Journal of Religious Studies
Year:2012 | Volume:6 | Issue:11|Papers Count:9

Bhakti ("loving devotion") is a general term in Indian culture. Considering its broad meaning this term could be an integral part of every religion, but in India, from a few centuries before Common Era, bhakti gradually has been associated with specific gods, religious beliefs and practices, in as much as today it is the most important component of Indian religions. According to early Indologists, such as Albrecht Weber and Friedrich Lorinser, the formation of bhakti was influenced by Christianity so they paid no heed to its Indian roots. However other scholars such as Bhandarkar and Radhakrishnan traced the roots of bhakti to the Hindu texts and considered it as an indigenous concept. The emphasis on Hindu texts was followed by later scholars in as much as it reduced the foreign influences to the secondary role and limited it to the later development of the concept in the medieval period. So in order to understand the concept of bhakti and to trace its roots, above all, it is necessary to study the Hindu texts.

Most of the Jewish rituals have been formed in connection with nature throughout history. Mishna and Talmud elaborated the nature-oriented teachings of the Bible in order to protect the environment. So Jews who behave in accordance with the teachings of Torah must choose the ways that are compatible with natural changes, such as the emergence of seasons, to cause the least damage to the environment. This article tries to describe the Jews' view on God, man and nature and explain their solution to the environmental crisis.

For Rumi the entire world of creation is the manifestation of the unique glory of God, in which God has revealed Himself in accordance with the creatures' capacities and faculties. Therefore, he describes the world as a mirror that constantly reflects the God's face. For him whole parts of the realm of existence are full of meaning and following his master, Shams Tabrizi, he believes that God is manifested in this very meaning. Rumi invites people to observe this meaning by purifying their minds and selves. Sometimes in Rumi's ontology the bipolar world changes into an indivisible and simple existence consisted of different levels. He sees no "discord" in the realm of existence but he describes the world as the place of "union" with God so every bit of it is full of meaning. Therefore from Rumi's viewpoint the realm of existence is full of joy and passion and every part of it goes through the way of perfection.

According to the Sufis' chains of authorities, the tradition of Shah Nimatullah Vali (d.1430 C.E.) goes back to Ahmad Ghazali (d.1126 C.E.), the head of the Marufi order and the brother of the famous Imam Muhammad Ghazali. This chain was developed outside Iran by the unknown successor of Ahmad Ghazali, mentioned as Abulfazl al-Baghdadi, and through some intermediaries reached Abu Madyan (d. 1198 C.E.), in Tlemcen (a town in Northwestern Algeria). The name of Abu Madyan is frequently mentioned in Ibn al-Arabi's works as his master. This chain finally came up to Shah Nimatullah Vali, thus returned to Iran. This article tries to survey the real identity of Shaikh Abulfazl al-Baghdadi.

The theory of "late modernity" is the key to understand Giddens' thought on religion and his critique of early sociologists. According to Giddens, religion has had two different phases in early and late modernity. The misunderstanding of the nature of the early modernity led to some wrong predictions about the future of religion as some sociologists claimed that religion would eventually disappear. However in late modernity, given its specific characteristics, appeal for religion and spirituality has increased. By surveying the outcomes of the modernity and criticizing the views of early sociologists (such as Marx, Durkheim and Weber) Giddens asserts that religion is not going to be abolish. Nevertheless, religious revival of late modernity does not indicate that religion will return to its traditional condition. A compromise between modernity and religion could be possible, provided that religion undergoes ongoing reflexivity and dialogue.

One of the important subjects of the philosophy of religion is the religious language. This subject was introduced in the early theological and mystical books, prior to the modern works of the philosophy of religion. Pseudo-Dionysius is one of the early thinkers who has systematically surveyed the subject in his books. For talking about God he prefers the negative language to affirmative one. Pseudo-Dionysius believes that the negative language is the language of intelligible realities thus when a person, in his spiritual journey, comes up to the state of the intelligible realities he begins to pray God by negative language. Therefore for Pseudo-Dionysius the negative theology is related to a special stage of knowledge. However he ascribes negative language to intelligible manifestations of God, not to the God's essence. He describes intelligible and hidden manifestations of God as "Super–existence" and for him it is not reasonable to talk about "Super–existence" in an earthy way. For this reason negative language is the best way to talk about God.

Abraham is the father of the Semitic religions, i.e. Judaism, Christianity and Islam. According to the sacred books of these religions God commands Abraham to offer his son as a sacrifice. However, the true identity of this son is a matter of debate, Jews and Christians refer to Isaac while Muslims mention Ishmael. But the question is what is really important in this story? The true identity of the son or the faith of Abraham and his loyalty to God's decree? If the story is told for drawing people's attention to Abraham's faith and persuading them to fallow his way, why such an argument has emerged? In an attempt to answer this question present article firstly presents a comparative account of the story according to the Bible and Qur'an. Then, it explains the role of "Inheritance" as the key feature of this disputation. Finally by a historical survey of various interpretations we come to the conclusion that these traditions think of the son offered as a sacrifice as the true heir to Abraham.