Philosophy of religion
Year:2015 | Volume:11 | Issue:4|Papers Count:9

The theory of “Moderation” which is based on Aristotelian ethics, since the third and fo urth centuries Be, gradually has entered into Islamic ethical literature and many scholars, such as Ibn Miskawayh and Khawajeb Nasir ai-Din Toosi, have founded their ethical works on this Idea. According to this theory, the criteria of each virtues deed or action, is its rational consistency with “the mean”; and avoiding the excess and deficiency which are considered as v ices. In this st udy, by examining this theory and comparing it with the Islam’s ethical theory- which is expressed in I slam’s main texts, i.e the Quran and hadith - first of all, we will try to set forth an accurate and inclusive view in this regard; and finally, we will show the incompleteness of the basis of the Aristotelian theory of “Moderation” and prov that according to reliable religious texts, the most important criterion for “happiness” and human being’s “"salvation”, is his “intimacy to God” that encompass all excellences. And vice versa, any deed that prevent person from approximating to the almighty God, is called “wretchedness”.

Both Olama-i- Osoul- Fiqh - in Islam- and Schle ierrnacher- in westem thought- have the same hermeneutical viewpoint, i.e. achieving the intention of author. For achieving this goal, Schleiermacher starts with two phases of grammatical and technical interpretation and explains them. But Moslem scholars (Olama-i- Osoul) in order to attaining to the author’s intention, set forth a chai n of I iteral and rational rules which is common among all rational scholars. In this paper, beside comparing these two hermeneutical view and explaining their similarities and differences, we will conclude that Moslem scholar’s theory is preferred to Schleiermacher’s for its internal consistency, and leaves no rooms for anomalous gestures.

The present study attempts to define the meaning of faith according to the views of Morjeeh. Because the definition of this notion could distinguishes this sect from the other sects of the era and the belief in this definition of faith is the common point among all the branches of Morjeeh. Finally, this study criticizes their view on the basis of the Quran and the traditions (Hadiths) of the Shiite Imams (Peace be Upon them). This sect believed that they adopted their name from the verses of the Quran. The views of the Morjeeh were the following regarding the definition of faith: a) There is no need to di stinguish between Islam and fai th; b) Everybody who confesses mierely that there is no God except Allah is a b eliever; c) committing great sins has no effect upon one’s faith; d) There is no relationship between faith and deeds. These strange views affected the thoughts of the Muslims at that era and deviat Muslim society from the right path which was delineated by the prophet for the salvation of mankind in this world and the hereafter (next world). This paper will criticize the views of this sect and prove that according to I marniyeh viewpoint (the twelve - Imam Shiite sect), faith is considered as an oral confession (Shahadatain), and true belief in God and it is after that accepting Islam and lower than it. Therefore, great sins or very bad deeds affect directly on the faith of a Muslim and one can never deny the relationship between faith and deeds.

“Reason” is one of the human being’s aspects through which he/she could both acquires the knowledge and acts. But “belief” is an internal and enthusiastically acknowledgement of God which reaches human the confidence and inner relief. Moreover, it provides an expanded worldview for him. So, the main goal of the present paper is to clarify How Belief and Reason are relevant to each other? Could we ignore the othere, if we have the other one? In this paper, we have investigated this issue from two different thinkers’ viewpoint. i.e. Ghazali, who belive to fide ism and could be considered more fideist than rational ist; and M ulla-Sadra, who is more a rationalist philosophers. Ghazali Believes that theoretical reason is unable to comprehend the religious doctrines. So, in his view until ordinary people’s believes is more reliable than philosopical reason. On the other hand, Mulla- Sadra asserts that, a I though theoretical reason is I im ited to som e extent, but has an unden iable role in religious domains. Moreover, not on ly reason is not contrary to religion, but it can compleat its ambiguity.

Traditionalism, is a new school of thought that belonges to 20th century. In the other word, traditionalism is one 0 f the main outcomes of co nflict between tradition and modernity in En lightenment. So it a dvocates from traditions and every thing that belongs to the past. One of the most important issues of this school is “perennial wisdom”. According to this doctrine, all deep-rooted traditions are legitimate andt hey could posses some parts of reality; i.e. the traditionalism, that itself emerges from enlightenment, will end up with religious pluralism and aut hority of any deep-rooted tradition and custom. This paper will review the pluralistic foundations of this school and claims that the most fundamental belief of traditionaIism, which leads to accept religious pluralism, i.e. the validity and sa nctity of a II historical traditions, is flawed and dismissed.

One of the main issues of theology and philosophy of religion is the problem of evil (Pain and suffering) and their re lationship with God and H is attributes. Because we may ask ourselves that how, from one hand, there could be an omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent God in the world, and on the other hand, he let many evils interfer in the world affairs and takes place. Dose his om nipotence, omniscience and ben evolence corresponds with the existence of ev ils? In this paper, from two different attitude (philosophers and theologians), i. e. Natural and Existential attitude will answer to this famous question. Theologians with their natural attitude will answer that both evils and goods are necessary in this world, because with the lack of evils nobody will appreciate goods and g od’s favor. So ev iles are indispensable part of this life and creation of the world. But philosophers with their existential attitude believe that the existence of evils like pains and suffering make human beings attention return to G od and metaphisical cuases as creator and main agent of this world, and especially comprehend their own initial needs to have a good relationship with them. Moreover, with experiencing pain and suffering, we will realize that others have endured suffering, so it is our duty to have sympathy with them.

Al-Ghazali was one of the Islamic scholars who was interested in revivaling Islamic religious teachings and for this reason, he wrote Ihya -Ulum aI-Din. In this book, he tried to provide a pattern for the believers of his time. In this paper, with emphasis on psychological views of al-Ghazali, we try to discuss about effects of religiosity. For this purpose, Ghazali’s ideas, which has been expressed in four parts of Ihya’ ‘ulurn aI-din as ‘Ibadiyyat, ‘Adat, Munjiyat and Muhlikat, under the titles of epistemological, spiritual, emotional, moral and social effects ofre ligiosity, will be taken into consideration. As we know, the religiosity which is based on knowleldge depends on the answers to existential and Interpretative questions. For Believers, Saviors of religion (Munjiyat), In addition to the elimination of evils (Muhlikat), help to create positive emotional feelings. Ethics has a crucial role in religiosity. So believers in their own lives must try to acquire moral virtues and avoid moral vices. In al-Ghazali’s thoughts, religion provides happiness for believers both in this world and in hereafter.

Neurotheology is a modern field that seeks to justify religious experiences. Neurotheology consist of two main fields: neuroscience and theology. These two fields mixed together and became a new field. Some scientists opposed with Neurotheology and its issues. They utilize neuroscience and prove that religious experiences are false and fiction. But other scientists try to prove the reliability of this new field. Although theologians themselves still defend of their views and religious experience. ln this paper, at first we will describe Neurotheology and re ligious experiences and then we will disgust whether Neurotheology can prove legitimacy of religious experiences or not.