نشریه نسیم خرد
سال چهارم شماره 2 (پیاپی 7، پاییز و زمستان 1397)

Traditionalism is a formalist approach that recommends giving up the rational independent discussions in inferring jurisprudential precepts. Applying this method in doctrinal discussions is called “separation school”. The traditional version of separation school is completely opposing to reason and reasoning, not tolerating their accompaniment to tradition. The new version, however, dignifies reason, while introducing its achievement as human and alien to religion. The proponents of separation school present various reasons for the opposition of religion to philosophy, some of which are as follows: (1) the caliphs’ vicious goals in translating philosophy, (2) existence of some anti-philosophical traditions, and (3) the jurists’ opposition to philosophy. The present article offers a synoptic introduction of the separation school to answer the abovementioned critics. According to those answers, (a) the origin and motive for developing an idea is not its rightness or wrongness; (b) in the Shiite collections of traditions, there are just two anti-philosophical traditions, one of whom is about pseudo-philosophers and the other is about the world-seeking philosophers. There are, however, many traditions admiring the philosophical method (independent reasoning); and (c) the necessity of referring to an expert in specialized issues shows that the opposition of some great jurists with no complete familiarity with philosophy does not support the claim made by the proponents of separation.
 

What is axiomatically accepted by a philosopher is the principle of external existence and fact-itself (naf al-amr) generally rather than the truth of meanings and modes of fact-itself. This is because the subject of philosophy is ‘being’ as it is being, and it is the very “reality”. However, one can generally and absolutely regard ‘fact-itself’ as the reality in all of its orders. Thus, in definition of fact-itself, we may say – before expanding it – that it is ‘fact in general sense’. The definition of fact-itself, after expansion, can be stated as follows: “The truth of fact-itself will be the original beings (external, mental, in the domain of human’s action, secondary philosophical intelligible and nothingness) as the main home, and its dependents and corollaries (whether existential corollaries or corollaries of nothingness) as the subsidiary home (derived from the existential reality of context) in itself”. In the final step, one can even extend the fact-itself to the active intellect, divine knowledge and transcendental essence. Finally, we conclude that we must assess the conformity of anything to fact-itself in any order with itself. Similarly, we may construct the order of fact-itself among other orders and consider other orders as subordinate to it. This main order is nothing but the essence of God Almighty; that is, the existence morality, beauty and all other truths are originated from it.
 

What is addressed here is a small opening to human’s self-knowledge, the knowledge that one can definitely refer to as the root for rational and traditional knowledge. In the present article, after referring to a definition of the ‘self’ or the ‘soul’, we have dealt with the stages of perfection of the rational soul; then, we have explained the incorporeity of all orders, especially the rational incorporeity and super-rational incorporeity of the soul. Among the prominent features of this article is a reference to the unity of the soul and the body, referred to in various places in Allama Hassan-Zada’s works. Finally, the body is introduced as the lower orders of the soul. In his view, the man does not belong to one mode of existence; rather, he is a natural, ideal, rational, divine creature with an incorporeity of status, and the man’s unity is not a numeral one; rather, it is a true but shadowy unity with no limitation.

The science of logic has been the focus of attention by various intellectual schools in the course of time, and each school has evaluated it with its own principles and – naturally – has approached it in a certain way. Some schools have regarded this science as having a high status, praising and admiring it well. Another group has renounced it as if it were the evil’s trick. Thus, they have objected it much and have cast doubts on it. In this article, we have tried to investigate those questions and doubts and verify them. This may be useful for those novice leaners who begin learning logic and face such questions. Thus, we present a brief account of generalities in logic in order to give the addressees a good mentality and clarify the general framework and the limits of the issues. Then, we have dealt with objections and questions to finally mention the uses of logic. Since the addressees of this article are novice learners of logic, we have finally offered a method for better learning of logic for novice learners.

Gradation means distinction in the level of enjoying a single truth and return of ‘sharing mode’ to ‘distinctive mode’. The criterion for unity is longitudinal gradation of truth of existence, and the criterion for its distinction is the orders of existence in intensity and weakness. Transverse gradation is applied in truths with an existential rank that are equal in intensity and weakness, but are distinguished. Here, distinction means individuals’ nature and distinction. Since existence has principality, all types of distinction must return to existence. Thus, transverse gradation returns to existence, and this article explains how it returns according to various tenets of conventionality. In longitudinal gradation, the criterion for distinction is orders of existence, and in transverse gradation, the criterion is the limits of existence (in typical distinction) and individuation of existence (in individuals’ distinction). Both of them, in effect, return to existence. Of course, this criterion must be adjusted on the basis of various views on gradations, i.e. general gradation, specific gradation and specific of specific gradation, so that they are not confused.
 

The present study aims at investigating the life of high-rank philosopher and theosophist, Haj Mulla Hadi Sabzewari and explaining his scientific life. The main question of the study is as follows: “How was Mulla Hadis’s scientific activity, and how much was this mystic-philosopher’s role in advancing philosophy and theosophy?” This study deals with other subsidiary questions as well. Besides, in this study, we have stated Hakim Sabzewari’s role in explanation of Mulla Sadra’s thoughts. The research method was using library resources. And among the findings is that Hakim Sabzewari was the best-known philosopher in 13th century, and that his fame was due to his exposition of Mulla Sadra’s thoughts and ideas, clarifying its complications in a way that – as some philosophers have pointed out – no one has exposited Mulla Sadra’s thoughts better than he has. This is quite clear in his invaluable works.