Abstract

Islamic theologians have held differing views on ethics. Ash'aris believe that the goodness and badness of actions are solely determined by divine law, while the ʿAdlīyeh (including Mu'tazilis and Shi’ites) assert that these qualities are intrinsic or rational. This means that ʿAdlīyeh believes that even in the absence of religion, humans can distinguish between goodness and badness and they are independent to religions. This belief is so prevalent in Shi’ites texts that students of theology often conclude that anyone who does not believe in the intrinsic goodness and badness of actions (IGBA) is not in Shi’ites boundary. However, this repetitive assertion has obscured dissenting opinions within Shi’ites. For instance, when Morteza Motahhari (an Islamic contemporary philosopher and a student of Tabatabaei), discovered that his teacher did not believe in the IGBA, he reconsidered his mentorship and Motahhari critics his teacher. This article, in addition to examining Tabatabaei's views, traces their roots to Farabi's philosophy. Given that both were Muslim philosophers and Farabi was likely a Shi'ite, identifying this connection can influence contemporary Shi'ite philosophers and create a third way in theorizing Shi'ite ethics. This article employs a persuasive paradigm, a qualitative approach, content analysis method, and library research collecting data method.