An Analysis of the Section on Causality in Khojazada’s Tahafut
Journal Title: Nazariyat İslam Felsefe ve Bilim Tarihi Araştırmaları Dergisi - Year 2016, Vol 3, Issue 1
Abstract
In this article, the nineteenth section of Khojazāda’s (d. 893/1488) Tahāfut, which was devoted to the problem of causality in an example of the works under the same title written during the fifteenth century and composed with the patronage of the Ottoman sultan Mehmed II (d. 886/1481), is subjected to a critical analysis. His discussion follows a critical course with respect to al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111) in context. This could be detected most clearly in his vindication of Avicenna (d. 428/1037) against al-Ghazālī’s accusation of the philosophers’ denial of miracles. Moreover, Khojazāda’s discussion has certain differences with al-Ghazālī’s at both the conceptual and the argumentative levels. The most striking differences at the argumentative level is Khojazāda’s grounding of his own conception of revelation and miracles on Avicennia’s, rather than al-Ghazālī’s, theory of prophethood. By the same token, he offered a practical response to the imputation that the Avicennian system leaves no room for the possibility of miracles. At the conceptual level, furthermore, he distinguished between complete and incomplete causes, in contradistinction with al-Ghazālī, and thereby opened another ground in order to demonstrate the inability of those natures that he viewed as incomplete causes to produce their own effects. On the other hand, Khojazāda concurs with al-Ghazālī that causality did not presume an ontological necessity, yet this condition did not incur defects on the certainty of our knowledge.
Authors and Affiliations
Muhammet Fatih Kılıç
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP296303
- DOI 10.12658/Nazariyat.3.1.M0033
- Views 169
- Downloads 0
A Fifteenth-Century Mamluk Astronomer in the Ottoman Realm: ‘Umar al-Dimashqī and his ‘ilm al-mīqāt corpus the Hamidiye 1453
The 15th century emergence of the Ottoman scientific endeavours occurred at a fortunate time when scientific knowledge in the Islamic world was already advanced. Since the Ottomans never had an intention to reinvent the...
On Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjanı’s Risala fi taqsim al-‘ilm: Analysis and Critical Edition
This research focuses on the previously unpublished treatise by Sayyid Sharīf al-Jurjānī, Risāla fī taqsīm al-‘ilm. The research is based on comparative evaluation of available manuscipts and is composed of a critical ed...
Pushing the Boundaries of the Universe: The Criticisms of Peripatetic Cosmology in Hikmat al-ishraq and its Commentaries
In this article, focused on the criticism of Suhrawardi who is the founder of the Ishrāqi School, four cosmological problems pointed out in the Hikmat al-Ishrāq are analyzed. These problems, which allow for the comparati...
An Early Attempt at Unifying the Universe: Suhrawardī’s Concept of Miqdār
Though sharing the general framework of twelfth-century Islamic thought and classical cosmology based on the theory of emanation in common with the Peripatetic school, Illuminationist philosophy diverged from it in conce...
Is it Possible to Speak of an Illuminationist Circle in the Ottoman Scholarly World? An Analysis of the Ottoman Scholarly Conception of Illuminationism
This article seeks to answer the questions of how Ottoman scholars perceived Illuminationist thought and Illuminationism and whether a milieu favorably disposed to Illuminationism existed. It first questions how and thro...