Awicenna
To, czym coś jest, i to, czy istnieje, to dwa różne pytania – a tylko Bóg istnieje z konieczności, wszystko inne od niego zależy.
Umiejscowienie
Lekarz i filozof: jego rozróżnienie istoty i istnienia ukształtowało metafizykę na Wschodzie i Zachodzie.
Kluczowe idee
- Istota a istnienie
- Człowiek unoszący się w powietrzu
- Byt konieczny
Wpływ
Pod wpływem 4
Arystoteles
pod wpływem ✓
Avicenna’s Book of the Cure (al-Shifa) follows the order of Aristotle’s corpus from logic to metaphysics, but reworks it into a system of his own. Ibn Sina, al-Shifa; D. Gutas, Avicenna and the Aristotelian Tradition (1988; 2nd ed. 2014); SEP “Ibn Sina [Avicenna]”
Arystoteles › 384–322 p.n.e.
Plotyn
pod wpływem ✓
Avicenna wrote notes on the Theology of Aristotle, the Arabic Plotinus, and his scheme of emanation from the Necessary Existent continues Plotinian Neoplatonism. P. Adamson, “Non-Discursive Thought in Avicenna’s Commentary on the Theology of Aristotle”, in J. McGinnis (ed.), Interpreting Avicenna (2004); SEP “Ibn Sina [Avicenna]”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Plotyn › 204–270
Al-Kindi
pod wpływem sporne ✓
Avicenna built on the Arabic Neoplatonic Aristotle shaped in al-Kindi’s circle, including the Theology of Aristotle; a direct influence of al-Kindi himself is disputed. P. Adamson, The Arabic Plotinus (2002); P. Adamson, Al-Kindi (2007); SEP “al-Kindi”
Al-Kindi › ok. 801–873
Al-Farabi
pod wpływem ✓
In his autobiography Avicenna recalls that he understood Aristotle’s Metaphysics, read some forty times, only through al-Farabi’s treatise On the Aims of the Metaphysics. Ibn Sina, autobiography, tr. W. E. Gohlman, The Life of Ibn Sina (1974); D. Gutas, Avicenna and the Aristotelian Tradition (1988); SEP “Ibn Sina [Avicenna]”
Al-Farabi › ok. 872–950
Wpływ na 17
Majmonides
wpływ na ✓
Maimonides took over Avicenna’s distinction between necessary and possible existence for a proof of God and held that existence is an accident of essence (Guide, c. 1190). Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed (c. 1190), tr. S. Pines (1963), with Pines’s introduction; SEP “Maimonides”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Majmonides › 1138–1204
Albert Wielki
wpływ na ✓
Albert drew on Avicenna’s paraphrases of Aristotle, especially his account of the inner senses and the intellect, throughout his commentaries such as De anima. Albertus Magnus, De anima; De homine; SEP “Albert the Great”; SEP “Ibn Sina [Avicenna]”
Albert Wielki › ok. 1200–1280
Nasir ad-Din Tusi
wpływ na ✓
Al-Tusi’s commentary on Avicenna’s Pointers and Reminders (completed 1246) defended him against Fakhr al-Din al-Razi’s objections and shaped how later scholars read him. Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, Hall mushkilat al-Isharat (1246); SEP “Ibn Sina [Avicenna]”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Nasir ad-Din Tusi › 1201–1274
Tomasz z Akwinu
wpływ na ✓
In On Being and Essence (c. 1255) Aquinas took up Avicenna’s distinction of essence and existence, citing him often; elsewhere he rejected his necessary emanation of the world. Thomas Aquinas, De ente et essentia (c. 1255); Summa theologiae I q. 47 a. 1; SEP “Thomas Aquinas”; SEP “Ibn Sina [Avicenna]”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Tomasz z Akwinu › ok. 1225–1274
Jan Duns Szkot
wpływ na
Scotus took over Avicenna’s common nature, ‘horseness is just horseness’, indifferent to universality and singularity, and his view of being as the intellect’s first object. Avicenna, Metaphysics (al-Ilāhiyyāt) V.1; Duns Scotus, Ordinatio II d. 3 p. 1 q. 1; I d. 3; SEP “John Duns Scotus”
Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO
Jan Duns Szkot › ok. 1266–1308
Seyyed Hossein Nasr
wpływ na ✓
Nasr presented Avicenna as the master of the Peripatetic school in Three Muslim Sages and studied his cosmology in An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines (both 1964). S. H. Nasr, Three Muslim Sages (1964); An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines (1964)
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Seyyed Hossein Nasr › ur. 1933
Pokaż wszystko (17)Pokaż mniej
Ibn Tufajl
wpływ na
Ibn Tufayl took the name Hayy ibn Yaqzan from Avicenna’s allegory and presented his tale as unveiling the ‘Oriental philosophy’ Avicenna had mentioned. Ibn Tufayl, Hayy ibn Yaqzan, introduction, tr. L. E. Goodman (1972); SEP “Ibn Tufayl”
Źródło: szkic AI
Ibn Tufajl › ok. 1105–1185
Szihab ad-Din Jahji as-Suhrawardi
wpływ na
Suhrawardi was trained in Avicenna’s philosophy and wrote Peripatetic works such as The Intimations (al-Talwihat) before setting illumination against it as an alternative. Suhrawardi, al-Talwihat; SEP “Suhrawardi”
Źródło: szkic AI
Szihab ad-Din Jahji as-Suhrawardi › 1154–1191
Asir ad-Din al-Abhari
wpływ na
Al-Abhari’s Guide to Philosophy presents logic, physics and metaphysics largely in Ibn Sina’s terms; its metaphysics, like that of al-Katibi’s Philosophy of the Source, depends closely on Ibn Sina and carried his doctrines into the madrasas. SEP “Arabic and Islamic Metaphysics” (A. Bertolacci); al-Abhari, Hidāyat al-ḥikma
Źródło: szkic AI
Asir ad-Din al-Abhari › ok. 1194–1265
Nadżm ad-Din al-Katibi
wpływ na
Al-Katibi’s Shamsiyya builds on Ibn Sina’s temporal modal logic, though it examines thirteen modal propositions where Ibn Sina had examined six, and his Philosophy of the Source presents metaphysics largely in Ibn Sina’s terms. T. Street, The Rules of Logic (2024); SEP “Arabic and Islamic Metaphysics”
Źródło: szkic AI
Nadżm ad-Din al-Katibi › 1203–1277
Roger Bacon
wpływ na
Bacon ranked Avicenna highest among Aristotle’s followers and, with him, held the agent intellect to be separate from the soul – for Bacon, God himself (Opus maius, 1267). Roger Bacon, Opus maius (1267); É. Gilson, ‘Les sources gréco-arabes de l’augustinisme avicennisant’, AHDLMA 4 (1929); SEP “Roger Bacon”
Źródło: szkic AI
Roger Bacon › ok. 1219–1292
Kutb ad-Din asz-Szirazi
wpływ na
Qutb al-Din wrote a five-volume commentary on the general part of Ibn Sina’s Canon of Medicine and taught the Canon and the Healing in Syria; his Pearly Crown presents Avicennan philosophy in Persian. F. J. Ragep, Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers (2007); J. Walbridge (1992)
Źródło: szkic AI
Kutb ad-Din asz-Szirazi › 1236–1311
Mir Damad
wpływ na
Mir Damad developed Avicenna’s distinction of time, perpetuity (dahr) and eternity into his doctrine that the world is ‘perpetually originated’ (Kitab al-Qabasat). Mir Damad, Kitab al-Qabasat; Encyclopaedia Iranica “Mir Damad”
Źródło: szkic AI
Mir Damad › ok. 1561–1631
Mulla Sadra
wpływ na
Mulla Sadra started from Avicenna’s distinction of existence and essence, but turned it into the primacy of existence and its gradation (al-Asfar al-arbaa). Mulla Sadra, al-Hikma al-mutaaliya fi l-asfar al-arbaa; SEP “Mulla Sadra”
Źródło: szkic AI
Mulla Sadra › ok. 1572–1640
Hadi Sabzawari
wpływ na
Sabzawari wrote marginal notes on the metaphysics of Ibn Sina’s Healing, printed with those of Mulla Sadra and Mir Damad. Ibn Sina, al-Shifāʾ, al-Ilāhiyyāt, with marginal notes by Mulla Sadra, Mir Damad, Khwansari, Sabzawari and others, ed. H. Naji Isfahani (Tehran 2004)
Źródło: szkic AI
Hadi Sabzawari › 1797–1873
Dżamal ad-Din al-Afghani
wpływ na
Schooled in the philosophical tradition of Avicenna, al-Afghani taught Islamic philosophy, including Avicenna’s works, in Cairo in the 1870s to a circle that included Muhammad Abduh. N. R. Keddie, Sayyid Jamal ad-Din “al-Afghani”: A Political Biography (1972); A. Hourani, Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age 1798–1939 (1962)
Źródło: szkic AI
Dżamal ad-Din al-Afghani › 1838–1897
Fazlur Rahman
wpływ na
Fazlur Rahman wrote his Oxford doctorate on Avicenna’s psychology, published Avicenna’s Psychology (1952) and edited the De anima of the Book of the Cure (1959). F. Rahman, Avicenna’s Psychology (1952); Avicenna’s De Anima (1959)
Źródło: szkic AI
Fazlur Rahman › 1919–1988
Krytyka
Krytyka ze strony 9
Al-Ghazali wpływ na
wpływ na
Al-Ghazali summarised Avicenna’s philosophy in The Aims of the Philosophers and took over much of his logic and psychology, even while condemning three of his doctrines. al-Ghazali, Maqasid al-falasifa (c. 1094); F. Griffel, Al-Ghazali’s Philosophical Theology (2009); SEP “al-Ghazali”
Źródło: szkic AI
krytyka ze strony
Al-Ghazali’s Incoherence of the Philosophers attacked Avicenna’s system on twenty points, among them the world’s eternity, emanation and the necessary link between cause and effect (1095). al-Ghazālī, Tahāfut al-falāsifa (1095), tr. M. Marmura, 2000; SEP “al-Ghazali”
Źródło: szkic AI
Al-Ghazali › 1058–1111
Asz-Szahrastani
krytyka ze strony
In Struggling with the Philosopher al-Shahrastani attacked Ibn Sina’s division of being, his proof of the one Necessary Existent, his account of God’s knowledge and the eternity of the world. al-Shahrastānī, Muṣāraʿat al-falāsifa; W. Madelung and T. Mayer, Struggling with the Philosopher (2001)
Źródło: szkic AI
Asz-Szahrastani › ok. 1086–1153
Awerroes
krytyka ze strony
Averroes faulted Avicenna for making existence an accident added to essence and for departing from Aristotle in concessions to the theologians (Tahafut al-tahafut). Ibn Rushd, Tahāfut al-tahāfut; Long Commentary on the Metaphysics; SEP “Ibn Rushd [Averroes]”
Źródło: szkic AI
Awerroes › 1126–1198
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi wpływ na
wpływ na
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi organised his Eastern Investigations (al-Mabahith al-mashriqiyya) around Avicenna’s philosophy and kept much of its framework even where he criticised it. Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, al-Mabahith al-mashriqiyya; A. Shihadeh, “From al-Ghazali to al-Razi”, Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 15 (2005)
Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO
krytyka ze strony
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi’s commentary on Avicenna’s Pointers and Reminders raised so many objections that al-Tusi called it a ‘wounding’ (jarh) rather than a commentary (sharh). Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, Sharḥ al-Ishārāt; Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī, Ḥall mushkilāt al-Ishārāt, preface
Źródło: szkic AI
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi › ok. 1150–1210
Sad ad-Din at-Taftazani
krytyka ze strony
Al-Taftazani replied to Ibn Sina’s argument that essences cannot be made by an agent, distinguishing between saying that four would not be even and that four would be non-even. SEP “Arabic and Islamic Philosophy of Essence and Existence”; al-Taftazani, Sharḥ al-Maqāṣid
Źródło: szkic AI
Sad ad-Din at-Taftazani › 1322–1390
Ibn Chaldun
krytyka ze strony
