INFORMATION TO USERSThisrnanuscripthasbeenreproducedframthemicrofilmmaster. UMI filmsthetext directly fromtheoriginal or copy submitted. Thus. sornethesisanddissertation copies are in typewriter face. while others may be from any type ofcomputer printer.ThequalKyof thlsreproductionisdependent uponthequalityof thecopy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrationsand photographs. print bleedthrough. substandard margins. and improperalignment can adversely affed reprodudion.ln theunlikely event that the author did not sendUMIacompletemanuscriptand there aremissingpages. thesewill be noted. Also. if unauthorizedcopyright material had ta be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.Oversize materials (e.g.. maps. drawings, charts) are reproduced bysectioning the original. beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuingfrom left to right in &quai sections with small overlaps.Photographs induded in the original manuscript have been reproducedxerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and whitephotographie prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearingin this copy for an additional charge. Contad UMI diredly ta order.ProQuest Information and Leaming300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. MI 48106-1346 USA800-521-0600.~SUHRAWAR.D(d.1191)AND HIS INTERPRETATION OFAVICENNA'S(d.l037)PHILOSOPHICAL ANTHROPOLOGYRoxanne D. MarcotteInstitute of Is1am.ic StudiesMcGill UnivesityMarcb 2000A tbesis submjtted to the FacuJty of Graduate Studies and Resea'Ch inpa"tial fulfilmentof the requirements of the degree of Ph.D. in Islamic Studies Roxanne D. Marcotte1+1National Ubraryof CanadaAcquisitions andBibliographie Services385 weIIingIon StreetOIawaONK1A0N4canadaBibliothque nationaledu CanadaAcquisitions etservices bibliographiques395. rue W"'lf1gtonoaawa ONK1A 0N4C8nBdaThe author bas granted a non-exclusive licence allowing theNational Library of Canada toreproduce, lou, distnbute or sellcopies oftitis thesis in microform,paper or electronic formats.The author retains ownership ofthecopyright intbis thesis. Neither thethesis nor substantial extracts from itmay be printed or otherwisereproduced without the author' spermission.L'auteur a accord une licence nonexclusive permettant laBibliothque nationale du Canada dereproduire, prter, distribuer ouvendre des copies de cette thse sousla forme de microfiche/film., dereproduction sur papier ou sur formatlectronique.L'auteur conserve la proprit dudroit d'auteur qui protge cette thse.Ni la thse ni des extraits substantielsde celle-ci ne doivent tre imprimsou autrement reproduits sans sonautorisation.0-612-64616-5CanadlAuteure:Titre:Dpartment:Diplme:RESUMERoxanneD. MarcotteSuhraward (m. l191) et son interprtation de l'anthropologiephilosophique d'Avicenne (d. 1037)Institute of Islamic StudiesDoctorat en Philosophie (D.Ph.)L'interprtationparSuhrawardi del'anthropologiephilosophiqued'Avicenne depend, enfait, du systeme pripatticien, etcela, en dpit de son motif de la lumire etde la predonunance del'imagination qu'ilintroduit. Sadfinition del'me ne s'eloignepasde faonsignifieat1ve decelled'Avicenne: sa dfinition en tant qu'entlichie et de substance, son incorporalit, sa pre-existence,oulel'ledes poeumoro. Parcontre, il critiquelematrialismed'uncertainnombredepositionsadoptes par Avicenne. Ce qui est en jeu, c'est l'unit ontologique de l'me que Suhraward peroita>m.me tant menace p.. la localisation dansle corps des facults responsables de la reprsentation- les imaginationactiveet passive, de mmequer estimation- Et deleurs objets. AprS avoiraitiqulesthories"extramissive" et uintromissive" delavision, SuhrawardiJltroduit saproprethorie qui a pour but d'expliquer la vision mystique, Urduit les facults internes responsables de lareprsentation d'Avicenne uneseulefacult, prfrant mettre l'acceat sur le rle quejouel'medans laperception. Uanalyse taconnaissancedesoi endiscutant del'apprhensionprimairedel'existence individuelle, de l'identit personnelle, ducaractre nonmdi de ce type de oonnaissace,et de la question de l' individufrion. Au niveau conceptuel,l' intellection demeure logiquement premirepar rapport l'imagin-.ion, alors que lesdiscussions portant sur l'intelligence agente, sesfonctions,et la conjonction de l'me rationnelle - la lumire-Isfahbad - avec l'intelligence agente - le principelumineux - sont avicenniens. Lesconceptspistmologiquestels que l'intuition et la contemplationmystique, aucisuxdans le dbat surtaprimaut de la connaissancemystique sur la connaissancephilosophique. Les propos de Suhraw81"d et d'Avicenne entourant lanatUre de laconnaissanceprophtiqueconrrastent aveclanature dela connaissancemystiqueenintroduisantlesfonctionsngative et positive de la facult d'imagination, c'est-ai-dire le rle de cette dernire dans le processusde particularisation des vrits universelles et sa fonction mimtique.Les discussions eschatologiquesintroduisent l'ide de la survie de l'imaginationncessaire pour que les mes puissent faire l'expriencedelartribution(divine) et atteindreleur perfectiondansl'au-del- mentionne par Avicenneseulement par quelques allusions mais dVeloppeparSuhraward; alorsquelapossibilitd'unemtempsychose n'est pas totalement carte, Suhrawsrd introduit deux sphres distinctes- Ether elZamharir - qui deviendront le substrat "pneumatique" for la facult imaginative.Author:Title:Department:Degree:ABSTR..-'\CfRoxanne D. MarcotteSuhraward (d. 1191) and His Interpretation of AviceJ1Jlll' s (d. 1037)Philosophical Anthropo1ogyInstitute of Islamic StudiesDactor of Philosophy (ph.D.). ~"..-.....Suhraward's inlerpretation. of A ~ ' i n n a ' s philosophica1anthropology greatlydependsonthe Peripatetic system. in. spite of ils nove1 light motif and the faculty of imagination' s predomiDance.His definitio11 of tbe soul does 110t depart significand)" from Avicetma' s: its definition as an entelechyand asubstance, itsincorporeality, itspre-existence, or theroleofthevital. spirits- pneumN"a.However, hecriticizesthemateria1ismimpliedina11umber of Avicennantheses. Atissuei5theontologicalunity of thesoul that Suhrawardiperceivestel be jeopardized by the 10calizatioll inthebody of the represenrativefacuJties - theactiveandpassiveimtginatiOftS andtheesti.aultion - andtheir objects. Alter criticizing the .. extramissive" and the"Jltromissive" theories of vision. Suhrawsrdiiauoduces bis own illuminetive tbeory iD. an effort ta simultaneously account for mystical vision. HealsoreducesAvicenna'sfacultiesresponsible for representatian toasingle facu1ty, focus1gon thesours role in perception. Subraw..di aaalyses self-knowledge, discusSlIg the primary aw..eness ofone's own e!cistence, setf-ideJUity, the unmediated ch8l'1leter of chis type of knowledge, ad the issueofindividuation. At the ccnceptua11eve1, inte11ectioJlis Iogica11yprior to imagiution, while discussioJ1Sabout the active intelligence, its functioJlS, and the conjwletion of the rational soul - the Isfahbad-light- with the active lteUigence - the Jigbt principle - still remsinAvicennan. Epistemologica1 conceptssuchasintuitionand mystica1contemplationbecomecentral in. thedebateovertheprimacyofmystical kJ10wledge over philosophieal tnowledge. Suhraw8r'd'san.dAvicenna's discussionsaboutthenatureof prophetictnowledgearethencontnlStedwiththenatureof mystical knowledgebyiJIlroduciog the llegative and positive fua.ctiOftS of the facu1ty of imagiution, nameIy, il! role in thepawticu18rizlltion of univers" truths and its mimetic functioJl. The SUMval of the imsginative facultyis a11udedbyAvicenna, butexplicitlydevelopedbySuhraw&rd. 115survival isrequiredfor theexperieacing of divine retribution and the perfecting of seuls in the afrlife; white metempsychosislurts inthe background. And rmaUy, Suhrawlrdi introduces two distinct spheres - Ether and Zambarir- that become the "pnewnaric" substrata for the poslbumous aeti.vities of the imaginative facu1ty.,"--InmemariamTomyMotherYvette GIinasACICNOWLEDGMENTSMy first and most lasting debt is towards my thesis advisor professer Hermann LandoJt whohas relemLesslysuggested particu1arreadings of tbe Persian ortbe Arabie. indieated possible alternativeiJlterpretations. even disagreedwith m8llY of my readings or conjectures.l would Jike ta thank theprofessorswho guided my inteUectual joumeys. especialJy those lit theInstitute of !stamic Swdies(McGill University): Professors W. Hallaq. D. Little. M. Estalami. E. Ormsby. S. Alvi. l mustindude J.-R. Milot as wellas tbe Arabie language teaehers of the Universit de MoDlril, die InstitutBourghiba des Langues Vivantes de l'Universit Tunis - I. and the Language Cenr- st tbe Jordani8llUniversity. as weJl astbePersian JuguageteaehersoftheLogbat N8IIle-yeDeb.khodaInstitute,lC.P,S. (Tebnm) mdtbeUJJiversity ofTeJuoan, and the professors that bave welcamed us intbeirclasses _the University of Jordan IUld the University of Tebnu1,Thecompletion oftbis tbesiswouldhavebeen. impossiblewitbout tbefinancial supportprovided by nomber of in.st1tutions -inthe forms of fellawships for researcb or rvel grants: 1999 (FaU)1999 (Wuuer)- 1998 (FaU)-1996 to1999-1991 (Summer)-1996 (Sommer)-1993 to 1995-1993 8Dd 1994-1992-1993- Depa'tmeDta1 Travel Grant Institute of Islamic Studies. McOLJIURiR!lS'iey (Ilip to Paris, France) Canadian Commiuee of the Middle EastStudies Associalion(CANMES) Graduae Student Travel Grant (trip 10 Washi ngton.DC and Dayton, OH. USA) Alma Miller Student Trave1 Grant (trip ta Binghamton, NewYork. USA), McZlI -Depanmen1al FeUowship. Institute of Islamie Studies, McOOIUm'R!ni!Y Alma Mater Studeat Travel Grant (trip 10 StJoJm. Newfoundland.Canada), Mt:Oi/I Um-RrS7ty-Bourse Qubec-TWlisie - Anlbic Laaguage Swdies, Tunisia,Lttslir BollJ7Ui/Jll desLto,pes URiRnd de Tl/ms- Fonds fCAR for Ph. D. resrcb -(JuebecOoRmmeDr- Honcx.y AnburTagge Fel1owsbip. McGill Major FeUowsbip,McGiII UJJiPlni{Y Deparlmema1 Fenowship. Inslitute of Islamic Studies, McGiU

