Al-Daleel

The article discusses a certain aspect of an issue that has been the topic of various problems, centered on the role of religion in human life, and whether or not man really needs religion to build true beliefs. The study relies on the data coming out of the rational approach. A set of religious texts has been quoted as a guide in this way. Since the mere occurrence of belief is useless without being practicable in the man’s worldly life, so the study discusses another point related to the central problem that deals with the role of religion in adopting that certain belief and acting according to it in daily life. At the end, the study gets to proving the big role of religion in both points.

There is no doubt that there are strong challenges against the theory of knowledge (epistemology), which is the basis of founding the worldview, upon which all sciences depend, besides its essential role in man’s happiness. The most serious challenges against this theory are those in Western philosophy. In this study, we try, through a critical analytical approach, to present the most important of these challenges in contemporary philosophy represented by phenomenological philosophy, and show the nature of these challenges, which form another reading of the relationship between mind and reality. As phenomenological philosophy deals with mind, the self, and the transcendental ego, and abandons reality. This, in fact, is exclusion of the demonstrative mind’s role in Moreover, phenomenology denies metaphysics that deals with abstract phenomena that cannot be realized through consciousness or feeling. Hence, true scientific knowledge is the knowledge of immutable essences, that are actually perceived by consciousness or feeling. And finally, we try to criticize Husserl's phenomenological philosophy.

The public path that must be followed in order to reach the stage of protecting society against atheism is achieved by making people wise. The more we work to expand the circle of wise people in society, the less area through which atheists can have influence on people’s souls and minds. In this way, the number of those who follow corrupt and deviate atheistic thoughts would be less and lesser.“Wise people” here means those who know well the rules of true thinking firstly, apply them in place to get to the true doctrinal knowledge secondly, and to confirm them in their souls thirdly; so that these would be effective in the situation of motivation and will. In this case, it is man himself who controls and manages his soul in both his perceptual and motivational aspects, and directs himself, in his thoughts, desires and actions, towards his final goal as a human being to reach his sought cognitive and behavioral perfection in this worldly life.

The study aims at sifting through the topic of the Sacred, in order to show what may distinguish it from everything else, and to question the real Sacred and distinguish it from any other. The study has come into an introduction, four sections, and a conclusion. The introduction talks about the features of the study in general. The first section explains the most important terms related to the main topic, whereas the second section mentions the sources and origins of sanctification, and the most important theories in this regard. The third section discusses the specifications of the sacred and the most important results that can come out of sanctification. The last section is a discussion on the standards of sanctification and its reality, besides the central role of reason in digging deep in the topic of the sacred.

The article talks about imitation (taqlid) in religious beliefs: must the beliefs, which man adopts, be based on the basis of reasoning and inference, or that imitation is permissible in these beliefs? Is it necessary to have certainty in religious beliefs, or conjecture is sufficient? If assuming that certainty is necessary, then, what is meant by certainty? Is it the dogmatic belief that conforms to reality, or every dogmatic thing, whether it conforms to reality or not? Is there a correlation between the opinion that sees the permissibility of imitation in beliefs and the other which sees that conjecture is sufficient (concerning beliefs)? In this study, we discuss the limits of this topic whether or not it covers everything related to beliefs. And through the topics discussed in the study, it can be concluded that the essential point is the necessity of searching for religious beliefs and getting to certainty from certain evidence. However, if ordinary people put aside the getting to certainty from certain evidence --even though they are required to get to it-- due to their lack of understanding, it would be sufficient for them to be considered faithful when they feel certain of the true beliefs that they obtain through imitation (taqlid) or simple innate evidence.

The matter of life after death is one of the important matters that have preoccupied mans mind since ancient times. Every person feels within himself how eager he is to know the world after death, and what shall happen to him then. All religions have argued that man should survive after death, except that they differed in the way of his survival. Some think that man remains purely physical; for they believe that the reality of man is based on body only, whereas some others believe that man only remain spiritually; for they see the corruption of human body after death and see the impossibility of reconstructing that structure as it has been before death. Others have argued that both soul and body remain together in the world after death, meaning that the Resurrection is both physical and spiritual at the same time. But as for empiricists, they sometimes infer from near death experiment that there is life after. Near death experiment is temporary death experienced by some people who moved to the world after death, and upon their return to this world, they talked about the facts and events they met there. However, some philosophers have made use of rational arguments to prove the existence of the world after death.

The question of creation and its explanation is one of the most important questions that have preoccupied mans mind since old times. Man tried to explain all phenomena in the universe through the cognitive approaches and tools he had, and justified the existence of the world and its phenomena according to these approaches. Theologians relied on the tool of reason to prove the First Cause and Wise Creator Who had created all creatures. In contrast, materialists relied on the materialistic approach in explaining the emergence of the universe and all its phenomena, so they said that either the world ha come into existence by chance, or it was matter that had created all things from nothing. In this article, we try to discuss this problem through the descriptive and analytical approach according to the approaches and thoughts of both theologians and materialists. Through the study, it has appeared that the arguments, established by theologians to prove the existence of the Creator of this world, are true and perfect, whereas the arguments, established by materialists to prove their claim, are false.

One of the essential pillars of Islam is the care for man’s human aspects, and the most important elements of which are the cognitive and emotional sides. And these two sides represent the cornerstone of the behavioral aspect. The cognitive dimension develops beliefs, and the more your cognitive dimension is based on mental proofs, the more sober man’s beliefs shall be. The same is said about the emotional aspect represented by morals, that whenever the emotional aspect is inspired by human values and principles that Islam has declared, morals shall be high and shall not be affected by alien moralities. Also, with regard to the behavioral aspect, whenever a person relies on demonstrative reason and the values and principles stipulated by the Sharia, he shall be more sober-minded, preserving the rights of individuals and society. As for cognitive, emotional, and behavioral aspects according to humanists, they depend on material matters that lead to relative knowledge. In the cognitive aspect, empirical reason is adopted to lead to relative knowledge. In the emotional aspect; humanists see that values and principles in societies are at one level and there is no difference between them; as they differ according to different cultures of societies. And as for the behavioral aspect -because of cognitive and emotional aspects- it is natural to see phenomena that contradict human nature; therefore, man behaves beastly and lustfully because of the exclusion of religion and reason in daily life.