The development of dialectic and argumentation theory in post-classical Islamic intellectual history by Mehmet Kadri Karabela Institute of Islamic Studies McGill University, Montreal August, 2010 ‚A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research, McGill University, Montreal in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy‛ © Mehmet Kadri Karabela 2010 DEDICATED TO MY MOTHER Hadice Akçay-Karabela (Hacer Hanım) (1938- 2008) If this work succeeds at all, it is due to my mother, Hadice Akçay- Karabela, known as Hacer Hanım among her friends, who lived through the difficulties I faced while working towards my Ph.D. dissertation. She died on 23rd March 2008 of a sudden heart attack. She decided to leave the city of Isparta on 23rd February 2008 for Erbaa, for reasons nobody has understood (at that time she was living in Ankara not in Isparta, instead of leaving Isparta for Ankara, she decided to leave for Erbaa spontaneously), to plant 23 trees in the backyard of the house in which she raised eight children. After she planted the trees she passed away alone. No sultan or president or king or general of an army or scientist or pope; no banker or cartel or oil company or big TV network or ayatollah holds the key to as much power as she has. None is as rich. For hers is the invincible weapon against the evils of this earth: a rock-solid heart. I do not speak her language, yet the eloquence of her life speaks to me. The last words I heard from her in a firm tone of voice a month before she died were these: ―Hayatta hep ‘gözün aydın olsun’a gelmezler, bir arada ‘başın sağolsun’a gelirler. Bazen gülersin bazen ağlarsın. Aman! Hayat böyle bir şey oğlum be.‖ Your Son Mehmet ii ABSTRACT This dissertation is an analysis of the development of dialectic and argumentation theory in post-classical Islamic intellectual history. The central concerns of the thesis are; treatises on the theoretical understanding of the concept of dialectic and argumentation theory, and how, in practice, the concept of dialectic, as expressed in the Greek classical tradition, was received and used by five communities in the Islamic intellectual camp. It shows how dialectic as an argumentative discourse diffused into five communities (theologicians, poets, grammarians, philosophers and jurists) and how these local dialectics that the individual communities developed fused into a single system to form a general argumentation theory (a>da>b al- bah}th) applicable to all fields. I evaluate a treatise by Shams al-Di>n Samarqandi> (d.702/1302), the founder of this general theory, and the treatises that were written after him as a result of his work. I concentrate specifically on work by ‘Ad}ud al-Di>n al-I<ji> (d.756/1355), Sayyid Shari>f al-Jurja>ni> (d.816/1413), Taşköprüzâde (d.968/1561), Saçaklızâde (d.1150/1737) and Gelenbevî (d.1205/1791) and analyze how each writer (from Samarqandi> to Gelenbevî) altered the shape of argumentative discourse and how later intellectuals in the post-classical Islamic world responded to that discourse bequeathed by their predecessors. What is striking about the period that this dissertation investigates (from 1300-1800) is the persistence of what could be called the linguistic turn in argumentation theory. After a centuries-long run, the jadal-based dialectic of the classical period was displaced by a new argumentation theory, which was dominantly linguistic in character. This linguistic turn in argumentation dates from the final quarter of the fourteenth century in I<ji>’s impressively prescient work on ‘ilm al-wad}‘. This idea, which finally surfaced in the post-classical period, that argumentation is about definition and that, therefore, defining is the business of language—even perhaps, that language is the only available medium for understanding and being understood—affected the way that argumentation theory was processed throughout most of the period in question. The argumentative discourse that started with Ibn al-Ra>wandi> in the third/ninth century left a permanent imprint on Islamic intellectual history, which was then full of concepts, terminology and objectives from this discourse up until the late nineteenth century. From this perspective, Islamic intellectual history can be read as the tension between two languages: the ‚language of dialectic‛ (jadal) and the ‚language of demonstration‛ (burha>n), each of which refer not only to a significant feature of that history, but also to a feature that could dramatically alter the interpretation of that history. iii RÉSUMÉ Titre: Le développement de la dialectique et théorie de l'argumentation dans la période post-classique de l'histoire intellectuelle islamique Cette dissertation est une analyse de l'évolution de la théorie dialectique et d’argumentation dans l'histoire intellectuelle islamique post- classique. Les préoccupations centrales de la thèse sont les suivantes: les traités sur la compréhension théorique de la notion de la théorie dialectique (de logique) et d’argumentation, et comment, en pratique, la notion dialectique, tel qu'elle est exprimée dans la tradition grecque classique, a été reçue et utilisée par les cinq collectivités du camp intellectuel islamique. Cette étude démontre comment la notion dialectique en tant que discours argumentatif a été diffusée dans cinq collectivités (théologiens, poètes, grammairiens, philosophes et juristes) et comment ces notions logiques locales, développées dans les différentes communautés, se sont fusionnées en un seul système pour former une théorie d'argumentation générale (a>da>b al- bah}th) applicable à tous les domaines. J’évalue un traité de Shams al-Di>n Samarqandi> (d.702/1302), le fondateur de cette théorie générale, et les traités qui ont été écrits après lui en tant que succession de son travail. Je me concentre spécifiquement sur les travaux de ‘Adud al-Di>n al-I<ji> (d.756/1355), Sayyid Shari>f al-Jurja>ni> (d.816/1413), Taşköprüzâde (d.968/1561), Saçaklızâde (d.1150/1737) et Gelenbevî (d.1205/1791) et analyse comment chaque auteur (de Samarqandi> à Gelenbevî) a modifié la forme du discours argumentatif et comment les intellectuels, venus par après dans le monde post-islamique classique, ont répondu à ce discours transmis par leurs prédécesseurs. Ce qui est frappant, de la période que cette thèse étudie (de 1300- 1800), est la persistance de ce qu'on pourrait appeler le tournant linguistique dans la théorie de l'argumentation. Après plusieurs siècles, la notion iv dialectique de la période classique basée sur jadal fût remplacée par une nouvelle théorie d’argumentation qui était principalement de caractère linguistique. Ce tournant linguistique dans l'argumentation est daté du dernier quart du quatorzième siècle dans le travail sur ‘ilm al-wad}‘ impressionnant et prémonitoire d’al-I<ji>. Cette idée, qui est finalement émergée dans la période post-classique, disant que l'argumentation décrit une définition et que, par conséquent, la définition est l’utilité du langage —et même peut-être, que le langage est le seul moyen disponible pour comprendre et être compris— a influencé la façon dont la théorie d'argumentation a été formulée dans la majeure partie de la période en question. Le discours argumentatif qui a commencé avec Ibn al-Ra>wandi> au troisième/neuvième siècle a laissé une empreinte permanente dans l'histoire intellectuelle islamique qui s’est remplie de concepts, de terminologie et d’objectifs de ce discours jusqu'à la fin du dix-neuvième siècle. Selon cette perspective, l'histoire intellectuelle islamique peut être lue comme une divergence entre deux langues: le ―langage dialectique‖ (jadal) et le ―langage démonstratif‖ (burha>n), dont chacun se réfère non seulement à une caractéristique importante de cette histoire, mais à une caractéristique qui pourrait changer radicalement l'interprétation de cette histoire. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Professor Eric L. Ormsby, my thesis supervisor and a man of letters, not only for his oversight and assistance with the planning, execution and writing of this project, but also for his constant support throughout my years at McGill, even after his retirement. Co- supervisor Professor A. Üner Turgay’s raw passion for my work as well as his concern for precision and detail has ensured that everything ended up in its proper place. Emeritus Professor Donald P. Little provided me with the intellectual stimulus to understand the classical period of Islamic history in a different way, but even more than his thought-provoking lectures, I thank him for introducing me to the world of the eighteenth-century English playwright and actor, Colley Cibber (d.1757), which helped me to grasp the dialectical relationship between writing (theory=ashes) and acting (re-writing=burning). Hearty appreciation goes to Emeritus Professors Josef van Ess and Fuat Sezgin for their endless enthusiasm and precious time in Tübingen and Frankfurt. Dr. Larry B. Miller has assisted me a great deal (thanks to Prof. Ormsby), even though he has not been working in academia for twenty years. I also received excellent assistance from the director of Süleymaniye Library Emir Eş. I thank my sister, Prof. Nevin Karabela: reminding me to swim like fish in two diametrically opposite directions at all times ‚to find the truth.‛ I also thank Professor Issa J. Boullata, Professor Wael B. Hallaq, Associate Dean of Graduate Studies Professor Lisa Travis and Dean of Students Professor Jane Everett for their support in various ways in the completion of my Ph.D. at McGill. Many thanks to Prof. Şükrü Özen of ISAM, Prof. Hüseyin Sarıoğlu of Istanbul University, Prof. M. Said Özervarlı, Prof. Bilal Kuşpınar, Charles Fugere, Dr. Ezgi Demirtaş, Faika Öz-Çelik, Dr. Fi Nanson, Gökhan Çelik, Emre Ünlücayaklı, Yaşar Acat and Necmettin Pehlivan for their excellent company: they will not be forgotten.