The Muqaddimah , often translated as "Introduction" or "Prolegomenon," is the most important Islamic history of the premodern world. Written by the great fourteenth-century Arab scholar Ibn Khaldûn (d. 1406), this monumental work laid down the foundations of several fields of knowledge, including philosophy of history, sociology, ethnography, and economics. The first complete English translation, by the eminent Islamicist and interpreter of Arabic literature Franz Rosenthal, was published in three volumes in 1958 as part of the Bollingen Series and (...) received immediate acclaim in America and abroad. A one-volume abridged version of Rosenthal's masterful translation was first published in 1969. This new edition of the abridged version, with the addition of a key section of Rosenthal's own introduction to the three-volume edition, and with a new introduction by Bruce B. Lawrence, will reintroduce this seminal work to twenty-first-century students and scholars of Islam and of medieval and ancient history. (shrink)

Kitāb al-ʻibar. Muqaddimah by Ibn Khaldūn, 1332-1406; criticism and interpretation.

This article contributes to the study of the globalization of science through an analysis of Ahmed Cevdet's nineteenth-century translation of the sixth chapter of Ibn Khaldun's (d. 1406) Muqaddimah, which deals with the nature and history of science. Cevdet's translation and Ottomanization of that text demonstrate that science did not simply originate in Europe to be subsequently distributed to the rest of the world. Instead, knowledge transmitted from Europe was actively engaged with and appropriated by scholars, who sought to (...) put that material within their own cultural context in a manner that could serve their own intellectual and practical needs. Cevdet's case is particularly interesting because it demonstrates that (1) Islamic conceptions of human nature, the soul and the nature of knowledge provided particularly fertile soil in which empiricist and positivist traditions could take root, and (2) aspects of modern science – specifically its ostensive separation from metaphysical debates – made it more attractive to Islamic theologians than was, for example, the work of Aristotelian philosophers. Through an exploration of Cevdet's career and a close analysis of his historiographical treatment of Ibn Khaldun's account of sciences, this article foregrounds the agency of non-Europeans in the late nineteenth-century circulation of scientific knowledge. (shrink)

al-Ḥifnī's Muqaddimah fī al-ādāb followed by al-Bishrī's commentary.

1. al-Muqaddimah -- 2-8. Ṣifāt mustaḥabbah -- 9-11. Ṣifāt madhmūmah -- 12. al-Fahāris.

Following the formation of disciplines/sciences in different fields of Islamic thought, the specific concepts and terminologies of these disciplines/sciences began to emerge. Then the special meaning and the area of utilization for every concept in each discipline/science were further clarified by compiling specific epistles of definition (ḥudūd), which would contribute to this process of conceptualization. For the terminological meaning of the used concept to be determined primarily and thus for the followed theological/sectarian affiliation to be supported, works belonging to this (...) genre have been written specifically for the field of theology. Especially, the Muʿtazilī theologians undoubtedly made the greatest contribution. Thusly, specific treatises containing theological concepts were compiled by names such as al-Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Jabbār (d. 415/1025), and his students Abū Rashīd al-Nīsābūrī (d. after 420/1029) and Ibn Sharwīn (fl. first half of the Vth/XIth century). Zaydī theologian and jurist Abū’l-Qāsim al-Bustī’s (d. 420/1029) Tahdhīb al-ḥudūd, which has no available copy, is also contemporary to the mentioned works. This tradition found its reflection in the Imāmī-Muʿtazilī line in Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭūsī’s (d. 460/1067) al-Muqaddimah fī l-madkhal ilá ṣināʿat ʿilm al-kalām, which could be seen as a concise theological work in terms of its construct and the explanations which it comprises, and in the work called al-Ḥudūd wa-l-ḥaqāʾiq, which is attributed to al-Sharīf al-Murtaḍá (d. 436/1044). Abū Jaʿfar al-Muqrī al-Nīsābūrī’s (d. mid-VIth/XIIth century [?]) al-Ḥudūd stands out as the most voluminous example in this tradition. The most important work belonging to this genre in the Muʿtazilī tradition, as it is the first among the available works, is the Ḥudūd al-alfāẓ of al-Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Jabbār, which is found together with some other important Zaydī-Muʿtazilī works in a compilation discovered by us and thought to be lost until recently. In this treatise, which generally includes theological concepts and partially includes the concepts of Islamic law and the history of sects, al-Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Jabbār has put forward a language-based definition theory. His approach here is in line with the views he put forward on definition in his al-Mughnī. Accordingly, instead of definition (ḥadd) and description (rasm) carried out over five universals in classical logic, he adopted a method of lexical definition based on wording that agrees with the meaning of the concept in question and is clearer than it, and consequently gave a brief definition and explanation of the concept he deals with. This clearly shows that the previous Muʿtazilī theologians’ approach of language-based definition, which was used as an alternative to the conception of Aristotelian definition due to their distanced stance to philosophy was also inherited by al-Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Jabbār. The approach seen in some sources in the period following al-Qāḍī, such as Abū Rashīd al-Nīsābūrī’s al-Ḥudūd, also indicates his influence. (shrink)

