The root and source of the unity of existence is mysticism، and it has been entered into philosophy from this realm. Perhaps the first philosophical explanation of the mystics’ unity of existence doctrine has been done by Dawwani. But this philosophical explanation has some unjustified and irrational consequences and accessories. Sadra، also، makes his best efforts to give a philosophical explanation of mystics’ unity of existence of doctrine. He did that through abandoning the theory of analogical unity of existence and suggesting a new philosophical system، whose pieces have been mentioned in Asfar (Volume II) and other places of the book and also in the book of Igaz an-naimin (Awakening the sleepers). By this way، he not only has not ended philosophy، but has brought it into a new realm of philosophical thoughts. So، we must design this new philosophical system to understand this important stage of his philosophy، especially to understand his philosophical explanation of personal unity and its valuable accessories. In this paper we describe briefly the philosophical system and the ontology of Dawwani’s approach، and attempt، as much as possible، express his philosophical explanation of unity of existence through an optimistic outlook. Then we will show that even though there are some the similarities between this explanation and Sadra''s philosophical explanation، Dawwani’s approach is self-inconsistent and that is why we will criticize it ultimately. Afterwards، we continue to express the Sadra''s philosophical explanation of mystical unity of existence. So the object of this paper is to compare these two philosophical explanation، reveal their strengths and weaknesses، also the relationship between these two explanations. It will be clear that Sadra''s philosophical explanation is worthy and reasonably defensible through a new philosophical system which has been followed by Sadra and he has referred to it in his books، not in the analogical unity of existence

The relationship between science and philosophy can be examined from various aspects; One of them is the question of the relationship between "scientific description" and "philosophical explanation." empiricists believe that there is no relation between the question of why phenomena are in the position of explanation, and how they are in the position of description and that the boundaries of natural science are independent of metaphysical and physical philosophy. In the meantime, paying attention to the thoughts of Avicenna, who was familiar with both philosophy and natural science, can be useful. In the Avicennian philosophy, explanation differs from the description, but it is not independent. The method of philosophical explanation, both in metaphysical philosophy and in physical philosophy, is effective in the method of scientific description. Thus, methodologically, description is the opposite of prescription, not explanation. Accordingly, without having any model of causal relations, it is not possible to provide a methodical description of natural and scientific phenomena. The main features of this causal model include: distinguishing between causal and intrinsic causality, near and far causality, simple and compound causality, potential and actual causality, and also the effect of causal relations in scientific attribution and reasoning.

The idea of an infinite system of philosophical thought could not be found in the ancient Greek philosophy. In the Islamic world, before the Sheikh Ishraq, infinite in number and infinite in time were be considered in the realm of quantity (essentially) and powers (accidentally). Abolbarkat and then Suhrawardi, referred infinite to the attributes of God and identified God’s perfection with the infinite. The basic questions of the author of this research are: What was Mulla Sadra’s philosophical explanation of the infinite? And what is the result of the accepting the infinite characteristic? The outcomes of this research are: in philosophical thought of Mulla Sadra, semantically, Infinite Including meanings such as Infinite in attribute, ontological infinite and metaontological infinite And from ontological point of view, the infinite Due to the existence of God is existent. Also, to establish God’s personal unity, Philosophical explanation of God’s authority to hearts and negative-positive theology are certain functions of Infinite in the three fields of metaphysics, theology and Anthropology in philosophy of Mulla Sadra.

Suhrawardi has spoken in two ways about the world of ideas: firstly, being a report of personal and mystical experience of his own and other theosophists; and secondly, giving a philosophical explanation in demonstrative way. Philosophical explanation of Suhrawardi on justification of the world of ideas has been occurred through ontological justifying of some phenomena which we call it here non-foundational approach.In this paper, features and the role of the world of ideas are proposed, and then ontological explanation of the world of Ideas, according to Suhrawardi’s approach, will be explained. Then, ontological explanation of the world of Ideas, as a requisite of ontological view of Suhrawardi, according to the foundational approach will be explored. Finally, by pointing to the differences between the two approaches, it will be shown that deficiencies and ambiguities in philosophy of Suhrawardi have mainly arisen from the non-foundational approach in ontological justification of the world of Ideas.

one of the religious teachings is that of book of actions that according to the verses and sayings contain all acts, intentions and personal beliefs of anyone. and at the day of Judgment it is given to human from his left or right side depending on his actions, and because this book is not a mundane book Muslim scholars have been confronted with the question: What is the truth of book of actions. One of the important responses to these questions is Mulla Sadra's philosophical explanation. He believes that this book is human spirit. This article, explains his philosophical explanation and describes his principles and his results. and then shows that this explanation is not sufficient because not only is incompatible with the teachings of his philosophy, but it is incompatible with some religious teachings.

Some of the Islamic philosophers such as Farabi and Mulla Sadra supporting the belief in sacred and divine revelation began to give a philosophical explanation in the field. In philosophical explanation of revelation, revealed facts can be divided into two: general and particular, perceived respectively by the Prophet`s intellect and imagination. Both the philosophers when explaining Divine revelation have emphasized on the important role of the imaginary faculty for receiving particular revealed facts. Again, as they believed, the faculty of imagination can understand general facts of revelation by turning the facts to objective and imaginary senses. For the philosophers both, the source of general facts has been known to be active intellect But there may be found a case of difference when studying the philosopher`s views on the source of particular facts. As is understood by Farabi, the source of particular facts is the same as that of general facts. But for Mulla Sadra, the source of particular facts has been known as “imaginary universe.” Therefore, with regard to the importance of imaginary faculty in the phenomenon of revelation the author has attended to the compare the views of the philosophers in this field.

Philosophical explanation of religious concepts is one of the missions of Islamic philosophy. What was known as reincarnation before Mulla Sadra is just the worldly reincarnation (tanāsukh mulkī) in the sense of removal of the soul from one body and its transference into another one. For explaining some of the religious concepts, Mulla Sadra fabricated another term for incarnation: celestial reincarnation (tanāsukh malakūtī), expositing many religious discussions and mystical experiences by using it. Here, we have firstly dealt with the special foundations of Mulla Sadra’s philosophy that help us in explaining the concept of reincarnation and its various types; then, we have stated his philosophical explanation of celestial reincarnation. Afterwards, we have investigated those Quranic verses that show various types of reincarnation. Finally, we have summarized the discussions related to reincarnation in traditions.

One of the phenomena studied in parapsychology is Telekinesis. This phenomenon can be studied from two empirical and philosophical perspectives, the first of which proves the existence of a Telekinesis and the second of which is the intellectual possibility and explanation of its existence.To understand Ibn Sina's philosophical explanation of Telekinesis, we must recognize the position of the principle of causality, how the soul interacts with matter, and also the meanings of nature from Ibn Sina's point of view.Ibn Sina, without denying the principle of causality and by expanding its meaning, which in addition to physical causality, also includes non-physical causality, considers Telekinesis as a natural phenomenon, which is in accordance with the general order of the world and the result of expanding the scope of soul activity; from the body to the world.One of the phenomena studied in parapsychology is Telekinesis. This phenomenon can be studied from two empirical and philosophical perspectives, the first of which proves the existence of a Telekinesis and the second of which is the intellectual possibility and explanation of its existence.To understand Ibn Sina's philosophical explanation of Telekinesis, we must recognize the position of the principle of causality, how the soul interacts with matter, and also the meanings of nature from Ibn Sina's point of view.Ibn Sina, without denying the principle of causality and by expanding its meaning, which in addition to physical causality, also includes non-physical causality, considers Telekinesis as a natural phenomenon, which is in accordance with the general order of the world and the result of expanding the scope of soul activity; from the body to the world.

Adopting new foundations in transcendental wisdom, Mulla Sadra has developed renewed viewpoints toward study of the soul. He has offered new explanations for souls’ life and quality of its creation and laid a proper groundwork for portraying the evolution of soul between death and resurrection by picturing the souls’ life through examples and generalizing the substantial motion to substantiality of the soul. Authors are to answer whether any analysis of evolution and nature of the soul can offer a philosophical explanation for the purgatorial evolution of the soul. It is concluded that although Mulla Sadra has adopted inconsistent positions toward the evolution of soul and refrains from definitive agreement with the obstacles toward any explanation for evolution of soul between death and resurrection, philosophical foundations of his transcendental wisdom enjoy potential capabilities for logical explanation in this regard. In addition, he has implicitly confirmed the purgatorial evolution of soul in his commentaries and his theological and philosophical views.

This article is aimed at a Qur’ānic explanation of one of the most important discourses brought up in the field of philosophical humanism, i.e., the priority and posteriority of the soul over the body. This discourse has so far been more of interest to the philosophers and theologians and its Qur’ānic-philosophical explanation has been less dealt with. Thus, the present research has undertaken the Qur’ānic-philosophical analysis of this issue. Accordingly, first, it touches upon the meanings of soul in the Qur’ān, then it explains the most important philosophical viewpoints concerning the priority and posteriority of the soul, and finally goes on to explain the Qur’ān’s perspective concerning this issue. In order to explain the Qur’ān’s perspective, it first explains the realistic and allegorical exegetical viewpoints, the world of pre-existence (dhar), and the theory of Divine Dominion (malakūt) and finally confirms it by referring to the theory of Divine Dominion as evidence that is adopted from Mullā Ṣadrā’s viewpoint. In the end, it is concluded that the Qur’ān’s perspective is more compatible with the viewpoint of Mullā Ṣadrā who believes in the priority of body over soul.