Theosophia Islamica

The main issue of the present paper is: What exactly is the relationship between our Iranian culture and thought and Western philosophy and thought? Most discussions raised in Iran regarding tradition and modernity have considered this relationship to be self-evident and obvious. However, contrary to appearances, it seems this relationship is not so obvious and clear. The mere fact that we study books and sources of Western philosophy, or write texts and articles about it in the form of various research projects, does not mean that we, who have been situated and grown within a different historical and intellectual framework, have a relationship with the intellectual tradition of the West. It must be acknowledged that the historical and intellectual course of modern Western thought, considering its roots and origins, has its own requirements and characteristics that do not necessarily align with the historical and intellectual framework in Iran. Therefore, the absolute extension of its precepts and concepts to this framework does not seem entirely acceptable. This very issue must be subjected to a serious question; that is, we must understand what the aforementioned relationship actually is and what characteristics it can possess. Hence, this seemingly clear relationship must itself become a subject for serious reflection and scrutiny. Finally, this paper proposes that instead of taking our relationship with modern Western thought for granted, we must begin an effort to discover the various dimensions of the internal logic of Iranian thought and reflection.

This study examines Farabi's perspective on international relations, focusing on the concept of the Virtuous City (al-Madīna al-Fāḍila) and the Non-Virtuous Cities. The research method is based on textual and comparative analysis of Farabi's works, particularly The Principles of the Views of the People of the Virtuous City (Ārā' Ahl al-Madīna al-Fāḍila), Civil Policy (al-Siyāsa al-Madanīya), and Selected Aphorisms (Fuṣūl Muntaza‘a). This analysis emphasizes a comparison with the views of Plato in the Republic and Laws, and Thucydides' Melian Dialogue in the History of the Peloponnesian War. Influenced by Plato, Farabi defines the Virtuous City as a just society guided toward happiness (sa'āda) by a chief-philosopher. He categorizes the Non-Virtuous Cities into three types: Ignorant (Jāhila), Immoral (Fāsiqa), or Erring/Straying (Ḍālla), with the Vicious City (al-Madīna al-Taghallubīya) serving as their core, dominated by the motive of superiority/dominance (taghallub). The study indicates that the beliefs of the inhabitants of the Ignorant Cities, particularly regarding justice and dominance, reflect Thucydides' views (as articulated by the Athenians in the Melian Dialogue, that "the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must"). Farabi considers just war to involve defense, securing legitimate rights, or guiding others toward the good (khayr), while unjust war arises solely from dominance and a lust for superiority (taghallub). This study argues that, for Farabi, the survival of the Virtuous City amidst dominant cities necessitates a strong defense, and the expansion of the Virtuous City into a Virtuous Nation (al-Umma al-Fāḍila) and a Virtuous World (al-Ma‘mūra al-Fāḍila) is a prerequisite for eliminating war and achieving true happiness.

This article explores key verses from the Old and New Testaments to formulate a Biblical view of leadership focused on service, justice, and the common good. Drawing upon texts from Genesis, Deuteronomy, the Books of Samuel, Psalms, the Books of the Maccabees, and several New Testament texts (including Matthew, Luke, Mark, and 1 Peter), the study contrasts positive models of servant leadership (such as Moses, David, Solomon, and St. Joseph) with negative models (such as Antiochus IV Epiphanes). The article argues that the Bible consistently describes legitimate authority as being characterized by accountability to God, humility, care for the vulnerable, and the promotion of communal flourishing. It further connects this Biblical ideal to the concept of the common good within Catholic Social Teaching (citing, for example, the papal encyclical Laudato si’), suggesting that the leader's primary role is to create social conditions that enable the integrated growth of individuals and communities. The implications of this vision for contemporary political and ecclesiastical leadership include prioritizing justice, protecting distinct communal identities, and fostering participatory structures for public prosperity.

In this article, the author aims to demonstrate how Hegel's political philosophy establishes a synthesis between classical political philosophy, particularly that of Aristotle, and modern political philosophy, from Machiavelli to Hobbes and Rousseau. In other words, the author seeks to show how Hegel utilized the strengths of both periods of political thought to construct his modern state.This research, conducted using a descriptive-analytical method, has studied all the primary texts of Western political thought. One of its findings is the influence of classical political philosophy on Hegel in the domain of the state. This is where, echoing Aristotle, Hegel views the state as prior to the individual, and the sphere of the common good as generally taking precedence over the individual. Consequently, the state holds a higher position than civil society and the family in Hegel's thought.On the other hand, modern political thought discovers the individual as separate from the whole and from the state. It attempts to recognize this newly discovered individual, with all their desires and inclinations, and to make the state subservient to them.Hegel, by drawing on the achievements of both past traditions, portrays a state that, while it is prior to the individual, is entirely structured from within the individual and is the objectivity of their inner subjectivity.

