kheradnameh59

Shams al-Din Shahrzuri's discussions of ethics in Shajarat al-ilahiyyah are exactly the same as those of Nasir al-Din Tusi in Akhlaq Nasiri, which Shahrzuri has translated into Arabic. The section on physics of this book has been adopted from al-Isharat, and the section on theology from al-Shifa, although here the writer claims to have been involved in unveiling.

Apparently, this is a long story, and, in his view, there are many thieves in the field of wisdom. He says, "There are so many corpses that we cannot shroud all of them." Therefore, here we will only refer to a few other instances. In his Theftology, he writes:

One of the thieves of scientific works is Mulla Ali Qushchi. He has combined Sharh-i maqasid and Sharh-i mawaqif with each other and called the product Sharh-i tajrid-i Tusi. Mulla Abdulrazzaq Lahiji has to some extent disgraced him in his Shawariq (al-ilham). Qushchi has also changed Tusi's Zubdat al-ilahiyyah (in Persian) slightly and presented it under the Persian title Hey'at in his own name. Mulla Muzaffar Gawanabadi (Gunabadi) has written a commentary on Mulla 'Abdulahi Birjandi's Bist bab and has exactly copied Tusi's sentences.

If this scholar had lived longer, there would have remained no philosopher who had not been accused of plagiarism by him. In addition to the pessimistic views of this researcher in the field of literary and scientific theft, he has sometimes used vulgar words about philosophers and gnostics which they do not deserve and we are ashamed of quoting. Thus we will ignore them here.

From this introduction and the divulgences of this mistrusting scholar, any insightful person understands that, at that time quoting the exact words of others, especially when they supported the writers' idea, was not viewed as plagiarism. Rather it was a kind of subtlety in writing because, in this way, not only did the writer add the speaker of the quoted words to the group of those who shared the same view with him, but also he economized in using words and structuring the phrases. It was even considered to be a service to the person who had been quoted. As mentioned before, this act has a long history under the title "adaptation" and was a literary figure. This is a subtle historical point that not everyone can grasp.

When recognizing scientific and literary theft, one must first pay attention to its meaning and instance because not all instances can be called theft. Certainly, choosing the titles of books, chapters, or sections written by others for one's work or discussing subjects discussed by earlier thinkers is not considered plagiarism or literary theft. As we can see, people choose the names of others for their children, and no one deems this as an immoral or unusual act. Therefore, choosing the name The Transcendent Philosophy for the book al-Asfar is not a case of literary theft and is not indecent. Repeating the titles of the parts or chapters of others' books is also a totally normal and common act.

It is senseless for a philosopher writing philosophical books not to repeat or discuss previous topics in his book or discuss an issue without referring to its previous appearance in others' books. Unfortunately, critics of Mulla Sadra, in order to fill the pages of their books, have even criticized him for similar cases. For example, Zia' Durri writes at the end of the translation of Shahrzuri's History as follows: "The chapter on general affairs in al-Asfar has been copied from Ibn Sina's works."

In the view of this scholar, since Ibn Sina starts this chapter with a set of specific words, Mulla Sadra and others must use other words and phrases so that they would not be accused of plagiarism.

After Aqa Zia' Durri, the obsession with recognizing theft was transmitted to others. One of these people is the contemporary bibliographer, Muhammed Taqi Daneshpajouh. He seizes any opportunity to attack Mulla Sadra and accuses him of plagiarism. For example, in the Introduction to Kasr al-asnam al-jahiliyyah, he quotes from Muhaddith Nuri's[1] Mustadrik that Mulls Sadra's Interpretation of al-'Ala Chapter is the same al-Tanbih 'ala b'az al-asrar al-muwaddiah written by Fakhr al-Din Razi. Then he states that the Interpretation of al-'Ala Chapter is attributed to Ibn Sina. He also adds that Mulla Sadra's treatise of Jabr wa tafwiz - or its first part - is the same as Gorgani's treatise with a similar title.

In order to complete his studies, he presents a new theory and claims: "Since Mulla Sadra was a rich man, he had a big library. Therefore, he selected parts of other scholars' works and included them, whether by referring or not referring to their names, in his own works."

