Natural Environment from the Perspective of the Transcendent Philosophy

Dr. Sayyid Mustafa Muhaqqiq Damad

 

Common people believe that philosophy is a science dealing with subjects that are completely distinct from daily life. Upon hearing the word ‘philosopher’, they imagine a person who has completely abandoned normal life and just thinks about being in its transcendent sense. However, this conception is to some extent well-established in laymen’s minds, the history of philosophical thought does not confirm them. Moreover, the philosophers’ practical and scientific conducts, whether in the past or present, reveal that they have always engaged themselves in the problems that have been of importance to our daily lives and, directly or indirectly, related to them.

It is true that philosophers think about being in general, but it is also an undeniable fact that a major part of their mental occupations pertain to the existence of the world and man, his place in the world, and his relation to the entire being.

In recent decades, the term ‘ecology’ has found a vast and various dimensions, and branches and, is frequently used in the mass media; however, it is only less than a hundred years that it is employed in a biological sense.[1]

This term is derived from the Greek word ‘oikos’, meaning family, and ‘logos’, meaning knowledge. Thus ecology means the study of life and anti-life related to any living being. Ecology pertains to the knowledge of the administration and management of nature in general, as well as that of the particular components of nature, the quality of their connection to and dependence on each other, and the way they comprise a whole through coordination with each other. In other words, ecology is a science helping us in understanding the world we live in and the way it affects us. Accordingly, it comes into a close relationship with philosophy.

Conceiving of philosophy of nature in terms of man’s thinking about worldly phenomena and his benefiting from this knowledge in satisfying his spiritual needs through the perception of beauty has a long history back in the centuries before Plato and Aristotle. It is also important to say that a study of the history of human thought reveals that natural philosophy has its origin in ancient civilizations of Iran, Sumer, Egypt, India, and China. Ancient eastern knowledge of cosmology gradually permeated through the Greek culture due to the relations among western and eastern tradesmen, travelers, and soldiers. It flowed in a new bed under the title of ‘natural philosophy’ and assumed a Greek color and flavor. The Melti tradesman, Thales, who lived in the sixth and seventh centuries B.C., was acquainted with eastern teachings and sciences during his journeys to Babel and Egypt and took them as gifts on his journey back to his country, Greece. He considered water as the basic and primary matter of the world, and, later, Anaximanders and Anaximanes followed him in acknowledging the material unity of the world. Anaximanes considered air as the origin of being. The philosophy of nature was extended more and enriched beyond the material unity of the world by Heraclitus in the next century. His worldview was based on two main pillars:

1. Fire is the main substance of being, since it has no form, rest, and stability and is in harmony with the changing and moving essence of the world.

2. The world is full of opposite elements, and every thing accompanies its opposite (which is necessary for it) in the world and is always in conflict with it.

However, this world, which abounds in aggression, enjoys a firm and perfect unity under the ruling of the dynamic system of Logos. The proximity of Heraclitus’s ideas to eastern cosmology and, particularly, to Zoroastrian thoughts is so close that the influence of one on the other can be clearly witnessed. Considering historical proofs, it is easy to believe that Heraclitus was greatly inspired by Zoroaster, the Iranian prophet. The philosophy of nature was eventually crystallized into the philosophy of the well-known Greek philosopher, Aristotle, and comprised a major part of it. In the Aristotelian classification, philosophy is divided into two theoretical and practical types. The major part of the first type consists of the philosophy of nature or physics, so that what is today called first philosophy was called ‘metaphysics’ by Aristotle’s students in the sense of a part of philosophy that comes after the philosophy of nature. In this field of knowledge, Aristotle does not separate his way from that of his predecessors in terms of believing in unity. He followed the same path they did in the same direction, yet he found access to a more perfect philosophical system. The common point among natural philosophies in various schools of ancient Greece is that the founders of all of them viewed the world and being as a whole and the world as a living organism. They also believed that each of the components of nature, which are subordinate organisms of the world structure, enjoys a spirit, a soul, and intellect and takes part in the formation of the universal soul of the world. According to organismic philosophers, certain rules govern the world and its phenomena. Therefore, the rules of nature are organismic rules and pertain to the general behavior of the world organism and the behavior of components in unity with the whole. An examination of Aristotle’s works presents us with some of the features of such a worldview, which he had inherited from his predecessors.[2]

