Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 18

Volume 12.

December 2011

Transcendent Philosophy
An International Journal for Comparative Philosophy and Mysticism

Editor
Seyed G. Safavi SOAS, University of London, UK

Book Review Editor


Sajjad H. Rizvi Exeter University, UK

Editorial Board
G. Aawani, Iranian Institue of Philosophy, Iran A. Acikgenc, Fatih University, Turkey M. Araki, Islamic Centre England, UK S. Chan, SOAS University of London, UK W. Chittick, State University of New York, USA R. Davari, Tehran University, Iran G. Dinani, Tehran University, Iran P.S. Fosl, Transylvania University, USA M. Khamenei, SIPRIn, Iran B. Kuspinar, McGill University, Canada H. Landolt, McGill University, Canada O. Leaman, University of Kentucky, USA Y. Michot, Hartford Seminary, Macdonald Center, USA M. Mohaghegh-Damad, Beheshti University, Iran J. Morris, Boston College, USA S.H. Nasr, The George Washington University, USA S. Pazouki, Iranian Institue of Philosophy, Iran C. Turner, University of Durham, UK H. Ziai, UCLA, USA

Transcendent Philosophy Journal is an academic peer-reviewed journal published by the London Academy of Iranian Studies (LAIS) and aims to create a dialogue between Eastern, Western and Islamic Philosophy and Mysticism is published in December. Contributions to Transcendent Philosophy do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial board or the London Academy of Iranian Studies. Contributors are invited to submit papers on the following topics: Comparative studies on Islamic, Eastern and Western schools of Philosophy, Philosophical issues in history of Philosophy, Issues in contemporary Philosophy, Epistemology, Philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Philosophy of science (physics, mathematics, biology, psychology, etc), Logic and philosophical logic, Philosophy of language, Ethics and moral philosophy, Theology and philosophy of religion, Sufism and mysticism, Eschatology, Political Philosophy, Philosophy of Art and Metaphysics. The mailing address of the Transcendent Philosophy is: Dr S.G. Safavi Journal of Transcendent Philosophy 121 Royal Langford 2 Greville Road London NW6 5HT UK Tel: (+44) 020 7692 2491 Fax: (+44) 020 7209 4727 Email: philosophy@iranainstudies.org Submissions should be sent to the Editor. Books for review and completed reviews should be sent to the Book Review Editor. All other communication should be directed to the coordinator. Transcendent Philosophy is published in December. Annual subscription rates are: Institutions, 60.00; individuals, 30.00. Please add 6.00 for addresses outside the UK. The Journal is also accessible online at: www.iranianstudies.org. London Academy of Iranian Studies ISSN 1471-3217

Assistant Editor:
Shahideh Safavi, University of London

Coordinator:
Seyed Sadreddin Safavi, University of London

Layout & Design


Mohamad A. Alavi, www.mediatics.net

Articles
The Structure and Semiotics of the Second Book of Rumis Mathnawi as a Whole Mahvash Alavi [5-28] Ethics in the Protection of Environment Seyyed Mostafa Mohaghegh Damad [29-54] Mulla Ali Nuri as an Exponent of Mulla Sadras Teachings Janis Eshots [55-68] A Comparative Study of Faith from Kierkegaards and Rumis Perspective Masoumeh Bahram [69-92] Fundamentality of Existence Aziz Daftari [93-118] Mulla Sadra and the Unity and Multiplicity of Existence Karim Aghili [119-146] Avicenna on Matter, Matters Disobedience and Evil: Reconciling Metaphysical Stances and Quranic Perspective Maria De Cillis [147-168] Some Reflections upon Islamophobia as the Totally Other Seyed Javad Miri [169-184] Religion and Artificial Intelligence Alireza Ghaeminia [185-200] Suhrawardi and Mohaghegh Dawani on the Intuitive Knowledge of Soul Ebrahim Rezaie [201-222] Transcendence Model of Intellectual Evolution Seema Arif [223-252] Foundations and Development of Absurdism in Western Thought: Reflections from Perennialist Perspective Bilal Ahmad Dar [253-278] Religious Studies and the Question of Transcendence Muhammad Maroof Shah [279-306] Relationship of Theoretical and Practical Rationality in the Philosophy of Kant and Mulla Sadra and Some of its Consequences Sima Mohammadpour Dehkordi [307-320] Mysticism of Ferdowsis Shahnameh: An International Epic, Mystical and Sagacious Persian Masterpiece Seyed G Safavi [321-332]

