نشریه معرفت کلامی
سال یازدهم شماره 1 (پیاپی 24، بهار و تابستان 1399)

Many religious people have tendency for religion and religiosity, though by divine nature, but they have no sound logical reason for this being religious. A which has no reasonable grounds, will not have effect on life as it ought to be and cannot manage individual and social human relationships. Using a descriptive analytical method, this study tries to analytical in depth the reasons for man’s need for religion and religiosity by referring to the principles of exalted theosophy and emphasizing on the view of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli. To this end, the article first, gives a precise definition of man and then, man's fundamental need for religion by reflecting and focusing on human humanity and transition from other superstructure needs; a perspective that has been given less attention in similar research works. Man's need for religion is rooted in his own existence and the true sublimity and perfection of this being will not be attained except through practicing religion.

The question whether or notGod Almighty has qualities and if so, how it relates to the divine essence, has provided a set of issues in Islamic thought that it is classified the heading of monotheistic attributes and today are known as the "ontology of divine qualities”. These issues have been historically discussed among Muslim thinkers since the first century AH, and each of them has theorized about them based on the principles and presuppositions of their intellectual system. One of the most important theories in this field is the theory of deputation which has seen various reactions.in this study, we have read the theory of deputation and recognized its pillars by using of analytical-historical view, and while proving the existence of such a theory among the Mu'tazila, we have recognized the believers in it from the Mu'tazila and other religions. We have come to the conclusion that this theory is an explanation for the negation of attributes and its delivery to the theory of Sadra objectivity is not correct.

The theory of evolution has provided good fielded for atheistic ideas by Charles Robert Darwin and many infidels have used it to defend atheism with scientific support. One of the anti-religious uses of this theory has been the negation of religious anthropology by using to human evolutionary explanations and its characteristics. One of the characteristics of man for which a complete and atheistic explanation has been provided is religiosity. For example, we will examine one of the newest and most powerful evolutionary and atheistic explanations of religion, which belongs to the most prominent figure of modern atheism, Rich Clinton Dawkins. And we will determine that this explanation does not have sufficient strength and scientific dignity and cannot challenge the religious view of religion. This examination, if true of the newest and strongest of these explanations, is also true of other explanations.

One of the glad tidings in the Torah about the Prophet of Islam and Jesus Christ, which are related from Imam Reza, such expressions like “donkey rider” and “camel rider” are metaphorically used in the Old Testament. Most English and Persian translators have translated donkey rider which is a metaphor for Jesus and “donkey riders”, and the “camel rider” which refers as Prophet of Islam as “camel riders”, and this their translation do not correspond to Jesus and the Prophet. Making use of historical linguistics, this study seeks to investigate the causes behind the incorrect translations through study of the Hebrew version of the Torah. The study findings show that “donkey rider” and “rider of al-ba'ir” refer to Jesus Christ and Muhammad and Imam Reza's words are correct and accurate. The study results indicate that the initial mistake was first made by those who undertook the task of the punctuation of the text layout of the Torah. Besides the Jewish-Christian theological prejudices after the Prophet mission of Islam made it and established it between Jews and Christians.

The relationship between ta’abud (obedience to divine injunctions) and rationality has been a challenging and influential subject in many epitomical and axiological areas of knowledge and it has been the special concern of many thinkers. Professor Mostafa Malekian an expert in this subject, considers obedience as the essence of traditional religiosity and regard it- in his speech and writings- as contrary to modern rationality, because, to Him, modern rationality requires that a proposition, be measured by an internal scale, in order to be accepted, any but then, he says: If it is proved that the person being obedience to all his words or those words that are related to the issue; never make mistakes, obedience is compatible with rationality. His division of knowledge into two categories, "knowledge through reason" and "knowledge through testimony", is also in conflict with the first part of his speech about the irrationality of obedience. In other cases, he states that not all the truths of the universe are in the realm of understanding the intellect and the internal scale of measurement.

Iqbal Lahori is one of the thinkers of the contemporary period and one of the pioneers who, considering the requirements of the new era, considered the traditional ways of defending religion to be insufficient, but also harmful. He tried to make the necessity and correctness of the teachings of religion in a new, permit and acceptable way. This study, which is formulated in a descriptive-critical way, first explains Iqbal's critiques of Islamic philosophy, theology and mysticism, and then criticizes it after expressing Iqbal's plan. In Iqbal's innovative design, in order to defend religion, the experimental sciences must first be used. He used "religious experience" and then turned his attention to the social issues of religion. The findings of study show that Iqbal's attention to empirical knowledge and the need to use it in words is acceptable and necessary; But what he says about abandoning traditional philosophy and theology is not true.

