Conceptual and Acquired Intellect in Khademi’s Epistemology

Conceptual and Acquired Intellect

Sense (ḥiss), estimation (wahm), imagination (khayāl), and rational thought (ta‘aqqul) are levels of perception and awareness.¹ Sensory perceptions, estimative apprehensions, and imaginative constructs are particular, whereas the conceptual intellect (‘aql-i mafhūmī) engages with meaning through universal concepts and demonstrative propositions, evaluating them systematically. Sensory perception is particular and tied to concrete referents, while the concept derived from it—abstracted by the creative mind at the level of intellect, stripping away the specific attributes of initial perception—is rational, meaning it is a universal significance capable, in principle, of applying to more than one instance, even hypothetically. Particularity and universality are attributes incidental to a concept. A particular concept corresponds to an external, distinct reality, applying to a specific referent.

¹ In Islamic philosophy, ḥiss refers to sensory perception via the five external senses; wahm denotes the faculty of estimation, which apprehends particular non-sensible meanings (e.g., danger); khayāl is the faculty of imagination, which stores and manipulates sensory forms; and ta‘aqqul signifies the process of rational intellection.

The acquired and conceptual intellect is instrumental in achieving precise, demonstrative awareness, enabling humans to comprehend universal concepts and rules through propositions that align with the order of existence and its phenomena. It yields accurate and truthful recognition of fixed patterns beyond the apparent differences of diverse events, fostering a relatively correct worldview through creative and productive engagement with the concrete world. This generates certain, definitive knowledge (‘ilm), the contrary of which is inconceivable. Such knowledge equips humans with the capacity to respond most effectively to environmental events. However, mere certainty, if not transformed into knowledge, lacks intrinsic correspondence with reality.

The conceptual intellect serves as an internal criterion (ḥujjat-i dhinī) for truth and validity, determining the legitimacy of external proofs, the authenticity of prophethood, the verification of miracles, and the judgment thereof. When fully realized, it attains the realm of wisdom (ḥikmat), surrendering itself to wisdom, gnosis (ma‘rifat), love, and unity.

Mental propositions collectively constitute humanity’s rational world. The conceptual rational world holds such significance that it is deemed an internal criterion, serving as the measure for discerning the truth or falsity of claims made by the divine human (insān-i ilāhī).

If the intellect merely calculates and does not transcend deductive and conceptual awareness, it risks becoming entangled in universal propositions and concepts detached from meaning. Instead of serving as a bridge to meanings and truths, it becomes a barrier to truth. Concepts alone remedy no ailment, and confinement to mere propositions and concepts—especially if they lack alignment with reality, intuitive grasp, or translation into belief and action—cannot pave the path to inner truth or realization. Such concepts may distort human essence, rendering it perverse.

Concept, Meaning, and Referent

In classical logic, the unit of thought is the concept (mafhūm). Conceptual and meaningful thoughts are constructs of understanding, positioned beyond sensory perception but not yet attaining the level of knowledge (‘ilm). Conceptual and mental realization is an engagement with reality.

The system of concepts and their derived propositions, along with their intended meaning, constitutes a distinct level from sensory perception and empirical induction. Sensory perception directly engages the realm of reality in situ, whereas a mental concept exists parallel to reality, residing solely in the mind. Precisely, a concept is a framework created from reality within the mind, constituting mental awareness with its inherent mentality, such as the mental concept of a human.

Meaning (ma‘nā) is that which the concept parallels, such as the collective rational meaning of a human, through which the mind constructs the mental concept of a human.² Meaning connects and binds the concept to its referent in proportion to mental awareness, serving as a crucial link for realizing this type of awareness. The concept describes the meaning.

² Ma‘nā denotes the semantic essence that a concept reflects, linking mental constructs to external reality.

The referent (muṣdāq) is a concrete reality to which the meaning applies and relates, named as such because it is subject to judgment and affirmation. For example, applying “human” to an external individual who is truly human and, in reality, a scholar.

The initial, rudimentary meaning that a term evokes in the mind is the ma‘nūn (denoted meaning), and the term itself, by virtue of its relation to it, is the ‘unwān (title). This title, which familiarizes one with the meaning, is deemed reality if it corresponds accurately to that meaning through valid means, such as sense, scientific experience, or demonstrative reasoning. The ma‘nūn is then called a referent by the same validity. Reality, if truthful, is truth (ḥaqīqat), accessible through heartfelt intimacy.

The connection between a term and its meaning, by virtue of its representational function, is dalālat (signification). Signification involves a mental intermediary—either a rational concept or a sensory, imaginative, or estimative image created by the mind. The consideration of its creation is also a relation to reality or truth. Terms are established for such meanings, which may indicate the ma‘nūn, reality, or truth. The establishment of a term, in relation to meaning and reality, must be sagacious, based on the logic of understanding meaning and semantics, transcending the apparent referents and meanings to reach the substance and spirit of meaning—i.e., a comprehensive, universal meaning—methodically and proportionately. The “spirit of meaning” and the comprehensive meaning of all referents of a concept denote an action, interaction, or manifestation, abstracted by disregarding the particularities of related referents.

An individual, with meaning qualified by distinctness and determination, is manifest, such as the external “I.”

In understanding a phenomenon, what matters is distinguishing its optimal, natural state from its coerced, undesirable state, transitioning from the latter to the former by attributing the phenomenon’s specific effect and judgment to itself. This is impossible without linking each concept to its reality and semantic referent, a clear and precise definition, and foundational, self-evident propositions. Foundational propositions are intuitive and primary, providing the truth and correspondence of any theoretical proposition with reality and the essence of a thing as it is. In analyzing concepts, it is crucial to determine the concept’s level of reality, its degree of truthfulness, and whether it leads to affirmation or an intuitive understanding of a proposition’s truth, achieved without discursive reasoning.

The formation and definition of a concept, if conducted through an inductive, empirical, and practical process—engaging with the conceptual system and internal structure of a case, its essential components, and distinctions among cases by attending to related, positive concepts and excluding irrelevant, negative examples—occurs within the pathways of understanding and discovering issues at the conceptual level, with its inherent limitations. It thus leads to solutions within this scope.

Defining and identifying a concept involves two levels: recognizing the phenomenon’s distinctness and distinguishing it from its peers, which does not inherently lead to uniqueness but serves to highlight its subtleties through comparison.

Concepts articulate various empirical experiences in particular terms, establishing symmetry between concept, experience, and action. In this case, the conceptual system is founded on experiential realities and organized accordingly. Otherwise, it becomes pure mentalism, detached from reality, potentially false, pseudo-knowledge, or delusion, lacking even weak or superficial awareness, constituting ignorance, falsehood, or deception.

Conceptual knowledge is a level of awareness and its determinations, the work of a material, impure mind characterized by its mentality. It should not be confused with luminous, heartfelt wisdom, which is pure light, possessing referent and interpretation. A concept is a passage to meaning. Fixation on mere concepts breeds delusion, deception, and fallacy. Knowledge must be meaningful and, beyond that, referential, wise, and interpretive. Semantics submits to the realm of gnosis and the discovery of referents, granting truth-value to thought and fostering creative knowledge production.

Sensory and conceptual knowledge are different determinations of a single knowledge, unified in reality, not distinct cognitive systems with disparate realities in humans. The collective awareness drives higher reasoning and thought, enhancing mental and rational capacity. Clear, illuminating knowledge is the creative output of a pure mind, though knowledge, wherever it resides—even in the material and mundane—is of the nature of light, clarity, and purity.

With the objectivity of existence and manifestation through knowledge, the expansion of manifestation correlates with scientific development. Scientific development requires the correspondence of awareness with reality and essence. The question of essence applies to both impure, tainted presences and pure, abstract mental knowledge, as error is possible in abstract knowledge and direct intuition. Absolute knowledge leading to absolute infallibility has no place in the mundane, human realm. We will later discuss superma‘rifat, superjustification, and essence.

Conditional Propositions

Speculative, mental propositions are specific to nature and the mundane. A proposition is a verbal expression of a mental judgment or affirmation. The system of propositions grants humans the capacity for generative reasoning (istidlāl-i inshā’ī) to apprehend realities in the mundane.³ In higher realms, meaning, reality, truth, and constancy prevail.

³ Istidlāl-i inshā’ī refers to reasoning that creatively constructs propositions to engage with reality, distinct from sensory, estimative, or imaginative processes.

The unit of mundane thought and the basis of logic is the proposition or statement, formed through the association and coexistence of concepts in the form of hypothetical syllogisms or simple propositions, attending to their relational and judgmental connections.

The foundation of mental and logical discourse is the conditional proposition. The conditional proposition is the primary form of propositions, with universal categorical propositions transforming into connected conditionals and particular categorical propositions into disjunctive conditionals. Thus, instead of the traditional logical principles of subject and predicate, the proposition itself, judged by its relational measure, is emphasized. The predicate always contains a relation.