In contrast to the unitarian philosophical school, there were some philosophers who believed in plurality in the essence of the world and infinite multiplicity of worlds. Instead of a single basic element, Empedocles considered the four elements of water, fire, earth, and air as the major elements of the world and believed in the material plurality of the world. The followers of Democritus maintained that the pre-eternal matter of the world consisted of objects that were, on the one hand, in unity in their specific essence and nature and, on the other hand, different in their forms and quantities. Another group of them, people of Khalit, believed that things essentially consisted of all things and their properties and stated that the pre-eternal matter of the world consisted of things that were different in their essence and nature.[3]

Nature in Islamic philosophy

According to the theoreticians of Sadrian philosophy (the Transcendent Philosophy) and, on top of them, Sabziwari, a kind of multiplicity of the reality of being was common among Peripatetics. Another view that is based on the unity of the reality of being is attributed to eastern Iranian sages, Fahlawiyyun. The unity they had in mind was mixed with graded multiplicity.[4]

Through inspirations from Islamic teachings, Muslim thinkers accepted the eastern philosophers’ view from the very beginning and believed in a single existence originated from the Source of the Truth and Sovereignty Essence for the entire world, including all of its components, elements, inanimate bodies, vegetations, animals, and humans. The well-known philosophers of the world of Islam, Ibn Sina and Khwajah Nasir al-Din Tusi, attached great importance to nature and the study of it. They viewed the sensible world as possessing a spirit, a soul, and a mirror reflecting the Pre-eternal Truth and the Infinite Essence.[5]

In their cosmology, the sensible world is only one of the stages of being which has originated from the Exalted Truth and Infinite Essence, and then declined and turned into the sensible world. They believed that the chain of being is of certain levels and called each a world. At the top of their hierarchy is the Existence of the Exalted, which is an Infinite Being and an Essence comprising all perfectional attributes. The station of His Essence, irrespective of His Attributes, has been called the world of ‘Hahut’ (This term has been derived from huwa in ‘Arabic and has been used in the holy verse of ‘God is One’ in the Qur’an). This word means the Essence of the Creator apart from His Attributes or the Divine Essence. The Essence of the Creator including His Attributes is called the world of ‘Lahut’ (This word has been derived from Allah) or the Divine Nature. The Essence of the Almighty is the Pure Emanator. An Emanation that is directly connected to the Truth is the world of immaterial intellects, which is the cause of the material world and dominates it. This world is called ‘Jabarut’ (This word has been derived from ‘jabr’ meaning determinism. It has not appeared in the Qur’an, but we can see it in some Islamic texts) or the world of pure intellects. Lower than the world of Jabarut is the world of Malakut (This word has been derived from malik and adopted from the Qur’an’s al-An‘am chapter, verse 75: “Thus did we show Abraham the kingdom of the heavens and the earth …”) or Kingdom. This is the world of universal souls, which, although immaterial, is lower than the world of the intellect in the hierarchy. Finally, the lowest world is called the world of ‘Nasut’ (This word has been derived from nas, meaning people) or the world of nature, i.e. the collection of the heaven and earth.

Muslim philosophers hold that there are two motions in the hierarchy of being: one in the arc of descent and the other in the arc of ascent. The descent of being from the origion to the world of nature is in the arc of descent. However, they maintain that it does not stop its motion after descending from catharsis and reaching the level of the sensible matter; rather, it begins its motion in the arc of ascent. The perfection of being in the arc of ascent begins from the world of nature and ends with the world of intellects or the world of catharsis. Islamic philosophers interpret man as ‘the all-comprehensive being’, i.e. a being involving all levels and grades. According to this interpretation, earth, which is a purely material existent, turns into life germ in its process of perfection, then into a blood-clot, then into embryo, and, finally, into a human. Man first reaches the level of the imaginal world and soul, and then the level of the intellect; that is, matter reaches the world of the intellects in the arc of ascent. The world of the intellects is the same world of Jabarut, which represents the lowest level of the Almighty Truth in the arc of descent and dominates its lower worlds. Man’s process of development can also be like this. In view of Islamic philosophers, the prophets have left such levels behind and reached the world of the intellects.

In Islamic gnosis, the unity of being, including both the sensible and non-sensible worlds, is the most basic issue. Ibn ‘Arabi considers the creation and the world of existence as a theophany. In his eyes, everything in the world is the theophany of the Names and Attributes of the Truth, whose primary and superior exemplars, firstly, existed in latency in the Divine Intellect, and then God granted existence to them to represent Himself. And what is there in the sensible world is but a shadow of those supreme exemplars.

