Ma`rifat-e Adyan
Year:2017 | Volume:8 | Issue:3 (31) |Papers Count:8

The term "Celestial Kingdom" is used in the Qur'an and in the Gospels as well. In Islam, several interpretations are given to this term; such as, great kingdom, throne, the wonders of the heavens and the earth and treasures. In the mystical Qur'an commentaries, kingdom is always to mean metaphysical world and inner state of the world. Witnessing this kingdom requires knowing the names of the Divine actions and the oneness of God (Tawhid). This objective can be realized by performing voluntary acts, grace and guidance according to Divine Command. Also, realization of the heavenly kingdom is accompanied by changes in the degree of the soul according to the levels of existence. In Christianity too, there are several interpretations of the kingdom, such as the kingdom of Christ in the apocalypse and the kingdom of God. But, in the mysticism of oriental Christianity, "kingdom" is used to mean an inner entity associated with intuition, unity with God and the Trinity. The attainment of this aim requires performing voluntary acts and supported by the grace of the Holy Spirit. If one wants to be prepared for celestial kingdom, one's soul must change through divine grace.

The adaptation of the Qur'an's from the New and Old Testaments is the most important theory about the sources of the Qur'an and is commonly held by Orientalists. It is mainly based on the teachings of these two scriptures. Rejecting the idea of the revelation of the Qur'an and prophecy of the prophet of Islam, this theory holds that the prophet had learned many teachings of the Testaments from some Jewish and Christian people and groups. This research aims to provide a relatively comprehensive critique of the theory of adaptation and to confirm the revelation of the Qur'an. Focusing on a number of important content and linguistic differences between the common teachings of the Qur'an and the Testaments, the researcher seeks to prove the unsoundness of the claim that the Qur'an has been adapted from the New and Old Testaments. The existence of the triple opposite, contradictory and slightly different accounts among the common historical narrations, the existence of different reports and the essential difference in the style and explanatory structure of the two and the lack of internal contradictions of the Testaments in the Qur' an are among the important differences already mentioned. The existence of a common source of revelation for the two books, the silence of a group of Jewish and Christian scholars or their converting to Islam, the severe criticism leveled by the Qur'an at the Jews and Christians, the inconsistency of adaptation with the Prophet's character, the challenge posed by the Qur'an and its emphasis on its being reveled and the association of many Quranic verses with occasions of Revelation are among the arguments against the theory of the adaptation of the Quran from the Testaments.

One of the important teachings of Islam and Christianity is calling their followers for cooperation and forbidding them from division. In spite of the repeated warnings which found in the sacred texts of these religions, some sects have taken form within them. The central point at issue here is the cause for the division and the motive and characteristics of those who provoke it. Using a descriptive-analytical method and a comparative approach, this study explores the issue of the division within religion and the characteristics of its promoters from the perspective of the Qur'an and the New Testament. Both sacred texts warn against the disagreement and division among their followers. The New Testament focuses only on the followers of Jesus Christ in this regard. But, the Holy Qur'an also warns the nations and the followers of the previous prophets. Regarding the features of the promoters of division, both sacred texts emphasize on their spiritual weaknesses and their involvement in vices. The Holy Quran uses the term "Bagi" as a distinctive feature of those who provoke division. The New Testament considers them as slaves of carnal desires and lacking spiritual maturity. The emphasis given by the sacred texts of Islam and Christianity to this issue indicates the importance of providing true believers with spiritual and moral education in order to prevent division within religion.

This paper, titled "a comparative study of the view of Islam and Zoroastrianism about afterlife", addresses the question whether man lives an immortal life or dies an eternal death. This research focuses on "man's afterlife". So, the main question of the research is what, according to Islam and Zoroastrianism, is the outcome of man? What Kind of life will it be if it is eternal? The research findings show that these two religions, though have slight differences about this issue, emphasize on man's "immortality" and the "life" after death. After examining the world and man of Mazdayasna, the paper elaborates on the fate of soul from this perspective. In Islam, special attention is given to the study of the eternity of spirit, soul, the levels of soul and Kholud (immortality). "Kholud" is used in the Quran to mean "immortality". In the Qur'an and Islam, this discussion comes under the heading of "immortality of soul."

