جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « prophethood » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

Miracles, considered the most prominent and universally recognized method for identifying prophets, pose a significant challenge for ordinary, non-infallible individuals. While theologians emphasize the ‘incontestability’ of miracles, the limitations of human knowledge regarding the future cast doubt on the ability to definitively ascertain whether a miracle will remain uncontested in the future. This uncertainty raises questions about the possibility of attaining absolute certainty regarding the miraculous nature of a prophet’s extraordinary acts. This article addresses this challenge through a critical-analytical approach. The key findings of this study suggest that while a miracle must be evident and clear to establish its authenticity, ordinary individuals can assess the miraculous nature of a prophet’s claims by examining the prophet’s background, evaluating the claims themselves against reason and innate understanding, and considering divine wisdom.

Infallibility is considered as one of the important elements in the matter of prophecy, without paying attention to it, the subject of prophecy will be ruled out. Literally, infallibility means "holding back" and "forbidding" and from the idiomatic point of view, it means a soul that prevents prophets and saints from committing sins, errors and mistakes. . The existence of this steadfast queen in the eyes of the prophets is a divine gift given to them according to their merit. Due to the difference in the spiritual position of the prophets, their infallibility is different; In such a way that the first prophets enjoyed more complete infallibility, and among them, Khatam al-Murslin (Prophet of Islam) has the most complete level of infallibility.The issue of infallibility has been the subject of serious attention by Muslim theologians; Just as Adliyyah theologians and Imamiyyah theologians accept the infallibility of the prophets as a divine gift and consider it compatible with the free will of the infallible; However, Mu'tazila theologians, while emphasizing the authority of the infallible, attribute the queen of infallibility to the era after the prophets.Allamah Tabataba'i, while accepting the Imamiyyah view, interpreted infallibility in his own way. This Neo-Sadrai philosopher examines infallibility based on his theological and philosophical standards and considers it as an inherent characteristic of prophecy.Keywords: infallibility, prophecy, Allamah Tabatabaei, God's grace, God's prophets, Islamic theologians, God's saints.

One of the definite beliefs of Muslims is that the Holy Prophet of Islam has closed the door of prophecy forever, and after him, no one will appear as a prophet, and the prophecy will be sealed. After the Prophet of Islam, the explanation and propagation of the religion will be done by the infallible Imams and right guardians. The seal of prophecy is based on several pillars which are: the eternality and comprehensiveness of the religion of Islam, having different levels, and the perfection of the Islam that has eternalized it, and it was manifested as a complete religion of Islam after going through various stages and levels. Some contemporary writers believe that revelation belongs to the age of instinct and its rule maintained its authority until the advent of Islam, but with the advent of empirical and inductive reason, its connection with the supernatural realm ended and now should be known as a completely natural experience and be criticized. Soroush believes that after the end of the prophethood, the authority of no one else has value and credibility, but his claim is not strong and acceptable. These intellectuals have proposed analysis and interpretation of the seal of prophecy that is not compatible with rational and narrative reasons, and incorrect results have emerged from it. Therefore, it has been criticized in this article.

Prophethood and divine revelation are among the most important pillars of divine religions and the key path to the delivery of the divine messages and wants to the human. In traditional theology, arguments have been put forth for the necessity of prophethood and divine revelation. However, in addition to the external anti-revelation arguments, some big opponents have raised over time against prophethood and revelation within the religious traditions to the point that this rejection of prophethood has come to be interpreted by some as “atheism.” The cornerstone of this movement is the consideration of the human wisdom as the highest source of perception. The adherent of this stance believe that the output of the prophets’ for the human is either congruent with intellect or is against it. If the former is the case, then revelation is a repetition of the intellectual findings of the human and so is absurd, and if the latter is true, then revelation is anti-intellectual and so is unacceptable. The authoritativeness of prophethood relies on answering this two-sided argument. The most important direction to adopt in answering this argument is that when we examine phenomena using intellect, in addition to intellect-verifiable and anti-intellect issues, there are intellect-evading phenomena as well. This is particularly true for the religious context and the focal topic of this article, i.e., the acceptance of the existence of God. Therefore, it can be maintained that the human has no way other than divine revelation to understand suchlike issues. Moreover, the inability of the human to perceive some details of religious rules and propositions through intellect, the confirmation of the intellectual judgment by the divine revelation, and the changes of intellect over time and in various locations – which lead to noticeable changes in the intellectual findings – are among the reasons for the authoritativeness of epistemic sources other than intellect in the domain of God’s legislative will.

The most central issue in Imam Khomeini's mysticism is the velayat. The quality of this relationship is one of the important issues of mystical analysis of scholars and its re-reading and explanation can be examined in the context of an important research issue. The present article, with the aim of examining and explaining this relationship and alignment, has tried to examine the texts and knowledge in this field by descriptive-analytical method. Findings of the research indicate that among the mystics who have discussed the velayat, Imam Khomeini (RA) has been very successful in explaining the relationship between mystical velayat with the belief in monotheism, prophethood and Imamate. In fact, Imam Khomeini's mystical worldview provides a mystical explanation of faith in seemingly theological categories that is worth pondering.

Some contemporary Islamic intellectuals have raised questions about the principle of Khātamiyya (Finality of Prophethood) and its related topics, such as the comprehensiveness and perpetuality of religion and the revelation. This article, by adopting a descriptive-analytical method, sets out to examine and compare the views of contemporary intellectuals including traditionalists such as Motahari and Nasr, and modernists like Lahuri, Shariati, Soroush and Abu Zayd about the three notions of Finality of Prophethood, the comprehensiveness of Islam and revelation. According ot the findings of the research, the approach of contemporary intellectuals to the Finality of Prophethood can be split into two main categories of need-oriented and cause-oriented. In the former approach, one can mention Shahid Motahari and Hossein Nasr, and in the latter approach, the views of Lahuri, Shariati, Soroush and Abu Zayd could be discussed. In the recent approach, contemporary modernist intellectuals hold divergent views. Lahore and Shariati acknowledge the need of today's man to the last religion and scripture despite rational maturity and evolution; however, Soroush and Abu Zayd, in view of the theory of succession of religious experiences and collective wisdom, as well as the rationalism approach, contend that Finality of Prophethood lends credit to the absolute validity of reason and the possibility of criticizing revelation, in light of which the modern human finds relevation unneeded and unnecessary. A perquisite of this approach is secularism and the retreat of religion from reason.

Sadra, the foremost among theosophers and Musa Ibn Maimonides are two philosophers belonging to Islamic and Jewish traditions respectively and both discussed the issue of prophecy in detail. By comparative study one finds that there are more similarities than differences between the two views. On such topics as nature of prophethood, proof of its necessity, way of recognizing true prophet from false one, and distinguishing the Divine Law from profane one, character traits of prophet, hierarchy and missions of the prophets, both think in much the same way. The only matter over which they disagree is the question as to which prophet is the most excellent. Sadra believes that Muhammad the holy prophet of Islam is the most excellent and his holiness was not obliged to follow the previous Divine Laws whereas Maimonides is of the opinion that Moses is superior and so the later prophet are also to follow Mosaic Law.

Epistemologically, Islamic mysticism is a kind of intuitive ontology obtained through a mystical journey. Given this perspective, the real being is the Absolute Being or the Almighty God Who is unique, infinite and absolutely perfect. Among the creatures in the universe, man enjoys a special status. He is composed of a physical body and divine soul. Whatever exists in the world of existence can be found man. Therefore, man is said to be a microcosm and a most comprehensive being. Man is the object of creation and everything in this world is at his disposal. Man has intellect and free will on the one hand, and animal desires and impulses on the other hand. Man can reach the highest levels of perfection if he follows ration and obeys God or will drop and get to the lowest levels if he follows animal desires. A perfect man is the most perfect manifestation of all God's names and attributes. Wilayah (divine authority) is sometimes accompanied by prophethood and sometimes by executorship and Imamate. Nearness to God and journey in the path of perfection is contingent upon knowing the Wali (God's friend) and following the light of guidance.

Sadra, the foremost among theosophers and Musa Ibn Maimonides are twophilosophers belonging to Islamic and Jewish traditions respectively and bothdiscussed the issue of prophecy in detail. By comparative study one finds that thereare more similarities than differences between the two views. On such topics asnature of prophethood, proof of its necessity, way of recognizing true prophet fromfalse one, and distinguishing the Divine Law from profane one, character traits ofprophet, hierarchy and missions of the prophets, both think in much the same way.The only matter over which they disagree is the question as to which prophet is themost excellent. Sadra believes that Muhammad the holy prophet of Islam is the mostexcellent and his holiness was not obliged to follow the previous Divine Lawswhereas Maimonides is of the opinion that Moses is superior and so the later prophetare also to follow Mosaic Law.

