The Ontological and Epistemological Transition of the Soul: A Comparison between Mulla Sadra’s Active Intelligence and Hegel’s Absolute Geist

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 (Corresponding Author) Assistant Professor, Dept. of Theology and Islamic Studies, Payame Noor University

2 Assistant Professor, Dept. of Theology, Shahrekord University

Abstract

By putting forward a divine introvertive existence of the active intelligence within his book entitled al-Shawādhid al-Rubūbiyya, the third Ishrāq (illumination) of the third Mashhad, Mulla Sadra has brought forth a novel theory of the transition and/or becoming process of soul. Although the active intelligence’s existence-in-itself is the same exactly as its mode of existence for the soul and as one of the modes of the soul’s modes, it can be recognized also as the soul’s telos and perfection. Accordingly, there arises some kind of justification for the soul’s passivity and affection generated from the divine introvertive existence of active intelligence, and for the soul’s attachment and unity with the active intelligence. Hereupon, the active intelligence acts simultaneously as the agent of the soul’s existence as well as its telos. To Hegel, “the Absolute” wholly shares its essence with the subject; here lies the nature of the subject and the subject’s telos is to become absolute as though the Absolute is a mode among many other ones of the subject. Consequently, the “soul” intelligibly becomes and unite with the self-thinking self (Geist) or pure self-consciousness. In this transformation, the respects of causation and telos are both identical. The Absolute constitutes itself through self-consciousness so as to become Geist on a temporal process. The aim of this article is to analyze and yield an exact comparison between the two theories, and to clarify that both of them, despite their differences, explain the soul’s epistemic alteration by exploiting the concept of self-consciousness. 

Keywords

References

ابن سینا. (1368).  اشارات و تنبیهات. ترجمۀ حسن ملکشاهی. تهران: سروش.
ارسطو. (1393). درباره نفس. ترجمۀ علیمراد داودی. تهران: حکمت.
افلاطون. (1367). مجموعهرسائل افلاطون. ترجمۀ محمد حسن لطفی و رضا کاویانی. تهران: خوارزمی.
افلاطون. (1393). شش رساله افلاطون. ترجمۀ محمدعلی فروغی. تهران: هرمس.
حسن زاده آملی، حسن. (1362). معرفت نفس. دفتراول. تهران: علمی فرهنگی.
ملاصدرا. (1382). الشواهد الربوبیه. تهران: بنیاد حکمت اسلامی صدرا.
ملاصدرا. (1383).  الاسفار الاربعه. جلدهای 3 و 8. تهران: بنیاد حکمت اسلامی صدرا.
ملاصدرا. (1422). مجموعه رسائل فلسفی. بیروت: داراحیاءالتراث العربی.
و.ت. ستیس. (1370). فلسفه هگل. ترجمۀ حمید عنایت. تهران:کتاب‌های جیبی.
هگل، فردریش. (1370). فنومنولوژی روح. ترجمۀ زیبا جبلی. تهران: شفیعی.
هیپولیت، ژان. (1386). پدیدارشناسی روح برحسب نظر هگل. ترجمۀ کریم مجتهدی. تهران: علمی فرهنگی.
Devries, willem. (2000). Hegel’s logic and philosophy of mind. in the age of German Idealism (ed). R.c.Solomon. London and New York: Rutledge.
Hegel. (1977). The difference Between Fichte’s and Schelling’s system of philosophy (ed). Harris and Walter Cerf. state university of New York.
Inwood, Michael. (1999). A Hegel Dictionary. The Black well publisher well publisher dictionary.
Rouch, Leo. (2000). Hegel,spirit and politic. in the age of German Idealism (ed). R.c Solomon. London and New York: Rutledge.
Seigel, Jerrold. (2005). The Idea of the self. Cambridge university press.
Solomon, R.c. (1987). from Hegel to Existentialism. Oxford: Oxford university press.
W.R, Bruce. (1999). Hegel, the logic of the self-consciousness. Edinburgh University press.
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image
Journal of Philosophical Theological Research
Volume 18, Issue 2 - Serial Number 70
February 2017
Pages 153-178

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics