the angles of rationality and its components and justifies the rulings of the Holy Qur'an in this regard.

Among the schools of ancient Greece, Aristotelian thought is the most systematic philosophical school and one of its important features is the special attention to the field of practice. But at the same time, in the Orient, some Indian schools were active with the benefit of various epistemological sources, including the Vedas and the Upanishads. Among these, the Sankehiyeh school seems to be more systematic than other Hindu schools in that it lays down specific metaphysical foundations, especially in the case of Purusha (the intangible soul in pure consciousness) and Prakriti (the primordial matter of the universe). Since practical wisdom in each of these two systems of thought is based on parts of their metaphysical views, the present study takes a historical approach to philosophy and to the background and analysis of philosophical terms widely used by Aristotle and Sankehiyeh. He tries to compare their psychological principles based on the relationship between theoretical wisdom and practical wisdom. The important finding of the research is that the different perceptions of these two schools of the characteristics of the human soul and its relationship with the body are the main reason for distinguishing their goals from the discussion of practical wisdom. Aristotle's intellectual backgrounds are much more complex than those of Capilla; Aristotle's practical wisdom includes the family and society, but the teachings of Sankehiyeh are only concerned with the individual conduct of human beings; "Moderation" is the key concept for understanding Aristotle's practical wisdom but in the Sankhya system.

In Greek philosophy, the later thinkers of Socrates paid more attention to the subject of “anthropology” than their predecessors, and especially in the works of Aristotle, issues related to this subject were presented in a special way. In parallel with him in the East, “ontology” was at the service of “anthropology” from the very beginning, and it received considerable attention, including in the Sankehye school. Naturally, in both intellectual traditions, knowing the human soul has been more important and complex than the human body. The present research is responsible for explaining the intrinsic characteristics of the human soul from the perspective of the founders of the mentioned schools in a comparative way. Although Aristotle considered the soul to be abstract from the monster and the incorporeal, he considered it to be the first perfection of the organic natural body. In his view, the rational soul of man was also the sum of the powers of the vegetable and animal souls. But according to the sage Capila, the soul or Purusha has a very transcendent, transcendental and eternal identity which was neither the cause and the creator of something nor the effect and artifact of something. Purusha is entirely abstract from matter or precreity, but it is the stimulus for the emergence of beings. Belief in the multiplicity of populations is also a necessary necessity for the definition of the soul in peripatetic thought, but considering the attributes of the soul in Sankehya thought, the idea of ​​multiplicity seems very strange.

This paper aims to provide a historical and comparative explanantion and analysis of the discourse of contemporary Asharites of Islamic world and the contemporary Asharite intellectuals of Iranian Kurdistan. For this purpose, a library-documentary, descriptive-analytical, and hitorical-comparative research method was adopted. The findings of the study indicate that the contemporary Islamic theologians such as Taha Abdurrahman, Abu Zaid, Arkoun, al-Jabri and Muhammad Abduh due to their Arabic fanaticism, adopted an anti-Aristotelian attitude and supported a sort of philosophy rooted in religious scripts. Due to their intellectual interactions with the western world, contemporary Arab Asharites of Islam have a more friendly attitude toward philosophy and philosophizing and do not accept traditional Asharites’ disagreements with philosophy. On the other hand, with the exception of Takhti Mardukhi family who due to their family authority have shown interest in philosophy and have even taught philosophy, other contemporary Asharites theologians of Iranian Kurdistan including Musannef Chory, Mahmoud Modarres and Mulla Baqer Balak have not shown any tendency toward philosophy; that is rooted in the conditions dominant on traditional religious seminaries in Kurdistan and lack of interaction with academicians in comparison to other contemporary Asharites in the Islamic world. Only a few of today’s seminarians who have university education are interested in philosophy, but they are still not interested in projecting their views in society.

The present study was conducted to investigate the views of the Ash'arites of Iranian Kurdistan towards philosophy. To achieve this goal, a phenomenological-based qualitative research method was used. Twelve contemporary Kurdistan theologians were interviewed about philosophy. The questions were designed based on the research objectives. The results were as follows: 1) The Ash'arites of Kurdistan considered it sufficient to rely on the Qur'an and Sunnah and a rational view based on religious texts for designing and teaching the issues of old and new theology.2) Following a philosophy of Greek origin and its imitation were considered by them to be futile.3) To them, a philosophy could be invented based on Islamic texts. However, Ash'arite academics were more interested in philosophizing due to studying humanities and interacting with professors based on the contents of their academic philosophical courses.Therefore, considering the trend of spreading philosophy among the contemporary Ash'arites of the world, the Ash'arites of Kurdistan still try the same traditional practice of opposing philosophy. In the section of practical suggestions based on the research findings, the following recommendations could be put forward: 1) establishing philosophy with different orientations at the University of Kurdistan; 2) further training of old and new theology; 3) establishing the Institute of Philosophy and Wisdom in Kurdistan; 4) strengthening and equipping Kurdistan libraries with philosophical books; and 5) providing a more interaction between Shiite and Ash'arite theologies.In the field of research literature on contemporary Ash'arite theologians of the Islamic world, the results showed that people, such as Sheikh Mohammad Abdo (Rabbani Golpayegani, 1999: 18), Taha Abdolrahman (Miri and Parsania, 2009: 56), Nasr Hamed Abu Zayd (Abuzid 2003: 263), Mohammad Abed Jaberi (Jaberi, 2010: 375), Mohammad Arkoun (Arkon 2009, 2993, pp. 15-3), and Varshid Reza (Enayat, 1998: 157) had agreed with philosophy and only Seyyed Qutb (Savoshi, 1997: 157) had opposed it. However, among the contemporary Ash'arite theologians of Kurdistan, the findings indicated that some great figures such as Mullah Abu Bakr Chori (Baba Marduk, 2003: 148), Mullah Abdul Karim Modarresi and Mullah Mahmoud Modarres Negal (Baba Marduk, 2003, vol. 1: 147), and Malabaqir Balk ( Modarresi, 1985: 14) completely opposed philosophizing theological and religious issues and only the theologians of Takhti Mardukhi family like Sheikh Abdul Qader Mohajer, Sheikh Mohammad Sim Thani, and Sheikh Mohammad Jassim Sadr al-Ulama could teach philosophical issues due to their family powers (Abdoli, 2019: pp. 43-40). This had a significant relationship with the field results resulting from the interviewees’ views.Therefore, according to the teaching procedures and contents of traditional courses governing these scientific schools, the majority of Sunni seminary teachers and scholars  followed Abolhassan Ash'ari in opposition to reason. Ghazali's views were especially in complete opposition to those of the philosophers. New doctrinal doubts were sufficient to make us rely on the Qur'an and Sunnah; thus, there was no need for Greek vague and imitative philosophy as being at the same time blasphemous. Finally, if one is to rely on philosophy in the present age, he/she must create a philosophy with Islamic text-based principles. Only a small number of the university interviewees were found to follow Ash'ari profession due to having an interaction with academics and studying in those fields. The humanities, such as sociology, law, philosophy, theology, and philosophy of education, had a positive approach to philosophy.It was expected that the Ash'arites of Kurdistan had a positive approach to philosophy like the Ash'arites in the Islamic world with the development of technology and modernity. However, the Ash'ari discourse of Kurdistan was finally found to be in opposition to philosophy.

Mulla Rajab Ali Tabriz is one of the thinkers of the Safavid era and contemporary of Mullā Ṣadrā. On several occasions, he has opposed the principles and foundations of Ṣadrā’s Transcendent philosophy. One of his oppositions is the issue of existence univocality. Tabrizi has strongly opposed the univocality of existence and has tried to prove its homonymity with various arguments. As for the Divine Attributes, he has also denied the attributes by referring to traditions (hadiths). In the present article, by examining these two issues, the weakness of Tabrizi arguments is made known. The drawbacks of Tabrizi’s view are as follows: interpreting narrations without considering the atmosphere and context of the time they were issued, ignoring the connected and separate indications in understanding their true meaning, disregarding narrations that have offered a completely affirmative interpretation of Divine Attributes, the fact that some traditions are irrelevant to this debate but are related to conditionality of the Divine Names and Attributes.

Mulla Rajab Ali Tabrizi philosopher of Safavid Isfahan is one of those philosophers who opposed many of the principles of transcendental philosophy Sadra . One of these principles is the spiritual or literal Share . Tabrizi strongly opposed spiritual Subscribe and share its rhetoric, the distinction is necessary and possible. Tabrizi triple proof of his claim; "rational", "cite the words of Hkmavrfa" and "the validity". This paper also presents his views in this regard, to try to explain the reasons for his non-narrative, their weaknesses and shortcomings as his poor show . Including evidence of Tabriz on his claim as a teacher first and second technology is called wise words. But by studying the ideas of its leaders have shown how Tabrizi actually become a part of review And the top and following those words or other words of the elders ignored.Keywords: Mulla Rajab Ali Tabrizi, School of Isfahan, sharing, Verbal Share Existence , spiritual sharing.