Lo studio verte sulla terminologia avicenniana utilizzata per richiamare l'idea di «emanazione» e quella di «creazione». Il vocabolario avicenniano è comparato in particolare alla terminologia della Theologia Aristotelis.
Ce texte d'Avicenne est l'un des seuls commentaires sur Aristote laissés par le philosophe persan. Il s'attaque au noyau théologique de la Métaphysique du Stagirite, les chapitres 6 à 10 du livre Lambda. Avicenne dépend d'une tradition gréco-arabe dans laquelle on a attribué à Aristote plusieurs oeuvres d'origine néoplatonicienne, notamment une Théologie adaptée de Plotin, et un Livre du Bien pur, adaptation des Eléments de Théologie de Proclus. Le " Dieu d'Aristote " est ainsi pour Avicenne la Cause première efficiente (...) de l'être. La structure hiérarchique de l'univers résulte de l'émanation produite par l'auto-intelligence du premier Principe. Il ne fait pas de doute, pour Avicenne, que ces doctrines aient été celles du Stagirite. Ce texte, pour la première fois rendu accessible dans cette édition critique et dans cette traduction, est fondamental pour comprendre la métaphysique avicennienne. (shrink)
This first supplement to my An Annotated Bibliography on Ibn Sînâ , published in 1991, informs the reader about all new studies on Ibn Sînâ published in the period 1990-1994, and also offers corrigenda and addenda to the former bibliography. Also in the supplement, attention is paid to Western, and to non-Western publications. Moreover, it has been tried to be even more exhaustive by including publications, which have not Ibn Sînâ in the title, but which nevertheless are offering important and (...) innovative information about his life or thought. First, an overview is given of the new editions and/or translations of Ibn Sînâ's works, which are once more identified according to the classic bibliographies of G.C. Anawati and M.Mehdavî. Hereafter, separate chapters are dedicated to studies of a biographical and a bibliographical nature. No less than ten chapters are devoted to materials dealing with Ibn Sînâ's philosophical thought . Finally, materials dealing with in two separate chapters. It has to be noted that almost all publications are annotated with a summary of their most original points and a short critical evaluation. An index, which includes the names of all authors, ancient, medieval and contemporary, has been added. In sum, this work aims at providing a clear, concise and comprehensive work- instrument for all future Avicenna research. It is not only of great interest for all scholars working in Arabic-Islamic philosophy, science and medicine, but also for historians of philosophy and mediaevalists. "Hay que felicitar al autor de este minucioso trabajo que, como su anterior bibliografía, es de un valor incalculable para todos aquellos que nos consagramos al estudio del pensamiento del gran filósofo islámico, al ser instrumento necesario con el que contar para futuras investigaciones sobre Avicena". (shrink)
... Avicenne et Fismaelisme sont comme'eau et le feu. On se souviendra du fameux passage de son autobiographie ou le philosophe coupe court avec toutes les ...
Doubts on Avicenna: A Study and Edition of Sharaf al-Dīn al-Masʿūdī’s Commentary on the Ishārāt. By Ayman Shihadeh. Islamic Philosophy, Theology and Science, Texts and Studies, vol. 95. Leiden: Brill, 2016. Pp. viii + 289. $126, €97.
The article focuses in a particular way on two Jesuits of the XVII Century, Philips van Winghe e Jean l'Heureux . It describes their active participation in the scientific life of their time, as well as their own contributions to science.
Ibn Sina, long known in the West as Avicenna, was at the center of the school of Islamic philosophy that inherited and adapted Greek thinking from pre-Socratic to late Hellenic times, says Jansson. The 17 essays he has collected here discuss such aspects as his heritage in the Islamic world and the Latin West, the problem of human freedom, al-Gazzali and his use of Avicennian texts, and some elements of Avicennian influence on Henry of Ghent's psychology. One is published here (...) for the first time; the others are reproduced--with original page numbers--from publication since 1987, but mostly the late 1990s. (shrink)
Le grand humaniste, Andrea Alpago, médecin et philosophe, fut aussi un traducteur notoire. Parmi ses traductions d’œuvres arabes en Latin figure une œuvre de jeunesse d’Avicenne, le Kitāb fī l-nafs ‘alā sunnat al-ikhtiṣār. Mais il ne se contenta pas de traduire simplement ce traité. Il ajouta à sa traduction un commentaire suivi. Même si tout indique que ce commentaire ne fut pas entièrement achevé, il mérite l’attention. En effet, on n’y trouve pas seulement l’expression de la façon dont Alpago a (...) compris ce texte, mais aussi des indications concernant les motifs qui l’ont poussés à le traduire, ainsi qu’à traduire d’autres textes avicenniens en relation avec l’âme. Comme la compréhension d’un texte est inévitablement liée à la façon dont celui-ci a été traduit, l’analyse du commentaire est précédée par une brève étude de la méthode de traduction d’Alpago, en prêtant particulièrement attention à ce qui en constitue les points forts, mais aussi les points faibles. (shrink)
The World of Image in Islamic Philosophy: Ibn Sīnā, Suhrawardī, Shahrazūrī, and Beyond. By L. W. C. van Lit. Edinburgh Studies in Islamic Apocalypticism and Eschatology, vol. 2. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017. Pp. viii + 278. $110, £75.
That Ibn Sīnā’s “Canon of medicine” figures among the major classics of the history of medicine is doubted by no serious historian of medicine, eastern or western, Islamic or non-Islamic alike. It is therefore all the more surprising that so far no serious critical edition of this text was available. Certainly, a first, very timid step toward a really critical edition was made at the Institute of the History of Medicine and Medical Research, under the direction of Hakeem Abdul Hameed. (...) It compared the four existing editions: Rome 1593; Būlāq 1877; Tehran 1878; and Lucknow 1905. In addition it used an ancient manuscript of Aya Sophia, dated 618, i. e. MS Aya Sophia 3686. With this new edition a further important step toward a full critical edition is made. Even if it is obvious that it does not yet present a “critical edition” in the full sense of the word, it has important merits. (shrink)
Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa contra Gentiles, cites by name and quotes Avicenna seventeen times explicitly. A detailed examination of all these passages reveals that Thomas sometimes, although rarely—in fact, only with regard to the discussion of the divine attributes of truth and liberality—makes a positive assessment of Avicenna’s ideas. Much more often, Thomas is highly critical of the latter’s doctrines. It comes as no surprise that Thomas strongly opposes Avicenna’s theories of emanation and of knowledge acquisition by an illumination (...) of the agent intellect. However, it is astonishing that he qualifies Avicenna as a “Platonist.” This understanding seems to result partly from Averroistic influences, partly from Thomas’s desire to make Avicenna’s system—in spite of the presence of obvious tensions in it—completely coherent, and partly from some rewordings which fit better Thomas’s own system. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that Avicenna was for Thomas a real “auctoritas.”. (shrink)
