14.02.2021 Views

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

a book on philosophy

a book on philosophy

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

qualitative, or in whichsoever of the nine categories of the accident-do not

cause, according to them, differentiations in the substance,’ and the

heavenly bodies, as we said, are not composed of matter and form and

are not specifically different, since they have, according to the

philosophers, no common genus (for, if so, they would be composite, not

simple). But we have treated of this already, and there is no sense in

repeating ourselves.

Ghazali says:

I say:

The fifth objection is to say: If we concede these inept

assumptions and these erroneous judgements, how is it then

that they are not ashamed to say that from the fact that the

first effect is of a possible existence, there results the

existence of the highest sphere, and that from its knowledge

of itself there follows the existence of the soul of the sphere

and from its knowledge of the First Principle there follows the

existence of an intellect? What is the difference between this

and the statement that the existence of an unknown man is

necessary , and that he is of a possible existence and knows

himself and his Creator and then that from the fact that he is

of a possible existence there follows the existence of a

sphere? But it will be objected: What is the relation between

his having a possible existence and the existence of a

sphere following from him? And the same holds for the fact

that from his knowing himself and his Creator there follow

two other entities. But it would be ridiculous to say such a

thing about a man or any other existent whatever, for the

possibility of existence is a concept which does not change

through the changing of the possible object, be it a man or

an angel or a sphere. I do not know how any madman could

content himself with any of these assertions, let alone the

learned who split hairs in their discussions about intelligibles.

These are all theories of Avicenna and his followers, which are not true

and are not built on the foundations of the philosophers; still they are not

so inept as this man says they are, nor does he represent them in a true

209

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!