Imam Ali (as) On Divine Proximity & Remoteness

Amīr al-mu’minīn (as) is reported to have stated:
"قريب فی بعدہ، بعيد فی قربہ"
translation: "He is nearest, in spite of His being distant.He is furthest, in spite of being nearest" [Al-Kafi,kitab-ul-tawhid,hadith#228]
Avicenna states in his 'Metaphysics of the Healing' that The Numerical One or Unity [وحدت] is the principle [مبدا] of number or multiplicity [کثرت] in that it is the repetitive occurrence of 'One' that brings into existence [وجود] all numbers since all numbers are nothing but the number 'One' repeated over and over again, for instance the number '2' is nothing but 'One' repeated twice, similarly the number '3' is nothing but 'One' repeated thrice over and so on, such that every number arises out of this Unity without the Unity arising out of any number but no number can be a number without unity. Therefore while every number must contain one as the principle of its existence but One or Unity is other than number or multiplicity, in fact One or Unity is the opposite [مقابل] of number or multiplicity.
Mullah Sadra states in 'Shawahid-al-Rububiyyah' that just as the numerical One [واحد] is the principle of numerical multiplicity or numbers, similarly Pure Existence [وجود محض] is the principle of the multiplicity of contingent beings [ممکنات]; and just as all numbers are nothing but the number 'One' repeated over and over again, similarly the contingent beings are nothing but various manifestations [مظاہر] and determinations [تعينات] of the Reality of Existence [حقيقت الوجود], because the existence of every essence [ماھيۃ] is an emanation [صدور] from the Reality of Existence, which is nearest [قريب] to every essence just as 'one' is in every number.
According to Ayatullah Hasan-Zadeh Amoli when we consider numbers so we do not see the 'one' but '3' or '4' or '5' etc, even though '3' is nothing but 'one' repeated thrice and so on; this inability to see the 'one' in the multiplicity of numbers is due to being veiled [محجوب] from the truth and being engrossed in multiplicity. Similarly when we see the multiplicity of contingent essences in the external reality we fail to see in them the Reality of Existence, in other words we fail to realize that these contingents are nothing but manifestations of Pure Existence.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Argument from Contingency [Burhan-al-Imkan]

Proofs or evidences can be both rational and empirical where rational evidence is the one provided by the intellect or reason and empirical evidence is the evidence obtained through sense-perception, observation and experience. Now since God is an immaterial or a metaphysical being that is incorporeal and non-sensible, lying beyond time and space therefore there can be no direct empirical or sensible evidence of the existence of the Divine Essence because the senses only perceive that which is sensible, corporeal, physical or material in nature and hence cannot apprehend a reality that is non-sensible and immaterial, because there has to be suitability between the perceived object and the one who perceives and there is no suitability between something metaphysical or immaterial and the human sense organs that are material or physical. However having said that this is not to deny the absence of rational proofs for the existence of God and the philosophers from time to time have advance
Read more

The Impact of Proximity to and Remoteness from, The One

According to Mullah Sadra the more intense the existence in the arc of ascent the more free it is from the shackles of time and space, and the higher the grade of existence in the arc the more incorporeal it happens to be, such that the ontological intensity of an Existent is indirectly proportionate to the degree of it's association and attachment with matter; therefore the stronger the attachment and association of an existent with matter the more corporeal and weaker it is, in terms of Existence; and the farther removed an Existent is from attachment and association with matter the more intense it happens to be in terms of Existence. Now since Pure Existence is the origin and source of all existence, and being such it is necessarily the Noblest and the Greatest of all existents, because every good and perfection emanates from this August Reality and traces its origin back to it; therefore just as the objects nearest to the Sun receive the greatest amount of light by virtue of
Read more

God, the Absolute or Pure Good

"GOD, THE ABSOLUTE OR PURE GOOD" God, the Necessary Existent, is either Absolute or Pure Good [ khayr e mehaz ], Absolute or Pure Evil [ sharr e mehaz ] or a composite [ murakkab ] of Good and Evil. Now evil [ sharr ] is described as a negation of good and as such has no independent and entified external reality, but can only exist accidentally as a negation or a privation of goodness [ khayr ] such as darkness [ zulmah ] which is the negation of light [ nur ] or death which is the negation of life [ hayat ], in other words evil is said to be a non-entity identified as non-being and is therefore synonymous with non-existence [ adum ]; therefore if the Necessary Existent is said to be Absolute or Pure Evil so such an assertion would be tantamount to equating the Divine Essence with Absolute-Non-existence [ adum e matlaq ] because evil as has been explained above is a negation of goodness and hence absolute-evil is the absolute or  complete negation of goodness, where the
Read more