Darʾ Taʿâroud al-ʿAql wa-n-NaqlIbn Taimiya

And they say that its contingency derives from its own essence, while its existence derives from another. This rests on their distinction, in external reality, between a thing’s existence and its essence. In their view, therefore, contingency belongs more fundamentally to its essence than existence does.

Had he said, “Then, when they came into existence, or were created, or were originated, he said, ‘I do not love things that exist or have been created,’” this would have been absurd and contradictory, since they had always been so. How much more so if he said, “Then, when they became contingent,” when they had always been contingent!

Moreover, from the moment they rose until they set, they were contingent in themselves, admitting of existence and nonexistence—even though, according to these thinkers, they are eternal and beginningless, and their nonexistence is impossible. Thus, their being in motion would not, for Abraham, be evidence that they were contingent and admitted of existence and nonexistence.

As for the claims that everything that moves has come into being, and that everything that moves is contingent and admits of existence and nonexistence, all rational people agree that this premise is not an innate, self-evident truth. Rather, those who maintain its validity say that it can be known only through subtle reasoning, while those who dispute it say that it is false on both rational and scriptural grounds. Whoever uses it as an example in the opening discussions of the universal sciences does so because of his limited understanding and inability, yet he himself challenges it throughout most of his books.

As for the assertion, “Everything that changes has come into being or is contingent,” if by change he means what is ordinarily understood by that word in the language—such as a healthy person becoming ill, a just person becoming unjust, or a friend becoming an enemy—then establishing this universal proposition requires proof.

If, however, by change he means motion, or the inherence of temporal events without qualification, so that the heavenly bodies are called changing when they rise,

وهم يقولون: إمكانه له من ذاته، ووجوده من غيره، بناء علي تفريقهم في الخارج بين وجود الشيء وذاته، فالإمكان عندهم أولي بذاته من الوجود، ولو قال: فلما وجدت أو خلقت أو أبدعت قال: لا أحب الموجوديين والمخلوفين، كان هذا قبيحاً متناقصاً، إذ لم يزل كذلك، فكيف إذا قال: فلما صارت ممكنة، وهى لم تزل ممكنة. وأيضاً فهي من حين بزغت وإلي أن أفلت ممكنة بذاتها تقبل الوجود والعدم، مع كونها عندهم قديمة أزلية يمنتع عدمها، وحينئذ يكون كونها متحركة ليس بدليل عند إبراهيم علي مونها ممكنة تقبل الوجود والعدم. وأما قول القائل: كل متحرك محدث، أن كل متحرك ممكن يقبل الوجود والعدم فهذه المقدمة ليست ضرورية فطرية بإتفاق العقلاء، بل من يدعي صحة ذلك يقول: إنها لا تعلم إلا بالنظر الخفي، ومن ينازع في ذلك يقول: إنها باطلة عقلا وسمعا، ويمثل من مثل بها في أوائل العلوم الكلية لقصوره وعجزه، وهو نفسه يقدح فيها في عامة كتبه. وأما قوله: كل متغير محدث أو ممكن فإن أراد بالتغير ما يعرف من ذلك في اللغة، مثل استحالة الصحيح إلي المرض، والعادل إلي الظلم، والصديق إلي العداوة، فإنه يحتاج في إثبات هذه الكلية إلي دليل. وإن أراد بالتغير معني الحركة، أو قيام الحوادث مطلقاً ن حتى تسمي الكواكب حين بزوغها متغيرة،

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies