Islamic Atomism and the Galenic Tradition

Sabra A. I. , “Kalām atomism as an alternative philosophy to Hellenizing Falsafa”, in Montgomery James E. (ed.), Arabic theology, Arabic philosophy, from the many to the one: Essays in celebration of Richard M. Frank (Leuven, Paris and Dudley, MA, 2006), 191–272.

Maimonides served as an important, often the most important, source for some early studies of kalam atomism, which were carried out before the kalam writings themselves became available to scholars; see, for example, MacDonald D. B. , “Continuous creation and atomic time in Muslim scholastic theology”, Isis, ix (1927), 326–44. Maimonides's sources have been fleshed out in detail by Schwarz Michael , “Who were Maimonides' mutakallimūn? Some remarks on Guide of the Perplexed Part I Chapter 73”, Maimonidean studies, ii (1991), 1991–209; iii (1992–93), 143–72.

Pines's study, Beiträge zur islamischen Atomenlehre (Berlin, 1936), was his doctoral dissertation under the formal guidance of H. H. Schaeder. In the 1970s Michael Schwartz, in collaboration with Pines, prepared an English version, which incorporated some revisions and additions. After Pines's death, the typescript of this revised translation (which included some hand-written notes by an unidentified individual) was given over to me to prepare for publication. The English version, Studies in Islamic atomism, was published by the Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 1997.

Van Ess Josef , “Sixty years after: Shlomo Pines's Beiträge and half a century of research on atomism in Islamic theology”, Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, vii (2002), 19–41.

As we shall see shortly, Pines later took note of some connections when the hitherto unknown critique of Galen by Abū Bakr al-Rāzī came to his attention.

This important but problematic group of texts will be discussed below.

Wolfson Harry Austryn , Philosophy of the kalam (Cambridge, MA, and London, 1976), 485. For the continued underappreciation of this book, see Gad Freudenthal's review of Lüthy Christopher (eds), Late medieval and early modern corpuscular matter theories (Leiden, 2001), in Journal for the history of philosophy, xli (2003), 2003–4.

Wolfson , Philosophy of the kalam (ref. 7), 480–5.

Wolfson Harry Austryn , Repercussions of the kalam in Jewish philosophy (Cambridge, MA, 1979), 165.

Asmis Elizabeth , “Review article: Asclepiades of Bithynia rediscovered?”, Classical philology, lxxxviii (1993), 145–56, p.147.

Pines , Islamic atomism (ref. 3), 112–13; compare the passage from the unrevised 1936 edition of Pines's study in Dhanani , op. cit. (ref. 12), 100.

Dhanani Alnoor , The physical theory of kalām: Atoms, space, and void in Basrian Mu'tazilī cosmology (Leiden, 1994).

The quotations are found on p. 153 n. 7 and p. 177 n. 103 of Dhanahi , op. cit. (ref. 12).

Pines , Islamic atomism (ref. 3), 114.

Kraus Paul , Jābir et la science grecque (Cairo, 1942; reprint, Paris, 1986), note 6 on p.154; al-Rāzī's use of the term is noted by Pines, Islamic atomism (ref. 3), 157. These terms are likely to be the source of the minima which are the basis of the physical theory of the Latin Geber, which is now thought not to be a translation of an Arabic text, although it certainly leans heavily upon Arabic sources; see Newman William R. , The ‘Summa Perfectionis’ of Pseudo-Geber: A critical edition, translation and study (Leiden, 1991); idem, Atoms and alchemy: Chymistry and the experimental origins of the Scientific Revolution (Chicago, 2006), 26–28.

See the long exposition in Kraus , Jābir (ref. 15).

Hunayn , De experientia medica, ed. and transl. by Walzer Richard (London, 1944), 62; cf. Asmis, op. cit. (ref. 10), p. 153 n. 36.

The connection was drawn by Kraus , Jābir (ref. 15), p. 154, n. 6.

Cited by Ben-Shammai H. , “Studies in Karaite atomism”, Jerusalem studies in Arabic and Islam, vi (1985), 243–97, pp. 276–7. Ben-Shammai does not comment upon the superlative sense of the double adjective and makes no reference to Epicurean minima.

On the place of On the elements in Galen's own scheme of things, see Singer Peter , “Levels of explanation in Galen”, Classical quarterly, xlvii (1997), 525–42, esp. p. 532.

Sezgin Fuat , Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, iii (Frankfurt, 1970), 86.

Salim Muhammad Salim , Kitāb Jālīnūs fī al-Usṭuqusāt (Cairo, 1986).

de Lacy Phillip , Galen, On the Elements According to Hippocrates (Corpus Medicorum Graecorum vi/2; Berlin, 1996). A preliminary comparison between the Greek and Arabic versions was published by Wilkie J. S. and Lloyd G. E. R. , “The Arabic version of Galen's De elementis secundum Hippocratem”, Journal of Hellenic studies, cii (1982), 1982–3; Strohmaier observes that their collation is “not always reliable”. See also Strohmaier's description, criticisms and corrections to Salim Salim in de Lacy, op. cit., 24–25.

