| Title | Ibn Rushd’s Criticism of the Theory of the Inherence of the Specific Property (khāssa) in Medicine |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2020 |
| Journal | Bulletin of the Society for Near Eastern Studies in Japan |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 33–48 |
| Categories | Medicine, Galen, Avicenna, Tradition and Reception |
| Author(s) | Yu Hoki |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| In Medieval Arabic medical texts, a specific property (khāṣṣa) is thought to be one of the effects of a medicine, and effective in a specific humor or organ. This property is mainly mentioned to explain two phenomena, purgative medicines' attraction of a certain humor and theriacas strengthening of human innate heat. Galen had advocated the theory that the faculty of attracting a specific material inheres in a medical substance as its nature (referred to as the theory of inherence). The same view can be seen in the texts of Islamic philosopher-physicians such as Ibn Sīnā (d. 1037). On the other hand, Ibn Rushd (d. 1198) perceived the defects of this theory and criticised it. This article examines his criticism of the theory of inherence in his discussions about purgative medicines and theriacas. Ibn Rushd says that using the theory of inheritance, we cannot explain the phenomenon that when someone takes more than one dose of purgative medicine, it attracts not only the specific humor, but all of the humors. He then proposes the alternative theory that the specific property originates in the proportions of the qualities in the attracting and the attracted materials. From this perspective, he insists that the object of attraction varies according to the amount of the heat in the medicine. As for theriaca, Ibn Rushd criticises the theory of inherence as seen in the writings of Ibn Sīnā Ibn Sīnā claims that theriaca's specific property is generated from its substance, i.e. the combination of form with matter, not the mixture of the four qualities. But according to Ibn Rushd, with this explanation, it is impossible to explain the body's various responses to theriaca. Therefore he maintains that one must explain its specific property in terms of the four qualities. To conclude, Ibn Rushd considers his theory to be more capable of explaining various phenomena than the theory of inherence is. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5049","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5049,"authors_free":[{"id":5799,"entry_id":5049,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Yu Hoki","free_first_name":"Yu","free_last_name":"Hoki","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Ibn Rushd\u2019s Criticism of the Theory of the Inherence of the Specific Property (kh\u0101ssa) in Medicine","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Ibn Rushd\u2019s Criticism of the Theory of the Inherence of the Specific Property (kh\u0101ssa) in Medicine"},"abstract":"In Medieval Arabic medical texts, a specific property (kh\u0101\u1e63\u1e63a) is thought to be one of the effects of a medicine, and effective in a specific humor or organ. This property is mainly mentioned to explain two phenomena, purgative medicines' attraction of a certain humor and theriacas strengthening of human innate heat. Galen had advocated the theory that the faculty of attracting a specific material inheres in a medical substance as its nature (referred to as the theory of inherence). The same view can be seen in the texts of Islamic philosopher-physicians such as Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 (d. 1037). On the other hand, Ibn Rushd (d. 1198) perceived the defects of this theory and criticised it. This article examines his criticism of the theory of inherence in his discussions about purgative medicines and theriacas.\r\nIbn Rushd says that using the theory of inheritance, we cannot explain the phenomenon that when someone takes more than one dose of purgative medicine, it attracts not only the specific humor, but all of the humors. He then proposes the alternative theory that the specific property originates in the proportions of the qualities in the attracting and the attracted materials. From this perspective, he insists that the object of attraction varies according to the amount of the heat in the medicine.\r\nAs for theriaca, Ibn Rushd criticises the theory of inherence as seen in the writings of Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 claims that theriaca's specific property is generated from its substance, i.e. the combination of form with matter, not the mixture of the four qualities. But according to Ibn Rushd, with this explanation, it is impossible to explain the body's various responses to theriaca. Therefore he maintains that one must explain its specific property in terms of the four qualities.\r\nTo conclude, Ibn Rushd considers his theory to be more capable of explaining various phenomena than the theory of inherence is. ","btype":3,"date":"2020","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5356\/jorient.57.1_33","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":29,"category_name":"Medicine","link":"bib?categories[]=Medicine"},{"id":30,"category_name":"Galen","link":"bib?categories[]=Galen"},{"id":10,"category_name":"Avicenna","link":"bib?categories[]=Avicenna"},{"id":43,"category_name":"Tradition and Reception","link":"bib?categories[]=Tradition and Reception"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5049,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Bulletin of the Society for Near Eastern Studies in Japan","volume":"57","issue":"1","pages":"33\u201348"}},"sort":[2020]}
| Title | From Alexandria to Cordoba: Medicine according to Averroes and the Araboislamic tradition |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Spanish |
| Date | 2020 |
| Journal | Asclepio. Revista de Historia de la Medicina y de la Ciencia |
| Volume | 72 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 312-327 |
| Categories | al-Fārābī, Avicenna, Medicine |
| Author(s) | Miquel Forcada |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Ibn Rushd consideró la medicina como un arte productivo en su al-Kulliyyāt fī l-ṭibb, escrito entre 1162 y 1169, y como una ciencia en su comentario al poema de Ibn Sīnā sobre la medicina (Sharḥ Urjūzat Ibn Sīnā fī l-ṭibb), escrito en 1180. En Kulliyyāt, Ibn Rushd sigue de manera bastante estricta las ideas sobre el estatus de la medicina del filósofo al-Fārābī. En Sharḥ Urjūzat Ibn Sīnā, Ibn Rushd sintetiza las concepciones de varias obras, entre las cuales Masā’il fī l-ṭibb de Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq y Ḥubaysh, Qānūn fī l-ṭibb de Ibn Sinā y las obras sobre la lógica aristotélica de al-Fārābī. El análisis conjunto de estas fuentes, más las aportaciones de un nuevo manuscrito de Sharḥ Urjūzat Ibn Sīnā, proporcionan una idea más clara de la concepción de la medicina expuesta en esta obra y, en consecuencia, podemos reconsiderar y relativizar la diferencia entre esta concepción y la que se expone en Kulliyyāt. Las ideas de Ibn Rushd sobre el estatus de la medicina se analizan de acuerdo con el contexto sociopolítico en que fueron concebidas, considerando especialmente el hecho de que Sharḥ Urjūza Ibn Sīnā fī l-ṭibb fue escrito para las elites intelectuales y políticas del régimen almohad. Ibn Rushd considered medicine as a productive art in his al-Kulliyyāt fī l-ṭibb, written between 1162 and 1169, and as a science in his commentary on Ibn Sīnā’s poem on the subject (Sharḥ Urjūzat Ibn Sīnā fī l-ṭibb), written in 1180. In Kulliyyāt, Ibn Rushd followed quite strictly the ideas on the status of medicine propounded by the philosopher al-Fārābī. In Sharḥ Urjūzat Ibn Sīnā, Ibn Rushd summarised the conceptions of several works including Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq’s Masā’il fīl-ṭibb, Ibn Sīnā’s Qānūn fī l-ṭibb and al-Fārābī’s works on Aristotle’s logic. The joint analysis of these sources and the evidence provided by a new manuscript of Ibn Rushd’s Sharḥ give us a clearer idea of the conception of medicine extant in this latter work and, in consequence, we can reconsider and relativise the difference between it and the conception expounded in Kulliyyāt. Ibn Rushd’s ideas on the status of medicine are analysed according to the sociopolitical context in which they were conceived, taking particular account of the fact that Sharḥ Urjūza Ibn Sīnā fī l-ṭibb was written for the intellectual and political elites of the Almohad regime. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5592","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5592,"authors_free":[{"id":6491,"entry_id":5592,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":903,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Miquel Forcada","free_first_name":"Miquel","free_last_name":"Forcada","norm_person":{"id":903,"first_name":"","last_name":"","full_name":"","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]="}}],"entry_title":"From Alexandria to Cordoba: Medicine according to Averroes and the Araboislamic tradition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"From Alexandria to Cordoba: Medicine according to Averroes and the Araboislamic tradition"},"abstract":" Ibn Rushd consider\u00f3 la medicina como un arte productivo en su al-Kulliyy\u0101t f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb, escrito entre 1162 y 1169, y como una ciencia en su comentario al poema de Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 sobre la medicina (Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bzat Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb), escrito en 1180. En Kulliyy\u0101t, Ibn Rushd sigue de manera bastante estricta las ideas sobre el estatus de la medicina del fil\u00f3sofo al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b. En Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bzat Ibn S\u012bn\u0101, Ibn Rushd sintetiza las concepciones de varias obras, entre las cuales Mas\u0101\u2019il f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb de \u1e24unayn ibn Is\u1e25\u0101q y \u1e24ubaysh, Q\u0101n\u016bn f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb de Ibn Sin\u0101 y las obras sobre la l\u00f3gica aristot\u00e9lica de al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b. El an\u00e1lisis conjunto de estas fuentes, m\u00e1s las aportaciones de un nuevo manuscrito de Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bzat Ibn S\u012bn\u0101, proporcionan una idea m\u00e1s clara de la concepci\u00f3n de la medicina expuesta en esta obra y, en consecuencia, podemos reconsiderar y relativizar la diferencia entre esta concepci\u00f3n y la que se expone en Kulliyy\u0101t. Las ideas de Ibn Rushd sobre el estatus de la medicina se analizan de acuerdo con el contexto sociopol\u00edtico en que fueron concebidas, considerando especialmente el hecho de que Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bza Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb fue escrito para las elites intelectuales y pol\u00edticas del r\u00e9gimen almohad.