Copulative existence (Wujud-e Rābiti) is "in itself for other". To "in itself" tells of its special nature and to "for other" tells of the relevance of this nature to another object. So, it has the essence apart from the relevant side that the relevance is the qualification of its essence. But the relevant ...
Read More
Copulative existence (Wujud-e Rābiti) is "in itself for other". To "in itself" tells of its special nature and to "for other" tells of the relevance of this nature to another object. So, it has the essence apart from the relevant side that the relevance is the qualification of its essence. But the relevant existence (Wujud-e Rābit) is just "for other" and not "in itself". It means that all its identity is the relevant and associated to otherness; therefore, there is no existence apart from the relevant side. In Mulla Sadra, the effect has the relevant existence and so, does not have an independent realization. His argument can be summarized in three steps: (1) rejection of external occurrence: on the basis of the principality of existence, the existence of the effect is just effect (in need); it is all its identity and the form of its existence; (2) rejection of analytic occurrence: the representation of the truth of effect (all is the relevant) means that there is no essence for the effect (even in mind); (3) Back causality to disposition (Tashaun): the effect is not "in itself" and there is no existence without cause; so, the distinction of cause and effect is in something non-external. Mulla Sadra calls it disposition (Tashaun). Some researchers raise some doubts in the second step, which is considerable. The answer to these doubts leads to the new version of Sadra's argument, which is more accurate than current versions. However, Mulla Sadra's claim in a way of the analysis of originator of the efficient cause is verifiable, which is less considered.
