The Scholastic Method in Medieval Education

8/9/2019 The Scholastic Method in Medieval Education

1/23

Medieval Academy of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Speculum.

http://www.jstor.org

Medieval cademy of merica

The Scholastic Method in Medieval Education: An Inquiry into Its Origins in Law and TheologyAuthor(s): George MakdisiSource: Speculum, Vol. 49, No. 4 (Oct., 1974), pp. 640-661Published by: Medieval Academy of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2852031

Accessed: 08-03-2015 14:06 UTC

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 contentin 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 [email protected].

This content downloaded from 152.118.24.10 on Sun, 08 Mar 2015 14:06:58 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=medacadhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2852031http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2852031http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=medacadhttp://www.jstor.org/


2/23

THE SCHOLASTICMETHOD INMEDIEVAL EDUCA-TION: AN INQUIRY INTO ITS ORIGINSIN

LAW AND THEOLOGYBY GEORGE MAKDISI

IN a book published posthumously n 1971,Maurice Lombard, of the Ecole desHautes Etudes of the University f Paris, wrote s follows n the very first ara-graph f his work:

In all fields, rom ll points f view, hehighMiddleAges from hefoundation fConstantinoplen the fourth entury, own o the great movement f the Crusadesfrom he leventh entury nwards constitute n Oriental eriod f history. his sespeciallyrue f he hree enturies rom hemiddle f he ighth othe middle f heeleventh, hich orrespondo the pogee f he MuslimWorld. t is ntheMuslim astthat the nstigative enters f economicnd cultural ife re found; he West offersbut empty nd receptive pacesof an area from which ommercial nd intellectualactivity aswithdrawnince he decadencefRome nd theBarbariannvasions.1For some time now there has been a growing wareness f the fact that world

history an no longer e understood s a European one, that we cannot afford oignore ther ivilizations uch as those of China, ndia and Islam.2

Before Maurice Lombard by a decade and a half, Christopher awson saidthat "the most striking xampleof the expansion f oriental ulture s to be seenin the case of slam. . . ."3 Still earlier, hesame historian ad written:

Islamic ulture etained ts pre-eminencehroughout heearlyMiddleAges, nd notonly ntheEast,but nWestern urope lso.We are so accustomed oregard ur culture s essentially hat of the West hat t sdifficult or sto realize hat here as n agewhen hemost ivilizedegionfWesternEuropewastheprovince f n alien ulture i.e., hat f slam]. .. It is, nfacthardlyaccurate o identify hristendom ith he West nd Islam with heEast, at a timewhenAsiaMinorwas still Christian and nd Spain ndPortugal nd Sicilywere hehome f flourishing oslem ulture. .. Western ulture rew p under he hadow fthemore dvanced ivilisation f slam, nd t wasfrom he atter ather han rom heByzantine orld hatmediaeval hristendom ecoveredts hare n the nheritance f

Greek cience nd philosophy.4R. W. Southern asalsowritten n a similar ein:

Within our undred ears f ts foundation,slamhad run hrough hases f ntel-Maurice Lombard, L'Islam dans sa premiere randeur VIIIL-Xl siecle) (Paris, 1971), p. 7.

-This paper is a slightly modified orm f a lecture delivered t the University f Pennsylvania nthe spring f 1972and at the University f Louvain in May, 1974. A much reduced version ad beengiven previously t Harvard University n the occasion of a conference eld in honor of ProfessorHarry A. Wolfson.

2 Cf. C. Dawson, The Movement f World Revolution New York, 1959),p. 8: "It is true that theisolation of these four ultures i.e. those of China, India, Islam and Europe] was never complete.Europe was in contact with slam, Islam was in contact with ndia and India was in contact withChina."

3Ibid., p. 163.4C. Dawson, TheMaking of Europe: An Introduction o the History f European Unity New York,

1945),pp. 167-168.Quotations from hese and other historians ould easily be multiplied.

640


http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/23


4/23

642 The ScholasticMethod n MedievalEducation

but also from ther arts ofEurope, contributed tudies n the "Legacyof slam"to the West. These studies dealt with Spain and Portugal; the Crusades; slamicArt and Architecture; eography nd Commerce; Literature nd Mysticism;Philosophy nd Science;Theology nd Law; Medicine,Music and Mathematics.Such an effort t understanding s worthy f high praise, ven though hepresentarticle goes counter o one of the main conclusions tated n the preface f thebook:

.. the readerwill earn rom his book hat here s little hat s peculiarlyemphasisin original]slamic n the contributions hich ccidental nd OrientalMuslims avemade oEuropean ulture. nthe ontrary, his egacy asproved east aluablewherereligion asexerted he trongestnfluence,s in Muslim aw.7

I hope to show that such a statement an no longer e made with uch certainty.More recently ritain gave us a soul-searching tudy by an Oxford cholar onIslam and the West,8 n excellentwork tracing he history f their hostile rela-tions, nd Western eactions, rom he beginnings own to modern imes.

This is not to say that prior to works uch as these slam did not have itsadvocates among Western cholars. Unfortunately, owever,Western cholarsof the nineteenth entury who devoted themselves o a sympathetic tudy ofIslam went overboard n their reaction o what had been done before hem. ntheir ttempt o adjust the balance they wung ver to the other xtreme,mak-ing someclaimsfor slam that couldhardly tand the test of critical cholarship.And this, n turn, gave ample reason for subsequent scholars to distrust hefindings f these zealots, and to swingback once again to the familiar ecurityof the opposite xtreme.

In the following ages, hope to showthat the scholasticmethod was alreadya fully-developed roduct f the slamic scholarly xperience ong before t hadeven begun to develop n Europe; and that t was not philosophy, ot theology,but law, that supplied the most basic constitutive lement f this method, astand West, on both sides of the Mediterranean.

The scholasticmethod s both a method f presentation nd a way of thought.Asa method f presentation, t may be seen n its finished nd most perfect ormin the Summa Theologiae f St Thomas Aquinas.9This monumental work onChristian heology s structured y the author nto "parts," which re dividedinto "questions" that are further ivided nto "articles." Each article eginswiththe formulation f a question, ollowed y a series f arguments or he negative,

7T. Arnold nd A. Guillaume, dd., The Legacyof slam (Oxford, 931),p. v (in the preface y

A. Guillaume).8N. Daniel, Islam and the West: The Making of an Image (Edinburgh, 960), and idem, slam,Europe and Empire Edinburgh, 966).

9S.Thomae de Aquino, umma Theologiae, vols. Ottawa, 1941); English ranslation, heSummaTheologica f Saint ThomasAquinas, translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province,revised by Daniel J. Sullivan, 2 vols. (Volumes 19and 20 of Great ooks of heWesternWorld, ditedby R. M. Hutchins nd M. J. Adler, t al.) (Chicago,1952).




5/23

The Scholastic Method in Medieval Education 643

each with a number, alled objections; these are followed n turn by argumentsfor the affirmative ased mainly on Sacred Scripture nd the Fathers of theChurch; then comes a solution to the question formulated t the head of thearticle. After his olution, series f numbered eplies re given, achreplying oits counterpart mong henumbered bjections.

This method f presentation asdevelopedover a longperiod of time. Severalelements went into its make-up. Foremost among these was the sic-et-non10method, method ntroduced n religious works sometime round the end ofthe eleventh century. Dialectic was another element. t was based, at first,only on some of the ogicalworks f Aristotle eferred o as the ogicavetus, r theold logic, nd later trengthened y the rest ofhis ogicalworks, eferred o as the

logicanova,or the new logic. A third element was the disputation, he Latindisputatio, hichdeveloped nto a fixed orm, trengthened ith the strengthen-ing of dialectic.

This is the outer form, he schema, of the scholasticmethod. There is alsoan inner pirit, he basic characteristic f which s a deep and equal concern orboth authority nd reason, ngaging cholastics ver a long period of time n anendeavor o effect harmony etween he two.

