نشریه خردنامه صدرا
پیاپی 57 (پاییز 1388)

The most important constituent elements of Suhrawardi’s Illuminationist Philosophy are Iran and Shi’ism. There is a hot debate among those who study him as to whether his philosophy follows his political thought, or whether his politics is rooted in his Illuminationist philosophy. The truth is that Suhrawardi is the only Islamic philosopher who has developed an objective and synthetic philosophy which cannot be understood without perceiving his political thoughts. In this paper, the writer has tried to show that Suhrawardi’s political thought is influenced by his Illuminationist philosophy; however, one must admit that these two fields are so tightly intertwined in his synthetic philosophy that it is extremely difficult to draw a distinct borderline between them.The questions that might arise at this point are: why did Suhrawardi turn to Illuminationist philosophy? Was it because of his political thoughts? The course of his journeys from Zanjan to Maraghah, Isfahan, Mardin, Diyar Bakr, and Halab reveal the existence of some Batini and gnostic tendencies in Suhrawardi. Is this accidental? We should not ignore the fact that he wrote his Hikmat al-ishraq and developed his political philosophy between 578-587 AH (the time of his murder) in lands dominated by Batini thoughts.However, the degree of Illuminationist Philosophy’s influence on Suhrawardi’s politics, or vise versa, has attracted the attention of the scholars who study this philosopher, and each has viewed this issue from a different perspective. Suhrawardi maintains that the end of his political-Illuminationist design is reaching a luminous period and society which is far from darkness and has no meaning without a philosopher possessing a dhawqi (related to gnostic intuition) and discourive wisdom. Unlike Farabi, he does not unite politics with the city and its types and says no word about virtues, administration, and justice. His political method is based on Illuminationist philosophy, “divine administration”, connection to the “Unseen World”, and “inspirations from the superior world”. Therefore, the only true politics in his philosophy is one which is governed by “God’s command”, and in which the “Divine order” is dominant.Suhrawardi’s political philosophy is completely different from Greek philosophy and is based on Islamic and Iranian thoughts and principles, i.e. prophethood, the miracles and charismatic acts of the prophets and the members of the Prophet’s Household, and the glory and nobility or Iranian Kings. Therefore, he is the founder of Islamic-Iranian politics among Islamic philosophers.

The principle of the One is one of the most important philosophical principles in Islamic philosophy which is employed in relation to the quality of the emanation of existents. Ibn Sina believes, on the one hand, in the principle of the One and, on the other, in independent and plural realities. He justifies the existence of these pluralities based on the directions and considerations that he refers to concerning the first intellect. Some thinkers such as Ghazzali, Ibn Rushd, Imam Fakhr al-Din Razi, etc. believe that these directions and considerations are not enough for the justification of the quality of emanation and maintain that the theory of emanation contradicts the principle of the One. In contrast, some others such as Tusi and Mulla Sadra have defended this principle. In this paper, we intend to critically examine the fundamental principles and motifs underlying the ideas of those who criticize or defend this principle. Moreover, we seek to provide an answer to the question of whether it is possible to believe in the principle of the One, on the one hand, and to justify the emanation of the plurals which are independent from the one Cause qua One, on the other.

The theory of perceptive pre-mordial nature is rooted in the philosophical thoughts of the seventeen century West. However, we can also approach this issue from the view point of Ibn Sina. In Avicennan philosophy, there are certain soulish faculties and processes that are perception-oriented, natural, non-acquired, and directional. Nevertheless, concerning the naturalness of some perceptive products, such as concepts and judgments, based on some of the claims and principles in this philosopher's school, we can conclude that, at least, the possibility of their naturalness and, at most, the occurrence of a kind of naturalness in them are consistent with Sinan philosophy.

Any attempt at planning the map of science in the Islamic Republic of Iran requires a return to Islamic principles in the realm of the classification of sciences, on the one hand, and the explanation of the philosophy of education and training on the basis of Islamic teachings, on the other. The present paper, following a comparative approach, aims at examining the views of two of the prominent figures in the field of the Transcendent Philosophy regarding the first issue.Mulla Sadra sees all types of sciences and teachings in a specific (religious and divine) network and system. Accordingly, he believes that otherworldly and divine sciences and theoretical wisdom are prior to worldly sciences and practical wisdom. Imam Khumayni’s classification of sciences is based on his own specific philosophical anthropology. In his view, man generally possesses three modes, stations, or worlds, and all types of science return to these three worlds. In other words, there is a kind of knowledge related to intellectual perfections and spiritual duties, one pertaining to heart-related acts and its duties, and one related to bodily acts and the duties of the external aspect of the soul. According to Imam Khumayni, the other types of sciences are involved in one of these types.

Following an ontological approach and based on the theory of ontological motion, and the union of the intellect and intelligible, Mulla Sadra refutes the idea of the specific unity of human beings. Moreover, in terms of their secondary pre-mordial nature and internal mode, he divides them into various types, each having specific and exclusive judgments in terms of existence and knowledge.On the other hand, man’s various types in the Transcendent Philosophy are in a tight relationship with man’s stations in religions. Religion proposes certain grades and stations for human beings which can be made accessible, explained, and understood only through ontological evolution. The different types of human being can be explained and interpreted in the Transcendent Philosophy through man’s stations in religion such as contentment and the divine vicegerent. The point is that in this interaction, religion does not decline to the level of corroborator, and, by maintaining an ontological approach, the Transcendent Philosophy does not turn into theology (kalam). In some of his works such as Asrar al-ayat, Mulla Sadra benefits from this interaction in clarifying the human types. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the specific plurality of human beings in Mulla Sadra’s view and determine its domain and types.

Among gnostic collections of poems, Gulshan raz enjoys particular fame and acceptance, but what is the reason behind it? What is the secret of this book? Those who have dealt with the literary aspects of Gulshan raz have hardly ever been able to justify its reputation and have failed in revealing the secret behind this collection of poems. The writer of this paper believes that in order to discover it, one must deal with the whatness of gnostic experience following a phenomenological approach and ignoring certain expressions involved in Gulshan raz. Accordingly, two types of experience can be distinguished from each other in this work: one is related to the knowledge of mysteries and ontological unity, which involves the secrets of the verses of Gulshan raz from its beginning to its middle, and the other is related to the knowledge of gnostic intuitions (dhawq) and loving states pertaining to the secrets of its final verses.

The oneness of being is still one of the most exciting and, at the same time, critical and controversial issues in the field of religious sciences. However, a correct study of it can decrease the number of the involved controversies to some extent. The writer has chosen Plotinus for this study because the Neo-Platonic philosophy, which has Plotinus as its founder, has influenced the thoughts of Muslim thinkers in the fields of gnosis and philosophy. This influence has been exercised through the books Uthulugiya and The Book of Causes. When dealing with the degree that Neo-Platonic philosophy has influenced Islamic philosophy and, particularly, gnosis, some historians in the areas of philosophy and gnosis have gone into such extremes that they have introduced this school as the origin of all the ideas of Islamic thinkers. In this paper, it has been tried to inquire into one of the most important gnostic issues, namely, the oneness of being, from the viewpoints of Plotinus and some Neo-Platonists. It is also intended to clarify whether prominent gnostics, such as Ibn Arabi, and believers in the oneness of being had been influenced by Plotinus, or whether this issue was among the innovations of Muslim gnostics.