Abstract

Abstract Prima facie it seems that principality of existence and principality of quiddity are two opposed theories, but they are, in fact, two distinct philosophical systems with different principles which these two theories are in their forefront stand. For example, considering Mulla Sadra's argument to prove principality of existence based on intensifying movement, shows that he criticized Peripatetic’s philosophical system which contained, in Mulla Sadra's view, principality of quiddity, denying intensifying movement of quiddity, and Peripatetic’s specific view about qule movement. On the other hand only when we consider ‘intensifying movement’ in a philosophical system, containing principality of existence, unity of existence, and intensity of existence, it can be a basis to prove principality of existence. This shows that Mulla Sadra portrays reality in his mind which has many metaphysical components, and conceives it as a distinguished and correct picture of reality compared to the picture of principality of quddity advocates. But having a picture in mind and its epistemic transmission to others are two different things. Epistemic transmission of a picture to others needs putting the picture into pieces and transmitting them in a linear state. This is exactly what Mulla Sadra did. To put the metaphysical pieces of his picture in a linear state he put the principality of existence in the forefront.

Abstract The theory of unification of the intellect and the intelligible is one of the most impotant issue in the transcendent philosophy. Allameh tabatabaii accepts this theory, but criticizes one of the proofs which Sadra had presented for it. Instead, he offers a new method to prove the theory. In this article we will analyze and criticize the allameh tabatabaii 's mathod in proving the thory, then through a comparative approach, we will dicuss about differentiations of these two philosopher’s veiws about the problem.

Abstract To find the roots and causes of backwardness of Arab World, al-Jaberi has examined and criticized the religious discourses and their epistemic elements, and found the starting point of the ascension and decline of Arabic-Islamic culture in the age of compilation; the age during which Islamic thoughts have emerged around Qur'an in the form of various systems of Islamic Knowledge (religious intelligible) along with non-Islamic epistemic systems (religious unintelligible). According to al-Jaberi, the inborn religious epistemic systems which have been founded upon religious intelligible are the result of the scientific endeavors of Sunnites, and Shiism just represents the other unintelligible epistemic systems. He also through differentiating Arabic west from Arabic east; opines that the foundations of pure Islamic rationality must be sought for in the western lands of Arabic-Islamic world, and Iran must be seen as the cradle of eclectic philosophies and unintelligible religious systems. To escape from the current intellectual and civilizational decline, al-Jaberi claims that we should leave the ideologies of Arabic east and appeal to the current rationalism in the Arabic west which is a heritage of Averroes. The purpose of the paper is to criticize these aforementioned stands of al-Jaberi, based on the existed cultural and civilizational realities in Islamic World and also by showing his methodological lapses and fallacies.

Abstract Unlike the Christian philosophy, in the Islamic philosophy, the question of individuality was emerged and grew gradually in a philosophical ground. The naïve form of the problem can be found in the Farabi and Ibn Sina's works, and its perfect form can be seen in Bahmanyar’s writings. Then, Suhrawardi considered the problem at a totally different view and separated from Peripatetics basically. After Suhrawardi,  Nasir al-Din Tūsi and Mulla Sadra, were dealt with the problem, while the differences between the two philosophers’ approaches were more than their agreements.  The issues related to the ‘individuality’ can be divided into four distinct debates: The conceptual bases of individuality; the affirmative principles of individuality; the Criterion of Individuality, and its justification. In the affirmative principles of individuality they are almost consentaneous, but in the other debates we can see some serious disagreements. The quiddity’s ability to justify “individuality” is the most important controversy between them. Nasir al-Din Tūsi considers quiddityas Criterion of Individuality, but Mulla Sadra belives that it is just ‘existence’ which can be the Criterion of Individuality.

Abstract The aim of this article is to explain possibility of Islamic Philosophy and describe its main characteristics and schools. Concerning the question of possibility and actuality of Islamic Philosophy, our approach in the article is that the question has a historical nature. So, to answer questions like ‘is Islamic Philosophy possible?’ And if yes: ‘has it ever been actualized?’ should consider philosophy, in this historical development, as a progressive discipline which from its entrance into the Islamic world has been continuously changed. In the development process of this philosophy, a variety of perspectives, theories, issues, and problems have arisen, some of them have been placed in the core of the philosophical mainstream, and some of them have been laid aside or ignored. So, in this process, this discipline has experienced some philosophical expansions and contractions, has taken some theories, problems, issues …, and has laid away some other. These changes and developments bring about a distinguished nature for Islamic philosophy. We can say that this discipline has three general and distinct characteristics: looking comprehensiveness (looking at physical and metaphysical worlds comprehensively); certainty (as a common core of knowledge); and God- oriented (regarding God as most importance being in the human life). In this paper, first of all, we will describe the main characteristics of main Islamic philosophy’s schools, Peripatetic, Illumination, and transcendent philosophy, and then argue that there is no inconsistency between ‘Islamic philosophy’ concept and open intellectual development.

Abstract It is generally conceived that the principal Mulla sadra’s approach in the problem of correspondence was to appeal to the prevalent foundationalism, and quiddity correspondence. However regarding the quiddity as a mere abstraction, as an element of Sadra’s philosophy, challenges the theory of quiddity correspondence severely. Thus, in the transcendental theosophy, the problem of knowledge and the quality of its attainting by soul is presented differently. Sadra believes that the soul manipulation is due ambiguity and lack of clarity in the perceptions, which is caused by existential poverty of the soul. To explain the problem of correspondence in the soul’s perceptions, Sadra uses the theory of unification of intellect and intelligible. In the sadra’s view, since the knowledge is existential, in the process of perception and unification with existential and perfectional perceptions, the existence and knowledge of the soul can be intensified and soul finally can attain clarity and correspondent perceptions.