فهرست مطالب

الهیات تطبیقی - پیاپی 19 (بهار و تابستان 1397)

مجله الهیات تطبیقی
پیاپی 19 (بهار و تابستان 1397)

  • تاریخ انتشار: 1397/06/26
  • تعداد عناوین: 10
|
  • محمدرضا شمشیری ، زهرا علافچیان * صفحات 1-22
    بحث دربارۀ اراده و اختیار همواره از مباحث مهم فکری - فلسفی و حتی اعتقادی بوده است. نوشتار حاضر با بررسی تطبیقی این مسئله از دیدگاه دو اندیشمند شرق و غرب، ابوحامد محمد غزالی و باروخ اسپینوزا، در پی آن است تا ضمن توجه به تشابه ها و تفاوت های دیدگاه ایشان نشان دهد چگونه در ورای الفاظ معارض، مشترکاتی میان دوگونه از تفکر به دست می آید. در جستار حاضر، این موضوع با روش کیفی از نوع تحلیلی - توصیفی، با توجه به مبانی فکری و سلوک معرفتی این دو بررسی شده است؛ همچنین در این راه، موضع هریک دربارۀ اراده و اختیار انسان و خدا جداگانه و سپس در مقایسه با یکدیگر بررسی شده است. نتیجه آنکه غزالی با انکار قاعدۀ علیت و بیان نظریۀ کسب به جبر نسبی انسان قائل بود. اسپینوزا نیز با تاکید بر اصل علیت و وحدت وجود به نوعی به ضرورت رسید و انسان را موجب دانست؛ البته اسپینوزا وجود اختیار و آزادی را یکسره در انسان نفی نمی کند. بنابراین هر دو به نوعی جبر نسبی را دربارۀ انسان پذیرفته اند. از سوی دیگر، این دو البته با انگیزه های متفاوت، خداوند را به معنی واقعی کلمه فاعل بالاختیار دانسته اند؛ در این حال در اندیشۀ غزالی خداوند دارای اراده است؛ درحالی که اسپینوزا به طورکلی هر نوع اراده را از ذات خداوند سلب کرده است.
    کلیدواژگان: اراده، اختیار، خدا، انسان، غزالی، اسپینوزا
  • زهره برقعی* صفحات 23-34
    هرچند کثرت گرایی دینی از مباحث جدید است و ابن سینا مستقیم به آن نپرداخته است ؛اما این مقاله بر آن است تا بر اساس آرای کلامی وفلسفی ابن سینا مبانی کثرت گرایی دینی را مورد بررسی ونقد قرار دهد. ابن سینا از یک طرف با براهین متقن اثبات می کند تمام ادیان الهی حاصل صعود پیامبرانبه عالم عقول اند، بنابراین به نحوی معتبر وتا حدی از حقیقت بهره مندند. از طرف دیگر وی برای اختلاف مراتب پیامبران استدلال های عقلی متعددی می آورد که بیان گر آن است تمام ادیان در یک سطح نیستند و به یک میزان از حقانیت برخوردار نمی باشند. هم چنین وی بر این باور است که با پیشرفت فکری و سیر تکاملی انسان، ادیان هم متکامل تر میشوند. با لحاظ این سه اصل می توان نتیجه گرفت که کثرت گرایی دینی به معنای یکسان بودن همه ادیان در بهره مندی از حقیقت ونجات بخشی قابل دفاع نیست، اما تفسیری از شمول گرایی از آرای وی استنباط می شود؛ از آنجا که نجات بخشی ادیان رابطه مستقیم با میزان حقانیت آنها دارد، ادیان به هر میزان که حق باشند به همان اندازه نجات بخش خواهند بود.
    کلیدواژگان: کثرت گرایی دینی، شمول گرایی، نبوت، حقانیت ادیان، وحی، عقل فعال
  • مهدی گنجور* ، حسین عزیزی صفحات 35-48
    یکی از مباحث بحث برانگیز کلام جدید در حوزۀ مهدویت پژوهی، مسئلۀ چگونگی رفتار و ارتباط امام زمان (عج) با پیروان سایر ادیان در دوران ظهور است. یکی از آن مسائل، «پلورالیسم هنجاری در سیره مهدی» است.
    متاسفانه از دیرباز، به دلیل سوءبرداشت و فهم قشری از برخی متون و روایات، باور به خشونت و برخورد تند امام عصر (ع) با نامسلمانان در اذهان تودۀ شیعیان نفوذ کرده و موجب بی رغبتی و هراس برخی زودباوران از درک آن روزگار پرفضیلت شده است؛ ازاین رو، نوشتار حاضر با توجه به نیاز علمی جامعۀ امروزی به مباحث اخلاقی و با توجه به بحران معیار در رفتار با غیر هم کیشان، درصدد فهم منطقی از الگوی رفتار ارتباطی با پیروان سایر ادیان، در پرتو آموزه های مهدویت، برآمده و به سبک مسئله محور و روش تحلیلی توصیفی به تبیین مبانی، ادله و مؤلفه های این الگوی اخلاقی پرداخته است.
    در این مقاله، ادعا و استدلال شده است که طبق سیره و فرهنگ مهدوی، مناسبات ما با غیرمسلمانان باید مبتنی بر احترام و مهرورزی، آزادی و کرامت انسان، رعایت حقوق اقلیت ها، رفق و مدارا، تاکید بر اصول مشترک، همزیستی مسالمت آمیز، گفتمان عقلی و مذاکره علمی باشد.
    کلیدواژگان: امام مهدی(ع)، الگوی رفتار ارتباطی، پلورالیسم هنجاری، همزیستی مسالمت آمیز، تسامح
  • حسین شهبازی، احمد فرشبافیان نیازمند، محمد مهدی پور، محمدرضا عابدی* صفحات 49-66
    سلوک عرفانی، سیری انفسی و درونی در قلب عالم صغیر برای نیل به حقیقیت محض است. در مکاتب عرفانی این سیر در قالب مراحل و مقاماتی تبیین می شود. در این پژوهش، منازل سلوک در عرفان یهود و متصوفه اسلامی به صورت تطبیقی بررسی می شود تا به این پرسش بنیادی پاسخ داده شود که «جنبه های همسان و وجوه ناهمسان ساختار منازل سلوک در تصوف اسلامی و عرفان یهود کدام اند». روش کار مبتنی بر شیوۀ تطبیقی رنه ولک (مکتب آمریکایی) با تاکید بر وجوه اشتراک و اختلاف ساختاری و کلی است. یافته های پژوهش نشان می دهند میان منازل سلوک در عرفان یهود و متصوفه سه وجه مشترک اساسی وجود دارد. تشابه تعداد مقامات سلوک، نخستین وجه مشترک است. کارکرد نمادین سمبول واره های این مقامات مخصوصا سمبول «قصر عرش» - یعنی آخرین منزل سلوک در قبالا و صوفیه - نیز از موارد مشترک به دست آمد. همچنین در هر دو آیین، سالک با دوری از آلایش های نفسانی، مراحلی را طی می کند تا در فقر و فنای تصوف و ارابوت قبالا و مرکاوا به اتحاد الاهی یا همان دوکوت برسد. عمده ترین تفاوت، تجسم خداوند در آخرین مرحلۀ سلوک عرفان یهود، در قالب پیکرۀ انسانی است؛ حال آنکه در تصوف تجسم ذات باری تعالی به این شکل مطرح نیست.
