نشریه کلام اسلامی
پیاپی 126 (تابستان 1402)

According to the famous view, which is derived from the verses of the Quran and Islamic hadiths, prophetic revelation is a special relationship that God has established with the prophets that He has chosen to guide mankind and through the prophets, He has conveyed His messages to mankind. This transfer has been done sometimes without an intermediary and sometimes with the intermediary of the angel of revelation. Divine messages are sometimes revealed to the prophets in the form of specific words, such as the revelation to Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) and the revelation of the Holy Quran to the Holy Prophet (PBUH), and sometimes these messages were not in the form of words. In a writing called "The Path of Prophethood", based on the premise that prophecy had a human origin and not a divine origin, the famous view about revelation was rejected and divine revelation was considered to be a "non-verbal mystical discovery". The author rejected the reference to the Quranic verses to prove the famous view and on the other hand, he interpreted them to solve their incompatibility with his own view. In this article, first, the correctness of reasoning based on the verses to determine the nature of revelation is proven, and then, by using the verses and narrations and rational thinking, the validity of the famous view is proven, and the author's theory is examined and criticized.

Mir Mohammad Ismail Khatunabadi, one of the 11th century philosophers of the Tanzihi school of philosophy in Isfahan, has criticized the opinions of other commentators of the book "Al-Kafi", especially Sadrul Mutalahin, in his commentary on "Usul Kafi" under the narrations of "Bab Ruh". This descriptive-analytical article has examined the opinions of Khatunabadi and Mulla Sadra about the soul and has come to the conclusion that according to Mulla Sadra, the reason for the inability of human science and reason to understand the truth of the soul is the greatness of the soul; But according to Khatunabadi, the source of the dispute about the truth of the soul is its verbal form, which is a generic noun and has a general meaning. According to Sadr al-Mutalahin, the soul, in the simplicity of existence, cannot be discovered except through divine knowledge; But Khatunabadi sees this view as a result of Sadra's intellectual basis in material movement, which according to Khatunabadi is invalid. In general, it should be said that the difference in the views of Mulla Sadra and Khatunabadi is due to the difference in their philosophical foundations. Khatun Abadi does not accept the essential movement, the unity of existence and the definition of existence presented by Sadr al-Mutalahin and considers them invalid; Therefore, his point of view, where these principles are involved, is rejected and rejected by Khatunabadi.

The hadith "Al-Saeed Man Saad fi Batn Umma wa Al-Shaqi Man Shaqi Fi Batn Umma" is one of the famous hadiths in Islamic traditions, which has been studied and debated by thinkers since the past. Based on this hadith, some people believed in the theory of predestination and lack of free will. In this research, ten semantic possibilities mentioned in this hadith have been pointed out, and finally, the accepted meaning has been explained by descriptive-analytical method and examination of the collection of related traditions and philosophical foundations. In the accepted meaning, the meaning of "Al-Saeed" is the end of the human being for the good, and the meaning of "Fi Batin Umme" is the time when the soul breathes in the fetus, and the meaning of happiness in the mother's womb is the divine destiny based on the test of the human being in the "Alam Dhar" has been taken .Of course, this divine destiny is changeable and not deterministic, and divine prior knowledge is not the cause of determinism either. And even though God's inherent knowledge does not change and bad'a does not belong to it, this hadith has nothing to do with God's inherent knowledge. In this analysis, the philosophical ambiguities of this narrative have been explained in such a way that a reasonable meaning can be taken from this narrative.

The issue of Imamate is one of the most important inter-religious issues that has caused many conflicts among Muslims throughout history. Mu'tazila is one of the religions that have disappeared, but their views are still the focus of Islamic scholars and theologians. This research, focusing on the four books of Al-Mughni, Al-Faiq, Al-Kashaf and Ibn Abi al-Hadid's Commentary on Nahj al-Balaghah, has explained the issues of Imamate from the point of view of the Mu'tazilites. Mu'tazila, like other Sunni schools, consider the authority of the imam to be limited to the management of community affairs and the implementation of divine limits. They consider conditions such as ijtihad, justice, and knowledge of the affairs that they are tasked to establish as necessary, but they do not consider conditions such as infallibility, excellence, and knowledge of all religious rules and truths as necessary. According to the Mu'tazila, the appointment of the imam is the responsibility of the people, and everyone is obliged to obey the imam who has been chosen with allegiance. Like other Sunni sects, the Mu'tazilites have made the historical events after the Messenger of God (PBUH) the basis of judgment about Imamate issues.

Wahhabis, while dividing monotheism into "divine monotheism", "divine monotheism" and "monotheism of names and attributes" and interpreting divine monotheism as "monotheism in creation, ownership and planning", claim that polytheists of the Prophetic era believed in divine monotheism, and the point The main conflict between monotheists and polytheists is considered to be religious monotheism (divine monotheism). Wahhabis use this issue as a prelude to excommunication of Muslims. Through the present essay, which is organized with the descriptive-analytical method and with the aim of presenting and evaluating this theory, it becomes clear that on the one hand, the Wahhabi's point of view in the interpretation of the monotheism of God is not compatible with the explanations of lexicographers and even Sunni commentators and theologians. On the other hand, despite their point of view, many verses testify to the polytheism of the polytheists of the prophetic era; As the verses argued by them also do not indicate their claims. On the third hand, despite their claims, the verses of the Qur'an and historical reports show the formation of many deviations throughout history, in the domain of divine monotheism. On the fourth hand, based on historical reports, polytheists of the prophetic era considered idols to be lords. From the collection of these materials, the weakness of the Wahhabi perspective and their monotony in the interpretation of the Qur'anic verses are revealed.

A hadith with the title of killing Rawafaz has been narrated in some Sunni sources and has been cited by Takfiri groups to kill Shiites. In the text of the hadith, it is mentioned that a people named Rawafd will come who are polytheists and should be killed. By examining the documents and brokers of this hadith, it has been proven that the takfiri groups' reference to this hadith is unjustified in justifying the killing of many Muslims. In the documentary part of the hadith, it has been concluded that all its methods are not valid by carefully examining the different narrators. From the point of view of meaning and content, it has also been proven that the term Rafizi did not exist at the time of the Holy Prophet and this is a proof of the fakeness of the narration. Secondly, ruling on polytheism is unrelated to insulting some of the Companions. In other words, the meaning of polytheism is the negation of monotheism and there is no connection between it and sub-sahaba. Therefore, the beginning of the hadith and the bottom of the hadith contradict each other. Thirdly, this hadith is in conflict with the verses of the Qur'an, other hadiths of the Holy Prophet and the consensus of the Ummah.