In Hinduism, formulating an idea or making a ruling is a very difficult task. First, it is necessary to refer to the diverse and numerous holy texts of this faith. Then, it is necessary to refer to the important philosophical schools of thought of Hinduism. Finally, one has to refer to the views of scholars, reformers and influential people of this faith. Furthermore, the researcher has to go through the various views of this faith and show to which Hindu period his findings are related, from which sacred text they are obtained, which philosophical schools support them, and who are the outstanding figures who approve them. Definitely, this is, a very difficult task and the findings are not generally accepted. The present paper seeks to review the mentioned sources and attempt to analyze them.

This paper seeks to study the idea of God and explain His ontological existence in Vedanta school. This school is the most important and most profound mystical- philosophical school in Hinduism and it is based on the last sections of "Vedas", which is considered as the most sacred Hindu scriptures. Although the hymns of Vedas begin with praising gods, in the final hymns, the One God is presented and the other gods represent a manifestation of the One God. Also, the Vedanta school is based on the last sections of the Vedas that display clear tendency to monotheism. The scholars of this school have presented a number of interpretations on God and the unity of Being, the most important of which is those presented by Sankara and Ramanuja. Sankara who established "Adavita Vedanta" school, rejects absolute dualism, denies any dichotomy between man and God, and believes in the unity of the Absolute. On the other hand, Ramanuja has modified non-dualism and his view is referred to a modified non-dualism or “ Vishishtadvaita ”. Ramanuja accepts the distinction between man and God and rejects the unity of absolute Being. Ramanuja’s theory is known as the theory of "Mokayef”.

Religious anthropology is a type of anthropology concerned with the various dimensions and human nature and based on sacred texts. Considering the undeniable influence of the teachings of Paul on Christian beliefs, the present paper seeks to examine his views on the multi-dimensional existence of man by directly referring to Paul's letters in the New Testament and citing historical evidence. According to the study results, Paul argues that, in addition to body, man has another dimension, which, unlike body, is permanent and everlasting, and has various effects. Although Paul sometimes uses words to distinguish between soul and spirit, his other writings do not confirm that there is essential distinction between the two. The use of different terms is only intended to refer to the various uses of the non-physical dimension, and there is no reason for distinguishing between them.

Practice and the mystical analysis of practice is one of the most important issues which are studied in most religious and mystical traditions. In many Islamic, fiqhi, ethical and mystical sources, practice is presented as a systematic mystical work. In Hindu faith, too, Brahmans, Pourhanis and Bhagavad Gita lay emphasis on practice. In the two texts of Hadiqqat Al-Haqiqah and Bhagavad Gita, performing religious duties is specially crystalized and it is referred to as one of the alternatives of salvation. The research argues that God has created man so that he may work, especiall regarding the compliance with religious duties which everyone has to perform in all stages of mystical journey, in so far as one can make a change in one's attributes. In Hadiqah, active people act differently according to their potentialities and purposes while in Bhagavad Gita, man’s action is based on his manners (primordial qualities). In addition, everyone has his/her own special actions and duties considering one's social class. The present paper expounds the nature of action and inaction by referring to the two texts of Hadiqat al-Haqiqah and BhagavadGita and makes a contrast between their views. The research findings show that through their interpretation of the truth of practice, the texts of Hadiqa al-Hagiqa and Bhagavad Gita provide a pattern of pragmatic mysticism and spiritual conduct that does not hinder the contemporary man from carrying out his worldly activities. In addition, contrary to the misconception about practice and pragmatism in modern time, and its adverse consequences on the contemporary world, Hadiqa and Bhagavad Gita insist on the principality of action and performing religious duties for the attainment of the highest state of divine nearness.