ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHICAL DOCTRINES
Year:2021 | Volume:15 | Issue:27|Papers Count:13

On the eve of passing through the scholasticism, we encounter a period of transition called the Renaissance. Although less attention has been paid to this historical period in the philosophical life of the West, but the role of Muslim philosophers, especially Ibn Sina (Avicenna) and Ibn Rushd (Latinized Averroes), has played an important and influential role in the philosophical thought of this period. The influence of Muslim philosophers on the philosophical life of the West has been done through the translations and interpretations of philosophers and school teachers. As a result, misconceptions have sometimes occurred. An example of these misconceptions can clearly be found in the meanings of double reality. In this article, we analyze the meanings of double reality (doubling in action, cognition, discourse, fact in itself; thing in itself) and examine three Latin Ibn Rushdians who had a greater impact on the intellectual space of their time. Then we will examine the consequences of the Latin Ibn Rushdian on the eve of the Renaissance.

Islamic philosophy, with its foundations of ontology (ontological), has established the most basic foundations of rational theology. Uncertainty and gradation in these principles inflicts irreparable damage on theology in a special (more peculiar) sense and transforms it into another path with transformative consequences. Principality of existence has a prominent, visible and irreplaceable role among all the central principles of ontology. Transcendent Wisdom has established this principle by recognizing its effective role. Opponents of it have, as a result of some inconsistencies results with their presuppositions, such as the unity of existence, distorted and induced doubt in its proofs. The main doubt is the accusation of circle doubt and circular reasoning by a seemingly heterogeneous spectrum, including anti-philosophers and some separatists (gradationists) in a polemical method. In this opportunity, attention will be paid to four reasons that are in this doubt. These reasons are: the argument of the goodness of existence, the argument based on the difference between the effects of external existence and the mental existence, the argument based on the refusal (impossibility) of doubt in gradation the quiddity and the argument of intensified (intensifying) motion. By presenting the contents of these arguments, the content of the doubt will also be tested against them. The analysis shows that the skepticism is due to insufficient attention to the principles of these arguments.

Discourse about the world of descendants is always accompanied by two questions: the place of the descendant's world in the existence system? And why does no human remember this covenant (compact)? There have been several answers to these two questions, and the answers of Allameh Tabataba'i and Javadi Amoli are more accurate and important. The library method has been used in this article, and we have tried to refer to the primary sources of theorists of this issue. The answer of Allameh Tabataba'i and Javadi Amoli is that they are initially opposed to each other. In this article, while examining the answers of these two thinkers, it is clear that the theory of nature of Javadi Amoli solves problems better and easier. In the following, according to Mullā Ṣ adrā 's innovations in the topics of transcendent theosophy, such as the issue of separation of existence and “ simplicity of the truth of all things” (Arabic: بسیط الحقیقه کل الاشیاء) and especially Rarefied and real predication, it is clear that the theory of innate natural disposition (nature) is complementary and compatible with the theory of collective existence.

Society and the individual and the relationship between the two is one of the most important philosophical issues for thinkers. Modern social scientists (companions) have offered three perspectives in answer to this question. Some have given principality to the individual in relation to society, some have considered society to be principal in relation to the individual, and others have taken a combined view between the individual and society. The importance of this issue is that any answer to the question of the relation and principality of the individual or society, forms the path of humanities and social sciences research. The question of this research is what is the response of contemporary Muslim philosophers to the relationship between the individual and society based on rational and philosophical principles, although in the works of early Muslim thinkers such as Fā rā bī , Khajeh Naṣ ir al-Din al-Ṭ ū sī and Ibn Khaldū n, one can find an answer to the relationship between the individual and society. However, due to the familiarity of contemporary Muslim philosophers with modern social sciences, different and independent works and opinions have been expressed and written about the relationship between the individual and society or the principality of the individual or society. The author believes that contemporary Iranian philosophers, in terms of their response to the relationship between the individual and society, can be classified into three groups: the principality of the individual, the principality of society and the principality of society and the individual. In order to prove their point of view, each of them has mentioned rational and scriptural (traditional) proofs that have caused the conflict of opinions and the emergence of innovative theories based on Islamic teachings. In this research, by referring to the available sources and works and describing, documenting and analyzing the content, the conflicts and discussions formed about the individual and society have been dealt with.

Undoubtedly, the history of music should be compared with the history of human life; because for a long time, various types of music derived from the text of nature have been associated with human societies. Music in a general view can be divided into natural and artistic (artificial). Ibn Sina (Avicenna) was one of the greatest thinkers and philosophers who spoke about art music in detail in his writings and this has exposed his views to more criticism and comments. However, the capacities of Avicenna philosophy in expressing the effects of music on the state of the human soul have not been revealed much. The main question of this article is what the relationship between music and the human soul in terms of Avicennism-psychology is? In an analytical descriptive approach and emphasizing the principles of Avicennism-psychology, the author has come to the conclusion that artistic music, with its direct impact, targets only the vegetable and soul (sprit) in humans, and theoretical and practical reason (conceptual and practical intellect) also often indirectly exposes him to these disturbances with its excessiveness and deviant (exess and neglect) effects on these faculties.

The fundamental question in the realm of epistemology is the quality of origin and how the mind achieves general concepts. In this study, we seek to answer the question: How is it possible to know the general principles through the partial principles? In the history of philosophy, two important currents, Platonic and Aristotelian, have been formed in this regard. The leader of the Aristotelian movement in the Islamic world is the Avicennism and in Western thought, influenced by Ibn Sina is medieval philosophy. The present study, with an analytical-comparative approach, deals with the perception and types of general concepts from the perspective of Ibn Sina and medieval philosophers. Findings show that both philosophical branches in achieving the mind to the first intellects, have often accepted the theory of abstraction and have also considered the rational intellects to be based on the essential concepts and their accident. In the field of philosophical concepts, although he did not use the term of secondary intelligible, but he considered these concepts to have originated from outside and at the same time he has distinguished the quality of their origin with the first and second intellects.

