Minhaj as-Sunnah - Ibn Taimiya - (3/308)

Minhaj as-SunnahIbn Taimiya

could be capable only through the other’s enabling him, this would be equivalent to saying:

“He could possess power only through the other’s empowering him.”

Furthermore, on this supposition, each would be prevented from acting independently by the other. Each would thus be both a preventer and one prevented. Yet such a being (1) could be a preventer only if he had the power to prevent; and whoever has the power to prevent another from acting has an even stronger claim to possess the power to act himself. Thus, each could be an agent (2) only if he had the power to act; but if (3) he had the power to act, he could not be prevented from doing so. It is therefore impossible for each of them to be both a preventer and one prevented, (4) even though this necessarily follows from their being required to agree in acting. It is thus known that it is impossible for them to be required to agree in acting, and it is established that they can differ.] (5)

Whenever it is assumed that they must agree (6), this is intrinsically impossible. This (7) is possible only among created beings, because their power is derived from a source other than themselves.

Thus, if it were said:

“This one cannot possess power until the other possesses power,”

there could be a third party (8) who empowers them both. Hence, one created being can assist another, whereas mutual assistance between two creators (9) is impossible, because each of two created beings who assist one another possesses power

(1) Manuscript (ʿAyn): “and he.” (2) Manuscript (ʿAyn): “a preventer.” (3) Manuscripts (A) and (B): “then if.” (4) Manuscript (ʿAyn): “a preventer and one prevented.” (5) The passage enclosed in square brackets is absent from manuscripts (N) and (M). (6) Manuscript (N): “their actions”; manuscript (M): “one of them.” (7) Manuscript (A): “be”; manuscript (B): “is.” (8) Manuscript (ʿAyn): “there could be a third party”; manuscript (M): “it was possible for there to be a third party”; manuscript (A): “he could be a third party”; manuscript (B): “there could be a third party,” with “third” in the nominative. (9) Manuscripts (A) and (B): “the two creators.”

لَا يَكُونُ مُمْكِنًا إِلَّا بِتَمْكِينِ الْآخَرِ، فَهُوَ بِمَنْزِلَةِ أَنْ يُقَالَ: لَا يَكُونُ قَادِرًا إِلَّا بِإِقْدَارِ الْآخَرِ. وَأَيْضًا فَإِنَّهُ فِي هَذَا التَّقْدِيرِ يَكُونُ الْمَانِعُ لِكُلٍّ مِنْهُمَا مِنَ الِانْفِرَادِ هُوَ الْآخَرُ، فَيَكُونُ كُلٌّ مِنْهُمَا مَانِعًا مَمْنُوعًا، وَهَذَا (١) لَا يَكُونُ مَانِعًا إِلَّا إِذَا كَانَ قَادِرًا عَلَى الْمَنْعِ وَمَنْ كَانَ قَادِرًا عَلَى مَنْعِ غَيْرِهِ مِنَ الْفِعْلِ، فَقُدْرَتُهُ عَلَى أَنْ يَكُونَ فَاعِلًا أَوْلَى، فَصَارَ كُلٌّ مِنْهُمَا لَا يَكُونُ فَاعِلًا (٢) حَتَّى يَكُونَ قَادِرًا عَلَى الْفِعْلِ، وَإِذَا (٣) كَانَ قَادِرًا عَلَى الْفِعْلِ امْتَنَعَ أَنْ يَكُونَ مَمْنُوعًا مِنْهُ، فَامْتَنَعَ كَوْنُ كُلِّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا مَانِعًا مَمْنُوعًا، (٤) وَذَلِكَ لَازِمٌ لِوُجُوبِ اتِّفَاقِهِمَا عَلَى الْفِعْلِ، فَعُلِمَ امْتِنَاعُ وُجُوبِ اتِّفَاقِهِمَا عَلَى الْفِعْلِ، وَثَبَتَ إِمْكَانُ اخْتِلَافِهِمَا] (٥) فَمَتَى فُرِضَ لُزُومُ اتِّفَاقِهِمَا (٦) كَانَ ذَلِكَ مُمْتَنِعًا لِذَاتِهِ، وَإِنَّمَا يُمْكِنُ (٧) هَذَا فِي الْمَخْلُوقِينَ ; لِأَنَّ الْقُدْرَةَ لَهُمْ مُسْتَفَادَةٌ مِنْ غَيْرِهِمَا. فَإِذَا قِيلَ: لَا يَقْدِرُ هَذَا حَتَّى يَقْدِرَ هَذَا، كَانَ يُمْكِنُ أَنْ يَكُونَ هُنَاكَ ثَالِثٌ (٨) يَجْعَلُهُمَا قَادِرَيْنِ، وَمِنْ هُنَا أَمْكَنَ الْمَخْلُوقُ أَنْ يُعَاوِنَ الْمَخْلُوقَ، وَامْتَنَعَتِ الْمُعَاوَنَةُ عَلَى خَالِقَيْنِ (٩) ; لِأَنَّ الْمَخْلُوقَيْنِ الْمُتَعَاوِنَيْنِ لِكُلٍّ مِنْهُمَا قُدْرَةٌ

(١) ع: وَهُوَ. (٢) ع: مَانِعًا. (٣) أ، ب: فَإِذَا. (٤) ع: مَانِعًا وَمَمْنُوعًا. (٥) مَا بَيْنَ الْمَعْقُوفَتَيْنِ سَاقِطٌ مِنْ (ن) ، (م) . (٦) ن: أَفْعَالِهِمَا، م: أَحَدِهِمَا. (٧) أ: يَكُنْ، ب: يَكُونُ. (٨) ع: كَانَ يُمْكِنُ هُنَاكَ ثَالِثٌ، م: كَانَ مُمْكِنًا أَنْ يَكُونَ هُنَاكَ ثَالِثٌ، أ: كَانَ يُمْكِنُ أَنْ يَكُونَ ثَالِثًا، ب: كَانَ يُمْكِنُ أَنْ يَكُونَ ثَالِثٌ. (٩) أ، ب: الْخَالِقَيْنِ.