THE

HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY

IN ISLAM

By

DR. T. J. DE BOER

Translated by

EDWARD R. JONES, B.D.

© ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY ONLINE, INC.
NEW YORK

TRANSLATOR'S PREFATORY NOTE.

 

This edition of Dr. De Boar's recent work is produced in the hope that it may prove interesting to not a few English readers, and especially that it may be of service to younger students commencing to study the subject which is dealt with in the following pages. The translator has aimed at nothing more than a faithful reproduction of the original. His best thanks are due to the accomplished author, for his kindness in revising the proof sheets of the version, as it passed through the Press.

E. R. J.

PREFACE.

 

The following is the first attempt which has been made, since the appearance of Munk's excellent sketch[1], to present in connected form a History of Philosophy in Islam. This work of mine may therefore be regarded as a fresh initiation, -.not a completion of such a task. I could not know of all that had been done by others, in the way of preliminary study in this field ; and when I did know of the existence of such material, it was not always accessible to me. As for manuscript assistance, it was only in exceptional cases that this was at my disposal.

Conforming to the conditions which I bad to meet, I have in the following account refrained from stating my authorities. But anything which I may have taken over, nearly word for word or without testing it, I have marked in foot-references. For the rest, I deeply regret that I cannot duly indicate at present how much I owe, as regards appreciation of the sources, to men like Dieterici, de Goeje, Goldziher, Houtsma, Aug. Müller, Munk, N?ldeke, Renan, Snouck Hurgronje, van Vloten, and many, many others.

Since the completion of this volume an interesting mo­nograph on Ibn Sina[2] has appeared, which farther extends its survey over the earlier history of Philosophy in Islam. It gives rise to no occasion, however, to alter substantially my conception of the subject.

For all bibliographical details I refer the reader to "die Orientalische Bibliographie", Brockelmann's "Geschichte der Arabischen Litteratur", and Ueberweg-Heinze's "Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie" II', p. 213 sqq. In the transcription of Arabic names I have been more heedful of tradition and German pronunciation, than of consistency. Be it noted only that z is to be pronounced as a soft s, and th like the corresponding English sound.[3] In the Index of Personal Names, accents signify length.

As far as possible I have confined myself to Islam. On that ground Ibn Gebirol and Maimonides have received only a passing notice, while other Jewish thinkers have been entirely omitted, although, philosophically considered, they belong to the Muslim school. This, however, entails no great loss, for much has been written already about the Jewish philosophers, whereas Muslim thinkers have hitherto been sadly neglected.

Groningen (Netherlands).

T. J. DE BOER.

 

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.

INTRODUCTION.