Although the premise of this hypothetical syllogism is correct, its conclusion is false because having a big library does not necessarily lead to plagiarism. However, he might have quoted others without referring to their names out of negligence. Before the writing of al-Asfar and his other books, he might have taken notes of others' statements, and since in the past they were not bound to record page numbers or the names of writers, these notes might have been considered to belong to Mulla Sadra himself by mistake, or they might have been added to al-Asfar by his students. Of course, in the past page numbers were not recorded in most books.

Fortunately, today attributing plagiarism and literary theft to Mulla Sadra and other philosophers and scholars is not taken seriously anymore and is considered to be a mark of lack of courtesy. A deeper knowledge of Mulla Sadra's life and deliberation on the philosophy of this unparalleled philosopher reveals the unfoundedness of such words and attributes.

Evidence suggests that Mulla Sadra had two important scientific treasures: a very strong memory and a comprehensive library. When quoting others and even referring to the noble verses of the Qur'an or hadith, he sometimes changed some words or their places by mistake. This was not due to negligence; rather, it naturally happens to anyone who has been long familiar with verses, hadiths, and poems.

In Mulla Sadra's books, such free quotations or change of words in quotations are also witnessed. This is one of the reasons why some critics have objected to him and accused him of stealing others' statements. The strong memory of this philosopher which had stored the theories and ideas of philosophers and gnostics since his adolescence, could have been the reason for such errors.

Apparently, Mulla Sadra had numerous philosophical books.[2] Either he had bought the original copy using the family wealth, or, following the old tradition of scholars and seminary students, he had copied them. Although he sometimes used the quotations given by other philosophers out of trust, the instances are quite limited.

Relying on the above-mentioned two sources, Mulla Sadra used quotations of others' ideas as an introduction to his own ideas and theories in most of his books. He did so in order to shed some light on the context of the discussion, clarify the points of disagreement, and, at the same time, familiarize the seekers of wisdom with the ideas of early philosophers.

Mulla Sadra's main and first source of knowledge and inspiration was the Holy Qur'an, to which he was greatly committed. He has frequently written in his books, "Cursed be the philosophy that does not conform to the Qur'an and hadith."[3] This is because our philosophy must lead us to realities and the Qur'an is the mirror of realities.

Mulla Sadra's sources of quotation, in addition to the Qur'an, hadith, and transmitted and prophetic traditions, are numerous and even include the Bible, the Torah, and the works of early Iranian philosophers and non-Iranian pre-Socratic philosophers and those after him, such as Plotinus and Alexandrians, as well as Muslim philosophers from Farabi to Dawani and other followers of the Shiraz School.

We have no knowledge of his major sources in quoting sentences from Khusrawani philosophy, Fahlawis, the Magi, and Iranian Ishraqi philosophers. He might have quoted all of them from Suhrawardi's Hikmat al-ishraq. During the Safawid era, a treasure of ancient Persian books was found by accident; however, no reference has been made to them in Mulla Sadra's works.

From among the works of pre-Socratic philosophers he had only access to Pythagoras's precious will, al-Risalat al-dhahabiyyah; however, he had seen all or most of Plato's articles and had them in his possession. He frequently referred to Timaeus, Phaedo, and Laws. Aristotle's works, which comprised the core of the first period of Islamic philosophy, were naturally at Mulla Sadra's disposal. That is why he sometimes quoted from his Metaphysics, On the Soul, On Sophistical Refutations, and On Heaven and the World.

From among the philosophers of later centuries, the names of Zenon, Stoics, and Diogenes are seen in his works, and more than anyone else, he pays attention to Plotinus or Shaykh al-hukama' (master of philosophers). However, like other Muslim philosophers and sages, he believes that Ethologia (Enneads) belongs to Aristotle, and, in this way, he committed some errors in his interpretations of Aristotle and presented some contradictory words in this regard.

Mulla Sadra's philosophy or school mainly relies on Ibn Sina's philosophy as a representative of the Peripatetic school. Nevertheless, it can be considered a branch separate from Aristotelian schools but similar to them.

This paper examines the principle of justice in Shi'ism and considers it to be of a particular and central place in this domain, and studies its relation to other principles from this point of view. In this regard, an innovative argument on infallibility has been adduced from the Shi'ite perspective. Then the writer refers to some of the Prophet's statements in order to support this view and uses the result in order to provide a response to the basic question of "man's expectation from religion". Finally, he concludes that in Shi'ism the most justified expectation that a Shi'ite can have from his religion is the same promise that it is committed to keep, that is, the establishment of justice in its comprehensive sense.

A New Approach to Comparing Kantian Categories with Secondary Intelligibles in Islamic Philosophy

Mahdi Husseinzadeh Yazdi

According to Kant, the faculty of understanding possesses apriori concepts. These concepts or categories are the basis of universal and necessary judgments. In his view, the knowledge of facts is possible for humans through these concepts. On the other hand, in Islamic philosophy true and universal concepts are divided into primary intelligibles or quiddative concepts indicating the quiddities of objects, logical secondary intelligibles, and philosophical secondary intelligibles. This paper compares the Kantian categories with the secondary intelligibles in Islamic philosophy. The writer believes that paying attention to various viewpoints of concepts makes this paper distinct from similar ones. Here, he has first explained the various viewpoints of concepts, and then, after a brief explanation of Kantian categories and secondary intelligibles in Islamic philosophy, compared them with each other.

Analytic-Synthetic Division of Propositions and Epistemological Skepticism in Hume's Philosophy

'Azim Hamzian

The division of propositions into analytic and synthetic types is one of the important analytic tools of human understanding in Hume's philosophy. British empiricist philosophers analyzed meaning, word functions, and the word-meaning relation with the purpose of knowing the human nature. Through analyzing propositions, David Hume intended to learn about human's power of understanding. He called this method the analysis of human knowledge and divided it into analytic (relations of concepts) and synthetic (relations of facts) types. The rise of this view in Hume's philosophy originates in the general structure of his philosophy, the dominance of Aristotelian logic over his thoughts, and the specific value that he attached to reason, its capabilities, and its limitations. Even after his death, the use of this division in analyzing knowledge was quite common for centuries. Following the establishment of the science of human nature, Hume made this division the center of his work and inferred empiricism from it. Later he directly referred to skepticism in his philosophy.

The writer of this paper intends to demonstrate that the use of this division inevitably led to skepticism in Hume's philosophy. In addition to the analysis of analytic and synthetic propositions in the framework of Hume's philosophy, the writer has also referred to the role of this division in his interest in skepticism.

A Study of the Theory of the Intermediate Position (amr bayn al-amrayn) in the Mirror of Theological and Philosophical Statements and Illustrations

Amir Shirzad

The quality of the relation between human's activity and God's activity has always been one of the most important problems of human thought, in general, and divine scientists, in particular. The most important ideas of Muslim philosophers in this regard are summarized in three theories of predestination, delegation, and the intermediate position. The theory of predestination is against each individual's independence, and the theory of delegation requires man's independent activity from God. The theory of the intermediate position, which was firstly suggested by the Infallible Imams ('a), indicates the negation of predestination and delegation and demonstrates the existence of a reality between the two of them. Understanding the truth of the intermediate position based on the intellect and traditions is not an easy task. Accordingly, in order to interpret it, scholars have resorted to various approaches including theological, philosophical, and gnostic ones and have employed the related corresponding examples and analogies in order to portray each of these explanations and interpretations. A critique and study of all of them, the most important of which amount to six in number, reveals that most of them are incapable of depicting a clear and comprehensive picture of this theory. From among all of these approaches, one of them, that is, explaining the appearance of the divine activity in creation-related manifestations along with its corresponding example, that is, the allegory of the activity of the soul in its faculties, particularly based on 'Allamah Tabataba'i's allegorical interpretation, while considering man's activity in the systematic collection of creation, is preferred to other approaches and analogies.

