Although the concept of "being" is known, and its nature is the same, there are different views on it. Ibn Arabi's view on the issue has a different and special place. Ontology in his school is tied to another fundamental issue called the "personal unity of being", without understanding which, it is difficult to achieve the ontological system of this great mystic. Therefore, we have tried to seek his opinion about "being" directly by relying on his two important books, Fotuhat and Fosus. According to Ibn Arabi, there is a single being in the universe, and that is the Almighty, and the rest of the beings are manifestations, or in other words, the names and attributes of God.

According to Quran (72nd verse of Surah Al Ahzab), "God did indeed offer the Trust to the Heavens and the Earth and the Mountains; but they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof: but man undertook it; He was indeed unjust and foolish." There are various interpretations of this verse and the nature of Trust. The Trust is regarded by most interpreters of the Quran as a capacity, quality, or a belief which is fixed in human soul by God. But, for Ibn Arabi and based on his mysticism, these three, i.e., the Trust, the trustee (God who offers the Trust), and the Trust holder (the man who accepted the trust) are the same. This article, regarding Ibn Arabi's different remarks on the interpretation of this verse and based on his monism and the manifestation of God in the universe, tries to analyze his interpretation.

In Ibn Arabi's mysticism human being is considered a historical being nor a substantial one, as believed by Aristotle. According to historical Gods attributes at any given era, the reality emerges in a specific way and human, as complementary embodiment existence, has deep relation to the historical emergence of reality. Knowing self embodiment, human being is able to pass the history and time and achieve eternity. In this way, historical a of Ibn Arabi toward human being becomes totally different from the primordial view of history toward modern era, because out of history there is no reality while in Mohioddin's mysticism human being tries to exit from the history and achieve the reality of universe.

In the present study, we focus on Ibn Sina's thoughts (359-416 AH) on the what, why, principles, realm and how of interpretation and its explanation based on Islamic mysticism. According to Ibn Sina, interpretation refers to the act of revealing truth in its true sense. In this regard, there is no difference between Ibn Sina and Ibn Arabi. Although they have their own language and terminology, they are similar in definition, principles and the why of interpretation. There are, of course, differences between the two in the realm of interpretation and how to interpret a proposition. To deal with the differences, we first draw on the works of Ibn Sina and then explain our findings based on the sources of Islamic mysticism. The most important finding of the present study is the new explanation of Ibn Sina's thought based on the teachings of Islamic mysticism. Our goal is a deeper understanding of Ibn Sina's terms and their mystical explanation. To this end, we have adopted the method of philosophical-intellectual analysis of words and propositions.

In the western civilization, the predominant methods belang to the category of the "hermeneutics of suspicion". In contrast, Islamic civilizationis charactrized by various interpretive methods that deserve to be called the "hermenuetics of trust", although this, of course, is trust in God alone. nonetheless, despite a general agreement on the importance of trusting in God, one can observea deep tensian between the interpretive approach of the Mutakallimun and the urafa, the "gnostics". the mutakallimun, and along with them that of the fuqahii, is were more likely to trust in God"s wrath and ven geance, while the urafa preferred to trust in God"s Mercy and forgiveness. the writer endeavours to explain in detail Ibual-A"rabi"s theoris about same important concepts as Mercy, trust in God, incomparahility, and similarity. in this respect, he refers to basic texts of Ibnal-A"rabi.

"Rahmat" God's blessing and mercy, can be divided in two types, i.e. general and specific blessings. The general blessing is for all the creatures,, whether good or evil whether obeying or committing sins, etc. The specific blessing is for the universe and the man on the basis of his good deeds. A perfect man's heart is created by "rahmat". Since this heart has the manifestation of all the divine names and features, it is more prevailing than it. Hence, "rahmat" exceeds the wrath. Therefore, it is for the persons in the hell as well. It should be considered that God's punishment is also a sort of "rahmat". The punishment of the people of the holy prophet Yunes Caused "rahmat" to be returned to them.

