Averroes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Averroës)
Jump to: navigation, search
Ibn Rušd
ابن رشد
Averroes
BAE09705.jpg
Statue of Ibn Rushd in Córdoba, Spain
Born 14 April 1126
Córdoba, Al-Andalus, Almoravid emirate (in present-day Spain)[1][2][3]
Died 10 December 1198
(aged 72 years)
Marrakesh, Maghreb, Almohad Caliphate (in present-day Morocco)
Era Medieval philosophy (Islamic Golden Age)
Region Islamic philosophy
School Averroism
Metaphysical intellectualism
Main interests
Islamic theology, Philosophy, Islamic Jurisprudence, Mathematics, Medicine, Physics, Astronomy
Notable ideas
Reconciliation of Aristotelianism with Islam

Ibn Rushd (Arabic: ابن رشد‎‎; 14 April 1126 – 10 December 1198), full name (Arabic: أبو الوليد محمد ابن احمد ابن رشد‎, translit. ʾAbū l-Walīd Muḥammad Ibn ʾAḥmad Ibn Rushd‎), often Latinized as Averroes (/əˈvɛrˌz/), was a medieval Andalusian polymath. He wrote on logic, Aristotelian and Islamic philosophy, theology, the Maliki school of Islamic jurisprudence, psychology, political and Andalusian classical music theory, geography, mathematics, and the mediæval sciences of medicine, astronomy, physics, and celestial mechanics. Ibn Rushd was born in Córdoba, Al Andalus (present-day Spain), and died at Marrakesh in present-day Morocco. His body was interred in his family tomb at Córdoba.[7] The 13th-century philosophical movement in Latin Christian and Jewish tradition based on Ibn Rushd's work is called Averroism.

Ibn Rushd was a defender of Aristotelian philosophy against Ash'ari theologians led by Al-Ghazali. Although highly regarded as a legal scholar of the Maliki school of Islamic law, Ibn Rushd's philosophical ideas were considered controversial in Ash'arite Muslim circles.[8] Whereas al-Ghazali believed that any individual act of a natural phenomenon occurred only because God willed it to happen, Ibn Rushd insisted phenomena followed natural laws that God created.[9][10][11]

Ibn Rushd had a greater impact on Christian Europe, being known by the sobriquet "the Commentator" for his detailed emendations to Aristotle. Latin translations of Ibn Rushd's work led the way to the popularization of Aristotle.[12]

Name[edit]

Ibn Rushd's full, transliterated Arabic name is "ʾAbū l-Walīd Muḥammad Ibn ʾAḥmad Ibn Rushd".[13][14] "Averroes" is the Medieval Latin form of "Ibn Rushd", derived from the Spanish pronunciation of the original Arabic name, wherein "Ibn" becomes "Aben" or "Aven".[15] The Latinized name is also spelled in some instances as "Averroës", "Averrhoës", or "Averroès", with the varying accents to mark that the "o" and "e" are separate vowels and not an "œ" diphthong.[16] Other forms of the name include: "Ibin-Ros-din", "Filius Rosadis", "Ibn-Rusid", "Ben-Raxid", "Ibn-Ruschod", "Den-Resched", "Aben-Rassad", "Aben-Rasd", "Aben-Rust", "Avenrosdy", "Avenryz", "Adveroys", "Benroist", "Avenroyth", and "Averroysta".[17]

Biography[edit]

Ibn Rushd was the preeminent philosopher in the history of Al-Andalus. 14th-century painting by Andrea di Bonaiuto

Ibn Rushd was born in Córdoba to a family with a long and well-respected tradition of legal and public service. His grandfather Abu Al-Walid Muhammad (d. 1126) was chief judge of Córdoba under the Almoravids. His father, Abu Al-Qasim Ahmad, held the same position until the Almoravids were replaced by the Almohads in 1146.[18]

Ibn Rushd's education followed a traditional path, beginning with studies in Hadith, linguistics, jurisprudence and scholastic theology. Throughout his life he wrote extensively on philosophy and religion, attributes of God, origin of the universe, metaphysics and psychology. It is generally believed that he was once tutored by Ibn Bajjah (Avempace). His medical education was directed under Abu Jafar ibn Harun of Trujillo in Seville.[19] Ibn Rushd began his career with the help of Ibn Tufail ("Aben Tofail" to the West), the author of Hayy ibn Yaqdhan and philosophic vizier of Almohad king Abu Yaqub Yusuf who was an amateur of philosophy and science. It was Ibn Tufail who introduced him to the court and to Ibn Zuhr ("Avenzoar" to the West), the great Muslim physician, who became Ibn Rushd's teacher and friend. Ibn Rushd's aptitude for medicine was noted by his contemporaries and can be seen in his major enduring work Kitab al-Kulyat fi al-Tibb (Generalities), influenced by the Kitab al-Taisir fi al-Mudawat wa al-Tadbir (Particularities) of Ibn Zuhr.[20] Ibn Rushd later reported how it was also Ibn Tufail that inspired him to write his famous commentaries on Aristotle:

