kheradnameh63

Knowledge not only grants identity to human beings and consolidates and elevates their essence of existence, but also adds a new dimension to their existence, which is like a geometrical figure the sides of which increase in number over time. That is why the multi-dimensional world is also called the multi-sided world.

In the course of history, there have been some scholars who were experts in a single field of study and, except for one science, did not deal with other scientific areas. In fact, the belief in specializing in one field and avoiding mastery in some or all scientific areas was an unwanted gift brought from the West in the 18^th and 19^th centuries to Eastern and Muslim nations. In this way, they suffered some damages; however, this trend has recently become weaker and its pillars are not as stable as they were before. Nevertheless, the negative consequences of this phenomenon has led the advocating nations to a kind of universalism, holism, and the so-called Gestalt school.

Two major reasons caused the rise of this phenomenon: one was the specific ethical psychology of those regions which was instinctively interested in the division of family and social work, and the other was the sudden spread of knowledge in modern centuries after its freedom from the dominance of European Catholic Church, which preached that the acquisition of a new science sometimes demands a second life.

However, in the East and in Iran, from ancient times until recent centuries, for example during the Safawid era and Mulla Sadra's time, there was a different situation. At that time, philosophy was a comprehensive field in which all divine, natural, mathematical, and mentally-posited sciences, and even politics, law, and government, which in some divisions were considered as traditional sciences, lived alongside each other. Therefore, a philosopher was a scholar who was not only learned in divine philosophy and human teachings but was also a mathematician, musician, engineer, architect, physicist, physician, pharmacologist, astronomer, and astrologist.

The important point is that among all these sciences, similar to the members of a family, there was a logical relation and an intelligible hierarchy sometimes called the "three of sciences" and "divisions of sciences". The same hierarchy and divisions were also observed in the teaching of these sciences. For examples, natural sciences, mathematics, and logic were considered as preliminary introductions to philosophy and theology.

The comprehensive knowledge of philosophers and the hierarchy of these sciences contributed to all these fields. Moreover, philosophy or the "universal knowledge" supporting them provided them with specific directions. For example, medicine and astrology were inspired by each other, and based on the belief that the world is a single existent called "macrocosm", the human being became the "microcosm" while being a human being through learning wisdom. There was a tight relationship between these two humans or the macrocosm and microcosm and, in the light of the harmony between them, order dominated both sciences and human life.

In spite of the unity of the family of philosophy and even learning all the sciences included in it and becoming an all-knowing scholar and a macrocosm, it was accepted for a philosopher to differentiate between these sciences, be more interested in one of them because of personal taste, and pay more attention to it.

Some scholars, because of its exalted and supreme subject matter, went after divine wisdom, and some, because of its applied and social uses, material benefits, or religious motifs, were determined in learning another field of knowledge. In this way, divine wisdom appointed each person to a particular task so that human society could continue its life.

In the time of our philosopher, the common sciences were divided into two groups: the first included philosophy, logic, natural sciences, mathematics, medicine, astronomy, astrology, physics, pharmacology, and chemistry. These fields were commonly called "real sciences" because they dealt with external objects and objective existence. Today, they are divided into metaphysical and empirical sciences.

The second group consisted of literary fields, jurisprudence, theology, exegesis, Qur'anic sciences, hadith, and biography and criticism of traditionists, which are called "human sciences" today. Literary fields or literature included lexicography, philosophy, semantics, syntax, morphology, rhetoric, figurative expression, history, poetry, art, calligraphy, etc. In fact, the included areas were about 15 in number and the rest were called "Shar'iah sciences", each sometimes divided into some other branches such as exegesis and ayat al-ahkam (verses on Shar'i principles), recitation of the Qur'an (phonology), occasions of revelation, gharayeb al-Qur'an (explanation of difficult Qur'anic words), Qur'anic inflection, secrets of verses, Qur'anic stories, Qur'anic figurative expressions, and miracles of the Qur'an, which were called "Qur'anic sciences". Science of jurisprudence (in its general sense) also included jurisprudence, rules of jurisprudence, principles of jurisprudence, biography and criticism of traditionists, knowledge of hadith (e.g. contextual study of hadith), comparative jurisprudence, etc.

