خلاصة:
In this article the impact of Mulla Sadra’s philosophical opinions concerning necessary being on his understanding of the Qur’anic verses is critically reviewed. To this end، all exegetical and philosophical books of Mulla Sadra have been studied and the instances in which he has–under the influence of the above opinions– inferred meanings other that the apparent meanings from the Qur’anic verses، have been collected. Then، with reference to other verses، narrations، apparent meanings، Revelation occasions، content of the verses in question، and their evidences and، in view of the absurdity of the intellectual requirements of some of Mulla Sadra’s interpretations، the validity of the aforementioned inferences were verified and this conclusion is drawn that from among the seven interpretations that Mulla Sadra has presented under the influence of the above opinions، only one instance can be confirmed.
ملخص الجهاز:
Important views, such as the Descent and Ascent Arc which is rooted in the actions of God, the Proof of the Righteous, the Simple Truth Rule, and… have been effective in Sadr al-Din Shirazi’s understanding of Quranic verses, and as a result of their influence, he has derived meanings from important verses, such as the Verse of Light, other than their apparent meanings.
Criticism and Investigation Sadr al-Din Shirazi has considered God’s testimony in this verse to be about His own existence and has assumed that the meaning of the verse is that the testimony of the Necessary Existence about Himself is the greatest of testimonies, and there is no need for the non-necessary to prove God (the Proof of the Righteous), whereas in this verse, God’s testimony is about the truth of the prophethood of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).
2- The claim that Sadr al-Din Shirazi says the word “ratq” refers to absolute necessary existence is flawed for two reasons: a) Absolute necessary existence, beyond which there is no rank, is the same sacred essence of God. Therefore, the sign and verse must be united with what the sign is presented to prove, and such a matter is impossible.
Given that the meaning of “the light of God” is not the light of existence and the true existence that shines from God upon possibilities, it becomes clear that the things Sadr al-Din Shirazi said about the other similes mentioned in the verse are not correct.
(
, 
, 
)