Transcendent Philosophy London Academy of Iranian Studies

Mull Al Nr as an Exponent of Mull Sadrs Teachings Janis Eshots University of Latvia, Latvia

Abstract
Mull Al Nr was an indispensable link in the transmission of Mull Sadrs teachings and an important commentator of his works. In my article, Ill focus on one of them a short treatise, entitled Bast al-haqqa wa wahdat al-wujd, which deals with the modes of thingness (shayiyya) and existence (wujd) in general, and the socalled illuminative relation (al-idfa al-ishrqiyya) in particular. The most significant statements Nr makes in this brief work consist in the identification of thingness with existence and the breath of the Merciful (nafas al-Rahmn) with the illuminative relation. I intend to examine these two important points and the employed argumentation in detail, showing how Nr exploited some ideas, current in the Kalm and theoretical Sufism, to the benefit of the doctrine of Mull Sadr. Keywords: Nr, Sadr, existence, thingness, illuminative relation, oneness, simplicity

I Mull Al ibn Jamshd Nr Mzandarn Isfahn (d. 1246/1831) was a disciple of Muhammad Bdbd (d. 1198/1783) and a teacher of Hjj Mull Hd Sabzavr (d. 1289/1873), Mull Ismil (Whid al-Ayn)

56 Janis Eshots

(d. 1277/1861), Mull Abdallah Zunz (1257/1841), Sayyid Rd Lrijn (d. 1270/1853) and Mull Muhammad Jafar Lhij Langard (d. after 1255/1839), to mention just a few of his numerous students. He was, thus, an indispensable link in the transmission of Mulla Sadras teachings. Nrs long life (the exact year, not to mention the date, of his birth is not known but he is believed to have been at least ninety according to some reports, more than a hundred years old when he died), it appears, was not rich in external events. He is said to have studied first in his native Nr (a small town on the shore of the Caspian sea), then for a while in Qazwn, finally coming to Isfahn to complete his studies with Bdbd.1 He taught philosophy in Isfahn for about sixty years. It is known that Fath Al Shh Qjr invited him to come to teach to Tehrn, but Nr declined his offer, because at that time he had almost two thousand (!) students in Isfahn.2 According to his last will, Nrs remains were taken to Najaf and buried in the precincts of the mausoleum of Imam Al (in the quarter of the gate of Ts).3 Nr was an important interpreter of Mull Sadrs works. He wrote, in particular, detailed glosses to Sadrs commentary on the Qurn,4 the Asfr, 5 Al-Shawhid al-rubbiyya, Asrr al-yt6 and Mafth al-ghayb. 7 He also composed a number of treatises, in which he expounded the tenets of Sadrs doctrine. Two of these treatises [Rislat f] bast al-haqqa and [Rislat f] wahdat al-wujd were published by the late S.J. Ashtiyn in the Anthology of the Iranian Philosophers, from Mir Damad to our days.8 In my paper, Ill focus on these treatises,9 attempting to establish, how faithful was Nr to Sadrs ideas and how insightfully he interpreted them.

