Alfrb on Imagination: With a Translation of His "Treatise on Poetry" Author(s): Nabil Matar Reviewed work(s): Source: College Literature,

Vol. 23, No. 1, Comparative Poetics: Non-Western Traditions of Literary Theory (Feb., 1996), pp. 100-110 Published by: College Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25112231 . Accessed: 02/06/2012 22:16
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

College Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to College Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

Alf?r?b? on Imagination: With a Translation of

his "Treatise on Poetry"

N A B I L MATAR

Nabu Matar English Institute

is Professor

of Although

at the Florida He

of Technology

is the author Beginners, Peter

of Islam for and Sterry: editor of Select

treatment of imagi Alf?r?bf's nation has received much critical atten tion in recent years, a problem that still is the distinction which requires examination introduced between the various Alf?r?bf some terms derived from the root khal. While critics have examined the concept of imagina tion without of Alf?r?bf's specifying which
numerous into Arabic terms they that intend, are translatable others have "imagination"

Writings.

been

alert to the importance

that appear

of the different and oth

concept

derivations

in Alf?r?bf?deriva

tions like khaydl,

ers.1 The most

takhyeel,

takhayyul
study of the

extensive

in Alf?r?bf and his successors of imagination "Die in Von Wolfhart Heinrichs' appears von und Phantasia antike Verkn?pfung bei den Arabern,"2 but neither he, Dicthung
nor other critics, have examined the innova

in Alf?r?bf's of imagination, analysis as it appears in his short Treatise on especially tion

Poetry, Kitab-u-Shi'r. The purpose of this

paper
between

is to show
various

how Alf?r?bf
derivations

differentiated
from the root

khal

in order

imagination analysis of poetics.3 was the greatest Arab/Muslim Alf?r?bf to engage the Greek mind, par philosopher that of Aristotle and Plato. Although ticularly 100

to arrive at a specific meaning of in the that would be suitable

it is unlikely that he knew Greek, Alf?r?bf mastered Arabic, Turkish and on philological this distinctions?in his emphasis Persian, which explains to the Arabic term for imagination. Primarily, the theory of case, pertaining examined was based on Aristotle's De Anima, imagination which Alf?r?bf Book III, chapter 3 (along with De Sominiis and other sources). The Stagirite from sensation, although the taught that imagination had to be distinguished on the latter and constituted the basis on which former was dependent that imagination?that faculty possible. He also explained thought became not capable of truth or falsity which evokes images?was thought by in the latter issue: the truth and/or interested Alf?r?bf was particularly interested in the role of imagination, of imagination, because he was falsity in in the context of psychology?but not as Aristotle had analyzed it?solely too. Indeed, it is clear that imagination for Alf?r?bf was as important poetics in psychology and political in aesthetic theory (as chapter theory as itwas could exam 10 of section 4 in The Perfect State shows). But before Alf?r?bf in the context of poetics, he realized that he had to identify ine imagination the terms that he could use. For in the translations of Aristotle and precisely numerous of other Greek writers available to him, Alf?r?bf had encountered And since he in meaning, terms, widely imagination. signifying divergent to situate imagination in the context was the first Arab/Muslim philosopher between the terms that of poetics, Alf?r?bf sought to distinguish carefully in psychology from those in poetics. be applicable would Since Alkinidi, who died in the latter part of the ninth century CE., the in De Anima had been translated as Greek term "phantasia" which appears the term "phantasia," and, khaya?. In the Poetics, Aristotle had not employed translation of that treatise by Abu in the only surviving Arabic therefore, Bishr Matta, the term does not appear at all 4. Aside from the term khaydl,
however, there were also takhyeel and takhayyul which were associated

in the Arabic translations of De Anima, with phantasia and which appeared on De Anima, that of commentaries in the translations of Greek chiefly faculties of the that alluded to Aristotle's and in other writings Themistius,5 linked to psycholo soul. So clearly were all these translations of phantasia 6 he did on the Poetics, that when Alf?r?bf wrote his own commentary gy
not use them at all; "phantasia" seemed not to belong to poetics.

