نشریه جستارهایی در فلسفه و کلام
سال پنجاه و چهارم شماره 1 (پیاپی 108، بهار و تابستان 1401)

The individual unity of existence is one of the most important and decisive issues in philosophy and mysticism, which can fundamentally and essentially influence our approach to ontology, theology, God-world relationship and other issues. At the same time, incorrect understandings of this doctrine may cause at least two problems: due to their misunderstanding, some of those influenced by this doctrine (whether in the West or in the East) may fall into intellectual and ideological deviations, and some others, having a weak understanding of this concept, will make unfair criticisms against it. Among the famous misconceptions are: “God’s immanence”, “unity of God and world”, “considering the multiplicity as nothingness or illusion”, “pantheism”, “mutability of the Real”, “negation of causality”, “determinism” and “antinomianism”. In this article, based on the rational arguments and the Islamic revelational texts taken from the thoughts and works of the divine sage, jurist and exegete, Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, we will criticize these false ideas and prove their weakness, absurdity and invalidity.

Pragmatism is one of the major contemporary schools of thought that has both methodologically and philosophically influenced various fields of human thought, including the field of religious studies. This article, which is a qualitative study using descriptive-analytical method, tries to prove the impact of pragmatism on contemporary Quranic exegesis studies and explain its dimensions. The result is that in the contemporary era, the interpretive principles are influenced by pragmatism in the field of issuing principles and the interpretive approaches owe their two utilitarian and pragmatic approaches to pragmatism. also, the interpretive methods are, at least from three angles, influenced by Pierce’s pragmatic ideas. This necessitates a wise, fair and serious attention toward the positive and negative aspects of this school in the Islamic scientific circles.

The purpose of this research is to explain the time based on the structuralist view of substantial movement. This analysis has been done with the method of demolition. Deconstructing is rereading and analyzing any subject through decentralizing it and obtaining the dimensions which are usually ignored. In general, the theories of time are divided into two categories: theories of essential change, which attribute change only to the appearances, names, and superficial layers of the system of existence and all its phenomena, and theories that consider time as a result of substantial movement and the fundamental change and transformation of the phenomena. When the themes contained in the former view are challenged, the structuralist view of transcendent and purposeful substantial movement could find a way to emerge. According to this approach, all the phenomena of existence and especially human being, due to their existential need and poverty, are moving in the path of the One. The centrality of this view has implications for education and training: education will enjoy a more religious nature; the universe, based on its inherent poverty and substantial change, needs a guardian who constantly creates and innovates in order to shape the momentary identity of the world and man; and the last, universe will enjoy the essential origination (not temporal origination or eternal existence).

There is a connection and give-and-take between different sciences in different ways. In the same way, there is a close and wide-ranging relationship between the principles of jurisprudence on one side and logic and philosophy on the other. The knowledge of the principles of jurisprudence has been influenced by various logical and philosophical issues. In this article, the judgment of some commentators of Kifāya on the compatibility or non-compatibility of the view of Akhund Khurāsānī with the view of logicians and philosophers on the issue of “the predicate extracted from the subject itself” and “the predicate by way of adherence” has been specifically discussed. The authors maintain that Akhund’s view bears two interpretations, one is compatible with the view of philosophers and the other, which has a more subtle meaning, distances from philosophical view. For this purpose, we have tried to find the roots of the debate in logical texts, especially Ibn Sīnā, as the most prominent pioneer of the debate. Scrutiny and analysis of the concepts of “extracted” (khārij), “with the way of adherence” (bi al-ḍamīma) and “from its very essence” (min Ṣamīmih) has led to the point that if we are satisfied with his expressions in Kifāya, Akhund is in agreement with logicians and philosophers, and if the term “the predicate extracted from the subject self” in his words can concomitantly denote the concept of “from its very essence”, then it will be different from philosophers’ view.

