A Decisive Discourse on the Delineation of the Relation between Religion and Philosophy (tr. Mohammad Jamil-ur-Rehman, 1921)

The book opens with

The business of philosophy is to study creation in order to be guided to its Creator

Their wordsWe maintain that the business of philosophy is nothing other than to look into creation and to ponder over it in order to be guided to the Creator,—in other words, to look into the meaning of existence.

Read the book on gutenberg.org ↗

8 korrents from this book ↓

Ibn Rushd (Averroes) did not write this page.

Every claim below was made in this book, quoted word for word and numbered in the order the piece makes them, so you can read it there rather than take our word for it. The book prints chapter headings its extracted text does not preserve, so the claims below are in the book's order but not grouped. The sentence above each quote is our reading of the claim, not their wording. Each quote was checked against a stored copy of the page at build time; where the two differ, the quote is the fact.

Our reading
The business of philosophy is to study creation in order to be guided to its Creator

Their wordsWe maintain that the business of philosophy is nothing other than to look into creation and to ponder over it in order to be guided to the Creator,—in other words, to look into the meaning of existence.
Our reading
Philosophical reasoning is no forbidden innovation just because it did not exist in early Islam

Their wordsOne cannot maintain that this kind of reasoning is an innovation in religion because it did not exist in the early days of Islam. For legal reasoning and its kinds are things which were invented also in later ages, and no one thinks they are innovations.
Our reading
We should study what the ancients wrote, accept what is true and be warned by what is wrong

Their wordsAll that is required of us is that we should go back to their books and see what they have said in this connection. If all that they say be true, we should accept it and if there be something wrong, we should be warned by it.
Our reading
No one can discover alone everything a science or an art requires

Their wordsThis is similar not only in the sciences but also in the arts. For no one is capable of discovering by himself alone everything which is required.
Our reading
A useful thing should not be banned because it harms some people by accident

Their wordsIt is not right that a drug which is medically useful by its nature should be discarded because it may prove harmful by accident.
Our reading
People come to belief in different ways: some through philosophy, some through argument, some through exhortation

Their wordsWe say this, because temperaments differ in believing: one will believe through philosophy; while another will believe through dogmatic discourse, just as firmly as the former, as no other method appeals to his nature.
Our reading
Rational investigation does not contradict revealed law, because truth cannot contradict truth

Their wordsAs this Law is true and leads to the consideration of the knowledge of God, we Muslims should believe that rational investigation is not contrary to Law, for truth cannot contradict truth, but verifies it and bears testimony to it.
Our reading
Where scripture seems to oppose a truth proved by philosophy, it admits of interpretation

Their wordsWe hold it to be an established truth that if the Law is apparently opposed to a truth proved by philosophy it admits of an interpretation according to the canons of the Arabic language.

Keep reading

The other pieces are the ones whose claims are worded most like this one's. That measures language, not agreement: they may argue the opposite.