NOTE TO CHAPTER IV.

Men may commit sin wittingly or unwittingly. It is the universal belief that a prophet never commits the greater sins in either way; but there is a difference of opinion with regard to the lesser sins. Some hold that they can do them unwittingly, though even then it is not in any thing connected with their office. Others again limit even this frailty to the period before "wahí" (inspiration) comes upon them. The general opinion, however, is that they are free from all sin, whether great or small. The frailties which they show are merely reckoned as faults and slight imperfections not amounting to sin.

This, to the Muslim mind at once disposes of a difficulty the Qurán itself raises on this point. With the exception of Jesus Christ, the Anbiya-ulul-'Azm are spoken of as doing what every one except an orthodox Muslim would call sin. Adam's transgression[148]is referred to in Súra ii. 29-37 andin Súra vii. 10-24. I quote only one verse: "They said, 'O our Lord! with ourselves have we dealt unjustly; if Thou forgive us not and have not pity on us, we shall surely be of those that perish.'" The sin of Noah is not specified in the Qurán, yet it is plainly hinted at. "To Thee verily, O my Lord, do I repair lest I ask that of Thee wherein I have no knowledge: unless Thou forgive me and be merciful to me I shall be one of the lost." (Súra xi. 49). There is also a similar request in Súra lxxi. 29. Abraham is represented as saying to his people: "They whom ye worship, ye and your fathers of early days, are my foes; but not so the Lord of the worlds, who hath created me, and guideth me, who giveth me food and drink; and when I am sick, he healeth me, and who will cause me to die and again quicken me, and who, I hope, will forgive me my sins in the day of reckoning." (Súra xxvi. 75-82). Moses is described as having done "a work of Satan" in killing a man, and as saying: "'O my Lord, I have sinned to my own hurt; forgive me.' So God forgave him; for He is the forgiving, the merciful. He said: 'Lord, because thou hast showed me this grace, I will never again be the helper of the wicked.'" (Súra xxviii. 15, 16).

The following passages refer to Muhammad. "Be thou steadfast and patient; for true is the promise of God; and seek pardon for thy fault."[149](Súra xl. 57). "Ask pardon for thy sin, and for believers, both men and women." (Súra xlvii. 21). The scandal caused by the Prophet's conduct with the wife of Zeid, and with the Egyptian slave Mary, necessitated a pretended revelation of God's will in reference to these events. The circumstances will be found fully detailed in Súra xxxiii. 36-38 and in Súra lxvi. 1-5.

One of the most important verses is: "Verily, we have won for thee an undoubted victory, in token that God forgiveth thy earlier and later fault." (Súra xlviii. 1-2).It is not quite clear what victory is here referred to. According to the Tafsír-i-Husainí, some commentators say that it is the taking of Mecca, the past tense being prophetically used for the future. The following explanations are given of the expression "earlier and later fault." (1) God has forgiven thy sin committed before and after the descent of wahí, (2) before and after the taking of Mecca, or (3) before the descent of this Súra. (4) The commentator Salmí says: "The earlier sin refers to the sin of Adam committed when Muhammad was in the loins of his great ancestor and thus connected with him; the later sin refers to the followers of the Prophet, and in that way is connected with him, just as the sin of Adam was the predecessor and the cause of their sin." (5) Imám Abu'l-Lais says: "The words refer to the sin of Adam, and to those of the followers of the Prophet. Both are connected with Muhammad, because the former is forgiven by the blessing, and the latter by the intercession of Muhammad."[150]

From these extracts from the Qurán it appears that sin is imputed to prophets, though Muslims evade the charge by the casuistry I have already referred to. Be that as it may, it is a striking fact that the one sinless member of the Anbiya-ulul-'Azm, the one sinless prophet of Islám, is none other than Jesus Christ. There is no passage in the Qurán which hints at sin, even in the modified form in which Muslims attribute it to other prophets, being committed by him: no passage which speaks of His seeking for pardon.

It is the universal belief that prophets work miracles, (mu'jizát). A miracle is defined to be "Kharq-i-'ádat," that is, something contrary to the usual course of nature.

The object for which a miracle is performed must be a moral one, and chiefly to attest the truth of the statements made by the prophet. Although Muhammad makes, in theQurán, no distinct claim to the power of working miracles,[151]his followers maintain that in this, as in all other respects he was equal to all and superior to some prophets, and produce various passages of the Qurán in support of their view. Thus, according to Shaikh Jelál-ud-dín Syutí, if to Adam was given the power of naming every thing, Muhammad also possessed the same power. Enoch was exalted on high, but Muhammad was taken to the 'Baqáb-i-qausain,' the 'two bows' length,' where Gabriel, "one mighty in power," appeared to him. (Súra liii. 5-9). Ishmael was ready to be sacrificed, but Muhammad endured the splitting of his chest;[152]Joseph was to some extent handsome, but Muhammad was the very perfection of beauty; Moses brought water from the rock, but Muhammad produced it from his fingers. The sun was stayed on its course by Joshua and so it was by Muhammad. Solomon had a great kingdom, Muhammad a greater, for he possessed the keys of the treasuries of the earth. Wisdom was given to John the Baptist whilst yet a child, so also were wisdom and understanding granted to Muhammad at an early period of his life. Jesus could raise the dead, so also could Muhammad. In addition to all these, the special miracles of the Prophet are the splitting of the moon asunder, the Mi'ráj, the coming of a tree into his presence, and above all the wonderful miracle of the Qurán.[153]

The splitting of the moon in sunder is referred to in,"The hour of judgment approacheth; and the moon hath been split in sunder." (Súra liv. 1). Imám Záhid says that Abu Jahl and a Jew visited the Prophet, and demanded a sign from him on pain of death. The Prophet made a sign with his little finger, and at once the moon separated into two parts: one of which remained in the sky, the other went off to a long distance. The Jew believed in Islám forthwith. Abu Jahl ascribed the affair to magic, but on making enquiry from various travellers ascertained that they, on this very night, distinctly saw the moon in two parts.[154]Some, however, refer the passage to the future, as they consider the splitting of the moon to be one of the signs of the last day.

The Mi'ráj, or night ascent, is mentioned in, "Glory be to Him who carried His servant by night from the sacred temple (of Mecca) to the temple that is more remote, whose precinct We have blessed, that We might show him of our signs." (Súra xvii. 1). Muslim writers, who are fond of the marvellous, narrate at length the wonderful things the Prophet saw and did on this eventful night;[155]but some maintain that it was only a vision, and quote the words: "We ordained the vision which we showed thee," in proof of this assertion.[156]Be that as it may, all orthodox Muslims maintain the superiority of Muhammad, as a worker of miracles, over all other prophets.

5.The Resurrection and the last day.—These two articles of the faith may be considered together. Thefollowing is a summary of the remarks of Muhammad Al Berkevi on this point. It is necessary to acknowledge:—

1. That the torments of the tomb are real and certain and that Munkir and Nakír (Ante p.145) will come and interrogate the dead person concerning his God, his Prophet, his faith and his Qibla. The faithful will reply: "our God is God; our Prophet is Muhammad; our religion, Islám; our Qibla, the Ki-'ádataba.2. That all the signs of the last day mentioned by the Prophet will come to pass; such as, the appearance of Dajjál, or Antichrist; the descent of Jesus from heaven; the appearance of Imám Mahdí and of Gog and Magog; the rising of the sun from the west, &c.3. That all living things will die; that the mountains will fly in the air like birds; that the heavens will melt away; that after some time has thus passed God most High will set the earth in order and raise the dead; that prophets, saints, doctors of the law, and the faithful will find near them the robes and the horses of Paradise. They will put on the robes, and mount the horses and go into the shade of the throne of God. Other men, hungry, thirsty, and naked will go on foot. The Faithful will go to the right, the Infidels to the left.4. That there will be a balance, in which the good and bad actions of men will be weighed. Those whose good deeds outweigh the bad will go to Paradise; if the bad predominate, they will go into the fire, unless God has mercy on them, or the prophets or saints intercede for them. If, however, they were not Muslims there will be no intercession for them, nor will they come out from the fire. The Muslims who enter the fire will, after having purged their crimes, enter Paradise.5. That the bridge Sirát, which is sharper than a sword, is raised above the fire; that all men must pass over this. Some will pass over with the speed of lightning, some like a horse that runs, some, their backs laden with their sins, will go very slowly over; others will fall and certainly enter into the fire.6. That each prophet has a pool where he, with his people, will quench their thirst before entering Paradise; that the pool of Muhammad is the largest of all, for it is a month's march from one side thereof to the other. Its water is sweeter than honey, whiter than milk.7. That Paradise and Hell actually exist; that the chosen remain for ever in the former; they neither die, nor grow aged. They experience no kind of change. The Houris and the females are exemptedfrom the infirmities of their sex. They will no longer bear children. The elect will find there the meat and the drink they require, without taking upon themselves any trouble. The ground of Paradise is of musk; the bricks of its edifices are of gold and of silver.The unbelievers and the demons will remain for ever in hell, tormented by serpents as thick as the neck of a camel, by scorpions as large as mules, by fire and by scalding water. Their bodies will burn, till they become reduced to a coal, when God will revive them so that they may endure fresh torments. This will last for ever."