In spite of the excellentwork of a number f scholars who have dealt with hehistory f the scholasticmethod, ts origins nd development emain o this dayobscure nd the

subjectof

controversy.artin

Grabmann,well-known o his-

torians f medieval hought,was the ast to write comprehensive istory f thesubject, Die Geschichte er scholastischen ethode.l Two volumes appeared in1909and 1911;unfortunately, projected hird volume was never published.12

Two decades before Grabmann nother German scholar, J. A. Endres, pub-lished an article on the same subject.13 efore Endres t was generally elievedthat Aristotlewas the father f the scholastic method. This notion, lthough nottrue, wasnot altogether alse.The article f Endres helped to put certain mattersstraight, nd to focus n on the origin nd early development f the method. Hisconclusionwas that the scholasticmethod was a product f scholasticism tself,and not, as had hitherto een surmised, product of Aristotelian hilosophy.14In support f this conclusion,whichhe realized wouldappear somewhat trangeto those concernedwith medieval thought,l5 e sketched what he believed to bethe historical evelopment f this method.

The very first eginnings, e says, ie far beyond the point n time when one

10Yes and no, pro and con, for nd against.11M. Grabmann, Die Geschichte er scholastischen ethode, vols. (Freiburg m Breisgau, 1909-

1911;reprint, raz, 1957).The first olumedeals with Die scholastischeMethode von ihren rsten

Anfangen n der Vaterliteratur is zum Beginn des 12. Jahrhunderts," nd the second with "DiescholastischeMethode m 12. und beginnenden 8. Jahrhundert."12Ibid., i, viii.13J. A. Endres, "Ueber den Ursprung nd die Entwicklung er scholastischen ehrmethode,"

Philosophisches ahrbuch, I (1889),52-59.14Ibid., p. 59: "Die scholastischeMethode st also . . . ein Product der Scholastik elbst."15Ibid., p. 57.




6/23

644 The ScholasticMethod n Medieval Education

can speak of a scholasticism t all. He cites the Sentences f Prosper f Aquitaine(d. after 55). The Liber sententiarum rosperi s a work of somethree hundred"sentences"

(quotationsfrom he Church

Fathers) quotedfrom t

Augustineon matters f dogma.The work has no noticeable rder, nd is based on this oneFather of the Church.

Endres next cites the Tres ibri ententiarum f sidore of Seville (d. 636) as awork of great mportance ecauseof the progress t showsover the Sentences fProsper: namely, he material s arrangedmethodically n three books, and, in-stead of a single entence ased on a single uthority nder ach title or theme,we have here a number f sentences rom ach of several authorities. n otherwords, here s a conscious rder nd greater ullness f detail. sidore's work re-mained a modelfor ll such worksdownto the turn f the eleventh-twelfth en-tury.

At this time, new method ame into being, he principles f which re foundin Abelard's Sic et Non. In this work Abelard d. 1142)cites a series of affirma-tive sentences,matching hemwith series f negative entences, ll by Fathersof the Church. The Prologuegivesexplicit nstructions n the method f recon-ciling these pros and cons, but the author does not apply these rules, nd hemakes no attempt to reconcile these apparently contradictory pinions. Forthis reason Abelard was often hought o have used his procedure o produceskepticism n the mind of the reader. Endres denies this on the basis of the ex-

plicit rules cited in the Prologue, nd concludes hat it is only at this point nhistory, with Abelard, hat we can, for he first ime, nd in a real sense, peakof a scholasticmethod.16

Though he attributes he creation of the scholasticmethod to scholasticismitself, ndres does not ose sight f the fact that Aristotle ad some nfluence nits ater development, ut he insists hat the original evelopment nd the essen-tial arrangement f the method do not go back to him. He points out that thosewhobelieve heydo trace them back to the aporias.But the first work hat couldpossibly eflect amiliarity ith he aporiasof Aristotle s the Summa of SimonofTournai at the end of the twelfth

entury,t a time

when the scholasticmethodwasalready beingused.17Notice that n this nalysis f Endres there s a period f five enturies n which

there wasvirtually odevelopment, heSentences f sidore of Sevilleprovidingmodelforwriters uring his ongperiod.Notice lsothe mportance f hetwelfthcentury, ith Abelard's Sic et Non at the beginning, nd the Summa of SimonofTournai at the end. Grabmann devotes full volume, he arger f the two vol-umesofhis great work, othe twelfth entury lone.18 learly hetwelfth enturyis a pivotal point n the history f the scholasticmethod, s it is in the history f

16Ibid., p. 56. Long before Abelard, a disciple of the Sophist Protagoras had compiled a dullcatalogue of mutually onflicting pinions n about the year 400 [B.C.]." Protagoras is said to havebeen the first erson o teach that t is possible o argue for r against any proposition hatsoever."There is no question here however of a method of reconciling ros and cons. See H. I. Marrou,A History f Education n Antiquity New York, 1964),p. 83.

17 Ibid., pp. 58-59.18To be exact, up to the beginning f the 13th century; f. n. 11 above.




7/23


8/23

646 The Scholastic Method n Medieval Education

Perhaps the greatest ontribution o canon aw in the twelfth entury was thatof Gratian (fl. mid-twelfth entury). His monumental work entitled Concordiadiscordantium anonum ontains loseto 4,000 texts. t is a systematic oncor-dance of udgments n canon law, with rules for the reconciliation f conflictingtexts. Gratian was influenced y vo ofChartres s well s by Alger fLiege.28

These writers were canon lawyers who were influenced y canon lawyersamongtheir redecessors. rabmann makes this point clear.29 t the same time,he recognizes he fact hat ater anonists were nfluenced n their way ofworkingby the sic-et-non ethod as it was further eveloped dialectically y Abelard.This is especially ruewith anonistswho also were heologians, nd, precisely stheologians,were nfluenced y the theologianAbelard as regards both method

and content. One example s Roland Bandinelli,who was later to become PopeAlexander II.30The fact s that Bernold nd Ivo had alreadymade use of the ic-et-non ethod

before Abelard. And it was from vo and Alger, anon lawyers, hat the greatGratian borrowedwholepassagesfor his famous Concordia.31

Why then s Abelard's name so closely onnectedwith the sic-et-non ethod,to the virtual xclusion f ts former ractitioners ernold nd Ivo? There couldbe several reasons for this. Perhaps it is simply because the title of his book isSicetNon; or because of Abelard'snotoriety ue to his oveaffair ith Heloise;orbecausehe was a

theologian,whereasBernold and Ivo were canon

awyers,nd

the scholasticmethod was seen as connected nly with theology, ot with aw.Most likely, owever, hereason may have been n the very nature of Abelard'swork; for, n its presentation, t differs adically from hat of other authors.Abelard, s wehave seen, llowsthe statements f the Church athers ostand asthey re, n contradiction f oneanother, with no attempt t reconciliation; encethe title Sic et Non, "Yes and No." On the other hand, Gratian, for nstance,after isting he rules of reconciliation, oeson to reconcile he conflicting tate-ments; hencehis title Concordia iscordantium anonum, ConcordofDiscordantCanons." Thus each of these two titles s fully escriptive f the contents f thebook to which t belongs.

One may therefore onder f the Sic et Non of Abelard did in fact originallycontain he ist ofrulesfound n the Prologue.For the earliest ersion f this workis believedto have been lost,32 nd the work has had many versions, ue to the

28bid., ii, 217.29 Ibid., i, 135,and p. 216where Grabmann ites the Tractatus e misericordia t ustitia f Alger

of Liege (d. 1131 or 1132) as signifying he transition rom he canonical works of vo of Chartres(d. 1116) to the Decretum f Gratian. See also ii, 215-216,where Grabmann onsiders he so-calledinfluence f Abelard's Sic et Non on the Decretum f Gratian as "certainly very much overrated"

(" ... so wird diesesEinfluss icherlich ehr iberschatzt.").80 bid., ii, 217. See also the recent work of D. E. Luscombe, The Schoolof Abelard Cambridge,England, 1969), p. 222,showingAbelard's nfluence n the canonisticmovement f the 12th entury,especiallywith respect o Gratian's successors.

