376190585-ISLAMIC-GOD-IS-KNOWABLE-BUT-NOT-COMPREHENSIBLE-BY-FINITE-KNOWLEDGES-OF-FINITE-SUPPOSITA
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Page 8 of 36<br />
How ever If it is assumed that that the Potentiality/Potency [P1] of a Thing [Say T1] in a thing [say T2]<br />
can be Known Without Knowing the Thing T2 in which the the Potentiality of the thing T1 subsisteth then<br />
the Knowledge of the Potentiality of thing T1 <strong>NOT</strong> NECESSARILY Implieth the the Knowledge of of the<br />
Thing T2. This is incorrect but if it is assumed to be correct then in this case the Knowledge of the<br />
Thing T1 which is transited from Potentiality to the Actuality does not imply the Knowledge of T2. Since<br />
if it doeth not imply the Knowledge of its Potentiality P1, it does not imply the Knowledge of the Holder<br />
of the Potentiality.<br />
Note: Potentiality of T1 is denoted by P1.<br />
Any thing say T1 which Existeth due to Motion from Potentiality to Actuality in a thing T2 CAN<strong>NOT</strong> be<br />
Known due to the Knowledge of its Potentiality P1.Since Potentiality [of a Thing T1] doeth not imply the<br />
transition [of T1] from (its) Potentiality [P1] to [its] Actuality.<br />
In other sentences:-<br />
1], if a thing T1 existeth in the thing T2 and T1 cometh in Act due to Motion from Potentiality [say P] into<br />
Actuality [say A] and the Potentiality of T1 is held in the thing T2 then the Thing T1 cannot be known<br />
without knowing its Potentiality P.<br />
2]If it is supposed that the thing (in Actuality/Act) T1 in the Thing T2 can be Known with out knowing<br />
the Potentiality P1 of T1, then it can also be known without the Knowledge of the thing T2.<br />
Since if the Potentiality P1 of a thing T1 in a thing T2 CANBE not Known <strong>BUT</strong> T1 is known then the thing<br />
T2 in which the Potentiality P1 of T1 Subsisteth can also be not known.<br />
[LET P2 BE THE POTENTIALIY <strong>OF</strong> A THING T3 IN THE THING T2.For<br />
technical reasons Potentiality of T3 is denoted by P2 and not by P3]<br />
In this case ,If there are one or two [ or more ] Potentialities [say P1, P2…..,….] in the the Second<br />
Hypostrasis to Assume the Human Nature and to Actualize the Human Nature (etc.) then it is not<br />
implied Necessarily that the Hypostasis it self is Known.<br />
Page 8 of 36
Change language