جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "uthulujiyya" در نشریات گروه "فلسفه و کلام"

Uthulujiyya examines anthropology in the arc of descent and arc of ascent. In the arc of descent, it explains the rational man, soulful man, and sensual man, and in the arc of ascent, it explains the return of these human levels to their original position. The problem of this article is to examine MullaSadra's reading of the anthropology of Uthulujiyya. How are human levels in Uthulujiyya compatible with Sadrai's reading of human levels? Can we talk about the influence of MullaSadra from the anthropology of Uthulujiyya? MullaSadra has reflected the anthropology of Uthulujiyya in various works such as Isfar, Havadat al-Rabbiyyah, Mufatih al-Gheeb and Tafsir of the Holy Quran. MullaSadra's anthropology, with its Islamic-philosophical foundations, i.e., the essential movement, and the questioning of the existence and single soul, and the Qur'anic view of the issue of man, has explained the anthropology of Uthulujiyya in the stages of the arc of descent and ascent, In fact, Mulla Sadra's rereading of the anthropology of Uthulujiyya is a critical rereading based on his philosophy.and reaches different conclusions from Uthulujiyya. This article is descriptive and analytical.

"Contemplation"(Gaze) is used in contrast to "action" in the new discourse, it is used in Uthulujiyya and Enneads in cosmological and existential discussions. The problem of this writing is the analysis of the use of " contemplation " in Uthulujiyya and Enneads with an existential approach. The question is, is the use of "contemplation"(Gaze) in the Uthulujiyya and the Enneads the same and in the same sense, or is it different in the two works? How is " contemplation" expressed in these two books? The answer is, they are not different in terms of meaning; But they are different in terms of application and method of examining the subject. in the theology of Uthulujiyya, "contemplation" (Gaze) can be attributed to both God and the intellect and soul. "contemplation" is raised in the theory of grace and issuance and is connected with cosmology and theology. And in the Enneads, there is an "contemplation" in all hierarchy of life about God, intellect, soul and nature, and it has a creative aspect. The important difference between these two works is that in the rendering of the Enneads, it pays attention to "contemplation" both in the existential aspect and the epistemological aspect as opposed to "action"; and examines contemplation against action; While there is no such view in Uthulujiyya. Therefore, in this article, we will explain the term "contemplation " in Uthulujiyya and Enneads and examine its position in the cosmological system of these two works. The method of this writing is descriptive-analytical.

In Uthulujiyya, "thought" (fikr) is discussed in various ontological, theological, cosmological, and psychological contexts, while "contemplation," (nazar) often contrasted with "action" in contemporary discourse, is explored in theological discussions on cosmology and existential meaning. This paper aims to examine the ontological usage of the terms "thought" and "contemplation" in Uthulujiyya theological discourse. The central question is: How are "thought" and "contemplation" employed in relation to God and the world? Are these two concepts interchangeable? The answer posits that in Uthulujiyya theology, "thought" cannot be attributed to God (a negative approach), while "contemplation" can be ascribed to God, intellect and soul (a positive approach). "Contemplation" is discussed in the context of the theory of emanation (feiz wa soudour), intertwined with cosmology and theology. Based on this foundation, in this essay, we aim to elucidate the theological meanings of "thought" and " contemplation " in Uthulujiyya and examine their applications in the its theology and cosmology.

This question what human truth is? And what components it has, is expressed and answered in Uthulujiyya. Therefore, in this research, we want to examine the place of human in the arc of descent and the arc of ascent and answer these questions: how does human have a hierarchy in the arc of descent and ascension, and what does hierarchy in the arc of descent, and what are the ways to return in the ascending arc? The author of Uthulujiyya introduces thinking Soul as the truth of man and examines the encounter of a rational and thinking man with existence in the material world as well as the world of intellects, and it explains the purpose of the creation of the soul in the material world in the cycle of the arc of descent and ascension. He presents the three stages of human's intellectual, spiritual and sensual descent and introduces ways such as meditation and spiritual effort to purify the soul in order to return to the original position. the arc of descent into the system of grace and illuminations is from top to bottom, and the soul of human is one of its hierarchies, and the soul of human takes the way of return and ascent.