ivAnumber of ldividualsandiJ1stitutionsmust be memionedfor their sinceresupport andassistanceinthePUlSuit ofmyacademicgoals: Professor Ma"CPelchDeanof thefacultdeThologie et de Sciences ReJgieuses. st the Universit Laval (Quebec City) and the professors of tbefacuJty for the opportuDity ta teacb our fint class, an intensive introduetory course on Islam (sommerof 1999) as Invited Professor; Professer Suzanne foisy, Director of the Department of PhiJosophy, stthe Universit duQubec8. Trois-Rivires (UQTR) and the professors of the departmeot who havemade it possible for us ta re.:b a course in Oriental PbiJosophy (W1Jlter' of 2000) - Islamic Philosophy- as Lecturet and for tbe opportunity to become a refercefCX' theElearomcJoum81 ofIlle Camldriul.5Oatv"ofAestheilc / ReYUe JecDTulifjue de la Soae cansdie.rUJe d'esdJdifJue inMarch1999:ProfesSOl" Marie-Andre Roy, Director of the Dpartement des Sciences Religieuses of the Universitdu Qubec Montral (uQAM) who made it possible for us ta jan the Executive Commiee of TheCanadian SocietyfortheStudy ofReligion(CSSR) 1 LaSocitcanadiennepourl'tUdedelareligion (SCER)forthe year1999-2000 asMember-at-Large 1 COdSeillreand forwhich it wasapleasure10 judgetheUndergradu8IeSUldent EssayContest that ye.: tbelareProfessor AhmadTafazzoJiandProfessor JaleJI Amuzeg of tbe University of Tebran, facu1ty of Arts. who havemade my stayinTebran most ple&S8IIt by havidg me work on a frencb tnmslation of a section of dieDeJZbn duringtheWiJJEer of1995: theDireetor'of theLanguageCenter of tbeDepartmentofModem Languages. st the University of Jordan, who ha ltindly invited me ta be a OUest Lecturer inthe Fall of 1993 md the Winter' of 1994, my first cJas room experience.1 bavehadtheopportunity tapresent the fmlSof myresearch stanumber ofschol8rlyconferences both in Canada and abroad: 13 "Subrawardi (m. 1191) et les facults internes selon le commentaire de Shahrazrl (m.CL1288) sur le.{5bIl1Ir III-FsiJnIfJ,01 Qualrime confrenceeuropeJUle d'tUdesiraniennes(Socetas lraIloJogica Europaea), Monde Iraai CNRS. Pans. Sept. 6-10,1999. 12 -The NewStatus of Imaginai Forms: Suhrawardi's Departure fromAvicennanPsychology," Medievalist Association of America (MAA),Washington. D.C., April 8-11,1999. Il ,.Self-Consciousness,Se1f-IdeJdity.mdSeJf-Knowledge in Subrawardi," MedievalPbilosophy andtheClassical Tradition inIslam, Judllism. andChrisanity. UniversityofDayton, Ohio, April 11-13. 1999. 10 "Religious Epistemology w FsIJn!irIf Epistemology: The Knowledge of Prophets andTheosophers in theWorks of Suhrawa'di.nI1th Annual conference SSIPS1 SAGP1998,Binghamton Uniyersity. BiDghamton. New York. Oct. 23-5, 1998. 9 "Escbatology and the Imaginative Faculty: Avicenna and Suhrawa'di" 17th Annualconference SSIPS1 SAGP1998, Binghamton University. Binghamton. NewYork. Oct.23-5,1998.v 8"Mtaphysique oriemale ct ambropoJogie philosophique," XXVlleCongrsdel'Association des socits dephilosophie de langue fnmaise (A.5.P.L.f.),Universit Laval. Qubec. Qubec, August 18-22. 1998. 7 "Suhrawardi's Presential KnowJedge and the Soul's KnowJedge of ItseJf," 42nd AnnualCongress Canadian Pbi1osophicalAssociation (C.PA.1 A.C.P. 1998) st the1998 Congressof theSocialSciencesandHumanities (H.S.S.f.C. 1 F.C.S.H.S.), University ofOttawa,Ottawa. Ontario, May 27-30, 1998.6"The Pbi1osophicalAntbropology of tbeBuslI1ll/-QuJlib andthe YllZtID Sltinjil1r:TwoWartsAaributedtoSubrawardi. SJtIlykJ/ IlI-IsIJnirJ." SecondBiennial Conference onlranian SlUdies (S.B.C.I.S.), BQesda. Mayland. May 22-4,1998. 5 "La notion de pLletUl1ll :une solution au problme pos par les "formes suspendues" deSuhrawardi (m.1191)," Congres annuel de la Socil de philosophie du Qubec (SPQ).congrS de l'Associationcanadiennefraaaise pourl'avancement de lascience 1998 (ACfAS),Universit Laval, Qubec. May 11-5. 1998. 4 "Avicenna and Suhrawardi on Imagination (mld6k8lfYYllIJ)," 16tb Annual ConferenceSSIPS 1SAGP1997, Bioghamton University, Bingbamton, NewYork, Oct. 24-6, 1997. 3 "TheflCUlties of the Soul inSuhrawni's Mystical lnterpr'etIlionofAvicenna'sPsychology," 41st Annual Congress CPA1997 st the1997 Congress of Leamed Socielies,Memorial University. St.-John's, Newfoundland. June 1-4,1997. 2 ,. Un critique de la tbOrie visuelle dans la psycbologie d'Avicenne (m. 1037): Suhrawardi(m. 1191)," CoagrS annuel de 1. SocitU de pbi1osopbie du Qubec(SPQ), 65ecoagrs del'ACFAS1997. Universit duQubec Trois-Rivires (UQ1R), Trois-Rivires. Qubec,May 13-6. 1997. 1 "InteBett andIntuition in the Philosopbical WorJesof al-Subraw..cli." 15tbAnnualConferea SSIPS1 SAGP1996, BiJJgbamtonUniversity, Binghamton, NewYork. Oct.25-7,1996.1 would a1so like tamentionanumber of slUdies that bave or will appe.. and !rom wbichsome SCUiOIlS of the tbesis are derived: 4 "Mtaphysique JlopJatonicienne oriemaleet andlropologie philosophique," AdCS du.KXWe de .rAssocriDo.rJdes Soatrs" de PAosopAie deLiuJ,tue FnlDSise: La8lt!lllpJJysitJue, JUstoitrJ, cnl'iJoe. jeur (UniversitLaval, Qubec, 18-22aot, 1998), 2vols. (Sainte-foy, Qubec: Presses de l'Universit Laval) (Fortbcoming) 3 "Resson( andDirect lnmition(8lusiJlllJlldII) inthe Workof SbiIJiI) al-DinSuhrawa-d (d. 1191)," Fe.srst:JJnh Dedit:Wetl rD HrJfessor HtnIlllml L8Jldo/r, cd. ToddLawson (fortbcoming) 2 "Suhrawawdi's Psychology in. tbe PApa of tbe Arabic [71JeFlRs/Jes ofLWN]: Some Remarks," in77Je {Jur"lUJd PJJilosopAiall ReOearims, S. Handaroh,R.AJ. McGregor, E. R. Alexandrin. R. MascGUe, S. Muly. A. Alibay and D. Steigerwald. A.Matin (Yogya Karta, Indonesia: Indonesian Academie Society XXI. 1998),51-64. 1 "Philosopbical Reamn Versus Mystical Intuilion. - SlIihab al-Din Subrawni (d. 1191),"AmlyueJdeestudiosiJnllJes (Madrid, Spain) 7 (1996): 109-126... _."vi1 would also like to tbank tbe staff of the Library of the IJlstitute of Istamic Studies - SalwaFerabian. Steve Miller. Wayne St.Thomas. and Mr. Gak - for their re1ent1ess help and the editorialheJp Asad Shaker and Lisa Alexandrin.Most importantly. 1 must tbank my aWlt Denise and Shabed. avery very dear friend. whohave bathprovidedmewitb tbeirunceasing moral supportduring tbese numerousyears. The complerionof this dissertation would not bave been possible without it.viiSUHRAWARO (d. 1191) ANDHIS INTJRPRErATIONOFAVICENNA'S(d. J037)PHILOSOPHICALANTHROPOLOGYAbsll'aCtS iAc:k.IDwlecigmelllS . iTableofCoatents viiT ~ o a xAblJrevil&.odS xiINrROOUcrION - Pbilosopbical. Aatbmpology 1Problem of the Philosophical Anthropology 1Chapters of the Thesis 3CHAP"J"ER. ONE - Is1am.ic Pbilosopbica1 Antbropology 8Historical Background 8Neoplatonismand Pseudepigraphical Works IlThe Is181tlc Milieu 13Avicenna' s Philosophica1 Anthropoloy 23Post-Avinnan. Developments till Suhrawa-di 30CHAYI"ER TWO - Subraw.cli 35Biographical. Sources , 35E..ly ure and Education 36His Stay' in Aleppo 38The Sociopolitical Conten " 40Mou.nting Opposition 46The Final Moments 51Enumeration of bis Worles 53Problem of C1lrooology 55Problem of the Nature of bis Writings 58His Intelleetual Allegiance 60Suhraward' 5 Philosophical Anthropology 65Works on Issues on Philosophical Anthropology 67CHAJI'I'ER TIIIlEE- NIIt1JI'e of tIle Soul 69The Sou! as Entelechy and Substantiality 69Incorporeality of the Soul 77Pre-existeooe of the Soul 81Existentiation of the Soul 91Physical Constituents and Cosmological ConjuJlction 92Soul-Body Relation 91The Vital Spirit....................................... . 103The Religious Tradition 103Nature of Vital Spirits 105Types of Spirits 109Functions of the Vital Spirits 112Light and the Rational. Soul 114HumanPS)"chic Spirit and Forms 116ExistenceMter Death 119viuCIJAIFI1?Il FOUR. -Division of tIIe Saut _ 121Vegetative. Animal, and HumanSoul 121Fivefold Division and Localisation of Faculties 122Rejeaion of Different FacuJties in a Bodily Organ 123Two Distinct FacuJties and Funetions 124Proolem of RecoUection 126Rejeaion of Fivefold Division of the Soul 129ATenebrous FacuJty and Ruling lights '" 132CHAP"l"FIVE- PE!l"CeJ'CiOD '" -.. . . 138Visual (SeJ1Sible) Perception 138The Extramissive Theory of the Light Rays 138The Intromissive Theory of the Fonns of Objects 141Nature of His Refutations _ 144Theory of Vision Adopted by Suhrawardi _ _ 146Conditions ofVision 148RuJing' Light - Isfahbad-I...igbt 151CHAP"l"SIX -Tlae Faca1ty of lauIgiJ:lllltioa _ 156Nature of the Faculty of Imaginstion 157The Avicenne Structure , 158Unity of Funetions of the Animal Soul 160Materia1.ity Or Immateria1ity 162Suhrsward' s Modified and Simplified Version -. 166Contents of Imagination and of the Rational Soul 167CIJAIFI1?Il SEVEN'- Epistemology 177Se1f-Knowledge _ 177Self-Con.sci.ousness 179SeJf-Identity 182UnmediatedNature ofSelf-Knowledge 183Individuation and Personal. Individuality 190Intellection 196Practical and Theoretical Intellects 197The Process ofInte1Jection 201The Facu1t)7of Imagination _ 210The Active IntelJigence _ 213Conjune:tion with the Di'Vine Realm , 219Divine Spirit. Log-os, and Light - -.225Philosophy vs Mystical Experience 230OntologyofLight : " 233&sence of Presential KnowJedge 236CHAI"fB. EKilrI"- Propbecalogy 243Prophetie Knowledge vs Theosophical Knowledge 245One or Many Epismological Processes 249Metaphysieal Considerations 253Anthropological ConsideratiollS 256The Notion of Intellective Conjunction 258The Facultyr of Imagination 260Divine Signs and Interpretation. 266CHAYrER. NINE- EsclllIlology 273BodilyResun-eetion 273Metempsyehosis 278Avieenna and the Survival of the Individual Self 284Avieenaa and the Survival of the Imaginative Faculty 286Suhrawardr5 Eschatology and the Active Imagination 295A Separate World of Imagination. 305C O ~ U S I O N 313BIBLImpsssesanumber of philosophical issues and physiological considerations (inherited from the medical traditionof Greek physicius, namely Guen).Like a number of important Islamic philosophen, Suhraward did net develop a philosophica1antbropology thlt was grounded !l amedical p-actice, unlike Avinna. He never wrote trearises onmedical matters, even. ifhe wuschooledinthe traditional Peripaletccurriculum(tbat includedmedical theories) that he followed in the different intellectual circles he attended (Mlrighah.Rum, orAleppo). In fa, Suhraward' 5 philosophical anthropology, Ji1the OJ1e of Avicenna,iscouched in aconceptual framewcrk that isessentially metaphysica1. For this reason, investigationsther undertookinto theJlatUteof thesou!essentially philosophica1. hence, theemphasisofthisstudy on theterms of philosophical anI:hropologyrsther chanpsycbology. Duringtbisperiod, thestudy of the soul still eJlcompassed philosophical investigstioJ1S iJlto ils nsrure andaU issues linked to2 Cbristian Wolff, EmpinQl/ (1732) andRII/r04Jll Ps,Jdolt:f{Y(1734); . Joba Locke,Hum., Und6r.st:mdiq (1690) aIld 71M CanrflAoFiM (1706); d. GeorgeBerkeley, A NerY'l'1N!1ot;r oF "'.".7 (1709) and Tn'lllise CDDrnrDr flleoF HlTLllJU1 Knawlet:(ye(1710); cf. Etienne Condillac, OD.. ttellSRfioDS (1754) and ESS1I.f'S OAdJf! apal" r.!H'HumJ16Undt!n'l:lndly (1746); cf. RenDescartes, TlMhs:siollS 0' SmzI (1649) andRules"" Ori'tfI:DDn oFdMAt,iAd (1701).3 VoilqUJl, Les Jlr4U6SOtnIQ!!S, 47-8, 51-3,56-7.TNTRODucnON ::.its fate, beforeand after death. Althoughthestudyof thesoul WliSoltenconcemedwith morep-agmatic psycho-medical iJlvestigations. a Mere empiricist outlook is genera11)'. absent fromSuhrawlll"d' s savesomedescriptionsofpS}chologica1states associatedwitha number ofpessions (e.g.. anger).lnthelastdecades. anumber of warksonSuhraward haveaddresseda number of issues(Ziai, Amin Razavi. or Walbridge. Dnin11. None ha""e provided a thorough analysis of bis philosophicalantbrapology. Thisstudy purportstoshedsome Iight on Suhtawardi's pbi1osophii anthropology,but. more specifically. on the relation that it haswithAviceWlS' 5own philosophical mthropolog)For this purpose. we will use an essentiaUy comparativeapproach - Scomparison. of Su1tnlwErd' stheory of the sou! with Avicenna' s.SuhrawEll"di didcontribute positively with8 number of philosophieal inno-vations - in physics or metaphysics. As Ziainotes. Suhrawstd'5 majorwork, the Ch"eJml-UiumintUir--eIVLsdam,aumotbeuilderstoodin. isol8tion ftombisother works- essentially thefourdogmSlic treetises-which "present system8tcallya newformulationofphilosophy.'..:l Nonetheless. Suhrawardi doesdaimthat be had been, in his youth. anardent foUower of Peripateticphilosophy. Suhrawardibelieved th. anumberof Peripatetiedoctrines andtheseswerevalid8.Ildconstitutedsomeofthefoundingprinciples of bisown reformulatiOJl. ThisconstitutesSuhrawardi'sAvicelllUUl Peripltet.cheritagewhichwewilltry toilIustra. We will try toshowwbereSuhrawardiadoptsPeripateticAviceJ1Jl8Jl positions and how be departs from the letter El"adition. 0.0. a number of issues relatedta the50U1. Ourgoal isnot todepitt Suhraward as the initiatOl"ofanoriginal and typically Eastern"I11uminatjonist"philosophy - others have done 50 (Corbin. Nasr).s Our ml.D. concern is more withintellectualhistory: What is the Perip81etic substratum of Suhrawsrdi'smore personal contribution teIsllmic Pbilosophy!CHAPTERS OF THE THESISThetint chaptet' provides a generai historica1 backgrOWld to the advemof anIs1amicphilosophical anthropology. Aquickincursion iIltotheGreekand Hellenicperiod- includingtheiafJuential NeoplatoAicphase- inlroduces foreign elementsintoIslamietnldition. th. heJped tacreste a philosophical1y a-ticulated Islamic antbropology. Although Christian and !stamic theologica1debates were of some importance. it is with al-Kiod and al-Firibi th. a truly philosopbical tradition4 2'iai., KJz"...10. 14,115.5 N......TheSpread cftheillllmjnatiOll1StSchoo1."16G-71; d. Corbin. TNTROD( renoN - 4develops inIslam. Avicenna owes muchto the latter. This philosopbica1antbropology is meniatrodueedwith,first. an exploration intawhatoonstitutes Islamic philosophical anthropology and,second, a presentation of A"icenna' s works where he discusses the hwnan sauL Finally, Suhrawardi' sown endeavors a-e imrodud after' the presentation of a brief sur"Vey of post-Avicennan developmentsti11 the time of Suhrawardi ta provide an overview of a span of more man a hundred and fifty)7eBl"5-Bahmanyir b. Msrzbin. Ibn Zaylah. al-Lawkari. al-Ghaziili. al-ShahrastiDi. Fakhr al-Din al-Rii2 andAbii al-Barakiit al-Baghdadi.The second chapter reviews Suhrawardi' s seant biograpbieal datascanered ina few biographiesin arder to sketch bis early life andeducation (tram Suhrawsrd to Marighah. ROm, and thento Aleppo). Abrief presentation of the socio-political cornextandthe moWJting opposition fromtheUlamas of Aleppo will &Rude to some of the possible causes of Suhrawardi' s tragic death in ..Shaykh Fakhr al-Dia used tatell ms disciples that there was no one more intelligentman thisyouth. or more eloquent ) and unequalled. Fakhr al-Dia. bowever. was conceraed for the lad.whose carelessnes5. rashness and unrestrained recldessness would 1 oneday. bethecause of bisdownfaUJ5 In spite of the existence of a number of anecdotes in w hicb he is described as often goingabout dressedas a pOOl'man36andwithout anypretension. reportsabout theheedlessnessofbiscbaraeter round their way into the biographicaJ WOrlcs.37This latter information. indeed. would easilyaccount for thefact that. with the passingof time, theanger of hisadversariesmouRted ta the pointof cavsing bis downfall.THESOCIO-pOLmCALCONfEXTIn. arder ta understand the events tbat led CO Subrawatdr s execution. it isnecessarytaprovide agJimpse iota the sociopolitical conn of the time. It basbeen suggested mat Suhrawardimight have unwillingly exacerbated the animosity that was mounting against him by writing aworkdedited to 'lmid al-Dia theso.o of Qsrii Arsln (Diwud) b. Artuq.the Saljuqprince(.J":!-8i ) ofKharput {Khartpert}. whoin1185establisbed acollateral bran.choftheArtuqids (hedied&round1204).36TheArtuqids wereaTutkishdynasty whobadsett1ed inDiyirbakr, North of Miridn andthe Syro-Turkish barder, lt'oWld Kayfi and Amid; a collateral brancb had settled &roundMiridn and MayiJariqn. They ruled over some territories, often as vassafs. for almost three centuriesuntil the Ayybid conquest in1232.The tise of the Zangids halted the expansion of the Attuqids who became the vassals of NuraI-Dm39 This was most probsbly Nul' al-Din MaJfmdb. Zangi(t. 1146-1174). Humphreys mentionstbat the Artuqids "represendmore the Turkmenthan theGreatSafjuqidtraditionandhencewereevenmoreclearlyorientedtowardthepoliticai value ofthesteppe... hence, al-DiahadtareconciJe the guidingprincip1es of "shared authority and local autonomy"with theselocal rulersinarder "tabalance the uJtimstely irreconci1able daims of the absolutist suJtanateand collectivesovereignty. ,,'10 TheZangidsl"Uledovet" acentury in Mosul andAleppowithacollateral branchin3S Ibn Ab V,Yiin, 642.J6 Ibn AbVyn1 644.n Ibn Abi Y,yiiD1 644.38 Bosworth, 71JeNewEs/mmclJXn;iDt!s, 194; cf. Idem, Saldjki.ds," 946b-9S0a.39 Bosworth, 71JeNew Es/.JlDVC lJ,)'DIIsties,195; cf. Cabe:n... Artutids, " 664a.40 Humphreys. From SlIIadiL1 rodieMangals. 73.CHAPTER. TWO - 41Damascusand. at limes. inAleppo."u They were also of Turkishoriginslikethe whiletheAY}'bids wereof Kurdish origin. lnevitably. with theirexpansionist policyinDiyirbakr and al-Jazrah,theywere ta clasb withtheAyybids. Twice al-Dnfailedta captureMosul (in 1182andeventually. however, they badtogive way under bis might.a2By thistUne. theZangids andtheArtuqidswereclieJ'lt statestotheAyyt1bids. andtheundeniable jealousy betweenthe(Wowasstillft[ work at the political JeveLlon ofknowledge- logic. mathematics. physicsandmelaphysic:s- roundinsuchworksas Avicenna'sBookofSciena? orRemlirKsor the more common threefolddivision (excJuding mathematics) chatfindsitsway111 most of bisphilosophicalworks. Suhraward dividestbispartic:ularwockinto [womajor sections. Thefirst seaioncontains discussions onlogicfollowed bya critical analY51s ofcertain fundamentalprinciples of Peripatic philosophy.l60 The second section presents, in delail. bisownphilosophical interpretstionoftheAvicennantraditionand covers topies suchas ontology.angelology, physic:s, eschatology. prophetology and. significant for this study, philosophicalantbropoJogy.Furthermore, as Many worksappear to have been written a the same time, il wouldbe quitefutile ta mate aforma! distinction between warks which Suhraward himself considered ta belong tabisPeripateticphase, before heaaually"saw"thelight.161Aproof tathecontrary isroundin hisassertion(in the prologue of the OntaDlIU-D/umioldif-eJJ'isdom) tbatbisIAdmmions was writtenaccordingto Peripatetictradition, althoughitcanbeshownchat this workcontains elements ofSuhrawardr s own reading of the Peripatetic tradition. even allusions ta bis own persona! positions. 162In spite of the persistent difficuJty in datingthecompLetion of the majority of Suhrawsrd' sworks. most scholars do acknowledge that he composed MOst of his treaisesOVE!!" a span of about tenyears. The brevity of this periodmaltesit difficuJt ta conive how[WOdistinct styles and modes ofthought migbt haveOCCUlTed in succession. By way of conclusion, let us restate that it is Corbin whomore tbanhaJfacentury agowrotemat a conclusivechronological cLassificationof Suhraward' swork was impossible. 163HIS lNfELLBCTUALALLEGIANCESuhraward'sinrellectual allegianceorallegiansarean issue justasdifficult tosettle asthatof thenature of biswritings. Altboughanumberof scholsrshaveaddressedthisissue. somelS9 These have already been disc;ussed. cf. Corbin, l, viii.160 Fakhry, "aJ.-Suhrawardwa Maitltidhubu,"151-68; cf. Fakhry, "AJ-Suhraward's Critique," 279-84.161 Introduction ro thef5.km4tr, 3,10.3-1087-8).162 T;l/wf/Jiit, 55-7, 70.1-78.6; cf. Ibid.. 75-90, 105.1-121.6; cf. the lanchapter': cf. Corbin, 163 Corbin. Lesmotifszorwlsuiens.17.CHAPTER TWO 61ftfty years of Suhrawardian schola-ship have produced a variety of opiJUons regardtng the intel1eet'.Ialallegiances of Suhrawa-di and the possible ongin of a number of bis ldeas. The followingdiscussionwill offer apanorama of opinionsthat have beenproposedregardingSuhrawardf sanddoctrinal affiliations, in the hope of illustna.iJlg the complex natUre of his intellectual heritage.Suhraward aiticized, reinterpreted and adopted ft modified Peripatetic philosophicalanthropology. Describing.bisownintelleaual jouroeyintheprologue of theSuhraward writes that he had started out as a staunch Peripatetic, before experiencing trueknowledge. Hisoriginal Peripatetictraining. therefore. setsthestagefor twodistinct facetsof mswork. Suchasupposedlygenuineshift ofintelleetual allegiances cannat, however, beobjectivelyidentifiedinhisworks solelybased 011 thenatureofhis different writings. Hisplulosophica1backgroundisesseotially Peripatetic anddependent on theAvice.nnan corpus. Indeed. numerous elementsof thePeripatetictraditions wereaIsoincorpot'Sted frombis predecessors (e.g., al-Fiirib). Again, it isnotthe purpose ofthis work. to identify these aider elements which have, quite naturally, found theirwayinto Su.hraward' s own works via Avicenna' 5Peripateticism.Neoplatonism and Plotinian ideas, essentiall)7 mediated bythe pseudo- Tllt!OlogyoEAn'"srodeincirculationinthe.. Islamicate" world,l6awereof undeniableimportancefor the elaborationofSuhrawardi'sthoUght.l6SAvicenna's own writings bear theha11m.ark of strong Neoplatonic features,which are, in lqepart, responsibJefor thespiritualization ofPeripateticphilosophy.l66AnotherimPOftant tradition responsible for the incorporation andp-opagation of Neoplatonic ideas within itsownphilosophico-religiolls systemwas the Ismaili tradition, whic.h bad incorporatedmany concepts, notions, andideas.167The debate over thenotionof an"oriental"tradition inwhichtheseNeoplatonicphilosophies share, as opposedtaa .. western" tradition, has not beenconcll1sivelyresolved. Thisdebateoriginaleswit.hAvicenna' s ownallusionsta such oriental tradition. A11umberof scholarly discussionshave tried to address mis issue - de Vaux.l68Massignon,l69 GUtas,t70 Pines,t 71andNasr.l72This isthetradition that SuhrawEnii himself claimstahave pursued!73Walbridgeand164Hadgson, 77Je offsIJIm,vol. 1,56-60.165 Marcotte, MCaphysiquenoplatonic:ienne ," (forthc:oaung): d. Netton, "The Neoplatonic Substrate, ..2...7-60: cf. Marcotte, An Auempt al DecoJ15trUetion," 89-99: d. Idem, The "Semiotlc" Fn.tel'pf'-se,"1-14.166 Walbndge, 167 Neuon,Neopklromsrs.168 De Vaux, "La philosohie iUuminative,"1-82.169 Massignon, "La philosophie onentale," 1-18.170 Gutas," [bn TufayI," 222-241.171 Pines, -La philosophie crientale" tn5-37. .. -CHAPTER TWO - 62Ziaihave discussedafurther possible influenceon Suhrawardi, namelypossible Stoicdoctrinesorconceptions that mayhave beenthe root of some of Suhrawardi' s cril:icisms of Peripatetichi! h17habit side by side.1OInthe Cure, Avicenna, first, esrablishes thereJationaJ chsracter of the soulfrom which proceedsaUother activities.1lAsapriJlciple ) whichcompletes or perfectsthespecies, the soul is a perfection (Jl..S) - an entelechy.12At theanthropo1ogical. level, thesoul finds itse1finrelation with matter, i.e., the bodybea>miJlg its receptacle.131n.Avicenna's defi.n.ition of the soul, the body does, indeed, play a role; forinstance, when he writes that, .. the name 'soul' does not appLy to [the saul] because of its substance,but, rather, because it isruling (0;;;" )overthebodies and isbrought intorelationwiththem :i ",.: ).',14 Smilar discussions are found in bis Commenhly on the pseudo- TAeoJogyofAn'srode inwhich the soul "n-forms ,n i.e.. provides a form10 the bodyand perfee:ts it byexercising over il its deliberate actions.1SFurtherm.ore, in bis CUrt', he writes that "the soul whicbweS"e defining is the fint perfection of anatural body which becomes instrumental.u )for accomplishing the activities [associated with] lifeJwi ).,,16 Avicenna adds that "that9 rlitJ'i6I, 11, 269.13.4 (Arrb.,22-3).10Jambet, "L'me humaine," 217-8.Il Avicenna,NaIS, l, l, 4.10-12 5).12Avcenna, NaIS, l, l, 6.9-10 6).13Avicenna, MilS, l, l, 7.10 (R!,-:, 7).104 Avicenna., Sltifi#, M'Ifs, l, l, 10.17-9(P-f.V, 9). Avicennaadds Chat "the studyof thesoul hasbecome pan of the .naturaJ sciencesrk ), because the study of the soul, as it is asoul, is its study withrespect to the relation (h) it possesse! with malter) and motioncf. Idem,NaIS, l, l,11.1-3 (Rs,.,-:. 9); cf.Idem, A/JwJ!8l-NalS. 1,53.11-13.CHAPTER THREE - nwhieh is attributed to [the soul] is the execution of the aets of living beingsJ.=..a:.Lii) by meansof weU thought-out chOleesand deduction through discemment l:),asit pereeives universal matters... ICeLestial souls, however, do not faU under mis definition. because they are devoid of organs.They themse!vescommand operations. e.g.. intelleetual conceptuaJization andmotion. They arethefonnsand perfections of the ceLestialspheres.18It wiU suffice here to mention that Avicenna' s notionof perfection associated with thedefinition of the soul is similar to, perhaps derivedfrom, the notionof entelecby found in Aristotle'sdefinition of the soul in the OA rheSoul - somethingPlotinus. itseem.s, had rejected.19Avicenna, however, innovates and dividesth15capacity of actualization of the soul into twotypes of enlechyor perfection. There lS a first perfeaion, "through which the species(e."':')becomes a species inaetualityl: ). liketheform)for thesword;" andaseoondaryperfection, which is "something that follows the species of the tbing. coming fromits aaioas and itspassions ),1ike the aet of cutting of the sword. and like the [aet of) disaimination [i.e.. ofjudging or deliberation] ofthinking (:i.:"J)' of sensation ), and of motion."20 Thesoul, as the principle of actualization (of the species), is a first perfection; and. as the principle of theexercise of the actions and the passions (coming from the species), it is a secondary perfection.For Avieenna, the soul' slife - i.e., the sout' 5 immortality - and its perfection wauld appearta be, in faet, synonymous.21Furthermore, there seems ta be a notion offinality (final. cause) impliedin thefirst perfection of thesoul whose uJtimateend is the perfeaing of the mostelevatedspecie:(human beings). lt is, however, preciselythisnotion of aperfeetiJlg principlewhichprecludesanyimmixion of thesoul withmaterial constituents, since thesou!isnot the famofthebody, in itsc1sssieai Aristotelian sense.Z2Suhraward adopts ft sim.i1ar conception ofthe soul interms of its perfectibility. He is15 Avic:enna, SlINr./J, 66.6-7(Vajda, "Noces,"VII, 1, 393). Funhermore,he me.Dti.o1lS tb. "[the soul)bec:omes ped'ect ( "r=u ) throughthe body) andperfects)itse1f byexercinngoveril, its[deliberated]actioncf.Idem, Sb..67.7-8 (Vajda, "Notes," VIl, 4,395).16 Avcenna, Hm,J, l, 12.6-8 10); d.Idem, NRfi"r, .MUs, 1, 3 L9. LI -320.6 (A wc., 25).17Avicenna, SJufil, Hm, J, S, 40.2-4 28).18 Avicenna, NlS. l,l,12.10-14(Psy;; lO-iL).19 Plotinus, EDneads, IV, 7,8(5); cf. Blumentbal, P.loanusP.sydJolqry, 12-3, 17.20 Avicenna.Nm, l, l,1L.8-11(P-!J'=, 10).21 Avicenna,NHfs,J, l,12.17-13.2 12); cf. Amid, Es:mi, 119.22 Usbida. ElUcIecompw-aliw. 30-2.CfiAPTER THREE - 7Jexp.licit: the soulin. me body is aperfectlon for il.23 Furthermore, "the mostperfeet(G.' is theonebelongingtohumanbeings:' bewrites, Mandit callsfromthe Provider[of fonns] [the gut of) aperfectlon.',zo.l Its perfection is. indeed. the human rstional soul whose origit: isin me intelligible world.2SSuhraward does not merely adopt Avicenna ' s position. A distinctive trait of bis interprerationoftheperfea.ibilityassociatedwiththe rational soul isthenewtenninology he uses. Therationalsoulisnowdiscussed in termsof the inteJlSity oflight that it possesses, as well asitscapacity taaccept the emanation or, more typically, the illumination chat originates from the intelligible lights tawhichhuman souJs aresubordin.ed. In Suhraward'sinterpretation. the rational soul bec::omestheruling light (";".)..tt) and.like Avicenna's rational sou!. itrules over the facultiesthat are attached to ieand wbich allow it ta ruleoVe!" the different activities of the human soul26The human soul is what he caUs the Isfahbad-light( ) .' f;' ), whichserves as theprincip1efor thevEU"iousfaculties.27ThisIsfahbad-light is but oneof the Many terms usedinwhatZiai caJlsM a special technicallanguage" which employs the symbolism of light ta .. describe ontologica1problems, and especiaUy depict cosmological struccures."ZfJ Literally, Isfahbad (Arabized fonnof thePahlaVi splibIJod, is the "anny commandant."Its use by Suhraward - as the dominatinglight - is reminiscent of the Stoic notion ofotyemo.DikoD. 30 It identifies the light possessed br everyhuman soul as the ruling light (,.H,)..A that rules over all the facuJties of the soul, like Avicenna'srational soul.Anolion of perfection aIso applies to Suhraward's understanding of the notion of light. Theintensityoflight is similarlydefinedineerms ofits perfectionorits deficiency, e.g., whenhediscusses the intelligible lights, i.e., the dominating lights (ijA .), Infaet , in his light tenninology,petfection is translated iota a quest ora needfor light. lna sense, intensityand perfe 51.1-4 (p) 7,87.5-9 (AJ'd., 43; ISmlfu.l03)..65 DavidsoJl. Alfilr'llDi 1 106, 152-3. Al-Ghazat altacks Avicenna's praof! ontheaatUre oftheaaChment. Tbereexist a factor that parQ.culari2esthe souI andwbicb c::ouldbea oondltionfor thecominuedexistenceof thesouI. Therewouldthen heapossibility tha, oncetheaaacbmeJ1t (body-soul) issevered, the saut cculd perisb 'Wlth the disappearmce of this factor. In addition, notwithstanding an independem:eof the souI witb regards to the body, a possibwty of the souJ' s destructIon by Gad (or another cause) must eDstandbec:onsida'ed, cf. aJ-Gbuil, TJllJaTur, 205.1-209.... (fDt:oJ1en!!J1c:e, 205-209); cf. Davidson, AffI1l/n,152-3.66 al-Ghazali, TilIJUur, 209.5-211.13 209-211).67 217.496.17-497.5;cf. HlI,rJbJ, II (a) 49.6-10 (P) 5,85.11-86.2 (Atrh., 43; /smJlU,101)._.CHAPTER THREE - 80piercingand passing through celestiai spheres 1Sinconceivtble. becausece1estialspheres perslsteternallyin [their] circular movement. [and it] is impossible to conceiveof [the Sphere]as moving in astraight line. because movement inft straight line isnot in confonnio/ with itsnature. If [thece1estialspheres] came back together arterhaving been ripped,therefore. it would have to be moving in a straight line.69The aux of thisargumentwouldseemtorest on aparticularcosmologicalconfiguration ofthe unverse. Celestial spheres consist of an impenetrabJe. unp1ercable. and untearabie (as a result oftheir circular motion) "subtie matter" In this particular cosmological scbeme. it 1S impossible to passfromthe oroit of onesphere taanother. One is only suckedinto the etemaJcurvature of itscircularmotion.70 It is for this reason thac the soui cannat be material. no matter how subtle such a materialityisdefined. because the sour 5ascent towardtheLight of lightswouldthen be impossible. Asimilarappea1tocosmological doctrines OCCUl"Sinsomeof Subraw"di' s arguments witbinbis themyofvision(seesectionon visual perception). The l81teroccurrence of theargument is, perhaps. acthearigin of thispsrticulardem.onsteationof theincorporeality ofthesoul. We will havetaretum taether argumentsprop05edbySuhrawardi tademonslc8te theexistenceof thesoul (seesectiononself-knowledge).SuhrawardCs main concern. is taestabJish the conditions tbat guarantee the soul's access, onits ewn terms, to theBei.ng, itself devoid by essence of any type of materiality. Therefore, thesoul mus/, bedefmedintennsofthemmateriality of ilSsubstance. Theargument be providesappears, therefore, to be more ontological innature. Hewrites:Theexistence of[the soul'sinteUective substance] is inconceivable in theworld ofbodiei, because, if it were in the worJdof bodies, it weuldbeinconceiv8ble thatitperceivestheunity of theFirst Being) [i.e., Gad] ... because theOnen only be perceived by an entity whicb is itself monadic,;-al).Bettet" 9till, [this inteUective substance] is itse1f amonadic entity,asI;Ia11iijbas said,while being aucified:What is sufficient for theOneis that the One isolEites mm [i.e.,maltes him One]?1Andnothing which exists in theworldof bodiesisaone[i.e., a monadicentity]69 rJigld, 7,268.2-6 (Aa-h.. 20).70 The ascent of the sou! cannot c;onstitute acOl"poreal ascent through thebeavens. lt 1S, according toCorbin. "an involl1tioJl of the inner spiritual heavens," if one usesAvicenna's TrlWioW ordle Bird JlI-An'] octheBook oFAsceDr [.Jt.til4fi:'mi".Qmh J, attrib11tedtemm. FaCorbin, the_centischrOlightheheavensoftheinnerimaginaI worJd, cf. Corbin, ArdJ., 28n.28; cf. [b:id., 366; cf. Rzf, 10, 248.11-12(.Ard., 374). For the debate surrounding thealUhorshipof the A-finj-DiD8fJ whicbcannet be proved. cf.Heath. ill/liAJ7Ce.Dnil, .. Appendix 8: On the Attribution of the .Jt.ti"ny:,mru.;th." 206.71 aa11ij, Abtb.r.Tll-.{nulni. 36.7. of the Arabictext(LJ CHAPTFR. THREE - 81The existence of the soul is therefore not conceivable [as being] in the woddof bodies.72Furthermore. Suhraward. more concernedthanAvicen.natoillustnltephilosophica1anddoctrineswithQUl""anicversesandhadiths. does just that regardingthesoul' s ncorporeality.Althoughthesearenot souiao sensu arguments. cheyarepresentedas proofsor corroborations(J.=.I,J) of thisperticular interpretation, likewise acentral tenet of Peripstetic philosophy. He quotestheQur'inicversewhich mentionsthosewhowill rem.ain"inanabodeof truth. at thesideofaMighty King," (Q.. 54:55). and wmcb be interprets as foUows:[Theexistenceof thesoul] is neitherabody, norcorporea1. sincetheseattributes are inconceivable regarding the reality [i.e.. the substaJlce] of bodies.these anributesbelong ta the divine spirit c."J)73 which is. onaccount of its substance. [radica11y]separated from the world of bodies. There is nodifference between [the divine spirit as the rational soul] andthe Angels, except that[the rational 50ul] has bodies at itsdisposal ta govem..7-! ).1(16 How, then. couldtheir individuality - as individualligbt-souls - be conceived9Second. then- mUltiplicity would also be inconceivable. because these immaterial lightswouldnot bedistinguishable fromone anothet". interm5of their intensity or weakness. befcre theyare associated withtheir bodies (litera1Jy. thar "citadels"). Furthermore. each degree of intensity (orweakness) is something numerica11y uncountableLa) and does not amount ta a distinctionin. terms of an unspecified accidentSuhntwardi cao then conclude that since neitber their multipliClty, nor chen- umey is possiblebefore they attach themselves ta the bodies, and rule over them. fv-4--1'... ). their existenceis not possiblepriortotheir comingintoexisten.cewiththebody.U)fl Evenwherehecouches bisargumentation in bis ligbt tenninology, Suhrawardi, in fact, faithfully psrallels the previous passageswhich discuss the incorpOt"ealityof the rationalsoul. Elsewhere, Suhrawardi will use similar arguments,but in terms of the logos (L-LS), ta discuss the incorporeality of the rationa1soul10CilThe most powerfuJ argument, however, is one from authority:religious tradition. The soul isneither pre-etemalnor eternaJ. (r:..).i ),"it is aeatedwitb thebody"oncethedispositionof the body is complete in order ta receive the soul; and moreover","it is written mat Gadaeated it withthebody, not before andnotaftet".....uo Suhrawardi' sphilosopbil argumentsareaptly used ta colTOborate the religious rraditian. It should be mentioned Ihat the notion of a primordial(X)venant 50 frequently adduced for a possible the pre-existenceof souls, e.g., the CQvenant that Godmade with Adam, is absent from bis works.Asecond argument for the negation of a pre-existence of the soul before its origination in abody restson theJUUure of the soul. If the soul existed at anesrtiet" time in the intelligible world, it106 ffrbnlU, 211.201.7-9190-1).107 ffrkm., 211, 201.9-202.L (s..w:. 19L).108 .{frkmnr. 211,202.1-2191).109 Kldim., DI, 20, 93.L2-17 (Arrh.. 161).110 Hl!yMi/, D 56. L-3Cp) 11,90. L6-19 (AJr.h., 46; Fsmn7, 107).

CHAPTBl THREE - 89would have to enter this wodd with its own perfeet nature. He argues tbat if immateriaJ souls existedbeforetheexistence of thebodies.tben. nothing- either veil orpreoccupation- couldinterposeitself betweenthemandtheworldof pureligbt. i.e.. theintelligiblerealm. Inother words. therewouldbe neither agreement nor difference. Again. the argument proceeds byOuclio dOnbsurdum- the soulswouldthen beperfect andtheirrulingove.. thebodywouldamount tawaste. Therewouldbe no superiority (4:."..(,1) with regards ta the quiddit)" in arder ta assign specifically some ofthem ta a particular body Cu- .;,;) As for contingenciesW1) - Like the necessity of movements- they take place in the world of bodies (V--1) whicb are apt to possess a certain light, onsecount of their motions. Nosuch contingenciescano however. occur in the world of pure ligbts.111Athirdargument reliesonthegoverningcharacteristics aaributed tatheruling.lights.Ifniling lights - rational souls - existed priOl" to theexistence of bodies. somewouJd be niling (thosein bodies) and others would not (those remaiJling in the metaphysil world). However, souls that doDot govem bodies could not. in fact, exist as ruling llgblS. On theCOfltrary. if ail rationa1souls wereruling(overbodies), thentherewouldbeatimewbenall ofthesaulswouldbeunitedwith thebodies. Thereupon, 110 morerational souls couldcome intoexistence, because suchaconjonctionwould have ta occurinpre-etenlity U' JI), and no rulinglights wouldremain. AU souls - Jl order tobe goveming - would haveconjoined witb the body or departedfromthis worJd, somedting that isabsurd.11ZAnd finaUy, Subraward pl"ovides a fourtbargument whichrests on the existence of endlessaeations. If souls didnot start ta exist, i.e., originated ) with their bodies, these souls wouldbe 1finite. The existeflce of infinitedimension ) wouldthenbave tabepostulated in thesepanted substances - which is, again, impossible.IDThesefour argumentsprovided br Suhraward against thepre-existence ofthe soul weredeemed inconclusive br Qub al-Dm al-Shiriz, unpreoccupied by the religious data. He consideredthem. weak and floll-demonstrative, primarily because the proof depends on the unproven assumption.that there is no transmigration of souls. 114 Moreover, most of these arguments rest on the assumption.that souls can omy be individuated by their attaehment to some sort of materiality. as souls belong toa single species. A similar assumption is round in Avinna' s works.111 prkmlU, 212,202.3-10 191).lU ffrkmur, 213,202..12-15 (5fr., 191-2).113 .fUbnll/', 214,203.1-3192).114 Q. o. al-Shrazi, SlliIffJ1 447 not fO[' line 25); . Walbridge, SQ'C:w, 138, 138-41._.- ~".CHAYTFR THREE - 90Suhrawardi' s arguments basedon aspects ofunity, of perfection, ofgovernance and creaednesscanaUbetracedbacktoarguments roundin Avicenna's works. Bathauthors, however. seemtahave adoptedviews on thepre-existence of the soul that were interpreted in a number of ways.'Tb!Sis more evident in Suhrawardrs works where seemingly opposing views are found, in bisphilosophically argued tensand in bis allegorical texts. The huer texts are often associ81edwith the"esoteric" positionofSuhrawardsinitiatoryteachings, bis "oriental-illuminative" wisdom, oftenidentifiedas bistrUeposition. Thisinterpretationhas thement ofexplaininghowsomePlalonicidetlS likethe pre-existenceofthe soul couldcoh,it withmoreorthodoxIslamic be1iefs, suchasaeationism. Ithas the merit to aaribute a "hidden" consisten.cyto Suhrawardi's works that uanscendsthe different genres. But, more importantly, it renders use1ess any attemptsto establish a chronologyof bis works.Another solutionta the presence of[wo seemingly contradie:tory stances consistsinconsideringthe various allusions tosomesort of pre-existence of the soul asSuhraward sattempt todescribethesoul'sabode, thedivineworld- i.e., the aaive intelligence- thesourceandthe causefromwhichit originates. Suhrawardi' s paradoxica1(evencontradietory) stancereflectsbis attemptstoiJlcorpOI'Bte a vsriety of elements.The implicit affirmationof the pre-eristence of the soul, onthe onehand, ecboes theGnostic motif ofthe"fallnor "descent" ofthesoul, somethi.ngtbat isfoundinAvicenna'sownallegorical tales. Theallusionstoits pre-existenceconstitute, perhaps, thelogicaJ. outcome oftheadoption of a Peripatetic cosmology, something Islamic philosophy inherited from Neoplatonism.Emanation becomes the ntral theme of Peripatetic cosmology, where the aaiveintelligence(closest tothe sublunsr world) p-oducedhumansouJs. Insucha scheme, the activeintelligencecontainsa11 the lower souls and is responsible. ta a great extent, for their existentiation. Thispositiondoesnot, however, provide any answers tothe difficultiesraisedby the possible existenceof soulswitbin the substance of the active intelligence.More problematic is the unambiguousstance Suhraward explicitly upholds in bis OneorMl-UllU.IIiDJJlif-p J ~ m (his opusDJHgAllO/). Suhrawardi, on theotherband, explicitlydenies thepre-existen of the soul and offers anumber of arguments ta support it. This expJicit denial has theadvantage of providing asolution fer the integration of the re1igious imperative of createdness. Morestriking in chis work is the "illuminative" character - i.e., the light terminology - of bis philosophicalqumentation central ta the negation of such apre-eristel1ce. One would not actually expect this inview of the alleged.. esoteric" position he is said to have he1d.'.CHAPTER TfIREE - 91EXISfENTrATJONOF THE saULTheactiveintelligence istheprincipleat theheart ofthe existelltlation - thecom..i.Jlgintaexistence- of individual souls. This is central ta Avicenna' s ontologyinwhich a NeopLatonicemanativescbemeis developed. Sucba concept oftheactiveintelligence asthesourceofaUthelower souls raisesanumber of issues, especiaUy regarding the unicity of tbisactive principle. Theseare objections usually addressedto thisparticuJar type of emanationist ontology. Tlus conception ofthe active intelligence transfms what is supposedly asingle andmonadic entity ioto an entity thatis simuJtaneously oneand many - i.e.. in whicb our souls aJreadyerist (inpenl/).This objectionwas raised by Fakhr al-Dm al-Riz against Avicenna (which Corbinidemifies as an entire1y theoreticaldilemma).115Other difficulties arise in discussions about the mysticaJ union of bumansoulswitbtheOne (see sections on intellection and prophetology),116 and about the SUt'"VlvaJ of the soul' 5 individualityiJl the afterlife (see section on escl1atology).1l7Theorigination of soulswith bodies guaranteestheir existentiation regardless of the natureof thefonner's existence intheactiveintelligence. Soulscomeintoexistenceoalyoncetheyareattachedto livingbodies. For Avicenna, evety human bei.ng and ever:y animal possessesa 50ul of itsown.116This is not atandom or haphazard process. The individuation of souls depends on conditionsassociated to the conditions of theirexistentiation. Although distinct analytically and logically, tbese[WOaspe? detennined by its particular mixture ) anditspartcularqUality (:L-t=..). 50 that it may become its first perfection. The soul becomes the principle thatp-ovidesaform ta this matter.lZ7Asft second8ljT perfection. the soul thenbecomesthe cause of thesctualization of thedifferent (particu1ar) souis (e.g., vegetative, animal or human) and of theirrespectivefaculties.l2flAvicennaexpressestheexistentiationof soulsthat OCCUl"Sonlyundertheseparticular circumstal1ces in the following tenns:The sau! cames into existence ) whenever abody fit to be used by it comesintaexistence. Thecreatedbody becomesilSdominion )anditsinstrument(4Jl). Inthe quality)of the substance of the 50ul createdwith aparticularbody, i.e., that body that is made suitable ta receive[the sou!'s] ongination fromtheprincipLe, there isanatura! ye.mng-0 ) needs to appeal tothe Provider of forms in order rareceivea soulacoording to its preparation(,JI It needs to be provded withits perfection - a buman soul.The soul, on the olher hand, aIsopossesses acertain affinitywith the body(:..1 n' '0Subraward expresses in terntS of povertyThepoverty that chs-acterizesthe Isfahbad-light - the(rational) soul- istobe understoodwitbregards ratheluminousentitiesthat areaboveit. Thesespiritual and intelliglbJeentities areuncon-upted by the tenebrous substances that lie at the level of the sublunar worJd. Bodies. however.whicbare impartedwilhacertain dynamic principle of light, are only the locus of apparition ortheplace of manifestationor the receptaclefor the activities of the light principle - therational soul. The body becomesonly a "vase"for the effeets of thesoul and a "battle field"for itsfaculties.156The crue nsture of the soul isluminosity', whereas the body is (almost) totaUy devoid ofil; worse, thejoumey of thesoul in theworld of bodies isresponsible for thecontaminationof thesoul.In. Suhraward' 5 theory of the soul, the Avicenn.an dualist positionis still at work. SuhrawS"diintroduces once morebis light ontologyand, thus , appears to depart from a strictiy dualistic perspective.Theontological. distinction heestablishes between light-souls and bodies is nowvoiced in tenns of811indigen.ceof light or luminosity.l57Assuch. theperspectiveheinlroduces appearstobemore"participationist," i.e.,lightbeing present in aU tbings.It hasbeenclaimedbyAmiJl Razavi thatthemind andbodydistinctionisa Il superlicialone."ooly based on SuhrawS"dr sdemonstration of the existen of animmaterial soul understoodas the self. Amin. Razavi adopts the viewthat SuhrawardI' s theory is a"spiriwal monism."The selfand body are twoentitiesthal partake of the "same ontological texture,"i.e., as "intensity" of light.This, in tum, permits him toappea1 to such notionsaslove ) and domination) toillustrate Suhl'awardi' smonism..158Although Suhraward explicitJy rejeets the Platonic idea of transmigration or metempsychoss(seesection onescbatology). bisconcems doremaiAthepreservation of thesoul'simmateriality,154 .{IkmRr, 229,216.10-11(.sw=. 203).155 Q. D. al-ShI"iz explains that this l5 a potentiality mat requlres ta be aetua1ized, a reason for whichthe seul attaches itself to it, cf. Q. D. al-Shri2, SJmr.!J, 478.8-10(S.yf'..393J1.2). Acc:identallighls are in theanimal pneomJl c.f.,,)} and psycbic pneumllcf. Ibid., 478.12-13 (5.t.v:, 394 n.4).156 H.ikm., 229,216.10-13 ( (5.t.v:, 203);cf..{fiJ:mIlr, 217,205.12-206.3(SolfJ{., 194).157 Jambet, "L'me humaine," 219.158 Amin. Razavi, SuhrJWJtrdi,39-41; cf. the slightly different vernon ln Idem, Suhrawanh's," 127,129.' ..'CHAPTER THREE - 100evenonce the soul hascome intaexistence inthebody. SmilsdytoAvcenna, Suhraward holdsthal the rational soul (the Isfahbad-ligbt) is immaterial (seethesection ontheintellection) andinhabitstheworldofpurelights, fromwhichit originales. Inits purest form, the soul does Ilotcontain any type of i.mmi.-X1on with the corporeaJdarkness (4.!':"'jJo:l).159 It 15 only once ilestabJishes a relation with the body thal it suffers contamination.What is not elucid.ed by Suhraward s texts. however. is the extent of the sour s participationin thebody's corporeality during its sojoum attached ta it. On the one band, the sours attachment tothe body severs its association with the wodd of pure lights to which it will seek to return; white. onthe other hand, the buman body hasbeen created torecei.ve aseul asitsperfeC%on160 Butthe body remains "the first abode for the Isfahbad-light, ft in the.. world of bodies" {t jl1 ...161The ontological indigence of bodies alludedto by Suhraward. nonetheless, necessitasthepresenceofa longingrelationshipbetweensoul and body, one inwhich thetenebrousfacu1ties ) associatedwiththe body impart the body with Eldesirefor the world of pureJight.l62Suhraward wnleS that:When the tenebrous faculties cling ta [the Isfabbad-light] witha longing attachment ,,.;-: Io; ), and they attractit to their world, from the world of purelightin which absolutely no bodily darknessc;.1.: j..;!is mixed, [the Isfahbad-light's] desi.re is severed from the world of pure light [and diverted]towards[the world of) darkness Suhraward asaibes two types of longing desirefor Jight on the part of the teJlebroussubstance. The ftl'St isits desire for an accidentalligbt thet will manifest it. The second is itsdesirefor an immareriallight) which govems it and gives it life. It is net difficult ta recognizehere in theseconddesire the Mional soul, whicbinother passagesSuhraward identifiesexphcitlylB such. The tenebroussubstance originates out of thedimension of poverty (Jei11) of thedomins1inglights) fromwhichthesubstance of the worldem.anates- aprocess. in. many159 M.b.71.Iu, 229, 216.14-217.1 203).160 AccOl'dUJg 10 Q.O. al-Sbiriz, it is complete because the temperame.Dtis the most baJancedand the most apt (-,11 ) at receving intellective effusions ); and it is thus the first attachment(J,,1 and the first stage (J).U) foc the [sfabb.t-light, i.e., the ratlonal soul. cf. Q. o. al-S1rizi.ShiIdJ,418.18-479.1(SIyr., 394 n.7).161 . . Prkmw, 229,217.2-3 (203-4).162 .{fikm6, 229, 216.13-14 (S..,. 203). Q. D. aJ-Shirizi writes that the sou! is the principle of thelower faa:uJtieswhichare tbem.selves derived; hence, what is UJfencr des:ires from",hal issuperiOl", d.Q. D.al-Sbraz, SbJlr./J, 216ft. for hne 13 394 n.6).163 plkmae, 229,216.13-217.1(54t:, 203).CHAPTER THREE - IOlways. simillr ta the emanationisl Avicennan scheme.l64For Suhraward, the "obscure has a nostalgia( ~ ~ ) for the light:1oSandmisdesirecharacterizes everything which cootains but ft parcel oflight. includingbodies. Furthermore. the human soulseesits owndesire (J""'::' ) severed fromtheworld of pure lights anddivel'ted to the woddof darkness once it is attachedto the body. In spite ofitsattachment tathe body. the human soul is able tocontemplate the metaphysicatentities ta whichil is subordinate. precisely because of its own luminous nature.The relation that Suhrawardi:establishes between body and50ulis. therefare, one of desireThequestionthat begs tobeansweredisthefollowing: Did sucha notionofdesireor longing(J""'::' ) alreadydefine thebody-soul relationship in the works of Avicenna? Traces of the idea ofyesmingcanbefoundinAvicenna' 5works suchas the Remaria, wherethesoul' 5 yeamingforhappiness and for the other-worldly pleasuresis part of thediscourseon the love andthe yearningchat natural bangs have fortheir perfection. Avicenna writes that:If youstudy thingsandrefJect on them. you will find that every corporeatchinghasa proper perfection, a voluntary or a naturallove (4 -.: : b "i l:,JI..)! ~ )for tbisperfection, as wel1asavoluntsry ornatural yeaming( l i ~ ) for it, when it isseparated from it. This is mercy from the First Providence l,J"i ~ ~ ) inasmuch as[God) is Providence.l66Hence, every corporeaJching - bodies - hasaperfection. More importantly, however, eachhas a voluntary or natural Jove for this perfection. Avicenna's own ontology is impregnated with thisnotion. of love. In the foUowing passage from the same work, he writes:The First loves His essence and is loved br Hisessence ... and by many other things... These are the saintly intelJectual substances( ~ . ~ ~ 1~ ). No yearningn beattributedtatheFirst. the True, n.ar tathose that follow... The rank of theyea-ning comes after the above [wo ranks.167Thislove and yeamingbelong to metaphysical entities. Humansoulsdopossessasimilardesire and yearning which they williose only in the other world, presumably once they - the perfectsouls - have compJeted their retunl ta the world theyhad strivento attain (see section on eschatoJogy).166Il shouldalsobementionedthat chisnotionofdesireechoesthemystical impetus foundintheNeoplatonism of Plotinusandwhich bas fedawhole mystical tradition of whichAvicenna was not164 lIibrrllr, 229,217.5-6 (Sote:, 204).165 .(fikmrll, 229,217.3-5 (Sigr:,204).166 Avicenna, fsllibir, vol. 3-4, VITI, 19, 787.8-788.3 (DU:, 481; /11(1'#:,79-80).167 Avicenna, .Ishiiir, vol. 3-4, VITI, 18, 784.2-785.6 (D:, 480; A-(y:st:,79).168 Avicenna, Rir.lllirffaJ-'ls/ly. (ed. Mehren). For aFrenchtrans., d. Sabri, "JlisiiIafil-'lftr. Lelrait sur l'amour d'Avicenne,"109-134.CffAnrR THREE - 102unaware.169Wehave seen howSuhraward.followingAviceona, hasadoptedanotionof the soul tbatn cOJorm to the tbeologica1requiremems of ae.edness.Moreimportantly. the soul isdefined intermsofimmateriality. ftcondition of its survival in theafterlife. another religiousdoctrine whicbourphilosophers are Iljing to establish in the most rationally arguable manner. A series of philosophicalarguments havealsobeenprovidedbyour twoauthors. Thesoul' s indivlduationintermsofthesour 5lnachment ta the body does. however, raise questions relatedto the preservation of the sour 5individuality in the afterlife (see section on eschatology). Some of the philosophicaJ positions adoptedby the Peripatetics have fosteredthe elaboration of a notion of the soul in tenns of ils subsrantiality,something which entai1s its immateriality. and a fortioriilS immortality.169 Trouill-..... , J L d Pl . #Al.Y Lii pur.i5Q1/:1On pIolimenDl!', 154-65; cf. abre." 'extase e otmet le fllHii deGhazali,"101-124.CHAPTFR. THREE - 103THEVITAL SPIRITThe pervasiveness of anumber of Peripatetic ideas inIslamicphilosophyishighhghted bythe pJace some of them ocpy inthe philosophical anthropology of Suhraward suchas the conceptof vital spirit (C.3 J - the pneumo).distinct from the divine - the Holy- spirit of the scriptures. Thisconcept of spirit goes as far back as the Greek tradition, where it was calJed vital spui.t. theresponsibJeforlifeitselfl lt becomes spinms for theLatinswho. unliketheGreeks. introducedreligious elements from the ludeo-Christian tradition.What is the type of relationship thevital spirit has with the soul !lJ1dwith the body?Abrieflook at the Judaic aswelJas theIslamic backgrounds will introduce our discussion about the natureof thevital spirit. its divisions. anditsfunetions in the worts ofAVlcenna andSuhrawsrd. Onthewhole, the foUowing section compares Avicenna' s and Suhraward's conpt of the spirit to illustratehowSuhrawardfs philosophical basisfor theconcept of spirit isderivedfrom theanthropology ofAvicenna. We will pursue the discussionwithsome remaries on the relationship between the notionsof spirit, light, andrational soul in order tadiscusstheroleof thepsychicspirit in the processofrepresentation. We will conclude with a discussion on its COlTUptihility.THERELIGIOUS TRADITIONThe concept of spirit - Greek, poeUOlH ; Latin, spinius - is not unique to Islam. It oecors inthe Judaie tradition where the term spirit -ru - means the wind or breath received from without,from Gad - Yahveh.2The spirit chusbecomes the principle responsiblefor life. by analogy withthebreath isrequiredfor the sustenance of life itself;without it, thereis suffocation, andultimatelydeath. The spirit aIso shares1 the creative power of God. i.e., in proportion to its participation in thedivine fromwhich it originates. Thisju:xtaposition of the notion of the life-providingspirit andchatof its aeativepower canevenculminate intheunder.italldingof the rtiniJ-poeomn asa divineattribute(raisingtheproblemofthehypostasis of thespirit). Generallyspeak.ing, in theChristiantradition, gready indebted to the Hebraic tradition, the spirit is usually likened te theRoty Spirit. Inthe HebraicandChristian traditions. thetwoterms - "spirit" (C.JJ)and"soul" )- aresocloseJy related that sometimes ther are undiffere.l1tiated fromone another.3FerStols, the"psychicbreath" is theunifyingprinciplebetweenthesoul andthebody, cf.Go1lrJUC, Lessroraens el'J iime , 28-32, esp. 30.Z Verlcindere," L' me ounc'1'IJes-.IJ . lVJI1J ," 65, 67.CfIAPTER THREE - 104ln theIs18lIlic tradition. the concept of spiritisnot one-fated a AI-Ghazili (d. 1111) notedthal this tenn wss not used unequivocally in the Qur"an.. In bis works. he discusses the existence of avariety of spirits. induding the vital spirit, the spirit associated with the appeased soul or withGod'scommand, the particularspirit ta whieh the senses eommunicate, the pa55ve unaginative spiritresponsiblefor representatlon. thetntellectivespirit. and, finally, thedivineand prophetiespirit.'3Earlytheologians distinguish the spirit fromthe soul fromthe spirit inthe Qur".5Out of itscontext, it hasdeveloped intoa eomptex, at times ambiguous concept with the introductionof a variety oftheological. philosophical. and mystical considerations round in the tradiuons (hadiths),or made by the theologians. the philosophers. or the mysties.COJltrary to thep.hllosophical tradition, Sufism hasascribeda lower position to the soulandelevated the position of the spirit. The soul isassociateciwiththe.. flesh" or the baser side of humanbeings, thefarthest fromthedivtne. Itisortenidentifiedwitha "veil," e.g., inDhual-Nn. anobstacle for the.. aseent"[() the spiritual world. e.g., Ab YandBistiimI, or the prison of the spirit. ln the philosophical rradition, the opposite is true. The spirit is more readily associated withthephysiologieal, and as will becomehuerapparent. withtheGreekpneumo: wheress thesautusually refers to the rational part of human beings in its most perfect form. Suhrawardfs voeabularyidentifies him more readilywitbthephilosophical. than theSufi traditioQ. It is notewotthy thlt hedoes net often use the tenn spirit in bis more mystical or visionary treatises. Adoser examination ofbis.. initiatolY"tales, howeva-. might reveal mother usage of these two tenns. We will foeus mainlyon bis philosophical works. both the longer and the shortet' versions.3 Macdonald. "The Development of the ldea of Spirit inIslam," 25-30; cf. Calvc:dey. "Nafs,"880a-8M..4 Agoodand extellSlvebibliography onthesubJect is round LnNeuon's "MoreRecent Works:'appendLXed ta Calverley,.. Nafs."883a-884a.5 F example. in al-Ghazili's JJfisbkir m-A.DWJir discussed inMa,;donald, "TheDevelopment oftheIde. of Sptrit inIslam."157, 154-61; or U1 al-Ghazali'sV/.l11 af-OfA discussed in Jabre, Es:saisurIe-Ien;oede ClIJJIZafi, 109-13, esp.109, 109 n.7.6 Macdonald, "The Deve10pment of the [dea of Spirit in [sIam."26.7 Sajjidi,f71 TiI'b;r-r 'lrfiinf, 763b-768b and427a-432a. By wayofsucc::im:;tsummary, Kuspinar men1ions that. -roughJyspeaku1g, theQuran. beSldestheversenarradabovewbidl the unknown aspectof the spirit, referselsewheretothesouls(Jlnfw) that will be takenawayfrom human betgs at deatb [Q, 39: 042], and aiso to the three ages orthe sou!'s deve1opment, i.e., (i) the souliJlcliJledto evil (ill-onaJ-JU11mJinl6i1-su1 [Q, 12: 53]. Cii) the bJaming soul(ilf-J1JS a1-lawwiima)[Q, 75:2],and (iti) tbesoul at satisfaction(a/-mlfsaI-murma'rnmt) [ Q, 89: 27]. Inviewof thesetwo apparelltJyinc;onsi.stent usages, one still awaitsa tenable answer tethe question of wbicl1 one of them. rib or n;lfs. willbe removed from the body and kept away till the Day of Resurreion," c:f. Kuspinar .Ismj7 , 130.,'..-....CfIAPTER THREE - lOSNATIJRE OF VITAL SPlRITSThe nature of the vital spirit in Suhrawardi's works shares many of the preoccupations of thePeripatetic tradition. Let us, first, rom ta the vital spirit andits nature. We will thenprov1de asketchof its division. .And then, we will see how the vital spirit functions.An JlStrUmenralist ides of the vital spiritsW i inrroducedin the[stamic uadition by way oftranslations of the Greek medical treatises6 These ideas were to become the basis of all discussionsonthenstureof thespirit. Typically, Greekphysiologica1 concepts likehumocs and thesubtlesubstance of the spint were genera11y adopted by the Peripatet1c tradition and most !slamic tbinkers.They constituted the physiological basis on which individual thinkers like Avicenna and Suhrawardie1aborated cheir own pbi1osophicaJ systems.The uaditionaJ concept of vital spirit rests on a particular notion of temperamentandbumors(.La ) with whichall living things arecharacterized. In the humanrea1m, each typicallypossesses a particular mixture(of primaryqualities, i.e., those that are associated withthefoure1ements) wbich, in tum, determines the temperamentof that particular individual. In this way, theeJ.ements are either balanced (one) or unbalanced (eight).9The mixture out of whichthe temperamentsare formethe faculty ofactive imagination (;;; i.:.;"