Mohammad Saeedimehr دانشیار گروه فلسفه، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران author Maryam Barooti دانشجوی دکتری حکمت متعالیه، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران author text article 2012 per Allamah Tabatabai interprets the doctrine of Attributive monotheism of God under the philosophical theory of the identity of God’s perfection attributes with His essence. Because, in his view point, it is the only rational way for explanation of Attributive monotheism. According to this theory, all Divine perfection attributes are identical with each other and with God’s nature in external world; although they conceptually differ from each other and with God’s nature. His demonstration is based on some Islamic philosophy principles, such as “the bestower of a thing cannot be lack of it” or on “simplicity and purity of Divine essence”. In order to show the consistency of this explanation from Attributive monotheism, with acceptance of conceptual plurality of attributes, Allamah has presented two theses: A) the concepts of Divine attributes are posited mentally or virtually; B) the negation of plurality of attributes from God’s very nature. Through an accurate analysis, we can understand that these two theses are compatible and there is no contradiction in it. The first one is based on the fact that, since the concepts of attributes are virtual and mental, so conceptual plurality of attributes cannot damages the external unity of God’s attributes and essence. The second one, however, steps beyond and purifies Divine essence from any existential and conceptual qualification. University of Tehran 2008-7063 9 v. 2 no. 2012 5 28 https://jpht.ut.ac.ir/article_30277_17e8ddcde41e853ec500907987c637dc.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22059/jpht.2012.30277 Ali Fazeli استادیار دانشکده الهیات، دانشگاه یاسوج author Reza Akbarian استادیار گروه فلسفه دانشگاه تربیت مدرس author Maryam Yazdani کارشناس ارشد فلسفه و کلام اسلامی، مؤسسه آموزش عالی صدرالمتألهین تهران author text article 2012 per William Lane Craig, American recent philosopher has tried with appealing to Cantor’s latest ideas and also theory of “Big Bang” in physics; present a new explanation of cosmological argument. His explanation which is called “Kalam- Cosmological Argument” is going to describe Moslem philosopher’s argument in this aspect, like Kendi and Ghazali. He makes efforts to refuse the doctrine of eternality of the world and prove that the world has come to existence in a special time. Moreover, he proves that the world in its creation needs to God as a creator. So in this paper, first of all we will explain the Craig’s argument according to its basis and introductory views that have been used in it; then we will evaluation and criticize his basis by referring to Mulla-Sadra’s philosophy (Hikmat-Mota-Alye). University of Tehran 2008-7063 9 v. 2 no. 2012 29 52 https://jpht.ut.ac.ir/article_30278_4acd0864e10527d81500b12cfcaf9cf8.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22059/jpht.2012.30278 Mohammad Ahmadizade دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد فلسفه و کلام اسلامی، دانشگاه امام صادق(ع) author Mohammad Forghani دانشیار گروه فلسفه و کلام اسلامی دانشگاه امام صادق(ع) author text article 2012 per According to the philosophical principles of higher Wisdom (Motealiyeh), especially the theory of Substantial Movement (hareka fil-jawhar) and Psychology, it look impossible for human being to return to worldly life after his/her death. So refutation of the theory of reincarnation in the Sadra’s system will not be very hard, especially when considering the rule of Impossibility of Return (Emtena Tarajo). But in Islamic sources, especially in Shiite’s sources, we can find a pervasive believe in Returning to the worldly life that differs from reincarnation. I.e. Moslems Believe in Resurrection and Shiite’s believe in Resurrection and Returning of some elite humans at the End of time (Akharo-al-Zaman). At the beginning, it seems very hard to explain this belief according to the principles of Sadraian Thought and to distinguish it from reincarnation; so that the proofs which alleged against the theory of reincarnation can do nothing with it (i.e. theory of Returning or Rajat). But some of New-Sadraians, like Allameh Tabatabaei have considered this issue. He has tried to explain this Belief and find the solutions for it by maintaining the Sadra’s philosophical principle and, at the same time, distinguishing between natural and sudden death (Moute Ekhterami). University of Tehran 2008-7063 9 v. 2 no. 2012 53 80 https://jpht.ut.ac.ir/article_30279_faeaf39d9dce8411af96f287bb62ce4a.