جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « soul » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

Mullahsadra has used the distinct views of previous philosophers for proving physical resurrection. He has considered his point of view in line with religion and surprised by those who know the day of judgment as spiritual, their express opposite opinion with doomsday bodies in the from of example body and have referred to the assembling from the graves and the blow of the soul by the angels. however, the involvement of some basic issues, such as the position of the religion, the inclusion of the differences between the world and the Hereafter, the kind of bonds of the soul with the afterlife bodies, and also the constitutive substance of the eternal bodies, has led to a dualism in his vision. Although he has distinguished the quality of hereafter life from the world, in the explanation the quality of the substance of Hellman's eternal body, he has inevitably likened the hell substance to this world. To compare the quality of the earthly body with the afterlife body, the mullah has used two terms of femininity and objectivity. In fact, he has generalized the soul to mentioned bodies. Although, he has considered his method for describing physical resurrection discursive and in conformance with religion, unlike his first claim, by including theosophical issues, he has given less importance to the mere rational aspects.

Avicenna, with the theory of the spiritual origination of the soul along with the body, was able to overcome some of the problems of the Aristotelian method in a step forward. But the question is, how did this famous philosopher and medical doctor express this matter in his philosophical natural sciences and what natural basis did he use? Another question is, if Avicenna’s explanation of soul origination in the nature of the body is consistence with his explanation of the soul origination in the body in his mind philosophy? In order to answer this question, the quality of life, nutrition and growth from the beginning of the formation of the sperm in the embryo is investigated in the Avicenna’s philosophical natural sciences. He said that the sperm becomes ready to receive the life-giving heavenly potency by using heavenly heat, and the soul potencies take responsible of planning, maintaining and growing the embryo's body through the vapor spirit. Then, after the formation of the heart in the embryo, the soul belongs to the heart and will take over the leadership of the whole body. In the second step, this article presents a solution to compatible these two explanations by using a different interpretation of Avicenna's expressions.

Gradation of existence is one of the most important philosophical principles in the transcendent philosophy of Mullā Ṣadrā, based on which we can answer this question, "what is the relationship between the three phenomena of awaking, sleep and death". This article shows that this relationship is longitudinal and gradational. Therefore, the difference between these states comes back to their commonality, which is: intensity and weakness in the concentration of the human faculties on the outer or inner aspects of the soul and the worlds corresponding to them. Awakening is the result of maximum attention of the soul's forces to the material world and external senses. When this attention weakens and the soul pays attention to the imaginal world, sleep occurs. Finally, with the complete disconnection of the soul from the material world, death –in its common use- occurs. In another sense, however, due to the substantial movement of the soul, death is a constant state that dominates other states. In a deeper view and based on the personal unity of the soul, awakening, sleep, and death are manifestations of the soul, and while maintaining a gradational relationship, they are unified with the soul and with each other.

While belonging to two different intellectual cultures and adopting different philosophical principles Suhrawardi and Descartes emphasize the role of self-knowledge in acquiring knowledge. In Descartes' philosophy, Cogito, ergo sum is considered as the basis of knowledge, from which the knowledge of other levels of Being, such as God and the world, are deduced. In Suhrawardi's philosophy, the human soul is a light of divine lights, which in the light of self-knowledge can apprehend the superior lights, the light of lights and material things. Of course, Suhrawardi and Descartes pay attention to the issue of soul and self-knowledge from two different viewpoints. Suhrawardi deals with this issue from the viewpoint of intuitive knowledge and Descartes from the rational-reasoning viewpoint. Now, according to this introduction, important issues arise: What is the difference between Suhrawardi's and Descartes' viewpoints on self-knowledge? How do the different viewpoints of these two philosophers on the issue of self-knowledge affect their views on other knowledge? This article, with a descriptive-analytical method, tries to explain how the different perceptions of Suhrawardi and Descartes about the human soul and self-knowledge cause these two philosophers to have a different view of the way to pass from self-knowledge to the knowledge of others.

