‫‪%6‬‬ ‫ّ‬

‫ ‪ 72‬رات ا‪2‬ح ‪  72‬او  ر ا ‪#$‬ا ن ‪ !6‬ن‬

‫‪١‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‬
‫‪٢‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ‬

‫ﭼﮑﻴﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ« ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﺸﹼﺎﺀ ﻣﻨﺒﻌﺚ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﺎ ﻗﻮﻩ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺻﻒ »ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ‬
‫ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ« ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﺷﻬﺮﺕ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺄﻣﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﺗﻠﻔﻴﻖ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻱ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻧﻲ ﻭ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﭘﺬﻳﺮﻱ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻲ ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻧﻲ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺭﺥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺑﻄﻮﺭﻱ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻌﻀﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﮑﺎﺗﺐ ﻓﮑﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺑﻨﺤﻮ‬
‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﺎﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﻫﺸﺖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺍﺯ »ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ« ﺍﺣﺼﺎﺀ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺘﺮﺗﻴﺐ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺪﻳﻦﻗﺮﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪:‬‬
‫‪ .۱‬ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻫﺮ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻣﺸﹼﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﮐﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪55‬‬
‫‪ .۲‬ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺘﺄﺧﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻔﺲ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺪ‪‬ﻡ ﺑﺮ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .۳‬ﺻﺮﻑ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﮐﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﺷﻴﺦﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ‬

‫‪ .١‬ﺩﺍﻧﺸﺠﻮﻱ ﺩﻛﺘﺮﻱ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﺩﻳﺲ ﻓﺎﺭﺍﺑﻲ)ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﻣﺴﺌﻮﻝ(؛‬

‫‪Mahmud hedayatafza@yahoo.com‬‬
‫‪rezaeirah@yahoo.com‬‬ ‫‪ .٢‬ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺩﻳﺎﺭ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺧﻮﺍﺭﺯﻣﻲ؛‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺗﺄﻳﻴﺪ‪96/10/24 :‬‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪96/8/24 :‬‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
 ‫ﻋﺮﺿﻲ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﮑﻴﻞ ﻣﻴﺪﻫﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .۴‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺟﻤﻴﻊ ﻋﻮﺍﻟﻢ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻧﻲ ﻭ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺧﺮﺍﻱ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻨﺒﺴﻂ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻋﺮﻓﺎ‬
‫‪ .۵‬ﺣﻴﺜﻴﺘﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺜﻴﺎﺕ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺳﺘﺎﻱ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩﻱ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ‬
‫‪ .۶‬ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻧﻲ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻪﺍﻟﺮ‪‬ﺏ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ‬
‫‪ .۷‬ﺑﺴﻂ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻇﻠﻤﺎﻧﻲﺍﻟﺬﹼﺍﺕ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺗﻔﮑﻴﮏ‬
‫‪ .۸‬ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺎﺀ ﺑﺴﻴﻂ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺎﺩ ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺩﻳﻨﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺗﻔﮑﻴﮏ‬

‫ﮐﻠﻴﺪﻭﺍﮊﻩﻫﺎ‪ :‬ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻗﻮﺓ ﻣﺤﺾ‪ ،‬ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻨﺒﺴﻂ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﺜﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻪﺍﻟﺮ‪‬ﺏ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻇﻠﻤﺎﻧﻲﺍﻟﺬﹼﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺀ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ‬

‫*‬ ‫*‬ ‫*‬

‫ﻃﺮﺡ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ‬
‫ﻳﮑﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﮔﺎﻩ ﻣﺘﻀﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﮐﺘﺐ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﮐﻼﻣﻲ ﻭ ﺣﺘﻲ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻧﻲ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﮑﺎﺭ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ‪» ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ »ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ« ﻳﺎ »ﻗﻮﻩ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻞ« ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻓﮑﺮﻱ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ ﺑﺮﻣﻴﮕﺮﺩﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻲ ﺗﺒﻠﻮﺭ ﻭﻳﮋﻩﻳﻲ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ‪» ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻ« ﺑﻪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻗﻮﺓ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﻠﹼﻖ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺟﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻣﻨﺸﺄ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﻠﹼﻖ ﺻﻮﺭ‬
‫ﻧﻮﻋﻴﻪ ﻣﺤﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺫﻫﻨﻴﺘﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺭﺍﻳﺞ ﺍﺳﺎﺗﻴﺪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﻂ ﺑﻤﻌﻨﺎﻱ‬
‫‪» 56‬ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ« ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﻔﮑﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﮑﺎﺭ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻗﺎﺋﻼﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻲﺧﺒﺮﻱ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﻣﺘﻬﻢ ﻣﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪ‪ (١).‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‪ :‬ﺁﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﮑﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﮑﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ؟‬
‫ﺍﮔﺮ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﻝ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺍﺭﺩ ﺷﺎﺫ ﻭ ﻧﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻱ‬
‫ﺗﻨﻮﻉ ﻭ ﺗﮑﺜﺮ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ؟‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
 ‫ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﮐﺞﻓﻬﻤﻲ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﻨﺤﻮ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﺎﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺣﺴﺐ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺳﺎﻣﺎﻥﺑﺨﺸﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻓﮑﺮﻱ ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺏ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﻏﻴﺮ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ ﺁﻥ ﺑﮑﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ؟‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺗﻔﺤﺺ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺩﺭ ﮐﺘﺐ ﻣﺘﻔﮑﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﻼﺣﻈﻪ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﮑﺎﺗﺐ ﻭ ﻧﺤﻠﻪﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻓﮑﺮﻱ ـ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﻣﺼﻨﻔﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﻐﻮﻟﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺻﺤﻒ‬
‫ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻧﻲـ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺔ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺑﻨﺤﻮ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺣﮑﻤﺎﻱ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷﻴﺦﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺁﻣﻮﺯﻩﻫﺎﻱ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺷﻴﺦ‬
‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻓﮑﺮﻱ ﻣﻴﺮﺯﺍﻱ ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﺑﮑﺎﺭ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﻭ ﺑﺘﺒﻊ‬
‫ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻣﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺩﻳﻨﻲ ﺳﺎﻳﻪ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﭘﻴﺶﺭﻭ‪ ،‬ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ‬
‫ﺍﻃﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﮕﻮ ﻓﺮﺍﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻥ‬
‫ﺑﻌﻀﻲ ﻣﮑﺎﺗﺐ ﺣﮑﻤﻲـ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩ‪‬ﻋﺎﻱ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ »ﺍﻧﺤﺼﺎﺭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ« ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻘﹼﺎﺩﻱ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﮑﺘﺔ ﻣﻬﻢ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻨﮑﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺍﻃﻼﻗﺎﺕ »ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ«‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻲ ﺗﻄﻮﺭﺍﺕ ﺁﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﻭﻳﮋﻩﻳﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﭼﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺪﻭﺙ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺍﻃﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﭘﻴﺶﺭﻭ‪ ،‬ﻫﺸﺖ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺍﺯ »ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ« ﺑﺎ ﺍﺗﹼﮑﺎ ﺑﺮ ﮐﺘﺐ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﻭ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻧﻲ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺘﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻲ‬
‫‪57‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﻣﻴﮕﺮﺩﺩ ﺗﺎ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺗﺎﺯﻩﻳﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭﮎ ﻣﺮﺍﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﺤﺎﺏ‬
‫ﻣﮑﺎﺗﺐ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻓﮑﺮﻱ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﻣﻴﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻧﻘﺪﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﻫﻞ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺰﺭﮔﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻢ ﻭ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ ﻣﻨﺼﻔﺎﻧﻪﺗﺮ ﻭ ﻋﺎﻟﻤﺎﻧﻪﺗﺮ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .۱‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻲ‬

‫ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﺗﺤﺖﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻭﺭﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺟﺴﻢ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻲ‪،‬‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻲ ﻣﺮﮐﺐ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺟﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ‬
‫ﺟﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﻫﻮﻥ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺟﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻟﹼﺎ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﺟﺰ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺟﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ـ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﺍﺑﻦﺳﻴﻨﺎ ـ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺣﺪﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﺎﻭﻳﻦ »ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﻗﻮﻩ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻞ«)‪،(٢‬‬
‫»ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﻓﺼﻞ ﻭ ﻭﺻﻞ«)‪ (٣‬ﻭ »ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﺗﺨﻠﺨﻞ ﻭ ﺗﮑﺎﺛﻒ«)‪ (4‬ﻭ )‪ (5‬ﺗﻤﺴﮏ ﺟﺴﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻦ ﺑﻌﺪﻫﺎ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﺘﮑﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﺘﺄﺧﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺑﻦﺳﻴﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬
‫)‪(6‬‬
‫ﺑﻄﻮﺭ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺑﻮﺍﻟﺒﺮﮐﺎﺕ ﺑﻐﺪﺍﺩﻱ ﻭ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ؛‬
‫ﺍﺑﻮﺍﻟﺒﺮﮐﺎﺕ ﺑﻐﺪﺍﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﻗﻮﻩ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻳﮏ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ـ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻳﮏ ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ـ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺗﺮﮐﺐ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺷﺘﻪ)‪ (٧‬ﻭ )‪ (٨‬ﻭ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺣﮑﻤﺔﺍﻻﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﻓﺼﻞ‬
‫ﻭ ﻭﺻﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﺧﻠﻂ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﺗﹼﺼﺎﻝ« ﻭ ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﺗﺨﻠﺨﻞ ﻭ ﺗﮑﺎﺛﻒ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺪﻟﻴﻞ‬
‫)‪(٩‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺧﻲ‬ ‫ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻧﺒﺴﺎﻁ ﻭ ﺍﻧﻘﺒﺎﺽ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺟﺴﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﻣﻐﺎﻟﻄﻪ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﮑﺮﺍﻥ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻓﺎﻉ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻦ ﻭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﺩﺍﺕ ﻣﻨﺘﻘﺪﺍﻥ ‪-‬‬
‫)‪(10‬‬
‫ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯﻩ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﭘﻴﺸﺮﻓﺖ ﻋﻠﻢ ﻓﻴﺰﻳﮏ‪ ،‬ﻃﺮﺡ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪ ﺗﺮﮐﹼﺐ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺟﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻴﺖ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﻮﺭﺍﻥ »ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﮐﻪ ﻓﺮﺽ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺟﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﮐﹼﺐ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﺀ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻲﺷﮏ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺛﺒﻮﺕ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﺀ ـ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺴﻠﹼﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻴﺰﻳﮏ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ـ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻱ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ«‪ (١١).‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺗﺮﮐﹼﺐ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻳﻞ ﻭ ﺭﻗﻴﺐ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﺗﻤﻲ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺪﻋﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺟﺴﺎﻡ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮﺭ ﮐﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻳﮑﭙﺎﺭﭼﻪ ﻭ ﻣﺘﹼﺼﻞ ﻣﻴﻴﺎﺑﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻧﻴﺰ ﭼﻨﻴﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻄﻼﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺪ‪‬ﻋﺎ ﺑﻠﺤﺎﻅ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺒﻮﻝ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻃﺮﺡ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪﮔﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺻﺮﻓﹰﺎ‬
‫‪ 58‬ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻧﻪ ﮐﺸﻒ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺣﮑﻤﺎﻱ ﻣﺸﹼﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺟﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﺻﻮﺭ ﻧﻮﻋﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ‬
‫ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺤﺚ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻧﻲ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﻣﺤﻞ ﻧﺰﺍﻉ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻃﻼﻗﺎﺕ »ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻭﻟﻲ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
 ‫‪ .۲‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﺧﻮﺍﻥﺍﻟﺼﹼﻔﺎ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﮐﺘﺐ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻼ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻠﻲ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﺭﻍ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﺍﻧﺠﻤﻦ ﺍﺧﻮﺍﻥﺍﻟﺼﹼﻔﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺸﻌﺎﺑﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﻳﺎ ﻓﺮﻗﺔ ﮐﺎﻣ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻲ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﺗﻮﺍﻓﻘﺎﺕ ﻗﺎﺑﻞﺗﻮﺟ‪‬ﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻏﻠﺐ ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﮑﻲ ﻣﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺮﺩﻭﺩ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺧﻮﺍﻥﺍﻟﺼﹼﻔﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻧﺸﻌﺎﺑﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﮐﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺩﺭﺍﻥ ﺻﻔﺎ ﻭ ﭘﺎﮐﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺑﺮ ﻫﺸﺖ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺑﻌﺒﺎﺭﺗﻲ ﻧﻪ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﺳﺎﺯﻱ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ‪،‬‬
‫»ﻫﻴﻮﻻ« ﺭﺍ ﻣﺘﺄﺧﹼﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺎﻟﻖ‪ ،‬ﻋﻘﻞ ﻭ ﻧﻔﺲ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺪ‪‬ﻡ ﺑﺮ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺟﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻓﻼﮎ‪ ،‬ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﮔﺎﻧﻪ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺍﻟﻴﺪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺭﺳﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﺧﻮﺍﻥﺍﻟﺼﹼﻔﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺨﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎﺭﻳﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻭﺣﺪﺍﻧﻴﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺧﺘﺮﺍﻉ ﻭ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺴﻴﻄﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻓﻌ‪‬ﺎﻝ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ؛ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﮐﻪ ﻋﺪﺩ ﺩﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﮑﺮﺍﺭ ﻋﺪﺩ‬
‫ﻳﮏ ﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻲﺁﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﭙﺲ ﻧﻔﺲ ﮐﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻠﮑﻴﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻋﻘﻞ ﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﺁﻣﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻧﮑﻪ ﻋﺪﺩ ﺳﻪ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﻓﺰﻭﺩﻥ ﻳﮏ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﻴﮕﺮﺩﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺮﮐﺖ ﻧﻔﺲ ﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﺁﻣﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﭼﻨﺎﻧﮑﻪ ﻋﺪﺩ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻓﺰﻭﺩﻥ ﻳﮏ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻪ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺳﭙﺲ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﺯ‬
‫)‪(١٢‬‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺳﺎﻃﺖ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻭ ﻧﻔﺲ ﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﺁﻣﺪﻧﺪ ‪. ...‬‬

