The origin of mystical interpretations, which is somehow related to the school of Islamic mysticism, is one of the important issues in understanding the style and method of mystical interpretation and its basic elements, and especially the exchange effect of this school and the influence of Qur'anic interpretation method from the non-Islamic teachings. This article uses analytical and descriptive methods, while analyzing and re-reading mystical ideas in Judaism and Christianity, seeks to answer the question of the relationship between mystical interpretations and Judeo-Christian mystical schools. The most important result of this study is that the influence of the teachings of mystical schools such as Christian and Jewish mysticism on Islamic mysticism and mystical interpretations has been only in order to complete or enrich the teachings of this school and the method of interpretation. Likewise, the assumption that mysticism and mystical interpretation must inevitably have a non-Islamic origin is unjustified and unacceptable; although, over the years, various philosophical and religious ideas have entered this process.

Hadith is one of the most important sources of the Holy Qur'an. In this study, we sought to answer the question of how much it has been noted in the mystical interpretations of Imam Sadiq (A.S.)? Also, how much do these interpretations have been used of narrations of Imam in Haghayegh al-Tafsir? Almost all of them are one of the most important licenses of interpretation, or the cause of the writing of commentary, are narrations of Imam Sadiq (A.S.). The most narrations have been related to the fourteenth century. Before the fourteenth century, the number of hadiths used is fluctuating, and there are no definite orders and hampered. The extent of the meaning of Imam's words has caused Commentators to use them in various issues, such as the dignity of verses, the virtues of Sura, the verses of Jurisprudence, interpretation, esoteric commentary, etc. The words of the Imam, in explaining the divine knowledges, fades the presence of the other interpreters, and in the esoteric commentary and the expression of the divine truths, No one is comparable to him. Only in the Arayes al-Bayan and Lata'if al-Isharat, the traditions attributed to the imam in the Haghayegh al-Tafsir are the main source and in the rest of the books of interpretation, very little is referred to this source.

One of the Quran well-known interpretive methods is the mystical interpretation with a long period record besides the other methods such as theological, philosophic, jurisprudential, literary methods. In 14th century this interpretative attitude took place in two different paths: classical and non-classical. The most important goal of this paper is the examination of Abbas Ali Keyvan Ghazvini’s interpretative method. His attitude is mystical and for instance of its differences from the prior mystical interpretations; we should regard it as one of the first non-classical mystical interpretations. The most important characteristic of interpretative method of Ghazvini is excessive attention to the external appearance of the words in comparison with the prior ones, lack fidelity to the antecedents’ discourses, not applying to the infallibles’ traditions and the companions and an approximate approach between Islamic schools. These different attitudes and approaches to the Quran and interpretation which have differentiated him from his contemporaries.

Scholars of the Qur'anic sciences have proposed various views on mystical interpretation. Among these thinkers is Muhammad Hadi Ma'refat. In his opinion, the documentaries (dependent) of the commentaries of the people of cognition are personal tastes and their interpretations are from the category of exegesis by opinion. Also, the meaning of the word interior which is mentioned in the narrations is a non-evident per nexum indication and also mystical interpretations are related to the association of meanings. In the present article, after collecting the data by library method, his view on mystical and esoteric exegesis has been evaluated analytically and it has been concluded that: Firstly, part of the mystics' interpretations is to express the esoteric meanings of the Qur'an and they exegete the verses and they have used common methods of understanding the text. Secondly, the exegesis of the Qur'an is not non-evident per nexum indication, but often means the inner meaning of the word of revelation and sometimes means adaptation. Thirdly, mystical exegesis is not about the association of meanings, but are references and subtleties that have entered the hearts of the people of cognition after the esoteric (internal) recitation of the Qur'an and is considered as new understanding, and in most cases there was no mental background around it to be considered with the association of meanings.

Although there is no religious diversity in mystical texts but couldn’t ignore them in mystical books. The present study which writes with comparative-analytic method, examines differences and consistencies of mystical interpretations’’ books of Fariqain, in content and context, with attaching to story of Muses (PUH) and Khezr (PUH). Being methodical in complaining the text, associating the concept of Soluk and training mystical language are important consistencies of mystical interpretation’s text. Consideration and concentration on words, especial attitude on some concepts such as Velayat and attempting to coherent mystical terms also are differences of these two kinds of interpretation.