Gnostic theology is in contrast to rational-natural and revelatory-historical theologies. Natural theology, rational theology, revelatory theology, transmitted theology, and gnostic theology are all intuitive. While being intuitive, gnostic theology in Islam benefits from rational analysis, on the one hand, and uses the light of the guidance of revelation, on the other. The result of using the intellect is the transmission and discovery of a theology that, while having its own method, structure, concepts, and explanations, is in harmony with the intellect and Shar'. In the light of a mystic journey rooted in Shari'ah, the gnostic attains a kind of direct hearty knowledge and insight of God, and, in this way, becomes needless of any rational argument on the demonstration of the existence of God. He reaches such a level of certainty upon which there is no stain of doubt and ambiguity. Since God's Essence is pure and infinite, and since it is impossible for anyone to reach it, most of the discussions in gnostic theology center on the names and attributes of Almighty Truth. Therefore, the main task of Islamic gnostic theology is studying His Names and Attributes. Since the world is nothing but the manifestation of the names of the Truth, gnostic theology is cosmology at the same time. In this paper, the writer has tried to present a brief analysis of this divine school.

The hidden world is a configuration beyond matter attaining the truths of which plays an extremely important and invaluable role in the realization of human perfection. Therefore, all monotheistic religions, particularly Islam, invite people to believe in it. Since the belief in the hidden is impossible without knowing it, it is necessary to discuss the method of gaining the knowledge of this world. This paper examines the ways of knowing the truths of the hidden world in the views of Mulla Sadra and 'Allamah Tabataba'i, two of the most prominent Shi'ite Islamologists.

The interaction between the body and soul is one of the topics that has always attracted the attention of scientists and philosophers. Mulla Sadra has propounded the problems related to the body and soul in the 8^th and 9^th volumes of al-Asfar in an independent form and in the 3^rd, 4^th and 6^th volumes of this book under other topics such as knowledge, substance, accident, and so on.

The present paper first refers to Mulla Sadra's principles and theories in this regard in short and then examines the interaction between the body and soul from three perspectives.

The writer first explains the effect of the interaction between the body and soul on the genesis of each of them and concludes that the soul is the cause of the combination of elements and formation of the body, and the body, which is of a specific quality and balanced temperament, is the cause of the emanation of the soul. Then he proceeds to discuss the effects of the soul and body through the faculties of the vegetative, animal, and human souls. The vegetative soul is responsible for the nutrition, growth, and reproduction of plants; the animal soul is responsible for perception and stimulation, and the human soul draws on its theoretical and practical faculties to reason about general and particular issue and explain ethical or other types of propositions.

Finally, the writer deals with the body-soul interaction in terms of their states and argues that physical characteristics and states, e.g. health, sickness, and pain, affect the soul, and some mental states such as anger and sorrow lead to some changes in the body.

The intellect and revelation are two categories that have always attracted the attention of thinkers and philosophers. Perhaps one of the most important achievements of Mulla Sadra is his synthesis of the intellect and revelation. A study of his method in accomplishing this task can serve as a luminous torch guiding many of the seekers of the truth.

This paper examines two important approaches followed by Mulla Sadra in this regard: the first is clarifying the problem of esoteric interpretation (ta'wil) and equating it with perfectional interpretation, and the second is distinguishing rational rules from estimative and imaginal ones. Both of these methods play significant roles in the structure of Sadrian philosophy and connect Sharia'h, the intellect, and gnosis.

[1]. Mirza Hussein Nuri is the writer of some books on hadith including Mustadrik al-wasa'il (He has collected some unfounded points which have not been mentioned in Shi'ite books). Unlike most Shi'ite scholars, he accuses the Shi'ites of having distorted the Qur'an and omitted some of its verses. In his Kashf asrar, Imam Khomeini has introduced him as a muhaddith whose words are not taken into account by Shi'ite scholars and rejected his ideas. One of the anomalies of this muhaddith is studying Mulla Sadra in order to demonstrate his literary and scientific thefts which he has discussed in the third volume of his Mustadrik.

[2]. In a list called the "List of Books of Mulla Sadra's Private Library", which has been recently published by Shiraz's Imam Asr School, the names of 104 books are recorded in his own handwriting. In this list, Mulla Sadra refers to Shaykh Baha'i and Mir Damad using epithets indicating that they were alive during his youth. He might have obtained these books during his adolescence, or they might have been a part of the books that he took with himself when he went on a journey or used in particular situations.

[3]. al-Asfar, vol. 8, p. 303.

Mulla Sadra's Life, Works, and Philosophy

Prof. S. M. Khamenei

Mahdi Husseinzadeh Yazdi

'Azim Hamzian

Amir Shirzad