Alfarabi, Avicenna, And Averroes, On Intellect

8/12/2019 Alfarabi, Avicenna, And Averroes, On Intellect

1/601


2/601

Alfarabi, Avicenna, andAverroes, on Intellect


3/601

This page intentionally left blank


4/601

Alfarabi, Avicenna, and Averroes, on Intellect

THEIR COSMO O!IES, THEORIES O" THE ACTI#E I$TE ECT, A$%THEORIES O" H&MA$ I$TE ECT

Herbert A' %avidson

$e( )ork O*ford O+"OR% &$I#ERSIT) RESS -../


5/601

O*ford &niversity ress

O*ford $e( )ork Toronto %elhi 0o1bay Calc2tta Madras 3arachi 32ala 21p2rSingapore Hong 3ong Tokyo $airobi %ar es Salaa1 Cape To(n Melbo2rneA2ckland and associated co1panies in 0erlin Ibadan

Copyright 45 -../ by Herbert A' %avidson

2blished by O*ford &niversity ress, Inc' /66 Madison Aven2e, $e( )ork, $)-66-7 O*ford is a registered trade1ark of O*ford &niversity ress All rightsreserved' $o part of this p2blication 1ay be reprod2ced, stored in a retrieval syste1,or trans1itted, in any for1 or by any 1eans, electronic, 1echanical, photocopying,recording or other(ise, (itho2t the prior per1ission of the p2blisher' ibrary ofCongress Cataloging8in8 2blication %ata %avidson, Herbert A' 9Herbert Alan:,-.;/Alfarabi, Avicenna, and Averroes on intellect< their cos1ologies, theories of theactive intellect, and theories of h21an intellect = Herbert A' %avidson, p' c1' Incl2desbibliographical references and inde*' IS0$ 68-.8>6?@/;8 -' hilosophy,Isla1icB D!reek infl2ences' /' Intellect' ;' "arabl' @' Avicenna, . 68-6;?' >'Averroes, --/78--. ' 7' hilosophy of 1ind' ?, Cos1ology, Isla1ic' I' Title'0?@>'I>@%; -../ ->;'.B Ddc/6 .-8; >7

-;>?. 7@/ rinted in the &nited States of A1erica on acid8free paper


6/601

Mark, Eli abeth, and Abigail

"OR


7/601



8/601

Ackno(ledg1ents

Chapters /, ;, and @, have gro(n o2t of an article p2blished in #iator ; 9-.?/:'Chapters 7 and ? re(ork articles that appeared in #iator - 9-. ?: and #iator -?9-. 7:, respectively' My (ife 3inneret read the entire 1an2script 1etic2lo2sly anddid her best to n2dge 1e in the direction of clarity and logic' My colleag2es HosseinFiai and Michael "ishbein gave 1e inval2able assistance, the for1er in the reading ofS2hra(ardi, and the latter in 1atters of Arabic' Michael Cohen, for1erly of the&C A H21anities Co1p2ting "acility g2ided 1e thro2gh the h2rdles attendant 2ponthe preparation of ca1era8ready copy' I e*tend (ar1est thanks to each of the1' Allthe translations are 1y o(n' os Angeles May -../ H' A' %'


9/601



10/601

Contents

-' Introd2ction, ; /' !reek and Arabic Antecedents, ?

Stages of H21an Intellect, . The 3ind of Entity That the Active Intellect Is, -; TheActive Intellect as a Ca2se of H21an Tho2ght, - The Active Intellect as a Ca2se ofE*istence, /. ConG2nction (ith the Active Intellect I11ortality, ;@

;' Alfarabi on E1anation, the Active Intellect, and H21an Intellect, @@

Al8Madina al8"d@ila and al8Siyasa al8Madaniyya, @@ Alfarabi s hilosophy ofAristotle, 7; TheRisalafial8cAJl, 7> 7> Alfarabi s Co11entary on the $ico1acheanEthics, ?6 Concl2ding $ote, ?;

@' Avicenna on E1anation, the Active Intellect, and H21an Intellect, ?@

The E1anation of the &niverse the Active Intellect as a Ca2se of the E*istence of theS2bl2nar Korld, ?@ Stages of H21an Intellect the Active Intellect as the Ca2se ofH21an Tho2ght, ; I1agination, Cogitation, Insight, .> ConG2nction andI11ortality, -6; rophecy, --7 S211ary, -/@

>' Reverberations of the Theories of Alfarabi and Avicenna, -/?

Avicenna s Isla1ic S2ccessors, -/? Reverberations in Medieval Le(ish hilosophy,- 6


11/601

+

Contents Reverberations in Scholastic hilosophy, /6. S211ary, /-

7' Averroes on E1anation and on the Active Intellect as a Ca2se of E*istence, //6!eneral Considerations, //6 The E1anation of the &niverse, //; The Active Intellectas a Ca2se of E*istence< Epito1es of the arva nat2ralia and the Metaphysics, /;/The Active Intellect as a Ca2se of E*istence< The Co11entary on %e generationeani1ali21, /@/ The Active Intellect as a Ca2se of E*istence< The ong Co11entaryon the Metaphysics and Tahdf2t al8Tahdf2t 9%estr2ctio destr2ction21:, /@>S211ary, />@ ?' Averroes on the Material Intellect, /> Introd2ction, /> TheEpito1e of the %e ani1a and the Epistle on the ossibility of ConG2nction, /7> AMinor Co1position on ConG2nction and the Middle Co11entary on the %e ani1a,/?@ Averroes ong Co11entary on the %e ani1a and his Co11entary onAle*ander s %e intellect2, / / S211ary, /.> Averroes Theories of Material Intellectas Reflected in S2bseJ2ent Le(ish and Christian Tho2ght, /. ' Averroes on theActive Intellect as the Ca2se of H21an Tho2ght, ;-> The assage of the H21anIntellect to Act2ality, ;-> The ossibility of ConG2nction (ith the Active IntellectI11ortality, ;/- rophecy, ;@6 Averroes Shifting ict2re of the &niverse and ofMan s lace in It, ;>- Inde*, ;>?


12/601

Alfarabi, Avicenna, andAverroes, on Intellect


13/601



14/601

-

I$TRO%&CTIO$

The 1ost intensely st2died sentences in the history of philosophy are probably thosein Aristotle s %e ani1a that 2ndertake to e*plain ho( the h21an intellect passes fro1its original state, in (hich it does not think, to a s2bseJ2ent state, in (hich it does'Aristotle started fro1 the pres2pposition that h21an tho2ghts reflect the e*ternal(orld (itho2t distortion, the antithesis of (hat (o2ld be I11an2el 3ant sperspective' Reasoning that the presence of any inborn J2ality (o2ld color tho2ghtsreceived by the h21an intellect and hence prevent the intellect fro1 perfor1ing itsassigned task, he fo2nd the h21an intellect to be a part of the so2l (hich has theability to beco1e each thing b2t in itself originally has no nat2re (hatsoever otherthan the ability to think'- Then ca1e the state1ents that (ere to echo do(n thro2ghthe cent2ries' Aristotle bro2ght to bear a dichoto1y pervading his entire philosophy,positing that the vario2s do1ains of the physical 2niverse disclose both a 1atter and

a ca2se or agent (hich leads the 1atter fro1 potentiality to act2ality and heinferred that the sa1e distinction 12st also be present in the so2l' At the side of theintellect that is (hat it is by virt2e of beco1ing all things, by virt2e of acJ2iring alltho2ghts, an intellect 12st conseJ2ently e*ist that is (hat it is by virt2e of 1akingall things, by virt2e of 1aking all tho2ghts'/ The intellect that is (hat it is by virt2eof beco1ing all things ca1e to be kno(n as the potential or 1aterial intellect, andthe intellect that is (hat it is by virt2e of 1aking all things, as the active intellectso1eti1es also translated as active 1ind, active intelligence, active reason, agentintellect, prod2ctive intellect:' L2st (hat Aristotle 1eant by potential intellect andactive intellectB Dter1s not even e*plicit in the %e ani1a and at best i1pliedB Dand G2st ho( he 2nderstood the interaction bet(een the1 re1ains 1oot to this day'

St2dents of the history of philosophy contin2e to debate Aristotle s intent, partic2larlythe J2estion (hether he considered the active intellect to be an aspect of the h21anso2l or an entity e*isting independently of 1an'; K' %' Ross has characteri ed thefa1o2s

Aristotle, %e ani1a ;'@'@/.a, -6, /-8// @/.b, 7' Ibid' ;'>'@;6a, -68->' ; A sa1ple;9transcendent: ide1, edition of Aristotle s %e ani1a 9O*ford -.7-: @>8@?9i11anent: L' Rist, $otes on Aristotle %e ani1a

/ -

;


15/601

@


doctrine of the active reason as perhaps the 1ost obsc2re and certainly the 1ostdisc2ssed of all Aristotle s doctrines' @ Khile today the nat2re of the h21an potentialintellect and active intellect is 1erely a proble1 of e*egesis, a con2ndr21 e*ercisinghistorians of philosophy, for t(o 1illennia it (as a good deal 1ore' %espite, and also2ndo2btedly beca2se of, the enig1atic J2ality of his (ords, the !reek co11entatorson Aristotle, 1edieval Isla1ic, Le(ish, and Christian philosophers, and E2ropeanphilosophers as late as the si*teenth cent2ry pored over the 1aster s (ords, seeking inthe1 the key for deciphering 1an s essence, 1an s fate, and the str2ct2re of the2niverse' Alfarabi 9d' .>6:, Avicenna 9. 68-6;?:, and Averroes 9--/78--. : integratethe active intellect and h21an potential intellect into larger cos1ic sche1es' In eachinstance, the physical 2niverse co1prises transparent celestial spheres, in (hich thestars and planets are e1bedded, and a stationary s2bl2nar (orld, aro2nd (hich thecelestial spheres rotate' A first s2pre1e being consisting in p2re tho2ght, and hencean intellect, presides over the entire cos1os and there follo( other beings consistingin p2re tho2ght, that is to say, other intellectsB Dor, as they are conventionally ter1ed,intelligencesB D(hich have the f2nction of 1aintaining the celestial spheres in1otion' The active intellect, the ca2se of act2al h21an tho2ght, stands at the end ofthe chain of s2pernal intelligences' In Alfarabi, Avicenna, and the early Averroes, theintelligences, incl2ding the active intellect, are bro2ght into e*istence thro2gh a seriesof eternal e1anations initiated by the "irst Ca2se and Alfarabi and Avicenna2nderstand that the chain of e1anations e*tends to the celestial spheres and bringsthe1 into e*istence as (ell' All three philosophers locate the h21an potential intellecti11ediately after the active intellect in the descending order of e*istence' The activeintellect plays a to(ering role in the philosophic syste1s of Alfarabi, Avicenna, andAverroes' ike the generality of 1edieval Isla1ic and Le(ish thinkersB Dand incontradistinction to the 1aGority of Scholastic philosophersB Dthey did not do2bt thatthe active intellect is an incorporeal s2bstance transcending the h21an so2l andocc2pying a definite spot in the incorporeal hierarchy' Each of the1 2nderstood thatthe active intellect leads the h21an intellect fro1 the state in (hich it has apotentiality for thinking to a state in (hich it act2ally thinks, and each e*plained the