The imposed wars and current aggressions in the Middle East and the world increasingly necessitate the need for sustainable peace and ethics in society (Statement of the Problem) Kant, by creating the Copernican Revolution, completely changed the perspective in ethics and practical reason. By believing in the formulation of law and equality in society, he considers the establishment of a sustainable peace possible. In fact, according to his Copernican view, we should no longer wait for the ethical foundations and peace from the heavens; rather, it is necessary to reach a global agreement for establishing a lasting peace in the world, with an emphasis on the foundations of human rights and ethical and religious pluralism. Hans Küng, inspired by Kant's moral philosophy, and while adopting a critical approach to it, seeks to find the common ethical frameworks among religions and thereby facilitate the possibility of mutual understanding and peaceful coexistence among religions (Research Findings) Therefore, this research has explained this important matter using a qualitative and analytical method (Objective and Method)

Achieving peace in contemporary societies has become a fundamental issue in political and ethical thought due to complexities in identity, cultural pluralism, and political challenges. This article focuses on how the concepts of the "Self" and the "Other" are defined, and examines the impact of ethical readings on the possibility of achieving peace. The main research question is: How can ethical readings of the "Self" and the "Other" contribute to achieving peace in contemporary societies? This article explores the dominant frameworks for confronting the "Other" through a comparative analysis of the ideas of Carl Schmitt (friend/enemy dichotomy), Liberalism (rational consensus), and Chantal Mouffe (agonistic pluralism). Then, in contrast to these approaches, it introduces the responsibility-centered ethics of Emmanuel Levinas as a fundamental alternative. The hypothesis is that although each of these approaches offers a way to manage differences, stable peace is only possible through understanding the "Other" as an ethical existence that has precedence over the "Self," and establishing a relationship based on empathy and asymmetrical responsibility, as explained by Levinas. Using a qualitative content analysis method, this research shows that the transition from a purely political logic to an ethical logic is a necessary condition for peaceful coexistence and can lead to the development of theories related to dialogue and justice in human relations.

In his ontological exposition of understanding, Gadamer, by raising the issue of dialogue between the interpreter and the text, paved the way for discussing challenging topics such as relativism in knowledge. In his view, the fusion of the temporal-linguistic horizons of the interpreter and the text explains the possibility of multiplicity of meaning and the endlessness of understanding. In this article, we attempt to examine the possibility of the metaphorical nature of understanding from a different perspective, namely by focusing on the discussion of "metaphor," due to its importance in providing reasons for the possibility of diversity and invention of meaning in language. Although the theory of metaphor is a core discussion in Ricoeur's philosophy, and Gadamer has not extensively addressed the topic of metaphor except for some allusions in explaining language; nevertheless, some commentators have re-examined understanding and the fusion of horizons by resorting to this theory. Therefore, while analyzing these interpretations using a descriptive-analytical method, and based on the relationship between unity and tension between identity and difference in the structure of metaphor, we substantiate the metaphorical characteristic of understanding, language, and the fusion of horizons, and its hermeneutic consequences.

Farabi, as a philosopher who presented the Aristotelian tradition in the Islamic world in a distinctive way, combining it with Neoplatonism and Platonism, also retained a large part of Aristotelian epistemology in his own cognitive system. Just as Aristotle, according to modern epistemological interpretations, is largely considered an evidentialist, so is Farabi. Evidentialism means that the only acceptable criterion for adopting beliefs is valid rational or empirical reasons appropriate to that belief. However, in Iran, many, especially some admirers of the Illuminationist  and Mulla Sadra's traditions, attempt to somehow discover a kind of intuitionism or at least evidence against evidentialism in Farabi. This judgment contradicts the view of some major specialists in Islamic philosophy, such as Dimitri Gutas. This issue is very important because the shift in Islamic epistemology from evidentialism to other directions played a very significant role in changing the nature of this philosophy. Accordingly, in this article, we will attempt to show based on which evidence Farabi is an evidentialist, and how he is largely indebted to Aristotle in this evidentialism, and we will also examine the evidence against Farabi's evidentialism. Given that the term "evidentialism" is an expression from contemporary Western epistemology, we will look at Farabi's philosophy from the perspective of this branch of philosophy. In this article, we will primarily view the matter from the perspective of Western specialists in Islamic philosophy, as their language is close to the language of contemporary epistemology. Our research method is descriptive and analytical, and comparative where appropriate. The findings of this research indicate that Farabi is largely an evidentialist, but a moderate one. This finding is very important in relation to determining the place and role of Farabi's epistemology in Islamic philosophy, as well as the later introduction of intuitionism into Islamic philosophy.

