14.02.2021 Views

Tahafut_al-Tahafut-transl-Engl-van-den-Bergh

a book on philosophy

a book on philosophy

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

God there would have to be a new impulse, and it is just this newness that

has to be denied. But, says Averroës, the whole basis of this argument is

wrong for it assumes in God a will like a human will. Desire and will can be

understood only in a being that has a need; for the Perfect Being there

can be no need, there can be no choice, for when He acts He will

necessarily do the best. Will in God must have another meaning than

human will.

Averroës therefore does not explicitly deny that God has a will, but will

should not be taken in its human sense. He has much the same

conception as Plotinus, who denies that God has the power to do one of

two contraries (for God will necessarily always choose the best, which

implies that God necessarily will always do the best, but this in fact annuls

the ideas of choice and will), and who regards the world as produced by

natural necessity. Aristotle also held that for the Perfect Being no

voluntary action is possible, and he regards God as in an eternal blissful

state of self-contemplation. This would be a consequence of His

Perfection which, for Averroës at least, involves His Omniscience. For the

Perfect the drama of life is ended: nothing can be done any more, no

decision can be taken any more, for decisions belong to the condition of

man to whom both knowledge and ignorance are given and who can have

an hypothetical knowledge of the future, knowing that on his decisions the

future may depend and to whom a sure knowledge of the future is denied.

But an Omniscient Being can neither act nor decide; for Him the future is

irremediable like the past and cannot be changed any more by His

decisions or actions. Paradoxically the Omnipotent is impotent. This

notion of God as a Self-contemplating Being, however, constitutes one of

the many profound contradictions in Aristotle’s system. And this profound

contradiction is also found in all the works of Aristotle’s commentators.

One of Aristotle’s proofs for the existence of God-and according to a

recent pronouncement of the Pope, the most stringent -is the one based

on movement. There cannot be an infinite series of movers; there must be

a Prime Agent, a Prime Mover, God, the originator of all change and

action in the universe. According to the conception of God as a Self-

Contemplating Being, however, the love for God is the motive for the

circular motion of Heaven. God is not the ultimate Agent, God is the

ultimate Aim of desire which inspires the Heavens to action. It is Heaven

which moves itself and circles round out of love for God. And in this case

14

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!