عرفان متعالي (ديدگاه و جايگاه عرفاني ملاصدرا)

Transcendent Gnosis and the Gnostic View and Place of Mulla Sadra

This paper deals with Mulla Sadraʹs views in gnosis and, as a result, his place among philosophers, theologians, and gnostics. It argues that Mulla Sadraʹs philosophy is neither a pure discoursive one, nor the same kalam or theology of his predecessors, nor gnosis in its traditional sense. Thus he is neither a pure discoursive philosopher, nor a gnostic heedless of philosophical problems, nor a theologian not to go beyond narration and argumentation. Rather, for him perfect knowledge originates in all principial sources of learning and wisdom, i.e. the intellect, revelation, and gnostic intuition. An intellect that is not rooted in revelation and gnostic intuition will go nowhere, and an intuition which is remote from revelation and rational deliberation cannot be immune against doubts. Moreover, pure reliance on traditions is not anything beyond imitative knowledge. The product of combining all these sources of knowledge is the Transcendent Philosophy, which contains a transcendent philosophy, a transcendent theology, and a transcendent gnosis. Mulla Sadra tries to grant an intuitive nature to philosophical findings and a demonstrative nature to gnostic intuitions, and then base both on revealed evidence. In this way, he presents arguments for the principiality and oneness of being and unites philosophy and gnosis with each other concerning their most essential common problems. The end of this philosophy is attaining happiness, and ultimate happiness and perfection are rooted in attaining the knowledge of God, which cannot be acquired except in the light of intellection, purification of the soul, and following the religious law (Shan ah). Accordingly, while rejecting useless theological and philosophical arguments and discussions, Mulla Sadra criticizes the pseudo-gnostics who suffer from some defects in their epistemological or behavioral dimensions or in both of them. In this way, he is both a critic and a reviver of kalam, philosophy, and gnosis. In fact, his criticism of these fields is the beginning of his revival of them.