Mull Al Nr as an Exponent of Mull Sadrs Teachings 57

To begin, the title of the first treatise (perhaps not given by Nr himself) - [Rislat f] bast al-haqqa does not reflect well the actual content of the work, since only the first four pages, out of thirty, deal with the principle of the simplicity of the reality directly. The rest is a discussion on the modes of thingness (shayiyya) and existence (wujd), and on the so-called illuminative relation (al-idfa al-ishrqiyya). The discussion on the simplicity of reality is succinct and, in fact, comes down to reproducing the basic version of the argument, provided by Sadr himself in a number of his shorter treatises (eg, the Arshiyya). Therefore, Ill focus on Nrs treatment of the issue of thingness instead. II The question of how thing (shay) relates to existent (mawjd), as it is well known, provoked a heated and lasting debate among the Mutazilites, some of whom proposed the concept of the non-existent thing (al-shay al-madm), defining it as something fixed and determined (shay thbit mutaqarrir).10 In the Avicennan tradition, the thing/ existent distinction manifests itself as the distinction between essence and existence.11 What meaning does Nr, a representative of the school of Sadr, whose followers assert the primacy of existence (aslat al-wujd), according to which quiddity (mhiya) is a shadow (zill) and an imitation (hikya) of existence, ascribe to thingness? Can it be, in his eyes, anything else than a shadow of existence, which alone possesses true reality or, rather, coincides with the latter (wujd being an equivalent of tahaqquq)? Interestingly, our expectations are not quite fulfilled, because Nr treats the issue of thingness in a somewhat different way. He begins the discussion by stating that there are two kinds of thingness: one is affirmative (thubtiyya) or conceptual (mafhmiyya), and the other existential (wujdiyya). The former can be predicated to many and appears to be identical with the mental existence (al-wujd al-dhihn);

58 Janis Eshots

in turn, the latter, which can only be predicated to a single individual, is, no doubt, an equivalent of the objective external existence (al-wujd alayn al-khrij). Nr describes these two kinds of thingness in the following way:
Our intellect and intuition (wijdn) testify and confirm that there is something in the unlimited (=absolute) reality (al-wqi al-mutlaq), which, if it is considered in itself, without taking into account what is external to it, can be predicated to many (l biyan an al-haml al l-kathrn). If it is considered solely in itself, it appears as something indefinite (mubham) that can be predicated to many and describes itself as the universal (al-kull), i.e. as something to which is attributed universality (kulliyya) We call this kind of thing and thingness conceptual thing and conceptual thingness; and it is [also] called affirmative thing and affirmative thingness [Likewise, our intellect and intuition also confirm that] there is something in the unlimited reality that is different from the thing that was described above namely, if it is considered in itself, without taking into account what is external to it, it cannot be predicated to many. If it is considered solely in itself, it appears as an absolute impossibility [to predicate it to many] and a pure negation of such predication. Its reality is a particular and real one, an individuation (tashakhuss) and entification (or: objectification. J.E.) (taayyun), in the sense of the aforementioned negation and impossibility of predication to many. Such a thing in itself negates the possibility to predicate it to many. In turn, the thing which is different from it, namely, the first one, which in itself can be predicated to many, does not become something particular, real, individual and entified that cannot be predicated to many, otherwise than through the second. We call this second kind of thing and thingness existential thing and existential thing; and it is also called [simply] existence. It has been definitely proved that this second kind of thing is what is truly real, while the first one, namely, the conceptual thing, can only exist accidentally, and that the first individuates and becomes an individuated affair through the second.12

The conceptual thing differs from the existential one (read: the concept of the thing differs from its reality) in that it does not effect the traces (thr) and properties (ahkm) of the thing, states Nr a few lines

Mull Al Nr as an Exponent of Mull Sadrs Teachings 59

below.13 This statement, together with the aforementioned proposition of the universality of the conceptual thing (as opposed to the particularity of the existential one) allows us to conclude that the affirmation (thubt) Nr speaks about refers to nothing else but the mental existence (al-wujd al-dhihn). The concept of mental existence plays an important role in the thought of Mull Sadr, who describes it as follows:
This kind of existence, in the aspect of which the things and quiddities do not effect their proper traces when the soul conceives of them and when they become present in the world of the soul, without taking into account the external [objective world], is called the mental and shadowy existence (wujdan dhihniyyan wa zilliyyan) and the existence of the likeness (wujdan mithliyyan).14

