Life, Character and School of Mulla Sadra
Prof.S.M.Khamenei
The Last Decade of Mulla Sadra's Life
Here, since we are not going to write about the lives of Mulla
Sadra's disciples in detail, it is better to be brief, and throw a glance on Shiraz of those days, and study the last decade of the philosopher's life.
As we have already pointed out, Shiraz has been the cradle of gnosis and philosophy since the old times. In that city, the great theologians and philosophers has changed the realm of science through their attempts, at least for two hundred years. Beside this stormy exterior, there was a quite and dynamic interior, which had centuries of history behind. Perhaps, in the esoteric activities of Husain ibn
Mansur Hallaj, his masters and disciples there had been such a phenomenon. And these Batini
(esoteric) activities were, in fact, the esoteric method of Islamic Sufism and Batinism. As we have already said, due to this reason Shiraz was called the tower of the Mystics- i.e. the castle of Mysticism.
As against these two movements, another movement, i.e. the movement of Ash'aris was advanced . Like other groups, who were bereft of true and mystical knowledges, piety and sincerity, and because of their ambition for the wealth and worldly positions, this group also had been attracted to the courts of the kings and the rulers. They spoke and wrote for the sake of money
,
and like the vultures they were always in secret war with their likes, and lived in an atmosphere full of hypocrisy, competition and conspiracy.
The kings' courts also were in need of such ostentatious scholars, and prepared for them some position and wealth, and in the proper time made uses of them.
Because of its tendency toward the worldly wealth and dependence on the powerful rulers, this movement had become prevalent, and had pushed the true scholars of that land from the scene of the science, philosophy and mysticism, aside. In the century, in which Mulla Sadra
came into being- whether in pre-Safavid or in Safavid era- such an atmosphere was prevalent in Shiraz. Though, due to the personal mentalities of the rulers and social and political alterations, this situation experienced certain changes.
During his life in Shiraz, Mulla Sadra
had witnessed and experienced various conditions. Sometimes, he was captured in the conspiracies, plotted by the false scholars, and some other times he was at
a such high summit of the honor that these scholars were not able to harm him. In his youth, which was simultaneous with the period of the ministership of his father
(Khwajah Ibrahim Qawami) in the court of Sultan Muhammad Khudabandah, he was not involved in such machinations, since he was not to fight with the above-mentioned group. After return to Shiraz in the era of Allahwirdi
Khan, however, he had experienced, because of their opposition, a bitter life so that he was compelled to leave his homeland and retired in seclusion in the villages of Qum. Again, in the era of Imamquli Khan, though having returned to Shiraz
respectedfully and sit on the throne of the honor, this honor and peace did not last for a long time. After the murder of Imamquli Khan by Shah Safi, our philosopher was left alone. Thus he was exposed to the attacks, made by his opponents, the partisans of theology (kalam), plebian philosopher-like ones, muhaddithun, and devoid-of-piety foolish pious ones.
It is not clear that when his Sih asl was written, but some evidences suggest that he wrote this risalah
in his second period of staying in
"Oh coward, would you deny the science, which the light-footed wayfarers, having made foot from their brain and eye and spent their body and spirit to acquire it and left their reputation and positions and having been exposed to the ironies of some poor ignorant and some other superficial scholars like you, and having suppressed the desires of the soul, and having accepted the hardship and despondency for fifty years, contented themselves with that science being imprinted in their hearts?
This
pargraph, making an allusion to Mulla
Sadra himself, suggests that this risalah
had been written after his sixties. Since, in this paragraph, he noted that
he"had made foot out of his brain and eye for fifty years", which means that he had been wayfaring with full devotion, and also it is written that he had"spent the body and spirit to acquire it", that is he had lost his health and nerves;
and'left their reputation and positions", that is, he had left his high family position and gone in the category of the disciples and sought for the qualified masters, and burned the midnight oil to make copies of this or that book, and he had been exposed to the attacks and ironies, made by the ignorant enemies, and acquired the science of Illumination and the Divine knowledge, in expense of long ascetic practices...
Thus, if we regard his education as having been began since the age of ten, when he had been writing this risalah,
he had exceeded the age of sixty and it is much likely that he had been even older. Hence, the date of its being compiled could be regarded to be in the last decade of his life and after 1040 A.H, when he was staying, as it is said, in Shiraz for the last time.
