مادی

The water streams branching from Zayandehroud in the city of Isfahan are called Madi and they are among the unique features of the structure of this city. In the past, they were used to irrigate agricultural lands, but today, with the change in their function, they have lost their past identity and efficiency. The expansion of activities and fundamental changes in the urban structure and elements have caused the loss of the importance and identity of Madi issues in the city of Isfahan. The current research has been carried out with the aim of identifying the Madi problems of Regions 1 and 3 of Isfahan and solutions to organize them. The method of this research is descriptive-analytical. In this regard, the existing Madi problems of these two areas were identified by field sampling and using a satellite positioning device. Then, the perceived problems were categorized and solutions related to their solution were presented. According to the conducted studies, the length of the Madi network of Region 1 is 10921 meters (10.9 km) and the Madi of Cheshme Niasserm is the longest Madi of this region with 3624 meters. In Region 3, the length of the Madi is 10,921.59 meters (10.9 km) and the Niaseram spring Madi is the longest one in this area with 3,624.72 meters. The results showed that Madies of Region 1 have 33 types of problems, the most important of which are bed slope correction and cleaning. In Region 3, 18 problems have been identified, of which dredging and cleaning are the main ones. Organizing the green space around the properties and using urban furniture and creating a space for the residents around the properties are among the most important management solutions for organizing the properties in these two regions.

Among the Muslim philosophers, Ibn Sina had an important view on the material and abstract issue. According to his theory of grace, which believes in the arc of descent and ascent, he believes in the obligatory grace of all beings, both material and abstract. His thought on the type of material and immaterial relationship and the way these two concepts influence each other is such that he has reached the inability to prove the physical resurrection and has left it to the Shari'ah. Based on his talking about cosmology, which divides beings into single and material ones, he comes to the conclusion that physical resurrection is not provable and the words of the Prophet must be trusted. The main question is: what are the consequences of the material and abstract concept in Ibn Sina's philosophy upon his psychology and eschatology. The current study aims to clarify the consequences of these two concepts in Ibn Sina's philosophy by examining the definition, and then he considers physical resurrection as an unprovable proof with these two concepts.

In the works of philosophers, the existing division of beings into immaterial and material ones has been done based on different criteria. Peripatetic scholars consider material beings ascribed to prime matter. Although some philosophers, like Sheikh Ishraq, who deny the existence of prime matter, believe in both immaterial and material beings, they maintain that the criterion of this division is not the prime matter but other things such as impotentiality and potentiality, denying and acceptance of sensible indication, and absence and presence. Mulla Sadra has also used these criteria in the division of beings into immaterial and material. In this research, by descriptive-analytical method, we have shown the inefficiency of these criteria, and, relying on Mulla Sadra's views and principles, we have shown equality of existence with the immateriality based on the principles of transcendent wisdom.

All beings in the world according to Ṣadr al Muta'allihīn, benefit from awareness (consciousness) in accordance with their existential order. Therefore, material bodies such as elements, inanimate bodies and vegetable, which are generally considered to be devoid of consciousness even have knowledge and awareness in general usage (custom). Ṣadrā has tried by two different approaches to justify the diffusion of the knowledge to material objects philosophically. He has attributed knowledge to objects with the same material identity by proving the absolute objectivity of existence with knowledge in the first way, and he considered knowledge to be proved for them through the union of objects by intellectual principles (masters of species) in the second way. The main issue in this article is whether the same results can be obtained from these two approaches or not. And which of these two ways is stronger and superior than the other? Both approaches have been studied by analytical and comparative method in this article and it has been firstly proved that the results of these two approaches are not the same, and the awareness that is proved for material objects according to the first approach is different from the knowledge that is proved according to the second approach, secondly, the second approach is stronger and superior for some reason.

Eyesight is one of the five superficial senses that has always been discussed in Islamic philosophy in such a way that each of the three important schools of Islamic philosophy has proposed specific and different theories about it. Transcendent Wisdom - which is the main school in modern Islamic philosophy - considers eyesight as an abstract thing and the result of the creation of the soul. According to this view, the material conditions of eyesight are specific to the advantaged of the soul. One of the arguments presented to prove this claim is the refusal of impression major in the minor; the argument was made in response to the theory of impression, which was based on ancient physics. In the present study, an attempt has been made to analyze and study how to observe and see images in a rational way and using new empirical evidence. In this regard, using the findings of neuroscience about eyesight, the strength and application of the argument of refusal major in the minor has been investigated and in the end it has been concluded that the findings of neuroscience reject the view of ancient physics regarding impression. However, these findings still do not explain all the features of eyesight. At the same time, Mulla Sadra’s argument about eyesight’s abstraction can be applied to the new sciences, and the findings of neuroscience are basically not an obstacle to abstraction in the Sadra sense.

Water streams branching from Zayandehrood in Isfahan, called Madi, are unique features of this city. Madi play a vital role in climate, agriculture, groundwater recharge, and urban flood control in Isfahan. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the madi problems of areas 1 and 3 of Isfahan in order to increase their resilience to urban floods. In this research, using the method of survey and field surveys, the madi path of Isfahan city in the central areas of the city (regions 1 and 3) was investigated and the problems that arose for the madi in different places using the positioning device. Satellite finder and receipt-recording were recorded, then problems were identified and categorized and necessary management solutions were provided to solve problems. The results showed that the length of the madi network of region one is 10921 meters (10.9 km) and the madi of Niasaram spring with 3624 meters is the longest madi of this region. Zone 3, despite having a larger area than Zone One, has less material network than Zone One. Studies on the madi problems of these two areas showed that the madi of region one have 33 types of problems, the most important of which are bed slope correction and cleaning. There are 18 problems in area three, the most important of which is dredging and cleaning. For this purpose, solutions appropriate to the problems of each madi should be considered. Organizing the green space around the madi and proper use of urban furniture and creating a space in order to benefit and use as many residents as possible around the madi is one of the most important management strategies to maintain and organize the material network in these two areas.

A knower’s intuitive knowledge (whether the exalted necessary being, or sublime abstract beings, or human beings) of the material thing is among the difficult issues in philosophy, about which thinkers disagree and some believe that knowledge does not belong to material things and some believe contrary to that. Various reasons have been stated for non-intuition, some of which return to the material thing itself, some others return to the features of knowledge, and still some others return to the knower’s characteristics. In this article, we seek to deal with this issue from three angles using the method of explanation and description to investigate how each of them is an obstacle. The result of the study is that the feature of extension and dispersal of material things as well as the feature of abstraction of knowledge and existential relation between the knower and the known does not hinder the attribution of knowledge to material things. This is because, firstly, if material things are extended from one aspect, they are non-extended from another aspect. Secondly, abstraction is not the condition for being known. Thirdly, another type of relationship, such as status, can cause intuition.

The division of beings with regard to their essential attributes and characteristics is one of the first step taken by a philosopher with an ontological view. Some inherent attributes of a species differentiate between individuals of that species and individuals of other species, which means including attributes in a species. Also, sometimes some characteristics of one type prevent the influence or direct influence of people of that type on / from people of another type. The division of beings into immaterial and material and its requisites can be considered as the basis and root of many philosophical theories. According to Ibn Sina, Sheikh Ishraq and Mulla Sadra‌, all beings in the universe, even the Almighty, are necessarily part of one of these two types. According to them, the inherent characteristics of these two types are such that it is impossible to directly influence each other. Attributes such as perception as an essential attribute of immaterials and those such as potentiality or talent, extension and ability for sensitive pointing as attributes of material beings can be obtained in a scattered manner from the works of these three philosophers. Important issues, such as how the higher causes of existence relate to other levels,‌ how of the soul`s way of attaining knowledge‌ and the nature of memory, may be related to the division of beings into immaterial and material and its requisites. Therefore, in this article, in addition to examining the inclusion or exclusion of the mentioned attributes in one type, the refusal of immaterial and material connection according to the other theories of these three philosophers and the general rules governing philosophy are discussed

Floods are one of the natural hazards that cause a lot of damage in cities. Resilience is one of the ways to reduce the effects of natural hazards. In this study, the material resilience of Isfahan against urban floods was investigated. First, Gis layers of 15 areas of Isfahan city and materials were prepared and the problems of each area were extracted. Then factor analysis was performed on them and the factors affecting the materials were identified. The relevant questionnaire was completed by 35 experts to assess material problems and related tests were performed on them. According to the results, a total of 4 factors explain more than 90% of the variance of the data. The first factor with 50.51% was called slope correction, the second factor with 18.45% was called material reopening, the third factor with 13.14% was called material cleaning, and the fourth factor with 8.2% was named as dredging. The results of t-test showed that according to the average of community 3 in all three social, physical and managerial-institutional criteria, the material situation of Isfahan is at a desirable level. In the community of 5, all three material criteria of Isfahan are far from the desired conditions. Considering that the materials of regions 15, 6, 12 and 10 have the least problems, respectively, it can be said that these regions have the highest resilience and the materials of regions 9, 8, 1 and 13 have the most problems. They have the least resilience.

Preparatory cause or the preparator is known in Islamic philosophy as an unreal cause on which the existence of the effect is not dependent, rather, it prepares the ground for the appearance of the effect. The nature and characteristics of the preparatory cause are not quite clear, as Muslim philosophers have addressed it very briefly and intermittently, rather than thoroughly and systematically. Consulting the primary sources of the Islamic philosophy, this article tries to provide a systematized account of the subject, in which the role of preparatory cause in the genesis of material beings is explained. According to the findings of this research, the preparator, as commonly understood, prepares the way for the emergence of the effect through making the matter prepared to take on a new form. Despite the differences between preparatory and real causes, such as the necessity of simultaneity and homogeneity between cause and effect in the latter and the unnecessity of these characteristics in the former, the emergence of any natural being is inevitably contingent on a prior process of preparation. Without this process of preparation, no material thing is preferred for turning into a new thing. This means that creating without the prior preparation amounts to preferring without any preference. Knowing that the nature of preparation is moving the matter toward the dispositional contingency, preparators are to be either material or souls that are in some relation to matter.

Dividing the creatures into abstract and material in philosophy and expressing their characteristics, some thinkers believe that in some cases there are conflicts between philosophical views and some religious texts (Quranic verses and narrations) on the characteristics of the incorporeal creatures. But is it fundamentally acceptable to divide creatures into abstract and material from the point of view of religious texts, so that it can be said that there is a conflict between religious texts and philosophical views in expressing their characteristics? To understand the view of religious texts about this division, it seems that we can examine three cases of verses and narrations, I) The cases in which the creation of the first creature of God Almighty has been discussed, II) The cases in which the existence and attributes of angels have been discussed, III) The cases that deal with the divisions of the universe and the types of creatures. It seems that the division of creatures into abstract and material can be obtained from the Quranic verses and narrations.

One of the important philosophical issues is the discussion of the “immaterial and material” (existence) being. Providing a precise definition of “immaterial” and “material”, proving their existence, expressing their species, and the relationship between immaterial and material are among the important concerns of philosophers. It has been tried in this article to define and analyze the quiddity and characteristics of immaterial and material beings and also has been tried to examine Mullā Ṣadrā's special opinion precisely on the manner of immaterial and material relation. The author by referring (citing) the doctrine of existential separation in the transcendent theosophy has tried to prove that in Ṣadrā's thought, it is not possible and should not be believed in a clear and definite boundary like the peripatetic, between the immaterial and the material, because the immaterial and the material and the rules and characteristics of existence each of them have a return to the degree of intensity and weakness in the fact of the unity of existence, and as in the system of existential separation, existential discontinuity that is not assumed, neither can be believed a definite and bold existential boundary between the immaterial and the material despite the essential distinction.

A great number of contemporary & traditional philosophers, used the principle of the “impossibility of the impression of the big things in small places” to prove the immateriality of the soul. Also, they have used this principle for other purposes. These thinkers have not provided an argument to prove this principle. they seem to have taken this principle as a self-evident principle. Today, because of the variety of reasons, including recent scientific advances, especially in two branches of science, biology and physics, the materialists have presented a materialistic explanation about the “process of obtaining perceptions”. If we accept it, it means: the traditional philosophers, because of the lack of advanced knowledge, thought that: “the impression of the Big things in small places” is impossible in the “world of perceptions”, in addition to the “material universe”; But today, scientific researches has clarified that “impossibility of the impression of the Big things in small places in the world of sense perception” not only isn’t impossible, but also quite possible and it is scientifically justifiable. This paper prove that the Materialists’ argument is wrong. We do this by comparing these two principles with together: “impossibility of the impression of the Big things in small places in the world of sense perception” and “materialistic process of obtaining perceptions”; we want to prove that the principle of “impossibility of the impression of the Big things in small places” not only is happened in the real world (material word), but also in the “world of sense perceptions”.