The thing which possesses only mental existence effects no traces and properties whatsoever. No doubt that the conceptual or affirmed thing is exactly this sort of thing. One might wonder what prevented Nr from employing the term mental existence (al-wujd al-dhihn) in his discourse and made him speak, instead, about affirmation (ithbt/ thubt). I have no ready answer to this, but my guess is that he simply reasoned in a somewhat different way than Sadr, eventually arriving at the same basic conclusions. Nr might have used different terminology in a number of cases and he might have had minor differences of opinion with Sadr but, as I hope to demonstrate in this paper, he was an entirely Sadrian thinker. What we call conceptual/ affirmative thingness, is only a shadow of existential thingness just as mental existence, which leaves no traces in the outside, is a shadow of the external objective existence, which does leave such traces. Therefore, the universal is, by necessity, the shadow of its particular, as far as their existence is concerned. But, a faithful follower of Sadr, Nr goes further than this. When we are dealing with a contingent being, which does not actually enjoy existence in the full and true sense of the term, both its existential and conceptual thingnesses represent nothing more than shadows and likenesses, states he.

60 Janis Eshots

Since the possible being cannot have a full and true existence, and since it is impossible to conceive of it as of a thing, possessing the reality of thingness, rather, since it can, by necessity, only enjoy an illuminative relational existence (al-wujd al-idf al-ishrq), possess a weak shadowy connective incomplete [mode of] being (alkawn al-nqis al-daf al-zill al-irtibt) and be a thing in the sense of relational thingness (al-shayiyya al-idfiyya), namely, by means of the relation that is called the illuminative relation and [by means of] a shadowy unreal thingness, nothing is a real thing, except the Necessary15

Not only cannot the contingent, according to Nr, exist in the true sense of the word it also cannot be a thing in the real sense of thingness. Such conclusion, as we saw above, can only be made if we treat thingness as either being inseparable from existence or coinciding with it fully. Ill postpone the discussion on the illuminative relation for a while, until we turn to the oneness of existence, and will conclude the discussion on thingness with what seems to be the ultimate result of Nrs meditation on this issue. The contingent lacks not only real existence and true thingness. As a pure shadow and mere relation, it cannot even be called he or it. Hence, it is impossible to refer to it properly, as to something (at least relatively) independent - just as we cannot properly refer to the shadow, if we do not take into account at all its owner and possessor.
The thing, whose quiddity is not fully identical with its being and which is not itself because of itself, as well as the thing, whose it-ness (huwiyya) depends on the other, is not it in the absolute sense.16

This allows us to turn to the discussion of Nrs treatment of the oneness of existence (wahdat al-wujd), to which his second treatise is devoted. III Nrs approach to the issue of the oneness of existence appears to be more radical than that of Sadr: while the latter on different occasions

Mull Al Nr as an Exponent of Mull Sadrs Teachings 61

and in different aspects treats the oneness at issue either as the specific oneness (i.e. the oneness of species) (al-wahda al-nawiyya), or as the individual oneness (al-wahda al-shakhsiyya), 17 Nr seems to be concerned solely with the individual oneness: not surprisingly, he only employs the expression wahdat al-wujd in order to refer to the essential unification (al-tawhd al-dht al-marf bi wahdat al-wujd wa l-mawjd).18 According to him, there are two levels of the oneness of existence or mercy the level of the essence of the Merciful (dht al-Rahman), which possesses true simplicity (al-basta al-haqqa), and the level of the flowing through (sarayn) of the essence of the Merciful and its allencompassing mercy. 19 The first level represents the true oneness, while the second (that of the flowing through of existence/ mercy and its being poured upon the contingents or the carcasses of the things (haykil al-ashy)) refers to the oneness in manyness (al-wahda f lkathra). This second level, upon an examination, turns out to be nothing but shadow, relation and connection of the first.
The possible existence to which this group (the Sufis. J.E.) habitually refer as the merciful breath is nothing else than connection (irtibt).20

Since it is nothing more than connection and relation, it should not actually be taken into consideration and paid attention to, in the same way as ink is not taken into consideration when we read a letter that is written with it.21 The nature of this relation or connection must now be explained, to make Nrs point clearer. What he has in mind, is not the ordinary categorical relation but the so-called illuminative one (al-idfa alishrqiyya).22 The illuminative relation is the relation, which consists of an illuminating thing (mushriq) and its illumination (ishrq) (e.g. the sun and its ray). Properly speaking, it consists of one side only, because,

62 Janis Eshots

in it, the relation (idfa) is simultaneously also the related thing (mudf). The possible existence, or the breath of the Merciful, or the illuminative relation, does not have any reality of its own in the same way as the shadow does not have any reality if considered without its owner and the ray if taken without the sun. Hence, there is no dweller in the abode, apart from Him. This is exactly the stance that Sadr had earlier taken in the Asfr, at the end of discussion on causation, arriving at a conclusion that
the existent (mawjd) and the existence (wujd) are confined to one individual reality, which has no companion in true existentiality (mawjdiyya) and has no peer in its entity, and there is no other dweller in the dwelling of existence, apart from Him.23

Thus, we can conclude that Nr believed in the individual oneness of existence, in the Sadrian sense. Previous to Sadr, this attitude was typically associated with Muhy alDn Ibn al-Arab, who taught that everything is a manifestation and self-disclosure (tajall) of the Real.24
The Real is the entity of the wujd, not anything else, and [what is known as] the attribution of the wujd to the contingents is [nothing else but] the Reals manifestation to itself through their (i.e., the contingents. J.E.) entities.25

However, as we see, unlike Sadr and Nr, who interpret wujd as existence (hast), Ibn al-Arab takes the word, first and foremost, in its literal sense, finding (yft). Finding, in turn, most have an object that is being found hence, Ibn al-Arab seems to ascribe some reality to the entities of contingent things (although the Real appears to find them only accidentally, as mirrors, in which He finds (contemplates) Himself).

Mull Al Nr as an Exponent of Mull Sadrs Teachings 63

The immediate source of Sadrs teaching on the individual oneness might have been Dwd al-Qaysar, who, in the introduction to his commentary on the Fuss, describes three kinds of limited (or quazi-) existence according to him, the existence that is spread upon the entities in knowledge is the shadow of the true existence, while, in turn, the mental existence and the (created) external existence are the shadows (zilln) of this shadow.26 One fine point of Sadr and Nrs treatment of the issue of the oneness of existence, perhaps, consists in their describing this shadowy being not merely as shadow (zill) but also as illuminative relation: in this way, a bridge between the teachings of Ibn al-Arab and Shaykh alIshrq was built and, gradually, in post-Sadrian thought, the doctrines of the oneness of existence, on the one side, and the illumination, on the other, penetrated into each other, making an integral whole.27 In turn, certain Nrs insights on the common existence (al-wujd almm) as connection (irtibt) have recently been developed by one of the most influential living Iranian philosophers, Ghulm Rid Ibrhm Dnn in his research on connected existence (al-wujd al-rbit).28 IV The examples provided above should be sufficient to demonstrate that Mull Al Nr was a thoughtful and insightful follower of Mull Sadrs teachings and a skilful and innovative exponent of them. He did not attempt to imitate the letter of Sadrs doctrine: instead, he often employed new terms and even new proofs, or modified and elaborated those provided by Sadr, in order to demonstrate the veracity and vitality of his teaching. He was quite successful in this, as we can conclude from the above analysis of his treatises, dealing with thingness and the oneness of existence. At the current stage, when a good number of Nrs works remain unpublished 29 and no attempts of a thorough and comprehensive analysis of those published, to the best of my knowledge, have been made, it is impossible to draw a sufficiently detailed picture of his philosophical views and to properly register his contributions to the

