جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "مجتهد شبستری" در نشریات گروه "فلسفه و کلام"

Javadi Amoli and Mujtahed Shabestari are considered to be important thinkers of political theology and among the most important sources of religious thought production who have actively participated in contemporary issues of political theology. Based on a comparative method, this article examines the opinions of these two in the most important issues of political theology to find their similarities and differences. The result is that their commonalities are attention to newly emerging political issues, relative coherence in their collection of political theology, the connection between the field of religion and the field of politics, the scientific and religious authority of imams, considering reason and revelation as parts of the same division and accepting reason's inherent validity, the fundamental importance of how to govern, the possibility of harmony between Islam and democracy, rejecting imposition and coercion, people's participation in the process of political affairs, the right to monitor the performance of rulers, non-imposition of opinion, freedom, justice, security, and ownership are different dimensions of human rights. The differences, however, are greater since they belong to two different paradigms/discourses with different presuppositions. While Javadi Amoli sincerely believes in maintaining and strengthening the political theological heritage, Shabestari considers this heritage completely useless in the contemporary era. Contrary to Shabestari, Javadi Amoli connects issues to God in a hierarchical manner and considers the intention of closeness to God necessary.

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.

One of the debates in theology, more than any other subject in the modern period, is the discussion of different readings of religion, or as Shabestari puts it, the humanistic reading of religion. The history of such debates in the Arab world goes back to Nasr Hamed Abu Zayd and then to Mr. Soroush and Mr. Shabestari in our country. The main problem of the article is to study Shabestari and his view of religion as not being revealed. His main claim is that God did not reveal any religion, because if God had revealed a religion, it should have been specified in the Qur'an, but there is no such explanation in It. In this article, after stating Shabestari's principles, we have tried to formulate his claims in a logical way and clarify the validity of his arguments and show that Shabestari's interpretation of religion is self-contradictory and his words needs to agree with the holy Quaran in any case as the word of God.

The main issue of this research is the study of the type of relativism in "cognitive theology" and its basic critique based on transcendent wisdom. For this purpose, in the first stage, the works of Mujtahid Shabestari on the subject of theology, called by him as "cognitive theology", have been studied in a descriptive and analytical method and, then, criticized according to the rules of transcendent wisdom. The findings of this study indicate that Shabestari hermeneutics, although hesitant between Schleiermacher's author-centered hermeneutics and Gadameri-centered interpreter hermeneutics, has a more inclined direction towards Gadameri's philosophical hermeneutics. Sometimes it even goes beyond this and considers meaning as a posterior thing that is made in the process of understanding, which in any case is similar to relativism. The gap between the types of relativism indicates that the gap between subject and object is the origin of the types of relativism that have arisen following the challenge of how the object and the mind relate. However, with the epistemological principles of transcendent wisdom, this gap is filled from the beginning and does not lead to relativistic devices.

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.

As commonly accepted and believed by Muslims, the noble Quran is Allah’s words (“kalāmullā”) retelling those facts Allah have created within the terminological framework of what have been revealed to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). As human knowledge (esp. philosophy of language and linguistics) was gradually taking steps in progress along with the expansion of some theoretical and practical scholarships in the contemporary Islam world, there gradually was a proliferative tendency for different views on the topic in question. The prophetic reading of world constitutes the general title of sequential writings whose attitudes recline in a distinctive way toward Quranic revelation. One the questions to which this view endeavors to respond in a distinctive way than the aforementioned one is “who is the announcer of Quran?” According to this view, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is the announcer of Quran. The aim of this article is to illustrate the arguments for the abovementioned idea brought forth by this view: For their purpose here, the authors have chosen one of the arguments entitled linguistic argument as their main objective. Therefore, this article firstly formulates the mentioned argument, and finally makes an evaluation of its linguistic major premises. Exact deliberations portray the fact that the argument is faced with severe insufficiencies to the extent that one cannot easily accept it.

The present survey attempts to analyze the pathology of religious researches from hermeneutics point of view. The method of the research is descriptive and analysis. The results of the research indicate that hermeneutics discourse of religious intellectualism is an out of religious discourse which is not relevant with the holly texts and is derived from philosophical hermeneutics and is led to ontological pluralism and consequently epistemological pluralism. The result of such attitude will conclude in secularism and relativism of philosophical hermeneutics. There is no relationship between hermeneutics discourse of religious intellectualism and religious basic resources. the article concludes that the root of intellectual theologians and their resent hermeneutics discourse is originated in Christianity and the theory of dividing religion and politics which is contrary to Islam and the belief of integration between religion and policy.