Ayeneh Ma‘refat
Year:2019 | Volume:19 | Issue:60 |Papers Count:6

In one classification, all of the sciences are divided into instrumental and original. Sciences such as logic, the principles of jurisprudence and algebra are classified as instrumental sciences, and other sciences such as philosophy, jurisprudence and arithmetic as the original ones. Instrumentality and originality are two terms that are in fact not defined clearly. To understand the criterion which distinguishes these two sciences, one must rely on the common sense of the scientologists of the two terms. Different sciences have a cooperative relationship with each other and in solving the issues of one science other sciences are involved; however, the use of one science in another cannot be regarded as a criterion of instrumentality of that science. Also, personal aims of the creators and users of the sciences cannot be a true criterion for this categorization. In the present article, by rejecting personal opinion and relativity, a general criterion for a science to be instrumental is presented. The main benefit of a science because of which the wise agree on its necessity in the body of human knowledge can be a criterion for this classification. In this article, the science of logic as an instrumental science has been the focus of discussion, although the criteria presented has nothing to do with logic.

There are two steps in the process of sensory perception: the sensory organ’ s sense-impression and the soul’ s perception. The first step is materialistic and the second one abstract. According to the union of the body and soul, the soul apprehends the sensory organs’ sense impressions, and the soul’ s apprehension is considered knowledge by presence. Some commentators of transcendent theosophy, like Allameh Tabatabai and Shahid Motahhari, support this viewpoint. From their point of view, the ability to explain the cause of sensory errors is an epistemological inseparable part of this theory. It is also an epistemic foundation upon which indirect realism theory can be defended in relation to the subject matter of sensory perception, as advocated by great scholars of Islamic theosophy. The acceptance of the knowledge by presence as belonging to the sensory organs’ sense perceptions is compatible with the concept of acquired knowledge. Ibn Sina and Mulla Sadra believe in acquired knowledge, while Suhrawardi and Sabzevari believe in knowledge by presence. According to the latter view, the soul finds its self outside, so the mismatch of perception with the outside is not conceivable, while in the encounter of sense organs with the outside, in some cases a form which is incompatible with reality presents itself to the soul. Thus one cannot imagine the presence of sensory perception.

The concept of free-will is an important and old philosophical issue that most religions have paid attention to, and philosophers of religion have contemplated on the issue adopting a new perspective. The present article is an attempt to present, review and criticize Leibniz’ s view, and tries to answer the question whether, in Leibnitz philosophical system, man has free will or whether it is a sort of Spinosian practical necessity that govern it? Leibniz, in order not to renounce man’ s free-will, divides necessity into two types: the supernatural necessity (geometrical) and the moral necessity. God is qualified with the attribute of goodness and so, in the creation of creatures, He will observe the ideal of perfection, and the necessity of this consideration is the power of choice. Creatures are only conditioned by necessity, and the necessity is not inherent to them, and this positive necessity stablishes their authority. Allameh Tabatabaii also considers free-will as an instinctive phenomenon and states that the rule of the necessity of an object not available does not contradict free-will.

The “ original sin” , as a teaching, is one of the fundamental pillars of Polusian interpretation of Christianity that besides the justification of salvation, as a teaching, confirms the divinity of Jesus. Indeed, sin, salvation or grace and Christ divinity have a necessary and profound interrelationship to the extent that the denial or repudiation of one can create big challenges to the Polus’ transcendental system. The theologians and philosophers of Christianity like Saint Augustin, saint Anselm and Odo with the aim of better understanding sin, as a teaching, and providing defense against the critics’ opinions, besides preserving the framework of what Polus has expressed in his letters on the new testament, have tried to describe, interpret and justify his system of thought. Augustine, through inheritance, Anselm, through relying on human nature and Odo, through attributing referents to their antecedents, have tried to give a better explanation of the original sin, but none of them seems to be able to provide a dependable justification in this regard. The present paper intends to study and analyze the justifications provided by these three theologians.

Mohammad Shahrour, as one of the activists of the contemporary Qur'anic discourse, seeks to reduce the scope of the Prophetic tradition in the field of religion. Updating religion by incorporating social teachings of the prophetic tradition is the cause of the defenders of this trend. The present study, adopting a descriptive-analytical method, intends to critically analyze this approach to renovate religious thought. Mohammad Shahrour emphasizes the necessity of a historical reading of the tradition through the separation of the concept of "messenger" and "prophet", the inculcation of the lack of authenticity of the prophetic tradition, as well as the proclamation of the prophecy's tradition to human traditions. He undermines the doctrine and efficiency of the teachings of the prophetic tradition. Inconsistencies in this approach with the Imamiyyah ideas include the incompatibility with the nature of tradition, the incompatibility with the nature of infallibility, and the fallacy of the historicity of tradition. Most of the Imamite theologians emphasize the position of the prophet in the immediate news of God and the organization of the spiritual and social life of the people, as well as certainty of their knowledge and their immunity from sin and error in the sphere of personal and social action, and the absolute prophetic obedience. From this point of view, the legislative nature of the prophetic tradition is thought to have revealed the divine order and established the universal authority of the tradition.

The issue of how human body is rebuilt in the hereafter has always been a challenging and important topic among the followers of the heavenly religions, theologians and faithful philosophers. The present study is aimed to provide a philosophical and theological explanation of the hadith known as the tail bone which means the decomposition of human body after death except the tail bone (the last vertebra of the spine). It is from this body part that the human body comes into being. In order to deal with one piece of the puzzle of physical resurrection, which is body reconstruction in the hereafter, we have adopted the method of library research to study the theologians’ opinions such as Khaje Nasir al-Din Tusi, al-Ghazali and others. The results of the study indicate the acceptance of the literal meaning of the narrative or the resurrection of the elemental body by the Muslim theologians, the rejection of the literal meaning of the narrative by philosophers such as Ibn Sina, and the interpretation of the narrative and the focus on its true meaning by Mulla Sadra. All of these opinions have a strong connection to the framework of mind of the philosophers who proposed them.