QABASAT
Year:2013 | Volume:18 | Issue:67|Papers Count:9

Pragmatism is a method in the new philosophy. According to his theory proving some matters, especially religion, is impossible and thus accepts them considering their application in human’s life. According to the theory of pragmatism all our imaginations, concepts, beliefs and theories are rules for our (pragmatic) “deed”; yet their “reality” lays in their practical benefit for our life. Thus the criterion of reality is beneficence, advantage, and resultant not consistency with the concrete reality. According to the theory of pragmatism, especially from the perspective of William James who is the founder of this school, religion has many personal and psychological benefits such as coherency of personality, vitality, hopefulness, relaxation, psychological health, ... This makes religion functionally necessary for human. I will show the negative results of such a view to religion and being religious. Some of the main criticisms of this method of proving the necessity of religion are: seeing religion as a device, neglecting the main functions of religion, intermixture of religion and religion-like schools, not being universal, not having essential functions, having some substitution for religion’s functions, not distinguishing between reality and function, devotionalism, and etc.

There are various and sometimes contradictory views regarding the possibility of religious knowledge. In this article the two bases of religious knowledge and making the other sciences religious, i.e. the theory of “comprehensiveness of religion” and “the Divine look at the universe”, are mentioned and tending to the theory of “comprehensiveness of religion”, the theory of “unity of science and religion” is emphasized; also the possibility of having religious science and the way to actualize it are discussed. Showing the non-cognitive aspects of science, the author has tried to show that these non-cognitive aspects may be completed by the non-cognitive aspects of religion; thus the possibility of religious science is proved. The author of this article believes religious knowledge is an intra-religious subject which has no answer in religion and also believes that science cannot answer the possibility or impossibility of religious knowledge; rather the author has proved religious knowledge by a philosophical and interpretational approach to the subject. The hermeneutical and interpretational approach of this article shows that reality has some esoteric aspects which should be interpreted step by step to explore the reality and reach to its core.

One of the challenging discussions in theology and philosophy is God’s former knowledge of the universe. There have been and there are pros and cons of this subject among the theologians in frequent decades. The pros have proved their claim with various substantial demonstrations. On the other hand the cons have tried to refute God’s former knowledge with various reasons. The known and important reasons of the cons will be analyzed and criticized in this article.

One of the fundamental questions regarding religion’s teachings is how to classify them. The main topic of this article is the division of religion into essential and accidental issues expressed by some writers. The meaning of the two terms in this view is different from their meaning in other places. The accidental teachings form 99 percent of the commands in this approach. These teachings are not the real Islam thus we are not obliged to obey them. According to the above theory, the two main reasons for considering Islam’s commands accidental are: they are either conditional propositions with false antecedents or they are answers to the questions asked from lawgiver. To evaluate these reasons, none of them are completely correct. The conditional propositions with false antecedents have the fallacy of confusing motivation and the motivated. The second reason has some problems as well including the fallacy of generalizing the predicate of an exception to all cases. The method of gathering data in this article is library research and the method of processing them is an analytic-critical method.

In this article I will investigate and criticize Nasr Hamed Abu-Zaid’s views and thoughts which are affected by historicism. Presenting some relevant bases of historicism, I will criticize Abu-Zaid’s views regarding the historicity of Quran and some of its teachings and commands.

One of the most outstanding and at the same time hysterical Muslim intellectuals is Dr. Nasr Hamed Abouzaid; he tries to present a modern interpretation of religion. He tries to criticize the traditional method of interpretation and Ijtihad (exertion) in understanding religious commands and also the main structure of the most Muslim scholar’s thought and religious interpretation; on the other hand, using the Hermeneutic method of interpretation, he tries to present a new method of interpreting texts. He believes heritage always forms our awareness and, consciously or unconsciously, affects our deeds. Therefore if the heritage cannot be neglected, it should be reconstructed. In his book “Dava’er al-Khoaf: Qira’ah fi Khetab al-Mar’ah” he is more a critic rather than an author. Yet in some discussions he has some comments, in addition to the criticism, and demonstrates for the validity or the the invalidity of his view. He investigates the views of Mohammad Abdeh, Qasem Amin, Taher al-Haddad, Fatimah Mernici, and etc. and approves or disapproves them. He also interjects and investigates the rules of some countries such as Egypt and Tunisia, and confirms or criticizes them. Presenting a structural method of understanding texts, Nasr Hamed Abuzaid tries to present a new perspective regarding women based on some principles such as the historical structure of text, interpretationism, linguistic structure, ... I will try to investigate and criticize some of the most important points of the book “Dava’er al-Khoaf”.

It is necessary to define the concept of faith to determine who is faithful and what is the meaning of being religious; thus it is necessary to determine the concept of faith. Islamic and Christian theologians have tried to define faith. Although the Martyred Motahhari does not independently define faith, but we can deduce from his writings on this topic that he considers faith as a kind of attachment, not a mere knowledge. Faith has a higher rank compared with knowledge and its subject, i.e. human’s attachment, may be religious or non-religious.The Christian existentialist theologian, Paul Tillich, defines faith as human’s final attachment and his goal. Every human’s final attachment is different from another one and is exactly a personal matter. He believes the final object of human’s life is only God and also believes that faith is a conscious deed which affects all aspects of human’s being. Faith is not an emotional matter and is not created by affection. Faith may be lost or in technical terms, it may be mixed with doubt; this makes it dynamic. Finally faith is a conscious deed which is freely formed yet the unconscious part of human’s personality affects it as well.

This article will answer the questions posed after studying Abu-Zaid’s report of Ibn-Arabi in the book ""Hakaza Takallam Ibn-Arabi" such as: is Abu-Zaid’s perception and interpretation of Ibn-Arabi correct, exact and fair-minded? Does his analysis of Ibn-Arabi show his personality and views or not?Although Abou-Zaid’s report of Ibn-Arabi is relatively correct and indicates the formation of his cognitive identity and also it is apparent that he is in harmony with him, but he in fact tries to use Ibn-Arabi and some of his theories to form his own intellectual ideas.Presenting Abu-Zaid’s narration of Ibn-Arabi in this article, his reading will be criticized.