81bid., I, 216,n. 6.8 E. M. Buytaert, The Greek Fathers n Abelard's Sic et Non'," Antonianum, Lt (1966),418-

458, see p. 414; cf. D. E. Luscombe,op. cit., p. 62.




9/23

The ScholasticMethod n MedievalEducation 647

copieshatweremade ystudents ndcarried waywithout eing ontrolledby he uthor. t maywell ethat he work ad cquiredts itle eforehe istofrules or econciliationas dded yAbelard,r by theAbelardianchool.The istmay ave een ddedater3 oplacatehe ritics f methodhat eemedbrazenlyoput he hurch athers t oddswith ne nother,34nd okeep hemthere.

In hishistory, rabmannxpressedoubt s to whether t is in Abelard'ssic-et-nonethodhatwe re o eek he ecisive rigin f he echnicalchemaof cholastic orks; amely,rguments,ounter-arguments,hemain hesis,ndcriticismf the rgumentsor he hallengedpinion. e concedeshat f wecould nswerhis uestionn he ffirmative,hen hemethod ouldndeedon-stitute foundationndmonumentor he istoryf he ormal hapingf cho-lasticism,he xternal ormn which he cholastic ethod f the hirteenthcentury omesous. n any ase, aysGrabmann, emust dd o the ic-et-nonmethod coefficientause; amely,he ssimilationy heWest f he emainingbooks f the Aristotelian rganon: hePrior nd Posterior nalytics, heTopicsand he ophisticalefutations.3heseworks adgreat nfluencen he hapingof he isputation, hich y he ime f John f alisburyd.1180) adbecomea distinct ormndfunctionf eaching,longsidehe ecturend he cademicsermonthe ectiond he raedicatio).ohn f alisburyxplainshe mportanceof he

ighthook f Aristotle's

opicsor

hert f

disputation,nd ays hat:"withoutt one ependsn hance, ot n rt, ndisputation."36ordisputationexercisesreknownohave xisted lreadyn he choolssearly erhapssthetenth, ut ertainly ythe leventhnd arly welfthenturies.3t AnselmfCanterburyd. 1109) peaks f t n his DeGrammatico;38ndPeterAberlardboastsnhisHistoriaalamitatumsbeing uperiorndisputationohismaster

8 n his study of the extant manuscripts f Abelard's Sic et Non, Father Buytaert tates that theprologue s represented n these manuscripts n various engths op. cit., pp. 418,419, 422, 426), and

that n two of the manuscripts heprologue s lacking ltogether, ut he believes his to be "becauseboth codices are deficient t the beginning."34On the state of Abelard's exts, eeE. M. Buytaert, p. cit., p. 414: "Of the Sic et Non ten manu-

scripts re known. ... in the strict ense f the word none of these en codices s complete.Moreover,the earliest redaction of the work s not directly ttested to by these manuscripts: he oldest orcertainly he shortest edaction n existence, he one preserved y the manuscript f Tours, presup-posesyet nother, ow ost." See also D. E. Luscombe, p. cit., hap. ii, The Diffusion f AbelardianWritings," p. 60-102,esp. p. 96: "The sheer haos of the varieties f the versions f the Sic et Nonconstitutes n editorial nightmare nd it is no wonder hat a modern ditor hould describe uchvolatile texts s 'poor'."

85The so-called logica nova." See Grabmann, p. cit., I, 219-220.86John f

Salisbury, Metalogicus .2,c. 4

(PL, cxcix, 860):"nam sine eo

[meaningook VIII of

Aristotle's opics]non disputatur rte, ed casu." Cf. Daniel D. McGarry, TheMetalogicon f Johnof Salisbury: A Twelfth-Century efense of the Verbal and LogicalArts of the Trivium Berkeley-Los Angeles, 955),p. 190: "without hisbook [=eighth book of the Topics], ne depends n chance,rather han on art, n disputation."

37Cf. Grabmann, p. cit., I, 17.38 Ibid.




10/23

648 The ScholasticMethod n Medieval Education

William f Champeaux d. 1122).39 ut the disputatio as not a distinct orm ndfunction f teaching heologyuntil ater; it was not. as yet separate from heeetio.40he works of Aristotle ust mentioned trengthened ialectic,which wasat the basisof this dvance n disputation.

The obscure nature f the origins f the scholastic method s due to the abruptappearance of the sic-et-non ethod n Europe towards he end of the eleventhcentury. here s nothing nown n the previous patristic eriod n the West oexplain ts existence.Nor can it be explained y Aristotle's porias, or difficulties,as discussedbriefly y him especially n the beginning f Book III of his Meta-physics. or not only was this work not known as yet in the West, the aporiasare not quite of the same nature as the sic-et-non onfrontation f conflictingtexts.

It is for possible nswer o this problem hat suggest we now turn our at-tention othe slamic experience.

The scholasticmethod s we find t at the height f ts perfection n the Summaof St Thomas, has been known s one of the great accomplishments f the me-dieval university, nd rightly o. But unlike the university tself, which wasstrictly phenomenon f Western Europe in the Middle Ages,41he scholasticmethod had alreadybeenused n the slamic East, a century r sopreviously.

The constitutive lements ad already developed here: he sic-et-non ethod,dialectic, nd the disputation disputatio), s distinct from he lecture lectio).Translated, these elements, n Islam, were: al-khildf also referred o as al-ikhtildf), adal, and mundaara, s distinct rom he qird'a (or lectio), nd othermethods f teaching.

Oneof hemost triking acts hat facethe eeker f heorigins f he cholasticmethod n the Muslim East is that the sic-et-non ethodhas its natural habitat,so to speak, n Muslim religious aw. Once this discovery s made - the studentof Islam can hardly void making t - the rest of the elements we mentionedfall nto their

roper lacein their

ppropriate tagesof

development.I have elsewhere aid some stress n the role played by Islamic law in the de-velopment f Muslim nstitutions f earning.42slamic law was no less mportantin the development f the scholasticmethod. As we have already seen, canon

89 bid.; see also the recent nglish ranslation f the Historia alamintatum y J. T. Muckle, TheStory f Abdard's Adversities Toronto, 1964),esp. pp. 12-20, for he section n his teacher Williamof Champeaux.

40 Grabmann, p. cit., r, 17.41See G. Makdisi, "Law and Traditionalism n the Institutions f Learning of Medieval Islam,"

Theology nd Law in Islam, edited by G. E. von Grunebaum Wiesbaden, 1971),pp. 75-88; idem,"Madrasa and University n the Middle Ages," Studia Islamica, xxxII (1970),255-264; and idem,"The Madrasa as a Charitable Trust and the University s a Corporation n the Middle Ages,"Actes, Ve Congres nternational 'Arabisants t d'lslamisants, Correspondance 'Orient, No. 11;Brussels: Centre pour l'Etude des Problemes du Monde Musulman Contemporain, 971).

4 G. Makdisi, "Muslim Institutions f Learning n Eleventh-Century aghdad," Bulletin f theSchoolof Oriental nd African tudies London), xxiv (1961), 1-56.




11/23

TheScholasticMethod n MedievalEducation 649

law was significant n the development f Christian cholasticism, nd Islamiclaw played a similar ole n the Muslim East. However, slamic experience if-fered rom hat of the West on two counts. First, the development ookplace inIslam at a much arlier ate; secondly, nd ust as significantly, t was in the verynature f slam to develop he ic-et-non ethod. n other words, hedevelopmentof this method n Christianity ouldvery well not have happened t all, whereaswithout t, slam couldnot have remained slamic. The reason s that the sic-et-non method was part and parcel of the slamic orthodox rocess ordeterminingorthodoxy.