The theory of syllogisms and their transformations hinges on connectives, dependencies, and meaningful relations, revealing the attributes and connections of existence and its phenomena within the system of propositions. Hence, subject and predicate are not the focus of understanding; rather, the judgmental relation (the verb “to be”) is what informs and illuminates. The logic of propositions is shaped by logical connectives, which treat propositions as indivisible wholes, not broken into smaller units. This analysis is termed the calculus or logic of propositions. We will discuss judgment and judgmental relations in Chapter Two due to their foundational role in awareness.

The manifestation of a relation with its two sides is unified in propositions and their application, as well as in the external world, where it has objective realization, not mere abstraction. Just as a relation in mental propositions involves consideration, it also manifests externally. Every manifestation involves relation and proportion, derived from the relationship of existence and manifestation, encompassing all realms and coexisting phenomena. In a conditional proposition, entailment is a relation between premises and the conclusion of a demonstration, independent of the antecedent-consequent relation in conditional propositions.

In a conditional statement, affirmation takes the logical form “it is the case that,” though its mention is not necessary, while negation takes the form “it is not the case that,” which must be explicitly stated.

Symbolic Logic of Propositions

In natural language, governed unconsciously by societal rules, propositions can effectively convey the meaning and referents of complex phenomena through verbal symbols—the system of vocabulary—and report on them.

Conceptual reactions are reflected in language. Meaning, mediated by mental and rational concepts—both realities and mental creations—is transferred in language through related, corresponding terms representing a coherent, non-arbitrary system of concepts.

Natural language logic, with conceptual symbols, facilitates communication, though symbolic logical language simplifies it further. Precise mathematical symbolic language expresses concepts clearly and concisely without ambiguity. Thus, the simplicity of symbolic logical language is a necessary condition, essential for logic due to reduced error and greater clarity.

Symbolic and visual representation of argumentative structures prevents fallacies, especially verbal ones, and their resulting errors, accelerating the analysis of reasoning processes and providing a clear tool for evaluating inference validity. It extends logic into domains beyond traditional logical rules.

Traditional logical analysis is intertwined with linguistic components, whereas modern logic focuses solely on the logical role of expressions. Predicate logic attributes structures to natural language sentences that obscure their logical properties. If logic is purely logical, unconfused with linguistic issues, it is a rational language with uniform concepts, shared across all possible cultures and languages.

As previously stated, meaningfulness is a condition of logical propositions. Logic engages concepts tied to meaning and referents, but concepts detached from meaning lack logic. Combining propositions without semantic coherence or juxtaposing unrelated subjects does not yield valid inference. Thus, restricting logic to its formal and symbolic aspects while neglecting material natural language is a fallacy that invalidates inference.

Logic cannot be purely formal philosophy, with rules applied without regard to the meaning and substance of demonstration. Meaningfulness is a condition of propositions, requiring semantic coherence and maximal consistency among components and their relations, achieved through interdisciplinary and networked thinking. Without preserving semantic import or signification, relying solely on form and structure, logic cannot be shielded from paradox and contradiction. Formal and symbolic logical language, and even its formal rules, can fall into paradigmatic traps, but what endures is the substance, spirit of meaning, and correct content.

Meaningfulness of Propositions

A proposition is not equivalent to a sentence and excludes performative sentences. Propositions are solely descriptive, representational, and analytical. A proposition is not necessarily an assertive sentence, as propositions have a logical identity, whereas sentences have a linguistic one. For example, “Ahmad is Ali’s son” and “Ali is Ahmad’s father” are two sentences in linguistics and literature but one proposition in logic due to their identical semantic content.

A proposition is a complete sentence reporting a meaningful reality, describing its mental content with cognitive import (not motivational or performative), which may be true or false. The foundation of truth requires at least wisdom and possession of a method, i.e., logic and correct methodology. Thus, a truthful person possesses wisdom and method, delivering descriptive reports.

Given the importance of material logic, sentences based on incorrect or unclear assumptions are merely conceptual, lacking meaning, and do not become logical propositions containing report and meaning. They remain at the level of conception, failing to reach affirmation, acknowledgment, or judgment. With concept and meaning, the referent becomes comprehensible, paving the way for understanding reality or truth.

A logical proposition must be assertive, meaningful, and contain a descriptive claim, leading to a new affirmation in a valid inferential system. Such a proposition is scientific and logical, bearing the capacity for knowledge production.

The proposition’s focus on judgmental relations and the judgment’s attention to meaning imply that semantic judgment leads to necessary acknowledgment and affirmation, not to terms or concepts devoid of meaning. Signification of a term to a mere concept without regard to meaning lacks judgment, affirmation, and connection, as meaning is the relation in every proposition.

Given the principle of propositional meaningfulness, real concepts, through the scientific principle of association and coexistence while preserving their level, are placed in a natural system and world. Combining propositions without regard to semantic coherence, the principle of association and coexistence, or their natural level and semantic context does not form a logical inference. Instead, it results in an incoherent, semantically unrelated combination of propositions, afflicted by a scientific descent or practical leap, rendering it invalid, entangled in mental and conceptual games, and not a refutation of rational logic.

Semantics of Propositions

Statements and propositions carry intended meaning and convey knowledge and awareness. We previously defined meaning as that which a concept parallels. Meaning manifests and is transferred through sagacious linguistic establishment in statements and terms.

Understanding the subtleties of semantic identity is the task of semantics. This emerging branch of human knowledge is closely tied to linguistics, analytical philosophy of language, hermeneutics, philosophy of religion, interpretation, and theories of understanding. It has been systematically examined in the principles of jurisprudence. This text does not aim to explore the principles and aspects of semantics in detail, limiting itself to a brief clarification necessary for understanding the narrations on gnostic knowledge, discussed in Chapter Two.

Thought constructs mental reality based on the objective world by discovering fundamental axes and enables communication through language, facilitating shared thought, collective reasoning, and teaching-learning processes.

Language, thought, and cognitive tools are collectively effective within a supportive, collaborative team structure.

Semantics is the methodical analysis of statements and the study of meaning as intended by the speaker. It examines and analyzes coherent meaning systems, worlds, and organized semantic structures to uncover the speaker’s intent and grasp the overall import of their discourse, not merely individual terms within a conceptual, propositional, or networked semantic system.

Semantics is impossible without the reader’s familiarity and connection with the speaker’s language. Language is the systematic expression aligned with the speaker’s ontology and worldview, forming their semantic world. Thus, the foundation of semantics consists of existential and phenomenological inquiries.

The output of such analysis requires deep exploration of informational propositions, which are inputs to human perspectives on existence and phenomena. These perspectives, appearing in the human faculty of understanding and analyzed through its cognitive system, are termed “principles of thought,” also known as foundations or “presuppositions.”

Informational and Instrumental Presuppositions

Presuppositions are either informational, contributing to meaning, or instrumental, serving as tools for understanding meaning. First, the most critical ontological presuppositions affecting the understanding of a statement must be identified, as the foundations of textual semantics are recognized. Understanding a text or statement with a simple mind devoid of presuppositions is impossible. Comprehending many foundational rules requires prior awareness of philosophical and mystical foundations and consideration of their specialized or general sources.

Informational presuppositions play a role in understanding the speaker’s intended meaning, potentially amplifying or diminishing it. They also contribute to explicating many instrumental presuppositions.

Beyond recognizing informational presuppositions, understanding the intended meaning requires identifying instrumental presuppositions—knowledge that aids in grasping concepts, subjects, and the apparent and primary meaning of a statement, such as lexicology, literature, semantics, and rhetoric.

Foundational informational presuppositions, not reliant on others, are limited to self-evident knowledge. We will discuss foundational informational presuppositions in the context of guardianship and the narration “Were it not for you” in Chapter Two.

The primary tools of awareness, learning, and teaching are the intellect and mind. Humans access the realm of reality through sensory perception, mental and rational understanding, and intuitive and heartfelt vision. Through perception, understanding, intuition, and awareness, they behold the world, becoming reality-representing through sensory and rational understanding and attaining truths through heartfelt vision. Transferring awareness and gnosis, beyond presenting referents, is possible through intersubjective and conceptual construction via rational cognitive tools—human intellect and reason—and the linguistic tool of semantic transfer. Superior to this is teaching through direct connection and referential attainment, which we will discuss later.

