نشریه معارف حکمی جامعه
پیاپی 4 (بهار و تابستان 1401)

knowledge has levels such as inherent and active knowledge. Inherent knowledge is the knowledge of the supreme Truth to the possible existence in the order of the Supreme Necessary Existence, and the active knowledge is the divine knowledge of the possible existence in the order of its own existence. In transcendental philosophy, Inherent knowledge is the brief innate knowledge, while the detailed appearance of all the known is in the position of the essence and the inherent positive attribute, and the active knowledge is the detailed innate knowledge in the position of the action and the active positive attribute. This article explains the above-mentioned point of view in a descriptive-analytical way and deduces it from the verses of the Holy Qur'an and Islamic traditions, for example, the inherent knowledge is obtained from the name "Ahad" and "Samad" and the active knowledge of the verse "He is with you wherever you may be, and Allah watches what you do " (Hadid: 4).

Distinguishing existence from essence, as the quetion of this research, was first proposed by Aristotle; But due to Aristotle's particular worldview, it never went beyond the realm of logic. In Farabi's philosophy, this problem (according to the classification of Farabi's works) has two aspects: according to the first category, Farabi specifies the distinction between existence and essence, and the metaphysical effects of this distinction (such as: the occurrence of existence over essence, interpretation of necessity and possibility and causality) has also appeared in his philosophy. But according to the second category, Farabi recognized the mentioned distinction, but due to the intertwining of the meaning of existence and essence, it did not have a metaphysical function in his philosophical system. This distinction was also favored and expanded in Ibn Sina's philosophy; But due to the fact that the issue of originality of existence or essence was not raised, it was not adequately explained. Therefore, it faced many criticisms from some philosophers, including: Ibn Roshd, Suhrawardi and Mirdamad. Finally, Mulla Sadra raised the fundamental question of the originality of existence and by insisting on the principles of philosophy such as: sub-rule, essential movement and gradual unity of existence, the union of existence and essence was raised outside, on the basis of which, the distinction between existence and essence is conventional and what deserves to be realized and proven is nothing but "existence" and essence is a conventional matter and it has no benefit from existence except in a secondary way. So, there is no otherness left that requires the discussion of precedence and backwardness or distinction. Therefore, the discussion of the distinction between existence and essence does not have a critical place in Mulla Sadra's philosophy.

The development of extra-religious studies on the issue of nature caused the present article to examine the spirituality presented in some psychological perspectives and to search for the outstanding characteristics of the theory of nature in their attitude. Although psychologists consider nature as a concept including instinct and human development issues, and religion is sometimes considered equivalent to any kind of spiritualism, but by reflecting on their opinions, it can be claimed that in their opinion, nature is the result of a careful look at the spiritualistic relationship of man and the world whose transcendent limit finds its perfect manifestation in reaching God, which can be considered as a kind of reference to the concept of nature in the language of religion. Of course, there is the attention that the foundations of psychologists and the goals they consider in their theories are different from the foundations and goals of religion. However, in the author's opinion, the result of this essay will be a new approach to the problem of nature and another solution in response to the suspicion of the exclusivity of nature in intra-religious studies.

Foundations of insight are one of the most important factors that influence a person's behavior. Modern man's lifestyle is the result of a change of attitude towards concepts such as God, religion, man and existence, and this change of attitude is also a product of some epistemological foundations such as subjectivism and the originality of mathematics. Subjectivism gave the centrality to the human mind instead of objective facts by giving originality to the knowing agent. The result of subjectivism, the centrality of man in existence, the replacement of man instead of God, epistemological idealism, value idealism, negation of the authority of religion, religious and moral tolerance, individualism and an exploitative view of nature and man, each of which, in a way, have directed the foundations of the western lifestyle. On the other hand, the originality of mathematics also popularized quantitative attitudes in the analysis of qualitative concepts of human sciences, and after that, precise mathematical concepts were considered the only criterion of truth, and intangible and immeasurable concepts such as the basic concepts of religion were considered invalid. The consequence of this attitude was to consider religious and moral values meaningless.

Heaven and hell in purgatory and hereafter are the results of the objectivity of "deed" and "punishment" in this world. What makes the objectivity between the action and its punishment possible is being the agent of the soul's imagination in issuing exemplary images that are appropriate to the action, and we call the sum of these exemplary images "inner heaven or hell". The basic problem of this research is to recognize - not just to know - being the agent of the power of imagination in the formation of heaven or hell within humans, using the analytical method. The main finding of the current research, which was obtained based on the systematic analysis of the psychological foundations of Sadr al-Mutalahin in the two positions of "Exemplary isolation of the power of imagination and the creation of the inner heaven" and "The creation of images and the creation of the inner heaven", indicates being the agent of the power of the self's imagination in creation of exemplary images in proportion to one's perceptions of the five senses and thoughts. These images remain at the level of self's imagination, and if the result of these images is consistent with the blessings and characteristics of heaven, then a person will live in the inner heaven, and if the characteristics of hell and the people of hell are true to them, he will burn in the inner hell right now.

The main question of this research is: "What is Ibn Sina's and Allameh Tabatabayi's report on Siddiquin's argument and what are their commonalities and differences with each other?" The purpose of examining this issue is to gain a deeper awareness of the position and value of one of the most important proofs of God in Islamic philosophy. In this article, using the analytical-rational method, an attempt has been made to present a report of Avicenna's speech from Burhan (Argument) Siddiqin by examining his works. Then Allameh Tabatabayi's speech about this argument is presented. By comparing these two speeches, their commonalities and differences are discussed, and at the end, the findings of the research are presented in the form of conclusions. Based on the results obtained from this research, there are three aspects in common between the above two speeches: “demonstration through the cause” (being Lemmi) of both speeches, the absence of the need for both speeches to negate logical turn and sequence, and proving the attributes of Wajib al-Wujud in addition to proving his existence. On the other hand, there are four differences between the two mentioned speeches: in Ibn Sina's speech, the principle of existence is used, while in Allameh Tabatabayi's speech, the principle of reality is used; Ibn Sina's speech is only capable of proving the inherent necessity of wajib al-wujud, but Allameh Tabatabayi's speech also proves the eternal necessity of inherent wajib-ul-wujud. Ibn Sina has used many preliminaries in his speech, but Allameh Tabatabayi has proved the ideal by using the fewest preliminaries in his speech.