Averroes

Averroes (Ibn Rushd) is well-known for his controversial thesis that there is only one separate intellect for all humankind. This article provides a detailed analysis of Averroes’s Unity Argument from his Long Commentary on De Anima, which argues from unified intelligible concepts to a single transcendent intellect. I set out the Unity Argument in its textual and philosophical context, explain exactly how the argument works on a new interpretation of its infinite regress (based on Averroes’s other assumptions about the mind-dependence (...) of universals), and offer some brief suggestions as to how it might be further evaluated in light of alternative ancient and medieval theories. Ultimately, I demonstrate that the Unity Argument is Averroes’s most important philosophical argument for his distinctive view of intellect. (shrink)

In Necessary Existence and the Doctrine of Being in Avicenna’s Metaphysics of the Healing Daniel De Haan explicates the central argument of Avicenna’s metaphysical masterpiece. De Haan argues that the most fundamental primary notion in Avicenna’s metaphysics is neither being nor thing but is the necessary ( wājib), which Avicenna employs to demonstrate the existence and true-nature of the divine necessary existence in itself. This conclusion is established through a systematic investigation of how Avicenna’s theory of a demonstrative science is (...) employed in the organization of his metaphysical science into its subject, first principles, and objects of enquiry. The book examines the essential role the first principles as primary notions and primary hypotheses play in the central argument of Avicenna’s metaphysics. (shrink)

Classical Islamic thinker Ibn Rushd is widely recognized for his commentaries on Aristotle and his influence on Western Medieval and Renaissance thinkers. Understandably, his contributio...

Averroes, considered to be the greatest Aristotelian commentator in the Middle Ages, has written three different types of commentary on almost all the works of this great philosopher: short, middle and long. These commentaries have been translated into Latin and Hebrew in the early period, and profoundly influenced both Medieval Europe and Jewish thought for centuries. The effect of Averroes in the West was to spread the whole of Europe under the name of Latin Averroism. The text what you have (...) consists of some remarks about the translation of the commentary on the ‘Book Alpha Meizon’, the second book of Averroes’ Tafsīr Mā Ba’d at-Tabī’a. (shrink)

To start with, we should say that the book is a thesis for obtaining a PhD in philosophy from Mohamed Al-Khamis University in Rabat, Morocco, Arab Cultural Center published in its first edition in 2015 with a number of 368 pages. The book deserves to be read, beginning with the title “The Image of Ibn Rushd in Contemporary Moroccan Thought”. It is an attractive title for two main reasons: Ibn Rushd is one of the most prominent symbols of intellectual rationality (...) in philosophical culture at the human and local levels.The other reason is that we, as a diverse group, need to rationalize Ibn Rushd's rationality because it represents the solutions to our troubled, lived reality. The book is divided into four parts and twelve chapters with entries for most of the chapters. It is a study in which the author presented the opinions of Moroccan researchers studies about Ibn Rushd. In my estimation that the researcher succeeded in his study and the book deserves reading . (shrink)

This article examines two medieval thinkers—Averroes and Aquinas—on the kind of causation exercised by the agent intellect in “abstracting” or producing intelligibles from images in the imagination. It argues that abstraction in these thinkers should be interpreted in causal terms, as an act whereby images in the imagination, through the power of the agent intellect, educe their intelligible likeness in a receptive intellect. This Averroan-Thomistic causal approach to abstraction offers an intriguing alternative to the usual approach to abstraction as an (...) epistemological content-sorting. The article also demonstrates the extensive common ground uniting these thinkers’ cognition theories, despite Aquinas’s well-known rejection of Averroes’s theory of separate Intellects. (shrink)

The thesis of this paper is that Thomas Aquinas offers an alternative model of abstraction (the Active Principle Model) that overcomes the standard objections to abstractionism and expands our view of what an abstractionist theory might look like. I contend that this alternative model of abstraction has been invisible in plain sight, in Aquinas’s references to the mind’s abstractive mechanism as an “intellectual light.” Such language is not metaphorical but rather technical, signaling that intellectual abstraction is to be modeled on (...) the activity of physical light as he understood it from theories proposed by Avicenna and Averroes. The Active Principle Model requires us to rethink Aquinas’s account of how we come to know essences—a process that turns out to be much more tentative and incremental than previously thought. (shrink)

The oft-rehearsed, seldom-contested story of Aquinas’s account of sacra doctrina has him holding that revealed theology counts as a demonstrative science, along Aristotelian lines, because it is subaltern to God’s self-knowledge. This paper seeks to question this assessment of the matter by comparing Aquinas’s view to that of another great Aristotelian commentator, Averroes, who holds the contrary position, insofar as he considered religious discourse to be dialectical, and not scientific, in nature. The paper argues that, although both of these thinkers (...) strive to present faithfully Aristotelian solutions to the problem of the epistemological status of religious discourse and in both accounts religious discourse somehow ends up being less than something naturally scientific, ultimately their approaches have widely divergent starting points and foundations that lead to distinctively different approaches and conclusions. (shrink)

This paper investigates Péter Pázmány’s theory of mixtures from his exegesis of Meteorologica IV, in the context of sixteenth-century scholarship on Aristotle’s Meteorologica. It aims to contribute to a discussion of Anneliese Maier’s thesis concerning the incompatibility between hylomorphism and the theory of elements in the Aristotelian tradition. It presents two problems: the placement of Meteorologica IV in the Jesuit cursus on physics and the conceptualization of putrefaction as a type of substantial mutation. Through an analysis of these issues, it (...) shows how sixteenth-century exegesis imposes the hylomorphic thesis onto the subject matter of meteorology and how the hylomorphic theory of substantial change can be adapted in order to accommodate the theory of elements. The case being made is that Meteorologica is a privileged place where hylomorphism and the theory of elements meet and that the late Aristotelian theory of mixtures sought to accommodate both theories of material substance. (shrink)

This paper presents Duns Scotus’s theory of mixture in the context of medieval discussions over Aristotle’s theory of mixed bodies. It revisits the accounts of mixture given by Avicenna, Averroes, and Thomas Aquinas, before presenting Scotus’s account as a reaction to Averroes. It argues that Duns Scotus rejected the Aristotelian theory of mixture altogether and that his account went contrary to the entire Latin tradition. Scotus denies that mixts arise out of the four classical elements and he maintains that both (...) the elemental forms and the elemental qualities are lost in the mixture. Consequently, he denies the distinction between the process of mixture and that of substantial change through generation and corruption. The reassessment of Scotus’s account modifies the current historical representation of this discussion, inherited from Anneliese Maier. (shrink)

Some contemporary readings of Averroes put special emphasis on the philosophical and critical character of the work of the Muslim theologian and mystic al-Ġazālī, who is also known as the “Proof of Islam”. They even regard him as some pioneer of Enlightenment thought. This paper therefore investigates the thesis of Averroes as a critical philosopher. It sets forth that one can indeed find some essential elements of critical thought in al-Ġazālī’s writings: for example Ġazālī’s critique of reason and especially his (...) rejection of, which means the nonreflective imitation of a teacher, authority or tradition, especially in matters pertaining to religion. Nevertheless, comparing him to both, Kant and Descartes, we will try to show that his thought falls short of critical thinking and even of philosophy itself. To this end we will proceed as follows: First, we analyze his critique of taqlīd. Secondly, we investigate his critique of Aristotelian Arabic philosophy as a variety of taqlīd. Thirdly, we consider his skeptical suspension of reason in favor of immediate prophetic perception. Fourthly, we look upon the relationship between the super-rational perception and reason. Fifthly, we show that Ġazālī dismisses the idea of autonomous reason. (shrink)

Mauro Zonta's long awaited work Il Commento medio di Averroè alla Metafisica di Aristotele nella tradizione ebraica is really three books in one: a historical and philological account of the two medieval Hebrew translations of Averroes' Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics and editions of both translations. The Arabic of Averroes' Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics is not extant apart from a few fragments (see vol. 1, pp. 13-5). Nor is there a direct Latin translation of the Arabic—indeed, Zonta states that (...) there is no evidence of reliable citations of the work by any Latin authors (vol. 1, p. 18). Zonta's book, then, presents the only way of accessing Averroes' monumental work in its .. (shrink)

Al-Ghazali (1058-1111) was concerned that early Islamic philosophers were leaning too heavily and uncritically on Aristotelian and Neoplatonic ideas in developing their models of God and His relation to the world. He argued that their views were not only irreligious, but philosophically problematic, and he defended an alternative view aimed at staying closer to the Qur’an and the beliefs of the ordinary Muslim. Ibn Rushd (1126-1198) responded to al-Ghazali’s critique and developed a sophisticated Aristotelian view. The present chapter explores their (...) views in light of a problem facing any philosophical model of God in Islam or classical theism more generally, the problem of conceiving of God’s nature and relation to the world in a way that places an appropriate distance between God and humans. On the one hand, we want a notion of God that is not overly anthropomorphic, or that does not make him to be too much like us. On the other hand, we want to be able to say something positive and substantive about God. And we want to do this while preserving the harmony of reason and revelation, of philosophy and religion, as much as possible. (shrink)

