Examining the boundaries and criteria for exaggeration and degradation from the views of Allameh Majlesi and Sheikh Mufid
Journal Title: جستارهایی در فلسفه و کلام - Year 2015, Vol 47, Issue 95
Abstract
The present study aims to examine the boundaries and criteria for exaggeration and degradation from the views of Allameh Majlesi and Sheikh Mufid. Both theologians have referred to similar notions as limits and criteria for exaggeration, including a belief in the divinity and prophecy of the infallible imams, a belief in the reincarnation and union of the infallibles with God, or believing that because of the knowledge of the Imams, religious obligations are not incumbent upon them. In addition, the common criterion of delegation is that infallibles (independently and in the same rank and line with the Lord) carry attributes such as creation, sustenance, causing birth, health and death. The disagreement between the two theologians as regards a determination of the boundaries and criteria for exaggeration and degradation become clear in terms of issues including the knowledge of the imam, infallibility regarding minor or unintentional sins, the primordial creation of the fourteen infallibles, their miracles and supernatural virtues, their dignity and status in the universe, and the like. The vast range of these disagreements leads to their different views pertaining to people who commit exaggeration and degradation. An attention to these differences is important because from a jurisprudential perspective, one who exaggerates (ghālī) is associated with disbelief and the implications of infidelity follow him. Hence, it is crucially important to come closer to issues of agreement with regard to the determination of the boundaries and criteria for exaggeration and degradation. Moreover, in relation to calling the ones who exaggerate as infidels, it is a vital issue to consider views such as ‘exaggeration will entail infidelity only if it leads to the (conscious and deliberate) denial of divinity, and the Oneness of God, and the prophethood.’ Therefore, in matters of conflict and antinomy, and in minor and detailed affairs, one should not accuse people of exaggeration and degradation based on personal or minimum criteria and limits.
Authors and Affiliations
Foroghusadat Rahimpour, Farzaneh Shahbazi
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP203729
- DOI 10.22067/philosophy.v47i2.25525
- Views 92
- Downloads 0
Religion and Moral Development in the Contemporary World
Having provided instructions about three basic issues of God, universe, and man with prescriptions and instructions on certain moral values, religions constantly aim at a desirable moral development. In Islamic texts, an...
A Critical Look at Kant’s Ethics
Kant’s ethical theory is one the most important theories in philosophy of ethics, which has always attracted the attention of the commentators and critics. Although it has many positive points, there are some objections...
Mind from the perspective of Avicenna
“Mind” is among the words frequently used in the works of Muslim philosophers, including Avicenna; however, a positive meaning can hardly be elucidated from it. Given the type of applications of this word in the works of...
Affirmative Ontology Study of Gilles Deleuze’s Principles of Affirmative Ontology among Pre-Kantian and Post-Kantian Philosophers
Deleuze presents his ontology as a post-Kantian philosophy. The main concern of post-Kantian philosophy, from Solomon Maimon to Hegel, was to construct a new metaphysics after critique of Kant and elucidation of the crea...
A Critical Review of Christian Exclusivism
Exclusivism is among the matters of dispute among the theologians and advocates of religions, which has since long ago been of interest to the Christian theologians and emphasized by them and now is facing various challe...