averroes and german hermeneutic tradition

8/11/2019 Averroes and German Hermeneutic Tradition

1/32

Contextualizing Averros within the German Hermeneutic Tradition/ /Author(s): Ernest Wolf-Gazo - Source: Alif: Journal of Comparative Poetics, No. 16, Averros and the Rational Legacy in theEast and the West/ pp. 133-163 ,(1996) Published by: Department of English and Comparative Literature, American University inCairo and American University in Cairo PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/521833Accessed: 29/10/2008 08:45

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cairo .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with thescholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform thatpromotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Department of English and Comparative Literature, American University in Cairo and American University inCairo Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Alif: Journal of Comparative Poetics.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/521833?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cairohttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cairohttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/521833?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/32

Contextualizing verroes ithin he GermanHermeneutic radition

Ernest Wolf-Gazo

I. Introduction

This is an attempt o contextualize Averroes within the Germanhermeneutic tradition that includes higher biblical criticism,Neo-Hellenism, and philosophical hermeneutics. Reformation biblicalcriticism developed into a critical and sophisticated analysis ofscriptures, while Germany's turn towards classical Greece fosteredclassical philology.1 The spin-off effects of these enterprises were feltin

philosophy.The

receptionof Aristotle's works

producedthe

standard dition of Bekker in 1831, under the auspices of the PrussianAcademy of Sciences;2 and the rejuvenation of Aristotelianism s seenfrom Trendelenburg, Bonitz, and Brentano to the young Heidegger.3The German hermeneutic tradition, steeped within the biblicalcriticism of the Reformed Lutheran church, found itsphilologic-theological refinement in Schleiermacher, a colleague ofHegel's at Berlin University, until the latter's death in 1831.4

Hermeneutic acumen continued to be sharpened by Greek classicalscholars, from Wilamowitz-Moellendorf o Jaeger, and highlighted byDilthey.5

Islamwissenschaften (a term the Germans use instead ofOrientalism) found its initiators again in the Reformed ChurchUniversity of Heidelberg in the sixteenth century, with JakobChristmann (1554-1613), and with Reiske in Gottingen; and thisintellectual trend crystallized n the works of Dieterici, Steinschneider,Wellhausen, Noldeke, von Kremer, Goldziher; C. H. Becker, and MaxHorten.6 Thus, it is no accident that Islamwissenschaften hould ariseout of the Reformed Lutheran Church circles (specifically in Hollandand England), which turned out to be the so-called Kulturtrdger nhermeneutics and philosophy. German classical philosophy, i.e.German Idealism, is an exclusive, Protestant reformed project. Fichte,

Alif 16 (1996) 133


3/32


4/32

Holderlin and Schelling, to find some compromises. When the FrenchRevolution occurred, Hegel and his Tiibingen friends were in theirlate teens, and the ideas of the Revolution and the Enlightenment left

a permanent mark on all. In addition, the reception of Hellenism andAristotle had their respective effects upon Holderlin and Hegel.Arab-Islamic philosophy did not make a difference to the founders ofGerman Idealism. However, the subtle relationship betweenNeo-Platonism in Schelling's work and in Islamic philosophy is stillan uncharted area. Schelling's father was, after all, an orientalistscholar and young Schelling was a prodigious reader in his father'svoluminous library. But in Germany the serious reception of Islamic

philosophy had not yet set in. Ibn Rushd was well known as the LatinAverroes, and the confrontational iterature of Albertus Magnus andAquinas was well known; yet the true Averroes was little known. Thedouble-theory of truth was still attributed o him, and it took Muller'sArabic edition, plus German translation, to dispel the double-truththeory as myth. Would Albert and Thomas have rescinded theircritique of Averroes, if they had known about the Fasl? It is difficultto say. Hegel and Schelling must have known Ibn Tufayl's Hayy IbnYaqzan, which was translated nto German and published in 1782 bythe Gottingen orientalist scholar, Johann Gottfried Eichhor(1752-1788). If this is the case, Hegel, certainly, must have noticedthe Neo-platonic element in Eichhorn's translation of theIslamic-philosophic tale.9 He would see a connection between theGerman mystical tradition of Meister Eckhard, Neo-Platonism, andArab-Islamic philosophy.

However, the attitude oward Islam changed in Europe with theEnlightenment.10 There is a certain irony to all of this: theEnlightenment, which causes Islam many headaches, was preciselythe movement that emancipated Islam from the Roman Catholic,Popish ghetto. A glance at the work of Gibbon will verify this fact.Gibbon had a favorable judgment of Islam and the ProphetMuhammad and thereby paved the way to a more sober reception ofIslam in Europe. But the reason why the Enlightenment should look

favorably upon Islam was political: since the philosophers confrontedthe Roman Church-its dogma, functions, and politicalhierarchy-and needed compatriots n arms; Islam lend itself nicely tosuch an arrangement. They followed the old dictum: the enemy of myenemy is my friend. Perhaps, this is a little extreme, but there is nodoubt, that the Enlightenment figures, especially Voltaire and

Alif 16 (1996) 135


5/32

Rousseau (whose father used to work as a clockmaker n Istanbul) hada more favorable attitude towards the competition of Rome. Voltairestarts his world history in the Far East, with China and India, and not

with the fallen couple of paradise. Leibniz, the cosmopolitanenlightenment thinker, sees in Islam the natural religion, (in the

Prologue to his Theodicee), and in Confucianism the religion ofreason. The romanticism about the Far East and Near East stems froma new enlightenment nterest in the Wisdom of the East (see MaxMiller), as opposed to the old fashioned dogmatic ways of the RomanChurch and its Jesuit anthropology. Goethe's enthusiasm for

everything Persian was genuine, and was shared by Friedrich Rtickert,

a foremost orientalist, not to mention the Austrian diplomat andhistorian of Ottoman activities, Joseph von Hammer Purgstall.11

III. Enter Averroes

There had been some dialogue between German-speakingChristian thinkers and Islam, such as the Neo-Platonist NicolausCusanus, who was Cardinal in Brixen, Tirol, and an influential

political philosopher in the Roman Curia.12 Cusanus, havingNeo-platonic leanings and a keen interest in the mathematicalsciences, may have appeared oo early for such a dialogue to be of anyserious consequences. He did, in fact, promote a plan to have the

Qu'ran translated nto German. Yet, by the time Cusanus died in 1400A. D., the Church, the nobility, and Christian thinkers compromised

the classical Aristotle and exchanged the original for a revisedChristian version, formulated by its Saint Thomas Aquinas.13Averroes had a dangerous image within the old guard of the Church

hierarchy, but, as the late Charles Schmitt has shown, Averroesflourished in generous copies, alongside Aristotle, in the Italian

university towns of Bologna and Padua.14 At this point Schmitt andKristeller spoke of a Renaissance Averroes. No doubt, Renan's

paradigmatic Averroes does not go unchallenged: strong reservations

had already been shown by J. M. Miller, Max Horten, and recently,Schmitt and Kristeller.

We can state that the dialogue between Christian Europe andArab-Islamic lands never really took place, despite the numerousencounters, from 1453 to the present, because the fundamental

presuppositions prevented a meaningful dialogue. Especially in the

Alif 16 (1996)36


6/32


7/32

IV. The true nature of philosophy: Averroes'comments on Aristotle's statement: ... a prayer is asentence, but is neither true nor false.

(De Interpretatione 17 a 4)

Let us return, or a moment, to systematic philosophy. We havechosen an interesting statement by Aristotle on prayer, that will serveas a test case, as to how Averroes handles this particular passage.18 Itseems to be unique, since Aristotle mentions prayer again, only in hisPoetics.19 The question as to what a prayer means, in the context of

philosophy, is quite revelatory of Averroes' keen mind.

Aristotle, in the fourth chapter of his Peri Hermeneias (DeInterpretatione 17a 4) states the following:

Every sentence has meaning, not as being the naturalmeans by which a physical faculty is realized, but, as wehave said, by convention. Yet every sentence is not a

proposition; only such are propositions as have in themeither truth or falsity. Thus a prayer s a sentence, but isneither true nor false. Let us therefore dismiss all other

types of sentence but the proposition, for this lastconcerns our present nquiry, whereas the investigation ofthe other belongs rather to the study of rhetoric or of

poetry.20

If we reduce the prayer passage, within its context, to pure

Aristotelian understanding, hen it says that the De Interpretationedeals exclusively with propositions that claim the property of truthand falsehood; in that sense, a prayer ies outside the boundaries of

propositional inquiry. A prayer cannot be analyzed in terms of thenormative demands of propositional ogic. A prayer s classified as asentence, but does not qualify as a proposition. Thus, we may ask,What kind of sentence is a prayer? We receive the Aristotelian

answer, that the investigation proper and the respective classification

of a prayer entence falls within the art of rhetoric. Rhetoric is themaster art of elocution; therefore, a prayer may be classified as anutterance n the form of a command, e.g. give us our daily bread.This prayer utterance, s of course, neither true nor false, but is rathera wish or a hope, in the disguise of a command, or demand-utterance.It is in that sense, that Aristotle seemed to understand and classify a

Alif 16 (1996)38


8/32

prayer n his Poetics. It also seems that the way Aristotle understandsprayer in the Poetics has already been affected by the

demythologizing of Homer's gods. The prayer Aristotle has in mind is

that of Homeric religion, deconstructedn the De

Interpretationeand

the Poetics. This deconstructive process, which Nestle described as amove from mythos to logos, can be studied in the prayer passageminutely.21 How does an Islamic philosopher and jurist resolve suchdilemmas? How does Averroes handle the situation?

In his middle commentary on the De Interpretatione we searchfor Averroes' interpretation f the prayer passage. Not surprisingly,there is no mention of a prayer example. 22 However, he does

comment on Aristotle, closely discussing the nature of a sentence,propositions, and utterances:

... the meaning of both script and spoken utterancescomes from convention rather than nature...an utteranceis sometimes understood without having truth orfalsehood attributed to it ... For as long as exists or

does not exist is not joined to it (man and whiteness), itis neither true nor false. Instead it signifies a designatedthing, without that thing having truth or falsehoodattributed o it.23

It is clear, from these comments, that Averroes did not overlookthe prayer example, but seemed to have been fully aware of whatAristotle intended. No doubt, using the prayer example without

qualification would certainly have misled many readers, and mighthave caused hostility and anxiety on the part of the true believer.From a simple point of view, or a casual or careless reading, a readermay get the impression that Aristotle meant that a prayer cannot claimTruth. He did not believe in praying, or rather he belittled prayers,since they are, apparently, empty of meaning-neither true norfalse-and, therefore, useless.

The empty meaning of prayers is precisely the dangerousreading (simple, uncritical, and careless) that maybe available on thesurface for the reading public, not to mention the rhetorical class.Needless to say, for an Islamic theologian and true believer, thissmells of heresy. Averroes, it seems, was quite aware of the dangersinvolved.

The subtle distinctions between meaning, utterance, and

Alif 16 (1996) 139


9/32

designation are sensitively handled by Averroes. He emphasizesconvention and conjoins this to utterances-he thereby relativizes anysort of utterance. There are many nations and, therefore, many

tongues and the respective utterances produced by these tongues mayor may not qualify as either truth or falsehood. And prayers, so manytongues, so many prayers, may be included in that assortment. Thus,Averroes does not let himself be nailed down by the prayerpassage-he understands quickly, and goes on to formal matters.True, if a prayer does not qualify as a proposition, hen its utterance sunderstood as a mode of elocution. In a more modem way, we mayeven speak of a speech act. Is, then, a prayer, a speech act, in the

Austin-Searle sense?24 There are many speech acts, in form ofutterances and commands, but can they claim truth or falsehood?

If we turn, for a moment, to Averroes' justly famous Kitdb aslal-maqal, in which he wants to show that there is no contradictionbetween philosophy proper, and divine revelation, we can see hisreason for oversight in the case of the prayer passage.25 He

basically follows al-Farabi's direction, in saying that religion isimitation (muhakdh) of philosophy, and that religion conveys thesame truth as philosophy, but that the multitude of believers do notunderstand the language of philosophy, not to mention theilliterates.26 People show a natural resistance to Aristotle's treatmentof prayer within the confines of propositional logic. After all, whathave prayers got to do with logic? And that is exactly the point: a

prayer does not, logically, submit to the demands of propositionallogic, the conditions for logical truth and falsehood, since the

prayer-utterance annot claim propositional status. This, of course, isdangerous talk, as far as the unschooled, the undereducated, and theilliterate are concerned. Averroes understood quite well, and he wasnot so much concerned about the objections of the unschooled, asmuch as he was concerned about the critique of the educated and theliterate, since, after all, they had vested interests at stake, and not

merely emotional security.In the Fasl, as is well known, Averroes, in a true Aristotelian

manner, comes up with a classification of types of people, accordingto the demands of scientific methodological rigor. He speaks of threeclasses of people, in terms of their intellectual and educational

capacity for comprehending divine scripture: the philosopher, the

theologian, and the simple-minded.27 As to what they believe in, thereis no question; it is the Divine Revelation, but how these types of

Alif 16 (1996)40


10/32

classes of believers have access to scriptures s another matter. Thus,the philosophers' mode of access to scripture is the logical, ordemonstrative method: they know the subtle difference between

utterances, speech acts, sentences, and propositions; what qualifies tobe true, not true, or, neither true nor false, logically. There are thetheologians, the guardians of orthodoxy, who follow the dialecticmode, holding on to the literate meaning of scripture. In that sense,they are the housekeepers of scriptures. Of course, then there are themultitude oi polloi), whose mode of access to scripture and revelationis a prayer. The so-called rhetorical class of people, who deal in thesphere of the emotions-the poetic, in the Aristotelian sense-do

not need logical proof, but simple faith. The pre-modem Europeans,too, had entertained such notion, encapsulated n the dictum: ora etlabora (pray and work), while the nobility ruled in the name of God.Averroes knew quite well the meaning of Aristotle, that utteranceswhich are non-propositional entences, and can claim neither truth norfalsehood, are cast into the sphere of the emotive, the rhetorical.28And this is precisely where the rhetorical class of people ought to belocated-in the manipulation of elocutions, passions, and emotions.For, in that class, it is not necessary to confront the perennial problemof reason, a problem which is preempted by the capacity of therhetorical, passionate mind to follow directive's, such as prayers. Onlythe troubled philosophers, those suspicious characters, have problemswith reason, while the world rattles on, in terms of what theAmerican-European philosopher, George Santayana, called animalfaith. All this, of course, does not suggest that the dialectic and

scientific (demonstrative) class has no need of prayers. On thecontrary, their type of prayer, their respective mode of believing, isexpressed in the form of the demonstrative and the dialectical. Theirmethods of approaching scriptures are a form of prayer, but aspropositions, on behalf of logic and truth.29 This is, precisely, why thedialectic theologians (mutakallimun) bjected, because they hold on tothe idea that there is only one way towards scriptures-their way andmethod-and anything else smacks of heresy. The rhetorical class

does not deal in such fine art and niceties; for them prayer is aclear-cut sign of true and real faith, no more, no less. The strugglebetween the theologian and the philosopher-and Averroes is veryalert to this issue-is that of the exclusive monopoly claims by thetheologians ('ulamc'), i.e. that only they retain exclusive copyright tothe interpretation f scripture. For Averroes the matter can be resolved

Alif 16 (1996) 141


11/32

in terms of metaphorical interpretation, so as to conjoin scripturalrevelation with demonstrative and correct Arabic usage. It is in the

metaphorical realm of interpretation that the struggle between

theology and philosophy is fought. Averroes need not handleAristotle's prayer passage directly, since he dealt with the matter inhis Fasl confession.

