Darʾ Taʿâroud al-ʿAql wa-n-Naql - Ibn Taimiya - (9/56)

Darʾ Taʿâroud al-ʿAql wa-n-NaqlIbn Taimiya

until we know that he is supported by a miracle? And how can we know that he is supported by a miracle until we know that this support comes from Allah, glorified be He? How can we recognize support from Allah until we know Him and know that He does not support a liar with a miracle? And how can we know this except through rational understanding, which is a form of self-evident knowledge? This shows that He, glorified be He, is known through reason.

A seventh proof:

If reason did not make knowing Him obligatory, it would have to be possible for Allah to forbid knowing Him and to command disbelief in Him, disobedience to Him, injustice, and lying, just as He may abrogate whatever He wills of matters established by revelation and make obligatory what He had previously forbidden. Since this is not possible, it follows that these judgments are not established by revelation, but by reason, which does not change and cannot be repudiated or abrogated.

Another proof:

Allah bestowed reason upon man and made it a perfection for him. To neglect inquiry and derive no good from reason is to squander it. If reason judges nothing bad and nothing good, its existence and nonexistence are alike—something no rational person would say.

The point may also be demonstrated concisely as follows:

Someone who finds himself bearing the marks of craftsmanship and immersed in countless blessings will not deem it unlikely that he has a Maker who fashioned him, undertook to govern his affairs, and bestowed blessings upon him. Nor will he deem it unlikely that, if he fails to investigate the truth of this so as to acknowledge his Maker and commit himself to thanking Him, he will be punished for neglecting inquiry and failing to acknowledge Him and thank Him. Reason will therefore inevitably oblige him to inquire, since nothing is closer to man than inquiry. This shows that inquiry is obligatory by reason.”

I say:

Those who dispute these proofs have objections that call for a decisive resolution, as discussed in its proper place. This approach, followed by Abū al-Khattāb and other proponents of rational inquiry among the Mu‘tazilites and others, rests on the premise that knowledge of Allah is attained

حتى نعلم أنه مؤيد بالمعجزة؟ ولا نعلم أنه مؤيد بالمعجزة حتى نعلم أن التأييد من الله سبحانه؟ ولا نعرف التأييد من الله حتى نعرفه ونعلم أنه لا يؤيد الكذاب بالمعجزة؟ ولا نعرف ذلك إلا بفهم العقل، الذي هو نوع من العلوم الضرورية؟ فدل على أن معرفته سبحانه بالعقل. دليل سابع: لو لم تجب معرفته بالعقل لوجب أن يجوز على الله أن ينهي عن معرفته، وأن يأمر بكفره وعصيانه والجور والكذب، كما يجوز أن ينسخ ما شاء من السمعيات، ويوجب ما كان قد نهى عنه. فلما لم يكن ذلك، دل على أن ذلك غير ثابت بالسمع، وإنما يثبت بالعقل الذي لا يتغير، ولا يجوز نكثه ونسخه. دليل آخر: أن الله وهب العقل وجعله كمالاً للآدمي. وإذا أغفل النظر وضيع العقل إذا لم يقتبس منه خيراً، وإذا كان لا يقبح شيئاً ولا يحسنه، فوجوده وعدمه سيان، وهذا لا يقوله عاقل. وأيضاً يدل على ذلك عبارة ملخصة: أن من وجد نفسه مؤثراً بآثار الصنعة، مستغرقاً في أنواع النعمة، لم يستبعد أن يكون له صانع صنعه، وتولى تدبيره، وأنعم عليه، وأنه إن لم ينظر في حقيقة ذلك ليتوصل إلى الاعتراف له وإلتزام شكره، عوقب على ما أغفل من النظر، وضيع من الاعتراف والشكر، فإن العقل سيلزمه النظر لا محاله، إذ لا شيء أقرب إلى الإنسان من النظر، فدل على وجوبه بالعقل) . قلت: هذه الأدلة فيها للمنازعين كلام يحتاج معه إلى فصل الخطاب، كما ذكر في موضعه. وهذه الطريقة التي سلكها أبو الخطاب، وغيره من أهل النظر: من المعتزلة وغيرهم، بنوها على أن معرفة الله تحصل