[17] HEBREW TRANSLATIONOF AVERROES' PROOEMIUM 71

PROOEMIUM

The aim of thistreatiseis to commentupon the book of Aristotle

entitledthe Physics since no complete commentary,word for
word,by any of the commentators on thisbook has reachedus.'
As forwhat has us
reached of the commentary of Alexander[of
Aphrodisias]on thisbook, part of the first[treatise],
the second,
the fourth, the sixth,the seventh,and partof the eighth
the fifth,
are notthewordsofAlexander.2 Before[we begin]we shouldmen-
tion, following the custom of the commentators, some of the
matterswith which they begin [their commentarieson] his

Averroes similarlybeginshis Long Commentary on thePosterior Analyt-

ics byexplaining thathis aim in thatbook is to commentuponthePosterior
Analytics since"no longcommentary of it fromanyofthosewhointerpreted
it has comedownto us." See CharlesE. Butterworth, Averroes' MiddleCom-
mentaries on Aristotle'sCategories and De Interpretatione (Princeton: Prince-
ton University Press,1983),pp. 4-5.
2
Averroes'meaningis not clear.He seemsto be sayingthatmostof the
commentary whichhas comedownin thenameofAlexander is spurious.Yet
he himself in thesecondtreatise (and in following treatises as well)refers to
Alexander'sversionof the Physics(see above, n. 16) and also citesAlex-
ander'sinterpretation (see,e.g.,Long Commentary, f. 83b). According to the
medievalArabicbibliographers, therewas indeeda commentary (tafsir)by
Alexander. Ibn Abi Usaibi'areported thatthecommentary was extantin full
(see 'Uyun al-anba'fi tabaqat al-atibba' [Cairo, 1882], pp. 69-70). Ibn
I,
al-Nadimand al-Qiftiafterhim reportedthatpartof the firsttreatise, the
second,partofthefourth, thefifth, partof thesixth,theseventh, and a very
smallpartof theeighthwereextant(see Fihrist[Leipzig,1871],p. 250, and
Ta'rikhal-hukama'[Leipzig,1903],p. 38). Ibn Bajjah citesAlexander's com-
mentary in thefourth and sixthtreatises ofhis owncommentary. In addition,
severalstatements fromAlexander's commentary are preserved in theunique
MS of Ishaq'stranslation of thePhysics.Theseoccurin TreatisesII, IV, V,
and VII. For page references, see the printededition,vol. II, p. 957. See
further, Peters,AristotelesArabus,p. 34. Alexander's commentary is not ex-
tanttodayin any language,althoughit is oftencitedby Simpliciusin his
commentary.
72 STEVEN HARVEY [18]

[Aristotle's]books.3 These [matters]are in general eight [in

number]:[1] theaim of thebook, [2] itsutility,[3] itsrank,[4] its
division,[5] its relation,[6] the methodof instructionused in it,
[7] what its name indicatesabout it, and [8] who wroteit.4 [We

