Hoseyn Arefiniya; Mohammad Rezapoor; Mostafa Soltani
Abstract
How human beings will be resurrected in the Day of Resurrection is one of the most important topics related to resurrection in Islamic religions. This article, by collecting information in a library method, in an analytical-comparative method, is the answer to the question that from the perspective of ...
Read More
How human beings will be resurrected in the Day of Resurrection is one of the most important topics related to resurrection in Islamic religions. This article, by collecting information in a library method, in an analytical-comparative method, is the answer to the question that from the perspective of Imamiyyah and Matridiyyah, will the resurrection of man on the Day of Resurrection be in the form of restoration of the destroyed object or will it be the gathering of scattered parts, together with the soul and soul?The purpose of the research is to create a platform for interaction and rapprochement between these two religions . Based on the findings of this research, most of Imamiyya theologians believed in the refusal to restore the dead, and as a result, the human being will be transported in the resurrection in the form of the transfer of the same elemental components, along with the soul and the soul. Unlike a small number of Imami theologians and the majority of Matridiyyah theologians, they believe in the permissibility of returning the annihilated, and as a result, the gathering of all human elements in the resurrection by God's perfect power, will be of annihilation and absolute nothingness. IntroductionThe issue of how the earthly body is resurrected in the afterlife has long been of interest to various schools and sects. Among them, the two theological schools of Imamiyyah and Matridayyyah have emphasized the eternal life of man in the afterlife. However, the fundamental difference lies in the manner in which the earthly body is resurrected to the afterlife, and the secret of this conflict lies in the return of the topic of resurrection to transcendental and non-sensuous matters that human science has not yet been able to explore in detail. (Fayyad Lahiji, Beta: 1/15)The two theological schools of Imamiyyah and Matridayyyah have had many things in common in most theological discussions, including adherence to narration and reason. Meanwhile, in some of the doctrinal issues between the two sects, including resurrection and the return of the extinct and the discussions surrounding it, no detailed and in-depth work has been done; therefore, this factor can be recognized as one of the reasons for the existence of a knowledge gap between these two sects; because responsibility and belief in the resurrection among the followers of these two schools can be a powerful lever in warding off evil and criminal acts; therefore, expressing the various angles of the resurrection can lead to the advancement of comparative and approximate studies among a significant range of Sunni Hanafi Matridi and Shia Twelvers.Meanwhile, the main research question between the Imamiyyah and the Matridiyyah is whether the resurrection of man in the resurrection is in the form of a return of the annihilated or not? That is, will the return of man on the resurrection be from annihilation and absolute nothingness, or will the return of man be in the form of a collection of scattered parts in the world?Using the analytical-comparative method, this research seeks to compare and contrast the views of the theologians of the two Imamiyyah and Matridiyyah schools on the manner of resurrecting man in the refusal to return the annihilated or its permissibility. Most Imamiyyah have argued in the discussion of the resurrection and the discussions around it, such as the permissibility or refusal of the return of the annihilated, using two narrative-rational methods; because in their doctrinal discussions, especially on the resurrection, they have used rational arguments in addition to narration (Mutahari, 1376: 3/92-95; Jibraeli, 1398: 59-65 and 273-283 and 289-290). However, most of the Matridi scholars are right. In most of their doctrinal discussions, they have also relied on reason in addition to narration. However, in the discussion of the resurrection and the discussions surrounding it, such as the return of the dead, they have been completely "narrative-oriented" and have only paid attention to auditory arguments, because from the perspective of this group, the discussions of the resurrection and its surroundings are beyond the reach of reason. (Matridi, 1427: 6-8; Samarqandi, 1440: 183; Nasafi, 1432: 428; Ibn Hammam, 2005: 140) For example, Najm al-Din Omar Nasafi, Abu al-Barakat Nasafi, and Ibn Kamal Pasha state in this regard: Many scholars of the Matridis school are silent on the extent and quality of the restoration of bodies and have generally agreed on accepting the restoration of bodies, whether it is restoration in the separation and addition of parts, or restoration from the non-existent; because they consider this discussion to be from narrations and they believe whatever the Quran and narrations indicate about it. (Nasfi, Bita: 108-110; Nasfi, 1432: 436-440; Ibn Kamal Pasha, 1430: 129) Therefore, in this article, first, the refusal or permissibility of restoring the extinct is examined from the perspective of the Imamiyyah and the Matridayyyah. Then, after determining the permissibility or refusal of restoring the extinct, the results and consequences of each of the views are discussed from the perspective of the two theological sects. BackgroundMany studies have been conducted on the issue of the return of the dead and the manner of human resurrection, some of the most important of which are:1- The article "The role of the issue of the return of the dead in the disputes of Islamic sects regarding the doctrine of bodily resurrection" by Ali Ma'mouri. In this article, the author examines the refusal or permissibility of the return of the dead from the perspective of some Ash'arite scholars such as Fakhr al-Razi, some philosophers such as Ibn Sina, and some philosopher-theologians such as Khwaja Nasir, Mulla Sadra, and Allama Tabataba'i.2- The article "A Study of the Return of the Dead from the Perspective of Islamic Theologians and Philosophers" by Ali Zia'i. In this article, the author first defines the return of the dead, then refers to the proponents of the permissibility and refusal of the return of the dead and their arguments from the perspective of some Ash'arite, Mu'tazilite, and Imamite scholars, and some scholars of the Mash'a and Transcendental Wisdom schools.3- The article “Revelationary Criticism and Analysis of the Assumption of the Extinction of Resurrection” by Seyyed Hassan Batha’i Golpayegani, the author in this article has responded to the suspicion of the assumption of the extinction of death; therefore, to move on to a clear answer, he first addressed the conceptualization of the assumption of the extinction, then the integration of the scattered elements, then he examined and analyzed the relationship between the assumption of the extinction and resurrection from the perspective of Imamiyyah theologians and some Ash’arites, as well as philosopher-theists of the Imamiyyah tradition such as Khwaja Nasir and Mulla Sadra, and Mohaqiq Sabzevari. Then he criticized and analyzed the suspicion of the extinction with the verses of the Quran; and finally, he came to the conclusion that the afterlife of man was not an example of the assumption of the extinction of death; so that the suspicion of the extinction of death was created.However, the advantage of the present research is that this article has considered and analyzed the issue of refusal and permissibility of the assumption of the extinction, as well as the transfer of the essence or likeness of the main and secondary elements from the perspective of the Imamiyyah and the Matridayyyah in a comparative manner; while the above studies, firstly, have not discussed the issue of nullification from the perspective of the Imamiyyah and the Matridayyyah, and secondly, they have not analyzed and examined the quality of the transfer of the same or similar main and secondary components in the discussion of the permissibility or refusal of nullification between the two schools of thought of the Imamiyyah and the Matridayyyah, or have paid less attention to this question with this approach. Thirdly, also, considering the examination conducted in the Matridayyyah school, no significant research has been seen on the issue of nullification; this reason could be another advantage of this study.
