Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Origin of Man in Pre Eternity and His Origination in Time Mulla Sadra and The Imami Shi Ite PDF
The Origin of Man in Pre Eternity and His Origination in Time Mulla Sadra and The Imami Shi Ite PDF
According to Mulla Sadra, then the movement of the soul is not from initial perfection, to
a state of bodily imperfection, and back to a second perfection. [33] Rather, the
individuated soul originates through the mixture of a pre-existent spiritual reality and
base matter (which may be signified by the clay as a mixture of “water” and “earth”,
respectively, although the analogy is not perfect.) Its movement, therefore is from its state
of an originally mixed and spiritually imperfect substance, toward a state of purified
substance; and it is precisely the pure or spiritual element within the mixed substance of
the human soul which alone leads it down the road to perfection. As the Shi’ite tradition
claims, it “yearns for that of which it was made”; it is the spirit in man which longs for
the spirit, or in other words, it is only that which comes from God that returns to Him.
There can be no yearning of base matter, or even of the body considered in its purely
material aspect) for the sublime spirit or the spiritual realm, for Mulla Sadra tells us,
“neither in the body nor in the faculties of the body is there the perception of the
immaterial substance, the reigning Light, such that one could speak of [the body]’s
desiring it”.[34]
Divine predestination and human free will of course, the implication that one’s spiritual
destination is determined by the very substance of which one is created raises the issue of
divine predestination or compulsion. Are some human beings compelled by their very
substance to move toward their own spiritual destruction? While the “believers”, in the
Shi‘ite tradition, whose hearts are made of the superior clay and whose bodies are made
of the inferior clay have the opportunity to work with their hearts and against their bodies
in the direction of spiritual perfection, it would seem that the “unbelievers” whose hearts
and bodies are made of inferior clay do not even have the faculties to attempt to move in
this direction.
There is also a second element in these traditions which likewise seems to suggest a kind
of divine compulsion of human spiritual destiny. According to many Shi‘ite cosmogonic
traditions, not only are there two types of clay - made with sweet and salty water,
respectively - but these two kinds of clay are then mixed together by the hands of God.
After having mixed the two, God then separates the clay into two parts, one taken with
His right hand and one taken with His left. This further dichotomy which is thus
established between the souls on the right and those on the left seems to have an
implication for the spiritual destiny of those two sets of individual souls. This is
demonstrated when God commands those souls derived from the clay in His right hand to
enter the fire. They do this with perfect obedience; and as a reward for this obcdience,
God makes the fire cool and harmless for them. He then commands those souls derived
from the clay in His left hand to enter the fire, but they fear for their own safety, and thus
disobey God by refusing to enter (in some cases after having been given two
opportunities to do so by God.)[35] The traditions then explain that it was in this way that
human “obedience” and “disobedience” were established.[36]
This particular element in the Shi’ite version of the events of pre-eternity is often
presented as part of a commentary upon Qur’anic verse, 7:172, regarding God’s taking of
a solemn oath from all of the children of Adam (a. s.) for their recognition of His
Lordship. The verse reads: “And when your Lord brought forth from the Children of
Adam, from their loins, their seed, and made them testify of themselves, (saying): Am I
not your Lord? They said: Yea, surely. We testify..”.
Now, this particular verse is often discussed in connection with the “fiìra”, or primordial
perfection of man, and the awareness of “tawåid”, or the oneness of God and His
Lordship, into which all human beings are born. However, in both Shi‘ite and Sunni
tafsir traditions,[37] this verse is also connected with the tradition of the divine command
to enter the Fire, and the obedience and disobedience of the people of God’s right hand
and left hand, respectively - a tradition which seems to suggest that the obedience or
disobedience of individual human souls in their earthly lifetimes is already determined
(albeit by their own actions and not divine compulsion) in pre-eternity. Such an idea
apparently conflicts with Sadra’s own view that it is only the habits and behaviors
repeated and thus ontologically acquired during the course of an individual’s earthly life
that determines his spiritual destiny, not choices made in the timeless realm of pre-
eternity.