    کلیدواژگان: منازل سلوک، هفت وادی، هخالوت، قصرهای معنوی، تصوف، مرکاوا، قبالا
  • فاطمه عابدینی ، فروغ سادات رحیم پور* صفحات 67-78
    غزالی و ملاصدرا ازجمله اندیشمندانی اند که درصدد شناخت علت مرگ برآمده اند و در مباحث نفس شناسی خود به این موضوع پرداخته اند. مقالۀ حاضر تلاش دارد دیدگاه این دو متفکر دربارۀ علت وقوع مرگ و مبانی نفس شناسانۀ مرتبط با آن نزد هریک را مقایسه و ارزیابی کند تا روشن شود کدام مبنا در توضیح نظریۀ خود موفق بوده است. غزالی معتقد است نفس روحانیه الحدوث است؛ اما چون تجرد آن تجرد تام نیست، از مادۀ خود (بدن) تاثیراتی می پذیرد و در ذات خویش استکمال می یابد و هنگامی که به کمال نهایی رسید، بدن را که به مثابۀ ابزار اوست، رها می کند و به اصل خویش باز می گردد. این حالت، «مرگ» نامیده می شود و علت آن، ارتقا نفس است. نزد ملاصدرا نیز علت مرگ، ارتقا نفس است؛ اما به نظر او اگر به حدوث جسمانی نفس قائل نباشیم، نمی توان به حرکت جوهری، قائل شد. با تکیه بر این سخن صدرا، نظریۀ غزالی دربارۀ علت مرگ با مبانی خود او، توضیح پذیر نخواهد بود.
    کلیدواژگان: مرگ، نفس، بدن، غزالی، ملاصدرا
  • محمد علی توانا *، سیده سکینه قربی صفحات 79-90
    فهم ماهیت وجودی انسان، یکی از دغدغه های اصلی بخشی از متفکران اسلامی و مسیحی بوده است. بر همین اساس، مقاله حاضر ابعاد وجودی انسان را نزد دو متاله برجسته، یکی مسیحی – یعنی سنت آگوستین - و دیگری مسلمان – یعنی آیت الله مطهری – می کاود و این پرسش را طرح می کند: انسان شناسی این دو متفکر چه تفاوت ها و شباهت هایی با هم دارد؟ برای این منظور از چهارچوب انسان شناسی کریستوفر بری (انسان موجودی اجتماعی/منفرد؛ عقلانی آزاد/غیرعقلانی مقید؛ تکامل پذیر/تکامل ناپذیر؛ سیاسی/غیرسیاسی) بهره برده می شود. یافته های این پژوهش نشان می دهند آگوستین انسان را موجودی منفرد می داند که ناگزیر از زندگی جمعی در این دنیای زمینی است؛ درحالی که مطهری بیش از هر چیز انسان را موجودی اجتماعی می داند که دارای مسئولیت فردی نیز است. همچنین هر دو متفکر «اراده و عقلانیت» را برترین قوه انسانی می دانند؛ با این تفاوت که سنت آگوستین انسان را موجودی مقید می داند که با اراده خویش قادر نیست سرنوشت خود را دگرگون کند؛ درحالی که مطهری نقش اراده انسانی را در تعیین سرنوشت او بنیادین می داند. آگوستین انسان را زائری تکامل ناپذیر در این دنیا می داند و مطهری انسان را موجودی تکامل پذیر می داند و درنهایت اینکه آگوستین انسان را ذاتا موجودی غیرسیاسی می داند که در نتیجه هبوط می باید در مقابل قدرت های سیاسی زمینی (که اساسا شر ضروری اند) اطاعت پیشه کند؛ درحالی که مطهری انسان را ذاتا موجودی سیاسی می داند که ناگزیر از کنشگری سیاسی است.
    کلیدواژگان: انسان، اسلام، مسیحیت، آیت الله مطهری، سنت آگوستین
  • جواد قدیری حاجی آبادی *، حسین کلباسی اشتری صفحات 91-106
    از زمره نوشته های ملا محمد سعید رودسری گیلانی - حکیم قرن یازدهم و دوازدهم قمری و متعلق به مکتب اصفهان – کتاب «رساله توحید» است که در آن، نظریه وحدت وجود را نقد و در خلال آن از ادله توحید و شبهات مربوط به آن و همچنین تعین واجب الوجود بحث کرده است. او هم با عصر حکمای نامداری همچون صدرالمتالهین قرابت دارد و هم با جریان های منتقد مکتب صدرایی همچون مدرسه ملا رجبعلی تبریزی و مانند او نزدیک است. این رساله که نگارندگان این مقاله آن را تصحیح و ترجمه کرده اند، گویا تنها اثر به جای مانده از این حکیم، متکلم و فقیه مکتب اصفهان است. در نگاه کلی، مصنف رساله، منشا اشتباه صوفیه در قائل شدن به وحدت وجود را خلط میان دو معنای متفاوت مطلق وجود دانسته است و با ذکر اقوالی از حکما و متکلمان، آن را نقد و بررسی کرده است. او در ادامه، لوازم و تبعات اعتقاد به وحدت وجود را نیز ذکر و نحوه تعین واجب الوجود و توضیحات لازم درباره حقیقت مطلق وجود را بررسی کرده است.
    کلیدواژگان: رودسری گیلانی، وحدت وجود، تعین واجب الوجود، مطلق وجود
  • محمد باقر تورنگ *، احسان جندقی صفحات 107-122
    عارفان مسلمان از تمثیل در تمام انواع آن اعم از تشبیه، استعاره و داستان های رمزی و مثالی، بسیار استفاده کرده اند. در کاربرد تمثیل در ادبیات عرفانی علاوه بر جنبه های آموزشی و استفاده از آن برای فهم بهتر، باید در جستجوی چیستی و چرایی عمیق تری بود. کاربرد انواع ادبی و شعر در زبان عارفان به گونه ای بوده است که برخی با نوعی ساده سازی معتقدند عرفان و شعر از یک مقوله اند؛ به هرحال، عارفان به ویژه در مکتب ابن عربی در استفاده از تمثیل همیشه به قرآن به منظور الگوی خویش پناه جسته اند. ابن عربی ضمن نظریه پردازی در زمینه عالم مثال، وحی قرآنی و شهود عرفانی را در ارتباط با آن تحلیل می کند. در این پژوهش با مطالعه کتابخانه ای و با روش توصیفی تحلیلی، ضمن بررسی و تحلیل وحی، جایگاه شعر و خیال و رابطه وحی و تصویرپردازی های شاعرانه، رابطه وحی قرآنی و تمثیل عرفانی بررسی شده است. ارتباط تمثیل با تشبیه خداوند، یکی از دو راه شناخت خداوند در کنار تنزیه او، از مباحث مطرح در این پژوهش است. ابن عربی بر جمع بین تشبیه و تنزیه در خداشناسی خویش بسیار تاکید دارد. او ادراک خیالی و استفاده از تمثیلات ادبی را در تقویت معرفت تشبیهی خداوند موثر می داند.
