著者

中村 廣治郎

出版者

日本宗教学会

雑誌

宗教研究 (ISSN:03873293)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.82, no.4, pp.1066-1067, 2009-03-30

著者

中村 廣治郎

出版者

日本宗教学会

雑誌

宗教研究 (ISSN:03873293)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.83, no.4, pp.1422-1423, 2010

著者

中村 廣治郎

出版者

東京大学東洋文化研究所

雑誌

東洋文化研究所紀要 (ISSN:05638092)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.67, pp.1-110, 1975-03

---

Abu Hamid al-Ghazālī (d. 1111) being one of the greatest Muslim thinkers comparable to St. Augustine or Thomas Aquinas in the Christian tradition, there is no wonder that so much attention has been paid to him and so many studies have been done on him by both Muslim and non-Muslim scholars. Even in Christendom, the study of al-Ghazālī (Algazel), or interest in his works at the least, goes far back to the Middle Ages when the Christian world was busy with transplanting the Greek philosophy through the Arabic translations. Al-Ghazālī's Maqāsid al-Falāsifah, his compendium of philosophy (falsqfdh) was first put into Latin toward the end of the 12th century, and he was mainly known in Europe throughout the Middle Ages as the author of this work, and therefore supposed by mistake to be a“philosopher”(failasūf) himself. This misunderstanding is ascribed to the unfortunate fact that his“preface”to this Maqāsid dropped from its most Latin manuscripts for some so far unknown reasons during their circulation, so that it was little known that the compendium was but a preliminary step to his refutation of philosophy (in his later work, Tahāfut al-Falāsifah). This Tahāfut was also introduced to Europe in the meantime, but it did not so much contribute to improve the situation as to increase the confusion all the more among the scholars. Thus the myth of“a philosopher Algazel”itself lasted almost unimpaired until S. Munk finally demythologized it in the middle of the 19th century by correctly identifying al-Ghazālī's true intention and thought. As more writings of al-Ghazālī came to be printed and published toward the end of the century, the study of al-Ghazālī made much progress. Profiting from all this study and that on Islamic history in general, D. B. Macdonald published his monumental study on al-Ghazālī at the turn of the century in an article,“The Life of al-Ghazzali”(1899), which laid the foundation for the subsequent study in this field. He also spotted and gave some proper pioneering discussions to the essential questions involved in the study, such as the problems of his“esoteric teachings,”the authenticity of his writings, the causes of his retirement, and so forth. (To be continued)

著者

中村 廣治郎

出版者

東京大学東洋文化研究所

雑誌

東洋文化研究所紀要 (ISSN:05638090)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.87, pp.17-50, 1981-11

---

Al-Ghazali wrote several works on (Aristotelian) logic (mantiq). The fact shows the importance of logic in his whole system of thought. This is particularly and uniquely so, except Islamic philosophers (failasūf), in the general negative attitude of the traditional Muslim scholars against logic. Nevertheless, these writings have not adequately been studied in an attempt to clarify the significance of al-Ghazali's logical study and thought in the history of Islamic theology as well as in the development of his personal religious thought. The aim of the present article is to analyse these works of al-Ghazali with a view to clarify his attitude to logic and point out some problems for further study. We come to the conclusion that al-Ghazali not only baldly accepts Aristotelian logic totally, but goes so far as to islamicize it in the Qur'ānic terms. This leads us to the questions: (1) What is the reason for this attitude of his? My tentative answer is: the usefullness of logic and its superiority to the traditional (legal) method of reasoning (qiyās). (2) The influence of al-Ghazali's logical study in later development of Islamic theology, with particular reference to Ibn Khaldun's comments on it in his al-Muqaddimah. (3) The problem of apparent contradiction of al-Ghazali's positive reliance on reason (‘aql) shown in those logical works and his negative attitude to reason in his autobiography, al-Munqidh min al-Dalāl.

著者

中村 廣治郎

出版者

日本宗教学会

雑誌

宗教研究 (ISSN:03873293)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.82, no.4, pp.1066-1067, 2009-03-30 (Released:2017-07-14)

著者

中村 廣治郎 Kojiro NAKAMURA

雑誌

国際学レヴュー = The Review of international studies (ISSN:09162690)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.18, pp.69-89, 2006-03-31

---

A great number of studies have been done so far on the history of Islam in the various fields of discipline. Among others, Oriental History has done a major contribution to the study, while very few by Comparative Religion, or the History of Religions. This article is an attempt to read the history of Islam in terms of the History of Religions, by which I mean to study religions by applying the general theories of religions. The theories I make use of in this article are "Holy Community" by J. Kitagawa, typology of religions "Prophetic" and "Mystic" by F. Heiler and "Fundamentalism."

著者

中村 廣治郎 東長 靖 飯塚 正人 鎌田 繁

出版者

東京大学

雑誌

一般研究(C)

巻号頁・発行日

1992

---

1.補助金交付の連絡を受けて6月に研究方針を話し合う会合を持ち、これまで主として国家論的見地からイスラム共同体思想を研究してきた飯塚が基調報告を行った。その上で、秋まで各自が個別研究を行い、10月以降報告と共同討議を行うこととした。2.6月の基調報告を受けて、10月からは以下のような研究発表が順次行われた。まず中村は、政府要人をイスラム共同体の外にある「不信仰者」と見なすことでテロをイスラム的に正当化しようとする現代のイスラム過激派運動に言及しつつ、「信仰者」とは誰かをめぐる神学論争史の検討を行った。ついで鎌田は、スンナ派とシーア派の権威のあり方の違い、とりわけシーア派の共同体論に特長的な隠れイマーム思想の意義を論じ、イラン革命に至る歴史の流れの中に位置づけた。東長は神秘主義者による教団設立を共同体思想のひとつの発露と見る立場から、特に18世紀以降大改革運動を繰り広げたネオ・スーフィズム教団の発生について分析した。また飯塚は現代イスラム国家論の系譜が大きくふたつの潮流に分類されることを示し、その根幹にはイスラム法の定義をめぐる中世以来の思想対立が存在することを指摘した。3.以上のように多様な観点から共同体思想が論じられたが、そこで常に意識されていたのは現代イスラムの動向を思想史的発展の中でとらえようとする共通の立場であった。イスラムが政治化する原因は何よりもその共同体思想にある。本研究を通じて、その個別局面の理解はかなり深まり、比較の作業も相当進んだと言えよう。しかし、一年間ではそれぞれの思想の相互連関および相互影響の理解が不十分でもあり、今後は私的研究会により研究を続けたい。その成果は2〜3年後をめどに公表するつもりである。

著者

中村 廣治郎

出版者

日本宗教学会

雑誌

宗教研究 (ISSN:03873293)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.84, no.4, pp.1114-1115, 2011