This essay Deals with the issue of comparing Aristotle's own Ideas and those of his followers - between Aristotle himself and Aristotelianism.
After the decline of Rome, Aristotle's work was lost in the west. However, in the ninth century, Arab scholars introduced Aristotle to Islam, and natural science took an Aristotelian approach. It was through Arab and Jewish scholars that Aristotelianism thought was reintroduced in the west. His works became the basis of medieval scholasticism; much of the Roman Catholic theology shows, through St. Thomas Aquinas, Aristotelian influence.
Due to reasons like, Firstly, that by the time Aristotle's work was re-introduced to the west, it was not his original and it must be noted that it was commentaries, which naturally bring about change. Secondly, during the time of Aristotle himself Christianity was not around, but by the time Aristotle's work re-entered the west, Christianity had developed a strong hold and this eventually influenced the scholastic-Aristotelianism. These notions portray that Aristotelianism differed from Aristotle's original work.
Aristotle's work and his commentaries were available in translation by about 1200. These were being widely used as part of the university's Arts curriculum. At Oxford, " No obstacles arose in the next in the next few decades to the slow, but steady growth of Aristotelian influence", (Lindberg,p.216). It did however become of major concern in Paris. Pope Gregory IX became directly involved and issued a ban stating that " Aristotle's books on natural philosophy were not to be read in the faculty of Arts until they had been " examined and purged of all suspected error", (Lindberg, p217).
Since Aristotle's original works were difficult to follow, readers used whatever explanatory aids they could. These aids included translate commentaries of Islamic scholars such as Avicenna, " who presented a platonized version of Aristotelian philosophy"(Lindberg,p.