Philosophy and Kalam
Year:2018 | Volume:50 | Issue:2 |Papers Count:8

The difficulty of extracting multiple concepts from an indivisible essence is one of the main motivation of interest to negative theology. On the other side, believing in the identity of the essence and attributes of God without clarifying the nature of ascribing of attributes to God’s essence is not precise, too. In spite of the variety of solutions to this issue, it seems no one is satisfiable. In this paper, after examining these solutions, we will show that, according to the fact that God is the origin and source of all perfections and the fact that the grantor does not lack the thing he grants, we can ascribe the attributes purified from defects to God although we don' t know the nature of this ascription.

Mirdamad argues, in some details, for a series of theses on wujud (existence) and ja’l (creation): first, wujud (existence) is not a property of anything; second, it is nothing butal-mojudiah al-masdariah (to-be-existent); third, what is created is mahiyah (quiddity) and not existence or quiddity’s being existent; forth, the resultant of creation is taghar or al-mahiyah (the subsistence of quiddity) and not its existence; and fifth, there are two non-equivalent simple-if questions, real (the question of subsistence) and commonly accepted (the question of existence). In this paper, the main question is how Mirdamad’s multidimensional theory about existence, subsistence, creation, and quiddity can be sustained coherently. We will show that the whole picture Mirdamad draws cannot be maintained coherently. A qualification will be proposed according to which in the language of metaphysics, there is nothing but creation and quiddity.

In cognitive metaphor theory, abstract concepts are understood by conceptual metaphors so that by removing these metaphors, these concepts are not understandable. Given this theory, wujud (existence), as one of the most important concepts in Mulla Sadra’s philosophy, is understood by several conceptual metaphors. Existence-as-fluid metaphor maps the properties of the fluid on the existence in metaphysics. The fluid is not able to keep its body shape, but conforms to the shape of its container; so, the fluid is seen as continuous and integrated matter. These two properties play an important role in the conceptualization of the existential unity. In the theory of existential unity, creation of the universe is described by the flow and expansion of existence. The two terms are also rooted in the understanding of existence as a fluid

Some the opponents of the theory of "Unity of Existence" is completely rejecting it, and some have some interpretation of it. Ghias ad-Din Mansour Dashtaki is one of those who interpreted it as the "Unity of intuition". It means that the mystic arrives in a state becoming unaware of all things but God. However, one can find, in his works, cases he defends the unity of existence too. We can conclude that his prevailing theory is the unity of intuition, and his confusion between the unity of existence and unity of intuition is the result of some matters such as his failing to distinguish between different views, being influenced by the dispute occurred between him and Jalal al-Din Dawani and his try to deal with the ignorant Sufis of his time.

There are several versions of psychological egoism, and each emphasizes some specific issue. This issue, in the Ayn’s version, is the reflection of the subject’s benefit to him. In Pojman's version, it is the reflection of the subject’s satisfaction to him. In Richards's remark, selfishness, and in Holmes's statement, motivation and self-love have been emphasized. All the aforementioned elements are present in the Mulla Sadra’s philosophy; as, in his explanation of the purpose theory, he speaks of self-love and the reflection of all purposes to the subject. The main question is: is, in the Mulla Sadra’s philosophy, the reflection of all purposes to the subject and self-love in favor of psychological egoism? The findings are: considering concepts such as purpose (in its general meaning), motivation (in its particular sense), selfishness and virtue, one can say the Sadra’s Philosophy is not in favor of the theory of psychological egoism.

Usuli experts' theory of conceptual implication, on one hand, and the linguistic philosophers' theory of semantical implication, on the other, can be the subject of a comparative study. Theory of conceptual implication is the basis of the semantic approach. Conceptual implication is the transfer of mind from a term to its meaning regardless of the speaker's intention. Judicial implication is the transfer of mind from a term to the speaker's intended meaning. Semantics is closer to the theory of conceptual implication because semantics is the study of meaning independent of the speaker or author’s intention. Pragmatics is closer to theory of judicial implication because pragmatics is the study of meaning based on the speaker or author’s intention. Of all theories of semantical signification, the use theory of meaning is closer to the theory of conceptual implication because according to both theories, language and the use of terms are socially rule-governed activities. What's more, both theories claim that phrases and terms acquire their meaning through their multiple usages and functions in society.

Athir al-Abhari (d. ca.656/1258) was an outstanding Iranian polymath who wrote numerous treatises, as Bayan al-Asrar, Talkhis al-Haqa’iq, Risalat al-Matali’, and Zubdat al-Haqa’iq. Each treatise contains three subjects: logic, physics, and metaphysics copied by Katibi al-Qazwini. Al-Abhari has written hisijaza at the beginning of each of the treatises. The four are preserved in MS Fazil Ahmed Pasha, 1618, in the Library of Kuprili, Istanbul. In this study, I have edited and introduced the Logic of Bayan al-Asrar. Abhari’s logic in this work is purely Avicennan.