Clarification

The Official Website of Grand Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi

صفحه کاربران ویژه - خروج
Sort by
 
The issue of the eater and the eaten. (Aakal and Makool)The doubts of those who deny physical resurrection

Philosophy has given various arguments about the impossibility of the return of that which is destroyed. And they believe that the impossibility of appearance of that which had been destroyed is counted among those deeds that need no proof because the return of something should be with all its attributes and persona and it is impossible for something that existed till yesterday to do the same. This is because that among the attributes is “its existence yesterday” and how is it possible for yesterday and today be together when they are opposites?

But if we overlook the attributes then it is not impossible that something which is very similar to the original but different only due to time in most aspect to come into existence. It is clear that this existence is not exactly the previous one but similar and thus the issue of the impossibility of return of that which is destroyed becomes just an argument for argument sake. Those that deny say that it does not return with all its attributes and the believers say that excepting for the time factor it returns with all the attributes.

No believer of the physical resurrection claims that the resurrected body will return in the same form as it existed in the time before but its return is for another time and so it is similar to the previous existence in appearance and in time. (Reflect)

The resurrection is not like the return of that which was destroyed because the soul is never destroyed and remains exactly the same. Though the body decays and returns to earth but is never destroyed. Its appearance only changes and on the Day of Judgment these dust particles will again regain its original form. If we talk only about the return of the destroyed then we should know that it is only about it outward appearance whether the same will return on the Day of Judgment but on the one side is the soul and the body on the other and they protect the persona of the person.

This is why we say that this person is the same as the one before because his soul is the same, the source of the body is the same and the physical appearance is similar.

The word “Mithl” which means” like” in verse 81 of Surah Yasin also proves the same.

“Is not He who created the heavens and the earth able to create the like of them?”

In verse 56 of Surah Nisaa god says:

“As soon as their skins are roasted We shall change them by other skins that they may taste the punishment.”

Ibn-ol-Abi Auja asked Imam Jafar Saidq:

“What is the sin of the new skins that they should burn?”

The Imam answered:

“The new skin is the old one but is different.”

Ibn-ol Auja persisted for more clarification and said, “Give us an example from this world.”

The Imam replied: “It is like someone breaks a brick into pieces and then remolds the pieces into a new brick. Now this brick is actually the old one but is new and different.”

The original component is the same but its appearance is like the old one. (1)


 

1. Behar-ol-Anwar vol.7 page 38 Hadith 6- this meaning has been narrated in another Hadith with a little difference. Nurus Saqlain also has the same Hadith in the explanation of verse 56 of Sarah Nisaa.

 

The issue of the eater and the eaten. (Aakal and Makool)The doubts of those who deny physical resurrection
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Lotus
Mitra
Nazanin
Titr
Tahoma