جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "religious pluralism" در نشریات گروه "علوم انسانی"

The concept of salvation is presented in different religions according to special principles. In Christianity, it is presented on the basis of Christian faith, and in Islam, it is presented within several concepts, but the most prominent of which is “najat” which is based on the faith that Islam calls for. From this view, the opinions of contemporary Arab thinkers differed toward varied religions and salvation. From this standpoint, the views of the most prominent contemporary Arab Christian and Muslim thinkers on the issue of salvation range between Inclusivism and exclusivism. Some of them adopt an Inclusivism vision and do not reject religious pluralism and believe in the possibility of salvation for followers of other religions, while others adopt an exclusive vision on the basis of which they reject the possibility of salvation for followers of other religions. Some of them do not believe in the possibility of salvation for followers of other sects that branch off from their religion. This article was conducted according to a descriptive analytical research method relying on library sources with the aim of exploring the opinions of the contemporary Iraqi thinker Dr. Abdul-Jabbar Al-Refae with a review of the opinions of some contemporary Arab thinkers regarding what was mentioned. The results indicated that he adopts an Inclusive vision in light of his belief in the breadth and universality of God’s mercy, and based on significant rational and religious evidence that proves the possibility of salvation for followers of other religions away from religious and sectarian fanaticism. He believes in the principle of pluralism of religions, so he calls for the necessity of respecting all religions and not underestimating their credos, and rejects “takfir” and doctrinal disputes that provoke hostility and hatred. However, there are others who hold an exclusive view based on their religious and sectarian fanaticism, relying only on religious evidence, some of which is shrouded in doubt in terms of historical support or whose significance does not amount to generalizing punishment to all human beings. Its implications can also be interpreted in another way such that its exclusivity at the level of salvation for followers of other religions is denied.

Seyyed Hossein Nasr is one of the prominent figures of the traditionalist movement who has played a significant role in expressing and explaining the views of this movement. The most important viewpoint of Seyyed Hossein Nasr, which has sparked many discussions, is the theory of the transcendent unity of religions. In this view, by drawing on the foundations of metaphysical wisdom and theoretical mysticism, he has concluded that all religions have a unified truth, and the differences between religions are related to external matters of religions, not the truth of religions. In this view, Nasr has given a new garment to the perspective of religious pluralism, which individuals like John Hick in the world of Christianity and Abdolkarim Soroush in the world of Islam promote. This study is written in a descriptive-critical manner, and the author, after explaining Nasr’s view, addresses its shortcomings, such as neglecting the discussion of eschatology, relativism towards religious doctrines, and its contradiction with the definitive texts of religions that consider salvation exclusive to a religion.

Religion is among the topics that are described as truth and falsehood. In order to attain eternal felicity through adopting a religion and adhering to its teachings, the discernment of true religion from false one holds great importance; Since there is nothing better than Reason, as a measurement, to select a true religion. The present study, providing a descriptive-analytical method, aims to present rational evidence for selecting and adopting a true religion. Reason does not leave humans free in adopting a religion they want; rather, it obliges them to select a religion that its origin and teachings are not in contradiction with the dictates of Reason. Likewise, denying religions, accepting any kind of religion, and considering all of them, in the present time, as true are not compatible with Reason. The true religion, therefore, must be selected among the existing religions. Judaism and Christianity, due to distortions in their holly scriptures, deviation from their originality, and some their teachings which are in contrary to Reason, not only have no rational obligation to accept, but may also be condemned by Reason. Islam is the only religion that has been affirmed by Reason and possesses the criteria for selecting the true religion.