Having no councils r synods, slam had to depend on the principle f jmd',or consensus, odefine rthodoxy. nd since consensus ould be tacit, hedoctors

of the aw, as a matter f conscience, elt bliged omake known heir ifferencesof opinion, est a doctrine which hey opposed be considered s having receivedtheir acit acceptance.Since there was no formal rganization f jmd', the pro-cessworked etroactively. ach generation ast its glancebackward o the gen-erations hat preceded t to see whether r not a certain doctrine had gainedacceptance hrough onsensus; nd this was decided by the absence of a dissent-ingvoiceamong hedoctors f the awregarding hat doctrine. n time, hesedif-ferences f opinionwere ompiled n arge omes, nd khildf ecamean importantfield f knowledge aught n the schools f aw.43

Jadal,the Islamic

dialectic,was

alreadywell-established n Islam as

earlyas

the ninth entury; nd, unlike urope, t benefitted arly rom hose ogicalworksof Aristotle which did not appear in Western Christianity ntil the secondhalfof the twelfth entury.44

43Works n khildf ikhtildf) ave survived rom s early s the econd/eighth entury; f. C.Brockel-mann, Geschichte er arabischen itteratur, nd ed., 2 vols. (Leiden, 1943-49), Supplement, vols.(1937-42), and Fuat Sezgin, Geschichte es arabischen chrifttums, (Leiden, 1967), indexes, .v.The subject of khildf s in need of study. gnaz Goldziher, lose to a century go, called our atten-tion to this need which has not as yet been fulfilled; ee I. Goldziher, ie Zdhirten, hr Lehrsystemund ihre Geschichte: eitrag ur Geschichte er muhammedanischen heologie Leipzig, 1884),p. 37,n. 1; cf. F. Rosenthal's note n Ibn Khaldfn, The Muqaddimah: An Introduction oHistory, rans-lated by F. Rosenthal, vols. (NewYork, 1958), II, 30, n. 289 (read "p. 37," instead of "p. 27").

44The chronicles eport mong the events of the year 279/892 hat a proclamation was issued bythe Caliph al-Mu'tadid to the effect hat booksellers were o take an oath not to sell works n kalam(dogmatic theology), adal (dialectic), or falsafa (philosophy). See Ibn al-Jauzi, al-Muntamam itdarkh l-mulfik a'l-umam, d. by F. Krenkow, vols. (Haidarabad: Da'irat al-Ma'arif Press, 1938-40), v, 122; Ibn al-Athir, l-Kdmil ft t-tdrikh, vols. (Cairo: al-Muniriya nd al-Istiqama Presses,1929ff.), i, 72; Ibn Kathir, al-Biddyawa 'n-Nihdya t t-tdrikh, 4 vols. (Cairo: as-Sa'ada Press,1929ff.), xi, 64-65. About a century arlier Caliph Harfin al-Rashid is reported o have banneddisputation mundwara) uring his reign 170-193/786-808), nd to have imprisoned ationalisttheologians ahl al-Kaldm) for ndulging n t. See Ibn al-Murtada, Tabaqdt l-Mu'tazila Die Klassen

der Mu'taziliten, ibliotheca slamica 21), ed. S. Diwald-Wilzer Beirut-Wiesbaden: ranz Steiner,1961), p. 54. By the ninth entury, ll of the logicalworks f Aristotle which formed he basis fordialectic nd the development f disputation ad already been translated nto Arabic: the Topics,both Analytics, nd the Sophistical efutations. or the translation f Aristotle's rganon nto Arabic,see N. Rescher, TheDevelopmentf ArabicLogic(Pittsburgh, 964),p. 31. On the other hand, the"logica nova" which ncluded he Topics, ll-important or he development f disputation, id notcometo Europe until he twelfth entury. ee Grabmann, p. cit., I, 18, 218if., 221,450 ff. Aristotle




12/23


13/23


at first oQudama b. Ja'far, nd currently eing ttributed o a certain shaq b.Ibrahim b. Wahb, and the Kitab al-Anwdr f al-QirqisnLi.49

M. GeorgesVajda points out, in his study and translation f the dialectic ofQirqisAni, hat this Karaite theologian oes not hide the fact that the essentialpart of his theoretical xposition ame from mutakallim, nd he says that t ismore than probable that his source was a Muslim (not a Jewish) mutakallim.There can nowbe scarcely ny doubt about this. Moreover, t is more han prob-able that the mutakallimwasa Mu'tazillite.60

As I began to read the Arabic text of Qirqisani, had no doubt as to wherehad previously een arge portions f that very ame text. or both Qirqisani ndIbn 'Aqil have several passageswhich re dentical.And in drawing p a table-of

concordance, t became quite clear to me that the two sets of parallel passagesbelong o two different anuscript raditions, oth ofwhichgoback to a commonsource. n other words, bn 'Aqil's text is in no way dependent upon that ofQirqisani; n fact ts manuscript radition s the better f the two, for bn 'Aqil'stext ompletes hat of Qirqisani.51

With the shorter ialectic of bn 'Aqil we already have a text which s moredeveloped han any other o far known n Islamic dialectic; nd this was his sec-ond work on the subject especially written or awyers. His greater work ondialectic, he first f the two to be written, nd applicableto any field f knowl-

edge,is more than twice almost three times the size of the second one.

Qirqisani's text represents pproximately ne-seventh f Ibn 'Aqil's greaterwork, nd only ouchesupon sixof ts thirteen hapters.

The importance f bn 'Aqil's works n dialectic s quite obvious.They affordus an unprecedented pportunity ostudy he character f slamic dialectic.Hisgreater work goesback to a sourcewhich ntedates hat of Qirqisani; the sourcemay also antedate both the Bad' wa 't-tdrzkh nd the Naqd an-Nathr. he size,completeness nd integrity f the texts of both of his works make them mostvaluable.

It will be recalled hat the Summa of St Thomas is divided nto Parts (pars),each Part is divided nto Questions quaestio), nd each Question nto Articles,the article articulus) eing tated n nterrogative orm.52

49 ee G. Vajda, "Etudes sur Qirqisani V: Les Reglesde la controverse ialectique," RevuedesEtudes Juives, 6ser., t. ii (cxxii), 7-74; for he Arabic text of this French ranslation f Q'rqisfni,see Qirqisani, Kitdb al-Anwdr wa 'l-mardqib: odeof Karaite Law, ed. Leon Nemoy, 5 vols., NewYork: Publications f the AlexanderKohut Memorial Foundation, 1989-43), v, 470-494,chapters59-68. See also G. Vajda, "La Contribution e quelques textes udeo-arabes Bla connaissancedumouvement 'idees dans l'Islam du III-IX6 siecle," Elaboration e 'Islam (Paris, 1961),pp. 87-97,esp. pp. 96-97, ncluding he "addenda."

60G. Vajda, "Etudes sur QirqisanI V," p. 8.61An article, now n press Belgium)willgive the concordance f passages n Qirqisani nd in IbnAqil.

62Pars, quaestio, rticulus. or introductions o the study of the Summa of St Thomas Aquinas,see M. Grabmann, infiihrung n die Summa Theologiae e8s . Thomas onAquin (Freiburg, 919),and M.-D. Chenu, ntroduction l'etudede Saint Thomas d'Aquin (Montreal-Paxis, 950;2nd ed.,1955).




