نوع مقاله : علمی- پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری گروه فلسفه و کلام دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران
2 استاد گروه فلسفه و کلام اسلامی دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Proving the Necessary Being has always been a core concern of philosophical theology in both Islamic and Christian traditions. The argument grounded in the graded hierarchy of existence, as articulated by Mulla Sadra and Thomas Aquinas, attempts to connect the levels of reality to Absolute Being. This study aims to comparatively analyze these two formulations, focusing on their metaphysical underpinnings, to demonstrate their maximal convergence regarding this proof, despite their foundational divergences. Employing a descriptive-analytical and comparative method, it examines the principle of causality and the concept of perfection. Aquinas argues from the observed graded perfections of goodness and truth in beings to a First Cause and Absolute Perfection. Relying on horizontal (Aristotelian accidental) causality, he explains God as the external standard and cause of all perfections. Conversely, Mulla Sadra, based on the principiality of existence and its intensive gradation (*tashkik*), redefines causality not as a relation between independent entities, but as an existential, longitudinal, and internal bond uniting the levels of being. Inferior beings are pure dependence on higher grades, and this chain terminates in the Necessary Being by essence, who is identical with existence and the source of emanation. The key finding is that both philosophers arrive at the necessity of God through causality and a specific account of existential degrees. However, Mulla Sadra achieves this by redefining causality as an internal graded nexus, while Aquinas does so via a reinterpretation of horizontal Aristotelian causality.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)