نشریه خردنامه صدرا
پیاپی 67 (بهار 1391)

The theory of gradation is one of the few problems that has attracted the attention of all philosophical schools (Peripatetic School, Illuminationist School and the Transcendent Philosophy) and Muslim logicians, mutakallimun, and gnostics. It is indeed because of this careful attention of Muslim thinkers that this theory has gradually flourished and attained relative and acceptable perfection in its process of development. This theory has greatly influenced logical and philosophical semantics, as well as the epistemology and cosmology of Muslim philosophers and gnostics. The theory of gradation has been propounded in response to the following question: Is the reality of being one or many? The answer to this question, in a way, reveals one’s philosophical and cosmological propensity. Generally speaking, there are three main responses to this question:1. The reality of being is “one”, and there is unity in the world (gnostics’ view).2. The reality of being is “multiple”; therefore, there is multiplicity in the world (this view is attributed to the Peripatetics).3. The reality of being is both one and many (Sadrian philosophers’ view).The most important debate and its outcome in this regard have emerged in the cosmology of Sadrian gnostics and philosophers. Here, gnostics believe in the theory of “gradation in the loci of the manifestations of being”. However, Sadrian philosophers advocate the theory of “gradation in the levels of being”. In this paper, while explaining the historical development of the problem of gradation, the writer has discussed the views of Muslim gnostics, mutakallimun, philosophers, and logicians in this regard.

The word hijab and its synonyms have been frequently used in some Qur’anic verses and traditions transmitted by Islamic leaders and, before them, in several important gnostic texts.In this paper, based on a study of verses, traditions, and gnostic sources, it has been tried to explain the usages of the word hijab and its synonyms and gnostics’ intention of it. Here, the writer has also explored the relationship between Qur’anic hijab and gnostic hijab.Given the background of the discussion, the writer has examined and criticized the meanings of some of the related terms, such as “union” and “proximity” in order to see if the concept of “gnostic union” is in conformity with “proximity” as used in the holy Qur’an.It is finally concluded that gnostics have used some Qur’anic terms, such as hijab, turned them into gnostic terms, and used them in the sense intended by themselves. Moreover, it is argued that there is an absolute general and particular relationship between Qur’anic hijab and gnostic hijab, and not all the uses of this word in the Qur’an are intended in its gnostic sense. Given the fact that, according to gnostics, not all the hijabs between the servant and the Truth can be removed, the writer also concludes that the union intended by gnostics is in unity with and related to the concept of “proximity” in the Qur’an.

A great number of Mulla Sadra’s innovations in the Transcendent Philosophy, such as the “principiality of existence”, “gradation of existence”, “oneness of being”, “principle of causality”, “the trans-substantial motion”, “createdness and eternity of the world”, and “corporeal and spiritual resurrection” have the taste of gnostic unveilings. A study of each of these important problems clearly reveals the influence of Ibn Arabi’s gnostic unveilings on Mulla Sadra’s philosophical thoughts. In several places of Mulla Sadra’s works, reference has been made to Ibn Arabi’s words as proof.The most important change in Mulla Sadra’s philosophical thoughts was his rejection of the theory of the principiality of quiddity and demonstrating the principiality of existence. This turn of thought and his interest in the principiality of existence were based on several factors a great part of which returned to the various aspects of gnosis and ideas of great gnostics such as Ibn Arabi.Regarding the problem of the oneness of being and non-existential nature of possible things, Mulla Sadra’s philosophical and dhawqi (related to intellectual intuition) ideas are very close to Ibn Arabi’s unveilings.It is important to know that the demonstration of grades and levels for multiple existents in instructional settings where we have considered them to be multiple is truly and essentially no different from what we will discuss concerning the demonstration of the unity of being and existents, as is confirmed by the great gnostics and favorites of God advocating unveiling and intuition.Regarding the problem of mental existence we should say that Mulla Sadra believes in it and, in order to demonstrate it, resorts to Ibn Arabi’s words. With respect to the problem of the trans-substantial motion, initially, he provides some arguments against his opponents and then refers to Qur’anic verses. Later, he quotes from Aristotle and, finally, refers to Ibn Arabi to prove his point.The above cases are examples of Ibn Arabi’s influence on Mulla Sadra’s philosophical-gnostic thought, as examined in this paper.

The Commensurability of existence with knowledge is one of the teachings of the Transcendent Philosophy the logical consequence of which is that each existent enjoys a kind of sensation and perception, whether it is an inanimate body or vegetative being. This view can be considered a philosophical outcome of the principiality of existence, gradation of existence, and simplicity of existence; however, it seems that this theory is in clear opposition to the principle of the immateriality of knowledge and perception acknowledged by Mulla Sadra. As a result, one might ask if believing in a kind of perception in bodies indicates the material nature of perception. Otherwise, how does a purely material existent possess knowledge and perception? In this paper, the writers have tried to provide a philosophical analysis of the principle of the immateriality of knowledge and the principle of the commensurability of existence with knowledge and explored their consistency with each other.

Mulla Sadra has criticized many of the groups who posed theological problems before him in his works. In doing so, he harshly attacks the anti-philosophy superficial pseudo-scholars and advances severe objections against the followers of discursive wisdom who have received their knowledge in ways other than through prophethood and guardianship. He also opposes that group of the people of unveiling who are content with their dhawqi findings (related to taste) and have no demonstrative arguments supporting their words, goes against the people of theology, who believe in some corrupt and heretic ideas advocating the method of disputation, and emphasizes that the religious beliefs of laymen and the people of imitation are shaky.With reference to the necessity of knowledge and the purity of heart in receiving teachings and true sciences, as well as the vital importance of gnostic taste, reasoning, and revealed teachings, Mulla Sadra establishes his theological system. While resorting to reasoning and wisdom, Sadrian theology also benefits from intuitive knowledge, Qur’anic teachings, and traditions of the Infallibles. There is a harmony among rational arguments, gnostic taste, and revealed teachings in transcendent theology. In fact, without resorting to the common kalami methods of that time, Mulla Sadra explains many Islamic realities.

Afdaluddin Kashani stepped into the domain of philosophical thought in Iran at a time when, following the harsh attack of Ghazzali and Fakhr al-Din Razi, philosophy was suffering from such lassitude and stagnancy that it needed revival and reconstruction. He saw the remedy in excluding the problematic discussions of metaphysics in particular sense from the field of philosophy and introducing self-knowledge as the basis of philosophical work. Comparing to the works of philosophers before him, what can be considered as the distinctive feature of Baba Afdal’s works in terms of content is dealing with philosophy from a perspective different from that of the common philosophical works of his time and before him. A study of the prevalent philosophical atmosphere of the early 5th century and all the 6th century reveals that what mostly provoked the opposition of religious people against philosophy could be found in the domain of theology. Accordingly, Baba Afdal had rightly understood that, after the destructive attacks of Ghazzali against the apparently solid and powerful foundation of Peripatetic philosophy, the continuity of philosophical thought following the method of early philosophers neither was possible nor had the necessary attraction and appeal for absorbing any audience. He correctly understood the significance of creating a fundamental change in philosophical approaches and tried to accomplish this important task in order to remove the causes of the conflicts between religious-minded people and philosophers from the field of philosophy. Moreover, he did so in order to open a new horizon before the eyes of philosophers and followed a clever method without making much ado in this regard. In fact, he tried to revive philosophy based on a Socratic method and free it from the problematic, fruitless, and soulless domain of metaphysics in particular sense and guide it into the lively and efficient realm of self-knowledge.

The word “existence” has two nominal and infinitival meanings. Nominal existence refers to the reality and essence of things, while infinitival existence refers to abstract and mental existence. Each of the denotations of existence has its own features; for example, for nominal existence, we can refer to the exclusion of non-existence, confirmation of strength and weakness, acceptance of intensity and simplicity, and recognition through intuition. On the other hand, for infinitival existence, we can refer to such characteristics as the capacity for coming together with non-existence in different directions, being general and universal, and not being applied to essence. Since in its affirmative sense, infinitival existence is a universal concept and, as is commonly said, an intelligible matter, here the writers have discussed its place among the three-fold intelligibles. At the end of this paper, they have also examined some of the functions and philosophical outcomes of the distinction between nominal existence and infinitival existence.