جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "philosophy of mysticism" در نشریات گروه "فلسفه و کلام"

This paper deals with the possibility of interaction between the two rational knowledges, namely philosophy and mysticism, and reaches the cooperation of the two with each other. Mulla Sadra's philosophy has revealed the joining and combining of these two knowledges and has placed reasoning next to observation. This combination cannot be realized unless inconsistent or seemingly inconsistent factors are rejected. Just as the rejection of polemic method from the argumentative knowledge of theology has placed it beside the argumentative knowledge of philosophy, the predominance of common or consistent rules and foundations between the ability to argue and the ability of intuition in the power of reason has brought the two knowledges, namely, mysticism and philosophy, closer to each other. The reason, in the position of argumentation, although fundamentally unable to pass into a section of reality, it makes the passage of intuition into the revealed part rationable and understandable and places it available to all by demonstrative syllogism. In this way, the knowledge of logic was employed to regulate the finding of intuitions, and the two knowledges of mysticism and philosophy, came together with two sets of concepts and rules in a combined form.

One proposed solution to address the validity of mystical experiences for non-mystics is to emphasize their frequency (tawatur). This approach suggests that certain mystical claims can be considered valid due to multiple reports from different mystics. This solution, which has been considered in Mulla Sadra's philosophy after Suhrawardi, can be seen as one of the best approaches in addressing the mentioned issue. However, even in recent research in the field of philosophy of mysticism and religion, the details of this solution have not been fully investigated. This article aims to logically formulate and elaborate on this solution using an analytical-descriptive approach, discussing key components, assumptions, and challenges. The necessary steps to achieve this goal can be outlined in six stages: first, examining the inherent validity of mystical experiences for the mystic themselves; second, establishing the possibility of sharing in mystical experiences; third, proving the occurrence of this sharing through the existence of an effective cause and the absence of obstacles; fourth, demonstrating the frequency (tawatur) of mystical experiences with necessary and sufficient conditions; fifth, discussing the authenticity and validity of tawatur; and finally, demonstrating the effectiveness of authentic tawatur in solving the problem of generalizing mystical experiences. In conclusion, if the claim of tawatur in a mystical experience successfully passes through these stages, it can be considered valid for non-mystics as well.

Ibn Khaldun (732-808 A.H.), as the founder of civil engineering, is often known as a philosopher of history, sociologist and civilizational scientist; however, his research is extended to many fields of knowledge of his era with valuable outcomes one of which is the philosophy of mysticism, which has not yet received due research attention. In this article, his specific point of view in this field is analyzed; the issues dealt with are originality, epistemology and mystical perceptions, and the unity of existence from the standpoint of his specefic mystic philosophy with a special analytic focus on his major views on these issues. The purpose of this descriptive study is to understand Ibn Khaldun’s sympathy with mysticism adopting a library research methos with reference to his major works. The results clearly show that Ibn Khaldun, though not a formal mystic, had a great tendency towards mysticism.

Most philosophers believe the relation between Haq (God) and the creation is homogeneity of the present Haq and the creation; i.e. they are both real existents although there are different opinions regarding the criterion of their existences. The peripatetic believe that creatures have simple realities and are completely different while the illuminati believe the creatures are essences and the philosophers of transcendental wisdom believe the creatures are independent or relative existence. The mystics reject any kind of homogeneity between Haq and the creatures, and consider Haq as a real existence and the creation as existence-like or virtual objects; and according to the Holy Qur’an and Islamic tradition, homogeneity between the two is incorrect.
It seems the mystics’ view has rational and narrational reasons and all the three views of philosophers – the school of peripatetics, illuminati, and transcendental wisdom – have plenty of rational criticisms, which make them impossible to admit. Therefore the idea of non-homogeneity of Haq (God) and the creation – which means that Haq is a real existence and is a necessary being by itself but the creatures are by accident and virtual - is approved with rational and narrational reasons and should be accepted.

Iqbal Lahori is one of the thinkers of the contemporary period and one of the pioneers who, considering the requirements of the new era, considered the traditional ways of defending religion to be insufficient, but also harmful. He tried to make the necessity and correctness of the teachings of religion in a new, permit and acceptable way. This study, which is formulated in a descriptive-critical way, first explains Iqbal's critiques of Islamic philosophy, theology and mysticism, and then criticizes it after expressing Iqbal's plan. In Iqbal's innovative design, in order to defend religion, the experimental sciences must first be used. He used "religious experience" and then turned his attention to the social issues of religion. The findings of study show that Iqbal's attention to empirical knowledge and the need to use it in words is acceptable and necessary; But what he says about abandoning traditional philosophy and theology is not true.

On what mysticism, some believe that mysticism is nothing but an artistic view at theology and religion. In this article, by descriptive, analytical, and critical method, seeks to answer this question: Has this view succeeded in showing the essential features of mysticism? First, a brief report on this viewpoint is presented. According to the definition of mysticism that is influenced by the artistic theories of the school of Russian formalism, mysticism is an art form. Imagination, mystery, affection and the many meanings that are the main components of art are also essential elements of mysticism. Also, every religious experience is a mystical experience, and every mystical experience is an artistic experience. Then the view of the Muslim mystics about the truth of mysticism and its various aspects is discussed, according to which mysticism is an intuitive cognition, and it is also the result of inner refinement of soul and inner purification. At the end, the author's comments on "equality of mysticism with artistic view of theology and religion" are expressed, it turns out that this view is without sufficient reasoning and evidence, It also has major bug.