2. That all the signs of the last day mentioned by the Prophet will come to pass; such as, the appearance of Dajjál, or Antichrist; the descent of Jesus from heaven; the appearance of Imám Mahdí and of Gog and Magog; the rising of the sun from the west, &c.

3. That all living things will die; that the mountains will fly in the air like birds; that the heavens will melt away; that after some time has thus passed God most High will set the earth in order and raise the dead; that prophets, saints, doctors of the law, and the faithful will find near them the robes and the horses of Paradise. They will put on the robes, and mount the horses and go into the shade of the throne of God. Other men, hungry, thirsty, and naked will go on foot. The Faithful will go to the right, the Infidels to the left.

4. That there will be a balance, in which the good and bad actions of men will be weighed. Those whose good deeds outweigh the bad will go to Paradise; if the bad predominate, they will go into the fire, unless God has mercy on them, or the prophets or saints intercede for them. If, however, they were not Muslims there will be no intercession for them, nor will they come out from the fire. The Muslims who enter the fire will, after having purged their crimes, enter Paradise.

5. That the bridge Sirát, which is sharper than a sword, is raised above the fire; that all men must pass over this. Some will pass over with the speed of lightning, some like a horse that runs, some, their backs laden with their sins, will go very slowly over; others will fall and certainly enter into the fire.

6. That each prophet has a pool where he, with his people, will quench their thirst before entering Paradise; that the pool of Muhammad is the largest of all, for it is a month's march from one side thereof to the other. Its water is sweeter than honey, whiter than milk.

7. That Paradise and Hell actually exist; that the chosen remain for ever in the former; they neither die, nor grow aged. They experience no kind of change. The Houris and the females are exemptedfrom the infirmities of their sex. They will no longer bear children. The elect will find there the meat and the drink they require, without taking upon themselves any trouble. The ground of Paradise is of musk; the bricks of its edifices are of gold and of silver.

The unbelievers and the demons will remain for ever in hell, tormented by serpents as thick as the neck of a camel, by scorpions as large as mules, by fire and by scalding water. Their bodies will burn, till they become reduced to a coal, when God will revive them so that they may endure fresh torments. This will last for ever."

The following additional remarks are based on the Sharh-i-'Aqáíd-i-Jámí. They fall under four heads.

(1). The sounding of the trumpets. (Nafkhatain-i-Súr). This will not take place until wickedness spreads over all the earth. The Prophet said: "The resurrection will not come to pass, till some of the sects among my followers mix up with the Mushriks (those who associate others with God) and till others commence to worship monuments." Again, "The last hour will not be till no one is found who calls on God." Then "There shall be a blast on the trumpet, and all who are in the heavens and all who are in the earth shall expire, save those whom God shall vouchsafe to live. There shall be another blast on it, and lo! arising they shall gaze around them." (Súra xxxix. 68). Abu Huraira, a Companion, relates that the Prophet speaking of the trumpet stated as follows: "After the creation of the heavens and the earth God created the trumpet and gave it to Isráfíl who, with his mouth placed to it, is ever looking up and waiting for the order to blow it. He will blow three times.[157]The first time, the blast of consternation, to terrify; the second, the blast of examination, to slay; the third, the blast of resurrection, to quicken the dead." Most persons believe that everything, save God and His attributes, will perish. The Karamians and some other sects deny this.

The resurrection of the body is clearly proved by the Qurán. Thus, "They say, 'Who will bring us back?' Say: 'He who created you at first.'" (Súra xvii. 53). "'Who shall give life to bones when they are rotten?' Say: 'He shall give life to them who gave them being at first, for in all creation is He skilled.'" (Súra xxxvi. 79). "Man saith: 'What! after I am dead, shall I in the end be brought forth alive?' Doth not man bear in mind that we made him at first, when he was nought?" (Súra xix. 68). "The infidels will say, 'shall we indeed be restored as at first? What! When we have become rotten bones?' 'This then,' say they, 'will be a return to loss.' Verily, it will be but a single blast, and lo! they are on the surface of the earth." (Súra lxxix. 10-14). "Is He not powerful enough to quicken the dead?" (Súra lxxv. 40). This resurrection will be to judgment. "'Never,' say the unbelievers, 'will the hour come upon us.' Say: 'Yea, by my Lord who knoweth the unseen, it will surely come upon you, ... to the intent that God may reward those who have believed, ... but as for those who aim to invalidate our signs, a chastisement of painful torment awaiteth them.'" (Súra xxxiv. 3, 4). "A terrible chastisement doth await themon the Daywhen faces shall turn white, and faces shall turn black. 'What! after your belief have ye become infidels? Taste, then, the chastisement for that ye have been unbelievers.' And as to those whose faces shall have become white, they shall be within the mercy of God." (Súra iii, 102). The Prophet knew not the time when all this would take place. "They will ask thee of the 'Hour,' when will be its fixed time? But what knowledge hast thou of it? Its period is known only to thy Lord; and thou art charged with the warning of those who fear it." (Súra lxxix. 41-45.) These and similar texts show the certainty of the resurrection. According to the Ijmá' of the Faithful, he who has any doubts on this article of the faith is an infidel. TheMutazilites show from reason that a resurrection of the body is necessary in order that rewards and punishment may be bestowed. The orthodox agree with the conclusion, but hesitate to base it on reason.[158]

The Karamians hold that the different parts of the body will not cease to be, but that at the last God will gather them together. "Thinketh man that we shall not re-unite his bones? Aye! his very finger tips we are able evenly to replace." (Súra lxxv. 3, 4.) The orthodox, however, hold that this verse does not disprove the fact of previous annihilation, a belief supported by the Prophet's saying, "All the sons of men will be annihilated." It will be a re-creation though the body will return to its former state.

The learned are not agreed as to the state of the soul during this period of the death of the body, and therefore disagree with regard to its revival. Some assert that it is wrong to speak of a resurrection of the soul, for it exists in the body as "fire in coal," hence its revival is included in the resurrection of the body; others maintain that as it is a distinct entity, it is not annihilated with the body. The scholastics favour the first idea. Practically the result seems the same in both cases. The resurrection body has a soul. Wise and foolish, devils and beasts, insects and birds—all will rise at the last day. Muhammad will come first in order and be the first to enter Paradise.

(2). The descent of the Books (Tatáír-i-sahá,íf). After the resurrection, men will wander about for forty years, during which time the "Books of Actions" will be given to them. These books contain the record kept by the Kirám-ul-Kátibín, (Ante p.141). Traditions recorded by Abu Huraira state: "Men will rise up naked, and confused; some will walk about, some stand for forty years. All will be constantly looking up toward the heavens (i.e.expecting the books.) They will perspire profusely throughexcess of sorrow.[159]Then God will say to Abraham, 'put on clothes.' He will put on a robe of Paradise. Then He will call Muhammad for whose benefit a fountain will flow forth not far from Mecca. The people, too, shall thirst no more." The Prophet said: "I will also put on a dress and will stand near the throne, where no one else will be allowed to stand and God will say: 'Ask and it shall be granted to thee; intercede, thy intercession shall be accepted.'" Each book flies from the treasury under the Throne of God and is given to its proper owner. "Every man's fate have We fastened about his neck; and on the day of resurrection will We bring forth to him (every man) a book which shall be proffered to him wide open: 'Read thy book, there needeth none but thyself to make out an account against thee this day.'" (Súra xvii. 15). "He into whoserighthand his book shall be given, shall be reckoned, with an easy reckoning, and shall turn, rejoicing, to his kindred. But he whose book shall be given behind his back (i.e.into hislefthand) shall invoke destruction." (Súra lxxxiv. 8-11.) "He, who shall have his book given into hislefthand will say: 'O that my book had never been given me! and that I had not known my reckoning.'" (Súra lxix. 25). It is always said that wicked Musalmáns will be seized by therighthand before they are cast into the fire, which is a proof that they are not always to remain there. Some hold that the expression "Read thy book" implies a literal reading; others that it is a metaphorical expression which simply means that all the past actions will be known. Those who believe in a literal reading say that each believer will read the account of his faults only, and that other persons will read that of his good deeds. The face of the believer as he reads will shine resplendently, but black will be the face of the infidel.

(3). The Balances (Mízán). This belief is based on the authority of the Qurán, Sunnat and the Ijmá'; no Muslim, therefore, can have any doubt about it. Thus: "They whose balances shall be heavy, shall be the blest; but they whose balances shall be light,—these are they who shall lose their souls, abiding in hell for ever." (Súra xxiii. 104). "As to him whose balances are heavy, his shall be a life that shall please him well: and as to him whose balances are light, his dwelling-place shall be the pit. And who shall teach thee what the pit (Al-Háwía) is? A raging fire!" (Súra ci. 5-8). The Traditions on this point are very numerous. The Ijmá' is also strong on the reality, the objective existence, of a balance with scales, &c., complete. They also state that the "Books of Actions" (Sahá,íf-i-A'mál) will be weighed. In the Sahíh-i-Bukhárí it is said that the Believers will not be weighed in the balances, for "God will say, 'O Muhammad make those of thy people, from whom no account is taken, enter into Paradise.'" Prophets and angels will also be exempt. Such a test also is not required for the unbelievers, for their state is very evident; "By their tokens shall the sinners be known, and they shall be seized by their forelocks and their feet." (Súra lv. 41). Thus it is evident that, with regard to true believers and unbelievers, the works of such only as God may choose need be weighed. Some, however, maintain that no unbeliever will have this test applied to his case and quote: "Vain therefore, are their works; and no weight will we allow them on the day of resurrection." (Súra xviii. 105). To this it is answered, that all that is here denied is the fact of "a weighing intheir favour." The place where the weighing will take place is situated midway between heaven and hell. Gabriel standing by watches the movement of the scales and Michael guards the balance. The orthodox are not agreed as to whether there will be a separate balance for each tribe of men, and also for each of the 'good works'of the believers. Those who hold that there will be a balance for prayer, another for fasting and so on, adduce the use of the plural form, balances (muwázín) in proof of their statement. There is also a difference of opinion as to whether the "works" themselves, or the books (sahá,íf) will be weighed. The latter opinion is supported by a Tradition recorded by Tirmízí. "The Prophet said: 'Ninety-nine registers will be distributed. Each register will extend as far as the eye can reach. God will say: 'What! dost thou deny this, or have the recording angels treated thee unjustly?' Each will say: 'No! O Lord.' 'Hast thou then any excuse?' 'No! O Lord.' Then God will display a cloth on which the Kalima is written. This will be put into one scale, and God will say: 'To thee will be no evil if thou hast a register in this scale, and this cloth in the other, for the first scale will be light.'" This is considered conclusive testimony with regard to the weighing of the Sahá,íf. The Mutazilites objected to statements such as these, for said they: "actions are accidents, and the qualities of lightness and heaviness cannot be attributed to accidents." They explained the verses of the Qurán and the statements of the Traditions on this point, as being a figurative way of saying that perfect justice will be done to all in the Day of Judgment.

(4). The Bridge (Sirát). The meaning of the word Sirát is a road, a way. It is so used in the Qurán. In connection with the Day of Judgment it is said: "If we pleased we would surely put out their eyes: yet even then would they speed on with rivalry in their path (Sirát)." (Súra xxxvi. 66). "Gather together those who have acted unjustly, and their consorts (demons), and the gods whom they have adored beside God; and guide them to the road (Sirát) for hell." (Súra xxxvii. 23). It is nowhere in the Qurán called a bridge, but Tradition is very clear on this point. The Prophet said: "There will be a bridge sharper than the edge of a sword, finer than a hair, suspended overhell. Iron spikes on it will pierce those whom God wills. Some will pass over it in the twinkling of an eye, some like a flash of lightning, others with the speed of a swift horse. The angels will call out, 'O Lord! save and protect.' Some Muslims will be saved, some will fall headlong into hell." Bukhárí relates a similar Tradition. The infidels will all fall into hell and there remain for ever. Muslims will be released after a while.

The Mutazilites deny the existence of such a bridge. "If we admit it," say they, "it would be a trouble for the believers, and such there is not for them in the Day of Judgment." To this the orthodox reply that the believers pass over it to show how they are saved from fire, and that thus they may be delighted with Paradise, and also that the infidels may feel chagrin at those who were with them on the bridge being now safe for ever.

Al A'ráf is situated between heaven and hell. It is described thus: "On (the wall) Al A'ráf shall be men who know all, by their tokens,[160]and they shall cry to the inhabitants of Paradise, 'Peace be on you!' but they shall not yet enter it, although they long to do so. And when their eyes are turned towards the inmates of the fire, they shall say, 'O our Lord! place us not with offending people &c.'" (Súra vii. 44, 45). Sale's summary of the opinions regarding Al A'ráf in his Preliminary Discourse is exceedingly good. It is as follows:—

"They call it Al Orf, and more frequently in the plural, Al Aráf, a word derived from the verbArafa, which signifies to distinguish between things, or to part them; though some commentators give another reason for the imposition of this name, because, say they, those who stand on this partition willknowanddistinguishthe blessed from the damned, by their respective marks or characteristics: and others way the word properly intends anything that ishigh raisedorelevated, as such a wall of separation must be supposed tobe. Some imagine it to be a sort oflimbofor the patriarchs and prophets, or for the martyrs and those who have been most eminent for sanctity. Others place here such whose good and evil works are so equal that they exactly counterpoise each other, and therefore deserve neither reward nor punishment; and these, say they, will on the last day be admitted into Paradise, after they shall have performed an act of adoration, which will be imputed to them as a merit, and will make the scale of their good works to overbalance. Others suppose this intermediate space will be a receptacle for those who have gone to war, without their parents' leave, and therein suffered martyrdom; being excluded from Paradise for their disobedience, and escaping hell because they are martyrs."

There is also an interval, between the death of the body in this world and the Last Day, called Al-Barzakh. "Behind them shall be a barrier (barzakh), until the day when they shall be raised again." (Súra xxiii. 102). When death takes place, the soul is separated from the body by the Angel of death; in the case of the good with ease, in that of the wicked with violence. It then enters into Al-Barzakh.[161]

It is a doctrine founded on Ijmá', that God will not pardon Shirk, that is, the ascribing plurality to the Divine Being. The Mushrik, one who does so, will remain in hell for ever, for as Kufr, infidelity, is an eternal crime, its punishment must also be eternal. "The unbelievers among the people of the Book, and among the Polytheists shall go into the fire of Gehenna to abide therein for aye. Of all creatures are they the worst?" (Súra xcviii. 5). "Cast into Hell every infidel, every hardened one, the hinderer of the good, the transgressor, the doubter who set up other Gods with God. Cast ye him into the fierce torment." (Súra 1. 23-25.)

Muslims who commit great (Kabíra) sins, though they die unrepentant, will not remain in hell for ever, for, "whosoever shall have wrought an atom's weight of good shallbehold it." (Súra xcix. 7). It is asserted that the fact of believing in Islám is a good work and merits a reward: this cannot be given before the man enters hell to be punished for his sins, and therefore he must be, after a while, released from punishment. "Perfect faith (Imán-i-Kámil) consists in believing with sincerity of heart and acting in accordance thereto, but the actions are not the faith itself. Great sins, therefore, prevent a man from having "perfect faith," but do not destroy faith (Imán), nor make the Muslim an infidel, but only a sinner."[162]The Mutazilites teach that the Muslim who enters hell will remain there for ever. They maintain that the person who, having committed great sins, dies unrepentant, though not an infidel, ceases to be a believer and hence suffers as the infidels do.

The orthodox belief is that Muhammad is now an Intercessor and will be so at the Last Day. The intercession then is of several kinds. There is the 'great intercession' to which the words, "it may be that thy Lord will raise thee to aglorious station," (Súra xvii. 81) are supposed to refer. The Maqám-i-mahmúd, (glorious station), is said to be the place of intercession in which all persons will praise the Prophet.[163]In the Zád-ul-Masír it is said that the Maqám-i-mahmúd refers to the fact that God will place the Prophet on His Throne. Others say that it is a place in which a standard will be given to the Prophet, around whom all the other prophets will then gather to do him honour. The first interpretation is, however, the ordinary one. The people will be in great fear. Muhammad will say: "O my people! I am appointed for intercession." Their fear will then pass away. The second intercession is made so that they may enter into Paradise without rendering an account. The authorities differ with regard to this. The third intercession is on behalf of those Muslims whoought to go to hell. The fourth for those who are already there. No one but the Prophet can make these intercessions. The fifth intercession is for an increase of rank to those who are in Paradise. The Mutazilites maintained that there would be no intercession for Muslims guilty of great sins, and adduced in favour of their opinion the verse: "Fear ye the day when soul shall not satisfy for soul at all, nor shall any intercession be accepted from them, nor shall any ransom be taken, neither shall they be helped." (Súra ii. 45). The orthodox bring in reply this Hadís-i-Sahíh: "The Prophet said: 'my intercession is for the men of my following who have committed great sins.'" If this Tradition is disputed, they then say that the verse in the Qurán just quoted does not refer to Muslims at all, but to the Infidels.[164]

According to a Tradition related by Anas the Prophet said: "In the day of resurrection Musalmáns will not be able to move, and they will be greatly distressed and say: 'would to God that we had asked Him to create some one to intercede for us, that we might be taken from this place, and be delivered from tribulation and sorrow.'" The Tradition goes on to state how they sought help from Adam and the prophets of the old dispensation, who, one and all, excused themselves on account of their own sinfulness. At length Moses told them to go to Jesus, the Apostle of God, the Spirit of God and the Word of God. They did so and Jesus said: "Go to Muhammad who is a servant, whose sins God has forgiven both first and last." The Prophet continued, according to the Tradition, "then the Musalmáns will come to me, and I will ask permission to go into God's presence and intercede for them."[165]

The second advent of Christ is a sign of the last day. "Jesus is no more than a servant whom We favoured ...and he shall be a sign of the last hour." (Súra xliii. 61). He will not, according to the Qurán, come as a judge, but like other prophets to be judged. "We formed with them (i.e.prophets) a strict covenant, that God may question the men of truth as to their truth, (i.e.how they have discharged their prophetic functions)." (Súra xxxiii. 7, 8). He will come to bear witness against the Jews who reject him: "In the day of resurrection, He will be a witness against them." (Súra iv. 158).

It is necessary to believe in the pond of the Prophet called Kausar. This faith is founded on the verse "Truly we have given thee anabundance." (Súra cviii. 1). Bukhárí says: "The meaning of Kausar is the 'abundance of good' which God gives to the Prophet. Abu Básh said to one Sa'íd, 'the people think that Kausar is a river of Paradise.' Sa'íd replied, 'Kausar is a river in which there is abundance of good.'" According to the same authority Muhammad said: "My pond is square, its water is whiter than milk, its perfume better than that of musk, whosoever drinks thereof will thirst no more."

There are many degrees of felicity in heaven to which the believers are admitted. The Prophet, according to Tirmízí, said there were one hundred. Some of these may possibly be meant by the eight names they give to Paradise. (1.) Jannat-ul-Khuld. "Say: Is this, or theGarden of Eternitywhich was promised to the God-fearing, best?" (Súra xxv. 16.) (2.) Jannat-us-Salám. "For them is aDwelling of Peacewith their Lord." (Súra vi. 127.) (3.) Dár-ul-Qarár. "The life to come is theMansion which abideth." (Súra xl. 42.) (4.) Jannat-ul-'Adan. "To the Faithful, both men and women, God promiseth gardens and goodly mansions in theGarden of Eden." (Súra ix. 73.) (5.) Jannat-ul-Mawá. "Near which is theGarden of Repose." (Súra liii. 15.) (6) Jannat-un-Na'ím. "Amiddelightsshall the righteous dwell." (Súra lxxxii. 13.) (7) Jannat-ul-Illiyún. "The register of the righteous isinIlliyún." (Súra lxxxiii. 18,) (8.) Jannat-ul-Firdaus. "Those who believe and do the things that are right, they shall have theGardens of Paradisefor their abode." (Súra xviii. 107.)

Hell is said to have seven divisions. The Qurán, though it mentions the names of these divisions, does not state what classes of persons will be sent to each; but Muslim Commentators have supplied the needed information. They classify them thus:—(1.) Jahannam, for sinners who die without repentance. (2.) Lazwá, for the infidels (i.e., Christians.) (3.) Hutama, a fire for Jews, and according to some for Christians. (4.) Sa'ir, for devils, the descendants of Iblís. (5.) Saqar, for the magians: also for those who neglect prayer. (6.) Jahím, a boiling caldron for idolaters: also for Gog and Magog. (7.) Háwía, a bottomless pit for hypocrites. It is said that heaven has one division more than hell to show that God's mercy exceeds His justice.

The Muhammadan writers give very full and minute accounts of the events connected with the resurrection, judgment and future state of those who are lost, and of those who are saved. Sale gives such an excellent summary of these opinions, that it is not necessary to enter into details here. The orthodox belief is that the statements in the Qurán and the Traditions regarding the pleasures of Paradise are to be taken literally.[166]

6.The Predestination of good and evil.—I have already in the section in which the attribute "will" is described (p. 118) given some account of the dogmatic statements concerning the doctrine of predestination; but as it always forms a distinct chapter in Musalmán books, I treat it separately here. Having, however, in the passage referredto, given Al Berkevi's words on the attribute "will," it is only necessary to make a short extract from his dogmatic statement concerning Predestination. He says:—

"It is necessary to confess that good and evil take place by the predestination and predetermination of God, that all that has been and all that will be was decreed in eternity, and written on thepreserved table;[167]that the faith of the believer, the piety of the pious and good actions are foreseen, willed, predestinated, decreed by the writing on thepreserved table, produced and approved by God; that the unbelief of the unbeliever, the impiety of the impious and bad actions come to pass with the fore-knowledge, will, predestination and decree of God, but not with His satisfaction and approval. Should any ask why God willeth and produceth evil, we can only reply that He may have wise ends in view which we cannot comprehend."

Another confession of faith has:—

"Whoever shall say, that God is not delighted with virtue and faith, and is not wroth with vice and infidelity, or that God has decreed good and evil with equal complacency is an infidel."

There are three well-defined schools of thought on the subject:—

First.—The Jabríans, so called from the word "jabr" compulsion, deny all free agency in man and say that man is necessarily constrained by the force of God's eternal and immutable decree to act as he does.[168]They hold that asGod is the absolute Lord, He can, if He so wills, admit all men into Paradise, or cast all into hell. This sect is one of the branches of the Ash'aríans with whom on most points they agree.

Secondly.—The Qadríans, who denyAl-Qadr, or God's absolute decree, say that evil and injustice ought not to be attributed to God but to man, who is altogether a free agent. God has given him the power to do or not to do an act. This sect is generally considered to be a branch of the Mutazilite body, though in reality it existed before Wásil quitted the school of his master Hasan (Ante. p.125). As Wásil, however, followed the opinions of Mábad-al-Johní, the leading Kadrían divine, the Mutazilites and Qadríans are practically one and the same.

Thirdly.—The Ash'aríans, of whom I have already given some account, maintain that God has one eternal will which is applied to whatsoever He willeth, both of His own actions and those of men; that He willeth that which He knoweth and what is written on thepreserved table; that He willeth both good and evil. So far they agree with the Jabríans; but then they seem to allow some power to man, a tenet I have already explained when describing their idea of "Kasb" (Ante. p.130). The orthodox, or Sunní belief is theoretically Ash'arían, but practically the Sunnís are confirmed Jabríans. The Mutazilite doctrines are looked upon as quite heretical.

No subject has been more warmly discussed in Islám than that of predestination. The following abstract of some lengthy discussions will present the points of difference.

The Ash'aríans, who in this matter represent in the main orthodox views, formulate their objections to the Mutazilite system thus:—

(i). If man is the causer of an action by the force of his own will, then he should also have the power of controlling the result of that action.

(ii). If it be granted that man has the power tooriginatean act it is necessary that he should know all acts, because a creator should be independent in act and choice. Intention must be conditioned by knowledge. To this the Mutazilites well reply that a man need not know the length of a road before he walks, or the structure of the throat before he talks.

(iii). Suppose a man wills to move his body and God at the same time wills it to be steady, then if both intentions come to pass there will be a collection of opposites; if neither, a removal of opposites; if the exaltation of the first, an unreasonable preference.

(iv). If man can create an act, some of his works will be better than some of the works of God,e.g.a man determines to have faith: now faith is a better thing than reptiles, which are created by God.

(v). If man is free to act, why can he not make at once a human body; why does he need to thank God for grace and faith?

(vi). But better far than all argument, the orthodox say, is the testimony of the Book. "All things have we created under a fixed decree." (Súra liv. 49). "When God created you andthat ye make." (Súra xxxvii. 94). "Some of them there were whom God guided and there were others decreed to err." (Súra xvi. 38). As God decrees faith and obedience He must be the causer of it, for "on the hearts of these hath God graven the Faith." (Súra lviii. 22). "It is he who causeth you to laugh and weep, to die and make alive." (Súra liii. 44). "If God pleased He would surely bring them, one and all, to the guidance." (Súra vi. 36). "Had God pleased, He had guided you all aright." (Súra vi. 150). "Had the Lord pleased, He would have made mankind of one religion." (Súra xi. 120). "God will mislead whom he pleaseth, and whom He pleaseth He will place upon the straight path." (Súra vi. 39.) Tradition records that the Prophet said: "God is the maker of all makers and of their actions."[169]

The Mutazilites took up the opposite side of this great question and said:—

(i). If man has no power to will or to do, then what is the difference between praising God and sinning against Him; between faith and infidelity; good and evil; what is the use of commands and prohibitions; rewards and punishments; promises and threats; what is the use of prophets, books, &c.

(ii). Some acts of men are bad, such as tyranny and polytheism. If these are created by God, it follows that to tyrannise and to ascribe plurality to the Deity is to render obedience. To this the Ash'aríans reply that orders are of two kinds, immediate and mediate. The former which they call "Amr-i-takwíti," is the order, "Be and it was." This comprehends all existences, and according to it whatever is ordered must come to pass. The latter they call "Amr-i-tashri'í," an order given in the Law. This comes to men through prophets and thus is to be obeyed. True obedience is to act according to that which is revealed, not according to the secret intentions of God, for that we know not.

(iii). If God decrees the acts of men, He should bear the name of that which he decrees. Thus the causer of infidelity is an infidel; of tyranny a tyrant, and so on; but to speak thus of God is blasphemy.

(iv). If infidelity is decreed by God He must wish it; but a prophet desires faith and obedience and so is opposed to God. To this the orthodox reply, that God knows by His eternal knowledge that such a man will die an infidel.If a prophet intends by bringing the message of salvation to such an one to make God's knowledge become ignorance, he would be doing wrong; but as he does not know the secret decrees of God, his duty is to deliver his message according to the Hadís: "A prophet has only to deliver the clear message."

(v). The Mutazilites claimed as on their side all verses of the Qurán, in which the words to do, to construct, to renew, to create, &c., are applied to men. Such are the verses: "Whatever is in the heavens and in the earth is God's that He may reward those whodoevil according to their deeds: and those whodogood will He reward with good things." (Súra liii. 32). "Whoso shall havewroughtevil shall not be recompensed but with its like: but whoso shall havedonethe things that are right, whether male or female and is a believer, these shall enter Paradise." (Súra xl. 43). Say: "the truth is from the Lord; let him then who will believe; and let him who will, be an infidel." (Súra xviii. 28).[170]"Those who add Gods to God will say: 'If God had pleased neither we nor our fathers had given Him companions.' Say: 'Verily ye follow only a conceit, ye utter lies.'" (Súra vi. 149). The Hadís is also very plain. "All good is in Thy hands and evil is not to Thee." (Al-khair kuluhu fí yadaika wash-sharru laisa 'alaika.)

The Ash'aríans have one famous text which they bring to bear against all this reasoning and evidence. It is: "This truly is a warning; and whoso willeth, taketh the way of his Lord; butwill it ye shall not, unless God will it, for God is knowing, wise." (Súra lxxvi. 29, 30). To the Hadís they reply (1) that there is a difference between acquiescence in evil and decreeing it. Thus the expression "God willeth not tyranny for His servants," does not meanthat God hath not decreed it, but that tyranny is not one of His attributes: so "evil is not to Thee" means it is not an attribute of God; and (2) the Hadís must be explained in accordance with the teaching of the Qurán.

The Muslim philosophers tried to find a way out of the difficulty. Averhoes says: "We are free to act in this way or that, but our will is always determined by some exterior cause. For example, we see something which pleases us, we are drawn to it in spite of ourselves. Our will is thus bound by exterior causes. These causes exist according to a certain order of things which is founded on the general laws of nature. God alone knows before hand the necessary connection which to us is a mystery. The connection of our will with exterior causes is determined by the laws of nature. It is this which in theology we call, 'decrees and predestination.'"[171]

I have already shown how, as Islám grew into a system, the Muslims fell into a Cabbalism, and a superstitious reverence for the mere letters and words of the Qurán. With this declension came a still more distorted view of the character of God. The quotations made from the Qurán in the last few pages will have shown that whilst some passages seem to attribute freedom to man and speak of his consequent responsibility, others teach a clear and distinct fatalism. The great strength of Islám lay in the energy with which Muhammad preached the doctrine that God was a divine Ruler, one who would deal righteous judgment, who "taught man that which he knew not." As the system became more complex and dogmatic—a very necessary result of its first principles—men lost the sense of the nearness of God. He became an unapproachable being. A harsh unfeeling Fate took the place of the Omnipotent Ruler. It is this dark fatalism which, whatever the Qurán may teach on the subject, is the ruling principle in all Muslimcommunities. It is this which makes all Muhammadan nations decay. Careless of self-improvement,[172]heedless of the need of progress, the Muslim nations, still independent, are in all that relates to the higher aspects of intellectual and civilized life far behind the nations of the west.

The subject of'Ilm-i-Aqáíd, or the science of dogma properly ends here, but most Muslim treatises include in this branch of the subject a few practical remarks. I therefore add a summary of them here. The believer who commits murder, fornication, &c., does not cease to be a Muslim provided that he does not say that these are allowed: should he die unrepentant, God can punish him for a while in hell, or forgive him without punishment. The Hadd, a punishment based on a Záhir, or obvious sentence of the Qurán requires that a Muslim who apostatizes shall be put to death.[173]In the case of an apostate woman, Imám Abu Hanífa ruled that she should be imprisoned and beaten every day. The other three Imáms, Málik, Sháfa'í and Hanbal said that she should be put to death in accordance with the Tradition which says: "He who changes his religion, kill." The Arabic word "man," usually translated "He who" is of common gender, and so these Imáms include women in the list of those who, after apostasy, are to be killed.[174]God does not pardon polytheism and infidelity; but He can, if He willeth, pardon all other crimes. If any one is asked, "dost thou believe?" he should reply, "I am truly a believer," and not say: "If Godwilleth."[175]If any one says to him: "Wilt thou die in the faith?" he should reply: "I do not know, God knows." Except when speaking of prophets, or of those of whom the Prophets have spoken, such as Abu Bakr, Omar, Osmán and 'Alí, it must not be said of any one, "he is gone to Paradise," for God only knows his state. Prayer should be made for a deceased Muslim whether he was a good or bad man. To give alms, to read the Qurán, to perform other good works, and to apply the merit thus gained to the souls of the dead is a pious and beneficial act.

