چکیده:
Imami Kalam in discussions related to the Rule of Lutf has witnessed an evolution. This evolution has occurred across various axes, including the section on evidences and functions. The issue of the present research is to discover the evolution of the Rule of Lutf in these two axes. Based on this research, using a descriptive-analytical method and with a historical-evolutionary approach, three distinct periods can be drawn: the period of formation, the period of growth and development, and the period of stabilization. In the formation period, only Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn al-Nawbakht spoke implicitly and briefly about Lutf and its evidence, and he alone provided two evidences for the obligation of Lutf and explicitly cited this rule in several issues. In the period of growth and development, a clear leap occurred in the discussion of the Rule of Lutf, the effects of which include providing nine evidences for the obligation of Lutf and citing this rule in more than thirty cases. The outcome of the stabilization period can also be summarized in mentioning some new evidences and functions for the Rule of Lutf; such as: the evidence of removing excuses, the evidence of expediency (Maslahat), and the evidence of the non-deviation of the effect from the cause, and the application of the Rule of Lutf in discussions of Divine Kalam, the knowledge of God, and the preservation of the Quran from distortion.
خلاصه ماشینی:
In fact, both reasons return to what is known in the discussion of the Rule of Lutf as the Argument of Wisdom (Burhan al-Hikmah) (Rabbani Golpayegani, 1418: 107); because one of the meanings of Divine Wisdom that theologians speak of is that God does not perform a base act and does not cause disruption in a mandatory act (Allamah al-Hilli, 1413: 302; Subhani, 1422: 225.
In the second formulation, most theologians, to explain this reason, compare it to someone who wants to invite a guest and his purpose is to benefit the guest, and it is assumed that he knows if he performs certain tasks that involve no hardship for him, the guest will come to his house, and if he does not perform them, the guest will not come; in this case, it is obligatory for him to perform these tasks, otherwise, the frustration of purpose will occur; and for this reason, they have said: "In the repulsiveness of preventing Lutf, it is like preventing empowerment; because the cause of the frustration of purpose in both is the same" (Sayyid Murtada, 1411: 190-191; Abu al-Salah al-Halabi, 1404: 122; Sheikh Tusi, 1406: 135 - 136).
2-2 Functions of the Rule of Lutf In the works of the theologians of this period, the rule of Lutf has many functions: (1) Obligation of knowing God (Sayyid Murtada, 1411: 179, 180; Sheikh Tusi, 1406: 166, 168; Himsi Razi, 1412: 260.
Sayyid Murtada Ali bin Husayn (1411 AH), Al-Dhakhira fi Ilm al-Kalam, Qom: Islamic Propagation Foundation.
(
, 
, 
)
