بررسی شکاکیت در آثار ناگارجونه از منظر ابن‌عربی

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه فلسفه، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه محقق اردبیلی، اردبیل، ایران.

2 گروه علوم سیاسی، ادیان و عرفان، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه محقق اردبیلی، اردبیل، ایران.

چکیده

در مکاتب عرفانی هندی در توانایی معرفتی عقل تشکیک می‌شود. ناگارجونه با بهره‌گیری از شک‌گرایی اوپانیشادها، ماده­باوری بودایی و روش استدلالی مارماهی‌لغزان ضمن تضعیف و تذلیل عقل، روش خاصی برای کشف حقایق هستی ارائه می‌دهد. پرسش این است که آیا شکاکیت ناگارجونه به نیهیلیسم منتهی می‌شود؟ با پیگیری ریشه‌های شک‌گرایی هند در ریگ ودا و اوپانیشادها و متون اولیه­ی بودایی و با تحلیل استدلال‌های جدلی ناگارجونه درمی‌یابیم که او ضمن نقد مبناگرایی معرفتی و ردّ اصل علیت و با تأکید بر تمایز محصول عقل و قلب و اهمیت سلوک عملی از نیهیلیسم فاصله می‌گیرد و به رئالیسم خاص عرفانی دست می‌یابد. این سلوک ذهنی و روحی باعث می‌شود سالک، مورد عطای الهی (ابن­عربی) قرار گرفته یا برگزیده (ناگارجونه) شود. بنابراین، تشکیک ناگارجونه در توانایی معرفتی عقل مقدمه‌ای است برای نیل به حکمت حاصل از قوه‌ای که ابن­عربی آن را قلب می‌نامد. حکمتی ملازم با مابعدالطبیعه‌ای رئالیستی که طبق آن کل عالم اعراض قائم به حق­تعالی به شمار می‌رود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Studying Skepticism in Nagarjuna's Works from the Perspective of Ibn ʿArabi

نویسندگان [English]

  • Esmail Saadati Khamsa 1
  • Masumeh Babanejadsomarin 2
1 Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran.
2 Department of Political Science, Religions and Mysticism, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran.
چکیده [English]

In Indian mystical schools, the epistemic ability of reason is doubted. By utilizing the skepticism of the Upanishads, Buddhist materialism, and the method of the slippery eel while weakening and denigrating reason, Nagarjuna offers a unique method for discovering the truths of existence. The question is whether Nagarjuna's skepticism leads to nihilism. By following the roots of Indian skepticism in the Rig Veda, the Upanishads, and early Buddhist texts, and by analyzing Nagarjuna's polemical arguments, we find that while criticizing epistemological foundationalism and rejecting the principle of causality and emphasizing the distinction between the product of the intellect and the heart and the importance of practical conduct, he distances himself from nihilism and achieves a specific mystical realism. This mental and spiritual conduct causes the seeker to be granted divine gifts (Ibn ʿArabi) or chosen (Nagarjuna). Therefore, Nagarjuna's skepticism about the cognitive capacity of reason is a prelude to achieving wisdom derived from a faculty that Ibn ʿArabi calls the heart. A wisdom associated with a realist metaphysics according to which the entire world of phenomena is considered to be ontic qualities of the Almighty

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Nagarjuna
  • skepticism
  • knowledge
  • heart
  • reason
  • Ibn ʿArabi
Holy Quran.
Collins, Steven. (1982). Selfless Persons: Imagery and Thought in Theravāda Buddhism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Corbin, Henry. (2005). Takhayol dar Erfan ibn ʿArabi (Imagination in Ibn ʿArabi's Mysticism), translated by Dr. Inshaʾallah Rahmati, Tehran: Jami. (In Persian)
Deussen, Paul. (1966). The Philosophy of the Upanishads. Translated by A. S. Geden. New York: Dover Publications.
Edgerton, Franklin. (1965). The Beginnings of Indian Philosophy: Selections from the Rig Veda, Atharva Veda, Upaniṣads, and Mahābhārata. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Heidegger, Martin. (2004). What is Metaphysics?. translated by Siavash Jamadi, Tehran: Qoqnus Publications. (In Persian)
Ibn ʿArabi, Abu ʿAbdullah Muhammad ibn ʿAli (1919). Inshaʾ al-Dawaʾir. published by Laydin ,Collection robarts; Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Ibn ʿArabi, Abu ʿAbdullah Muhammad ibn ʿAli. (1987). Fusus al-Hikam. edited by Abu al-ʿAla ʿAfifi, Tehran: Al Zahra Publications.
Ibn ʿArabi, Abu ʿAbdullah Muhammad ibn ʿAli. (2009). The Sorrows of the Prisoner. translated by Golbaba Saʿidi, Tehran: Jami Publications. (In Persian)
Ibn ʿArabi, Abu ʿAbdullah Muhammad ibn ʿAli. (n.d.). Al-Futuhat al-Makkiyah. Volumes 1-4, Beirut: Dar al-Sader.
James, William. (1958). The Varieties of Relgious Experience. New York: Mentor Books.
Jamison, Stephanie W. and Joel P. Brereton. (2014). The Rigveda: The Earliest Religious Poetry of India. New York: Oxford.
Jayatilleke, K. N. (1963). Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Kakaʾi, Qasem. (2003). Unity of Being According to Ibn ʿArabi and Meister Eckhart. Tehran: Hermes Publishing, Second edition. (In Persian)
Kant, Immanual. (1996). Critique of Pure Reason. T.by Paul Guyer, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Makki, Mohammad bin Muzafaruddin Mohammad. (2006). Aljanib al-Gharbi fi Hall al-Mushkilat al-Sheykh Muhyaddin ʿArabi (The Al-Gharbi Side of Solving the Problems of Sheikh Muhiuddin ʿArabi). Tehran: Mowla publication, second edition.
Matilal, Bimal Krishna. (2001). Mind, Language and World: The Collected Essays of Bimal Krishna Matilal. New York: Oxford University Press.
Matilal.  Bimal Krishna. (1977). The Logical Illumination of Indian Mysticism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Matilal.  Bimal Krishna. (1986). Perception: An Essay on Classical Indian Theories of Knowledge. Oxford, GB: Oxford University.
Mills, Ethan A.  (2018). Three Pillars of Skepticism in Classical India Nāgārjuna, Jayarāśi, and Śrī Harṣa. America: Journal of Dharma Studies.
Mills, Ethan A.  (2018a). “Skepticism and Religious Practice in Sextus and Nāgārjuna.” In Ethics Without Self, Dharma Without Atman: Western and Buddhist Philosophical Traditions in Dialogue, edited by Gordon Davis, Springer Publishing.
Murti, T. R. V. (1955). The Central Philosophy of Buddhism. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Nāgārjuna. (1960). MMK(Mūlamadhyamakakārikā). Commentary Prasannapadā by Candrakīrti. Edited by P. L. Vaidya. Dharbanga: Mithila Institute.
Nāgārjuna. (2010). VV (Vighrahavyāvartanī). Translated with Commentary by Jan Westerhoff.In The Dispeller of Disputes: Nāgārjuna’s Vigrahavyāvartanī. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Olivelle, Patrick. (1996).  The Kaṭha Upaniṣad. Translated from the Original Sanskrit by Patrick Olivelle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Parsa, Khawaja Muhammad. (1987). Explanation of Fusūs al-Hikam. edited by Jalil Asgarnejad, Tehran: University Publication Center. (In Persian)
Perrett. (2016). An Introduction to Indian Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Qaysari, Dawud. (2003). Explanation of Fusūs al-Hikam.  1, edited by Hasan Hasanzadeh Amoli, Qom: Bustan-e Ketab. (In Persian)
Saʿadati Khamsa, Esmail. (2015). Epistemology and the Psychology of Kant: Interconnection and Interaction. Tehran: Cultural and Intellectual Research Institute. (In Persian)
Schuon, Frithjof. (2002). The Essence and the Pearl of Islamic Mysticism. translated by Minoo Hojjat, Tehran: Society for Research and Publication of Suhrawardi. (In Persian)
Siderits, Mark. (2000). 'Nāgārjuna as Anti-realist', in Jan Westerhoff (ed.), Oxford Scholarship Online, 16(4): 311-325. doi: 9780198754862.003.0002.
Smart, Ninian; Pins, Shlomo; Chan, Wing-tsit. (1999). Three Philosophical Traditions, translated by Abulfazl Mahmudi, Qom: Center for Publications of the Islamic Cultural Bureau.
Śrī Śaṅkara. (1965). Brahma-Sūtra-Bhāṣya. Translated by Swami Gambhirananda. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama.
Stace, Walter Terence. (2009). Mysticism and Philosophy. translated by Bahauʾddin Khorramshahi, Tehran: Soroush Publications. (In Persian)
Taber, J. A. (1998). “On Nāgārjuna’s So-Called Fallacies: A Comparative Approach”. Indo-Iranian Journal, 41(3), 213–244. (In Persian)
Weil, Simone. (2003). Letter to a Priest, translated by Forouzan Rasakhi, Tehran: Contemporary Perspective. (In Persian)
Westerhoff. (2009). Nāgārjuna’s Madhyamaka: A Philosophical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.