Among the questions of fundamental importance in theoretical Sufism is analysis of the realm of all other than God, after oneness of being (wahdat al-wujood). Enumerating necessary preliminaries of the discussion, this paper investigates into tajalli (theophany) as a scheme, which is put in charge of explaining and analyzing Multiplicities. What, for the author, can be of special importance is the validity of what is ascribed to mystics, especially to those following Muhyi al-Din Ibn al-'Arabi. Meanwhile in the writings of some researchers, there are some wrong conceptions, which are decisively ascribed to Shaykh Akbar; if we are to prevent research harms, we should avoid such erroneous ascriptions and undertake to represent opinions precisely. So the author sets forth Shaykh Akbar's and his expositor's words in a narrator-like way and then analyze them.

Man is the ultimate end in creation although ranked as the last. In Mowlana’s view, although fruit is produced from a tree, yet the ultimate purpose of the tree is its fruit.However, entangled in the nitty gritty of the material world he has remained ignorant of his spiritual truth. The purpose of creation is the manifestation of God’s attributes, and actions hence man is the embodiment of such manifestation. The seeker of God must die to self before he can shine with the divine light. After putting out the fires of ego, the divine light of the soul shines through, when burnished of all its rust, the mirror of the soul perfectly reflects the attributes of God. By bringing such stories as Merchant and the parrot, Mowlana illustrates that the ultimate end of the Mystic path is this conscious death. This annihilation in the Beloved’s being facilitates the union.In this station, if the mystic wishes to give voice to his most intimate experience, his saying would come out as the ‘shath’, the ecstatic utterance and only a true mystic could perceive that state. In this stage, the traveler reaches an ecstatic state completely intoxicated and bewildered faced with the glory of God. Although in Mowlana’s view the melody which is inside the Perfect man, is the reflection of the eternal melody and Hallaj’s words were in fact the resonance of his own chords of existence which experienced selflessness, he was not, but the truth was. Mowlana believed that what the mystic attains in this ascent is total absorption in God and must not be confused with the incarnation of a spirit in a body because in this stage, the mystic merges in God, the part partakes the whole and not becoming whole.

Knowing God and relationship with him is one of the important theological issues in Abraham`s religions. Christianity believes that invisible God reflects in the incarnation of Christ. In the Christians` view, the Jesus Christ is the revelation of God. As a result, incarnation is one of the most important principles of Christianity. The Jews are opposed to incarnation but believe in anthropomorphism. However, belief in incarnation is sometimes considered. Islam neither accepts incarnation nor anthropomorphism of God; although anthropomorphism of angles and Satan are accepted but God may have theophanic manifestation in humans with his characteristics. The present paper describes anthropomorphism, incarnation, and theophany in three religions of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism.

Hurufiyya was a mystical sect that was formed after Mongol invasion in later 14th and early 15th century. Their teachings took root in Ismailism and belief in symbolic interpretation of Scriptures.  Imadaddin Nasimi (14th-century), the most famous and learned poet of the sect, has presented the thoughts of Hurufiyya. He believes that the man is vicegerent of God on Earth and manifestation of Him. Man is the locus of theophany of Divine Names and Quran.In the present article, the thoughts of Imadaddin Nasimi are entertained.

In his writings, Mevlana's utilizes numerous allegories and similes to the allegories to convey his thoughts and teachings. In some cases, the allegories highly resemble each other. For example, depicting a lion, in all cases, it is described in circumstances that would mistakenly render it as a cow. This allegory is a symbol, an implicit and explicit synthesis of a being whose constituent elements, the lion and the cow, each represent an independent symbol. It demonstrates Mevlana's adeptness at creating an original symbol, for the intended synthesis, out of these elements. The religion of Islam and the Prophet's tradition asserted that the realities of diverse aspects of Messengership, namely, the Word of God, the Messenger of God and the God's saint, which can be called theophanies, are identical. Therefore, in order to create a symbol that symbolizes a theophany, Mevlana combines the symbol of the Divine, the lion, with the symbol of the world, the cow. Thus, to symbolize both aspects, he uses the symbol of the lion in the image of a cow. Although this symbol is utilized in Divan-e-Shams, its highest application is in Mathnawi. The repetition of this symbol is corroborative of its herein identified conceptual structure which describes the mode of applying this symbol throughout Mathnawi. Thus, it unveils its significance, function and embodiment in Mevlana's thought and language.

