LISANULARAB - ض - ARAB TONGUE (for the Revival of Arabic and the Arabic Language Sciences)  

Go Back   LISANULARAB - ض - ARAB TONGUE (for the Revival of Arabic and the Arabic Language Sciences) > Lisanularab Forums > Arabic Skills (Highly Advanced) > Textual Reading, Analysis & Interpretation
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-05-2008, 05:01 PM
Ibn Ajiba Ibn Ajiba is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 26
The role of Mantiq in Arabic sciences

as salam alaykum sidi Amr,

As you know, many of the more detailed (and some intermediate) works that deal with grammar, morphology, etc, employ the vocabulary of Mantiq, and argue for or against any given position using logic and its nomenclature.

Would you not agree that this reality compels the western student (or arab for that matter) to learn Mantiq in Arabic, so as to navigate these works and take full benefit? If so, what would be an easy way to tackle that? Would studying the Sullam or al-Isaghuji suffice for learning the Istilahat that one would encounter in the works of grammar?

What is the easiest way for someone to get around this if they do not wish to go into in depth studies of logic?

On a similar note, do you know of any books that provide a good comparison between the Mantiqi terms in arabic works, and their English equivalent, eg: Mutabaqa=congruence, etc?

Jazakum Allah khaira
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-06-2008, 07:25 AM
Amr Amr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,225
Wa 'alaykum as-salam warahmatullahi wabarakatuh

Very important questions, masha Allah.

The primary role that Mantiq played in the Arabic and Islamic tradition was to help (1) clarify concepts (or tasawwurat) through definition (whether by way of hadd or rasm) and (2) clarify the process of passing judgments on these concepts after they have been clearly defined. This is in line with the principle that states:
الْحُكْمُ عَلَى شَيْءٍ فَرْعٌ عَنْ تَصَوُّرِهِ (Passing judgment on something is contingent and dependent on its prior conception).
So, before you could say anything useful about the al-Fa-'il (doer or agent), for example, you had to have provided a very clear conception of it otherwise you would have been passing judgment on an unknown or ill-conceptualised object. A clear conception came from providing a clear definition. Only then could you pass judgments (or ahkam) on the object such as whether, for example, the al-Fa-'il is marfu' or mentioned or dropped in the sentence, etc. and how these judgments were arrived at.

Hence, some scholars invested a lot of time and effort in trying to arrive at the most jami' mani' (inclusive and exlusive) definitions possible, that is, definitions that were broad enough to include everything that must be included under the concept of the object defined, and at the same time narrow enough to exclude everything that must be excluded from it. At the same time they would provide arguments for why the al-Fa-'il, for example, is marfu' or why it must always be mentioned in the sentence, and so on. These latter points constituted the judgments passed on the concept that had been defined prior to this.

Mantiq, thus, served to safeguard the intellect from erring in the same way that Nahw served to safeguard the tongue from erring, and this is how it is stated in the traditional Mantiq literature. Mantiq was seen to safeguard our intellects from erroneous thinking in essentially two areas (a) how to formulate a valid definition (called "al-Qawl al-Sharih") and (b) how to formulate a vaild argumentation or piece of reasoning that involved deriving a valid conclusion from its basic premises (called "al-Qiyas" = Syllogism, or more generally "al-Hujjah" = Demonstration or Argument, of which al-Qiyas is a part). Everything else in Mantiq was seen as secondary and merely there to serve these two main objectives (or maqasid).

While Mantiq was seen as a useful tool in the Arabic and Islamic disciplines, its over-and excessive use in these disciplines was generally frowned upon as it would cloud and adulterate the character of the original discipline in which a particular work was written. The general attitude seemed to have been that Mantiq was meant to be used judiciously and only when necessary, and not liberally without any reservation, otherwise it would render the work unintelligible except to logicians and those of the scholars who are adept at it. It was therefore seen is a deficiency in a work should it contain too much Mantiq, and could well compromise and jeopardise its chances from enjoying wide circulation. This was exactly the charge that was laid against the al-Muqaddimah al-Juzuliyyah on Nahw which served as a precursor to the later but more popular al-Muqaddimah al-Ajurrumiyyah. Certain disciplines such as Nahw in their then current state have already been criticised for being inaccessible to the wider public, and the excessive use of Mantiq has just added fuel to an already feircely burning fire. Obviously, works which tended to be more dialectical or polemical in nature because they were written with adversaries in mind or because they defended particular stances or viewpoints, readily and liberally made use of Mantiq in which case its use was seen as essential. In fact, certain writers almost always wrote in a polemical style because of the nature of the subjects and disciplines that they predominantly occupied themselves with. It, therefore, follows that while Mantiq (or its excessive use) suits certain disciplines it does not suit certain others. Nevertheless, you will find works containing Mantiq when by right they should not, but which are nevertheless important works for students to study and become conversant with. While you might be able to skip some of the Mantiq-orientated passages without a major loss to the general message that is being conveyed this cannot be done with certain other passages the comprehension of which is entirely steeped in being familiar with Mantiq. So I would agree to the usefulness if not essentialness of studying Mantiq for the purpose of filling in the necessary background when it comes to reading and understanding certain passages from the literature of our Islamic and Arabic literature.

