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

Order is one of the important functions of civilization. In order to find out the civilizing capability of an idea, its relationship with this civilizational function of analysis and its efficiency in ordering and systematization must be explained. Since the historical position of the Islamic Revolution is on the threshold of a civilizational upsurge, in order to achieve a new Islamic civilization, it must bring its capitals to the field against its rivals and explore their capacities. The idea of Imamate is considered the most important soft capital of Shia, and it is necessary to find out its basic components for the construction of modern Islamic civilization, capacity measurement and its capabilities for the civilizational functioning of order.The current research aims to produce theoretical literature and reflect the effectiveness of Imamat's thought along social lines, in a library way and with an analytical approach. As the center of civilization, man's possession of desirable characteristics such as science and infallibility will lead to the system and consistency of civilization in the process of designing, building and managing it, and its output is a more comprehensive order than the contractual order in Hobbes's thought and the moral order in Durkheim's thought.

Muhammad Shahrour is one of the contemporary Quranists who aim to weaken the place of Hadith in jurisprudence.  To prove this claim, he presents Quranism as a complete alternative and then questions the doctrine of  the Justice of the Companions and rejects the Sunni hadiths regarding the justice of the Companions. He then challenges the infallibility of the prophets and the concept of the Sunnah in order to discredit the hadiths transmitted from the Prophet and to discredit the position of the Sunnah as a foundation of jurisprudence. For this purpose, he rejects the validity and effectiveness of the teachings found in the prophetic tradition and emphasizes their historicity. By adopting the descriptive-analytical method, this article attempts to provide a critique of the disregard for Hadith in the jurisprudential inference system of Shahrour. For this purpose, an attempt has been made to respond to the controversies so that the position of hadith is recognized as one of the pillars of valid jurisprudence.

In this article, the problem of Sayfuddin Amidi's (551-631 A.H.) - a prominent Ash'ari theologian - criticism has been investigated in the denial and refutation of the infallibility of Imam Ali. In the book Abkar al-Afkar fi Usul al-Din, seven cases of doing and living as obligation have been attributed to Imam (a) and concluded that the requirement of those obligations is the absence of infallibility. The findings of the research show that none of the seven requirements may be taken as being against the infallibility of Imam (a). Amidi is a person of polemics and fallacies, he does not have mastery of history and hadith and he used weak narrations, he is not impartial in his research and fanatically seeks to prove his presuppositions. Issues such as accepting arbitration, pledging allegiance, cooperating with caliphs and dealing with the killer of Zubair, etc., may not be taken as being in conflict with infallibility.

In verse 143 of the al-Baqarah Chapter, God Almighty introduces some witnesses to the actions of humans. There is a difference of opinion among exegetes as to whether the position of witnessing deeds, like prophethood and imamate, is a position exclusive to the prophets and infallible Imams or whether it can also belong to the special companions and students of the Imams. Allamah Tabatabai considers the relationship between the position of witnessing people’s deeds and infallibility to be equal and believes that witnessing people’s deeds is reserved for the Infallible. In contrast, Ayatollah Javadi Amoli considers this relationship to be absolute generality and particularity, and introduces examples of witnesses to people’s actions that include the Infallibles. It is clear that this verse can be used as one of the proofs of infallibility when there is an equal relationship between infallibility and the position of witnessing; otherwise, it will not be considered as proof of infallibility. In the present study, we have examined the views of Allamah Tabatabai and Ayatollah Javadi Amoli using the method of comparative exegesis, and after presenting and examining the evidence of both exegetes, we have shown that according to the application of the content of the verses of witnessing deeds, that literally manifests as witnessing all deeds of all nations, Allamah Tabatabai’s view is preferable.

The Prophet of Islam (PBUH)’s infallibility matter has a deep stem in Quran verses. From the First Days of Prophet’s prophecy opponents and antagonists were tried to offend his holy character. Because of that, they provided some doubts and uncertainty from Quran verses to downgrade the position of him and find the religious reason for their wrong thoughts. Besides that, the misunderstanding of some Quran verses causes controversy among Muslim’s wisemen. Therefore, the present research has done by library method in order to find the Prophets infallibility doubts and uncertainty from different sources. We used content analysis to categorize those founded doubts and certainty to set for general and private examples .the general examples include past sins, future sins, ask for forgiveness and the private examples include, Receiving and communicating revelations such as the legend of Gharaniq, and the field of action of revelations is divided into the execution of rulings, family issues, moral issues, and issues of political rulings. According to the verses, narratives and viewpoints of commentators and philosopher have criticized these doubts.

The problem is, what is the reason for Moses' severe rebuke of Aaron in the story of the Israelites' calf worship? Syed Morteza believes that since Harun was Moses' partner in the mission and they shared profits and losses, Moses treated him as if he were his own and the way a person treats himself when he is angry. And it is possible that at that time, taking its head and pulling it was not considered disrespectful, and it is possible that saying the phrase ﴿La tākhūdh bilhiṭī walābrāsi...﴾ by Aaron was due to his fear of the children of Israel's false assumption that Moses would blame him, or that the content of this Musa's speech is a consolation and an invitation to patience. The author believes that his point of view is far-fetched and improbable. Apparently, what caused such an interpretation of Sayyid Morteza is his theological basis about the absolute infallibility of the Prophets (pbuh); But it is possible to provide an analysis that is more compatible with both this basis and the appearance of the verses, and it should be noted that the field of interpretation of the verses is not a wide and wide-ranging field and is only limited to urgency and necessity. It seems that the severe rebuke of Moses (pbuh) towards Aaron (pbuh) was a means to wake up the children of Israel to realize the severity and magnitude of their mistake in worshiping the calf.

The Prophet of Islam (PBUH)’s infallibility matter has a deep stem in Quran verses. From the First Days of Prophet’s prophecy opponents and antagonists were tried to offend his holy character. Because of that, they provided some doubts and uncertainty from Quran verses to downgrade the position of him and find the religious reason for their wrong thoughts. Besides that, the misunderstanding of some Quran verses causes controversy among Muslim’s wisemen. Therefore, the present research has done by library method in order to find the Prophets infallibility doubts and uncertainty from different sources. We used content analysis to categorize those founded doubts and certainty to set for general and private examples .the general examples include past sins, future sins, ask for forgiveness and the private examples include, Receiving and communicating revelations such as the legend of Gharaniq, and the field of action of revelations is divided into the execution of rulings, family issues, moral issues, and issues of political rulings. According to the verses, narratives and viewpoints of commentators and philosopher have criticized these doubts.

"Infallibility" means to be pure from any sin as well as error in receiving and communicating revelation, it is one of the special privileges and characteristics of the divine prophets and necessary for their mission, which is dealt with and paid attention to by many scholars and thinkers of different theological schools of thought due to its high importance. One of the issues that has raised many discussions is the verses of the Holy Qur'an that contain expressions of "confession of oppression" in the words of prophets such as Prophet Adam, Prophet Moses, and Prophet Jonah, and some people have concluded that divine prophets are infallible based on these verses. This study, via a descriptive and analytical method and in a comparative way, seeks to answer the question that what is meant by "oppression" and its acknowledgment from the point of view of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli and Fakhruddin Razi, and what is its relationship with the "infallibility" of the prophets? The findings of the research suggest that Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, as a representative of the Shia theological school of thought, proves "infallibility" for all the prophets, and he considers "oppression" to be based on its literal meaning, which means injustice, deficiency and deprivation, by referring to numerous arguments and evidence. However, Fakhruddin Razi, as a representative of theological school of thought in Ash'arism, in his analysis considers "infallibility" to be related to the period after prophethood and "oppression" to before prophethood

Verse 74 of Surah Hood contains an account of Abraham arguing with God about the people of Lot. In connection with this issue, detailed discussions have taken place between commentators and even theologians, and it has also raised doubts. Doubts that have sometimes challenged the infallibility of Abraham in particular and the prophets in general. Some have considered the subject of the controversy to be Lot herself and some, the people of Lot. Some believe that Abraham's quarrel was out of curiosity, and some believe that the quarrel means intercession. The present study, after collecting various views on Ibrahim's dispute with God, uses the method of critical analysis documented on Quranic teachings to describe and critique these views. Paying attention to the compassionate character reflected in Abraham in the Holy Qur'an seems to mean the concept of strife, supplication and prayer out of kindness, in order to find a way to guide a people who are on the verge of divine punishment. But since, according to divine knowledge, this return was not possible, Ibrahim's request was rejected, considering that the dispute was before the announcement of God's final decision, does not negate Ibrahim's infallibility.

Imamate is a theological teaching that all the Islamic sects and denominations agree on its necessity and each of them has dealt with it considering some characteristics and aspects. From the beginning of the debate of imamate until now, in addition to the common features, Shiites have emphasized three specific features (appointment by text, infallibility and knowledge) and in this sense, they have made imamate in their belief system different from other Islamic schools, and associated their identity of Shiism with the imamate characterized by these features; Therefore, it can be seen that a significant part of the scholarly efforts of Imamiyya theologians in the discussion of Imamate has been devoted to these three characteristics in order of priority. Regardless of the researches that have mostly explained, justified and defended the mentioned teachings considering the stated order, this article, with a descriptive-analytical method, aims to a deal with the role of Imam's knowledge, its importance and underlying position compared to the other two features by presenting the proofs and pieces of evidence. Also, it will lead to more attention of theologians to the teaching of the Imam's knowledge in the system of compiling and teaching theology.

