• List of Articles


      • Open Access Article

        1 - Editor's Notes
        Hossein  Kalbasi Ashtari
        Language Culture Civilation
        Language Culture Civilation Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        2 - A Study of Idah al-Khayr al-Mahd and its Influence over the History of Islamic Philosophy
        Gholamhossein  Ahmadi Ahangar
        The book al-Khayr al-mahd is inspired by Proclus’ Elements of Theology and, in spite of its small size, has exercised the greatest influence upon Islamic philosophy along with Athologia. In this treatise, Proclus has propounded several problems concerning the prime caus Full Text
        The book al-Khayr al-mahd is inspired by Proclus’ Elements of Theology and, in spite of its small size, has exercised the greatest influence upon Islamic philosophy along with Athologia. In this treatise, Proclus has propounded several problems concerning the prime cause, intellect, and soul, which are accepted by Muslim philosophers. Through posing the four elements of prime cause, existence, intellects, and souls in the cosmological theory of emanation based on effusion, as well as dividing each of the intellects and souls into primary and secondary ones and discussing them based on their ontological places and excellence, Proclus stands at a distance from Plotinus’ theory of emanation. The translation of al-Khayr al-mahd into Arabic granted it a more visible presence before Muslim philosophers because of its greater conformity with their religious and revealed thoughts. That is why we sometimes confront the same words and statements used in al-Khayr al-mahd in their works. For example, in ‘Amiri’s treatise of Fi al-m‘alim ilahiyyah, the principles and problems discussed in al-Khayr al-mahd have been presented in exactly the same form. However, they have been reflected in a new form in others’ works. In this paper, the writer has tried to demonstrate the influence of this book on Muslim philosophers. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        3 - Truth of Man and the True Man in Abulhassan ‘Amiri and Mulla Sadra
        Hassan  Rahbar
        The discussion of man’s existence and his truth and station in the world of creation has always attracted the attention of philosophers as one of the important philosophical issues. Muslim philosophers have also dealt with the problem of man in their discussions. The fu Full Text
        The discussion of man’s existence and his truth and station in the world of creation has always attracted the attention of philosophers as one of the important philosophical issues. Muslim philosophers have also dealt with the problem of man in their discussions. The fundamental point in philosophical anthropology is to speak about the truth of man as a distinct and chosen existent among all others. Abulhassan ‘Amiri Nishaburi, the Iranian Muslim philosopher, is one of the thinkers who has posed certain discussions regarding the truth of man in his philosophical works. As a result, here the writers have compared his views in this regard with those of Mulla Sadra as a distinguished philosopher with some novel theories about the truth of man. In doing so, they have tried to analyze their ideas and reveal their points of agreement and disagreement. Here, their conception of man as a creature of God composed of soul and body, their conception of the soul as the truth of man and, as a result, their opposition to materialistic approaches can be considered to be among their common points. On the other hand, their views concerning the body-soul relationship and its quality can be viewed as their points of difference. Mulla Sadra believes that the body-soul relationship is a necessary and ontological one, and introduces the steam-like spirit as the mediator between the two. Then, by posing the theory of corporeal origination, he provides a more comprehensive theory. Nevertheless, ‘Amiri considers this relationship to be an accidental one and does provide a clear explanation to justify his position in this regard. It is emphasized that both of them conceive of the intellect as one of the levels of the soul, the element distinguishing man from other existents, and the criterion for the truth of man. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        4 - Man’s Intellectual and Intuitive Knowledge of the One and the One’s Knowledge of Himself and other than Himself in Plotinus’ Philosophy
        Asadullah  Heydarpour Kiya’i
        The present paper explores whether, based on Plotinus’ view, man can have a demonstrative and inferential knowledge of the One. It also tries to provide answers to the questions of whether he can describe and explain Him, whether he is capable of having an intuitive and Full Text
        The present paper explores whether, based on Plotinus’ view, man can have a demonstrative and inferential knowledge of the One. It also tries to provide answers to the questions of whether he can describe and explain Him, whether he is capable of having an intuitive and presential knowledge of the One, what kind of knowledge the One has of Himself, and, finally, whether this knowledge is of an intellectual demonstrative nature or of an intellectual-intuitive type. Plotinus believes that man is not capable of attaining a theoretical concept and intellectual-demonstrative knowledge of the One. Therefore, he cannot provide a description and explanation for Him. Nevertheless, he will be able to have intuitive knowledge and presential knowledge of the One under certain conditions. In this case, he will become one with the One in some way. Demonstrative thinking, which is concomitant with plurality in its essence, has no way into the essentially simple and pure One. Accordingly, He is intuitively self-conscious, and since He is the Origin of everything, and since everything is present in Him, He is aware of other than Himself in the same way that He is aware of Himself. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        5 - The Relationship between the Pillars of Wisdom and Utopia in Suhrawardi and Plato
        Saeed  Rahimian
        The idea of utopia entails extensive discussions with a history as long as the history of humanity. Plato was the first philosopher who portrayed utopia in a philosophical mould. On the other hand, in the Islamic world, Farabi was the pioneer of this view and left it as Full Text
        The idea of utopia entails extensive discussions with a history as long as the history of humanity. Plato was the first philosopher who portrayed utopia in a philosophical mould. On the other hand, in the Islamic world, Farabi was the pioneer of this view and left it as a legacy to the thinkers living after him until today. Shaykh Shahab al-Din Suhrawardi is one of the philosophers who gives a specific direction to his philosophical thoughts in search of an ideal state; one that emerges from the heart of his Illuminationist ontology and epistemology. The present paper aims to explore this firm relationship and, given the place of Plato’s ideas in Suhrawardi’s philosophy, highlights the points of agreement and disagreement of these two thinkers in this regard. Considering the similarities between their views, particularly in cases such as man’s interest in a civil society, the conformity and harmony between their ideal state and the order of being and confining the ruling power to the people possessing the knowledge of the truths of the higher world, one cannot deny the independence of Suhrawardi’s philosophy, especially, with respect to the leadership of an ideal state and its leader’s attributes. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        6 - Philosophers and the Esoteric Interpretation of the Qur’an in Ibn Rushd
        Roohallah  ‘Alizadeh
        Like other Islamic philosophers, Abulwalid Muhammed Ibn Rushd, the most prominent philosopher of the West of the Islamic world thought about the relationship between religion and philosophy and created some important works in this regard. From among them, we can refer t Full Text
        Like other Islamic philosophers, Abulwalid Muhammed Ibn Rushd, the most prominent philosopher of the West of the Islamic world thought about the relationship between religion and philosophy and created some important works in this regard. From among them, we can refer to Fasl al-maqal, al-kashf ‘an manahij al-adillah fi ‘aqa’id al-malah and Tahafut al-tahafat. In Ibn Rushd’s view, religion and philosophy are in harmony and bear no opposition against each other. In this regard, he argues, “Since Shari‘ah is the truth and invites people to a kind of rational reasoning which is fulfilled by the truth, both are the truth, and the truth is not in contrast to the truth. Rather, both agree with each other and acknowledge each other.” However, saying that philosophy is not in opposition to religion pertains to the innermost of religion and Qur’anic verses because philosophy and rational thinking are sometimes in contrast to the external meaning of religious ideas and verses. Ibn Rushd’s solution for removing such contrasts is to attain the inner meaning of the verses through interpretation. Of course, like Farabi, Ibn Rushd does not believe in the unity of religion and philosophy and merely thinks about their consistency with each other and lack of opposition between them. This is because philosophy and religion have to be independent from each other for the sake of their own safety. Thus we must not mix their related discussions with each other. In the present article, the writers have tackled the problem of the harmony between philosophy and religion from Ibn Rushd’s view in general, and explored his theory of interpretation, in particular. Finally, they argue that one of the most important goals of Ibn Rushd in propounding the discussion of the lack of opposition among religion, philosophy, and interpretation was defending philosophy and giving the right of interpretation to the people of reasoning, who are the same philosophers. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        7 - Development of the Theory of Categories from Aristotle to Ibn Sina
        Reza  Rasuli Sharabiyani
        Aristotle’s view of categories is not a merely linguistic one. His four-fold division of existents and referring to the features of being in the subject and being told in terms of the subject alongside each other indicate his ontological view of categories. In his eyes, Full Text
        Aristotle’s view of categories is not a merely linguistic one. His four-fold division of existents and referring to the features of being in the subject and being told in terms of the subject alongside each other indicate his ontological view of categories. In his eyes, they are the windows linking subject and object to each other. He poses the issue of categories to bring thought and reality together. Therefore, the goal of the laws of Aristotelian logic, in addition to analyzing the forms of thinking, is to explain the knowledge of reality as it is reflected in the human mind. The discussion of categories in Aristotle’s logical works functions as a window to the entrance of essentialism in logic and the dominance of Aristotelian metaphysics on his logic. This aspect weakens Aristotle’s logic in presenting and analyzing many propositions and syllogisms and makes the semantic aspect of this logic more prominent in comparison to its formal aspect. The theory of categories existed in logic books before Ibn Sina. In several cases in the book of categories of al-Shifa, he mentions that there is no place for the discussion of categories in logic and puts it aside in the logic section of al-Isharat. Unlike Aristotle, Ibn Sina’s heedlessness of categories can reveal formalization in logic and its deviation from Aristotle’s essentialism and semanticism. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        8 - Athiri’s Heritage: Life and Works
        Mehdi  ‘Azimi
        Athir al-Din Mufaddal Ibn Umar Abhari (590-663 AH) is a well-known Iranian mutikallim, philosophers, logician, mathematician, and astronomer. So far, Recher, Qanawati, Muwahhid, and Sariogulu have provided some heterogeneous reports of his life and works. In this paper, Full Text
        Athir al-Din Mufaddal Ibn Umar Abhari (590-663 AH) is a well-known Iranian mutikallim, philosophers, logician, mathematician, and astronomer. So far, Recher, Qanawati, Muwahhid, and Sariogulu have provided some heterogeneous reports of his life and works. In this paper, through criticizing previous studies and based on first-hand historical sources, the writer has tried to give a comprehensive and well-documented report of his life and works. Some of the new findings of this report are as follows: 1) the timeline of Abhari’s life, 2) a bibliography of his works (a list of his manuscripts and printed works), 3) a complete list of his masters, students, and contemporary thinkers, 4) critiques of Recher, Qanawati, and Sariogulu claiming that Abhari’s hometown was Mosul, 5) Sariogulu’s critique stating that Abhari was said to be from Samarqand because either he or his ancestors were originally from this city, and Muwahhid’s critique stating that old sources do not contain any information in this regard, 6) Sariogulu’s critique reporting that Abhari went to primary school in Mosul, 7) ‘Asqalani’s critique and, following it, the critiques of Sarkis, Kordali, and Mudarres Razawi, all claiming that Abhari found shelter with Abu al-fada’ in Hamat, and 8) A critique declaring that Abhari passed away in Mosul. Manuscript Document