چکیده:
This writing examines the divine will from the perspective of two great philosophers, Ostad Motahhari and Baruch Spinoza, and aims to clarify the similarities and differences in their views regarding the question of whether God possesses a will or not, and if He does, whether His will is absolute and free. In this regard, the present essay compares the theories of these two philosophers on the following issues: divine intellect, divine will, the relationship between intellect and will to God, God's power, the relationship between free will and God or divine predestination, cause or necessary by another, God's free will, and the actuality of God's knowledge.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Unity of Substance In Spinoza's thought, similar to the proponents of metaphysics, the theory of multiple existing beings is explained from a causal perspective by referring to the single infinite substance that he calls God or Nature.
Divine Free Will Based on Spinoza's definition of free will, it becomes clear that only God is the true free agent, "for He alone exists by the necessity of His own essence and is necessitated to His actions, and He does not come into existence, endure, or persist through any other thing, whether substance or mode, nor is He compelled to act or work," because besides Him, there is no substance 1.
In his last book about Spinoza, a collection of articles published in 1383, Jahangiri says: "Although he has emphasized that God, through His essence and that whatever God knows and to which His infinite knowledge pertains, He creates" meaning it necessarily emanates from Him. Therefore, it must be said: "Whatever is intelligible and known to God necessarily exists, and in the expression of our sages, 'knowledge is existence'" (Spinoza, Ethics, 35).
3. Divine Will from the Perspective of Professor Motahhari However, Islamic philosophers consider the will, like other attributes of God, to be identical to His essence, and they believe that just as God's knowledge has levels, His will also has levels (Motahhari, Lessons in Theology, Shifa, 432/2).
(
, 
, 
)
