1. Het averroïstisch-nominalistisch front en de leer van de dubbele waarheid.

A intenção deste tratado é a exposição das doutrinas científicas atribuídas a Platão e contidas na República, prescindindo da argumentação dialética. Queremos ser muito concisos para assim poder falar sucintamente de todo ele. Sem embargo, e em razão do bom andamento expositivo, cremos que era necessário um prefácio introdutório, no qual o objeto de estudo se apresentasse na ordem devida, já que Platão escreveu este livro somente depois de haver concluído outros escritos acerca desta ciência. Também indicaremos, sempre que pudermos, (...) algumas precisões acerca da utilidade deste saber, de sua finalidade e de suas partes. (shrink)

About the Republic is the only commentary left by Averroes, the Commentator, so called on behalf of his commentaries on Aristotle’s work. Although the original in Arabic is lost, there is a medieval version in Hebrew and two later translations in Latin from the Hebrew version. Averroes’ Commentary on the ‘Republic’ – divided in three Books – can be considered an original work as only 1/3 of it corresponds to the platonic treatise. Averroes presents in it aristotelic concepts drawn from (...) the Nicomachean Ethics and also several notions from Alfarabi’s political works. He also presents his own thoughts and offers criticisms of his own society. KEY WORDS – Plato’s Republic; a commentary or an original work? Ethics. Politics. Cardinal virtues. Ideal city. Education. (shrink)

O Fasl al-maqal, umas das obras originais de Averróis, se destaca por seu caráter polêmico. Sendo redigida como um pronunciamento jurídico, tem como um de seus objetivos principais analisar o estatuto da filosofia em face da Lei islâmica, ao verificar qual é a atitude que deve ser adotada por todo aquele que travar contato com as obras da antiguidade grega. Em um cenário em que a legitimidade da filosofia se coloca em questão, o diagnóstico e a solução propostos por Averróis (...) se destacam ao apresentar uma interpretação singular da Lei ante a filosofia, concebendo a segunda como um elemento necessário para a saúde da comunidade. Este artigo pretende analisar essa interpretação, na qual três pontos se colocam na consideração da relação entre filosofia e revelação: o (1) asseguramento da possibilidade do assentimento religioso individual e (2) da manutenção do bem-estar geral junto à (3) possibilidade de se afirmar a legitimidade de um intérprete que garanta o assentimento correto aos crentes não filósofos. (shrink)

Analiso neste artigo a presença na cosmologia de Tomás de Aquino da hipótese real do vacuum in natura afirmada no contexto da discussão sobre a geração e os primeiros instantes da locomoção natural dos corpos simples sublunares. Para tanto, o texto possui três partes. Primeiro, mostro porque o vaccuum in natura é uma discussão pertencente ao domínio da cosmologia entendida como matriz disciplinar cujo objeto é o cosmo enquanto conjunto dos corpos simples. Na segunda parte, por sua vez, apresento a (...) discussão geral sobre a noção de vazio que Tomás estabelece com Aristóteles. Enfim, na terceira parte, exponho, por um lado, a crítica de Tomás à tese de Averróis segundo a qual a resistência é necessária para a locomoção natural e, por outro lado, a hipótese tomista baseada nas noções de generans e vis sobre a locomoção natural e finita no vazio. Abstract:In this article I analyze the presence in the cosmology of Thomas Aquinas of the real hypothesis of the vacuum in natura affirmed in the context of the discussion about the generation and the first instants of the natural locomotion of the sublunary simple bodies. To do so, the text has three parts. Firstly I show why the vaccuum in natura is a discussion belonging to the domain of cosmology understood as a disciplinary matrix whose object is the cosmos as a set of simple bodies. In the second part, I present the general discussion of the notion of void that Aquinas establishes with Aristotle. Finally, in the third part, I present, on the one hand, Aquinas’s critique of Averroes’ thesis that resistance is necessary for natural locomotion and, on the other hand, the Thomistic hypothesis based on the notions of generans and vis on locomotion natural and finite in the void. (shrink)

A filosofia política que se desenvolveu no mundo islâmico, entre os séculos IX e XII, apropriou-se de conceitos da filosofia grega, principalmente de Platão e de Aristóteles. A República e as Leis, de Platão, e a Ética Nicomaqueia, de Aristóteles, foram os textos que fundamentaram as concepções políticas dos filósofos de expres são árabe , desde as virtudes a serem buscadas individualmente até a ideia do melhor regime político. Com base nos textos gregos traduzidos para o árabe, esses filósofos delinearam (...) os objetivos da vida política e o modo como o regime político deveria ser estruturado para alcançá-los. A cidade ideal platônica é o paradigma a ser realizado. O tópico das qualidades essenciais ao soberano faz parte de uma longa tradição que remonta aos “espelhos dos príncipes” de origem persa; está presente também na tradição religiosa e no Direito islâmico. Dois grandes expoentes da filosofia de expressão árabe, Al-Fârâbî e Averróis, retomam o tópico das qualidades essenciais ao filósofo-rei, enunciado na República, e o adaptam a seu universo histórico. (shrink)

Since 1537 Marco Antonio Zimara’s Tabula cum dilucidationibus in dictis Aristotelis et Averrois has been one of the most efficient and largely used instruments for a swift and at the same time precise access to the philosophical topics discussed in Aristotle’s works and in Averroes’ commentaries as well. In this paper the long and laborious gestation of Zimara’s Tabula is taken into account, starting with the notes in a 1507 edition of Aristotle’s works.

Sobre a anterioridade de Deus com relação ao mundo no Trahafut de Averróis.

A minha ideia: aquisição e atribuição no Pensamento de Averróis.

Ce livre est consacré aux auteurs qui ont repris la pensée d’Averroès dans le monde latin entre 1250 et 1350. De nouvelles remarques sur la polysémie du terme averroista précèdent les grands thèmes abordés : le retour numériquement identique au corps corrompu, le rapport entre matière et puissance, la nécessité et la contingence, l’intellect agent et possible. Des manuscrits et des textes inédits jusqu’à ce jour sont au coeur des discussions qui apportent la preuve que des doctrines puisées dans l’œuvre (...) d’Averroès circulaient entre les Universités de Paris, Oxford, Bologne et Padoue. Sans prétendre aborder tous les aspects de l'averroïsme latin de cette période, le livre reprend sur nouveaux frais des questions considérées comme résolues et propose de nouvelles perspectives de recherche. (shrink)

A grande obra de Aristóteles sobre psicologia foi o De anima. Entretanto, nem por isso a obra Parva naturalia, também conhecida como De sensu et sensato, deixou de exercer um papel importante, entre os árabes e os pensadores ocidentais. No presente ensaio, procura-se mostrar como a tradução árabe desta última obra foi utilizada por Avicena, Ibn Bâjjia e, sob a influência deste último, por Averróis. No Epítome De sensu de Averróis, percebe-se, por exemplo, que os princípios teóricos são aristotélicos, mas (...) estão contaminados pelo termo “espiritual”, que não é utilizado pelo filósofo grego. No Ocidente Latino, essa leitura averroísta terá influência sobre Alberto Magno e Tomás de Aquino. PALAVRAS-CHAVE – Parva naturalia. De anima. Filosofia da mente entre pensadores árabes e ocidentais latinos. Averróis. Percepção espiritual. (shrink)

In this paper I will show some contributions from Averroes around some issues related to psychology and medicine. My intention is to establish some relations between the commentaries on De anima and the medical treatises. The itinerary is the following: a) I will show that, like Aristotle, Averroes conceives the soul as a set of biological capacities; b) De anima is a biological treatise, so there we can find some considerations that must be understood from a medical point of view, (...) specially, from the Arabic contributions on Anatomy. It is necessary, then, to point out the importance of the nerves and the brain to understand the narrow relation between the De anima and the Book of Medicine. We will find that Averroes does not understand the soul as a 'spiritual principle' but like something generated that makes possible several biological functions, from the vegetative and the sensitive to the intellectual ones. So, Averroes denies the Neoplatonic conception of the soul as something separated from the body. Averroes explains that the soul is the concretion of the biological process denominated "life". KEY WORDS – Averroes. Aristotle. De anima. Neoplatonism. Biology. Life. (shrink)

