جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "knowledge of god" در نشریات گروه "فلسفه و کلام"

One of Avicenna's renowned intuitive arguments that emphasizes the individuality or distinct existence of the soul is the thought experiment of the 'flying' or 'suspended' man. This argument takes various forms in Avicenna’s works. The central concept across all versions is the imperative nature of cessation or detachment from the soul's faculties to attain self-awareness and confirm the inniyyah (particular existence) of the self. In other words, a focus on particular existence is only achievable through detachment from both external and internal faculties. This detachment unfolds in three stages: withdrawal of attention from the external world, turning attention inward to the internal sphere, and ultimately confirming the Inniyyah, representing the deepest layer of the self in Avicenna’s perspective. Avicenna employs the same approach in his treatise Hayy Ibn Yaqzan, framing it as a journey to acquire knowledge about God. In this treatise, we witness the rational soul's journey, guided by the active intellect, towards higher principles. This journey is predicated on the detachment from faculties. Avicenna consistently adopts this approach in the pursuit of self-awareness and knowledge of God. This methodology is rooted in the interference of the soul's faculties in its path and the necessity of detachment from these faculties for the fulfillment and completion of this journey. The rationale behind this lies in Avicenna's distinctive perspective on the faculties and their relationship to the soul.

The theory of mental existence has been seriously discussed in Islamic philosophy and theology since the time of Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī. Meanwhile, some philosophers have proved this theory and others have denied it. Mir Qavam al-Din is one of the philosophers who denied the theory of mental existence. This philosopher is influenced by his teacher Mulla Rajabali Tabrizi in denying the existence of the mind, and as Tabrizi connects the theory of mental existence with soul, knowledge and perception, Mir Qavam al-Din also pays attention to these axes like his teacher. The main issue in this article is to examine the evidence of the denial of mental existence by Mir Qavam al-Din and its result with the subject of knowledge and perception. The discussion method in this article is the descriptive-analytical method and the library data collection method. The brief conclusion reached by the article is that Mir Qavam al-Din by denying mental existence, cannot give an adequate answer to Ḥaqīqī propositions, and Mir Qavam al-Din Rāzī's theory about the mental existence should be interpreted in the light of Aristotle's words, although he presented A revised theory of selfconcern is unsuccessful except as a way of perceiving things.

Spinoza and Mulla Sadra, in spite of having different philosophical principles, paid special attention to the problem of immediate knowledge of God. A philosophical dialogue between them can be held, if the two following conditions are satisfied. First, the ontological features of the object of that knowledge -that play the essential role in immediate knowledge- should be identified. In this regard, infinity in Spinoza’s philosophy and lacking quiddity and being superior to the perfection in Mulla Sadra’s philosophy can be cited. Secondly, the definition of the immediate knowledge and its main feature that is relevant to the object of that knowledge should be surveyed. On one hand, Spinoza points out that the truth of this kind of knowledge and complete correspondence between that knowledge and its object are its main characteristics. On the other hand, Mulla Sadra stresses that such knowledge is confined to the existential degree of the knower. The comparison shows that Spinoza, in common with Mulla Sadra, asserts that the immediate knowledge is the most perfect one which the most perfect existent is its object. Nonetheless, the breadth and the narrowness of the meaning of the medium, along with inconsistency in Spinoza’s view and consistency in Mulla Sadra’s position on the immediate perfect knowledge of God are the matters that distinguishes Spinoza’s views from those of Mulla Sadra’s.

