نتايج وجود رابط در خداشناسي فلسفي

Consequences of Copulative Existence in Philosophical Theology

بسياري از مباحث فلسفه اسلامي مقدمه‌يي براي مبرهن‌سازي مسايل خداشناسي شمرده ميشوند. از جمله» اين مباحث كه عنوان برجسته‌يي پيدا نكرده است، تقسيم دوبخشي وجود به رابط و مستقل در حكمت صدرايي است. اين ديدگاه كه از تحليل رابطه عليت بدست مي‌آيد، نكته ارزنده‌يي بيان ميكند كه بر اساس آن اصل هستي و ذات حق، سراسر بينيازي و استقلال است و مخلوقات او صرف وابستگي و تعلق به او بشمار ميروند. براهين خداشناسي، از قبيل اثبات ذات و صفات، در پرتو اين حقيقت، استحكام ويژه‌يي پيدا ميكنند. همچنين وابستگي محض ممكنات، وجودي غني و مستقل مطلق را ايجاب ميكند كه دوگانگي در ساحت او راه ندارد؛ زيرا نفي وحدانيت ذات حق، مستلزم تحقق دو امر محال، يعني استقلال يافتن موجودات رابط و نقصان نسبي غني مطلق خواهد بود. همچنين مسايلي مانند توحيد ربوبي و افعالي و قدرت و اراده» فراگير الهي، در پرتو اين مسيله تبيين قابل قبولي مي‌يابند. علم الهي بويژه علم به جزييات متغير، با اين ديدگاه به اثبات ميرسد؛ چرا كه اين امور جزيي همانند ساير ممكنات، تعلقات محض به آفريننده» خويش هستند و درنتيجه عين حضور نزد او خواهند بود.

Many issues in Islamic philosophy are used as premises in order to give a demonstrative nature to theological problems. One of these issues, which has not been given a specific topic, is the two-fold division of existence into copulative and independent types in Sadrian philosophy. This approach, which Mulla Sadra has developed based on an analysis of the causality relation, entails a significant point according to which the whole being and the Truth is independent, and His creatures absolutely depend on Him and belong to Him. Theological arguments, including the demonstration of essence and attributes, attain particular strength in the light of this truth. Moreover, the absolute dependence of possible things necessitates the existence of a self-sufficient and independent being in which duality has no way. This is because the negation of the oneness of the essence of the truth requires the realization of two impossible things: independence of copulative existents and the relative imperfection of the Absolute Rich. Moreover, some issues such as divine and agentive oneness and the all-embracing divine power and will can be conveniently explained based on the above problem. In the light of this view, the divine knowledge, specially the knowledge of changing particulars, is demonstrated. The reason is that these particular affairs, like other possible things, purely depend on their Creator and are, consequently, the same as being in His presence.