ANDISHE-E-NOVIN-E-DINI
Year:2016 | Volume:11 | Issue:43|Papers Count:12

Human soul’s survival is one of philosophical challangable problems. In this paper, considering and mentioning its essential conceptual elements, Avicenna and Fakhr-e Razi’s views have been comparatively studied. Avicenna has relied on lack of essential dependence between human soul and body to prove the former’s survival. Such being the case, corruption of body would be of no effect on soul's life. While Razi has viewed body only as a case for soul’s physical action not as an essential element for it. There is no such a relation as approximation and farness between them. In this way, the two philosophers have agreed on survial of human soul after death and corruption of body.

Today many scholars in the field of religion have agreed on phenomenology of religion. This approach arrived at the field of religious studies under the influence of husserlian phenomenology. One may order elements of the phenomenology of religion as describing religious phenomena as such without any explanation, focusing on the intentionality covered in religious phenomena, opposing reductionism, leaving all presuppositions and seeking for perceiving the essence of religion. Phenomenology of religion lacks dimenetions of a complete epistemological system and, therefore, it may not be considered as an independent field with a full epistemological character. Such being the case, phenomenology of religion in its highest state can only regarded as an approach restricted to the level of gathering, not an independent knowledge and not a method usable for judgment. Stopping in the level of pure description, leaving explanation and justification, failing in opposing reductionism, relying on universal and ambiguous concepts, lack of a clear model for studing and of a clear research program, lack of useful and applicable method for examining theories in both levels of judgment and gathering have led to the failure of phenomenology of religion.

The field of validity of khabar-e vahed is counted among important discussions in religious epistemology. Though the effects of the discussion are used in such fields as exegesis, history and theology, its main place of use is usul-e feqh. Khabar-e vahed is commonly viewed by scholars of usul-e feqh to be valid in feqh only. Allamah Tabatabaea has severely opposed its validity in other fields than feqh. He has been faithful to this view in different places of his works including Almizan from which four reasons for has view may be found. They include khabar-e vahed’s lack of certain knowledge, its effectless status in exegesis and articles of faith, impossibility of causing certainty in naturally made news and maltiplicity of artificial news. He views the validity of khabar-e vahed in exegesis to be conditioned to its agreement with the Quran. In this paper, Allamah’s four reasons have been studied critically. The reasons do not seem enough.

Avicenna as a prepatetic philosopher with a reason-based approach has regarded a prophet qualified with three properties. Qazi ‘Azod Iji as an Ash’arite theologian, however, criticizing philosophers’ view, has been of a clear text-based approach and known prophet's appointment of no condition and property. Comparing the two views make their weaknesses clear and at the same time shows stability of Avicenna's with regard to Iji’s. This paper, as a study in the field of comparative theology, has intended to bring stability and weakness of the two views in to eye with in a comparative study. It is concluded that Avicenna's is more reasonable than Iji’s.

Theologians in some cases use the proof of miracle to prove the existence of God. This paper, surveying the relation of miracles to the proofs of the field, has intended to find the degree of miracle proof’s validity for the existence of God in Islamic and Christian theology. The conclusion would not only lead to the clearness of the real place of the proof and its usage but also help commentators to understand real meaning of the verses in the field. In the paper, the nature of miracle is described in a religious approach at first and then, the usage of the proof of miracle in Muslim and Christian theologians’ works is studied. Finally, the usability of the proof and degree of its validity have been critically studied.

Substantial departure is regarded as fundamental principle in transcendental philosophy, the one causing the school to be distinguished from others. Human soul, because of its dependence on natural world, is exposed to this departure and transformed. The theory opens a new space for knowing and introducing human soul not founded befor Mulla Sadra. The how for receieveing Divine revelation and occurrence of miracles and extraordinary actions by the friends of God is justified by this principle. Again, the human soul`s substantial departure help us to explain the problem of death. As is understood, during the departure two agents of belief and good action would lead human to happiness. Furthermore, corporeal resurrection and human metamorphosis may be justifiable by the departure.

As is certainly believed by Muslims, with the death of the Prophet of Islam revelation has been ended forever and no other prophet will come. After the Prophet's death, pure Imams have been regarded as religious authority. The concept of the seal of the Prophets has been founded on some principles among which is everlasting and comprehensive state of Islam as the most perfect and highest religion. In other word, the perfection of religion as something having passed stages and orders has established in Islam and, therefore, has made it the most perfect and everlasting religion. Now one may ask the question: are the followers of other religions, acting on their own religious teachings, merit of reward or are viewed as excusable? Some have viewed them to be excusable only, while some other have viewed them to be merit of reward and to go to Heaven. In this paper, the latter's has been criticized and the former established.

Examining the relation of religion with cosmology and ideology is regarded as an interesting and challangable discussion in religious studies. This study, with a theoric and analytic approach, has intended to explaining such problem as religion’s position to ideology, validity or invalidity of religion’s ideologizing, consequences of ideologic religion and reconsidering Dr. Shari’ati’s opinions has been performed. Muslim and western scholar’s interpretation of ideology and Shariat’s idea with regard to the interpretation of Islamic ideology as well as consequences of ideologic religion have been discussed in the paper. It has been understood that: 1. In one phrase, religion is more than ideology, though it may be of ideologic aspect also; 2. In some cases as Shariati’s thought, religion is not identical to ideology, it has been changed to institution; 3. One may not necessarily count ideology religious as is seen in Marx that is irreligious; 4. Though religion is not identical to ideology, Divine religions have been of ideologic message.

Quranic meaning's state of being in different levels ant its being of multiple depths is accepted by fariqain. Some have wrongly concluded the fact as pluralism and difference of readings. Yet, none of commentators and scholars have viewd it as pluralism; they all have viewed it as logical ordered meanings without any contradiction as a support for multiple opinions of commentators and faqihs and without any relation with pluralism. Moreover, pluralism leads to contradictory plurality at first and then, to authorizing all religious and sectorial readings, namely to the fact that opposes the most foundational purpose of Prophets and causes servants’ wandering and misleading. Such being the case, the holy Quran’s being of different ordered meanings opposes pluralism and never will agree with it.

During middle ages when the West was sunken in darkness and superstitions, Islamic world was at its highest point of flourishing. From the thirteenth century onwards, however, science was exposed to decline among Muslims. In sixteenth century when the west was in scientific progress, the East was eager to be equipped with sciences; the West used the eagerness of the East and, regardless of the culture of eastern traditional society transferred its scientific findings to it. Not so late, the eastern found that science may not be neutral and even it has been of negative effects on the western society such as alienation. Again, the westerns’ culture was different from the easterns’. Such a new attention to the cultural consequences of western sciences led to different positions among Muslim scholars. Some knew modern science as something opposing to Islam, some agreed with modern science, some other sought to make Islam as modern science demands and some tried to put modern science in the depth of Islamic view of the world. This paper is a research on functionalism and symbolism taken respectively by seyyed Hosein Nasr and Ziaoddin Sardar.