Keith Ward tries to choose a new approach to religious pluralism called "soft and open religious pluralism." Considering the question "What are Keith Ward's elements of religious pluralism?" this paper attempts to explain how he overcame John Hick's religious pluralism and introduced his soft and open religious pluralism, as well as its logical requirements. By criticizing John Hick's extreme approach to religious pluralism, particularly its epistemic basis and unacceptable results, Ward emphasizes the possibility of divine manifestation in all religious traditions, the importance of the doctrinal dimension of religion, the avoidance of adequacy of religion, and the development of religious worldviews. He believes it is unacceptable to believe that all religions have one internal core that can be understood only by a limited number of people. According to his viewpoint, the experience of divine reality cannot be wholly explainable and comprehensible. Also, making a difference between internal and external forms of religion may lead to an exclusivist approach. Some of the more important consequences of Keith Ward's tendency to open religious pluralism are: openness to other religions, not adopting an exclusivist viewpoint, respecting religious struggles and striving to excel in one's own spirituality, fostering mutual understanding among religions, and recognizing that our understanding and commitment to our religion is insufficient.

The theory of religious pluralism is one of the latest theories that has been developed and pursued by its followers with different goals. In Tasnim commentary, this theory, which has created a lot of controversies, has been introduced in detail and criticized. The author's mastery of this theory and his presentation of a comprehensive discussion that explores various aspects of this theory and the use of rational and narrative arguments are some of the advantages of the discussion. Lack of a transparent answer to the question of salvation, which is one of the most important questions of religious pluralism, the presentation of some intra-religious topics which seem not to be dependable in response to pluralist thought, and the presentation of some Qur'anic citations to confirm the denial of pluralism without taking into consideration some other related verses are criticisms levelled against the issues discussed in this commentary. The present paper, relying on a descriptive-analytical method using library sources, critiques religious pluralism in Tasnim commentary.

Given the increase in Muslim sectarianism over the last decade or so, especially in the Middle East, one would be forgiven for asking whether the idea of Muslims transcending the historical and religious Sunni-Shi’i divides today would ever be possible (even if one is of the view that it is highly desirable).The numerous recent events of ‘sectarian’ or religiously-inspired/justified violence and ongoing repression of many Muslim communities by other Muslims (both within and across sectarian divides in many parts of the Muslim majority world), which have resulted in many lost lives, justify scepticism and lack of optimism in this respect.However, this rather grim picture ought not deter us from efforts to make the situation better, as problematic as it is. Put differently, the alternative of upholding the status quo is for many Muslims today no longer acceptable on both moral and religious/theological grounds.Part of the solution is that the intellectual and the lived reality-based arguments for transcending Muslim sectarianism are already in place in the form of what I refer to as the theory of progressive Islam.

One of the theological topics that has always been of interest to Muslim Quran scholars and has been specially analyzed and studied in recent years is "pluralism" or "religious pluralism". Some contemporary religious modernists, such as Abdul Karim Soroush, have cited some verses of the Holy Qur'an in which the straight path is mentioned in indefinite form, and have considered it as a reason for the multiplicity of the straight path and have claimed religious pluralism. Among the verses that have been cited are: “Indeed, you are on a straight path” (Zukhruf / 43), ”on a straight path” (Yasin / 4), “and guided him to a straight path” (Fath / 2), “and guides you to a straight path” (Nahl / 121) which in the first three verses, guidance on the straight path, is related to the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and in the fourth verse, is related to the prophet Ibrahim (AS).The approach of the present article, which is organized by descriptive-analytical method, using the opinions of Quranic commentators and thinkers, especially Allameh Tabatabai, considers the mentioned verses as a reason for regarding, valuing and respecting to the straight path and rejects the citation of these verses on religious pluralism. The path to happiness and the religion of truth is considered to be the religion of Islam, which solely contains the Straight Path.

The influence of the political power factor on the strength and weakness of religious pluralism discourse in the thoughts of Muslim Sufis is a topic that this article examines its quantity and quality in the historical course of Sufism until the end of the seventh century (with an emphasis on the Mongol era). The studies showed that the stability and hegemony of religious exclusivism in Iranian society until the 7th century was the result of the link between the religious Legislators and political power; The removal of religious jurists (Al-fuqahāʾ) from political power has caused the weakness of jurisprudence-oriented discourses and the growth of Sufism, and as a result, the strengthening of the religious pluralism discourse in Sufi opinions. An example of the validity of this claim is the (non-religious and then religious) rule of the Mongols in Iran, which is examined in this research.

