Özet:

In intellectual history, the annotations written on the main texts of philosophers who had an important place after the creation of philosophical and logical thinking became a tradition. One of the works on which annotations were written during this period is the work of Avicenna’s (d. 428/1037) named al-Ishārāt. This work, which is a summary of his philosophy, has been organized in two parts, including logic, physics and metaphysics. The first chapter, which deals with the logic issues, is ten nehic; the second part, which deals with physics and metaphysics, consists of ten namats. Scholars primarily such as Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210), Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī (d. 672/1274) and Sayf al-Dīn al-Āmidī (d. 631/1233) wrote annotations on this work. Bashārāt al-Ishārāt written by al-Samarqandī (d. 702/1303) who lived in the second half of the thirteenth century was one of the annotations written on al-Ishārāt. al-Samarqandī’s Bashārāt al-Ishārāt was a noteworthy annotation. Because this work is important in terms of revealing al-Samarqandī’s philosophical and logical approach and Avicenna's interpretation of the issues. In this study, we tried to examine al-Samarqandī’s views on proof sciences and scientific questions based on the logic section of his annotation by following the commentator method. We fictionalized the annotation via the “qāla- aqūlu” method and cited the al-Ishārāt text as a whole. al-Samarqandī annotated all three sections of al-Ishārāt. In the aforementioned annotation, al-Samarqandī made a classification as “namaṭ” and “nehij” based on Avicenna’s sub-headings and followed an arrangement including topics such as “apprehension”, “admonition” and “sign” existing within them. In classical logic, the comparison is examined in two sections in terms of its form and item. Comparisons in terms of items are examined in five sections as proof, dispute, rhetoric, poetry and fallacy. While premises expressing the truth create proof, premises not expressing the truth create dispute, rhetoric, poetry and fallacy. Avicenna divided scientific questions into three sections in the first partition and into six sections in the second partition. In the first partition he discussed scientific questions such as “what?”, “is it?” and “why?”. al-Samarqandī examined scientific questions in two sections as primary and secondary. According to al-Samarqandī “what?”, “is it?”, “why?” and “which?” were primary questions, while “how is it?”, “where is it?”, “when is it?”, “how much?” and “when?” were secondary questions. al-Samarqandī followed Avicenna and made explanations about scientific questions. Sciences have distinctive subjects, principles and issues. Concerning subjects, principles and issues, al-Samarqandī chose to explain Avicenna’s statements and contributed to clarifying the subject. al-Samarqandī examined sciences in three sections in terms of their subjects, which were “intertwined”, “proportional” and “opposite”. According to al-Samarqandī the subjects of sciences were named “intertwined” if they were more general than the subjects of specific sciences; “proportional” if sciences had one proportion to each other and only one thing was the subject of two sciences; and “opposite” in a reverse situation. Finally al-Samarqandī discussed the proof types. He divided the proof in question into two as “causality proof” and “existence proof”. It should be noted that al-Samarqandī not only explained Avicenna's views, but also included his own views in his commentary.

Anahtar Kelimeler: