University of Religions and Denominations PressReligious Inquiries2322-489411120220601The “Seal of Prophets”: Jesus, Mani, and Muḥammad72014428010.22034/ri.2022.258396.1456ENHusain KassimAssociate Professor, University of Central Florida, United States America.Journal Article20201124This article deals with the claim that Jesus (4 BC), Mani (216 CE), and Muḥammad (570 CE) are the “Seals of Prophets,” relating it to the theologically developed Johannine concept of the Paraclete. These three historical figures are believed to be the “Seals of Prophets” after whom the chain of Prophets has ended according to their religious and cultural traditions. However, most of the research on the subject is pursued exclusively from within the perspective of each religious and cultural tradition, and without discussing the Johannine theologically developed concept of the Paraclete by relating it properly either to Jesus, or to Mani, or to Muḥammad, especially when one considers the fact that Mani claims to be the Paraclete of Jesus in his recently found works, <em>Kelley Library and CMC Writings.</em> Similarly,<em> </em>Muslim writers maintain that Muḥammad was the Paraclete of Jesus and the “Seal of Prophets.” Furthermore, there has been no question about how the claim of being the “Seal of Prophets” about these historical personalities could be considered valid, since after the death of Jesus, Mani came and claimed to be the Paraclete of Jesus and the “Seal of Prophets.” And after Mani’s death, Muḥammad came and, as Muslim writers believe, he was the Paraclete of Jesus and the “Seal of Prophets.”https://ri.urd.ac.ir/article_144280_0e26b65c3c36895a50da7c69fe22cfd2.pdfUniversity of Religions and Denominations PressReligious Inquiries2322-489411120220601A Review and Critique of the Theory of the Speculativeness of the Implication (Ẓannī al-Dilāla) of the Qurʾān213914423310.22034/ri.2022.248925.1437ENSeyyed Ziaoddin OlyanasabAssociate Professor at Hazrat-e Masoumeh University, Qom, Iran.orcid.org/0000-0001-5939-8795Seyyed Mohammad OlyanasabPhD student in Quran and Islamic Texts at the University of Tehran, College of Farabi, Qom, Iran.Seyyed Majid NabaviPhD student in Quran and Hadith at Arak University, Iran.0000-0002-1382-5998Journal Article20200918Since the purpose of the Qurʾān is to promote the Worldly and Otherworldly Life of mankind, and nourish the human soul and body in all dimensions, we should consult this holy book in all aspects of our lives.<strong> </strong>However, some Shia and Sunni scholars believe that the implication of the Qurʾān is speculative. The present study seeks to determine the correct view of the definitive (<em>qaṭʿī</em>) and the speculative textual implication of Qurʾān. If we examine and explain the definitiveness of the usage-based intentions of speakers and, in most cases, the definitiveness of real intentions, adopt a holistic view of the verses, consider different sorts of verses (perspicuous (<em>muhkam</em>), intricate (<em>mutashābih</em>), etc.), and focus on the expressive miracle of the Word of God, then we might conclude that the word of revelation (i.e. the Qurʾān) enjoys a definitive implication, barring the intricate verses the interpretation of which no one knows except those who are firmly grounded in knowledge (<em>al-rāsikhūn fi l-ʿilm</em>). There are no doubts about the meanings of Quranic words more often than not.https://ri.urd.ac.ir/article_144233_101b50a496f21873729665995b39adfa.pdfUniversity of Religions and Denominations PressReligious Inquiries2322-489411120220601Al-Ghazālī’s Reading of the Fourth Gospel415614427910.22034/ri.2020.247490.1433ENVali AbdiAssistant Professor, Department of Comparative Religions and Mysticism, Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.Eirini Avraam ArtemiLecturer, Hellenic Open University, Greece.Journal Article20200909Throughout their long history of theological debates, both Christians and Muslims have studied and challenged one another’s beliefs and Scriptures. From the ninth century onward, Muslims have studied the Bible and criticized Christian Trinitarian doctrines. Similarly, al-Ghazālī, a famous Muslim philosopher and theologian wrote a treatise to challenge the divinity of Jesus. Since in his view Christians have identified Jesus with God in accordance with the fourth Gospel, he focuses on this Gospel and interprets it in a way to refute the divinity of Jesus. He suggests a metaphorical interpretation of this Gospel, and therefore, studies all of its complicated verses in figurative, rather than literal, terms. By doing so, he concludes Jesus was a human being, not a divine being as Christians believe.https://ri.urd.ac.ir/article_144279_cfbf4209a2b32d2deb8fe22ee9957807.pdfUniversity