Dag Nikolaus Hasse - The Arabic, Hebrew and Latin Reception of Avicennas Physics and Cosmology

The Arabic, Hebrew and Latin Reception
of Avicennas Physics and Cosmology

Scientia Graeco-Arabica

herausgegeben von

Marwan Rashed

Band 23

De Gruyter

Gedruckt mit freundlicher Untersttzung der VolkswagenStiftung.

ISBN 978-1-61451-774-0

e-ISBN (PDF) 978-1-61451-697-2

e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-1-61451-935-5

ISSN 1868-7172

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018949693

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek

Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen National-bibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet ber http://dnb.dnb.de abrufbar.

2018 Walter de Gruyter Inc., Boston/Berlin

www.degruyter.com

The studies of this volume are based on papers presented at a colloquium hosted by the Villa Vigoni in Menaggio, Italy, in 2013. We are grateful to the participants and chairs who do not contribute to this volume: Charles Burnett, Alnoor Dhanani, Silvia Donati, Heidrun Eichner, Lukas Mhlethaler and Ulrich Rudolph. This was the second colloquium on Avicennas influence in Arabic, Hebrew and Latin. The results of the first Villa Vigoni conference on metaphysics were published in 2012 in the same series as the present volume. We would like to thank warmly Max Kinninger and, in particular, Katrin Fischer, who prepared the articles for copy-editing, and Jon Bornholdt, who revised the texts of those contributors who are not native speakers of English. We are very grateful for the funding of the colloquium and of the publication by the VolkswagenFoundation, as part of the Lichtenberg professorship grant to Dag Nikolaus Hasse. A final expression of gratitude goes to the staff of the Villa Vigoni, who created a most pleasant atmosphere and thus helped to foster an intense research discussion about Avicenna and his influence in physics and cosmology.

Avicenna discusses physical and cosmological issues in many of his writings, and most pertinently in all of his great summae. The most comprehensive treatment can be found in the section on natural philosophy of the summa al-if ( The Cure ), which contains treatises on physics, on the heavens and the world, on coming to be and passing away, on actions and passions of elementary qualities, and on minerals and lofty impressions, i.e., on meteorology (besides psychology, botany, and zoology). Research on the influence of these sections and of the other summae is only at its beginning. The present study does not aim at providing a complete overview, but is meant to stimulate the field by presenting papers on current research on Avicennas influence on key figures or topics of the Arabic, Hebrew and Latin philosophical traditions. It combines philological studies on the transmission of Avicennas works with historical and philosophical interpretations of texts and authors influenced by Avicenna.

Some findings of the present book concern the Arabic transmission of Avicennas works in the Islamic East. It is well known that Avicennas late work al-Irt wa-l-tanbht ( Pointers and Reminders ) had a broad manuscript transmission and a rich commentary tradition in Arabic; recent scholarship is progressively showing that the same applies to Avicennas earlier al-if , which is likewise transmitted in hundreds of manuscripts, although the massive bulk of this work prevented its commentary tradition, until the Safavid epoch, to pass from the form of glosses to the form of independent commentaries. The reception history of the Irt is visible also in terminology. An example of this is Avicennas phrase ikma mutaliya , philosophy of the supernal world, or simply cosmology, which from the thirteenth century onwards received a transcendent interpretation meaning exalted philosophy (see the article by Gutas). Given the well-documented influence of the Irt , but also the attested use of the if by commentators on the Irt as a reference work for the clarification of doubtful or controversial issues, it is not too surprising that Far al-Dn al-Rz in the sections on place and directions of his Mabi al-mariqiyya relies much more heavily on the if than on the Irt . Rzs sections are a patchwork of silent quotations from Avicennas if , Nat , Dnenme and udd , while the influence of the Irt is limited to a single chapter. This wide recourse by Rz to works of Avicenna other than the Irt is remarkable, and shows the full-fledged acquaintance with the Avicennian corpus by a prime exponent of post-Avicennian philosophy and theology, especially since Rz, as a commentator on the Irt , knows this text very well (see the article by Janssens).

In Andalusia and the Maghreb, Avicennas philosophy was mainly known via the if , as is confirmed by the sources on which Averroes drew when attacking Avicenna. There are indications that Averroes was also acquainted with the Nat , for instance with the passage on the doctrine of a celestial cold emanating from the stars (see the article by Cerami). The Andalusian philosopher Ibn Daud may have been acquainted with the physics part of the Nat too, but his main sources in physics were clearly Avicennas al-if and al-azls Avicennian Maqid al-falsifa ( Intentions of the Philosophers ) (see the article by Fontaine). The broad reception of the various parts of Avicennas al-if in Andalusia is reflected also in the many Latin translations from al-if that were produced on the Iberian peninsula. While a good number of al-if translations carry the name of the translator, three of them are anonymous. Stylistic analysis shows that the Physics IIII and Isagoge sections of al-if were, in fact, translated by Dominicus Gundisalvi in the later twelfth century, while On Floods ( De diluviis ), i.e., chapter II.6 of the meteorological part of al-if , was translated, in all likelihood, by Michael Scot in the early thirteenth century (see the article by Hasse and Bttner).

As to Avicennas transmission in the Latin West, it is well known that the high point of Avicennas influence in psychology was reached in the middle of the thirteenth century and that his authority in this field decreased afterwards. It is noteworthy that changing attitudes towards Avicenna can be observed also in physics, as a comparative analysis of Albertus Magnus commentaries on the Physics and the Metaphysics shows, which date from ca. 1250 and ca. 1264 respectively. In the commentary on the Physics , Albertus defends Avicenna openly against the criticisms of Averroes, whom he accuses of aggressiveness towards Avicenna. In the later commentary on the Metaphysics , Albertus now silently follows Averroes on many issues debated between Avicenna and Averroes. Albertus respect for Avicenna is still high, which is why he does not criticize him directly and tries to explain and excuse Avicennas opinions when they diverge from Averroes, who seems to have replaced Avicenna as the main doctrinal authority after Aristotle (see the article by Bertolacci).

The Latin reception of Avicennas meteorology, in turn, differed much from other areas of Avicennian philosophy. Only sections from Avicennas meteorology of al-if were translated early enough to influence the scholastic discussion: On Minerals and the above-mentioned On Floods. The translator of On Minerals, Alfred of Shareshill, inserted the text at the end of Aristotles Meteorologica , with the effect that Avicennas standpoint was not known primarily through his own meteorology, which traveled under the name of Aristotle, but through other sources and mainly via Averroes attacks on Avicennian doctrines. The full Latin translation of Avicennas meteorology by the Burgos translators in 127480 apparently came too late and received hardly any diffusion (see the article by Mandosio).