Abu Bakr ibn Tufayl summoned me one day and told me that he had heard the Commander of the Faithful complaining about the disjointedness of Aristotle's mode of expression—or that of the translators—and the resultant obscurity of his intentions. He said that if someone took on these books who could summarize them and clarify their aims after first thoroughly understanding them himself, people would have an easier time comprehending them. "If you have the energy, " Ibn Tufayl told me, "you do it. I'm confident you can, because I know what a good mind and devoted character you have, and how dedicated you are to the art. You understand that only my great age, the cares of my office—and my commitment to another task that I think even more vital—keep me from doing it myself. "[21]

Ibn Rushd also studied the works and philosophy of Ibn Bajjah ("Avempace" to the West), another famous Islamic philosopher who greatly influenced his own Averroist thought.

However, while the thought of his mentors Ibn Tufail and Ibn Bajjah were mystic to an extent, the thought of Ibn Rushd was purely rationalist. Together, the three men are considered the greatest Andalusian philosophers.[18] Ibn Rushd devoted the next 30 years to his philosophical writings.

In 1160, Ibn Rushd was made Qadi (judge) of Seville and he served in many court appointments in Seville, Cordoba, and Morocco during his career. Sometime during the reign of Yaqub al-Mansur, Ibn Rushd's political career was abruptly ended and he faced severe criticism from the Fuqaha (Islamic jurists) of the time.[22]

A contemporary of Ibn Rushd, Abdelwahid al-Marrakushi writing in 1224, reported that there were secret and public reasons for his falling out of favor with Yaqub al-Mansour:[22]

And in his days [Yaqub al-Mansur], Abu al-Walid Ibn Rushd faced his severe ordeal and there were two causes for this; one is known and the other is secret. The secret cause, which was the major reason, is that Abu al-Walid—may God have mercy on his soul—when summarizing, commenting and expending upon Aristotle's book "History of Animals" wrote: "And I saw the Giraffe at the garden of the king of the Berbers".
And that is the same way he would mention another king of some other people or land, as it is frequently done by writers, but he omitted that those working for the service of the king should glorify him and observe the usual protocol. This was why they held a grudge against him but initially, they did not show it and in reality, Abu al-Walid wrote that inadvertently ... Then a number of his enemies in Cordoba, who were jealous of him and were competing with him both in knowledge and nobility, went to Yaqub al-Mansur with excerpts of Abu Walid's work on some old philosophers which were in his own handwriting. They took one phrase out of context that said: "and it was shown that Venus is one of the Gods" and presented it to the king who then summoned the chiefs and noblemen of Córdoba and said to Abu al-Walid in front of them "Is this your handwriting?". Abu al-Walid then denied and the king said "May God curse the one who wrote this" and ordered that Abu al-Walid be exiled and all the philosophy books to be gathered and burned ... And I saw, when I was in Fes, these books being carried on horses in great quantities and burned[22]

— Abdelwahid al-Marrakushi, "The Pleasant Book in Summarizing the History of the Maghreb", (1224)

Ibn Rushd's strictly rationalist views collided with the more orthodox views of Abu Yusuf Ya'qub al-Mansur, who therefore eventually banished Ibn Rushd in 1195 and ordered his writings burned, though he had previously appointed him as his personal physician. Ibn Rushd was not allowed to return to Marrakesh until 1197, shortly before his death in the year 1198 AD. His body was returned to Córdoba for burial.[23]

Works[edit]

Imaginary debate between Ibn Rushd and Porphyry. Monfredo de Monte Imperiali Liber de herbis, 14th century.[24]

Ibn Rushd's first writings date from his age of 31 (year 1157).[25] His works were spread over 20,000 pages covering a variety of different subjects, including early Islamic philosophy, logic in Islamic philosophy, Islamic medicine, mathematics, astronomy, Arabic grammar, Islamic theology, Sharia (Islamic law), and Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence). In particular, his most important works dealt with Islamic philosophy, medicine and Fiqh. He wrote at least 80 original works, which included 28 works on philosophy, 20 on medicine, 8 on law, 5 on theology, and 4 on grammar, in addition to his commentaries on most of Aristotle's works and his commentary on Plato's The Republic.[18]

