فصلنامه حکمت معاصر
پیاپی 10 (زمستان 1392)

The Mulla Sadra’s view on the existence of philosophical secondary intelligible has been interpreted and expressed diversely. What is easily understood from Sadra’s statements is that the external aspect of philosophical secondary intelligible is distinguished from its descried aspect. This discrepancy has not been truly stated by some Neo-Sadraian philosophers those who have interpreted Mulla Sadra’s viewpoint. I think the source of the most misconceptions of the interpretations is because that the interpreters try to derive from his speeches a general principle for the whole philosophical secondary intelligible، while there are many evidences which indicate that he was not intended to present such a generalized principle. In this article، at first، we refer to the space in which Mulla Sadra’s thought is constructed and then، review and evaluate Shahid Motahari، Maestro Javadi Amoli، and Maestro Yazdanpanah’s interpretation. Finally، through refer to the different words and interpretations of Mulla Sadra، we try to express the Mulla Sadra’s view about the differentiation of philosophical secondary intelligible

The absolutely unconditioned status is the usual reading of theosophists’ words regarding the essence of God. But in this article inspiring from a deep and novel division، offered by late Gharavy Isfahany، known as Kompany، regarding the mere truth، quiddity and identity، we will prove another consideration in which neither considering others، so the tenor of the absolutely unconditioned is taken، nor non-considering others is considered. Also we recognize the consideration، the most suitable attention to God’s furtive essence and in the wake of it we consider the absolutely unconditioned in connection with god’s essence in the level of appearance and divulgence in nominal، genuine، emersion، comedown، and creatures places and opening verses. On the other hand، the consideration is related to the attention to the most secretive of the secrets، and the most intrinsic conscience of every consciences and the invisible Maghib and Angha-e-Maghreb and knowing the God as the hidden treasure which is in inherent heterogeneity with the process of appearance and emersion and has no presence and descent in God and the existential Hadavat presences، rather it is deep-seated and steeped in the mere secret and mere consciences، with stairs extended and emerged infinitely. Also being comprehensive، it involves the appearance of restricted Esm-alzaher and consciences of restricted Esm-albaten which are from divine names. Also we present some theosophists’ statements from some theosophical books in which they tenderly have had hinted the consideration in question. At the final section، the most important section of this paper، I want to deal with the implications of my viewpoint. I disprove and deny the consequences of the absolutely unconditioned consideration of God، and demonstrate their opposites، regarding the aforesaid consideration، consequences like the realization of the collection and the disavow of the opposites in the stair of invisibility of essence، denying the realization of names and epithets، either with dissolved glancing limited mode or extended limited one، having inherent heterogeneity with appearance and emersion in mirrors and places of appearance، the Maghib invisibility، Angha-e-Moghrib، the essence remaining، hidden treasure، divesting aspiration of absolute and inapplicable being، eternity of absolute unknown of God’s essence and the stair left unsaid.

Prevalence of Ibn Al-arabi’s gnostic teachings in the eastern lands of the Islamic world is not comparable to the Arab and West countries. In particular، the essence of his thoughts on being oneness and perfect man has been properly explained only by eastern thinkers، especially the Iranian Shi’ei. Feiz Kashani، a great Shi’ei theologian and Muhaddith، despite of some of his criticisms on Ibn Al-arabi’s ideas، accepts his principles of speculative Gnosticism، and explained Shi’ei thoughts based on his teachings. Feiz’s monotheistic attitudes and his other ideas، strongly influenced by Gnostic theoretical teachings and crystallized in his theological writings such as Principles of Knowledges (Osool Al-Maarif) and Hidden Words (Al-Kalimat Al-Maknoonah) have been discussed in this paper as far as possible

Divine essence is most complex gnostical considerations، an absolutely unconditioned status، which it is doubtful to ascribe event words like status، position، gnostical consideration، and also the very notion of applicability. There are two kinds of disagreements concerning absolutely unconditioned being، between philosophers and Gnostics on the one hand and among Gnostics themselves on the other hand. Philosophers think that this status is just secondary philosophical intelligible so has no external extension، but gnostics believe that the level is truth of all truths. The disagreement among gnostics is about the interpretation of this famous statement: ‘He has neither a designation nor a depiction’. Some believe that any attribution or ascription is wrong; we should just be silent about this level of being. On the contrary some argue that the statement doesn’t mean the impossibility of indication by names provided He don’t determined by the attributions. The writes’ suggestion is that the Aristotelian logico-epistemologicus system is unable to explain the non-attributability of divine essence. So since we have no commitment to preserve this system in any circumstances، if we want to justify our Gnostical opinions rationally we should try other logico-epistemologicus frameworks

Qûnawî in his interpretation of Sura Fatiha، maintains that the God’s absolute being is a developing absoluteness of His Being without Qualification and free from the shackles of the composition and plurality. In his view this being is a mere existence، not a plurality، not a hybrid، not adjective، not descriptive، no name، and no formal، no relation، no predication، it is just a pure existence. Fanaari، the commentator of Miftaah al-qaib، considers His existence as an absolute one without any valid adverbial، though it can be taken with or without constraints. However، the discussion is not unconditional although derived bound constraint is applied. Qûnawî provides five arguments to prove that the Necessary Being is the Absolute، and then discusses some doubts and criticisms which have been presented against the proofs. Imam Al-Khomeini in his commentating on Mesbah، seeks to answer the problems. He argue that except the first three arguments، the other arguments don’t establish the claim، so he rejects them and thinks that the main mistake and fault of the invalid arguments are the confusion between concept and extension، the primary essential predication and common technical predication، the conceptual meaning and external reality، and between absolute being and being as a being

Plato on the basis of his unifier viewpoint offered the theory of Idea and other cosmological related to creation and the chain and arrangement of beings. He also placed the principal of Goodness in the climax of the pyramid of his ontology، and by which tried to refer the plurality of beings to oneness. On the other hand، Mulla Sadra by his philosophical and religious principals and on the basis on his unifier viewpoint offered his first ontological theory (i. e. Tashkiki unity of being) and the ultimate one (i. e. personal unity of being). As a result، he also tried to explain the quality of manifold beings by reference to oneness. Despite the thought differences of the two philosophers in the field which based is based on their philosophical foundations، both return manifold beings to unity، so that they regard manifold beings as shadows of a transcendent unity. Ontology in Plato''s thought corresponds with Mulla Sadra''s first theory (i. e. Tashkiki unity of being).

Most of laymen، and sometimes specials and intellectuals have missed the sight of Imam Khomeini''s Gnostic aspect because of his significant political face and high rank of knowledge in Fiqh. Not to deny the deep discerning and hard efforts made by scholars in this critical field، but very little work is done on Imam Khomeini''s theoretical and practical Gnosticism and its basics and principles; though the Gnostic aspects of the both kinds was clear and discernible in his adventurous life for all those who admired him. Since in Imam Khomeini''s point of view those pure springs of Gnosticism can only come from the high mountains of Quran and Muslim hallows، in this research we briefly reviewe his interest toward adages of Muslim hallows as one of the main basics of Islamic Gnosticism and analyze the process of Narration (quoting) and Acknowledgement (understanding) in his spoken and written words