In the Muslim world, the principle of causality has been mostly addressed by philosophers and theologians, and discussions on the subject generally occurred among them. However, other theories dealing with cause-and-effect relationships observed in the world of existence have also been developed by Islamic thinkers such as the Mutazilite scholars, members of the Unity of Being school of Sufism, Jahiz, and Nazzam. This article will attempt to summarize these theories.
Concealment and Manifestation Theory Concealment means to hide or to be hidden. Manifestation means to appear or to become evident. In terms of terminology, concealment and manifestation refer to the potential existence of an object or its characteristic (accident) in another object, its being hidden, and the hidden thing becoming actually existent by appearing. According to this theory, objects exist within other objects, intertwined, together with their opposites, applying force to each other in a balanced manner. Nazzam and Jahiz are among the foremost proponents of this theory.
Islamic theologians explain existence through the concepts of substance and accident. They state that all existence is created from the same substances (essence, atoms), differentiated by accidents (attributes, qualities) attached to substances, which are recreated by Allah at every moment. According to proponents of the Concealment theory, everything is created by Allah at once, with some things hidden within others, and objects emerge over time from potential to actual existence with certain structures and characteristics. Accordingly, in terms of time, nothing has precedence over another. For example, all humans in the form of particles exist in Adam, and creationally, a father has no precedence over his child.
In the theory of concealment and manifestation, objects can be divided indefinitely, and each divided part is still referred to as an object. There is no undividable part (part that cannot be divided or individual substance). Every substance has its own nature that determines its quality. Some characteristics that appear in substances are embedded in their nature from the beginning. For example, the potential for burning in wood, heat and light in fire, sweetness in grapes, rain in clouds, taste, color, and smell in smoke, and nourishing properties in food (Nazzam calls these properties substances) are latent, i.e., they exist potentially. Until they emerge, they cannot be perceived by the senses. Although proponents of this theory explain changes and transformations in matter, actions and movements, causes and effects through the nature of objects, they also believe that it is Allah who created these natures and bestowed these properties on them. (See https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/1327141)
Theory of Generation The word “generation” in the dictionary means to give birth, to bring forth, to cause. When used as a term, it refers to the bringing about of actions based on human will without any divine influence. The emergence of certain actions based on human will and power is explained through the concept of generation. Initially used by BiÅŸr b. Mu’temir, the concept of generation/generativity was later adopted by Mutazilite theologians to explain the cause of human actions. According to them, actions based on will belong to the human, produced by them. The agent (effective cause) of actions caused by humans, such as throwing a stone, speaking, moving, is the human. (https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/162749)
To elaborate, Mutazilite theologians divided human actions into direct (immediate) and generative (mediated) actions. Accordingly, shooting an arrow is a direct action, while the arrow hitting a person and killing them is a generative action. The act of shooting the arrow generates (brings about) the act of killing. Therefore, generation is the coming into being of an action from an agent through another action. The movement of the hand that turns the key, the pain that arises from hitting, the feeling of fullness from eating can be examples of this. In these examples, the movement of the hand, hitting, and eating are direct (unmediated) actions, while the turning of the key, feeling pain, and feeling full are mediated actions, and there is a causal relationship between them. That is, generative actions are the inevitable consequences of direct actions. (Some Mutazilite scholars do not accept this inevitability) However, a direct action is a means and cause for the emergence of a generative action. Therefore, the effect and outcome resulting from a direct action are attributed not to the generative action but to the human seen as capable. Because the cause of direct actions is human will. (http://cuid.cumhuriyet.edu.tr/tr/download/article-file/961739)
The main reason for proposing this theory is to hold humans responsible for the consequences of their actions. In other words, the idea of free will and responsibility can only be grounded in this way. Underlying the concept of generation is also the thought of not attributing bad and ugly actions to Allah, thus exalting Him. However, the issue is closely related to the idea of causality. Mutazilite theologians considered the servant to be the creator (creator) or agent (effective cause) of their own actions. They stated that the servant is not helpless, that the power and capability (ability) to perform actions are given to them by Allah. Therefore, they have been subject to harsh criticism from Sunni scholars.
Sunni scholars approach the issue from the perspective of divine knowledge, will, and power, accepting that every action is created by Allah. This should not lead to a determinism. For Sunni scholars accept limited free will, seeing humans as free beings capable of making choices. That is, the servant is the one who desires, requests, inclines; but the outcomes according to these desires are created by Allah. God has made the servant’s limited will a customary condition for His universal will. When a person resorts to causes with the intention and desire for the outcome to occur, the results are attributed to them, and thus the person is held responsible for their actions.
