Sie sind auf Seite 1von 4

1

DoctrineofDoubleTruth

SigerofBrabant(123582)

MayhaveadvocatedtheDoctrineofDoubleTruth:apropositioncanbetruein philosophy&falseintheology,&viceversa.Thisviewwasalsoattributedby variouswesternthinkers,mistakenly,toAverroes.Sigerwascriticizedforsuch viewsin1270&againintheCondemnationsof1277,whenhewascalledbefore FrenchInquisitorialCourtofSimonduVal.Hedefendedhimselfin1270ongrounds thathewassimplyreportingAristotleadefensetreatedasmeresubterfugeby conservativeAugustiniantheologianslikeSt.Bonaventure(b.Tuscany,12211274), whowere(unlikeThomasAquinas)opposednotonlytoAverroismbutalsoto Aristotelianism,whichBonaventuretooktobesynonymouswithAverroism. Averroesactuallyendorsedadifferentview:Oneandthesametruthisunderstood clearlyinphilosophyandexpressedallegoricallyintheologye.g.,metaphorical imageryoftheKoranexpresstruthinmannerintelligibletoordinaryman,while philosophicalanalysisaddressedtothelearned.[CompareAverroes'political theory,withtheologians(thedialecticalclass)situatedbetweentherulers(the demonstrativeclass)andthemasses(therhetoricalclass)intheircapacityfor understanding.]ButeventhoughAverroesneveractuallyendorsesideaof contradictorytruthsintworealms,heclearlydoessubordinatetheologyto philosophy.(Seeexcerptbelow.)

Averroes(112698),OntheHarmonyofReligion&Philosophy

(ExcerptreflectingAverroesversionoftheDoctrineofDoubleTruth) (tr.byG.F.Hourani[London:Luzac&Co.,1961], inA.Hyman&J.J.Walsh,PhilosophyintheMiddleAges[Hackett,1973]) Demonstrativetruthandscripturaltruthcannotconflict. Nowsincethisreligionistrueandsummonstothestudywhichleadsto knowledgeoftheTruth,weintheMuslimcommunityknowdefinitelythat demonstrativestudydoesnotleadto[conclusions]conflictingwithwhatScripture hasgivenus;fortruthdoesnotopposetruthbutaccordswithitandbearswitness toit. IftheapparentmeaningofScriptureconflictswithdemonstrativeconclusionsit mustbeinterpretedallegorically,i.e.,metaphorically. Thisbeingso,wheneverdemonstrativestudyleadstoanymannerofknowledge aboutanybeing,thatbeingisinevitablyeitherunmentionedormentionedin Scripture.Ifitisunmentionedthereisnocontradiction....IfScripturespeaksaboutit, theapparentmeaningofthewordsinevitablyeitheraccordsorconflictswiththe conclusionsofdemonstrationsaboutit.Ifthis[apparentmeaning]accordsthereis noargument.Ifitconflictsthereisacallforallegoricalinterpretationofit.The

