hamedeh rastaei jahromi; Aliasghar Mosleh
Abstract
Although the matter of the “Other” have not been considered by Muslim scholars as an independent issue, there is capacity to discuss the matter in all schools of thought in the Islamic world, especially that of mysticism. For this reason, one can examine the “other” in the works ...
Read More
Although the matter of the “Other” have not been considered by Muslim scholars as an independent issue, there is capacity to discuss the matter in all schools of thought in the Islamic world, especially that of mysticism. For this reason, one can examine the “other” in the works of Ibn Arabi as a representative Islamic mysticism and search his intellectual foundations. The fundamentals such as the symbolism of divine names, the widespread adoption of the field of salvation, and the inaccessibility of the whole truth can clarify the position of this well-known mystic against the “other”. One of the most important foundations of Ibn Arabi’s ontology in his approach to the “other” is the symbolism of divine names and considering the “other” as one of the divine names. Avoiding monopoly on truth and knowing the “other” from bliss and salvation is also a positive view towards the “other”. Ibn Arabi’s emphasis on the lack of clarity of the truth and it not being exclusive to a particular group or sect will lead to search for truth in the religion of the “other”.
Saeed Anvari; hamedeh rastaei jahromi
Abstract
The current study attempts to evaluate the claim that Mirdamad and his disciples, such as Mulla Sadra and Mir Seid Ahmad Alavi, considered Suhrawardi a Successors of the Stoics. Since the Stoics have been quoted in a small number of publications in Islamic works, by searching in these sources, all the ...
Read More
The current study attempts to evaluate the claim that Mirdamad and his disciples, such as Mulla Sadra and Mir Seid Ahmad Alavi, considered Suhrawardi a Successors of the Stoics. Since the Stoics have been quoted in a small number of publications in Islamic works, by searching in these sources, all the narrations cited and related to the Stoics are compared with Suhrawardi's views, and about forty similar cases have been considered among their opinions. The results suggest: A) Direct effects: objects as quantity, the different definition of the substance and the accident, form as accident, denial of the prime matter, denial of real condensation and rarefaction, spherical revolutions,and etc. B) Indirect effects: the reduction of the ten categories, the hierarchy of existence, the immateriality of the soul, and etc. It is also examined that on the basis of what evidence Mirdamad and his disciples called Suhrawardi "successors of stoic". Previously, John Wallbridge (2000) attempted to answer the question of why Mulla Sadra regarded Suhrawardi as a "successors of the Stoic". But, his answer has been criticized, and it is hypothesized in the current study that due to link between the "al-aqdamin" (the ancients) in Suhrawardi's works and the stoic's views, Mirdamad Sheikh has called him as an "successors of the stoic".