We can show that, for Averroes, there are many types of

prayers, which may be conveyed in the form of written expression,scientific demonstration, or simply, in positive assertion andaccommodation. In matters of faith, neither way has exclusive status,but in matters of interpretation of meaning, or semantics, the

methodology is decisive in reaching comprehension of the true andinner meaning of the divine scripture. It is not necessary for the

rhetorical class to comprehend he esoteric meaning, since the exotericutterances are quite adequate within that respective class.30 True faithis not lost thereby; nevertheless, the inner meaning of scripturescannot be attained by rhetoric. Again, in Averroes there is a subtleconnection between his middle commentary on the Interpretationeand aspects of his Fasl. He demonstrates, in his commentary, his

conception of philosophy, i.e. a logical instrument, n order to elicitthe inner meaning of the scripture. Philosophy, thereby, becomes a

propaedeutic method to be used in order to handle passages in

scripture that appear to contradict logic; these contradictions,however, seem, on the surface, only contradictions, but can beresolved through metaphorical interpretation, showing in fact thatcontradictions are only exoteric in form, but quite tenable at the level

of esoteric meaning, excavated by the demonstrative (scientific)method. Thereby, there is, in itself, no real contradiction to berecorded between scripture and philosophy, between philosophy and

religion.Centuries ater, in a fascinating correspondence, carried on by

oriental scholars Noldeke and Goldziher, we find the same problemsdiscussed anew. These discussions are part of the heritage of

Islamwissenschaften and should help us to elaborate and promote a

healthy debate on the respective subject matter.

Alif 16 (1996)42


12/32

V. Noldeke to Goldziher: Do you think Averroeswas far removed from Islam?

In a rough way, this is the question the famous German orientalscholar and author of the History of the Qu'ran, Theodor Noldeke,Professor at Strasbourg University, posed to the junior but rising starof Islamic studies, Ignaz Goldziher, Professor at Budapest University,Hungary. The extraordinary orrespondence between the two giants ofEuropean slamic Studies, has just recently been made available to thepublic.31 Noldeke and Goldziher exchanged letters, during twodecades, on every topic imaginable pertaining to Islam and its

traditions. At one point, a discussion is introduced by Noldeke on theintellectual and especially the philosophic achievements of Islamicphilosophers. They speak of Ibn Khaldun giving them insights intohistorical processes, of al-Ghazali's immense influence in theintellectual formation of the Islamic East and Islamic West, and of theAristotelian influence in al-Andalus. Again and again, Goldziherreplies with high commendations or al-Ghazali, Ibn Tufayl, and IbnRushd (Averroes), as

beingthinkers of the first order.32

In the letter from Strasbourg o Budapest, dated February 2,1904, Noldeke pops the so-called Gretchenfrage made famous inGoethe's Faust, Wie haltst Du's mit der Religion? ( What is yourattitude towards religion? ), to Goldziher on the philosophers ofal-Andalus, particularly, Averroes and Ibn Tufayl:

Meinen Sie nicht auch dass Leute, wie Averroes und Ibn

Tufail im Herzen dem Islam ganz fern standen? (Don'tyou think that people like Averroes and Ibn Tufayl werefar removed in their hearts from Islam?)33

Noldeke, it should be noted, was less philosophically inclinedthan Goldziher-the former had a certain liking for Averros , but notnecessarily for al-Ghazali: Noldeke seems to see a link betweenAristotle, the Enlightenment, and positivism. He sensed that theCommentator would fit into that chain. Be that as it may, Goldziher,being sensitive about the questions his senior colleague in Strasbourgposed, replies that, in the long run, when all is said and done,everyone must answer to God in his own way; yet it is not hisbusiness, or anyone else's, to probe into the heart of another and that acertain empathy (Einfiihlung) for the privacy of the heart should be

Alif 16 (1996) 143


13/32

respected. Averroes and Ibn Tufayl knew in their heart how they stoodin relation to Islam-the irony is, that Goldziher gave Noldeke anIslamic reply: you cannot force someone to reveal the innermost

meaning of his heart. What Noldeke did not suspect was, thatGoldziher, being a Jew in the Austro-Hungarian Empire in which the

majority of the population was staunchly Roman Catholic, identifiedwith the precarious situation of the Andalusianfalasifah.34 Goldziher,no doubt, understood he sensitive position of the Aristotelian Muslim

philosophers, being a minority among the umma. The psychology of

marginality was something Goldziher knew a great deal about, and sodid, we suspect, Averroes. But the message of the Hungarian Jewish

orientalist scholar to his German colleague was clear: the true essenceof philosophy may be a matter of the heart and not the head, for eachof us has his or her own heart to attend. This message, so it seems,comes close to Averroes' conviction.

In a remarkable etter, from Budapest to Strasbourg, dated May28, 1910, Goldziher replied as follows:

In his defenseagainst

Ghazali, Ibn Rushd showsclearly,that philosophical knowledge (cognition) cannot be taken

out from Islam and that he, still, insists on a line ofdemarcation between Islam and philosophy; yet, heleaves philosophers enough space to move in areas thatare indifferent to religion. I seriously believe that heunderstood himself as a true Muslim and was convincedthat he was not radically removed from the basic

doctrines of Islam. Generally, that is how the IslamicAristotelians felt, whom we know through their works.Islam has presented mankind truths, which can also beattained by the philosophic road; yet, which simplereason can only attain through religious teachings. [Mytranslation; ee original in notes.] 35

Again, Goldziher, dentifies with the Andalusian philosophers because

of his own precarious existence.Give the philosopher what is rightfully his, logic and

demonstrative easoning; and religion, what is hers, namely, faith andthe heart. Philosophy, according to Goldziher, cannot possiblypersuade the heart-by means of the logical method-to give upsomething that belongs to it. Faith is not a matter of logical proof and

Alif 16 (1996)44


14/32

well-formed formulae, but in essence, an exclusively private matter ofthe individual. It is interesting to see Goldziher slowly coming toconclusions analogous to those of Averroes, but he was freer to

express himself in letters to sympathetic colleagues and friends, suchas Noldeke. In another way, the true nature of philosophic inquiry inAverroes, seen through the lattice of Goldziher, seems to be to drawlogical conclusions in the mind, and let them rest in the heart, to bemeasured n the face of the ultimate.

We now move on to contextualize the hermeneutic dimensionwe find in the deep structure of Averroes' texts. The focus will be onthe controversy between ijmai' and ta'wll, and its analogous treatment

in the German hermeneutic radition, displayed by the metaphorologyof the philosopher Hans Blumenberg and the philosophic hermeneuticof Hans-Georg Gadamer, expressed in the concept of sensuscommunis. We may ask, How do the efforts of Averroes fit into theGerman hermeneutical attempt to transcend the ultimate in terms ofmetaphorical nterpretation?

VI. Hermeneutics in Averroes: Ijma' and Ta'wil,Metaphor and sensus communis

Considering the rich legacy of the German Hermeneutictradition, from Schleiermacher o Gadamer, we are surprised hat theArab-Islamic contribution o hermeneutic heory has never really beentaken up by Western philosophers with hermeneutic eanings, such as

Ricoeur.36Be that as it may, we find in the efforts of the scholastic and

oriental scholar, Max Horten (1873-1945) at Bonn University, apioneering spirit in dealing with the perennial problem of reason andfaith. Through his experience in Latin scholastic philosophy he wasable to appreciate he intricate problem besetting, not only Christian,but also Muslim philosophers.37 Horten holds that even Averroes didnot step beyond the threshold between interpretation and what is

considered admissible in the methodology of scriptural nterpretation.He points out that the basic characterization of theArab-Greco-philosophical mode has been, basically, apologetic, andthat includes Averroes.38 Horten shows, furthermore, hat there hadnever been any compromise made, on behalf of logic andhermeneutics, n the interpretation f scripture, and that also includes

Alif 16 (1996) 145


15/32


16/32

Ta'wil?45 This conflict, which can be examined as a case-study,including al-Ghazali's critique of Averroes and the latter's reply,especially in the Fasl, contains a great deal of problematic elements

that make up the Schleiermacher-Dilthey-Gadamer tradition.Philosophically speaking, we are dealing with the reason vs. scriptureproblematic; heologically, we deal with revelation and interpretation.The question is, who interprets what, to whom? Can revelation be

interpreted? Is it in need of interpretation? How does the innermeaning (esoteric) relate to the outer (exoteric) meaning? Whathappens if the demonstrative method of the philosophers contradictsthe apparent meaning of scriptures? Indeed, this is a hermeneutic

battle fought in the Arab-Islamic philosophy-world, to this day.46 Ofcourse, we know Averroes' solution: only those who are qualified bytraining, in jurisprudence as well as in philosophy, are qualified topronounce udgment on a textual s tuation that may admit allegoricalinterpretation, or metaphorical usage, in order to make the innermeaning of the apparent textual surface clear to those who aretrained o understand iterally. This, of course, is not the procedure orthe masses, for they must rely on rhetorical devices. We understandthat the textual battlefield between al-Ghazali and the IslamicAverroists is a political power game that raises questions aboutinterpretive authority: who holds the exclusive rights on interpretationof scriptures? In fact, some of the problems raised on that textualbattlefield seem to reappear n post-modernist dress.47 Although suchquestions have been raised, a serious direct Auseinandersetzung(confrontation), n detail, with factual evidence and counter-evidence,

has not really been played out in the Arab-Islamic world of textualcriticism of scriptures. However, if it does happen, there always seemsto be the glass safety net, that everyone knows about, which willsave the author. How different is the Zarathustrian eiltdnzer scene inNietzsche? This is critical interpretation without a safety net of anykind.48

Be that as it may, we will move quickly from the ta'wil vs.ijmd' controversy, o the usage of metaphorical nterpretation, hat has

been rejuvenated in Western philosophy, by Hans Blumenberg, aleading contemporary German philosopher, in the Ernst Cassirertradition.49 With an eye cast on Averroes' treatment of scripture, wecan appreciate Blumenberg's project, which he has called

metaphorology nd has pursued since the late 1950s.50Blumenberg reintroduces the idea that the metaphor is a

Alif 16 (1996) 147


17/32

construction of interpretation we find in the area of metaphysics andthe ultimate. Human beings tend towards metaphor when the languageavailable to them does not suffice to express and come to terms with

ultimates such as birth, death, fate, or God. From his earliestmonograph, paradigms towards a metaphorology, to later worksincluding Work on Myth and The Legibility of the World, Blumenbergresearches the inner meaning of the metaphorical conditions,supporting ultimates n life. He points out:

The Human condition to reality is indirect,circumstantial, delayed, selective, and above all

'metaphorical' ... Man comprehends himself only by wayof what he is not. It is not only his situation that is

potentially metaphorical; his constitution tself already is... Metaphysics often proved itself to us to be

metaphysics taken literally; the disappearance of

metaphysics calls metaphysics back to its place.51

Needless to say, Blumenberg's project should be of great interest tothose in the Islamic learned world who are debating the ijmd'-ta'wllissue, on its own merit. For Blumenberg, the inner meaning of thehuman condition can be described in metaphorical structures that

make sense to the language user and deliver the order of meaning,situating the human condition in an appropriate etting, against theultimates. In Blumenberg's terms, man's relation to God can be

expressed in metaphorical erms by those who are capable of learned

communication; others may resort to prayer, and still others can repeatthe literal orthodoxy, keeping alive the tradition of original revelation.It is precisely within the metaphorical sphere where philosophy,hermeneutics, and literary criticism take their place. They provide themoder tools for interpretation f the ultimates through metaphoricalconstructs that are meaningful to the human being. Anything elsebecomes repetition, without meaning.

We suggest that a comparative study of Averroes' usage of

ta'wil and Blumenberg's project of metaphorology s warranted. Thepositive side to such an enterprise would be the classification of

metaphorical anguage within narrative structures hat are contrastedin terms of their cultural contexts, respectively. Instead of

simple-minded ideology, we need robust comparative studies,alongside a sensitive and subtle analysis of contrasts. In such an

Alif 16 (1996)48


18/32

enterprise, everyone participates n a truly universal discourse.Another aspect of the hermeneutic dimension in Averroes'

work is the idea of sensus communis. The term is of Roman origin,

cultivated by the Stoics and invigorated, again, by the Italian thinker,Vico. Our interest, though, is the contrast between the hermeneutictreatment of sensus communis in the German tradition, andcontextualizing Averroes' types of cognitive class within theindigenous framework of the umma. We may propose the question:how does the umma and Averroes' demonstrative class fit into thehermeneutic structure? How can we reconcile Averroes' hermeneuticproject in the Fasl and Gadamer's notion of hermeneutic truth ?

In Oetinger's works we find the following definition of sensuscommunis:

... the ratio governs itself by rules, often even withoutGod; but sense, always with God. Just as nature isdifferent from art, so sense and ratio are different. Godworks through nature in a simultaneous increase ingrowth that spreads regularly throughout he whole. Art,however, begins with some particular part. ... senseimitates nature; he ratio, art.52

Thus, sensus communis, the community of the senses, is a gift fromGod, according to Oetinger. The communal aspect of the sensus, thatpromotes participation, anticipation, oyalty, and bonding, reminds usof the active relationship between human beings and God. For the arts

follow method and not communal sense. By the time Kant is engagedin his Critique, sensus communis has been replaced by Urteilskraft(judgment). Judgment addresses the individual's Urteilskraft andconcepts (Begriffe), referring to objects (Gegenstdnde) a priori.53

What the Andalusian philosopher tried to achieve, areconciliation between philosophy and religion (theology would bemore precise), was deliberately derailed by the time Kant appears onthe scene. The paradoxical situation turned out to be this: while the

Arab-Islamic world preserved a sensus communis, in the form of the'ulema and the umma, it neglected and rejected the critical faculty ofjudgment (in the Kantian sense), because it saw a basic contradictionto the Islamic sensus communis.54 Kant's Urteilskraft individualizesthe human being, while, at the same time, that individualized beinglives in tension with the sensus communis. This is especially true of

Alif 16 (1996) 149


19/32

Averroes' demonstrative class of thinkers. Thus, in the West thesensus communis was marginalized and individual judgment madesupreme. The contrary situation happened in the Islamic world. We

hold that the battle to rescue the communal sense from the falasifa,who tended, according to Ghazali's critique, to emphasize individualjudgment in the name of reason supreme, could not legitimately holdon to their claims. The hermeneutic radition n Germany matured oan unprecedented discipline, applied as the methodology of theGeisteswissenschaften,55 rom philosophy to jurisprudence.56 Yet, inthe midst of all that, the communal sense of truth got lost, the truththat was still entertained by Islamic philosophers after Ghazali. It was

the encounter with Occidental natural science that forced the Islamicworld to face, anew, the individual version of the truth question, andto place the Averroes-Ghazali ebate at the forefront of discourse, romal-Afghani to Iqbal. The rejuvenation of Islamic sentiment is but anattempt o reclaim truth, on behalf of al-Ghazali, while the old struggleof the Andalusian philosophers are taken on by critical minds, hoping,at least, to arrange some sort of truce between sensus communis andcritical udgment n the Arab-Islamic world.

VII. Conclusion

Let us quickly reiterate our contention: we tried to show that in

contextualizing Averroes and his project of reconciliating philosophyand religion within the German hermeneutical tradition, we can

provide a basis for a modem discourse that has not yet taken place,from a universal point of view. The German hermeneutic traditionitself, enmeshed in the theology-philosophy debates since theReformation, was reinforced through the emergence of the

Altertumswissenschaften-and Islamwissenschaften (theGreco-Islamic world of scholarship). The Neo-scholastic resurgencepromoted a critical reception of Aristotle's work (from Bekker'sedition to Brentano and Heidegger), which included Marcus Joseph

Muller's Arabic and German edition of the Fasl. Thus, the Germanreception of Aristotle is also a part of a renewed reception of Islamic

philosophy, summarized by the classic work of de Boer in 1901.We have shown, by using Aristotle's statement on prayers as an

analytic case-study, how Averroes' specific dealings can be integratedinto a cognitive structure that does justice to all, not necessarily

Alif 16 (1996)50


20/32

forfeiting the umma. Focusing on the hermeneutic dimension and thecapacities, laying dormant in Averroes' project, we can see that thecontemporary fforts arising out of Germany's hermeneutic radition,

exemplified in Gadamer and Blumenberg, show strong affinities toAverroes and the ijma -ta'wil debate.When all is said and done, we should not restrict the brilliant

mind of Averroes to the role of a medieval Islamic philosopher whogot into trouble with his own people and, not unlike Wittgenstein,became the darling of another Kulturkreis (cultural environment),namely that of the medieval Latin left-wing intellectuals at ParisUniversity (including Siger of Brabant and his followers). Rather, the

Averroes legacy must be transformed into a universal legacy andintegrated nto a universal discourse between the Western and Islamicworld. The basic issues raised by Averroes are not settled, and cannotbe settled, in an exclusively ideological framework. The intellectualand cultural value of Averroes is enhanced, n our time, if we considerin what type of world we happen to live, as the twentieth centurydraws to a close. Ultimate ssues are manipulated on the altar of thecomputer, while the dutiful visit to the shopping mall promises theultimate celebration of happiness, and Disneyland promises eternalbliss, negating the world of sin, by means of Mickey Mouse. We arein dire need of a man like Averroes, when we consider that Plato'sCave has turned post-modernist.

