A comparative study of the meaning of life according to Kierkegaard and Sadrul Matalhin

One of the most important issues of philosophy is the question of the meaning of life. It seems that the purpose of meaning in the opinion of Kierkegaard and Mulla Sadra is the purpose of life. It should be noted that the purpose of life is for someone who has knowledge and will, and the example of this is only human. Mulla Sadra and Kierkegaard explained the meaning of life by clinging to and appealing to religious beliefs, or in a better word, religious feeling, with God at the head of them. Kierkegaard considers the meaning and purpose of life to be a leap towards faith in God, and without this He considers the spirit of human life to have no support and no meaning. He does not interfere with rational reasoning in the discussion of the meaning of human life, because this spirit (intellectual) is a kind of passivity that removes the characteristic of religious activity from man. take but it must be acknowledged that what has been neglected in his view is the natural structure of man. In the wisdom of the Supreme, inspired by religious teachings, there is a kind of connection between man, God and existence, and the existence of God is considered the ultimate goal and the main factor of this connection, and in Sadra's thought, the correct understanding of this meaningful relationship and efforts in this direction are the key to meaning. Life is human. According to Sadrul Matalhin, the meaning of life depends on the existence of a valuable goal, a goal that is beyond the material and even spiritual issues of man, and that is a transcendental matter. He considers man to consist of soul and body, and what brings man to this valuable goal is man's will and intellect. This article attempts to express the thoughts of these two thinkers about the meaning of life, while also establishing the source of God as the only foundation and source of meaning in Mulla Sadra's thought, and criticizes Soren Kierkegaard's view.