Thus even in the last period of his life, and despite his social position in Shiraz,
Mulla Sadra (perhaps, because of the murder of his devotee, Imamquli khan and the rule of a cheap one of Safavid) had experienced the enmity of the "superficial scholars" and "the poor ignorant ones" - who live in all eras- and thus he had been heat-sore.
Mulla Sadra's
complaint of his contemporaries' denial suggests that his philosophical and, perhaps interpretive, doctrines were popular. Perhaps, in certain sessions he argued with them and answered their objections, but his warm breath could not treat their cold iron, and the steel nail of his philosophical, intellectual and intuitive demonstration was not able to go down in their stony hearts; and as he himself said, they denied these demonstrations.
Here it is worthy to look at another aspect of his life, that is his being a referent, to whom the well-minded and truth-seeking philosophers of time referred to solve their problems. His wide-spread fame in science and the firmness of his philosophical and mystical doctrines should be regarded as the reasons for this. It seems that this fame had began to spread when his works- such as his commentaries upon the Holy Quran, Asfar,
and other books- had been put down from the throne of his thought to the earth of writing, and the pen of his decree had got acquainted with the tablet of destiny of his created works, and his disciples and students took his sweet expressions like the sheet of gold and presented dozen copies of them to their friends.
Because of this fame, his contemporary philosophers, correspondingly and speakingly with him, asked him to solve their intricate problems. Some of these correspondences are available:
Solutions of the problems, posed by Mulla Shamsa
Gilani, who was apparently among Mulla
Sadra's friends, known as Ajwabat
al- masa'il-i Mulla Shamsa Gilani.
Solutions of the problems, posed by Mulla Muzaffar
(Husain) Kashani, who was apparently among Mir Findiriski's disciples, known as Ajawabat al- masa'il-i Kashaniyyah.
A treatise, called Ajwabat al- masa'il- 'awisiyyah, apparently compiled by his disciples.
The other treatise, which is called Ajwabat al-
masa'il al- Nasiriyyah, which contains, in fact, the solutions of the unsolved problems posed by Khwajah Nasir Tusi
for his contemporary philosopher Shams al-Din Khasrawshahi.
Mulla Sadra had posed the solutions of these problems, once in his youth, and again in the period of his experience. Having posed these solutions Mulla Sadra does not seem to have sought for fame, but his disciples had asked him to solve these problems, and employ his mafatih (keys) to open the gate of that impenetrable castle.
The other treatise, which has been put in writing under the title Al- ma sail al-khamsah (by Muhammad Baqir ibn Zayd al-'Abedin
in Qazwin, in 1034 A.H.). This treatise, as Mulla Sadra himself said, had been written for the dearest friends, i.e. the divine friends, and the closest dependants, i.e. the spiritual dependants.
If we do not take Ajwabat al-mas'ail al- Nasiriyyah into account, and regard Ajwabat al-masa'il- 'awisiyyah same as
Ajwabat al- mas'ail al- Kashaniyyah (in whose introduction, the term "Masa'il al- 'awisiyyah" is noted, and perhaps the copier himself has called the book so) there are totally three risalah for three persons available. It is not unlikely, however, that he was in correspondence with the other true scholars of his time, as well and the jewels of Sadrean
treasure had a good market, and this consoled the philosopher, to some extent.
From the intricacy of the philosophical problems, i.e. the so-called 'awisah, posed by his contemporary philsophers
and scholars to be solved by Mulla Sadra, his being a referent and his fame in the philosophical circles could be understood.
Surprisingly enough, in this time Mir Damad was still living and occupied with
writing books and training the disciples. And more surprisingly that Mulla
Shamsa Gilani himself, who was among those who posed problems to be solved by Mulla
Sadra, was among the disciples of Mir Damad and had a training circle in Khurasan; this is the case for the writer of Al- Masa'il al-
khamasah- who was in correspondence with Mulla Sadra in 1034( A.H.)- who posed his problems before 1041, when Mir Damad was still living, and received the solutions of his problems.
There is a copy of Mulla Sadra's solutions for the problem posed by Mulla Shamsa available, which had been written by Mulla 'Abdul Razzaq
Lahiji in Ma'sumiyyah school of Qum in 1034 A.H. to do service to his great master. This suggests that these problems had been posed before this date, when Mir Damad was living. From the last paragraph of this
risalah:
"What we have already said, was, taking our short time and the other limitations into account, presented to the extent, which our capacity allowed us to unveil the issues. These issues should be discussed in details, may God eliminate the obstacles and gather us in the same place, ..."
it can be concluded that even in thirties of the llth. Century when he lived in Qum, he was not free of worries and embarrassments, and had not the peace which the secluded ones have.