    کلیدواژگان: تمثیل، وحی، خیال، تشبیه، عرفان، تصوف اسلامی، ابن عربی
  • حسین همت زاده *، زهرا خزاعی، محسن جوادی صفحات 123-145
    در مقاله حاضر نقش فضایل معرفتی در شکل گیری هویت فکری و تاثیر آن در بهبود رفتارهای حقیقت جویی مان بررسی شده است. معرفت شناسی فضیلت به دلیل عامل محور بودن و تمرکزش بر منش شناختی فاعل، از معرفت شناسی تحلیلی باورمحورانه متمایز می شود و فضایل معرفتی را عامل سازنده هویت فاعل معرفتی و شرط رسیدن به حقیقت می داند. این مقاله از بین دو رویکرد اعتمادگرایی و مسئولیت گرایی فضیلت، بر رویکرد دوم متمرکز شده و با بهره گیری از فضایل نه گانه معرفتی - که جیسون بئر مطرح کرده است - نشان می دهد چگونه انسانی با به کارگیری این فضایل و اجتناب از رذایل متناظر، به لحاظ معرفتی خوب و اندیشمند می شود و از این طریق، حقیقت را در حوزه های مختلف معرفتی کسب می کند. پس از توضیح این فضایل و نقش آن در دو حوزه مذکور براساس معرفت شناسی فضیلت، اهمیت این رابطه در دیدگاه ملاصدرا، به منزله نمونه ای از فلسفه اسلامی بررسی می شود و درنهایت پیشنهاد می شود به دلیل اهمیت فضایل معرفتی در بهبود رفتارهای حقیقت جویی، آموزش دهی و پرورش دهی این نوع فضایل می باید بخشی از محتوای درسی گفتاری و نوشتاری دانشگاه ها و مدارس باشد و اندیشه ورزی انتقادی صحیح در وجود افراد جامعه، نهادینه و تقویت شود.
    کلیدواژگان: فضایل معرفتی، معرفت شناسی فضیلت، هویت عقلی، حقیقت جویی
  • فروغ سادات رحیم پور، مجید یاریان * صفحات 147-159
    در حکمت اسلامی، نفس همواره اساس و شالوده ساختار وجودی انسان معرفی شده و در مقابل، به بدن و نقش آن در شناخت هویت انسان، کمتر توجه شده است. این در حالی است که شناخت نفس در بیشتر زوایای معرفت شناختی آن، متکی بر شناخت بدن و جایگاه آن است و این امر با دقت نظر در مباحث علم النفس آشکار خواهد شد. در نوشتار پیش رو، چند مبحث از نفس شناسی ملاصدرا حول محور پنج پرسش بررسی شده اند: 1. ملاصدرا چگونه از بدن و ویژگی های جسمانی در ابطال تناسخ بهره می جوید؟ 2. ویژگی های بدنی در حکمت متعالیه چگونه ملاصدرا را قادر به دفاع از اتحاد نفس و بدن کرده است؟ 3. صدرا چگونه با کمک بدن تعدد قوای نفس را به اثبات می رساند؟ 4. بدن در حکمت متعالیه چه کارکردی در تبیین فرایند علم و ادراک دارد؟ 5. ملاصدرا چگونه بدن و ویژگی های آن را در اثبات جاودانگی نفس به استخدام می گیرد؟ در پاسخ به این پرسش ها، استدلال های منتهی به مطلوب، مبتنی بر مقدماتی است که وابستگی مستقیم به شناخت بدن و ویژگی های آن دارد؛ ازجمله این مقدمات عبارتند از: تناسب مراتب قوه و فعل نفس با درجات قوه و فعل بدن، ذومراتب بودن بدن و جایگاه آن در حرکت جوهری استکمالی نفس، تغییر، ضعف یا زوال برخی از قوای بدنی در زمان هایی خاص از حیات دنیوی، مقدمه بودن حس و ادراکات بدنی در شکل گیری ادراکات فراحسی و منزه بودن برخی از ساحت های وجودی انسان از عوارض مادی و بدنی. با این زاویه دید خاص، نقش بدن و ویژگی های آن در تبیین و تحلیل این پنج مسئله، انکارناپذیر خواهد بود.
    کلیدواژگان: بدن، ماده، نفس، تجرد، ملاصدرا
|
  • Mohammad Reza Shamshiri , Zahra Alafchian* Pages 1-22
    The debate of will and volition has always been an important part of the intellectual and philosophical discourse as a whole. The current essay has studied this issue from the points of view of Ghazali and Spinoza in a comparative context. Spinoza has conceived will to be a type of notion while Ghazali considers it a mental quality that deals with preferring one side to the other. It seems that the reason for the disagreement of these two scholars in definition of will lies in the fact that Ghazali believes that will is one aspect of heart and soul whereas Spinoza includes it among the capabilities of mind. First he regarded will as a type of judgment but later due to the fact that judgment is the necessary result of notion he was compelled to consider it a kind of notion. Furthermore, according to Spinoza, an action is volition when it becomes realized out of its nature in the sense that no other internal or external stimulus forces the agent to undertake the action at issue; while Ghazali contends that the criterion for an action’s volitionality (the state of being volitional) is it’s being grounded in will. One may trace the origin of the disagreement of these two thinkers in definition of volition back to their particular views on the issue of human freedom and servitude; because Spinoza based on his specific stance on the problem of human freedom and servitude defines a free agent as one who is actively following the intellect while in his opinion compelled is the one who is exposed to the emotions under the influence of external factors. According to Ghazali, a man can be free whose heart has been already purified of moral vices and devotes oneself to virtues; on the contrary, a man is the servant of Satan who is following the carnal desires and this cannot happen unless by doing volition action based on will. Consequently, for Ghazali every action in human being occurs following a will in the soul. Then he considers will to be based on volitional action. According to Spinoza, intellect and will are identical. However, Ghazali denies the particular philosophical intellect and thus in his view intellect and will cannot be identical. It seems that the cause of identity of intellect and will in Spinoza is the fact that he believes in the unity of notion and judgment and deems intellect and will to be a particular mode of the property of thought. But Ghazali regards will and intellect two capabilities for human soul and does not trace them back to notion and judgment. Intellectual principles of Ghazali in the debate of will and volition consists of the denial of causal necessity and belief in the theory of
    Habit of Allah (‘Adat Allah) whereas Spinoza believes in pantheism and causality. To analytically
    compare the intellectual principles of Spinoza and Ghazali one should say that both Spinoza and Ghazali believe in a type of pantheism (unity of existence) and one might trace the cause of the similarity between these two thinkers back to their inner effervescent enthusiasm for knowing God and their thirst for joining their Lord. Of course, Spinoza denies the final cause and it appears even that this denial is a definition that he provides of volition. Because he considers volition one’s ability to act according to his nature and remain uninfluenced by the dominant external factors. On the other hand, Ghazali wholly denies causal necessity. One may state that the basic cause of the difference of these two thinkers lies in their disagreement on the principle of causality as Spinoza considers the latter to be a self-evident truth while Ghazali with a theological impetus seeks to demonstrate the perfect divine agency. Ghazali considers God to be of a will that is something added to the Divine Essence in an eternal fashion while Spinoza does not attribute any will to God. One might trace the root cause of the disagreement of these two thinkers back to their particular approaches to the debate of immanence and transcendence. For Spinoza denies the belief in immanence and seeks to provide proofs for demonstration of a type of transcendence that is not pure and absolute. Ghazali in his discussion of Divine Attributes argues for the unknown immanence in the sense that God has such attributes as All-Hearing and Will but we do not know their quality. As to human will, Ghazali believes in a universal will in man but Spinoza denies the idea of universal will and only accepts particular will. One might say that the disagreement of these scholars has its origin in their particular notion of human soul. Because Spinoza believes in the unity of soul and body and considers human soul to be a mode of Divine Modes while Ghazali regards human soul as an independent substance that has will as one of its aspects. As to human and Divine will, Ghazali denies absolute determinism and submission as regards human will based on his theory of God’s Habit and believes instead in a type of relative determinism because on the one hand, man is compelled and he does not own the whole elements of his action and on the other, he is the subject of Divine Will and is the one who enjoys Divine Action. Then man is compelled to be free and it is only God who is truly effective and acts as He wills. But Spinoza sides with another idea in this regard in line with his intellectual system and believes that volition in the sense of power to decision should be denied both from God and man. He offers a new definition of volition and considers it to be tantamount to necessity of existence in which case only God can be a genuine free agent and man is like a straw that goes one way or another by the wind. Of course, Spinoza does not deny the whole existence of volition in man rather he believes in a type of human volition; the thing that he denies of human will is freedom from the causality and what he accepts of man is acting according to nature. According to Ghazali, man can be an integration of determinism and volition; his being free is in the sense that he is the subject of Divine Will while his being compelled refers to the fact that the productive elements of his action is not for him. It is for sure that they both believe in a type of relative determinism though their impetuses differ based on their intellectual principles.
