Prior to Islam, the Arabs’ store of
‘wisdom’ comprised proverbs and aphorisms – the results of practical experience
of mundane life, which were sometimes put in poetic verse. They were characterized
by observation of individual facts leading to no reflection on universals.
Islam presented to them revealed knowledge but relied for its acceptance
on an awakening of the intellect and common sense – a stimulation of thought
rather than stupefaction through a show of miraculous powers. The result
was that the early Muslims were fortified with the self-assurance that
in upholding the tents and practices of the new faith they were only following
the path of wisdom and virtue. Before long, however, their conquests of
the neighboring lands brought them into contact with cultured communities
belonging to other faiths, notably the Monophysite and the Nestorian Christians
and the Persians, in whose land the Greek currents of thought mingled with
the Perso-Indian tradition. Liberal social intercourse and discussions
on comparative religion brought home to Muslims the realization that their
religious thought was characterized by simplicity worthy only of the common
sense of practical-minded enthusiasts. There was need for philosophical
articulation and logical formulation to match the subtleties of the Schoolman
and the Dialectician. Besides the stimulus from outside, there were certain
individual problems of faith which were pressing themselves for re-examination
due to stresses and strains within their own political and social fabric.
Thus, the beginnings of philosophical thought centered around the problems
of predestination and freewill and the attributes of Godhead with their
bearing on unity – the main point of difference with the believers in Trinity
and Dualism. In order to proceed, the Muslims needed a mastery of Greek
philosophy – the source of what they believed to be the tactical strength
of their opponents.
During the ninth-tenth centuries C.E.
many of the treasures of Greek philosophy were passed on into Arabic through
the labors of Syrian Christians under the patronage of the Caliphs and
the elite of Baghdad. Though the works of the early Muslim thinkers rely
far more on neo-Platonist, neo-Pythagorean, Stoic and the Hermetic writings,
ultimately Aristotelianism came to reign supreme. However, the interpretation
of Aristotle was always based on neo [Platonic commentaries. Moreover,
there were several spurious works attributed to Aristotle. One of them,
the so-called Theology of Aristotle, based on several sections of
Plotinus’ Enneads, exercised a profound influence on Muslim thinkers.
The Arab scholars succeeded well in passing beyond the narrow limits of
Nestorian studies but perhaps it was beyond their resources to disentangle
Aristotle from neo-Platonism.
The first look by Muslims at Greek
philosophy amply confirmed their self-assurance that Reason could not conflict
with Revelation. The towering fact of monotheism emerging from the circles
of Greek philosophy so enraptured them that they set about hastily adopting
and appropriating the new acquisition instead of critically examining it
in all its details. This is best exhibited in the attempt at parallelism
between the language of philosophy and the language of religion, e.g. the
theory of the Spheres was taken over and the Intellects recognized as ‘angels’
while the Intellectual Light was equated with Revelation. When all the
possible equations were exhausted, it was found on deeper thought that
there remained a considerable residue representing the area of disagreement
between Reason and Revelation. It is the working of the Muslim mind, represented
more by the Persians and the Turks than by the Arabs, on this marginal
area which justifies distinctive term ‘Arabic Philosophy’, ‘Arabic’ referring
only to the language of expression and to some extent to historical milieu.
The impact of philosophy gave rise
to two schools of thought among the Muslims. First, there were those who
clung to the primacy of Revelation but, in demonstrating its identity with
Reason resorted to a liberal or what appeared to them to be the ‘reasonable’
and ‘natural’ formulation of the tenets of Islam. These apologists of Revelation,
the Mutazilites as they were called, went forth in pursuit of the
concept of Natural Religion until they veered them into a position of antagonism
to Orthodoxy. They could not resist the temptation of imposing their intellectual
Islam on the masses at the point of the bayonet under the aegis of their
champion, the Caliph Mamun (813-33), a venture that ruined them
and defeated their own purpose. However, the sanguine showdown came only
after they had left their indelible mark on Muslim thought and shaken orthodoxy
out of rigidity forever.
