Abstract Seyyed Hussein Nasr believes that science and religion were complemented and divine in ancient ages. In middle ages they were divine also but in new ages and Contemporary centuries. He says that real science is not the contrast with real religion and the study of sacred science and real religion is one of the fascinating areas of human inquiry. In this case, the particular concern of this paper is to explore the interface of science and religion.

Abstract In this paper, I will try to present a comparative examination of Avicenna’s and Mullā Sadrā’s views of analyzing the concept of the Necessary Being. According to Avicenna, “the Necessary Being” is an entity which is Pure Being, but according to Mullā Sadrā, Necessity of Being requires that the existent besides being real and not having conditional mode and accidental intermediary has not causative mode. According to the separability of these two modes, the Necessary Being is a being which is both “by-itself” and “for-itself”; hence, Mullā Sadrā considers these two qualifications in his definition of the Necessary Being. Therefore, the arguments of the two philosophers for Necessary Being will be different.

Abstract In this paper, I try to discuss about one of the important issues which have been discussed in the dialogue between Iranian contemporary philosophical thought and the philosophy of Kant. Many of Kant’s Iranian critics criticized innativism according to a special version of it. This special version, has been arisen for the first time in the essential encounter of Iranian contemporary islamic philosophy with the philosophy of Kant in Allāmeh Tābātabāyi’s “Osūle” Falsafeh va Raveshe Realism [= the principles of philosophy and the method of realism”. This version is still alive in Iran and forms the foundation of the criticism of Kant’s epistemology. According to this, in this paper, I will discuss, first, about the prevalence of believing in Kantian innativism among the Iranian scholars. Then, I will discuss about one of the current versions of Kantian innativism in the Iranian contemporary philosophical thought and will consider its elements. This version of Kantian innativism can be found in Mortazā Motahharī’s works. Finally, I will state Kant’s own view of innativism in order to clarify the similarities and differences of his view and his critics’ view of innativism.

Abstract Mulla Sadra in his transcendent philosophy used Tafkik method (i.e. separation of reason and tradition); it is claimed in a theory. According to the theory Mulla Sadra changed from his early philosophical-mystical and ta'vili method to Tafkik. The evidence of this claim is a case study on Mulla Sadra and the problem of bodily resurrection. Considering Transcendent Philosophy as a transformative school, and objectively examining his thoughts, is among the merits of this investigation. Nevertheless, there are major challenges to the theory like the exclusive view to transformation, the illusion that integrating disciplines implicates ta'vil, the inadequacy of the supportive evidence, and confusing the two claimed stages (i.e. philosophical stage and Tafkik stage).

Abstract Philosophy in modern age has begun with rationalists. The theory of innate ideas, their foundation of epistemology, was introduced by Descartes and developed by the other rationalists as Spinoza and Leibniz. This theory then was attributed to Kant and he was assumed as an innativist.This paper is trying to prove that Kant is not innativist and is going on a different path in western tradition.The theory of innate ideas is a starting point for Kant to introduce new perspectives in west thinking.

Abstract One of the important issues in moral philosophy is the relation between “ought” and “is”. Many different views have been arisen about this issue. One of these views is ’Allāmeh Tabātabāyī’s view. According to his view, moral ought and ought not are inventions that originate in human beings’ establishing the real relation between his voluntary acts and their consequences, and the “ought” are based on the acts, although they are not induced from the facts.

Abstract No doubt mysticism is the essence of religious experience and this experience for both those who have religious beliefs and those who have not such beliefs typically causes changes in life. Regardless of the difficulty of describing the mystical experiences which seems very far from the conceptual framework of normal moods, it appears that the similarities among the various religious traditions for various mystical states can be outlined. These similarities include: the experience of unity, the feeling of being beyond time and space, sense of sacredness, a sense of joy and happiness, unity and awareness of the public with a vacuum and an eternal ultimate reality. Mystical states can be divided into two distinct categories: transcendent and immanent. Though Mysticism and spiritual meditation have some considerable similarities to each other, but they certainly look different. These two mystical tendencies in east & west religious faiths in the world to be seen with difference. Differences over the interpretation of mystical experiences may be caused by cultural and linguistic differences and distinctions. Psychological interpretations, neuro psychological and cognitive science of mystical experiences of the research approach is innovative in the world.