1anner by (hich the active intellect perfor1s that task' Each, in at least so1e of his(ritings, also sa( in the active intellect the ca2se of the e*istence of seg1ents or allof the s2bl2nar (orld' Each affir1ed the possibility of the h21an intellect s entering ae2dae1onic state called conG2nction (ith the active intellect, assigned the activeintellect a central role in h21an i11ortality, and b2ilt a rationale for the pheno1enonof prophecy aro2nd the active intellect' They each th2s espo2sed a cos1ic sche1e in(hich a hierarchy of beings consisting in p2re

;'>, in Essays in Ancient !reek hilosophy, ed' L' Anton 9Albany -.?/: >678?9i11anent:' See also R' Hicks edition of Aristotle s %e ani1a 9Ca1bridge -.6?:l*iv8l*i*' @ K' %' Ross, edition of Aristotle s Metaphysics 9O*ford -./@: l'c*liii'

Ross hi1self changed his 1ind see n' ;'


16/601

Introd2ction

>

intellect 2nfolds 2ntil the active intellect is reached, in (hich the active intellectserves as the transcendent ca2se of a portion or all of the s2bl2nar (orld, in (hich thetranscendent active intellect leads the h21an intellect to act2ality, and in (hich therelationship of the active intellect to the h21an intellect e*plains pheno1ena (ithreligio2s overtones' The active intellect reached its c2l1ination in Avicenna, (ho sa(it as the direct ca2se of all, or virt2ally all, e*istence and all theoretical tho2ght in thes2bl2nar (orld, as, in effect, the vicar of !od on earth' A direct line of develop1ent iseasily traced fro1 Alfarabi to Avicenna, and then for(ard to Averroes, b2t (hen onelooks back beyond Alfarabi, no i11ediate predecessor appears' $evertheless,tendencies that crystalli e in Alfarabi and Avicenna, as (ell as specific propositionsadvanced by the t(o, are discernible in the !reek co11entators on Aristotle, in$eoplatonic philosophy, and in Arabic (ritings before Alfarabi' That does notnecessarily i1ply that Alfarabi took 1aterial at his disposal and hi1self 1olded itinto a co1prehensive doctrine, (hich (as to be f2rther developed by his s2ccessors'The positions Alfarabi p2t for(ard 1ay be borro(ings fro1 lost philosophic so2rcesand not his o(n innovations' The follo(ing chapter revie(s disc2ssions of intellect inlate !reek and early Arabic philosophy not for their o(n sake b2t as backgro2nd forAlfarabi, Avicenna, and Averroes' Chapters ; and @ e*a1ine the cos1ologies, theconceptions of the active intellect, and the theories of h21an intellect, espo2sed byAlfarabi and Avicenna, respectively' Chapter > st2dies the reverberations of thetheories of Alfarabi and Avicenna, and especially the latter, in s2bseJ2ent Isla1ic,Le(ish, and Scholastic philosophy' Chapter 7 takes 2p Averroes str2ggles (ith t(oiss2es on (hich he changed his 1ind several ti1es< the relation of the "irst Ca2se tothe rest of the incorporeal hierarchy, and the active intellect s role as a ca2se of thee*istence of the s2bl2nar (orld' Chapter ? atte1pts to 2ntangle Averroes changingstands on another iss2e' %efining precisely the kind of entity that the h21an 1aterialor potential intellect is had not been a central the1e in Alfarabi and Avicenna'Alfarabi barely to2ched on the J2estion, and Avicenna dealt (ith it indirectly as partof the 1ore general J2estion of the nat2re of the h21an so2l' Averroes, by contrast,(restled (ith and agoni ed over the nat2re of the h21an potential intellect thro2gho2t

his career, changing his 1ind repeatedly' Chapter ? traces the develop1ent of histho2ght on the iss2e and then p2rs2es the s2bGect beyond Averroes into s2bseJ2entLe(ish and Christian tho2ght that fell 2nder his infl2ence' Chapter e*a1inesAverroes treat1ent of the active intellect s role in leading the h21an potentialintellect to act2ality and his treat1ent of s2bGects related to the active intellect sleading the h21an intellect to act2ality, na1ely, conG2nction (ith the active intellect,h21an i11ortality, and prophecy' roble1s connected (ith intellect 1ade 2p aconsiderable portion of the overall philosophic enterprise for the three philosophersdisc2ssed, and their handling of those proble1s reveals so1ething of (hat can becalled their philosophic styles' A (ord abo2t the philosophic style of each 1ay be inplace here' %ifferent (orks of Alfarabi so1eti1es advance differing positions on a

single iss2e' To acco2nt for


17/601


18/601

7


the discrepancies, scholars have s2ggested that Alfarabi s (ritings disclose adevelop1ent or, alternatively, that so1e of the1 e*press e*oteric vie(s, and others,esoteric vie(s' One striking trait e*hibited by Alfarabi is that he al1ost al(ays laysdo(n his positions flatly, (itho2t arg21ent' My conGect2re is therefore that he 1aysi1ply have been dependent on (hatever so2rces (ere available to hi1 (hen he(rote,> and the differing positions he advanced on different occasions 1ay si1plyreflect the so2rces fro1 (hich he (as (orking at any given ti1e' As for Avicenna, he1entions that he had developed an oriental philosophy (hich diverged fro1 theneoplatoni ed Aristotelianis1 he 2s2ally espo2sed' )et nothing of s2ch a distinctivelyOriental philosophy has ever co1e to light' A 1edieval list of Avicenna sco1positions na1es his Ishdrdt as the last and best of the1,7 and the thesesespo2sed in the Ishdrdt, tho2gh for12lated in all2sive and high8flo(n lang2age,har1oni e co1pletely (ith (hat Avicenna s pri1ary philosophic treatises 1aintain' Iaccordingly ass21e that Avicenna (as consistent thro2gho2t his philosophic careerand 1erely played (ith alternate for12lations'? Averroes, like Alfarabi, takesdiffering stands on certain iss2es at different ti1es, b2t in his case the reason is clear'Thro2gho2t his lifeti1e, Averroes labored to attain the tr2th, (hich for hi1 (astanta1o2nt to recovering Aristotle s intent, and in the co2rse of rethinking iss2es, herepeatedly changed his 1ind' Altho2gh Averroes overriding goal (as to c2t a(ayaccretions and ret2rn to Aristotle, (e shall find that he did not al(ays s2cceed' Ont(o iss2es, the relation of the 2niverse to the "irst Ca2se and the active intellect s roleas a ca2se of s2bl2nar e*istence, he grad2ally does reapproach gen2ine Aristotelianpositions, (hile on another, the nat2re of the h21an potential intellect, he starts (ith(hat the consens2s of scholars today (o2ld dee1 to be the gen2ine position ofAristotle and then, in s2ccessive (orks, 1oves steadily off in the opposite direction,2ntil he arrives at an egregio2s 1isreading' A re1ark on ter1inology< !reek andArabic do not have separate ter1s for intellect and intelligence, b2t a conventionoriginating in the atin Middle Ages disting2ishes the t(o, applying the ter1intelligence to the incorporeal beings that in the Aristotelian (orld govern thecelestial spheres, and e1ploying the ter1 intellect in other conte*ts' Since the

convention has beco1e part of the idio1 of the history of philosophy and is 2sef2l, Idisting2ish intellect fro1 intelligence even tho2gh only a single !reek or Arabic (ord2nderlies the t(o ter1s'

The na1e of a scholar (ith (ho1 Alfarabi st2died logic has been preserved' See M'Meyerhof, #on Ale*andrien nach 0agdad, Sit 2ngsberichte der pre2ssischenAkade1ie der Kissenschaften, hilosophisch8historische 3lasse /; 90erlin -.;6:@6>8 "' Rosenthal, The Classical Heritage in Isla1 90erkeley -.?>: >68>-' 7 The

ife oflbn Sina 9L2 Gani s biography of Avicenna: ed' and trans' K' !ohl1an 9Albany-.?@: .78.?' ? %' !2tas, Avicenna and the Aristotelian Tradition 9 eiden -. : -->8-;6, 1akes the case against ass21ing an Oriental philosophy (hich differed

s2bstantially fro1 Avicenna s preserved philosophic syste1'>


19/601


20/601

/

!REE3 A$% ARA0IC A$TECE%E$TS

Here I shall e*a1ine !reek and early Arabic spec2lation on the follo(ing topics< 9-:the stages thro2gh (hich the h21an intellect can pass 9/: the type of entity the activeintellect is 9;: the 1anner in (hich the active intellect prod2ces h21an tho2ght 9@:the active intellect s role in bringing the s2bl2nar (orld or seg1ents of it intoe*istence and 9>: the rationale that the active intellect f2rnishes for certain religio2spheno1ena' My obGect (ill not be to reprod2ce the syste1s of the philosophersdisc2ssed b2t to dra( attention to state1ents and theories that shed light on Alfarabi,Avicenna, and Averroes' As is hardly s2rprising, Aristotle constit2tes the startingpoint for 2nderstanding Alfarabi, Avicenna, and Averroes certain post8Aristotelian!reek te*ts and early Arabic philosophic te*ts, nevertheless, also contrib2ted to thesetting in (hich they (orked' The pertinent post8Aristotelian te*ts are< Ale*ander ofAphrodisias %e ani1a- a (ork entitled %e intellect2, (hich is like(ise attrib2ted toAle*ander,/ altho2gh the attrib2tion has been J2estioned beca2se of discrepanciesbet(een the %e intellect2 and Ale*ander s %e ani1a; lotin2s Enneads@The1isti2s araphrase of Aristotle s %e ani1a > The1isti2s araphrase of Aristotle s

Ale*ander, %e ani1a, in Scripta 1inora /'-, ed' I' 0r2ns 90erlin - ?: -8-66'Ale*ander 9N:, %e intellect2, in Scripta 1inora /'-, -678-;' Arabic translation< Te*te

arabe d2 d Ale*andre d Aphrodise, ed' L' "innegan 90eir2t -.>7:, (ith pagination ofthe !reek given and Co11entaires s2r Aristote perd2s en grec, ed' A' 0ada(i90eir2t -.7 : ;-8@/' $either edition of the Arabic version is (holly adeJ2ate' I havetranslated fro1 1y o(n ad hoc eclectic te*t, (hich I base on both editions and theirapparat2ses, (ith corrections here and there fro1 the !reek' ; ' Mora2*, Ale*andred Aphrodise 9 aris -.@/: -;/8@/' Mora2* later changed his 1ind and decided thatboth the %e ani1a and %e intellect2 are gen2ine (orks of Ale*ander see ' Mora2*,

e %e ani1a dans la tradition grecJ2e, Aristotle on Mind and the Senses, ed' !'loyd and !' O(en 9Ca1bridge -.?>: /.?,;6@' @ lotin2s, Enneades, ed' ' Henry

and H'8R' Sch(y er / 9 aris -.>.: contains a 2sef2l English translation of the e*tantArabic paraphrases of lotin2s, done by !' e(is' > The1isti2s, araphrase ofAristotle s %e ani1a, in Co11entaria in Aristotele1 graeca >';, ed' R' Hein e 90erlin- ..:' Medieval Arabic translation, (ith the pagination of the !reek indicated< AnArabic Translation of The1isti2s ' ' ' on Aristoteles %e ani1a , ed' M' yons9Col21bia, S'C' -.?;:'

/

-

?


