ENSANPAJOOHI-E DINI (RELIGIOUS ANTHROPOLOGY)
Year:2014 | Volume:10 | Issue:30|Papers Count:8

Spiritual needs of human beings to look at the world and life meaningfully and escape from meaninglessness, and to look at religion as a factor that provides meaning to life, have opened a new horizon in the direction of understanding of religion and produced “meaning approach” in religious. By presenting a new interpretation of human being, religion and their relationship, this approach emphasizes that in understanding of human being and religion, ‘all their aspects should be kept in mind. One, of the features of human need for religion lies in the meaning that. can be provided only by religion.Muhammad Hussein Tabatabaei, who approaches to religion and explains it from a religious point of view, believes that religion has various aspects. Explaining of religion rationally, he provides an interpretation of Islam that comes closer to the approach of those favoring the meaning approach. He, too, believes that the most important aspect of religion is that it provides meaning to human life.

Modem age due to its epistemological virtue has a special important, since it defined a new relation between human and truth, in which some modem philosophers, like Descartes, Kant and Nietzsche have more roles. In this thought, human could take place as the center and criterion of understanding and interpretation of truth. In fact, human’s subjectivism has been of more important role in understanding the whole system of being. Descartes with his Cogito, mathematical method, rationalism and clear and distinctive conceptions, Kant with his a priori categories, Copernicus revolution; being axial of human reason in morality and religion, Nietzsche with his thought of Will to Power, nihilism and revaluation, and. Sartre with putting human in place of God, had a big role in taking place of human as center of truth and gradual evolution of subjectivism. The conclusion was and is consisted of neglecting and misunderstanding of metaphysical facts, religion and morality, and also of to restricted human to manage his/her mundane life.

Studying human free will and option in both theoretical and practical aspects of human life has always been of vital importance. The reason why lies in the relation between one’s religious beliefs and practical life. With regard to the effect of free will as the base of human action, knowing the meaning and its essential agents has been necessary. Although most experts and scholars have been agreed on the self- evidence of human will, there cannot be found any agreement on its way of realization and nature. Reflecting on definitions and interpretations in the field, it would be clear that each has only a part of the truth. Proving human will and explaining the truth of human existence, this paper has studied the relationship between human will and Divine will. As is understood, human’ will differs from Divine God. Human will is founded upon some ground of such a kind that never may be attributed to God.

On Tabatabais Viewpoint, human being is of a particular nature leading to special manner of life and way that is ended to God. , that he is certain that led to the Lord is leading and Specific traditions and way of life. Calvin’s theology is based on the acknowledgment of God in the depths of the human mind. It is a theory one may not acquire by common education, rather it is something that each of us knows it in the womb completely and the nature does not let us forget it. In this paper, we have tried to extract the similarities and differences of the views. As is described, heart’s state. of being the place for innate knowledge, the need to evolve and mature natural tendency and the effect of sin on such an inner knowledge have been in common, while the purpose of the discussion, the nature of such an inner knowledge, its object and the way in which the knowledge happens are counted as the cases of difference.

Knowing oneself or self-recognition has been one of the major topics discussed by many philosophers and mystics. By the same token, Muslim philosophers and mystics inspired by the verses of the holy Qur’an and narrations introduced the most outstanding methods of self-recognition especially when referring to the Hadith “the one who knows his God, truly knows oneself’. Mulla Sadra and Ibn Arabi are among the prominent Muslim thinkers who in their various books talked about the possibility or impossibility of self-recognition and different methods to achieve it. For instance, Mulla Sadra talks about the plausibility of self-recognition whereas Ibn Arabi through two opposite analytical approaches refers to the concept of possibility and impossibility of “Knowing Oneself”. The present study discusses two approaches of Mulla Sadra and Ibn Arabi on Self-Recognition and Knowing Oneself and through a careful analysis finds no difference in the thoughts of these two outstanding Muslim philosophers.

Mohammad Taqi jafari Tabrizi believes that only one may perceive the real meaning of life who distances one’s natural self and attains one’s true self. Taking religion, reason and knowledgeable human nature as models, he introduces reasonable life and views such a life to be meaningful. Friedrich Nietzsche, however, explains nihilism - creating new values and putting them in place of the preceded ones- in four realms of human’s life including. those of reality, religion, mystical life and common morality. He has known those acting according to this theory -the will to power- and according to their abilities and talents and not following any pre-established ideals as “surhomme”. The will to power in Nietzsche’s thought, as is claimed, has prepared a ground for man to arrive at the highest degree of potency.

One of the chief principles of philosophical teachings is to explain the position of human in the world; the problem has been followed by different views as that of Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, the theory of superman. Opposing preceded approaches, Nietzsche sought not only to redefine this position but also to react appropriately considering the crises caused by modernity. That is how this theory had formed. Just like other theories proposed by human schools, Nietzsche’s theory, also, has its own problems which made it capable of being criticized. Believing in relativity, denying fundamentals as well as preferring body over the soul are the principles of his theory’ which made it totally against the religious teachings and is, therefore, criticized by them. This theory also has some internal issues as not being flexible in general, putting so much emphasize on superman and not giving a clear-cut model. This paper is to study the theory of superman from a new prospective and analyse it from the points of view of religion and reason.

Maimonids distinguishes between the resurrection and the next world. He relate the resurrection of the dead to the messianic era and the immorality of the soul to the next world. Maimonids tied immorality of the soul with intellectual development of soul in this world. he believes immorality of the soul belongs only to those who have enjoyed the blessing of intellect. Therefore, his interpretation of eschatological beliefs differs from common interpretation in Judaism. For Maimonids, Heaven and Hell and in general, reward and punishment have described in the level of most people’s understanding. Heaven and Hell is here and now. In this paper, we try to find an answer to this important question whether his source of ‘. inspiration in this theory has been bible and Jewish tradition or he has been influenced -by Greek philosophy, especially Aristotle and Muslim Peripatetics like Abu Nasr Farabi and Ibn Rushd.