It is possible that the descriptions of these apparently determinative pre-eternal events as
found in Shi‘ite åadith sources and the seemingly contradictory Sadrian principle that a
soul’s spiritual destiny depends upon its own willful actions in this life[38] can be
reconciled by establishing a distinction between God’s foreknowledge of human destiny
and His compulsion of that destiny. In Sadrian terms, the principle that the spiritual
destiny of a given man is determined by his habits and actions committed in this world is
explained as the last, and not always achieved, movement of the highest element of a
man’s soul from potentiality (quwwa) to actuality (fi‘l). From the Sadrian perspective,
whether a development should take place within the physical, psychic or spiritual aspect
of a man, it always represents a trans-substantial movement from potentiality to actuality.
Thus, according to Mulla Sadra, while the child is still in the womb, it possesses in
actuality only the vegetative soul - that which is nourished and which grows – and all
other levels of soul are only possessed in potentiality. When the embryo develops into an
infant and is born, the animal soul - that which senses and imagines -is actualized; and
when the child reaches the age of reason (sometimes equated with the age of
“speaking”) the rational soul (al-nafs al-naìiqa) is actualized. Once the human soul has
reached this level, it possesses the “practical” intellect, the faculty through which it may
come to realize its intellectual perfection, or in other words, the faculty through which the
intellective or immaterial soul may be actualized, after having only existed in potentiality.
This final move only occurs in a small minority of individual souls; but short of having
realized this final perfection, individual souls may pass from this world while in a state of
moving either upward toward this post-rational perfection, or downward, toward a
reduction of the uniquely human rational perfection. For this reason, according to Mulla
Sadra, some souls (namely, those who reach intellective perfection) are transmuted into
an angelic form in the next world; while the souls moving toward this, but dying short of
it, are raised in the next life in the sensible paradise of the soul. Those who died while
moving away from the direction of perfection, are thus transferred in the next life to the
sensible hell,[39] and transmuted, as noted above, either into form of a devil, or into the
subhuman forms of a brute beast or predatory animal - in accordance with their true inner
nature[40] - hidden in this world, but obvious and apparent in the next.
Now all of this motion and transition from potentiality to actuality belongs precisely to
beings created in time. Time, itself, is the measure of this constant motion of the world,
the elements and human souls from potentiality to actuality, which is itself an illusion
engendered by existence in the temporal world. But what can this have to do with God,
with His immutable Essence, or with His quality of knowledge? God and the essential
quality of His knowledge exist in pure actuality. Thus, from the point of view of God’s
knowledge, all things exist in their actuality, while from the perspective of individual
souls created in time, existence is experienced as the movement from potentiality to
actuality. In a sense, then, what these spiritual or immaterial souls will become through
their own actions and habits in the world of temporality, they already are in God’s
knowledge and in the timeless state of pre-eternity.[41] Proof of this might be given by the
very nature in which the oath or mithaq is taken by God from the Children of Adam
(a.s.). From one point of view, this event is ontologically prior to the existence of these
souls in the material world, that is, before the spirit’s connection with matter and their
passage through the various states of the soul. These individuals are brought forth as
“particles” (dhurriyya), which suggests that they were existing in a state which precedes
their full material individuation. Yet, they are asked a question by God (Am I not your
Lord?) and they are able to answer. As viewed from the perspective of human becoming,
this capability seems to imply the possession of at least the rational soul (al-nafs al-
naìiqa). However, after giving their answer and having accepted the mithaq or
“primordial pact” with God, they are then once more returned to the loins of Adam (a.s.)
It is indeed as if these individuals are, for this one instant, brought directly from a state
of potentiality to a state of actuality and then returned to state of potentiality; but Mulla
Sadra has made it clear that it is impossible for a soul to return to a state of potentiality
after having been in a state of actuality.[42] This event, thus, must be understood as taking
place within, or from the perspective of, God’s knowledge, and not from the perspective
of human becoming.
Some of these themes relating to the meaning of the primordial pact (mithaq) which God
takes for mankind, and the relative role of God’s creative will and human effort in the
spiritual differentiation of mankind after their common origination in primordial
perfection (fiìra), are brought out in a lengthy tradition from the fifth Imam, Moåammed
al-Baqir. The tradition relates a conversation between Adam (a.s.) and God in connection
with the taking of the Qur’anic mithaq:
Adam (a.s.) said: O. Lord, why do I see that some of the particles [taken from my loins]
are greater than others and some of them have much light and some of them have little
light and some of them have no light? God (‘azza wa jall) said: Thus I have created them,
in order to test them in every situation. Adam (a.s.) said: O. Lord, permit me speech that I
might speak. God (‘azza wa jall) said: Speak, for verily your spirit (rêå) is from My
Spirit and your nature (ìabi‘a) is from other than My Kaynuna. Adam said: O. Lord, had
You created them according to a single archetype (mithal) and a single rank, and a single
nature (ìabi’a) and a single disposition (jibla) and a single coloring and a single life span
and a single [set of] endowments, they would not transgress one against the other, and
there would not be envy between them, nor hatred or differences over anything. God
(‘azza wa jall) Said: O Adam, you speak (literally, “spoke”, naìaqta) through My Spirit,
and through the weakness of your [own] nature (ìabi’a) you make a pretense to that of
which you have no knowledge, and I am the Creator, the All-Knowing. By My
knowledge are there differences in their character and by My will is My command carried
out in them and toward My arrangement (tadbir) and toward My decree (taqdir) are they
traveling.
There is no alteration in My Creation. I only created the jinn and mankind to worship Me,
and I have created Paradise for those who obey Me... and I created the fire for those who
disbelieve in Me and disobey Me... and I only created you and [your progeny] to try you
and to try them. You are urged to the best of acts in the life of this world in your lifetimes
and before your deaths, and for this [purpose] was this world and the next created... [43]
This tradition clearly manifests the ambiguity - perhaps deliberate ambiguity - over the
issue of divine compulsion and human free will in the determination of one’s spiritual
destiny. But it is clear that the ambiguity stems from the difference between the
perspective of the unchanging knowledge and decree of God, and the perspective from
the world of becoming which is ordained by God but only experienced as such, by
created beings. On the one hand, God says that “toward My arrangement and toward My
decree are they traveling”. On the other hand, God says that He only created mankind to
try or test them, and that they are “urged”, but not compelled toward obedience and
spiritual success; for this purpose “was this world and the next” - that is the world of
human action and consequence - created. While Mulla Sadra does not give a specific
commentary on this particular tradition, such an interpretation as we have suggested
would seem to accord with Mulla Sadra’s commentary on another, very famous statement
of the sixth Shi’ite Imam, Ja’far al-Sadiq, with regard to the issue of divine compulsion
(Jabr) and human free will (tafwiè), namely: “It is not [divine] compulsion and it is not
free will, but the matter lies between the two (la jabr wa la tafwiè, wa lakinna amr bayn
amrayn.)[44] In another treatise, Mulla Sadra gives a commentary on this tradition in
particular. In this commentary he makes it clear that the fact that “the matter” [of human
destiny] lies between divine compulsion and human free will does not mean that the
matter is half one and half the other. It is not, he says, like tepid water which is neither
hot nor cold, but only a kind of weak and imperfect hot or a weak and imperfect cold.
The matter of human destiny is not determined by a divine will weakened or constrained
by the human will; nor is it determined by a human will weakened or constrained by the
divine will. Rather, the matter is determined fully by the will of God and fully by the will
of man: we move of our own free will toward an end which God has likewise willed.[45]
Something of the divine/non - divine dichotomy in man, and its relation to human free
will is also suggested in the part of the tradition in which Adam (a.s.) asks God for the
faculty of speech. God responds to Adam (a.s.), saying: “speak, for verily your spirit
(rêå) is from My Spirit and your nature (ìabi‘a) is from other than My Kaynuna”. Thus,
on the one hand, it is by virtue of the divine in man (or the “rêå” which is derived from
the Spirit of God) that Adam is able to speak; but on the other hand, it is by virtue of
man’s separateness from God (generated by his own individual nature, ìabi‘a) that he is
able to speak to God with words that are other than those of God and which may even
contradict Him. Adam indeed demonstrates his free will and independence by using his
newly bestowed faculty of speech to call into question the manner in which God has
brought humankind into being - in inequality, and thus destined for conflict. God
responds to Adam’s expressed opinion by telling him, “... you speak (naìaqna) through
My Spirit, and through the weakness of your nature (ìabi‘a) you make a pretense to that
of which you have no knowledge”. In other words, the human faculties - in this case,
speech - are derived from their divine counterparts; yet every man is free to use those
faculties in submission to and agreement with the divine will, or in opposition to and
rebellion against it. Yet, paradoxically, it is in contradiction or rebelling against God
that Adam - and indeed all men - demonstrate, not human strength vis-a-vis God, but
rather their own human weakness and ignorance.
It is interesting that the tradition juxtaposes “rêå” or spirit (as representing the divine in
man) to “ìabi‘a” or “nature”, representing man’s individuation and relative independence
and separation from God as the two elements present in man. As mentioned earlier, Mulla
Sadra uses the term “ìabi‘a” to refer to that energy which is the principle of all motion, of
all substantial change, or the transfer of all realities from potentiality to actuality, and as
the force or energy through which the wujêd or Being of the one Necessary Being (God)
is made to emanate in various intensities throughout all contingent beings. It is like the
wave of energy through which that light of the sun is caused to extend through its rays
beyond their source, while still remaining inescapably connected to it. Even if this
particular Shi‘ite tradition does not employ the term “ìabi‘a” in the technical sense which
Mulla Sadra has given to it, its meaning is not far from the same. As the rays of the sun
extend further into darkness, they do not grow stronger by virtue of their distance from
their source, but weaker. So, too, the will, knowledge and independence of man grows
weaker and dimmer as it extends further from its divine source. Only when human will is
nearest to the divine will does it reach its pinnacle of freedom, for it nears that absolute
freedom which can only belong to God.
In conclusion, we would re-iterate the fact that although Mulla Sadra’s philosophy and
Imami Shi‘ite åadith tradition and theology are technically separate disciplines, with their
own principles and terminology, we believe that there is a profound intellectual
consistency between the two. The spiritual authority of the Shi‘ite Imams allowed them
to speak at great length on matters beyond the realm of ordinary knowledge; and for this
reason Shi‘ite tradition deals with spiritual, cosmological or mystical topics to a far great
extent than its Sunni counterpart. Mulla Sadra, for his part, both operated within the
received Islamic philosophical tradition, and at the same time claimed to have
transcended it through his own mystical insights. It is precisely in this transcendent realm
– the realm closest to the true source of all knowledge - that the two strains of though
resonate with a clear consistency.
Notes
[1]
. For an explanation of Mullà sadrà's classification and explanation of the nature of his
own thought and writing, see the chapter, “What is the Transcendent Theosophy?” in S.
H. Nasr, sadr al-Din Shiràzi and his Transcendent Theosophy, Institute for Humanities
and Cultural Studies, Tehran, 1997, pp. 85 - 88.
[2]
. sadr al-Din al-Shiràzi, Wisdom of the Throne (trans. and ed., James Winston Morris),
Princeton University Press, 1981, pp. 132, 142.
[3]
. See, for example, sadr al-Din al-Shiràzi, Ta‘liqàt' ala åikmat al - ishràq (Mullà sadrà's
commentary on the margins of Suhrawardi's Kitàb åikmat al-ishràq), Lith. Tehran, 1897,
p. 476.
Note:
Mullà sadrà himself mentions that it is in this commentary that he provides the clearest
exposition on the theories regarding the nature of the pre-existence of the soul. See
Wisdom of the Throne, p. 140.
[4]
. sadr al-Din al-Shiràzi, al-Åikmat al-muta'àliyya (14 vols.), Beirut, 1990, V. 9, p. 159.
[5]
. Wisdom of the Throne, pp. 121 - 123.
[6]
. Wisdom of the Throne, p. 132.
[7]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 476.
[8]
. Ta‘liqàt t, p. 476 (for the attribution of this to Buddhists and the Brethren of Purity)
and p. 479 (for the attribution of a doctrine entailing a kind of transmigration to the
“literalists”, i. c., those who believe that “bodily resurrection” entail resurrection in the
earthly body.)
[9]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 476.
[10]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 479.
