Ibn Hazm of Cordova on Logic Author(s): Anwar G. Chejne Source: Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol.

104, No. 1, Studies in Islam and the Ancient Near East Dedicated to Franz Rosenthal (Jan. - Mar., 1984), pp. 57-72 Published by: American Oriental Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/602642 Accessed: 05/02/2010 10:10
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://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 you may 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 at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aos. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the American Oriental Society.


Development and Studies. As a result. He considered these not only noble and useful. 101. Tawq. 8 Mainly.5The work is not only an apologia for logic. to make the discipline readily comprehensible to a large audience. His work on logic. and other sciences.8 who appear to have failed to consult Ibn Hazm's TaqrTb order to in 4 This point is discussedat greatlengthin his Maratibal- culum. it is not only useless. Ibn Hayyan as quoted by Ibn Bassam.who placedhim in jail and caused his expulsionlateron. 1. 75. the free circulation of books from the East and the frequent travel of scholars from al-Andalus to the East and vice-versa were important factors in making logic and other unpopular disciplines known to the curious student. medicine. logic is a noble science and an indispensable tool (alah) for all the sciences. Sivar. 181ff. and may be considered one of the most erudite scholars of al-Andalus. All indicationsare that he stayed in Cordova untilthe accessionof al-Mustakfi (1023-25). that led some of his Andalusian contemporaries to criticize Ibn Hazm and accuse him of deviating from Aristotelian logic and of dabbling in things beyond his capability. and Rosenthal. Sacid. logic was pursued in a clandestine manner in al-Andalus. even when he became devoted almost wholly to the study of the religious disciplines. and was its staunch defender throughout his career. 2 See Rescher.6 It was this new approach. but detrimental to religious belief in that it leads to doubt and diminution of faith.. See below. Mainly. Nashshar. V. 6 3Goldziher. Facilitating the Understanding of the Rules of Logic and Introduction Thereto (al-TaqrTb li-hudufd al-mantiq wa-madkhaluh).I:ii. . El'. 87. who were for a long time the guardians of an unadulteratedorthodoxy. who depended on Sagid and Ibn Hayyan. but This paperis an expandedversionof some points dealt with by the author in his forthcomingwork. CHEJNE UNIVERSITY MINNESOTA OF LOGIC (CILM AL-MANTIQ) OCCUPIED AN IMPORTANT Islamic culture. 354.3 This dichotomy of views which had its locus in eastern Islam reached al-Andalus with all the attending consequences. no sooner had logic developed fully than it became the object of heated controversy within the general context of the sciences. s. Due to the ultra conservative posture of Andalusians toward issues affecting religious belief and practice. 438. Mantik. This notwithstanding. Legacv. Tabaqat. between 1025 and 1029. Irshdd.200. perhaps. Under the circumstances. In his Taqrnb. notes 95ff. and had its early supporters prior to the time of Ibn Hazm in the eleventh century. 140. and received the attention of a good number of writers over the centuries. Stellung. was written early in his career.IBN HAZM OF CORDOVA ON LOGIC1 ANWAR G. which comprised logic. Mandhij. Ibn Hazmappears to have returnedto Cordovain about 1029and remained thereuntilabout 1035whenhe was exiled for the thirdtime. thereby. DhahabT. Ibn Hazm of Cordova and His Conception of the Sciences. Logic. Ibn Hazm.7 This assessment was followed uncritically by Eastern biographers. Ibn Hazm states: "We composed this book of oursand manyotherswhilewe werein exile and far This could not away from homeland.familyand offspring. To its advocates. He hoped. See his Ancients ('ul2um al-awa'il). See below. notes 88ff. Mughrib. Ibn Hazm received a broad education in both the religious and secular sciences.v. To its opponents. See below.4 He also emphasized the value of logic within the context of both the religious and secular sciences. See Chejne." have taken place during his first exile (1013-19). DhakhTrah.and Ibn Sa'cd. notes 96ff. 251. neverto return again. and von Grunebaum. it had both ardent supporters and uncompromising opponents.2 However. logic appears to have been condemned at the outset by pietists. He was an enthusiastic defender of the sciences of the PLACE in attempted to reconcile them within the framework of the religious sciences. mathematics. Madkour. Organon. Yquit. astronomy. but a lucid treatment of the subject with the declared intention of simplifying it by using a new vocabulary and examples derived from the religious law and every day experience.

23 al-RazT (d. 249." and Mardtib Among the commentators and authors were al-Kindi (d. mainly Fisal..16 Hunayn b. " Ibn Hazm. Development. 677. 1037). Development.2' his pupil al-SarakhsT (d. However. These eastern scholars. Ihkam. 264. Kindi. and were instrumental in forging an important place for logic among the Arabic sciences. evaluate his attitude to and competence in logic. credits 'Abdallah b. jurisprudence. 93ff. Sa'id refers to the great library of the caliph al-Hakam II (961-76) and says that many people were driven to read the Books of the Ancients (kutub al-awa'il). 18 Ibid. 27 Sci id. Rescher. Rosenthal. 107. commented on and glossed by several generations of Muslim scholars. see Rescher. rhetoric. 28 Ibid. both of which were known to the Arabs through the original Greek and later commentaries on them. 70. 15. Fisal. who more often than not gave the Greek terminology and its Arabic equivalents. 103ff. SarahsT. and dialectics. 18. Van Den Berg in El' under Mantik. al-Mukaffa'. 414. among others. Arabic logic was based on Aristotle's Organon and Porphyry's Eisagoge. Studies. 21 . they also appear to have overlooked his other works.28 'Abd al-Rahmin b. More often than not. 255. As a result. 111. 910). 285.l2 where Ibn Hazm emphasizes the importance of logic and directs the reader to his TaqrTb. and Sophistics (mughalatah). Numbers afterthe daggerreferto the Rabatmanuscript.9 Ihkdm.27Sacid also gives the names of scientists who concerned themselves with or wrote on logic. 135ff. Development. notes 153ff.19 and Yahya b. Development. 11Iff. Organon.. 974). as one of the early translators of logic.s who wrote on some sections or on the whole of the Organon. 71/236. Development. Muhammad b.1 (1984) (d. Y0nus (d. theology. 149ff. 24 Ibid. See below. and to learn the various schools of thought contained therein.18 Matta b. Ishaq (d. 299ff. Development.. those scientists were physicians. Analytics (qiyas). Development. 10ff. Development. 4ff. followed by the Organon in eight parts: Categories (maqulat). 413ff. An attempt will be made to place his views and works in a historical context with reference to the views and works of some of his predecessors. Rescher.'4 Muslim scholars appear to have relied on both the original and the commentaries. 492. 294. CAdi (d.22 al-Farabi (d. 12 Ibn Hazm. see Rescher. Apodictics (burhan). Mardtih al-'ulum. and involved generations of translators and commentators.. This procedure was adopted by Ibn Hazm. Ibid. 90. which he used as an important tool in his many polemics with Muslims.. and his grasp of logic. 13 See Madkour. 15ff. 448. logic came to permeate Arabic philology. KalTlahwaDimnah. see Rescher. 657. 635. 877). V. and Christians. and produced a recension incorporating their format and content. 17 Ibid. 248ff. 9. 925). 16... logic could hardly be ignored by those Andalusians who depended for education on eastern masters and who were familiar with eastern logicians whose works were imported into al-Andalus during the ninth and tenth centuries.13 Post-Aristotelian commentators expounded the Organon. 1070) of Toledo supplies valuable information about the state of the secular sciences in al-Andalus with particular reference to logic..20 were among the principal translators. 314. logic appears to have been pursued by a large number of scholars. etc. Rescher. Topics (jadal). and 9 Ibn Hazm. 263ff. In spite of the conservative outlook of the The task of arriving at a final Arabic recension was a long drawn out process. Development. 69. See Rescher. 22 Ibid.. 3. ca.'7 his son Ishaq Andalusians. was knowledgeable in geometry.. More often than not.58 Journal of the American Oriental Society 104. Tabaqat. It is within this framework that Ibn Hazm's views on logic will be considered. cAbdun (d. 79/241.?l TawqTf.. 25 7TrTkh. 130ff. is likely that it was his son Muhammad. QiftT. 23 Ibid. 26 Rescher. Atiyeh. 757). abridged. Poetics (shi'r). Organon. they were combined into one single work with the Eisagoge serving as an Introduction (madkhal). Hermeneutics ('ibdrah). Tawqtf. Rescher. Moreover. 950). His TaqrTb and statements found in his other works will show his commitment to. Ibn al-Muqaffa' (d. 110. Development. 263ff. Jews. 's The Arabic terminology of some of these titles differs among Muslim authors. 54. Ism'cTl b. 19 20 Ibid. mathematicians.26 With its important place in Islamic culture. Rescher. '0 Ibn Hazm..24 and Ibn STna (d. The scientist-historian Sa'id (d. 16. 873). 899). 940). Brunschvig. 990) was an able physician. 100ff.. who studied in the East and introduced Aristotelian logic into al-Andalus. 14 See S. known as Euclid. 117ff. 89/246. 263. Logic.68. Rhetoric (khitabah). adding to it Stoic and neoPlatonic elements. exerted an enormous influence on the development of Arabic logic..astronomers.Fihrist. the translator of the famous book of fables. 17. The Organon and the Eisagoge were translated several times into Arabic. and philologists. Madkour. 16 Ibn al-NadTm. it Ibid.25 al-'ulhm. See Rescher. Zayd (tenth century). 315. 88.