3 Or
accordingto some readings(see apparatus):"... some of the things
withwhichtheybegintheirbooks."The meaningis, however, the same.
4 This is curiously Averroes'onlyaccountof theseeightmatters, although
he does beginsome of his commentaries by mentioning a numberof them.
See, forexample,his Prooemiumto his Long Commentary on thePosterior
Analytics (in Juntasedition,Vol. I, 2a, ff.la-9b), his EpitomeoftheMeta-
physics(in Die EpitomederMetaphysik des Averroes, Germantrans.by S.
Van Den Bergh[Leiden,1924],pp. 1-7), his Middle Commentary on the
Topics(ed. by CharlesE. Butterworth [Cairo:The AmericanResearchCenter
in Egypt,1979],pp. 29-34), and his Long Commentary on the De Anima
(Latin trans.,ed. by F. StuartCrawford [Cambridge, Mass.: The Mediaeval
AcademyofAmerica,1953],pp. 3-6). Alfarabi enumerates and explainsthese
eightmatters in his Kitab al-alfdzal-musta'malah fi al-mantiq,sec. 51, pp.
94-95. He also refers to thecustom('ddah) ofthecommentators ofmention-
ingthesematters at thebeginning oftheirbooks(see ibid.,sec. 51, p. 94, and
sec. 58, p. 104). He himself discussesthesematters, perhapsas a prefaceto
his commentary on theCategories, at theend of Kitabal-alfaz,secs. 58-65,
pp. 104-111.Alfarabi also beginsa numberof his Aristotelian commentaries
withan accountof mostof theseeightmatters. See, e.g.,Alfarabi's
Commen-
taryon Aristotle's De Interpretatione, ed. by WilhelmKutschand Stanley
Morrow(Beirut:Imprimerie Catholique,1960),pp. 17-23,and his Introduc-
tionto his Commentary on theNicomachean Ethics,Hebrewtrans.ed. and
trans.by LawrenceV. Berman,"Ibn Rushd'sMiddle Commentary on the
NicomacheanEthicsin MedievalHebrewLiterature," in MultipleAverroes
(Paris:Les BellesLettres,1978),pp. 303-311.See also thereferences in ibid.,
p. 299, notes3-4. In addition,Alfarabi wrotea smalltreatise, Risdlahfi md
yanbaghian yuqaddamqabl ta'allumal-falsafah [Treatiseon whatone ought
to knowbeforestudying philosophy] (ed. and Germantrans.by Fr. Dieterici
in his Alfarabi's philosophische Abhandlungen [Leiden,1890 (text)and 1892
(translation)]),devotedto theninematters thatone mustknowbeforestudy-
ing Aristotelian philosophy. Professor MuhsinMahdiinformed me thatAbf
al-Faraj'AbdullahIbn al-Tayyib(d. 1043) also refersto the customof the
commentators ('ddat al mufassirin) of mentioning these mattersat the
beginning of theircommentaries. Ibn al-Tayyib writesin his Commentary on
theCategories, Cairo,Dar al-kutubal-misriyah MS No. 1962,f. la: "It was
the customof the commentators beforeinquiryinto the book of Aristotle
[19] HEBREW TRANSLATIONOF AVERROES' PROOEMIUM 73

will mentionthem] even thoughmost of these mattersare in-

cluded implicitly in the beginningof his book, as we will explain
whenwe get there,God willing.
We say thatthe aim of naturalscience [physics]in general,of
whichthe aim of thisbook is a part,is to knowthe causes of the
sensiblespeciesand the causes of the accidentsthatexistin them. lb
The subject,then,of thisartintowhichwe are inquiringis things
thatare recognizableto the sensesand thatchangeby themselves,
i.e. thai have withinthemselvesthe principleof motionand rest.5
[1] The aim of thisbook is to giveknowledgeof thecauses that
are common to all naturalthings,i.e. the material,formal,final,
and agent [causes],and to give knowledgeof the firstcauses,i.e.
those [causes]thatit is possibleto make knownthroughthissci-
ence, like primematterand the Prime Mover. As forfirstform
and the firstend, it is the studentof divinescience[metaphysics]
who inquires into them.6 Speculation [here] is also into the
concomitants thatare commonto all naturalthings,such as time,
place, and the like.
[2] The utility[of thisbook] is partof the utilityof theoretical
science.It has alreadybeen explainedin thevoluntaryscience,i.e.
[thescience]thatinquiresintovoluntary actions,thattheexistence
of man in his ultimateperfection and in his perfectessenceis his

knownas theCategories to inquireintotenprinciples[mabddi']."Now none

of the extantcommentaries on the Physicsin Commentaria in Aristotelem
Graeca followthispractice.Ammonius,the son of Hermias,however,dis-
cussesten suchmatters in his Prefaceto his Commentary on theCategories.
See now Les Attributions. Le texte aristotelicien et les prolegomenes
d'Ammonios d'Hermeias,Frenchtrans.by Y. Pelletier(Paris:Les BellesLet-
tres, 1983). Otherearlycommentators who begin theircommentaries on
Aristotle's in a similarfashionincludeAlexanderof Aphrodi-
logicalwritings
sias,Proclus,Simplicius,
Olympiodorus, JohnPhiloponus, and Elias. See Ed-
winA. Quain,"The MedievalAccessusad auctores," Traditio,III (1945),pp.
215-264,esp. pp. 247-252.
5
In his MiddleCommentary on thePhysics(in Juntasedition,Vol. IV, f.
434a) Averroes describes
thesubjectof naturalsciencesimplyas "beingsthat
move."Cf. Aristotle,Metaphysics VI 1025b 18-21,IX 1059b 17, 1061b5-6
and 29-30, and 1064a 15-16.
74 STEVEN HARVEY [20]

being perfectin [the knowledgeof] the theoreticalsciences.His

havingachievedthisstateis theultimatehappinessand [thecause
of] eternallife.One sees fromthis science thatthe term"man"
thatis predicated[both]oftheone who is perfect in thetheoretical
sciencesand of the one who is not perfectin themor who is such
thathe willnot becomeperfectin them,is predicatedequivocally,
just as the term"man" thatis predicatedof [both]the livingman
and the dead man, and similarlyalso the term"man" thatis pre-
dicated of the rational[being] and of the [being] carved from
stone.7
Now in additionto whatfollowsfroma knowledgeof thetheo-
reticalsciences,thereis [theacquisition]of important
qualities,for
when the studentsof these sciencesattainto what is naturalfor
them,it willfollownecessarily thattheywillbe distinguishedin all

6
Averroesexplainsin the Middle Commentary on the Physics,f. 434a,
thattheredo not existpremises in naturalsciencefromwhichwe can arrive
at knowledge of the firstformand thefirstend. See also his Epitomeof the
Physicsin Rasd'il ibn Rushd(Hyderabad,1947),p. 7, and Epitomeof the
Metaphysics, PhysicsII 194b 15.
p. 3. Cf. Aristotle,
7 On "man"as an equivocalterm,see
HarryA. Wolfson, "The Amphibo-
lous Termsin Aristotle, ArabicPhilosophy and Maimonides," HarvardTheo-
logicalReview,XXXI (1938),pp. 163-171.Wolfsonclaimsthattheexample
of "man" as an illustration of an equivocaltermis infrequent in Arabic
philosophy (p. 167). Amongthe fewreferences Wolfsonprovidesis Maimo-
nides'use of"man"as an exampleofan amphibolous termin his Treatiseon
Logic. Maimonidesexplainsin ch. 13 of the Treatisethat"man" is applied
amphibolousy to the rationalanimal,to the man who is dead, and to the
imagecarvedin wood.Wolfsondoes notreferin thisarticleto Maimonides'
shortchapterin theGuideofthePerplexed(I, 14) on theequivocality of the
word"man"(adam), whichmaybe comparedto Averroes' strikingstatement
that"man" is predicatedequivocallyof the one perfectin the theoretical
sciencesand of theone imperfect in them.For an exposition of thischapter,
see WarrenHarvey,"HasdaiCrescas'sCritiqueoftheTheoryof theAcquired
Intellect"(unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
ColumbiaUniversity, 1973),pp.,
205-217.HarveyconcludesthatforMaimonides"man"is appliedequivocally
to theperfect man and thevulgarman.They"are completely different
kinds
of beings;thefirstis immortal theseconddoomedand brutish"
intellect, (p.
217).
[21] HEBREW TRANSLATIONOF AVERROES' PROOEMIUM 75

the kinds of importantvirtues,which are justice, temperance,

courage,magnanimity, generosity, truth,faith,humility,and the
otherhuman virtues.Alexanderhas alreadyexplainedin his fore- 2a
wordto thisbook how the existenceof thesevirtuesfollowsfrom
a knowledgeof the theoreticalsciences.When the scholarknows
the scantinessof his lifein relationto thiseternalexistenceand to
the continuousmotion [of the heavens],and thatthe relationof
his lifeto eternaltime is as thatof the pointto the line, and in
general,as thatof the smallestfinitethingto the infinite, he will
not be overlydevotedto lifeand will necessarilybe courageous.
Similarly, whenhe knowsthatdeathis fromthe necessityof hyle,
and in particularwhenhe attainshumanperfection, he willnotbe
afraid of death and, indeed, will fearonly thathe will be deprived
of perfection.8When he attains[humanperfection] it is not unli-
kelythatat some timehe willsee thatdeathis betterforhimthan
life,just as Socratesdid [in his dealings]withthe Athenians9(al-
thoughit is thoughtthatthe methodsof instruction forthe many
and forthe fewwerenot clearto Socratesbecause he triedto fol-

8
Averroes definesthecourageousindividualas theone "whoalwayspre-
serveswhatcogitation ordersand commandshim" even in "timesof fears
and anxietiesand desires."See Averroeson Plato's "Republic",trans.by
RalphLerner(Ithaca,New York:Corell University Press,1974),p. 55. On
therelationofthecourageous individual to hisattitudetowardlifeand death,
see ibid.,p. 21.
9 See
Plato,Apology40c-42a, 37d-38a,and Phaedo 62a-68c, 82e-85b.
See also Alfarabi,Philosophy of Plato in Alfarabi'sPhilosophy of Plato and
trans.by MuhsinMahdi(revisededition,Ithaca,New York:Cornell
Aristotle,
University Press,1969), sec. 30, pp. 63-64; and Averroes,Commentary of
Plato'sRepublic,p. 32. In theMiddleCommentary 6n thePhysics,f. 445a,
Averroes givesas an exampleof the finalcause replyto thequestion,"Why
does theman die?""becauseit is betterforhimthathe die." An anonymous
medievalcommentator to the Middle Commentary (New York,The Jewish
TheologicalSeminary of America MS No. 2457, f. 14a) explainsthat"after
man acquirestheintelligibles and apprehends whathe possiblycan of them,
it is betterforhimto die and his matterto be corrupted so thatonlythe
acquired will
intellect remain, forthe are
intelligibles only knowntogether
whentheyare abstracted frommatter."
76 STEVENHARVEY [22]
low themethodfortheelitewiththemultitude).'1 when
Similarly,
he [thescholar]determines thatperfectionis deprivedhim,thereis
no difference [forhim]betweenhis deathand his life,exceptthat
his deathis forhim morepraiseworthy. This is clearsincehis wor-
ry is indeed about the inaccessibility him of thisperfection.
to
It is furtherclear thatthe studentsof thissciencemustbe just
and temperate.[Theymustbe] just because whentheyknowthe
natureof the justice whichexistsin the substanceof the beings,
theywillwantto likenthemselvesto the same natureand acquire
the same form.11[They must be] temperatebecause when they 2b
knowthe baseness12of desiresand thattheyare not amongthose
thingsthatare necessaryfortheimmortality of man,muchless for
his perfections,but are thingsthatappertainto thembecause of
the necessityof the natureof hyle,theywill cast themfaraside
and utterly detestthem,and theywill become temperate, clinging
to the divinelaws and followingthe naturalnomoi. It is further
clear thattheywill be betterand more generousthan others;for
theydespisetheacquisitionof moneyand theyknowthebaseness

10 See
Alfarabi,Philosophy of Plato, sec. 36, p. 66.
11 Whatis this"justicewhichexistsin thesubstancse of thebeings?"The
phrase,"in the substance[or perhaps:essence]of the beings,"is a literal
translation of the Hebrewbe-'esemha-nimsa'ot (Latin: in substantiarerun;
probableArabic:bi-jauharal-maujudat).The passagebecomesintelligible if
we recallthatAverroes defines justicein his Commentary on Plato'sRepublic
(pp. 8-9 and 54) as "everyone of thepartsdoingonlywhatit has to do in
theappropriate measureand at theappropriate time."It is in thissensethat
thereis justicein thesubstanceof thebeings.Averroes adds in his Commen-
taryon theRepublicthatjusticenecessarily occursin the partsof the soul
"onlywhenintellect rulesoverthem."The intellectlearnsto governjustly
fromits observation of thejusticein nature.
12 The termI translate as "baseness"is "pehitut." This termoccursin
medievalHebrewphilosophical textsas a translation of the Arabicterm
"radhilah"("vice")(see,e.g. SamuelIbn Tibbon'stranslation of Maimonides'
EightChapters, chs.,2, 4, and 8). Thistermoccursfivetimesin thepresent
paragraph in our text.The sixteenth-century Latintranslation translates
this
termas "imperfectio" and, in one instance,"iqnobilitas." The corresponding
thirteenth-century Arabic-to-Latin translation is "vilitas"or "indignitas."
[23] HEBREW TRANSLATIONOF AVERROES' PROOEMIUM 77

of its existence,and thatdevotionto it is one of the desiresthat

deviatefromnature.Similarly,it is clearthattheywillbe magna-
nimous,loversof truthin theirspeech and in theiractions,and
[possessors]of theotherimportant traitsand humanvirtueswhich
by naturetheywill necessarilyhave.
Now if one wereto arguethatexistencedoes not testify to the
truthof thisstatement[ofAlexanderthatknowledgeof thetheore-
tical sciencesleads to virtuouscharacter],and thatratherwe see
thatformostof thosewho glorify themselvesin thesesciencesin
theseour timesthe oppositeis true,13 you shouldknowthatthey
only became this way because of an unnaturaldispositionwhich
broughtthemto thisinclination.'4This [unnatural]dispositionis
clearto whoeverhas studiedand accustomedhimselfa bitto prac-
tical science and investigatedinto it a little.What we findfrom
Alexanderand othersshould indicateto you thatwhat has hap-
pened [to the latter-day scholars]is a matteroutsidenature.[Our

13 See Maimonides, GuideofthePerplexed, trans.by ShlomoPines(Chi-

cago:The University ofChicagoPress,1963),II, 36, p. 371: "For mostofthe
thoughtsof thosewho are outstanding amongthe men of knowledgeare
preoccupied withthe pleasures of this sense [i.e. thesenseof touch,and] are
desirousof them."Cf. Alfarabi,The Attainment of Happinessin Alfarabi's
Philosophy ofPlatoand Aristotle, secs.,60-61, pp. 48-49. An exampleof an
outstanding philosopher knownforhis want of temperance in the worldly
pleasures is Ibn Bajjah. See, e.g.,Ibn Tufail's remarks about him in his Intro-
ductionto Hayyibn Yaqzdn,and Fath Ibn Khaqan's no doubtembellished
biographical accountin his Qala'id al-'iqydn(Paris,n.d.),pp. 346-353.
14 "Inclination" in thissentence is a translation oftheHebrewha-haskamah
(13th c. Latin: consensus; 16th c. Latin: deliberatio). This translationof ha-
haskamahis basedon Wolfson's discussion ofthetermin his Crescas,p. 401,
n. 8. Averroes'pointhereis thatit is not philosophy thatmakesthesemen
unvirtuous. Averroes similarly explains in the Fasl al-maqal(trans.byGeorge
HouraniinAverroes ontheHarmony ofReligionandPhilosophy [London:Luzac
and Co., 1961],pp. 48-49) thatthestudentofphilosophy maystumblein his
studyowingto a "deficiency in hisnaturalcapacity" orhis"beingdominated by
hispassions."He evenacknowledges that"someofthemostviciouspeoplemay
be thought to havegoneastray through theirstudyofthebooksofphilosophy,"
butthisis accidentalto philosophy, and philosophy is notto blame.See also
Averroes' Commentary on Plato's Republic,pp. 77-78.
78 STEVENHARVEY [24]
readingof Alexander]arguesforthe existenceof scholarsas men
of virtueand distinction, forthe men of sciencewere of such a
characterin his day.Whenthismatteris investigated, you willfind
nothing but that the perfection which they[the scholars of our
day] surrender to because of upbringing and habit is in its essence
farfromthe [true]perfection. And15thisis not all thathas hap-
penedto them,but theywerebroughtup on thebeliefin thebase-
ness of this[true]perfection and the basenessof thosewho attain
it. This happenedto themnot because of the Law, but because of 3a
thosewho despiseand distrust it. It happensto thisspeciesof man,
whentheybeginin speculation,thattheydespisethis[true]species
of perfectionto whichtheyhave begunto submit,fortheyremain
withthaton whichtheywere broughtup, and theyhave hardly
eversubmittedto thisperfection. They imaginebasenessin them-
selvesbecause men denouncethemand considerthemuncivilized
and among thosewithwhom the least of themshould not asso-
ciate. When theydespairof attainingthis perfection, theythink
thatwhat is said about it is not farfrombeinglike what is said
about the firstperfection whichtheycast aside afterhavingbeen
15 The
passagethatfollowsis unclearand verydifficult. Averroes does not
explainwhat he is
perfections talking about and itis not to
easy distinguish when
he has in mindthe trueperfection and whenthe assumedperfection. The
thirteenth-centuryArabic-to-Latin translationis significantlydifferentin a few
places,butis of somehelp.It readsas follows:
Butthisis notallthathappenstothem.In addition, as a resultofthecustom
inwhichtheyarereared, theybelievethatthisperfection is quiteworthless.
Thisdoesnothappentothembecauseofthelaw,butbecauseofthosewho
corrupt [corrumpentibus] it.Thus,thisis whathappensto thesemenwhen
theybegin to inquire into thiskindof perfection to whichtheyused to
submit. Moreover, whentheydespairofachieving thisperfection andwhen
theyseeall menbelittling itandbelieving thatthosewhoyearnforitought
notto be a partofthecity,or whentheybelievethateverything whichis
said of thisperfection is similarto whatis said of thefirstperfection in
whichtheyarerearedandwhichtheycastout- andthesearethemajority
at thistime,i.e. amongthosewhoengagea bitin speculation - thenthey
completely incline to the and
appetite therebefalls[read"accidit"]thema
dispositionso unnatural thattheyoughtnotto be calleda partofthecity
at all .... All theiractions are forthemselves.
[25] HEBREW TRANSLATIONOF AVERROES' PROOEMIUM 79

broughtup on it. They are the majorityat thistimeamongthose

who are drawnto logic as an inclinationto the desires.Something
happensto them which is so much outside of naturethat they
shouldnot be called a partof the cityat all since no politicalact
at all is realizedfromthemand no humanlove comes fromthem
nor anythingof benefitto anyoneelse. But theyconsiderall their
actsimportant in thefancyoftheirminds.For thisreason,science
at this time has become a disgraceto its possessorand a huge
blemishon whoeverattainsit.'6 But we have alreadystrayedtoo
farfromour path,so we will now returnto it.
[3] As forthe rankof thisbook, it is thebook thatis called the
firstof the books thatare writtenby Aristotleon naturalscience.
The meaning of this is [as follows]:When natural thingsare
divided into different natures,these naturesdifferaccordingto
whatis particular to each one ofthem,but theystillsharein things
thatare common[to them].It followsthatspeculationintothisart
shouldbe dividedfirstinto two parts:one partthatinquiresinto
generalthingsthatare common to all naturalthings;the second 3b
part that inquiresinto those thingsthat are particularto each
genusof thegeneraof the different naturalthings,and thispartis
dividedalso intoa numberof different genera.For thisreasonthe
books authored[by Aristotle]on thisscienceare more than one.
Whathappensto themhereis likewhathappensin theartof logic
and in otherarts.Now the commonpartin theseartsis priorin
instruction to the particularparts,[and this is so] forthreerea-
sons.17One of themis thatthecommonis betterknownby nature

16
Cf.Averroes on Plato's"Republic",
pp. 77-78:"As forthosegivenoverto
philosophywithout thesequalitieshavingbeeencompleted in them,... notonly
does one receiveno advantagefrom themin cities,buttheyare also themost
harmful ofthings forwisdom.... Theyhaveno virtuein and ofthemselves that
wouldrestrain themfromtheseactions[sc.violenceandthelike];norwillthey
speaktrulyin thetaleswithwhichtheyfrighten thecitizens
whilebringing about
thesethings[sc. violenceand thelike].Theywillbe a disgraceto wisdomand
a causeof muchharm... as is thecase in thistimeofours."
17 AverroesgivesthesesamethreereasonsintheMiddleCommentary onthe
Physics,f.434b.Cf.theEpitomeofthePhysics,pp. 5-6.
80 STEVEN
HARVEY [26]
to us thantheparticular.The secondis thatrepetition
oughtnot
occurin instruction,
thatis, mentioningthesamecommonthing
manytimes.Thethirdis thattheprinciples thatareemployed here
arefirstand particular
ones.Forexample, whenonedemonstrates
thattheanglesofan absolute areequaltotworight
triangle angles,
he demonstrates thisfromfirstprinciples. However,one who
demonstrates this[specifically]
forscaleneor equilateral
triangles
does so fromprinciplesthatare necessarily
notfirst principles.18
Likewiseis thecase withone whodemonstrates theexistence of
primematterin a man or animalor otherparticular thing.In
thesecases,thecommonand general partmustprecedetheparti-
cular as the Prior Analyticsand On Interpretationprecede the
PosteriorAnalyticsand the Topics and the restof the [last] five
books[oftheOrganon].
[4] As forthepartsof thisbook,Aristotle madeit intoeight
treatises.
Each one ofthesetreatisesis dividedintolargesections,
and thelargesectionsaredividedintosmallsections. In somein-
stancesthesmallsectionsaredividedintoyetsmaller sections.At
timesthefirst willnotbe divided,
sections and at othertimesthe
divisionprocesswilltakeplacemorethanthreetimes.All thisis
according to the natureof whatis beingdiscussed.Sometimes
somethings willcallforbeingdividedforthesakeoftheorderof
instruction.
We willenumerate [all] thesedivisionsat thebegin-
ningofeachtreatise. 4a
[5] The relation[ofthisbook],i.e. therelation of naturalsci-

