{"title":"Philosophical and Philological Debates on Kulliyyāt I.1.ii of Ibn Sīnā’s Qānūn: From Faḫr al-Dīn al-Rāzī to Quṭb al-Dīn al-Šīrāzī","authors":"Osama Eshera","doi":"10.1163/18778372-12340025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe debates on Kulliyyāt I.1.ii of Ibn Sīnā’s Qānūn (“on the subjects of medicine”) were initiated by Faḫr al-Dīn al-Rāzī and continued by Afḍal al-Dīn al-Ḫūnaǧī, Naǧm al-Dīn al-Naḫǧawānī, Yaʿqūb ibn Ġanāʾim al-Sāmirī, Rafīʿ al-Dīn al-Ǧīlī, Ibn al-Nafīs, and Ibn al-Quff al-Masīḥī. In his own commentary, entitled al-Tuḥfa al-saʿdiyya, Quṭb al-Dīn al-Šīrāzī preserved and scrutinized his predecessors’ commentaries, in order to offer what he believed to be more conclusive interpretations of Ibn Sīnā. Focusing on the introductory part of Kulliyyāt I.1.ii, we show that the commentators were divided not only on philosophical issues, but also on the very text that should be attributed to Ibn Sīnā.","PeriodicalId":43744,"journal":{"name":"Oriens","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oriens","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18778372-12340025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The debates on Kulliyyāt I.1.ii of Ibn Sīnā’s Qānūn (“on the subjects of medicine”) were initiated by Faḫr al-Dīn al-Rāzī and continued by Afḍal al-Dīn al-Ḫūnaǧī, Naǧm al-Dīn al-Naḫǧawānī, Yaʿqūb ibn Ġanāʾim al-Sāmirī, Rafīʿ al-Dīn al-Ǧīlī, Ibn al-Nafīs, and Ibn al-Quff al-Masīḥī. In his own commentary, entitled al-Tuḥfa al-saʿdiyya, Quṭb al-Dīn al-Šīrāzī preserved and scrutinized his predecessors’ commentaries, in order to offer what he believed to be more conclusive interpretations of Ibn Sīnā. Focusing on the introductory part of Kulliyyāt I.1.ii, we show that the commentators were divided not only on philosophical issues, but also on the very text that should be attributed to Ibn Sīnā.
1.关于Kulliyyāt的辩论。二世伊本年代īān S Qānūn(“医学学科”)是由足总ḫr al-Dīn al-Rāzī和持续Afḍal al-Dīn al -Ḫūnaǧī,naǧm al-Dīn al-Naḫǧawānī,丫ʿ问ūb伊本Ġāʾim地基ā米尔īRafīʿal-Dīn al -Ǧīlī,伊本al-Nafī年代,和伊本al-Quff al-Masīḥī。在他自己的题为al-Tuḥfa al-sa al- diyya的注释中,Quṭb al- d n al-Šīrāzī保存并仔细审查了他的前辈的注释,以便提供他认为对伊本s - nā更结论性的解释。重点介绍Kulliyyāt I.1的介绍部分。ii,我们表明,评论员不仅在哲学问题上存在分歧,而且在应该归因于伊本·桑努伊的文本上也存在分歧。
期刊介绍:
Oriens is dedicated to extending our knowledge of intellectual history and developments in the rationalist disciplines in Islamic civilization, with a special emphasis on philosophy, theology, and science. These disciplines had a profoundly rich and lasting life in Islamic civilization and often interacted in complex ways--from the period of their introduction to Islamic civilization in the translation movement that began in the eighth century, through the early and classical periods of development, to the post-classical age, when they shaped even such disciplines as legal theory and poetics. The journal''s range extends from the early and classical to the early modern periods (ca. 700-1900 CE) and it engages all regions and languages of Islamic civilization. In the tradition of Hellmut Ritter, who founded Oriens in 1948, the central focus of interest of the journal is on the medieval and early modern periods of the Near and Middle East. Within this framework, the opening up of the sources and the pursuit of philological and historical research based on original source material is the main concern of its editors and contributors. In addition to individual articles, Oriens welcomes proposals for thematic volumes within the series.