The Characteristics of Effusion (fayd) and Ontological Activity in Mulla Sadra’s Philosophy

Sa'id Rahimiyan
One of the most fundamental issues which can reveal the specific identity of every philosophical system is the kind of theory which accounts for the relationship between God and other than God. In this regard, we can refer to the theory of creation in religions, theologians’ theory of creatio ex nihilio, the theory of union (ittihad) and indwelling (hulêl) in some religions and certain orders of Sufis, the theory of evolution as propounded by materialists and some Western philosophers, gnostics’ theory of self-disclosure or theophany (tajallí), and finally the theory of effusion (fayè) (in its three Peripatetic, Illuminationist, and Theosopher versions) proposed by Muslim philosophers. Among all these theories, the theory of effusion has gone through a specific process of development. It found its way into the Muslim philosophers’ terminology after an annotative translation of Plotinus’ Enneads, called Athologia (or Theology of Aristotle ascribed to the first teacher, Aristotle). Later, in the light of inspirations from profound Islamic teachings embodied in the Quranic verses and traditions, and due to Muslim philosophers’ deep insight and ontological approach to the issue (from al-Kindi to Mulla Sadra) and benefiting from gnostics’ intuitions (shuhêd) and unveilings (kashf), it went through a series of changes and finally reached its culmination in Mulla Sadra’s Transcendent Philosophy (al-hikmat al-muta‘aliyah) on the basis of the principiality of existence (aSalat al-wujêd) and unity of being (wahdat al-wujêd). The present paper undertakes to expound the characteristics of this theory in the Transcendent Philosophy on the basis of Mulla Sadra’s works and proposes certain solutions to the following problems on the basis of the theory of effusion[1]: 1. The relation between unity (wahdah) and multiplicity (kithrah); 2. The relation between immaterial (mujarrad) and material (maddí); 3. The relation between eternal (qadím) and originated (hadith); 4. The relation between immutably fixed (thabit) and changing (mutaghayyir); 5. The relation between the knowing agent (‘alim) and the known (ma‘lêm); 6. The relation between muríd and murad; 7. The relation between absolute good and evil.

To clarify the above-mentioned issues, the author has firstly discussed the characteristics of ontological activity through effusion (fayè) in brief. In the rest of the paper, he has expanded them in the eight following chapters by referring to Mulla Sadra’s ideas and works, and the impacts of the doctrine of the principiality of existence on the theories of effusion and ontological activity. A Brief Account of the Characteristics of Effusion (fayd) and Ontological Activity in Mulla Sadra’s Philosophy According to Mulla Sadra, the characteristics of effusion can be listed as follows[2]: 1. The individual desire (gharaè) or reason for effusion and creation has been the essential goodness of the Creator (the Effusing). In fact, His Essence necessitates the effusion of goodness[3]. 2. No intention other than the Essence has been involved in this effusion[4]. 3. His effusion enjoys universality, prevails the entire world, and is not restricted to the first effect[5]. 4. The effusion of existence from the Truth is from the highest to the lowest, since every cause is stronger than its own effect (the arch of descent), and then, in the evolutionary development of existents, it will return to the Highest Origin (the arch of ascent)[6]. 5. The first existent, emanated from the Effusing Origin (mufíè), is the unfolding and unconditioned existence (wujêd munbasiì wa la bisharì). Accordingly, the first intellect is one of the determinations and channels of other existents’ effusion, and causes the realization of multiplicity in the next levels in terms of both essential possibility (imkan bi’l dhat) and being necessitated by the other (wujêd bi’l ghayr)[7]. 6. There is a uniform and continuous ontological connection and hierarchy between the levels of existence and effusion[8]. 7. Effusion is accompanied by the Divine knowledge, will, and consent (the effusion of a thing through its connection)[9]. 8. The Truth’s effusion is perpetual (by virtue of the perpetuity of the Essence, essential will, and Truth’s essential love, and the impossibility of the renewal of accidental wills) [10]. 9. The effused things (mustafiè) (or a part of them) are renewed because of transsubstantial motion and the renewal of forms (tajaddud-i amthal)[11].

at the same time. there is the intermediation of the names of the Truth. What has been discussed so far was devoted to the negation of the efficient individual desire. That is why they have posed the issue of “the end of act”. Later. there is the intermediation of celestial beings (angels)[12]. and in the second place. since He is the pure good and the real Beloved. Muslim philosophers. so that the act may be qualified as being wise. including al-Kindí and the later philosophers. In the first place. and due to His being the final cause for all the world and being a goal which all things are seeking for willingly or naturally. In other words. They have also considered the Truth as the ultimate goal of the world. The reason for the perpetuity (dawam) of effusion in the world of matter is transsubstantial motion and the existence of opposition in this world. 12. Mulla Sadra maintains that the intentional agent depends on the other for its perfection (mustakmil bi’l ghayr). Everything receives the Divine unlimited effusion according to its own limited. they did not regard the absolute negation of intention as deserving the Divine knowledge and wisdom. we can say that there is an end for the world and since God is at the top of the efficient order of the world. we shall see how philosophers use this point to attribute some kind of individual desire (gharaè) to the Truth. and that other which becomes goal should be nobler and higher than the agent in cognitive agents. philosophers have regarded the world as the best possible order and in conformity with the concept of effusion[15]. explored the concepts of end and private desire and their relation to knowledge and the will. the Necessary Being is the First of firsts with respect to all things. He is the End of ends."[16] . inconsistent with demonstrating individual desire with regard to act. and emphasized its distinction from “the efficient end” and. however. Effusion takes place through intermediation (wisaìat). specific. This is not. In this regard. Mulla Sadra says: “Due to His being the efficient cause. The Individual Desire (gharad) for effusion The idea that the First Agent (fa‘il awwal) has no individual desire and external intention for effusion was first proposed by Plotinus. imperfect and composite agents.10. in other words. while stressing the negation of any goal other than the Essence for God and opposing those theologians who believed in God’s intentional activity (fa‘ilyyah bi’l qaSd). this is not consistent with the essential independence and ontological perfection of the Truth[14]. 11. He is the End of ends and at the top of the teleological order of the world. The above-mentioned issues are discussed in eight parts below: A. He believed that this quality is exclusively for limited. As every component of the world has been created for a particular goal. accepted this aspect of the theory of effusion following a critical approach. Obviously. and essential capacity and preparedness[13].

It should be noted that there is a special and absolute act for God which is emanated from Him directly. respected the Truth’s independence. and both its agent and end are the Essence of One. Therefore. Concerning this point he says: “this is not to say that His act is absolute and does not seek any goal and individual desire. rather.”[18] In this regard. More importantly. and deemed any attention to other than the absolute perfection as an imperfection. because of His essential independence. His Creation (His being the Creator) follows no individual desire and goal (save His own Essence) so that no will other than His Essence or a potential motive can be ascribed to Him[19]. it is first necessary to love its effects”. that is. and the reason for the truth of the second consideration (the Truth’s being the End of ends) is the effusion of things from Him accompanied by the existents’ enthusiasm to maintain their present perfections and obtain the lost (but possible) ones". Mulla Sadra explains the intentionality and teleological aspect of the Truth’s act while being independent as follows: God’s acts are many due to the multiplicity of things. His act which is emanated after this particular act is caused by a goal and at levels after it”.[17] As a result. Mulla Sadra has considered the Divine Essence as His only essential individual desire. As we see. if He has created anything. it has been for the sake of His love for His essence. to His own Essence. however. Muslim philosophers have ultimately tried to provide a balance between the two extremes of anthropomorphization (tashbíh) and deanthropomorphization (tanzíh) and. two answers might be provided: His creatures have individual desires and goals. He says: “what the arguments prove with respect to its not being caused by the other and not having any goal save the Essence of the Truth is relevant to the particular (absolute) act which is firstly and essentially emanated from Him. However. wisdom. In his interpretation of the issue. two questions might arise: Does the Necessary Being follow a goal in creating the world and being the source of effusion? If the answer is yes. while acknowledging the theory of effusion. in philosophers’ eyes. for “in order to love anything. This is a universal act which is unraveled in multiple things.[20] . His goal is His own sacred Essence.He also adds: “the reason for the truth of the first consideration (the Truth’s being the First of firsts) is the Essence of the Truth (which is in conformity with His being Effusing). at the same time. while regarding the will the same as love. the Divine wisdom and God’s individual desire means the creation of things and making of their perfections and leading their internal attention toward those perfections (forwarding the things to attain their essential and natural ends). “What is that goal?” On the basis of Mulla Sadra’s thorough discussion on the issue. and tactfulness. since His will is directed to the absolute perfection.