One of the contentious issues concerning Farabi's views is whether he asserts the immortality of souls or not, and, if the former, whether this immortality is personal (individual) or generic (of the species). This article, employing a descriptive-analytical method, argues that Farabi holds the view of personal immortality, though not for all humans, but only for certain individuals. The fundamental reason for the confusion and conflict in views regarding Farabi's stance on the issue of immortality stems from the failure to distinguish between the different souls in the various cities (societies) in his philosophy. Farabi's criterion for explaining immortality is the actualization of human intellect through connection with the Active Intellect. Based on this criterion, he considers only the inhabitants of the two types of cities—the Virtuous City and the Transgressing City—to be immortal, because only the intellect of these two groups of humans becomes actualized. The difference is that the inhabitants of the Virtuous City act upon their knowledge, whereas the inhabitants of the Transgressing City abstain from acting upon their knowledge. Humans in all other cities only experience worldly life, and their souls perish with the decay of the body due to the non-actualization of their intellect. Regarding the issue of immortality being personal or generic, a reflection on Farabi's works leads to the conclusion that he posits a specific connection between the body and the temperament on the one hand, and the temperament and the soul on the other, considering each soul specific to a body and vice-versa. Therefore, just as we encounter multiple and individuated souls in worldly life due to the multiplicity of bodies and temperaments, in the afterlife, souls will also be distinguished from one another and will continue their immortal life in an individuated and personalized manner due to the acquisition of multiple and different dispositions and habits.

Islam, Christianity, and Judaism, as the major Abrahamic religions, are grounded in belief in one Almighty God who created the world and sent messengers to guide humanity. Despite differences in theology and practice, these religions share common moral foundations that extend to medical ethics. Ethics, as a discipline, examines moral character and moral status, determining what rights and responsibilities are due to human beings and other living creatures. Medical ethics, as an applied branch, provides professional codes and value-based frameworks that help practitioners manage moral dilemmas in clinical practice and reduce moral distress in decision-making. In recent decades, particularly in the third millennium, Islamic and Christian scholars have increasingly engaged in dialogue to develop guidelines that address ethical challenges arising from modern medical technologies, especially at the beginning and end of life. The present study aims to review Islamic and Christian ethical guidelines for healthcare professionals encountering such dilemmas. Using content analysis, the study examines contemporary medical guidelines, professional codes, and academic materials, focusing on countries where healthcare systems are highly influenced by modern technologies, such as Britain, Australia, the United States, and several European nations. Findings show that these regions have developed extensive literature on ethical issues related to assisted reproduction and end-of-life care, where Muslims, Christians, and Jews alike face comparable moral challenges. The analysis reveals significant similarities between Islamic and Christian ethical perspectives, particularly in their shared opposition to induced abortion and euthanasia, both grounded in the belief that life is a sacred gift from God. These shared values influence not only clinical practice but also establish moral boundaries for biomedical research.

The concept of ethics in subjective idealism is determined based on the free inner subjectivity (agency). In this conception, morality emerges centered on autonomous reason and, due to the opposition that Kant considers between reason and inclination (desire), creates a rift between the ethical subject and the object. The main question of the present article is: Upon which philosophical elements does Hegel base his critique of Kantian ethics, and how does he examine the problems of subjective ethics? The answer to this question is that Hegel, by creating a dialectic between reason and nature/inclination (desire), seeks to remove the opposition between morality and individual will and motive. Furthermore, by inverting the relationship between the universal will and the individual will that exists in Kant's thought, he seeks a way to address the alienation of the ethical subject from social and political institutions. He also intends to severely criticize the terror and dread that were justified in ethical relations in the shadow of the destruction of political institutions.

This research explores the ethical principles guiding business practices in Islamic and Christian traditions, with a focus on key concepts such as honesty, fairness, and social responsibility. Through an analysis of Islamic  texts, including the Quran and Hadith, and Christian scriptures, primarily the Bible, the study highlights both commonalities and differences between the two religious frameworks. The findings show that while both traditions emphasize honesty, justice, and the moral obligation to act ethically in business, they diverge on specific issues like the prohibition of usury (riba) in Islam and the evolution of views on usury in Christianity. The research also examines the practical challenges of applying these ethical principles in contemporary globalized business environments. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of how religious ethics can inform modern business practices, offering insights into the application of ethical principles across diverse cultural and religious contexts. Future research areas include the ethical implications of technological advancements and the role of interfaith dialogue in addressing business ethics.

The continuation of life on our planet requires a set of essential elements, including water, soil, air, trees, and plants, making environmental protection our duty. Environmental preservation has long been a pressing concern throughout human history, but it has now evolved into a major challenge. Indeed, it forms the very basis and foundation of human life. Significantly, the Sacred Texts of Islam and Christianity recognized this issue centuries ago and offered their followers guidelines on environmental protection. These directives encompass various aspects such as preserving trees, promoting agricultural development and afforestation, safeguarding water resources, counseling against waste and pollution, and avoiding the restriction of access to these resources, especially during conflicts. Furthermore, emphasis is placed on sustainable development and the cleanliness of lands and habitats, preventing the pollution of our surroundings, and the importance of clean air for the sustenance of life. Muslims and Christians, recognizing their human and religious duties, are called upon to actively defend their surrounding environment and refrain from harming it. The aim of this research is to conduct a comparative study on the Sacred Texts of Islam and Christianity regarding environmental protection, clarifying their shared teachings and insights on this vital subject. The scope of this research is limited to the Sacred Texts of Islam and Christianity and is executed as a case-by-case comparison of environment-related issues.