بررسی تطبیقی رئوس ثمانیه در فلسفه سینوی و حکمت صدرایی

A comparative study of the octet vertices in Sina’s philosophy and Sadra’s wisdom

Abdullah Nasri¹, Seyed Mokhtar Mousavi²

1. 1.       Professor of philosophy, University of Allameh Tabataba'I, Email: nasri_m@atu.ac.ir
2. 2.       PhD Student of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, University of Allameh Tabataba'I, (Corresponding Author) Email: s.mokhtar.mousavi@gmail.com.

Abstract

Sina's philosophy after Farabi's philosophy, with an accurate search of the views of the ancient Greek scholars, is the basis of Islamic philosophy and one of the foundations of transcendental wisdom. The relation between Sina and Sadra's philosophy is still susceptible to numerous thematic studies. In this research, the views of Ibn Sina and Mulla Sadra have been studied comparatively regarding octet vertices. Among the octet vertices, there is an emphasis on the importance of four subjects: "the definition of philosophy and its importance", "fundamentals and problems of philosophy", "the position of philosophy among other sciences", and "the benefit and place of philosophy ". The views of these two philosophers on the octet vertices of philosophy (as an introduction to philosophy and some of the outside looking into philosophy) are largely linear and compatible, although there are some disagreements. In many cases, Sadra had a viewpoint about Ibn Sina's opinions and was largely criticized and analyzed from Sina's viewpoint. and in spite of Sina's supreme power of philosophy, he has sometimes been forced to use transcendental wisdom because of its conceptual failure; therefore, it can be said that not only at the entrance of philosophy but also in philosophical opinions, if the prophetic power of Sina's philosophy is combined with the conceptual richness of transcendental wisdom, we will have a more powerful and effective philosophical heritage for the contemporary philosophical dialogue.

KeyWords: Comparative Study, Octet Vertices, philosophy Ibn sina, Mulla Sadr

Introduction

In the past, Octet Vertices has been introduced as an introduction to science, but not in philosophy as an introduction, but as part of philosophy itself. In this paper, some of the topics of Octet Vertices in philosophy are comparatively reviewed from the point of view of Avicenna's philosophy of wisdom, and their sharing and disagreement with Mulla Sadra's reading of Avicenna. No research has ever been done so far.

Methodology

In this article, the views of both philosophers regarding Octet Vertices are discussed first, and their differences and commands emphasizing Mulla Sadra's reading from Avicenna are considered. In this way, we take into account all the works of the two philosophers.

Findings and Arguments

The position of philosophy regarding the position of philosophy in science, these two philosophers disagree due to differences in the fields of science division ("subject" and "destination"). Sadra has made interpretive attempts to explain that Avicenna paid attention only to the "subject" as the only criterion for the science division, and the rest would return to the "subject", but Mulla Sadra's perception was wrong.

The Subject of Philosophy

Both philosophers are regarded as the subject of philosophy as "existing to what is existed" slightly difference in the meaning of the argument. Also, the concept of existence is trivial and no need to a definition. Sadra has been argued it's being trivially, and both of them consider the subject of philosophy as a trivial one and its proof is Impossible.

Definition of philosophy

In the definition of philosophy, both philosophers have several definitions that can be categorized. For both philosophers, "the First Philosophy" is a science that discusses the "existing to what exists".

Intrinsic Contingency (Araz)

Regarding the intrinsic contingency, Sadra, while confirming the comment of Avicenna, mistakenly considered misplacing others' perceptions of Avicenna's words for not paying attention to the criterion of intrinsic contingency. Sadra describes the verses of Avicenna regarding the determination and definition of the subject of philosophy and intrinsic contingency in the Healing (Shafa) Book, which expresses the implied confirmation of their provisions.

Concepts and Philosophical Issues

In describing philosophical concepts without referring to a philosophical second conscionable, Ibn-e Sina has described the features that distinguish them from the logical and the material concepts. But there is also a word that destructs this notion. Sadra explained the Ibn-e-Sina's statement that the being contingency of philosophical concepts influenced by Sadra's principles (such as the existence of an interface, etc.) was not the same as the principles of Avicenna's argument.  According to Ibn Sina and Sadra's opinions, only the primary divisions of existence are of a philosophical issue, however, on the basis both of which, in all matters of science, must be discussed about the intrinsic contingency. If the intrinsic contingencies only including primary divisions are, then this division is not a primary one, and includes secondary divisions as well, and should not be entered in philosophical discussions. The solution to the problem is to determine the criterion of "intrinsic contingency". According to both philosophers' opinions, there will be irreparable mistakes unless we consider the matter as valid and do not provide proof.

The Benefit and Degrees of Philosophy

Both philosophers consider philosophy to be a special beneficiary (proof of the origins of other sciences) that is worthy of itself, but Sadra, specifying Avicenna's vision, says that as the existence of eminent self-existence creates the origin and is the cause of other beings, the related science (superiority philosophy) is the origin and the reason for other sciences. But this justification is acceptable only on the basis of Sadra (the relative existence of events), not on Avicenna's opinion. Perhaps Ibn Sina's purpose has not been a foreign cause.

Ibn Sina has considered philosophy inherently prior to other sciences, but because of the necessity of teaching or weakness of man to make a lemma argument in philosophical matters, it is considered as a conclusion science. Sadra has also interpreted such a view of the philosophy in a different way. It seems that Khajeh Nasir's view of considering the conditions of a pupil at the beginning of learning is the best justification, that is, the order of the familiarity of the mind with natural, mathematical, and philosophical concepts.

Conclusion

Sadra's reading of Ibn Sina has not been uniform, but generally in the domain of the Octet Vertices without the intervention of his bases, he has had a singular reading of Ibn Sina's ideas. A careful analysis shows that Ibn Sina's words have the potential to explain some of Sadra's views, but the scarcity of Masha wisdom's conceptual system regarding lexical and conceptual weakness is a barrier. Undoubtedly, the power of Ibn Sina's philosophy, along with the richness and precision of the words of the transcendentalist wisdom, gives contemporary Muslim thinkers the capacity and philosophical heritage of philosophy to enter into meaningful philosophical discussions with other philosophical owners and metaphysical systems.

References

-        Aristotle, (1998) Metaphysics, Persian Translated by Sharaf al-Din Khorasani, Tehran, Hekmat [In Persian].

-        Ibn Sina, Hossein Ibn Abdullah (1326 AH) Tasse Rassail, Cairo, Dar Al-Arab [In Persian].

-         Ibn Sina, Hossein Ibn Abdullah (1405) Logic of the Mashryqin, Qom, Persian Translated by Ayatollah Al-Marashi School [In Persian].

-         Javadi Amoli, Abdullah, (2007) Rahigh Makhtom Adjusted by Hamid Parsania, Qom, Esra Center Publishing House [In Persian].

-        Sadr al-Din Shirazi, Mohammad ibn Ebrahim (1981) Al-Shavahed Al-Robobeih, Persian Translated and Correction and Pendency by Seyyed Jalaluddin Ashtiani, Mashhad, Al-Markaz Al-Jamei  Lelnshar [In Persian].