فصلنامه مقالات و بررسیها
شماره 1 (پیاپی 87، 1387)

Creation is one of the basic concepts which have a prominent role in all aspects of the Islamic world-view; especially that man has been invited to thinking and reflection in the creature and creative. That is why the philosophers, theologians and mystics have presented their view points in this sphere and opened a new opinion. Asharites tried to develop the sphere of divine will and power took the position of the ex nihilo. They claim that their view point was deduced from religious texts. This view point based on special grounds and requirements, bothers from some intellectual problems. This article tries to study the intellectual problems of this viewpoint.

The subject of Divine Will is discussed in three views of Imammieh, Moatazeleh, and Ashaereh scholars. In views of them, God has Will, however, there are differences between their beliefs: Is Divine Will a substance attribute or an attribute surplus to substance Is Divine Will an ancient or created attribute Is Divine Will an affirmative or privative attribute Is Divine Will a real or unreal attribute Is Divine Will an existing attribute In this article, the opinions of the three scholars are studied

Certainly, the ontological thought of Ibn Arabi and Shankara is the greatest achievements in the spheres of theoretical researches and mystical intuitions in Islamic world, India and all over the world. This thought that prepares the way to freedom, salvation and formation of pantheistic school. This article attempts to study the views and thoughts of these great thinkers of Islamic and Hindu world about ontology and compare them. It shows that undetermined essence in Ibn Arabi’s school and Nirguna in Shankara’s viewpoint are similar

The problem of "Other Minds", as one of the most important problems of the contemporary philosophy of mind, is usually considered through two different approaches; i. e. the epistemological and the conceptual ones. In this paper, after a short discussion of these approaches and a survey of historical issues, we will focus on the "analogical argument" as one of well-known responses to the epistemological problem. The main basis of this argument is that we are able to justify our belief in other minds through an inductive generalization of our mental states. We first explain some versions of the argument and then try to examine the most important objections against it. The final conclusion is that the analogical argument results in a probability of the existence of other minds, which is enough high to justify the related belief.

Human love, which in Sufism and its critics’ expression usually appears in the phrase “virtual love”, is one of the most challenging concepts in Islamic mysticism. The primacy of Ruzbihan in this arena is in view of the fact that he declines to use the common phrase “virtual love” and instead he uses “human love”. He also emphasizes that experiencing of human love is inevitable for achievement of divine love. Ruzbihan’s opinion arises this question: “what is the epistemological quality of human love that without experiencing it, divine love isn’t achievable. In this research, in order to answer this question, first it will be shown that human love in mystic thoughts isn’t admired only in one paradigm. At least five different paradigms can be found in their thoughts. Then the place of human love in Ruzbihan’s mystic system will be analyzed by explaining the keyword “Tajalli” and the process of “Ta’vil”. Finally Ruzbihan’s initiatives will be expressed and important distinctions between Ruzbihan and other Islamic mystics, who admire virtual love, will be under consideration.

One reading (qaraat) of Asr sura,, which is inconsistent with other valid readings, has been attributed to Ali (p.b.u.h). Because this reading contains additions to the Asr sura, its acceptation is not possible. A survey of two chains of traditions about this reading of the Asr sura attributed to Ali (p.b.u.h) shows that these traditions are of isolated type (khabar vahed). It also shows that the main narrator is an unknown person and there is only one single narrator, named Abu Ishaq al-Sbiai, who narrates it from the previous unknown narrator. From the point of view of tradition scholars Abu Ishaq al-Sabii’s traditions are weak due to the fact that he often doesnt state clearly that he has heard traditions himself. furthermore he suffered from mental disorder in the last decades of his life. Therefore, his traditions couldn’t possibly be accurate. What's more, there are a number of different citations based on his traditions. All this implies that his traditions have not been transferred to us sound and safe.

Induction is the issue about which many philosophers have discussed. The main question was raised in quest for how it is possible to constitute a theory or a hypothesis just by assembling some extensions. Philosophers of science have indicated different speculations on the theme in view of empiricism, arithmetic, contingencies and... Martyr Sadr, in his book "Al ‘Asases Al Manteqeiya Le Al Isteqra", not only has criticized the western philosophers, but suggested a new theory, on the basis of which inductive demonstration has been analyzed into two stages of subjective production and essential production; and moreover, he has distinguished between essence logical certitude and subjective logical one. Additionally, by making use of collective knowledge in principles in Islamic jurisprudence, he justified certitude based on inductive demonstration.