    Keywords: Will, Free Will, God, Human, Ghazali, Spinoza
  • Zohreh Borghei* Pages 23-34
    Religious pluralism is one of the recent issues with which Avicenna has not dealt directly, but with a new approach and through the topic of prophethood and the characteristics of the prophets, this article examines the foundations of religious pluralism based on Avicenna's theological and philosophical ideas. According to Avicenna, prophets have the highest level of perception and they have taken all their talents into action, therefore they are the wisest, the most knowledgeable and actually, the most perfect people of their time. Avicenna believes that all the prophets, because of the perfection of their intellectual faculties, are related to the active intellect and through it to the essence of being and they are aware of them.  All their teachings are in accordance with reality and truth, because they have originated from the source of being.  Just as the differences in languages and religions are not due to their substantial and inherent difference, apparent difference in some life-style laws and ways of prayer are also not due to the inherent difference between religions, but the kernel of religion and what the prophets have received from the higher world by the archangel or active intellect, all originated from one reality and for this reason all of them are true. On the other hand many spiritual statuses are realized in the world of intellects and merely relationship with the intellectual world is not the cause of the relationship with the whole world and awareness of all facts and levels and stations. Avicenna explicitly states that the soul of the prophet is more active in its connection to the active intellect. He is more aware of the world of intellect and his mission is stronger. Therefore, although all divine religions are manifestations of a single truth, their hierarchies are not the same. Some prophets, and consequently some religions are more virtuous. Although all the prophets are equal in invitation and the purpose of the prophecy which is invitation towards God, the Return and training the community and according to Hick turning from self-centeredness toward God, but in perfection, knowledge and other characteristics they have different grades. Men of heavenly religions all agree that true prophecy has levels and the prophets differ in level and position. Avicenna in his work explains the difference of levels of the prophets and has rational reasons for that. He believes that the prophets are different in terms of knowledge, virtues, moral perfection and the power of influence in the world. His most important reasons are the differences in the powers of the prophets, the differences in the levels of the world of intelligences and the extent of qualifications or lack thereof regarding the sacred intellect. Even his reasons for the necessity of prophecy implies different levels of the prophets and their evolutionary journey.
    If, as stated, access to truth is not the same in all religions, it is natural that the acquisition of happiness will not be equal in all religions. So, all those who believe in God and the Day of Judgment and do actions that are motivated to approach God and obey the religious and divine commands, whether they are Muslims or non-Muslims, their actions will be acceptable to the Divine court, and they will be saved. As if the truth has degrees and achieving one level of it and awareness of the facts of it does not require achieving all grades, happiness and wretchedness also have grades. Among the felicitous and the wretched there are various degrees.
    Therefore, religious pluralism at this level is acceptable and it is provable that all divine religions have a degree of legitimacy and all the prophets have been associated with the higher world and from that world they brought truth for people. But pluralism in the sense that all religions have truthfulness to the same extent and give the same amount good fortune to their people is not compatible with Avicenna's theological and philosophical ideas about prophethood. In his view, religions constitute an evolutionary movement with the intellectual development of mankind, the right laws have been passed on to the people through prophets.   By the connection of the prophetic missions with each other prophecy has progressed gradually toward evolution and the last link of prophecy is its highest peak.
    Finally all divine religions, in spite of their differences in rank, have total authenticity. The final salvation of religious followers is precisely based on religious righteousness of religions and consequently have degrees, because there is a direct relation and concomitance between the religious levels of religions and their salvation. Felicity and wretchedness are subject to real and genuine conditions, not contractual terms.
    Keywords: religious pluralism, inclusivism, prophet hood, legitimacy of religions, revelation
  • Mahdi Ganjvar* , Hosein Azizi Pages 35-48
    One of the controversial issues of New Theology in the field of Mahdism is the issue of the mode of conduct of Imam Mahdi (as) with followers of other religions during the uprising (‘Zuhur’) period. One such issue is the normative pluralism in Imam Mahdi’s mode of conduct.
    Unfortunately, it has been a long time that, due to misconceptions and superficial understanding of some Shi’ite texts and narratives, the belief in the violent and harsh conduct of the Imam (as) with non-Muslims has infiltrated into the minds of the Shiite masses and has caused some credulous simpletons to be reluctant to and fearful of the proper understanding of the uprising time.
    Such an interpretation of the uprising time may inculcate the idea that if followers of other religions go astray or are involved in corruptions, they should deserve such a violent and harsh conduct of the Imam (as), and that the philosophy of the Imam’s uprising and his main mission will be to establish a global sovereignty to rise against non-Muslims and take revenge against strayers and oppressors.
    However, a deeper analysis of the authentic Islamic texts and the rich Quranic and prophetic heritages reveals that such beliefs hold no ground. The Imams’ modes of conduct and their transcendental culture attest to the contrary and reveals the true uprising reality. Imam Mahdi (as) is not only the messiah of Muslims but that of all the humanity. His justice is not only done to Muslims and believers but also extends to unbelievers and dissidents. The Imam (as) seems to be both decisive against oppression, deviation, hypocrisy, disbelief and polytheism, while being a supporter of the divine rights of the humanity and religious minorities.
    The Imam (as) is also known for his tolerance of the People of the Book and followers of other religions, which is a characteristic of his universal justice. Although the Mahdist justice is a multi-faceted phenomenon, which is worth studying in terms of individual, social, legal, economic, etc. aspects, this study mainly focused on the question that what mode of conduct the Imam (as) will adopt with followers of other religions during the early uprising period and during his universal invitation after the establishment of his global sovereignty. It also raised the following question that what characteristics can be derived from the Mahdist teachings as the Imam’s pattern of behavior with non-Muslims for today’s world.
    Therefore, the present study sought to answer the above questions, which comes two theoretical and practical benefits. Firstly, this helps solve some of the theoretical issues in this area. Secondly, this helps foreign diplomacy, in that this can promote dynamic, efficient, and ethical diplomacy with non-Muslim states.
    As a result of the contemporary society’s need for ethics and due to the lack of criteria for conduct with followers of other religions, this study sought a rational understanding of the pattern of behavior with followers of other religions based on the Mahdist teachings. It used a problem-oriented and descriptive-analytic method to determine the fundamentals, evidence, and elements of this pattern of ethical behavior.
    Finally, it has been claimed and reasoned in this writing that relationship of Muslims with non-Muslims should be based on reverence, affection, freedom, human dignity, respect for the rights of minorities, lenity, toleration, emphasis on common grounds, peaceful coexistence, and rational and scientific discourse.
    Keywords: Imam Mahdi (as), pattern of behavior, normative pluralism, peaceful coexistence, toleration
  • Hossein Shahbazi, Ahmad Farshbafian, Mohammad Mahdi pour , Mohammadreza Abedi* Pages 49-66
    The mystical journey is the inner circle to achieve highest of spiritual perfection. In mystical thoughts, they are depicted in the form of dwellings. In this essay, spiritual dwellings of the Jewish mysticism (Merkava and Kabbalah) and the Islamic Sufism are subject to a comparative discussion in order to finally answer this fundamental question: "What are the identical aspects and the heterogeneous structure aspects of mystical Conduct dwellings in Islamic Sufism and Jewish mysticism?" to this passer-by, the beginning and the end spiritual journey, the number and characteristics of dwellings, status of the mystic in each of the dwellings, and the allegories and symbols in these two schools, in terms of the matched and disparate aspects to be explained. Mystical conduct dwellings are one of the most important issues that the Sufis and the Jewish mystics have often spoken in the esoteric language. And have tried with emotional and symbolic interpretations, to show inner degree. From these homes is interpreted to dwellings, stations, palaces, levels, valleys, degrees, situation and etc. In the Jewish mysticism (Merkava and Kabbalah), wayfaring, is called the Seven Hekhalots and the mystic with the inner journey in the infinite space of the heart reaches celestial dwelling of Araboth (Palace of empyrean). The Hekhals, as the heavenly seven mansions, are surely the opinion of the Jewish mystics.
    In Islamic Sufism, there are two viewpoints on the wayfaring. The first point of view is the religious Sufis and their belief in the seven dwellings and ten statuses. However, in a few individuals of this group, the number of dwellings is different slightly. The second view is that the mysterious Sufis which is express mystical Conduct dwellings used to through symbolism and believes in seven valleys mystical.
    The first sparks of the symbolic function of the seven stands Sufism in "Magamat al-goloob" (Dwellings of the Hearts) of Abu-al-Hasan al-Nuri. These stands or dwellings include seven strong castles. The introduction of seven strong castles around believer's heart for achieve spirituality, was, of course, the simplistic and primitive form of spiritual dwellings in Sufism Which later became more fully explained by the great mystics of Attar, Neishaburi, Molana Jalal al-din Rumi and others. The description Abu al-Hassan Nuri is one of castles, similar to the palaces of Merkava and Kabbalah. In Merkava and Kabbalah mysticism, the arrival of the mystic to spiritual dwellings and heavenly palaces necessitates knowing the password. These codes are the names of God and awareness of divine epithets. In a similar look, Ghazali knows the arrival of the seas necessitates awareness and appearance of epithets and names divine.
    The esoteric journey in seven valleys is in fact synonymous with the "Seven Hekhalot" proposed in Merkava and Kabbalah. These two ways, from "path during" in Sufism and Kabbalah, although it may be externalized in order to fill of descriptions accordance with the appearance world, but it is in fact inner truth. The spiritual evolution of the mystic of Merkava and Kabbalah in ascending from the palace to the higher palace and the gradual distancing from the previous contamination, as far as his perfect celibacy leading to unity with the divine substance it is the same evolution and abstraction that is spoken in Sufism journey. However, the kabbalah description does not have that much of mature maturity and apparent perfection in the Sufism description and has an extremely simple shape.
    In the Kabbalah view, each human being achieves only by practical experience (not a theory) and by observing the principles of the spiritual rules to inexplicable intuition. Plato also believed that the spiritual teachings of mysticism were not found in the books, and every human being must experience it with the right understanding of these celestial facts. The Sufis believe that the path of conduct must be practiced in order to make the intuition be possible, and the veil of appearances and Sensuality is removed and the achievement to perfection is possible. Shabestari said: Let's consider his conduct as an intuitive journey from the universe by practicing religious duties and leaving sensual contaminations, go from humanity degree to become a perfect man.
    In summary, from the present essay, in Comparative Study of mystical conduct dwellings in Islamic Sufism and Jewish mysticism following conclusions can be reached: 1) the similarity of the number of conduct dwellings; seven Valleys, Seven Hekhalots. 2) The need for acquaintance of the mystic with the main name code as the keyword of the garlic in the realm conduct. 3) The description of spiritual dwellings in the form of allegory and in the form of material traits. 4) The symbol of the "Palace of empyrean" is the last dwelling of conduct in Kabbalah and Sufism. 5) The ultimate goal of the conduct achieving the status of Mortal's Sufism and Araboth - Devekoth Kabbalah. 6) Emphasis on the love nature of conduct. 7) the most significant difference is the embodiment of God at the last stage journey of Jews mysticism, in the form of humanity and the non-embodiment of the nature of God in Sufism. 8) Differences in the way of expressing mystical experiences and interpretations, symbols and expressions related to religion, culture and social requirements.
    Keywords: mysticism, conduct dwellings, seven valleys, Hekhalot, spiritual palaces, Sufism, Merkava, Kabbalah
  • Fatemeh Abedini , Forooghosadat Rahimpoor* Pages 67-78
    Ghazali and Mulla Sadra are among the thinkers who have sought to understand the causes of death and have addressed this issue in their own philosophical discussions about the reality of the soul. Although they have different foundations in their views about soul, they give more or less similar ideas about the cause of human death. Some experts in this field believe that natural death is due to severe weakness of the body and malfunction of vital organs and the breakdown of its forces, but Mulla Sadra and Ghazali see the cause of death as a development and enforcement of the soul, not defect and destruction of the body. An important question to which the present paper tries to find its answer is that which of the above-mentioned theory is more consistent with the foundations accepted by these two philosophers, and can this theory be based on either of them? First, the anthropological viewpoints of each of them are explained, and then through analyzing, this will be investigated that which principles and foundations have succeeded in presenting his theory of the cause of death and has the ability to justify his theory.
    There are several bases and principles in Ghazali and Mulla Sadra's philosoph views regarding soul, which play a central role in the cause of death, and it is important to pay attention to the similarities and differences between the two thinkers. The first is the view of each about the "nature and reality of the soul." From Ghazzali's point of view, the soul is an immaterial, rational substance, and Mulla Sadra accepts this, but equalizes it to one of the powers of the soul, which is known a rational power. So he doesn’t equalize it with all the nature and soul. This is because, in his opinion, soul is a substance which in some of its levels is material and some others od immaterial and only at the level of reason, it is an immaterial, rational substance. Another important principle is about the way in which the soul is created, according to the point of view of Ghazali, the soul from the beginning of the universe, was an immaterial being; (Rohaniyat al-Huduth). But in Mulla Sadra’s viewpoint, the soul at the beginning was a physical reality that gradually moves toward immaterial thing.
    This is the case of Sadra's fundamental differences with Ghazali and with all the previous philosophers. The next pivotal difference is the occurrence of movement and evolution in the essence of the soul. In the philosophical discussions of Ghazali, he talks about stages of human evolution, and it is understood that he has in some way considered the intrinsic motion of the soul. Mulla Sadra also explicitly stated the gradual movement of man in a natural way, and explicitly called it the intrinsic motion of the soul. Thus, Ghazali and Mulla Sadra explain the uplift of the soul by its intrinsic motion, but this movement is consistent with the foundations of Sadra, not with Ghazali's basics. Sadra is helping to explain this from principles such as the trans-substantial motion, and that it has different levels and stages and that it has temporal contingency, but Ghazali is not equipped with such principles, and this leads him to fail to explain his theory. For this reason he claims that the soul can have intrinsic motion only if it is material and physical at the time of its creation not immaterial, because there is no movement in immaterial beings
    The relationship between the soul and the body is the next major principle, and Sadra believes in this regard that, contrary to the general impression that the soul is derived from the body, it is the soul that makes the body existent and, in fact, the body is one of the outcomes of the existence of the soul, not the opposite. Ghazali also has a similar view and believes that this is a soul that is useful and grants the existence to the body, so essentially the soul is the principal and the body is its function. With the explanation that Ghazali and Mulla Sadra have shown from the relationship between the soul and body, it can be concluded that the origin of the separation of the soul from the body is not the end of the strength of the body and the extinction of instinctive heat and temperament, but the promotion and independence of the soul is the origin of this separation, and this promotion and independence is the result of the inherent movement of the soul.
    After expressing the philosophical principles of Ghazali and Mulla Sadra in explaining the sould, one can explain the cause and quality of the occurrence of death from their points of view. The exploration in the works of al-Ghazali, shows that, although death is due to the shutting down of natural and animal powers, but what causes these powers to be shut down is the soul’s rejection to observe the body, the rejection is not the result of degeneration of Mizaj, but due to gradual evolution and perfection of reason, rational power and the human soul. Sadra also believes that the cause of the death is in the innate evolution of life and the upgrading of the existential level of man. By saying that the human soul has a steady and evolutional movement in its own substance and every movement has its ultimate goal, and each goal has an owner which will stop moving when it reaches its very end. The soul is moving towards its ultimate goal of acquiring power and talents - during the worldly life - and death occurs when all its talents are activated and no longer capable of acquiring any other power and talent in this life.
    The result is that al-Ghazali's theory of the cause of death is similar to Mulla Sadra's theory in this regard, but compared to Mulla Sadra's theory, the theory of al-Ghazal differs in some bases as the following: One of Ghazali's important reasons in explaining the cause of death is that death is the result of the inherent motion of the soul and due to its upgrade. One of the main sources of Mulla Sadra's explanation for the cause of death is the intrinsic motion of the soul, and he believes that death is due to the uplift of the soul, which is the result of the innate motion of the soul. But the very basis that Ghazali makes in choosing such an explanation for death is the belief in the spiritual nature of the soul; that is, the combination of the inherent motion of the soul with its spiritual form, which is acceptable to Ghazzali, is impossible because Moving from the power to the action is possible only in material matter. In order to be able to move in the essence of the soul, we must believe in its materiality at the beginning of its conception, that is to say, we must consider the soul as the physical aspect of its creation, and this is the same as the accepted principle by Sadra. Consequently, death as the result of self-awareness is compatible only with the principles of Mulla Sadra, and there is an inconsistency between Ghazali's opinion on the cause of his death and his principles.
    Keywords: Death, Soul, Body, Ghazali, Mulla Sadra
  • Mohammad Ali Tavana *, S. Sakine Ghorbi Pages 79-90
    Man is a complex puzzle that the greater part of his nature and extent is unknown. Hence, anthropology is one of the main concerns of thinkers, whst in the world of Christendom and islam, and what the old testament and new testament, and definition of man have been cornstone of political and social order. Based on these, this article investigates concept of man with two prominent Christian and muslim thinkers –S.t Augustine and Ayatollah Motahari. It seems, the issue of being or human existence was the intellectual concerns of both thinkers. It means that both thinkers looking at human from the perspective of ontological. That was the reason that, the article compared concept of man with these two thinkers and clear the similarities and differences of their view. The article uses the method qualitative content analysis for the purpose.That was the reason that, the article compared concept of man with these two thinkers and clear the similarities and differences of their view. The article uses the method qualitative content analysis for the purpose.
    Keywords: Human, Antropology, Islam, Christendom, Motahari, Augustine.
  • Javad Ghadiri Hajiabadi *, Hossein Kalbasi Ashtari Pages 91-106
    Among the writings of Mullah Mohammad Saeed Rudsari Gilani - the wise man of the eleventh and twelfth centuries and the Isfahan school of thought - is a treatise titled Monotheism, in which he criticized the theory of unity of existence, while discussing the evidences of monotheism and related doubts as well as the obligatory determination Al-Wujud has discussed. On the one hand, he is closely related to the era of well-known scholar like Sadr al-Mota'alahin, and on the one hand, he is close to the critics of Sadr's school such as Mullah Rajabali Tabrizi's school.
    The theory of unity of existence, irrespective of its origin, is one of the most important and most basic mystical and philosophical issues that has always been affluent, and has seen various ups and downs and readings.Firstly, in this treatise, the writer goes to what has led to the mistakes of believers in unity, and then mentions the notion of such belief;And then, they have criticized the source of their mistakes-that is, the confusion between the two absolute meanings of being-and, according to their point of view, also mentions the unity of existence.In many cases, the writer has come to the fore in Mashai's wisdom, and has argued that a number of phrases from the scholars of this school, especially Avicenna, testify to this claim. Also, in order to confirm his perception of the critique of the unity of existence, they mention the terms of Mir Sayyed Sharif Jorjani (816 AH) and Fadhil Khafari (957 AH) in various cases and explain and explain these phrases.
    The explanation of the author of the mistaken origin of the believers is that of the unity of existence: those who believe in the unity of the existence of the semantic between the absolute being-which is a common thing between the obligatory and the possible-and the other meaning of it-which is devoid of any constraints and essence- Have made a mistake.Thus, the attributes of the absolute existence, which is common to both obligatory and possible, have proved in such a way that absolute existence, in addition to the obligatory person, which is glorified of all constraints and credits, is at its highest level of perfection;Then, in the same way as possible, in the order of the persons mentioned, ie the levels of reason, of the soul and of the classes, for an absolute being, it is empty of all constraints and depressions; and that mistake has occurred in the use of the absolute word in two ways.
    According to Hakim Rudsari, the submission of evidence based on the validity of the existence of possibilities does not lead to a critique of the unity of existence and, in his view, the validity of existence is void and criticizes the existence of being. However, at the time of the writings, the validity of the existence and originality of the justified nature were justified, and such beliefs as Mirdamad, Mulla Jabali Tabrizi and Qazi Sa'id Qomi had come to this belief.
    The writer of the monotheistic treatise then goes on to discuss the compulsion of the obligatory existence and states: "Since the obligatory existence is a sufficient existence which is inherently fixed for it, the necessity of existence has been established, not by the fact of non-existence Proven by its nature. It is imperative that that being be intrinsically determinant, so that it does not require anything other than its essence, which separates and separates it from non-self, because the determination that is contrary to nature, or its confirmation to the essence of the doctrine is intrinsically And it relies on this that it is impossible, because the essence determines how much determines matter until it is inherently unstable. And it makes sense that such a thing is impossible.
    In the statement of the writer, the permissibility of the sequence in credit affairs means that it is permissible for reason to deviate from something else and something else from that other, and thus continue; And the levels of abstraction that can not be abstracted for reason can not abstract anything else; rather, the realization of non-finite and non-finite and non-finite credits may be possible in the ego. Also, according to the wise man of Isfahan school, the theory of unity of existence is not based on the proof, and the Sofia's reading of it is criticized, and also its belief in incorrect consequences.
    According to the evaluations carried out in the form of defective answers and controversy over the bugs and the contents of the writings, it can be objected to using it not to use the original sources of theoretical mysticism, and to provide accurate interpretations of the theory of unity of existence, Because Mulla Sadra's narration based on the existence of an interface is ineffective, it can be defended against the writer's mistakes of monotheism on the unity of existence.
    Keywords: Rudsari Gilani, the unity of existence, the determination of the obligatory existence, the absolute existence
  • Mohammad Bagher Toorang *, Ehsan Jamdaqi Pages 107-122
    The parable is one of the issues of the knowledge of expression. An allegory in the word means a derivative and a narrative or a hadith, for example. An allegory in the general sense is synonymous with likeness, and any meaning that is intended to be analogous is also intended to be an analogy. Muslim mystics try to express their message in a language that attracts writers, that is, a language full of analogies. But it seems to be beyond their motive that they can describe God in allegorical language. The presence of an analogy in the domain of the mystical language and literature is undeniable. The application of allegory in religious texts is also serious. Although advocates of reason obviously do not take the application of paradigm and simile seriously, however, many philosophers can be used in philosophy too. We seek to reveal the relationship between mysterious paradigm and Quranic revelation. . Are the similarities used in Quranic verses similar to mystical allegories? And how can they communicate? To answer these questions, firstly, the recognition of revelation in Islam is discussed and the relationship between revelation and imagination is examined and the relationship between the mystical and revelatory allegiances is expressed at the end. Revelation in Islam means speaking God with the Prophet . Revelation has two different aspects. First, it is the aspect of being the language (distinct from language), and the second aspect is the same as losani and linguistic. In Islam, God has intentionally chosen Arabic as the common symptom for the second aspect. But the first aspect has an ontological barrier, which means that there is a fundamental difference between being between God and the creature (Prophet). Therefore, one must answer the question of how God (absolute) has had the Word with the Prophet (limited and relative). Revelation in the Quran's particular meaning is beyond mere two-person relationship. It should be said that the verse is a three-person relationship, including the personality of God, the Prophet as the person receiving the revelation and the mediator of the transmission of the revelation, which is the "angel of revelation". Muslim scholars believe that in the revelation of the prophet of Islam in the first step of the Prophet there is a profound personality development, and in the second step the revelation has fallen to a degree that has received the personality traits of the recipient. These changes for the Arabs are the same as for the poet and the clan of the clan. For this reason, they have been stubbornly believed to be similar to the Prophet and an immortal poet or priest under the control of the genius (resurrection or genocide).
    The poem from the perspective of Muslim scholars is the same word that is written by weighty sayings. The word is the word that the soul gives it, without any sight, thought, and authority, it finds some expansion, and some of the others are bribed whether this promise is true or false. From the point of view of the thinkers in "Fan Poetry", the way to create an affair with truth is to create the true meaning of the connection with the subject. It is an objection to something like that, provided that there is no identity between the two. Of course, it should be noted that poetry is the truth of the truth, and not false, which means error, and therefore most Islamic philosophers have brought the poetry fan in their logic. Therefore, poetry is false, but only in the sense that it derives the truth from the object, and not the object itself, and should be distinguished between the mistakes and the error. The imagination as the basic element of the poem has two different meanings that are in each other in Connected First, what is not real, but it looks real. Second, the existential level of mediation between abstractions and material. The fact that one's imagination does not necessarily mean absurdity, but the imaginary being represents the real being and is due to the fact that the imaginary can be a revealing sign (verse) of the transcendence. This is why the soothsayers of the whole universe, Masawi Allah, because of the existence of Absolute and Absolute, have called the imagination. In the second sense, the imagination of the existential level and the universe of intermediate and intermediate between the universe of meaning (the single) and the universe of nature (objects) and makes it possible for the connection between them.
    The mystics as the designers of the world of imagination, the world with prophetic revelation And mystical discovery and intuition, and they have considered it a land of revelation and inspiration. As mentioned, revelation in Islam is a threefold relationship. The angel of revelation as an intermediary plays an unmistakable role in the process of revelation. In the course of the revelation of the revelation, based on the thoughts of the Muslim mystics of the Prophet, it is connected with the absent-minded world and into the world of imagination and example. The observation of the angel of revelation by the Prophet is initially related to the example world and the Imam. From the perspective of the mystics, the prophetic experience, the revelation, which is the absolute and relative relationship, has come down in the context of the language, and that is why the revelation is called a degradation. Prophetic experience is like a mystical experience, and Ibn-Arabi emphasizes the issue of the decline of meanings among many issues related to the revelation. The meaning in Sufism means the esoteric and the non-existent truth and the face of the matter has it. The meaning of one thing is the same as that which is the expression of the object as it is known of God and is rooted in the superstitious (spiritual) sense (physical and physical). The imagination is a borderline between the senses and the superficiality and an intermediate reality. The emotional and spiritual imagination shifts and covers both. The revelation of ejaculation is the meanings that are present in the universe of the unseen as the science of God, and they enter into the spiritual universe through the imagination and in the world of imagination. The revelation initially began as a dream for the Prophet. Revelation takes on a sensation when the Prophet hears it. But this still begins with the realm of imagination. Revelation is a meaning. Revelation deals with an allegorical manifestation and an example in the world of language, but these manifestations are not inconceivable, but based on God's knowledge.
    If degradation and depiction are related to one another, man's excellence and behavior must be accompanied by allegory, because understanding and receiving the implied meaning behind the analogy allows us to pass through the layers of the image, to become familiar with the gradation, and to the absolute truth We get Hence, most mystics use their allegory in expressing their meaning, and have used all its forms, especially stories and stories, and stories in their works. It is a point that the mystics used the use of the allegory first, in order to express the meaning, secondly, they have learned from the Qur'an in order to know the imaginary layers of the emergence of the truth, and how they were to pass through them, and to find out the way of the coming of the Quran, and Ibn Arabi tried to explain the necessity of using it Has had an allegory.
    Keywords: Allegory, Revelation, Imagination, Likeness, Mysticism, Islamic Sufism, Ibn al-Arabi
  • Hosein Hemmatzadeh *, Zahra Khazaei, Mohsen Javadi Pages 123-145
    The present paper examines the role of epistemic virtues in the formation of intellectual identity and its impact on improving our truth-seeking behaviors. A epistemic virtue is a special faculty or trait of a person whose operation makes that person a thinker, believer, learner, scholar, knower, cognizer, perceiver, etc., or causes his intellectual development and perfection, and improves his truth-seeking and knowledge-acquiring behaviours and places him on the path to attain understanding, perception and wisdom. Virtue epistemology is a set of approaches in contemporary epistemology that regards knowledge as "a true belief arising from humans epistemic virtues." Virtue responsibilism and Virtue reliabilism are two important approaches to virtue epistemology that differ together in their attitude to the nature of epistemic virtue. Responsibilisms regards epistemic virtues as an acquired character traits that must be attained through practice and training with plenty of effort from the agent who possesses the will. In contrast, virtue reliabilisms considers epistemic virtues as reliable and innate cognitive faculties, and believes that this natural faculties has been placed in the human being from the very beginning and, if used in the appropriate condition and in a proper environment, is reliably truth-conducive. So virtue epistemology, which is distinguished from belief-based analytical epistemology by focusing on the cognitive character of the agent rather than the belief, regards epistemic virtues as the constructive factor of the epistemic agent and the condition of reaching the truth.
