چكيده لاتين
Throughout the history of Islamic thought, the most important debate that has caused severe disagreements among Muslims is the issue of Imamate. Although Shiites agree on the divine nature of Imamate, there are many differences of opinion among Shiites on matters of Imamate, including the creational Cosmic sainthood; some consider it to be outside Shiite thought, while others believe that it is a pillar of Shiite religious thought. Among the latter group, due to different ontological, epistemological, and methodological foundations, different explanations and interpretations of this fact have been presented.
By examining the evidence and intellectual systems of individuals, one can understand their foundations and present a scientific diagram of different foundations to enable scientific comparison and evaluation of different opinions. However, since it is not possible to examine all sources and all works, this study focuses on two views that are related to the last century and have received less attention in scientific circles.
In this research, information has been collected with a library approach, then this information has been examined with an analytical and descriptive perspective, and the theories have been interpreted and explained in a semantic way based on the paradigm that governs them. After that, the opinions of the two thinkers have been compared with a comparative approach, and the similarities and differences of the two theories have been expressed to achieve a deeper understanding of the theory.
Finally, this study concludes that Allama Fakhr al-Muhaqqiin Shirazi and Ayatollah Seyyed Abul-Fazl Nabavi Qomi have many similarities in methodology. For example, both use different methods in different issues, intra-religious methods, analytical-logical approach, comparative approach, literary interpretation, theological interpretation and semantic interpretation, but nevertheless they have important methodological differences, such as the fact that they do not agree on the quality of the realm of analytical-logical method and its scope. They are not the same in using philosophical and mystical approaches in explaining issues. They also have important differences in using different methods in one issue, and it can be said that the Allamaʹs approach is a synthesis like Mulla Sadra Shirazi, but the approach of Ayatollah Nabavi Qomi is a theological-philosophical approach like the method of Khwaja Nasir al-Din Tusi in Tajrid al-eteghad. These important differences in epistemology have led to ontological differences and various arguments and explanations of the issue of the Universal sainthood of Ahl al-Bayt. Although they have in common the definition of the whole and the realm of the Universal sainthood and the justification and explanation of its results, including knowledge and power, the way they explain them is completely different; Allamah has a mystical-philosophical explanation and his attention and focus is on providing a suitable explanation of the necessity and position of Universal sainthood in the system of existence. While the explanation of Ayatollah Nabavi Qomi focuses more on solving the problems and refusals of Universal sainthood and does not provide a comprehensive explanation of the position of Universal sainthood in the system of existence and the quality of its issuance from God and the quality of the issuance of subsequent levels from it, and relies more on divine power in his explanation. It must be admitted that in the section of justification and argumentation, Ayatollah Nabavi Qomiʹs efforts and organization of arguments and explanation of implications are very commendable, unlike Allamah who did not work in depth and detail in the section of justification such as explanation.