64 Janis Eshots

development of the Sadrian school of thought. However, even a brief analysis of some of his published treatises seems to provide unquestionable evidence of the depth of his insight and the highly refined character of his discourse. Hence, there is little doubt that the sixty years long period, during which he transmitted Sadrs doctrine to several generations of students, constitutes an indispensable and extremely important stage in the development of Sadrs school of thought and in the dissemination of his ideas among wider intellectual circles of the Zand and Qajar Iran. Bibliography
shtiyn, S.J. and H. Corbin (eds.). Anthologie des philosophes iraniens depuis le XVIIe sicle jusqu nos jours/Muntakhabt az thr-i hukam-i ilh-yi Irn az asr-i Mr Dmd wa Mr Findirisk t zamn-i hdir. 4 vols., Paris and Tehran: Academie Imperiale Iranienne de Philosophie et Depositaire Librairie Adrien Maisonneuve 1971-79. shtiyn, S.J. Sharh-i muqaddima-i Qaysar bar Fuss al-hikam. 4th ed. Qum: Markaz-i intishrt-i daftar-i tablght-i islm 1375 S.H. Esots, Janis. Cosmic Imagination in the Thought of Ibn al-Arabi and al-Suhrawardi, in A. Asadova (ed.). East and West: Common Spiritual Values. Istanbul: Insan 2010. P. 237-248. Esots, Janis. The Gnostic Element of Sadras Doctrine on Causation, in Seyed G. Safavi (ed.), Mulla Sadra and Comparative Philosophy on Causation. London: Salman Azade Press 2003. P. 7389. Esots, Janis. Unification of Perceiver and Perceived and Unity of Being, in Transcendent Philosophy, vol. 1, 3 (December 2000). P. 17. Frank, Richard M. The Metaphysics of Created Being According to Ab l-Hudhayl al-Allf: A Philosophical Study of the Earliest Kalm. Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut in Het Nabije Oosten 1966. Ibn al-Arab, Muhy al-Dn. Al- Futht al-makkiyya. Beirt: Dr al-Sdir: non-dated. Ibrhm Dnn, Ghulm Rid. Wujd-i rbit wa mustaqil dar falsafa-i islm. Tehrn: Sahm 1362 S.H. Karbs-zda Isfahn, Al. Hakm-i mutaallih Bdbd - ihygar-i hikmat-i shi dar qarn-i davzdahum-i hijr. Tehrn: Pazhhishgh-i ulum-i insn wa mutlit-i farhang 1381 S.H. Mull Al Nr. Haqiqat-i Qurn, Irfn-i Irn. No. 8. Tehrn: Haqqat 1380 S.H. P. 88-96. Mull Al Nr. Rasil-i falsaf: Bast al-haqqa wa Wahdat al-wujd. khund Mull Nazar Al Gln. Tuhfa (published as one vol.). Ed. S.J. shtiyn. [Mashhad?]: Anjuman-i islm hikmat wa falsafa-i Irn 1357 S.H. Nj Isfahn, Hmid. Darmad, in Irfn-i Irn. No. 8. Tehrn: Haqqat 1380 S.H.

Mull Al Nr as an Exponent of Mull Sadrs Teachings 65

Qaysar, Dwd al-. Matla khuss al-kalam f man fuss al-hikam. Qum: Muassasa muhibbn li-tiba wa l-nashr 1423 L.H. Sadqh Suh, M. Tarikh-i hukam wa uraf-i mutaakhir. 2nd ed. Tehrn: Hikmat 1381 S.H. Shrz, Sadr al-Dn al-. Asrr al-yt. Ed. M.Khjav. Tehrn: Iranian Academy of Philosophy 1981. Shrz, Sadr al-Dn al-. Al-Hikma al-mutaliyya f l-asfr al-aqliyya al-arbaa. 9 vols. Eds. R.Lutf, I.Amn, and F.Ummd. 3rd edition, Beirt: Dr ihy al-turth alarab 1981. Shrz, Sadr al-Dn al-. Mafth al-ghayb. 2 vols. Ed. M.Khjav. Beirt: Muassasat al-tarkh al-arab 1999. Shrz, Sadr al-Dn al-. Al-masil al-qudsiyya, in idem. Se risla-i falsaf. Ed. S.J. shtiyn. 3rd ed. Qum: Markaz-i intishrt-i daftar-i tablght-i islm hawza-i ilm-i Qum 1378 S.H. Shrz, Sadr al-Dn al-. Tafsr al-Qurn al-Karm. 7 vols. Ed. M. Khjav. Qum: Intishrt-i Bdr 1366/1987. Sohravardi, Sh.Y. Oeuvres philosophiques et mystiques. Ed. Henry Corbin. 2nd edition. TehranParis: Academie Imperiale Iranienne de Philosophie et Depositaire Librairie Adrien Maisonneuve 1976.T. 1. Tunikbun, Muhammad. Qisas al-ulam. Tehrn: 1888 (lithogr. ed.). Wisnovsky, Robert. Notes on Avicennas Concept of Thingness, in Arabic Sciences and Philosophy. Vol. 10 (2000). P. 181-221. Endnotes
1

Among his other teachers, the biographers have mentioned Mrz Ab l-Qsim Mudarris Isfahn and Muhammad Ibrhm Jadd Gulpyagn Isfahn (d. 1199/ 1785) (see: Hmid Nj Isfahn. Darmad// Irfn-i Irn. No. 8. Tehrn: Haqqat 1380 S.H. P. 81; M. Sadqh Suh. Tarikh-i hukam wa uraf-i mutaakhir. 2nd ed. Tehrn: Hikmat 1381 S.H. Chapter 5. P. 144). 2 Al Karbs-zda Isfahn. Hakm-i mutaallih Bdbd - ihygar-i hikmat-i shi dar qarn-i davzdahum-i hijr. Tehrn: Pazhhishgh-i ulum-i insn wa mutliti farhang 1381 S.H. P. 121-122. 3 Muhammad Tunikbun. Qisas al-ulam. Tehrn: 1888 (lithogr. ed.) P. 150-151. For more sources on Nrs life, see: Hmid Nj. Darmad. P. 81-82, note 1. The most recent attempt to present a detailed account on Nrs life, apparently, was made by M. Sadqh Suh in his Tarikh-i hukam wa uraf. Chapter 5. P. 143160. However, almost the entire chapter consists of (badly arranged) quotations from earlier sources and a list of Nrs most prominent students (even a tentative list of Nrs writings is absent!). 4 Published in: Sadr al-Dn al-Shrz. Tafsr al-Qurn al-Karm. 7 vols. Ed. M.Khjav. Qum: Intishrt-i Bdr 1366/1987. 5 Published in: Sadr al-Dn al-Shrz. Al-Hikma al-mutaliyya f l-asfr al-aqliyya

66 Janis Eshots

al-arbaa. 9 vols. Eds. R.Lutf, I.Amn, and F.Ummd. 3rd edition, Beirt: Dr ihy al-turth al-arab 1981. 6 Published in: Sadr al-Dn al-Shrz. Asrr al-yt. Ed. M.Khjav. Tehrn: Iranian Academy of Philosophy 1981. 7 Published in: Sadr al-Dn al-Shrz. Mafth al-ghayb. 2 vols. Ed. M.Khjav. Beirt: Muassasat al-tarkh al-arab 1999. 8 S.J. shtiyn and H. Corbin (eds.). Anthologie des philosophes iraniens depuis le XVIIe sicle jusqu nos jours/Muntakhabt az thr-i hukam-i ilh-yi Irn az asr-i Mr Dmd wa Mr Findirisk t zamn-i hdir. 4 vols., Paris and Tehran: Academie Imperiale Iranienne de Philosophie et Depositaire Librairie Adrien Maisonneuve 1971-79. Vol. 4. P. 545-598. Another treatise of Nr, Haqqat-i Qurn (in Persian), was published by Hmid Nj Isfahn a few years ago (Mull Al Nr. Haqiqat-i Qurn, Irfn-i Irn. No. 8. Tehrn: Haqqat 1380 S.H. P. 88-96). 9 I was using the book: khund Mull Al Nr. Rasil-i falsaf: Bast al-haqqa wa Wahdat al-wujd. khund Mull Nazar Al Gln. Tuhfa (published as one vol.). Ed. S.J. shtiyn. [Mashhad?]: Anjuman-i islm hikmat wa falsafa-i Irn 1357 S.H. P. 9-33 and 34-62. (It is impossible to establish, whether this edition actually preceded the 4th vol. of the Muntakhabt az thr-i hukam or it is a pirated edition that has appeared after it. In any case, the texts seem to coincide exactly with those found in the Muntakhabt.) 10 This definition is believed to belong to Ab Yaqb al-Shahhm (d. after 257/871), a disciple of Ab l-Hudhayl al-Allf (d. 227/841 ?) (see: Richard M. Frank. The Metaphysics of Created Being According to Ab l-Hudhayl al-Allf: A Philosophical Study of the Earliest Kalm. Istanbul: Nederlands HistorischArchaeologisch Instituut in Het Nabije Oosten 1966. P. 47 (see also the references to Shahrastn in footnote 6)). A most useful review (together with a detailed list of the sources on the history of the issue of thingness) is provided by Robert Wisnovsky.in his Notes on Avicennas Concept of Thingness (Arabic Sciences and Philosophy. Vol. 10 (2000). P. 181-221, See P. 185-186 and notes 8 and 9). Moreover, the issue is discussed in great detail by the eminent Russian scholar A.V. Smirnov in his monograph: .. . : . : 2001. . 293-317. 11 As R. Wisnovsky puts it, for Ibn Sn, thing and existent are identical extensionally but different intensionally (Wisnovsky. Notes. P. 190.). 12 Nr. Rasil. P. 34-35. 13 Nr. Rasil. P. 35. 14 Sadr al-Dn al-Shrz. Al-masil al-qudsiyya (Chapter 3. F ithbt al-wujd aldhihn), in idem. Se risla-i falsaf. Ed. S.J. shtiyn. 3rd ed. Qum: Markaz-i intishrt-i daftar-i tablght-i islm hawza-i ilm-i Qum 1378 S.H. P. 220. 15 Nr. Rasil. P. 32.