Belief in the resurrection is one of the principles of Islam and its physicality is one of the religious principles. The discussion of the physical resurrection is actually the discussion of the physicality of human thoughts and actions in the resurrection. This issue has been discussed since the beginning and descent of Islam, and in addition to the Holy Quran, religious leaders from the Prophet (PBUH) to imams, religious scholars and even some Islamic philosophers have emphasized on this issue. Among the Islamic scholars, Hakim Modares Zanouzi and Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, considering that they accept the principle of physical resurrection based on the Qur'an and hadiths, as well as the principles of transcendental wisdom, but they have their own unique point of view on this issue.Hakim Zanouzi believes that the body of every human after death is related to his soul and in the resurrection the body will reach the soul and will remain with him, but Professor Javadi Amoli believes that human actions have an inner existence in the higher levels that are with him. The soul remains in harmony with that world, and the body does not turn to the soul

Some of Avicenna’s expressions about the rational soul and its relationship with intelligibles specify the union of the intelligent and the intelligible, while others clearly show the invalidity of this theory. This has caused a difference among philosophers after him regarding his final opinion on this issue. Some considered Avicenna's explanation contradictory and took a critical approach toward it, while another group has tried to resolve this contradiction. However, apparently, neither of the two groups has followed the right path. In this article, after evaluating the opinions raised, we have expressed three things: (1) the meanings of important terms in the issue of “union”; (2) the relationship between the soul and intellectual faculties; (3) the semantics of the “union” theory in Avicenna's view and, at the same time, the quality of the union of the soul and the intelligibles in the presence of the body and in separation from it. In general, it seems that Avicenna's statements about the theory of “union” don’t contradict each other. The illusion of contradiction arises from not paying attention to the different meanings of "union" in his works and not distinguishing the various positions that Avicenna expressed regarding the relationship between the soul and the intelligibles. Avicenna proves the union of the soul with the intelligibles and believes that it is similar to the union of matter and form. In his opinion, this union with a special intelligible form exists in the soul together with the body as long as the soul does not turn away from it. However, the soul, by going through the stages of perfection and separation from the body, can become an intellectual world in accordance with the objective world by instantaneously receiving all intelligibles and uniting with them.

Ibn Sina, whose extensive research on the human being from biological and existential aspects, and especially on the human soul, is unparalleled in the Islamic world, considers the comprehension of universals to be the highest level of perception and the highest stage of the human soul. The comprehension of universals, which is the key to entering the boundless sea of knowledge and truths, has sparked long-standing ambiguities and debates among philosophers. These include whether its scope is limited or unlimited, and also to what extent humans can recognize the essence and properties of universals. In light of the importance and functional role of consciousness in all spheres of life, this research has endeavored to provide an appropriate response from Ibn Sina’s perspective to two questions: (1) what is the extent of human knowledge? and (2) is the only role of definitions to distinguish between things, or do they also enable humans to recognize all their essential qualities? To reach a scholarly judgment, two groups of Ibn Sina’s statements are first presented, evaluated, and analyzed. Then, drawing on general philosophical principles that do not consider human knowledge limited, and benefiting from Ibn Sina’s philosophical foundations, especially his view on the connection between soul and body and his emphasis on the ability to develop existential capacities, it is concluded that humans have no closed boundary in the horizontal path to acquiring perfections and are capable of recognizing the essence of things. If it is objected that, in addition to ancient philosophical texts, many treatises and articles have been written on the comprehension of universals and the subject matter of this research, the answer is that what distinguishes this research from previous research is the explanation of the existential capacities of humans. If these capacities are developed, they open up new horizons around the scope of knowledge for humans and reveal the fallacy of the assumption that Ibn Sina’s statements about the limits of human knowledge are not consistent with each other.