in his Treatise on Poetry, probably written as a brief sequel to a unit from Aristotle and turned in the Catalogue of the Sciences, Alf?r?bf departed in art (sculpture) to the role of imagination and poetics. his attention in this that he was breaking new ground by treating imagination Realizing a wide of derivations all of which introduced context, Alf?r?bf spectrum in one continuing part of the Treatise: "takhayyul?t" (plural of appeared But "takhayyul"), "khuyyil," "yukhayyal," "takhayyal," "yukhayyil" "tukhayyil" and is important about the list is not only its variety but also "mukhayyil." What its omissions; for Alf?r?bf clearly avoided specific terms relating to imagina in translations by Arab Aristotelians?chiefly the tion which had appeared terms khaydl and wahm. The omission for of the first was a great departure Nabil Matar 101

8 and since Alkindi 7, Ishaq bin Hunayn Qusta bin Luqa had fre not employ at all, possibly, it of the because quently used it. Alf?r?bf did in Luqa's statement it?as connotation associated with that khaydl negative characterizes what is false and insane.9 Khaydl was also linked in Aristotelian translations to Plato's theory of phantasia and was therefore widely mistrust was ed 10.Thus Mansour Ajami's generalization that "Takhyil [takhyeell . . . noun of the more the Arab philosophers' abstract common equivalent n. For Alf?r?bf, there (imagination)" khaydl," does not hold true for Alf?r?bf was a difference between and khaydl, and he clearly favored the for takhyeel mer over the latter. Furthermore, Alf?r?bf did not use the terms wahm and tawahhum which were also associated with untruth;12 and he avoided the Alf?r?bf link between takhayyul and tawahhum, which had been umade by Ishaq bin who had predicated the latter on the former: Hunayn, takhayyul u-tawah the imagining of phantasy.13 hum," In the Treatise, Alf?r?bf of used takhyeel at the outset of his discussion to takhayyul, but then shifted and to the present imagination, passive In so doing, Alf?r?bf was distinguishing between what he viewed yukhayyal. as the end result of imagining, of that takhyeel, and the making/creating is imagined takhayyal?takhayyul. One reason why Alfarabi may have which on takhyeel was that takhyeel (and its plur to reduce his dependence wanted al takhyeeldt) occurred both in animals as also in humans.14 Alf?r?bf needed a different term from takhyeel to signify the act of creating/causing imagin ings, rather than the passive reception of images. He also needed a term that to in its application could imbue imagination with especially legitimacy,
action. While for Aristotle, imitation and the nature of the resemblance

between Alf?r?bf

the real and the literary/artistic was a dominant motif in the Poetics, in the Treatise, focused on creative imagination, takhayyul, and its to truth/the real in the context of human actions. relationship which was there was a faculty of imagination?that Alf?r?bf believed
caused what was "imagined." The definition of

creative/causative?that

imagination
tion was

for Alf?r?bf

was

thus predicated
and, therefore,

on

its function?which
to action.

func
That is

to make

imaginable

to motivate

used after from the verb takhayyal which Alf?r?bf why all the derivations in the Treatise were emphatic, the shadda wards (the diacritical employing mark which doubles a letter), underlining thereby, the element of creativity. at further philological between the Alf?r?bf distinguished precision, Aiming active takhayyal and the past passive khuyyil. In so doing, he intro present of imagination asso between the processes duced an originative difference to that led Alf?r?bf ciated with these two verbs. And itwas this difference the most Again,
Aristotelian

original

concept
that

in his

discussion must

of

imagination:

uaqaweel of the
present

mukhayyila"?statements

create/cause

imaginings.

the importance
terminology

of this concept
that was current:

be seen
was

in the context
the passive

there

to Ishaq bin Hunayn indicated which tense, yutakhayyal, that which does not exist in reality,"15 and the verbal noun, 102

"the imagining of takhayyul, which Literature

College

to Themistius
upon it."16

(in Ishaq's translation) indicated a "faculty that can receive the of sense-perception images of sensible objects through the mediation acting
In these usages, the former pointed to an image-forming faculty,

while the latter indicated an image-receiving used takhayyul as image-forming (as indeed indicates) and then turned to the past passive
For man's actions imagine were often follow his wandering something by sense that he may he would way the (takhayyal) it confirmed even (khuyyil). there is takhayyal,

one.