The subject of evil and good is the most difficult problem in philosophy and divine religion and all religions acknowledge this, and no one has ever denied it. Hence, at first glance, the existence of evil appears in the figure of the order of being, and shows his filthiness; because evil is actually the opposite of goodness, and with the formation of evil among human beings, the structure of their lives becomes disoriented, and it damages human society. Philosophers and scholars have addressed this issue in two general terms. A group of scientists believe that this is a matter of the laws of nature, therefore, it must be studied according to the laws of nature, in this case, it must be seen as a material case. Another group interprets the phenomenon of evil in the universe with a religious and metaphysical view. In fact, they give a metaphysical reading of the existence of evil and link it somehow to the act of God. This article aims to, (incomplete)

To ask about the arche or first element of the world has been one of the questions of Greek philosophy received different answers. It was called hyle by Aristotle. During Graeco-Arabic translation movement, some translators rendered arche into madatu al-mawad (the matter of matters, prime matter) and hyle into matter; coining such wrong terms gave rise to many misunderstandings and philosophical complications. From the very beginning, the division of beings into corporeal and incorporeal was proposed by Muslim Philosophers. Later however, the term Jismani (bodily) was substituted for maddi (material); while the Aristotelian so-called hyle had been integrated in the meaning of material then most philosophers unknowingly made use of material instead of Jismani (bodily) even those who did not embrace hyle (the very matter) at all. In their essay and through semantic analysis of the related philosophical terms, the authors have tried to shed light on the philosophical consequences of coining such terms (such as that potentiality is confined to bodily things and that there is no time or motion in incorporeal beings); they managed to avoid verbal controversy which is far from philosophical discussion. Finally, they have suggested their adequate definitions of corporeal and incorporeal beings.

The contemporary companions of Sadraean philosophy consider the problem of the materiality and immateriality as a gradational one; so, they have determined no other criterion of distinction between the materiality and immateriality than the perceptibility. This paper is aimed to show that, in Sadraean philosophy, to be material or immaterial is dependent on the existential levels of the existents. Thus, we attribute the materiality and immateriality simultaneously to the existents. Therefore, there is no external border between the two. The agent of attributing materiality and immateriality to the existents is the mind and our perspective. To be abstract or material are subjective as well as a priori categories of the mind to understand the realm of reality (or existence). The aforementioned conception of materiality and immateriality affects other problems, including the relation of the accident to the eternal, the relation between the soul and body, the immortality of the soul and eschatology.

Mulla Sadra has adopted different standpoints regarding the acceptance of material forms as a level of divine knowledge in his various works. He has sometimes explicitly agreed with this idea, sometimes remained neutral, and sometimes denied it. This paper is intended to shed some light on Mulla Sadra’s final view in this regard based on his different standpoints in his works. In doing so, the author has investigated his various descriptions of God’s knowledge of material things and his justifications and arguments for each of them. One of the justifications for such a variety of ideas is rooted in his shift from the divine Ishraqi knowledge to transcendent knowledge, while another one sees the root of this diversity in separating the receptacles of perpetual duration and time from each other. Here, the author demonstrates that both of the justifications are defective and argues that the only acceptable explanation for Mulla Sadra’s final view of the knowledge of material things is the relative nature of the division of beings into material and immaterial ones. This solution conforms to the two fundamental approaches which Mulla Sadra has adopted regarding the necessity of gradation in existence and its perfections as well as the same-as-relation identity of possible things.

Various spheres such as religious beliefs, natural and cosmological opinions, and the intellectual sphere regarding ontological and epistemological issues can be regarded as the historical background for dividing the being into immaterial and material. Although the philosophers of Milesian and Eleatic schools were the pioneers of this philosophical division, Plato and Aristotle were prominent philosophers who highlighted such a division with specified criteria. This trend went on in an evolutionary form during the history of philosophy, and changes appeared in standards of separating immaterial beings from material beings along with changes in other philosophical subjects. In the course of history, the philosophers have suggested various criteria and features for separating immaterial beings from material beings, features such as extension, spatiality, having location and position, being dividable, being perceptible and sensible, and having matter and knowledge. Some of these criteria refer to the difference between material being and the world of intellects, not between material and immaterial beings. Some of them have drawback, but some can be accepted with modifications or without them.

The existing division [of things] into ‘immaterial’ and ‘material’ is one of the important and vital divisions in philosophy. Paying attention to it will answer many philosophical problems. Muslim thinkers have discussed material and immaterial beings in their works and have presented definitions for them. In their definitions, they have stated features of the immaterial and material beings and the criteria for distinguishing them. Scrutinizing those criteria and their foundations would reveal challenges. In the present article, by reviewing and investigating criteria such as matter, quantity, form, state, length, width, volume, color, being in the matter  and being with the matter, potentiality, change, motion, capability of being externally divided, time, place, personality and particularity, put forward by Muslim thinkers, a new criterion for distinguishing material beings from immaterial ones is established based on which a material being is a being that is perceived through senses or is dependent on it. An immaterial being, however, is a being neither sensible through senses nor dependent on it.