Jean de Jandun (ca. 1285/1328), maître es arts à l'Université de Paris durant la première moitié du quatorzième siècle, est considéré par l'historiographie contemporaine comme le principal tenant de l'"averroi͏̈sme latin", c'est-à-dire comme le défenseur majeur d'une psychologie extrême dans laquelle l'intellect est unique, éternel, et séparé par essence des hommes. Sa noétique procède en réalité d'une réarticulation ou d'une reprise active du corpus latin d'Averroès et l'on étudie sur trois plans (le rapport au corps, l'intervention de l'image, la production (...) de la pensée) comment elle s'élabore et chemine à l'écart du Grand Commentaire sur le De anima laissé par le Cordouan. La notion de subiectum sert de fil directeur, elle vaut chez Averroès à la fois pour l'intellect sujet-substrat des intelligibles et pour le phantasme qui sert de base à la formation du concept. On décrit donc quels "transferts du sujet" s'opèrent dans la relance de la noétique rushdienne, pour relever des glissements et finalement pointer la mise en place de problématiques nouvelles et constitutives, aussi, de notre modernité. Car, en reconnaissant à l'"averroi͏̈sme" une production réellement philosophique qu'on tendait à lui refuser, on fait apparaître combien l'oeuvre de Jean est solidaire de l'invention ou de l'accentuation d'une question capitale dont nous sommes héritiers : celle du sujet humain des pensées, celle de l'assomption de l'homme comme sujet. (shrink)

Translators of Aristotle’s and Averroës’ metaphysical works into 14th C Hebrew often associated important philosophical concepts with Hebrew terms that were also used to signify central Jewish and Biblical religious concepts. Here I examine how two such terms, “mofet” and “devequt”, were used to refer to extraordinary, divine wonders and to clinging (in particular to God) respectively in the religious texts, but to Aristotelian demonstration and continuity (especially noetic continuity) respectively in the translations of Averroës’ Long Commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics. (...) This kind of convergence of metaphysical and religious terms makes possible, indeed encourages, a re-interpretation of the religious concepts along Aristotelian lines. Biblical expressions of God’s wonders are thus to be interpreted to refer to Aristotelian demonstration and the mystical desire to cling to God is to refer to unifi cation with the Active Intellect.Translatores, qui Aristotelis et Averrois opera metaphysica in linguam Hebraicam saeculi 14. transferebant, notabilibus conceptibus philosophicis saepe nomina Hebraica assignaverut, quibus et principales notiones religiosae Judaicae ac Biblicae solebant exprimi. In hac dissertatione investigatur, quomodo duo talium nominum, scil. “mofet” et “devequt”, quae in textibus religiosis “extra ordinaria miracula divina” et “adhaerentiam” (praecipue ad Deum) proprie significant, in translationibus Averrois Commentarii Magni in Aristotelis Metaphysicam ad demonstrationem Aristotelicam et continuationem (praecipue noeticam) significandas transumebantur. Huiusmodi nominum metaphysicorum cum religiosis coniunctio conceptus religiosos iuxta sensum Aristotelicum denuo explicari permittit, imo suadet. Hinc dicta Biblica quae miracula Dei olim significaverunt ad demonstrationes Aristotelicas relata sunt; item desiderium mysticum adhaerendi ad Deum de unione cum Intellectu Agenti intellectum est. (shrink)