The main claim of the separationists is the separation of revelation from reason and intuition. To obtain religious teachings, as they claim, there must be a distinction between reason and intuition on one hand, and revelation on the other. To justify their claim, they use various methods. One of them is attributing this idea to great religious figures and personages. Accordingly, Muhammad Reza Hakimi, in many of his works, attributes this theory to Allama Tabatabai, introducing him as the defender of the theory of separation so that he may attract some attention to the claims of separationists. To better analyze this claim by Mr. Hakimi, we have first extracted two main axes of his claim, then analyzed them separately. Having analyzed those axes through destructive and constructive arguments, we made it clear that first Allama Tabatabai does not believe in the separationists’ claim, and second, Muhammad Reza Hakimi has mixed up affirmation with assertion, which then has led to the semantic distortion of Allama Tabatabai’s statement.

Due to the high position of the doctrine of resurrection in religious texts, Muslim thinkers have investigated and analyzed the question of resurrection from an ontological view or for the purpose of proving or defending the religious doctrines. Resting on creation principles, some theologians and philosophers believe that resurrection is either corporeal or spiritual. But, like most Muslim thinkers, mystics consider this restriction as in complete, and believe in its corporeal and spiritual property. In presenting and expounding this view, mystics keep aloof from other thinkers. They adhere to such principles like the order of manifestation, the reality of man, death and resurrection. In stressing the differences between the variant emanations of Judgment day, they hold that man will not necessarily be resurrected in a natural and elemental body, and that in the dwelling place of Paradise and Hell, the dwellers of Hell have a natural and elemental bodies and the dwellers of Paradise have natural and gentle bodies.

In philosophical texts, the primary focus is on proving The Necessary, and monotheism is taken into account as derivatives of proving The Necessary while mystical texts have their focus on monotheism. Rather than focusing on proof of Gods existence, Qurans focus is on monotheism. Firstly, philosophers try to recognize God by acquiring and holistic knowledge and secondly, in philosophy, both God and creatures are from types of existence but each one has a different level of existence, while mystic has non conceptual knowledge about God and for him, only God is existed and except God nothing else neither himself nor any other creature is existed. When the Quran is talking about God, obviously, it mentions a personal God. Focusing on three groups of Islamic texts (Quran text, Mystical texts, and philosophical texts) the paper has been an attempt to analyze the attitude of each text about Proofs of Gods Existence and at the second view, the similarities and differences of these three approaches are mentioned.

The emergence of mystical (quasi-mystical) experiences following the consumption of psychedelic drugs (hallucinogens) is one of those important proofs for their claimants to demolish epistemological validity of mystical experiences (mystical unveilings). By resorting to such deduction they try to claim that mystical experiences may always be aroused from abnormal physiological states of their experiencers, so they conclude that these experiences are not valid and cannot be confirmed that they manifest the reality.This article aims at investigating different aspects of the argument so as to show that it is deeply flawed because firstly, this argument is based on the existence of cognation between the experiences achieved by psychedelic drug users and those achieved by mystics and this is the case which cannot be proved by alleged evidences; secondly, even in case that the cognation in question is proved, it will exist between the former and those mystical experiences of extrovertive kind; thirdly, considering the extrovertive mystical experiences as invalid due to considering them as congeneric with quasi-mystical experiences achieved by psychedelic drugs is not accepted; fourthly, there is no reason represented proving the invalidity of quasi-mystical experiences. It has also been discussed in this article the criticism on the principle of “causal indifference” by Stace and also the Muslim philosopher's consideration toward the possibility of occurrence of perceptual connections with esoteric issues.

It's not a long time that the philosophy of mysticism as a new born scientific field, has occupied the minds of scholars of this field. It is to be admitted that this subject has been studied from different perspectives; because some have just explained the ‘eight headings of sciences’ {the bases of science discussed before entering its discussions}, and some have seen the realities of existence philosophically and analytically, and have criticized and evaluated its bases, criterion and frame-works and have chosen a holistic, external and comprehensive perspective. The philosophy of mysticism studies subjects such as: the essence of mysticism, mysticism and religious experience – their similarities and differences, mysticism and inexplicability, the possibility of having a mystical experience and the validity of mystical intuition, the goal and functions of mysticism and some other similar subjects.I believes the discussions of this field are completely open and untouched; and due to the importance of mysticism and its position among other sciences and the necessity of preventing deviation and going to the extremes in this field, the discussions of this subject is a greater duty for the discussers. Yet I believe that the present article includes some introductory and selected discussions which should be completed by specialists.

All major spiritual traditions around the globe develop paths to salvation have particular teachings and protect the deposit of their beliefs and shared faith. Each religion translates the original mystical experience of its founder in terms of their own cultural heritage.A philosophy of religion tries to understand the nature of the Divine, irrespective of these cultural differents.A philosophies of mysticism goes a step further and tries to grasp the nature of the experience founding the original community.The philosophy of mysticism includes some subjects such as the nature of mysticism and mystical experience, varieties of mystical experiences, the relationship between mystical experiences and religious experiences, mystical epistemology, the language of mysticism and many other philosophical investigations and considerations on mystical experiences.In this Article we try to refer to these issues in base of the most valid philosophical and mystical works, hoping that in which the researchers and other readers interested in the field of philosophy, mysticism and philosophy of mysticism may find their favorite subjects and develop some of them.