Ibn Khaldun argued that the metaphysics of the philosophers, among whom he named al-Farabi and Avicenna, cannot reach certainty about what lies beyond experience (Muqaddima VI, 1377). Ibn Khaldūn, al-Muqaddima (1377), ch. VI, ‘A refutation of philosophy’, tr. F. Rosenthal, 1958, vol. III
Źródło: szkic AI
Ibn Chaldun › 1332–1406
Pokaż wszystko (9)Pokaż mniej
Al Biruni
krytyka ze strony
Al-Biruni objected to Ibn Sina’s answers in defence of Aristotle and pressed his questions again; Ibn Sina’s student al-Maʿsumi replied in his place. al-Asʾila wa-l-ajwiba, ed. Nasr and Mohaghegh (1972); Berjak and Iqbal (2003–06)
Źródło: szkic AI
Al Biruni › 973–1048
Ibn Tajmijja
krytyka ze strony
Ibn Taymiyya rejected Avicenna’s God as a Necessary Existent without attributes and the Avicennan logic on which the philosophers built (Dar taarud; al-Radd ala al-mantiqiyyin). Ibn Taymiyya, Darʾ taʿāruḍ al-ʿaql wa-l-naql; al-Radd ʿalā al-manṭiqiyyīn; J. Hoover, Ibn Taymiyya, 2019
Źródło: szkic AI
Ibn Tajmijja › 1263–1328
Mohammed Abed al-Jabri
krytyka ze strony
Al-Jabri cast Avicenna, above all his ‘Oriental philosophy’, as turning Arabic philosophy towards gnostic irrationalism, against the rationalism of Averroes in the Maghreb (Nahnu wa-l-turath, 1980). M. A. al-Jābirī, Naḥnu wa-l-turāth, 1980; Arab-Islamic Philosophy: A Contemporary Critique, tr. 1999
Źródło: szkic AI
Mohammed Abed al-Jabri › 1935–2010
Krytykuje 1
Porfiriusz pod wpływem
pod wpływem
Avicenna opened the logic of the Book of the Cure with an Introduction (al-Madkhal) that follows Porphyry’s Isagoge on the five predicables. Ibn Sina, al-Shifa, al-Madkhal; SEP “Porphyry”
Źródło: szkic AI
krytykuje
Avicenna rejected the doctrine, which he attributed to Porphyry, that the knowing intellect becomes identical with what it knows (Shifa, De anima V.6; al-Isharat). Ibn Sīnā, al-Shifāʾ: al-Nafs V.6; al-Ishārāt wa-l-tanbīhāt, namaṭ 7
Źródło: szkic AI
Porfiriusz › ok. 234–305
Dzieła
- ok. 1025Kanon medycyny
Systematyczna summa medycyny greckiej i arabskiej; w łacińskim przekładzie Gerarda z Cremony była w Europie podręcznikiem uniwersyteckim aż do XVII wieku.
Encyklopedia od logiki po metafizykę – z rozróżnieniem istoty i istnienia.
Jego ostatnia summa w zwięzłej, aluzyjnej formie – logika, fizyka i metafizyka, kończąca się stacjami mistyków; przedmiot długiej tradycji komentatorskiej.
Stanowisko
Avicenna built the system that later Islamic philosophy and theology took as their main point of reference. He distinguished sharply between what a thing is (its essence) and the fact that it exists: no creature exists by its essence, so each needs a cause. This leads to God as the Necessary Being, whose essence is to exist. His “floating man” thought experiment – a person created in mid-air without any sensations would still know that he exists – argues that the soul knows itself directly and is distinct from the body. His Canon of Medicine was a standard textbook for centuries, and his metaphysics shaped Aquinas, Duns Scotus and the whole later Islamic tradition.
Życie i kontekst
Ibn Sina was born in 980 near Bukhara and was a celebrated physician while still a teenager. He served as doctor and minister at various Persian courts, including Hamadan and Isfahan, often in turbulent times, writing at night and even while travelling. He died in Hamadan in 1037, leaving a huge body of work in philosophy and medicine.
Dalsze główne dzieła
- The Canon of Medicine (c. 1025)
- The Book of Healing (Kitab al-Shifa) (c. 1027)
- The Book of Salvation (c. 1027)
- Remarks and Admonitions (c. 1030)
Pojawia się w
- Podróż „Podróż Arystotelesa” · Przystanek 4 z 9
- Podróż „Od Bagdadu do Isfahanu” · Przystanek 3 z 9
Stan na listopad 2026 · Źródła · Ulepsz tę stronę · Jak powstaje Agora