14/23

652 TheScholasticMethod n MedievalEducation

A question s posed beginning ith the word "whether" utrum): or nstance,"Whether esides philosophy, ny further octrine s required."53 n answer sgiven beginningwith "it seems that" (videtur uod): for nstance, It seems hatbesidesphilosophical octrinewe have no need of any further nowledge."54hisanswer s followed y specific oints, ach with ts number. These are the argu-ments of the adversary. After that comes the On the contrary .. ,55which citesa view opposed to the answer given under t seems that.... Then comes thethesis of St. Thomas with the words answer hat ... 5 This is the body of thearticle presenting t Thomas' judgment egarding he various views.Then comethe replies o the objections isted by number: Reply] o objection]ne, . . two,etc.57

Thus wehave first ne view together ith ts arguments; hen contrary iewwith ts arguments; henSt Thomas' thesiswhich s the body of the article;58 ndfinally he replies o the objections efuting ll arguments pposed to the thesis.Anyonewhohas becomefamiliarwith he Summa will find t easier to read firstthe question n the title of the article, hen to go straight o the body of thearticle for St Thomas' answer nd arguments, hen to read each of the severalobjections long with ts reply.

This highly tylized resentation n St Thomas' Summa s not to be found nIbn 'Aqil. Ibn 'Aqll's presentation s closer to the method one would use in

readingt Thomas.59

urthermore,he whole of the Summa of St Thomas fol-

lowsthis method without eviation, whereas bn 'Aqil applies t only where hehas encountered ifferences f opinion ither rally, n actual disputations, r inwriting.60

At one timehe will beginby giving thesis nd a counter-thesis. his sfollowedby the arguments or he thesis; hen heobjections o these rguments; hen hereplies o these objections; then the arguments or he counter-thesis; hen therefutation f these rguments.

At another ime the article or unit of disputation s more elaborate, but it isreducible othe basic schema namely, 1) thesis nd counter-thesis, 2) argumentsfor he thesis, 3) objections o the arguments, 4) replies o the objections, 5)pseudo-arguments or the counter-thesis, nd (6) replies n refutation f thesepseudo-arguments.

The terminology s technical, s one would expect. The word"for hesis sal-madhhab pl. madhdhib). he arguments or he thesis re al-adilla (sg. dalil),

6"Utrum it necessarium raeter philosophicasdisciplinas liam doctrinam aberi." SeeS.Thomae eAquino, umma heologiaeOttawa, 941), ol. , p. 2a.

" "Videtur uodnon it necessarium raeter hilosophicasisciplinasliamdoctrinam aberi"(loc. it.).

5"Sedcontra...."66"Respondeoicendum...."

67 ad primum," ad secundum,"tc.8 Corpus rticuli."9Cf.Grabmann, infihrung, . 108." It willbe rememberedhat St Thomas id not lways sethis method; f. for nstance, he

Summa ontra entiles.




15/23


whereas he arguments or he counter-thesis re called ash-shubah, sh-shubuhdt(sg. shubha).The objections o the arguments dvanced for he thesis re calledal-as'ila; a su'al is not a question, t is an objection; the replies o the objectionsare called al-ajwiba sg. awdb,which s also the term used for he refutation fthe pseudo-arguments shubah]).

Medievalists have rightly een in the chronology f disputations eld by StThomas the ntention f feeding hecomposition f the Summa Theologiae hichhe was in the processof writing. n passing,he dealt in these disputations withquestions of actuality. This calls to mind Ibn 'Aqil's Kitdb al-Funun,61 hichplayed such a role for his own works nd in whichhe recorded isputations hathad taken place in his presence. ome of these were regular essions, nd others

wereheld on the occasionof the death of a scholar r the nauguration f a pro-fessor.Ibn 'Aqil and St Thomas were professors ho put their nterest n students

first nd foremost n their works. n the prologue o their espectiveworks, heyboth say that they are writing heir Summas for the instruction f beginners.They both speak of the need for larity n the presentation hichwouldcontrastwith he confusion ne meets n the works f predecessors. t Thomas wanted todo away with the multiplication f uselessquestions, rticles, nd arguments,""he wanted to present he work ccording o the order f the subject matter, ot

according o the chronology f the various disputations,which

was quite arbi-trary.63 y the same token, bn 'Aqil aimedfor larity f presentation nd facilityof expressionwhich would contrast with his predecessors' tyle, which was ob-scure nd too difficult orbeginners o comprehend.64 e said that this clarifica-tion was a departure from he method of the rationalist heologians nd ob-scurantists Ahl al-kaldm wa-dhawZl-i'jdm), rejoining the method of juris-prudence nd the procedures sed n the exposition f positive aw.65

Then Ibn 'Aqil concludeshis Summa of three argevolumeswith he followingstatement, which shows that he was perfectly onsciousof the method he wasusing:

In writing hiswork followed method hereby irst presented n ogical rder hetheses, hen he rguments, hen he bjections,hen hereplies o the bjections,henthepseudo-argumentsof he pponents or he ounter-theses),hen he replies in re-buttal f hese seudo-arguments) (allof his) or he urposef eaching eginnershemethodf isputation.

61See n. 68 below.62 ... multiplicationem nutiium quaestionum, rticulorum t argumentorum."63See the Prologue o the Summaof St Thomas.64"... yuwazi fi I-ldabi wa 'I-basti wa-tashlli l-'ibarati llati ghamad.at Ikutubi I-mutaqad-

dimin, wa-daqqat 'an afhami 1-mubtadi'in." ee Ibn 'Aqil, al-Wd4ibfi ufld al-fiqh,MS uuil al-fiqh78, Zahiriya Library Damascus), fol. b.66" , . li-yakhruja i-hadha 1-idalii an tariqati Ahl al-Kalam wa-dhawl l-i'jam ila 't-tarlqati

'l-fiqhiya wa 'I-asalibi l-fur'iya." My French colleagueand friend, M. Louis Gardet, has rightlyreferred n more han one occasion to the need for tudying works n u4l al-fiqh s wellas kaldm norder to get a more complete picture of Islamic theology; ee especiallyhis Dieu et a destins deI'homme Paris, 1967),Index I, termeds echniques," . 495, a.e.




16/23


(Wa-innamaalaktu l-hl =al-Wa;ib]taf$Ilal-madhahib, hummal-as'ila, humma'I-ajwibaanha, hummash-shubuhat, humma1-ajwiba,a'liman i-tariqatin-naari

i l-mubtadi'in.)66Ibn 'Aqil had not only the schema f the method, he external echniqueor

external orm f presentation, e had also its soul; that s, in the words of Grab-mann, the use of reason n order o bring hecontent f faith loser o the spiritof thinking men, describe t as a system nd clarify he objections nd difficul-ties."67 uch wasIbn 'Aqil's method, s it was that of St Thomas.

In addition o a genuine nterest n students, bn 'Aqil shared with t Thomasa desire for harmony etween easonand faith. n Kitdb al-Funun, peaking susual in the third erson, e refers o himself s someone whohas devotedhimselfto the study of the science of the Ancients meaning Greek philosophy), whodelights n the search for the truth while remaining eligious nd deeply com-mitted to the religious aws of God: Insanun yantayilu ilma 'l-Awd'il, wa-yu'jibuhu l-ba thu 'ani 'l-.haqd'iq, ua-huwa mutadaiyin, aiyidu'li 'itiqdi fI'sh-shard'i'.68 n another ccasion, n an academicsermon, e says that such isthe codefollowed y the ntellectuals hocling o their eligious eliefs, groupwith which he identified: Hddha huwa qdnunu l-'uqald'i 'I-mutamassikina i'l-adydn.69

Reason, for bn 'Aqil, is the most excellent f God's gifts o man: al-'aqlu

afdalu md manalhahu Lldhu khalqah.70eing God's gift to man, reason's firstfruit hould be obedience o God, in his commands nd prohibitions: hamaratu'l-'aqli td'atu Lldhi ft-md maraka bihi wa-nahdk.71or a mind which does notbear the fruit f obedience o God, nor ustice for ne's fellowman, s like an eyethat cannot see, an ear that cannot hear: fa-'aqlun ld yuthmiru d'ata l-Ijaqq,wa-ld nsdfa l-khalq, a-'ainin d tubsir, a-udhunin dtasma.72

This means, of course, hat f God gave us reason, hen reason and revelationare from he same source, nd the two must be in harmony nd cannot be incontradiction. [Right] reason s in agreementwith revelation nd there s noth-ing in revelation xcept that which agrees with [right] eason": inna 'l-'aqlamutabiqun i 'sh-shar, wa-innahu d yaridu sh-shar'u bi-mdyukhdlifu I-'aql.73

In this next tatement bn 'Aqil directs is criticism t both the strict ational-ists and the strict traditionalists. o the doctors of both tendencies he says,"Nothing causes intellectuals o err except acts due to hastiness f temper nd

66Wd4di, MS Garrett Collection 842 formerly rill-H.2 06), Firestone ibrary, rinceton Uni*versity, ol.207a.

67Grabmann, Geschichte,i, 384.68bn Aqil,Kitdb l-Funun TheNotebooksf bn Aqil:Kildb l-Funun), rabic ext Edited

with ntroduction nd Critical Notes by G. Makdisi, 2 Parts continuous agination Beirut: nstitutdes Lettres Orientales, echerches ols.44 [Part One]and 45 [Part Two], 1970-71), p. 307 (lines5-6).69 Ibid., p. 450 (1.16).70 Ibid., p. 652 (1.1).71Ibid., p. 652 (1.4).72Ibid., p. 652 (lines5-6).73 bid., p. 509 (lines7-8); cf. St Thomas Aquinas, Summa ContraGentiles, ook 1, Chap. 7.




17/23

The Scholastic Method n Medieval Education 655

their being content with the Ancients to the exclusion of the Moderns": mdauqa'a 'sh-shubuha i 'I-'uqala'i illd 'l-bawddir, wa 'l-quniuu bi 'I-Awd'ili ani'I-Awdkhir.74y "the Ancients" al-Awd'il) he meant the pioussalaf or Fathersof the Church), he strict raditionalists; y the strict ationalists, e meant theGreek philosophers. oth tendencies e regarded s beingbackward, or he onerepudiates eason,while the other rejects revelation.

He separates men into three ategorieswith regard o reason and revelation.Again, his s how he puts t:

Somemetaphysiciansay "there s in philosophy hat which nables s to dispensewith rophets." hus they haveannulled he aws of God and contented hemselveswith he dictates f heir unaided] eason nd the disciplinef heir ntellects. n the

other and, ome ntelligent eoplehavemadereason ubmissiveothe religiousaw,but use t to pass udgment nmatters fworldly oncern egarding hich here s noprovisionnthe revealedaw.Andfinally here re ome ontemptibleeoplewhohaveannulled he aws f God norder odeliver hemselvesrom estraint ndresponsibility,andwhohave nnulled eason s well.76Ibn 'Aqil belongs o that middle group whichdistinguishes heplace of reason

and the place of revelation. n one of the sections f his work he reinforces hisdoctrine. This section s entitled: That which may be known by reason to theexclusion f scripture, hat which may be known only through cripture o theexclusion f reason, nd that whichmay be known y both together."76

Like St Thomas, bn 'Aqil did not regard himself s a philosopher. e madeuse of philosophy nd had a healthy espect or eason.When young he was per-secuted nd caused to go into hiding; his persecuters ccusedhim, mong otherthings, f excessiverespect for the rationalist Mu'tazilites.77 eflecting n thisaffair n his old age, he said without he slightest ouch of bitterness, hat hiscompanions ad misunderstood is ntent; he had merelywanted to benefit romthe knowledge f all the great professors f his day, including he Mu'tazilites.78For Ibn 'Aqil was after he truth, nd the Mu'tazilites had tools which he con-sidered o be important or rriving t the truth. t was their methodology hat

he wanted o earn; he wanted nothing o do with heir octrines. n search f thetruth, ewas ready orecognize t and accept t wherever e happened o find t.Ajewel n a dung-heap, e once said, sno less a jewelfor eing here.

It is easy to see how bn 'Aqil and St Thomas Aquinascouldbe considered stwo kindred pirits. ike St Thomas, bn 'Aqil had a deep and genuine espectfor the truth, oupledwith the courage to follow t wherever t led him, and a

74Funun, p. 381 (lines 6-7).76 bid., p. 289 (lines 10-14): "Ba'Qu 'l-bukama'i 1-ilahlyina aqfilfn: fI -bikmati ma yughni ani

's-sufara'.' Fa-'attali 'shshara'i', wa 'qtana'il bi-ma tu'addihim laihi 'l-'uqul, wa-tu'addibuhum

bi-hi l-albabu wa 'n-nuha. Wa-ba'du l-futana'i a'alf 'l-'uqula musta'badatan i sh-shar', akimatan'ala amri d-dunya wa-siyasatiha llati lam yiijad fi-ha na un min shar'. Wa-ba'du 's-safsafi attalf'sh-shara'i'a talaban li 'r-rabati mina l-bajri wa 't-takalluf, a-attall '1-uquil."

76Wad4iMS Zatiriya Library Damascus), usfd l-fiqh 8, fol. 14b: "ma yu'lamu bi 'l-'aql dmna'sh-shar', wa-ma a yu'lamu lla bi 's-sam' dfina l-aql, wa-mayasubtu an yu'lama bihima ami'an."

7 G. Makdisi, bn 'Aqil, pp. 424 ff.78Ibid., p. 434.




18/23


doggedresolvenot to be sidetracked. e scandalizedhis traditionalist anbalitecompanionswhen he declared hat he wouldfollow he vidence, ot the founderof their chool,Ahmad b. Hanbal: al-wajibu ttibd'u d-dalil, d ttibd'u Afmad,79explaining hat this s what the founder imself ad done, and to do so wouldbeto follow im n his true pirit.

Ibn 'Aqilwasa Hanbalite, whostudied nder he direction f Muttazilites, ndwho was once claimed by the Ashtarites.80 ut he stood apart from ll threegroups, man sui generis. e had great ympathy orhis own companions, heHanbalites, whom he never deserted,81 nd respected the knowledge of theMu'tazilites,82 ut had little r no patience with the Ash'arites, orhe saw themas advancingwith one foot owards he traditionalists nd with nother owards

the rationalists, onfused s to which irection o take.83It was his genuine ympathy or the Hanbalites that taught him respect forrevelation, nd his genuine espect for he Mu'tazilites that taught him how toappreciate reason, but it was his own genius coupled with the unusual circum-stances of his background hat showed him how to put each in its proper placeand effect harmony etween hem.

This harmony was altogether ifferent rom he sort ofharmony hat Averroisadvocated n his Fasl al-maqdl,84 here he reader s left without ny doubt n hismind bout philosophy eing irst nd foremost, bove theology nd law.

