|
An atmosphere of free investigation
is essential to the progress of science. In former times, however, such
an atmosphere was extremely rare, thanks to various kinds of man-made beliefs.
There were many cases in those days of an intelligent, scholarly person
discovering a certain truth while pondering over his subject, only to find
people turning against him and his discovery because they found it clashing
with their superstitious beliefs. That was why innovative thinking could
not make any progress.
One of the most notorious examples
of the suppression of new ideas in antiquity was the condemnation of the
renowned Greek philosopher, Socrates, to death, by drinking hemlock in
399 B.C. He was accused of ignoring the gods worshipped by the Athenians,
of making new inventions in religion and of corrupting the youth of Athens.
Another such example – as late as
the seventeenth century – was that of Galileo (1564-1642), the Italian
astronomer who offended the Church simply by endorsing the Copernican view
of the planets moving round the sun. He was sentenced by a religious court
and thrown into prison. When he saw that death awaited him, he was forced
to recant before the Inquisition. Kneeling, with both his hands on the
Bible, he solemnly withdrew his ‘far-fetched’ theory of the movement of
the planets around the sun. He not only rejected this theory, but said
that he considered it ‘abominable’.
This was not just an isolated incident,
but rather a symptom of the intellectual malaise created by the Christian
scholars of those times. The search for new truths and the discovery of
nature’s secrets remained forbidden pastures to them for centuries. Such
activities were reviled as black magic and a part of satanic teachings.
In such circumstances, it was impossible for research and investigation
to be carried on with any success. In the Middle Ages, it was solely due
to the Muslims that such work could be given any impetus, thanks to the
Qur’an having removed the kind
of mental blocks that had stood in the way of people of other faiths, such
as Galileo.
An appropriate attitude to scientific
matters began to be encouraged for the first time after the Islamic revolution.
This process then went on unhampered, ultimately leading to the age of
modern discoveries. Following is a brief description of the contribution
of the Muslims in various fields of science and learning.
The Solar System
The astronomer who is said to have
studied the solar system and presented the heliocentric theory for the
first time was a Greek known by the name of Aristarchus of Samos. He died
in 270 B.C. However, this theory of the sun being at the centre and of
the earth revolving around it never gained popularity in those early times.
Then came the age of Ptolemy, who
lived in the second century A.D. Ptolemy’s astronomical system represented
the earth as the fixed centre of the universe, with the sun and the moon,
and other stars and planets revolving around it.
This geocentric theory of the universe
appeared to be in conformity with the beliefs the Christians had developed
after Jesus Christ. These beliefs were given the final seal of approval
at the famous Church Council held at Nicaea, a city in Asia Minor, in A.D.
325. After the acceptance of Christianity by Constantine the great (280-337),
the faith spread all over Roman territory. Now vested with tremendous power,
the Christians patronised, in particular, the theory of Ptolemy. The curtain
of darkness fell over the heliocentric theory of Aristarchus.
Of geocentricity the Encyclopaedia
Britannica (1984) says:
There was no further scope for cosmology in the model,
which continued to be taught and used almost everywhere until the 17th
century.1
It was not until 1495 that the Copernicus
arrived at the conclusion that the earth was not the centre of the universe.
After a long period of research devoted to astronomical studies, he was
forced to conclude that the planets revolved around the sun. But, fearing
the opposition of the Church, he refrained from publishing his findings
until 1543.
The Muslims, however did not suffer
from the error of regarding as sacred that which was non-sacred. They were
in a position to reflect upon matters of scientific interest with open
minds, and in a purely academic way. When they found out that the heliocentric
theory was more rational, they accepted it without any hesitation.
Edward Mcnall Burns writes that the
heliocentric theory developed by Aristarchus (310-230 B.C.), although destined
to fall into oblivion for four hundred years, has today become an established
fact. This is after many centuries of man’s minds being dominated by Ptolemy’s
geocentric theory.
Of all the subjects developed by the
Spanish Muslims, there was none brought to a higher degree of perfection
than science. In fact, in this field, their successes were such as to have
no parallel in history. They distinguished themselves in the fields of
astronomy, mathematics, physics, chemistry, medicine, etc. As McNall Burns
writes:
Despite their reverence for Aristotle, they did not hesitate
to criticise his notion of a universe of concentric spheres with the earth
at the centre, and they admitted the possibility that the earth rotates
on its axis and revolves the sun.2
The Muslims arriving at the correct hypothesis
of the solar system’s functioning was made possible only because Islam
had broken down the walls of conditioned thinking which had acted as a
barrier to man’s intellectual progress. As soon as this artificial barrier
was out of the way, the caravan of human thought began to move on its journey
with a hitherto unimaginable rapidity. And thus it brought us finally to
the spectacular scientific feats of the present century.
Medicine
Just as diseases have afflicted man
in every age, so has the science of medicine always existed in one form
or the other. In ancient times, however, the science of medicine never
reached the heights of progress that it did in the Islamic era.
It is believed that the beginning
of the science of medicine – a beginning to be reckoned with – was made
in ancient Greece. The two very great physicians who were born in ancient
Greece were Hippocrates and Galen. Hippocrates lived in the fifth and fourth
centuries B.C. However, very little is known about his life. The historians
of later times have estimated that Hippocrates was probably born in 460
B.C. and died in 377 B.C. Some historians, on the other hand, even have
doubts about him being a historical figure. It has also been questioned
whether the books on philosophy and medicine supposedly written by him
were actually written by someone else and later attributed to him.3
Galen is considered the second most
important philosopher and physicist of this period of antiquity. He was
born probably in A.D. 129 and died in A.D. 199. Galen had to face stiff
opposition in Rome, and most of his writings were destroyed. The remainder
would also have been lost to posterity if the Arabs had not collected them
in the ninth century and translated them into Arabic. These Arabic translations
were later to reach Europe, in the eleventh century, where they were translated
from Arabic into Latin. The Encyclopaedia Britannica (1984) concludes its
article on Galen:
It is a fact that ancient Greece produced
some very fine brains and some very high thinking in this field. But the
respective fates of Galen and Hippocrates show that the atmosphere in ancient
Greece was conducive neither to the rise of such people to their due eminence,
nor to the growth of medicine as a science. Different kinds of superstitious
beliefs were an obstruction in the path of free inquiry; for instance,
the attribution of disease to mysterious powers, and the sanctification
of many things, such as plants which had healing properties.
The science of medicine came into
being in ancient Greece about 200 years before the Christian era and flourished
for another two centuries. In this way, the whole period extended over
about four or five hundred years. This science did not see any subsequent
advance in Greece itself. Although a European country, Greece, did not
contribute anything to the spread of its own medical science in Europe,
or to modern medicine in the West. These facts are proof that the atmosphere
in ancient Greece was not favourable to the progress of medicine.
The Greek medicine which was brought
into being by certain individuals (effort was all at the individual level,
as the community did not give it general recognition) remained hidden away
in obscure books for about one thousand years after its birth. It was only
when these books were translated into Arabic during the Abbasid period
(750-1258), and edited by the Arabs with their own original additions,
that it became possible for this science to find its way to Europe, thus
paving the way for modern medicine science.
The reason for this is that before
the Islamic revolution, the world had been swept by superstitious beliefs
and idolatry. The environment in those times was so unfavourable that whenever
an individual undertook any academic or scientific research, he would seldom
receive encouragement. More often than not, he had to face severe antagonism.
Indeed, whenever any scientific endeavour at the individual level came
to the notice of the authorities, it would be promptly and rigorously suppressed.
In a situation where diseases and their remedies were traditionally linked
with gods and goddesses, what appeal could the scientific method of treatment
have for the people? Only when the monotheistic revolution came to the
world in the wake of Islam did the door open to that medical progress which
saw its culmination in modern medical science. One example would be worthwhile
here:
Smallpox is considered one of the
dangerous diseases in the world. It is a highly contagious disease, characterised
by fever and the appearance of small spots leaving scars in the form of
pits. The symptoms include chill, headache, and backache. The spots appear
about the fourth day. This is a fatal disease. Even if one survives the
attack, the skin in scarred permanently. According to present records,
this disease was identified in Egypt in 1122 B.C. and is also mentioned
in ancient Indian books written in Sanskrit. In the past, this disease
gripped many countries in the form of dangerous epidemics. Thousands of
people fell prey to it. As far back as 1156 B.C. this disease was taking
its toll of human life, there being visible evidence in the pock marked
faced of the mummy of the Egyptian Pharaoh, Ramses V, who died in that
year. (His embalmed body was found inside a pyramid). Even then, it took
thousands of years for this dreaded disease to be investigated scientifically.5
Now we know that smallpox is a contagious disease resulting from virus
infection, and such remedies have been discovered as can ward off attacks,
provided suitable precaution are taken in advance. But is was not until
the end of the ninth century, subsequent to the emergence of Islam, that
this medical fact was unearthed for the first time. The first name which
became prominent in history in this connection was that of the well-known
Arab physician, Al-Razi (865-925), who was born in Ray in Iran. In search
of a remedy for the disease, he investigated it from the purely medical
standpoint and wrote the first book on the subject, called, Al-Judri
wa al-Hasba. This was translated into Latin, the academic language
of ancient Europe, in 1565 in Venice. It was later translated into Greek
and other languages, and thus spread all over Europe. Its English translation,
published in London in 1848, was entitled, A Treatise on Smallpox and Measles.
Researchers have accepted that this is the first medical book on smallpox
in the whole of recorded history. Prior to this, no one had ever done research
on this topic.
