View Ibnu Tufail Research Papers on for free. Ibn Tufayl or Ibn Tufail (c – ), full name: Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Abd al-Malik ibn Muhammad ibn Tufail al-Qaisi al-Andalusi أبو. Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Tufail (also known by a Latinized version of his name, Abubacer Aben Tofail, –85 AD) was an Andalusian.
|Published (Last):||8 June 2008|
|PDF File Size:||8.62 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||2.56 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Ibhu belonged to the tufall Arab tribe of Qais. Al-Marrakushi traces his education to Ibn Bajjah, which in view of Ibn Tufail’s denial of acquaintance with him, is incorrect. He started his career as a practising physician in Granada and through his fame in the profession became secretary to the governor of the province. Finally, he rose to the eminent position of the physician and Qadi of the Court and vizier 2 to the Muwahhid Caliph Abu Ya’qub Yusuf r.
Ibnu Tufail Research Papers –
ignu On the express desire of the Caliph, he advised Ibn Bajjah to annotate the works of Aristotle, a task that had been taken up zealously by Ibn Bajjah but had remained unfinished to the time of his death.
Al-Mansur himself attended his obsequies. Ibn Tufail was an illustrious physician, philosopher, mathematician, and poet of the Muwahhid Spain, but unfortunately very little is known about his works. Ibn Khatib attributes two treatises on medicine to him. The foundation of the Muwahhid dynasty is associated with the name of Ibn Tumart d. He introduced in the West orthodox scholasticism of al-Ghazali and exhorted people to observe the Zahirite Fiqh.
During his travels he met ‘Abd al-Mu’min al-Qumi d. He was succeeded by Abu Ya’qub Yusuf d. The Muwahhids professed to be Ghazalians. They were noted for their puritanical belief in the unity gufail God. Anthropomorphic notions were an anathema to them. Secondly, obnu by Ibn Tumart, they stood for the strict observance of the exoteric aspect of religion.
The Zahirite Fiqh constituted the Muwahhid State religion. Thirdly, as a legacy of Ibn Bajjah, they regarded philosophy as a species of esoteric truth reserved for the enlightened few. The masses, being incapable of pure knowledge, should not be taught more than the literal sense of the colourful eschatology of the Qur’an. Needless to say, the mental equipment of Ibn Tufail is largely provided by the official religion of tuvail Muwahhids, and his Hayy Bin Yaqzan is but a defence of the attitude of the Muwahhids both towards people and philosophers.
The treatise dramatically opens with the spontaneous birth of Hayy in an uninhabitated island, followed by a popular legend about his being thrown to this desolate place by the sister of a certain king, in order to keep her marriage with Yaqzan a secret. Unalloyed by social conventions. He reflects over the situation and covers the lower parts of his body with leaves.
The death of the mother-roe leads him to the discovery of the animal soul which uses the body as an instrument, like the stick in his hands, shares light and warmth with fire, and thus bears resemblance to the heavenly bodies. He then turns to the analysis of the phenomena of nature, compares the objects around him, and discriminates between them, and classifies ibnh into minerals, plants, and animals.
Nadia Maftouni, Ibn Tufail as a SciArtist in the Treatise of Hayy Ibn Yaqzan – PhilPapers
Observation shows him that body is a common factor in all the objects, but they belong to different classes because of the functions peculiar to them. This leads him to assume a specific form or soul for tutail class of objects. But the soul being imperceptible, his dialectical ingenuity at last brings him to the idea of an ultimate, eternal, incorporeal, and necessary Being which is the efficient cause of the peculiar behaviour of bodies.
This makes him conscious of his own immaterial essence; and acting upon a three-point code of ascetic discipline which will be explained later, he is finally absorbed in the unrestrained contemplation of the Ultimate Being.
He, however, in the first instance, fails to see the wisdom implicit in the figurative languages of the Qur’an about God and the hereafter, and in the permission that it gives one to lead a worldly life – -a permission which is likely fufail turn one away from the truth.
Full of ambition and hope, he sets out in the company of Asal to the said inhabited island ruled by Salaman and begins to reform its convention-ridden people. He endeavours hard to enlighten the masses through pure concepts, but, in the end, finds these concepts far above their heads. He then realizes the wisdom of the Prophet in tuufail them sensuous forms instead of full light, returns to his lonely island, and is absorbed in contemplation.
Nevertheless, the idea of this romance is not entirely new. But the comparison ends here. Ibn Sina’s dramatized tale narrates how one day he, with a few companions, went out for a ramble in the vicinity of a town and chanced to meet an old man, Hayy bin Yaqzan, and requested him to be permitted to accompany him is his unending journeys.
But the old man replied that that was not possible for Ibn Sina, because of his companions whom he could not leave. In this allegory Ibn Sina himself represents the rational soul, the companions the various senses, and the old man, Hayy bin Yaqzan, the active intellect. Similarly, the names of Salaman and Asal, the other two characters of Ibn Tufail’s romance, are not new in the philosophical literature.
These, too, have been borrowed from Ibn Sina’s tale of Salaman wa Absalof which we know only through Tusi’s paraphrase in his commentary on Isharat. The story relates how Absal, the younger brother of Salaman, was obliged to proceed to war in ibbnu to avoid the immoral designs of the latter’s wife, but was deserted by the army through her machinations and his wounded body was carried away by a gazelle to a place of safety.
On returning home, he raised a strong army and regained the lost kingdom for Salaman, whose wife becoming desperate poisoned him to death. The sorrow-stricken Salaman lost heart and became a hermit. A mystic trance, at last, revealed to him that his own wife was the cause of the catastrophe, and he killed her and all her accomplices.
Notwithstanding the similarity of ttufail and the inu of the gazelle, the basic theme of both the treatises inu intrinsically different. With Ibn Sina the main object is to show how personal afflictions he himself was a prisoner in the dungeon of a fortress while writing the allegory invoke divine grace and cause the purification of the soul but the object of Ibn Tufail is nothing less than to dramatize the development of theoretical reason from the gross sense-perception to the beatific vision of God.
By far the tufsil marked, deep, and saturating influence, which seems to have coloured the basic structure of Ibn Tufail’s romance, is that of Ibn Bajjah, his arch-rationalist predecessor. Nevertheless, in spite of his recognition of the necessity of tufil for the improvement of theoretical reason, Ibn Tufail feels rather unhappy over Ibn Bajjah’s one-sided emphasis on the role of reason in arriving at the ultimate truth. And it is the influence of Ghazali d.
Of Hayy’s birth in an uninhabited island, Ibn Tufqil relates two versions. The scientific version of his spontaneous birth, he owes entirely to Ibn Sina. The tale narrates how, under royal displeasure, the daughter of a king threw away her natural daughter from the son of her father’s vizier, in the sea, the surging waves of which landed her in an uninhabited island where she was nourished by tufwil roe.
She grew up into a beautiful damsel; later, Alexander the Great chanced to meet her in the island of Oreon. Besides, the aforesaid Greek tale does not seem to be the only source of this legend. The romantic frame of Hayy Bin Yaqzan is by no means original. It is of Alexandrian origin; it may have even a Persian strain. Nevertheless, it is Ibn Tufail who changes a simple tale into a inbu of a unique philosophical significance. But actually this beginning is meant merely to provide a background for showing the development of inductive intellect, independently of any social influence whatsoever.
Contradicting al-Marrakushi’s position, but in complete agreement with de Boer, Dr. The truth of the Qur’an and the Hadith is open to pure intellectual apprehension, but it ttufail to be guarded against the inu masses whose business it is not to think but to believe tuffail obey.
In fact, this view is an echo of Ibn Bajjah’s position, which later came to be regarded as the proper official attitude under the Muwahhids. Muhammad Yunus Farangi Mahalli 24 points to a still higher aim implicit in the treatise.