At thepresent

ime know of no other doctor n medieval slam of thesamestamp s Ibn 'Aqil, whether monghis predecessors, r his contemporaries, r his

immediate uccessors.He was originally rom Hanafite family iving n aMu'tazilite quarter f Baghdad, and grew p with rationalist Mu'tazilism s partofhis familiar urroundings. t the age of sixteen, e decided n favor f the tra-ditionalist anbalite school.What makes him unusual s exactly hisbackgroundof traditionalism nd rationalism. o avoid being psychologically plit n two,so to speak, he had the choice of choosing ne of them, or of renouncing hemboth, or of reconciling hem.He chose to reconcile hem, nd was able to do sobecause he had neither he traditionalist's ears and suspicionsof Mu'taziliterationalism or the Mu'tazilite's contempt or traditionalists nd his tendencyto give primacy o reason bove faith. With healthy espect or he ntellectualequipment f the Mu'tazilite, and with the deep commitment f the Hanbalite

79 bn Rajab, Dhail 'ald Tabaqat al-landbila, T, 190 (line 1).80 SeeSubki, Tabaqdt sh-shdfi'Zya,1, 58 line 18). For an explanation f this laim, eeG.Makdisi

"Ash'ari and the Ash'arites n, slamic ReligiousHistory," tudia slamica, xvii (1962),62and n. 2.81Cf. his appraisal of his Hanbalite companions nd his defense f Aimad b. IIanbal, cited by Ibn

Rajab, Dhail, I, 184 and 189, translated n G. Makdisi, bn 'Aqil, pp. 479-481.82 As evidenced by the number f his teachers who were Mu'tazilites: Abii 'l-Qsim b. Barhan

(d. 456/1064), Abi 'Ali b. al-Walid d. 478/1006), nd Abu l-Qasimb. Tabban (of whomvery ittleis known).83SeeG. Makdisi, "Quatre opusculesd'Ibn 'Aqil sur e Coran," Bulletin dEtudes Orientales, xIv

(1971),55-96, and esp. p. 93 (lines 9-10).84The title f this work n the French ranslation f Leon Gautier Alger, 948)is: Traitg dcisif ur

l'accordde a religion t de a philosophis.




19/23

The ScholasticMethod n Medieval Education 657

for the Scriptures, he Koran and traditions, bn 'Aqil embodies he synthesiswhichmade possible harmony etween aith nd reason.85

Ibn 'Aqil's method of exposition ketched bove does not exist, as far as Iknow, n any Muslim work before him. Only recently was able to find manu-script vidence hat a modified orm, essdeveloped han his, was used a centuryafter him.86With due allowance being made for the difference n culture ndreligious ersuasion, bn 'Aqil and St Thomas belong othe samespiritual amily.

The sic-et-non ethod, ialectic nd disputation re not the only lements hatare found n Islam before heir ppearance n the West. Noteworthy re the fol-lowing parallel elements: the Latin relationes r reportationes nd the Islamicta'liqa, notes of professorial ectures hat developed nto he textbooks f the day,several of which have survived; the Latin pecia, or piece of a book, and theIslamic uz', alsoa constituent art of a book,both of which erved he needs forreproducing he work before he advent of printing; he European college, ikethe Collegedes Dix-Huit, in Paris, and the Muslim khdn, n Baghdad, both ofwhich erved t first s boarding ousesfor tudents, nd where nstruction atertook place, the Muslim khan becoming ncorporated nto the madrasa, nd theEuropean collegebecoming university ollege.

Many more parallels could be cited.87 nd when they re all totaled up, theybecome perhaps too numerous o be dismissed s mere parallels. t is not as

though we were at a loss to explain how the influence, f influence here was,couldpossiblyhave travelled rom ast to West. The channelswerenot acking:Byzantium, taly, Sicily, nd Spain.

When treating f the sic-et-non ethod, Grabmann isted the names of thosewho used it before Abelard.88 wo of these have already been cited: Bernold of

86His students fter him, s far as I know at present, ecame either Mu'tazilites or Hanbalites,and in one case Ash'arite.

86 See especially the work of Fakhr ad-Din ar-Razi, al-Matdlib l-'aliya fi 'ilm al-kaldm, MSBerlin, andberg , and Arabic MS 3114,Chester eatty Library, ublin. The latter houldbe addedto the MSS cited by C. Brockelmann, eschichte erArabischen itteratur, , p. 507,Suppl. , p. 922.

87 See G. Makdisi, "Law and Traditionalism n the Institutions f Learning f Medieval Islam,"pp. 76-77.

88More recently, study was made of the historical recedents f Abelard's ic-et-non ethodbyErmenegildo Bertola, "I Precendenti torici del metodo del 'sic et non' di Abelardo," Rivista diFilosofiaNeo-Scolastica, III (1961), 255-280. The author concludes hat the methodological rece-dents of the sic-et-non f Abelard show how the method of comparison f various and apparentlyopposed patristic exts was used for criptural xegesis n the theological chools t the beginning fthe 12th century, specially n that of Laon, a method which n turn derived from he exegeticalmethodology f the Carolingian eriod. t was a method used especiallywhen dealing with difficultquestions n biblical exts. To avoid disputes mong the masters, herewas recourse o the testimonyof patristic exts. n the school of Anselm f Laon, in the 12th entury, hemethod was modified r

perfected ith respect o what t was in the Carolingian eriod. Whereas previously t was used forthe literary xegesis f the biblical texts, with Anselm t was applied to individual uestions. WithAbelard he method nderwent urther evelopment, ecoming n instrument or ystematic xegesis,not a purely extual one; in his Sic et Non, the comparison f patristic exts has a logicaland sys-tematic rder. Thus E. Bertola traces hesic-et-non ethod back to a method f exegesis sed at thebeginning f the 12th century, which was derived n turn from method f exegesisused in the 9th




20/23


Constance nd Ivo of Chartres. ut Grabmann peaks of two others: Gerbert fAurillac d. 1003)and Photius, the patriarch f Constantinople. n a work at-tributed oGerbert, rabmann aw the

beginningsf the method f

concordance,the sic-et-non ethod, hat was later to be used by Bernold and Abelard. Butthere s some question s to whether his work, ntitled e Corpore t SanguineDomini, s correctly ttributed o Gerbert.89

Turning to the East, Grabmann sees the beginning f this method n theAmphilochia Quaestiones mphilochianae) f Photius, a collection f questionsand answers n biblical,dogmatic, hilosophic, rammatical nd historical rob-lems. n the exegetical arts Photius ndicates he rules for econciling pparentcontradictions. e especially oints ut that onemust pay attention o the personmaking ach statement, nd to the place and time nvolved; one must considerthe context nd, above all, explore he Sacred Scripture rom ll points of view.These rules re reminiscent f what was later doneby Bernold nd Abelard.90

Now we learn from he biography f Photius that he was at one time an am-bassador to the court of the Caliph al-Mutawakkil reign: 232-247/849-861).This was in 855, when Photius was about 35 years of age. At the court of al-Mutawakkil he most certainly ould have come into contact with khildf- thesic-et-non ethod. Muslim scholarsheld ceremonial isputations t the caliphalcourt n honor of foreign missaries n which uch emissaries ould also partici-pate, especiallywhen heywere cholars f the caliber f Photius.

Writings uch as those of Photius would have had no trouble arriving nEurope, given hefact of Byzantine nterests n taly. Before he advent of Abel-ard and his predecessors ho used the sic-et-non ethod, ranslators ad alreadybeen active in translating works from Greek to Latin. The quarrel over icono-clasm had brought bout a migration f Greek monks o Italy, where hey be-came established n colonies and monasteries. his migration n turn broughtabout a renewal f Greek scholarly earning n Southern taly and Sicily,whichwere Greek by tradition. here were closecontacts between Constantinople ndItaly in the eleventh entury, nd southern taly was regarded s part of the

Byzantine Empire well nto the secondhalf of the eleventh entury, efore ariwas lost to the Normans.Greek works were ncluded n gifts ent to Europe as early as the ninth en-

tury. The Byzantine Emperor Michael II sent to Louis the Pious a codex of theworks f the pseudo-Dionysius; he translation was carried ut under the direc-tion of Hilduin, bbot of Saint-Denis, n the year 835.John cotus Eriugena re-vised the translation 860-862). In the eleventh entury Alphanus of Salerno

century. he authormakesno mention f the canon awyers ernold f Constance nd Ivo ofChartres; he egal ntecedents iscussedyGrabmannrepassed ver n silence.

89Grabmann, p. cit., , 213.90bid., , 113 seealsop. 353, Sachregister,".v. ic-et-non ethode: Anfunge eiPhotius.").

On Photius'smission o the Muslims,eeJ. Hergenrbther,hotius, atriarch onConstantinopel,vols. Regensburg,867-69),, 343,who tates egretfullyhatPhotius imself asnot eft s anyreport nthismission. or n analysis f herules f reconciliationselaborated yPhotius, ee m,298-319.




