Lo studio verte sulla terminologia avicenniana utilizzata per richiamare l'idea di «emanazione» e quella di «creazione». Il vocabolario avicenniano è comparato in particolare alla terminologia della Theologia Aristotelis.

What are the moral implications of cancel culture? If it is viewed as a means to achieve social justice, we might be more inclined to say that cancel culture is morally good. However, one could argue that cancel culture has too harsh consequences or involves immoral – even hateful – behaviour. We propose that cancel culture is used as an umbrella term for (at least) two different kinds of ‘cancelling’. Cancelling is often seen in public debate as punishment. Following Radzik’s (...) objections to social punishment we argue that this kind of cancelling is morally reprehensible. However, cancel culture as an umbrella term also includes other kinds of cancelling. Many also refer to cancel culture as a phenomenon when someone is being called out or held accountable for their supposedly problematic behaviour. Such cancelling does not need to be punishment, but is often rather an attempt to remove privileged access to the public sphere. In this way, cancelling is used as a tool for redistributing attention: it can (re)claim attention and recognition for marginalized perspectives, by a radical attempt to deny a privileged person access to the public sphere. We conclude that cancel culture as a whole cannot be seen as either morally good or bad, because ‘cancelling’ can be used as a tool for both punishment and redistribution. Each have their own moral implications: cancelling as punishment is reprehensible, but cancelling to redistribute attention might be less of a problem. (shrink)

The last four sections of the first book of Abū al-Barakāt al-Baghdādī’s summa, entitled Kitāb al-Mu‘tabar, deal with dialectics, sophistical refutations, rhetoric, and poetics in full line with Aristotle’s Organon. However, they are not so much based on Aristotle’s works, but on a work of the young Ibn Sīnā, namely al-Ḥikma al-‘Arūdiyya. Both texts have much in common not only in their structure, but also in their very wording. The article presents a basic survey of the correspondences for all four (...) sections and also highlights the most significant differences. However, important part of these differences has a counterpart in an logical text, which is present in the manuscript Nuruosmaniye 4894 and which is, in turn, very close to, albeit not identical, with Ibn Sīnā’s al-Ḥikma al-‘Arūdiyya as conserved in the unique manuscript Uppsala 364. Therefore, it is obvious that Abū al-Barakāt takes over many formulations and, at once, many ideas from Ibn Sīnā. However, he adds clearly personal elements that often seem to have been religiously inspired and, on occasion, consciously returns to Aristotle’s wording. (shrink)

English summary: This Arabic edition and French translation of Avicennas commentary on Aristotles Lambda offers a clear opportunity to better understand the Greek philosophers influence on medieval Arabic philosophy, especially concerning the hierarchy of the universe. French description: Ce texte d'Avicenne est l'un des seuls commentaires sur Aristote laisses par le philosophe persan. Il s'attaque au noyau theologique de la Metaphysique du Stagirite, les chapitres 6 a 10 du livre Lambda. Avicenne depend d'une tradition greco-arabe (Alexandre d'Aphrodise, Themistius, l'ecole "peripateticienne" (...) de Bagdad). La tradition arabe a aussi attribue a Aristote plusieurs oeuvres d'origine neoplatonicienne, notamment une Theologie adaptee de Plotin, et un Livre du Bien pur, adaptation des Elements de Theologie de Proclus. Le Dieu d'Aristote est ainsi pour Avicenne la Cause premiere efficiente de l'etre. La structure hierarchique de l'univers resulte de l'emanation produite par l'autointelligence du premier Principe. Il ne fait pas de doute, pour Avicenne, que ces doctrines aient ete celles du Stagirite. (shrink)

Ce volume offre l'édition critique de la traduction latine médiévale (partielle) de la troisième partie de la Physique du Shif?' d'Avicenne. Pour l'édition de la peine première partie traduite à Tolède, qui couvre le prologue et le début du premier chapitre, les mêmes principes ont été maintenus que pour l'édition du second traité. Quant à l'édition de la majeure partie, qui fut traduite à Burgos quasiment un siècle après la tolédane et qui n'a été conservée que dans un seul témoin, (...) les cas où la traduction latine ne correspond pas à la lecture du texte arabe sont analysés de façon particulière et, autant que possible, expliqués sur la base de considérations philologiques et/ou doctrinales. En outre, dans la mesure du possible, les sources historiques des doctrines évoquées par Avicenne dans l'ensemble de ces chapitres ont été précisés. (shrink)

This first supplement to my An Annotated Bibliography on Ibn Sînâ , published in 1991, informs the reader about all new studies on Ibn Sînâ published in the period 1990-1994, and also offers corrigenda and addenda to the former bibliography. Also in the supplement, attention is paid to Western, and to non-Western publications. Moreover, it has been tried to be even more exhaustive by including publications, which have not Ibn Sînâ in the title, but which nevertheless are offering important and (...) innovative information about his life or thought. First, an overview is given of the new editions and/or translations of Ibn Sînâ's works, which are once more identified according to the classic bibliographies of G.C. Anawati and M.Mehdavî. Hereafter, separate chapters are dedicated to studies of a biographical and a bibliographical nature. No less than ten chapters are devoted to materials dealing with Ibn Sînâ's philosophical thought . Finally, materials dealing with in two separate chapters. It has to be noted that almost all publications are annotated with a summary of their most original points and a short critical evaluation. An index, which includes the names of all authors, ancient, medieval and contemporary, has been added. In sum, this work aims at providing a clear, concise and comprehensive work- instrument for all future Avicenna research. It is not only of great interest for all scholars working in Arabic-Islamic philosophy, science and medicine, but also for historians of philosophy and mediaevalists. "Hay que felicitar al autor de este minucioso trabajo que, como su anterior bibliografía, es de un valor incalculable para todos aquellos que nos consagramos al estudio del pensamiento del gran filósofo islámico, al ser instrumento necesario con el que contar para futuras investigaciones sobre Avicena". (shrink)

... Avicenne et Fismaelisme sont comme'eau et le feu. On se souviendra du fameux passage de son autobiographie ou le philosophe coupe court avec toutes les ...

In the present paper it is shown that al-Ämidî has tried to integrate somehow pilosophy into theology in way that reveals closer to al-Ghazâlî's than to F.D. al-Râzî's way of combining both currents of thought. Based on an analysis of several ideas taken from different works it is shown that al-Ämidî not only accepts the logic of the philosophers, but also their views that may be considered as scientifically established beyond any reasonable doubt.

Une grande partie du livre Kitāb al-inṣāf d’Avicenne ne nous est pas parvenue. Toutefois, le «paraphrase-commentaire » ayant trait à la Métaphysique d’Aristote, livre Lambda, chapitres 6-10 a été conservé dans deux manuscrits. En 1948 Badawi avait fourni une édition du texte arabe, qui, malgré ses mérites, est ouverte à des corrections importantes, comme le démontrent quelques exemples. En outre, une attention particulière est payée au problème de l’identification de la traduction utilisée par Avicenne. Un examen, bien que non exhaustif, (...) de différents cas donne à penser qu’il s’agit d’une version révisée de la traduction d’Usāth. Mais il est à noter qu’Avicenne n’hésite pas de modifier de temps à temps la terminologie en fonction de sa propre pensée. Enfin, des éléments novateurs se font jour, dont au moins deux s’expliquent par les particularités de la traduction arabe. Au niveau doctrinal, trois éléments de telle sorte ressortissent : 1. le rejet d’inclure l’argument du Premier moteur immobile comme preuve de Dieu dans un contexte métaphysique ; 2. la qualification de la dépendance de l’univers envers le Premier Principe en termes de « don d’être » , non de mouvement ; enfin, 3. l’affirmation que l’auto-connaissance du Premier Principe inclut la connaissance de toutes les choses.A large part of Avicenna’s Kitāb al-inṣāf has been lost. However, the section containing a « paraphrasis-commentary » of Aristotle’s Metaphysics, book Lambda, chapters 6-10, has reached us in two manuscripts. Badawi, in 1948, has offered a printed edition that notwithstanding its merits is open to serious improvement as shown by several examples. Furthermore, the problem of which of the old Arabic translation Avicenna has used is dealt with in detail. The examined cases, although limited in number, point to a revised version of Ustāth’s translation. But it has to be noted that Avicenna now and then changes the terminology consciously in view of his own ideas. Finally, some innovative elements come to the fore, two of which, at least, are due to particularities of the Arabic translation. From the doctrinal point of view, three ideas do strike: 1. the fact that the proof of the Unmoved Mover is unacceptable in a metaphysical context; 2. the qualification of the dependence of the Universe on the First Principle as a “Gift of Being” , not as a motion; 3. the inclusion of the knowledge of all things in God’s self-knowledge. (shrink)

