seyed mohammad javad seyed hashemi; mohammad reza karimi vala; mohsen izadi
Abstract
Ghazali is one of the Islamic scholars with research works in the field of jurisprudence, ethics, theology and philosophy. Despite his alleged opposition to philosophy and philosophical thinking, his works shows, especially in topics related to psychology, that he is a rationalist thinker who has benefited ...
Read More
Ghazali is one of the Islamic scholars with research works in the field of jurisprudence, ethics, theology and philosophy. Despite his alleged opposition to philosophy and philosophical thinking, his works shows, especially in topics related to psychology, that he is a rationalist thinker who has benefited from the methods and approaches of Islamic philosophers. In the present article, using a descriptive-analytical method, we have surveyed Ghazali's views on logic and philosophy and their application in psychology and we have come to the conclusion that, contrary to the opinion of some researchers who have considered Ghazali a strict anti-philosophy theologian, he should be considered a rationalist theologian who, in allstages of his life, even when he turned to Sufism, remained loyal to rational principles and methods and considered reason to be the most important criterion for the validity of any kind of knowledge. In psychology, he is totally influenced by peripatetic philosophy, and due to his strong attachment to Ibn Sina's philosophical method in psychology, he sometimes borrow words from his books to support his own views. He adheres to logical arguments and considers reason as the criterion for testing the validity of other means of knowledge, that is, tradition, experience and intuition. According to some of Ghazali's theoretical foundations such as the negation of causality between phenomena, it seems that, by replacing causality with the theory of habit of Allah, he has managed to solve some of the requirements of the negation of causality in psychology. But such a theory is not free of ambiguities and problems.
mohsen izadi; seyyed mohammad javad seyyd hashemi; Ali Badpa
Abstract
The issue of temporal creation has been a point of divergence among Islamic philosophers and theologians. Adhering to the superficial meaning of sacred texts, Islamic theologians have often argued for temporal creation of the whole universe, including the worlds of angles and nature and on the opposite ...
Read More
The issue of temporal creation has been a point of divergence among Islamic philosophers and theologians. Adhering to the superficial meaning of sacred texts, Islamic theologians have often argued for temporal creation of the whole universe, including the worlds of angles and nature and on the opposite side, Islamic philosophers have insisted on essential creation of the non-materials and the basic material. Mulla Sadra also believes in the eternity of the world, but tries to propose his theory in such a way that it would not be in opposition with the superficial meaning of Quranic verses and Islamic hadith (temporal creation), using especially his own ideas like “substantial motion”. The present article is an attempt to collect Mulla Sadra’s views on the verses and hadith he has cited in his work pertaining to temporal creation and to compare them to the views of theologians. Although the superficial meaning of the verses and hadiths shows that the world starts from inexistence, there is no clear affirmation of the temporal creation of the whole universe or its creation from non-existence. Considering time as existing independent of the world not only creates problems in reasoning, it is also not in consistent with the superficial meaning of the Quranic verses and hadith.