18
Thegeneral proposition is demonstratedbyEuclidin TheoremI, 32 ofthe
Elements.Heathpointsoutin hisnotesto thistheorem (The ThirteenBooksof
Euclid'sElements, trans.bySirThomasL. Heath[2nded.,3 vols.;NewYork:
DoverPublications, 1956],vol.I, p. 317)thatit"wasdiscovered
intheveryearly
stagesofGreekgeometry." Eucliddoesnothavespecialtheorems forthepropo-
sitionforequilateral, or scalenetriangles.
isosceles, However,someoftheancie-
ntsarereported to haveinvestigated thistheoremofthetworightanglesin each
individualspeciesof triangle (see Heath,pp. 317-320).See further,
Aristotle,
PosteriorAnalytics,I 74a25-74b4,andAverroes, MiddleCommentary onArist-
otle'sPosterior
Analytics, ed. byCharlesE. Butterworth (Cairo:The American
ResearchCenterin Egypt,1982),pp. 51-57.
[27] HEBREW TRANSLATIONOF AVERROES' PROOEMIUM 81

ence,to theothertheoreticalsciencesis therelation ofthepartto

thewhole.The theoretical sciencesare oftwokinds:one kindis
reckoned forthemostpartas propaedeutic ofthe
and it consists
mathematical sciences;theotherkindis reckoned fortheperfec-
tionsforwhichthepropaedeutic sciencesexist,and it consists
of
naturalscienceanddivinescience.Therelation ofthisbookwithin
naturalscienceis therelationof theelements of a thingto the
thing.Thisbookincludesthosethings thataretheprinciples and
roots,whichare commonto whatever thestudent ofthisscience
wishesto discuss.
[6] The methodofinstruction usedin thisbookis ofthetypes
ofinstructionusedin thisscience,andthesearethemethods ofall
disciplines,
namely,thethreetypesofdemonstrations: demonstra-
tionsofbeing,demonstrations ofcauses,and absolutedemonstra-
tions.19
Now,although demonstrations of beingand [demonstra-
tionsof] causesare those[typesof demonstrations] whichare
employed forthemostpartin thisart,absolutedemonstrations
maybe usedon occasion.Thissituation is differentfromthatin
mathematics where they almost alwaysemploy absolute demon-
The typesof instruction
strations.20 [in thisscience]also include

19 Demonstrations ofbeing(Arabic:dalilorburhanwujud;Hebrew:re'ayah;
Latin:signior demonstratio quod est) are arguments thatproceedfromthe
posterior(orwhatis moreknownto us) to theprior(orwhatis moreknownby
nature),fromthefactsin theworld(thatis,theeffects) to theircauses.Demon-
strationsof causes (Arabic:burhan asbdb; Hebrew: mofetha-sibbot;Latin:
demonstratio causaeordemonstratio propter quid)proceedfromthepriortothe
posterior,fromthe causesto theireffects. Absolutedemonstrations (Arabic:
burhanmutlaq;Hebrew:mofetmuhlat;Latin:demonstratio simpliciter)also
proceed from to
prior posterior, from causes to but
effects, in absolutedemon-
whatis priortous in knowledge
strations is alsopriorinexistence.Thisthreefold
divisionofdemonstrations had a markedinfluence on laterChristian thought.
See JohnHermanRandall,Jr.,"The Development ofScientificMethodin the
SchoolofPadua,"JournaloftheHistoryofIdeas, I (1940),esp. pp. 187-197.
20 See also,Averroes, MiddleCommentary onthePhysics,ff.434a-b,Epito-
meofthePhysics,pp. 3-4, and LongCommentary on theMetaphysics, ed. by
MauriceBouyges(3 vols. and Introduction; Beirut:Imprimerie Catholique,
1938-1952),vol. I, pp. 50-51.
82 STEVENHARVEY [28]
thatwhichis bydefinition,thatbydivision, thatbyenthymeme,21
thatbyinduction, andthatbyexample;forthedemonstrative arts
mayuseall thesefivetypesinthemanner mentioned in thePoste-
Theuseofexampleandinduction
riorAnalytics.22 is in a manner
otherthanthemannerin whichtheartofdialectic andtheartof
rhetoricuse them,i.e. thedialectical
induction and therhetorical
example.
[7] As forwhatthe nameof thisbook indicates aboutit, he 4b
meant
[Aristotle] byPhysical Akroasis a on
[i.e. hearing nature] a
discourseon nature,butbecausethediscourse washeard,he em-
ployed[theterm]"hearing" in placeof"discourse." The purpose
ofsuchmetaphor and change,as is explained in theRhetoric, is
thepleasure andstrangenesswhicharein thechanged words.23He
setitapartbythis[name],although
[Aristotle] it [thename]refers
to thiswholeart[ofnaturalscience], forthisbookis therootof