philology. 1052). known as the philosopher (al-hakTm).. 'Abd alRahman. Yuinus. logic. known as Ibn al-KattanT. These problems had already taken their toll in eastern Islam during the ninth and tenth centuries. Ibn Hazm was a beneficiary of both the Andalusian and eastern legacies. the great lexicographer of al-Andalus. 113. and Abi 'Abdallah Muhammad b.31 His contemporary al-Hasan b. And were they aware of its virtue. Tabaqdt. Ibn Ibn Hazm. Judhwah. Development. 144ff. 98. Muhammad b. but there is reason to believe that he was familiar with his works and his views on logic.45 Whether or not these men can be considered logicians is hard to tell in the absence of their works.40 'Umar b. which he acknowledges with deference when he as refers to Ibn al-KattanT "our teacher"(shaykhuna). Isma. had a sufficient background in the evolution and development of Arabic logic. In his Fadl. 1065). 32 Ibid. 35 On Ibn Fathiin (d. logic and the natural sciences. 98ff. 33 Ibid. and followed a trajectory similar in many ways to that in eastern Islam. 143. cAsakir al-DarimT(d. 175. 'Abdallah b.. but cultivated as well.36 Hazm appears to have had an Ibn intimate knowledge of these two men.was an expert in geometry. by the time of Ibn Hazm in the eleventh century. 92. 'Abdin.44 and others. Al-HumaydT quotes a poem by Ibn Fathun on the authority of his teacher Ibn Hazm in which Ibn Fathiin deplores and even ridicules the attitude of his contemporaries toward logic: on it Theyinflictinjustice logicwhendescribing With things that are not there. Judhwah. 36 On Ibn al-Kattani. no. Fadl. the polarization of views with respect to its merit or absence of merit. 478. Tabaqat.by God!they wouldlie evenif they knewit And wouldpersistin all thatthey imputeto it. and the technical but disparate vocabulary. and was quite familiar with the manifold problems facing it: namely.30 Ibn Sidah (d. Sa'id.. 103. Juljul. However. an anthology exalting the excellence of al-Andalus and written about 1027.'l. Dabbl.39S'id acknowledges the scientific expertise of Ibn al-KattanT. Ibn Juljul. no. and refers to his training by quoting from Ibn al-KattanT'swritings that he (Ibn al-KattanT) studied logic under Muhammad b.29 Muhammad b. 149. Maratib al-'ulum. al-Baghuinish See Rescher. Were they aware of its merit. 35. Khalaf b. is credited with a comprehensive work on logic in which he followed the method of the eastern logician Matta b. He also traveled to the East where he died. Fathun al-SaraqustT(d.42Abui CAbdallahb. Hasan al-MadhhijT(d. 81.34 They are: Sa'id b.38 Furthermore. This is the more significant in that logic had a fertile soil in al-Andalus. Yunus b. motion of the stars. Ibrahim al-'AsimT. Fadl. On the other hand. 87.was an expert in both logic and mathematics. the lack of easily understood examples. 1010). Ibn Hazm.33 Thus. no. 108. no. Rescher.37 29 30 It is not clear whether Ibn Hazm studied logic under Ibn Fathiin. logic. he considers Ibn al-KattanTas an able scientist and an expert in medicine. Development. logic was not only known among a good number of Andalusians. Ahmad al-HarranT. see Humaydi. who most probably influenced his scientific preparation. the difficult format of presentation. 813.35 known as al-Hammar. 164 and 148. Ibn Hazm refers to two Andalusian scientists and credits them with several works on philosophy. 175. no. one can gather from their biographical sketches that they covered the gamut of Arabic culture: poetry. no. was an expert in geometry. . ca. 813. poet. (d.. Tabaqat. Khalid al-KinanT. 1070) and the c physician Abi Uthman Sacid b.. 37 HumaydT. Ibid. 109. Masfid. See Rescher. Ahmad b. Ibid.. Hafsiin b. Bughyah. for they are ignorant of it.CHEJNE:Ibn Hazm of Cordova on Logic 59 wrote a book abridging the eight books on logic. which he echoed in his TaqrTb. aphorismson all of which he wrote numerous and well known works. 31 Ibid. Ibn Hazm's relationship with Ibn al-Kattani was that of a pupil. they would not deny it. the religious and the secular sciences. was pursued actively. 1029). astronomy. Dabbi. Maymin. But. ca. There are also Abui-l-Hasan 'Abd al-Rahman b. 91. and contributed to the formation of deep rooted attitudes toward logic resulting in seemingly two irreconcilable stands: that of the scientist-philosopher 38 39 40 41 42 43 Ibid. see Humaydi.32Abii-l-Walid Hisham b.known as Ibn al-WaqshT.43 Muhammad b..Judhwah. 34 Ibn Hazm.Bughyah. they would like it. 83. 110.41 Ahmad b. Development. Judhwah. and the secular sciences. 1010).mentionshim as a famous HumaydT. known as Ibn al-Jallad. 44 Ibid. 45 Sacid. 148. In consequence.no. See note 28.Tabaqdt.

who wrote works on the subject. Amiri. or any of the Companions. The philosopher al-KindT.See Madkour.52This antagonism toward logic continued up to the time of Ibn Hazm and long after his death. Organon. 181ff. Ibn Hazm revolted against theological dialectics. they made provision for it in their division of the sciences. 105-128. 198. who was concerned with explaining the technical terminology of the various sciences. and if their authors had been blessed with any ideas corresponding to the truth." Subsequently. such as medicine. and was summarized in the saying. One such celebrated debate took place between the Christian logician Abfi Bishr Matta b. This polarization of views had enormous repercussions. It is for this reason. Ghazzail. gave the following reply to the question of whether occupation with logic is permissible: "Logic is an introduction (madkhal) to philosophy. 992) conveys the attitude of theologians and traditionists toward logic when he says that they despise logic and argue that works on logic contain only obscure words and strange phrases.53 supporting logic. Mafatih. among other On their part. Munqidh. 1111). Finally. ff..see Rosenthal. Fatdwa 35. and lbn Rushd (d..46 Their method. were staunch supporters of logic. Ibn al-Salah al-Shafic' (d. thus. 140ff. 1245). 197. it may be relevant to point to some of the arguments of his predecessors which were advanced in public debates and in writing. and for this reason they came under the attack of the philosophers. see Ibn Rushd. and devoted nine paragraphs to it in which he explained Porphyry's Eisagoge and the eight books of the Organon. 89ff. 263. and the philologist Abfi Sa'Td al-Sirafi (d. who was decidedly on the side of the philosophers. Imtac. Taqrib. 3 Nashshar. philosophers and scientists. 67ff. 46 47 See Nashshar.whichis analyzedby Mahdi. was articulated in writing and often aired in private and public debates.Language. states the problem succinctlysaying that "theologymerelywants to fight heretics.see Mahdi. an argumentum ad hominem aiming at defending one's position and triumphing over one's adversary by all means available. It remained unabated during the time of Ibn Hazm. who had their training in the secular sciences. ca. They further argue that any intelligent person is able to draw logical conclusions without the formal study of logic. 990). 54 Judging by the large number of titles on the secular sciences attributed to al-Kindi. but is not so for the Arabic language.60 Journal of the American Oriental Society 104.I'lam. which was developed by the theologian al-Ash'ari (d. Muqaddimah. perhaps. 1198). al-Sirafi retorts that it may be so for the Greek language. For a full appreciation of his stand. 68ff. and astronomy. and the end result hinged on the validity of the Aristotelian method versus the dialectics of the theologians. Ibn Hazm attempted to put Greek logic at the service of Islamic theology and jurisprudence with his insistence on thorough individual inquiry (ijtihad) and investigation (bahth) for ascertaining the truth. 191ff.. that Ibn Hazm. included logic among them. Taqrib.49As a consequence. 49 Ibn Hazm. and that of the jurist-theologian denigrating it. theologians and jurists considered logic detrimental to religious belief. 115. Ibid. Ibn Kaldun. van Ess. Manahij. they would surely have taken great pains to clarify them. notwithstanding his deep commitment to the religious sciences. counterargumentand conclusion. remained essentially apologetic. 21ff. 109. 55 Khuwarizmi. Making one's occupation in teaching and learning is not condoned by God.. with the relation of logic to language. I. Yuinussupporting logic.48 Aware of the shortcomings of theological dialectics. 89ff. "He who espouses logic espouses heresy" (man tamantaqa tazandaqa)." 48 Ibn Hazm. it lacked the rigor and precision of Aristotelian methodology. Manahij. the introduction to evil is evil. 111.54 Al-Khuwarizml (d.Legacy. Mandhij. Development.1 (1984) things. Fasl.Language. To the contention of Matta that logic is the instrument (alah) of speech. 63ff. See Rescher. Nashshar. The skirmish between the philosophers and the religious scholars concerning the merit or the absence of merit of logic. already in full swing during the tenth century.47 As such. 50 TawhTdi. it is unlikely that he would have omitted logic from his classification of the sciences. considered logic an important science deserving a place among the philosophical sciences. 935).50 The lengthy debate dealt. 979) denigrating it. the great reformer Ibn Taymiyyah devoted his Radd to refuting logicians. Theology. . 40ff.5' The philosopher Abu Hasan al-'Amiri (d. who was followed by al-GhazzalT (d. Theologians had developed their theological dialectics consisting of argument. More often than not.55 The great philosopher alFaraib wrote on logic and considered it one of the five 51 52 81. mathematics. This attempt to put logic at the service of theology is often attributedto al-Ghazzall. viewed the dialectic of the theologians as falling short of demonstrative reasoning (burhan) and of attaining certainty (yaqTn). preserves the text of the 5 debate.

Ihsa'. but it is not certain that Ibn Hazm knew of his works at the time he wrote his views were echoed. After dividing philosophy into theoretical and practical. Logic controls question and answer as well as contradiction. 25. 6. Ishaq b. contrast and fallacy. which are conditions for happiness.66He refers to Aristotle's eight Books of the Organon. 57 Ikhwan al-Safa . among However. others as part of theoretical philosophy. Ibn STna. a third group considers it an instrument of philosophy. Maqasid (Leiden. who devoted ample space to logic in several of his works that are written in a popular language and constitute veritable 56 encyclopedias of the secular sciences. In such a role. al-KhuwarizmT states the problem succinctly: "Some consider logic as a third branch of philosophy. who offers an apologia for logic. but was quite familiar with its evolution. or as to whether logic is an integral part of philosophy."6' He adds that logic "is a discipline whose objective includes discrimination of truth from falsehood in discourse. and what is an error.h. 69. there is no consensus of opinion as to whether logic is a "science" ('ilm). 1888)."62 These tenth-century views of leading scholars were echoed and articulated in the eleventh century by the great philosopher-scientist Ibn Sina. al-Ghazzall says. pointing to their purpose in arranging and designating things under names conveying meaning. As such. 62 Ibid. See Madkour. and set out to formulate his ideas about the significance of logic and its place among the sciences. to arrive at true knowledge. 9 Farabi. He pondered all these questions in his TaqrTb. Sina'sapproach logic."58 In his Inventory of the Sciences (i. The arguments of adversaries have no foundation in fact since logic is meant to: 1) elucidate existing and ascertainable things.it is the servant of the sciences and the truth.. 204."See Jabre.. Rasa'il. GhazzalT. 66 Ibn Hazm.. thus making them comprehensible for 63 Mainly his Shifda'.see Madkour. it is extremely useful and should be pursued. maintains that "only through the application of logic in philosophical reasoning do we learn what is possible and what is impossible in the nature of things. TaqrTb. expose misleading statements and support ideas. It appears that Ibn Hazm realized fully not only the prominent role of logic in Islamic culture. a secret and eclectic society which attempted to harmonize the religious and secular sciences. Organon. For Ibn Farabi. 130. and the reasons behind writing the work. Legacy. 97ff. Ibn Zur'ah CAdT.Danishnama. Certitude. as the Greek term organon indicates. 4) or by means of signs (isharat). In his introduction to the TaqrTb... which is a comprehensive treatise on logic. It is within this historical framework that Ibn Hazm's views on logic should be considered. 1008). 22. importance. Najah. 7."60 Alc'Amirf's views were reiterated by the Nestorian c'sa b. a pupil of the famous logician Yahya b. I. and a fourth group regards it as a part and tool of philosophy. 10. 2) give them forms and attributes that are reaffirmed by the intellect. logic is a scale that determines the usefulness of the rest of the sciences. . Ibn STna's TaqrTb.who viewed logic as a scale by means of which one is able to discern right from wrong. 3) designate them by sounds. It helps to resolve doubt. "which alone properly enables the rational soul to distinguish between truth and untruth in speculative problems and between good and evil in practical problems. and distinguishing good from evil in action . Ihsa'.63 Ibn Sina conceives of logic as a science by means of which one is able to derive knowledge from the unknown to the known.. Furthermore.hsa al-culum). by the great theologian al-GhazzilT.56 The Brethren of Purity.57 While the scientist-philosopher assigns an important place to logic in the classification of the sciences. a craft (sind'ah). "One cannot rely absolutely on the 65 64 knowledgeof one who has not masteredlogic. 60 As translated by Rosenthal.64Ibn STna's influence on future generations was enormous. development.. and Ddnishnama. More important. I.Maffit. 69.. logic has a primary importance in explaining words and determining their relationship to meaning. logic could not have been overlooked in the evolution of Islamic thought.65 In sum. Studies. Furthermore. In his Mustasfa. its purpose is to establish a methodology by means of which the veracity or falsity of a given issue can be determined with a modicum of accuracy. 49ff.59His contemporary al-cAmirnconsidered logic as an invaluable instrument of the philosophical sciences. 61 As translated by Rescher. or an "instrument" (alah). or merely its tool. to Organon. 58 KhuwarizmT. others. to know what approximates the truth.. 59. regarded logic as one of the four philosophical sciences.. al-FarabTrefers to logic as a craft (sindaah) that supplies the rules for right thinking and the attainment of truth. I. and the manifold problems facing it. 5.CHEJNE:Ibn Hazm of Cordova on Logic 61 groups of sciences. Ibn Hazm refutes the adversaries of logic indicating its merit. Zurcah (d. p.

the argument of adversaries to the effect that logic leads to unbelief (kufr) and the triumph of heresy is utterly wrong. and Ihkdm. he mentions the Greek source of logic and its two leading paragons. he often digresses to refute the methodology of theologians and jurists with respect to accepting authority (taqlrd). remaining faithful to Porphyry's Eisagoge and Aristotle's Organon in format and content. the rational consisting of metaphysical and natural. numbers and astronomy. 79 Ibn Hazm. 10.ulum. TaqrTb. 68 67 74 TaqlTd. In sum. and will discern falsehood without a shred of doubt. 73 Ibid.62 Journal of the American Oriental Society 104. 72. 50. heresiography. except perhaps the way in which it had been described. 72 Ibid. logic is the best weapon in disputation and debate (al-munazarah wa-l-jadal) for combating and exposing sophistry and contention.. some poetry. and conclusions.. 76 Ibn Hazm. Aristotle and Porphyry. thus preparing him to know what is proof (burhdn)and what is contention. Ibn Hazm intends to rewrite the works of Aristotle and Porphyry with no apparent objective except simplification. rhetoric and. 71 Ibid. analogical reasoning Ibid. 81. species. 4. He emphasizes its utility in that logic will enable the student to have a knowledge of genera. 69 Ibid.76 He also assigns to it a prominent place in the curriculum.qiyds.71 Ibn Hazm also calls attention to the deficiencies in translations of works on logic. TaqrTb.79It is also useful in Qur'anic studies.. our main purpose . 78.75 He assigns to it a prominent place in his classification of the sciences. suggests that Ibn Hazm followed Matta b. 71/236.70On the other hand. he refers to the Ancients (awd'il) and predecessors (mutaqaddimun) without specifying who they were. See his Ibtal. 77 Ibid. and other techniques. Ibid. 10. I. lexicography. 46. who "have been asserting confidently through vicious assumptions and without any certainty that can be arrived at on the basis of research that philosophy and the rules of logic contradict the religious law. 8. propositions. 35. he shows great enthusiasm for logic and considers it an invaluable science and an indispensable tool for all the sciences.186. and by clarifying the technical jargon hitherto used in treatises on logic. To him. "In consequence. 70 Ibid. Yfinus. 202. . 798ff.. Thus. lexicography. homonyms. in legal opinions (futyd) concerning lawful.74 For the rest.. 35. designations. he proposes to remedy this difficulty by replacing letters and symbols with examples derived from the religious law. and divides it into rational and sensory.68 Ibn Hazm states categorically that there is nothing wrong with logic per se. unlawful. 32.77 It is through it that proof can be ascertained regarding creation and the existence of a sole Creator. logic ('ilm al-mantiq) is the means of interpretation (Cibarah) of all the sciences. 9.. It is through logic that the individual will arrive at the reality of things. Instead. see his Fisal. It is significant that Ibn Hazm placed logic in the curriculum ahead of the pursuit of the religious sciences. Ibn Hazm does not mention the works of his Islamic predecessors where such difficulties in presentation occur. and the sensory consisting of the natural only.. is to illuminate this darkness.. traditions. 9. He complains that books on logic lacked clarity through the use of letters and symbols (huruf wa-rumuz) and the use of examples that are remote from religion and alien to every day experience. 44.. poetry. 75 Ibn Hazm. to expose the errors and the myopic attitude of its opponents. and urges the student to pursue it as soon as he has knowledge of reading.1 (1984) (qiyds). 6. 78. obligatory. and synonyms. grammar. 8."73 On the whole. particularly. 79/241. grammar. However. on their meanings.78Moreover. 78 Ibid. premises. and permissible acts. all experts should know that the individual who does not understand the value of logic is at a distance from what Almighty God and His Prophet-may God pray for him and give him peacehad prescribed.. In sum. l15ff."72Another principal objective is to correct the apprehensions of people toward the discipline.69 Consequently. Maratib al. 131. in order to put an end to "the complication in translation and to the presentation of this science by use of uncommon expressions. writing. Ibn Taymiyyah. simple expressions. and other methods used in jurisprudence remained anathema to Ibn Hazm's Zahirite doctrine. Radd. it will also enable the individual to avoid what is believed to be a proof but is not. it is helpful in understanding all things on which God legislates.67 This being the purpose of logic. without specifying any particular translation. that such an individual should not be permitted to pass legal judgment [on a dispute] between two individuals because of his ignorance of definitions elucidating things. Ibn Hazm succeeded in his lucid treatment of logic.