Abstract:This essay traces the ambivalent work of ghurba (estrangement, exile, alienation) across four ethnographic scenes: Orthodox Christian activists in austerity Beirut refuse to abandon the corrupted world; a Syrian Islamic scholar in Jordan insists on the patient work of rehabilitation; Orthodox ascetics in a monastic community outside Tripoli turn to the hidden alienation borne in the world; and a Muslim calligrapher in Canada relinquishes the guarantee of ethical relation. Taken together, these scenes form a tableau of estrangement in the shared (...) vocabulary of Eastern Christianity and Islam. Drawing on Ibn Khaldun's Muqaddimah–in its articulations of soul, community, and world always already shadowed by their undoing–we then situate these four scenes along spatio-temporal axes of destruction and production, city and desert, paradise and hellfire: a purgatorial topology which modulates what Agamben calls the contemporary destruction of experience. (shrink)

There is a prevailing opinion in the literature that the first name to mention the interpretation of the Qur'an with the Qur'an as a method is Ibn Taymiyya. He puts it at the forefront in the hierarchy of evidence in his Muqaddima. However, Abu Bakr Ibnu'l-Arabi, who lived two centuries before Ibn Taymiyya, also refers to the same method in the first place among the tafsir methods he suggested. Based on this finding, in the article, after briefly mentioning the aforementioned (...) tafsir method, a brief information about Ibn al-Arabi's Qânûn al-Ta'wîl is given and his approach to this method is examined. Within the scope of this subject, the common and different aspects of both authors' methods of interpreting the Qur'an with the Qur'an are presented. In addition, the findings regarding the problems arising from the authors' putting this method in the first place are shared. Finally, the possible reasons why both authors put this method in the first place are discussed. The aim of the study in this background is to reveal that there was another scholar mentioning the method in the first place before Ibn Taymiyya among the exegetical methods in the classical period and to perform an analysis within this framework. By the application of "data and content analysis", the content in Ibn al-Arabi's Qânûn al-Ta'wîl and Ibn Taymiyya's Muqaddimah in the context of the Qur'an's interpretation with the Qur'an has been analyzed. This content has been subjected to comparative analysis in terms of commonality and differences. (shrink)

La existencia de evidentes semejanzas en cuestiones concretas entre las concepciones históricas y, sobre todo, entre algunos principios de la Muqaddimah de Ibn Jaldún y la Scienza Nuova de Vico, inducen a una puesta en confrontación de las principales ideas históricas de ambos pensadores. Considerando la distancia temporal de cuatro siglos entre el historiador magrebí y el filósofo napolitano, así como sus diferentes ámbitos culturales, se apuntan una serie de afinidades y de contrastes.The existence of plain resemblances on specific (...) questions between historical conceptions and more specially between some of the principles of Ibn Jaldún’s Muqaddimah and Vico’s Scienza Nuova might lead us to confront the two thinkers’ main conceptions. Taking into account both the four century temporal distance between the North-african thinker and the Neapolitan philosopher and the different background, there is an attempt to sketch a series of affinities and contrasts. (shrink)