The theories of the unity of being and the sensible world as the manifestation of the Essence of the Almighty were phrased in the language of gnostics and Sufis in such a way that they had no choice but to employ different expressions and similes to explain them to their followers.

Jilani, the great gnostics of the late 8th century, compared the relation between the world and God to the one between ice and water. He said, “The world is like ice, and the Almighty God is like water, which is the origin of this ice. Ice is a borrowed word used to refer to frozen water, as its real name is water. This is because when ice is melted, we can not call it ice anymore.”[6]

‘Azzuddin Nasafi, a Sufi of the 7th century, says:

Beware that all beings, including the intellects, natures, spheres, stars, elements, and generables are on journey to reach their end and entelechy. And each has an end and an entelechy, and the end of everything is to reach man. When they reach man, the ascension of all beings comes to an end. Oh, dervish, all beings are to have their ascension. God says in the Holy Qur’an to the heaven and earth, “… Come both of you, willingly or loth. They said: We come, obedient ”(Fussilat chapter, verse 11). The end of a journey is a stage at which it comes to an end; however, entelechy is a goal that leads to the journey.

Hafiz views the entire being of the world as a light of the face of the cupbearer having fallen into the goblet of wine. ‘Abdul Rahman Jami explicitly refers to the unity of the Essence of Being and plurality of His Manifestations and Attributes.[7]

Sufi Shaykhs ask their close friends and followers to deny the theory of the unity of being. However, in certain cases, they openly disclose their ideas. In this regard, we can refer to Shaykh Mahmud Shabistari’s words in his Gulshan-i raz.[8]

In order to explain the relation of God, the world, and man, Rumi assimilates himself in one place to a harp, a flute, and chess. He says that sound is produced by the plectrum tapping on the strings of harp, and that he is like a flute, whose music comes from Him, and that the chess, itself, plays no role in having a checkmate or winning a game. Eventually, he says: “We are non-existences, and our existences, which are manifested as transient forms, are from You, Who are the Absolute Being.”[9]

Gnostics’ similes were not much pleasing for strangers to gnostic literature and expressions. They found them difficult to digest and accused gnostics of believing in immanentism.[10]

Golpinarli, the well-known commentator of Mathnawi, considers Ibn ‘Arabi’s unity of being inconsistent with the ‘foundations of Islam’ and believes that Rumi thought otherwise. He attributes another theory to him, as follows:

This belief exists in the form of extreme piety and is rooted in philosophers’ views developed through comparing Greek philosophy with Islamic ideas. Here, there is no place for creation; rather, it deals with manifestation, and since it is essentially necessary for the Absolute Being, it is permanent. This idea is consolidated on the basis of this sentence: “The body of the world is pre-eternally originated.” Among those who believe in the extreme idea of being-unity, some do not refrain from declaring that Lahut has appeared in the form of Nasut and introducing their God as an eating and drinking being. To be on the safe side, they say: This borrowed existence between you and I is a nuisance to me. I want you to swear to your being to destroy my being … There is even no need to such a careful scrutiny to conclude that this is a materialistic belief … In this way, even the creatures are the same as Him. He has manifested His Perfection in man. Or, man, who represents Him, has attained perfection. In sum, this semi-idealistic view has been explained by employing a large number of statements and expressions. If they are carefully analyzed, we will see that it is mixed with materialism and, finally, becomes one with it. There is not the least possibility that this extreme belief is consistent with the fundamental principles of Islam.[11]

Theory of the unity of being in the Transcendent Philosophy

The theory of the unity of being is being supported by specific proofs in the Transcendent Philosophy;[12] however, its roots can be traced back in the works and words of Mulla Sadra’s predecessors.[13]

After demonstrating the distinction between being and whatness, the principiality of existence, the mentally-posited nature of whatness, and the common meaning of being in its applications to various references, the Transcendent Philosophy finally arrives at the theory of the unity of the reality of being.