This study is concerned with 'nature' specifically as the subject-matter of physics, or natural science, as described by Aristotle in his "Physics". It also discusses the definitions of nature, and more specifically physical nature, provided by Avicenna and Averroes in their commentaries on Aristotle's "Physics". Avicenna and Averroes share Aristotle's conception of nature as a principle of motion and rest. While according to Aristotle the subject matter of physics appears to be nature, or what exists by nature, Avicenna believes that (...) it is the natural body, and Averroes holds that the subject matter of physics or natural science consists in the natural things, in what constitutes a slight shift in focus. O presente artigo trata da 'natureza' enquanto objeto da física, ou da ciência natural, tal como descrita por Aristóteles na "Física". Também trata das definições da natureza, especificamente a natureza física, fornecidas por Avicena e Averróis nos seus comentários à "Física" de Aristóteles. Avicena e Averróis partilham da conceção da natureza de Aristóteles enquanto princípio de movimento e repouso. Enquanto para Aristóteles o objeto da física parece ser a natureza, ou aquilo que existe por natureza, Avicena defende que é o corpo natural, e Averróis afirma que o objeto da física, ou ciência natural, consiste nas coisas naturais, apresentando uma ênfase algo diferente. (shrink)

Neste estudo, procura-se mostrar, através de um autor cristão do século 10, como comentários às obras de Aristóteles foram continuamente feitos, desde os gregos até Averróis. Por meio de alguns textos da Metafísica, é possível perceber que, mesmo sem ter contato direto com o original grego, foram cotejadas pelo autor diversas traduções, tanto do grego como do siríaco. Nesses casos, tratava-se, não apenas de tradução, mas também de comentário ao texto de Aristóteles. PALAVRAS-CHAVE – Aristóteles. Metafísica. Filosofia islâmica. Traduções para (...) o árabe. Comentários. (shrink)

Pretendemos, neste texto, analisar a arquegenealogia da potência (do comum) desenvolvida por Giorgio Agamben. Para alcançar esse objetivo, nosso texto investiga algumas noções centrais nos pensamentos de Aristóteles, Averróis e Dante, articulando um fio condutor em torno do debate sobre o intelecto, a potência e o comum. A partir dos entrecruzamentos teóricos que vai-se desenvolvendo ao longo das doutrinas de cada pensador, buscamos, em Agamben, fundamentar e concatenar criticamente a doutrina da potência comum, sobremodo voltando-nos à possibilidade de pensar a (...) teoria de uma potência desativadora. (shrink)

Resumo: No capítulo 5 do Livro III De anima (430a10-19) Aristóteles distingue entre o νοῦς ποιητικός (nous poietikós), chamado pelos Latinos intellectus agens (intelecto agente), e νοῦς παθητικός (nous pathetikós), chamado pelos Latinos intellectus passivus, ou seja, intellectus possibilis (intelecto possível), termos técnicos e filosóficos mais comuns. O capítulo 5 é de grande importância não só para a filosofia antiga e para os comentadores das obras de Aristóteles, como os comentários de Teofrasto, de Alexander de Afrodisias, de Simplício e Themístius (...) entre outros, mas também para a filosofia do mundo árabe e da Europa latina. Sabe-se que Aristóteles não escreveu um tratado próprio sobre o intelecto, embora possam ser encontradas várias observações acerca do intelecto em suas obras. Os tratados do Intelecto começam com Al-Kindi, Al-Farabi, Avicena e sobretudo Averróis, e se refletem, num sentido crítico e afirmativo, (nos debates) dos tratados latinos, por exemplo, nos tratados de Alberto Magno, de Tomás de Aquino, de Sigério de Brabant entre outros. Este artigo apresenta observações preliminares e preparatórias ao projeto de traduções bilíngue (Latim-Português) dos tratados medievais sobre o intelecto ‘Teorias do Intelecto na Idade Média’ que está em desenvovlimento no Centro Internacional de Estudos Medievais da UFU. Palavras-chaves: Unidade do intelecto; Imaginação; Intencionalidade; Luz intelectual e cognição. Theories of the Intellect in the Latin Middle Ages. De anima III, cap. 5 of Aristotle and his Medieval Tradition Abstract: In the chapter 5 of the III. Book of De anima (430a10-19) Aristotle distinguishes between the νοῦς ποιητικός (nous poietikós) called by the Latins intellectus agens (agent intellect) and the νοῦς παθητικός (nous pathetikós) called by the Latins intellectus passivus, or intellectus possibilis (possible intellect), most common technical and philosophical terms. The chapter 5 is of great importance not only to ancient philosophy and to the commentators of Aristotle’s works such as the commentaries of Theophrastus, Alexander of Aphrodisias, of Simplicius, and Themistius among others, but also to the philosophy of the Arabic World and the Latin Europe. One knows well that Aristotle does not have written a proper treatise on intellect; although there are several observations about the intellect in his works. Separate treatises begin with Al-Kindi, Al-Farabi, Avicenna, and especially Averroes, which Latin treatises as of Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, Siger of Brabant among others reflect in a critical as well as an affirmative sense. This article can be read as preliminary and preparatory observations to a bilingual (Latin-Portuguese) translation project of treatises corresponding to ‘Theories of Intellect in the Middle Ages’ which is ongoing at the International Center for Medieval Studies at UFU. Key-words: Unity of the Intellect; Imagination; Intentionality; Intellectual Light; and Cognition. Theorien des Intellekts im Lateinischen Mittelalter. De anima III, 5 des Aristoteles und seine mittelalterliche Tradition Zusammenfassung: Im 5. Kapitel des III. Buchs von De anima (430a10-19) unterscheidet Aristoteles zwischen dem νοῦς ποιητικός (nous poietikós), von den Lateinern intellectus agens (tätiger Intellekt) genannt und dem νοῦς παθητικός (nous pathetikós), von den Lateinern intellectus passivus oder auch intellectus possibilis (möglicher Intellekt) genannt, gemeinhin bekannte technische und philosophische Begriffe. Dieses 5. Kapitel ist von grösster Bedeutung nicht nur für die antike Philosophie und die Kommentatoren der Werke des Aristoteles wie die Kommentare des Theophrastus, des Alexander von Aphrodisias, Simplicius und Themistius unter anderen, sondern auch für die Philosophie der arabischen Welt und des lateinischen Europas. Bekanntlich hat Aristoteles keinen eigenen Traktat über den Intellekt geschrieben, obgleich sich viele Beobachtungen zum Intellekt in seinem Werk antreffen. Selbständige Traktate über den Intellekt beginnen mit Al-Kindi, Al-Farabi, Avicenna und besonders Averroes, die sich in den lateinischen Traktaten, z.B. des Albertus Magnus, Thomas von Aquin, Siger von Brabant und anderen zustimmend wie kritisch widerspiegeln. Dieser Artikel kann als vorläufige und vorbereitende Bemerkungen zu einem zweisprachigen (lateinisch-portugiesischen) Übersetzungsprojekt von Texten gelesen werden, welche „Theorien des Intellekts im Lateinischen Mittelalter“ betreffen. Dieses Projekt ist am Internationalen Zentrum für Mittelalterstudien der UFU in Arbeit genommen worden. Schlüsselwörter: Verstand; Vernunft; Intentionalität; Anschauung und Erkenntnis. Data de registro: 12/03/2020 Data de aceite: 21/10/2020. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:80 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY AVERROES' Quaesitum ON ASSERTORIC (ABSOLUTE) PROPOSITIONS UNTIL 1962 ONLY ONE logical work of Averroes existed in print in the original Arabic? At this late date, D. M. Dunlop published the Arabic text of the short tract by Averroes on the modality of propositions with which we shall be concerned here.' The text published by Professor Dunlop forms part of a collection of treatises by Averroes (...) which has long been known to exist in the immensely valuable collection of Arabic manuscripts of the Escorial Library, near Madrid.' The collection is simply entitled Mas~'il (Questions),' faithfully reflected in the rubric of Quaesita under which several of these treatises are given in Latin versions in the sixteenth-century editions of.4ristotelis Opera cure.4verrois Commentariis. The particular treatise published by Prof. Dunlop deals with the problem of the relationship of assertoric propositions to the modalities of possibility and necessity. This treatise has been accessible for over four centuries in two printed Latin versions, made in Renaissance times from medieval Hebrew translations. The earlier of the Latin versions was made by a Jewish scholar, Ella del Medigo, for the Renaissance luminary Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, and was printed in the very rare Aldine incunabulum edition of the Quaesita Averrois in librum priorum (analytiorum Aristotelis) (Venice, 1497). A second Latin translation was made by Abraham de Balmes (d. 1523): and printed in several editions of the Juntine Latin Aristotle (Venice, from 1590): From these versions the main substance, at any rate, of Averroes' xMaurice Bouyges, ed., Averroes: Talkh~ Kitdb al-Maqouldt ("Middle Commentary on Aristotle 's Categoriae") Beyrouth, 1932 (-- Vol. IV of Bibliotheca Arabica-Scholasticorum, S6rie Arabe). sD. M. Dunlop, "Averroes (Ibn Rushd) on the Modality of Propositions," Islamic Studies (Journal of the Gentral Institute of Islamic Research, Karachi), Vol. I (1962), 23-34. sMichael Casiri, Bibliotheca Arabico-Hispana Escurialensis (2 vols., Madrid; 1760, 1770), No. 629; Hartwig Derenbourg, Les Manuscrits Arabcs de l'Escurial (3 vols., Paris; 1884, 1903, 1928), No. 632. ' Prof. Dunlop states that "another copy" of the Masa'il (presumably made from the Escorial MS?) exists in the Biblioteca Nacional in Madrid (No. 102 in the catalog of Robles). For information about this translator, see Bayle's Dictionary, art. "BALMIS, Abraham de," where note (B) describes some complaints about his translations from Hebrew to Latin. (I owe this reference to Prof. Richard Popkin.) Note (I) of Bayle's article on "AVERROES" gives some data concerning the Renaissance translations of Averroes, citing inter alia the opinion expressed by Keckermann in his PraecognitisLogicis (II, 2, nb. 32): "How much all Philosophy is indebted to Averroes, can then only be known, when God shall raise up a Genius, who will free our Latin Translations of him from the unintelligible Barbarisms everywhere to be met with, and render him in That Language, in a style, at least tolerable, and intelligible, for the Use of Students in Philosophy." eAristotelis Opera cure Averrois Commentariis, Vol. I. The edition of 1562 is now readily accessible in a photoreprinting made in Frankfurt am Main in 1962, and contains the "Averrois varii generis quaesita in libros logicae Aristotelis, Abramo de Balmes interprete," pp. 75 verso--- NOTES AND DISCUSSIONS 81 Quaesitum has been determinable.' The present, reasonably literal translation of the Arabic text should facilitate the work of anyone wishing to form his own judgment about the character of the Latin versions of Averroes' logical treatises, or at any rate the not insignificant number of them that came from the pen of Abraham de Balmes. The Latin version in the present instance is, on the whole, literal to the point of obscurity. It is punctuated by occasional strange, and sometimes ludicrous renderings--as, for example, at 27:6, where "not used in the art of rhetoric" becomes "non uterent agricolae"l Occasionally the Latin incorporates a marginal explanation within the text (e.g., at 29:10), and sometimes it omits phrases of the Arabic text. In general, it is significantly more difficult to derive from the Latin than from the Arabic an exact idea just what it is that Averroes had in mind. Unquestionably the most interesting aspect of Averroes' treatise is the light it sheds... (shrink)