Among the Western philosophers, Bonantore has emphasized in his theology that in order to know the nature and attributes of God, one must use the knowledge of man. To complete his philosophy and solve the problem of negative and allegorical theology, he believes that knowing creatures is the best way to know God, because they all reflect his actions and will, but knowing man, who is the supreme creature of God, plays the greatest role in knowing God. By knowing many human attributes, one can know the attributes of God. He presented the psychology of man to God in the form of knowledge in the soul and from the soul. In this article, in order to find commonalities and differentiate the intellectual and argumentative aspects such as the supremacy of man, in a descriptive-analytical way, after explaining the example of the soul in Mulla Sadra's thought and presenting it in an organized way and examining its drawbacks, to explain Franciscan allegorical theology. We provide a coherent form and explanation of the knowledge of God through the soul in his works, and then we examine the theory of the way of the soul by emphasizing the ontological, epistemological and linguistic aspects in a comparative way between Sadra's wisdom and Italian Enlightenment philosophy. And we express the commonalities and differences of this theory in the two schools, the most important of which are the use of both the law of causalitymiddle solution of verbal commonality and spitraits between people. And riphilosophers.

The upcoming research is about the occurrence of the human ego; Is the human soul old or an accident? Is the accident spiritual or physical? Opinions surrounding it are different and sometimes conflicting, and Ibn Sina's and Mulla Sadra's views have provoked long-term controversies from the supporters of the two Sinawi and Sadra schools. Ibn Sina, whose extensive research in the science of psychology, especially the human soul, is without a rival until now, claims the spiritual occurrence of the soul, and Mulla Sadra, who, after Ibn Sina, is the most interested in the issue of the soul among Muslim philosophers, considers the existence of the soul to be physical; It is worth noting that believing in immortality and the theological concepts related to it, before determining the task regarding the physicality or spirituality of the human soul, is an effort with a deficiency, because the influence of the results from the sources is inevitable; Failure to reach a definite answer in the current issue will make the researcher face many questions and philosophical dead ends in drawing how the soul is related to the body, the corruption or solitude of the soul, and ultimately the correct conception of the meaning of life. The research has tried to state which of the two theories is more consistent with the rational foundations by presenting the reasons of the two views and criticism and what makes this research different from the previous research is that it is based on evaluation and analysis and in a rational way. Finding the answer to this basic question is whether these two theories are in serious conflict with each other, or whether Sadra's view can be evaluated in line with Ibn Sina's view

Undoubtedly, in addition to being responsible for guidance, the teachings of Sharia are also discoverers of reality, and sometimes the ultimate achievements of human science are reflected in the most subtle expressions of Sharia. Therefore, different schools and sometimes opposing viewpoints claim to adapt their knowledge to the themes of the Shari'ah, the noble hadith "Knowledge is poured into the heart" is one of the traditions that exemplify different understandings of the truth of science being external to the essence, to the unification of all sciences with the essence. has taken, judging these views and evaluating their credibility requires a wider scope, but the research question is whether the final view of Islamic wisdom, which is manifested in the sublime wisdom, can be a more reasonable interpretation and a more acceptable harmony than other views. In this article, we have shown in an analytical-comparative way that, contrary to the viewpoints that sometimes consider the soul as material and dark and the truth of science as outside of the essence, and sometimes consider science as inherent to the soul, Islamic wisdom is between the material existence and the isolation of the soul. On the one hand and the acquisition and unification of sciences on the other hand, he has collected and presented a better interpretation of the interpretation of knowledge in this narrative, in the wisdom of the Supreme, the human soul is material at the beginning and it happened with the creation of the body, but gradually and with the movement of substance to The status of purgatory and total celibacy has reached, from the level of sensory perception to illusion and example, and then the understanding of intellectual generalities and above that; He attains the rank of Ain al-Iqin and observing the names and attributes of God

One of the new and famous arguments in denying the existence of God is the Divine hiddenness argument. Based on this argument that was first proposed by John Schellenberg, a contemporary Canadian philosopher, God’s hiddenness is in conflict with his attribute of perfectly loving. Considering this conflict, defenders of the hiddenness argument have denied the existence of God. By adopting a new approach to the issues of being and knowledge, Shihab al-Din Suhrawardi (1154–1191) has presented a different point of view. Suhrawardi calls God the Light of all lights. In his opinion, God’s essence is nothing but his light, and light is that which is manifest (Ẓāhir). Therefore, it is necessary that God’s essence be also manifest. Of course, Suhrawardi also has paid attention to the issue of divine hiddenness and its relationship with the human soul. In Suhrawardi's view, divine hiddenness is due to man's lack of attention to the origin of the universe (i.e. the Light of all lights) and his neglect of his own existential (luminous) aspect. Nevertheless, in Schellenberg's view, God itself is the cause of divine hiddenness, and man has less responsibility. While comparing the viewpoints of Suhrawardi and Schellenberg on divine hiddenness, this article, using a descriptive-analytical method, tries to explain how God’s essence can be hidden while it is manifest, but this hiddenness should not return to his essence.

Awareness of the soul and its definition has had a special position and has. This position is somehow reflected in experimental sciences. Aristotle and Proclus, two representatives of the greatest and most influential ancient philosophical schools, namely the philosophy of Masha and the Neoplatonic school, have paid special attention to this field and have dedicated a part of their main writings to this topic. The present article, focusing on the two main sources of the psychology among these two philosophers, aims to identify the points of commonality and difference in their views and to study the evolution and development of the subject, the definition, and what the soul is.While expressing two natural and metaphysical definitions, Aristotle considers the soul to be related to the body in the natural definition. He considers it independent of the body in the metaphysical definition and calls the soul the principle of life of a living being. By expressing natural and metaphysical definitions and a description of the soul, Proclus pursues a path close to Aristotle in his natural and metaphysical definition; But in the descriptive definition, he chooses a different path from Aristotle. He considers the truth of the soul to be self-made, self-animated, self-formed, and self-realized, and he believes that the soul is the principle of life, the cause of bodies, the reason for the existence of objects and their preservation, and in other words, the creator of their uniqueness and continuity.

The concept of death inspires many philosophical reflections about human existence which can affect the human attitude and lifestyle. As two existentialists, Mullā Sadrā and Jaspers have paid attention to the issue of death and its various dimensions. The comparative and analytical comparison of these two philosophers' opinions shows that from the religious and mystical perspective, Jaspers considers the human encounter with the issue of death, as a boundary situation, one of the most effective factors in the formation of identity and finding the real Human self. By distinguishing the three stages of human empirical being from existenz, he believes that in the transcendental level of existenz, man has the ability to understand immortality or in other words "deathlessness" and the "experience of immortality" and without having an immaterial dimension, he can experience it throughout his life. On the other hand, according to Mullā Sadrā, death and immortality have a broad and systematic conception that is derived from his philosophical and religious foundations. In Sadrā's philosophy, there is a correlation between the immateriality of the soul and its immortality; the soul has different levels of existence, which can achieve the level of immateriality through undergoing the substantial movement and passing its evolutionary levels of existence. The soul does not disappear with the destruction of the body, but, because of being immaterial, it will survive forever as eternal and immortal. He considers immortality to be a graded truth which exists both in this world (through voluntary death) and in the next world.

The primary focus of this research is the critical analysis of Avicenna's argument for demonstrating the existence of the soul in living beings. The objective is to reconstruct this argument and expose its inadequacy in proving the presence of a soul in plants. Avicenna's argument, as presented in the opening sections of the 'Book of Soul' in his al-Shifa, revolves around establishing the existence of souls in all living entities, equating it with proving the form of the species in all bodies. Avicenna asserts that the five essential characteristics—sense, voluntary movement, nutrition, growth, and reproduction—do not originate from the physical form of objects. Therefore, he posits the existence of a source, referred to as the soul, in certain bodies. This soul is considered the form of their species or similar to it, serving as the origin of these five characteristics. However, Avicenna's argument, grounded in inference through the best explanation, remains incomplete due to a lack of comprehensive exploration of all possible avenues and neglecting potential objections. The authors initially reconstruct Avicenna's argument by drawing on interpretations by Nasir al-Din al-Tūsi and Sadr al-Mutallahin. Subsequently, after highlighting the limitations of these two interpretations, they offer their independent reconstruction, considering all possible divisions. Nevertheless, this argument falls short in proving the existence of a soul in plants, primarily due to objections regarding certain invalidated physical foundations that reject temperament as the source of movement.

