Seyyed Abbas Zahabi Articles List

List of Articles Seyyed Abbas Zahabi

Open Access Article
- Abstract Page
- Full-Text
1 - Politics and Ruler’s in Suhrawardī’s Political System
Nooshin Naziri khameneh Abbas Zahabi Baabak Abbasi Ahmad Beheshti

Conduct is a keyword in Suhrawardī’s political system. In his view, conduct or wayfaring begins with self-knowledge at the individual level and moves them ahead to the social and political level and, finally, to ruling over a society. Suhrawardī’s intended ruler is a ph More

Conduct is a keyword in Suhrawardī’s political system. In his view, conduct or wayfaring begins with self-knowledge at the individual level and moves them ahead to the social and political level and, finally, to ruling over a society. Suhrawardī’s intended ruler is a philosopher who, through self-knowledge, steps into higher worlds, including the world of Ideas, which is the first world higher than the world of bodies in Suhrawardī’s philosophy. Through wayfaring in this world, the philosopher turns into an intermediary between the world of human beings and the world of God and angels. Through self-knowledge, wayfaring in the world of Ideas, and obedience to God, the philosopher further reaches the level of the spiritual leader, Imām, and leadership of the world. By considering the ruler as the spiritual leader or Quṭb and as an individual who is capable of connecting with the world of Ideas and mediating between God and human beings, Suhrawardī investigates politics, governance, ideal governance, and utopia in the light of a new philosophy. His views in practical wisdom and, particularly, politics correspond to his views in theoretical wisdom concerning some principles such as gradation, nobler possibility, wrath and kindness, and gradedness of the world. For Suhrawardī, as the world of Ideas, which among his own innovations, mediates between the world of matter and the world of omnipotent lights, the philosopher-ruler is related to the world of Ideas and mediates between human beings and God and also angels. The ruling of a ruler with the characteristics intended by Suhrawardī is never idealistic, far-fetched, or limited to specific people; rather, it is quite real and possible. Such a ruler pays attention to people’s happiness not only in the material world but in the hereafter. Manuscript profile
Open Access Article
- Abstract Page
- Full-Text
2 - A Comparative Judgement of the Views and Principles of Mullā Ṣadrā and Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī on the Problem of Corporeal Resurrection
Seyyed Ali Razizadeh Seyyed Abbas Zahabi
20.1001.1.15600874.1401.28.1.1.4

Both Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī and Mullā Ṣadrā believe in corporeal resurrection; however, they follow different approaches in this regard. A comparison of their views shows similarities in some of their principles but fundamental differences in some others. The origin of their More

Both Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī and Mullā Ṣadrā believe in corporeal resurrection; however, they follow different approaches in this regard. A comparison of their views shows similarities in some of their principles but fundamental differences in some others. The origin of their difference is their philosophical principles and, particularly, the discussions of “identical restoration of the non-existent” and “immateriality of faculties”. The rational demonstration of Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī’s corporeal resurrection was based on his belief in identity with the identical restoration of the non-existent, which has led to some incorrect conclusions such as the materiality of the immaterial dimensions of the soul in the process of resurrection. On the other hand, in contrast to Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī’s claim as to philosophers’ lack of belief in corporeal resurrection, Mullā Ṣadrā tried to prove it philosophically for the first time. Although his philosophical approach gave rise to some criticisms against him, the same approach was the secret behind his immunity against repeating the same mistakes committed by mutikallimun, including Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī. Mullā Ṣadrā rejected the theory of the restoration of the non-existent and believed in other worldly and not elemental corporeal resurrection. Therefore, to demonstrate the restoration of individuals’ acts, he did not have to resort to mutikallimun’s theory of the “return of dispersed components” of human beings. One of the other differences between the views of these two philosophers concerns the problem of the multiplicity and immateriality of faculties. Both thinkers believed in the immateriality of the soul, but Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī maintained that soulish faculties lack multiplicity and tried to bring it in line with the idea of the identical restoration of the non-existent. However, Mullā Ṣadrā believed that the solution to the problem of corporeal resurrection, similar to many other problems, must be sought in the specific method of the soul’s knowledge, particularly, the immateriality of imagination. This paper aims to explain and evaluate the fundamental differences between the views of Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī and Mullā Ṣadrā regarding the problem of corporeal resurrection. Manuscript profile

Current Issue

Published Issues

Menu

Browse

List of Articles Seyyed Abbas Zahabi