Vol-7, Special Issue-Number4-July, 2016, pp679-689 http://www.bipublication.com
Research Article
Methodological comparative survey of Mowlavi and Khajeh Nasir Toosi
perspectives regarding Ma’ad (the judgment day)
Abedin Darvish Poor1 and Seyyed Ahmad Shahrokhi2
1PhD student, Islamic discourse department,
2Assistant professor and a member of faculty,
Qom University, Qom, Iran
ABSTRACT:
Accepting Ma’ad is at the same rank with the acceptance of the God’s unity (Monotheism) and prophecy and these are three fundamental principles underlying the Islam’ religion for which all of the Mo’emens (believers) and Islamic thinkers have come to a general consensus. Discussion regarding the quality of the occurrence of such a huge and grand phenomenon is one of the basic challenges in the Islamic discourse, philosophy and epistemology fields. Mowlana, the great Islamic poet and Gnostic, from the one hand, has made use of the concept of Ma’ad and the judgment day in his utterances through contemplation and deploying the original Islamic teachings, and, on the other, has realized that the occurrence of the judgment day and Ma’ad is necessary and at the same time worldly and corporeal through taking advantage of the Holy Quran’s allegorical and figurative styles and methods. Moreover, he has come to know that the issue of Ma’ad is more of a natural and intrinsic nature and he considers it as being corresponding to the whole Creation Honor and Reputation. Khajeh Nasir Al-Din Toosi, the great Islamic philosopher and prominent spokesman through emphasizing that Ma’ad is not returing back what has been died out and vanished, and that it is rather a difference and distance between the components and constituents, from the one hand, has come to this realization that the occurrence of Ma’ad is a reasonably completely possible phenomena and, from the other hand, through confirming and affirming the unbound and unlimited power of the God almighty concludes that the physical resurrection can be justifiable and accountable. In the current research paper we are seeking to elaborate on the perspectives adopted by Khajeh Nasir and Mowlana regarding Ma’ad and its quality of occurrence and then we deal with the comparisons between them from the point of view of the methodology, reasoning and logics contents and the conclusions and results stemming from the discussions.
Keywords: Ma’ad, physical or corporeal resurrection, Khajeh Nasir, Mowlana
INTRODUCTION:
Discussion about the resurrection day or Ma’ad and the life after death are among the most fundamental and radical topics posited by the divine religions and particularly the Islam as the last and most complete religion, this topic is so critical and of great value that it has been proposed and accepted as one of the three-fold principles of the divine religions. The most original challenge and discrepancy in this area
disjoined from the soul and the body degrades (Ibrahimi Dinani, 2001:77) and some others have asserted resurrection of the soul and the body concomitantly which is sometimes reminded of and called “corporeal resurrection”, and from their perspective the human beings will be present and revealed on the judgment day with the same shape and visage they have in this world in such a manner that if one has seen a person in this world, after being raised from the dead s/he can recognize him or her and say that this is the same person (Sadr Al-Din Shirazi, 2007:599). According to the importance of the topic posed here, in the current study we are seeking to compare the perspectives of the two original Islamic thinkers in the fields such as philosophy and epistemology regarding the topic of the present study, to do so firstly we provide Mowlana’s standpoint regarding the topic and then we try to recount Khajeh Nasir Al-Din Toosi ratiocinations regarding the topic posed by the current study and finally we come up with the commonalities and the discrepancies between these two perspectives.