21/23


(d. 1085) translated he De natura hominis f Nemesius of Emessa from Greekinto Latin. Several other works were translated n this century nd later.91 he

growth f trade and commerce ad brought he Venetians nd Pisans into con-tact with Greek cholars nd learning t Constantinople.On the other hand, the sic-et-non ethod may have comedirectly o the Latin

language from Arabic, through pain. Toledo, it will be remembered, as re-conquered from he Muslims by Alphonse VI in 1085, the year which markedthe end of the Great Saljuqs. Soon after his,Toledo became the most mportantcenter f translation romArabic to Latin, under the patronage of ArchbishopRaymond (1126-53). In passing, will only recall the names of two famoustranslators: onstantine he African d. c. 1087)92nd Adelard of Bath (d. after

1142),both of whomwere ontemporaries f Abelard.It is true hat the Arabic works ranslatedweremostly works n medicine ndphilosophy. ut even if no works on law and theology were translated andthis s by no means certain the scholasticmethod may have been transmittedthrough work n medicine. or the scholastic method of urisconsults as putto use in the field f medicine, s, for nstance, n the work of Najm ad-Din b.al-Lubfdi (7th/13th entury): Tadqiq al-mabdhith t-tibbiya i tahqiq l-masd'ilal-khildfiya, aladariq masd'il khildf l-fuqahd'.93 his title was translated ntoLatin by F. Wilstenfeld s follows: Exploratio accurata disquisitionum medi-cinalium de

quaestionibusontroversis ere

cognoscendis,d rationem ontro-

versarum Jurisconsultorum nstituta.94 he application of the method of uris-consults o works on medicine s not at all surprising and this s by no meansthe only nstance), incemany doctors f medicinewere lso doctors f aw.95

Peter Abelard himselfwas not unaware of the Saracens. When he was havinghis troubles n Paris, he declared that he would ike to go and live among them;he felt that the Saracens96would receive him all the more favorably ince hewouldbe considered s a bad Christian n the basis of the accusations hat werebeing evelled gainst him.97

91 or a ready ist of such works, ee "Translation Literature, Greek and Arabic," New CatholicEncyclopedia, iv (New York, 1967), 251-254 (by M. R. P. McGuire).

2Constantine he African was born around 1010-1015, n Central North Africa r in Sicily; hedied n Monte Cassino about 1087. He was a Christian whoknew Arabic,Latin and Greek, nd spentmost of his ife ravelling s a merchant r a physician n the Middle East. His early areer s obscure;he became a monk nd died in the Benedictine ouseof Monte Cassino n Italy, wherehe had trans-lated a great number f Arabic works nto Latin.

93bn Abi Usaibi'a (d. 668/1270), Uyun al-anbd' fi abaqdt al-atibbd' Beirut: Dar Maktabatal-Uayat, 1965),p. 668.

4Geschichteer rabiachen rzte und Naturforscher Gdttingen, 840),p. 120,no. 211 (1). The workis cited in IjAjjl Khalifa, Kashf a-;untn, 2 vols. (Istanbul: Government ress, 1941-43), I, 382,

where he author s said to have died after 61/1263. t is likely hat he died after 68/1270, inceIbn AbiUsaibi'a, who died n that year, does not have a date of death for he author n the biographi-cal notice devoted to him; cf. n. 93 above.

95 Cf. Ibn Abi Usaibi'a, op. cit., passim.06He refers o them not as "the Saracens," but as "the pagans," but John of Meung specifies

"Saracens" in his translation; eeJacques Le Goff, es Intellectuls u moyen ge Paris, 1957),p. 48.97The passage in question reads as follows n the recent ranslation y J. T. Muckle, TheStory f




22/23


Thus it would have been quite possible for the sic-et-non ethod o come toEurope by way ofByzantium r Spain,or from oth directions. t was onlyone ofmany lements hat could have travelled, r did indeed travel, long such routes.

To sum up: first, hescholasticmethod, oth as a form f writing nd a way ofthinking, ad already developed n the East before t began to develop in theWest, where t later was to reach the peak of ts sophistication n the Summa ofSt Thomas. Why t did not developfurther n the Muslim East is, believe,dueat least in part to the absenceof that university ystem whichwas the peculiarproduct f Western urope.

Secondly, t was not philosophy r theology, ut law, that supplied he nitial

impetus or heearly development f khildf n the Muslim East and the sic-et-nonmethod ater n the Christian West. Furthermore, he role that law played wasnot simply formal ne. Law also shares n the inner pirit f scholasticism,spirit rawing ts strength rom wo sources: uthority nd reason. Justinian nhis Institutes efers o reason and authority s the two brightest ights of theworld "ratio et auctoritas, uo clarissimamundi umina") and Sir Edward Coke,in the nstitutes f the aws of England, efers o an argument rom uthority sbeing the strongest n the law ("argumentus b auctoritate st fortissimum nlege.)" Islam being essentially nomocracy, wherein he rule of law reigns u-

preme,t is not

surprisinghat t shouldhave found ts

wayto

what came to beknown s the cholastic method. But not only s lawto be found t the birth f thescholasticmethod, t has also become ts soleheir. One has only to sit in a courtof aw and watch trial awyers ut on their ases.One can readily ecognize erethe essential tagesof a complete isputation, ownto the "determination" aterm that has been preserved n the law, like so many others, with the samemeaning t had in the MiddleAges:the decision f court f ustice or a medievalmaster t a university isputation) which puts an end to the controversy ndsettles he ssueby authoritative entence.98

And finally, egarding he question f nfluence, othing an be said at presentwith bsolute certainty. t is interesting noughfor historians f culture o notea parallel development f this nature on both sides of the Mediterranean. t isinteresting nough to note that the Arabic-Islamic xperiencewas not one ofmere transmission; hat having received the Greek legacy, t carried out an

Aboard's Adversities, . 64: "God knows, fell nto uch despair hat was ready to depart from heChristian world nd to go to the Saracens, here, y paying whatever ribute wasdemanded, o live aChristian ife mong he enemies f Christ. thought hat they wouldbe better isposed owardsmeas they would uspect rom he hargesmade gainstme hat wasnot a Christian nd sowouldbelieve

that would therefore e more asily nduced o oin their eligion" italics mine). The translation nJacques Le Goff f the same passage differs lightly nd points out that the term was "pagans" butspecified s "Saracens" by John f Meung cf. previousnote), n Les Intdlectulds u moyen ge,p. 48:" .. . j'ai song Aquitter e territoire e la chretiente t a passer chez es palens aller aux Sarrazins,pr6cisera a traduction eJean de Meung)poury vivre npaix et, moyennant ribut, ivre n chretienparmi es ennemis u Christ... " (italicsmine).

98Black'sLawDictionary, th edn. (St. Paul, Minn., 1951), .9r.




23/23


operation of "creative assimilation" not only in the realm of philosophy ndscience,but also in that of religion. ut I am not convinced hat nfluence adno part n all that has been described.The circumstantial vidence s quite im-pressive. Heretofore we have felt that the West would not be influenced yIslam in matters nvolving eligion.99 his is quite true in those areas wheredoctrines ouldbe at odds.But consider heareas wherein slam and Christianitywould be in complete greement gainst what they both aw as "pagan philoso-phy," for nstance, s regards heexistence f a personal nd provident lmightyGod, the non-eternity f the world, and the resurrection f the body. Here,Christianity would be in a receptive mood and could borrow lready-testedmethods of combatting agan thought. Against a pagan and anthropocentric

culture, Christianity nd Islam stood together s members of a theistic ndtheocentric ulture. They had much to gain by a spiritual lliance.UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA

99Cf.p. 642above.

Documents

The Scholastic Method in Medieval Education