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

Veridicality consists in the representation of the objective existence of things as they are, independently of our perception. The veridicality of religious propositions in the Quran has become a contentious issue in recent decades, particularly regarding propositions related to resurrection, which some intellectuals have doubted or outright denied as being factual. Muslim philosophers assert that resurrection-related propositions are not only veridical but also true, even though they cannot be empirically verified. Instead, similar to philosophical propositions, they can be rationally analyzed and grounded in knowledge by presence (al-ʿilm al-ḥuḍūrī). However, empiricists have raised challenges regarding the verifiability and veridicality of religious propositions. Mojtahed Shabestari, despite his belief in God, has contested the veridicality of Quranic propositions concerning resurrection. Therefore, the primary focus of this study is to analyze Mojtahed Shabestari’s denial of the veridicality of such propositions. Through a descriptive-analytic approach, this research critiques Mojtahed Shabestari’s perspective and underscores the veridicality of resurrection-based propositions in the Quran. The findings indicate that since Quranic propositions regarding resurrection are not empirical and are articulated by a wise speaker, they should be evaluated on their own terms. Furthermore, Quranic verses explicitly affirm the veridicality of propositions related to resurrection.

In Islam, revelation is the cornerstone and source of all religious teachings. Most Muslims believe that the Quran's wording and meaning come from God, but some contemporary thinkers such as Muhammad Mujtahid Shabestari believe that revelation came from the subconscious mind of the Prophet (pbuh) and was subsequently incorporated into the Quran. He presents new definitions of divine revelation, word and saying and believes that the word and meaning of the Quran originated from the Prophet (PBUH). Since the basis of religious teachings and the source of all Islamic knowledge is revelation, considering the teachings of the Quran as definitive proof depends on one's attitude towards revelation. Shabestari considers the Quran as a product of revelation, not revelation itself. This paper examines his views and arguments using the analytical-critical method and critiques them using rational and narrative criteria. It concludes that Shabestari's evidence is unable to support his claims, since the words and meaning of the Quran come from God.

The issue of inspiration is one of the fundamental issues in Islam, which is faced with two attitudes, earthly and heavenly. The heavenly attitude considers inspiration as a message from God to mankind and considers the Prophet of Islam as the messenger of its communication. But the earthly attitude, which is a product of the modernity period, has different aspects and dimensions. Some modern thinkers such as Mohammad Mojtahed Shabestari believe that the inspiration originated from the subconscious mind of the Prophet and came in the form of words in the Quran. Shabestari believes that if the inspiration is the word of God is not understandable by the audience. he cited to the views of linguists and implication of affirmation in the science of principles jurisprudence and its comparison with the Quran and concludes that the Quran is the word of the Prophet. Shabestari considers pre-understanding to be the main element of understanding and considers it to be influenced by time, place and personal interests. With this point of view, understanding is a historical matter. As a result, regardless of whether the Quran is the word of the Prophet or the word of God, he considers it impossible to truly understand the Quran. The purpose of this article is to review and criticize Shabestri's comparative reasons regarding the impossibility of understanding divine inspiration, which he cited the opinions of some linguist philosophers and the principles of jurisprudence in this context. The flaws in his arguments in the discussed field have been clarified and explained in a new method. In the present article, the philosophical definition of language, the possibility of understanding divine inspiration and the implication of affirmation from Shabestari's point of view were analyzed with analytical-critical method and it was proved by rational and narrative criteria that he has presented a wrong understanding of the definitions of linguists and the issue of understanding and the implication of affirmation. And with presuppositions and illogical reasoning method, it has achieved false results. Therefore, the cases cited by Shabestari do not indicate the impossibility of understanding God's inspiration.

The hermeneutic understanding and interpretation of the text is the result of the interaction between the interpreter and the text and is based on the four pillars of author, text, interpreter and context. Understanding and comparing the principles of hermeneutic theories is important since it is the bedrock of critiques of the critics. With a descriptive-analytical method, this article seeks to compare and analyze the principles of the views held by the contemporary Muslim thinker Mojtahed Shabestari and the contemporary western hermeneutist Eric Hirsch. This will lead to answering this main question: What is the result of a comparative study of the principles of hermeneutic understanding in the views of Mojtahed Shabestari and Hirsch? The result of a comparative study in the four mentioned axes shows that the similarities are more than the differences. The most important commonalities are accepting the author’s intention in producing the text, determining the meaning by the author, the interpreter’s interrogating the text, the effect of the interpreter’s presuppositions, interests and expectations in understanding the text and accepting the hermeneutic cycle in understanding the text. The main difference is that Shabestari believes in the multiplicity of meanings and Hirsch believes in the stability of meaning. Also, Shabestari establishes the hermeneutic circle between the pre-understanding and the author’s semantic horizon of the text, but Hirsch between the genre of the text and the elements of the text and the interpreter’s pre-knowledge. By accepting the historicity of the text, Shabestari supports the meaning related to the current state of the text, while Hirsch accepts the historicity in the interpretation and not in the understanding.

