Philosophers of the medieval world, in Arabic

This lesson asks you to describe the main periods of philosophical development and the major philosophers of each. The curriculum names Ibn Rushd (Averroes) in its medieval period, among others. The museum offers only philosophers of the Islamic world and the Greek philosophy that reached them, so your class will add the other names. ¹

Look at the expectation: it asks for periods and the philosophers tied to them. Ask what makes a thinker a child of his time, and where the questions he worked on came from.

Read one scene as the Encyclopaedia of Islam reports it from al-Marrakushi, who took it from a pupil of Ibn Rushd. The prince asked Ibn Rushd whether the heavens had existed from all eternity or had a beginning. Ibn Rushd was uneasy at so dangerous a question, but Yusuf began a discussion with Ibn Tufayl that displayed wide knowledge of the ancient philosophers and the theologians, and Ibn Rushd, put at ease, spoke in turn and showed the extent of his learning ². He received gifts and from then on the prince's favour, and the article dates the event to 1169 or slightly earlier ². Notice who asks, who is uneasy, and what the story takes for granted about the ancient philosophers at this court.

The records give reasons for his commentaries as reports, not in his own words. In al-Marrakushi's account the caliph complained of the obscurity of Aristotle's texts and their translations, and Ibn Tufayl, thinking himself too old and too busy, asked Ibn Rushd to undertake the explanation ². For his medical work, the article says he asked his friend Abu Marwan Ibn Zubr to write a companion on particular matters, so that together they would form a complete treatise on medicine ². The records quote no preface of his stating why he wrote the commentaries.

Where are Ibn Rushd's own ideas to be found? The article reports a long dispute. Renan suspected that the distinction between the commentaries and the philosopher's personal views might be a precaution allowing him to speak more freely ^{2 3}. Munk tried to extract his personal ideas from the commentaries, Asin Palacios looked for them in the Tahafut, the Fasl and the Kashf, and Cruz Hernandez concludes that it is absurd to choose in advance between the philosopher and the theologian ³. The article calls Renan's view that the theological writings were artifices meant to deceive the Maliki jurists entirely without foundation ³.

Only a small number of his works survive in Arabic; the majority are preserved only in Latin or Hebrew translations, some of the Arabic texts being written in Hebrew letters ³. His commentary on Plato's Republic is preserved in Hebrew ⁴. For the end of his life the sources differ. Al-Bakri says he was tried over an alleged leaning to the sciences of the ancients and confined to his house ⁵; al-Zirikli says al-Mansur exiled him to Marrakesh and burned some of his books, then was reconciled with him ⁶. The record keeps these accounts side by side without choosing.

The article reports that Cruz Hernandez finds it absurd to choose in advance between the philosopher and the theologian in Ibn Rushd, while Renan suspected that the commentaries hid his own views. Which of the two readings do you find more convincing, and what is the strongest objection to your choice?

• Ibn Rushd: his judgeship, his works in order, and how scholars have read them.
• Fasl al-Maqal: the treatise on philosophy and the revealed law, as al-Zirikli lists it.
• Plato: his place in late Greek thought and the sources through which Arab authors knew him.

Read the record of Ibn Rushd and of Fasl al-Maqal. Draw a short timeline of three points: where Aristotle came to him from, what he did with Aristotle, and where his books went.