Key Instrumental Presuppositions

Instrumental presuppositions are derived from informational presuppositions. As informational presuppositions vary with the reader’s mental repertoire, cognitive capacities, and methodological or reductionist constraints, the explication and interpretation of instrumental presuppositions admit diverse perspectives. While comparative discussions, interdisciplinary research, and critical examination of presuppositions and biases can facilitate superior awareness, differences in cognitive capacity, mental ability, and intuitive or rational insight open the door to the relativity of knowledge and perspectives. Thus, one should not expect uniform thought. The manifestation of the exalted Truth never repeats in any form, place, or phenomenon, especially in humans, each possessing countless internal determinations.

A key instrumental rule is the conventional assignment of terms to true meaning. Some consider the signification of a term to meaning as natural, as in theories of inherent meaning or revelatory perspectives. In the former, establishment and usage occur due to intrinsic suitability; in the latter, a term is a shadow or revelatory existence of meaning, immediately understood by the mind upon hearing, revealing qualities like beauty or ugliness in the term’s form. Others view terms as conventional and discretionary, with some attributing conventions to ordinary humans, divided into designated and determined types. Though term establishment is conventional and subject to human discretion, the terms of sacred texts are sagacious, rational, and aligned with suitability, relation, and connection, rooted in supernatural semantics. This is especially true for the Qur’anic revelation, with its direct manifestation and divine composition. As truth is singular and each manifestation unique, a term is conventionally assigned to a single true, perfect meaning. The divine human’s statement in the realm of truth carries true meaning, becoming increasingly metaphorical as it departs from that realm, possibly reduced to mere allegory in the material realm. If the reader is not freed from human constraints and focuses solely on the apparent meaning, they will gain only a fraction of the true meaning. Tools for understanding metaphorical meanings include redirecting (ṣārifa) and determining (mu‘ayyina) contextual cues. The semantic connection of each term and proposition to a broader semantic system allows infinite semantic functions. This feature, like the role of connected or disconnected redirecting cues, determines the speaker’s intended meaning. The multiplicity of metaphorical meanings and the role of cues first establish the meaning in the speaker’s mind, then reproduce it in the reader’s mind. Among disconnected cues is the divine human’s guarded heart, which articulates and clarifies their propositions. Given the arrangement of terms, the order of propositions, and the Qur’an’s revelatory structure and boundless linguistic domain, articulated by the divine human’s blessed heart, and the richness of Arabic vocabulary, the scope for precision and insight in this revelatory system is vast.

As language is the systematic expression aligned with the speaker’s worldview and ontology, the speaker embeds their perspective on existence and phenomena in terms, expecting the reader to grasp each term’s meaning in relation to other terms, the semantic system, and the speaker’s intent. Some view religious language as a set of non-cognitive propositions, with proponents emphasizing functionalist semantics, where religious propositions address values and evoke believers’ emotions. They argue: do not ask for a proposition’s meaning but its application. Thus, religious propositions are neither true nor false but recommendations for a way of life. The cognitive view of religious language sees religious propositions as reflecting objective realities. Based on prior presuppositions, religious language is both truthful and metaphorical, not incapable of conveying true meaning as expected. This realm cannot fully manifest true meaning, so the speaker sometimes likens transcendent meaning to sensory phenomena. This simile should not lead to conflating it with material attributes or dismissing the true meaning of revealed terms, mistaking sensory meaning for true meaning. The necessary and applied functions of these terms and their referents are comprehensible, and to that extent, the speaker’s intent can be attained. Each human phenomenon has numerous, distinct manifestations and determinations, for which these propositions provide language. Thus, revelatory propositions (except limited dialectical or exclusive propositions for the elect) have multifaceted functions: the common perceive religious language as common, the elite and elect see it as allusive, the saints as subtle, and prophets as truthful. Beyond this, the highest level has its own language, unbound by these, with revelatory propositions possessing various realms with distinct intended meanings, each with its specific language and reader.

It must be noted that in every name, as the singular unity of the Truth manifests, all names manifest collectively, differing only in appearances and determinations. A statement may reflect the reader’s state in a specific manifestation or realm they inhabit, not the state of truth itself.

Affirmation and Belief in Propositional Meaning

Awareness is based on affirmation and prioritizing the occurrence and manifestation of a reality. Affirmative understanding refers to grasping a proposition’s truth or falsity.

This understanding is distinct from imitation, conjecture, assurance, ordinary knowledge, certainty, conviction, belief, acknowledgment, reporting, declaration, and devotion to or belief in the known. All these are psychological states and, like understanding and perception, personal. They are gradational, admitting degrees of intensity. Conviction is reinforced certainty with dual stability: certainty in affirming the proposition and certainty in negating its contrary.

With the objectivity of knowledge through existence and manifestation, and the gradational nature of manifestation levels, knowledge becomes multilevel and multifaceted. The criterion of propositional truth is fluid, aligned with the knowledge of each level and compatible with it.

Imagination, which prioritizes the proposition’s contrary, and doubt, which neither affirms the proposition nor its contrary, are forms of unawareness and ignorance.

Meaningless and false propositions are detached from reality and lack objective reality. Some mental propositions are relations of the mind with itself, though in this case, the mind itself, as an objective phenomenon, is their reality.

Affirmation is the enactment and formation of a judgment. This internal act is perceived through intuition and termed faith or belief. Judgment is the practical intellect’s acknowledgment, mental submission, and voluntary devotion, which may be rejected or denied due to impurity or rebellion, failing to reach affirmation, faith, or belief, unlike perception, which lies within the theoretical intellect.

Perception, given its premises, is involuntary, not volitional. Affirmation is a condition of faith. In faith, beyond affirmation, there is internal acknowledgment and belief.

Affirmation is the mission of philosophy and the system of propositions, reaching judgment and affirmation of realities through rational demonstration.

One possesses true knowledge and awareness who has the capacity for affirmation, manifesting their findings, connections, and lived scientific essence, the meaning of mental propositions, and heartfelt wisdom through their own creative expression and perspective.

Affirmative understanding and correct belief lead to the soul’s perfection. Later, we will discuss how the soul adopts the determination of what it knows and attends to, becoming what it knows and believes.

The system of propositions is so significant that a mind’s life can be said to be its propositional system, which, through affirmation and faith, constructs eternal life.

As we will discuss, scientific life surpasses mental life, gnostic and revelatory intuitive life surpasses scientific life, and true existential life surpasses all. These levels of awareness must not be conflated.

The mind organizes its functions, effects, and judgments based on the brain’s general content, the intellect’s conceptual system, or the truths and realities entering the heart, achieving joyful, fulfilling functions if aligned with what is good, desirable, and salvific for it.

The significance of the comprehensive, creative perceptual system becomes evident when noting that the mind, upon gaining proximity, intimacy, and connection with any manifestation and becoming aware of it, creates and adopts that manifestation’s visage, which becomes its aspect. This aspect, derived from the mind, is neither lost nor destroyed. Whatever settles in the human mind or heart becomes inseparable and eternal for them.

The “I” perceived through intuitive understanding is an act, determination, and visage of the mind or heart, not the soul in its entirety, and this act is inseparable from it. Both the mind and the heart’s internal perceptual system can adopt infinite visages without anything exiting them, just as nothing enters the mind or heart as mind or heart. The system of transformation and infinite configurations is governed by the mind and heart’s will and creation.

If concepts possess correct meaning and reality within a conceptual system that intricately interacts with emotional concepts, they can form truthful propositions in a sound structure, propositions that constitute a system of inference and knowledge production, supported by reason, demonstration, and completeness.

In this system, the logic of propositions looks to the apparent phenomena of existence for their understanding, not their essence or nature, as traditional categorical propositions, based on the theory of ten categories and essential concepts, claimed to address. Essence, like non-existence, has no role or effect in objectivity, externality, awareness, or the mind.

Personal Propositions

The logic of propositions relies on the necessity of empirical induction, attention to the external laws of objects, and assuming the truth of premises in inference, adopting a conditional form.

Particular existential propositions (manifest existential propositions) condition the truth of a proposition on the existence and manifestation of at least one individual for the subject, analyzing universal propositions conditionally, with their truth or falsity unrelated to the subject’s existence.

A true proposition, whose subject may be hypothetical or assumed, is reduced to a conditional. An external proposition can be reduced to a true proposition and proven through it.

The basis of logic and thought, regarding the object of the report, lies in personal propositions (specific, manifest existential), composed of nominal and predicative parts, not in concepts detached from realities and confined to mental universals. In this cognitive system, a personal proposition functions as a universal proposition, as its subject denotes the entirety of the individual itself—an individual for whom, considering manifestation and hiddenness, the principle “everything is in everything” applies, and by its completeness and infinitude, it is a universal confined to the individual. We will discuss this completeness and infinitude in Chapter Two, particularly in the discussion of the term aflāk (orbits, floaters).

Logic must serve as a measure for evaluating the mind’s connection to the laws of reality, attending to relations and connections among objects and the attributes of existence and phenomena, to engage with the realm of reality, especially since reality’s truth and essence cannot be cohabited through mental concepts. In Chapter Two, we will discuss how such material and semantic logic is at the disposal of the luminous sage.

