scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Explaining the Views of Ibn Sina and Al-Ghazali on Games and Physical Exercises and their Relation to the Relationship Between Body and Soul

01 Dec 2020-Dinamika Ilmu (Faculty of Education and Teacher Training of IAIN Samarinda. JL. HAM Rifadin Samarinda Sebrang, Samarinda, Kalimantan Timur 75131, Indonesia. Tel: 62-541-7270222; Fax: 62-541-7270222; e-mail: journal.dinamika@gmail.com; Web site: https://journal.iain-samarinda.ac.id/index.php/dinamika_ilmu)-Vol. 20, Iss: 2, pp 357-366
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors describe the philosophical views of Ibn Sina and Ghazali on the relationship between the soul and the body and explain their relationship between their philosophical views on games and physical exercises related to body and soul.
Abstract: The purpose of this article is to describe Ibn Sina and Ghazali's philosophical views on soul and body on the one hand and to express their views on physical movements on the other hand in order to explain the relationship between their philosophical views on games and physical exercises related to body and soul. The research method was descriptive-analytical. The research findings showed that despite the differences in the philosophical thought of Ibn Sina and Ghazali, in the field of proofs of the soul and the body, there is a similarity between these two thinkers and the relationship between the soul and the body is two-ways. With physical activity in the game, there is an effect on the soul and vice versa. In fact, whenever playing and exercising are done in proportion and the body is active, then the soul will also have fun, and this is based on the effect that the body has on the soul. According to the theory of two thinkers, such a conclusion is that games and physical exercises recreate energy and rejuvenates the body and soul.

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, major contributions of prominent early Muslim scholars to psychology and outlines the challenges faced by today's Muslims in adapting to the Western theories are discussed. And they also offer a few recommendations on the indigenization of psychology for Muslim societies interested in seeking the Islamic perspective on human behaviors.
Abstract: Early Muslims wrote extensively about human nature and called it Ilm-al Nafsiat or self-knowledge. In many cases, their works seem to be the original ideas for many modern day psychological theories and practices. What is interesting however is that a lot of what the early scholars wrote was blended with Islamic philosophy and religious ideas. This paper covers major contributions of prominent early Muslim scholars to psychology and outlines the challenges faced by today's Muslims in adapting to the Western theories. It also offers a few recommendations on the indigenization of psychology for Muslim societies interested in seeking the Islamic perspective on human behaviors.

196 citations

Book
28 May 2009
TL;DR: This book discusses the role of falsafa in Islam, al-Ghaz?l?'s biography, and the causes and effects in the Revival of the Religious Sciences.
Abstract: Chapter One: A Life Between Public and Private Instruction: Al-Ghaz?l?'s Biography Chapter Two: Al-Ghaz?l?'s Most Influential Students and Followers Chapter Three: Al-Ghaz?l? On the Role of falsafa in Islam Chapter Four: The Reconciliation of Reason and Revelation Through the "Rule of Interpretation" Chapter Five: Cosmology in Early Islam-Developments that Led to al-Ghaz?l?'s Incoherence of the Philosophers Chapter Six: The Seventeenth Discussion of the Incoherence of the Philosophers Chapter Seven: Knowledge of Causal Connections is Necessary Chapter Eight: Causes and Effects in the Revival of the Religious Sciences Chapter Nine: Cosmology in Works Written After the Revival

154 citations


"Explaining the Views of Ibn Sina an..." refers result in this paper

  • ...…there were quite many previous researchers done this kind of research including Haque (2004), Dutton (2001), Kayode, Nasirudeen, & Al-Hasani (2016), Griffel (2009), Aman (2017), Muhaya (2015), Giacaman & Bahlul (2000), Black (1993), Fazli (2013), Imdad, 360 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 20(2), 2020 aimed…...