Page

1. The Theatre 1-6

4. Ancient Arabia ........ 1

2. The first Caliphs. Medina. The Shiites ......... 2

3. The Omayyads. Damascus, Basra and Kufa 3

4. The Abbasids. Bagdad........ 3

5. Minor States. Fall of the Caliphate .... 5

2. Oriental Wisdom 6-11

4. Semitic Speculation . 6

2. Persian Religion. Zrwanism .. 8

3. Indian Wisdom .... 8

3. Greek Science 11-30

1. The Syrians ...... 11

2. The Christian Churches .. 11

3. Edessa and Nisibis ...... 12

4. Harran ..... 13

5. Gondeshapur ..... 14

6. Syriac Translations ..... 14

7. Philosophy among the Syrians ..... 16

8. Arabic Translations ..... 17

9. The Philosophy of the Translators 19

10. Range of Tradition .... 21

11. Continuation of Neo-Platonism ... 22

12. The "Book of the Apple" ............. 24

13. The "Theology of Aristotle" ............. 25

14. Conception of Aristotle............ 27

15. Philosophy in Islam ............ 28

CHAPTER II. PHILOSOPHY AND ARAB KNOWLEDGE

1. Grammatical Science .. 31-35

1. The several Sciences ........ 31

2. The Arabic Language. The Koran 31

3. The Grammarians of Basra and Kufa ........ 32

4. Grammar influenced by Logic. Metrical Studies........ 33

5. Grammatical Science and Philosophy .... 35

2. Ethical Teaching ..... 36-41

1. Tradition and Individual Opinion (Sunna, Hadith, Ra'y) ……………………. 36

2. Analogy (Qiyas). Consensus of the Congregation (Idjma) ……………………37

3. Position and Contents of the Muslim Ethical System (al-Filth) ………………..38

4. Ethics and Politics ........ 40

3. Doctrinal Systems . 41-64

1. Christian Dogmatic ...... 41

2. The Kalam ........ 42

3. The Mutazilites and their Opponents ..... 43

4. Human and Divine Action ........ 44

5. The Being of God 46

6. Revelation and Reason ........ 48

7. Abu-l-Hudhail ........ 49

8. Nazism ........ 51

9. Djahiz ........ 53

10. Muammar and Abu Hashim ................ 54

11. Ashari ................ 55

12. The Atomistic Kalam ............... 57

13. Mysticism or Sufism................ 62

4. Literature and History ......... 65-61

1. Literature ...... 65

2. Abu-l-Atahia. Mutanabbi. Abu-l-Ala. Hariri 65

3. Annalistic. Historical Tradition ........ 67

4. Masudi and Muqaddasi ... 69

CHAPTER III. THE PYTHAGOREAN PHILOSOPHY

1. Natural Philosophy             72-80

1. The Sources ........ 72

2. Mathematical Studies ........ 73

3. Natural Science ........ 75

4. Medicine ........ 76

5. Razi ........ 77

6. The Dahrites ........ 80

2. The Faithful Brethren of Basra . 81-96

1. The Karmatites ....... 81

2. The Brethren and their Encyclopaedia . 82

3. Eclecticism ...... 84

4. Knowledge ....... 85

5. Mathematics ..... 87

6. Logic .......... 89

7. God and the World 90

8. The Human Soul... 92

9. Philosophy of Religion .......... 93

10. Ethics .......... 94

11. Influence of the Encyclopaedia . 95

CHAPTER IV. THE NEO-PLATONIC ARISTOTELIANS OF THE EAST

1. Kindi   95-106

1. His Life .. 97

2. Relation to Theology ......... 99

3. Mathematics 100

4. God; World; Soul 101

5. Doctrine of the Spirit (`aql) 402

6. Kindi as an Aristotelian .. 104

7. The School of Kindi ....... 105

2. Farabi ..... 106-128

1. The Logicians ...... 106

2. Farabi s Life ...... 107

3. Relation to Plato and Aristotle ...... 108

4. Farabi's Conception of Philosophy .. 110

5. His Logic ...... 111

6. His Metaphysics. Being. God 114

7. The Celestial World ...... 115

8. The Terrestrial World ...... 117

9. The Human Soul 118

10. The Spirit in Man .............. 419

11. Farabi's Ethics .............. 121

12. His Politics .............. 122

13. The Future Life .............. 123

14. General Survey of Farabi's System .............. 124

15. Effects of his Philosophy. Sidjistani .............. 126

3. Ibn Maskawaih ..... 128-131

1. His Position ...... 128

2. The Nature of the Soul 128

3. The Principles of his Ethics ...... 129

4. Ibn Sins (Avicenna) ... 131-148

1. His Life .... 131

2. His Work .... 132

3. Branches of Philosophy. Logic .... 134

4. Metaphysics and Physics .... 135

5. Anthropology and Psychology 139

6. The Reason... 141

7. Allegorical Representation of the

        Doctrine of the Reason .... 143

8. Esoteric Teaching 144

9. Ibn Sina's Time. Beruni .... 145

10. Behmenyar ........... 146

11. Survival of Ibn Sina's Influence........... 147

5. Ibn al-Haitham (Alhazen) ... 148-153

1. Scientific Movement turning Westward 148

2. Ibn al-Haitham's Life and Works .... 149

3. Perception and Judgment 150

4. Slender effect left by his Teaching 152

CHAPTER V. THE OUTCOME OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE EAST

 

1. Gazali ... 154-168

1. Dialectic and Mysticism 154

2. Gazali's Life ..... 155

3. Attitude towards his Time:

       Hostility to Aristotelianism . 158

4. The World as the Production of God's

        Free Creative Might..... 159

5. God and Divine Providence 162

6. Doctrine of the Resurrection .... 163

7. Gazali's Theology 164

8. Experience and Revelation 166

9. Estimate of Gazali's Position and Teaching 168

2. The Epitomists ..... .... 169-171

1. Position of Philosophy in the East,
              after Gazali's Time... 169

2. Philosophical Culture ... 170

CHAPTER VI. PHILOSOPHY IN THE WEST

 

1. Beginnings .. 172-175

1. The Age of the Omayyads ... 172

2. The Eleventh Century . 174

2. Ibn Baddja (Avempace) ..... 175-181

1. The Almoravids .. 175

2. Ibn Baddja's Life 176

3. The Character of his Works ...... 177

4. His Logic and Metaphysics 177

5. His Opinions regarding Soul and Spirit ...... 178

6. The Individual Man ...... 179

3. Ibn Tofail (Abubacer) ..... 181-187

1. The Almohads .... 181

2. Ibn Tofail's Life 182

3. "Hai ibn Yaqzan.. . .... 182

4. "Hai" and the Development of Humanity .... 184

5. "Hai's" Ethics ...... 185

4. Ibn Roshd (Averroes) ..... 187-199

1. His Life 187

2. Ibn Roshd and Aristotle ...... 188

3. Logic. Attainability of Truth ...... 189

4. The World and God ...... 191

5. Body and Spirit ...... 193

6. Spirit and Spirits ...... 194

7. Estimate of Ibn Roshd as a Thinker ..... 196

8. Summary of his Views on the Relations of Theology, Religion

and Philosophy to one another. Practical Philosophy . . 197

CHAPTER VII. CONCLUSION

 

1. Ibn Khaldun .... 200-208

1. The Conditions of his Time ..... 200

2. Ibn Khaldun's Life ..... 201

3. Philosophy and Worldly Experience 202

4. Philosophy of History. Historical Method ..... 204

5. The Subject of History ..... 205

6. Characterization ...... 206

2. The Arabs and Scholasticism 208-213

1. Political Situation. The Jews ..... 208

2. Palermo and Toledo..... 209

3. Parisian Averroism in the Thirteenth Century ..... 211

I. INTRODUCTION.

1. THE THEATRE.

1. In olden time the Arabian desert was, as it is at this day, the roaming-ground of independent Bedouin tribes. With free and healthy minds they contemplated their monotonous world, whose highest charm was the raid, and whose intellectual treasure was the tribal tradition. Neither the achievements of social labour, nor the accomplishments of elegant leisure were known to them. Only on the borders of the desert, in regularly constituted communities, which often had to suffer from the incursions of those Bedouins, a higher degree of civilization had been attained. This was the case in the South, where the ancient kingdom of the Queen of Sheba continued its existence in Christian times under Abyssinian or Persian overlordship. On the West lay Mecca and Medina (Yathrib), by an old caravan route; and Mecca in particular, with its market safe-guarded by a temple, was the centre of a brisk traffic. Lastly on the North, two semi-sovereign States had been formed under Arab princes: towards Persia, the kingdom of the Lakhmids in Hira; and towards Byzantium the dominion of the Gassanids in Syria. In speech and poetry, however, the unity of the Arab nation was set forth to some extent even before Mohammed's time. The poets were the `men of knowledge' for their people. Their incantations held good as oracles, first of all for their several tribes, but no doubt extending their influence often beyond their own particular sects.

2. Mohammed and his immediate successors, Abu Bekr, Omar, Othman and Ali (622-661) succeeded in inspiring the free sons of the desert, together with the more civi­lized inhabitants of the coast-lands, with enthusiasm for a joint enterprise. To this circumstance Islam owes its world ­position: for Allah showed himself great, and the world was quite small for those who surrendered themselves to him (Muslims). In a short time the whole of Persia was conquered, and the East-Roman empire lost its fairest pro­vinces, - Syria and Egypt.

Medina was the seat of the first Caliphs or represen­tatives of the prophet. Then Mohammed's brave son-in-law Ali, and Ali's sons, fell before Moawiya, the able governor of Syria. From that time dates the existence of the party of Ali (Shi`ites), which in the course of diverse vicissi­tudes, - now reduced to subjection, now in detached places attaining power, - lives on in history, until it finally incorporates itself with the Persian kingdom in definite opposition to Sunnite Islam.

In their struggle against the secular power the Shiites availed themselves of every possible weapon, - even of science. Very early there appears among them the sect of the Kaisanites, which ascribes to Ali and his heirs a su­perhuman secret lore, by the help of which the inner meaning of the Divine revelation first becomes clear, but which demands from its devotees not less faith in, and absolute obedience to, the possessor of such knowledge, than does the letter of the Koran. (Cf. III, 2 4 1).

3. After the victory of Moawiya, who made Damascus the capital of the Muslim empire, the importance of Medina lay mainly in the spiritual province. It had to content itself with fostering, partly under Jewish and Christian influences, a knowledge of the law and Tradition. In Damascus, on the other hand, the Omayyads (661-750) conducted the secular government. Under their rule the empire spread from the Atlantic to districts beyond the frontiers of India and Turkestan, and from the Indian Ocean to the Caucasus and the very walls of Constantinople. With this development, however, it bad reached its farthest extension.

Arabs now assumed everywhere the leading position. They formed a military aristocracy; and the most striking proof of their influence is the fact, that conquered nations with an old and superior civilization accepted the language of their conquerors. Arabic became the language of Church and State, of Poetry and Science. But while the higher offices in the State and the Army were administered by Arabs in preference, the care of the Arts and Sciences fell, first of all, to Non-Arabs and men of mixed blood. In Syria school-instruction was received from Christians. The chief seats of intellectual culture, however, were Basra and Kufa, in which Arabs and Persians, Muslims, Christians, Jews and Magians rubbed shoulders together. There, where trade and industry were thriving, the beginnings of secular science in Islam must be sought for, - beginnings them­selves due to Hellenistic-Christian and Persian influences.

4. The Omayyads were succeeded by the Abbasids  (750-1258). To obtain the sovereignty, the latter had granted concessions to the Persians, and had utilized religio-political movements. During the first century of their rule (i. e. up to about 860), though only during that period, the greatness of the empire continued to increase, or at least it held its own. In the year 762, Mansur, the second ruler of this house, founded Bagdad as the new capital, - a city which soon outshone Damascus in worldly splendour, and Basra and Kufa in intellectual illumination. Constantinople alone could be compared to it. Poets and scholars, particularly from the North-Eastern provinces, met together in Bagdad at the court of Mansur (754-775), of Harun (786-809), of Mamun (813-838), and others. Several of the Abbasids had a liking for secular culture, whether for its own sake or to adorn their court, and although they may often have failed to recognize the value of artists and learned men, these at any rate could appreciate the ma­terial benefits conferred upon them by their patrons.

From the time of Harun at least, there existed in Bagdad a library and a learned institute. Even under Mansur, but especially under Mamun and his successors, transla­tion of the scientific literature of the Greeks into the Arabic tongue went forward, largely through the agency of Syrians; and Abstracts and Commentaries bearing upon these works were also composed.

Just when this learned activity was at its highest, the glory of the empire began to decline. The old tribal feuds, which had never been at rest under the Omayyads, bad seemingly given place to a firmly-knit political unity; but other controversies, - theological and metaphysical wranglings, such as in like manner accompanied the decay of the East-Roman empire, - were prosecuted with ever­increasing bitterness. The service of the State, under an Eastern despotism, did not require men of brilliant parts. Promising abilities accordingly were often ruined in luxurious indulgence, or flung away upon sophistry and the show of learning. On the other hand, for the defence of the empire the Caliphs enlisted the sound and healthy vigour of nations who had not been so much softened by over ­civilization, - first the Iranian or Iranianized people of Khorasan, and then the Turks.

5. The decline of the empire became more and more evident. The power of the Turkish soldiery, uprisings of city mobs and of peasant labourers, Shi'ite and Ismaelite intrigues on all sides, and in addition the desire for inde­pendence shown by the distant provinces, - were either the causes or the symptoms of the downfall. Alongside of the Caliphs, who were reduced to the position of spiritual dignitaries, the Turks ruled as Mayors of the Palace; and all round, in the outlying regions of the empire, indepen­dent States were gradually formed, until an utterly astoun­ding body of minor States appeared. The most influential ruling houses, more or less independent, were the follow­ing: in the West, to say nothing of the Spanish Omay­yads (cf. VI, 1), the Aglabids of North Africa, the Tulunids and Fatimids of Egypt, and the Hamdanids of Syria and Mesopotamia; in the East, The Tahirids and Samanids, who were by slow degrees supplanted by the Turks. It is at the courts of these petty dynasties that the poets and scholars of the next period (the 10th and 11th centuries) are to be found. For a short time Haleb (Aleppo), the seat of the Hamdanids, and for a longer time Cairo, built by the Fatimids in the year 969, - have a better claim to be regarded as the home of intel­lectual endeavour than Bagdad itself. For another brief space lustre is shed on the East by the court of the Turk, Mahmud of Ghazna, who had become master of Khorasan in the year 999.

The founding of the Muslim Universities also falls within this period of petty States and Turkish administration. The first one was erected in Bagdad in the year 1065; and from that date the East has been in possession of Science, but only in the form of stereotyped republications. The teacher conveys the teaching which has been handed down to him by his teachers; and in any new book hardly a sentence will be found which does not appear in older books. Science was rescued from danger; but the learned men of Transoxiana, who, upon hearing of the establishment of the first Madrasah, appointed a solemn memorial service, as tradition tells, to be held in honour of departed science, have been shewn to be correct in their estimate.[4]

Then, - in the 13th century, - there came storming over the Eastern regions of Islam the resounding invasion of the Mongols, who swept away whatever the Turks had spared. No culture ever flourished there again, to develope from its own resources a new Art or to stimulate a revival of Science.

 

2. ORIENTAL WISDOM.

 

1. Prior to its contact with Hellenism, the Semitic mind had proceeded no farther in the path of Philosophy than the propounding of enigmas, and the utterance of apho­ristic wisdom. Detached observations of Nature, but espe­cially of the life and fate of Man, form the basis of such thinking; and where comprehension ceases, resignation to the almighty and inscrutable will of God comes in without difficulty. We have become familiar with this kind of wis­dom from the Old Testament; and that it was developed in like manner among the Arabs, is shewn to us by the Bible story of the Queen of Sheba, and by the figure of the wise Loqman in the Arab tradition.