Ibn Rushd commentaries on Aristotle were the foundation for the Aristotelian revival in the 12th and 13th centuries. Ibn Rushd wrote short commentaries on Aristotle's work in logic, physics, and psychology. Ibn Rushd long commentaries provided an in depth line by line analysis of Aristotle's "Posterior Analytics," "De Anima," "Physics," "De Caelo," and the "Metaphysics."[26]

His most important original philosophical work was The Incoherence of the Incoherence (Tahafut al-tahafut), in which he defended Aristotelian philosophy against al-Ghazali's claims in The Incoherence of the Philosophers (Tahafut al-falasifa).

In Fasl al-Maqal fi ma bayn al-Hikma wa al-Shariah min Ittisal (فصل المقال في ما بين الحكمة و الشريعة من إتصال translated as The Harmony of Religion and Philosophy, or The Decisive Treatise, Determining the Nature of the Connection between Religion and Philosophy), Ibn Rushd argues that philosophy and revelation do not contradict each other, and are essentially different means of reaching the same truth.[27][28] However, he warns against teaching philosophical methods to the general populace.

Other works include Kitab al-Kashf an Manahij al-Adilla كتاب الكشف عن مناهج الادلة .

Ibn Rushd is also a highly regarded legal scholar of the Maliki school. Perhaps his best-known work in this field is Bidāyat al-Mujtahid wa Nihāyat al-Muqtaṣid ( بداية المجتهد و نهاية المقتصد), a textbook of Maliki doctrine in a comparative framework.

Jacob Anatoli translated several of the works of Ibn Rushd from Arabic into Hebrew in the 13th century. Many of them were later translated from Hebrew into Latin by Jacob Mantino and Abraham de Balmes. Other works were translated directly from Arabic into Latin by Michael Scot. Many of his works in logic and metaphysics have been permanently lost, while others, including some of the longer Aristotelian commentaries, have only survived in Latin or Hebrew translation, not in the original Arabic. The fullest version of his works is in Latin, and forms part of the multi-volume Juntine edition of Aristotle published in Venice 1562–1574.

Commentaries on Aristotle and Plato[edit]

Commentarium magnum Averrois in Aristotelis De Anima libros. French Manuscript, third quarter of the 13th century.

Ibn Rushd wrote commentaries on most of the surviving works of Aristotle working from Arabic translations. He wrote three types of commentaries. The short commentary (jami) is generally an epitome; the middle commentary (talkhis) is a paraphrase; the long commentary (tafsir) includes the whole text with a detailed analysis of each line.[29]

Not having access to Aristotle's Politics, Ibn Rushd substituted Plato's Republic. Ibn Rushd, following Plato's paternalistic model, advances an authoritarian ideal. Absolute monarchy, led by a philosopher-king, creates a justly ordered society. This requires extensive use of coercion,[30] although persuasion is preferred and is possible if the young are properly raised.[31] Rhetoric, not logic, is the appropriate road to truth for the common man. Demonstrative knowledge via philosophy and logic requires special study. Rhetoric aids religion in reaching the masses.[32]

Following Plato, Ibn Rushd accepts the principle of women's equality. They should be educated and allowed to serve in the military; the best among them might be tomorrow's philosophers or rulers.[33][34] He also accepts Plato's illiberal measures such as the censorship of literature. He uses examples from Arab history to illustrate just and degenerate political orders.[35]

Medicine[edit]

Colliget

Ibn Rushd wrote a medical encyclopedia called Kulliyat (Colliget) ("Generalities", i. e. general medicine), known in its Latin translation as Colliget.[36] He also made a compilation of the works of Galen, and wrote a commentary on The Canon of Medicine (Al-Qanun fi 't-Tibb) of Avicenna (Ibn Sina) (980–1037).