Wittgenstein’s narrative of religion, faith, and its relation to practice has led to one of the important approaches in the contemporary philosophy of religion, influencing many researches in the humanities and social sciences; Thus, Wittgenstein’s view in this regard deserves more careful consideration, reassessment, and preparation for application in society. The present research method is descriptive and a kind of content analysis. This article describes and analyzes the truth and nature of faith and its relation to practice based on Wittgenstein’s later works, including Philosophical Investigations, Culture and Value, and Lectures on Religious Belief. It is inferred from Wittgenstein's scattered works and lectures on religion that he was concerned both in thought and in practice with the relationship between faith and action, albeit in his own way. The use theory of meaning, which is the basis of his later thought, has been brought up for this purpose. Using his own terms “use theory of meaning” and the metaphor of “language games” and “the form of life”, Wittgenstein explains that religion is an interconnected system composed of faith and practice, and that the two are concomitant and cannot be separated.

Philosophy of law is one of the most complex and difficult branches of law, as well as philosophy, which seeks to determine the legal truth of law (law as it is). Legal positivism, as one of the philosophical schools of law, with a morally neutral theory, makes the conceptual description of law possible and necessary. According to this school of law, positive laws are laws adopted by governments, and in the context of the analysis of this school, public law emerges as a branch of law whose main mission is to study the rules governing the organization of internal and external relations of the state in its general sense, by designing general theory with a correct and in-depth understanding of its fundamental concepts. Herbert Hart’s legal theory, with a hermeneutical approach to legal rules, seeks to understand the legal system through introspective analysis and semantics of legal rules. Through a comprehensive analysis of the formulation of legal rules, while adhering to a minimum of the natural law, it also seeks to depict a system of law in which following the law is internalized, not as mere following the ruler; this system of law proposes the theory of distinction between the primary rules and the secondary rules, as well. Therefore, this descriptive-analytic research analyzes Hart’s positivism in the field of public law.

The Divine speech has been one of the important and basic issues in Kalam which, in fact, was the starting point of this knowledge. What provides the ground for conflicting opinions in this issue is the explanation of the truth of the Divine word. Although the preamble of the disputes of the philosophers and theologians is related to the temporality or eternity of the Divine word, the interpretation of its truth and the quality of its belonging is considered to be the most controversial subject of conflict. Allama Khafrī maintains that the word is a homonym and considers two meanings for it, according to one meaning, God’s word is eternal and according to the other, it is temporal; word as “speech” is eternal and as “what one speaks through” is temporal. The true Divine word can be considered eternal in three ways: by using the relationship between Divine knowledge and word, the true speech will be identical to the undifferentiated essential knowledge, and as a result, it will be eternal. According to the second justification, speech is a kind of knowledge transmission and, knowledge is also a kind of speech, in turn; therefore, this theory defends the unity of knowledge and speech and the sameness of their attributes. The third justification interprets true speech as power, that is the Necessary’s essential power to inspiration, and by using this connection and considering the eternity of power, it considers speech to be eternal, as well. Allama Dawwānī, unlike many of the early philosophers, considers the Divine word to be the source of creation of the words and contrary to Divine knowledge. In his view, the truth of the Necessary’s word is the origin of the compilation of letters and sounds that have been realized in the Divine eternal knowledge and this compilation was made without any order or sequence. He claims that so far, no sect or group has presented such an effective point of view like his and he is the originator of this viewpoint. Reviewing the views of Mu‘tazila, Ash‘arīyya, Karrāmiyya, Ḥashwiyya, and the philosophers, he considers his opinion to be different from all.

