Al-Daleel

The question of human freedom and choice within the framework of divine justice is a prominent intellectual debate that has occupied human thought. It raises a central question regarding the balance between human freedom of choice and God\'s justice in predestination (Qadar) and decree (Qada\'). If humans are entirely free in their actions, how can God be all-knowing and the administrator of the universe? Conversely, if humans are compelled to act by the will of God, how can divine judgment be just if man lacks genuine freedom in his decisions? Islamic thought has grappled with this issue since its inception, seeking to understand the relationship between determinism (Jabr) and free will (Ikhtiyar) in light of reason and revelation. Meanwhile, some modern and Western philosophies offer materialistic and analytical interpretations of this problem. David Hume, for example, argues that free will must be understood within the framework of natural causality, where human actions are linked to empirical causes, weakening the idea of absolute choice but not entirely negating moral responsibility. Sam Harris, on the other hand, adopts a more deterministic view, arguing that free will is merely an illusion because human decisions are governed by pre-existing biological and neurological factors, thereby limiting individual responsibility for their actions. This philosophical understanding intersects with Islamic and religious debates concerning predestination and decree. However, the fundamental difference lies in the metaphysical basis. Islamic thought relies on the duality of divine justice and moral responsibility, while modern perspectives originate from a purely materialistic standpoint. This issue remains a focal point of ongoing intellectual discussion, with numerous approaches seeking to understand it according to the data of religion, philosophy, and science. Furthermore, how can religious texts - particularly the scientific and intellectual foundations laid down by Imam al-Ridha (peace be upon him) - pertaining to predestination, decree, determinism, and free will be understood in the context of reason and the principles of divine justice? All of this will be presented within the framework of ancient and contemporary intellectual debates and approaches to address this problem.

Many researchers see the collective mind as a drawback for nations, primarily because individuals within it tend to follow others blindly, without thinking for themselves. Some even call this a "herd mentality," where individual thought disappears and actions become unconscious, controlled by the group. Each group often believes that its unity is right and that everything else is wrong and dangerous. But this completely negative view isn't accurate or helpful. We can distinguish between a "conscious collective mind," which is based on facts and good reasons, includes smart, aware, and creative people, and supports practical ideas that benefit society; and an "unconscious" one, based on chaos and ignoring individual thought, which harms national unity and the discipline of people. So, this study, which describes and analyzes the issue, concludes that we can accept the collective mind, but only the "conscious collective mind" – and we should engage with it. When smart people come together and focus on the same goals, it helps the nation move forward. The collective mind of leading figures is the best kind for guiding the nation, embracing genuine religious thinking, which builds strong societies and fills gaps in human relationships in all areas. It's a positive force that improves the nation, unlike the unconscious collective mind, which can corrupt it unless controlled.

Establishing a standard of truthfulness is crucial for ensuring access to accurate and reliable knowledge across all domains, particularly in the realm of religious knowledge. The significance of this endeavor arises from the central role religious knowledge plays in shaping beliefs, guiding conduct, and fostering moral values within individuals and societies. This article examines the standards of truthfulness applied to religious propositions, focusing on achieving correspondence between these propositions and authoritative religious texts or observable reality, thereby ensuring alignment with divine objectives. Furthermore, the article explores the relationship between religious knowledge and reason, including self-evident truths, as a foundation for constructing sound propositions. Epistemological theories, such as the correspondence theory, pragmatism, and coherence theory, are critically analyzed in this context. The analysis specifically applies these standards to doctrinal, ethical, and behavioral issues, providing illustrative examples of their interaction with religious texts. The role of both reason and revelation in achieving truthful cognitive propositions is emphasized. A key finding is that the fundamental standard for the truthfulness of doctrinal, ethical, and legal propositions is their correspondence with reality, verifiable through reason using self-evident truths or authentic religious texts. Consequently, doctrinal, ethical, and legal knowledge rests upon a firm foundation that integrates both reason and revelation.