Technically speaking, politics means the wise management and administration of society and has appeared in various forms. Some of these forms are close to the real meaning of politics and some of them are far from it. The best pattern for a political system is one with the most comprehensive program and law in order to provide for man’s happiness in every aspect of life. That is why the patterns and systems rooted in human convenience, since man is not capable of dominating everything, are imperfect and are abolished one after the other. Therefore, the best political pattern belongs to the system which has been designed by an ultra-human source (God) and has been analyzed and legislated for human beings by His Prophets.The historical development of the divine political system is divided into two general periods: The period of “prophethood”, which covers the period of the presence of the Prophets, and the period of “guardianship”, covering the period of the dominance of the heirs and representatives of the Prophets. In most philosophical schools and works reference has been made to these periods, their necessity, and features. In the field of Islamic philosophy, either explicitly or implicitly, philosophers have referred to the construction of political systems. As the most sublime and comprehensive of all philosophical schools in Islamic tradition, the Transcendent Philosophy sees itself needless of dealing with political discussions directly and extensively for several reasons. However, when necessary, it has touched this issue in the middle of many other discussions.Mulla Sadra’s political view, although similar to that of Farabi and Ibn Sina regarding its basic principles, is closer to a true philosophical view of politics because of being based on the specific principles of the Transcendent Philosophy. By “Utopia”, he means society at the national level; by “virtuous people”, he means regional communities, and by “inhabited land”, he means the world society. Accordingly, his view is closer to the Islamic teaching of the “one people”. The ruler of this society is a wayfarer who is united with God, has returned from the third mystic journey, and is now among the creatures of God.The writer believes that, in addition to the two common methods in Mulla Sadra’s works for the demonstration of the philosophical necessity of politics and the features of a divine ruler, we can adduce an ontological argument for it. This paper presents different interpretations of this argument.

This paper tries to study the function and the role of religion in different fields of society from the viewpoint of Ibn Sina. Since the perspectives and explanations of sociologists and philosophers in relation to religion and society differs from one another, first it seemed necessary to define religion and society from the viewpoint of Ibn Sina and then to explain the functions of religion in relation to the community. It is concluded that Ibn Sina recognizes religion as a spiritual subject revealed by God and he believes that because of its different function religion is necessary to protect the life and to improve the community and the other world luckiness.

The theory of ideal ruling is the central idea of the medieval Persian political thought; as the ideal ruler, in turn, is at the center of this theory. This paper intends to identify and introduce, with an analytic view, the most important features of the ideal ruler in the medieval political thought of Iran. The focal thesis of this article is to introduce the philosopher-prophet as the central idea of the political thoughts in medieval Iran. We will investigate the ideas of the principal representatives of this thought in medieval Iran such as Al-Farabi,Avicenna, Suhrewardi, and Mulla Sadra, and recreate their intended ruler. In the author's view, the philosopher-prophet introduced as the real ruler in the works of these representatives of Iranian thought has the characteristics of the ideal Iranian king, the platonic philosopher, the prophet of Islam, and the Shite Imams. Besides recreating the features of the ideal ruler in the main streams of Iranian thought, the author has tried to find and introduce the common foundation of these thoughts.

In Mulla Sadra’s school of philosophy, guardianship has mainly a Qur’anic and gnostic taste and flavor. In his view, guardianship, which is the inner being of prophethood, is of two general and particular types. General guardianship, according to the Qur’an, involves all believers. Particular guardianship means the annihilation of the loving wayfarer in the essence and attribute of Almighty Truth. This guardian, who is a perfect Man, gnostic, and God’s caliph on Earth, enjoys genetic guardianship, which is of different degrees and levels. According to traditions and based on philosophical arguments, absolute guardianship before creation, is an intermediary in creation, accompanies the created, is a guide and proof for them, and continues through divine subsistence after the created. Therefore, unlike prophethood, guardianship is not disconnected, and that is why its primary purpose is other than leading people. This is because the ultimate end of a supreme existent is not the benefit of an inferior existent but at some levels of guardianship people will benefit from the guardian. However, the outer being of a prophet is Shari‘ah, and his purpose is to guide God’s servants. This guardianship comes to the Infallible Imam (leader) after the end of prophethood, and at the time of the absence of the Imam (a), a religious jurist who is most similar to a prophet in terms of his knowledge of Shari‘ah will undertake this duty. Such a duty also includes political guardianship because it is responsible for organizing and regulating people’s affairs.

