magazine aldhakwat albedh

Abstract:
This research deals with the investigation and study of the thesis of Ismail bin Muhammad bin Mustafa Abu al-Fida al-Qunawi (d.1195AH), entitled (A Letter on the Refutation of the Objection to Al-Ghazali’s Statement: There is nothing more creative than what was possible).
This thesis discusses the objections raised regarding Imam Al-Ghazali’s famous statement: “Nothing is possible that is more perfect than what has been,” which has been a subject of controversy among scholars and philosophers. Some of them saw this statement as an attempt to deny God Almighty’s ability to create a world more perfect than this one. However, Al-Qunawi (may God have mercy on him) explained that what is meant by it is not to deny absolute divine power, but rather to point to a firmly established doctrinal principle, which is that God Almighty’s eternal knowledge is connected to the existence of the world in this most perfect manner and order.
Al-Qunawi (may God have mercy on him) explained that what Imam al-Ghazali meant was not related to the denial of power, but rather to the eternal divine knowledge being related to the occurrence of the world in the form it is in, such that it is impossible for anything other than that to occur after knowledge is related to it, even if it is possible in itself.
The research seeks to highlight the intellectual value of this text within the context of Islamic theology, and to clarify the accuracy of Imam Al-Ghazali’s distinction between intrinsic possibility and impossibility by others.
The investigation also studies the two approved manuscript copies of the thesis, compares their texts, and documents the sources on which the author relied.

Abstract :
Fadil Muhammad al-Wani discusses the interpretation of the verse: “Who has perfected everything He created,” focusing on the meaning of “better” and its relationship to “created.” He studies the possibilities of parsing between making “created” a substitute for “all,” or a second object of “better.” He rejects making it a second object for linguistic and interpretive reasons. He believes that “better” does not necessarily indicate prior choice or the attachment of a will; rather, it may mean “beautified,” as in linguistic usage. He denies that benevolence here means “gave” or “bestowed,” as it does not fit the context. He explains that using “created” instead of “all” is more accurate, as it indicates that benevolence is applied to the creation itself, not to the act of benevolence. He explains that the verse aims to demonstrate the complete perfection and wisdom in the creation of things. He discusses the reading of Nafi’ and the Kufians with a fat-ha on the “lam” in “all,” considering it a more accurate interpretation in terms of the connotation of connection and separation in the substitute and description. He responds to those who interpret «creation» to mean «created,» arguing that this does not convey the intended interpretative meaning. He relies on the statements of al-Zamakhshari and others that «the best of something» means «he knew it with precise knowledge,» without a second object. He points out that simply stating that knowledge is related to created things is not sufficient; rather, the intent is to demonstrate God›s care in the order of creation. He opposes understanding the verse as merely knowing how creation is created, and in fact, he sees it as a failure to understand the reason for the praise. He notes that some scholars› interpretations were devoid of this precision, influenced by the apparent syntax rather than the subtleties of meaning. Al-Baydawi is appreciated for his precise distinction between the two readings and the interpretive meanings based on them. He warns against lax interpretations of the instances of divine praise that are linked to wisdom and perfection. He asserts that the apparent meaning of the verse indicates God›s creation of things in the most perfect manner, not merely His knowledge of them. He believes that the Quranic structure was intended to highlight perfection, not to explain the attributes of abstract knowledge. He concludes that the most correct view is that “He created it” instead of “all” to emphasize the comprehensiveness of benevolence in the essence of creation.