Like other Islamic philosophers, Abulwalid Muhammed Ibn Rushd, the most prominent philosopher of the West of the Islamic world thought about the relationship between religion and philosophy and created some important works in this regard. From among them, we can refer t Full Text
Like other Islamic philosophers, Abulwalid Muhammed Ibn Rushd, the most prominent philosopher of the West of the Islamic world thought about the relationship between religion and philosophy and created some important works in this regard. From among them, we can refer to Fasl al-maqal, al-kashf ‘an manahij al-adillah fi ‘aqa’id al-malah and Tahafut al-tahafat. In Ibn Rushd’s view, religion and philosophy are in harmony and bear no opposition against each other. In this regard, he argues, “Since Shari‘ah is the truth and invites people to a kind of rational reasoning which is fulfilled by the truth, both are the truth, and the truth is not in contrast to the truth. Rather, both agree with each other and acknowledge each other.” However, saying that philosophy is not in opposition to religion pertains to the innermost of religion and Qur’anic verses because philosophy and rational thinking are sometimes in contrast to the external meaning of religious ideas and verses. Ibn Rushd’s solution for removing such contrasts is to attain the inner meaning of the verses through interpretation. Of course, like Farabi, Ibn Rushd does not believe in the unity of religion and philosophy and merely thinks about their consistency with each other and lack of opposition between them. This is because philosophy and religion have to be independent from each other for the sake of their own safety. Thus we must not mix their related discussions with each other. In the present article, the writers have tackled the problem of the harmony between philosophy and religion from Ibn Rushd’s view in general, and explored his theory of interpretation, in particular. Finally, they argue that one of the most important goals of Ibn Rushd in propounding the discussion of the lack of opposition among religion, philosophy, and interpretation was defending philosophy and giving the right of interpretation to the people of reasoning, who are the same philosophers.