This report is divided into two main parts, devoted to the Aristoteles Latinus and to the Editions of Latin Commentaries on Aristotle. The report on the Aristoteles Latinus sheds light on recent research on medieval Latin translations of Aristotle’s works. Among other things, it discusses the editions published in the context of the Aristoteles Latinus , and some recent studies and collective volumes on individual texts and translators. The report on Editions of Latin Commentaries on Aristotle gives information for each (...) edition of a commentary on Aristotle that has been published in the last five years and on those editions that are about to be published or are in preparation or are planned to start within the next five years. (shrink)

In Albert’s De anima III, 3, chapters 6–11 there is a discussion on whether the human intellect is able to apprehend only forms abstracted from matter or whether it is possible for it to know something separated from magnitude. If the human intellect is able to understand separate forms, this would mean that some forms are not apprehended with phantasms and magnitude but by the conjunction of the possible intellect and the separate intellect. This matter is quite problematic since it (...) is not clear enough whether separate forms are known through the perfect conjunction of the possible intellect and the agent intellect or by means of the agent intellect which acts both as efficient and formal cause of these forms. Here, I focus on chapter 8 where Albert criticizes Avempace’s doctrine of the intellect, and chapter 11 where he states a resolution to the problem, which is very close to that of Averroes. This exploration illustrates the complexity of the relationship between the philosophies of Albert and Averroes. (shrink)

Born in 1126 to a family of Maliki legal scholars, Ibn Rushd, known as Averroes, enjoyed a long career in religious jurisprudence at Seville and Cordoba while at the same time advancing his philosophical studies of the works of Aristotle. This translation of Averroes’ Long Commentary on Aristotle’s _De Anima_ brings to English-language readers the complete text of this influential work of medieval philosophy. Richard C. Taylor provides rich notes on the Long Commentary and a generous introduction that discusses Averroes’ (...) most mature reflections on Aristotle’s teachings as well as Averroes' comprehensive philosophical views on soul and intellect. It is only in the Long Commentary that Averroes finally resolves to his satisfaction the much vexed issue of the nature of intellect, Taylor shows. (shrink)

Translators of Aristotle’s and Averroës’ metaphysical works into 14th C Hebrew often associated important philosophical concepts with Hebrew terms that were also used to signify central Jewish and Biblical religious concepts. Here I examine how two such terms, “mofet” and “devequt”, were used to refer to extraordinary, divine wonders and to clinging respectively in the religious texts, but to Aristotelian demonstration and continuity respectively in the translations of Averroës’ Long Commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics. This kind of convergence of metaphysical and (...) religious terms makes possible, indeed encourages, a re-interpretation of the religious concepts along Aristotelian lines. Biblical expressions of God’s wonders are thus to be interpreted to refer to Aristotelian demonstration and the mystical desire to cling to God is to refer to unifi cation with the Active Intellect.Translatores, qui Aristotelis et Averrois opera metaphysica in linguam Hebraicam saeculi 14. transferebant, notabilibus conceptibus philosophicis saepe nomina Hebraica assignaverut, quibus et principales notiones religiosae Judaicae ac Biblicae solebant exprimi. In hac dissertatione investigatur, quomodo duo talium nominum, scil. “mofet” et “devequt”, quae in textibus religiosis “extra ordinaria miracula divina” et “adhaerentiam” proprie significant, in translationibus Averrois Commentarii Magni in Aristotelis Metaphysicam ad demonstrationem Aristotelicam et continuationem significandas transumebantur. Huiusmodi nominum metaphysicorum cum religiosis coniunctio conceptus religiosos iuxta sensum Aristotelicum denuo explicari permittit, imo suadet. Hinc dicta Biblica quae miracula Dei olim significaverunt ad demonstrationes Aristotelicas relata sunt; item desiderium mysticum adhaerendi ad Deum de unione cum Intellectu Agenti intellectum est. (shrink)

On the inside covers of Ms. 426 of the Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Darmstadt , one finds parchment pastedowns containing passages from the medieval Latin translation of Averroes’s Middle Commentaries on the Categories and Peri Hermeneias. The collation of these fragments shows that Da is nothing but a copy of the well-known Ms. UB Erfurt, Dep. Erf. CA. 2°, 318. Consequently, Da has no value for the critical reconstruction of the text.

This article is intended to illustrate that the hermeneutics of al-Ghazzl influenced Ibn Rushd in a certain degree. One can come across a number of contexts in the works of Ibn Rushd such as Taḥfut al-taḥfut, Faṣl al-maql and al-Kashf, in which he criticizes al-Ghazzl in relation to the interpretation of religious texts. However, one can notice that Ibn Rushd is deeply influenced by the views of al-Ghazzl on the matter of hermeneutics, especially concerning the definition of interpretation, the categorization (...) of the ambiguous wordings in the religious texts as well as the classification of the groups of people authorized to fulfill the task of interpretation. In fact, Ibn Rushd's threefold graduation of people as the masses, the theologians, and the demonstrative people was masterminded and introduced by al-Ghazzl. In addition, it is from al-Ghazzl and from his interpretation of the 125th verse of Srat al-Naḥl that Ibn Rushd borrowed the suggestion that as regards the interpretation of religious texts, each of these three groups should adopt one of the three methods described as rhetorical, dialectical, and demonstrative. Another important context where Ibn Rushd is clearly under the influence of al-Ghazzl is the issue how the lawful method of interpretation is to be applied to the religious texts. Regarding this issue, he took up al-Ghazzl's fivefold categorization of being as essential existence, sensual existence, imaginative existence, mental existence and analogical existence, suggesting to interpret the religious texts on the basis of this categorization. (shrink)

El objeto de este libro es mostrar quién fue, qué pensó y cual es el sentido, para nosotros, del pensamiento de Abu al-Ualíd Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Ahmad Ibn Ruxd, en adelante Averroes, nombre que deriva de la latinización del apelativo Ibn Ruxd, nacido en Córdoba en 1126 y muerto en Marrakex en 1181. Su impronta en la cultura de su tiempo le hizo figurar nada menos que entre el auténtico canon onomástico de la teología y (...) la filosofía medievales que supuso La Divina Comedia de Dante, o en el parnaso de la filosofía de Rafael en "La escuela de Atenas". Y eso no resulta incompatible con su peso central en el pensamiento racionalista que marcó el rumbo de la modernidad de donde surge nuestro mundo presente. Averroes supone una cima del pensamiento universal en cualquier tiempo y lugar. Entre los límites cronológicos que encierran una vida como la de Averroes no podemos lograr totalidades, más allá de un conjunto de fragmentos, indicios, referencias indirectas procedentes de datos que nos ofrecen autores contemporáneos o sucesores. El conjunto de todas esas informaciones, que forman la biografía del filósofo, resulta ser muy escaso y poco ilustrativo si lo comparamos con la trayectoria de su pensamiento, un proceso intelectual cuyo prodigioso esfuerzo racional deja en la sombra al Averroes persona en beneficio del Averroes pensador. Frente a los momentos destacados de una vida, cuyos límites espaciales o geográficos vienen determinados por continuos desplazamientos de ida y vuelta entre Córdoba, Sevilla y Marrakex, lugares donde desempeñó cargos oficiales, sobresale un constante y sostenido esfuerzo intelectual plasmado en sus 92 obras escritas en 72 años de vida del filósofo. (shrink)

En la historia no hay solución de continuidad. Este principio racionalista sirve para desmitificar la historia de la filosofía que la academia occidental ha fabricado desde un punto de vista etnocéntrico. Desde su nacimiento en Grecia, el racionalismo penetró en Oriente Medio y Norte de África, para pasar luego a Europa a través del desarrollo científico y filosófico de al-Ándalus en la Edad Media.

L'A. confronta due commenti su quello che nel mondo arabo viene considerato il primo libro della Metaphysica di Aristotele: alpha Elatton. Dopo averne delineato i contenuti e la penetrazione nel mondo arabo grazie alle traduzioni di Ustat e Ishaq ibn Hunayn, l'A. esamina due importanti commenti a quest'opera: Yahyá Ibn 'Adi, un commentatore cristiano della scuola di Baghdad e Averroè . I due autori leggono il testo in modo molto diverso: questo suggerisce una grande differenza tra Averroè e la scuola (...) di Baghdad, sebbene il filosofo andaluso abbia ammirato e seguito il lavoro di al-Farabi. In particolare è naturale il rifiuto da parte di Averroè di introdurre un'inchiesta puramente teologica nella trattazione, punto accettato invece da Ibn 'Adi, secondo il proposito di Averroè di rimarcare il fondamento fisico della metafisica, come è possibile comprendere soprattutto grazie alla lettura del Trattato. (shrink)

This book contains the first English translation of an important medieval treatise on Aristotle's Metaphysics. The original Arabic text was composed around 1160 by the famous Andalusian philosopher Averroes (Ibn Rushd).

In her Al-Ghazali, Averroes and the Interpretation of the Qur'an, Avital Wohlman tries to draw a map of the area of relations between reason and revelation based on Ghazali's and Averroes' thoughts.