    From the two approaches of virtue reliabilism and virtue responsibilism, this paper focuses on the second approach and with using of the nine-fold virtues, that Jason Baehr posed, shows how to make epistemically good and thinker human by utilizing these virtues and avoiding the corresponding vices and through this, gained the truth in various epistemic areas. After explaining these virtues and their role in the two mentioned domains based on the virtue epistemology, the significance of this relationship in the view of Mulla Sadra as an example of Islamic philosophy is examined, For the reason that he sees knowledge as the produce of some factors that epistemic virtues is considered part of them. In the view of Sadra, epistemic virtues is the specific attributes and traits of reason faculty that their function causes man to be a very good and strong perciever, and their actual possesion or their gradual acquisition leads to the perfection of the soul and the dignity of human existence. In a new theory of soul-knowledge, he considers the journey of the soul from the outset as evolutionary journey, and, on the other hand, he considers all human activities directly as an activity of the soul (epistemic agent), which he performs through his own faculties. As a result, the soul is a increasing and evolving being, while at the same time acquiring knowledge is also from its own activities, and therefore the factors that make up the soul are also influential in its products. Now, as knowledge comes from soul exposure to the outside world, the more this soul is refined from pollutions and adorned to virtues, the better reflection from reality will be.
    Undoubtedly, the desire to engage in the process of truth-seeking and the responsible use of cognitive virtues and skills lead man to a desirable goal (recognition of truth) and forms his true intellectual identity. In the end, the paper suggests that because of the importance of epistemic virtues in the improvement of truth-seeking behaviors, educating and cultivating of these types of virtues should be part of the spoken and written course content of universities and schools, and must be proper critical thinking is institutionalized and strengthened in the spirit of community members. Educational resources contain a wide range of information that can deeply influence our epistemic behaviors and actions. Hence, it is necessary to include praised cognitive skills and epistemic virtues training in them. Teachers play an important role in educating and developing epistemic virtues as part of the formal curriculum content of educational centers, perhaps as part of critical thinking and logic courses. The formal education of epistemic virtues and the creation of opportunities for practicing and exercising them will be a good starting point for institutionalizing and developing admired cognitive skills among members of the community.
    In a society where individuals in their epistemic processes use their own cognitive virtues and organize their beliefs on their basis, the community itself and the social relations will also be virtuous, because the necessity of such an virtues is that individuals interact with their peers and In these interactions, rule virtue. Observing fairness towards others, intellectual humility, intellectual generosity, courage against miscreant and one who has weak arguments, observance of neutrality and other epistemic virtues, if it is to be found in societies as a habit and praised skill, then that society will be virtuous and its relations will be healthier and with the cultivating of those virtues, Intellectual and moral development will also become easier and more common. Intellectual virtues (or praised cognitive skills) should be taught to the community members, so that they display such characteristics when engaging in social activities, whean expressing opinions, when doing research, and so on. It is important to change our education policies, because the decay of praised cognitive skills leads to devastating consequences for intellectual identity and the truth-seeking and knowledge-acquiring behavior of the community members.
    Keywords: Epistemic virtues, Virtue epistemology, Intellectual identity, Truth-seeking
  • Frough al Sadat Rahimpour, Majid Yarian * Pages 147-159
    In Islamic philosophy the soul is almost introduced as the base of existential Structure of human being and on the contrary, the body and its role is noteworthy less. Actually the knowledge of soul in most of ontological dimensions is related to knowledge of body and its place in psychological discussions. In this article we have studied five problems about soul in Mulla Sadra’s philosophy. Therefor in this paper, five issues of soul are mentioned and the role of the body is mentioned in understanding and analyzing these issues. These issues include: the rejection of metempsychosis of the soul, the proof of the union of the soul and the body, proving the plurality of the faculties of the soul, explaining the knowledge and perception of the soul, and ultimately proving the immortality of the soul.
    According to the five titles mentioned above, this article seeks to answer these five questions:1- How does Mulla Sadra benefit from the physical issues of body in rejecting metempsychosis? 2- How the Physical features in his philosophy have enabled Mulla Sadra to defend the unity of the soul and body? 3- How does Mulla Sadra prove the plurality of the body with the help of the features of body? 4- What is the body in Mulla Sadra’s Philosophy in explaining the process of knowledge and perception? 5- How does Mulla Sadra hire his body and its attributes in the proof of immortality? In response to these questions, there are reasons and arguments those are based on prefaces which are straightly depend on body and its characteristics. Some of these prefaces are: the harmony between potential and actual in soul and potential and actual in body, levels of body and its place in evolutionary substantial movement of soul, alteration, weakness or decline of some physical forces in special moments of mundane life, the importance of senses and physical perceptions in order to develop rational cognitions, being some existential levels of human free from physical feature. By this point of view, the body and its characteristics have an important ontological role.
    1- The body always moves through the substantial movement from potential to actual during its lifetime and in order to the unity of the soul and body, the soul also make its potential actual with the body. Returning from action to potential is impossible, so The soul can’t be transmitted physically after actuality, which is empty of it. The body also has other features that Mulla Sadra can with the help of them, reject metempsychosis of the soul Including that: the body must always be under the control of one soul and You can never imagine a body which is empty of the soul Because the consistency of body's reality depends on soul companionship. In addition, the body can’t have two or more soul at the same time and with a self-determination anyone will find it.
    2- Mulla Sadra believes that the existence is a one thing with different levels which are connected to each other and between its levels, there is no detachment. Therefor if an existence is developed on the basis of substantial movement Can within itself have the lowest levels of materiality to the highest degrees of immateriality. The human soul, after its being substantial Perfection in the immortality becomes one which is the highest level of it is intellect and the lowest level of that is material body. He also introduces the body as the emergence of the soul and its perfection. Accordingly, we can consider the body as the highest level and the soul as the lower level of the soul. In this way, the we can reject the duality of the soul and body and confirmed by the unity of the two.
    3- Mulla Sadra, while believing in the union of the soul with Perceptual and provocative faculties, identifies them as various Dignities of soul and Considers the plurality of the faculties as a difference in the levels of soul. From his point of view, observing the physical faculties shows that Some physical faculties are available at the time, and at other time some are not exist. This is while some other physical faculties are available all the time. The permanent existence of some of the faculties during the life and their absence at another time, is a suitable criterion for proving plurality.
    4- The formation of the faculties of the soul begins from the material body. The sensory and physical faculties are the beginning of the emergence of other faculties. Therefore, the distinction between non-physical perceptions of sensory perceptions is through taking physical properties away. The perfection of soul is initially through sensory perceptions and physical matter. The body is the origin of sensory, imaginary, and rational perceptions and The plurality and variety of perceptions relate to physical instruments. The rational perceptions also come with the help of senses and partial perceptions. Of course, this point must also be emphasized that after achieving immateriality of the soul, sensory and physical faculties plays a dominant and deterrent role in rational perceptions.
    5- Mulla Sadra uses a method of taking physical properties away to prove Immortality of soul. He shows that the soul does not only have some physical states like Weakness in sleep or fatigue due to intellectual activity, but also the body is more powerful in these cases. Taking these physical characteristics away from the perceptive faculty Reveals that the soul is immaterial. This leads us to the proof of the survival of the Immortality of soul after the death of body.
    Keywords: Body, Matter, soul, immateriality, Mulla Sadra