The family is one of the most important social institutions created by social re¬lations. Nasr Ad-Din Tusi's discussion on the concept of the family in his book “Akh¬laqi-Nasiri” and his views on the necessity of this institution, are of great im¬por¬tance in the sense that man is a cultural being by nature. Because the family is a door that opens from the individual to society. Tusi's conception of the family is not based on the need to satisfy sexual desi¬res, but (...) on the need to leave a generation that will continue the human race. He deals with the relationship between men and women not in terms of biological needs, but in terms of humanity and morality. The purpose of this study is to explain Tusi's concept of the family in terms of its main features, to show how much he was influenced by the ideas and approaches of previous philosophers in this matter. In this sense, one of the main goals is to de¬ter¬mine the extent to which he influences the subsequent moral thinkers. According to the article, Tusi was influenced by Ibn Sina in the classification of sciences and included moral science as an integral part of practical philosophy. He also deepened the content of moral philosophy in the Islamic world by evaluating the science of family management and politics in this context. At the same time, Tusi de¬tails all three areas of practical philosophy in his book Akhlaqi-Nasiri, which dis¬tin¬guishes him from Ibn Miskawayh. (shrink)

This study discusses the classifications of sects in a treatise named Firqa-ye Nājīye, written in Persian by a Shiite scholar in 982/1574. In this treatise, which is in the Merkez-i İḥyâʾi Heritage Library and has no other copy as far as we know, it has been tried to prove that the Twelver Shiʿa is the saved sect (firqa-yi nājiya) through seventy-three sects classification. The author summarized the seven doubts raised by the devil, the first events that caused the Muslim community (...) (umma) to disagree, and the general information about the sects from al-Milal wa-l-niḥal, the classifications of the sects from Sharḥ al-Mawāqif, but reconstructed the data in these texts according to the Shiite understanding. On the other hand, the main reason for writing this treatise is to respond to Jalāl al-Dīn Davānī’s claims rather than the classification of sects. Nasīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī determined a method for the identification of the saved sect as "differentiating from all sects in matters of theology". He claimed that the Twelver Shīʿīsm differed from the other sects in all matters of theology and was therefore the saved sect. Davānī stated that Twelver Shīʿīsm differed from other sects only with the belief in imamate, which is not the subject of creed, and that it generally agrees with Mu'tazila in other creeds, thus claiming that Tusi's claim is baseless. He also said that, when considered through the same method, Ashʿarīsm is more worthy of being the saved sect, because this sect differs from all sects in matters related to the creeds. Contrary to Davānī's claim, the author of Firqa-ye Nājīye stated that imamate was one of the most important principles of religion and also claimed that the Twelver Shīʿīsm differed from other sects in matters of creed other than imamate. However, he failed to provide sufficient data to justify this claim. (shrink)

In this work the Persian and English texts are edited and published together for the first time. This is Tusi’s major Ismaili work and the most important primary source on Ismaili doctrines during the Alamut period.

The case of Gorgias’ profession has been an object of ongoing dispute among scholars. This is mainly because in some dialogues Plato calls Gorgias a rhetorician, in others a sophist. The purpose of this article is to show that a solution only emerges in the Gorgias, where Plato presents Gorgias’ goals as a rhetorician and its associated arts. On this basis, Plato introduces a systematic division between genuine arts and fake arts, including rhetoric and sophistry, thereby identifying their conceptual differences (...) and similarities. The paper concludes by arguing that Gorgias can be called both a rhetorician and a sophist, provided that the labeling is done from different perspectives. (shrink)

