Ibrahim Bayyumi Madkour
translated from Persian by Shahyar Sa'adat
For a long time Islamic philosophy was
under a cloud of doubt and uncertainty. Some people denied its existence while
others affirmed it. This uncertainty continued all through the nineteenth
century. Those who denied the very existence of an Islamic philosophy feigned
ignorance and maintained that the teachings of Islam opposed all free
discussion and investigation, and therefore Islam has never risen to the aid of
philosophy and science throughout the centuries of its existence. The only
fruits Islam has borne for its followes have been intellectual despotism and
dogmatism, they said. Christianity, in comparison, has been the cradle of free
thought and discussion, they maintained, patronizing art and literature,
encouraging the sciences, and becoming a fertile ground for the germination of
new philosophy and helping it to develop and bear fruit. [1]
1. Racial Prejudice
Those who attacked and denigrated Islamic
philosophy did not stop at the kind of arguments that have been mentioned. They
went much further an extended their fallacious notions to general racial
characteristics, and extended what they said about philosophy and learning to
political matters. It is surprising that although the French politically
opposed racial discrimination, they were among the people who sowed the seeds
of this kind of attitude, the effects of which have continued well into the
present century. For example, Renan was the first person who openly stated the
view that the Semitic race is inferior to the Aryan race.[2] This judgement of Renan's had an effect on
some of his contemporaries, and some of his disciples and students repeated his
views and published them far and wide. This was because Renan was both an
unequalled master of the Semitic languages and was more familiar with Islamic
matters than other researchers of his day.
Advancing the notions of the 'Semitic
spirit' in contrast to the 'Aryan spirit' by Leon Gauthier during the early
part of the twentieth century was nothing other than the continuation of the
argument made by Renan. In Gauthier's view, the Semitic mind is only capable of
comprehending details and particulars which are disconnected with each other or
are combined and incapable of conceiving any coherent order or relationship
between details. In other words, the 'Semitic spirit' is that of division and
separation, or in Gauthier's words, espirit separatiste. The 'Aryan
spirit' on th other hand, is the spirit of integration and synthesis, espirit
fusionniste, as he calls it.[3]
It follows naturally that since the Arabs
are inherently able to understand only particulars and isolated facts, they
would be unable to form any theories, propositions, laws or hypotheses. It
would be futile therefore to look for any philosophical or scientific
investigations on their part. This is especially true now when Islam has
narrowed their intellectual horizons and closed the doors to any speculative
discussions, so much so that the Muslim student denigrates and ridicules
science and philosophy.[4]
Those who stated such views, held that
Islamic philosophy is simply an imitation of Aristotelian philosophy, and
Islamic philosophical texts are nothing other than repititions of Greek ideas
in Arabic.[5]
The views of Renan, which I have just
mentioned, were widespread during the nineteenth century. Fortunately the days
when the habits, customs, ethical, moral, and intellectual characteristics of a
nation were thought to be products of either its geographical conditions or
racially inherited traits have passed. Other attempts in the same vein or
formulating so-called 'national psychology' or 'group psychology' proved
equally futile.
Moreover, who has claimed that Islamic
philosophy is a creation of Arab thinking? It is a well established fact that
many nationalities such as the Persians, Indians, Turks, Egyptians, Syrians,
Barbars, and Andalusians contributed to the development and enrichment of
Islamic philosophy.
