نسرین بحرینی

Any political unit's development, strength, and subsistence, especially in critical situations, rely on people's participation and social resources. Similarly, in costly and threatening crises like war, reliance on the masses and their responsibility leads to social advancement and solutions to state problems. The main question of the present article is ‘whether popular participation in the imposed war and Western sanctions could be a pattern for solving the country's future problems?’ People's presence and participation have been of most crucial factors of victory, persistence, and maintenance of the Islamic Revolution of Iran. The findings declare that although we can find examples of this kind of national partnership in some nations, Iranians' successful model of unity and participation during the eight years of unequal war and sanctions is unique. Using this model can lead to the solidarity of the government and nation in rapid development and ensure the country's progress in the future. The study employs a library-research method for data collection in a descriptive-analytical approach.

The transmission of values in a country like Iran, which has a society and political system based on religion, has a twofold importance. Cinema in our country can be improved by localizing it - as one of the most basic and most impressive media of the modern world- based on the Islamic Revolution values and principles. It is evident that the continuous monitoring and evaluation of products in this area becomes more serious. The present study is an attempt to analyze the content of one of the cinematic products and evaluate different dimensions of religiosity used in it. By making use of the five dimension model of religiosity of Glock and Stark (doctrinal, ritual, experiential, cognitive, and the one related to outcome) and by implementing the quantitative content analysis, the thrust of this research is to evaluate the dimensions and categories of religiosity used in the "The Gold and the Copper" movie through a descriptive-analytic approach. The main question of the article is: What dimensions of religiosity lie in this film and how have they been reflected in it? The results illustrate that the ritual and doctrinal dimensions (45/7% and 29/5% respectively) have the highest degree of contribution of the religious categories used in the film, while the cognitive dimension has the lowest degree (7%).

Plato maintained that God's knoivledge of things consisted of se!f existent externalforms, i.e. Ideas. Plato's belief has been criticized lry Mui/a 5adra and others. Avicenna believes since God is the knower of His own essence which is the complete cause of things, He is the knower of things. His knowledge of things is a general kn01v!edge and general, in this sense, means lack of transformation of knowledge in accordance witb the transformation of knmvn object. The philosophers after Avicenna criticized him, because his belief necessitates the obstacle of the evacuation of the essence of God from peifection and the dread of subsistence of the empirica! knowledge is essentialfor one who is by essence and act non-material. 5hqykh Ishraq maintains that things, whether material or non-material, are presentfor God, the Exalted, by their own concrete existence. There are also criticisms on 5hqykh Ishraq 's notion, among them is that his opinion on the presence of material things is prohibitedfor God, the Exalted, because materiality and presence do not aggregate. 5adr ul-Muta'alehin has affirmed the detailed kno1vledge of God through the principle of "simple reality is all things" i.e. the knowledge of the Necessary Being of all things is actualized in the stage of His essence before the existence of those things. Allameh Tabatabaii rationalizes the detailed knoivledge of God by the existential application of God which is essential for the assumption of necessity of the existence in• itse!f.

Plato maintained that God's knoivledge of things consisted of se!f existent externalforms, i.e. Ideas. Plato's belief has been criticized lry Mui/a 5adra and others. Avicenna believes since God is the knower of His own essence which is the complete cause of things, He is the knower of things. His knowledge of things is a general kn01v!edge and general, in this sense, means lack of transformation of knowledge in accordance witb the transformation of knmvn object. The philosophers after Avicenna criticized him, because his belief necessitates the obstacle of the evacuation of the essence of God from peifection and the dread of subsistence of the empirica! knowledge is essentialfor one who is by essence and act non-material. 5hqykh Ishraq maintains that things, whether material or non-material, are presentfor God, the Exalted, by their own concrete existence. There are also criticisms on 5hqykh Ishraq 's notion, among them is that his opinion on the presence of material things is prohibitedfor God, the Exalted, because materiality and presence do not aggregate. 5adr ul-Muta'alehin has affirmed the detailed kno1vledge of God through the principle of "simple reality is all things" i.e. the knowledge of the Necessary Being of all things is actualized in the stage of His essence before the existence of those things. Allameh Tabatabaii rationalizes the detailed knoivledge of God by the existential application of God which is essential for the assumption of necessity of the existence in• itse!f.