That Ibn Sīnā’s “Canon of medicine” figures among the major classics of the history of medicine is doubted by no serious historian of medicine, eastern or western, Islamic or non-Islamic alike. It is therefore all the more surprising that so far no serious critical edition of this text was available. Certainly, a first, very timid step toward a really critical edition was made at the Institute of the History of Medicine and Medical Research, under the direction of Hakeem Abdul Hameed. (...) It compared the four existing editions: Rome 1593; Būlāq 1877; Tehran 1878; and Lucknow 1905. In addition it used an ancient manuscript of Aya Sophia, dated 618, i. e. MS Aya Sophia 3686. With this new edition a further important step toward a full critical edition is made. Even if it is obvious that it does not yet present a “critical edition” in the full sense of the word, it has important merits. (shrink)

Al-Ghazzālī a toujours utilisé les travaux de ses prédécesseurs. Le Mi‘yār al-‘ilm fī fann, sorte de manuel de logique aristotélicienne adaptée au droit et à la théologie islamiques, contient ainsi une grande variété d’écrits avicenniens, du K. jusqu’à certaines parties du Šifā’. Mais quelques écrits farabiens, en particulier al-Qiyās et al-Maqūlāt, y sont mêlés. C’est la première et, à notre connaissance, la seule fois qu’al-Ghazzālī combine ainsi des éléments empruntés à ces deux grands maîtres.

Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa contra Gentiles, cites by name and quotes Avicenna seventeen times explicitly. A detailed examination of all these passages reveals that Thomas sometimes, although rarely—in fact, only with regard to the discussion of the divine attributes of truth and liberality—makes a positive assessment of Avicenna’s ideas. Much more often, Thomas is highly critical of the latter’s doctrines. It comes as no surprise that Thomas strongly opposes Avicenna’s theories of emanation and of knowledge acquisition by an illumination (...) of the agent intellect. However, it is astonishing that he qualifies Avicenna as a “Platonist.” This understanding seems to result partly from Averroistic influences, partly from Thomas’s desire to make Avicenna’s system—in spite of the presence of obvious tensions in it—completely coherent, and partly from some rewordings which fit better Thomas’s own system. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that Avicenna was for Thomas a real “auctoritas.”. (shrink)

Doubts on Avicenna: A Study and Edition of Sharaf al-Dīn al-Masʿūdī’s Commentary on the Ishārāt. By Ayman Shihadeh. Islamic Philosophy, Theology and Science, Texts and Studies, vol. 95. Leiden: Brill, 2016. Pp. viii + 289. $126, €97.

The article focuses in a particular way on two Jesuits of the XVII Century, Philips van Winghe e Jean l'Heureux . It describes their active participation in the scientific life of their time, as well as their own contributions to science.

Ibn Sina, long known in the West as Avicenna, was at the center of the school of Islamic philosophy that inherited and adapted Greek thinking from pre-Socratic to late Hellenic times, says Jansson. The 17 essays he has collected here discuss such aspects as his heritage in the Islamic world and the Latin West, the problem of human freedom, al-Gazzali and his use of Avicennian texts, and some elements of Avicennian influence on Henry of Ghent's psychology. One is published here (...) for the first time; the others are reproduced--with original page numbers--from publication since 1987, but mostly the late 1990s. (shrink)

Le grand humaniste, Andrea Alpago, médecin et philosophe, fut aussi un traducteur notoire. Parmi ses traductions d’œuvres arabes en Latin figure une œuvre de jeunesse d’Avicenne, le Kitāb fī l-nafs ‘alā sunnat al-ikhtiṣār. Mais il ne se contenta pas de traduire simplement ce traité. Il ajouta à sa traduction un commentaire suivi. Même si tout indique que ce commentaire ne fut pas entièrement achevé, il mérite l’attention. En effet, on n’y trouve pas seulement l’expression de la façon dont Alpago a (...) compris ce texte, mais aussi des indications concernant les motifs qui l’ont poussés à le traduire, ainsi qu’à traduire d’autres textes avicenniens en relation avec l’âme. Comme la compréhension d’un texte est inévitablement liée à la façon dont celui-ci a été traduit, l’analyse du commentaire est précédée par une brève étude de la méthode de traduction d’Alpago, en prêtant particulièrement attention à ce qui en constitue les points forts, mais aussi les points faibles. (shrink)

Nella seconda parte del _Libro della condanna dello status e dell’ostentazione_ il ventottesimo libro della sua opera principale, _La rinascita delle scienze religiose_ – al-Ghazālī trae molta ispirazione da al-Muhāsibī, soprattutto dalla sua opera _al-Ri’āya al-huqūq Allāh _(_L’osservanza dei diritti di Dio_). Il fatto che al-Ghazālī menziona esplicitamente il nome di al-Muhāsibī non meno di quattro volte in questa sezione testimonia la sua ammirazione profonda per questo grande mistico delle origini. Un attento esame di questi riferimenti e del loro contesto (...) rivela una grande familiarità e un ampio uso della _Ri’āya_, così come un accesso diretto a un’altra grande opera di al-Muhāsibī, cioè il _Kitāb al-Wasāya_ (_Il Libro dei Comandamenti_). Inoltre, la scelta di al-Ghazālī di specifici versetti coranici e delle Tradizioni, sia profetiche che di storie, è molto debitrice della _Ri’āya_, come diventa chiaro sulla base di un esame del primo capitolo di questa seconda parte che consiste interamente in citazioni di versetti coranici e delle Tradizioni riguardanti la questione dell’ostentazione. Per quanto riguarda il secondo capitolo, che si concentra sui modi usati per attirare l’attenzione della gente su di sé sia negli atti religiosi che in quelli verbali, esso condivide molte caratteristiche con l’esposizione di al-Muhāsibī nella _Ri’āya_, compresa la copia quasi letterale di alcuni passaggi. Infine, l’uso che al-Ghazālī fa della _Ri’āya_ in ciascuno degli altri capitoli è brevemente indicato. Questo studio mostra che al-Muhāsibī non era solo una fonte importante per al-Ghazālī – un fatto già noto da quasi un secolo – ma _la_ fonte principale, almeno per questa sezione della sua _Rinascita_. Tuttavia, allo stesso tempo, questo studio chiarisce che al-Ghazālī non è colpevole di cieco plagio. In the second part of the _Book of the Condemnation of Status and Ostentation_ – the twentieth-eight book of his major work, _The Revival of the Religious Sciences_ – al-Ghazālī draws much inspiration from al-Muhāsibī, above all from his work _al-Ri’āya al-huqūq Allāh_ (_Eyeservice to God’s Laws_). The very fact that al-Ghazālī explicitly mentions al-Muhāsibī’s name no less than four times throughout this section clearly testifies to his profound admiration for this great early mystic. A close examination of these references and their context reveals a great familiarity with and an extensive use of the _Ri’āya_, as well as a direct access to another major work of al-Muhāsibī, i.e., _Kitāb al-Wasāya_ (_The Book of Commandments_). Moreover, al-Ghazālī’s choice of specific Qur’anic verses and of Traditions, both prophetic and stories, is much indebted to the _Ri’āya_, as becomes clear on the basis of an examination of the first chapter of this second part which consisting entirely of quotations of Qur’anic verses and Traditions concerning the issue of ostentation. As to the second chapter, which focuses on the ways used to draw people’s attention to oneself both in religious as well as in wordly acts, it shares many features with al-Muhāsibī’s exposition in the _Ri’āya_, including the almost verbatim copying of some passages. Finally, al-Ghazālī’s use of the _Ri’āya_ in each of the other chapters is briefly indicated. This study shows that al-Muhāsibī was not just a major source for al-Ghazālī – a fact already known for nearly a century – but _the_ major source, at least for this section of his _Revival_. However, at the same time, this study makes clear that al-Ghazālī is not guilty of blind plagiarism. (shrink)

Jules Janssens a construit une œuvre importante, qui, pour de nombreux chercheurs, a ouvert des perspectives de recherches nouvelles et fécondes. Ses travaux ont fait date. Ils portent principalement sur la philosophie d'Avicenne, ses sources, ses rapports avec la pensée musulmane, son influence sur la théologie ash'arite (al-Ghazālī, Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī) et sa réception dans le monde latin. Pour lui rendre hommage, quatorze collègues et amis de renommée internationale se sont réunis pour poursuivre ses réflexions sur ces thèmes. L'ouvrage qui (...) en est issu offre un état des lieux de la recherche contemporaine sur Avicenne et sa postérité arabo-latine. (shrink)

The World of Image in Islamic Philosophy: Ibn Sīnā, Suhrawardī, Shahrazūrī, and Beyond. By L. W. C. van Lit. Edinburgh Studies in Islamic Apocalypticism and Eschatology, vol. 2. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017. Pp. viii + 278. $110, £75.