CONCLUSION.Let us now briefly sum up the results of our survey. We have seen that the Persian mind had to struggle against two different kinds of Dualism—pre-Islamic Magian Dualism, and post-Islamic Greek Dualism, though the fundamental problem of the diversity of things remains essentially the same. The attitude of the pre-Islamic Persian thinkers is thoroughly objective, and hence the results of their intellectual efforts are more or less materialistic. The Pre-Islamic thinkers, however, clearly perceived that the original Principle must be dynamically conceived. With Zoroaster both the primary spirits are "active", with Mānī the principle of Light is passive, and the principle of Darkness is aggressive. But their analysis of the various elements which constitute the Universe is ridiculously meagre; their conception of theUniverse is most defective on its statical side. There are, therefore, two weak points in their systems:—1. Naked Dualism.2. Lack of analysis.The first was remedied by Islām; the second by the introduction of Greek Philosophy. The advent of Islām and the study of Greek philosophy, however, checked the indigenous tendency towards monistic thought; but these two forces contributed to change the objective attitude characteristic of early thinkers, and aroused the slumbering subjectivity, which eventually reached its climax in the extreme Pantheism of some of the Ṣūfī schools. Al-Fārābī endeavoured to get rid of the dualism between God and matter, by reducing matter to a mere confused perception of the spirit; the Ash‘arite denied it altogether, and maintained a thoroughgoing Idealism. The followers of Aristotle continued to stick to their master's Prima Materia; the Ṣūfīs looked upon the material universe as a mere illusion, or a necessary "other," for the self-knowledge of God. It can, however, be safely stated that with the Ash‘ariteIdealism, the Persian mind got over the foreign dualism of God and matter, and, fortified with new philosophical ideas, returned to the old dualism of light and darkness. TheShaikh-al-Ishrāq combines the objective attitude of Pre-Islamic Persian thinkers with the subjective attitude of his immediate predecessors, and restates the Dualism of Zoroaster in a much more philosophical and spiritualised form. His system recognises the claims of both the subject and the object. But all these monistic systems of thought were met by the Pluralism of Wāḥid Maḥmūd, who taught that reality is not one, but many—primary living units which combine in various ways, and gradually rise to perfection by passing through an ascending scale of forms. The reaction of Wāḥid Maḥmūd was, however, an ephemeral phenomenon. The later Sūfīs as well as philosophers proper gradually transformed or abandoned the Neo-Platonic theory of Emanation, and in later thinkers we see a movement through Neo-Platonism towards real Platonism which is approached by Mulla Hādī's Philosophy. But pure speculation and dreamy mysticism undergoa powerful check in Bābism which, unmindful of persecution, synthesises all the inherited philosophical and religious tendencies, and rouses the spirit to a consciousness of the stern reality of things. Though extremely cosmopolitan and hence quite unpatriotic in character, it has yet had a great influence over the Persian mind. The unmystic character and the practical tone of Bābism may have been a remote cause of the progress of recent political reform in Persia.
Let us now briefly sum up the results of our survey. We have seen that the Persian mind had to struggle against two different kinds of Dualism—pre-Islamic Magian Dualism, and post-Islamic Greek Dualism, though the fundamental problem of the diversity of things remains essentially the same. The attitude of the pre-Islamic Persian thinkers is thoroughly objective, and hence the results of their intellectual efforts are more or less materialistic. The Pre-Islamic thinkers, however, clearly perceived that the original Principle must be dynamically conceived. With Zoroaster both the primary spirits are "active", with Mānī the principle of Light is passive, and the principle of Darkness is aggressive. But their analysis of the various elements which constitute the Universe is ridiculously meagre; their conception of theUniverse is most defective on its statical side. There are, therefore, two weak points in their systems:—
1. Naked Dualism.
2. Lack of analysis.
The first was remedied by Islām; the second by the introduction of Greek Philosophy. The advent of Islām and the study of Greek philosophy, however, checked the indigenous tendency towards monistic thought; but these two forces contributed to change the objective attitude characteristic of early thinkers, and aroused the slumbering subjectivity, which eventually reached its climax in the extreme Pantheism of some of the Ṣūfī schools. Al-Fārābī endeavoured to get rid of the dualism between God and matter, by reducing matter to a mere confused perception of the spirit; the Ash‘arite denied it altogether, and maintained a thoroughgoing Idealism. The followers of Aristotle continued to stick to their master's Prima Materia; the Ṣūfīs looked upon the material universe as a mere illusion, or a necessary "other," for the self-knowledge of God. It can, however, be safely stated that with the Ash‘ariteIdealism, the Persian mind got over the foreign dualism of God and matter, and, fortified with new philosophical ideas, returned to the old dualism of light and darkness. TheShaikh-al-Ishrāq combines the objective attitude of Pre-Islamic Persian thinkers with the subjective attitude of his immediate predecessors, and restates the Dualism of Zoroaster in a much more philosophical and spiritualised form. His system recognises the claims of both the subject and the object. But all these monistic systems of thought were met by the Pluralism of Wāḥid Maḥmūd, who taught that reality is not one, but many—primary living units which combine in various ways, and gradually rise to perfection by passing through an ascending scale of forms. The reaction of Wāḥid Maḥmūd was, however, an ephemeral phenomenon. The later Sūfīs as well as philosophers proper gradually transformed or abandoned the Neo-Platonic theory of Emanation, and in later thinkers we see a movement through Neo-Platonism towards real Platonism which is approached by Mulla Hādī's Philosophy. But pure speculation and dreamy mysticism undergoa powerful check in Bābism which, unmindful of persecution, synthesises all the inherited philosophical and religious tendencies, and rouses the spirit to a consciousness of the stern reality of things. Though extremely cosmopolitan and hence quite unpatriotic in character, it has yet had a great influence over the Persian mind. The unmystic character and the practical tone of Bābism may have been a remote cause of the progress of recent political reform in Persia.
ERRATAP. 4, Note 4, l. 1, read Buudahish for Buudadisḥ.P. 9, l. 10, read environment for environments.P. 56, l. 1, read reaction for reation.P. 61, l. 18, read considered for consided.P. 73, l. 21, read full stop after dialectic.P. 102, l. 1, read conditions for condition.P. 123, l. 19, read predecessors for precessor.P. 153, l. 21, read He-ness for an He-ness.P. 166, l. 21, read a piece for pieee.
P. 4, Note 4, l. 1, read Buudahish for Buudadisḥ.P. 9, l. 10, read environment for environments.P. 56, l. 1, read reaction for reation.P. 61, l. 18, read considered for consided.P. 73, l. 21, read full stop after dialectic.P. 102, l. 1, read conditions for condition.P. 123, l. 19, read predecessors for precessor.P. 153, l. 21, read He-ness for an He-ness.P. 166, l. 21, read a piece for pieee.
Transcriber's Notes:Many words appear in the text with different transcription or mark-up. They have been left as in the original.All occurrences of e. g., i. e., B. C., A. D. and A. H. have been replaced with e.g., i.e., B.C., A.D. and A.H., without note. Other initials have been left as in the original.Errata (printed on unnumbered page, pasted before page 1) has been moved to the end of the text.The following corrections have been made to the text:Errors noted in the Errata list have been fixedpage IX—due perhaps to semitic[original has samitic] influences,page CONTENTS—Reality as[original has as as] Beautypage 9—social environments[original has evironments]page 25—introduced[original has intruduced]page 33—Maulānā[original has Maulāna]page 54—necessarily[original has necssarily]page 54—Nazzām[original has Nazzān]page 56—reaction[original has reation]page 57—Ismā‘īlians[original has Ismā‘īliams]page 61—considered[original has consided]page 61—metaphysical[original has netaphysical]page 63—which,[original has period] by graduallypage 65—Ash‘arite.[original has Ash‘arīte]page 69—philosophising[original has plilosophising]page 74—Shahrastānī[original has Shahrastānī]page 75—Ash‘arite[original has Ash’arite]page 76—Ash‘arite[original has Ash‘ārite]page 81—seem to[original has the letter t missing] bepage 68, footnote 68:1—Ash‘aritenthums[original has Ash’aritenthums]page 69, footnote 69:1—Ash‘aritenthums[original has As‘aritenthums]page 81—Ḥikmat al-‘Ain—[original has -]"Philosophy of Essence",page 85—objectively[original has objectivily]page 95, footnote 95:1—Commentary[original has Comentary]page 104—restatement[original has restatemet]page 105—Ka‘bahs[original has Ka‘bāhs]page 111—self-conscious[original has self-consious]page 123—predecessors[original has precessors]page 124—the son of Sultan Ṣalāḥ[original has Ṣalā-Ṣalāḥ]-al Dīnpage 127—visible[original has visibile]page 136—is motion.[original has comma] The distinction of past,page 142—theory of[original has theoryof]page 148—maintains[original has mantains]page 158—identical[original has indentical]page 162—marks the[original has the the] first steppage 152, footnote 152:1—Insān al-Kāmil[original has Insānul Kāmul]page 163, footnote 163:1—Notwithstanding[original has Nowithstanding]page 171, footnote 171:1—Insān al-Kāmil[original has Insānul Kāmil]page 180—standpoint[original has staindpoint]page 187—Shī‘ahs[original hasShī’ahs]
Many words appear in the text with different transcription or mark-up. They have been left as in the original.
All occurrences of e. g., i. e., B. C., A. D. and A. H. have been replaced with e.g., i.e., B.C., A.D. and A.H., without note. Other initials have been left as in the original.
Errata (printed on unnumbered page, pasted before page 1) has been moved to the end of the text.
The following corrections have been made to the text:
Errors noted in the Errata list have been fixedpage IX—due perhaps to semitic[original has samitic] influences,page CONTENTS—Reality as[original has as as] Beautypage 9—social environments[original has evironments]page 25—introduced[original has intruduced]page 33—Maulānā[original has Maulāna]page 54—necessarily[original has necssarily]page 54—Nazzām[original has Nazzān]page 56—reaction[original has reation]page 57—Ismā‘īlians[original has Ismā‘īliams]page 61—considered[original has consided]page 61—metaphysical[original has netaphysical]page 63—which,[original has period] by graduallypage 65—Ash‘arite.[original has Ash‘arīte]page 69—philosophising[original has plilosophising]page 74—Shahrastānī[original has Shahrastānī]page 75—Ash‘arite[original has Ash’arite]page 76—Ash‘arite[original has Ash‘ārite]page 81—seem to[original has the letter t missing] bepage 68, footnote 68:1—Ash‘aritenthums[original has Ash’aritenthums]page 69, footnote 69:1—Ash‘aritenthums[original has As‘aritenthums]page 81—Ḥikmat al-‘Ain—[original has -]"Philosophy of Essence",page 85—objectively[original has objectivily]page 95, footnote 95:1—Commentary[original has Comentary]page 104—restatement[original has restatemet]page 105—Ka‘bahs[original has Ka‘bāhs]page 111—self-conscious[original has self-consious]page 123—predecessors[original has precessors]page 124—the son of Sultan Ṣalāḥ[original has Ṣalā-Ṣalāḥ]-al Dīnpage 127—visible[original has visibile]page 136—is motion.[original has comma] The distinction of past,page 142—theory of[original has theoryof]page 148—maintains[original has mantains]page 158—identical[original has indentical]page 162—marks the[original has the the] first steppage 152, footnote 152:1—Insān al-Kāmil[original has Insānul Kāmul]page 163, footnote 163:1—Notwithstanding[original has Nowithstanding]page 171, footnote 171:1—Insān al-Kāmil[original has Insānul Kāmil]page 180—standpoint[original has staindpoint]page 187—Shī‘ahs[original hasShī’ahs]
Errors noted in the Errata list have been fixed
page IX—due perhaps to semitic[original has samitic] influences,
page CONTENTS—Reality as[original has as as] Beauty
page 9—social environments[original has evironments]
page 25—introduced[original has intruduced]
page 33—Maulānā[original has Maulāna]
page 54—necessarily[original has necssarily]
page 54—Nazzām[original has Nazzān]
page 56—reaction[original has reation]
page 57—Ismā‘īlians[original has Ismā‘īliams]
page 61—considered[original has consided]
page 61—metaphysical[original has netaphysical]
page 63—which,[original has period] by gradually
page 65—Ash‘arite.[original has Ash‘arīte]
page 69—philosophising[original has plilosophising]
page 74—Shahrastānī[original has Shahrastānī]
page 75—Ash‘arite[original has Ash’arite]
page 76—Ash‘arite[original has Ash‘ārite]
page 81—seem to[original has the letter t missing] be
page 68, footnote 68:1—Ash‘aritenthums[original has Ash’aritenthums]
page 69, footnote 69:1—Ash‘aritenthums[original has As‘aritenthums]
page 81—Ḥikmat al-‘Ain—[original has -]"Philosophy of Essence",
page 85—objectively[original has objectivily]
page 95, footnote 95:1—Commentary[original has Comentary]
page 104—restatement[original has restatemet]
page 105—Ka‘bahs[original has Ka‘bāhs]
page 111—self-conscious[original has self-consious]
page 123—predecessors[original has precessors]
page 124—the son of Sultan Ṣalāḥ[original has Ṣalā-Ṣalāḥ]-al Dīn
page 127—visible[original has visibile]
page 136—is motion.[original has comma] The distinction of past,
page 142—theory of[original has theoryof]
page 148—maintains[original has mantains]
page 158—identical[original has indentical]
page 162—marks the[original has the the] first step
page 152, footnote 152:1—Insān al-Kāmil[original has Insānul Kāmul]
page 163, footnote 163:1—Notwithstanding[original has Nowithstanding]
page 171, footnote 171:1—Insān al-Kāmil[original has Insānul Kāmil]
page 180—standpoint[original has staindpoint]
page 187—Shī‘ahs[original hasShī’ahs]