One of the traditional theistic beliefs is the belief in God’s absolute attributes. One of these absolute attributes is “Omniscience”. But there are some challenges concerning this attribute and one of them addresses indexical propositions. Among all kinds of indexicals de presenti -propositions that inform about present time, the de se propositions are considered by philosophers. Philosophers who criticize Omniscience use these propositions in different ways. In this article, these challenges and responses to them will be scrutinized.De presenti propositions are troublesome for traditional theism because it seems that the knowledge of different present moments causes a change in God and this contradicts God’s immutability. For example, if God knows that “it is 9 a.m. now”, then He should know “it is 10 a.m. now” an hour later. So, His knowledge changes from time to time which means God Himself changes.There are some responses to this problem:1- To change de presenti propositions to non-indexical ones. For example, the audiences of The Proclamation of Constitutional Monarchy of Iran could say: “Today, the Proclamation of Constitutional Monarchy was declared” or say: “The Proclamation of Constitutional Monarchy is declared on August 5, 1906”. Therefore, the knowledge of such propositions is fixed through time.2- To claim that God is timeless. That is, God is outside the boundaries of time and His knowledge of different moments, unlike human beings, is immutable.3- Final solution: to modify the interpretation of the concept of God. Theologians traditionally have presupposed that any kind of change in an absolutely perfect being brings it down from its absolute perfection. But this is not so clear. It can be shown that some changes in God, including changes in His knowledge of different moments, do not affect His perfection.Also, knowledge of de se propositions like “I’m in the hospital”, is challenging for God being Omniscient because only the person who utters such propositions, not God, can know them.There are some responses to this problem:1- To distinguish between the content of a proposition and the proposition itself. Although “I’m in the hospital” can only be explained by the patient himself, it indicates a situation in the world, that is, that person X is in the hospital, which can also be explained by other people. Although God's knowledge does not belong to the de se propositions themselves, it belongs to the content of such propositions,2- Theists can claim that knowledge does not belong to propositions themselves, but belongs to their truth. In such a case, the Omniscient can know “I’m in the hospital” is true.3- Final solution: to modify the interpretation of the concept of God. According to this solution, theists can consider what atheists put forward against Omniscience not as a denial of the existence of God, but as an illumination of the concept of God, and by accepting it, restrict the extension of the absolute knowledge of God.In this article, we first try to show that some of the objections against solutions for the problem of indexicals could be avoided. So, responses like God’s timelessness or distinction between a proposition and its content can overcome the problem. At the same time, the final solution in each part, which is to modify the interpretation of the concept of God, is a way for those who think other responses do not work.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the type and quality of understanding of God in elementary and preschool children. A review of the research background showed that so far little research has been done in this field in Iran. To achieve this goal, qualitative research with an integrated approach was used. The target population of this study was all primary and preschool male students in Chadegan city and the sample size was 42 people from this population who were selected by purposive sampling method. Qualitative data collection methods included interviewing the children, interviewing experienced teachers, and analyzing the children's drawings. The content analysis method was used to analyze the data. The results show that children have different knowledge of God according to the stages of Piaget's cognitive development and according to the characteristics of each stage. To have a comprehensive understanding of children's knowledge of God, topics such as the prophets, the Qur'an, prayers, and a large number of issues related to God have also been investigated. Findings indicate that children first get familiar with concepts that have objective and tangible examples. As their minds grow and become more powerful they know and understand more abstract concepts. Other religious concepts, such as the concepts of God, resurrection, prophet, prayer, Hajj, prayer, and miracle, like other concepts, follow the general rule of formation of concepts in the child's mind. Having this point in mind, we must adjust religious education, like other education, in accordance with their mental capacities.

The epistemological explanation of the knowledge of God is certainly one of the most important and controversial in the philosophy of religion. One of the theories presented is primordial nature theology. The Imams (as) in their hadith family have largely spoken on the knowledge of God by primordial nature. The innate knowledge of God in the expression of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) is such that God has placed His knowledge in the institution of all human beings and they have no involvement in obtaining this knowledge. In addition, a large group of verses and hadiths have made statements about monotheism that are based solely on narrated sources. The purpose of this research and its innovation is to examine the epistemological validity of propositions related to the knowledge of God based on the Qur'an and the traditions of the Ahl al-Bayt. Accordingly, among the theories of justification, the selected theory of this study is based on the moderate fundamentalism. The method of this article, in terms of theological propositions, is the method of library study (study of documents) and the descriptive-analytical method when the epistemological justification is considered.

