فصلنامه آینه معرفت
پیاپی 75 (تابستان 1402)

The analogy of priority, which means that the reason for the ruling is strong in the subsidiary and the spread of the original ruling to the subsidiary, is one of the arguments used in the Qur'an. Among the cases for which this rule is used is the proof of a new creation and the return of the creatures’ (humans) in the hereafter. The proof of the return of creatures in the resurrection is one of the examples of this discussion. First and foremost, in order to eliminate the polytheists’ argument of improbability, the Qur'an compares the new creation of beings in the resurrection with the original creation arguing that if God is capable of creating from non-existence, a fortiori, He is capable of restoring a creation that is not prior to non-existence. In this regard, it has also been pointed out that both creations are the same in the eyes of God with none accompanied with more hardships compared to the other. Second, as a proof for the new creation and the restoration of man in the resurrection, the power of creating the heavens and the earth, which is more compatible with the mind of those who deny the resurrection, is prioritized as the middle ground in the analogy. It is argued that when God is capable of creating the heavens and the earth, with its greatness and large parts, a fortiori, is capable of restoring the human being, who is only made of sticky mud and has small parts. Under this analogy, the discussion of the similarity between the worldly and the hereafter body and the objectivity of these two bodies after the soul enters the otherworldly body has been discussed. In the present paper, along with the definition of the analogy of priority, the concept and examples of this type of analogy in the verses of the Qur'an are analyzed and explained.

As all possible beings have a special order, determination, and emergence, each of these determinations is governed by a noun that is the origin of its emergence. It is the sovereign name that determines and governs the being’s manifestation.  In the system of creation, by the grace of the Almighty, there is a name ruling over this world and the hereafter, over the past, and over the laws revealed by the Divinity. These ruling names have governments which are endless for some and finite for some others. The names whose governments end are subordinated to other names or return to the essence of Supreme Being. The name that governs a human being is also the ruling and dominant name among his constant names, which is referred to as his "straight path". Therefore, the right path seeker, by taking on or determining and annihilating in his ruling name can achieve his levels of perfection. Of course, due to the comprehensiveness of the human species, in any order or in any world, man is also influenced by the ruling names in the order of the creation system. Among all names, the Exalted Name “Allah” belongs to the domain of the perfect man who is the epicenter of totality of all the names of God's beauty and glory; in this domain, no name prevails another, and this perfect divine body is in extreme moderation of all names. This ancient and eternal position is exclusive and limited to the Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h). Therefore, the perfect human being, in accordance with his divine essence is the origin, reference and medium of the appearance of all the sovereign names and has the position of sovereignty and lordship over them, and is the absolute caliph of the Most High in all levels of existence.

Adopting a descriptive-analytical method, the present study deals with issuing action from Ghazali’s point of view. Consistent with his different perspectives that he assumes, research in the field of Ghazalian studies enjoys coherence and has the quality of opening different windows of insight into the stages of the process of issuing action. As examples, we can refer to involuntary promise and the lack of inconsistency between Ghazali’s topics of discussion with those of the intellectual pillars of psychology. He has stablished the infrastructure of the intellectual pillars of psychology and the structure of action in his early works. He has explained the apparent conflict of his theory of inaccessibility of the essence of things and the philosophical definition of man in Ma'arej al-Quds. The current structure of man, from the deep to the surface structure, is the scientific position of choosing the end, creating enthusiasm through the sensual powers and the power of anger (willful action), or through the power of knowledge (volitional action). Willful enthusiasm belongs to the animal stage and volitional enthusiasm to the stage of man. Its surface structure consists of motor muscles. The necessitas of actualization of choosing the end and non-volitional minds in both mystical and philosophical approaches is reaching the position of dogmatism according to the rank of each human being, which explains the apparent contradiction between opinion and action. Applying will to the structure of action indicates the role of will in performing optional and obligatory actions.

Belief, along with religious and non-religious duties, are among the most important issues addressed by Sharia (Islamic law). It may be claimed that strong arguments can be put forward for the necessity of believing in the principles of religion. This article seeks to provide an answer to the question raised with regard to the validity of certainty as follows: If somebody adopts a false belief through the recognition of his own intellect, or on the contrary, if somebody, through rational reasoning, denies a belief stablished in a religious community, how can the possibility of his worldly and hereafter punishment be justified based on rational reasoning? By examining the rational arguments and the jurists’ injunctions, we find out that since the validity of a decision is inherent, a person who is firm on a theory and performs actions accordingly, or abandons real and self-evident duties, it is impossible to make the actions obligatory contrary to his decision. Also, it can be concluded that although, in practice, it is possible to force him to show commitment or pretend to do so against his will, it is not possible for him to change his belief. Therefore, if his ignorance was his fault, he will be punished for his fault not for acting according to his belief.

Sometimes a person is faced with a disease or sufferings over which he has no control as he receives them directly from God. In such cases, which are interpreted as primary ailments, should God compensate this person? Islamic theologians have addressed this issue under the topic of Awad (compensation). The present article, adopting an analytical and comparative method, first explains the definition of Awad from the point of view of some Shia and Mu'tazili theologians, who have dealt with its conditions, limits and attributes. Then, relying on the opinions of those who agree with the issue of divine Awad, it examines the verses of the 15th prayer in Sahifeh Sajjadieh and shows that Hazrat Sajjad (peace be upon him) was of the same view. He has referred to divine compensation through prayers and supplications.

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.

The Stoics as psychological philosophers and Rumi as a religious psychologist, have paid close attention to enhancing resilience. The present paper is the result of an interdisciplinary study in the field of applied philosophy to describe, explain and compare the thought of the Stoics and Rumi regarding the ways resilience can be enhanced in dealing with the problems of everyday life. The significance of the current research is in providing practical solutions to enhance resilience against distressing events. The assumption is that following these solutions will bring happiness and peace. In the course of the research from the perspective of the Stoics and Rumi, we have identified points of similarity and difference in the of ways resilience can be enhanced. A point of similarity between the two is that both the Stoics and Rumi considered the origin and cause of good and evil to be internal; that is why self-knowledge and ultimately self-actualization are introduced as the most important elements in strengthening resilience in the teachings of these thinkers. On the other hand, the Stoics searched for peace and happiness in philosophy, while Rumi considers happiness in an intuitive connection with God.