فصلنامه قبسات
پیاپی 48 (تابستان 1387)

Islamic philosophers have discussed revelation and prophecy in two positions: first in the egology discussions and second in the discussion of knowledge of God (Divine theology). They believe revelation is God’s teaching to the Prophets which is fulfilled through the active intellect. The philosophical explanation of revelation is based on the fact that this world is managed on the basis of causes and effects and the active intellect has a determinative effect, with God’s permission, on the world’s management. Human’s science and knowledge is fulfilled through the active intellect. On the other hand, human’s soul is abstract and deserves having relation with the world of intellects but the materialistic and worldly attachments is an obstacle for establishing this relation. The Prophets have purified their soul so they don’t have any materialistic or worldly attachment and are able to have the highest level of relationship with the world of intellect and receive metaphysics realities. In their system of knowledge, these realities are allegorized in the form of the angel of revelation and eloquent speech. Some have criticized this theory. Although the philosophical explanation of revelation is not an absolute and full-scale theory, we may say, as a final evaluation, it is the best rational theory presented for analysis of revelation.

One of the main questions posed regarding Quran is on its source: does it have a Divine source or a human source? One of the reasons mentioned, nowadays, to show it is a human book is to consider revelation the same as the common religious experiences. Can we accept this theory and consider Quran as the Prophet's religious experience, just like the Christian philosophers who accept this theory regarding the present distorted Bible and like some Muslim intellectuals who mention it regarding the Holy Quran, such as Dr. Abdol-Karim Soroush? In order to answer this question, we will first define the expression of "revelation" and explain its various uses in Quran and the meaning of having revelatory teachings from this Divine book. We will then compare revelation with religious experience.

Gabriel has an important role in the process of Quranic revelation. If we investigate this role according to Quran and narrations, we will actually settle some of the questions raised regarding the rejection of Gabriel’s role in the Quranic revelation and the attribution of Quran’s creation to prophet Mohammad (PBUH). This article will try to identify this role. Therefore this article first investigates the Muslim scholar’s perspectives regarding Gabriel’s role in the process of Quranic revelation and then on the basis of Quran’s verses, emphasizes six points to explicate this role. The points are as follows: 1- Quran, the result of Divine speech through the intercession of Gabriel; 2- Descent of Quran through the intercession of Gabriel; 3- The characteristics of Gabriel effecting Quran’s complete descent; 4- Prophet’s heart as the place of Quran’s descent; 5- Equality of the essence of the Quranic revelation descended on Gabriel and Prophet Mohammad (PBUH); 6- God’s superintendence in the complete process of Quran’s revelation to Prophet Mohammad (PBUH). Based on these points, the question of Prophet’s interference in the creation of Quran is answered at the end of the article.

Islamic mystics, especially Ibn-Arabi, have a special analysis of revelation. According to their view regarding unity of existence and the degrees of being, they believe the first sader (the first being emanated) is the Mohammadian reality. They believe that God willed to observe all of his characteristics and perfections outside himself, therefore he created the Mohammadian reality. The Mohammadian reality is the manifestation of all of God’s names and characteristics and all of the Prophets receive their light from it. Ibn-Arabi believes the expanded being of the Prophet of Islam (PBUH), as the first sader, receives all of the learned perfections including the Holy Quran. In fact the rational reality of Quran is revealed to the Prophet by existence of the Mohammadian reality but the literal being of Quran is gradually descended to him during the twenty three years of his mission.

Quran is a linguistic text which God descended to the Great Prophet of Islam (PBUH) through the angel of revelation, the honest Gabriel, to guide the faithful people who accepted this invitation. Since it is a linguistic text and is descended in a certain geographical area, it is founded on the language of the Prophet’s tribe which is Arabic. Quran is descended to institute a new culture and fight against the ignorant culture of the time. What is the relation between Quran and the Arab culture of the time of descent? Some believe the birthplace of Quran’s text is the Arab culture therefore it is based on this culture. And because it has used the Arab concepts and acknowledgements, it is a guest of the Arab culture. However most Muslim scholars believe that not only it has not been affected by the Arab culture, rather it is descended to create a grate effect on it and reform the bases of this culture. This article will inspect the two approaches to Quran’s text and its birthplace.

