المَسارُ المَغارِبِيّ · المُسْتَوَى 2 · Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā al-Sullam · الدَّرْسُ 12 مِنْ 18

The syllogism

The syllogism · al-qiyās · ص 86–89

القِياسُ

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

(قَوْلُهُ إِنَّ القِياسَ إِلَخْ) إِنَّما أَتَى بِإِنَّ المُفِيدَةِ لِلتَّوْكِيدِ لِأَنَّ المَقامَ مَقامُ أَنْ يُتَرَدَّدَ فِي مَعْنَى القِياسِ: هَلْ هُوَ المَعْنَى الأُصُولِيُّ أَوِ المَنْطِقِيُّ.

(His words “the syllogism is …”): he uses inna, which gives emphasis, because here one may hesitate over what qiyās means: whether it is the sense of the jurists' legal theory (uṣūl) or that of logic.

ص 86

بَلِ المُرادُ أَنَّ الأَصْغَرَ الَّذِي اشْتَمَلَتْ عَلَيْهِ الصُّغْرَى يَجِبُ انْدِراجُهُ فِي الأَوْسَطِ الَّذِي اشْتَمَلَتْ عَلَيْهِ الكُبْرَى، وَذٰلِكَ كَما فِي قَوْلِكَ: كُلُّ إِنْسانٍ حَيَوانٌ، وَكُلُّ حَيَوانٍ جِسْمٌ.

Rather, what is meant is that the minor term, contained in the minor premise, must fall under the middle term contained in the major premise, as when you say: “Every human is an animal, and every animal is a body.”

ص 89

الدَّرْس

The Sullam defines the as a statement composed of from which another statement follows of itself. Al-Bājūrī notices that the poem opens the with inna, a particle of emphasis, and explains why: a reader might hesitate whether qiyās here means the of the jurists in uṣūl al-fiqh or the syllogism of , and the emphasis settles it.

He goes through the parts of the and the objections to them. One is that “every human is an animal, and every animal is an animal” yields the itself; the answer he prefers denies that such an counts as a at all, because one of its is faulty, having the same term on both sides.

On the poem's rule that the must “fall under” the , he explains what is meant: the , contained in the minor premise, must fall under the contained in the major premise — as in “every human is an animal, and every animal is a body”.

المُصْطَلَحات

القِياسُ al-qiyās: syllogism: propositions from which another follows of itself
الحَدُّ الأَوْسَطُ al-ḥadd al-awsaṭ: the middle term, repeated in both premises
الانْدِراجُ al-indirāj: falling under

الأَمْثِلَة

كُلُّ إِنْسانٍ حَيَوانٌ وَكُلُّ حَيَوانٍ جِسْمٌ
“every human is an animal, and every animal is a body”: the minor term falls under the middle

اخْتَبِرْ نَفْسَك

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

السؤال 1
Why, according to al-Bājūrī, does the poem begin the definition with inna?
السؤال 2
What is meant by the minor falling under the major?
السؤال 3
What objection does al-Bājūrī mention against the definition?

الدَّرْسُ التّالِي: The four figures

تابِع ←