Muhyeddin Ibn Arabi, one of the greatest theorists and founder of monism school of thought in Islamic mysticism, has discussed in details in the twenty third chapter of the fourth section of his book titled Futuhat Makkiah under the title of Fil Bahalil va Aemmatehem Fil Bahlelah about the divine madness and their delicate behavior. Ibn Arabi in his book calls them Bahaleil and their madness is taken to be from the sudden emergence of the unknown world. In his view, the dominance of such an emergence has caused them so intoxicated that made their ever ascension of their rationality to the spiritual world, however, without their tactfulness of cognition, God makes them talk wisely.The smashing of the mountain- like hearts of these people is caused by the manifestation of the divine grace just like the Fainted Moses due to the manifestation of God on the Mountain as well as the same panic coming to the Prophet Muhammad at the outset of the divine revelation. The difference between their madness and the sensation of prophets is that God keeps their wisdom because of the prophet mission, but keeps the wisdom of mad people captured for himself. Ibn Arabi had had some meetings with mad people and has welcome their wise and meaningful behaviors. He has mentioned the behavior and remarks of one of the greatest divine mad people in his short reports without mentioning his name, talking about his sympathy and condolence with him and some parts of his talking with him. To explain different divine mad people he has named some people such as Bohlul, Sa' doon, Abu Vahab, Fazel, and the like, while he has seen some of them to be in reflection andsome other ones being astonished. As claimed by himself, he has tasted the stage of divine madness and has compared his own state of mind with Shebelli being mad and unconscious. He has explained on the prayers to be stranger to themselves and to the surroundings, and as well, his being within a vast source of light while praying and other wonderful state of mind unaware of himself.

This article will answer the questions posed after studying Abu-Zaid’s report of Ibn-Arabi in the book ""Hakaza Takallam Ibn-Arabi" such as: is Abu-Zaid’s perception and interpretation of Ibn-Arabi correct, exact and fair-minded? Does his analysis of Ibn-Arabi show his personality and views or not?Although Abou-Zaid’s report of Ibn-Arabi is relatively correct and indicates the formation of his cognitive identity and also it is apparent that he is in harmony with him, but he in fact tries to use Ibn-Arabi and some of his theories to form his own intellectual ideas.Presenting Abu-Zaid’s narration of Ibn-Arabi in this article, his reading will be criticized.

According to the Islamic mystical texts, and in spite of the writings of the hagiographers, Sufi masters were not willing to do miracles and extraordinary practices. On the contrary, these extraordinary practices had no essential role in the development of early Sufism. But gradually when the Sufi orders were established, speaking about the miracles of the masters became prevalent among the naive adherents of Sufism.They used these stories as a proof of the superiority of their masters.However, some of the Muslim philosophers and mystics such as Ibn Sina and Ibn Arabi, speak about the possibility of these practices.Ibn Sina in the tenth chapter of Isharat wa Tanbihat surveys the mystery of non-prophetical miracles (kiramat) and extraordinary practices and he tries to give rational reasons to prove it. Ibn Arabi also brings many examples of Sufi miracles in his works. He categorizes extraordinary practices into miracles, non-prophetical miracles and magic. He insists on the possibility of non-prophetical miracles.

Considering the fact that the words in the intra-religious attitude are considered in two ways, the first is towards jurisprudential words and the second is a rational and conceptual view focusing on their meanings. we have tried to deal with one of the most important issues of intra-religious attitude with a rational approach by descriptive and analytical method, which is the category of "hermeneutic interpretation" of words, especially the most influential idea of interpretation & that is the view of the "spirit of meaning" of Ghazali. After Ghazali, Ibn Arabi used this theory of Ghazali regarding the development of meaning in creating his new idea, and by re-reading Ghazali's idea with a mystical approach, he presented his own theory regarding the expansion of meaning. While accepting the argument of the focal point of the theory of the spirit of meaning, he removes it from the exclusivity to the "linear", and for this purpose, he brought up arguments as well as the Conditions of Hermeneutic Interpretation in this regard. Ibn Arabi's arguments on transversal interpretation include new formulations in the argument, which after him, this theory was favored and accepted by Mulla Sadra, and then it was accepted by his students.