This text explains in detail the meaning of death. It also touches subjects like why we are born, why we live, why some fear death and how understanding death. Nonetheless, Āyatullāh Muťahharī always retained great respect and affection of Man · Evils, An Excerpt from Ayatullah Murtadha Mutahhari’s Divine Justice. Throughout the history of thought and action, the justice of God has been a In the end, I have to thank Muhammad Taqi Ja’fari and Murtadha Mutahhari.
|Published (Last):||4 June 2016|
|PDF File Size:||14.63 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||11.45 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Sometimes relativity is used in opposition to absoluteness; mutahharj this case it means that the actuality of a thing depends on a series of conditions; and absoluteness means freedom from a juwtice of conditions. I did a quick search and found this http: One who is poor lacks something called wealth; it is not the case that he in turn possesses something called poverty and, like a wealthy person, has a type of possession, except that a wealthy person possesses wealth and a poor person possesses poverty.
Iustice is, all evils are of the form of non-existence and non-being. Whether evils be existential or non-existential, are good and evil separable or inseparable?
In books of philosophy, this idea is attributed to the ancient Greeks and specifically to Plato. Their being effects or being created is accidental.
Being and non-being do not comprise two separate groups in the external world. We consider ignorance, poverty, and death to be evil. Good and evil, too, are like being and non-being; in fact, fundamentally good is the same as being and evil is the same as non-being. What is the essence of evils? I also wouldn’t mind an online or pdf version, but that doesn’t seem to exist either. The answer we present in this book contains the same elements that are mentioned in books of Islamic philosophy—especially the books of Mulla Sadra—and both answers are essentially the same.
The answer is that there is no more than one type of being in the universe, and that is the existence of good things; evils are all of the form of non-being, and non-being is not a created thing.
Ayatullah Murtadha Mutahhari
That is, do goodnesses predominate over evils, or do the evils of the world predominate over its goodnesses? Or does neither predominate over the other, with them being equal. Every thing can be both small and large; it depends what thing we make our base and standard [of comparison].
The dualists have been unable to harmonize belief in the unlimited power and unchallenged will of God divjne His uncontested decree with belief in His Wisdom, Justice, and Goodness.
Ayatullah Murtadha Mutahhari | Books on Islam and Muslims |
A being, irrespective of whether it is compared to something else, either possesses life or doesn’t possess it. Any help would be appreciated. Is this a contradiction?
This too is in comparison to other watermelons. The third part of the discussion reveals the beautiful and unique order of the world of existence, and it can be considered divihe independent answer—albeit sufficient—or a useful complement to the first answer.
If a beast of prey were to exist but not to prey [on other things], that is, if it were not to cause loss of life for anything, it would not be evil, and if it exists and loss of life takes place, it is evil.
In any case, attribution of suppositional things to a cause is accidental. Paying attention to the example above will clarify the matter. A thing that is white is white without it having to be compared to anything else, and a thing that is black is black in itself, and it doesn’t need to be compared to something else for it to be black.
If ignorance were an actual reality, acquiring knowledge—since it would be alongside a loss of ignorance—would simply be the changing of one attribute for another, just as a body loses one form and quality and acquires a different form and quality.
Evils, An Excerpt from Ayatullah Murtadha Mutahhari’s Divine Justice
If poisonous animals did not cause death and sickness, they would not be evil; if plant afflictions did not cause the annihilation of trees or their fruits, they would not be evil; if floods and earthquakes did not result in human and material losses they would not be evil.
First, is it possible to separate these deficiencies and lacks from the affairs of this world, or not? Create an account or sign in to comment You need to be a member in order to leave a comment Create an account Sign up for a new account in our community. But Islam, at the same time as it considers God to be the origin of all existence and possessor of unending mercy and supreme wisdom, it doesn’t diivne fault with His supreme will and uncontestable power; it relates everything to Him, even Satan and his leading astray.
The conclusion that can be reached from this discussion is only that being is mutahharl of two types: And [in turn] non-being, inasmuch as it is non-being, does not require a separate origin and source.
It is a mistake diviine assume that evil things are a specific group of things whose essence consists of evil and in which there is no good; and good things in their turn are another category separate and differentiated from bad things. Divine justice requires that these vacuums be filled.
Evil is in those casualties and losses. This is why a body that loses the attribute of life and turns into an inanimate object has descended, not ascended. In reality, the dualists wished to exonerate God of evil, and ended up charging Him with having an associate.
This point can be elucidated in two ways: Already have an judtice
Book Request: ” Divine Justice – Mutahhari ” – Off-Topic –
I had the book but it was destroyed in a basement flood. There dicine also a series of existential things that—as indicated previously—are born of non-beings like ignorance, inability, and poverty, and in their turn are mutahahri of a series of deficiencies, annihilations, and non-beings. It is obvious that the second case is correct.
Justiice real attribute is one for which it is sufficient to posit a thing and that attribute in order for it to be possible for that thing to be described by that attribute. The point is that here, where our discussion is about the relativity of the evilness of beings from which essential evils—meaning non- beings—originate, the intent is relativity as opposed to reality and actuality, not relativity as opposed to absoluteness, in which sense many good things are also relative.
Posted September 5, You need to be a member in order to leave a comment.