21/601


22/601


Metaphysics, 0ook -/7 a !reek co11entary on Aristotle s %e ani1a attrib2ted toLohn hilopon2s? and a different !reek co11entary on 0ook ; of the %e ani1a,also attrib2ted to hilopon2s, (hich is no longer e*tant in the original b2t is preservedin a atin translation' Of these, only the t(o (orks carrying Ale*ander s na1eB Dthe1edieval Arabic philosophers (ere little inclined to J2estion the na1es on books andharbored no do2bts abo2t Ale*ander s a2thorship of either (orkB Dand The1isti2sparaphrases of Aristotle s %e ani1a and of Metaphysics -/, are kno(n to have beendirectly available to the 1edieval Arabs in Arabic translation' In the case of the %eintellect2 and of The1isti2s araphrase of Aristotle s %e ani1a, the 1edieval Arabictranslations have s2rvived and been p2blished' Khile no 1an2scripts of the Arabictranslations of Ale*ander s %e ani1a and of The1isti2s araphrase of Metaphysics-/ are kno(n, 1edieval Hebre( translations fro1 the Arabic have been preserved'Avicenna refers to the vie(s of both Ale*ander and The1isti2s on the so2l,. andAverroes does the sa1e-6 in addition, Averroes J2otes a key passage at length (erenot even kno(n by na1e, b2t parts of the Enneads circ2lated in Arabic in anony1o2sand pse2depigrapho2s paraphrases, the 1ost notable of (hich is the Theology ofAristotle' The Theology of Aristotle is cited by Alfarabi as a gen2ine (ork ofAristotle s,-/ and Avicenna (rote a co11entary on it'-; The follo(ing Arabicco1positions fro1 the period preceding Alfarabi also have so1e pertinence< aparaphrase of Aristotle s %e ani1a attrib2ted to IshaJ ibn H2nain 9d' ?7: a frag1entfro1 a certain 0akr al8Ma(sili 9ca' .66: the (ritings of 3indi 9ninth cent2ry: atreatise on the so2l, of 2nkno(n date, (hich is attrib2ted

7 The !reek original and the Arabic translation fro1 the !reek are not e*tant'Medieval Hebre( translation fro1 the Arabic< The1istii in ArislotelisMelaphysicor21 libr21 A paraphrasis, ed' S' anda2er, in Co11entaria inAristotele1 graeca >'> 90erlin -.6;:' ? hilopon2s, Co11entary on %e ani1a, inCo11entaria in Aristotele1 graeca ->, ed' M' Hayd2ck 90erlin - .?:' eco11entaire de Lean hilopon s2r le troisie1e livre d2 traite de I a1e d Aristote, ed'M' Corte 9 iege -.;@:' . See Avicenna, $otes on Aristotle s %e ani1a, in Arist2cinda al8 cArab, ed' A' 0ada(i 9Cairo -.@?: . , -6-, --@, --7 M2bahathat, in Arist24 inda al8cArab, -/6 Al8Pa(l fl Ah(dl al8$afs, in MaG12c Rasa il 9Hyderabad-.;>: ->' -6 See belo(, pp' /7 87., /?@8?>, /? 8 6, / /8 @, / ?, ;/7' -- Averroes,Tafsir 1a bacda al8Tabica 9 ong Co11entary on Metaphysics:, ed' M' 0o2yges90eir2t -.; 8-.@ : -@./8.@' -/ Alfarabi, Al 8La1c baina al8Hakl1ain, ed' A' $ader90eir2t -.76: -6>87' Also printed in Alfarabi s philosophische Abhandl2ngen, ed' "'%icterici 9 eiden - .6: / !er1an translation< Alfarabi s philosophischeAbhandl2ngen a2s de1 Arabischen iiberset t, trans' "' %ieterici 9 eiden - ./: @@8@>'Altho2gh several scholars have tried to interpret a(ay (hat Alfarabi says, he2na1big2o2sly recogni es Aristotle s a2thorship of the Theology' -; Avicenna sco11entary is printed in Arist2 4 inda al8 cArab 9n' . above: ;>8?@ "rench

translation< $otes d Avicenne s2r la Theologie d Aristote, trans' !' #aGda, in Rev2etho1iste >- 9-.>-: ;@78@67'


23/601

fro1 The1isti2s araphrase of Metaphysics -/'-- lotin2s and his Enneads


24/601

!reek and Arabic Antecedents

.

to orphyry and e*tant only in Arabic' Avicenna refers to the orphyryB Dor pse2do8orphyryB Dtreatise, critici ing it harshly'-@ Of the (orks that have been 1entioned

here, the 1ost i1portant for Alfarabi, Avicenna, and Averroes are Ale*ander s %eani1a, the %e intellect2, lotin2s Enneads, and The1isti2s araphrase of Aristotle s%e ani1a' As already noted, parts of lotin2s (ere available to 1edieval Arabicreaders in a paraphrase, and the other three te*ts (ere available in translation' Kherethe Arabic translation or paraphrase of a !reek te*t diverges fro1 the original, theArabic version is nat2rally 1ore ger1ane for o2r p2rpose, and I shall 2s2ally J2otefro1 it'

Stages of H21an Intellect

Each nat2ral do1ain, Aristotle reasoned, discloses a 1atter that is potentiallyeverything in the do1ain, as (ell as an agent that 1akes everything in the do1ain(hence he inferred that the so2l too 12st contain an intellect that is (hat it is byvirt2e of beco1ing all things, as (ell as an intellect that is (hat it is by virt2e of1aking all things' -> Aristotle s (ording s2ggested the J2alifications potential and1aterial for the 2ndeveloped intellect2al fac2lty of the h21an so2l (hich can beco1eeverything, that is, (hich can think all tho2ghts, and Ale*ander of Aphrodisiastherefore co2ld, in a single sentence, call the initial state of the h21an intellect both

potential and 1aterial intellect'-7 Co11entators and philosophers (ere to ask(hat sort of thing the potential or 1aterial intellect is' Ale*ander s reading ofAristotle led hi1 to concl2de that it is only a disposition in the h21an organis1,-?(hereas The1isti2s paid heed to state1ents of Aristotle s pointing in anotherdirection' He learned fro1 Aristotle that the potential intellect does not e1ploy abodily organ for its activity, is (holly 2n1i*ed (ith the body, i1passive, and separateQfro1 1atter ' - Since anything (ith those characteristics is perforce an incorporeals2bstance, Averroes (ill consistently report that The1isti2s and others of a si1ilar1ind took the h21an potential intellect to be an incorporeal s2bstance or, in another

for12lation, a disposition inhering in an incorporeal s2bstance'-. A 1odernco11entator 2nderstands The1isti2s in the

-@ Avicenna 3' al8Ishardt (al8Tanblhat, ed' L' "orget, as e livre des theore1es etdes avertisse1ents 9 eiden - ./: - 6 "rench translation< ivre des directives etre1arJ2es, trans' A' !oichon 90eir2t -.>-:, (ith pages of "orget s edition indicatedAvicenna, Shifa < %e ani1a, ed' "' Rah1an 9 ondon -.>.: /@6' l> %e ani1a;'>'@;6a, -68->' -7 Ale*ander, %e ani1a 9n' - above: -' -? Ibid' @' - The1isti2s,

araphrase of the%e ani1a 9n' > above: -6>' -. Cf' belo(, pp' /7., /?., / ?'


25/601

-6


sa1e (ay'/6 The nat2re of the h21an potential or 1aterial intellect is 1entioned onlyin passing by Alfarabi, it is dealt (ith indirectly by Avicenna, b2t it beco1es centralin Averroes' 0esides noting the e*istence of h21an intellect that can beco1eeverything, Aristotle re1arked on the sit2ation (herein the h21an intellect hasalready beco1e everything B Din other (ords, already possesses a f2ll repertoire oftho2ghtsB Dyet is not act2ally thinking the1 at the 1o1ent' The h21an intellect inthat condition is, Aristotle (rote, potential in a certain sense, beca2se it is notact2ally thinking' It is not, ho(ever, potential in the sa1e sense as before learning,beca2se it has 2ndergone a passage to act2ality' It is no( able thro2gh itself tothink, 12ch like the 1an of science (ho is able to e*ercise his kno(ledge at (illb2t does not at the 1o1ent happen to be doing so'/- Ale*ander s %e ani1a and theArabic Aristotelians (ho follo( Ale*ander s e*a1ple applied the ter1 intellect inhabit2 bil81alaka: to the h21an intellect (hen it is in possession of a repertoire oftho2ghtsB Dtho2gh not necessarily a f2ll repertoireB D (itho2t act2ally thinkingthe1'// A f2rther distinction, (hich altho2gh not bro2ght o2t in Aristotle is obvio2s,(as all2ded to by Ale*ander' Ale*ander co11ented that intellect in habit2 stands

bet(een the p2re potentiality of the person (ho has not beg2n to acJ2ire intelligiblekno(ledge and the f2ll act2ality of the 1an of kno(ledge c2rrently engaged intho2ght'/; Intellect in habit2, the stage in (hich the h21an s2bGect has

/6

Aristotle, %e ani1a ;'@'@/.b, >8.' Aristotle also disc2sses this sense of potentiality in%e ani1a /'>'@-?a, //ff' // See Ale*ander, %e ani1a >8 7 %e intellect2 9n' /above: -6? Rasa il al83indi, ed' M' Ab2 Rida 9Cairo -.>6: -';> 9the notion (itho2tthe ter1: Avicenna, belo(, p' @' !ha ali, MaJdsid al8"aldsifa 9Cairo n'd': /./Averroes, Epito1e of %e ani1a, p2blished as Talkhis 3itab al8$afs, ed' A' Ah(ani9Cairo -.>6: ?' Else(here, Averroes 2ses the ter1 intellect in habit2 in the sense ofthe h21an intellect possessed of a repertoire of tho2ghts, b2t (itho2t the condition

that the 1an is not thinking the tho2ghts at the 1o1ent' See Averroes, IggeretEfshar2t ha8%ebeJ2t 9Arabic original lost:, ed' and English trans' 3' 0land, as Epistleon the ossibility of ConG2nction 9$e( )ork -. /:, Hebre( te*t -/8-; 9the Englishtranslation, p' /?, incorrectly renders intellect in habit2 as acJ2ired intellect : ide1,Co11entari21 1agn21 in Aristotelis de Ani1a libros, ed' "' Cra(ford 9Ca1bridge,Mass' -.>;: 9henceforth cited as< ong Co11entary on the %e ani1a: @.78.?'The1isti2s, in his araphrase of Aristotle s %e ani1a .>, also takes cogni ance of thecondition in (hich intellect has 2ndergone a passage to act2ality, (itho2t its act2allythinking at the 1o1ent, and he appears to call that state a habit2s on . , ho(ever, heappears to 2se the ter1 intellect in habit2 in the sense of h21an intellect (hen f2llyact2al, rather than (hen in an inter1ediate state of potentiality' Ale*ander andThe1isti2s so1eho( tho2ght that the ter1 (hich in the preserved te*t of Aristotle,%e ani1a ;'>'@;6a, ->, J2alifies the active intellect, refers instead to a state or stage


26/601

of the developing h21an potential intellect' See !' Rodier s note to the Aristotelianpassage in his edition of Aristotle s %e ani1a 9 aris -.66:' /; Ale*ander, %e ani1a

>8 7'

@6'

O' Ha1elin, a theorie de l intellect d apres Arislote el ses co11entate2rs 9 aris-.>;:

/-


27/601


--

the po(er to think at (ill b2t is not doing so, 1ay in other (ords be disting2ishedfro1 act2al intellect, the stage in (hich the h21an intellect is act2ally thinking'/@The stages of h21an intellect have no( increased to three< potential or 1aterialh21an intellect, h21an intellect in habit2, and act2al h21an intellect' Alfarabi andAvicenna recogni ed still another stage or state, (hich they called acJ2iredintellect'/> The ter1 acJ2ired intellect reflects nothing in Aristotle' It does appear inthe !reek te*t of Ale*ander of Aphrodisias %e ani1a, altho2gh it is inconspic2o2sthere, serving only as a synony1 for intellect in habit2, that is to say, h21an intellectin possession of the ability to think yet not act2ally thinking'/7 The ter1 beco1essignificant in the Arabic translations of Ale*ander s %e ani1a and of the %e intellect2attrib2ted to Ale*ander' 0oth Ale*ander s %e ani1a and the %e intellect2 2se adifferent e*pression, intellect fro1 (itho2t, a n21ber of ti1es, echoing aperple*ing passage in Aristotle s %e generatione ani1ali21, (hich refers to intellectthat alone enters Qthe organis1 fro1 (itho2t' /? 0oth (orks, as (ill be seen,dee1ed it possible for an incorporeal s2bstance, and the active intellect in partic2lar,to enter the h21an intellect and beco1e the obGect of h21an tho2ght and they calledthat g2ise of the incorporeal s2bstance intellect fro1 (itho2t' The sense of thee*pression is that s2ch an obGect of tho2ght already (as intellect (hen still o2tside,and before being tho2ght by, the h21an intellect, in contrast to intelligible tho2ghtsabstracted fro1 1aterial obGects and rendered act2ally intelligible, and thereforeact2al intellect, only 2pon entering the h21an intellect' In the Arabic versions ofAle*ander s %e ani1a and the %e intellect2 attrib2ted to Ale*ander the (ords intellectfro1 (itho2t are not translated literally' They are generally rendered as acJ2iredintellect, and so1eti1es as intellect acJ2ired fro1 (itho2t' / The Arabic versionshave an another pec2liarity they s2bstit2te the ter1 acting 9facil: intellect for the1ore precise ter1 active 9faccdl: intellect' Th2s, instead of speaking of an active,acJ2ired intellect, (hich (o2ld sho( 2na1big2o2sly that the active intellect is (hatis J2alified as acJ2ired, the Arabic translations speak of an acting, acJ2iredintellect' /. Altho2gh the collocation

3indi, Rasa il -';> , dra(s s2ch a distinction, (itho2t the ter1 in habit2' The%eintellect2 -6?, and The1isti2s, araphrase of the %e ani1a . , do not recogni e thedistinction bet(een act2al intellect and intellect in habit2' /> On the s2bGect of theacJ2ired intellect, see A' 0ada(i, $e( hilosophical Te*ts ost in !reek, Isla1ic

hilosophical Theology, ed' ' More(edge 9Albany -.?.: @8> "' Rah1an,Avicenna s sychology 9O*ford -.>/: .68.; "innegan 9n' / above: -?/8? 'Merlan, Monopsychis1 Mysticis1 Metaconscio2sness 9Hag2e -.7.: -@8-> and thereferences they give to earlier literat2re' /7 Ale*ander, %e ani1a /' See E' Feller,%ie hilosophie der !riechen ;'-, >th ed' 9 eip ig -./;: /7, n' /' /? %e generationeani1ali21 /';'?;7b, / ' / Cf' "innegan 9n' / above: -?/' /. Ibid' - 7, - ?' %eintellect2 -6., describes intellect in habit2 as acting'

/@


28/601


29/601

-/


acting acJ2ired intellect is clo2dy, the Arabic translations do say eno2gh to 1akeclear (hat acJ2ired intellect 1eans' According to the Arabic, acJ2ired intellect

e*ists act2ally ;6 and is in itself intellect ;- it co1es to 1an fro1 (itho2t ;/ itaids the intellect in Q1an and establishes the habit2s Qfor tho2ght (ithin the

1aterial intellect ;; it is the factor (hereby the potential intellect is led fro1potentiality to act2ality ;@ it is generated in 2s fro1 (itho2t ;> and (e think it' ;7The descriptions reveal that a transcendent incorporeal entity, and the active intellectin partic2lar, is at iss2e' The added J2alifications acJ2ired, or acJ2ired fro1(itho2t, f2rther indicate that the intellect in J2estion so1eho( belongs to 1an' In a(ord, the Arabic translator of Ale*ander sa( that the e*pression intellect fro1(itho2t denotes the active intellectB Dor other incorporeal for1sB Dinsofar as itso1eho( enters the h21an intellect and for 2nkno(n reasons he rendered thee*pression as acJ2ired intellect' The Arabic does not 1isrepresent the intent of theoriginal, altho2gh, by coining the ne( na1e, it does dra( additional attention to, andper1its a 1is2nderstanding of, the aspect of the active intellectB Dor of anotherincorporeal for1B Dthat enters 1an' lotin2s like(ise 2sed the ter1 acJ2ired intellect'He 1eant by it intellect2al kno(ledge that is acJ2ired by the so2l directly fro1 thes2pernal, cos1ic Intellect';? Alfarabi and, in so1e conte*ts, Avicenna (ill e1ploythe ter1 acJ2ired intellect to designate not an aspect of the active intellect, or ofanother incorporeal intelligence, (hich enters the h21an intellect, the sense the ter1has in the Arabic translations of Ale*ander, b2t rather an 2lti1ate stage of the h21anintellect itself, a stage (herein the h21an intellect enGoys a certain close relationship(ith the transcendent active intellect' Kith the addition of the acJ2ired intellect, (ehave a cadre of fo2r stages< 1aterial or potential h21an intellect, intellect in habit2,act2al h21an intellect, and acJ2ired intellect' The cadre does not appear precisely ass2ch in either Alfarabi, Avicenna, or Averroes' Each of the1, ho(ever, e1ploys avariation of it'

;6

;-

Hebre( translation of the Arabic version of Ale*ander, %e ani1a .6, in aris,0ibliotheJ2e $ationale, Hebre( MS .@' ;/ "innegan -.-' ;; Ibid' ;@ Ibid' -.-' ;>Ibid' - 7,-.@ Hebre( translation of Ale*ander, %e ani1a .-' ;7 Hebre( translationof Ale*ander, %e ani1a .6' ;? Al8Shaykh al8)2nanl, ed' "' Rosenthal, Orientalia /-9-.>/: @ 68 -, paralleling Enneads >'7'@'

lbid'


30/601


31/601

!reek and Arabic Antecedents The 3ind of Entity That the Active Intellect Is

-;

Aristotle s 1eager re1arks on the intellect that is (hat it is by virt2e of 1aking allthings B Ds2bseJ2ently to be kno(n as the active intellectB Dincl2de both as2ggestion that it is, and a s2ggestion that it is not, a transcendent s2bstance' "or hedescribed it as present in the so2l yet also as separate Qfro1 1atter ''' and, in itsessence, act2ality' ; If pri1ary (eight be attached to the latter description and theactive intellect is 2nderstood to e*ist in an 2nchanging state of act2ality, it (o2ld haveto be an incorporeal s2bstance independent of the h21an organis1' The state1entabo2t its being present in the so2l (o2ld then 1ean either that an aspect of theessentially transcendent active intellect enters the h21an so2l or else 1erely that aca2se as (ell as a 1atter 12st be ass21ed in the case of so2l';. Sho2ld, by contrast,pri1ary (eight be attached to the state1ent locating the intellect that 1akeseverything in the h21an so2l, and sho2ld the active intellect e*ist no(here b2t inindivid2al h21an so2ls, the description of it as act2ality in its essence (ill have tobe interpreted a(ay' Alfarabi, Avicenna, and Averroes, like virt2ally all Isla1ic andLe(ish philosophers in the Aristotelian tradition, accepted the transcendentinterpretation (itho2t J2estion' And they did 1ore' They pinpointed the precise placein the incorporeal hierarchy (here the active intellect standsB Dthe (ords place,stands, and si1ilar ter1s being 2sed 1etaphorically here, of co2rse, since incorporeals2bstances e*ist o2tside of space and ti1e' In the 1edieval Aristotelian 2niverse, aseries of incorporeal intelligences parallels the series of celestial spheres, thetransparent spherical bodies that carry the planets and stars aro2nd the earth' In theversion of the Aristotelian sche1e of the 2niverse endorsed by Alfarabi, Avicenna,and Averroes, the active intellect, the factor leading the potential h21an intellect toact2ality, is added as a final link to the chain of intelligences' It therein parallels thes2bl2nar (orld, (hich stands as the last and least cos1ic body, at the end of the seriesof celestial spheres' The sy11etry, as (e shall see, can be e*tended, thro2gh theascription to the active intellect of f2nctions in respect to the s2bl2nar (orld (hichare analogo2s to the f2nctions each intelligence perfor1s in respect to thecorresponding celestial sphere' $o kno(n thinker prior to Alfarabi identified theactive intellect precisely as the last link in the chain of incorporeal intelligences, b2t

the active intellect (as co11only taken to be a transcendent, incorporeal s2bstance'The earliest kno(n philosopher (ho e*plicitly@6 constr2ed the active intellect as atranscendent being

Aristotle, %e ani1a ;'>'@;6a, -;, -?8- ' Ale*ander, %e ani1a 9n' - above: , In theco2rse of re(ording Aristotle s reason for positing an active intellect, (rites that a1aterial factor and an agent 12st e*ist in the case of intellect' 0elo(, p' /6' @6Aristotle s %e generations ani1ali21 /';'?;7b, / , and the E2de1ian Ethics -/@ a,/>/., 1ay be read as constr2ing the active intellect as a transcendent being'Theophrast2s also

;. ;


