| Title | The Importance of History and Perspective in Understanding Mediæval Philosophy: The Case of Maimonides’ Response to the Question of Eternity |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2023 |
| Journal | The Maghreb Review |
| Volume | 40 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 289-307 |
| Categories | Relation between Philosophy and Theology, Maimonides, al-Ġazālī |
| Author(s) | S. M. Hadi Gerami |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The study aims to show how taking history and perspective into consideration could help in understanding mediæval philosophy. To that end, in spite of a philosophical assumption which usually considers that there is no connection between eternity and creation, the paper assumes that Maimonides planned to establish a distinct response which was neither creation nor eternity. Investigating Maimonides’ perspective will be approached in two ways. Firstly, through the distinction between Maimonides, on one hand and theologians and philosophers on the other will be discussed from an intellectual point of view. Al-Ghazālī will be compared to Maimonides to show that, despite initial impressions, they differ substantially from each other on this issue. It will also be shown how Maimonides differentiated his discourse from that of the Greek philosophers. It will firstly be shown here that Maimonides’ response to the question of eternity adopts a different position from that of the classical theologians and the ancient philosophers. Secondly, the historicity of Maimonides’ discourse, or whether anyone else shared Maimonides’ conciliatory approach, will be examined. It will be shown that Averroes has the highest affinity with Maimonides in this regard. This will result in recognition of the fact that Maimonides’ “conciliatory approach” was shared with some other mediæval philosophers such as Averroes. Ultimately, it will be explained how Maimonides’ complicated concept of eternity can be better understood and justified if one takes perspective and historical discourse into consideration, showing that he was someone who tried to incorporate “conciliatory discourse” into mediæval philosophy. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5604","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5604,"authors_free":[{"id":6505,"entry_id":5604,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"S. M. Hadi Gerami","free_first_name":"S. M. Hadi ","free_last_name":" Gerami","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"The Importance of History and Perspective in Understanding Medi\u00e6val Philosophy: The Case of Maimonides\u2019 Response to the Question of Eternity","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"The Importance of History and Perspective in Understanding Medi\u00e6val Philosophy: The Case of Maimonides\u2019 Response to the Question of Eternity"},"abstract":"The study aims to show how taking history and perspective into consideration could help in understanding medi\u00e6val philosophy. To that end, in spite of a philosophical assumption which usually considers that there is no connection between eternity and creation, the paper assumes that Maimonides planned to establish a distinct response which was neither creation nor eternity. Investigating Maimonides\u2019 perspective will be approached in two ways. Firstly, through the distinction between Maimonides, on one hand and theologians and philosophers on the other will be discussed from an intellectual point of view. Al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b will be compared to Maimonides to show that, despite initial impressions, they differ substantially from each other on this issue. It will also be shown how Maimonides differentiated his discourse from that of the Greek philosophers. It will firstly be shown here that Maimonides\u2019 response to the question of eternity adopts a different position from that of the classical theologians and the ancient philosophers. Secondly, the historicity of Maimonides\u2019 discourse, or whether anyone else shared Maimonides\u2019 conciliatory approach, will be examined. It will be shown that Averroes has the highest affinity with Maimonides in this regard. This will result in recognition of the fact that Maimonides\u2019 \u201cconciliatory approach\u201d was shared with some other medi\u00e6val philosophers such as Averroes. Ultimately, it will be explained how Maimonides\u2019 complicated concept of eternity can be better understood and justified if one takes perspective and historical discourse into consideration, showing that he was someone who tried to incorporate \u201cconciliatory discourse\u201d into medi\u00e6val philosophy.","btype":3,"date":"2023","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"10.1353\/tmr.2015.0029","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":47,"category_name":"Relation between Philosophy and Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Relation between Philosophy and Theology"},{"id":9,"category_name":"Maimonides","link":"bib?categories[]=Maimonides"},{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5604,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Maghreb Review","volume":"40","issue":"3","pages":"289-307"}},"sort":[2023]}
| Title | Investigating the Influence of Ibn Rushd from Ghazali on the Issue of Interpretation of Religious Texts |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Arabic |
| Date | 2022 |
| Journal | Comparative Theology |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue | 27 |
| Pages | 1-16 |
| Categories | al-Ġazālī, Influence, Relation between Philosophy and Theology |
| Author(s) | Abuzar Rajabi , Morsal Azizi |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Islamic thinkers do not think alike about understanding similar verses and the issue of the appearance and interiority of verses, and sometimes there are fundamental differences between them. Al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd are in favor of using the method of interpretation in understanding similar verses and considering the way of escaping from the challenge and conflict of appearance and the inner self using the approach of interpretation. Ibn Rushd was famous for opposing Al-Ghazali and writing the book Tahaft Al-Tahaft in his critique of Tahaft al-Ghazali philosophers. Despite the criticisms, he is influenced by Al-Ghazali in some cases, and especially in the matter of interpretation. Al-Ghazali has two approaches encountering the problem of interpretation in two intellectual periods, in both of which he has been able to provide a new model by presenting a special approach in interpretation so that others can take a step in this direction and achieve a methodical understanding of religious texts. He has benefited a lot from this research model in understanding Ibn Rushd's text. According to the research findings, Ibn Rushd was influenced by Ghazali both in the nature of interpretation and in the reasoning and necessity of accepting it, as well as in the means of approaching interpretation. In the present descriptive-analytical study, the influence of Ibn Rushd from Ghazali on the issue of interpretation has been investigated.Al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd are both advocates of using the method of interpretation in understanding the text. Although Ghazali is one of the Ash'arite theologians, in the matter of interpretation in both intellectual periods, he distances himself from thinkers such as Abul Hassan Ash'ari, Baqalani, and Jovini and accepts the methodical interpretation in understanding many verses of the Holy Qur'an. Methodology and adherence to a disciplined mechanism in interpretation are the characteristics of using this method by Al-Ghazali.Ibn Al-Rushd, like Al-Ghazali, does not see a conflict between the outward and inward meaning of the verses of the Holy Qur'an. Interpretation is a method that philosophers have the right to use in understanding the Holy Qur'an. Although this method raised serious objections to Al-Ghazali, it is influenced by Al-Ghazali’s interpretation. Ibn Al-Rushd mentions Al-Ghazali in many cases and considers Ghazali's method in this regard to be correct. He speaks about the nature of interpretation, the necessity of paying attention to it, its types and varieties, the division of the audience of revelation, and the permission and impermissibility of interpretation like Al-Ghazali. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5766","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5766,"authors_free":[{"id":6678,"entry_id":5766,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Abuzar Rajabi","free_first_name":"Abuzar ","free_last_name":"Rajabi","norm_person":null},{"id":6679,"entry_id":5766,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Morsal Azizi","free_first_name":"Morsal ","free_last_name":"Azizi","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Investigating the Influence of Ibn Rushd from Ghazali on the Issue of Interpretation of Religious Texts","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Investigating the Influence of Ibn Rushd from Ghazali on the Issue of Interpretation of Religious Texts"},"abstract":"Islamic thinkers do not think alike about understanding similar verses and the issue of the appearance and interiority of verses, and sometimes there are fundamental differences between them. Al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd are in favor of using the method of interpretation in understanding similar verses and considering the way of escaping from the challenge and conflict of appearance and the inner self using the approach of interpretation. Ibn Rushd was famous for opposing Al-Ghazali and writing the book Tahaft Al-Tahaft in his critique of Tahaft al-Ghazali philosophers. Despite the criticisms, he is influenced by Al-Ghazali in some cases, and especially in the matter of interpretation. Al-Ghazali has two approaches encountering the problem of interpretation in two intellectual periods, in both of which he has been able to provide a new model by presenting a special approach in interpretation so that others can take a step in this direction and achieve a methodical understanding of religious texts. He has benefited a lot from this research model in understanding Ibn Rushd's text. According to the research findings, Ibn Rushd was influenced by Ghazali both in the nature of interpretation and in the reasoning and necessity of accepting it, as well as in the means of approaching interpretation. In the present descriptive-analytical study, the influence of Ibn Rushd from Ghazali on the issue of interpretation has been investigated.Al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd are both advocates of using the method of interpretation in understanding the text. Although Ghazali is one of the Ash'arite theologians, in the matter of interpretation in both intellectual periods, he distances himself from thinkers such as Abul Hassan Ash'ari, Baqalani, and Jovini and accepts the methodical interpretation in understanding many verses of the Holy Qur'an. Methodology and adherence to a disciplined mechanism in interpretation are the characteristics of using this method by Al-Ghazali.Ibn Al-Rushd, like Al-Ghazali, does not see a conflict between the outward and inward meaning of the verses of the Holy Qur'an. Interpretation is a method that philosophers have the right to use in understanding the Holy Qur'an. Although this method raised serious objections to Al-Ghazali, it is influenced by Al-Ghazali\u2019s interpretation. Ibn Al-Rushd mentions Al-Ghazali in many cases and considers Ghazali's method in this regard to be correct. He speaks about the nature of interpretation, the necessity of paying attention to it, its types and varieties, the division of the audience of revelation, and the permission and impermissibility of interpretation like Al-Ghazali.","btype":3,"date":"2022","language":"Arabic","online_url":"","doi_url":"10.22108\/coth.2022.131221.1658","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"id":24,"category_name":"Influence","link":"bib?categories[]=Influence"},{"id":47,"category_name":"Relation between Philosophy and Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Relation between Philosophy and Theology"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5766,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Comparative Theology","volume":"13","issue":"27","pages":"1-16"}},"sort":[2022]}
| Title | Averroës' Takfir of al-Ghazālī: Ta'wīl and Causal Kufr |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2021 |
| Journal | American journal of Islam and society |
| Volume | 38 |
| Issue | 1/2 |
| Pages | 60-92 |
| Categories | al-Ġazālī, Relation between Philosophy and Theology, Theology |
| Author(s) | Saja Parvizian |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Al-Ghazālı̄ famously claims in the Incoherence of the Philosophers that al-Fārābī and Avicenna are unbelievers because they hold philosophical positions that conflict with Islam. What is less well-known, however, is that Averroës claims in the Decisive Treatise that al-Fārābī and Avicenna are not unbelievers; rather, al-Ghazālı̄ is the true unbeliever for writing the Incoherence of the Philosophers. In this paper, my aim is to present a sustained reconstruction of Averroës’ legal and philosophical argument for why al-Ghazālı̄ is an unbeliever. The crux of Averroës’ argument is that al-Ghazālı̄ has expressed false allegorical interpretations of scripture to unqualified persons, which has caused them to fall into unbelief. By being causally responsible for other people’s unbelief, al-Ghazālı̄ is an unbeliever as well. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5566","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5566,"authors_free":[{"id":6460,"entry_id":5566,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":903,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Saja Parvizian","free_first_name":"Saja ","free_last_name":"Parvizian","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":"Averro\u00ebs' Takfir of al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b: Ta'w\u012bl and Causal Kufr","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Averro\u00ebs' Takfir of al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b: Ta'w\u012bl and Causal Kufr"},"abstract":"Al-Ghaza\u0304l\u0131\u0304 famously claims in the Incoherence of the Philosophers that al-Fa\u0304ra\u0304bi\u0304 and Avicenna are unbelievers because they hold philosophical positions that conflict with Islam. What is less well-known, however, is that Averroe\u0308s claims in the Decisive Treatise that al-Fa\u0304ra\u0304bi\u0304 and Avicenna are not unbelievers; rather, al-Ghaza\u0304l\u0131\u0304 is the true unbeliever for writing the Incoherence of the Philosophers. In this paper, my aim is to present a sustained reconstruction of Averroe\u0308s\u2019 legal and philosophical argument for why al-Ghaza\u0304l\u0131\u0304 is an unbeliever. The crux of Averroe\u0308s\u2019 argument is that al-Ghaza\u0304l\u0131\u0304 has expressed false allegorical interpretations of scripture to unqualified persons, which has caused them to fall into unbelief. By being causally responsible for other people\u2019s unbelief, al-Ghaza\u0304l\u0131\u0304 is an unbeliever as well.","btype":3,"date":"2021","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.35632\/ajis.v38i1-2.735","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"id":47,"category_name":"Relation between Philosophy and Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Relation between Philosophy and Theology"},{"id":39,"category_name":"Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Theology"}],"authors":[{"id":903,"full_name":"","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5566,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"American journal of Islam and society","volume":"38","issue":"1\/2","pages":"60-92"}},"sort":[2021]}
| Title | Relation as Key to God’s Knowledge of Particulars in the Tahāfut al- tahāfut and the Damīma: A Cross-talk between Averroes, al-Ghazālī and Avicenna |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2020 |
| Journal | Arabic Sciences and Philosophy |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 1–26 |
| Categories | Avicenna, al-Ġazālī, Commentary |
| Author(s) | Jean-Baptiste Brenet |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| This article deals with the divine knowledge of particulars in Averroes’ Tahāfut al-tahāfut and Ḍamīma. It examines how the concept of relation, generally neglected, is at the heart of the dispute between Avicenna, al-Ġazālī, and the Commentator. In al-Ġazālī’s eyes, Avicenna's misconception of divine knowledge “in a universal way” is based on a misuse of relation in the case of God's knowledge. If particulars change and God does not, his knowledge of particulars, insofar as it undergoes change, can be considered a pure relation without ontological consequences. Averroes contests both al-Ġazālī’s criticism and his proposal, despite the fact that, for different reasons involving the coming-to-be of human knowledge, he too employs the notion of pure relation in his Long Commentary on the Physics. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5038","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5038,"authors_free":[{"id":5785,"entry_id":5038,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":622,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Jean-Baptiste Brenet","free_first_name":"Jean-Baptiste","free_last_name":"Brenet","norm_person":{"id":622,"first_name":"Jean-Baptiste","last_name":"Brenet","full_name":"Jean-Baptiste Brenet","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051778867","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/27224973","db_url":"NULL","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Jean-Baptiste Brenet"}}],"entry_title":"Relation as Key to God\u2019s Knowledge of Particulars in the Tah\u0101fut al- tah\u0101fut and the Dam\u012bma: A Cross-talk between Averroes, al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b and Avicenna","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Relation as Key to God\u2019s Knowledge of Particulars in the Tah\u0101fut al- tah\u0101fut and the Dam\u012bma: A Cross-talk between Averroes, al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b and Avicenna"},"abstract":"This article deals with the divine knowledge of particulars in Averroes\u2019 Tah\u0101fut al-tah\u0101fut and \u1e0cam\u012bma. It examines how the concept of relation, generally neglected, is at the heart of the dispute between Avicenna, al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b, and the Commentator. In al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b\u2019s eyes, Avicenna's misconception of divine knowledge \u201cin a universal way\u201d is based on a misuse of relation in the case of God's knowledge. If particulars change and God does not, his knowledge of particulars, insofar as it undergoes change, can be considered a pure relation without ontological consequences. Averroes contests both al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b\u2019s criticism and his proposal, despite the fact that, for different reasons involving the coming-to-be of human knowledge, he too employs the notion of pure relation in his Long Commentary on the Physics.","btype":3,"date":"2020","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"10.1017\/S0957423919000109","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":10,"category_name":"Avicenna","link":"bib?categories[]=Avicenna"},{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"}],"authors":[{"id":622,"full_name":"Jean-Baptiste Brenet","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5038,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy","volume":"20","issue":"1","pages":"1\u201326"}},"sort":[2020]}
| Title | Il manoscritto della Destructio destructionum di Averroè appartenuto a Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (Napoli, Biblioteca Nazionale, VIII E 31) |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Italian |
| Date | 2018 |
| Journal | Bulletin de Philosophie Médiévale |
| Volume | 60 |
| Pages | 67–80 |
| Categories | al-Ġazālī, Transmission, Renaissance |
| Author(s) | Giovanna Murano |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The Tahāfut al-tahāfut is Averroes' response to the Tahāfut al-falāsifa (The Incoherence of the Philosopher) written by Abū Hāmid al-Ghazālī. The work in its Latin translation from the Arabic was entitled Destructio destructionum, and an incomplete edition of this translation was published by Agostino Nifo in 1497. The MS. Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale, VIII E 31, unknown until now to scholars, belonged to Giovanni Pico della Mirandola. It is a manuscript of the Destructio destructionum, translated into Latin in 1328 by Calonymos ben Calonymos ben Meir of Arles for Robert of Anjou, and extensively annotated by Pico. The manuscript differs from Nifos' edition in that it also includes the second part of the Destructio destructionum with the until-now unpublished disputations on the natural sciences. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5099","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5099,"authors_free":[{"id":5873,"entry_id":5099,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Giovanna Murano","free_first_name":"Giovanna","free_last_name":"Murano","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Il manoscritto della Destructio destructionum di Averro\u00e8 appartenuto a Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (Napoli, Biblioteca Nazionale, VIII E 31)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Il manoscritto della Destructio destructionum di Averro\u00e8 appartenuto a Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (Napoli, Biblioteca Nazionale, VIII E 31)"},"abstract":"The Tah\u0101fut al-tah\u0101fut is Averroes' response to the Tah\u0101fut al-fal\u0101sifa (The Incoherence of the Philosopher) written by Ab\u016b H\u0101mid al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b. The work in its Latin translation from the Arabic was entitled Destructio destructionum, and an incomplete edition of this translation was published by Agostino Nifo in 1497.\r\n\r\nThe MS. Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale, VIII E 31, unknown until now to scholars, belonged to Giovanni Pico della Mirandola. It is a manuscript of the Destructio destructionum, translated into Latin in 1328 by Calonymos ben Calonymos ben Meir of Arles for Robert of Anjou, and extensively annotated by Pico. The manuscript differs from Nifos' edition in that it also includes the second part of the Destructio destructionum with the until-now unpublished disputations on the natural sciences.","btype":3,"date":"2018","language":"Italian","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"id":40,"category_name":"Transmission","link":"bib?categories[]=Transmission"},{"id":5,"category_name":"Renaissance","link":"bib?categories[]=Renaissance"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5099,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Bulletin de Philosophie M\u00e9di\u00e9vale","volume":"60","issue":"","pages":"67\u201380"}},"sort":[2018]}
| Title | Comparisons between al-Ġazālī and Ibn Rušd in the Late Ottoman Period |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2017 |
| Journal | Mélanges de l’Université Saint-Joseph |
| Volume | 67 |
| Categories | al-Ġazālī, Tradition and Reception |
| Author(s) | M. Sait Özervarli |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5157","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5157,"authors_free":[{"id":5938,"entry_id":5157,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"M. Sait \u00d6zervarli ","free_first_name":"M. Sait","free_last_name":"\u00d6zervarli","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Comparisons between al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b and Ibn Ru\u0161d in the Late Ottoman Period","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Comparisons between al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b and Ibn Ru\u0161d in the Late Ottoman Period"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"2017","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"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":5157,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"M\u00e9langes de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 Saint-Joseph","volume":"67","issue":"","pages":""}},"sort":[2017]}
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5158","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5158,"authors_free":[{"id":5939,"entry_id":5158,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1617,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":" Ines Peta","free_first_name":"Ines","free_last_name":"Peta","norm_person":{"id":1617,"first_name":"Ines","last_name":"Peta","full_name":"Ines Peta","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"http:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/88145541821696600433","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Ines Peta"}}],"entry_title":"L\u2019interpretazione del Corano alla luce della ragione in al-Ghaz\u00e2l\u00ee e Ibn Rushd","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"L\u2019interpretazione del Corano alla luce della ragione in al-Ghaz\u00e2l\u00ee e Ibn Rushd"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"2016","language":"Italian","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":39,"category_name":"Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Theology"},{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"}],"authors":[{"id":1617,"full_name":"Ines Peta","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5158,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Rivista di Filosofia Neo-sc\u00f3lastica","volume":"108","issue":"4","pages":"1005\u20131012"}},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | La philosophie comme pratique: erreur et droit à l’erreur dans la pensée d’Averroès |
| Type | Article |
| Language | French |
| Date | 2016 |
| Journal | Les Études Philosophiques |
| Volume | 117 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 269–282 |
| Categories | al-Ġazālī, Law |
| Author(s) | Ziad Bou Akl |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Responding to the accusations of the Ašʿarite theologian al-Ġazālī, in his Decisive Treatise Averroes champions the practice of philosophy, using legal and scriptural arguments. In this article, I wish to place these arguments within the context of legal theory, a discipline to which Averroes devoted one of his earliest treatises, the Abridgment of al-Mustaṣfā . A comparison of these two texts allows us to identify the origin of some arguments of the Decisive Treatise, concerning the taxonomy of errors and the social organization of knowledge. My aim is to set Averroes’ reflection within a continuity of the Islamic meta-legal tradition that provided him with the necessary tools for his conceptualization of the philosopher’s place within society. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5217","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5217,"authors_free":[{"id":6019,"entry_id":5217,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1608,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Ziad Bou Akl","free_first_name":"Ziad","free_last_name":"Bou Akl","norm_person":{"id":1608,"first_name":"Ziad","last_name":"Bou Akl","full_name":"Ziad Bou Akl","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1105658635","viaf_url":"http:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/306483990","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Ziad Bou Akl"}}],"entry_title":"La philosophie comme pratique: erreur et droit \u00e0 l\u2019erreur dans la pens\u00e9e d\u2019Averro\u00e8s","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"La philosophie comme pratique: erreur et droit \u00e0 l\u2019erreur dans la pens\u00e9e d\u2019Averro\u00e8s"},"abstract":"Responding to the accusations of the A\u0161\u02bfarite theologian al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b, in his Decisive Treatise Averroes champions the practice of philosophy, using legal and scriptural arguments. In this article, I wish to place these arguments within the context of legal theory, a discipline to which Averroes devoted one of his earliest treatises, the Abridgment of al-Musta\u1e63f\u0101 . A comparison of these two texts allows us to identify the origin of some arguments of the Decisive Treatise, concerning the taxonomy of errors and the social organization of knowledge. My aim is to set Averroes\u2019 reflection within a continuity of the Islamic meta-legal tradition that provided him with the necessary tools for his conceptualization of the philosopher\u2019s place within society.","btype":3,"date":"2016","language":"French","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3917\/leph.162.0269","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"id":26,"category_name":"Law","link":"bib?categories[]=Law"}],"authors":[{"id":1608,"full_name":"Ziad Bou Akl","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5217,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Les \u00c9tudes Philosophiques","volume":"117","issue":"2","pages":"269\u2013282"}},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | La crítica de Al-Gazzali al racionalismo filosófico islámico y la refutación de Averroes |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Spanish |
| Date | 2012 |
| Journal | La Ciudad de Díos |
| Volume | 225 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 161–188 |
| Categories | al-Ġazālī |
| Author(s) | Andrés Martínez Lorca |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"1786","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1786,"authors_free":[{"id":2060,"entry_id":1786,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":756,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Andr\u00e9s Mart\u00ednez Lorca","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9s","free_last_name":"Mart\u00ednez Lorca","norm_person":{"id":756,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9s","last_name":"Mart\u00ednez Lorca","full_name":"Andr\u00e9s Mart\u00ednez Lorca","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1047955687","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/51730671","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Andr\u00e9s Mart\u00ednez Lorca"}}],"entry_title":"La cr\u00edtica de Al-Gazzali al racionalismo filos\u00f3fico isl\u00e1mico y la refutaci\u00f3n de Averroes","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"La cr\u00edtica de Al-Gazzali al racionalismo filos\u00f3fico isl\u00e1mico y la refutaci\u00f3n de Averroes"},"abstract":null,"btype":3,"date":"2012","language":"Spanish","online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"}],"authors":[{"id":756,"full_name":"Andr\u00e9s Mart\u00ednez Lorca","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1786,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"La Ciudad de D\u00edos","volume":"225","issue":"1","pages":"161\u2013188"}},"sort":[2012]}