NOTES

1 See the classic work by E. M. Butler, The Tyranny of Greece overGermany (1935; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955);German Neo-Hellenism peaked with Wilamowitz-Moellendorf andWerner Jaeger's three-volume Paideia and his classic, Aristotle'sPhilosophic Development (written in Germany and translated intoEnglish after Jaeger was forced to leave Nazi Germany for theUnited States, where he became the Chair of Classics at Harvard

University).2 Cf. Rudolf Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship: 1300-1850

(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978) 173ff.; Bekker was one ofF. A. Wolf's most illustrious students, editing and publishing thestandard critical edition of Aristotle's works, a four-quarto volumepublished by the Berlin Academy in 1831; the Oxford Aristotle (W.

Alif 16 (1996) 151


21/32

D. Ross translation) as well as the Loeb Classical Library ollow theBekker edition and pagination.

3 Bonitz translated Aristotle's Metaphysics anew and his translation

was still used alongside Bekker, by my student peer group, when Iwas a philosophy graduate student in the mid-1960. Trendelenburgwas a forceful promoter of Aristotle and was the teacher of MorrisCohen, who, in turn, was the teacher of John Dewey at JohnsHopkins-likewise, Franz Brentano wrote his dissertation in 1862on The Manifold Meaning of Being in Aristotle (Von dermannigfachen Bedeutung des Seienden nach Aristotleles), andBretano was to be young Heidegger's first guide through Greek

philosophy (see John van Buren, The Young Heidegger(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994) 55ff., 220ff.); youngHeidegger was part of the general Aristotle reception(Rezeptionsgeschichte Aristoteles) in the mid-to-late-19th CenturyGermany, entertained by a neo-scholastic movement within theRoman Catholic Church; although Roman Catholic, Heidegger madeuse of the hermeneutic tradition, as it developed within theReformed Church (e.g. Rudolf Bultmann in Marburg), and thephenomenological project of Edmund Husserl (Husserl'sfather-in-law was Moritz Steinschneider, he Orientalist).

4 See Edgar Krentz, The Historical-Critical Method (Philadelphia:Fortress Press, 1975); and H. Lazarus-Yafeh, Intertwined Worlds:Medieval Islam and Biblical Criticism (Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 1992). It is well known that the German ReformerMartin Luther preferred Mohammad, the Prophet, to the Pope in

Rome (cf. Helmut Wolfhardt Vielau, Luther und die Turkei(G6ttingen Diss., 1936), and the work by R.W. Southern on the

Image of Islam in Medieval Latin Europe); F. Schleiermacher, riendof F. A. Wolf, translated he complete works of Plato, still in use in a

paperback dition published by Rowohlt Verlag and used by Germanstudents; steeped in the Romantic movement, Schleiermacherdelivered a famous lecture series entitled, Uber die Religion (OnReligion), meant as a subtle critique of the French version of

enlightenment epistemology and its followers, at Berlin Universityin the 1820s-at the same time, the lectures were understood o be a

critique of Hegel's idea of truth, embodied in Absolute Geist(absolute mind, spirit); Neo-Hellenism, from Winckelmann toWilhelm von Humboldt, treated religion and Christianity with

benign neglect (cf. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, 183 f.).

Alif 16 (1996)52


22/32

5 Higher biblical criticism fostered the development of criticalclassical scholarship (especially Hebrew, Greek, and Latin), from F.A. Wolf and Schleiermacher to Wilamowitz-Moellendorf; the

spin-off' results can be seen in Jaeger's acute philological analysisof Aristotle's Metaphysics and Dilthey's usage of criticalinterpretation n his biography of Schleiermacher, ushering intoLebensweltphilosophie, rescued from oblivion by Husserl,

Heidegger, and used by Habermas to construct his communicationtheory. Nietzsche, too, turned out to be a first-class classical scholar,studying with Ritschl at Bonn University, then became a rather

youngish professor of classics at Basel University; his famouslectures on the birth of tragedy arising from the dialectic tensionbetween Appollonian and Dionysian culture, turned nto a fiasco foryoung Nietzsche, in the eyes of his senior colleagues and theclassical philology establishment, spearheaded byWilamowitz-Moellendorf (cf. J. H. Groth,

Wilamowitz-Moellendorf on Nietzsche's Birth of Tragedy,Journal of the History of Ideas, vol. XI, (1950): 179-190; also, see

the critique on Neo-Hellenism by Max Horkheimer and Theodor W.Adorno, Dialektikder Aufkldrung (1947; Frankfurt a.M.: Fischer

Verlag, 1968), including their extensive footnotes onWilamowitz-Moellendorf.

6 The development of Islamwissenschaften (critical scholarshippertaining to Islam as religion, culture, and history) was developedout of a broader discipline of Orientalistik, which referred to India,China, and the Far

East;likewise,

Altertumswissenschaft(specifically classical Greece and Rome), coined by F. A. Wolf, waspart of a rejuvenation of the movement back to the classics thatoccured after the disappointment that followed of the FrenchRevolution and Napoleonic wars in Central Europe. The followingliterature gives the reader an overview on the establishment ofIslamwissenschaft, as an outgrowth of general classical scholarshipin German-speaking lands: Rudi Paret, Arabistik und Islamkunde an

deutschen Universititen (Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1966); Johann Flick,Die Arabischen Studien in Europa (Leipzig: Harrasowitz, 1955)(especially, 322ff.); Gerot Rotter, ed., Deutsche Orientalistik(Tiibingen: Erdmann, 1974); J. Fiick, Arabische Kultur und Islam imMittelalter, 2 vols. (Weimar: Buhlau Verlag, 1956); AnnemarieSchimmel, Die Aneignung arabischer Literatur in der deutschen

Alif 16 (1996) 153


23/32

Klassik und Romantik, Araber und Deutsche. eds. F. H.Kochwasser et al. (Ttibingen: Erdman, 1974) 133-158; Josef vanEss, From Wellhausen to Becker: The Emergence of

Kulturgeschichte n Islamic Studies, Islamic Studies-- A Traditionand its Problems, ed. Malcolm H. Kerr (Malibu, California: UndenaPubl., 1980) 27-51; H. H. Schaeder, Ein Gedenkbuch, ed. CarlBecker (1876-1933) (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck, 1950); BertoldSpuler, Helleni-sches Denken im Islam, Speculum, vol. 5 (1954):179-193; Katharina Mommsen, Goethe und 1001 Nacht (Frankfurta.M.: Suhrkamp, 1981); ed. Gustav Pfannmuller, Handbuch derIslam-Literatur (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1923); Ekkehard Rudolph,Westliche Islamwissenschaft im Spiegel Muslimischer Kritik, Diss.Bonn 1990 (Berlin: Schwarz Verlag, 1991).

