Aquinas and ‘the Arabs’

Aquinas and ‘the Arabs’ International Working Group

An Interview with Richard Taylor and Luis López-Farjeat

By Guillermo Ruz and Isabel Inzunza

September 2024 – In a recent conversation, IPM Monthly sat down with Richard Taylor and Luis Xavier López-Farjeat to talk about their work in the Aquinas and ‘the Arabs’ International Working Group. These scholars lead a vibrant community of researchers dedicated to exploring the complex interactions between Islamic, Jewish, and Christian philosophies during the medieval period. Through their efforts, the group is uncovering new pathways for understanding how these diverse traditions have shaped and enriched each other over centuries.

About Richard Taylor and Luis López Farjeat

Richard Taylor is a professor of philosophy at Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where he has taught since 1982. He earned his Ph.D. in Philosophy and Medieval Studies from the University of Toronto in 1981. Since 2010, he has also been affiliated with the KU Leuven in Belgium, where he co-teaches the course of Aquinas in Context with Andrea Robiglio, utilizing live video technology. Taylor is deeply involved in both his home institution and KU Leuven, offering a unique combined graduate course on Aquinas and the Arabic Tradition. In addition to his teaching, Taylor has organized an international series of lectures on the Christian West and Islamic East, focusing on theology, science, and knowledge. He serves as the editor of the book series Philosophy in the Abrahamic Traditions of the Middle Ages and as the director of the Aquinas and ‘the Arabs’ International Working Group (www.AquinasAndTheArabs.org). He is also the Vice President of SIHSPAI (Society for the Study of the History of Philosophy in the Islamic World).

Richard Taylor is about to be honored with the prestigious Aquinas Medal by the International Étienne Gilson Society at the November 2024 meeting of the American Catholic Philosophical Association, an accolade that recognizes his outstanding contributions to philosophical scholarship and teaching. His extensive list of publications includes works on Avicenna, Maimonides, and Averroes, such as “Causality in the Discourse on the Pure Good, the Arabic Liber de Causis” and “Maimonides and Aquinas on Divine Attributes: The Importance of Avicenna.” A collection of essays dedicated to him, Contextualizing Premodern Philosophy. Explorations of the Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, and Latin Traditions, edited by Katja Krause, Luis Xavier López-Farjeat, and Nicholas Oschman, was published with Routledge in 2023.

Luis Xavier López-Farjeat is a full professor-researcher at the Faculty of Philosophy at Universidad Panamericana, Mexico City, where he holds a tenured position as a researcher at the D level. He received his Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Navarra, Spain, in 2001. López-Farjeat is a member of the National System of Researchers at Level III and serves as the associate director of the Aquinas and ‘the Arabs’ International Working Group (www.AquinasAndTheArabs.org). In addition, he is the editor of Tópicos, Revista de Filosofía (https://revistas.up.edu.mx/topicos). López-Farjeat teaches Islamic philosophy in the Master’s Program in Ancient Philosophy at Universidad Panamericana and at the Graduate Program in Philosophy at UNAM; he also teaches Islamic intellectual history in the Master’s Program in Middle Eastern Studies at El Colegio de México. His academic journey includes roles as a visiting researcher at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Texas, Austin, and a resident researcher at the Center of Theological Inquiry in Princeton. He has also been a visiting professor at numerous prestigious institutions, including Marquette University, the University of Notre Dame, The Catholic University of America, Princeton Theological Seminary, Universidad de Navarra, and Universidad de los Andes.

López-Farjeat’s scholarship focuses on the transmission and transformation of ancient philosophy within the Islamic world, exploring the interaction between Jewish, Christian, and Islamic philosophies. He has published several books and numerous scholarly articles and book chapters on these topics. He is co-author and co-editor of several significant works, including Philosophical Psychology in Arabic Thought and the Latin Aristotelianism of the 13th Century (2013), The Routledge Companion to Islamic Philosophy (2016), and Contextualizing Premodern Philosophy. Explorations of the Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, and Latin Traditions (2023). His recent publications include Reasons, Arguments, and Beliefs: Reflections from Classical Islamic Philosophy (2018) and Classical Islamic Philosophy: A Thematic Introduction (2022).

The Aquinas and ‘the Arabs’ International Working Group (AAIWG) is an academic initiative founded by Richard C. Taylor and David B. Twetten of Marquette University in 2005. The working group aims to promote scholarly understanding and dialogue concerning philosophical and theological issues from the Medieval period, particularly within the Abrahamic traditions—Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. Inspired by the Jesuit tradition of fostering cross-cultural and interreligious understanding, the AAIWG builds on a legacy of Catholic scholars who have studied Arabic and Islamic philosophy and its profound impact on Western thought.

The AAIWG focuses on exploring the significant influence of Arabic and Jewish philosophical traditions on the work of Thomas Aquinas and other Christian thinkers of the High Middle Ages. However, the group’s scope has evolved beyond the study of Aquinas to include a comprehensive study of philosophical thought in all three Abrahamic traditions, examining their unique insights and the ways they have influenced one another. The group encourages research that highlights these interactions and contributions to the history of philosophy, promoting new avenues of international cooperation and scholarly inquiry.

Since its inception, the AAIWG has grown into a vibrant international community of over 110 scholars, teachers, and graduate students proficient in classical languages such as Arabic, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. The group actively engages in various collaborative projects, seminars, conferences, and meetings worldwide, contributing to both the Catholic philosophical tradition and the broader interfaith dialogue by emphasizing the shared intellectual heritage of the Abrahamic religions.

The Interview

Guillermo Ruz: Professor Taylor, what inspired the creation of the Aquinas and ‘the Arabs’ project back in 2005?

Richard Taylor: The project started from work that Professor David Twetten and I were doing at Marquette University, focusing on the influence of philosophers like Avicenna, Averroes, and Al-Farabi on Thomas Aquinas, particularly in natural philosophy and conceptions of God. Initially, we began with small meetings at Marquette, which gradually expanded into a broader project. The project was originally called the “Finiteness and Causality Project” around 2005, but we rebranded it to the “Aquinas and ‘the Arabs’ International Working Group” to better reflect our focus. Although the title mentions “Aquinas and ‘the Arabs’,” it encompasses philosophy within the broader Abrahamic traditions.

Over time, the project grew to include annual conferences, alternating between Europe and North America. However, due to the logistical challenges of frequent international travel, we eventually decided to hold just one conference per year, often outside North America. We’ve hosted conferences in places like Morocco, Istanbul, Pisa, and Paris, with our upcoming one in 2025 planned for Oxford.

Professor López-Farjeat and I have collaborated closely since 2007. Together, we’ve expanded the project to include scholars from Europe, Muslim countries, Israel, and beyond, creating an interreligious group that is crucial to our work.

Luis, do you want to add anything?

Luis López-Farjeat: Yes. We first met in 2004 when I invited Prof. Taylor to Mexico, and this led to a long-standing collaboration. In 2007, I attended the conference he organized at Marquette on philosophy in the Abrahamic traditions, where I met many scholars who are now part of our project. By 2008, we began organizing conferences not only in the U.S. but also in Mexico, acknowledging that Mexico is part of North America. Over time, we expanded our network to include participants from Europe, Muslim countries, and Israel, making our group interreligious and internationally diverse, which has greatly enriched our work.

GR: Building on the ideas both of you have mentioned, I’d like to ask you to explain the primary goals of the Aquinas and ‘the Arabs’ International Working Group (AAIWG), particularly in promoting understanding of philosophical and theological issues across the Abrahamic traditions. Given that your work spans not only Aquinas but also Islamic and Jewish traditions, how do you approach these goals?

LLF: As Professor Taylor mentioned, the original focus was on Aquinas, particularly how he engaged with Arabic sources and occasionally Jewish sources like Maimonides. However, we quickly realized that this project also had great potential for promoting serious interreligious understanding. Unlike many interreligious dialogues that are well-intentioned but sometimes superficial, our approach is deeply rooted in working with original Greek, Arabic, Latin, and Hebrew sources. We emphasize the philosophical and theological material because understanding these texts in depth allows for a more meaningful interreligious dialogue.

We acknowledge that there are tensions in how religious and philosophical ideas are discussed across traditions, but rather than focusing solely on these tensions, we highlight the intellectual exchange between the three traditions. This exchange shows how concepts and arguments are shared and developed across religious boundaries, which is crucial for fostering collaboration among scholars from different backgrounds.

RT: I’d like to add that as we delved deeper into this work, we realized just how essential the Arabic sources are for understanding Aquinas and other Latin medieval philosophers like Albertus Magnus. Aquinas, for instance, was heavily influenced by Avicenna, particularly in his discussions on essence and existence, and other philosophical issues. Although Aquinas didn’t always agree with these sources, he was in constant dialogue with them, which shaped his thinking.

Additionally, Maimonides, who is often studied alongside Aquinas, was influenced by philosophers like Al-Farabi and, indirectly, Avicenna. When Aquinas writes about Maimonides in his commentary on the Sentences, he often considers these Arabic influences, which are crucial for understanding his thought.

Another significant influence was the Greek author Pseudo-Dionysius (called a philosopher by Albertus Magnus) whose works Aquinas studied while working closely with Albertus. Albert was deeply engaged with the Arabic tradition and was particularly interested in Pseudo-Dionysius’s writings. We even have records of Albert’s lectures on the Divine Names of Pseudo-Dionysius, transcribed in Aquinas’s own hand. This illustrates how Aquinas was learning and integrating these ideas early in his career, under the guidance of Albert.

Our first goal is to help each other, as scholars, penetrate these complex materials, especially since not everyone in our group is familiar with all the languages involved. We aim to uncover the deeper issues and see how these philosophical engagements took place, without taking sides, but rather striving for a full understanding.

Our second goal is to use this methodology to mentor younger scholars. The study of medieval philosophy increasingly requires knowledge of Arabic sources. For years I’ve run reading and discussion groups with North American and European students together with others from places like Iran, Turkey, or elsewhere and I’m pleased to see some of these latter students now pursuing PhDs in the United States. I also co-teach courses on Aquinas and the Arabic tradition at institutions like the KU Leuven and Marquette, where we help students understand traditional interpretations of Aquinas alongside the Arabic influences that shaped his work.

GR: This is all fascinating. One thing I’d like to ask both of you is about the approach of the AAIWG. The group is quite large and diverse, with members from different cultures and perspectives. How does the group approach the engagement between Islamic, Christian, and Jewish philosophies? How does this engagement shape your work?

RT: As I mentioned earlier, not everyone in the group knows all the languages involved, so we rely on each other for assistance. We frequently share papers for critical feedback and exchange resources, both primary and secondary, often facilitated by the internet. This allows for detailed discussions and a more precise analyses of texts.

It’s important to consider the historical context in which these philosophical exchanges occurred. In the medieval period, when Islam was dominant in regions like the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of what is now modern day Europe, Jewish and Christian traditions were respected as part of the “People of the Book.” Particularly in the East, this respect fostered a collaborative intellectual environment, where scholars from different religious backgrounds worked together. For example, Al-Farabi’s main teacher was a Christian working with Syriac and Greek texts in Baghdad, and Al-Farabi’s most famous student, Yahya Ibn Adi, was also a Christian theologian and philosopher.

Despite political challenges, such as Maimonides’ need to flee Spain due to persecution, these intellectual collaborations persisted. Today, our group mirrors this historical cooperation by engaging with scholars who specialize in different languages and traditions, allowing us to better understand the intricate connections between these philosophical traditions. For instance, we work with experts in early translation movements and those who study figures like Al-Farabi, Avicenna, and Averroes. This collaboration helps us better understand how Aquinas and others integrated these influences into their own work, often adapting the material to fit their philosophical or theological frameworks.

LLF: I’d like to add that this approach is crucial for what we consider a new methodology in studying Aquinas. As you know, Aquinas wasn’t reading the original Arabic or Hebrew texts; he relied on Latin translations. Our methodology emphasizes the importance of comparing these Latin translations with the original Arabic, Hebrew, and even Greek sources to understand what was lost, altered, or retained in translation. This comparison is essential for understanding how Aquinas interpreted these sources.

For us, engaging with scholars who work on Jewish, Syriac, Greek, and Arabic texts is vital. This interdisciplinary approach allows us to uncover the nuances in the translations and to see how different terms were interpreted across languages. For example, understanding why a specific Arabic term was translated in a particular way into Latin helps us see how Aquinas and his contemporaries understood and integrated these ideas.

Moreover, working directly with the original texts offers insights into the broader intellectual context. For instance, Maimonides’ interaction with Islamic theologians and philosophers like Avicenna and Averroes becomes clearer when we study these texts in their original languages. Similarly, studying Aquinas without considering the sources he used and the translations available to him, would miss a significant part of the picture. That’s why this engagement with different linguistic and cultural traditions is so central to our work.

RT: This approach, while common in European and Arabic scholarship, where texts are studied meticulously within their historical context, has been formalized by our group as “source-based contextualism.” This method emphasizes the importance of understanding what an author was reading and how they engaged with their sources. While this can be an extensive task, it’s incredibly valuable. For instance, recent work by scholars like Timothy Noone has revealed the deep influence of Avicenna on the Franciscan Latin tradition, particularly in the work of Saint Bonaventure.

Understanding these contexts enriches our comprehension of early 13th-century intellectual life, particularly in centers like Paris. By bringing in our own expertise with original texts, we gain new insights into how these ideas were received and transformed. This method has been incredibly enlightening and we’ve learned a great deal through this collaborative effort.

GR: Thank you. As a personal treat, I’d love to know what each of you finds most interesting or exciting in your work with the AAIWG. What has been the most fascinating discovery for you?

RT: There are so many intriguing aspects to this work, but I’ll focus on one that stands out to me. For many years, Aquinas has been praised for his insights into human intellectual understanding and epistemology, particularly in how he built on Aristotle’s ideas. What I’ve found most fascinating is tracing the origins of Aquinas’s epistemology, especially his concepts of the active and receptive intellect, back to his teacher, Albertus Magnus.

In Albert’s work, particularly in his De Homine, he explicitly draws from Avicenna, taking elements of his epistemology while rejecting others, such as the separate Agent Intellect. He as well bases his account on a very positive though problematic interpretation of Averroes. Albert then transmits his synthesized understanding to Aquinas, who further develops it in his own works, like the Commentary on the Sentences. It’s remarkable to see that what is often attributed to Aquinas’s original genius actually has roots in the Arabic tradition, mediated through Albert. This discovery has been particularly exciting for me and I’ve been writing about it extensively.

LLF: I share that excitement, and for me, one of the most interesting areas has been the way both Aquinas and the Arab philosophers understood logical treatises, particularly Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics and the use of demonstrative syllogism in philosophical arguments. It’s also fascinating to see how Aquinas’s understanding of creation is influenced by Avicenna and how it relates to the works of Averroes.

Additionally, I’ve recently delved into the role of Albertus Magnus as a mediator between Aquinas and the Arab philosophers. Although I primarily focus on the Arabic tradition, working on this project has led me to explore how Albert engaged with and interpreted these sources. He didn’t just adopt their ideas; he critically engaged with them, sometimes changing his interpretations or incorporating their arguments into his own work.

Albert’s dynamic approach shows how he was not merely a transmitter but a real teacher to Aquinas, guiding him through complex philosophical issues. This has been a major revelation for me, as it deepens our understanding of how interconnected these intellectual traditions truly were. It challenges the simplistic view that Arab philosophers were just commentators and highlights how Albert played a crucial role in shaping Aquinas’s thought by actively engaging with the rich legacy of Arabic philosophy.

GR: Perfect. I’m particularly interested in the possible connection between Proclus, the Alexandrian tradition of Neoplatonism, and the commentaries on Aristotle’s Organon. Proclus’ thoughts, especially on the Posterior Analytics, might have passed through Syriac translations and into the Arabic tradition. I’d love to know if there’s any connection there. Apologies for my enthusiasm, but it’s a fascinating subject!

LLF: I don’t specifically work on Proclus, so I can’t say for certain whether his works were translated into Syriac, though you might know more about that. However, Professor Taylor has done significant work related to Neoplatonism, particularly through his collaboration with Professor Cristina D’Ancona on Liber de Causis, which is closely related to Proclean and Neoplatonic thought.

RT: Indeed, the Syriac theologians had a strong command of Greek, so they didn’t always need to translate these materials into Syriac. When it comes to Proclus, they likely knew his work directly from the Greek texts, and indirectly through Pseudo-Dionysius. Pseudo-Dionysius, often associated with a group of theologians in Constantinople, played a significant role in transmitting these ideas.

Interestingly, the ideas didn’t always come through direct philosophical texts. Instead, they were likely often transmitted through conversations and interpretations. The Syriac scholars, who were well-versed in Greek, would incorporate these ideas into their own theological and philosophical discussions.

