Journal Ontological Researches
Year:2020 | Volume:9 | Issue:17|Papers Count:12

In Islamic philosophy, two phrases about the concept/ meaning of existence are famous: concept of existence: 1) is the most general concept; 2) is simple, primary evident and undefinable. But the favorite theory about the Nafsol al – Amr (the truth in itself) draws us to conclusion that existence (special existence or opposed the inexistence) is set in the following of two general concepts: 1) reality in the general sense (general existence), 2) real existence (against credit existence). In other words, special existence firstly is subgroup of general existence; secondly is subgroup of real existence. We can define the two mixture as follows: (general existence+ reality= real existence) + property of opposing inexistence= special existence. Therefore, special existence is compound of three affairs (general existence, reality and property of opposing inexistence. Hence, 1. Existence is not the most general concept; 2. Is not simple, primary evident rather it is secondary evident so is definable. But general existence which is not opposed to inexistence: 1. is the most general concept; 2. is simple, primary evident and undefinable.

Qadhi Sa`id Qomi is one of the mystics and sages of the second half of the 11th century AH who has tried to reach the depths of the intentions of the infallible narrator by reflecting on the narrations of the Ahl al-Bayt. Since the previous principles and prerequisites of each person play a serious role in understanding the sacred texts, in this article, one of the judicial presuppositions of Qadhi Sa`id Qomi, i. e. his belief in the personal unity of existence, is examined and its effect on his understanding will be displayed. For this purpose, the effect of this mystical view on his understanding of narrations in three areas of language, epistemology and existence is examined. In this research, it has been shown that Qadhi Sa`id Qomi`s belief in the personal unity of existence in all three areas has led to a special understanding, and he is influenced by this basis even in lexical issues. It also shows how he explains issues of monotheism, including the infinity of truth, how God is the first and last, the negation of the theory of Incarnation and unity, the God`s actual actor, and even man's free will be explained on the personal unity of existence.

"Existent" is a central issue in Aristotle philosophy and it is followed by Farabi’ s philosophy and it changed to "existence" in Mullasadra’ s transcendent philosophy. The investigation in this research concluded that the reason and way of this change is seen in this fact that although Farabi could take some distance from the diversity of Aristotle’ s commentators (about Aristotle’ s quadruple position) but he by adopting being qua being as the subject matter of philosophy, didn’ t find a way to reality of existence through interconnectedness meaning of existence and quiddity. Then mullasadra presented different explanation regarding the subject of philosophy by appealing to his basic doctrine, principality of existence, and gradation in existence the unity of the very nature of existence, and ultimately by adopting the identification of existence and quiddity, and rejecting Avicennian theory on the distinction between existence and quiddity and making distinction between the reality of existence and its concept has refreshed up the subject of philosophy, thus change the subject of philosophy from existent to existence. Although in Sadra’ s philosophy, through principality of existence and abstraction of quiddity, often being and existence (about the subject of philosophy) are used in one meaning and both indicate to the reality of existence.

The category of motion is one of the most important philosophical and scientific issues has been studied in philosophical ontology since Aristotle until now. Ibn Sina has also discussed movement and has proved movement in some accidental categories. But he refused to accept substantial movement. Mulla Sadra also accepts the motion in all categories, and while responding to the problems about substantial movement, for the first time in the history of philosophy, he proved the moton in essence by applying his ontological foundations. This article answers the question of how necessity and impossibility can be met in one proposition. Why does Ibn Sina believe in impossibility of substantial movement while it is necessary for Mulla Sadra? By qualitative content analysis of both views, we have come to the conclusion that given the philosophical foundations and ontological presuppositions, there is an acknowledgment of the theory of substantial movement in the views of philosophers before Mulla Sadra, in particular IbnSina. But due to the intertwining of the discussion of transformation in quiddity with the movement in the existence or ambiguity in quality of substantial movement, there is a dualism between Ibn Sina's and Mulla Sadra's views. But given these two approaches and whether essential forms can safeguard the unity of the matter or not, we came to the conclusion that in Ibn Sina's view, substantial movement is possible, and it is not impossible.

Although many debates have been made on death, but thoughts on death are among the issues that have always been the subject of concern by many thinkers in the East and the West. For Muslim thinkers, traditional discussions include a discussion of death, but in the West, with the philosophers of existential philosophy, death is considered one of the important issues. Heidegger is one of the existential philosophers who displays thoughts on death as his main concern. The present article aims at presenting a metaphysical account of Death Thinking in the works of Allamah Tabatabai. The authors while trying to point out this issue, will evaluate thinking on death from Allameh's perspective and Heidegger's Death Thinking. As a result of the discussion in this article, it will be argued that the thought on death with these two thinkers results in different consequences due to different metaphysical attitudes. However, there are some fundamental similarities between these two thinkers. The methodology of the research in this article is descriptive-analytic, and the writers, relying on the works of these two thinkers and their commentators, evaluate with critical rationality approach death thinking of these two thinkers.

Mystical ontology is one of the most important issues of theoretical mysticism. Mystics refer to God when they speak about the absolute being. Undoubtedly, the most important mystical ideas of Seyyed Haidar Amoli and Imam Khomeini can be sought in their ontological theories. Sayyid Haider, an eighth-century mystic, was influenced by the views of Ibn Arabi and Imam Khomeini, influenced by the thoughts of Sadr al-Mutallah Shirazi. This research describes and expresses the personal unity of existence, the genuine unity of the same type existence and the absolute being with descriptive-comparative method, and seeks to disclose what they have in common and what make them to differentiate in the ontology as two Shi`tes mystics. Sayyid Haidar, following Ibn Arabi, believes in the truth of a personal unity of its own, and considers the gradation in manifestation. He offering three reasons for the Absolute Being, holds the absoluteness of being. Imam Khomeini, on the other hand, makes the distinction between the being absolute and the absolute being. And he considers the absolute application of the existence rather than the being absolute to be the result of the interplay between concept and object. Following Mulla Sadra's belief, he believes in both a certain form and a manifestation. Following Mulla Sadra's belief, he believes in both a Special gradation and a gradation in manifestation. Sayyid Haidar believes that the existence of the bound is absolute, while the Imam considers the strongest reason to prove the existence of the object as the essence of righteousness.

One of the issues in the discussion of ontology is the relationship between existence and thought. Among pre-Socratic philosophers, Parmenides, as an eminent sage, has studied the interaction of existence and thought with an ontological view. He considers existence and thought to be one and says that what can be thought is existence and non-existence cannot be thought of; that is, thought belongs only to existence and perceives it. On the other hand, this relationship is also seen in the thought of modern philosopher such as Descartes. He established the foundation of his philosophy-Cogito-on the basis of this interaction. First he proves his existence and then the existence of external world through thought and doubt. In his view, existence and being are certain and obvious, but only when there is a thought; because if one completely gives up thinking, there will not be any existence; so thinking is the same as being. this article will seek to explain and reconcile the views of these two philosophers centered on the relationship between being and thought.

Undoubtedly a unified Order encompasses all the hierarchy of being. An ontological Order that has reached the deepest layers of theological, anthropological, and anthropological dimensions. The great set of being in a continuous and directional motion depicts the Cosmic Order in all its material and transcendental dimensions. Man is also the most important being in the field of existence that this cosmic order is manifested in human levels and appears as a moral, worshipful order. Man experiences this current order in individual and social morality in the form of human and divine interactions. In Avestan and Zoroastrian texts, this concept is referred to as Ashe. In this paper, the authors examine the moral and devotional order in the Zoroastrian tradition by quoting religious sacred texts, and through this, they presented a relatively practical analysis of the concept of Ashe. In the ontological realm, Asha is not only a creature of Ahuramazda, in other words, is the manifestation of the wisdom of Ahuramazda, has collaborated with him and mediated the creation of Mazda. The full realization of Asha in the individual dimension of human life is evident in the form of a perfect human being, and the full realization of Asha in the social dimension of human life attains the Ideal City. On the other hand, it can be said that Asha encompasses both the material and the immaterial aspects of life. And to the direct and indirect influence of the various moral and devotional layers of human life. Thus, the life, durability and consistency of Zoroastrianism may lie in the great sense of adherence to and adherence to.

This paper in the context of Mulla Sadra’ s Philosophy studies this issue from his point of view that what effects the theory of “ Super-Incorporeality Existence of the Soul” have on individual lifestyle. It is obvious that individual lifestyle has very close relationship with the kind of person’ s thinking and attitude to the world. In other words, the type of attitude and perspectivie taken by an individual, determines his/her life style. An atheist has different worldview and lifestyle from a theist. According to Mulla Sadra, individuals’ attitudes are different based on their existential expansion. What is meant by the “ super-incorporeality reality of the soul” is that human soul which is an non-material existent in his evolutionary path after separation from his material body and becoming an absolute abstract existent can go beyond of this level and reach to the super-abstract existential status and separate even from his quiddity and become a pure being. In this level, human soul becomes united with God which is the super abstract Being. By analyzing Mulla Sadra's views and emphasizing on his substantial movement principle, we inferred some of the effects of this super-abstract attitude to human soul on individual lifestyle which are existential monism, non-materialistic attitude to the life, internal peace, change in worship way, and happiness in light of existential expansion. This article, with a descriptive and analytical method, seeks the influence of the super-abstract attitude toward the human soul on individual life style.

In this article, we seek to understand Derrida's philosophical thought and resolve its ambiguity; our answer to this ambiguity is that Derrida must first be understood and placed within the framework of Emmanuel Levinas' discussions. Considering Derrida, in his own type, is very key and makes the implicit meaning of his philosophy different. The reason for this development is that in the general reading Derrida is considered to be the first heir of Nietzsche and then Heidegger, which is placed on the intellectual horizon of the two and in the tradition of metaphysical critique of the two. Levinas-based view of Derrida means that his philosophy is a transition from Heideggerian philosophy, that is ontology, to morality. That is, Derrida's words, within the language of Levine, fall within the framework of justice. According to this statement, the main question of the present article is how the precedence of morality over ontology in Derrida's philosophy can be revealed? Accordingly, Derrida's intellectual endeavor should be seen as an attempt to move beyond ontological issues, and his method of deconstruction should be considered as an analysis that is not in the realm of existence but in the binding force of morality, an action that goes beyond and recognizes it.

The human pre-mundane life, which is referred to by some verses of the Qur'an and emphasized by many narrations with the interpretation of the world of spirits and Zar, is due to its close connection with fundamental issues such as nature and destiny, innate knowledge, predestination and free will, divine justice in the system has a special place in religious thought. The emphasis on religious texts and the ambiguities and complexities of this part of human life on the one hand and the conflict between the appearance of some texts on one hand and the other on rational principles have led Islamic scholars in various fields to explain this issue. Unlike some scholars who refer to verse 172 of A’ raf and have considered the home of the Covenant as the “ a’ lame Zar” , in Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, one of the NoSadraian feature, is the homeland of promise to the same kind of sense and world. In his work, he applies the approach of the Covenant to revelation and prophecy as well as the monotheistic primordial nature in his two approaches. According to him, man has four levels of material, Form, intellectual and divine existence, and the presence of man in pre-mundane life is considered as his intellectual existence. In this paper, his thoughts are explained and analyzed by descriptive-analytical method and by studieng their works and writings on this subject.

Among the complicated issue of the soul in the works of Ibn Sina, texts of pleasure in his works are very less but considerable. In his view, the pleasure is one of the mental qualities of the human soul and an evident issue. Therefore, he did not try to define it but explained this concept. He considers pleasure as the perception of the appropriate thing with the faculty of knower, and defines the appropriate thing as the perfection and goodness of the power of knower or its specific action. On the other hand, in some of Ibn Sina's sayings about pleasure, it is stated that the perfection of known leads to the perception of pleasure. Now the question is what is the place of these two perfections (perfection of known and perfection of the power of knower) in Ibn Sina's perception of pleasure and in general what is the relationship between these two perfections in his thought. In this research for the accurate understanding of pleasure in the thought of Ibn Sina the issue of pleasure in his books is interpreted and analyzed. After that for getting accurately explanation of the pleasure, all his texts of pleasure by the analytical-philosophical method are analyzed. The analysis of them demonstrates that these two perfections are two conditions for the achieving or perception of pleasure but the achieving of the second perfection, the perfection of a perceptive faculty, is a pleasure perception.