چکیده:
The section on monotheism (tawḥīd) is one of the most important areas of Islamic theology, addressing numerous issues related to the ontology and epistemology of God, including His names and attributes. A key challenge in this field has been the question of whether the divine names are divinely pre-established or ordained (tawqīfiyyat al-asmāʾ). This issue was considered in several hadiths even before the first theological works were compiled. As a result, theologians have sometimes drawn upon sacred texts, such as the Quran and the Tradition, to support their arguments on the matter. Among prominent Imami scholars, al-Sayyid al-Murtaḍā (355-436 AH/965-1044 CE) was the first theologian to formally present and establish the view that divine names are divinely ordained, which subsequently became one of the main solutions to the problem. Given the significance of al-Sayyid al-Murtaḍā’s views and their influence on shaping trends in the history of Imami theology, this article aims to examine the issue based on his theological texts and to derive his perspective on the matter from his writings.
خلاصه ماشینی:
com) 77 Criticism and review of Nasir al-Qafari's view on the emergence of Shiism in Introduction ــــــــــ Scientific-Research Quarterly ـــــــــــ This writing investigates the issue of the divinely appointed nature of Divine Names in the thought of Sayyid Murtada.
The divinely appointed or conventional nature of languages Although Sharif Musawi presents several discussions of general linguistic topics here, the necessity of 81 81 A critique and review of Nasir al-Qafari's view on the emergence of Shiism in brevity, we refrain from addressing it and only mention that he here deals with the very important subject of ــــــــــ Quarterly ـــــــــــ whether languages are divinely appointed (tawqifi) or not, in order to lay one of the premises of his theory regarding the non-divine appointment of Divine Scientific-Research Names: "The convention that takes place among us humans regarding the use of various words does not require a received permission from the Lawgiver -as a group has thought- because that which prompts us to dialogue and causes each of us to understand another's intention is strong, and the benefit of it is obvious; and whatever in it is beneficial for us -and at the same time does not appear ugly- must be considered good; just as breathing is such.
(
, 
, 
)