2 meaningofallegoricalinterpretationis:extensionofthesignificanceofan expressionfromrealtometaphoricalsignificance,withoutforsakingthereinthe standardmetaphoricalpracticesofArabic,suchascallingathingbythenameof somethingresemblingitoracauseorconsequenceoraccompanimentofit.... Thedoublemeaninghasbeengiventosuitpeoplesdiverseintelligence.The apparentcontradictionsaremeanttostimulatethelearnedtodeeperstudy. ThereasonwhywehavereceivedaScripturewithbothanapparentandan innermeaningliesinthediversityofpeoplesnaturalcapacitiesanddifferenceof theirinnatedispositionswithregardtoassent.Thereasonwhywehavereceivedin Scripturetextswhoseapparentmeaningscontradicteachotherisinordertodraw theattentionofthosewhoarewellgroundedinsciencetotheinterpretationwhich reconcilesthem..... Onthequestionoftheworld,theancientphilosophersagreewiththeAsharitesthat itisoriginatedandcoevalwithtime.ThePeripatetics[EditorialNote:Aristotleand hisfollowers,sonamedforAristotle'sreputationforwalkingaboutthegroundsof theLyceumwhilediscussingphilosophy]onlydisagreewiththeAsharitesandthe Platonistsinholdingthatpasttimeisinfinite.Thisdifferenceisinsufficientto justifyachargeofunbelief. [EditorialNote:TheAsharites,foundedbyAlAshari(873935),wereagroupof theologiansemerginginIslamicworldtowardsendofninthcentury,knownfor theirrelianceonGreekphilosophicalargumentsforexplicationofscripturaltexts andresolutionofscripturalinconsistencies.Amongotherthings,theybelieved,like ancientneoplatonists,thattheworldwascreated,buthadnobeginningintime. LiketheMutazilitesarivalandslightlyolder(eighthcentury)groupof philosophicallyorientedIslamictheologians,theywerealsoconcernedaboutthe possibilityofreconcilingGod'somnisciencewithexerciseoffreewillbyhumans. ButunliketheMutaziliteswho(likeCiceroandtheEpicureans)placedhighvalue ontheconceptoffreewill,theAshariteswerewillingtoemphasizeGod's omnipotenceevenattheexpenseoffreewill.Ontheirview,whichwascloserto Islamicorthodoxyonthispoint,Godisthedirectcauseofeverythingthathappens intheworld.("Whydidthishappen?""Godwilledit.")Eventheorderweperceive tooperateinalawlikemannerinnatureisjustaproductofourownattitudes& expectations("custom",adah).Toexplainourintuitionsabouttheexistenceoffree will,theAsharitepositionisreminiscentofthatoftheStoics,formulatingadoctrine of"acquisition",underwhichhumanbeingscanchoosetoactwillinglyin accordancewithGod'swill,ordosounwillingly.Buteitherway,we'restill compelledtoactasGoddictates.MoralitycomesinwhenGodrewardsusforgoing alongwithhiswillgraciously,andpunishesuswhenwedosoonlywith reservations.] Concerningthequestionwhethertheworldispreeternalorcameinto existence,thedisagreementbetweentheAsharitetheologiansandtheancient philosophersisinmyviewalmostresolvableintoadisagreementabout naming....Fortheyagreethattherearethreeclassesofbeings...

3 Oneextremeisabeingwhichisbroughtintoexistencefromsomethingother thanitselfandbysomething,i.e.,byanefficientcauseandfromsomematter;andit, i.e.,itsexistence,isprecededbytime.Thisisthestatusofbodieswhosegeneration isapprehendedbysense,e.g.,thegenerationofwater,air,earth,animals,plants,and soon.Theoppositeextremetothisisabeingwhichisnotmadefromorbyanything andnotprecededbytime;andheretooallmembersofbothschoolsagreeinnaming itpreeternal.Thisbeingisapprehendedbydemonstration;itisGod,Blessedand Exalted,WhotheisMaker,Giverofbeing,andSustaineroftheuniverse;mayHebe praisedandHisPowerExalted! Theclassofbeingwhichisbetweenthesetwoextremesisthatwhichisnot madefromanythingandnotprecededbytime,butwhichisbroughtintoexistence bysomething,i.e.,byanagent.Thisistheworldasawhole.Nowtheyallagreeon thepresenceofthesethreecharactersintheworld.Forthetheologiansadmitthat timedoesnotprecedeit,orratherthisisanecessaryconsequenceforthemsince timeaccordingtothemissomethingwhichaccompaniesmotionandbodies.They alsoagreewiththeancientsintheviewthatfuturetimeisinfiniteandlikewise futurebeing.Theyonlydisagreeaboutpasttimeandpastbeing:thetheologians holdthatitisfinite(thisisthedoctrineofPlatoandhisfollowers),whileAristotle andhisschoolholdthatitisinfinite,asisthecasewithfuturetime. Thusitisclearthatthislastbeing[theworldasawhole]bearsaresemblance bothtothebeingwhichisreallygenerated[thefirstkindphysicalobjects]andto thepreeternalBeing[thesecondkindGod].Sothosewhoaremoreimpressed withitsresemblancetothepreeternalthanitsresemblancetotheoriginatedname itpreeternal,whilethosewhoaremoreimpressedwithitsresemblancetothe originatednameitoriginated.Butintruthitisneitherreallyoriginatednorreally preeternal,sincethereallyoriginatedisnecessarilyperishableandthereallypre eternalhasnocause.... Thusthedoctrinesabouttheworldarenotsoveryfarapartfromeachother thatsomeofthemshouldbecalledirreligiousandothersnot.Forthistohappen, opinionsmustbedivergentintheextreme,i.e.,contrariessuchasthetheologians supposetoexistonthisquestion;i.e.,[theyhold]thatthenamespreeternityand comingintoexistenceasappliedtotheworldasawholearecontraries.Butitis nowclearfromwhatwehavesaidthatthisisnotthecase. Anyhow,theapparentmeaningofScriptureisthattherewasabeingandtime beforeGodcreatedthepresentbeingandtime.Thusthetheologiansinterpretation isallegoricalanddoesnotcommandunanimousagreement.... TextsofScripturefallintothreekindswithrespecttotheexcusabilityoferror.[1] Textswhichmustbetakenintheirapparentmeaningbyeveryone.Sincethe meaningcanbeunderstoodplainlybydemonstrative,dialecticalandrhetorical methodsalike,nooneisexcusedfortheerrorofinterpretingthesetexts allegorically.[2]Textswhichmustbetakenintheirapparentmeaningbythelower classesandinterpretedallegoricallybythedemonstrativeclass.Itisinexcusablefor thelowerclassestointerpretthemallegoricallyorforthedemonstrativeclassto takethemintheirapparentmeaning.[3]Textswhoseclassificationunderthe previousheadingsisuncertain.Errorinthismatterbythedemonstrativeclassis excused....

4 Withregardtothingswhichbyreasonoftheirreconditecharacterareonly knowablebydemonstration,GodhasbeengracioustothoseofHisservantswho havenoaccesstodemonstration,onaccountoftheirnatures,habits,orlackof facilitiesforeducation:Hehascoinedforthemimagesandlikenessesofthese things,andsummonedthemtoassenttothoseimages,sinceitispossibleforassent tothoseimagestocomeaboutthroughindicationscommontoallmen....Thisisthe reasonwhyScriptureisdividedintoapparentandinnermeanings[class2above]: theapparentmeaningconsistsofthoseimageswhicharecoinedtostandforthose ideas,whiletheinnermeaningisthoseideas[themselves],whichareclearonlyto thedemonstrativeclass.... Thetextsaboutthefuturelifefallinto[3],sincedemonstrativescholarsdonot agreewhethertotakethemintheirapparentmeaningorinterpretthem allegorically.Eitherispermissible.Butitisinexcusabletodenythefactofafuture lifealtogether.... Butanyonewhoisnotamanoflearningisobligedtotakethesepassagesin theirapparentmeaning,andallegoricalinterpretationofthemisforhimunbelief becauseitleadstounbelief.Thatiswhyweholdthat,foranyonewhosedutyitisto believeintheapparentmeaning,allegoricalinterpretationisunbelief,becauseit leadstounbelief.Anyoneoftheinterpretativeclasswhodisclosessuch[an interpretation]tohimissummoninghimtounbelief,andhewhosummonsto unbeliefisanunbeliever.... ThuspeopleinrelationtoScripturefallintothreeclasses: Oneclassisthesewhoarenotpeopleofinterpretationatall:thesearethe rhetoricalclass.Theyaretheoverwhelmingmass,fornomanofsoundintellectis exemptedfromthiskindofassent. Anotherclassisthepeopleofdialecticalinterpretation... Anotherclassisthepeopleofcertaininterpretation:thesearethe demonstrativeclass,bynatureandtraining,i.e.,intheartofphilosophy.This interpretationoughtnottobeexpressedtothedialecticalclass,letalonetothe masses. Toexplaintheinnermeaningtopeopleunabletounderstanditistodestroy theirbeliefintheapparentmeaningwithoutputtinganythinginitsplace.Theresult isunbeliefinlearnersandteachers.Itisbestforthelearnedtoprofessignorance, quotingtheQuranonthelimitationofmansunderstanding. [EditorialNote:InthislastpassageAverroesisreferringtothreedistinctpolitical classes:therulers,likePlatosphilosopherkings,exercisethecapacityof demonstrativereasoning.Themassesarecapableonlyofrhetoricalinterpretation. TheintermediateclassinAverroestheocraticStatearethetheologians.]

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen