فصلنامه پژوهش های فلسفی - کلامی
سال پانزدهم شماره 3 (پیاپی 59، بهار 1393)

Ambiguous Quranic verses have been one of the challenging issues during the history of Islamic sciences. In the principles of his ontology، Mulla Sadra Shirazi (the Leader of Theosophers) believes in particular monotheism versus general monotheism. He holds that، on the basis of philosophical-mystical principles of particular monotheism view، outward meanings of Quranic verses can be maintained and all ambiguous verses can predicated to their outwards meanings، without the necessity of expounding the esoteric meanings of verses or of belief in corporealization about the essence of God. On the contrary، ambiguous verses cannot be predicated on their outward meanings on the basis of general monotheism; rather، their esoteric meanings should be expounded and the belief in corporealization about the Necessary Being should accepted. Given the fact that ambiguous Quranic verses are multi-factorial، Mulla Sadra adopts an inter-disciplinary approach to this issue

The present paper investigates Mulla Sadra’s specific approach to the theory of substantial motion by reanalyzing the existential and epistemic foundations of his philosophy. Based on his synthetic attitude، Mulla Sadra revises the components and requirements of his theory. Accordingly، dichotomy of matter-form and qualifying them to substantiality are explained under the rubric of soul’s functions. By differentiating existential increase in intensity from substantial increase in intensity، he believes that gradual increase in intensity is beyond substantiality، accidentalness and congruence of reality. By proposing gradation as the final criterion، he applies the process of gradual increase in intensity to immaterial intellects and everything other that God. In Sadrian thought، therefore، removing material and physical accidents from soul at the time of death does not prevent the continuation of its perfecting motion and worldly reincarnation.

Religious experience is an event in which observer confronts with ultimate reality or metaphysical world. J. L. Mackie believes that religious experiences are delusions، fantasies and functions of the observer’s unconscious mind، thus as proofs for God’s existence، are invalid. On the contrary، based on “the principle of credulity” which holds that “things are in fact as they appear unless approved otherwise” and “the principle of testimony” which holds that “we should accept observers’ sayings about intended experience if they are not deluded or deceived”، Richard Swinburne negates Mackie’s criticisms and believes that religious experiences are inductive valid proofs to prove God’s experience.

Religious scholars have long discussed about the nature of miracle and its relevant issues. Since miracle is an unusual event but natural events are meaningful and end-oriented، it has caused different views about its definition، became a subject of study for thinkers، especially theologians، and attracted their attention to the reality of miracle and how it happens. Therefore، it can be said that miracle is the most important and authentic supernatural thing whose occurrence is approved by valid historical narratives. In recent decades and following Hume’s skeptical view about miracle، however، Muslim and western thinkers have studied and deliberated on miracle to defend their religious beliefs. Among western thinkers، Swinburne has tried to provide a specific definition of miracle and discussed the rationality of believing in miracle in the intellectual system of Christianity by relying on the views of predecessors of western tradition such as Thomas Aquinas; and among Muslim thinkers، Allamah Tabatabaii has provided a precise definition of miracle and discussed its compatibility with causality.

One of the most important pillars of epistemic pluralism is pluralism in beliefs. Therefore، we are obliged to discuss about pluralism in beliefs when we talk about epistemic pluralism. It can be claimed that one of the most important aspects of rationality of pluralism in beliefs is the capability of variation in beliefs themselves. It seems that doubt and uncertainty about some beliefs are possibly related to the probability of variation in beliefs. The beliefs that are not certain and we are not sure about them can tolerate other uncertain beliefs. However، the issue should be explained in such a way that it does not lead to anarchy and excessive relativism. We can evaluate beliefs by analyzing them and how variation occurs in them. No doubt، this evaluation should not lead us to absolutism and denial of variation. By analyzing belief، we understand that three main components of belief are believer، subject of belief and statement of belief. Accordingly، we can use theoretical foundations related to each of these components to explain variability in beliefs.

One of the fundamental issues in the field of Quranic sciences، interpretation and، especially، in mysticism is the possibility of grasping the esoteric meaning of the Quran. There are some hadiths narrated from Infallible Imams (peace be upon them) about the esoteric commentary and expounding the inner meaning of some Quranic verses، but these verses are very few. So the question is whether we can grasp the esoteric interpretation and meaning of those Quranic verses with no valid narrated hadiths to discover their inner signification، with regard to the fact that there are limited hadiths on esoteric meaning and only about very few verses. The present paper seeks to prove the possibility (of mystical approach to the Quran) and elaborate on how the language of the Quran is expansible. To this end، intellectual and transmitted foundations (the Quran and hadiths) are provided while referring to the significance of the issue، particularly in present time، and to the role that authentic Islamic mysticism can play in confronting with newly-founded religious and spiritual movements.

It is clear that there is no specific reason for many newly-happened occurrences in the Quran and hadiths and a jurisprudent is obliged to return to such arguments as rational way of conduct، based on which the legal injunctions of such occurrences will be decided. Rational way of conduct will be a proof if it has been formed during infallible Imams’ presence، so that its conclusion from Holy Lawgiver’s view can be proved. However، those existing rational ways of conduct which are known as newly-happened ways of conduct will face with the problem of proving their authority. The present paper seeks to understand Lawgiver’s approval or disapproval of these ways of conduct. In this regard، it cites six proofs in the noble verses of the Quran، Sunna (way of conduct) and rational analysis.