After reading Al-Razi’s book, Edward
Jenner (1749-1823), the English physician who became the inventor of vaccination,
was led to making a clinical investigation of the disease. He carried on
his research over a twenty-year period, ultimately establishing the connection
between cowpox and smallpox. In 1796, he carried out his first practical
experiment in inoculation. This was a success, and the practice spread
rapidly, in spite of violent opposition from certain quarters, until, in
1977, it was announced by the UN that for the first time in history, smallpox
had been eradicated.
Now the question arises as to why
such a long time had elapsed between the initial discovery of the disease
and the first attempts to investigate it medically with a view to finding
a remedy. The reason was the prevalence of shirk, that is, the holding
of something to be sacred when it is not, or the attribution of divinity
to the non-divine. Dr. David Werner writes: ‘In most places in India, people
believe that these diseases are caused because the goddess is angry with
their family or their community. The goddess expresses her anger through
these diseases. The people believe that the only hope of a cure for these
diseases is to make offerings to her in order to please her. They do not
feed the sick child or care for him because they fear this will annoy the
goddess more. So the sick child becomes very weak and either dies or takes
a long time to get cured. These diseases are caused by virus infection.
It is essential that the child be given plenty of good to keep up his strength
so that he can fight the infection.’
When Islam came to the world, it banished
such superstitious beliefs about disease announcing in no uncertain terms
that none except God had the power to harm or benefit mankind. The Creator
was the one and only being who had such power. All the rest were His creatures
and His slaves. When, after the Islamic revolution, such ideas gained ground,
people began to think freely and independently of all superstitious. Only
then did it become possible to conduct medical research into diseases in
order to discover appropriate remedies.
Only after this intellectual revolution
had come to the world did it become possible to make smallpox the subject
of inquiry. Only then did it become possible for such people as Abu Bakr
Razi and Edward Jenner to rise and save the world from this dreaded disease
by discovering a remedy for it.
The real barrier to finding a cure
was the generally accepted body of superstitious beliefs based on idol
worship; these beliefs were swept away for the first time in history by
Islam.
Linguistics
On account of superstitious beliefs
becoming attached to language, linguistics, as a science, stagnated for
thousands of years. Writing of this failure to Dr Ernest Gellner, a linguist
very aptly commented: ‘Linguistic philosophy has an inverted vision which
treats genuine thought as a disease and dead thought as a paradigm of health.’
In antiquity, it was generally believed
that writing was the gift of God, as in the Indian concept of ‘Braham lipi.’
Words and the forms of speech were considered to have been given to man
by the gods and, as such, they commanded the highest veneration from humans.
John Stevens, in his book Sacred Calligraphy of the East, presents
research carried out by himself, which shows that the concept of ‘sacred’
calligraphy persisted for centuries. Scholars differed as to the origin
of calligraphy, whether in Egypt, China, India, or any other place. One
idea, however, was universal: writing was divine. It was inherently holy.
Writing was the speech of the gods.
That human languages have been the
object of superstitions for thousands of years is a matter of historical
record. It was supposed that certain languages had divine origins, and
that their speakers enjoyed a special status above others. For instance,
for centuries the Greek language had been supposed to be superior to other
languages, Greek being the language of the gods, while other languages
were those of barbarians.
The same was the case with Hebrew.
In the Jewish Christian world it was an age-old belief that Hebrew was
God’s own language and that it was the first language to be used in the
world. Wonderly and Engene Nida, who have made a detailed study of the
influences of Christian beliefs on languages, have made this analysis:
One of the facts which retarded linguistic progress was
the belief among early Christian writers, and persisting well into the
Renaissance era, that all languages were derived from Hebew.6
The concept of ‘divine’ language was wholly
a product of superstitious beliefs, having nothing to do with reality.
Whenever it comes to be supposed of a language that it is the language
of the gods, it becomes an object of reverence in people’s eyes with the
status of a sacred language. It can no longer remain an object of investigation.
After this stage, making a critical analysis of it, or advocating a new
method to develop it, or any other such progressive attitude towards it,
were looked upon as heretical, and akin to being sacrilegious. All such
efforts are seen by the people as presumptuousness, rather than as a sincere
attempt to develop the language. This state of arrested development was
typical not only of the ancient languages, but of all other departments
of thought, innumerable kinds of superstitious beliefs having stemmed the
tide of intellectual progress. It was the revolution based on monotheism
which broke down this barrier for the first time in history. This revolution
originated in Arabia, and finally came to exert its influence all over
the world. Human history then entered the age of realism, leaving behind
the age of superstition.
The very moment when the Qur’an announced that there was no god but the one God, the scientific way
of thinking was set in motion. People began thinking about things independently
of unrealistic, mental barriers. This way of thinking went from strength
to strength until, finally, it led to the present scientific revolution.
The monotheistic practice of according
the status of divinity to the one and only God, and denying sanctity to
all else, diverted all other creatures and things of any special status
they may have had.
