جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « divinity » در نشریات گروه « علوم انسانی »

Śaivism, or Shaivism, is a branch of Hinduism with roots tracing back to ancient India. This religion notably developed and expanded under the influence of mystics known as Nāyanmārs in southern India. This period marks a significant turning point for Shaivism. Many foundational theological and philosophical concepts of Shaivism can be traced to the humns left by the Nāyanmārs, including their ideas on divinity and God. Despite extensive research, little is known about the concept of divinity and related issues in Hinduism. Therefore, this article aims to investigate the hymns of these saints, exploring their perspectives on the concept of God, God's anthropomorphic and apophatic attributes, monotheism, the eternity of God, and God's grace. Through an analysis of these hymns, we delve into these issues.

Religion and morality are two fundamental and influential phenomena in human life, and the relationship between the two has always been a challenging issue among thinkers. There are various opinions and views regarding the relationship between these two phenomena among thinkers; So that the quality of the relationship between religion and ethics is influential in the way of acting on them. One of the thinkers who comments on the relationship between these two phenomena, considering the intersection of tradition and modernity in the post-enlightenment era, is Hilmi Ziya Ulken, a Turkish philosopher, thinker and sociologist who has expressed penetrating views. Therefore, the relationship between religion and morality, after examining what these two categories are from the point of view of the present thinker, is expressed analytically in this article. In spite of the fact that Ulken has tried to bring the new western views of the entrance to the Islamic society and the religious heritage of Turkey and its suburbs closer to each other; But there are some criticisms towards his theory. These criticisms include: considering the relationship between religion and ethics as secondary, considering religion historically and socially, ignoring the executive guarantee of ethics, and ignoring the views of Islamic thinkers. The present article is written with a descriptive and analytical method using Hilmi Ziya's sources and books.

The question of the purpose of creation is one of the most important human questions that have always been raised throughout history and many efforts have been made to answer it. The extent of the impact and importance of this question is so great that it covers all aspects of human life and until a person does not find a convincing answer to it, his life has no meaning and he will always be in anxiety and worry with a feeling of emptiness and meaninglessness. In addition to human answers, heavenly religions have also provided answers to this question, which have a special place because they originate from the heavenly origin and are reliable and innocent. All heavenly religions, especially Islam, consider the creation of the world, especially man as the master of creation, to be purposeful. The Qur'an has introduced several goals as the goal of human creation, which has only used the word "servitude" in the context of introducing "servitude" and called it "divine covenant"(عهد الهی) and "straight path" (صراط مستقیم). The position of servitude is the noblest and highest human position, which is superior to apostleship (رسالت); because "apostleship" is a divine mission for chosen people, while "servitude" is an optional thing that people go through its steps and degrees by their own choice and with continuous and methodical effort. Reaching the position of "absolute servitude", in fact, means reaching all the blessings of this world and the hereafter.

After the fall of the Ilkhanate dynasty, Iran underwent periods of unrest. The turmoil intensified following Timur's attack and the ensuing brutal bloodshed. Subsequently, Iran witnessed significant upheavals in cultural, social, and political spheres. These events played a pivotal role in shaping religious extremist views, exemplified by the emergence of the Hurufists. Faḍl Allāh al-Astarābādī, the leader of Hurufism, initially engaged with Shiite slogans and held exaggerated (ghālī) ideas regarding Shiite Imams. Later, he focused on promoting the doctrine of Mahdism, garnering widespread public support. This article seeks to address the question: How did the doctrine of Mahdism evolve in the thoughts of Faḍl Allāh al-Astarābādī? The research methodology employed in this article is descriptive, relying on an analysis of historical data. The research findings highlight that political, social, and religious movements are responses to societal objectives and resistance against unjust and oppressive rulers. Faḍl Allāh, drawing from the grievances and injustices inflicted by the Mongols and the Timurid dynasty, utilized the motivating force of Mahdism to initiate an uprising aimed at establishing a "virtuous society" (utopia) and ensuring social justice. It is crucial to note that Faḍl Allāh's doctrines developed gradually over time.

Since miracles are considered as a way to prove prophethood from the point of view of religious people, proving the inability of human beings to create something like the Qur'an is a reason for the divinity of the Qur'an and a reason for the validity of the claim of the Holy Prophet prophethood. The inability of human beings to create something like the Qur'an proves the claim of prophethood of the Prophet if its implication is accepted as the validity of the claim of its creator. The proof of this implication is based on the rational explanation of goodness and badness, and after believing and confessing the existence of Allah, the Almighty, the Wise and the All-Knowing. In this article, this issue has been examined via a descriptive, analytical and library method and according to the rules of "obligation of grace", "ugliness of exaggeration with ignorance" and "refusal to violate the intention" of Allah. The result of the present article is the proof of the rational and logical reason for human inability to create the Qur'an indicates its divinity.