Because of its different types and its attention to the social importance of prayer and worship, the science of jurisprudence (in its particular sense) sometimes included the knowledge of personal and family affairs (or the affairs related to the prosecutor-general), laws of inheritance, political and state jurisprudence, constitutional and administrative laws, financial laws or jurisprudence of land-tax and property, commercial law, laws of contracts, and the like. Some specialized books were exclusively written on these fields and taught in seminaries.

Alongside the above sciences, sometimes the science of theology, which was considered to be a part of rational sciences, and ethics, which was considered to be a part of practical philosophy, were also dealt with beside religious sciences and as an introduction or conclusion to jurisprudence and hadith.

With some slight differences, the above divisions were the same as those common among Muslims during the early centuries (however, today some other divisions and hierarchies of religious sciences are used in seminaries).

Under such conditions, Mulla Sadra, like all other scholars, had to learn all of the above sciences at the highest level possible. That is why we sometimes read about his knowledge of all of them and even of mathematics, astrology, medicine, and natural sciences. Although there is not much evidence in this regard in available sources, we will try to tackle this point in this chapter.

What we know for certain about Mulla Sadra is his serious involvement in theology and, in his own words, the "Origin and Resurrection". He has referred to this point in his Kasr al-asnam al-jahiliyyah.[1]He spent all of his life and energy on learning, writing about divine lessons, and teaching them or the same Transcendent Philosophy. He only wrote about this school and saw it his mission to introduce, disseminate, and spread it. Even within the realm of philosophy, which was once the mother of all sciences and techniques and included mathematics, physics, and astronomy, he only focused on general and particular theology and did not pay attention to its less important parts. In other words, he never lost sight of the Celestial Throne and the related problems.

Mulla Sadra was one of the scholars who, in spite of his expertise in most or all of the sciences of his time, had focused specifically on philosophy. Moreover, from among all branches of philosophy, he was mainly interested in divine knowledge, and the knowledge of the Origin and Resurrection in order to unite the two sides of the "chain of being" to each other.

Available evidence suggests that he was also involved in some other sciences; however, we observe such a deep love of divine wisdom in this philosopher that we might conclude he was apparently not much interested in other sciences and did not try to learn them. In fact, his biography shows how passionately he studied rational sciences and gnosis from a very young age.

Mulla Sadra himself has referred to this point in different places in his books. For example, in the Introduction of Sharh al-hidayah, he writes, "I have spent a great part of my life on learning philosophy and, since long ago, tried to understand the thoughts and ideas of early philosophers…"

In the Introduction of the Interpretation of Chapter al-Waqi'ah, he also writes, "Since long ago, I have been passionately involved in discussions and dialogs on philosophy and the reading of books and writings of authorities in this field". Likewise, he discusses this point in the Introduction of al-Asfar in detail and says, "Thus in the past, that is, since my youth, I spent my time learning the divine philosophy and followed the works of leading philosophers".

In spite of his great efforts in learning philosophy and wisdom, he did not find his much-sought knowledge in the philosophy sold on the market and did not see the object of his desire before him. Thus his thirst was not satiated with available sciences, although some of them were of a divine nature, and although at that time great importance was attached to philosophy among other sciences, he did not stop searching and looked for something else.

At the end of his life, despite his vast knowledge of philosophy and Eastern and Western wisdom, when in his eventful mystic journeys he reached the chamber of the Holy Qur'an and the hadiths of the Prophet (s) and the Infallible Imams (a) and stepped in the magnificent palace of the divine word, he suddenly found whatever knowledge he had accumulated to that point too negligible. Therefore, he quit everything and headed towards the true threshold of wisdom, which he had finally found after a life time of laborious efforts and never returned from there. He was indeed like a person who, after a long time of satiating his thirst by drinking from the lagoons of the wilderness of desires, had reached Euphrates, witnessed the rays of the sun in the radiance of its waves, lost control, and ran hastily and restlessly towards it.

In some of his books, he calls this wisdom, which is obtained through revelation, the Qur'an, and prophetic inspirations, the "true divine wisdom", "certain teachings", and "perfectional science". He writes in the Introduction of his book al-Mazahir al-ilahiyyah as follows:

By wisdom, we do not intend the common and figurative philosophy, but one that prepares the soul for ascending to the Dominion, and this is a divine gift which is bestowed by no one but Him. This kind of wisdom has sometimes been called the Qur'an; gnostics call it "light", and philosophers call it the "simple intellect".

The reason why others have failed to access this hidden treasure is that they have not found its threshold and have not entered it from its true door. Thus they have failed to drink from the "wine" of knowledge and reached a "mirage". Wisdom is nothing but picking the fruit of the garden of prophethood and guardianship and satiating the thirst from the springs of the Book and Sunnah. However, these words appear wrong to the people of ignorance and dialectics and enrage the enemies of certain philosophy.[2]

However, Mulla Sadra was an all-knowing philosopher in his own time, and although he was not content with the common philosophy and rational sciences of that period, he never ignored the other real, mentally-posited, and traditional sciences. As we know, he was also a pioneer in both interpretation and hadith and had founded his own school in this regard.

The sciences that were prevalent in Mulla Sadra's time in Iranian scientific centers were classified into two general categories: Shar'i sciences, which are called traditional sciences today, and wisdom, which essentially included philosophy, logic, and perhaps theology and even theoretical gnosis. It naturally included natural sciences, mathematics, astrology, and their branches.

Nowadays, logic, philosophy, and theology are called rational sciences; physics is called natural sciences and has several branches; mathematics is also of several well-known divisions. Of course, there are some other modern sciences that fill a long list and cannot be named here.

One of the historical problems occupying the minds of early philosophers and theologians was the classification of sciences. Perhaps, Farabi was the first to have written a book in this regard in which he divided sciences into several categories in terms of the following subjects:

Language (morphology, syntax, and semantics); concept (logic); conjunctive, disjunctive, and theoretical quantities (mathematics and geometry); applications (music, astronomy, mechanics, and physics); nature (bodies, plants, and animals), and, finally, existent qua existent (including philosophy).

Philosophy or wisdom was also divided into two major types: theoretical philosophy (including epistemology or general theology and the knowledge of God or particular theology) and practical philosophy (including ethics and politics and even Shar'i principles (jurisprudence) and the demonstration of Shari'ah (theology)).

A Study of the Relationship between Philosophy and Purification of the Soul in the Transcendent Philosophy

Monireh Seyyed Mazhari

In relation to the faculties of the soul, philosophy in divided into practical and theoretical types. Since long ago, philosophers have emphasized the simultaneous acquisition of these two branches of knowledge for the realization of the definition and meaning of "philosophy". Like other philosophers, Mulla Sadra has emphasized this task. However, because of its applied and practical implications for the perfection and transcendence of the soul, practical wisdom is concomitant with the purification of the soul, and since the end of wisdom is the perfection of souls, the purification of the soul bears a tight relationship with wisdom or philosophy, its definition, and its end.

The present paper is devoted to a study of this relationship from Mulla Sadra's point of view and seeks to analyze and explain the reality of wisdom and its connection with belief and purification of the soul based on the principles of the Transcendent Philosophy. Accordingly, the writer has initially referred to the end of philosophy and then examined the mutual relationship between the ends of wisdom and the purification of the soul in detail. In this way, she has demonstrated the following:

1. Mulla Sadra's main focus in the definition and explanation of the Transcendent philosophy is the purification and perfection of the soul.

2. The ends of wisdom which Mulla Sadra and others have referred to as "end" are, in fact, ontological and practical ends rather than scientific and methodological ones.

3. Wisdom is the main element of the correct purification of the soul, and the purification of the soul is the main element in the correct perception of philosophical problems.

4. The purification of the soul plays a greatly significant role in the development of the concept, definition, applications, and worldly ends of wisdom.

God's Knowledge of Material Things in Ibn Sina and Mulla Sadra' Philosophies

Reza Akbarian and Zahra Mahmud Kelayeh

God's knowledge of material things is among the most complicated philosophical problems the complexity of which stems from the status of the changing existence of material objects. Accordingly, such knowledge must be explained in a way that the cognitive relation between Almighty Necessary and changing material things does not lead to the rise of any change or plurality in His Essence. Mulla Sadra's general view of solving the cognitive relationship between Almighty Necessary and material things comparing to that of Ibn Sina enjoys particular comprehensibility and has removed the defects of his theories in this regard, such as considering God's knowledge of other than God as acquired knowledge and their failing to demonstrate the Necessary's essential knowledge of other than Himself. Mulla Sadra's fundamental innovation regarding the Necessary's knowledge of material things is benefitting from the principle of truth in its simplicity in demonstrating the fixed essential knowledge of Almighty Truth. On the other hand, he considers Almighty Necessary's actual knowledge of material things to be the same as their external presence before Him. Since he attributes God's cognitive perfection to His essential knowledge, he argues that the changeability of actual knowledge does not prove the existence of any defect in His almighty essence. This is because, in his view, actual knowledge, which is the same as act, is considered the cognitive perfection of act rather than that of the agent. Of course, Mulla Sadra has some seemingly contradictory statements in his explanation of God's knowledge of material things which are justifiable if viewed from two different perspectives.

Saleh Hassanzadeh

The word revelation has a particular place in Islam. In fact, the basis and main center of all religious lessons and the origin of all teachings is revelation.

The Holy Qur'an is the manifestation of revelation, and its words, sounds, letters, and language represent the divine language in the view of Muslims. No issue in Islam holds a place as high and glorious as that of revelation, and it is the foundation of everything else in Islam. It is wroth mentioning that, from among Abrahamic religions, only Islam, and from among all holy texts, only the Qur'an have spoken of revelation and its different types in detail. Thus revelation is a fundamental concept in Islamic culture.

A careful study of the history of Islamic philosophies reveals to what extent the nature of revelation has affected theological, philosophical, and other religious thoughts. The presence of revelation is evident in all branches of religious sciences. One of the purposes of this paper is to provide some answers to the following questions: what are the different views of revelation? What is the theological view of revelations? What is the reality of revelation? Is revelation the same religious experience? Is prophetic experience the same as revelation? Can the Islamic concept of revelation be reduced to prophetic experience? Is revelation a kind of religious experience?

Moreover, the writer has tried to explain the principles of Islamic and Qur'anic revelation using a clear but demonstrative language and sought to reject the opposing views.

Presently, there are three different views concerning the nature of revelation: 1. propositional approach; 2. religious experience approach; and 3. speech acts approach. apparently, the closest approach to the reality of Islamic revelation is that of speech acts approach; however, the propositional approach is also compatible with it to some extent. In these two approaches, the linguistic nature of revelation is the focus of attention. The farthest approach in this regard is that of religious experience.

Theological, Philosophical, and Gnostic Interpretations of Verse 18 of Chapter al-Imran

Amir Shirzad

Oneness (tawhid) is a fundamental principle in all divine religions; however, neither do all monotheists have the same perception of oneness, nor do all divine religions present the same picture of the reality of oneness. The Holy Qur'an has introduced oneness in its most sublime and extensive sense of the word. One of the Qur'anic verses descended in this regard is the noble verse 18 in chapter al-Imran. According to it, Almighty God Himself testifies to His Oneness. This noble verse has inspired many Islamic scholars in the presentation of various interpretations and explanations of the quality of God's testimony to His Oneness. A study of these interpretations and explanations some of which are compatible with a theological approach, some with a philosophical approach, and some with a gnosic approach, on the one hand, represent the hierarch of the perception of the truth of oneness and, on the other, are based on the meanings of the exterior, interior, and interior of the interior of the Noble Qur'an so that each perception corresponds with a specific level of meaning. This paper is a study of the various interpretation of verse 18 in Chapter al-Imran based on the above approaches.

Nahleh Gharawi Naeeni and 'Abdullah Mir Ahmadi

A study of the discussions in the chapter entitled Bab al-'aql wa al-jahl in Mulla Sadra's Sharh al-usul al-kafi leads us to the point that in this work he always interprets the intellect as the most principial constitutive element of human beings and the only instrument for unveiling the secrets of being that conform to the facts referred to in the words of the infallible Imams (a). In his view, in spite of the conceptual variety of the intellect in the 34 traditions in chapter al-'Aql wa al-jahl in this book, one can consider all of them to be referring to equivocal meanings. However, following this part, based on his philosophical system, Mulla Sadra maintains that the four-fold intellects in the book of "the soul", the levels of practical intellect in the books of ethics, the immaterial intellect in the book of theology, and the intellect in the sense of human instincts represent instances of the gradation of the intellect which all refer to the same reality in spite of their different levels of perfection and defect. Mulla Sadra believes that such community and gradation can be gathered in the mould of theoretical intellect and practical intellect and argues that their unity is a premise in the acquisition of the immaterial intellect. He also emphasizes the graded-vertical interaction between them. Finally, he introduces "Muhammedan truth" as the most perfect referent of the immaterial intellect, the first created, and the intermediary between emanation and the creation of other existents. Moreover, he views the union of the first intellect with Muhammedan spirit as an important proof in the interpretation of the intellect's attention and inattention to the Holy Prophet's spiritual states.

Isma'il Sa'adaty Khamseh

Presential knowledge is a particular theory concerning knowledge which has been well-developed in Islamic philosophy and, specifically, in Sadrian philosophy, and its epistemological effects have become clearly manifested there. However, without resorting to the principiality of existence, one cannot defend presential knowledge. Based on Sadrian philosophy, knowledge is the same as existence; it is not an accident of it or added to it. Accordingly, the various levels of existence demand various levels of knowledge and awareness. Here, in addition to his own existence, man has presential knowledge of his soulish faculties and knowledge, and since presential knowledge is at the threshold of human knowledge and the point after which conceptualization and acquired knowledge begin, one can reveal the main defects of idealism, solipsism, skepticism, and finally subjectivism in the light of this theory and go beyond them.

In this paper, it has been tried to briefly introduce the theory of presential knowledge and demonstrate its potential for going beyond various kinds of subjectivism.

A Study of the Truth's being Constitutive or Non-Constitutive in the Sinan Definition of Certain Judgmental Knowledge

Mas'ud Umid

The present paper deals with the theory of Ibn Sina's certain judgmental knowledge in terms of determining its constituent parts. Given Ibn Sina's existing ideas, these constitutive elements include belief, bi-dimensionality of belief, stability, and existence of middle term (in non-axioms). Nevertheless, regarding the notion of truth, we should say that Ibn Sina's considering it a constituent part creates several problems. The writer believes that since this point has not been directly stated in Ibn Sina's views, truth is necessary for a specific type of certain affirmative knowledge. Truth is neither a constituent of certain judgmental knowledge nor something external to it; rather, it is necessary for it.

[1]. Kasr al-asnam al-jahiliyyah, Publication Center of the Sadra Islamic Philosophy Institute, Tehran, p. 72.

[2]. al-'Arshiyyah, al-Mabda' wal-ma'ad.

Mulla Sadra's Life, Works, and Philosophy