Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present: Philosophy in the ...

Al-¡ikmat al-Ilåhiyyah and Kalåm 53
even more accentuated in the eighth/fourteenth and ninth/fifteenth
centuries. While specifically Shi‘ite theologians such as Ibn Ab¥ Jumh¨r
A±∑å˘¥ and Sayyid ¡aydar ≈mul¥ were well versed in the doctrines of
÷ikmat-i ilåh¥, some of the best known ÷ak¥ms of the age, such as Jalål
al-D¥n Dawån¥, S • adr al-D¥n and Ghiyåth al-D¥n Man∑¨r Dashtak¥, and
M¥r Sayyid Shar¥f Jurjån¥ were as much at home with kalåm as ÷ikmah
and also ‘irfån. It is hardly possible to say whether Dawån¥ was a ÷ak¥mi
ilåh¥ or a mutakallim in the same way that later in India numerous
figures appeared who were both mutakallim and faylas¶f or ÷ak¥m. It is
important to note, however, that while apple¨s¥ was well versed in both
schools but expressed the viewpoint of each in separate works and did
not combine their arguments in a single book or a single doctrinal synthesis,
Dawån¥ and many other later figures combined arguments and
methods of both schools in their exposition of the nature of things and
attempted a synthesis between them. This is a hallmark of much of the
thought of the eighth/fourteenth and ninth/fifteenth centuries.
With Mullå S • adrå the new relation between kalåm and al-÷ikmat
al-ilåhiyyah, which had been developing since the seventh/thirteenth
century, reaches a new peak and the summit of its development. 7
Mullå S • adrå knew well the important Mu‘tazilite and Ash‘arite theologians,
especially al-Ghazzål¥ and Fakhr al-D¥n al-Råz¥, and also the
most important Shi‘ite theologians before himself. In fact among the
later Islamic philosophers probably none was as well acquainted with
both Sunni and Shi‘ite kalåm as he. Kalåm represents, along with Peripatetic
philosophy, ishråq¥ theosophy and ‘irfån, one of the basic elements
from which he created his vast synthesis. He turns to the
arguments of kalåm again and again especially in the Asfår, and he
confirms and praises some of the arguments of the mutakallim¶n in
certain places 8 while rejecting them violently in others. 9
What is, however, most interesting in Mullå S • adrå’s views about
kalåm is not his acceptance of some of their beliefs and arguments nor
the fact that nearly every single problem discussed by kalåm is also
considered by him in his “transcendent theosophy” (al-÷ikmat almuta‘åliyah);
rather, it is his views concerning the very nature of kalåm
and the shortcomings of the knowledge acquired through its methods.
According to him, the mutakallim¶n in general have not purified their
inner being sufficiently so as to enable the intellect within them to
perceive directly the Divine Realities without the dimming and obscuring
influence of the carnal soul. In the Si a„l (Three Principles) he
says in bitter words that reflect the hardship he suffered at the hands
of some of the superficial ‘ulamå˘ and mutakallim¶n who opposed his
teachings, “Some of those who pretend to be scholars and are full of evil