The fame of Mulla Sadra, which seems to reach its culmination in the thirties of the llth. Century A.H. is an independent phenomenon to be discussed independently. Among the consequences of this well reputation was the penetration of Mulla Sadra's school, "transcendent theosophy" in India continent. In that time, India (which, toady, consists of four countries, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Kashmir) was governed by the dynasty of Tymirids, some of whom were learned and good kings, partisans of the science and literature, and safeguarders
of the Persian culture and language.
In other words, this dynasty did many services to Persian language. In the time, when the formal language of Iranian court was Turkish, in the court of Indian kings, the Persian language was recognized as the formal language. In the time, when the Safavid kings, sometimes, expelled the famous Iranian scholars and poets, the court of the Indian king was considered as a base and refuge for them. And the development of the Persian literature, including poetry and establishment of the style known as Indian style- which is called by a group
"Isfahani style- should be correctly considered as indebted to the Indian court.The
Indians and Iranians are of the same race (the original Arian race), and the peoples of these two vast lands seem to have emigrated to this part of the world in the same time, some of them having stayed in India and the rest having come to Iran. Also in the ancient time, Iranians and Indians had had a common religion for a long while, which, perhaps, was considered as a single religion down to Zoroaster. The Persian and Sanskrit languages were of the same origin, and, in fact, a single language. In the next eras, besides the unanimity between the Indians and Iranians, there were also a sort of accord and spiritual and cultural unity between them.
Buddha, who reformed the ancient Brahman religion, and was considered contemporary with
Zoroaster, is much likely that, being influenced by Zoroaster or some magi among his disciples and follower, had left his own religion and put the garb of mission on. As regards Pythagoras also this historical thesis could be accepted. He also was contemporary with Zoroaster and among his disciples. He had studied the wisdom and the other sciences under magi and transmitted these sciences to the West and Mediterranean.
After the advent of Islam, and as soon as Islam, through Ghaznavis, reached India, it was welcomed. Since then also, Indians were always looking for the rays of wisdom, science, mysticism and literature to be illuminated from Iran, to absorb and safeguard them lovingly.
India was always a market in which the cultural products of Iran were presented. And, there, the scholars were always looking for what was to be imported from Iran, to enjoy it. In the eleventh Century (A.H.) the school of Mulla
Sadra and his dazzling philosophical doctrines exercised the same influences on the culture, spirit, and thought of Indians, which Hafiz lyric poems had exercised in the eighth. Century (A.H.). Hafiz himself had said:
"With Hafiz's poems are singing and dancing;
"The Kashmirean black eyed ones and the Smarkandean Turks.
According to the report provided by Dr. Seyyed
Hossein Nasr, in the festival of the 400th. anniversary
of Mulla Sadra's birth, in 1340 (A.H. solar year) in
"during the last three centuries, Mulla
Sadra's books were always taught in the [Indian] Islamic schools and, even, his As far was, till some years ago among the textbooks of the students of the advanced course of the intellectual sciences. After the replacement Arabic and Persian languages by Urdu and English languages, however, the teaching of Asfar was left, and since then only Sharh-i hidayat al- athiriyyah, among
Mulla Sadra's books, is taught".
Mulla Sadra's
Sharh-i hidayah was, in those regions so popular that it was called
"Mulla
Sadra". That is the term "Mulla Sadra, in these centuries, had been, rather to mention that philosopher, used to mention his Sharh-i-hidayah. The number of commentaries, written on this book in India, is much more than the number of the commentaries and glosses, written on this same book in Iran. These numerous commentaries are indicatives of the interest of the Indians in this book; and like Sabzawari's Sharh-i manzumah in Iran, this book was the most famous philosophical textbook in India.
Despite the fame of Mulla Sadra's
books, and in particular his Asfar and Sharh-ihidayah, in India, he is said to have been known mostly as a logician in India.
It is not clear why his Sharh-i hidayah had been more popular than his other valuable books. Some believe that the prevalent atmosphere in the Indian seminaries, following a sort of Hashwigari, which was opponent of the mysticism and Sufism, went to oppose to his mystical books and "transcendent theosophy". Some others consider it as originated from a sort of anti- Shi'i bigotry in those regions; this is, however, a weak hypothesis; since the enmity between Shi'is
and Sunnis and the social tensions, in those regions, originated after the rule of Britain on India; and, in fact, the enmity between two sects was caused by the colonial policy of Britain.