Subjectivism is an approach to interpretation that finds credible the involvement of the subjective element or the interpreter's mental world in meaning creation. According to this approach, every text has a meaning independent of its reader. Some intellectuals' views about interpretation are influenced by subjectivism, which has been reflected as various interpretations and explanations, seasoned with religious knowledge, in the works and ideas of Islamic intellectuals such as Mojtahed Shabestari and Soroush. With an analytic approach and based on the statements of these intellectuals, this paper has concluded that their subjectivism in interpreting religious texts has led to relativism in religious knowledge, which is represented in various ways such as pluralism, the multiplicity of religious readings, and the transformability and historicism of religious knowledge. The consequence of relativism in religious knowledge is giving credit to eisegesis, ignoring the existence of real meaning, and deconsecrating religious texts, especially the Holy Quran. By accepting relativism and multiple readings of religious texts, it is impossible to claim an accurate and valid understanding and interpretation of these texts.

The purpose of the present study is to describe and criticize the social-political categorizations of Mojtahed Shabestari that are a mixture of some western and Islamic instructions. To this aim, his epistemological approach and social-political categorizations including justice, freedom, politics, government, and democracy were studied using qualitative content analysis. Based on the results of this research, Mojtahed Shabestari in some fields such as justice, freedom, politics, and governance, aims to discuss solutions for the issues in politics that according to his claim, should be decided within political philosophy through rational measures and therefore, Fiqh (jurisprudence) and Shi'ite Islam is silent towards them. In the realm of politics, he has presented some solutions through normative and secular methods mostly adopted from the liberal idea of democracy and has also used the references in Islam to justify and confirm his arguments.

Political development can be considered as the most important arena of competition between intellectual-political currents, and the external view of political struggles in the contemporary history of Iran can be seen by examining the history of Iranian expansionism. In the contemporary period, too, currents of thought-politics, by diversifying their view of political development, have created an atmosphere of contradiction and competition on the one hand, and interaction and confrontation on the other. One of the currents that has dealt with the issue of political development in contemporary Iran is the current of religious intellectuals. Soroush and Shabestari's religious intellectual discourse includes elements such as minority religion, religious democratic government, human rights, secularism and pluralism. In Soroush's discourse, the acceptance of epistemological pluralism and its logical consequence in social pluralism leads to the acceptance of political pluralism. In Shabestari discourse, man is considered a righteous being and the righteousness of man is placed in front of duty and metaphysics and the domination of religion over all his life. Shabestari recommends the acceptance of Western human rights by Muslims, the precondition for which is the establishment of a democratic system; In his view, in a democratic system, rights are more easily enforced than in an authoritarian system, and political and religious freedoms are better respected. In this article, with the analytical-critical approach, the theories of Soroush and Mojtahed Shabestari, the lack of philosophical depth and the structural and comprehensive approach to modernity, development and new Western civilization are discussed.

Relying on his hermeneutic and interpretive perspective, Mohammad Mojtahed Shabestari regards the Holy Quran as "prophetic words" and the Prophet's monotheistic reading of the world in the light of revelation. In this paper, we have used a library-research method within the descriptive-analytical approach to criticize his interpretive perspective to illustrate the weaknesses of this view so as to indicate the weakness of his theory of the prophetic origin of the Qur'an. In addition to the fact that his interpretive theory leads to the denial of prophethood and Islam, there are also other weaknesses in that theory. These involve ignoring the other meaning of interpretation, not paying attention to all kinds of presuppositions, not paying attention to the degrees of understanding and implications, integrating two perspectives as well as two methods which are incompatible, generalizing the doctrines of the age of modernity and philosophical hermeneutics,  confusion of part and whole, not adhering to one of his foundations, introducing a loose criterion as a criterion for the examination and evaluation of presuppositions, and ignoring the most important use of language.

