Ibn Arabi - What is God?

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 1 дек 2024

Комментарии • 7

  • @kaisersozajunior8650
    @kaisersozajunior8650 6 месяцев назад +2

    If ALLAH almighty was to reveal himself then nothing would have the right to exist so his veiling himself from us is his mercy to us

    • @citizenkhan4696
      @citizenkhan4696 6 месяцев назад

      Utter and complretely Bvllsh!t.
      If Allah/God truly existed and was omnipotent, then IT could simply do anything, even manifest itself without harming creation.
      There are no Gods, there is only the wickedness of mankind which uses anything to manopulate for the sake of gaining p;ower.

    • @ChillAssTurtle
      @ChillAssTurtle 6 месяцев назад

      Gay

    • @PerennialWisdom
      @PerennialWisdom  6 месяцев назад +2

      Yeah that's paradoxical. On one side, He is veiling Himself, but on the other side, the veil is but Himself.

  • @mohammadzaky5749
    @mohammadzaky5749 6 месяцев назад

    Kuranı emphasized that it is crucial to distinguish between al-wujud al-mushtarak, that is, the general concept that is common to the Necessary Existent and the contingent realities, and al-wujud al-mujarrad, that is, pure, quiddity-less existence. It is the latter that Sufis claim to exist in the extramental world. Again, Kuranı quoted from Avicenna’s Shifaʾ a passage that emphasizes this distinction: The pure (mujarrad) existence that is identical to the quiddity of the Necessary Existent is not the absolute (mutlaq) existence that is common to many things. The former is existence with a negative condition (bi-shart al-salb), that is, existence insofar as it is devoid of quiddity, not the existence that is common to all quiddities. Having invoked that particular passage by Avicenna, Kuranı had to confront the problem that it seems to say that God is not “absolute existence” (wujud mutlaq). Undaunted, he argued that this was a terminological difference, not a substantive disagreement. Avicenna meant by “absolute” (mutlaq) what defenders of monism meant by “common” (mushtarak), and there can be no question of God being identical to existence in that sense. On the other hand, Avicenna identified God with “pure” (mujarrad) existence, and this was precisely what defenders of monism meant by “absolute” (mutlaq) existence - existence that is devoid of any quiddity. (Kuranı, Ithaf al-dhakı, 242; Avicenna, The Metaphysics of the Healing, 276.)