Volume 5, Issue 1 (2025)
jpt 2025, 5(1): 29-44 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Najafi H, Naji Esfahani H. Mir Damad and the Formation of Shi’i Philosophy; from Refining Avicennian Philosophy to the Theory of Perpetual Creation. jpt 2025; 5 (1) :29-44
URL: http://jpt.modares.ac.ir/article-34-79499-en.html
URL: http://jpt.modares.ac.ir/article-34-79499-en.html
1- Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
2- Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
Full-Text [PDF 726 kb]
(136 Downloads)
| Abstract (HTML) (433 Views)
Full-Text: (2 Views)
Introduction
The Isfahan School of Philosophy is pivotal in reconciling wisdom and religious teachings. Mir Damad, the central figure of this school and the founder of the “Yemeni Wisdom”, was a representative of a movement that had profound affinity and alignment with the traditions of the Ahl al-Bayt (A.S.) and interpretive theological perspectives. By frequently quoting Qur'anic verses and Hadiths and blending philosophical expressions with them, Mir Damad diligently sought to prove the agreement and harmony between reason and revelation [Dinani 1998: 2/316-32]. And believed that true wisdom must be sought under the guidance of revelatory knowledge. Thus, the teachings of shari’a can be regarded as one of the fundamental pillars of knowledge in Yemeni Wisdom.
On the other hand, Mīr Dāmād held Avicenna in an exceptionally elevated and unparalleled position. He was one of the most active teachers of logic, natural sciences, and metaphysics in Avicenna’s al-Shifa (The Healing), and his works are filled with references to Avicenna’s writings. To such an extent that Mīr Dāmād’s theory of “perpetual creation” is based on the analysis and refinement of Avicennian teachings. By deriving several general principles from Qur'anic verses and Hadiths, Mīr Dāmād refined and completed some of the ontological foundations of Avicennian philosophy, thereby providing a philosophical explanation for the theory of “perpetual creation”. This article seeks to narrate this intellectual dialogue between Mīr Dāmād and Avicenna.
Mir Damad and the “Creation of the World” in Traditional Sources
Mir Damad believes that the notion of “temporal creation” or “imaginary time” is unacceptable from the perspective of religious texts. This is because, besides numerous rational objections, it contradicts the transcendental teachings of shari’a. Therefore, the emergence of the world must be explained through a means other than temporal creation. He argues that among the Quranic verses and Hadiths, there are indications - either direct or indirect - that point to the content of the theory of “perpetual creation”. He considers the explicit statements of the verses and Hadiths to affirm several general principles:
1- The essence and actions of the Creator are free from time and any form of imaginary extension.
2- The agency of God is in the form of creation ex nihilo (ibda’) and “creation from nothing”.
3- The creation of contingent beings occurs all at once without the precedence of time or matter.
4- God's relationship, knowledge, and actions with all contingent beings are uniform.
5- while encompassing all contingent beings existentially, God has “companionship” with them.
6- The Quranic verses and Hadiths indicate the “real and separative posteriority” of the world's existence from the existence of the Creator.
The acceptance of these principles by Mir Damad confronts him with two fundamental challenges:
- Based on the first and third principles, the “temporal creation” theory is unacceptable in any formulation. Moreover, considering the sixth principle, the theory of “essential creation” and the precedence of contingent beings by essential non-existence merely expresses that every creation requires a Creator who bestows existence. However, this is insufficient to fulfill the religious meaning of “creation”.
- Reconciling the fifth and sixth principles means adopting a moderate position on a spectrum where anthropomorphism and transcendentalism form their two extremes. This issue is deeper and more significant than the previous challenge, as it clarifies the relationship between the Creator and the created in Mir Damad’s philosophy.
The Theoretical Foundations of the “Perpetual Creation” Theory, from Avicennan Philosophy to Yemeni Wisdom
The foundational developments made by Mir Damad in the Avicennan principles of the theory of “Perpetual creation” are as follows:
1- In his analysis of perpetuity (dahr) and eternity (sarmad), Mir Damad, like Avicenna, speaks of “the relationship between the constant and the variable” and “the relationship between the constant and the constant” [Mir Damad, 2002a: 106]. However, midway through, he sets aside the term “relationship” and instead uses the expression “vessel” [Mir Damad, 1995: 7]. Mir Damad, on various occasions and within different frameworks, discusses the characteristics of time, dahr, and sarmad, explaining their existential status, relationships, and connections. The most significant developments in his interpretation of the Avicennan understanding of dahr and sarmad include: restricting the vessel of sarmad to the Necessary Existence (wājib al-wujūd) and affirming the eternal existence of temporal beings.
2- Following Avicenna, Mīr Dāmād identifies the criterion for needing a cause as contingency (imkan) [Mir Damad, 2013b: 342-343]. However, by expanding Avicenna’s theory, he also considers the contingent nature as the source of perpetual creation [Mir Damad, 2002b: 1/36].
3- Like Avicenna, Mir Damad regards priority (taqaddum) and posteriority (ta’akhkhur) as concepts that apply analogically (tashkik) to various categories [Mir Damad, 1995: 61]. He agrees with Avicenna in depicting the concept of priority and posteriority and how they apply to their instances and categories. However, regarding the diversity of priority and posteriority, he proposes a sevenfold division that differs from the common classification in Avicennan philosophy. He presents his theory through two explanations - based on types of separation (infikak) and types of coexistence (ma’iyya).
4- By reconstructing a passage from The Metaphysics of al-Shifa’, Mir Damad argues that Avicenna sought to present a threefold creation division. The third type of creation in Avicenna’s view is explained based on the posteriority of existence from non-existence explicitly in the text of reality: a separative (infikaki) and disjunctive (inilakhi) posteriority, which is non-temporal and non-flowing.
5- In revisiting a passage from al-Ta’liqat, Mir Damad explains that if a causal relationship exists between two contingent beings, the cause and effect coexist (ma’iyya) at the actualization level (taqarrur). However, the intellectual level (martabat al-‘aqli) of the cause precedes the intellectual level of the effect, as the intellectual level of both is distinct from their actualization. If the contingent effect is evaluated concerning the Necessary Cause, its intellectual level will still be posterior to the intellectual level of the Necessary Existence. Given the unity of the intellectual level and the objective actualization (taqarrur ’ayni) in the essence of the Necessary Existence, the posteriority of the contingent effect from the intellectual level of the Necessary Existence implies its posteriority from the objective actualization of the Necessary Existence.
Conclusion
Inspired by Quranic and traditional teachings, and through expanding the meanings of perpetuity and eternity and the categories of priority and posteriority in Avicennan philosophy, Mir Damad has provided a comprehensive and all-encompassing depiction of the three realms of existence. By accepting the precedence of each realm by its non-existence in the prior realm, it can be concluded that as we approach the higher realms, the number of real non-existences decreases. Temporal events are preceded by three types of non-existence: temporal, perpetual, and eternal. Similarly, perpetual beings are preceded by two types of non-existence: perpetual and eternal. However, the realm of eternity, the vessel of necessary existence, is free from all types of non-existence.
On the other hand, considering the presence of all essential contingent beings in the vessel of Dahr, God's creation of this realm is equivalent to the simultaneous creation of all realms of creation and command. Similarly, knowledge of this realm implies unchanging knowledge of the objective reality of contingent beings. The perpetual existence of temporal beings is a perspective that places their entire connective identity in the presence of the perpetual and eternal observer.
The Isfahan School of Philosophy is pivotal in reconciling wisdom and religious teachings. Mir Damad, the central figure of this school and the founder of the “Yemeni Wisdom”, was a representative of a movement that had profound affinity and alignment with the traditions of the Ahl al-Bayt (A.S.) and interpretive theological perspectives. By frequently quoting Qur'anic verses and Hadiths and blending philosophical expressions with them, Mir Damad diligently sought to prove the agreement and harmony between reason and revelation [Dinani 1998: 2/316-32]. And believed that true wisdom must be sought under the guidance of revelatory knowledge. Thus, the teachings of shari’a can be regarded as one of the fundamental pillars of knowledge in Yemeni Wisdom.
On the other hand, Mīr Dāmād held Avicenna in an exceptionally elevated and unparalleled position. He was one of the most active teachers of logic, natural sciences, and metaphysics in Avicenna’s al-Shifa (The Healing), and his works are filled with references to Avicenna’s writings. To such an extent that Mīr Dāmād’s theory of “perpetual creation” is based on the analysis and refinement of Avicennian teachings. By deriving several general principles from Qur'anic verses and Hadiths, Mīr Dāmād refined and completed some of the ontological foundations of Avicennian philosophy, thereby providing a philosophical explanation for the theory of “perpetual creation”. This article seeks to narrate this intellectual dialogue between Mīr Dāmād and Avicenna.
Mir Damad and the “Creation of the World” in Traditional Sources
Mir Damad believes that the notion of “temporal creation” or “imaginary time” is unacceptable from the perspective of religious texts. This is because, besides numerous rational objections, it contradicts the transcendental teachings of shari’a. Therefore, the emergence of the world must be explained through a means other than temporal creation. He argues that among the Quranic verses and Hadiths, there are indications - either direct or indirect - that point to the content of the theory of “perpetual creation”. He considers the explicit statements of the verses and Hadiths to affirm several general principles:
1- The essence and actions of the Creator are free from time and any form of imaginary extension.
2- The agency of God is in the form of creation ex nihilo (ibda’) and “creation from nothing”.
3- The creation of contingent beings occurs all at once without the precedence of time or matter.
4- God's relationship, knowledge, and actions with all contingent beings are uniform.
5- while encompassing all contingent beings existentially, God has “companionship” with them.
6- The Quranic verses and Hadiths indicate the “real and separative posteriority” of the world's existence from the existence of the Creator.
The acceptance of these principles by Mir Damad confronts him with two fundamental challenges:
- Based on the first and third principles, the “temporal creation” theory is unacceptable in any formulation. Moreover, considering the sixth principle, the theory of “essential creation” and the precedence of contingent beings by essential non-existence merely expresses that every creation requires a Creator who bestows existence. However, this is insufficient to fulfill the religious meaning of “creation”.
- Reconciling the fifth and sixth principles means adopting a moderate position on a spectrum where anthropomorphism and transcendentalism form their two extremes. This issue is deeper and more significant than the previous challenge, as it clarifies the relationship between the Creator and the created in Mir Damad’s philosophy.
The Theoretical Foundations of the “Perpetual Creation” Theory, from Avicennan Philosophy to Yemeni Wisdom
The foundational developments made by Mir Damad in the Avicennan principles of the theory of “Perpetual creation” are as follows:
1- In his analysis of perpetuity (dahr) and eternity (sarmad), Mir Damad, like Avicenna, speaks of “the relationship between the constant and the variable” and “the relationship between the constant and the constant” [Mir Damad, 2002a: 106]. However, midway through, he sets aside the term “relationship” and instead uses the expression “vessel” [Mir Damad, 1995: 7]. Mir Damad, on various occasions and within different frameworks, discusses the characteristics of time, dahr, and sarmad, explaining their existential status, relationships, and connections. The most significant developments in his interpretation of the Avicennan understanding of dahr and sarmad include: restricting the vessel of sarmad to the Necessary Existence (wājib al-wujūd) and affirming the eternal existence of temporal beings.
2- Following Avicenna, Mīr Dāmād identifies the criterion for needing a cause as contingency (imkan) [Mir Damad, 2013b: 342-343]. However, by expanding Avicenna’s theory, he also considers the contingent nature as the source of perpetual creation [Mir Damad, 2002b: 1/36].
3- Like Avicenna, Mir Damad regards priority (taqaddum) and posteriority (ta’akhkhur) as concepts that apply analogically (tashkik) to various categories [Mir Damad, 1995: 61]. He agrees with Avicenna in depicting the concept of priority and posteriority and how they apply to their instances and categories. However, regarding the diversity of priority and posteriority, he proposes a sevenfold division that differs from the common classification in Avicennan philosophy. He presents his theory through two explanations - based on types of separation (infikak) and types of coexistence (ma’iyya).
4- By reconstructing a passage from The Metaphysics of al-Shifa’, Mir Damad argues that Avicenna sought to present a threefold creation division. The third type of creation in Avicenna’s view is explained based on the posteriority of existence from non-existence explicitly in the text of reality: a separative (infikaki) and disjunctive (inilakhi) posteriority, which is non-temporal and non-flowing.
5- In revisiting a passage from al-Ta’liqat, Mir Damad explains that if a causal relationship exists between two contingent beings, the cause and effect coexist (ma’iyya) at the actualization level (taqarrur). However, the intellectual level (martabat al-‘aqli) of the cause precedes the intellectual level of the effect, as the intellectual level of both is distinct from their actualization. If the contingent effect is evaluated concerning the Necessary Cause, its intellectual level will still be posterior to the intellectual level of the Necessary Existence. Given the unity of the intellectual level and the objective actualization (taqarrur ’ayni) in the essence of the Necessary Existence, the posteriority of the contingent effect from the intellectual level of the Necessary Existence implies its posteriority from the objective actualization of the Necessary Existence.
Conclusion
Inspired by Quranic and traditional teachings, and through expanding the meanings of perpetuity and eternity and the categories of priority and posteriority in Avicennan philosophy, Mir Damad has provided a comprehensive and all-encompassing depiction of the three realms of existence. By accepting the precedence of each realm by its non-existence in the prior realm, it can be concluded that as we approach the higher realms, the number of real non-existences decreases. Temporal events are preceded by three types of non-existence: temporal, perpetual, and eternal. Similarly, perpetual beings are preceded by two types of non-existence: perpetual and eternal. However, the realm of eternity, the vessel of necessary existence, is free from all types of non-existence.
On the other hand, considering the presence of all essential contingent beings in the vessel of Dahr, God's creation of this realm is equivalent to the simultaneous creation of all realms of creation and command. Similarly, knowledge of this realm implies unchanging knowledge of the objective reality of contingent beings. The perpetual existence of temporal beings is a perspective that places their entire connective identity in the presence of the perpetual and eternal observer.
Article Type: Original Research |
Subject:
Metaphysics (Islamic)
Received: 2025/01/17 | Accepted: 2025/02/25 | Published: 2025/03/15
Received: 2025/01/17 | Accepted: 2025/02/25 | Published: 2025/03/15
References
1. Ashtiyani SJAD (1972). An anthology of philosophy in Persia. Paris: LIBRAIRE D'AMERIQUE ET D'ORIENT ADRIEN MAISONNEUVE. [French] [Link]
2. Dinani Q (1998). Philosophical thought in the Islamic world. Tehran: TARH-E NOU. [Persian] [Link]
3. Ibn Sina AA (1954). UYUN AL-HIKMAH. Badavi A, editor. Cario: French Institute of Oriental Archaeology. [Arabic] [Link]
4. Ibn Sina AA (1960). AL-ŠIFA: AL-ILĀHIYYĀT. Qanawati G, Zayed S, editors. Cairo: Ministry of Culture and Guidance. [Arabic] [Link]
5. Ibn Sina AA (1985). AL-NIJĀT. Danesh Pajouh M, editor. Tehran: University of Tehran Press. [Arabic] [Link]
6. Ibn Sina AA (1987). AL-ḤUDŪD. Tehran: Soroush. [Arabic] [Link]
7. Ibn Sina AA (2008). AL-IŠĀRĀT WA Al-TANBĪHĀT. Zarei M, editor. Qom: BUSTAN-E KETAB. [Persian] [Link]
8. Ibn Sina AA (2013). AL-TAʿLĪQĀT. Mousavian H, editor. Tehran: Iranian Research Institute of Philosophy. [Arabic] [Link]
9. Mir Damad MB (1899). AL-SABʿ AL-ŠIDĀD. Qom: AL-ISLAM Publishing House. [Arabic] [Link]
10. Mir Damad MB (1995). AL-QABASĀT. Mohaqeq M, editor. Tehran: University of Tehran Press. [Arabic] [Link]
11. Mir Damad MB (2001). JAẔAVĀT VA MAVĀQĪT. Owjabi A, editor. Tehran: MIRAS-E MAKTOOB Research Center. [Persian] [Link]
12. Mir Damad MB (2002a). AL-ṢIRĀṬ AL-MOSTAQĪM. Owjabi A, editor. Tehran: MIRAS-E MAKTOOB Research Center. [Arabic] [Link]
13. Mir Damad MB (2002b). The collected works of Mir Damad. Nourani A, editor. Tehran: Association of Cultural Works and Figures. [Arabic] [Link]
14. Mir Damad MB (2005). ŠĀREʿ AL-NEJĀT. In: Hashemi Shahroudi M, editor. Jurisprudential treatises. Qom: Islamic Jurisprudence Encyclopedia Institute on the Religion of Ahl al-Bayt. p. 239-420. [Persian] [Link]
15. Mir Damad MB (2013a). ZAVĀBIT AL-REDHĀ. Manganechi H, editor. Qom: Jurisprudential Center of Athar Imams. [Arabic] [Link]
16. Mir Damad MB (2013b). AL-UFUQ AL-MUBĪN. Naji Esfahani H, editor. Tehran: MIRAS-E MAKTOOB Research Center. [Arabic] [Link]
17. Naraqi MIA (2002). JAME AL-AFKAR VA NAQED AL-ANZAR. Hadizadeh M, editor. Tehran: HEKMAT Publication. [Arabic] [Link]
18. Taftazani MIU (1991). SHARH AL-MAQASID. Umaira A, editor. Qom: Al-SHARIF Al-RAZI Publication. [Arabic] [Link]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |