Click subject name to see related articles.
Amin Shahverdi
Abstract
In the first section of the Mahābād’s letter which has been located at the beginning of Dasātīr, a blueprint of world is presented which is influenced by Peripatetic doctrines. On the basis of this plan, first intellect which is named Behnām in Dasātīr is emanated from God. Second intellect ...
Read More
In the first section of the Mahābād’s letter which has been located at the beginning of Dasātīr, a blueprint of world is presented which is influenced by Peripatetic doctrines. On the basis of this plan, first intellect which is named Behnām in Dasātīr is emanated from God. Second intellect which is named Amshām is emanated from first intellect, as well as body and soul of paramount sphere byname Mānistār and Tānistār are emanated from first intellect. After this, third intellect as well as body and soul of the sphere which is located under paramount sphere, are emanated from second intellect and this series is continued in the same way and finally ends to moon sphere. From the last intellect which is emanated from the intellect which emanated him together moon sphere, does not emanate neither any intellect nor any sphere. This last intellect who is named Farnoosh, flows the under the moon world. Opposite of this Peripatetic plan in which the number of intellects and spheres are determined and Peripatetic philosopher could know it, the number of intellects and spheres are undetermined and uncertain in second section of Mahābād’s letter. We understand from this section that human reasons could not recognize these numbers that is counts of intellects and spheres. On the other hand, there is a limit for human in this case. Moreover, in the second section of Mahābād’s letter, it is emphasized that there are many intelligible creators in world and this proposition is obviously conflict with Peripatetic view. This approach is affected by Illumination school and it is clear that is not according to what has been said in the first section of Mahābād’s letter. Thus, there are two views about system of the world in Dasātīr which could not be true simultaneously. On the basis of the verdict of this paper, Illumination approach is more important in Dasātīr and plays a role in other parts of it
Goshtasb Farzaneh
Abstract
We recognize Sāsān V with the help of some lexicons and books. We know that he had translated and interpreted Dasātīr, the book which is God revelation to Mahābād, from a “Heaven Language” which was un-understandable for everyone into Persian. The only evidence, by which we can recognize ...
Read More
We recognize Sāsān V with the help of some lexicons and books. We know that he had translated and interpreted Dasātīr, the book which is God revelation to Mahābād, from a “Heaven Language” which was un-understandable for everyone into Persian. The only evidence, by which we can recognize this Sāsān in the history are Shahname and some historical books. As much as we know, in the books before 10th century AH there is no evidence of Dasātīr and Mahābād and Sāsān V. After revealing the name of Sāsān V in Dasātīr and the other books of Azarkayvani’s school, we confront Sāsān V as the translator of Dasātīr in the lexicons and the other books which was written in India. For example, a view of him is described in the “Sasan-e-Panjum”, by Naiyer Masud, the Indian author and researcher. In this article, Sāsān V as the translator and interpreter of Dasātīr is represented at first, and then his background in the literature and historical books before the 10th century AH is searched and the reflection of this personality in the late 4 centuries is studied.