Mull Al Nr as an Exponent of Mull Sadrs Teachings 67

16 17

Nr. Rasil. P. 58. I have discussed Sadrs views on the oneness of existence in my earlier article The Gnostic Element of Sadras Doctrine on Causation, in Seyed G. Safavi (ed.), Mulla Sadra and Comparative Philosophy on Causation. London: Salman Azade Press 2003. P. 7389. 18 Nr. Rasil. P. 58. 19 Ibid. 20 Nr. Rasil. P. 28. 21 Nr. Rasil. P. 19. 22 The term illuminative relation (al-idfa al-ishrqiyya) apparently was first used by Suhraward (see: Sh.Y. Sohravardi. Oeuvres philosophiques et mystiques. Ed. Henry Corbin. 2nd edition. TehranParis: Academie Imperiale Iranienne de Philosophie et Depositaire Librairie Adrien Maisonneuve 1976.T. 1. P. 487). However, Sadr and his followers interpret it in a very different way (see my article Unification of Perceiver and Perceived and Unity of Being, in Transcendent Philosophy, vol. 1, 3 (December 2000). P. 17). 23 Sadr. Asfr. Part 2. P. 292. 24 We are not discussing here popular ecstatic mysticism, whose slogan and catchword was all is He, without making any differentiation between the Real proper and His shadows and manifestations. 25 Muhy al-Dn Ibn al-Arab. Al- Futht al-makkiyya. Beirt: Dr al-Sdir: nondated. Vol 1. P. 328. 26 Dwd al-Qaysar. Matla khuss al-kalam f man fuss al-hikam. Qum: Muassasa muhibbn li-tiba wa l-nashr 1423 L.H. Vol. 1. P. 17. See also S.J. shtiyns commentary on this passage: S.J. shtiyn. Sharh-i muqaddima-i Qaysar bar Fuss al-hikam. 4th ed. Qum: Markaz-i intishrt-i daftar-i tablght-i islm 1375 S.H. P. 117-118. 27 I have referred to some results of this integration in my article Cosmic Imagination in the Thought of Ibn al-Arabi and al-Suhrawardi, in A. Asadova (ed.). East and West: Common Spiritual Values. Istanbul: Insan 2010. P. 237-248. 28 Ghulm Rid Ibrhm Dnn. Wujd-i rbit wa mustaqil dar falsafa-i islm. Tehrn: Sahm 1362 S.H. 29 See the list in: Hmid Nj Isfahn. Darmad. P. 82-83. In this article, Hmid Nj writes (P. 82, note 2) that he is preparing a collection of Nrs works. I do not know, how far this project has advanced since then (the article was published in early 1380 S.H., i.e., some ten years ago).

68 Janis Eshots