پژوهشنامه معارف قرآنی
پیاپی 5 (تابستان 1390)

This paper discusses and critiques a theory which states that the Qur’an is imperfect and cannot be generalized to all times and places and to all new and changing issues; such a theory requires that people continue to experience what the Prophet would experience in order to fill this void. Later in this paper we deal with the views of Sadr al-Moteallehin and Mowlana about the Qur’an and the relation between the Qur’an and Mathnavi. The paper then, in a firm and documented way, refutes the competing claim that these great people have offered new religious concepts, other the ones in the Qur’an.

In this paper sustenance is examined from the perspective of the Qur’an and narrations. In the first place, the paper focuses on some questions including: what does sustenance mean? Who is provider? What does this mean that the Transcendent God has made it incumbent upon Himself to provide for his creatures? Is there enough sustenance for all beings? The paper then focuses on the part man plays in obtaining his daily bread and how God determines the sustenance and distribute it as well as the factors that increase or decrease one’s sustenance. Later sections are devoted to responding to the following questions: What does without-reckoning sustenance mean? What does it mean that the sustenance is in the heavens? What is pure sustenance? Can we consider what is earned illegally as sustenance? And the final part of the paper addresses this question: Does substantial sustenance result in man’s rebellion and insubordination?

From a Quranic perspective, the Creator has honored man and has made him His successor on the earth. This paper attempts to find the criteria of humanity in the Qur’an, relying on Tafsir al-Mizān. The Qur’an introduces a triangle of criteria: faith, righteous deed and knowledge. Man can reach perfection solely when he has both faith and righteous deeds and he will be promoted to a higher spiritual rank only when these two qualities are completed with knowledge. In Quranic logic, only the knowledge that adds to the learned man’s modesty is one of the criteria of humanity. It is merely through the logical and balanced interaction between these three qualities that one becomes a perfect man who satisfies the standards and criteria set by the Qur’an. The fulfillment of these criteria will result in a pure life in this world and prosperity in the Hereafter.

Theory of leadership and guardianship is based upon Quranic verses and the traditions of the Prophet (PBUH) and the descendants of Imam Ali (PBUH); this theory can be understood and proved with an inner-religious attitude and it is a rational-epistemological necessity and guarantees the continuation of prophetic mission – which can be logically and clearly explained and defended with an outer-religious approach; this theory is also one of the requirements of ‘innate disposition’ and the inner truth of religious law. Therefore, the theory of leadership and guardianship is a sacred, primary and theologic theory rather than being conventional, secondary and jurisprudential. This theory has ideological, moral and spiritual aspects as well as dimensions related to legal rulings and jurisprudence and these are responsible for the interpretation of religion, defending religious law, performing God’s prescriptions, administering justice and ensuring mental and spiritual guidance; furthermore, leadership and guardianship complete the religion and the bounties of God and are the indication of the true Islam favored by God which is His promise and a divine order; the leader or guardian has the following real qualities: innocence, knowledge of religion, religious rulings, politics and spirituality and he should be appointed and have a high scientific rank. Relying on these, we can make a logical and historical critique of the competing theories like theories of electing, setting up a council, caliphate as political leadership and the lack of proof for tradition of the Imam and the leader. The present paper has attempted to investigate these from logical, historical and sociological perspectives.

Secularism means adopting a materialistic attitude toward different dimensions of human life including government, culture, economy, community, etc. The gist of the definitions of secularism can be summarized as follows: eliminating religion from society, directing people’s attention to material affairs, preventing religion from becoming a social issue, justifying behaviors with reference to human’s rather than God’s power, dispossessing the material world of invisible powers and desacralizing them and basing decisions on principles of logic and efficiency. The present paper aims at explaining secularism and the attitude of the Qur’an towards this school of thought. The Qur’an does not approve a secular government and secular thoughts are in sharp contrast with Quranic verses and hence we cannot consider secularist theses in line with Quranic concepts and the Prophetic tradition. From the viewpoint of the Qur’an, this world is transient and should not be one’s goal and all man’s efforts should be directed toward his Hereafter.

Many researchers throughout history, especially Sufi Shaykhs have proposed differing definitions for mysticism and Sufism; the first definition is given by Kerkhi (d. 815). Nicolson has provided 78 definitions for the emergence and development of Sufism and these definitions are taken from three books (Tazkerah al-Oliyā, Resāleh Qoshayrieh and Nafahāt al-Ons) and none is comprehensive enough.It seems that the definition offered by Shafi’i Kadkani is more complete. According to his definition, Sufism is the result of an artistic approach to religion. In the present paper, after explicating “artistic approach” and “artistic explanation”, to provide some examples of Kadkani’s definition, we investigate some of the Quranic verses and traditions which are approached artistically in Tamhidāt of ‘Eyn al-Qozāt Hamedāni (d. 1130) in order to find out what ‘Eyn al-Qozāt has done when using Quranic verses and the narrations of the immaculate Imams (PBUT), artistic approach or artistic explanation?

Scientific centers that lay the ground for the development of science and the education of scientists are of great importance and are among the remarkable achievements of a culture and civilization. This paper compares the educational systems and scientific centers of the Buyids and the Seljuqs with regard to their efficiency and religious leniency and prejudice. Therefore, we first examine the fundamental elements of the educational systems of these two governmental systems and then investigate the efficiency, religious leniency and prejudice of these two as well as the development of their scientific centers and the outcome of their educational systems. The rulers of the Buyid family would treat other religions with leniency, whereas the rulers of Seljukian had a bigoted attitude and would support Shāfi’ism and Hanafism. Their diverse religious policies had impact upon their scientific centers such as mosques, (dervish) monasteries, observatories, libraries, hospitals, houses of science, schools as well as the educational systems of these centers including their textbooks and selection of their teachers and students.