Thus His effusion is firstly and essentially infinite and there is nothing to hinder His effusion. in natural agents. the . Therefore. he regards the theologians’ solution as being meaningless and inconsistent with God’s being the cause of the world[23]. 2. however. for the realization of things in the state of possibility is impossible. Being the Most Perfect In a chapter under the rubric of “Verily the cause is stronger than its effect”. Attributes. According to the principle of homogeneity of the cause and effect. necessity. for example. temporally. The Mechanism of the Creator’s Effusion In order to better understand the ontological activity and effusion. In this way. and Act is good[21]. through resorting to the rule of “nothing comes into being unless it is necessary”. Nevertheless. the cause will naturally be stronger than effect in terms of existence and all the derived perfections. The Universality of Effusion and Receptivity (qabiliyyah) of the Effused (mustafid) One of the characteristics of effusion and ontological activity is its universality. particularly. the Necessary Being has infinite control over the infinite possible things. when the related is nothing but the relation to what it is related to. In this regard. C. Theologians had presented this solution in order to maintain the Truth’s free will and not place him in a one-sided position. it is necessary to refer to the qualities which make a distinction between the ontological agents and others. we will discuss four rules which are referred to by Mulla Sadra. and clarify the mechanism of the relation between the ontological cause and its effect: 1. or ontologically. since the assumption of the “relation and connection” is the same as the assumption of assuming a necessity relation between the related and what it is related to. if the impact of the cause on effect is to bestow existence and grant the whole entity. It is emphasized that the universality of the Creator’s effusion poses another issue: If we consider agents other than the Truth as being valid. as agents dependent upon the infinite and absolute Agent. Mulla Sadra says: evidently the cause in terms of its direction of impact and causality is essentially stronger than its effect. that is. due to His absolute goodness. Mulla Sadra considers the impact of the cause on the effect firstly as affirmation (íjab) and then making (íjad). what is effused from His Essence.B. one cannot be so certain in terms of other directions[24]. we will inevitably have to regard them as the channels of effusion. whether quantitatively. The above-mentioned explanation will be clearer through an ontological analysis of the efficient cause. in a mental analysis of the issue. Secondly. Necessity In line with the Peripatetic philosophers. Such universality and fluidity of effusion leads to the realization and subsistence of free agents[22]. or in a philosophical sense.

the essential possibility of any thing is the first condition for the receptivity of the ontological grace of the Creator. 4. and many philosophers have regarded the explanation of intermediation between God and His creation and the manner of the origination of the multiplicity form unity among the objectives of the theory of effusion. and each as possessing a particular status and specific level (like the sequence of arithmetic numbers). is regarded as necessary. though at the lowest level. The necessity of the realization of the intermediary originates from Mulla Sadra’s ontological approach to the issue of the gradation of existence and the ontological relation between the higher and lower grades of existence. mere possibility is not enough. However. and the entire world will be regarded as commensurate with a single cause. In other words. and the preparedness (isti‘dad) and possibility of these receptacles alone do not suffice for receiving immediate effusion (fayè-i bilawasiìah). for the concept of homogeneity with respect to the nature of the cause and effect. The importance of these two interrelated issues can be inferred from reflecting on the contents of the various chapters of Plotinus’ Enneads and Athologia (Theology of Aristotle). or the natural agent and mover is not so strong and evident. these are not sufficient for material receptacles (qawabil). in the relation between the strong level of existence and its weak level or in the descending of effusion to the lower . The Priority of the Nobler (taqaddum-i ashraf) According to the previously mentioned rule of the possibility of nobler (imkan-i ashraf). Here. the ontological commensurability between the two will be more evident. they should leave the lower levels behind without any possibility to disrupt the priority and posterity of each. the effusion of any grade of existence or any world. This issue has been more deeply dealt with in the Transcendent Philosophy as it regards the ontological level of existent as the criterion for priority. Effusion (fayd) and the Issue of Intermediation (wisaìat) The historians of philosophy. the first aspect of the two above-mentioned issues will be discussed and ontologically analyzed based on the Transcendent Philosophy.only priority and strength which are demonstrable are in the direction of motion and the like. 3. Likewise. and in order for them to enter a new level. an existent or an existing quiddity. which is nobler than other existents (or existents of its kind). If we consider effect as a product of cause and continuous effusion. Thus. D. The second aspect will be discussed in other sections. and according to the rule of the possibility of the nobler. Commensurability The issue of the homogeneity of the cause and effect in ontological agents is of paramount importance. it regards existents as various levels of the spectrums of existence. is emanated from the Necessary Being prior to other existents. in intermediate worlds. Because of God’s infinite perfection and generosity. the people of theology.

it is impossible to attribute the multiple acts to a single agent just because it is one[26]. there is no restriction or avoidance on the part of the Effusing Agent in granting existence to things or perfecting them.levels. These are the things and receptacles which should possess the potential for receiving the graces of the Absolute Gracious. Divine Names and Attributes as the determinants of effusion (in terms of manifestation and characteristics) 2. In philosophical texts. especially because the source of this effusion and generosity is the absolute simple One. Subsidiary factors as the characteristics of effusion[29] (temporally and spatially). The following principles provide the rational basis for the demonstration of this issue in the Transcendent Philosophy: 1. and corporeal proximity. and as we know. The intermediates of effusion are among the factors which restrict the Truth’s effusion to a particular receptacle. In order to liken the intelligible to the sensible. The goal-oriented nature of Truth’s acts. E. spatial. the intermediates of effusion are of various kinds. it plays some role in increasing the ability of the effused. The relation between immateriality and all parts of the world and time periods is the same. the existence of intermediates is necessary[25]. this issue (the unity of ultimate activity and the absolute teleological nature of being) dates back to Plotinus’ works and those of Neo-Platonists and Enneads. Thus. In other words. Existence is essentially immaterial and so is the Truth’s ontological effusion. According to Mulla Sadra. and the role of intermediates is the very spiritual and ontological proximity among farther levels of existence. rather. That is why this theory has been accepted by most Muslim philosophers. though various accounts of it have been presented according to various philosophical approaches[31]. Effusion and the Arches of Descent (nuzêl) and Ascent (Su‘êd) The issue of the origination of things from the First Origin and their later return to their origin is rooted in Quranic verses. for example: 1. one can say that as the corporeal effect is dependent on the situational. which should be related to multiple and composite existents of the lower worlds. it is necessary to have a kind of ontological and spatial proximity in ontological effusion. Immaterial things as channels of effusion 3. Here. traditions and religious texts[30]. The gradation of existence. . Their other role is to prepare the objects to receive effusion and existence[27]. without the intermediacy of multiple means and directions. the intermediate plays no role in empowering the effusing agent. the role played by intermediates can be better understood because in Mulla Sadra’s interpretation intermediates are the same characteristics and determinants of making (ja’l) and multiple directions which relate the simple and single agent to multiple receptacles[28]. 2.

2. In sum. The intensified motion and substantial perfection. This is a process which an existent can go through by means of undergoing a transformation in its very essence and substance and finally reach to what is in fact a more complete copy (cause) of itself. one might conclude that the process of the entelechy of effects in the arch of descent (al-qaws al-nuzêlí) is developed in the reverse direction of the process through which their existence. The fourth principle confirms the possibility of intensification and perfection in the very ontological degree (and not only in accidents) of certain things. The third principle holds that the lower level cannot come into existence unless the higher and nobler level has been realized. 4. Anaxagoras[34] and some others regard the instruments (alat) as the origin of appearance of multiple things. The Effusion of Multiplicity (kithrah) from Unity (wahdah) As mentioned before. nothing can step onto a higher level. Plato and his followers deem the “means and intermediates”[35] as the origin of multiplicity. unless it has left the lower ontological levels behind. his acts are goal-oriented and created for gaining perfection and entelechy. along with its specific level. If these four principles are added to the previously discussed rule. The first principle implies that although the Truth is needless. from Plotinus to his followers.3. . F. is to explain the relation between unity and multiplicity and the way of the effusion of the many from the absolute One. exactly in the same way that having leaps is impossible in nature and in order to cover a distance. Pythagoras[33] and his followers regard the hyle and potentiality (isti‘dadat) as the origin of the realization of multiplicity. The principle of the possibility of the nobler and the possibility of the lower. Ibn-Rushd has proposed certain solutions for this problem including the following: 1. it is necessary to go through all its stages. in the course of the perfection of possible things. has originated from the Necessary Being. On the other hand. posed by Mulla Sadra about the characteristics of effusion and ontological activity (the ontological cause is regarded as the final and perfect limit of the effect and the effect as the imperfect limit of its own cause). each of which is a cause for the lower level and its perfection. 3. The second principle poses the various ontological degrees. Quoting from ancient philosophers. an important problem for the Neo-Platonist philosophers. it is also impossible to go through the spiritual and ontological levels while skipping over some levels[32].

the logical and shortened version of this argument is as follows: There should be a particular and essential relation between the required cause and its effect to connect the effect to the cause (in itself). however. they have been emanated either from the same direction (jihat) or from two different ones. reject the principle of “ex unum nihilo” ( from the one does not proceed but the one) and consider it as being inconsistent with the Divine perfect Power. . If it is the case that two effects originate from a simple source. here we will only refer to the solution of this problem based on the theory of effusion[37] in the Transcendent Philosophy and pinpoint its difference from the Peripatetics’ well known solution. According to ‘Allamah Ìabaìaba’í. on the basis of the principle of homogeneity of the cause and effect expressed in the rule of ex unum nihilio (from the one does not proceed but the one)[39]. The effusion of two things from the same direction is impossible. its essence should necessarily be related to the two effects. the rule of ex unum nihilio is supported by axiomatic facts. and Mulla Sadra[38] have acknowledged the relative or absolute axiomatic nature of those facts. Gnostics. have their own approach[36] in treating the issue. Ghazalí’s criticisms in Tahafut al. proposed by Mulla Sadra in Asfar. 1) A New Argument to Prove the Rule Apart from the famous indication argument (burhan-i tanbíhí) proposed by Ibn Sína in alIsharat and expanded and completed later by his Peripatetic followers. who ascribe originality only to the “Divine Power” and evaluate every transmitted and rational principle in terms of it. since this requires the simple one to be two things to be able to produce two directions.Among theologians. This essential relation between them requires a kind of commensurability between them which is similar to unity so that there would be no difference between them except in terms of their degrees of strength and weakness. the causedness of any effect for an existing cause is the result of the essential commensurability between them. there is another argument. however. that is. for it requires the cause to be composite (not simple)[40]. their methods of explaining this principle and the way it has been used with respect to the theory of effusion by the last two philosophers are the points of discussion in different parts of this article. The second option is also impossible. Ash’arís. particularly by Muhaqqiq Ìêsí. it should have at least two directions (jihat). Thus if two things are emanated from a real simple unity. Some distinguished philosophers such as Ibn Rushd.falasifah are mainly rooted in this very inconsistency between the two above-mentioned principles (the universal power and the rule of ex unum nihilo). As we will discuss later. too. They argue that the non-effusion of multiples (instantly) from the Necessary Being is a weakness and imperfection for Him. it should be noted that concerning the issue of the cause and effect. which is in contradiction with the given condition. In sum. Ibn Sína. As an introduction.

accompanied by a motive other than the Essence to the Most Exalted. finally. and preserving his entelechies on the other. and agent-by forced should be set aside. corporeality and naturalness. the independence of the willing from what is willed for. causedness. we see that from the eight agents discussed in philosophy and theology in relation to the Most High. the finiteness or infiniteness of the will. His being an agent will inevitably be confined to three modes of activity which represent effusion and ontological activity concerning the Truth’s knowledge and will. The Transcendent Philosophy has developed the previous discussion of God’s knowledge of particulars in the Essence. we will understand why so much attention has been paid to this issue by Islamic philosophy and theology and why dozens of opinions have been put forward in this regard. Considering the above points. The points that philosophers regard as necessary in the discussion of the Truth’s will are: the objectivity or otherness of Divine Essence with the Essence (whether the will is essential or actual). agent-by-being conquered. Most philosophers maintain that considering the continuous presence . Effusion and the Divine knowledge After accepting the theory of effusion as representing the relation between God and the world. Muslim philosophers faced two basic problems: the problem of the knowledge and the will of the Necessary Being and the problem of their conformity with the theory of effusion. the gathering of passivity and act. and being an agent-by force requires being subservient to some another power. The issue has been so profoundly explored that a new discussion under the title of “the kinds of agents and the mechanism of the Truth’s activity” has started in philosophy mainly with the purpose of explaining and clarifying the attributes of the agent with respect to two features: knowledge and the will. for this requires assigning an intentional act. and athropomorphization on the one hand. the relation of the will to creation and effusion.G. origination. and. According to Muslim philosophers (Peripatetics. Illuminationists. The Divine knowledge can be classified into three stages: before creation. the relation between knowledge and power. Among the other concerns of philosophers (particularly in the Transcendent Philosophy) with respect to both of the above-mentioned issues is the purification of the Necessary from imperfection. agent-by-nature (fa‘il bi’l ìab‘)[41]. agent-by-being pushed[42]. causing multiplicity and combination. the origination of the mode of possibility in the Necessary. and after creation. with creation. If we add the objections and criticisms of theologians to the above problems. the unity or disparity between will and knowledge (the relation between the will and knowledge). The philosophers have rejected the idea that He is an agent-by-intention as well. four agents. and finally the limitation of the Divine knowledge. the origination or eternity of the will. and the followers of Transcendent Philosophy). namely. The points which most philosophers considered as being necessary to be observed concerning the Divine knowledge were related to negating attributes such as being unnecessary (za’id). since the first three require materiality. A detailed account of the issue is presented below.

Some philosophers do not basically believe in the Truth’s essential knowledge before creation. for it is this very rule which explains the mode of the inclusion of multiplicity in the universal and simple unity which contains all the perfections of multiple things[44]. The priority of the perfection of the effect in the cause (according to the rule “what bestows something cannot lack it”) 2. It goes without saying that the best way to prove the Necessary’s knowledge of other than Him is relying on His being the Origin of other than Him and their presence before Him (whether after creation or before creation). 4. and since there is no place for relation in God’s knowledge. The existence of the Simple Truth means the existence of all things. some others like Shaykh al-Ishraq have left the discussion in abeyance. Anyone who apprehends the Simple Truth apprehends all things. and since they regard knowledge as relation . they consider the container of sarmad for the Essence of the Truth to be void of knowledge. and the knowledge after creation is based on adventitious forms (Suwar al-murtasimah). The propositions which lead to the desired result are as follows: 1. 3. and where there is no trace of the effect (in the realm of the Essence). the knowledge with creation originates out of solicitude (‘inayah) in the Peripatetics’ view. The Necessary Being is the Effusing Origin of all realities and things. and its application to many issues including the problem of the knowledge of the Effusing. The Necessary Being knows His own Essence. The dominance of the Absolute and the Simple Truth over the conditioned (according to the rule “the Truth in its simplicity contains all things”). A great number of various ideas have been propounded in this regard. the last two stages are the same except that in terms of their bases. . we can claim that we have found the solution to the problem. Thus. On the other hand. The Necessary Being is the Simple Truth. Mulla Sadra’s main art in this regard is devising and expanding the rule of “the truth in its simplicity contains all things”. however. the main problem lies in God’s knowledge of other than Him at the level of Essence and before creation[43]. we can discuss unity in multiplicity in two ways: 1. since for them the criterion for the Truth’s knowledge of things is the presence of things before Him. for the knowledge of the essences of things cannot be obtained unless through the knowledge of things themselves. as mentioned before. if we succeed to prove unity in multiplicity. 5. 2.of the world before the Truth. Still. its presence is also out of question and the existence of a criterion for such knowledge is also obviated. and these two are fundamentally different from each other. Some others believe in the essential knowledge. However. they regard the adventitious forms in the Essence as its criterion.

Mulla Sadra does not see any mutual incompatibility between effusion and the Divine will. And if the Essence of the Truth in its simplicity contains all things. for Divine effusion stems from the fact that the knowledge of things as essences of causes cannot be gained unless through their cause (the Truth). it would obviously be the evidence for having their knowledge. he considers an essential meaning for the will and interprets it as a kind of joy and love which is present in the Truth to His own Essence. Thus. Since nothing is involved in the Divine act except for His . His knowledge of Essence is the same as His knowledge of things and precedes them (through essential priority). Like the knowledge of Essence. Last but absolutely not least is the point that the evidence for proving this idea comes from the problem of effusion. and also because of his being in agreement with Ibn-Sína in interpreting the Divine will as His knowledge of the best order. the love for the Essence is also essential perfection and the same as the Simple Essence of the One. and the identity of attributes with each other. 7.6. Thus the knowledge of all things is present in the Necessary Essence before the realization of other than Him. Mulla Sadra believes that the voluntary nature of act means the non-existence of compulsion and imposition from the other. because of his belief in the identity of attributes with Essence. it has been proved that the presence of things before their perfect cause is stronger than their own essential presence. In this way. and the principle of “the Truth in its simplicity…” convincingly accounts for such a presence[45]. as mentioned before. Therefore. At the same time. In the first place. if the existence or the ontological aspect of the particulars of the world (before their creation) in the simple immaterial Essence is proved. In The Transcendent Philosophy. activity and knowledge. the undifferentiated knowledge of God is demonstrated through His differentiated unveiling. such as unity. and since the Divine being of the things is higher and nobler than their determinate being. since the love for perfection (particularly infinite perfection) itself is perfection. like other ontological perfections. the essential Divine knowledge of them is even more real than their own knowledge of themselves. this differentiated knowledge of multiples is consistent with the simplicity of Divine Essence and His undifferentiated knowledge. Effusion and The Divine Will Unlike some Neo-Platonists. nothing is veiled before the Divine Essence of the Truth. since the Divine Essence is not veiled to Him. and it is this very station which fully reflects all things like a mirror. love is also identical with and a Friend of existence. H. He knows everything and. This is a realm where multiple things exist through the existence of the simple One.

which is the highest of all (through a kind of knowledge which is the highest of all). will.agent-by-compulsion. Thus He takes joy in His Essence (the strongest kind of joy). and a drop of the ocean of His effusion[46]. he relates the Truth’s present will to His essential will and. he will also take joy in what is emanated from it. 4. Mulla Sadra takes the Divine activity as the activity-by-foreknowledge in the second sense (a kind of foreknowledge prior to the act and the same as Essence)[50]. In this regard. None of Mulla Sadra’s commentators has attributed this idea to him. as discussed before.agent-by-foreknowledge.Essence and His knowledge of the best order (which is the same as His Essence). The fluidity of love. “if there were not love. In most of his works. reference has also been made to the role of effusion in the Divine active will. which is realized at a stage prior to the act and is an adventitious kind of knowledge which is other than the Essence. is of two kinds: in the first kind. Most of the commentators of Mulla Sadra also maintain that he believes in the activity-by-foreknowledge[51]. without any explanation. in turn. and the sea would not come into existence”. in Asfar and alMabda’ wa’l ma’ad. since His active joy is based on effusion and initiative and not on desire and passivity[47](as it is the case for possible things). however. the knowledge is same as the Essence. who for the first time propounded a six-fold classification of agents in terms of their knowledge and will in his works. which have also been referred to in hadíth kanz. His knowledge of the best order by itself requires the realization of that order. . Agent-by-foreknowledge. he takes recourse to the rule “to love something…”. Mulla Sadra has regarded the activity-by-selfdisclosure as being among the seven kinds of the active cause. if the Necessary Being loves His own acts and effects. the Divine will is the same as His active (‘inayí) knowledge. Sadra has preferred the activity-by-agreement[52] to others. since. it is because each of them is an effect of His effects. and affection throughout the worlds of existence is also related to this issue. He has. the earth. At this stage. If one takes joy in something. In this analysis. since He knows His Essence. it has been said. affection is also identical with existence and accompanies it everywhere[49]. 3. he states that it is the choice of the Peripatetic philosophers[53]. and in the second kind. He considers the first kind as the choice of the Peripatetic philosophers.agent-by-intention. The important point that Mulla Sadra infers from this analysis is that the whole world depends on love[48]. the knowledge of the best order. and by love he means the Necessary’s will and His taking joy in Himself and His actions. 2. however. Therefore. 5agent-by-agreement. Activity-By-Foreknowledge (fa‘iliyyah bi’l ‘inayah) and Activity By-Self-Disclosure (bi’l tajallí) in Mulla Sadra It was Mulla Sadra. In the short treatise of al-Shawahid al-rubêbiyyah.agent-by-force. the heaven. and 6. in doing so. His classification goes as follows: 1agent-by-nature. like knowledge. It is only in Kitab al-masha‘ir that.