Second, there were the philosophers
in the proper sense of the word who believed in the primacy of Reason,
but were at pains to demonstrate its compatibility with Revelation. For
them the end of the first stage of establishing an authentic version of
Greek philosophy was reached with the first and last of the Arab philosophers,
Al-Kindi (d: 873) and the Turk, Al-Farabi (d: 950). The second
stage of the formulation of a doctrinal system was completed by Ibn
Sina (Avicenna, d: 1037). The outstanding problems which these Muslim
philosophers had to grapple with were no easy ones: the Eternity of Matter,
the process of the creation of the Many from the Absolute One, His Omnipotence
and Omniscience with regard to the Universal and the Particular, Immortality
of the Soul and Resurrection, and, of course, the overall consideration
of the need for, and the nature and admissibility of, Prophethood. From
the orthodox point of view, the philosophers appeared to be skeptics but
were tolerated so long as they did not repudiate Revelation outright. A
strong reaction was, however, touched off by the attacks of Ibn Al-Rawandi
(d: 935), a Jewish convert of questionable motives, on the institution
of prophethood. The reaction culminated in Ash‘ari (d: 935) and
Ghazzali (d: 1111), both of whom exposed the unreliability of philosophy
and repudiated the same on behalf of Religion. They were, of course, accomplished
in the use of the weapons of philosophy and, in turning them against unbridled
Reason, satisfied not only the masses but also the intellectuals. Only
Ash‘ari’s accasionalism – the assertion of direct activity and creation
by God and the denial of natural causation – had a reactionary effect on
the Muslim mind. It was left to Ibn Rushd (Averroes, 1126-1198)
to resuscitate philosophy by making amends for the vagaries of the renegades
and at the same time exposing the retaliatory partisan attitude of Ghazzali.
Significantly enough, Ibn Al-Rawandi
declared himself dependent on Indian wisdom in the repudiation of prophethood.
The Samaniyya, i.e. the Buddhists, were well represented in the cosmopolitan
Abbasid society by Jarir Ibn Hazim al-Azdi of Basra, who, though
remaining within the community, invited the intellectuals of his age to
his home and argued Buddhist philosophy with them. However, atheism or
agnosticism constituted a palpable heresy not only against Islam but also
against Greek philosophy; it was viewed only as a curio of philosophical
thought. The attacks on the institution of prophethood, which was equally
lacking in Greek philosophy, called forth a spirited defense especially
from the Fatimid Shiites who believed in the divine guidance of their Imams
or leaders. It was just because of its ultimate monotheism that Hindu –
as distinguished from the Buddhist – thought had greater chance of admission
within the circle of Muslim philosophers. Aristotelianism asserted the
existence of the Unmoved Mover but posited Eternal Matter in a sort of
Dualism with Him. It was here that the Monism of Hindu thought attracted
the Muslim thinkers strongly. Moreover, once the existence of God is regarded
as a fundamental Reality, the urge to establish some sort of communion
with Him is awakened. Strictly speaking, Islam provides for this communion
only through the consciousness of the will of God during the full course
of Man’s participation in the normal life-pattern of this world. Already
under the influence of neo-Platonism, ways of contemplation – as opposed
to activity – were being explored by the Muslims when the concepts of emanation
and remanation came across their way. Thus pantheism was able to enter
surreptitiously and under sufficient disguise. Yet the other characteristic
features of Hindu thought such as Incarnation and Transmigration were vigilantly
kept outside. Even the excesses resulting from the concept of ‘Union with
God’ touched off violent reaction as in the case of Husain Ibn Mansur
al-Hallaj (who was executed in 922). Once the contemplative ways of
communion came in vogue, the ascetic practices and the institution of the
Orders were borrowed from the Christian monks, the Hindus, whose mortification
of the flesh, nevertheless, continued to be abhorrent, and from the Buddhist
Sangh, whose moral ideal of self abnegation deeply impressed the common
Muslim. Remarkably enough, even vegetarianism was dissociated from the
notion of birth cycles or mere compassion for the sentient being; it was
assimilated to a much higher ideal which made Hayy Ibn Yaqzan, the hero
of Ibn Tufayl’s philosophical romance, pause to think whether he was not
obstructing the ordained processes of nature by appropriating for himself
the milk of the cow, which was really meant for the subsistence of the
calf, and the fruit of the tree, which was designed for the propagation
of the kind.
Philosophy also came to be cultivated
in secret societies possessing an esoteric doctrine in a political setting.
One of them, the Brethren of Purity (d: 970), became famous for a somewhat
incoherent compendium of philosophical thought collected from all the sources
and showing a marked deviation in favor of Pythagorean speculation.
Lastly, Ibn Khaldun (1332-1476), the
father of the Philosophy of History, applied the discipline to the world
of men, determining the facts of history and their proximate causes and
deriving the law governing the development of human society.
On the whole, Arabic philosophy is
remarkable for the evolution of a peculiar approach by Reason towards Revelation.
It was fortuitous indeed that the Muslims received Aristotelianism overgrown
with Neo-Platonism, but the synthesis which they themselves assiduously
worked afterwards remains distinctly theirs. Still more important is the
concession which Discursive Reason was ultimately compelled to make in
favor of Intuition. The example of Muslims reconciling religion with philosophy
was emulated by the Jews living in the western parts of the Islamic world
and they acted as intermediaries between Muslim philosophers and Western
Christians. The influence of Avicenna, Ghazzali, Averroes and others, so
prominent in the writings of Thomas Aquinas, ultimately led to Christian
Europe’s discovery of the lost treasure of Greek learning.
|