NOTE TO CHAPTER IV.MUSLIM PHILOSOPHY.I have shown in the preceding chapter how the earlier scholastics, or the Mutazilites, as they are called, were finally crushed by the orthodox party. The later scholastics, or the philosophers, form the subject of this note. The Khalíf Mámún (813-833A.D.), a notorious free-thinker, was the first to give an impulse to philosophic researches. It was then that Greek philosophical works were translated into Arabic. The Greek author most patronized was Aristotle, partly, because his empirical method accorded with the positive tendencies of the Arab mind better than the pure idealism of Plato; and, partly, because his system of logic was considered an useful auxiliary in the daily quarrels between the rival theological schools. It was quite natural that Aristotle should be thus followed. "The Musalmán mind was trained in habits of absolute obedience to the authority of fixed dogmas. The Muslims did not so much wish to discover truth as to cultivate their own intellect. For that purpose, a sharp and subtle systematist like Aristotle was the very man they required."[176]Some idea of the range of subjects then discussed may be gained from an account given by the Arab historian, Masoudi, of a meeting held under the Presidentship of Yahya, one of the famous Barmecide family.[177]Yahya thus addressed the meeting: "You have discussed at length the theory of concealment (Al-Kumún) and manifestation (Al-Zahúr), of pre-existence and creation, of duration and stability, of movement and quiescence, of the union and separation (of the Divine substance), of existence and non-existence, of bodies and accidents, of the approval and the refutation (of the Isnáds of the Traditions), of the absence or the existence of attributes in God, of potential and active force, of substance, quantity, modality and relation, of life and annihilation. You have examined the question as to whether the Imám rules by divine right, or by popular election; you have had an exhaustive discussion on metaphysical subjects, in their principles and corollaries. Occupy yourselves to-day with the subject of love," &c.The translation of the works of Aristotle, as indeed of all the Greek authors, was made by Syrian and Chaldean Christians, andespecially by the Nestorians who, as physicians, were in high favour with the liberal Khalífs of the 'Abbásside dynasty. In some cases the translation into Arabic was made from Syriac versions, for in the time of the Emperor Justinian many Greek works had been translated into the latter language. The most celebrated translator was the historian physician Honein-Ibn-Ishak (died 876A.D.), a man profoundly acquainted with the Syriac, Greek and Arabic languages. He was at the head of a school of interpreters in Baghdád, to which his son Ishak-ben-Honein and his nephew Hobeisch-Al-Asam also belonged. In the tenth century (A.D.) Yahya-ben-Adi and Isa-ben-Zara'a translated some works and corrected earlier translations of others. It is to these men that the Arabs owe their chief acquaintance with Plato.The study of Aristotle spread rapidly amongst the Muslim people, especially amongst the heretical sects. The orthodox looked with grave suspicion on the movement, but could not for a while stay the impulse. The historian Makrizi says: "The doctrine of the Philosophers has worked amongst the Muslims evils most fatal. It serves only to augment the errors of the heretics and to increase their impiety."[178]It came into contact with Muslim dogmas in such subjects as the creation of the world, the special providence of God and the nature of the divine attributes. To a certain extent the Mutazilites were supported by the philosophical theories they embraced, but this did not diminish the disfavour with which the orthodox looked upon the study of philosophy. Still it grew, and men in self defence had to adopt philosophic methods. Thus arose a later system of scholasticism. The earlier system was confined mainly to matters of religion; the later school occupied itself with the whole range of philosophic investigation, and thus went farther and farther away from orthodox Islám.The Muslims themselves did not write books on philosophy in the earlier period. Men of liberal tendencies imbibed its teaching, but orthodoxy finally gained the day over the earlier scholastics, and in the form known as that of the Ash'arían School became again supreme.[179]The great intellectual movement of the Philosophers proper, the later scholastics (Mutakallimán), lasted longer, but by the end of the twelfth century (A.D.) the whole Muhammadan world had again become orthodox. Saláh-ud-dín (Saladin) and his successors in Egypt were strong supporters of the Ash'aríans.The period now under review was one prolific of authors on grammar, rhetoric, logic, exegesis, traditions and the various branches of philosophy; but the men who stand out most prominently as philosophers were then, and are now, considered heretics.[180]Al-Kendi, was born at Basra, on the Persian Gulf. He died about 870A.D.He was a very scientific man, but a thorough rationalist in theology. He composed commentaries on the logic of Aristotle. In his great work on the unity of God he has strayed far away from Muslim dogmas.Al Farabi, another philosopher patronized by the 'Abbássides, seems to have denied not only the rigid and formal Islámic view of inspiration, but any objective revelation at all. He held that intuition was a true inspiration, and that all who had acquired intuitive knowledge were real prophets. This is the only revelation he admits. He received his philosophical training at Baghdád, where for a while he taught; but finally he went to Damascus, where he died 950A.D.Ibn Sina, better known as Avicenna, a man of Persian origin, was a Philosopher of great note, but of him it is said that in spite of the concessions he made to the religious ideas of his age, he could not find favour for his opinions, which ill accord with the principles of Islám. He was born near Bukhárá, in the year 980A.D.For a while he taught medicine and philosophy in Ispahán.Ibn Badja, (Avempace) was one of the most celebrated Muslim Philosophers of Spain. He was born at Saragossa towards the end of the eleventh century. He is distinguished for having opposed the mystical tendencies of the teaching of Al-Ghazzálí, and for maintaining that speculative science alone was capable of leading man to a true conception of his own proper nature. He was violently attacked by the orthodox divines who declared that all philosophical teaching was "a calamity for religion and an affliction to those who were in the good way."Al-Ghazzálí was bornA.D.1059 in Khorásán. He was a famous Muslim divine. He adopted scholastic methods. For a while he was President of the Nizámiah College at Baghdád. He travelled much, and wrote many books to prove the superiority of Islám over all other religions and over philosophy. The first result of his wide and extensive study of the writings of the philosophers, and of the heretics was that he fell into a state of scepticism with regard to religion and philosophy. From this he emerged into Súfíism, inwhich his restless spirit found satisfaction. On Súfíism, however, he exercised no very notable influence; but the scepticism which he still retained as regards philosophy rendered him a very formidable opponent to those who were trying to bring Islám into accord with philosophic theories. His works, "Tendency of Philosophers," and "Destruction of the Philosophers" had an immense influence. In the preface to the latter book, he speaks of "those who arrogate to themselves a superior intelligence, and who, in their pride, mistaking the precepts of religion, take as a guide the authority of certain great men, instead of revealed religion." It is, however, and with some show of reason supposed that Al-Ghazzálí did not really object to all that he condemned, but that to gain the orthodox he wrote what he did. Indeed, Moses of Narbonne states that Ghazzálí later on in life wrote a book, circulated only amongst a few select friends, in which he withdrew many of the objections he had raised in the "Destruction of Philosophers." Be that as it may, it is acknowledged that he dealt a blow to philosophy from which in the East it has never recovered; that is, as far as the Muslim world is concerned. His course marks a reaction of the exclusively religious principle of Islám against philosophical speculation, which in spite of all accommodation never made itself orthodox.In Spain philosophy still found an ardent defender in Ibn Rashíd, better known as Averhoes. This celebrated man was born at Cordova in the year 1126A.D., or about 520 of the Muhammadan era. He came of a noble and learned family, whilst he himself must ever occupy a distinguished place amongst the Muslim Philosophers. "Without dispute he was one of the most learned men of the Muslim world, and one of the profoundest commentators of Aristotle. He knew all the sciences then accessible to the Muslims and was a most prolific writer."[181]One of his most famous works was the "Refutation of the destruction of Philosophers." Notwithstanding his philosophical opinions Averhoes claimed to pass for a good Muslim. He held that the philosophic truths are the highest object of research; but that only a few men could by speculation arrive at them, and that, therefore, a divine revelation through the medium of prophets was necessary for spreading amongst men the eternal verities which are proclaimed alike by philosophy and religion. He held, it is true, that the orthodox had paid too much attention to the letter, and too little to the spirit, and that false interpretations had educed principles not really to be found in religion. Thisprofession and a rigid adherence to outward forms of worship, however, did not save him from suspicion. He was accused of preaching philosophy and the ancient sciences to the detriment of religion. He was deprived of his honours and banished by the Khalíf Al-Mansúr to Lucena, near Cordova. In his disgrace he had to suffer many insults from the orthodox. One day on entering the mosque with his son he was forcibly expelled by the people. He died at Morocco in 1198A.D.Thus passed away in disgrace the last of the Muslim Philosophers worthy of the name.[182]In Spain a strict prohibition was issued against the study of Greek philosophy, and many valuable works were committed to the flames. Soon after the rule of the Moors in Spain began to decline. The study of philosophy came to an end, and liberal culture sank under the pressure of the hard and fast dogmatic system of Islám. In Spain,[183]as in Baghdád, orthodoxy gained the day. There was much of doubtful value in the speculations of the Muslim Philosophers, but they were Muslims, and if they went too far in their efforts to rationalize Islám, they also tried to cast off what to them seemed accretions, added on by the Traditionalists and the Canonical Legists. They failed because like the earlier scholastics they had no gospel to proclaim to men, no tidings to give of a new life which could enable wearied humanity to bear the ills to which it was subject. Another strong reason was that the orthodoxy against which they strove was a logical development of the foundations of Islám, and these foundations are too strongly laid for any power other than a spiritual one to uproot. They were men of good position in life, voluminous writers, profound admirers of Aristotle, and "more or less devoted to science, especially to medicine." Yet they did not advance philosophy, and science they left much as they found it. They preserved something of what Grecian thought had achieved, and so far their labour is not lost.Thus Islám has, as a religion, no right to claim any of the glory which Muslim philosophers are supposed to have shed around it.The founders of Islám, the Arabs, produced but one philosopher of note.[184]The first impetus to the study was given by heretical Khalífs employing Christians at Baghdád to translate Greek books; whilst in Spain, where philosophy most flourished, it was due largely to the contact of intelligent Muslims with learned Jews. Even there, the philosophers were, as a rule, the objects of bitter persecution. Now and again, a liberal minded Khalíf arose, but a system such as Islám survives the liberal tendencies of a generation. From the close of the twelfth century (A.D.) downwards it would be difficult to point to any Muslim Philosopher, much more to an Arab one, whose work is of any real value to the human race. For four hundred years the contest raged, a contest such as Islám has never since seen. This great effort to bring it into accordance with the main stream of human thought, to introduce into it some element of progress utterly failed. The lesson is plain. Any project of reform in Islám which admits in any degree its fundamental principles must fail. Revolution, not reform, is the only hope for the permanence of an independent Muslim state when it enters into the circle of civilized nations.