The historical experience and research show that the enmity between Islamic schools, whether between Shi'is and non- Shi'is or between Hanafis and Shafi'is or between these two on the one hand and Hanbalis on the other hand, and even the general massacre and taking women captive were always caused by the policies of Umayyad and Abbassid caliphs and their proteges
and the like.
Later, the unworthy and colonial governments also went to produce enmity between the peoples and divided them to conflicting groups, to make them busy and attract their attention to the other things. And under any possible pretext, these governments made the people fight against each other, and under the light of this schism plundered the national wealth easily.
Apart from India, in Asia Minor (present Turkey) also Mulla
Sadra was well-known for philosophers and theologians. In the 12th.century A.H. his Sharh-i
hidayah was translated to Turkish by Muhammad b. Mustafa al- Kafwi, and since then it has been published many times, and at least 200 handwritten copies of Mulla
Sadra's books, among which 11 copies are commentaries on his Sharh-i hidayah
written in Turkish, are available.
Even when the Ottoman Hanafis jurisprudents and muftis went to oppose to philosophy and intellectual sciences (apparently, simultaneous with the culmination of Akhbarigari in Iran, in the last part of Safavid rule) and most of philosophical books were prohibited to be taught, Mulla
Sadra's Sharh-i hidayah was still among the textbooks.
Later upon the translation of Sharh-i hikmat al-ishraq of Suhrawardi into Turkish, the Illummationist
philosophy became, as it is said under the influence of Mulla
Sadra's books, prevalent in the intellectual circles in Ottoman Turkey. According to the above-mentioned researcher, these copies of
Mulla Sadra's books were made mostly in the same era (for example, the copy of Diarbakr, made in 1125 A.H. (1724 a.d.); and the copy made by Raghib Pasha the grand vizier of Ottoman government in 1140/1727).
In 1724 Raghib Pasha was the martial attache
of Ottoman government in Tabriz and Hamadan, and played a significant role in the transmission of the Iranian and Shi'i culture and Mulla Sadra's book to Ottoman Turkey. He alluded to Mulla Sadra
as Muhaqqiq (researcher) and 'Allamah (omniscient). He himself made copies of Mulla Sadra'sAsfar, commentary
on Sharh-i hikmat al-ishraq, Shawahid al-rububiyyah, and Sharh-i
hidayah.
Later, perhaps because of the religious conflict between Iranian and Ottoman governments or the bigotry of Hanafis muftis or the shortage of handwritten copies,Mulla
Sadra's school was forgotten.
In Iraq and perhaps in the western region of Persian Gulf, Mulla
Sadra had been well - known and his books had attracted the attention. In Iraq, this had been caused by the presence of the seminary of Najaf, from which originated great Shi'i scholars and jurisprudents. On the other hand, not only the fact that Shi'i school was a spiritual link between Iraqis and Iranians but even the fact that Iraq and the western regions of the Persian Gulf, such as Ahsa and Bahrain had been in the realm of Iranian kings for a long time, had been influential in the origination of this phenomenon. And the political influence had led to cultural influence.
The most famous one, who despite his opposition to Mulla Sadra's doctrines, caused Mulla Sadra to be well-known in those regions was Shaykh Ahmad Ahsayi, whose (negative) attention to Mulla Sadra's
books and doctrines caused his books and doctrines to be well-known and prevalent in those regions.
He has had famous commentaries on 'Arshiyyah and Masha'ir, which are, more than commentary (shark},
similar to wounding (jarh). His commentaries were answered by the famous philosopher and mystic Mulla 'Ali Nuri and some other ones. Some have said that he
(Shaykh Ahmad Ahsayi) did not understand the philosophical issues.
The reason of this is that despite his vast knowledge of most of the popular sciences in Shi'i seminaries, Shaykh
Ahmad Ahsayi was captured by a sort of mental and even spiritual deviation. Instead of attempt to study the true Quranic knowledges and the Transcendent Theosophy, he proceeded to study the occult sciences such as alchemy (kimiya) and letter magic (simiya).
His famous student, from whose doctrines the deviated schools "Babiyyah"ai\d "Bahaiyyah"and
their innovations originated, i.e. Sayyid Kazim Rashti taught to his students how to employ sun and the other stars.
A sort of exaggeration about Imams has been assigned to Shaykh
Ahmad Ahsayi, and from his doctrines, a school called
"Shaykhiyyah" originated. He who excommunicated an accomplished and pious wayfarer mystic such as Mulla
Sadra for what he had not, in fact, committed, was, because of some corruption, excommunicated and expelled by his immediate students.
Taking all these discrepancies between a great philosopher like Mulla
Sadra and Shaykh Ahmad Ahsayi into consideration, it is surprising that some western researchers or orientalists try to introduce Shaykh Ahmad Ahsayi as the heir and safeguarder of the transcendent theosophy; and even Iqbal Lahuri writes that Mulla Sadra
"turned to the intellectual basis for the Babi
"religion""!
Among the most strange and novel points in Mulla Sadra's life and his character is the kind and diversity of his opponents. Incidentally, the opponents of every figure and their oppositions- despite the apparent and objective separation between them and that figure- are regarded as a part of his character and among his conceptual and judgmental foundations; and like the negative attributions,
they could introduce the external essence of everyone. This phenomenon could be regarded as a referent of "Know the things through their contraries".
All the oppositions with Mulla Sadra
and all his opponents are of a sort, which affirms his perfection and makes the curious researcher of the history more interested in him. The recognition of Shaykh Ahmad Ahsayi's mentalities and character, or those of his other opponents proves Mulla
Sadra's firmness in religion, the knowledge of the Holy
Quran, and the knowledge of hadith,
and understanding the truths and sciences. For example Mulla
Sadra is pride of his intuitive knowledge and esoteric unveiling, and takes it as affirming the external and demonstrative intellectual sciences or the transmitted sciences; while Shaykh
Ahmad, as a Muslim philosopher and a partisan of the Holy Quran
and hadith, relies only on his own understanding of the exterior of the words, and is pride of this externalism. Both of them are among the people of ascetic exercises, paying attention to extraordinary achievements. Mulla Sadra's
ascetic practices, however, were to attain the station of the intellects, and union with the high souls; while Shaykh Ahmad's ascetic practices, as far as we know, were for employing the heavenly souls, letter magic and alchemy.
All the attacks, accusations, and even ill-names, brought against this divine saint, all the attempts to turning off this divine lamp, and all those scientific, philosophical, and mystical attempts made by the others in the realm of the knowledge cannot bring down Mulla Sadra from the seat of honor, on which has seated him the jeweler of the destiny. Here it is worth to quote Hafiz's
poem:
"They bring thousand jewel's
to the market of the universe;
"No one of them can be compared with our standardized coin.
Mulla Sadra, because of his own essential value, was not a coin which could be made dull over the course of time and through the oppositions made by those who were attributed to the knowledge and even Godfearing. Despite the fact that he did not exercised a sharp impact on the neighboring countries, and as far, in this regard we have no evidence to present, in the domestic circles of the philosophy and in centers such as Isfahan, Tehran, Sabzawar, Mashhad, and Qum, he caused, in the course of time, certain schools, called later the school of Isfahan, the school of Tehran, the school of Sabziwar and Mashhad, and Neo- Sadrean
* * *
In our study on Mulla Sadra's
life and travels, we found that in his early youth he went from Shiraz to the then capital Qazwin. Then upon the transfer of capital to Isfahan, he also immigrated to Isfahan. At the end of his advanced education, he returned to his homeland Shiraz. After a while, offended by the persecutions made by the scholars and false scholars, he went to Qum or Kahak. There he stayed for a long a time, and finally he returned again to his homeland
Apart from this general account of his life and travels between the above-mentioned cities, some other travels in Mulla Sadra's life can be found as well. For example, there are some evidences available, suggesting his travel to the sacred thresholds in Iraq (apparently in the period of his discipleship).
His travels to Mecca and his death during the last travel are recorded in the history as well. He is much likely to have traveled to the sacred Radawi Mashhad too.
About his confrontation with the scholars of various cities, we have no evidence; taking his reputation into account, however, if there was such a confrontation, it would be, of course, reported in history books. Hence what is written by the late researcher and scholar Shaykh 'Abdullah Zanjani in his book Al- Filsuf
al-Irani al-kabir, cannot be regarded as being true.
He writes that Mulla Sadra was afraid of superficial religious scholars, and in order to avoid making them cynic, he expressed his doctrines metaphorically (?). Upon entering to a city, since he sought to visit the scholars of that city, he went to their classes. There he sat silently for a long time, and when his turn to speak reached, he spoke quietly and admired the others' assertions. He did not mention to his own doctrines; but he presented the well-known doctrines and did not pretend to be a philosopher and, thus, he attracted the others' attention. So he was invited to teach. Following these claims, Zanjani goes to describe his "way of spreading philosophy"and
says:
"When
Mulla Sadra went to teach in a city, took the science of jurisprudence and its related issues, and usul as the main subjects of his lectures. Then he brought his discussion from ablution and prayer to their secrets and then to the Revelation and its relation with the Lordly station. Finally he proceeded to the Divine Unity (Tawhid} and declared his own philosophical doctrines, and so he attained his goal skillfully.
He tried to express his doctrines and ideas with the help of double-sided words. The simple-hearted unaware ones understood a thing of his expressions and the aware disciples understood some other thing. He always expressed his ideas under the verses and hadith so that no one could make an attack on him (!)
I believe that, there is no evidence to prove these claims. This is, in fact, misunderstanding
Mulla Sadra's character and could be regarded as a sort of alteration of the history. A researcher like 'Abdullah Zanjani is not expected to have written such things, without a reliable historical evidence, in his only analytical book.
Firstly, Mulla Sadra was afraid, in the conventional sense of the term, of no one. His books, and in particular his Kasr al-asnam al-jahiliyyah and Sih asl- suggest his bravery in confrontation with his opponents. And according to the well-known proverb "One who knows God is insolent", his reliance on God- the Exalted- caused him to speak explicitly and state his doctrines and ideas- without being afraid of enemies- who, sometimes, through instigating the ignorant kings, put their opponents into death. In the introduction of his commentary on Ayat al-Kursi- which has been written when he was staying in Qum and the false scholars were about to made attacks on him- he writes: "Without being afraid of the blames made by blamers, I left the what has been said by the famous philosophers and scholars, and stated what I myself had understood of the truths."
Abstract
Existence as a Predicate in Kant and Mulla Sadra
Dr.Reza Akbarian
The question of "existence as a predicate" enjoys an outstanding significance from the historical and comparative point of view.
Kant, the eminent German philosopher claimed that existence could not be a real predicate for its own subject, since existence is not a concept that could add anything to an object. According to Kant, existence in its logical sense is, merely, copula (rabit), rather than either of the terms. The copula on the proposition, of the other hand, does not indicate something that owns a real referent. Its exclusive role is, rather, to establish a nexus between the predicate and the subject.
Mulla Sadra, the great Muslim Philosopher, has acknowledged the concept of being (wujud) as an independent, and predicative concept. His remarks concerning the contents of the simple proposition, i.e. "A is existent" are similar to that of Kant in some respects and different from them, in others. In so far as the content of the proposition signifies the subsistence and the realization of the subject, rather than the subsistence of something for the subject, their respective remarks are quite similar, but in so far as Mulla Sadra, on the basis of his philosophical stance "the principiality of being" demonstrates that what is principial in the external reality is "existence" rather than
"quiddity", he is quite different from the philosophical view point of Kant. The quiddity
in his opinion is a mentally posited (itibari) that is either abstracted from the limits of being, or is the manifestation of the limits of being in the mind.
A comparative study of Mulla Sadra
's and Kant's views concerning the existence as a predicate, of any other issue in general, without taking into account their whole systems as well as the basic principles of Mulla Sadra's
ontology will be impossible. The being that is applied by Mulla
Sadra, like other Muslim Philosophers, as a predicate in the existential proposition is totally different from that of Kant. Mulla Sadra just as his predecessors examined the concept of being, God, and reality from an aspect, wholly different from that of Kant. Accordingly, Kant and Muslim philosophers despite their
similar
methods of applying the concepts in their philosophical arguments believe in thwo exactly distinctive worlds. Therefore, to compare them, it is not possible to consider certain concepts such as "being" or "necessity", and ask about the soundness of either one. However, the chief aim of this paper is to carry out a comparative study of the philosophical systems of the two philosophers.
The present artical, is a comparative study of Kant's denial of existence as a real predicate, on the one hand, and Mulla Sadra's acknowledgement and demonstration of such predicates, on the other. Hopefully, this study will pave the ground for an inquiry into one of the most important philosophical problems, and through the demonstration of such philosophical propositions, the way for a study of the "reality of being" in Mulla Sara's philosophy will be prepared.
Platonic Source of the Classical Theory of Knowledge
Dr.M.Fathizadeh
In the modern philosophy the theory of knowledge has been among the main issues of philosophical researches, made by philosophers such as Descartes, Locke, Hume and Kant. That is why they have to be, primarily, regarded as the epistemologist. If we classify the theory of knowledge under three categories: the range of knowledge, the sources of knowledge, and the nature of knowledge, difference between epistemologists' ideas will become clearer. In particular, as regards the range of knowledge, there is a wide spectrum of various ideas, some of them opposing some other. At one end of this spectrum is skepticism claiming that our knowledge of the world is much less than what we usually think. Some extremist skeptics claim that our knowledge does not go beyond the sensible issues and the everyday experiences. At the other end of this spectrum are various kinds of realism, maintaining the possibility of man's knowledge of the internal and external world. Some other theories are centered in the spectrum. One of such theories is phenomenology.
As regards the possible sources of knowledge also, the present philosophical ideas lead to a wide spectrum. At the one end, there are classical empiricists, such as Locke and Hume. At the other end we find Plato, who believes that the true knowledge cannot be found through experiment. In the middle of extremist rationality and extremist empiricism, there is a more moderate position, called classical rationality, which is supported by philosophers such as Descartes and
Leibniz.
The nature of knowledge, also among the main axes in epistemology, is, since the olden times down to the present time, disputed on. Particularly, in the recent times, this axis has attracted the attentions of philosophers and caused them to analyze the knowledge to find its main constituent.
The history of the issue of possible and possibility And its place among the intellectual sciences
Dr.A.Khadimi
Like the other logical issues, this issue also has been introduced by Aristotle. Unlike the Muslim thinkers, who classified the modals under three groups, he classifies them under four groups, as follows:
1- Necessary, 2- Impossible, 3- Likely, 4- Possible.
In some places, Arostotle's expressions are not clear at all, and so scholars have provided various interpretations of it. Some believe that in the book Pere Hermeneias,
Aristotle has made no distinction between possible and likely; and he has employed the two as synonyms.
About the three fold modals, logicians, theologians, and philosophers discuss in their own books; and so a question arises: is there any discrepancy between logical, theological, and philosophical discussions?
Concerning this issue, there are two points of view, as follows:
1- Concerning the issue of three fold modals, there is no conceptual discrepancy between logic, theology, and philosophy; they are different only in use and referents. That is, the same definition, posed in logic for the necessity, possibility and impossibility are introduced in theology and philosophy; the logician, however, deals with the proposition or copulative existence, since it is an intelligible issue; theologian or philosopher, however, pays no attention to proposition or copulative existence between predicate and subject; but he deals with the predicative existence.
2- In addition to the difference in use and referents, the issue of three fold modals is conceptually different in logic, philosophy, and theology. That is, in the philosophy and theology, one assigns a proper predicate (existence) to the subject, necessarily, possibly or impossibly; thus by the necessity, possibility and impossibility, respectively, the Necessary Being, possible being, and impossible being are meant. In logic, however, since the predicate is more general than existence and non-existence, so by the necessity, the necessity of predicate in relation with the subject is meant, and by the possibility or impossibility, possible or impossible beings are not meant, but possibility or impossibility of assigning the predicate to the subject is intended.
Some Important points of Mulla Sadra's Philosophy and the
A Comparative Study
Dr.g.delwari
This article is, in fact, a glance at the main doctrines of Mulla
Sadra, the greatest Iranian Philosopher in the recent centuries; and at the same time, some points in the philosophical systems of some European thinkers such as John Locke, Spinoza, Hegel,Fuerbach, Marx, Heidegger as well as some scientists such as Darwin and Einstein, which are similar to the beliefs of Mulla Sadra, are critically discussed.
In
Mulla Sadra's philosophical system, there are particular issues, which are in tact characteristic of his Transcendence Theosophy, distinguishing his school from the previous ones. The following issues are briefly compared:
1- Ontology and metaphysics: the main core of his doctrines is his doctrine of unity and gradation of existence. Here the existence is considered as a degree among the various degrees in the ladder of existence, which are in an evolutionary and essential relation with each other. The world of being has come to be manifest from the absolute Origin (the Necessary Being), and all its parts are His manifestations. Nature and God are in an essential as well as substantial relation; His encompassing all things is of because simplicity, and manifestation in all existents.
2- Doctrine of trans substantial motion: Mulla Sadra lifted the traditional doctrine of motion, introduced in Metaphysics of Aristotle and Ibn Sina, according to which the motion takes place only in four categories: quantity, quality, attitude and place.
According to Mulla Sadra, motion not only takes place in the above categories, but it penetrates in the substances of things and the world of being. According to this doctrine, motion and matter, motion and nature are inseparable.
Time also is a quantity for substances; and like the motion, it is among the essential characters of the matter. This is against the opinions, introduced by Mir Damad and Kant, who have considered the space and the time merely as mental things, aroused because of man's imaginations, and not maintained external reality for them. In addition, it is a refutation to the doctrine of Newton, who considers the time as being abslute; he called the time as the fourth dimension, and added it to the known dimensions: length, width and height.
Educational Consequences of Trans-Substantial Motion
M.Khusrawnizhad
This article tries to develop an educational theory, based on a philosophical doctrine- Mulla Sadra's trans-substantial doctrine-, which, like all other educational theories, should be able to deal with issues concerning the goals, contents, methods, structure, and evaluation. In addition, it should be able to pave the way to solve the existing problems in the scene of education, and perhaps to provide some answers for the present scientific questions. Trans-substantial doctrine is an ontological one. In this field, the first question, which is discussed, is the existence or non-existence of the motion. Some thinkers believe that there is no motion, or it is a mere illusion. Among other group, which believe
in motion, some like Aristotle and Ibn Sina suppose that it is only in accident, and some other like Mulla Sadra the thinks that it is in substance, and consequently both in substance and accident.
According to Mulla Sadra, existence is prior to quiddity. In the other words, man's perfection is posterior to his existence. This perfection, however, cannot be obtained by it self. Soul, which is the conscious part of the body, provides, from within, the substance of motion, and the external circumstances provide the setting for motion. And both of them should be guided and regulated by a superior soul; and perfection cannot be acquired, except through education.
Carnap and theory of Knowledge
Dr.M.Dashtbozorgi
Every philosopher who is to deal with the epistemology and go to discuss human beliefs should answer the question; how can be our beliefs justified?
. That is, in the system of our beliefs, which of our beliefs can be taken as true and reasonable and the base of other beliefs?
The present article is merely to introduce Rudolf Carnap's point of view.
Carnap turned the philosophy into the study of formal languages, i.e. symbolic logic. Carnap believed that he had connected the metaphysical realities and epistemology with the language, and based the philosophical issues on the pragmatic desirability. For the philosophers who had spent their lives in philosophical issues, such a viewpoint seemed, unsatisfactory. To go to connect the issues of above-mentioned disciplines with the pragmatic ones is below the position of philosophy and mathematics. It may be said that, through introducing the pragmatic desirability of philosophical and mathematical issues, Carnap insisted on materializing such issues; while philosophers regard these issues, instead of material ones, as among the rational issues. They believe that it is intuition, which enables us to come to touch with the realm of the realities, beyond the experience. Such an intuition makes philosophy higher, nobler, and more original than the empirical sciences.
Existent qua Existent
S.Radawi
The philosophia
prima or metaphysics is among the branches of the theoretical philosophy, and speaks of "existent qua existent" and its essential aspects. In this way, the Muslim philosophers also have followed the First Master.
In
al-Shawahid al-rububiyyah
(the First Mashhad, the Tenth Ishraq), as regards the subject of Divine philosophy and the implication of the term ''qua existent Mulla Sadra says:
1- The predications in Divine philosophy are, firstly and essentially, occurred on the existent qua
existent. Thus the existent qua existent is the subject of
Divine philosophy.
2- The subjects of the other disciplines are the natural existent and the mathematical existent; the former being the subject of natural philosophy; and the latter, that of mathematical sciencees. In order to be the subject of the Divine philosophy, however, the existent does not need any of these affirmative attributes.
3-
Mulla Sadra speaks of the absolute existent, which after accepting certain particular attributes, turns to the subject of particular. He does not make clear, however, what he means: absolute in terms of division, or absolute in terms of the source of [all ontological] divisions.
Then the connotation of absoluteness in terms of division and in terms of the source of division, according to Muslim philosophers, are introduced, and opinions of Sabziwari,
'Allamah Tabataba'i and Misbah Yazdi, and finally the opinion of Dr. Ha'iri Yazdi
in his Kawishha-yi 'aql-i
nazari are put forth. And in some places, the latter's opinions are criticized.