Ibn Arabis Theory of Divine Roots and TH

Ibn 'Arabī's Theory of Divine Roots and the Question of God and Ten Categories
Author(s): QAISER SHAHZAD

Source: Islamic Studies, Vol. 51, No. 4 (Winter 2012), pp. 445-459
Published by: Islamic Research Institute, International Islamic University, Islamabad
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43664353
Accessed: 12-03-2018 04:40 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/43664353?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Islamic Research Institute, International Islamic University, Islamabad is collaborating

with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Islamic Studies
This content downloaded from 111.68.97.183 on Mon, 12 Mar 2018 04:40:12 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Islamic Studies 51:4 (2012) pp. 445-459
Ibn 'Arabi's Theo

of God and Ten C
QAISER S
Abstract
This paper constructs a the

regarding the relationship
divine roots." According t
discerned for each and ever
order to make sense of Ibn
the applicability of Aristotel
Ibn ' Arabi's understanding
two seemingly contradictor
dislike of the whole discussio
categories. If we keep in min
then Ibn ' Arabi most proba
explaining how they apply to
is more positive.
<0>
Introduction
In the terminology of logic a proposition is any sentence that can be

or false. A sentence is made of words and the words that make propo
called its terms. Hence in the proposition "this apple is sweet" th
terms 'apple' (subject) and 'sweeť (predicate). In a short trea
Categories Aristotle listed and explained all types singular terms can
Eventually he organized these classes, or as he called them, 'categ
substance ("that which is neither predicable of a subject nor pre
subject"1) and other nine categories which are not "substances" i.e
qualification, relation, place, time, position, possession, action and
Now it is not difficult to see the philosophical importance of th
1 Aristotle, Categories , 2b [14].
446 QAISER SHAHZAD
which primarily is logico-lin

from the question 'to what c
to 'what is the ultimate categ
heads of classification not
Medieval Jewish and Christ
assign God to any of these A
The debate on God and ca
and philosophy as clearly as
submit, is Ibn 'Arabī. The p
and plausible picture of his
relationship between ten Ari
Now, the question whethe
related dimensions, one r
dimension i.e., related to h
knowledge (epistemological
things). From its first dime
with the world does God st
is: how to talk about God?
response to questions arisin
of Categories and God wo
necessity of combining the s
infinitely beyond and unlike
some sense a continuity be
famously asserts that that
implication of this standpoin
God is simply transcendent
positive terms. This synthesi
since it concerns both the r
God and the possibility or im
2 See John Marenbon, From the C

Philosophy in Early Middle Ages
Aristotle's Categories and the prob
John Scottus Eriugena (d. 877 C
(d. 942 CE) see Gyongyi Hegedus, S
(Boston: Brill, 2013), 93ff.
3 An important paper that covers
Logik und theologie: Das Organon in
and Ulrich Rudolph (Leiden: E. J
differs in its scope and approach.
regarding the relations of categor
This specific dimension is, moreov
the scattered passages of Ibn 'Ara
I BN 'ARABÎ'S THEORY OF DIVINE ROOTS AND THE QUESTION OF GOD AND TEN CATEGORIES 447
The issue of relating God to ten categories was never formulated and
treated as a separate theological issue in Muslim theological thought before Ibn
'Arabi. Applicability of a few particular categories (though these were not
known to be Aristotelian Categories) to Divine Essence was discussed in the
context of other Divine Attributes and their implications. For instance, it was in
the context of working out the implications of divine simplicity ( al-basātah )
and incorporeality or refutation of the Christian doctrine of Trinity.
Al-Juwaynl (d. 1085) denies God's being a substance (jawhar) and he also
refutes Trinity in view of its applying the category to God.4 Al-Juwaynī's
disciple al-Ghazālī (d. 1111), unlike other theologians, prefers to argue on
traditionalist Unes and says that since the "substance" is not one of Divine
Names and Attributes mentioned in the Sacred texts it cannot be literally
applied to God although one could call God a substance in metaphoric sense.5
Another Ash'arite theologian, al-Shahrastānī (d. 1153), in his refutation of
comparability ( tashbih ) negates, in addition to substance and accidents, God's
being in time and space also.6 All these writers, for one reason or other, reject
the applicability of substance to God ruling out any exception. Ibn 'Arabl's
contemporary theologian, with whom indeed he corresponded, Fakhr al-Dīn
al-Rāzī (d. 1210) presents an analysis of the word jawhar (substance) into four
possible meanings. First, as something indivisible existing in a place; second,
an entity capable of having contradictory attributes; third, the essence which
when found among things does not inhere in any other thing and fourth, "a
being which is independent of a dwelling ( mahalt) in which to dwell".
According to al-Rāzī "God is the worthiest of being jawhar in this sense."7
This meaning is close to the sense in which Aristotle used the word substance
when he said that "some things can exist apart and some cannot and it is the
former that are substances."8 Al-Rāzī then presents a defence of his position
against a possible objection in the course of which he explains that the word
jawhar takes its basic meaning from jahārah i.e. loudness and zuhūr i.e.
manifestation. In view of this meaning, he reiterates that a being more
independent than others enjoys these qualities and can consequently be called
takes the spiritual context of Ibn 'Arabi's use of philosophical terminology whereas here the
problem is considered as a purely philosophical issue.
4 'Abd al-Malik b. Yusuf al-Juwayni, Kitab al-Irshad (Cairo: al-Khānjī, 1950), 46-51.
5 Muhammad b. Muhammed al-Ghazālī, Iqtisad ft 'l-1'tiqãd, ed. Insāf Ramadan (Damascus: Dar
Qutaybah, 2003), 52.
6 Muhammad b. 'Abd al-Karīm al-Shahrastanī, Nihãyat al-Iqdam, ed. Alfred Guillaume (London:
Oxford University Press, 1934), 103.
7 Muhammad b. 'Umar al-Razï, al-Matalib al-'Aliyah min al-'Ilm al-Ilabï (Beirut: Dãr al-Kitab
al 'Arabi, 1987), 2: 115.
8 Aristotle, Metaphysics, XII, 5: 1070b-36: 1071a.
44g QAISER SHAHZAD
jawhar .9 Al-Räzl's approa

theologians on this point, a
question into its possible me
one sticks to the traditional
with al-Ghazālī and others,
clearly taken a moderate st
denial of the word's applicat
The theologians mention
however, there has been alm
this category to God amon
The only recorded oppositi
Muhammad b. Kirām (d. 25
accepts calling God substance
subject."11
Coming to Ibn 'Arabi, his readers get the initial impression that he
dislikes the whole discussion of God and categories. Thus he observes this
debate as a proverb says "I hear the grinding, but I do not see any flour."12 At
another place this distaste for the discussion of categories and God is combined
with the practical demands of Sufi piety. Indulging into such discussion is not
recommended since it distracts one from focusing on "one thing needful" that
is, "knowing oneself" and makes one do something God has prohibited to do,
namely contemplation of Divine Essence. The Qur'än reads, "God warns you
regarding His self."13 However, these warnings serve as caveat on the
uninitiated, since we find Ibn 'Arabi ready to discuss the issue with his eligible
readers. Thus many interesting and insightful comments are scattered on the
question throughout his major as well as some shorter works. It is by collating
and interpreting these stray reflections that we intend to present a complete
theory.
Substance in Relation to other Categories

Let us begin with a general look at the way Ibn 'Arab! understands the
correlation between the first category (i.e. substance) and the rest. Ibn 'Arabi
9 Al-Razī, al-Matalib , 2: 116.

10 Mas'ud b. 'Umar al-Taftazānī, Shark al-Maqasid (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyyah, 2001),
3: 34.
11 Al-Husayn b. 'Abd Allah b. Sina, al-Shifíť, ed. George Anawati (Cairo: al-Amlriyyah, 1960),
2: 367.
12 Muhammad b. 4 All b. 'Arabi, al-Futūhāt al-Makkiyyah (Beirut: Dār Sādir, n.d.), 2: 116. The
translation is of William Chittick, Sufi Path of Knowledge (Stony Brook, NY: State University of
New York Press, 1989), 75.
13 Ibid., 3: 81-82.
IBN 'ARABĪ'S THEORY OF DIVINE ROOTS AND THE QUESTION OF GOD AND TEN CATEGORIES 449
considers them to "appear with the appearance of substance for itself when the
Real brings it out from its hiddenness."14 The first category, substance, thus is
thought to be a substrate. This becomes clear also from the diagrammatical
presentation of the ten categories in his Inshā' a short but important treatise
on the degrees of being, which contains a number of diagrams.15 For Ibn
'Arab! this category is the most basic of all. This presentation consists of a
circle representing Primordial Matter which comprises all knowable realities,
existent, nonexistent and those which are beyond existence/non-existence. In
that diagram jawhar is given the central position while the rest of ten
categories form a circle around it.
Accident Passion
/ State X Action '
Substance ļ ļ
^ Time ' Ì Position j

'. Place j' ' Relation
Ibn 'Arabï's Circle of Ten Categories
Ibn 'Arabl's view squares nicely with Aristotle's stated

has observed that substances "are the entities which underl
If the expression "everything else" includes the rest of c
which seems plausible in view of the fact that after al
14 See ibid., 3: 11.

15 Muhammad b. 'All b. 'Arabi, Inshā * alDawaW (Beirut: Dār al-Kut
24-25. The diagram given here is taken from Paul B. Fenton and Ma
Book of the Description of the Encompassing Circles (al-Inshâ* ad-Daw
and M. Tiernen, eds., Muhyiddin ibn ' 'Arabi : A Commemorative Volum
Element Books, 1993), 24-40.
16 Aristotle, Categońes , 2b [15]. There is some controversy on the mea
of substance with substratum and its place in Aristotle's mature thou
New Essays on Plato and Aristotle , ed. Renford Bembrough (London:
There is no denying, however, that Aristotle does identify these two c
450 QAISER SHAHZAD
supposed to be the headings un

then, of course Ibn 'Arabī's v
Do the Categories Apply t
Really Not: The Perspective o
Coming to the question of the

Ibn ' Arabī's semi-negative res
No knowledge of Him provide

no quality, location, time, posit
There is nothing of the ten
definite activity. . . So whom sh
is bounded by time, made plura
distinguished by positions, mad
Let us note a few things a

problems. Firstly, it is bein
theology (tanzīh) which r
upholding God-world identi
under discussion (namely, r
cannot be the final word but h
approach from the vintage
accordance with Ibn 'Arabī
combining the two perspective
ten categories, namely action
This allowance already con
complementing immanence p
declared substance to be the
seems hard to understand ho
affection while denying the
passage we are analyzing. Can
by bringing in once again t
saying that Ibn 'Arabi is only
these categories to God and
seems to be supported by hi
17 This passage is from the chapter

so here Ibn 'Arabi discusses the p
contemplate God.
18 Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futuhat , 2: 211. The
The work Insha* from which th
1201 CE, just one year before the co
IBN 'ARABĪ'S THEORY OF DIVINE ROOTS AND THE QUESTION OF GOD AND TEN CATEGORIES 45 ļ
Having allowed the applicability of action and affection Ibn 'Arab! says that in
addition to activity and passivity there also is a "manifest act by an unknown
agent whose effect is seen."20 Hence, the effects of action show that agent
exists, just as accidents show that underlying substance exists, but one cannot
know the nature either of agent or of substratum.
Anyhow, Ibn 'Arabi indicates that he does not construe Divine agency in
the sense of primary causality. While discussing the ritual of stoning the
Satans, which Ibn 'Arabi symbolically interprets as a dialogue between the
pilgrim and Satan as part of pilgrimage (hajj)> he negates applicability of the
word "cause" to divinity since the existence of cause implies that of effect
while God was there and there was nothing besides Him, at least in the sense
of spatio-temporal existence.21 This limitation however is mitigated when one
looks at Ibn 'Arabl's own recognition of the pre-existence of the world as
objects of divine knowledge, although not in case of spatio-temporal existence.
The category of affection would also be applicable to the Divine however not
to the transcendent divine essence but to the level of divinity which is
understood in terms of Attributes and Names.22 It is important to notice that
this category would be applicable in a deeper ontological sense to the level of
divinity as well as in the ordinary sense of being affected. The Divine Names
"Avenger" (al-Muntaqim) and "Grateful" (al-Shakūr), for instance imply God's
being moved by actions that are committed by the mortals. In the deeper
ontological sense the very level of divinity owes itself in a logical sense to the
existence of creatures. However this dependence is merely logical and not
ontological, just as someone's being "father" is dependent upon and
inconceivable without supposition of a son. Obviously in this logical sense
"son" cannot be understood without a reference to father. While ontologically
speaking the son's existence owes itself to that of the father, it is in the former
logical sense that dependence of the level of divinity on the creatures can be
understood.
Applicability and Correspondence : The Perspective of Immanence
From the perspective of tashbih we can hope to find more encouraging

response, however, here Ibn 'Arabl's approach gives the whole question a
20 Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futuhat , 2: 211.

21 See ibid., 1: 720.
22 While referring to God Ibn 'Arabi uses the word "the Divine presence" (al-hadrah al-ilahiyyah)
which he defines by saying that "There is nothing in existence save Divine presence which is
His essence (1 dhätuh ), His attributes (sifötuh) and His Actions {afāluh)" (Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futūhāt ,
2: 114). He thus has a multi-layered conception of the divine so one has to have a nuanced
interpretation of whatever Ibn 'Arab! says about God.
452 QAISER SHAHZAD
fresh form. While looking at

in relation to God, one gets
all appropriate word to co
categories and some of them
that this alternate is corres
world which is constitute
correspondence, we further
his doctrine of Divine roots
(hukm) becomes manifest i
'Divine side' by which it (i.e
he writes,
There is no existent possible thing in everything-other-than-God24 that is not

çpnnected to the Divine relationships and lordly realities (al-haqa'iq
al-rabbãniyyah) which are known as "the most beautiful names." Therefore, every
possible thing ( mumkin ) is in grasp of a Divine reality.25
Hence the divine roots doctrine is the theoretical model that Ibn 'Arabi
applies to explain the relationship between phenomenal world and the
noumenal or divine realities. Since the phenomenal world is characterized by
being analyzable to one of the ten categories, these categories must themselves
be related to their noumenal root in what Ibn 'Arabi calls "the divine side."
One could thus see clearly how Ibn 'Arabi goes beyond any other theologian
or philosopher before him by not considering a simple denial of applicability
of categories to God sufficient. He rather thinks it necessary to explain the
existence of these categories by reference to their ontological rootedness in
Divine Reality.
The correspondence between categories and the nature of God is
established in at least two places in al-Futūhāt, in chapter 22 and in chapter 302.26
The 22nd chapter of al-Futūhāt does not name "categories" and its context
at any rate is not philosophical at all but rather spiritual. The said chapter is
about the station of stations (manzil al-manāzil ) which discusses nineteen types
of stations contained within the said station and corresponding to each of
these nineteen stations are mentioned specific sciences. One of these sciences is
the so called "science of bodies" (' Urn al-ajsām). It is here that nineteen aspects
in the divine side are mentioned to correspond to the levels of corporeal
25 Ibid.. 2: 508.
24 Mā siwi Allah (lit. "what is other than Allah"): This is the name Ibn 'Arabi gives to the created
world.
Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futūhāt, 2: 115; Chittick, Sufi Path, 37.
26 Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futūhāt, 1: 179-180; 3: 11 respectively.
IBN 'ARABl'S THEORY OF DIVINE ROOTS AND THE QUESTION OF GOD AND TEN CATEGORIES 453
existence and the ten categories are among these. However, the peculiarity of
context would seem to be immaterial since the divine roots given there can be
seen to correspond with the more explicit discussion in the 302nd chapter, as
is obvious from the table that follows.
In the 302nd chapter Ibn 'Arabi first argues that the world consists of the
entities (a'yan) of substances and the relation that follows them, i.e. the
remaining nine categories. He then provides the principle that since the world
is a copy of its archetype in Divine knowledge and Divine knowledge of the
world is identical with Divine self-knowledge the world must be upon the
image of the creator. This statement contains an allusion to Ibn 'Arabl's
celebrated doctrine of immutable entities (mistakenly identified with Platonic
theory of forms)27 according to which before existing in spatio-temporal
world, everything pre-exists as an object of divine knowledge. Then he
immediately mentions Divine qualities that correspond to the ten categories
by which the spatio-temporal world is characterized.
In order to be able to look simultaneously at these two lists, we present
them below in a tabular form following which are some observations
regarding the correlation of these two lists and explanations of the divine roots
or scriptural foundations given by Ibn 'Arabi.
Divine Roots Categories

Chapter 302 Chapter 22
Essence Essence Substance
Number of His Names
"Each day He is
"We will finish
and jinn."29 "T
upon the throne."30
"He came to b
"And He is God in the Heavens."32
27 This applies to Toshihiko Izut

Concepts (Berkeley: Chicago Unive
28 Qur'än 55: 29.
29 Ibid., 55: 31.
30 Ibid., 20: 5.
31 I could not locate the reference for this Prophetic saying in the Hadith literature but Ibn
'Arabi does mention it in chapter 302 of al-Futūhāt.
32 I could not locate the reference for this Prophetic saying in the Hadith literature but Ibn
'Arabi does mention it in chapter 302 of al-Futūhāt.
454 QAISER SHAHZAD
He is God in the Eternity Eternity Time
Allah spoke directly to Moses33 Al- Posture
"Maste
Creatures
A Balance in His Hand, lifts it and Munificence Action

lowers it.
He is c
Asked a
and forgives.
Table: Div
Some Obser
Ten Catego
As far as th
observe the
detailed. A c
questions.
Posture
The root mentioned for posture in chapter 22nd is al-fahwãniyyah, a term used
by Ibn 'Arab! to denote "Face to face address of the Real in the imaginai
world."35 God's direct address to Moses is mentioned at al-Futūhāt ,36 as an instance.
Quality and Place

A quality according to Aristotle is "that in virtue of which people are said to
be such and such."37 Ibn 'Arabi has explicitly claimed that istiwã' (session) is an
attribute of God38 and in the two places mentioned above has assigned it as a
root to different categories. Hence "session" is assigned to quality in the first
list and to "place" in the second one. This tells us an important thing about the
theory of divine roots. The relation between divine root and its manifestation
is not one-to-one relationship, like the one that exists between an immutable
33 Qur'an 4: 164.
34 Ibid., 3: 26.
35 Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futuhāt , 2: 128.
36 Ibid., 3: 11.
37 Aristotle, Categories , 8a: 25, II. 13.
38 See Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futūhat , 3: 162.
I BN 'ARABl'S THEORY OF DIVINE ROOTS AND THE QUESTION OF GOD AND TEN CATEGORIES 455
entity and its manifestation. There appears to be a problem involved here. It

seems that istiwã' itself does not answer the question regarding qua, as is
obvious from the question placed before Mālik b. Anas39 regarding the quality
of istiwã '40 That is to say, having known the fact that God is sitting upon the
throne Malik's interlocutor could ask him "how" (kayfi. In fact the quoted
Qur'anic words are more akin to the category of action rather than that of
quality. It is possible to take istiwã' in the text quoted from Ibn 'Arab! not as a
single word but as an abbreviation for the whole statement in which it occurs.
This strategy can be justified by invoking analogy with Ibn 'Arabl's treatment
of the category of quantity in the two lists given in the table. Although in the
22nd chapter the root for quantity is just "names" we know from the 302nd
chapter that this word is just an abbreviation for "number of names." Thus the
Divine root of istiwã' is not necessarily the quality denoted by istiwã' but
some other fact meant by the words "The All-Merciful sat upon the throne."
From some of his comments upon these words we do get an idea of the quality
to which the word istiwã' points. In this case, by mentioning istiwã' as the
Divine root of quality, Ibn 'Arabi can be taken to be pointing to mercy, which
clearly corresponds to quality. One might object to this interpretation that it
is rather far-fetched. This objection would have been justified if some quality
other than mercy were mentioned in these words. Ibn 'Arabī's readers are
familiar with the central significance accorded to this divine attribute by him.
He would have picked up the words containing mercy as signifying
application of "quality" to God because these words, according to him show
that God sits upon the throne, that is, rules the world qua the Merciful, i.e.
through his quality of mercy.
State
The category of state is missing from both lists. It seems worthwhile to try to
complete this list by finding out the possible Divine root of "state". In the
39 Mālik (d. 795) is the founder of one of four major schools of law in Sunni Islam. He was asked
to explain how (kayfj God is sitting upon the throne, with reference to the Qur'anic words,
"The All-Merciful sat upon the throne" (Qur'än 20: 5). The response made by Malik has become
the paradigmatic position of the conservative-traditionalist schools (Salafis) in theological
matters. He said, "All-Merciful sits upon the Throne as he described Himself. It cannot be asked
'how?' because 'how' does not apply to Him." He then ordered his interlocutor to be removed
from his assembly (see Abū Bakr Ahmad b. Husayn al-Bayhaqi, al-Asmā' wa 'l-Sifat (Jeddah:
al-Sawâdï, 1993), 2: 304-305).
40 See Muhammad b. 'Abd al-Karim al-Shahrastānī, al-Milal wa 'l-Nihal (Beirut: Dār al-Ma'rifah,
1995), chapter 3. Certainly "sitting," even though not a very accurate translation of istiwã', is
mentioned by Aristotle himself as instantiating the category of position (see Aristotle,
Categories, 2').
456 QAISER SHAHZAD
circle of categories that we

uses the word hai for the ca
philosophy and Kalām into Su
theophany or Divine self-m
in its original linguistic me
Since a term retains some of
some specific discipline, we
between Divine nature and
We hypothesize that we cou
words quoted by Ibn 'Arabi
category of quality. Before
hypothesis from Ibn 'Arabi
two categories from a singl
shown in the table above, s
'Arab! has mentioned the Q
according to him, "the qualit
love he considers the stat
quality's having multiple sta
in "Divine states ( ahwãl ilahi
can be applied directly to G
causes the characterization
Eriugenian language of negat
or creator of states. This c
connecting difference in hum
If it is asked why Divine relat

difference in states!" ... so the
and the one whose state is 'dro
In this passage it is apparent

are connected to Divine nat
Qur'ânic verse about Divine
us to use it as a source of the
41 Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futūhat, 3: 11.

42 Ibid., 1: 195. Ibn 'Arabi identifi
(ibid., 2: 305). He relates the Div
traditions like God's joyfully rec
(ibid., 2: 368).
43 Ibid., 2: 337. Ibn 'Arabi writes a
his states except from his Lord, so h
44 Ibid., 1: 265.
I BN 'ARABl'S THEORY OF DIVINE ROOTS AND THE QUESTION OF GOD AND TEN CATEGORIES 457
In view of these textual sources, we can finally submit that the root in the
Divine side of the appearance and existence of "state" is the fact that the God is
upon some task every day. "Being upon" is the archetype for the symbol of
"state."
Time
A number of scholars have studied Ibn 'Arabī's concept of time. Among them
Böwering45 and Kalin46 are particularly worthy of mention. Their studies seem
to agree that Ibn 'Arabī's relevant views can be discussed conveniently by
dividing time into principiai (related to Divine Being) and theophanic (related
to Divine Self-manif estation). The latter can further be divided into
microcosmic and macrocosmic. The Arabic word dahr is taken to mean
principiai time or time with which God has identified himself, while the word
al-waqt is considered to be the counterpart of time as it relates to theophany,
whether microcosmic or macrocosmic.
Thus when Ibn 'Arab! relates the Prophetic saying "Do not curse al-Dabr
because al-Dahr is God" he considers it to be about the Principiai time, which
"stands above temporal time and thus presents permanence against
transience."47 Therefore, since this Divine time is eternal time, identifying God
with it does not necessarily entail the implausible consequence of attributing
mutability or corruption to God, since time spoken of here is different from
• • • 4O
time as we ex
The first su
we experien
important pr
the dispositio
"Moment,"
45 G. Böwering
Fetschrifi Anne
46 Ibrahim Kaii
on Time," Journ
47 Ibid., 50.
48 A further s
which even cha
since one can u
different from
pure duration w
character as co
To conceive the
motiveless, stag
imperfection"
Sheikh(Lahore:
453 QAISER SHAHZAD
"what is decreed by and pas

time to the category of "
mentioning Divine decre
designates a state of being in
with his disposition."50 By th
emergence or appearance. J
universe also has a disposit
different degrees of ontolog
rooted in the divinity, as I
moment in the Divine thin
words, 'Each day He is upo
course theophanic time) is r
category of state is rooted.
What we have been calling

Kalin. "Eternity belongs to
moment," remarks Böwering
these terms that just like we
is a conclusion that Ibn 'Ara
the help of a complex argum
without-beginning) conceiv
absurd conclusions. For exam
God and negation of Divine u
Him. It would also be tant
legitimate i.e. expressly pr
reasoning (involves tasalsul
while He has his attributes et
After negating this concep
"God spoke in eternity" w
attribute of Allah, without q
that on the one hand we h
that encompasses Him and
root in God's being upon so
49 Kalin, "Temporal Time," 47. The

2: 539.
50 Kalin, "Temporal Time," 48.
51 Ibid.
52 Ibn 'Arabī, al-Futūhāt, 2: 539; Chittick, Sufi Path, 38.

5ł Böwering, "Ibn 'Arabī's Concept of Time," 91.
54 Ibn 'Arabi, Rasa'il: Kitāb al-Azal (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyyah, 1999), 121-122.
IBN 'ARABl'S THEORY OF DIVINE ROOTS AND THE QUESTION OF GOD AND TEN CATEGORIES 459
Conclusion
To sum up the discussion of God's relation to the ten categories, Ibn 'Arab!
admits that in consideration of Divine transcendence none of these categories
should apply literally to God. However, since he thinks that the world, in its
form, is ontologically connected to Divine Nature, he takes the uniquely bold
step of connecting Divine nature and these categories with the help of his
ingenious theory of divine roots. The step thus taken by him marks, in our
concluding opinion, a true breakthrough in the history of Muslim theological
thought, which stops at denying the application of Categories to God.
® ®

Ibn Arabis Theory of Divine Roots and TH

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Ibn Arabis Theory of Divine Roots and TH

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Ibn 'Arabī's Theory of Divine Roots and the Question of God and Ten Categories

Author(s): QAISER SHAHZAD

Islamic Research Institute, International Islamic University, Islamabad is collaborating

Ibn 'Arabi's Theo

This paper constructs a the

In the terminology of logic a proposition is any sentence that can be

1 Aristotle, Categories , 2b [14].

which primarily is logico-lin

2 See John Marenbon, From the C

jawhar .9 Al-Räzl's approa

Substance in Relation to other Categories

9 Al-Razī, al-Matalib , 2: 116.

/ State X Action '

^ Time ' Ì Position j

Ibn 'Arabï's Circle of Ten Categories

Ibn 'Arabl's view squares nicely with Aristotle's stated

14 See ibid., 3: 11.

supposed to be the headings un

Do the Categories Apply t

Really Not: The Perspective o

Coming to the question of the

No knowledge of Him provide

Let us note a few things a

17 This passage is from the chapter

Applicability and Correspondence : The Perspective of Immanence

From the perspective of tashbih we can hope to find more encouraging

20 Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futuhat , 2: 211.

fresh form. While looking at

There is no existent possible thing in everything-other-than-God24 that is not

Divine Roots Categories

Number of His Names

27 This applies to Toshihiko Izut

He is God in the Eternity Eternity Time

Allah spoke directly to Moses33 Al- Posture

A Balance in His Hand, lifts it and Munificence Action

Quality and Place

entity and its manifestation. There appears to be a problem involved here. It

circle of categories that we

If it is asked why Divine relat

In this passage it is apparent

41 Ibn 'Arabi, al-Futūhat, 3: 11.

"what is decreed by and pas

What we have been calling

49 Kalin, "Temporal Time," 47. The

52 Ibn 'Arabī, al-Futūhāt, 2: 539; Chittick, Sufi Path, 38.

S-ar putea să vă placă și