By examining the different meanings of "essence" and "quiddity" in the thought of the Muslim philosophers, and by examining the important origins of Mula Sadra'a (TRANSCENDENT) PHILOSOPHY, this article will prove that the concepts of essence and quiddity are rejected in his PHILOSOPHY and are considered as something conventional and as subjective constructs. So this line of thinking is nominalistic in this regard, and therefore is epistemologically a relativistic thought considering the knowledge of reality as something relative. In his PHILOSOPHY, necessary and absolute knowledge of reality is impossible, and from the methodological viewpoint, this line of thought cannot be classified under rationalistic PHILOSOPHY. Therefore, this kind of PHILOSOPHY must rely on methods like intuition or experience.

Although Ibn Sī nā has been frequently introduced as a Peripatetic philosopher and the “ Master of Peripatetic Philosophers” in the world of Islam, one might wonder if such a reading of his PHILOSOPHY is absolutely correct. Undoubtedly, his major works have been written on the basis of the principles of Peripatetic PHILOSOPHY. However, the question is whether one can find some indications of his departure from this school of PHILOSOPHY in the same works. Ibn Sī nā neither remained a Peripatetic philosopher nor followed Peripatetic thoughts to the end of his life. Through coining the term “ TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY” for his own school and inviting the seekers of truths to follow it in order to have an accurate grasp of what they sought for, Ibn Sī nā added a completely new dimension to his identity. Finally, the TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY reached its peak of development in Sadrian thoughts. Here, the author intends to explain the “ transcendence of Sinian PHILOSOPHY” and, at the same time, trace the roots of the principles of the TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY in Sinian PHILOSOPHY and highlight them in his works and words. Although the political occupations of Ibn Sī nā and his short life did not allow him to provide a new synthesis of such principles, he managed to pave the way for the creation of the TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY by his successors.

Perhaps few philosophical schools have been judged so differently or opposed as much as the TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY in the course of history. The vast domain and influence of this school, as well as its strength and all-inclusiveness, have persuaded several thinkers with different philosophical, gnostic, kalami, and even Qur’ anic tendencies to take it into consideration, to describe it from their own point of view, and, consciously or unconsciously, interpret it to their own advantage. Such differences have resulted in the creation of some ambiguity with regard to the truth and nature of the TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY. For example, the meaning and truth of the word “ PHILOSOPHY” (in Mulla Sadra’ s view), which has been given the adjective of “ TRANSCENDENT” is one of such ambiguous cases. In the present paper, in order to clarify this ambiguity, the author has tried to describe Mulla Sadra’ s PHILOSOPHY by referring to his own words. In doing so, after determining the nature of wisdom and PHILOSOPHY and conducting a comparative study of the common meaning of PHILOSOPHY and the TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY and specifying their similarities and differences, it is demonstrated that his PHILOSOPHY is a particular PHILOSOPHY with a prophetic and religious origin. It is indeed a divine blessing which is only bestowed upon His special servants; a kind of PHILOSOPHY which safely brings gnosis and reasoning to the shore of harmony and cooperation in the light of the Qur’ an.

The theme of this Congress is political PHILOSOPHY, or PHILOSOPHY, in the TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY; i.e. in Mulla Sadra's view. Here, I do not intend to discuss politics in Mulla Sadra's PHILOSOPHY. This will be done by the distinguished scholars and speakers taking part in this congress, and we hope that similar studies continue in future in other forms. My main intention here is to pave the way for beginning of this discussion and to encourage all the people dealing with PHILOSOPHY to study and analyze this topic. Such issues have always existed in PHILOSOPHY during the last several centuries of its life, and if we explore the depth of the history of PHILOSOPHY, we learn that they were always the focus of attention of related gatherings. For some reasons they were studied first in Greece and later in other places in an academic fashion.

Proving the existence of God has always been at the core of philosophical discussions. One of the arguments employed in order to demonstrate the existence of God is the argument of motion. In this paper, the writer has tried to compare the notion of the First Mover from the viewpoints of Aristotle and Mulla Sadra, as two prominent Greek and Islamic philosophers. He has also explained the possible differences between the ways they have tried to demonstrate the existence of the First Mover.

Panpsychism in PHILOSOPHY of mind is the view that mentality is fundamental and ubiquitous in the natural world. The view has a long and venerable history in philosophical traditions-both East and West-and has recently enjoyed a revival in analytic PHILOSOPHY. Thus, in conjunction with the widely held assumption that fundamental things exist only at the micro-level, panpsychism entails that at least some kinds of micro-level entities have mentality, and that instances of those kinds are found in all things throughout the material universe. We can see something like this in Mulla Sadra's TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY. Mulla Sadra claims that all things enjoy some kind of intelligence and understanding. On the other hand, many verses of the Holy Qur'an either explicitly or implicitly assert the presence of understanding and intelligence in all things. In this article, I will explain all three issues (Panpsychism, Mulla Sadra's view, and relevant verses of the Holy Qur'an), then I will make it clear that Mulla Sadra's view and Qur'anic statements are consistent with at least some versions of the Panpsychism.

Movement is a discussion that it was current among philosophers during the history of PHILOSOPHY. According the Egypt philosopher’s writing, we can understand that one of the main pre Socratis philosopher’s concerns, was movement and their idea was different. Some of them like Herakleitos thought that subjects had move and some of them like Parmenides considered it, as a fantastic subject. But people accepted none of them. Among post Socratis philosophers especially Platon and Aristoteles, these ideas converted to a PHILOSOPHY thinking which it accepted the change and stability. But Platon found stability on Imaginal world and accepted changes in material world. But Aristoteles, accepted stability in the essence of material subjects and movement in some of the latitudinal category. After that Muslim’s philosophers accepted Aristoteles’s idea with a little change. Ibn-sina believed that category of position which Aristoteles named it place movement will changed. Sohrevardi considered movement as a separate category beside the other categories. He accepted the change of subject’s essence because of the change in accidents’ subjects. Mulla-sadra did the most excellent discussion about movement. He accepted some of the ideas of ex philosophers and also critiqued most of their beliefs and at last concluded that subjects’ essence isn’t calm in essence and is permanent in change.

The term "embodiment of deeds", the content of which, unlike its verbal combination, has a long history, has been accepted by Islamic religious culture. By resorting to religious teachings and the works of some early Greek philosophers, while acknowledging the embodiment of deeds and beliefs in the Hereafter, Mulla Sadra grants a rational and philosophical flavor to this issue. As we can see, the principles of his TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY also allow him to do so. The corporeal relatedness and spiritual subsistence of the soul, along with the tran8-substantial motion and the union of the intellect and the intelligible, are among such principles. Accordingly, the acts that human beings perform repeatedly turn-into film habits in the soul's innermost interior and are inseparable from it. They are, in fact, among its essential concomitants. Noble and evil habits create appropriate and various forms for themselves in the afterlife and appear in those forms therein.

The aim of this study is to extract concepts from the heart of TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY to form a psychological theory. The basic premise is that Sadr al-Muta'allehin's views include the implications needed to formulate a theory of psychology. The second and third assumptions are that various aspects of a psychological theory can be deduced from the TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY of Mulla Sadra. Moreover, Mulla Sadra's opinions have explanatory and helpful concepts in comparison with the existing theories in psychology.The results of the research confirm thiese assumptions and show that Mulla Sadra's views carry significant notions in the science of psychology, and by examining Sadra's anthropology, the basic assumptions in a psychological approach can be extracted.In this paper, presuppositions in the field of ontology are extracted and compared with the field of "human position in the world" with the approach of existentialism and in the field of "human definition" with the approach of behaviorism. Furthermore, some assumptions concerning "human evolution and development" have been extracted and compared in the fields of "human instincts" using a psychoanalytic approach, and "evolutionary features" based on Piaget's theory of "constructivism".Regarding the stages of infinite evolution in Sadra's views, we have not found any equivalent in psychology for comparison.

The nature of health and sickness and their relationship with each other is the first and most necessary theoretical issue in medical PHILOSOPHY, upon which all other discussions in this field depend, and which has provoked several theoretical and practical controversies. Similar to some Islamic philosophers, Mullā Ṣ adrā has also dealt with this problem. In his discussions, he explains Ibn Sī nā ’ s standpoint in this regard and defends him against his critics, the most prominent of whom is Fakhr al-Din Razi. In doing so, Mullā Ṣ adrā follows the common wisdom of his own time and defines health as a state or condition of the soul through which mental acts are properly issued from their own specific sources and emphasizes the psychological nature of both health and sickness. Being more straightforward than Ibn Sī nā , Mullā Ṣ adrā corresponds the relationship between health and sickness to that between habit and non-habit. However, he does not clearly refer to his position as to what comes between health and sickness. A study of Mullā Ṣ adrā ’ s works indicates that, apart from his direct references to the nature of health and sickness, one can define health as “ a mode of the existence of the soul which enables it to perform its acts properly at the level of physical and elemental body” based on the principles of the TRANSCENDENT PHILOSOPHY. In the same vein, through emphasizing the ontological nature of health and non-being nature of sickness and, accordingly, their being graded, one can refute the existence of any boundary or intermediary between them and, as a result, portray a distinct picture of health and sickness.