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.

In his book on resurrection (Risala al-Adhawiyah) Avicenna has submitted a reasoning revealing the truth of Man and entailing the core concept of the argument of Floating Man. The current research is an attempt to analyze and criticize this reasoning and examine in relation with the notable argument of Floating Man. Besides, this reasoning is compared with the argument of Floating Man in other scripts of Avicenna. In addition to that the progression of the argument is traced back in all writing of the Avicenna and finally one analysis of the argument is criticized. It was discussed that the discussed reasoning entails the critical preliminaries of the Floating Man argument but stands in the need of further development and modification. Thus, in the subsequent works of Avicenna some components are added to and some are removed from the argument through a maturational progress. The evolution of the argument of Floating Man in works of Avicenna submits proofs on his maturational advancement in knowledge from youth to the later stages of life.

Talking about the first origin of activism in Islamic philosophy has a very long history in ontological discussions and the common view is beginning action from cognition and acknowledgement of benefit. But considering his different basics in Psychologyand ontology, Mulla Sadra reveals other views compatible with his existential doubt. The current study aims at revealing the “first origin” of activism in soul based on Mulla Sadra’s thought framework using existential analysis of action issuance basics, not only the conceptual analysis. This origin which is obtained after analyzing his positions specially comparing “action issuance in soul” with “the universe creation in God Almighty” and also comparing his positions with mystics’ view, may be called inherent love or self-love in activism. The origin of activism according to this idea is the inclination of essence existential perfections statement and the love to describe them at the level of external behavior and action is nothing except the essence revealed at the level of human features and then at the level of natural behavior. This idea also causes deeper understanding of “need” and its appearance in reverse perspective and analysis.

Mullā Ṣadrā considered the soul corporeal at the stage of origination and spiritual at the stage of survival. In his view, corporal matter gradually moves through the levels of perfection in the light of its trans-substantial motion until it reaches the level of immateriality. This was considered a revolutionary theory in the history of Islamic philosophy. Given the significance of this problem, Mullā Ṣadrā’s commentators have paid particular attention to explaining the soul’s corporeal origination in Mullā Ṣadrā’s view; however, they have not always been unanimous in their ideas in this regard. Generally speaking, when explaining the meaning and nature of the corporeal origination of the soul, the commentators of Mullā Ṣadrā’s works can be divided into three groups: some of them believe that the word corporeal in this theory refers to the natural body; some others have interpreted it as something that bears a strong relation to the body, and the third group provides a general meaning for this word including both the natural body and immaterial existent. The main purpose of this study is to analyze and explain the views of these three groups and, thus, clarify the real meaning of the corporeal origination of the soul based on an analytic-descriptive method.

Ibn Arabi is one of the gnostics who has paid particular attention to Man’s corporeal resurrection and its quality in his works. When demonstrating corporeal resurrection, he mainly relies on unveiling and intuition rather than rational demonstration. However, the authors of this paper believe that Man’s posthumous corporeal dimension in purgatory and the hereafter can also be proved based on Ibn ‘Arabī’s gnostic principles. Apart from the quality of corporeal resurrection, the question is whether corporeal resurrection itself can be demonstrated relying on such principles or not. This study, which was carried out following the method of content analysis, aimed to provide a convenient response to this question and, thus, concluded that corporeal resurrection is demonstrable based on some of Ibn ‘Arabī’s principles such as Man’s distinction and determination in the process of ascent, the relationship between the macro-anthropo and micro-anthoropo, the theory of contrasting names, nobility of sensory faculties, creation of Man in God’s face, gnostic knowledge of the soul, Man’s level of comprehensiveness and moderation, and repetition in epiphany and renewal of likes. The authors also conclude that the idea that Man is originally an incorporeal existent and finally returns to his incorporeal birthplace is absurd. They argue that the human face must possess a body; hence, even if Shari’a has not spoken of corporeal resurrection, it can be proved based on gnostic principles.