The Human

Sura # 76 (The Human):

1. "Is it not a fact that there was a time when the human being was nothing to be mentioned?"
2. "We created the human from a liquid mixture, from two parents, in order to test him. Thus, we made him a hearer and a seer."
3. "We showed him the two paths, then he is either appreciative, or unappreciative."


What most people are unaware of, is the very STRUCTURE of their own selves.

Most of us grow up to think that 'we' are just made-up of the 'soul' which, when it dies, reverts back to GOD.

Although this information is 'partially' correct, there is also much more to the make-up of the human being which GOD explains to us through the Quran.

It is the devil's system to confuse and weaken us so we do not even know how to fight him!. One principal rule of any conflict is that you "know your enemy". But before doing that, you must first "know yourself"!.



Rouh = Soul?

This is the single biggest misconception that people have made which helped distort the issue of 'who we are'.

In Arabia, when someone dies, the people say: 'let us pray on his Rouh!'.

Also, when they speak about someone dying, the say: 'his Rouh has left him'.

In schools, they teach our kids that the 'Soul' is the 'Rouh' and that is what will die and be judged and punished or rewarded...

However, the story changes when we look at what GOD has to say:

"GOD takes the 'Nafs' when death comes, and also at the time of sleep..." (39:42)

"No 'Nafs' dies except by GOD's leave, at a predetermined time..." (3:145)

"Every 'Nafs' tastes death, then you receive your recompense on the Day of Resurrection..." (3:185)

"...You shall not kill the 'Nafs' that GOD has made sacred, except in the course of justice..." (6:151)

"...she said: my Lord, I have wronged my 'Nafs"..." (27:16)

Well, you get the picture!.

GOD tells us that our 'Soul' is called 'Nafs', and that this 'Nafs' is what is taken at death and what is judged on j-day (then rewarded or punished). The 'Nafs' is YOU, it is your entire being, it is your slate, which is burdened or lightened by your actions...

So, if the 'Soul' is the 'Nafs', then what is the Rouh?



Rouh = Spirit.

"While a barrier separated her from them, we sent to her Our 'Rouh'. He went to her in the form of a human being." (19:17)

"They ask you about the 'Rouh'. Say: 'The 'Rouh' comes from my Lord. And you were not given knowledge, except little." (Quran 17:85)

It becomes apparent to the reader that the 'Rouh' is from GOD and it is the accumulation of 'knowledge' that will assist the human being in his life...It is best described as 'Spirit'.

You see, animals also have 'Nafs' just like we do (it is their life-force), yet, you do not see monkeys building spaceships nor turtles working on computers!.

The 'Rouh' is the gift that GOD gave to our species to allow us the advantage of 'knowledge'.

"Once I perfect him (the human), and blow into him from My 'Rouh', you shall fall prostrate before him." (15:29)

All animals can communicate with one another (remember the birds speaking to Solomon?). However, it is only man that has 'knowledge'.

The 'Rouh' is GOD's gift to us, and it is only GOOD. The information that the 'Rouh' provides each of us is to be used for our benefit, but we have the 'choice' to use it for evil (like nuclear fission being used to make a bomb).

Some unfortunate news about the 'Rouh': It will NEVER approach you and save the day. for example, you are struggling to understand something. If you don't ask GOD for help, it won't go; "hey, here is the answer!" no, you have to approach it. Also, it will always be LITERAL. you will have to be specific of what you are asking. Note, you don't have to say this out loud. You can just think of it - because many times, humans have hard time expressing what exactly they want to ask. With the spirit of god, you don't have to worry about this - as long as you get the intention of asking, the spirit will know the question...as much as you wanted to ask and that ALONE (though it knows all the questions you know - it is not going to answer anything you did not ask).



Thus if we can summarize what we have upto this point.

The human being so far is made-up of:

1. The 'Soul' - Nafs (the is YOU, the real person, what makes choices and what will be judged);

2. The 'Spirit' - Rouh (this is a gift from GOD, it is NOT yours, you do not own it, all people have access to it - like the Quran. It's purpose is to help provide answers and knowledge to help your Soul make the right decisions).




Satan - Shaitan

The 3rd and most lethal mix in the equation of man is 'Satan'.

"He (Satan) said, "Since You have honored him over me, if You respite me till the Day of Resurrection, I will possess all his descendants, except a few." (17:62)

The unfortunate fact of our lives is that Satan challenged the right of our ancestors to posses access to the 'Rouh". Satan claimed that he was more qualified to utilize GOD's gift and that he would do a better job with it:

He (GOD) said, "What prevented you from serving when I ordered you?" He said, "I am better than he; You created me from fire, and created him from mud." (7:12)

This questioning of man's ability led to a dispute in the heavens and 'doubts' thus erupted:

Sura 38 (S'ad):

67 . Say, "Here is awesome news.
68. "That you are totally oblivious to.
69. "I had no knowledge previously, about the feud in the High heavens.
70. "I am inspired that my sole mission is to deliver the warnings to you."
71. Your Lord said to the angels: 'I am creating a human being from clay.
72. "Once I design him, and blow into him from My spirit, you shall assist him."
73. The angels assisted, all of them,
74. except Satan; he refused, and was too arrogant, unappreciative.
75. He said, "O Satan, what prevented you from assisting what I created before with My hands? Are you too arrogant? Have you rebelled?"
76. He said, "I am better than he; You created me from fire, and created him from clay."
77. He said, "Therefore, you must be exiled, you will be banished.
78. "You have incurred My condemnation until the Day of Judgment."
79. He said, "My Lord, respite me till the Day of Resurrection."
80. He said, "You are respited.
81. "Until the appointed day."
82. He said, "I swear by Your majesty, that I will send them all astray.
83. "Except Your worshipers who are devoted absolutely to You alone."

The above verses tell the story very clearly.

Satan requested that he be given a chance to 'prove' that man is unfit for the task...

And GOD thus allowed Satan (who has evil intentions) to entice us (but NOT have access to us):

"You may entice them with your voice, and mobilize all your forces and all your men against them, and share in their money and children, and promise them. Anything the devil promises is no more than an illusion." (Quran 17:64)

"I will come to them from before them, and from behind them, and from their right, and from their left, and You will find that most of them are unappreciative." (7:17)

Had the story stopped there, we would still be fine. Problem is, Satan managed to trick our ancestors into giving him ACCESS to our Souls!:

"The devil whispered to them, in order to gain access to them. He said, "Your Lord did not forbid you from this tree, except to prevent you from becoming angels, and from attaining eternal existence." (7:20)

Eating from the 'forbidden' tree allowed Satan to have constant access to our 'Nafs'.

The mix we now have is:

1. The 'Soul' - Nafs ;

2. The 'Spirit' - Rouh;

3. Satan - Shaitan (this is the devil having access to our Souls and being able to influence them).

Satan is the ULTIMATE falsehood within you. If there is ever a falsehood, don't look for it...outside of you - it lies within you.

Some more bad news: unlike the Rouh, Satan APPROACHES you. If you have a delimma, he will give your answer. Whether the answer is correct is not even a question, because we know it isn't. sometimes, before you even have a delimma, he will give you chaos...because he will give you so much falsehood in your life that you will end up feeling CONFUSED, DEPRESSED, feeling HATED by god, ABANDONED, etc etc etc - all the things he thrives in.

Do not despair.

Because Satan exists within you, there isn't much you can do about getting rid of him for good. however, you can get rid of every time he approaches - and as long as you keep in mind you shouldn't get tired of kicking him into silence, you are always the winner - because he invades your mind. by seeking refuge in GOD, you give the Rouh authority to keep him silent.

"When you learn the Quran, you shall seek refuge in GOD from Satan the rejected. He has no power over those who believe and trust in their Lord. His power is limited to those who choose him as their master, those who choose him as their god." (16:98-100)

How can you be safe with his falsehood information?. Every time he offers a solution, you do not take it for face value - you go and ask your Rouh. if you get a solution without asking for it - there are two ways you might've got that;

1. The 'Nafs' gave it to you (your own subconscious made the suggestion);

2. It came from Satan!.


You never get unasked solutions from the spirit. Abraham...whom god has chosen...was not approached by GOD - he approached GOD. The point is; GOD always loves you...but he won't stop you from ruining your life...if you don't ask for His help. GOD never abandons someone entirely...and never guides someone entirely - if he did, he would Abraham, Mohammed, etc - messengers whom He has chosen (who we see making human mistakes). And guidance, unlike the Muslim understanding of it...is a process of every situation...instead of all at once thing.



Final Note:

The best Islam is within you - the spirit of GOD (Rouh'u Allah) is within you. There is no such thing that truth lies outside of you. the ultimate truth lies within you. please, take advantage of that blessing. It will be your ultimate weapon against falsehood...


By Free-Minds (e-mail: free@free-minds.org)

SOUL IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY



The discussion of the human soul, its existence, nature, ultimate objective and eternity, occupies a highly important position in Islamic philosophy and forms its main focus. For the most part Muslim philosophers agreed, as did their Greek predecessors, that the soul consists of non-rational and rational parts. The non-rational part they divided into the plant and animal souls, the rational part into the practical and the theoretical intellects. All believed that the non-rational part is linked essentially to the body, but some considered the rational part as separate from the body by nature and others that all the parts of the soul are by nature material. The philosophers agreed that, while the soul is in the body, its non-rational part is to manage the body, its practical intellect is to manage worldly affairs, including those of the body, and its theoretical intellect is to know the eternal aspects of the universe. They thought that the ultimate end or happiness of the soul depends on its ability to separate itself from the demands of the body and to focus on grasping the eternal aspects of the universe. All believed that the non-rational soul comes into being and unavoidably perishes. Some, like al-Farabi, believed that the rational soul may or may not survive eternally; others, like Ibn Sina, believed that it has no beginning and no end; still others, such as Ibn Rushd, believed that the soul with all its individual parts comes into existence and is eventually destroyed.

1 The existence of the soul

2 The nature of the soul

3 The rational soul

4 The ultimate objective of the soul

5 Eternity of the soul

References end further reading



1 The existence of the soul

All Muslim philosophers concerned themselves with the subject of the soul. The most detailed and most important works on this subject are those of al-Kindi, al-Farabi, Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd. Muslim philoso­phers recognized that the first issue, that confronts the human mind with regard to the soul is its existence. That is why, at the very beginning of his inquiry about the soul in al-Shifa’ (Healing), Ibn Sina (§6) asserts that we infer the existence of the soul from the fact that we observe bodies that perform certain acts with some degree of will. These acts are exemplified in taking nourishment, growing, reproducing, moving and perceiving. Since these acts do not belong to the nature of bodies, for this nature is devoid of will, they must belong to a principle they have other than bodies. This principle is what is called ‘soul’.

This argument is intended to prove the existence of the animal soul, which includes the plant soul. The soul is the source of acts performed by the will, not inasmuch as it is ‘a substance’ (an independent entity), but inasmuch as it is ‘the principle of such acts’. The rational soul, on the other hand, need not look outside itself to infer its existence. It is aware of its existence with immediacy, that is, without any instruments. Ibn Sina’s example of the suspended man is intended to prove that the rational soul is aware of itself apart from any body. His argument boils down to the view that, even if the adult rational soul is not aware of anything material, not even its body, it remains aware of its own existence.



2 The nature of the soul

While Islam made it incumbent on Muslim philoso­phers to occupy themselves extensively with the study of the soul and to make certain statements that in some cases appear consistent with Islamic beliefs, Greek philosophy had the upper hand in forming the real convictions of Muslim philosophers with regard to the nature of the soul. Unless otherwise specified, reference to :he soul here is limited to the terrestrial soul to the exclusion of the celestial one, since Muslim philosophers concerned themselves primarily with the former. It must be pointed out at the outset that ‘soul’. (nafs) was used in more than one sense in Islamic philosophy; the term was used to refer to the plant or vegetative part of a living being, the animal or sensitive part, the rational part and finally the totality of all three parts. The first two are the non-rational soul and the totality is the human soul. To add to the confusion, ‘human soul’ is used only in the sense of this fourth type of soul. The plant, animal and; rational souls are also called powers or parts of the; soul. Only from the context can one understand, whether a Muslim philosopher was using ‘soul’ in the broad sense to mean the human soul (the totality of the parts of the soul), or in the narrow sense to mean a specific part of the human soul.

Inasmuch as it has a certain relation to a body, the soul is a form for that body, that is, the perfection of that body. It is a form because a natural body is composed of matter and form, which in the case of animals are body and soul. Since it has been shown that the soul is the source of will and therefore is not matter, it remains a form. Perfection is of two types, primary and secondary. A primary perfection is what makes a thing actually a species, as shape does for the sword, or a genus as sensation and-movement do for animals. A secondary perfection is an act necessitated by the nature of the species or genus, such as cutting for the sword and touching for animal. The soul is a primary perfection of a natural body capable of performing the secondary perfections necessitated by this primary perfection. Together with its body, the soul constitutes a material substance. This substance can be the subject of plant, animal or human life.

The soul is a perfection inasmuch as it makes a natural body into a plant, an animal or a rational being. However, to define the soul as a perfection does not give us a clue as to what the soul is in itself, but only inasmuch as it has a relation to the body. The body is, therefore, an essential element in the definition of the soul. Without relating to a body, the thing we call ‘soul’ is not a soul and does not require the body as an essential part of its definition. Note, however, that in spite of this assertion, perhaps for the lack of any better term, Muslim philosophers use ‘soul’ also to refer to the rational soul after it separates from the body and reaches a complete state of purity from matter.

In its first or lowest stages of relating to the body, the soul is the plant soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can take nourishment, grow and reproduce. The plant soul is the power human beings and other animals share with plants. If the body with a soul is an animal, the soul develops into the animal soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body has sensation and movement through will. While this soul includes the plant soul, it has also a sensitive power and a locomotive one. The sensitive power has both external and internal senses. The external senses are, in priority of existence, touch, taste, smell, hearing and sight. The first three are said to be necessary for survival and the last two for well being. In Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), IBN RUSHD (§3) asserts that the five external senses may be in potentiality, as in infancy and sleep, or in actuality, as in daily seeing or hearing. He also argues that there cannot be any external sense other than these five because there would be no function for it, since there is no external sensation other than the objects of the five senses mentioned above. Most Muslim philosophers men­tion three types of internal senses: common sense, imagination and memory. IBN SINA (§3) enumerates five internal senses: common sense, representational power, imagination, estimative power and memory. On the whole, the philosophers agree on the function of the common sense, imagination and memory; the function that Ibn Sina limits to the representational and estimative powers, other Muslim philosophers allocate to the imagination.

The common sense is an internal power in which all the objects of the external senses are collected. Contrary to the external senses, which can grasp only one type of sensation, as sight grasps light and hearing grasps sound, the common sense can grasp all external sensations, such as that honey is of such and such a colour, texture and smell. The representational power preserves the sensations of the common sense even after sensible things disappear. The imagination selects at will to combine some of the objects of the representational power with each other and to separate the rest. It makes its judgment about external things, but in the absence of these things. That is why it functions best when the external senses, which represent external things, are not at work, as in sleep. Ibn Rushd points out that animals such as worms and flies that do not act except in the presence of sensible things are devoid of imagination. The imagination is called such inasmuch as it is an animal instrument; it is called cognitive inasmuch as it is a rational instrument. The estimative power grasps non-sensible notions of sensible things, such as the sheep’s notion that the wolf is to be avoided. This notion is about a sensible thing but is not grasped through the external senses, as is the colour or shape of a wolf. Memory preserves the notions of the estimative power. The imagination acts on the objects of memory in the same way it acts on those of the representational powers. Like the objects of the external senses, those of the internal senses are particular and material. The difference is that they can be experienced in the absence of external things and are to some degree abstracted from matter.

The locomotive power branches into that which causes movement and that which actually moves. The former, the desiderative power, subdivides into the appetitive and the irascible. The appetitive causes movement toward what is imagined to be necessary or beneficial in the pursuit of pleasure. The irascible causes avoidance of what is imagined to be harmful or an impediment in the pursuit of dominance. The power that actually moves uses the nerves to relax the muscles at the demands of the appetitive power or tighten them at the demands of the irascible one.



3 The rational soul

The rational soul, which is defined as a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can act by rational choice and grasp the universals, is divided into the practical and the theoretical intellects. The practical intellect seeks knowledge in order to act in accordance with the good in its individual body, its family and its state. It must, therefore, know the principles for properly managing the body, the family and the state, that is, ethics, home management and politics. The practical intellect is the rational soul turning its face down­ward. The function of the theoretical intellect is to know just for the sake of having the universals (the realities or natures of things). Some of these natures, such as God and the intellect, cannot attach to movement; knowledge of them is metaphysics. Other natures, such as unity, can attach to movement but do not; knowledge of them is mathematics. Still other natures, such as humanity and squareness, can attach to movement either in reality and thought, such as humanity, or in reality but not in thought, such as squareness. Knowledge of these is physics.

The theoretical intellect is the rational soul with its face upward. The practical intellect looks up to the theoretical one and moves its body accordingly. In this, the practical intellect is similar to :the celestial soul that looks up to the intellect of its sphere and moves its sphere accordingly. Thus, like .the celestial soul, the practical intellect is the link between intellect as such and matter.

On the whole, Muslim philosophers followed al-Kindi’s division of the theoretical intellect into the material intellect (al-‘aql al-hayulant), the habitual intellect (al-‘agl bil-malaka), the actual intellect (al-‘aql bi’!-fi’b and the acquired intellect’ (al-‘aql al-mustafad). The material intellect is a blank slate with the potentiality for grasping the intelligible forms or universals. Ibn Sina points out that it is referred to as material, not because it is actually material but because it resembles matter in accepting the form. The habitual intellect grasps the universals, as one acquires the skill to write; in other words, this intellect has the ability to use the universals but does not always do so. The actual intellect grasps the universals in actuality and is always ready to use them. While Muslim philosophers differed slightly with regard to their accounts of the acquired intellect, their general view is that it is the highest human state, the point of contact with the divine, the agent intellect (the intelligence of the moon, the lowest celestial intellect), which makes it possible for the theoretical intellect to acquire the universals in the purest form (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY §4).



4 The ultimate objective of the soul

AL-FARABI asserts that even though the soul is of different parts, it is a unity with all its parts working for one final end, happiness. While the plant soul, for example, serves a specific function, it also serves the powers that are higher than it in rank, the animal powers. Without nourishment, growth and reproduc­tion, the animal powers cannot perform their necessary functions. Similarly, while the function of the animal powers is to have sensation and movement, by performing this function they also promote the functions of the powers above them, the rational ones. The operations of the animal powers, especially those of the senses, are particularly important for the attainment of the final end. The external senses strip the forms from material objects and convey them to the internal senses. The more they are transferred internally, the less mixed with matter do they become. Since the innermost sense they reach is the imagina­tion, they are there in their purest material existence (see IMAGINATION).

The role of the objects of the imagination is not always clearly defined in Islamic philosophy. Occa­sionally it is said by somebody like Ibn Sina to be one of preparation for the theoretical intellect to receive the universals from the agent intellect. At other times Ibn Sina, like other Aristotelians such as Ibn Rushd, takes these objects to be the ingredients out of which the universals are made after the last process of purification (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY). It seems, however, that in either case the light of the agent intellect is needed to complete the process. In the former case, this light gives the intelligible forms to the theoretical intellect when this intellect is prepared. In the latter case, it sheds itself on the objects of the imagination, which are then reflected on the theoretical intellect without their matter. Since the theoretical intellect is in its first stages in potentiality, it cannot act on the objects of the imagination directly; hence the need for the agent intellect, which is pure actuality. The role of the practical intellect in all this is to put order into the body. This sets free the theoretical intellect from preoccupation with the body and helps the powers whose function is necessary for theoretical knowledge to function unhampered.

Muslim philosophers adhered to the view that the acquired intellect is one with its objects, for they thought the knower and the known are one, as did their Greek predecessors. This means that the highest human state is one in which unity with the universals or the eternal aspects of the universe is reached. This state is described as happiness because in it eternity, an aspect of the objects of the acquired intellect, is attained.



5 Eternity of the soul

When Muslim philosophers assert that the soul comes into existence simultaneously with the coming into existence of the body, some, such as Ibn Sina (§6), who believe that the rational soul is in essence non­material, are thinking only of the non-rational soul. Others, such as Ibn Rushd (§3), who believe that the rational soul is originally not separate from matter, contend that the whole human soul comes into existence. The latter believe that since the rational soul grasps the universals from particular sensibles, and since such sensibles are material and have a temporal beginning, this soul must also be material and must have a temporal beginning. Those who attribute non-materiality to the essence of the rational soul, such as AL-KINDI and Ibn Sina, assert that this soul pre-exists the body. While all of them agree that the non-rational soul is destroyed after the destruc­tion of the body, they differ with regard to the end of the rational soul.

Al-Kindi and Ibn Sina, for example, strongly adhere to the view that all rational souls are indestructible because by nature they are simple. AL-FARABI reminds us that the reason for eternal existence is the rational soul’s knowledge of the eternal aspects of the universe. From this he draws the conclusion, as did ALEXANDER OF APHRODISIAS before him, that only those rational souls that have this knowledge at their separation from the body are indestructible. Other rational souls are eventually destroyed. Ibn Sina finds in the grasping of the universals the grounds for happiness, not the eternity of the soul. Ibn Rushd seems to hold that only the acquired intellect can be indestructible; but the acquired intellect, he argues (as does his teacher IBN BAJJA), is divine and numerically one in all. Ibn Rushd was attacked for this view because it denies eternal existence of individual souls (see AVERROISM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE).

See also: ARISTOTELIANISM IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; ETHICS IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; IBN RUSHD §3; IBN SINA §6; MYSTICAL PHILOSOPHY IN ISLAM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE



References end further reading

al-Farabi (c.870-950) al-Madina al fadila (The Virtuous City), trans. R. Walter, Al-Farabi on the Perfect State.’ Abu Nasr al-Farabi’s Mabadi’ Ara’Ah al-Madina al-Fadila, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. (English and Arabic of the most comprehensive and best known philosophical work of al-Farabi.)

Ibn Rushd (1180) Tahafut al-tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence), trans. S. Van Den Bergh, London: Luzac, 1954. (A response to a number of issues raised by al-Ghazali against philosophers. One of the three most important of these issues is that of the soul and its fate.)

- (c.1174) Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Maktabat an-Nahda, 1950. (Includes also four other essays: Ibn Baja’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction), Ishaq Ibn Hunayn’s Kitab ft an-nafs (Book on the Soul), Ibn Rushd’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction) and al-Kindi’s Risalat al-‘aql (Essay on Intellect).)

Ibn Sina (980-1037) an-Nafs (The Soul), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s de Anima, London: Oxford University Press, 1959. (The most important and detailed philosophical treatise on the soul in Islamic philosophy, the sixth part of the Physics of al-Shifa’. An Arabic edition of the text is included.)

(980-1037) Ahwal an-nafs (The States of the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1952. (Includes Risala fi an-nafs wa-baqa’ha wa-ma’adiha (Essay on the Soul, Its Permanence and Its Second Life), Mabhath ‘an al-qiwa an-nafsaniyya (Inquiry about Psychic Powers), Risala fi ma’rifat an-nafs an-natiga (Essay on Knowing the Rational Soul) and Risala fi al-kalam ‘ala an-nafs an-natiqa (Essay on an Inquiry Concerning the Rational Soul).)

- (980-1037) an-Najat (Deliverance), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s Psychology, London: Oxford University Press, 1952. (The psychology of an-Najat is an abridgement by Ibn Sina of his encyclopedic work al-Shifa’ (Healing).)

- (980-1037) Rasa’d ash-shaykh ar-ra’is f asrar al-hikma al-mashriqiyya (Essays of the Master of the Head on the Secrets of Oriental Wisdom), ed. M. Mehren, Traites mystiques d’Avicenna, Leiden: Brill, 1889-99. (Ibn Sina’s ‘oriental philosophy’.)

Inati, S.C. (1996) A Study of Ibn Sina’s Mysticism, London: Kegan Paul International. (Includes a detailed analysis of Ibn Sina’s notion of the soul and a translation of the fourth part of al-Isharat wa­‘1-tanbihat (Remarks and Admonitions).)

al-Kindi (before 873) Rasa’il al-Kindi al falsafiyya (Al-Kindi’s Philosophical Treatises), ed. M. Abu Rida, Cairo: Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi, 1953. (Includes al-Kindi’s most relevant works on the subject of the soul, al-Qawl fi an-nafs (Discourse on the Soul), Fi an-nafs (On the Soul) and Fi mahiyyat an-nawm war-ru’ya (On the Essence of Sleep and Internal Vision).)



SHAMS C. INATI


Collectede By
Shobuz Bhai

Il n'y a aucune une telle chose que la vérité se trouve dehors de toi. la vérité finale se trouve en dessous de toi.
Automatically translated into French thanks to WorldLingo
Le Sura

humain # 76 (l'humain) :

1. « N'est-ce pas un fait qu'il y avait un temps où l'être humain n'était rien à être mentionné ?  »
2. « Nous avons créé l'humain d'un mélange liquide, de deux parents, afin de l'examiner. Ainsi, nous lui avons fait un auditeur et un scombre. « 
3. « Nous lui avons montré les deux chemins, alors il est élogieux, ou unappreciative. De »


ce que la plupart des personnes sont ignorantes, est la STRUCTURE même de leurs propres individus.

La plupart d'entre nous se développe pense jusqu'à que « nous » sommes juste préparés de la « âme » qui, quand elle meurt, retourne de nouveau à un DIEU.

Bien que cette information soit « partiellement » correcte, il y a également beaucoup plus au maquillage de l'être humain qu'un DIEU explique à nous par le Quran.

C'est le système du diable pour nous confondre et affaiblir ainsi nous ne savons pas même le combattre !. Une règle principale de n'importe quel conflit est que vous « connaissez votre ennemi ». Mais avant de faire cela, vous devez d'abord « se connaître » !.



Rouh = âme ?

C'est la plus grande idée fausse simple qui peuplent ont fait dont a aidé à tordre la question « qui nous sommes ».

En Arabie, quand quelqu'un meurt, le peuple dit : « prions sur son Rouh ! ».

En outre, quand ils parlent au sujet de quelqu'un qui meurt, la parole : « son Rouh l'a laissé ».

Dans les écoles, ils enseignent à nos enfants que la « âme » est le « Rouh » et c'est ce qui mourra et sera jugé et puni ou récompensé…

Cependant, l'histoire change quand nous regardons ce qu'un DIEU doit dire :

Un « DIEU prend « le Nafs » quand la mort vient, et également à l'heure du sommeil… » (39 : 42)

« pas « Nafs » matrices excepté par le congé de GOD'S, à un temps prédéterminé… » (3 : 145 que)

« chaque « Nafs » goûte la mort, alors vous reçoivent votre récompense le jour de la résurrection… » (3 : 185)

« … vous ne tuerez pas « le Nafs » que ce DIEU a rendu sacré, excepté au cours de la justice… » (6 : 151)

« … qu'elle a dits : mon seigneur, j'ai fait du tort mon 'Nafs "… « (27 : 16)

Bien, vous obtenez l'image !.

Un DIEU nous dit que notre « âme » s'appelle « Nafs », et que ce « Nafs » est ce qui est pris à la mort et ce qui est jugé le j-jour (alors récompensé ou puni). Le « Nafs » est TOI, il est votre être entier, c'est votre ardoise, qui est chargée ou éclairée par vos actions…

Ainsi, si la « âme » est le « Nafs », alors ce qui est le Rouh ?



Rouh = esprit.

« Tandis qu'une barrière la séparait de eux, nous avons envoyé à son notre « Rouh ». Il est allé chez elle sous forme d'être humain. « (19 : 17)

« ils vous interrogent au sujet « du Rouh ». Parole : 'Le « Rouh » vient de mon seigneur. Et vous n'avez pas été donné la connaissance, excepté peu. « (Quran 17:85)

elle devient évidente au lecteur que « le Rouh » est d'un DIEU et c'est l'accumulation « de la connaissance » qui aidera l'avoir lieu humain dans sa vie… qu'il mieux est décrit en tant que « esprit ».

Vous voyez, les animaux ont également « Nafs » juste comme nous (c'est leur vie-force), pourtant, vous ne voyez pas des singes construire des vaisseaux spatiaux ni des tortues travaillant sur des ordinateurs !.

Le « Rouh » est le cadeau qu'un DIEU a donné à nos espèces pour permettre nous à l'avantage de la « connaissance ».

« Une fois qu'I parfait il (l'humain), et coup dans lui de mon « Rouh », vous tomberont prosterné avant lui. » (15 : 29)

Tous les animaux peuvent communiquer entre eux (rappelez-vous les oiseaux parler à Solomon ?). Cependant, c'est seulement l'homme qui a la « connaissance ».

Le « Rouh » est le cadeau d'un DIEU à nous, et il est seulement BON. L'information que le « Rouh » fournit chacun de nous est d'être employée pour notre avantage, mais nous ont le « choix » pour l'employer pour le mal (comme la fission nucléaire étant employée pour faire une bombe).

Quelques nouvelles malheureuses au sujet du « Rouh » : Il ne vous approchera jamais et sauvera le jour. par exemple, vous luttez pour comprendre quelque chose. Si vous ne demandez pas à un DIEU l'aide, elle ne disparaîtra pas ; « hé, voici la réponse ! » non, vous devez l'approcher. En outre, il sera toujours LITTÉRAL. vous devrez être détail de ce que vous demandez. Note, vous ne devez pas dire ce dehors fort. Vous pouvez juste penser à lui - parce que beaucoup de fois, humains ont exprimer dur de temps ce qu'exactement elles veulent demander. Avec l'esprit d'un dieu, vous ne devez pas s'inquiéter à ce sujet - tant que vous obtenez l'intention de demander, l'esprit saura la question… autant que vous avez voulu demander et ce SEUL (bien qu'il sache toutes questions que vous savez - il ne va répondre à rien vous n'avez pas demandé).



Ainsi si nous pouvons récapituler ce que nous avons jusqu'à ce point.

L'être d'humain jusqu'ici est préparé de :

1. La « âme » - Nafs (est VOUS, la vraie personne, ce qui fait des choix et ce qui sera jugé) ;

2. Le « esprit » - Rouh (c'est un cadeau d'un DIEU, il n'est pas à vous, vous ne le possèdent pas, toutes les personnes ont accès à lui - comme le Quran. C'est but est d'aider à fournir des réponses et la connaissance pour aider votre âme pour prendre les bonnes décisions).




Satan - Shaitan

le 3ème et le plus mortel mélange dans l'équation de l'homme est « Satan ».

« Il (Satan) a dit, « puisque vous l'avez honoré au-dessus de moi, si vous sursis je jusqu'au jour de la résurrection, je posséderez tous ses descendants, excepté uns. » (17 : 62)

Le fait malheureux de nos vies est que Satan a défié la droite de nos ancêtres à l'accès de bandes au 'Rouh ". Satan a réclamé qu'il était plus qualifié pour utiliser le cadeau d'un DIEU et qu'il ferait un meilleur travail avec lui :

Il (un DIEU) a dit, « ce qui vous a empêché de la portion quand je vous ai commandé ? » Il a dit, « je suis meilleur que lui ; Vous m'avez créé du feu, et l'avez créé de la boue. « (7 : 12)

Cette interrogation de la capacité de l'homme a mené à un conflit dans les cieux et les « doutes » éclatés ainsi :

Sura 38 (S'ad) :

67 . La parole, « voici des nouvelles impressionnantes.
68. « Ce vous êtes totalement inconscient à.
69. « Je n'ai eu aucune connaissance précédemment, au sujet de l'inimitié dans les cieux élevés.
70. « On m'inspire qui ma mission unique est pour te fournir les avertissements.  »
71. Votre seigneur dit aux anges : 'Je crée un être humain d'argile.
72. « Une fois que je le conçois, et souffle dans lui de mon esprit, vous l'aiderez.  »
73. Les anges ont aidé, tous,
74. excepté Satan ; il a refusé, et était trop arrogant, unappreciative.
75. Il a dit, « O Satan, ce qui vous a empêché d'aider ce que j'ai créé avant avec mes mains ? Êtes-vous trop arrogant ? Vous êtes-vous rebellé ? « 
76. Il a dit, « je suis meilleur que lui ; Vous m'avez créé du feu, et l'avez créé de l'argile. « 
77. Il a dit, « par conséquent, vous doit être exilé, vous sera bani.
78. « Vous avez encouru ma condamnation jusqu'au jour du jugement.  »
79. Il a dit, « mon seigneur, sursis je jusqu'au jour de la résurrection.  »
80. Il a dit, « vous êtes respited.
81. « Jusqu'au jour désigné.  »
82. Il a dit, « je jure par votre majesté, que je les enverrai tout égarés.
83. « Excepté vos worshipers qui seul sont consacrés absolument à toi.  »

Les vers ci-dessus indiquent l'histoire très clair.

Satan a demandé qu'il soit donné une chance « s'avèrent » que l'homme est incapable au charger…

Et un DIEU a ainsi permis à Satan (qui a des intentions mauvaises) de nous attirer (mais ne pas avoir accès à nous) :

« Vous pouvez les attirer avec votre voix, et mobilisez toutes vos forces et tous vos hommes contre eux, et part dans leur argent et enfants, et les promettez. Quelque chose les promesses de diable n'est pas plus qu'une illusion. « (Quran 17:64)

« je viendrai à elles de avant qu'ils, et par derrière elles, et de leur droite, et de leur gauche, et de toi constatent que la plupart d'entre eux est unappreciative. » (7 : 17)

Ont fait arrêter l'histoire là, nous seraient toujours bien. Le problème est, Satan parvenu pour duper nos ancêtres dans lui donner l'ACCESS à nos âmes ! :

« Le diable a chuchoté à eux, afin d'accéder à eux. Il a dit, « votre seigneur ne vous a pas interdit de cet arbre, excepté de vous empêcher des anges devenants, et d'atteindre l'existence éternelle. » (7 : 20)

Manger de l'arbre « interdit » a permis à Satan d'avoir accès constant à notre « Nafs ».

Le mélange que nous avons maintenant est :

1. La « âme » - Nafs ;

2. Le « esprit » - Rouh ;

3. Satan - Shaitan (c'est le diable ayant accès à nos âmes et pouvant les influencer).

Satan est la fausseté FINALE chez toi. S'il y a jamais une fausseté, ne la recherchez pas… dehors de toi - elle se trouve en dessous de toi.

Encore plus de mauvaises nouvelles : à la différence du Rouh, Satan VOUS APPROCHE. Si vous avez un delimma, il donnera votre réponse. Si la réponse est correcte n'est pas même une question, parce que nous savons qu'elle n'est pas. parfois, avant que vous ayez même un delimma, il te donnera le chaos… parce qu'il te donnera tellement la fausseté dans votre vie que vous finirez vers le haut du sentiment CONFUS, DIMINUÉE, le sentiment DÉTESTÉ par un dieu, ABANDONNÉ, etc. etc. etc. - toutes choses qu'il prospère po.

Ne désespérez pas.

Puisque Satan existe chez toi, il n'y a pas beaucoup que vous pouvez faire au sujet de se débarasser de lui pour de bon. cependant, vous pouvez obtenir débarrassé de chaque fois qu'il s'approche - et tant que vous maintenez dans l'esprit que vous ne devriez pas se fatiguer de le donner un coup de pied dans le silence, vous êtes toujours le gagnant - parce qu'il envahit votre esprit. en cherchant le refuge dans un DIEU, vous donnez l'autorité de Rouh pour le maintenir silencieux.

« Quand vous apprenez le Quran, vous chercherez le refuge dans un DIEU du de Satan rejeté. Il n'a aucun excédent de puissance ceux qui croient et font confiance dans leur seigneur. Sa puissance est limitée à ceux qui le choisissent en tant que leur maître, ceux qui le choisissent en tant que leur dieu. « (16 : 98-100)

Comment pouvez vous être sûr avec son information de fausseté ?. Chaque fois qu'il offre une solution, vous ne la prenez pas pour la valeur nominale - vous allez demander votre Rouh. si vous obtenez une solution sans demander lui - il y a deux manières vous might've obtenu cela ;

1. Le « Nafs » te l'a donné (votre propre subconscient a fait la suggestion) ;

2. Il est venu de Satan !.


Vous n'obtenez jamais les solutions non sollicitées de l'esprit. Abraham… qui un dieu a choisi… n'a pas été approché par GOD - il a approché un DIEU. Le point est ; D'un DIEU les amours toujours toi… mais lui ne vous arrêteront pas de ruiner votre vie… si vous ne demandez pas son aide. Un DIEU n'abandonne entièrement jamais quelqu'un… et ne guide entièrement jamais quelqu'un - s'il, il Abraham, Mohamed, etc. - les messagers qu'il a choisis (qui nous voyons faire des erreurs humaines). Et les conseils, à la différence de l'arrangement musulman de eux… sont un processus de chaque situation… au lieu d'un seul trait de chose.



Note finale :

Le meilleur Islam est chez toi - l'esprit d'un DIEU (Rouh'u Allah) est chez toi. Il n'y a aucune une telle chose que la vérité se trouve dehors de toi. la vérité finale se trouve en dessous de toi. svp, tirez profit de cette bénédiction. Ce sera votre arme finale contre la fausseté…


Par Libre-Esprit (E-mail : free@free-minds.org)

L'ÂME EN PHILOSOPHIE ISLAMIQUE



la discussion de l'âme humaine, son existence, nature, objectif final et éternité, occupe une position fortement importante en philosophie islamique et forme son foyer principal. Pour la plupart les philosophes musulmans ont convenu, de même que leurs prédécesseurs grecs, que l'âme se compose des pièces non-raisonnables et raisonnables. La partie non-raisonnable qu'ils se sont divisée en âmes d'usine et d'animal, la partie raisonnable dans les intellects pratiques et théoriques. Tous ont cru que la partie non-raisonnable est liée essentiellement au corps, mais certains ont considéré la partie raisonnable comme séparé du corps par la nature et d'autres que toutes parties de l'âme sont par le matériel de nature. Les philosophes ont convenu que, alors que l'âme est dans le corps, sa partie non-raisonnable est de contrôler le corps, son intellect pratique doit contrôler des affaires mondaines, y compris ceux du corps, et son intellect théorique est de savoir les aspects éternels de l'univers. Ils ont pensé que la fin ou le bonheur finale de l'âme dépend de sa capacité de se séparer des demandes du corps et de se concentrer sur saisir les aspects éternels de l'univers. Tous ont cru que l'âme non-raisonnable se produit et périt inévitablement. Certains, comme Al-Farabi, ont cru que l'âme raisonnable peut ou peut ne pas survivre éternellement ; d'autres, comme Ibn Sina, ont cru qu'il n'a aucun commencement et aucune fin ; encore d'autres, tel qu'Ibn Rushd, ont cru que l'âme avec toutes ses différentes pièces hérite l'existence et est par la suite détruite.

1 L'existence de l'âme

2 La nature de l'âme

3 L'âme raisonnable

4 L'objectif final de l'âme

5 L'éternité de l'âme

met en référence de lecture 1 d'extrémité



davantage L'existence de l'âme

tous les philosophes musulmans s'est concernée par le sujet de l'âme. Les travaux les plus détaillés et les plus importants sont à ce sujet ceux d'Al-Kindi, d'Al-Farabi, d'Ibn Sina et d'Ibn Rushd. Les philosophes musulmans ont identifié que la première question, celle confronte l'esprit humain en ce qui concerne l'âme est son existence. C'est pourquoi, à commencer très de son enquête au sujet de l'âme en Al-Shifa' (curatif), Ibn Sina (§6) affirme que nous impliquons l'existence de l'âme du fait que nous observons les corps qui exécutent certains actes avec un certain degré de volonté. Ces actes sont exemplifiés en prenant l'alimentation, la croissance, se reproduire, se déplacer et percevoir. Puisque ces actes n'appartiennent pas à la nature des corps, parce que cette nature est exempte de volonté, ils doivent appartenir à un principe qu'ils ont autres que des corps. Ce principe est ce qui s'appelle l'âme de `'.

Cet argument est prévu pour prouver l'existence de l'âme animale, qui inclut l'âme d'usine. L'âme est la source des actes exécutés par la volonté, pas puisque c'est `par substance' (une entité indépendante), mais puisque c'est `le principe de tels agit'. L'âme raisonnable, d'une part, n'a pas besoin de regarder en dehors de elle-même pour impliquer son existence. Il se rend compte de son existence avec l'urgence, c'est-à-dire, sans aucun instrument. L'exemple d'Ibn Sina de l'homme suspendu est prévu pour montrer que l'âme raisonnable se rend compte de elle-même indépendamment de n'importe quel corps. Ses ébullitions d'argument vers le bas à la vue qui, même si l'âme raisonnable d'adulte ne se rend pas compte de n'importe quoi matériel, ne pas égaliser son corps, il reste averti de sa propre existence.



2 La nature de l'âme

tandis que l'Islam lui incitait le candidat sortant sur les philosophes musulmans pour s'occuper intensivement avec l'étude de l'âme et pour assurer les rapports qui semblent dans certains cas conformés à la croyance islamique, la philosophie grecque a eu le dessus en formant les vraies convictions des philosophes musulmans en ce qui concerne la nature de l'âme. Sauf indication contraire, référence à : il âme ici est limité à l'âme terrestre à l'exclusion de la céleste, puisque les philosophes musulmans se sont concernés principalement par l'ancien. It must be pointed out at the outset that ‘soul’. (nafs) was used in more than one sense in Islamic philosophy; the term was used to refer to the plant or vegetative part of a living being, the animal or sensitive part, the rational part and finally the totality of all three parts. The first two are the non-rational soul and the totality is the human soul. To add to the confusion, ‘human soul’ is used only in the sense of this fourth type of soul. The plant, animal and; rational souls are also called powers or parts of the; soul. Only from the context can one understand, whether a Muslim philosopher was using ‘soul’ in the broad sense to mean the human soul (the totality of the parts of the soul), or in the narrow sense to mean a specific part of the human soul.

Inasmuch as it has a certain relation to a body, the soul is a form for that body, that is, the perfection of that body. It is a form because a natural body is composed of matter and form, which in the case of animals are body and soul. Since it has been shown that the soul is the source of will and therefore is not matter, it remains a form. Perfection is of two types, primary and secondary. A primary perfection is what makes a thing actually a species, as shape does for the sword, or a genus as sensation and-movement do for animals. A secondary perfection is an act necessitated by the nature of the species or genus, such as cutting for the sword and touching for animal. The soul is a primary perfection of a natural body capable of performing the secondary perfections necessitated by this primary perfection. Together with its body, the soul constitutes a material substance. This substance can be the subject of plant, animal or human life.

The soul is a perfection inasmuch as it makes a natural body into a plant, an animal or a rational being. However, to define the soul as a perfection does not give us a clue as to what the soul is in itself, but only inasmuch as it has a relation to the body. The body is, therefore, an essential element in the definition of the soul. Without relating to a body, the thing we call ‘soul’ is not a soul and does not require the body as an essential part of its definition. Note, however, that in spite of this assertion, perhaps for the lack of any better term, Muslim philosophers use ‘soul’ also to refer to the rational soul after it separates from the body and reaches a complete state of purity from matter.

In its first or lowest stages of relating to the body, the soul is the plant soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can take nourishment, grow and reproduce. The plant soul is the power human beings and other animals share with plants. If the body with a soul is an animal, the soul develops into the animal soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body has sensation and movement through will. While this soul includes the plant soul, it has also a sensitive power and a locomotive one. The sensitive power has both external and internal senses. The external senses are, in priority of existence, touch, taste, smell, hearing and sight. The first three are said to be necessary for survival and the last two for well being. In Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), IBN RUSHD (§3) asserts that the five external senses may be in potentiality, as in infancy and sleep, or in actuality, as in daily seeing or hearing. He also argues that there cannot be any external sense other than these five because there would be no function for it, since there is no external sensation other than the objects of the five senses mentioned above. Most Muslim philosophers men­tion three types of internal senses: common sense, imagination and memory. IBN SINA (§3) enumerates five internal senses: common sense, representational power, imagination, estimative power and memory. On the whole, the philosophers agree on the function of the common sense, imagination and memory; the function that Ibn Sina limits to the representational and estimative powers, other Muslim philosophers allocate to the imagination.

The common sense is an internal power in which all the objects of the external senses are collected. Contrary to the external senses, which can grasp only one type of sensation, as sight grasps light and hearing grasps sound, the common sense can grasp all external sensations, such as that honey is of such and such a colour, texture and smell. The representational power preserves the sensations of the common sense even after sensible things disappear. The imagination selects at will to combine some of the objects of the representational power with each other and to separate the rest. It makes its judgment about external things, but in the absence of these things. That is why it functions best when the external senses, which represent external things, are not at work, as in sleep. Ibn Rushd points out that animals such as worms and flies that do not act except in the presence of sensible things are devoid of imagination. The imagination is called such inasmuch as it is an animal instrument; it is called cognitive inasmuch as it is a rational instrument. The estimative power grasps non-sensible notions of sensible things, such as the sheep’s notion that the wolf is to be avoided. This notion is about a sensible thing but is not grasped through the external senses, as is the colour or shape of a wolf. Memory preserves the notions of the estimative power. The imagination acts on the objects of memory in the same way it acts on those of the representational powers. Like the objects of the external senses, those of the internal senses are particular and material. The difference is that they can be experienced in the absence of external things and are to some degree abstracted from matter.

The locomotive power branches into that which causes movement and that which actually moves. The former, the desiderative power, subdivides into the appetitive and the irascible. The appetitive causes movement toward what is imagined to be necessary or beneficial in the pursuit of pleasure. The irascible causes avoidance of what is imagined to be harmful or an impediment in the pursuit of dominance. The power that actually moves uses the nerves to relax the muscles at the demands of the appetitive power or tighten them at the demands of the irascible one.



3 The rational soul

The rational soul, which is defined as a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can act by rational choice and grasp the universals, is divided into the practical and the theoretical intellects. The practical intellect seeks knowledge in order to act in accordance with the good in its individual body, its family and its state. It must, therefore, know the principles for properly managing the body, the family and the state, that is, ethics, home management and politics. The practical intellect is the rational soul turning its face down­ward. The function of the theoretical intellect is to know just for the sake of having the universals (the realities or natures of things). Some of these natures, such as God and the intellect, cannot attach to movement; knowledge of them is metaphysics. Other natures, such as unity, can attach to movement but do not; knowledge of them is mathematics. Still other natures, such as humanity and squareness, can attach to movement either in reality and thought, such as humanity, or in reality but not in thought, such as squareness. Knowledge of these is physics.

The theoretical intellect is the rational soul with its face upward. The practical intellect looks up to the theoretical one and moves its body accordingly. In this, the practical intellect is similar to :the celestial soul that looks up to the intellect of its sphere and moves its sphere accordingly. Thus, like .the celestial soul, the practical intellect is the link between intellect as such and matter.

On the whole, Muslim philosophers followed al-Kindi’s division of the theoretical intellect into the material intellect (al-‘aql al-hayulant), the habitual intellect (al-‘agl bil-malaka), the actual intellect (al-‘aql bi’!-fi’b and the acquired intellect’ (al-‘aql al-mustafad). The material intellect is a blank slate with the potentiality for grasping the intelligible forms or universals. Ibn Sina points out that it is referred to as material, not because it is actually material but because it resembles matter in accepting the form. The habitual intellect grasps the universals, as one acquires the skill to write; in other words, this intellect has the ability to use the universals but does not always do so. The actual intellect grasps the universals in actuality and is always ready to use them. While Muslim philosophers differed slightly with regard to their accounts of the acquired intellect, their general view is that it is the highest human state, the point of contact with the divine, the agent intellect (the intelligence of the moon, the lowest celestial intellect), which makes it possible for the theoretical intellect to acquire the universals in the purest form (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY §4).



4 The ultimate objective of the soul

AL-FARABI asserts that even though the soul is of different parts, it is a unity with all its parts working for one final end, happiness. While the plant soul, for example, serves a specific function, it also serves the powers that are higher than it in rank, the animal powers. Without nourishment, growth and reproduc­tion, the animal powers cannot perform their necessary functions. Similarly, while the function of the animal powers is to have sensation and movement, by performing this function they also promote the functions of the powers above them, the rational ones. The operations of the animal powers, especially those of the senses, are particularly important for the attainment of the final end. The external senses strip the forms from material objects and convey them to the internal senses. The more they are transferred internally, the less mixed with matter do they become. Since the innermost sense they reach is the imagina­tion, they are there in their purest material existence (see IMAGINATION).

The role of the objects of the imagination is not always clearly defined in Islamic philosophy. Occa­sionally it is said by somebody like Ibn Sina to be one of preparation for the theoretical intellect to receive the universals from the agent intellect. At other times Ibn Sina, like other Aristotelians such as Ibn Rushd, takes these objects to be the ingredients out of which the universals are made after the last process of purification (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY). It seems, however, that in either case the light of the agent intellect is needed to complete the process. In the former case, this light gives the intelligible forms to the theoretical intellect when this intellect is prepared. In the latter case, it sheds itself on the objects of the imagination, which are then reflected on the theoretical intellect without their matter. Since the theoretical intellect is in its first stages in potentiality, it cannot act on the objects of the imagination directly; hence the need for the agent intellect, which is pure actuality. The role of the practical intellect in all this is to put order into the body. This sets free the theoretical intellect from preoccupation with the body and helps the powers whose function is necessary for theoretical knowledge to function unhampered.

Muslim philosophers adhered to the view that the acquired intellect is one with its objects, for they thought the knower and the known are one, as did their Greek predecessors. This means that the highest human state is one in which unity with the universals or the eternal aspects of the universe is reached. This state is described as happiness because in it eternity, an aspect of the objects of the acquired intellect, is attained.



5 Eternity of the soul

When Muslim philosophers assert that the soul comes into existence simultaneously with the coming into existence of the body, some, such as Ibn Sina (§6), who believe that the rational soul is in essence non­material, are thinking only of the non-rational soul. Others, such as Ibn Rushd (§3), who believe that the rational soul is originally not separate from matter, contend that the whole human soul comes into existence. The latter believe that since the rational soul grasps the universals from particular sensibles, and since such sensibles are material and have a temporal beginning, this soul must also be material and must have a temporal beginning. Those who attribute non-materiality to the essence of the rational soul, such as AL-KINDI and Ibn Sina, assert that this soul pre-exists the body. While all of them agree that the non-rational soul is destroyed after the destruc­tion of the body, they differ with regard to the end of the rational soul.

Al-Kindi and Ibn Sina, for example, strongly adhere to the view that all rational souls are indestructible because by nature they are simple. AL-FARABI reminds us that the reason for eternal existence is the rational soul’s knowledge of the eternal aspects of the universe. From this he draws the conclusion, as did ALEXANDER OF APHRODISIAS before him, that only those rational souls that have this knowledge at their separation from the body are indestructible. Other rational souls are eventually destroyed. Ibn Sina finds in the grasping of the universals the grounds for happiness, not the eternity of the soul. Ibn Rushd seems to hold that only the acquired intellect can be indestructible; but the acquired intellect, he argues (as does his teacher IBN BAJJA), is divine and numerically one in all. Ibn Rushd was attacked for this view because it denies eternal existence of individual souls (see AVERROISM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE).

See also: ARISTOTELIANISM IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; ETHICS IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; IBN RUSHD §3; IBN SINA §6; MYSTICAL PHILOSOPHY IN ISLAM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE



References end further reading

al-Farabi (c.870-950) al-Madina al fadila (The Virtuous City), trans. R. Walter, Al-Farabi on the Perfect State.’ Abu Nasr al-Farabi’s Mabadi’ Ara’Ah al-Madina al-Fadila, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. (English and Arabic of the most comprehensive and best known philosophical work of al-Farabi.)

Ibn Rushd (1180) Tahafut al-tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence), trans. S. Van Den Bergh, London: Luzac, 1954. (A response to a number of issues raised by al-Ghazali against philosophers. One of the three most important of these issues is that of the soul and its fate.)

- (c.1174) Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Maktabat an-Nahda, 1950. (Includes also four other essays: Ibn Baja’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction), Ishaq Ibn Hunayn’s Kitab ft an-nafs (Book on the Soul), Ibn Rushd’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction) and al-Kindi’s Risalat al-‘aql (Essay on Intellect).)

Ibn Sina (980-1037) an-Nafs (The Soul), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s de Anima, London: Oxford University Press, 1959. (The most important and detailed philosophical treatise on the soul in Islamic philosophy, the sixth part of the Physics of al-Shifa’. An Arabic edition of the text is included.)

(980-1037) Ahwal an-nafs (The States of the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1952. (Includes Risala fi an-nafs wa-baqa’ha wa-ma’adiha (Essay on the Soul, Its Permanence and Its Second Life), Mabhath ‘an al-qiwa an-nafsaniyya (Inquiry about Psychic Powers), Risala fi ma’rifat an-nafs an-natiga (Essay on Knowing the Rational Soul) and Risala fi al-kalam ‘ala an-nafs an-natiqa (Essay on an Inquiry Concerning the Rational Soul).)

- (980-1037) an-Najat (Deliverance), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s Psychology, London: Oxford University Press, 1952. (The psychology of an-Najat is an abridgement by Ibn Sina of his encyclopedic work al-Shifa’ (Healing).)

- (980-1037) Rasa’d ash-shaykh ar-ra’is f asrar al-hikma al-mashriqiyya (Essays of the Master of the Head on the Secrets of Oriental Wisdom), ed. M. Mehren, Traites mystiques d’Avicenna, Leiden: Brill, 1889-99. (Ibn Sina’s ‘oriental philosophy’.)

Inati, S.C. (1996) A Study of Ibn Sina’s Mysticism, London: Kegan Paul International. (Includes a detailed analysis of Ibn Sina’s notion of the soul and a translation of the fourth part of al-Isharat wa­‘1-tanbihat (Remarks and Admonitions).)

al-Kindi (before 873) Rasa’il al-Kindi al falsafiyya (Al-Kindi’s Philosophical Treatises), ed. M. Abu Rida, Cairo: Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi, 1953. (Includes al-Kindi’s most relevant works on the subject of the soul, al-Qawl fi an-nafs (Discourse on the Soul), Fi an-nafs (On the Soul) and Fi mahiyyat an-nawm war-ru’ya (On the Essence of Sleep and Internal Vision).)



SHAMS C. INATI


Collectede By
Shobuz Bhai

No hay tal cosa que la verdad miente afuera de usted. la última verdad miente dentro de usted.
Automatically translated into Spanish thanks to WorldLingo
El Sura

humano # 76 (el ser humano):

1. ¿“No es un hecho de que había una época en que el humano no era nada ser mencionado? ”
2. “Creamos a ser humano de una mezcla líquida, a partir de dos padres, para probarlo. Así, le hicimos un oyente y un adivino. “
3. “Le demostramos las dos trayectorias, entonces él es elogioso, o unappreciative. ”


Cuál la mayoría de la gente es inconsciente, es la misma ESTRUCTURA de sus propios uno mismo.

La mayor parte de crecemos hasta pensamos que “apenas nos” construyen de la “alma” que, cuando muere, invierte de nuevo a DIOS.

Aunque esta información está “parcialmente” correcta, hay también mucho más al maquillaje del ser humano que el DIOS explica a nosotros con el Quran.

Es el sistema del diablo para confundirnos y para debilitar así que incluso no sabemos lucharlo!. Una regla principal de cualquier conflicto es que usted “conoce a su enemigo”. Pero antes de hacer eso, usted debe primero “conocerse”!.



¿Rouh = alma?

Ésta es la sola idea falsa más grande que puebla ha hecho que ayudó a torcer la aplicación “quiénes somos”.

En Arabia, cuando alguien muere, la gente dice: “roguemos en su Rouh!”.

También, cuando hablan sobre alguien que muere, la opinión: “su Rouh lo ha dejado”.

En escuelas, enseñan a nuestros cabritos que la “alma” es el “Rouh” y eso es qué morirá y será juzgada y castigada o recompensada…

Sin embargo, la historia cambia cuando miramos qué el DIOS tiene que decir:

El “DIOS toma “el Nafs” cuando viene la muerte, y también a la hora del sueño…” (39: 42)

“no “Nafs” dados excepto por la licencia de GOD'S, en un rato predeterminado…” (3: 145 que)

“cada “Nafs” prueba muerte, entonces usted reciben su recompense en el día de la resurrección…” (3: 185)

“… usted no matará “al Nafs” que ese DIOS ha hecho sagrado, excepto en el curso de justicia…” (6: 151)

“… que ella dijo: mi señor, he agraviado mi 'Nafs "… “(27: 16)

Bien, usted consigue el cuadro!.

El DIOS nos dice que nuestra “alma” esté llamada “Nafs”, y que este “Nafs” es qué se toma en la muerte y qué se juzga el j-día (entonces recompensado o castigado). El “Nafs” es USTED, es el su ser entero, es su pizarra, que es cargada o aligerada por sus acciones…

¿Así pues, si la “alma” es el “Nafs”, después cuál es el Rouh?



Rouh = alcohol.

“Mientras que una barrera la separó de ellos, enviamos a su nuestro “Rouh”. Él fue a ella bajo la forma de humano. “(19: 17)

“le preguntan acerca “del Rouh”. Opinión: 'El “Rouh” viene de mi señor. Y le no dieron conocimiento, excepto poco. “(Quran 17:85)

llega a ser evidente al lector que “el Rouh” es de DIOS y es la acumulación “del conocimiento” que asistirá al humano en su vida… que se describe lo más mejor posible como “alcohol”.

Usted ve, los animales también tienen “Nafs” apenas como lo hacemos (es su vida-fuerza), con todo, usted no ve monos el construir de las naves espaciales ni de las tortugas que trabajan en las computadoras!.

El “Rouh” es el regalo que el DIOS dio a nuestra especie para no prohibir nos a la ventaja del “conocimiento”.

“Una vez que bajan I perfecto él (el ser humano), y el soplo en él de mi “Rouh”, usted prostrate antes de él.” (15: 29)

Todos los animales pueden comunicarse el uno con el otro (recuerde los pájaros hablar a Solomon?). Sin embargo, es solamente el hombre que tiene “conocimiento”.

El “Rouh” es regalo del DIOS a nosotros, y es solamente BUENO. La información que el “Rouh” proporciona a cada uno de nosotros es ser utilizado para nuestra ventaja, pero nosotros tiene la “opción” para utilizarla para el mal (como la fisión nuclear que es utilizada hacer una bomba).

Un ciertas noticias desafortunadas sobre el “Rouh”: NUNCA le acercará y ahorrará el día. por ejemplo, usted está luchando para entender algo. Si usted no pide a DIOS ayuda, no irá; “hey, aquí está la respuesta!” no, usted tiene que acercarle. También, será siempre LITERAL. usted tendrá que ser específico de lo que usted está preguntando. Nota, usted no tiene que decir este hacia fuera ruidoso. Usted puede apenas pensar en él - porque muchas veces, seres humanos tienen expresar duro del tiempo qué desean exactamente pedir. Con el alcohol del dios, usted no tiene que preocuparse de esto - mientras usted consiga la intención de pedir, el alcohol sabrá la pregunta… tanto como usted deseó pedir y ese SOLO (aunque sabe todas las preguntas que usted sabe - no va a contestar cualquier cosa usted no pidió).



Así si podemos resumir lo que tenemos hasta que este punto.

El del ser humano se construye hasta ahora de:

1. La “alma” - Nafs (es USTED, la persona verdadera, qué hace opciones y qué será juzgada);

2. El “alcohol” - Rouh (esto es un regalo del DIOS, él no es el suyo, usted no lo posee, toda la gente tiene acceso a él - como el Quran. Es propósito es ayudar a proporcionar respuestas y conocimiento para ayudar a su alma para tomar las decisiones derechas).




Satan - Shaitan

la 3ro y más mortal mezcla de la ecuación del hombre es “Satan”.

“Él (Satan) dijo, “puesto que usted lo ha honrado sobre mí, si usted plazo yo hasta el día de la resurrección, posee a todos sus descendientes, excepto algunos.” (17: 62)

El hecho desafortunado de nuestras vidas es que Satan desafió la derecha de nuestros antepasados al acceso de los posses al 'Rouh ". Satan demandó que él era calificado para utilizar el regalo del DIOS y que él haría un trabajo mejor con él:

Él (DIOS) dijo, “qué le previno de la porción cuando le pedí?” Él dijo, “soy mejor que él; Usted me creó del fuego, y lo creó de fango. “(7: 12)

Esta cuestión de la capacidad del hombre condujo a un conflicto en los cielos y las “dudas” entrados en erupción así:

Sura 38 (S'ad):

67 . La opinión, “aquí es noticias impresionantes.
68. “Ese usted es totalmente olvidadizo a.
69. “No tenía ningún conocimiento previamente, sobre la pelea en los altos cielos.
70. “Me inspiran que mi misión única es entregarle las advertencias. ”
71. Su señor dicho a los ángeles: 'Estoy creando un est humano de la arcilla.
72. “Una vez que lo diseño, y soplo en él de mi alcohol, usted le asistirá. ”
73. Los ángeles asistieron, todos,
74. excepto Satan; él rechazó, y era demasiado arrogante, unappreciative.
75. ¿Él dijo, “O Satan, qué evitó que usted asistiera a lo que creé antes con mis manos? ¿Es usted demasiado arrogante? ¿Usted ha rebelado? “
76. Él dijo, “soy mejor que él; Usted me creó del fuego, y lo creó de la arcilla. “
77. Él dijo, “por lo tanto, usted debe ser exiliado, usted banished.
78. “Usted ha incurrido en mi condenación hasta el día del juicio. ”
79. Él dijo, “mi señor, plazo yo hasta el día de la resurrección. ”
80. Él dijo, “usted es respited.
81. “Hasta el día designado. ”
82. Él dijo, “juro por su majestad, que los enviaré todo extraviados.
83. “Excepto sus worshipers que se dedican absolutamente a usted solamente. ”

Los versos antedichos cuentan la historia muy claramente.

Satan solicitó que le den una ocasión “pruebe” que el hombre es impropio para la tarea…

Y el DIOS permitió así que Satan (quién tiene intenciones malvadas) nos tentara (pero no tener acceso a nosotros):

“Usted puede tentarlos con su voz, y moviliza todas sus fuerzas y todos sus hombres contra ellos, y la parte en su dinero y niños, y los promete. Cualquier cosa las promesas del diablo no es no más que una ilusión. “(Quran 17:64)

“vendré a ellas de antes de que, y de detrás él, y de la su derecha, y de su izquierda, y de usted encuentren que la mayor parte de él es unappreciative.” (7: 17)

Hicieron la historia parar allí, nosotros todavía serían fino. El problema es, Satan manejado para trampear a nuestros antepasados en darle el ACCESO a nuestras almas!:

“El diablo susurró a ellos, para acceder a ellos. Él dijo, “su señor no le prohibió de este árbol, excepto prevenirle de ángeles que se convertían, y de lograr existencia eterna.” (7: 20)

El comer del árbol “prohibido” permitió que Satan tuviera acceso constante a nuestro “Nafs”.

La mezcla que ahora tenemos es:

1. La “alma” - Nafs;

2. El “alcohol” - Rouh;

3. Satan - Shaitan (éste es el diablo que tiene acceso a nuestras almas y que puede influenciarlas).

Satan es la ÚLTIMA falsedad dentro de usted. Si hay siempre una falsedad, no la busque… afuera de usted - miente dentro de usted.

Más malas noticias: desemejante del Rouh, Satan LE ACERCA. Si usted tiene un delimma, él dará su respuesta. Si la respuesta está correcta no es uniforme una pregunta, porque sabemos que no es. a veces, antes de que usted incluso tenga un delimma, él le dará caos… porque él le dará tanto falsedad en su vida que usted termine encima de la sensación CONFUNDIDA, PRESIONADA, la sensación ODIADA por el dios, ABANDONADO, etc etc etc - todas las cosas que él prospera pulg.

No se desespere.

Porque Satan existe dentro de usted, no hay mucho que usted puede hacer sobre conseguir librado de él para el bueno. sin embargo, usted puede conseguir librado de cada vez que él se acerca - y mientras usted tenga presente que usted no debe conseguir cansado de golpearlo con el pie en silencio, usted es siempre el ganador - porque él invade su mente. buscando el refugio en DIOS, usted da la autoridad de Rouh para mantenerlo silencioso.

“Cuando usted aprende el Quran, usted buscará el refugio en DIOS del de Satan rechazado. Él no tiene ningún excedente de la energía los que crean y confíen en en su señor. Su energía se limita a las que lo elijan como su amo, las que lo elijan como su dios. “(16: 98-100)

Cómo puede usted ser seguro con su información de la falsedad?. Cada vez que él ofrece una solución, usted no la toma para el valor de cara - usted va pedir su Rouh. si usted consigue una solución sin pedir él - hay dos maneras usted might've conseguido eso;

1. El “Nafs” le lo dio (su propio subconsciente hizo la sugerencia);

2. Vino de Satan!.


Usted nunca consigue unasked soluciones del alcohol. A GOD no acercó a Abraham… quién el dios ha elegido… - él acercó al DIOS. El punto es; Del DIOS los amors siempre usted… sino él no le pararán de arruinar su vida… si usted no pide su ayuda. El DIOS nunca abandona a alguien enteramente… y nunca dirige a alguien enteramente - si él lo hiciera, él Abraham, Mohammed, etc - los mensajeros a que él ha elegido (quién vemos incurrir en equivocaciones humanas). Y la dirección, desemejante de la comprensión musulmana de ella… es un proceso de cada situación… en vez de una vez de cosa.



Nota final:

El mejor Islam está dentro de usted - el alcohol del DIOS (Rouh'u Allah) está dentro de usted. No hay tal cosa que la verdad miente afuera de usted. la última verdad miente dentro de usted. por favor, aprovéchese de esa bendición. Será su última arma contra falsedad…


Por Libre-Mente (E-mail: free@free-minds.org)

El ALMA EN LA FILOSOFÍA ISLÁMICA



la discusión del alma humana, su existencia, naturaleza, último objetivo y eternidad, ocupa una posición altamente importante en la filosofía islámica y forma su foco principal. Para mayor parte los filósofos musulmanes convinieron, al igual que sus precursores griegos, que el alma consiste en piezas no-racionales y racionales. La parte no-racional que se dividieron en las almas de la planta y del animal, la parte racional en las intelectos prácticas y teóricas. Todos creyeron que la parte no-racional está ligada esencialmente al cuerpo, pero algo consideraba la parte racional como a parte del cuerpo por la naturaleza y otras que todas las partes del alma están al lado de material de la naturaleza. Los filósofos convinieron que, mientras que el alma está en el cuerpo, su parte no-racional es manejar el cuerpo, su intelecto práctica deben manejar asuntos worldly, incluyendo los del cuerpo, y su intelecto teórica es saber los aspectos eternos del universo. Pensaron que el último final o felicidad del alma depende de su capacidad de separarse de las demandas del cuerpo y de centrarse en agarrar los aspectos eternos del universo. Todos creyeron que el alma no-racional entra en ser y fallece inevitable. Algunos, como el al-Farabi, creyeron que el alma racional puede o no puede sobrevivir eternamente; otros, como Ibn Sina, creyeron que no tiene ningún principio y ningún extremo; todavía otros, tales como Ibn Rushd, creyeron que el alma con todas sus piezas individuales entra en existencia y está destruida eventual.

1 La existencia del alma

2 La naturaleza del alma

3 El alma racional

4 El último objetivo del alma

5 La eternidad del alma

se refiere a la lectura adicional 1



del extremo La existencia del alma

todos los filósofos musulmanes se refirió al tema del alma. Los trabajos más detallados y más importantes sobre este tema son los del al-Kindi, del al-Farabi, de Ibn Sina y de Ibn Rushd. Los filósofos musulmanes reconocieron que la primera edición, de que enfrenta la mente humana con respecto al alma es su existencia. Ése es porqué, en muy comenzar de su investigación sobre el alma en al-Shifa' (curativo), Ibn Sina (§6) afirma que deducimos la existencia del alma del hecho de que observamos los cuerpos que realizan ciertos actos con un cierto grado de la voluntad. Estos actos se ejemplifican en tomar el alimento, el crecimiento, la reproducción, la mudanza y percibir. Puesto que estos actos no pertenecen a la naturaleza de cuerpos, porque esta naturaleza es desprovista de voluntad, deben pertenecer a un principio que tienen con excepción de cuerpos. Este principio es qué se llama alma del `'.

Esta discusión se piensa para probar la existencia del alma animal, que incluye el alma de la planta. El alma es la fuente de los actos realizados por la voluntad, no ya que es `a la sustancia' (una entidad independiente), pero ya que es `el principio de tales actúa'. El alma racional, por otra parte, no necesita mirar fuera de sí mismo para deducir su existencia. Está enterado de su existencia con urgencia, es decir, sin ningunos instrumentos. El ejemplo de Ibn Sina del hombre suspendido se piensa para probar que el alma racional está enterada de sí mismo aparte de cualquier cuerpo. Sus ebulliciones de la discusión abajo a la visión que, aunque el alma racional del adulto no está enterada cualquier cosa material, no igualar su cuerpo, sigue siendo enterado de su propia existencia.



2 La naturaleza del alma

mientras que el Islam le hizo a titular en filósofos musulmanes para ocuparse extensivamente con el estudio del alma y para hacer ciertas declaraciones que en algunos casos aparecen constantes con creencia islámica, la filosofía griega tenía la mano superior en la formación de las convicciones verdaderas de filósofos musulmanes con respecto a la naturaleza del alma. Salvo especificación de lo contrario, referencia a: lo alma aquí limitan al alma terrestre a la exclusión de la celestial, puesto que los filósofos musulmanes se refirieron sobre todo al anterior. It must be pointed out at the outset that ‘soul’. (nafs) was used in more than one sense in Islamic philosophy; the term was used to refer to the plant or vegetative part of a living being, the animal or sensitive part, the rational part and finally the totality of all three parts. The first two are the non-rational soul and the totality is the human soul. To add to the confusion, ‘human soul’ is used only in the sense of this fourth type of soul. The plant, animal and; rational souls are also called powers or parts of the; soul. Only from the context can one understand, whether a Muslim philosopher was using ‘soul’ in the broad sense to mean the human soul (the totality of the parts of the soul), or in the narrow sense to mean a specific part of the human soul.

Inasmuch as it has a certain relation to a body, the soul is a form for that body, that is, the perfection of that body. It is a form because a natural body is composed of matter and form, which in the case of animals are body and soul. Since it has been shown that the soul is the source of will and therefore is not matter, it remains a form. Perfection is of two types, primary and secondary. A primary perfection is what makes a thing actually a species, as shape does for the sword, or a genus as sensation and-movement do for animals. A secondary perfection is an act necessitated by the nature of the species or genus, such as cutting for the sword and touching for animal. The soul is a primary perfection of a natural body capable of performing the secondary perfections necessitated by this primary perfection. Together with its body, the soul constitutes a material substance. This substance can be the subject of plant, animal or human life.

The soul is a perfection inasmuch as it makes a natural body into a plant, an animal or a rational being. However, to define the soul as a perfection does not give us a clue as to what the soul is in itself, but only inasmuch as it has a relation to the body. The body is, therefore, an essential element in the definition of the soul. Without relating to a body, the thing we call ‘soul’ is not a soul and does not require the body as an essential part of its definition. Note, however, that in spite of this assertion, perhaps for the lack of any better term, Muslim philosophers use ‘soul’ also to refer to the rational soul after it separates from the body and reaches a complete state of purity from matter.

In its first or lowest stages of relating to the body, the soul is the plant soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can take nourishment, grow and reproduce. The plant soul is the power human beings and other animals share with plants. If the body with a soul is an animal, the soul develops into the animal soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body has sensation and movement through will. While this soul includes the plant soul, it has also a sensitive power and a locomotive one. The sensitive power has both external and internal senses. The external senses are, in priority of existence, touch, taste, smell, hearing and sight. The first three are said to be necessary for survival and the last two for well being. In Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), IBN RUSHD (§3) asserts that the five external senses may be in potentiality, as in infancy and sleep, or in actuality, as in daily seeing or hearing. He also argues that there cannot be any external sense other than these five because there would be no function for it, since there is no external sensation other than the objects of the five senses mentioned above. Most Muslim philosophers men­tion three types of internal senses: common sense, imagination and memory. IBN SINA (§3) enumerates five internal senses: common sense, representational power, imagination, estimative power and memory. On the whole, the philosophers agree on the function of the common sense, imagination and memory; the function that Ibn Sina limits to the representational and estimative powers, other Muslim philosophers allocate to the imagination.

The common sense is an internal power in which all the objects of the external senses are collected. Contrary to the external senses, which can grasp only one type of sensation, as sight grasps light and hearing grasps sound, the common sense can grasp all external sensations, such as that honey is of such and such a colour, texture and smell. The representational power preserves the sensations of the common sense even after sensible things disappear. The imagination selects at will to combine some of the objects of the representational power with each other and to separate the rest. It makes its judgment about external things, but in the absence of these things. That is why it functions best when the external senses, which represent external things, are not at work, as in sleep. Ibn Rushd points out that animals such as worms and flies that do not act except in the presence of sensible things are devoid of imagination. The imagination is called such inasmuch as it is an animal instrument; it is called cognitive inasmuch as it is a rational instrument. The estimative power grasps non-sensible notions of sensible things, such as the sheep’s notion that the wolf is to be avoided. This notion is about a sensible thing but is not grasped through the external senses, as is the colour or shape of a wolf. Memory preserves the notions of the estimative power. The imagination acts on the objects of memory in the same way it acts on those of the representational powers. Like the objects of the external senses, those of the internal senses are particular and material. The difference is that they can be experienced in the absence of external things and are to some degree abstracted from matter.