Participatory Theory of Causality Sufis, especially those adhering to the school of the Unity of Being, such as Ibn Arabi, have their own approach to causality. Özgür Koca refers to it as the “participatory theory of causality.” For Ibn Arabi and his followers, the foundation of all causality is existence; the basis for beings having causal efficacy is their participation in existence. Since all beings participate in existence, their causality and freedom are understood within the relationship they establish with existence. (Özgür Koca, Islam, Causality, and Freedom)
As is well known, mystics who support the Unity of Being, especially Ibn Arabi, have a different view of existence than theologians and philosophers. First and foremost, unlike Islamic philosophers and theologians, who divide existence into “possible existence” and “necessary existence,” they do not. For them, existence/reality is one, and that is the reality of God. They have focused on the relationship between God, humans, and existence, trying to explain how multiplicity emerges from unity. They have not relied on the emanation theory like philosophers, nor on the substance-accident theory like theologians. Instead, they have explained the relationship between God and the world, how multiplicity emerges from unity, through divine attributes and the concept of fixed archetypes, and developed a new creation theory.
Fixed archetypes represent the realities of things existing in the external world in divine knowledge, their essences. Initially, things existing without distinction and separation in divine knowledge separate and differentiate in divine knowledge as fixed archetypes, and then they manifest and appear in the external world by wearing the garment of external existence. Therefore, creation is the manifestation of fixed archetypes in the external world, the overflow of existence. Creation is also referred to as the presence of existence at certain levels. Therefore, what we see as existence in reality does not have independent existences. Their existences are metaphorical, so to speak, mere shadows. They are manifestations of God’s existence in various forms and relations. (See DÄ°A, “Fixed Archetypes”)
According to Ibn Arabi, since the world does not have a real and independent existence, the cause and effect that occur in the world also do not have a real existence. According to him, the reason why proponents of causality claim that there is a necessary relationship between cause and effect, that the beings in the world emerge from this necessary causality chain, is their belief that the universe has an independent existence. However, beings are in need and poverty and are dependent on Allah, who is the Absolutely Rich. Those who think that outcomes need causes for their occurrence are mistaken. Because their needs are not to secondary causes, but to Allah.
Moreover, a deterministic view of causality would render God’s will and power ineffective and inevitably lead to deism. In reality, both existence and the cause and effect that arise in existence are manifestations of God’s names and attributes. That is, existence is constantly created from nothing (creation anew). Ash’arites have grasped this reality only in the plane of accidents and have not been able to say that the world is merely a collection of accidents; philosophers who criticize Ash’arites for this idea have fallen far from the truth.
Moreover, Ibn Arabi also opposes the naming of God as the “First Cause.” First, being a cause would imply dependence on the effect. Because the cause necessitates the effect. However, God, being transcendent and possessing absolute existence, is beyond this. His actions have no cause. Secondly, this would mistakenly place God and the world on the same level of existence and unity.
Although Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi offers different explanations for the principle of causality from a metaphysical perspective, he does not deny the horizontal causal relationships in the cosmic world. He acknowledges that every being and event is connected to each other through a chain of cause and effect, that secondary causes play a role in the world of existence. He even says that the connection between causes and effects is uninterrupted and will not be broken. According to him, it is Allah who has established these causes and devised a divine plan with them. Since Allah is the one who has established the causes, we cannot remove them from this world of existence. Therefore, Muslims must also adhere to them. He says that Allah has not established causes in vain, but according to a wisdom and plan. Without causes, even a way to know Allah cannot be found.
Secondary causes, in a way, hide the Creator and veil the divine power inherent in everything, so Ibn Arabi often refers to them as “veils” (screens, hijabs). Those who are unaware of the truth behind the veil may think that some actions and behaviors can be attributed to themselves or to causes. Those who cannot see Allah behind the causes make causes their “lord.” However, as the verse “You are in need of Allah.” (Fatir, 35/15) indicates, everyone and everything in the world of existence is in need of Allah. Causes do not have a real effect or creativity. The duty of the believer is to tear these veils with the strength of faith and hear the “be” (exist) sound.
On the other hand, living as if causes do not exist is also contrary to reality. Essentially, the meaning of humans being in need and poverty is that they must resort to causes and never ignore them. In short, Ibn Arabi emphasizes the importance of knowing the nature of causes, that Allah should not be forgotten and that they should not be seen as the real agents, while also emphasizing the importance of knowing their wisdom and dealing with them. Even according to him, understanding the principle of causality in the universe holds a high spiritual value. (https://isamveri.org/pdfdrg/D195720/2017/2017_KUTLUERI_21.pdf)
In the next article, we will focus on the views of Imam Ghazali and discuss how Sunni theologians approach the principle of causality.