The issue of distinction between existence and quiddity has been openly raised in Islamic philosophy; but there is not agreement regarding the origins of this issue. This article claims that in Uthulujiyya, in the topic of "intelligence", we can find the traces of “distinction between existence and quiddity". In the fifth Mimer of Uthulujiyya, he equates the term "Ma howa")ماهو))what question) with "Lema howa") هو لم)) why question) in the intellect and in other beings it is considered entirely different questions. What is meant the identification of these two sort of questions: the "Ma howa")ماهو)and "Lam howa") هو لم) in Intellect? Is it possible to consider the two terms "Ma howa")ماهو)and "Lema howa") هو لم) in Uthulujiyya in the subject of reason as "existential" in which the root of the problem of distinguishing "existence and nature" can be investigated? In this article, we intend to examine this issue conceptual-extensional and creatively. In terms of concept, let's explain it through definition, and its examples in the world of reason and matter, and in terms of innovation, we should examine the problem with complete innovation. Therefore, it is necessary to first explain the terms and words used for "existence" and "essence" in the Enneads Uthulujiyya and the understanding these books have of "existence" and "essence" and then to examine "Ma howa")ماهو)and "Lema howa") هو لم) and the issue of existence and essence in the intellect in terms of concept and examples. The method of this research is descriptive-analytical.

In Uthulujiyya, " thought " and "gaze" are discussed in different topics. Every thought needs a subject of thought and also an object of thought and " theory " usually means "practice". The problem is, what is the definition and position of " thought " and " gaze " in Uthulujiyya, and are " thought " and "gaze" one and the same, or are they two separate things and related to different domains?
Therefore, in this article, we reread "thought" and " gaze "in Uthulujiyya with approach of epistemology with a descriptive-analytical method and answer the questions raised in the form of analysis.
In this article, two definitions of "thought" and the duties of the soul are presented, according to its first relation, that is, thought in relation to its place, namely, the soul and the intellect. The one is "rational understanding of the soul" and the other is "thought" which means "organization of the body"; But in the second relation, that is, thought in relation to God, thought means "movements from premises to results", and thought is deprived of God for some reasons. But the discussion of "gaze" also has the same meaning in God, intellect and soul different from the thought of the predecessors, which was opposite to "practice".
In Uthulujiyya, "thought" is examined in terms of the subject of thought and its belonging in two fields: "mind and soul" and "God". Thinking is related to both practical science and theoretical science. In this sense, in the face of tangible things and the material world, on the one hand, to get rid of it and return to the world of reason, and also to remember what was taken from the world of reason, a kind of practical exercise to plan and control the body to rid oneself of pains and dependencies. to the world of matter and freedom from it. From this point of view thought is the source of action. But thinking in the sense of "synthesizing sensations" and making general concepts has an epistemological and theoretical and is deprived of God.

Thinking " in Uthulujiyya in one way means "mind" and "awareness. in another sense means "prudence" and a kind of "controlling", the soul needs more effort and suffering to keep the busyness away from itself. “gaze” also carries the meaning of creative reasoning and action. The difference between “thought” and “gaze” is that action in thought is action and a kind of movement; But gaze is a creative act.
Therefore, “thought” and “gaze” in have both practical and current aspects; But thinking has a theoretical aspect in addition to the practical side. The origin of action and being a verb is different in both thinking, planning and organizing and controlling. In view, it is creation. Therefore, thoughts and opinions in Uthulujiyya do not coincide with each other due to their different meanings and applications in different fields, and for this reason, they are not mutually transferable.

The philosophical God is explained by philosophical concepts and terms such as ‘being, cause’, ‘pure Act’ that in addition to them, in Uthulujiyya have also spoken of ‘pure One’, ‘light’ and ‘unthinking.’ In Al-Kindi, in addition to the first two terms, ‘agency’ and ‘Truth’ have been spoken of for the concept of God. The present issue is a comparative study of the conceptualization of God with Al-Kindi and Uthulujiyya to determine the degree of Al-Kindi's independence from Uthulujiyya or to determine the degree of similarity between Al-Kindi`s thought and the text of Uthulujiyya in the conceptualization of God. Therefore, there are questions raised, about how approach these common terms, semantically are in Uthulujiyya and Al-Kind’s thought? And how adaptable that are their application for Uthulujiyya and Al-Kindi? Can Al- Kindi's thought and the book of Uthulujiyya about the concept of God be reconciled? In this article, we examine the concepts in both and analyze them, we find the concept of God in Uthulujiyya and Al-Kindi in concepts such as being, cause and One, Close to each other but in Concept of Aysa and Moeeis are different.