32/601

-@


(as Ale*ander' Ale*ander connected the active intellect i1plied in Aristotle s %eani1a, 0ook ;, (ith the first, incorporeal, ever8thinking ca2se of the 2niverseestablished in Aristotle s Metaphysics, 0ook -/' He ass21ed that the t(o entities areidentical, that the active intellect, the ca2se of the h21an intellect s passage fro1potentiality to act2ality, is nothing other than the "irst Ca2se of the 2niverse, thedeity'@- lotin2s too, in a sense, constr2ed the active intellect as a transcendent entity'In his cos1ology, the "irst Ca2se of the 2niverse, called the One, eternally radiates, ore1anates, fro1 itself a cos1ic IntellectB D(hich in t2rn radiates a cos1ic So2l anda1ong the f2nctions for (hich the cos1ic Intellect is responsible are those ofAristotle s active intellect'@/ The1isti2s (as a third philosopher (ho placed atranscendent constr2ction on the active intellect' He reGected the identification of theactive intellect as the "irst Ca2se of the 2niverse, or, to be 1ore precise, theproposition that the active intellect is the "irst Ca2se of the 2niverse and nothing1ore' His reason (as that Aristotle had located the active intellect in 1an s so2l'@;02t The1isti2s also insisted on the transcendent character of the active intellect, or ofits pri1ary aspect, beca2se Aristotle hadB Din an analogy that (o2ld be analy ed andreanaly ed thro2gh the cent2riesB Dco1pared the active intellect to light'@@ Theanalogy of light entailed for The1isti2s that altho2gh rays fro1 the active intellectdisperse and enter individ2al 1en, they have their origin in an e*ternal radiatingso2rce, in a single transcendent active intellect e*isting o2tside and above 1an' In ac2rio2s bit of syncretis1, The1isti2s added that the transcendent active intellect, ortranscendent aspect of the active intellect, fro1 (hich rays radiate and enterindivid2al h21an so2ls, is the very entity lato had in 1ind (hen he co1pared theIdea of the !ood, the ca2se of science and tr2th, @> to the s2n, the so2rce of light'@7Other instances of the active intellect s being taken as a transcendent s2bstance arerecorded in the t(o co11entaries on the %e ani1a attrib2ted to Lohn hilopon2s'Each of the co11entaries lists fo2r theories regarding the active intellect, and oneite1 in each list is of especial interest beca2se it approaches still f2rther (hat (as tobe the conception of the Arabic Aristotelians' The !reek

see1s to have constr2ed the active intellect as a transcendent being see The1isti2s,araphrase of the %e ani1a 9n' > above: -6/' @- Ale*ander, %e ani1a . cf' the %e

intellect2 9n' / above: --;' @/ Cf' A' Ar1strong, The Architect2re of the Intelligible&niverse in the hilosophy of lotin2s 9Ca1bridge -.@6: @-' @; Aristotle, %e ani1a;'>'@;6a, -;' @@ Ibid' ->8-?' @> lato, Rep2blic 7'>6 ' @7 The1isti2s, araphrase ofthe %e ani1a -6/8-6;' lotin2s, Enneads >'-' , had identified lato s idea of the!ood (ith the One, that is to say, (ith the "irst Ca2se, (hich is beyond Intellect' IfThe1isti2s accepts the sa1e eJ2ation, his arg21ent that the active intellect cannot bethe "irst Ca2se of the 2niverse is to be 2nderstood as contending only that the activeintellect cannot be the "irst Ca2se and nothing 1ore, inas12ch as an aspect of itenters the h21an intellect'


33/601


->

co11entary attrib2ted to hilopon2s reports that a philosopher na1ed Marin2s@?vie(ed the active intellect as so1ething dae1onic or angelic' @ A parallelstate1ent in the co11entary e*tant in atin reports that so1e thinkers identify theactive intellect not as !od b2t as a certain other intellect, inferior to Hi1, positionedclose to o2r Qintellect , (hich radiates 2pon o2r so2ls and perfects the1' @. In bothstate1ents, and 1ore e*plicitly in the second, the active intellect is an incorporeals2bstance o2tside 1an (hich stands close to 1an in the hierarchy of e*istence'Ale*ander, lotin2s, and The1isti2s, by contrast, located the active intellect at or nearthe top of the hierarchy of being' ittle is added by preserved Arabic (orks prior toAlfarabi' At least t(o Arabic (orks do not recogni e the transcendent character of theactive intellect' A paraphrase of the %e ani1a attrib2ted to IshaJ ibn H2nain speaks ofthe active intellect as the act2al intellect and states its f2nctions briefly, (itho2t anys2ggestion that it e*ists o2tside the h21an so2l'>6 An obsc2re conte1porary ofAlfarabi kno(n as 0akr al8Ma(sili arg2es against the proposition that the h21anintellect obtains kno(ledge thro2gh the action of an incorporeal being o2tside of 1an'He contends instead that the principles of tho2ght, (hich are G2dg1ents abo2t the2niversal things, 12st be innate to the h21an intellect' To e*plain the 1anner(hereby 1an beco1es conscio2s of the innate principles, 0akr al8Ma(sili hasreco2rse to a latonic theory of re1iniscence'>- 3indi offered t(o distinct and, verylikely, inco1patible theories of the ca2se of act2al h21an tho2ght' His brief treatiseOn Intellect 2nderstands the factor act2ali ing the h21an intellect to be a transcendentthinking being, (hich the treatise calls first intellect rather than active intellect anddescribes as the ca2se of all intelligible tho2ghts and secondary intellects' >/Connections (ith Ale*ander have been detected, or are tho2ght to have been detected,in the te*t,>; and therefore 3indi 1ight conceivably be reflecting Ale*ander sposition that the active intellect is identical (ith the "irst Ca2se of the 2niverse'

@?

hilopon2s 9n' ? above: >;>' "or the likely conte*t of Marin2s state1ent, see H'0l21enthal, $eoplatonic Ele1ents in the %e Ani1a Co11entaries, hronesis /-9-.?7: -' @. Co11entaire 9n' above: ;6' >6 Ah(ani 9n' // above: -7 ' >- S'

ines, a doctrine de - intellect selon 0akr al8Ma(sili, St2di' '' in onore di' ' ' evidella #ida 9Ro1e -.>7: /';> 8;7-' >/ Rasa il al83indi 9n' // above: -';>?' Medieval

atin translations of 3indi s On Intellect< A' $agy, %ie philosophischenAbhandl2ngen des LocJvb ben IshaJ al83indi 9Minister - .?: -B D -- 9significantvariants fro1 the preserved Arabic: English translation< R' McCarthy, Al83indi sTreatise on the Intellect, Isla1ic St2dies ; 9-.7@: -/>8/ "rench translation< L'Lolivet, intellect selon 3indi 9 eiden -.?-: -87' d histoire doctrinale et litteraire d21oyen age @ 9-./.: /;8/? Lolivet ;-8@-'

>; Cf' E' !ilson, es so2rces greco8arabes de - A2g2stinis1e avicennisant,


34/601

Archives

@

robably identical (ith a st2dent of rocl2s by that na1e'


35/601

-7


On a 1ore pla2sible reading, ho(ever, 3indi s On Intellect is 2sing the ter1 firstintellect for the Intellect that is the second hypostasis in the $eoplatonic hierarchy' An21ber of considerations s2pport that reading< One of the Arabic paraphrases of

lotin2s e1ploys the ter1 first intellect precisely in the sense of the cos1icIntellect'>@ The Arabic te*t On the So2l attrib2ted to orphyry e1ploys the ter1 firstintellect in a $eoplatonic conte*t and pres21ably again in the sense of the$eoplatonic cos1ic Intellect'>> The Le(ish philosopher Isaac Israeli 9ca' >6.>6:repeats the 1ain points in 3indi s acco2nt of intellect>7 b2t incorporates the1 into a$eoplatonic hierarchy of Creator8Intellect8So2l8$at2re'>? He apparently, therefore,took 3indi s first intellect to be the second of the $eoplatonic hypostases' Ibn !abirol,a later Le(ish Arabic philosopher standing in the $eoplatonic tradition, e*plicitlyapplies the ter1 first intellect to the hypostasis Intellect, (hich is s2bordinate to the"irst Ca2seB Dincidentally adding that philosophers call the sa1e being activeintellect' > And pop2lar $eoplatonic literat2re, in general, 2ses the ter1s firstintellect as (ell as active intellect for the cos1ic Intellect of the $eoplatonichierarchy'>. There is finally an 2np2blished te*t that, in the G2dg1ent of the scholars(ho called attention to it, is 3indi s (ork' The te*t defines 2niversal intellect by thesa1e distinctive for12la that 3indi s On Intellect e1ployed to define first intellectit defines 2niversal intellect, and the treatise On Intellect defines first intellect, as thespecificality of things' 76 Ass21ing that the ne(ly discovered te*t does belong to3ind or at least reflects his tho2ght, (e have first intellect eJ2ated (ith 2niversalintellect and pres21ably eJ2ivalent to the $eoplatonic cos1ic Intellect' S2ch is one(ay 3indi represents the so2rce of act2al h21an tho2ght' He identifies it as thetranscendent first intellect, (hich appears to be the second hypostasis in the$eoplatonic hierarchy, standing 2nder the "irst Ca2se of the 2niverse' In a separate(ork, entitled On "irst hilosophy, 3indi takes another

See Theology of Aristotle, ed' "' %ieterici 9 eip ig - /: -@/, paralleling Enneads7'?'/' K' 32tsch, 0in arabisches 0r2chstiick a2s orphyries 9N:, Melanges deI &niversite St' Loseph ;-9-.>@:/7 ' >7 A' Altraann and S' Stern, Isaac Israeli9O*ford -.> : ;>8; ' >? Ibid' @78@?' > The Arabic original is lost' Medieval atintranslation fro1 the Arabic< S' Ibn !abirol, "ons vitae, ed' C' 0ae21ker 9Miinster- ./8- .>: >, 4 -., p' /.@ e*cerpts fro1 the Arabic in 1edieval Hebre( translation?: >, 4 />' >. See ong #ersion of the Theology ofAristotle, cited by ' %2he1, e syste1e d2 1onde @ 9 aris -.-7: ;. 8@6- Rasa ilIkh(an al8SJfa 90eir2t -.>?: ;'; 7, chap' @- Ibn al8Sid 90atlay2si: 3' al8Hada iJ,ed' and Spanish trans' M' As1 alacios, in Al8Andal2s > 9-.@6:, Arabic te*t ??Spanish translation -- 1edieval Hebre( translation< 0atlaG2si, ha8cAg2llothaRa yoniyyot, ed' %' 3a2f1ann 902dapest - 6: /? 3' Macanl al8$afs, ed' I'!old iher 90erlin -.6?: >@ "' Rosenthal, On the 3no(ledge of lato s hilosophy,Isla1ic C2lt2re -@ 9-.@6: ;..' 76 Alt1ann and Stern 9n' >7 above: ;?8; '

>> >@


36/601


37/601


-?

tack' He reasons that since act2al h21an tho2ght co1es abo2t (hen the h21anintellect 2nites (ith the species and genera of things, that is, (ith the 2niversals ofthings, those 2niversals 12st be the factor act2ali ing the h21an intellect'7- $oindication is given of the ontological stat2s of 2niversals' 3indi s (ording does recall0akr al8Ma(sili s 2niversal things that are innate to the h21an intellect' 02t sincehe speaks of the h21an intellect s beco1ing act2al by 2niting (ith 2niversals, he(o2ld see1 to e*cl2de its being 2nited (ith the1 fro1 the o2tset' In other (ords, hesee1s to e*cl2de 2niversals being inborn' He 1ight, of co2rse, 1ean that the2niversals (hereby the h21an intellect is act2ali ed are e1bodied in, and s2ppliedby, the transcendent first intellect for, as (as G2st seen, he describes first intellect asthe specificality of things, (hich is al1ost tanta1o2nt to saying that first intellecte1bodies the 2niversals of things' The state1ent that the 2niversals of thingsact2ali e the h21an intellect co2ld, therefore, 1ean that they do so (henco112nicated by first intellect to the h21an intellect' The har1oni ation, like allhar1oni ations, is te1pting, b2t since the passage describing 2niversals as the ca2seof act2al h21an tho2ght does not 1ention a transcendent intellect, (e sho2ld be(areof introd2cing one' The 2niversals in the passage 1ay si1ply be concepts abstractedfro1 physical obGects Isaac Israeli, (ho (as dependent on 3indi, o2tlined a process(hereby h21an concepts are refined fro1 sense perceptions thro2gh s2ccessiveabstractions'7/ Or perhaps the 2niversals 3indi speaks of are abstract conceptss2bsisting in a latonic (orld of ideal "or1s' In the passage 2nder consideration,3indi 1ay, then, very (ell be dis1issing the need for any transcendent agent to leadthe potential intellect to act2ality' He (as f2lly capable of advocating diverse andinconsistent theories at different ti1es'7; Al83indi, in s21, offered t(o theories ofthe so2rce of act2al h21an tho2ght' According to one, the h21an intellect is led toact2al tho2ght by the transcendent first intellect, by (hich he probably intended the$eoplatonic cos1ic Intellect' According to the other, the h21an intellect is renderedact2al by the 2niversals of things (ith no f2rther clarification' In yet anotherpassage that 1ight, at first glance, appear pertinent, 3indi describes the heavenlybodies as the agent of Qh21an reason' 7@ There, ho(ever, he probably 1eant that

the heavens generate the h21an rational so2l (ith its potentiality for tho2ght,7> notthat the heavens lead the h21an rational so2l to act2al tho2ght'

Rasa il al83indl 9n' // above: -'->>' English translation< Al83indi s Metaphysics,trans' A' Ivry 9Albany -.?@: -67' 7/ Alt1ann and Stern ;78;?' 7; Regarding 3indi seclecticis1, see "' Rosenthal, Al83indl and tole1y, Sl2di ''' in onore di ' ' ' evidella #ida 9Ro1e -.>7: /'@; , @@7, @>@8>7' 7@ Rasail al83indl -'/>>' 7> See belo(,p' ;;'

7-


38/601


39/601

-


The foregoing s2rvey discloses that post8Aristotelian !reek philosophers (hoconstr2ed the active intellect, the ca2se of act2al h21an tho2ght, as a transcendententity identified it (ith the "irst Ca2se of the 2niverse 9Ale*ander: (ith lato s Ideaof the !ood 9The1isti2s: and (ith the cos1ic Intellect that is the second hypostasisin the $eoplatonic hierarchy 9 lotin2s:' Or they took it to be a s2pernal being locatedbelo( the deity and close to 1an in the hierarchy of e*istence 9vie(s recorded in bothco11entaries on the %e ani1a attrib2ted to Lohn hilopon2s:' A1ong Arabicphilosophic (ritings prior to Alfarabi, so1e recogni e a transcendent ca2se of act2alh21an tho2ght, (hich they call first intellect 9a (ork of 3indi s, the te*t attrib2ted to

orphyry, Isaac Israeli:, and others reGect or ignore the notion of s2ch a ca2se 9IshaJibn H2nain, 0akr al8Ma(sili:' In 3indi alone, one (ork recogni es a transcendentca2se of h21an tho2ght, (hile another acco2nts for the act2ali ation of the h21anintellect (itho2t 1ention of it' %espite the range of precedents for a transcendentconstr2ction of the active intellect or of the ca2se of act2al h21an tho2ght 2nderanother na1e, no kno(n (riter before Alfarabi identifies the active intellect as thelast link in the hierarchy of celestial intelligences, (hich parallels the s2bl2nar (orldas each incorporeal intelligence parallels its celestial sphere' Alfarabi (as the firstkno(n philosopher even to ass21e an entity of the sort, let alone identify it (ithAristotle s active intellect' The Active Intellect as a Ca2se of H21an Tho2ght Theactive intellect (as originally posited to help e*plain act2al tho2ght in 1an' Eachnat2ral do1ain, in Aristotle s (ords, discloses a 1aterial factor, and also a ca2se or

agent that stands to the other as art stands to 1atter and prod2ces everythingin the given do1ain and therefore the so2l too 12st contain both an intellect that is(hat it is by virt2e of beco1ing all things, by virt2e of receiving all tho2ghts, andan intellect that is (hat it is by virt2e of 1aking all things' 77 In representing theactive intellect as an instance of the ca2se or agent that prod2ces everything in a givendo1ain, Aristotle s intent (o2ld s2rely appear to be this< In each do1ain, a ca2se oragent operates on the 1aterial factor and leads it fro1 its state of potentiality to a stateof act2ality' Si1ilarly, the intellect that is (hat it is by virt2e of 1aking all things iss2ch inas12ch as it perfor1s an operation on the intellect that is potential and

rese1bles 1atter and the operation perfor1ed by the intellect that 1akes everythingon the potential intellect brings abo2t a ne( condition in (hich the latter has beco1eact2al and possesses act2al tho2ghts' A f2nda1ental proposition of eripateticphilosophy (o2ld co1e into play here, na1ely, as Aristotle e*plained else(here'


40/601


41/601


-.

characteristic in J2estion ' 7? Obvio2s as that reading of Aristotle 1ight be, a readingaccording to (hich the active intellect perfor1s an action on the potential intellectrendering the latter act2al, Ale*ander of Aphrodisias 1ay not have accepted it, and ithas been challenged in 1odern Aristotelian scholarship'7 The 1edieval ArabicAristotelians, for their part, (ere certain that (hen Aristotle co1pared the activeintellect to the ca2se or agent in any given do1ain, he 1eant that the active intellectperfor1s a certain operation on the potential intellect and thereby brings it toact2ality'7. There re1ained the task of 2nderstanding ho( the activeintellectB D(hich the Arabic Aristotelians took to be a transcendents2bstanceB Dprod2ces act2al tho2ght in the h21an potential or 1aterial intellect'Aristotle (as not of great help' He did offer several observations abo2t act2al h21antho2ght< The h21an intellect thinks the for1s in the i1ages Qfo2nd (ithin the h21ani1aginative fac2lty ?6 intellect is Qrelated to (hat is intelligible as sensation is to(hat is sense perceptible ?- the intellect hence is receptive of the for1 it thinks?/

act2al kno(ledge is identical (ith its obGect ?;B Din other (ords, an intellectbeco1es identical (ith (hatever tho2ght it thinks altho2gh the h21an intellectreceives a for1 and beco1es identical there(ith, the intellect is not affected, or

altered in the process, and is, 1oreover, free of affection and alteration to a greaterdegree than sensation, (hich like(ise, according to Aristotle, is not affected andaltered' ?@ The state1ents tell 2s that the h21an intellect takes for1s fro1 i1ages inthe i1aginative fac2lty, thinks those for1s, and beco1es identical (ith the1, (itho2tbeing altered in the process' 02t as for the role played by the active intellect, Aristotleoffered only t(o 2ndeveloped analogies' "irst is the analogy already J2oted (hichco1pares the active intellect to the art that acts on 1atter' Then a fe( lines later,Aristotle co1pared the active intellect to light for in a certain fashion, light 1akespotential colors act2al'' ' , ?> The analogy (ith light 1ight (ell s2ggest that theactive intellect leads the h21an intellect to act2ality by, in so1e sense, ill21inating(hat is

Aristotle, Metaphysics .' '[email protected], /@8/>' Cf' rocl2s, Ele1ents of Theology, ed' E'%odds, /d ed' 9O*ford -.7;:, roposition ?? that proposition cannot be identified inthe 1aterial kno(n to have been translated fro1 rocl2s Ele1ents into Arabic' 7See belo(, n' 6 K' %' Ross introd2ction to his edition of the %e ani1a 9O*ford-.7-: @;, @78@?' 7. One translation of the %e ani1a into Arabic in fact paraphrasesAristotle and has hi1 establish not an intellect that is (hat it is by virt2e of 1akingall things b2t, instead, an intellect that is an intellect by virt2e of 1aking the otherQpotential or 1aterial intellect think all things see Averroes, ong Co11entary onthe %e ani1a 9n' // above: @;?' ?6 Aristotle, %e ani1a ;'?'@;-b, / cf' %e 1e1oria-, @@.b, ;-8@>6a, -' ?- Ibid' ;'@'@/.a, -?8- ' ?/ Ibid' ->8-7' ?; Ibid' ;'>'@;6a, /6' ?@Ibid' ;'@'@/.a, ->, /.8;- ;'?'@; la, >' ?> Ibid' ;'>'@;6a, ->8-?'

7?


42/601

/6


intelligible in the (orldB Dor, 1ore precisely, (hat is intelligible in i1ages presentedby the i1aginative fac2lty to the h21an intellect and the potential intellect beco1esact2al by, in so1e sense, vie(ing the ill21ined intelligible tho2ghts' S2ch a readingof the analogy can find s2pport in lato s notion, s2rely kno(n to Aristotle, that 1ancan look at the ideal "or1s'?7 Aristotle s %e ani1a does not, ho(ever, tro2ble toclarify (hat it has in 1ind' Having s2b1itted the state1ents abo2t act2al h21antho2ght and the bald co1parisons to art and light, the %e ani1a t2rns a(ay to other1atters and leaves the co11entators to their o(n devices' Alfarabi, Avicenna, andAverroes have t(o e*planations of the 1anner by (hich the active intellect effectsact2al h21an tho2ght' In one, the active intellect casts a kind of light on i1ages in theh21an i1aginative fac2lty and on the potential intellect itself, thereby enabling theintellect to discern (hat is intelligible in the i1ages' In the other, the active intellectf2nctions as a cos1ic trans1itter, contin2ally broadcasting all possible intelligibletho2ghts, and properly att2ned h21an intellects receive intelligible tho2ghts directlyfro1 the active intellect' Antecedents for both e*planations can be fo2nd in the late!reek and early Arabic so2rces' To begin, Ale*ander of Aphrodisias %e ani1asho2ld be 1entioned' Ale*ander there re(ords the Aristotelian gro2nds for positingan active intellect as follo(s< In all things generated ''' by nat2re??' ' ' there is a1atter,' ' ' (hich is potentially everything in the given do1ain, as (ell as an agentthat effects the generation, in the 1atter, of the things the 1atter is receptive of' Thedistinction bet(een 1atter and agent 12st also occ2r in the case of intellect' Hence,since a 1aterial intellect e*ists, there 12st like(ise e*ist an active intellect (hichis the ca2se of the habit2s of the 1aterial intellect, ? that habit2s being a for1 ' ' 'and perfection of the 1aterial intellect'?. Ale*ander (o2ld see1 to be saying thatthe active intellect acts 2pon the 1aterial intellect and prod2ces a habit2s for tho2ghtin it' The ens2ing acco2nt of the active intellect s role in h21an tho2ght p2rs2es adifferent line, (hich is of considerable interest in itself b2t not pertinent to the Arabicphilosophers (ho1 (e are st2dying' 6

?7

lato, Rep2blic @ @C E2thryphro 7E'

??

More precisely< In all things generated ''' by nat2re (hich do have a 1atter''' there isa 1atter'''' Ale*ander is leaving open the possibility of things that are generated, yetcontain no 1atter' ? Ale*ander, %e ani1a 9n' - above: ' ?. Ibid' >' 6 Ale*anderlays do(n the proposition that (hatever has a given characteristic to the highestdegree and pree1inently,''' is the ca2se of other things being s2ch' 9The converse(as


43/601

affir1ed in Aristotle, Metaphysics /'-'..;b, /@8/7< If so1ething is the ca2se of otherthings

having a certain characteristic, it itself possesses the characteristic to a higher degree':Ale*ander e*plains the proposition in a latonic spirit< Khen so1ething has a J2ality

pree1inently and


44/601


/-

The %e intellect2, (hich (as read by the Arabic philosophers as a co1panion piece toAle*ander s %e ani1a, 1akes a n21ber of points abo2t the active intellect s role inprod2cing h21an tho2ght and they, altho2gh disGointed and probably not evenconsistent (ith each other, are highly pertinent' The first point is p2t th2s in theArabic translation of the %e intellect2< Khat prod2ces intellect2al thinking and leadsthe 1aterial intellect to act2ality is the active intellect, a being that is intellect inact2ality and as a conseJ2ence act2ally ' ' ' and by its o(n nat2re ' '' intelligible' -The active intellect is, as Aristotle says,'' ' analogo2s to light, / for light is theca2se 1aking colors that are potentially visible, act2ally so' If the analogy (ith light(ere intended at face val2e, the active intellect 12st so1eho( ill21ine potentialobGects of intellect and thereby transfor1 the1 into act2al obGects of intellect' 02t inthe present passage, the %e intellect2 ignores the i1plications of the analogy ; anddra(s only the 2nfoc2sed inference that the active intellect leads the 1aterial intellectto act2ality< As light 1akes potential colors visible to the eye, so too this Qactiveintellect renders the 1aterial intellect, (hich is in potentiality, an act2al intellect' Theactive intellect renders the 1aterial intellect act2al by fi*ing a habit2s for intellectingtho2ght Q!reek< the intellecting habit2s in the 1aterial intellect' @ A si1ilarfor12lation (as G2st 1et in Ale*ander s %e ani1a' In (hat 1ay or 1ay not be ana1plification of the (ay the active intellect brings the potential intellect to act2ality,the %e intellect2 goes on to all2de to Aristotle s re1ark, in %e generatione ani1ali21,that intellect alone enters Qthe organis1 fro1 (itho2t' > The %e intellect2e*plains, in the lang2age of the 1edieval Arabic version< Khen the active intellect

beco1es ca2se of the 1aterial intellect s

so1ething else has it secondarily, (hat Qhas the J2ality secondarily receivese*istence fro1 (hat Qhas it pree1inently' He gives t(o e*a1ples< light, (hich is

to the highest degree visible and is the ca2se of other things being visible andthat (hich is to the highest degree and pri1arily good and is the ca2se of otherthings being good' Applying the r2le to intellect, Ale*ander finds that thetranscendent active intellect, (hich is pree1inently and by its o(n nat2reintelligible, can (ith reason be considered the ca2se of other things intelligibletho2ght 9Ale*ander, %e ani1a 8 .:' In a (ord, the active intellect is kno(n to bethe ca2se of h21an tho2ght not beca2se it is fo2nd to do anything, b2t inas12ch as itis the being (ith the highest degree of intelligibility' Ale*ander adds a f2rther blandconsideration< If the active intellect is the first ca2se of the 2niverseB DasAle*ander in fact took it to beB Dit (o2ld, by virt2e of being the ca2se of the2niverse, also be the 2lti1ate ca2se of the e*istence of all intelligible tho2ghts'The active intellect 1ay, in other (ords, be dee1ed the ca2se of h21an tho2ght in the1ost broad sense of being the ca2se of everything in the 2niverse 9Ale*ander, %eani1a .:' $either here nor else(here in the treatise does Ale*ander describe adefinite action or operation perfor1ed by the active intellect on the h21an 1aterial

intellect'- -%e intellect2 9n' / above: -6?86 ' / ;


45/601

Ibid' -6?'

@ %e intellect2 -6?' > Aristotle, %e generatione ani1ali21 /';'?;7b, / '

See Mora2*, Ale*andre d Aphrodise 9n' ; above: -/78/?'


46/601

//


abstracting, receiving, and conceiving every 1aterial for1 Qas an intelligibletho2ght , it is called the acting acJ2ired intellect Q!reek< the active intellect''' fro1(itho2t for it is not any part and po(er of o2r so2l, b2t rather appears in 2s fro1(itho2t' 7 If the state1ents J2oted so far 1ay be correlated, the %e intellect21aintains that the transcendent active intellect enters 1an fro1 (itho2t, it fi*es ahabit2s for tho2ght in the h21an intellect, it thereby leads the potential intellect toact2ality, and the h21an intellect begins to think' Still a f2rther a1plification, orperhaps an alternative position, follo(s' Aristotle had dra(n a parallel bet(eenintellect and sense perception, ? and the %e intellect2 plays on the parallel toe*po2nd (hat it calls Aristotle s reasons for introd2cing an acJ2ired intellectQ!reek< the intellect fro1 (itho2t ' The e*position begins (ith the assertion that(henever anything co1es into e*istence, three factors 12st be present' These are

so1ething 2ndergoing affection, so1ething active and a third thing,''' na1ely, that(hich is generated ''' fro1 the1' In sense perception, the three factors are the sensefac2lty,' ' ' the sense perceptible, and so1ething generated, na1ely, the perception And by analogy, tho2ght too 12st contain a si1ilar set of three factors' The arg21entfoc2ses on the second of the factors fo2nd in all processes (hereby things co1e intoe*istence, hence in sense perception, and hence in tho2ght as (ell' The second factorin all processes is so1ething active' In sense perception, (here the %e intellect2calls the second factor the sense perceptible, the te*t accordingly e*plains that thefactor in J2estion is so1ething active, an agent enabling the sense fac2lty to pass toact2ality' Since tho2ght reJ2ires the sa1e set of factors, it too 12st have a factor (iththe character of the second one in sense perception, (ith the character of the factorrendering the sense fac2lty act2al' And s2ch a factor in tho2ght can be nothing otherthan an act2al active intellect' ConseJ2ently, G2st as there e*ist things that areact2ally sense perceptible and that render sensation act2al, so too there 12st e*istthings that, being the1selves act2ally intelligible, render the ''' intellect act2al' .There 12st e*ist an act2al active intellect that renders the hitherto potential intellectcapable of thinking, brings the 1aterial, potential intellect to act2ality, and renders

all e*istent things

7 %e inlellect2 -6 ' ?

Above, p' -.' In the seJ2el, not J2oted here, the %e intellect2 ascribes plainly Stoictheories to this Aristotle see belo(, p' ;6' Feller, follo(ed by 0r2ns, the editor ofthe %e intellect2, therefore ingenio2sly conGect2red that Aristotle is a copyist s errorfor Aristokles, the na1e of Ale*ander s s2pposed teacher' See Feller 9n' /7 above:

->' ' Mora2*, %er Aristotelis12s bei den !riechen / 90erlin -. @: ; and n' 7, hasresponded that Ale*ander had a teacher na1ed Aristotle and that the reference is tohi1' See also "' Trab2cco, II proble1a del de hilosophia di Aristocle di Messene ela s2a doctrina, Ac1e -- 9-.> : --?, --.' . The Arabic 1an2scripts are garbledhere' My translation is partly conGect2ral b2t it is co1patible (ith the !reek original'


47/601


48/601


/;

intelligible' This factor in tho2ght, (hich parallels (hat is act2ally sense perceptible,and (hich brings the h21an intellect to act2ality, is an intellect''' entering fro1(itho2t, according to the original !reek' It is acJ2ired fro1 (itho2t, according tothe 1edieval Arabic translation'.6 The %e intellect2 fails to identify (hat it is that isact2ally sense perceptible and that 1akes the sense fac2lty act2al' Khen Averroeslater read the %e intellect2, he 2nderstood that in the case of vision, the act2ally senseperceptible is light,.- and the pages in the %e intellect2 co1ing after the state1ents G2st J2oted tend to corroborate Averroes interpretation' The %e intellect2 no( arg2esthe ne(, 2ne*pected proposition that the h21an 1aterial intellect is not, after all,(holly passive b2t is active as (ell, and f2rther that it develops spontaneo2sly, asthe a1b2latory fac2lty in 1an spontaneo2sly passes to act2ality (ith ti1e'./ Toill2strate ho( the h21an intellect can be both active and passive, the %e intellect2e*pands the repertoire of analogies by co1paring the h21an intellect to an additionalpheno1enon, fire' "ire has t(o sides' It has an active side, (hich destroys ''' 1atter,b2t at the sa1e ti1e it also feeds on 1atter, and insofar as it feeds on 1atter, itpassively 2ndergoes affection' Si1ilarly, the acting Ufdcil intellect in 2s B D(hichhere 1eans the h21an 1aterial intellect, described in the lines i11ediately precedingas activeB Dboth separates off for1s thro2gh its active side and takes hold of the1thro2gh its passive side' est anyone s2ppose that recogni ing an active side of theh21an intellect leaves the transcendent active intellect otiose, the %e intellect2 insists' ./ Ale*ander s %e ani1a /, instead contrasts thea1b2latory fac2lty, (hich beco1es act2ali ed nat2rally, (ith the intellect2al fac2lty,(hich does not' .; Ibid' ---'

.- .6


49/601

/@


the state1ent thro2gh Aristotle s co1parison of the active intellect to light yet ignoresthe analogy s i1plications' The %e intellect2 then develops another Aristoteliannotion and co1pares the process of tho2ght to the process of sensation' The parallel(ith sensation leads to the concl2sion that h21an 1aterial intellect is activated by theactive intellect in the (ay that the sense fac2lty is activated by (hat is act2ally senseperceptible' In a final clarification of the nat2re of act2al h21an tho2ght, the %eintellect2 s2b1its that the 1aterial intellect is itself active, like fire, and developsspontaneo2sly, like the a1b2latory fac2lty' 02t even (hen recogni ing an active sideof the h21an intellect, the %e intellect2 still insists on the need for an e*ternal activeintellect' The e*ternal active intellect enters the 1aterial intellect fro1 (itho2t andbeco1es its act2al obGect of tho2ght, as light, besides ill21ining visible obGects,serves as the act2al obGect of vision' Of interest for 2s in lotin2s is not his f2lldoctrine of intellect b2t selected re1arks' lotin2s cos1ic Intellect has a certainrese1blance to the Aristotelian active intellect, the ca2se of act2al h21an tho2ght,and the rese1blance increases (hen the active intellect is taken to be a transcendents2bstance' It is hardly s2rprising, therefore, that lotin2s e1ployed (hat (as tobeco1e the standard arg21ent for the e*istence of the active intellect as an arg21entfor the e*istence of his o(n cos1ic Intellect' In the (ording of the Arabic paraphraseof the Enneads, an intellect 12st e*ist (hich brings abo2t act2al tho2ght in so2l,beca2se potentiality passes to act2ality only thro2gh a ca2se that is in act2alitysi1ilar to Q(hat the Qfor1er is in potentiality' .@ In the original !reek, the arg21entis designed to prove that above the hypostasis So2l there stands the hypostasisIntellect' The Arabic paraphrase leaves 2ncertain, ho(ever, (hether cos1ic So2l orindivid2al h21an so2ls are at iss2e' The anony1o2s Arabic paraphrase offering thearg21ent 1ight th2s be treated as a te*t belonging to the eripatetic 1ainstrea1, andthe arg21ent read as establishing the e*istence of an already act2al intellect thatbrings the h21an rational so2l to the state of act2al tho2ght' art or all of h21anintellect2al kno(ledge is, for lotin2s, co112nicated to the h21an rational so2ldirectly by the cos1ic Intellect' lotin2s (rites that (henever a so2l is able toreceive, Intellect gives it clear principles, and then it Qthe so2l co1bines those

principles 2ntil it reaches perfect intellect' .> In other passages the scope of thekno(ledge co112nicated by Intellect is broadened beyond clear principles' In the(ording of one of the Arabic paraphrases of lotin2s< The intellect2al sciences,(hich are the tr2e sciences, co1e only fro1 Intellect to the rational so2l' .7 And theparaphrase kno(n as the Theology of Aristotle brings

Risala ft al8cll1 al8flahi, in lotin2s ap2d Arabes, ed' A' 0ada(i 9Cairo -.>>: -7 ,paralleling Enneads >'.'@' "or the principle, see above, p' - , and cf' Theology ofAristotle 9n' >@ above: ; , paralleling Enneads @'?' ;'

.> Enneads -';'>' .7Risdlafi al8cll1 al8flahl -7., paralleling Enneads >'.'?' .@


50/601


/>

the 1atter8for1 dichoto1y to bear, 1aintaining< So2l has the stat2s of 1atter, itreceives the for1 of Intellect, and reason occ2rs in so2l only thanks to Intellect' .?

The original !reek te*t of the last passage again had cos1ic So2l, and not theindivid2al h21an so2l, in vie(' 02t Avicenna s co11ent on the passage as it appearsin the Theology of Aristotle, sho(s that he took so2l in the sense of the h21an so2l,and intellect in the sense of the active intelligences' . On s2ch a reading, the h21anrational so2l is a kind of 1atter that is perfected and receives all its intellect2alkno(ledge thro2gh a for1 co1ing fro1 an incorporeal intelligence' lotin2s depictsthe sit2ation of the h21an so2l vis a vis the cos1ic Intellect thro2gh a 1etaphor that(ill rec2r over and over again in Arabic literat2re' The so2l, he (rites, contains a sortof 1irror (herein i1ages of tho2ght and Intellect are reflected (hen the so2l orientsitself properly to(ard the higher (orld'.. T(o 1ore passages deserve to be1entioned' The first, (hich did not pass into the preserved Arabic paraphrases, saysthat 1an has intellect2al tho2ghts in t(o (ays' In intellect, (hich see1s to 1eaninsofar as the h21an intellect re1ains part of the cos1ic Intellect, 1an has intelligibletho2ghts all together in so2l, that is to say, in his rational so2l, (hich is anoffshoot of the cos1ic So2l, or perhaps of the cos1ic Intellect, he has the1 2nrolledand discrete, as it (ere' -66 The second passage says that the so2l contains anacJ2ired intellect c aJl 12ktasab (hich ill21inates it Qthat is, (hich ill21inates theso2l ' '' and renders it intellect2al' -6- If (e do so1e violence to lotin2s by readinghi1 pri1arily in the Arabic paraphrase and fitting the scattered J2otations together ina synthesis, (hile ignoring 12ch 1ore that is central to his syste1, (e get thefollo(ing< A transcendent Intellect has to be ass21ed in order to acco2nt for thepassage of the h21an rational so2l fro1 potentiality to act2ality' Intellect2alkno(ledge is trans1itted directly by the transcendent Intellect to h21an rational so2lsthat are properly oriented and ready to receive Intellect s bo2nty' The h21an intellectis like a 1irror in (hich intelligible tho2ghts fro1 above are reflected' Tho2ght at ahigher level, at the level of Intellect, is all together, (hich can be taken to 1ean that itis 2ndifferentiated at a s2bseJ2ent level, it is 2nrolled, (hich can be taken to 1eanthat tho2ght beco1es differentiated as it descends into the h21an rational so2l' The

relation of the h21an rational so2l to the intelligible tho2ght it receives isB DasAristotle already s2ggested and Ale*ander (rote e*plicitlyB Da relation of 1atter tofor1 and lotin2s adds that clear principles and the intellect2al sciencesconstit2ting the for1 of the rational so2l co1e directly fro1 the transcendentIntellect' 0eca2se tho2ght is acJ2ired by the h21an intellect fro1

Cf' Avicenna s co11entary on the Theology of Aristotle 9n' -; above: ?/' Enneads-'@'-6' -66 Enneads -'-' ' lotin2s held that the h21an intellect does not descendfro1 the cos1ic Intellect into the h21an body' See 0l21enthal 9n' @ above: ?;8?@'-6- Al8Shaykh al8)2nani 9n' ;? above: @ 68 -, paralleling Enneads >'7'@'

.?Theology of Aristotle -6>87, paralleling Enneads >'-';'


51/601

.


52/601

/7


above, act2al h21an tho2ght is acJ2ired intellect' Khen the foregoing state1ents,(hich are 1ade here and there by lotin2s, are th2s co1bined, they prefig2reAvicenna s acco2nt of the 1anner (hereby the active intellect acts on the h21anintellect' T2rning to The1isti2s, (e find hi1 laying do(n the r2le that nothing isperfected by itself and inferring at once the e*istence of an act2al, perfect intellect,(hich leads the h21an intellect to act2ality and perfection' art of The1isti2s G2stification for ass21ing a single active intellect for the entire h21an species is thatall 1en grasp the sa1e co11on notions, first definitions, and first a*io1s,(itho2t being ta2ght'-6/ His intent co2ld be either that the single active intellectco112nicates the principles of tho2ght directly to the h21an intellect, or that itenables the h21an intellect to discern the principles of tho2ght in sense perceptionsand e*tract the1 fro1 there' In a possible echo of lotin2s, The1isti2s describestho2ghts as all together in the active intellect, (hile in the potential intellect theyare differentiated' Tho2ghts that the active intellect gives 2ndividedly, the h21anintellect cannot receive 2ndividedly b2t only in a differentiated 1ode'-6;$evertheless, despite having described the active intellect as giving tho2ghts2ndividedly, The1isti2s does not 1ean that it conveys tho2ghtsB D(ith the possiblee*ception of the first notions, a*io1s, and definitions, (hich (ere G2st1entionedB Ddirectly to the h21an 1ind' So 12ch is plain (hen he deploysAristotle s analogy of light in order to e*plain the interaction of active intellect andpotential intellect' The i1plication of the analogy receives 1ore attention fro1The1isti2s than it did fro1 Ale*ander' The1isti2s (rites< Khen light beco1espresent in the potential fac2lty of vision and in potential colors, it t2rns the for1erinto act2al vision and the latter into act2al colors' In an analogo2s 1anner, the activeintellect Goins the potential intellect, acts on it, and acts as (ell on 1an s potentialintelligible tho2ghts potential intelligible tho2ghts, (hich parallel potential colors,are sense perceptions, 1ediated by the i1aginative fac2lty and stored in the h21an1e1ory' The active intellect t2rns the potential intellect into act2al intellect andrenders potential tho2ghts act2ally intelligible to the h21an intellect'-6@ In other(ords, the active intellect, f2nctioning as a sort of light, activates both i1ages in the

so2l, (hich are potential tho2ghts, and the h21an potential intellect and it therebyenables the potential intellect to perceive act2al tho2ghts and to beco1e act2al itself'0esides e*hibiting, after a fashion, ho( the active intellect renders the h21an intellectact2al, the analogy serves the f2rther p2rpose of helping The1isti2s grasp ho( theactive intellect, altho2gh a transcendent being, can have been located by

-6/ The1isti2s, araphrase of the %e ani1a 9n' > above: . , -6;8@' There is a certainsi1ilarity bet(een The1isti2s position and the position of the %e intellect2 J2otedabove, p' //, since according to both, the active intellect Goins the potential h21anintellect at the beginning of the latter s develop1ent' -6; The1isti2s, araphrase ofthe %e ani1a -66' -6@ Ibid' . 8..'


53/601


/?

Aristotle in the h21an so2l< The active intellect is in itself one, b2t it breaks 2p andenters different h21an s2bGects, G2st as nat2ral light co1es fro1 a single so2rce andbreaks 2p in the different s2bGects receiving it'-6> The1isti2s deploys the otherAristotelian analogy too and describes the active intellect as standing to the potentialintellect as art stands to 1atter' He appends a J2alification, ho(ever< Art and theartisan re1ain o2tside the 1atter they act 2pon, (hereas the active intellect entersinto the potential intellect thro2gh and thro2gh' -67 Then The1isti2s p2rs2es theco1parison of the h21an potential intellect (ith 1atter along a different line' Theseveral fac2lties of the so2l, he (rites, 1ake 2p a hierarchy in (hich each level hasthe stat2s of 1atter in respect to the level above it, (hile the level above is thelo(er level s for1' The fac2lty of sense perception serves as 1atter for thei1aginative fac2lty, the i1agination as 1atter for the potential intellect, and thepotential intellect as 1atter for the active Qintellect ' In the last instance, the activeintellect beco1es one (ith the potential intellect in the (ay 1atter and for1constit2te a single entity' And 2nlike the inter1ediate levels of the so2l, (hich areboth 1atter in respect to (hat co1es ne*t and for1 in respect to (hat precedes, theactive intellect is not the 1atter of anything else' The active intellect is the so2l s for1in the tr2e sense, the final for1, the for1 of for1s, and in it the processc2l1inates'-6? The 2pshot is that the active intellect, or an aspect of the activeintellect, enters the potential h21an intellect, penetrates it thro2gh and thro2gh, (orksfro1 (ithin, lights 2p the potential intellect and also casts a light on i1ages stored inthe 1e1ory, and beco1es the for1 of the potential intellect' The active intellect isresponsible for the first a*io1s of tho2ght and perhaps conveys the1 directly to 1an'After the active intellect has Goined the h21an potential intellect, the co1po2nd of thet(o constr2cts a corp2s of intellect2al kno(ledge' 0y Goining (ith the potentialintellect and leading it to act2ality the active intellect effects the intellect in habit2,in (hich 2niversal intelligible tho2ghts and 2niversal scientific kno(ledgereside' -6 In early Arabic philosophy, both 3indi s treatise On Intellect and thetreatise On the So2l attrib2ted to orphyry 1aintain that a s2pernal beingco112nicates act2al tho2ght directly to the h21an intellect' 3indi offers the standard

arg21ent for the e*istence of an agent that prod2ces h21an tho2ght< Kheneverso1ething has a certain characteristic potentially, it can only be act2ali ed byso1ething else already possessing the given characteristic act2ally therefore theh21an so2l, (hich is potentially in possession of intelligible tho2ght, can be renderedact2al only thro2gh the first intellect' -6. 02t 3indi does not 1erely concl2de thatact2al

Ibid' -6; cf' above, p' -/' Ibid' ..' -6? Ibid' ..8-66' At several points, the Arabicdiffers slightly fro1 the !reek, and I have translated the latter' -6 Ibid' . '

-67 l6. -6>


54/601

Rasa il al83indl 9n' // above: ;>7 cf' ibid' ->>'


55/601

/


h21an tho2ght entails an act2al intellect as its ca2se' Act2al tho2ght occ2rs (hen theh21an so2l 1akes contact Qbdshara (ith intellect, that is, (ith for1s containingneither 1atter nor i1agination and first intellect is the intellect (ith (hich it 1akescontact' "irst intellect s2pplies 912fid: (hat the h21an so2l Qh21an so2l fro1 thefirst intellect' --6 Ho( the h21an intellect 1akes contact (ith s2pernal intellect and(hat role sense perception plays in the process is left 2ne*plained' The treatise On theSo2l attrib2ted to orphyry does not artic2late a f2ll theory of intellect b2t does affir1that tho2ght co1es to 1an directly fro1 a trans

Date post:	03-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	moreno-nourizadeh
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

Alfarabi, Avicenna, And Averroes, On Intellect

Documents