Abstract

This article addresses the dispute of freedom and religious obligations, and the relation between them, being said that it is based on a contradiction. The basis of this seeming conflict is to object the status of religion and damage its image in order to eliminate religion from the scope of life, in it being a difficult issue in our lives. This is presented for the purpose of humans being able to live far from restrictions and to live with freedom and not being obliged to be burdened with duties, especially when freedom is a fundamental principle that must precede everything else. This article discusses the issue of freedom from a religious perspective, and also from a non-religious perspective adopted by humanism, which promotes the centralisation of humans in life. I will explain the epistemic principles of freedom according to both trends, and then explain the different outcomes for both of them. The outcome of this study is that religion in its principle is based on freedom and choice, and rejection of creational and legislative compulsion in certain cases, even though it involves certain obligations and rulings that come via choice and conscious selection. It is not external to it, and it is for achieving spiritual freedom and human interests for this world and for the hereafter.