‫ﻧﺰﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺳﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺣﮑﻤﺎ ﮐﻪ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻴﻢ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻋﺪﺍﺩ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﻗﺴﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬
‫)‪(١٣‬‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﻣﺼﻨﻮﻋﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﮐﻞ ﻭ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻗﻴﻘﹰﺎ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻤﺎﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﻌﺮﻭﻓﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪:‬‬
‫‪59‬‬
‫ﺳﭙﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻔﺲ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻟﻲ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺷﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﺭﻱﺳﺒﺤﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻮﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻧﻔﺲ ﻭ ﻋﻘﻞ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﺮ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺖ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻱ ﺁﻣﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﺍﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﺮ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺖ ﺩﻭﺋﻲ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻔﺲ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺖ ﺳﻪﺋﻲ؛ ﻻﺟﺮﻡ ﻫﻴﻮﻟﻲ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﻧﺪﺭﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﻳﮑﻲ ﻫﻴﻮﻟﻲ ﺻﻨﺎﻋﻲ ﻭ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﻴﻮﻟﻲ ﻃﺒﺎﻋﻲ ﻭ ﺳﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﻴﻮﻟﻲ ﮐﻠﹼﻲ ﻭ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﻫﻴﻮﻟﻲ ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ‪ ،‬ﺃﻋﻨﻲ‬
‫)‪(14‬‬
‫ﺑﻲﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺷﺪ ﺍﻧﺪﺭ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺖ ﭘﻨﺠﻲ ‪. ...‬‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﺪﮐﻲ ﺗﺄﻣﻞ ﺩﺭ ﮐﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺳﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﭼﺸﻤﮕﻴﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ‬
‫)ﻫﻴﻮﻟﻲ ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ‪ ،‬ﺃﻋﻨﻲ ﺑﻲﺻﻮﺭﺕ( ﺑﺎ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻣﺸﺎﺀ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﻭﺷﻨﻲ ﻗﺎﺑﻞﻣﻼﺣﻈﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺫﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻫ ‪‬ﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻴﺮﻭﺩ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻒ( ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻣﺠﻌﻮﻝ ﻭ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻱ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎﺕ ﺟﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻱ‬
‫ﻣﺤﻘﱠﻖ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﺑﻈﺎﻫﺮ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺮﻫﻮﻥ ﻃﺒﺎﻳﻊ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﻨﺪ؛ ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﻕ ﻣﺮﺍﺩ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ‬
‫»ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ« ﺑﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﺸﺎﺀ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﭘﻴﺮﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﺷﻲﺀ‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﺎﺭﻍ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﺸﺄ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ؛ ﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺑﻤﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﻣﻨﺸﺄ‬
‫ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻣﺠﻌﻮﻝ‪ ،‬ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻔﺲ ﻭ ﻣﺤﻘﹼﻖ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺧﺎﺭﺝ )ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻱ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻣﺸﹼﺎﺋﻲ( ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‬
‫)‪(15‬‬
‫ﺗﻠﻘﹼﻲ ﻣﻴﮑﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ( ﺭﺗﺒﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻱ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ )ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ( ﻭ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﻣﺎﺩﻭﻥ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺑﻄﻮﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻔﺲ ﮐﻠﹼﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭ ﻓﻴﺾ ﺍﻟﻬﻲ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻣﻴﮑﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﻣﺸﹼﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺿﻌﻴﻔﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻱ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻲ‬
‫)‪(16‬‬
‫ﻣﺮﺯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺑﺴﺮ ﻣﻴﺒﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺟﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﺍﻣﺪﺍﺩ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺝ( ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺑﺮ ﭘﻨﺞ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺟﺴﻢ ﻓﻠﻜﻲ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﮔﺎﻧﻪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺑﻮﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻔﺲ‬
‫ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩﻱ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ‪ ،‬ﺟﺴﻢ ﻓﻠﮑﻲ ﻭ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﮔﺎﻧﻪ‬
‫)‪(١٧‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﻲ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺟﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﺸﹼﺎﺀ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻧﻤﻴﮕﺮﺩﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻌﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ‬
‫‪ 60‬ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺟﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺘﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﻭ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﺍﺧﻮﺍﻥﺍﻟﺼﹼﻔﺎ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺑﻄﻮﺭ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺗﺤﺖﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺍﻓﻠﻮﻃﻴﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﻣﺎﺩﻭﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ـ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻭ ﻧﻔﺲ ـ ﺩﺭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻇﻠﻤﺎﻧﻲ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﮐﺪﻭﺭﺕ ﺑﺸﻤﺎﺭ ﻣﻲﺁﻭﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺣﺘﻲ ﻧﻘﺺ ﻧﻔﺲ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻘﻞ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﺷﻲ ﺍﺯ‬
‫)‪(١٨‬‬
‫ﺗﺼﺮﻑ ﻭ ﺗﺪﺑﻴﺮ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﻨﺪ‪.‬‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
 ‫ﺹ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ‬
‫‪ .۳‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﺧﺎ ﹼ‬

‫ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﮑﻤﺔﺍﻻﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺣﮑﻤﺎﻱ ﻣﺸﺎﺀ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺗﺮﮐﺐ ﺟﺴﻢ‬

‫ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺟﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺑﻄﺎﻝ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺍﺗﹼﺼﺎﻝ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ ﭘﻨﺪﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ)‪ ،(١٩‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺟﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻭ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻ‬
‫ﺑﻬﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻋﺮﺿﻲ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﺟﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻱ ﻳﮏ ﺟﺰﺀ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺟﺰﺀ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻋﺮﺿﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻮﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﺍﺟﺴﺎﻡ ﺑﺎ ﺣﻔﻆ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻧﻮﻋﻴﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫)‪(٢٠‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﺪ؛ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﺟﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺻﺮﻑ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ«‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺑﻨﻈﺮ ﻣﻴﺮﺳﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺩﭼﺎﺭ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺾﮔﻮﻳﻲ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺳﺖﻛﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﺔ ﻧﮕﺎﺭﺵ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﺎﺕ ﺗﺎ ﺣﮑﻤﺔﺍﻻﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻫﺶ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﻣﺎ ﺷﺎﺭﺣﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺍﺛﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﻗﻄﺐﺍﻟﺪ‪‬ﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﺮﺍﺯﻱ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻭﺭﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻟﻔﻆ‬
‫»ﻫﻴﻮﻻ« ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﺑﺼﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﮎ ﻟﻔﻈﻲ ﺑﮑﺎﺭ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﺑﻄﺎﻝ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺣﮑﻤﺔﺍﻻﺷﺮﺍﻕ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﻧﻪ‬
‫)‪(٢١‬‬
‫ﺗﻨﺎﻗﻀﻲ ﺩﺭ ﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻱ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻫﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻓﮑﺎﺭ ﻭﻱ‪.‬‬
‫ﻗﻄﺐﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﺮﺍﺯﻱ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﮑﻪ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻅ »ﺟﺴﻢ« ﻭ »ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ« ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﻼ‬
‫ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﺘﺮﮎ ﻟﻔﻈﻲ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻭ ﻣﻴﮕﻮﻳﺪ‪ :‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺟﺴﻤﻲ ـ ﻣﺜ ﹰ‬
‫ﻗﻄﻌﻪﻳﻲ ﻣﻮﻡ ـ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﻼﺣﻈﻪ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻳﮑﻲ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﮑﻞ ﻣﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﮐﻢ ﻭ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ ﻧﻤﻴﮕﺮﺩﺩ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ﮐﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﻃﺮﺍﻑ ﻣﻮﻡ ﻭ ﻋﺎﺭﺽ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﮑﻞ ﻣﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻴﮑﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﺴﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﺎﺕ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻉ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺣﮑﻤﺔﺍﻻﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺻﺮﻑ‬
‫)‪(٢٢‬‬
‫‪61‬‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ ﻭ ﻋﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻭﻱ ﻣﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺩ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ـ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﺎﺕ ـ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ ﻭ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﺂﺕ ﻣﺘﻮﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﺮ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﺎ ﻳﮏ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻋﺮﺿﻲ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ ـ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻋﺮﺿﻲ ﺩﺧﺎﻟﺘﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺟﺴﻢ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ـ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻉ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻣﺮﮐﹼﺐ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺆﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺷﻴﺦﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻮﺭ‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
‫ﻧﻮﻋﻲ ﻭ ﻧﻔﻲ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺻﻮﺭ ﻧﻮﻋﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﻭ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﺟﺰ ﺍﻋﺮﺍﺽ ﻭ‬
‫)‪(٢٣‬‬
‫ﻫﻴﺂﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺮﮐﹼﺐ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ )ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﺎﺕ( ﻭ ﻫﻴﺂﺗﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺳﺨﻦ‪ ،‬ﺟﺴﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ ﻫﻮﻳﺘﻲ ﺑﺴﻴﻂ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ )ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺛﺎﺑﺖ(‪ ،‬ﻭﺻﻒ ﺫﺍﺗﻲ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻬﺎ ﻭ ﻫﻴﺂﺕ )ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻋﺮﺿﻲ(‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺑﺸﻤﺎﺭ ﻣﻲﺁﻳﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺛﺎﻧﻲ ﻣﺸﹼﺎﺀ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﻧﻤﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺳﺨﻨﺎﻥ ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ ﺑﮑﻠﹼﻲ‬
‫)‪(24‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺑﻠﮑﻪ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻗﺾ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺷﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺫﻋﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻗﻄﺐ ﺷﻴﺮﺍﺯﻱ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺘﺒ‪‬ﻊ ﻓﺮﺍﻭﺍﻥ ﻭﻱ ﺩﺭ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺷﻴﺦﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ ﻭ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﻭ ﺣﻜﺎﻳﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﻈﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺮﺳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﺎﺭﺡ ﺣﮑﻤﺔﺍﻻﺷﺮﺍﻕ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻮﺟﺰ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﻪ‬
‫ﭘﺮﺗﻮﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺮﮐﹼﺐ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭ ]ﻭﺍﺟﺐ ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ[ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﮑﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﮑﻲ‪،‬‬
‫)‪(25‬‬
‫ﺟﺴﻢ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺟﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﮐﹼﺐ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ«‪.‬‬
‫ﻇﺎﻫﺮﹰﺍ ﻣﺮﺍﺩ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻄﻌﺔ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﻋﺮﺿﻲ ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺟﺴﺎﻡ ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﮐﻮﺗﺎﻩ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﻏﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﺻﻠﻲ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺤﺚ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﻳﮑﻲ ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺠﻌﻮﻝ ﻭ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺟﺴﻢ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻫﺪﺍﻑ ﺷﻴﺦﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ ـ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺣﮑﻤﺔﺍﻻﺷﺮﺍﻕ ـ ﺑﻠﺤﺎﻅ ﺳﻠﺒﻲ ﻳﮑﺴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﺮﻓﹰﺎ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺗﻲ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺟﺴﻢ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .۴‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻋﺎﺭﻓﺎﻥ‬

‫ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻳﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺪﻭﻳﻦ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻥ ﻧﻈﺮﻱ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻤﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﻌﺪ‪‬ﺩﻱ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫‪62‬‬
‫ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﮑﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻤﺒﻨﺪﻳﻬﺎ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺑﭽﺸﻢ ﻣﻴﺨﻮﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﺑﺮﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﺳﻪﮔﺎﻧﺔ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﻻ«‪» ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻻﺑﺸﺮﻁ« ﻭ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﺷﻲﺀ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﻭ ﺣﮑﻤﺎﻱ ﻣﺘﺄﺧﹼﺮ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ ﺧﺎﺻﻲ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﺎﺭﺡ ﻣﺪﻗﹼﻖ ﻓﺼﻮﺹﺍﻟﺤﮑﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺳﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ‬
‫ﻣﺬﻛﻮﺭ ﻣﻴﻨﻮﻳﺴﺪ‪:‬‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
 ‫ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻫﺮ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﻁ ﻻﺷﻲﺀ ﺍﺗﺨﺎﺫ ﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﺍﺣﺪﻳ‪‬ﺖ ﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﺀ ﻭ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺘﻬﻠﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺟﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻊ ﻭ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔﺍﻟﺤﻘﺎﺋﻖ ﻭ ﻋﻤﺎﺀ ﻧﻴﺰ ﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﺷﻲﺀ ﺍﺧﺬ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻭ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﺍﺿﺎﻓﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺻﺮﻑ‬
‫)ﺍﺳﻤﺎﺀ ﻭ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ( ﻣﻼﺣﻈﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻬﻴ‪‬ﻪ ﻭ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻳ‪‬ﺖ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺟﻤﻊ‬
‫ﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺭﺳﺎﻧﻴﺪﻥ ﻓﻴﺾ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻈﺎﻫﺮ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﺀ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻋﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺕ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺪﺍﺩﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺛﺎﺑﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﺼﺎﻝ ﺣﻘﺎﻳﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺗﺒﻪ ﻛﻤﺎﻻ ‪‬‬
‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺭﺑﻮﺑﻴ‪‬ﺖ ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﺮﮔﺎﻩ ﻻﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﺷﻲﺀ ﻭ ﻻﺑﺸﺮﻁ‬
‫)‪(26‬‬
‫ﻻﺷﻲﺀ ﺃﺧﺬ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﻫﻮﻳ‪‬ﺖ ﺳﺎﺭﻳ‪‬ﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻤﻴﻊ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ‪.‬‬

‫ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﻻ« ﮐﻪ ﻣﺒﺮ‪‬ﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﻗﻴﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﺣﺘﻲ ﻗﻴﺪ ﺍﻃﻼﻕ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺫﺍﺕ ﺑﺎﺭﻳﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺻﻘﻊ ﺭﺑﻮﺑﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺑﻌﻀﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﻘﻘﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺗﺠﻠﹼﻲ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺣﻖ )ﻓﻴﺾ ﺍﻗﺪﺱ( ﻭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺭﺑﻮﺑﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻼ ﺍﺳﻢ ﻭ ﻻ ﺭﺳﻢ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻣﻌﺮﻭﻑ ﻋﺎﺭﻓﻲ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻣﻌﺒﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻋﺎﺑﺪﻱ‪ (٢٧).‬ﺍﻣﺎ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻻﺑﺸﺮﻁ«‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻓﻌﻞ ﺑﺎﺭﻳﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﻭﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫)‪(٢٨‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺪ‪‬ﻡ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻣﻤﮑﻨﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺣﮑﻢ ﮐﺮﻳﻤﺔ ﺷﺮﻳﻔﺔ »ﺃﻻ ﻟﻪ ﺍﻟﺨﻠﻖ ﻭ ﺍﻷﻣﺮ«‬
‫ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﺷﻲﺀ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩ ﺍﺻﻠﻲ ﺍﻫﻞ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺤﺚ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫»ﻻﺑﺸﺮﻁ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ـﺑﺎ ﺣﻔﻆ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻓﺎﺕ ﻧﻈﺮﻱـ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻤﺜﻴﻼﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﺷﻌﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﻌﺪ‪‬ﺩﻱ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻞ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺑﺪﻟﻴﻞ‬
‫ﻋﻈﻤﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻧﻲ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻃﹼﻼﻉ ﺑﻪ ﮐﻨﻪ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﮐﺲ ﺟﻠﻮﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺟﻠﻮﺍﺗﻲ‬
‫‪63‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺷﻪﻳﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﺮﻣﻦ ﺑﺮﭼﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻥ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎﻱ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻌﻀﻲ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺎﻣﻲ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ »ﺃﻣﺮﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ«‪» ،‬ﻭﺟﻪﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ«‪» ،‬ﻧﻮﺭﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ« ﻭ »ﻣﺸﻴﺔﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ« ﺍﺯ ﻗﺮﺁﻥ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺎﺕ‬
‫ـﺧﺎﺻﹼﻪ ﺍﺩﻋﻴﻪـ ﺍﻗﺘﺒﺎﺱ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ »ﻓﻴﺾ ﻣﻘﺪﺱ«‪» ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻨﺒﺴﻂ« ﻭ‬
‫ﺹ ﻋﺮﻓﺎ ﻭ ﺣﮑﻤﺎﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻏﺎﻟﺐ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺜﻲ‬
‫ﻖ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻕ‪ ‬ﺑﻪ« ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺧﺎ ﹼ‬
‫»ﺣ ‪‬‬
‫ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻳﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺎﺕ ﻣﻴﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍﺳﺘﺎ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﻘﹼﻘﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻤﻊﺁﻭﺭﻱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺎﻣﻲ ﻭ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺭﻭﻱ‬
‫ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ (٢٩).‬ﺑﻌﻀﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺎﻣﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ﺳﻴﺪ ﺣﻴﺪﺭ ﺁﻣﻠﻲ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬
‫ﻋﻘﻞ ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ‪ ،‬ﻧﻔﺲ ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ‪ ،‬ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﺍﻟﻮﻫﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﮐﺒﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﺁﺩﻡ‪ ،‬ﺟﺒﺮﺋﻴﻞ‪،‬‬
‫ﺭﻭﺡﺍﻟﻘﺪﺱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎﻡ ﻣﺒﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺠﺪﺍﻷﻗﺼﻲ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺡ ﺃﻋﻈﻢ‪ ،‬ﻧﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔﺍﻟﺤﻘﺎﻳﻖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻ‪ ،‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﺒﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻋﺮﺵ‪ ،‬ﺧﻠﻴﻔﺔﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻠﹼﻢ ﺍﻭﻝ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺯﺥ ﺟﺎﻣﻊ‪ ،‬ﻣ‪‬ﻔﻴﺾ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﺁﺓ ﺣﻖ‪ ،‬ﻗﻠﻢ ﺃﻋﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﮐﺰ‬
‫)‪(٣٠‬‬
‫ﺩﺍﺋﺮﻩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻭ ‪. ...‬‬

‫ﻣﻼﺣﻈﻪ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﻳﮑﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﺀ‪» ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻ« ﻭ ﺑﺘﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ »ﻫﺒﺎﺀ« ﺍﺳﺖ؛‬
‫ﺑﺪﻳﻨﻤﻌﻨﺎ ﮐﻪ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺧﻠﻖ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﺩ؛ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﮕﻮﻧﻪﻳﻲ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﻫﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻴﺚ‪» ،‬ﻋﻠﹼﺖ ﻣﺎﺩﻱ« ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺸﻤﺎﺭ ﻣﻴﺮﻭﺩ؛ ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﮐﻪ ﺻﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﮐﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﮑﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻣﺸﻴﺖ ﺍﻟﻬﻲ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺷﮑﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭ ﺩﺭﺁﻳﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺑﻦﻋﺮﺑﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺒﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻴﮕﻮﻳﺪ‪ :‬ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﮐﺮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻲ ﺑﻨﺎﻡ »ﻫﺒﺎﺀ« ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﻣﻘﺪ‪‬ﺱ ﻭﻱ ﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﺁﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ‬
‫ﮔﭻ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺑﻨﹼﺎ ﺑﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﻭﻱ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺷﮑﻞ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻲ ﺩﺭﻣﻲﺁﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ‬
‫ﺻﺎﺣﺒﺎﻥ ﺍﻓﮑﺎﺭ )ﺣﮑﻤﺎ(‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ »ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﮐﻞ« ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﮐﻪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺑﻨﺤﻮ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮ‪‬ﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺗﺤﻘﹼﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ ﺳﺒﺤﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺮ ﻫﺒﺎﺀ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻞ ﺗﺠﻠﹼﻲ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺠﻠﹼﻲ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﻳﮏ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻋﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﻗﺮﺏ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﮐ ﹼ‬
‫)‪(٣١‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺗﺠﹼﻠﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺑﻬﺮﻩﻣﻨﺪ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﻓﺘﻮﺣﺎﺕ ﻣﮑﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﺔ ﺳﺨﻦ‪ ،‬ﺿﻤﻦ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻳﺔ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺗﺼﺮﻳﺢ ﻣﻴﮑﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻤﮑﻨﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﻳﻪ)ﺹ( ـﻣﺴﻤ‪‬ﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺍﻭﻝـ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺗﺠﻠﹼﻲ ﺍﺯ‬
‫‪64‬‬
‫ﺳﺎﻳﺮﻳﻦ ﺳﺒﻘﺖ ﺟﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﺍﻭ ﺁﻗﺎﻱ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﻭ ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻟﻴﻦ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ‬
‫)‪(٣٢‬‬
‫ﻧﺰﺩﻳﮑﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺩﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻭ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺑﻲﻃﺎﻟﺐ)ﻉ(‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎﻡ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺮﺍﺭ ﺟﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻧﺒﻴﺎ ﻣﻴﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺣﮑﻤﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻨﮑﻪ ﺍﺑﻦﻋﺮﺑﻲ ﭼﻪ ﮐﺴﺎﻧﻲ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺪﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﻫﻤﻴﻨﻘﺪﺭ ﻳﺎﺩﺁﻭﺭ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﻳﻢ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﻱ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺑﺴﺎ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻋﻤﻮﻡ ﻭ ﺧﺼﻮﺹ‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
 ‫ﻼ ﻣﺘﺒﺎﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﭼﻮﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺻﺎﺩﻕ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﮐﺎﻣ ﹰ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻻﺑﺸﺮﻁ‪ ،‬ﻧﻔﺲ ﻓﻌﻞ ﺍﻟﻬﻲ ﻭ ﻣﺸﻴﺊ ﻫﺮ ﺷﻲﺀ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖﺑﺨﺶ ﻫﺮ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻧﻲ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻌﺒﺎﺭﺗﻲ‪ ،‬ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻣﺤﻤﺪﻳﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺜﻲ ﻓﺎﻋﻞ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺜﻲ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺏ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﭼﻨﺎﻧﮑﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻠﻮﺍﺕ ﻣﻨﺴﻮﺏ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﻦﻋﺮﺑﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺪﺡ ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺧﺪﺍ)ﺹ( ﻣﻴﺨﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ‪:‬‬
‫ﺻﻠﻮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ ﻭ ﻣﻼﺋﮑﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺣﻤﻠﺔ ﻋﺮﺷﻪ ﻭ ﺟﻤﻴﻊ ﺧﻠﻘﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺭﺿﻪ ﻭ ﺳﻤﺎﺋﻪ ﻋﻠﻲ‬
‫ﺳﻴﺪﻧﺎ ﻭ ﻧﺒﻴﻨﺎ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻬﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ ﺍﻻﻭﺍﺋﻞ ﻭ ﺍﺩ ﹼﻝ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺪﻻﺋﻞ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺪﺀ ﺍﻷﻧﻮﺍﺭ ﺍﻷﺯﻟﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺘﻬﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﻭﺝ ﺍﻟﮑﻤﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻏﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻳﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻨﹼﺸﺂﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﹶﺏ ﺍﻻﹶﮐﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻔﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ‪ ‬ﻭ ﹸﺍ ‪‬ﻡ ﺍﻻ‪‬ﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﺑﻘﺎﺑﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺜﻞ ﺍﻷﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻻﻟﻬﻲ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻟﻲ‬
‫)‪(٣٣‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻮﺍﻟﻢ ﺍﻟﻐﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻨﺎﻫﻲ‪. ...‬‬

‫ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻣﺤﻘﻘﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻤﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﺘﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ‪ ،‬ﺗﺠﻠﹼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻬﻲ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﻗﺴﻢ ﺫﺍﺗﻲ‪ ،‬ﺻﻔﺎﺗﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻓﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭﻱ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺫﻳﻞ ﺗﺠﻠﹼﻲ ﺁﺛﺎﺭﻱ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ »ﻫﺒﺎ« ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺍﻧﻔﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻧﻔﺲ‬
‫)‪(34‬‬
‫ﮐﻠﻴﻪ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺏ ﻣﻴﮕﺮﺩﺩ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .۵‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ‬

‫ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﻣﺒﺤﺚ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﺸﺎﺀ ﺍﻗﺘﺒﺎﺱ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻦ »ﻗﻮﻩ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻞ«‪» ،‬ﻭﺻﻞ ﻭ ﻓﺼﻞ« ﻭ »ﺗﺨﻠﺨﻞ ﻭ ﺗﮑﺎﺛﻒ«‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ‬
‫ﭘﺎﺳﺨﮕﻮﻳﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﺪﻫﺎﻱ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ ﺑﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﺑﺮﻣﻲﺁﻳﺪ‪ (35).‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻇﺎﻫﺮﹰﺍ ﻭﻱ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺿﻤﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ ﺩﺭﻣﻴﻴﺎﺑﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﺟﺎﻡ ﻧﮑﻮﻳﻲ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻲ‬
‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺳﺎﻣﺎﻥﺑﺨﺸﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺏ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻻﺯﻡ ﻣﻴﺒﻴﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ‬
‫‪65‬‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺗﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ‬
‫ﻧﻈﺮﻫﺎ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﺁﻭﺭﻳﻬﺎﻱ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻗﻮﻝ ﺑﻪ »ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﺗﹼﺤﺎﺩﻱ ﻣﺎﺩ‪‬ﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ«‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻗﺒﺎﻝ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ (36).‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﺔ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺤﺚ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺻﺪﺭﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺩﺷﺘﮑﻲ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ)‪ ،(٣٧‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺣﮑﻤﺎﻱ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﻭ ﺍﺧﻮﺍﻥﺍﻟﺼﹼﻔﺎ‪ ،‬ﻗﺮﻧﻬﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻭﻱ ﻭ ﺩﺷﺘﮑﻲ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ »ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩﻱ ﻣﺎﺩ‪‬ﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ« ﺭﺍ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﮐﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ؛ ﭼﻪ ﺑﺴﺎ‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
 ‫ﺩﺷﺘﮑﻲ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺳﺎﻃﺖ ﺷﻴﺦﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻗﺎﻣﻪ ﻣﻴﮑﻨﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ـ ﺻﺤ‪‬ﺖ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﺮ ﻳﮑﺪﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﻣﺠﻮ‪‬ﺯ ﻭ ﻣﺼﺤ‪‬ﺢ ﺣﻤﻞ‪ ،‬ﺍﺗﹼﺤﺎﺩ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻱ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻭ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ـ ﻧﻔﻲ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺟﺴﺎﻡ ﻣﺮﮐﹼﺐ‪ :‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻲ ﺩﻭ ﺷﻲﺀ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﻣﻐﺎﻳﺮ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﺀ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻴﻦ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﺭﻭﻱ ﻧﻤﻴﺪﻫﺪ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻱ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻧﻤﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ـ ﻳﮑﻲ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺟﺴﻢ‪ :‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻓﺮﺽ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻲ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺎﺩ‪‬ﻩ ﻭ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻋﻴﻦ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺷﻴﺌﻴﺖ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﺀ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ـ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻑ ﻧﻔﺲ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺑﺪﻥ‪ :‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺣﮑﻤﺎﻱ ﻣﺸﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ‬
‫)‪(٣٨‬‬
‫ﻧﻔﺲ ﻭ ﻧﻔﺲ‪ ،‬ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺮﺡ ﺩﻻﻳﻞ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻭ ﺩﻓﻊ ﺳﻪ ﺍﺷﮑﺎﻝ ﻣﻘﺪﺭ ﺑﺮ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪ‬
‫)‪(٣٩‬‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺿﻤﻦ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺷﮑﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﮐﹼﺐ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩﻱ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺩ‪‬ﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﻴﭙﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻌﺮﺽ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺩﺷﺘﮑﻲ ـ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﺦﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩ‪‬ﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻲ ﺟﺴﻢ ﭘﻨﺪﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ ـ ﻭ ﺍﻋﻼﻡ ﻧﺎﺭﺿﺎﻳﺘﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩ ﻭﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ‬
‫ﺍﺗﹼﺤﺎﺩﻱ ﻣﺎﺩ‪‬ﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﻴﮕﺮﺩﺩ‪ (40).‬ﺳﭙﺲ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺗﺼﺮﻳﺢ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺮﺍﺩ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﺷﺘﮑﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺩﻓﻊ ﺍﺷﮑﺎﻻﺕ ﺩﻭﺍﻧﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺩﺷﺘﮑﻲ ﻫﻤ‪‬ﺖ‬
‫ﻣﻴﮕﻤﺎﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﮕﻮﻳﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﺩﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻣﺒﺎﻧﻲ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﺍﺻﺎﻟﺖ‬
‫)‪(41‬‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺸﮑﻴﮏ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺣﺮﮐﺖ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ ﺍﺷﺘﺪﺍﺩﻱ ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﻣﻴﮕﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻓﺎﻋﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺎﺭﺣﺎﻥ ﺑﺰﺭﮒ ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻴﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻗﺎﻧﻊﮐﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻩ‬
‫‪ 66‬ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﭼﻨﺎﻧﻜﻪ ﺣﮑﻴﻢ ﺳﺒﺰﻭﺍﺭﻱ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩﻱ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻧﺘﺎﺑﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺿﻤﻦ‬
‫ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻼﺵ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺄﮐﻴﺪ ﺑﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﻩ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﮎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺰﺍﻉ ﺑﮑﺎﻫﺪ‪ (42).‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺩﺍﻭﺭﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺰﺍﻉ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺿﻬﺎ ﻭ ﻓﻬﻢ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﻕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺗﹼﺤﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﺬﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﻗﻮﻝ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺩﻻﻳﻞ ﻫﺮ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﻄﺔ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﺤﺜﻲ ﮐﻪ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻫﺪﻑ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﻋﺎﻭﻱ ﺷﺎﺭﺣﺎﻥ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
 ‫ﺭﺃﻱ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﭼﻪ ﻭﻱ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﮑﺘﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩﻱ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻤﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﺀ ﻣﺮﮐﹼﺒﺎﺕ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ـ ﮐﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺩﺭﻣﻲﺁﻳﻨﺪ ـ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ؛ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩ‪‬ﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻇﻞ ﻭ ﺫﻱﻇﻞ ﺗﺸﺒﻴﻪ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻳﻨﻤﻌﻨﺎ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ‬
‫)‪(43‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﻭﻱ ﻫﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﻳﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻋﺪﻣﻲ ﻭ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﮐﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﺎﺩﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﮐﻪ ﺟﺰﺀ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ‬
‫ﺟﺴﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﻈﹼﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪﻳﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﮑﻪ ﺟﺰﺀ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻲ‬
‫)‪(44‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﻨﻈﺮ ﻣﻴﺮﺳﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻱ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﻗﻮ‪‬ﻩ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻞ‬ ‫ﺟﺴﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺎﺕ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭ ﻫﻴﻮﻟﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺻﺪﺭﺍﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‬
‫)‪(45‬‬
‫ﻣﻮﺟﻬﻲ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻠﺰﺍﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺘﻨﮑﺎﻑ ﻣﻴﻮﺭﺯﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺳﻮﻣﻲ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺷﺪﻩ ﮐﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺭﺍﻗﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺳﻄﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺗﹼﮑﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻣﺒﺎﻧﻲ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺻﺪﺭﺍﻳﻲ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ‬
‫ﺍﺗﹼﺤﺎﺩﻱ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺑﺎ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﺌﻴﺖ ﺷﻲﺀ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺼﻞ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﺁﻥ ﻭ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺖ ﻓﺼﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻴﮕﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺖ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫)‪(46‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺷﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺍ ﹼﻝ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﻳﮑﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺜﻴﺎﺕ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺏ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ«‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪﭼﻴﻨﻲ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ »ﺷﻮﻕ« ﺩﺭ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺒﻴﻦ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ ﻭﺟﺪﺍﻥ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﮐﻤﺎﻟﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﻣﻴﮕﻮﻳﺪ‪ :‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺏ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺭﺍ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪﻳﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﻭ ﺣﻈﹼﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻫﻤﺔ ﮐﻤﺎﻻﺗﻲ ﺭﺍ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﺔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺍﺋﺮ ﻣﺪﺍﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺭﺗﺒﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻱ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻋﻠﻢ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﮑﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ‬
‫)‪(47‬‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺘﺒﻊ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﹼﺼﻒ ﻣﻴﮕﺮﺩﺩ‪...‬‬
‫‪67‬‬
‫ﺁﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﻓﻮﻕ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﻓﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺳﭙﺲ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻋﻨﺎﻳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺒﺎﻧﻲ ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻴﻪ )ﺍﺻﺎﻟﺖ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﺖ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﮐﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ( ﺍﺭﺗﻘﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺨﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﺟﺎﻳﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺷﻮﻕ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻣﻨﺘﻬﻲ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺳﺒﺰﻭﺍﺭﻱ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻘﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺿﻤﻦ ﺗﺄﻳﻴﺪ ﺩﻋﻮﻱ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻫﻢﺳﻨﺦ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ـ ﻓﺎﺭﻍ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﺗﺸﮑﻴﮑﻲ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ـ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻴﺴﺎﺯﺩ‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
 ‫)‪(48‬‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﻣﺘﻀﻤ‪‬ﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺷﻮﻕ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﺳﻴﺮ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﮕﻲ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ‬
‫ﺷﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻣﺘﻨﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺒ‪‬ﺐ ﺍﺻﻠﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺸﺘﹼﺖ ﺍﻗﻮﺍﻝ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﻳﮑﺮﺩﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭﺵ ـ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﻣﺠﻠﹼﺪﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﺔـ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻄﻮﺭ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺠﻠﹼﺪ ﺩﻭ‪‬ﻡ ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭ ﮐﻪ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﺑﺮ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺷﻮﻕ‪ ،‬ﺷﻌﻮﺭ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ‪ ...‬ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺷﻴﺮﺍﺯﻱ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺠﻠﹼﺪ ﻫﻔﺘﻢ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺷﻮﻕ‬
‫)‪(49‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﻧﻜﺎﺭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺷﻮﻕ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .۶‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ‬

