Human,s Need of Religion from the Viewpoint of Ayatullah Javādi Amoli and Ibn Taymiyyah

Human^,s need of religion is a very significant subjet in the realm of studies of religion, Islamic theology and philosophy of religion. Despite his faculty of reason, human is incomplete in cognition, needing a guaranteed comprehensive divine plan, capable of leading him throughout his life to achive Salvation. As a result human^,s need of divine religion is an integral part of his whole life. A comparison of the viewpoints of Ayatullah Javādi Amoli and Ibn Taymiyyah as the representatives of Shia and Salafi schools of thought of Islam, respectively, reveals that they both believe in the necessity of a divine religion, capable of meeting man^, s this world and the Hereafter needs as well. However, since they believe in different sources for knowing religion, their ontological and epistemological views vary in this regard. Maintaining an equal role for Aghl (reason) besides Naghl (Qoutation), Ayatullah Javādi Amoli believes that reason, as a constituent of religion, has also a significant place in knowing it. Maintaining an epistemological point of view, he believes that religion is a comprehensive plan, capable of meeting all of human^, s this-worldly and coming-worldly needs, a characteristic that necesitates his need of it. According to Amoli, religion is a necessary pre-requisite in this world for the man^, s formation of civilization and compelling him to practice his religious duties. He also believes in the practicality of the comprehensive religion of Islam in all realms of the life. On the contrary, Ibn Taymiyyah who insists on his rationality, not only maintains a significant place for the Salaf-e Salih (The Righteous Companions of the Prophet) as the sources of religion, but also practically he puts the reason aside, denying its place as a source for knowing religion, and turns out to be a mere literalist even in the principles of religion. He admits human^,s need of religion because of its necessary function in leading him to salvation in the coming world but confines the realm of religion to the mere surface of Naghl (Qoutation) and resorting to the Salaf (disciples of the prophet). In conclusion, though the two thinkers put emphasis on the necessity of the existence of a divine religion, they are of different views on how to explain the man^, s need of religion and his duties in this regard.