Design and study of Fakhr-e-Razi’s arguments on the obligatory proof and their critique from the perspective of Sadra’s wisdom

The present study, by explaining Fakhr Razi’s arguments on the obligatory proof and examining the attitude of Sadra’s wisdom to these arguments, deals with the most important intellectual principles of these thinkers, which have reflections on the issue of the obligatory proof. Studies show that the most important intellectual principles of Fakhr Razi: the principle of causality, the emergence of the universe and the reason for possible need. With the approach of rationalism, he considered the issue of obligatory proof as a theoretical and argumentative matter and by studying the beings of the universe in the two axes of their essence and attributes and their characteristics (occurrence and possibility), he discussed the possibility with four possible arguments. Essences and attributes and the occurrence of essences and attributes, follows. The middle ground of possible proofs is the essential possibility. Also, according to the principle of the occurrence of the universe and the need for the event to the narrator, he interprets the argument of the occurrence. In addition to conclusive arguments, he uses uncertain arguments, including general consensus, religious experience, and rational caution. The most important difference between Fakhr Razi and Sadra’s wisdom in the principles of theology, which has important reflections in the proofs of the obligatory proof, is the issue of the origin and step of the universe, the reason for possible need, the meaning of existential possibility. In Sadra’s view, occurrence and substantive possibility cannot be the reason for possible need; Hence, the argument of the existence of theologians faces two forms: 1. The reason for need is occurrence 2. It is incapable of proving the necessity of the nature of bodies. But Sadraians consider the findings of Sadra’s wisdom to compensate for the criticisms of this argument by changing the meaning of occurrence from time to nature, the reason for need is the possibility of poverty, also by attaching the principle of substantial motion They spread. Sadra’s wisdom considers the reason for possible need to be inherent poverty and the existence of a connection. Hence, the argument interprets the possibility in such a way that it ends in the necessary proof of transcendence without the need for purely philosophical premises.