The goal of this study is surveying the similarities and differences between “ Sharh-e-Shatahiyat” by Rouz Bahan Baqli and “ Javaher-ol-Asrar” by Shaikh Azari Esfarayeni. The results indicated that these authors, through a pathology of Mysticism, have criticized the Sufi elders on the one hand, and have defended them on the other. Some of the common points of Sharh-e-Shatahiyat and Javaher-ol-Asrar include their Persian language, the respectful view of authors to Masters of Sufism and Mysticism, interpretation of Moqattae letters and semi-theophany words of the Prophet Mohammad and the theophany locutions of elders of Sufism, using verses from Holy Quran and the Prophet’ s utterances while interpreting theophany locutions. Regarding differences could be said that paying attention to semi-theophany locutions of Kholafay-e Arbae (the four Caliphs) is one of the characteristics of Sharh-e-Shatahiyat, was interpreting versified theophany locutions of mystical poets is the feature of Javaher-ol-Asrar. Moreover Rouz Bahan himself is a master of theophany locutions, and his interest in Hallajʼ s theophany locutions is obvious in his work. Such locutions, by Azari have not been reported, and, therefore, he can be counted as a member of Sahv School, who regarded all locutions from all sheiks. Differing ideologies of the two authors is also among the effective factors the content of the two works. Technical and difficult prose style of Rouz Bahan, in comparison with the relatively flowing prose of Shaikh Azari is another aspect of their distinction.

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.

In Holy Quran (68: 42) one of the characteristics of the Day of Judgment has been described as “the day when the leg shall be bared” which is a metaphor for removing the veil of Glory, and subsequently the humiliation of creatures are shown by general command for prostration. In this research, by taking advantage of mystical principles and traditional commentaries, four propounded questions about these verses (68: 42-43) are responded: the generality of this command, benefit and sagacity of prostration, polytheists' disability, and whose presence to prostrate. By referring to the Hadith Tahawwol (a tradition about God's self-transmutation at the Resurrection) -upon which Ibn al-Arabi's theory of Ilah ul-Motaghid were developed- and the other traditions mentioned under these verses by other commentators, author comes to the conclusion that the interpretation of “the leg shall be bared” is associated with divine theophany in the form of Perfect Man. According to Hadith Tahawwol, God reveals Himself to each group of people, but they keep on denying Him until He transmutes Himself into a form that has the mark which they recognize. However, the Day of Judgment is the field where monotheists are detached from others. Hence, a particular theophany is needed by which monotheists start prostrating and others fail to do so. Concerning the fact that in Shiite tradition the phrase “saq al-arsh” has been interpreted as the meeting place of the light of oneness (Tawhid) and the Mohammadian light, and “Kashf saq” has been interpreted as the authority and guardianship of Shiite Imams, and with regard to what is narrated in Bukhari's Sahih one can interprete the verse as the epiphany of universal guardianship. Therefore, prostration in the Day of Judgment before this Truth is like angles’ bowing down to man.

Some scholars believe that mystical monism, by denying human distinctions, leaves no room for the formation of the concepts of "self" and "other" and the "I-you" relationship, which is essential for moral thinking. Therefore, the subject of this article is how to develop the concepts of "self" and "The Other" based on the ontology of Ibn Arabi's unity of existence and tried to show by the analytical method based on the mystical principles of "unity in plurality", "Names manifestation", "multiplicity of directions" and the principle of "No repetition in theophany" that in Ibn Arabi's theory of unity of existence, human distinctions are not eliminated and we can speak of a relationship based on "I-you" under the concepts of "self" and "other", which thus provides the condition for the possibility of morality. The monistic mystic also sees both the "self" before the "other" and finds the "other" within himself without reducing the other to himself and questioning his originality and otherness. At the same time, it is argued that the belief to the fundamental unity of human beings not only does not make morality impossible, but is one of its essential conditions.

The "perfect man" is a term that Sufis invented and used in their discussions about ontological problems. On the one hand, it is related to the knowledge of God; and on the other hand, it is related to anthropology and cosmology. They believe that perfect man is the most complete theophany in the world, and therefore is the best mirror for the Majesty and the Divine Beauty, and the mediator in creation. Thus the knowing of perfect man is necessary for the knowing of the world and its creator. The Quran and the Imams, also introduced, interpreted and explained the characteristics of the perfect man. In this article, we study a part of Imam Ali's words and Sufis's words about perfect man.