7 The epoch making European work on Ibn Rushd (Averroes) wasErnest Renan's, Averroes et l'averroisme (published in Paris in1852); a third edition followed in 1866, while an Arabic translationwas published as late as 1957 in Cairo. Renan was not however, thefirst Orientalist who dealt, systematically, with Arabic-Islamic

philosophyin

Europe-thehonor

goesto

AugustSchmoelder,

Documenta philosophiae Arabum (Bonn, 1836). Specifically, theGerman-language contribution, developing scholarship onArab-Islamic culture (philological, hermeneutical, andIslamwissenschaft) had been extensive, in the form of

Rezeptionsgeschichte, ncluding studies of Averroes and systematicresearch in Arab-Islamic philosophy: e.g. August Schmoelder,Essais sur les ecoles philosophiqos chez les Arabes et notamment ur

la doctrine d'Algazzali (Paris, 1842); included in thisreception-period s the original publication (in Arabic and German)of Averroes' famous Kitab fasl al-maqal (Harmonie der Religionund Philosophie) by Marcus Joseph Muller in 1859 (reprintWeinheim: VCH Verlagsgesellschaft, 1991): Muller was critical ofRenan's assessment of Averroes' philosophy, but Renan did nothave the hindsight of Muller's edition. Further important worktowards developing a tradition n the West of systematic treatment of

Islamic thought (including Turkish and Persian literature andcontributions) ncludes R. Hercz, ed. and trans., Drei Abhandlungen(Averroes' theory of conjunction) (Berlin: 1869); Friedrich Dieterici,Die Philosophie bei den Araber im X. Jahrhundert n.Chr., vols.I-XII (translation and extensive footnotes) (Berlin: 1876-1888) see

especially Vol. XII: Die sog. Theologie des Aristoteles, 1883);

Alif 16 (1996)54


24/32

Moritz Steinschneider, Die europdischen Ubersetzungen derarabischen Schriften (Graz: Akad. Druck-und Verlagsanstalt, 1965),rep. T. J. de Boer, Geschichte der Philosophie im Islam (Stuttgart:

Kohlhammer, 1901), which was translated nto Arabic in 1938 andused, for a very long time, by Muslim students of philosophy atAligarh College, until the more up-to-date works by Badawi, Corbin,Fakhry, M. M. Sharif, and Marmura; Martin Grabmann Der lat. Ave.des 13. Jahrhunderts u. seine Stellung zur christlichen

Weltanschauung (Sitzung der Bayerischen Akademie derWissenschaften, Heft 2, Mtinchen, 1931); and the works byGoldziher and Horten, leading German-language cholars on Islamic

philosophy, see Ignaz Goldziher, Die islamische und die jtidischePhilosophie des Mittelalters, Kultur der Gegenwart, 2nd ed., vol. 1(Berlin: de Gruyter 1909 ed., 1913 ed.); Max Horten, DieMetaphysik des Averroes, nach dem Arabischen iibersetzt underliutert (1912; Frankfurt a. M.: Minerva, 1960), Die Hauptlehrendes Averroes nach seiner Schrift: Die Widerlegung des Gazali

(Bonn: Cohen (Bouvier), 1913), Die philosophischen Probleme der

spekulativen Theologie in Islam (Bonn: Verlag Peter Hanstein,1910), Die Philosophie des Islam in ihrem Beziehungen zu den

philosophischen Weltanschauungen des Westlichen Orients

(Miinchen: Reinhardt, 1924), Falsafa, Enzyklopddie des Islam,vol. II (Leiden/Leipzig: Brill/Harrasowitz, 1927) 49-54, and Dasphilosophische System von Schiraz (Strasbourg: Truebner, 1913).Horton (1874-1945) was a Roman Catholic theologian at BonnUniversity, with strong leanings towards philosophical speculation,

in reference to the relationship between the Latin MedievalPhilosophy and Islam; unfortunately, most of his works areunavailable in English or French. See Miklos Maroth, TheReception of Arabic Philosophy at the University of Budapest, TheIntroduction of Arabic Philosophy into Europe. eds., Ch. E.Butterworth and B. A. Kessel (Leiden: Brill, 1994); andphilosophically, in itself of some interest, Ernst Bloch, Avicenna unddie aristotelische Linke (Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1968). Andfinally, see also Anke V. Ktigelgen, Averroes und die arabischeModerne (Leiden: Brill, 1994).

8 Cf. G. W. F. Hegel, Vorlesungen uber die Geschichte der

Philosophie, vol. 2 (1832-1845; Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1971),especially 514-524 on Arabic philosophy.

9 Cf. Otto Spies, Geschichte der arabischen Literatur, (H. Kevelar

Alif 16 (1996) 155


25/32

Rhld.: Verlag Butzon und Bercker, 1949 [vol. 1], 1951 [vol. II])17ff.; a friend of Lessing. J. J. Reiske (1706-1774) was one of thefirst serious competent Arabists in Germany (see Pfeiffer, History of

Classical Scholarship,172); Hegel must have known Ibn Tufayl'swork in German translation. See Abu-Dschafar Ebn Tofail, DerNaturmensch oder Geschichte des Hai Ebn 'Joktan, ein morgenldndischer Roman aus dem Arabischen iibersetzt von Johann

Gottfried Eichhorn (Berlin/Stettin: Fr. Nicolai, 1782).10 Otto Spies, Geschichte der arabischen Literatur, vol. II, 9 ff.11 Based on public lectures on Rtickert and Goethe, given by Prof.

Annemarie Schimmel at the Turkish-German Cultural Institute,

Ankara, Turkey, during April 1988; also see the pioneering workby the poet and Orientalist Friedrich Riickert, Grammatik, Poetikund Rhetorik der Perser (orig. 1827-28), New Edition by W.Pertsch (Gotha: Friedrich Andreas Perthes, 1874), and Hamasaoder die altesten arabische Volkslieder gesammelt von AbuTemman, ibersetzt u. erlautert von F. Riickert, 2 vols. (Stuttgart:Verlag von Samuel Gottlieb Liesching, 1846).

12 Cf. UlrichRudolph,

Nikolaus von Kues und der Dialog mit demIslam, Der Islam, Bd. 71, Heft 1, (1994): 95-108.

13 Cf. the standard work, Ferdinand van Steenberghen, Aristotle inthe West (Louvain, 1955; Notre Dame University Press, 1968);also see F. E. Peters, Aristotle and the Arabs: The AristotelianTradition n Islam (NY: New York University Press, 1968).

14 See Charles B. Schmitt, Aristotle and the Renaissance (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1981) and his Renaissance

Averroism studied through the Venetian Editions ofAristotle-Averroes, The Aristotelian Tradition and RenaissanceUniversities (London: Variorum Reprints 1984) 113-142.

15 See S. MacClintock, Heresy and Epithet: An Approach to theProblem of Latin Averroisme, Review of Metaphysics, vol. 8,1954-1955, 176-199; 342-356; 526-545; L. Hoedl, Uber dieaverroistische Wende der lateinischen Philosophie des Mittelaltersim 13. Jahrhundert, Recherches de theologie ancienne et

medievale, Lovain, 39, (1972): 171-204, and a more concisepresentation by Hoedl, Lateinischer Averroismus, Lexikon des

Mittelalters, Bd. I (1980):1291 ff. Albertus Magnus, the teacher ofThomas Aquinas at Cologne, in his commentary on Aristotle's deAnima (1254-1257) pointed out: nos autem in paucis dissentimusab Averroe. ( Only in a few items do we dissent from Averroes,

Alif 16 (1996)56


26/32

1293); Aquinas, John Peckham and Robert Kilwardby agreed withAlbert.

16 See Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal, La Reception de la Philosophie

Arabe a L'Universite de Paris au XIIIeme Siecle, in Butterworthand Kessel, The Introduction of Arabic Philosophy, 31-39.17See A. V. Kigelgen, Averroes und die arabische Moderne; E. I. J.

Rosenthal, The Place of Politics in the Philosophy of Ibn Rushd,Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, vol. 15 (1953):246-278; Migel Cruz Hernandez, Abu-l-Walid Ibn Rusd(Averroes): Vida, Obra, Pensamiento, Influencia (Cordoba:Publicaciones del monte de Piedad y caja de Ahorros de Cordoba,

1986)--see especially the excellent chronology and comprehensiveliterature, 55-58, 371ff.; Andres Martinez Lorca (coord.) Ensayossobra la Filosofia en Al-Andalus (Barcelona: Editorial Anthropos,1990) 405-427 ( El sentido de las tres lecturas Aristoteles porAverroes ); Wolfgang Kluxen, Charakteristik iner Epoche-ZurGesamtinterpretation einer Philosophie des lateinischenMittelalters, Wissenschaft und Weltbild, 28, (1975): 83-90; J. P.Beckmann et al., Philosophie im Mittelalter (Hamburg: Meiner,1987). The Latin translations of Averroes' works have beencritically edited at the Thomas-Institute of Cologne University,Germany, under the general editorship of Prof. Dr. AlbertZimmermann. See Averroes, Opera, see also, a description andevaluation of modem editions of Averroes' work by the late H.Gaetje, Zu neuen Ausgaben von Texten des Averroes, DerIslam, Bd. 67, Heft 1 (1990): 124-139. An international

conference entitled, Averroes and Enlightenment, wasconducted during December 5-8, 1994, in Cairo, sponsored by theAfro-Asiatic Philosophy Society under the its Head and founder,Prof. Murad Wahba (the proceedings are forthcoming).

18 We refer to Averroes' Middle Commentary on Aristotle's DeInterpretatione. Cf. Averroes, Middle Commentaries onAristotle's Categories and De Interpretatione, trans. with Notesand Introduction by Charles E. Butterworth Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 1983).19 Cf. Aristotle, Poetics, (1456) b 8-10; see Loeb Classical Library

Edition, based on the Bekker Edition.20 Cf. Aristotle, De Interpretatione, 17 a 4; W. D. Ross translation,

The Works of Aristotle in English, based on the Immanuel BekkerEdition.

Alif 16 (1996) 157


27/32

21 For an interesting nterpretation f the rise and fall of the idea ofGreek mythology being transformed into logos, see WilhelmNestle, Vom Mythos zum Logos (Miinchen: Beck,1973); however,

further research is needed to determine what epistemologicalstatus a prayer takes on in a polytheistic religion, such asPharaonic Egypt and Homeric Greece, in contrast to monotheistic

religions, such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam; again, theGreek differentiation between pistis (belief), doxa (dogma:literateness), and episteme (real knowledge) seems to function,analogously to Averroes' classification of people along the line ofrhetorical, dialectic, and metaphorical methodology (this, still,needs to be investigated carefully).

22 Any careful comparison of the prayer passage n Aristotle and inAverroes' Commentary, ells the reader that Averroes must havenoticed the prayer example and its contextual meaning (hedecided, apparently, o comment on the formal logical nature ofthe neither .. nor construction, but does not discuss the status ofthe passage at large).

23 Cf. Averroes, 16 a 4-19; see Butterworth's translation, TheIntroduction of Arabic Philosophy, 125-126.

24 See J. L. Austin, How To Do Things with Words, ed. J. O. Urmson

(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1970), and John Searle, SpeechActs (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972). Averroes,would qualify today as an analytical philosopher.

25 Cf. Marcus Joseph Miller, Arabic and German ranslation of 1859(standard edition), reissued as Philosophie und Theologie

(Weinheim: VCH Acta Humaniora, 1991); also, see the Englishtranslation and commentary by George F. Hourani, Averroes: Onthe Harmony of Religion and Philosophy (London: Luzac,

1967)1-43, and his clear and concise lecture at American

University in Cairo, in March 1957, entitled and published as,Ibn-Rushd's Defence of Philosophy, The World of Islam:

Studies in Honour of Philip K. Hitti, eds. James Kritzeck and R.B.Winder (London: Macmillan, 1959) 145-138.

26 Two interesting comments on the connection between al-Farabiand Ibn Rushd are offered by Michael E. Marmura in TheIslamic Philosophers' Conception of Islam, Islam's

Understanding of Itself, eds. R.G. Hovannisian and S. Vryonis(Malibu, California: Undena Publ., 1983) 87-102; and in Arthur

Sagadeyev, Ibn Rushd's Theory of the Relationship between

Alif 16 (1996)58


28/32

Philosophy, Theology, and Religion, and his Sources inal-Farabi's work, Muslim Philosophy in Soviet Studies, ed.Marietta Stepanyantis New Delhi: Sterling Publ. Private Limited,

1988) 49-69 ( ...Ibn Rushd [used] the word al-haqq, in aphilosophical context as meaning 'corresponding o reality,' andin a religious context in the sense of 'inviolable and universaldivine law', 53-54). The formulization and institutionalization f

prayer rituals in the Islamic tradition s well presented by EugenMittwoch, Zur Entstehungsgeschichte des Islamischen Gebets undKultus, Verlag der Koenigl (Berlin: Akademie derWissenschaften, 1913) 6: Die Salat ist eine bestimmte Form des

Kultgebetes, die nicht nach den individuellen Bediirfnissen desBeters gestaltet werden darf, sonder die von jedem Glaubigen zubestimmten Zeiten in gleicher Weise in denselben Formen und mitdenselben Formeln zu verrichten st.

27 It is curious that Greek epistemological classification is alsodivided according to the human being's capacity for levels of

cognition: e.g. pistis is understood as meaning simple belief, doxaclaims expression of the doctrinaire, while episteme, in Plato andAristotle, can claim the status of true knowledge exclusively. Itdoes not take a great deal of imagination to see a curious

correspondence between Greek epistemological types ofintellectual claims and Averroes' classification of types of classesof people, according to their cognitive capacity to relate to divinescripture; thus, pistis refers to the rhetorical class, doxa to thedialectic group, and episteme to the demonstrative class of

peoples.28 The relationship between the emotive sphere, language usage, andmoral claims, has been brilliantly worked out by the lateAmerican analytic philosopher, Charles Stevenson, Language andEthics (1944; Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1985).Stevenson's emotive theory of moral language fits into the moldof the Greek pistis, and Averroes' rhetorical class of humanbeings; as for the epistemological class, those who use the

demonstrative ogical method, see R. M. Hare, The Language ofMorals (1958; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991).

29 This construction comes close to Hegel's idea of Absolute Spirit(der absolute Geist), unfolding itself in the form of art,philosophy, and religion; Hegel understands these forms ofepistemological expressions as transformations of the ultimate

Alif 16 (1996) 159


29/32

spirit, the absolute; thus, art (pistis, rhetoric) is the empiricalversion of prayer, philosophy (episteme, demonstrative method) isthe intellectual version of art and religion, and religion (doxa,

dialectic method) is truth in form of prayers, but the threeexpressions of truth unite in the ultimate, the absolute Geist. SeeHegel, Phenomenology of Mind, concluding chapter; Heideggerconcludes his famous lecture, Was ist das, die Philosophie? ,with the pronouncement, Philosophie st das Gebet des Denkens(Philosophy is the prayer of thinking).

30 Here we should remind ourselves of the discussion in classicalscholarship on the esoteric and exoteric Plato, see Paul Shorey,What Plato Said (1958; New York: Harper, 1968).

31 Cf. Robert Simon, Ignac Goldziher: His Life and Works (Leiden:Brill [Under the auspices of Hungarian Academy of the Sciences],1994). It should be noted that the first part of Simon's book iswritten in English, including summaries of Goldziher's workswritten in his native Hungarian. Most of the Hungarian works ofGoldziher have never been translated nto English (some Germantranslations exist). The second part of Simon's book contains a

surprise for the reader: it consists, exclusively, of the

Correspondence between Goldziher and Noldeke, in the originalGerman, without a translation-the correspondence akes up about250 pages.

32 Simon, Ignac Goldziher, 223-225; 253.33 Simon, 256.34 Cf. Miklos Maroth, The Reception of Arabic Philosophy at the

University of Budapest, The Introduction of Arabic Philosophyinto Europe. Charles E. Butterworth and B.A. Kessel ed. (Leiden:Brill, 1994) 98-111; see also Goldziher's Oriental Diary. R. Petaied. (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1985) and his

Tagebuch. A. Scheiber ed. (Leiden: Brill, 1982). Goldziher andNoldeke certainly do not qualify as typical Orientalists.