| Title | Al-Miklātī, a Twelfth Century Aš’arite Reader of Averroes |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2012 |
| Journal | Arabic Sciences and Philosophy |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 155–197 |
| Categories | Proceedings, Relation between Philosophy and Theology, al-Ġazālī |
| Author(s) | Yamina Adouhane , Yamina Adouhane |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The aim of this article is to present a new witness of Averroes' reception in the Muslim world, in the years that immediately followed his death. Indeed Abū al-Ḥağğāğ al-Miklātī (d. 1237) is an Ašʿarite theologian, who was born in Fez. He is the author of a Quintessence of the Intellects in Response to Philosophers on the Science of Principles in which he aims at refuting the Peripatetic philosophers in their own field, using their own weapons. This article will first attempt to draw the portrait of this atypical theologian. It will then focus on showing that al-Miklātī – although he never mentions his name – is a reader of Averroes and in particular, of his Tahāfut al-Tahāfut, of which he makes various and unexpected uses. A close look at these uses will enable us to better define the nature of al-Miklātī's work. More importantly, this article will try to prove that al-Miklātī provides us with a key passage of Averroes' lost treatise On the Prime Mover. At the heart of the Rushdian criticism of Avicenna's “metaphysical” proof, this passage should throw new light on Averroes' precise understanding of this proof. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"1757","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1757,"authors_free":[{"id":2027,"entry_id":1757,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1489,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Yamina Adouhane","free_first_name":"Yamina","free_last_name":"Adouhane","norm_person":{"id":1489,"first_name":"Yamina","last_name":"Adouhane","full_name":"Yamina Adouhane","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"http:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/458146284502615332481","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Yamina Adouhane"}},{"id":2028,"entry_id":1757,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1489,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Yamina Adouhane","free_first_name":"Yamina","free_last_name":"Adouhane","norm_person":{"id":1489,"first_name":"Yamina","last_name":"Adouhane","full_name":"Yamina Adouhane","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"http:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/458146284502615332481","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Yamina Adouhane"}}],"entry_title":"Al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b, a Twelfth Century A\u0161\u2019arite Reader of Averroes","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b, a Twelfth Century A\u0161\u2019arite Reader of Averroes"},"abstract":"The aim of this article is to present a new witness of Averroes' reception in the Muslim world, in the years that immediately followed his death. Indeed Ab\u016b al-\u1e24a\u011f\u011f\u0101\u011f al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b (d. 1237) is an A\u0161\u02bfarite theologian, who was born in Fez. He is the author of a Quintessence of the Intellects in Response to Philosophers on the Science of Principles in which he aims at refuting the Peripatetic philosophers in their own field, using their own weapons. This article will first attempt to draw the portrait of this atypical theologian. It will then focus on showing that al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b \u2013 although he never mentions his name \u2013 is a reader of Averroes and in particular, of his Tah\u0101fut al-Tah\u0101fut, of which he makes various and unexpected uses. A close look at these uses will enable us to better define the nature of al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b's work. More importantly, this article will try to prove that al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b provides us with a key passage of Averroes' lost treatise On the Prime Mover. At the heart of the Rushdian criticism of Avicenna's \u201cmetaphysical\u201d proof, this passage should throw new light on Averroes' precise understanding of this proof.","btype":3,"date":"2012","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/S095742391200001X","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":45,"category_name":"Proceedings","link":"bib?categories[]=Proceedings"},{"id":47,"category_name":"Relation between Philosophy and Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Relation between Philosophy and Theology"},{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"}],"authors":[{"id":1489,"full_name":"Yamina Adouhane","role":1},{"id":1489,"full_name":"Yamina Adouhane","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1757,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy","volume":"22","issue":"2","pages":"155\u2013197"}},"sort":[2012]}
| Title | Al-Ghazālī et l'ironie de Malebranche sur Averroès |
| Type | Article |
| Language | undefined |
| Date | 1987 |
| Journal | Arabica |
| Volume | 34 |
| Pages | 287–304 |
| Categories | Modern Readings, al-Ġazālī |
| Author(s) | Mohammed Allal Sinaceur |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"641","_score":null,"_source":{"id":641,"authors_free":[{"id":794,"entry_id":641,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":718,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mohammed Allal Sinaceur","free_first_name":"Mohammed Allal","free_last_name":"Sinaceur","norm_person":{"id":718,"first_name":"Mohammed Allal","last_name":"Sinaceur","full_name":"Mohammed Allal Sinaceur","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/141794011","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/76322953","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Mohammed Allal Sinaceur"}}],"entry_title":"Al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b et l'ironie de Malebranche sur Averro\u00e8s","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"Al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b et l'ironie de Malebranche sur Averro\u00e8s"},"abstract":null,"btype":3,"date":"1987","language":null,"online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":35,"category_name":"Modern Readings","link":"bib?categories[]=Modern Readings"},{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"}],"authors":[{"id":718,"full_name":"Mohammed Allal Sinaceur","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":641,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Arabica","volume":"34","issue":null,"pages":"287\u2013304"}},"sort":["Al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b et l'ironie de Malebranche sur Averro\u00e8s"]}
| Title | Al-Miklātī, a Twelfth Century Aš’arite Reader of Averroes |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2012 |
| Journal | Arabic Sciences and Philosophy |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 155–197 |