1. Mowlana’s theosophical methodology: Theosophy is the epistemological method posed by those of the experts and thinkers who unlike the thinkers basing their actions and theories on proofs and logics more confide in their tastes and intuitions than on reason and logics (Zarrinkoub, 2011:9). In this method, the theosophist or the Gnostic person is seeking to create a state of sympathy between himself and the listener or the addressee in order to transform the understanding stream from the state of a concept to the state of an intuition. Mowlana Jalal Al-Din Rumi as the most outstanding and prominent Muslim theosophist has upgraded this methodology to its highest rank through taking advantage of the specific and unique allegorical features. He recites a poetry regarding the topic of Ma’ad by describing it as the most perfect aspect and the world and the creatures of the world desire to seek perfection:
“So, there will come another world after this one, and this assemble disassemble in another assembly”
“If I begin saying, recounting and enumerating from now till the judgment day, I am unable to explicate the resurrection day”
From the other hand, in his idea the being’s world resurrection originates from the inside of the lover’s life and its sparkles are pervasive and expand across the universe;
“If the lover soul opens its mouth, the whole world would be set on fire, and this lowborn world would be disintegrated into particles” “The universe turns out to be a sea and the sea vanishes in advance of the solemnity, no man having a relation with the Adam and no humanity shall remain”
“A smoke rises of the firmament no man shall remain no sultan, and of the smoke all of a sudden a fire rises to the high dome of the heavens”
“On that instant the heavens fracture not a single location shall remain not the universe, the whole world fills with craze, and this one howls for the mourning feast”
“Sometimes the waters are taken away by fire and sometimes waters put out fire, and sometimes the nothingness sea waves hit Ashhab and Adham”
“There shall be seen less of the sun, where the human’s soul is enlightening, there shall be few of the strangers where the intimates gather” “Mars abandons its masculinity, Jupiter’s office shall be burnt, for the moon, there shall remain no groom, his happiness looks like sorrow” “Mercury falls down in the mud, and Saturn shall ignite, for Zohreh shall remain no venous to shout her happiness”
“No rainbow would remain nor its color, no wine no beaker, no joy shall remain no enlivening, nor anyone put ointment on the wounds”
“No pain is permanent nor are the medicines. No foe shall remain nor friend, no windpipe shall exist nor tune, no one shall play harp with high and low pitch”
“The righteous One ignites a fire to burn out every wrong things, the fire burns the heart and takes it to the other world (Qazal, sonnet, 258). Also, in his belief the great Islam’s apostle (peace be upon him) is the real and the taut truth of such a resurrection who has caused an evolutionary change to the hugeness of the resurrection in the entire universe of the beings and the humans via purifying and clearing his inside1 (Sabzevari, 2004: 314, v.2)
“He who asks when is the resurrection day, Lo! My idol, show up your face that now I am the resurrection day”
So it seems that the resurrection Mowlavi is talking about complies with the internal evolution of the human beings as it is ordered in a Hadith by Imam Ali (peace be upon him) that: “ َﻦِﻣ اﻮُﺟِﺮْﺧَأ
ﺎَﮭْﻨِﻣ َجُﺮْﺨَﺗ ْنَأ ِﻞْﺒَﻗ ْﻦِﻣ ْﻢُﻜَﺑﻮُﻠُﻗ ﺎَﯿْﻧﱡﺪﻟا” which means “before your bodies are taken out from the world, take your heart away from it2”(Nahj Albalagha: sermon 203).
Besides, in the discussions regarding proving the resurrection day meanwhile dealing with the statement of the issue regarding the topic of resurrection and Ma’ad with a tasteful and theosophical methodology he does not fall short of presenting reasons and logics in this field as he basing his reasoning on the issue of the occurrence of the world, states that:
“Last night a fellow was saying that the world has been built, that it is transient this wheel and it is inherited by the heirs”
“The philosophers say that as you know that the world has been created, how cloud can be aware of the gallant”
“A small worm buried inside a seed, how shall be knowing the beginning and the ending of the earth”
1
Sabzevari, v.2, p.314, Also Shahidi, v.2, p.219
2Nahj Al-Balagha: 203
“You have heard it followed by your father, out of stupidity have you twisted into it” (2868/4) And also there are evidences and proofs of the nature’s change and transformations:
“What are the implications and the cues of the other world, the moods are renewed and the old temperaments and states go away”
“A new day, a new night and a new garden and a new herd, a new thought in very breath, newness is joy and wealth”
“The new comes from where and where does the old go, although beyond sight the world is of no end”
(Divan, B 7905)
And also with the comparison between sleeping and death:
“The attraction of the parts taught the soul, how comes that the owner of the body knows nothing of the parts’ compilation”
“At the time that you rise from sleep, the consciousness and the senses gone are called upon hastily”
“And you should know that these do not go away, they will be returned if ordered to” (3/1795)
These are the evidences used by him to prove the resurrection day possibility and not only does he consider it as not being improbable but he does introduce it as a clear and explicit issue for the ones who have discretions and can see the inside of the things.
2.1. Khajeh Nasir Toosi philosophical methodology:
Khajeh Nasir revived the peripatetic school traditions which were declining in Iran after Ibn Sina. Alfred Madlong believes that Khajeh’s discourse mindset should be considered as part of the discourse stage in which some of the phrases and expressions were accepted and reasoning and ratiocination and logics and philosophy were agreed upon (Nasr, 2014, v.3:105).
researcher Toosi. He has presented works in each of these three areas and three important features can be pointed out in these areas for his works: 2.1.1. His perspective universality and comprehensiveness:
In fact, Khajeh does not solely suffice to one method or way to prove or elucidate the resurrection rather he has attempted in his various works to deal with the explication and elaboration of the resurrection by taking advantage of any method for instance he enters philosophically to the discourse discussions in his book “Tajrid Al-E’eteghad” and he has handled the topic from the beginning to the end with adopting a theosophical attitude, therefore it cannot be said that he has been firstly handling the issue through working with and believing in the science of discourse and then he has found interests in philosophy and then eventually has involved and engaged in theosophy, rather he has been always found somehow attentive to the various aspects of philosophy, discourse and theosophy in discussing subjects.
2.1.2. Khajeh Nasir Toosi’s independence of thoughts:
Through taking khajeh’s “Sharh-e-Esharat” and his philosophical treatise one can clearly found out that khajeh’s philosophical perspectives have been fundamentally laid upon the foundation of peripatetic school. Of course, Khajeh is a scholar researcher and he seems not to be agreeing the peripatetic school ideas in some of the stances; such as the corporeal resurrection and the divine partial science. He also appears to be approving some of the perspectives adopted by Hakim Eshraghi; such as disavowing the existence of the monsters, utterances regarding the originality of the nature and considering the intellectual concepts as being secondarily reasonable. Khajeh also tries to preserve independent perspectives and attitudes regarding some of the issues; such as the topic of Ma’ad and the discussions on the nature of the matters. He has provided a strong and solid explication about the peripatetic
philosophy. It is for the same reason that his book “Sharh-e-Esharat” from the time of his living up to date is one of the most important philosophical textbooks (Toosi, 1982, v.3:37-40).
2.1.3. Statement and conclusion methods: What has been proved through offering evidences as being refused and unacceptable cannot also prove its presence in discourse. At the beginning of “Tajrid Al-E’eteghad”, Khajeh talks about common philosophical discussions and then he enters discourse-specific debates. By doing so he has intended to mean that firstly there had to be enlightened topics regarding the issues in respect to the reason to be able to enter discourse afterwards and draw accurate conclusions. It is because of the same approach that the reader, upon reading “Tajrid Al-E’eteghad”, feels that an intellectual and philosophical space governs the writings and it is in an accurate and coherent manner. This job accomplished by the researcher Toosi caused optimism regarding philosophy (Zaryab, 1988: 1433).
But what needs to be focused on in the survey of the discourse level of the Khajeh’s work and its relationship with the philosophical and theosophical levels is that although Khajeh refused to accept parts of the discourse disputes and principles common in his time and decorated discourse among the unreasonable and illogical issues but he practiced conservatism and accepted the principles and the sources of the science of discourse which was common at those times.