21
Mantinus'Latintranslation adds"thatbyenthymeme" between"thatby
division"and "thatby induction." The Hebrewmanuscripts all speakoffive
typesofinstruction.
22
See Posterior AnalyticsI, 1-2. The beginning of thePosterior Analytics
deals withthe natureand conditions of demonstration. Thereis no specific
statement in thePosterior Analytics of thewayin whichthesefivetypesof
instructionmaybe usedin thedemonstrative arts.
23 Scholars todaygenerallyagreethattheancientGreektitle,Phusikeakroa-
sis,ofthePhysics "impliesthatitwasoriginally a courseoflectures" (W.D. Ross,
Aristotle's
Physics[Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press,1936],p. 9). Averroes also
understands thatthePhysics,likeperhapsotherofAristotle's works, washeard,
buthe wishesto explainwhyit wascalleda "hearing" (Latin:auditus)instead
of the moreusual term"discourse," thatis, a speaking(Latin:sermo).His
explanation is basedon Aristotle'sstatementsin theRhetoric (III, 2, esp. 1405a
5ff.)oftherhetorical importance ofmetaphor and change,and thatmetaphor,
aboveall else,givesthedesiredpleasure(Greek:edos;Latin:delectatio; Hebrew:
'arevut)and strangeness (Greek:xenikon;Latin:extraneitas; Hebrew:zarut)to
speech.Sincediscourses areindeedheard,theunexpected akroasisis a legitimate
changefortheusual"discourse" or "speech,"and servestherhetorical function
ofinteresting and delightingthelistener.
[29] HEBREW TRANSLATIONOF AVERROES' PROOEMIUM 83

theart[ofnaturalscience]and itsprinciple,24 and thepartis called

by the name of the whole so thatit mightbe in potentialityall its
parts,as is thecase withan elementwhichis in potentiality all the
thingsthatare generatedfromit.
[8] The authorof thisbook is Aristotle, theson of Nicomachus,
who is well knownin scienceamong the Greeks,and who is the
authorof otherbooks on thisartand books on theartof logicand
treatiseson thedivineart.He is theone who originated thesethree
arts,i.e. the artof logic,naturalscience,and divinescience,and it
is he who completedthem.Indeed he originatedthem,forwhat
one findsof otherson thesethingsshouldnotbe positedas a prin-
ciple of thesearts,nor [even]as a partof them.Further,whatone
findsof othersshould not even be consideredas difficulties in
thesearts,let alone principlesof them.This is clear fromwhathe
relatesin his books of theirarguments on thesethings.This is also
clear fromthe extantbooks thatare attributed to them.But these
are fewsince men kept away fromthe books of those who pre-
ceded him [Aristotle]afterseeingthe books of this man. Of the
books authoredbeforehim,the books thatare closestto the path
of instruction in thesethingsare thoseof Plato,althoughwhatis in
themis verylittlein comparisonto what is in the books of this
scholar,and in some sciencesit is less than it is in others.As for
Aristotle'shaving completedthem [logic, natural science, and
divinescience],no one who has come afterhim to thisour time
- and thisis close to fifteen-hundred yearslater- has been able
to add a wordworthyof attentionto whathe said. The existence
of [all] this in one man is exceedinglyunusual and extremely
amazing.When thesethingsexistin some man, it is more fitting
that theybe attributedto divine existencethan to human exis-
tence.It is forthisreasonthatthe ancientscalled him "divine."25

24
Physics tothewholeartofnaturalscience,treated
ornaturalsciencerefers
byAristotlein bookssuchas thePhysics, De Caelo,De Generatione et corrup-
tione,and Meteorologica,as wellas to thesubscienceof thisart,treatedby
in thePhysics.
Aristotle
25
ofAverroes'
Thispassageis one oftheclearestillustrations deificationof
84 STEVEN HARVEY [30]
Since we have alreadyexplainedin brieftheseeightmatters
whichareas introductionsto whoeverwishesto understand
what
said in thisbook,we shouldnow beginwithour
he [Aristotle]
word-for-word
commentary on itstreatises.

Aristotle.
See also hisMiddleCommentary on theMeteorologica (Hebrewtrans.
ed. by I.M. Levey,"The Middle Commentary of Averroeson Aristotle's
Meteorologica" [unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
HarvardUniversity, 1947],pp.
117-118):"How minuteis thespeculation ofothersin comparison withthatof
Aristotle!
Withthisdivinepowerwhichexistsin himhe brought scienceinto
existenceand perfectedit .... Thereis nota thingin hiswordsthatneedsto be
completed."Forotherexplicit examples ofAverroes'highestimation ofAristotle,
see hisLongCommentary on theMetaphysics, vol. I, p. 7; LongCommentary
on De Anima,p. 433; and thereferences in Renan,Averroes etl'averroisme,p.
60.