| Categories | Proceedings, Relation between Philosophy and Theology, al-Ġazālī |
| Author(s) | Yamina Adouhane , Yamina Adouhane |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The aim of this article is to present a new witness of Averroes' reception in the Muslim world, in the years that immediately followed his death. Indeed Abū al-Ḥağğāğ al-Miklātī (d. 1237) is an Ašʿarite theologian, who was born in Fez. He is the author of a Quintessence of the Intellects in Response to Philosophers on the Science of Principles in which he aims at refuting the Peripatetic philosophers in their own field, using their own weapons. This article will first attempt to draw the portrait of this atypical theologian. It will then focus on showing that al-Miklātī – although he never mentions his name – is a reader of Averroes and in particular, of his Tahāfut al-Tahāfut, of which he makes various and unexpected uses. A close look at these uses will enable us to better define the nature of al-Miklātī's work. More importantly, this article will try to prove that al-Miklātī provides us with a key passage of Averroes' lost treatise On the Prime Mover. At the heart of the Rushdian criticism of Avicenna's “metaphysical” proof, this passage should throw new light on Averroes' precise understanding of this proof. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"1757","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1757,"authors_free":[{"id":2027,"entry_id":1757,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1489,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Yamina Adouhane","free_first_name":"Yamina","free_last_name":"Adouhane","norm_person":{"id":1489,"first_name":"Yamina","last_name":"Adouhane","full_name":"Yamina Adouhane","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"http:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/458146284502615332481","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Yamina Adouhane"}},{"id":2028,"entry_id":1757,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1489,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Yamina Adouhane","free_first_name":"Yamina","free_last_name":"Adouhane","norm_person":{"id":1489,"first_name":"Yamina","last_name":"Adouhane","full_name":"Yamina Adouhane","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"http:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/458146284502615332481","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Yamina Adouhane"}}],"entry_title":"Al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b, a Twelfth Century A\u0161\u2019arite Reader of Averroes","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b, a Twelfth Century A\u0161\u2019arite Reader of Averroes"},"abstract":"The aim of this article is to present a new witness of Averroes' reception in the Muslim world, in the years that immediately followed his death. Indeed Ab\u016b al-\u1e24a\u011f\u011f\u0101\u011f al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b (d. 1237) is an A\u0161\u02bfarite theologian, who was born in Fez. He is the author of a Quintessence of the Intellects in Response to Philosophers on the Science of Principles in which he aims at refuting the Peripatetic philosophers in their own field, using their own weapons. This article will first attempt to draw the portrait of this atypical theologian. It will then focus on showing that al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b \u2013 although he never mentions his name \u2013 is a reader of Averroes and in particular, of his Tah\u0101fut al-Tah\u0101fut, of which he makes various and unexpected uses. A close look at these uses will enable us to better define the nature of al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b's work. More importantly, this article will try to prove that al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b provides us with a key passage of Averroes' lost treatise On the Prime Mover. At the heart of the Rushdian criticism of Avicenna's \u201cmetaphysical\u201d proof, this passage should throw new light on Averroes' precise understanding of this proof.","btype":3,"date":"2012","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/S095742391200001X","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":45,"category_name":"Proceedings","link":"bib?categories[]=Proceedings"},{"id":47,"category_name":"Relation between Philosophy and Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Relation between Philosophy and Theology"},{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"}],"authors":[{"id":1489,"full_name":"Yamina Adouhane","role":1},{"id":1489,"full_name":"Yamina Adouhane","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1757,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy","volume":"22","issue":"2","pages":"155\u2013197"}},"sort":["Al-Mikl\u0101t\u012b, a Twelfth Century A\u0161\u2019arite Reader of Averroes"]}
| Title | Aquinas, Ghazali, and Averroes on the Age of the Universe. Response to Massey |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2008 |
| Journal | Divinatio |
| Volume | 28 |
| Pages | 171–194 |
| Categories | al-Ġazālī, Thomas, Theology, Cosmology |
| Author(s) | Chryssi Sidiropoulou |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5376","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5376,"authors_free":[{"id":6228,"entry_id":5376,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1323,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Chryssi Sidiropoulou","free_first_name":"Chryssi","free_last_name":"Sidiropoulou","norm_person":{"id":1323,"first_name":"Chryssi","last_name":"Sidiropoulou","full_name":"Chryssi Sidiropoulou","short_ident":"ChrSid","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Chryssi Sidiropoulou"}}],"entry_title":"Aquinas, Ghazali, and Averroes on the Age of the Universe. Response to Massey","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Aquinas, Ghazali, and Averroes on the Age of the Universe. Response to Massey"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"2008","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"id":51,"category_name":"Thomas","link":"bib?categories[]=Thomas"},{"id":39,"category_name":"Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Theology"},{"id":19,"category_name":"Cosmology","link":"bib?categories[]=Cosmology"}],"authors":[{"id":1323,"full_name":"Chryssi Sidiropoulou","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5376,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Divinatio","volume":"28 ","issue":"","pages":"171\u2013194"}},"sort":["Aquinas, Ghazali, and Averroes on the Age of the Universe. Response to Massey"]}
| Title | Autori Arabi e Giudei nell'opera di San Tommaso |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Italian |
| Date | 1960 |
| Journal | Angelicum |
| Volume | 37 |
| Issue | 3/4 |
| Pages | 336-401 |
| Categories | Aquinas, Tradition and Reception, al-Ġazālī, Avicenna, Ibn Bāǧǧa |
| Author(s) | C. Vansteenkiste |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Online Access | https://www.jstor.org/stable/44621289 |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5669","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5669,"authors_free":[{"id":6573,"entry_id":5669,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1858,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"C. Vansteenkiste","free_first_name":"C. ","free_last_name":"Vansteenkiste","norm_person":{"id":1858,"first_name":"Clemens ","last_name":"Vansteenkiste","full_name":"Clemens Vansteenkiste","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"https:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/141544864","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null,"link":"bib?authors[]=Clemens Vansteenkiste"}}],"entry_title":"Autori Arabi e Giudei nell'opera di San Tommaso","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Autori Arabi e Giudei nell'opera di San Tommaso"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"1960","language":"Italian","online_url":"https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/44621289","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":2,"category_name":"Aquinas","link":"bib?categories[]=Aquinas"},{"id":43,"category_name":"Tradition and Reception","link":"bib?categories[]=Tradition and Reception"},{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"id":10,"category_name":"Avicenna","link":"bib?categories[]=Avicenna"},{"id":17,"category_name":"Ibn B\u0101\u01e7\u01e7a","link":"bib?categories[]=Ibn B\u0101\u01e7\u01e7a"}],"authors":[{"id":1858,"full_name":"Clemens Vansteenkiste","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5669,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Angelicum","volume":"37","issue":" 3\/4","pages":"336-401"}},"sort":["Autori Arabi e Giudei nell'opera di San Tommaso"]}
| Title | AverroesのDestructio Destructionum におけるPhysicaについて |
| Transcription | Averroes no Destructio Destructionum ni okeru Physica ni tsuite |
| Translation | About the Physica in Averroes' Destructio Destructionum |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Japanese |
| Date | 1972 |
| Journal | Chūsei Shisō Kenkyū |
| Volume | 14 |
| Pages | 86–95 |
| Categories | al-Ġazālī, Physics, Relation between Philosophy and Theology |
| Author(s) | Chisato Tanaka |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5413","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5413,"authors_free":[{"id":6277,"entry_id":5413,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Chisato Tanaka","free_first_name":"Chisato","free_last_name":"Tanaka","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Averroes\u306eDestructio Destructionum \u306b\u304a\u3051\u308bPhysica\u306b\u3064\u3044\u3066","title_transcript":"Averroes no Destructio Destructionum ni okeru Physica ni tsuite","title_translation":"About the Physica in Averroes' Destructio Destructionum","main_title":{"title":"Averroes\u306eDestructio Destructionum \u306b\u304a\u3051\u308bPhysica\u306b\u3064\u3044\u3066"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"1972","language":"Japanese","online_url":"http:\/\/jsmp.jpn.org\/jsmp_wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/smt\/vol14\/86-95_tanaka.pdf","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"id":37,"category_name":"Physics","link":"bib?categories[]=Physics"},{"id":47,"category_name":"Relation between Philosophy and Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Relation between Philosophy and Theology"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":{"id":5413,"pubplace":"T\u014dky\u014d","publisher":"Ch\u016bsei Tetsugaku-kai","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5413,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Ch\u016bsei Shis\u014d Kenky\u016b","volume":"14","issue":"","pages":"86\u201395"}},"sort":["Averroes\u306eDestructio Destructionum \u306b\u304a\u3051\u308bPhysica\u306b\u3064\u3044\u3066"]}
| Title | Averroës' Takfir of al-Ghazālī: Ta'wīl and Causal Kufr |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2021 |
| Journal | American journal of Islam and society |
| Volume | 38 |
| Issue | 1/2 |
| Pages | 60-92 |
| Categories | al-Ġazālī, Relation between Philosophy and Theology, Theology |
| Author(s) | Saja Parvizian |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Al-Ghazālı̄ famously claims in the Incoherence of the Philosophers that al-Fārābī and Avicenna are unbelievers because they hold philosophical positions that conflict with Islam. What is less well-known, however, is that Averroës claims in the Decisive Treatise that al-Fārābī and Avicenna are not unbelievers; rather, al-Ghazālı̄ is the true unbeliever for writing the Incoherence of the Philosophers. In this paper, my aim is to present a sustained reconstruction of Averroës’ legal and philosophical argument for why al-Ghazālı̄ is an unbeliever. The crux of Averroës’ argument is that al-Ghazālı̄ has expressed false allegorical interpretations of scripture to unqualified persons, which has caused them to fall into unbelief. By being causally responsible for other people’s unbelief, al-Ghazālı̄ is an unbeliever as well. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5566","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5566,"authors_free":[{"id":6460,"entry_id":5566,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":903,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Saja Parvizian","free_first_name":"Saja ","free_last_name":"Parvizian","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":"Averro\u00ebs' Takfir of al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b: Ta'w\u012bl and Causal Kufr","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Averro\u00ebs' Takfir of al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b: Ta'w\u012bl and Causal Kufr"},"abstract":"Al-Ghaza\u0304l\u0131\u0304 famously claims in the Incoherence of the Philosophers that al-Fa\u0304ra\u0304bi\u0304 and Avicenna are unbelievers because they hold philosophical positions that conflict with Islam. What is less well-known, however, is that Averroe\u0308s claims in the Decisive Treatise that al-Fa\u0304ra\u0304bi\u0304 and Avicenna are not unbelievers; rather, al-Ghaza\u0304l\u0131\u0304 is the true unbeliever for writing the Incoherence of the Philosophers. In this paper, my aim is to present a sustained reconstruction of Averroe\u0308s\u2019 legal and philosophical argument for why al-Ghaza\u0304l\u0131\u0304 is an unbeliever. The crux of Averroe\u0308s\u2019 argument is that al-Ghaza\u0304l\u0131\u0304 has expressed false allegorical interpretations of scripture to unqualified persons, which has caused them to fall into unbelief. By being causally responsible for other people\u2019s unbelief, al-Ghaza\u0304l\u0131\u0304 is an unbeliever as well.","btype":3,"date":"2021","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.35632\/ajis.v38i1-2.735","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"id":47,"category_name":"Relation between Philosophy and Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Relation between Philosophy and Theology"},{"id":39,"category_name":"Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Theology"}],"authors":[{"id":903,"full_name":"","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5566,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"American journal of Islam and society","volume":"38","issue":"1\/2","pages":"60-92"}},"sort":["Averro\u00ebs' Takfir of al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b: Ta'w\u012bl and Causal Kufr"]}
| Title | Causality and Occasionalism. A Study of the Theories of the Philosophers, Al-Ghazālī and Ibn Rushd |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1998 |
| Journal | Hamdard islamicus |
| Volume | 21 |
| Pages | 23–31 |
| Categories | Metaphysics, al-Ġazālī |