"Bu araştırmada Meraga Rasathanesi'nin kurucusu Nasîrüddin Tûsî'nin öğrencisi, meşhur alim, matematikçi, astronom ve İşrâkî filozof Kutbüddîn-i Şîrâzî'nin hayatı, eserleri, öğrencileri ile XIII. Yüzyılın son çeyreğinde İlhanlı nüfuzu altında bulunan Selçuklu Türkiye'sindeki faaliyetleri incelenmiştir. Şîrâzî, Sivas'ta kadılık ve Gök Medrese'de müderrislik yapmış, daha sonra İslamı kabul eden ilk İlhanlı hükümdarı Ahmed Tekudar tarafından elçi olarak Memluk sultanı Kalavun'a gönderilmiştir. Siyasi görevleri bununla sınırlı olmayan Şirazî, Argun Han tarafından Yakın-Doğu haritasını çizmekle vazifelendirilmiş, o da bu görevi başarıyla ifa ederek İlhanlı Devletinde (...) önemli bir konuma yükselmiştir. Ancak Şirazî bu siyasî görevleriyle pek anılmamaktadır. Nitekim onun ilim adamı sıfatı daha önde olmuş, siyaseti bazı nedenlerle tercih etmiştir. Şirazî Anadolu'da aklî ilimler sahasında dersler vererek Meraga matematik ve astronomi ekolunun buraya taşınmasını sağlamıştır. Daha sonra Tebriz'e giderek yetiştirmiş olduğu öğrenciler ve telif ettiği eserleriyle Anadolu, İran ve Türkistan coğrafyasında ilmî ve fikrî bir birliktelik oluşturmuştur. Daha sonra Semerkant matematik astronomi okulu mensuplarının Osmanlı ülkesine göçmeleriyle, Şirazî'nin astronomi ve matematik sahasındaki eserleri Osmanlı medreselerinde ders kitabı olarak okutulmuştur."--Back cover. (shrink)

İbn Sînâ, Yeter Sebep İlkesi’ni (YSİ), yani her şeyin bir sebebi olduğu ve sebepsiz hiçbir varlığın var olamayacağı iddiasını savunan modern dönem öncesi filozoflarından biridir. YSİ’nin sonuçlarından biri de zorunlulukçuluktur (necessitarianism); yani gerçekte var olan her şeyin aynı zamanda zorunlu olarak var olduğu iddiasıdır. Bu fikre göre sebepler zincirinin her bir üyesi kendinden önceki sebepler tarafından belirlenir. Dolayısıyla YSİ, olayların başka türlü de olabileceğini telkin eden insan sezgisine karşı çıkmaktadır. Bu çalışmadaki amacım, İbn Sînâ sonrası yazarların insan iradesini dışlamak suretiyle (...) YSİ’nin zorunlulukçu sonuçlarını hafifletmeye çalışıp çalışmadıklarını araştırmaktır. Nasîrüddin Tûsî’nin (ö. 672/1274) Cebr ve Kader adlı Farsça risalesi ile Tecrîdü’l-i‘tikâd adlı kelâm kitabı arasında bir karşılaştırma yapmaya odaklanacağım. Bu konuyu seçmemin öncelikli sebebi, insanların eylemlerinin bağımsız fâilleri olduklarını sezgisel olarak bildiklerine dair Tûsî’nin iddialarıdır ki bu, YSİ‘nin evrensel uygulanabilirliği ile çelişiyor gibi görünmektedir. Tûsî’nin özgür irade konusunda, metinlerin karakterine ve yazıldıkları döneme bağlı olarak, bazen İbn Sînâ ile tutarlılık arzeden bazen de Mu‘tezile’ye angaje olan farklı görüşler benimsediğini savunacağım. Tûsî’nin, bazen nedensel olarak etkin olmamasına rağmen insan özgürlüğüne nasıl yer bıraktığını göstereceğim. O, insan özgürlüğünü, insanın karşı karşıya kaldığı fiziksel veya ilahî diğer belirlenim türlerinden bağımsız olarak hareket edebilen farklı bir belirlenim türü olarak anlar. Genel olarak bu mesele, Tûsî’nin İbn Sînâ felsefesine ya da Şiî kelâmına bağlılığını test etmekte ve hatta onu bazı eserlerinde İbn Sînâ’nın bilgi görüşüne karşı bir duruş sergilemeye zorlamaktadır. (shrink)

