PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION RESEARCH (NAMAH-I HIKMAT)
Year:2011 | Volume:9 | Issue:1 (17)|Papers Count:8

One and the Necessary Existence in Plotinus and Mulla Sadra's Philosophy, have positive and negative aspects. As the One is the source of all beings, the positive attributes of supreme creatures has been proven for him and what which indicate to imperfection and failure has been negate from this level. In addition, The Necessary Existence that is corresponded to God in religion has some specified attribute. Plotinus and Mulla sadar in describing this reality, have different approaches because they have different origins, nevertheless they have similarities in describing real unity, free will, activity by self manifestation and negation the limited being. The assimilation between Intellect in Plotinus and self unfolding existence in Mulla Sadra's philosophy is another point. Although Plotinus and the Neo-platonism tradition had decisive influence on Islamic philosophy especially Mull Sadra, comparing two philosophers could be useful.

From a religious experience point of view, some ethical characters like RAHMAT describe the Divine Essence. Considering the caused theory of meaning in the field of philosophical semantics the character of RAHMAT is applicable in relation to the Divine Essence in its anthropomorfical meaning. According to the caused theory of meaning content, the kindness of God is not inconsistent with the transcendence and simplicity of his Essence. A semantics survey based upon the Quranic evidences shows that the unbelievers are the oppressors who wrong the oppressed as far as possible and for a time they desire. The RAHMAT of God or His compassion to the oppressed requires taking their revenge from the unbelievers and their eternal punishment into Hell. This method of punishment is conformed to the method of the unbelievers in punishing the oppressed. The vastness of the RAHMAT of God belongs to this world but in the other world the RAHMAT of God only belongs to the believers and will not keep from punishing the unbelievers for all eternity into Hell.

The Islamic Philosophers view about union between Divine Attributes in object and referring Will to eternal knowledge, was not accepted in opinion of Kalam authorities. Also, the Ibn Sina's view in Divine agency by providence that is an existential agency and it's application for solution some of theological difficulties such as problem of Eviles provided a suitable field for discussion.Fakhar Razi, who emphasis on foundations of Ash' arites, did not see the explanation of philosophers to be successful about God's essential will. He accuses them in denying the will of God. In his view the mean of Will is aim and decision which is added to Essence and determins each of beings to it's time to be.This article mentions the result of Ibn Sina's essay in negation goal and purpose for Divine acts, don' t negate His Will and Wisdom, rather means that His aim is Himself and will otheres beacuse will Himself, also Divine providence which is immediate knowledge to the best arrangement of things, helps Ibn Sina to solve some of theological problems.

Fakhr Razi denies authenticity between God Almighty and the creatures because of the subscription between God and creatures may limit the divine power and It is incompatible with the transcendence of God Almighty, but khaje Tusi in his philosophical Works, based on similarity principle has defend the rule "Alwahid" And belief in the principle of similarity from His words will be taken. On the mystical view he has another Sight about that rule.He believes that the Explanation of multiplicity of the universe and Their relationship with God Almighty and Question of similarity among them, Interest on the principle that multiplicity really comes from God and here anyone says their own suspicions of what his own good, not worthy of God Almighty.

Although, the question of the realm of religion belongs to the contemporary thought, but its roots can be found in the views of early Muslim thinkers. Looking at the views of the two main thinkers in the Muslim world, Ibn Sina and al-Ghazali, explains different approaches to religion. While Ibn Sina insists in his philosophical analysis on legal aspects and social functions of religion, Ghazali’s focus is on spiritual and moral dimensions of religion. Of course, this does not mean ignoring the spiritual aspect of religion by Ibn Sina and the elimination of social aspect of religion in al-Ghazali. Ibn Sina’s analysis is close to the Social model of religion and al-Ghazali’s prospective is closer to the individualistic model of religion.

If we are in doubt of religious beliefs, in practice between religiousness and irreligiousness which one we should choose. Considering the potential benefits of religiousness, which are many, Pascal argues that one must choose religiousness. On the other hand, according to those who believe in the principle of acquittance and the generalization of its subject of doubt, which can also include doubt in religious beliefs, religiousness is unnecessary. Apparently due to the diversity of religions and their differing laws and dogmas to the extent that they reject each other, when one doubts the truth of one religion among other religions not only reason endorses acquittance but it is also necessary not to take a stand. The right way is to stress the theoretical reason and to prove rationally the principles of faith.

It appears as if in explanation of Kierkegaard's relation to Hegel's philosophy, the researchers have contented with his distinctions to Hegel and have paid less attention to the properties which perhaps be a proof of Hegel's influence on him. We suggest that the influence will be emerged by analyzing the manner which these distinctions have realized, and hereby present a better explanation about their relation. The categories that have been applied for analyzing these distinctions are the two conserving and cancelling aspects were been included in the concept of «Aufheben» which is one of the main concepts of Hegel's philosophy. Within this analysis we attempt to make a comparative study among their religious views.