35 Cf. Simon, Ignac Goldziher, 321. The original reads, In seiner

Verteidigung gegen Gazali zeigt Ibn Roshd deutlich, dass er die

philosophische Erkenntnis aus dem Islam nicht hinausdekretierenlasse und dass er hauptsachlich noch auf eine Demarkationliniezwischen den beiden Geleisen, Islam und Philosophie dringt, undden Philosophen auf einem Gebiet sich bewegen lisst, der fur die

Religion indifferent st. Ich glaube, dass er sich ehrlich als Muslimfihlte und glaubte, die Grundlehren des Islam nicht radikal

Alif 16 (1996)60


30/32

verlassen zu haben. So fiihlten ja die islamische Aristoteliker diewir aus ihren Schriften kennen. Der Islam habe den MenschenWahrheiten gebracht, die auch auf philosophischen Wege zu

erreichen sind, die aber die gemeine Vemunft nur auf dem Wegeder religi6sen Belehrung erreichen Konne.36 A former student of Ricoeur, the Egyptian Prof. Hassan Hanafi,

Professor of Philosophy at Cairo University, has had some impactin the Arabic speaking world, not in terms of hermeneutics, ratherin political philosophy. See Richard K. Khuri, A Critique ofHassan Hanafi Concerning his Reflections on the Scarcity ofFreedom in the Arabi-Muslim World, Cultural Transitions in the

Middle East. S. Mardin ed. (Leiden: Brill, 1994) 86-115.37 For a general assessment of the situation, see Jean Jolivet, The

Arab Inheritance, A History of Twelfth-Century Philosophy. P.Dronke ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1922)113-148; and a highly informative and sensitive presentation,Dietrich Brandenburg, Die Madrasa (Graz: Verlag F. Sammler,1978); concise, See also Max Horten, Glauben und Wissen inIslam (Bonn: A. Marcus und Weber's Verlag, 1913) and

Falsafa, Enzyklopddie des Islam, Bd. II. (1927): 49-54.38 Also see Horten's work on Averroes, Die Metaphysik des

Averroes. Halle (Abh. z. Phil. u. ihre Geschichte, B. Erdmann d.)1912 and Die Hauptlehren des Averroes nach seiner Schrift: Die

Widerlegung des Gazali (Bonn: Cohen [Bouvier] Verlag, 1913).39 Horten, Glauben und Wissen, 19.40 Relevant to this is Josef van Ess, Die Anfinge der islamischen

Theologie, Deutsche Orientalistik. G. Rotter ed. (Tiibingen:Erdmann, 1974) 53-62. (Van Ess speaks of theology, 'ilmal-kalam, as Rede-Argumentationsstil, 4). See also, MajidFakhry, Philosophy and Scripture n the Theology of Averroes,Philosophy, Dogma and the Impact of Greek Thought in Islam

(London: Variorum, 1994) XVI.41 See Hans-Georg Gadamer for a short historical account of the

Romantic and Pietist importance within the German

hermeneutical tradition, in his classic work, Wahrheit undMethode (Truth and Method) (1962; New York: Crossroad, 1993).

42 See Wilhelm Dilthey, Einfiihrung in die Geisteswissenschaften(Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1968); some of Dilthey's works arein the process of being translated and published in English byPrinceton University Press.

Alif 16 (1996) 161


31/32

43 Gadamer, Wahrheit und Methode; also see his collected workspublished by Klostermann Verlag in Frankfurt . M.

44 Horten, Glauben und Wissen, Einfiihrung.

45 See the excellent case-study by, Iysa A. Bello, The MedievalIslamic Controversy between Philosophy and Orthodoxy: IJMA'and TA' WIL n the Conflict between Al-Ghdzali and Ibn Rushd(Leiden: Brill, 1989); compare Etienne Gilson, Reason andRevelation in the Middle Ages (New York: Scribners' Sons, 1938)and Dimitri Gutas, Avicenna and the Aristotelian Tradition(Leiden: Brill, 1988).

46 Cf. Tilman Ansatze Nagel, Gab es in der Islamischen GeschichteAnsatze einer Sakularisierung? Studien zur Geschichte undKultur des Vordern Orients-Festschrift ur Bertold Spuler, H.R.Roemer and A. Noth ed. (Leiden: Brill, 1981) 275-288; and,Kazuo Shimogaki, Between Modernity and Post Modernity: TheIslamic Left and Dr. Hassan Hanafi's Thought (Tokyo: Instituteof Middle Eastern Islamic Studies, 1988). For a recent discussionsee Aziz Al-Azmeh, The Discourse of Cultural Authenticity:Islamists Revivalism and

EnlightenmentUniversalism, Culture

and Modernity: East-West Philosophic Perspectives (Hawaii:Hawaii University Press, 1991) 468-486.

47 See, for instance, Akbar S. Ahmad, Postmodernism and Islam(London: Routledge, 1992) and a critique, Bryan S. Turner,Orientalism, Postmodernism and Globalism (London: Routledge,1994) 10 ff.. Also relevant is S. G. Mestrovic, The Balkanization

of the West (London: Routledge, 1993); along more traditional

lines is Bernard Lewis, Islam and the West (Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 1993). See especially in Lewis, The Questionof Orientalism, 9-118.

48 See Nietzsche, Zarathustra; compare Muhammed El-Bahay,Muhammad Abduh: Eine Untersuchung seiner

Erziehungsmethode um Nationalbewusstsein und zur nationalen

Erhebung in dgypten (Hamburg: Hamburg University Diss.,1936); John Racy, Psychiatry n the Arab East, PsychologicalDimensions of Near Eastern Studies. L.C. Brown and N. Itzkowitzeds. (Princeton: Darwin Press, 1977) 279-329.

49 Hans Blumenberg s a retired Professor of Philosophy at Miinster

University, Germany; in the 1990s he was discovered byEnglish-speaking philosophers, although he had been well knownin Central Europe since the 1970s. It can be said that Blumenberg

Alif 16 (1996)62


32/32

has a wider readership n the German philosophic community thaneither his compatriots, Habermas and Apel. This writer witnesseda Blumenberg ecture at Munster University, during the Fall term

of 1982, with about 300 students attending , who weremesmerized by his style (the majority of students were from theGerman and Comparative Literature Departments). Littlebackground s known about Blumenberg (who seems to cultivatesecrecy and privacy) and who never writes prefaces orintroductions to his massive 600 or 700-page works. A usefulintroduction to his work is H. J. Wetz, Blumenberg: ZurEinfiihrung. (Hamburg: Campus, 1993); see also, William J.Bowsma, Work on Blumenberg, Journal of the History of Ideas,vol. XLVIII, 1 (1987): 347-354; David Adams, Metaphors orMankind: The Development of Hans Blumenberg'Metaphorology Journal of the History of Ideas, vol. LII, 1

(1991): 154-166; and for research purposes, P. Behrenberg and D.Adams, Bibliographie Hans Blumenberg: Zum 70. Geburtstag,Zeitschriftf Philosophische Forschung, XLIV (1990).

50 Cf.Blumenberg's

initialproject-outline, Paradigmen

zu einerMetaphorologie, Archivf Begriffsgeschichte, vol. 6 (1960).

51 Cf. quote from An Anthropological Approach to theContemporary Significance of Rhetoric, David Adams,Zeitschrift f Philosophische Forschung, 159.

52 See H.-G. Gadamer, Wahrheit und Methode, 29.53 Gadamer, 30 ff.54 This may sound harsh, but we are not sure whether al-Ghazali and his

immediate followers had any idea of the destruction fall-out ineliminating critical reasoning.

55 Traditionally, Geisteswissenschaften has been translated as themoral sciences. Discussions between the Neo-Kantian Schools inMarburg and Heidelberg, until the late 1920s, dealt with the statusand epistemological significance of the Geisteswissenschaften, ncontrast to the Naturwissenschaften. See the works by H. Rickert,E. Lask, E. Cassirer, E. Rothacker, and K.-O. Apel.

56 See the works of the Italian egal hermeneuticist Emilio Betti, whotries to apply the Gadamerian version of philosophic hermeneuticsto jurisprudence.

averroes and german hermeneutic tradition

Documents