1

Comparative analysis of resisting philosophy among Shia and Sunni

Sayed Reza Ghaemi1

In Islam world there were people who thought philosophy is the cause of

propagating infidelity and atheism and did not allow teaching and learning it just

like Christianity in middle ages that resisted philosophy. Among Sunnis the

opposition was harder but some of Shias also have resisted philosophy. Also the

factor of policy has been influential.

The main opponents of philosophy in Muslim world both in Shi’as or Sunnis could

be categorized in four groups, namely: scholars of rational sciences, theologians,

muhadithin, jurists, and rulers. All of them fought philosophy based on their own

attitude of thought.

Opponents of philosophy have made different arguments, the most important of

them are: 1- pre-existence of world 2- denial of divine detailed knowledge3-denial

of physical resurrection 4- divestment of free will from God.

This composition is about to express each of these views by collecting the sayings

of opponents of philosophy among Sunni and Shia from reliable books.

Key Words: Opponents of philosophy, Scholars of rational sciences, Theologians,

Muhadithin, Jurists, Rulers, Shi’a, Sunni.

1. PhD candidate in Shahid Motahari University in Tehran, Researcher of Quran and Hadith

Research Institute in Qom.

2

Preface

From the very old times until now philosophy has brought about disagreements

and philosophers have faced difficulties at any time. By expansion of Christianity

people were completely banned from philosophy in Greece and Rome, they either

burned or hid the philosophy books; because philosophy was regarded against the

religious believes.

In Islamic world it has always had disagreement and some of Muslim philosophers

have been accused to infidelity and atheism. Although some of Islamic scholars

point to some verses of the Qur’an that invite people to thinking and pondering

about the globe and locate them in front of Christians’ holy book, but in history of

Islamic thought there have been persons who have referred to verses and traditions

and by giving a special exegesis of them have rejected rational reasoning and

claimed that content of these verses and tradition is disagreement with any kind of

discussion about doctrines and as conclusion they portrayed them in contrast with

theology and philosophy.

In some cases Muslim scholars have accused Christians for fighting the reason, but

the reality is that Islamic history is not that far from fighting the reason and

philosophers have been disturbed many times. Though some people have tried to

make reason and Sharia compatible, but they have paid so much for their fruitless

efforts. So rational challenges in history of Muslim thoughts cannot be overlooked.

Much of Islamic scholars’ efforts have been put to convene “correct in transition”

and “explicit in reason”. (Lahiji,1433AH, v1 ,pp 44,45)

Anyway, the relation between clientele of transition and reason have not been that

friendly in Islam world. Late Dr. Abdolhosein Zarrinkub says:” philosophy have

faced disagreement and distrust in Islam just like in the Jews and Christianity.

They thought of engaging it asbid’a [innovation in the religion] and its

acquaintance as getting misdirected.”(Zarrinkub, 1369: p305)“Getting into doctrinal

3

problems and theology was banned and thought as fault from the beginning by men

of hadith. This was most probably because of its relation with and its similarity to

philosophy and sciences ascribed to Greece.”(Zarrinkub, 1369: pp 267, 268)

The stream of resisting reason is not overlookable. Now, yet there are some people

among Islamic scholars who opposes learning new sciences and suppose it in

contradiction to Islam. In criticizing the people who believe in compatibility of

Islam and modern sciences, SayedHosein Nasr says: “a scholar who uses new

techniques and tools of modern science definitely taint Islam’s warp and woof…

Old sciences had never had any challenge with Islam. Young students in traditional

schools used to say prayers while studying Khayam’s algebra and Jabir-ibn-

hayyan’s chemistry; but todays’ students lose their religious support when studying

mathematics and chemistry”( Najashi, 1317AH: p47)

1- Opposition to philosophy in Islam

Muslims divide sciences to two groups: one is Islamic science the other one is

Primary science. Philosophy is in the second group that had been propagated

before Islam. After philosophy entered to Islamic sciences all of rational sciences

were subject to accusation and all geometrician, astronomers, mathematicians and

naturalists were attacked so hard by Akhbaris whether Shi’a or Sunni. Musa

Nobakhti wrote a book titled “rejecting astronomers”. (Al-sobki, n.d: v2 p101)Imam

Shafe’i also believed astronomy as illegal.(Hamudi,n.d: v4 pp173, 174)Sahib-ibn-

abbad believed geometry as dangerous for religion and think of geometriciansas

doodles.(ibid, v6 pp174, 175)He also viewed philosophical sciences disgustedly.

