Nuzhat al-Nazar fi Tawdih Nukhbat al-Fikar - Tahqiq al-Qasim - Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani - (89)

Nuzhat al-Nazar fi Tawdih Nukhbat al-Fikar - Tahqiq al-QasimIbn Hajar Al-Asqalani

Certainty is a firm conviction that conforms to reality, and the accepted position is that a report(1) transmitted through tawātur(2) produces necessary knowledge—the kind that forces itself upon a person so that he cannot possibly repel it(3).

Some have claimed that it yields knowledge only through inference, but this view carries no weight. Knowledge derived from tawātur(4) is attained even by those who lack the capacity for analytical reasoning—such as the average layperson—because reasoning(5) is the ordering of established or conjectural premises in order to reach further truths or assumptions, and the layperson is not equipped for that. If tawātur knowledge were merely inferential, it would never reach such people.

[The difference between necessary and inferential knowledge]

From this explanation(6) the distinction between necessary knowledge and inferential knowledge has become clear, since(7) necessary knowledge imparts certainty without recourse to inference, whereas inferential knowledge does so only by means of inference. Moreover, necessary knowledge reaches every listener, while inferential knowledge is acquired solely by those who possess the aptitude for reasoning.

(1) K reads “al-khabar” (the report). (2) A and K read “al-mutawatir” (mass-transmitted). Al-Laqani states in Qada al-Watar, p. 509: “Had he said, ‘The relied-upon view is that tawatur yields certain knowledge,’ it would have been briefer and clearer.” (3) K adds the word “anhu” (from him). (4) Y reads “bi-l-mutawatir” (by the mutawatir). Al-Qari comments in Sharh Sharh al-Nukhba, p. 181: “Because the knowledge that is obtained through tawatur is better expressed with the phrase bi-l-mutawatir, meaning ‘by reason of it.’” (5) B reads “idha” (if). (6) A and H read “al-taʿrif” (the definition), whereas T has “al-tafriq” (the differentiation). The adopted reading agrees with Al-Qari’s Sharh Sharh al-Nukhba (p. 183), Al-Manawi’s Al-Yawaqit wa al-Durrar (1/137), and Al-Laqani’s Qada al-Watar (p. 517), the last of which records another copy that reads “bi-l-taʿrif.” (7) B again reads “idha” (if).

وَاليَقِينُ: هُوَ الِاعْتِقَادُ الجَازِمُ المُطَابِقُ، وَهَذَا هُوَ المُعْتَمَدُ؛ أَنَّ خَبَرَ (١) التَّوَاتُرِ (٢) يُفِيدُ العِلْمَ الضَّرُورِيَّ؛ وَهُوَ الَّذِي يُضْطَرُّ الإِنْسَانُ إِلَيْهِ بِحَيْثُ لَا يُمْكِنُهُ دَفْعُهُ (٣). وَقِيلَ: لَا يُفِيدُ العِلْمَ إِلَّا نَظَرِيّاً! وَلَيْسَ بِشَيْءٍ؛ لِأَنَّ العِلْمَ بِالتَّوَاتُرِ (٤) حَاصِلٌ لِمَنْ لَيْسَ لَهُ أَهْلِيَّةُ النَّظَرِ - كَالعَامِّيِّ -؛ إِذِ (٥) النَّظَرُ: تَرْتِيبُ أُمُورٍ مَعْلُومَةٍ أَوْ مَظْنُونَةٍ يُتَوَصَّلُ بِهَا إِلَى عُلُومٍ أَوْ ظُنُونٍ، وَلَيْسَ فِي العَامِّيِّ أَهْلِيَّةُ ذَلِكَ، فَلَوْ كَانَ نَظَرِيّاً؛ لَمَا حَصَلَ لَهُمْ. [الفرق بين العلم الضروريّ والعلم النظريّ] وَلَاحَ بِهَذَا التَّقْرِيرِ (٦): الفَرْقُ بَيْنَ العِلْمِ الضَّرُورِيِّ وَالعِلْمِ النَّظَرِيِّ؛ إِذِ (٧) الضَّرُورِيُّ يُفِيدُ العِلْمَ بِلَا اسْتِدْلَالٍ، وَالنَّظَرِيُّ يُفِيدُهُ؛ لَكِنْ مَعَ الِاسْتِدْلَالِ عَلَى الإِفَادَةِ، وَأَنَّ الضَّرُورِيَّ يَحْصُلُ لِكُلِّ سَامِعٍ، وَالنَّظَرِيَّ لَا يَحْصُلُ إِلَّا لِمَنْ فِيهِ أَهْلِيَّةُ النَّظَرِ.

(١) في ك: «الخبر». (٢) في أ، ك: «المتواتر». قال اللَّقانيُّ ﵀ في قَضَاء الوَطَر (ص ٥٠٩): «ولو قال: والمعتمد: أن التواتر يفيد العلم؛ كان أخصر وأظهر». (٣) في ك زيادة: «عنه». (٤) في ي: «بالمتواتر». قال القارِي ﵀ في شرح شرح النُّخبة (ص ١٨١): «(لِأَنَّ العِلْمَ) أي: الذي هو حاصلٌ (بِالتَّوَاتُرِ)، الأولى بالمتواتر؛ أي: بسببِ». (٥) في ب: «إذا». (٦) في أ، ح: «التَّعريف»، وفي ط: «التَّفريق»، والمثبت هو الموافق لشرح شرح النُّخبة للقارِي (ص ١٨٣)، واليَوَاقِيت والدُّرَر للمُنَاويِّ (١/ ١٣٧)، وقَضَاء الوَطَر للَّقانيِّ (ص ٥١٧) وذكرأنَّها في نسخة: «بالتعريف». (٧) في ب: «إذا».