The Argument for the Univocal Meaning of Being: A Proof or Circular Reasoning?

The debate of whether existence, or being, (wujud) is a synonymous term (ishtirak ma’nawi) or homonymous term (ishtirak lafzi) appears in numerous philosophical and theological works. Some believed in its homonymous term and established other theological issues on such basis. The followers of the synonymous term for existence provided reasons as proof for their belief which appear to be distorted and invalid. The title of the reasons are، the consistency of knowledge or comprehension (‘ilm) of a thing despite having doubt towards its properties (khususiat), the first imaged thing as being (wujud), non - existence (‘adam)—the opposite of being—  as a synonymous term, the accuracy (sihat) of the categorization of being, the denial of synonymous term requires its acceptance, the division of being to necessity and contingency , which necessitates difference between the two, generalization of the properties of a relational or  copulative existence (wujud rabit) and independent existence (wujud mustaqil), a singular meaning in the rhyme of poetic verse. With a precise reading and analysis, it is clear that all provided reasoning contain the fallacy of ‘Begging the Question’. With that said, none of the mentioned reasons have the ability to be used towards its claim. Although it should be noted that a negation of the reason does not require the negation of its claim. As many acclaimed scholars have said, the assertion towards the synonymous term of being, in and of itself is self - evident (badihi) or close to it, and its verity is certain. In this article, we will only be discussing reasons in proof of this claim, and not in relation to its integrity or inaccuracy of the primary claim.