جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "double truth" در نشریات گروه "فلسفه و کلام"

Averroists are accused of believing the «Double Truth» theory، based on which a proposition might be true in religion، and، at the same time، its contradict is philosophically true. In this article، at first، the history and significance of this theory is investigated، second، the Averroes'' view about the post-mortem existence of the soul is studied، and، third، through investigating his views، in his philosophical and theological works، we show that his points of view on material intellect and its being common and single for all human beings in the afterlife (unity of Intellect) in his Philosophical works do not contradict his views on post- mortem existence of individual souls in his Theological works.

The purpose of the present paper is to demonstrate that Ibn Rushd considers a single truth for the intellect and religion but approaches it following two methods. The historical background of this discussion goes back to the thinkers before Ibn Rushd. In his period, he learnt about the dominance of the spirit of imitation over scholars, the prevalence of dialectic Kalam, and enmity against philosophy. Therefore, in order to legitimize philosophy and rationalization, he wrote the book Fasl al-maqal fi ma bayn al-hikmah wal shari’at min al-ittisal; in order to modify dialectic Kalam, he wrote al-Kashf an minahij al-adillah fi ‘aqayid al-halat; and in order to correct the existing philosophy, he wrote Tahafut al-tahafat and some summaries of and commentaries on Aristotle’s works. In his Fasl al-maqal, he demonstrated that teaching and studying philosophy is a Shar’i (religious) obligation, and the end of philosophy and religion is attaining the knowledge of existents in order to attain the knowledge of Almighty God. Each human being, in line with his own human nature, learns about Almighty Truth and the three-fold principles of Islam following a different method of address, discussion, or demonstration, and there is no opposition between the data of the intellect and religion. However, some people called the Latin Averroes and their followers, because of the needs of the Western Christian society of that time and their lack of knowledge of Ibn Rushd’s writings, merely took his commentaries on Aristotle’s works in consideration and, based on their wrong perception of Ibn Rushd’s thoughts, concluded that he believed in two different realities about religion and the intellect. The writer of this paper has tried to reveal the falsity of this idea based on the books and other texts written by Ibn Rushd himself.