One of the complicated discussions which has always drawn the attention of scholars who research on religious subjects is the essence of revelation. Due to various reasons, this discussion has not remained an intellectual and theoretical subject, rather it has became a social-political challenge. A group of recent Christian philosophers consider revelation as a kind of "religious experience". Affected by these philosophers, Dr. Abdol-Karim Soroush tried to introduce this view regarding Islam's revelation about a decade ago which simultaneously provoked some discussions in relatively specialized centeries. He has recently pointed out the same discussions with a more impertinent and stinging literature and in a more common level. The only point he has added to his previous discussion is the analogy he draws between prophecy (and the process of revelation) and poetry.His discussions can be investigated from two aspects: first is how theoretically reasonable and defendable are his propositions and second is what is the position of his discussions from the social-political aspect and what are its results. The first area is mainly mentioned in this article: does his view have enough theoretical stability or not? In this article his theory is first written in the form of four main claims which are: impossibility of receiving letters and adequacy of understanding the content by Prophet (PBUH); drawing an analogy between revelation and poetry; the effect of the culture of Prophet's (PBUH) times on the content of revelation thus fallibility of revelation; lack of necessity to accept and be faithfulness to all of the content of revelation. Besides criticizing the claims, their origin and theoretical foundations are mentioned in each case.

Revelation is an important issue in Christian and Muslim theology and is considered as one of their main subjects. Priest John Macquarrie and Motahhari have especially mentioned revelation in their theories as well. This article tries to investigate the perspectives of these two intellectuals in the following subjects: the essence of revelation, the content and bearer of revelation, validity of revelation, different kinds and levels of revelation, epistemology of revelation, explanation of revelational knowledge and …. It will also compare their views although they have different intellectual, social and religious conditions. While comparing the two, their similarities and differences will be apparent.

“The Prophetic reading of the world” is the title of a series of articles written by Mr. Mojtahed Shabestari, from June of 2007 to May 2008. He has two main cl the first one is that the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) is the teller of revelation and the second is that he has received an interpretation of revelation. The first claim is evaluated in this article. Three rational reasons, two traditional reasons and one analogical reason are extracted from his articles which try to prove the first claim. The rational reasons have a hermeneutics/linguistic approach. Analyzing the components of human language, the first and second rational reasons try to prove that if we consider Prophet as the transmitter of revelation, then it will not be directed to other addressees and especially the non-pious addressees. And according to the third (rational) reason, if God is the teller of revelation, it will not have the characteristics of human language such as awareness, will, speech acts and conventional signs arisen from the social and historical life of human. Therefore it will not be comprehensible. I will prove that first of all, a hypothetical teller is enough to understand the text (critique of the first reason) and second of being pious or non-pious will be meaningful only after reading the Holy Quran (critique of the second reason). And Third of all the above characteristics are the prerequisites of understanding most human texts not an absolute prerequisite for understanding all of them (critique of the third reason). Mentioning his traditional reasons, Mr. Shabestari tries to confirm his view by quoting a phrase of Allameh Tabataba’i and referring to an interpretation of mystic’s sayings. I will clearly cite these phrases of Allameh and analyze Shabestari’s interpretation of mysticism and will show that these quotations do not confirm his claim. Shabestari’s analogical reason uses the similarity between genetic and legislative verses and their attribution to God – through longitudinal causality – to confirm his claim. I have proved that God’s longitudinal causality is equal with respect to both perspectives – prophet as a transmitter and as a teller – therefore this analogy doesn’t confirm the idea. Finally explaining some of Quran’s contradictions with this theory – i.e. the prophet is the teller of revelation – I have analyzed and evaluated his solution (literal description of Quran) of solving the contradictions.