Interpretation of God’s Speech in Mulla Sadra’s Philosophy

 

By: Prof. Sayyed Muhammad Khamenei

 

 

The interpretation of God’s Words or Speech has always been a topic of debate among scholars. It has also been tackled in Islamic philosophy and gnosis from different perspectives. The Holy Qur’an refers to ‘words’ as ayat (signs). These signs, which are of course meaningful, are sent in three ways:

1.      Through natural indications, such as natural but out of ordinary events, including the eclipse of the sun, lunar eclipse, earthquake, etc.

2.      Through human languages. Such Divine speech is called revelation and is only sent to those people who possess the necessary qualifications and potentials for receiving it.

3.      Through expression without using words and phrases. This is done through inspiring the addressees and transferring the concepts directly to their minds and hearts.

Nevertheless, from another perspective, all the phenomena of the world are the results of the Orders given by Almighty God and His Creative Acts. In other words, they are considered as His Acts and Speech, and their indications are essential and natural.

In this regard, the first leader of Shi’ites, Imam Ali (AS), says: “When God wills something to come into existence, He orders: “Become”! And then that thing becomes existent. Yet, His Order is not given in the form of evocation or a sound to be received by the material ear. The word of God Almighty is the same as His Act.”[1]

This saying of Imam Ali (AS) opens our discussion and leads us to our central point of interest, since it takes the Divine Words out of the domain of human speech (enhanced by storing the air stream in the lungs and then releasing it, and produced by means of using sounds), which is arbitrarily related to meaning, and even out of the domain of verbal games that are quite common in the philosophy of language, and takes it to the realm of natural phenomena and the phenomenology of revelation. As a result, the interpretation of the Qur’an and its related hermeneutic is mainly done in the domain of philosophical rather than traditional hermeneutics. Accordingly, we might be able to consider Mulla Sadra’s interpretation and hermeneutics as a bridge connecting and reconciling the above- mentioned types of hermeneutics, and also introduce it as the foundation of philosophical hermeneutics.

The word ‘Become!’ (Be! Come into existence!), which has been frequently used in the Qur’an[2], is the same as the ‘Divine Will’ and ‘Divine Order’. This word is interpreted as ‘speech’ and becomes existent in the outside as an external thing. In fact, the external existence of objects, or, as Heidegger calls them, their existence, depends on the Divine Word, i.e., ‘become’. It seems that this word, which Moslem gnostics, through resorting to the Holy Qur’an, call ‘existential becoming’[3] is the reference for the same ‘Logos’ which had been used in the Illuminative philosophy of ancient Iran and in ancient Greek philosophy.

Consequently, the world together with all the existents therein (which are sometimes called the macrocosm) comprise one book and one Divine Speech. In fact, all the things in the world are interpretable and meaningful signs for the perception of Divine meanings and intentions. This reality, however, does not prevent God from communicating with man through arbitrary and verbal sings called ‘revelation’[4]. Verbal speech or ‘revelation’ is not only related to existential speech, but, according to Islamic gnosis and Mulla Sadra, it is also a level or degree of the levels and degrees of existential speech (or Logos). It is as if God speaks to the micro anthropo through the macro anthropo (or the macrocosm), and the symmetry[5] or perhaps the union of these two anthropos in existence reveals the Divine meanings and intentions to mankind through different signs. This is because as man’s purpose of speech is the expression of meanings in his innermost, the Divine speech also aims at revealing the hidden faces of existence and manifesting the objective and external reality of the Divine Will.

Therefore, the Divine Word appears both in the form of external existents in the world scene and revelations, which are sent to the Prophet in his own language (but without the mediation of sounds or anything else), and which become a part of his perception. This is a kind of perception which is never separate from the intentions of the Speaker and which deals with realities through knowledge by presence.

The important point here is that these two types of Divine Speech (natural and arbitrary) are in fact the two existential forms of the same reality, since as Moslem gnostics and Mulla Sadra maintain, although ‘existence’ is only one in its reality and essence, it possesses certain vertical and horizontal degrees and levels. In this classification the rational existence comes first at the highest level of existence and is then followed by its Ideal existence, and then by its objective and external existence. The mental[6] or perceptive existence is at the middle level, and the ‘oral existence’ of mental concepts, as well as their written existence, come at the lowest level.

At these levels, existence is in fact one thing whose images have fallen in several mirrors; however, it is classified into different degrees or levels with respect to the validity, strength and weakness of its types.[7] According to Mulla Sadra,[8] existence seems to revolve around itself and change faces all through this existential process, and at all these rational, Ideal and sense (or oral and written) levels. This deceitful, coquettish and charming idol appears in a new form in every moment. Finally, it seems that we had better repeat what we said at the beginning of the paper: The world is the same as God’s book; its beginning and end are the same, and the whole world is only one ‘word’ which appears differently in different occasions. It might be due to such various manifestations of existence or ‘word’ that philosophers have interpreted Logos sometimes as cosmos and sometimes as word or speech.

According to what was discussed above, revelation is the same as the Divine Speech. It passes through the levels mentioned above and changes into words which are incarnated in the mirror of the Prophet’s mind, as if God were speaking in his ear. Consequently, we can consider the Qur’an as the oral form of the real and objective realities of the macrocosm or macro anthropo. This Holy Book has a meaning as vast as the world in its oral form and, like other realities of the world of existence, is an ‘ayat’ or sign of God and the representation of His Holy words. The Qur’an has frequently referred to this symmetry and equated itself with ‘Kitabi Mobin’ or the manifest book.[9]

The Prophet’s perception of revelation or his understanding of God’s speech is the same as the reflection of obvious realities and phenomena of the world on the Prophet’s soul and his intuition of them. After passing through the existential descending levels, God’s words are realized in the mould of oral messages, consisting of words which have been chosen on the basis of specific structures and enjoy such depth and inner meaning that one can only perceive them through intuition.

In the process of the Prophet’s receiving revelation, it seems that the senses are not alert, and that the Divine Speech is perceived through intuitive and presential knowledge. The perception of the Divine Words is done automatically, and no other factor can interfere with the Prophet’s perception of revelation. The only prerequisites for this process are some common verbal signs that should be known to both the Receiver and Sender of revelation, exactly like signs and codes used in transmitting messages. The language of the Qur’an is Arabic, and so was the Prophet’s language. This has been frequently stipulated in the Qur’an,[10] where the philosophy of speaking the same language has been equated with perceiving God’s meaning and messages.

In contrast to what contemporary hermeneutic theories in philosophy issue, the idea of the interference of the thoughts, horizons and presuppositions of the addressee or interpreter in revelation is totally absurd, since it will decrease the validity of revelation, which, in this way, cannot be considered the Pure Speech of God.[11]

One of the other reasons for the purity of the Prophet’s perception of revelation and its being free from the interference of other factors is the existence of the same rational atmosphere which comprises the level of purity or being free from matter, and is deemed the origin of revelation and Divine Speech. This is because, as mentioned before, the world of existence possesses certain material, Ideal and supra-Ideal (rational) stages and levels. We can find the same existential levels in mankind, including the Prophet. That is, man lives in a world and a space full of physical phenomena (sense data) and matter, yet he possesses the faculty of imagination, and also an Ideal space (in the sense of the supra-matter stage) which is equal to and conforms to Ideal existence in the world and cosmos. He also possesses the supra-Ideal faculty (wisdom or the rational faculty), which is equal to and conforms to the supra-Ideal world or the world of intellects. According to what Mulla Sadra and gnostics maintain, the existential levels of ontology have not been ordered at random and by accident; rather, they follow the general system of creation and the relation between the macrocosm and microcosm. One must learn about revelation not only through reading about the Prophet in the Qur’an, but through gaining the knowledge of the total process of descent as well. The reason for choosing the word ‘descent’ is this very journey and the traversing of the levels in the arch of descent. As mentioned before, the oral existence (and then the written one) is the lowest of all existential degrees, so that apart from Islamic gnostics, few consider it as one of the degrees of existence.

 

The Perception of God’s Speech

After the inquiry into the process of the perception of revelation and the Divine Words (the Qur’an) by the Prophet (the Most Generous Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (s)), it is the right time to explore the philosophy of perception (and the perception of the Qur’an) by commentators and ordinary men (other than the Prophet). In accomplishing the purpose of the discussion, it is first necessary to tackle the nature of ‘perception’ in short.

