{"title":"Theory of Quiddity Preparedness by Ibn ‘Arabī and its Relation to the Negation of Determinism of Servants","authors":"Münzir Şeyhhasan","doi":"10.26570/isad.1134035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The issue of servants’ acts is one of the most controversial issues in Islamic thought and helped to sharpen the characteristics and differences between theological schools, mainly due to its relation to taklīf and servants’ responsibility. Therefore, understandings of this issue revealed differences in understandings of divine justice and wisdom, as well as in interpretations of fate and destiny. \nOne of the noteworthy theories is that of Ibn ‘Arabī (d. 638/1240) and his followers, who attempted to establish responsibility and negate the determinism of servants through al-a‘yān al-thābita (fixed entities) and ʻadam maj‘ūliyat al-mahiya (un-createdness of quiddities). They also focused on the construction of fate and destiny in accordance with this theory and considered such construction to constitute “the secret of destiny” and “the absolute proof” of God over the peoples. \nWhile studying the servants’ acts and the extent of their freedom of choice, we must deal with the issue of fate and destiny, as nothing in this universe is beyond fate and destiny. Human beings and their voluntary acts are no more than a part of this fate. We, therefore, first set out to understand the meaning of fate and destiny as understood by Ibn Arabi in this article. Then, we clarify the meaning of al-a‘yān al-thābita. Next, we detail the issue of createdness of quiddities; as the universal entities are no more than realities and quiddities, we then tackle the issue of preparedness of quiddity and its relation to the establishment of the servant’s freedom and the negation of determinism. Finally, we explore criticisms of this theory and try to present an objective evaluation of opinions on the issue.","PeriodicalId":177102,"journal":{"name":"İslâm Araştırmaları Dergisi","volume":"339 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"İslâm Araştırmaları Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26570/isad.1134035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The issue of servants’ acts is one of the most controversial issues in Islamic thought and helped to sharpen the characteristics and differences between theological schools, mainly due to its relation to taklīf and servants’ responsibility. Therefore, understandings of this issue revealed differences in understandings of divine justice and wisdom, as well as in interpretations of fate and destiny.
One of the noteworthy theories is that of Ibn ‘Arabī (d. 638/1240) and his followers, who attempted to establish responsibility and negate the determinism of servants through al-a‘yān al-thābita (fixed entities) and ʻadam maj‘ūliyat al-mahiya (un-createdness of quiddities). They also focused on the construction of fate and destiny in accordance with this theory and considered such construction to constitute “the secret of destiny” and “the absolute proof” of God over the peoples.
While studying the servants’ acts and the extent of their freedom of choice, we must deal with the issue of fate and destiny, as nothing in this universe is beyond fate and destiny. Human beings and their voluntary acts are no more than a part of this fate. We, therefore, first set out to understand the meaning of fate and destiny as understood by Ibn Arabi in this article. Then, we clarify the meaning of al-a‘yān al-thābita. Next, we detail the issue of createdness of quiddities; as the universal entities are no more than realities and quiddities, we then tackle the issue of preparedness of quiddity and its relation to the establishment of the servant’s freedom and the negation of determinism. Finally, we explore criticisms of this theory and try to present an objective evaluation of opinions on the issue.
仆人的行为问题是伊斯兰思想中最具争议的问题之一,它有助于突出神学院之间的特点和差异,主要是因为它与伊斯兰教和仆人的责任有关。因此,对这个问题的理解揭示了对神的正义和智慧的理解的差异,以及对命运和命运的解释的差异。其中一个值得注意的理论是伊本·阿拉伯(公元638/1240年)及其追随者的理论,他们试图通过al-a 'yān al-thābita(固定实体)和al- adam maji ' ūliyat al-mahiya(非创造性的本质)来建立责任并否定仆人的决定论。他们还注重按照这种理论建构命运和命运,认为这种建构构成了上帝对人民的“命运的秘密”和“绝对证明”。在研究仆人的行为和他们选择自由的程度时,我们必须处理命运和命运的问题,因为在这个宇宙中没有什么是超越命运和命运的。人类和他们的自愿行为只不过是这种命运的一部分。因此,我们首先着手理解伊本·阿拉比在本文中所理解的命运和命运的含义。然后,我们澄清al-a 'yān al-thābita的含义。接下来,我们详细讨论属性的创造性问题;由于普遍实体不过是现实和本质,我们接下来要讨论本质的准备问题,以及它与仆人自由的确立和决定论的否定的关系。最后,我们探讨了对这一理论的批评,并试图就这一问题提出客观的评价。