By the side of this wisdom there was found everywhere the Magic of the sorcerer, - a knowledge which was authenticated by command over outward things. But it was only in the priestly circles of ancient Babylonia, - under what influences and to what extent we do not pre­cisely know, - that men rose to a more scientific consi­deration of the world. Their eyes were turned from the confusion of earthly existence to the order of the heavens. They were not like the Hebrews, who never got beyond the wondering stage[5], or who saw merely an emblem of their own posterity in the countless stars[6]; they resembled rather the Greeks who came to understand the Many and the Manifold in their sublunary forms, only after they had discovered the harmony of the All in the unity and steadiness of the movement of the heavens. The only draw­back was that much mythological by-play and astrological pretence was interwoven with what was good, as in fact was the case also in Hellenism. This Chaldaean wisdom, from the time of Alexander the Great, became pervaded, in Babylonia and Syria, with Hellenistic and later with Hellenistic-Christian ideas, or else was supplanted by them.

In the Syrian city of Harran only, up to the time of Islam, the old heathenism held its ground, little affected by Christian influences. (Cf. 1, 3, § 4).

2. Of more importance than any Semitic tradition, was the contribution made to Islam by Persian and Indian wisdom. We do not need to enter here upon the question as to whether Oriental wisdom was originally influenced by Greek philosophy, or Greek philosophy by Oriental wisdom. What Islam carried away directly from Persians and In­dians may be learned with tolerable certainty from Arabic sources, and to this we may confine ourselves.

Persia is the land of Dualism, and it is not improbable that its dualistic religious teaching exercised an influence upon theological controversy in Islam, either directly or through the Manichaeans and other Gnostic sects. But much greater, in worldly circles, was the influence wielded by that system which, according to tradition, came to be even publicly recognized, under the Sasanid Yezdegerd II (4389-457), viz. Zrwanism (Cf. III, 1, 4 6). In this system the dualistic view of the world was superseded by setting up endless Time, (zrwan, Arab. dahr) as the para­mount principle, and identifying it with Fate, the outer­most heavenly sphere or the movement of the heavens. This doctrine, pleasing to philosophic intellects, has secured, with or without the guise of Islam, a prominent place for itself in Persian literature and in the views of the people, up to our own day. By theologians, however, and no less by philosophers of the Idealistic schools, it was disavowed as Materialism, Atheism and so forth.

3. India was regarded as the true land of wisdom. In Arab writers we often come upon the view that there the birthplace of philosophy is to be found. By peaceful tra­ding, in which the agents between India and the West were principally Persians, and next as a result of the Muslim conquest, acquaintance with Indian wisdom spread far and wide. Much of it was translated under Mansur (754-775) and Harun (786-809), partly by means of the intervening step of Persian (Pahlawi) versions, and partly from the Sanskrit direct. Many a deliverance of ethical and political wisdom, in the dress of proverbs, was taken over from the fables and tales of India, such as the Tales of the Pan­tshatantra, translated from the Pahlawi by Ibn al-Moqaffa in Mansur's time, and others. It was, however, Indian Mathematics and Astrology, - the latter in combination with practical Medicine and Magic, - that mainly influenced the beginnings of secular wisdom in Islam. The Astrology of the Siddhanta of Brahmagupta, which was translated from the Sanskrit, under Mansur, by Fazari assisted by Indian scholars, was known even before Ptolemy's Almagest. A wide world, past and future, was thereby opened up. The high figures with which the Indians worked pro­duced a powerful, perplexing impression upon the sober Muslim annalists, just as, on the other hand, Arab mer­chants, who in India and China put the age of our created world at a few thousand years, exposed themselves to the utmost ridicule.

Nor did the logical and metaphysical speculations of the Indians remain unknown to the Muslims. These produced, however, much less effect on scientific development than did their Mathematics and Astrology. The investigations of the Indians, associated with their sacred books and wholly determined by a religious purpose, have certainly had a lasting influence upon Persian Sufism and Islamic Mysti­cism. But, - once for all, - Philosophy is a Greek con­ception, and we have no right, in deference to the taste of the day, to allot an undue amount of space in our description to the childish thoughts of pious Hindus. What has been advanced by these meditative penitents about the deceptive show of everything sensuous, may often possess a poetic charm, just as it agrees perhaps with those obser­vations on the evanescence of all that is earthly, which the East had access to in Neo-Pythagorean and Neo-Platonic sources; but it has contributed just as little of importance as these did, towards the explanation of phenomena or the awakening of the scientific spirit. Not the Indian imagination, but the Greek mind was needed to direct the reflective process to the knowledge of the Real. The beat example of this is furnished by Arabic Mathematics. In the opinion of those who know the subject best, almost the only thing Indian in it is the Arithmetic, while the Algebra and the Geometry are Greek, preponderatingly, if not exclusively. Hardly a single Indian penetrated to the notion of pure mathematics. Number, even in its highest form, remained always something concrete; and in Indian Philosophy knowledge in the main continued to be only a means. Deliverance from the evil of existence was the aim, and Philosophy a pathway to the life of blessedness. Hence the monotony of this wisdom, - concentrated, as it was, upon the essence of all things in its Oneness, - as contrasted with the many-branched science of the Hellenes, which strove to comprehend the operations of Nature and Mind on all sides.

Oriental wisdom, Astrology and Cosmology delivered over to Muslim thinkers material of many kinds, but the Form, - the formative principle, - came to them from the Greeks. In every case where it is not mere enumeration or chance concatenation that is taken in hand, but where an attempt is made to arrange the Manifold according to positive or logical points of view, we may conclude with all proba­bility that Greek influences have been at work.

3. GREEK SCIENCE.

1. Just as the commercial intercourse between India and China and Byzantium was conducted principally by the Persians, so in the remote West, as far even as France, the Syrians came forward as the agents of civilization. It was Syrians who brought wine, silk &c. to the West. But it was Syrians also who took Greek culture from Alexandria and Antioch, spreading it eastward and pro­pagating it in the schools of Edessa and Nisibis, Harran and Gondeshapur. Syria was the true neutral ground, where for centuries the two world-powers, the Roman and the Persian, came in contact with one another, either as friends or as foes. In such circumstances, the Christian Syrians played a part similar to the one which in later days fell to the share of the Jews.

