Internal Inconsistency of the Epistemic System of Fakhr Razi on Causation and Unity of Divine actions

In Fakhr Razi’s thinking, on the one hand, the causality argument and the mutual effects of the creatures on one another are discussed. On the other hand, the arguments of unity of actions and the general nature of God's causality and agency over all actions and causes, and the monopoly of God’s causality and agency have been raised. Some believe there is a conflict between these two statements. The present article aims at providing a clearer explanation and makes an attempt to investigate this issue with an analytical method within the framework of Fakhr Razi’s perspective. The analysis shows that although the unity of actions, the principle of causality and its derivatives are not incompatible, the principle of causality and its derivatives originate from the philosophical foundations of the Unity of Divine Acts and provide a better explanation for the issue. But the view of unity of divine actions and the acceptance of the principle of causality and some of its derivatives in Fakhr Razi's thought reflects an internal inconsistency in his epistemic system. It is possible, however, to distinguish between the philosopher Fakhri Razi and the theologian Fakhri Razi. His argument of the principle of causality may be considered philosophical while his argument of the unity of divine acts falls within his theological perspective. Nevertheless, his theological views dominate philosophical ones in his works.