What is mainly criticized by the opponents of the unity of being is individual unity, and some jurisprudents even consider it as blasphemy.[14]

Such a conflict has a history in Christianity as well in the 9th century AD, John Scotus Erigena, the Irish philosopher, wrote a commentary on the Bible. There, he tried to create a close relation among God, the world of nature, and man. There were some theologians who, due to their poor understanding of metaphysical and cosmological concepts, considered any theory of this type as being related to the unity of being and, finally, called it naturalistic and blasphemous. They criticized him severely, but he stood against them and tried to demonstrate and justify his theory in conformity with the basic principles of Christianity.[15]

Through propounding the theory of the gradation of existence, which is among the consequents of the principiality of existence, Mulla Sadra succeeded in relieving the opponents from their worries to a great extent.

In his view, being, although enjoying unity, is a graded category, i.e. it is of different grades and levels. Gradation of existence enjoys priority and posteriority, as well as strength and weakness. The gradation of being is a reality. It is a specific kind of gradation, causing the distinction between two things that are of the same genus. Existence enjoys two types of plurality: vertical and horizontal. Vertical plurality pertains to the lower levels of the effect of higher levels, to strength and weakness, and to causality and effectuality. Nevertheless, horizontal plurality pertains to certain things none of which is the effect or cause of the other, and all of which are at the same level. In order to clarify this issue, he uses the example of light. The light, too, enjoys two pluralities: vertical and horizontal. The light which is radiated from the sun is very strong. However, the greater the distance, the weaker the radiation. The strong levels are the cause and source of weak levels. There is a vertical plurality among these levels, but there is a horizontal plurality in the relation of the lights radiated to the different parts of the earth. None of them is the effect of the other. However, we should keep in mind that in this example, strength and weakness are related to the existence rather than quiddity of light. This is because quiddity has no strength and weakness; what is graded here is existence.

The relation among the different worlds of the intellects, souls, and nature is of the type of graded unity; that is, a unity that enjoys vertical plurality. Each of these worlds is placed at a level prior to the other. Nevertheless, the relation among existents that are at the same level, like the relations among different people, has a kind of unity, but one that enjoys horizontal plurality. None of the different people is the cause of another.

Thus, according to Mulla Sadra, being lacks an individual unity, so that other existents could be its components. Rather, it possesses a plurality in a wide horizon. One level of this plurality has no finitude, which is the Necessary, and its other level is the locus of limited existents, which constitute the possibles. And the relation among the levels depends on strength and weakness, priority and posteriority, and causality and effectuality.

In Mulla Sadra’s view the being’s inclusion of things is not of the type of the universal’s inclusion of particulars; rather, it is of the type of extension and flow of being in the quiddity of things.[16]

Nature’s life in the Transcendent Philosophy

In Sadrian philosophy, life is one of the modes of being, and everything, whether material or immaterial, enjoys life, perception, sense, intellect, and love in proportion to its ontological capacity. One of the pillars of this philosophy is Mulla Sadra’s perception of Qur’anic verses. He tries to match the flow of life in the world of nature with the verses related to the general praise of being. He says:

All being, even inanimate ones, which are inanimate apparently but animate in reality, are perfectly aware of their Creator and Origin and praise the Truth. The Holy Qur’an also refers to the same issue and says, “… and there is not a thing but hymneth His praise, but ye understand not their praise …[17]

Mulla Sadra does not interpret this verse as addressing ‘ye’ and believes that it refers to the third person. That is, those existents are not aware of their worshipping God, although they are doing this consciously. In this regard, he reasons as follows. “This is because this kind of knowledge, i.e. knowledge of having the knowledge (which is called double knowledge in Islamic philosophy) is restricted to those beings that enjoy perfect immateriality and are separate from corporeality …”[18]

In his al-Shawahid al-rububiyyah, Mulla Sadra calls one ishraq of the 2nd mashhad as ‘On the diffusion of all existents’ lives from the Essence of the Almighty Creator …’

In his view, we can find no body, whether simple or compound, in the world, unless it possesses a soul and life. Following this issue, Mulla Sadra quotes a part of Uthulujia, which he believed belonged to Aristotle, as follows:

In this book, the first teacher, Aristotle, quotes from his master, Plato: This corporeal world consists of hyle and form. And an essence that is more meritorious than and superior to hyle grants form to it. That essence is the intellectual soul. And the intellect confirms and intensifies the soul in the form of hyle. This is done by the Primary Existence, i.e. the Necessary Being and the First being, who is, Himself, the cause of existence of all intellectual, spiritual, material, and natural beings. All sensible things owe their beauty and value to the First Agent; however, the act of creating all this beauty in the sensible world is done by the intellect and the soul.

