Conclusiones

As a commentator on Aristotle‟s works, Averroes endeavored to reconcile Aristotle‟s system of thought with Islam. Averroes avers that there is no conflict between religion and philosophy; that the two are different but complimentary ways of accessing truth. He attempted this reconciliation trough his famous „Double Truth Theory‟ There are two ways of accessing truth, one is through religion and the other is through philosophy. Truth by religion is based on faith and as it were is not open to labouratory test of experimentation and as such it does not require any special training to understand and comprehend. On the other hand, the truth of philosophy is reserved for the few elites who are intellectually sophisticated and matured.

Still on the question of truth, Averroes avers that demonstrative truth cannot conflict with scripture (Qur‟an). This is because Islam is the ultimate truth and philosophy is the search for truth. According to Averroes, if Scripture conflicts with demonstrative truth, then such conflict must only be apparent. If and when there is a conflict between scripture and philosophy on the existence of any particular being, in such case, scripture should be interpreted allegorically.

Averroes opines that allegorical interpretation of scripture is common among the lawyers, theologians and the philosophers and that this has been accepted by all Muslims. The only point at which the Muslims disagree is the propriety of its use. Averroes avers that scripture is written in allegorical style to appeal to the emotions and imagination of the uneducated. According to Averroes, the scriptures have various meanings, both apparent and hidden to inspire study and suit diverse intelligences. Therefore, there is no much difference between theologians and philosophers for one to label the other irreligious. The allegorical interpretation of the scripture

110

by the theologian should not be seen as being infallible. The same applies to the apparent interpretation of scripture by the philosophers (Ogabo, 2014:463-464). However, Averroes placed philosophy over religion. Averroes is of the opinion that the philosopher must strip away the surface meaning to uncover the true or inner meaning of religious or scriptural truths. He further states that where the conclusions of philosophical reasoning conflict with religious tradition, such conflict is only a conflict with the apparent meaning of the scriptures. Be that as it may, Averroes believes that truth cannot conflict with truth. Thus the best of philosophy is consistent with the hidden meaning of the Koran (Lawhead, 2002:163).

Apart from being misunderstood and misinterpreted by his fellow Muslims, Averroes was equally misinterpreted by thirteenth-century Christians who opposed him as well as by those who admired him. These crop of Christians thought Averroes meant that some proposition X could be literary true in philosophy and at the same time its contradiction not X equally true in religion. This certainly, for them, makes the issue of truth problematic. According to Lawhead,

the faculty at the newly founded University of Paris seemed to enthusiastically endorse this mistaken interpretation in their attempts to adopt Averroes‟

explication of Aristotle. This group, known as the “Latin Averroists” was headed by Siger of Brabant. To embrace many Aristotelian doctrines that were contrary to Church teachings, they tended to shuffle philosophy and theology into separate conpartments without any attempt to relate the two. As opposed to this extreme double-truth theory Averroes was actually saying the truth could be expressed at different levels and in different ways, figuratively in religion and literary in philosophy. Apart from the misinterpretation imposed on him, what is revolutionary about Averroes is that this method of interpretation implies that the theology yields its authority to philosophy. The philosopher decided how revelation should be interpreted to make it consistent with philosophical reason (Lawhead, 2002:165).

4.0 Conclusion

111

Averroes‟ attempt to reconcile Aristotle‟s philosophy with Islam brought him into fierce opposition by Islamic theologians. His attempt to place philosophy above religion was also fiercely opposed. However, Averroes tried to escape this opposition by maintaining that the truths of philosophy and the truths of religion can be reconciled. This he tried by his use of his famous double truth theory. Your understanding of the thoughts of Averroes will help you to appreciate his enormous contributions to the development of Islamic philosophy in the medieval period.

5.0 Summary

The following are the summary of what you have learnt in this unit:

 That Averroes placed philosophy over and above religion and this earned him serious opposition from Islamic theologians and adherents.

 That Averroes tried to reconcile the truths of philosophy and the truths of religion through his double truth theory.

Self-assessment Exercise

Articulate and explain the differences between Avicenna and the Koran‟s idea of the immortality of the soul and the creation of matter.

6.0 References/Further Readings

Hyman, Arthur (2010) Philosophy in the Middle Ages: The Christian, Islamic and Jewish Traditions. New York: Hackett Publishing.

Steinschneider, M. (1893) Die Hebraeischen Uebersetzungen des Mittelalters und die Juden als Dolmetscher. Trans. Nelson, S. Berlin: Kommissionsverlag dwes Bibliographischen Bureaus.

Zonta, M. (2006) "Al-farabi's Long Commentary on Aristotle's Categoriae in Hebrew and Arabic: A Critical Edition and English Translation of the Newly-found Extant Fragments", Studies in Arabic and Islamic Culture. Ed. Abrahamov, B. Vol. 2. Ramat Gan: Bar-llan University Press.

Tutor Marked assignment

Explain the Double Truth Theory of Averroes.

112

Answer: in his idea of the double truth theory, Averroes avers that there is no conflict between religion and philosophy; that the two are different but complimentary ways of accessing truth.

He attempted this reconciliation trough his famous „Double Truth Theory‟. This theory means that there are two ways of accessing truth, one is through religion and the other is through philosophy. Truth by religion is based on faith and as it were is not open to labouratory test of experimentation and as such it does not require any special training to understand and comprehend. On the other hand, the truth of philosophy is reserved for the few elites who are intellectually sophisticated and matured.

113

MOSES MAIMONIDES en.wikipedia.org

MODULE 4: UNIT 4 MOSES MAIMONIDES

Contents

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs) 3.0 Main Content

3.1 Maimonides‟ Short Biography 3.1 Maimonides‟ Epistemology 3.2 Maimonides‟ Metaphysics 4.0 Conclusion

5.0 Summary

6.0 References/ Further Readings 1.0 Introduction

114

Maimonides as a medieval philosopher also contributed his quota to the two basic philosophical discussions of the medieval period which are (a) The attempt to reconcile “faith”

and “reason” and (b) The efforts to rationally prove the existence of God. However, one may find it difficult if not impossible to understand the thought pattern of Maimonides without a background knowledge of Aristotle and Avicenna. In this unit therefore, you shall be exposed to the philosophical thoughts of Moses Maimonides.

2.0 Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs) By the end of this unit, you will be able to:

 Understand and explain Maimonides‟ reason for thinking that there is really no conflict between philosophy and religion.

 Understand and explain Maimonides‟ arguments for the existence of God which are Aristotelian in nature

3.0 Main Contents