Religion is as much essential for a progressive society as are philosophy and mysticism – a thesis which is brilliantly exemplified by the co-operation of the three dramatic characters: Hayy, the philosopher; Asal, the mystic; and Salaman, the theologian.
The underlying aim is not only to show that philosophy is at one with religion properly understood, but that both the exoteric and the esoteric aspects of religion and philosophy are expressions of the same eternal truth tufil to individuals according to their intellectual capabilities.
Al-Ghazali ignu dogmatically critical of Aristotelian rationalism, but Ibn Bajjah was Aristotelian through and through. Ibn Tufail, following the middle course, bridged the gulf between the two.
As a rationalist he sides with Ibn Bajjah against al-Ghazali and qualifies mysticism with rationalism; as a mystic he sides with al-Ghazali against Ibn Bajjah and qualifies rationalism with mysticism. Ecstasy is the highest form of knowledge, but the path leading to such knowledge is paved with the improvement of reason, followed by the purification of the soul through ascetic practices. The methods of al-Ghazali and Ibn Tufail are both partially the same, but, unlike the former, the latter’s ecstasy is marked by a Neo-Platonic strain.
Al-Ghazali, true to his theologico-mystical position, takes ecstasy as the means to see God, but lbnu Ibn Tufail, the philosopher, the beatific vision reveals the active intellect and the Neo-Platonic chain of causes reaching down to the elements and back to itself. This is one of the most challenging problems of Muslim philosophy.
Ibn Tufail, quite in keeping with his dialectical ingenuity, faces it squarely in the manner of Kant. Unlike his predecessors, he does not subscribe to any of the rival doctrines, nor does he make any attempt to reconcile them.
On the other hand, he subjects both the Aristotelian and the theological positions to scathing criticism. The eternity of the world involves the concept of infinite existence which is no less impossible than the notion of infinite extension.
Such an existence cannot be free from created accidents and as such cannot precede them in point of time; and that which cannot exist before the created accidents must itself be created in time. Similarly, the concept of creatio ex nihilo does not survive his scrutiny. Like al-Ghazali, he points out that the notion of existence after non-existence is unintelligible without supposing the priority of time over the world; but time itself is an inseparable accident of the world, and fufail its being prior to the world is ruled out.
Again, the created must needs have a Creator. Why then tucail the Creator create the world now and not before?
Was it due to something that happened to Him? Obviously not, for nothing existed before Him to make anything happen to Him. Should it be attributed to a change in His nature? Consequently, Ibn Tufail accepts neither the eternity nor temporal creation of the world. This antinomy clearly anticipates the Kantian position that reason has its own limits and that its arguments lead to a maze of contradictions.
Again, the Creator must, of necessity, be immaterial, for matter being an accident of the world is itself subject to creation by a Creator.
On the other hand, regarding God as material would lead to an infinite regress which is absurd. The world, therefore, must necessarily have a Creator that has no bodily substance. And since He is immaterial, it follows that we cannot apprehend Him by any of our senses or even by imagination; for imagination represents nothing except the sensuous forms of things in their physical absence.
The eternity of the world implies the eternity of its motion as well; and motion, as held by Aristotle, requires a mover or an efficient cause. If this efficient cause is a body, its power must be finite and consequently incapable of producing an infinite effect. The efficient cause of eternal motion must, therefore, be immaterial. It must neither be associated with matter nor separated from it, nor within it nor without it; for union and separation, inclusion and exclusion are the properties of matter, and the efficient cause, by its very nature, is absolutely free from it.
However, a question is posed here. God and the world both being eternal, how could the former be the cause of the latter?
Following Ibn Sina, Ibn Tufail makes a distinction between eternity in essence and that in time, and holds that God does precede the world in point of essence, and not in respect of time. If you have a body in your fist and move your hand, the body, no doubt, will move with the movement of the hand, yet its motion will be subject to the motion of the hand.
The motion of the latter proceeds from its essence, that of the former is borrowed from the latter, 27 though in point of time neither precedes the other.