The locomotive power branches into that which causes movement and that which actually moves. The former, the desiderative power, subdivides into the appetitive and the irascible. The appetitive causes movement toward what is imagined to be necessary or beneficial in the pursuit of pleasure. The irascible causes avoidance of what is imagined to be harmful or an impediment in the pursuit of dominance. The power that actually moves uses the nerves to relax the muscles at the demands of the appetitive power or tighten them at the demands of the irascible one.



3 The rational soul

The rational soul, which is defined as a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can act by rational choice and grasp the universals, is divided into the practical and the theoretical intellects. The practical intellect seeks knowledge in order to act in accordance with the good in its individual body, its family and its state. It must, therefore, know the principles for properly managing the body, the family and the state, that is, ethics, home management and politics. The practical intellect is the rational soul turning its face down­ward. The function of the theoretical intellect is to know just for the sake of having the universals (the realities or natures of things). Some of these natures, such as God and the intellect, cannot attach to movement; knowledge of them is metaphysics. Other natures, such as unity, can attach to movement but do not; knowledge of them is mathematics. Still other natures, such as humanity and squareness, can attach to movement either in reality and thought, such as humanity, or in reality but not in thought, such as squareness. Knowledge of these is physics.

The theoretical intellect is the rational soul with its face upward. The practical intellect looks up to the theoretical one and moves its body accordingly. In this, the practical intellect is similar to :the celestial soul that looks up to the intellect of its sphere and moves its sphere accordingly. Thus, like .the celestial soul, the practical intellect is the link between intellect as such and matter.

On the whole, Muslim philosophers followed al-Kindi’s division of the theoretical intellect into the material intellect (al-‘aql al-hayulant), the habitual intellect (al-‘agl bil-malaka), the actual intellect (al-‘aql bi’!-fi’b and the acquired intellect’ (al-‘aql al-mustafad). The material intellect is a blank slate with the potentiality for grasping the intelligible forms or universals. Ibn Sina points out that it is referred to as material, not because it is actually material but because it resembles matter in accepting the form. The habitual intellect grasps the universals, as one acquires the skill to write; in other words, this intellect has the ability to use the universals but does not always do so. The actual intellect grasps the universals in actuality and is always ready to use them. While Muslim philosophers differed slightly with regard to their accounts of the acquired intellect, their general view is that it is the highest human state, the point of contact with the divine, the agent intellect (the intelligence of the moon, the lowest celestial intellect), which makes it possible for the theoretical intellect to acquire the universals in the purest form (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY §4).



4 The ultimate objective of the soul

AL-FARABI asserts that even though the soul is of different parts, it is a unity with all its parts working for one final end, happiness. While the plant soul, for example, serves a specific function, it also serves the powers that are higher than it in rank, the animal powers. Without nourishment, growth and reproduc­tion, the animal powers cannot perform their necessary functions. Similarly, while the function of the animal powers is to have sensation and movement, by performing this function they also promote the functions of the powers above them, the rational ones. The operations of the animal powers, especially those of the senses, are particularly important for the attainment of the final end. The external senses strip the forms from material objects and convey them to the internal senses. The more they are transferred internally, the less mixed with matter do they become. Since the innermost sense they reach is the imagina­tion, they are there in their purest material existence (see IMAGINATION).

The role of the objects of the imagination is not always clearly defined in Islamic philosophy. Occa­sionally it is said by somebody like Ibn Sina to be one of preparation for the theoretical intellect to receive the universals from the agent intellect. At other times Ibn Sina, like other Aristotelians such as Ibn Rushd, takes these objects to be the ingredients out of which the universals are made after the last process of purification (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY). It seems, however, that in either case the light of the agent intellect is needed to complete the process. In the former case, this light gives the intelligible forms to the theoretical intellect when this intellect is prepared. In the latter case, it sheds itself on the objects of the imagination, which are then reflected on the theoretical intellect without their matter. Since the theoretical intellect is in its first stages in potentiality, it cannot act on the objects of the imagination directly; hence the need for the agent intellect, which is pure actuality. The role of the practical intellect in all this is to put order into the body. This sets free the theoretical intellect from preoccupation with the body and helps the powers whose function is necessary for theoretical knowledge to function unhampered.

Muslim philosophers adhered to the view that the acquired intellect is one with its objects, for they thought the knower and the known are one, as did their Greek predecessors. This means that the highest human state is one in which unity with the universals or the eternal aspects of the universe is reached. This state is described as happiness because in it eternity, an aspect of the objects of the acquired intellect, is attained.



5 Eternity of the soul

When Muslim philosophers assert that the soul comes into existence simultaneously with the coming into existence of the body, some, such as Ibn Sina (§6), who believe that the rational soul is in essence non­material, are thinking only of the non-rational soul. Others, such as Ibn Rushd (§3), who believe that the rational soul is originally not separate from matter, contend that the whole human soul comes into existence. The latter believe that since the rational soul grasps the universals from particular sensibles, and since such sensibles are material and have a temporal beginning, this soul must also be material and must have a temporal beginning. Those who attribute non-materiality to the essence of the rational soul, such as AL-KINDI and Ibn Sina, assert that this soul pre-exists the body. While all of them agree that the non-rational soul is destroyed after the destruc­tion of the body, they differ with regard to the end of the rational soul.

Al-Kindi and Ibn Sina, for example, strongly adhere to the view that all rational souls are indestructible because by nature they are simple. AL-FARABI reminds us that the reason for eternal existence is the rational soul’s knowledge of the eternal aspects of the universe. From this he draws the conclusion, as did ALEXANDER OF APHRODISIAS before him, that only those rational souls that have this knowledge at their separation from the body are indestructible. Other rational souls are eventually destroyed. Ibn Sina finds in the grasping of the universals the grounds for happiness, not the eternity of the soul. Ibn Rushd seems to hold that only the acquired intellect can be indestructible; but the acquired intellect, he argues (as does his teacher IBN BAJJA), is divine and numerically one in all. Ibn Rushd was attacked for this view because it denies eternal existence of individual souls (see AVERROISM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE).

See also: ARISTOTELIANISM IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; ETHICS IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; IBN RUSHD §3; IBN SINA §6; MYSTICAL PHILOSOPHY IN ISLAM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE



References end further reading

al-Farabi (c.870-950) al-Madina al fadila (The Virtuous City), trans. R. Walter, Al-Farabi on the Perfect State.’ Abu Nasr al-Farabi’s Mabadi’ Ara’Ah al-Madina al-Fadila, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. (English and Arabic of the most comprehensive and best known philosophical work of al-Farabi.)

Ibn Rushd (1180) Tahafut al-tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence), trans. S. Van Den Bergh, London: Luzac, 1954. (A response to a number of issues raised by al-Ghazali against philosophers. One of the three most important of these issues is that of the soul and its fate.)

- (c.1174) Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Maktabat an-Nahda, 1950. (Includes also four other essays: Ibn Baja’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction), Ishaq Ibn Hunayn’s Kitab ft an-nafs (Book on the Soul), Ibn Rushd’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction) and al-Kindi’s Risalat al-‘aql (Essay on Intellect).)

Ibn Sina (980-1037) an-Nafs (The Soul), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s de Anima, London: Oxford University Press, 1959. (The most important and detailed philosophical treatise on the soul in Islamic philosophy, the sixth part of the Physics of al-Shifa’. An Arabic edition of the text is included.)

(980-1037) Ahwal an-nafs (The States of the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1952. (Includes Risala fi an-nafs wa-baqa’ha wa-ma’adiha (Essay on the Soul, Its Permanence and Its Second Life), Mabhath ‘an al-qiwa an-nafsaniyya (Inquiry about Psychic Powers), Risala fi ma’rifat an-nafs an-natiga (Essay on Knowing the Rational Soul) and Risala fi al-kalam ‘ala an-nafs an-natiqa (Essay on an Inquiry Concerning the Rational Soul).)

- (980-1037) an-Najat (Deliverance), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s Psychology, London: Oxford University Press, 1952. (The psychology of an-Najat is an abridgement by Ibn Sina of his encyclopedic work al-Shifa’ (Healing).)

- (980-1037) Rasa’d ash-shaykh ar-ra’is f asrar al-hikma al-mashriqiyya (Essays of the Master of the Head on the Secrets of Oriental Wisdom), ed. M. Mehren, Traites mystiques d’Avicenna, Leiden: Brill, 1889-99. (Ibn Sina’s ‘oriental philosophy’.)

Inati, S.C. (1996) A Study of Ibn Sina’s Mysticism, London: Kegan Paul International. (Includes a detailed analysis of Ibn Sina’s notion of the soul and a translation of the fourth part of al-Isharat wa­‘1-tanbihat (Remarks and Admonitions).)

al-Kindi (before 873) Rasa’il al-Kindi al falsafiyya (Al-Kindi’s Philosophical Treatises), ed. M. Abu Rida, Cairo: Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi, 1953. (Includes al-Kindi’s most relevant works on the subject of the soul, al-Qawl fi an-nafs (Discourse on the Soul), Fi an-nafs (On the Soul) and Fi mahiyyat an-nawm war-ru’ya (On the Essence of Sleep and Internal Vision).)



SHAMS C. INATI


Collectede By
Shobuz Bhai

Non ci è tale cosa che la verità si trova all'esterno di voi. l'ultima verità si trova presso voi.
Automatically translated into Italian thanks to WorldLingo
Il Sura

umano # 76 (l'essere umano):

1. “Non è un fatto che ci era un periodo in cui l'umano non era niente essere accennato? „
2. “Abbiamo generato l'essere umano da una miscela liquida, da due genitori, per esaminarli. Quindi, gli abbiamo reso un ascoltatore e uno sgombro. “
3. “Gli abbiamo mostrato i due percorsi, allora è elogiativo, o unappreciative. „


Di che cosa la maggior parte della gente è ignara, è la STRUTTURA stessa dei loro propri auto.

La maggior parte di noi si sviluppano fino a pensano che “„ siamo preparati appena “dell'anima„ che, quando muore, ritorna di nuovo al DIO.

Anche se queste informazioni sono “parzialmente„ corrette, ci sono inoltre molto più al trucco dell'umano che il DIO spiega a noi con il Quran.

È il sistema del diavolo per confonderlo ed indebolire in modo da neppure non sappiamo combatterlo!. Una regola principale di tutto il conflitto è che “conoscete il vostro nemico„. Ma prima di fare quello, dovete in primo luogo “conoscerti„!.



Rouh = anima?

Ciò è la singola idea sbagliata più grande che popola ha fatto di che ha contribuito a storcere l'emissione “chi siamo„.

In Arabia, quando qualcuno muore, la gente dice: “preghiamo sul suo Rouh!„.

Inoltre, quando parlano di qualcuno che muore, l'opinione: “il suo Rouh lo ha lasciato„.

In scuole, insegnano ai nostri capretti che “l'anima„ è “il Rouh„ e quello è che cosa morirà e sarà giudicato e punito o ricompensato…

Tuttavia, la storia cambia quando guardiamo che cosa il DIO deve dire:

“il DIO prende “il Nafs„ quando la morte viene ed anche ai tempi di sonno…„ (39: 42)

“no “Nafs„ dadi tranne da permesso del GOD, ad un tempo predeterminato…„ (3: 145 che)

“ogni “Nafs„ assagia la morte, allora ricevono il vostro recompense il giorno di Resurrection…„ (3: 185)

“… non ucciderete “il Nafs„ che quel DIO renda sacred, tranne nel corso di giustizia…„ (6: 151)

“… che ha detto: il mio signore, ho fatto torto al mio 'Nafs "… “(27: 16)

Bene, ottenete l'immagine!.

Il DIO ci dice che la nostra “anima„ sia chiamata “Nafs„ e che questo “Nafs„ è che cosa è preso alla morte e che cosa è giudicato il J-giorno (allora gratificante o punito). “Il Nafs„ è VOI, è vostro intero essere, è la vostra ardesia, che è caricata o alleggerita tramite le vostre azioni…

Così, se “l'anima„ è “il Nafs„, quindi che cosa è il Rouh?



Rouh = spirito.

“Mentre una barriera la ha separata da loro, abbiamo trasmesso al suo nostro “Rouh„. È andato a lei sotto forma d'un umano. “(19: 17)

“gli chiedono riguardo “al Rouh„. Opinione: '“Il Rouh„ viene dal mio signore. E non siete stati dati la conoscenza, tranne piccolo. “(Quran 17:85)

diventa apparente al lettore che “il Rouh„ proviene dal DIO ed è l'accumulazione “di conoscenza„ che aiuterà l'luogo umano nella sua vita… che è descritto il più bene come “spirito„.

Vedete, gli animali inoltre hanno “Nafs„ appena come (è la loro vita-forza), tuttavia, non vedete le scimmie costruire le navi spaziali né le tartarughe che lavorano ai calcolatori!.

“Il Rouh„ è il regalo che il DIO ha dato alla nostra specie per concedere noi al vantaggio “di conoscenza„.

“Una volta che la I perfetta lui (l'essere umano) ed il colpo in lui dal mio “Rouh„, cadranno prostrate prima di lui.„ (15: 29)

Tutti gli animali possono comunicare tra loro (ricordi degli uccelli parlare a Solomon?). Tuttavia, è soltanto uomo che ha “conoscenza„.

“Il Rouh„ è regalo del DIO a noi ed è soltanto BUONO. Le informazioni che “il Rouh„ ci fornisce ciascuno sono di essere usate per il nostro beneficio, ma noi hanno “la scelta„ per usarla per la malvagità (come fissione nucleare che usando fare una bomba).

Alcune notizie sfavorevoli circa “il Rouh„: MAI si avvicinerà e non conserverà il giorno. per esempio, state lottando per capire qualcosa. Se non chiedete al DIO aiuto, non andrà; “hey, qui è la risposta!„ no, dovete avvicinarti. Inoltre, sarà sempre LETTERALE. dovrete essere specifici di che cosa state chiedendo. Nota, non dovete dire questo fuori forte. Potete pensare appena esso - perché molte volte, esseri umani hanno esprimere duro di tempo che cosa desiderano esattamente chiedere. Con lo spirito del dio, non dovete preoccuparti per questo - finchè ottenete l'intenzione di chiedere, lo spirito conoscerà la domanda… tanto quanto avete desiderato chiedere e quel SOLO (benchè conosca tutte le domande che conoscete - non sta andando rispondere a qualche cosa non chiediate).



Così se possiamo ricapitolare che cosa abbiamo fino a questo punto.

L'dell'essere umano finora è preparato di:

1. “L'anima„ - Nafs (siete, la persona reale, che cosa fa le scelte e che cosa sarà giudicato);

2. “Lo spirito„ - Rouh (questo è un regalo dal DIO, esso non è il vostro, voi non lo possiede, tutta la gente gli ha accesso - come il Quran. È scopo è di contribuire a fornire le risposte e la conoscenza per aiutare la vostra anima per prendere le giuste decisioni).




Satan - Shaitan

la terza e miscela più mortale nell'equazione dell'uomo è “Satan„.

“(Satan) ha detto, “poiché honored lui sopra me, se dilazione me lavorare al giorno di Resurrection, possederete tutti i suoi discendenti, tranne alcuni.„ (17: 62)

Il fatto sfavorevole delle nostre vite è che Satan ha sfidato la destra dei nostri antenati ad accesso dei posses 'al Rouh ". Satan ha sostenuto che era qualificato per utilizzare il regalo del DIO e che gli farebbe un lavoro migliore con:

(DIO) ha detto, “che cosa li ha evitati il serving quando li ho ordinati?„ Ha detto, “sono migliore del lui; Lo avete generato da fuoco e lo avete generato da fango. “(7: 12)

Questo problema dell'abilità dell'uomo condotto ad una disputa nel cielo e “nei dubbi„ scoppiati così:

Sura 38 (S'ad):

67 . L'opinione, “qui è notizie impressionanti.
68. “Quel siete completamente oblivious a.
69. “Non ho avuto precedentemente conoscenza, circa il feud nell'alto cielo.
70. “Sono ispirato che la mia sola missione è trasportare gli avvertimenti voi. „
71. Il vostro signore ha detto agli angeli: 'Sto generando un umano dall'argilla.
72. “Una volta che lo progetto e salto in lui dal mio spirito, lo aiuterete. „
73. Gli angeli hanno aiutato, tutti,
74. tranne Satan; ha rifiutato ed era troppo arrogante, unappreciative.
75. Ha detto, “O Satan, che cosa gli ha impedito di aiutare che cosa ho generato prima con le mie mani? Siete troppo arroganti? Vi siete ribellati? “
76. Ha detto, “sono migliore del lui; Lo avete generato da fuoco e lo avete generato da argilla. “
77. Ha detto, “di conseguenza, voi deve exiled, voi banished.
78. “Avete subito la mia condanna fino al giorno di giudizio. „
79. Ha detto, “il mio signore, dilazione me lavorare al giorno di Resurrection. „
80. Ha detto, “siete respited.
81. “Fino al giorno nominato. „
82. Ha detto, “giuro dal vostro majesty, che li trasmetterò tutto il fuori strada.
83. “Tranne i vostri worshipers che sono dedicati assolutamente a voi da solo. „

I suddetti verses dicono molto chiaro alla storia.

Satan ha chiesto che è dato una probabilità “risulta„ che l'uomo è inadatto per l'operazione…

Ed il DIO ha permesso così che Satan (chi ha intenzioni diaboliche) li attraesse (ma non averci accesso):

“Potete attrarli con la vostra voce e mobilitate tutte le vostre forze e tutti gli vostri uomini contro di loro e la parte nei loro soldi e bambini e promettete loro. Qualche cosa le promesse del diavolo è nient'altro di un'illusione. “(Quran 17:64)

“verrò a loro da prima che loro e da dietro loro e dalla loro destra e dalla loro parte di sinistra e da voi trovino che la maggior parte di loro sono unappreciative.„ (7: 17)

Ha fatto arrestarsi la storia là, noi ancora sarebbe fine. Il problema è, Satan riuscito per ingannare i nostri antenati nel dargli l'ACCESSO alle nostre anime!:

“Il diavolo ha bisbigliato a loro, per accedere a loro. Ha detto, “il vostro signore gli non ha proibito da questo albero, tranne di evitarlo gli angeli diventanti e dal raggiungimento dell'esistenza eterna.„ (7: 20)

Mangiando dall'albero “proibito a„ ha permesso che Satan avesse accesso costante al nostro “Nafs„.

La miscela che ora abbiamo è:

1. “L'anima„ - Nafs;

2. “Lo spirito„ - Rouh;

3. Satan - Shaitan (questo è il diavolo che ha accesso alle nostre anime e che può influenzarle).

Satan è l'ULTIMO falsehood presso voi. Se ci è mai un falsehood, glie lo non cerchi… all'esterno - si trova presso voi.

Un po'più di notizie difettose: diverso del Rouh, Satan SI AVVICINA. Se avete un delimma, darà la vostra risposta. Se la risposta è corretta non è neppure una domanda, perché sappiamo che non è. a volte, prima che persino abbiate un delimma, gli darà il caos… perché gli darà così tanto il falsehood nella vostra vita che concluderete sulla sensibilità CONFUSA, DIMINUITA, nella sensibilità ODIATA dal dio, ABBANDONATO, ecc ecc ecc - tutte le cose che prospera poll.

Non despair.

Poiché Satan esiste presso voi, ci non è molto che possiate fare circa eliminare lui per la merce. tuttavia, potete ottenere sbarazzati di ogni volta che si avvicina a - e finchè tenete presente che non dovreste stancarti di dargli dei calci nel silenzio, siete sempre il vincitore - perché invade la vostra mente. cercando il rifugio in DIO, date l'autorità di Rouh per mantenerli silenzioso.

“Quando imparate il Quran, cercherete il rifugio in DIO dal di Satan rifiutato. Non ha eccedenza di alimentazione coloro che crede e si fida di del loro signore. La sua alimentazione è limitata a coloro che lo sceglie come loro padrone, coloro che lo sceglie come loro dio. “(16: 98-100)

Come potete essere sicuri con le sue informazioni di falsehood?. Ogni volta che offre una soluzione, non la prendete per valore nominale - andate chiedere il vostro Rouh. se ottenete una soluzione senza chiedere esso - ci sono due sensi voi might've ottenuto quello;

1. “Il Nafs„ lo ha dato voi (il vostro proprio subcosciente ha formulato il suggerimento);

2. È venuto da Satan!.


Non ottenete mai unasked le soluzioni dallo spirito. Abraham… chi il dio ha scelto… non si è avvicinato a da GOD - si è avvicinato al DIO. Il punto è; Del DIO gli amori sempre voi… ma lui non li arresteranno dal rovinare la vostra vita… se non chiedete il suo aiuto. Il DIO non abbandona mai qualcuno interamente… e mai non guida qualcuno interamente - se, Abraham, Mohammed, ecc - messaggeri quale ha scelto (chi vediamo fare gli errori umani). Ed il consiglio, diverso della comprensione musulmana di esso… è un processo di ogni situazione… anziché tutto d'un tratto la cosa.



Nota finale:

L'Islam migliore è presso voi - lo spirito del DIO (Rouh'u Allah) è presso voi. Non ci è tale cosa che la verità si trova all'esterno di voi. l'ultima verità si trova presso voi. per favore, approfitti di quel blessing. Sarà la vostra ultima arma contro il falsehood…


Da Libero-Mente (E-mail: free@free-minds.org)

L'ANIMA IN FILOSOFIA ISLAMICA



la discussione sull'anima umana, la relativa esistenza, la natura, ultimo obiettivo ed eternity, occupa una posizione altamente importante in filosofia islamica e forma il relativo fuoco principale. Per la maggior parte i filosofi musulmani hanno accosentito, come i loro predecessori greci, che l'anima consiste delle parti non-razionali e razionali. La parte che non-razionale si sono divisi nelle anime dell'animale e della pianta, la parte razionale nei intellects pratici e teorici. Tutti hanno creduto che la parte non-razionale fosse collegata essenzialmente al corpo, ma alcune hanno considerato la parte razionale come a parte dal corpo dalla natura e da altre che tutte le parti dell'anima sono dal materiale della natura. I filosofi hanno accosentito che, mentre l'anima è nel corpo, la relativa parte non-razionale è di controllare il corpo, il relativo intellect pratico deve controllare gli affari worldly, compreso quelli del corpo ed il relativo intellect teorico è di conoscere le funzioni eterne dell'universo. Hanno pensato che l'ultima conclusione o felicità dell'anima dipendesse dalla relativa capacità di separarsi dalle richieste del corpo e di mettere a fuoco sull'afferrare le funzioni eterne dell'universo. Tutti hanno creduto che l'anima non-razionale producesse ed inevitabilmente perisse. Alcuni, come Al-Farabi, hanno creduto che l'anima razionale potesse o meno sopravvivere eternally; altri, come Ibn Sina, hanno creduto che non avesse inizio ed estremità; ancora altri, quale Ibn Rushd, hanno creduto che l'anima con tutte le relative diverse parti entrasse nell'esistenza e finalmente fosse distrutta.

1 L'esistenza dell'anima

2 Natura dell'anima

3 L'anima razionale

4 L'ultimo obiettivo dell'anima

5 Il Eternity dell'anima

riferisce ulteriore lettura 1



dell'estremità L'esistenza dell'anima

tutti i filosofi musulmani si è interessata dell'argomento di anima. Gli impianti più dettagliati e più importanti a questo proposito sono quelli di Al-Kindi, di Al-Farabi, di Ibn Sina e di Ibn Rushd. I filosofi musulmani hanno riconosciuto che la prima edizione, quella confronta la mente umana riguardo all'anima è la relativa esistenza. Ecco perché, molto all'inizio della sua inchiesta circa l'anima in Al-Shifa' (Healing), Ibn Sina (§6) asserice che arguiamo l'esistenza dell'anima dal fatto che osserviamo i corpi che effettuano determinati atti con un certo grado della volontà. Questi atti sono esemplificati nella presa l'alimentazione, crescere, il riproduzione, muoversi e della percezione. Poiché questi atti non appartengono alla natura dei corpi, dato che questa natura è priva della volontà, devono appartenere ad un principio ch'hanno tranne i corpi. Questo principio è che cosa è denominato anima del `'.

Questa discussione è intesa per dimostrare l'esistenza dell'anima animale, che include l'anima della pianta. L'anima è la fonte degli atti effettuati dalla volontà, non poiché è `un la sostanza' (un'entità indipendente), ma poiché è `il principio di tali si comporta'. L'anima razionale, d'altra parte, non deve osservare fuori di se per arguire la relativa esistenza. È informato della relativa esistenza con urgenza, cioè senza alcuni strumenti. L'esempio del Ibn Sina dell'uomo sospeso è inteso per dimostrare che l'anima razionale è informata di se oltre a tutto il corpo. I suoi boils di discussione giù alla vista che, anche se l'anima razionale dell'adulto non è informata di qualche cosa materiale, non neppure il relativo corpo, esso rimane informato della relativa propria esistenza.



2 La natura dell'anima

mentre l'Islam la ha resa incombente sui filosofi musulmani per occuparsi estesamente con lo studio sull'anima e per rilasciare determinate dichiarazione che in alcuni casi sembrano costanti con credenza islamica, filosofia greca ha avuta la mano superiore nel formare le convinzioni reali dei filosofi musulmani riguardo alla natura dell'anima. Salvo specificazione contraria, riferimento a: anima qui è limitato all'anima terrestre all'esclusione di quella celeste, poiché i filosofi musulmani si sono interessati soprattutto del precedente. It must be pointed out at the outset that ‘soul’. (nafs) was used in more than one sense in Islamic philosophy; the term was used to refer to the plant or vegetative part of a living being, the animal or sensitive part, the rational part and finally the totality of all three parts. The first two are the non-rational soul and the totality is the human soul. To add to the confusion, ‘human soul’ is used only in the sense of this fourth type of soul. The plant, animal and; rational souls are also called powers or parts of the; soul. Only from the context can one understand, whether a Muslim philosopher was using ‘soul’ in the broad sense to mean the human soul (the totality of the parts of the soul), or in the narrow sense to mean a specific part of the human soul.

Inasmuch as it has a certain relation to a body, the soul is a form for that body, that is, the perfection of that body. It is a form because a natural body is composed of matter and form, which in the case of animals are body and soul. Since it has been shown that the soul is the source of will and therefore is not matter, it remains a form. Perfection is of two types, primary and secondary. A primary perfection is what makes a thing actually a species, as shape does for the sword, or a genus as sensation and-movement do for animals. A secondary perfection is an act necessitated by the nature of the species or genus, such as cutting for the sword and touching for animal. The soul is a primary perfection of a natural body capable of performing the secondary perfections necessitated by this primary perfection. Together with its body, the soul constitutes a material substance. This substance can be the subject of plant, animal or human life.

The soul is a perfection inasmuch as it makes a natural body into a plant, an animal or a rational being. However, to define the soul as a perfection does not give us a clue as to what the soul is in itself, but only inasmuch as it has a relation to the body. The body is, therefore, an essential element in the definition of the soul. Without relating to a body, the thing we call ‘soul’ is not a soul and does not require the body as an essential part of its definition. Note, however, that in spite of this assertion, perhaps for the lack of any better term, Muslim philosophers use ‘soul’ also to refer to the rational soul after it separates from the body and reaches a complete state of purity from matter.

In its first or lowest stages of relating to the body, the soul is the plant soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can take nourishment, grow and reproduce. The plant soul is the power human beings and other animals share with plants. If the body with a soul is an animal, the soul develops into the animal soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body has sensation and movement through will. While this soul includes the plant soul, it has also a sensitive power and a locomotive one. The sensitive power has both external and internal senses. The external senses are, in priority of existence, touch, taste, smell, hearing and sight. The first three are said to be necessary for survival and the last two for well being. In Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), IBN RUSHD (§3) asserts that the five external senses may be in potentiality, as in infancy and sleep, or in actuality, as in daily seeing or hearing. He also argues that there cannot be any external sense other than these five because there would be no function for it, since there is no external sensation other than the objects of the five senses mentioned above. Most Muslim philosophers men­tion three types of internal senses: common sense, imagination and memory. IBN SINA (§3) enumerates five internal senses: common sense, representational power, imagination, estimative power and memory. On the whole, the philosophers agree on the function of the common sense, imagination and memory; the function that Ibn Sina limits to the representational and estimative powers, other Muslim philosophers allocate to the imagination.

The common sense is an internal power in which all the objects of the external senses are collected. Contrary to the external senses, which can grasp only one type of sensation, as sight grasps light and hearing grasps sound, the common sense can grasp all external sensations, such as that honey is of such and such a colour, texture and smell. The representational power preserves the sensations of the common sense even after sensible things disappear. The imagination selects at will to combine some of the objects of the representational power with each other and to separate the rest. It makes its judgment about external things, but in the absence of these things. That is why it functions best when the external senses, which represent external things, are not at work, as in sleep. Ibn Rushd points out that animals such as worms and flies that do not act except in the presence of sensible things are devoid of imagination. The imagination is called such inasmuch as it is an animal instrument; it is called cognitive inasmuch as it is a rational instrument. The estimative power grasps non-sensible notions of sensible things, such as the sheep’s notion that the wolf is to be avoided. This notion is about a sensible thing but is not grasped through the external senses, as is the colour or shape of a wolf. Memory preserves the notions of the estimative power. The imagination acts on the objects of memory in the same way it acts on those of the representational powers. Like the objects of the external senses, those of the internal senses are particular and material. The difference is that they can be experienced in the absence of external things and are to some degree abstracted from matter.

The locomotive power branches into that which causes movement and that which actually moves. The former, the desiderative power, subdivides into the appetitive and the irascible. The appetitive causes movement toward what is imagined to be necessary or beneficial in the pursuit of pleasure. The irascible causes avoidance of what is imagined to be harmful or an impediment in the pursuit of dominance. The power that actually moves uses the nerves to relax the muscles at the demands of the appetitive power or tighten them at the demands of the irascible one.



3 The rational soul

The rational soul, which is defined as a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can act by rational choice and grasp the universals, is divided into the practical and the theoretical intellects. The practical intellect seeks knowledge in order to act in accordance with the good in its individual body, its family and its state. It must, therefore, know the principles for properly managing the body, the family and the state, that is, ethics, home management and politics. The practical intellect is the rational soul turning its face down­ward. The function of the theoretical intellect is to know just for the sake of having the universals (the realities or natures of things). Some of these natures, such as God and the intellect, cannot attach to movement; knowledge of them is metaphysics. Other natures, such as unity, can attach to movement but do not; knowledge of them is mathematics. Still other natures, such as humanity and squareness, can attach to movement either in reality and thought, such as humanity, or in reality but not in thought, such as squareness. Knowledge of these is physics.

The theoretical intellect is the rational soul with its face upward. The practical intellect looks up to the theoretical one and moves its body accordingly. In this, the practical intellect is similar to :the celestial soul that looks up to the intellect of its sphere and moves its sphere accordingly. Thus, like .the celestial soul, the practical intellect is the link between intellect as such and matter.

On the whole, Muslim philosophers followed al-Kindi’s division of the theoretical intellect into the material intellect (al-‘aql al-hayulant), the habitual intellect (al-‘agl bil-malaka), the actual intellect (al-‘aql bi’!-fi’b and the acquired intellect’ (al-‘aql al-mustafad). The material intellect is a blank slate with the potentiality for grasping the intelligible forms or universals. Ibn Sina points out that it is referred to as material, not because it is actually material but because it resembles matter in accepting the form. The habitual intellect grasps the universals, as one acquires the skill to write; in other words, this intellect has the ability to use the universals but does not always do so. The actual intellect grasps the universals in actuality and is always ready to use them. While Muslim philosophers differed slightly with regard to their accounts of the acquired intellect, their general view is that it is the highest human state, the point of contact with the divine, the agent intellect (the intelligence of the moon, the lowest celestial intellect), which makes it possible for the theoretical intellect to acquire the universals in the purest form (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY §4).



4 The ultimate objective of the soul

AL-FARABI asserts that even though the soul is of different parts, it is a unity with all its parts working for one final end, happiness. While the plant soul, for example, serves a specific function, it also serves the powers that are higher than it in rank, the animal powers. Without nourishment, growth and reproduc­tion, the animal powers cannot perform their necessary functions. Similarly, while the function of the animal powers is to have sensation and movement, by performing this function they also promote the functions of the powers above them, the rational ones. The operations of the animal powers, especially those of the senses, are particularly important for the attainment of the final end. The external senses strip the forms from material objects and convey them to the internal senses. The more they are transferred internally, the less mixed with matter do they become. Since the innermost sense they reach is the imagina­tion, they are there in their purest material existence (see IMAGINATION).

The role of the objects of the imagination is not always clearly defined in Islamic philosophy. Occa­sionally it is said by somebody like Ibn Sina to be one of preparation for the theoretical intellect to receive the universals from the agent intellect. At other times Ibn Sina, like other Aristotelians such as Ibn Rushd, takes these objects to be the ingredients out of which the universals are made after the last process of purification (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY). It seems, however, that in either case the light of the agent intellect is needed to complete the process. In the former case, this light gives the intelligible forms to the theoretical intellect when this intellect is prepared. In the latter case, it sheds itself on the objects of the imagination, which are then reflected on the theoretical intellect without their matter. Since the theoretical intellect is in its first stages in potentiality, it cannot act on the objects of the imagination directly; hence the need for the agent intellect, which is pure actuality. The role of the practical intellect in all this is to put order into the body. This sets free the theoretical intellect from preoccupation with the body and helps the powers whose function is necessary for theoretical knowledge to function unhampered.

Muslim philosophers adhered to the view that the acquired intellect is one with its objects, for they thought the knower and the known are one, as did their Greek predecessors. This means that the highest human state is one in which unity with the universals or the eternal aspects of the universe is reached. This state is described as happiness because in it eternity, an aspect of the objects of the acquired intellect, is attained.



5 Eternity of the soul

When Muslim philosophers assert that the soul comes into existence simultaneously with the coming into existence of the body, some, such as Ibn Sina (§6), who believe that the rational soul is in essence non­material, are thinking only of the non-rational soul. Others, such as Ibn Rushd (§3), who believe that the rational soul is originally not separate from matter, contend that the whole human soul comes into existence. The latter believe that since the rational soul grasps the universals from particular sensibles, and since such sensibles are material and have a temporal beginning, this soul must also be material and must have a temporal beginning. Those who attribute non-materiality to the essence of the rational soul, such as AL-KINDI and Ibn Sina, assert that this soul pre-exists the body. While all of them agree that the non-rational soul is destroyed after the destruc­tion of the body, they differ with regard to the end of the rational soul.

Al-Kindi and Ibn Sina, for example, strongly adhere to the view that all rational souls are indestructible because by nature they are simple. AL-FARABI reminds us that the reason for eternal existence is the rational soul’s knowledge of the eternal aspects of the universe. From this he draws the conclusion, as did ALEXANDER OF APHRODISIAS before him, that only those rational souls that have this knowledge at their separation from the body are indestructible. Other rational souls are eventually destroyed. Ibn Sina finds in the grasping of the universals the grounds for happiness, not the eternity of the soul. Ibn Rushd seems to hold that only the acquired intellect can be indestructible; but the acquired intellect, he argues (as does his teacher IBN BAJJA), is divine and numerically one in all. Ibn Rushd was attacked for this view because it denies eternal existence of individual souls (see AVERROISM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE).

See also: ARISTOTELIANISM IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; ETHICS IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; IBN RUSHD §3; IBN SINA §6; MYSTICAL PHILOSOPHY IN ISLAM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE



References end further reading

al-Farabi (c.870-950) al-Madina al fadila (The Virtuous City), trans. R. Walter, Al-Farabi on the Perfect State.’ Abu Nasr al-Farabi’s Mabadi’ Ara’Ah al-Madina al-Fadila, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. (English and Arabic of the most comprehensive and best known philosophical work of al-Farabi.)

Ibn Rushd (1180) Tahafut al-tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence), trans. S. Van Den Bergh, London: Luzac, 1954. (A response to a number of issues raised by al-Ghazali against philosophers. One of the three most important of these issues is that of the soul and its fate.)

- (c.1174) Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Maktabat an-Nahda, 1950. (Includes also four other essays: Ibn Baja’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction), Ishaq Ibn Hunayn’s Kitab ft an-nafs (Book on the Soul), Ibn Rushd’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction) and al-Kindi’s Risalat al-‘aql (Essay on Intellect).)

Ibn Sina (980-1037) an-Nafs (The Soul), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s de Anima, London: Oxford University Press, 1959. (The most important and detailed philosophical treatise on the soul in Islamic philosophy, the sixth part of the Physics of al-Shifa’. An Arabic edition of the text is included.)

(980-1037) Ahwal an-nafs (The States of the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1952. (Includes Risala fi an-nafs wa-baqa’ha wa-ma’adiha (Essay on the Soul, Its Permanence and Its Second Life), Mabhath ‘an al-qiwa an-nafsaniyya (Inquiry about Psychic Powers), Risala fi ma’rifat an-nafs an-natiga (Essay on Knowing the Rational Soul) and Risala fi al-kalam ‘ala an-nafs an-natiqa (Essay on an Inquiry Concerning the Rational Soul).)

- (980-1037) an-Najat (Deliverance), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s Psychology, London: Oxford University Press, 1952. (The psychology of an-Najat is an abridgement by Ibn Sina of his encyclopedic work al-Shifa’ (Healing).)

- (980-1037) Rasa’d ash-shaykh ar-ra’is f asrar al-hikma al-mashriqiyya (Essays of the Master of the Head on the Secrets of Oriental Wisdom), ed. M. Mehren, Traites mystiques d’Avicenna, Leiden: Brill, 1889-99. (Ibn Sina’s ‘oriental philosophy’.)

Inati, S.C. (1996) A Study of Ibn Sina’s Mysticism, London: Kegan Paul International. (Includes a detailed analysis of Ibn Sina’s notion of the soul and a translation of the fourth part of al-Isharat wa­‘1-tanbihat (Remarks and Admonitions).)

al-Kindi (before 873) Rasa’il al-Kindi al falsafiyya (Al-Kindi’s Philosophical Treatises), ed. M. Abu Rida, Cairo: Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi, 1953. (Includes al-Kindi’s most relevant works on the subject of the soul, al-Qawl fi an-nafs (Discourse on the Soul), Fi an-nafs (On the Soul) and Fi mahiyyat an-nawm war-ru’ya (On the Essence of Sleep and Internal Vision).)



SHAMS C. INATI


Collectede By
Shobuz Bhai

Es gibt keine solche Sache, daß Wahrheit draußen von Ihnen liegt. die entscheidende Wahrheit liegt innerhalb Sie.
Automatically translated into German thanks to WorldLingo
Das menschliche

Sura # 76 (der Mensch):

1. „Ist es nicht eine Tatsache, daß es eine Zeit gab, als das menschliche Wesen nichts war erwähnt zu werden? “
2. „Wir stellten den Menschen von einer flüssigen Mischung, von zwei Eltern her, um ihn zu prüfen. So bildeten wir ihn einen Hörer und eine Serra. „
3. „Wir zeigten ihm die zwei Wege, dann ist er entweder anerkennend unappreciative, oder. Von


“ was die meisten Leute ahnungslos sind, ist die STRUKTUR ihren eigenen Selbst.

Die meisten uns wachsen denken bis, daß „wir“ gerade von der „Seele“ hergerichtet werden, die, wenn sie stirbt, zurück zu GOTT umschält.

Obgleich diese Informationen „teilweise“ korrekt sind, gibt es auch viel mehr zur Verfassung des menschlichen Wesens, das GOTT uns durch das Quran erklärt.

Es ist das System des Teufels, zum wir zu verwirren und zu schwächen, also können wir nicht sogar ihn kämpfen!. Eine Hauptrichtlinie jedes möglichen Konflikts ist, daß Sie „Ihren Feind kennen“. Aber, bevor Sie das tun, müssen Sie „zuerst dich kennen“!.



Rouh = Seele?

Dieses ist das einzelne größte Mißverständnis, das haben gebildet bevölkeren, dem half, zu verzerren die Ausgabe von „, wer wir sind“.

In Arabien wenn jemand stirbt, sagen die Leute: „lassen Sie uns auf seinem Rouh beten!“.

Auch wenn sie über sterbendes jemand sprechen, das Sagen: „sein Rouh hat ihn gelassen“.

In den Schulen bringen sie unseren Zicklein bei, daß die „Seele“ das „Rouh“ ist und das ist, was wird stirbt und geurteilt und bestraft oder belohnt…

Jedoch ändert die Geschichte, wenn wir betrachten, was GOTT sagen muß:

„GOTT nimmt das „Nafs“, wenn Tod kommt und auch zu der Zeit des Schlafes…“ (39: 42)

„nicht „Nafs“ Würfel ausgenommen durch Urlaub GODS, zu einer vorbestimmten Zeit…“ (3: 145, die)

„jedes „Nafs“ Tod schmeckt, dann Sie, empfangen Ihr recompense am Tag der Auferstehung…“ (3: 185)

„… töten Sie das „Nafs“, das dieser GOTT heilig, gebildet hat ausgenommen nicht im Verlauf Gerechtigkeit…“ (6: 151)

„…, das sie sagte: mein Lord, habe ich meinem 'Nafs "… „geschadet (27: 16)

Gut erhalten Sie die Abbildung!.

GOTT erklärt uns, daß unsere „Seele Nafs“ genannt“ wird „und daß dieses „Nafs“ ist, was am Tod genommen wird und was am Jtag beurteilt wird (dann belohnt oder bestraft). Das „Nafs“ ist SIE, ist es Ihr gesamtes Sein, ist es Ihr Schiefer, der wird belastet oder erleichtert durch Ihre Tätigkeiten…

So wenn die „Seele“ das „Nafs“ ist, dann was das Rouh ist?



Rouh = Geist.

„Während eine Sperre sie von ihnen trennte, sendeten wir ihrem unserem „Rouh“. Er ging zu ihr in Form eines menschlichen Wesens. „(19: 17)

„sie fragen Sie nach dem „Rouh“. Sagen: 'Das „Rouh“ kommt von meinem Lord. Und Ihnen wurden nicht Wissen, ausgenommen wenig gegeben. „(Quran 17:85)

wird es zum Leser offensichtlich, daß das „Rouh“ vom GOTT ist und es die Ansammlung „des Wissens“ ist, die das menschliche Wesen in seinem Leben unterstützt,…, das es gut als „Geist“ beschrieben wird.

Sie sehen, haben Tiere auch „Nafs“, gerade wie wir (es ist ihre Lebenkraft), dennoch, sehen Sie nicht Affen, die Raumschiffe noch Schildkröten zu errichten, die auf Computern! arbeiten.

Das „Rouh“ ist das Geschenk, das GOTT zu unserer Sorte gab, um zu erlauben uns dem Vorteil „des Wissens“.

„Sobald vollkommenes I er (der Mensch) und Schlag in ihn von meinem „Rouh“, Sie fallen ausgestreckt vor ihm.“ (15: 29)

Alle Tiere können miteinander in Verbindung stehen (erinnern Sie sich die an Vögel, mit Solomon zu sprechen?). Jedoch ist es nur Mann, der „Wissen“ hat.

Das „Rouh“ ist Geschenk des GOTTES zu uns, und es ist nur GUT. Die Informationen, daß das „Rouh“ jedes von uns liefert, sind, für unseren Nutzen verwendet zu werden, aber wir haben die „Wahl,“, zum er für übel zu benutzen (wie die Kernspaltung, die verwendet wird, eine Bombe zu bilden).

Etwas unglückliche Nachrichten über das „Rouh“: Es NIE nähert sich Ihnen und speichert den Tag. z.B. kämpfen Sie, um etwas zu verstehen. Wenn Sie GOTT nicht um Hilfe bitten, geht sie nicht; „he, ist hier die Antwort!“ Nr., müssen Sie ihm dich nähern. Auch es ist immer WÖRTLICH. Sie müssen sein Besondere von, was Sie fragen. Anmerkung, müssen Sie nicht dieses heraus laute sagen. Sie können an es gerade denken - weil viele Male, Menschen das harte Zeitausdrücken haben, um um was genau sie bitten möchten. Mit dem Geist des Gottes, müssen Sie nicht um dieses dich sorgen - solange Sie die Absicht des Bittens erhalten, weiß der Geist, daß die Frage,… soviel wie Sie stellen wollten und dieses ALLEIN (obwohl es alle Fragen kennt, die Sie kennen - es wird nicht nichts beantworten Sie nicht baten).



So, wenn wir zusammenfassen können, was wir bis zu diesem Punkt haben.

Das Mensch Wesen bis jetzt wird von hergerichtet:

1. Die „Seele“ - Nafs (sind SIE, die wirkliche Person, was Wahlen trifft und was beurteilt wird);

2. Der „Geist“ - Rouh (dieses ist ein Geschenk vom GOTT, es ist NICHT Ihr, Sie besitzen es nicht, alle Leute haben Zugang zu ihm - wie das Quran. Es ist Zweck ist zu helfen, Antworten und Wissen zur Verfügung zu stellen, um Ihrer Seele zu helfen, die rechten Entscheidungen zu treffen).




Satan - Shaitan

die 3. und lebensgefährlichste Mischung in der Gleichung des Mannes ist „Satan“.

„Er (Satan) sagte, „, da Sie haben geehrt ihn über mir, wenn Sie Frist ich bis den Tag der Auferstehung, ich alle seine Nachkommen besitzen, ausgenommen einige.“ (17: 62)

Die unglückliche Tatsache unserer Leben ist, daß Satan das Recht unserer Vorfahren zum Gruppezugang zum 'Rouh " herausforderte. Satan behauptete, daß er qualifiziert war, um Geschenk des GOTTES zu verwenden und daß er eine bessere Arbeit mit ihr erledigen würde:

Er (GOTT) sagte, „, was Sie an der Umhüllung verhinderte, als ich bestellte Sie?“ Er sagte, „ich bin besser als er; Sie stellten mich vom Feuer her und stellten ihn vom Schlamm her. „(7: 12)

Dieses Ausfragen der Fähigkeit des Mannes führte zu eine Debatte in den Himmeln und „in den Zweifeln“ folglich ausgebrochen:

Sura 38 (S'ad):

67 . Sagen, „ist hier ehrfürchtige Nachrichten.
68. „Dieses sind Sie zu total weltvergessen.
69. „Ich hatte kein Wissen vorher, über die Fehde in den hohen Himmeln.
70. „Ich werde angespornt, der meine alleinige Mission ist, die Warnungen an Sie zu liefern. “
71. Ihr Lord gesagt zu den Engeln: 'Ich stelle ein menschliches Wesen vom Lehm her.
72. „Sobald ich ihn entwerfe und in ihn von meinem Geist durchbrenne, unterstützen Sie ihn. “
73. Die Engel unterstützten, alle,
74. ausgenommen Satan; er lehnte ab, und war zu arrogant, unappreciative.
75. Er sagte, „O Satan, was hinderte Sie an der Unterstützung, was ich vorher mit meinen Händen verursachte? Sind Sie zu arrogant? Haben Sie sich aufgelehnt? „
76. Er sagte, „ich bin besser als er; Sie stellten mich vom Feuer her und stellten ihn vom Lehm her. „
77. Er sagte, „folglich, Sie muß verbannt werden, Sie wird verbannt.
78. „Sie haben auf sich meine Verurteilung bis den Tag des Urteils genommen. “
79. Er sagte, „mein Lord, Frist ich bis den Tag der Auferstehung. “
80. Er sagte, „Sie sind respited.
81. „Bis den festgesetzten Tag. “
82. Er sagte, „ich schwöre durch Ihre Majestät, daß ich sie ganz abweichend sende.
83. „Ausgenommen Ihre Anbetern, die absolut Ihnen alleine gewidmet werden. “

Die oben genannten Verse erklären die Geschichte sehr offenbar.

Satan verlangte, daß ihm eine Wahrscheinlichkeit „prüft“ gegeben wird, daß Mann ist ungeeignet für die Aufgabe…

Und GOTT ließ folglich Satan (wem schlechte Absichten hat), uns verleiten (aber Zugang zu uns NICHT haben):

„Sie können sie mit Ihrer Stimme verleiten und mobilisieren alle Ihre Kräfte und alle Ihre Männer gegen sie und Anteil an ihrem Geld und an Kindern und versprechen sie. Alles die Teufelversprechungen ist no more als eine Illusion. „(Quran 17:64)

„komme ich zu ihnen von, bevor sie und von hinten sie und von ihrem Recht und von ihrem links und von Ihnen finden, daß die meisten ihnen sind unappreciative.“ (7: 17)

Ließen die Geschichte dort stoppen, wir würden sein noch fein. Problem ist, Satan, das gehandhabt wird, um unsere Vorfahren in das Geben ihm des ZUGANGES zu unseren Seelen zu betrügen!:

„Der Teufel flüsterte zu ihnen, um zu ihnen Zutritt zu erhalten. Er sagte, „Ihr Lord verbot Sie nicht von diesem Baum, ausgenommen, Sie an werdenen Engeln zu verhindern und von das Erreichen des ewigen Bestehens.“ (7: 20)

Das Essen vom „verbotenen“ Baum ließ Satan konstanten Zugang zu unserem „Nafs“ haben.

Die Mischung, die wir jetzt haben, ist:

1. Die „Seele“ - Nafs;

2. Der „Geist“ - Rouh;

3. Satan - Shaitan (dieses ist der Teufel, der Zugang zu unseren Seelen hat und in der Lage ist, sie zu beeinflussen).

Satan ist die ENTSCHEIDENDE Unwahrheit innerhalb Sie. Wenn es überhaupt eine Unwahrheit gibt, suchen Sie nach ihr nicht… draußen von Ihnen - sie liegt innerhalb Sie.

Mehr schlechte Nachrichten: anders als das Rouh NÄHERT sich Satan Ihnen. Wenn Sie ein delimma haben, gibt er Ihre Antwort. Ob die Antwort korrekt ist, ist nicht eine Frage gleichmäßig, weil wir wissen, daß sie nicht ist. manchmal bevor Sie sogar ein delimma haben, gibt er Ihnen Chaos…, weil er Ihnen soviel Unwahrheit in Ihrem Leben gibt, das Sie herauf das Gefühl beenden, das VERWIRRT wird, NIEDERGEDRÜCKT, im Gefühl, das durch den Gott GEHASST wird, VERLASSEN, usw. usw. usw. - alle Sachen, die er inch vorwärtskommt.

Verzweifeln Sie nicht.

Weil Satan innerhalb Sie besteht, gibt es nicht viel, das Sie über das Loswerden tun können ihn für gutes. jedoch können Sie gereinigt von erhalten, jedesmal wenn er sich nähert - und solange Sie im Verstand halten, den Sie nicht vom Treten er in Ruhe müde erhalten sollten, sind Sie immer der Sieger - weil er Ihren Verstand eindringt. indem Sie Schutz im GOTT suchen, geben Sie die Rouh Berechtigung, um ihn leise zu halten.

„Wenn Sie das Quran erlernen, suchen Sie Schutz im GOTT von Satan zurückgewiesen. Er hat keinen Energie überschuß die, die auf ihren Lord glauben und vertrauen. Seine Energie wird auf die, die ihn als ihr Meister wählen, die begrenzt, die ihn als ihr Gott wählen. „(16: 98-100)

Wie Sie mit seinen Unwahrheitinformationen sicher sein können?. Jedesmal wenn er eine Lösung anbietet, nehmen Sie sie nicht für Nominalwert - Sie gehen um um Ihr Rouh bitten. wenn Sie eine Lösung erhalten, ohne um es zu bitten - es gibt zwei Möglichkeiten Sie das might've, das das erhalten wird;

1. Das „Nafs“ gab es Ihnen (Ihr eigenes unterbewußtes bildete den Vorschlag);

2. Es kam von Satan!.


Sie erhalten nie unasked Lösungen vom Geist. Abraham… wem hat Gott… gewählt, wurde nicht von GOD genähert - er näherte sich GOTT. Der Punkt ist; Des GOTTES Lieben immer Sie… aber er stoppen Sie nicht vom Ruinieren Ihres Lebens…, wenn Sie nicht um seine Hilfe bitten. GOTT verläßt nie jemand völlig… und führt nie jemand völlig - wenn er, wurde er Abraham, Mohamed, usw. - Kuriere, die er gewählt hat (wem wir das Machen der menschlichen Fehler sehen). Und Anleitung, anders als das moslemische Verständnis von ihr… ist ein Prozeß jeder Situation… anstelle in einem Zug von der Sache.



Schlußbemerkung:

Der beste Islam ist innerhalb Sie - der Geist des GOTTES (Rouh'u Allah) ist innerhalb Sie. Es gibt keine solche Sache, daß Wahrheit draußen von Ihnen liegt. die entscheidende Wahrheit liegt innerhalb Sie. bitte nutzen Sie diesen Segen. Es ist Ihre entscheidende Waffe gegen Unwahrheit…


Durch Frei-Verstand (E-mail: free@free-minds.org)

SEELE IN DER ISLAMISCHEN PHILOSOPHIE



die Diskussion über die menschliche Seele, sein Bestehen, Natur, entscheidende Zielsetzung und Ewigkeit, besetzt eine in hohem Grade wichtige Position in der islamischen Philosophie und bildet seinen Hauptfokus. In den meisten Fällen stimmten moslemische Philosophen zu, wie ihre griechischen Vorgänger, daß die Seele aus den nicht-rationalen und rationalen Teilen besteht. Das nicht-rationale Teil, das sie in die Betriebs- und Tierseelen sich teilten, das rationale Teil in den praktischen und theoretischen Intellekt. Alle glaubten, daß das nicht-rationale Teil im Wesentlichen mit dem Körper verbunden wird, aber einige betrachteten das rationale Teil wie getrennt von dem Körper durch Natur und andere, daß alle Teile der Seele durch Naturmaterial sind. Die Philosophen stimmten zu, daß, während die Seele im Körper ist, sein nicht-rationales Teil, den Körper zu handhaben ist, sein praktischer Intellekt soll worldly Angelegenheiten, einschließlich die des Körpers handhaben, und sein theoretischer Intellekt ist, die ewigen Aspekte des Universums zu kennen. Sie dachten, daß das entscheidende Ende oder das Glück der Seele von seiner Fähigkeit, sich von den Nachfragen des Körpers zu trennen und auf das Fassen der ewigen Aspekte des Universums zu konzentrieren abhängt. Alle glaubten, daß die nicht-rationale Seele Sein erbt und unvermeidbar umkommt. Einige, wie Al-Farabi, glaubten, daß die rationale Seele möglicherweise nicht ewig überleben kann oder kann; andere, wie Ibn Sina, glaubten, daß es keinen Anfang und kein Ende hat; noch andere, wie Ibn Rushd, glaubten, daß die Seele mit allen seinen einzelnen Teilen Bestehen erbt und schließlich zerstört wird.

1 Das Bestehen der Seele

2 Die Natur der Seele

3 Die rationale Seele

4 Die entscheidende Zielsetzung der Seele

5 Ewigkeit der Seele

bezieht Ende weiteren Messwert



1 Das Bestehen der Seele

alle moslemischen Philosophen betraf sich mit dem Thema der Seele. Die ausführlichsten und wichtigsten Arbeiten über dieses Thema sind die des Als-Kindi, des Als-Farabi, des Ibn Sina und des Ibn Rushd. Moslemische Philosophen erkannten, daß die erste Ausgabe, die den menschlichen Verstand hinsichtlich der Seele ist sein Bestehen konfrontiert. Das ist, warum, an seiner Anfrage über die Seele im Al-Shifa sehr anfangen' (heilend), Ibn Sina (§6) erklärt, daß wir das Bestehen der Seele von der Tatsache schließen, daß wir Körper beobachten, die bestimmte Taten mit irgendeinem Grad des Willen durchführen. Diese Taten werden illustriert, wenn man Ernährung, das Wachsen, das Reproduzieren, das Bewegen und das Wahrnehmen nimmt. Da diese Taten nicht der Natur der Körper gehören, denn diese Natur vom Willen leer ist, müssen sie einer Grundregel gehören, die sie anders als Körper haben. Diese Grundregel ist, was `Seele' genannt wird.

Dieses Argument soll das Bestehen der Tierseele prüfen, die die Betriebsseele einschließt. Die Seele ist die Quelle der Taten, die durch den Willen durchgeführt werden, nicht insofern als es `ein Substanz' (ein unabhängiges Wesen) ist, aber, insofern als es `ist, fungiert die Grundregel von so'. Die rationale Seele braucht einerseits, nicht außerhalb sich zu schauen, um sein Bestehen zu schließen. Es berücksichtigt sein Bestehen mit Unmittelbarkeit, das heißt, ohne irgendwelche Instrumente. Ibn Sinas Beispiel des verschobenen Mannes soll prüfen, daß die rationale Seele sich abgesehen von jedem möglichem Körper berücksichtigt. Seine Argumentblutgeschwüre unten zur Ansicht, die, selbst wenn die rationale Seele des Erwachsenen nicht materielles nichts berücksichtigt, seinen Körper, es nicht zu glätten seinem eigenen Bestehen bewußt bleibt.



2 Die Natur der Seele

, während Islam es Amtsinhaber auf moslemischen Philosophen sich mit der Studie der Seele weitgehend besetzen und bestimmte Aussagen abgeben ließ, die in einigen Fällen mit islamischem Glauben gleichbleibend aussehen, griechische Philosophie hatte die obere Hand, wenn sie die realen überzeugungen der moslemischen Philosophen hinsichtlich der Natur der Seele bildete. Wenn nicht anders angegeben Hinweis auf: er Seele hier wird auf die terrestrische Seele zum Ausschluß vom himmlischen begrenzt, da moslemische Philosophen hauptsächlich mit dem ehemaligen sich betrafen. It must be pointed out at the outset that ‘soul’. (nafs) was used in more than one sense in Islamic philosophy; the term was used to refer to the plant or vegetative part of a living being, the animal or sensitive part, the rational part and finally the totality of all three parts. The first two are the non-rational soul and the totality is the human soul. To add to the confusion, ‘human soul’ is used only in the sense of this fourth type of soul. The plant, animal and; rational souls are also called powers or parts of the; soul. Only from the context can one understand, whether a Muslim philosopher was using ‘soul’ in the broad sense to mean the human soul (the totality of the parts of the soul), or in the narrow sense to mean a specific part of the human soul.

Inasmuch as it has a certain relation to a body, the soul is a form for that body, that is, the perfection of that body. It is a form because a natural body is composed of matter and form, which in the case of animals are body and soul. Since it has been shown that the soul is the source of will and therefore is not matter, it remains a form. Perfection is of two types, primary and secondary. A primary perfection is what makes a thing actually a species, as shape does for the sword, or a genus as sensation and-movement do for animals. A secondary perfection is an act necessitated by the nature of the species or genus, such as cutting for the sword and touching for animal. The soul is a primary perfection of a natural body capable of performing the secondary perfections necessitated by this primary perfection. Together with its body, the soul constitutes a material substance. This substance can be the subject of plant, animal or human life.

The soul is a perfection inasmuch as it makes a natural body into a plant, an animal or a rational being. However, to define the soul as a perfection does not give us a clue as to what the soul is in itself, but only inasmuch as it has a relation to the body. The body is, therefore, an essential element in the definition of the soul. Without relating to a body, the thing we call ‘soul’ is not a soul and does not require the body as an essential part of its definition. Note, however, that in spite of this assertion, perhaps for the lack of any better term, Muslim philosophers use ‘soul’ also to refer to the rational soul after it separates from the body and reaches a complete state of purity from matter.

In its first or lowest stages of relating to the body, the soul is the plant soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can take nourishment, grow and reproduce. The plant soul is the power human beings and other animals share with plants. If the body with a soul is an animal, the soul develops into the animal soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body has sensation and movement through will. While this soul includes the plant soul, it has also a sensitive power and a locomotive one. The sensitive power has both external and internal senses. The external senses are, in priority of existence, touch, taste, smell, hearing and sight. The first three are said to be necessary for survival and the last two for well being. In Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), IBN RUSHD (§3) asserts that the five external senses may be in potentiality, as in infancy and sleep, or in actuality, as in daily seeing or hearing. He also argues that there cannot be any external sense other than these five because there would be no function for it, since there is no external sensation other than the objects of the five senses mentioned above. Most Muslim philosophers men­tion three types of internal senses: common sense, imagination and memory. IBN SINA (§3) enumerates five internal senses: common sense, representational power, imagination, estimative power and memory. On the whole, the philosophers agree on the function of the common sense, imagination and memory; the function that Ibn Sina limits to the representational and estimative powers, other Muslim philosophers allocate to the imagination.

The common sense is an internal power in which all the objects of the external senses are collected. Contrary to the external senses, which can grasp only one type of sensation, as sight grasps light and hearing grasps sound, the common sense can grasp all external sensations, such as that honey is of such and such a colour, texture and smell. The representational power preserves the sensations of the common sense even after sensible things disappear. The imagination selects at will to combine some of the objects of the representational power with each other and to separate the rest. It makes its judgment about external things, but in the absence of these things. That is why it functions best when the external senses, which represent external things, are not at work, as in sleep. Ibn Rushd points out that animals such as worms and flies that do not act except in the presence of sensible things are devoid of imagination. The imagination is called such inasmuch as it is an animal instrument; it is called cognitive inasmuch as it is a rational instrument. The estimative power grasps non-sensible notions of sensible things, such as the sheep’s notion that the wolf is to be avoided. This notion is about a sensible thing but is not grasped through the external senses, as is the colour or shape of a wolf. Memory preserves the notions of the estimative power. The imagination acts on the objects of memory in the same way it acts on those of the representational powers. Like the objects of the external senses, those of the internal senses are particular and material. The difference is that they can be experienced in the absence of external things and are to some degree abstracted from matter.

The locomotive power branches into that which causes movement and that which actually moves. The former, the desiderative power, subdivides into the appetitive and the irascible. The appetitive causes movement toward what is imagined to be necessary or beneficial in the pursuit of pleasure. The irascible causes avoidance of what is imagined to be harmful or an impediment in the pursuit of dominance. The power that actually moves uses the nerves to relax the muscles at the demands of the appetitive power or tighten them at the demands of the irascible one.



3 The rational soul

The rational soul, which is defined as a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can act by rational choice and grasp the universals, is divided into the practical and the theoretical intellects. The practical intellect seeks knowledge in order to act in accordance with the good in its individual body, its family and its state. It must, therefore, know the principles for properly managing the body, the family and the state, that is, ethics, home management and politics. The practical intellect is the rational soul turning its face down­ward. The function of the theoretical intellect is to know just for the sake of having the universals (the realities or natures of things). Some of these natures, such as God and the intellect, cannot attach to movement; knowledge of them is metaphysics. Other natures, such as unity, can attach to movement but do not; knowledge of them is mathematics. Still other natures, such as humanity and squareness, can attach to movement either in reality and thought, such as humanity, or in reality but not in thought, such as squareness. Knowledge of these is physics.

The theoretical intellect is the rational soul with its face upward. The practical intellect looks up to the theoretical one and moves its body accordingly. In this, the practical intellect is similar to :the celestial soul that looks up to the intellect of its sphere and moves its sphere accordingly. Thus, like .the celestial soul, the practical intellect is the link between intellect as such and matter.

On the whole, Muslim philosophers followed al-Kindi’s division of the theoretical intellect into the material intellect (al-‘aql al-hayulant), the habitual intellect (al-‘agl bil-malaka), the actual intellect (al-‘aql bi’!-fi’b and the acquired intellect’ (al-‘aql al-mustafad). The material intellect is a blank slate with the potentiality for grasping the intelligible forms or universals. Ibn Sina points out that it is referred to as material, not because it is actually material but because it resembles matter in accepting the form. The habitual intellect grasps the universals, as one acquires the skill to write; in other words, this intellect has the ability to use the universals but does not always do so. The actual intellect grasps the universals in actuality and is always ready to use them. While Muslim philosophers differed slightly with regard to their accounts of the acquired intellect, their general view is that it is the highest human state, the point of contact with the divine, the agent intellect (the intelligence of the moon, the lowest celestial intellect), which makes it possible for the theoretical intellect to acquire the universals in the purest form (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY §4).



4 The ultimate objective of the soul

AL-FARABI asserts that even though the soul is of different parts, it is a unity with all its parts working for one final end, happiness. While the plant soul, for example, serves a specific function, it also serves the powers that are higher than it in rank, the animal powers. Without nourishment, growth and reproduc­tion, the animal powers cannot perform their necessary functions. Similarly, while the function of the animal powers is to have sensation and movement, by performing this function they also promote the functions of the powers above them, the rational ones. The operations of the animal powers, especially those of the senses, are particularly important for the attainment of the final end. The external senses strip the forms from material objects and convey them to the internal senses. The more they are transferred internally, the less mixed with matter do they become. Since the innermost sense they reach is the imagina­tion, they are there in their purest material existence (see IMAGINATION).

The role of the objects of the imagination is not always clearly defined in Islamic philosophy. Occa­sionally it is said by somebody like Ibn Sina to be one of preparation for the theoretical intellect to receive the universals from the agent intellect. At other times Ibn Sina, like other Aristotelians such as Ibn Rushd, takes these objects to be the ingredients out of which the universals are made after the last process of purification (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY). It seems, however, that in either case the light of the agent intellect is needed to complete the process. In the former case, this light gives the intelligible forms to the theoretical intellect when this intellect is prepared. In the latter case, it sheds itself on the objects of the imagination, which are then reflected on the theoretical intellect without their matter. Since the theoretical intellect is in its first stages in potentiality, it cannot act on the objects of the imagination directly; hence the need for the agent intellect, which is pure actuality. The role of the practical intellect in all this is to put order into the body. This sets free the theoretical intellect from preoccupation with the body and helps the powers whose function is necessary for theoretical knowledge to function unhampered.

Muslim philosophers adhered to the view that the acquired intellect is one with its objects, for they thought the knower and the known are one, as did their Greek predecessors. This means that the highest human state is one in which unity with the universals or the eternal aspects of the universe is reached. This state is described as happiness because in it eternity, an aspect of the objects of the acquired intellect, is attained.



5 Eternity of the soul

When Muslim philosophers assert that the soul comes into existence simultaneously with the coming into existence of the body, some, such as Ibn Sina (§6), who believe that the rational soul is in essence non­material, are thinking only of the non-rational soul. Others, such as Ibn Rushd (§3), who believe that the rational soul is originally not separate from matter, contend that the whole human soul comes into existence. The latter believe that since the rational soul grasps the universals from particular sensibles, and since such sensibles are material and have a temporal beginning, this soul must also be material and must have a temporal beginning. Those who attribute non-materiality to the essence of the rational soul, such as AL-KINDI and Ibn Sina, assert that this soul pre-exists the body. While all of them agree that the non-rational soul is destroyed after the destruc­tion of the body, they differ with regard to the end of the rational soul.

Al-Kindi and Ibn Sina, for example, strongly adhere to the view that all rational souls are indestructible because by nature they are simple. AL-FARABI reminds us that the reason for eternal existence is the rational soul’s knowledge of the eternal aspects of the universe. From this he draws the conclusion, as did ALEXANDER OF APHRODISIAS before him, that only those rational souls that have this knowledge at their separation from the body are indestructible. Other rational souls are eventually destroyed. Ibn Sina finds in the grasping of the universals the grounds for happiness, not the eternity of the soul. Ibn Rushd seems to hold that only the acquired intellect can be indestructible; but the acquired intellect, he argues (as does his teacher IBN BAJJA), is divine and numerically one in all. Ibn Rushd was attacked for this view because it denies eternal existence of individual souls (see AVERROISM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE).

See also: ARISTOTELIANISM IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; ETHICS IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; IBN RUSHD §3; IBN SINA §6; MYSTICAL PHILOSOPHY IN ISLAM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE



References end further reading

al-Farabi (c.870-950) al-Madina al fadila (The Virtuous City), trans. R. Walter, Al-Farabi on the Perfect State.’ Abu Nasr al-Farabi’s Mabadi’ Ara’Ah al-Madina al-Fadila, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. (English and Arabic of the most comprehensive and best known philosophical work of al-Farabi.)

Ibn Rushd (1180) Tahafut al-tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence), trans. S. Van Den Bergh, London: Luzac, 1954. (A response to a number of issues raised by al-Ghazali against philosophers. One of the three most important of these issues is that of the soul and its fate.)

- (c.1174) Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Maktabat an-Nahda, 1950. (Includes also four other essays: Ibn Baja’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction), Ishaq Ibn Hunayn’s Kitab ft an-nafs (Book on the Soul), Ibn Rushd’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction) and al-Kindi’s Risalat al-‘aql (Essay on Intellect).)

Ibn Sina (980-1037) an-Nafs (The Soul), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s de Anima, London: Oxford University Press, 1959. (The most important and detailed philosophical treatise on the soul in Islamic philosophy, the sixth part of the Physics of al-Shifa’. An Arabic edition of the text is included.)

(980-1037) Ahwal an-nafs (The States of the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1952. (Includes Risala fi an-nafs wa-baqa’ha wa-ma’adiha (Essay on the Soul, Its Permanence and Its Second Life), Mabhath ‘an al-qiwa an-nafsaniyya (Inquiry about Psychic Powers), Risala fi ma’rifat an-nafs an-natiga (Essay on Knowing the Rational Soul) and Risala fi al-kalam ‘ala an-nafs an-natiqa (Essay on an Inquiry Concerning the Rational Soul).)

- (980-1037) an-Najat (Deliverance), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s Psychology, London: Oxford University Press, 1952. (The psychology of an-Najat is an abridgement by Ibn Sina of his encyclopedic work al-Shifa’ (Healing).)

- (980-1037) Rasa’d ash-shaykh ar-ra’is f asrar al-hikma al-mashriqiyya (Essays of the Master of the Head on the Secrets of Oriental Wisdom), ed. M. Mehren, Traites mystiques d’Avicenna, Leiden: Brill, 1889-99. (Ibn Sina’s ‘oriental philosophy’.)

Inati, S.C. (1996) A Study of Ibn Sina’s Mysticism, London: Kegan Paul International. (Includes a detailed analysis of Ibn Sina’s notion of the soul and a translation of the fourth part of al-Isharat wa­‘1-tanbihat (Remarks and Admonitions).)

al-Kindi (before 873) Rasa’il al-Kindi al falsafiyya (Al-Kindi’s Philosophical Treatises), ed. M. Abu Rida, Cairo: Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi, 1953. (Includes al-Kindi’s most relevant works on the subject of the soul, al-Qawl fi an-nafs (Discourse on the Soul), Fi an-nafs (On the Soul) and Fi mahiyyat an-nawm war-ru’ya (On the Essence of Sleep and Internal Vision).)



SHAMS C. INATI


Collectede By
Shobuz Bhai

Não há nenhuma tal coisa que a verdade se encontra fora de você. a verdade final encontra-se dentro de você.
Automatically translated into Portuguese thanks to WorldLingo
O Sura

humano # 76 (o ser humano):

1. “Não é um fato que havia uma época em que ser humano não for nada ser mencionado? ”
2. “Nós criamos o ser humano de uma mistura líquida, de dois pais, a fim testá-lo. Assim, nós fizemos-lhe um hearer e um seer. “
3. “Nós mostramos-lhe os dois trajetos, então é appreciative, ou unappreciative. ”


O que a maioria de povos são inconscientes, é a ESTRUTURA very de seus próprios selves.

A maioria de nós crescem pensam até de que “nós” made-up apenas da “alma” que, quando morre, reverts para trás ao DEUS.

Embora esta informação esteja “parcialmente” correta, há também muito mais à composição do ser humano que o DEUS nos explica com o Quran.

É o sistema do diabo para confundir-nos e enfraquecer assim que nós não sabemos mesmo lutá-lo!. Uma régua principal de todo o conflito é que você “conhece seu inimigo”. Mas antes de fazer isso, você deve primeiramente “conhecer-se yourself”!.



Rouh = alma?

Este é o único misconception o mais grande que povoa fêz de que ajudou distorcer a introdução “quem nós somos”.

Em Arábia, quando alguém morre, os povos dizem: “deixe-nos pray em seu Rouh!”.

Também, quando falarem sobre alguém que morre, a palavra: “seu Rouh deixou-o”.

Nas escolas, ensinam a nossos miúdos que a “alma” é o “Rouh” e aquele é o que morrerá e será julgado e punido ou recompensado…

Entretanto, a história muda quando nós olhamos o que o DEUS tem que dizer:

O “DEUS faz exame “do Nafs” quando a morte vem, e também na altura do sono…” (39: 42)

“não “Nafs” dados exceto pela licença de DEUS, em uma estadia predeterminada…” (3: 145 que)

“cada “Nafs” prova a morte, então você recebem seu recompense no dia de Resurrection…” (3: 185)

“… você não matará “o Nafs” que esse DEUS fêz sacred, exceto no curso da justiça…” (6: 151)

“… que disse: meu senhor, eu tratei injustamente meu 'Nafs "… “(27: 16)

Bem, você começa o retrato!.

O DEUS diz-nos que nossa “alma” está chamada “Nafs”, e que este “Nafs” é o que são feitas exame na morte e o que é julgado no j-dia (recompensado então ou punido). O “Nafs” é VOCÊ, é seu ser inteiro, é seu slate, que burdened ou é iluminado por suas ações…

Assim, se a “alma” for o “Nafs”, a seguir o que é o Rouh?



Rouh = espírito.

“Quando uma barreira a separou deles, nós emitimos a seu nosso “Rouh”. Foi-lhe no formulário ser humano. “(19: 17)

“perguntam-lhe sobre “o Rouh”. Palavra: 'O “Rouh” vem de meu senhor. E você não foi dado o conhecimento, exceto pouco. “(Quran 17:85)

torna-se aparente ao leitor que “o Rouh” é do DEUS e é a acumulação “do conhecimento” que ajudará se realizar humano em sua vida… que é descrito melhor como “o espírito”.

Você vê, os animais têm também “Nafs” apenas como nós (é sua vida-força), contudo, você não vê macacos construir as naves espaciais nem as tartarugas que trabalham em computadores!.

O “Rouh” é o presente que o DEUS deu a nossa espécie para permitir nos à vantagem do “conhecimento”.

“Uma vez que I perfeito ele (o ser humano), e o sopro nele de meu “Rouh”, você cairão prostrate antes dele.” (15: 29)

Todos os animais podem se comunicar um com o outro (recorde os pássaros falar a Solomon?). Entretanto, é somente o homem que tem o “conhecimento”.

O “Rouh” é-nos presente do DEUS, e é somente BOM. A informação que o “Rouh” fornece cada um de nós é ser usada para nosso benefício, mas nós tem a “escolha” para usá-lo para o evil (como o fission nuclear que está sendo usado fazer uma bomba).

Alguma notícia infeliz sobre o “Rouh”: NUNCA aproximá-lo-á e conservá-lo-á o dia. por exemplo, você está esforçando-se para compreender algo. Se você não pedir a DEUS ajuda, não irá; “hey, está aqui a resposta!” No., você tem que aproximá-lo. Também, será sempre LITERAL. você terá que ser específico de o que você está perguntando. Nota, você não tem que dizer este para fora alto. Você pode apenas pensar dele - porque muitas vezes, seres humanos têm expressar duro do tempo o que exatamente querem pedir. Com o espírito do deus, você não tem que preocupar-se sobre este - contanto que você começar a intenção de pedir, o espírito saberá a pergunta… tanto quanto você quis pedir e esse SOZINHO (embora sabe todas as perguntas que você sabe - não está indo responder a qualquer coisa você não pediu).



Assim se nós pudermos sumariar o que nós temos upto este ponto.

Ser do ser humano assim distante made-up de:

1. A “alma” - Nafs (é VOCÊ, pessoa real, o que fazem escolhas e o que será julgado);

2. O “espírito” - Rouh (este é um presente do DEUS, ele não é seu, você não o possui, todos os povos tem o acesso a ele - como o Quran. É finalidade é ajudar fornecer respostas e conhecimento para ajudar a sua alma fazer as decisões direitas).




Satan - Shaitan

a 3o e mistura a mais letal na equação do homem é “Satan”.

“(Satan) disse, “desde que você o honrou sobre mim, se você respite mim até o dia de Resurrection, eu possuísse todos seus descendentes, exceto alguns.” (17: 62)

O fato infeliz de nossas vidas é que Satan desafiou a direita de nossos antepassados ao acesso dos posses 'ao Rouh ". Satan reivindicou que era mais qualificado para utilizar o presente do DEUS e que faria um trabalho melhor com ele:

(DEUS) disse, “o que o impediu do serving quando eu o requisitei?” Disse, “eu sou melhor do que ele; Você criou-me do fogo, e criou-o da lama. “(7: 12)

Este questionar da abilidade do homem conduziu a uma disputa nos heavens e nas “dúvidas” erupted assim:

Sura 38 (S'ad):

67 . A palavra, “é aqui notícia awesome.
68. “Esse você é totalmente oblivious a.
69. “Eu não tive nenhum conhecimento previamente, sobre o feud nos heavens elevados.
70. “Eu sou inspirado que minha única missão é lhe entregar os avisos. ”
71. Seu senhor disse aos anjos: 'Eu estou criando ser humano da argila.
72. “Uma vez que eu o projeto, e o fundo nele de meu espírito, você ajudar-lhe-á. ”
73. Os anjos ajudados, todo,
74. exceto Satan; recusou, e foi demasiado arrogante, unappreciative.
75. Disse, “O Satan, o que impediu que você ajude a o que eu criei antes com minhas mãos? É você demasiado arrogante? Você rebelled? “
76. Disse, “eu sou melhor do que ele; Você criou-me do fogo, e criou-o da argila. “
77. Disse, “conseqüentemente, você deve exiled, você banished.
78. “Você incorreu meu condemnation até o dia do julgamento. ”
79. Disse, “meu senhor, respite mim até o dia de Resurrection. ”
80. Disse, “você é respited.
81. “Até o dia apontado. ”
82. Disse, “eu juro por seu majesty, que eu os emitirei toda astray.
83. “Exceto seus worshipers que lhe são devotados absolutamente sozinho. ”

Os versos acima dizem a história muito claramente.

Satan pediu que estivesse dado uma possibilidade “prova” que o homem é inadequado para a tarefa…

E o DEUS permitiu assim que Satan (quem tem intenções evil) seduzisse-nos (mas para não ter o acesso a nós):

“Você pode seduzi-los com sua voz, e mobilize todas suas forças e todos seus homens de encontro a eles, e parte em seus dinheiro e crianças, e promete-os. Qualquer coisa as promessas do diabo não é não mais do que um illusion. “(Quran 17:64)

“eu vir-lhes-ei de antes que, e de de trás ele, e de sua direita, e de sua esquerda, e de você encontrarem que a maioria deles são unappreciative.” (7: 17)

Tiveram a história parada lá, nós seriam ainda fino. O problema é, Satan controlado enganar nossos antepassados em dar-lhe o ACESSO a nossas almas!:

“O diabo sussurrou-lhes, a fim aceder-lhes. Disse, “seu senhor não o proibiu desta árvore, exceto impedi-lo dos anjos tornando-se, e de alcançar a existência eternal.” (7: 20)

Comer da árvore “proibida” permitiu que Satan tivesse o acesso constante a nosso “Nafs”.

A mistura que nós temos agora é:

1. A “alma” - Nafs;

2. O “espírito” - Rouh;

3. Satan - Shaitan (este é o diabo que tem o acesso a nossas almas e que pode as influenciar).

Satan é o falsehood FINAL dentro de você. Se houver sempre um falsehood, não o procure… fora de você - encontra-se dentro de você.

Alguma notícia mais má: ao contrário do Rouh, Satan APROXIMA-O. Se você tiver um delimma, dará sua resposta. Se a resposta está correta não é uniforme uma pergunta, porque nós sabemos que não é. às vezes, antes que você tenha mesmo um delimma, dar-lhe-á o caos… porque lhe dará tanto o falsehood em sua vida que você terminará acima do sentimento CONFUNDIDO, COMPRIMIDA, em sentimento ODIADO pelo deus, ABANDONADO, etc. etc. etc. - todas as coisas que prospera em.

Não despair.

Porque Satan existe dentro de você, não há muito que você pode fazer sobre começar livrado dele para o bom. entretanto, você pode começar livrado de cada vez que se aproxima - e contanto que você se mantiver na mente que você não deve começar tired de o retroceder no silêncio, você é sempre o vencedor - porque invade sua mente. procurando o refúgio no DEUS, você dá a autoridade de Rouh para mantê-lo silencioso.

“Quando você aprende o Quran, você procurará o refúgio no DEUS do de Satan rejeitado. Não tem nenhum excesso do poder aqueles que acreditam e confíam em seu senhor. Seu poder é limitado àqueles que o escolhem como seu mestre, aqueles que o escolhem como seu deus. “(16: 98-100)

Como pode você ser seguro com sua informação do falsehood?. Cada vez que oferece uma solução, você não faz exame d para o valor de cara - você vai pedir seu Rouh. se você começar uma solução sem pedir ela - há duas maneiras você might've começado isso;

1. O “Nafs” deu-lheo (seu próprio subconscious fêz a sugestão);

2. Veio de Satan!.


Você nunca começa unasked soluções do espírito. Abraham… quem o deus escolheu… não foi aproximado por DEUS - aproximou o DEUS. O ponto é; Do DEUS os amores sempre você… mas ele não o pararão de arruinar sua vida… se você não pedir sua ajuda. O DEUS nunca abandona alguém inteiramente… e nunca guia alguém inteiramente - se, Abraham, Mohammed, etc. - os mensageiros quem escolheu (quem nós vemos fazer erros humanos). E a orientação, ao contrário da compreensão muçulmana dela… é um processo de cada situação… em vez de uma vez da coisa.



Nota final:

O mais melhor Islam está dentro de você - o espírito do DEUS (Rouh'u Allah) está dentro de você. Não há nenhuma tal coisa que a verdade se encontra fora de você. a verdade final encontra-se dentro de você. por favor, vantagem da tomada desse blessing. Será sua arma final de encontro ao falsehood…


Por Livre-Mente (E-mail: free@free-minds.org)

A ALMA NA FILOSOFIA ISLAMIC



a discussão da alma humana, sua existência, natureza, objetivo final e eternity, ocupa uma posição altamente importante na filosofia Islamic e dá forma a seu foco principal. Para a maioria de parte os filósofos muçulmanos concordaram, como seus predecessors gregos, que a alma consiste nas peças non-racionais e racionais. A parte que non-racional se dividiram nas almas da planta e do animal, a parte racional nos intellects práticos e teóricos. Todos acreditaram que a parte non-racional está ligada essencialmente ao corpo, mas algumas consideraram a parte racional como separada do corpo pela natureza e por outra que todas as partes da alma são pelo material da natureza. Os filósofos concordaram que, quando a alma estiver no corpo, sua parte non-racional é controlar o corpo, seu intellect prático devem controlar casos worldly, including aqueles do corpo, e seu intellect teórico é saber os aspectos eternal do universo. Pensaram de que o fim ou a felicidade final da alma dependem de sua abilidade de se separar das demandas do corpo e de o focalizar em agarrar os aspectos eternal do universo. Todos acreditaram que a alma non-racional vem em ser e perishes unavoidably. Alguns, como o al-Farabi, acreditaram que a alma racional pode ou não pode sobreviver eternally; outros, como Ibn Sina, acreditaram que não tem nenhum começo e nenhuma extremidade; ainda outros, tais como Ibn Rushd, acreditaram que a alma com todas suas peças individuais vem na existência e está destruída eventualmente.

1 A existência da alma

2 A natureza da alma

3 A alma racional

4 O objetivo final da alma

5 O Eternity da alma

References uma leitura mais adicional 1



da extremidade A existência da alma

todos os filósofos muçulmanos concerniu-se com o assunto da alma. Os trabalhos os mais detalhados e os mais importantes neste assunto são aqueles do al-Kindi, do al-Farabi, do Ibn Sina e do Ibn Rushd. Os filósofos muçulmanos reconheceram que a primeira edição, aquela confronta a mente humana no que diz respeito à alma é sua existência. Isso é porque, no começo muito de seu inquérito sobre a alma no al-Shifa' (Healing), Ibn Sina (§6) afirma que nós infer a existência da alma do fato que nós observamos os corpos que executam determinados atos com algum grau de vontade. Estes atos exemplified em fazer exame do nourishment, do crescimento, de reproduzir, de mover-se e de perceber. Desde que estes atos não pertencem à natureza dos corpos, porque esta natureza é devoid da vontade, devem pertencer a um princípio que têm à excepção dos corpos. Este princípio é o que é chamado alma do `'.

Este argumento é pretendido provar a existência da alma animal, que inclui a alma da planta. A alma é a fonte dos atos executados pela vontade, não visto que é `um a substância' (uma entidade independente), mas visto que é `o princípio de tais age'. A alma racional, na uma mão, não necessita olhar fora dse para infer sua existência. Está ciente de sua existência com immediacy, isto é, sem nenhuns instrumentos. O exemplo de Ibn Sina do homem suspendido é pretendido provar que a alma racional está ciente dse aparte de todo o corpo. Suas fervuras do argumento para baixo à vista que, mesmo se a alma racional do adulto não estiver ciente de qualquer coisa material, não nivelar seu corpo, ele remanesce ciente de sua própria existência.



2 A natureza da alma

quando o Islam lhe fêz o encarregado em filósofos muçulmanos para se ocupar extensivamente com o estudo da alma e para fazer determinadas indicações que em alguns casos parecem consistentes com a opinião Islamic, a filosofia grega teve a mão superior em dar forma às convicções reais de filósofos muçulmanos no que diz respeito à natureza da alma. A menos que especificado de outra maneira, reference: alma aqui é limitado à alma terrestrial à exclusão da celestial, desde que os filósofos muçulmanos se concerniram primeiramente com o anterior. It must be pointed out at the outset that ‘soul’. (nafs) was used in more than one sense in Islamic philosophy; the term was used to refer to the plant or vegetative part of a living being, the animal or sensitive part, the rational part and finally the totality of all three parts. The first two are the non-rational soul and the totality is the human soul. To add to the confusion, ‘human soul’ is used only in the sense of this fourth type of soul. The plant, animal and; rational souls are also called powers or parts of the; soul. Only from the context can one understand, whether a Muslim philosopher was using ‘soul’ in the broad sense to mean the human soul (the totality of the parts of the soul), or in the narrow sense to mean a specific part of the human soul.

Inasmuch as it has a certain relation to a body, the soul is a form for that body, that is, the perfection of that body. It is a form because a natural body is composed of matter and form, which in the case of animals are body and soul. Since it has been shown that the soul is the source of will and therefore is not matter, it remains a form. Perfection is of two types, primary and secondary. A primary perfection is what makes a thing actually a species, as shape does for the sword, or a genus as sensation and-movement do for animals. A secondary perfection is an act necessitated by the nature of the species or genus, such as cutting for the sword and touching for animal. The soul is a primary perfection of a natural body capable of performing the secondary perfections necessitated by this primary perfection. Together with its body, the soul constitutes a material substance. This substance can be the subject of plant, animal or human life.

The soul is a perfection inasmuch as it makes a natural body into a plant, an animal or a rational being. However, to define the soul as a perfection does not give us a clue as to what the soul is in itself, but only inasmuch as it has a relation to the body. The body is, therefore, an essential element in the definition of the soul. Without relating to a body, the thing we call ‘soul’ is not a soul and does not require the body as an essential part of its definition. Note, however, that in spite of this assertion, perhaps for the lack of any better term, Muslim philosophers use ‘soul’ also to refer to the rational soul after it separates from the body and reaches a complete state of purity from matter.

In its first or lowest stages of relating to the body, the soul is the plant soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can take nourishment, grow and reproduce. The plant soul is the power human beings and other animals share with plants. If the body with a soul is an animal, the soul develops into the animal soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body has sensation and movement through will. While this soul includes the plant soul, it has also a sensitive power and a locomotive one. The sensitive power has both external and internal senses. The external senses are, in priority of existence, touch, taste, smell, hearing and sight. The first three are said to be necessary for survival and the last two for well being. In Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), IBN RUSHD (§3) asserts that the five external senses may be in potentiality, as in infancy and sleep, or in actuality, as in daily seeing or hearing. He also argues that there cannot be any external sense other than these five because there would be no function for it, since there is no external sensation other than the objects of the five senses mentioned above. Most Muslim philosophers men­tion three types of internal senses: common sense, imagination and memory. IBN SINA (§3) enumerates five internal senses: common sense, representational power, imagination, estimative power and memory. On the whole, the philosophers agree on the function of the common sense, imagination and memory; the function that Ibn Sina limits to the representational and estimative powers, other Muslim philosophers allocate to the imagination.

The common sense is an internal power in which all the objects of the external senses are collected. Contrary to the external senses, which can grasp only one type of sensation, as sight grasps light and hearing grasps sound, the common sense can grasp all external sensations, such as that honey is of such and such a colour, texture and smell. The representational power preserves the sensations of the common sense even after sensible things disappear. The imagination selects at will to combine some of the objects of the representational power with each other and to separate the rest. It makes its judgment about external things, but in the absence of these things. That is why it functions best when the external senses, which represent external things, are not at work, as in sleep. Ibn Rushd points out that animals such as worms and flies that do not act except in the presence of sensible things are devoid of imagination. The imagination is called such inasmuch as it is an animal instrument; it is called cognitive inasmuch as it is a rational instrument. The estimative power grasps non-sensible notions of sensible things, such as the sheep’s notion that the wolf is to be avoided. This notion is about a sensible thing but is not grasped through the external senses, as is the colour or shape of a wolf. Memory preserves the notions of the estimative power. The imagination acts on the objects of memory in the same way it acts on those of the representational powers. Like the objects of the external senses, those of the internal senses are particular and material. The difference is that they can be experienced in the absence of external things and are to some degree abstracted from matter.

The locomotive power branches into that which causes movement and that which actually moves. The former, the desiderative power, subdivides into the appetitive and the irascible. The appetitive causes movement toward what is imagined to be necessary or beneficial in the pursuit of pleasure. The irascible causes avoidance of what is imagined to be harmful or an impediment in the pursuit of dominance. The power that actually moves uses the nerves to relax the muscles at the demands of the appetitive power or tighten them at the demands of the irascible one.



3 The rational soul

The rational soul, which is defined as a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can act by rational choice and grasp the universals, is divided into the practical and the theoretical intellects. The practical intellect seeks knowledge in order to act in accordance with the good in its individual body, its family and its state. It must, therefore, know the principles for properly managing the body, the family and the state, that is, ethics, home management and politics. The practical intellect is the rational soul turning its face down­ward. The function of the theoretical intellect is to know just for the sake of having the universals (the realities or natures of things). Some of these natures, such as God and the intellect, cannot attach to movement; knowledge of them is metaphysics. Other natures, such as unity, can attach to movement but do not; knowledge of them is mathematics. Still other natures, such as humanity and squareness, can attach to movement either in reality and thought, such as humanity, or in reality but not in thought, such as squareness. Knowledge of these is physics.

The theoretical intellect is the rational soul with its face upward. The practical intellect looks up to the theoretical one and moves its body accordingly. In this, the practical intellect is similar to :the celestial soul that looks up to the intellect of its sphere and moves its sphere accordingly. Thus, like .the celestial soul, the practical intellect is the link between intellect as such and matter.

On the whole, Muslim philosophers followed al-Kindi’s division of the theoretical intellect into the material intellect (al-‘aql al-hayulant), the habitual intellect (al-‘agl bil-malaka), the actual intellect (al-‘aql bi’!-fi’b and the acquired intellect’ (al-‘aql al-mustafad). The material intellect is a blank slate with the potentiality for grasping the intelligible forms or universals. Ibn Sina points out that it is referred to as material, not because it is actually material but because it resembles matter in accepting the form. The habitual intellect grasps the universals, as one acquires the skill to write; in other words, this intellect has the ability to use the universals but does not always do so. The actual intellect grasps the universals in actuality and is always ready to use them. While Muslim philosophers differed slightly with regard to their accounts of the acquired intellect, their general view is that it is the highest human state, the point of contact with the divine, the agent intellect (the intelligence of the moon, the lowest celestial intellect), which makes it possible for the theoretical intellect to acquire the universals in the purest form (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY §4).



4 The ultimate objective of the soul

AL-FARABI asserts that even though the soul is of different parts, it is a unity with all its parts working for one final end, happiness. While the plant soul, for example, serves a specific function, it also serves the powers that are higher than it in rank, the animal powers. Without nourishment, growth and reproduc­tion, the animal powers cannot perform their necessary functions. Similarly, while the function of the animal powers is to have sensation and movement, by performing this function they also promote the functions of the powers above them, the rational ones. The operations of the animal powers, especially those of the senses, are particularly important for the attainment of the final end. The external senses strip the forms from material objects and convey them to the internal senses. The more they are transferred internally, the less mixed with matter do they become. Since the innermost sense they reach is the imagina­tion, they are there in their purest material existence (see IMAGINATION).

The role of the objects of the imagination is not always clearly defined in Islamic philosophy. Occa­sionally it is said by somebody like Ibn Sina to be one of preparation for the theoretical intellect to receive the universals from the agent intellect. At other times Ibn Sina, like other Aristotelians such as Ibn Rushd, takes these objects to be the ingredients out of which the universals are made after the last process of purification (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY). It seems, however, that in either case the light of the agent intellect is needed to complete the process. In the former case, this light gives the intelligible forms to the theoretical intellect when this intellect is prepared. In the latter case, it sheds itself on the objects of the imagination, which are then reflected on the theoretical intellect without their matter. Since the theoretical intellect is in its first stages in potentiality, it cannot act on the objects of the imagination directly; hence the need for the agent intellect, which is pure actuality. The role of the practical intellect in all this is to put order into the body. This sets free the theoretical intellect from preoccupation with the body and helps the powers whose function is necessary for theoretical knowledge to function unhampered.

Muslim philosophers adhered to the view that the acquired intellect is one with its objects, for they thought the knower and the known are one, as did their Greek predecessors. This means that the highest human state is one in which unity with the universals or the eternal aspects of the universe is reached. This state is described as happiness because in it eternity, an aspect of the objects of the acquired intellect, is attained.



5 Eternity of the soul

When Muslim philosophers assert that the soul comes into existence simultaneously with the coming into existence of the body, some, such as Ibn Sina (§6), who believe that the rational soul is in essence non­material, are thinking only of the non-rational soul. Others, such as Ibn Rushd (§3), who believe that the rational soul is originally not separate from matter, contend that the whole human soul comes into existence. The latter believe that since the rational soul grasps the universals from particular sensibles, and since such sensibles are material and have a temporal beginning, this soul must also be material and must have a temporal beginning. Those who attribute non-materiality to the essence of the rational soul, such as AL-KINDI and Ibn Sina, assert that this soul pre-exists the body. While all of them agree that the non-rational soul is destroyed after the destruc­tion of the body, they differ with regard to the end of the rational soul.

Al-Kindi and Ibn Sina, for example, strongly adhere to the view that all rational souls are indestructible because by nature they are simple. AL-FARABI reminds us that the reason for eternal existence is the rational soul’s knowledge of the eternal aspects of the universe. From this he draws the conclusion, as did ALEXANDER OF APHRODISIAS before him, that only those rational souls that have this knowledge at their separation from the body are indestructible. Other rational souls are eventually destroyed. Ibn Sina finds in the grasping of the universals the grounds for happiness, not the eternity of the soul. Ibn Rushd seems to hold that only the acquired intellect can be indestructible; but the acquired intellect, he argues (as does his teacher IBN BAJJA), is divine and numerically one in all. Ibn Rushd was attacked for this view because it denies eternal existence of individual souls (see AVERROISM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE).

See also: ARISTOTELIANISM IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; ETHICS IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; IBN RUSHD §3; IBN SINA §6; MYSTICAL PHILOSOPHY IN ISLAM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE



References end further reading

al-Farabi (c.870-950) al-Madina al fadila (The Virtuous City), trans. R. Walter, Al-Farabi on the Perfect State.’ Abu Nasr al-Farabi’s Mabadi’ Ara’Ah al-Madina al-Fadila, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. (English and Arabic of the most comprehensive and best known philosophical work of al-Farabi.)

Ibn Rushd (1180) Tahafut al-tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence), trans. S. Van Den Bergh, London: Luzac, 1954. (A response to a number of issues raised by al-Ghazali against philosophers. One of the three most important of these issues is that of the soul and its fate.)

- (c.1174) Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Maktabat an-Nahda, 1950. (Includes also four other essays: Ibn Baja’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction), Ishaq Ibn Hunayn’s Kitab ft an-nafs (Book on the Soul), Ibn Rushd’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction) and al-Kindi’s Risalat al-‘aql (Essay on Intellect).)

Ibn Sina (980-1037) an-Nafs (The Soul), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s de Anima, London: Oxford University Press, 1959. (The most important and detailed philosophical treatise on the soul in Islamic philosophy, the sixth part of the Physics of al-Shifa’. An Arabic edition of the text is included.)

(980-1037) Ahwal an-nafs (The States of the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1952. (Includes Risala fi an-nafs wa-baqa’ha wa-ma’adiha (Essay on the Soul, Its Permanence and Its Second Life), Mabhath ‘an al-qiwa an-nafsaniyya (Inquiry about Psychic Powers), Risala fi ma’rifat an-nafs an-natiga (Essay on Knowing the Rational Soul) and Risala fi al-kalam ‘ala an-nafs an-natiqa (Essay on an Inquiry Concerning the Rational Soul).)

- (980-1037) an-Najat (Deliverance), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s Psychology, London: Oxford University Press, 1952. (The psychology of an-Najat is an abridgement by Ibn Sina of his encyclopedic work al-Shifa’ (Healing).)

- (980-1037) Rasa’d ash-shaykh ar-ra’is f asrar al-hikma al-mashriqiyya (Essays of the Master of the Head on the Secrets of Oriental Wisdom), ed. M. Mehren, Traites mystiques d’Avicenna, Leiden: Brill, 1889-99. (Ibn Sina’s ‘oriental philosophy’.)

Inati, S.C. (1996) A Study of Ibn Sina’s Mysticism, London: Kegan Paul International. (Includes a detailed analysis of Ibn Sina’s notion of the soul and a translation of the fourth part of al-Isharat wa­‘1-tanbihat (Remarks and Admonitions).)

al-Kindi (before 873) Rasa’il al-Kindi al falsafiyya (Al-Kindi’s Philosophical Treatises), ed. M. Abu Rida, Cairo: Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi, 1953. (Includes al-Kindi’s most relevant works on the subject of the soul, al-Qawl fi an-nafs (Discourse on the Soul), Fi an-nafs (On the Soul) and Fi mahiyyat an-nawm war-ru’ya (On the Essence of Sleep and Internal Vision).)



SHAMS C. INATI


Collectede By
Shobuz Bhai

Det finns inte något sådan ting att sanning ligger förutom dig. den ultimat sanningen ligger inom dig.
Automatically translated into Swedish thanks to WorldLingo
Människan

Sura nr. 76 (människan):

1. ”Är det inte ett faktum att det fanns en tid, då människan var ingenting att nämnas? ”
2. ”Skapade vi människan från en vätskeblandning, från två föräldrar, för att testa honom. Således gjorde vi honom en hearer och en siare. ”
3. ”Visade vi honom de två banorna, därefter är han endera appreciative eller unappreciative. ”


Vad mest folk är omedvetet av, är mycket STRUKTURERA av deras egna själv.

Mest av oss växer upp till funderare som ”vi” är precis uppdiktade av ”soulen”, som, när den dör, återvänder tillbaka till GUDEN.

Även om denna information är ”delvist” korrekt, finns det också mycket mer till sminket av människan som GUDEN förklarar till oss till och med Quranen.

Det är jäkel system som förväxlar och som försvagar oss, så vi vet inte ens hur man slåss honom!. En rektor  härskar av någon konflikt är att du ”vet din fiende”. Men, innan du gör det, måste du först ”veta sig yourself”!.



Rouh = Soul?

Denna är den största missuppfattningen för singeln som bemannar har gjort, som hjälpte att förvrida utfärda av ”vem vi är”.

I Arabien när någon dör, folket något att säga: ”låt oss be på hans Rouh!”.

Också när de talar om någon som dör, något att säga: ”har hans Rouh lämnat honom”.

I skolar, undervisar de våra ungar att ”soulen” är ”Rouhen” och det är vad den ska matrisen och bedömas och bestraffas eller belönas…,

Emellertid ändrar berättelsen, när vi ser vilken GUD måste något att säga:

”Tar GUDEN ”Nafsen”, när död kommer, och också på tiden av sömn…”, (39: 42)

Nafs” dör ”inte ”undantar vid Gud tjänstledighetar, på en förutbestämd tid…”, (3: 145 som)

”varje ”Nafs” smakar död, dig, mottar därefter din ersättning på dagen av uppståndelsen…”, (3: 185)

”… dödar du inte ”Nafsen,” som den GUD har gjort sakralt, undantar i jaga av rättvisa…”, (6: 151,)

”… som hon sade: min Lord, har jag förorättat min 'Nafs "… ”(27: 16)

Brunnen får du föreställa!.

GUDEN berättar oss att vår ”Soul” kallas ”Nafs”, och att denna ”Nafs” är vad tas på död och vad bedömas på j-dag (därefter belönat eller bestraffat). ”Nafsen” är DIG, är den ditt hela vara, är den din kritiserar, som betungas eller göras ljusare av dina handlingar…,

Så, om ”soulen” är ”Nafsen”, då vad är Rouhen?



Rouh = ande.

”Fördriva en barriär avskilde henne från dem, oss överförde till hennes vår ”Rouh”. Han gick till henne i form av en människa. ”(19: 17)

”frågar de dig om ”Rouhen”. Något att säga: '”Kommer Rouhen” från min Lord. Och du gavs inte kunskap, undantar lite. ”(Quran 17:85)

blir den påtaglig till avläsaren att ”Rouhen” är från GUD och det är ackumulationen av ”kunskap” att ska hjälp människan i hans liv… det är bäst som beskrivas som ”ande”.

Du ser, har djur också ”Nafs” den rättvisa något liknande som vi (den är deras liv-tvingar), yet, ser du inte apor byggande spaceships nor sköldpaddor som är funktionsdugliga på datorer!.

”Rouhen” är gåvan som GUDEN gav sig till vår art för att låta oss fördelen av ”kunskap”.

”När jag görar perfekt honom (människan) och blåser in i honom från min ”Rouh”, du nedgången som är prostrate för honom.”, (15: 29)

Alla djur kan meddela med ett another (minns fåglarna att tala till Solomon?). Emellertid är det endast manen som har ”kunskap”.

”Rouhen” är gud gåva till oss, och den är endast BRA. Informationen, att ”Rouhen” ger varje av oss, ska användas för vårt gynnar, men vi har ”det primat” som använder det för ondska (lik kärn- fission som är van vid, gör en bombardera).

Någon olycklig nyheterna om ”Rouhen”: Det ska att närma sig ALDRIG dig och räddning dagen. till exempel kämpar du för att förstå något. Om du inte frågar GUDEN för hjälp, ska den för att inte gå; ”hey, här är svaret!”, nr.en måste du att att närma sig den. Också ska det är alltid ORDAGRANNT. du ska måste att vara närmare detalj av vad du frågar. Notera dig inte måste något att säga detta ut högt. Du kan precis funderare av den - därför att många tider, människor har att uttrycka för hård tid vad de önskar exakt att fråga. Med anden av guden måste du inte att oroa härom - så länge som du får avsikten av att fråga, vet den ska anden ifrågasätta… så mycket som dig önskade att fråga och det ENSAMT (fast den vet att alla ifrågasätter dig vet - det inte går att svara något som du inte frågade).



, om således vi kan resumera vad vi har upto detta, peka.

Människan är så långt uppdiktad av:

1. ”Soulen” - Nafs (är DU, den verkliga personen, vad gör val och vad att ska bedömas);

2. ”Anden” - Rouh (denna är en gåva från GUDEN, det INTE är din, dig inte äger den, allt folk har att ta fram till den - gilla Quranen. Det är ämnar är att hjälpa att ge svar och kunskap för att hjälpa din Soul för att göra de högra besluten).




Satan - Shaitan

den 3rd och mest dödliga blandningen i likställanden av manen är ”Satan”.

”Sade han (Satan), ”, sedan du har hedrat honom över mig, om du beviljar uppskov mig kassalådan dagen av uppståndelsen, jag ska äger alla hans ättlingar, undantar några.”, (17: 62)

Det olyckliga faktumet av våra liv är att Satan utmanade rätten av våra förfäder till posses tar fram till 'Rouhen ". Satan fordrade att han var mer kvalificerad att använda gud gåva och att han skulle gör ett bättre jobb med det:

Han (GUD) sade, ”vad förhindrade dig från portion, då jag beställde dig?”, Han sade, ”I-förmiddagen som var bättre än honom; Du skapade mig från avfyrar, och skapat honom från mud. ”(7: 12)

Detta förhör av man kapacitet ledde till en tvist i himmlarna, och ”tvivlar” thus fått utbrott:

Sura 38 (S'ad):

67 . Något att säga ”är här enorm nyheterna.
68. ”Det är du totalt glömsk till.
69. ”Hade jag ingen kunskap föregående, om fejden i kickhimmlarna.
70. ”Inspirerade I-förmiddagen att mitt sula beskickningen är att leverera varningarna till dig. ”
71. Din Lord sade till änglarna: 'I-förmiddag som skapar en människa från lera.
72. ”När jag planlägger honom och blåser in i honom från min ande, hjälper du honom. ”
73. Änglarna hjälpte, alla dem,
74. undanta Satan; han vägrade och var för arrogant, unappreciative.
75. Han sade, ”nollan Satan, vad förhindrade dig från att hjälpa vad jag skapade med mitt räcker för? Är du för arrogant? Har du tredskats? ”
76. Han sade, ”I-förmiddagen som var bättre än honom; Du skapade mig från avfyrar, och skapat honom från lera. ”
77. Han sade, ”därför, måste du landsförvisas, dig ska landsförvisas.
78. ”Har du åsamka sig min fördömelse till dagen av domen. ”
79. Han sade, ”min Lord, beviljar uppskov mig kassalådan dagen av uppståndelsen. ”
80. Han sade, ”beviljas uppskov du.
81. ”Till den bestämda dagen. ”
82. Han sade, ”svär jag vid din majestät, att jag ska överför dem som all var astray.
83. ”Undanta dina dyrkare som ägnas absolut till dig bara. ”

Berättar de ovannämnda versesna berättelsen mycket klart.

Satan bad att han ges en riskera till ”bevisar” att manen är unfit för uppgiften…,

Och GUD thus tillåtna Satan (vem har onda avsikter), som lockar oss (men att inte ha att ta fram till oss):

”Kan du locka dem med ditt uttrycker, och mobiliserar alla dina styrkor och alla dina manar mot dem, och delar i deras pengar och barn och lovar dem. Något jäkellöftena är inte mer än en illusion. ”(Quran 17:64)

”ska jag kommet till dem från, för de och bakifrån de, och från deras rätt och från deras lämnat och dig ska fynd att mest av dem är unappreciative.”, (7: 17)

Hade berättelsen att stoppas där, oss skulle är fortfarande boten. Problemet är, Satan som klaras av för att lura våra förfäder in i att ge honom, TAR FRAM till våra Souls!:

”Viskade jäkeln till dem, för att få tillträde till dem. Han sade, ”din Lord förböd inte dig från denna tree, undantar för att förhindra dig från passande änglar och från att nå fram till evig existens.”, (7: 20)

Äta från ”den förböd” treen tillåtna Satan som har konstant att ta fram till vår ”Nafs”.

Blandningen som vi har nu, är:

1. ”Soulen” - Nafs;

2. ”Anden” - Rouh;

3. Satan - Shaitan (denna är jäkeln som den har, tar fram till våra Souls och att vara kompetent till påverkan dem).

Satan är den ULTIMAT osanningen inom dig. Om det finns någonsin en osanning, sök efter inte den… förutom dig - den ligger inom dig.

Någon mer dåliga nyheter: i motsats till Rouhen ATT NÄRMA SIG Satan dig. Om du har en delimma, ska han give ditt svar. Huruvida är svaret korrekt är inte ens en ifrågasätta, därför att vi vet att den inte är. ibland för du har även en delimma, ska han give dig kaos…, därför att han ska give dig så mycket osanning i ditt liv som du ska avslutar upp känslig FÖRVIRRAT, DEPRIMERAT, känsla som HATADES av guden som ÖVERGAVS, etc. etc. etc. - alla saker som, han blomstrar i.

Misströsta inte.

Därför att Satan finns inom dig, finns det inte mycket som du kan göra om att få rid av honom för goda. emellertid kan du få rid av varje tid han att närma sig - och, så länge som dig uppehället, i åtanke som du inte bör få trött av att sparka honom in i tystnad, du är alltid vinnaren - därför att han invaderar ditt varar besvärad. genom att söka fristaden i GUD, ger du den Rouh myndigheten till uppehället honom som är tyst.

”När du lärer Quranen, du sökandenfristaden i GUD från kasserad Satan. Han har inget att driva över de som tro och förtroende i deras Lord. His driver begränsas till de, som väljer honom som deras ledar-, de som väljer honom som deras gud. ”(16: 98-100)

Hur kan du vara kassaskåpet med hans information om osanning?. Varje tid erbjuder han en lösning, tar du inte den för nominellt värde - du går fråga din Rouh. om du får en lösning, utan att fråga för den - det finns två väg dig might've som fås det;

1. ”Nafsen” gav det till dig (ditt egna undermedvetet gjorde förslag);

2. Det kom från Satan!.


Du får aldrig unasked lösningar från anden. Abraham… vem guden har valt…, att närma sig inte av GUD - han att närma sig GUDEN. Peka är; För GUD förälskelser alltid dig… men honom ska inte stoppet dig från att fördärva ditt liv…, om du inte frågar för hans hjälp. GUDEN överger aldrig någon helt… och vägleder aldrig någon helt - om han, skulle han Abraham, Mohammed, etc. - budbärare som han har valt (vem vi ser att danandemänniskan missförstår). Och vägledning, i motsats till den Muslim överenskommelsen av den… är ett processaa av varje läge… i stället för alla strax tinget.



Finalen noterar:

Den bäst islammen är inom dig - anden av GUDEN (Rouh'u Allah) är inom dig. Det finns inte något sådan ting att sanning ligger förutom dig. den ultimat sanningen ligger inom dig. behaga, ta fördel av den välsignelse. Det ska är ditt ultimat vapen mot osanning…,


Vid Fri-Varar besvärad (e-posten: free@free-minds.org)

SOUL I ISLAMISK FILOSOFI



diskussionen av människasoulen, dess existens, naturen, ultimat mål och evighet, upptar ett högt viktigt placerar i islamisk filosofi och bildar dess huvudsakligt fokuserar. För mest del Muslim instämmde filosoferna, som deras grekiska föregångare, att soulen består av non-rationella och rationella delar. Denrationella delen som de delade in i växt- och djursoulsna, den rationella delen in i de praktiska och teoretiska intellekten. Alla trodde, att denrationella delen anknytas i grunden till förkroppsliga, bara något ansett den rationella delen som separat från förkroppsliga vid naturen och andra att alla delar av soulen är vid den materiella naturen. Filosoferna instämmde att, fördriva soulen är i förkroppsliga, är dess non-rationella del att klara av förkroppsliga, är dess praktiska intellekt att klara av worldly angelägenheter som är inklusive de av förkroppsliga, och dess teoretiska intellekt är att veta de eviga aspekterna av universum. De tänkte att det ultimat avslutar eller lyckan av soulen beror på dess kapacitet att avskilja sig från begärningarna av förkroppsliga och att fokusera på gripa de eviga aspekterna av universum. Alla trodde, att denrationella soulen kommer in i att vara och förgås unavoidably. Några lik alsom tros att den rationella soulen kan eller inte kan fortleva evigt; andra lika Ibn Sina som tros att det har ingen början och inget att avsluta; stilla andra, liksom Ibn Rushd som tros att soulen med alla dess individdelar kommer in i existens och förstörs slutligen.

1 Existensen av soulen

2 Naturen av soulen

3 Den rationella soulen

4 Det ultimat mål av soulen

5 Evigheten av soulen

hänvisar till avslutar mer ytterligare läsning



1 Existensen av soulen

alla Muslim filosofer angick sig med betvinga av soulen. De mest specificerade och viktigaste arbetena på detta betvingar är de av al-Kindi, al-Farabi, Ibn Sina och Ibn Rushd. Muslim filosofer kände igen, att första utfärdar, det konfronterar människan varar besvärad med hänseende till soulen är dess existens. Det är varför, på den very början av hans förfrågning om soulen i al-Shifa' (läka), Ibn som Sina (§6) påstår, att vi innebär existensen av soulen från faktumet som vi observerar, förkroppsligar det utför bestämt agerar med någon grad av ska. Dessa agerar exemplifieras, i att ta nourishment, att växa, reproducering, flyttning och att märka. Sedan dessa agerar inte tillhörde naturen av förkroppsligar, for denna natur är devoid av ska, dem måste tillhörde en princip som de har annat än, förkroppsligar. Denna princip är vad kallas `- soul'.

Detta argument ämnas för att bevisa existensen av den djura soulen, som inkluderar växtsoulen. Soulen är källan av agerar utfört av ska, inte inasmuch, som det är `per vikt' (en oberoende enhet), men inasmuch, som det är `som principen av sådan agerar'. Den rationella soulen, behöver å ena sidan inte att se utanför honom för att innebära dess existens. Det är medvetent av dess existens med omedelbarhet, det är, utan några instrumenterar. Det Ibn Sinas exemplet av den inställda manen ämnas för att bevisa att den rationella soulen är medveten av honom frånsett som några förkroppsligar. Hans argumentbölder besegrar till beskåda som som är jämn, om den vuxna rationella soulen inte är medveten av något som är materiell, dess förkroppsliga inte ens, det återstår medvetent av dess egna existens.



2 Naturen av soul

stundislammen gjorde den vilande på på Muslim filosofer för att uppta sig omfattande med studien av soulen, och att göra bestämda meddelanden, som verkar i vissa fall jämna med islamiska troar, hade grekisk filosofi upperen att räcka, i att bilda de verkliga övertygelserna av Muslim filosofer med hänseende till naturen av soulen. Hänvisa till, om inte specificerat annars: han soul här begränsas till den terrestrial soulen till uteslutandet av det himmelska, sedan Muslim filosofer angick sig i första hand med gamlan. It must be pointed out at the outset that ‘soul’. (nafs) was used in more than one sense in Islamic philosophy; the term was used to refer to the plant or vegetative part of a living being, the animal or sensitive part, the rational part and finally the totality of all three parts. The first two are the non-rational soul and the totality is the human soul. To add to the confusion, ‘human soul’ is used only in the sense of this fourth type of soul. The plant, animal and; rational souls are also called powers or parts of the; soul. Only from the context can one understand, whether a Muslim philosopher was using ‘soul’ in the broad sense to mean the human soul (the totality of the parts of the soul), or in the narrow sense to mean a specific part of the human soul.

Inasmuch as it has a certain relation to a body, the soul is a form for that body, that is, the perfection of that body. It is a form because a natural body is composed of matter and form, which in the case of animals are body and soul. Since it has been shown that the soul is the source of will and therefore is not matter, it remains a form. Perfection is of two types, primary and secondary. A primary perfection is what makes a thing actually a species, as shape does for the sword, or a genus as sensation and-movement do for animals. A secondary perfection is an act necessitated by the nature of the species or genus, such as cutting for the sword and touching for animal. The soul is a primary perfection of a natural body capable of performing the secondary perfections necessitated by this primary perfection. Together with its body, the soul constitutes a material substance. This substance can be the subject of plant, animal or human life.

The soul is a perfection inasmuch as it makes a natural body into a plant, an animal or a rational being. However, to define the soul as a perfection does not give us a clue as to what the soul is in itself, but only inasmuch as it has a relation to the body. The body is, therefore, an essential element in the definition of the soul. Without relating to a body, the thing we call ‘soul’ is not a soul and does not require the body as an essential part of its definition. Note, however, that in spite of this assertion, perhaps for the lack of any better term, Muslim philosophers use ‘soul’ also to refer to the rational soul after it separates from the body and reaches a complete state of purity from matter.

In its first or lowest stages of relating to the body, the soul is the plant soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can take nourishment, grow and reproduce. The plant soul is the power human beings and other animals share with plants. If the body with a soul is an animal, the soul develops into the animal soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body has sensation and movement through will. While this soul includes the plant soul, it has also a sensitive power and a locomotive one. The sensitive power has both external and internal senses. The external senses are, in priority of existence, touch, taste, smell, hearing and sight. The first three are said to be necessary for survival and the last two for well being. In Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), IBN RUSHD (§3) asserts that the five external senses may be in potentiality, as in infancy and sleep, or in actuality, as in daily seeing or hearing. He also argues that there cannot be any external sense other than these five because there would be no function for it, since there is no external sensation other than the objects of the five senses mentioned above. Most Muslim philosophers men­tion three types of internal senses: common sense, imagination and memory. IBN SINA (§3) enumerates five internal senses: common sense, representational power, imagination, estimative power and memory. On the whole, the philosophers agree on the function of the common sense, imagination and memory; the function that Ibn Sina limits to the representational and estimative powers, other Muslim philosophers allocate to the imagination.

The common sense is an internal power in which all the objects of the external senses are collected. Contrary to the external senses, which can grasp only one type of sensation, as sight grasps light and hearing grasps sound, the common sense can grasp all external sensations, such as that honey is of such and such a colour, texture and smell. The representational power preserves the sensations of the common sense even after sensible things disappear. The imagination selects at will to combine some of the objects of the representational power with each other and to separate the rest. It makes its judgment about external things, but in the absence of these things. That is why it functions best when the external senses, which represent external things, are not at work, as in sleep. Ibn Rushd points out that animals such as worms and flies that do not act except in the presence of sensible things are devoid of imagination. The imagination is called such inasmuch as it is an animal instrument; it is called cognitive inasmuch as it is a rational instrument. The estimative power grasps non-sensible notions of sensible things, such as the sheep’s notion that the wolf is to be avoided. This notion is about a sensible thing but is not grasped through the external senses, as is the colour or shape of a wolf. Memory preserves the notions of the estimative power. The imagination acts on the objects of memory in the same way it acts on those of the representational powers. Like the objects of the external senses, those of the internal senses are particular and material. The difference is that they can be experienced in the absence of external things and are to some degree abstracted from matter.

The locomotive power branches into that which causes movement and that which actually moves. The former, the desiderative power, subdivides into the appetitive and the irascible. The appetitive causes movement toward what is imagined to be necessary or beneficial in the pursuit of pleasure. The irascible causes avoidance of what is imagined to be harmful or an impediment in the pursuit of dominance. The power that actually moves uses the nerves to relax the muscles at the demands of the appetitive power or tighten them at the demands of the irascible one.



3 The rational soul

The rational soul, which is defined as a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can act by rational choice and grasp the universals, is divided into the practical and the theoretical intellects. The practical intellect seeks knowledge in order to act in accordance with the good in its individual body, its family and its state. It must, therefore, know the principles for properly managing the body, the family and the state, that is, ethics, home management and politics. The practical intellect is the rational soul turning its face down­ward. The function of the theoretical intellect is to know just for the sake of having the universals (the realities or natures of things). Some of these natures, such as God and the intellect, cannot attach to movement; knowledge of them is metaphysics. Other natures, such as unity, can attach to movement but do not; knowledge of them is mathematics. Still other natures, such as humanity and squareness, can attach to movement either in reality and thought, such as humanity, or in reality but not in thought, such as squareness. Knowledge of these is physics.

The theoretical intellect is the rational soul with its face upward. The practical intellect looks up to the theoretical one and moves its body accordingly. In this, the practical intellect is similar to :the celestial soul that looks up to the intellect of its sphere and moves its sphere accordingly. Thus, like .the celestial soul, the practical intellect is the link between intellect as such and matter.

On the whole, Muslim philosophers followed al-Kindi’s division of the theoretical intellect into the material intellect (al-‘aql al-hayulant), the habitual intellect (al-‘agl bil-malaka), the actual intellect (al-‘aql bi’!-fi’b and the acquired intellect’ (al-‘aql al-mustafad). The material intellect is a blank slate with the potentiality for grasping the intelligible forms or universals. Ibn Sina points out that it is referred to as material, not because it is actually material but because it resembles matter in accepting the form. The habitual intellect grasps the universals, as one acquires the skill to write; in other words, this intellect has the ability to use the universals but does not always do so. The actual intellect grasps the universals in actuality and is always ready to use them. While Muslim philosophers differed slightly with regard to their accounts of the acquired intellect, their general view is that it is the highest human state, the point of contact with the divine, the agent intellect (the intelligence of the moon, the lowest celestial intellect), which makes it possible for the theoretical intellect to acquire the universals in the purest form (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY §4).



4 The ultimate objective of the soul

AL-FARABI asserts that even though the soul is of different parts, it is a unity with all its parts working for one final end, happiness. While the plant soul, for example, serves a specific function, it also serves the powers that are higher than it in rank, the animal powers. Without nourishment, growth and reproduc­tion, the animal powers cannot perform their necessary functions. Similarly, while the function of the animal powers is to have sensation and movement, by performing this function they also promote the functions of the powers above them, the rational ones. The operations of the animal powers, especially those of the senses, are particularly important for the attainment of the final end. The external senses strip the forms from material objects and convey them to the internal senses. The more they are transferred internally, the less mixed with matter do they become. Since the innermost sense they reach is the imagina­tion, they are there in their purest material existence (see IMAGINATION).

The role of the objects of the imagination is not always clearly defined in Islamic philosophy. Occa­sionally it is said by somebody like Ibn Sina to be one of preparation for the theoretical intellect to receive the universals from the agent intellect. At other times Ibn Sina, like other Aristotelians such as Ibn Rushd, takes these objects to be the ingredients out of which the universals are made after the last process of purification (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY). It seems, however, that in either case the light of the agent intellect is needed to complete the process. In the former case, this light gives the intelligible forms to the theoretical intellect when this intellect is prepared. In the latter case, it sheds itself on the objects of the imagination, which are then reflected on the theoretical intellect without their matter. Since the theoretical intellect is in its first stages in potentiality, it cannot act on the objects of the imagination directly; hence the need for the agent intellect, which is pure actuality. The role of the practical intellect in all this is to put order into the body. This sets free the theoretical intellect from preoccupation with the body and helps the powers whose function is necessary for theoretical knowledge to function unhampered.

Muslim philosophers adhered to the view that the acquired intellect is one with its objects, for they thought the knower and the known are one, as did their Greek predecessors. This means that the highest human state is one in which unity with the universals or the eternal aspects of the universe is reached. This state is described as happiness because in it eternity, an aspect of the objects of the acquired intellect, is attained.



5 Eternity of the soul

When Muslim philosophers assert that the soul comes into existence simultaneously with the coming into existence of the body, some, such as Ibn Sina (§6), who believe that the rational soul is in essence non­material, are thinking only of the non-rational soul. Others, such as Ibn Rushd (§3), who believe that the rational soul is originally not separate from matter, contend that the whole human soul comes into existence. The latter believe that since the rational soul grasps the universals from particular sensibles, and since such sensibles are material and have a temporal beginning, this soul must also be material and must have a temporal beginning. Those who attribute non-materiality to the essence of the rational soul, such as AL-KINDI and Ibn Sina, assert that this soul pre-exists the body. While all of them agree that the non-rational soul is destroyed after the destruc­tion of the body, they differ with regard to the end of the rational soul.

Al-Kindi and Ibn Sina, for example, strongly adhere to the view that all rational souls are indestructible because by nature they are simple. AL-FARABI reminds us that the reason for eternal existence is the rational soul’s knowledge of the eternal aspects of the universe. From this he draws the conclusion, as did ALEXANDER OF APHRODISIAS before him, that only those rational souls that have this knowledge at their separation from the body are indestructible. Other rational souls are eventually destroyed. Ibn Sina finds in the grasping of the universals the grounds for happiness, not the eternity of the soul. Ibn Rushd seems to hold that only the acquired intellect can be indestructible; but the acquired intellect, he argues (as does his teacher IBN BAJJA), is divine and numerically one in all. Ibn Rushd was attacked for this view because it denies eternal existence of individual souls (see AVERROISM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE).

See also: ARISTOTELIANISM IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; ETHICS IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; IBN RUSHD §3; IBN SINA §6; MYSTICAL PHILOSOPHY IN ISLAM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE



References end further reading

al-Farabi (c.870-950) al-Madina al fadila (The Virtuous City), trans. R. Walter, Al-Farabi on the Perfect State.’ Abu Nasr al-Farabi’s Mabadi’ Ara’Ah al-Madina al-Fadila, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. (English and Arabic of the most comprehensive and best known philosophical work of al-Farabi.)

Ibn Rushd (1180) Tahafut al-tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence), trans. S. Van Den Bergh, London: Luzac, 1954. (A response to a number of issues raised by al-Ghazali against philosophers. One of the three most important of these issues is that of the soul and its fate.)

- (c.1174) Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Maktabat an-Nahda, 1950. (Includes also four other essays: Ibn Baja’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction), Ishaq Ibn Hunayn’s Kitab ft an-nafs (Book on the Soul), Ibn Rushd’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction) and al-Kindi’s Risalat al-‘aql (Essay on Intellect).)

Ibn Sina (980-1037) an-Nafs (The Soul), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s de Anima, London: Oxford University Press, 1959. (The most important and detailed philosophical treatise on the soul in Islamic philosophy, the sixth part of the Physics of al-Shifa’. An Arabic edition of the text is included.)

(980-1037) Ahwal an-nafs (The States of the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1952. (Includes Risala fi an-nafs wa-baqa’ha wa-ma’adiha (Essay on the Soul, Its Permanence and Its Second Life), Mabhath ‘an al-qiwa an-nafsaniyya (Inquiry about Psychic Powers), Risala fi ma’rifat an-nafs an-natiga (Essay on Knowing the Rational Soul) and Risala fi al-kalam ‘ala an-nafs an-natiqa (Essay on an Inquiry Concerning the Rational Soul).)

- (980-1037) an-Najat (Deliverance), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s Psychology, London: Oxford University Press, 1952. (The psychology of an-Najat is an abridgement by Ibn Sina of his encyclopedic work al-Shifa’ (Healing).)

- (980-1037) Rasa’d ash-shaykh ar-ra’is f asrar al-hikma al-mashriqiyya (Essays of the Master of the Head on the Secrets of Oriental Wisdom), ed. M. Mehren, Traites mystiques d’Avicenna, Leiden: Brill, 1889-99. (Ibn Sina’s ‘oriental philosophy’.)

Inati, S.C. (1996) A Study of Ibn Sina’s Mysticism, London: Kegan Paul International. (Includes a detailed analysis of Ibn Sina’s notion of the soul and a translation of the fourth part of al-Isharat wa­‘1-tanbihat (Remarks and Admonitions).)

al-Kindi (before 873) Rasa’il al-Kindi al falsafiyya (Al-Kindi’s Philosophical Treatises), ed. M. Abu Rida, Cairo: Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi, 1953. (Includes al-Kindi’s most relevant works on the subject of the soul, al-Qawl fi an-nafs (Discourse on the Soul), Fi an-nafs (On the Soul) and Fi mahiyyat an-nawm war-ru’ya (On the Essence of Sleep and Internal Vision).)



SHAMS C. INATI


Collectede By
Shobuz Bhai

Не будет такой вещи что правда лежит снаружи вас. предельная правда лежит внутри вы.
Automatically translated into Russian thanks to WorldLingo
Людское

Sura # 76 (человек):

1. «Не будет фактом что было время когда людское существование было ничего быть упомянутым? »
2. «Мы создали человека от жидкостной смеси, от 2 родителей, для того чтобы испытать его. Таким образом, мы сделали им hearer и провидца. «
3. «Мы показали ему 2 курса, после этого он или appreciative, или unappreciative. »


Большинств люди незнающи, будет очень СТРУКТУРОЙ их собственных собственных личностей.

Большое часть из нас растет up to думает что «мы» как раз макетированы «души», когда она умирает, reverts back to БОГ.

Хотя эта информация «частично» правильно, также очень больше к составу людского существования которое БОГ объясняет к нам через Quran.

Будет системой дьявола, котор нужно смутить и ослабеть нас поэтому мы даже не умеем как воевать его!. Одно главным образом правило любого конфликта что вы «знаете ваш противника». Но перед делать то, вы должны сперва «знать»!.



Rouh = душа?

Это будет одиночный самый большой misconception населяет делало помогл передернуть вопрос «мы».

В Аравии, когда кто-то умирает, люди говорят: «препятствуйте нам помолить на его Rouh!».

Также, когда они поговорят о кто-то умирая, мнение: «его Rouh оставляло он».

В школах, они учат нашим малышам что «душой» будет «Rouh» и то умрет и будет рассужено и репрессировано или награжено…

Однако, рассказ изменяет когда мы смотрим БОГ должен сказать:

«БОГ принимает «Nafs» когда смерть приходит, и также во время сна…» (39: разрешение 42

) «не «Nafs» БОГОВ кроме как плашек, на предопределенном времени…» (3: 145)

«каждое «, котор Nafs» пробует смерть, после этого вы получите ваше recompense на день Resurrection…» (3: 185)

«… вы не убьете «Nafs» тот, котор БОГ делал священнейшим, за исключением в процессе правосудия…» (6: 151)

«…, котор она сказала: мой лорд, я вредил моему 'Nafs "… «(27: 16)

Наилучшим образом, вы получаете изображение!.

БОГ говорит нам что наша «душа» вызвана «Nafs», и что это «Nafs» принято на смерть и рассужено на j-дне (после этого награжено или репрессировано). «Nafs» будет ВАМИ, оно ваш весь быть, это будет вашим шифером, который или облегчен вашими действиями…

Так, если «душой» будет «Nafs», то будет Rouh?



Rouh = дух.

«Пока барьер отделил ее от их, мы послали к ее нашему «Rouh». Он пошел к ей in the form of людское существование. «(19: 17)

«они спрашивают вам о «Rouh». Мнение: '«Rouh» приходит от моего лорда. И вам не дали знание, за исключением маленького. «(Quran 17:85)

оно будет явно к читателю что «Rouh» от БОГА и будет накоплением «знания» поможет людскому существованию в его жизни…, котор она наиболее наилучшим образом описана как «дух».

Вы видите, животные также имеют «Nafs» как раз как мы делаем (будет их жизн-усилием), но, вы не видите, что обезьяны строят корабли ни turtles работая на компьютерах!.

«Rouh» будет подарком БОГ дал к нашему виду для того чтобы позволить нам преимуществу «знания».

«Как только I совершенное он (человек), и дуновение в его от моего «Rouh», вы понизятся prostrate перед им.» (15: 29)

Все животные могут связывать с одним другое (вспомните, что птицы говорят к Solomon?). Однако, это будет только человеком который имеет «знание».

«Rouh» будет подарком БОГА к нам, и только ХОРОШО. Информацией что «Rouh» обеспечивает each of нас будет быть использованным для нашего преимущества, но нами имеет «выбор», котор нужно использовать его для зла (как атомный распад будучи использованным для того чтобы сделать бомбу).

Некоторые несчастливые новости о «Rouh»: Оно НИКОГДА будет причаливать вам и не сохранять день. например, вы боретесь для того чтобы понять что-то. Если вы не просите БОГ помощь, то они не пойдут; «hey, здесь ответ!» нет, вы должны причалить ему. Также, оно всегда будет БУКВАЛЬНО. вы быть специфическим вы спрашиваете. Примечание, вы не должны сказать эта вне громкую. Вы можете как раз думать его - потому что много времен, люди имеют трудный выражать времени точно они хотят спросить. С духом бога, вы не должны потревожиться о этом - покуда вы получите намерие спрашивать, дух знает вопрос… как очень как вы хотели спросить и то ОДНО (хотя они знают все вопросы, котор вы знаете - они не идут ответить что-нибыдь вы не спросили).



Таким образом если мы можем суммировать, то мы имеем до этого пункта.

Макетируют существование человека до тех пор:

1. «Душа» - Nafs (ВЫ, реальная персона, делают выборы и будет рассужено);

2. «Дух» - Rouh (это будет подарком от БОГА, его не твоим, вами не имеет его, все люди имеет доступ к ему - как Quran. Будет целью должно помочь ответить и знание для того чтобы помочь вашей душе для того чтобы сделать правые решения).




Satan - Shaitan

3-ее и самое летальное смешивание в уровнении человека будет «Satan».

«Он (Satan) сказал, «в виду того что вы удостоили его над мной, если вы передышка я до дня Resurrection, я будете обладать всеми его выходцами, то за исключением несколько.» (17: 62)

Несчастливый факт наших жизней что Satan бросило вызов right of наши родоначальницы к доступу posses к 'Rouh ". Satan востребовало что он был квалифицироватьле использовать подарок БОГА и что он сделает более лучшую работу с ей:

Он (БОГ) сказал, «предотвратило вас от сервировки когда я приказал вас?» Он сказал, «я более лучший чем он; Вы создали меня от пожара, и создали его от mud. «(7: 12)

Этот спрашивать способности человека вел к спору в таким образом изверганных раях и «сомнениях»:

Sura 38 (S'ad):

67 . Мнением, «здесь будет awesome новости.
68. «Т вы полно забвенны к.
69. «Я не имел никакое знание ранее, о феоде в высоких раях.
70. «Я воодушевлян мой единственный полет для того чтобы поставить предупреждения к вам. »
71. Ваш лорд сказал к ангелам: 'Я создаю людское существование от глины.
72. «Как только я конструирую его, и дую в его от моего духа, вы поможете ему. »
73. Помогать ангелы, all of them,
74. за исключением Satan; он отказал, и был слишком заносчив, unappreciative.
75. Он сказал, «o Satan, предотвратил вас от помощи я создал раньше с моими руками? Вы слишком заносчивы? Вы бунтовали? «
76. Он сказал, «я более лучший чем он; Вы создали меня от пожара, и создали его от глины. «
77. Он сказал, «поэтому, вы должен быть exiled, вы будет изгнан.
78. «Вы не произвести мой condemnation до дня суждения. »
79. Он сказал, «мой лорд, передышка я до дня Resurrection. »
80. Он сказал, «вы respited.
81. «До назначенного дня. »
82. Он сказал, «я присягаю Ваша Королевское Величество, что я пошлю их совсем astray.
83. «За исключением ваших worshipers посвящены совершенно к вам самостоятельно. »

Вышеуказанные вирши говорят рассказ очень ясно.

Satan спросило, чтобы ему давал шанс «доказывает» что человек непригоден для задачи…

И БОГ таким образом позволил Satan (имеет злейшие намерия) поманить нас (но не иметь доступ к нам):

«Вы можете поманить их с вашим голосом, и мобилизуете все ваши усилия и все ваши людей против их, и долю в их деньг и детях, и обещаете им. Что-нибыдь посылы дьявола no more чем иллюзион. «(Quran 17:64)

«я приду к им от прежде чем они, и от заднего они, и от их права, и от их левой стороны, и вас найдут что большое часть из их unappreciative.» (7: 17)

Имел рассказ быть остановленным там, мы все еще был точн. Проблема, Satan управляемое для того чтобы trick наши родоначальницы в давать ему ДОСТУП к нашим душам!:

«Дьявол прошептал к им, для того чтобы gain access к им. Он сказал, «ваш лорд не запретил вас от этого вала, за исключением предотвратить вас от становить ангелов, и от достигать вечного существования.» (7: 20)

Еда от «запрещенного» вала позволила Satan иметь постоянн доступ к нашему «Nafs».

Смешивание, котор мы теперь имеем является следующим:

1. «Душа» - Nafs;

2. «Дух» - Rouh;

3. Satan - Shaitan (это будет дьяволом имея доступ к нашим душам и влиять на их).

Satan будет ПРЕДЕЛЬНОЙ кривдой внутри вы. Если будет всегда кривда, то не ищите она… снаружи вас - она лежит внутри вы.

Some more плохие новости: не похоже на Rouh, Satan ПРИЧАЛИВАЕТ вам. Если вы имеете delimma, то он передаст ваш ответ. Ли ответ правильно не ровно вопрос, потому что мы знаем он не. иногда, прежде чем вы даже будете иметь delimma, он передаст вам беспорядок… потому что он передаст вам so much кривда в вашей ОТЖАТОЙ жизни которую вы закончите вверх по СМУЩЕННОМУ ощупыванию, ощупывании ОМ ПОКИНУТЫМ богом, etc etc etc - всеми вещами, котор он thrives cIn.

Не отчайтесь.

Потому что Satan существует внутри вы, не много, котор вы можете сделать о получать rid его для хорош. однако, вы можете получить rid every time он причаливает - и покуда вы держите в разуме, котор вы не должны получить утомленными пинать его в безмолвие, вы будете всегда winner - потому что он вторгается ваш разум. путем изыскивать убежище в БОГЕ, вы даете авторитет Rouh для того чтобы держать его молчком.

«Когда вы выучите Quran, вы будете изыскивать убежище в БОГЕ от излученное Satan. Он не имеет никакую силу над теми верят и доверяют в их лорде. Его сила ограничена к тем выбирают его как их оригинал, тем которые выбирают его как их бог. «(16: 98-100)

Как можете вы быть безопасны с его данными по кривды?. Every time он предлагает разрешение, вы не принимаете его для нарицательной стоимости - вы идете спрашивать ваше Rouh. если вы получаете разрешение без ask for оно -, то 2 дороги вы might've полученное то;

1. «Nafs» дало его к вам (ваше собственное subconscious сделало предложение);

2. Оно пришло от Satan!.


Вы никогда не получаете unasked разрешения от духа. Abraham… бог выбирал… не было причалено БОГОМ - он причалил БОГУ. Пункт; БОГА влюбленности всегда вы… а он не остановят вас от губить вашу жизнь… если вы ask for его помощь. БОГ никогда не покидает кто-то вс… и никогда не направляет кто-то вс - если он сделал, то он Abraham, Mohammed, etc - посыльные которые он выбирал (мы видим совершать людские ошибки). И наведением, не похоже на мусульманскому вниканию его… будет процесс каждой ситуации… вместо сразу вещи.



Окончательное примечание:

Самое лучшее мусульманство находится внутри вы - дух БОГА (Rouh'u аллаха) находится внутри вы. Не будет такой вещи что правда лежит снаружи вас. предельная правда лежит внутри вы. пожалуйста, take advantage of то благословение. Это будет вашим предельным оружием против кривды…


Свободно-Разумом (и-мэйлом: free@free-minds.org)

ДУША В ИСЛАМСКОМ ОБЩЕМ СООБРАЖЕНИИ



обсуждение людской души, своего существования, природы, предельной задачи и вечности, занимает высоки важное положение в исламском общем соображении и формирует свой главным образом фокус. Для большинств мусульманских philosophers согласил, как сделали их греческие предшественницы, что душа consist of non-рациональные и рациональные части. Non-рациональная часть, котор они разделили в душ завода и животного, рациональная часть в практически и теоретические интеллекты. Все верили что non-рациональная часть соединена необходимо к телу, но некоторые рассматривали рациональную часть как separate from тело природой и другими что все части души материалом природы. Philosophers согласились что, пока душа находится в теле, своя non-рациональная часть должна управлять телом, свой практически интеллект должен управлять worldly делами, включая то из тела, а свой теоретический интеллект должен знать вечные аспекты вселенного. Они думали что предельные конец или счастье души зависят на своей способности отделить от требований тела и сфокусировать на схватывать вечные аспекты вселенного. Все верили что non-рациональная душа come into быть и неизбежно погибает. Некоторые, как al-Farabi, верили что рациональная душа may or may not выдержать eternally; другие, как Ibn Sina, верили что оно не имеет никакие начало и непочатый край; все еще другие, such as Ibn Rushd, верили что душа с всеми своими индивидуальными частями come into существование и окончательн разрушена.

1 Существование души

2 Природа души

3 Рациональная душа

4 Предельная задача души

5 Вечность души

снабжает ссылками чтение 1 конца



более дальнеишее Существование души

все мусульманские philosophers относилось с вопросом души. Самые детальные и самые важные работы на этом вопросе тем из al-Kindi, al-Farabi, Ibn Sina и Ibn Rushd. Мусульманские philosophers узнали что первым вопросом, тем confronts людской разум with regard to душа будет свое существование. То почему, на очень начинать его дознания о душе в al-Shifa' (Healing), Ibn Sina (§6) утверждает что мы infer существование души от факта что мы наблюдаем телами которые выполняют некоторые поступки с некоторым STEPENью воли. Эти поступки приведены в пример в принимать питание, расти, воспроизводить, двигать и воспринимать. В виду того что эти поступки не принадлежат к природе тел, потому что эта природа devoid воли, они должны принадлежать к принципу, котор они имеют за исключением тел. Этот принцип вызвано душой `'.

Этот аргумент предназначен доказать существование животной души, которая вклюает душу завода. Душой будет источник поступков выполненных the will, не inasmuch as будет `вещество' (независимо реальность), но inasmuch as будет `принцип таких действует'. Рациональная душа, с другой стороны, не нужно посмотреть, что вне себя infer свое существование. Оно осведомленно своего существования с immediacy, that is, без VSех аппаратур. Пример Ibn Sina suspended человека предназначен доказать что рациональная душа осведомленна себя отдельно от любого тела. Его аргумент кипит вплоть до взгляд, even if душа взрослого рациональная не осведомленна что-нибыдь материального, не выровнять свое тело, его остает осведомленным своего собственного существования.



2 Природа души

пока мусульманство сделало им incumbent на мусульманских philosophers для того чтобы занять обширно с изучением души и сделать некоторые заявления in some cases появляются совместимое с исламское верование, греческое общее соображение имела верхнюю руку в формировать реальные осуждения мусульманских philosophers with regard to природа души. Unless specified otherwise, справка к: он душа здесь ограничен к земной душе к исключению небесное одного, в виду того что мусульманские philosophers относились главным образом с бывшим. It must be pointed out at the outset that ‘soul’. (nafs) was used in more than one sense in Islamic philosophy; the term was used to refer to the plant or vegetative part of a living being, the animal or sensitive part, the rational part and finally the totality of all three parts. The first two are the non-rational soul and the totality is the human soul. To add to the confusion, ‘human soul’ is used only in the sense of this fourth type of soul. The plant, animal and; rational souls are also called powers or parts of the; soul. Only from the context can one understand, whether a Muslim philosopher was using ‘soul’ in the broad sense to mean the human soul (the totality of the parts of the soul), or in the narrow sense to mean a specific part of the human soul.

Inasmuch as it has a certain relation to a body, the soul is a form for that body, that is, the perfection of that body. It is a form because a natural body is composed of matter and form, which in the case of animals are body and soul. Since it has been shown that the soul is the source of will and therefore is not matter, it remains a form. Perfection is of two types, primary and secondary. A primary perfection is what makes a thing actually a species, as shape does for the sword, or a genus as sensation and-movement do for animals. A secondary perfection is an act necessitated by the nature of the species or genus, such as cutting for the sword and touching for animal. The soul is a primary perfection of a natural body capable of performing the secondary perfections necessitated by this primary perfection. Together with its body, the soul constitutes a material substance. This substance can be the subject of plant, animal or human life.

The soul is a perfection inasmuch as it makes a natural body into a plant, an animal or a rational being. However, to define the soul as a perfection does not give us a clue as to what the soul is in itself, but only inasmuch as it has a relation to the body. The body is, therefore, an essential element in the definition of the soul. Without relating to a body, the thing we call ‘soul’ is not a soul and does not require the body as an essential part of its definition. Note, however, that in spite of this assertion, perhaps for the lack of any better term, Muslim philosophers use ‘soul’ also to refer to the rational soul after it separates from the body and reaches a complete state of purity from matter.

In its first or lowest stages of relating to the body, the soul is the plant soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can take nourishment, grow and reproduce. The plant soul is the power human beings and other animals share with plants. If the body with a soul is an animal, the soul develops into the animal soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body has sensation and movement through will. While this soul includes the plant soul, it has also a sensitive power and a locomotive one. The sensitive power has both external and internal senses. The external senses are, in priority of existence, touch, taste, smell, hearing and sight. The first three are said to be necessary for survival and the last two for well being. In Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), IBN RUSHD (§3) asserts that the five external senses may be in potentiality, as in infancy and sleep, or in actuality, as in daily seeing or hearing. He also argues that there cannot be any external sense other than these five because there would be no function for it, since there is no external sensation other than the objects of the five senses mentioned above. Most Muslim philosophers men­tion three types of internal senses: common sense, imagination and memory. IBN SINA (§3) enumerates five internal senses: common sense, representational power, imagination, estimative power and memory. On the whole, the philosophers agree on the function of the common sense, imagination and memory; the function that Ibn Sina limits to the representational and estimative powers, other Muslim philosophers allocate to the imagination.

The common sense is an internal power in which all the objects of the external senses are collected. Contrary to the external senses, which can grasp only one type of sensation, as sight grasps light and hearing grasps sound, the common sense can grasp all external sensations, such as that honey is of such and such a colour, texture and smell. The representational power preserves the sensations of the common sense even after sensible things disappear. The imagination selects at will to combine some of the objects of the representational power with each other and to separate the rest. It makes its judgment about external things, but in the absence of these things. That is why it functions best when the external senses, which represent external things, are not at work, as in sleep. Ibn Rushd points out that animals such as worms and flies that do not act except in the presence of sensible things are devoid of imagination. The imagination is called such inasmuch as it is an animal instrument; it is called cognitive inasmuch as it is a rational instrument. The estimative power grasps non-sensible notions of sensible things, such as the sheep’s notion that the wolf is to be avoided. This notion is about a sensible thing but is not grasped through the external senses, as is the colour or shape of a wolf. Memory preserves the notions of the estimative power. The imagination acts on the objects of memory in the same way it acts on those of the representational powers. Like the objects of the external senses, those of the internal senses are particular and material. The difference is that they can be experienced in the absence of external things and are to some degree abstracted from matter.

The locomotive power branches into that which causes movement and that which actually moves. The former, the desiderative power, subdivides into the appetitive and the irascible. The appetitive causes movement toward what is imagined to be necessary or beneficial in the pursuit of pleasure. The irascible causes avoidance of what is imagined to be harmful or an impediment in the pursuit of dominance. The power that actually moves uses the nerves to relax the muscles at the demands of the appetitive power or tighten them at the demands of the irascible one.



3 The rational soul

The rational soul, which is defined as a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can act by rational choice and grasp the universals, is divided into the practical and the theoretical intellects. The practical intellect seeks knowledge in order to act in accordance with the good in its individual body, its family and its state. It must, therefore, know the principles for properly managing the body, the family and the state, that is, ethics, home management and politics. The practical intellect is the rational soul turning its face down­ward. The function of the theoretical intellect is to know just for the sake of having the universals (the realities or natures of things). Some of these natures, such as God and the intellect, cannot attach to movement; knowledge of them is metaphysics. Other natures, such as unity, can attach to movement but do not; knowledge of them is mathematics. Still other natures, such as humanity and squareness, can attach to movement either in reality and thought, such as humanity, or in reality but not in thought, such as squareness. Knowledge of these is physics.

The theoretical intellect is the rational soul with its face upward. The practical intellect looks up to the theoretical one and moves its body accordingly. In this, the practical intellect is similar to :the celestial soul that looks up to the intellect of its sphere and moves its sphere accordingly. Thus, like .the celestial soul, the practical intellect is the link between intellect as such and matter.

On the whole, Muslim philosophers followed al-Kindi’s division of the theoretical intellect into the material intellect (al-‘aql al-hayulant), the habitual intellect (al-‘agl bil-malaka), the actual intellect (al-‘aql bi’!-fi’b and the acquired intellect’ (al-‘aql al-mustafad). The material intellect is a blank slate with the potentiality for grasping the intelligible forms or universals. Ibn Sina points out that it is referred to as material, not because it is actually material but because it resembles matter in accepting the form. The habitual intellect grasps the universals, as one acquires the skill to write; in other words, this intellect has the ability to use the universals but does not always do so. The actual intellect grasps the universals in actuality and is always ready to use them. While Muslim philosophers differed slightly with regard to their accounts of the acquired intellect, their general view is that it is the highest human state, the point of contact with the divine, the agent intellect (the intelligence of the moon, the lowest celestial intellect), which makes it possible for the theoretical intellect to acquire the universals in the purest form (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY §4).



4 The ultimate objective of the soul

AL-FARABI asserts that even though the soul is of different parts, it is a unity with all its parts working for one final end, happiness. While the plant soul, for example, serves a specific function, it also serves the powers that are higher than it in rank, the animal powers. Without nourishment, growth and reproduc­tion, the animal powers cannot perform their necessary functions. Similarly, while the function of the animal powers is to have sensation and movement, by performing this function they also promote the functions of the powers above them, the rational ones. The operations of the animal powers, especially those of the senses, are particularly important for the attainment of the final end. The external senses strip the forms from material objects and convey them to the internal senses. The more they are transferred internally, the less mixed with matter do they become. Since the innermost sense they reach is the imagina­tion, they are there in their purest material existence (see IMAGINATION).

The role of the objects of the imagination is not always clearly defined in Islamic philosophy. Occa­sionally it is said by somebody like Ibn Sina to be one of preparation for the theoretical intellect to receive the universals from the agent intellect. At other times Ibn Sina, like other Aristotelians such as Ibn Rushd, takes these objects to be the ingredients out of which the universals are made after the last process of purification (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY). It seems, however, that in either case the light of the agent intellect is needed to complete the process. In the former case, this light gives the intelligible forms to the theoretical intellect when this intellect is prepared. In the latter case, it sheds itself on the objects of the imagination, which are then reflected on the theoretical intellect without their matter. Since the theoretical intellect is in its first stages in potentiality, it cannot act on the objects of the imagination directly; hence the need for the agent intellect, which is pure actuality. The role of the practical intellect in all this is to put order into the body. This sets free the theoretical intellect from preoccupation with the body and helps the powers whose function is necessary for theoretical knowledge to function unhampered.

Muslim philosophers adhered to the view that the acquired intellect is one with its objects, for they thought the knower and the known are one, as did their Greek predecessors. This means that the highest human state is one in which unity with the universals or the eternal aspects of the universe is reached. This state is described as happiness because in it eternity, an aspect of the objects of the acquired intellect, is attained.



5 Eternity of the soul

When Muslim philosophers assert that the soul comes into existence simultaneously with the coming into existence of the body, some, such as Ibn Sina (§6), who believe that the rational soul is in essence non­material, are thinking only of the non-rational soul. Others, such as Ibn Rushd (§3), who believe that the rational soul is originally not separate from matter, contend that the whole human soul comes into existence. The latter believe that since the rational soul grasps the universals from particular sensibles, and since such sensibles are material and have a temporal beginning, this soul must also be material and must have a temporal beginning. Those who attribute non-materiality to the essence of the rational soul, such as AL-KINDI and Ibn Sina, assert that this soul pre-exists the body. While all of them agree that the non-rational soul is destroyed after the destruc­tion of the body, they differ with regard to the end of the rational soul.

Al-Kindi and Ibn Sina, for example, strongly adhere to the view that all rational souls are indestructible because by nature they are simple. AL-FARABI reminds us that the reason for eternal existence is the rational soul’s knowledge of the eternal aspects of the universe. From this he draws the conclusion, as did ALEXANDER OF APHRODISIAS before him, that only those rational souls that have this knowledge at their separation from the body are indestructible. Other rational souls are eventually destroyed. Ibn Sina finds in the grasping of the universals the grounds for happiness, not the eternity of the soul. Ibn Rushd seems to hold that only the acquired intellect can be indestructible; but the acquired intellect, he argues (as does his teacher IBN BAJJA), is divine and numerically one in all. Ibn Rushd was attacked for this view because it denies eternal existence of individual souls (see AVERROISM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE).

See also: ARISTOTELIANISM IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; ETHICS IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; IBN RUSHD §3; IBN SINA §6; MYSTICAL PHILOSOPHY IN ISLAM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE



References end further reading

al-Farabi (c.870-950) al-Madina al fadila (The Virtuous City), trans. R. Walter, Al-Farabi on the Perfect State.’ Abu Nasr al-Farabi’s Mabadi’ Ara’Ah al-Madina al-Fadila, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. (English and Arabic of the most comprehensive and best known philosophical work of al-Farabi.)

Ibn Rushd (1180) Tahafut al-tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence), trans. S. Van Den Bergh, London: Luzac, 1954. (A response to a number of issues raised by al-Ghazali against philosophers. One of the three most important of these issues is that of the soul and its fate.)

- (c.1174) Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Maktabat an-Nahda, 1950. (Includes also four other essays: Ibn Baja’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction), Ishaq Ibn Hunayn’s Kitab ft an-nafs (Book on the Soul), Ibn Rushd’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction) and al-Kindi’s Risalat al-‘aql (Essay on Intellect).)

Ibn Sina (980-1037) an-Nafs (The Soul), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s de Anima, London: Oxford University Press, 1959. (The most important and detailed philosophical treatise on the soul in Islamic philosophy, the sixth part of the Physics of al-Shifa’. An Arabic edition of the text is included.)

(980-1037) Ahwal an-nafs (The States of the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1952. (Includes Risala fi an-nafs wa-baqa’ha wa-ma’adiha (Essay on the Soul, Its Permanence and Its Second Life), Mabhath ‘an al-qiwa an-nafsaniyya (Inquiry about Psychic Powers), Risala fi ma’rifat an-nafs an-natiga (Essay on Knowing the Rational Soul) and Risala fi al-kalam ‘ala an-nafs an-natiqa (Essay on an Inquiry Concerning the Rational Soul).)

- (980-1037) an-Najat (Deliverance), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s Psychology, London: Oxford University Press, 1952. (The psychology of an-Najat is an abridgement by Ibn Sina of his encyclopedic work al-Shifa’ (Healing).)

- (980-1037) Rasa’d ash-shaykh ar-ra’is f asrar al-hikma al-mashriqiyya (Essays of the Master of the Head on the Secrets of Oriental Wisdom), ed. M. Mehren, Traites mystiques d’Avicenna, Leiden: Brill, 1889-99. (Ibn Sina’s ‘oriental philosophy’.)

Inati, S.C. (1996) A Study of Ibn Sina’s Mysticism, London: Kegan Paul International. (Includes a detailed analysis of Ibn Sina’s notion of the soul and a translation of the fourth part of al-Isharat wa­‘1-tanbihat (Remarks and Admonitions).)

al-Kindi (before 873) Rasa’il al-Kindi al falsafiyya (Al-Kindi’s Philosophical Treatises), ed. M. Abu Rida, Cairo: Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi, 1953. (Includes al-Kindi’s most relevant works on the subject of the soul, al-Qawl fi an-nafs (Discourse on the Soul), Fi an-nafs (On the Soul) and Fi mahiyyat an-nawm war-ru’ya (On the Essence of Sleep and Internal Vision).)



SHAMS C. INATI


Collectede By
Shobuz Bhai

Er is geen dergelijk ding dat de waarheid buiten u ligt. de uiteindelijke waarheid ligt binnen u.
Automatically translated into Dutch thanks to WorldLingo
Menselijke

Sura # 76 (de Mens):

1. „Is het geen feit dat er een tijd was toen het menselijke wezen te vermelden niets was? “
2. „Wij cre�ërden de mens van een vloeibaar mengsel, van twee ouders om hem te testen. Aldus, maakten wij tot hem een toehoorder en een makreel. „
3. „Wij toonden hem de twee wegen, dan is hij of waarderend, of unappreciative. De“


welke meeste mensen van onbewust zijn, zijn de eigenlijke STRUCTUUR van hun eigen selves.

De meesten van ons groeien om te denken dat „wij“ van de „ziel“ enkel opgemaakt zijn die, wanneer het sterft, terug naar GOD terugkeert.

Hoewel deze informatie „gedeeltelijk correct“ is, zijn er ook veel meer aan de samenstelling van het menselijke wezen dat de GOD aan ons door Quran verklaart.

Het is het systeem van de duivel om ons te verwarren en te verzwakken zodat weten wij niet zelfs het hoe te om hem te bestrijden!. Één belangrijkste regel van om het even welk conflict is dat u „uw vijand“ kent. Maar alvorens dat te doen, u „“ moet eerst kennen!.



Rouh = Ziel?

Dit is de enige grootste misvatting die de mensen hebben gemaakt wat hielp de kwestie van „vervormen wie wij“ zijn.

In Arabië, wanneer iemand sterft, zeggen de mensen: „bid op zijn Rouh!“.

Ook, wanneer zij over iemand het sterven spreken, zeg: „zijn Rouh heeft hem“ verlaten.

In scholen, onderwijzen zij onze jonge geitjes dat de „Ziel“ „Rouh“ is en dat is wat zal sterven en beoordeeld en gestraft of… beloond

Nochtans, verandert het verhaal wanneer wij bekijken welke GOD moet zeggen:

De „GOD neemt „Nafs“ wanneer de dood, en ook op het tijdstip van slaap…“ komt (39: 42)

„Geen „Nafs“ sterft behalve door het verlof van de GOD, in een vooraf bepaalde tijd…“ (3: 145)

„Elke „Nafs“ proeft dood, dan ontvangt u uw recompense op de Dag van Verrijzenis…“ (3: 185)

„… U zult niet „Nafs“ doden die de GOD, behalve in de loop van rechtvaardigheid…“ heilig heeft gemaakt (6: 151)

„… zei zij: mijn Lord, heb ik mijn 'Nafs "… „geschaad (27: 16)

goed, krijgt u het beeld!.

De GOD vertelt ons dat onze „Ziel“ „Nafs“ wordt genoemd, en dat dit „Nafs“ is wat bij dood wordt genomen en wat op j-dag (dan beloond of gestraft) wordt beoordeeld. „Nafs“ is U, is het uw het volledige zijn, is het uw lei, die wordt belast of door uw acties… verlicht

Zo, als de „Ziel“ „Nafs“ is, dan wat is Rouh?



Rouh = Geest.

„Terwijl een barrière haar van hen scheidde, verzonden wij naar haar Onze „Rouh“. Hij ging naar haar in de vorm van een menselijk wezen. „(19: 17)

„zij vragen u over „Rouh“. Zeg: '„Rouh“ komt uit mijn Lord. En u werd gegeven geen kennis, behalve weinig. „(Quran 17:85)

Het wordt duidelijk aan de lezer dat „Rouh“ van GOD is en het de accumulatie van „kennis“ is die bijstaan=zal= het menselijke wezen in zijn leven… Het wordt het best beschreven als „Geest“.

U ziet, hebben de dieren ook „Nafs“ enkel als wij (het is hun leven-kracht), maar toch ziet u apen bouw spaceships noch geen schildpadden werkt aan computers!.

„Rouh“ is de gift die de GOD aan onze soorten gaf om ons het voordeel van „kennis“ toe te staan.

„Zodra ik hem (de mens), perfectioneer en in hem van Mijn „Rouh“ blaas, zult u prostrate vóór hem.“ vallen (15: 29)

Alle dieren kunnen elkaar communiceren met (herinner de vogels sprekend aan Solomon?). Nochtans, is het slechts mens die „kennis“ heeft.

„Rouh“ is de gift van de GOD aan ons, en het is slechts GOED. De informatie dat „Rouh“ elk van ons verstrekt moet voor ons voordeel worden gebruikt, maar wij hebben de „keus“ om het voor kwaad (als kernomsplitsing die worden gebruikt om een bom te maken) te gebruiken.

Sommige ongelukkig nieuws over „Rouh“: Het zal u NOOIT benaderen en zal de dag bewaren. bijvoorbeeld, worstelt u om iets te begrijpen. Als u GOD om geen hulp vraagt, zal het niet gaan; „hey, hier is het antwoord!“ nr, u moet het naderen. Ook, zal het altijd LETTERLIJK zijn. u zult moeten specifiek zijn van wat u vraagt. De nota, u moet niet uit luid dit zeggen. U kunt enkel aan het denken - omdat vaak, de mensen harde tijd uitdrukkend hebben wat precies zij willen vragen. Met de geest van god, moet u niet zich over dit ongerust maken - zolang u de bedoeling krijgt om te vragen, zal de geest de vraag… zo veel kennen aangezien u en dat ALLEEN (hoewel het alle vragen kent u kent - het gaat niet om het even wat beantwoorden u niet vroeg) wilde vragen.



Aldus als wij kunnen samenvatten wat wij upto dit punt hebben.

Het menselijke wezen is tot dusver opgemaakt van:

1. De „ziel“ - Nafs (is U, de echte persoon, wat keuzen maakt en wat zal worden beoordeeld);

2. De „geest“ - Rouh (dit is een gift van GOD, is het Geen van u, bezit u het niet, hebben alle mensen toegang tot het - zoals Quran. Het is doel is antwoorden en kennis te helpen geven om uw Ziel te helpen de juiste besluiten) nemen.




Satan - Shaitan

de 3de en meest dodelijke mengeling in de vergelijking van de mens is „Satan“.

„Hij (Satan) zei, „aangezien u hem over me, als u respijt me tot de Dag van Verrijzenis, ik al zijn nakomelingen zal bezitten, behalve enkelen.“ hebt geëerd (17: 62)

het ongelukkige feit van ons leven is dat Satan het recht van onze voorvaderen aan possestoegang tot 'Rouh " uitdaagde. Satan beweerde dat hij meer gekwalificeerd was om de gift van de GOD te gebruiken en dat hij een beter werk met het zou doen:

Hij (GOD) zei, „wat u te dienen verhinderde toen ik tot u?“ opdracht gaf Hij zei, „ik ben beter dan hij; U cre�ërde me van brand, en cre�ërde hem van modder. „(7: 12)

Dit het vragen van man capaciteit die tot een geschil in de hemel en de „twijfels“ wordt geleid barstte zo los:

Sura 38 (S'ad):

67 . Zeg, „hier is ontzagwekkend nieuws.
68. „Dat u aan totaal vergeetachtig bent.
69. „Ik had geen kennis eerder, over de ruzie in de Hoge hemel.
70. „Ik word geïnspireerdg dat mijn enige opdracht de waarschuwingen aan u moet leveren. “
71. Uw Lord zei aan de engelen: 'Ik cre�ër een menselijk wezen van klei.
72. „Zodra ik hem, ontwerp en in hem van Mijn geest blaas, zult u hem bijstaan. “
73. De engelen woonden, allemaal,
74 bij. behalve Satan; hij weigerde, en was te arrogant, unappreciative.
75. Hij zei, „O Satan, wat verhinderde u bij te staan wat ik voordien met Mijn handen cre�ërde? Bent u te arrogant? Hebt u gerebelleerd? „
76. Hij zei, „ik ben beter dan hij; U cre�ërde me van brand, en cre�ërde hem van klei. „
77. Hij zei, „daarom, moet u worden verbannen, zult u banished zijn.
78. „U hebt Mijn veroordeling tot de Dag van Oordeel opgelopen. “
79. Hij zei, „Mijn Lord, respijt me tot de Dag van Verrijzenis. “
80. Hij zei, „u bent respited.
81. „Tot de benoemde dag. “
82. Hij zei, „ik zweer door Uw majesteit, dat ik hen verkeerd allen zal verzenden.
83. „Behalve Uw worshipers die aan u alleen absoluut toegewijd zijn. De“

bovengenoemde verzen vertellen zeer duidelijk het verhaal.

Satan verzocht om dat hij een kans „om wordt gegeven te blijken“ dat de mens voor de taak… ongeschikt is

En de GOD stond zo Satan (die kwade bedoelingen) toe heeft om ons (maar Geen toegang tot ons hebben) te verleiden:

„U kunt hen verleiden met uw stem, en al uw krachten en al uw mensen tegen hen, en aandeel in hun geld en kinderen mobiliseren, en hen beloven. Om het even wat de duivelsbeloften is een niet meer dan illusie. „(Quran 17:64)

„ik zal komen aan hen uit vóór hen, en uit achter hen, en uit hun recht, en uit hun linkerzijde, en u zult vinden dat de meesten van hen.“ unappreciative zijn (7: 17)

Gehad het daar tegengehouden verhaal, zouden wij nog fijn zijn. Het probleem is, Satan die erin om is geslaagd om onze voorvaderen in het geven van hem TOEGANG tot onze Zielen te bedriegen!:

De „duivel die aan hen wordt gefluisterd, tot hen toegang te krijgen. Hij zei, „Uw Lord verbood u niet van deze boom, behalve om u te verhinderen engelen te worden, en van het bereiken van eeuwig bestaan.“ (7: 20)

Etend van „verboden“ boom toegestane Satan om constante toegang tot onze „Nafs“ te hebben.

De mengeling die wij nu is hebben gehad:

1. De „ziel“ - Nafs;

2. De „geest“ - Rouh;

3. Satan - Shaitan (dit is de duivel die toegang tot onze Zielen heeft en kan om hen beïnvloeden).

Satan is UITEINDELIJKE falsehood binnen u. Als er ooit falsehood zijn, zoek het niet… buiten u - het ligt binnen u.

Wat meer slecht nieuws: in tegenstelling tot Rouh, BENADERT Satan u. Als u een delimma hebt, zal hij uw antwoord geven. Of het antwoord correct is is zelfs geen vraag, omdat wij weten het niet is. soms, alvorens u zelfs een delimma hebt, zal hij u chaos… geven omdat hij u zo veel falsehood in uw leven dat u omhoog VERWARD voelen zult beëindigen, GEDEPRIMEERD zal geven, voelen GEHAAT door VERLATEN god, enz. enz. enz. - alle dingen hij in bloeit.

Wanhoop niet.

Omdat er Satan binnen u bestaat, zijn er niet veel u over het van de hand doen van hem voor goed kunt doen. nochtans, kunt u van de hand doen telkens als hij naderbij komt - en zolang u in mening houdt zou u niet moeten vermoeid worden van het schoppen van hem in stilte, bent u altijd de winnaar - omdat hij uw mening binnenvalt. door toevluchtsoord in GOD te zoeken, geeft u het gezag Rouh om hem stil te houden.

„Wanneer u Quran leert, zult u toevluchtsoord in GOD van Satan verworpen zoeken. Hij heeft geen macht over zij die geloven en in hun Lord vertrouwen op. Zijn macht is beperkt tot zij die hem als hun meester kiezen, zij die hem als hun god kiezen. „(16: 98-100)

hoe u met zijn falsehood informatie kunt veilig zijn?. Telkens als hij een oplossing aanbiedt, neemt u het niet voor gezichtswaarde - u gaat en vraagt uw Rouh. als u een oplossing zonder het vragen om het krijgt - er zijn twee manieren u might've dat kreeg;

1. „Nafs“ het aan gaf u (uw eigen onderbewust deed de suggestie);

2. Het kwam uit Satan!.


U wordt nooit unasked oplossingen van de geest. Abraham… wie de god… heeft gekozen werd niet benaderd door GOD - hij benaderde GOD. Het punt is; De GOD houdt van u altijd… maar hij zal u niet van het ruïneren van uw leven… tegenhouden als u niet om Zijn hulp vraagt. De GOD verlaat nooit iemand volledig… en begeleidt nooit iemand volledig - als hij, hij Abraham, Mohammed, enz. - boodschappers die hij heeft gekozen (die wij het maken van menselijke fouten zien). En de begeleiding, in tegenstelling tot het Moslim begrip van het… is een proces van elke situatie… in plaats van alles in één keer ding.



Definitieve Nota:

Beste Islam is binnen u - de geest van GOD (Rouh'u Allah) is binnen u. Er is geen dergelijk ding dat de waarheid buiten u ligt. de uiteindelijke waarheid ligt binnen u. tevreden, haal voordeel uit die zegen. Het zal uw uiteindelijk wapen tegen falsehood… zijn


Door vrij-Meningen (e-mail: free@free-minds.org)

de ZIEL IN ISLAMITISCHE FILOSOFIE



de bespreking van de menselijke ziel, zijn bestaan, aard, uiteindelijke doelstelling en eeuwigheid, bezet een hoogst belangrijke positie in Islamitische filosofie en vormt zijn hoofdnadruk. Grotendeels Moslim goedgekeurde filosofen, zoals hun Griekse voorgangers, dat de ziel uit nietrationele en rationele delen bestaat. Het nietrationele deel dat zij in de plant en de dierlijke zielen, het rationele deel in praktische en theoretische intellects hebben verdeeld. Iedereen geloofde dat het nietrationele deel met het lichaam hoofdzakelijk verbonden is, maar sommigen overwogen het rationele deel afzonderlijk van het lichaam door aard en anderen dat alle delen van de ziel door aardmateriaal zijn. De filosofen waren het ermee eens dat, terwijl de ziel in het lichaam is, zijn nietrationeel deel het lichaam moet leiden, zijn praktische moet intellect worldly zaken, met inbegrip van die van het lichaam beheren, en zijn theoretische intellect moet de eeuwige aspecten van het heelal kennen. Zij dachten dat het uiteindelijke eind of het geluk van de ziel van zijn capaciteit afhangen om te scheiden van de eisen van het lichaam en zich bij het begrijpen van de eeuwige aspecten van het heelal te concentreren. Iedereen geloofde dat de nietrationele ziel tot stand komt en onvermijdelijk omkomt. Sommigen, als al-Farabi, geloofden dat de rationele ziel of niet kan kan eternally overleven; anderen, als Ibn Sina, geloofden dat het geen begin en geen eind heeft; nog geloofden anderen, zoals Ibn Rushd, dat de ziel met al zijn individuele delen komt in bestaan en uiteindelijk vernietigd.

1 Het bestaan van ziel

2 De aard van ziel

3 Rationele ziel

4 De uiteindelijke doelstelling van ziel

5 De eeuwigheid van de ziel

Verwijzingen beëindigt verdere lezing



1 Het bestaan van de ziel

Alle Moslimfilosofen betrof zich met het onderwerp van de ziel. De meest gedetailleerde en meeste belangrijke werkzaamheden over dit onderwerp zijn die van al-Kindi, al-Farabi, Ibn Sina en Ibn Rushd. De moslim filosofen erkenden dat de eerste kwestie, die de menselijke mening met betrekking tot de ziel confronteert zijn bestaan is. Dat is waarom, helemaal bij het begin van zijn onderzoek over de ziel in al-Shifa' (Helend), Ibn Sina (§6) beweert dat wij het bestaan van de ziel van het feit concluderen dat wij organismen waarnemen die bepaalde handelingen met één of andere graad van zullen uitvoeren. Deze handelingen worden toegelicht in het nemen van zich voeding, het groeien, het reproduceren, het bewegen en het waarnemen. Aangezien deze handelingen niet tot de aard van organismen behoren, voor deze aard is verstoken van zal, moeten zij tot een principe behoren dat zij buiten organismen hebben gehad. Dit principe is wat ziel `' wordt genoemd.

Dit argument is bedoeld om het bestaan van de dierlijke ziel te bewijzen, die de installatieziel omvat. De ziel is de bron van handelingen die door de wil worden uitgevoerd, niet aangezien het `een substantie' is (een onafhankelijke entiteit), maar aangezien het `het principe van dergelijke handelingen' is. De rationele ziel, enerzijds, vergt geen blik buiten zich om zijn bestaan te concluderen. Het is zich bewust van zijn bestaan met urgentie, namelijk zonder enige instrumenten. Het voorbeeld van Sina van Ibn van de opgeschorte man is bedoeld om te bewijzen dat de rationele ziel van zich behalve om het even welk lichaam zich bewust is. Zijn argument kookt neer aan de mening dat, zelfs als de volwassen rationele ziel niet zich bewust van materieel om het even wat is, niet zelfs zijn lichaam, het van zijn eigen bestaan bewust blijft.



2 De aard van de ziel

terwijl Islam het op Moslimfilosofen zittend maakte om uitgebreid te bezetten met de studie van de ziel en bepaalde verklaringen af te leggen die in sommige gevallen met Islamitische geloven verenigbaar lijken, Griekse filosofie had het bovenleer het vormen van de echte overtuigingen van Moslimfilosofen met betrekking tot de aard van de ziel indienen. Tenzij anders gespecificeerd, verwijzing naar: hij ziel is hier beperkt tot de aardse ziel aan de uitsluiting van hemel, aangezien de Moslimfilosofen zich hoofdzakelijk met de eerstgenoemden betroffen. It must be pointed out at the outset that ‘soul’. (nafs) was used in more than one sense in Islamic philosophy; the term was used to refer to the plant or vegetative part of a living being, the animal or sensitive part, the rational part and finally the totality of all three parts. The first two are the non-rational soul and the totality is the human soul. To add to the confusion, ‘human soul’ is used only in the sense of this fourth type of soul. The plant, animal and; rational souls are also called powers or parts of the; soul. Only from the context can one understand, whether a Muslim philosopher was using ‘soul’ in the broad sense to mean the human soul (the totality of the parts of the soul), or in the narrow sense to mean a specific part of the human soul.

Inasmuch as it has a certain relation to a body, the soul is a form for that body, that is, the perfection of that body. It is a form because a natural body is composed of matter and form, which in the case of animals are body and soul. Since it has been shown that the soul is the source of will and therefore is not matter, it remains a form. Perfection is of two types, primary and secondary. A primary perfection is what makes a thing actually a species, as shape does for the sword, or a genus as sensation and-movement do for animals. A secondary perfection is an act necessitated by the nature of the species or genus, such as cutting for the sword and touching for animal. The soul is a primary perfection of a natural body capable of performing the secondary perfections necessitated by this primary perfection. Together with its body, the soul constitutes a material substance. This substance can be the subject of plant, animal or human life.

The soul is a perfection inasmuch as it makes a natural body into a plant, an animal or a rational being. However, to define the soul as a perfection does not give us a clue as to what the soul is in itself, but only inasmuch as it has a relation to the body. The body is, therefore, an essential element in the definition of the soul. Without relating to a body, the thing we call ‘soul’ is not a soul and does not require the body as an essential part of its definition. Note, however, that in spite of this assertion, perhaps for the lack of any better term, Muslim philosophers use ‘soul’ also to refer to the rational soul after it separates from the body and reaches a complete state of purity from matter.

In its first or lowest stages of relating to the body, the soul is the plant soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can take nourishment, grow and reproduce. The plant soul is the power human beings and other animals share with plants. If the body with a soul is an animal, the soul develops into the animal soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body has sensation and movement through will. While this soul includes the plant soul, it has also a sensitive power and a locomotive one. The sensitive power has both external and internal senses. The external senses are, in priority of existence, touch, taste, smell, hearing and sight. The first three are said to be necessary for survival and the last two for well being. In Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), IBN RUSHD (§3) asserts that the five external senses may be in potentiality, as in infancy and sleep, or in actuality, as in daily seeing or hearing. He also argues that there cannot be any external sense other than these five because there would be no function for it, since there is no external sensation other than the objects of the five senses mentioned above. Most Muslim philosophers men­tion three types of internal senses: common sense, imagination and memory. IBN SINA (§3) enumerates five internal senses: common sense, representational power, imagination, estimative power and memory. On the whole, the philosophers agree on the function of the common sense, imagination and memory; the function that Ibn Sina limits to the representational and estimative powers, other Muslim philosophers allocate to the imagination.

The common sense is an internal power in which all the objects of the external senses are collected. Contrary to the external senses, which can grasp only one type of sensation, as sight grasps light and hearing grasps sound, the common sense can grasp all external sensations, such as that honey is of such and such a colour, texture and smell. The representational power preserves the sensations of the common sense even after sensible things disappear. The imagination selects at will to combine some of the objects of the representational power with each other and to separate the rest. It makes its judgment about external things, but in the absence of these things. That is why it functions best when the external senses, which represent external things, are not at work, as in sleep. Ibn Rushd points out that animals such as worms and flies that do not act except in the presence of sensible things are devoid of imagination. The imagination is called such inasmuch as it is an animal instrument; it is called cognitive inasmuch as it is a rational instrument. The estimative power grasps non-sensible notions of sensible things, such as the sheep’s notion that the wolf is to be avoided. This notion is about a sensible thing but is not grasped through the external senses, as is the colour or shape of a wolf. Memory preserves the notions of the estimative power. The imagination acts on the objects of memory in the same way it acts on those of the representational powers. Like the objects of the external senses, those of the internal senses are particular and material. The difference is that they can be experienced in the absence of external things and are to some degree abstracted from matter.

The locomotive power branches into that which causes movement and that which actually moves. The former, the desiderative power, subdivides into the appetitive and the irascible. The appetitive causes movement toward what is imagined to be necessary or beneficial in the pursuit of pleasure. The irascible causes avoidance of what is imagined to be harmful or an impediment in the pursuit of dominance. The power that actually moves uses the nerves to relax the muscles at the demands of the appetitive power or tighten them at the demands of the irascible one.



3 The rational soul

The rational soul, which is defined as a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can act by rational choice and grasp the universals, is divided into the practical and the theoretical intellects. The practical intellect seeks knowledge in order to act in accordance with the good in its individual body, its family and its state. It must, therefore, know the principles for properly managing the body, the family and the state, that is, ethics, home management and politics. The practical intellect is the rational soul turning its face down­ward. The function of the theoretical intellect is to know just for the sake of having the universals (the realities or natures of things). Some of these natures, such as God and the intellect, cannot attach to movement; knowledge of them is metaphysics. Other natures, such as unity, can attach to movement but do not; knowledge of them is mathematics. Still other natures, such as humanity and squareness, can attach to movement either in reality and thought, such as humanity, or in reality but not in thought, such as squareness. Knowledge of these is physics.

The theoretical intellect is the rational soul with its face upward. The practical intellect looks up to the theoretical one and moves its body accordingly. In this, the practical intellect is similar to :the celestial soul that looks up to the intellect of its sphere and moves its sphere accordingly. Thus, like .the celestial soul, the practical intellect is the link between intellect as such and matter.

On the whole, Muslim philosophers followed al-Kindi’s division of the theoretical intellect into the material intellect (al-‘aql al-hayulant), the habitual intellect (al-‘agl bil-malaka), the actual intellect (al-‘aql bi’!-fi’b and the acquired intellect’ (al-‘aql al-mustafad). The material intellect is a blank slate with the potentiality for grasping the intelligible forms or universals. Ibn Sina points out that it is referred to as material, not because it is actually material but because it resembles matter in accepting the form. The habitual intellect grasps the universals, as one acquires the skill to write; in other words, this intellect has the ability to use the universals but does not always do so. The actual intellect grasps the universals in actuality and is always ready to use them. While Muslim philosophers differed slightly with regard to their accounts of the acquired intellect, their general view is that it is the highest human state, the point of contact with the divine, the agent intellect (the intelligence of the moon, the lowest celestial intellect), which makes it possible for the theoretical intellect to acquire the universals in the purest form (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY §4).



4 The ultimate objective of the soul

AL-FARABI asserts that even though the soul is of different parts, it is a unity with all its parts working for one final end, happiness. While the plant soul, for example, serves a specific function, it also serves the powers that are higher than it in rank, the animal powers. Without nourishment, growth and reproduc­tion, the animal powers cannot perform their necessary functions. Similarly, while the function of the animal powers is to have sensation and movement, by performing this function they also promote the functions of the powers above them, the rational ones. The operations of the animal powers, especially those of the senses, are particularly important for the attainment of the final end. The external senses strip the forms from material objects and convey them to the internal senses. The more they are transferred internally, the less mixed with matter do they become. Since the innermost sense they reach is the imagina­tion, they are there in their purest material existence (see IMAGINATION).

The role of the objects of the imagination is not always clearly defined in Islamic philosophy. Occa­sionally it is said by somebody like Ibn Sina to be one of preparation for the theoretical intellect to receive the universals from the agent intellect. At other times Ibn Sina, like other Aristotelians such as Ibn Rushd, takes these objects to be the ingredients out of which the universals are made after the last process of purification (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY). It seems, however, that in either case the light of the agent intellect is needed to complete the process. In the former case, this light gives the intelligible forms to the theoretical intellect when this intellect is prepared. In the latter case, it sheds itself on the objects of the imagination, which are then reflected on the theoretical intellect without their matter. Since the theoretical intellect is in its first stages in potentiality, it cannot act on the objects of the imagination directly; hence the need for the agent intellect, which is pure actuality. The role of the practical intellect in all this is to put order into the body. This sets free the theoretical intellect from preoccupation with the body and helps the powers whose function is necessary for theoretical knowledge to function unhampered.

Muslim philosophers adhered to the view that the acquired intellect is one with its objects, for they thought the knower and the known are one, as did their Greek predecessors. This means that the highest human state is one in which unity with the universals or the eternal aspects of the universe is reached. This state is described as happiness because in it eternity, an aspect of the objects of the acquired intellect, is attained.



5 Eternity of the soul

When Muslim philosophers assert that the soul comes into existence simultaneously with the coming into existence of the body, some, such as Ibn Sina (§6), who believe that the rational soul is in essence non­material, are thinking only of the non-rational soul. Others, such as Ibn Rushd (§3), who believe that the rational soul is originally not separate from matter, contend that the whole human soul comes into existence. The latter believe that since the rational soul grasps the universals from particular sensibles, and since such sensibles are material and have a temporal beginning, this soul must also be material and must have a temporal beginning. Those who attribute non-materiality to the essence of the rational soul, such as AL-KINDI and Ibn Sina, assert that this soul pre-exists the body. While all of them agree that the non-rational soul is destroyed after the destruc­tion of the body, they differ with regard to the end of the rational soul.

Al-Kindi and Ibn Sina, for example, strongly adhere to the view that all rational souls are indestructible because by nature they are simple. AL-FARABI reminds us that the reason for eternal existence is the rational soul’s knowledge of the eternal aspects of the universe. From this he draws the conclusion, as did ALEXANDER OF APHRODISIAS before him, that only those rational souls that have this knowledge at their separation from the body are indestructible. Other rational souls are eventually destroyed. Ibn Sina finds in the grasping of the universals the grounds for happiness, not the eternity of the soul. Ibn Rushd seems to hold that only the acquired intellect can be indestructible; but the acquired intellect, he argues (as does his teacher IBN BAJJA), is divine and numerically one in all. Ibn Rushd was attacked for this view because it denies eternal existence of individual souls (see AVERROISM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE).

See also: ARISTOTELIANISM IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; ETHICS IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; IBN RUSHD §3; IBN SINA §6; MYSTICAL PHILOSOPHY IN ISLAM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE



References end further reading

al-Farabi (c.870-950) al-Madina al fadila (The Virtuous City), trans. R. Walter, Al-Farabi on the Perfect State.’ Abu Nasr al-Farabi’s Mabadi’ Ara’Ah al-Madina al-Fadila, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. (English and Arabic of the most comprehensive and best known philosophical work of al-Farabi.)

Ibn Rushd (1180) Tahafut al-tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence), trans. S. Van Den Bergh, London: Luzac, 1954. (A response to a number of issues raised by al-Ghazali against philosophers. One of the three most important of these issues is that of the soul and its fate.)

- (c.1174) Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Maktabat an-Nahda, 1950. (Includes also four other essays: Ibn Baja’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction), Ishaq Ibn Hunayn’s Kitab ft an-nafs (Book on the Soul), Ibn Rushd’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction) and al-Kindi’s Risalat al-‘aql (Essay on Intellect).)

Ibn Sina (980-1037) an-Nafs (The Soul), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s de Anima, London: Oxford University Press, 1959. (The most important and detailed philosophical treatise on the soul in Islamic philosophy, the sixth part of the Physics of al-Shifa’. An Arabic edition of the text is included.)

(980-1037) Ahwal an-nafs (The States of the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1952. (Includes Risala fi an-nafs wa-baqa’ha wa-ma’adiha (Essay on the Soul, Its Permanence and Its Second Life), Mabhath ‘an al-qiwa an-nafsaniyya (Inquiry about Psychic Powers), Risala fi ma’rifat an-nafs an-natiga (Essay on Knowing the Rational Soul) and Risala fi al-kalam ‘ala an-nafs an-natiqa (Essay on an Inquiry Concerning the Rational Soul).)

- (980-1037) an-Najat (Deliverance), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s Psychology, London: Oxford University Press, 1952. (The psychology of an-Najat is an abridgement by Ibn Sina of his encyclopedic work al-Shifa’ (Healing).)

- (980-1037) Rasa’d ash-shaykh ar-ra’is f asrar al-hikma al-mashriqiyya (Essays of the Master of the Head on the Secrets of Oriental Wisdom), ed. M. Mehren, Traites mystiques d’Avicenna, Leiden: Brill, 1889-99. (Ibn Sina’s ‘oriental philosophy’.)

Inati, S.C. (1996) A Study of Ibn Sina’s Mysticism, London: Kegan Paul International. (Includes a detailed analysis of Ibn Sina’s notion of the soul and a translation of the fourth part of al-Isharat wa­‘1-tanbihat (Remarks and Admonitions).)

al-Kindi (before 873) Rasa’il al-Kindi al falsafiyya (Al-Kindi’s Philosophical Treatises), ed. M. Abu Rida, Cairo: Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi, 1953. (Includes al-Kindi’s most relevant works on the subject of the soul, al-Qawl fi an-nafs (Discourse on the Soul), Fi an-nafs (On the Soul) and Fi mahiyyat an-nawm war-ru’ya (On the Essence of Sleep and Internal Vision).)



SHAMS C. INATI


Collectede By
Shobuz Bhai

هناك ما من هذا شيء أنّ يكذب حقيقة في الخارج من أنت. يكذب الحقيقة نهائيّة ضمن أنت.
Automatically translated into Arabic thanks to WorldLingo
[سورا] إنسانيّة

# 76 (الإنسان):

1. "ليس هو حقيقة أنّ كان هناك وقت عندما الكائن إنسانيّة [ب] لاشيء أن يكون ذكرت? "
2. "خلق نحن الإنسان من خليط سائلة, من اثنان واجدات, [إين وردر تو] اختبرته. لذلك, جعله نحن مستمعة و[سر]. "
3. "أبدىه نحن الاثنان ممرات, بعد ذلك هو إمّا مستحقّ إعجاب, أو [أونبّرستيف]. "


ماذا كثير الناس يكونون غير واع من, البنية جدّا من هم خاصّة أنفاس.

ينمو أكثر من نا [أوب تو] يفكّر أنّ "نحن" فقط [مد-وب] من ال "روح" أيّ, عندما هو يموت, يعاود [بك تو] إلهة.

رغم أنّ هذا معلومة يكون "جزئيّا" يصحّ, هناك أيضا كثير أكثر إلى المستحضرات التجميل من الكائن إنسانيّة أيّ إلهة يفسّر إلى نا من خلال [قورن].

هو الشيطانة نظامة أن يربك وأضعفت نا لذلك يعرف نحن لا حتّى كيف أن يتنازعه!. واحدة قاعدة رئيسيّة من أيّ نزاع أنّ يعرف أنت "عدوتك". غير أنّ قبل يتمّ أنّ, أنت ينبغي أولى "عرفتبنفسي"!.



[رووه]=روح?

هذا ال [ميسكنسبأيشن] وحيدة كبيرة أنّ يعمّرون يجعل أيّ ساعد شوّهت الإصدار من "الذي نحن نكون".

في شبه جزيرة عربيّة, عندما يموت أحد ما, الالناس يقولون: "تركتنا صلحت على [رووه] ه!".

أيضا, عندما يتكلّم هم حول أحد ما يصبغ, الرأي: "قد تركه [رووه] ه".

في مدارس, يعلم هم جدياتنا أنّ ال "روح" ال "[رووه]" وأنّ ماذا سيموت وكنت سيقضي وسيعاقب أو سيكافئ…

مهما, يغيّر القصة عندما نحن نّظر في ماذا إلهة يضطرّ قلت:

"يأخذ إلهة ال "[نفس]" عندما موت يأتي, وأيضا [أت ث تيم وف] نوم…" (39: 42)

"لا "[نفس]" [ديس] ماعدا ب [غد] إذن, في يقدر وقت…" (3: يستلم 145)

"كلّ "[نفس]" يذوق موت, بعد ذلك أنت [ركمبنس] ك على اليوم [رسورّكأيشن]…" (3: 185)

"… لن يقتل أنت سوفت ال "[نفس]" أنّ إلهة قد جعل مقدّسة, ماعدا خلال عدل…" (6: 151)

"… هو قال: لوردي, قد ظلم أنا ي '[نفس] "… "(27: 16)

جيّدا, يحصل أنت الصورة!.

إلهة يقولنا أنّ نا "دعات روح" "[نفس]", وأنّ هذا "[نفس]" ماذا يكون أخذت في موت وماذا يكون قضيت على [ج-دي] (بعد ذلك يكافئ أو يعاقب). ال "[نفس]" أنت, هو ك كاملة يكون, هو أردوازك, أيّ يكون حمّلت أو أنرت بأعمالك…

هكذا, إن ال "روح" يكون ال "[نفس]", بعد ذلك ماذا يكون [رووه]?



[رووه]=كحول.

"بينما عائقة فصله من هم, أرسل نحن إلى ه نا "[رووه]". هو ذهب إلى ه [إين ث فورم وف] كائن إنسانيّة. "(19: 17)

"يسأل هم أنت حول ال "[رووه]". رأي: 'ال "يأتي [رووه]" من لوردي. ولم يعط أنت كان معرفة, ماعدا بعض. "([قورن] 17:85)

يصبح هو ظاهرة إلى القارئة أنّ ال "[رووه]" من إلهة وهو التراكم من "معرفة" أنّ سيساعد الكائن إنسانيّة في حياته… هو يكون على أحسن وجه وصفت بما أنّ "كحول".

أنت ترى, يتلقّى حيوانات أيضا "[نفس]" فقط مثل نحن نتمّ (هو [ليف-فورس] هم), مع ذلك, أنت لا ترى قردة يبني سفينة فضائيّة ولا سلاحف يعمل على حاسوبات!.

ال "[رووه]" الهبة أنّ إلهة أعطى إلى نوعنا أن يسمح نا الميزة من "معرفة".

"ما إن أنا كاملة ه (الإنسان), وضرب داخل ه من ي "[رووه]", أنت سوفت سيسقط ساجدة قبل ه." (15: تذكّرت 29)

كلّ حيوانات يستطيع اتّصلت مع واحدة آخر (العصافير يتكلّم إلى سليمان?). مهما, هو فقط رجل أنّ يتلقّى "معرفة".

ال "[رووه]" إلهة هبة إلى نا, وهو فقط جيّدة. المعلومة أنّ ال "يزوّد [رووه]" كلّ من نا أن يكون استعملت لفائدتنا, غير أنّ نحن يتلقّى ال "إختبار" أن يستعمل هو لشر (مثل [نوكلر فيسّيون] يكون يستعمل أن يجعل قنبلة).

بعض أخبار تعيسة حول ال "[رووه]": هو أبدا سيقارب أنت وسينقذ اليوم. مثلا, يكافح أنت أن يفهم شيء. إن أنت لا تسأل إلهة لمساعدة, لن يذهب هو; "هاي, هنا الجوابة!" رفض, أنت يضطرّ قاربت هو. أيضا, سيكون هو دائما حرفيّة. أنت ستضطرّ كنت مواصفة من ماذا أنت يكون تسأل. بطاقة, أنت لا يضطرّ قلت هذا خارجا مرتفعة. أنت يستطيع فقط فكّرت من هو - لأنّ كثير وقت, أناس يتلقّون يستعصي وقت عبّر عن ماذا تماما هم يريدون أن يسأل. مع الكحول الإلهة, أنت لا يضطرّ أقلقت حول هذا - [أس لونغ س] يحصل أنت النية من يسأل, الكحول سيعرف السؤال… مثل كثير بما أنّ أنت أردت أن يسأل وأنّ بانفراد (رغم أنّ هو يعرف [ألّ ث] أسئلة أنت تعرف - هو لا يذهب أن يجيب أيّ شيء أنت لم تسأل).



لذلك إن نحن يستطيع لخّصت ماذا نحن نتلقّى [أوبتو] هذا نقطة.

الإنسان [مد-وب] كائن [س فر] من:

1. ال "روح" - [نفس] (ال أنت, الشخص حقيقيّة, ماذا يجعل إختبار وماذا كنت سيقضي);

2. ال "كحول" - [رووه] (هذا هبة من إلهة, هو ليس خاصّتي, أنت لا يمتلك هو, كلّ الناس يتلقّى منفذة إلى هو - مثل [قورن]. هو غرض أن يساعد زوّدت جوابات ومعرفة أن يساعد روحك جعلت ال يصحّ قرارات).




[ستن] - [شيتن]

ال [3رد] ومزيج قاتلة أكثر في المعادلة الرجل "[ستن]".

"قال هو ([ستن]), "بما أنّ أنت قد شرّفته على ي, إن أنت تأجيل ي حتّى اليوم [رسورّكأيشن], أنا ستملك كلّه سلائل, ماعدا بضعة." (17: 62)

الحقيقة تعيسة من حيواتنا أنّ تحدّى [ستن] الحق من أسلافنا إلى شيوخ البلدة منفذة إلى ال '[رووه] ". [ستن] ادّعى أنّ كان هو أكثر ينعت أن يستعمل إلهة هبة وأنّ هو أتمّ شغل جيّدة مع هو:

قال هو (إلهة), "ماذا منع أنت من حصة عندما أنا أمرت أنت?" هو قال, "أنا جيّدة من هو; أنت خلقتني من نار, وخلقه من طين. "(7: 12)

هذا يستنطق من رجل قدرة يقاد إلى مجادلة في السماوات و" [دووبتس]" لذلك يثار:

[سورا] 38 ([س'د]):

67 . رأي, "هنا أخبار مروّعة.
68. "أنّ أنت تماما كثير النسيان إلى.
69. "تلقّى أنا ما من معرفة سابقا, حول الحزازة في السماوات عال.
70. "ألهمت أنا أنّ مهمتي وحيد يكون أن يسلّم الإنذارات إلى أنت. "
71. لوردك يقال إلى الملاكات: 'يخلق أنا كائن إنسانيّة من طين.
72. "ما إن أنا أصمده, ويفجّر داخل ه من كحولي, سيساعده أنت سوفت. "
73. ساعد الملاكات, [ألّ وف ي],
74. ماعدا [ستن]; هو رفض, وكان أيضا يتفخّر, [أونبّرستيف].
75. هو قال, "[و] [ستن], ماذا منع أنت من يساعد ماذا أنا خلقت من قبل مع أياديي? تكون أنت أيضا يتفخّر? يتلقّى أنت تتمرّد? "
76. هو قال, "أنا جيّدة من هو; أنت خلقتني من نار, وخلقه من طين. "
77. هو قال, "لذلك, أنت ينبغي كنت نفيت, أنت كنت سيبعد.
78. "قد تكبّد أنت إدانتي حتّى اليوم الحكم. "
79. هو قال, "لوردي, تأجيل ي حتّى اليوم [رسورّكأيشن]. "
80. هو قال, "أنت [رسبيتد].
81. "حتّى ال يعيّن يوم. "
82. هو قال, "يقسم أنا بعظمتك, أنّ أنا سأرسلهم جميعا ضالّة.
83. "ماعدا عابداتك الذي يكون كرّست إطلاقا إلى أنت فحسب. "

يقول البيت شعر آنفة القصة جدّا بوضوح.

[ستن] رجا أنّ يعطي هو فرصة أن "يبرهن" أنّ رجل غيرصالح للمهمة…

وسمح إلهة لذلك [ستن] (الذي يتلقّى نيات شرّيرة) أن يستهوينا (غير أنّ لا يتلقّى منفذة إلى نا):

"أنت يمكن استهويتهم مع صوتك, ويجنّد كلّك قوات وكلّك رجال ضدّ هم, وسهم في هم مال وأطفال, ويعدهم. أيّ شيء الشيطانة وعود [نو مور] من وهم. "([قورن] 17:64)

"سيأتي أنا إلى هم من قبل أن هم, ومن خلفيّة هم, ومن حقهم, ومن يسارهم, وأنت سيجدون أنّ أكثر من هم [أونبّرستيف]." (7: تلقّى 17)

القصة يتوقّف هناك, نحن بعد كان دقيقة. مشكلة, [ستن] يدار أن يخدع أسلافنا داخل يعطيه منفذة إلى أرواحنا!:

"همس الشيطانة إلى هم, [إين وردر تو] [غين كّسّ] إلى هم. هو قال, "لوردك لم يمنع أنت من هذا شجرة, ماعدا أن يمنع أنت من يصبح ملاكات, ومن يبلغ وجود دائمة." (7: 20)

سمح يأكل من ال "يمنع" شجرة [ستن] أن يتلقّى منفذة ثابتة إلى نا "[نفس]".

المزيج نحن الآن:

1. ال "روح" - [نفس];

2. ال "كحول" - [رووه];

3. [ستن] - [شيتن] (هذا الشيطانة يتلقّى منفذة إلى أرواحنا ويكون يمكن أن يأثرهم).

[ستن] البهتان نهائيّة ضمن أنت. لا يفتّش إن هناك يكون في أيّ وقت بهتان, هو… في الخارج من أنت - هو يكذب ضمن أنت.

[سم موش] أخبار سيّئة: بخلاف [رووه], يقارب [ستن] أنت. إن أنت تتلقّى [دليمّا], سيعطي هو جوابتك. ما إذا الجوابة يصحّ ليس يتساوى سؤال, لأنّ نحن نعرف هو ليس. أحيانا, قبل أن يتلقّى أنت حتّى [دليمّا], هو سيعطي أنت حالة فوضى… لأنّ هو سيعطي أنت كثيرا بهتان في حياتك أنّ أنت ستنهي فوق إحساس يربك, يخفّض, إحساس يكره بإلهة, عن تخلّى, [إتك] [إتك] [إتك] - [ألّ ث] أشياء هو يتنامى [إين.].

لا يقنط.

لأنّ [ستن] يتواجد ضمن أنت, ليس هناك كثير أنت يستطيع أتمّت حول يحصل يخلّص من ه لالخير. مهما, أنت يستطيع حصلت يخلّص من [إفري تيم] يقارب هو - و [أس لونغ س] أنت تحافظ في عقل أنت سوفت لا يحصل تعبة من يرفسه داخل حالة سكون, أنت دائما الرابحة - لأنّ هو يغزو عقلك. ب يبحث مأوى في إلهة, يعطي أنت [رووه] سلطة أن يحافظه يسكت.

"عندما يعلم أنت [قورن], أنت سوفت ستبحث مأوى في إلهة من [ستن] ال يرفض. هو يتلقّى ما من قوة على أنّ الذي يصدق ويثق في لوردهم. حدّدت قوته إلى أنّ الذي يختاره كسيدهم, أنّ الذي يختاره كإلهتهم. "(16: 98-100)

كيف يستطيع أنت كنت آمنة مع ه بهتان معلومة?. [إفري تيم] يقدر هو حل, أنت لا تأخذ هو ل [فس فلو] - أنت تذهب [أند] يسأل [رووه] ك. إن أنت تحصل حل دون يسأل ل هو - هناك اثنان طرق أنت [ميغت'ف] يحصل أنّ;

1. ال "أعطى [نفس]" هو إلى أنت (ك خاصّة [سوبكنسكيووس] جعل الاقتراح);

2. هو أتى من [ستن]!.


أنت أبدا تحصل [أونسكد] حلول من الكحول. [أبرهم]… من قد اختار إلهة… كان لم يقارب ب [غد] - هو قارب إلهة. النقطة; إلهة دائما لن يتوقّف حالة حبّ أنت… غير أنّ هو أنت من يدمّر حياتك… إن أنت لا تسأل لمساعدته. عن تخلّى إلهة أبدا أحد ما كلّيّا… وأبدا يرشد أحد ما كلّيّا - إن هو أتمّ, هو أراد [أبرهم], محمّد, [إتك] - رسل الّذي هو قد اختار (الذي نحن نرى يجعل أغلاط إنسانيّة). وإرشاد, بخلاف التفهم مسلمة من هو… عملية من كلّ حالة… [إينستد وف] [ألّ ت ونس] شيء.



[فينل نوت]:

الإسلام جيّدة ضمن أنت - الكحول الإلهة ([رووه'و] الله) ضمن أنت. هناك ما من هذا شيء أنّ يكذب حقيقة في الخارج من أنت. يكذب الحقيقة نهائيّة ضمن أنت. استفدت رجاء, أنّ بركة. هو سيكون سلاحك نهائيّة ضدّ بهتان…


ب [فري-ميندس] (بريد إلكترونيّ: [فريفري-ميندس.ورغ])

يحتلّ روح في فلسفة



[إيسلميك] النقاشة من الروح إنسانيّة, وجوده, طبيعة, هدف نهائيّة وأبديّ, موقعة مهمّة جدّا في فلسفة [إيسلميك] ويشكّل بؤرته رئيسيّة. ل ال [موش برت] مسلمة وافق فيلسوفات, بما أنّ أتمّوا أسلافهم يونانيّة, أنّ الروح يتألّف [نون-رأيشنل] وأجزاء منطقيّة. الجزء [نون-رأيشنل] هم قسموا داخل المعمل وحيوان أرواح, الجزء منطقيّة داخل العمليّة والعقول نظريّة. كلّ صدر أنّ اقترنت الجزء [نون-رأيشنل] أساسا إلى الجسم, غير أنّ بعض اعتبر الجزء منطقيّة بما أنّ [سبرت فروم] الجسم بطبيعة وأخرى أنّ [ألّ ث] أجزاء من الروح بطبيعة مادة. وافق الفيلسوفات أنّ, بينما الروح يكون في الجسم, جزءه [نون-رأيشنل] أن يدير الجسم, عقله عمليّة أن يدير شؤون دنيويّة, بما في ذلك أنّ من الجسم, وعقله نظريّة أن يعرف المظاهر دائمة من الكوك. هم فكّروا أنّ النهائيّة يعتمد نهاية أو سعادة من الروح على قدرته أن يفصلبنفسي من الطلبات من الجسم وأن ركّز على على يمسك المظاهر دائمة من الكوك. كلّ صدق أنّ [كم ينتو] الروح [نون-رأيشنل] يكون وحتما يهلك. صدق بعض, مثل [أل-فربي], أنّ الروح منطقيّة يمكن أو يمكن لا يبقى أبديّا; صدق أخرى, مثل ابن [سنا], أنّ هو يتلقّى ما من بداية وما من نهاية; بعد صدق أخرى, مثل ابن [روشد], أنّ الروح مع كلّه أجزاء فرديّة [كم ينتو] وجود وأخيرا دمّرت.

1 الوجود من الروح

2 الطبيعة من الروح

3 الروح

منطقيّة 4 الهدف نهائيّة من الروح

5 يزوّد أبديّ من الروح

نهاية قراءة



بعيد 1 تعلّقبنفسي الوجود من الروح

كلّ فلاسفة مسلمة مع الموضوع من الروح. ال أكثر مفصّلة وأعمال مهمّة أكثر على هذا موضوع أنّ من [أل-كيندي], [أل-فربي], ابن [سنا] وابن [روشد]. ميّز فيلسوفات مسلمة أنّ الإصدار أولى, أنّ يجابه العقل إنسانيّة [ويث رغرد تو] الروح وجوده. أنّ لما, في ال جدّا يبدأ من تحقيقه حول الروح في [أل-شيفا]' (يشفي), ابن [سنا] (§6) يؤكّد أنّ يستنتج نحن الوجود من الروح من الحقيقة أنّ نحن نلاحظ أجسام أنّ ينجز أعمال مؤكّدة مع بعض درجة الإرادة. مثّلت هذا أعمال في يأخذ [نووريشمنت], ينمو, ينسخ, يتحرّك ويلاحظ. بما أنّ هذا أعمال لا ينتسبون إلى الطبيعة الأجسام, لأنّ هذا طبيعة يكون خلو من إرادة, هم ينبغي انتسبت إلى مبدأ هم يتلقّون غير أجسام. هذا مبدأ ماذا يكون دعات `روح'.

نويت هذا حجة أن يبرهن الوجود من الروح حيوانيّة, أيّ يتضمّن المعمل روح. الروح المصدر الأعمال ينجز ب [ث ويلّ], لا [إينسموش س] هو يكون `[ا] مادة' (ذاتية مستقلّة), غير أنّ [إينسموش س] هو يكون `يتصرّف المبدأ من مثل هذا'. يحتاج الروح منطقيّة, [أن ث ون هند], لا ينظر خارج بنفسي أن يستنتج وجوده. هو مدركة من وجوده مع فوريّة, [ثت يس,] دون أيّ أجهزة. ابن [سنا] نويت مثال من ال يعلق رجل أن يبرهن أنّ الروح منطقيّة مدركة من بنفسي [أبرت فروم] أيّ جسم. ه حجة غليان إلى أسفل إلى المنظرة أنّ, [إفن يف] البالغ روح منطقيّة ليس مدركة من أيّ شيء مادّيّة, لا ساويت جسمه, هو يبقى مدركة من ه خاصّة وجود.



2 تلقّى الطبيعة من الروح

بينما إسلام جعل هو مسؤول كبير على فيلسوفات مسلمة أن يحتلّبنفسي بشكل واسع مع الدراسة من الروح وأن يجعل بيانات مؤكّدة أنّ أحيانا يظهر متوافقة مع إعتقاد [إيسلميك], فلسفة يونانيّة السيطرة في يشكّل القناعة حقيقيّة من فيلسوفات مسلمة [ويث رغرد تو] الطبيعة من الروح. [أونلسّسبسفيدوثرويس], مرجع إلى: حدّدت هو روح هنا إلى الروح أرضيّة إلى الاستثناء من السماويّة واحدة, بما أنّ فيلسوفات مسلمة تعلّقوابنفسي أوّلا مع السابقة. It must be pointed out at the outset that ‘soul’. (nafs) was used in more than one sense in Islamic philosophy; the term was used to refer to the plant or vegetative part of a living being, the animal or sensitive part, the rational part and finally the totality of all three parts. The first two are the non-rational soul and the totality is the human soul. To add to the confusion, ‘human soul’ is used only in the sense of this fourth type of soul. The plant, animal and; rational souls are also called powers or parts of the; soul. Only from the context can one understand, whether a Muslim philosopher was using ‘soul’ in the broad sense to mean the human soul (the totality of the parts of the soul), or in the narrow sense to mean a specific part of the human soul.

Inasmuch as it has a certain relation to a body, the soul is a form for that body, that is, the perfection of that body. It is a form because a natural body is composed of matter and form, which in the case of animals are body and soul. Since it has been shown that the soul is the source of will and therefore is not matter, it remains a form. Perfection is of two types, primary and secondary. A primary perfection is what makes a thing actually a species, as shape does for the sword, or a genus as sensation and-movement do for animals. A secondary perfection is an act necessitated by the nature of the species or genus, such as cutting for the sword and touching for animal. The soul is a primary perfection of a natural body capable of performing the secondary perfections necessitated by this primary perfection. Together with its body, the soul constitutes a material substance. This substance can be the subject of plant, animal or human life.

The soul is a perfection inasmuch as it makes a natural body into a plant, an animal or a rational being. However, to define the soul as a perfection does not give us a clue as to what the soul is in itself, but only inasmuch as it has a relation to the body. The body is, therefore, an essential element in the definition of the soul. Without relating to a body, the thing we call ‘soul’ is not a soul and does not require the body as an essential part of its definition. Note, however, that in spite of this assertion, perhaps for the lack of any better term, Muslim philosophers use ‘soul’ also to refer to the rational soul after it separates from the body and reaches a complete state of purity from matter.

In its first or lowest stages of relating to the body, the soul is the plant soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can take nourishment, grow and reproduce. The plant soul is the power human beings and other animals share with plants. If the body with a soul is an animal, the soul develops into the animal soul, which is a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body has sensation and movement through will. While this soul includes the plant soul, it has also a sensitive power and a locomotive one. The sensitive power has both external and internal senses. The external senses are, in priority of existence, touch, taste, smell, hearing and sight. The first three are said to be necessary for survival and the last two for well being. In Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), IBN RUSHD (§3) asserts that the five external senses may be in potentiality, as in infancy and sleep, or in actuality, as in daily seeing or hearing. He also argues that there cannot be any external sense other than these five because there would be no function for it, since there is no external sensation other than the objects of the five senses mentioned above. Most Muslim philosophers men­tion three types of internal senses: common sense, imagination and memory. IBN SINA (§3) enumerates five internal senses: common sense, representational power, imagination, estimative power and memory. On the whole, the philosophers agree on the function of the common sense, imagination and memory; the function that Ibn Sina limits to the representational and estimative powers, other Muslim philosophers allocate to the imagination.

The common sense is an internal power in which all the objects of the external senses are collected. Contrary to the external senses, which can grasp only one type of sensation, as sight grasps light and hearing grasps sound, the common sense can grasp all external sensations, such as that honey is of such and such a colour, texture and smell. The representational power preserves the sensations of the common sense even after sensible things disappear. The imagination selects at will to combine some of the objects of the representational power with each other and to separate the rest. It makes its judgment about external things, but in the absence of these things. That is why it functions best when the external senses, which represent external things, are not at work, as in sleep. Ibn Rushd points out that animals such as worms and flies that do not act except in the presence of sensible things are devoid of imagination. The imagination is called such inasmuch as it is an animal instrument; it is called cognitive inasmuch as it is a rational instrument. The estimative power grasps non-sensible notions of sensible things, such as the sheep’s notion that the wolf is to be avoided. This notion is about a sensible thing but is not grasped through the external senses, as is the colour or shape of a wolf. Memory preserves the notions of the estimative power. The imagination acts on the objects of memory in the same way it acts on those of the representational powers. Like the objects of the external senses, those of the internal senses are particular and material. The difference is that they can be experienced in the absence of external things and are to some degree abstracted from matter.

The locomotive power branches into that which causes movement and that which actually moves. The former, the desiderative power, subdivides into the appetitive and the irascible. The appetitive causes movement toward what is imagined to be necessary or beneficial in the pursuit of pleasure. The irascible causes avoidance of what is imagined to be harmful or an impediment in the pursuit of dominance. The power that actually moves uses the nerves to relax the muscles at the demands of the appetitive power or tighten them at the demands of the irascible one.



3 The rational soul

The rational soul, which is defined as a primary perfection for an organic natural body inasmuch as this body can act by rational choice and grasp the universals, is divided into the practical and the theoretical intellects. The practical intellect seeks knowledge in order to act in accordance with the good in its individual body, its family and its state. It must, therefore, know the principles for properly managing the body, the family and the state, that is, ethics, home management and politics. The practical intellect is the rational soul turning its face down­ward. The function of the theoretical intellect is to know just for the sake of having the universals (the realities or natures of things). Some of these natures, such as God and the intellect, cannot attach to movement; knowledge of them is metaphysics. Other natures, such as unity, can attach to movement but do not; knowledge of them is mathematics. Still other natures, such as humanity and squareness, can attach to movement either in reality and thought, such as humanity, or in reality but not in thought, such as squareness. Knowledge of these is physics.

The theoretical intellect is the rational soul with its face upward. The practical intellect looks up to the theoretical one and moves its body accordingly. In this, the practical intellect is similar to :the celestial soul that looks up to the intellect of its sphere and moves its sphere accordingly. Thus, like .the celestial soul, the practical intellect is the link between intellect as such and matter.

On the whole, Muslim philosophers followed al-Kindi’s division of the theoretical intellect into the material intellect (al-‘aql al-hayulant), the habitual intellect (al-‘agl bil-malaka), the actual intellect (al-‘aql bi’!-fi’b and the acquired intellect’ (al-‘aql al-mustafad). The material intellect is a blank slate with the potentiality for grasping the intelligible forms or universals. Ibn Sina points out that it is referred to as material, not because it is actually material but because it resembles matter in accepting the form. The habitual intellect grasps the universals, as one acquires the skill to write; in other words, this intellect has the ability to use the universals but does not always do so. The actual intellect grasps the universals in actuality and is always ready to use them. While Muslim philosophers differed slightly with regard to their accounts of the acquired intellect, their general view is that it is the highest human state, the point of contact with the divine, the agent intellect (the intelligence of the moon, the lowest celestial intellect), which makes it possible for the theoretical intellect to acquire the universals in the purest form (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY §4).



4 The ultimate objective of the soul

AL-FARABI asserts that even though the soul is of different parts, it is a unity with all its parts working for one final end, happiness. While the plant soul, for example, serves a specific function, it also serves the powers that are higher than it in rank, the animal powers. Without nourishment, growth and reproduc­tion, the animal powers cannot perform their necessary functions. Similarly, while the function of the animal powers is to have sensation and movement, by performing this function they also promote the functions of the powers above them, the rational ones. The operations of the animal powers, especially those of the senses, are particularly important for the attainment of the final end. The external senses strip the forms from material objects and convey them to the internal senses. The more they are transferred internally, the less mixed with matter do they become. Since the innermost sense they reach is the imagina­tion, they are there in their purest material existence (see IMAGINATION).

The role of the objects of the imagination is not always clearly defined in Islamic philosophy. Occa­sionally it is said by somebody like Ibn Sina to be one of preparation for the theoretical intellect to receive the universals from the agent intellect. At other times Ibn Sina, like other Aristotelians such as Ibn Rushd, takes these objects to be the ingredients out of which the universals are made after the last process of purification (see EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY). It seems, however, that in either case the light of the agent intellect is needed to complete the process. In the former case, this light gives the intelligible forms to the theoretical intellect when this intellect is prepared. In the latter case, it sheds itself on the objects of the imagination, which are then reflected on the theoretical intellect without their matter. Since the theoretical intellect is in its first stages in potentiality, it cannot act on the objects of the imagination directly; hence the need for the agent intellect, which is pure actuality. The role of the practical intellect in all this is to put order into the body. This sets free the theoretical intellect from preoccupation with the body and helps the powers whose function is necessary for theoretical knowledge to function unhampered.

Muslim philosophers adhered to the view that the acquired intellect is one with its objects, for they thought the knower and the known are one, as did their Greek predecessors. This means that the highest human state is one in which unity with the universals or the eternal aspects of the universe is reached. This state is described as happiness because in it eternity, an aspect of the objects of the acquired intellect, is attained.



5 Eternity of the soul

When Muslim philosophers assert that the soul comes into existence simultaneously with the coming into existence of the body, some, such as Ibn Sina (§6), who believe that the rational soul is in essence non­material, are thinking only of the non-rational soul. Others, such as Ibn Rushd (§3), who believe that the rational soul is originally not separate from matter, contend that the whole human soul comes into existence. The latter believe that since the rational soul grasps the universals from particular sensibles, and since such sensibles are material and have a temporal beginning, this soul must also be material and must have a temporal beginning. Those who attribute non-materiality to the essence of the rational soul, such as AL-KINDI and Ibn Sina, assert that this soul pre-exists the body. While all of them agree that the non-rational soul is destroyed after the destruc­tion of the body, they differ with regard to the end of the rational soul.

Al-Kindi and Ibn Sina, for example, strongly adhere to the view that all rational souls are indestructible because by nature they are simple. AL-FARABI reminds us that the reason for eternal existence is the rational soul’s knowledge of the eternal aspects of the universe. From this he draws the conclusion, as did ALEXANDER OF APHRODISIAS before him, that only those rational souls that have this knowledge at their separation from the body are indestructible. Other rational souls are eventually destroyed. Ibn Sina finds in the grasping of the universals the grounds for happiness, not the eternity of the soul. Ibn Rushd seems to hold that only the acquired intellect can be indestructible; but the acquired intellect, he argues (as does his teacher IBN BAJJA), is divine and numerically one in all. Ibn Rushd was attacked for this view because it denies eternal existence of individual souls (see AVERROISM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE).

See also: ARISTOTELIANISM IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; EPISTEMOLOGY IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; ETHICS IN ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY; IBN RUSHD §3; IBN SINA §6; MYSTICAL PHILOSOPHY IN ISLAM; SOUL, NATURE AND IMMORTALITY OF THE



References end further reading

al-Farabi (c.870-950) al-Madina al fadila (The Virtuous City), trans. R. Walter, Al-Farabi on the Perfect State.’ Abu Nasr al-Farabi’s Mabadi’ Ara’Ah al-Madina al-Fadila, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. (English and Arabic of the most comprehensive and best known philosophical work of al-Farabi.)

Ibn Rushd (1180) Tahafut al-tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence), trans. S. Van Den Bergh, London: Luzac, 1954. (A response to a number of issues raised by al-Ghazali against philosophers. One of the three most important of these issues is that of the soul and its fate.)

- (c.1174) Talkhis kitab an-nafs (Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s On the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Maktabat an-Nahda, 1950. (Includes also four other essays: Ibn Baja’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction), Ishaq Ibn Hunayn’s Kitab ft an-nafs (Book on the Soul), Ibn Rushd’s Risalat al-ittisal (Essay on Conjunction) and al-Kindi’s Risalat al-‘aql (Essay on Intellect).)

Ibn Sina (980-1037) an-Nafs (The Soul), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s de Anima, London: Oxford University Press, 1959. (The most important and detailed philosophical treatise on the soul in Islamic philosophy, the sixth part of the Physics of al-Shifa’. An Arabic edition of the text is included.)

(980-1037) Ahwal an-nafs (The States of the Soul), ed. A.F. al-Ahwani, Cairo: Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1952. (Includes Risala fi an-nafs wa-baqa’ha wa-ma’adiha (Essay on the Soul, Its Permanence and Its Second Life), Mabhath ‘an al-qiwa an-nafsaniyya (Inquiry about Psychic Powers), Risala fi ma’rifat an-nafs an-natiga (Essay on Knowing the Rational Soul) and Risala fi al-kalam ‘ala an-nafs an-natiqa (Essay on an Inquiry Concerning the Rational Soul).)

- (980-1037) an-Najat (Deliverance), ed. F. Rahman, Avicenna’s Psychology, London: Oxford University Press, 1952. (The psychology of an-Najat is an abridgement by Ibn Sina of his encyclopedic work al-Shifa’ (Healing).)

- (980-1037) Rasa’d ash-shaykh ar-ra’is f asrar al-hikma al-mashriqiyya (Essays of the Master of the Head on the Secrets of Oriental Wisdom), ed. M. Mehren, Traites mystiques d’Avicenna, Leiden: Brill, 1889-99. (Ibn Sina’s ‘oriental philosophy’.)

Inati, S.C. (1996) A Study of Ibn Sina’s Mysticism, London: Kegan Paul International. (Includes a detailed analysis of Ibn Sina’s notion of the soul and a translation of the fourth part of al-Isharat wa­‘1-tanbihat (Remarks and Admonitions).)

al-Kindi (before 873) Rasa’il al-Kindi al falsafiyya (Al-Kindi’s Philosophical Treatises), ed. M. Abu Rida, Cairo: Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi, 1953. (Includes al-Kindi’s most relevant works on the subject of the soul, al-Qawl fi an-nafs (Discourse on the Soul), Fi an-nafs (On the Soul) and Fi mahiyyat an-nawm war-ru’ya (On the Essence of Sleep and Internal Vision).)



SHAMS C. INATI


Collectede By
Shobuz Bhai