المَسارُ المَغارِبِيّ · المُسْتَوَى 2 · Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā al-Sullam · الدَّرْسُ 2 مِنْ 18

May one study logic? The three opinions

Introduction · ḥukm al-ishtighāl bi-l-manṭiq · ص 35

حُكْمُ الاشْتِغالِ بِالمَنْطِقِ

مسوّدة · بانتظار المراجعة

دُرُوسُنا الخاصَّةُ مَعَ نُقُولٍ مِنْ طَبْعَةِ Cairo 1324/1906 · تَرْجَمَةُ The Mantiqi، مُسَوَّدَة

عَنْ هٰذا النَّصّ

Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā al-Sullam حاشِيَةُ الباجُورِيِّ عَلَى السُّلَّمِ

Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī (d. 1276/1860)

النَّصّ: العَرَبِيَّة: المَقاطِعُ المَنْقُولَةُ فِي الدُّرُوس، نَقَلَها The Mantiqi مِنْ هٰذِهِ الطَّبْعَة (وَلا يُنْقَلُ النَّصُّ كُلُّه): Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā matn al-Sullam, with al-Anbābī's taqrīr in the margin, al-Maṭbaʿa al-Azhariyya al-Miṣriyya (2nd printing), Cairo 1324/1906, pp. 26–112 (passages) اعْرِضِ الصُّورَة
تَتْبَعُ الدُّرُوس: الدُّرُوسُ شَرْحُ The Mantiqi الخاصُّ لِلسُّلَّمِ بَيْتًا بَيْتًا، عَلَى أَثَرِ Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī؛ وَيُنْقَلُ كَلامُهُ حَيْثُ يَكُونُ أَهَمّ.
التَّرْجَمَة: مِنْ عَمَلِ The Mantiqi؛ مُسَوَّدَة.
المُراجَعَة: مُسَوَّدَة، بِانْتِظارِ مُراجَعَةِ Ustadh Muhammad Yusuf.

بِكَلامِ Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī

تَحْتاجُ لُغَةً أُخْرَى؟ «تَرْجَمَةُ Google» تَفْتَحُ المَقْطَعَ فِي التَّرْجَمَةِ الآلِيَّةِ مِنْ Google — مُفِيدَةٌ لِفِكْرَةٍ أُولَى، لٰكِنَّنا لَمْ نُراجِعْها. أَوِ انْسَخِ النَّصَّ إِلَى مُتَرْجِمٍ تَخْتارُه.

مَنْقُولٌ مِنَ النَّصِّ بِاللُّغَةِ العَرَبِيَّة فِي Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā matn al-Sullam, with al-Anbābī's taqrīr in the margin, Cairo 1324/1906

وَاعْلَمْ أَنَّ عِلْمَ المَنْطِقِ قِسْمانِ: أَحَدُهُما ما هُوَ خالٍ عَنْ ضَلالاتِ الفَلاسِفَةِ المُكَفِّرَةِ وَغَيْرِها، كَالمَذْكُورِ فِي هٰذا المَتْنِ وَمُخْتَصَرِ السَّنُوسِيِّ وَإِيساغُوجِي وَمُخْتَصَرِ ابْنِ عَرَفَةَ وَتَآلِيفِ الكاتِبِيِّ وَالخُونَجِيِّ وَالسَّعْدِ وَغَيْرِهِمْ مِنَ المُتَأَخِّرِينَ، وَهٰذا القِسْمُ لا خِلافَ فِي جَوازِ الاشْتِغالِ بِهِ، بَلْ هُوَ فَرْضُ كِفايَةٍ عَلَى أَهْلِ كُلِّ إِقْلِيمٍ، لِأَنَّهُ يَتَوَقَّفُ عَلَيْهِ رَدُّ الشُّكُوكِ فِي عِلْمِ الكَلامِ.

Know that the science of logic is of two kinds. The first is free of the errors of the philosophers that amount to unbelief and of others, like what is in this matn, in al-Sanūsī's Mukhtaṣar, the Īsāghūjī, Ibn ʿArafa's Mukhtaṣar, and the works of al-Kātibī, al-Khūnajī, al-Saʿd [al-Taftāzānī] and other later scholars. About this kind there is no disagreement that one may study it; rather it is a communal obligation (farḍ kifāya) on the people of every region, because answering doubts in the science of kalām depends on it.

ص 35

وَثانِيهِما ما لَيْسَ خالِيًا عَنْ تِلْكَ الضَّلالاتِ كَالمَذْكُورِ فِي كُتُبِ المُتَقَدِّمِينَ، وَهٰذا القِسْمُ هُوَ الَّذِي فِيهِ الخِلافُ.

The second is not free of those errors, like what is in the books of the early logicians; and it is this kind that is disputed.

ص 35

الدَّرْس

The Sullam gives three opinions on studying : Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ and al-Nawawī forbade it; some said one should learn it; and the “well-known and sound” view is that it is allowed for one of sound mind who knows the Sunna and the Book.

Al-Bājūrī makes the question precise by dividing into two. The first kind is logic free of the philosophers' errors that amount to unbelief: the logic of the Sullam itself, of al-Sanūsī's Mukhtaṣar, the , Ibn ʿArafa's Mukhtaṣar, and of al-Kātibī, al-Khūnajī and al-Taftāzānī. Here, he says, there is no disagreement: it is allowed, and even a communal obligation (farḍ kifāya) on the people of every region, because answering doubts in kalām depends on it.

The second kind is the of the early books, mixed with those philosophical doctrines; it is this kind that the three opinions are about. So the verses of the Sullam, read with al-Bājūrī, are not a warning against the Sullam: the logic it teaches is of the first kind. He adds that the obligation holds only where good minds and sound natures cannot do without it, and that is why the Companions, their Followers and the great imams did not need it.

المُصْطَلَحات

فَرْضُ الكِفايَةِ farḍ al-kifāya: a communal obligation: if enough people do it, the rest are free of it
ضَلالاتُ الفَلاسِفَةِ ḍalālāt al-falāsifa: the errors of the philosophers
المُتَأَخِّرُونَ al-mutaʾakhkhirūn: the later logicians, from the 7th/13th century on

الأَمْثِلَة

وَالقَوْلَةُ المَشْهُورَةُ الصَّحِيحَةْ * جَوازُهُ لِكامِلِ القَرِيحَةْ
the well-known and sound view: it is allowed for one of sound mind (the Sullam)

اخْتَبِرْ نَفْسَك

عَدَدُ الأَسْئِلَةِ عَلَى هٰذا الدَّرْسِ 3. بِسِتَّةٍ مِنْ عَشَرَةٍ فَأَكْثَرَ (نَجْمَتَيْن) يُفْتَحُ الدَّرْسُ التّالِي.

السؤال 1
How does al-Bājūrī divide the science of logic in this question?
السؤال 2
What does he say about studying the first kind, such as the Sullam?
السؤال 3
Why does he call it a communal obligation?

الدَّرْسُ التّالِي: Conception, assent, and the names of the two roads

تابِع ←