Yaghout describes him as follows:

منطق والعدد و و هو شديد التعصب علي اهل الحکمة و الناظرين في اجزائها کالهندسة و الطب و التنجيم و الموسيقي وال»...

«.و ال له عين و ال اثر ليس له من الجزء االلهي خبر

4

Because of hard prejudice by men of hadith who just care the outward, scholars of

rational sciences always had problems and barrios. Mathematics, natural sciences,

medicines, astronomy, music, and chemistry were protested by prejudiced men of

hadith. They count everyone who paid attention to these sciences as atheist and

infidel. Ma’moun –the Abbasid caliph- was titled as infidel and the commander of

infidels because of his attention to philosophy and the translation movement. (Ibn-

al-nadim, 1381: 437; Hamudi,n.d: v14 pp52) Ahmad-ibn-Tayibalsarakhsi –the famous

pupil of al-Kendi- was killedin charge of inviting to atheism. (Hamudi,n.d: v3

pp101)Nidham al-mu’tazeli was called infidel because of dealing with theological

issues.(Al-Baqdadi, 1367 AH: pp79-91) About theology they said:

(Razi, 1405AH: v2 p289)«من تعمق فى الکالم تزندق»

From 4th to 6th century (A.H), there were few scholars who remained immune from

being accused of infidelity and atheism. Even some scholars in the end of their

lives have regretted for spending time aimlessly in the field and have asked God to

forgive them. Hassan-ibn-Muhammad-ibn-Naja al-Arbili (d. 660 A.H.) who was a

Shi’a philosopher and famous in rational sciences is an example of this reretion,

reports say his last words were as follows:

(Soyuti, 1979: v1 p518)«صدق اهلل العظيم و کذب ابن سينا»

Opposition to philosophy includes a wide range of peoples from different attitudes.

In the following we will investigate these groups namely: rulers, jurists,

muhaddithin, theologians, and scholars of rational sciences.

1-1. Scholars of rational sciences

Abul-Barakat Baghdadi was a Jewish scholar who converted to Islam and got

Sunni .His view is different from other critics of philosophy. He himself believed

in philosophy but criticized many bases of Masha’ philosophy and presented his

own ideas. “When I dealt with philosophy by studying the books written by

5

precedent scholars and their commentaries and exegesis also writings of late

scholars; I noticed that understanding words of precedent scholars is hard because

of brevity and disorder of sentences, caused by being translated from another

language, and words of later scholars have the same problem –hardly understood-

that is made by prolixity, incompatibility of reasons and claims, and complexity in

many cases... therefore I started research and contemplation to reach the meanings

and articles. In some cases it resulted in agreeing them and sometimes it caused my

disagreement. After contemplation about the book of existence I got to some truths

that was not mentioned before.”(Baqdadi, Abu-al-Barakat, 1357-1358 AH: v1 pp3-4)

Some of his disagreements with Masha’ philosophy are as follows: rejecting

interpretation of Masha’ philosophy from Al-Wahid theory, regarding their thought

as confused in their idea about active reason, rejecting theory of decuple reasons,

applying God’s knowledge of details in a detailed way and so on.

