Journal Ontological Researches
Year:2014 | Volume:3 | Issue:5|Papers Count:7

This paper studies the ontology of Mircea Eliade. Eliade’s historical-religious hermeneutic method explores the meaning and interpretation of messages hidden in religious myths, symbols and rituals. According to him, question of the meaning of existence is an important and real question for human being. Every religion, even in its most primitive form, is ontology. He divides human beings into two categories: the man of traditional society, who is definitely homo religious and the modern man. He denies that of the thinking of archaic man is illusory. He wants to live in a real and effective world. There are two modes of being in the world: sacred and profane. The sacred represents the real, order and the significant. Profane being is the opposite of the sacred mode of being: amorphous, relative and heterogeneous. He indicates that the sacred is equivalent to the real, to absolute truth, and to being. Eliade’s exposition of archaic ontology suggests several unspecified implications: it is relational, non- derivable, non-reducible, non-contingent, dynamic and static. The essence precedes existence. It means that homo religious is what one is precisely because of primal events at the beginning of time. The sacred appears in the forms of myths, gods, symbols, creation and human beings. The manifestation of the sacred is dialectical, by which the ordinary things are transformed to sacred. Symbols and myths reveal the “Being”. The basis of myth is ontology. Since archaic and primitive myths account for the origin of realities, they are considered sacred and likewise eternally true. Homo religious, in the light of myths sees the manifestation of the “Being”. He considers himself its shepherd. It appears that he construes the profane, at least for the archaic or primitive person, to be unreal or illusory.

For Sohrawardi, soul has been known to be a light among isfahbudiyih lights being originally from the heavenly beings having put in creative relation to body to administer it. It, therefore, has fallen from immaterial world and become captive in material world. Having become aware of itself, the soul finds its original place and tries to attain it. Soul’s turning way to its original place, the obstacles and stages in the way led by the measured leader have been taken as the subjects of Sohrawardi’s symbolic writings. As is understood, he has regarded one’s knowledge of oneself, mental powers and the dark world as the requisite ground for the departure and acquiring knowledge and leaving earthly desires as the way of freedom and salvation. For him, in the way of mental growth, soul is of such an ability that can go beyond itself and become an intellect among intellects making those slept aware and affecting souls and material world. Sohrawardi’s psychology is interconnected with his ontological system of light. Not understanding his system of light, one never may understand the soul and its process of growth and acquiring knowledge.

In the paper, the most basic ontological principles of Sadra’s explanation of the best system has been given at first. In addition to relying on priority of existence, the distinction of existence and quiddity, the distinction of possibility and necessity, gradational unity of existence or individual unity of existence and gradation of its appearances (as two distinct bases), and the principle of the higher possible, has presented an exact description of systematic state of the universe (including both cause and effect, and apparent systems), true unity and essential system of the universe. Finally, on the basis of its logical ground, Divine Will, the mentioned manner of description (has been analyzed.

The paper has brought Avicenna’s ontological view on love into consideration in a philosophic-mystical approach. As is understood, in a gradual system, Avicenna has known the highest degree of love to be of God; one may consider all his philosophical statements to be on this degree. Yet, on his mystical view, love has been divinely established in all degrees of beings from the highest to the lowest, the highest is essentiality in God and other degrees were Divinely bestowed upon. The gradation of love can be regarded to be ordered as intellectual substance affected by the love of God and being lover for Absolute Good. Then, love of heavenly souls and, then, that of human perfect soul. In the fourth and fifth, middle and imperfect souls and in the others, other orders of created beings including animals, plants and the inanimates have been placed. This philosopher has known the love of creatures to be natural cause for growth and perfection. In this way, he has taken a position like that of mystics in the field.

One of the essential grounds for establishing new form of aesthetics in the Enlightenment has been regarded as the independence of the beautiful from the good and the true. In the philosophy of Greece and middle ages, however, the beautiful was explained based on the good and the true. This dependence was due to its own ontological and metaphysical approach to the three meanings. One case of such an approach may be found in Thomas Aquinas. When studying the transcendental qualities of the created being, the philosopher has spoken of the relation of the beautify to the good and the true. He has sought to connect the three of the created beings to those of the Divine level of being. Again Thomas, linking the three qualities with human mental powers of knowledge and will, has established such a foundation for moral life in which beauty plays an essential part.

When studying Sadra’s view on fundamentality of existence, one should explain the point of dispute at first and, then, take a position. In Sadra’s system of thought there can be found two meanings for fundamentality and mentality. In one meaning, fundamentality means the state of being actualized and realized in outer world while mentality means not being actualized so. In another, by fundamentality is meant being actualized in itself and by mentality being accidentally actualized. Primacy of existence and mentality of quiddity have two meanings in Transcendent philosophy (al-Hikmah al-muta’aliya): the first is that the concept of existence has referent in the external world but that of quiddity does not. The second is that existence and quiddity both have referents in the external world, while existence is actualized by itself but quiddity by existence. Of the two, only the former can be attendant in the disputable point. There are five meanings for existence in Transcendent philosophy and four meanings may be found for quiddity in philosophical works of which only one can be raised in the debatable point. MullaSadrā doesn’t clarify this position and, therefore, several inconsistent concepts of debatable point have appeared in the field.

Sadr Ul-Mota’allihin has referred to his special proof of the Supreme Necessary Being’s unity as the “Celestial demonstration” and then preferred it to the other demonstrations, presented by Avicenna and some other preceding philosophers. While analysing those demonstrations, he considered them incomplete and defective in some ways and in need of correction. Thus, he proposed the corrective approach. The present essay intends to expound that despite the anteriors demonstrations, Avicenna’s needs not to be corrected and has got all elements necessary for proving the unity of the Supreme Necessary Being.