Then he says: “The first true being is one that, firstly and before anything else, granted life to the intellect, then to the soul, and then to other natural things”.[19]

In the Transcendent Philosophy, according to the theory of the diffusion of general life in being, a hidden order is established in the depth of the world; whether natural or unnatural, and the whole world of beings turns into an integrated intelligence, will, and determination. The theory of diffusion of life in the particles of the universe is consistent with the Qur’anic concept of the general guidance of the world. According to several verses in the Holy Qur’an, all motions and evolutions occurring in nature are based on the general guidance that is given along with a kind of revelation and inspiration whose source is the Essence of the Creator. In this regard, we can refer to al-‘Alla chapter: verses 2 and 3 ( “who creath, then disposeth: who measureth, then guideth”) and Hud chapter: verse 56 ( “… Not an animal but He doth grasp it by the forelock! Lo! My Lord is on the straight path”).

Resurrection of nature in the Transcendent Philosophy

In Sadrian philosophy, following the teachings of the Qur’an, all parts and components of nature share in prosperity and salvation with man. Therefore, all natural beings, including vegetations and inanimate bodies, experience ‘revivification’ (return to the other world) like human beings. Mulla Sadra says:

All beings undergo resurrection. The return of everything is to the place where it has come from. And whosoever knows where he has come from; he will know where he is going to. Thus the revivification of bodies is towards the bodies, and that of the souls is toward the souls.[20]

Mulla Sadra holds that the group of animal souls that are at a grade beyond the grade of the sensitive soul will be revived. He interprets some Qur’anic verses such as “And when the wild beasts are herded together”, (al-Takwir chapter, verse 5) and “And the birds assembled; all were turning unto Him ”(Sad chapter, verse 19) in relation to this group of animal souls.[21]

Concerning the resurrection of the bodies, he believes that some bodies, such as luminous heavenly bodies, which are governed by spirits, are of the type of other worldly bodies and resurrected with the souls. Such bodies are in unity with the souls and accompany them.[22]

The fates of man and nature are completely intertwined in the Qur’an, and God says that the corruption and good of one is related to those of the other: “Corruption doth appear on land and sea because of (the evil) which men’s have done, …” (al-Rum chapter, verse 41).

One of the exclusive points of the Qur’an that cannot be seen in other holy books is God’s swearing to nature. Interestingly enough, the writer’s studies indicate that this issue was also unprecedented in pre-Qur’anic literature as well and is considered one of the Qur’anic innovations. The common interpretation concerning swearing to the sun, the moon, the stars, the heaven, the earth, mountains, seas, fruit trees, and the like is to attract people’s attention to the Divine verses. However, it also appears that it indicates the interrelation of the fates of man and nature. In al-Shams chapter, we observe frequent swears to the manifestations of nature, including man’s soul, to show that man can enjoy salvation through purifying his soul. At the same time, it indicates that the contamination of his soul will lead to his corruption. According to the verses in this chapter, in order to attain salvation, man should primarily view nature as possessing a shared fate with him.

Conclusion

In sum, we can refer to the following as the major issues in the Transcendent Philosophy:

1. Although enjoying levels, being is not multiple,.

2. All parts of the world of being, a part of which is the world of nature, have originated from the Absolute Origin of Being, are the various manifestations of the Truth, and reveal the Essence of the Necessary Being.

3. The levels of being begin with the origin and continue with several others. The world of nature is at the lowest level of being.

4. The plurality of levels does not do any damage to the unity of being; rather, it intensifies it.

5. Life, feelings, and intelligence are among the modes of being, and every existent has its share of them in proportion to the limit of its existence.

6. The hierarchy of levels of being, after descending and reaching the level of the world of nature, continues its intelligent motion along with a feeling of love in an upwards manner to reach the source from which it has originated.