| Author(s) | Yusuf Rahman |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"590","_score":null,"_source":{"id":590,"authors_free":[{"id":741,"entry_id":590,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":843,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Yusuf Rahman","free_first_name":"Yusuf","free_last_name":"Rahman","norm_person":{"id":843,"first_name":"Yusuf","last_name":"Rahman","full_name":"Yusuf Rahman","short_ident":"YusRah","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Yusuf Rahman"}}],"entry_title":"Causality and Occasionalism. A Study of the Theories of the Philosophers, Al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b and Ibn Rushd","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"Causality and Occasionalism. A Study of the Theories of the Philosophers, Al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b and Ibn Rushd"},"abstract":null,"btype":3,"date":"1998","language":"English","online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"},{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"}],"authors":[{"id":843,"full_name":"Yusuf Rahman","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":590,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hamdard islamicus","volume":"21","issue":null,"pages":"23\u201331"}},"sort":["Causality and Occasionalism. A Study of the Theories of the Philosophers, Al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b and Ibn Rushd"]}
| Title | Comparisons between al-Ġazālī and Ibn Rušd in the Late Ottoman Period |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2017 |
| Journal | Mélanges de l’Université Saint-Joseph |
| Volume | 67 |
| Categories | al-Ġazālī, Tradition and Reception |
| Author(s) | M. Sait Özervarli |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5157","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5157,"authors_free":[{"id":5938,"entry_id":5157,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"M. Sait \u00d6zervarli ","free_first_name":"M. Sait","free_last_name":"\u00d6zervarli","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Comparisons between al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b and Ibn Ru\u0161d in the Late Ottoman Period","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Comparisons between al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b and Ibn Ru\u0161d in the Late Ottoman Period"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"2017","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"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":5157,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"M\u00e9langes de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 Saint-Joseph","volume":"67","issue":"","pages":""}},"sort":["Comparisons between al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b and Ibn Ru\u0161d in the Late Ottoman Period"]}
| Title | Discussion between Al-Ghazzālī and Ibn Rushd about the Nature of Resurrection |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1986 |
| Journal | Islamic Studies |
| Volume | 25 |
| Pages | 181–195 |
| Categories | al-Ġazālī |
| Author(s) | Imtiaz Yusuf , Imtiaz Yusuf |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"960","_score":null,"_source":{"id":960,"authors_free":[{"id":1130,"entry_id":960,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1051,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Imtiaz Yusuf","free_first_name":"Imtiaz","free_last_name":"Yusuf","norm_person":{"id":1051,"first_name":"Imtiaz","last_name":"Yusuf","full_name":"Imtiaz Yusuf","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/7065556","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Imtiaz Yusuf"}},{"id":1131,"entry_id":960,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1051,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Imtiaz Yusuf","free_first_name":"Imtiaz","free_last_name":"Yusuf","norm_person":{"id":1051,"first_name":"Imtiaz","last_name":"Yusuf","full_name":"Imtiaz Yusuf","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/7065556","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Imtiaz Yusuf"}}],"entry_title":"Discussion between Al-Ghazz\u0101l\u012b and Ibn Rushd about the Nature of Resurrection","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"Discussion between Al-Ghazz\u0101l\u012b and Ibn Rushd about the Nature of Resurrection"},"abstract":null,"btype":3,"date":"1986","language":"English","online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"}],"authors":[{"id":1051,"full_name":"Imtiaz Yusuf","role":1},{"id":1051,"full_name":"Imtiaz Yusuf","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":960,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Islamic Studies","volume":"25","issue":null,"pages":"181\u2013195"}},"sort":["Discussion between Al-Ghazz\u0101l\u012b and Ibn Rushd about the Nature of Resurrection"]}
| Title | Discussion of Causality Based on the Conceptions of Nature of Ibn Rushd and al-Ghazalī |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2010 |
| Journal | Ilahiyat Studies. A Journal on Islamic and Religious Studies |
| Volume | 1 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 241–258 |
| Categories | Natural Philosophy, al-Ġazālī, Metaphysics |
| Author(s) | Mehmet Fatih Birgül |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| In this short analysis, we will compare Ibn Rushd's justification of the causality principle to the suspicions and objections of al-Ghazālī. Nevertheless, our analysis of the issue will center on al-Ghazālī's and Ibn Rushd's conceptions of nature. Therefore, our article aims at illuminating two points: first, there is a fundamental difference between the conceptions of nature and generation of the two philosophers; second, this structural difference constitutes the real cause of disagreement over the causality principle. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"1636","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1636,"authors_free":[{"id":1892,"entry_id":1636,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1425,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mehmet Fatih Birg\u00fcl","free_first_name":"Mehmet","free_last_name":"Fatih Birg\u00fcl","norm_person":{"id":1425,"first_name":"Mehmet","last_name":"Fatih Birg\u00fcl","full_name":"Mehmet Fatih Birg\u00fcl","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"http:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/101480661","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Mehmet Fatih Birg\u00fcl"}}],"entry_title":"Discussion of Causality Based on the Conceptions of Nature of Ibn Rushd and al-Ghazal\u012b","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Discussion of Causality Based on the Conceptions of Nature of Ibn Rushd and al-Ghazal\u012b"},"abstract":"In this short analysis, we will compare Ibn Rushd's justification of the causality principle to the suspicions and objections of al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b. Nevertheless, our analysis of the issue will center on al-Ghaz\u0101l\u012b's and Ibn Rushd's conceptions of nature. Therefore, our article aims at illuminating two points: first, there is a fundamental difference between the conceptions of nature and generation of the two philosophers; second, this structural difference constitutes the real cause of disagreement over the causality principle.","btype":3,"date":"2010","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"10.12730\/13091719.2010.12 (refers to the whole issue of the magazine)","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":38,"category_name":"Natural Philosophy","link":"bib?categories[]=Natural Philosophy"},{"id":14,"category_name":"al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-\u0120az\u0101l\u012b"},{"id":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"}],"authors":[{"id":1425,"full_name":"Mehmet Fatih Birg\u00fcl","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1636,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Ilahiyat Studies. A Journal on Islamic and Religious Studies","volume":"1","issue":"2","pages":"241\u2013258"}},"sort":["Discussion of Causality Based on the Conceptions of Nature of Ibn Rushd and al-Ghazal\u012b"]}