Resumo: A finalidade deste trabalho é destacar importância e o legado do dominicano Alberto Magno na controvérsia com os defensores da unicidade do intelecto possível para todo o gênero humano. Para tanto, será feita uma apresentação sumária do seu tratado De unitate intellectus, redigido em 1263. Após uma contextualização histórica que apresenta a posição do bispo de Regensburg diante das teses averroístas, procurar-se-á mostrar como ele foi o inspirador, quanto a essa questão, de um dos seus alunos mais brilhantes: Tomás (...) de Aquino. Além disso, deseja-se frisar como, para o Doctor Universalis, a contribuição de Averróis se revelasse indispensável: este soube indicar, com efeito, a maneira correta segundo a qual o intelecto devia ser considerado “imaterial”, embora sua conclusão da existência de um único intelecto possível para todo gênero humano fosse inaceitável.: The purpose of this paper is to highlight the importance and the legacy of the Dominican Albertus Magnus in the controversy with the defenders of the possible unity of the intellect of all mankind. To this end, a brief presentation of his treatise De unitate intellectus, written in 1263, will be given. After a historical contextualization that presents the Bishop of Regensburg’s position in relation to Averroism, it will be shown how he inspired one of his most brilliant students, Thomas Aquinas, with regard to this topic. Moreover, it is pointed out that, for the Doctor Universalis, Averroes’ contribution proved indispensable: the latter was able to indicate the correct way in which the intellect should be considered “immaterial”, although his conclusion that there was a possible single intellect for all mankind was unacceptable. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:80 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY AVERROES' Quaesitum ON ASSERTORIC (ABSOLUTE) PROPOSITIONS UNTIL 1962 ONLY ONE logical work of Averroes existed in print in the original Arabic? At this late date, D. M. Dunlop published the Arabic text of the short tract by Averroes on the modality of propositions with which we shall be concerned here.' The text published by Professor Dunlop forms part of a collection of treatises by Averroes (...) which has long been known to exist in the immensely valuable collection of Arabic manuscripts of the Escorial Library, near Madrid.' The collection is simply entitled Mas~'il (Questions),' faithfully reflected in the rubric of Quaesita under which several of these treatises are given in Latin versions in the sixteenth-century editions of.4ristotelis Opera cure.4verrois Commentariis. The particular treatise published by Prof. Dunlop deals with the problem of the relationship of assertoric propositions to the modalities of possibility and necessity. This treatise has been accessible for over four centuries in two printed Latin versions, made in Renaissance times from medieval Hebrew translations. The earlier of the Latin versions was made by a Jewish scholar, Ella del Medigo, for the Renaissance luminary Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, and was printed in the very rare Aldine incunabulum edition of the Quaesita Averrois in librum priorum (analytiorum Aristotelis) (Venice, 1497). A second Latin translation was made by Abraham de Balmes (d. 1523): and printed in several editions of the Juntine Latin Aristotle (Venice, from 1590): From these versions the main substance, at any rate, of Averroes' xMaurice Bouyges, ed., Averroes: Talkh~ Kitdb al-Maqouldt ("Middle Commentary on Aristotle 's Categoriae") Beyrouth, 1932 (-- Vol. IV of Bibliotheca Arabica-Scholasticorum, S6rie Arabe). sD. M. Dunlop, "Averroes (Ibn Rushd) on the Modality of Propositions," Islamic Studies (Journal of the Gentral Institute of Islamic Research, Karachi), Vol. I (1962), 23-34. sMichael Casiri, Bibliotheca Arabico-Hispana Escurialensis (2 vols., Madrid; 1760, 1770), No. 629; Hartwig Derenbourg, Les Manuscrits Arabcs de l'Escurial (3 vols., Paris; 1884, 1903, 1928), No. 632. ' Prof. Dunlop states that "another copy" of the Masa'il (presumably made from the Escorial MS?) exists in the Biblioteca Nacional in Madrid (No. 102 in the catalog of Robles). For information about this translator, see Bayle's Dictionary, art. "BALMIS, Abraham de," where note (B) describes some complaints about his translations from Hebrew to Latin. (I owe this reference to Prof. Richard Popkin.) Note (I) of Bayle's article on "AVERROES" gives some data concerning the Renaissance translations of Averroes, citing inter alia the opinion expressed by Keckermann in his PraecognitisLogicis (II, 2, nb. 32): "How much all Philosophy is indebted to Averroes, can then only be known, when God shall raise up a Genius, who will free our Latin Translations of him from the unintelligible Barbarisms everywhere to be met with, and render him in That Language, in a style, at least tolerable, and intelligible, for the Use of Students in Philosophy." eAristotelis Opera cure Averrois Commentariis, Vol. I. The edition of 1562 is now readily accessible in a photoreprinting made in Frankfurt am Main in 1962, and contains the "Averrois varii generis quaesita in libros logicae Aristotelis, Abramo de Balmes interprete," pp. 75 verso--- NOTES AND DISCUSSIONS 81 Quaesitum has been determinable.' The present, reasonably literal translation of the Arabic text should facilitate the work of anyone wishing to form his own judgment about the character of the Latin versions of Averroes' logical treatises, or at any rate the not insignificant number of them that came from the pen of Abraham de Balmes. The Latin version in the present instance is, on the whole, literal to the point of obscurity. It is punctuated by occasional strange, and sometimes ludicrous renderings--as, for example, at 27:6, where "not used in the art of rhetoric" becomes "non uterent agricolae"l Occasionally the Latin incorporates a marginal explanation within the text (e.g., at 29:10), and sometimes it omits phrases of the Arabic text. In general, it is significantly more difficult to derive from the Latin than from the Arabic an exact idea just what it is that Averroes had in mind. Unquestionably the most interesting aspect of Averroes' treatise is the light it sheds... (shrink)

Averroes the philosopher was the Commentator of Aristotle. In this, the project of his life coincided with the perception of his contemporary readers & with the esteem governing four centuries of European Aristotelianism. It has been the purpose of the 4th Symposium Averroicum to contribute to a better understanding of this philosophy: both on the basis of Averroes' works & in the light of his sources. The Symposium, held in conjunction with the 6th Editors Conference of the Averrois Opera, (...) brought together eminent scholars & researchers on Averroes & adjacent areas. Their contributions are presented in four sections: * The Project of Averroes * Averroes & the Hellenistic Commentators * Averroes, the Commentator * Averroes & the Latin Tradition A bibliography of editions & contributions to the text is appended (to date 1998). (shrink)

Aristotle’s major work on psychology was De anima. Nevertheless, Parva naturalia, also known as De sensu et sensato, played a prominent role among Arabs and Western thinkers. In the present essay, we aim to show how the Arabic translation of this last work was used by Avicenna, Ibn Bâjjia and, under his influence, by Averroes. In Averroes’s Epitome De Sensu one can notice, for example, that the theoretical principles are Aristotelian, but they are contaminated by the term “spiritual”, which is (...) not used by the Greek philosopher. In the Latin West, Averroes’s reading will have influence on Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas. KEY WORDS – Parva naturalia. De anima. Arabic and Western philosophy of mind. Averroes. Spiritual perception. (shrink)

In 1978 the American Research Center in Egypt published a report on a project in "Medieval Islamic Logic" it was cosponsoring with the Smithsonian Institute. The report announced the project's goal to be "to produce critical editions of the Arabic text of Averroes' Middle Commentaries on Aristotle's logical works." The first of these editions, the Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Topics, appeared in 1979, and since that time the editions have appeared with impressive regularity: the MC on Aristotle's Categories in 1980; (...) the MC on Aristotle's De Interpretatione in 1981; the MC on Aristotle's Posterior Analytics in 1982; and the MC on Aristotle's Prior Analytics in 1983. The editor of all these commentaries is Charles E. Butterworth, with editorial assistance from Ahmad Abd al-Magid Haridi. The editions of these eight commentaries, when they are all published, will constitute the Arabic version of the middle commentaries of volume 1 of Harry A. Wolfson's carefully planned Corpus Commentariorum Averrois in Aristotelem. (shrink)