The argument of the righteous (burhan-i siddiqin) is the name of a kind of argument in which the middle term is the absolute being or reality itself. ‘Allamah Tabataba’i has a specific interpretation of this argument that has been formulated in different ways. In this p More
The argument of the righteous (burhan-i siddiqin) is the name of a kind of argument in which the middle term is the absolute being or reality itself. ‘Allamah Tabataba’i has a specific interpretation of this argument that has been formulated in different ways. In this paper, the writer explains Fayyadi’s formulation of ‘Allamah Tabataba’i’s argument of the righteous and then criticizes it. Here, the writer also demonstrates that this formulation is in contrast to the surface meaning of ‘Allamah’s words. Moreover, he argues that it has remained essentially unfinished and cannot be considered a successful interpretation of the argument of the righteous.
Manuscript profile
Ibn Sina’s argument of the righteous is one of the most important arguments on demonstrating the existence of God in Islamic tradition. After Ibn Sina, a number of prominent Muslim philosophers and mutakallimun welcomed this argument and carried out some profound studie More
Ibn Sina’s argument of the righteous is one of the most important arguments on demonstrating the existence of God in Islamic tradition. After Ibn Sina, a number of prominent Muslim philosophers and mutakallimun welcomed this argument and carried out some profound studies in this regard in order to reveal its strengths and weaknesses following a critical approach. In spite of such efforts, there are still some ambiguities about this argument which demand more scientific research. In the present paper, the author has analyzed the form, content, and limits of the argument of the righteous based on logical principles and has demonstrated that it is an existent-oriented (not the concept of existent) and apriory argument on the basis of the impossibility of infinite regression and distinct from the argument of possibility. He also acknowledges that the argument of the righteous is no different from creature-oriented arguments in terms of epistemological value.
Manuscript profile
In an attempt to provide some stronger interpretations of the argument of the righteous which were based on fewer premises, Ḥakīm Sabziwārī presented three main interpretations, two of which can be considered to be among his philosophical innovations. These interpretati More
In an attempt to provide some stronger interpretations of the argument of the righteous which were based on fewer premises, Ḥakīm Sabziwārī presented three main interpretations, two of which can be considered to be among his philosophical innovations. These interpretations attracted great attention from later researchers and inspired some thinkers, such as ‘Allāmah Ṭabāṭabā’ī to present some more advanced interpretations. At the same time, as pioneers, they opened some new horizons before this philosophical discussion and, hence, functioned as turning points in the development of the argument of the righteous. Accordingly, it is necessary to critically examine the mentioned interpretations as well as later thinkers’ interpretations of these interpretations. The present study reports and critically analyzes Sabziwārī’s interpretations and deliberates over the specific points and problems of recent readings of his interpretations.
Manuscript profile
The argument of the righteous (Burhān al-Ṣiddīqīn) demonstrates the essence of the Necessary Being without resorting to an intermediary. This title was chosen for the first time by Ibn Sīnā in order to provide a new interpretation of an argument that Fārābī had previous More
The argument of the righteous (Burhān al-Ṣiddīqīn) demonstrates the essence of the Necessary Being without resorting to an intermediary. This title was chosen for the first time by Ibn Sīnā in order to provide a new interpretation of an argument that Fārābī had previously adduced. The argument of the righteous is one of the best and most concise philosophical and rational arguments on demonstrating the existence of God.This argument reasons from “being” to the “Necessary Being” so that none of God’s acts, such as motion or origination, functions as the middle term. Haeri Yazdi has tried to respond to the problems of this argument by explaining the meaning of possibility in the Peripatetic and Transcendent Schools of philosophy. Given his accurate analysis of the meaning of possibility, he believes that it can be used as a basis for proving the existence of the Necessary Being; therefore, it is not necessary to resort to the impossibility of infinite regression. Following an analytic comparative method and based on Mullā Ṣadrā’s valid criteria for the truth of the argument of the righteous, the present paper analyzes and examines Haeri Yazdi’s interpretation and shows that his view is not immune to criticism.
Manuscript profile