Zihnî temsillerin onto-epistemolojik statüsü İbn Sînâ sonrası felsefenin en tartışmalı problemleri arasında görülebilir. Problemin kökenleri bir yandan İbn Sînâ’nın farklı varlık düzlemleri arasında yüklemsel birlik elde etme teşebbüsünde, diğer yandan Fahreddin er-Râzî’nin zihnî varlık ve zihnî misallerin tümelliği eleştirisinde bulunur. Fahreddin er-Râzî’nin eleştirileri İbn Sînâ’nın önde gelen takipçilerini, İbn Sînâ’nın mahiyetlerin farklı varlık seviyelerinde korunumu ilkesini ve onun bilgiyi doğanın gayrimaddi temsili olarak tanımlamasını yeniden düşünmeye sevk etmiştir. Fahreddin er-Râzî’nin eleştirilerine karşı Nasîrüddin et-Tûsî mahiyetlerin ontolojik kapsamını daraltmış ve tümel (...) yüklemlemeyi yeniden tanımlamıştır. Kutbüddin er-Râzî’nin tartışmaya dâhil olması daraltma çabalarını daha ileri bir seviyeye taşımıştır. Tûsî’nin mahiyetlere sadece epistemolojik bir rol vererek onların ontolojik kapsamında yaptığı daraltmaya ilaveten Kutbüddin er- Râzî mahiyetlerin epistemolojik kapsamında da daraltmaya gitmiş ve İbn Sînâ’nın aklî suretlerini, hiçbir şekilde tümel olması mümkün olmayan, tikel bir zihindeki tikel suretler olarak değerlendirmiştir. Ayrıca Tûsî’yle birlikte, kendinde mahiyetlerin hariçteki fertler arasında müşterek varlığını reddeden Kutbüddin er-Râzî, bu iki adımdan yola çıkarak mutabakat ve tümellik tasavvurlarını yeniden tanımlamış, İbn Sînâ’nın hilomorfik cevher teorisi için mereolojik olmayan bir yorum geliştirmiştir. Bu makale İbn Sînâcı felsefede on üçüncü yüzyıldan itibaren ortaya çıkan bu adımları, İbn Sînâ’ya özgü gerçekçiliğin dönüşümü olarak okumakta ve bu dönüşüme giderek artan zihinselci bir eğilimin eşlik ettiğini öne sürmektedir. (shrink)

This is a translation of three philosophical questions raised by Tusi (1201–1274) in his letter to Khusrawshahi (1184-1254). These critical questions are related to three main fields of philosophy: Philosophy of Nature, Philosophical Psychology (or Philosophy of the Soul) and Philosophical Theology which is traditionally subsumed as one of the proper subtopics of Metaphysics. Although Tusi did not receive any recorded response from Khusrawshahi, his short letter attracted considerable scholarly attention and received some remarkable responses, in later Islamic philosophy and (...) thus provided an exemplar of the traditional technique of debating by way of “question-answer” correspondence. (shrink)

This is the original Arabic text of three philosophical questions raised by Tusi (1201–1274) in his letter to Khusrawshahi (1184-1254). These critical questions are related to three main fields of philosophy: Philosophy of Nature, Philosophical Psychology (or Philosophy of the Soul) and Philosophical Theology which is traditionally subsumed as one of the proper subtopics of Metaphysics. Although Tusi did not receive any recorded response from Khusrawshahi, his short letter attracted considerable scholarly attention and received some remarkable responses, in later Islamic (...) philosophy and thus provided an exemplar of the traditional technique of debating by way of “question-answer” correspondence. (shrink)

Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī’s _Nasirean Ethics_ is the single most important work on philosophical ethics in the history of Islam. A fine example of medieval Persian-to-Arabic translation technique, this first edition carefully reproduces Middle Arabic elements that can be found throughout the text.

Euclid's Elements were translated into Hebrew from Arabic in the 13th century; but precious few of the Arabic commentaries have come down to us in a Hebrew version. Nonetheless, a study of several texts dealing with the Fifth Postulate of Book I reveals that the Hebrew authors are greatly indebted to Arabic sources.

T?s?, a thirteenth century logician writing in Arabic, uses two logical connectives to build up molecular propositions: ?if-then?, and ?either-or?. By referring to a dichotomous Tree, T?s? shows how to choose the proper disjunction relative to the terms in the disjuncts. He also discusses the disjunctive propositions which follow from a conditional proposition.

This essay deals with a selected part of an epistemological controversy provided by Tūsī in response to the skeptical arguments reported by Rāzī that is related to what might be called "intellectual skepticism," or skepticism regarding the judgments of the intellect, particularly in connection with self-evident principles. It will be shown that Rāzī has cited and exposed a position that seems to be no less than a medieval version of empiricism. Tūsī, in contrast, has presented us with a position that (...) rejects such empiricism. The comparative aim of this essay is to draw attention to some similarities as well as some points of divergence between the kind of skeptical debate we are focusing on here, and some relevant epistemological discussions in the later traditions in the West. ". (shrink)

Avicenna (d. 1037) and Tūsī (d. 1274) have different doctrines on the contradiction and conversion of the absolute proposition. Following Avicenna's presentation of the doctrine in Pointers and reminders, and comparing it with what is given in Tūsī's commentary, allow us to pinpoint a major reason why Avicenna and Tūsī have different treatments of the modal syllogistic. Further comparison shows that the syllogistic system Rescher described in his research on Arabic logic more nearly fits Tūsī than Avicenna. This in turn (...) has consequences for analysing Avicenna's logic, and for writing the history of a fascinating period of change and diversity in the discipline in the medieval Islamic world. (shrink)

Özet Şii-İmamiyye’nin usûlde Mu’tezilenin etkisinde kaldığı iddiaları, hicri dördüncü asırdan itibaren dile getirilmektedir. Buna karşılık usûlî düşüncenin ilk mümessili sayılan Şeyh Müfîd’den itibaren mezhep içinden yükselen sesler bu iddiaları şiddetle reddetmişlerdir. Biz bu çalışmada Mu’tezile kelamına sistematik hüviyet kazandıran ve yazdığı eserlerle Mu’tezile kelamının bugüne ulaşmasında büyük pay sahibi olan Kâdî Abdülcebbâr ile İmamiyye’nin kelam düşüncesinin istikrar bulmasında ve Şeyh Müfîd’le başlatılan usûlî yaklaşımın benimsenip yaygınlaşmasında büyük bir yeri olan Ebû Ca’fer et-Tûsî arasında adalet ilkesi üzerinden bir karşılaştırma yaparak, (...) söz konusu iddiaların ne kadar sübut bulduğunu tespit etmeye çalıştık. Kısmi farklı izahları bir kenara bırakırsak, adalet ilkesinin ispat ve yorumlanmasında iki kelamcı arasında kayda değer bir farklılığın olmadığı görülmektedir. Abstract The claim that the Shi’i Imamite thought is heavily influenced by the Mu’tazilite outlook has been alleged since the fouth century of hijra. However, beginning with Shaikh Mufid, the first representative of the Usuli branch of Shi’a, the Shi’is vehemently denied this allegation. In this article, this issue is dealt with by making a comparison between the idea of Qadi Abd al-Jabbar, the prominent Mu’tazilite scholar who made a major contribution to the consolidation of the schools’ theaching and that of al-Tusi, who also made a contrubitued to the integration of the Shi’ite kalam and the spreading of the usuli approach initiated by Shaikh Mufid. Leaving aside the differences in deatil, it seems that there is no noteworthy difference between their approcah to the issue of justice. Key Words: Qâdî Abd al-Jabbâr, Abû Ja’far al-Tûsî, Husn-Qubh, Divine Justice, Free Will. (shrink)

RésuméDans les Sphériques, Ménélaüs ne démontre pas l'importante proposition III.5, mais propose seulement une esquisse de démonstration. Une fois le livre des Sphériques traduit en arabe, les mathématiciens, à partir de la fin du IXe siècle, ont voulu en donner une démonstration complète. Le développement de la géométrie sphérique a permis à Ibn ʿIrāq de parvenir au but. Un premier article a été consacré à sa contribution. Deux mathématiciens du XIIIe siècle – Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī et Ibn Abī Jarrāda – (...) ont repris la démonstration de cette même proposition, à partir de Ménélaüs et des acquis d'Ibn ʿIrāq. C'est le sujet du présent article. (shrink)

The Mongols’ invasion of the territories of the Islamic world, especially Baghdad, the seat of the Islamic Caliphate, had great consequences, including the fall of Baghdad and the Bani Abbas Caliphate, the killing of the Caliph, and extensive destruction in the geography of their invasion. About half a century after the invasion of the Mongols, Ibn Taymiyyah (1263-1328), regardless of historical documents, accused Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, a prominent thinker, of collusion and cooperation with Hulagu Khan. After Ibn Taymiyyah Harrani, these (...) accusations were followed and disseminated in religious, historical, rijal (the study of hadith narrators and their personality), and even moral books by his students, such as Ibn Qayyim al Jawziyya (1292-1350). This article is an attempt to deny these accusations. Relying on the earliest historical documents, it tries to describe the historical event as it happened. In this regard, the article first provides the text of Nasir al-Din al-Tusi’s short treatise “On the Baghdad Incident”, included in Aladdin Atamalik Juveyni’s “Tarikh-i Jahangusha”, and then presents its descriptive interpretation separately. Although this treatise is short, it contains all the important points, from Hulagu Khan’s decision to go to war to the conquest of Baghdad and the analysis of the internal factors of the fall of the caliphate. This treatise, above all, is a very solid argument. For its author first of all was the witness of the Baghdad events. Secondly, in this writing, Nasir al-Din al-Tusi examines the Mongols’ attack on Baghdad but does not mention his own activity or role in the attack on Baghdad. Thirdly, if he had an activity and a role in this incident, or if he had an intention to take revenge on his religious opponents considering the situation, he should at least have hinted and expressed his approval, which is not the case at all. (shrink)

To say ‘mysticism versus philosophy’ in the context of Islamic civilization means something far different from what it has come to signify in the West, where many philosophers have looked upon mysticism as the abandonment of any attempt to reconcile religious data with intelligent thought. Certainly the Muslim mystics and philosophers sometimes display a certain mutual opposition and antagonism, but never does their relationship even approach incompatibility.

RésuméLes mathématiciens et les philosophes arabophones, comme leurs prédécesseurs grecs, ont soulevé plusieurs questions épistémologiques fondamentales. Parmi ces questions figure celle qui porte sur le concept d’égalité et sur celui de congruence des grandeurs géométriques. Mais qu'entendait-on par de tels concepts? quelle était leur relation à l'idée de mouvement? Comme les réponses à ces questions combinaient souvent des éléments métriques et d'autres, philosophiques, j'ai choisi d’étudier celles d'un mathématicien, d'un philosophe et d'un mathématicien-philosophe.

Philosophy in Iran finds its own way after Avicenna’s death in 1037 and goes it until the late 17th century AD. The article looks at the period following his death and pays special attention to Naṣîr ad-Dîn aṭ-Ṭûsî, and Ibn al-Muqaffa̔ are influential in Ṭûsî’s thought.

In this article we study the development of the mathematical theorem, now known as the T Couple, and discuss the difference between its plane and spherical applications.

adr al-Dīn al-Dashtakī (d. 1498) has proposed a solution to the liar paradox according to which the liar sentence is a self-referential sentence in which the predicate ‘false’ is iterated. Discussing the conditions for the truth-aptness of the sentences with nested and iterated instances of the predicates ‘true’ and/or ‘false’, Dashtakī argued that the liar sentence is not truth-apt at all. In the tradition of Arabic logic, the central elements of Dashtakī's solution—the self-referentiality of the liar sentence and the implicit (...) iteration of the predicate ‘false’—were initially highlighted in two earlier solutions proposed by Naīr al-Dīn al-ūsī (d. 1274) and Shams al-Dīn al-Samarqandī (d. 1322), respectively. Here I investigate all three solutions and show that Dashtakī's solution can be taken as a synthesis of the other two. None of these solutions seems to be convincing at the end of the day. Nevertheless, all of them include significant logical and philosophical insights. In particular, although Dashtakī's solution is not itself compelling, it is only a few steps away from a promising solution. The appendix to this paper includes translations of the relevant passages. (shrink)

It seems Avicenna’s passages regarding God’s knowledge of particulars are susceptible of being given two different types of interpretation. The main difference between these two accounts of his theory concerning God’s knowledge of particulars is that one of them, which I call the Neglected Interpretation, appeals to some metaphysical entities as the proxies of concrete particular objects, which are distinct from God’s essence, to explain God’s knowledge of particulars, while the other type does not. The views of post-Avicennian thinkers like (...) Suhrawardī and Ṭūsī of Avicenna’s account are classifiable under the Neglected Interpretation, as shown by their objections to Avicenna’s theory of God’s knowledge of particulars. This type of interpretation of Avicenna’s theory of God’s knowledge of particulars has been neglected in the secondary English literature on the issue. In this paper, I will present a reconstructed version of this type of interpretation of the Avicennian theory of divine knowledge. (shrink)

This paper shall look briefly into the treatment of some topics related to scepticism in general in works by Barhebraeus, the famous Syrian Orthodox polymath and theologian (1226–1286). He addresses scepticism both directly by a discussion of sensory and intellectual fallacies or sceptical scenarios as well as indirectly by the definition of knowledge and the role of intuitive knowledge regarding primary notions and logical principles, which have an impact on establishing secure knowledge. Despite writing in Syriac, his dealing with the (...) matter is heavily indebted to Arabic sources, primarily contemporary post‐Avicennan authors, and here especially Fakhr al‐Dīn al‐Rāzī (1149–1209) and Naṣīr al‐Dīn al‐Tūṣī (1201–1274) but also Avicenna (980–1037) himself, although Barhebraeus adds a decisively Christian note in some instances. The Syriac tradition, therefore, should not be neglected when dealing with medieval scepticism. (shrink)

Ṭūsī, Naṣīr al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad, 1201-1274's Tajrīd al-ʻaqāʼid; selections; philosophy, Islamic; early works to 1800.

Ṭūsī, Naṣīr al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad, 1201-127 ; Risālah-i is̲bāt al-ʻaql - Criticism and interpretation.

The present piece focuses on the influence of Plotinus' understanding of time and eternity as articulated in Plotinus' third and fifth Enneads upon Mīr Dāmād's (d. 1631–2) conception of eternity, perpetuity, and time found in his Book of Blazing Brands (Kitab al‐Qabasāt). Although Mīr Dāmād's conception of eternity, perpetuity, and time resembles that of Plotinus' cosmology and ontology, he departs from Plotinus' hypostases in establishing strict parameters for each domain. Unlike Plotinus, Mīr Dāmād argues that the realm of eternity is (...) reserved for God alone, while the realm of Perpetuity contains the Platonic Forms. For Mīr Dāmād, the realm of time is an effect of the realm of Perpetuity and a tool for human beings to understand how to measure events in the temporal world. Unlike many other Shī'ite philosophers, Mīr Dāmād's articulation of these three cosmological realms incorporates thought found in the works of both prominent Sunni and Shī'ite scholars such as Ibn Sīnā, Abū Ḥāmid al‐Ghāzālī, Suhrawardī, and Naṣīr al‐Dīn Ṭūsī. Although his most successful student, Mullā Ṣadrā Shirazī, had ultimately disagreed with his teacher's cosmological doctrine, he remained influenced by the multitude of sources that his teacher had used. (shrink)

The traditions about isrāʾīliyyāt that were seen almost in all the types of Islamic sciences appeared in the sources of tafsīr from early periods. These traditions that were generally used to explain the Qurʾān were seen problem and critisized by some exegetical specialists. Even though corresponding to a relative later period in the classical era, an approach was tried to put forward in view of the traditions about isrāʾīliyyāt. This methodological concern for isrāʾīliyyāt in classical period has increased and been (...) influential for many researchers from east and west to work on this issue in modern times. There has been reached to important results about the issues of the definition of isrāʾīliyyāt, the source of it, its spread in Islamic sciences, its aim of usage, the progress of these positive-negative attitudes against these traditions in historical process. But it is important to discuss some evaluations and analysis again that put forward in this process when different cases about the issue are taken into consideration. According to this, a series of problem, such as how the isrāʾīliyyāt can be defined in tafsīr, when the criticism of isrāʾīliyyāt started, whether Biqāʿī was the first exegete who made reference to Bible or not will be discussed considering relevant resources in this article.Summary: Since the early periods, isrā’īliyyāt narratives were used as a source of information in tafsīrs. These narratives, which are transmitted in various tafsīrs of the Qur’ān, one of the main sources of Islamic religion, have also taken the methodological interests of some exegete since the early periods. This interest continued in the modern period, and both Western and Eastern researchers made research on isrā’īliyyāt. Some of the findings, analyses, and claims available in researches on this subject will be reexamined in this article. The first of these is the problem of the definition of isrā’īliyyāt. In contemporary research, inclusive definitions are made for isrā’īliyyāt, seen in all sources. These definitions do not allow for a refined description of isrā’īliyyāt which is handled in terms of different intentions in the sources of each different field and which varies in terms of the issues it covers, leading to the underestimation of some of its aspects in relevant fields. In the definitions, it is stated that isrā’īliyyāt is mostly learned from the Ahl al-Kitāb, (the People of the Book) it became widespread along with Islām and it included narratives about caliphs, dynasties, and Mahdī, as well. Another issue is to be emphasized that they are fictive or mythological. In classical tafsīrs, isrā’īliyyāt is observed to be related mainly with the history of the Ahl al-Kitāb or with the subjects they know about. In the modern era, the narratives about the ancestors of the Arabs have been identified as isrā’īliyyāt. If some of the isrā’īliyyāt narratives are related to the history of Arabs, then their resource should be the historical-cultural memory of Arabs. However, as almost all Qur’ānic stories were somewhat known before the revelation period and relations with the Ahl al-Kitāb dated back to times long before the Islamic period, the claim that these narratives became widespread along with Islām should be revised. It is also problematic to emphasize the legendary nature of some of the isrā’īliyyāt and to make that as a reason to reject all. Such emphasis also leads to the underestimation of the functions of narratives in tafsīrs. In isrā’īliyyāt, tafsīr was used for i) interpreting the ambiguous words in the stories, ii) to bring evidence to the Ahl al-Kitāb, and ii) tarhīb-targhīb (encouragement-warning). These narratives can be used as a source in tafsīr unless they are explicitly falsified by the data of fields such as history, history of religions and archaeology as well as the Qur’ān and the true Sunnah. The first criticisms of isrā’īliyyāt are claimed to belong to exegete like Ibn al-‘Arabī (d. 543/148) or Ibn ‘Aṭīyah (d. 541/1147). However, criticism of isrā’īliyyāt is also observed in the tafsīrs of earlier exegete, such as al-Māturīdī (d. 333/944), al-Māwardī (d. 450/1058) or al-Ṭūsī (d. 460/1067). They do not necessarily have to use the term isrā’īliyyāt explicitly in their criticism like the later ones. If the narratives they criticize and the reasons for their criticism are the same as those of the later exegete, it will be necessary to date the criticism of isrā’īliyyāt back to the 4th Century of the Hegira. The understanding that "the expression in the story is sufficient, it is unnecessary to deal with the ambiguities; instead, it is necessary to deal with the lesson and wisdom in the story" is one of the criteria that Muḥammad ‘Abduh (d. 1905), who is deemed to be the pioneer of the strict criticism of isrā’īliyyāt in the modern period, took as basis in this criticism, is valid for the exegete of the classical period, as well. Although exegete, such as al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923), al-Māturīdī, al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210), and Abū Ḥayyān (d. 745/1344) who had this understanding, gave place to isrā’īliyyāt, these people recognized that "these narratives were not final, binding or necessary”, indeed. The understanding that such expression in the story is sufficient, which is one of the reasons for such awareness in the classical period, seems to have turned into a strict rejection in the modern period. Another issue is the claim that Biqā‘ī (d. 885/1480) was the first exegete to systematically benefit from the Bible in tafsīr in the classical period. However, al-Daylamī (d. 593/1197) before Biqā‘ī, is also observed to have used the Old Testament systematically in tafsīr. He cited the Tanakh in his period in two ways. He either directly quoted from the translation of Tanakh or the Hebrew text written in Arabic letters. Another exegete who used the Tanakh as a source in his tafsīr was al-Ṣafadī (d. 696/1296). He enriched his tafsīr with systematic quotations from the Tanakh. Therefore, the use of the Bible as a source of interpretation in the classical period should not be started with Biqā‘ī. The reason why the pioneer exegete of the classical period did not directly use the Bible is claimed to be the fact that they falsified it and deemed the isrā’īliyyāt narrated from the predecessors to be more reliable. However, it is known that a significant portion of the isrā’īliyyāt, which was orally transferred from the predecessors, is based on written sources, particularly including the apocryphal texts. So just like the Bible, isrā’īliyyāt, which was orally transferred from the predecessors, is problematic in terms of authenticity. This allows us to argue that classical exegete have an inconsistent attitude, indeed. On the other hand, when we take into account the fact that classical exegetes criticize these narratives from time to time and believe that they are not final or binding, the problem of potential inconsistency disappears. Accordingly, they did not deem chain transmission of these narratives from the predecessors by reliable transmitters to be a sufficient reason for their acceptance and adoption for good and all. (shrink)