Ali Babaei Ali Babaei

The present article critically examines three distinct interpretations regarding the foundations of Illuminationist philosophy (Ḥikmat al-Ishrāq) and the intellectual lineage of its progenitor, Sheikh al-Ishrāq (Suhrawardī). While each perspective acknowledges Suhrawardī as a reviver of earlier wisdom traditions, they tend to construct a linear historical narrative that traces his intellectual heritage back to his predecessors. Upon closer inspection, it becomes evident that Suhrawardī's relationship with this wisdom transcends mere educational transmission, defined by a direct and personal motivation sourced from an exceptional origin. At the heart of Suhrawardī's philosophical framework lies the concept of "eternal dough" (Khamireh Azali), which encapsulates a circular understanding of time and eternity, reminiscent of the intrinsic relationship between the radii of a circle and its center. This circularity within his thought facilitates the synthesis of mysticism insights and historical connections, thereby affirming the immediate relationship of mystics with the Divine and the comparative lineage of philosophers. Suhrawardī’s methodology integrates both intuitive and historical dimensions, positing that his philosophical lineage transcends mere linear progression and instead manifests as a complex network of insights emanating from a central source of wisdom. Consequently, the intuitive essence of Illuminationist philosophy necessitates this distinctive mode of knowledge acquisition, thereby distinguishing it from conventional historical interpretations. This exploration invites a reevaluation of the epistemological foundations of Suhrawardī's thought and underscores the intricate interplay between intuition and tradition in the development of Islamic philosophy. The roots of wisdom lie deep, intertwining with the branches of intuition.

Mulla Sadra has experienced three philosophical journeys: the originality of nature, the originality of existence of gradational oneness and the originality of existence of personal oneness. These three journeys are the main principles of Transcendent Theosophy, and any kind of evolution in them leads to evolutions in minor issues. Due to the systematic connection of the issues, in the issue of the reality of science and various issues related to it, there should be evolutions that are proportional to the three mentioned journeys. According to the first journey of science, the science is from the category of accident and as a result, it is an essential affair, while according to the requirements of the second and third journey, the science has coexistence with existence. This transformation leads to transformation in many minor issues and creates fundamental differences. The issues of the first journey are more influenced by the non-existential view of the realities related to the subject of science, which is referred to as the foundation of qảvm in pre-Sadrai philosophy. In this article, due to the position and opportunity, we will address and analyze some important preliminary issues, which include: the position of discussion, the essential or existential nature of science, being nature or concept of science, the definition of science, the equivocality of names or commonality of meaning of science, being contiguous or analogous of science and the type of attribution proposed in science based on three philosophical journeys.

It is recognized by scholars that Mullā Sadrā has three philosophical journeys: Fundamentality of quiddity, Fundamentality of existence on gradational unite, and Fundamentality of existence on individual Unite; With this in mind, the issue of motion, an important issue in Sadra's wisdom, has changed as a result of these three journeys; In this regard, the belief of “Natural Motion” is commensurate with the first level, the belief of “Substantial Motion” is appropriate with the second level, and the belief of “Renewal of Likes” is commensurate with the third philosophical journey of Mullā Sadrā; Each of this three journeys has its requirements and causes the evolution of related issues. Addressing the above-mentioned issues, we have implicitly emphasized the longitudinal relationship between natural motion, substantial motion, and the renewal of the like, and their adherence to the longitudinal journey of Sadrā's wisdom.

Most philosophers have regarded humans as a psychosomatic reality, considering the individual human being as a unity composed of two distinct dimensions: immaterial and material, which are interrelated. However, the manner in which these two distinct substances relate to each other has leaded humanity to numerous challenges. Hence, Descartes and Mulla Sadra, have attempted to elucidate the relationship between the mind and body. Therefore, comparing thoughts of Mulla Sadra and Descartes regarding the issue of the mind and body, along with the proposed solutions by these two philosophers, can address numerous human inquiries regarding the dual constituents forming the reality of human existence. This article, using a descriptive-analytical method, comes to conclusion that Descartes considered the pineal gland as the primary agent of the interaction between the mind and body, whereas Mulla Sadra, based on the theory of material creation and substantial motion of the mind, deemed the interaction between the mind and body feasible.

In theological sources, many symbols are used to explain the transcendent truths of existence. Among the shapes, the circle has the most use of a symbol which is important for Religious, philosophers, and mystics. However, what is refer mostly to the shape of a circle is the rotation of a circular line that begins at a point on a surface and ends at the same point; then, the most superficial and intermediate symbols of facts are explained with it. Contrary, the present article proposes a novel way of drawing a circle, and with this approach, examines some philosophical concepts. We call this drawing "Boiling Circle", because, the rays are coming out boiling from the center. We also have analyzed and introduced a unique example of a mystical-philosophical-religious Architectural building, during which a circular spring has been built. Its water comes out boiling of the center and fills the five circles within itself and twelve eyes around it. This article begins with the drawing of a boiling circle, continues with explaining the philosophical symbols of the boiling circle and boiling spring according to Islamic mysticism, and ends with comparing and expressing the differences between the symbols of the two circles.

“Simple reality” rule states the relation of its true instance, that is, God to the universe. The similarity of this relationship in transcendent wisdom and mysticism, and Mulla Sadra's stipulation of mystics' intuitive perception of the content of this rule, makes thought seek its counterparts in mysticism. The closest mystical interpretation to the meaning of the above-mentioned rule is the statement of Ibn Arabi that "The essence of God is oneness in his essence, everything in the names", as far as it can be considered as a counterpart in the mysticism of the “simple reality” rule. The meaning of this phrase is the negation of plurality by the inherent oneness of God and the justification of plurality by the effusion of the universe from divine names. This mystical belief, results such as; The attribution of all positive and negative rulings to God, unity at the same time as multiplicity at the same time as unity, and simultaneous correctness of similitude and purification. An analytical study of these cases shows that the positive content of the “simple reality” rule in in knowing God "all things" is the mystical expression that the totality of the existence of God with the existence of others does not stand, in the sense that the existence of the God as appearance is different from the universe as his manifestations.

The main headstone of Illumination wisdom is light, just as the one of the transcendent wisdom is existence. For Mulla Sadra, the existence is the same as the light in Suhravardi, idea. But there is some of existence kinds such as body that is not light in Suhravardi doctrines and he believe that only sensible light is one kind of light among all of bodes; this point of view is very powerful impediment to know that light and existence are same. So, Mulla Sadra make efforts to criticize the doctrine of Suhravardi in this subject. Mulla Sadra’s criticism is that or all of materials are light or the material light, too, is not light. This paper aims to explain that even according to the some principles of transcendent philosophy, such as relation between truth and it's thin, there is no contradiction in Suhravardi’s view. Thus, both the matter is darken and the material light is light.