تشكيك خاصي از منظر ابن‏سينا و شيخ اشراق

The Particular Gradation from Avicenna and Shaykh al-Ishraqiʹʹs Viewpoints

تبيين دقيق و عميق مسيله تشكيك كه از آن به عنوان عدل و مكمل نظريه اصالت وجود ياد مي‏شود، اگرچه در نظام حكمت صدرايي صورت گرفته است، ليكن نبايد از تلاش علمي فيلسوفان گذشته كه سرمايه‏اي غني براي وي فراهم آوردند غفلت نمود. به مشّاي نسبت داده‏اند كه وجودات را حقايق متباين دانسته و بر اين اساس، تشكيك در حقيقت وجود را منكرند. از سوي ديگر، سهروردي با مباني فلسفي نادرست خود، تشكيك را به متن خارج مي‏برد. هدف اين پژوهش كه به روش تحليلي و اسنادي سامان يافته، بررسي انتساب يادشده و نيز تبيين ديدگاه سهروردي مي‏باشد و حاصل آن اين است كه مشّاي اگرچه در ابتدا به تشكيك در حوزه مفاهيم (تشكيك عامي) معتقد بوده است، اين، سخن نهايي ايشان نبوده و مي‏توان قول به تشكيك خاصي را در آثار ابن‏سينا سراغ گرفت. البته معنون نبودن اين مسيله در زمان وي موجب شده كه برخلاف شيخ اشراق نتواند فروع و لوازم آن را نتيجه گرفته و در دستگاه فلسفي هستي‏شناختي منسجم و سازواري بسط دهد.

Although the analogical gradation, referred to as the counterpoise and complementary element of the theory priority of existence has been profoundly and precisely expounded in Sadraian system of theosophy, it is unfair to ignore the scientific endeavors of the past philosophers who had provided him with rich sources. The Aristotelians (Peripatetics) have been attributed to consider the entities as heterogeneous realities and accordingly deny the analogical gradation in the reality of being. Suhraward?, too, has put the analogical gradation outside the context through his wrong philosophical principles. Using a documentary–analytical method, the present paper tries to investigate the aforementioned attribution and expound Suhraward?ʹs standpoint. The research findings show that although Aristotle and his followers had initially accepted the analogical gradation in the realm of concepts (general analogical gradation), this acceptance was not his final view, and that reference to the particular analogical gradation can be found in Avicennaʹs works. Of course, unlike Suhraward? (Master of Illumination), he was not able to conclude the ramifications and implications of analogical gradation to a develop them in a coherent system of philosophical ontology, taking into account that this question was not a topic of discussion in his time.