In the history of Islamic though, faith and GNOSIS -Iman va Ma’rifat- are two key and controversial theological concepts, having always been subject the argument. Some important theological problems such as excommunication and calling one profligate-Takfir va Tafsiq-, principle of rational goodness and badness -Hosn va Qobh-i Aqli- are obviously consequences of diversity in definition of these two concepts. Among Muslim scholars, Sufis based on their own world- view, have had a particular conception towards them. Sufis attractive attitude stimulates us to investigate their definition of Iman and Ma’rifat.So, the present paperis an attempt to survey them semantically and examine their relation with each other and the impact of reseating on faith according to Sufis’ words and views. Eventually the resemblance of Sufis’ viewpoint with the approach of the fideists and reformed epistemologists have briefly been presented.

Two MYSTICAL paths have been explained in books of mysticism: Ibn-e-Arabi’s “special-mode path (of GNOSIS)” and “Shettar” path. As the uppermost path of GNOSIS, Shettar path has occasionally been considered the same as ‘’special-mode’’ path. In the present study, the special-mode path, as an immediate one between God and His servants through eternal essence, is compared with Shettar path, as love path. Then, enumerating the traits of either one, we have concluded that an identification of one with the other is not correct and that such identification was carried out by Kebrooyeh after they approved of Ibn-e-Arabi’s thoughts. Of course, one can easily render an ontological analysis of Shettar path by means of special-mode path.

Gnosticism is one of the important religious - Gnostic schools at the beginning centuries of Christian era. In this paper, the important Gnostic schools of the second and the third century A.D. are analyzed. These Gnostic schools are mainly based on the ideas of Gnostics of the early Christianity, such as Simon the Magus. Valentine, Marcion, and Basilides. Gnostic attitude in Hermetic literature and in Mandaism, Sabaeans (Sābiūn) or Mughtasilah (Babtizers), is a complementary analysis of Gnosticism.The new theme that is presented through this paper is Manichaean GNOSIS which originated from Gnosticism of the early Christianity. In the 3rd century A.D., the eastern religious intellectuals (as the followers of Denavariyye in khorasan (and the western religious - Gnostic schools (in Asia Minor, Syria and Egypt) were grossly influenced by it. Manichaean Gnostic motif is the descend of spirit from the light paradise to this material world. So, human function, according to this school, is to release the celestial spirit particles imprisoned in the material bodies, salvation of the souls, and finally to the Realm of Light.

Intuitive GNOSIS or MYSTICAL knowledge is different from conventional sensual or rational knowledge. This knowledge is not achieved through theoretical contemplation but is attained through remembering God, meditation, purification of soul and MYSTICAL life. In this knowledge there is no distance or medium between the object and subject of knowledge. In other words, the knower and the known or the witness and witnessed enjoy a kind of unity or union and connection. Hence, this knowledge is known as direct, intuitive and without medium. The subjects of this GNOSIS are God, universes of being and inner and hidden worlds which, in the viewpoint of mystic, are nothing but the divine inner manifestations. As our ordinary knowledge is diverse and gradational, MYSTICAL intuition too is diverse and gradational. As our ordinary perceptions are divided into sensual and rational, our MYSTICAL discoveries are divided into formal and spiritual.From the perspective of Islamic mysticism, the superior path to GNOSIS of God and faith in Him is intuitive knowledge. There are two criteria for assessment of MYSTICAL institution, particularly for non-mystics, i.e. reason and revelation. The main thrust of the present paper is to sum up the viewpoints of the Muslim mystics about this issue.

In the series articles by Mr. Biabani Oskouei, "GNOSIS of God" was regarded as "the Act of God and His blessing" and the concept of acquiring this knowledge based on Quran and traditions was rejected. In this essay, the author tries to answer these questions: If "GNOSIS of God" is Act of God and is only from God, why is it regarded as the man’s duty to accept it?What is the role of Prophets in creating this knowledge and understanding it by logic?In cases where God puts instruments and tools for gaining knowledge, these instruments are instruments, therefore what is the meaning of God’s direct creation and if they are ineffective, what are they needed for? In order to prove God’s full one-and-only Power, the rejectionists of "Elliyat" principle refused the impact of middle causes; neglecting the fact that "being middle causes of some other cause" (sababbiyat) is created and endowed by God the Alimighty Himself.

In viewpoint of Ibn Arabi and according to the theory of continuous generation, knowledge is the permanent manifestation of God in the hearts which have not been veiled by the worldly amusements. True knowledge is accompanied with practice whose result is spiritual paradise. In his viewpoint, the status of knowledge is divine and the status of GNOSIS is related to the Lordship.Therefore, knowledge is superior to GNOSIS. A mystic is only the place of witness of the Lord's Name, but scholar is one in whom God is manifested with His quiddity and divinity. Hence he witnesses all the Divine Names. On the basis of this distinction, GNOSIS belongs to the world of generation while knowledge belongs to the world of commandment. Meanwhile, mystic enjoys MYSTICAL conditions while they are not manifest in the scholar. Mystics are monotheists, but scholars are monotheists because of being Gnostic, i.e., only it is the scholars who who possess the knowled of uniqness of multiplicity.

GNOSIS is the paramount kind of knowledge about the most supreme truth of the existence and as the elder scholars have said it is the noblest knowledge about the noblest issues. Furthermore, the tendency toward GNOSIS is innate in human being. Hence, GNOSIS enjoys a unique power of fascination and lots of the people who search for culmination seek it enthusiastically. Meanwhile, as a result of the high value of the pearl of GNOSIS, distinguishing the pure GNOSIS from the false and fake ones is difficult. Most of time, the pure GNOSIS remains unknown and abandoned because of the ornamented façade and deceitfulness of the fake GNOSIS. Although GNOSIS is inherent in the Islamic knowledge and an inseparable part to the Shiite knowledge, unfortunately it has remained hidden and its reality is unknown and lots of its aspirers wander around in its search. Therefore, in order to enjoy the bounty of GNOSIS and remain intact from the semi-GNOSIS and fake spiritualities, it is crucial to realize the features of the true GNOSIS, which is the very same pure Shiite GNOSIS. The present work, as a small step in this long route, is an attempt to provide some of the most important features of the Shiite GNOSIS.

This study explores the distinguished Persian Sufi mystic Shaykh Maḥmūd Shabestarī’s Golshan-e Rāz, or The Rose Garden of Mystery. Adopting a hermeneutic approach, it scrutinizes the intricate spiritual journey towards divine realization delineated in Shabestarī’s poetry, utilizing qualitative content analysis of original texts and interpretations by scholars such as Lāhījī and Ibn Turka Iṣfahānī. The main question the paper addresses is this: “How can the spiritual journeyer overcome obstacles—particularly ‘otherness’—and achieve unity with the divine Essence within the framework of Islamic mysticism, as interpreted through Shabestarī’s teachings in Golshan-e Rāz?” To answer this inquiry, the paper addresses pivotal questions concerning Shabestarī’s depiction of the spiritual journeyer’s path, its stages and challenges, and the critical role of the human form in divine manifestation. The study underscores the necessity of overcoming duality and distinction, alluding to the transformative nature of the journey that necessitates self-purification and the cessation of otherness. Findings from this study provide an enriched understanding of Shabestarī’s thought, contributing to the discourse on Islamic metaphysics. It presents valuable insights into the spiritual journeyer’s path, offering a comprehensive interpretation of the challenges, practices, and transformative experiences leading to divine realization and unity.

The mystics believe that knowledge is necessary in mystic journey, because the ignorance is the cause of corruption in many of travelers on the mystic way. According to Abdullah Ansari a Sufi without knowledge is Devil while ignorance is poison that which destroys travelers on the mystic way. In his opinion, GNOSIS is spirit of knowledge and it is Divine vision that it don’t happen by acquisition. In mystic journey, Knowledge is a light that illumines darkness of the mystic way, while GNOSIS is ladder that which ascends travelers on the mystic way. If a mystic talks with religious scholars and they acquire his talking, this is knowledge for scholars, while all of knowledge is GNOSIS for mystics. In reality intellectual knowledge turns into esoteric knowledge i.e. whenever is known for religious scholars is witnessed for Gnostics. As a result of that it is necessary that a traveler on the mystic way takes away veil of knowledge and remove to the states of the mysticism. In station of knowledge, i.e. before taking away its veil human intelligence is knowledgeable and rational soul joys of that, but in station of GNOSIS, rational soul is effacement and spirit is knowledgeable and joys of that.

In John’s Gaspel, Jesus heralds the coming of someone called Peraclete or Paraclete. Peraclete means “praised” and has been used in ancient texts.Paraclete in the sense accepted by the Church means “consolation” or the “Holy Spirit”.Through a study of the Gnostic theory of Theophany, the quality of the manifestation of divine names and attributes in the various levels of being, the perfect man’s being the manifestation of the supreme name of God, its manifestation in the existence of the Holy Prophet (s) and Infallible Imams (a) and its continuity with the presence of God’s remainder (Imam Mahdi (a)), aims to demonstrate that what Jesus heralds in John’s Gospel is the same Muhammedan truth, which existed in all the prophets and reached its perfect manifestation in the Holy Prophet (s) and the Infallible Imams (a).In line with this goal, the writer of this paper first explains the first theophany and manifestation of Muhammedan truth, whose other names are the “first intellect” and the “Holy Spirit”. Then she refers to the second theophany as a result of which all the existents that are present in the divine Knowledge in the first theophany appear in the outside world, and the Muhammedan truth, which appears as the perfect man in the clothes of prophet hood, messenger ship, and leadership (Imamat) and is the guardian of all the worlds of being, is the same consoling entity, the Holy Spirit or the praised whose coming and staying Jesus has heralded. Hence, in spite of the conceptual differences between the two words of Peraclete and Paraclete, there is no difference between them in terms of their referents. The referent of both is one truth which is the Muhammedan truth.