In Shi’as also Sheykh al-Bahaee who had great pupils in philosophy like Sadr-al-

Mutuallihin Shirazi, but he himself was one of critics of philosophy. Al-Bahaee

disagreed the philosophy in his era that was school of Masha’ and Ishragh that he

called them “Greek’s wisdom.”(Baha’odin ‘amili, 1385: chapter 4) He had strictly

rejected philosopher’s idea about infringement of sky and their reasoning to proof

it in the book al-hadighat al-hilalia and called their reasons very weak.(Baha’odin

‘amili, 1410AH, v1 p83)

He also needled many of rational books in his poems and insisted on their

ineffectiveness on human’s rescue. He believes felicity is in learning “knowledge

of love” and anything other than that is devil’s deceiving.(Baha’odin ‘amili, 1361, p34)

He also called the official science as fruitless because it nothing other than

ruction.(ibid, p33)

1-2. Theologians

6

Two of the most important critics of philosophy among Sunnis are Ghazali and

Fakhr-al-razi. Ghazali have written the famous book of “Tahafat-al-falasifa” that

has criticized Aristotle and his followers’ ideas maybe in the hardest way happened

in history. This book has a philosophical method itself. In this book he points out

that what philosophers say is in front of religion such as their idea about God’s

knowledge, pre-existence of world and physical resurrection and continues: “this

view of philosophers means clear infidelity and lying by God’s prophets and none

of the Islamic sects believe in such views; though philosophers have not vividly

rejected prophets’ prophecy- because of fearing the Muslims and regarding their

own benefits.”(Ghazali, 1392AH, p308)

Fakhr-al-Razi was also one who criticized philosophy as a theologian but never got

out of reasoning and argument. He never used excommunication or accusation.

Unlike theologians who completely rejected Greek philosophy, Razi criticized

most of its discussions and accepted some of them. He does not accept theory of

Al-Wahid and believes in issuance of many from unity.(Razi, 1370: v1 p465, 466) He

also disagreed philosophers in the meaning of Good and evil,(Razi, 1411 AH:

p147)Kalam Nafsi, (Razi, 1405AH: v1 p31)Visiting God.(ibid, v13 pp97-104)

Among Shi’a, scholars of separation school are from the main critics of

philosophy. Of course scholars of separation school have not had same position

towards philosophy. The earlier like Mirza Mahdi Esfahani opposed philosophy

and believed in a divergence between Shari’a and philosophy.(Halabi, n.d: p178)The

latters of this school of thought like Jafar Seyedan and Mohammad Reza Hakimi

have different position when facing separation and do not negate philosophy in all

but they regard separation school as separation of methods.(Hakimi, 1376: p44)

Mirza Mahdi Esfahani call philosophers as terminators of religion.(Halabi, n.d: p25)

He believed all philosophical statements in opposition to divine teachings.(ibid:

7

p178) Devil’s syllogism in disobeying God was a philosophical argument in his

view.(ibid)He invalidated any Factual and external theorems(ibid: p41) and called

philosophy teachers as cheaters(ibid: p12)and his fatwa was illegality of

philosophical and rational conduct.(ibid: p28) He claims that distrusting arguments

stems from invalidation of causality; when it is invalidated the building of

argument is tore down.(ibid: p27) He believes man’s imagery and evident sciences

as sheer darkness and searching them is misdirection and walking through this way

is conduct of the fools.(Isfahani,n.d: p26)

Opposition to philosophy in next generations of separation school was not as hard

as the founders. Mohammad Reza Hakimi believes that the relation between

philosophy and revelation is not complete divergence; they are completely

unequal.(Hakimi, 1381:p308; Hakimi, 1378: p66)In Seyedan’s view not only revelation

is not in contradiction with explicit reason but revelation is based on explicit

reason.(Sayed ja’farseyedan, gholamrezafayazi, hamidParsania, 1384: No.34)

1-3. Muhadithin

One of the most known characters of Sunnite jurists and muhaddithin opposing

philosophy is ibn-Taymia. He resisted philosophy by two factors: following the

predecessors and coordination of reason to the outward of the Quran and hadith.

