A comparative study of divine knowledge according to Ibn Sina and Mulla Sadra

Ibn Sina and Mulla Sadra, each founder of a philosophical school, are among those whose opinions have led to a tremendous and fundamental transformation in various scientific fields. The basic difference between these two philosophers in divine science is in the kind of attitude that each of them have about the nature of science. This kind of attitude towards science has caused the fundamental differences between Masha'in and Hekmat Sadrai. In Sadra's wisdom, knowledge is an existential matter and has weak and strong degrees, and in the system of walking, it is a physical bag. In the transcendental wisdom, God's knowledge of the essence and knowledge of the creatures before creation and after creation is present knowledge, but in the wisdom of Masha, knowledge of the essence and knowledge of the forms determined in the essence is present and knowledge of external beings, before and after Creation is the science of design, achievement and detail. According to Ibn Sina, God's knowledge is a superfluous aspect of his essence and in a way, it is general. This knowledge is present, not passivity, and its rise is obligatory, not a solution. External objects are obviously obligatory, not essential. Mulla Sadra used the principle of "simple truth of all things" in solving science as equivalent to essence, and explained the theory of detailed science united with essential essence, which is one of his initiatives. According to this divine sage, the knowledge of God is inherent in him. Since the Almighty is the source of all things, and the Wajib Ta'ala is aware of all things through the description of development and emergence, with only self-knowledge.