Some archaeologists claim that Islam is a monopolistic religion, but in ancient Iran, especially the last dynasty of Iran, the Sassanid era, there was freedom and tolerance in the face of opposing religious beliefs. The purpose of this study is to investigate the question: did religious pluralism really exist in Sassanid Iran and, if any, what was their pluralism in that period? The present study is a descriptive-analytical method with interdisciplinary (historical-theological) nature and the research findings show that in the structure of the Sassanid government, especially the clergy in this era due to the domination of Zoroastrian religion and their exclusivism, there not only may be found any case for belief in religious pluralism meant by epistemological or functional pluralism or salvation, but they did not even believe in or adhere to any form of religious behavioral pluralism, and they imposed various social and religious strictures on the followers of other religions.

Religious pluralism is a good alternative to the two approaches of religious exclusivism and inclusiveness. The greater conformity of religious pluralism to the requirements of the New World has made it more attractive. But this approach is unacceptable in terms of principles, principles and especially its results. Among the important reasons for not accepting religious pluralism, in terms of its results, the following can be mentioned: 1. It ignores the realities of different religions; 2. Religious pluralism ignores important differences within religious traditions; 3. Iqbal leads to the futility of the question of religious legitimacy and human endeavor to save; 4. The acceptance of religious pluralism leads to epistemological relativism and the meaninglessness of religious truthseeking; 5. Attachment to religious pluralism makes the meaning of revelation meaningless and abolishes the philosophy of prophecy; 6. Belief in this approach leads to the futility of the difference between imitative and research religiosity; 7. The devaluation of religiosity and religious beliefs is one of the results of welcoming religious pluralism; 8. Accepting it also violates the divine attributes and insults the divine dignity of God; 9. Success in it leads to the growth of religious immorality, and 10. Therefore, it destroys the religious identity of believers. Considering the unacceptable problems of religious pluralism, and the ineffectiveness of the two previous approaches, the proposal of this research is to reflect on the skeptical approach to the issue of legitimacy and salvation; This means that there are two gifts of legitimacy and salvation to varying degrees of longitudinal skepticism and hierarchy in all religions; However, the ultimate salvation depends on the efforts of the believers themselves.

There are three views to revelation in Christianity. According to propositional revelation, the salvation of humanity can be achieved only through the clear and enlightening words of the Bible. In the experimental revelation, the emphasis is on the divine unveiling and the personal relationship between God and human. The third approach introduces revelation as a historical incident. Christian thinkers have provided various opinions for or against these three approaches. One of these figures is Carl Rahner, a contemporary Christian theologian, who has offered concepts similar to these three approaches. In his conceptualization, he deems these three types of revelation as levels of salvations arranged vertically, moving from the experimental revelation/universal salvation of all humans through propositional revelation to the Christianity-specific salvation. From Rahner’s viewpoint, the transcendent revelation is the precondition for understanding the universe, which is accessible due to the infusion of grace and metaphysical existence. The universal categorical revelation can be achieved through God’s unveiling in history, while the specific categorical revelation can be attained through Jesus. All in all, from the viewpoint of Rahner, revelation entails all three experimental, historical, and propositional essences but at different levels. Rahner’s perception of revelation and salvation is to some extent close to those of thinkers such as Hans Küng, John Hick, Karl Barth, and Friedrich Schleiermacher, with different levels of adherence to the church teachings as the differentiating factor. Deriving from his perception of revelation, Rahner’s theory of “anonymous Christians” deems salvation possible for the non-Christians, and so allows for religious inclusivity. However, he believes that achieving absolute salvation is possible only through conscious adoption of Christianity.