the formulation of premises. The same can be said about the need for writing books on logic.. Ibn Hazm retorts: If an ignorant man were to ask us. logic is measured by its high degree of utility. which was due mainly to the realization of its importance in understanding God's utterances and those of His Prophet. abilityis reiterated his Tavwqtf. 80 81 82 Despite such need. through popularization. but if taken by a sick and weak individual. since it has immediate and broad applications. 83 Ibid. 3ff. and perceive the division of created things and God's impact on them. If such a drug is taken by a healthy and strong person. 11. The ignorant man is like a blind person and you have to caution him. and the drawing of conclusions on which rests the proof that is always certain. Ibid."80 To Ibn Hazm.85 This notwithstanding. which he compares to a strong drug.. serving the rest of the sciences.. TaqrTh. nor will he be able to discern between true and false premises. The following passages reveal his thinking.CHEJNE:Ibn Hazm of Cordova on Logic 63 of words (hudud al-kaldm). However important and useful.. and denigrate what they do not know.95 and his Tawqtf. 7.84 It is because of the calamities (baldayat) affecting the first three groups of people that Ibn Hazm resolved to in compose his TaqrTb simple language calling attention to the inestimable value of logic and to its preeminent place among the sciences. To the question that the ancestors (salaf) did not cultivate. His categorization of people according to their in 36. Ibn Hazm's passionate plea for the importance of logic as a tool for establishing proof (burhan) in secular and religious matters. after them when ignorance became rampant and people began to make gross mistakes in grammar and lexicography.. "To those who attain the fundamentals of logic and claim expertise in it. Ibn Hazm. 4) An intelligent and perceptive group that has a full understanding of logic and of its true objective. financial support and rewards for those who pursue and acquire the knowledge of logic. mainly the religious scholars. we say. the pursuit of logic for its own sake would be a futile endeavor. consent without knowledge. it will benefit him enormously. for them logic is a true companion by means of which they reaffirm God's unity. You are like someone who gathered materials for building but failed to use them for that purpose. logic remained shrouded with gross misunderstandings among the people. 'You have acquired a knowledge that has no benefit except within the framework of the rest of the sciences. coupled with his defense of it against the onslaught of its opponents. 89/246. This is true for all the sciences. Ibid. it will increase his malady and may even lead to death. Ibn Hazm. thus. whom he divides into four categories: 1) An uninformed group that condemns books on logic maintaining that they contain wrong belief and lead to heresy."832) A group that considers logic as frivolous and an idle occupation. . 84 85 86 Ibid.82 He adds that the pious ancestors had the advantage of witnessing prophecy with their own eyes. leaving them idle and meaningless. and to the attending confusion of not being able to distinguish between falsehood and the truth. 3) A group that reads books on logic with preconceived ideas and vested interests and with the pretense of knowing it all when in reality they are completely ignorant. preaching in the streets and to groups. Ibid. 9. since logic is essentially a means to an end. However. Ibn Hazm also devotes considerable space to refuting the arguments of the opponents of logic.86 All in all. they are people who "judgebefore ascertaining. their structure. The bright intellect can arrive at the utility of this science in proportion to the amount of understanding God has provided for him. Maratih al-'ulIum. and were able to reproduce the divine ordinances without making any grammatical.'"8' In other words. or have any need for logic. 6. lexical. that is. He considers it a duty to share and disseminate that knowledge by all means possible. Ibn Hazm reflects that not all people are capable of pursuing logic. "Did anyone among the pious ancestors deal with this discipline?" the answer will be that this science is imbedded in the soul of anyone who possesses brains (luhh). This may be attested by the following summary-analysis of his TaqrTb. or legal mistakes. 6ff. 41. was born out of his deep commitment to and familiarity with logic. they belong to the majority of people who are quick to oppose things they are ignorant of. Ibn Hazm reiterates the point in his Fisal. and jump to conclusions without proofs. the need for writing on these subjects arose. 10. logic ought to be put into practice in conformity with its true objective. hoping thereby to facilitate the understanding of the discipline to people of all walks of life.

354. In view of his passionate defense of logic and of his many references to it in his major works. As quotedby Ibn Bassam. 9' Humaydi. Siyar. eliminating misconception about it. 1282).9 QiftT (d.Moreover.DhakhTrah. the Fadl al-Andalus. especially logic. In fact. 11.94 and the eastern scholars Yaquit (d. 95 Yaqut. not having accepted his book. III.90it is easy to assume that logic had a strong impact on the formation of his intellectual perspective. 81.Mandhij. The Fisal. probably by the time he composed his literary masterpiece. and composed a book on it which he called Facilitating the Definition of Logic. the Tawq. and Nashshar. On the other hand. the historian Ibn Hayyan (d. Td'rTkh. and refuting the lies of swindlers concerning it. 70. 108. 243. 250. On 1. 1274). the other hand. Mughrih. Wafaiat. He undertook the task of elucidating [logic]. 65. a large composition consisting of a multiplicity of subjects. A summaryanalysis of his TaqrThreveals that Ibn Hazm was a logician to be reckoned with. in particular. they often denigrate it. l:ii. 88 27. 10. indicating his innovative approach within the framework of Aristotelian logic and the works of his Muslim predecessors in general. TaqrTh. 1075). popularizing the discipline and providing it with new examples and a new terminology. 202. Ibn Hazm's pupil."92 Another contemporary.97 and DhahabT (d. . with respect to some of the fundamentals of logic as someone who did not understand Aristotle's aim. 87. As a result. Irshdd. 96 plained at length the manner of attaining knowledge 87 QiftT. '00 For instance. considers Ibn Hazm the precursor of al-Ghazzal. 98 DhahabT.64 Journal of the American Oriental Society 104. logic appears to permeate most of his works in that he often prefers to use the Aristotelian syllogism over the dialectical method of arguments and counter-arguments of the theologians. no.99 some of whom were to dismiss the value of the work and to attribute to al-GhazzalTsome of its innovative approach. As far as we know. indicating that the TaqrTbwas composed at an early stage of his career.'00 These notions. 92 93 popular language with juridical examples. both of which were written in all probability between 1025 and 1030. and who in turn declared him a heretic and frowned upon his works. 89 Fisal. 99 For instance. 97 Ibn Khallikan. his contemporary Sacid of Toledo says that Ibn Hazm "concerned himself with the science of logic. and Jabre. note 5. Madkour. they failed to take into account Ibn Hazm's commitment to and defense of the philosophical sciences in general.232-233. and has been current even among modern scholars. 90. It is clear that his biographers simply incorporated the statement of a contemporary without scrutiny and without having had first hand information about the actual content and purpose of the TaqrTb. 111.87 and However. adds that Ibn Hazm "has written many books on logic and philosophy which are full of mistakes and rubbish. Asin Palacios. 47. 1348).68. Judhwah. 708. This tendency appears early in his works. C."91 On the other hand. He ex- Sc'id. 438. Certitude. 101. V. 12. which would explain such a cross reference. notes 9.1 (1984) A SUMMARY-ANALYSIS OF THE TAQRIB The following paragraphs are intended to give a general idea of the manner in which Ibn Hazm wrote about logic. 94 Ibn Sac'd.98 This general antagonism to the work must be understood within the context of Ibn Hazm's tense relationship with many religious scholars whom he attacked vehemently. 1248). and his literary anthology. 90 See above. 180. such a negative evaluation remained uncontested for centuries. namely. his book was full of mistakes. and his insistence on reconciling them with the religious sciences. Both of their works were written before the edition of the TaqrTh. his reference to Fisal in his TaqrTh88 to the TaqrTb his Fisal89poses a problem of chronology in as to which one precedes the other. This is so because of his audacity in delving into these sciences. See above. Tabaqat. 140. Although the majority of Ibn Hazm's biographers cite the TaqrThas one of his principal works. For this reason. may have been written over a long span of time. V. I. who says: "Facilitating the Definition of Logic and Introduction Thereto is written in and used extensive juridical examples drawn from the religious law. An exception is al-HumaydT (d."93 These statements by two of Ibn Hazm's contemporaries were incorporated almost verbatim by Ibn Sa'Td al-MaghribT(d. it is difficult to determine the extent of the dissemination of the TaqrTb and its possible impact on Arabic logic. 1229). no one before him had written such a work in this manner. Abenhdzam. He differed from Aristotle. Organon. 1095).96 Ibn Khallikan (d. although he suggests that Ibn Hazm may have modeled his TaqriTon the works of Ibn Sina. 13-14. the founder of this science. I. van Arendonk in El' under Ibn Hazm.