De Lacy , op. cit. (ref. 23), 28–30.

Ibid., 21–22.

Sezgin , op. cit. (ref. 21), 86.

Strohmaier (de Lacy, op. cit. (ref. 23), 22) notes that Sālim quotes from this text in the apparatus to his edition “under the misleading title sharḥ Ḥunayn”.

Or: “the rationalists”. The Hebrew ba 'alei ha-heqeish presumably is a translation of the Arabic aṣḥāb al-qiyās. As we have seen in ref. 20 above, in fact it is Galen himself who placed On the elements first in the curriculum. The specific reference to logic or rationality would seem to come from Galen as well; as Singer observes, “It is if one wishes to grasp the demonstrations of these matters with scientific understanding () that one should start from, and then read all the other works in stated order. The order of reading is thus clearly linked with an order of logical consequence which begins from logical fundamentals — The only kind of beginning that may lead to ”.

MS Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, cod. heb. 228, f. 60. On the translation see Steinschneider Moritz , Die hebraeischen Uebersetzungen des Mittelalters (Berlin, 1893), 735.

See the brief remarks of Pines Shlomo , “Rāzī critique de Galien”, Actes du VIIIe Congrès d'Histoire des Sciences (Paris, 1953), 480–7, esp. pp. 483–4 [reprinted in The collected works of Shlomo Pines, ii: Studies in Arabic versions of Greek texts and in medieval science (Jerusalem and Leiden, 1986)]. Al-Rāzī's al-Shukūk 'alā Jālīnūs was unknown when Pines published his book on atomism, and the exposition in that book is not mentioned at all in the chapter on al-Rāzī. Kraus Paul , who first uncovered the treatise, took note of the exposition of al-Rāzā's atomism therein in his Jābir (ref. 15), p. 154 n. 6.

Ḥunayn , De experientia medica, ed. and transl. by Walzer Richard (London, 1944); see the criticism of Asmis in note 36 to her review cited above (ref. 10).

Note for example, Newman William R. , “Experimental corpuscular theory”, in Lüthy Christoph Murdoch John E. , and Newman William R. , Late medieval and early modern corpuscular theories (Leiden, 2001), 291–329, p. 302: “This definition [of ‘element’ as 'the smallest particle of the body'] has an ancient pedigree, deriving ultimately from Galen's De elementis secundum Hippocratem, although it is not the case that Galen was himself an atomist”.

The manuscripts are listed by Sezgin, op. cit. (ref. 21), 147. I have looked at three manuscripts so far, all from Istanbul: Ayasofya 3588, f. 118b; Fatih 3538, f. 148a; Yeni Cami 1179, f. 231b.

In the case of On critical days, at the very least, it is clear that significantly different versions of the “summaries” circulated, and the Arabic ‘vorlage’ of the Hebrew version differs considerably from the available Arabic; see Langermann Tzvi Y. , “The astral connections of Critical Days: Some late antique sources preserved in Hebrew and Arabic”, in Akasoy Anna Burnett Charles and Yoeli-Tlalim Ronit (eds), Astro-medicine: Astrology and medicine, East and West (Florence, 2008), 99–118. However, my studies so far show that the Hebrew translation of the summary to On the elements, unlike On critical days as reported by Langermann, follows closely the Arabic manuscripts.

Frank Richard M. , “Bodies and atoms: The Ash'arite analysis”, in Marmura Michael E. (ed.), Islamic theology and philosophy: Studies in honor of George F. Hourani (Albany, 1984), 39–53, p. 42.

MS Istanbul, Koprülü 961, f. 118a.

De Lacy , op. cit. (ref. 23), 58: 5–8.

In other Galenic writings it is clear that three or four theories are at play here; see de Lacy's commentary, op. cit. (ref. 23), 164.

See his discussion, op. cit. (ref. 23), 163 (commentary to 58, 20) for a full discussion.

De Lacy , op. cit. (ref. 23), 60: 10–11.

De Lacy , op. cit. (ref. 23), 62: 17.

The name is transcribed quite clearly in MS Ayasofya 3588, f.119a, although garbled elsewhere. Philoponus tells us that Ion is the author of a three-element theory mentioned by Aristotle; see Whitby Maurice , “Quasi-elements in Aristotle”, Mnemosyne, xxxv (1982), 225–247, p. 231 n. 13. Ion was a Pythagorean; see Guthrie W. K. C. , A history of Greek philosophy, i: The earlier Presocratics and the Pythagoreans (Cambridge, 1962), 58. The inclusion of a Pythagorean doctrine in this “summary”, taken together with the finding of Langermann, “Astral connections” (ref. 34), concerning the “summary” of On critical days, bolsters the contention that Pythagorean views in particular were rehabilitated in late Antiquity.

De Lacy , op. cit. (ref. 23), 135, where Asclepiades is criticized as one of those “who interweave empty space (kenon)”; see also 147, where his theory is said to be one of “particles, pores, and unattached elements”.

