پژوهشنامه فلسفه دین (نامه حکمت)
سال پنجم شماره 2 (پیاپی 10، پاییز و زمستان 1386)

Some existentialist philosophers have analyzed the phenomenon of revelation. Some have accepted the traditional theology while others have reduced it to existential experience. Jaspers favors the latter analysis. In light of his interpretation of man and his existential hierarchy Jaspers construes revelation as a type of internal consciousness. In his opinion if man is place at the level of existence he will attain particular enlightenment facing up to the transcendent. This is regarded as general revelation. This type of existential experience is achieved through meditation and contemplation into the Transcendent as well as thinking about one’s responsibilities toward oneself and others General revelation is associated with the type of philosophical belief that Jaspers supports. This belife dose not stand against religious belief. In philosophical belife a person is only committed to his personal experience and never regards it as true FOR OTHERS. Philosophical belief dose not require to have obligation to any religion. It is related to science and tradition and draws on them.

The theory of reincarnation, after entering to the realm of Islamic thought, and from the first Hijry century appeared as one of the forms of immortality and some of metempsychosists and extremists supported it. As reincarnation was in contrast with the Islamic foundations and doctrins, Islamic thinkers attempted to refuse in three fields of theology, mysticism and philosophy through direct and indirect method. In the indirect method, they first tried to prove resurrection, so that reincarnation would be rejected. But in the direct method, they tried to reject the proofs of metempsychosists. to do this, it was essential to know all about their reasons and thoughts as well as having stable foundations to reject it. Among the Islamic thinkers, suhrawardi and mullasadra tried to refuse reincarnation according to illuminated and transcendental principles, but there are visible differences between their rejection methods.

This paper is concerned with one of the most important differences between philosophers and mystics. The former seek knowledge of “existence” while the latter want to reach and to gain the state of “nonexistence”. But is “seeking nonexistence” a meaningful concept?In this paper we will discuss the meaning of “nonexistence” from the viewpoints of two great mystics of the East and the West –Mowlana and Eckhart- who leaved in the same century (13th) and who belonged to two great Abrahamic traditions –Islam and Christianity. We will also examine the relation between this idea and the doctrine of “oneness of Being” (wahdat al-wujud). The influence of this idea on the emergence of a kind of “negative theology” will also be discussed from the viewpoints of these two mystics.

The intercultural philosophy is one of the new philosophical trends that is applied to a group of philosophers and researchers who, having a common conception of contemporary world, seek to formulate the principles of mutual understanding, dialogue and coexistence among cultures. This philosophy regards itself not as a philosophy among others but as including the principles in view of which thinkers from different cultures can continue their thought and researches. Rejecting absolutism and egoism, intercultural philosophy intends to be a theory about the dialogue among cultures. It attempts, therefore, to provide a way for dialogue and sympathy among cultures through rereading philosophical literature in different cultures. It also tries to enrich the attempt of the thinkers from different cultures for solving the problems of contemporary world.

There arose two distinctive philosophical approaches in the philosophical school of Isfahan: one originating from Mirdamad and the other from Mirfindiriski and Mulla Rajab Ali Tabrizi. The first approach resulted in the emergence of the Transcendent Theosophy and the second one in that of the peripatetic school of Mulla Rajab Ali Tabrizi. Taking the external meanings of Quranic verses and traditions into consideration, the proponents of the peripatetic school of Mulla Rajab Ali Tabrizi such as Qadi Said Qumi, Pirzadeh Qumi, etc. did not admit the principality of being and its implications such as the equivocation of being, unity of being, and analogical gradation of being. They argued that the principality of being and its equivocation would place God or the Creator in the same line as the creatures. This is not consistent with the transcendental approach toward God in Quranic verses and traditions. They did not consider the principality of being and its implications compatible with certain religious doctrines and beliefs on the unity of the necessary being. Drastically opposing the principality of being, they approved the principality of quiddity and its implications such as homonymy of being extending from the necessary being to the contingent being. Thus they concluded that beings are heterogeneous and multiple.

John McDowell holds that there are moral facts. These facts are natural but natural sciences can not discover them. One through moral education becomes virtuous and then can percept those facts. This is contrary to Kant who thinks that the autonomous will of rational man is the law giver of morality. McDowell defends a kind of "particularism" that is inconsistent with Kant's "generalism." McDowell's ideas about motivation also differ radically from Kants. After these criticisms some objections are leveled against McDowell. Lastly some McDowellian answers are given.

Although the existence of the world after death and otherworldly life are among the fundamental tenets of the whole Muslims, Islamic thinkers are divided as to what category of existents this kind of life belongs. Aside from various interpretations of the Quranic verses and Islamic traditions, the issue of the animal resurrection in theological and philosophical sources of different Islamic schools is closely associated with the two principles of whether animals possess rational soul or not and how would it be possible while they are not religiously obligated. Though it seems certain that animals are not religiously obligated, the fact that they are considered as a community by the Quran, suggests both their knowledge of being and their shared and definite purpose in the life of this world. The two factors of consciousness and purposiveness in animals have caused Quran to identify them with human being and to speak of their other-worldly life. With this assumption, it might be claimed that the resurrection of animals in the Hereafter, in addition to the pleading for justice from themselves, is also meant to plead justice from human being. Thus, the principle of accepting man's responsibility towards animals is open to discussion, one which denies any exploitation of them outside the essential purpose of their creation.

From an Hermeneutical methodology perspective, metaphor, having exclusive attributes, is considered an efficient instrument for understanding complex phenomena in different sciences. In the organization theory and management world also some scholars have tried to understand and explain organization by using different metaphors. This article by going beyond common organizational issues, intended to discuss about a root metaphor, which asks about the being and the truth of organization from an ontological perspective. Contrary to many of other organizational metaphors, the way metaphor stemmed from God’s saying and in the light of holy Quran is considered as a essential metaphor in the Islamic philosophy Specially Sadraian ontology and epistemology and mysticism teachings and has a high validity in the ontological explanations of these social phenomena.