This research examines the concept of freedom within liberal thought, a cornerstone of its ideology. It reviews the multifaceted dimensions of freedom, including intellectual, ideological, social, and political aspects. The analysis focuses on the core tenets underpinning liberalism, such as humanism, individualism, the pursuit of pleasure, the primacy of sensation, and instrumental reason. Furthermore, the study considers the intellectual contributions of prominent liberal thinkers like John Locke and John Stuart Mill. A central focus is the critique of liberal freedom, particularly from an Islamic perspective, which emphasizes a balanced approach between individual rights and societal obligations. This perspective argues that the freedom advocated by liberalism often contradicts established theoretical and practical values. In conclusion, the research underscores the necessity of harmonizing individual liberties with the broader public good. It critically evaluates liberal conceptions of freedom in terms of their definition, underlying principles, and various manifestations. Employing both descriptive and analytical methods, the research presents diverse perspectives on liberal freedom. A critical methodology is then applied to evaluate these perspectives.

The developments following the Industrial Revolution of 1760 AD in Europe produced a new image of the natural sciences. These sciences rose to dominance in all matters due to the excessive confidence they gained. Consequently, those events precipitated a recession in the field of research based on rationalism – most notably in theological studies – with the result that it became a domain dedicated to raising questions that lie beyond the purview of scientific investigation. Moreover, its results became relative matters with little or no epistemic value in most cases. Since religious doctrines were based on these foundations, they also became unscientific. Undoubtedly, the real reason behind this transformation is the dominance of some sciences over others. Therefore, in this research, we wanted to shed light on the inherent relationship between the natural sciences and divine science (theology), clarifying the limits of each, and the way in which one needs the other, using an analytical and descriptive methodology. We concluded that the natural sciences, despite their importance, should be limited to matters subject to experimentation and that they are necessarily dependent on divine science (theology). As for the latter, although it benefits in some matters from the natural sciences, this benefit is very minimal, meaning that there is no justification for the subordination of divine science to the natural sciences.

Many mistakenly assume that philosophers, divorced from the rich human experiences, merely decorate their ideas with fanciful notions. While philosophy permeates various human sciences, its influence is particularly profound and vibrant in education. Such misconceptions dissolve upon realizing that education is, in fact, an applied branch of philosophy. Indeed, in the West, the term "pedagogy" denotes the philosophy of education or the science of teaching methods, distinct from "Education", which refers to abstract learning or instruction. Consequently, Western philosophies have broadly influenced teaching principles, educational and curricula policies, and learning methodologies, recognizing the pivotal role of education in the advancement and development of nations and societies. This article seeks to highlight the pedagogy of postmodern philosophy, which has informed the design of educational practices in the West. It cautions against the uncritical adoption of this model by other nations, particularly Muslim societies, where its globalization and generalization disregards culturally specific values and standards. Alarmingly, this extends to the imposition of particular curricula and the elimination of others in some Muslim countries. Regrettably, certain intellectuals within the Islamic world advocate for unrestrained intertextuality with Western educational approaches.

This article explores the topic of miracles, focusing on the origins attributed to them by theologians. Specifically, it examines whether miracles are exclusively acts of God Almighty, without any influence from the infallible individual (Masoom), even in a mediating capacity. Otherwise, does God enact miracles directly at times, and at other times empower the infallible individual to bring them about? Are miracles exclusively from God (Exalted and Glorified), either initiated or enabled, or are they solely a result of supplication (Dua)? Through an inductive approach, classifying and analyzing the works of theologians in particular, we conclude that a miracle must be an act of God. This is because He is the one who validates the truthfulness of the claim being made upon Him. This purpose can only be achieved if the miracle originates solely from God. If it were the act of another – even ostensibly – the validity of the claimant's assertion could be questioned by those addressed by the claim. However, while miracles are exclusively acts of God, they occur in various forms: either originating directly from God Almighty without the mediation of the infallible, as in the extinguishing of the fire for Abraham (peace be upon him); or through the mediation of the infallible, manifested through them, as in the transformation of the staff into a serpent; or occurring in response to the supplication of the infallible, as in Zechariahs prayer to God to grant him a child from his barren wife.