Celâleddin Ed-Devvânî's Understanding of Isbât-ı Vâcib (According to his work called Risaletü Isbâti'l- Vâcibi'l- Kadime)

Jalaladdin Davvani, born in the first quarter of the 15th century AD in the town of Devvan in Kazerun city, Iran, lived during a period marked by the fragmentation of the Seljuks into principalities, the rivalry between the Ak Koyunlu and the Kara Koyunlu, and the rise of the Ottoman Empire as a state. Davvani received his initial education from his father and later studied Arabic and Islamic Sciences with renowned teachers, including students of Jurjani. Although Davvani authored works in various fields, his contributions in the field of Kalam (Islamic theology) are particularly notable. His works and ideas concerning the existence of God in the field of Kalam have drawn the attention of researchers. The purpose of this study is to elucidate Davvani's concept of the "proof of the necessary existent" (İsbat-ı vâcib) as presented in his work "Risaletü İsbâtü'l Vâcibü'l Kadîm." In constructing this work, Davvani's classification system and comparative method were largely adhered to. The concept of the "proof of the necessary existent" is discussed within the context of the the evidence of possibility and the evidence of the impossibility of transfer and succession. The views of philosophers and theologians, exemplified by scholars such as Jurjani and Taftazani, are examined. In the work where criticisms of the arguments are addressed, Davvani exhibited a conciliatory attitude. This aspect was also preserved while presenting his understanding of the "proof of the necessary existent." To elucidate his understanding, the study analyzes the concepts in "Risaletü İsbâtü'l Vâcibü'l Kadîm" and highlights the importance of the meanings ascribed to these concepts in understanding the issue. The study specifies Davvani's equivalents for the concepts used by philosophers and theologians concerning the proof of the necessary existent, such as cause, efficient cause, independent cause, complete cause, conjunction of conditions, and aggregate (majmū').The author's opinion is stated regarding the sufficiency of the evidence of possibility and the evidence of the impossibility of transfer and succession. Consequently, despite differences, it is concluded that there are many common points and complementary aspects between the views of philosophers and theologians.