درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

With a rational reflection on possible beings, Farabi presents an analysis of the relationship between existence and essence, which requires a new philosophical system distinct from Greek philosophy. In his view, all possible beings are composed of two metaphysical aspects, i.e. existence and essence. By distinguishing constituents (muqawwamāt) from accidental things (‘araḍiyyāt) and using terms such as ‘āriḍ and lāzim, Farabi explores the structure of possible beings. In possible beings, existence is not the same or a part of essence; rather, it is an accident of essence, and since any accidental thing is subject to causality (mu‘allal), thus the possible things require something out of themselves for their existence. The main point is that the container of this distinction is not merely the world of the mind or the objective world; rather, it is the product of rational analysis. In other words, the distinction of existence and essence is neither a mental distinction nor a physical one; rather, it is a rational distinction which is called, in today’s metaphysics, metaphysical distinction. In metaphysical distinction, the existence and essence of the possible beings are two ontological principles and two metaphysical modes of the being that compose its identity. The metaphysical distinction designs the foundation of the non-Greek philosophical system based on which one can explain, from the theological viewpoint, proving the existence of the Necessary Being, the evolution of the ultimate causality, natural agency with the agentive causality and divine agency; from the cosmological viewpoint, proving the essential contingency of the universe and the philosophical explanation of the creation; from the ontological viewpoint, dividing beings into necessary and possible, and explaining the structure of possible beings; and from the epistemological viewpoint, evolution in dividing knowledge. This article is an applied study that attempts, by relying on the descriptive-analytical method with an exploration of the metaphysical distinction between existence and essence, to deal with applying that distinction in Farabi’s philosophical system and its products and results.

Verse 69 / Zumar refers to the word "Ashraqat" and the radiance of the feeling of God's presence on the Day of Resurrection and likens it to the rising of the sun from the east of the earth and its illumination with this light. The commentators of the sects have expressed different views on it, including, "removing the veils, establishing the truth and proof, justice, illuminating the earth with the light of the believer's face, the resurrection of the Imam, the light of God, etc." The beginning and the end of the verse are accompanied by the proof of justice and the denial of oppression. Different classes of commentators, narrators, theologians, philosophers, and mystics have contented themselves with the interpretation of a verse, or interpretation, and some with the literal meaning of the phrase, but have not reached a single statement about it. However, the mentioned verse is one of the verses with different readings, or one of the verses that the commentators of the two sects have looked at from a special angle and view; Is not. The revelation of the monopoly of God's lordship over all human beings, for which there is evidence and none of the commentators have expressed this view, as well as the removal of the veils and veils and the revelation of the truths of things in the resurrection which some commentators have chosen.

SUBJECT AND OBJECTIVES : The source of sovereignty and obedience is Allah, the Almighty. Any obedience to others but Allah is rejected and considered as oppression unless it be along with His sovereignty and through His permission, such as the Guardianship (wilayah) of prophets and Divine Authorities (wali). The question arises here that what are the reasons for the compulsion of obedience or forbidding opposition to the Prophets. METHOD AND FINDING : This paper, was conducted with the method of qualitative research and documentary review. Accordingly, the author has examined the most important proofs of the obligation to follow the commands and instructions of the prophets based on the Quranic sources of narration and the covenants. CONCLUSION : This study argues that its evidences are based on both Sharia (Divine Law) and intellect; because if everyone acts according to his own ideas, as wherever the words of the Prophets agreed with his carnal desires, he would act according to them and if the words of the Prophets were not in accordance with his intentions and desires, he would not pay attention to them and so oppose him, surely such a person is not a follower of the Law of Religious, even though he seems to be a believer. In fact, he is really a hypocrite or ignorant of the truth of religion, which in both cases lacks faith.