Abstract

According to Mulla Sadra, the purpose of wisdom is essentially the perfection of the soul or entelechy. Of course, the aim of the perfection of both faculties of the soul, including the faculty of the theoretical and the faculty of the practical intellect, is to attain happiness. This idea does not merely belong to Mulla Sadra. Other Muslim philosophers, following Greek philosophers, also believed in it. The important point here, which is also the source of the differences between their ideas, is the relation between theoretical wisdom and practical wisdom. The discrepancies here arise from whether it is theory which is prior to practice or vice versa, whether thought is prior to will or vise versa, and whether there is essentially any priority and posteriority at work.Aristotle introduces God as "the thought of thought". From among Islamic philosophers who presented their theories within this framework and, as a result, viewed act and will as secondary and dependant issues, we can refer to Abu Nasr Farabi and, after him, Ibn Sina.In theoretical and practical dimensions, Mulla Sadra has a comprehensive view of being and mankind. Farabi and Ibn Sina believed that God was agent-by-foreknowledge and, thus, His Knowledge of the superior system of existence was enough for it to be realized. Suhrawardi was of the view that the activity of Almighty Truth was by-agreement, and His Knowledge of His Acts was enough for their realization. However, Mulla Sadra agrees with none of them. In his view, neither is knowledge primary and essential, nor are will and act secondary and dependent. Based on this view, Mulla Sadra discusses the relationship between theoretical and practical types of wisdom and presents some theories that are completely different from those of his preceding philosophers regarding practical wisdom, political philosophy, and the attributes of the first leader of Medina.The purpose of this paper is to clarify Mulla Sadra's theory concerning the relationship between theory and act and introduce its philosophical consequences in the field of his political thought in comparison to the present status.