Throughout history, human beings have been confronted with various divine and non-divine religions, and today, due to the wide range of connections, this diversity of religions has received more attention. There are different approaches to the plurality of religions, one of which is pluralism. The present study examines and critiques religious pluralism from the perspective of Mohammad Shahrour; Religious pluralism means that the great religions of the world constitute changing perceptions and reactions of the divine truth. By referring to Shahrour's writings, his views and arguments in the discussion of religious pluralism are explained and evaluated on the basis of Islamic doctrinal principles. Their sentence is quoting verses from the Quran. Shahrour considers Islam as an innate religion and considers all human beings (including the followers of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and others) as Muslims. He introduces the pillars for Islam, adherence to which leads to entering the circle of Islam and enjoying Islamic rights; however, by contemplating the verses of the Qur'an and referring to their interpretation, his misunderstanding of the verses is clarified and the invalidity of his view is proved.

The issue of the present article is the equality of hereditary choice, religious knowledge and the reasons derived from religious texts. The purpose of this study is to show that hereditary choice, religious knowledge and reasons for religions are not equal. The method used is by way of description and analysis. The findings, the change of extension in the family and ethnic religion, reject the equality of religions. The cases of knowledge derived from the texts of religions are different and inconsistent. As scholars of different religions do not agree with each other's knowledge. Some religions offer incompatible concepts and cognitions from within. The reasons for religions are no longer valid with other scholars. Islam has considered the knowledge of certainty and logical reasons along with the study of various sayings as the criterion for choosing a religion as has viewed the compatibility of concepts within religion a prerequisite for the legitimacy of religious teachings. Hence, the religion of Islam, by presenting compatible cognitions and concepts, rejects external reasons and the astonishing expansion of religious equality.

Religious pluralism is a theory that seeks to interpret and explain the plurality and diversity of different religions. Pluralists believe that legitimacy, and consequently salvation, is not limited to one religion, rather, all religions may have legitimacy and save their followers. One of the sources they have cited to prove their claim is the some verses of the Holy Qur'an. They are verses that consider the truth of religion as submission to God, introduce the faith and righteous deeds as the cause of salvation, point to the existence of different laws for different nations, and seem to have somehow accepted their existence or legitimacy. In this study, with a descriptive-analytical method and according to the general rules of interpretation of texts, the weakness of the citation of pluralists and the lack of implication of these verses on their claim have been explained. These rules include paying attention to the continuity and semantic connection of the verses of the Holy Quran with each other, paying attention to their status, paying attention to the authentic narrations in the commentary, and not objecting to the interpretation of the text with definite rational principles.

In the 1990s, the Iranian intellectual community faced a trend of religious modernization. This new spirit flowed in the academic and seminary community, and the market for scientific debate and critique flourished. From this point of view, the age of righteousness has replaced the age of duty, and as a result, they demanded a new interpretation of religious texts and task-oriented jurisprudence. The common denominator of this movement is that pure understanding is not possible, and any understanding is preceded by pre-understandings. For this reason, this movement has been inspired by hermeneutic theories that seek to understand the nature and mechanism of understanding. The book under review examines the influence of Heidegger and Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics on the religious modernization movement. In this article, I describe, analyze and evaluate the main claims of the book. It seems that Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics is not a good model for analyzing the current of religious modernism, and although they have similarities, it is in some ways in conflict with the foundations of this movement.

