سرورق / Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā al-Sullam / 18 میں سے سبق 12
مقفل
The syllogism
Back to Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā al-SullamNorth-African path · level 2 · Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā al-Sullam · 18 میں سے سبق 12
The syllogism
The syllogism · al-qiyās · pp. 86–89
القِياسُ
مسودہ · نظرِ ثانی کا منتظر
Our own lessons with quotations from the print of Cairo 1324/1906 · translation by The Mantiqi, draft
About this text
Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā al-Sullam حاشِيَةُ الباجُورِيِّ عَلَى السُّلَّمِ
Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī (d. 1276/1860)
- Text
- Arabic: passages quoted in the lessons, transcribed by The Mantiqi from this print (the whole text is not reproduced): 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) View the scan
- Lessons follow
- The lessons are The Mantiqi's own explanations of the Sullam, verse by verse, following Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī; his words are quoted where they matter most.
- Translation
- The Mantiqi's own; a draft.
- Review
- Draft, awaiting review by Ustadh Muhammad Yusuf.
In Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī's words
Need another language? “Google Translate” opens a passage in Google's machine translation — handy for a first idea, but not checked by us. Or copy the text into a translator of your choice.
Quoted from the Arabic of 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.
Google Translate ↗p. 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.”
Google Translate ↗p. 89
The lesson
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”.
Terms
- 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
Examples
كُلُّ إِنْسانٍ حَيَوانٌ وَكُلُّ حَيَوانٍ جِسْمٌ
“every human is an animal, and every animal is a body”: the minor term falls under the middle
اپنا امتحان لیں
3 questions on this lesson. With 6 out of 10 or more (two stars) the next lesson opens.
سوال 1
Why, according to al-Bājūrī, does the poem begin the definition with inna?
“Because here one may hesitate over what qiyās means: whether it is the sense of uṣūl or that of logic.”
سوال 2
What is meant by the minor falling under the major?
“The minor term, contained in the minor premise, must fall under the middle term contained in the major premise.”
سوال 3
What objection does al-Bājūrī mention against the definition?
Such an argument yields the minor premise itself; the answer he prefers is that it is not called a syllogism, one of its premises being faulty.
اگلا سبق: The four figures
جاری رکھیں ←