The relationship between Known by essence and Known-by-Accident from Avicenna's perspective

Mohammadalizadeh, Jafar; Haghighat, Sohrab; Hasani, Hamid

doi:10.30465/cw.2025.51535.2099

The relationship between Known by essence and Known-by-Accident from Avicenna's perspective

Document Type : Biannual Journal

Authors

Jafar Mohammadalizadeh ¹

Sohrab Haghighat ²

Hamid Hasani ³

¹ Ph.D. student in Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Shahid Madani University of Azerbaijan, Tabriz, Iran, (Corresponding Author)

² Associate Professor, Department of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Faculty of Theology, Shahid Madani University of Azerbaijan, Tabriz, Iran

³ Assistant Professor, Department of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Faculty of Theology, Shahid Madani University of Azerbaijan, Tabriz, Iran,

https://doi.org/10.30465/cw.2025.51535.2099

Abstract

Abstract
The present study seeks to discover the Known by essence (ma'lum bil-dhat) and known-by-accident (ma'lum bil-'aradh) relationship from Avicenna's perspective. The first assumption, namely the objectivity of the Known by essence, is incorrect. However, the second assumption, i.e. they are different, challenges the understanding of knowledge and cognition. Method: To find an answer, Avicenna’s views on knowledge have been collected and analyzed. Ultimately. Findings: Abstraction, form and connection are the most important concepts that create knowledge in the thought of Ibn Sina. And it seems that rather than being consistent with the Substantive view, it illuminates some facts of Avicenna's epistemological system in the context of existence. So that the answer to many issues in this field, including the present issue, is also. Argument: Basically, no relationship leads to unity except in the context of existence. Ultimately, the conclusion was that, Known by essence and Known-by-Accident would achieve unity by connecting in the realm of existence. Therefore, due to their existential connection, they have objectivity; But one is an effect and the other is effective, and in this respect they are different.
Keywords: Knowledge, Abstraction, Known by essence, Known-by-Accident, Avicenna

Introduction
The discussion of science and cognition is one of the important topics in philosophy and one of the current issues in this field. One of the major issues in Islamic philosophy is the discussion of science and epistemology. This issue has been considered and studied in various chapters by Islamic philosophers, including Avicenna. Analyzing Avicenna's theory of science helps us to accurately understand acquired knowledge and distinguish it from direct knowledge, and provides a precise criterion for these two types.

Materials & methods
This article was conducted and analyzed using a descriptive-analytical method and collecting Avicenna's views on science from library sources.

Discussion & Result
The issue raised here is what relationship does Known by essence have with Known-by-Accident? If these two truths are independent and disconnected, the reality of science faces a challenge. And if they are in fact one thing and one truth, then when we perceive a tree, the tree itself should be present in our minds, rather than its form. But obviously that is not the case. It seems that in the knowledge of a thing, there must be both objectivity and unity between the external object and the perceiver, and also otherness and separation. Avicenna has precise references to science in his works and he explained this issue with the language of his philosophy on the axis of existence. Therefore, paying attention to them can guide us to the answer to the problem. The theory of science in Avicenna's view is more existential. The truth of "knowledge" in Avicenna's thought is linked to concepts that cannot be properly understood without considering all of them. The most important of these concepts are: "Existence", "Contact", and "Immateriality".

Conclusion
It is understood from the words of Avicenna that when perceiving something, between Known by essence and Known-by-Accident, there must be both objectivity and otherness, in such a way that neither contradiction nor sophistry arises. Without considering "Existence" as the truth present in the context of reality, both mental and objective and without considering the concept of "Contact " and how the truths of existence are related at all levels it is impossible to justify the way Known by essence and Known-by-Accident communicate. Therefore, the connection between the two is not of the quiddity type. Rather, for the realization of knowledge, a connection is established between them in their existential plane. Basically, no relationship leads to unity except in the context of existence. Therefore, it must be said that Known by essence and Known-by-Accident are two sides of the same existential truth. This means that one being has two sides, one called Known by essence and the other called Known-by-Accident. Known by essence is the abstract aspect of Known-by-Accident and its effect that is compatible with the abstract soul and can be known to the soul.

Keywords

Knowledge

Abstraction

Known by essence

Known-by-Accident

Avicenna

Subjects

Philosophy

Arezoomandi, Vahid (1402), Allameh Tabatabai on The Relation of the Essential known and the Accidental known, Hikmat-e-Islami, 10, no. 4.

Ibrahimi dinani, Gholamhossein (1380), General philosophical principles in Islamic philosophy, Vol. 1, Tehran, Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies. [in Persian]

Ibn Sina, (1381), Al-Ilāhiyyāt min kitāb al-shifā, Research Mojtaba Zareei, Qom: Bustan-e Ketab-e Qom (Publishing Center of the Islamic Information Office). [In Arabic]

Ibn Sina. (1376), Al-Ilāhiyyāt min kitāb al-shifāʾ . Edited by Hasan Hasanzadeh Amoli. Qom: Islamic Propagation Office. [In Arabic]

Ibn Sina. (1404), Al-Taʿ līqāt. Edited by Abdel Rahman Badawi. Qom: Islamic Propagation Office. [In Arabic]

Ibn Sina. (1405), Al-Shifāʾ(Tabīʿ iyyāt), Vol. 2, Research by Saeed zayed, Edited by Ibrahim Madkour. Qom: Library of Ayatollah Marʿ ashi Najafi. [In Arabic]

Ibn Sina. (1363). Al-Mabdaʾ wa-l-maʿ ād. Edited by Abdollah Nurani. Tehran: Institute for Islamic Studies, University of Tehran and McGill University. [In Arabic]

Ibn Sina. (1379). Al-Nijāt. Edited by Mohammad Taghi Daneshpajooh. Tehran: University of Tehran. [In Arabic]

Ibn Sina. (1375). Al-Nafs min kitab al-shifāʾ . Edited by Hasan Hasanzadeh Amoli. Qom: Islamic Propagation Office. [In Arabic]

Ibn Sina. (1383). Daneshnameye Alaee (Elahiat), Introduction by Mohammad Moeen, Hamedan: Abu Ali Sina University. [in Persian]

Ibn Sina. (n.d.). Al-Rasaʾ il (Kitabo –l Hodoud), Qom: Bidar. [In Arabic]

Ibn Manzoor. (2005 AD). Lesano –l arab, Beirut: Dar Sader. [In Arabic]

jafari valani (1402). A Critique of An Exclusively Epistemological Rendering of Avicenna’s “Flying Man” in light of His Principles, 14, no. 1.

Hasanati Fatemah. (1390). The Relation of Representational Knowledge with Presential Knowledge, Theosphofia Practica 3, no. 10.

Heydari Mohammadjafar. (1400). The possibility of knowing the truth of objects in Avicenna’s philosophy, Shinakht 14, no. 2.

Khademi Hamidreza and Hoseini Seyedhasan. (1393). The possibility of knowledge from the perspective of Avicenna, Ayeneh Marefat 14, no. 1.

Tabatabai, Mohamad Hosein. (1416)., Nehayato –l hekmah, Qom: Maassesato alnashr- ol eslami. [In Arabic]

Allameh Hili. (1413). Kasho –l morad. Edited by Hasan Hasanzadeh Amoli. Written by Nasiruddin Tusi, Qom: Maassesato alnashr- ol eslami. [In Arabic]

Fakhr Razi, Muhammad bin Omar. (n.d.). Al-Mabahiso –l mashrighiah, Qom: Bidar. [In Arabic]

Faali, Mohammadtagi. (1376). Perception from view point of Ibn sina, Qom: Islamic Propagation Office. [in Persian]

Kabirirad Mohsen and Islami Picha Qhasem and Rabinataj Aliakbar and Mahdavi Ramazan. (1402). Mental Existence and its Correspondence with Objective Existence from Avicenna’s Viewpoint, Nasim-e-Kherad 9, no. 1.

Lahiji, Abdo –l Al-Razzagh bin Ali. (1425). Shavarigho –l Al-elham, Research by Akbar Asad Ali, Introduction by Jafar Sobhani, Vol. 5, Qom: Imam Al-Sadiq Foundation. [In Arabic]

Mozafar, Mohammadreza, (1379). Al- Mantigh, Qom: Dar A-Tafsir. [In Arabic]

Nasiruddin Tusi, Mohammad bin Mohammad, (1407). Tajrido –l Eteghad, Research by Mohammadjavad Hoseini Jalili, Tehran: Islamic Media Office, Publishing Center. [In Arabic]

Nasiruddin Tusi, Mohammad bin Mohammad, (1404). Sharhay Al-Esharat. Explainer by Mohammad bin Omar Fakhr Razi, Author by Ibn Sina, Vol. 1, Qom: Library of Ayatollah Marashi Najafi. [In Arabic]

Nasiruddin Tusi, Mohammad bin Mohammad, (1386). Sharh Al-Isharat wa t-Tanbihat, Research by Hasan [In Arabic]Hasanzadeh Amoli, Vol. 2, Qom: Bustan-e Ketab-e Qom (Publishing Center of the Islamic Information Office). [In Arabic]

Varzdar Keramat and Ketabchi FatemehSadat (1402). Critical analysis of Avicenna's seven Arguments in rejecting the identity of soul and temperament, 14, no. 2.