{"title":"6 / 12世纪也门的zayd神学家辩论阿维森纳哲学","authors":"H. Ansari, S. Schmidtke","doi":"10.1163/24682470-12340068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis article offers critical editions of three texts by Zaydī theologians of sixth/twelfth-century Yemen refuting philosophical notions. The three texts are Qāḍī Jaʿfar b. Aḥmad b. ʿAbd al-Salām al-Buhlūlī’s (d. 573/1177-78) Kitāb al-Risāla al-munāṣifa li-l-mutakallimīn wa-l-falāsifa (Masʾalat al-nafs) and two tracts by al-Ḥasan al-Raṣṣāṣ (d. 584/1188), al-Masʾala al-kāshifa ʿan buṭlān shubhat al-falāsifa, a refutation of the philosophers’ doctrine of the eternity of the world, and Masʾala fī ibṭāl al-qawl bi-talāzum al-hayūlā wa-l-ṣūra wa-anna l-jism murakkab minhumā, a refutation of hylomorphism. Qāḍī Jaʿfar’s tract, of which only a fragment has come down to us, contains four extensive quotations from an unidentified philosophical work. These are strikingly similar to those cited by Rukn al-Dīn Ibn al-Malāḥimī (d. 536/1141) in his Tuḥfat al-mutakallimīn fī l-radd ʿalā l-falāsifa; likewise, Qāḍī Jaʿfar’s responses to the arguments of the philosophers closely resemble those given by Ibn al-Malāḥimī. However, a comparison of the relevant passages shows that the possibility that Qāḍī Jaʿfar had consulted Ibn al-Malāḥimī’s Tuḥfa as his source can safely be excluded. Both rather seemed to have relied on a common and so far unidentified source, possibly written by a Muʿtazilī author. Qāḍī Jaʿfar’s tract is thus another early Muʿtazilī critique of Avicennan philosophy that can shed some additional light on the reception of Ibn Sīnā’s (d. 428/1037) philosophy among the mutakallimūn before Ibn al-Malāḥimī.","PeriodicalId":107625,"journal":{"name":"Shii Studies Review","volume":"77 11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sixth/Twelfth-Century Zaydī Theologians of Yemen Debating Avicennan Philosophy\",\"authors\":\"H. Ansari, S. Schmidtke\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/24682470-12340068\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThis article offers critical editions of three texts by Zaydī theologians of sixth/twelfth-century Yemen refuting philosophical notions. The three texts are Qāḍī Jaʿfar b. Aḥmad b. ʿAbd al-Salām al-Buhlūlī’s (d. 573/1177-78) Kitāb al-Risāla al-munāṣifa li-l-mutakallimīn wa-l-falāsifa (Masʾalat al-nafs) and two tracts by al-Ḥasan al-Raṣṣāṣ (d. 584/1188), al-Masʾala al-kāshifa ʿan buṭlān shubhat al-falāsifa, a refutation of the philosophers’ doctrine of the eternity of the world, and Masʾala fī ibṭāl al-qawl bi-talāzum al-hayūlā wa-l-ṣūra wa-anna l-jism murakkab minhumā, a refutation of hylomorphism. Qāḍī Jaʿfar’s tract, of which only a fragment has come down to us, contains four extensive quotations from an unidentified philosophical work. These are strikingly similar to those cited by Rukn al-Dīn Ibn al-Malāḥimī (d. 536/1141) in his Tuḥfat al-mutakallimīn fī l-radd ʿalā l-falāsifa; likewise, Qāḍī Jaʿfar’s responses to the arguments of the philosophers closely resemble those given by Ibn al-Malāḥimī. However, a comparison of the relevant passages shows that the possibility that Qāḍī Jaʿfar had consulted Ibn al-Malāḥimī’s Tuḥfa as his source can safely be excluded. Both rather seemed to have relied on a common and so far unidentified source, possibly written by a Muʿtazilī author. Qāḍī Jaʿfar’s tract is thus another early Muʿtazilī critique of Avicennan philosophy that can shed some additional light on the reception of Ibn Sīnā’s (d. 428/1037) philosophy among the mutakallimūn before Ibn al-Malāḥimī.