One of the most important debates in the field of religious studies and understanding of religion teachings today is the ability to understand religion based on human readings and religious experience. When it comes to the human readings of religion, two points are assumed to be concurrent: first, it is possible for human beings to understand religion; It is not unique and can be read as human. This last point, the change in the structures of understanding religion, is due to the changes that human beings are facing today. Mojtahed Shabestari, a contemporary thinker, believes that, given the dramatic changes in human life today, their thinking, religion, spirituality, and faith must also undergo a fundamental change, and one must go beyond their religious tradition, ideas, or beliefs. It gained a new understanding of it until it finally came to religious experience. He believes that there are different readings on religion and that one single reading cannot be accomplished. The main purpose of this research is to explain the aforementioned claim by presenting the arguments presented and responding to them by the content analysis method of explaining the data. The findings of the study show that human readings of religion are in contrast to divine readings, and the Shabestari perspective is sometimes explicitly and sometimes slightly hidden and rooted in relativity, hermeneutics, religious experience, and humanism.

Mojtahed Shabestari as an initiator of religious intellectual’s hermeneutics has undertaken a main part in spreading such a discourse in Iran. As a result of his following postmodernist epistemology, a sort of relativism and deconstructionism appeared in his religious interpretations. The present article is to examine the claim that the religious intellectual’s hermeneutics is a philosophical discourse the method of which is not consistent with the Bible and scripture. The continuous use of new theories including hermeneutics has taken this sort of thought to dissolution and the logical and direct result of it is clear departure from holy Quran and Sunna and falling into a sort of secular discourse and hermeneutical relativism. The article will show that one can be both pluralist and protected from relativism, a position which Shabestari could not coherently adopt. In fact in his view relativism is not of a negative theme but a valuable accomplishment. This article is an attempt to criticize intellectual principles of Shabestari largely from his hermeneutical origin particularly in view of Gadamerian influence on his thought. By highlighting historical and temporal aspect of religion this religious neotheologian has confined it to the age of revelation and overlooked timeless capacities of faith. In addition he reduces revelation to the word of Prophet. The truth is that, however, one cannot undertake reinterpretation of scripture through Jacques Derrida without jeopardizing the entire reliability of its meaning

Human rights or fundamental human rights in the sense that the present century is the most fundamental issues First¡ theoretically¡ in the West and in the 1948 Universal Declaration was drafted in this field. But then the response of the different cultures and religions took And each his own views expressed in this category. In Iran¡ the ruling Shiite Islam than it took three perspectives In this study we investigated the specificity of view because we Shabestari. The main question of this research is to answer it. This is how it looked Mohammad shabestari human rights?And the assumption that this study suggests that the shabestari at modernizing the human rights.He also criticized the human rights of non-metaphysical¡ so that it knows that the application of human rights in Western Muslims must accept as realistic¡ practical and global scope.The way to do this research is to explore analytical thinking and analytical human rights shabestari right or wrong¡ it suggests the idea.

One of the areas that Mojtahed Shabestari has entered, is the argument of essential and accidential of religion or the gem and shell. He looks at this two: Once, he knows the gem of religion as religious experience and in other cases, represents the gem of religion as the by-itself purpose. These two views can be evaluated separately, but it seems, his goal to discuss the by-itself purpose is finding common aspect between the religious experiences that completely different from one another in essentiality. The contribution of the foregoing share the religious experiences with each other, for the sake of purpose. This paper aims to examine the two proposed views: First, examine the relationship between these two views, secondly, the logic of the discovery of the essences of religion analyze, as it has been posited in his opinion. It also validates the method used in this theory.

Mr. Mohammad Mojtahed Shabestari is a contemporary dissident which, based on the principles derived from hermeneutics, has analyzed various religious and social issues and he has produced a lot of works. He introduced his thought base, as well as the thought-maker of his hermeneutic system, on the twentieth-century Continental Philosophy of Germany and in its importance it has said that now the problem of the Islamic world is not resort to hermeneutical school taken from philosophical hermeneutics. However, his hermeneutic system is a collection of elements which is non-academic from various hermeneutic schools which unscientificly has been borrowed and put together from the hermeneutic schools, which are completely opposite and even contradictory in the foundations as well as in the buildings. For example, he spoke on the of anthropological and semantic principles and also the place of interpretation in understanding the meaning based on doctrines of methodic hermeneutic and methodological hermeneutic, and also he has chosen a combination of philosophical hermeneutics and methodic hermeneutics in the subject of epistemology of understanding and its process. In addition, his conception of Schleiermacher's methodological is inaccurate, and is incorrectly identified his main problem. This paper tries to illustrate and discuss these non-technical adaptations and misconceptions.