جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "سبحانی" در نشریات گروه "علوم قرآن و حدیث"

The Holy Quran divides human beings into two groups, the people of Paradise and the people of Hell, and promises to fulfill the division on the Day of Resurrection. There are disputes among theologians as to what is the truth of the reward and punishment of the Hereafter and where they come from. One of the issues in psychology is the reality and the source of human happiness and misery. However, theologians and philosophers have expressed different theories about the afterlife punishment. The present study, which is in the field of self-knowledge, was conducted by descriptive-analytical method and using theological and philosophical ideas. The purpose of the study is the ontological analysis of the truth of the afterlife punishments from the perspective of two early and contemporary Shiite figures, Mulla Sadra and Sobhani, and it seeks to answer the fundamental question: "What is the source of Heaven and Hell and the afterlife reward and punishment from the viewpoint of Mulla Sadra and Sobhani?" The research results show similarities and differences. According to similarities, the life and the Resurrection are due to the union between science, practice and the human soul in this world, and the emergence of moral characteristics in the next life makes the afterlife and eternal body. Furthermore, contrary to the belief of many sages, the afterlife punishment is the result of non-existence affairs and worldly shortcomings rooted in sensual desires, and the reward of Paradise is the result of removing them and attaining true perfection with divine teachings and good morals. The difference between the viewpoints of both thinkers about evil is based on the fact that Mulla Sadra emphasizes that evil is inherent and existential, but Sobhani considers evil as a concomitant of the existence of good

the meaning of Imamat based on Quran and traditions denotes the necessity of being followed and the right to order others to do something or stop doing something which is not proper. Some scholars and interpreters by emphasizing on the Tashri’I aspect of Imamat,believe Imamatmeans theobligatory obidience. But some others emphasize on the Takvini aspect of imamat, so they interpret imamat as a kind of interference in the hearts of people to guide them. The author, through conducting a comparative study on Imamat by emphasizing on the idea of two contemporary elites, Ayatullah Jafar Subhani, the representative of the first idea and Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Husain Tabatabaee, the representative of the second belief, concludes that the first belief is more compatible with the surface and exact wording of Quran.