Recently, I’ve been reading about how, during that early period, Syriac theologians used Proclus to defend the concept of divine unity. In debates with Muslims, who emphasized the absolute oneness of God, these Christians would draw on Proclean ideas to argue for the unity of the first cause while still maintaining the doctrine of the Trinity. They presented the Trinity as different “faces” or aspects of the divine, which was a fascinating adaptation of Proclean thought within a Christian framework.

GR: That’s truly fascinating, especially considering Proclus’ efforts to establish a strong scientific basis in theology. His approach wasn’t just about negative theology or reaching an intellectual impasse when contemplating the One. He sought to explain God—or the One—as a cause in a scientific manner. It’s intriguing to think about how his lost commentary on the Posterior Analytics might have influenced subsequent traditions, like Simplicius’s work, and how that might have filtered into the Arabic tradition through the Alexandrian school’s focus on Aristotle’s Logic.

RT: Absolutely. There’s also an interesting influence on Averroes in his conception of divine and ultimate causality, which ties back to these ideas. But that’s a topic for another discussion.

GR: Thank you so much. Shifting gears a bit, I’d like to ask about the relationship between the AAIWG and the book series Philosophy in the Abrahamic Traditions of the Middle Ages (PATMA). How are these connected?

RT: While there’s no formal connection between the AAIWG and the PATMA series by Brepols, there is a significant overlap in the work we do. The idea for the book series came to me after I was approached at the Kalamazoo Medieval Congress, where I was asked to consider starting a new series. After some thought, I proposed this series to focus on philosophy in the Abrahamic traditions during the Middle Ages.

When forming the editorial board, I selected five of the most respected scholars in the field: Stephen Harvey from Bar Ilan University in Israel, Jules Janssens from KU Leuven, Therese-Anne Druart from The Catholic University of America, Josef Puig Montada from the Universidad Complutense in Madrid, and Cristina D’Ancona from the University of Pisa. This board is highly active, with each member carefully reviewing every work published, ensuring the quality and depth of the publications.

Although the series and the working group are not formally linked, the editorial board members are all part of the AAIWG. As a result, the series has become a natural outlet for much of the research and scholarship emerging from our group. For example, we recently published a book on Albert the Great and His Arabic Sources, which aligns closely with our interests.

The series has proven to be successful, providing a platform for publishing work related to the Abrahamic philosophical traditions. We’re open to proposals for books, translations, and collections of essays, and Brepols has been very supportive, even allowing us to publish without requiring subventions, which is a significant advantage.

GR: I just have one last question. You’ve touched on this a bit already, but could you tell us what’s coming up in the next few years for the AAIWG? Perhaps focus on what’s planned for 2025.

RT: The most significant event for 2025 is our meeting at Oxford, scheduled for the end of May. It will be a three or four-day conference, and it’s something we’re very much looking forward to. Around the same time, there’s also a meeting in Prague organized by the Symposium Thomisticum, led by Fran O’Rourke. Several of us involved in the Aquinas and Arabic tradition will be participating. This will be a valuable opportunity to engage with traditional Thomists and help them appreciate the profound influence of the Arabic tradition on Aquinas’s thought.

These are two major events on our calendar. Luis might have additional plans that I’m not always aware of since he’s involved in so many activities.

LLF: While 2025 will be important, I’d also like to mention that in the coming month, we’ll have sessions at the ACPA (American Catholic Philosophical Association) meeting. A significant highlight will be Richard receiving the Aquinas Medal from the International Étienne Gilson Society, which is a wonderful recognition of his contributions to our field and our group. This award acknowledges the years of work we’ve done under Richard’s leadership, and many of us are deeply grateful for his mentorship.

Our group has always been committed to supporting young scholars. At our conferences, including the upcoming one in Oxford, we make sure to include sessions specifically for graduate students. These conferences are not just for senior scholars; they’re also a platform for emerging scholars to present their work and receive guidance on their dissertations and papers. We believe in nurturing the next generation of scholars, and this has been a central part of our mission.

GR: Thank you so much for this interview, and congratulations again, Professor Taylor, on your well-deserved award. It’s been an honor to learn from one of the best professors I’ve had in my own classes.