The question raised in the present research is: what concepts does Farabi use in his exposition of the idea of prophethood? Not all disciplines can give an explanation for the relationship between the terrestrial world and celestial world and explain how they are related with one another. The intellectual faculty is unable to understand it. Revelation and prophethood, being the only source of relation between the earth and heaven, are regarded as theological subjects. Farabi uses a philosophical and intellectual approach for expounding it. He explains prophethood by relying on Aristotelian psychology and considering two faculties of the soul, i.e. reason and fancy. Simple and valuable ideas about this kind of relation are detected in Farabi's philosophy. In this regard, he has tried to resolve the problem about the relationship between the philosopher and prophet. According to him, soul has a single inseparable reality; it has hierarchical degrees and faculties which put the body in motion. Therefore, reason and fancy have one single system called "soul". This means that the philosopher and prophet are one person with two particular characteristics. The research’s main finding is the scrutiny of Farabi's answer to the question about the kind of relation that exists between the soul and the celestial world (Holy Spirit).

This study is mainly about Imam Khomeini’s view regarding the world’s multiplicity. According to him the Divine essence as unity is unrecognizable since there is no Divine attributes. The reason of multiplicity in the realm of absolute unity is the manifestation of the Divine essence on itself and the next step is the manifestation of Divine essence on Divine attributes. These manifestations can make some concepts as: The Greatest name of God, Muhammadan reality (peace be upon him), determination, Divine Will, genetic argument, and some other mystical concepts about multiplicity of the world. Moreover, Imam Khomeini explains his view about the issue of multiplicity in his mystical books, particularly Mesbaholhedayeh.

Farabi has placed artists as the carriers of religion in the second place in utopia and after the prophetic (nabawi) government. He believes that the angel of revelation emanates all intelligibles to the rational faculty of the Prophet (s) and then to his imaginal faculty. Due to their low capabilities or habits, the public are incapable of the rational perception of happiness and the truth. Therefore, the Prophet (s), who himself enjoys intellectual mastery over all realities based on certain arguments, revealed their images and referents to people’s imagination. In Farabi’s philosophical system, an artist, in the general sense of the word, deals with the element of imagination, and the utopian or religious and prophetic art is an art that transfers intelligible happiness to the mind of the public through sensual and imaginal forms.

The Prophet (Ò), as perfect man, is the ultimate manifestation of the divine names and attributes on the tripartite existential planes—the supernal, the angelic, and the terrestrial—corresponding to the three stations of sanctity (walÁyah), prophethood (nubuwwah), and messengership (risÁlah). His terrestrial role as the viceroy and vicegerent of God is nothing but the realization and determination of the higher states in the lowest one. The article employs intellectual and traditional methods to analyse the subject at hand.

One of most popular views among Orientalists on the Quran is the view of the adapted Quran. While persons such as the German Theodore Noldke (1836-1931) and the Jewish Goldziher (1850-1921) enjoy a special prestige and status among Orientalists, it seems that the most voluminous scholarly work conducted by non-Muslims for denial of the reveled Quran and proving the view of its adaptation is the work done by the modern priest, Yusuf Durra Haddad (1913-1979). He believes that the Quran is neither a new book or invitation, nor does it contain an independent prophethood; Islam and the monotheism it propagates is the very ideas adapted from the Torah and the Bible, without anything else added; the only difference is that the Prophet propagated the Islam of "the Book" in Arabic for his Arab audiences.It seems that the main deficiencies of his work, causing him to widely distort the Quranic teachings, are his false theoretical presuppositions and bases, the most important of which are as follows:(1) The Quran is the translation and the Arabic version of "the Book"; (2) The holy Prophet is not the God's chosen prophet, and enjoys no miracle; (3) Islam contains no new and independent invitation; (4) Quran is an invitation to Christianity; and (5) The perfected forms of the prophethood and the celestial book are the Christ and the Bible.The present paper investigates the main theoretical bases of Yusuf Haddad's view, going on to an elaborate criticism of his theory.

Ibn Sina is a philosopher who in the domain of Islamic Philosophy has presented a new reading of Aristotelian doctrines and therefore not only he is Aristotle's commentator but also is a great and prominent philosopher in his own right. The attempt to show the consistency of religious beliefs with rational perception has been one of the mental concerns of Ibn Sina. Although this problem in many cases has not been stated in his writings, but considering his whole writings support this claim. At the same time, in some of the philosophical topics such as the problem prophethood, bodily resurrection, as well as in the area of ethics, we are witnessing that shaykh tries to show the supremacy of religious teachings over rational perceptions and inability of intellect in some of these areas. This fact shows that Ibn Sina is not merely a retionalist philosopher but he is a rationalist – fideist Philosopher.