---

Some muslim scholars and theologians believe in monotheistic creation, but others believe that Allah The Almighty has inspired monotheism to man after his creation. Aiming to investigate the collection of Mulla Sadra's works on monotheism (tawhid) and its correspondent beliefs, the Topic-based Discourse Analysis Model (See Mazinani, Alizadeh, and Azad, 1397) was applied. The results were categorised in three sections: claims, warrants/topos, and certainty in assertion. Sadra claims that the belief in the monotheism is Man's very nature and a necessity for his existence. He has made most of his claims by refering to Quranic verses and hadiths by their explicit quotation, implication and interpretation. In the maze of this important matter, this philosopher occasionally takes an implicit rational position by denoting the topos such as "benefit", "harm", "fundamental need", "necessity", "fulfillment of treaties", "trustworthiness" "Pressure", and "attribution", which these can also be infered from the quoted verses and hadiths. Of course, such kind of argumentation by Mulla Sadra makes it difficult for non-Muslims and rationalists to accept his claims and theory. In all the data considered, however, an influential decisive declarative tone prevails in the claims so that no words or signs of doubt or any item suggesting Mitigation Strategy were observed. In the same vein, the Intensification Sterategy application was nearly observed in 20% of the data, and the processes of negation and passivization with their specific function were seen in 10% of the data.

---

---

---

Mullah Rajab Ali Tabrizi is one of the philosophers concerned about the issue of "verbal or spiritual sharing of the concept of existence". While referring to some of the predecessors' opinions, Tabrizi is based on some ontological foundations. From an epistemological point of view, Tabrizi believed in a close relationship between concepts and examples. Therefore, one cannot expect such a realist thinker to rule on a concept such as existence, regardless of its examples. Also, Tabrizi's disbelief in credit concepts in philosophy aligns with his opinion on the verbal sharing of existence. Contrary to Khatunabadi's theory, this point was not the main reason for Hakim's tendency towards the idea of verbal sharing; Rather, Tabrizi's main addressee in this matter is Mulla-Sadra, who has a special understanding of verbal sharing and based on it, he puts forward the challenging idea of doubting the truth of existence, which Tabrizi does not accept.

---

Relying on the psychological theories of Ibn Sina and Mulla Sadra, this argument examines the movement of the human soul in two stages: “when the soul is connected to the natural body” and “after its separation from the natural body”. By demonstrating the possibility of movement in the immaterial soul, it is also possible to prove and explain the movement of other non-material beings. When the soul is connected to the natural body, the unified human soul can move and change independently of the power and matter within the body. This independence suggests that other non-material beings can also undergo movement without reliance on matter. However, after the soul is separated from the material body, Ibn Sina considers the possibility of the soul’s evolutionary movement but lacks sufficient grounds to prove it. In contrast, Mulla Sadra explicitly denies the evolution of the soul in the intermediate state but provides psychological foundations that support the possibility of the soul's evolution. These same principles can also demonstrate and explain the movement of other immaterial beings.
 

---

Mulla Sadra and Heidegger have dealt with nature and the call of conscience in their ontology. The main question is whether there are any commonalities between the theory of nature and the call of conscience. The research findings indicate some commonalities between the call of conscience in Heidegger's thought and nature in Mulla Sadra's philosophy. Making man transcendent, discovering the meaning of life, discovering the inherent poverty of man, adapting to the fluid existence and instability of human nature, and finding a foundation based on consciousness are some of the commonalities of these two concepts. The most important difference is that God has an important place in nature but does not play a role in Heidegger's concept of conscience. Of course, some commentators of Heidegger's thought have presented a mystical interpretation, in which case a greater affinity can be established between these two concepts.
 

---

"Language" and its related issues are one of the most challenging aspects of philosophy and new critical approaches in reading religious texts. This is highly important in postmodern critical approaches and especially the Derridian reading of texts, which is one of the tools of some neo-Mu'tzalites in reading the Quranic text due to the authenticity of the language in these approaches. This has caused serious challenges due to its distinctive view on language. In this regard, the present research aims to "explain" two different views from the perspective of Derrida and Mulla Sadra in order to provide the conditions for the visibility of two approaches to being and knowledge through the window of language and the extent of the possibility of such readings with an analytical-comparative method. The findings of the research illustrate Mulla Sadra's view of existence, knowledge, and language, and his belief in the system of formation and education, which is derived from three sources of knowledge, the intellect, the heart, and revelation, and the divine language which has three creative stages. Considering the formative and legislative as well as the sub-territorial features of human language, Derrida's view on the third linguistic level can be examined from this point of view, and due to Derrida's failure to proceed from the intellectual-philosophical method, it was argued that he could not go beyond the "verbal" stage (in the epistemic system of creation.

