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.

I say:

of theirs which we have mentioned, which is based on the

denial of plurality in the First; we have shown its futility, and

apart from it there is no other method. It is therefore clear

that for the man who does not believe in the temporal

creation of bodies there is no foundation for believing in a

creator at all.

This argument is, without doubt, binding for the man who follows the

method of a necessary existent to prove the existence of an incorporeal

being, but this is not the method followed by the ancient philosophers, and

the first, so far as we know, who used it was Avicenna. He said that it was

superior to the proof of the ancients, because the ancients arrived only at

an immaterial being, the principle of the universe, through derivative

things, namely motion and time; whereas this proof, according to

Avicenna, arrives at the assertion of such a principle as the ancients

established, through the investigation of the nature of the existent in so far

as it is an existent. If indeed it did arrive at such an affirmation, what

Avicenna says would be true; however, it does not. ‘ For the most that

could be affirmed of the existent necessarily existing by itself would be

that it is not composed of matter and form, and generally speaking that it

has no definition. But if it is supposed to exist as composed of eternal

parts which are continuous by nature, as is the case with the world and its

parts, it may indeed be said of the world with its parts that it is a necessary

existent, z it being of course understood that there is a necessary existent.

And we have already said that the method Avicenna followed to establish

an existent of this description is not demonstrative and does not by nature

lead to it, except in the way we have stated. The utmost consequence of

this argument-and this constitutes its weakness-is the theory of those,

namely the Peripatetics, who assume that there exists a simple body not

composed of matter and form. For the man who assumes an eternal

compound of actual parts must necessarily acknowledge that it is

essentially one, and every oneness in a compound is one through an

essential unity, namely a simple, and through this unity the world becomes

one, and therefore Alexander of Aphrodisias says that there must exist a

spiritual force which is diffused in all the parts of the universe in the same

way as there is a force in all the parts of a single animal which binds them

334

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!