I hope that with this response I was able to provide more perspective on the issue of Mantiq and the role it plays in our Islamic and Arabic legacy.

I hope in later posts to address some of the other questions which you have raised in your post, and upload a chart which basically summarises the al-Sullam al-Munawraq of al-Akhdari in its entirety, and which provides a good overview of the subject-matter of Mantiq, insha Allah.

If you have any questions concerning my response in this post, then don't hesitate to ask.

Last edited by Amr : 03-18-2008 at 10:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-06-2008, 07:57 PM
salaam92 salaam92 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amr View Post
I hope in later posts to address some of the other questions which you have raised in your post, and upload a chart which basically summarises the al-Sullam al-Munawraq of al-Akhdari in its entirety, and which provides a good overview of the subject-matter of Mantiq, insha Allah.
I would really love to see such a chart uploaded onto this forum!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-09-2008, 10:41 AM
Amr Amr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by salaam92 View Post
I would really love to see such a chart uploaded onto this forum!
Here you go, insha Allah (see the uploaded attachment). I'm not sure if I'll find time in the short term to explain the chart as a whole. So much to do, and so little time. Nevertheless, check it out, and if you have any questions, then don't hesistate to ask. I had also started a translation on the al-Sullam al-Munawraq a long time ago, and then got busy with some other work, and then left it. I revisited it last night again, and I realised that I've translated about 105 verses, and there is not much to go. So, if Allah permits, I should be able to finish it off quite soon, and then I'll make it available on the forum.
Attached Files
File Type: doc جدول المنطق.doc (60.5 KB, 120 views)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-09-2008, 06:20 PM
salaam92 salaam92 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9
I would greatly appreciate it! BarakAllahu feekum for this attachment and the translation.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-21-2008, 06:37 AM
mushrraf mushrraf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 149
الكلّيّات

Assalamualekum!

I am actually new here and I am very much happy that Muslims brothers are serving hard to take the Islamic Ullom wa Funnon to its best.

I am also learning the Arabic and Islamic Uloom now-a-days and I am also studying Ilm-ul-Mantiq and I want to clear somethings here.

I have read the concept of الكلئ الطبعئ ؤ الكلئ المنطقئ الكلئ العقلئ

Actually I am not getting what is the difference between الكلئ النتطقئ الكلئ العقلئ?

SO if someone, please, explain it to me!

Regards
Mushrraf
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-21-2008, 04:20 PM
Amr Amr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by mushrraf View Post
Assalamualekum!

I am actually new here and I am very much happy that Muslims brothers are serving hard to take the Islamic Ullom wa Funnon to its best.

I am also learning the Arabic and Islamic Uloom now-a-days and I am also studying Ilm-ul-Mantiq and I want to clear somethings here.

I have read the concept of الكلئ الطبعئ ؤ الكلئ المنطقئ الكلئ العقلئ

Actually I am not getting what is the difference between الكلئ النتطقئ الكلئ العقلئ?

SO if someone, please, explain it to me!

Regards
Mushrraf
Wa 'alaykum as-salam warahmatullahi wabarakatuh

When you say: الإنسان كُلّي (A human is a universal), then you mean that "human" is something that can be said of a number of objects that all share the same particular reality (namely, that of being a rational being), e.g. Zayd, Amr, Bakr, Zaynab, Fatimah, John, Jack, etc.

Now, when you consider الإنسان by itself without reference to it being a كُلّي (like in the sentence above), then it is known as a كلّي طبيعيّ (natural universal) because it refers to the reality, essence or nature (طبيعة) of الإنسان (human), which is that of being a rational being.

Furthermore, when you consider the concept of كلّي (universal) by itself without reference to what it can be applied to, and as it is understood in the science of Logic, which is something that can be conceptualised in a number of things whether or not they share in the same essence, and not merely in one specific thing. Because the concept of كلّي is specifically studied in Logic or المنطق it is called الكليّ المنطقيّ .

Finally, the concept of الإنسان above when combined to the concept of كُلّيّ (in the logical sense) such that it means a human (rational being) together with the quality of being universal at the same time, then it becomes known as الكلي العقْليّ (rational unversal) because it is in reason or the intellect / mind that الإنسان is conceptualised with the quality of being universal. In other words, it is reason or the intellect / mind that makes this connection between الإنسان (human) and كليّ (universal).

I hope that explains it.

والله أعلم
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-21-2008, 06:49 PM
mushrraf mushrraf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 149
As-salam alaykum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh

Just to confirm. It means that just like there is a super set whose members ( AFRAAD ) are actually sets ( with the fact that super set is also a set ) الكليّ المنطقيّ is actually كُلّي of كُلّيات

Regards
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-21-2008, 07:44 PM
Amr Amr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by mushrraf View Post
As-salam alaykum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh

Just to confirm. It means that just like there is a super set whose members ( AFRAAD ) are actually sets ( with the fact that super set is also a set ) الكليّ المنطقيّ is actually كُلّي of كُلّيات

Regards
Wa 'alaykum as-salamu warahmatullahi wabarakatuh

الكلّي المنطقيّ is simply كلّي as it is studied in المنطق (Logic) and hence the name: الكلي المنطقي . When you open any book on Logic, you will find a discussion on the "universal" (كلّي) and its opposite the "particular" (جزئيّ) . It is this كلّي that is meant by الكليّ المنطقي because it is in المنطق that it is studied. In other words, الكليّ المنطقيّ is really the word "كليّ" , whereas الكلي الطبيعي would الإنسان , for example, and الكلي العقلي the combined meaning of الإنسان كليّ . It would therefore appear that الكلي المنطقي can never be other than the word "كليّ" , whreas the other two can be other things, except that the الكلي العقلي is going have something that is combined with the meaning of كليّ . So the الكلي العقليّ is not only كليّ but a class or genus combined with the idea of كليّ .

This is how I understand it.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-22-2008, 09:33 AM
humayunrasheed humayunrasheed is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 5
Here is what I understand. Please correct the arabic mistakes also
اذا رایت الفرس فی الحقیقة فھو الکلی الطبعی لانھ موجود بالطبع اما یعرف او لا‘ ھھنا معنی الطبع لیس بمادة فقط لان الوجود یتحقق بغیر مادة کالنور و الصوت
اذا فتحت کتابا لفھم الفرس ففھمھ الکلی المنطقی لان المنطق یبحث بھ نحو انھ متحرک بالارادة و قائم بالقوائم الاربعھ و صاہل و غیر ذٰلک
اذا فھمت ان الکلی المنطقی موجود فی الحقیقھ او الکلی المنطقی ھو ذٰلک فی الطبع و ما حکمھ فھٰذا ھو الکلی العقلی کالفرس حیوان
فیجوز علم الکلی العقلی بطریقین اما من الکلی الطبعی او بالکلی المنطقی۔ فشئ موجود فی الحقیقھ ای بالطبع اوّلا‘ ثم الانسان یعرف احوالہ و اوصافھ و یترتب ھٰذہ المعلومات و یقرر حدہ لبحث باحوالہ و فروعہ و ینتقل ھٰذہ المعلومات فی الالفاظ مع القوانین فھٰذا الکلی المنطقی‘ ثم اذا یحکم فھو الکلی العقلی۔ قد مر امثالھ
الکلی المنطقی یقسم فی الانواع و یقوم بالفصول و لا یقسم العقلی و لا الطبعی۔ فالکلی الطبعی ھو موجود لحصول العلم‘ و اذا یبحث یبحث بالکلی المنطقی۔ الکلی العقلی لیس بشئ الا لحکم‘ فالفرس موجود فی الحقیقھ و نعلمھ فی المنطق ثم المنطق ینطق ان یجوز کونھ نوع الحیوان فالعقل یحکم- فالکلی المنطقی یعلم جواب ای شئ و ماھو‘ و الکلی العقلی یحمل حکم فقط کالفرس حیوان‘ و الکلی الطبعی ھو شئ اصلا-
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.