The subject of thought must refer to a specific object and personal referent. Note that personal does not equate to particular. With the abandonment of the essentialist framework, recognizing the essence of objects is also set aside, and reality consists of empirical, personal matters. Thus, the basis of knowledge and thought is simple propositions expressing a judgment in particular terms.

If the subject is a universal concept unrelated to its referents or individuals, the proposition is natural, and the term “concept” can be added to it. Such a proposition functions as a personal proposition, as it offers no applicable law for its referents. The subject in personal and natural propositions is true, not instrumental or nominal, unlike restricted propositions, where the subject is nominal, descriptive, and instrumental, with its individuals being the subject’s essence, the true subject, and the predicate a concept.

Foundational Self-Evident Propositions

Sensory perceptions form some concepts, but in the system of propositions and affirmations, the first self-evident propositions are rational and mental. The mind relies on itself to understand them, requiring no sensory perception to grasp their correspondence with reality or affirm them. Their self-evidence equals their truth.

Every self-evident proposition possesses dual certainty: certainty in affirming the predicate for the subject and certainty that its contrary is impossible.

Conceptual and rational propositions, if theoretically describing objects to achieve their optimal application, must be demonstrative, reaching a self-evident, simple, self-measuring proposition whose clarity and self-evidence lie in its immediate, obligatory affirmation by the intellect, without external affirmations or reasoning.

Self-Evidence, Existence, and Philosophical Thought

The calculating and deductive intellect is enriched by logic as the method of thought and philosophy as its content.

The Arabic term for philosophy derives from the Greek philosophia, meaning love of knowledge, with philo denoting boundless love and sophia denoting knowledge. Later, we will discuss the intertwining of knowledge and love, noting that knowledge and awareness are unattainable without connection, affection, and empathy. One must become intimate with a phenomenon, even if that phenomenon is awareness, to access its complexities. We will also address the reductive, effective role of negative emotions and sentiments opposing healthy connection in awareness.

A self-evident concept is simple, non-composite, and its clear understanding depends on nothing else.

The generality of the concept of existence is evidence of its self-evidence, meaning understanding the concept of existence requires no other concept. The general, simple concept of existence has no essence, rational components, genus, species, or any composition, and cannot be defined or described.

The philosophical concept of being (wujūd, existence) is the most general concept. The conceptual intellect knows no concept broader than being and existence. A cursory attention affirms the generality of the concept of being. No concept arises without the concept of being. The generality and thus self-evidence of existence is the first self-evident, certain proposition, the foundation of all perceptions and the basis of all propositions and awareness, without which no perception is possible. Philosophical concepts are tied to existence and its attributes.

Existence, as a nominal infinitive, means being; as a verbal infinitive, it means to be or existing. The existent is a mental creation, while what exists objectively is existence. The existence of being is existence itself, not something else, nor the existent or being as a mental creation. From the generality of existence, the principle of identity is derived, stating that existence is existence, and everything is itself.

Existence is a philosophical concept. Philosophical concepts address the modes of existence of phenomena and their levels of manifestation, not their essential boundaries, and thus lack particular concepts or perceptions. The referent and reality of existence, which is self-evident, are the source of every awareness’s presence.

The reality of existence is objective, independent, and possesses essence, not merely a subjective mental construct, nor subordinate to essence. It is the origin, reality, and entirety of truth, and every manifestation is realized through and by existence.

Essence has no objectivity, external reality, or thingness and is a false, misguided notion from ancient philosophy.

The concept and rational notion of quiddity, a mental creation opposing objective reality, has no external identity in an existential proposition, as by its nature it is neither existence nor non-existence. External affirmation is the prerogative and act of a reality in ultimate perfection, beyond perfection, ultimate absoluteness, and simplicity, which does not admit non-existence. Existence never admits non-existence in any place, nor does its manifestation and appearance become non-existent; rather, it continually renews, gaining a better life upon life without interruption by non-existence or falsehood.

Non-existence and absence are pure falsehood, lacking thingness, realization, or differentiation, and do not admit separation, connection, composition, gradation, intensity, weakness, or levels to constitute existential multiplicity, just as existence lacks such attributes and is unified with objectivity. Composition with non-existence is the absence of composition.

Philosophical Ontology

Existence has both a conceptual and epistemological dimension and a real, objective, ontological reality. These aspects must not be conflated. We previously discussed the concept of existence. The reality of existence, like its concept, is self-evident, clear, simple, and infinite, otherwise it would be composite and limited.

The mind’s presential knowledge of the reality of existence precedes even presential knowledge of the soul, self-awareness, and thought. One who has reached the level of the soul finds, through internal intuitive perception and experience, that without existence, nothing is felt or experienced.

The self-evidence of the reality of existence is perceived presentially and must be grasped through presence, not through the mediating, diminishing concept.

Definitions and descriptions of existence or knowledge, due to their self-evidence and simplicity, are all apophatic and nominal.

Beyond the mind, in the objective world, the fixed reality and truth is existence, accessible to the heart through intimacy, friendship, proximity, and attraction, not merely through the self-evidence of its concept, which does not constitute philosophy.

Simplicity and Distinctness of Existence

Existence and being are purely simple, non-composite, in ultimate existential purity and unity. The reality of being is pure, simple, free of any determination, limitation, attribute, essence, condition, non-existence, genus, or species, in ultimate perfection, richness, and self-sufficiency, without composition, parts, or judgments, a distinct individual. The essential attribute of objective existence is its distinctness, perceived only through intuition, with conceptual propositions merely offering nominal descriptions. Of this existence, one can only say: existence is existence by eternal necessity.

Considered in itself, existence not only requires no proof—its conception equaling its affirmation—but is entirely non-demonstrable and non-inferential. All arguments claiming to prove existence and reality fail to reach inference. Existence has evident, self-evident affirmation, requiring coexistence with it. Through presence in existence’s court, necessity is found in its essence, not through the deductive intellect’s conceptual deliberations and profiteering.

Objective philosophy is founded on the self-evidence of the reality of existence, not its concept. The self-evidence of the concept and reality of existence renders the Qur’an independent of mentioning it, just as proving the essence of the exalted Truth is absent from this revelatory text. Knowledge of the sacred divine essence, the absolute Truth, like the self-evidence of the concept and reality of existence, is self-evident, innate to every phenomenon, and requires no proof, reasoning, or explanation.

Existence is an unlimited referent, inherently boundless, not subject to any judgment, purified of any nominal or attributive manifestation or conceptual limitation, even this judgment, an absolute unknown—an unknown not opposed to manifestation. Every term, even “being,” is applied to it pedagogically. As truth is absolute, it does not fit conceptual molds and, in its absoluteness, does not diminish to the small, superficial mind to become mental. The reality of existence is absolute, infinite, and singular, nay, boundless. Absolute truth, being absolute, encompasses everything, is not confined to any place, has no station or endpoint, is eternal and everlasting, admits no non-existence, and existence is its essential attribute. Existence accepts no name or attribute and is pure silence, otherwise it would not be absolute.

Existential monotheism is achieved through shattering all determinations and complete annihilation, not through the deductive intellect. Intellectual understanding, moving from the desired to principles and suitable grounds, and detailed validation of all latent meanings and knowledge, separating suitable premises, determining the desired, and moving from determined principles to the desired in a specific arrangement, requires consideration of numerous determinations, incompatible with existential monotheism.

Complete Perfection, Existence, and Simple Manifestation

Any identity from which something is negated is composite, consisting of affirmation (establishing itself for itself) and negation (denying the other from itself). Thus, any truly simple reality, whose essence is simple, neither has anything negated from it nor is composed with anything, nor does composition with itself make sense; hence, it is all things and perfections. The all-encompassing nature of existence reaffirms its simplicity and unity, and that it is all truth.

Though the name “existence” is the broadest and most extensive title for reality, as it does not fully express God’s essence, the title “Truth” (ḥaqq) is employed for theological discussions, as it better reflects the essence and is more fitting for God.

The exalted Truth possesses perfection and completeness in knowledge, love, and every perfection. Knowledge, love, and every perfection and attribute, at the level of essence, are identical with the essence of the exalted Truth, neither separate, distinct, nor created, nor forming an additive composition with it, but unified with the essence. These attributes are not incidental to the exalted Truth nor additional to it.

God possesses knowledge, love, and every attribute in simplicity, so His perfect attributes are not superadded to His essence. Knowledge, love, and all His attributes are established by His essence, identical with all attributes and perfections, not of the nature of manifestation and appearance at the essential level. At the level of appearance, they are of the nature of manifestation, with gradational manifestation suited to each level, preserving the completeness and totality of perfection, considering both manifestation and hiddenness together. This loving movement is the life, sustenance, and health of every level and manifestation. Note that collectivity differs from completeness.

Manifestation lacks an independent, self-subsistent essence but, beyond this relation, possesses all perfect attributes in a modal, functional sense, considering both manifestation and hiddenness. The necessity of manifestation is not imperfection, limitation, posteriority, or origination (appearance after non-existence). Manifestation need not be assumed in time or assigned a beginning. The energy of appearance has neither beginning nor end but, with continuous expansion and inflation, experiences font-family: ‘Georgia’, serif; color: #333F4F; line-height: 1.7; border-radius: 10px; box-shadow: 0 4px 6px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.1); text-align: justify; direction: ltr;”>

Conceptual and Acquired Intellect in Khademi’s Epistemology

Conceptual and Acquired Intellect

Sense (ḥiss), estimation (wahm), imagination (khayāl), and rational thought (ta‘aqqul) are levels of perception and awareness.¹ Sensory perceptions, estimative apprehensions, and imaginative constructs are particular, whereas the conceptual intellect (‘aql-i mafhūmī) engages with meaning through universal concepts and demonstrative propositions, evaluating them systematically. Sensory perception is particular and tied to concrete referents, while the concept derived from it—abstracted by the creative mind at the level of intellect, stripping away the specific attributes of initial perception—is rational, meaning it is a universal significance capable, in principle, of applying to more than one instance, even hypothetically. Particularity and universality are attributes incidental to a concept. A particular concept corresponds to an external, distinct reality, applying to a specific referent.

¹ In Islamic philosophy, ḥiss refers to sensory perception via the five external senses; wahm denotes the faculty of estimation, which apprehends particular non-sensible meanings (e.g., danger); khayāl is the faculty of imagination, which stores and manipulates sensory forms; and ta‘aqqul signifies the process of rational intellection.

The acquired and conceptual intellect is instrumental in achieving precise, demonstrative awareness, enabling humans to comprehend universal concepts and rules through propositions that align with the order of existence and its phenomena. It yields accurate and truthful recognition of fixed patterns beyond the apparent differences of diverse events, fostering a relatively correct worldview through creative and productive engagement with the concrete world. This generates certain, definitive knowledge (‘ilm), the contrary of which is inconceivable. Such knowledge equips humans with the capacity to respond most effectively to environmental events. However, mere certainty, if not transformed into knowledge, lacks intrinsic correspondence with reality.

The conceptual intellect serves as an internal criterion (ḥujjat-i dhinī) for truth and validity, determining the legitimacy of external proofs, the authenticity of prophethood, the verification of miracles, and the judgment thereof. When fully realized, it attains the realm of wisdom (ḥikmat), surrendering itself to wisdom, gnosis (ma‘rifat), love, and unity.

Mental propositions collectively constitute humanity’s rational world. The conceptual rational world holds such significance that it is deemed an internal criterion, serving as the measure for discerning the truth or falsity of claims made by the divine human (insān-i ilāhī).

If the intellect merely calculates and does not transcend deductive and conceptual awareness, it risks becoming entangled in universal propositions and concepts detached from meaning. Instead of serving as a bridge to meanings and truths, it becomes a barrier to truth. Concepts alone remedy no ailment, and confinement to mere propositions and concepts—especially if they lack alignment with reality, intuitive grasp, or translation into belief and action—cannot pave the path to inner truth or realization. Such concepts may distort human essence, rendering it perverse.

Concept, Meaning, and Referent

In classical logic, the unit of thought is the concept (mafhūm). Conceptual and meaningful thoughts are constructs of understanding, positioned beyond sensory perception but not yet attaining the level of knowledge (‘ilm). Conceptual and mental realization is an engagement with reality.

The system of concepts and their derived propositions, along with their intended meaning, constitutes a distinct level from sensory perception and empirical induction. Sensory perception directly engages the realm of reality in situ, whereas a mental concept exists parallel to reality, residing solely in the mind. Precisely, a concept is a framework created from reality within the mind, constituting mental awareness with its inherent mentality, such as the mental concept of a human.

Meaning (ma‘nā) is that which the concept parallels, such as the collective rational meaning of a human, through which the mind constructs the mental concept of a human.² Meaning connects and binds the concept to its referent in proportion to mental awareness, serving as a crucial link for realizing this type of awareness. The concept describes the meaning.

² Ma‘nā denotes the semantic essence that a concept reflects, linking mental constructs to external reality.

The referent (muṣdāq) is a concrete reality to which the meaning applies and relates, named as such because it is subject to judgment and affirmation. For example, applying “human” to an external individual who is truly human and, in reality, a scholar.

The initial, rudimentary meaning that a term evokes in the mind is the ma‘nūn (denoted meaning), and the term itself, by virtue of its relation to it, is the ‘unwān (title). This title, which familiarizes one with the meaning, is deemed reality if it corresponds accurately to that meaning through valid means, such as sense, scientific experience, or demonstrative reasoning. The ma‘nūn is then called a referent by the same validity. Reality, if truthful, is truth (ḥaqīqat), accessible through heartfelt intimacy.

The connection between a term and its meaning, by virtue of its representational function, is dalālat (signification). Signification involves a mental intermediary—either a rational concept or a sensory, imaginative, or estimative image created by the mind. The consideration of its creation is also a relation to reality or truth. Terms are established for such meanings, which may indicate the ma‘nūn, reality, or truth. The establishment of a term, in relation to meaning and reality, must be sagacious, based on the logic of understanding meaning and semantics, transcending the apparent referents and meanings to reach the substance and spirit of meaning—i.e., a comprehensive, universal meaning—methodically and proportionately. The “spirit of meaning” and the comprehensive meaning of all referents of a concept denote an action, interaction, or manifestation, abstracted by disregarding the particularities of related referents.

An individual, with meaning qualified by distinctness and determination, is manifest, such as the external “I.”

In understanding a phenomenon, what matters is distinguishing its optimal, natural state from its coerced, undesirable state, transitioning from the latter to the former by attributing the phenomenon’s specific effect and judgment to itself. This is impossible without linking each concept to its reality and semantic referent, a clear and precise definition, and foundational, self-evident propositions. Foundational propositions are intuitive and primary, providing the truth and correspondence of any theoretical proposition with reality and the essence of a thing as it is. In analyzing concepts, it is crucial to determine the concept’s level of reality, its degree of truthfulness, and whether it leads to affirmation or an intuitive understanding of a proposition’s truth, achieved without discursive reasoning.

The formation and definition of a concept, if conducted through an inductive, empirical, and practical process—engaging with the conceptual system and internal structure of a case, its essential components, and distinctions among cases by attending to related, positive concepts and excluding irrelevant, negative examples—occurs within the pathways of understanding and discovering issues at the conceptual level, with its inherent limitations. It thus leads to solutions within this scope.

Defining and identifying a concept involves two levels: recognizing the phenomenon’s distinctness and distinguishing it from its peers, which does not inherently lead to uniqueness but serves to highlight its subtleties through comparison.

Concepts articulate various empirical experiences in particular terms, establishing symmetry between concept, experience, and action. In this case, the conceptual system is founded on experiential realities and organized accordingly. Otherwise, it becomes pure mentalism, detached from reality, potentially false, pseudo-knowledge, or delusion, lacking even weak or superficial awareness, constituting ignorance, falsehood, or deception.

Conceptual knowledge is a level of awareness and its determinations, the work of a material, impure mind characterized by its mentality. It should not be confused with luminous, heartfelt wisdom, which is pure light, possessing referent and interpretation. A concept is a passage to meaning. Fixation on mere concepts breeds delusion, deception, and fallacy. Knowledge must be meaningful and, beyond that, referential, wise, and interpretive. Semantics submits to the realm of gnosis and the discovery of referents, granting truth-value to thought and fostering creative knowledge production.

Sensory and conceptual knowledge are different determinations of a single knowledge, unified in reality, not distinct cognitive systems with disparate realities in humans. The collective awareness drives higher reasoning and thought, enhancing mental and rational capacity. Clear, illuminating knowledge is the creative output of a pure mind, though knowledge, wherever it resides—even in the material and mundane—is of the nature of light, clarity, and purity.

With the objectivity of existence and manifestation through knowledge, the expansion of manifestation correlates with scientific development. Scientific development requires the correspondence of awareness with reality and essence. The question of essence applies to both impure, tainted presences and pure, abstract mental knowledge, as error is possible in abstract knowledge and direct intuition. Absolute knowledge leading to absolute infallibility has no place in the mundane, human realm. We will later discuss superma‘rifat, superjustification, and essence.

Conditional Propositions

Speculative, mental propositions are specific to nature and the mundane. A proposition is a verbal expression of a mental judgment or affirmation. The system of propositions grants humans the capacity for generative reasoning (istidlāl-i inshā’ī) to apprehend realities in the mundane.³ In higher realms, meaning, reality, truth, and constancy prevail.

³ Istidlāl-i inshā’ī refers to reasoning that creatively constructs propositions to engage with reality, distinct from sensory, estimative, or imaginative processes.

The unit of mundane thought and the basis of logic is the proposition or statement, formed through the association and coexistence of concepts in the form of hypothetical syllogisms or simple propositions, attending to their relational and judgmental connections.

The foundation of mental and logical discourse is the conditional proposition. The conditional proposition is the primary form of propositions, with universal categorical propositions transforming into connected conditionals and particular categorical propositions into disjunctive conditionals. Thus, instead of the traditional logical principles of subject and predicate, the proposition itself, judged by its relational measure, is emphasized. The predicate always contains a relation.

The theory of syllogisms and their transformations hinges on connectives, dependencies, and meaningful relations, revealing the attributes and connections of existence and its phenomena within the system of propositions. Hence, subject and predicate are not the focus of understanding; rather, the judgmental relation (the verb “to be”) is what informs and illuminates. The logic of propositions is shaped by logical connectives, which treat propositions as indivisible wholes, not broken into smaller units. This analysis is termed the calculus or logic of propositions. We will discuss judgment and judgmental relations in Chapter Two due to their foundational role in awareness.

The manifestation of a relation with its two sides is unified in propositions and their application, as well as in the external world, where it has objective realization, not mere abstraction. Just as a relation in mental propositions involves consideration, it also manifests externally. Every manifestation involves relation and proportion, derived from the relationship of existence and manifestation, encompassing all realms and coexisting phenomena. In a conditional proposition, entailment is a relation between premises and the conclusion of a demonstration, independent of the antecedent-consequent relation in conditional propositions.

In a conditional statement, affirmation takes the logical form “it is the case that,” though its mention is not necessary, while negation takes the form “it is not the case that,” which must be explicitly stated.

Symbolic Logic of Propositions

In natural language, governed unconsciously by societal rules, propositions can effectively convey the meaning and referents of complex phenomena through verbal symbols—the system of vocabulary—and report on them.

Conceptual reactions are reflected in language. Meaning, mediated by mental and rational concepts—both realities and mental creations—is transferred in language through related, corresponding terms representing a coherent, non-arbitrary system of concepts.

Natural language logic, with conceptual symbols, facilitates communication, though symbolic logical language simplifies it further. Precise mathematical symbolic language expresses concepts clearly and concisely without ambiguity. Thus, the simplicity of symbolic logical language is a necessary condition, essential for logic due to reduced error and greater clarity.

Symbolic and visual representation of argumentative structures prevents fallacies, especially verbal ones, and their resulting errors, accelerating the analysis of reasoning processes and providing a clear tool for evaluating inference validity. It extends logic into domains beyond traditional logical rules.

Traditional logical analysis is intertwined with linguistic components, whereas modern logic focuses solely on the logical role of expressions. Predicate logic attributes structures to natural language sentences that obscure their logical properties. If logic is purely logical, unconfused with linguistic issues, it is a rational language with uniform concepts, shared across all possible cultures and languages.

As previously stated, meaningfulness is a condition of logical propositions. Logic engages concepts tied to meaning and referents, but concepts detached from meaning lack logic. Combining propositions without semantic coherence or juxtaposing unrelated subjects does not yield valid inference. Thus, restricting logic to its formal and symbolic aspects while neglecting material natural language is a fallacy that invalidates inference.

Logic cannot be purely formal philosophy, with rules applied without regard to the meaning and substance of demonstration. Meaningfulness is a condition of propositions, requiring semantic coherence and maximal consistency among components and their relations, achieved through interdisciplinary and networked thinking. Without preserving semantic import or signification, relying solely on form and structure, logic cannot be shielded from paradox and contradiction. Formal and symbolic logical language, and even its formal rules, can fall into paradigmatic traps, but what endures is the substance, spirit of meaning, and correct content.

Meaningfulness of Propositions

A proposition is not equivalent to a sentence and excludes performative sentences. Propositions are solely descriptive, representational, and analytical. A proposition is not necessarily an assertive sentence, as propositions have a logical identity, whereas sentences have a linguistic one. For example, “Ahmad is Ali’s son” and “Ali is Ahmad’s father” are two sentences in linguistics and literature but one proposition in logic due to their identical semantic content.

A proposition is a complete sentence reporting a meaningful reality, describing its mental content with cognitive import (not motivational or performative), which may be true or false. The foundation of truth requires at least wisdom and possession of a method, i.e., logic and correct methodology. Thus, a truthful person possesses wisdom and method, delivering descriptive reports.

Given the importance of material logic, sentences based on incorrect or unclear assumptions are merely conceptual, lacking meaning, and do not become logical propositions containing report and meaning. They remain at the level of conception, failing to reach affirmation, acknowledgment, or judgment. With concept and meaning, the referent becomes comprehensible, paving the way for understanding reality or truth.

A logical proposition must be assertive, meaningful, and contain a descriptive claim, leading to a new affirmation in a valid inferential system. Such a proposition is scientific and logical, bearing the capacity for knowledge production.

The proposition’s focus on judgmental relations and the judgment’s attention to meaning imply that semantic judgment leads to necessary acknowledgment and affirmation, not to terms or concepts devoid of meaning. Signification of a term to a mere concept without regard to meaning lacks judgment, affirmation, and connection, as meaning is the relation in every proposition.

Given the principle of propositional meaningfulness, real concepts, through the scientific principle of association and coexistence while preserving their level, are placed in a natural system and world. Combining propositions without regard to semantic coherence, the principle of association and coexistence, or their natural level and semantic context does not form a logical inference. Instead, it results in an incoherent, semantically unrelated combination of propositions, afflicted by a scientific descent or practical leap, rendering it invalid, entangled in mental and conceptual games, and not a refutation of rational logic.

Semantics of Propositions

Statements and propositions carry intended meaning and convey knowledge and awareness. We previously defined meaning as that which a concept parallels. Meaning manifests and is transferred through sagacious linguistic establishment in statements and terms.

Understanding the subtleties of semantic identity is the task of semantics. This emerging branch of human knowledge is closely tied to linguistics, analytical philosophy of language, hermeneutics, philosophy of religion, interpretation, and theories of understanding. It has been systematically examined in the principles of jurisprudence. This text does not aim to explore the principles and aspects of semantics in detail, limiting itself to a brief clarification necessary for understanding the narrations on gnostic knowledge, discussed in Chapter Two.

Thought constructs mental reality based on the objective world by discovering fundamental axes and enables communication through language, facilitating shared thought, collective reasoning, and teaching-learning processes.

Language, thought, and cognitive tools are collectively effective within a supportive, collaborative team structure.

Semantics is the methodical analysis of statements and the study of meaning as intended by the speaker. It examines and analyzes coherent meaning systems, worlds, and organized semantic structures to uncover the speaker’s intent and grasp the overall import of their discourse, not merely individual terms within a conceptual, propositional, or networked semantic system.

Semantics is impossible without the reader’s familiarity and connection with the speaker’s language. Language is the systematic expression aligned with the speaker’s ontology and worldview, forming their semantic world. Thus, the foundation of semantics consists of existential and phenomenological inquiries.

The output of such analysis requires deep exploration of informational propositions, which are inputs to human perspectives on existence and phenomena. These perspectives, appearing in the human faculty of understanding and analyzed through its cognitive system, are termed “principles of thought,” also known as foundations or “presuppositions.”

Informational and Instrumental Presuppositions

Presuppositions are either informational, contributing to meaning, or instrumental, serving as tools for understanding meaning. First, the most critical ontological presuppositions affecting the understanding of a statement must be identified, as the foundations of textual semantics are recognized. Understanding a text or statement with a simple mind devoid of presuppositions is impossible. Comprehending many foundational rules requires prior awareness of philosophical and mystical foundations and consideration of their specialized or general sources.

Informational presuppositions play a role in understanding the speaker’s intended meaning, potentially amplifying or diminishing it. They also contribute to explicating many instrumental presuppositions.

Beyond recognizing informational presuppositions, understanding the intended meaning requires identifying instrumental presuppositions—knowledge that aids in grasping concepts, subjects, and the apparent and primary meaning of a statement, such as lexicology, literature, semantics, and rhetoric.

Foundational informational presuppositions, not reliant on others, are limited to self-evident knowledge. We will discuss foundational informational presuppositions in the context of guardianship and the narration “Were it not for you” in Chapter Two.

The primary tools of awareness, learning, and teaching are the intellect and mind. Humans access the realm of reality through sensory perception, mental and rational understanding, and intuitive and heartfelt vision. Through perception, understanding, intuition, and awareness, they behold the world, becoming reality-representing through sensory and rational understanding and attaining truths through heartfelt vision. Transferring awareness and gnosis, beyond presenting referents, is possible through intersubjective and conceptual construction via rational cognitive tools—human intellect and reason—and the linguistic tool of semantic transfer. Superior to this is teaching through direct connection and referential attainment, which we will discuss later.

Key Instrumental Presuppositions

Instrumental presuppositions are derived from informational presuppositions. As informational presuppositions vary with the reader’s mental repertoire, cognitive capacities, and methodological or reductionist constraints, the explication and interpretation of instrumental presuppositions admit diverse perspectives. While comparative discussions, interdisciplinary research, and critical examination of presuppositions and biases can facilitate superior awareness, differences in cognitive capacity, mental ability, and intuitive or rational insight open the door to the relativity of knowledge and perspectives. Thus, one should not expect uniform thought. The manifestation of the exalted Truth never repeats in any form, place, or phenomenon, especially in humans, each possessing countless internal determinations.

A key instrumental rule is the conventional assignment of terms to true meaning. Some consider the signification of a term to meaning as natural, as in theories of inherent meaning or revelatory perspectives. In the former, establishment and usage occur due to intrinsic suitability; in the latter, a term is a shadow or revelatory existence of meaning, immediately understood by the mind upon hearing, revealing qualities like beauty or ugliness in the term’s form. Others view terms as conventional and discretionary, with some attributing conventions to ordinary humans, divided into designated and determined types. Though term establishment is conventional and subject to human discretion, the terms of sacred texts are sagacious, rational, and aligned with suitability, relation, and connection, rooted in supernatural semantics. This is especially true for the Qur’anic revelation, with its direct manifestation and divine composition. As truth is singular and each manifestation unique, a term is conventionally assigned to a single true, perfect meaning. The divine human’s statement in the realm of truth carries true meaning, becoming increasingly metaphorical as it departs from that realm, possibly reduced to mere allegory in the material realm. If the reader is not freed from human constraints and focuses solely on the apparent meaning, they will gain only a fraction of the true meaning. Tools for understanding metaphorical meanings include redirecting (ṣārifa) and determining (mu‘ayyina) contextual cues. The semantic connection of each term and proposition to a broader semantic system allows infinite semantic functions. This feature, like the role of connected or disconnected redirecting cues, determines the speaker’s intended meaning. The multiplicity of metaphorical meanings and the role of cues first establish the meaning in the speaker’s mind, then reproduce it in the reader’s mind. Among disconnected cues is the divine human’s guarded heart, which articulates and clarifies their propositions. Given the arrangement of terms, the order of propositions, and the Qur’an’s revelatory structure and boundless linguistic domain, articulated by the divine human’s blessed heart, and the richness of Arabic vocabulary, the scope for precision and insight in this revelatory system is vast.

As language is the systematic expression aligned with the speaker’s worldview and ontology, the speaker embeds their perspective on existence and phenomena in terms, expecting the reader to grasp each term’s meaning in relation to other terms, the semantic system, and the speaker’s intent. Some view religious language as a set of non-cognitive propositions, with proponents emphasizing functionalist semantics, where religious propositions address values and evoke believers’ emotions. They argue: do not ask for a proposition’s meaning but its application. Thus, religious propositions are neither true nor false but recommendations for a way of life. The cognitive view of religious language sees religious propositions as reflecting objective realities. Based on prior presuppositions, religious language is both truthful and metaphorical, not incapable of conveying true meaning as expected. This realm cannot fully manifest true meaning, so the speaker sometimes likens transcendent meaning to sensory phenomena. This simile should not lead to conflating it with material attributes or dismissing the true meaning of revealed terms, mistaking sensory meaning for true meaning. The necessary and applied functions of these terms and their referents are comprehensible, and to that extent, the speaker’s intent can be attained. Each human phenomenon has numerous, distinct manifestations and determinations, for which these propositions provide language. Thus, revelatory propositions (except limited dialectical or exclusive propositions for the elect) have multifaceted functions: the common perceive religious language as common, the elite and elect see it as allusive, the saints as subtle, and prophets as truthful. Beyond this, the highest level has its own language, unbound by these, with revelatory propositions possessing various realms with distinct intended meanings, each with its specific language and reader.

It must be noted that in every name, as the singular unity of the Truth manifests, all names manifest collectively, differing only in appearances and determinations. A statement may reflect the reader’s state in a specific manifestation or realm they inhabit, not the state of truth itself.

Affirmation and Belief in Propositional Meaning

Awareness is based on affirmation and prioritizing the occurrence and manifestation of a reality. Affirmative understanding refers to grasping a proposition’s truth or falsity.

This understanding is distinct from imitation, conjecture, assurance, ordinary knowledge, certainty, conviction, belief, acknowledgment, reporting, declaration, and devotion to or belief in the known. All these are psychological states and, like understanding and perception, personal. They are gradational, admitting degrees of intensity. Conviction is reinforced certainty with dual stability: certainty in affirming the proposition and certainty in negating its contrary.

With the objectivity of knowledge through existence and manifestation, and the gradational nature of manifestation levels, knowledge becomes multilevel and multifaceted. The criterion of propositional truth is fluid, aligned with the knowledge of each level and compatible with it.

Imagination, which prioritizes the proposition’s contrary, and doubt, which neither affirms the proposition nor its contrary, are forms of unawareness and ignorance.

Meaningless and false propositions are detached from reality and lack objective reality. Some mental propositions are relations of the mind with itself, though in this case, the mind itself, as an objective phenomenon, is their reality.

Affirmation is the enactment and formation of a judgment. This internal act is perceived through intuition and termed faith or belief. Judgment is the practical intellect’s acknowledgment, mental submission, and voluntary devotion, which may be rejected or denied due to impurity or rebellion, failing to reach affirmation, faith, or belief, unlike perception, which lies within the theoretical intellect.

Perception, given its premises, is involuntary, not volitional. Affirmation is a condition of faith. In faith, beyond affirmation, there is internal acknowledgment and belief.

Affirmation is the mission of philosophy and the system of propositions, reaching judgment and affirmation of realities through rational demonstration.

One possesses true knowledge and awareness who has the capacity for affirmation, manifesting their findings, connections, and lived scientific essence, the meaning of mental propositions, and heartfelt wisdom through their own creative expression and perspective.

Affirmative understanding and correct belief lead to the soul’s perfection. Later, we will discuss how the soul adopts the determination of what it knows and attends to, becoming what it knows and believes.

The system of propositions is so significant that a mind’s life can be said to be its propositional system, which, through affirmation and faith, constructs eternal life.

As we will discuss, scientific life surpasses mental life, gnostic and revelatory intuitive life surpasses scientific life, and true existential life surpasses all. These levels of awareness must not be conflated.

The mind organizes its functions, effects, and judgments based on the brain’s general content, the intellect’s conceptual system, or the truths and realities entering the heart, achieving joyful, fulfilling functions if aligned with what is good, desirable, and salvific for it.

The significance of the comprehensive, creative perceptual system becomes evident when noting that the mind, upon gaining proximity, intimacy, and connection with any manifestation and becoming aware of it, creates and adopts that manifestation’s visage, which becomes its aspect. This aspect, derived from the mind, is neither lost nor destroyed. Whatever settles in the human mind or heart becomes inseparable and eternal for them.

The “I” perceived through intuitive understanding is an act, determination, and visage of the mind or heart, not the soul in its entirety, and this act is inseparable from it. Both the mind and the heart’s internal perceptual system can adopt infinite visages without anything exiting them, just as nothing enters the mind or heart as mind or heart. The system of transformation and infinite configurations is governed by the mind and heart’s will and creation.</

Revised Epistemology of the Conceptual Intellect in Sadegh Khademi’s Awareness and the Divine Human

Introduction

Sadegh Khademi’s Awareness and the Divine Human articulates a profound epistemology rooted in Islamic philosophy, emphasizing the conceptual intellect (‘aql-i mafhūmī) as a bridge to knowledge (‘ilm) and truth (ḥaqīqat). Khademi delineates a cognitive hierarchy—sense (ḥiss), faculty of conjecture (wahm), imagination (khayāl), and rational thought (ta‘aqqul)—that underpins human awareness. This article examines Khademi’s conceptualization of the conceptual intellect, its role in propositional logic, and its ontological foundation in existence (wujūd). By contextualizing Khademi’s thought within the traditions of Avicenna, Suhrawardī, and Mullā Ṣadrā, it highlights his synthesis of rational and mystical epistemologies. The analysis draws on a revised translation of Khademi’s text, incorporating precise terminology and Qur’anic references, such as “Say, ‘The Spirit is of my Lord’s command’” (Isra, 17:85), to elucidate the holy intellect (‘aql qudsī) (Khademi, 2025).¹

¹ The translation uses “faculty of conjecture” for wahm (apprehending non-sensible intentions) and “imagination” for khayāl (storing and manipulating sensory forms), aligning with Avicenna’s psychological distinctions (Avicenna, 1952).