2.2. Ma’ad in Khajeh’s thoughts:
tries to define the soul and ego and then through proving the existence of ego and its perseverance opens the way to state and prove resurrection day in order to be able to provide the deniers with reasoning and logics and based on the likelihood with which the current world could have been existing and it is existing he regards the presupposition of having another world as being acceptable and likely and in dispute with the deniers he reaches to the justification and proof for the existence of the resurrection day through dealing with the philosophy of the world existing from an unlimited time ago [creationism]. However, he never finds it pointless to make references to the narrative reasons for proving and substantiating the resurrection day and every time he deems it necessary he takes full advantage of the Holy Quran Verses and narrations plus presenting the reader with the philosophical inferences.
Another specimen of the philosophical elucidations related to the resurrection day in Khajeh’s works is the issue of “souls’ introduction” after being separated from the body in the isthmus and the judgment day. The idea that the souls know each other in isthmus and the judgment day has been frequently pointed out in our religious texts and Khajeh is attempting to resolve it in a philosophical method. In his mind, till the ego is imprisoned in the framework and a cast made up of matter the souls’ introduction does not make any sense but after death when the ego finds itself in an abstract format and freed itself from the material chains based on its features can make connections to the other souls. If the earthly world one has been able to create and acquire the features required for making connection to the souls in the raptures of the after-world s/he can communicate with them. Of course the abstract ego cannot feel and conceive bodies; since it is devoid of the appropriate means and tools to perceive material and earthen things and objects (Toosi, 2011: 406-407).
Besides the philosophical discourse look at the topic of resurrection, Khajeh deals with the topic of resurrection through theosophical glasses in some of his works such as the book entitled “beginning and ending”. The material and subject matters provided by him although are scattered among the theosophical ideas and notions but they are of a coherent nature and accompanied with excellent and selected analysis and are very admiring and astonishing. To the best of our knowledge regarding the works written by the philosophers and ignoring Ibn Arabi’s theosophical school, some of the Ma’ad-related issues have been emerged and demonstrated for the first time in this book, but it has to be pointed that suh material and subjects have been later posited by Allameh Dehdar and then they have found their way to Shiraz school and finally to the works done by Sadr Al-Mota’allehin.
easy, but the people turn their backs on it; “ ْﻦﱢﯾَﺄَﻛ َو
ﻟا ﻲِﻓ ٍﺔَﯾآ ْﻦِﻣ ﺎﮭْﻨَﻋ ْﻢُھ َو ﺎﮭْﯿَﻠَﻋ َنوﱡﺮُﻤَﯾ ِضْرَﺄْﻟا َو ِتاوﺎﻤﱠﺴ
َنﻮُﺿِﺮْﻌُﻣ
(. ”, which means that “And How many a sign in the heavens and on earth do they pass over while they, therefrom, turn their faces away. ” but the reasons behind this easy wayfaring is that this is the path from what the people have com once, so what is seeable he has seen once and what is hearable he has heard once, but he has forgotten them; “ َو َﻲِﺴَﻨَﻓ ُﻞْﺒَﻗ ْﻦِﻣ َمَدآﻰﻟِإ ﺎﻧْﺪِﮭَﻋ ْﺪَﻘَﻟ َو
ًﺎﻣْﺰَﻋ ُﮫَﻟ ْﺪِﺠَﻧ ْﻢَﻟ” which means that “once we already had signed promise with the Adam, but we have not found determination for it” and it states at this instant that “ارﻮُﻧ اﻮُﺴِﻤَﺘْﻟﺎَﻓ ْﻢُﻛَءارَو اﻮُﻌِﺟْرا” which means that “get back to your behind, then beg for the light”. Human nature is superior and Ma’ad means to regress to that nature; “ ِﻦﯾﱢﺪﻠِﻟ َﻚَﮭْﺟَو ْﻢِﻗَﺄَﻓ
َﻚِﻟذ ِﮫﱠﻠﻟا ِﻖْﻠَﺨِﻟ َﻞﯾِﺪْﺒَﺗ ﻻ ﺎﮭْﯿَﻠَﻋ َسﺎﱠﻨﻟا َﺮَﻄَﻓ ﻲِﺘﱠﻟا ِﮫﱠﻠﻟا ةَﺮْﻄِﻓ ًﺎﻔﯿِﻨَﺣ ُﻢﱢﯿَﻘْﻟا ُﻦﯾﱢﺪﻟا” which means that “so, direct your face towards the religion, inclining to the truth. [Adhere to] the Fitrah of Allah upon which he has created [all] people. No change should there be in the creation of Allah. That is the correct religion.” ; that at first there was only God and nothing else, “«ءﻰﺷ ﮫﻌﻣ ﻦﻜﯾ ﻢﻟ و ﮫّﻠﻟا نﺎﻛ” which means that “there was only Allah and there was nothing with Him”. So the creation has been brought about to being from nothing; “ َﻚُﺘْﻘَﻠَﺧ ْﺪَﻗ َو
ًﺎﺌْﯿَﺷ ُﻚَﺗ ْﻢَﻟ َو ُﻞْﺒَﻗ ْﻦِﻣ” which means that “I already created you from before and you were not a thing”. And eventually every created thing becomes nothing and the God remains being; “ ﱡﻞُﻛ
ﻰﻘْﺒَﯾ َو ٍنﺎﻓ ﺎﮭْﯿَﻠَﻋ ْﻦَﻣ
ِماﺮْﻛِﺈْﻟا َو ِلﻼَﺠْﻟا وُذ َﻚﱢﺑَر ُﮫْﺟَو ” which
means that “everything on it is mortal and the visage of your God, he is the possessor of grandiosity and honor”. So the way that the creatures come to existence after being nothing and this nothingness is the source of creation, nothingness after being in existence is considered as their resurrection; both coming and going as two opposite and standalone actions can be taken place the same as the other; “ُهُﺪﯿِﻌُﻧ ٍﻖْﻠَﺧ َلﱠوَأ ﺎﻧْأَﺪَﺑ ﺎﻤَﻛ” which means that “the way we innovated the first creation we return it back”, and it is from here
that according to the verdict and decree of the source the God says and the creatures and people answer “ﻰﻠَﺑ اﻮُﻟﺎﻗ ْﻢُﻜﱢﺑَﺮِﺑ ُﺖْﺴَﻟَأ”, “Am I not your God, they said: yes”, and by the decree of Ma’ad the God says and the God Himself answers; “ ُﻚْﻠُﻤْﻟا ِﻦَﻤِﻟ
ِﺪِﺣاﻮْﻟا ِﮫﱠﻠِﻟ َمْﻮَﯿْﻟا
رﺎﱠﮭَﻘْﻟا ”, which means that “for who is
the domain on this day, for the almighty the one God”. And because the creatures have first found their being out of the God’s existence and they were not there, so finally they will come to existence, then give back their existence to the God “ﻰﻌْﺟﱡﺮﻟا َﻚﱢﺑَر ﻰﻟِإ ﱠنِإ”, “Verily! Towards your God is the returning back”, and then they find no existence “ُﮫَﮭْﺟَو ﺎﱠﻟِإ ٌﻚِﻟﺎھ ٍءْﻲَﺷ ﱡﻞُﻛ”, “everything is perishable but the face of Him”, “ ﮫﯿﻟا و أﺪﺒﻤﻟا ﮫﻨﻣ
ﻌﻤﻟا
دﺎ ” which means that “from Him everything originates and towards him everything regresses (Toosi, 9:10-1407)
world, from creation to order, and from the material existence to the transcendental existence , so it is necessary to take a trip from intuition to the unseen (ibid:15).
Therefore, the Qiama or resurrection is more superior to the tangible world. Resurrection is the flesh and the world is the skin. He has pointed to the same issue in other locations “so, when his discretionary eyes become wide open via the guidance collyrium, the way it was told about the fellows of the Qiama, s/he will pass the world of creatures and reaches to the world of orders from where he had once come (ibid: 46).
3.1. The quality of the Ma’ad:
Sole confirmation and verification of the resurrection day likelihood cannot provide us with a lucid image of the Ma’ad, therefore it seems it is necessary to make debates and discussions regarding the way and the quality with which resurrection takes place and therefore both Mowlana and Khajeh Nasir have dealt with the issue in great details.
Like his deployment of the persuasive allegorical and figurative examples and proofs in making statements regarding the possibility of the resurrection day and its confirmation through the method invented by himself, Mowlana similarly takes advantage of the same methods to try to offer a relatively clear image of the quality of the resurrection day to the addresses and therefore he makes talks about the plants changes and variations and the plants fruitfulness and introduces resurrection as a somatic-spiritual issue afterwards verifying and confirming it in verses of his poetry. Also, he makes a special exploitation of the events and incidents cited in the holy Quran for indicating and demonstrating the God’s mighty power for assembling and integrating the dead things’ body parts and through doing so he intends to showcase the occurrence of the spiritual-somatic nature of the resurrection;
“Who has decayed and degraded at your side, look into the organs of the Ozayra’s donkey and
how they were again recollected after being disintegrated”
“That head and the tail and the two ears and the foot, we recollected them again those parts” “The hands are attached to the body and the organs are assembled, the pieces find complexion and collectivity”
“It is as if He stitches the old parts without using a needle, look and watch what darning industry does”
“He sews in a way that the sutures cannot be seen, there is no yarn and no needle when he does haberdasher”
“It is for you to not have a doubt in the day of the judgment, open your eyes and see clearly the resurrection for yourself”
“This is for you to not shiver at the efforts of the dying time, to see my whole collection”
“All of your senses die out, the same way that you are absent of them when sleeping”
“Although because of the death of your senses you become depressed and spoiled, but you do not shiver and shake when sleeping”
the bodies and corpses” it is intended to mean the dead parts of the bodies are collected and compiled the same as the early or the first time compilation and the soul which was navigating it for the first time should be returned to it and he considers it as being possible; since the mighty God is capable of the entire things possible and the things that can be thought to be done and He is omniscient to the entire things deemed as likely and the corpse and the body in itself can be compiled and combined, so the God [is] able to this in the manner and with the compilation and combination that was just mentioned. And the returning of the perished ones is not impossible in this sense … and because the returning back is right and it is somehow deserving of bring accomplished so the main parts of the assignees’ bodies and their souls will never be destroyed; rather their compilation and their temperament will be molded into their bodies. In fact, in Khajeh’s idea, the philosophers have fallen short of offering a decisive and concrete proof to refuse the corporeal resurrection and their utterances and expressions regarding disavowing the corporeal resurrection is nothing more than some things far away to be imagined, therefore they can be seemed to have accepted corporeal and somatic resurrection; since, on the one hand, it is deemed as being necessary for the religion and, on the other hand, there is no proof at hand to refuse and refute it.
Based on this it can be said that both Mowlana and Khajeh have commonalities regarding the quality of resurrection as a spiritual-corporeal issue by taking advantage of their own specific and unique methods and radical principles and both of the thinkers have made their best uses of the verses and the narrations in their own specific field of studies but they have acted based on their discourse and theosophical principles in expressing the ideas.
4. CONCLUSION:
Based on what was mentioned above, the descriptions regarding the resurrection
substantiation methodologies by Mowlana and Khajeh can be enumerated as below:
1. Although Mowlavi holds a respectful and submissive standpoint regarding the general reason but he describes the owner of partial reason and philosophical fellow states as the state of a treasure-seeker who the more he tries to throw the arrow farther the more distant he stays of the treasure. It seems that he does not intend to prove anything explicitly rather he tries to allegorically and figuratively approach the ideas closer to the understanding. His allegories are in fact a sensational and intuitive images by the use of which he attempts to approach an extrasensory issue to something that can be approached to sensation by the addressee to be able to conceive it. And it is not doubted that the image piece by piece is never supplying an intangible issue. It is its general whole which induces an overall image of the totality which is intended to be conveyed. However, because such an image is sensational and intuitive it is helpful to those who have difficulty imagining the abstract concepts to delineate in their imagination what has been demonstrated and is intended to be presented by that allegorical examples. Since allegory is one type of a thing that can be used as a proof, and it is commonly used to make it tangible the ideas which are assumed to be difficult imagining by the general public who consider it as a sort of proof and are therefore persuaded. And because Mowlana was busy at that time teaching to the general public and their persuasive acceptance and practical obligation and commitment to the results of the discussions were at the first degree of importance for him, as, it is difficult or impossible for some to take the proof and reasoning methodologies and discovering the middle points and coming to a conclusion through proof-offering talks, so nothing can be more convincing and understandable than allegorical features (Zarrinkub, 1987: 85).
philosophical utterances. He proves resurrection but not through utilization of the proofs applied by the experts in theology, rather through fetching in evidences from the tangible ubiquitous nature. He talks about the ego and the soul but adds spices of stories and allegories to it. He recognizes that the reward and punishment and the paradise and the hell are absolute and definite and then he tries to convey the meanings and make senses, but within the display scenes of Masnavi. And this way, whatever weak the reason and whatever unable the heart, he invites all of the Adam’s offspring, as his addressees, to awareness and rouse. And as it was interpreted by Zarrinkoub: “Mowla narrates the stories in the form of evidences and documents in justifying and substantiating the ideas claimed by him and therefore incumbently these truths and secrets latent in his claims are reflected in the same allegories and evidences and these stories are the mirrors reflecting Masnavi’s secrets (Ibid: 163). 3. Although in his works one can trace the replacement of the reasoning and proofs by allegorical features and figurative speech and narration of the stories are taking the load of inferences and deductions but it has to be confessed that his success in human arousing and warning is seen as nothing less than solid philosophical lessons. Since “his allegories and stories can actualize and embody the product of his commitment and claim regarding the theosophical truth and secrets. And he has been able to remove any sort of doubt and uncertainty in the possibility of the claims and promises, and it is clear that what has been found to be of relation to the Holy Quran’s narrations and the allegories and examples of the humans’ everyday life can be of a greater trust and confidence for the audiences as bearing such semantic and meaning even more than the evidences and documents offered as proofs” (Zarrinkoub, 2011:164). The important theme which has to be pointed out in the survey of the topic of
resurrection or Ma’ad from Khajeh’s perspective is that:
1. He believes in corporeal resurrection both in the discourse and in the philosophical levels and he has risen to resist the philosophers’ ideas denying the corporeal resurrection. He believes that corporeal resurrection is a must in Islam and it is deemed as being likely (Toosi, 99:98-1413).
2. Regarding the quality of corporeal resurrection Khajeh Nasir holds a particular idea in agreement to the discourse space. Concerning the issue of Ma’ad in which it is stated that it is compulsory for the dead to return and that the same exactly perished and dead ones should return not the other ones states that such a returning back from the dead is not in a way that the dead person is returned which is thought of as being impossible by him rather he believes that the perish has taken place in the form of the disintegration and degradation of the body parts and organs but the resurrection is the compilation and combination of the main body parts again and returning the other parts of the bodies for the assignees does not seem to be necessary.
and the temperament will be induced into it (Toosi, 1413: 405-406).
4. He believes that the deniers of the corporeal resurrection have not provided a concrete and solid proof in refuting it and their utterances in denying and disavowing the corporeal and bodily resurrection is nothing more than something far away to be imagined.