12.'07 Below the species are individual things (ashkhas). difference (fasl). This difference is important in Ibn Hazm's view.Organon. Rasa'il. for it facilitates mutual understanding. . all things.. called surah by the Ancients in conformity with the linguistic usage in Greek.see Madkour. '09 Ibid. Ibid. he reduces the eight headings of the Organon to five by including qiyas. species. He places great emphasis on definition (hadd) and description (rasm). MafatLh. al-Asma' al-mufradah (Categories) Ibn Hazm explains this heading as corresponding to the Greek qatlghfriyas and to the Arabic Maqulat consisting of ten expressions. Meaningless sounds are like those uttered by a parrot or any other animal. all created things are classified under genera. and the other with the different parts of speech. He divides the Book into two sections. Who is neither a substance. Substance and accident apply to all God's creation. Ibn Hazm introduces the TaqrTb with a refutation of the opponents of logic. they denote either a substance or an accident. 102 Eisagoge.'02while meaningful sounds are expressions (alfa. are determined in two ways: either by a definition (hadd) specifying the nature of a thing. 31. who based his edition on a manuscript of the Zaytinah Mosque of Tunis (Ahmadiyyah Collection. in addition to Porphyry's 103 '04 TaqrTb. while an accident does not and is dependent on something else. Jawhar corresponds to the jins al-ajnds of al- 141. 15. ajnas) that can be applied to all things... 107 Ibid. 30.'08 Thus. 17.. particular(khassah). the particular is equal to what is particularized and constitutes a definition thereof.'03 Here Ibn Hazm establishes a clear difference between substance and accident maintaining that substance exists independently of anything else. and remains faithful to its subject matter concentrating on the quinque voces (the five terms): genus (jins).'?' He then proceeds with a systematic treatment of logic following Porphyry's Eisagoge and Aristotle's Organon.'05 Ibn Hazm explains the principal terms of the 10'See above.. dealswith it at great length when discussing the ten expressions of the Categories and considers it the principal expression. Ibid.44ff. stupid and ignorant people. substance being the highest genus (jins. one dealing with simple expressions. The term ashkhas was already used by the Brethrenof Purity. 32-34. KhuwarizmT. 108 Ibid. His arrangement follows: 1. Thus. Genus encompasses two or more species. and accident applies to and differentiates species.'04Similarly. species (naw'). jadal and safsatah under the heading of burhan. ARISTOTLE'S Organon Ibn Hazm adheres closely to Aristotle's Organon in arrangement and content. Ibn Hazm. equivocal words (al-asma' al-mukhtalifah). 20. and considers them the key (miftah) of the whole book. became outmoded with the publication of the TaqrTbin 1959 by IhsAn 'Abbas. and the same differentiation. quinquevoces. indicating its importance and the reasons for writing the work. but its absence does not constitute the disappearance of the thing which it qualifies. nor an attribute. 74. or by a description (rasm) differentiating one thing from another. which constitutes the core of his system. 6814). He elaborates on these notions by examing the nature of sound (sawt). However. synonyms 106 Ibid.z) designating existing things by themselves. mere attributes (sifat).CHEJNE: Ibn Hazm of Cordova on Logic 65 however. and things-difference (fasl) being particular (khassah). and shows the difference between substance (jawhar) and accident. PORPHYRY'S Eisagoge (madkha) Ibn Hazm attaches great importance to the Eisagoge. or qualifying other things. Species in its various kinds (naw' al-anwd') have in common a single definition. maintaining that they constitute the two and only categories of existing things. as having or lacking a meaning. the rest beingmereancillaries. is a substratum of genus comprising a group of things that agree in definition and description. no.. genera and individual things.. attempting to obscure the true intent of expressions is the occupation of babblers. that is. He takes up attribution (haml) and subject (wad'). except God. I:1. a single nature.. 'O' Ibid. 17. and accident ('arad). except God Himself.'06 Species. Thus difference is the differentiation of one nature from another.ibid. homonyms (al-asma' al-mushtarikah).notes66 to 72. 313.'09 II. Ibn Hazmappears havecomposed separate to a treatiseon the subjectof definitionand description. I. and accident ('arad).. or a distinction between one species and another. and differ in accidents only. Simple expressions comprise unequivocal words (al-asmad al-mutawdti'a.

66 Journal of the American Oriental Society 104. position (nusbah). See KhuwarizmT. 146. MafatTh. relation (iddfah). He reiterates a previous statement that khabar is the only part of speech that can be either true or false. Sophistics... 146. MafatTh. and derived words (alasma' al-mushtaqqah). often used by some of his Muslim predecessors. 75. wadc/nusbah.... he hardly mentions that the term was used by some of his Muslim predecessors in its meaning as a proposition. of qadTyah):affirmative (mujibah). which alone is the surest way to certainty."affirmative."6 conditional (shartiyyah). kayf. Khuwarizmi. See Ibn Hazm."4 However. and takes issue with some of his predecessors' misuse of certain expressions. and command (amr). verb (kalimah). The last four kinds do not admit of truth or falsity. X" Ibid. 2. 143ff. permissible. place (makan). This notwithstanding.. exclamation (nida'). cibarah. possession (milk). He concludes with a discussion of the different kinds of propositions (qaddyd. who are believed to have carried qiyds to the extreme and with negative results. arguing that it is impossible that the whole could precede its parts. See Rescher. and consisting of five kinds: a proposition (khabar). He says that theologians had misused the word qadamah when applying qadTmto God when He actually is the First." "each. "O Ibid. action (fa'il). Ibn Hazm then discusses the ten terms. 112 Ibid. ibid. Kitab al-burhdn (Apodictics). quantity (kammiyyah). as such. 14 13 See KhuwarizmT. 30. As such. Ibn Hazm gives burhan precedence as over qiydis (Analytics) insofar as it was used by Muslim (al-asmai' al-mutaradafah). "7 Ibid. Moreover. negative (ndfiyah). and yafCal. Studies. possible.. 3. and elements ('andsir) conveying what is obligatory. This section corresponds to the Afuidiktiqa.. 39. 79. and contrasting statements. TaqrTb.. but not without expressing grave reservations concerning their validity: We combined in this part of our work the things corresponding to the contents of Aristotle's Third Book on logic called AnulutTkiyd(Analytics). substance (jawhar). Theology.."5 Specifically. desire (raghbah). kamm.1 (1984) deals with parts of speech: noun (ism)." "contradictory. Speech consists of independent words conveying a meaning. of khabar) was used by the grammarians in the sense of predicate. idifah." and the like. or impossible. the Ancients also erred by maintaining that the genus precedes the species. The same can be said about cause and effect (al-'illah wa-lmaclul). and by the historians in the sense of information. and his Fourth Book called AfiudiqtTkd (Apodictics) since the object of both is to elucidate the manner and conditions of proof . TaqrTb."' Similarly. called nu'Ct by grammarians and sifat (attributes) by theologians. Also. and a qualifier (sur). We have also added to it Aristotle's Fifth Book called Tubfqd(Topics) dealing with disputation. it occupies an important place in the Organon and in Ibn Hazm's TaqrTb well. Essentially." "opposite. to which we added the conditions that are indispensable for disputants seeking the realities of things. and van Ess. quality (kayfiyyah). The term khabar in the sense of "proposition" appears to have been used prior to the time of Ibn Hazm. which establishes the criteria for demonstration. 23. thereby causing controversy and division in Islam. discusses them in the Book of burhan. Ibn Hazm.12 He concludes with a discussion of motion and its various kinds. ayna. mata. 35. and Disputatio. 149. calls it qadiyah mahsurah. In fact. 118It should be pointed out that the discussion of propositions falls under qiyds (Analytics). "5 Ibn Hazm. uses the following corresponding expressions: jawhar."?O concludes with a discussion of "similar. yanfacil."7 indeterminate (muhmalah). 116 . or misinterpretation of fundamental principles. Ibn Hazm remained faithful to the format of the Organon and provided ample room for qiyvis. could not serve as a substitute for burhan. and passion He (munfacil). or combinations of words (murakkab) conveying more than one thing. statement (qawl) expressing a complete thought. a proposition introduced by "every. the Book jurists and theologians. 67. who calls it qadTyah sdlibah. this books deals with the conditions for establishing proof and things ancillary to it. negative. special (makhsusah). time (zaman). pl. while a proposition does. which are simultaneous and inseparable. or the Fourth Book of the Organon. Ibid. 75. Kitab al-akhbar (Hermeneutics) Ibn Hazm says that this part corresponds to the Greek BanrArminiyas but does not mention the Arabic equivalent. he does not believe that qiyds possesses the rigor and precision of the syllogism and. determinate (dhat al-aswdr). inquiry (istikhbar).18 that is.106ff. lahu. Mafaith."3 He says that the term akhbar (pl.