‫ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺟﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻭ ﻧﻘﻞ ﺗﻼﺵ ﻭﻳﮋﻩﻳﻲ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺣﮑﻤﻲ ﻭ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻧﻲ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﻗﺎﺑﻞﺗﻮﺟﻬﻲ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻭﻱ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻠﻔﻴﻘﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻧﻲ ﻭ ﺣﮑﻤﻲ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺷﻴﺦ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺣﮑﻤﻲ »ﻣﺎﺩﻩ« ﻭ »ﺻﻮﺭﺕ« ﺑﺘﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ »ﻧﻮﺭ« ﻭ‬
‫»ﻇﻠﻤﺖ« ﺩﺭ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﹸﺧﺮﺍﻱ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ« ﻭ »ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ‪» ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ« ﺩﻭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﺍﻋﻢ ﻭ ﺍﺧﺺ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﺍﻋﻢ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ« ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻨﮑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻋﺪﻡ‪ ،‬ﺻﺮﻓﹰﺎ ﺑﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﮐﻤﺒﻮﺩ ﻟﻔﻆ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﻨﮕﻲ ﻗﺎﻓﻴﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﻋﺪﻡ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻠﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻤﻌﻨﻲﺍﻷﻋﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﺀ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻧﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻇﻠﻤﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻭ‬
‫)‪(50‬‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻤﻌﻨﻲﺍﻷﺧﺺ ﻣﻴﮕﺮﺩﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ »ﻫﺴﺘﻲ« ﺩﺭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻓﺎﺭﺳﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻤﻌﻨﻲﺍﻷﺧﺺ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ »ﻣﺎﺩ‪‬ﻩ« ﺩﺭ ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﻭ »ﻧﻮﺭ« ﺩﺭ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪ 68‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻧﻮﺭﺍﻧﻲ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻪﺍﻟ ‪‬ﺮﺏ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﺀ‬
‫ﻣﻴﭙﻨﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻱ‬
‫ﻣﺤﻘﻖ ﻭ ﻣﺠﻌﻮﻝ ﺣﻖﺗﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﺑﺪﻳﻦﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﻋﻘﻮﻝ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﻧﻔﻮﺱ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﻧﻔﺴﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ‬
‫)‪(51‬‬
‫ﻣﺜﺎﻟﻲ ﻭ ‪ ...‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻓﮑﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻌﻞ ﺑﻼﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺩ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
 ‫ﻫﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻓﺎﺿﻪ ﻧﻤﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﮑﻪ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﻧﻔﻌﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻣﺸﻴﺖ ﺍﻟﻬﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭ ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻥ ﻣﺒﺪﻝ ﻣﻴﮕﺮﺩﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻌﺒﺎﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻣﻮﻣﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﺘﺼﻮﺭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻲ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﮐﻤﻮﻥ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﭼﻮﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲﺍﻟﺴﻮﻳﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻳﮑﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻬﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺣﺮﺍﺯ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺧﺎﺹ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻳﮏ ﻓﺎﻋﻞ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻲ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ ﺑﻼﻣﺮﺟ‪‬ﺢ ﻧﺸﻮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﹼﻖ ﻳﮏ ﺷﻲﺀ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻌﻞ ﻣﺮﮐﺐ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻣﻴﭙﺬﻳﺮﺩ‪ :‬ﺟﻌﻞ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺷﻲﺀ ﺗﻌﻠﹼﻖ ﻣﻴﮕﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺟﻌﻞ ﺛﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺷﻲﺀ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺷﻴﺌﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ‪ ،‬ﻋﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺩ‪‬ﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫)‪(52‬‬
‫ﺩﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻳﮏ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻳﮑﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻌﻞ‪ ،‬ﺻﺮﻓﹰﺎ ﺑﻠﺤﺎﻅ ﺭﺗﺒﻲ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻳﮑﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻘﺪﻡ ﻭ ﺗﺄﺧﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻠﺤﺎﻅ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻲ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﻭ ﺷﺎﺭﺣﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﻭﻱ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻼ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻤﺎﻫﻮ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻣﻲﺁﻳﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﺀ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺁﻧﻬﺎﺳﺖ؛ ﻣﺜ ﹰ‬
‫ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺗﺤﻘﹼﻖ ﻧﻤﻴﻴﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﮕﺮ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻲ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺯﻳﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻣﺤﻘﻖ ﻧﻤﻴﮕﺮﺩﺩ ﻣﮕﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻄﻪ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﻮﻗﻒ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻮﻗﻒ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻘﺎﻱ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ! ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻣﻌﻲ‬
‫)‪(53‬‬
‫ﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺤﺎﻝ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺗﻮﻗﻒ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻧﻲ ﻫﻤﮕﻲ ﻣﺮﮐﺐ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ‬
‫ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﻣﺎ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﺍﺛﺮ‬
‫ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﻣﻄﻠﻘﻪ ﻳﺎ »ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻻﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ‬
‫‪69‬‬
‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻻﺑﺸﺮﻁ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺤﺴﺐ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﻴﻂ ﻭ ﮐﻼﻡ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺒﺎﺭﻩ‬
‫)ﻓﻬﻮ ﻓﻲ ﺫﺍﺗﻪ ﺃﻣﺮ‪ ‬ﺑﺴﻴﻂ( ﺻﺤﻴﺢ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ‬
‫ﺑﻤﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻲ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺗﺸﺨﺺ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻭ‬
‫)‪(54‬‬
‫ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺘﻲ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺑﻴﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻤﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﺀ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺴﻴﻂ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﺑﻤﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻳﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﺣﺎﺩﻳﺚ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﺯ‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
‫ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﺁﻳﺎﺕ »ﻭ ﺧﻠﻘﮑﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻧﻔﺲ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺓ ﺛﻢ ﺟﻌﻞ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺯﻭﺟﻬﺎ«)ﺯﻣﺮ‪ (۶/‬ﻭ »ﻭ ﻣﻦ ﮐ ﹼ‬
‫ﻞ‬
‫ﺷﻲﺀ ﺧﻠﻘﻨﺎ ﺯﻭﺟﻴﻦ ﻟﻌﻠﹼﮑﻢ ﺗﺬﮐﹼﺮﻭﻥ«)ﺫﺍﺭﻳﺎﺕ‪ (۴۹/‬ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻟﻲ‪» ،‬ﻧﻔﺲ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻩ« ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﻣﻄﻠﻘﻪ )ﻫﻴﻮﻻ( ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻪﺍﻟﺮ‪‬ﺏ ﻭ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﺀ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺘﻮﺟﻪ ﺟﻌﻞ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻫﺮ ﺷﻲﺀ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ)‪ (55‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ‪‬ﻣﻲ‪ ،‬ﺯﻭﺟﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻲ ﺗﮏﺗﮏ‬
‫)‪(56‬‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺣﺎﺩﻳﺚ »ﺇ ‪‬ﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﻴﺎﺀ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫)‪(57‬‬
‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﷲ ﺳﺒﺤﺎﻧﻪ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺨﻠﻖ ﺷﻴﺌﹰﺎ ﻓﺮﺩﹰﺍ ﻗﺎﺋﻤﹰﺎ ﺑﺬﺍﺗﻪ ﺩﻭﻥ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ ﻟﻠﹼﺬﻱ ﺃﺭﺍﺩ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺪ‪‬ﻻﻟﺔ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ«‬
‫)‪(58‬‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﺣﺪﻳﺚ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫»ﺇ ‪‬ﻥ ﺍﷲ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﻟﻤﺆﻣﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻦ ﻧﻮﺭﻩ ﻭ ﺻﺒﻐﻬﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺭﺣﻤﺘﻪ ‪«...‬‬
‫)‪(59‬‬
‫ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺪﻳﺚ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺑﺮ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺑﺴﺎﻃﺖ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﺀ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻲ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ‬
‫)‪(60‬‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺭﺣﻤﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﮐﻨﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﺑﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﮐﺞﻓﻬﻤﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺨﻨﺎﻥ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻣﺎﻗﺒﻞ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﺣﺎﻃﺔ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﻗﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺁﺭﺍﺋﻲ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻧﻘﺪﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺮ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﮕﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﻭﺷﻨﻲ ﻣﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﻗﻮﻡ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺮﺍﺩﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭﺍﻗﻒ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺑﻌﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﺍﻃﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻤﻌﻨﻲ‪-‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﺧﺺ )ﻣﺎﺩ‪‬ﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻮﺭ( ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬
‫ﻓﺒﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﮐﻮﻧﻬﺎ ﺟﺰﺀﹰﺍ ﻟﻠﻤﺮﮐﹼﺐ ﺗﺴﻤ‪‬ﻲ »ﺭﮐﻨﹰﺎ«‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﹼﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﺴﻤ‪‬ﻲ‬
‫ﺼﹰﺎ«‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﮐﻮﻧﻬﺎ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﺔ‬
‫»ﻋﻨﺼﺮﺍ«‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﹼﻞ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻳﺴﻤ‪‬ﻲ »ﺍﹸﺳﺘﻘ ﹼ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺼﹼﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﻐﻴﺮ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺗﺴﻤ‪‬ﻲ »ﻫﻴﻮﻟﻲ«‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻗﺒﻮﻟﻬﺎ ﻟﻠﺼﹼﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺗﺴﻤ‪‬ﻲ‬
‫»ﻣﺎ ‪‬ﺩﺓ«‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﮐﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﮐﹼﺐ ﻣﺄﺧﻮﺫﹰﺍ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﺴﻤ‪‬ﻲ »ﺃﺻﻼ«‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﮐﻮﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺤﹼﻠﹰﺎ ﻟﻠﺼﹼﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺗﺴﻤ‪‬ﻲ »ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﹰﺎ«‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺷﺊ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫)‪(61‬‬
‫ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻄﹼﻴﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .۷‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺗﻔﮑﻴﮏ‬ ‫‪70‬‬

‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﮐﻪ ﻣﻴﺮﺯﺍ ﻣﻬﺪﻱ ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻧﻲ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺤﻮﻝ ﻓﮑﺮﻱ ﻭ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻔﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ‬
‫ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺪﻳﻦ ﺳﺎﻝ ﺑﺎ ﮐﺘﺐ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﻭ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻧﻲ ﺍﻧﺲ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ ﻣﺒﺎﻧﻲ ﺣﮑﻤﻲ‬
‫ﺧﺎﺹ ﺧﻮﺩ ـ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻪ ـ ﺗﺤﺖﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﻭ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻱ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺼﻨﻴﻔﺎﺕ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ـ ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺎﺗﻲ‬
‫)‪(62‬‬
‫ـ ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﺑﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺿﻤﻦ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﻭﺭﺯﻱ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
 ‫ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ ﺑﺎﺭﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻤﻠﮑﺮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻋﺎﻭﻱ ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻧﻲ ﻭ ﺷﺎﺭﺣﺎﻥ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻭﻱ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫»ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ« ﻣﻼﺣﻈﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ »ﻗﻮﻩ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻞ« ﻭ »ﻓﺼﻞ ﻭ‬
‫ﻭﺻﻞ«‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻴﺎﻻﺕ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﹼﺎﺋﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻐﺎﻟﻄﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺭ ﺻﺮﻓﹰﺎ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﻗﻮﻩ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻞ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﺵ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺷﻲﺀ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻱ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺖ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﮑﻪ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻴﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻳﮏ ﺷﻲﺀ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮ‪‬ﻩ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺷﻲﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺣﻴﺜﻲ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺜﻲ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺮﻃﻲ ﻣﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺘﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺘﻲ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮ‪‬ﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﺳﺨﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺟﻨﺒﺔ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺘﻲ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻫﺮ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ‬
‫)‪(63‬‬
‫ﺻﺮﻑ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ـ ﭼﻨﺎﻧﮑﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻲ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻴﮑﻨﻨﺪ ـ ﻣﺤﺎﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻼﺣﻈﻪ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻻﻱ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻗﻮ‪‬ﻩ‬
‫ﻭ ﻓﻌﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺟﺴﺎﻡ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺭﻭﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻴﮕﻴﺮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎﺕ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻗﻮ‪‬ﻩ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻞ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺆﺍﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺼﻨﻴﻔﺎﺕ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺗﻔﮑﻴﮏ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺻﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ »ﺍﳌﺎﻫﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺣﻴﺚ ﻫﻲ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﺇﻟﹼﺎ ﻫﻲ‪ ،‬ﻻ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺓ ﻭ ﻻ ﻣﻌﺪﻭﻣﺔ« ﺭﺍ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺎﺩ ﺍﻗﻮﺍﻝ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺟﻤﻌﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ »ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ« ﻳﺎ »ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻌﻴﺔ« ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﻨﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﺔ ﻓﻌﻞ ﻭ ﺍﻧﻔﻌﺎﻝ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﮐﻨﻪ ﻭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭ‬
‫ﻼ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻲ ﺟﺰ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﮐﺮﺩﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺖ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺻ ﹰ‬
‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘ ‪‬‬
‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﮐﺮﺩﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﮑﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺖ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﮐﺮﺩﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ‪ ...‬ﭘﺲ ﮐﻨﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮐﻨﻪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘ ‪‬‬
‫‪71‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﮐﻨﻬﻴﺘﺶ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺣﺘﻴﺎﺝ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﻤﮑﻨﺎﺕ ﻭ‬
‫)‪(64‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻭ‪ ،‬ﻧﻔﺲ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺡ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪.‬‬

‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍﺳﺘﺎ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻫﺮ ﻳﮏ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﻇﻠﻤﺎﻧﻲﺍﻟ ﹼﺬﺍﺕ ﻭ ﻓﻘﻴﺮ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﮐﻪ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺴﺘﺮ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻫﻤﺔ ﮐﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﻧﻮﺭﻱﺍﻟﺬﹼﺍﺕ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻢ ﻭ‬
‫)‪(65‬‬
‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻧﻔﺴﻲ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻳﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺟﻨﺒﺔ ﻳﻠﻲ‪-‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺮ‪‬ﺑﻲ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻣﻴﺮﺯﺍﻱ ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺩﻳﻨﻲ ﻣﻴﮕﻮﻳﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻤﻠﻴﮏ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺩﺭﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻳﻦﺳﺒﺐ ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﻣﺎﻟﮏ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻔﺎﺽ ﺑﺎ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﺍﺣﺪﻳﺖ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﮑﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ ﻣﺎﻟﮏ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺤﺴﺐ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫)‪(66‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺑﻬﺮﻩﻣﻨﺪ ﻣﻴﺴﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﻣﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ »ﻧﻮﺭ ﻭﻻﻳﺖ« ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺳﺨﻦ‪ ،‬ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺑﻨﺤﻮ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻋﻲ ﻭ »ﻻ ﻣﻦ ﺷﻲﺀ« ﺧﻠﻖ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ‬
‫)‪(67‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻔﻌﻞ ﻭ ﺑﻨﺤﻮ »ﻣﻦ ﺷﻲﺀ« ﺧﻠﻖ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﭘﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﺤﺎﺏ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺗﻔﮑﻴﮏ ﺑﻪ ﺣﮑﻢ ﺁﻳﺎﺗﻲ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ »ﻭ ﺟﻌﻠﻨﺎ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﻞ ﺷﺊ ﺣﻲ«)ﺍﻧﺒﻴﺎﺀ‪ (۳۰/‬ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺎﺗﻲ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ »ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ ﻣﺎ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺀ«)‪ ،(68‬ﻗﺪﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺀ ﮐ ﹼ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﮎ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺍﺑﻦﻋﺮﺑﻲ ﻭ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺭﺍ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﻓﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ ﺍﺯ »ﻣﺎﺀ ﺑﺴﻴﻂ«‪ ،‬ﻋﻮﺍﻟﻢ ﻧﺎﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻱ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪ ﻭ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻋﻮﺍﻟﻢ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻲ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻨﺎﻭﺏ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻮﺍﻟﻢ ﻭ ﻋﻤﺎﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﻧﺔ ﺁﻧﻬﺎﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻳﻲ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻕ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺀ‬
‫)‪(69‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺗﻌﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻧﻲ ﻻﺑﺸﺮﻁ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻴﻂ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﺍﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﻳﺎ ﺁﺏ‪ ،‬ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ ﻣﺎ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺪﺃ ﻧﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﺭ‪،‬‬
‫ﺿﻮﺀ‪ ،‬ﻇﻠﻤﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺟﻮﺍﻫﺮ ﻭ ﺍﻋﺮﺍﺽ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻪ ﺁﺏ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﮐﺮﺓ ﺧﺎﮐﻲ‬
‫ﻣﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﮑﻪ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺎﺗﻲ ﮐﻪ ﻧﻮﺭ ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺒﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻕ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻳﮑﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﺎﻣﻲ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ‬
‫)‪(٧٠‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﻳﻪ ﻣﺎﺀ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﮐﻮﺗﺎﻩ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﺗﻔﮑﻴﮑﻴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺿﻤﻦ ﺗﺄﮐﻴﺪ ﺑﺮ ﻓﺴﺎﺩ ﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻦ ﺣﮑﻤﺎﻱ ﻣﺸﺎﺀ ﻭ ﻣﻐﺎﻟﻄﻲ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻦ‪» ،‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ« ﻭ »ﻣﺎﻟﮑﻴﺖ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﺘﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺰﻳﻦ‬
‫‪ 72‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭ ﻧﻮﻋﻴﻪ ـ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ـ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭ ﻣﻴﮑﻨﻨﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﮐﻞ ﻣﺎ ﻗﺎﻟﻮﺍ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﻮﻟﻲ ﻳﺄﺗﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﳌﻬﻴﺔ ﻭ ﮐﻞ ﻣﺎ ﻗﺎﻟﻮﺍ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺼﹼﻮﺭﺓ ﻳﺄﺗﻲ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺟﺪﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﺒﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻘ ‪‬ﻮﺓ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻔﺼﻞ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻮﺻﻞ ﺗﺎﻣ‪‬ﺎﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﳌﻬﻴﺔ ﻭ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﮑﻴﺔ ﻻ‬
‫)‪(٧١‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻬﻴﻮﻟﻲ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺼﹼﻮﺭﺓ‪.‬‬

‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺗﻔﮑﻴﮏ‪» ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻻﻱ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ« ﺑﻈﺎﻫﺮ ﻧﻘﺪ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
 ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻭﺻﻒ »ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ« ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﺀ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻌﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺗﻌﻤﻴﻢ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﻡ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫»ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ« ﻣﺒ ‪‬ﺪﻝ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻱ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺁﻧﮑﻪ ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺍﺩ ﻫﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻤﮑﻨﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻳﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﺁﻧﻬﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﺖ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﭘﺲ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ »ﺗﻤﻠﻴﮏ« ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻓﮑﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺟﻌﻞ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺑﺘﺒﻊ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻧﻈﺮ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻱ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﮑﺮ »ﺟﻌﻞ« ﺑﻮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺭﻫﺎﻭﺭﺩ‬
‫ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﻧﻪ ﻣﺘﹼﺨﺬ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺩﻳﻨﻲ)‪ (٧٢‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻓﮑﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﮐﻠﻴﺖ«‬
‫ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻣﺒﻬﻤﻲ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻳﻲ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺩﺭﮎ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺸﮑﻼﺕ‬
‫)‪(٧٣‬‬
‫ﻻﻳﻨﺤﻞ ﻣﻴﻤﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻱ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬﻢ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺣﺼﻮﻟﻲ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻧﭙﺬﻳﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬

‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪﮔﻴﺮﻱ‬
‫ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺗﺤﺖﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ ﺑﻤﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ‬
‫ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻫﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻤﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎﺕ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﮑﺎﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ؛ ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪ‬
‫ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻔﮑﹼﺮﺍﺕ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﻭ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﻣﻮﺭﻱ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ـ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ ﻭ ﺍﺧﻮﺍﻥﺍﻟﺼﹼﻔﺎ ﺑﻤﻮﺍﺯﺍﺕ ﺣﮑﻤﺎﻱ ﻣﺸﹼﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻨﺪ‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﻧﻔﺲ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﻴﮑﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﺻﺪﻭﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻭ ﺟﺴﻢ ﻣﻴﺸﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ـ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﻧﻘﹼﺎﺩﻱ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﹼﺎﺋﻲ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻲ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺛﺎﻧﻲ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﮐﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺜﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺜﻲ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮ‪‬ﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ـ ﻋﺎﺭﻓﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺑﺨﺼﻮﺹ ﺷﺎﺭﺣﺎﻥ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺍﺑﻦﻋﺮﺑﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻨﺒﺴﻂ ﺭﺍ ﮐﻪ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‬
‫‪73‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﺾ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺗﻠﺒ‪‬ﺲ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭ ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻥ ﻣﻤﮑﻨﺎﺕ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺻﻲ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﺻﺎﻟﺖ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ـ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﺎﻧﻲ ﺧﺎ ﹼ‬
‫ﺗﺴﺎﻭﻕ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺎ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻭ ﺣﻴﺜﻴﺘﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺜﻴﺎﺕ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ـ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﻭﻳﮋﻩﻳﻲ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺻﻮﺭ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻧﻲ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻪ‪-‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺮ‪‬ﺏ ﻣﻤﮑﻨﺎﺕ ﺷﻤﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ـ ﺩﺭ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺗﻔﮑﻴﮏ‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻇﻠﻤﺎﻧﻲﺍﻟﺬﹼﺍﺕ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻲ ﺍﻋﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻻﻱ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺑﺼﺮﺍﺣﺖ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺀ ﺑﺴﻴﻄﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺼﻮﺹ‬
‫ﺩﻳﻨﻲ ﺑﻌﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺎﺩﺓﺍﻟﻤﻮﺍﺩ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻳﺎﺩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﮎ‬
‫ﺳﺨﻨﺎﻥ ﻋﺮﻓﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻪ ﻣﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻣﻴﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﻗﺎﺋﻼﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﺩﺍﻧﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﻣﺘﹼﻬﻢ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﺩ؛ ﭼﻪ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻲ ﮐﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺍﮊﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻌﻀﹰﺎ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻦ ﻣﺸﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺟﻌﻞ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻱ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﮐﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭﺍﺗﻲ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺹ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻨﺪﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﮐﺞﻓﻬﻤﻲ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﺠﻮﻳﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻃﺎﻟﺒﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺧﺎ ﹼ‬
‫ﻣﮑﺎﺗﺐ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻓﮑﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻧﺴﻨﺠﻴﺪﺓ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺳﻄﺤﻲﻧﮕﺮﻱ ﺩﺭ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﻬﺎﻱ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻲ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺤﻮﻳﻠﻲﻧﮕﺮﻱ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬

‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺘﻬﺎ‪:‬‬

‫‪ .١‬ﺍﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻤﻲ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻧﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺑﻌﻀﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﻣﻴﻨﻮﻳﺴﺪ‪» :‬ﮐﺴﺎﻧﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺁﺷﻨﺎﻳﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﺨﻮﺑﻲ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺣﮑﻤﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﺬﹼﺍﺕ ﺍﻣﺮﻱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮ‪‬ﻩ ﮐﻪ ﺟﺰ ﺍﻧﻔﻌﺎﻝ ﻭ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺜﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﺍﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻫﻴﻮﻻ ﺑﺮﺣﺴﺐ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻱ ﻓﻌﻞ ﻭ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﮏ ﺍﺳﺖ« )ﺍﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻤﻲ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻏﻼﻣﺤﺴﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺟﺮﺍﻱ ﻓﮑﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﺹ‪ ۳۷۰‬ﻭ ‪.(۳۷۱‬‬
‫‪ .٢‬ﺍﺑﻦﺳﻴﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺸﹼﻔﺎﺀ )ﺍﻹﻟﻬﻴﺎﺕ(‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺳﻌﻴﺪ ﺯﺍﺋﺪ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۶۷‬‬
‫‪ .٣‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۶۶‬؛ ﻫﻤﻮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻹﺷﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﹼﻨﺒﻴﻬﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۵۷‬‬
‫‪ .4‬ﺍﻹﺷﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﹼﻨﺒﻴﻬﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۵۹‬‬
‫‪ .5 74‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻗﺴﺎﻡ ﺍﻧﺒﺴﺎﻁ ﻭ ﺍﻧﻘﺒﺎﺽ ﮐﻪ ﻳﮑﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺎﺕ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﺑﺸﻤﺎﺭ ﻣﻴﺮﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻮﻋﻠﻲ‬
‫ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺭ‪.‬ﮎ‪ :‬ﺍﺑﻦﺳﻴﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﹼﺠﺎﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻐﺮﻕ ﻓﻲ ﺑﺤﺮ ﺍﻟﻀﹼﻼﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺪ‪‬ﻣﻪ ﻭ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺗﻘﻲ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ‪-‬‬
‫ﭘﮋﻭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۲۹۹‬‬
‫‪ .6‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻘﺪﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻄﻮﺭ ﺗﻔﺼﻴﻠﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ »ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻯ ﻣﺸﹼﺎﺋﻰ« ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻃﹼﻼﻉ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺭ‪.‬ﻙ‪ :‬ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ؛ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﻓﺼﻠﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﻲ‬
‫ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﺳﻴﻨﻮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﺓ ‪ ،۴۹‬ﺹ‪۱۱۷‬ـ‪.۱۳۷‬‬
‫‪ .٧‬ﺑﻐﺪﺍﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﻮﺍﻟﺒﺮﮐﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺃﻟﻤﻌﺘﺒﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺍﳊﮑﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﺹ‪.۱۴‬‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
 ‫‪ .٨‬ﻻﺯﻡ ﺑﺬﮐﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺻﺤﺎﺏ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺗﻔﮑﻴﮏ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺎﺕ ﺧﺎﺻﻲ‪ ،‬ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﻗﻮ‪‬ﻩ ﻭ‬
‫ﻓﻌﻞ ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﺍﺧﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ!‬
‫‪ .٩‬ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺷﻬﺎﺏﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﻣﺼﻨﹼﻔﺎﺕ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻫﺎﻧﺮﻱ ﮐﺮﺑﻦ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۷۵‬ـ‪.۷۹‬‬
‫‪ .١٠‬ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭ ﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ ﺭﺿﺎ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﺯﺍﺩﻩ؛ ﺑﺎﺷﺮﺍﻑ ﺁﻳﺖﺍﷲ ﺳﻴﺪ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪ ﺧﺎﻣﻨﻪﺍﻱ‪،‬‬
‫ﺝ‪ ،۵‬ﺹ‪۱۲۸‬ـ‪۱۷۳ ،۱۶۲‬ـ‪۱۹۹‬؛ ﻫﻤﻮ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﺑﺮ ﺷﺮﺡ ﺣﮑﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۲۰۷‬ـ‪.۲۲۳‬‬
‫‪ .١١‬ﻳﺜﺮﺑﻲ‪ ،‬ﻳﺤﻴﻲ‪ ،‬ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۹۵‬‬
‫‪ .١٢‬ﺇﺧﻮﺍﻥﺍﻟﺼﹼﻔﺎ‪ ،‬ﺭﺳﺎﺋﻞ ﺇﺧﻮﺍﻥﺍﻟﺼﹼﻔﺎ ﻭ ﺧﻠﹼﺎﻥﺍﻟﻮﻓﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱‬ﺹ‪.۵۴‬‬
‫‪ .١٣‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﺹ‪.۶‬‬
‫‪ .14‬ﻗﺒﺎﺩﻳﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﺻﺮﺧﺴﺮﻭ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺤﮑﻤﺘﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻫﺎﻧﺮﻱ ﮐﺮﺑﻦ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۱۴۹‬‬
‫‪ .15‬ﻫﻤﻮ‪ ،‬ﺯﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻓﺮﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻭ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺳﻴﺪ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪ ﺣﺎﺋﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۳۱‬‬
‫‪ .16‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۳۲‬‬
‫‪ .١٧‬ﺟﺎﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺤﮑﻤﺘﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۱۴۹‬‬
‫‪ .١٨‬ﺻﺎﻋﺪ ﺭﺍﺯﻱ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻌﻠﻲ‪» ،‬ﻣﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﺎﻥ« ﺩﺭ‪ :‬ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ )ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ(‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۱۹۳‬‬
‫‪ .١٩‬ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﻣﺼﻨﹼﻔﺎﺕ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﺹ‪۷۵‬ـ‪.۷۹‬‬
‫‪ .٢٠‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱‬ﺹ‪.۱۴‬‬
‫‪ .٢١‬ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﻭﺡ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺣﻬﺎﻱ ﺷﻬﺮﺯﻭﺭﻱ ﻭ ﺍﺑﻦﮐﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻗﻄﺐﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﺮﺍﺯﻱ ﺑﺮ ﺣﮑﻤﺔ‪-‬‬
‫ﺍﻹﺷﺮﺍﻕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳﺘﺮﺱ ﻣﺎﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺎﺩ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﺎﺕ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻲ ﺑﺮ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﺵ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۵‬ﺹ‪۲۹‬ـ‪ ۳۰‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﺵ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺤﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻗﻄﺐﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﺮﺍﺯﻱ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺳﺨﻨﺎﻥ ﺷﺎﺭﺣﺎﻥ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺷﻬﺮﺯﻭﺭﻱ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﺣﮑﻤﺔﺍﻹﺷﺮﺍﻕ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﮑﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻣﺘﻌﺮﺽ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺾ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .٢٢‬ﺷﻴﺮﺍﺯﻱ‪ ،‬ﻗﻄﺐﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺣﮑﻤﺔﺍﻹﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ ﻧﻮﺭﺍﻧﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻬﺪﻱ ﻣﺤﻘﹼﻖ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۲۱۵‬‬
‫‪ .٢٣‬ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﻣﺼﻨﹼﻔﺎﺕ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﺹ‪.۸۰‬‬
‫‪ .24‬ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﺪﻋﺎﻱ ﻣﺰﺑﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﺒﻴﻨﻴﺪ‪ :‬ﺭ‪.‬ﮎ‪ :‬ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲ ﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ؛ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﻓﺼﻠﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﻲ ﺣﻜﻤﺖ ﺳﻴﻨﻮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺵ‪ ،۴۹‬ﺹ‪۱۳۱‬ـ‪.۱۳۵‬‬
‫‪ .25‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۳‬ﺹ‪.۴۱‬‬
‫‪ .26‬ﻗﻴﺼﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﺩﺍﻭﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﻓﺼﻮﺹ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺪ‪‬ﻣﻪ ﻭ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺳﻴ‪‬ﺪ ﺟﻼﻝﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺁﺷﺘﻴﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ۲۲‬ﻭ‪۲۳‬؛‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺭ‪.‬ﮎ‪ :‬ﻣﺪﺭ‪‬ﺱ ﻳﺰﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺮﺯﺍ ﻋﻠﻲﺍﮐﺒﺮ‪ ،‬ﺭﺳﺎﺋﻞ ﺣﮑﻤﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۷۳‬‬
‫‪ .٢٧‬ﺧﻤﻴﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺡﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺼﺒﺎﺡ ﺍﳍﺪﺍﻳﺔ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺍﳋﻼﻓﺔ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻮﻻﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺳﻴﺪ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﻓﻬﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۲۲‬‬
‫‪ .٢٨‬ﻗﺮﺁﻥ ﮐﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺳﻮﺭﻩ ﺍﻋﺮﺍﻑ‪ ،‬ﺁﻳﻪ ‪.۵۴‬‬
‫‪75‬‬ ‫‪ .٢٩‬ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﺄﺧﹼﺮﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﺨﺼﻮﺹ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺑﻨﮕﺮﻳﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ـ ﺣﺴﻦﺯﺍﺩﻩ ﺁﻣﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺣﺴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﻭ ﻳﮏ ﮐﻠﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﺹ‪ ،۱۹۹‬ﮐﻠﻤﻪ ‪.۲۵۴‬‬
‫ـ ﻓﺮ‪‬ﺧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﺒﺼﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺭﻓﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﮔﺰﻳﺪﻩﻳﻲ ﺍﺯ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﲢﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺸﹼﺎﻕ ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻒ ﺳﻴﺪﺣﺴﻴﻦ ﻻﻣﻊ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۶۲‬ـ‪ .۶۶‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺛﺮ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﻢ ﺍﺳﺎﻣﻲ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﮔﺮﺩﺁﻭﺭﻱ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﻭﺟﻮﻩ ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﺀ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .٣٠‬ﺁﻣﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺪ ﺣﻴﺪﺭ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﻨﹼﻘﻮﺩ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺿﻤﻴﻤﺔ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﺟﺎﻣﻊ ﺍﻷﺳﺮﺍﺭ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺒﻊ ﺍﻷﻧﻮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۶۸۸‬‬
‫‪ .٣١‬ﺍﺑﻦﻋﺮﺑﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻴﻲﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻔﺘﻮﺣﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﮑﹼﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﺭﺓ ‪ ۱۴‬ﺟﻠﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻋﺜﻤﺎﻥ ﻳﺤﻴﻲ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﺹ‪.۲۲۷‬‬
‫‪ .٣٢‬ﻫﻤﺎﻧﺠﺎ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .٣٣‬ﻣﻨﺎﻗﺐ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺳﻴﺪ ﺻﺎﻟﺢ ﻣﻮﺳﻮﻱ ﺧﻠﺨﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻭ ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻣﻬﺪﻱ ﺍﻓﺘﺨﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۴۸‬‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
 ‫‪ .34‬ﺑﻴﮕﻢ ﻧﻴﺮﻳﺰﻱ‪ ،‬ﹸﺍ ‪‬ﻡ ﺳﻠﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﮑﻠﻴﺎﺕ )ﮐﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻥ ﺷﻴﻌﻲ(‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻭ ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻣﻬﺪﻱ ﺍﻓﺘﺨﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۸۴‬‬
‫‪ .35‬ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭ ﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۵‬ﺹ‪۱۲۸‬ـ‪۱۷۳ ،۱۶۲‬ـ‪۱۹۹‬؛ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﺑﺮ ﺷﺮﺡ ﺣﮑﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۲۰۷‬ـ‪.۲۲۳‬‬
‫‪ .36‬ﻓﺮﻗﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﮐﺎﻇﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺁﻭﺭﻳﻬﺎﻱ ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۶۲۷‬ـ‪۶۲۹‬؛ ﻋﺒﻮﺩﻳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﺮﺳﻮﻝ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭﺁﻣﺪﻱ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﺻﺪﺭﺍﻳﻲ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۳۳۸‬ـ‪.۳۴۶‬‬
‫‪ .٣٧‬ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭ ﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۵‬ﺹ‪.۴۷۶‬‬
‫‪ .٣٨‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۴۷۷‬ـ‪.۴۸۱‬‬
‫‪ .٣٩‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۴۸۲‬ـ‪.۴۸۷‬‬
‫‪ .40‬ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺼﻞ ﺑﺪﻳﻦﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﻓﻲ ﺣﻞ ﺷﻜﻮﻙ ﺗﺘﻮﻫﻢ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﻫﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺤﺎﺩ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻤﺎ ﺃﻭﺭﺩﻫﺎ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮﻩ« )ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۴۸۳‬ـ‪.(۴۸۵‬‬
‫‪ .41‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۴۸۶‬ـ‪.۵۰۴‬‬
‫‪ .42‬ﺳﺒﺰﻭﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻣﻼﻫﺎﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻈﻮﻣﻪ‪ ،‬ﺣﻮﺍﺷﻲ ﺷﻴﺦ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﺗﻘﻲ ﺁﻣﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻭ ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﺣﺴﻴﻨﻲ ﻣﻴﻼﻧﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﭘﺎﻭﺭﻗﻲ ﺹ‪.۲۷۴‬‬
‫‪ .43‬ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺪﺃ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺫﺑﻴﺤﻲ ﻭ ﺟﻌﻔﺮ ﺷﺎﻩﻧﻈﺮﻱ؛ ﺑﺎﺷﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺳﻴﺪﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺧﺎﻣﻨﻪﺍﻱ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .44‬ﺁﺷﺘﻴﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺪ ﺟﻼﻝﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۶۶‬‬
‫‪ .45‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۶۷‬‬
‫‪ .46‬ﻳﺰﺩﺍﻥﭘﻨﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﺹ‪.۳۳۵‬‬
‫‪ .47‬ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭ ﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ۲۵۸‬ﻭ‪.۲۵۹‬‬
‫‪ .48‬ﺳﺒﺰﻭﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﺑﺮ ﺃﺳﻔﺎﺭ ﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﻪ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﭘﺎﻭﺭﻗﻲ ﺹ‪.۲۵۹‬‬
‫‪ .49‬ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭ ﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﻱ؛ ﺑﺎﺷﺮﺍﻑ ﺁﻳﺖﺍﷲ ﺳﻴﺪ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪ ﺧﺎﻣﻨﻪﺍﻱ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۷‬ﺹ‪.۱۷۵‬‬
‫‪ .50‬ﮔﻮﻫﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺮﺯﺍ ﺣﺴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺨﺎﺯﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪ ﻋﻴﺪﻱ ﺧﺴﺮﻭﺷﺎﻫﻲ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۹۹‬‬
‫‪ .51‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﻋﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ ﻭ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻧﺎﺻﺮ ﺍﻟﺒﻮﻋﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱‬ﺹ‪.۱۶۳‬‬
‫‪ .52‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۵۴۳‬ـ‪.۵۴۶‬‬
‫‪ .53‬ﻣﺨﺎﺯﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۱۰۵‬؛ ﺣﺴﻴﻨﻲ ﺭﺷﺘﻲ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺪﮐﺎﻇﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﺩﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ۸۰‬ﻭ‪.۸۱‬‬
‫‪ .54‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﻋﺮ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱‬ﺹ‪.۱۱۴‬‬
‫‪ .55‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﻋﺮ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱‬ﺹ‪۳۵۹‬؛ ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﺹ‪.۴۵۵ ،۲۷۲ ،۲۴۴ ،۱۳۸‬‬
‫‪ .56‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱‬ﺹ‪۴۷۷ ،۱۷۰ ،۷۲‬؛ ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﺹ‪.۵۴۷ ،۲۷۳‬‬
‫‪ .57‬ﻣﺠﻠﺴﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﻼﻣﺤﻤﺪﺑﺎﻗﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﺤﺎﺭ ﺍﻷﻧﻮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱۰‬ﺹ‪.۳۱۶‬‬
‫‪ .58‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۶۴‬ﺹ‪.۷۳‬‬
‫‪ .59‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﻋﺮ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱‬ﺹ‪۵۲۹ ،۳۸۲ ،۳۳۷ ،۱۷۰ ،۱۳۴ ،۷۲‬؛ ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﺹ‪.۲۷۳ ،۲۴۲ ،۱۸۵‬‬
‫‪ .60 76‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱‬ﺹ‪ ۳۵۷ ،۱۰۴‬ﻭ ‪.۳۵۸‬‬
‫‪ .61‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱‬ﺹ‪.۱۰۵‬‬
‫‪ .62‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺵ ﻓﻲﺍﻟﺠﻤﻠﻪ ﺍﺷﮑﺎﻟﻲ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﮐﻪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻓﮑﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﻭ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﻓﮑﺮﻱ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺒﺎﻧﻲ ﻭﺣﻴﺎﻧﻲ ﻭ ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺩﻳﻨﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﻲ ﺟﺎﻱ ﺗﺄﻣﻞ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .63‬ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺮﺯﺍ ﻣﻬﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻘﻠﻢ ﺷﻴﺦ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﺣﻠﺒﻲ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﺓ ‪ ،۱۲۴۸۰‬ﺹ‪.۱۱۶‬‬
‫‪ .64‬ﺣﻠﺒﻲ )ﺗﻮﻟﹼﺎﻳﻲ(‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﺦ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﺩﺭﻭﺱ ﺑﻘﻠﻢ ﺭﺿﺎ ﺁﻝ ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺷﻤﺲﺁﺑﺎﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‬
‫‪ ،۶۱۸۶۰‬ﺹ‪۷۸۰‬ـ‪ .۷۸۲‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺭ‪.‬ﮎ‪ :‬ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۸۵‬‬
‫‪ .65‬ﺑﻨﻲﻫﺎﺷﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺪ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪ‪ ،‬ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﺗﻮﺣﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻓﺘﺮ ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ‪ :‬ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺻﺎﻧﻊ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ۳۰‬ﻭ‪۳۱‬؛ ﻣﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۲۷۰‬‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
 ‫‪ .66‬ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ۶۶‬ﻭ‪.۶۷‬‬
‫‪ .67‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۱۴۹‬‬
‫‪ .68‬ﺑﺤﺎﺭ ﺍﻻﻧﻮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۵‬ﺹ‪.۲۴۰‬‬
‫‪ .69‬ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪۱۷۹‬؛ ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺮﺯﺍ ﺟﻮﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻄﺎﻟﺐ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۲۳۶‬‬
‫‪ .٧٠‬ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۱۱۰‬‬
‫‪ .٧١‬ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻄﺎﻟﺐ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۲۳۶‬‬
‫‪ .٧٢‬ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.۷۸‬‬
‫‪ .٧٣‬ﻋﻴﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﺇ ‪‬ﻥ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﮑﻴﺔ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻣﻤ‪‬ﺎ ﻳﻌﺮﻑ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﺮ‪‬ﻓﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪﺍﺕ ﮐﻴﻒ ﻭ‬
‫ﻫﻲ ﺷﻴﺌﻴﺔ ﻣﻬﻴﺘﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻻﺷﺊ ﻣﺤﺾ« )ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.(۷۲‬‬

‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ‪:‬‬
‫ﺁﺷﺘﻴﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺪ ﺟﻼﻝﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻗﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺑﻮﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۸۲ ،۴‬‬ ‫‪.۱‬‬
‫ﺁﻣﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺪ ﺣﻴﺪﺭ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﻨﹼﻘﻮﺩ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺿﻤﻴﻤﺔ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﺟﺎﻣﻊ ﺍﻷﺳﺮﺍﺭ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺒﻊ ﺍﻷﻧﻮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺕ‬ ‫‪.۲‬‬
‫ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ ﻭ ﺁﻣﻮﺯﺵ ﻋﺎﻟﻲ‪.۱۳۶۸ ،‬‬
‫ﺍﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻤﻲ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻏﻼﻣﺤﺴﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺟﺮﺍﻱ ﻓﮑﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻧﻮ‪،‬ﺝ‪.۱۳۷۹ ،۳‬‬ ‫‪.۳‬‬
‫ﺍﺑﻦﺳﻴﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺸﹼﻔﺎﺀ )ﺍﻹﻟﻬﻴﺎﺕ(‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺳﻌﻴﺪ ﺯﺍﺋﺪ‪ ،‬ﻗﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﮑﺘﺒﺔ ﺁﻳﺔﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﻋﺸﻲ‪۱۴۰۴ ،‬ﻕ‪.‬‬ ‫‪.۴‬‬
‫ــــــــــ ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﹼﺠﺎﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻐﺮﻕ ﻓﻲ ﺑﺤﺮ ﺍﻟﻀﹼﻼﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺪ‪‬ﻣﻪ ﻭ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺗﻘﻲ ﺩﺍﻧﺶﭘﮋﻭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪،‬‬ ‫‪.۵‬‬
‫ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪.۱۳۷۹ ،۲‬‬
‫ﺍﺑﻦﺳﻴﻨﺎ؛ ﻫﻤﻮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻹﺷﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﹼﻨﺒﻴﻬﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻗﻢ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﺍﻟﺒﻼﻏﺔ‪.۱۳۷۵ ،‬‬ ‫‪.۶‬‬
‫ﺍﺑﻦﻋﺮﺑﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻴﻲﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻔﺘﻮﺣﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﮑﹼﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻋﺜﻤﺎﻥ ﻳﺤﻴﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺼﺮ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﺭﺓ‪۱۴‬ﺟﻠﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪۱۴۰۵ ،۲‬ﻕ‪.‬‬ ‫‪.۷‬‬
‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺋﻲ‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﻋﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺪ‪‬ﻣﻪ ﻭ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻧﺎﺻﺮ ﺍﻟﺒﻮﻋﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺮﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﺆﺳﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻼﻍ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪۱۴۳۰،۱‬ﻕ‪.‬‬ ‫‪.۸‬‬
‫ﺇﺧﻮﺍﻥﺍﻟﺼﹼﻔﺎ‪ ،‬ﺭﺳﺎﺋﻞ ﺇﺧﻮﺍﻥﺍﻟﺼﹼﻔﺎ ﻭ ﺧﻠﹼﺎﻥﺍﻟﻮﻓﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺮﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻻﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪۱۴۱۲ ،۱‬ﻕ‪.‬‬ ‫‪.۹‬‬
‫ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺮﺯﺍ ﻣﻬﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻘﻠﻢ ﺷﻴﺦ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﺣﻠﺒﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﻬﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺍﺳﻨﺎﺩ ﺁﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻗﺪﺱ ﺭﺿﻮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ ‪.۱۲۴۸۰‬‬ ‫‪.۱۰‬‬
‫ﺑﻐﺪﺍﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﻮﺍﻟﺒﺮﮐﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺃﻟﻤﻌﺘﺒﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﮑﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺍﺻﻔﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۷۳ ،۲‬‬ ‫‪.۱۱‬‬
‫ﺑﻨﻲﻫﺎﺷﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺪ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪ‪ ،‬ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﺗﻮﺣﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻓﺘﺮ ﺍﻭ‪‬ﻝ‪ :‬ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺻﺎﻧﻊ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﻣﻨﻴﺮ‪.۱۳۸۸ ،‬‬ ‫‪.۱۲‬‬
‫ﺑﻴﮕﻢ ﻧﻴﺮﻳﺰﻱ‪ ،‬ﹸﺍ ‪‬ﻡﺳﻠﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﮑﻠﻴﺎﺕ )ﮐﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻥ ﺷﻴﻌﻲ(‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻭ ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻣﻬﺪﻱ ﺍﻓﺘﺨﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻗﻢ‪،‬‬ ‫‪.۱۳‬‬
‫ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﻄﺒﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﺩﻳﻨﻲ‪.۱۳۸۶ ،‬‬
‫ﺣﺴﻦﺯﺍﺩﻩ ﺁﻣﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺣﺴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﻭ ﻳﮏ ﮐﻠﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﻗﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺑﻮﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۸۱ ،۳‬‬ ‫‪.۱۴‬‬
‫‪77‬‬ ‫ﺣﺴﻴﻨﻲ ﺭﺷﺘﻲ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺪﮐﺎﻇﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﺩﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﮐﺮﻣﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺳﻌﺎﺩﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻲﺟﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫‪.۱۵‬‬
‫ﺣﻠﺒﻲ )ﺗﻮﻟﹼﺎﻳﻲ(‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﺦ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﺩﺭﻭﺱ ﺑﻘﻠﻢ ﺭﺿﺎ ﺁﻝ ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺷﻤﺲﺁﺑﺎﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﻬﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫‪.۱۶‬‬
‫ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺍﺳﻨﺎﺩ ﺁﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻗﺪﺱ ﺭﺿﻮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﺓ ‪.۶۱۸۶۰‬‬
‫ﺧﻤﻴﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺡﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺼﺒﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻬﺪﺍﻳﺔ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﺨﻼﻓﺔ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻮﻻﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﺳﻴﺪﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﻓﻬﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﭘﻴﺎﻡ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻱ‪.۱۳۶۰ ،‬‬ ‫‪.۱۷‬‬
‫ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ؛ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﻓﺼﻠﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﻲ ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﺳﻴﻨﻮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺵ‪ ،۴۹‬ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ‬ ‫‪.۱۸‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﺎﻡ ﺻﺎﺩﻕ )ﻉ(‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻬﺎﺭ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺑﺴﺘﺎﻥ ‪.۱۳۹۲‬‬
‫ﺳﺒﺰﻭﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻣﻠﹼﺎﻫﺎﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻈﻮﻣﻪ‪ ،‬ﺣﻮﺍﺷﻲ ﺷﻴﺦ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﺗﻘﻲ ﺁﻣﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻭ ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻓﺎﺿﻞ ﺣﺴﻴﻨﻲ‬ ‫‪.۱۹‬‬
‫ﻣﻴﻼﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻗﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﺸﻮﺭﺍﺕ ﺫﻭﻱﺍﻟﻘﺮﺑﻲ‪۱۴۳۰ ،‬ﻕ‪.‬‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖﺍﻓﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲﺭﻩ؛ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻄﻮ‪‬ﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻫﻴﻮﻻﻱ ﺍﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬
‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎت ‪78-55‬‬
‫ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺷﻬﺎﺏﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﻣﺼﻨﹼﻔﺎﺕ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻫﺎﻧﺮﻱ ﮐﺮﺑﻦ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ‬ ‫‪.۲۰‬‬
‫ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻲ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۲‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۸۰ ،۳‬‬
‫ﺷﻴﺮﺍﺯﻱ‪ ،‬ﻗﻄﺐﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺣﮑﻤﺔﺍﻹﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻠﹼﻪ ﻧﻮﺭﺍﻧﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻬﺪﻱ ﻣﺤﻘﹼﻖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ‬ ‫‪.۲۱‬‬
‫ﺍﻧﺠﻤﻦ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻭ ﻣﻔﺎﺧﺮ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻲ‪.۱۳۸۳ ،‬‬
‫ﺻﺎﻋﺪ ﺭﺍﺯﻱ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻌﻠﻲ‪» ،‬ﻣﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﺎﻥ« ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﻴﻠﻴﻪ )ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ(‪ ،‬ﻗﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﮐﺰ‬ ‫‪.۲۲‬‬
‫ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﺩﻳﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﺬﺍﻫﺐ‪ ،‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۸۴ ،۲‬‬
‫ﻋﺒﻮﺩﻳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﺮﺳﻮﻝ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺁﻣﺪﻱ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﺻﺪﺭﺍﻳﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺳﻤﺖ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۸۹ ،۳‬‬ ‫‪.۲۳‬‬
‫ﻓﺮ‪‬ﺧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﺒﺼﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺭﻓﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﮔﺰﻳﺪﻩﻳﻲ ﺍﺯ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﲢﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺸﹼﺎﻕ ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻒ ﺳﻴﺪﺣﺴﻴﻦ ﻻﻣﻊ‪ ،‬ﻗﺰﻭﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺮﺳﺎﻳﻪﮔﺴﺘﺮ‪.۱۳۷۹ ،‬‬ ‫‪.۲۴‬‬
‫ﻓﺮﻗﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﮐﺎﻇﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺁﻭﺭﻳﻬﺎﻱ ﻣﻠﹼﺎﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺍﻣﺎﻡ ﺻﺎﺩﻕ )ﻉ(‪.۱۳۸۵ ،‬‬ ‫‪.۲۵‬‬
‫ﻗﺒﺎﺩﻳﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﺻﺮﺧﺴﺮﻭ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺤﮑﻤﺘﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻫﺎﻧﺮﻱ ﮐﺮﺑﻦ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻃﻬﻮﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۶۳ ،۲‬‬ ‫‪.۲۶‬‬
‫ــــــــــــ ‪ ،‬ﺯﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻓﺮﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻭ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺳﻴﺪ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪ ﺣﺎﺋﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﻴﺮﺍﺙ ﻣﮑﺘﻮﺏ‪.۱۳۸۴ ،‬‬ ‫‪.۲۷‬‬
‫ﻗﻴﺼﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﺩﺍﻭﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﻓﺼﻮﺹ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺪ‪‬ﻣﻪ ﻭ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺳﻴ‪‬ﺪ ﺟﻼﻝﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺁﺷﺘﻴﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ‬ ‫‪.۲۸‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻲ ﻭ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻲ‪.۱۳۷۵ ،‬‬
‫ﮔﻮﻫﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺮﺯﺍ ﺣﺴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺨﺎﺯﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪ ﻋﻴﺪﻱ ﺧﺴﺮﻭﺷﺎﻫﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺑﻬﺒﻬﺎﻧﻲ‪.۱۳۷۲ ،‬‬ ‫‪.۲۹‬‬
‫ﻣﺠﻠﺴﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﻠﹼﺎﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﺑﺎﻗﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﺤﺎﺭ ﺍﻷﻧﻮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻟﮑﺘﺐ ﺍﻻﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۱۰‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۶۵ ،۲‬‬ ‫‪.۳۰‬‬
‫ﻣﺪﺭ‪‬ﺱ ﻳﺰﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺮﺯﺍ ﻋﻠﻲﺍﮐﺒﺮ‪ ،‬ﺭﺳﺎﺋﻞ ﺣﮑﻤﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺕ ﺍﺭﺷﺎﺩ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻲ‪ ،‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۶۵ ،۲‬‬ ‫‪.۳۱‬‬
‫ﻣﻼﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭ ﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﺑﺘﺼﺤﻴﺢ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ ﺭﺿﺎ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﺯﺍﺩﻩ؛ ﺑﺎﺷﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺩ ﺳﻴﺪﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺧﺎﻣﻨﻪﺍﻱ‪،‬‬ ‫‪.۳۲‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩ ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۵‬ﭺ‪۱۳۸۱ ،۱‬‬
‫ــــــــــ ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﺳﻔﺎﺭ ﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺘﺼﺤﻴﺢ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩ ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪﻱ؛ ﺑﺎﺷﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺩ ﺳﻴﺪﻣﺤﻤﺪ‬ ‫‪.۳۳‬‬
‫ﺧﺎﻣﻨﻪﺍﻱ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩ ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻲ ﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،۷‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۸۰ ،۱‬‬
‫ــــــــــ ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺪﺃ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺫﺑﻴﺤﻲ ﻭ ﺟﻌﻔﺮ ﺷﺎﻩ ﻧﻈﺮﻱ؛ ﺑﺎﺷﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺩ‬ ‫‪.۳۴‬‬
‫ﺳﻴﺪﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺧﺎﻣﻨﻪﺍﻱ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩ ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﺻﺪﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۸۱ ،۱‬‬
‫ــــــــــ ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﺑﺮ ﺷﺮﺡ ﺣﮑﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺷﺮﺍﻕ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﻬﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﺎﭖ ﺳﻨﮕﻲ‪۱۳۱۵ ،‬ﻕ‪.‬‬ ‫‪.۳۵‬‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﻗﺐ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺡ ﺳﻴﺪ ﺻﺎﻟﺢ ﻣﻮﺳﻮﻱ ﺧﻠﺨﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻭ ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻣﻬﺪﻱ ﺍﻓﺘﺨﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻗﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﻄﺒﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﺩﻳﻨﻲ‪،‬‬ ‫‪.۳۶‬‬
‫ﭺ‪.۱۳۸۶ ،۲‬‬
‫ﻳﺜﺮﺑﻲ‪ ،‬ﻳﺤﻴﻲ‪ ،‬ﺣﮑﻤﺖ ﺍﺷﺮﺍﻕ ﺳﻬﺮﻭﺭﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻗﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺑﻮﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﭺ‪.۱۳۸۶ ،۲‬‬ ‫‪.۳۷‬‬

‫‪78‬‬

‫ﺳﺎل ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎره ﺳﻮم‬

‫زﻣﺴﺘﺎن ‪1396‬‬