kheradnameh46

According to another story, Mirza Hassan Lahiji, Fayyad's son, took his father's place in Ma'sumiyyah school due to his students' insistence and continued his lessons. Mirza Hassan died in 1049 AH; therefore, at the time of his father's death, he must have reached an age at which he was knowledgeable enough to be qualified for teaching and considered superior to his father's students. If this happened when he was at least 23 years old, we can conclude again that Fayyad died in 1072 AH.

This divine sage died in Qum and was buried in a graveyard known as Shaykhan tomb, which is in the proximity of the Holy Shrine of Lady M'asumah. Apparently, latter, when a part of the graveyard was destroyed due to repairing the layout of streets, the remaining of his pure body was transferred to the great courtyard of Lady M'asumah. Previously, there was a gravestone on his burial place, but it was later removed in order to level the courtyard.[1] Therefore, as he himself always desired, and as all other gnostics do, no trace remained of his grave.

One of the other famous students of Mulla Sadra was Mulla Hussein Ibn Ibrahim Tunkabuni. He is sometimes called just Gilani. From the vulgar words written in Riyad al-'ulama' about him, we can infer that he was a philosopher of gnostic taste, a teacher and disseminator of Ishraqi (Illuminationst) wisdom, and a well-known master of knowledge of his time. The writer of this book has introduced him as a mystic who followed "Illuminationsm" (Ishraqi philosophy). He has also claimed that Tunkabuni's knowledge was limited to wisdom.

One of the problems of the history of knowledge among Muslim nations has always been the fact that most of the biographies of prominent figures have been written by nonprofessionals who pretend to be scholars. Moreover, history has often been controlled by people of low insight and sometimes of corrupt thoughts.

When telling the life-story of prominent people, such as Mulla Sadra or Fayyad, Fayd, and his other students, it is a grave mistake to suffice to words and attributes such as knowledgeable, having a mystic's taste, and being a teacher of Peripatetic or Illuminationist philosophy. It is a cruelty not only to those great people, but also, even more so, to future generations who enthusiastically try to learn about these outstanding scholars and are all ears in order to hear about their life and characteristics.

Every single moment of the lives of men of science and those who were trained in the school of the People of the Prophet's House, particularly the fathers and friends of the Transcendent Philosophy, is an invaluable lesson that can affect the lives of future generations and provide a great model and exemplar for young knowledge-seekers. Ignoring this precious legacy is a huge loss for humanity, particularly, for children of their homelands.

For example, when we inquire into the life of an outstanding sage, such as Mulla Sadra, in spite of our temporal proximity to his time, the field of research is so narrow and the number of reliable sources is so small that very little is added to our knowledge of him.

The biography of this noble philosopher and gnostic, Mulla Hussein Tunkabuni, which could bring a part of Mulla Sadra's honorable life and the golden period in which he lived into light, is so short and ambiguous and so much full of dark corners that it cannot be called a biography.

One of such superficial and shortsighted biographers has written about him as follows:

He is a mystic philosopher with an Ishraqi taste. He was a knowledgeable scholar and one of Mulla Sadra's students. His knowledge was merely limited to philosophy, and he had nothing else to offer!

It is said that once he was told that Mulla Fadil Qazwini - one of his own friends - believed that philosophers had corrupt ideas and excommunicated them. Although he had made a plan to go to Qazwin in order to visit his friend, he changed his mind because he thought that Mulla Fadil would be upset with having a guest who was a sage and philosopher. When Fadil heard about this, he sent him a humorous message saying, "I excommunicate those who understand philosophers' words and believe in them. Therefore, I have no problem with you!" Tunkabuni said in response, "This message of yours is worse than excommunication for me."

Hakim Tunkabuni had asked Mulla Fadil to say two rak'at (unit) of prayers for him after his death so that his soul would be blessed. Tunkabuni went on Hajj pilgrimage to Holy Mecca. One day people saw that he just stuck himself to "Mustajar" or touched "Hajar al-aswad" (the Black Stone of the K'abah) lovingly. They thought that he was insulting the K'abah and, thus, hit him badly. He was seriously injured and, when being taken to Medina, passed away in the middle of the way. He was buried in "Rabazah" desert beside Abuzar's grave.[2]

The above represents all the biography of a philosopher who spent years in Iran disseminating or teaching wisdom and was considered one of the greatest philosophers of his time. Tunkabuni had cultivated some noble thoughts in his mind, endured long periods of bodily and spiritual ascetic practices, and reached sublime epistemological and intuitive stations. Finally, he was martyred when worshiping his Beloved and attaining the knowledge of God. This happened because he was kissing and touching the door and walls of the house of his loving martyr like an insane lover. From among all those lovers, the beloved of all gnostics broke his goblet of love and granted him the honor to die for him.

One who reads the biography of this man in such books assumes that this prominent sage was a nobody who went to Hajj at the end of his life and did nothing during his life but exchange a few messages with his knowledgeable friend, Fadil. As long as the pen for recording history is held by such superficial people rather than philosophers, scientists, and people of insight, no one will ever know about the real lives of the bright stars of the sky of science and wisdom.

We are in the dark as to the exact place and date of his birth. We merely know that he was originally from Tunkabun, a town in Mazandaran. He must have had his primary studies there and then found his way into Mulla Sadra's class. As we know, he was involved in teaching for about two decades in Qum and its suburbs. His well-known students benefited from his knowledge in the seminary of that city until he stopped teaching there in 1038 AH.

Hakim Tunkabuni, who was a knowledgeable man at the time of his master's demise, must have studied under him for some years. If we assume that he started his education under Mulla Sadra in about 1032 AH, and that he was bout 20 years old at that time, he must have been born in the time period between 1010 and 1015 AH. This would be the case if he did not attend his master's class at an older age or did not study in a place other than Qum.

Some say that Tunkabuni was martyred in 1105 AH,[3] and some others say that it happened in 1101 AH. Mulla Sadra died in 1050 AH (or 1045 AH). Therefore, he must have lived between 55 to 60 years after his master. If we assume that he was 20 years old when he started his studies under Mulla Sadra and continued his education for about 10 years, we must add almost 30 years to the above age. Consequently, he must have been between 85 and 90 years old at the time of his martyrdom.

Aqa Bozorg Tehrani states that his pseudonym was "Maghfur", since he introduced himself as "Hussein Maghfur" in one place in his own handwriting.[4] Thus, in line with the customs of his time, this philosopher perhaps had a poetic taste and wrote poetry. However, his poems are not available.

According to historians, he was one of Mulla Sadra's top 10 students or, as is famous, one of his "Asharah-i Mubashshirah" (ten messengers). He was one of the most skillful and knowledgeable students of his school and heirs to his treasure of knowledge. His philosophical works and books testify to this fact.

Unlike Lahiji, he never pretended to be a theologian in order to gain publicity, make friends, follow a safe policy in life, or protect himself against his enemies. Unlike Fayd, he never sat on the chair of jurisprudence and hadith; rather, like his master, in spite of his knowledge of these two areas, which were ornaments to the thoughts of all of Mulla Sadra's students, as well as seminary students, he merely focused on wisdom and devoted all his energy and life to disseminating it.

All historians, including the writer of Riyad al-'ulama', who was contemporary with Tunkabuni and his son, have introduced him an Ishraqi philosopher. It is written that he wrote a commentary on Ibn Sina's al-Shifa and one on Khafri's commentaries on al-Tajrid. This naturally means that he also taught al-Shifa, Peripatetic philosophy, Sharh al-Tajrid, and theology. He must also be considered a Peripatetic philosopher or theologian. Consequently, we can say that Tunkabuni's being an Ishraqi philosopher never prevented him from revealing his Sadrian-gnostic tendencies and beliefs and permanent and open support of the Transcendent Philosophy.

The Basic Principle in Mulla Sadra's Practical Wisdom and its Importance in the Present Time

According to Mulla Sadra, the purpose of wisdom is essentially the perfection of the soul or entelechy. Of course, the aim of the perfection of both faculties of the soul, including the faculty of the theoretical and the faculty of the practical intellect, is to attain happiness. This idea does not merely belong to Mulla Sadra. Other Muslim philosophers, following Greek philosophers, also believed in it. The important point here, which is also the source of the differences between their ideas, is the relation between theoretical wisdom and practical wisdom. The discrepancies here arise from whether it is theory which is prior to practice or vice versa, whether thought is prior to will or vise versa, and whether there is essentially any priority and posteriority at work.

Aristotle introduces God as "the thought of thought". From among Islamic philosophers who presented their theories within this framework and, as a result, viewed act and will as secondary and dependant issues, we can refer to Abu Nasr Farabi and, after him, Ibn Sina.

In theoretical and practical dimensions, Mulla Sadra has a comprehensive view of being and mankind. Farabi and Ibn Sina believed that God was agent-by-foreknowledge and, thus, His Knowledge of the superior system of existence was enough for it to be realized. Suhrawardi was of the view that the activity of Almighty Truth was by-agreement, and His Knowledge of His Acts was enough for their realization. However, Mulla Sadra agrees with none of them. In his view, neither is knowledge primary and essential, nor are will and act secondary and dependent. Based on this view, Mulla Sadra discusses the relationship between theoretical and practical types of wisdom and presents some theories that are completely different from those of his preceding philosophers regarding practical wisdom, political philosophy, and the attributes of the first leader of Medina (city).

The purpose of this paper is to clarify Mulla Sadra's theory concerning the relationship between theory and act and introduce its philosophical consequences in the field of his political thought in comparison to the present status.

Following Aristotle, Islamic logicians and scientists believe that the subject of science is one of its pillars and maintain that each science has a subject matter and discusses its essential accidents. However, when clarifying the necessity of the existence of subject and determining the nature of its essential accidents and their relationship with the subject, they face great problems. These problems, which are basically rooted in ambiguity and common nomination in the meaning of essential accidents, have resulted in the rise of great disagreements among scholars when trying to bring them in conformity with scientific issues. In this paper, the writer has tried to study and analyze of the essence of the problem and the ideas of various scientists in this regard following a critical approach.

Undoubtedly, Islamic philosophy discusses the essential aspects of being within its own historical framework and considers the predicates of its problems as essential accidents of existence. Some of the issues propounded in philosophy are peripheral, and some others are primary and fundamental. One of the primary but influential issues is the univocality of existence. Commitment to either of them might have some constructive or destructive consequences.

According to Mulla Sadra, the univocality of existence is a prerequisite for entering the field of metaphysics and theology in conceptual and judgmental terms. Moreover, negating it requires denying the knowledge of Almighty Necessary to the intellect and the existence of that First Cause to the world in absolute terms. Some of the basic arguments on the oneness of Almighty Necessary (such as the argument of superimposition) and the mode of the application of the ontological attributes and concepts abstracted from possible existents on His Existence are also based on the univocality of existence. The present paper deals with the concomitants of the theory of the univocality of existence in the domain of theology in its particular sense.

The theory of the individual oneness of being represents the most sublime level of intuition and the peak of the ascent of Muslim gnostics concerning the issue of God's unity. It is also the most accurate philosophical theory regarding unity and plurality. This theory has a long history in its unsystematic form; however, it has appeared in a systematic form in the works of such prominent gnostics as Ibn Arabi, Kashani, Qaysari, Jami, Seyyed Heydar Amuli, and Ibn Turkeh Isfahani. Mulla Sadra has also explained this theory in al-Asfar and presented two arguments in order to demonstrate it. Moreover, he has considered it to be higher than the theory of the graded unity of being. After him, some gnostics and philosophers such as Aqa Muhammed Reza Qumsha'i, Seyyed Ahmed Karbala'i, Mirza Ali Aqa Qadi, Imam Khumeini, and Allamah Tabataba'i were among the thinkers who believed in this theory and defended it. According to the theory of the individual oneness of being, true being is exclusively limited to the Holy Essence of Almighty Truth, and all other than God are among the modes, manifestations, and epiphanies of that One Being and Single Truth. The application of the term "being" to His numerous manifestations is by accident and metaphorical. Some scholars, including Mutahhari, believe that this theory, due to denying plurality, is against rational and sense-related evident issues and accuse it of sophistry and idealism. This paper presents a critique of Mutahhari's view in this regard.

A Critical Study of Plato's Theory of Ideas and the Related Criticisms with Particular Focus on Aristotle

Undoubtedly, Plato's most fundamental and basic philosophical theory is his theory of Ideas. Not only his ontological and epistemological ideas, but also his political, ethical, and other theories are, either directly or indirectly, influenced by this theory. This Platonic view has greatly attracted the attention of thinkers, whether those for or against it, in the history of philosophy.

For some reasons, the writer believes that Aristotle's evaluation and critique of Plato's theory of Ideas is very important and worth propounding. First, Aristotle himself was Plato's student and studied under him for several years. Second, since, like Plato, Aristotle was one of the most prominent philosophers of the history of humanity, his critique of this theory will be more accurate and reliable.

Nevertheless, Aristotle has unfortunately been accused of misunderstanding his teacher's doctrine of Ideas and even having evil intentions in interpreting it. Moreover, in some cases, Plato's theory of Ideas has been introduced as such a low and unimportant theory that it appears there is no way to defend or justify it.

The writer has tried to choose a middle way between extreme positions and exonerate these two philosophers from the above accusations. He has also tried to be as just and moderate as possible in explaining and criticizing the Platonic theory of Ideas.

Referential Explanation of the Rise and Fall of some Theological, Logical, and Philosophical Terms

'Aynullah Khadimi

As we witness the rise and fall of phenomena in the world, we also observe the birth and death of certain scientific issues and terminology in various scientific fields. As we know, some of them have a short life; some have an average life; and some have a long life. We have witnessed the conceptual employment of some philosophical terms concerning possibility, including quiddative, general, particular, most proper, istikbali, predispositional, occurring, indigent, and ontological types of possibility since their birth until now. Nevertheless, some other terms such as natural possibility, fake possibility, rare possibility (coined by Abulhassan 'Amiri), systematic and unsystematic possibilities (coined by Ibn Bajah), plural ('al-alkathr) possibility, equal (al-altasawi) possibility, and minimum ('al-alaqal) possibility (coined by Ibn Rushd) had a short life and were not used conceptually in the history of philosophy after the demise of those who coined them. From among the factors determining the lifespan of certain terminology we can refer to the scientific status of the people who create them, the preferences of the advocates of various philosophical schools, entrance of scientific terms in educational texts, and their efficiency and influence.

In this paper, the writer has dealt with hermeneutics from the viewpoints of two contemporary philosophers, Allamah Tabataba'i and Martin Heidegger. Both of them follow completely new and innovative approaches to this problem. The common characteristic of these two philosophers is going beyond the epistemology of hermeneutics and emphasizing its ontological dimension.

Allamah Tabataba'i believes that hermeneutical interpretation pertains to the reality of the Qur'an and maintains that the essence of this Holy Book is not basically of the type of words, meanings, and concepts; rather, it is of the type of objective and external existence.

Martin Heidegger, does not limit interpretation necessarily to texts, either. He ignores the exoteric concepts and meanings of the Holy Book and believes that the key to its reality is paying attention to the truth of human existence (Da-sein).

One of the most controversial issues in Islamic philosophy and theology is God's Will. However, there are certain questions in this regard that require convincing answers. They include 'What is the meaning of Will, how is it realized in human beings, and what are its prerequisites and concomitants?', 'How can we attribute will to God so that it is not accompanied with possible concomitants?', 'Is God's Will one of the attributes of His Essence or Act?', 'How is it attributed to human acts?', and finally, 'How should we think about this issue so that we are not accused of following a determinist insight?'

The present paper undertakes to explain this issue and provide answers to related questions.

[1]. About 60 years ago the remaining of his body was taken to the courtyard. Zayn al-'Abdin Qurbani Lahiji wrote in this regard as follows: "... The rest of the body was transferred to the great courtyard of Lady M'asumah and was buried in front of a chamber where Shahid Mufatih is now lying in peace. His grave is 10 steps far from the Holy Shirne. In 1328 AS, when I was honored by visiting Qum, I prayed for him at a grave with a stone bearing his name. However, now that all the gravestones have been destroyed in order to level the courtyard, there is no trace of his tomb. The grave at the side of Iram street near Chaharmardan belongs to his son, Mirza Hassan." Introduction of Goharmorad, p. 5.

[2]. Riyad al-'ulama', Afandi Isfahani, and Tabagat a'lam al-Shi'a, Aqa Bozorg Tehrani, Stars of the 12th Century.

[3]. Tabaqat a'alam al-faqih, 12th century.

[4] . Ibid.

Mulla Sadra's Life, Works, and Philosophy

Prof. S. M. Khamenei

'Aynullah Khadimi