Objections to the Eternity of the World and their solutions

The Philosophers assert that even if the world were to be eternal, it would still be an effect and consequently dependent upon a cause for its existence due to its essential contingency امکان ذاتی; the theologians object to this assertion by stating that an eternal world would be independent of a cause for bringing it into being, since it was never non-existent to be brought into existence in the first place; for the theologians, in order for an existent to be an effect it is necessary for its existence to be preceded by non-existence; here their eyes are fixed on temporal non-existence عدم زمانی only; they failed to realize that, that which an effect has due to its cause is its existence, whereas that which it has due to itself is essential-non-existence عدم ذاتی; therefore even an eternal world is brought into existence by its cause from essential non-existence albeit the world was never temporally non-existent. 

 The theologians also object to the notion of the eternity of the world on the ground that it would lead to a multiplicity of eternals تعدد قدماء; here also as before they fail to distinguish between being eternal in itself قدیم بالذات and being eternal through another قدیم بالغیر; the world and all that it contains is eternal through another, namely God, whereas God is eternal in itself; the world derives its eternity from the First Cause and is not eternal in its own essence; therefore even an eternal world does not lead to a multiplicity of beings that are eternal in themselves.

 The theologians argue that in order for an agent فاعل to be a free-agent فاعل قادر و مختار its essence ذات must exist prior to the existence of its act or effect; therefore simultaneity between a cause and its effect negates the possession of free will by the cause; hence, if the world were to be eternal and consequently simultaneous with the Necessary Being واجب الوجود, so this would negate the presence of free will in its agent-cause namely the Divine Essence; in response to this objection the Philosophers simply state that a free agent is not one whose essence is temporally prior in existence to its effect or act, but one whose act emanates from its free will; it makes no difference whether this act or effect is contemporaneous with its agent-cause or is posterior to it in time; in fact the more ontologically intense and sublime the cause, the greater is its ability to eliminate non-existence from its effect, and an Omnipotent Being قادر مطلق must be able to remove non-being from its effect absolutely.

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

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

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