{"title":"Reconsidering Arabic Roots for the <i>Tertia Via</i>","authors":"Cornelis van Lit","doi":"10.2478/ejsta-2023-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper reopens the debate on the possibility that Aquinas borrowed his tertia via from a Latin translation of Maimonides ‘Guide for the Perplexed’. After introducing the text of the tertia via , I shall analyze the first part and conclude that while a ‘metaphysical’, tenseless reading is correct, we should not be nervous to call Aquinas’s reasoning for what it is: flawed. Framing the problematic passage in its historical context, I shall then argue that the flaw lies not so much with Aquinas, but with the source he was borrowing from. This is Maimonides’ Dalālat al-ḥāʾirīn (“The Guide for the Perplexed”), and in fact more specifically the blame is to be given to an early translator into Latin.","PeriodicalId":500329,"journal":{"name":"European Journal for the Study of Thomas Aquinas","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal for the Study of Thomas Aquinas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/ejsta-2023-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract This paper reopens the debate on the possibility that Aquinas borrowed his tertia via from a Latin translation of Maimonides ‘Guide for the Perplexed’. After introducing the text of the tertia via , I shall analyze the first part and conclude that while a ‘metaphysical’, tenseless reading is correct, we should not be nervous to call Aquinas’s reasoning for what it is: flawed. Framing the problematic passage in its historical context, I shall then argue that the flaw lies not so much with Aquinas, but with the source he was borrowing from. This is Maimonides’ Dalālat al-ḥāʾirīn (“The Guide for the Perplexed”), and in fact more specifically the blame is to be given to an early translator into Latin.
摘要本文重新开启了一场关于阿奎那从迈蒙尼德的《迷惘指南》的拉丁文译本中借用了他的信条的可能性的辩论。在介绍了《论》的文本之后,我将分析第一部分,并得出结论,尽管“形而上学的”、无时态的阅读是正确的,但我们不应该紧张地称阿奎那的推理是:有缺陷的。将这段有问题的段落置于其历史背景中,然后我将论证其缺陷与其说在于阿奎那,不如说是在于他所借用的来源。这是迈蒙尼德的Dalālat al-ḥā ā ir n(“困惑的指南”),事实上,更具体地说,应该归咎于一位早期的拉丁语译者。