It was actually the ‘divine’ status
of things which had been acting as a barrier to their becoming of research
and investigation. Once all these things were shorn off their former so-called
divinity, they naturally came down to the level of being proper subjects
for research and investigation. It is this unique achievement of Islam
which entitles it to be regarded as the creator of the modern age.
Numerals
The present system of numerals was
first invented in India. That was in an age, however, when all that was
traditionally established had come to be regarded as holy, while all that
was invented was suspect. As such, this method of writing numerals could
not become widely known, and continued for a long time to remain hidden
in privately owned books. The new invention did not, therefore, gain currency:
people clung to the old method, considering it to be holy.
Having learnt that in the recently
established Baghdad empire great appreciation was shown for new inventions,
an Indian traveller went in 771 to Baghdad, which was then under the rule
of the Abbasid Caliph, Al-Mansur.
The Indian pundit introduced into Baghdad a treatise on astronomy, a Siddhanta
(the Arabs called it sind hind) and a treatise on mathematics. By order
of Al-Mansur
these books were translated into Arabic by Muhammad
Ibn Ibrahim
al-Fazari, between 796 and 806. The famous
Arab mathematician, Al-Khwarizmi
(780-850) went through this translation into which the digit zero had been
introduced. He found that with the nine Indian figures, 1-9, and the zero
sign, any number could be written. Calling these the ‘Indian’ numerals,
Al-Khwarizmi
pronounced them the most satisfactory, and advocated their general adoption.
Philip K. Hitti writes:
Al-Khwarizmi,
writing in the first half of the ninth century, was the exponent of the
use of numerals, including the zero, in preference to letters. These numerals
he called Hindi, indicating their Indian origin. His work on the Hindu
method of calculation was translated into Latin by Adelard of Bath in the
twelfth century and as De numero indico has survived, whereas the
Arabic original has been lost.7
In ancient times, Roman numerals were
in general use in Europe. In this system, letters are used to express numbers,
a method adopted by the Greeks and some other ancient nations, and later
by the Romans, who used the seven letters – M.D.C.L. X.V.I. – in various
combinations. For instance the figure 88 would be written as LXXXVIII.
This was a cumbersome method and made calculation extremely difficult.
The Europeans, however, regarded the Roman numerals as holy – a gift from
the gods. As a result, they failed to revise their thinking in this matter.
Regarding non-holy numerals as holy was the reason they failed to make
any progress in science and mathematics for several hundred years. It was
the Islamic revolution which for the first time dispelled the aura of sanctity
surrounding the numeral and ushered in the era of scientific progress in
Europe.
Leonardo of Pisa was the most distinguished
mathematician of the Middle Ages. He helped introduce into mathematics
the Hindu-Arabic numerals and the number sequence that bears his name.
Little is known about Leonardo’s life
beyond the few facts given in his mathematical writings. It is probable
that he was born in Pisa, Italy. During Leonardo’s boyhood, his father,
Guglielmo, a Pisan merchant, was appointed consul, or chief magistrate,
over the community of Pisan merchants in the North African port of Bugia
(now Bejara, Algeria). Leonardo soon joined him. With a view to future
usefulness the father sent his son to study calculation with an Arab master.
Leonardo later described his enjoyment in learning the art of the nine
Indian figures. Leonardo also travelled to Egypt, Syria, Greece, and Sicily,
etc., where he studied different numerical systems and methods of calculation
but never found one as satisfactory as the Arabic numerals.
When Leonardo’s Liber abaci first
appeared, Arabic numerals were known to only a few European intellectuals
through translation of the writings of the ninth century Arab mathematician
and astronomer Al-Khwarizmi.
Leonardo began his explanation of the notation by observing: ‘The nine
Arabic figures are; 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1. With these nine figures and with
the sign 0… any number may be written, as is demonstrated below.’ The first
seven chapters dealt with the notation, explaining the principle of place
value, by which the position of a figure determines whether it is a unit,
ten, hundred and so forth, and demonstrating the use of the numerals in
arithmetical operations. The techniques were then applied to such practical
commercial problems as profit margin, barter, money changing, conversion
of weights, partnerships, and interest.
The Liber abaci, which was
widely copied and imitated, drew the attention of the Holy Roman Emperor,
Frederick II, who was a patron of science. In the year 1220, Leonardo was
invited to appear before the Emperor at Pisa, and there he propounded a
series of problems, three of which Leonardo presented in his books. The
first two belonged to a favourite Arabic type. Wilfried Blunt writes:
And supposing the tide of Islam and not been stemmed?