In the Treatise, Alf?r?bf the reflexive form of the verb form:

in imagination (takhayyul?t), in a matter and then act in the or demonstration imagined to him that (khuyy

in the matter, thing was not as it appeared il) was the above statement,

perception was if that which

In

he

imagines,

or

creates/caus

es imaginings; and there is khuyyil, that which has been made In imaginable. the imagining is al-quwwa the case of the former, the agent doing al as Alf?r?bf in The the "faculty of representation," explained mutakhayyila, State ,17 In the case of khuyyil, there is some ambiguity, for Alf?r?bf Perfect could have continued his above sentence with the active form of the verb: "even if that which he had imagined was not as he had imagined"?which
would have emphasized the image-forming operation of al-quwwa al

By turning to the passive khuyyil and its implied active par mutakhayyila. a quwwa which would be dif Alf?r?bf was suggesting ticiple (mukhayyil), ferent from al-quwwa al-mutakhayyila (and not as Cantarino states and Ajami
concurs "in the same vein" as takhyeel).18 While al-quwwa almutakhayyila

in itself, i.e., is reflexive, al the faculty that creates imagination signifies to the creating/projecting of imaginings, quwwa al-mukhayyila i.e., is points causative and factitive. Although Alf?r?bf did not use the phrase, al-quwwa he alluded to that faculty in his phrase, aqaweel mukhayyila. al-mukhayyila, Had Alf?r?bf used the phrase al-aqaweel he would al-mutakhayyala, are imagined by have been suggesting that statements/discourses (aqaweel) and from within the faculty of imagination. The use of aqaweel mukhayyila to the imagining act as having an impact outside the imagining points itself and is caused by an unspecified the process agent, since grammatically, verbal form khuyyil which Alf?r?bf used is one that does not need to have
a subject, as incidentally, is the deponent use of "imaginor" in Seneca and

in the Classical tradition. The allusion to al-quwwa in al-mukhayyila in drawing attention, not so shows that Alf?r?bf was concerned imagination much to the agent, but to the creative process of imagining, not to the reflex others
ive nature of imagining, but to its causative effect.

an imagining in and by the al-quwwa there was al a transitive imagining; and there was an imagining that was mutakhayyila, the doubly transitive, active on something. Here Alf?r?bf was going beyond as a capacity a) to retain images, and b) to distinction between imagination For Alf?r?bf
manipulate them, to a function of the imagination that allows it to act upon

and to create Kitab Nabil

imaginings by causing them in external things?as ma laysa huwa al-jawhar: ul-hur?f: utukhayyilfil-jawhar

is shown in " 19 it creates 103

Matar

in the essence that which ilwujud a-shai'fi shai'-in

in something else." Alf?r?bf

is not the essence; or as in the Treatise, "yukhayy akhar" "makes possible the imagining of the thing
seems to point at a quwwa which causes imag

inings, (and therefore changes those imaginings and that into which they are That is why he used the term khuyyil, not only to mean that projected). which was but also that which the above quotation appears?as imagined, shows. What appears, Alf?r?bf iswhat has been imagined,20 and recognizes, what has been imagined iswhat has been acted upon/created by al-quwwa While its verbal noun al-mukhayyila. takhayyal (along with takhayyul) its implies a creative act whose impact is reflexive, yukhayyil along with active participle verbal noun muhkhayyil (and passive participle mukhayyal) not only does not suggest an agent, but also that that which is being imag ined is acting on an object to create it/make it appear. for Alf?r?bf motivates is action.21 But what therefore, Imagination, a certain legitimacy for action it establishes important is that in motivating states in the Treatise, reason may indicate one thing, but itself. As Alf?r?bf if imagination to fol indicates its opposite, the individual might still choose low what his imagination dictates; so although the imagination might project a falsity, there is a kind of suspension of belief as the individual acts in accor
dance with that falsity and need in not contradiction set it at the to polar reason. extreme Such of a function reason/truth; of imagination, however,

of its causative rather, and because faculty, within the realm of sense perception operate
creative-mukhayyil meaning.

