نشریه حکمت اسرا
سال ششم شماره 4 (پیاپی 22، زمستان 1393)

The general principles have an important role in agreement or disagreement in philosophical theories. "The simplicity of existence" is one of the principles that Mulla Sadra projected in general principles against Peripatetic philosophy. So, the question can be posed: What is the main different view between Transcendent and Peripatetic philosophies that one accepted it as a common introduction to his philosophy and the other disallowed? The main aim of design and reply to this question is to find the Transcendent philosophy view toward the fundamental issue of philosophy and its difference from pervious philosophies. This article with comparatively analytical method tries to explain the viewpoint of Transcendent and Peripatetic philosophies toward the simplicity of existence, regard for the separation between the concept of simplicity of existence and of reality of existence, and to request the principles for the simplicity of existence and for its aims and subsequences. Peripatetic philosophy presents the truth of existence as only abstract fact which mind attains it in the analysis of objects of universe, but rather transcendent philosophy regards it as external objectivity, the premier fact than only abstract one. This viewpoint explores multiplicity in existence, i.e. the unified factor. So, Peripatetic philosophy should consider the simplicity of existence as something relating to mind, though Transcendent philosophy considers it in the middle of external universe. To explain Transcendent view, we can be supported by Basit al- Haqiqa principle.

Compositionality is an important principle in new semantics. On this principle, the meanings of compound words are determined by the meaning of its parts and the way in which how to be composed. Every system of semantics must be compositional on a priory arguments of this principle. The history of the principle usually returned to Frege but the supreme status of Muslim thinkers has been forgotten. So al-Farabi as a great Muslim thinker is a good candidate. In the article, I tried to introduce a suitable conceptual framework in al-Farabi for research in compositionality. Then to separate epistemological compositionality from semantic one and based on pragmatic approach, we study al-Farabi's speaks. It seems that al-Farabi accepts at least some of explanations of compositionality.

The study of different explanations of unveiling of acquired knowledge (al-'Ilm al-Husuli) is the problem of this article. Islamic philosophers divided knowledge into acquired knowledge and knowledge by presence. Unveiling of acquired knowledge for Islamic philosophers was certain. They explain it through four ways: the objectivity of quiddity, the concept of quiddity, the absolute concept, the existence of knowledge. In this article, we detail every explanation in order to evaluate of strengths and weaknesses. Although the explanation of Islamic philosophers has some strength, the weaknesses should be removed.

Avicenna and his followers believe that when the soul perceives the matter in the world, it communicates with external world through its faculties and its tools; so a similar quality of object quality is imprinted firstly on the tool of perception, then on faculties and finally on the atmosphere of soul in the light of this connection. This imprinted form in order to refer to the external world is the criterion for soul knowledge to sensuous world. The principality of existence to Avicenna's theory of knowledge entails the impossibility of unity of quiddity of external being with mental being because of mixing of two different levels of being. The principality of quiddity to Avicenna's theory of knowledge entails transmitting the principal object (quiddity) to mind. It is an absurdity because of impossibility of transmitting the principal object. Even accepting the transition, transition with external effects entails mutation in essence and transition without them entails disjoining adherents from essence.

Mulla Sadra mentioned some meanings for intellect which some of them refer to practical wisdom and others to theoretical. Mulla Sadra believes that intellect is continuous reality in man who is capable of becoming incorporeal essence by Substantial Motion under the shadow of Active Intellect. Descartes believes that reason distinguishing right from wrong makes a distinction between man and other creatures and has the potentiality of right judgment. In his opinion, this is a similar faculty in all human beings. The meaning of reason in Descartes should be found by its function in philosophy that derives from Mathematics. Reason and method are different just conceptually. Reason in Descartes is the same level of Habitual Intellect (Aql bi al-Malaka) in Mulla Sadra's Philosophy but it is not enough for Mulla Sadra; so he expands it and considers some levels for it. Both philosophers meant reasoning under the shadow of intellect and intuition. Mulla Sadra believes that human's intellect can reach to ontological end to see Separated Intellects and to receive intellectual Forms but Descartes believes that the light of reasoning is the same innate reason that understands things clearly and distinctly.

"Historical Knowledge of Divine Names" is the conjunction of two different thoughts in two different periods; Knowledge of Divine Names is the main viewpoint of Ibn 'Arabi in governance of universe and historicity derived from Heidegger's view to the world. Ibn 'Arabi of course speaks of historical evolution of Divine Names In the context of the Prophets in Fusus al-Hikam and he tells Knowledge of Divine Names in the historical context of Perfect Man. The conjunction shows itself in Fardid who interests in Sufism, though he has a Heideggerian mission. In this article, we want to regulate Fardid's thoughts, especially given to Sayyed Abbas Maarif's handwritings, to upgrade it with mystical heritage of Ibn 'Arabi in order to study the role of this doctrine in the formation of religious knowledge. Finally, we hope to take the first step in smoothing the way of Islamic human sciences by the explanation of religious knowledge as the base of humanities.

There are many discussions about the validity and the objectivity of religious experiences among philosophers. We will analyze five main viewpoints such as Stace (the authenticity of unanimity, the ability of investigation and discipline), Swinburne (the way of credulity), Alston, John Hick (the way of similarity between perceptual and religious experiences), Rudolf Otto (the explanation of three ways for demonstration of objectivity of religious experiences) William James (the separation between experiencer and others). We say then "referring to knowledge by presence (al-'Ilm al-Huduri)" is the criteria and the proof of objectivity of religious experiences. We can of course refer some of religious experiences to knowledge by presence and these kinds of experiences are just valid; so the experiences which are not understood by knowledge by presence like most of mystical revelations are not valid and so they can not the source of certain knowledge.