Minhaj as-Sunnah - Ibn Taimiya - (2/525)

Minhaj as-SunnahIbn Taimiya

For sophistry is of three kinds:

One kind consists in denying realities and any knowledge of them. More extreme than this is the statement of one who says of the Necessary Existent, the Eternal Creator:

“He is neither existent nor non-existent.”

Such people contradict themselves, for they categorically affirm that no categorical affirmation can be made.

Another kind is the position of those who profess ignorance—the agnostics who suspend judgment—saying:

“We do not know whether any reality (1) or knowledge exists.”

More extreme than this is the statement of one who says:

“I do not know, nor will I say whether He is existent or non-existent, living or dead.”

A third kind is the position of those who make realities dependent upon beliefs. The first group denies them; the second suspends judgment concerning them; and the third makes them dependent upon people’s conjectures (2).

A fourth group has also been mentioned: those who say that the world is in constant flux and therefore affirm no fixed reality for it. They belong to the first group, but this is what their position entails (3).

The point here is that a person’s withholding judgment between two contradictories does not entail the negation of both.

(1) (ع) reads: “whether it has a reality.” (2) (N) and (M) read: “people’s ways.” (3) (N) and (M) read: “the rationale for their position.” Ibn Hazm states in *al-Fisal* (1:9), while discussing the sophists: “Earlier *mutakallimūn* (dialectical theologians) stated that they fall into three groups: one group denied realities altogether; another doubted them; and a third said that realities are true for those who regard them as true and false for those who regard them as false.” In his commentary on al-Ījī’s *al-Mawāqif* (1:117–18), al-Jurjānī divides them into the *lā-adriyya*, who suspend judgment; the *inādiyya*, who obstinately claim to be certain that nothing whatsoever exists; and the *indiyya*, who maintain that the realities of things depend upon beliefs.

فَإِنَّ السَّفْسَطَةَ ثَلَاثَةُ أَنْوَاعٍ: نَوْعٌ هُوَ جَحْدُ الْحَقَائِقِ وَالْعِلْمِ بِهَا. وَأَعْظَمُ مِنْ هَذَا قَوْلُ مَنْ يَقُولُ عَنِ الْمَوْجُودِ الْوَاجِبِ الْقَدِيمِ الْخَالِقِ: إِنَّهُ لَا مَوْجُودَ وَلَا مَعْدُومَ، وَهَؤُلَاءِ مُتَنَاقِضُونَ، فَإِنَّهُمْ جَزَمُوا بِعَدَمِ الْجَزْمِ. وَنَوْعٌ هُوَ قَوْلُ الْمُتَجَاهِلَةِ اللَّاأَدْرِيَّةِ الْوَاقِفَةِ الَّذِينَ يَقُولُونَ: لَا نَدْرِي هَلْ ثَمَّ حَقِيقَةٌ (١) وَعِلْمٌ أَمْ لَا. وَأَعْظَمُ مِنْ هَذَا قَوْلُ مَنْ يَقُولُ: لَا أَعْلَمُ وَلَا أَقُولُ: هُوَ مَوْجُودٌ أَوْ مَعْدُومٌ أَوْ حَيٌّ أَوْ مَيِّتٌ. وَنَوْعٌ ثَالِثٌ قَوْلُ مَنْ يَجْعَلُ الْحَقَائِقَ تَتْبَعُ الْعَقَائِدَ. فَالْأَوَّلُ نَافٍ لَهَا، وَالثَّانِي وَاقِفٌ فِيهَا، وَالثَّالِثُ يَجْعَلُهَا تَابِعَةً لِظُنُونِ (٢) النَّاسِ. وَقَدْ ذُكِرَ صِنْفٌ رَابِعٌ: وَهُوَ الَّذِي يَقُولُ: إِنَّ الْعَالَمَ فِي سَيَلَانٍ فَلَا يُثْبِتُ لَهُ حَقِيقَةً. وَهَؤُلَاءِ مِنَ الْأَوَّلِ لَكِنْ هَذَا يُوجِبُهُ قَوْلُهُمْ (٣) . وَالْمَقْصُودُ هُنَا أَنَّ إِمْسَاكَ الْإِنْسَانِ عَنِ النَّقِيضَيْنِ لَا يَقْتَضِي رَفْعَهُمَا.

(١) ع: هَلْ لَهُ حَقِيقَةٌ. (٢) ن، م: لِطُرُقِ. (٣) ن، م: تَوْجِيهُ قَوْلِهِمْ. وَقَالَ ابْنُ حَزْمٍ (الْفِصَلَ ١/٩) عِنْدَ كَلَامِهِ عَنِ السُّوفِسْطَائِيَّةِ: " ذَكَرَ مَنْ سَلَفَ مِنَ الْمُتَكَلِّمِينَ أَنَّهُمْ ثَلَاثُ أَصْنَافٍ: فَصِنْفٌ مِنْهُمْ نَفَى الْحَقَائِقَ جُمْلَةً، وَصِنْفٌ شَكُّوا فِيهَا، وَصِنْفٌ مِنْهُمْ قَالُوا هِيَ حَقٌّ عِنْدَ مَنْ عِنْدَهُ حَقٌّ وَهِيَ بَاطِلٌ عِنْدَ مَنْ هِيَ عِنْدَهُ بَاطِلٌ ". وَيُقَسِّمُهُمُ الْجُرْجَانِيُّ (شَرْحَ الْمَوَاقِفِ لِلْإِيجِيِّ ١/١١٧ - ١١٨) إِلَى: اللَّاأَدْرِيَّةِ الْقَائِلِينَ بِالتَّوَقُّفِ، وَالْعِنَادِيَّةِ وَهُمُ الَّذِينَ يُعَانِدُونَ وَيَدَّعُونَ بِأَنَّهُمْ جَازِمُونَ بِأَنْ لَا مَوْجُودَ أَصْلًا، وَالْعِنْدِيَّةِ وَهُمُ الْقَائِلُونَ بِأَنَّ حَقَائِقَ الْأَشْيَاءِ تَابِعَةٌ لِلِاعْتِقَادَاتِ ".