Abstract
Aversion towards logic is a characteristic feature of the Islamic traditionalists. There is in fact a history of opposition to logic in Islam. As any other areas of history, here also the correct picture will not be achieved unless all of the pieces are put together. In what follows, I am going to shed light on a chapter written by Zayn al-Dīn al-ʿĀmilī (d. 966/1558), the Twelver Shīʿī Scholar better known as al-Shahīd al-Thānī. The chapter not only shows al-Shahīd al-Thānī’s negative stance towards logic, but also is important because it is a part of less studied Shīʿite traditionalists’ tendencies towards logic; those who are considered as the most influential figures in Iranian seminaries from the Safavid period up until today.
Acknowledgements
This article is the completed form of what I have previously presented in the 2nd annual Islamic Philosophy Conference at Harvard University, December 5–6, 2020. The YouTube link of the panel in which I delivered my presentation is as follows: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-PSL8XEKLo. I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to Dr Asadollah Fallahi, associate professor at the Department of Logic in the Iranian Institute of Philosophy, for generously reading the draft and proposing useful revisions.
Notes
2 For Tabāṭabāyī’s impassioned defence of logic see Tabāṭabāyī Citation1996/Citation1417, vol. 5, p. 254. For an English translation of his discussion, see Ṭabāṭabāyī Citation1983/Citation1403, vol. 10, p. 68–77. Tabāṭabāyī reports eleven criticisms to logic and answers them in detail. He does not reveal the name of the critics, but the translator of the text into English, Sayyid Saʿīd Akhtar Raḍawī, ascribes them to Akhbārīs (see Ṭabāṭabāyī Citation1983/Citation1403, vol. 10, p. 68). But the translator of the text into Persian, Musawī Hamidānī, refers to Saykh Mujtabā Qazwīnī instead (Ṭabāṭabāyī Citation1995/1374Sh, vol. 5, p. 419–420).
3 For Qazwīnī's attack to logic see Qazwīnī's book, Bayān al-Furqān. Sajjad Rizvi considers this book as one of the works that have formed the foundation of Maktab-e Tafkīk (Rizvi Citation2012, 493). For a Persian translation of the book see Qazwīnī 2013/1392.
4 See Hourani Citation1986, p. 135. It is also important to note Hourani’s remark that ‘the possibility of persecution was always present, but at the same time Sunnī and Shīʿī Scholars could learn from each other’. Hourani in fact seeks support for this claim by referring to the lives and deaths of al-Shahīd al-Awwal and al-Shahīd al-Thanī (see Hourani Citation1986, p. 135).
5 See Kohlberg Citation1997, p. 209. He is offered thereby a choice of any teaching position in Damascus or Aleppo (Kohlberg Citation1997, p. 209).
6 In fact, all of his major legal works are said to be in the form of commentaries (Kohlberg Citation1997, p. 209). ‘These works are noted for the clarity of their exposition and argument’ says Kohlberg (Kohlberg Citation1997, p. 209).
10 According to Hourani, he did actually teach all of the five after he went to Istanbul and obtained from the Ottoman government an appointment as a teacher in a Sunnī madrassa at Baʿlabak (see Hourani Citation1986, p. 136).
12 For an effort to show the indirect impact of al-Shahīd al-Thānī on Iranian religious discourse, see Ā’īniwand Citation2010. For him al-Shahīd al-Thānī must be considered as one of those who killed the philosophically inclined sphere dominant on Iranian seminaries, replacing it with a more jurisprudentially inclined one.
13 This does not contradict with the fact that, as Newman says, there be no record of ʿIzz al-Dīn Ḥusayn himself as having made contact with the safavids (See Newman Citation1993, p. 93). This shows only that the influence has been an indirect one.
15 For an unpublished manuscript version of the book (accessible online), see al-Shahīd al-Thānī Citationn.d.
16 For a good research in this field but focused to al-Suyūṭī, see Ali Citation2008.
19 In noticing to the latter reading of the word, I am indebted to my dear colleague, Muhammadrizā Azīzī.
20 See Adamson Citation2014, p. 105. Adamson relates this from the Seventh letter whose ascription to Plato is doubtful. But what is important for us here is the idea itself not its ascription to Plato.
24 See Gleave Citation2010, p. 71. This is a contemporary Shīʻī school which insists on the necessity of separating Mystical and philosophical ideas from Islamic teachings.
29 Al-Shahīd al-Thanī is not innovative in this argument, but his attitude is clear.
30 See Adamson Citation2016, p. 318. In other words, ‘Defining a term would then be a matter of claiming to know it before it is known’ (Leaman Citation2000, p. 19).
Ṭabāṭabāyī, M. H.. 1996/1417. Al-Mīzān, Qum: Daftar-i Intishārāt-i Islāmī-i Jāmiʿi-yi Mudarrisīn-i, 5th edition. Ṭabāṭabāyī, M. H.. 1996/1417. Al-Mīzān, Qum: Daftar-i Intishārāt-i Islāmī-i Jāmiʿi-yi Mudarrisīn-i, 5th edition. Ṭabāṭabāyī, M. H. 1983/1403. Al-Mīzān, translated by Sayyid Saʿīd Akhtar Raḍawī, Tehran: World Organization for Islamic Services. Ṭabāṭabāyī, M. H. 1983/1403. Al-Mīzān, translated by Sayyid Saʿīd Akhtar Raḍawī, Tehran: World Organization for Islamic Services. Ṭabāṭabāyī, M. H. 1983/1403. Al-Mīzān, translated by Sayyid Saʿīd Akhtar Raḍawī, Tehran: World Organization for Islamic Services. Ṭabāṭabāyī, M. H. 1983/1403. Al-Mīzān, translated by Sayyid Saʿīd Akhtar Raḍawī, Tehran: World Organization for Islamic Services. Ṭabāṭabāyī, M. H. 1995/1374Sh. Al-Mīzān, translated by Sayyed Muhammad Bāqir Mūsawī Hamidānī, Qum: Daftar-i Intishārāt-i Islāmī-i Jāmiʿi-yi Mudarrisīn-i, 5th edition. Rizvi, S. H. 2012. ‘“Only the Imam Knows Best” The Maktab-e Tafkīk’s Attack on the Legitimacy of Philosophy in Iran’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 22, 487–503. Hourani, A. 1986. ‘From Jabal ʿĀmil to Persia’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 49, No. 1 (In Honour of Ann K. S. Lambton), pp. 133–140. Hourani, A. 1986. ‘From Jabal ʿĀmil to Persia’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 49, No. 1 (In Honour of Ann K. S. Lambton), pp. 133–140. Kohlberg, E. 1997. ‘al-Shahīd al-Thānī’, in S. Nurit and C. E. Bosworth (eds.), The Encyclopaedia of Islam, Leiden: Brill, pp. 209–210. Kohlberg, E. 1997. ‘al-Shahīd al-Thānī’, in S. Nurit and C. E. Bosworth (eds.), The Encyclopaedia of Islam, Leiden: Brill, pp. 209–210. Kohlberg, E. 1997. ‘al-Shahīd al-Thānī’, in S. Nurit and C. E. Bosworth (eds.), The Encyclopaedia of Islam, Leiden: Brill, pp. 209–210. Kohlberg, E. 1997. ‘al-Shahīd al-Thānī’, in S. Nurit and C. E. Bosworth (eds.), The Encyclopaedia of Islam, Leiden: Brill, pp. 209–210. Kohlberg, E. 1997. ‘al-Shahīd al-Thānī’, in S. Nurit and C. E. Bosworth (eds.), The Encyclopaedia of Islam, Leiden: Brill, pp. 209–210. Hourani, A. 1986. ‘From Jabal ʿĀmil to Persia’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 49, No. 1 (In Honour of Ann K. S. Lambton), pp. 133–140. Hourani, A. 1986. ‘From Jabal ʿĀmil to Persia’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 49, No. 1 (In Honour of Ann K. S. Lambton), pp. 133–140. Newman, A. J. 1993. ‘The Myth of the Clerical Migration to Safawid Iran: Arab Shiite Opposition to ʿAlī al-Karakī and Safawid Shiism’, Die Welt des Islams, 33 (1), 66–112. Hourani, A. 1986. ‘From Jabal ʿĀmil to Persia’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 49, No. 1 (In Honour of Ann K. S. Lambton), pp. 133–140. Ā’īniwand, Ṣ., and others. 2010/1389Sh. Taḥawwulhāyi dīnī-yi aṣr-i ṣafawīyyi wa naqsh-i ʿālimān-i ʿāmili: muṭāliʿi-yi muridī-yi Muḥaqqiq Karakī wa Shahīd-i Thānī (Religious developments of the Safavid era and the role of the scholars ʿĀmili: a case study of Muḥaqqiq Karakī and Shahīd Thānī), Justārhāyi Tārīkhī, 1st year, No. 2, pp. 1–18. This source is in Persian. Newman, A. J. 1993. ‘The Myth of the Clerical Migration to Safawid Iran: Arab Shiite Opposition to ʿAlī al-Karakī and Safawid Shiism’, Die Welt des Islams, 33 (1), 66–112. Hourani, A. 1986. ‘From Jabal ʿĀmil to Persia’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 49, No. 1 (In Honour of Ann K. S. Lambton), pp. 133–140. Ali, M. 2008. ‘Muslim opposition to logic and theology in the light of the works of Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyutī (d. 911/1505)’, Doctoral Thesis, Department of Religious Studies, Faculty of Humanities, Leiden University, accessible online at: https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/13226. al-Shahīd al-Thānī, Z. A.-D. 1988/1409. ‘al-Iqtiṣād wa al-Irshād ‘ilā Ṭarīqat al-Ijtihād fī Maʿrifah al-Hidāya wa al-Maʿād wa Aḥkām ‘Aʿmāl al-ʿIbād (The Moderation in and Guideline to the Jurisprudential Way of Gaining Knowledge about Guidance, Resurrection and Rulings)’, in S. M. Rajāyī (ed.), Ḥaqā’iq al-Ῑmān maʿa Risālatay al-Iqtiṣād wa al-ʿIdāla, Qum: Marʿashī Najafī’s library, 1st edition, pp. 165–206. al-Shahīd al-Thānī, Z. A.-D. 1988/1409. ‘al-Iqtiṣād wa al-Irshād ‘ilā Ṭarīqat al-Ijtihād fī Maʿrifah al-Hidāya wa al-Maʿād wa Aḥkām ‘Aʿmāl al-ʿIbād (The Moderation in and Guideline to the Jurisprudential Way of Gaining Knowledge about Guidance, Resurrection and Rulings)’, in S. M. Rajāyī (ed.), Ḥaqā’iq al-Ῑmān maʿa Risālatay al-Iqtiṣād wa al-ʿIdāla, Qum: Marʿashī Najafī’s library, 1st edition, pp. 165–206. Adamson, P. 2014. Classical Philosophy, New York: Oxford University Press. Leaman, O. 2000. ‘Islamic Philosophy and the Attach on Logic’, Topoi, 19, 17–24. al-Shahīd al-Thānī, Z. A.-D. 1988/1409. ‘al-Iqtiṣād wa al-Irshād ‘ilā Ṭarīqat al-Ijtihād fī Maʿrifah al-Hidāya wa al-Maʿād wa Aḥkām ‘Aʿmāl al-ʿIbād (The Moderation in and Guideline to the Jurisprudential Way of Gaining Knowledge about Guidance, Resurrection and Rulings)’, in S. M. Rajāyī (ed.), Ḥaqā’iq al-Ῑmān maʿa Risālatay al-Iqtiṣād wa al-ʿIdāla, Qum: Marʿashī Najafī’s library, 1st edition, pp. 165–206. Adamson, P. 2016. Philosophy in the Islamic World, New York: Oxford University Press. Gleave, R. 2010. ‘Continuity and Originality in Shīʿī Thought: The Relationship between the Akhbāriyya and the Maktab-e Tafkīk’, in S. Mervin and D. Hermann (eds.), Shīʿī trends and dynamics in modern times (XVIIIth - XXth centuries), Würzburg: Ergon, pp. 71–92. īşfahānī, Mīrzā Mahdī. 2008. Abwāb al-Hudā, ed. Ḥusayn Mufīd, Tehran: Munīr. Ṭabāṭabāyī, M. H. 1995/1374Sh. Al-Mīzān, translated by Sayyed Muhammad Bāqir Mūsawī Hamidānī, Qum: Daftar-i Intishārāt-i Islāmī-i Jāmiʿi-yi Mudarrisīn-i, 5th edition. Rita, G. 1979. Juan Luis Vives against the pseudodialecticians, in Texts and Studies in the History of Logic and Philosophy, eds. N. Kretzmann and G. Nuchelmans and L. M. De Rijk, vol. 18, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company. Rita, G. 1979. Juan Luis Vives against the pseudodialecticians, in Texts and Studies in the History of Logic and Philosophy, eds. N. Kretzmann and G. Nuchelmans and L. M. De Rijk, vol. 18, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company. Adamson, P. 2016. Philosophy in the Islamic World, New York: Oxford University Press. Leaman, O. 2000. ‘Islamic Philosophy and the Attach on Logic’, Topoi, 19, 17–24. Hourani, A. 1986. ‘From Jabal ʿĀmil to Persia’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 49, No. 1 (In Honour of Ann K. S. Lambton), pp. 133–140. Adamson, P. 2014. Classical Philosophy, New York: Oxford University Press. Adamson, P. 2014. Classical Philosophy, New York: Oxford University Press.