The subject of philosophy is absolute existence, which encompasses other levels, from the Supreme Being to the last levels of existence.The center of existence and the series of beings, which is often interpreted as obligatory, is known in the philosophy of illumination as the "Noor al_Anwar". Suhrawardi in his enlightenment system, after proving "Noor al-Anwar" and his unity, negates the superfluous attributes of that field. He has also offered a novel view of his science and action.Although Mulla Sadra considers his «Gotham sediqin» on the obligatory proof to be close to Suhrawardichr('39')s argument, but considering the validity of existence in Suhrawardichr('39')s philosophy, he has considered Ibn Kamunachr('39')s doubt on his method of obligatory proof.Regarding science and other attributes of God, he has either criticized Suhrawardichr('39')s speech or has adopted different opinions with him in some details. In the present article, while expressing Suhrawardichr('39')s views on this subject, Mulla Sadrachr('39')s differences and criticisms against him have been discussed.

 One of the important concerns of Islamic thinkers throughout history has been the correct knowledge of God Almighty. Mirza Mehdi Isfahani, by emphasizing verses and narrations, seeks to express a special method for knowing God Almighty, which is different from the method of philosophers and mystics. In the present study, the author evaluates Mirza Mehdi Isfahani's theory on the issue of knowing God Almighty. By referring to the works of Mirza Mehdi Isfahani and the commentators of his views, it becomes clear that according to Mirza Mehdi Isfahani, philosophical arguments not only do not lead us to God Almighty but are a veil for the knowledge of God Almighty and this knowledge stops us in recognizing mental concepts. According to Mirza Mehdi, the knowledge of the divine essence can be obtained only by God Almighty and with innate knowledge. Mirza Mehdi states that in the matter of knowing God, a distinction must be made between the two positions of proving God and knowing God. By referring to religious sources, which are important and emphasized sources of Mirza Mehdi Isfahani, it becomes clear that the distinction between the two positions of proof and knowledge of God is not correct and we have no choice but to use mental concepts to know God Almighty. Also, due to the simplicity of God Almighty, it becomes clear that the innate knowledge explained by Mirza Mahdi is impossible.

What is the place of human reason and thought in the matter of human expectation from religion? Comparing Sheikh Tusi and Ghazzali`s views with an analytical-descriptive method, this article is an attempt to answer to this question. As found by the study, the two scholars played a key role in understanding human reason in the realm of knowing God, but did not say anything on the nature of reason and on the why of its wrong. As the scope of revelation and the teachings of the Sharichr('39')ah expand, the scope of the intervention and the influence of the intellect diminishes. For these two thinkers, reliance on reason alone is not enough without reference to revelatory teachings; Ghazali considers Divine knowledge obligatory through sharia, and Sheikh Tusi believes in the intellectual necessity of knowledge with the help of the prophets. Another result of the article is that; The innate sense of seeking God does not mean that it is self-evident. Finally, the serious challenge of the present age in the understanding of reason as a dignity among the dignities of the soul and the proof of the independent existence of the soul is pointed out.

This research referred to showing the way in knowledge of God depending on Ibn Arabi's ideas in subject of art. Descriptive – analytic method has used in this research. The research states the place of knowledge, its kinds and levels, ways of knowledge of God in Ibn Arabi's ideas. The aim of research is explaining the way of art as the clearest way in knowledge of God and approach to God. The research after explaining art in Ibn Arabi's idea, expresses main subject of knowledge of God through self- knowledge and world as art of God. For gaining this aim the affected principles at art and being artist in Islamic civilization and mysticism is considered. Then the relationship between art and approach to God being studied and proved in Ibn Arabi's mysticism. Finally with considering the direct relationship between the degree of the approach to God and knowledge of God and also the idea of Ibn Arabi in subject of God's emergence in the world by art, it seems that the way of art is the clearest way to approach to God and knowledge of God.

In Nahj al-Balāgha, Imām ‘Alī particularly considered knowledge of God and how it is acquired. In his view, it is impossible to grasp the core of God’s essence and attributes. However, one might know God through knowledge by presence as well as knowledge by acquisition of His attributes, although such knowledge varies with different abilities and dispositions of people. Knowledge by presence is occasioned by one’s innate nature or fiṭra, and knowledge by acquisition is facilitated by proofs such as arguments from motion, incipience, and fine-tuning as well as teleological and causal arguments. In the present paper, we overview and analyze statements by Amīr al-Mu’minīn ‘Alī concerning issues of theology, uncovering their ordinary logical forms. The Imam has presented arguments for the existence of God that help his audience to arrive at the conclusion just by understanding the premises. Such a method might reveal the crucial place of reason and innate understanding in knowledge of God in Imām ‘Alī’s words, and can pave the path for novel research about Nahj al-Balāgha. The research shows that arguments for God as presented in Nahj al-Balāgha are both cogent in their contents and firm in their logical forms.

The frontispiece of all religious knowledge is the knowledge of God. For such knowledge some ways have been put forward. From amongst that is especially paid attention to in the Imams speech, is the light of intellect from the inside and the existence of the immune prophets and saints from the outside that can guide humans to the knowledge of God. But because reason lonely cannot be the cause of gaining of knowledge by man, in this article, with an emphasis on the narrative points of view and by analyzing the actual place of the Immune Imam and his unique characteristics in giving knowledge to humans, the impact of the Immune Imam in the function of reason and its access to perfect knowledge of God is analyzed and examined. On the basis of their existential capacity and the legal responsibility, the Immune Imams prepare the field for reason's flourishing and bringing about the knowledge and its immunity of knowledge deviations. As a perfect pattern, the Immune Imam's reason can guide the human reasons in correct gaining knowledge of God and prevent the reasons damages and deviations. In some cases, the existential and legal presence of the Immune Imam guaranties the strength of reason knowledge in individuals that each one in sequence is examined as the "creating function", "safety-making function" and "quality function".

Divine guidance has source¡ destination¡ device¡ and path. Discussing the topic of guidance in the holy verse “show us the straight path”¡ without explaining the reality of “straight path” which is the second object of “show us” and belong to guidance¡ is in fact dealing with a discussion without subject which could be led to ambiguous results such as multiplicity of paths. The main purpose of this research is philosophical explanation of the reality of the straight path from Mulla Sadra’s viewpoint. For him¡ the straight path in the world conceptually means a path towards God which is an optional and religious movement in a religious framework and evolution of human existence within scientific and practical dimensions by obeying the instances of the path and the instances are “the Quran”¡ “religion”¡ “prophet and the infallible Imams” which are representations of worldly paths in the hereafter life and cover the hell. The second purpose of the study is logically proving the unity of the straight path along with its explanation by three reasons of: 1. Context unity of God’s Hekmat (Hekmat Al-Kawn) in development and legislation¡ 2. The correlation between the unity of God and unity of the right path¡ and 3. The right path is similar to knowledge and righteousness. Therefore¡ to this scholar¡ unity is the logical and philosophical necessity of the reality of the right path and multiplicity of the right paths is rejected from a rational perspective.

How to obtain human knowledge of God is always a concern of philosophers and scientists, and there are different views about it; Islamic traditions for the Ahl al-Bayt (PBUH) in the knowledge of God have placed a very high status key so that the knowledge of God exclusively in some traditions through inmate has been introduced. By the Ahl al-Bayt (PBUH) who, in a sense, existential mood and on the other hand due to unique features and their own place in the universe are connected to God can help us in the pursuit of knowledge and the quality of and the seeking to lead it. In this article clarifies the role of intermediary Ahl al-Bayt (as) in the knowledge of God and the need for such intermediaries have confirmed that support the rational and traditional Furthermore, their developmental role and legislation in different kinds of knowledge creation in the image. Explaining the rational and intuitive knowledge of God in the form of legislative Besides being captured, and his love for developmental role of provinces and their role in the knowledge of God. Based on how to obtain the knowledge of God by Ahlbyt based on Islamic sources such narratives can be Tbyyyn and analyzed.

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.