The article” abot bada” has written by Goldziher and Triton in the Encyclopedia of Islam is concerned the doctrine of bada' advocated. This article investigates the definition of bada’, the evidence establishing it, its historical development and some examples of bada’ according to Sunni and Shiite sources. Although this article tries to present views of the opponents and the improper framework and the great concentration on Sunni sources (compared to Shiite sources) have made the article suffer from weaknesses in the content, the article need to be revised. The differences of opinion among Imamiyah theologians over the definition of bada’ have greatly contributed to the failure of non-Muslim writers to present a common and unambiguous picture of bada’. Using a descriptive-analytical method this article critically examines the definition of bada’ and its relationship with divine science, the history of the origin of the belief in bada’ Muslim community and its socio-historical outcomes by. A suitable framework is suggested by the article in an attempt to overcome the weaknesses of the current structure.

One of the important questions related to the field of theology and epistemological discussions in the subject of justice is how to recognize the goodness of justice? This study seeks to answer this question, using a library based method in collecting the information and a descriptive-analytical method in the information processing. The research findings can be summarized as follows: first, the perception of the goodness of justice and ugliness of oppression is a self- evident truth; second, showing one’s opinion on its self-evident depends on a correct understanding of the concept of justice as well as in the geometric design of the value system. With this explanation which correctly defines the concept of justice "as a proper and desirable state" and the position of justice as a system of desirable way of pulling values together (not together with to justice), its goodness will be self- evidence without the need for any evidence to confirm it.

The whole human will be known in Islam by the Mu'tazila theologian sect. Judge Abdul Jabbar is a prominent thinker of retreat with the aim of defending divine justice and explaining its compatibility with the issue of duty as well as moral responsibility, considers human actions independent of the Divine Will. On the other hand, in contemporary Western philosophy, Roderick Chizam introduces himself as the ultimate source of action in order to explain the compatibility between human causality and the principle of causal necessity. In this study, by using analytical-descriptive method, while expressing the views of both thinkers on human moral responsibility, will be expressed that despite the fundamental differences in the worldview of Chizam and Judge Abdul Jabbar on matters such as human nature and the types of causality in the world, on the issue of human free will, there is a kind of coherence and closeness, However, by accepting the total independent will of man, both thinkers, while being caught in a non-monotheistic view, have achieved wrong conclusions about human activity.

Different approaches have been adopted to the question of the conflict between science and religion. for example, positivists and linguistic analysts have consider focusing the paying attention on the issue of language as the appropriate way to settle this issue. Al-Manar and Al-Mizan reject the positivist approach altogether. Besides, although there exists the flaw of the proposing the solution of language analysts in some of expressions in "Al-Manar" and "Al-Mizan", they cannot be considered to be in favors of this approach. The expressions in "Al-Manar" and "Al-Mizan" do not accord with scientific instrumentalism and they should be considered as scientific realists. Al-Manar's encounter with the interpretation solution is also different from Al-Mizan. Rashid Reza does not consider this solution to be suited for showing the relationship between science and religion; but to the contrarry, Allameh Tabatabai generally uses this approach methodically.

The belief in the life after death and its quality is one of the important issues in all religions. Muslims thinkers have expounded this issue and recounted the pure of Islam thought in the light of the Qur'an and sunnah. Although they accept idea of the spiritual resurrection, they have a difference of opinion over the idea of corporeal resurrection and its quality. According to the Qur’anic verses and narrations, the corporeal resurrection with an elemental body not with an ideal body on the Day of Judgment in certain. However, some thinkers cast doubt about the theory of corporeal resurrection with elemental body. This study five critically reviews important doubts about the physical resurrection with elemental body and concludes that none of them can undermine the facts reflected by Qur’anic verses and hadiths about the elemental property of physical corporeal resurrection. These doubts include the characteristics of the inhabitants of Paradise, not being deprived of the trees of Paradise, suffering and trial, lack of spatial and temporal interference in the beings of the Hereafter, and failure to attain perfection. The reason for choosing these doubts is that on the one hand, these doubts are of special importance; On the other hand, they are less discussed in philosophical and theological works.

The subject of attributing of man to God is raised in the verses of the Holy Qur'an. At first glance, this seems to be inconsistent with divine justice and man’s free will; therefore, Muslims thinkers have tried to resolve this conflict presenting various opinions. Using this study which based on descriptive-critical data processing, aims at explaining the exact meaning of divine misguidance and examining, the intellectual approach adopted by Shiite and Mu'tazilite schools in the light of "Allameh Tabatabai" and "Jarullah Zamakhshari’s views". Both thinkers hold that divine misguidance is represented in not on forwarding to the desired objective, lack of grace, one in the wrong way, for punishment man’s misconduct and man’s freedom of choices; but Allameh has explains through process with a precise philosophical and view. Regarding the area of man’s free will in voluntary actions he considers the doctrine that man’s action is something “between determination and free will” to be in agreement with Islamic ontological principles. On the other hand, Zamakhshari thinks man has free will in actions. They, however, do not have difference of opinion over the question of divine misguidance which is inevitable result of man’s bad choice and is considered within the domain of divine action and they do not consider this question to be contrary to human free will and divine justice. This article clearly examines how to prove and compare the views of the two thinkers.