Physics[edit]

Ibn Rush also authored three books on physics namely: Short Commentary on the Physics, Middle Commentary on the Physics and Long Commentary on the Physics. Ibn Rushd defined and measured force as "the rate at which work is done in changing the kinetic condition of a material body" and correctly argued "that the effect and measure of force is change in the kinetic condition of a materially resistant mass". He took a particular and keen interest in the understanding of "motor force".[37][38]

Ibn Rushd also developed the notion that bodies have a (non-gravitational) inherent resistance to motion into physics. This idea in particular was adopted by Thomas Aquinas and subsequently by Johannes Kepler, who referred to this fact as "Inertia".[39][40]

In optics, Ibn Rushd followed Alhazen's incorrect explanation that a rainbow is due to reflection, not refraction.[41]

Astronomy[edit]

Regarding his studies in astronomy, Ibn Rushd argued for a strictly concentric model of the universe, and explained sunspots and scientific reasoning regarding the occasional opaque colors of the moon. He also worked on the description of the spheres, and movement of the spheres.[42]

Psychology[edit]

Ibn Rushd also made some studies regarding Active intellect and Passive intellect, both of the following were formerly regarded subjects of Psychology.[8][43][44]

Jurisprudence and law[edit]

Ibn Rushd is also a highly regarded legal scholar of the Maliki school. Perhaps his best-known work in this field is "Bidāyat al-Mujtahid wa Nihāyat al-Muqtaṣid, "a textbook of Maliki doctrine in a comparative framework, which is rendered in English as The Distinguished Jurist's Primer.[45] He is also the author of "al-Bayān wa'l-Taḥṣīl, wa'l-Sharḥ wa'l-Tawjīh wa'l-Ta`līl fi Masā'il al-Mustakhraja, "a long and detailed commentary based on the "Mustakhraja" of Muḥammad al-`Utbī al-Qurtubī.

Philosophical ideas[edit]

The tradition of Islamic philosophy[edit]

Ibn Rushd furthered the tradition of Greek philosophy in the Islamic world (falsafa). His commentaries removed the neo-Platonic bias of his predecessors.[2] Criticizing al-Farabi's attempt to merge Plato and Aristotle's ideas, Ibn Rushd argued that Aristotle's philosophy diverged in significant ways from Plato's.[46] Ibn Rushd rejected Avicenna's Neoplatonism[47] which was partly based on the works of neo-Platonic philosophers, Plotinus and Proclus, which were mistakenly attributed to Aristotle.[48]

In metaphysics, or more exactly ontology, Ibn Rushd rejects the view advanced by Avicenna that existence is merely accidental. Avicenna holds that "essence is ontologically prior to existence". The accidental are attributes which are not essential, but rather are additional contingent characteristics. Ibn Rushd, following Aristotle, holds that individual existing substances are primary. One may separate them mentally; however, ontologically speaking, existence and essence are one.[49][50][51] According to Fakhry,[52] this represents a change from Plato's theory of Ideas, where ideas precede particulars, to Aristotle's theory where particulars come first and the essence is "arrived at by a process of abstraction."

Reconciliation of religion and philosophy[edit]

His most important original philosophical work was The Incoherence of the Incoherence (Tahafut al-tahafut), in which he defended Aristotelian philosophy against al-Ghazali's (AD 1058–1111) claims in The Incoherence of the Philosophers (Tahafut al-falasifa).[53] Al-Ghazali had argued that Aristotelianism, especially as presented in the writings of Avicenna, was self-contradictory and an affront to the teachings of Islam. In particular he argued that three philosophical points (viz. a pre-eternal world, God only knowing universal—that is to say, Platonic—characteristics of particulars, and a spiritual rather than physical resurrection) constituted not just heresy, but rather disbelief in Islam itself.[54] Ibn Rushd's rebuttal was two-pronged: First, he contended that al-Ghazali's arguments were mistaken, arguing that the Qur'an actually commanded devout Muslims to study of philosophy.[19] Second, Ibn Rushd contended that he actually agreed with al-Ghazali in regards to a number of the latter's criticisms of Avicenna; Ibn Rushd argued that the system of Avicenna was a distortion of genuine Aristotelianism, and as a result, al-Ghazali was effectively aiming at the wrong target. Ibn Rushd thus argues that his own system is, as R. Arnaldez notes, "a reconstruction of the true philosophy, that of Aristotle himself, against the false, that of the neo-Platonic falāsifa, which distorted the thinking of Aristotle".[13]

Whereas al-Ghazali believed that phenomenon such as cotton burning when coming into contact with fire happened each and every time only because God willed it to happen: "all earthly occurrences depend on heavenly occurrences."[55] Ibn Rushd, by contrast insisted while God created the natural law, humans "could more usefully say that fire cause cotton to burn—because creation had a pattern that they could discern."[9][10][11]

In Fasl al-Maqal (Decisive Treatise), Ibn Rushd argues for the legality of philosophical investigation under Islamic law, and that there is no inherent contradiction between philosophy and religion[56]

In Kitab al-Kashf, which argued against the proofs of Islam advanced by the Ash'arite school and discussed what proofs, on the popular level, should be used instead[citation needed].

