Page 8 of 36 How ever If it is assumed that that the Potentiality/Potency [P1] of a Thing [Say T1] in a thing [say T2] can be Known Without Knowing the Thing T2 in which the the Potentiality of the thing T1 subsisteth then the Knowledge of the Potentiality of thing T1 NOT NECESSARILY Implieth the the Knowledge of of the Thing T2. This is incorrect but if it is assumed to be correct then in this case the Knowledge of the Thing T1 which is transited from Potentiality to the Actuality does not imply the Knowledge of T2. Since if it doeth not imply the Knowledge of its Potentiality P1, it does not imply the Knowledge of the Holder of the Potentiality. Note: Potentiality of T1 is denoted by P1. Any thing say T1 which Existeth due to Motion from Potentiality to Actuality in a thing T2 CANNOT be Known due to the Knowledge of its Potentiality P1.Since Potentiality [of a Thing T1] doeth not imply the transition [of T1] from (its) Potentiality [P1] to [its] Actuality. In other sentences:- 1], if a thing T1 existeth in the thing T2 and T1 cometh in Act due to Motion from Potentiality [say P] into Actuality [say A] and the Potentiality of T1 is held in the thing T2 then the Thing T1 cannot be known without knowing its Potentiality P. 2]If it is supposed that the thing (in Actuality/Act) T1 in the Thing T2 can be Known with out knowing the Potentiality P1 of T1, then it can also be known without the Knowledge of the thing T2. Since if the Potentiality P1 of a thing T1 in a thing T2 CANBE not Known BUT T1 is known then the thing T2 in which the Potentiality P1 of T1 Subsisteth can also be not known. [LET P2 BE THE POTENTIALIY OF A THING T3 IN THE THING T2.For technical reasons Potentiality of T3 is denoted by P2 and not by P3] In this case ,If there are one or two [ or more ] Potentialities [say P1, P2…..,….] in the the Second Hypostrasis to Assume the Human Nature and to Actualize the Human Nature (etc.) then it is not implied Necessarily that the Hypostasis it self is Known. Page 8 of 36
Page 9 of 36 As this discussion requires some more explanations it is attempted to explain once again in some different sentence of Speech as follow:= As the Human Nature and the Assumption of Human Nature in the Hypostasis are not Eternal according to Athanasian Trinitarians the Potentiality Pi (I=1,2) of each one of the two is in the Hypostasis which [i.e Hypostasis] is one of the two constituents which constitute the Hypostatic Union.[The other being the Human Nature]. These Potentialities [P1,P2] require two motions [ one for each to cause the transition of each one of the two i.e Assumption of Human Nature and the Human Nature from the Domain of Potentiality into the line of Actualization]. So the Potency/Potentiality of each one [P1,P2] of them [T1 and T3] is Logically Prior to both of them. If they [i.e P1 and P2] are not known Prior of them [T1 AND T3] then it is required to know them [P1,P2] first (Which are in the Hypostasis) ,then these two [T1,T3] are known. If it is supposed that T1 and T3 can be known even if their respective Ptentialities P1,P2 are not known; Then their [T1,T2] (RESPECTIVE )Knowledges neither collectively nor individually imply the Knowledge of T2 which holdeth these Potentialities [P1 and P2] in it. If the Male Human Nature and the Assumption of Male Human Nature in the Hypostasis [T1,T3 respectively] are known or can be known with out their respective Potentialities [P1,P2] in the Hypostasis then In this case the respective Knowledges of Assumption Of Human Nature [T3] and the Very Human Nature [T1] do not imply the Knowledge of their Potentialities [P1,P2] ;neither Collectively nor Individually. In this case these two [T1,T3] Cannot lead to the Knowledge of their Respective Potentialities [P1,P2]Which are in the Hypostasis [Say T2]. How lever these TWO [T1,T3] may inform about the Potential Aspects and Qualities of the Hypostases some thing new ,if the Hypostasis, and the Potentialities [P1,P2] are somehow Known independent of these two [T1,T3]. But neither the Knowledge of these two [T1 and T3] nor their respective Knowledges their respective potentialities [P1,P2] can be the Necessary Conditions for Knowing the Hypostasis in the Godhead , God the Trinity and Godhead of God . One can safely conclude that:= If it is supposed that the Knowledge of Potentiality [P1] of Human Nature in the Hypostasis , the Knowledge of Potentiality [P2] of Assumption and the Knowledge Hypostasis ARE NOT prior to the Page 9 of 36
This is a comprehensive and magnificently illustrated encyclopedia of the Islamic faith, its history, philosophy and religious practice. It offers an insightful overview of Islamic beliefs, teachings, texts and traditions, and an exploration of the Qur an as the revealed word of God and as a sacred text. It discusses Islamic worship, religious practices and Muslim life, and discusses the significance of holy sites, prayer, fasting and pilgrimage. It is an unparalleled reference book for the general reader, superbly illustrated with over 500 colour paintings, photographs, artworks and maps. In the contemporary world the Islamic community is represented by around 1.4 billion people or twenty five percent of the global population. To understand the religion of Islam it is essential to comprehend the prophet Muhammad, his message, his life and the early medieval Arabian society into which he was born. This book comprehensively explores the life and work of Muhammad, the history of Islam, Islamic beliefs and doctrine, and religious practices and worship.Illustrated with more than 500 full-colour paintings, artworks, maps and photographs, and including a helpful glossary at the end, this book offers an introduction to and overview of a complex and often misunderstood religion. It is perfect for general readers new to Islam, and a handy resource for students and scholars alike.
David W. Montgomery presents a rich ethnographic study on the practice and meaning of Islamic life in Kyrgyzstan. As he shows, becoming and being a Muslim are based on knowledge acquired from the surrounding environment, enabled through the practice of doing. Through these acts, Islam is imbued in both the individual and the community. To Montgomery, religious practice and lived experience combine to create an ideological space that is shaped by events, opportunities, and potentialities that form the context from which knowing emerges. This acquired knowledge further frames social navigation and political negotiation. Through his years of on-the-ground research, Montgomery assembles both an anthropology of knowledge and an anthropology of Islam, demonstrating how individuals make sense of and draw meanings from their environments. He reveals subtle individual interpretations of the religion and how people seek to define themselves and their lives as “good�? within their communities and under Islam. Based on numerous in-depth interviews, bolstered by extensive survey and data collection, Montgomery offers the most thorough English-language study to date of Islam in post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan. His work provides a broad view into the cognitive processes of Central Asian populations that will serve students, researchers, and policymakers alike.