安萨里的忏悔录
- 语言:
- 英语
- 状态:
- 完整作品
- 作者归属:
- 作者本人所著
- 文本状况:
- 未检测到扫描噪点 (对全文的自动评估,未经人工核对)
- 篇幅:
- 约 13,300 词 · 63 个段落
引用本作品
- APA安萨里. (n.d.). The Confessions of Al Ghazzali [安萨里的忏悔录]. Digital reproduction: SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/al-ghazali/the-confessions-of-al-ghazzali
- MLA安萨里. The Confessions of Al Ghazzali [安萨里的忏悔录]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/al-ghazali/the-confessions-of-al-ghazzali.
- Chicago安萨里. The Confessions of Al Ghazzali [安萨里的忏悔录]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/al-ghazali/the-confessions-of-al-ghazzali.
这是 SigPhi 所复制版本的引用:SigPhi 是其数字复制品,不是出版者。元数据中没有版本年份(因此写作“n.d.”),译者只有在有记录时才列出。
内容简介
安萨里的思想自传,阿拉伯文题作《al-Munqidh min ad-dalal》,意即“解脱迷误者”。
背景与流传
约在一〇九五年,身为巴格达薪俸最高的教授的安萨里忽然失语。这场转折,他既作病症来记,也作警告来记。他辞去讲席,离开家人与城市,退隐多年,然后才重新执教。此书是这条路的记述,同时也是对他试过的四条道路——教义学、哲学、伊斯玛仪派与苏非之道——的有序考察。他的结论是:唯有最后一条给得出他所寻求的东西,因为前三条可以学得来,而这一条必须活出来——“知道什么是醉,与醉着,是两回事”。人们常把它与奥古斯丁的《忏悔录》相比,这个比拟站得住;只是安萨里远比英文书名所引人期待的更为枯瘦,也更少自陈心曲。
这是编辑性背景,不是可引用的来源:与作品本身的段落不同,这些说明无法在语料库中核对。
with the avidity of brutes. These also ought to be called atheists, for the true faith depends not only on the acknowledgment of God, but of His Apostle and of the Day of Judgment. And although they acknowledge God and His attributes, they deny a judgment to come. (3) Next come the _Theists_. Among them should be reckoned Socrates, who was the teacher of Plato as Plato was of Aristotle. This latter drew up for his disciples the rules of logic, organised the sciences, elucidated what was formerly obscure, and expounded what had not been understood. This school refuted the systems of the two others, i.e. the Materialists and Naturalists; but in exposing their mistaken and perverse beliefs, they made use of arguments which they should not. “God suffices to protect the faithful in war” (_Koran_, xxxiii. 25). Aristotle also contended with success against the theories of Plato, Socrates, and the theists who had preceded him, and separated himself entirely from them; but he could not eliminate from his doctrine the stains of infidelity and heresy which disfigure the teaching of his predecessors. We should therefore consider them all as unbelievers, as well as the so-called Mussulman philosophers, such as Ibn Sina (Avicenna) and Farabi, who have adopted their systems. Let us, however, acknowledge that among Mussulman philosophers none have better interpreted the doctrine of Aristotle than the latter. What others have handed down as his teaching is full of error, confusion, and obscurity adapted to disconcert the reader. The unintelligible can neither be accepted nor rejected. The philosophy of Aristotle, all serious knowledge of which we owe to the translation of these two learned men, may be divided into three portions: the first contains matter justly chargeable with impiety, the second is tainted with heresy, and the third we are obliged to reject absolutely.…