Bernard Marie , “La critique de la notion de nature (ṭab') par le kalām”, Studia Islamica, li (1980), 59–105.

Ibid., 71, and esp. n. 4 on the same page.

Ibid., 81.

Ibid., 99.

Van Ess Joseph , Theologie und Gesellschaft (Berlin and New York, 1991–97), iii, 352–3.

Ess Van , Theologie und Gesellschaft (ref. 48), iv, 518 and especially note 39.

Job of Edessa, Book of treasures, ed. by Mingana A. (Cambridge, 1935), III.16, pp. 388b (text), 153 (translation). Van Ess , Theologie und Gesellschaft (ref. 48), vi, text 98, pp. 86–87, sees the references here to be to al-Naẓẓām.

al-Malāḥimī Rukn al-Dīn , Kitāb al-Mu'tamad fī Uṣūl al-Dīn, ed. by McDermott Martin and Madelung Wilfred (London, 1991). Although the editors rectify the error that al-Malāḥimī was a student of Abū 'l-Ḥusayn al-Baṣrī (d. 1024), in fact al-Malāḥimī's book is by and large a summary of the latter's largest work on kalam (Introduction, p. xi) and, moreover, all of the other sources identified by the editors (ibid., pp. xii–xiii) date to the ninth or tenth centuries.

Al-Malāḥimī , op. cit. (ref. 51), 547–61.

Ibid., 549, for Galen's adhering to four natures only, and p. 556, for Galen's reference to Hippocrates.

Altmann A. and Stern S. M. , Isaac Israeli, a neoplatonic philosopher of the early tenth century (Oxford, 1958). Israeli's Book of the elements is discussed in Part I, chap. V, but since Altmann and Stern were mostly concerned with Israeli's neoplatonism, his remarks concerning natural philosophers and the response of mutakallimūn were irrelevant to their project and hence omitted from their study. Israeli's contemporary and rival (and like him, Egyptian-born) Saadiah Gaon also includes this theory among the eternalisms he rebuffs in his Book of Beliefs and Opinions.

Wolfson's views are recorded in his book on the kalam (ref. 7) and at greater length in his Repercussions of the kalam in Jewish philosophy (Cambridge and London, 1979), 162–5.

Israeli Isaac , Sefer ha-Yesodot, Das Buch über die Elemente, ed. by Fried S. (Frankfurt, 1900); the texts of interest to us begin on page 64 and continue to the end of the book.

These passages were left out of the translation and analysis in Altmann and Stern (ref. 54).

Wolfson , Repercussions (ref. 55), 163 and note 5, emends the text to the third person (following the Latin certificet). This seems to me unnecessary, since the passage continues the argument that Israeli puts in the mouth of his fictitious interlocutor.

Israeli , op. cit. (ref. 56), 43; partial translation in Wolfson, Repercussions (ref. 55).

Wolfson , Repercussions (ref. 55), 163–5.

An anonymous commentary on Kitāb al-Tadhkira by Ibn Mattawayh (facsimile edition of Mahdavi Codex 514 (6th/12th century), introduction and indices by Sabine Schmidtke (Tehran, 2006). The passage of interest is on f. 27b of the manuscript (p. 54 of the facsimile edition).

The direct quotation ascribed to Aristotle states that “the line divides lengthwise, but not width-wise; the plane divides in length and width; and the solid divides in length, width, and depth”. This corresponds approximately to De coelo I, 1, 268a 7–9.

Israeli , op. cit. (ref. 56), 51. For more on medieval perceptions of Hippocrates's esotericism, see Bos Gerrit and Langermann Tzvi Y. , “The Introduction of Sergius of Rēsh'ainā to Galen's Commentary on Hippocrates' On nutriment”, Journal of Semitic studies, liv (2009), 179–204. Our thanks to the authors for sharing a preprint of this study with us.

al-Dīn al-Rāzī Fakhr , al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr (Cairo, 1938), part 20, p. 60.

Austin Umar , “Suffering in Muslim religious thought”, Islamic quarterly, xxvi (1982), 27–39.

Rationality and Christian influences are the two explanations suggested by Watt W. M. , “Suffering in Sunni Islam”, Studia Islamica, l (1979), 5–19. The most recent and exhaustive treatment is Heemskerk M. T. , Suffering in the Mu'tazilite theology (Leiden, 2000); see p. 2 n. 2 for an extensive bibliography in secondary sources.

See especially Pines Shlomo , “A study of the impact of Indian, mainly Bhuddist, thought on some aspects of kalam doctirnes”, Jerusalem studies in Arabic and Islam, xvii (1994), 182–203; this article was unfortunately not included in the five volumes of collected studies by the late scholar and, perhaps for that reason has not received the attention it deserves.

That is, they have no aesthesis.

On the elements (ref. 23), 63.

Heemskerk , Suffering (ref. 66), 98–102.

Abū Iṣḥāq, Abū Hāshim and Ibn Mattawayh all weighed in on this issue; see Heemskerk , loc. cit. (ref. 70).