جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « آیت الله مصباح » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

Following the famous thinkers, Ayatollah Misbah considers the ethics to include moral education, but in his moral philosophy, he distinguishes between moral education and ethics. In his philosophy of ethics, he considers faith in God and belief in the resurrection to be the moral criterion, while he holds that the generosity of non-Muslims such as Hātam al-Ṭāʾī is valuable and will lead to a reduction in punishment. Considering that moral standard refers to the conditions necessary to reach the ultimate goal of morality, the generosity of Hātam al-Ṭāʾī as a non-believer should not have moral qualification and value; so what is the reason for reducing his punishment and what value can be considered for his generosity? With a new interpretation of Ayatollah Misbah's point of view in answering these questions, this research uses the distinction between ethics and moral education that are different at least in their aim, method, nature and criterion. Based on this distinction, the actions of infidels fails to qualify moral standards and lack moral value, while some of their actions may satisfy the standards and enjoy values of moral education. Ayatollah Misbah's view on moral education needs to be completed, and this article considers the criterion and standard of moral education as being the means for attaining nearness to God, and explains the goal of moral education in a way that the generosity of those like Hātam al-Ṭāʾī can enjoy the standard and value of moral education due to the goodness of the action.

One of the criteria that has been used for distinguishing and compiling sciences since long ago is the criterion of “essential accident”. By having this criterion, scientists will be able to put together propositions specific to a certain subject correctly and in a logical order, and draw a specific boundary for their desired science. However, Ayatollah Mesbah introduces problems to this criterion, which makes this criterion invalid in the Philosophy. This article tries to explain with a descriptive-analytical method and according to the available references, first explain a summary of the criterion of “essential accident”, then discuss Ayatollah Mesbah's problems with this criterion in compiling the Philosophy.       The “essential accident” nature of the predicate for the subject depends on the achievement of two major conditions, namely "inherence" and "priority", and the problems of Ayatollah Mesbah are also related to these two; However, it is possible to answer these problems by paying attention to the problem of the participation of term and proof and also comparing the conditions of philosophical secondary intelligibles to the predicates of the subject the Philosophy.

One of the most important human concerns is how to have a clean, peaceful, and free life with the least suffering and hardship and eternal life. This research, with the analytical method and document study, seeks to answer the question, "What does Hayate Taybeh mean from viewpoint of Ayatollah Tabatabai and Ayatollah Misbah, and what are the ways to reach it?" The findings of the research shows that Allameh's perspective is a good life in this world and a new life that is specific to believing people with righteous deeds. But according to Ayatollah Misbah, a good soul with a good life has degrees that if someone becomes a real human being and reaches a stage higher than reasonable life, he will have a good life. According to Alameh, one of the factors for a person to achieve a good life is his worship and servitude, which originates from his self-knowledge, but in addition to self-knowledge, Ayatollah Misbah also emphasizes the key role of human desire and natural tendency and love and attraction to God. Also, leaving the fleeting pleasures of the world and the role of servitude and accepting the authority of the Shia Imams and faith combined with righteous deeds are considered by both of them to be effective in attaining a virtuous life. From the point of view of Ayatollah Misbah, what is most desirable is "intrinsic value" which is an example of "human perfection" and the example of human perfection is "closeness to God" which is the peak of human perfection and the main philosophy of human creation.

One of the most important issues of the Islamic government is the role of the people in the government. Using a descriptive-analytical method, expressing monotheism and its levels based on its fundamental status in Islam, this paper seeks to study the relationship between believing in monotheism and political participation from the perspective of Imam Khamenei and Ayatollah Mesbah. Considering the common opinion of these two thinkers in the belief in monotheism and its levels, the findings show that the people have no role in the political legitimacy of the Islamic government, while they can only pave the way for the realization of the Islamic government. Regarding political participation, the right to determine the system and its structure, the appointment of the ruler and agents, the appointment of the legislator, the law enforcer and the overseer of the law, these two thinkers consider these matters to belong to God Almighty and believe that others have the right to do such things only with God's permission.

In the sphere of anthropology, there are two major approaches: philosophical anthropology and empirical anthropology. This study seeks to compare the views of two contemporary anthropologists representing those approaches regarding human essentials and investigate the consequences of their basic common points and differences in humanities. Therefore, we consider the views presented by Ayatollah Muhammad Taqi Mesbah on the basis of Islamic sources and transcendental philosophy, and among the humanist psychologists, Abraham Harold Maslow’s views on the basis of romantic philosophy, existentialist philosophy and empiricism. This study, in the concluding section, considers the limited and formal common points and many deeply-rooted differences between those two thinkers regarding those fundamental issues. This is in a way that the aforementioned differences have caused think differently regarding the description of human phenomena, explanation of human relations, determining the research issues and subject matters, and choosing the tools and sources of recognition; they even have contradicting judgments on determining behavioral norms as well as in valuing, policy-making, and recommending human behaviors and issues.

Analysis and investigation of secondary intelligibles has been focus of attention among philosophers since long ago. Epistemology of philosophical concepts deals with an investigation of these concepts, and in the present article, we have explored the epistemology of philosophical concepts in the minds of Allama Tabataba’i and Ayatollah Mesbah. In this study, it is clarified that Allama Tabataba’i was the first philosopher who put forward the mode of abstraction of the philosophical concepts including the concept of existence and non-existence. He believes that philosophical concepts are abstracted by using intuitive knowledge. Ayatollah Mesbah, unlike Allama, does not consider intuitive knowledge and internal experience as sufficient for abstraction of each of the primary philosophical concepts; rather, he maintains in addition to that, they must be compared with one another, and one must regard a certain relation among them. In his view, Allama’s method in abstracting philosophical concepts cannot be generalized

There are different approaches in the course of the Islamization of sciences. Some scholars have adopted maximal, some minimal, and some moderate approaches. Some approaches demand the refinement of existing sciences and the confirmation of their identities. Other approaches demand the formation of new sciences. The formation approach in religious science considers revealed doctrines and metaphysical backings as primary in the process of religious knowledge production, or devote parallel attention to different methods in the acquisition of knowledge. In the course of forming new disciplines of knowledge, serious consideration of the Islamic worldview and modifying it accordingly is necessary.      Furthermore, the new knowledge is expected to enjoy a variety of methods and references. The erudite criticism of the existing sciences and their development through academic method, known as the formation approach, are demanded by the production of new religious knowledge. The esteemed professors Javadi Amoli and Misbah Yazdi have adopted the formation approach and meta-fundamentalism in the course of the interpretation of religious knowledge.

The discussion of man as one of the three important pivots of philosophy besides God and the world has always been considered in the world’s philosophical schools. Also, since ancient times, one of the most important questions about man concerns the nature and quiddity of man. Ayatollah Misbah believes that in addition to the material dimension, man has a spiritual dimension, which is the reality and the truth of man, of course. He believes that humans have a common nature and quiddity both in the sphere of desire and attitude and in awareness and cognition. However, Jean-Paul Sartre, the French philosopher, believes that humans have no common nature. Man’s quiddity is not predetermined, and he is free because he has no a priori nature and definition; man is equal to freedom. This paper comparatively examines the different views of these two philosophers on the nature of man.

"Fitra" or innate nature is an existential issue and a part of man's nature which is related to man's incorporeal or spiritual dimension. There is no disagreement among Islamic thinkers over the existence of the divine Fitra which is a ground for innate desire for seeking and knowing God. It seems that the difference lies in ways and methods to prove Fitra, the characteristics of innate affairs and its relation to religion. Hence, there are diverse and somewhat different views in their works. Using a descriptive-analytical method and studying the views of contemporary Islamic scholars which are derived from the Qur'an and the divine tradition, this paper seeks to prove the existence of "Fitra" and its position. The research findings show that Islamic scholars have proposed rational and mystical intuition, historical and experimental evidences, and rational and narrative arguments to prove the existence of "Fitra" in human beings. The most important evidence in this regard is rational reasoning, and the other arguments are regarded as supporting evidence.

Investigating, correcting and writing additional notes in the six volumes of the great book Behar al- Anvar (54-59) as well as additional notes in Maani al-Akhbar are among the first works of Professor Allameh Mohammad Taqi Misbah which include many points about Rijal and Fiqh al-Hadith. Using the analytical-descriptive method, this paper has examined some of the efforts of Professor Misbah in understanding the hadiths’ documents and achieved the following Some of hadiths’ documents in these books have had alterations in sense, omissions and additions, which Allameh has mentioned and tried to correct. Also, sometimes there has been a need to differentiate between hadiths with ambiguous words and unity of disputed words. The aforementioned titles are recognized, or their unity is emphasized. Moreover, many documents have been introduced, and their authenticity, weakness or anonymity, transmission or connection are mentioned with reasons, and some problems and shortcomings of the documents have been resolved.

"Freedom" and its boundaries have long been considered by humans. As a limiting factor for human’s freedom, "responsibility" has also been discussed by philosophers of ethics. Ayatollah Misbah and Jean-Paul Sartre are among the philosophers who have focused on these two issues. Since one of these two philosophers is a Muslim and monotheist, and the other one belongs to the atheistic school of Existentialism, they naturally have many disputes and disagreements about man’s "freedom" and "responsibility". Sartre considers man as equal to freedom, and argues that the only state in which man is not free is when he cannot be free. He also believes in a global responsibility for man. On the other hand, Ayatollah Misbah emphasizes on human’s freedom and believes in a variety of responsibilities for human. Given the great difference between the views of these two philosophers, the present paper examines their views in a comparative way.

The relationship between natural sciences and religion is one of the most important issues that has been raised in recent years with the rise of the discussion of "religious science and the Islamization of sciences". Using the descriptive-analytical method, the present paper analyzes this issue from the viewpoint of Ayatollah Misbah. After examining two general views on the relationship between natural sciences and religion, this paper explains the criteria for the religiousness of science, and in the most important part, through the explanations presented in the paper, it comes to the conclusion that there is not any serious incompatibility between natural sciences and religion, rather there is a considerable mutual cooperation between the natural sciences and religion. Issuance of a decree for scientific subjects, extension of the circle of empirical knowledge, confirmation of science, addition of richness to empirical issues and giving direction to the use of science are some examples of the contribution of religion to science. Identifying the subject matter and providing new grounds for religious analysis, determining the details of religious education, such as the expressing of conditions and obstacles, proving some religious teachings, and leading to a better understanding of religious issues can be considered as the helps of religion to science.

The present article deals with one of the important philosophical discussions on “right”; that is the question of whether “right” in the usage of “having right” is a real entity or a conventional one. For example, when we say “God has the right to create” or “man has the right of living”, is this right, disregarding the making of the Maker, real in itself or a conventional one? If “right” is an objective reality, then all “rights” are among objective are discoverable realities,, and one must refer to objective realities to find out about them. Otherwise, the concept of “right” is among conventional affairs, does not show any reality and, in that case, all “rights” depend on the subjective consideration of those who create such conventions. Since Ayatolah Mesbah is among prominent and authoritative experts in human sciences, his view on the issue of “right” is an influential one. The present article attempts to investigate his view in this regard and is seeking to explain the claim that based on the foundations of Ayatollah Mesbah’s ideas, as well as various meanings of the word “conventional”, “right” is not merely of a conventional nature; rather, one may consider a non-conventional nature for it as well.

