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.

finite, the existence of the Creator becomes finite; if you say

infinite, a duration in which there is an infinite number of

possibilities receives its termination. We answer: Duration

and time are, according to us, created, but we shall explain

the real answer to this question when we reply to the second

proof of the philosophers.

I say:

Most people who accept a temporal creation of the world believe time

to have been created with it. Therefore his assertion that the duration of

His inactivity was either limited or unlimited is untrue. For what has no

beginning does not finish or end. And the opponent does not admit that

the inactivity has any duration at all. What one has to ask them about the

consequences of their theory is: Is it possible, when the creation of time is

admitted, that the term of its beginning may lie beyond the real time in

which we live? If they answer that it is not possible, they posit a limited

extension beyond which the Creator cannot pass, and this is, in their view,

shocking and absurd. If, however, they concede that its possible beginning

may lie beyond the moment of its created term, it may further be asked if

there may not lie another term beyond this second. If they answer in the

affirmative-and they cannot do otherwise-it will be said: Then we shall

have here a possible creation of an infinite number of durations, and you

will be forced to admit-according to your argument about the spherical

revolutions-that their termination is a condition for the real age which

exists since them. If you say what is infinite does not finish, the arguments

you use about the spherical revolutions against your opponents your

opponents will use against you on the subject of the possibility of created

durations. If it is objected that the difference between those two cases is

that these infinite possibilities belong to extensions which do not become

actual, whereas the spherical revolutions do become actual, the answer is

that the possibilities of things belong to their necessary accidents and that

it does not make any difference, according to the philosophers, if they

precede these things or are simultaneous with them, for of necessity they

are the dispositions of things. If, then, it is impossible that before the

existence of the present spherical revolution there should have been

infinite spherical revolutions, the existence of infinite possible revolutions

is equally impossible. If one wants to avoid these consequences, one can

52

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!