İbn Sînâ ve Molla Sadrâ’da İlâhi Erek Problemi
The Problem of Divine Intentionalist in Avicenna and Mulla Sadra

Summary/Abstract: Final cause is complementary to the efficient and it cause of the perpetration of the perpetrator. That's why all the perpetrators have goals. Such as habits, nonsense and futile works are voluntary acts even they are not independent of final. Intention spites to both verb and subject so that in the topic of goal is both verb and agent are the subject of research. The act of the perpetrator is what the movement is for itself. The act of the act is what the action or act ends with reaching it. Different schools of thought in the Islamic world have expressed different opinions about the divine goal. Ashris are saying that final is a deficiency indicator so that God is excluded from having the intention. Even thought, Mu’tazila claimed that deprivation of intention is the sign of nonsense and that all the acts of God contain intention. In Islamic philosophy there is no other necessity to intention, because Allah’s agent is full. His intention is free from all of the lacks which are essence and love to his essence. This source of love is also about the knowledge that is his essence. There is no dispute over the fact that in Islamic philosophy divine acts which are possible assets have intention but there is controversy about the physical assets reaching the quality of intention. According to Avicenna, material beings reach their goals with the help of active mind and related movements. In Mulla Sadra, the physical assets reach their goals with substantial motion and they try to reach a higher level in the asset range.

• Details
• Contents