The Cognitive Hierarchy

Khademi outlines the stages of perception: “Sense (ḥiss), faculty of conjecture (wahm), imagination (khayāl), and rational thought (ta‘aqqul) are levels of perception and awareness” (Khademi, 2025, p. 1). This framework mirrors Avicenna’s psychology, where sensory faculties transition to intellectual processes (Avicenna, 1952). Ḥiss engages the five external senses, capturing particular sensible forms. Wahm, the faculty of conjecture, apprehends non-sensible intentions, such as perceiving danger, a role Avicenna attributes to conjectural judgment (Goodman, 1992). Khayāl, the imagination, retains and recombines sensory data, enabling creative constructs (Black, 1997). Ta‘aqqul, rational thought, operates at the intellectual level, forming universal concepts and propositions.

Khademi’s contribution lies in emphasizing the conceptual intellect’s transcendence of particularity: “Sensory perceptions, conjectural apprehensions, and imaginative constructs are particular, whereas the conceptual intellect engages with meaning through universal concepts” (Khademi, 2025, p. 1). Unlike Avicenna’s focus on the active intellect, Khademi highlights the mind’s creative role in universalization, resonating with Mullā Ṣadrā’s dynamic view of intellection (Rizvi, 2009).

The Conceptual Intellect and Knowledge

The conceptual intellect is pivotal in Khademi’s epistemology, acting as an “internal criterion (Burhan Dhihni, ḥujjat-i dhinī) for truth and validity” (Khademi, 2025, p. 2). It enables comprehension of universal patterns, producing “certain, definitive knowledge (‘ilm), the contrary of which is inconceivable” (Khademi, 2025, p. 2). This echoes Avicenna’s concept of certitude (*yaqīn*) through demonstrative reasoning (Gutas, 1988). Khademi cautions against over-reliance on abstract concepts: “If the intellect merely calculates… it risks becoming entangled in universal propositions detached from meaning” (Khademi, 2025, p. 3). This critique aligns with Suhrawardī’s advocacy for presential knowledge (*‘ilm ḥuḍūrī*), which surpasses discursive thought (Walbridge, 2000).

Khademi’s intellect operates within a propositional system: “Mental propositions collectively constitute humanity’s rational world” (Khademi, 2025, p. 2). This reflects Al-Fārābī’s adaptation of Aristotelian logic, where propositions underpin syllogistic reasoning (Rescher, 1966). Khademi’s emphasis on conditional propositions as “the primary form of propositions” (Khademi, 2025, p. 10) aligns with modern symbolic logic, prioritizing relational structures.

Concept, Meaning, and Referent

Khademi’s epistemology revolves around the triad of concept (*mafhūm*), meaning (*ma‘nā*), and referent (*muṣdāq*): “Meaning is that which the concept parallels… The referent is a concrete reality to which the meaning applies” (Khademi, 2025, p. 4). This framework mirrors Avicenna’s semiotics, where concepts mediate between terms and realities (Kalin, 2010). Ma‘nā is “the semantic essence that a concept reflects, linking mental constructs to external reality” (Khademi, 2025, p. 4, note 2). The referent anchors concepts in concrete instances, akin to Mullā Ṣadrā’s existential gradation (Nasr, 1997).

Signification (*dalālat*) is central: “The establishment of a term… must be sagacious, based on the logic of understanding meaning” (Khademi, 2025, p. 5). This principle draws on Islamic jurisprudence (*uṣūl al-fiqh*), where semantic analysis ensures textual fidelity (Hallaq, 1997). Khademi’s focus on the “spirit of meaning” underscores the need for comprehensive semantic engagement, transcending superficial referents.

Semantics of Propositions

Khademi’s discussion of propositional semantics is intricate: “Propositions carry intended meaning and convey knowledge. Meaning manifests through sagacious linguistic establishment” (Khademi, 2025, p. 12). To enhance clarity, this can be reframed: Propositions express meaning, which is conveyed through precise linguistic terms. Semantics analyzes these terms to uncover the speaker’s intent, engaging with coherent meaning systems. This process, rooted in linguistics and philosophy of language, ensures propositional coherence (Hallaq, 1997). Khademi’s approach aligns with Islamic hermeneutics, emphasizing the speaker’s ontological worldview as the basis for semantic analysis.

Ontological Foundation: Existence and the Holy Intellect

Khademi’s epistemology is grounded in an ontology of existence (*wujūd*): “The reality of existence is objective… the origin and entirety of truth” (Khademi, 2025, p. 20). This reflects Mullā Ṣadrā’s primacy of existence (*aṣālat al-wujūd*), where existence is the fundamental reality (Rizvi, 2009). Khademi states, “The concept of being (wujūd) is the most general concept… the first self-evident proposition” (Khademi, 2025, p. 19), echoing Avicenna’s view of existence as indefinable (Avicenna, 2005).

The holy intellect (*‘aql qudsī*) is implicitly linked to the Qur’anic verse: “Say, ‘The Spirit is of my Lord’s command’” (Isra, 17:85), which underscores the divine origin of intellectual faculties (Al-Tabari, 2001). This verse situates Khademi’s epistemology within a metaphysical framework, where the intellect transcends mundane cognition to attain divine wisdom (*ḥikmat*). The cosmic manifestation of existence is further evoked in “When the earth is shaken with its [final] earthquake… it will report its news” (Zalzalah, 99:1–5), highlighting existence’s dynamic reality (Nasr, 1993).

Discussion: Khademi’s Synthesis

Khademi’s epistemology integrates rational and mystical dimensions, synthesizing Avicenna’s logical precision, Suhrawardī’s illuminative insights, and Mullā Ṣadrā’s existential ontology. His focus on the conceptual intellect as a meaning-oriented faculty distinguishes him from Avicenna’s static model. The emphasis on propositional semantics aligns with Islamic jurisprudence, while his ontology of existence offers a contemporary articulation of *aṣālat al-wujūd*. The inclusion of Qur’anic references, such as Isra (17:85), enriches his framework, grounding rational inquiry in divine revelation.

A limitation is Khademi’s limited exploration of non-discursive knowledge, which Suhrawardī and Mullā Ṣadrā emphasize through presential knowledge. Future studies could investigate how Khademi’s reference to “heartfelt wisdom” (*ḥikmat*) engages mystical epistemology.

Conclusion

Sadegh Khademi’s Awareness and the Divine Human presents a sophisticated epistemology, with the conceptual intellect navigating perception to produce definitive knowledge. By blending propositional logic, semantic analysis, and an ontology of existence, Khademi contributes to Islamic philosophical discourse. His work invites further exploration of rational-mystical synthesis, particularly in light of divine revelation, as exemplified by Qur’anic references.

References

Al-Tabari, M. (2001). Jāmi‘ al-Bayān ‘an Ta’wīl Āy al-Qur’ān (Vol. 15). Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya.
Avicenna. (1952). Al-Shifā’: Al-Nafs (F. Rahman, Ed.). Oxford University Press.
Avicenna. (2005). The Metaphysics of The Healing (M. E. Marmura, Trans.). Brigham Young University Press.
Black, D. L. (1997). Avicenna on the ontological and epistemic status of fictional beings. Documenti e Studi sulla Tradizione Filosofica Medievale, 8, 425–453.
Goodman, L. E. (1992). Avicenna. Routledge.
Gutas, D. (1988). Avicenna and the Aristotelian Tradition. Brill.
Hallaq, W. B. (1997). A History of Islamic Legal Theories. Cambridge University Press.
Kalin, I. (2010). Knowledge in Later Islamic Philosophy. Oxford University Press.
Khademi, S. (2025). Awareness and the Divine Human (Unpublished translation). [Translated by Grok 3, xAI].
Nasr, S. H. (1993). An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines. State University of New York Press.
Nasr, S. H. (1997). Sadr al-Din Shirazi and His Transcendent Theosophy. Institute of Ismaili Studies.
Rescher, N. (1966). The Development of Arabic Logic. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Rizvi, S. H. (2009). Mullā Ṣadrā and Metaphysics. Routledge.
Suhrawardī. (1999). The Philosophy of Illumination (J. Walbridge & H. Ziai, Trans.). Brigham Young University Press.
The Qur’an. (2004). The Qur’an (M. A. S. Abdel Haleem, Trans.). Oxford University Press.
Walbridge, J. (2000). The Leaven of the Ancients. State University of New York Press.