\r\n\r\nIbn Rushd considered medicine as a productive art in his al-Kulliyy\u0101t f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb, written between 1162 and 1169, and as a science in his commentary on Ibn S\u012bn\u0101\u2019s poem on the subject (Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bzat Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb), written in 1180. In Kulliyy\u0101t, Ibn Rushd followed quite strictly the ideas on the status of medicine propounded by the philosopher al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b. In Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bzat Ibn S\u012bn\u0101, Ibn Rushd summarised the conceptions of several works including \u1e24unayn ibn Is\u1e25\u0101q\u2019s Mas\u0101\u2019il f\u012bl-\u1e6dibb, Ibn S\u012bn\u0101\u2019s Q\u0101n\u016bn f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb and al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b\u2019s works on Aristotle\u2019s logic. The joint analysis of these sources and the evidence provided by a new manuscript of Ibn Rushd\u2019s Shar\u1e25 give us a clearer idea of the conception of medicine extant in this latter work and, in consequence, we can reconsider and relativise the difference between it and the conception expounded in Kulliyy\u0101t. Ibn Rushd\u2019s ideas on the status of \r\nmedicine are analysed according to the sociopolitical context in which they were conceived, taking particular account of the fact that Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bza Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb was written for the intellectual and political elites of the Almohad regime.","btype":3,"date":"2020","language":"Spanish","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3989\/asclepio.2020.13","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":28,"category_name":"al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b"},{"id":10,"category_name":"Avicenna","link":"bib?categories[]=Avicenna"},{"id":29,"category_name":"Medicine","link":"bib?categories[]=Medicine"}],"authors":[{"id":903,"full_name":"","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5592,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Asclepio. Revista de Historia de la Medicina y de la Ciencia","volume":"72","issue":"2","pages":"312-327"}},"sort":[2020]}
| Title | From Alexandria to Cordoba: Medicine according to Averroes and the Araboislamic tradition |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Spanish |
| Date | 2020 |
| Journal | Asclepio. Revista de Historia de la Medicina y de la Ciencia |
| Volume | 72 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 312-327 |
| Categories | al-Fārābī, Avicenna, Medicine |
| Author(s) | Miquel Forcada |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Ibn Rushd consideró la medicina como un arte productivo en su al-Kulliyyāt fī l-ṭibb, escrito entre 1162 y 1169, y como una ciencia en su comentario al poema de Ibn Sīnā sobre la medicina (Sharḥ Urjūzat Ibn Sīnā fī l-ṭibb), escrito en 1180. En Kulliyyāt, Ibn Rushd sigue de manera bastante estricta las ideas sobre el estatus de la medicina del filósofo al-Fārābī. En Sharḥ Urjūzat Ibn Sīnā, Ibn Rushd sintetiza las concepciones de varias obras, entre las cuales Masā’il fī l-ṭibb de Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq y Ḥubaysh, Qānūn fī l-ṭibb de Ibn Sinā y las obras sobre la lógica aristotélica de al-Fārābī. El análisis conjunto de estas fuentes, más las aportaciones de un nuevo manuscrito de Sharḥ Urjūzat Ibn Sīnā, proporcionan una idea más clara de la concepción de la medicina expuesta en esta obra y, en consecuencia, podemos reconsiderar y relativizar la diferencia entre esta concepción y la que se expone en Kulliyyāt. Las ideas de Ibn Rushd sobre el estatus de la medicina se analizan de acuerdo con el contexto sociopolítico en que fueron concebidas, considerando especialmente el hecho de que Sharḥ Urjūza Ibn Sīnā fī l-ṭibb fue escrito para las elites intelectuales y políticas del régimen almohad. Ibn Rushd considered medicine as a productive art in his al-Kulliyyāt fī l-ṭibb, written between 1162 and 1169, and as a science in his commentary on Ibn Sīnā’s poem on the subject (Sharḥ Urjūzat Ibn Sīnā fī l-ṭibb), written in 1180. In Kulliyyāt, Ibn Rushd followed quite strictly the ideas on the status of medicine propounded by the philosopher al-Fārābī. In Sharḥ Urjūzat Ibn Sīnā, Ibn Rushd summarised the conceptions of several works including Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq’s Masā’il fīl-ṭibb, Ibn Sīnā’s Qānūn fī l-ṭibb and al-Fārābī’s works on Aristotle’s logic. The joint analysis of these sources and the evidence provided by a new manuscript of Ibn Rushd’s Sharḥ give us a clearer idea of the conception of medicine extant in this latter work and, in consequence, we can reconsider and relativise the difference between it and the conception expounded in Kulliyyāt. Ibn Rushd’s ideas on the status of medicine are analysed according to the sociopolitical context in which they were conceived, taking particular account of the fact that Sharḥ Urjūza Ibn Sīnā fī l-ṭibb was written for the intellectual and political elites of the Almohad regime. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5592","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5592,"authors_free":[{"id":6491,"entry_id":5592,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":903,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Miquel Forcada","free_first_name":"Miquel","free_last_name":"Forcada","norm_person":{"id":903,"first_name":"","last_name":"","full_name":"","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]="}}],"entry_title":"From Alexandria to Cordoba: Medicine according to Averroes and the Araboislamic tradition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"From Alexandria to Cordoba: Medicine according to Averroes and the Araboislamic tradition"},"abstract":" Ibn Rushd consider\u00f3 la medicina como un arte productivo en su al-Kulliyy\u0101t f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb, escrito entre 1162 y 1169, y como una ciencia en su comentario al poema de Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 sobre la medicina (Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bzat Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb), escrito en 1180. En Kulliyy\u0101t, Ibn Rushd sigue de manera bastante estricta las ideas sobre el estatus de la medicina del fil\u00f3sofo al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b. En Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bzat Ibn S\u012bn\u0101, Ibn Rushd sintetiza las concepciones de varias obras, entre las cuales Mas\u0101\u2019il f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb de \u1e24unayn ibn Is\u1e25\u0101q y \u1e24ubaysh, Q\u0101n\u016bn f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb de Ibn Sin\u0101 y las obras sobre la l\u00f3gica aristot\u00e9lica de al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b. El an\u00e1lisis conjunto de estas fuentes, m\u00e1s las aportaciones de un nuevo manuscrito de Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bzat Ibn S\u012bn\u0101, proporcionan una idea m\u00e1s clara de la concepci\u00f3n de la medicina expuesta en esta obra y, en consecuencia, podemos reconsiderar y relativizar la diferencia entre esta concepci\u00f3n y la que se expone en Kulliyy\u0101t. Las ideas de Ibn Rushd sobre el estatus de la medicina se analizan de acuerdo con el contexto sociopol\u00edtico en que fueron concebidas, considerando especialmente el hecho de que Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bza Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb fue escrito para las elites intelectuales y pol\u00edticas del r\u00e9gimen almohad.\r\n\r\nIbn Rushd considered medicine as a productive art in his al-Kulliyy\u0101t f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb, written between 1162 and 1169, and as a science in his commentary on Ibn S\u012bn\u0101\u2019s poem on the subject (Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bzat Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb), written in 1180. In Kulliyy\u0101t, Ibn Rushd followed quite strictly the ideas on the status of medicine propounded by the philosopher al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b. In Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bzat Ibn S\u012bn\u0101, Ibn Rushd summarised the conceptions of several works including \u1e24unayn ibn Is\u1e25\u0101q\u2019s Mas\u0101\u2019il f\u012bl-\u1e6dibb, Ibn S\u012bn\u0101\u2019s Q\u0101n\u016bn f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb and al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b\u2019s works on Aristotle\u2019s logic. The joint analysis of these sources and the evidence provided by a new manuscript of Ibn Rushd\u2019s Shar\u1e25 give us a clearer idea of the conception of medicine extant in this latter work and, in consequence, we can reconsider and relativise the difference between it and the conception expounded in Kulliyy\u0101t. Ibn Rushd\u2019s ideas on the status of \r\nmedicine are analysed according to the sociopolitical context in which they were conceived, taking particular account of the fact that Shar\u1e25 Urj\u016bza Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 f\u012b l-\u1e6dibb was written for the intellectual and political elites of the Almohad regime.","btype":3,"date":"2020","language":"Spanish","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3989\/asclepio.2020.13","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":28,"category_name":"al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b"},{"id":10,"category_name":"Avicenna","link":"bib?categories[]=Avicenna"},{"id":29,"category_name":"Medicine","link":"bib?categories[]=Medicine"}],"authors":[{"id":903,"full_name":"","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5592,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Asclepio. Revista de Historia de la Medicina y de la Ciencia","volume":"72","issue":"2","pages":"312-327"}},"sort":["From Alexandria to Cordoba: Medicine according to Averroes and the Araboislamic tradition"]}
| Title | Ibn Rushd’s Criticism of the Theory of the Inherence of the Specific Property (khāssa) in Medicine |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2020 |
| Journal | Bulletin of the Society for Near Eastern Studies in Japan |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 33–48 |
| Categories | Medicine, Galen, Avicenna, Tradition and Reception |