The issue has its origins in the revealed religions and their related scriptures. no reference has been made to the cause and effect. Given the formal basis of his ideas in most of his works. written during the last years of his life[60] (his sixties). However. At this stage. rather. and some interpret this kind of activity as being the same as the second kind of activity-by-foreknowledge[56]. The evidence for the latter comes from Mulla Sadra’s speech in Mafatíh al-ghayb (keys to the unseen). such as the knowledge prior to creation and will. he propounds the activityby-self-disclosure[61]. I. however. Some authorities believe that by the activity-by-disclosure he means the activity-by-foreknowledge. some commentators regard the origin of the two kinds of unity (gradational and individual) to be the same[59]. most complex problems which has occupied man’s mind for a long time. in which there is no trace of an adventitious and acquired knowledge that is in contrast with the Essence. in which he attributes the Divine activity to self-disclosure (tajallí) and causality to the self-manifestation and determination of the existence of the One in His own manifestations[57]. And as he has stipulated in Mafátíh al-ghayb. The Continuity of Effusion and the Renewing Origination of the Effused (mustafid) The issue of the origination (hudêth) and eternity (qidam) of the world is one of the most important and. as well as other Greek philosophers who mostly . in non-revealed religions and their related myths and stories of creation. It is emphasized. and the relation between unity and multiplicity. his choice is naturally the activity-by-foreknowledge. This is the same kind of activity which he has chosen in the last chapters of Asfar. the emphasis is on self-manifestation and self-disclosure. at the same time. in line with the gnostics of Ibn ‘Arabí’s school. There are still others who consider it as being consistent with the individual unity of existence. it is an undifferentiated knowledge (‘ilm-i ijmalí) by presence characterized by being differentiated unveiling (kashf-i tafSílí). leaves no room for the activity-byforeknowledge. The author of this paper believes that Mulla Sadra. has adopted two approaches. that he prefers the second meaning of this kind of activity. Another principle devised by Mulla Sadra concerning the discussions of the relation between the cause and effect. rather. In Kitab al-masha‘ir he has presented a justifiable reason for each of the seven kinds[54]. he presents a different kind of activity. which is the gradational unity of existence. He maintains that the previous knowledge of the cause brings the effect into existence in the later stage. Moreover. and in the works of pre-Socratic philosophers. as well as his belief in the individual unity of existence and the relation between the Truth and His effects in the form of self-disclosure and tasha’un. on the basis of the development of his ontological ideas concerning unity and multiplicity (transmission from gradational unity to individual unity). known as the mystical chapters[58]. Some commentators attribute the belief in the activity-by-self.attributed it to the Sufis (and not philosophers).disclosure to Mulla Sadra[55]. and on the fact that the effects are the manifestations of Divine attributes. while preserving its positive aspects. in which the cause and effect are considered as two separate though related beings.

philosophers with various religious beliefs have different opinions and mostly prefer to support the idea of the eternity of the world. Mulla Sadra: relying on the ontological analysis of effusion (fayè) and the theory of trans-substantial motion (al-harakat al-jawhariyyah). while accepting its dependence on an agent who bestows existence to them. Mulla Sadra divides the discussion into two parts: 1. temporality. The realm of matter and corporeal things. The realm of immaterial things and pure invention (ibda‘iyyat). 2. and in the second realm. The theological consequences of the issue: Most theologians maintain that believing in the eternity of the world is in contrast with believing in the Creator of the world. such as Thomas Aquinas[62] and Kant[63]. we will discuss the solution to the problem in the Transcendent Philosophy. or a demonstration on the basis of the revealed scriptures). Antinomy of proofs: According to some of the greatest Christian and western philosophers. . In the first realm. and temporal origination are meaningless in this world). two of them claim to have demonstratively solved the problem of origination and eternity: 1. In this part. Theologians have generally adopted the argument indicating the temporal origination of the world.believed in the eternity and continuity of the world. a mystical intuition. 2. he believes in the eternity and perpetuity of effusion and the effused (for time. the issue will always remain a secret. as discussed in appendix B. after some preliminary remarks. The specific theory introduced by the Transcendent Philosophy in this regard can be called “the perpetuity of effusion (fayè) and the origination of the effused”. In this regard. Some of the reasons for the importance of this discussion are as follows: 1. Among later philosophers. However. the arguments presented in favor of either side of the discussion. 2. he believes in the eternity of the effusion (fayè) and origination of the effused. are equally rational and without incorporating an element out of the realm of logic and argumentation (whether a moral statement. Aristotle’s belief in the eternity of the world and Plato’s idea concerning the temporal origination of the world (referred to in the Timeaus) are quite well known among historians. Mír Damad: relying on the theory of atemporal origination (hudêth-i dahrí). the eternity (qidam) or origination (hudêth) of the world.

The relation of ontological causality is the same as the relation between the existence of copula and connected existence (existence by poverty) on the one hand. These issues embrace both the realm of immaterial things and the world of matter and material objects. Later. the possible and needy effect will not turn into a necessary and independent existent. Likewise. since. the effects subsist due to the subsistence of the Truth. Thus. The basis for being in need is always with it. and for quiddities. The fourth premise for proving the perpetuity of effusion explains the necessity of the perpetuity of activity for the Divine Essence and His Names and Attributes. inhibition. in the ontological cause and effusion. In other words. and not as something alien to Him. and His love . rather. and the independent existence on the other. the basis for the need to the cause (essential possibility) is not separable from the possible. the existence of the Effusing is regarded as the perfect cause of the existence of the possible effect and the separation of the effect (the relation itself) from what it is related to is the same as the annihilation of its copulative ipseity. and avarice cannot penetrate into the Divine Essence. The Perpetuity of Effusion The premises of the issue of the perpetuity of effusion in The Transcendent Philosophy are as follows: 1. It can be concluded from the second premise that the effect cannot be separated from the perfect cause. concept. rather. one should say that the existence of effect during its origination is not different from its existence during its subsistence. This principle has been introduced as the perpetuity of the Divine effusion over existents and the related evidence comes from the fact that negative attributes such as abstinence. which is restricted to the world of matter in its temporal dimension. 4. we will discuss the renewal of the effused (renewing origination). whether we consider it as being originated or eternal. Its existential perpetuity from pre-eternal to eternal does not reduce its poverty.Here. since even if the causal relation is established. and theoretical bases of effusion. in The Transcendent Philosophy. in Mulla Sadra’s words. we shall firstly deal with the perpetuity. Attributes. and not because they owe their subsistence to the Truth. as well as the method to prove it. A. In the Peripatetic philosophy. it is their essential possibility[64]. taking these three premises into consideration. and Names of the Truth. it indicates the continuity of its poverty and need. parsimony. such a basis for need (ontological imperfection and possibility by poverty) is the same as the possible ipseity. Therefore. The basis for existents’ need to a cause is their essential imperfection and connected existence. 2. 3. the ontological relation is so strong that the effects are regarded as the Concomitants. and its relation and connection to the Effusing Agent merely add to its poverty. its poverty will be compensated for by its relation to the latter[65].

and time. and basically in existence itself. and inevitable priority and posteriori of events. conflict. the fundamental difference between the immaterial and material things appears in terms of origination and eternity. Since. and the second requires temporality. the required thing is always present. and contradictory causes. contradiction. Thus the first factor requires potential possibility. at every moment. The influence of the theory of trans-substantial motion in this respect should be taken into consideration. and challenge between the things. firstly. That is why the Truth has been called “the perpetual virtue for creatures” in religious texts[66]. and perpetual origination. this problem leads to the perpetuity of the effused in the realm of material things as well[67]. and defect). continuity. not so that an existence is transformed. In material things. And it is these two very factors which set limits for the phenomena of the world of matter in terms of number. which provide the focal points of this paper.for His effects is not restricted to a specific time. B. It is here that. the first case is proved. Although the perpetuity of effusion is proved in both cases (as we saw. it is not the case. but in a way that the existence is the same as becoming and transformation. temporality. the effusing of existents is either required by the Divine Essence or it is not. since according to this theory. and secondly. annihilation. In other . The former case always comes true and the second is never the case. the world of matter is in a state of renewal . This point will be discussed in the next section. If the body and matter are viewed from this perspective. there is nothing to stop it). It is emphasized that the infinite power of the Truth. it is in a state of dressing after dressing (labs ba‘d al-labs). that is. imperfection. however. The Origination of the Effused (mustafíd) The reason for the agreement between the perpetuity of effusion and the origination of the world and lack of inconsistency between them should be sought in the essential characteristics of the material world in relation to potential possibility. given the sameness of all time periods and divisions for God and the secondary position of time in relation to the existence of the world. as emphasized by Mulla Sadra. in the Divine effusion. this possibility alone does not suffice in the material world. the renewed existence or ontological renewal. A more profound study in this regard will lead us to the issue of trans-substantial motion and the four-dimensional quiddity of things. since realization and origination in this world (unlike the world of immaterials) is not possible without matter and duration. However. trans-substantial motion. the ontological renewal of things. but also in substances and essences. and His will and foreknowledge of the best order require the creation of an infinite number of individuals and corporeal quiddities with essential possibility. And since this requirement has certainly exercised its influence over the existents. or in Mulla Sadra’s words. and both of these factors themselves depend on the specific existential degree of matter and material existence (existential weakness. existence. evolution occurs not only in qualities and accidents.

In other words. and secondly. the thing is realizable with these very four dimensions (time. And the Divine effusion is always involved in renewing the world or bestowing existence. one can say that each piece of the pieces or each level of the ontological levels of the world of matter is originated and temporally preceded by its non-existence. and temporality and gradation have become a part of its identity. . despite its perpetual existence. as some thing which is continually in a state of origination and annihilation. The past and future are the same for Him. the pre-eternal production of the Truth and this pre-eternal connection of the various parts of the world are not inconsistent with their momentary existence. Thus. bestowing and activity of the Effusing Agent occur in the realm of existence and entity. The reason lies in an essential characteristic of the body according to which time has penetrated into its every cell. in other words. length. And these entities are the same as the relation to the Maker (ja‘il). therefore. neither all components of the world . As a result. and what can be demonstrated through rational arguments is the perpetuity of the effusion of existence and not the eternity of the world (of matter). which are themselves originated. the world of matter is continuously gaining renewing and changing individuals and ipseities (huwiyyat). the specific identity of the world of matter is not preceded by temporal non-existence. nor is the temporal eternity of the existential stages of the world. And the natural universal also exists depending on the existence of its individuals. one should not conceive of the infinity of the worlds (parts) effused by the Truth as indicating the eternity of the world (as a whole)[71]. firstly. From Him all possible things are equally effused. and originated in the material things. and height)[69]. which are all originated. nor its universals (particulars and the referents of universal concept of the nature of thing) are eternal. neither the discontinuity of the Divine effusion and the origination of numerous renewing wills in Him are required. while they are renewing. supposing it had such an existence. or depends on the existence of the parts. Thus Mulla Sadra considers the Effused as being originated (hadith). And the perpetuity of effusion does not lead to the perpetuity of the effused things and the eternity of all possible things. since. the world and its infinite levels and components have always existed. it would be originated for two reasons. However. let alone be eternal[68]. nothing is subsistent in the world. such existence and entity in the immaterial things are constant and perpetual qualities. the Divine effusion is permanent and His Essence is in perfect activity. Conclusion According to Mulla Sadra. On the other hand. And the reason for the agreement between the two is the existence of things which is the same as becoming[70]. The reason for this agreement is that the taking. The individuals are also originated. universal has no independent existence from its parts. that is. according to the theory of trans-substantial motion. on the basis of trans-substantial motion. What is dependent on an originated thing is originated itself. Therefore. annihilating. Eternity and even subsistence are not among the qualities which can be brought together with the four-dimensional and renewing existence of the world. The existence of universal is either the same as the existence of its individuals.words. for. However. width.

In other words.” the infinity of the Divine knowledge and power. Considering the fact that God is the absolute good. it is the best of all effects. According to Mulla Sadra. to some extent. What is relevant to the issue of effusion is the first issue. this world is a Divine effusion. and the effusion of every single thing is commensurate to that thing like the shadow of things which have no independent existence. The role of receptivity (qabiliyyah) in effusion. 5. that is. The principle of the independence (ghina) and perfection of the Divine Essence. 8. . Moreover. and an objection to Divine justice. 3. The principle of evil as privation. 1. this issue is posed as a counter-example for the principle of commensurability. through resorting to the apriori argument (burhan-i limmí). and the impossibility of parsimony in Divine Essence. Although the world is also the shadow of existence. and origination of evil from the Effusing Origin. hence. is justifying the appearance of evil in the world. that the world enjoys the best possible order can be proved on the basis of the rule of “the possibility of the nobler (imkan-i ashraf). The principle of universality and the necessity of considering the universal ends of Truth’s acts. it can be proved that the system of the world and whatever there is represent the best possible order.J. Who is the absolute good and the origin of all good. Effusion and the Issue of Evil One of the complexities arising out of every theory that deals with the relation between the Creator and the creatures. appearance. The necessity of the Divine existence in all aspects. in his theory of effusion. The principle of the relativity of evil. 7. Mulla Sadra presents a detailed account concerning the solution of this problem. 2. 6. The principle of order in the Divine effusion. and causeness and causedness among the levels. the realization. and the impossibility of parsimony in effusion. and the gradation of ontological levels. a counterargument for the problem of Tawhíd (particularly the Unity of actions). To solve the problem in the Sadrian method. and the Divine effusion is the highest of all effusions. 4. along with a kind of essential priority and posteriori. In Asfar. it is first necessary to refer to the principles demonstrated in his theology and. or between the Origin and its inferiors. The necessary essentiality of evil in relation to the good. it represents the best order of the Origin of existents (the Truth).

it will never come into existence. evil is a quality pertaining to non-existence in both senses. non-made. evils and defects which cause damage are the results of certain conflicts which cannot be found in the world of immaterial beings. we can find evil as either absolute non-existence (such as death. as we know. If it were evil through the other. However. They are contained in the world of bodies because of the existence of . Through inductive reasoning. and is regarded as one of the non-made concomitants of the existence of material things and the world of matter. These imperfections and non-beings are the results of direct creation (ibda‘) and the descent of existence from the level of absoluteness. and. it would not be evil. Thus. it would be either evil by itself (linafsih) or evil through the other (lighayrih). it is the non-existence of essence or the non-existence of the perfection of essence[73]. in discussing effusion. we maintain that.There are certain ambiguities and objections concerning the issue of evil which Mulla Sadra has dealt with in the eighth mawqif of Asfar. otherwise. After the first rule (evil’s being non-existent in essence) it is necessary to refer to the second rule which is about evil through the other (sharr-i bi’l ghayr). Such qualities are. the reason for inferring their evil nature would be non-existence or the absence of a quality pertaining to non-existence[72]. as discussed in the section related to making (ja‘l). fatherhood…). thus it does not require a maker. the intellects. it would be because it destroys either the essence of the other or one of its perfections. for an essential quality needs no cause[74]. The evil by accident (leading to non-existence) is a relative and mentally-posited quality. evil is a quality pertaining to non-existence. brotherhood. if evil is evil by itself. it means the absence of the essence of a thing or the absence of one of its particular perfections. The third rule which explains the roots of the origination of evil in the world (the world of matter and body) indicates that the realization of the relative evils is an essential quality of the world of matter and conflict. nor is it essentially intended by the Creator. if it does no harm to others. in fact. has no creator and maker. and are only abstracted by man’s mind. that is. The residence of such phenomena (evil) is the world of matter. Thus. and not to quiddity or non-existence or a quality pertaining to non-existence. Now. making (ja‘l) is not applied to relative qualities of things (such as upperness. However. since things neither require the non-existence of their own essence nor do they require the absence of their own perfections. he defines evil as follows: According to what is said about good. and even if they require the absence of some of their own perfections. too. The conclusion is that evil is the non-existence of the other and not the existence of a cause. making and creation can merely be applied to existence and existential qualities. one cannot question its cause or source of origination. and the souls. therefore. ignorance and poverty) or some existential events leading to non-existence (such as earthquake. and the reason lies in the fact that if evil was an existential quality. evil qua evil. disease and pain). While defining good as what everything desires and by virtue of which enjoys possible perfection for itself.

In some cases in which evil is an ontological thing leading to non-existence (such as disease and pain). In this case. at the same time. These relations can be classified into the following categories: 1. we can say that evil. they are regarded as good things. it is a relative thing and. and effusion. Thus the source of this kind of evil is opposition and conflict which lead to certain transformations. is the product of effusion and the descending of existence[76].motion on the one hand. they pave the way for new effusions to recipients. the theory of effusion has achieved a profound clarity and firmness both in terms of explaining the concept of ontological activity and its ramifications. evil is in some cases equal to non-existence or a quality that pertains to non-existence (such as ignorance and poverty). The relation between unity (wahdat) and multiplicity (kithrat). it is regarded as evil in relation to other existents. as we know. It goes without saying that both motion and conflict are among the essential concomitants of this world. such a thing will not be essentially prone to making. however. evil and effusing may be sketched as follows: Opposition and conflict a Transformations a Renewing Preparedness a Origination of accidents a Perpetuity of effusion. and. what is called evil is not in contradiction with the principle of effusion or the commensurability between effusion and the effused. Summary In conclusion. therefore. The main purpose of the theory of effusion is clarifying the relation or relations between the Origin and other than Him. Mulla Sadra’s scheme for the relation between opposition. In other words. we can claim that such affairs are among the concomitants of all goodness and they are contained in the Divine decree by accident. creation. in the sense of a kind of deficiency in the ontological degree or absolute non-existence of goodness embracing all other than Him. These transformations themselves lead to the emergence of dispositions and occurrence of events. In other words. As a result. such a thing is good by itself and for itself. concerning the relation between effusion and evil. it will never be subject to making. since they cause the continuity of effusion and have other benefits for the overall order of the world. and pave the way for the perpetuity of Divine effusion[75]. and it is only accidental making that can be applied to it. If we define evil in terms of the very conflicts and oppositions leading to transformations and originations in the world of matter. and the occurrence of conflict on the other. . Therefore. In the sense of the absence of a kind of perfection that a thing might have had before. we can say that in the Transcendent Philosophy. it will be prone to essential making.

the by-products of the theory of effusion can be summarized as follows: 1. all of which are in perpetual origination based on trans-substantial motion.” the rule of “the Truth in its simplicity….possibility through poverty. The relation between immutable fixed and changing: The existence of an intermediary between pure stability (actuality) and gradual entities would be possible through acknowledging trans-substantial motion as the mode of fluid existence which is subject to making. The relation between unity and multiplicity: This relation relies on the rule of “from the one does not proceed but one. 4. 5. and 3. it was emphasized that this term is explicated through three main concepts in the Transcendent Philosophy: 1the copulative existence. 6. The relation between murad and muríd (effect). . And in this way.illuminative correlation. Along with the theory of the confinement of making to existence. 4. these three concepts provide a general perspective of ontological activity. 2. This contiguous and gradually realized existence (an existence that is the same as motion and renewal) is that very two sided entity which has the role of the relation between the permanent and the changing. The relation between the knower (‘alim) and the known (ma’lêm). and determining the unfolded existence as the first effusion. 2. the grounds are provided for believing in the eternity of effusion and the effused in immaterial things. The relation between eternal (qadím) and originated (hadith). and the eternity of effusion and origination of the effused in material things. 3. With regard to propounding a clear picture of ontological activity. without affecting its station. With respect to explaining the various relations between the Origin and the consequences of these relations. The relation between pure good and evil. 7. The relation between immaterial (mujarrad) and material (maddí). The relation between eternal and originated: This relation is explained on the basis of essential origination along with temporal origination in the continuous and renewing material entities. attributing the multiple aspects to the existential and analytical aspects in the first effusion.2. The relation between immutable fixed (thabit) and changing (mutaghayyir).” the analysis of the ontological and non-existential aspect in the first effusion. 3. The relation between immaterial and material: Such an effusion is demonstrated by resorting to the gradation of the degrees of existence and the effusion of the weaker degree from the stronger one.

two kinds of the will (essential will and active will) which provide the grounds for the occurrence of effusion can be attributed to the Truth. 6.5. The relation between the pure good and evil: Through analyzing evils and considering them as non-existence or qualities pertaining to non-existence. conflict. the commensurability between the world of possibility (the best order) and the Effusing Agent is proved. and accidental ends. . i. 7. in this way. as well as the essential and accidental making and their connection to things. the Transcendent Philosophy believes in the voluntary nature of this necessary effusion. it becomes clear that privative and relative evils do not need a maker and. effect. etc. The relation between the knowing agent (‘alim) and the known (ma‘lêm): In addition to his profound studies on God’s active knowledge by presence. His theory is related to the realm of essential knowledge and relies on basing effusion and activity on the inner sense of entity and the perfections of effects (what grants something cannot lack it). The relation between the agent of desire and the desired effect: Through analyzing the meaning of creative act.e. motion. as it emphasizes the distinctions among the active.. While believing in the necessity of these effects through other than them. and also with reference to the essential qualities of the world of matter. introducing the rule of “the Truth in its simplicity…”. concepts of simple and compound making. the rule of the owners of causes. and resorting to the Necessary’s knowledge by presence. agentive. Mulla Sadra has developed the theory of the simple undifferentiated knowledge along with differentiating unveiling in the Transcendent Philosophy. opposition. will and intisab. essential.

Ibid. 19. Vol. 282. p. Vol. Vol. 367. 8. 14. 9. 15. 279. 2. p. Vol. Ibid. 223. 3. p. Vol. 17. Ibid. Ibid. from the earth to the human world. Among the necessary topics in this regard are the explanation of developed foundations of the theory of effusion and its development in Islamic philosophical systems and responding to the objections raised against this theory in The Transcendent Philosophy. 84. Ibid. and Vol. p. 8. Ibid. 376. 2. p. 379. 9. 186. Ibid. p. 2. 8. 6. p. Mustafawi publication. Ibid. 9. Ibid. 9. 118. References are all made to various volumes of Asfar. 24. 5. p. p. p. Vol. 20. 75. 7. 220. p. 104. 8. 76. p. Vol. p. p. and Vol. Vol.Notes: 1. 149. 2. 281and Vol. 275-276. 23. p. 2. p. 13. 186. Qum) 3. 6. 321. 8. p. 16. 9. 142 and p. 333. Vol. Mulla sadra’s commentary on Sêrah Baqarah.6. 1. 2. Vol. Then he describes in detail the goal of creating different things. p. Vol. Vol. The author has discussed these issues in his Ph. Vol. (in 9 volumes. Vol. 14. Ibid. 189. 84. p. Ibid. Ibid. 21. p. 22. p. 7. 6. Vol. 11. Vol. and Vol. p. p. Vol. 3-4. 77. Vol. Ibid. Vol. p. Ibid. Vol. 2. 6. 279. 276. 6. p. 230. Vol. 18. 75. Ibid. 357. and Vol. Ibid. 2. Ibid. Ibid. 279. Vol. p. pp. 333. p. 4. 7. 7. 2. Ibid. p. 367. . p. p. 231. p. and Vol. pp.D thesis under the title of “the explanation of Plotinus’ doctrine of ontological activity and its assessment from Mulla sadra’s point of view”. 12. 10. Ibidr. 2. Ibid. 8.

According to Pythagoreans. 34. 236. and “…He produceth creation. the Ionian philosopher. then reproduceth it…” (10:4). While introducing the fact that most of the later philosophers relied on the idea that the Essence is the origin with respect to the emanation of things. Vol. 2. 39. 357. Ibid. 8. and the act is consistent with its nature. 6. see Nahayat al-hikmah. p. Ibid. rather. here we do not mean temporal priority. p. p. 27. whose act is not consistent with its nature.makkiyyah. 42. 84. Ibid. Vol. 237. who believed in hiding (kumên). pp.428 B. 8. p. “Lo! We are Allah’s and lo! unto Him we are returning” (2:156).). 3. 1648) or it is only about the Divine agents (the idea of later Muslim philosophers. He also puts great emphasis on practical purification. p. Vol. chapter 6. Evidently. For details see the author’s Tajallí wa îuhêr dar ‘irfan-e naîarí. 229 and onward. 28. 35. 192 29. 50) or about both of them (Asas al-tawhíd. 38. 242 and Asas al-tawhíd. Futêhat al. An agent from which the act is originated without its knowledge and will. 214-216 and Vol. p. Vol. the idea that all things are hidden at once in a whole) as well as the four-folded principles of the world (water. 266. 32. 176-177. Anaxagoras (500. see Ibn ‘Arabí. 84. this rule can be applied to ontological agents. For details. Pythagoras: Greek philosophers and mathematician (571-490 b. Verses such as “He is the First and the Last” (57:3). 43. and our discussion is based on this very point. 31. earth. Vol. 33. the topic of Qa‘idah al-wahid. The gnostics express the two stages in one of which the Divine manifestations are brought into being and in the other these manifestations go back to their origin as the arches of descent and ascent. 7.C. 51). There have been introduced various opinions as to whether the above rule is about the natural and sensible agents (Ibn Rushd’s opinion. Also see Nahayat al-hikmah. we mean priority in level and essence and causal and essential priority. 9. 2. Mulla sadra says that their problem is that they are not aware of the mechanism through which his knowledge of things is put in agreement with his knowledge of . p. pp. Asfar. Tahafut al-tahafat.) believed in the ontological relation between the numbers and being. air. 143. 204. “As He brought you into being. p. 30. p. Contrary to Ibn Rushd’s rudimentary opinion. Vol. so return ye (unto Him)” (7:29). Bab 374. 8. and the role played by harmony between numbers in the universe. p. Ibid. 26. Tafsír-i maba‘d al-ìabí’ah. Vol. Vol. 40.c. Ibid. number was the primary principle (arche). 9. and fire) and the involvement of nous (intellect) in the world. p. pp. 41. p. Ibid. 44. 36. Asfar. An agent without knowledge and will. Vol. 37. 3-5. Ibid.25. p. p.

Ashtiyani. p. p. 3. and Vol. (ed. 46. see ibid. 49. p. He refers to the philosophers’ inability to understand the truth of ontological issues. and these two schools on the other. 355. 2. Sabziwarí. 198-202. Zunêzí in Luma‘at-i ilahiyyah. Asfar. is that Thomas has regarded both sides as possible. in Wahdat-i wujêd az díd-i ‘arif wa hakím. 225. 238. p. in Sharh al-masha‘ir. however. in his Glosses on Lahíjí’s Sharh pp. pp. al. while the Peripatetic philosophers and theologians consider only one side of the issue as being possible. 47. Vol. Dunya). 380 and Aqa ‘Alí Hakím. one sees that the difference between Thomas’ school on the one hand. 2. 4. Usêl al-ma‘arif. Mafatíh al-ghayb. 157 and p. 160-161. 12. p. 30. pp. p 250. For example. He says that: Love means happiness because of imaging the essential presence. and Tafsīr.Mabda’ wa’l ma‘ad (Persian translation).Mabda’ wa’l ma‘ad. 225. 67 and pp. Mulla sadra. Sulayman Dunya. p. Vol. Vol. p. 3. ed. p. 58. 6. The followers of Mulla sadra have made extensive use of the theory of the Necessary’s knowledge. 526. Thomas Aquinas has regarded the issue of the origination of the world or its eternity among the issues which cannot be solved by human’s reason alone. 57. 2. and Vol. p. pp. 12) and the arguments for the impossibility of the world’s temporal eternity. 29. 48. 225. For example. Mulla sadra. and Mulla ‘Abdullah Zunêzí in Luma‘at-i ilahiyyah. p. and Hasan Zadeh Amuli. Namaì 5. See Fayè Lahíjí. Asfar. For example. See. p. p. 6. 52. 62. Lahíjí. p. and Hasan Zadeh Amuli. Asfar. 183-184. 51. 2. 292-301. 12 and also al. Mulla sadra. p. 305-306. p. 59. (al-Shawahid al-rubêbêiyyah). It is here that one should refer to the Scriptures to come up with a correct solution. 211. Khayr al-athar dar radd-i jabr wa qadar. in Sharh-i manîêmah. 45. Asfar. and Vol. 235 50. 335. Zunêzí. Sabziwarí. ibid. 6. 321. There have been raised some arguments in favor of both sides of the issue. 56. p. pp. Vol. 10. given Ibn-Sína’s arguments in favor of the impossibility of the world’s temporal origination (Isharat. For details refer to Thibault. For the issue of the knowledge after creation (other than the Essence) see ibid. 429. Mafatíh al-ghayb. Mulla sadra. 55. and alsoTaríkh al-falsafat alurubiyyah fil ‘asr al-wasiì pp. For the issue of knowledge before creation (same as the Essence). The other reason is how things can be distinguished from each other in such knowledge. Asfar. According to Dr. Vol. 158-159. Ibid. Vol. p. 54. and Vol. see Asfar. For example. 14. For example. 61. by Husaini Ardakani. 53. Majmê‘ayah rasa’il-e falsafí.Essence. 305-306. by S. 58. 60. See the footnotes of Tahafat al-falasifah. p. . p. Ch. 312. Kitab al-masha‘ir. They have taken this rule as a base according to which the issue of the Creator’s knowledge can be introduced. p. 7. in Badayi‘al-hikam. Creation…p. Vol. 379-380. pp. ibid. ibid and Ashtiyani.

Critique of Practical Reason. 1. Vol. Ibid. 67. 65. 3. 75. 73. p. 7. Vol. Ch. p. Ibid. Mulla sadra. Ibid. 66. 77. Ibid. and Vol. 348-349. p. 71. 305-306. Ibid. Among his most famous works are Critique of Pure Reason. 219. pp. Vol. 4. Mafatíh al-jinan. 7. 140. Ibid. p. 206. the great German philosopher from Konigsberg (1724-1804). He is the founder of transcendental philosophy. 19. 76. Asfar. Sharh-i hikmat-i muta‘áliyyah 69. Vol. 72. 73. 7.63. See. In his Critique of Pure Reason. . including the issue of eternity and origination. and Prolegomena. 3. 1. 7. p. 140. Vol. Mulla sadra. Ibid. p. he has a chapter titled “Antinomies”. 71. 108-115. 3. 68. 74. 64. pp. and p. was a critical philosopher in the field of epistemology and believed in the separation of Phenomenon and Neomen. p. Asfar. 7. Taken from the expressions of Ayatullah Jawadí Amulí in his. p. Ibid. 59. Vol. and presents them as the evidence for the inability of theoretical knowledge to achieve the truth of the world. Ibid. 70. Vol. pp. Vol. 71. Kant. 1. 266. Vol. p. p. Vol.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful