Author
YİĞİT, Fevzi
Publication Place
Firat University -
Firat University
Subject
God, Islamic philosophy, Metaphysics
Type
Book
Language
ara,tur
Digital
Yes
Manuscript
No
Library
Leitir Library
Library Asset ID
ISSN: 1304-639X, EISSN: 2791-951X, DOI: 10.58568/firatilahiyat.1263823
Record ID
cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_6f0086d4ce9045f3952f981995957dac
Library Location
DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
Notes
The subject of this article is Ebû Hâmid İsfizârî's metaphysical views and proof of God in his final book, Fî mesâilü'l-umûri'l-İlâhiyye. As far as we know, there is no academic study about the philosopher in Turkey, and there is no article title in the Religious Affairs Encyclopedia of Islam. The aim of the article is to make an attempt to recognize the philosopher in our country. Although he was one of the important philosophers of his time, there is almost no information about Isfizari's life. He named Ibn Sina and criticized some of his views on morality. Hanafi theologian Ebü'l-Yüsr Pezdevî, on the other hand, mentioned Kindi's name and strongly opposed the general views of philosophers about tawhid. Isfizari, a competent mathematician and physicist, mentions the names of ancient philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, Ptolemy, Galen, Proclus and Yahya en-Nahvî in his aforementioned work, but basically philosophizes in a Peripatetic and Neo-Platonic line. In terms of value, the sciences are theology, mathematics and physics; In terms of education, they list it as - from best known to least known - physics, mathematics and theology. According to Isfizari, the subjects of theology/wisdom are divided into two: theoretical and practical, and the aim of both is to reach the good. Isfizari defines the science of metaphysics as the science of tawhid and determines its main subject as proving the existence and unity of God. God, as the real present and light, is the ultimate cause and reality in which all things end. Isfizari seems confused about whether God is a substance or not. Moreover, there is no relationship between God and the universe like there is between a building and its master; on the contrary, God is the complete agent who unites matter and form. The existence of God can only be proven through the universe and ontological necessity. However, since God cannot be shown by signs and humans are limited, the nature of God is outside the field of human knowledge. In other words, no evidence can be brought about God and he can only be introduced by the method of negation. Isfizari proves God through the evidence of motion. That is to say, all horizontal and vertical movements are dependent on and dependent on other causes and movements. The movements of the heavens ultimately depend on God in the vertical dimension. In other words - as Aristotle admitted - the spheres act because they desire to reach the First Cause. This desire, unlike the desire caused by lust, anger and will, develops in the direction of obtaining the divine share and eternity. Isfizari tries to show the invalidity of succession in order to prove that all movements in the vertical direction are based on the first mover, and he does this by mentioning the famous side/end evidence. Accordingly, an orderly chain of causes must have a beginning, end and middle. The first cause at the beginning is the cause in one respect, the ones in the middle are the cause in another respect, while the one at the end of the chain is only the cause. Isfizari interprets the idea of creation from nothing as "the existence of non-existent things in divine knowledge before their existence". Accordingly, God is like an artist who reveals hidden forms in His presence. With this idea, he differs from Plato, who had the idea that things consist of "abstract forms and species that subsist with their essences", and from Aristotle, who argued that "things subsist with their persons in the external world". Creation is rather an event that takes place from the unseen to martyrdom, which Muslim philosophers describe with the concept of ibda. In addition, creation is not the product of a divine will similar to human will, but is a result of God's eternal generosity, but this does not require the universe to be eternal. At this point he; He criticizes Yahya an-Nahvi for misunderstanding Proclus. The soul emerges at the end of the physical world that occurs over time, and the mind is given to it from outside with the formation of the human soul. Isfizari bases all knowledge on a priori knowledge; He likens the light of the mind to light, says that all thinkable things can be known through God, and accepts the human soul as the link between the abstract and concrete universe. In short, although Isfizari is a strong follower of Aristotle, he interprets the First Muharriq as the one who gives existence and creates. Notion of the present article is metaphysical theory and the proof for the existence of God in Ebū Hāmid İsfizari's book Fi mesāilü'l-umuri'l-İlāhiyye, the ultimate book of his we have. To our knowledge, as there is no academic study in Turkey about the philosopher, there is no article title about him in DIA. The purpose of the article is to make an attempt on making the philosopher gain recognition. Although he is one of the most outstanding philosophers of his own age, we have little to no information about Isfizārī's life. Avicenna criticized some of his views regarding to ethics by addressing his name. Hanafī theologian Ebu'l-Yusr Pezdevī strongly opposed Isfizārī's and Kindī's general opinions regarding to tawhid. Isfizārī who is a competent mathematician and physicist, besides mentioning ancient philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, Ptolemy, Galen, Proclus and John Philoponus, he basically philosophizes along the lines of Peripatetic philosophy and Neo-Platonism in his aforesaid work. He sorts the disciplines in terms of the value like; theology, mathematics and physics, and in terms of learning; -from the most known to the least known- physics, mathematics and theology. According to Isfizārī, subjects of theology split in two groups; theoretical and practical subjects and both of them aim to reach the good. Isfizārī descripes metaphysics discipline as tawhid discipline and determines its fundamental issue as the evidence for the existence and oneness of God. God is the ultimate reason and truth in which everything dies in and genuine entity and divine light. Isfizārī seems to be wooly-minded about whether God is substance or not. In addition, the relation between God and the universe is not similar to the relation between a building and its constructor rather God is the doer that compounds all the articles and forms. God's existence can merely be proven through the universe and ontological obligation. However, God cannot be pointed at and the man is restricted thus God's entity is trancendental. In other words one cannot show evidence about God and he only can be known through negation method. Isfizārī proves God's existence by using motional evidence. Namely, all horizontal and perpendicular movements are dependent and connected to other reasons and movements. Eventually, movements of orbits, in vertical size, rely on God himself. In other saying -as Aristotle accepted too- orbits move because they desire to reach the First Cause. This desire is different from the wish that contains lust, rage and willpower and it develops towards reaching the divine part and eternity. Isfizārī tries to show the invalidity of infinite regress in order to prove that in vertical size, every movement relies on the first driving power. And he mentions excellent evidence called ''bilateral''. According to this evidence, the chain of regular reasons has to have initial, final and central aspects. Initial first reason and central ones are; in one regard a reason and in another regard have reasons. Isfizārī descripes the idea of creating out of nothing as ''presence of non-existent things in divine knowledge even before they exist''. Accordingly, God is similar to an artist that unveils hidden forms. He diverges from Plato who thinks that things consist of ''absolute forms and self-perpetuating kinds'' and from Aristotle who advocates ''things exist with selves in external world''. Creation is further a nascence that occurs from unseen to seen and Muslim philosophers mention it as the concept of “ibdā”. Moreover, creation is not an outcome of an olympian willpower which is similar to human willpower, in fact it is the sum of God's external generosity but this situation does not necessarily make the universe eternal. At this point, he criticizes John Philoponus for he mistaken Proclus. The soul emerges at the end of the external world and the intellect is given to it after the human soul emerges. Isfizārī relies on all the information to a priori information; compares intellect's light to divine light, says everything can be known with God and accepts human soul as a bridge between abstract and concrete universe. In even though Isfizārī is a strong follower of Aristotle, he descripes First Driving Power conclusion as the one creates and generates.
Detaylı Başlık
Ebû Hâmid İsfizârî’nin Metafizik Görüşleri ve Tanrı Kanıtlaması