should be imagination and reason but with

seen to its own

introduction of mukhayyil propelled his theory of imagination causes into epistemology. For al-quwwa beyond psychology al-mukhayyila in external the existence of that which is not part of the sensory reality of that object. Although all that is in the imagination is from the knowledge shows is that the imagination can act causatively with senses, what Alf?r?bf
the images which link them it receives with other from sense perceptions; define and it can compare, project analyze them and onto cre objects, images,

Alf?r?bf's

and abstractive knowledge. In so doing the ate, thereby arriving at perceptive link between is clarified; and imi\2tion-muhakat it is a link imagination is projected between what from the imagination al-quwwa al-mukhayyila, onto external objects, and the analogies and/or differences that then become the objects. Al-quwwa apparent between al-mukhayyila projects an image onto an object raising thereby the possibility of comparing or contrasting that makes possible muhakat. object with another. Al-quwwa al-mukhayyila It is important to note that Alf?r?bf used the term aqaweel mukhayyila, on which in the Poetics, Aristotle had focused in connection with For in his short Treatise, Alf?r?bf proved to be the first muhakat/imitation. to link Aristotle's discussion Muslim philosopher inDe Anima of imagination to poetics. is important in the Treatise is that Alfarabi what intro Indeed, an Aristotelian term into aesthetics?the duced of concept psychological into artistic (sculpture and poetry) construction. In no other work mukhayyil 104 College Literature

did Alf?r?bf
imagination

so carefully
and poetic

focus

on

the

interaction

between

psychological

imitation.

In bringing takhayyul and mukhayyil into the poetic discourse, Alf?r?bf made possible in Arab/Islamic later developments theory. For at the start of his analysis of Aristotle's poetics, the concept of takhyeeh Ibn Sin? employed he indicated in this treatise that he "Poetry employs takhyeel."22 Significantly,
was tioned "summarizing" "imagination" Aristotle's at the On outset Poetry, of his except treatise. that The Aristotle same had approach not men appears

in Ibn Rushd's "Outline of Argument on Aristotle's for the Short Commentary Poetics,"2?* and so too in his Talkhees.24 Both Ibn Sin?, Ibn Rushd, and Musa bin Maymoon, who was directly indebted to Alf?r?bf,25 into their introduced treatment of poetics a discussion of the nature of takhyeel and takhayyul. In so doing, text in the Arabic they could not have been following Aristotle's translation: rather, in integrating takhyeel and takhayyul into their commen Ibn Sin? and Ibn Rushd may well have been drawing on tary on the Poetics, not his Canons, but his Treatise, since itwas in this short treatise Alf?r?bf, the concept of imagination had first been brought by a Muslim philoso that
pher into the discourse on poetics.

A TREATISE ON POETRY The Arabs have been more attentive to rhyme in verse than any other nation whose poetry we have known. For their [Arabs] poems improve and becomea more the use of specific wordsb?either familiar or complete by of words imitate the content of the state unfamiliar; by having the meanings into metrical feet each of which ment;c by having rhythm; by being divided is rhythmical, with a fixed number of syllables,d asbdb e and awtdd;f by hav that is identical between one part and anoth ing a fixed metrical arrangement er (for by this the parts become similar when enunciated); by having words in each meter fixed in their arrangement; by having fixed rhymes (which either use the same letters or use letters that are similar in enunciation); by imitate the matter in the statement; and also by being melodic. having words Some nations treat the tune with which poetry as part of they melodify
poetry in the same way that they treat words: so that a statement without its

tune loses itsmeter as itwould if it lost some of its letters. Other nations do not treat tune in the way they treat the letters in a statement but make the statement consist only in its letters?as is the case in the poetry of the Arabs. For if this poetry is melodified, the rhythm of the melody might clash with the rhythm of the words. This clash would disappear when the rhythm of the words produces its own melody. Those nations [the Arabs] treat the tune as they treat letters in a statement for fear that the meter of the statement would be lost if it is set to melody. when The publics and many of the poets recognize that a statement is poetical it ismetrical and divided into feet that are enunciated at equal intervals. do not care whether the statement consists in what imitates the object They or not; neither do they care about the words as long as, in the language of Matar 105

Nahil

that

statement,

those

words

are

eloquent

and

literary:

instead

they

prefer

what

and easy. Many of them [public and poets] have ruled that the should be similar, either by using rhyme endings of the parts [of the words]
the same letters, or by using letters that are enunciated at equal intervals.

is familiar

It is evident that Homer,h the poet of the Greeks, does not use a rhyme imitates the matter without scheme. But a statement which being metrically is not considered statement. rhythmic poetical but is said to be a poetical Should that statement be put inmeter and divided into feet, it becomes poet and substance of poetry among the ancients is that it ry. For the constitution consists of that which imitates the matter, and that it be a statement which at similar intervals. Everything else into feet which are enunciated be divided to its substance although it improves poet that is in it is then not necessary of poetry are ry. The most important of these two [things] in the constitution imitation and the science of the things with which imitation is effected; the
least important is meter.

is immediate, clear Rhetoric may employ something1 of imitation which are naturally and familiar to all. Many of the rhetoricians, however, who to poetical statements, have erred in using more imitation in rhetoric inclined than they should, for imitation is not reliable. For then his [their rhetoricians]
statement would, to many people, constitute eloquent rhetoric) while in truth

it is a poetical
Many pose stitute those

statement which
are naturally in meter,

has been
inclined so that

diverted
to for many

from rhetoric
of the

to poetry.
com con been

who poets statements while

statements people, statements

persuasion statements that have

poetry

actually

being

rhetorical

in their of rhetoric. Many rhetoricians combine from the method both matters, and so do many of the poets, and that is how most statements in things that imitate the is. But poetical should consist poetry matter of the statement. This imitation could either be in [the form of] action or of statement. If it is in action, it is of two kinds: one is for a man to imi imitates tate something with his hands (for instance to sculpt a statue which a specific person or something other than that); or to do an action which imi diverted rhetoric
tates a man or anything else. Imitation in statement is [for a man] to construct

that is to that imitate the thing in the statement: the statement with matters is imitate that thing. What make the statement point to the matters which statement which imitates the thing is the creative intended by the constructed the imagining (takhyeel) of it in imagining (takhyeel)1 of that thing?either or in something else. itself, The result is that the statement of imitation is twofold: one that makes the imagining (yukhayyil) of the thing itself, and another that makes possible are sci the imagining (yukhayyil) of the thing in something else?as possible statements. For one kind [of scientific statements] defines the thing in entific in a definition, while of a thing in the existence another defines itself?as in demonstration. Creative else?as something in demonstration and speculation like science
rhetoric. For man's actions often follow his wandering

imagining (takhyeel) here in logic and persuasion

imagination (takhayyu

is in

106

College

Literature

in a matter and then act lot), in that he may imagine (takhayyal) something or demonstration in the way he would were it confirmed by sense perception in the matter, even if that which had been made that the thing was imagin Thus it is said: if a able to him (khuyyil) was not as it appeared (khuyyil)man is similar to what he loathes, it instantly is looks at something which to him (yukhayyal) that that thing is what he actually made imaginable loathes: he is thus revolted and turns away from it even if in reality it is not as it appeared to him (khuyyil).m Similarly with a man when he listens to dis courses of imitation: he imagines (takhayyal) in the thing a certain matter. For what he sees with his eyesight imaginatively creates (yukhayyil)n for him a cer tain matter in that object in the same way that if a statement described that create (yukhayyil) matter to him, itwould that same matter in imaginatively in it by eyesight. created (khuyyil) the object which had been imaginatively imaginatively create (tukhayyil) beauty or ugli Similarly in statements which
ness or oppression or baseness or majesty in a thing. For in man, actions often

and often they [actions] fol follow his wandering imagination (takhayyuldt); or knowledge low his opinion or knowledge; and quite often, his opinion so that his action would contradicts his imagining (takhayyul), follow his and not his opinion or knowledge. imagining (takhayyul) is to The purpose thus of statements that make imaginable (mukhayyila)0 the listener towards doing that thing which has been imagined (khuyy impel il) to him in a certain matter (either making him seek it or avoid it,withdraw from it or detest it, or any other action of harm or charity) regardless of to appear (yukhayyal) is true or whether what has been imaginatively made not. Clearly, the matter depends on what has been imagined (khuyyil) and not on what is real. Similarly, if a man imitates something inwhat he is doing, he do that by which he imitates himself, or he might also do that which might imitates what is similar to the object of imitation: perhaps he sculpted a statue imitating Zaid and then made a mirror inwhich he saw the statue of Zaid. We, perhaps, may not know Zaid but see his statue and thus recognize him by
what have imitates seen him and of not Zaid by himself his own but see reflection. a reflection Furthermore, of his statue we may not a statue in the mir

imitates what imitates him. ror, then we would have known him by that which We would thus be twice removed from his reality. This fits exactly with statements of imitation. For these statements may be constructed of things that imitate the matter imitate the itself; or of what imitate the matter itself, and of what imitate those things.By imi which things from tation, thus, statements of imitation create a distance of many degrees the matter. In a similar vein, the imagining (takhayyul) of the thing by those statements [of imitation] leads to the same distance. A thing ismade the imaginable (yutakhayyal) by what imitates itwithout mediation and it is made [of anything], imaginable by the (yutakhayyal) on the statement which mediation of one or two things depending imitates the thing. Many people find that the imitation of a thing by that which is far thest from it is better and more complete is than imitating it by that which Nabu Matar 107

nearest. tation

view They at and better

the maker its craft and

of

such

statements

as more

deserving

of

imi

orientation.1"

NOTES
Words not appear There from Shi'r Salem in square brackets text. in the Arabic are MS two 812 are added in the translation for clarification. They do

Mahdi sbi'r," Saleem and Farabi edge

of manuscripts in the Hamidiyya 90-95. The

this

treatise: Library

the

first was and

published appeared

in Istanbul was

by Muhsin in uKitab-u

3 (1959): from

second Library

appeared (Cairo: Mahdi's There are

the University in Talkhees Kitab al-Ahram text. textual

manuscript of Bratislava

published in (the former) ma'ahu Salem

by Mohammad Czechoslovakia

Aristotalessfi-Shi'r At-tijariyya, differences 1971)

. . . wa 171-175.

Matabi' earlier a few

u-Shi'r lil Jawami did not acknowl

between and

Mahdi's

and

Salem's because

versions? of refer, "tas'eef\ Salem's there

although attempt fore,

they differ to make the

in punctuation widely text comply with modern which have

paragraphing Arabic rules.

I shall

only

to textual a. Salem

differences has

the masculine used

a bearing on Mahdi uyas'eer" while

the meaning. has the feminine

for this term. "phonetic compounds" c. While Butterworth used from Ibn Rushd, for this term: "argument" translating see Averroes'Middle on Aristotle's trans. Charles E. Butterworth Poetics, Commentary b. Cantarino (Princeton: Commentaries Butterworth has Princeton on U P, 1983), Aristotle's SUNY P, "Arabic-English " 'Rhetoric, "Topics, 1977), "Technical " Averroes' Three Short Glossary"; trans. E. and Charles 'Poetics", Used by Averroes." Cantarino

(Albany: "discourse/statement." Salem has

Terms

d. e. which does

In prosody, both letters (or has

Mahdi has "sullab?t". usulamiyy?f; is a phonetic sabab asbdb) (plural or in which one have short vowels, instead watad second has the silenting awtdd) third diacritical

construction has a short vowel

of

two and

letters the other

in

not

mark?sukoon). of three letters in

which

f. In prosody, the either g. Butterworth h. Mahdi has

(plural or the

is a phonetic construction letter has a sukoon.

