On the life of Nund-Rishi, Nund-Rishi, Muslim saint from Jammu and Kashmir and Kashmiri poet.

Bibliography of work by and on al-Fārabī, classical Muslim scholar.

Juzʼ 1. al-Falsafah al-Yūnānīyah minṬālīs ilá Aflāṭūn al-Ṭabʻah 2. 1965 -- juzʼ 2. Arisṭū. 1966 -- juzʼ 6. al-Falsafah al-ḥadīthah. al-Ṭabʻah 1. 1969 --.

This is the first complete English translation of the Jami al-hikmatayn, written in Persian, the final, and crowning, work of the great poet, philosopher, and Ismaili missionary Nasir-i Khusraw (1004-1077). Twin Wisdoms Reconciled was written at the request of the emir of Badakhshan 'Abu al-Ma'ali 'Ali ibn Asad' who was perplexed by the questions in a long philosophical ode written a century earlier by Abu al-Haytham Jurjani, an obscure Ismaili author. The ode consists of a series of some 90 questions (...) on a wide range of subjects, from logic and metaphysics to medicine, cosmology, and physics, as well as esoteric Ismaili doctrine. Nasir-i Khusraw's text takes the form of a commentary on certain astutely selected lines. Twin Wisdoms Reconciled represents yet another example of the author's lifelong endeavour to transform Persian philosophical prose into a deft and nuanced instrument of expression. The work has not been as extensively studied as Nasir-i Khusraw's other major theological and philosophical treatises, all written in his final exile in Badakhshan, in part perhaps because of its textual difficulties. Twin Wisdoms Reconciled survives in a single manuscript of dubious accuracy in the Aya Sofya collection, Suleymaniyye Library, Istanbul. The present translation is based on the critical edition of the text produced by Henry Corbin and Mohammed Mo'in in 1953, but with frequent reference to the unique original manuscript. Twin Wisdoms Reconciled represents an endeavour to reconcile two apparently opposed forms of knowledge: the knowledge accorded by revelation and exegesis and the knowledge gained by reason. Seeing that "the bazaar of wisdom" stands empty because of the mutual incomprehension of traditional theologians and Aristotelian philosophers, Nasir-i Khusraw stepped boldly forward to reinvigorate that desolate marketplace. His final work, written in 1070, is thus a testimony as well as an exposition of his mature thought. (shrink)

El presente artículo versa sobre Abū Zakariyyāʾ Yaḥyà al-Balansī, un discípulo fervoroso y distinguido del conocido maestro sufí Ibn Sabʿīn de Ricote. Hay poca información sobre Yaḥyà, y quizás por ello ha pasado desapercibido. En el trabajo se recogen estos datos para darlo a conocer. Yaḥyà al-Balansī (o algún antepasado suyo cercano) habría nacido en Valencia. Estuvo en Alejandría en compañía del šayḫ Abū l-Ḥasan al-Šāḏilī, quizás a partir del año 642/1244. Regresó a al-Andalus y, después, habría viajado nuevamente hacia (...) el Magreb. En Bugía, se encontró con Ibn Sabʿīn, en fecha desconocida, aunque debió de haber sido hacia el año 648/1250. Desde entonces se hizo discípulo incondicional suyo. Habría acompañado a Ibn Sabʿīn, hasta establecerse en La Meca, después de pasar por Túnez y Egipto. También estuvo en Medina y en el Líbano. Se deduce que Yaḥyà era un sufí viajero, al igual que Abū l-Ḥasan al-Šuštarī. Yaḥyà falleció en el año 665/1267 y fue enterrado en al-Balyana, en el Alto Egipto. En este trabajo se presentan los fragmentos de las pocas obras que nos han llegado, y se busca confirmar su autoría de Kitāb al-Sulūk fī ṭarīq al-qawm, la única epístola suya que se conserva completa. Al final, se traducen los fragmentos tanto de al-Wirāṯa al-muḥammadiyya, y un fragmento recogido por Ibn al-Ṭawwāḥ, como de otro fragmento que aparece al final de una Risāla de Ibn Sabʿīn. Del estudio de este acopio de datos se llega a dos conclusiones de relevancia: 1. Aunque en el encabezado de Kitāb al-Sulūk, Yaḥyà se presenta como hijo de Ibn Sabʿīn, en este trabajo se va a demostrar que no lo era. 2. Se confirma su autoría de Kitāb al-Sulūk. (shrink)

Rāzī, Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn Zakarīyā,865?-925?; criticism and interpretation.

Jild-i 1: Muntakhab-i ās̲ār-i: Sant Agūstīn, tarjumah-ʼi Muḥammad Taqī Bahrāmī Ḥarrān; Tūmās Akvīnās, tarjumah-ʼi Manūchihr Buzurgmihr; Bārūkh Ispīnūzā, tarjumah-ʼi Abū Ṭālib Ṣārimī; Bilz Pāskāl, tarjumah-ʼi Ḥusayn Kasmāʼī, va muntakhabātī az: Ūpānīshādhā, Dimāpādā, Sūrāngāmāsūtrā, Bhāgavat Gītāyā tarjumah-ʼi Riz̤ā Ṣaddūqī --.

This article discusses Abū Isḥāq al-Naẓẓām’s (d. 231/845) (one of the first Muʽtazilī thinkers); understanding of Allah-world relationship, his theory of nature (tab‘) and his view on miracles. In a proposal form, Muʽtazilī scholars accept that the miracle, which is the actual confirmation, must occur, since it is not possible for Allah to confirm His messenger (prophet) in a way that everyone can hear and in a direct word. Since the Prophet's message can be authenticated only by a miracle, Muʽtazilī (...) thinkers paid great attention to this issue, organized and formed natural theories about the universe in a way that miracles can occur. Naẓẓām explains a kind of miracle that occurs under the power of Allah, by his theory of nature called latency and occurrence (kumūn-ẓuhūr). His view of miracles is rooted in the Muʽtazilī classification of miracles. Naẓẓām argues that in the theory of nature, things are infinitely divided. He also argues that all qualities considered accident (aʽrāḍ) by other Muslim theologians are different objects as only motion and rest are the only accidents. According to him, the universe consists of objects and accidents of motion only. In each object in the universe, an unlimited number of opposing objects (sub-components) that have different effects on each other is located in the same space. Those objects in the same space are intervened (tadākhul) with each other. Kumūn refers to sub-components that are located inside the object in a state of passing into each other, and a state of balancing each other through the push-pull motion (i‘timād). Ẓuhūr is an outward movement of the sub-component from where it is located when an impact imposed outside the object interacts with one of the sub-components contained in it. Naẓẓām says that too many opposing sub-components, such as heaviness-lightness, heat-coldness contained in the object, form an internal dynamic by providing balancing each other through inside the object with the push-pull motion. The state of balance inside the object is disrupted by an external factor affecting one of the sub-components. An external thing approaching the object interacts with one of the sub-components contained in the object. Then, the affected sub-component moves out of the object and thus the state of balance inside the object is disrupted. According to the theory of kumūn-ẓuhūr, change in objects occurs when the balance within the object is disturbed. The change in the balance also occurs not by the direct intervention of Allah and the creation of accidents, but by the disruption in the balance of natures within the object. Naẓẓām, who advocates the intrinsic natures in things, has been criticized for not leaving any room for Allah’s influence on objects at least through miracles. This criticism is not correct. Naẓẓām says that the nature of objects depends on God, and it is possible for God to intervene in them at any time. According to him, Allah can force opposing objects into a union that is not in their natures. In their natures, unification can separate those by applying pull and push. In this way, Naẓẓām sees the intervention of Allah as possible in the occurrence of a situation that is the opposite of what is present in the nature of objects. In Naẓẓām's theory of kumūn-ẓuhūr, there are suppressed natures and sub-components that are in a weak state inside the actual object. Furthermore, they cannot go out in any way from the actual object. One of these suppressed natures found in the object is removed from the nature of the object by the intervention of Allah when a miracle occurs in the hands of theProphet. In this case, the miracle is not something new that Allah has created, but that Allah has disclosed a hidden sub-component that is hidden in that thing that has never appeared before. Naẓẓām’s view of miracle is something occurring under the power of the created, which Muʽtazilī scholars accept in the classification of miracles in relation to, the theory of sarfa. He suggests that the Qur'an, which he accepts under the power of the created, would not be a miracle, if the Arabs could dispute it. However, according to him, the Qur'an is a miracle because Allah prevents them from the dispute. In his understanding of sarfa, the miracles occur directly as an act of God’s divine intervention with human beings. This study investigates Naẓẓām’s view of miracles along with his theory of nature and his understanding of sarfa. (shrink)

Study of a classical critic of Avicenna's views on the existence and nature of God.

Study of a classical critic of Avicenna's views on the existence and nature of God.

Thoughts of Muḥammad Mujtahid Shabistarī and Naṣr Ḥāmid Abū Zayd about Quranic hermeneutics and philosophy.

This study is an attempt toexamine the critiques of Mu‘tazilites in general and Rukn al-Dīn Abū Ṭāhir al- Ṭuraythīthī in particular, of “ta’yēen by naṣṣ”(appointment by text or direct proclamation) which has long been discussedwithin the intellectual history of Islam. The concept of ta’yēen by nass is a case which has been attemptedto be grounded on the basis of Qur’ān and Ḥadith. Although it is thought to bepeculiar to the Shiite circles, it has also been expressed in some Sunnischools (...) as well. Despite the fact that it is generally discussed in regard tothe imamate of the fourth Caliph ‘Ali,some also argued that ta‘yēen by ṇass was to be the case for the imamateof Abū Bakr. Concerning this theory, Mu‘tazilalevelled a great number of essential critiques at the Shiites’ understanding ofmatter. Since it has been discussed in direct relation to the textual evidencesfrom the Qur’ān, a re-examination of the subject in the Qur’anic context is required. In this regard, themethodological approach of Mu‘tazilitescholar al-Ṭuraythīthī is an important component to take into consideration.Ṭāhir al- Ṭuraythīthīcriticizes the sects for their understandings of the notion of ta‘yēen by naṣṣ, in his prominent book “Mutashābihal-Qur’ān” inwhich he tries to understand the subject at stake within the boundaries of languageand reason. Moreover, he evaluates the assertions of both Imāmiyya and Bakriyyaand criticizes both sides relying on the contextual basis of Qur’ānic verses. (shrink)

Collected articles on the creation of the universe; Islamic viewpoint.

On Avicenna, 980-1037, a Muslim philosopher.