MUSLIM PHILOSOPHY.

I have shown in the preceding chapter how the earlier scholastics, or the Mutazilites, as they are called, were finally crushed by the orthodox party. The later scholastics, or the philosophers, form the subject of this note. The Khalíf Mámún (813-833A.D.), a notorious free-thinker, was the first to give an impulse to philosophic researches. It was then that Greek philosophical works were translated into Arabic. The Greek author most patronized was Aristotle, partly, because his empirical method accorded with the positive tendencies of the Arab mind better than the pure idealism of Plato; and, partly, because his system of logic was considered an useful auxiliary in the daily quarrels between the rival theological schools. It was quite natural that Aristotle should be thus followed. "The Musalmán mind was trained in habits of absolute obedience to the authority of fixed dogmas. The Muslims did not so much wish to discover truth as to cultivate their own intellect. For that purpose, a sharp and subtle systematist like Aristotle was the very man they required."[176]Some idea of the range of subjects then discussed may be gained from an account given by the Arab historian, Masoudi, of a meeting held under the Presidentship of Yahya, one of the famous Barmecide family.[177]Yahya thus addressed the meeting: "You have discussed at length the theory of concealment (Al-Kumún) and manifestation (Al-Zahúr), of pre-existence and creation, of duration and stability, of movement and quiescence, of the union and separation (of the Divine substance), of existence and non-existence, of bodies and accidents, of the approval and the refutation (of the Isnáds of the Traditions), of the absence or the existence of attributes in God, of potential and active force, of substance, quantity, modality and relation, of life and annihilation. You have examined the question as to whether the Imám rules by divine right, or by popular election; you have had an exhaustive discussion on metaphysical subjects, in their principles and corollaries. Occupy yourselves to-day with the subject of love," &c.

The translation of the works of Aristotle, as indeed of all the Greek authors, was made by Syrian and Chaldean Christians, andespecially by the Nestorians who, as physicians, were in high favour with the liberal Khalífs of the 'Abbásside dynasty. In some cases the translation into Arabic was made from Syriac versions, for in the time of the Emperor Justinian many Greek works had been translated into the latter language. The most celebrated translator was the historian physician Honein-Ibn-Ishak (died 876A.D.), a man profoundly acquainted with the Syriac, Greek and Arabic languages. He was at the head of a school of interpreters in Baghdád, to which his son Ishak-ben-Honein and his nephew Hobeisch-Al-Asam also belonged. In the tenth century (A.D.) Yahya-ben-Adi and Isa-ben-Zara'a translated some works and corrected earlier translations of others. It is to these men that the Arabs owe their chief acquaintance with Plato.

The study of Aristotle spread rapidly amongst the Muslim people, especially amongst the heretical sects. The orthodox looked with grave suspicion on the movement, but could not for a while stay the impulse. The historian Makrizi says: "The doctrine of the Philosophers has worked amongst the Muslims evils most fatal. It serves only to augment the errors of the heretics and to increase their impiety."[178]It came into contact with Muslim dogmas in such subjects as the creation of the world, the special providence of God and the nature of the divine attributes. To a certain extent the Mutazilites were supported by the philosophical theories they embraced, but this did not diminish the disfavour with which the orthodox looked upon the study of philosophy. Still it grew, and men in self defence had to adopt philosophic methods. Thus arose a later system of scholasticism. The earlier system was confined mainly to matters of religion; the later school occupied itself with the whole range of philosophic investigation, and thus went farther and farther away from orthodox Islám.

The Muslims themselves did not write books on philosophy in the earlier period. Men of liberal tendencies imbibed its teaching, but orthodoxy finally gained the day over the earlier scholastics, and in the form known as that of the Ash'arían School became again supreme.[179]The great intellectual movement of the Philosophers proper, the later scholastics (Mutakallimán), lasted longer, but by the end of the twelfth century (A.D.) the whole Muhammadan world had again become orthodox. Saláh-ud-dín (Saladin) and his successors in Egypt were strong supporters of the Ash'aríans.

The period now under review was one prolific of authors on grammar, rhetoric, logic, exegesis, traditions and the various branches of philosophy; but the men who stand out most prominently as philosophers were then, and are now, considered heretics.[180]

Al-Kendi, was born at Basra, on the Persian Gulf. He died about 870A.D.He was a very scientific man, but a thorough rationalist in theology. He composed commentaries on the logic of Aristotle. In his great work on the unity of God he has strayed far away from Muslim dogmas.

Al Farabi, another philosopher patronized by the 'Abbássides, seems to have denied not only the rigid and formal Islámic view of inspiration, but any objective revelation at all. He held that intuition was a true inspiration, and that all who had acquired intuitive knowledge were real prophets. This is the only revelation he admits. He received his philosophical training at Baghdád, where for a while he taught; but finally he went to Damascus, where he died 950A.D.

Ibn Sina, better known as Avicenna, a man of Persian origin, was a Philosopher of great note, but of him it is said that in spite of the concessions he made to the religious ideas of his age, he could not find favour for his opinions, which ill accord with the principles of Islám. He was born near Bukhárá, in the year 980A.D.For a while he taught medicine and philosophy in Ispahán.

Ibn Badja, (Avempace) was one of the most celebrated Muslim Philosophers of Spain. He was born at Saragossa towards the end of the eleventh century. He is distinguished for having opposed the mystical tendencies of the teaching of Al-Ghazzálí, and for maintaining that speculative science alone was capable of leading man to a true conception of his own proper nature. He was violently attacked by the orthodox divines who declared that all philosophical teaching was "a calamity for religion and an affliction to those who were in the good way."

Al-Ghazzálí was bornA.D.1059 in Khorásán. He was a famous Muslim divine. He adopted scholastic methods. For a while he was President of the Nizámiah College at Baghdád. He travelled much, and wrote many books to prove the superiority of Islám over all other religions and over philosophy. The first result of his wide and extensive study of the writings of the philosophers, and of the heretics was that he fell into a state of scepticism with regard to religion and philosophy. From this he emerged into Súfíism, inwhich his restless spirit found satisfaction. On Súfíism, however, he exercised no very notable influence; but the scepticism which he still retained as regards philosophy rendered him a very formidable opponent to those who were trying to bring Islám into accord with philosophic theories. His works, "Tendency of Philosophers," and "Destruction of the Philosophers" had an immense influence. In the preface to the latter book, he speaks of "those who arrogate to themselves a superior intelligence, and who, in their pride, mistaking the precepts of religion, take as a guide the authority of certain great men, instead of revealed religion." It is, however, and with some show of reason supposed that Al-Ghazzálí did not really object to all that he condemned, but that to gain the orthodox he wrote what he did. Indeed, Moses of Narbonne states that Ghazzálí later on in life wrote a book, circulated only amongst a few select friends, in which he withdrew many of the objections he had raised in the "Destruction of Philosophers." Be that as it may, it is acknowledged that he dealt a blow to philosophy from which in the East it has never recovered; that is, as far as the Muslim world is concerned. His course marks a reaction of the exclusively religious principle of Islám against philosophical speculation, which in spite of all accommodation never made itself orthodox.

In Spain philosophy still found an ardent defender in Ibn Rashíd, better known as Averhoes. This celebrated man was born at Cordova in the year 1126A.D., or about 520 of the Muhammadan era. He came of a noble and learned family, whilst he himself must ever occupy a distinguished place amongst the Muslim Philosophers. "Without dispute he was one of the most learned men of the Muslim world, and one of the profoundest commentators of Aristotle. He knew all the sciences then accessible to the Muslims and was a most prolific writer."[181]One of his most famous works was the "Refutation of the destruction of Philosophers." Notwithstanding his philosophical opinions Averhoes claimed to pass for a good Muslim. He held that the philosophic truths are the highest object of research; but that only a few men could by speculation arrive at them, and that, therefore, a divine revelation through the medium of prophets was necessary for spreading amongst men the eternal verities which are proclaimed alike by philosophy and religion. He held, it is true, that the orthodox had paid too much attention to the letter, and too little to the spirit, and that false interpretations had educed principles not really to be found in religion. Thisprofession and a rigid adherence to outward forms of worship, however, did not save him from suspicion. He was accused of preaching philosophy and the ancient sciences to the detriment of religion. He was deprived of his honours and banished by the Khalíf Al-Mansúr to Lucena, near Cordova. In his disgrace he had to suffer many insults from the orthodox. One day on entering the mosque with his son he was forcibly expelled by the people. He died at Morocco in 1198A.D.Thus passed away in disgrace the last of the Muslim Philosophers worthy of the name.[182]In Spain a strict prohibition was issued against the study of Greek philosophy, and many valuable works were committed to the flames. Soon after the rule of the Moors in Spain began to decline. The study of philosophy came to an end, and liberal culture sank under the pressure of the hard and fast dogmatic system of Islám. In Spain,[183]as in Baghdád, orthodoxy gained the day. There was much of doubtful value in the speculations of the Muslim Philosophers, but they were Muslims, and if they went too far in their efforts to rationalize Islám, they also tried to cast off what to them seemed accretions, added on by the Traditionalists and the Canonical Legists. They failed because like the earlier scholastics they had no gospel to proclaim to men, no tidings to give of a new life which could enable wearied humanity to bear the ills to which it was subject. Another strong reason was that the orthodoxy against which they strove was a logical development of the foundations of Islám, and these foundations are too strongly laid for any power other than a spiritual one to uproot. They were men of good position in life, voluminous writers, profound admirers of Aristotle, and "more or less devoted to science, especially to medicine." Yet they did not advance philosophy, and science they left much as they found it. They preserved something of what Grecian thought had achieved, and so far their labour is not lost.

Thus Islám has, as a religion, no right to claim any of the glory which Muslim philosophers are supposed to have shed around it.The founders of Islám, the Arabs, produced but one philosopher of note.[184]The first impetus to the study was given by heretical Khalífs employing Christians at Baghdád to translate Greek books; whilst in Spain, where philosophy most flourished, it was due largely to the contact of intelligent Muslims with learned Jews. Even there, the philosophers were, as a rule, the objects of bitter persecution. Now and again, a liberal minded Khalíf arose, but a system such as Islám survives the liberal tendencies of a generation. From the close of the twelfth century (A.D.) downwards it would be difficult to point to any Muslim Philosopher, much more to an Arab one, whose work is of any real value to the human race. For four hundred years the contest raged, a contest such as Islám has never since seen. This great effort to bring it into accordance with the main stream of human thought, to introduce into it some element of progress utterly failed. The lesson is plain. Any project of reform in Islám which admits in any degree its fundamental principles must fail. Revolution, not reform, is the only hope for the permanence of an independent Muslim state when it enters into the circle of civilized nations.

The portion of the creed considered in the last chapter was connected with Imán (faith); the remaining portion is connected with Dín (practical religion). The five principal acts are called Irkán-i-Dín, pillars of religion. They are: (1) The recital of the Kalima, or short confession of faith; (2) Sulát, the five stated periods of prayer; (3) Roza, the thirty days' fast of Ramazán; (4) Zakát, legal alms; (5) Hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca. These are allfarzduties, being based on a Nass-i-Záhir, or "obvious," sentence of the Qurán, a proof derived from which is called dalíl-i-qata'í. This is the strongest of all kinds of proofs.

The authorities, however, specify other religious duties which good Muslims should perform. Such are the seven duties which arewájib, or duties based on the more obscure texts of the Qurán, called Khafi, or "hidden" sentences, a proof derived from which is called dalíl-i-zaní. These duties are: (1) To make the 'Umra, or Pilgrimage to Mecca in addition to the Hajj; (2) obedience to parents; (3) the obedience of a wife to her husband; (4) the giving of alms after a fast; (5) the offering of sacrifice; (6) the saying of Namáz-i-witr, a term which will be explained later on; (7) the support of relatives. The duties numbered as (4) and (5) arewájiborders to the rich; but onlymustahabto the poor: that is, it is meritorious if they perform them, but not sinful if they leave them undone.

The duties next in order as regards authority are thesunnatones. They are three in number and are based either on the practice of the Prophet, or arefitrat, that is practices of previous prophets, the continuance of whichMuhammad did not forbid. They are (1) circumcision; (2) shaving off the hair from the head and the body; (3) the paring of the nails. In addition to these there are actions which aremustahab. They are those which Muhammad sometimes did and sometimes omitted. There is a still lower class of action which aremubáh. These are works of supererogation. If omitted there is no fear of punishment.

It may be mentioned in passing that unlawful actions and things are (1)Harám, actions and food forbidden either in the Qurán or the Traditions; (2)Mahrúh, actions the unlawfulness of which is not absolutely certain, but which are generally considered wrong; (3)Mufsid, actions corrupting or pernicious. It is necessary to bear these terms in mind as they will now frequently occur.

1.Tashahhud.—This is the recital of a confession of faith. There are several forms of this. A common one is: "I testify that there is no deity but God, I testify to His unity and that He has no partner; I testify that Muhammad is His servant and His messenger." The shorter form is: "There is no deity but God and Muhammad is the apostle of God." The power contained in this latter confession is extraordinary. It embodies the very spirit of Islám. "It has led everywhere the march of its armies, it has rung for twelve centuries in the morning air from its minarets, it has been passed from lip to lip, as no other word has ever been passed, by thousands of millions of the human race." The power of Islám, its proclamation of the Unity, is here seen in the closest contact with what is to Muslim theologians the equally fundamental truth—the apostleship of Muhammad, a dogma which retards the healthy development, explains the narrowness, and causes the prostration of Islám, as the world around grows luminant with the light of science and truth, of faith and reason.

2.Sulát.[185]—All the books on Fiqh (Law) which treat ofthese Irkán-i-dín, give in connection with Sulát the rules regarding the necessary purifications. It will be convenient to follow the same order.

Tahárat or legal purification is of three kinds: (1) Wazú, the lesser lustration; (2) Ghusl, the greater lustration; (3) Tayammum, or purification by sand.

(1). Wazú is an ablution made before saying the appointed prayers. Those which are 'farz' are four in number, viz:—to wash (1) the face from the top of the forehead to the chin, and as far as each ear; and (2) the hands and arms up to the elbow; (3) to rub (masah) with the wet hand a fourth part of the head; also (4) the feet to the ankles. The authority for these actions is the text: "O Believers! when ye address yourselves to prayer, wash your hands up to the elbow, and wipe your heads, and your feet to the ankles" (Súra v. 8). The Sunnís wash the feet: the Shía'hs are apparently more correct, for they only wipe, or rather rub, (masah) them. In these ablutions, if the least portion of the specified part is left untouched, the whole act becomes useless and the prayer which follows is vain.

The act of making wazú, however, has not been allowed to remain in this simple form. The Sunnat regulations regarding it are fourteen in number. They are, (1) to make the intention of wazú, thus: I make this wazú for the purpose of putting away impurity; (2) to wash the hand up to the wrist, but care must be taken not to put the hands entirely into the water, until each has been rubbed three times with water poured on it; (3) to say one of the names of God at the commencement of the wazú[186]thus: "In the name of the Great God," or "Thanks be to God for the religion of Islám;" (4) to clean the teeth; (5) to rinse the mouth three times; (6) to put water into thenostrils three times; (7) to do all the above in proper order; (8) to do all without any delay between the various acts; (9) each part is to be purified three times; (10) the space between the fingers of one hand must be rubbed with the wet fingers of the other; (11) the beard must be combed with the fingers; (12) the whole head must be rubbed once; (13) the ears must be washed with the water remaining on the fingers after the last operation; (14) to rub under and between the toes with the little finger of the left hand, drawing it from the little toe of the right foot and between each toe in succession. Imám Sháfa'í holds that (1) and (7) are farz duties and that (12) should be done three times. Imám Málik considers (8) to be farz.

The actions may be done in silence, or prayer may be repeated. Such a recital is a mustahab, not a sunnat or farz order. It is not obligatory. A specimen of these prayers is given in a note.[187]

Back to Index Next