نشریه آموزه های فلسفه اسلامی
سال نهم شماره 2 (پیاپی 15، پاییز و زمستان 1393)

The prevailing view among Islamic scholar and western philosophers since Aristotle was that the truth is the correspondence of intelligible form with the external reality. But there have been some other views about “truth” in ancient and contemporary, including; we can refer to the perspectives of the Transcendent Philosophy of Mulla Sadra and Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics and their criticisms of the current understandings of the truth. Explaining the current idea, the paper describes the version of the transcendent philosophy of “truth” in the form of correspondence of essential known with the accidental known and also the correspondence of the proposition with the thing in itself and his own attitude of the “truth” and the way to achieve it will be expressed and then the exposition of the philosophical hermeneutics of the “truth” and Gadamer’s view about the nature of “truth” and the way to achieve it will be explained. Finally, following sixteen paragraph, the most important positions of the transcendent philosophy of Mulla Sadra and Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics of the “truth”, their comparison and their affinity and strangeness will be determined.

Substantial movement is one of the important issues and central foundations of transcendent philosophy. Some philosophers due to the weakness of their philosophical basis have not been able to provide for it a reasonable and justified explanation and answer the objections, so they themselves joined them. Transcendental philosophers in different periods have made their brilliant effort in illuminating of the teachings of transcendent philosophy. The effort of unique contemporary philosopher, Ashtiani, in explaining and bringing out the doctrine from the turmoil of doubters and showing its broad influential application in various fields, is unique. Prevailing on this issue requires a dynamic skill in all transcendental philosophical system in various fields, especially in religious thought so that a great scholar such as Ashtiani can highlight the central unique role of this doctrine for explaining and strengthening the religious and monotheistic worldview and prove that in addition to the deep intelligibilities that regard the institution of the world dynamic and seeker, religious teachings, verses and hadith also clearly inspire this sublime idea. Professor Ashtiani believes in substantial movement like other transcendent philosophers and applies it as a basic principle for philosophical explaining and justification and solving the complex ontological and anthropological issues and foundational beliefs of origin resurrection and bases on it the foundation philosophizing and offers interpretative interests for the religious texts. Using this method and view, he provides the soundest principles leading to this doctrine and approaches based on it particularly in the area of ontology in the tradition of transcendent philosophy.

The rule of “repeating of everything leads to impossibility that is fiction” that has been provided by Suhrawardi in illuminationist theosophy, is one of the issues of intellectual fictions and expressing the impossibility of the external realization of the examples of concepts such as: existence, essence, thingness, etc. This rule that has been regulated in the form of an objection to Peripatetic philosophers, states that the external realization of such concepts entails the endless chain and it is impossible. Based on this criticism, Suhrawardi negates the Peripatetic foundational principle about the metaphysical distinction between existence and essence, so he denies the combination of existence and essence in contingent things. He considers that the only reality is the various lights that are actualized essences or quiddities. This principle has also influenced other philosophers such as Mulla Sadra and has had special implications in transcendental philosophy that we can refer to some principles such as principality of existence and fictitiousness of quiddity and paying attention to the existence in opposite of its concept.

The Grand Design Theory of Stephen Hawking is one of the most important theories which it has been posited in recent years and due to its content based on negation of necessity of the existence of God and creation of universe out of “nothing” it has different reactions in religious and physical forums. In this research, with using the bases of Transcendental Theosophy (Hikmah al-Muta’allyah) and if all physical theories of Stephen Hawking were true the author will show that the concept of “nothing” which has been mentioned by Stephen Hawking differs from the concept of vacuum in Transcendental Theosophy (Hikmah al-Muta’allyah) and it does not mean absolute nothing and the creation of universe from “nothing” which has been mentioned by Stephen Hawking has no negation with the creative power of God and if the M-theory were true the role of God as Lord ship and creative power is inevitable and acceptable. In this respect the bases of epistemology and ontology of Hawking and Sadr al-muta’allihin and how the creation of human nature -humanity- (Aalam–e nasoot) and the regulation human nature -humanity- (Aalam–e nasoot) and the role of God will be compared and criticized and studied.

Death of organisms such as animals and human beings is realized with the separation of the soul from the physical body. In this state, the body stops working and gradually becomes corrupted. It is clear that the animal soul after its separation from the body, dose not survive and disappears. But the human soul due to its essential immateriality continues its survival. It has an intermediate life in this world and an eternal life in the resurrection. However, the main question is how and why death occurs? In fact, what happens to the soul that it becomes separated from the body? Is it because of its evolution and becomes self-sufficient, or because the body can not accompany the soul and is being forced to separate? The second view is famous one among scholars, while Mulla Sadra and his followers believe that the reason of the separation of the soul from the body is its perfection and self-sufficient. In this article we want to criticize the view of Mulla Sadra and ask questions that it seems they cannot be answered in his view.

Innovative explanation of Mulla Sadra about the theory of the Ideas has a special importance. Since, he attempts to provide a new explanation about the nature, place and functions of the Ideas by using the principality and systematic ambiguity in reality of the existence which is different from the previous and even Plato. Accepting the theory of Ideas, he begins to prove them in the order of the whole universe with different ontological, epistemological, Gnostic and religious attitudes. Ontologically, it will be shown that an unchangeable issue is needed in order to ensure the unity, permanence and end of substantial movement of material existents. Epistemologically, Mulla Sadra argues that human soul observes the abstract and supreme examples of the material things in the intellectual perception which they are platonic Ideas. In Gnostic attitude, Platonic Ideas are regarded as resembling to immutable entities and divine attributes. And finally, in theological attitude, he cited to some verses of the Quran that they say that the real existence of this world is in immaterial world. Mulla Sadra considers in all of these words the existential relation such as causality, and epistemic one such as imitation and material things have ideas, and rule out the gap between intellectual and physical worlds by using the ambiguous degrees of the worlds. His attempt to explain more exactly Platonic Ideas leads to the consideration of the imaginal world which is mediate between the sensible and intelligible worlds. In this article, it is attempted to be considered the innovative aspects of Mulla Sadra’s explanation about the theory of Ideas and the measurement of success of this issue is shown.

The most important attribute of Imam in Shiite culture and the clearest difference between Shiism and Sunni about the attributes of Imam is the infallibility of Imam. Many arguments have been presented for proving the infallibility of Imam and they have been answered by Sunni Muslims too. Examining these arguments, this research attempts to show that all of their foundation and the principle that makes them sound is that we believe a position for Imam such as the position of the prophet (pbuh), in the sense that we believe that the duty of Imam like the mission of the Prophet is the reviving of the teachings of religion, protecting and transferring them. This issue can both be as a sound principle for the proving of all the arguments and can be regarded as an independent argument for the proving of the infallibility of Imam.