7. In Mulla Sadra’s view, man is like a sea including the corporeal and spiritual worlds. The human soul is the end of the world of material bodies in the process of sensory perfection. It is also the beginning of the world of intellectual things in the process of rational perfection.[23]

8. According to Mulla Sadra, man’s coming from that world to this world is not the same as his return from this world to that world in terms of traversing the levels. In other words, all people are equal in their dissension from the higher world to the lower world, and no one has any superiority over the other. However, in their upward journey, at any moment, human beings ascend from a lower world to a vaster and higher world in the light of their knowledge and good deeds. At this level, they are different from each other in terms of their perfection and imperfection, vice and virtue, and honor and meanness.[24]

9. Man is the noblest of all creatures and responsible for divine vicegerency and ruling the nature. The earth is in trust with him for good and perfection, as well as for being developed and becoming a part of his Hereafter provisions. He is prohibited from corrupting or destroying it in any way. Causing disorders on earth is the same as abusing the Divine Confidence. Corruptors of earth are among the people of the left, i.e. those who have tied themselves by the chains of whims and bodily pleasures in the world prison and limited themselves to it. They will fall into the holes of nature, decline from the sky of mercy to the depth of the dungeon of nature, and stay in company of the disciples of Satan in the assembly of disappointment: “… then we shall bring them, crouching, around hell” (Maryam chapter, verse 68).[25]

10. The Transcendent Philosophy is the divine wisdom and Mulla Sadra is Sadr al-Muta’allihin (the chief of all theosophers). He was called by the same title during his life time.[26] Apparently, none of the other Islamic philosophers, such as Ibn Sina or Farabi, were called the divine philosopher. From among Greek philosophers, Mulla Sadra calls Plato, but not Aristotle, by this title in his works. It seems that the secret of divinity of this philosophy lies in its being superior and transcendent.

After attaining the truth, the divine philosopher studies the world of creation, and his view of the world is a divine one. As Mulla Sadra says, he views the creation in company with Truth.

Notes:

[1]. Popkin and Sterol, 1981, p. 14.

[2]. Aristotle, 1363 AS, Metaphysics, Translated by Mahdi Farshad, Amir Kabir Publications, p. 12 onwards, and Mahallati, Salahaddin, Nature and Environment, Letter of the Iranian Cultural Center for Sciences, no. 17, pp. 75-79.

[3]. Mullà Sadrà, al-Shawàhid al-rububiyyah, Research by Mustafa Muhaqqiq Damad, Sadra Islamic Philosophy Institute Publications, p. 175.

[4]. Manzumah-i hikmat.

[5]. Sharh al-ishàràt wal-tanbihàt, vol. 3, p. 154.

[6]. Jilani, Abdul Karim Ibn Ibrahim, al-Insàn al-kàmil, vol. 1, p. 31.

[7]. Jami, Abdul Rahman, Lawàyih, p. 50.

[8]. Shabistari, Mahmud, 1333 AS, Gulshan-i ràz, Shiraz, Ahmadi Library, p. 15.

[9]. Rumi, Mathnawi, 1st Book, couplets 602-609.

[10]. Encyclopedia of Islam, entry: Jalal al-Din Rumi.

[11]. Golpinarli, Abdulbaqi, Nathr wa sharh-i mathnaw-i sharif, Translated by Tufiq Subhani, 1st book, p. 176.

[12]. al-Shawàhid al-rububiyyah, pp. 9-20.

[13]. Ibn Sinà, al-Ta‘liqàt, p. 65.

[14]. Tabàtabà’i Yazdi, ‘Urwat al-wuthqà, vol. 1, Chapter on “Contamination of the Disbeliever” and its glosses.

[15]. Muhaqqiq Damad, Sayyed Mustafa, “Theology of Nature”, Letter of Iranian Cultural Center for Sciences, no. 17.

[16]. Mullà Sadrà, al-Shawàhid al-rububiyyah.

[17]. Bani Isra’il chapter, verse 44, and Mullà sadrà, al-Asfàr, edition, research, and introduction by Ahmad Ahmadi, Supervised by Sayyed Mohammed Khamenei, ed. Maqsud Mohammedi, Sadra Islamic Philosophy Institute, p. 181.

[18]. Ibid.

[19]. al-Shawàhid al-rububiyyah, edition, research, and introduction Sayyed Mustafa Muhaqqiq Damad, Supervised by Sayyed Mohammed Khamenei, ed. Maqsud Mohammedi, Sadra Islamic Philosophy Institute, p. 181.

[20]. al-Shawàhid al-rububiyyah, Sadra Islamic Philosophy Institute, p. 389.

[21]. Ibid.

[22]. Ibid., p. 392.

[23]. Ibid., p. 244.

[24]. Ibid., pp. 376-378.

[25]. Ibid., p. 377.

[26]. The writer’s introduction to al-Shawàhid al-rububiyyah.

 

 

 Print This Document

Save This Document on Your System