Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userThe poblem of reconciling the wisdom and Sharia in the Islamic Middle Ages ((Kendi - Farabi - Ibn Rushd))
إشكالية التوفيق بين الحكمة و الشريعة في العصر الإسلامي الوسيط (( الكندي – الفارابي – ابن رشد))
3740
3 62
0
(
0
)
Created by
Shamra Editor
Ask ChatGPT about the research
يسلط هذا البحث الضوء على مشكلة لعلها الأهم بين مجموع المشكلات التي نجدها في تاريخ الفلسفة ألا و هي مشكلة العلاقة بين الحكمة و الشريعة، حيث يحاول البحث الكشف عن طبيعة العلاقة بينهما بهدف الكشف عن الصراعات الفكرية بين مختلف التيارات الفلسفية حول العلاقة بين الحكمة و الشريعة، فقد شكّلت هذه المشكلة محور الاهتمام الأساسي في منظومتهم المعرفية و الثقافية و سنحاول من خلال هذا البحث مناقشة آراء بعض الفلاسفة في المجتمع العربي و الإسلامي أمثال الكندي و الفارابي و ابن رشد إذ تناول كل من هؤلاء الفلاسفة المشكلة في محاولة منه للتقريب ما بين الفلسفة و الدين و إيضاح النقاط المبهمة لدى عامة الناس حول هذه المسألة و ذلك في إطار المناخ الثقافي و الاجتماعي السائد في المجتمع العربي و الإسلامي في القرون الوسطى، إضافة لذلك سنحاول إيضاح الأسس النظرية و المنهجية المستخدمة لدراسة مشكلة التوفيق و إبراز الأهداف الأيديولوجية التي دفعت الفلاسفة للتوفيق بين الحكمة و الشريعة.
The paper Sheds light on one of the most important problems among the whole problems that we find in the history of philosophy, namely, the problem of the relationship between wisdom and Sharia law, trying to disclose the nature of the relationship between wisdom and law in order to detect intellectual conflicts or issues that the philosophers tried to detect the pivotal and key points between wisdom and Sharia law, and philosophy and religion, through the general cultural state prevailing in the Arab society during the Islamic middle ages. In addition, we will try to clarify the theoretical and methodological foundations of the problem of reconciling and highlight the ideological goals that drove the philosophers to reconcile between wisdom and Sharia.
References used
أبو نصر الفارابي: آراء أهل المدينة الفاضلة، تقديم ألبير نصري نادر، دار المشرق، بيروت، 2002, ط8.
جعفر آل ياسين : فيلسوفان رائدان، الكندي و الفارابي، دار الأندلس، بيروت ، 1980م .
rate research
Read More
This research discusses the most important pieces of evidence put forward by Ash'ari thinkers on two very important issues: formation of the world and the idea of causality. Depending on IbnRushd's reading, the paper also highlights the most import
ant loose and weak points Ash'ari inferences. Ibin Rushd, a pioneer of the intellectual trend in Islamic philosophy, saw in the treatment of these two issues represented an epistemological obstacle faced by Arab-Islamic mind and stood between it and the causal understanding of the universe. The philosopher Averroes sensed the danger of the absence of objective consciousness of the universe and the nature in Arabic and Islamic philosophy. In an attempt transform society from a state of theological submission to one of scientific certainty, he tried to lay the ground for a vision depending on the mind.
The aim of this research is to study the concept of history and evolution for
“IbnKhaldun” through a systematic illustration of the meaning of history. Therefore, we
present this research in order to reach the philosophy of history for “IbnKhaldun”
and to
highlight the importance of this philosopher as one of the founders of the philosophy of
history as his conception of history makes him close to contemporary philosophers.
This perception is crystallized to history on rejecting the “empiricalconcept”
radically. Therefore, we find that the history of “IbnKhaldun” is not a narrative of news,
but it is an explanation of eventsin which we can build it a new science.
The concept of progress that was crystallized in the eighteenth century has signs in
the introduction of IbnKhaldun in which he presented a methodology for studying history
in its interior movement and not in appearance. In addition, the problematic questions that
raised by “IbnKhaldun” opened horizons for knowledge and development such as:
What is the relationship between historical knowledge and historical writing? Is it
possible for history to be part of science?
This research also points to the errors of historians, which occur for many complex
reasons that might be psychological, social, political and cultural.
The errors also may happen because of a lack in knowledge about the laws of nature.
Islam has protected humans from anything that can cause
harm and spread of sins. Some of what Islam has provided is
the law of Punishment that puts society in order and organize
people's relations in order to make them live in harmony. On of
the
important rules that the Islamic law was built on,is that a
person is not punished on behalf of another person's mistake.
The Punishment comes along with how bad the criminal act
was,so the robber wasn't punished by killing, nor the murderer
jailed for tow days for example, and then no Punishment was
build on suspicious doubts, unless solid evidence and eye
witnesses are provided. Islam made the Punishment of harming
society stronger. The drug dealers Punishment was not
mentioned in the Quran or sunna. But because of the great
damage caused to individuals and society, therefore the death
sentence is justified under special circumstances and comes by
the measurements of Islamic rules.
The study of the ethical issue in the Aristotelian attitude and Averroes one is the aim
of this research. It also studies and analyzes the point of view of each one of them in three
fields which are:
• The originality of ethics and its field
• Th
e virtue theory
• Virtues varieties and arrangements
According to our dealing with this case, we work on specifying the degree of
similarities and differences between the two philosophers. We try to show the Aristotelian
moral effect in the Islamic_ Arab intellectual space represented by Averroes whose
understanding of Aristotelian ethics in the process of reading and analyzing Plato
Republic.
In the light of the above, we have the right to ask whether Averroes has an
independent ethical theory or he followed the approach of his predecessors, especially
Aristotle in his similarity with his ethical issue.
This research tries to address the problem of Ibn Wahab Al-Kateb Types of Rhetorics
according to Al-Jahiz and Ibn Wahab Al-Kateb
accusing Abi Othman Al-Jahiz of not giving rhetorics what it is worth, and of not
studying it thoroughfully. Ibn Wahab
claimed completing what is missed through his
detailed study of the types of rhetorics, which are, to a large extent, similar to the types of
rhetorics according to Abi Othman.The later referred to the importance of the relation
between pronunciation, meaning and the necessity of the accordance between the two. In
addition, meaning is prior to pronunciation because it depends upon thought and
contemplation. He describes the types of rhetorics in a pyramidal sequential through levels
that stem-- and result-- from each other.
Similarly, Ibn wahab considers that the types of rhetorics result from each other.
These types, according to critics, are a process of a birth of these forms.
Despite the big similarity of the types of rhetorics according to both Ibn Wahab Al-
Kateb and Abi Othman Al-Jahiz, the first was not only a transcriber, but also he added and
clarified in certain areas. He exclusively talked about writers and classified them in one of
five: transcript writer, pronunciation writer, contract writer, judgment writer and
management writer. He also mentioned the most important features that a transcript writer
must have and divided writers into three levels. He extended in talking about the types of
handwriting and the forms of pens. These issues were dropped by Al-Jahiz when talking
about the types of rhetorics.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
