RésuméCet article offre une édition, une traduction et une analyse d'une préface adressée par Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq, traducteur de Galien, à un mécène chrétien syro-oriental, le médecin Salmawayh ibn Bunān. Ḥunayn a composé cette Épître à Salmawayh ibn Bunān en syriaque, mais seule en a survécu une traduction arabe par son neveu. Le texte n'a reçu que peu d'attention depuis sa découverte, il y a plus de quatre-vingts ans; il n'a jamais été publié entièrement. L’Épître donne un nouvel aperçu des (...) débuts de Ḥunayn et du milieu chrétien dans lequel il évoluait, en montrant ses attaches au passé littéraire syriaque, bien illustrées par les préfaces d'un autre traducteur de Galien, son prédécesseur Sergius de Rēšʿaynā ; mais l’Épître indique aussi des éléments qui distinguent de leur prédécesseur les traducteurs abbassides comme Ḥunayn. Cette étude soutient que la demande accrue des mécènes et la lecture attentive des commentaires hippocratiques de Galien ont suscité un nouveau discours, dans l’Épître, selon lequel des lecteurs de tout niveau peuvent et devraient avoir accès aux textes scientifiques grecs. Cette Épître montre ainsi comment Ḥunayn comprenait son propre projet littéraire et scientifique et sa relation à la tradition grecque de l'Antiquité. (shrink)

Según las fuentes hanbalíes, el imám Ibn Hanbal (m. en 855) no capituló ante inquisición `abbásí. En tiempos recientes, sin embargo, se tiende a pensar que sí debió capitular porque si no, nunca habría sido liberado. Sin embargo, una comparación del proceso de Ibn Hanbal con el de Hunayn b. Isháq (m. 873), indica que los califas `abbá-síes, cuando tenían que juzgar a un sospechoso de herejía, lo hacían más bien basados en razones de estado que en motivos dogmáticos. (...) En este contexto, en la narración del proceso recogido por Hanbal b. Isháq, puede leerse una explicación plausible de por qué el califa al-Mu'tasim puede haber liberado a Ibn Hanbal a pesar de que éste desafiara a la Inquisición. = According to Hanbali sources, the imam (d. 855) did not capitulate to the `Abbásid Inquisition. In modem times, a persuasive argument has been made that he must Nave done so; otherwise, he would never Nave been released. Yet a comparison of Ibn Hanbal's trial with that of Hunayn b. Isháq (d. 873) suggests that the `Abbásid caliphs, when asked to judge suspected heretics, made their decisions based on reasons of state rather than dogmatic grounds. Against this background, the trial report of Hanbal b. Isháq can be read as a plausible account of why the caliph al-Mu'tasim might Nave released Ibn Hanbal despite the latter's defiance of the Inquisition. (shrink)

RésuméL'ouvrage galéniqueSur les Éléments selon Hippocrateest une importante source d'information concernant les théories physiques de l'antiquité tardive. Les diverses doctrines atomistes discutées par Galien ainsi que les arguments employés par lui pour les réfuter ont été étudiés de près par les premiersMutakallimūn.Les abrégés de cet ouvrage, qui semblent avoir été écrits plusieurs siècles après Galien, et dont certains remontent aux débuts de la culture islamique, présentent un intérêt particulier. Dans cet article, nous donnons une édition, une traduction et une étude (...) d'un abrégé inconnu jusqu'ici, conservé dans un unique manuscrit, qui l'attribue à Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq. Comme les autres abrégés, il s'agit en fait d'une doxographie de théories physiques qui ne reproduit pas toujours précisément ce que Galien a dit, mais qui reflète le discours de l'époque où elle a été rédigée. (shrink)

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

RésuméTechnê iatrikêde Galien a été traduit en hébreu trois fois. Deux fois dans le midi, autour de l'an 1199: d'abord, à partir de la version latine de Constantine l'Africain, par un médecin anonyme qui utilisait le pseudonyme “Doeg l’Édomite”; et une seconde fois de l'arabe, par Samuel Ibn Tibbon à Béziers, laVorlageétant maintenant la version arabe de Ḥunayn Ibn Isḥāq (al-Ṣināʿa al-ṣaġīra), accompagnée par le commentaire de ʿAlī Ibn Riḍwān. (La paternité de Samuel Ibn Tibbon de cette traduction a été (...) contestée, mais elle est établie dans l'article de Gad Freudenthal dans ce numéro d’ASP.) Une troisième traduction, encore une fois du latin et comprenant le commentaire d'Ibn Riḍwān, a été réalisée par Hillel ben Samuel à Rome à la fin du XIIIesiècle, mais elle n'entre pas dans notre sujet.Nous présentons leTegniet décrivons son histoire. Puis nous posons la question pourquoi cet ouvrage a été traduit en hébreu deux fois exactement au même moment et dans la même région. Nous montrons que les deux traducteurs ont répondu à un besoin des médecins juifs lisant seulement l'hébreu. Doeg réalise sa traduction dans le cadre de son vaste projet de mise à disposition en traduction hébraïque de la plus grande partie du corpus de l’école de Salerne. Samuel Ibn Tibbon, pour sa part, a traduit leTegniavec le commentaire d'Ibn Riḍwān parce que, après avoir été médecin, il évoluait graduellement vers la vocation d'un traducteur de l'arabe en hébreu d’œuvres philosophiques et ce texte médico-philosophique était en adéquation avec cette évolution d'un médecin avec des intérêts philosophiques vers un scientifique-philosophe. (shrink)

El grano de ben es un fruto que ha sido utilizado con fines terapéuticos desde la Antigüedad. Su descripción está incluida en el libro VI del De simplicium medicamentorum facultatibus de Galeno (s. II), una de las obras farmacológicas más importantes de la historia de la medicina. En este artículo compararemos desde una perspectiva filológica la entrada que Galeno dedicó a este simple en dos de sus traducciones medievales: la árabe de Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq (s. IX) y la latina de (...) Gerardo de Cremona (s. XII). Nuestro análisis ayudará a profundizar en el estudio de estas dos traducciones y en la técnica de Gerardo de Cremona, el traductor más prolífico de obras de medicina griega y árabe al latín en la Edad Media. (shrink)

Professor Guillaume's translation of the Sira of Ibn Ishaq is now reissued. The translator used Ibn Hisham's abridgement and also included many additions and variants found in the writings of early authors. The book thus presents in English practically all that is known of the life of the Prophet.In the introduction, the translator discusses the character of the Sira in the light of the opinion of early Arabian scholars, noting especially the difficulties of the poetry. As the earliest monument (...) of Arabian prose literature, the Sira remains a work of the first importance. (shrink)

Los summaria alexandrinorum (conocidos como ǧawāmiʿ al-iskandarāniyyīn en árabe) son resúmenes de obras galénicas que solo sobreviven en versiones hebreas o árabes. Tradicionalmente, estas traducciones se han atribuido a Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq (s. IX) y se han vinculado a la enseñanza de la medicina en la Alejandría de los siglos VI y VII. En este artículo presentamos la edición de uno de estos ǧawāmiʿ al-iskandarāniyyīn, en concreto el compendio árabe del De simplicium medicamentorum facultatibus de Galeno que se conserva en (...) el manuscrito Huntington 600/2 de la Bodleian Library de Oxford. Con la publicación de este texto inédito pretendemos contribuir a comprender mejor la naturaleza y el origen de este tipo de textos, así como a facilitar su consulta y estudio por parte de otros especialistas. Añadimos una breve introducción sobre los summaria alexandrinorum y su importancia en la enseñanza y la transmisión de la medicina en la Edad Media, seguida de una serie de apuntes acerca del De simpl. med. fac. A continuación, se describe el manuscrito fuente tanto en forma como en contenido y se fijan los criterios de edición. Asimismo, se han extraído del texto los usos y las características más comunes de la farmacopea galénica. Con el fin de ofrecer una edición rigurosa, se ha cotejado el texto con la traducción completa del De simpl. med. fac. al árabe, así como con otros tratados de simples andalusíes. (shrink)

In this study, after a short introductory information on the etymology, origin, and transition of botanical knowledge in Medieval Islamic Civilisation, we made a comparison of illustrated botanical works in Maghreb and Masriq through two illustrated books. We studied on randomly selected illustrations from Kitab al- Hashaish at-Tibb li-Diskuridus al-Aynzarbi translated by Istefan ibn Basil & Hunayn ibn Ishaq from Dioscorides’ Materia Medica, and Kitab al-Adwiyat al-Mufradat of Abu Ja’far Ahmad al-Ghafiqi, the Andalusian physician, pharmacist, and herbalist. We (...) made comparisons on the illustrations of nine plants and one lichen, chosen from Codex Osler of al-Ghafiqi, and Codices Ayasofya of Istefan-Hunayn, with real photos of plants and lichen, via the methods used currently in the science-art of botanical illustration. With this «botanical illustrative method», we conclude that in the same century, the work of al-Ghafiqi has been copied in a more accurate way than that of Istefan-Hunayn translation. -/- تخصص هذه الدراسة - بعد تقديم معلومات تمهيدية موجزة عن علم أصل الكلمات، وأصول وتطور المعرفة النباتية في الحضارة الإسلامية في العصور الوسطى - للتحليل المقارن للمؤلفات في علم النبات المصور في المغرب والمشرق، من خلال كتابين مصورين. و لهذه الغاية، قمنا بتحليل سلسلة من الرسوم، إختيرت بشكل تلقائي، أُخذت من كتاب النباتات الطبية لصاحبه دِيُسوفُورِيدس، و من ترجمة ابن استيفان ابن باسل و حنين ابن إسحاق لدراسة المادة الطبية لديسوفوريدس، و من كتاب الأدوية البسيطة لأبو جعفر أحمد الغافقي، و هو طبيب و صيدلي و عشاب أندلسي. لقد أجرينا مقارنات لرسوم تسعة نباتات و أشنة وقع الإختيار عليها من كتاب أوسلر للغافقي و من كتب أياصوفيا لإستيفان و حنين، مع صور حقيقية لعينات من هذه الأنواع، باستخدام الطرق المطبقة في وقتنا الراهن في فن وعلم الرسوم النباتية. و بعد تطبيق هذا المنهج التصويري النباتي، نستطيع أن نخلص إلى أنه، و على الرغم من إنتاجها في نفس القرن، فإن نسخ رسوم الغافقي النباتية كانت أكثر دقة من تلك الموجودة في ترجمة استيفان - حنين. الكلمات المفتاحية دِيُسوفُورِيدس، الغافقي، تاريخ علم النبات، الأندلس -/- Este estudio –tras una breve información introductoria sobre etimología, orígenes y evolución del conocimiento botánico en la civilización islámica medieval– está dedicado a un análisis comparativo de los tratados botánicos ilustrados en el Magreb y en el Máshreq, a través de dos libros ilustrados. Para ello, hemos analizado una serie de ilustraciones, elegidas al azar, extraídas del Libro de plantas medicinales de Dioscórides por Anazarba, traducción de Istefan ibn Basil y Hunayn ibn Ishaq del tratado De materia medica de Dioscórides, y del Libro de los medicamentos simples de Abu Ya'far Ahmad al-Gafiqi, médico, farmacéutico y herbolario andalusí. Hemos llevado a cabo comparaciones de las ilustraciones de nueve plantas y un liquen, escogidos del códice Osler de al-Gafiqi y de los códices Ayasofya de Istefan-Hunayn, con fotografías reales de especímenes de dichas especies, acudiendo a los métodos aplicados actualmente en el arte y ciencia de la ilustración botánica. Tras este «método ilustrativo botánico», podemos concluir que, aunque llevadas a cabo en el mismo siglo, las copias de ilustraciones de al-Gafiqi han resultado más precisas que las de la traducción de Istefan-Hunayn. (shrink)

RésuméBien que l'existence d'une traduction arabe d'une section perdue en grec du commentaire de Proclus sur leTiméesoit connue depuis longtemps, ce texte n'avait fait jusqu'à présent l'objet d'aucune édition. Le présent article vise à remédier à ce manque, en proposant une édition critique du fragment arabe accompagnée d'une traduction anglaise annotée. L'étude qui l'accompagne, consacrée au contenu et à la structure du fragment transmis, montre qu'il présente, au plan formel, tous les éléments caractéristiques des commentaires de Proclus, quand bien même (...) sa concision et ses défauts soulèvent certains doutes quant à sa complétude. En forme d'appendice, l'article propose une analyse d'une lettre de Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq négligée jusqu'à présent, jointe au fragment sous sa forme transmise. Loin de se borner à nous fournir des renseignements sur les origines du fragment de Proclus, cette lettre jette aussi quelque lumière sur la réception syriaque et arabe de certaines œuvres d'Hippocrate et de Galien, tout particulièrement sur le traitéDu régime dans les maladies aiguësd'Hippocrate et sur l'histoire de sa traduction arabe. (shrink)

This volume presents the first edition of the Arabic translation, by Hunayn ibn Ishaq, of Galen's Critical Days (De diebus decretoriis), together with the first translation of the text into a modern language. The substantial introduction contextualizes the treatise within the Greek and Arabic traditions. Galen's Critical Days was a founding text of astrological medicine. In febrile illnesses, the critical days are the days on which an especially severe pattern of symptoms, a crisis, was likely to occur. The (...) crisis was thought to expel the disease-producing substances from the body. If its precise timing were known, the physician could prepare the patient so that the crisis would be most beneficial. After identifying the critical days based on empirical data and showing how to use them in therapy, Galen explains the critical days via the moon's influence. In the historical introduction Glen Cooper discusses the translation of the Critical Days in Arabic, and adumbrates its possible significance in the intellectual debates and political rivalries among the 9th-century Baghdad elite. It is argued that Galen originally composed the Critical Days both to confound the Skeptics of his own day and to refute a purely mathematical, rationalist approach to science. These features made the text useful in the rivalries between Baghdad scholars. Al-Kindi (d.c. 866) famously propounded a mathematical approach to science akin to the latter. The scholar-bureaucrat responsible for funding this translation, Muhammad ibn Musa (d. 873), al-Kindi's nemesis, may have found the treatise useful in refuting that approach. The commentary and notes to the facing page translation address issues of translation, as well as important concepts. (shrink)

The author examines the question of Galen's affinity with astrology, in view of Galen's extended astrological discussion in the De diebus decretoriis . The critical passages from Galen are examined, and shown to be superficial in understanding. The author performs a lexical sounding of Galen's corpus, using key terms with astrological valences drawn from the Critical Days, and assesses their absence in Galen's other works. He compares Galen's astrology with the astrology of Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos, and evaluates their respective strategies of (...) scientific reasoning. Three types of inference are introduced and applied to Galen's astrology. Finally, he concludes that the empirical side of Galen's science does not depend upon astrological methods or concepts, but that these were introduced for their rhetorical effect in presenting his new medical methodology. It is suggested that continued attention to Galen's astrology has obscured the truly important empirical scientific method that Galen developed. (shrink)

This first edition contains an elaborated version of Aristotle's Problemata Physica in Arabic translation by the famous ḥunain ibn Ishāq and in Hebrew translation by Moses ibn Tibbon, with an introduction and glossaries.

A translation and commentary on al-Kindi's “On First Philosophy,” a seminal work of early Islamic thought.

In the ninth century, Arabic philosophy was in ferment, and an inquisition of heretics was in process. Al-Kindi, a court scholar, physician, and philosopher functioning at Baghdad, courageously produced, in that context, a treatise, Fi al-Falsafah al-Ula, in which he attempted to unify the philosophical tradition, starting from Aristotle, with basic Islamic concepts. Part One of the treatise is here published for the first time in a non-Arabic language. Al-Kindi, in this treatise, tries to show, by philosophical reasoning, that the (...) world could not have come spontaneously into being ex nihilo, that there must be a unique, eternal being, and that the ad hoc unity and plurality of individual things rest on a prior, creative, self-subsisting, and eternal unity, which is the Ultimate Cause. This volume contains a résumé of al-Kindi studies, a description and analysis of the text, On First Philosophy, a "reevaluation" of al-Kindi’s relation to the Mu'Tazilah sect of Moslem theologians, a translation of On First Philosophy, and a learned passage-by-passage commentary on it, with perspicuous discussions of nuances in Arabic terminology. This is primarily a book for medieval specialists, but students of ontology and theology will find some of al-Kindi’s argumentation relevant to their concerns.—W.G. (shrink)

One of the most important medieval documents in the history of medicine and scholarship, and of culture in general, is doubtless the bibliographical treatise (“epistle”, Risāla) by Ḥunayn b. Isḥāq (808-873) addressed to his patron and patron of the arts, the gentleman courtier ‘Alī b. Yaḥyā b. al-Munaǧǧim (d. 275 / 888-889), listing the translations of Galen into Syriac and Arabic. Its transmission and publication history, though, is extremely complicated.

El ms. árabe num. 1.077 de El Escorial contiene una obra de Abū Isḥāq al-Garnāṭī, cuyo último capítulo lo constituye la enumeración de veintidós normas jurídicas, en cuatro de las cuales los andalusíes no siguieron la doctrina de Mālik, y en las dieciocho restantes se apartaron de la de Ibn al-Qāsim. Ese mismo texto aparece también al final de K. al-Mufīd del cordobés Ibn Hišām. En este artículo su autor, tras definir el concepto de ‛amal local, plantea la cuestión de (...) la autoría del citado texto, ofrece una edición crítica y traducción del mismo a partir de las dos fuentes mencionadas y hace un estudio diacrónico de la aplicación en al-Andalus de esas controvertidas normas. Dicho estudio muestra que tales diferencias con respecto a Mālik o Ibn al-Qāsim no siempre se mantuvieron, sino que caracterizaron más bien el fiqh «temprano» andalusí. (shrink)

Tras una rápida revisión de los escasos datos conocidos sobre la vida y la obra de Ibn Abī l-Riŷāl , se analiza el contenido de su Urŷūza fī aḥkām al-nuŷūm comparándola con su célebre al-Kitāb al- Barī‘ fī aḥkām al-nuŷūm concluyéndose que se trata de dos obras independientes y que la Urŷūza no es un resumen del Barī‘. El trabajo continúa con datos biobibliográficos del historiador, matemático y astrólogo Ibn Qunfuḏ al-Qusanṭīnī , autor de un comentario a la Urŷūza de (...) Ibn Abī l-Riŷāl dedicado a Abū Bakr b. Abī Muŷāhid Gazī Ibn al-Kās, visir de los sultanes meriníes Abū Fāris y Abū Zayyān . La obra parece haber sido redactada durante el breve reinado de este último y antes de la deportación del dedicatario a Mallorca en 1375. Se analiza el contenido del comentario, las fuentes citadas en el mismo, las técnicas astrológicas utilizadas tanto por Ibn Qunfuuḏ como por Ibn Abī l-Riŷāl y el uso, por parte del comentarista de un zīŷ derivado del de Ibn Isḥāq. El artículo termina con un comentario detallado de los horóscopos contenidos en la obra de los que uno corresponde al equinoccio vernal del año 571 de JC, en el que se produjo una conjunción de Saturno y Júpiter que anunció el advenimiento del Islam, mientras que los once restantes constituyen una historia astrológica del Marruecos meriní entre 1348 y 1366. Dos de ellos habían sido publicados en un artículo anterior. En lo que respecta a los nueve restantes, en seis de ellos se identifica el sujeto o acontecimiento al que aluden, quedando tres por identificar. (shrink)

El manuscrito 2461 de la Biblioteca General de Rabat conserva un tercer zi)3 del astrónomo Muhammad ibn al-Raqqám al-Andalusí (m. 1315): al-Ziy al-Mustawfa. Los cánones (capitulo 18) y la tabla del movimiento del apogeo de al-Mustawfa están relacionados con el trabajo de Ibm Isháq al-Túnisí (1193-1222), quien compiló, probablemente, un conjunto de tablas carentes de cánones. Ibn al-Raqqám conocía bien el ziy de Ibn Isháq del que realizó dos recensiones conocidas hasta ahora: al-Ziy al- amil y al-Ziy al-Qawim. En al-Mustawfó, (...) tercera recensión de la misma obra, Ibn al-Raqqám aclara cuál era la opinión de Ibn Isl3áq sobre el movimiento de los apogeos planetarios y la división que existía, a este respecto, entre los astrónomos de la escuela andaluso-magrebí. (shrink)

The Hippocratic Aphorisms is a well-known treatise which was very popular throughout the ages. This paper studies the Arabic translation of [Hdotu]unayn ibn Ishaq, the renowned Arab translator, of the first book of the Aphorisms as well as the commentary of Ibn al-Nafis, the thirteenth-century Arab doctor, on the same book. This study highlights the difficulties that occasionally confronted the Arab commentator while commenting. The obscurity of a few Hippocratic sentences as well as [Hdotu]unayn's interpretation and alteration in meaning (...) were probable sources for those difficulties. Ibn al-Nafis, however, was unaware of the role played by [Hdotu]unayn in shaping the Arabic text. Ibn al-Nafis reflected a deep trust in the Arabic text to the degree of commenting on every single word. He used both his intellect and his knowledge of other commentaries to solve those problematic phrases. He did not exhibit an interest in philological matters to help explain the text. His commentaries reflect his respect and appreciation for both Hippocrates and Galen, the latter of whom exercised some influence on [Hdotu]unayn and Ibn al-Nafis in their understanding of the work. Nonetheless both [Hdotu]unayn and Ibn al-Nafis showed traces of independence from Galen's influence. (shrink)

This brief note aims at contributing to the study of the reception of parabiblical narratives in hadith literature and Islamic historiography. Taking the Testament of Abraham as a case study, it sets out to analyse a particular literary motif shared by this text and an early version of the miʿrāǧ (Ascension) of the Prophet Muhammad. The comparative analysis demonstrates that the Testament of Abraham could have provided a number of elements for the redaction of at least one particular section of (...) the miʿrāǧ. This hypothesis finds support in other cases of textual correspondence between several sections of the Testament of Abraham and other Islamic works such as the Tafsīr of Muqātil ibn Sulaymān (d. 150/767), the unedited Kitāb Mubtadaʾ al-dunyā wa-qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʾ of Abū Ḥuḏayfa al-Buḫārī Isḥāq ibn Bišr (d. 206/821) and Ibn ʿAsākir’s Taʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq (d. 571/1176). The examined material thus throws additional light on the continuity between late antique apocrypha and nascent Arabic literature. (shrink)

Abū al-Ma’ālī Sadr al-Dīn Muhammad b. Ishāq al-Qūnawī nacque probabilmente a Konya nel 605/1209 e morì nel 673/1274. L’influenza che Ibn al-’Arabī esercitò su Qūnawī fu decisiva e lo _shaykh al-akbar_ riservò questa questa particolare formazione esclusivamente a lui, forse proprio perché il compito del suo erede spirituale e interprete era già stato “ previsto”. In questo intervento tracceremo uno dei punti fondamentali del pensiero di Qūnawī, basandoci sulla prima epistola del carteggio che si concentra proprio sulla questione del _rapporto (...) tra conoscenza filosofica e illuminazione divina_, questione che si ritrova nell’opera del nostro sufi e che lo contraddistingue all’interno del pensiero sufi in generale, collocandolo nella scuola ibnarabiana. Abū al-Ma‘ālī Sadr al-Dīn Muhammad b. Ishāq al-Qūnawī was born probably in Konya in 605/1209 and died in 673/1274. The influence that Ibn al-‘Arabī exerted on Qūnawī was decisive and the _shaykh al-akbar_ reserved this intense education and this particular training exclusively for him, perhaps precisely because the task of his spiritual heir and interpreter had already been “foreseen”. In this intervention we will trace one of the fundamental points of Qūnawī’s thought, relying on the first epistle of the correspondence that focuses precisely on the question of the _relationship between philosophical knowledge and divine illumination_, a question that is found throughout the work of our Sufi and that it distinguishes it within Sufi thought in general, placing it within the Ibnarabian school. (shrink)

Yaaqub ibn Ishaq al-Kindi’s philosophy was a fundamental beginning for Arabic mediaeval philosophy. This philosopher was a great admirer and student of Greek philosophy, and influenced philosophers such as Avicenna. Some of his treatises were translated into Latin.

This paper discusses two passages from Alexander of Aphrodisias’s commentary on Aristotle’s _ Topics _ that are transmitted in Ps-Jābir’s _ Kitāb al-Nukhab _. It argues that the Arabic translation of Alexander’s commentary may have been made from a fuller version than what came down to us in Greek. Especially since the author(s) of the Jābir-corpus form a tradition different from the school of Ḥunayn b. Isḥāq (d. 873) and authors associated to the ‘Baghdad school’, whose earliest figure is Abū (...) Bishr Mattā b. Yūnus (d. 940), the Arabic fragments of Alexander’s commentary preserved in the _ Kitāb al-Nukhab _ promise to shed more light on the early reception of the _ Topics _ and the different contexts in which Aristotelian dialectic was studied in the Islamic world. (shrink)

This paper discusses two passages from Alexander of Aphrodisias’s commentary on Aristotle’s Topics that are transmitted in Ps-Jābir’s Kitāb al-Nukhab. It argues that the Arabic translation of Alexander’s commentary may have been made from a fuller version than what came down to us in Greek. Especially since the author(s) of the Jābir-corpus form a tradition different from the school of Ḥunayn b. Isḥāq (d. 873) and authors associated to the ‘Baghdad school’, whose earliest figure is Abū Bishr Mattā b. Yūnus (...) (d. 940), the Arabic fragments of Alexander’s commentary preserved in the Kitāb al-Nukhab promise to shed more light on the early reception of the Topics and the different contexts in which Aristotelian dialectic was studied in the Islamic world. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Der Islam Jahrgang: 94 Heft: 2 Seiten: 385-422.

The Greek original of Galen's is lost, nor has a copy of the complete translation into Arabic, made by Hunayn b. Ishāq in the first half of the ninth century, come down to us, though some passages of it are quoted by various Arab authors. A summary of the translation, however, was discovered by P. Kraus in a miscellaneous manuscript in Cairo and published by him in the Bulletin of the Faculty of Arts of the University of Egypt, vol. (...) v/i. (shrink)

Cosmological arguments attempt to prove the existence of God by appeal to the necessity of a first cause. Schematically, a cosmological argument will thus appear as: (1) All contingent beings have a cause of existence. (2) There can be no infinite causal chains. (3) Therefore, there must be some non-contingent First Cause. Cosmological arguments come in two species, depending on their justification of the second premiss. Non-temporal cosmological arguments, such as those of Aristotle and Aquinas, view causation as requiring explanatory (...) or conceptual priority, and thus insist that there can be no infinite regresses in such priority. Temporal cosmological arguments, also called kalam cosmological arguments due to their historical roots in Islamic kalam philosophers such as Abu Yusuf Ya'qub b. Ishaq al-Kindi and Abu Ali al-Hussain ibn Sina, view causation as requiring temporal priority, and thus insist that there can be no infinite temporal regresses.1 The kalam cosmological argument thus requires some supporting argument showing the incoherence of an infinite temporal regress of causally related events. William Lane Craig, in "The Finitude of the Past and the Existence of God"2, attempts to provide such an argument: (4) An actual infinite cannot exist. (5) An infinite temporal regress of events is an actual infinite. (6) Therefore an infinite temporal regress of events cannot exist. (9) I will not be concerned here with the general status of cosmological arguments, kalam or otherwise, or with contesting Craig's assumption that an infinite past would (unlike an infinite future) constitute a problematic actual infinity. I am rather concerned with Craig's general working principle, embodied in (4) above, that actual infinities are impossible. Craig, of course, is not alone in denying the possibility of the actually infinite. Resistance to such infinities is at least as old as Aristotle (Physics 3.5.204b1 – 206a8), and, as Craig rightly points out, persists through much of modern (i.e., post-scholastic, pre-twentieth-century) philosophy.. (shrink)

There is a close relationship between Ashʿarism and Ḥanbalism since the emergence of Ashʿarism. However, they often conflicted with each other as they approached to religious matters from different perspectives. These conflicts were not only limited to theological discussions but also turned into social conflicts, which occasionally resulted with deaths. First massive events occurred in 429/1038 in Baghdād between Ashʿarites and Ḥanbalities. When Niẓām al-Mulk was appointed as vizier, the conflicts reached a peak. The apparent reason of the conflicts was (...) the theological controversy between these two sects. However, the rise of Ashʿarism, which was usually against Ḥanbalism, was the main reason of the social conflicts. Supports of the Ashʿarite thought by the leading statesmen of the era such as Niẓām al-Mulk and Ayyūbid sultans, and accusations of some Ashʿarite preachers about Ḥanbalities relying on this political support were also among the factors that led to these conflicts. Nevertheless, even if any accusation was not made, it occurred that the members of both sects resorted to violence in case of criticisms about their beliefs. This shows that the most important reason of the conflicts was sectarian fanaticism.Summary: Ashʿarism is the name of the sect that was formed around the ideas of Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī. It is a continuation of Kullābism in terms of general thought system. Ashʿarism replaced Kullābism by the end of the 5th century of the Hijrah, and started to be called as an independent sect. It spread mostly among the Shāfiʿites and Mālikites in Iraq, Khurāsān, Damascus, Maghreb, and Yemen. When it was arrived to the last quarter of the 5th century, it became the common theological sect of most of Shāfiʿites and Mālikites. Bāqillānī (d. 403/1013), Ibn Fūrāk (d. 406/1015), and Abū Isḥāq al-Isfarāyīnī’s (d. 418/1027) efforts played an important role in rising of Ashʿarism in this period. In the following periods, contribution of the Seljuk vizier Niẓām al-Mulk (d. 485/1092) to Ashʿarism was massive by establishing the Niẓāmiyah Colleges to strengthen the Ashʿarites against the Hanafites in Khurāsān and against the Ḥanbalites in Baghdād. The Niẓāmiyah Colleges were donated by Niẓām al-Mulk to Shāfiʿite scholars for the mission of primarily limiting the influence Shīʿī thought. The condition of belonging to Shāfiʿites in waqfiyyah (endowment certificate) of the colleges provided some important advantages for Shāfiʿites and Ashʿarites. On the other hand, the Ayyūbids provided important contributions to Ashʿarites in the regions of Egypt, Damascus and Yemen. They worked for strengthening Ashʿarism during their ruling for two centuries. It was a state policy for the Ayyūbids to support Ashʿarism starting from the founder of the state, Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn al-Ayyūbī (d. 589/1193).This rapid rise of Ashʿarism led to a tense relationship between the Ashʿarites and the Ḥanbalites who became the most important representative of Aṣḥāb al-ḥadīth (people of the traditions of the Prophet) after the period of Miḥnah (period of religious persecution). Undoubtedly, the first respondents of these tense relations were Kullābite scholars. At the beginning of the 4th century of the Hijrah, Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī became the natural inheritor of the Ḥanbalite reaction to the Kullābites. He conflicted with the Ḥanbalites because of his different approach on the debate regarding creation of the Qur’ān. Ḥanbalite reactions to Imam al-Ashʿarī continued after his death. When he died in Baghdād in 324/935, officials buried him secretly as they worried about Ḥanbalite attacks against his funeral. Hence, after his burial some Ḥanbalites tried to destroy his tomb several times. After Ashʿarī died, the first social events between the Ashʿarites and the Ḥanbalites took place in Iṣfahān, one of the most important cities of West Khurāsān, in the end of the 4th century of the Hijrah. The debate started around the question of whether the letters of the Qur’ān were created or uncreated between the Ḥanbalite scholar Ibn Mandah (d. 395/1005) and Ashʿarite scholar Abū Nuʿaym al-Iṣfahānī (d. 430/1038). This debate led to prolonged events between the supporters of these scholars. Abū Nuʿaym, saved his life from various attacks and finally he had to leave Iṣfahān.The tense relationships between the Ashʿarites and the Ḥanbalites reached the peak in the 5th century of the Hijrah. Many events occurred in Baghdād during this century. The discussion on interpretation of the revealed attributes of Allah turned into conflict between the two sides from time to time. The Ashʿarite scholars accused the Ḥanbalites with tashbih (affirming Allah’s similarity to humanity) and tajseem (anthropomorphism) by pointing at Abū Yaʿlā al-Farrā’s work titled Ibṭāl al-taʾwīl al-ṣifāt. The ʿAbbāsid caliphs generally supported the Ḥanbalites in this debate. For example, when al-Qāim bi-Amr Allāh re-published the famous declaration known as the Qādirī Creed in 433/1042, he proclaimed that rejection of the Ḥanbalite approach on the issue of the revealed attributes of Allah would be regarded as a cause of blasphemy. The paper was read in a meeting where several scholars from various sects were present. It was signed firstly by Ashʿarite scholar Abū al-Ḥasan ʿAli ibn ʿUmar al-Qazwīnī (d. 442/1051). However, he was one who had criticized Ibṭāl al-taʾwīl al-ṣifāt in 429/1038, which caused conflicts in society at that time. This shift in his position is remarkable as it shows that the declaration was primarily response to him.In the middle of the 5th century of the Hijrah, Ashʿarite scholar al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī (d. 463/1071) became a victim of the tension between the Ashʿarites and Ḥanbalites. Khatīb had protection of vizier Ibn al-Muslima and under his protection he lectured on Hadith in the Mansur Mosque. However, after the death of the vizier, he was subjected to harassment of the Ḥanbalites because of some expressions in his work titled Tarīkh Baghdād. So much so that he began to worry about his life, thus he had to leave Baghdād and went to Damascus in 451/1059.The tense relations between the Ashʿarites and the Ḥanbalites reached the summit in the period of Niẓām al-Mulk who was the vizier of Seljuk Empire. In fact, some events resulted with deaths. For example, in the events of 469/1076, which lasted years, the Ḥanbalites attacked Ashʿarite scholar Abū Naṣr ibn ʿAbd al-Karīm al-Qushayrī (d. 514/1120) who accused them with tashbeeh and tajseem. As a result, around twenty people died during these events. The gradual rise of the Ashʿarite thought with the support of Niẓām al-Mulk and abusive discourses of some Ashʿarite scholars who relied on this support can be mentioned among the basic reasons of the events at that time.After the death of Niẓām al-Mulk in 485/1092, for a long time there was no serious event between the Ashʿarites and the Ḥanbalites. In the middle of the 6th/12th century, the relations started to become tense again in the regions of Egypt, Damascus, and Yemen under the Ayyūbid dynasty. In addition to these places, various events occurred in Khurāsān region, in cities such as Marw. Nevertheless, unlike some previous events, the current tensions were not against a whole sect but only targeted some individual scholars. Moreover, unlike the previous periods, oppressed and victimized people were mostly Ḥanbalite scholars this time. No serious events took place between two sects after this period. Therefore, it can be said that their struggle to dominate society led to the above-mentioned events. (shrink)

