Kontra Narasi atas Tanggapan Ibnu Rusyd terhadap Imam Al-Ghazali Terkait Apostesi Filosof

This article is intended to illustrate that the hermeneutics of al-Ghazzl influenced Ibn Rushd in a certain degree. One can come across a number of contexts in the works of Ibn Rushd such as Taḥfut al-taḥfut, Faṣl al-maql and al-Kashf , in which he criticizes al-Ghazzl in relation to the interpretation of religious texts. However, one can notice that Ibn Rushd is deeply influenced by the views of al-Ghazzl on the matter of hermeneutics, especially concerning the definition of interpretation, the categorization of the ambiguous wordings in the religious texts as well as the classification of the groups of people authorized to fulfill the task of interpretation. In fact, Ibn Rushd's threefold graduation of people as the masses , the theologians , and the demonstrative people was masterminded and introduced by al-Ghazzl. In addition, it is from al-Ghazzl and from his interpretation of the 125 th verse of Srat al-Naḥl that Ibn Rushd borrowed the suggestion that as regards the interpretation of religious texts, each of these three groups should adopt one of the three methods described as rhetorical, dialectical, and demonstrative. Another important context where Ibn Rushd is clearly under the influence of al-Ghazzl is the issue how the lawful method of interpretation is to be applied to the religious texts. Regarding this issue, he took up al-Ghazzl's fivefold categorization of being as essential existence, sensual existence, imaginative existence, mental existence and analogical existence, suggesting to interpret the religious texts on the basis of this categorization.

Ibn Rushd’s Heritage in Western PhilosophyrnIbn Rushd grew up in Andalusia as a versatile Islamic thinker. Ibn Rushd’s knowledge of both religious and theoretical sciences made him unique in later periods. Although it has never received the recognition it deserves in the Islamic world, it has been one of the leading drivers of change, transformation and intellectual revolution for Western civilization. Ibn Rushd’s sudden fall from grace in Andalusia and the burning of his works, which he had written with hard work and which also built his commitment to Islam, limited his influence in the Islamic world. On the other hand, the demographics of the place of exile, the presence of Jews among his students, and the strong recommendation of Moses Maimonides, the so-called “Second Moses”, gave Ibn Rushd a tremendous reputation within the Jewish community. For this reason, Ibn Rushd attracted the attention of Jewish scholars while he was still alive. Shortly after his death, almost all of his works were translated into Hebrew. These studies, which started with the Tibbon family, gained momentum and continued for years. Moreover, his works have not only been translated, but also extensively commented upon. In this context, what Ibn Rushd did to Aristotle’s acquis, Jewish thinkers did to Ibn Rushd’s works. He replaced Aristotle in Jewish thought. Ibn Rushd became one of the most important figures read, discussed and commented upon among Jews. Thus, schools of thought were formed around his views and thoughts. Ibn Rushd shaped the thought of Jewish thinkers in many areas such as ontology, epistemology, ethics and politics, the relationship between religion and philosophy, and logic.rnAnother civilization that Ibn Rushd influenced was the Christian Western society. The Christian West, which generally preferred to resist Muslims, underwent a paradigm shift after the 12th century. Although Westerners continued to clash politically and militarily, they acted with an intellectual consciousness in transferring the acquis of Islamic civilization to their own societies in intellectual and scientific developments. Frederick II and Alfonso X, the so-called “Wise King”, played a major role here. In this process of transmission, it is seen that Ibn Rushd is mostly utilized. Because reading Ibn Rushd is a necessary way to understand Aristotle in the West. In this context, Ibn Rushd was discussed early on and for a long time in many universities such as Paris, Oxford, Bologna, Padua, Salerno, etc. He pioneered the formation of a school called the Latin Averroists. For this reason, Ibn Rushd was subjected to harsh criticism for some of the ideas of this school, even though they did not belong to him. On the other hand, on many philosophical problems, he shaped the thought of dozens of Christian thinkers, most notably Albert the Great and his student Thomas Aquinas. For this reason, Ibn Rushd played a decisive role in the Renaissance, which heralded a great change in the West.rnKeywords: Islamic Philosophy, Jewish Philosophy, Christian Philosophy, Andalusia, Ibn Rushd, Influence

Ethics is one part that can’t be given a distance from the discipline of philosophy. This happened because Greek philosophy also contributed to the birth of Islamic philosophy. In addition, ethics is also a very vital and substantial part of the discipline. Al-Ghazālī himself is a scholar, a philosopher, and a Sufi who is very intelligent and productive. In this case, the concept of Islamic ethics according to al-Ghazālī towards the opinions of philosophers who lead to disbelief, there are three problems, first, the natural faith. Second, God does not know things that are particular (juziyat), but only knows things that are universal (kulliyāt). Third, physical awakening. However, the ethical concept disputed by al-Ghazālī received a rebuttal from one of the Islamic leaders who were no less great, namely Ibn Rushd. Keywords: Ethics, Islam, al-Ghazālī

Reviewed by: Renaissance Averroism and Its Aftermath: Arabic Philosophy in Early Modern Europe ed. by Anna Akasoy and Guido Giglioni Steven Harvey Anna Akasoy and Guido Giglioni, editors. Renaissance Averroism and Its Aftermath: Arabic Philosophy in Early Modern Europe. International Archives of the History of Ideas, 211. Dordrecht: Springer, 2013. Pp. viii + 405. Cloth, $179.00. This rich volume of fifteen papers comprises the proceedings of a conference held at the Warburg Institute in 2008, with three additional papers. It begins with a learned introduction by one of the two editors, Guido Giglioni, that maps out the volume, outlines its main themes, and points to the care the editors have taken “in this volume” to distinguish Ibn Rushd, the twelfth-century historical figure, from Averroes, his literary incarnation in the Latin West, and to distinguish “between ‘Averroan’ [‘any philosophical view that belongs directly to Ibn Rushd’], ‘Averroist’ [any opinion held by a follower of Ibn Rushd in the medieval Latin West] and ‘Averroistic’ [‘the general cultural label denoting a pronounced [End Page 612] (vaguely Aristotelian) rationalistic attitude’]” (1–2). While scholars have long recognized the need to distinguish between Ibn Rushd’s teachings and those attributed to him by later thinkers, the pedantic distinction between Ibn Rushd’s teachings and those of Averroes seems misplaced and even misleading (and is not followed consistently in this book). Scholars of Ibn Rushd today who read him in the Arabic original do not always agree on his personal views (see, on this point, Anna Akasoy’s essay), particularly regarding philosophical problems such as God’s knowledge of particulars and the creation/eternity of the world. On the other hand, those who seek to understand Ibn Rushd through reading the medieval Latin translations are often able to do so. The key questions here concerning the medieval Latin readers are not semantic, but rather simply, did X read Averroes? Does he cite him approvingly? Does he seem to understand him? To what purpose does he use him? All too often in this volume, we are left to wonder in what ways Averroes parts from Ibn Rushd (and an Averroist teaching from an Averroan one), for example, Averroes’s view of supreme happiness (although curiously there is no reference in this volume to his commentary on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics). The opening paper, one of my favorites, is Amos Bertolacci’s account of the critique of Averroes (=Ibn Rushd) against Avicenna on human spontaneous generation. For Bertolacci, who elsewhere has surveyed such criticisms by Ibn Rushd, Avicenna, “albeit negatively … is one of the most important sources of Averroes’s system”(39). Here he deftly traces Ibn Rushd’s various critiques in different places of Avicenna’s position on this topic—most interestingly, that it violates the principle of the necessary inherence of complex forms, like that of man, in specific matters; argues they are “representative of Averroes’s overall anti-Avicennian position” (41); and shows they do not present Avicenna’s views accurately. It may be noted that the highlighted inconsistencies here between Averroes’s Tahāfut and his long commentaries may be attributed to their different intentions and his considering only the latter demonstrative books. Charles Burnett’s short but sweet paper on the mid-sixteenth-century Latin editions of Aristotle’s corpus with Averroes’s commentaries spells out what is little known about the editors of these editions and their editorial policies and interests. Notwithstanding, his conclusion that the changes from edition to edition reflect “the developments in the academic circles in Padua and can hint at not only the academic discussions going on there, but also at the tensions, loyalties, and passions of the personalities involved” (64)seems a bit grandiose for the paper. Craig Martin’s suggestive chapter on the Latin commentaries on Averroes and, in particular, the sixteenth-century Latin supercommentaries on his Aristotelian commentaries, points to reasons for Averroes’s growing popularity during that century. The Latins turned to Averroes not only for his remarkably reliable philosophical expositions, but also because of his agreement with the Greek commentators, and his being a reliable source for their teachings (Dag Hasse would add for his philosophically attractive unicity of the intellect thesis...

This article aims to take a lesson and inspiration from of two Muslim thinkers al-Ghazālī and Ibn Rushd in their intellectual legacy in Islamic philosophy. The legacy of these two figures has an influence on the current development of Islamic thought and Islamic education until now. Its influence is not only in the Islamic world, but also in the Western world. One of the interesting issues in examining the thoughts between these two figures is the contradiction between philosophical aspect in the al-Ghazālī’s work in Tahāfut al-Falāsifah and Rushd’s work in Tahāfut at-Tahāfut. The value of this article is to take inspiration from the discussion, then use it to develop Islamic education in Modern Era. This study uses a library research methodology of the work of the two figures and from a journal or research that analyzes the discussion of the two figures. The results of this study are: providing insight into how to benefit from a culture of literacy and scientific dialogue; open and productive attitude, the importance of critical and systematic thinking; and provides insights into the Islamic worldview of Muslim scientists in the era of modern science to understand the concepts of knowledge and causality.

In this essay, first, I concentrate on the issue of miracle, divine action and divine interventionaccording to Enlightenment thinkers. Liberal teologians such as Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976),after Laplacian determinist metaphysics was added to the Newtonian mechanics, found thatdivine action in the world is contrary to the necessity of natural laws, i.e., to their beingsecientific and they defended a semi-deist view of “hand-off theology.” Many moderntheologians defended outdated Laplacian determinist metaphysics for the sake of complyingwith scientific standards. Then, I discuss famous causality debate between al-Ghazali and IbnRushd in the light of the divine action and the New Scientific Picture that is intensivelydebated in the contemporary philosophy of religion. Here, contrary to the claim of Ibn Rushd, Iargue that if quantum mechanics is correct, then al-Ghazali do not uproot science and his viewthat causality is contingent is more scientific and more modern than that of Ibn Rushd'sposition. Finally, I point out that outside of the theological project of al-Ghazali, in hisepistemological project, al-Ghazali believes that natural laws are certain and I argue that hefollows a middle way in this regard.

Islamic theology as axiology that advocates various social inequalities both social and religious aspects. Although it is recognized that Ibn Rushd had the capacity as the greatest Muslim philosopher who was influential not only in the Islamic world but in the West. However, another fact Ibn Rushd was also an Islamic theologian based on philosophical and jurisprudential views. Both of these sources influenced Ibn Rushd's theology which was more rational but did not lead liberal because it was following his jurisprudence. This simple research is a type of library research, using theological approach. In this article, the writer wishes to present the analysis of Ibn Rushd on the views of theology, Ibn Rushd wa not only theologian but also a philosopher and jurist of Islam. This was interesting to be discussed; first, whether Ibn Rushd’s theology was different from other figures of theologians. Second, whether his philosophical and jurisprudential view affected his theology thought. The result of this writing showed that Ibn Rushd had unique strategies on Islamic theology, so the two strategies are Dalil al-‘Inayah and Dalil al-Ikhtira’. In this strategies, showed that Ibn Rushd had unique theology thought which his philosophical and juristprudential view affected his theology so that his theology was more rational but it was not too liberal. So in this article. Showed that Ibn Rushd had application are explained three important thoughts of Ibn Rusyd relating to the themes of Kalam namely; The oneness of God, the attributes of God and the matter of monotheism

The discourse on the role and contribution of Muslim scholars to the progress of mankind and modern life needs great attention. Their traces cannot be erased either from the existing facts or the collective memory of mankind. Ibn Rushd is one of the Muslim scholars who has made his mark on the Western World. Ibn Rushd is known in the Western world as Averroes. It is an indisputable fact that the traces of Ibn Rushd's scholarship are very clear in the Western world. This research explores the teachings and thoughts of Ibn Rushd who were influential in the Western World. The result of Ibn Rushd's thought has a very strong network to this day. The various rationality movements that took place in the West were inspired by the thought of Ibn Rushd. Therefore, the expression of Ibn Rushd's thought is something that really needs to be revealed, both its origin and its substance. The revelation of the origins and substance of this thought will prove the extent to which Muslim scholars contributed to modern civilization. Ibn Rushd's thought related to the relationship between philosophy and religion, namely that between philosophy and religion are interrelated. Philosophy reveals the nature of truth based on ratios; while Islam expresses a truth based on revelation from God. Islamic philosophy and religion should not contradict, so that the two cannot be separated and should even strengthen each other. Ibn Rushd's thought is understood and implemented by the West very differently, that is, only philosophical thought is considered correct. KEYWORDS Ibn Rushd, Averroes, Islamic philosophy

This paper investigates the twelfth-century commentary on Plato’s Republic by the Andalusian Muslim philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes). Ibn Rushd is considered to be the only Muslim philosopher who commented on the Republic. Written around 375 BC, Plato’s Republic discusses the order and character of a just city-state and contains revolutionary ideas on the position and qualities of women, which remained contested also in Ibn Rushd’s time. This Muslim philosopher is primarily known as the most esteemed commentator of Aristotle. However, for the lack of an Arabic translation of Aristotle’s Politics, Ibn Rushd commented on the political theory of Aristotle’s teacher, i.e. Plato’s Republic, instead. In his commentary, Ibn Rushd juxtaposes examples from Plato’s context and those from contemporary Muslim societies. Notably, when he diverges from the text, he does not drift off toward more patriarchal, Aristotelian interpretations. On the contrary, he argues that women are capable of being rulers and philosophers, that their true competencies remain unknown as long as they are deprived of education, and that this situation is detrimental to the flourishing of the city. This article aims to critically analyse Ibn Rushd’s statements on the position of women, as well as their reception in scholarly literature.

مسألة تأويل النص الديني وتوظيفه لخدمة القضايا الفلسفية والکلامية من المسائل الشائکة في الفکر الإسلامي، حيث وقع فيها الخلاف بين طوائف المسلمين، وکان لفلاسفة الإسلام نصيب کبير من الإسهام الفکري في هذه المسألة، وقد أدلوا بدلوهم فيها محاولين التوفيق بين النصوص الشرعية والقضايا العقلية وکان من أبرز المهتمين بهذه المسألة من الفلاسفة المسلمين الشيخ الرئيس ابن سينا، وابن رشد الفيلسوف الشهير، وذلک أنهم في بعض مسائلهم الفلسفية کانوا يحاولون ربطها بنصوص الدين لمحاولة البرهنة عليها من جانب، وإکسابها قداسة وصحة من جانب آخر، وقد وفقوا في بعض من ذلک، وجانبهم الصواب في الکثير من المسائل، وفي هذا البحث تعرضت لمسألة تأويل النصوص الدينية وتوظيفها عند الشيخ الرئيس ابن سينا وعند فيلسوف قرطبة ابن رشد، وقد تبين من خلال البحث مدى حرص ابن سينا وابن رشد الشديد على التوفيق بين آراءهما وبين النصوص الدينية، وأنهما في کثير من الأحيان قد لجئا إلى التأويل التعسفي لبعض نصوص الشرع الشريف بهدف إلباس آراءهم ونظرياتهم ثوب القداسة، وجعلها محفوفة بإطار من الدين، حتى لا يجرأ شخص على نقدها والطعن فيها. وکل هذا قد أسلمنا إلى نتيجة مهمة مفادها، أن إعمال العقل في النص الشرعي بدون توفر أدوات فهمه يؤدي بصاحبه إلى الوقوع في مزالق ومخاطر عظيمة، وأن الخوض في تأويل النصوص الشرعية لا يتم إلا بعد اکتساب العلوم المؤهلة لهذه المهمة العظيمة. The issue of interpreting the religious text and employing it to serve philosophical and theological issues is one of the thorny issues in Islamic thought, where disagreement occurred among Muslim sects, and the philosophers of Islam had a great share of intellectual contribution in this issue, and they gave their opinion in it, trying to reconcile between legal texts and mental issues. Among the most prominent Muslim philosophers interested in this issue were the chief Sheikh Ibn Sina, and the famous philosopher Ibn Rushd, and that in some of their philosophical issues they were trying to link them to the texts of religion in an attempt to prove them on the one hand, and make them holiness and health on the other hand, and they were successful in some of that, And their right side in many issues, and in this research I was exposed to the issue of interpretation of religious texts and their employment with the chief Sheikh Ibn Sina and with the Cordoba philosopher Ibn Rushd, and it was shown through the research how keen Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd were to reconcile their views with religious texts, and that they are in many Sometimes they resorted to the arbitrary interpretation of some texts of the Shari’a in order to dress their views and theories in the guise of holiness, and make them surrounded by a framework of religion, so that no one would dare criticize and challenge them. And all of this has delivered us to an important conclusion that the realization of the mind in the legal text without the availability of tools for understanding it leads the owner to fall into great pitfalls and dangers, and that delving into the interpretation of the legal texts is only after acquiring the sciences qualified for this great task.

This research is very important to understand the discourses of Islamic philosophy in Indonesia. The responses of the people to this theme are greatly varied. This article tries to discuss the response of Muslims towards Islamic philosophy. Some accept Islamic philosophy and try to develop it but others reject it. The debate between al-Ghazālī and Ibn Rushd is widely influencing the acceptance of the Muslims toward philosophy. Harun Nasution, Nurcholish Madjid, and Mulyadhi Kartanegara are the important figures in promoting Islamic philosophy in Indonesia.

The spectacular progress of Islamic civilization in the West cannot be separated from the role of communication and Muslim philosophers who existed in the Middle Ages. In this century, Islam became a spearhead in scientific civilization. Ibn Rushd was a Muslim philosopher who had a very important role in the development of Islam in Europe, but the influence of Ibn Rushd himself did not occur in the mass of his life, but through his students who loved his thoughts, so that these students translated his works into Latin and this is called Aveoroism. Aveorism itself has a point of view on the relationship between philosophy and religion, and this view is based on Ibn Rushd. With his abilities, Ibn Rushd succeeded in commenting on the works of Aristotle, and gave rise to a culture of thought that had never been experienced in that period of civilization. Ibn Rushd's thoughts had a lot of influence on other philosophers. And he is considered the most influential and instrumental figure in Islamic civilization in the western world. Therefore, studying his life journey and philosophical thoughts is very interesting.

This paper aims to analyzing the thought of a character (Ibn Rushd) to education, and its relevance to modern education. The research method used in this paper is content analysis. This paper uses a qualitative approach (library research) and then analyzes the sources that have been collected and then provides conclusions related to the material in the paper. The results showed that Ibn Rushd's concept of thinking leads to freedom of thought in developing science in the world of Islamic education without having to be limited to objects, be it exact or metaphysical; there is a compatibility between Ibn Rushd's education using the burhānī method with modern world education, it can be seen from the development of science in Islamic education.

This article was written with the aim of examining Ibn Rushd's thoughts in bringing together religion and philosophy. Ibn Rushd views that there was a peaceful relationship between sharia and philosophy because apart from placing the two as a means of achieving the truth and affirming that they supported each other, not deny each other in the form of the principle of unification. That means, both were in one goal, namely to find the truth. The research method used by the author was library research. While the results of the study explained that in Ibn Rushd's view, to bring together philosophy and religion, a tool was needed, namely the mind. Ibn Rushd gave his own area of ??work on revelation and the intellect (ratio) and tried to link the two through his theory of takwil. Takwil was used to bridge the difference between the meaning of textuality and rational understanding.

Miracle stories in sacred texts have been a source of both fascination and heated debate across religious traditions. Qur'anic miracle stories are especially interesting because they are part of a discourse that also de-emphasises the miraculous. By looking at how three scholars have engaged with Qur'anic miracle stories, I here investigate how these narratives have been interpreted in diverse and fruitful ways. The first part of the article analyses how two medieval scholars, al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111) and Ibn Rushd (d. 595/1198), engaged with the implications of miracle stories. Taking his cue from miracle stories, al-Ghazālī offered a sophisticated critique of natural determinism and suggested that the natural order should be perceived as a constantly renewed divine gift. In contrast, Ibn Rushd dismissed al-Ghazālī’s critique as sophistry and maintained that accepting the possibility that the natural order might be suspended was an affront to human knowledge and science. In the second part, I turn to Bediuzzaman Said Nursi (1870–1960), whose interpretation offers a crystallisation of al-Ghazālī’s insights as well as, surprisingly, an indirect confirmation of Ibn Rushd's concerns about human knowledge and science. Nursi redefines the miraculous in light of miracle stories, and interprets them as reminders of ‘everyday miracles’ and as encouragements to improve science and technology in God's name.