Interpreting the verses of the Quran, which had already begun while the Prophet was still living, received attention in the time of the Companions and further developed and expanded at the time of Tabein (i.e. close followers)? With the inflow of new intellectual views to the developing Islamic culture, different perspectives and approaches to the interpretation of the Quran were developed. Among these was the mystic approach. The mystic approach enjoys a distinguished position since the interpretations of verses within this approach not only closely correspond with the Quran and Sunnat (i.e. the Prophet’s way), but also contain a variety of subtle and clever observations.
A descriptive-analytical approach was adopted in this study to review the mystic approaches after Ibn Arabi and how they have evolved, and also to explore the extent and type of influence caused by Ibn Arabi on mystical interpretations of the Quran. The findings of the study suggest that mystical approaches to the interpretation of the Quran were largely based on piety and Shariat (i.e. strict religious conventions) up until the seventh century (in Hijra lunar calendar), after which more interpretive approaches have received attention under the influence of Ibn Arabi’s views and his work.

The testaments, as the holy books of Jews and Christians, due to some verses in the Quran, have been considered by Muslim interpreters over and over, and every one of them has paid their own attention according to their own approach, dealing with them from different aspects. In this regard, due to the difference of approaches by mystics in interpreting the Quran and the mysterious aspects of the Quran and their paraphrasing approaches toward the holy book, the investigation and case study of this idea in the mystical interpretation could open new horizons for the Quran researchers. To this end, the paper tries to collect and first hand information and data on a library study method with a focus on the two areas of lexicology and historical study based on the available historical approach together with descriptive solution regardless of the philosophical presuppositions, dealing with the case study of dialogues on the testaments distortion within mystical interpretations. This paper concludes by the process and analysis of acquired information that first there was nothing talked about the distortion of the testaments in mystical interpretations up to the late fourth century. It appears that the originality of the testaments was dominant on mystical interpretations until the late fourth century. Second, this belief initiated in the fifth century with Qashirieh’s notion on the distortion of the testaments after whom this notion has been explained in the two types of spiritual and verbal ones under the verses concerning the testaments distortions in majority of interpretations.

In mystical and traditional exegeses the word paraphrase is of essential importance. Among traditional exegeses, Feyz Kashani’s Exegesis is important for its inclusion of paraphrases offered by the Holy Shia Imams and some of Feyz’s own paraphrases are of special importance. Among mystical exegeses, too, Ibn ‘Arabi’s exegesis includes paraphrases relying on mystical paraphrases. Comparing these two works focusing on concepts and methods can clarify the meaning of this act in both areas. In the mentioned exegeses, sometimes because of methodological similarity in studying the meaning of a Quranic verses or ayahs, the paraphrases are similar. However, in most other cases, there are essential differences between the paraphrases. This article attempts to study Ibn ‘Arabi’s and Feyz’s approach to paraphrasing both in theory and practice; thereby introducing the similarities and differences.

The interpretation of “Bian al-Sa’adah” is one of the most important and complete Shia mystical interpretations, which can be discussed in terms of theological, jurisprudential and social issues despite the mystical approach. The question is, how have mystical interpretations such as the expression of happiness dealt with the science of readings? In other words, the significant issue is whether the science of readings can be related to the mystical approach of the commentator. The current research has evaluated the position and function of the issue of readings in the interpretation of the expression of happiness with the descriptive-analytical method. The results of the research indicate: that the position of recitations in Gonabadi’s viewpoint has a significant place compared to his contemporary commentators, in such a way that he has shown special attention to the discussion of recitations and his intellectual origin is the origin of a method with a non-hadith approach. In the discussion of recitations, Gonabadi sometimes prefers famous and sometimes non-famous recitations in terms of their compatibility with the context of the verses, narrative preferences, and semantic explanation; sometimes he paid attention to both readings and left the judgment between them. The function of readings in the interpretation of this work can be presented around three subjects: a) expansion and development in the meaning of the verse; b) explaining the meaning of the verse; c) clearing the ambiguity of the meaning of the verse. Of course, the commentator’s mystical approach has not had any effect on the discussion of readings.

Mystical interpretation is an approach applied by the commentators of the Qur’an to disclose its esoteric meaning. The main feature of this approach that dates back to pre-Islamic religious texts is emphasis on the esoteric and symbolic interpretation. Sufis and Gnostics, based on their intuitions, observations, and their mystic knowledge, interpreted the Qur’an in a distinct manner from other commentators.Josef is one of the most mystically interpreted surahs. In this inquiry, ten of these interpretations are being treated from a mystical approach and the transformation of mystical outlook is being considered. The results indicate that while the commentators had applied both theoretical and practical mysticism approaches to the interpretation of the surah, they had profited more from the religious texts prior to the Qur’an and even sometimes had provided interpretations based on their mystical tastings. The interpretations provided of the surah up to the seventh century were based on asceticism and religious Law, however, later the teachings of Ibn Arabi and the effect he left among his followers raised the attention of commentators to esoteric interpretation.