According to the Qur'an, Jesus Christ considers himself a servant of God and does not consider himself GodAnd this is while Trinitarian Christians claim that Jesus Christ claimed his divinity in the New Testament.And this issue is considered a contradiction between the Qur'an and the New Testament according to the interpretation of Trinitarian Christians.The question raised in this research is "Do the texts of the New Testament claim the divinity of Christ?" Or do they deny this issue? »The purpose of this research is to show the alignment of the Holy Quran with the New Testament in denying the divinity of Jesus Christ.In the interpretations of the Qur'an, the reference to the verses of the New Testament in the negation of the Christian divinity is clearly evident in the interpretation of the related verses of the Qur'an.The results of this research show that Jesus denied his divinity dozens of times in the Bible in different ways.and removes any doubts about this;The research method in this research is based on textual analysis and interpretation of the holy text to the holy text.

Muslim sages and Ghazali believe that the theoretical intellect is able to recognize the existence of a necessary thing, devoid of time, place, and regardless of the lineage and additions that it finds with its creatures. And as a result, they say, it is obvious that God's existence and His perfections are subject to our knowledge of His existence, which means that our knowledge causes us to become aware of God's existence And in this regard, they have not made a difference between knowing the essence and the names and attributes of God. But Ibn Arabi has distinguished between proving and knowing God's names and attributes and his essence, and he says that we have no way to know and prove his essence, and he says, Shariat (Book and Sunnah) has never been a reflection of God's nature, talking about God's nature is one of the absurdities of reason, and our knowledge of God is achieved only through His names and attributes, and this knowledge also depends on the appearance and manifestation of God in the world. As a result, our knowledge is subject to God, and the theory of the subjection of science to the knowledge of the known connects it to the knowledge of God, and makes it a prelude to knowing and proving the existence of God. Not in science itself.

Allameh Mohammad Mahdi Asefi, one of the Shia clerics, and Seyyed Qutb, a Sunni thinker, are among the scholars who, having a maximum view of religion and Islamic teachings, consider religion to be useful for all the individual, social and political spheres of man, and believe that in order to solve the problems of humanity, one should turn to true Islam. The most important issue for returning to true Islam is sovereignty, which is the issue of the present article. From the point of view of these two scholars, the rule of Islam is based on the divinity of God and the servitude of servants, and it means ruling based on the laws of Islam and Sharia. The following article expresses the views of these two scholars in the field of governance with a descriptive analytical method and a comparative approach. The findings of the research show that the two scholars think similarly in the fields of the divine sovereignty and its realization, the general outlines of the government, the unity of authority and the government, though there are some differences in issues such as the authority, legitimacy and governor`s conditions.

Divinity and Lordship are two levels of the absolute unseen worlds in existence that have a special place in ontology. The present paper reports on a comparative study of Ibn-Arabi’s and De Leon’s views on the absolute unseen worlds. The concept of the absolute unseen worlds is defined as the level of divinity considering the essence and names, and the level of lordship considering the essence, both of which have no direct relationship with the real world ontologically. The results of this study are based on close reading of Ibn Arabi’s and De Leon’s works and the commentaries added to them. The study aimed to explain the causes of the absolute unseen worlds and their relationship with unity of essence and the lower worlds. Based on the ontological approach of these two thinkers, it can be inferred that divinity is the setting of essence names and lordship is the setting where acts appear, all with their specific aspects. These levels are independent by nature from creation and are the starting point for the emergence of names. As from both thinkers’ point of view divinity is not much different from essence, contradiction in their description of this level is remarkable. Despite considerable similarities between the two thinkers' approach, Ibn Arabi's epistemological approach is is different from De Leon's ontological one.

Worship of God is the main philosophy of human life and the call to monotheism and worship of Allah, which is one of the instinctual and natural needs of man, has always been the headline of the mission of all prophets and preachers of God and all religions and Islamic sects agree that worship is only for God. However, the Begging-like behavior of some Muslims, such as the Shiites who call upon the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and other saints, or humiliate and humble themselves in front of their graves, has been severely criticized by Mohammad Rashid Rida in his commentary of Al-Manar. While the general Muslims have always acted in this way throughout history, not only in belief, but in their behavior. This research was conducted with the library method and analytical and comparative approach of Allameh Tabatabai and Rashid Rida, with the aim of achieving the correct point of view from the Quran’s perspective and removing the accusation against Shiites in worshiping saints and polytheism in worshiping the one God. By examining the basic concepts, especially the concept of worship and prayer in dictionaries and their Qur'anic applications, it became clear that the examples of supplication and worship to non-Allah, which have been criticized by Rashid Rida, are not only away from polytheism but in the direction of monotheism and worship of Allah.

Manis a multi-dimensional creature with many potential capacities the recognitionand realiziations of which unfolds these hidden and innate capacities andbrings about wonder. Servitude of God, purification of soul and controlling thematerial aspect reigned by spiritual dimensions disclose these wonderful andincredible capacities of man and reveal the hidden divine aspect of theservant.  In the way of spiritualevolution of man through servitude of God, he ascends to heaven, becomesdivinely, his egoism disappears, and through the promotion of soul in the universe,performs divinely deeds such as implementing a wonder. In absolute surrender toGod, Man’s deeds adopt divine management and a bilateral commitment ofaffairs occurs. Man commits his affairs to God and submits himself todivine measure and as a result, God bestows on him an evolutionary and acreationary power just beyond the realm of the soul. This creativity is called thewonder of the saints and the miracle of the prophets by the mystics.  Performing a miracle and implementing ofsupernatural acts is verified by credible religious texts and Islamic thinkers.In the current study, this human dimension is validated by relying on religiousand Quranic texts and contents. Also, the mechanism of doing wonder (miracle)is explained and some proofs are submitted on it from the words of religious thinkers.

Belief in the Trinity in the Christian holy Book has been a major challenge for Christian theologians; especially for those who have tried to show it in accordance with monotheism in the Qur'an in the comparative discussion. Confirming the superiority of the Qur'an in the issue of monotheism and some weaknesses of Christian thought in it, Ms. Masson tries to triumph over this challenge in a way that shows the idea of ​​the Trinity as being compatible with monotheism; but she has not been successful in this way. Some scholars try to show her views as being different from other Christian thinkers and influenced by the mystical thought of Islam; but the explanation of her view shows that her thought is not different from other Christian thinkers. Her thought is also different from the mystical view that has spoken of the unity of existence. Belief in the Trinity, with any interpretation of it, is fundamentally different from the view of the Qur'an. This fundamental difference and critique of the Trinity is clearly perceiveable to the verses of the Qur'an and the interpretive thought of some thinkers such as Sadra.

Muslim scholars, by contemplating the Qur'an verses and analyzing monotheism, refer to different types of monotheism. Proving the oneness of God by analyzing the God's names, actions and attributes is an important part of establishing monotheism and explaining its types. Analyzing the truth of monotheism with dignity can be another important source of achieving monotheism. There is no proof of monotheism based on dignity in previous researches. This issue is necessary in terms of gaining a newer view of dignity and the impact of dignity-based monotheism on human life. In this article, with the descriptive-analytical method of Qur'anic verses and traditions, the dignity-based monotheism is examined. Based on the analysis of dignity-based monotheism Qur’anic concept, and recognizing it with a monotheistic approach, the dignity principle is the proof of monotheism. This source shows new dimensions of monotheism. The findings are focused on the fact that the dignity-based monotheism and its characteristics can be found in verses and traditions.

All popular concepts of deity (Theism, Pantheism, and Panentheism) believe in divinity. In Theism, “God” has attributes such as consciousness, will, goodness, and so forth, which can be seen in humans. On the contrary, pantheists argue that: a) the person is equal to the human being; b) embodiment is a prominent feature of the human being; c) having attributes such as consciousness, will, and so forth, requires a body and equates to anthropomorphism. In other words, these attributes are inevitably associated with embodiment and the resulting limitations. Thereby, the pantheistic deity is impersonal. There is a duality of the “personality” and “impersonality” of the deity. The crucial question of this article is, “what is the relationship between divinity and personality?” The relationship of embodiment to personality and the relationship of perfection to the impersonal deity, constitute the sub-questions of it. We show that there is a significant relationship between personality and divinity. In the first section, the term divinity is examined; firstly, it is assumed that, contrary to pantheism, divinity is definable. Otto’s attempting to trace the origins of the “holy” and the historical studying of pantheistic approaches confirms this assumption. Secondly, “Infinity, ” “influence, ” and “transcendence” are three critical terms in defining divinity. Pantheistic argument showed that all critiques of personality are summed up in the fact that personality is a limiting factor. That is, it is inconceivable that the transcendent, infinite, and influential deity can be a person. Therefore, in the second part, the concept of person is examined, and we conclude that: 1) there is a relation between the practical terms in person’s meaning and the terms of divinity; 2) Although the main critique of the deity’s personality is the embodiment, it is not a crucial term in defining the person. That is why Michael Levin is in contradiction when he believes that divine unity doesn’t need to be a person or conscious, it is sufficient to be perfect. The question arises as to what perfection means without consciousness, power, and will? Isn’t a human being more complete due to the pantheistic divine unity? Accordingly, an analysis of perfection without addressing personal attributes puts pantheists in an apparent contradiction. Besides, impersonality faces a severe dilemma; if they do not take the personal attributes, according to Kant, the deity is reduced to an object. Instead, there could be some responses to anthropomorphism; firstly, the basis of the Pantheistic mistake is to generalize the meaning of finite consciousness or will to an infinite being, whereas temporality is an attribute of the deity’s knowledge or will’s objects, not of the deity’s knowledge and will. Secondly, the study shows where personality is interpreted to anthropomorphism, it focuses on the late idea in Christian thought about Jesus, while the history of attributing the deity to consciousness, will, and so forth, is much older. Finally, it is indicated that the critiques of the personality are not strong enough to challenge it. So, according to the “Principle of Simplicity”, believers in the personality of the deity have a more justified view.

The nature of “Sirat” (the Path or Bridge which every human must pass on the "Day of Judgment" to enter the Paradise) and its features are among the important issues in theology and religious teachings. Any explanation and interpretation of it is influential in theological discussions and the network of religious teachings. In this study, “the meaning and truth of Sirat” in three spheres of genesis, legislation and punishment in Allamah Tabatabai’s view is investigated. The results show that Allamah deals with the four systems (cause and effect, motion, authority and servitude, and divinity) in his intellectual system and his worldview, and has offered in each system a definition according to that system for Sirat. In the sphere of genesis, Sirat has been explained with a consideration of the two systems of “cause and effect” and “motion” (if it is involuntary); and in the sphere of legislation, it is defined with a consideration of the three systems of “motion” (in voluntary motion), “authority and servitude”, and “divinity”. In the sphere of punishment, a definition related to the definition of legislative Sirat is presented.

Throughout the history, the human beings were worshipping different Gods and consume that they are the administrators of this world, thinking that they give them the blessings. The holy prophets came to guide the mankind to the right path, inviting the people toward the God. There are so many verses in the Holy Quran referring to the deity of the God. Ibn Jarir Tabari, the great Sunni scholar maintain that the polytheism of pagans is not limited to their polytheism in administrating but include deity as well. While, the Wahhabi referring to some of the Quranic verses believe that the pagans knew that there is only one God, but they failed in knowing the senses of the true God. Tabari in his famous book, Jame al-Bayan says that although the pagans were believed in deity of the God theoretically, but in practice were worshipping the other Gods. In this essay, the viewpoints of Wahhabi and Tabari will be compared. The results are that the Tabari view is valid in this case.

One of the essentials mentioned in the holy Quran is that the pagans did not believe in divinity of God. Because they thought that their gods can affect in events in this world. Although pretending that there is no creator but God, they attribute God's affairs to someone other than God. The polymath Tabatabaee believes that the pagans were claiming that the God is the creator of this world but they were pagan in divinity. On the contrary, The Wahhabi scholars maintain that the pagans were monotheists in divinity and were attributing all of the God's attributes to Him and believed in no other God but Him. There are so many proofs for refuting this claim which will be mentioned in this essay from the viewpoint of polymath Tabatabaee.

Divine monotheism is one of the main Qur’anic beliefs which has a great outcome for the type of answers to political matters. The main question of this research is: what are the different answers (compared with polytheistic bases) to political matters while believing in the Divine monotheism (especially the legislative aspect)? The hypothesis of this research underlines that the answers to political matters based on the belief of the Divine monotheism are sensibly different with the answers based on not having such a belief; including: it will be possible to enter the stage of delegating the political legislative changes; the Divine laws will be dominant on the sovereignty’s political legislations; it will be necessary to obey the political system of the holy Qur’an; it will be necessary to form a government to obtain the Divine desires in the political-social aspects; the government will be obliged to provide the situation for human’s perfection and its authority will be limited to the Divine legislations. This research has a rational interpretative method to explain the rational consequences of the legislative Divine monotheism, and in some cases uses an interpretive method for [Islamic] traditional documentations; and has a critical look to the consequences and corollaries of the views of the opposite side.