"multitude." Salem as has "Horneros". Mahdi notes that Arabic writ

ers

referred always i. Mahdi has the j. Salem k. "that has

"Homerosh"; to Homer singular;

"Homerosh." has Mahdi not the plural, includes in Salem. Cantarino has "imaginative cre "ashya"'. in his notes.

Salem which

"kbufabiyya" is to make the statement", has "imaginative

1. Butterworth ation."

representation";

what

to to another is similar in The Catalogue "similar passage of the Sciences-, we an object we which loathe. For another when observe resembling happens we to be something and our spirit feels this object then we right away loathe, imagine are certain even in reality if we that it is not and thus we avoid from it, it, repelled to us," cited as it appears in Cantarino, 116. m. The n. Salem o.

has the feminine, "tukhayyil." as "imi term in Ibn Rushd It is surprising the same that Butterworth translates on Aristotle's tation": Averroes' Middle 60 and 63n. Poetics, Commentary is in the Salem version: "The treatise appears p. The postscript only following on Poetry is completed, its completion and with all of the book The Treatise finished.

108

College

Literature

of Abu

Nasr

[Alf?r?bl] be

recompense gratitude of the poorest of men who seeks God's for completed] by the hand On Ahmad Ibn Ali Ashami, God Amen. the morning giveness may grant him mercy. of Saturday in the year one of Safar the 18th of the good month thousand and hun dred from there and sixteen Praise all evil. are no in Constantinople be to God alone, and blessings [1705 it and preserve God C.E.], may protect on the Prophet and God's after whom blessings on his unlimited and companions." family it

intellect, praise [The book was

(may God without given

rest his desire

soul) for

is completed. and

To Him

who

creates without

the end.

prophets,

NOTES
^ansour Untruthfulness Press, Brill, 1988), Ajami, in Medieval 6264; The Dialectic and of Glory: of Truthfulness Alchemy Criticism Arabic Three Continents Literary (Washington: in the Golden Vicente Poetics Arabic (Leiden: Cantarino, Age the final unit Brill, Sin?) "Die der of the (Leiden: (ibn introduction; See 89-104. Columbia Salim also U The Poetics Kemal, Parviz Morewedge, 1973), 321-324. und Dichtung 128 of The The

and 80-85 1975), and Avicenna Alfarabi Metaphysics of Avicenna 2Von Wolfhart bei den Arabern," little

1991), (New York: antike

P,

Heinrichs, Zeitschrift has Burgel. influence

von Verkn?pfung Deutschen Morgenl?ndischen

Phantasia

Gesellschaft, 252-255 in his

(1978): 252-298.
his sive on 3Very reference attention been to Christof to the Treatise-, see Heinrichs, paid nor Ismail M. Dahiyat Cantarino Neither the text: Avicenna's and exten

on Avicenna used study of Alf?r?bi's the Poetics (Leiden: 1974). Brill, of Aristotle of this text, see Abdul Rahman 4For an edition Dar-u-Thaqafa, the edition 5See 85-145. 1953), C. An Lyons, by M. on Aristoteles De Anima (Columbia, text Arabic on 385, in Badawi, Poetics The Perfect n 385. 212-213. 164: ed. Abdul "al-khayal Rahman

Commentary

Badawi,

Aristotalees, Translation

fann-u-Shi'r of Themistius South Carolina

(Beirut:

Arabic South

Commentary P, 1973). 6See lation

Carolina:

U of

the Arabic

Aristotalees, 109-116. State, ed.

fann-u-shi'r, and trans.

149-158

and

the

trans

in Cantarino, 7See Al-Farabi P, 1985)

Richard

Walzer

(Oxford:

Clarendon

ed. Lyons 8Themistius, in Aristotaleesfi-nafs 9Luqa hi bi-takhyeel al-bat'il," 1954). Misriyya, wibid. 162.

fa-huwa Badawi

a-shai' (Cairo:

ul-ladhi Maktabat-u

yanjalibu Nahda

ilay al

11 Ajami, The Alchemy of Glory

12Hunayn l$Ibid. 11. Rahman in Aristotalees, See however fi-nafs

63.
70: "akthar u-tawahhum bat'il." a-T'abi'a, 1964) ed. Abdul 324 where

Badawi (Cairo: " and "yuwahhim "yukhayyil" 14See for instance Qusta Vlbid.

translation of Aristotalees: Hunayn's Ad-dar lil-Tiba'a wal-Nashr, al-Qawmiyya are used bin Luqa's and where translation the former of Plutarch

suggests falsity. in Aristotalees fi-nafs.

163. 69. ed. Lyons Poetics ul-hurufi 162.

l6Themistius,

17ThePerfect State 164.

18Cantarino, 19Alfarabi, Arabic Kitab The Alchemy 74-99; Ajami, ed. Muhsin Mahdi (Beirut: 63. of Glory Dar ul-Mashriq, 1970) 177.

Nabil

Matar

109

The Poetics 20Kemal, 21Ibid. 99. 22Aristotalees, in Ismail

of Alfarabi 162. Avicenna's

and

Avicenna

95. on and commentary the Poetics of Aristotle. "Topics," 1977) 203-206. 201 Medieval ff. "Rhetoric," this

treatise

23Averroes' "Poetics", 24See ed.

fann-u-shi'r M. Dahiyat, Short Three

See

the

translation

of

Commentaries

on Commentary on Aristotle's SUNY in Badawi, of Imagination P,

and

Charles

E. Butterworth kitab

(Albany:

Talkhees Wright

25Murray

Bundy,

Aristotaleesfi-shi'r The Theory

Aristotalees, fann-u-shi'r in Classical and

Thought (Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1927) 212 n. WORKS CITED

Alfarabi. Ajami, Kitab Mansour. Untruthfulness Continents Badawi, _. ?. Abdul ul-hur?f The Ed. Muhsin Mahdi. Beirut: The of Glory: Arabic Literary Fann-u-Shi'r. Dar ul-Mashriq, 1970. Dialectic of Truthfulness Criticism. Washington; Beirut: lil-Tiba'a al-Misriyya, in Classical and Three

Alchemy in Medieval

P,

1988. ed. Aristotlees, Cairo. Adar Dar-u-Thaqafa, wal-Nashr, 1954. and Medieval Thought. Poetics. . 1964. 1953.

Rahman, a-Tabi'a.

Aristotlees: Aristotlees

Cairo. fi-nafs. The Theory Murray Wright. Bundy, U of Illinois Urbana: P, 1927. Charles E., trans. UP, Short Princeton Three

al-Qawmiyya Maktabat-u-Nahda of Imagination Middle

Butterworth, Princeton: ?. Averroes' "Poetics." Cantarino, Dahiyat, 1974. Heinrichs, den

Averroes' 1983.

Commentary Aristotle's 1977.

on Aristotle's

Commentaries

on

"Topics,"

"Rhetoric"

and

State U of New York P, Albany. in the Golden Vicente. Poetics Arabic M. Avicenna's Commentary "Die antike der on

Ismail

Leiden: 1975. Brill, Age. the Poetics Leiden: of Aristotle. und

Brill, bei 128

Von

Wolfhart.

Arabern."

Zeitschrift

von phantasia Verkn?pfung Deutschen Morgenlandischen and Avicenna. Themistius's Leiden:

Dichtung

Gesellschaft 1991. on Aristotle's

(1978): 252-298.
Kemal, Salim. M.C. The Poetics An Arabic Lyons, Anima. Mahdi, of AlFdrahi translation U of Brill, of Carolina South P, 1973. " Shi'r 3 (1959): 90-95. of Avicenna (ibn Commentary De

Columbia:

Muhsin.

"Kitab-u-shi'r, Parviz.

Morewedge, 1973. Salem, Saleem.

The Metaphysics Kitab

Sind)

New

York:

Columbia

UP, lil

Talkhees Matabi' trans.

Aristotaless

fi-Shi'r

... wa 1971. State.

ma'ahu

Jawami' Clarendon

u-Shi'r

Farabi. Walzer,

Cairo:

al-Ahram

Richard,

Al-F?r?bi

At-tijariyya, on The Perfect

Oxford:

P,

1985.

110

College

Literature