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22059/jpht.2012.30279 Hamid Sarvarian استادیار دانشکده الهیات و علوم اسلامی، دانشگاه تبریز author Mohammad Bonyani استادیار دانشکده الهیات، دانشگاه شیراز author text article 2012 per As we all know, human beings and animals in their life sometimes encounter with hardships and pains, while they were not culpable. Some of the Motazela and Emamiyeh’s theologians called this pains “the Primary Pains” and they generally regard them as a good events, because they are coming from Allah. In this respect (goodness of the Primary Pains) there are two different ideas: The first one that belongs to Mutazelah and emamiyeh theologians argues that beside the fact that “the Primary Pains” are expediential, it is also good because of the theory of substitution. In the other word, it is necessary for its cause to substitute this pain with something else. The Second one says that the origins of “the Primary Pains” lay down only in their interest for creatures and there is no need to any more substitution. In this paper we challenged both perspectives: the first view is not completely true, because the devout people (people who are observant of religious laws and practices) will receive the remuneration in the afterlife world, and they will receive the substitution only if they are not given remuneration. And about non-devout people (who necessarily are not observant of religious laws and practices) like animals, kids, insane and so on, if the “the Primary Pain” is in their interest then they ... University of Tehran 2008-7063 9 v. 2 no. 2012 81 110 https://jpht.ut.ac.ir/article_30280_df51272eb0bcf81440496d175c40f8c0.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22059/jpht.2012.30280 Ibarahim Rezaei استادیار گروه معارف اهل البیت، دانشگاه اصفهان author Mohammad Safian استادیار گروه فلسفه، دانشگاه اصفهان author text article 2012 per In Heidegger’s thought God is appeared in three main forms: existence, sacred idea, and the final God. The existence, is apprehended with an internal experience; and the sacred will discovered by confronting with an art work which is exhaustive; but the final God, needs to eager expectancy, The God whose absence is expressed in the verses of poets. So the existence, art works and God's absence are all “possessing phenomena”, a phenomenon which cause unification between subject and nature. Accordingly, perception of God indeed depends on resilience from ordinary logical thought and entrance into spiritual thought. According to Heidegger, poetry is manifestation and guidance of such a perception. University of Tehran 2008-7063 9 v. 2 no. 2012 111 130 https://jpht.ut.ac.ir/article_30281_35ad5dcfd6d3d1d81eb70b24d365a44b.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22059/jpht.2012.30281 Javad Firoozi استادیار ادیان و عرفان دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه سمنان author Zinat Hosseini دانش‌آموخته کارشناسی ارشد ادیان و عرفان، دانشکده علوم انسانی دانشگاه سمنان author text article 2012 per From the Ancient times, the question of God’s concept has been an ultimate concern for humankind and in recent times most of the thinkers try to answer in it from different aspects. The present article is going to consider this problem from Yung's psychoanalytical point of view. Following William James and Sigmund Freud generally, Carl Gustav Yung has had many studies concerning psychology of religion and in most part of his life tried to answer to this essential question. Although we can find some paradoxes in his findings. In his view point, God is a psychological reality that is located in our inside (psyche). He is not an imaginary or illusory reality that philosophers mixed it up with an object. God is achieved through religious experience. University of Tehran 2008-7063 9 v. 2 no. 2012 131 148 https://jpht.ut.ac.ir/article_30282_a05ce23d739f11404f934661ada92e62.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22059/jpht.2012.30282 Mohammad lal Alizadeh استادیار گروه علوم سیاسی دانشگاه پیام نور تهران، ایران author Azam Moghadas دانشجوی دکتری جامعه‌شناسی سیاسی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس تهران author text article 2012 per This paper is an inquiry concerning the function of religion in Tocqueville’s theory of democracy. In analyzing the ideology of Democracy in America, he stated that religion plays an important role in establishing democracy, protecting it against threats such as materialism, individualism, tyranny of majority, focusing of power, and restriction of freedom versus equality. Tocqueville explains this role by emphasizing on moral aspect and social utility of religion in democratic societies. To him, religion is the main source and backrest of private and public morality and morality, is one of the first conditions of society continuance and survival. University of Tehran 2008-7063 9 v. 2 no. 2012 149 166 https://jpht.ut.ac.ir/article_30283_9c83e298dba79817a0fc7728e0ab9206.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22059/jpht.2012.30283