1. Introduction
Contemporary reading of Holy Quran through critical and linguistic approaches based on the philosophical and post-modern criticism by some neo-Mu'tzalites has creates serious challenges for the Islamic communities. For example, Nasr Hamed Abuzayd mentions in his book On the Meaning of Text that although language is one of the most important tools of social communication and culture, one cannot consider any text out of culture and the actual reality of that text. Without any distinction between the language of divinity and material dialectics, he considers the language of Quran as a cultural construct. Considering the importance and status of language, truth, meaning, and elements of different readings, this study focuses on two Islamic and western thinkers’ thoughts on the relationship between truth and being. In other words, the study analyzes the ideas of Mulla Sadra – considered by some as the representation of post-modern Islamic civilization – and Derrida – as a Jew thinker familiar with mysticism – to compare their approaches regarding language. It compares and contrasts their ideas on language to investigate language as a whole, and the principles and meta-structures in detail. Therefore, this analytic-comparative study happens within comparative philosophy and explanatory framework to compare a phenomenon with its samples to realize the two approaches regarding knowledge and being from the linguistic point of view. It is evident that the comparative approach toward this topic can shed light on the differences regarding the theories and ideas of these two thinkers, and show the similarities in their views on language. The aim is to answer the following research questions:
1. What is the role of language regarding being and knowledge in Quranic-based approaches of Mulla Sadra and Derrida?
2. How far Mulla Sadra’s reading of Quran’s language can leave space for Derridian reading of this text?
Accordingly, the following hypotheses were put forth:
1. It seems that the approaches of these two thinkers regarding language is very similar and both prioritize language to being and knowledge.
2. Considering the hypothesis on the similarity between the two approaches on language, one can claim that Mulla Sadra’s approach and his philosophical view on Quran affirms the Derridian approach to the same text.

2. Findings
Mulla Sadra relies on three sources of intellect, heart, and revelation, and three schemes of originality of being, suspicion of existence and intrinsic movement which refer to independence of being, meaning that the divine and being in the hierarchical system is based on cause and effect. The first cause is the divine force which is the speaker, and the speech is the actual potential. The God’s speech is the final outcome of its perfectionism which appears in two forms of non-verbal and verbal which is realized through manifestation and representation of the world, and the other one is verbal which occurs through the writing of Quran for understanding the world. God manifested in its speech and is the actual being. The world happens through the divine speech. The divine speech is on its own (the world) and it is prior to knowing. This priority of language to being is the commonality between Derrida and Mulla Sadra which confirms the first hypothesis of the research, the difference being that Derrida is human’s speech unlike the divine word, and it is not based on a perfect being borrowed from language. It also does not go beyond the reliance on others from Mulla Sadra’s perspective. Based on Mulla Sadra, Quran is God’s speech and a reference. However, Derrida only believes in the written and even departs it from the status of a book.
Based on Mulla Sadra, to understand the divine language, one needs a learned science and divine one, but Derrida only relies on the learned science since he does not go beyond the intellectual-philosophical level.
Based on Mulla Sadra’s approach and his theory of integrity of being, the invented speech and the religious one are based on a holistic and hierarchical being, not a plural and diverse meaning, but a deep-seated one. The level of understanding depends on the reader which is different from that of Derrida’s which is based on plurality of meaning. In Mulla Sadra’s approach, the speaker in the Quranic text is an infinite being, an actual presence. Understanding this presence is based on the feature of comprehension, the lack of which is the lack of comprehension. Therefore, the language of Quran is a technical language.
The divine speech is an actual action and the meaning of speech is actual speech. In religious words, the purpose is non-verbal, however, in both cases, presence and purpose are unchangeable. Therefore, based on Mulla Sadra’s approach, Quranic text does not welcome Derridian reading. Accordingly, the second hypothesis is rejected and some Mu'tzalites’ reading of Quran which are based on Derrida’s theory needs revision.
According to Mulla Sadra’s ideas on human’s speech, as human is a representation and sample of the divine, and a lower version, he can reach the actual divine speech if perfection happens for him as well, which can on its own account bring along the divine names for him, and all three aspects of divine speech in invention, interpretation, and realization manifest within the person. Nevertheless, when human stands in lower position where the actual knowledge is not within his reach, using language at the lowest possible level of asking for things through language, the meaning of speech is anything but speech, which merely means words and verbal speech. Human should dwell on a lowering curving path through manifestation and understanding in order to reach knowing, after which the rising path leads to development. Therefore, knowing is prior to language, and language is representation.
Derrida’s approach is based on the lowest level of language. Based on his own assumptions and philosophical mentality, Derrida does not try to achieve perfect truth and divine knowledge, since this divine world is denied in his western metaphysics, centering human on its conception, which is surprisingly rejected by the post-modernists. Although one cannot ignore postmodernism's spirituality, even as some consider some type of postmodernism as a return to religion, this return is thoroughly individual spirituality which does not rely on any truth. However, the religious spirituality is absolutely perfectionist and divine. Nonetheless, Derrida’s reading is the lowest possible level of human language which occurs in material world, though one can claim based on Mulla Sadra’s approach that this level of reading is not actually possible as words are merely resources through which the level of some underlying absolute meaning are accessible, not a source of plural meaning.
Although Derrida relates the world as God’s writing due to his Jewish background, and like Mulla Sadra, considers the word as the cause of being, he traps God within the language. Mulla Sadra, however, posing the theory of being, considers God the cause of all causes, which has been caused before anything, and language, compared to the perfect being, is the occurred and secondary feature. If both of these figures consider the world as a part of God’s written, Mulla Sadra believes in the world as the actual and descriptive representation of the higher perfect speech and being, while Derrida distinguishes the writing from the book and looks for plural meaning and evolution of the world based on the holy book. It should also be mentioned that writing and speech is fundamentally different from the perspective of these two thinkers

 

---

During the last centuries, great religious traditions as well as prominent philosophical and theological schools have been facing the so-called "problem of evil" and trying to solve it in a reasonable and convincing way. This paper seeks to explore Muslim philosophers' approach to the problem and examine their proposed solutions for it. After the main versions of the problem in Islamic philosophy are briefly sketched, the author explains its view about the non-existential nature of evil. At this stage, he discusses the challenge of "apprehensional evil" and three reactions to it. Then he turns to three main solutions proposed by Muslim philosophers in order to meet three versions of the problem of evil, i.e., the problem of evils and God's decree, the problem of creation-dualism and the problem of evils and Divine wisdom.

---

Therefore, our main question is what semiotic model can be sought in the context of these philosophical theories, what is the evolutionary relationship of these models with each other and what is the relationship between the Iranian semiotic model and the West.
The findings show in the Iranian philosophical tradition, in the heritage of Farabi and Avicenna, an epistemic system which has roots in Aristotelian and Neoplatonic thinking based on rational presupposition of priori categories. To them, the beginning of the sign is where the active intellect adapts the forms of a prior art imaginable to material matters. As a result, Farabi and Avicenna represent a semiotic system in a modern sense. But Suhrawardi and Mulla Sadra introduce an evolutionary epistemic system, indicating the beginning of the abstract movement of the thinkers. This theory is similar to the ideas of the Renaissance in Europe and adapts to the modernist theories of semiotics. According Suhrawardi and Mulla Sadra, there are no selfsame signs. In their semiotics, except by the mind, the sign cannot reach the field of creativity and semantic interpretation. For them, the sign flows through the steady evolution of sensory differentiation into abstract and collective space. We show in his paper the usefulness of this implicit semiotics as a method for textual analyzing by analyzing a visual-verbal literary text.
 

---

---

Providing an exact explication of rationality in a way that would lead to the explication of the scope of rational discourse is among the most fundamental problems of philosophers. In the current essay the author struggles to reach a comprehensive definition of rationality via an exact description and analysis of ideas of Mulla Sadra (1571-1641) as the most significant philosophical figure in the Islamic world according to which one can present all human achievements in the domain of knowledge and science as manifestations of this rationality. Rationality in Sadra’s intellectual system represents a comprehensive term with an analogically graded meaning that in different levels of certainty guarantees the validity of applied, theoretical and intuitive sciences. This comprehensive perspective of the domain of rational discourse can put an end to many disputes on the exact sense of rationality and in doing so, it can bring about a basis for more interaction and sympathy among scholars in various branches of science and open the path for deeper dialogue.

---

Purgatorial perfection is one of the important discussions about human destiny as the soul, after separating from the body dwells in the isthmus realm called Barzakh (purgatory). Heavenly revelations or messages from prophets, especially Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) are the inspirational sources on the said topic that human intellect is incapable to conceive. This issue is certainly the matter of heavenly or Islamic affairs whose evolution cannot be archived unless we prove it through movement and change. Hence, the change and movement of the soul, after divorcing from the body, is proved, both for human and for the rest (in that realm) which are regarded as among abstract incorporeal beings. Islamic philosophers tried to intellectually deal with this topic of research commensurate with their own philosophical and theosophical fundamentals. Yet, the peripatetic concepts being limited, they did not present any considerable or significant results until Mulla Sadra, who rather preparing an appropriate framework for research and investigation in this field, leaves it open for his successors. The issue of the purgatorial perfection is important enough that unlike the peripatetic philosophy to which nothing can be added or subtracted, Mulla Sadra’s philosophy is flexible. Thus, this research aims to shed light on some aspects of human integration in the purgatorial realm and bring important pieces of evidence to it.
 

---