[11]
. Wisdom of the Throne, p. 140; Ta‘liqàt, p. 479.
[12]
. sadr al-Din al-Shiràzi, Kitàb al-mashà‘ir, (ed. with French translation, Henry Corbin),
Institut Francais d'iranologie de Teheran, Tehran, 1982, p. 61, Where Mullà sadrà is
quoting an unnamed authority for this principle, and agreeing with it.
[13]
. Ibn Babawayh, A Shi'ite Creed, (trans. and ed. A. A. A. Fyzee), World Organization
for Islamic Services, Tehran, 1982, p. 48.
[14]
. Kitàb al-mashà‘ir, p. 62.
[15]
. Kitàb al-i‘tiqàd, p. 48.
[16]
. Kitàb al-mashà‘ir, p. 62.
[17]
. For example, see in general Kulayni, Uæêl al-kàfi (7 vols., ed. `Ali Akbar al-
Ghaffari), Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyya, Tehran, v. 2, pp. 242-244, for an entire chapter on
this subject.
[18]
. Kitàb al-mashà‘ir, p. 62.
[19]
. Wisdom of the Throne, p. 148.
[20]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 479; Wisdom of the Throne, p. 132.
[21]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 476.
[22]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 476; Wisdom of the Throne, p. 148.
[23]
. Wisdom of the Throne, pp. 120-122.
[24]
. Wisdom of the Throne, p. 161.
[25]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 476; Wisdom of the Throne, p. 146.
[26]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 480.
[27]
. Wisdom of the Throne, p. 145; Ta‘liqàt, p. 480.
[28]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 476; Wisdom of the Throne. p. 146.
[29]
. Wisdom of the Throne, p. 141.
[30]
. For example, see Kitàb al-mashà‘ir, pp. 58-63, where he quotes the Shi'ite
theologians, Ibn Bàbawayh and al-Shaykh al-Mufid, the Imàmi traditionist al-saffàr al-
Qummi's Baæà'ir al-darajàt, as well as other Shi'ite traditions found in Kulayni's Uæêl al-
kàfi and al-Sharif al-Raèi's Nahj al-balàgha, a collection of the sayings of ‘Ali b. Abi
Ìàlib. See also Wisdom of the Throne, p. 141.
[31]
. Kulayni, Uæêl al-kàfi, v. 2, p. 2, h. l.
[32]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 479.
[33]
. In Mullà sadrà's words: “... the derived [substance - i. e., the spiritual element in man
derived from its pre-existent spiritual reality] does not attract its source to it; but it is,
perhaps led toward the source. The caused does not constrain the cause, it is [the cause]
which is re-integrated into [the cause] and which moves toward it.” Ta‘liqàt, p. 479.
[34]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 479.
[35]
. Kulayni, Uæêl al-kàfi, v. 2, pp. 6-7, h. 1, 2, 3.
[36]
. Ibid., v. 2, p. 8, h. l.
[37]
. For Sunni traditions, see Ìabari, Jami' al-bayan fi tafsir al-Qur'an, v. 9, p. 76.
[38]
. It should also be noted that Mullà sadrà says that the final realization of the pure spirit
or intellect in man - this rare and final completion of the actualization of man in his
earthly life - cannot be acquired merely through human efforts, but it requires, in
addition, “a certain divine attraction”. (Wisdom of the Throne, p. 132.)
[39]
. Wisdom of the Throne, p. 150.
[40]
. Wisdom of the Throne, p. 138; Ta‘liqàt, p. 476.
[41]
. Wisdom of the Throne, pp. 105-108.
[42]
. Ta‘liqàt, p. 479.
[43]
. Kulayni, v. 2, pp. 8-10, h. 2.
[44]
. Kulayni, v. l, p. 160, h. 13. See, in general, Kulayni, v. l, pp. 155 - 160 for other
formulations and elaborations of this basic principle.
[45]
. sadr al-Din al-Shiràzi, “Risàlàt khalq al-a'mal”, in Majmu'eh-vi rasa'il-i falsafi-yi Sadr
al-muta'allihin (ed, IIamid Naji Isfahani), Intisharat hikmat, Tehran, 1996, pp. 276-277.