Academic literature on the topic 'Risālat Ḥayy ibn Yaqẓān (Ibn Ṭufayl, Muḥammad ibn ʻAbd al-Malik)'

Hayy Bin Yaqzan is a famous Arabic narrative written by the Muslim philosopher Abu Bakr Ibn Tufail in the twelfth century and translated first into Latin by Edward Pocock, the son, in 1671, then into English by George Keith in 1674, by George Ashwell in 1686, and by Simon Ockley in 1708. Ibn Tufail's work is mentioned in connection with Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe, which appeared in 1719, by many critics who either accentuate or repudiate its significance as a possible source. This study goes beyond the off-hand question of derivation to compare these two analogous books, not to take part in the long-standing dispute but to inquire into the premises it stands upon and investigate its motivating grounds. After pointing out the identical settings of two men each stranded on a desert island, this study proceeds to analyze the approach of each book to the relationship between man and Nature. In the process of mastering their environments, Hayy and Crusoe awaken to the providential presence behind natural forces and learn to regulate themselves within the divine scheme and to form strong relations with God. The narratives of Ibn Tufail and Defoe share a concern not only with their heroes' solitude but also with their attitudes toward society, which threatens their sense of individuality. Whereas Hayy prefers his solitary state to immersion in human society and remains on his island accompanied only by one faithful apostle, Crusoe eagerly sails back to the world of men, although he too adjusts poorly to the spirit of society and spends the rest of his life roaming the globe. Examining the technical aspects of Robinson Crusoe and Hayy Bin Yaqzan, their narrative methods, their chronological order, their structure, style, and delineation of character, the study concludes that although the two books belong to different genres, they are still more similar than ordinarily assumed. It also finds that the question of indebtedness, which may never be resolved, is less significant than the broader similarities in cultural, political, and religious circumstances which may be at work.

From its inception in the twelfth century to its current use as a text, Ibn Tufayl's Hayy ibn Yaqzan has a sustained history of translation and transmission. A unique aspect is its early translation into Hebrew around the first quarter of the fourteenth century, whose extensive manuscripts have been traced and established in this study. The Hebrew translation, and its commentary by Moses Narboni, shift the Tufaylian narrative from the Maghribi milieu toward Latin Averroism. They allow us to examine the particular reception in the Judaic milieu and suggest new perceptions of Ibn Rushd and Ibn Tufayl as rational mystics.
The extensive printed translations in Europe that begin with the Latin Philosophus Autodidactus (1671) reflect different facets on Individuality, the Natural Man and Inner Revelation as accessible to and sought by the natural theologies of the 17th-18th centuries. The concurrent translations also reflect the differences in their reception by the translators. Through the process of transmission, the notion of self-sufficiency becomes epitomized in the paradigm of "Robinson Crusoe."
In its own milieu, the narrative is conceived as an answer to Ibn Sina's 'secret of eastern philosophy' and is expressed as a rational-mystic response from the Maghribi context. The narrative finds its anti-thesis in Ibn al-Nafis' reiteration, that applies the structure and content of the Tufaylian narrative to reverse its philosophical precepts and establish a normative frame of revelation. Its recent reclamation in modern Arabic literature as the proto-type of Robinson Crusoe is indicative of post-Colonial validation.
The different receptions of the narrative within each of the three milieux have inspired the application of new methodologies in literary criticism. Using the literary theories of reception and cultural paradigm in Hans Jauss and Edward Said, I further discuss the process of translation, transmission and reception of the narrative. Each milieu in a particular time-frame receives the text within certain sets of expectation and accordingly responds to it. This approach raises vital questions on both structural analyses that study an aesthetic work outside its history, and historical analyses that focus on the "unchanged loyalty" of its sources. The methodology developed in this study can be applied to central issues in Islamic thought, from the predilection toward its Greek sources to its dismissal of Averroism. It also allows for the appreciation of the integrai notion of rational mysticism. The notion of reception validates, resolves and values the different reiterations by recognizing their diverse contexts.

Après la présentation générale, dans la première partie, de l'appartenance culturelle des œuvres de Hayy Ben Yaqdhan et de El Criticon , et de la part de la tradition platonicienne dans leur conception d'ensemble, la seconde étudie le statut de la fiction de « l'enfant de la nature » dans ces deux récits, suivant la perspective littéraire d'une évolution transformationnelle du mythe vers le roman. La troisième partie procède ensuite, selon la méthode d'analyse structurale des récits, à une étude textuelle très précise de la structure, de la thématique et de la polysémie du « mythe allégorique de la caverne », parallèlement a une étude comparée qui cherche à dégager les principaux axes qu'explorera la confrontation intertextuelle de la quatrième partie. Ainsi, la quatrième et dernière partie, qui est aussi la plus importante, constitue-t-elle l'essentiel de ce travail de recherche. Elle comporte deux phases analytiques distinctes : l'une analogique, qui étudie les phénomènes de résurgences des schèmes platoniciens dans HBY et EC, comme genèse du motif romanesque de « l'enfant de la nature» dans ces deux textes, l'autre plus strictement transformationnelle, tente d'analyser les écarts distanciateurs et les recréations fécondes, qui, à partir du paradigme platonicien, semblent rendre compte de l'originalité de la réalisation thofai-lienne et gracianesque de ce motif dans HBY et EC. La fonction de catalyseur esthétique et conceptuel du texte platonicien, par rapport aux récits de HBY et EC, à laquelle permet de conclure la synthèse de ces deux phases analytiques, conduit, en outre, en dernière analyse, à mettre en évidence, au confluent de deux cultures, et par-delà la spécificité idéologique de chacun de nos trois auteurs, une voie esthétique de passage, sorte « d'horizon transculturel » qui atteste à la fois de la nécessite de la pluralité des cultures dans la quête du sens, et de la fécondité de leur dialogue. Enfin, la conclusion s'élargit en une réflexion plus générale sur l'intertextualité, dont la confrontation des trois textes étudiés parait particulièrement bien illustrer la triple vocation, d'outil critique et méthodologique, de processus de création de la littérature, et d'instrument de communication ou de véhicule transculturel.