1,725,543 research outputs found
Avicenna
No full textAVICENNA
Avicenna ( - )
Cover ( - )
Blank page ( - )
Avicenna: Lieber canonis primus. (1r)
Fen I (1r)
Fen II (30r)
Fen III (60v)
Fen IIII (75r)
Blank page ( - )
Grey chart ( - )
Cover ( -
Universitätsbibliothek Marburg Ms. 123: Avicenna
No full textElektronische Reproduktion von: [Handschrift] Universitätsbibliothek Marburg Ms. 123: Avicenna. - 10 Blätter ; Beschreibstoff: Pergament; 16,3 x 11,8 (9 x7) cm. -
Erschienen: [Italien], [um 1500]. -
Standort: Universität Marburg, Universitätsbibliothek. -
Signatur: Ms. 123
Bemerkungen: Frühere Signaturen: Mscr. 123. Ausführliche Beschreibung: Heyne, Sirka: Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Marburg; Wiesbaden : Harrassowitz, 2002; S. 259. -
(Fragment)
Digitalisiert 202
Avicenna's concept of pain.
Get PDFIbn Sina (Latin name - Avicenna, 980-1037) is a famous Muslim physician who wrote The Canon of Medicine. Pain-related writings within The Canon were identified and analysed and compared to Galen and Modern Pain Theory. We found evidence in The Canon that Avicenna challenged Galen's concept of pain. Galen insisted that injuries (breach of continuity) were the only cause of pain. In contrast, Avicenna suggested that the true cause of pain was a change of the physical condition (temperament change) of the organ whether there was an injury present or not. Avicenna extended Galen's descriptions of 4 to 15 types of pain and used a terminology that is remarkably similar to that used in the McGill Pain Questionnaire
Avicenna in Medieval Jewish Philosophy
No full textUna prima ricostruzione storica dell'influenza diretta esercitata da Avicenna sui filosofi ebrei medievali dei secoli XII-XIV.A first historical reconstruction of the direct influence exerted by Avicenna on medieval Jewish philosophers of the XII-XIV centuries
JOURNAL OF «AVICENNA BULLETIN» – 20 YEARS
No full textThe article, devoted to the 20th anniversary of the journal “Avicenna Bulletin”, reflects the historical background of its creation, tells about the contribution of those scientists who were in the first series of the journal. Information on the main stages of the formation of Avicenna Bulletin is given. In 1999, the journal was registered by the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Tajikistan (No. 464 of January 5, 1999) and re-registered on 12.11.2018, No. 084/97. Since 2003, the journal has been included in the “List ...” of the Higher Attestation Commission of Russia. Since 2008, Avicenna Bulletin has been presented in the Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI). It should be noted that the journal’s two-year impact factor increased from 0.02 in 2013 to 0.453 by 2018, i.e. 22 times, and the growth of the five-year impact factor during the same period amounted from 0.024 to 0.320, i.e. 13 times. In 2009, the journal was assigned the International Standard Serial Number (ISSN). During 20 years of its existence on the pages of Avicenna Bulletin were published 1641 articles including 1343 works submitted by Tajik researchers and 298 articles by foreign scientists. In 2017, Avicenna Bulletin joined the Publishers International Linking Association (PILA), and each article is assigned a unique identification number – DOI (Digital Object Identifier). To date, Avicenna’s Bulletin adheres to the “Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals” formulated by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), as well as the provisions developed and approved by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). In the year of its anniversary, Avicenna Bulletin will continue the glorious traditions based on the principles of objectivity, transparency, goodwill, demanding, and ethics, and will also intensify efforts to improve its internal and external content
Basel, Universitätsbibliothek, M III 5 : Avicenna, Manẓūma fī ăṭ-ṭibb
No full textDidactic poem in Arabic by Avicenna (d. 1037) about the art of healing. The manuscript was written in the 17th century on paper of European provenance and came to the university library in 1682 as a gift from Konrad Harber. According to the canon, the Urǧūza (or Manẓūma) fī ṭ-ṭibb is the Persian scholar’s greatest contribution to medicine. Armengaud Blaise translated it into Latin in Montpellier in 1284 under the title Cantica; a version of the translation, revised by Andrea Alpago, was printed in Venice in 1527.Online Since: 2018-03-2
Avicenna in Medieval Hebrew Translation Ṭodros Ṭodrosi's Translation of Kitāb Al-Najāt, on Psychology and Metaphysics
