Necessary and contingent being
necessary and possible being
Editorial introduction
Nobody chooses to fall asleep, and nobody escapes death; ‘Abdu’l-Bahá begins from such plain compulsions to show that the whole contingent world lives under a law it did not make. Everything we meet is dependent, limited, divisible, caused, and that dependence points to a reality that is none of these things: the Necessary Being, self-sufficient and without beginning, whose perfection is the measure of our imperfection. The vocabulary gets precise along the way. The existence we can conceive in the mind is itself only an accident of things, not that real Existence through which all things are realized; a chair is originated because it has a cause, which is a different matter from having begun at some moment in time; and to call creation nothing beside God is to speak relatively, for even a stone has being, and created things are not parts of God but realities He has made. Aquinas, arguing from the possible to the necessary, follows a path that can be walked step by step beside these claims [1]. The road leads on to existence and nonexistence, to preexistence and eternity, and to the relation of essence to substance and form.
Selected passages
O divine friends! The reality of contingent existence is pure imperfection, while the essence of necessity is absolute perfection. That is, imperfection is inherent in the essential requirements of contingent things, while perfection is the reality and essence of the Lord of Names and Attributes.
Yet contingent being, in its existence and conditions, needs the outpouring from the Necessary Being. Thus the Impenetrable Unseen, transcendent beyond consciousness, has manifested to the realities of things through Names and Attributes. Nothing exists but has its portion of this divine outpouring and merciful manifestation, and "there is nothing but glorifies His praise."
3. "And as for the Third Proof , it is that they have said that the knowledge of Possible Being is necessarily dependent on objects of knowledge and is impossible without them. And if the Knowledge of Necessary Being were also dependent on objects of knowledge, it would be the knowledge of Possible Being. It is clear and evident that what is Possible Being cannot be part of the Absolute for no similarity, likeness, comparison or resemblance can there be between Creator and creature, between Necessary Being and Possible Being, and between the Absolute and the creation. For the attributes of the Absolute have always been Absolute Power, Might and Self-Sufficiency while the station of creatures and of Possible Being is that of lowliness, neediness and poverty. And whatever essential attributes are clearly proven for contingent and existent beings, that Essence of Essences and that Reality of Realities is free from them in the loftiness of Its Purity and the exalted heights of Its Sanctity. What relationship can there be then between Necessary Being and Possible Being, between the Absolute and the creation? Therefore the Knowledge of the Absolute is not dependent on objects of knowledge for it is the knowledge of Possible Being which requires these.
Were the Essence the Simple Reality for multiplicities, nothing would exist save His own manifestation, yet intuition testifies to the falsity of this through the limitations of creation, their weakness, and their need for the Bountiful Source.
Contingent existence is pure imperfection and sheer nothingness - grant a gleam and effusion from the perfection of the Necessary Being and absolute existence.
Descent, division, transmission and transmigration in the stations of life are the conditions of the contingent beings, but the Eternal Reality is wholly beyond and above these conditions; for when you behold that a being is subject to division, descent and disintegration, this is a proof, of the contingency and impermanency of that being. The Ancient, the Ever-living, and the Omniscient Lord, who is above the comprehension of humanity and is qualified with self-existent perfections, will never descend to the stations of life, and will not be divided so that every man may become an atom or a part of Him.
Existence is of two kinds: One is the existence of the True One (God) which is sanctified above the comprehension of creation. He is the Unknowable Invisible. He is not preceded by any cause, but rather is the Creator of the Cause of causes. He is Ancient without beginning and absolutely Self-Sufficient. The second existence is that of creation. It is a general existence which is a mental concept that human reason can comprehend. This existence is originated, dependent, preceded by cause, and contingent. Therefore, the contingent cannot become ancient, and the ancient cannot become contingent. Creation cannot become Creator, and the Creator cannot become creation. The transformation of essence is impossible in the realm of existence.
And regarding proof for the temporal eternity of contingent beings in this transient world - briefly, divine sovereignty is eternal, and the existence of beings is from the eternal effulgences of the Sun of Reality. One cannot imagine the sun without rays. All divine names and attributes are eternal, and their requirements are also eternal. This is a brief answer - reflect upon it to derive detailed meanings, as there is no opportunity for elaboration.
Further quotations · supplied wording and references
Existence (vujud) is of two kinds: conceptual ('ilmi) and material ('ayni). Prior to being embodied in material forms, all created things existed on a conceptual plane, that is to say they were entities within the knowledge of God. They subsequently found material existence and became visible in the external world. Conceptual existence hath no impact on the eye; it can only be affected by material reality.
Compared to God nothing has existence but this does not mean that even stones do not have being. It is speaking relatively. Moreover, God reveals Himself in all things in the sense that He is the source of their being and the Cause of their existence. Without Him all things will shrink down into nothing. This however does not mean that all things are parts of God as the pantheist believes. The pantheist says that only God exists, objects are mere modes of His attributes. Baha'u'llah however says that objects have a separate reality that is created by God.
Continue exploring
For thought and discussion
Questions to carry forward
- Which experiences of dependence make the distinction between necessary and contingent being intelligible, and what further argument does it require?
- How is dependence on a cause different from having a beginning at a particular time?
- What does it mean to call created existence relative without dismissing the world as unreal?
- How might the philosophical argument and the prayers affect one another when read together?