The finitude of the natural body has implications and consequences in some of Avicenna’s philosophical issues. The proof of some problems in Avicennian philosophy is subject to proving the limitation of natural body. It should be made clear that the proof of which issues in this philosophy is the result of finitude of the body and what implications it has. In terms of background, only the finitude of the body and its dimensions has been examined in the existing research literature, and the connection between the finiteness of the natural body and other philosophical topics discussed by Avicenna is absent. To answer the question “What are the implications of the finitude of the body in Avicennian philosophy?” we have referred to the works of Avicenna and some of his prominent commentators, and have inferred and explained its physical and metaphysical implications. These considerable and important implications are as follows: non-separation of form from matter, proof of shape for body, rejection of void, proof of muḥaddid al-jihāt (the celestial sphere which determines the directions), rejection of infinite regress and proof of the Necessary

One of the most main and serious criteria in validating a perspective is the critical study of external epistemic manifestations and the re-examination of its fundamental intellectual principles. The revelationological basis is one of the important bases of the view that considers the language of the Qur’an as mysterious and hence, astonishing. This article tries to critically analyze the above-mentioned basis by applying precise intellectual considerations and, in this way, prove the weakness of that viewpoint. The research method of this article is analytical, using library sources. The findings of the research indicate that the basis considered for revelation in this view is posed to several serious challenges, some of which are as follows: First, in terms of background, it is consistent with Schleiermacher’s attitude. Second, in terms of nature, revelation and religious experience are two distinct truths. Third, the claim that the Qur’an was influenced by the culture of its time is a rejected claim. Fourth, in terms of immutability of concepts, Qur’an is eternal and non-historical. Therefore, this viewpoint about the language of the Qur’an is based on a distorted and rejected ground.

Prophets have different functions in different dimensions of their duties. Prophethood and infallibility are closely related to each other, because according to most Muslims, every prophet should, at least partially, have the ability to avoid sins and mistakes. By proving the foundations of infallibility, the validity of the prophets’ words, actions and silent approvals will be meaningful and the correctness of receiving and spreading revelation will be established. The purpose of this article is to achieve the pattern of prophecy affairs in the scope of revelation and its layers and to present the connections between infallibility and prophecy based on verses and traditions, which has been conducted through qualitative research using the database method with the help of MAXQDA software based on open, axial, and selective coding. The result is a model that includes all types of functional affairs of prophecy before, during and after the revelation, which is made up of different sub-layers but homogeneous in terms of level and component. The findings of the research show that the different affairs of prophecy, such as receiving the revelation, guidance, teaching and reciting verses, calling to monotheism, staying away from idolatry and tyranny, cultivating souls, bringing good tidings, warning, etc. are can be categorized in three major components: “affairs before the revelation”, “affairs during the revelation” and “affairs after the revelation”. Such functions reveal the unbreakable connection between infallibility and prophecy. Some of the types of relationship between infallibility and prophecy that they bring about are as follows: infallibility causes the prophet to deserve the position of prophecy, infallibility preserves prophecy, infallibility is necessary in receiving, spreading, and stating the revelation, so that what is delivered to people is identical to what has been received by the prophet, and the last, infallibility covers the whole life of the prophet.

Resurrection is one of the main issues regarding the eschatology, which has not been neglected by Islamic sages and mystics, and each of them has expressed some points, though brief, based on their own principles. As for Mullā Ṣadrā, by carefully examining and modifying the foundations and opinions of the past based on his own principles, he has improved the past opinions and provided a decent explanation of resurrection. In this article, an attempt has been made to address Mullā Ṣadrā’s philosophical explanation and then, to find the origin of his opinion and its sources in the works of his predecessors. Since the Peripatetics only mentioned the levels of resurrection and sometimes referred to the revelation, it is not possible to find much influence for them in Ṣadrā’s thought. By accepting the immateriality of imagination, Suhrawardī opened a new horizon in the debate and paved the way for Mullā Ṣadrā. Most of the mystics also maintained that the resurrection is material and considered the place of its realization to be the earth; however, some of them, like Ibn ‘Arabī, on the one hand, tried to give more details about resurrection, and on the other hand, synthetized reason and revelation in explaining resurrection, and therefore played a more influential role in Mullā Ṣadrā’s thought. Ṣadrā thinks of resurrection as reaching the goal and based on this, he considers it as a philosophical issue and offers an explanation based on the principles of his transcendent philosophy.