He excommunicated philosophers and called many of them dualists. (Ibn Taymiya,

2000: v9 p253) He is a serious critic of Aristotle’s philosophy and logic. (Ibn Taymiya,

1993) His hard opposition is in subjects like: philosophical movement, (Ibn Taymiya,

1979: v9 p139&141) philosophical interpretation of eternal cause, (Ibn Taymiya, 1986:

v1 p111) unity in existence (Ibn Taymiya, 1983: v4&5) and so on.

On the other hand Shiite Akhbaris were opponents and critics of philosophy. Mola

Amin AstarAbadi who is the leader of Shi’a Akhbaris has not accepted any

position for reason in the process of recognition and knowledge. He completely

8

denied validity of rational perceptions. He divided sciences into two groups: 1-

sciences that lead to experiment and feeling 2- sciences that are out of the circle of

feeling which he calls ultra-experimental like divine wisdom, theology, Osul-

alfiqh, some theoretical issues of fiqh, and some logical principles. He believed

that just the first part is useful and the second part that stems from reason does not

have any clear result, because they are related to something beyond sense and

experiment, so they are invaluable at all.By this proof he disagreed Usol-alfiqh and

theology. (Estar Abadi, 1426AH: p256)

1-4. Jurists

Most of great jurists like Shafi’i, Malik, and Ahmad-ibn-Hanbal believed in

illegality of theology. Ibn-Jozi believed philosophy as illegal and bound to

infidelity; he also quotes Shafi’i’s speech in illegality of theology:” Prior jurists of

this Ummah when found out that theology does not fulfill the need of truth seekers

and misdirect a man with right faith; so they avoided it and prohibited thinking and

contemplation about it.”(Ibn Jozi, 1426 AH: p82) Also Shafi’isays:”if a servant

commits all actions prohibited by God other than duality; it is better than getting

into theology… my decree about scholars of theology is to wipe them take them

around tribes and nomads and say that this is the punishment of one who left the

holy book and tradition and got into theology.”(ibid, p83) Ahmad-ibn-Hanbal also

said that men of theology will never see felicity and all scholars of theology are

atheist. (ibid)

Ibn-al-Salah also stated philosophy and logic are illegal and says: “… they who are

engaged with teaching philosophy will face one of these punishments; execution

by sword or believing in Islam, in this way the earth gets clean of these

contaminating people and misdirecting sciences.” (Dhahabi, 1405 AH: v23 p143)

9

Opposition to philosophy was because of theologians using Aristotle’s logic and

sometimes philosophical arguments to prove their doctrines and fight their

opponents.

However, there were some jurists among Shi’a who rejected philosophy and

believed its principles same as infidelity and atheism and some jurists were not

only expert in fiqh but also they were considered great philosopher. For example

Allama- Hilli considered philosophy completely separate from religion (Hilli, 1982:

p125) and learning it as illegal except to disproof it. (Hilli, 1401AH, p89) He hardly

disagreed philosopher’s idea about unity of existence and pre-existence of world

and believed that it necessitates infidelity. (Hilli, 1982: p57; Hilli, 1414AH: v9 p37)

Shahid al-thani disagreed studying philosophy and claims that having the holy

Qur’an and tradition there is no need for writings of Aristotle and other

philosophers. (‘Amili, 1421AH: v1 p55) Some of contemporary great Shi’a scholars

oppose philosophy too.

On the other Shi’a jurists like Ayatolah Khomeini and AlamaTabatabaee have been

two of the greatest Shi’ite philosophers at the same time being jurist and have

taught and wrote philosophical texts.

1-5. Rulers

Opposition to philosophy in Islamic world is much more motivated by sect and

politics than religion. The most opposition to philosophy has been done in the fifth

century (AH) in the time of Saljouqi’s government. At this time Nizamiya schools

were established by Khaje Nizam-alMolk to authorize Shafi’i and Ash’ari sects. At

this era cultural atmosphere was monopolized and followers of other sects were

facing tight choke.

Opponents of philosophy sometimes commanded to burning philosophical books

or excommunicate philosophers. They were supported from the Caliphate system.

10

Ibn-Athir writes about the year 279 AH: “in this year booksellers were banned

from selling philosophy and theology books.” (Ibn-al-Athir, 1965: v7 p453)

In Andalusia and western parts of Islamic world there were also opposition to

rational sciences. In the era of Umayyad Caliph, Al-Hakam-ibn-Nasir (d.336AH),

all books of rational sciences were burned or buried in wells by the command of

Mansur-ibn-abi-Amer and whoever studied philosophical sciences was accused of

atheism and infidelity. (Al-andolosi, 1912: p66)

2- The reasons of opposing philosophy

Theologians including Shia’a, Mu’tazila, Ash’aira and others disagreed

philosophers in some religious issues. Some of these issues are: the way this

world is created, occurrence or pre-existence of world, physical resurrection,

God’s knowledge of details, God’s attributes, compatibility of creator and

creation, incorporeity of self and Soul, systematicality of the world and

causality principle and so on. Problems for which Abu Hamid al-Ghazaly have,

in the end of the book Tahafat al-Falasifa and the book Al-Monqazmin min al-

Zalal, called philosophers infidel are these three:

1- Pre-existence of the world;

2- Denial of God’s knowledge of details;

3- Denial of physical resurrection.

Ghazali says: “these three believes of philosophers end in clear infidelity and

necessitates lying by prophets; none of Islamic sects believe in these matters.

Although philosophers have not denied prophecy of prophets because of fear,

Taqia, and considering their benefits.” (Ghazali, 1993: p35&36; Ghazali, 1392 AH, p308)

It is mentioned before that the cases of disagreement between philosophers and

men of shar’a are more than these things; but it is concluded from the above-

11

mentioned views that the main controversial issues among Islamic philosophers

and theologians are these three. So we suffice to presentation of arguments made

by opponents of philosophy in rejection of these three issue.

2-1- occurrence or pre-existence of the world

The most important issue making Islamic philosophers and theologians disagree is

the problem of occurrence or pre-existence of the world. Most philosophers

including Aristotle and his Muslim followers like Farabi, Avicenna, and ibn-roshd

believe in pre-existence of the world. Abu Hamid Ghazali, citing Farabi and

Avicenna, says: “they have given four reasons for pre-existence of the world which

are:

1- Issuance of something occurred from something pre-existent is

impossible;

2- Time priority of God to the world is impossible;

3- It is necessary that the world be existence-possible before creation;

4- Before occurrence of the world a material must have existed.” (Ghazali,

1392 AH, p88-124)

Most of Muslim theologians believe in occurrence of the world and do not believe

in any pre-existent thing other than God. Motivation of theologians to disagree

philosophers in the issue of pre-existence of the world is that they assume

philosophers in this way deny creation of the world by God; the other one is that

philosophers believe in creation from in-existence as impossible while it is a

Qur’anic concept. Based on the verse

(Nahl/40) إنما قولنا لشيء إذا أردناه أن نقول له كن فيكون

The world is created from sheer in-existence. They believed in necessity of

existence of a material before occurrence of the world. Theologians say that

12

philosophers, by these assumptions, have overlooked God’s will and extreme

power and assumed God’s power limited. (Ghazali, 1392 AH, p88-124; Jorjani, 1907: v4

p14-19)

Muslim theologians believe that God is the only pre-existent and anything other

than God is called world and “Ma Siva Allah”. They include Material and aspect,

individuals and types, components and generics, incorporeal and material; all of

them have occurred. (Shahrestani, n.d: p151-169) But Muslim philosophers believe

that occurrence is of characteristics of natural world and ultra-natural worlds are

incorporeal and pre-existent. In natural world yet principles and generics are pre-

existent; minutiae and details are occurred. So, considering minutiae and details the

world is occurred but considering principles and generics it is pre-existent.