In the anthropology sphere, two major approaches are pursued: “philosophical anthropology” and “empirical anthropology”. The present study aims at comparing the ideas of two contemporary anthropologists as the representatives of these two approaches in regard with human’s innate features, investigating the effects of their basic commonalities and differences. Accordingly, the views of Ayatollah Muhammad Taqi Mesbah, among Muslims philosophers, based on Islamic sources and transcendental theosophy, and the views of Abraham Harold Maslow, among humanist psychologists, based on romantic philosophy, existentialism and empiricism were considered. In the result section, the present research has found limited and apparent commonalities as well as many basic differences between these two thinkers regarding the abovementioned issues, in a way that the differences has caused them to think differently in describing humane phenomena, explaining their relations, specifying the subjects and issues of research, and choosing tools and sources of recognition. Besides, they have different judgments in ordering, specifying behavioral norms, values, policies, and advising humane behaviors and issues.

The basic principles of interpretation is one of the most effective factors of interpreter’s endeavor of interpretation and has a unique role in the correct understanding of the meaning of Qur’an verses which is intended by God. One of the ways of recognizing the basic principles of Qur’anic interpretation is referring to the introduction or the text of Qur’an interpretations which deals with the fundamental aspects of speech or which is used as an endeavor of interpretation. In ‘’The thematic Interpretation of Quranic Knowledge’’ by Allamah Misbah and in his other works, he refers to some basic principles and elaborates on their effect on understanding the Qur’an. The author, reviewing these works, brings out and analyzes these basic principles. Some of these principles are: the Divinity of the Qur’anic words, the rationality of Qur’anic language, the possibility of understanding the Qur’an, the difference between interpretation and Qur’an commentation, the truthfulness of verses, purposefulness, immunity from distortion, inimitability with regard to harmony and lack of discrepancy, universality and eternity, and comprehensiveness of the explanation of verses about the guidance of man.

The possibility and extent of having rational knowledge of God, proving the existence of God and presenting evidence about divine unity are among the important subjects of theology. Using a descriptive-analytical approach, this paper aims at reviewing and explaining Ayatollah Mesbah’s views about the mentioned issues in Quranic teachings. According to the view of Ayatollah Mesbah, having rational knowledge of God is possible and man can, within the limits of his comprehension, have knowledge of the Divine attributes which are referred to in Quranic verses and the Infallibles’ words. The Qur’an regards that the very idea of God’s existence requires no evidence, and does not consider it as a problem. However, there is an implicit argument in the Qur’an for God’s existence. The Quran repeatedly presents arguments for the unity of God, such as the argument in verse 22 of “Prophets” chapter. This argument bears no relation to the argument called “prohibition” and then it will be possible to prove the unity of God by preserving the stability of today's the world.

Although there is no disagreement on the desirability of perfection, there are disagreements – both in practice and in theory – as to the notion of perfection itself. Most of these disagreements are rooted in the bases of discussion on human’s ultimate perfection. This disagreement on bases of ultimate perfection has led to the emergence of various ethical schools. Among the most important of these bases are the epistemological bases. In the present article, we deal with the discussion on epistemological bases of perfection in Ayatollah Mesbah’s view based on which knowledge is a possible and even a realized affair and can be proved with a certain explanation. Besides, the devices for knowledge are not restricted to reason and senses; rather, revelation and intuition are among the main devices of human knowledge. In addition, according to Ayatollah Mesbah’s view, there is a necessary relationship between action and the goal of morality.

In recent decades, liberalism has faced a barrage of criticism directed to it by socialists in western world and Muslim thinkers in East. The present paper studies and compares the normative state of the aforementioned critics, which is contrary to the moral situation in liberal societies. To this end, Alasdair Macintyre is selected as the representative of socialism and Ayatollah Misbah Yazdi as the representative of Islamic thought. The result of the comparison between the view of each of these two thinkers shows that both of them criticize the liberal extreme individualism and ego-centrism in relation to morality as reflected by the negative aspect of their thoughts. However, the positive aspect of their views or their alternatives for this moral system is different. Macintyre supports socio-centrism in ethics and defines social life as something which has value in itself which gives form to morality, but Ayatollah Misbah Yazdi defines revelation and, in some cases intellect as the source of moral standards and rejects the idea that society possesses value in itself and holds that it is a means for meeting material and spiritual needs. Both thinkers seem to agree that felicity is the final end of morality and support state's participation in preserving morality.