ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHICAL DOCTRINES
Year:2020 | Volume:15 | Issue:26|Papers Count:12

The issue of knowing the divine attributes and their semantics is one of the most important and controversial issues in the discussion of knowing the Almighty God. Mirza Mahdi Esfahani, by emphasizing verses and hadiths (traditions), seeks to express a special type of negative theology, which is different from other words of those who believe in negative theology, such as Ibn Maimon (Maimonides, Moses ben Maimon) and Qadi Sa’ id. In his view, God has attributes, and these attributes are established equivocally (homonymous). The intellect of human beings cannot also know the divine attributes due to the inconsistency between the Creator and the creature, and the description of God to human notions, concepts and knowledge is not correct, but it is God who introduces his attributes to human beings and for this reason, this quotation of this theory does not lead to the cessation of the knowledge of God’ s attributes. By explaining and analyzing this theory, it becomes clear that this theory actually leads to the cessation of the intellect in understanding the knowledge of divine attributes.

The discussion of the relationship between the world of archetypal images and the world of nature is one of the important issues of T Islamic philosophy. Sheikh Ishraq rejected the theory of the peripatetic (Aristotelians) about the materiality of imaginary forms and proposed the theory of the world of archetypal images to explain some other issues of his philosophy. Allā ma Tabataba'i is also one of the contemporary philosophers who has expressed significant theories about the world of archetypal images and its relationship with the world of nature. In this article, first, the views of two philosophers about the worlds of existence and their arguments in proving the world of archetypal images are explained; then to analyze the relationship between world of archetypal images and the world of nature in subjects such as the theory of illusory and vision, images in the mirror and knowledge of the unseen (mystic, invisible) affairs in Sheikh Ishraq and subjects such as the longitudinal and ambiguity (analogical gradation) relationship of the worlds, the causality of the world of archetypal images to the world of nature, the existence of perfections of the world of nature in the world of archetypal images and explanation of veracious dreams and the quality of sensory perception according to Allā ma Tabataba'i, and in the end, some issues are said about the common and distinct points of view of these two philosophers and the challenges of each view.

During the written history of philosophy, various views on movement have emerged, among these, it was only Aristotle’ s theory of “ power” that became most popular with the philosophers after him, especially Muslim philosophers. He considered the hyle to be a complete essence which, together with the physical form, constitutes the body and receives its transformations. Islamic philosophers, especially Ibn Sina, while accepting this, presented several proofs on it, and since then these proofs have been reviewed by philosophers and sometimes-especially in the contemporary period-have been viewed with such denial by some thinkers which has been reduced to something completely mental. Due to the important role of this idea in explaining the changes in the universe and that one of the most important of these proofs is the proof of “ power and action” . This study also tries to show that most of the criticisms of this proof are fundamental and this proof has a high degree of unity in Peripatetic philosophy and also tries to analyze its capacity to accept Ṣ adra’ s editorial. The importance of this issue in strengthening the position of the origin system of Islamic philosophy, i. e. peripatetic philosophy, in one of the most important philosophical teachings; i. e. “ power and action” that itself lays the groundwork for a more accurate explanation of the great doctrine of substantive motion (movement-in-substance) and its determination of area.

Civilization is one of the fundamental categories in human societies that emphasizes the obligation to observe the rules and principles of civilization. This category has been widely reflected in the thoughts and theories of Islamic philosophers, including Ibn Miskawayh, due to its impact on biosocial quality. By writing the book of tahdhī b al-Akhlā q, he took an important step in theorizing in the field of ethics and human virtues (excellences) that underlie the growth of civilization. The present article tries to identify and introduce moral virtues and express their impact on creating a semantic formulation of civilization by using the semantic method in the field of linguistics. The research findings show that the five moral virtues: wisdom, chastity, courage, generosity and justice-which are themselves characteristics of civilization-which presented in the book of “ tahdhī b al-Akhlā q” have produced categories in a semantic relationship with internal concepts which in the semantic relations with civilization as a focal point, has created a semantic formulation of civilization behind the ideas of Ibn Muskawiyyah, which emphasizes the biosocial based on the preservation of human values.

The word ḥ aqq (truth, right, reality etc. ) is one of the most widely used words in the Holy Quran, which despite its external clarity, its exact meaning requires etymology, and in the Holy Quran, it has been used in more than 30 different meanings. Meanings such as: Allah, the Prophet (pbuh), Quran, Islam, justice, truth, Ka'bah, wealth, . . . which indicate the ambiguity of the meaning of this word in the Holy Quran. In this research, using the knowledge of etymology and historical semantics, the relationship between the various uses of this word and the centrality of the lexical principle of “ existence” is explained. This new approach to the word ḥ aqq (truth, right, reality etc. ) can, while confirming some of the philosophers’ interpretations of the word ḥ aqq (truth, right, reality etc. ), document the principle of the validity of lexical (literal) ijtihad (lit. physical or mental effort, expended in a particular activity) and make the way easier for the philosophical interpretation of many other verses in the Holy Qur'an that philosophers has not held it due to avoid the eisegesis for the lack of lexical basis. It can also have an effect on ranking different topics of existence, in terms of its importance and results.

Suhrawardī in his works criticizes and refutes the existence and necessity of specific substances (forms of species). The negation of the existence of species (specific substance) forms requires the negation of two important rules in peripatetic philosophy. The first is that the substance is only dependent on the substance and the accident cannot be the fixer of the substance, and the second is that the essentials (essences) in the substances which attributed on their univocal (non-derivative predication), not analogical gradation are attributed on their own essence. The question that arises here is what is the place of the negation of the existence of specie (specific substance) in the philosophical system of illumination and for what purpose? According to Suhrawardī ’ s method of reasoning, we find that he uses by knowing of the negation of the Specific substances (form of species) and the acceptance of the standing of the essence to the body (disposition, figure) and also gradation (ambiguity) in nature, uses them in proving the ideal (paradigm, idea) and designers (managers, governing) of differences and thus reaches in the new concept of nature. Nature in this new meaning and concept, as the origin (principle) of light management of the universe of objects by the lords of types (archetypes of species), in other words, the origin of light for the various movements (motions, change) of objects (physical beings).

Sadr-ol-Mote'allehin May Allah be Merciful to him paints two main images for the soul regarding the perception of partial illusory and Ṣ sensory (perceptual) forms: one is the active soul and the other is the capable soul. For each of the two theories, there is evidence in his works. The most important result of accepting the activity of the soul, according to the rule of “ the doer (producer) and the giver of the object, that does not lack it” , is the acceptance of the possession of forms by the soul in the rank before issuance (emanation) and activity. Such a conclusion leads us to a similar theory but more accurate in the field of soul perception, which is the mystical theory of soul development (unveiling). On the other hand, talking about the capability of the soul in relation to illusory and sensory forms leads us to have the power (potentiality) of the soul, its departure from the power to actuality in the process of perception consequently, the materiality of the human soul and also the materiality of sensory and illusory perceptions. The results which are inconsistent with some of Ṣ adra’ s other principles. Therefore, it seems that the first theory in partial perceptions is closer to the correct opinion and has more acceptable philosophical results.

Semiotics is an important part of Saussure’ s serious studies in the field of linguistics. According to Saussure, the nature of the sign is S divided into signifier and signified. In the common sense, the signifier is something outside the mind and the signified is something inside the mind. Saussure, however, following Kant, challenges the customary view and considers the origin of the production of them enclosing in mind. In the tradition of Islamic philosophy, Farabi is the first linguistic philosopher to pay attention to the contemporaneous structure of language, regardless of its historical aspect. Using the concept of word and reason, while reading the relations between them conventionally, he offers a subjectivist reading of the analysis of the nature of signs. The present article has two purposes: 1 st, Saussure and Farabi’ s views on the nature of the sign will be examined. 2 nd , Farabi’ s view of the letter and reasonable and how they relate to Saussure’ s signified will be analyzed.

In this research, the views of Professor Fayyazi have been analyzed. Sadr-ol-Mote'allehin, according to the rule of indivisible entity and by I proving the existential perfections of possible beings in the essence of the Almighty Supreme Being, explaining the knowledge by presence of God (immediate apprehension, intuitive knowledge) in the position of essence. Professor Fayyazi believes that this view has its drawbacks. The basic drawback is that Mulla Sadrā ’ s interpretation of the systematic ambiguityof existence becomes contradictory and the structural drawback with this, is that, this view is incapable of proving God’ s knowledge of the contingent things which annihilated (nonexistent) and the impossibilities. After explaining the conceptual, systematic ambiguity and individual (particular) unity of existence, the author has reached the conclusion that the above-mentioned basic drawback has not been included Ṣ adr-olMote'allehin’ s argument on the immediate apprehension of God is based on the systematic ambiguity unity of existence, while the basic drawback which is related to individual oneness (particular unity) unity is still existed and for the structural problems, it has been stated that although the proof of this kind of immediate apprehension for God has methodological weaknesses, but the final opinion of Ṣ adr-ol-Mote'allehin is the same synoptic (collective) knowledge while discovering (unveiling) in detail what is immediate apprehension and then the theory of Professor Fayyazi about the inferred knowledge (attained knowledge) of God to the creatures before creation has been examined.

Shams al-Dī n Muḥ ammad ibn Ashraf al-Ḥ usaynī al-Samarqandī , an unknown logician of the seventh century AH, has an effective role in the growth and development of Sinai (Avicennism) logic in the Islamic world. Examination of his logical views shows his influence on the thoughts of some logicians, especially Qutb al-Din al-Razi. In addition to expanding some of Ibn Sina’ s (Avicenna) innovations, he has certain logical views. Adherence to Ibn Sina’ s system of logistics, simplification of affirmation (assertion) or negation of the composition of affirmation (assertion), solving the whole problem of false theology, distinguishing between different instances (referents) of the necessity of description and dividing it into three types, adding mental condition in negative conversion (even conversion or converse) in inversion of subject which is nonexistent attribute or affirmative inversion of attribute (predicate) which is nonexistent subject is one of the logical thoughts of Shams al-Dī n al-Samarqandī . The present article, while mentioning and examining these opinions, in discussing the simplicity of affirmation, mentions and examines Allā ma Tabataba'i’ s innovative view on the number of parts of the proposition, which in his view is not the Hokmieha (order, verdict ratio of the main parts of the proposition.

Heidegger and Mulla Sadra’ s views on the “ transcendental identity of human” can be examined comparatively. In this comparison, H conformities and differences are obtained. The forms of affinities are as follows: First, both believe in a single meaning of transcendence in the context of existence and acknowledge the unilateral influence of existence in the realization of human transcendence; Second, they believe in the importance of transcendence in the definition of human and consider the identity of human as dependent on transcendence and then, both imply the constant continuation of human transcendence. The points of distinction are as follows: First, their basis for transcendence is different; since the beginning of transcendence in Heidegger is with Descartes’ critique of subjectivism, and he arrives at the idea that man is the only being who realizes things in their opening; but the beginning of transcendence in Mulla Sadrā ’ s thought is depicted by explaining the objectivity (entity of connection) of beings to real existence and is based on the belief that the exploration of existence in man occurs through the substantial movement, will and grace of real existence. Second, Heidegger, with the ontological system he portrayed, believes in Dasein’ s self-reliance in transcendence; but in Mulla Sadra’ s thought, attention to the divinity and in the light of it, scientific and practical reliance on its aspects has fundamental importance.

Causality, which is one of the principles of existence and thought, is one of the important issues in the field of religious knowledge (studies). Shiite thinkers, as a rationalist current, have always defended the principle of causality and explained its rulings and types. Division of cause into complete (perfect), incomplete (partial), real, preparing, simple, compound (composite), proximate, remote, etc. in philosophy and division into cause, condition, appropriateness (necessary), hindrance (hindering) and preparer, etc. in the knowledge of principles of jurisprudence, is one of the common topics between these two studies. Philosophers have done this division mostly by the method of dichotomy exclusion, and the scholars of the knowledge of principles have presented multiple divisions according to the jurisprudential and practical credentials. In this article, we have comparatively studied the divisions of cause in these two sciences by an analytical method, and by criticizing of the explanation principally, we have shown that the division of causes in the dichotomy method is more coherent and convincing and faces fewer problems. In addition, some divisions of motive (reason) in the knowledge of principles can be interpreted based on the common division in philosophy.