(Mutahari, 1317AH:141)

2-2- God’s knowledge of details

The second issue of disagreement between philosophers and theologians is God’s

knowledge. In theologians’ point of view, most philosophers believe that God is

gust knowledgeable about his own essence. Although Avicenna has said that in

addition to his essence, God is knowledgeable about generics; but not about

details. (Ibn Sina, 1376: 384&385) Theologians, jurists, Muhaddithin, and all other

Islamic sets and denominations, based on contents of verses and traditions, believe

that there is no existing thing in the world not known by God.2

Fakhal-din al-Razi says: “God is incorporeal and is knowledgeable about his

essence. On the other hand, he is the creator of all existing world. So, because of

his knowledge about himself; he is knowledgeable about the world. Razi believe

2 . For example: ... ثقال ذر وما يعزب عن ر ماء ول أصغر ض ة في الر بك من م إل في لك و لأكبر من ذ ول في الس

بين (Yunos/61) كتاب م

13

that God’s knowledge about details does not necessarily bring about change and

dependency to details. Knowledge is just a special relation between one who know

and what is known. ” (Razi, 1411 AH: 127) It is not the unity of them, as philosophers

claim.

3-2- Physical resurrection

The third problematic issue among Muslim philosophers and theologians is about

the way of assembling the souls and whether it is physical or spiritual. Muslim

theologians, following the outward of Qur’an and tradition, believe in physical

resurrection; some of them believe it is physical and spiritual and have accused

earlier ones of Islamic philosophy such as Farabi and Avicenna for denial of

physical resurrection, in spite of the Qur’an and traditions, and just stating

spirituality of resurrection.

Despite opponents’ claim, Avicenna has not rejected physical resurrection; he

found his reason unable to prove it. He announced that accepting Shari’a and

trusting message of prophet is the way to prove it. (Ibn Sina, 1376: 423)

Conclusion

As opposition to philosophy was witnessed in Christianity at the Middle Ages, In

Islamic world yet there are groups opposing it. Opposition is viewed among both

Shi’a and Sunni but it is more seen in Sunnis. Because philosophy was a science

that was imported into Islam and was regarded as one of “’Ulom-al-‘awa’il”, many

scholars started opposing it and did not count it in Islamic sciences. These

oppositions sometimes got so hard that even theology and theologians who used

logic were banished and called atheist.

Opponents of philosophy among Shi’a and Sunni could generally be divided

into some parts that come below:

14

1- Scholars of rational sciences like Abu-al-Barakat al-Baqdadi from Sunnis

and Sheykh Bahaei from Shi’as whose most critiques were about using

Greek philosophy.

2- Theologians like Ghazal and Fakhr al-Razi from Sunnis and scholars of

school of separation from Shi’a who have disagreed philosophers in

many issues; in some cases these disagreements ended in

excommunication of philosophy.

3- Muhsddithin like Ibn Taymiya from Sunnis and Mulla Amin AstarAbadi

from Shi’as, have always disagreed philosophy because of their belief in

the Qur’an and traditions. This opposition was so hard that they have

excommunicate theologians, astronomers, engineers, and logicians

because of their use of “’Ulom-al-‘awa’il”.

4- Some of Shi’a Jurists and most of Sunnis have been the serious

opponents and critiques of philosophy. Of course there are some scholars

who have been great philosophy teachers and writers while being jurist.

5- Rulers also, following the scholars caring about outward, opposed to

philosophy. Since most governments have been ruled by Sunni rulers,

Just the opposition of Sunni rulers is reported. Of course at the time of

Shi’a being powerful and ruler, like Ale Buye and Fatimid, there are

reports of supporting philosophy.

The main reasons of opposition and philosophy are: stating pre-existence of

the world, denial of God’s knowledge about details, denial of physical

resurrection.