158. Ibid. They are qiyds. while the senses.. 117ff. 34ff. and al-jadal wa-lmundzarah. the essential ingredients of proof are proper demonstration.. and transmission (naql) may lead to true knowledge the same cannot be said about ilhdm (divine inspiration) when claimed by people other than prophets. This is utterly wrong.. he frequently uses propositions bearing on the religious law for arriving at legal decisions. he reasons that ignoring them would do great violence to establishing proof.. 67 a. but on 128 129 130 Ibid. Ibn Hazm. While the religious scholars called it qiyds. "9 Although Ibn Hazm considers analogical reasoning and sophistry as false methods for establishing the realities of things.105. thus concluding that the First Agent. pointing to the belief in a proof by qiyas when actually there is none. 161.. 149ff.. 124ff. He devotes space to the different means of arriving at proof (ashkdl al-burhdn). Ibid.'23or fallacy of propositions. and we shall not interdict those which we cannot find. 145ff. Qiyds (Analytics) Ibn Hazm disavows qiyds from the vantage point of Islamic dogmatics and logic. 162ff.'25 He also delves into the theory of the acquisition of knowledge. He concludes. we shall accept those if and when we find them. 106. for that which is hidden to the intellect cannot possibly be known. no more or less. some supporting its use while others disavowed it.'29 Such a procedure is as bad as the method used by theologians and jurists which aims at arriving at the knowledge of the hidden on the basis of the visible (al-istidlal bi-l-shdhid 'ala al-ghd'ib). Ibid. decisions are arrived at by attributing to God things not found in texts emanating from Him.. they would have known that what is hidden to the senses concerning existing things is not hidden to the intellect. . the Ancients also misused it and thereby arrived at wrong conclusions. "For our object is to establish proof and to correct the manner of demonstration (tash. "As for the things which are neither affirmed nor denied by the nature of the intellect. See van Ess. TaqrTb.'27 And from the vantage point of logic. Ibid. 126 27 Ibid. "because had its advocates done their research (bahth). Ibid. 162. 124 125 Ibid. there are no hidden things concerning known things (ma'lumdt). theologians appear to have inferred the "hidden"from the "visible"(al-istidlal bi-l-shdhid 'ald al-ghd'ib) as an extension of analogy (qiyds) to which Ibn Hazm addresses himself in vehement terms. he conceives three methods of reasoning as invalid for establishing proof.'28 In fact. Prior to Ibn Hazm. and a conclusion (natTjah). "It is impossible that a truth could be truer than another truth. 120 121 122 123 Ibid. In this way..T' A single proposition conveys no more than what it contains. Thus. Its advocates used it excessively. even if they have never seen one.'24 Unlike his predecessors. the intellect. 167. Theology."'30 Ibn Hazm illustrates his point saying that even the blind knows about the existence of colors in the same manner a person with sight does. He concludes by saying that truth and falsehood are absolute terms not admitting any degree of intensity. This is shown in their premise that an agent is a body... is also a body." 20 To Ibn Hazm.. 106. The reason for includingit is that it is necessaryfor the seekersof the realitiesof thingsto know the natureof such peopleand be prepared for them." 3' Another method reprehensible to Ibn Hazm is the following of one's appetites (shahawdt) through the unbridled use of similarities (mushtabahdt).. Ibn Hazm attaches importance to establishing the proof through syllogism which consists of two propositions (qadiyatdn)or premises (muqaddamatan). ibid. safsatah. 166.'22 pointing to the validity. Ibid. or a falsehood more false than another."'26 In all. 13' Ibid.h al-istidldl) in all differences and disagreements occurring among disputants. 165. and that people admit the existence of elephants. also rejects the vicious circle (burhdn al-dawr) and the definition of the unknown on the basis of the unknown (bavdn al-majhulfT-l-majhal). it was the object of heated controversy among Muslim jurists and theologians. but is as manifest as that which is perceived by the senses.. the Ancients called it istiqrd7 (induction). and the proper formulation of the syllogism (jimicah). and fell into serious error by arriving at the knowledge of the universal through the particular. 19 Ibn Hazm.CHEJNE: Hazm of Cordova on Logic Ibn We have also added Aristotle'sSixth Book called Sufistiya(sic) (Sophistics)dealingwith the characteristics of disputantswho turn away from the realities of thingsand advocatethe triumphof ignorance and deception. and constitutes a union (qarTnah) when combined with another proposition... definition.. which is God. Ibid.

'35However. 133Ibid.thencamethe trickery our brethren. Sophists (ahl al-shaghab) indulge in obfuscation and double-talk with intent to deceive and to turn people from the truth. converting it into trickery and sophistry. Aside from this religious consideration." This is true for both ordinary things and legal ordinances.185ff. cleaving to a homonym. and evidence for establishing truth regardless of the consequences. Such investigation (bahth) requires that the individual study all views. Al-Jadal wa-l-munazarah (Topics) Ibn Hazm tackles disputatio and debate against an Islamic background. "Deception is the greatest weapon of the confounder and advocate of falsehood. 183. They called qiyds the arbitrary way reached through reprehensible induction (al-istiqra' 'ald madhmam) arriving at decisions in the absence of scriptural texts in the same way as when texts exist. 171. Untold erosion is thus created in the application of the religious law. Manahij. 134 Ibid. and they do so on the basis of certain similar features found in two different things.. falsifying a syllogism. Ibid. 135Ibid. opinions. 182ff. and it is impossible that a thing can be true and false at one and the same time. 172. but that remained essentially apologetic and an argumentum ad hominem. 185. and refutes those who maintain that cause must have an impelling reason for its effect.. and the different proofs presented (ibid. the analogists. Ibn Hazm conceives cause and effect as interwined and always acting interdependently.."136 b.1 (1984) on false premises. Ibn Hazm considered disputatio a praiseworthy endeavor as long as it followed a strict method of demonstration.'39 and arrived at with proper evidence. and insisted on thorough individual search (ijtihad). Theology. he integrated Aristotelian logic into the hitherto unyielding Islamic dialectics that consisted of argument.'43and condemns trickery in debate and fighting wrong with wrong. the nature of things.'44 He spells out the the basis of similarity. Ibid.. 169. See van Ess. "It is impossible that a cause could ever be found in time without having an effect. the analogists (al-qayydsun) had distorted the whole concept of qiyds. In so doing. 34ff. Know that the Ancients(al-mutaqaddiman) called the premises of qiyas. note 47. and particularizing or generalizing for things qualities applied to other things. He argues that such a view would compromise God's intent. 142 Ibn Hazm. "Know that liberality (musamahah) in seeking the realities of things is absolutely inadmissible. and concludes with reflections on the superiority of the intellect over the senses'38 for grasping the reality of things that can be attained with investigation alone.'40 c. 197).32 Similarly. 167ff. some supporting their validity and others opposing them. but always through the invocation of prophetic traditions. Nashshar.68 Journal of the American Oriental Society 104."'37 This deception may take place by affirming what cannot be affirmed. who used [qiyds] as a sophistical and weak ruse for arbitrariness and sophistry. and conclusion.. there is either truth. He says. for the Almighty acts voluntarily as He wishes and does things for no cause.. Safsatah (Sophistics) Ibn Hazm considers sophistics an extension of qiyds. by applying ordinances for specified things to unspecified things. 173ff. and would subject Him to strictures. This section on disputatio constitutes. on the whole." 34He maintains that there is no discrepancy between the religious ordinances and the way of proof (burhdn). Ibn Hazm gives unqualified support to disputatio that is based on rigorous rules. 173. 143Ibid.. See note 49. but using the material in Aristotle's Topics. a veritable treatise on the conduct (adab) of disputants.14' Aware of these pitfalls. having the object of defending one's side and triumphing over the opponent. He illustrates their method with copious examples. On his part. qualifications. Ibn Hazm concludes. 88.. Ibid. Disputatio and debate had become current in Islamic society and at the same time controversial.'33 After showing the flaws of qiyds in its various ramifications. 140 Ibid. Their method is built 132 '37 Ibid. 176ff. Ibn Hazm made use of logic. and moral integrity of the disputants.. 190. counterargument. Ibn Hazm ponders the question of the relationship between cause and effect (al-'illah wa-lma'll). and a rigorous set of rules that would govern all its aspects including the etiquette..'42 In short.. 139 138 ... 144 Ibid. or falsehood. 141 See above. investigation (bahth). and in the manner of Aristotle launches a vehement attack against it. Taqrrb. 136 Ibid.