Nothing so delayed the advance of science in the West as the clumsiness
of the Roman numerals. Had the Arabic numerals, which had reached Baghdad
from India towards the end of the eighth century, been soon afterwards
introduced into the adopted by western Europe as a whole, much of that
scientific progress which we associated with the Renaissance in Italy might
have been achieved several centuries earlier.8
For those who are interested in the origins
of the concept of zero in India, the Children’s Book Trust, New Delhi has
published a 22 page booklet in English entitled, ‘The Story of Zero,’ which
has been written for the general reader as well as for children by Dilip
M. Salwai.
Before this invention there existed
no simple method of representing large figures. According to one method,
certain words were fixed for particular figures like Sahasara for 1,000.
Aayota for 10,000, Laksha for 100,000, and Koti for 1,000,000. The invention
of zero revolutionised the science of mathematics, for now it became extremely
easy to denote large figures.
Brahma Gupta (598-660), who was born
in Multan, was the first notable person to work out a method of using the
zero. However his method had some shortcomings. Later on Bhaskar (1114-1185),
who was born in Bijapur, wrote a book in Sanskrit called Lailawati,
in which he described the zero concept in simpler and more understandable
terms.
R. K. Murthi, in his review of this
book, writes:
The writer of Lailawati tells us that
‘the Indian numbers first entered Spain, then Italy, France, England and
Germany… Indian numbers were accepted completely… Their adoption turned
out to be the turning point in the history of mathematics and science.10
It is true that the concept of zero
originated in India, but it is not true that it reached the western world
directly from India: it was through the Arabs that it reached the West.
That is why the West calls these numerals Arabic rather than Indian. The
Encyclopaedia Britannica says:
Arabic numerals – the numbers, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
8, 9 they may have originated in India, but were introduced to the western
world from Arabia.11
The Encyclopaedia tells us, moreover,
that these numbers became known to western intellectuals in the ninth century
through the writings of the Arab mathematician, Al-Khwarizmi,
whose explanations of numbers in Arabic reached Europe through Latin translations.12
Bertrand Russell writes:
About 830,
Muhammad
Ibn Musa
Al-Khwarizmi,
a translator of mathematical and astronomical books from the Sanskrit,
published a book which was translated into Latin in the twelfth century,
under the title Algorimi de numero Indrum. It was from this book
that the west first learnt of what we call ‘Arabic’ numerals, which ought
to be called ‘Indian’. The same author wrote a book on algebra which was
used in the West as a text-book until the sixteenth century.13
In spite of the concept of zero having
originated in India, for several hundred years it received no recognition
in India itself. It came to be generally known in India only when first
the Arabs and then the West adopted it. The Encyclopaedia Britannica says:
The invention, probably by the Hindus, of the digit zero,
has been described as one of the greatest in the history of mathematics.
Hindu literature gives evidence that the zero may have been known before
the birth of Christ, but no inscription has been found with such a symbol
before the ninth century.14
It is true then that the concept of zero
had first formed in the mind of an Indian. But at that period in history,
India was dominated wholly by polytheism and superstition. Everything was
shrouded in mystery and inventions were abhorred. That was why the concept
of zero did not receive general recognition in ancient India. It was reduced
to a mere discovery of an individual, and thus failed to win general approval.
The seed of India, neglected at home, did, however, fall on fertile soil
in Muslim Baghdad, where it flowered into a tree and then, via Muslim Spain,
spread all over Europe.
Yet, without Islam having first put
an end to the concepts of polytheism and superstition, the concept of zero
– like so many other innovative ideas – could not have been universally
welcomed.
Agriculture
The river was one of those phenomena
of nature held to possess divine attributes. People believed that therein
dwelt a mysterious spirit which caused the water to move and made it useful
or harmful.15
The river Skamandros in ancient Greece
evidently was so personified, according to Aeshines, a fourth century B.C.
Greek orator. Girls bathed in it before marrying and used to say: ‘Skamandros,
accept my virginity.’ Magical rites in which water serves as a substitute
for semen or the fertility of men were numerous.16
Because rivers were held to be sacred
in ancient times (even to this day, some are still held sacred) people
began to worship them and offer sacrifices to them. It was this concept
of holiness that hindered man in his conquest of nature. People saw rivers
in the form of deities rather than in the form of physical objects to be
exploited by common methods. That is why the use of river water in agriculture
remained limited in antiquity. It is astonishing that the history of irrigation
had its beginnings in relatively modern times.
With the onset of the Islamic revolution
based on monotheism, it was revealed to man that the river was a creature
and not a creator, it was a servant and not the Lord. Only then was it
possible for man to give thought to finding ways and means to exploit rivers
on a large scale. That is why we come across the fact in history books
that there is no precedent in any nation to the large-scale irrigation
system developed by the Spanish Muslims.