5. Based on the author’s idea, Khajeh, in the discourse level, has taken the main principles from philosophy and he has taken the role of philosophers in this regard. He seems approving of the corporeal resurrection principle; since, on the one hand, sees it as being religiously necessary and, on the other hand, finds no proof for it to be disavowed. In discourse, he has offered a special interpretation of the bodily resurrection and based on this he has considered the resurrection and bringing back the dead bodies as likely.
The important theme which needs to be focused on here is that Ma’ad is some sort of returning back. In discourse section of his works, Khajeh defines resurrection as the return of the soul to the body which has been compiled. In other words, the kind of resurrection envisaged by Khajeh in discourse level can be realized as some sort of returning back to the world.
So in comparison it can be stated that:
1. Ma’ad and believing in it is one of the main elements of the theosophical and philosophical thoughts formed in respect to religion. Therefore it can be said that making statement about Ma’ad is carried out in theosophical and philosophical thoughts which have religious backgrounds or are rooted in the divine books.
2. Theosophical and philosophical methods each deal with a special aspect of resurrection and Ma’ad upon confrontation and of course to the aspects which are more conforming to their foundations.
3. Acceptance of diversity of the methods in handling the issues regarding resurrection can
be defendable and accepted due to the fact that the individuals’ attitudes and their temperaments differ.
4. The philosophical method applied by the researcher Toosi respective to Ma’ad has taken advantage of reasoning and logic and simultaneously has resorted to the Divine Verses and at the same time has made use of theosophical teachings, although theosophical methods are not pervasive and they cannot be used ubiquitously and they require their own specific audiences.
5. Mowlavi has also dealt with the elaboration of Ma’ad through taking active advantage of the Holy Quran in the form of presenting allegories and stories and this method seems to have a great deal of audiences and is therefore more pervasive although he has not made benefit of the Ahl-e-Beyt (peace be upon them) epistemologies and instructions.
REFERENCES:
1. Ibrahimi Dinani, Gholam Hussain, 2001, “the reason book and love sign”, three volumes, 1st ed., Tehran, Tarh-e-Now
2. Zarrinkoub, Abd Al-Hussein, 2011, “search in mysticism in Iran”, Amirkabir
3. Zarrinkoub, Abd Al-Hussein, 1987, “the sea in a pitcher”; the criticism of Masnavi’s stories and allegories interpretation”, Elmi, Tehran
4. Nasr, Hussein, 2014, “Islamic philosophy history”, Hekmat
5. Zaryab, Abbas, 1988, “Aba Aqa Khan, in the great Islamic encyclopedia”, supervised by Kazem Mousavi Bojnourdi, Tehran, the great Islamic encyclopedia center, p.1433
6. Sabzevari, Molla Hadi, 2004, “the secrets of the theologies”, revision Karim Feyzi, 1st ed., Qom, religious press
7. Nahj Al-Balagha, tr.Seyyed Ja’afar Shahidi 8. Toosi, Khajeh Nasir Al-Din, 1982, “the
9. 1992, “the rules of the beliefs”, Beirut, Dar Al-Ghorba
10.1995, “the beginning and the end”, ministry of Islamic guidance and culture
11.1984, “Talkhis Al-Mohassel”, Dar Al-Azva’a, Beirut, no.2, 2nd ed.
12.1998, “Mohtashami ethics”, Tehran, published and distributed by Tehran University
13.1999, “Al-Anvar Al-Jalalyeh”, the Islamic discussions conference, no.1, 1st ed.,
14.1996, “five ideological treatise”, Qom, Ayat Allah Mar’ashi Najafi Library
15.1986, “Tajrid Al-E’eteghad”, Tehran, the Islamic Knowers’ school
16.1998, “Naseri ethics”, Tehran, scientific Islamic publications
17.1992, “the rules of the beliefs”, Beirut, Dar Al-Ghorba
