روش‌شناسي و كارآمدي الهيات توماس آكوئيناس و كلام خواجه‌نصيرالدين طوسي

Methodology and Efficiency of Theology of Thomas Aquinas and the Theology of Khāja Naṣīruddīn Ṭūsī

اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از روش ﻓﻠﺴﻔﯽ و ﮐﺎرآﻣﺪي آن در ﮐﻼم و اﻟﻬﯿﺎت ﻫﻤﻮاره ﻣﯿﺎن ﻣﺘﮑﻠﻤﺎن ﻣﺴـﻠﻤﺎن و ﻣﺴـﯿﺤﯽ ﻣﺤـﻞ ﺑﺤـﺚوﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﻮده اﺳﺖ. ﺗﻮﻣﺎس آﮐﻮﯾﻨﺎس و ﺧﻮاﺟﻪ ﻃﻮﺳﯽ، ﻣﺘﮑﻠﻤﺎن ﻫﻢﻋﺼﺮي ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ اﺛﺮﭘﺬﯾﺮي از ﻓﻠﺴﻔﮥ اﺑﻦﺳﯿﻨﺎ و ﺑﺎ ﮐـﺎرﺑﺮد ﺑﺮﻫﺎن در ﺗﺒﯿﯿﻦ و دﻓﺎﻋﯿﺎت ﮐﻼﻣﯽ دﯾﻦ، ﻣﺸﺮب و روﺷﯽ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﯾﺎﻓﺘﻪاﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻣﯽﺗﻮان آن را ﮐﻼم ﻋﻘﻠﯽ ـ ﻧﻘﻠـﯽ ﻧﺎﻣﯿـﺪ. اﯾـﻦ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺗﻄﺒﯿﻘﯽ ﺑﻪ روشﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽِ ﺗﻌﻠﯿﻤﯽ آنﻫﺎ اﺷﺎره ﻣﯽﮐﻨﺪ. ﺗﻮﻣﺎس آﮐﻮﯾﻨﺎس ﺑﺎ ﻗﺎﺋﻞﺷﺪن ﺑﻪ دو ﻧﻈﺎم ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺘﯽ ﻣﺒﺘﻨـﯽ ﺑـﺮ وﺣﯽ و ﻋﻘﻞ، دو ﻧﻮع اﻟﻬﯿﺎت ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎم اﻟﻬﯿﺎت وﺣﯿﺎﻧﯽ و اﻟﻬﯿﺎت ﻃﺒﯿﻌﯽ را ﻣﻄﺮح ﮐﺮد. وي در ﮐﺘﺎب ﺟﺎﻣﻊ اﻟﻬﯿﺎتِ ﺑـﺮﺧﻼف ﮐﺘﺐ ﭘﯿﺸﯿﻨﯿﺎﻧﺶ ﮐﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺟﻨﺒﮥ رﻫﺒﺎﻧﯽ و درونﻣﺘﻨﯽ داﺷﺘﻨﺪ، اﻓﺰون ﺑﺮ اﺳﺘﻨﺎد ﺑﻪ ﻣﺘﻮن ﻣﻘﺪس و آﺛﺎر آﺑـﺎي ﮐﻠﯿﺴـﺎ ﺑـﻪ ﺗﺤﻠﯿـﻞ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﯽ در ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ اﻟﻬﯿﺎﺗﯽ ﻫﻤﺖ ﮔﻤﺎﺷﺖ. ﺧﻮاﺟﻪ ﻃﻮﺳﯽ ﻧﯿﺰ در ﮐﺘﺎب ﺗﺠﺮﯾﺪ اﻹﻋﺘﻘـﺎد ﺑـﻪ ﺗﻠﻔﯿـﻖ روش ﻋﻘﻠـﯽ و ﻧﻘﻠـﯽ ﭘﺮداﺧﺖ. اﯾﻦﺟﺴﺘﺎر، ﺿﻤﻦ اﺷﺎره ﺑﻪ روش ﮐﻼﻣﯽ ﭘﯿﺶ از اﯾﻦ دو ﻣﺘﻔﮑﺮ، ﺑﺎ ﻧﮕﺎﻫﯽ ﺗﻮﺻﯿﻔﯽ ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻠـﯽ، وﺟـﻮه اﺷـﺘﺮاك و اﻓﺘﺮاق روﺷﯽِ ﺗﻮﻣﺎس و ﺧﻮاﺟﻪ را ﺑﯿﺎن ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﺪ. اﺗﺨﺎذ روش اﻋﺘﺪاﻟﯽ از وﺟﻮه اﺷﺘﺮاك آﻧﺎن اﺳﺖ. آﮐﻮﯾﻨﺎس در ﻣﯿﺎﻧـﮥ رأي ﺗﻔﺮﯾﻄﯽ ﺗِﺮﺗﻮﻟﯿﺎن و دﯾﺪﮔﺎه اﻓﺮاﻃﯽِ اﺑﻦرﺷﺪﯾﺎن ﻻﺗﯿﻨﯽ ﻗﺮار دارد و ﺧﻮاﺟﻪ ﻧﯿﺰ ﺑﺎ ﻋﺒﻮر از ﻧﺺﮔﺮاﯾﺎﻧﯽ ﭼﻮن ﺷﯿﺦ ﺻـﺪوق، از آﺳﯿﺐﻫﺎي اﻓﺮاﻃﯽ ﺑﺮﺧﯽ ﻣﻌﺘﺰﻟﻪ و ﺑﺮداﺷﺖﻫﺎي ﻏﻠﻮآﻣﯿﺰي ﭼﻮن ﻓﺮﻗﮥ ﺷﯿﺨﯿﻪ ﺑﻪدور اﺳﺖ. ﻧﺘﯿﺠـﮥ روش اﻋﺘـﺪاﻟﯽ ﻫـﺮدو، اﺳﺘﻔﺎدۀ ﺣﺪاﮐﺜﺮي از ﺑﺮﻫﺂنﻫﺎي ﻋﻘﻠﯽ و ﻋﺒـﻮر از »ﻧﺺﺑﺴـﻨﺪي« ﺑـﻪ »ﻧﺺﭘﺴـﻨﺪي« اﺳـﺖ. روش داﻧـﺶ ﮐـﻼم اﺳﺎﺳـﺎً اﻧﺤﺼﺎري ﻧﯿﺴﺖ، اﻣﺎ ﻧﻮﯾﺴﻨﺪه از رﻫﮕﺬر اﯾﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﯾﺴﻪ و ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻼك ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻬﺎت روﺷﯽ، ﺑﺮ آن اﺳـﺖ ﮐـﻪ روش اﻋﺘـﺪاﻟﯽ آندو، ﮐﺎرآﯾﯽ و ﺳﻮدﻣﻨﺪي و ﭘﺎﺳﺦﮔﻮﯾﯽ ﺑﯿﺸﺘﺮي ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ روشﻫﺎي ﻧﺺﮔﺮا دارد.