The Spanish Muslims developed agriculture
to such an extent that it became a regular science. They studied trees
and carried out research on the properties of soil. Vast expanses of land
which had hitherto been lying infertile were then converted into orchards
and lush green fields. It was a virtual green revolution. Philip K. Hitti
writes:
They dug canals, cultivated grapes and introduced among
other plants and fruits, rice, apricots, peaches, pomegranates, oranges,
sugarcane, cotton and saffron. The south-eastern plains of the peninsula,
especially favoured by climate and soil, developed important centres of
rural and urban activity. Here wheat and other grains as well as olives
and sundry fruits were raised by a peasantry who worked the soil on shares
with the owners.
The agricultural development was one of the glories of
Muslim Spain and one of the Arab’s lasting gifts to the land, for Spanish
gardens have preserved to his day a ‘Moorish’ imprint. One of the best-known
gardens is the Generalife (from Al-Jannat al-arif the inspector’s
paradise), a Nasrid monument of the late thirteenth century whose villa
was one of the outlying buildings of the Alhambra. This garden, proverbial
for its extensive shade, falling waters and soft breeze, was terraced in
the form of an amphitheatre and irrigated by streams which, after forming
numerous cascades, lost themselves among the flowers, shrubs and trees
represented today by a few gigantic cypresses and myrtles.17
Charles Sinobose, a French author, writes
that the Spanish Arabs adopted the method of irrigation by canals. They
also dug large wells. Those who discovered new sources of water were given
sizeable rewards. In Spain, they dug broad canals, and then subdivided
them, with the result that the arid plain of Valenica was turned into a
vast trace of lush green. They established a permanent department of irrigation
which supplied all kinds of relevant information.
Describing Muslim Spain, Bertrand
Russell writes:
One of the best features of the Arab economy was agriculture,
particularly the skilful use of irrigation, which they learnt from living
where water is scarce. To this day Spanish agriculture profits by Arab
irrigation works.18
It is a fact that the Muslims who went
to Spain brought about a veritable green revolution. There they established
such irrigation systems for fields and orchards as were unprecedented in
history. However, strangely enough, Bertrand Russell attributes this to
their having lived in the past in desert areas, where water is scarce.
This explanation is meaningless. The true, underlying cause of this feat
is the monotheistic revolution which had overhauled the minds of Arabs.
Prior to this, people had seen rivers, springs, and the sea in the form
of gods. They held them to be objects of reverence rather than of conquest.
The Arabs with their changed mind saw these phenomena of nature in the
form of God’s creations. They saw them with the eye of conquering them
for exploitation. It was this mental revolution which enabled the Arabs
to perform their historic feats in the world of irrigation and agriculture.
How can we learn methods of irrigation
in the desert where water is scarce? Ignorant of the true source of this
Arab skill, Bertrand Russell linked it, quite irrelevantly, to their life
in the desert, sans water, instead of to their mental revolution which
had come about thanks to monotheism. The science of irrigation was developed
not because of their desert life but because of their monotheistic thinking.
Historiography
The starting point in Arnold Toynbee’s
philosophy of history is his contention that the proper unit of historical
study must be a civilisation, rather that the traditional unit, the nation
state.19
Both these concepts, however, hinge
on the same principle: that history should not focus solely on royal actions
and prerogatives throughout the ages, but should be a study of the sum
of all activities of all groups of human beings, whatever the framework,
political or civilizational, within which they interact. In the long history
of mankind, this approach, developed only during the last few centuries,
is relatively new. History, or historiography, is now equated with ‘man-story’
as opposed to the ‘King-story’ of the pre-modern era. ‘King-story’, made
up of elaborate descriptions of kings, along with copious details of the
palaces they occupied and the generals they commanded, had made no mention
of the common man, even if his achievements were marked by greatness. The
only man considered worthy of mention was the one whose head was adorned
by a crown. Ancient history thus amounted to a belittling of humanity in
general.
While real events relating to non-kings
were regarded as undeserving of any mention, even legendary tales and concocted
stories about the kings were preserved in writing as if they were great
realities. Take, for instance, the building of Alexandria, the renowned
coastal city named after its founder, Alexander the Great. Many strange
stories are associated with the foundation of this city. One of them concerns
sea genies who were said to have put obstacles in the path of building
when the work was first started. Alexander, so the story goes, decided
to see for himself what the genies were about. He gave orders for a large
box of wood and glass to be made, and when it was ready, he had himself
lowered in it to the bottom of the sea. There he drew pictures of the genies
and then back on land, he had metal statues cast to look exactly like the
dragons. These statues were then laid under the foundations of Alexandria.
When the sea genies came there, and saw that genies like themselves had
been killed and buried in the foundation, they became frightened and ran
away. The fact that this tale gained currency shows the credulous state
in which the whole world lived before the advent of Islam.