Nature of God[edit]

In the treatise Al-Kashf 'an Manahij al-Adilla fi ‘Aqaid al-Milla (The Exposition of the Methods of Proof Concerning the Beliefs of the Community), Ibn Rushd examined and critiqued the doctrines of four sects of Islam: the Asharites, Mutazilites, the Sufis and the those whom he deems "literalists." While his work focuses on many topics, part of it examines the various sects' proofs for the existence of God, many of which Ibn Rushd finds objectionable. After considering and critiquing the various argument, he argues that there are only two arguments that are worth upholding: the arguments from "providence" and "invention". The first argument considers the fact that the world and the universe seem fine-tuned to support human life. According to Ibn Rushd, given the fact that the universe seems to have been made just for humans, this suggests a creator who set the parameters of the universe in the first place. The second argument, also known as the teleological argument, contends that everything in the world appears as if it were invented. This leads to the conclusion that there is a designer behind creation.[19]

In his philosophical treatises, Ibn Rushd affirms the doctrine of divine unity. Ibn Rushd also argues that God has seven divine attributes: knowledge, life, power, will, hearing, vision, and speech. In regards to the first, the philosopher argued that "God, being the cause of the universe, has knowledge based on being its cause; while humans have knowledge based on the effects of such causes."[19] Thus human knowledge and divine knowledge, while related, are different attributes. Given that life necessarily results from the natural world, and God is the creator of said world, Ibn Rushd thus contends that life is by necessity the second attribute of the divine. The attributes of will and power are essential aspects of what it means to be "God", and given that God exists (per the arguments given in the above paragraph), Ibn Rushd logically concludes that he must also have these attributes by definition. As to speech, Ibn Rushd argues that knowledge and power inevitably give rise to speech, and given that God has the first two, he thus has the third. Finally, in regards to vision and speech, Ibn Rushd points out that because God created the world, he necessarily knows every part of it, just like an artist that understands their work intimately. Given that two elements of the world are the visual and the auditory, God must necessarily possess the vision and speech.[19]

Eternity of the world[edit]

Ibn Rushd looked to Aristotle as to whether the world was eternal. In his Physics, the Greek philosopher argues that everything that comes into existence does so from a substratum. Therefore, if the underlying matter of the universe came into existence, it would come into existence from a substratum. But the nature of matter is precisely to be the substratum from which other things arise. Consequently, the underlying matter of the universe could have come into evidence only from an already existing matter exactly like itself; to assume that the underlying matter of the universe came into existence would require assuming that an underlying matter already existed. As this assumption is self-contradictory, Aristotle argued, matter must be eternal.[57] Because in his eyes, "Aristotle demonstrated the eternity of matter", Ibn Rushd "abandon[ed] belief in the creation out of nothing."[13]

This is not to say that Ibn Rushd denied the Creation; rather, he proposed an eternal creation. Oliver Leaman explains Ibn Rushd's argument as such:

We [as humans] can decide to do something, we can wait for a certain time before acting, we can wonder about our future actions; but such possibilities cannot arise for [an eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent] God. In his case there is no gap between desire and action, nothing stands in the way of his activity; and yet we are told by al-Ghazali that God suddenly created the world. What differentiates one time from another for God? What could motivate him to create the world at one particular time as opposed to another? For us, different times are different because they have different qualitative aspects, yet before the creation of the world, when there was nothing around to characterize one time as distinct from another, there is nothing to characterize one time over another as the time for creation to take place.[58]

Significance[edit]

Ibn Rushd, detail of the fresco The School of Athens by Raphael.

Ibn Rushd is most famous for his commentaries of Aristotle's works, which had been mostly forgotten in the West. Before 1150, only a few of Aristotle's works existed in translation in Latin Europe, although the tradition of great philosophers and poets of antiquity continued to be studied and copied in the Greek Byzantium. It was to some degree through the Latin translations of Ibn Rushd's work beginning in the thirteenth century, that the legacy of Aristotle was recovered in the Latin West.

