A Comparative Study of Shaykh al‑Mufīd and Mullā Ṣadrā on the World of Dharr (ʿĀlam al‑Dharr)

Moqaddam, Gholamali; Salem, Hanieh

doi:10.22034/pke.2025.20901.1975

A Comparative Study of Shaykh al‑Mufīd and Mullā Ṣadrā on the World of Dharr (ʿĀlam al‑Dharr)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Gholamali Moqaddam ¹
Hanieh Salem ²

¹ Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy and Islamic Theology, Razavi University of Islamic Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

² MA Student in Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Razavi University of Islamic Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

10.22034/pke.2025.20901.1975

Abstract

The world of dharr (ʿālam al‑dharr) is among the most challenging and fascinating topics in religious knowledge (maʿārif‑i dīnī), briefly mentioned in the Qurʾān and discussed in greater detail in the ḥadīth traditions. The reality of the dharr covenant has been examined by scholars of Islamic sciences from various perspectives. Some have judged the event of dharr as symbolic, while others have accepted it as a real occurrence. Among the latter group, some interpret the world of dharr in its literal (ẓāhirī) sense, while others have engaged in its hermeneutical interpretation (taʾwīl) and justification. Shaykh al‑Mufīd, considering certain aspects, has offered a hermeneutical interpretation of the dharr event. Mullā Ṣadrā has also provided a theosophical (ḥikmī) interpretation of the world of dharr. The research question is: What are the points of agreement and disagreement in the approach and hermeneutical interpretation of these two Shīʿī thinkers concerning the world of dharr? In this article, employing the method of content analysis (taḥlīl‑i muḥtawā) and a comparative approach (rawish‑i muqāyisih‑ī), the engagement of Mullā Ṣadrā and Shaykh al‑Mufīd with this topic has been subjected to a comparative study. It is shown that the two thinkers differ on certain points, such as the evaluation of chain‑based authenticity (iʿtibār‑i sanadī) and the existence of particles without the attachment of a soul, while they agree on other points, such as the rejection of a literal interpretation, the provision of a rational hermeneutical interpretation (taʾwīl‑i ʿaqlānī), and the manner of addressing objections.

Keywords