In old historical records, the most
striking omissions are the lives and influence of the great prophets of
the world. Today, people would find it very strange if a history of the
freedom struggle of India laid no stress on the role of Gandhiji, or if
a history of the erstwhile U.S.S.R. omitted Lenin altogether. But a far
strange history is one bereft of all mention of those pious souls, who
were the messengers of God. The sole exception to this rule of omission
is the Final Prophet, the Prophet Muhammad (sws). The reason for his prominent
inclusion in historical records is that, by setting in motion the Islamic
revolution, he was able to change exactly those factors – the undemocratic,
polytheistic and superstitious nature of society – which in the past had
been responsible for such astonishing lacunae in the writing of human history.
There can be no doubt that it was the Islamic revolution which made it
possible for historiography to proceed on scientific lines.
In known human history, Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406) is the only historian to have changed the pattern of historiography.
It was he who raised historiography from the level of mere King-story to
the level of genuine man-story. ‘Kingology’ was changed into sociology.
The truth is that the science known today as sociology is the gift of Ibn
Khaldun. He himself claimed that
he was the founder of sociology, and there is no reason to dispute his
claim.
Ibn Khaldun’s greatness was acknowledged in a similar vein by Robert Flint:
As a theorist on history he had no equal in any age or
country until Vico appeared, more than three hundred years later; Plato,
Aristotle and Augustine were not his peers’.20
It was indeed Ibn Khaldun who gave to Europe the modern science of history. And it was Islam
which bestowed this gift upon him. The Islamic revolution produced Ibn
Khaldun and Ibn Khaldun
produced the modern science of history. Professor Philip K. Hitti writes:
The fame of Ibn Khaldun
rests on his Muqaddamah (Introduction to his book on history). In it he
presented for the first time a theory of historical development which takes
due cognisance of the physical facts of climate and geography as well as
of the moral and spiritual forces at work. As one who endeavoured to formulate
laws of national progress and decay, Ibn Khaldun may be considered the discoverer – as he himself claimed – of the true
scope and nature of history, or at least the real founder of the science
of sociology. No Arab writer, indeed no European, had ever taken a view
of history at once so comprehensive and philosophic. By the consensus of
critical opinion Ibn Khaldun
was the greatest historical philosopher Islam produced, and one of the
greatest of all times.
In Book I of the Muqaddamah, Ibn Khaldun
sketches a general sociology; in Books II and III, a sociology of politics;
in Book IV a sociology of urban life; in Book V, a sociology of economics;
and in Book VI, a sociology of knowledge. The work is studded with brilliant
observations on historiography, economics, politics, and education. It
is held together by his central concepts of
‘asbiyah,
or social cohesion. Thus he laid the foundation of a science of history
which is not based just on the description of kings, but which is, in a
broader sense, based on the economics, politics, education, religion, ethics,
and culture of the whole nation.21
Historians have generally acknowledged
that the science of history remained undeveloped before the emergence of
Ibn Khaldun, and that he was
the first person to develop a philosophy of history. The Encyclopaedia
Britannica even goes so far as to say:
The question arises as to how it became
possible for Ibn Khaldun to
discover something which had remained undiscovered for centuries. The answer
is that other historians were born before the Islamic revolution, while
Ibn Khaldun was born after
it. On the basis of monotheism, Islam had brought about a revolution which
eliminated the difference between the king and the commoner. All human
beings, the offspring of Adam and Eve, were held to be equal. It was, uniquely,
this great revolution of equality that paved the way for an Ibn Khaldun – himself a product of this revolution – to lay the foundation of modern
history in which the central position was held not the ‘royal figures’
but by humanity itself.
One belief which had hampered the
development of the science or art of history was polytheism. The whole
period prior to Islam was pervaded by polytheistic beliefs which were supportive
of divine kingship.
The King has often stood as mediator between his people
and their god, or as the god’s representative.23
Some kings pretended to be incarnations
of God or even gods themselves, without feeling the need to rationalise
their claims. They did so in order that by the ‘divine right of kings’,
their absolute sovereignty should never be questioned. Even where monarchs
made no such claims, they were credited with divinity, because divinity
was universally associated with kings. Whenever the common people came
upon anything that was out of the ordinary, they regarded it as supernatural
and, if it was a person, they took him to be a god, or a manifestation
of a god. Naturally, this mentality was not discouraged by the kings.
The ancient rulers, on the contrary,
encouraged such superstitious notions so that people would continue to
regard them as superior beings. In known history, the Prophet Muhammad
(sws) was the first ruler who refuted such superstitious beliefs, showing
them to be without foundation. In this way, he lead mankind to the path
of enlightenment, eliminating the differences between men on an intellectual
plane. He held as baseless all those suppositions and superstitions which
had been responsible for creating and perpetuating the slave-master mentality.
Towards the end of the Prophet Muhammad’s
life, Mariyah Qibtiyah
bore him a beautiful and vivacious son in
Madinah.
