نشریه آموزه های فلسفه اسلامی
سال هفدهم شماره 2 (پیاپی 31، پاییز و زمستان 1401)

The speed of the expansion of cyberspace and its high power among different individuals and communities is one of the important issues of today’s world. On the other hand, one of the operative conditions of transcendent theosophy or al-ḥikmat al-muta’āliyah (Arabic: الحکمه المتعالیه) is the encounter of its followers with emerging questions new questions and providing answers and explaining the philosophical foundations of these problems. The philosophical analysis of the power of the influence of cyberspace is one of the positions of the followers of transcendent theosophy. The question of research is whether it is possible to analyze the philosophical principles of the power of cyberspace by relying on ʿAllāma Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s theory of fictions. ʿAllāma Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s theory of fictions has been explained as one of the answers to the above question in this research. The occurrence of any act by man depends on the fictitiousness of perceptions created in the mind according to this theory. The motive forces of human after knowing about the internal needs and in order to solve these needs, create estimative meanings that play a mediating role in the occurrence of act by human active (incentive) forces. Cyberspace, with its nature beyond the world of sense (sensory realm) and close to the imaginal world (realm of imagination), accelerates the process of creating these estimative meanings in the mind and influences human thoughts and acts by directing fictitious perceptions.

Faculty of fantasy (imagination) is one of the most important faculties of the internal sense and has different functions. The research and analysis of this faculty from the perspective of philosophers will help to determine its functions. The present research is the analysis of the epistemological functions of imagination from Fārābī’s point of view and the answer to the question that: What is Fārābī’s position in explaining the nature and determining the epistemological functions of fantasy (imagination)? We have explained, by analytic method and focusing on the analysis of the nature and functions of representative faculty and evidence of the role of fantasy (imagination) in the field of epistemology, the extent and the scope of fantasy in both formal and conceptual fields and the specific and general meaning of fantasy in these two fields of the fantasy in two formal and conceptual domains and the individual and universal meaning of fantasy in these two fields and we have shown that the general meaning of fantasy that belongs to the conceptual field of the faculty of fantasy, including a variety of argumentative (certain) and non-argumentative (problematic) cognitions. Fārābī’s approach in explaining the scope of fantasy is based on the equivocal mode of man’s cognitive levels and psychological, epistemological foundations and finally Fārābī’s idealistic view, while Ibn Sīnā (Arabic: ابن سینا, Avicenna)’s approach relies more on his anthropological and epistemological theory.

In the intellectual system of Ṣadr al-Mutiʾallihīn (Arabic: صدر المتالهین) and on the basis of principals such as the priority of existence and modulation of existence and most importantly the self-unfolding of existence and the rule of “بسیط الحقیقه کل الاشیاء ولیس بشیء منها” [Indivisible Entity or God (Arabic: بسیط الحقیقه) is all things and it is none of them] is only a “single manifestation” in the universe and does not have manifestation except God himself and all manifestations are considered as the attributes and modes of being and consequently, the basis of existence which is based on the unity of the absolute, are all individuation, manifestation and appearance of that truth, i.e., the only existence of Him is considered and His manifestation and all things are the manifestation of that single and absolute Essence with a special mode. This attitude is present in many parts of the supplications of the Infallibles (as) (which is their direct, special and open communication is with the Lord), phrases such as: “My God, You are the Manifest (Evident, Outward or Ascendant) and there is nothing above You,” (Arabic: إلهی انت الظاهر فلیس فوقک شیء), “Oh, the Immanent in His Evident” (Arabic: یا باطنا فی ظهوره), “I saw you appearing in everything” (Arabic: فرایتک ظاهرا فی کل شیء), “Will there be any appearance other than you?” (Arabic: ایکون لغیرک من الظهور), “Praise be to Allah, who has revealed Himself to His creatures because of His creation” (Arabic: الحمد لله المتجلی لخلقه بخلقه) etc. that along with proofs from the aḥādīth and verses of the Quran are indicative of this importance which leads to the strengthening of this Mullā Ṣadrā’s view and will open the way to knowledge for those who want to know God Almighty. There is no precedent for this research and citation of the subject and its method is based on a library method.

The issue of Khilāfa (Arabic: خلافه, caliphate) has been interpreted and elaborated in various fields of religious teachings and a comparative study of these views and creating a dialogue between them will help to emerge new works and results. Although both Shaykh al-Ṣaduq (Arabic: الشیخ الصدوق) and Ibn ʿArabī (Arabic: ابن عربی, Ibn ʿArabī‎) consider the caliph to have two heavenly and earthly sides and the caliph was the political, scientific and spiritual authority of society but selecting and making this position in the world of appearance (manifestation) is by divine will and outside people’s choice and the caliph in reality is the mediator of grace and the cause of the world’s survival but the theological attitude of Shaykh al-Ṣaduq and Ibn ʿArabī’s mystical tendency cause the differences between these two views, some of which are important and significant. For example, Shaykh al-Saduq considered the caliph to be derived from the divine attribute of “الانتصاف لاولیائه من اعدائه” and to prevent the creation of determinism in the world but Ibn ʿArabī introduced the caliph as the manifestation of the comprehensive name “Allāh” (Arabic: الله) and considered for the caliphate two real ranks and stages i.e. Muhammadan Reality and apparent i.e. human instances of saints. Ibn ʿArabī also distinguished between the caliphate of Allah and the caliphate of Rasūl (Arabic: رسول, God’s messenger) and introduced the caliphate of Allah as a political and scientific authority.

One of the common topics of Islamic theology and transcendent theosophy or al-ḥikmat al-muta’āliyah (Arabic: الحکمه المتعالیه) is the “physical creation of soul”. There are two incidental and original approaches in this regard In Islamic theology: the incidental approach considers the soul conditioned on moderate temperament in the body to be created (originated) and the original approach considers the soul like other bodies and considers it as an originated object in an absolute manner. The original view of the soul has also offered different interpretations about the mode of creation (origination): Being accident, sameness with perceptible (sensible) temple, being rarefied body (subtle body), the main part of the body and being indivisible part of soul. The main reason of theologians for creation based on the incompatibility of pre-eternity of the soul with attributes such as the Almighty and All-Powerful for God. In contrast, Mullā Ṣadrā believes in the incompatibility between the temporal contingency (temporal origin) of the soul and its innate immateriality and emphasizes the idea of “corporeality of creation and the spirituality of continuance” (Arabic: جسمانیه الحدوث و روحانیه البقاء). The research is a comparative study and analysis of Islamic theology and transcendent theosophy in the problem of createdness of the soul (temporality of the soul). The difference between theological and philosophical approaches goes back to the ontological and anthropological principles of them. The theory of the soul corporeality creation in theology and philosophy in addition to sharing in some essential concomitants has different consequences such as differences in the criterion of personal identity. The soul corporeality creation from the perspective of Islamic theology and transcendent theosophy by an analytical and comparative method has been analyzed in this article and the intersection points and their distinction are highlighted in the principles and essential concomitants.

Theories of the social sciences, after the development of philosophical linguistics in the twentieth century and the emergence and evolution of the schools of linguistic analysis, have also been proposed in relation to “language” and are also known as cultural theory in terms of symbolic linguistic meanings. However, Abū Naṣr al-Fārābī (Arabic: ابو نصر الفارابی) defines civil science (political science) as a social theory about civic and followers and on the other hand, in the section of ʿIlm al-lisān (Arabic: علم اللسان) of the book of Iḥṣāʾ al-ʿUlūm (Arabic: إحصاء العلوم) and he explains civic and communities (Arabic: امم و مدن) in relation to language and the evolution of linguistic industries in more detail especially in chapter two of Kitāb al-Ḥurūf (Arabic: کتاب الحروف). The following research is an analysis of the relation between language, community and city (polis) in Fārābī philosophy and Fārābī’s explanation of civil science (political science) and the characteristics of cities and communities (ummahs) is expressed from his point of view in this article and then, the relationship between language, communities and cities in Fārābī’s view has been discussed. The result of this research is that Fārābī relates and links the evolution of communities with the development of linguistic techniques and arts and at some stage of development of linguistic techniques emphasizes the relationship between philosophy and religion and he uses the word nation (Arabic: مله) instead of Ummah (Arabic: امه) consequently.

The essential substance (nature) by itself only consists of its own essence according to the principle of “existence distinction from nature”, which is considered among the most important principles of Avicenna’s metaphysics and the metaphysical element of existence in order to exist must be occurred on it from the outside and from the determinant cause. Ibn Sīnā (Arabic: ابن سینا, Avicenna) also, based on this principle, establishes the important principle of “the necessary existent distinction from the potential existent” and he explains the issue of creation and the proof of existence of God on the basis of these two principles. Some of Avicenna’s phrases in explaining the distinction of existence on nature have led to different interpretations of his word. Ibn Rushd (Arabic: ابن رشد, Averroes)’ reading is one of the most important of these readings which has become popular among medieval thinkers through translating his works and his followers. Avicenna considers the distinction of nature and existence to be external according to Averroes’ view and believes that existence, like accidental categories, affects the nature. However, attention in Avicenna’s phrases shows that his purpose of considering ascription of existence to subject as accidental means that existence is not a part of essence and essentials and it is occurred from external over essence and nature and not that the existence is occurred to the nature like categorical accidents. Thomas Aquinas, though influenced by Averroes, considers his principle of distinction to be different from Avicenna’s and in some minor cases is different from Avicenna but the examination of his works shows that he is influenced by Avicenna in the main framework of the principle of distinction and its explanation is not significantly different from Avicenna’s.

The ability of deduction, explanation, inference and defending of some knowledge is axiomatic and undeniable. A narrative (ḥadīth) about the relationship of the Truth (Arabic: حق تعالی) and things is narrated in the narrative, theological, philosophical and mystical books narrated by Imam Ali (as) that God “is not inside objects; not like entering of an object in another object and He is outside objects without exiting of object from an object” and without doubt, this word is not of the kind of mystery and has an understandable meaning for the audience. The question is what does it mean by God being inside or outside of things? Is it possible to interpret it using philosophical fundamentals or should it be left to understand it in the time of the presence and encounter with Maʿṣūm (Arabic: معصوم, the Infallible) In this article, we have mentioned while implicative and document reviewing of Ḥadīth and stating different words and interpretations, the evidence of the verses and traditions and we have shown that a reasonable meaning from this ḥadīth can be presented by explaining the philosophical rule of: “«بسیط الحقیقه کل الاشیاء ولیس بشیء منها»” [Indivisible Entity or God (Arabic: بسیط الحقیقه) is all things and it is none of them] and show that God is Indivisible Entity and He is the Infinite that pervasive of all their objects and perfections and none of them is outside of Him and none of the limits of possibility can be found in Him.

How explaining practice which is the point of linking this new branch of philosophy with the philosophy of the humanities is one of the main questions of contemporary philosophy of practice. Some philosophers have explained this issue scientifically and based on the causal relation of reason to action (with practice) and others have attempted to rationalize it and interpret it differently from scientific explanation. ʿAllama Jaʿfari while analyzing human action and emphasizing the element of free will has tried to show that the voluntary action can be explained despite the dominance of the factor over doing and quitting. ʿAllama while distinguishing between rational explanation and scientific explanation, although accepted causal explanation in the field of scientific research, but does not limit it in explanation by reason; rather, by emphasizing the role of free will and human freedom, considering of the four factors of intrinsic (intrinsically) variable, intrinsically fixed, extrinsically variable and extrinsically fixed in scientific explanation. ʿAllama also, divides explanation into two stages before and after operation and introduces a priori explanation method as inductive and based on probability calculus and introduces posteriori explanation method as syllogistic. The present study, in addition to extract and adjust ʿAllama Jaʿfari’s theory in explaining action, explains three important challenges of normativeness (the quality or state of being normative), logical relationship and deviation in the chain of action that are discussed in causal theories and shows that these problems that based on analysis of human action and freedom of the will can be answered.

The issue of the temporal beginning of the cosmos is one of the challenging issues which, in addition to philosophy and theology, has attracted the attention of contemporary physicists, so that some of them have expressed metaphysical-theological reactions and even atheistic opposing in choosing their opinions. Reviewing of Stephen Hawking’s works shows that he merely bases the physical rules that rely on the method of sensation and experience without the use of metaphysical and philosophical methods. Some metaphysical results such as temporal of beginningless have concluded the creation of cosmic and thereby denied the existence of God. The findings of the research in the present article which has been written by descriptive-analytical method and with philosophical approach indicate that Hawking’s cosmic temporal of beginningless is consistent with the view of some philosophers such as Mullā Ṣadrā but Mullā Ṣadrā unlike Hawking does not conclude atheism and atheistic readings from cosmic temporal of beginningless. Some of Hawking’s ontological concepts have led to fallacy of non-sequitur and lead to internal contradictions in philosophical discussions which in this article have been investigated and evaluated with the principles and fundamentals of transcendent theosophy or al-ḥikmat al-muta’āliyah (Arabic: الحکمه المتعالیه). It has been concluded in the end that Mullā Ṣadrā considers the criterion of the cosmic need for cause as “possible” in transcendent theosophy and has concluded between the “cosmic temporal of beginningless” and “the existence of God.”

Mullā Ṣadrā has explained the resurrection (Arabic: معاد) and gathering (Arabic: حشر) based on his principles. The consequential (subordinate) and independent resurrection is one of the important and useful points in his explanation but which less attention has been paid to it. Ṣadr al-Mutiʾallihīn (Arabic: صدر المتالهین) himself did not mention the term “subordinate” and “independent”, but Muḥaqqiq Sabziwārī mentioned it in his commentary on al-Asfār al-arbaʿa (Arabic: الاسفار الاربعه). Ṣadr al-Mutiʾallihīn believes that gathering (Arabic: حشر) means to raise the level of existence and access to the upper world, which is possible with the essential progressive motion. All creatures in the world of nature have become progressed to the substantial motion and their order of existence is increased. This is their gathering they have reached. It is possible to accept a subordinate gathering for the creatures in addition to this kind of gathering which is independent. The effect is the same as the relation to the cause and exists in the order of the cause briefly and its cause is also related to its own cause and is present with it. The presence of the effect in the presence of the cause of the cause is called a secondary (subordinate) resurrection (gathering). We tried, in this article, to explain the issue of consequential and independence Hashr (resurrection or gathering) in such a way to solve the problems and dilemmas facing the philosophical explanation of Hashr and return toward God (Arabic: رجوع إلی الله). All levels of existence, from the inferior level to the superior level, refer to God Almighty based on this.

Freedom is one of the issues that have been considered in different divine and human schools including the moral and legal system of Kant’s philosophy as well as the teachings and doctrines of Islamic philosophy. Since the influence of Kant’s ideas on the question of freedom on the practical science (ethics) prevailing in the era of modernity is undeniable and paying attention to his views in this discussion can provide a better understanding of modern practical philosophy and its relation to the thoughts of Muslim philosophers. Therefore, the main problem of this paper is the critical study of Kant’s attitude to the issue of freedom and intellectual aspects in relation to the Islamic philosophy fundamentals is the main issue of this article. This study analyzes Kant’s view in this field and his fundamentals by a critical analytical method and then with a comparative approach examines the relation between the views of Muslim philosophers with him. The findings of this study suggest that the critical approach of Islamic philosophy to Kant is from two aspects; first: epistemological methodology in the discussion of the compatibility of free rationality and religion; second, in terms of the role of freedom in the legal system and conflict in its value position. Therefore, this research can be considered innovative in terms of philosophical approach to the problem and Kant’s view from the perspective of Islamic ethics.