In its general sense, perception means what man’s faculty of perception perceives from a verbal phenomenon or other things. The ‘perception of speech’ (or written text) commonly means understanding the intended meaning of the speaker (or writer) through his words. However, this definition is unacceptable in contemporary hermeneutics, and a new definition has been provided in this regard. In this definition, there are two sides: the interpreter (addressee) and the text (oral language).

Heidegger conceives of perception as one of the modes of existence in the world rather than a simple process. To put it more clearly, although perception is rooted in an existence which is prior to man’s existence, since ‘existence’ appears and is manifest in man, and since he is conscious and has awareness, he is the only existent who is able to perceive and interpret the horizons (macrocosm and microcosm) in the realm of his existence. Like most western philosophers, Heidegger does not present a reason for this decree of his. In this theory, phenomenology and hermeneutics and intertwined, and perception and interpretation are equated with the manifestations of existence. This is called the natural language of existents in the literature of Islamic gnosis, and represents the first Divine Language or Logos.

If Heidegger really believes in what was detailed before (that the three-fold levels of man’s ontology correspond to the three-fold levels of existence in the world, and that unlike other existents, man can proceed harmoniously through all existential levels at every step he receives and perceives the message of existence, whether in the form of revelation, art, or human language), his claim concerning the relation between man’s perception and the mode of his existence in the world (Dasein) is demonstrable and acceptable; otherwise, there would have been a long discussion to follow.

Unfortunately, Heidegger’s approach is different from that of Mulla Sadra, and he has not even been able to perceive the spirit of Plato’s words. Heidegger seems to have been under the influence of sophists in his considering man or Dasein as the only center and measure of the truth. That is why the relativism witnessed in sophism also emerges in the philosophical hermeneutics of Heidegger’s school of thought, and the perception and interpretation of every single of his writings and works remain relative, unfinished, and not finalized.

The word ‘horizon’ in Heidegger’s school of thought does not mean a nafs al-amri[12] truth, and its interpretation differs from one person to another. In other words, each interpreter’s horizon is different from another one’s horizon. According to this theory, even the contradictory horizons, perceptions and interpretations (all together) are considered correct and real. Consequently, the importance of man’s role in the perception and interpretation of the world is questioned, and one might even consider it false and illusory. It should also be emphasized that in this approach the ‘Absolute Existence’, i.e., God, does not play any role and the chain of existences in the world does not lead to Him. According to Islamic philosophy and Mulla Sadra’s school of thought, any perception of existence will be incorrect and incomplete, and will face a dead end unless it accepts the Absolute Existence (God, who is the Necessary Being).

Another defect of Heidegger’s hermeneutics is that the domain of his horizon-seeking hermeneutics is material and limited to the world of sensible things. This is because he does not conceive of man’s perception of the world (or his asking questioning about existence) as anything beyond uttering the words of a text or the appearance of a phenomenon. Unlike Mulla Sadra’s hermeneutics, it never transcends the borderlines of matter and sense data; rather, it aims at going beyond what is before it and gaining a deeper understanding. This is like wishing to place a big object into an object which is smaller than that; as a result, there will remain neither the container nor the contained.

Heidegger’s off and on reference to Plato’s method, that is, going out of the cave and observing the outside reality, in the tawil (interpretation) and perception of the existing phenomenon has been slightly contaminated by certain misunderstandings. The reason is that the outside of Plato’s cave is in fact the outer space of matter and sensible things; it is what Mulla Sadra believes in, that is, the world of Idea and supra-Idea.

Henry Corbin had grasped this point, and thus called hermeneutics as the ‘unveiling of the veiled’, which in Islamic Gnosis is equal to the Platonic concept of existence or Idea.

Mulla Sadra believes that the best reasoning for demonstrating the relation between perception or interpretation and Dasein or human existence arises out of finding an existential relation between the micro anthropo (microcosm) and macro anthropo (macrocosm). He also maintains that the best way for proving the relation between language and existence on the one hand, and the manifestation of existence in language on the other, is the perception of the classification of existential degrees, starting with objective existence and ending with oral existence. This is because without ‘alert existence’ and benefiting from existential degrees, man would not be able to adapt himself to nature, speak a language, interpret the nature, approach new horizons (real and not illusory ones), and discover and experience them.