"'5 5. and its merit resides in avoiding excessive use of rare expressions. He argues that reputable authorities can err. 830) was a famous prose writer. 204. The inclusion of Porphyry's Fisagoge as an Introduction (madkhal) appears to have been optional among Ibn Hazm's Muslim predecessors.CHEJNE:Ibn Hazm of Cordova on Logic 69 6 conditions governing debates. with general reference to Aris146 b.141 Sahl b. 14 cAbdallAihb. Analytics Madkhal Madkhal MaqCilt TafsTr CAks Maqildit Tr Tafs 'Aks Maqididt cIbdrah Maqiddt cIbjrah al-A smd' al-mufradah AkhbMr Burhdn: a. 757) was a prominent prose-writer and translator of the famous book of fables. Qudamah Jacfar (d. 204. 146 b. JaCfarand of Abfl 'Ali al-HatimT for further information. Hairon.. Kitdb al-baldghah (Rhetoric) This section corresponds to R!tC7rTqd. Aristotle's Organon: I. as the following table shows: Kind! '5 Khuwairizmi'514 Ibnal-Nadlm 116 lbn Hazm I. Qiyiis Qiyds TahiTial-qiyas b. It is a succinct treatment of rhetoric. Hgrin (d.. totle. Sophistics 7. which Ibn Hazm confesses not to have seen. ISOIbn Shuhayd(d. Ibn Hazm says simply that all things contain some elements of truthfulness except those expressed by a slanderer or a poet. Hermeneutics 3. gian. innate ability (!ab C). considers sheer ignorance the claim of those who purport to turn the true into false. Topics 6. 4. and wrote a book of rhetoric. Jadal. Safsatah c. 148 Sahl b. a rhetorician and author of various works among which is the Naqd al-nathr. the format and content of the TaqrTb conform to those of Aristotle's Organon. (See lbn Hazm. 52Ibid.'4 lbn al-Muqaffac.'445 and disavows obscurantism in debate. and excellence (hardacah). Poetics h DBalIdg-ha Shicr 41Ibid. and vice versa. warns against blind imitation of the Ancestors and over-reliance on reputable authorities. . Rhetoric Iddhah Jadaliyyah Mughdlatah Baldghah Shicr Iddh Jadal Tahakkum Khitlbah Shicr Burhdn Jadaliyyah al-Hikmah al-mumawwahah Khitdbah Sbhicr Burhdn Jadal MughdIaiaun Khitdbah Shicr 8. KalIlah wtaDimnah. referring the reader to the works of Qudiimah b. 4. 848). Taqrfh.'50Ibn Hazm says that a knowledge of rhetoric requires two or more sciences.l and Ibn Shuhayd. He adds that the ingredients of poetry are three: craftmanship (sind'ah). 207. Kitib aI-shicr (Poetics) This section is also brief. and to the Arabic khitilbah commonly used by Muslim logicians.152 On the whole. TaqrTb. Seventh the Book of the Organon. al-Muqaffac (d. Apodictics 5. 47 1 Hasanal-Basr-T 728) was a noted ascetic and theolo(d. Categories 2. Hasanal-Basri. Porphyry's Eisagoge II. 1034)was a close friend of Ibn Hazm.) ''Ibn Hazm. Quddmah Jacfar. and in making things understood for both the average person and the elite. He concludes with an exaltation of knowledge and the pursuit of the sciences. 195ff. which alone lead to establishing the realities of things.

who referred to the maquldt as mufradat and to the 'ibdrah as aqwdl bas. and at great odds with the religious scholars. He conceived this to be the only sure way leading to a true comprehension of the physical world and the divine mission of Muhammad. He says that the term didd (contrary) and naqid (contradictory) hitherto used by predecessors (mutaqaddimun) tend to lead to confusion and. 156 Ibn al-NadTm. their relationship. Studies.or naqTd'amm for universal denial. and their interdependence. He often goes to great length to elucidate terms. He is conversant with the works of Aristotle and Porphyry whom he considers the paragons of the discipline.Studies. 106. 54 1 145ff.. he proposed to present it in easy language thereby eliminating the confusion surrounding it. whereas Arabicordinarily does not (ibid. when these appear to him obscure or misleading.Ihsd'. see also his lhkdm. Ibid. 59 Ibn Hazm. he emerges not only as a knowledgeable and enthusiastic logician.70 Journal of the American Oriental Society 104. and he often refers to his Muslim predecessors (al-mutaqaddimun) but without specifying who they were.30. Ibn Hazm disavows qiyas as used among religious scholars. the significance attached to proof (burhdn) was already echoed by alFarabT. He also remarks that Latin makes a distinctionbetweenthe presentand future tenses.163He also replaces kull (universal) and juz' (particular) by 'dmm and khass.tah. 19ff. and to give their equivalents in logic.'64 In conclusion.who considered it as having precedence over the rest of the Organon since the object of logic is to accomplish the goal of burhdn. for this reason. all the rest of the Organon being a mere ancillary to it with the first three books serving as preliminaries and the following four books as an aid and tool.162 53 Rescher. He also appears to rely on some of the explanations of al-Farabi. of i. creditsalGhazzalT the coinageof 'Cmm khdss. attributes (nu'ut) to the grammarian. grammar and theology... and a deep commitment to logic. Fihrist.'58 As a result. 92. which had been used by the philosopher al-KindT. but a staunch defender of the discipline against attacks by co-religionists.'57Moreover. He also appears to have been influenced by the grammarians in the use of khabar (predicate of a nominal clause).. Ibid.'61He finds Latin a better equipped language than Arabic for discerning the difference between quality and quantity. and nafi khiss or naqTd khdss for particular denial. 248.e. 161 62 tively. he adds numerous examples drawn from everyday experience and the religious law. Ihsd'. considers khabar as a seemingly obsoleteArabicequivalent the Greeklogos apophantikos. called for their harmonization. He appreciated the value of logic for demonstrating the realities of things in both the secular and religious fields. Madkour. 52 and 54..243.'59and makes provision for Rhetoric and Poetics with a modicum of tolerance. Proposition. the philosopherscientists.See Rescher. respec- While Ibn Hazm compresses the Eight Books of Aristotle's Organon into Five Books remaining faithful to its content. KhuwarizmT.. He makes it crystal clear that there is nothing wrong with the discipline per se. Studies. MafatTh. . 81. condemns Sophistics altogether.Organon. For one. he proposes nafi Camm. His choice of terminology for the different books appears to have been derived for the most part from primitive terminology such as balaghah (rhetoric).. who looked upon the philosophical sciences in general with great mistrust.185ff.63).See GhazzalT. 30. 164 Ibid. Ibn Hazm was in full agreement with his Islamic predecessors. FarabT.. which he articulated in his Mardtib al-'ulum. which Ibn Hazm considers paramount. and insisted on offering a combined curriculum that would do justice to both the secular and religious sciences. A further distinctive feature of the TaqrTbis the careful attention given to definition (hadd) of terms. This position was consistent with his conception of the sciences.'60 He often gives Greek equivalents for Arabic terminology: two premises (qadiyatdn) and a conclusion (nattjah) are called sullugismus in Greek and ( jdmi'ah) in Arabic. 163 Ibid. 95. He says that the word kalimah means "verb" to the philosopher. 46-50. he disavowed the dichotomy of views separating the philosopher and the religious scholar. and qualities (sifdt) to the theologian. a grasp of. Ibn Hazm creates new terminology for hitherto used Arabic terms. Consequently. but perhaps with the manner in which it had been presented by his predecessors. He hoped that his co-religionists would then cease opposing it and would begin to appreciate its value even in religious matters. TaqrTb. 35. Here as elsewhere. an examination of his TaqrTband statements on logic in his other works shows that Ibn Hazm had a great insight into. 160 Ibid. As a result. with and Mihakk. elevates disputatio to the level of burhdn.1 (1984) Finally. In this connection. 50. I58Farabi. 157 Rescher.64ff.