Islamic civilsation at its zenith not only
did not block the path of science, it both confirmed and encouraged it. And far
from opposing philosophy, it welcomed and embraced it with open arms. It
welcomed opinions and views of every shade and colour. How can Islam, which
invites mankind to observe the heavens and the earth and to contemplate and
meditate upon their mysteries, oppose discussion and inquiry and restrict the
freedom of thought? Even Renan, who expressed the kind of views about Islamic
philosophy and science that we have already mentioned, has confessed elsewhere
that Muslims treated conquered peoples with an indulgence unheard of throughout
history. For example, some among the Jews and Christians accepted Islam while
others preserved their ancestral faith and attained to high and honoured
official positions in the courts of the Muslim caliphs and rulers. Moreover,
although Muslims differed with the Jews and the Christians in regard to beliefs
and religious principles, they still married in those communities.[6]
Of course, this is not the first time that
this French historian and philologist has contradicted himself. In one place he
denies the very existence of such a thing as an Arab (Islamic) philosophy and
says: "The only thing that the Arabs (Muslims) accomplished was to learn a
Greek encyclopedia of the seventh and eighth centuries."[7] Then he goes on to contradict his denial
and asserts that there is a uniquely Islamic philosophy whose special
characteristics must be given attention. He confesses that, "the Arabs
(Muslims), like the Latins, through engaging in interpretation of Aristotle's
works learned how to formulate a philosophy full of peculiar chraracteristics
and elements in serious opposition to what was taught at the Lyceum."[8] He then adds that "The original
movement in Islamic philosophy should be sought in the various schools of the
Mutakallimun (theologians)."[9] These contradictory statements of Renan's
and the negligence evident in his works did not remain hidden from Dugat, one
of his contemporaries. Dugat believed that the quality of thought such as
witnessed in Ibn Sina could not result in anything other than original and
sophisticated interpretations and views: and the schools of thought such as
that of the Mu'tazilites and the Ash'arites are nothing other than original
creations of Islamic thought.[10]
In the twentieth century what was
expressed in the form of guess and speculation by menlike Dugat wad found to be
irrefutable and proven fact. Researchers became gradually more familiar with
Islamic topics than before, and their understanding of the original and unique
characteristics of Islamic thought gradually increased. As they came to know
more about Islam, their judgement of it became fairer and more even-handed. The
truth of the matter is that the malicious intent of the nineteenth century
European scholars was quite evident in their handling of various Islamic
topics; because, while on the one hand they admitted that "the works of
the Islamic philosophers have not been adeqautely studied and our knowledge of
their substance and content of their writings is incomplete,"[11] in the next breath they made the most
general and blanket statements and judgements on it and said that Islamic
philosophy is nothing other than an imitation of Aristotle. It is well to keep
in mind that these scholars had no direct access to Islamic philosophy because
they did not have the original texts at their disposal, while the Latin
translations could not give a full and accurate portrayal of the scope and
depth of this philosophy. Today, however, we can speak with complete certainty
of the accomplishments which the Islamic civilization had made in this regard
and still claim that there are a large number of topics in Islamic thought
which have not yet been fully investigated and discussed.
As to the question of whether we should
call this philosophy "Islamic" or "Arab", such questions
are nothing but futile arguments over words and names. This philosophy
developed and grew in an Islamic environment and was written in the Arabic
language. The fact however that these thoughts were written in Arabic does not
mean that Islamic philosophy is a creation of the Arab element. We who have
already condemned racism have never claimed any such things. Islam gathered in
its fold numerous nationalities and all of them contributed to the growth and
development of its thought. And as for this philosophy being called
"Islamic", it can not be claimed that it is the product of the
intellectual efforts of the Muslims alone, since such a claim would not sit
well with the historical evidence available. Historical records show that the
earliest teachers of the Muslims were Nestorian, Jacobites, Jews, and Sabaeans,
and that Muslim scholars cooperated with their Nestorian and Jewish
contemporaries in their philosophical and scientific investigations.
In any case, I am inclined to call this
philosophy "Islamic" because of two reasons. Firstly, Islam is not
just a religion it is also a civilization; and the topics of Islamic
philosophy, despite the variety of its sources and backgrounds of writers, are
rooted in the Islamic civilization. Secondly, the problems, the foundations,
and aims of this philosophy are all Islamic, and it was Islam that formed this
cohesive philosophy by gathering teachings and views belonging to many
different cultures and schools of thought.
2. Islamic Philosophy
Islamic philosophy is unique in the sort
of topics and issues with which it deals, the sort of problems it attempts to
solve and the methods it uses in order to solve them Islamic philosophy
concerned itself with such matters as the problem of unity and multiplicity,
the relationship between God and the world, both of which had been subjects of
heated controversies and discussions among the theologians for a long time.[12]
Another aim of this philosophy was to
reconcile revelation with reason, knowledge with faith, and religion with
philosophy, and to show that reason and revelation do not contradict each
other, and that religion would be accepted by the pagan when it is illuminated
by the light of philosophic wisdom. It aimed to prove also that when religion
embraces philosophy it takes on philosophical qualities just as philosophy too
assumes the colour of religion. In all, Islamic philosophy is a creature of the
environment in which it grew and flourished, and as is quite obvious, it is a
religious and spiritual philosophy.
(a) Topics: Although Islamic philosophy is religiously oriented, it has not ignored
any major philosophical issues. For example, it has extensively discussed the
problem of being, and defended its position on issues like time, space, matter,
and life. Its treatment of epistemology is both unique and comprehensive. It
drew distinction between the self (nafs) and reason, inborn and acquired
qualities, accuracy and error, surmise and certain knowledge. It has
investigated the question of what is virtue and happiness and divided virtues
into a number of categories and reached the conclusion that the highest virtue is
uninterrupted contemplation and serene realization of the Truth.
Muslim thinkers divided philosophy into
the two generally accepted categories of 'speculative' and 'practical' and
their discussions extended over varied topics such as natural philosophy,
mathematics, metaphysics, ethics and politics.[l3] Evidently, the Islamic thinkers believed philosophy to have a much greater
scope than is generally given it today, and in this regard their work was
similar to that of the Greek philosophers, specially Aristotle, whom they
imitated and followed. Thus, Islamic philosophy was intermingled with medicine,
biology, chemistry, botany, astronomy and music. Generally speaking, all the
fields of science were considered to be nothing other than branches of philosophy.
Considering all that has been said, it
would not be an overstatement to claim that Islamic philosophy encompasses all
the various aspects of Islamic culture. It should, of course, be kept in mind
that during the ages when Islamic philosophy was developing and maturing,
learning and investigation were carried out in an encyclopedic and all-round
manner. Furthermore, it should be kept in mind that the full range of Islamic
philosophical thought cannot be fully accessible through the study of
philosophical texts alone. In order that a full understanding be attained, it
is necessary to expand the range of investigation and research to include
discussion of theology (kalam) and mysticism (tasawwuf). It might
even be necessary to relate any discussion of Islamic philosophy to the history
of Islamic Law and the principles of jurisprudence. It is not rare to discover
philosophical ideas, concepts, and views in what are ostensibly Islamic
scientific texts dealing with such topics as medicine, geometery, chemistry,
and astronomy. Furthermore, some Muslim scientists showed more courage and
freedom in expressing philosophical views than that shown by those specializing
in the field of philosophy. Also, amongst Islamic mystical and theological
discussions, views and positions are encountered which in their profundity and
precision equal any found amongst the Aristotelians. These Muslim thinkers
challenged Aristotle's philosophy and struggled against it for many years. This
struggle led to the emergence of a distinctive Islamic philosophy and thought.
Later on a certain methodology and forms of rational analysis were introduced
into discussions about the foundations of Islamic law and the principles of
jurisprudence which have a distinctly perceptible philosophical tinge. It is
even possible to uncover in their involved procedures, rules and methods
similar to those in use today.
(b) Islamic Philosophy and Christian
Scholasticism: What we have already said may give an
idea of the wide scope of philosophical thought in Islam. And it would be a
mistake to limit ourselves-as the nineteenth century European scholars did-to
the study of a few scattered Latin and Hebrew translations. In fact, if the
depth and the scope of Muslim philosophers' thinking is ever to be clearly and
fully understood, it must be done through an examination of the original
sources themselves.
However, even though not all the original
texts have as yet been published and subjected to research, enough is known to
convince us that the material gathered by the Muslim thinkers of the Middle
Ages was greater than that gathered by the Christian scholars of that era, that
the Muslim thinkers explored wider horizons, enjoyed more complete freedom, and
made greater inventions and discoveries than their Christian counterparts. If,
therefore, one is to speak of a Christian philosophy, or as it is better known,
of Christian Scholasticism, it would be more apt to speak first of an Islamic
philosophy and an Islamic Scholasticism, especially since Christian Scholastic
thought owes much to Islamic Scholasticism for developing and clarifying many
of its problems and issues.[14]
Islamic philosophy is to the East what
Latin philosophy is to the West. The combination of these two philosophical
traditions plus the scientific investigations carried out by Jewish scholars
complete the history of speculative thought of the Middle Ages. In order that
the true place of Islamic philosophy can clearly be understood, and a full
understanding of the various stages in the development of human thought be
attained, it is essential that we investigate the relationship of the Islamic
philosophy with ancient, medieval, and modern philosophies.
(c) The Islamic and the Greek
Philosophies: We do not deny the fact that
philosophical thought in Islam has been influenced by Greek philosophy and that
Islamic philosophers have mostly adoped Aristotle's views. Nor do we deny that
Islamic thinkers looked upon Plotinus with wonder and followed him in many
instances. If a word is not repeated it dies, and who has not been an
apprentice at the school of his predecessors? We, the children of the twentieth
century, are still relying on the scientific work done by the Greeks and Romans
in a number of fields. If, however, we should go so far as to label the use and
join the chorus sung by the likes of Renan who claims that Islamic philosophy
is nothing other than a replica of Aristotelian philosophy, or of some others
who say that it is an exact copy of NeoPlatonic philosophy, we would be
completely mistaken.[15] The truth of the matter is that Islamic
philosophy has been influenced by a number of factors, the result of which was
birth of new ideas and views. Just as it has been influenced by Greek thought,
it has also been influenced by the Indian and Persian cultural
traditions.
The exchange and adoption of ideas do not
always imply blind obedience. Several individuals may examine a particular
topic and the result of their investigations may appear in a number of forms. A
philosopher may utilize some of the ideas of another philosopher but this does
not prevent him from giving birth to new ideas or to wholly new philosophical
systems. Spinoza, for example, even though clearly followed Descartes, was the
originator of an independent philosophical system of his own, and Ibn Sina,
even though a loyal disciple of Aristotle, put forth views never professed by
his master. Each of the Islamic philosophers lived in a particular environment
distinct from the environment of the other, and it would be a mistake if we
ignore the influence that these particular circumstances have had on their
philosophical ideas and views. Thus the Muslim world could have a philosophy
appropriate to its social conditions and religious principles. As to what the
nature of this philosophy is, only an extensive discussion and analysis of its
main ideas and principles could provide us with the answer.
(d) Islamic Philosophy and Modern
Philosophy: It is not possible for us to adequately
discuss the relationship of Islamic philosophy with modern philosophy in this
article and speak of the chain of ideas that relate these two together. This is
specially true since repeated attempts have been made during the middle of the
present century to discover the principles of modern philosophy and their roots
in Christian Scholasticism.
Today, when we are aware, of the
relationship between modern and medieval philosophy, on the one hand, and the
influence of Islamic philosophy on European medieval thought on the other, how
is it possible to ignore the influence that Islamic thought has had on modern
philosophy? In this study we shall discuss some examples of this influence and
relation. As we shall prove, the similarity between Islamic philosophy and
modern philosophy is so strong that one may speak of the existence of a kind of
kinship between them.
Without going into details we can say that
the history of modern philosophy originates with the consideration of two
important issues: firstly, the significance of the experimental aspect, which
deals with matters related to external reality; secondly speculation, which is
concerned with the rational sciences. In other words, the experience of Bacon
on the one hand and the doubt of Descartes on the other, have been the subjects
of discussion and controversy in the modern age. Moreover, it has been pointed
out before that Christian Scholastic thinkers and the Renaissance philosophers
engaged in experimentation and paid attention to the world of nature a long
time before Bacon. Roger Bacon, whom Renan calls "the real prince of
thought during the middle ages" did not limit himself to carrying out chemical
experiments but widened the scope of his experiments to include the world of
nature. Now if it can be shown that he had contact with the works of Islamic
scientists, we can conclude that his experimental approach, or rather the
origin of experimentation during the Renaissance, were both products of Islamic
thought and Muslim thinkers, because they were the ones who used observatories
and laboratories in order to discover scientific truths.
As for the Cartesian doubt, there is
evidence that it had some precedence during the Christian Middle Ages and we
believe that any study of the origin of Cartesian doubt will remain defective
without any attempt to discover it in Islamic philosophy. Who can say that the
doubt of Descartes is not wholly or partially influenced by the doubt of
Al-Ghazzali? Even if we set aside the question of influence, the two
philosophers are still found to think in parallel and similar terms. Elsewhere
in our discussions we have shown that Descartes' "cogito" is not entirely
inspired by St. Augestine and that there is much similarity between it and Ibn
Sina's idea of "man suspended in spaced."[16]
In short, since Christian and Jewish
Scholasticism-which is closely related to the Islamic world-is the link
connecting Islamic philosophy to modern philosophical speculation, the
probability of transfer and exchange of ideas cannot be denied.
Indeed it would amount to hasty
generalization if, without having first properly investigated and studied the
issue, we were to say that there have been no connections between the East and
the West in regard to the world of thought and philosophic and rational
speculation. It has been proven today that an exchange dating back to the
ancient times did exist and it was renewed during the middle ages. What is
there then to stop such a connection from existing today? Ideas and opinions
cannot be imprisoned in limited geographical boundaries, their movement cannot
be restricted. What was once referred to as the secret of the atom, is common
scientific knowledge today in all parts of the world.