The use of the philosophical method and its effectiveness in theology has always been the subject of debate among Muslim and Christian theologians. Thomas Aquinas and Khājah Ṭūsī are contemporary theologians who, influenced by Avicenna’s philosophy, have found a similar doctrine and method by using proof in the explanation and theological defenses of religion, which can be called rational-narrative theology. This comparative research refers to their didactic methodology. Thomas Aquinas, believing in two knowledge systems based on revelation and reason, proposed two types of theology called revealed theology and natural theology. In his Summa Theologica, unlike the books of his predecessors, which only had a monastic and intra-textual aspect, in addition to referring to the Holy Texts and the works of the Church Fathers, he devoted himself to philosophical analysis in theological topics. Khājah Ṭūsī also discussed the integration of intellectual and narrative methods in his book Tajrīd al-I‘tiqād. This essay, while referring to the theological method of these two thinkers, with a descriptive-analytical view, shows the similarities and differences in the method of Thomas and Khājah. Adopting a moderate method is one of their common features. Aquinas is somewhere in between the Tertullian’s negligent opinion and that of the extremist Latin advocates of Averroes; and Khājah, by passing beyond such textualists as Shaykh Ṣadūq, is far away from the extreme harms of some Mu’tazila and exaggerated impressions of the like of Shaykhiyya sect. The result of the moderate method of both is the maximum use of rational arguments and passing through “sufficing texts” to “favoring texts”. The method of theology knowledge is basically not exclusive; but the author, through this comparison and paying attention to the criteria of method similarities, believes that the moderate method of the two of them is more efficient, useful and responsive than the textualist methods.