حسین معصوم

The ultimate aim of religion is to illumination of human being in light of knowledge and proximity to God. The truth and Path constitute the kernel of religion and Sharia its shell.
To Sayyed Heydar Amoli the supreme purpose of religion is monotheism and in terms of the People of gnosis the attainment of the status of “annihilation in Allah”.
In James’s view religion deals with the most profound moment of individuals and at same time is concerned with the very center of reality. The present article is an attempt to examine the views of these two philosophers on religion and make a comparison of their ideas on mystical and religious experiences.

Although peripatetic and transcendent schools of philosophy have not dealt with epistemological problems independently and specifically as in western philosophy in modern times, each has touched them in course of its own ontological discussions and attempted to explain the way knowledge of eternal world is obtained. Ibn Sina and Mulla Sadra as preeminent representative of these two great schools have presented innovative views on the object, subject as well as nature of knowledge in accordance with their own ontology. Avicenna regarded knowledge of external world as a sort of abstraction and accordingly held 'natural universal' as extra-mentally real of which human soul endowed with internal and external faculties can obtain knowledge imparted by Active Intellect. To his own satisfaction Ibn Sina in this way explained the occurrence of objective knowledge. Mulla Sadra on the other hand with his "existentialistic" view provided different explanation for the problem. In this view, what constitutes external world is not quiddity but existence hence realization of 'natural universal' does not make sense to him. Human soul is an existence with degrees identified as its own faculties. Knowledge of external world is an abstraction but of is a higher degree of existence in different levels. To Mulla Sadar this higher degree can guarantee objectivity of knowledge of external world. This article is an attempt to make a comparative study of Ibn Sina and Mulla Sadra in respect with the possibility of objective knowledge of external world.

One of the most important issues concerned with causation is that of ultimate cause. The ultimate in philosophy is used in two senses; one means: “Something to which movement is directed”; the other means: “Something for which movement takes place.” There are three theories with regand to “What is ultimate cause?” 1. The external existence of the ultimate of act; 2. The conception of the ultimate and the outcome of act; 3. Eagerness for the ultimate and the outcome of act. One can point out: What needs the ultimate cause? Triple question: Are some volitional acts like those regarded as absurd as well as natural and divine acts based on the altimate cause?