درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

“Individualization” (Tafarrud), a fundamental principle of education, means that a person, despite similarities with his fellows, has psychological characteristics and unique abilities that distinguish him from others. It is important to pay attention to this principle in identifying the talents and abilities of people and their proper direction for correct education. This article investigates the role of the principle of "individualization" in education from the perspective of the Qur’an and Hadith and examines its position in education based on a descriptive-analytical method. Findings show that the differences between people are divided into two categories, individual and group differences, and for individual differences, there are two concepts of inter-individual and intra-individual differences. People have inter-individual differences in terms of faith, knowledge, talents and abilities, emotions, and feelings. In addition, in terms of differences in abilities and talents in a person, they have intra-individual differences. Also, there are social differences in terms of social position, gender, geographical location, etc., so that paying attention to these differences is effective in the formation of correct education. Therefore, in educational matters, in order to achieve educational goals, attention should be paid to individual and social differences.

The existence of differences in the interpretive opinions of Muslims is undeniable, and one of the serious issues in exegetical discussions is to find the root of the differences in the opinions of commentators of the Holy Qur’an (especially in presenting traditional or modern interpretations). Commentators have different preconceptions and views on various issues, especially about some verses related to women. Some commentators have a traditional view and some have a modern view. This essay examines culture and gender and their role in providing traditional and modern interpretation. The method of collecting materials is desk study and the method of processing them is descriptive-analytical. After the investigations, it was found that different presuppositions and cultures play a role in presenting different interpretations and an example of traditional commentary about women can be seen in the commentary of Banu Amin and an example of modern interpretation can be seen in the opinions of Amina Wadud, and their opinions also had problems that were pointed out. The factors causing modern interpretations are: 1- The flourishing of human reasons; 2- Journeys; 3- meeting special people, 4- Cultural and social conditions.

The image of the first woman in the stories of the creation of man in all cultures has always been an inspiration and has had an impact on the current idea of ​​women and femininity in every culture. This first mother, who is called Eve in Abrahamic traditions and is the first woman in the story of creation, has always been reflected in different layers of Jewish, Christian and Islamic cultures, especially in literature and art, and since Abrahamic traditions, whether in "Holy texts" and their interpretations, as well as in their cultural life, were not completely separate and distinct from each other. Some intertextualities have caused the image of Eve to be influenced by each other in these three cultures despite the differences in the holy texts in this field. The present study aims to first analyze the image of the first woman separately in the Testaments and the Qur'an, and then, in a comparative perspective, analyze the reflection of the Testament image of Eve in Christian literature and art and the reflection of the Quranic image of Eve in Islamic literature and art. The result of this analysis shows that the image of Eve in the Testaments is not free from anti-feminist myths, and the creation from the left rib, the temptation of Adam, and the guilt of Eve in descent and her punishment are depicted differently from Adam, and despite the fact that the Qur'an does not paint such a picture, But Islamic literary and artistic works are also greatly influenced by the same image and are less consistent with the Quranic image of Eve.

Ibn Ṭufayl and Kierkegaard share existentialist elements around nature. Ibn Ṭufayl believes in nature as the best teacher of philosophy and philosophical reasoning. For Kierkegaard, being human means being dependent on and embedded in nature. This makes Kierkegaard a highly relevant interlocutor for contemporary Eco philosophy and ecocriticism. Ibn Ṭufayl’s opinion on the subject is discernible in his novel called Ḥayy Ibn Yaqẓān. Pursuing the truth of life, Ḥayy, the main personage of Ibn Ṭufayl’s novel, finds his way through four travels of mind. Nature is the context of his travels, so determined to protect nature, Ḥayy takes considerable care of fauna and flora as he steps into the highest levels in his ascent. In the first travel, Ḥayy begins from nature from which is created and in which is raised by a roe mother. In the second travel, he figures out all of natural affairs insofar as becoming a leading scientist. In the third travel resulted in the former travel, Ḥayy becomes successful in philosophical analysis. In the fourth travel, Ḥayy goes forward with philosophical analysis and reaches mystical level. The mystical experiences go on so that through all natural beings and events Ḥayy conveys to God. In this last pace, Ḥayy returns to nature and becomes a nature protectionist. At the end of story, Ḥayy faces a religious stranger showed up from another island. Ḥayy finds his beliefs thoroughly in accordance with his own opinions.

In the text of the Holy Quran and the Bible, it is emphasized that God is invisible and cannot be seen by the eyes. There is a distinction in that while the Old Testament does not regard God as merely a mental entity, it acknowledges a direct presence of God in speaking to humans through specific verses and signs. The vision represented in the Quran is used to explain the perception of events and the manifestation of human actions on the Day of Judgment, whereas the vision in bodily form regarding seeing God exists in the Two Testaments. The language of the Holy Quran cannot be influenced by the language of the Bible, although there are similarities in some instances. Ultimately, despite the claims of the Bible regarding the invisibility of God, their descriptions often suggest a corporeal image. However, the Quran explicitly denies the embodiment and vision of God Almighty, and instances discussing sight are often interpreted as a denial of sight.