Abstract
Mūlla Sādra, according to his three philosophical journeys, or in other words, the early, middle, and later Sādra, has explained the coexistence of God with His, which is interpreted as scientifical, existential, and qayūmi coexistence, respectively. Research Problem: This article attempts to explain Mūlla Sādra's explanations in his three philosophical journeys in explaining God's coexistence with His creatures. Methodology: This article was conducted by using a descriptive-analytical method and library references. Findings: Middle Mūlla Sādra, by criticizing the scientific coexistence, believed that scientifical coexistence would require some problems. In the later Mūlla Sādra, with the help of the personal oneness of existence, he defended the qayūmi coexistence, and showed that God is not distinct from His creatures. The reason for this is that, first, God is simple and unlimited and is present in creatures with His simple and unlimited Essence. Second, He is the Originator of all His creatures. Third, the existence of no effect is separate from its cause. Conclusion: Although the early Mūlla Sādra is incompatible with the middle and later Mūlla Sādra, the middle and later Mūlla Sādra are not incompatible with each other, but rather they are in line with each other.
Key Words: The Early, Middle, and Later Mūlla Sādra, Scientifical, Existential, and Qayūmi Coexistence of God, Distinction or Lack of Distinction of God with His Creatures



1. Introduction
The issue of God's coexistence with creatures, or His distinction or non-distinction from His creatures, is one of the fundamental issues in Islamic philosophy and theology, and various explanations have been offered for it. If we consider the conception of God to have three components: 1. God's distinction or non-distinction from His Attributes and creatures; 2. God's conceptual, epistemic, logical, ethical, and aesthetic transcendence or non-transcendence; and 3. God's personhood or non-personhood (Bayat, 1402: 59-68), then God's distinction or non-distinction from His creatures can be considered another interpretation of the issue of God's coexistence with creatures, or His distinction or non-distinction from His creatures. It can be said that any view regarding God's coexistence with His creatures implies His existential and numerical distinction or non-distinction from His creatures. Therefore, the issue of God's coexistence is solely concerned with His distinction or non-distinction from His creatures, and it differs from the relationship between God and His Attributes. The overwhelming majority of Muslim theologians and philosophers have not understood God's coexistence with creatures to mean temporal or spatial proximity, or the coexistence of one body with another. Rather, they have interpreted it as God's metaphysical or spiritual proximity, considering Him present everywhere, witnessing His creatures and their actions, with nothing hidden from Him. According to Allameh Tabataba'i (1281-1360) and Javadi Amoli (b. 1312), Mūlla Sādra experienced three philosophical journeys in his intellectual life (Mūlla Sādra, 1368: Vol. 1, 49; Tabataba'i, 1387: 152; Javadi Amoli, 1394: Vol. 13, 11).
Although Mūlla Sādra considers words and phrases inadequate to describe the coexistence of God, he has endeavored to offer explanations consistent with the philosophical journeys of his life (Mūlla Sādra, 1383: Vol.3, 65). This article, by dissecting the three journeys of Mūlla Sādra's philosophical life into early, middle, and later Mūlla Sādra, will demonstrate that in his first philosophical journey, or early Mūlla Sādra, which is characterized by the originality of nature, he accepted multiplicity in beings and defended scientifical coexistence. However, in his second philosophical journey, or the middle Mūlla Sādra, he defended existential coexistence through the gradational oneness of existence. This is because, by accepting the originality of existence, he supported oneness in the multiplicity of beings. Finally, in his third philosophical journey, or the later Mūlla Sādra, referred to as the personal oneness of existence, he defended guardian coexistence by relying on principles and concepts such as tāshūn, absolute oneness, and connective being (Mūlla Sādra, 1368: Vol.2, 293). Therefore, this article elucidates the issue of coexistence across three philosophical journeys of Mūlla Sādra, presenting and evaluating his explanations and underlying arguments.
2. Materials & Methods
This article endeavors, through a descriptive-analytical method, to elucidate and investigate the issue of coexistence within the three philosophical journeys of Mūlla Sādra, drawing upon Mūlla Sādra's own works, commentaries on his works, and the insights of other Sadrian philosophers.
3. Discussion & Result
3-1. The Explanation of Early Mūlla Sādra on Coexistence or Scientifical Coexistence
Early Mūlla Sādra embraced the views of theologians and peripatetics concerning the originality of nature, acknowledging the existence of diverse species and natures in the realm of being, ultimately defending their inherent disparity. The originality of nature was the prevailing paradigm among theologians and peripatetics, especially Ibn Sina, which is why Mūlla Sādra referred to it as “the foundation of qávm”. Mūlla Sādra also used the term “qávm” when discussing Sheikh al-Ishraq, whenever the Sheikh's discussions predominantly focused on his peripatetic views. However, whenever his work turns to the specific discussions of his illuminated philosophy, perhaps due to the concomitance of existence with light from Mūlla Sādra 's perspective and the truth of oneness and gradation in lights, he sets Sheikh al-Ishraq apart from the qávm (Mūlla Sādra, 1368: Vol.2, 44). Early Mūlla Sādra aligns with the qávm view and explicates the issue of God's coexistence with His creatures as the foundation of divine wisdom (Mūlla Sādra, 1354: Vol. 1, 147) in this manner: on the one hand, God's existence is pure, infinite, and simple, admitting no multiplicity whatsoever; on the other hand, according to the theory of the originality of nature, the beings of the world are also accepted in existence as various natures. Mūlla Sādra, in elucidating the issue of coexistence, has defended scientifical coexistence with the following premises. In his view, firstly, God is the cause of the emergence of all existents; secondly, God is inherently omniscient; thirdly, knowledge of the cause entails knowledge of the effect. Therefore, God possesses eternal and immediate knowledge of all things and, consequently, scientifical coexistence (Mūlla Sādra, 1981: Vol.6, 190).

3-2. The Explanation of Middle Mūlla Sādra on Coexistence or Existential Coexistence
Although there are allusions in the works of Muslim philosophers, such as Suhrawardi's Hikmat al-Ishraq, regarding God's existential coexistence with His creatures, and he considered God to be the farthest of the nearest and the highest of the lowest (Suhrawardi, 1372: Vol.2, 153). However, prior to Mūlla Sādra, there had been no independent philosophical defense of God's existential coexistence. The middle Mūlla Sādra, shifting his view from the originality of nature to the originality of existence, defended God's existential coexistence with His creatures. He posited, firstly, that according to the theory of the originality of existence, the universe is nothing but existence, and various natures are measures and limits of existence. Secondly, God's existence fully and perfectly possesses the characteristics of existence and is infinite, encompassing all His beings or creatures, for infinite existence has no bounds or limits. Consequently, none of His creatures are outside His Essence and Existence. Thirdly, all beings share a singular essence, manifesting in various degrees or, in his words, possessing a “gradated oneness of existence”. Thus, a unifying principle governs the multiplicity of diverse natures (Mūlla Sādra, 1368: Vol.2, 381; Vol.1, 35; Haeri Yazdi, 1361: 10; Babaei and Mousavi, 1401: 124). Middle Mūlla Sādra believes that infinite existence necessitates existential coexistence with all creatures, and through the “gradational oneness of existence”, he has attempted to explain the observed multiplicity in beings.
3-3. The Explanation of Later Mūlla Sādra on Coexistence or Qayūmi Coexistence
Later Mūlla Sādra, despite his belief in the theory of the originality of existence, transitioned from the gradational oneness to the personal oneness, and elucidated some of his discussions based on this perspective; (for example, a different explanation of causality as manifestation with all its implications, see: Mūlla Sādra, 1360: 50; Babaei, 1402: 500-510). Although, in the later Mūlla Sādra, the originality of existence is still accepted, the gradation of existence has transformed into a gradation in its manifestations. In other words, in the later Mūlla Sādra, the gradation of existence is made a prelude to the gradation in the manifestations of existence (Samadi Amoli, 1386: 252). Thus, although the early Mūlla Sādra is inconsistent with the middle and later Mūlla Sādra, the middle and later Mūlla Sādra are not inconsistent with each other. Rather, a more profound explanation of the theory of the originality of existence has been presented in the later Mūlla Sādra. The later Mūlla Sādra, through his exposition of the theory of the originality of existence of personal oneness, stemming from qayūmi coexistence.
4. Conclusion
Mūlla Sādra, in elucidating many philosophical issues, went through three philosophical journeys: the originality of nature, and the originality of existence with two interpretations – gradational oneness and personal oneness. Mūlla Sādra's three philosophical journeys have also influenced his explanation of the issue of God coexistence with creatures or distinction or lack of distinction of God from His creatures. On early Mūlla Sādra, the coexistence between God and creatures is scientifical coexistence, meaning that God's coexistence is understood as His Knowledge over all creatures. On the middle Mūlla Sādra, by accepting the theory of the originality of existence, he defended existential coexistence and believed that none of the things are outside the essence and existence of God, and the separation of other beings from God arises from the limitations and deficiencies of His creatures. According to early Mūlla Sādra, the coexistence between God and His creatures is scientifical coexistence i.e. God has comprehensive knowledge on His creatures. On the middle Mūlla Sādra, by accepting the theory of the originality of existence, he defends existential coexistene and believes that none of the objects are outside the essence and existence of God, and that the separation of other beings from God arises from the limitations and imperfections of His creatures. Despite accepting the theory of the originality of existence, the later Mūlla Sādra defended qayūmi coexistence by relying on the personal oneness of existence and explained it with the help of concepts such as tashảun, relational existence, manifestation, limited presence in absolute existence and absolute oneness. He believes that God, with His infinity, has filled all stages of possibility without becoming one with creatures or taking on their possible defects. He is not separate from His creatures and has qayūmi coexistence with them. Although, the middle and later Mūlla Sādra are not incompatible with each other and are in line with each other, it seems that the later Mūlla Sādra is more defensible because, as Mūlla Sādra himself has acknowledged, both the gradational oneness of existence and the personal oneness of existence are defensible. However, the personal oneness of existence is more precise and profound. In the issue of coexistence, in existential coexistence, or in other words, from the perspective of the middle Mūlla Sādra, the existence of pluralities is accepted and existence means a two-way relationship between God and His creatures. However, in the qayūmi coexistence of the later Mūlla Sādra, the existence of pluralities is set aside and the Original and Single Existence that flows and permeates all of existence is proven to be present in the existence of every creature.