نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری فلسفه و کلام اسلامی دانشگاه علوم اسلامی رضوی مشهد، مشهد، ایران.
2 دانشیار گروه فلسفه و کلام اسلامی دانشگاه علوم اسلامی رضوی مشهد، مشهد، ایران (نویسنده مسئول).
3 استادیار گروه فلسفه و کلام اسلامی دانشگاه علوم اسلامی رضوی مشهد، مشهد، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
While the principle of belief in the Return (rajʿat) is an essential and unanimously held doctrine among the Imāmiyyah, its specific modality is not a credal necessity. Owing to a perceived similarity between rajʿat and transmigration (tanāsukh), some have erroneously equated the two. Among the most significant and challenging discussions in this area is the problem of elucidating the modality of rajʿat and distinguishing it from tanāsukh. This study aims, first, to present a tenable modality for the Return that is consistent with rational and scriptural principles, and second, to articulate its distinction from tanāsukh from the perspective of the theosophers (ḥukamāʾ). Tanāsukh is beset by rational and scriptural impediments. Mullā Ṣadrā and ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī did not specify the modality of the Return; they only sought to resolve the rational improbabilities associated with it, arguing that it is not an instance of regression from actuality (fiʿl) to potentiality (quwwah), nor is it a retrogressive motion (ḥarakat taḍaʿʿufī). Fayḍ Kāshānī and Shāhābādī maintained that the Return involves a return to the imaginal body (badan mithālī), thus positing a fundamental difference from tanāsukh. From the viewpoint of Rafīʿī Qazvīnī and Imam Khomeini, the Return occurs with the elemental body (badan ʿunṣurī). They argue that an intrinsic relationship exists between the body and the soul (nafs), as the body is a direct positing of the soul. Therefore, rajʿat is distinct from tanāsukh, in which the soul becomes attached to a different body.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)