پژوهشنامه معارف قرآنی
پیاپی 13 (تابستان 1392)

Allah (God) is in the view of the Quran the Almighty above everything and anything who is never limited in any of his names. His being is far from any confinement, limit, and condition, and describing Him with numerable oneness and plurality, i.e. oneness and plurality in terms of numbers, is never possible, which is stated in the Holy Quran. The reason is that the one whose oneness is in terms of numbers is necessarily confined and conditioned by limits of time and space and probably by many other limits, and will necessarily be conditioned and affected by actions of another being who is aware of him. In the view of the Quran, God is far above being affected or conditioned by anything. This does not however imply that human thought is absolutely incapable of knowing God, which is what Sceptics claim. As understood from the Divine Wisdom and Revelation, human thought is unable to reach in its intellectual course to a full understanding of God’s names, including His Oneness (Tawhīd). However, although incapable of reaching a full understanding, the human thought is capable of reaching a limited understanding. In other words, the human is surely capable of knowing God and His names within the limits of his human power of thought and understanding, though not as would suit His Glory, Majesty and Splendour. This paper aims to give an interpretation of two names of God, the One (‘Ahad’) and the Unique (Wāhid), and by way of this interpretation concludes that God is One in His very essence, and His Oneness is His very being and not an attribute assigned to Him. Other forms of oneness and unity, including numerable oneness, therefore never suit God.

Āya [sign] as a word refers to an observable object whose being observable is in order to convey to as person a message which is in line with a particular purpose and which draws that person’s attention to a certain direction, albeit within the limits of that person’s level of knowledge and understanding. God Almighty has presented the signs in the outer world [āfāq] and the signs within the human self [anfus] in order that the observer reaches an understanding and that the authenticity of the sign be proved. The human thought is able to transcend limits of time and space and thus revisit and reshape sensory inputs. Considering the ultimate purpose of the act of thinking plays an important role in making that thinking positive or negative, and therefore in human’s attaining to guidance [hidāya] or error [zalāl]. The most efficient kind of thinking is therefore thinking about ultimate purposes. Inputs of all senses can be a starting point for thinking about the ultimate purpose of any given sign. However, observation, as the input of the visual sense, has a particular importance and its different types can be used for observing signs while considering their ultimate purposes. Types of observation of signs include: observing themes and signs of the nature while considering their relationship to the human being, extending observation of natural signs with the aim of acknowledging the purest form of Oneness of God [Tawhīd] as is realized through lā ilāha illa-llāh [There is no God but Allah], observing to make connections with natural phenomena while considering that they have certain levels of understanding and behave in a certain way before God Almighty (and learn from it), observing objects while considering their dependence upon God, observation with the aim of understanding the hikma [wisdom] and ultimate purpose of a given topic, and top-down observation aimed at discovering unknown and necessary relationships between objects.

Developing a vision and planning for bright futures in a way that will envisage growth and progress form the first and most fundamental step in designing the structure of any organization and institution. However, in spite of all efforts aimed at elevating the institution of university to the desired status of a university in our country, and in spite of all the concerns for Islamicizing universities as sacred institutions, the vision for a university whose values are based on Islamic teachings is not adequately developed yet. This paper therefore aims to have a look on general aspects of concepts of vision and Islamic university in order to determine the main characteristics of an Islamic university and the indicators for developing a vision for such a university. It also refers to the Quran verses and Islamic narrations from ahl ul-bayt [the fourteen Infallibles in the belief of Shi‘a] and makes inferences from these teachings to present an adequate vision for and a befitting picture of an Islamic university. This study introduces the Islamic university as an institution with five key aspects: academic identity, religious orientation, research capacity, efficiency for the society, and satisfaction-centeredness. It then develops an ideal vision for an Islamic University based on four indicators which, together, propose a model for an Islamic type of university. They include: knowledge, capability, goodness, and beauty.

The question about the source of the Quran has been dealt with by both proponents and opponents of Islam since old times. In the 19th century, it turned into an important issue for many orientalists, who then proposed a number of different ideas to settle it. This paper first reviews major ideas of Islamic scholars about the source of the Quran. It then employs a library method to deduct major ideas of Western orientalist who studied the Quran and finds these ideas to be as follows: epilepsy and disease, mental visions, natural genius, culture and beliefs of pre-Islamic Arabs, the Hanif cult, poets and poetry, books of other religions – both divine and non-revealed books and divine and revealed books. This paper uses forthright views of Islamic scholars on the issue to criticize six Western ideas which firmly insist on a human source of the Quran. The method used for criticism involves two parts. First, general arguments for the Divine source of the Quran are presented in two categories of intra-religion and extra-religion arguments, and ideas which claim a non-divine source for the Quran are rejected thereby. Second, a specific criticism of each of the six ideas is made.

The question of “authenticity” of religions and “salvation” of their respective adherents is a long-standing one. However, it was only in the 20th century that it was formulated into a discipline by John Hick and his predecessors. The question has been addressed with a number of different approaches, and this paper intends to have a look on them. Advocates of pluralism argue that all religions of the world, despite their different and conflicting claims about a single Reality, are capable of leading their adherents to salvation and to the Real, and bringing them happiness and virtue. This is the view of John Hick on epistemological religious pluralism, and is explained and criticized in this paper. This paper then discusses the views of the Quran and Mutahhari on authenticity of religions. Mutahhari believes there is a unity in all divine religions and that “Islam” [lit. surrender to the truth] is the only religion sent by God to his prophets, from Adam to Muhammad. He further believes that “Islam” has had different manifestations throughout history and in different periods of time, and that the last and most perfect manifestation of it was sent down to Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam and the last prophet of God.

Tabarruj [a woman’s display of beauty in an improper place] is expressly forbidden in the Quran. Its scope is defined in the Quran wider than only the way a woman dresses and it includes tabarruj in behaviour, tabarruj in the content of ones words, etc. as well. In other words, any kind of displaying and showing off one’s beauties and beautifications in the presence of non-mahram men [i.e. men in the presence of whom a woman is required to have hijāb], which indeed facilitates committing sins, will be counted as tabarruj, be it in the way she dresses, behaves or speaks. In addition to making references the Quran verses, this paper employs a library method of data collection and a descriptive-analytical method of data handling to prove that all kinds of tabarruj, including tabarruj in dress, in behaviour, in words, etc. are forbidden in the view of the Quran teachings.

Mystic illumination is a topic area whose relationship with the Divine Revelation needs to be discussed. This paper aims to study this relationship by, first, referring to dictionaries and lexicons, the Quran verses and sayings of mystics. It finds out by way of comparing effects of the two matters that mystic illumination stands on a far lower level than Revelation, which is a comprehensive and much deeper kind of understanding. That is why no true mystic has ever claimed having Divine Revelations from God, which is, in the words of Ibn Arabi, a property far out of mystics’ hands. This paper then looks at the differences between knowledge gained through mysticism and through the Divine Revelation. Finally, it explores the Quran verses which indicate Divinity of the Revelation of the Quran under a number of topics including the receptive role of the Prophet in the Revelation, use of ‘qul’ [‘say!’] in the Quran, and the role of Jibrā’īl [Angel Gabriel] in the Devine Revelation, among others.