Ibn Rushd's work on Aristotle spans almost three decades, and he wrote commentaries on almost all of Aristotle's work except for Aristotle's Politics, to which he did not have access. Hebrew translations of his work also had a lasting impact on Jewish philosophy. Moses Maimonides, Samuel Ben Tibbon, Juda Ben Solomon Choen, and Shem Tob Ben Joseph Falaquera were Jewish philosophers influenced by Ibn Rushd.[59] In regards to Muslim philosophy, in his work Fasl al-Maqāl (often translated into English as The Decisive Treatise), he stresses the importance of analytical thinking as a prerequisite to interpret the Qur'an. However, because his death coincided with a change in the culture of Al-Andalus, Ibn Rushd had no major influence on Islamic philosophic thought until modern times.[60] Those Islamic philosophers who did comment on his work often condemned his writings as unorthodox.[53]

In the Christian West, Ibn Rushd's ideas were assimilated by Siger of Brabant and Thomas Aquinas and others (especially those from the University of Paris) who situated themselves in the Christian scholastic tradition, which valued Aristotelian logic. With that said, famous scholastics such as Aquinas did not refer to Ibn Rushd by name, instead choosing to refer to him simply as "The Commentator" (with Aristotle in turn being given the sobriquet "The Philosopher"). Ultimately, Ibn Rushd received a mixed reception from Christian Europe: while he was regarded fairly highly for his detailed commentaries on the works of Aristotle, his person philosophy—which came to be known as Averroism—was criticized for not being compatible with Christian doctrine. The Catholic Encyclopedia, for instance, notes:

His doctrines had a varying fortune in Christian schools. At first they secured a certain amount of adherence, then, gradually, their incompatibility with Christian teaching became apparent, and finally, owing to the revolt of the Renaissance from everything Scholastic, they secured once more a temporary hearing. His commentaries, however, had immediate and lasting success. St. Thomas Aquinas used the "Grand Commentary" of Averroes as his model, being, apparently, the first Scholastic to adopt that style of exposition ... he always spoke of the Arabian commentator as one who had [in his view] perverted the Peripatetic tradition, but whose words, nevertheless, should be treated with respect and consideration.[61]

Indeed, Aquinas considered Ibn Rushd to be the premiere commentator on Aristotle, but he disagreed with his religious and theological arguments.[61][62] In regards to this point, Norman Kretzmann argues that, through the use of the title "The Commentator", Aquinas was able to convey Ibn Rushd's understanding of Aristotle without having to accept or condone Ibn Rushd's personal understanding of philosophy.[62]

Legacy[edit]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Liz Sonneborn: Averroes (Ibn Rushd)): Muslim scholar, philosopher, and physician of the twelfth century, The Rosen Publishing Group, 2005 (ISBN 1404205144, ISBN 978-1-4042-0514-7) p.31 [1]
  2. ^ a b (Leaman 2002, p. 27)
  3. ^ (Fakhry 2001, p. 1)
  4. ^ A.C. Brown, Jonathan (2014). Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy. Oneworld Publications. p. 12. ISBN 978-1780744209. Thomas Aquinas admitted relying heavily on Averroes to understand Aristotle. 
  5. ^ "H-Net Reviews". H-net.org. Retrieved 2012-10-13. 
  6. ^ "Spinoza on Philosophy and Religion: The Averroistic Sources" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-12-03. 
  7. ^ Duignan, Brian (2010). Medieval Philosophy: From 500 to 1500 Ce. The Rosen Publishing Group. p. 102. ISBN 1615302441. Retrieved November 7, 2012. 
  8. ^ a b "Averroës (Ibn Rushd) > By Individual Philosopher > Philosophy". Philosophybasics.com. Retrieved 2012-10-13. 
  9. ^ a b Kadri, Sadakat (2012). Heaven on Earth: A Journey Through Shari'a Law from the Deserts of Ancient Arabia ... macmillan. pp. 118–9. ISBN 9780099523277. 
  10. ^ a b For al-Ghazali's argument see The Incoherence of the Philosophers. Translated by Michael E. Marmura. 2nd ed, Provo Utah, 2000, pp.116-7.
  11. ^ a b For Ibn Rushd's response, see Khalid, Muhammad A. ed. Medieval Islamic Philosophical Writings, Cambridge UK, 2005, p.162
  12. ^ Sonneborn, Liz (2006). Averroes (Ibn Rushd): Muslim Scholar, Philosopher, and Physician of the Twelfth Century. The Rosen Publishing Group. p. 89. ISBN 1404205144. Retrieved November 3, 2012. 
  13. ^ a b c Arnaldez, R. (2012). "Ibn Rus̲h̲d". In Bearman, P.; Bianquis, T.; Bosworth, C. E.; van Donzel, E.; Heinrichs, W. P. Encyclopaedia of Islam (2 ed.). Brill Publishers. Retrieved June 21, 2017 – via BrillOnline Reference Works. 
  14. ^ Rosenthal, Erwin I.J. (April 14, 2016). "Averroes". Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. Retrieved June 21, 2017. 
  15. ^ Renan, Ernest (1882). Averroès et l'Averroïsme: Essai Historique (in French). Calmann-Lévy. p. 6. Retrieved June 21, 2017. Le nom latin d' Averroès s'est formé d'Ibn-Roschd par l'effet de la prononciation espagnole, où Ibn devient Aben ou Aven. 
  16. ^ Robert Irwin (2006). Dangerous Knowledge: Orientalism and its Discontents. The Overlook Press. ISBN 978-1-58567-835-8.
  17. ^ Renan, Ernest (1882). Averroès et l'Averroïsme: Essai Historique (in French). Calmann-Lévy. p. 6. Retrieved June 21, 2017. Peu de noms ont subi des transcriptions aussi variées : Ibin-Rosdin, Filius Rosadis, Ibn Rusid, Ben-Raxid, Ibn Ruschod, Ben-Resched, Aben Rassad, Aben-Rois, Aben-Rasd. Aben-Rust, Avenrosd, Avenryz, Adveroys, Benroist, Avenroyth, Averroysta, etc. 
  18. ^ a b c Ahmad, Jamil (September 1994), "Averroes", Monthly Renaissance, 4 (9), retrieved 2008-10-14 
  19. ^ a b c d e H. Chad Hillier (2006). Averroes (Averroes) (1126–1198 CE), Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  20. ^ Bynum, WF & Bynum, Helen (2006), Dictionary of Medical Biography, Greenwood Press, ISBN 0-313-32877-3
  21. ^ Seyyed Hossein Nasr and Oliver Leaman (1996), History of Islamic Philosophy, p. 314, Routledge, ISBN 0-415-13159-6.
  22. ^ a b c Abdelwahid al-Marrakushi, al-Mojib fi Talkhis Akhbar al-Maghrib [The Pleasant Book in Summarizing the History of the Maghreb], pp. 150–151 (1224), King Saud University
  23. ^ Menocal, Maria Rosa (29 November 2009). The Ornament of the World: How Muslims, Jews, and Christians Created a Culture of Tolerance in Medieval Spain. Little, Brown. p. 156. ISBN 978-0-316-09279-1. 
  24. ^ "Inventions et decouvertes au Moyen-Age", Samuel Sadaune, p.112
  25. ^ Kenny, Joseph. "Chronology of the works of Ibn-Rushd". Archived from the original on August 3, 2002. Retrieved April 18, 2014. 
  26. ^ Richard C. Taylor (2005). Richard C. Taylor; Peter Adamson, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Arabic Philosophy. Cambridge University Press. p. 181. ISBN 978-0521520690. 
  27. ^ Hillier, H. Chad. "Ibn Rushd (Averroes)". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved January 3, 2017. 
  28. ^ Belo, Catarina (December 1, 2016). "Averroes (d. 1198), The Decisive Treatise". doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199917389.013.37. Retrieved January 3, 2017. 
  29. ^ McGinnis, Jon, ed. (2007). Classical Arabic Philosophy: An Anthology of Sources. Hackett Pub Co Inc. p. 295. ISBN 978-0-87220-871-1. 
  30. ^ Black, Antony (2011). The History of Islamic Political Thought (2nd ed.). Edinburgh University Press. p. 122. ISBN 978-0-7486-3987-8. 
  31. ^ (Fakhry 2001, p. 106)
  32. ^ Robert Pasnau (Nov–Dec 2011). "The Islamic Scholar Who Gave Us Modern Philosophy". Humanities. 32 (6). 
  33. ^ (Averroes 2005, p. xix)
  34. ^ (Fakhry 2001, p. 110)
  35. ^ (Fakhry 2001, p. 114)
  36. ^ "ملخص لأعمال ابن زهر وابن رشد الطبية". 
  37. ^ http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof: oso/9780199567737.001.0001/acprof-9780199567737
  38. ^ IBN RUSHD: AVERROES PB - Urvoy. 1991-04-25. Retrieved 2012-10-13. 
  39. ^ Rushdī Rāshid; Régis Morelon. Encyclopedia of the History of Arabic Science. Retrieved 2012-10-13. 
  40. ^ Abdus Salam; H. R. Dalafi; Mohamed Hassan. Renaissance of Sciences in Islamic Countries. Retrieved 2012-10-13. 
  41. ^ Hüseyin Gazi Topdemir (2007). "Kamal Al-Din Al-Farisi's Explanation of the Rainbow" (PDF). Humanity & Social Sciences Journal. 2 (1): 75–85 [p. 77]. 
  42. ^ "Ibn Rushd [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]". Iep.utm.edu. 2010-01-05. Retrieved 2012-10-13. 
  43. ^ The Legacy of Muslim Spain. Retrieved 2012-10-13. 
  44. ^ Ibn Rushd's Metaphysics: A Translation with Introduction of Ibn Rushd's ... – Averročs. 1986-12-31. Retrieved 2012-10-13. 
  45. ^ Nyazee, The Distinguished Jurist's Primer, 2 vols. (Reading: Garnet Publishing 1994 & 1996)
  46. ^ (Fakhry 2001, p. 6)
  47. ^ (Fakhry 2001, p. 7)
  48. ^ Popkin, Richard H., ed. (1999). The Columbia History of Western Philosophy. MJF Books. pp. 184–185. . The works in question were the Liber de Causis and The Theology of Aristotle.
  49. ^ Hyman, Arthur, ed. (2010). Philosophy in the Middle Ages: The Christian, Islamic, and Jewish Traditions (3rd ed.). Hackett Publishing Co. p. 285. ISBN 978-1-60384-208-2. 
  50. ^ (Fakhry 2001, pp. 8–9)
  51. ^ (Leaman 2002, p. 35)
  52. ^ (Fakhry 2001, pp. 8)
  53. ^ a b Esposito, John L. (ed.). "Ibn Rushd". The Islamic World: Past and Present. Oxford University Press. Retrieved April 8, 2017 – via Oxford Islamic Studies Online. 
  54. ^ Leaman, Oliver (2002). An Introduction to Classical Islamic Philosophy. Cambridge University Press. p. 55. ISBN 978-0-521-79757-3. 
  55. ^ Averroes. Ibn Rushd al-Qurtubi Averroes' Tahafut al-tahafut E-text Edition (The Incoherence of the Incoherence). 1. Translated by van den Bergh, Simon. Trustees of the "E. J. W. Gibb Memorial". Retrieved September 15, 2015. 
  56. ^ Sarrió, Diego R. (2015). "The Philosopher as the Heir of the Prophets: Averroes’s Islamic Rationalism". Al-Qanṭara. 36 (1): 45–68. ISSN 1988-2955. doi:10.3989/alqantara.2015.002.  p.48
  57. ^ Aristotle, Physics I, 7.
  58. ^ Leaman, Oliver (1998). "Ibn Rushd, Abu'l Walid Muhammad (1126-98)". In Craig, Edward. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge. Retrieved June 21, 2017 – via Islamic Philosophy Online. 
  59. ^ (Fakhry 2001, p. 132)
  60. ^ (Leaman 2002, p. 28)
  61. ^ a b Turner, William (1907). "Averroes". Catholic Encyclopedia. Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved April 8, 2017. 
  62. ^ a b Kretzmann, Norman (1993). The Cambridge Companion to Aquinas. Cambridge University Press. p. 60. ISBN 9780521437691. 
  63. ^ Ana Ruiz, Vibrant Andalusia: The Spice of Life in Southern Spain, p. 42.

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]

Works of Averroes
  • DARE, the Digital Averroes Research Environment, an ongoing effort to collect digital images of all Averroes manuscripts and full texts of all three language-traditions.
  • Averroes, Islamic Philosophy Online (links to works by and about Averroes in several languages)
  • The Philosophy and Theology of Averroes: Tractata translated from the Arabic, trans. Mohammad Jamil-ur-Rehman, 1921
  • The Incoherence of the Incoherence translation by Simon van den Bergh. [N. B. : This also contains a translation of most of the tahafut as the refutations are mostly commentary of al-Ghazali statements that were quoted verbatim.] There is also an Italian translation by Massimo Campanini, Averroè, L'incoerenza dell'incoerenza dei filosofi, Turin, Utet, 1997.
  • SIEPM Virtual Library, including scanned copies (PDF) of the Editio Juntina of Averroes' works in Latin (Venice 1550–1562)
Information about Averroes