2. The Muslim conquerors found the Christian church split up into three main divisions, - to say nothing of many sects. The Monophysite church, alongside of the Orthodox State-church, preponderated in Syria proper, and the Nestorian church in Persia. The difference between the doctrinal systems of these churches was perhaps not without importance for the development of Muslim Dogmatics. According to the teaching of the Monophysites, God and Man were united in one nature in Christ, whereas the Or­thodox, and in a still more pronounced manner the Nestorians, discriminated between a Divine nature and a human nature in him. Now nature means, above everything, energy or operative principle. The question, accordingly, which is at issue, is whether the Divine, and the human Willing and Acting are one and the same in Christ or different. The Monophysites, from speculative and religious motives, gave prominence to the Unity in Christ their God, at the expense of the human element : The Nestorians, on the other hand, emphasized, in contrast with the Divine element, all that is specially characteristic of human Being, Willing and Acting. The latter view, however, favoured by political circumstances and. conditions of culture, offers freer play to philosophical speculations on the world and on life. In point of fact the Nestorians did most for the cultivation of Greek Science.

Syriac was the language both of the Western and of the Eastern or Persian Church ; but Greek was also taught along with it in the Cloister Schools. Rasain and Kinnesrin must be mentioned as being centres of culture in the Western or Monophysite Church. Of more importance, at the outset at least, was the school of Edessa, inasmuch as the dialect of Edessa had risen to the position of the literary language; but in- the year 489 the school there was closed because of the Nestorian views held by its teachers. It was then re-opened in Nisibis, and, being patronized by the Sasanids on political grounds, it dissem­inated Nestorian belief and Greek knowledge throughout Persia.

Instruction in these schools had a pre-eminently Biblical and ecclesiastical character, and was arranged to meet the needs of the Church. However, physicians or coming stu­dents of medicine also took part in it. The circumstance that they frequently belonged to the ecclesiastical order does not do away with the distinction between theological study and the pursuit of secular knowledge. It is true that according to the Syro-Roman code, Teachers (learned Priests) and Physicians were entitled in common to exemption from taxation and to other privileges; but the very fact that priests were regarded as healers of the soul, while physi­cians had merely to patch up the body, seemed to justify the precedence accorded to the former. Medicine always remained a secular matter; and, by the regulations of the School of Nisibis (from the year 590), the Holy Scriptures were not to be read in the same room with books that dealt with worldly callings.

In medical circles the works of Hippocrates, Galen and Aristotle were highly prized; but in the cloisters Philo­sophy was understood to be first of all the contemplative life of the ascetic, and "the one thing needful" was the only thing cared for.

4. The Mesopotamian city of Harran, in the neighbour­hood of Edessa, takes a place of its own. In this city, especially when it began to flourish again after the Arab conquest, ancient Semitic paganism comes into association with mathematical and astronomical studies and Neo-Py­thagorean and Neo-Platonic speculation. The Harranaeans or Sabaeans, as they were called in the 9th  and 10th cen­turies, traced their mystic lore back to Hermes Trisme­gistus, Agathodaemon, Uranius and others. Numerous pseud-epigraphs of the later Hellenism were adopted by them in good faith, and some perhaps were forged in their own circle. A few of them became active as translators and learned authors, and many kept up a brisk scientific in­tercourse with Persian and Arab scholars from the 8th to the 10th century.

5. In Persia, at Gondeshapur, we find an Institution for philosophical and medical studies established by Khosrau Anosharwan (521-579). Its teachers were principally Nes­torian Christians; but Khosrau, who had an inclination for secular culture, extended his toleration to Monophysites as well as to Nestorians. At that time, just as was the case later at the court of the Caliphs, Christian Syrians were held in special honour as medical men.

Farther, in the year 529, seven philosophers of the Neo-­Platonic school, who had been driven away from Athens, found a place of refuge at the court of Khosrau. Their experiences there, however, may have resembled those of the French free-thinkers of the 18th century at the Russian court. At all events they longed to get home again; and the king was sufficiently liberal-minded and magnanimous to allow them to go, and in his treaty of peace with By­zantium of the year 549 to stipulate in their case for freedom of religious opinion. Their stay in the Persian kingdom was doubtless not wholly devoid of influence.

6. The period of Syriac translations of profane literature from the Greek extends perhaps from the 4th to the 8th century. In the 4th century collections of aphorisms were translated. The first translator, however, who makes his appearance avowing his name, is Probus, "Priest and phy­sician in Antioch" (19t half of the 5th century?). Possibly

he was merely an expounder of the logical writings of Aristotle, and of the Isagoge of Porphyry. Better known is Sergius of Rasain, = who died at the age of 70 or so, probably in Constantinople, about 536, - a Mesopotamian monk and physician, whose studies, which were probably pursued in Alexandria itself, took in the whole range of Alexandrian science, and whose translations not only embraced Theology, Morals and Mysticism, but even Physics, Medicine and Philosophy. Even after the Muslim conquest the learned activity of the Syrians continued. Jacob of Edessa (circa 640-708) translated Greek theological writings; but he occupied himself besides with Philosophy, and in answer to a question relative thereto he pronounced that it was lawful for Christian ecclesiastics to impart the higher in­struction to children of Muslim parents. There was thus a felt need of culture among the latter.

The translations of the Syrians, particularly of Sergius of Rasain, are generally faithful; but a more exact corres­pondence with the original is shewn in the case of Logic and Natural Science than in Ethical and Metaphysical works. Much that is obscure in these last has been misun­derstood or simply omitted, and much that is pagan has been replaced by Christian material. For instance, Peter, Paul and John would come upon the scene in room of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Destiny and the Gods were obliged to give place to the one God; and ideas like World, Eternity, Sin and the like were recast in a Christian mould. The Arabs, however, in subsequent times went to a much greater length with the process of adaptation to their lan­guage, culture and religion than the Syrians. This may perhaps be partly explained by the Muslim horror of everything heathen, but partly too by their greater faculty of adaptation.

7. Apart from a few mathematical, physical and medical writings, the Syrians interested themselves in two subjects, - the first consisting of moralizing collections of aphorisms, put together into a kind of history of Philosophy, and, generally, of mystical Pythagorean-Platonic wisdom. This is found principally in pseudepigraphs, which bear the names of Pythagoras, Socrates, Plutarch, Dionysius and others. The centre of interest is a Platonic doctrine of the Soul, sub­jected to a later Pythagorean, Neo-Platonic, or Christian form of treatment. In the Syrian cloisters Plato is even turned into an oriental monk, who built a cell for himself in the heart of the wilderness, far away from the dwellings of men, and after three years' silent brooding over a verse of the Bible was led to a recognition of the Tri-Unity of God.

A second subject of interest was added, in Aristotle's Logic. Among the Syrians, and for a longer period among the Arabs also, Aristotle was commonly known almost solely as a logician. This knowledge, just as in the early scholas­ticism of the West, extended to the Categories, the Her­meneutics, and the first Analytics as far as the Categorical Figures. They stood in need of the Logic in order to comprehend the writings of Greek ecclesiastical teachers, since these, at least in form, were influenced thereby. But as they did not possess it complete, as little did they possess it pure. They had it before them only in a Neo-Platonic redaction, as may be seen, for example, from the work of Paulus Persa, which was written in Syriac for Khosrau Anosharwan. In that work knowledge is placed above faith, and philosophy is defined as the process by which the soul becomes conscious of its own inner essence, in which, like a God as it were, it sees all things.

8. What the Arabs owe to the Syrians is expressed by this circumstance amongst others, - that Arab scholars held Syriac to be the oldest, or the real (natural) language. The Syrians, it is true, produced nothing original; but their activity as translators was of advantage to Arab-Persian science. It was Syrians almost without exception, who, from the 8th century to the 10th, rendered Greek works into Arabic, either from the older Syriac versions or from those which had been in part improved by them, and in part re-arranged, Even the Omayyad prince, Khalid ibn Yezid (died 704), who occupied himself with Alchemy under the guidance of a Christian monk, is said to have provided for transla­tions of works on Alchemy from Greek into Arabic. Pro­verbs, maxims, letters, wills, and in short whatever bore on the history of philosophy, were at a very early time collected and translated. But it was not till the reign of Mansur that a commencement was made with the transla­tion into Arabic - partly from Pahlawi versions - of those writings of the Greeks which deal with Natural Science, Medicine and Logic. Ibn al-Moqaffa, an adherent of Persian Dualism, took a leading part in this task, from whom later workers must have marked themselves off by their termi­nology. None of his philosophical translations have come down to us. Other material too, belonging to the 8th  cen­tury has gone a missing. The earliest specimen of this work of translation which we possess dates from the 9th century, the time of Mamun and his successors.

The translators of the 9th century were, for the most part, medical men; and Hippocrates and Galen were among the first to be translated after Ptolemy and Euclid. But let us confine ourselves to Philosophy, in the narrower sense. A translation of the Tim?us of Plato is said to have come from Yuhanna or Yakhya ibn Bitriq (in the beginning of the 9th century), as well as Aristotle's `Meteorology', the `Book of Animals', an epitome of the `Psychology', and the tract 'On the World'. To Abdalmasikh ibn Abdallah Naima al-Himsi (circa 835) is to be ascribed a rendering of the 'Sophistics' of Aristotle, in addition to the Commen­tary of John Philoponus upon the `Physics', as well as the so-called `Theology of Aristotle', - a paraphrased epitome of the Enneads of Plotinus. Qosta ibn Luqa al-Balabakki (circa 835) is said to have translated the Commentaries of 'Alexander of Aphrodisias and John Philoponus upon the `Physics' of Aristotle, and in part, Alexander's Commentary on the 'De generatione et corruptione', as well as the 'Pla­cita Philosophorum' of the Pseudo-Plutarch, and other works.

The most productive translators were Abu Zaid Honain ibn Ishaq (809 P-873), his son, Ishaq ibn Honain (t 910 or 911), and nephew Hobaish ibn al-Hasan. Seeing that they worked together, there is a good deal which is ascribed, now to the one and now to the other. Not a little material must have been prepared, under their oversight, by disciples and subordinates. Their activity extended over the whole range of the science of that day. Existing trans­lations were improved, and new ones added. The father preferred to work at versions of medical authors, but the son turned more to the rendering of philosophical material.

The work of the translators was still proceeding in the 10th century. Among those who especially distinguished themselves were Abu Bishr Matta ibn Yunus al-Qannai (t 940), Abu Zakarya Yakhya ibn Adi al-Mantiqi (t 974), Abu Ali Isa ibn Ishaq ibn Zura (t 1008), and finally, Abu-l-Khair al-Hasan ibn al-Khammar (born 942), a pupil of Yakhya ibn Adi's, of whose writings, besides transla­tions, commentaries, and so forth, a tract is mentioned, on the Harmony between Philosophy and Christianity.

From the time of Honain ibn Ishaq the activity of the translators was almost wholly confined to Aristotelian and Pseudo-Aristotelian writings, and to epitomes of them, to paraphrases of their contents and to commentaries upon them.

9. These translators are not to be regarded as specially great philosophers. Their work was seldom entered upon spontaneously, but almost always at the command of some Caliph or Vizir or other person of note. Outside of their own department of study, usually Medicine, they were chiefly interested in Wisdom, - that is, in pretty stories with a moral, in anecdotes, and in oracular sayings. The expressions which we merely bear with in intercourse, in narrative or on the stage, as being characteristic utterances with certain persons, were admired and collected by these worthy people for the sake of the wisdom contained in them, or perhaps even for no more than the rhetorical elegance of their form. As a rule, those men continued true to the Christian faith of their fathers. The traditional story of Ibn Djebril gives a good idea both of their way of thinking and of the liberal-mindedness of the Caliphs. When Mansur wanted to convert him to Islam, he is said to have replied: "In the faith of my fathers I will die: where they are, I wish also to be, whether in heaven or in hell". Whereupon the Caliph laughed, and dismissed him with a rich present.

Only a small portion has been saved -of the original writings of these men. A short dissertation by Qosta ibn Luqa on the distinction between Soul and Spirit (tvevµa, ruh), preserved in a Latin translation, has been frequently mentioned and made use of. According to it, the Spirit is a subtle material, which from its seat in the left ven­tricle of the heart animates the human frame and brings about its movements and perceptions. The finer and clearer this Spirit is, the more rationally the man thinks and acts : there is but one opinion upon this point. It is more diffi­cult, however, to predicate anything sure, and universally valid, of the Soul. The deliverances of the greatest philo­sophers occasionally differ, and occasionally contradict each other. In any case the Soul is incorporeal, for it adopts qualities, and, in fact, qualities of the most opposite nature at one and the same time. It is uncompounded and un­changeable, and it does not, like the Spirit, perish with the body. The Spirit only acts as an intermediary between the Soul and the Body, and it is in this way that it becomes a secondary cause of movement and perception.

The statement which has just been given regarding the Soul is found in many of the later writers. But by slow degrees, as the Aristotelian philosophy thrusts Platonic opinions more and more into the background, another pair of opposites come into full view. Physicians alone continue to speak of the importance of the `ruh' or Spirit of Life. Philosophers institute a comparison between Soul and Spirit or Reason (vovc, `aql). The Soul is now reduced to the domain of the perishable, and sometimes, in Gnostic fashion, even to the lower and evil realm of the desires. The rational Spirit, - as that which is highest, that which is imper­ishable in man - is exalted above the Soul. In this notice, however, we are anticipating history: let us return to our translators.

10. The most valuable portion of the legacy which the Greek mind bequeathed to us in art, poetry, and historical composition, was never accessible to the Orientals. It would even have been difficult for them to understand it, seeing that they lacked the due acquaintance with Greek life, and the relish for it. For them the history of Greece began with Alexander the Great, surrounded with the halo of legend; and the position which Aristotle held beside the greatest prince of ancient times must have assuredly con­duced to the acceptance of the Aristotelian philosophy at the Muslim court. Arab historians counted up the Greek princes, on to Cleopatra, and then the Roman Emperors; but a Thucydides, for example, was not known to them, even by name. Of Homer they had not picked up much more than the sentence, that "one only should be the ruler". They bad not the least idea of the great Greek dramatists and lyric poets. It was only through its Mathematics, Natural Science and Philosophy, that Greek antiquity could bring its influence to bear upon them. They had come to know something of the development of Greek Philosophy, from Plutarch, Porphyry and others, as well as from the writings of Aristotle and Galen. A good deal of legendary matter, however, was mingled with their information; and the account which passed in the East, of the doctrines of the Pre-Socratic philosophers can only be referred by  us to the pseudepigraphs which they consulted, or perhaps even to the opinions which had been developed in the East itself, and which they en­deavoured to support with the authority of old Greek sages. But still, in every case, our thoughts must turn first of all to some Greek original.

11. It may be affirmed generally that the Syro-Arabs took up the thread of philosophy, precisely where the last of the Greeks had let it fall, that is, with the Neo-Platonic explanation of Aristotle, along with whose philosophy the works of Plato were also read and expounded. Among the Harranaeans, and for a long time in several Muslim sects, it was Platonic or Pythagorean-Platonic studies which were prosecuted with most ardour, - with which much that was Stoic or Neo-Platonic was associated. Extraordinary interest was taken in the fate of Socrates, who had suf­fered a martyr's death in heathen Athens for his rational belief. The Platonic teaching regarding the Soul and Na­ture exercised great influence. The Pythian utterance: "Know thyself", - handed down as the motto of the Socratic wisdom, and interpreted in a Neo-Platonic sense, - was ascribed by the Muslims to Ali, Mohammed's son-in-law, or even put into the mouth of the Prophet himself. "He who knows himself, knows God his Lord thereby" : this was the text for Mystic speculations of all kinds.

In medical circles and at the worldly court, the works of Aristotle came more and more into favour, first of all of course the Logic and a few things from the Physical writings. The Logic - so they thought - was the only new thing the Stagyrite had discovered: in all the other sciences he agreed throughout with Pythagoras, Empedocles, Anaxagoras, Socrates and Plato. Accordingly Christian and Sabaean translators, and the circle influenced by them, drew their psychologico-ethical, political and metaphysical instruction without hesitation from the Pre-Aristotelian sages.

What bore the names of Empedocles, Pythagoras &c., was, naturally, spurious. Their wisdom is traced either to Hermes or to other wise men of the East. Thus Empedocles must have been a disciple of King David's, and afterwards of Loqman the Wise : Pythagoras must have sprung from the school of Solomon, - and so on. Writings which are cited in Arabic works as Socratic are, in so far as they are genuine, Platonic dialogues in which Socrates appears. Their quotations from Plato - not to speak of spurious writings -- have a more or less comprehensive range : they are taken from the Apology, Crito, the Sophistes, Phaedrus, the Republic, Phaedo, Tim?us and the Laws. That does not mean, however, that they possessed complete translations of all these works.

This much is certain, - that Aristotle did not reign as sole lord from the very outset. Plato, as they understood him, taught the Creation of the world, the Substantiality of the Spiritual, and the Immortality of the Soul. That teaching did no harm to the Faith. But Aristotle, with his doctrine of the Eternity of the World, and his less spiritualistic Psychology and Ethics, was regarded as dan­gerous. Muslim theologians of the 9th and 10th centuries, from various camps, wrote therefore against Aristotle. But circumstances altered. Philosophers arose by-and-by who rejected the Platonic doctrine of the One World-Soul, of which the souls of men are only transient parts, and sought grounds for their hope of immortality from Aristotle who attributed so great a significance to the Individual Substance.

12. The conception which was entertained of Aristotle in the period most remote, is best shown by the writings which were foisted upon him. Not only did they get his genuine works with Neo-Platonic interpretations attached to them, - not only was the treatise: "On the world" unhesitatingly acknowledged as Aristotelian, but he was also regarded as the author of many late-Greek produc­tions, in which a Pythagorising Platonism or Neo-Plato­nism, or even a barren Syncretism was quite frankly taught.

