Ebu Hamid Isfizārī's Metaphysical Theory and Proof for the Existence of God

Fevzi Yiğit

Makale detayları

Ebu Hamid Isfizārī's Metaphysical Theory and Proof for the Existence of God

Yazarlar:

Fevzi Yiğit

Yayıncı:

Fırat University

Ana Başlıklar:

Din Araştırmaları

Dergi:

Fırat Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.28 Issue 1, pp.19-33

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001294890

pISSN:

1304-639X

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 Notion of the present article is metaphysical theory and the proof for the existence of God in Ebū Hāmid İsfizaris book Fi mesāilül-umuril-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 recognization. Although he is one of the most outstanding philosophers of his own age, we have little to no information about Isfizārīs life. Avicenna criticized some of his views regarding to ethics by addressing his name. Hanafī teologian Ebul-Yusr Pezdevī strongly opposed Isfizārī s and Kindīs general opinions regarding to tawhid. Isfizārī who is a competent mathematician and physicist, besides mentioning ancient philosophers such as Platon, Aristoteles, 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 proof 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. Gods existence can merely be proven through the universe and ontological obligation. However God cant be pointed at and the man is restricted thus Gods entity is trancendental. In other words one cannot show evidence about God and he only can be known through negation method. Isfizārī proves Gods existence by using motional evidence. Namely, all horizontal and perpendicular movements are dependant and connected to other reasons and movements. Eventually, movements of orbits, in vertical size, rely on God himself. In other saying -as Aristo 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 renowned 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 Platon who thinks that things consist of absolute forms and self-perpetuating kinds and from Aristo 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 Gods 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 external world and intellect is given to it after human soul emerges. Isfizārī relies all the information to a priori information; compares intellects light to divine light, says everything can be known with God and accepts human soul as a bridge between abstract and concrete universe. In conclusion even though Isfizārī is a strong follower of Aristo, he descripes First Driving Power as the one creates and generates.

 Bu makalenin konusu, Ebû Hâmid İsfizârînin elimize ulaşan nihai kitabı Fî mesâilül-umûril-İlâhiyyedeki metafizik görüşleri ve Tanrı kanıtlamasıdır. Bildiğimiz kadarıyla filozof hakkında Türkiyede yapılan akademik bir çalışma olmadığı gibi Diyanet İslâm Ansiklopedisinde de madde başlığı yoktur. Makalenin amacı filozofun ülkemizde tanınması yönünde girişimde bulunmaktır. Devrinin önemli filozoflarından birisi olmasına rağmen İsfizârînin hayatı hakkında neredeyse hiçbir bilgi yoktur. İbn Sînâ ismini vererek onun ahlaka dair bazı görüşlerini eleştirmiştir. Hanefî kelamcı Ebül-Yüsr Pezdevî ise Kindîyle birlikte onun ismini anarak filozofların tevhit hakkındaki genel görüşlerine şiddetle karşı çıkmıştır. Yetkin bir matematikçi ve fizikçi olan İsfizârî, ismi geçen eserinde Eflâtun, Aristoteles, Batlamyus, Galen, Proclus ve Yahya en-Nahvî gibi antik filozofların adını anmakla beraber temelde Meşşâî ve Yeni Eflâtuncu bir çizgide felsefe yapar. O, değeri açısından ilimleri ilahiyat, matematik ve fizik; öğrenim açısından ise -en iyi bilinenden en az bilinene doğru- fizik, matematik ve ilahiyat şeklinde sıralar. İsfizârîye göre ilahiyathikmet konuları nazarî ve amelî olmak üzere ikiye ayrılır ve her ikisinin gayesi de iyi olana ulaşmaktır. İsfizârî metafizik ilmini tevhit ilmi olarak tanımlar ve temel konusunu Tanrının varlığı ve birliğini ispat etmek olarak belirler. Tanrı, gerçek mevcut ve nur olarak bütün her şeyin kendisinde sona erdiği nihai sebep ve gerçektir. İsfizârînin, Tanrının cevher olup olmadığı meselesinde kafası karışık gibidir. Ayrıca Tanrı ile âlem arasında bina ile ustası arasındaki gibi bir ilgi yoktur bilakis Tanrı madde ve sûreti birleştiren tam faildir. Tanrının varlığı ancak âlem ve ontolojik zorunluluk vasıtasıyla ispat edilebilir. Bununla beraber Tanrı işaretle gösterilemediği, insan da sınırlı olduğu için Tanrının mâhiyeti insanın bilgi alanının dışındadır. Yani Tanrı üzerine burhan getirilemez ve o, ancak olumsuzlama yöntemiyle tanıtılabilir. İsfizârî Tanrıyı hareket delili üzerinden ispat eder. Şöyle ki, yatay ve dikey bütün hareketler, başka nedenlere ve hareketlere bağlı ve muhtaçtır. Feleklerin hareketleri nihayetinde dikey boyutta Tanrıya dayanır. Başka bir deyişle -Aristotelesin de kabul ettiği gibi- felekler İlk Nedene ulaşmayı arzuladıkları için hareket ederler. Bu arzu şehvet, öfke ve iradenin meydana getirdiği istekten farklı olarak ilâhî payı ve sonsuzluğu elde etme yönünde gelişir. İsfizârî, dikey yönde bütün hareketlerin ilk muharrike dayandığını ispatlamak için teselsülün geçersizliğini göstermeye çalışır ve bunu meşhur tarafuç delilini zikrederek yapar. Buna göre sıra düzenli nedenler zincirinin baş, son ve orta taraflarının olması gerekir. Baştaki ilk neden, ortadakiler bir açıdan neden bir açıdan nedenli iken zincirin son tarafında bulunan sadece nedenlidir. İsfizârî, yoktan yaratma fikrini madum şeylerin varlıklarından önce ilâhî ilimde mevcut olmaları şeklinde yorumlar. Buna göre Tanrı, katında saklı sûretleri ortaya çıkaran bir sanatkâr gibidir. O, bu düşüncesiyle şeylerin mücerret sûretler ve zâtlarıyla kaim türlerden oluştuğu fikrine sahip olan Eflâtundan ve şeylerin dış dünyadaki şahıslarıyla kaim olduğunu savunan Aristotelesten ayrılır. Yaratma daha çok müslüman filozofların ibdâ kavramıyla karşıladıkları gaybdan şehadete doğru gerçekleşen bir meydana geliştir. Ayrıca yaratılış insan iradesine benzeyen Tanrısal bir iradenin ürünü değil, Tanrının ezelî olarak cömert olmasının bir sonucudur ancak bu durum âlemin ezeli olmasını gerektirmez. Bu noktada o; Yahya en-Nahvîyi Proclusu yanlış anladığı için eleştirir. Nefis, zamanla meydana gelen fizik dünyanın sonunda ortaya çıkar ve akıl, insanî nefsin meydana gelmesiyle ona dışarıdan verilir. İsfizârî bütün bilgileri apriori bilgilere dayandırır; aklın nurunu ışığa benzetir, bütün düşünülürlerin Tanrıyla bilinebileceğini söyler ve insan nefsini soyut ile somut evren arasında bağlantı kurucu olarak kabul eder. Hâsılı İsfizârî, güçlü bir Aristoteles takipçisi olsa da o İlk Muharriki varlık veren ve meydana getiren olarak yorumlar.

 Notion of the present article is metaphysical theory and the proof for the existence of God in Ebū Hāmid İsfizaris book Fi mesāilül-umuril-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 recognization. Although he is one of the most outstanding philosophers of his own age, we have little to no information about Isfizārīs life. Avicenna criticized some of his views regarding to ethics by addressing his name. Hanafī teologian Ebul-Yusr Pezdevī strongly opposed Isfizārī s and Kindīs general opinions regarding to tawhid. Isfizārī who is a competent mathematician and physicist, besides mentioning ancient philosophers such as Platon, Aristoteles, 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 proof 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. Gods existence can merely be proven through the universe and ontological obligation. However God cant be pointed at and the man is restricted thus Gods entity is trancendental. In other words one cannot show evidence about God and he only can be known through negation method. Isfizārī proves Gods existence by using motional evidence. Namely, all horizontal and perpendicular movements are dependant and connected to other reasons and movements. Eventually, movements of orbits, in vertical size, rely on God himself. In other saying -as Aristo 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 renowned 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 Platon who thinks that things consist of absolute forms and self-perpetuating kinds and from Aristo 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 Gods 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 external world and intellect is given to it after human soul emerges. Isfizārī relies all the information to a priori information; compares intellects light to divine light, says everything can be known with God and accepts human soul as a bridge between abstract and concrete universe. In conclusion even though Isfizārī is a strong follower of Aristo, he descripes First Driving Power as the one creates and generates.

 Notion of the present article is metaphysical theory and the proof for the existence of God in Ebū Hāmid İsfizaris book Fi mesāilül-umuril-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 recognization. Although he is one of the most outstanding philosophers of his own age, we have little to no information about Isfizārīs life. Avicenna criticized some of his views regarding to ethics by addressing his name. Hanafī teologian Ebul-Yusr Pezdevī strongly opposed Isfizārī s and Kindīs general opinions regarding to tawhid. Isfizārī who is a competent mathematician and physicist, besides mentioning ancient philosophers such as Platon, Aristoteles, 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 proof 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. Gods existence can merely be proven through the universe and ontological obligation. However God cant be pointed at and the man is restricted thus Gods entity is trancendental. In other words one cannot show evidence about God and he only can be known through negation method. Isfizārī proves Gods existence by using motional evidence. Namely, all horizontal and perpendicular movements are dependant and connected to other reasons and movements. Eventually, movements of orbits, in vertical size, rely on God himself. In other saying -as Aristo 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 renowned 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 Platon who thinks that things consist of absolute forms and self-perpetuating kinds and from Aristo 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 Gods 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 external world and intellect is given to it after human soul emerges. Isfizārī relies all the information to a priori information; compares intellects light to divine light, says everything can be known with God and accepts human soul as a bridge between abstract and concrete universe. In conclusion even though Isfizārī is a strong follower of Aristo, he descripes First Driving Power as the one creates and generates.

Makale detayları

Ebu Hamid Isfizārī's Metaphysical Theory and Proof for the Existence of God

Yazarlar:

Fevzi Yiğit

Yayıncı:

Fırat University

Ana Başlıklar:

Din Araştırmaları

Dergi:

Fırat Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.28 Issue 1, pp.19-33

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001294890

pISSN:

1304-639X

Islamic Philosophy

Ebū Hāmid Isfizārī

Metaphysics

God

Motion Evidence.İslâm Felsefesi

Ebû Hâmid İsfizârî

Metafizik

Tanrı

Hareket Delili.

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Fevzi Yiğit

Yayıncı: Fırat University

Ana Başlıklar: Din Araştırmaları

Dergi: Fırat Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.28 Issue 1, pp.19-33

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 6/2023

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001294890

pISSN: 1304-639X

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Fevzi Yiğit

Yayıncı:

Fırat University

Ana Başlıklar:

Din Araştırmaları

Dergi:

Fırat Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.28 Issue 1, pp.19-33

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001294890

pISSN:

1304-639X