An Analysis and Evaluation of the Law of Higher Possibility

The main purpose of the present article is investigating the reasons and the content of the ‘law of higher possibility’ in peripatetic philosophy and transcendental theosophy. Accordingly, it will become clear that in addition to non-integrity of the reasons for that law, its content is not acceptable without aid from personal unity of existence, because the well-known reasons of that law are all based on impossibility of plural emanation from the Most High Necessary existent as well as the sufficiency of the essential possibility of the possibilities for being emanated from the Most High Necessary existent. This is while, firstly, these two foundations are inconsistent, and, secondly, according to Mulla Sadra’s final opinion and that of other scholars, the plural emanation from the Most High Necessary existent is possible. The content of that law, however, involves infinite regression; and the philosophical rules and bases were unable, before the emergence of Mulla Sadra’s philosophy, to resolve that issue. Besides, Mulla Sadra was forced to resort to the ‘personal unity of existence’ to resolve it. Another way prepared by the transcendental theosophy to prove it is arguing for that law through the relationship between the effect and the creating cause. Much research, ample documents, stating the logical form of the arguments, and the critical look are among the features of this article.