arabic

Textkit is a learning community- introduce yourself here. Use the Open Board to introduce yourself, chat about off-topic issues and get to know each other.
Post Reply
User avatar
Constantinus Philo
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1403
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm

arabic

Post by Constantinus Philo »

I'm just wondering if Arabic could be added to the section on other classical languages.
Semper Fidelis

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: arabic

Post by jeidsath »

Let's get some threads on classical Arabic going here in the Open Section, and if there are good threads, as there were with Coptic, then let's create the section.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

User avatar
Constantinus Philo
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1403
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm

Re: arabic

Post by Constantinus Philo »

I'm mostly interested in Arabic translations of Aristotle so when I finish with Stephanus I will read Hunayn's translations of De Interpretatione and I'm sure there will be interesting things to discover especially in terminology.
Semper Fidelis

User avatar
NolanusTrismegistus
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:31 pm

Re: arabic

Post by NolanusTrismegistus »

Is your interest just in Aristotle, or his reception more broadly in medieval Arabic / Islamic philosophy*? I'm very interested in this subject as a whole, and I would love to follow your progress and collaborate. My Arabic in its current state though is nothing to write home about, but I've read a significant amount of the scholarship in this area.

Some things you might want to consider as you're reading Hunayn ibn Ishaq's translations of Aristotle into Arabic:
  1. Hunayn ibn Ishaq may not have been translating Aristotle directly from Greek editions exclusively, but also from Syriac Aramaic editions. The philosophical and literary traditions of Eastern Christians of this period that Hunayn ibn Ishaq belongs to are significant for the origins of what was to become Arabic/Islamic philosophy. (Eastern Christians are also known to have been teachers of al-Kindi, al-Farabi, al-Tabari, and other early Abbasid scholars). This is something that is woefully understudied and merits more attention.
  2. Aramaic already has had a long history of influencing the Arabic language long before the House of Wisdom in Baghdad, appearing in the Qur'an itself, even back in Old Arabic inscriptions, so there's already a precedence being built upon here. Again, the influence of Aramaic on Arabic (especially on Quranic Arabic, which is the basis of the kind of Arabic used in philosophy) is understudied and needs way more attention in the scholarly literature.
  3. The writings of Neoplatonists like Plotinus, Porphyry and Proclus came down to the Arabs under the book "Theology of Aristotle". As such, they thought these were the writings penned by the hand Aristotle, thus giving their perception of him a strong Neoplatonic flavour, no doubt influencing translations.
  4. The commentary tradition played an important role in Aristotle's reception for the Arabs. For example, Alexander of Aphrodisias was translated into Arabic and his influence was profound. (many of his writings are only extant in Arabic)
*I'm not a huge fan of the phrases "Arabic philosophy" or "Islamic philosophy", given the contributions to the tradition of people who were neither Arabs (Avicenna a Persian) nor Muslims (Hunayn ibn Ishaq a Christian), indeed even people working in the tradition who were openly hostile to religion (ibn al-Rawandi an atheist).... But I'll make due of these terms for convenience.

User avatar
Constantinus Philo
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1403
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm

Re: arabic

Post by Constantinus Philo »

Since I do not know Aramaic, I will limit myself to Arabic works pertaining to Aristotle.
Semper Fidelis

User avatar
Fletcher
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2023 1:35 pm

Re: arabic

Post by Fletcher »

NolanusTrismegistus wrote: Fri Dec 30, 2022 6:38 pm *I'm not a huge fan of the phrases "Arabic philosophy" or "Islamic philosophy", given the contributions to the tradition of people who were neither Arabs (Avicenna a Persian) nor Muslims (Hunayn ibn Ishaq a Christian), indeed even people working in the tradition who were openly hostile to religion (ibn al-Rawandi an atheist).... But I'll make due of these terms for convenience.
If we don’t use the term "Arabic philosophy" then what single term could contain all three of the men in your example? I don’t think there is one, unless perhaps one said “Middle Eastern Philosophy”, but that's unnecessarily vague and is based on geography instead of language. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to posit that “Arabic philosophy” is the correct term here, as the Arabic language is the common denominator for all three of the examples you gave:

Ibn Sina/Avicenna: Persian/Muslim who wrote in Arabic (as most Islamic scholars of his time did)
Ibn al-Rawandi: Persian/atheist (I believe he too wrote in Arabic, but correct me if I’m mistaken)
Hunayn ibn Ishaq: Arab/Christian who translated from from other languages into Arabic.

I’m not 100% clear on whether Hunayn ibn Ishaq wrote in Persian or Arabic, but if his writings are in Arabic then are we classifying him based on his ethnicity or by the language in which he composed? If he wrote in Arabic then he too would fall into the “Arabic Philosophy” category. That makes all three of the examples above fall into the “Arabic” category, even though they were ethnically and religiously diverse. So I don’t yet see the problem with the term “Arabic philosophy” to encompass scholars such as these.

It’s important to remember that we’re saying “Arabic” and not “Arab” philosophy: one denotes a language and the other an ethnicity. Since TextKit is based around grouping threads and sections by language, I think it’s unavoidable that “Arabic Philosophy” will be a common term going forward if we wish to create a new Classical Arabic section. Perhaps the term “Arabic-Language Philosophy” would be more precise going forward.

I’d like to see a Persian section develop too, as I saw you also expressed interest in that.
"The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there."

User avatar
Fletcher
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2023 1:35 pm

Re: arabic

Post by Fletcher »

jeidsath wrote: Fri Oct 28, 2022 1:55 am Let's get some threads on classical Arabic going here in the Open Section, and if there are good threads, as there were with Coptic, then let's create the section.
When a new section is created are the old threads on that topic transferred over to it? Or does it start again from scratch?
"The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there."

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: arabic

Post by jeidsath »

We'd probably move some threads around.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

User avatar
NolanusTrismegistus
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:31 pm

Re: arabic

Post by NolanusTrismegistus »

Fletcher wrote: Fri Feb 24, 2023 4:19 pm Since TextKit is based around grouping threads and sections by language, I think it’s unavoidable that “Arabic Philosophy” will be a common term going forward if we wish to create a new Classical Arabic section.
Well said. I wonder if we have enough people to support the creation of a Classical Arabic section on TextKit then?

Post Reply