Salvation from suffering, sin and punishment on the Day of Judgment, and reaching a state of peace, tranquility, contentment, happiness and closeness to Allah, Almighty, and even tranquility and lack of feeling for some. As in Nirvana, it is one of the most important topics in various religions, as it constitutes the highest goal that followers of each religion seek to achieve. Indeed, we find that some of the positive religions that do not believe in the Day of Judgment and believe in reincarnation are striving to be saved from the cycle of repeated births, and their highest goal is to reach Nirvana.
Tracing the temporal progression of the Catholic Church's control reveals that the authority of the clergy began to rise to the point where convert the Catholic doctrine became the only way to survive, and the Protestant Reformation was nothing but a reaction to the Catholic doctrine. On the other hand, these reformers did not accept other religions, such as Islam, but rather took a negative position on Islam, and this position continued with the Age of Enlightenment, as Immanuel Kant’s position on the Prophet of Islam was indicative of intense hostility. The research also revealed that contemporary religious pluralism philosophies, such as John Hick's, have no other goal than pushing people into the maze of agnosticism.
This origin played a pivotal role in the Christian faith in particular, in which the doctrine of redemption was closely linked. The Christian religion was founded on the idea that whoever did not believe that Christ (peace be upon him) was crucified in redemption for human sin, he will not be saved. However, the desired salvation was subjected - over the course of the historical development of the Christian faith - to some expansion, so the comprehensive theory was officially proposed in the Second Vatican Council, despite its preservation of the traditional exclusive idea in terms of content, and contradicting it only from a formal standpoint, this theory developed and was presented under the title of religious pluralism, which received general rejection, because it is incompatible with the search for truth, which is the innate goal of man. Islam is not isolated from this goal, as it is a religion that seeks to achieve human happiness on earth and in the hereafter. Therefore, it has his own statement, and vision of salvation that is consistent with - and emanating from - his cosmic vision.
Mohammad Abdul Hussein Al-Busabi Al-Khalidi
In the research, an attempt was made to shed light on this view in terms of premises and evidence. There is also an attempt to discuss the pluralistic view corresponding to it in terms of the premises on which it is based, and the evidence that it infers. Exclusivism reached several results, including: building the cognitive system on the basis of the release of religious truth, its stability, and the possibility of reaching it, which requires limiting legitimacy and the path to the final religion that clarifies it in all its dimensions. Exclusivism also pushed the claim of pluralism - due to suspicion of narrow reading and marginalization of others - by creating a space for dialogue and mutual respect governing Islam’s relations with others, whether within the Islamic community or outside it.
Hence, the research was an attempt to answer this question in two main axes: The first axis is devoted to present the introductory introductions and explaining the foundations of the argument of certainty. The second was devoted to dealing with the argument of certainty, to know the validity of those mentioned from the premises in ensuring the excuse of the wrong certainty on the Day of Resurrection.
To discuss this issue, we have relied on what is stated in the Qur’an and the hadiths of the Prophet, relying on the general common understanding in explaining it. It has been shown that the oppressed person in general is anyone who is excused for not attaining the truth in his beliefs - we mean by beliefs the fundamentals around which the faith revolves - whether due to innate shortcomings or external factors.
The term “the oppressed” - that mentioned in some statements - is often used specifically for those who acknowledge the two testimonies of faith, and thus it is meant for everyone who does not oppose from all the sects of Muslims; there is a disagreement in clarifying the reality of the oppressor, and that he is the one who showed enmity or everyone who denied the right of the Imams (peace be upon them). Then we explained, in terms of ruling on faith and disbelief, the oppressed is not judged by either of them, but rather he is an intermediary between them, so he does not deserve the name of disbelief or belief as stated in a number of hadiths, and that his judgement in the afterlife is that he will be tested, so whoever obeys will enter Paradise, otherwise he will deserve Hell.
Is he judged as an infidel like someone who denies a religious necessity or does he remain a Muslim but not a believer?
The research addressed several basic introductions; such as explaining the meaning of the necessary and theoretical in language and terminology and explaining its difference from the religious necessary, then explaining the role of time and its effect on the necessary and theoretical, considering that the necessary and theoretical are two descriptions of the thing regardless of its position in religion. Then the research showed whether the Imamate is a religious or doctrinal necessity. After that, it showed that Imamate is a religious necessity for the first class of Muslims. If there is confusion and lack of clarity for other classes of Muslims, it leads to become theoretical for the public, and this is the case for other Muslim sects other than the Twelver Shiites.
As for the Twelver Shiite Muslims, the concept of Imamate is a religious doctrinal necessity for them.
Therefore, the research concluded with several results:
1. Denying the necessary is not an independent subject of disbelief, but rather, it is a subject composed of it and the continuity of denial, to the denial of the Prophet (peace be upon him).
2. The one who denies the doctrinal necessity is not a non-Muslim, but rather he is not a believer.
In this research, we have tried to clarify this matter among the Imamis, as this issue is not new, but rather appeared since the time of the Khawarij, and was one of the reasons for the emergence of the Mu'tazila school of thought. The word eternity is used either to mean permanence or to mean length of stay. Muslim scholars have stated that the infidel and polytheist will remain in Hell forever, and there was disagreement among them about the eternity of others. The Imamis said that others will not remain in Hell forever.
By reviewing the Holy Quran, we see that it mentions many titles that contain a threat of eternal damnation in Hellfire, including the hypocrite, the liar, the arrogant, and the one who disobeys Allah and His Messenger, and transgresses His limits.
From here, it is necessary to clarify what is meant, and that they all go back to the titles of the infidel and the polytheist. Whoever swears falsely is a hypocrite. Whoever is arrogant about monotheism, whoever takes the side of the disbelievers - who are the people of Quraysh or the Jews and Christians - and whoever takes the side of a people with whom Allah is angry, they are the hypocrites.
The narrations in this regard have shown that the infidels and polytheists are the ones who will remain in Hell forever, while others will not remain in it forever. This has been applied to the enemies of the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him) and the killers of Imam Hussein (peace be upon him).
It cannot be said that there is no correspondence between the belief in eternal damnation in Hellfire and divine justice, because eternal damnation in Hellfire is not a natural punishment, but rather the result of one's actions in this worldly life. The torment in the afterlife is an embodiment of the work that a person has done in this world.
The research reviews models that contribute to presenting an image of each of them, and shows the difference between the two perceptions so that it is necessary to adopt one of them, and justify the models included in the other perception, in a way that does not prejudice the chosen one, Then the researcher tries to address the problem by resorting to reason and Quranic evidence as the most important transmitted evidence and reference in the event of a conflict.
The researcher concludes that the prophetic image is bright and cannot bear the attribution of dark models to it. What is mentioned in the Islamic heritage, in this context, should be denied and removed, as it contradicts the personality and morals of the Prophet, or it should be limited by temporal determinants and objective circumstances that make him palatable and consistent with the principles of justice and the requirements of divine wisdom.
which lead to total skepticism in religious information and other knowledge, which is contrary to what reason and transmission called for, regarding the necessity of certainty in religion, faith and the necessities of religion.
The writer of the book discussed Dr. Soroush's articles, and clarified the wrong premises and inferences. He refuted the pillars of this theory in various ways, by carefully following his articles, and the examples and evidence they contained, to reach the stage of complete induction, in addition to highlighting the tolerances and fallacies that Dr. Soroush fell into.
addcomment