Madrid. Miyar: MiCyaral-Cilm.H. A. 126. Atiyeh. Ghazzall. author of the Madkhal. Ibn Hazm complains not only about the onslaught against logic. Ihsa': Ihsa' al-'ulum. 170 Ibn Rushd wrote commentaries on the Organon and the Eisagoge. Radd. A. Abenhdzam: Abenhdzam de C6rdoba y su historia critica de las ideas religiosas. 1884. 1927-1932. 1960. 188ff. 169 The philosopher-physician Ibn Tufayl does not appear to have written on logic. G. Dabbi. Kindi: Al-Kindi: Philosopher of the Arabs. Ribera y Tarrag6. 1223). One may add that Ibn Taymiyyah. C. 201ff. 2 vols. Ibn Hazm was a towering figure in an Andalusian context. 167ff. TaqwTm: TaqwTmal-dhihn. 95. Afghani. 460. 177ff. I. Ed. and other works bearing on logic. but about those who accused him of heresy for having been an avid reader of the books of the Ancients (kutub al-awadil). Gonzalez Palencia. and his attempt to simplify and popularize it coincide 71 with the work of the eastern theologian al-GhazzalT.'' Ibn Hazm. 10." in von Grunebaum. who lamented the neglect of logic in al-Andalus. See Rescher. Asin Palacios. who attempted in his Mihakk and MiCyar to show not only the utility of logic. Siyar: Siyar al-nubala'.d. Ibn Hazm: Ibn Hazm of Cordova and His Conception of the Sciences (forthcoming). Madrid. al-Farabi. Logic: "Logic and Law in Classical Islam. Ed. Munqidh: al-Munqidh min al-dalal. Maqsad. A. Stellung: "Stellung der Alten islamischen Orthodoxie zu den antiken Wissenschaften. 1198)'7--who the intellect and demonstrative reasoning a deserving place in the search for truth. author of the TaqwTmon logic (see Rescher. I'lam: al-l'cam bi-mandqib allsldm. Under the circumstances. Bughyah: Bughyat al-multamis. I. . 168 Ibn Bajjah wrote among other things commentaries on al-FarabT'scommentaries on logic. note 100. 1915. 171 Among other Andalusians who concerned themselves with logic may be cited: Abui-l-Salt(d. Development. Cairo. 1270). 1937-49. See alGhazzalT. Ibn Tumlis (d.'66 This antagonism to the man and his works is also reflected in the majority of his biographers. his Hayy Ibn Yaqzdn 166 165 covers the whole intellectual process where the intellect plays a most important role in perceiving the truth. R. Ibn Hazm. and defended it in language similar to that used by Ibn Hazm. GonzAlez Palencia. and Spanish trans. A. GAL. and a worthy predecessor of his compatriots-the great philosophers Ibn Bajjah (d. 171ff. who acknowledged his wide erudition. X (1941). Chejne.) and the mystic Ibn Sab'Cn (d. El': Encyclopaedia of Islam (First Edition). See Brockelmann. and Spanish trans. Cairo. M. Brockelmann. 167 See above. (See Rescher. Abu-l-Hasan. II. Goldziher.168 Ibn Tufayl gave (d. 433-449. and 3 suppls. However.169 and Ibn Rushd (d. Rawalpindi. 1332 A.'65 and about those who denigrated his works without having read them. This notwithstanding. SalTba. Ed.'67 Finally. 1185).d. 402. Cairo. Development. Damascus. n. Development. it is difficult to gauge the impact of his works on succeeding generations. but to make it accessible to a large audience through simplification and the use of examples drawn from the religious law. J. Madrid. Fisal.). in Majma' al-'ilmr al-'arabl. Ed J. Development. Siyar. Radd. al-'AmirT.CHEJNE:Ibn Hazm of Cordova on Logic Moreover. Mihakk: Mihakk al-nazar. it is significant to note that Ibn Hazm's conception of logic. Ed. S. Leiden. . Ed. Rescher. Logic. See Rescher. 5 vols. Maqsad: Kitab al-maqsad al-asna. CA. Madrid. mentions Ibn Hazm's involvement with logic. Development. 9-20. n. Dhahabi. Dhahabi. Brunschvig. 1138).Ghurab. GAL: Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur. It should be added that the connection between Ibn Hazm and al-Ghazzall cannot be ruled out since al-Ghazzall himself acknowledges Ibn Hazm's authority with respect to the beautiful names of God. 1967. 1966. four volumes of which are a translation of Ibn Hazm's Fisal. ABBREVIATIONS AND REFERENCES Abu-l-Salt al-DanT." Abhandlungen der koniglichen Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. 1134) of Denia. A. 1953. 131-132. 1915. Cairo.

Fi/rist. Fadi: Risdla/ . IbtdI: lbtdl al-qii'ds wa-l-raly.Pt. New York. Ibn Hazm. F. 1895. F. Cairo. 1328 A. Radd: al-Radd 'ala al-/dtuf. Ed. Mand/ii: Mand/ii al-bahth 'ind mufakkirr al-isldm. Ibn Khald0in. Rosenthal. Ibn al-Nadim. Nqfh: Naf/i al-tTb. lbn SMin. Ed. Leiden. Asin Palacios. 1955. Ibn BassBm. 1952. M. al-Khuwarizmi. A. Mantiq al-mas/riqiyyi'n." in von Grunebaum. Ed. Ibn Tumlois. Development: The Development of Arabic Logic. Wiesbaden. 1347 A. 1963.H.7 vols. Ed. Trans. Ibn Taymiyyah. Beirut. see Dhahabi's Siyar. Mahdi. Cairo. S. Cairo. CUyian: c'Lyin al-anbd9fT td'rTkhalattibbiP. Mardtib al-'ulam. Muqaddima/. Cairo. New Haven. 3 vols. Yaqiit. 8 MaqqarT. Berkeley-Los Angeles. Ed. Cairo. and English trans. I. Heritage: The Classical Heritage in Islam. Rasd'il: Rasd'il Ibn Hazm. E." in von Grunebaum. Tawq: Tawqal-hamdma/. Ed. 1959.fTfadl al-Andalus wa-d/ikr riadli/hd. Ed. Fliigel. III. 1952. 1882-1884. 1907-1927. 1958. Judhwa/: Jud/wat al-muqtabis. Spanish Trans. Cairo. Madrid. DhakhTrah. 59-90. 2 vols. Madkour. I. Ibn Abi Usaybicah. 5-17. Sayyid. Mass6. Tabaqdt: Tabaqat al-umam. J. 1916.in MaqqarT. 1347-48 A. under the title Le livre de science. G. Paris. Ed. Rescher. M. SarajsT: Ahmad b. Organon: L'OrganondAristotle dans le nionde arabe. Madk/al: Kitdb al-madk/al li-sindcat almanuiq.H. 156-179. Studies: Studies in t/e History. 1:1. Rosenthal. I. Zayn. Ihkdm: al-Ihkdm li-usfl al-ahkdm. Rasd'il. English trans. Fisal: al-FisalfT-l-milal wa-l-nihal. al-AfghanT. van Vloten. Tanji. Ibn al-Salah. 1954. 1934. Ed. Ed. in Rasd'il. In Rasd'il.Ed. Muh. Ibn SacTd. Dayf. 436). Theology: "The Logical Structure of Islamic Theology. Ed. Margoliouth. 209. (Ed.d. Ahmad Amin and A. French trans. S. Cairo. Beirut. T. and Spanish trans. Ibn Juijul. Paris. Cairo. 2 vols. Taqrrb: al-Taqrfb li-hudid al-mantiq wa-madkhaluh. 1958. 3 vols. 1968. Cairo. ImtId: al-Imtd' wa-l-mu'dnasa/. 1964. by M. 1348 A. 'Abbas. Radd: al-Radd Cald al-mantiqiyyTn. 21-50. Sh. Hadd: Hadd wa-rasm (not extant.d. 2 vols. 1939-42. 1871-72. M. Madrid.4 vols. Jabre. Ikhwan al-Safai'. vols. Mug/rib: al-Mug/rib fT huld al-Mag/rib. 1949. Cairo. n. Sacid. 104.H. 1970. 1943. Leiden-London. Miiller. E. G. G. of Arabic Logic. CAbbais. Fasl: Fasl al-maqdl.72 Journal of the American Oriental Society. Tabaqdt: Tabaqdtal-atibbd' wa-l-hukamd'. Hourani. 1961. Irs/idd: Irs/iddal-arTb.) Logic: Logic in Classical Islamic Culture. Ed. Achena et H. al-Tawhidi. Pittsburgh. CAbbais. Cairo. 1955.H. 1939-44.Bombay. 51-84. al-Nashshair. Cairo. I. Paris. al-Tayyib as-SarahsT.Damascus. wa-l-istihsdn wa-ltaqlTdwa-l-taclIT. Certitude: La notion de certitude se/on G/azzali. D. Pittsburgh. Language: "Language and Logic in Classical islam.Nqfh. 1975.Ddnishndma. F. Van Ess. London. Leipzig. 1967. 41-55. Mafdtfh: MafdtTh al-'ulCim. n. Von Grunebaum. . Ibn Rushd. Fatidwd: Fatdwd Ibn al-Saldh_fT-l-tafsTr wa-lhadTti wa-l-'aqd'id. G. Ed.1 (1984) Humaydi. Logic. Rabat MS no. 'A. N. Garcia G6mez. 1960. Ed. Logic. 1966.In Rasd'il. Cairo. F. TawqTff Risdlat al-tawqif cald s/idric al-nujd/ biik/tisdr al-tarTq. Cairo. al-ZirkilT.