Sadrian Shift from Quidittative Contingency to Contingency of Ontic Indigence
The criterion for an effect's need or dependence احتیاج upon a cause علت was a hotly debated issue in the intellectual history of Islam among philosophers فلاسفہ and theologians متکلمین; according to the latter of these two schools, meaning the theologians, the criterion for an effect's dependence upon a cause was temporal--origination حدوث, whereas for the philosophers that criterion was essential-contingency امکان ذاتی; the philosophers defined Quidittative or Essential Contingency as the negation of both the necessity of existence وجوب وجود as well as the necessity of nonexistence وجوب عدم; therefore a contingent quiddity ماھیت ممکنہ is one for which neither existence, nor nonexistence is necessary, but both are possible ممکن; hence a contingent essence is one that can both be and not be but for which it is not necessary to either be or not to be; it is evident that in the view of the Philosophers a contingent quiddity is in a state of equilibrium with respect to both being and non-being, both of which are possible but neither is necessary; now in order to eliminate this state of equilibrium or equidistance of the contingent quiddity with respect to both the possibility of being and the possibility of non-being, and to grant preponderance to either one of the two possibilities, an extraneous determinant or a cause is needed that can convert the possibility of existence into a necessity, or alternatively convert the possibility of non-being into a necessity for non-being, and in the absence of such a cause or determinant the contingent quiddity would continue to remain in a state of equidistance in relation to both existence and non-Existence.
The dispute between the theologians and the Philosophers concerning the criterion for an effect's need for a cause, was a tributary of a greater debate among the two schools regarding the eternity ازلی or origination of the cosmos کائنات; the theologians assert that an existent can only be justly considered as an effect of another, if its existence is preceded by temporal non-existence عدم زمانی; in other words for an existent to be an effect of another it is necessary for it's existence to be posterior to time مسبوق بالزمان; to elaborate further it is only an existent that comes into being from non-being that qualifies as an effect; and since in their view an eternal effect does not come into being from non-being and is not posterior to time, therefore it does not qualify for being an effect, and without being an effect of any cause it cannot be contingent in essence ممکن بالذات; and that which exists without having been caused by another must be Necessary in Itself واجب بالذات; but this is inadmissible since it leads to a plurality کثرت of Necessary Beings.
The Philosophers preceding Sadra, such as Farabi, Avicenna and Averroes counter argued that the real criterion for being an effect was not temporal origination or origination in time, which involves the coming into existence of something from a previous non-Existence or being after not having been, but the real criterion was essential-contingency; this is because a thing can only begin to exist after not having been, if it is possible for it to exist in the first place since nothing impossible in essence can enter the realm of existence; this fact can be rationally demonstrated by asking why can't there be a four sided triangle? Well this is because the essential impossibility inherent within the very notion of a four sided triangle renders the origination of its existence impossible for it, thereby proving that that which enters existence, does so because its existence is possible in essence in the first place, this possibility being prior to its existence, just as in the case of a four sided triangle the essential impossibility of its existing negates its origination; therefore the Philosophers successfully proved that in intellectual consideration اعتبار عقلی the existence of a thing is preceded by the necessity of existence وجوب وجود, as Avicenna states in the Metaphysics of the Healing الاھیات من الشفا that an essence does not exist unless it's existence is first rendered necessary; now this necessity is itself posterior to quidittative contingency or essential possibility; in the case of originated things the stages in intellectual consideration are as follows Quidittative Contingency, Necessity, Origination and Existence; therefore Quidittative Contingency precedes origination and existence since an essence can only exist if it is possible for it to exist in the first place.
While the theory of Quidittative Contingency was undoubtedly superior as a criterion for an effect's dependence upon a cause, but it was based on the notion of quidittative indigence فقر ذاتی, which postulated that the essences or the quiditties of things are utterly destitute or indigent of all good خیر and perfection کمال; and this essential destitution was something inherent to these essences in themselves and nothing extraneous to them; and due to this inherent indigence these essences are dependent upon an extraneous factor or a cause for enrichment in terms of goodness, existence or perfection; this notion may or may not have been influenced by the Doctrine of the Primacy of Essence اصالت الماھیہ which was prevalent in Islamic Philosophy prior to the Sadrian revolution.
Mullah Sadra revolutionized the world of Islamic Philosophy by making evident the falsity of the Doctrine of the Primacy of Essence and establishing the rational validity of the Doctrine of the Primacy of Existence and the relativistic nature of Essence اصالت الوجود و اعتبار الماھیہ; according to the former doctrine, the objective or concrete reality was constituted by the essences or the quiditties of things as opposed to their existences; whereas the latter doctrine as postulated by Mullah Sadra asserts that it is the existences of things as opposed to their essences that constitute concrete reality or the objective world. While Mullah Sadra acknowledged the validity of the notion of quidittative contingency امکان ذاتی و ماھوی as a criterion for an effect's need for a cause, as opposed to temporal--origination حدوث, he argued that since in accordance with the Doctrine of the Primacy of Existence, reality حقیقت was synonymous with Existence as opposed to Essence, the notion of quidittative indigence فقر ذاتی although still valid for intellectual consideration, lacks the degree of validity represented by the idea of Ontic Indigence فقر وجودی; because it is Existence and not Quiddity that constitutes Reality; Mullah Sadra stated in accordance with the idea of Ontic Indigence that it is more true to assert that it is the existences of things that are utter destitution and indigence, rather than upholding the former notion of quidittative indigence and quidittative contingency; this is due to the fact that that which is related or connected to the existence of the agent-cause are not the quiditties of things but their existences; in fact the existences of things are not something to which this relation with the agent-cause is predicated, but these existences are that very relation and connection اضافه و تعلق themselves; since that which emanates from the agent-cause are the existences of the effects and not their quiditties; and the emanation of the existences of the effects is identical to the emanation of the causal connection or relation itself, because the existence of an effect is nothing but this relation and connection; since that which is related to the existence of the agent-cause is the existence of the effect instead of the effect's quiddity or essence, therefore the notion of Ontic Indigence takes precedence over the idea of quidittative indigence; hence that which truly renders an effect dependent upon its agent-cause is its ontological weakness, destitution and imperfection.
The dispute between the theologians and the Philosophers concerning the criterion for an effect's need for a cause, was a tributary of a greater debate among the two schools regarding the eternity ازلی or origination of the cosmos کائنات; the theologians assert that an existent can only be justly considered as an effect of another, if its existence is preceded by temporal non-existence عدم زمانی; in other words for an existent to be an effect of another it is necessary for it's existence to be posterior to time مسبوق بالزمان; to elaborate further it is only an existent that comes into being from non-being that qualifies as an effect; and since in their view an eternal effect does not come into being from non-being and is not posterior to time, therefore it does not qualify for being an effect, and without being an effect of any cause it cannot be contingent in essence ممکن بالذات; and that which exists without having been caused by another must be Necessary in Itself واجب بالذات; but this is inadmissible since it leads to a plurality کثرت of Necessary Beings.
The Philosophers preceding Sadra, such as Farabi, Avicenna and Averroes counter argued that the real criterion for being an effect was not temporal origination or origination in time, which involves the coming into existence of something from a previous non-Existence or being after not having been, but the real criterion was essential-contingency; this is because a thing can only begin to exist after not having been, if it is possible for it to exist in the first place since nothing impossible in essence can enter the realm of existence; this fact can be rationally demonstrated by asking why can't there be a four sided triangle? Well this is because the essential impossibility inherent within the very notion of a four sided triangle renders the origination of its existence impossible for it, thereby proving that that which enters existence, does so because its existence is possible in essence in the first place, this possibility being prior to its existence, just as in the case of a four sided triangle the essential impossibility of its existing negates its origination; therefore the Philosophers successfully proved that in intellectual consideration اعتبار عقلی the existence of a thing is preceded by the necessity of existence وجوب وجود, as Avicenna states in the Metaphysics of the Healing الاھیات من الشفا that an essence does not exist unless it's existence is first rendered necessary; now this necessity is itself posterior to quidittative contingency or essential possibility; in the case of originated things the stages in intellectual consideration are as follows Quidittative Contingency, Necessity, Origination and Existence; therefore Quidittative Contingency precedes origination and existence since an essence can only exist if it is possible for it to exist in the first place.
While the theory of Quidittative Contingency was undoubtedly superior as a criterion for an effect's dependence upon a cause, but it was based on the notion of quidittative indigence فقر ذاتی, which postulated that the essences or the quiditties of things are utterly destitute or indigent of all good خیر and perfection کمال; and this essential destitution was something inherent to these essences in themselves and nothing extraneous to them; and due to this inherent indigence these essences are dependent upon an extraneous factor or a cause for enrichment in terms of goodness, existence or perfection; this notion may or may not have been influenced by the Doctrine of the Primacy of Essence اصالت الماھیہ which was prevalent in Islamic Philosophy prior to the Sadrian revolution.
Mullah Sadra revolutionized the world of Islamic Philosophy by making evident the falsity of the Doctrine of the Primacy of Essence and establishing the rational validity of the Doctrine of the Primacy of Existence and the relativistic nature of Essence اصالت الوجود و اعتبار الماھیہ; according to the former doctrine, the objective or concrete reality was constituted by the essences or the quiditties of things as opposed to their existences; whereas the latter doctrine as postulated by Mullah Sadra asserts that it is the existences of things as opposed to their essences that constitute concrete reality or the objective world. While Mullah Sadra acknowledged the validity of the notion of quidittative contingency امکان ذاتی و ماھوی as a criterion for an effect's need for a cause, as opposed to temporal--origination حدوث, he argued that since in accordance with the Doctrine of the Primacy of Existence, reality حقیقت was synonymous with Existence as opposed to Essence, the notion of quidittative indigence فقر ذاتی although still valid for intellectual consideration, lacks the degree of validity represented by the idea of Ontic Indigence فقر وجودی; because it is Existence and not Quiddity that constitutes Reality; Mullah Sadra stated in accordance with the idea of Ontic Indigence that it is more true to assert that it is the existences of things that are utter destitution and indigence, rather than upholding the former notion of quidittative indigence and quidittative contingency; this is due to the fact that that which is related or connected to the existence of the agent-cause are not the quiditties of things but their existences; in fact the existences of things are not something to which this relation with the agent-cause is predicated, but these existences are that very relation and connection اضافه و تعلق themselves; since that which emanates from the agent-cause are the existences of the effects and not their quiditties; and the emanation of the existences of the effects is identical to the emanation of the causal connection or relation itself, because the existence of an effect is nothing but this relation and connection; since that which is related to the existence of the agent-cause is the existence of the effect instead of the effect's quiddity or essence, therefore the notion of Ontic Indigence takes precedence over the idea of quidittative indigence; hence that which truly renders an effect dependent upon its agent-cause is its ontological weakness, destitution and imperfection.
Comments
Post a Comment