The Meaning of the Poet's Statement: How, and those are specific instances that have been realized *** in a particular, visible form, yet they are universal if they *** correspond to their individuals, like a word on the scale
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"How, and those are specific instances that have been realized *** in a particular, visible form"
This means how can we affirm the existence of an attribute in concrete realities or the existence of a meaning in words, when they have been specified in a particular form? A thing specified in a particular form must have the attribute of the specifier in a specific context; it must have a meaning that no other thing can bear. This is like that.
"Yet they are universal if they *** correspond to their individuals, like a word on the scale"
Meanings are universal if they correspond to their individuals, but the specific individual among them is particular and must be described by an attribute. For example, the word "human": we see or know that all humans share in a universal meaning, which is humanity. Is humanity a specific thing that is seen and observed? No, but it is a general universal meaning in which the individuals are equal. For instance, "animal": "animal" is the name for every being with a soul, whether human or non-human. Is animality, this universal meaning, a specific thing seen by the eye? No, but its individuals are specific and seen by the eye. Likewise, the universal meanings: they said, for example, the Throne has such and such a meaning. We say this is a universal meaning, and the meaning is not determined except by the context. Good.
This means how can we affirm the existence of an attribute in concrete realities or the existence of a meaning in words, when they have been specified in a particular form? A thing specified in a particular form must have the attribute of the specifier in a specific context; it must have a meaning that no other thing can bear. This is like that.
"Yet they are universal if they *** correspond to their individuals, like a word on the scale"
Meanings are universal if they correspond to their individuals, but the specific individual among them is particular and must be described by an attribute. For example, the word "human": we see or know that all humans share in a universal meaning, which is humanity. Is humanity a specific thing that is seen and observed? No, but it is a general universal meaning in which the individuals are equal. For instance, "animal": "animal" is the name for every being with a soul, whether human or non-human. Is animality, this universal meaning, a specific thing seen by the eye? No, but its individuals are specific and seen by the eye. Likewise, the universal meanings: they said, for example, the Throne has such and such a meaning. We say this is a universal meaning, and the meaning is not determined except by the context. Good.