نشریه جاویدان خرد
سال هفدهم شماره 2 (پیاپی 38، پاییز و زمستان 1399)

Pascal starts strictly speaking from experience. Pascal does not simply accept the authority of reason, and he says that if reason were the ultimate authority, rationality would certainly be sufficient in itself and there would be no need for revelation, but rationality has not yet found a universally accepted truth. Pascal's logic is neither Aristotelian nor Cartesian, rather his logic is the "logic of the heart" in which the primordial human nature, that is, inner intuition, must be distinguished from reason. Where "thought" is supplanted by "belief"? Can he be called a "philosopher of religion"? Philosophers have generally identified Pascal as a rationalist, but this article proves that he is a "Fideist", and on this basis, the author examines the subject of religion and faith in the heart from Pascal's point of view.

Immanuel Swedenborg (1772-1688), the Protestant Christian mystic, was able to pass on the appearance of the material world in the light of understanding intuitive truths and to attain the intuitive facts of the real world, thereby gaining a semantic understanding of the events of the appearance world. Mystical thought of Immanuel Swedenborg forms on the basis of three fundamental principles. First, the principle of correspondence, which is the main axis of his mystical thought, is such that the hidden presence of this theory can be traced back in the rest of his ideas again. The second pillar of the mystical thought of Swedenborg is presented in the form of a different interpretation of the biblical text through the use of symbolic components which in this direction leads to the formation of an interpretive and symbolic interpretation of Bible verses, which is in the interest of the attention of the scholars and scholars. In the third pillar of his mystical thought, he addresses the various periods of humanity and how man relates to spiritual realms which is a very luminous beginning, and is the end with separation and parting, and hopes to reach light.

This essay attempts to refute Ibn Taymiyyah's view of mystical ontology in a descriptive-analytic way; since the emergence of the theory of unity of existence in Ibn Arabi's works, it was not long before Ibn Taymiyyah raised it in Islamic society, so Ibn Taymiyyah It is considered as a pamphlet of the first opponents and critics of the doctrine of the unity of existence. Halal knows and all of his criticism is based on his belief in the appearance and likeness of God. It is. Ibn Taymiyyah's critiques of the unity of existence with the correct interpretation of the themes of manifestation, objectivity and non-reality of right and creation and the plural of simile and Tanzania are rejected. He has also failed to summarize and correctly understand the doctrine of unity of existence, just as the Qur'an could not solve the incarnation of the Qur'an in a proper way.

 Detailed & precise study on Qādī Sa‘īd writings represents that every existent’s quiddity in Qādī Sa‘īd’s thought is identical to what by which it is what it is or quiddity in general (al māhiya bil ma‘na al a‘am) & quiddity as whatness has not been his target in arguments. In explanation two problems on external realization of quiddity, that are the problem of creation & the problem of distinction, he declares that every quiddity is created by simple creation of it’s creator & denies every kind of beingexistence for quiddity before creation of it’s creator, as well he names the creation of creator as the just cause of distinction of every existent, so the externality & distinction of quiddities does not need to accident of existence to become existent & also does not need to attributes to become distinct.

Sadr al-Din Dashtaki, the innovator of the theory of unified composition, believes that any true composition is unified. In this paper, based on his old and new commentaries on Quschchi’s commentary on Tajrid, we have outlined his view of the nature and characteristics of unified composition. In the next step his two arguments in favor of the unity of some compositions have been formulated, and then three objections to this theory and Dashtaki's responses have been demonstrated. Importantly he demonstrates that the whole and it’s parts can be predicated to each other, so they are unified. He also believes that form and matter are unified and form is the analytic cause of matter; and parts of a unified composition do not exist independently from the composition itself. In the final section we have examined some phrases of Bahmanyar’s Al-Tahsil, which Dashtaki has relied on in his theory and could be one of the backgrounds of this theory.

Muslim logicians have concluded in two different ways from the conditional syllogism, whose middle term is incomplete. In this paper, Kashshi's method is investigated. By examining disagreements about types, conditions of validity, conclusive moods, and the reason for the validity of this syllogism, we find that the validity of this syllogism is based on a syllogism whose middle term is complete and the components of categorical syllogism in the deduction system of conditional syllogism have made it difficult to understand clearly the structure of conditional syllogisms. In order to reveal the deduction system concealed in this method, two basic syllogisms have been identified first: the syllogism whose middle term is part of the consequent in both the premises and the syllogism whose middle term is part of the minor consequent and the major antecedent. And then we introduce the rules that are used to prove non-basic syllogisms.

Among the Chinese religious traditions, it is particularly Daoism that pays a strong attention to heavenly paradises and gives a detailed account of their features. Daoism clearly makes a difference between earthly and heavenly forms (zhenxing lit. true form) of the paradises. This paper depicts those traditional accounts that give more attention to archetypal geography and tries to illustrate common characteristics of the paradises. Nevertheless, our special concern is focused on the heavenly paradise of Kunlun. The final section of the paper is dedicated to the symbolism attached to the paradises, such as the symbols related to mountains representing Axis Mundi, and that of water that denotes their belonging to the subtle state of manifestation as containing possibilities of the gross manifestation as well as the capacity of emerging the saviors of the world.

The term of "ethos" which first used in works of the eighth to fifth centuries B.C, as habit, nature, character and deceptive character, is also found in the opinions of philosophers of that time, special in Heraclitus. But the meaning of ethos in Heraclitus, has always been a point of contention for researchers, particular in B119. By analyze its key terms, namely, ethos and daimon, we will find that "daimon" means as "the highest level of human Being", and "ethos" as "divine nature"; the nature that relates daimon, wisdom and logos. In Heraclitus opinion, in spite of the great difference between the dignity of ethos and daimon in following wisdom, which is virtue and also a part of the logos system, it is possible for man to ascend to the daimon stage on a worldly level; but the attainment of the perfect divine nature in the world is impossible.

Baḥr al-Ḥayāt ("the Ocean of Life") is a 16th century Persian text written by Muḥammad Ghawth Gwaliyari (d 1563). It is originally a translation of a yogic text known as Amṛtakuṇḍa ("Pool of Water of Life") which is now lost. Muḥammad mentions only an Arabic version named Ḥawḍ al-Ḥayāt. Baḥr is consisted of ten chapters. In its last chapter there is a kind of cosmology similar to those of the Tantric and Purānic. It promotes the doctrine of "Multiplicity in Unity" which is in accordance with Muḥammad's thoughts. Muḥammad employs Islamic proofs for Hindu ideas for instance when the text speaks of the Sound as the first manifestation of the Absolut, or the love as the vital element of creation or the primeval waters as the foundation for creation Muḥammad brings quotations from Quran and Islamic traditions as evidences. This paper tries to trace Muḥammad's narration in the Hindu literature.

In this paper, after a brief discussion of traditional metaphysics and its guiding principles, we take a look at naturalized metaphysics. There is an agreement in the practice of naturalized metaphysics that it is continuous with science. However, it turns out that this commitment is not enough to define the discipline. Having defined what naturalized metaphysics is, a concrete example drawn from the literature on the philosophy of time is examined thoroughly. The example is taken from Putnam's famous paper on the relation of science to the problem of time. In that paper, he argued that special relativity favors the static model of time, which has a counterpart in philosophy. Based on our chosen example, four kinds of approaches to naturalized metaphysics emerge. Additionally, the naturalistic aspects of these approaches are introduced. Finally, we conclude by saying that naturalized metaphysics is not radically different from the traditional one with respect to its methods. Therefore, there is a fundamental vagueness in terms of methods in multiple instances of alleged naturalized metaphysics.

Introduction S̲h̲ihāb al-Dīn Yaḥyā al-Suhrawardī known as S̲h̲ayk̲h̲-i Is̲h̲rāḳ or “Master of Illumination” (1154 – 1191 AD), believed that some of the kings and prominent personalities of ancient Iran, such as Kayūmarth, Farīdūn, Kay-khusraw, and Prophet Zoroaster, were guided to the right, People of ecstasy, and had a divine spirit (Khuvarna; Farrah;The glory Light) And they had the "light of Ṭāmes" (which annihilates the seeker, leads to a small death in the face of the great death in the great resurrection, which is for all living beings.) and calls his wisdom the “ῌīkmat-i Khusrawānī”. In the intellectual system of (Khwadja) Shams al-Din Muḥammad ῌāfiz Shīrāzī (1315-1390 AD), the names of some kings of ancient Iran such as DJams̲h̲īd and Kay-khusraw, as well as the word "Mughān" had a special place. It seems that ῌāfiz in his poems introduces this Kings as the wise men of "mad̲h̲hab-i Rindān" (religion of “one whose exterior is liable to censure, but who at heart is sound”) and its patterns   Statement of the problem Although there is no doubt about the authenticity of ῌāfiz's system of thought, the idea in which Khusrawānī's Figures play a role is one of the things that put ῌāfiz next to S̲h̲ayk̲h̲-i Is̲h̲rāḳ and because of the temporal precedence, the possibility of Enlightenment Wisdom's influence on ῌāfiz's thought. The subject of this article is to examine this section of the commonalities and differences between the wisdom of Khusrawānī S̲h̲ayk̲h̲-i Is̲h̲rāḳ and ῌāfiz Shirazi. In this study, it will be determined that "each of the ancient kings of Iran; "What role do they play in ῌāfiz's intellectual system and Suhrawardī's Enlightenment wisdom, and what are the sources of their thought in this regard?" Also, "What is the place of the thought and word "Mughān" in each of ῌāfiz's thoughts and thoughts of S̲h̲ayk̲h̲-i Is̲h̲rāḳ?" And "Is it possible for S̲h̲ayk̲h̲-i Is̲h̲rāḳ's thoughts to influence ῌāfiz or not?"   Method To identify this part of Khusrawānī's wisdom of ῌāfiz, the author first examined the names of the kings mentioned in his poems (Diwan) and identified kings such as DJams̲h̲īd, Kay-khusraw and their spiritual successor, Iskandar (Alexander the Great) who play an important role in his thought. Then, search for the history and position of their dignity in Zoroastrian Sacred Scriptual and texts (including different parts of Avesta and literature called Pahlavi) and the history and literary culture of the early Islamic period of Iran, and then search for the importance and position of each of these kings. It has been studied both in the works of S̲h̲ayk̲h̲-i Is̲h̲rāḳ and in the poems of ῌāfiz. Also, the most important paradigmatic words of the names of these kings (DJām-i DJam and DJām-i Djahān Bīn; A cup where the state of the universe and the unseen are visible, and Iskandar Mirror) in the mentioned texts and the works of these two thinkers have been studied. Finally, the word Mughān and its syntagmatic words, which were among the prominent words in ῌāfiz's intellectual system, were examined along with the reason for ῌāfiz's acceptance and Suhrawardī's reluctance to Mughān and its religion .   Research Findings Khusrawānī's wisdom of ῌāfiz is fundamentally different from Khusrawānī's wisdom of Suhrawardī due to the presence of personalities such as Djams̲h̲īd and Iskander, as well as the position he gives to Mughān in his system of thought. What Suhrawardī has said about the ancient kings of Iran in his works is more compatible with Zoroastrian sacred scriptures. He does not place the name of Djams̲h̲īd alongside the letters of other idealistic Iranian kings and Fahlavi scholars because of the sins attributed to him by religious texts. He acquits Zoroaster of his belief in duality without quoting the hymns of the Gathās and introduces him as a disseminator of ideas about Khuvarna and light. He also makes no effort to purify the Madjūs (Dualists and claimants of following Zoroaster) and, contrary to the opinion of his philosophical commentators, Shahrazūrī (13th century AD) and Ḳuṭb al-Dīn Shīrāzī (1236- 1311 AD), adheres to ancient Persian texts and despite Iskandar's enjoyment of Greek wisdom, Suhrawardī does not place him among the sages who benefited from the Khamīreh-e Azalī (eternal dough). But ῌāfiz, unlike S̲h̲ayk̲h̲-i Is̲h̲rāḳ, is adheres only to post-Islamic Iranian literature and culture and its mystical literature and in his poems, Djams̲h̲īd and Iskander have an acceptable face and in his intellectual system, Mughān are introduced as clerics of Rindān religion. Therefore, the possibility of ῌāfiz being influenced by Khusrawānī's wisdom in his system of thought is completely ruled out.

Chance is one of the topics discussed below causality and has a special place in the works of Aristotle and Darwin's theory of evolution. A closer look reveals that the meaning of chance for Darwin is the same as the meaning accepted by Aristotle. Chance is the most effective factor of change and transformation that causes modification and adaptation and as a result the evolution of living beings. Natural selection is the law that decides which creatures survive and evolve in the struggle for survival. How and why change occurs, and what are the natural causes of the vast diversity of organisms, is something that is unknown to Darwin. In fact, our ignorance of these causes is called Chance. In a descriptive-analytical way, this article seeks to examine the meaning of chance in Aristotle and Darwin and to clarify its place in natural selection and evolution.