Ebrahim Noei
Abstract
A number of Orientalists and a number of Muslim thinkers believe that IbnRushd'sphilosophical and theological books did not enter the Islamic world, including Iran, and that Muslim philosophers and theologians did not pay attention to her books. Reasons such as the absence of Ibn Rushd's books or the ...
Read More
A number of Orientalists and a number of Muslim thinkers believe that IbnRushd'sphilosophical and theological books did not enter the Islamic world, including Iran, and that Muslim philosophers and theologians did not pay attention to her books. Reasons such as the absence of Ibn Rushd's books or the lack of loyal students to him have also been presented for this belief. The present article both presents a report from the opposite point of view and shows that Muslim philosophers and theologians have always paid attention to Ibn Rushd's books.To achieve this goal, first Muslim thinkers are introduced who have paid attention to Ibn Rushd's philosophical and theological books in different centuries. In the next stage, I will criticize the reasons that say that Muslim philosophers and theologians did not pay attention to Ibn Rushd's philosophical and theological books. Finally, I show that if Ibn Rushd's books were sometimes ignored, it was because he was not considered an important philosopher.
Ebrahim Noei; Aabas Izadpanah; shareat Aghajari
Abstract
Hadith scholars and the consequences of dealing with theology(Study of epistemological and methodological consequences)Theology is a religious science that has not had a uniform history. Some believe it is necessary to address it. Some also oppose addressing it. Scholars of hadith have given several ...
Read More
Hadith scholars and the consequences of dealing with theology(Study of epistemological and methodological consequences)Theology is a religious science that has not had a uniform history. Some believe it is necessary to address it. Some also oppose addressing it. Scholars of hadith have given several reasons for this opposition. They also enumerated the wrong consequences for addressing this knowledge. Those consequences for any other knowledge should be avoided. The question of the present article is that which epistemological and methodological consequences have the scholars of hadith considered for theology? Does theology really have such consequences? It seems that this effort of the scholars of hadith only makes the scholars of theology aware of some dangers that they may face when dealing with this science. And of course, these dangers are not specific to theology, and anyone who does not follow the correct conditions for research in a science may be caught in such errors. Theologians have also paid attention to these consequences and have tried to avoid getting caught up in them. Even if one of the theologians has made a mistake, it cannot be said that theology should be abandoned.
