KHERADNAME-YE SADRA
Year:2007 | Volume:12 | Issue:48|Papers Count:12

In line with the method of his contemporary philosophers and the common tradition of sages, Aqajani followed Peripatetic Philosophy and, particularly, the Sinan philosophy. He considered himself an independent religious jurist - rather than an imitator - in rational sciences and philosophical issues. Even if he had a hand in gnosis and the Transcendent Philosophy, unlike the first commentator of Qabasat (Seyyed Ahmed Amili), he never set foot beyond the principles of the Sinan School in his commentary of this work and rarely ever went beyond the framework of the common philosophical tradition of his time....

One of tools for the development of philosophical thought has always been the clash of the thoughts of thinkers and philosophers in the course of the history of philosophy and wisdom. The good tradition of criticizing others' words and writing glosses or commentaries on their books is one of the manifestations of this development. One of the people who tried to examine, analyze, reject, and criticize others' ideas and thoughts in his works was Ayatullah Rafi'i Qazwini. In his glosses on lalal al-Din Dawani's Sharh-i hayakil al-nur, he has harshly attacked the commentator employing a religious tone. However, following a specific and clever method, he has agreed with its religious framework.

According to divine philosophers, there is an Origin at the peak of the pyramid of being Who is the Necessary Being and is absolutely Independent. His Existence can be demonstrated based on rational arguments; however, it is not possible for human beings to know His Truth and Essence. This is because He is the Absolute Being. He can only be known through specific attributes that exclusively qualify Him. His characteristics are generally in contrast to those of possible beings. In other words, all of them reveal His Needlessness. In sum, "the Necessary Being" never needs and depends on the other, since He is the Origin of the existence of all existents of the world. Rather, He possesses every and all ontological perfections. Otherwise, He would be one of the existents of the world, who need another origin to exist. The present paper deals with a study and analysis of the characteristics of the Necessary Being from the viewpoint of Islamic philosophers.

The issue of macranthropos and microcosm is discussed in Sadrian Philosophy. Here, man is compared as the "microcosm" with the external world as the "macranthropos".In order to grasp a better understanding of this topic in Mulla Sadra's works, we have to pay attention to certain preliminary points.For example, we should learn from which perspective and based on which philosophical thought Mulla Sadra studies man. The knowledge of the background of this topic in other schools is also necessary in this regard.This paper does not deal with this issue in the field of anthropology, which studies man from the four dimensions of physical anthropology, archeology, linguistics, and cultural anthropology. Rather, the question here is whether there exists essentially anything under the title of macranthropos and microcosm in the history of philosophy. That is why we recognize Mulla Sadra not merely as a rationalist philosopher, but as a theologian (muti'allih) philosopher. A related question here is whether there exists anything in this regard in the Book and Sunna. This paper will also cast a glance at gnostics' related ideas because they play an essential role in our understanding of Mulla Sadra's view of man. Perhaps, one can claim that without following a gnostic approach, which is apparent in the Transcendent Philosophy, we cannot learn about Mulla Sadra's view of this issue.

Considering the importance of the argument of the righteous in the history of Islamic philosophy, through examining the related religious, philosophical, and theological texts, the writer has first tried to introduce its philosophical background and context of development. Second, he has studied and analyzed its historical changes from the time of Ibn 8ina until 'Allamah Tabataba'i in various philosophical seminaries, particularly those of Shiraz and Isfahan. In doing so, he has specified each thinker's principles in the formulation of this argument. Moreover, while reporting the various interpretations of this argument in brief, he has revealed the strengths and weak points of each and introduced the most solid and reliable of all them.

