A Critical study of Naeini’s View on Causal Necessity in the Light of Transcendent Wisdom

Causation and its subsidiaries as causal necessity are among the issues considered by thinkers since antiquity till the present time. Despite its long history, it is still the center of attention and the source of controversies. A wide range of views (including absolutely positive or negative ones) on causal necessity shows its difficulty and importance which necessitate more accurate reflection. In Islamic philosophy, including transcendental wisdom, causal necessity has been accepted as one of the fundamental principles of philosophy. That is why, according to various analyses, its refutation or acceptance has no effect on the acceptance of causal necessity principle itself. On the contrary, some of Islamic Usuliyyin, such as  Naeini and his followers take the view that the result of belief in human will and authority necessitates the denial of causal necessity in the case of free agents. While accepting causal necessity and the principle that “al-Shay-u Ma Lam Yajib Lam Yujad” (the thing that is not obligatory is not existent), these thinkers have considered its allocation and specialization; and therefore, have reduced this rule to obligatory natural causes. The present article is an attempt to study these two opposing positions comparatively. The conclusion is that Mirza Naeini and his followers seem to be not aware of the principles of transcendental wisdom as they advance their discussion according to their non-Sadraian view of Causal necessity. This shows the dominance of customary view among Usuliyyin which is inconsistent with the transcendental wisdom in analyzing the issue, explaining their principles and thought system and in their type of analyses which are borrowed and not original. The paper is a critique of their claim that free agents are not subject to the necessity principle, and their claim that their views are similar to the views of transcendental wisdom. Finally, this paper shows that the various fundamental and structural objections to Mirza Naeini and his followers indicate the strength and comprehensiveness of the position of transcendental wisdom.