                              *                                  *                                     *

In Gadamer’s definition, the perception of the text and spoken language or hermeneutics is a synthesis resulting from not only the dialog between two horizons, but from their dialectics as well. These two horizons consist of the interpreter’s horizon and that of the text. This theory which is based on the existence of shared presuppositions, traditions, historical background and conditions of both the interpreter and the addressee intends to introduce the interference of the interpreter’s horizon, along with all its dimensions and content, as something necessary and inevitable (and scientific), and in fact impose it on the philosophy of hermeneutics, so that without the interference of the interpreter’s mind or horizon, there would exist no pure content and meaning in the realm of interpretation.

This theory is far from reality, since it imposes on man some kind of mechanical, unconscious and deterministic mechanism which is not al all in conformity with the acceptance of consciousness in him. It is crystal clear that unlike other existents, man, through his knowledge and free will, can overcome a great part of nature’s determinism, which naturally dominates his existence to a great extent, and refute his own experiences and even presuppositions.

In unconscious situations, man is influenced by traditions, social variables, his so-called personal horizon, and even his temperamental features; moreover, he allows himself to draw on his presuppositions in interpreting and perceiving different things, particularly with respect to some artistic categories. However, he is, at the same time, able to safeguard against the impact and interference of such factors in his interpretations through his freedom and consciousness. In other words, if this theory is true in the form of particular affirmative propositions, it will be false in the form of universal affirmative propositions, and renders the independent and free man into a compelled existent who has no free choice.

Here we do not resort to supernatural phenomena such as telepathy and correct predictions; however, among the everyday simple analyses of different things, including religious texts, legal laws, and physical or mathematical principles, we can find certain examples in which the interpreter, rather than surrendering to his presuppositions or social traditions, tries to discover the intended meaning of the speaker and the portrait of the writer in the mirror of the text in order to interpret it. Even the motivation of the readers of Gadamer’s books is the perception of the ultimate meaning of the author, rather than posing a series of questions and seeking the answers in the text.

According to what was discussed before, man’s perception is a complicated process that cannot be limited to a general principle. The only acceptable general principle for the interpretation and perception of phenomena, whether natural, verbal or artistic, is the one stating that there exists in the world a universal, common, absolute, real and ultimate perception, according to which every human being sees himself in common with others in the perception of a specific phenomenon.[13]

It is possible to demonstrate this general principle through the correspondence between the macrocosm and microcosm. The writer believes that in the category of art, the creativity of the artist means the reflection of one of the manifestations of the macrocosm in his soul, rather than merely innovation. In other words, everyone could have been inspired by the soul of the world or the macrocosm for creating a specific artistic content or phenomenon.

The illuminations occurring to the mystic wayfarer and the words uttered by the foreteller (completely against his habits) both belong and are denied to them.

In spite of all their complexity, ambiguity and vastness of meaning, the perception of an artist’s art and a poet mystic’s words in their general sense is equally possible for everyone to some extent. This is because all people possess a common spiritual element enabling them to understand each other and know about the nature. The existence of a universal perception is also in perfect conformity to wholistic practical theories and the theory of mystic Oneness (tawhid).

 

Revelation

The phenomenology of revelation is also possible in a similar way. Revelation is the most complete and powerful type of dialog between the macro anthropo and the Prophets, and the reflection of their existential realities in their soul. The macro anthropo can be considered as one of the means and elements of revelation and expression of Divine words to humankind. The perception of revelation should be somewhat possible for all possessing a language, since in spite of its apparent arbitrariness, language is a human phenomenon. Accordingly, it is an existential phenomenon which has more or less been introduced in Heidegger’s theory, as well as the theories of some contemporary hermeneutic philosophers.

 

Human Perception and Interpretation

At the outset of this paper reference was made to the hierarchy of existence (from rational and ideal existence to material, oral and written existences). Reference was also made to the existence of a sense, Ideal, and rational hierarchy in man.

Mulla Sadra has solved the problem of man’s perception of God’s Words by resorting to the above points. He believes that the perception and interpretation of the Qur’an consists of referring its sentences and words back to the known and hidden realities beyond them, and going behind the veil of words. Gnostics call this process ‘tawil’. Literally speaking, tawil means the returning of everything to its primary and main position. This is an ascending process that, comparing to revelation, works in the reverse direction; that is, it moves from words towards rational realities.

Generally speaking, the perception of God’s speech (the Qur’an and Heavenly Texts), which have been revealed to the Prophet, takes place at two independent stages:

The first is the stage of verbal interpretation and consists of paying attention to man’s arbitrary and verbal signs while considering all their literary and lexical aspects, as well as their eloquence. Shlayer Macher’s calls this syntactic or grammatical interpretation. This is also what critiques commonly do in the well-known field of literary criticism, which aims at perceiving the concept embodied in the mould of words. This stage corresponds to the lowest level of existence (written or oral existence).[14]

The second stage comprises esoteric interpretation. Tawil or esoteric interpretation means going beyond the surface of words and entering the innermost part of the speaker’s meaning and intention. This phenomenon is like going beyond the material and sensible world and entering the innermost and spirit of the world. This innermost part is hidden to the sense, but is the origin of sense data and is higher and more powerful than the sense in its existential level. At its own level, the surface perception and interpretation of the Qur’an means the perception of God’s words; however, according to Mulla Sadra, they cannot be considered as the true interpretation and perception of the depth of His speech. This is because as we read in hadith, God’s speech has seven to seventy inner parts or semantic degrees,[15] as a result, sufficing to its first and oral level means failing to perceive the essence of the speaker’s meaning and cannot be considered interpretation in the real sense of the word. In contrast to the present western hermeneutic schools of thought, such going beyond the surface meaning of words is not rooted in obstinacy, personal taste and temperamental state, and has nothing to do with the presuppositions, horizons, and background knowledge of the interpreter. Rather, the Speaker’s meaning is something which has been realized in the stages of revelation and in the supra-material world of Idea; it is existent and can be perceived only by those people who have transcended the borderlines of matter and the realm of material laws, and through getting help from their immaterial soul and inwardly intuition, observe the Ideal realities at an immaterial stage known as continuous imagination.

This stage, too, consists of different degrees or levels which, like those of existence and light, are either ascending or descending. Going through each level depends on the degree of the interpreter’s immateriality of the soul and his inwardly purity.

The esoteric or mystic interpretation of the Qur’an, or the perception of the depths of its concepts is possible through the ascending journey of perception from the sense and matter (the world of speech) to higher and higher stages, that is, the Ideal and supra-Ideal stages of the soul, and being related to reality. As Mulla Sadra says, both the Qur’an and man possess an outward and an inward; in other words, they both have evident and hidden aspects.[16] The inward of the Qur’an is its spirit, which man should perceive by means of his soul, that is, through employing a power beyond his senses.

What is beyond the sense is veiled and hidden to it, thus the hidden meanings of the Qur’an could not be deciphered through the senses and at the surface level of its words. Like man, the Qur’an has some levels. The lowest of these levels, i.e., its words, could be perceived by means of man’s lowest degree (sense) of existence, while its higher levels could only be grasped through man’s highest levels of soul, one of which being intellect or wisdom. The Qur’an calls the highest level of its own perception, as well as the perception of other Divine verses, as ‘Qalb’ (heart). Considering Qur’anic terminology, ‘Qalb’ is the same as love and being connected to the highest kingdom and intuition.

Mulla Sadra emphasizes that a comprehensive interpretation of the Qur’an and the true perception of God’s Speech should begin with the perception and interpretation of its words. Therefore, any interpretation of this Holy Book which is against its surface meaning, or which ignores it would be an incorrect one.

The next stage is realized through employing intuition, in other words, through union with the spirit of the world, the macro anthropo and the vast space of immaterial existence. At this stage the worlds are unveiled and the truth emerges; a truth which is the same as the realities of the world, and which corresponds to the supra-material existence. That is why Mulla Sadra has called his book on the philosophy of interpretation as ‘Mafatih al-Qayb’, meaning ‘Hidden Keys of the World’.

In spite of their being accepted by Moslem philosophers and Gnostics, Mulla Sadra’s definitions of interpretation or tawil have been refuted by those scholars paying attention only to the surface meaning of language (literalists). These scholars believe that interpretation means the literal study of the Qur’an. However, according to Mulla Sadra, they are deprived of the perception of the hidden realities and veiled beauties of this Holy Book.

 

 

 

Notes: