Abstract
Problem: The generation of consciousness from non-conscious entities—the hard problem of consciousness—is a central issue in the philosophy of mind. We argue that addressing it requires a critical stance toward reductionist approaches (including physicalism, emergentism, and micropsychism) and a shift toward a holistic framework. Gradualist Cosmopsychism and Existence Cosmopsychism represent two holistic options which can be brought into alignment, respectively, with the Sadrian frameworks of gradation of existence and unity of existence., thereby offering two distinct frameworks for articulating MullāṢadrā’s holistic solution to the hard problem.
Method: We employ a descriptive–analytical approach to outline the relevant theories and a comparative method to evaluate them.
Findings: Existence Cosmopsychism faces fewer theoretical difficulties and is more compatible with MullāṢadrā’s ultimate metaphysical commitments. On his framework of the unity of existence, belief in a single, maximally perfect Existence—which manifests all beings and their perfections—requires that the apparent generation of consciousness from seemingly non-conscious manifestations also be explained by reference to this single Existence.
Conclusion: The Sadrian version of Existence Cosmopsychism—formed through integrating Existence Cosmopsychism with Ṣadrā’s doctrine of unity of existence—grounds the two key components for addressing the hard problem in a single cosmic Existence/Consciousness: (1) the pervasiveness of consciousness throughout all manifestations, and (2) the possibility of its perfection within them. Consciousness is manifested equally by the one Existence, while differences among manifestations arise from their varying capacities to disclose it; the evolution of consciousness is thus understood as the expansion of this disclosing capacity.
Keywords: Mulla Sadra, The Unity of Being, The Gradation of Existence, Existence Cosmopsychism, Constitutive Cosmopsychism.

Extended Abstract
Introduction
The “hard problem” of consciousness, formulated by David Chalmers, asks how and why physical processes in the brain culminate in conscious experience. Since traditional approaches—such as physicalism, dualism, and emergentism—encounter serious difficulties in addressing this problem, either because they begin from constituent material parts, rely on bottom-up (down–top) causal models, remain reductionist, or fail to offer an adequate explanation, and since dualism faces the interaction problem, we turn to their proposed synthesis: panpsychism. Panpsychism itself divides into atomistic and holistic strands. The atomistic branch—including constitutive micropsychism and emergentist micropsychism—suffers from difficulties traceable to metaphysical and methodological presuppositions shared with materialism and dualism. For this reason, the holistic branch, cosmopsychism, becomes the focus of our evaluation. Cosmopsychism and its variants, as theories of consciousness, are grounded in a monistic ontological framework known as holism. In this ontological domain, metaphysical holism either (1) posits a fundamental whole alongside non-fundamental parts dependent on it, or (2) denies non-fundamental parts entirely, or (3) affirms only their manifestational (Manifestation) rather than existential status.
From the first branch arises priority monism, which—when applied to the problem of consciousness—yields constitutive cosmopsychism. The other two branches generate two forms of existence monism, and applying them to consciousness produces two versions of existence cosmopsychism. Our claim is that the Sadrian doctrines of gradational being (tashkīk) and the doctrine of wahdat al-wujūd (unity of being) correspond, respectively, to priority monism and manifestational existence monism. By applying these two ontological frameworks to the problem of consciousness, we develop two Sadrian models: constitutive cosmopsychism and existence/manifestational cosmopsychism.

Materials & Methods:
This study employs an analytic–comparative method. A critical engagement with contemporary ontological and consciousness theories leads us toward a Sadrian ontology and consciousness theory capable of cross-traditional applicability. Our primary sources include the works of Mullā Ṣadrā—al-Asfār al-Arba‘a, al-Shawāhid al-Rubūbiyyah, and his commentary on Uṣūl al-Kāfī—which reveal both of his ontological foundations and his shift from one to the other. To clarify some Sadrian positions, we also consult commentaries by Sabzawārī and Ṭabāṭabā’ī, and for elucidating his mystical commitments, we refer to interpreters of Ibn ‘Arabī such as Ibn Turka, Qayṣarī, and Kāshānī. For the comparative side, we rely on works by Chalmers, Schaffer, and Goff, and examine critical perspectives from Albahari, Maharaj, and Vaidya.

Discussion & Result:
Because both Sadrian ontological frameworks—gradational being and unity of being—posit a single, independent, and foundational reality that is the source of all things, the principal requirement of holism, namely the existence of a fundamental whole with the specified attributes, is satisfied in both. Depending on whether this foundational being produces non-fundamental existents (as in the gradational model) or manifests non-fundamental phenomena (as in the unity-of-being model), two forms of holism emerge: one corresponding to priority monism, the other to manifestational existence monism. These two ontologies allow us to propose two distinct Sadrian responses to the hard problem. When combined with panpsychism, they give rise to holistic theories of consciousness—forms of cosmopsychism.
Sadrian constitutive cosmopsychism is possible on the basis of the gradational ontology, yet it inherits both the challenges of Western constitutive cosmopsychism and the critiques leveled from Eastern mystical perspectives. Therefore, we shift to Sadrian existence cosmopsychism, grounded in the doctrine of unity of being, which is free of these difficulties and is consistent with Ṣadrā’s final metaphysical position. To present this consciousness theory, we first articulate the unity-of-being framework in three principles, and then derive three corresponding features of Sadrian existence cosmopsychism. This allows us to describe how consciousness is ubiquitous within the fundamental being and its manifestations, thereby satisfying the first requirement of panpsychist theories. We then introduce a further feature to account for the second requirement—namely, the development or intensification of consciousness.

Sadrian Principles of Unity of Being
(A) Ṣadrā holds that existence and existent are, in truth, one, yet the multiplicity of manifestations does not negate the unity of the real existence. He likens this to a single person reflected in many mirrors: multiplicity of appearance occurs without compromising unity.
(B) The real existence has a single, inseparable manifestation—the Act of the Real—which, despite its simplicity, encompasses all manifestations (effects). It pervades all while being limited by none. Like letters and words that are nothing over and above the breath from which they emerge, the breath remains present in all yet identical with none.
(C) Because the real existence fully appears in both its Act and its further manifestations, each part of the cosmos contains, in a certain mode, all that exists in the whole. Their differentiation results only from the dominance or concealment of particular divine attributes within each manifestation.

Application to Sadrian Existential Cosmopsychism
Applying these principles to Ṣadrā’s theory of consciousness yields:
1. Although real consciousness is one, its multiplicity of appearances in many subjects is not negated.
2. Since the Divine Essence is pure transcendence, we identify its Act—unified, simple, pervasive, and conceptually divisible without compromising unity—with the conscious cosmos, thereby resolving the decombination problem (how plurality emerges from a unitary whole).
3. Consciousness is present in all manifestations, yet its degree of appearance varies with their luminosity or opacity. This secures the ubiquity of consciousness, the first requirement of panpsychism.
4. To explain the development of consciousness—the second requirement—we introduce the principle that every manifestation possesses all existential perfections. Differences concern only the degree of appearance. Thus the seemingly low-level manifest consciousness that serves as the origin of ascent toward human consciousness may, given conducive conditions, actualize its latent perfections. Development is therefore the transition from implicit to explicit manifestation, not from absence to presence.

Conclusion
The cosmic consciousness of the real existence, fully manifest in its Act and, by degrees, in all its further manifestations, generates a holistic theory of consciousness grounded in the doctrine of unity of real being and the multiplicity of its manifestations. This Sadrian existence cosmopsychism avoids the difficulties facing the gradational model and accords with Ṣadrā’s final metaphysics. It fulfills both pillars of panpsychism: the ubiquity of consciousness due to the equal pervasion of the Divine Act, and the possibility of consciousness development understood as the unfolding of latent perfections. As a holistic theory, it naturally avoids the combination problem and offers a principled response to the decombination problem while providing an explanatory basis for both the universality and evolution of consciousness.