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Mar 1993-Dialogue
TL;DR: Averroes and Ghazâli as discussed by the authors pointed out that the notion of an estimative power as defined by Avicenna was not entirely unambiguous, and suggested that a correct understanding of the Avicennian conception of estimation is required.
Abstract: One of the chief innovations in medieval adaptations of Aristotelian psychology was the expansion of Aristotle's notion of imagination or phantasia to include a variety of distinct perceptual powers known collectively as the internal senses (hawâss bâtinah). Amongst medieval philosophers in the Arabic world, Avicenna (Ibn Sinâ, 980–1037) offers one of the most complex and sophisticated accounts of the internal senses. Within his list of internal senses, Avicenna includes a faculty known as “estimation” (wahm), to which various functions are assigned in a wide variety of contexts. Although many philosophers in the Arabic world as well as in the Latin West accepted Avicenna's positing of an estimative faculty, Avicenna's best-known critics, al-Ghazâli (1058–1111) and Averroes (Ibn Rushd, 1126–1198), found Avicenna's arguments in support of a distinct estimative faculty problematic. For different reasons, both Averroes and Ghazâli raised the basic question of whether one needed to posit a distinct faculty of estimation to supplement the perceptual abilities of the other internal senses, and whether the notion of an estimative power as defined by Avicenna was internally coherent. Such criticisms suggest that the Avicennian conception of estimation is not entirely unambiguous, and that a correct understanding of Avicenna's motivations for delineating an estimative power requires a careful study of the diverse activities assigned to it throughout Avicenna's philosophical writings.

95 citations


"Explaining the Views of Ibn Sina an..." refers background in this paper

  • ...…including Haque (2004), Dutton (2001), Kayode, Nasirudeen, & Al-Hasani (2016), Griffel (2009), Aman (2017), Muhaya (2015), Giacaman & Bahlul (2000), Black (1993), Fazli (2013), Imdad, 360 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 20(2), 2020 aimed to explore the view of Ibn Sina and Al-Ghazali related to playing…...

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In the Ash'arite tradition of Islam, causal power is identical with creative power, and since God is the sole and sovereign creator, to assert anything else is to compromise monotheism as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: One of the most striking features of speculative theology (kalāam) as it developed within the Ash'arite tradition of Islam is its denial of causal power to creatures. Much like Malebranche in the seventeenth century, the Ash'arites saw this denial as a natural extension of monotheism and were led as a result to embrace an occasionalist account of causality. According to their analysis, causal power is identical with creative power, and since God is the sole and sovereign creator, God is the only causal agent. To assert anything else is to compromise monotheism. This position, of course, was in direct opposition to the prevailing accounts of causality within the philosophical tradition of Islam at the time. The philosophers (falāasifa) had by and large taken over accounts of causality from Aristotle and the Neoplatonists and adapted them in accordance with their own set of concerns. In such accounts, while God stands as the first cause, secondary causation—the causative action of agents other than God—is unambiguously affirmed, even if variously understood. Thus, as they offered a sophisticated account of causal action in direct opposition to the occasionalist thesis, the falāasifa posed something of challenge to the theologians.

18 citations


"Explaining the Views of Ibn Sina an..." refers result in this paper

  • ...Hence, there were quite many previous researchers done this kind of research including Haque (2004), Dutton (2001), Kayode, Nasirudeen, & Al-Hasani (2016), Griffel (2009), Aman (2017), Muhaya (2015), Giacaman & Bahlul (2000), Black (1993), Fazli (2013), Imdad, 360 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 20(2),…...

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors study about al Ghazali's thoughts on the curriculum of Islamic education based on the series of curricula before al-Ghazali which eventually distinguish this study from others.
Abstract: Al Ghazali lived in the Islamic golden age when all the fields of education flourished. There have been many studies of al-Ghazali's thoughts, yet, further and deeper examination from various perspective is needed to get objective and actual thoughts of Al-Ghazali. In al Ghazali’s time, there was no term of curriculum, however, the concept emerged as an accumulation of previous thoughts about the curriculum. The objective of this research is to study about al Ghazali's thoughts on the curriculum of Islamic education based on the series of curricula before al-Ghazali which eventually distinguish this study from others. This library research relies on written materials from the works of al Ghazali and others related to this topic. The data were collected using documentary technique and analyzed using content analysis method. In conclusion, Al-Ghazali’s curriculum is similar to the concept of holistic education which is characterized by intellectual, emotional, physical, and spiritual developments. The curriculum also covers the dimension of development and it is beneficial for individual and society to make people closer to Allah SWT.

11 citations