Abstract

In his work De communibus omnium rerum naturalium principijs et affectionibus Benet Perera deals with the “magna disceptatio” on the distinction in every creature between essence and existence.Perera does not share the theory of the Thomists, who were defending the real distinction between essence and existence. Furthermore, he questions the relationship between Thomists’ and Aquinas’ position about the distinctio realis on the basis of the affinity of their position with that of Avicenna, expressly criticized by Aquinas. The historico-philosophical interest of Perera’s discourse lies in the application of this centuries-old question to the theological issue of transubstantiation. Perera argues that the existence of something cannot fail without the annihilation of the essence of which it is the existence. Hence, he denies that the existence of the species of bread and wine fails in the consecration and denies that only the essence of the species of bread and wine remains.