The infallibility of the prophets is one of the definite principles of Imamiyah School, but the purports of some verses of the Qur'an suggesting that Adam has committed a sin and error give rise to doubts concerning the inerrancy of the prophets. This research seeks to analyze and evaluate the doubts about the infallibility referring to the verses indicating the sins and errors of Adam based on the analysis presented by Sayyed Murtaza and ʿAllamah Majlisi. The two scholars have studies and answered about seven doubts that have been cast about the infallibility of Adam and finally the infallibility of all prophets according to what appears from some verses. These doubts are derived from words and expressions such as disobedience ('usyān), misguidance (ghawāyīt), injustice, repentance, error, forgiveness, and opposition to the divine prohibition that is attributed to Prophet Adam in the Holy Qur’an. However, it pears from the explanations of the two scholars that based on the intellectual and scriptural principles of Imamiyah, firstly, the concepts and terms based on which the arguments have been developed, have multiple meanings and applications inasmuch as they do not indicate sin and error only. Secondly, these concepts are graded so that the way they reflect their manifestations is not equal. Thirdly, Prophet Adam only violated a recommended order and perpetrated a less preferred act. Fourthly, due to the definitive proofs of infallibility of the prophets the appearance of the above mentioned texts are not trustable. The method of the research is descriptive – analytic with an inference approach.

Regarding the doubts raised about the issue of the infallibility and good example of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) with a maximal perspective on it, the first verse of Surah At-Tahrim (Prohibition) is interpreted as a reproach. According to some opinions, the question in this verse was either out of compassion or an indication to abandon the first opinion, or it was in a derogatory position and actually a reproach to others. Or this rebuke was for the sake of warding off extremism. In conclusion, it is said that it should be interpreted in a way that does not contradict infallibility. In the writer's opinion, taking compassion as an interpretation is contrary to the apparent meaning of the verse, lacks evidence, and is incompatible with the supporting evidence. Assuming acceptance implies an obligation on the part of the recipient to follow a wrong path, and considering this rebuke as beneficial contradicts several established principles. The necessity of interpreting this verse in a way that does not contradict infallibility is a foundational-convincing response, and accepting abandoning the first opinion is sufficient to address any issues. Therefore, these justifications are not enough to refute the doubt and defend maximal infallibility and good example.

“Appointing the caliph” (Sūrah al-Baqarah: 30), due to its particular significance in theological arguments and demonstrating Imamate and Wilāyat, is one of the controversial issues among Fariqain commentators. The Divine caliphate of Adam (AS) and the prophets after him, Adam’s (AS) deputyship on behalf of others, God’s deputyship on earth to carry out Divine commandments, the caliphate of the humankind and its current realization in the perfect human being, and the need to appoint a caliph, are issues that have been addressed by commentators. This research, using the documentary method and taking into account the influential factors, investigated the evolutionary process of interpretation of this verse over centuries. The outcome of this scientific effort was the achievement of interpretations by Fariqain commentators, indicating the necessity of the existence of an infallible Imam for all time. In this view, the perfect human being is the caliph of God, whose appointment as the mediator of divine grace is inevitable, but the theological presuppositions of Sunni commentators have prevented the acceptance of the truth and caused the position of the caliph to be equal to the divine ruler of the Islamic society, even if he is not infallible.

The teaching of proving the reliability of Hazrat Ali (AS) with the scientific approaches of Nahj al-Balagha is of special importance; Because according to the narrations of the Prophet of Madinah and Hazrat Ali (AS) as its gate, this requires his scientific infallibility. Nahj al-Balaghah contains novel scientific points, the purpose of the research is to investigate wisdom according to experimental science or library method and analyze the content of the text and present its results to the target community (students, teachers and the scientific community). . Hazrat Ali (AS) has beautifully explained the structure of human eye, tongue, ear and nose.Can a person see with the help of tissue? Does man owe his speech to muscle tissue? Can humans hear with the help of bones? Does a person breathe through a gap? By examining the anatomy of the human body, we conclude from the concepts presented in Hikmat 7 that the connective tissue plays an important role in the faculties (sight, hearing and speech), therefore, Imam (a.s.) correctly pointed out its role in vision.

All the Islamic sects, except Azargheh and Hashwiyyah, believe that God's prophets did not fall into polytheism and did not commit polytheistic acts. However, it appears from the appearance of some religious texts (Qur'an and Hadiths) that some of God's prophets committed polytheism. These texts are in clear contradiction with the evidence of the infallibility of God's prophets; Therefore, in this research, which is a library in terms of the method of collecting the materials, and in the way of citing the data, it follows the documentary method, and in the analysis of the materials, the method is content analysis of a descriptive-analytical type, all the doubts related to the polytheism of Hazrat Mohammad (PBUH) were collected, and after arranging these doubts and the various answers of scientists to them, There are analyzed and criticized these answers and in the end, according to the author, it has reached the best answer or a new point of view in this field.

In the guidance of Ahl al-Bayt (AS) and the teachings of the Qur'an, the prophets (AS) are innocent of committing sin. But some verses seem to contradict this belief.The 19th verses of Muhammad (PBUH) and the 104 suras of Nisaa are among those verses in which the Prophet (peace be upon him) was commanded to be rejected. The commentators have different opinions about the reason for the Prophet's asking for forgiveness in these two verses and have tried to provide an interpretation of these verses that does not contradict the Prophet's infallibility; But none of their opinions are without problems. The present article, with the aim of removing doubts about the infallibility of the Holy Prophet (PBUH), after examining and criticizing the existing opinions, based on numerous evidences from verses and narrations, has come to the conclusion that: Asking for forgiveness in Surah Muhammad (PBUH) for Praying is to remove unpleasant things that are not worthy of believers, so that the effects of unpleasant things are removed and the basis for benefiting from divine blessings, which are the result of pure faith, is provided. The reason for seeking forgiveness in Surah Nisa is also related to the judgment that the Holy Prophet (PBUH) made. In this judgment, according to the Islamic law, he was assigned to judge based on the evidence of the parties to the dispute, and he judged correctly in this dispute. But because his judgment was influenced by the false testimony of some who gave false testimony, an innocent person was exposed to slander. Therefore, to ward off the bad effects of this judgment based on appearance, the Prophet (PBUH) was ordered to ask for forgiveness. The approach of this research is based on the Qur'an, on this basis, religious matters (intellect, Qur'an, tradition, experience, literature, the way of rational and legal scholars, etc.) are the judges of religious thoughts and practices based on the Holy Qur'an.

In Ibn Taymiyya’s opinion, prophets are not innocent of sin, but they are innocent of insisting on sin. He believes that the verses of the Qur’an indicate that the Holy Prophet committed a sin and then asked for forgiveness and repented. One of the verses cited by Ibn Taymiyya in this regard is the second verse of Sūrat al-Fatḥ, which he thinks proves the non-infallibility of the Holy Prophet (S.A.W.) of Islam in committing sins. By discrediting an interpretative opinion concerning this verse, he condemns the viewpoint about the Prophets’ infallibility of committing sins and considers the people who are seeking to achieve the serious intention of the verse based on this viewpoint to be distorters and have invalid and corrupt interpretations. In the present research, an attempt has been made to evaluate Ibn Taymiyya’s viewpoint and his objections on this verse with a descriptive-analytical method and with a critical approach. In the end, it was concluded that his interpretation is contrary to the interpretation of the predecessors and his accusations of the Shi‘as are baseless.

Some verses in the Holy Quran, either directly or indirectly, attribute errors or sins to Allah’s prophets. Based on their intellectual background, interpreters may come up with different explanations and interpretations of such verses in their efforts to make them consistent with the idea of Ismah (i.e., infallibility). The present study aimed to take a look at the interpretation of mystics and scholastic theologians by examining verses 76 to 78 in Al-An'am chapter. The study hypothesized that the definition of the concepts of prophetic mission and infallibility would differ among scholastic theologians and mystics who are equipped with intuitive tools. The results show that mystics, based on their specific ontology and epistemology, use the grand meaning and knowledge of the words to indicate that the apparent meaning of the verses should not contradict infallibility. From the mystics’ point of view, these verses are a metaphor for the prophets’ spiritual wayfaring. The stars, the moon, and the sun as mediators were removed gradually from Abraham’s (peace be upon him) path leading the removal of his self in front of the supreme Deity. On the other hand, theologians are of the opinion that the appearance of the Qur'an is proof, and one can reveal the purpose by sticking to the meaning of the Qur'an by referring the metaphorical verses to the unambiguous ones. Adopting interpretation is permitted in cases where there is valid evidence. According to theologians, the ambiguities in the story of the prophets are interpreted as abandoning the primary or as instructing others.

Recognition infallible cases is of such a value that demands all to do their best in the field. The recognition would be established by the method of narration due to the inability of the intellect to recognize the innocent example. One of the narrations that realizes this responsibility in the best way is the Hadith of Safina. In order to benefit from the hadith, the present article examines its evidence according to both the Imamiyyah and Ash'ari manners of thought and considers it to be reliable, and contrary to Ash'arite view and for explaining Imamiyyeh view more, it proves the infallibility of the hadith. An examination of the narrative books of both schools shows that Safina's hadith refers to the fourteen innocents. Of course, the appearance of narrations with different expressions including Imam Ali, five members of Ale-Aba and imams have been shown. The existence of various problems for mankind in all ages has been proven by experience and rational reasoning, and this fact with attention to the mentioned hadith indicates human lasting need for an infallible example to save us from the turbulent sea.