One of the most important duties of commentators is to provide an interpretation of the Qur'an in every era that, while not deviating from the original Islamic path, can offer persuasion to the contemporary world and effective preaching in the international community. In this regard and with the same purpose, a book entitled “The Study Quran” has been compiled in English in the West based on the mystical tendency and the approximation of religions and denominations. The Persian translation of the first volume is entitled “Contemporary Interpretation of the Holy Quran”. Due to being a recent work and sensitivity of the subject, the current article is one of the first studies that has dealt with its methodology and critique with a descriptive-analytical method focused on the study of text-based contemporary interpretation. The results of the present study indicate that the mentioned work did not use a single and steady interpretive method throughout the text; There is also an immethodical use of narrations and in some parts of the text, there is a disregard for Shiite principles. The present research, rejecting most of the claims of the editor-in-chief in the introduction of the book, enumerated the weaknesses for “The Study Quran”; of them,: the authors’ incompetence for ijtihad in selecting and writing the commentary is unknown, the commentary method is not clear, the narrations of the Ahl al-Bayt are ignored and religious pluralism is tolerated; Also, the title “Contemporary Interpretation” was not recognized as a suitable title due to ambiguity in regarding interpretation and the distance between the text and the contemporary adjective.

At some point in history, Indonesia has faced a crisis of violent clashes between followers of different religions and ethnicities, sometimes leading to the death and displacement of significant numbers of citizens. As one of Indonesia's leading cultural elite and thinkers Dr. Nurcholish Madjid has tried to find a way out of this crisis.This article intends to study and analyze his intellectual experience on religious pluralism with a library and descriptive-analytical method to review his plan, which has been formed by using Islamic principles as well as modern values, and its goal is to end the conflict and realization of peaceful coexistence in Indonesia.This research first examines the historical context of the confrontation and challenge between the followers of religions and sects, especially Muslims and Christians, then, while stating the purpose of Nurcholish Madjid from the religious pluralism idea, deals with the main principles and components of this plan and in the end will analyze and critique these views.

Focusing on the will to power and reach the superman, Nietzsche's moral thought despises any system based on human humiliation, and introduces Christianity for promoting the morality of slavery, as the morality of the weak, which its emphasis on the original sin and inherent pollution of man kills the spirit of will and power and self-esteem in people. Applying a phenomenological method, this research has tried to find the Islamic teachings which drew Nietzsche's attention and to explore the consistency of his intellectual system with those teachings. According to him, Islam is a religion that recognizes the passion, will, selectivity, and authenticity of man and has an honest understanding of human nature, and a positive and realistic view of the world that is in line with Nietzsche's philosophy and especially the idea of ​​the will to power. Moreover, the theory of perspectivism has contributed to a pluralistic understanding of religions, and the adaptation of some Islamic teachings to parts of his philosophical apparatus has provided him with a positive view of Islam. Paying attention to the realm of the heart and emotion in the mystical wisdom of Islam has also been consistent with its principles in the critique of modern reason.

David Basinger is among philosophers who defend religious exclusivism. He tries in his various writings to provide a new explanation for supporting this approach. Although he is supposedly a religious exclusivist, his different attitude towards religious diversity and his acceptance of some of the principles of religious pluralism have put his explanation under critics. This research tries to explain Basinger’s theory, criticize its foundations, and examine whether it is a successful approach to defend religious exclusivism. The study shows that some of the bases accepted by him are inclined to religious pluralism, including lacking objective criteria for comparative evaluation of religions, substitution the explanatory role of religious propositions for the description of reality, and considering the followers of religions equal in accessing the sources of knowledge.

This writing is going to answer this question whether achieving prosperity and salvation in eternal world from the viewpoint of the Holy Quran is restricted to faithfulness and belief in the religion of truth? In other words, those who will prosper and rescue from adversity and punishment, are only among followers of the religion of truth or there is a possibility for the false claimants who are not believed in the religion of truth and have chosen the void path, to be rescued and prospered? Which verses of the Holy Quran indicate this possibility or lack of it, and in case of rescuing this group of people, which conditions have stated for them?   In order to answer these questions, after overviewing the history of this topic, among the followers of religions, the terms “unbelief” and “unbeliever” are examined in terminology of the Holy Quran and from the viewpoints of religious jurisprudents; then the statements of proponents and opponents are studied and their Quranic reasons are examined, and at the end dividing  the false claimants to three groups: “antagonist”, “culprit” and “defaulter”, the last group believably are known as those who will rescue.