Let us take here as our first example "the Book of the Apple"[7], wherein Aristotle plays the same part as Socrates in the Phaedo of Plato. As his end draws near, the Phi­losopher is visited by some of his disciples who find him in a cheerful frame of mind. This leads them to request their departing Master to give them some instruction about the Essence and Immortality of the Soul. Thereupon he discourses somewhat as follows: - "The Essence of the Soul consists in knowing, - in fact, in Philosophy, which is the highest form of knowing. A perfect knowledge of the truth constitutes therefore the blessedness which after death awaits the soul which is devoted to knowing. And just as knowing is rewarded with a higher knowledge, - so the punishment for not-knowing consists in a deeper ignorance. And really, there is nothing in Heaven or Earth, after all, except knowing and not-knowing, and the recompence which these two severally bring with them. Farther, - virtue is not essentially different from knowing; nor does vice differ essentially from not-knowing. The relation of virtue to knowing, or of vice to not-knowing, is like that of water to ice: i. e. it is the same thing in a different form.

In knowing, - which is the divine essence of the Soul, - the Soul finds naturally its only true joy, and not in eating and drinking and sensual pleasure. For, sensual pleasure is a flame which merely warms for a short time; but the thinking Soul, - which longs for its deliverance from the murky world of the senses, - is a pure light that sheds a radiance far and wide. The Philosopher therefore is not afraid of death, but meets it gladly, when the Deity sum­mons him. The enjoyment, which his limited knowledge affords him here is a guarantee to him of the rapture which the unveiling of the great world of the Unknown will pro­cure him. Even already he knows something of this, for it is only through knowledge of the invisible, that the proper estimate of the sensible, on which be prides him­self, is at all possible. He who comes to know his own self in this life, possesses in that very knowledge of himself the assurance of comprehending all things with an eternal knowledge, - i. e. of being immortal."

13. In the second place the so-called "Theology of Aristotle" may be referred to. In it Plato is represented as the Ideal-Man, who gains a knowledge of all things by means of an intuitive thinking, and thus has no need of the logical resources of Aristotle. Indeed, the highest rea­lity - Absolute Being - is not apprehended by thinking, but only in an ecstatic Vision. "Often was I alone with my soul", says Aristotle-Plotinus, on this point. "Divested of the body, I entered as pure substance into my proper self, turning back from all that is external to what is within. I was pure knowing there, at once the knowing and the known. How astonished I was to behold beauty and splendour in my proper self, and to recognize that I was a part of the sublime Divine world, endowed even with creative life! In this assurance of self, I was lifted above the world of the senses, ay, even above the world of spirits, up to the Divine state, where I beheld a light so fair that no tongue can tell it, nor ear understand".

The soul forms the centre of the discussions in the `Theology' also. All true human science is science of the soul or knowledge of self, - knowledge of its essence, it is true, coming first, and next in order, though less com­plete, knowledge of the operations of that essence. In such knowledge, to which exceedingly few attain, the highest wisdom consists, which does not admit of being fully understood in the form of ideas, and which therefore the philosopher like a skilful artist and wise lawgiver re­presents, for us men, in ever beautiful figures in religious service. In this function precisely, the wise man comes for­ward as the potent, self sufficing magician, whose know­ledge lords it over the multitude, seeing that they remain always bound in the fetters of outward things, of presen­tations and desires.

The soul stands in the centre of the All. Above it are God and Intelligence, beneath it - Matter and Nature. Its coming from God through Intelligence into Matter, its presence in the body, its return on high - these are the three stadia in which its life and that of the world run their course. Matter and Nature, Sense-perception and Presentation here lose their significance almost entirely. All things exist by Intelligence (you;, `aql). Intelligence constitutes all things, and in Intelligence all things are One. The Soul too is Intelligence, but, so long as it stays in the body, it is Intelligence in hope, Intelligence in the form of longing. It longs for what is above, for the good and blessed stars, which spend their contemplative existence as sources of light, exalted above presentation and effort.

That then is the oriental Aristotle, as he was acknow­ledged by the earliest Peripatetics in Islam[8].

14. We need not wonder that the Easterns did not suc­ceed in reaching an unadulterated conception of the Aris­totelian philosophy. Our critical apparatus for discriminating between the genuine and the spurious was not in their possession. It must have proved even more difficult for them, to familiarize themselves with the world of Greek civilization, than for the Christian scholars of the Middle Ages, which had never entirely lost living touch with antiquity. In the East men remained dependent on Neo­Platonic redactions and interpretations. A part of the scien­tific system, to wit, the Politics of Aristotle, was a-wanting; and so, as a matter of course, the Laws or the Republic of Plato took its place. Only a few were aware of the differ­ence between the two.

Another determining motive deserves notice. In their Neo-Platonic sources even, the Muslims came upon a har­monizing exposition of the Greek philosophers, and they felt constrained to adopt it. The first adherents of Aristotle were bound to assume a polemical and apologetic attitude. In opposition to, or in conformity with, the voice of the Muslim community, they required a coherent philosophy, in which the One Truth must be found. The same rever­ence, which Mohammed in his day had paid to the sacred writings of the Jews and of the Christians, was shewn af­terwards by Muslim scholars towards the works of Greek philosophers; but these learned men exhibited greater fami­liarity with their models, and less originality. In their eyes the old philosophers were invested with an authority, to which it was their duty to submit. The earliest Muslim thinkers were so fully convinced of the superiority of Greek knowledge that they did not doubt that it had attained to the highest degree of certainty. The thought of making farther and independent investigations did not readily occur to an Oriental, who cannot imagine a man without a teacher as being anything else than a disciple of Satan. In accordance, therefore, with the precedent set by Hellen­istic philosophers, an attempt had to be made to demon­strate the existence of the harmony between Plato and Aris­totle, - and, in particular, to shelve tacitly those doctrines which gave offence, or to exhibit them in a sense which was not too decidedly contrary to Muslim Dogmatics. In order to humour the opponents of Aristotle or of Philo­sophy in general, prominence was given to wise and edifying sayings out of the philosopher's works, - both the genuine. and the spurious, - that so the way might be prepared for the reception of his scientific thoughts. To the initiated, however, the teaching of Aristotle, like that of other schools and sects, was set forth as a higher truth, to which the positive faith of the multitude and the more or less firmly established system of the theologians were merely preli­minary steps.