In his whispered prayer of the knowers، Imam Sajjad deals with the subject of knowledge and love of God. The more one’s love towards God is، the greater his knowledge of God will be. Paying great attention to the worldly things، however decreases one’s zeal and love and knowledge of God. This is because the darkness and veil of this world hinder one from grasping the truths about the universe. Imam Sajjad asks God to assign him amongst those from whom darkness of the heart and doubts in beliefs are removed. Open-mindedness which is a sort of one’s feeling of great joy and readiness for work، thinking، worship and affection that bring one closer to God. One can، through God’s proximity، become God-like and acquire divine knowledge and affection.

Determining the main objective of the religious obligations, discussed briefly in Usul books, is one of the important theological issues. There are two main perspectives in this regard: "rational understanding" and "religion and belief." The followers of each of these two perspectives are trying to prove that one of the obligations is inherent and the other is born out of it. This paper reviews the reasons of two theories and finally the latter is chosen.

The position of knowledge of God in Spinoza’s theory of knowledge has provided one of the most distinct theories of knowledge. In Spinoza’s philosophy, knowledge is particularly interwoven with knowledge of God. For Espinoza, method, conception and knowledge are all based on the conception and knowledge of God. Espinoza bases the method on conception: a perfect method is based on a perfect conception and the most perfect method is based the most prefect conception, i.e. the conception of God. The conception of God is the only real conception and no other conception can be a real conception. Spinoza’s theory of knowledge is also based on the knowledge of completeness which is God in his philosophy. On the other hand, knowledge of God is the basis of differentiation between intellectual and intuitive knowledge and, as a result, the basis of third kind of knowledge called perfect knowledge. Knowledge of God is a factor through which intellectual knowledge transcends into intuitive knowledge.

Determination of the first ritual obligation is one of the most challenging issues in Islamic Theology. Doubt, intention, will, opinion, reason, and knowledge of God are the most important theories in this discussion. If the first ritual obligation is meant to be the main obligation then the knowledge of God should be regarded as its example and if the first includes all then intention and will is the first ritual obligation. However, if we believe in the innate knowledge of God then faith and belief in God will be the first.

The development and consequences of self-knowledge is one of the important discussions in Islamic philosophy. One of the most noteworthy of these consequences, according to the hadith of “One who has self-knowledge verily knows God”, is to know the Creator. The explanation and interpretation of this hadith was not taken seriously in earlier schools of Islamic philosophy. In fact, it was not until the early periods of the Schools of Shiraz and Isfahan up to the period of the dominance of the Transcendent Philosophy among contemporary thinkers that great attention was devoted to clarifying and interpreting it. This paper is intended to discuss the background of these explanations and analyses in two of the early schools of Islamic philosophy, Peripatetic and Illuminationist philosophies, and even in those preceding them. The interpretation of the hadiths on self-knowledge in Islamic philosophy is united with psychology. That is why its background is traceable to Greek philosophy. In books on Islamic philosophy, some ideas and words have been attributed in this regard to Greek early philosophers, who are considered to mark the beginning of writing the history of this issue.The narration of these hadiths and similar words began during the first periods of Islamic philosophy with Ikhwan al-Safa (Brethren of Purity). They mainly focused on the importance of self-knowledge and the immateriality of the soul, which is more prominent in the Peripatetic philosophy considering the significance of psychology and self-knowledge in this school. Through relying on these hadiths, Ibn Sina demonstrated the most important problem of self-knowledge, that is, the immateriality of the soul, and uses it as a religious confirmation of this point versus the view of mutikallimun as to the corporeality of the soul. In Illuminationist philosophy, given the fundamental status of the dimension of the epistemology of the soul, a more basic approach to the relationship between self-knowledge and the knowledge of God is observed. This approach is introduced as an argument in order to demonstrate the existence of God and His attributes; it is an argument which is indeed superior to other arguments. What is clearly witnessed in this historical process is an interpretation referring to the possibility of self-knowledge and the possibility of the move from that knowledge to the knowledge of God, which is considered to be gradational in its most Illuminationist explanation.