Hello, Father Angelo,

I have a question for you…

I’ve been fascinated for a while now by a figure who has had a profound impact on me (since my catechism days), and I saw that you’ve already paid homage to him in another question posted by another user: Averroes.

I’ve noticed that a good number of people (both prominent and non-prominent) are against his theories and are calling him a name that’s not very appropriate.

Unfortunately, I don’t know much about him. I’ve also tried to approach and learn more about him. Is he being disliked perhaps because he lacked faith in converting to Christianity?

Thanks again.

ps. I’m 18 years old.

Priest’s answer

Dear friend,

1. Averroes was one of Islam’s greatest philosophical exponents.

He was born in Cordoba, Spain, in the 12th century.

His work was multifaceted.

Within the history of philosophy, he is important because he introduced Aristotle to Western thought.

However, his commentary on Aristotle was plagued by errors, so much so that initially, for example in Paris, the reading of Aristotle was forbidden under penalty of excommunication.

Averroes was known as the Commentator par excellence. In the Divine Comedy, Dante speaks of him as the one who wrote the great commentary. T-N

2. The reason for the prohibition concerned the human intellect.

Aristotle distinguished a dual intellect: an active intellect whose task is to abstract the essence of things, and a passive intellect that receives and preserves within itself the essence of things.

The abstractive principle is the clear sign of the spiritual nature of the intellect.

Concerning the active intellect, Aristotle used an expression that has given rise to various interpretations: “The active mind is separate, and unaffected and unmixed, being in its essence actually” (The Soul III, 5 430a 10).

3. According to some of his commentators, the active intellect, identical for all men, would even be identified with God.

According to others, it would reside on the moon.

4. What is at stake in this debate is the immortality of the soul. Because the starting point for demonstrating the immortality of the soul lies precisely here: in the spiritual activity of our intellect.

Because if the spiritual activity of our intellect is carried out outside of us and only sensible images remain within us, there is no basis for speaking of the individual immortality of the soul.

5. Well, this was precisely Averroes’ error: he asserted that both the active and the potential intellect are in God and left man only the faculty of imagination.

But imagination, or rather the ability to elaborate and preserve images, belongs to the senses rather than to the spirit, and even animals possess it.

With this, he denied the immortality of the soul.

6. According to St. Thomas, every human being is endowed with an active intellect, that is, the capacity for abstraction, and a passive intellect, that is, the ability to know the essence of things.

Therefore, every human soul, possessing spiritual activity, transcends matter and survives the death of the body.

7. William of Tocco, writing the Positio of Thomas Aquinas, which is a summary of the life, virtues, thought, and works of the Saint for his cause of canonization, also mentions this problem.

He presents it as an error spread by Siger of Brabant, the greatest exponent of Averroes’ thought at the time.

This error concerned the immortality of the soul, which was effectively denied because of the belief that there was “a single intellect common to all men.”

This error fueled the sins of the wicked and obscured the virtues of the saints. If, in fact, we all shared a single intellect, there would no longer be any difference between men, not even in merit.

This heresy grew so strong even in the weakest minds and insinuated itself so perniciously that a Parisian soldier, asked if on his deathbed he wished to atone for his sins, replied: “If the soul of blessed Peter is saved, then I too will be saved; For if we are given the power to understand through a single intellect, we will also die a single death” (Hystoria santi Thomas de Aquinas, chap. 19). T-N

Aquinas showed how Aristotle had been misinterpreted by Averroes and “uprooted this error by exposing its inconsistency” (ibid.). T-N

Precisely on this subject he wrote De unitate intellectus (1270), De spiritualibus creaturis, and De anima (1268-1269).

8. Averroes wasn’t rejected because he wasn’t a Christian. Neither were Plato and Aristotle. Yet their thinking has been largely by Christian theologians and philosophers.

I bless you, wish you well, and remember you in my prayers.

Father Angelo

Questo articolo è disponibile anche in: Italian Portuguese