No full textIntro -- Contents -- Preface -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- 1. Ṭodros Ṭodrosi and the Hebrew Translation Movement -- 2. The Translator of Avicenna -- 3. Avicenna's Concept of the Soul -- 4. Notes on Avicenna and Jewish Thinkers -- Chapter 1. Ṭodros Ṭodrosi's Hebrew Translation of Kitāb al-Najāt (Haẓalat ha-Nefesh), Section Two, Treatise Six: "On the Soul" -- 1. Guide to the Critical Apparatuses -- The Manuscripts -- The First Apparatus -- The Second Apparatus -- 2. Sigla and Abbreviations Used in the Text -- Hebrew Manuscripts -- Arabic Manuscripts and Editions -- Others -- 3. Ṭodros Ṭodrosi's Hebrew Translation of Kitāb al-Najāt (Haẓalat ha-Nefesh), Section Two, Treatise Six: A Critical Edition -- Chapter 2. Ṭodros Ṭodrosi's Method of Translation: A Study of Language and Translation Techniques -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Ṭodrosi's Arabic Version -- 3. Ṭodrosi's Approach to Translation -- 4. The Hebrew Tradition of Literalism -- 5. Ṭodrosi's Syntax -- Verb -- The Noun -- Complements -- Pronouns and Pronominals -- Prepositions and Conjunctions -- Subordinate Clauses -- 6. Ṭodrosi's Terminology -- Ṭodrosi's Distinctive Use of Hebrew Terms and Expressions -- 7. Variations in Ṭodrosi's Use of Terminology -- קנה -- רגש -- תכף -- אות -- עסק -- מציאות -- השתכלות -- הווה -- סתר -- 8. Epilogue -- Chapter 3. Shem Ṭov ben Joseph Ibn Falaquera and Ṭodros Ṭodrosi: Two Translators of a Similar Text -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Juxtaposition of Equivalent Sections in Ṭodrosi's Translation of The Salvation and Falaquera's Guide to the Guide -- 3. Juxtaposition of Equivalent Sections in The Salvation in Ṭodrosi's Translation and Falaquera's Book of the Soul -- 4. Notes on Hebrew Terminology -- 5. Notes on Arabic Terminology -- 6. General Style -- ConclusionAppendix. Avicenna's Metaphysics in Ṭodros Ṭodrosi's Incomplete Hebrew Translation of Kitāb al-Najāt, III -- 1. Introduction -- Glossaries -- 1. Hebrew-Arabic -- 2. Arabic-Hebrew -- Bibliography -- Primary Sources -- Secondary Sources -- IndexDescription based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, YYYY. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries
Creazione e provvidenza. Influssi della metafisica di Avicenna sul "De potentia" di Tommaso d'Aquino
Get PDFLe Quaestiones disputatae de potentia sono una delle opere più importanti dell’intera produzione di Tommaso d’Aquino: in esse vengono discusse alcune tra le dottrine più rilevanti dell’intero impianto teologico tomista. In particolare, tra le altre, le dottrine della crezione e quella strettamente connessa della conservazione delle cose nell’essere trovano in queste pagine una delle loro formulazioni più rigorose e approfondite. La struttura stessa dell’opera evidenzia quanto per Tommaso il confonto con le auctoritates del passsato sia costitutivo per il darsi stesso delle proprie dottrine: lo studio delle fonti, in questo senso, può rivelarsi una porta davvero privilegiata per comprendere l’autentica portate speculativa delle dottrine tomiste. Questo lavoro si propone proprio di verificare l’effettiva influenza di quella che da molti è stata indicata come la fonte di riferimento privilegiata per le dottrine che sopra si citavano: il filosofo arabo Avicenna. Dopo aver rintacciato le linee principali di queste dottrine, prima in Tommaso, poi nella Metafisica di Avicenna, si è cercato di detrminare l’importanza di Avicenna sia dal punto di vista “quantitativo” che “qualitativo”. Seppur con alcune differenze rispetto a quanto fin’ora ha sottolineato la critica, si può affermare che, per quanto concerne la dottrina della creazione, Avicenna è la fonte di rifermineto privilegiata. Il rapporto tra i due pensatori ha due facce: dietro a un’espilicita e vibrante polemica col filosofo arabo, è possibile rintracciare soprendenti punti di contatto e affinità. Per quanto concerne la conservazione delle cose nell’essere, Tommaso rimane certamente un punto di rifermimento importante (anche se non più di altri): il rapporto tra i due, qui, però, si declina solo negativamente.
The Quaestiones disputatae de potentia are one of Thomas Aquinas’ masterpiece: here the author discusses some of the most relevant doctrines of his theological system. Specifically, the author investigates the theory of creation and the closely related doctrine of the presevation of things by God which find in these pages therir most in-depth and rigorous formulations. The structure of the work itself shows how for Thomas Aquinas the discussion with the auctoritates constitutes a fundamental aspect for his thought: it is in this respect that the study of the sources represents one of the best way to undersand the real significance of Thomas Aquinas’ theories. This master dissertation aims to verify the influence of the Arabic philosopher Avicenna who is generally considered as a priviledged source in the formulation of the above-mentioned doctrines. After showing the main features characterising these theories, first in Thomas Aquinas, then in the Avicenna’s Metaphysics, attempts have been made to asses the relevance of Avicenna both from a “quantitative” and a “qualitative” point of view. With regard to creation, Avicenna certainly represents the most important source for Thomas Aquinas. In this respect, the relationship between the two authors results bivalent: on one side the latin philosopher argues with Avicenna while on the other side we could identify some very surprising contact points. Reffering to the doctrine of presevation of things instead, the importance of Avicenna results equal to that of other sources and Thomas Aquinas himself does not recognise any similarity between his thought and Avicenna’s position.ope
al- Qānūn fi 'ṭ-ṭibb, kitāb 3 fann 3 <Ausz., dt.>
No full text[Avicenna]. Aus d. Arab. übers. u. erl. von J. Hirschberg u. J. Lipper
- …