The study of concepts such as "causality" in western philosophy in the modem era has been a challenging endeavor. Considering the empiricism dominating western philosophy during this period, causality has been analyzed in an atmosphere of western subjectivism. This has led to some challenges and ups and downs in this regard in the West. This paper initially deals with and portrays the process of evolution of the analysis of causality in the new Western Era from the view point of a number of distinguished philosophers who have presented some significant ideas in this regard. Then it examines the same topic in Islamic philosophy from the viewpoint of theologians, Peripatetic philosophers, and the thinkers following the Transcendent Philosophy. Finally, the author has compared the analyses of causality in the new western philosophy and Islamic philosophy with each other and introduced the related differences, which are essentially rooted in following two different approaches to similar issues and categories. Accordingly, in western philosophy causality is an empirical and, ultimately, subjective issue, while in Islamic philosophy it is a "nafs alamari"( fact itself) or "intelligible" category.

One of the main epistemological questions today is related to the whatness of objects. This question itself is divided into explicative and essential types. In response to essential questions concerning accident, theologians and philosophers have given various responses. They have also provided different definitions for accident - such as something that is added to essence; something whose existence has no permanence and continuity; something that depends on the other; an originated thing that depends on the spatial; something that is spatial, etc. However, in their definitions of substance and accident, they typically consider the divided as the originated existent. Philosophers have also presented various definitions for accident such as quality, predicate, what is constituted by what constitutes itself, a quiddity which is not found but in a subject, an existent in a thing (but not as a part of it) which has no constitution beyond what contains it, etc. Nevertheless, in their definitions of substance and accident, they consider the divided as quiddity and do not pay attention to the limitation of "the subject's being spatial". When evaluating these definitions, we can say that none of them is a definition in the real sense of the word. According to Ibn Sina, they are not even true descriptions. On the whole, the definitions that present a greater number and more important characteristics of accident are more valid than others.

The main questions of this paper concern how the human mind attains the notion of the Necessary Being in Peripatetic Philosophy, and to what extent it can know Him in terms of concept and judgment.A short response of the present paper to the above questions is that our realist intellect, based on its first judgment, qualifies each existing object with a necessary or possible attribute and, in this way, learns the concept of the Necessary Being. Later, based on philosophical arguments, it tries to demonstrate its applications. However, in spite of attaining a conceptual system of God Almighty in the light of rational analysis and a justified and honest belief in His Existence on the basis of philosophical arguments, our intellect is not capable of knowing Him perfectly.Therefore, in this philosophical system the unique source of our knowledge of God is the intellect. Moreover, in spite of enjoying the capacity for entering this domain, this intellect, too, is not capable of perceiving the existence of this Almighty Truth due to its essential limitations and the infinity of the object of recognition. Rather, it merely knows that the concept of the Necessary Being and the other concepts that are based on it have referents the truths of which are unknown to us.

The word "industry" has a specific meaning for the people of wisdom and gnosis which has nothing to do with modem technology.Mir Findiriski's Risalah-i sana'iyyah is one of the best and most comprehensive works that has ever been written exclusively on the topic of industry by one of the most distinguished Muslim philosophers, gnostics, and scholars. The meaning of industry as intended by the people of wisdom and gnosis has been illustrated in the best way possible in this treatise. This work was written at the same time with the rise of modern knowledge and technology in the West. The reading of this treatise reveals some of the philosophical crises of the Safawid Era which led to some serious defects in civil life, working, and industry. One of the most important questions posed here pertains to the relation between industry as intended by Mir Findiriski and that in its new technological sense.

The question about the relationship between philosophical thought and historical time has always been a basic one. Mulla Sadra's Transcendent Philosophy, along with the collection of the works of its prominent commentators, have given rise to the greatest philosophical tradition in Iranian culture from the 11th century (AH) until the present time. The continuity of this trend persuades us to ask some serious questions concerning the status of this school in today's world. The most important question in this regard pertains to the way we approach this philosophical legacy and our expectations in this regard. In the present paper, the writer has initially tried to describe three different approaches to the Transcendent Philosophy. Then, based on his position as to the relationship between philosophical thought and historical time, he has tried to analyze and criticize them. The writer's main purpose here is to invite interested readers to a dialog on the above question. His assumption is that the Transcendent Philosophy is the basis of philosophical thought or is, at least, worth being used as a reference for philosophical inquiries.