15

Bibliography

1. The holy Qur’an

2. ‘Amili, zain al-din ibn Ali, Ras’il shaid thani, revised by Reza

Mokhtari and Husain Shafi’i, entesharatdaftarnashr e tabliqateslami,

Qom, 1421AH.

3. Al-andolosi, Sa’id ibn ahmad, Tabaghat al-‘Omam, publication and

index by al-ab louis sheikh al-yasu’i, al-mat’aba al-catholikia li-alba

al-yasu’iin, Beirut, 1912.

4. Al-Baqdadi, Abi Mansur abd al-ghahir ibn tahir, Al-firaghbain al-

firaghwabayan al-firghat al-najihiaminhom, research by Muhammad

zahid ibn al-hasan al-kowthari, nashr al-thaghafat al-Islamia, Egypt,

1367 AH.

5. Al-sobki, abd al-wahhab ibn Ali, tabaghat al-shafi’aia al-kobra, Dar

ihya al-kotob al-‘arabia, Beirut, n.d.

6. Baha’odin ‘amili, Muhammad ibn Hussain, Al-Hadighat o l-Helaliah,

Ali Mousavi Publication, Qom, 1410AH.

7. Baha’odin ‘amili, Muhammad ibn Hussain, Kulliyatash’arwaathar e

farsi Shaikh Baha’i, preface by sa’idNafisi, chakame publication,

Tehran, 1361

8. Baha’odin ‘amili, Muhammad ibn Hussain, Resale Nan wa halva,

nashr e Agahan ide, Tehran, 1385.

9. Baqdadi, Abu-al-Barakat, al-Mu’tabar fi al-Hikmat, Zain al-

AbedinMousavi and Ta’ligh by SulaimanNadavi, Heidarabaddakan,

1357-1358 AH

10. Dhahabi, Muhammad, Siar al-a’lam al-nobala’, by effort of

basharawadma’rouf and mohyihilal al-sarhan, Beirut, 1405 AH.

11. EstarAbadi, Mulla Muhammad Amin, Al-Fawa’id al-madaniawa al-

Shawahid al-Makkia, Ghom, muasast al-Nashr al-Islami, 1426 AH.

12. Ghazali, Abu hamid Muhammad, al-Monqadhmin al-zalal, Dar

waMaktabat al-hilal, Beirut, 1993.

13. Ghazali, Muhammad, tahafat al-falasafe, Dar al-Ma’arif, n.p,

1392AH.

14. Hakimi, Muhammad Reza, Ijtihadwataghliddarfalsafe, daftar e nashr e

farhang e eslami, Tehran, 1378.

15. Hakimi, Muhammad Reza, Ma’adjesmanidarhekmatmota’alie, Ghom,

dalil e ma, 1381.

16

16. Hakimi, Muhammad Reza, Maktab e tafkik, daftar e nashr e farhang e

eslami, Tehran, 1376.

17. Halabi, Mahmud, taghriratmirza Mahdi esfahani,

MakazasnadAstanghodsrazavi, Mashad, n.d, No.12480.

18. Hamuvi, Yaghout ibn Abdollah, Mo’jam al-udaba, Dar al- Ma’mun,

Egypt, n.d.

19. Hilli, Hassan ibn yousof, ajwabat al-masa’il al-mahna’iya, matba’t al-

khayam, Ghom, 1401AH.

20. Hilli, Hassan ibn yousof, Nahj al-haghwakash al-sidgh, allaghahu

‘ainallahhassaniormavi, Dar al-kitab al-lobnani, Ghom 1982.

21. Hilli, Hassan ibn yousof, tadhkarat al-foghaha, Mo’assat Al al-bayt

(pbut), Ghom, 1414AH.

22. Ibn Jozi, Abd al-Rahman, TalbisIblis, Dar al-Fikr, Beirut, 1426 AH.

23. Ibn Sina, Hussain ibn Abdollah, al-ilahiat min kitab al-shifa’, research

by Hassan HassanzadeAmoli, ghom, publication center of

DaftartabliqatIslami, 1376.

24. Ibn Taymiya, Ahmad Ibn Abdol-Halim, Al-Raddala al-mantighieen,

Beirut, Dar-al-Fikr al-Lobnani, 1993.

25. Ibn Taymiya, Ahmad Ibn Abdol-Halim, dar’ota’aroz al-‘aqlwa al-

naql, research and correction of manuscript by Muhammad abd al-

razzaq Hamza and Sulaiman bin abd al-rahman al-sani’, Dar al-kotob

al-‘ilmia, Beirut,1993.

26. Ibn Taymiya, Ahmad Ibn Abdol-Halim, Majmu’ al-fatawa, research

by mostafaabdal-qadirata, Dar al-kotob al-‘ilmia, 2000.

27. Ibn Taymiya, Ahmad Ibn Abdol-Halim, Majmu’at al-rasa’ilwa al-

masa’il(haqiqatmadhhab al-itahadiin aw wahdat al-vojud), hadith

extraction and commented by Muhammad Rashid Reza, Dar al-kotob

al-‘ilmia, Beirut,1983.

28. Ibn Taymiya, Ahmad Ibn Abdol-Halim, Majmu’at-ol-Rasa’ilva al-

Masa’il (HaghighatMadhhab al Itihadiin aw wahdat al-wojud),

Muhammad Rashid Reza, Beirut, Dar al-maktab al-‘ilmia, 1983.

29. Ibn Taymiya, Ahmad Ibn Abdol-Halim, Minhaj al-Sunnah, research

by Muhammad Rashad Salim, Riaz, Jami’at al-Imam Muhammad bin

So’ud, 1986.

30. Ibn-al-Athir, Izzidin Abu al-hassan Ali-ibn Abi-al-Karam, Al-Kamil

Fi al-tarikh, Beirut, 1965.

17

31. Ibn-al-nadim, Al-Fihrist, research by Reza Tajaddod, Tehran, Asatir

publication, 1381.

32. Isfahani, Mirza Mahdi, abvab al-Hoda fi Bayan Tarighat al-hidayat al-

IlahiyawaMukhalafatma’a al-‘olum al-younaniya,n.d, n.p.

33. Jorjani, Ali ibn Muhammad, sharh al-Mawaghif, publication of

Muhammad badr al-din na’sani al-halabi, Egypt, 1907.

34. Lahiji, Abd al-Razaq, Shawariq al-ilham fi sharhtajrid al-Kalam,

research by Akbar asadzadeh, Mua’sese Imam sadiq (pbuh), 1433AH.

35. Mutahari, Murtaza, Kullyat ‘olumeslami, sadra, Tehran, 1389.

36. Najashi, Ahmad ibn Ali, Rijal al-najashi, nashr e ketabkhane sheikh

alimahallatiha’eri, Mumbai, 1317AH.

37. Razi, Fakhr al-din, al-mabahith al-mashrighia, nashr e bidar, Ghom,

1370.

38. Razi, Fakhr al-din, al-muhasal, research by Hussain otai, Maktabatdar

al-torath, Cairo, 1411 AH.

39. Razi, Fakhr al-din, al-tafsir al-kabir, Dar ihyatorath al-‘arabi, Beirut,

1405AH.

40. Sayed ja’farSeyedan, gholamrezafayazi, hamidParsania, Session for

studying relation of reason and revelation from viewpoint of

philosophy and separation school, , ma’aref journal,Bahman&Esfand,

1384, No. 34.

41. Shahrestani, abd al-karim, nihayat al-aghdam fi ‘ilmal-kalam, Alfred

gium, Cairo, n.d.

42. Soyuti, jalal al-din, Boqyat al-vo’at fi tabaghat al-loghaviinwa al-

nohat, Dar al-Fikr, Beirut, 1979.

43. Zarrinkub, Abdol Hossain, Dar ghalamrov e vojdan, Tehran, Elmi

Pablication, 1369.