This article examines Mughulṭāy b. Qilīj’s (d. 762/1361) al-Zahr al-bāsim fī siyar Abī al-Qāsim, a ḥāshiya (gloss, marginal notes) on ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Suhaylī’s (d. 581/1185) commentary on Ibn Isḥāq’s Sīra. Drawing on evidence from Mamlūk-era chronicles, biographical dictionaries, and commentarial introductions, it analyzes Mughulṭāy b. Qilīj as a historical figure and the context and content of his work. This is done in order to demonstrate how commentaries and glosses are deeply related to the schol­arly and cultural life of the period. (...) These resources testify to the antagonistic relationship between Mughulṭāy and his opponents and to the ensuing rivalry between them. Hence, this article seeks to examine the correlation between his personality and the rationale for his commentary, to determine the reasons behind his choice of text to write a gloss on and his sustained and harsh criticism against al-Suhaylī and his scholarly legacy. (shrink)

El estudio de la producción literaria medieval sobre la vida de Muḥammad debe ir de la mano del estudio de su historia, empresa para la que disponemos de rica información en una variedad de fuentes. La biografía de Muḥammad por Ibn Isḥāq y su epítome por Ibn Hišām fueron productos de su época. Un caso de auto-censura aplicado por uno de los informantes de Ibn Isḥāq y dos casos de censura aplicados por Ibn Hišām, quien omitió muchos de los materiales (...) de su predecesor, contribuyen a una mejor comprensión del contexto social y político de la biografía del Profeta. (shrink)

Pythagoras -- Confucius -- Heracleitus -- Parmenides -- Zeno of Elea -- Socrates -- Democritus -- Plato -- Aristotle -- Mencius -- Zhuangzi -- Pyrrhon of Elis -- Epicurus -- Zeno of Citium -- Philo Judaeus -- Marcus Aurelius -- Nagarjuna -- Plotinus -- Sextus Empiricus -- Saint Augustine -- Hypatia -- Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius -- Śaṅkara -- Yaqūb ibn Ishāq aṣ-Ṣabāḥ al-Kindī -- Al-Fārābī -- Avicenna -- Rāmānuja -- Ibn Gabirol -- Saint Anselm of Canterbury -- al-Ghazālī -- (...) Peter Abelard -- Averroës -- Zhu Xi -- Moses Maimonides -- Ibn al-'Arabī -- Shinran -- Saint Thomas Aquinas -- John Duns Scotus -- William of Ockham -- Niccolò Machiavelli -- Wang Yangming -- Francis Bacon, Viscount Saint Alban (or Albans), Baron of Verulam -- Thomas Hobbes -- René Descartes -- John Locke -- Benedict de Spinoza -- Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz -- Giambattista Vico -- George Berkeley -- Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu -- David Hume -- Jean-Jacques Rousseau -- Immanuel Kant -- Moses Mendelssohn -- Marie-Jean-Antoine-Nicolas de Caritat, marquis de Condorcet -- Jeremy Bentham -- Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel -- Arthur Schopenhauer -- Auguste Comte -- John Stuart Mill -- Søren Kierkegaard -- Karl Marx -- Herbert Spencer -- Wilhelm Dilthey -- William James -- Friedrich Nietzsche -- Friedrich Ludwig Gottlob Frege -- Edmund Husserl -- Henri Bergson -- John Dewey -- Alfred North Whitehead -- Benedetto Croce -- Nishida Kitarō -- Bertrand Russell -- G.E. Moore -- Martin Buber -- Ludwig Wittgenstein -- Martin Heidegger -- Rudolf Carnap -- Sir Karl Popper -- Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno -- Jean-Paul Sartre -- Hannah Arendt -- Simone de Beauvoir -- Willard Van Orman Quine -- Sir A.J. Ayer -- Wilfrid Sellars -- John Rawls -- Thomas S. Kuhn -- Michel Foucault -- Noam Chomsky -- Jürgeb Gabernas -- Sir Bernard Williams -- Jacques Derrida -- Richard Rorty -- Robert Nozick -- Saul Kripke -- David Kellogg Lewis -- Peter (Albert David) Singer. (shrink)

La linguistique arabe est sans aucun doute la première science conçue et cultivée en arabe pour répondre à certains besoins scientifiques et idéologiques de la nouvelle société islamique. Les premiers travaux en ce domaine datent du VIII e siècle, et leurs auteurs, les premiers linguistes, sont précisément contemporains de l'arabisation des institutions, de l'administration, de la monnaie etc., sous le Khalife Omeyade ʿAbd al-Malik ibn Marwān. Ces premiers travaux étaient intimement liés à l'exégèse coranique, à l'orthoépie coranique, à la jurisprudence (...) islamique, c'est-à-dire aux disciplines associées à l'organisation de la nouvelle société et à sa culture. C'est à cette époque qu'Abū al-Aswad al-Duʾalī inventa des signes graphiques permettant de distinguer les différentes fonctions grammaticales des éléments linguistiques. C'est à la même époque que l'on a engagé la codification massive et systématique des données de l'arabe, comme en témoignent, à peine plus tard, les travaux d'ʿAbdallāh ibn Isḥāq , d'Abū ʿAmr ibn al-ʿAlāʾ et de bien d'autres. Ils ont également initié l'étude de la grammaire au sens large, puisque celle du système phonétique y est incluse. Tous ces travaux ont tracé la voie de plusieurs disciplines: phonologie, phonétique, métrique, lexicographie, et favorisé la naissance des grandes théories du langage. Et, de fait, au cours de la seconde moitié du VIII e siècle, al-Khalīl ibn Aḥmad a fondé plusieurs de ces disciplines. Sa connaissance des mathématiques et son recours aux procédés combinatoires l'ont aidé non seulement à inventer des disciplines telles que la métrique et la lexicographie, mais aussi à formuler les catégories grammaticales. Son élève, l'éminent linguiste Sībawayh, a ensuite codifié la plupart des analyses et des explications d'al-Khalīl, et les a enrichies en maintes occasions. Cette période héroïque de la linguistique arabe s'est prolongée grâce à de grands successeurs qui vont fonder des écoles linguistiques à Bassorah, Kufa, Bagdad, etc. D'autres écoles ont également vu le jour à Fuṣṭāṭ et ailleurs, et la recherche linguistique va ainsi se poursuivre jusqu'à la fin du XI e siècle, au moins. (shrink)

The main evidence used in a matter of proving prophethood in Kalām is miracles. For this reason, other extraordinary situations that miraculously occur have always been on the agenda of theologians. Of these the most similar to miracle is karāma events that occur extraordinary in the hands of Walī. Karāma has been discussed on certain theoretical grounds in kalām books during the beginning period of Sunnī kalām. As in other theological debates, the leading adversaries of Sunnī theologians in the issue (...) of karāma were Muʿtazilite theologians. This study discusses approaches towards karāma in early period of Sunnī kalām. Accordingly, the scholars who determined the basic approaches of Ashʿariyya and Māturīdiyya kalām schools are included in the study. İmām al-Ashʿarī, Ibn Fūrak, al-Bāqillānī, ʿAbd al-Qāhir al-Baghdādī, Abu’l-Maʿālī İmām al-ḥaramayn al-Juwaynī, Abū ʿAbdallāh al-Ḥalīmī and Abū Isḥāq al-Isfarāyīnī from Ashʿarī school; Abū Manṣūr al-Māturīdī, Ḥakīm as-Samarqandī, Abū al-Yusr al-Bazdawī and Abū al-Muīn an-Nasafī from Māturīdiyya school, in this context, are included in the study. Besides, some authors from fields other than kalām are included in the scope of the study in order to determine the first use of the concept of karāma and different approaches are discussed. In the study, after the views of the theologians on the subject are presented descriptively, these views are critically assessed. (shrink)

The issue of wiping over socks is part of the more general issue of wiping over leather socks (khuffayn) for ablution (wuḍū’). Washing feet or wiping over them is a debate whose sides bases their claims on the verses of the Qur’an and supports these claims with narrations. When performing ablution, if shoes or socks are on the feet, whether one can wipe over them without taking these off and the qualities that these clothes should have is a debate based (...) on hadith narrations. Most Muslims except for the Ja’farite are of the opinion that either washing the feet or wiping over a khuff or similar clothing that was put on while a person already had ablution can be done during ablution, while the Ja’farite think that wiping over bare feet is enough but wiping over khuff is not. There is a consensus that shoes, boots, buskins and other leather footwear qualify as khuff. However, there is disagreement over whether clothing from materials like cotton, linen, wool, and felt -usually referred to as socks- qualify as khuff. For this reason, some Muslims of the world wipe over socks while others do not. There are contemporary fatwas (legal opinion) that are supportive of either of the positions. However, there are those who treat this issue beyond choosing a side in an ijtihad (process of juristic legal reasoning) and some who wipe on socks are censured strongly. In this research based on an examination of the fiqh heritage, the goal is to contribute to making this issue better understood and its fiqh ruling clearer.Summary: The sixth verse of Surah Ma’idah in the Qur’an clearly states that wuḍū’ requires washing the face, arms up until elbows, and wiping over the head. However, when it comes to the fourth element of wuḍū’, the feet, there has been disagreement about whether it should be wiped or washed. Arabic grammar rules and narrations have been interpreted in ways that support both views; in general Sunni sects, Zaydis, and Kharijites argue the feet should be washed while Shia Ja’farites are in favor of wiping over bare feet. There have also been efforts among faqihs (jurists) to reconcile washing and wiping; washing slightly; choosing the better one between the two; washing when not covered, wiping when covered; washing if there is dirt, wiping if it is clean; viewing at least wiping as fard (obligatory), washing as a Sunna (recommended) that includes the fard as a way to unify the two approaches have also been proposed.According to widely accepted narrations, the prophet and his companions washed their feet when performing wuḍū’ and once they put on their shoes having had wuḍū’, the next time they only wiped over the shoes without taking them off. In less commonly accepted narrations, which some hadith authorities regard as authentic, the Prophet is said to have wiped over his socks. In narration sources, it has been narrated that about fifteen faqih companions, among them ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb, ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib, ʿAbdallāh Ibn Masʿūd, ʿAbdallāh b. ʿAbbās, ʿAbdallāh b. ʿUmar, saw wiping over socks as appropriate. However, there are no narrations about the companions disapproving of wiping over socks. Among those who approved of wiping over socks are tābiʿūn (successors) faqihs like Saʿīd b. D̲j̲ubayr, Saʿīd b. al-Musayyab, Ibrāhīm al-Nakhaʿī, ʿAṭāʾ b. Abī Rabāḥ, al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī ve al-Aʿmash, and Mujtahid Imams like Zufar, Sufyan al-Thawri, al-Ḥasan b. Ṣāliḥ, Ibn al-Mubārak, Abū Yūsuf, Muḥammad al-Shaybānī, Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, Isḥāq b. Rāhawayh. Considering their most prominent positions, we can say that Ḥanafis and Shafis allow wiping over socks that are thick and opaque, Hanbalis allow it over socks that cover the foot even if thin, while Mālikīs do not allow wiping over socks at all.As far as it is understood from narrations from the Prophet’s time, due to both climate conditions and weaving possibilities, socks were used only rarely. Also, footwear like shoes or slippers made of leather were very hard to find and narrations suggest that prayers were performed at houses and the masjids over soil base on either bare foot or with shoes. For these reasons, the issue of wiping over socks did not arise at the time and at later periods different opinions on the issue led to disagreements. When carpets were placed on the ground at later periods, performing the prayer with shoes was abandoned and a second layer of shoes (khuff) was placed inside the shoes as khuff. Since removing the shoes would invalidate wuḍū’ performed over that shoe, those who wanted to avoid the difficulty of having to wash their feet each time they needed wuḍū’ have instead wiped over this second layer once they put them on after performing wuḍū’.Ḥanafīs and Shāfiʿīs, who tend to approach the issue of wiping over socks with hesitation and make this conditional on some strict rules, emphasize that the socks to be wiped over should be similar to shoes in terms of thickness, based on the idea that it is certain that the Prophet has wiped over shoes made of leather but his wiping over socks is weaker and that the qualities of those socks are not clear. Among the thickness criteria expressed for the socks are being waterproof, the ability to walk for at least a league with it, and its ability to hold on to feet without being tied at the wrists. Due to these criteria, which have been developed to protect the wuḍū’ and whose boundaries are not well specified, especially among Ḥanafis the idea that wiping over socks is not allowed has gained popularity. As opposed to this, in circles dominated by Ḥanbalīs opinions allowing wiping over any type of socks have been expressed.At times when the Prophet had his shoes on and did not want to take off his shoes, he used to wipe over the shoes. The equivalent of this act today is to wipe over socks since prayer with shoes on is not common any more. While nowadays wiping over socks is an ease for everybody when performing wuḍū’, it is something that is especially needed under certain circumstances. Cold weather and the lack of drying possibilities for the feet leading catching cold and illness, socks that are put on when feet are wet leading to bad smell and fungus on feet, the hardship of elevating the feet high enough to the sink and of changing socks on one foot when there are no special wuḍū’ places, the fact that at societies distant from Islamic culture it is seen against the etiquette to wash feet in the sink are among the reasons why this need arises. Because most of the time we are not in a position to determine the circumstances of our work and travels at modern times, it can be said that today this need is more than it was in the past.Some scholars of today use a precautionary principle and argue that the Qur’an commands to wash the feet, and the only narration powerful enough to make an exception to this rule is about masts made of leather, and extending this to include socks would go against the precaution principle and some other principles of uṣūl al-fiqh (Islamic legal theory). However, some other scholars who use the ease in religion principle argue that the permission to wipe over masts also include wiping over socks and that they are of the same nature, that there are authentic narrations that show wiping over socks are allowed and that one can even talk of an ijmāʿ (consensus) among the companions on this issue, and that seeking additional qualities socks on which one is to wipe over, such as thickness, ability to walk with it, its ability to hold on to the feet, being waterproof, have no merit in the sharīʿa. Jamaleddīn Qāsimī, who wrote a special research book on the topic, and scholars like Abū l-Aʿlā Mawdūdī, Yūsuf al-Qaradāwī, ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz b. Bāz, Ibn al Uthaymeen think that one can wipe over daily socks that do not show the skin beneath it, while scholars predominantly of the Ḥanafi opinion hold that one cannot wipe over the thin daily socks. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Islamic Disputation Theory: The Uses & Rules of Argument in Medieval Islam by Larry Benjamin MillerKhaled El-RouayhebLarry Benjamin Miller. Islamic Disputation Theory: The Uses & Rules of Argument in Medieval Islam. Logic, Argumentation and Reasoning 21. Cham: Springer 2020. Pp. xviii + 143. Hardback, €77.99.Very few unpublished PhD dissertations have had a formative influence on a field. One of the precious few is Larry Miller's Princeton dissertation from (...) 1984 on Islamic disputation theory. It proposed an original and compelling account of the development of the discipline, from the earliest extant Arabic works in the tenth century to the composition of classic madrasa handbooks in the late thirteenth century. It has been cited regularly in the past decades and has served as the starting point for all later studies of Arabic/Islamic dialectics in European languages. The fact that it has finally been published is a fitting tribute to a study that is even more admirable for having been written when many of the primary sources were still only available as manuscripts.Part of the explanation for why the dissertation was not published sooner may be that its author did not pursue an academic career. And as he states in a short preface, he has not kept abreast of all relevant studies and editions that have appeared since his dissertation. A thorough revision and update has therefore not been possible. Though some minor corrections and revisions have been made, the book is still by and large the influential 1984 dissertation, now made available with a short introduction by Walter Young, one of the leading younger scholars in the field, along with helpful indices of proper names and subjects.Miller's narrative begins with Arabic works on disputation (jadal) by a number of theologians from the late ninth and tenth centuries, such as Ibn al-Rāwandī (d. 911), [End Page 518] al-Ash'arī (d. 935), and the Karaite Jewish scholar al-Qirqisānī (d. ca. 960). The basic assumption was that a questioner (sā'il) would ask a claimant (mu'allil) (i) what his view is; (ii) what the ground or reason ('illa) for that view is; (iii) the appropriateness of the ground/reason for the view; and (iv) to verify the ground/reason by showing it to be commensurate with the view. The ground/reason for the theological dialecticians was standardly an entity or property, not a premise. The reasoning tended to be informal and analogical, as opposed to explicitly making syllogistic deductions from quantified premises.Parallel to this theological tradition of jadal, there was an Arabic Aristotelian tradition that took its point of departure from Aristotle's Topics, translated into Arabic more than once in the period from the late eighth to the early tenth centuries. Though also often referred to as jadal, this tradition, represented by the writings of al-Farabi (d. 950), Avicenna (d. 1037), and Averroes (d. 1198), retained distinct features. It tended to deny any epistemic value to dialectics, instead seeing it as useful only insofar as it provided logical training. For the Aristotelian/Neoplatonic philosophers, the pursuit of truth was the preserve of demonstrative syllogism (burhān). Whereas the theological dialecticians envisaged a claimant (mu'allil) and a questioner (sā'il), with the burden of proof on the former, the philosophical tradition had a questioner (sā'il) seek, in the manner of Socratic elenchus, to elicit from a respondent (mujῑb) a series of answers that would allow the construction of a syllogism whose conclusion contradicted the respondent's initial position.From the time of al-Ghazali (d. 1111), Islamic theologians tended to take over the syllogistic ideal of reasoning from the philosophers, perhaps explaining why theological writings on jadal trail off after the eleventh century. The informal, analogical jadal tradition continued, however, in the writings of Islamic jurists. From the eleventh century, scholars such as Abū Isḥāq al-Shīrāzī (d. 1083) and al-Juwaynī (d. 1085) wrote works on jadal in which the examples are disputes about questions of Islamic law and the disputants are partisans of the various legal schools. This tradition of what Miller calls "juristic dialectics" (74, 95) later adopted some... (shrink)