The Prophet named him Ibrahim,
after the Prophet Abraham. Ibrahim
was just one had a half years old when, in the tenth year of Hijrah
(January 632 A.D.), he died. It so happened that the death of Ibrahim
coincided with a solar eclipse. From ancient times, one of the many
prevailing superstitions was that the solar and lunar eclipses were caused
by the death of some king or other important personage. They were meant
to show, they thought, that the heavens mourned the death of the exalted
in status. At that time, the Prophet Muhammad (sws) was the ruler of Arabia.
For this reason, certain of the Madinans
began attributing the eclipse to the death of the Prophet’s son. As
soon as the Prophet heard of this, he refuted it. There are several accounts
of this incident in the books of Hadith.
One of these is recorded as follows:
One day the Prophet came in great haste to the mosque.
At that time the sun was in eclipse. The Prophet began to say his prayers
and, by the time he had finished, the eclipse was over. Then, addressing
the congregation, he said that people imagined that the sun and moon went
into eclipse at the death of some important person, but that this was not
true. The eclipses of the sun and moon were not due to the death of any
human being. Both the sun and the moon were just two of God’s creations,
with which He did as He willed. He told them that when they saw an eclipse,
they should pray to God.24
When the whole of Arabia had come under
the domination of Islam, the Prophet (sws) made a farewell
H~ajj
pilgrimage in his last days, along with 125,000 companions. During
this pilgrimage he delivered a historic sermon. This sermon was a declaration
of human rights: ‘Hear, O people. All human beings are born of a man and
a woman. All the apparent differences are only for the sake of introduction
and identification. The most worthy before God is the one who is the most
God-fearing. No Arab has any superiority over a non-Arab and vice versa.
No black has any superiority over a white and vice versa. Taqwa (piety) is the only thing which will determine one’s superiority over
others.’ To this the Prophet (sws) added: ‘All things of the period of
ignorance before Islam are trampled down by my steps.’ For the first time
in ancient history, all sorts of inequality and discrimination were almost
entirely eliminated.
Only then did a new civilisation come
into being in which all human beings were equal. Speaking of the successors
of the Prophet, Abu Bakr and
‘Umar, Mahatma Gandhi noted that ‘though they were masters of a
vast empire, they lived the life of paupers.’
This revolution was so powerful that
even at a later period, when the rot had taken root in the institutions
of the government, and the Caliphs had been replaced by ‘emperors,’ the
pressure of Islamic civilisation was so great that none of these ‘emperors’
could live in the style of the ancient monarchs. In Islamic history there
are many such instances. The following incident, which took place during
powerful ruler of Muslim Spain, is an apt illustration.
This sultan had a palace built for
himself called Al-Zahrah, to the east of Cordova, which was of such
immensity that the word palace was not adequate to describe it. This magnificent
residence came to be known as Al-Madinah
Al-Zahrah (the brilliant town). But, in spite of being so powerful
and living in such magnificence, the sultan did not regard himself as being
above the law. Before the Islamic revolution it was an accepted fact that
the king was superior to a common man. For instance, the Byzantine emperor,
Heraclius, a contemporary of the Prophet Muhammad (sws), in spite of being
a Christian: ‘had married his niece, Martina, thus offending the religious
scruples of many of his subjects, who viewed his second marriage as incestous.’25
It was known to the people that this marriage was illegal, yet there was
no public outcry. This was because Heraclius was a king and, therefore,
above any judgement by human standards. As a king, he had the right to
do as he pleased.
In ancient times, this extraordinary
concept of the greatness of kings was so firmly implanted as a matter of
superstitious belief that ordinary citizens had begun to consider their
monarchs to be innately superior creatures. The observance of special rites
and rituals by kings was aimed at reinforcing this way of thinking. The
kings had thus, in their respective empires, achieved a temporal greatness
which was on a parallel with God’s prerogative in the vastness of His universe.
It was but natural that historiography should come under the influence
of this concept of the ‘divine right of the kings’ so that, in practice,
it became a chronicle of the lives of royal families with scant reference
to the common man.
With the onset of the Islamic revolution
in Arabia and in the neighbouring countries, objects of nature like the
sun and the moon were dislodged from their divine pedestals. In like manner,
kings were removed from the seat of extraordinary greatness. Now a king
was just a human being like any other.
The influence of the Islamic revolution,
which ultimately reached Asia, Africa and many European countries, paved
the way for a new atmosphere on a universal scale. With the new way of
thinking, the old king-centred mentality gave way to a man-centred ethos.
The most eminent of the Mamluk
historians was Al-Maqrizi, a disciple
of Ibn Khaldun. It was through
him in the fifteenth century that Ibn Khaldun’s theories were introduced into Egypt. Later, other Muslims countries
came under their influence. Between 1860 and 1870 a complete rendering
of the Muqaddamah was published in French, thus introducing his
historical theories into Europe. These thoughts took root in the soil of
Europe, and gained great popularity. Vico and other western historians
developed this art, finally giving rise to the modern form of historiography.
(Courtesy: "Islam: Creator of the Modern
Age".)
|