| Author(s) | Yu Hoki |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| In Medieval Arabic medical texts, a specific property (khāṣṣa) is thought to be one of the effects of a medicine, and effective in a specific humor or organ. This property is mainly mentioned to explain two phenomena, purgative medicines' attraction of a certain humor and theriacas strengthening of human innate heat. Galen had advocated the theory that the faculty of attracting a specific material inheres in a medical substance as its nature (referred to as the theory of inherence). The same view can be seen in the texts of Islamic philosopher-physicians such as Ibn Sīnā (d. 1037). On the other hand, Ibn Rushd (d. 1198) perceived the defects of this theory and criticised it. This article examines his criticism of the theory of inherence in his discussions about purgative medicines and theriacas. Ibn Rushd says that using the theory of inheritance, we cannot explain the phenomenon that when someone takes more than one dose of purgative medicine, it attracts not only the specific humor, but all of the humors. He then proposes the alternative theory that the specific property originates in the proportions of the qualities in the attracting and the attracted materials. From this perspective, he insists that the object of attraction varies according to the amount of the heat in the medicine. As for theriaca, Ibn Rushd criticises the theory of inherence as seen in the writings of Ibn Sīnā Ibn Sīnā claims that theriaca's specific property is generated from its substance, i.e. the combination of form with matter, not the mixture of the four qualities. But according to Ibn Rushd, with this explanation, it is impossible to explain the body's various responses to theriaca. Therefore he maintains that one must explain its specific property in terms of the four qualities. To conclude, Ibn Rushd considers his theory to be more capable of explaining various phenomena than the theory of inherence is. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5049","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5049,"authors_free":[{"id":5799,"entry_id":5049,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Yu Hoki","free_first_name":"Yu","free_last_name":"Hoki","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Ibn Rushd\u2019s Criticism of the Theory of the Inherence of the Specific Property (kh\u0101ssa) in Medicine","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Ibn Rushd\u2019s Criticism of the Theory of the Inherence of the Specific Property (kh\u0101ssa) in Medicine"},"abstract":"In Medieval Arabic medical texts, a specific property (kh\u0101\u1e63\u1e63a) is thought to be one of the effects of a medicine, and effective in a specific humor or organ. This property is mainly mentioned to explain two phenomena, purgative medicines' attraction of a certain humor and theriacas strengthening of human innate heat. Galen had advocated the theory that the faculty of attracting a specific material inheres in a medical substance as its nature (referred to as the theory of inherence). The same view can be seen in the texts of Islamic philosopher-physicians such as Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 (d. 1037). On the other hand, Ibn Rushd (d. 1198) perceived the defects of this theory and criticised it. This article examines his criticism of the theory of inherence in his discussions about purgative medicines and theriacas.\r\nIbn Rushd says that using the theory of inheritance, we cannot explain the phenomenon that when someone takes more than one dose of purgative medicine, it attracts not only the specific humor, but all of the humors. He then proposes the alternative theory that the specific property originates in the proportions of the qualities in the attracting and the attracted materials. From this perspective, he insists that the object of attraction varies according to the amount of the heat in the medicine.\r\nAs for theriaca, Ibn Rushd criticises the theory of inherence as seen in the writings of Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 Ibn S\u012bn\u0101 claims that theriaca's specific property is generated from its substance, i.e. the combination of form with matter, not the mixture of the four qualities. But according to Ibn Rushd, with this explanation, it is impossible to explain the body's various responses to theriaca. Therefore he maintains that one must explain its specific property in terms of the four qualities.\r\nTo conclude, Ibn Rushd considers his theory to be more capable of explaining various phenomena than the theory of inherence is. ","btype":3,"date":"2020","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5356\/jorient.57.1_33","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":29,"category_name":"Medicine","link":"bib?categories[]=Medicine"},{"id":30,"category_name":"Galen","link":"bib?categories[]=Galen"},{"id":10,"category_name":"Avicenna","link":"bib?categories[]=Avicenna"},{"id":43,"category_name":"Tradition and Reception","link":"bib?categories[]=Tradition and Reception"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5049,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Bulletin of the Society for Near Eastern Studies in Japan","volume":"57","issue":"1","pages":"33\u201348"}},"sort":["Ibn Rushd\u2019s Criticism of the Theory of the Inherence of the Specific Property (kh\u0101ssa) in Medicine"]}