One of the important philosophical issues is the discussion of the “ immaterial and material” (existence) being. Providing a precise definition of “ immaterial” and “ material” , proving their existence, expressing their species, and the relationship between immaterial and material are among the important concerns of philosophers. It has been tried in this article to define and analyze the quiddity and characteristics of immaterial and material beings and also has been tried to examine Mullā Ṣ adrā 's special opinion precisely on the manner of immaterial and material relation. The author by referring (citing) the doctrine of existential separation in the transcendent theosophy has tried to prove that in Ṣ adrā 's thought, it is not possible and should not be believed in a clear and definite boundary like the peripatetic, between the immaterial and the material, because the immaterial and the material and the rules and characteristics of existence each of them have a return to the degree of intensity and weakness in the fact of the unity of existence, and as in the system of existential separation, existential discontinuity that is not assumed, neither can be believed a definite and bold existential boundary between the immaterial and the material despite the essential distinction.

It cannot be claimed that Ibn Miskawayh, the philosopher of the fourth century AH, systematically addressed the basic issues of aesthetics and philosophy of art in his works. However, he considers the issue of aesthetic experience and beauty as an issue and believes that the basic features of aesthetic experience are related to unity. Unity is a characteristic of divine existence, and the purpose of harmony, proportion, and rhythm in the physical (corporeal, bodily) world is to approach (to come close) this unity. In his view, beauty is an objective idea (concept) and “ beautiful” is defined in the triangle of soul-nature-matter. What makes an object beautiful is the harmony between the souls that reflects the divine existence with a matter that is able to receive it. Perfection occurs when the artist applies what is appropriate to the soul in matter. Perfection is also the product of the relationship between theory and practice, which are two complementary fields. Ibn Miskawayh, in his works also examines music and poetry. In his view, music is the closest experience to receiving a divine existence. The experience gained through music has a greater impact on the soul than other arts. In his view, there is a connection between music and the unity and universal order. However, he keeps his distance from poetry, because he believes that poetry uses tricks to arouse the soul.

The doubt of incompatibility of concomitance of satisfaction to divine decree with satisfaction to evil is one of the most important challenges facing the belief in the generality of divine will and decree and ordinance (predestination). Knowing real evil negatively and the separation (distinction) of decree and predestined thing, the separation of essential and incidental in the mode of being and the separation in the mode of the existential and essential aspects and the emphasis on the dominance of the existence-oriented attitude in virtual evil are the answers that can be obtained from Mullā Ṣ adrā 's works. Examination of these answers shows that negative knowing is faced with the problem of the circle of its argument. Separation of decree and predestined thing is also not a solution due to the inability to prove the real difference. In the essential and incidental distinction (separation), doubt on the arbitrary existence of evil can still be raised. But in Mullā Ṣ adrā 's final answer that principality in the principality of existence means being outside and multiplicity in the unity of existence also means the manifestations of existence, the doubt is fundamentally removed.

Anthropology is one of the most important topics in influencing our understanding, explanation and interpretation of religious teachings. The discussion of human essences is one of its most fundamental parts. Islamic philosophers and some theologians believe in the immateriality of the soul. Some theologians deny the immateriality of the soul and consider it material. From the beginning of the formation of theological schools until now, sometimes materialism (corporealism) and sometimes incorporealism (incorporeality) have been the dominant theory. In the last century, although the view of abstractionism is the dominant theory, theologians of the school of separation (disassembly) have defended the materiality of the soul. Incorporealist present a number of arguments to prove the abstraction of the soul. One of the most important of them is the proof that proves the abstraction of the soul through the perception of general ideas by the soul. In this argument, it concludes the incorporeality of the soul as the place of these forms, sometimes through the accidents of being material perceived intelligibles and sometimes through the absence of material effects that perceived intellects. This research has investigated this reason by descriptive-analytical method. The correctness (verification) and extent of its indication were examined after explaining it, and it became clear that there are several forms that have been included in both expressions of this rational proof; cannot damage the validity of this argument.

Predicating the Essence and the Flimsy is one of Mulla Sadra's important innovations. The implication of this theory is that imperfect existence in perfect existence is more fully realized, so that the higher order encompasses all the lower perfections. Mulla Sadra achieved this theory by using the material of earlier philosophers and being influenced by Ibn Arabi. He explained this theory with his own principles such as the principality of existence, graded unity of being, the principle of unity-in-plurality, the simple rule of truth and causality. In this article, we have tried to examine the background and foundations of this theory along with Ibn Arabi's theories.

The rule of unity is one of the basic and important rules and principles in Islamic philosophy. The implication of this rule is that for a single reason, only a single disabled issue is issued. Although many sages and philosophers have accepted this rule, some theologians have denied it. Determining the channel of this rule is considered as one of the necessary issues around it. Considering the words and phrases of Mulla Sadra, it can be said that he has taken a double position on this important issue. In some of his expressions, he spoke of attributing this rule to the Almighty, and in others, he considered the channel of this rule to include God, in such a way that he even used this rule as a proof of reason. The existence of such phrases in the words and speeches of Mulla Sadra has caused criticism from Hakim Sabzevari in this regard. He makes three criticisms of Mulla Sadra's view and concludes that this rule is not specific to the Supreme Being and includes other unrealistic units. The author has tried to study the criticisms of Hakim Sabzevari by analytical-comparative method and has shown that it is possible to combine Mulla Sadra's double expressions.