\",\"PeriodicalId\":107625,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Shii Studies Review\",\"volume\":\"77 11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Shii Studies Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/24682470-12340068\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shii Studies Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24682470-12340068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
这篇文章提供了六/十二世纪也门zayd神学家的三个文本的批判版本,反驳了哲学观念。三个短信问āḍīJaʿb。一个ḥ疯狂b。ʿAbd al-Salām al-Buhlūlī’s (d。573/1177 - 78)工具包āb al-Risāla al-munāṣifa li-l-mutakallimīn wa-l-falāsifa (Masʾalat al-nafs)和两个大片al -Ḥ峨山al-Raṣṣāṣ(584/1188),al-Masʾala al-kāshifaʿ一个布鲁里溃疡ṭlān shubhat al-falāsifa,驳斥哲学家的教义的永恒世界,和Masʾala fīibṭāl al-qawl bi-talāzum al-hayūlāwa-l——ṣūra wa-anna l-jism murakkab minhumā,hylomorphism的驳斥。Qāḍī贾尔法尔的小册子,其中只有一个片段流传下来,包含了四个广泛的引用,来自一个身份不明的哲学著作。这些与Rukn al-Dīn Ibn al-Malāḥimī (d. 536/1141)在他的Tuḥfat al- mutakallimn n f ā l-radd alā l-falāsifa;同样地,Qāḍī贾法尔对哲学家们的论点的回答与伊本al-Malāḥimī的回答非常相似。然而,对相关段落的比较表明,Qāḍī贾伊法尔曾咨询伊本al-Malāḥimī的Tuḥfa作为他的来源的可能性可以安全地排除。两者似乎都依赖于一个共同的,迄今为止尚未确定的来源,可能是由Mu - tazili的作者写的。Qāḍī因此,贾法尔的小册子是另一个早期穆塔兹尔对阿维森纳哲学的批判,它可以为伊本al-Malāḥimī之前的mutakallimūn人对伊本萨努伊(公元428/1037年)哲学的接受提供一些额外的启示。
Sixth/Twelfth-Century Zaydī Theologians of Yemen Debating Avicennan Philosophy
This article offers critical editions of three texts by Zaydī theologians of sixth/twelfth-century Yemen refuting philosophical notions. The three texts are Qāḍī Jaʿfar b. Aḥmad b. ʿAbd al-Salām al-Buhlūlī’s (d. 573/1177-78) Kitāb al-Risāla al-munāṣifa li-l-mutakallimīn wa-l-falāsifa (Masʾalat al-nafs) and two tracts by al-Ḥasan al-Raṣṣāṣ (d. 584/1188), al-Masʾala al-kāshifa ʿan buṭlān shubhat al-falāsifa, a refutation of the philosophers’ doctrine of the eternity of the world, and Masʾala fī ibṭāl al-qawl bi-talāzum al-hayūlā wa-l-ṣūra wa-anna l-jism murakkab minhumā, a refutation of hylomorphism. Qāḍī Jaʿfar’s tract, of which only a fragment has come down to us, contains four extensive quotations from an unidentified philosophical work. These are strikingly similar to those cited by Rukn al-Dīn Ibn al-Malāḥimī (d. 536/1141) in his Tuḥfat al-mutakallimīn fī l-radd ʿalā l-falāsifa; likewise, Qāḍī Jaʿfar’s responses to the arguments of the philosophers closely resemble those given by Ibn al-Malāḥimī. However, a comparison of the relevant passages shows that the possibility that Qāḍī Jaʿfar had consulted Ibn al-Malāḥimī’s Tuḥfa as his source can safely be excluded. Both rather seemed to have relied on a common and so far unidentified source, possibly written by a Muʿtazilī author. Qāḍī Jaʿfar’s tract is thus another early Muʿtazilī critique of Avicennan philosophy that can shed some additional light on the reception of Ibn Sīnā’s (d. 428/1037) philosophy among the mutakallimūn before Ibn al-Malāḥimī.