of Religions and Denominations PressReligious Inquiries2322-489411120220601The Semantic Model of the Concept of “Certainty” in Nahj al-Balagha: A Focus on Collocation and Substitution Relationships577214423410.22034/ri.2022.210596.1379ENSeyyed Hossein AzimidokhtAssistant professor, Philosophy and Islamic Wisdom Department, Meybod University.Maryam TavakolniaPhD student in Nahj-ol-Balagheh, Meybod University.Journal Article20191205The word <em>yaqīn </em>(certainty) is key to epistemological discussions in <em>Nahj al-Balagha</em>, where the word and its cognates appear thirty one times. The analysis of the semantic network of “certainty” has an effective role in understanding Imam ʿAli's (a) stance toward epistemology. In the present study, a descriptive-analytical method is adopted to identify the semantic model of “certainty” in <em>Nahj al-Balagha</em>. After a clarification of the conceptual meaning of the word “certainty,” a simultaneous analysis of the content of <em>Nahj al-Balagha</em> is performed at two levels: collocation and substitution. Through this process of text comprehension, a semantic model of certainty is introduced. In light of this model, it becomes evident that certainty is hierarchical. At the primary level, certainty accompanies faith, and at higher levels, it intensifies faith to the highest levels.https://ri.urd.ac.ir/article_144234_14c2ca73080cc5f8cb199155d1531c89.pdfUniversity of Religions and Denominations PressReligious Inquiries2322-489411120220601A Critical Analysis of Graham Oppy's View of Arguments about God738914426210.22034/ri.2021.261368.1459ENFarah RaminAssociate Professor, Department of Philosophy and Islamic Theology, University of Qom, Qom, Iran.Fariedeh Mohammad ZamaniPhD Graduated, Department of Philosophy and Islamic Theology, University of Qom, Qom, Iran.Journal Article20201209Graham Oppy is an analytical philosopher in the contemporary era. He acknowledges the rationality of theistic, as well as non-theistic, beliefs, but he does not consider them successful for arguing for or against God. In general, a successful argument is one that persuades all reasonable persons who have reasonable views about the issue in question. His basic criterion for the success of an argument is its ability to convince all reasonable persons who previously denied, or were undecided about, its conclusion. The present article tries to answer the following question: Is Oppy’s standard for a satisfactory argument acceptable, and what challenges does it face? I conclude that his criterion, which renders all the traditional arguments for God’s existence unsuccessful, is pessimistic and self-defeating, because Oppy cannot provide a successful argument, by his own lights, for the correctness of his standard. He seems to propagate agnosticism, with a vague criterion, regardless of the difference between rational reason and argument from the common sense (sound judgment argument), and defending a kind of strong rationalism.https://ri.urd.ac.ir/article_144262_ec7ff2f34242db593ef90cba211c29fe.pdfUniversity of Religions and Denominations PressReligious Inquiries2322-489411120220601The Content of the Mystical Experience of the Brahman-World Relation in Upanishads based on Ibn ʿArabi’s Nondelimited Oneness of Being9110614455010.22034/ri.2022.291179.1500ENMohammad Rasool Imani KhoshkhooAssistant Professor, Department of Religions and Mysticism, Faculty of Religious Studies, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.Journal Article20210618The Upanishads incorporate different interpretations of the relation between Brahman and the world, a difference that gives some people a reason to deny the existence of a unique philosophical doctrine in these texts. This article aims to note the internal consistency in the Upanishads with a view to analyzing their content in the words of Ibn ʿArabi and his commentators concerning the doctrine of the nondelimited oneness of being. For him, being is endowed with nondelimited oneness, and the world and multiple existing things limit this absolute reality, and this unique truth manifests itself within their framework, and therefore, it acquires multiplicity at the level of manifestation. In mystical experiences, when a mystic unites himself with God, he would either witness the oneness of being and have an acquaintance with the world as God, or consider the multiplicity within oneness, and hence, find the world distinct from Him. If we consider various Upanishadic phrases as expressions of such dual perspectives, then we will find a more precise understanding of, and we will have sufficient reasons to accept, their internal consistency.https://ri.urd.ac.ir/article_144550_c39753a9c5de1d2b50a17dea938c1052.pdf