ETHICAL AND RELIGIOUS CLASSICS "OF EAST. AND WEST PROPHECY IN ISLAM old A Widen: ne: roe ween | ‘43. dibery: roe | PHILOSOPHY AND ORTHODOXY Arh Walp: rs YOET 1 aanEER oF 1179 Gage Ret: sate aac 2§ EAGAN PADTTNG I By "Alon Petter O st aster Boe ad ln Noy: 08 ARs F. RAHMAN ‘Boy Wale: aan nas T4OUOT part W Mageney Wels tx tten seo rast ow raRhEhts “sade te" AJ. Arbor: Tam MOLY BORA Penal Desi of Dotan 4H, Ameteng: moore irae Mat: an taoccar on rs ror Loot Rath G00 AS MAS D8 THE OLD TEETAGSET ‘Edcard Con: yonnmae wEOEEATIO RC. Zour: ra vescses of Te Act D.M, Lang: VES 20 gens op To GeoRSS TE Kite: conrven= FH Hird: x sooo, Ta PROPSET 0 TE CHRIST WG dcr: ma woven co xenin | Lib Childs ne nats op marae | D. M, Lang: ts vost oF SALAAR | GEORGE ALLEN & UNWIN LTDTHE DOCTRINE OF INTELLECT ‘The Mustim philosopher’ doctrine of prophecy, so fara its paycho- logieometaphyscal buses aze concerned, & founded upos Grce theories abou the soul and is power of eogaiton, The hf anes workof their doctrine ofthe propheterevelaton i thefainous doctrine of inelectul cognition obscurely mocted by Avistole in the third Dock of his De nina, but commentators, ‘of Aphrodisia, although, as we sbal seein the next chapter;—the~ Muslims incorporated into this. general framework, other elements Stoic and neo-Patonic, and, above all, ‘these fund in the fuid;-ealectie Helleniam of the carly centuicy of te Cisne ma te ‘moet impertan ical figures in Islam, who have cxglcty treated the question of prophecy and have baed it oa the cognitive nature ofthe human soul, ate al arab and Avicenna (Tb Sins). ‘Since, however, these two men show certain important Aifferences in ther treatment ofthe problem of the intellect (aie Spe ch ee thy oar ve om at hc dvr ‘materially, are none-theless important in themselves) snd, fureher, employ dlghtly diferent terminology, I propose-10 ‘describe their noete docetines separately 2 AL Rarabe ‘According to al Fir, dhe inal capacity, shared by all man beings an called the’ potential inet for actual intelectual cegton is not an immaterial subetance but sone Kind of power in mater ke theres ofthe lower soul So we ears thatthe poten {guest is ‘s Lind of oul ora arto a uly ofthe soul or ome Bing (ofthe Lid) buy, more cleanly, “the imac posesed by a ‘oman being, aturally cad fom his tery beginning ome Kind ‘of dbpositon or preparation (bay's) ia the mater “Ths potendalty or capacity is actualized fo men who actully begin to acqute a nowige of univenals o fms. The actunza. tio consi in the fact that the AniveTntligence which according‘to Mustim philosphers i the last and lowest of a series often Tntei- fences emanating fom God) sends out a light (an Aristotelian fetaphor repeated by all his commentator) which renders the mages of seauble things, sored up in man's memory, abstract and thus transforms them into intelligible: or wnivenale. Al-Parbt Says explcly thatthe forms which come to exit inthe fntellect oF rather Which the intellect becomes arise by absraction from the Sensible objecs Le. they, as such, do not How from the Active Intelligence whove function & to render both the sensbles and the potential human intellect Tuminour.* The manner in which the Potential intellect receives and becomes actual inteligiber ie dex {sibed by al-Firaht by the analogy ofa pice of wax which recives forms ot by being imprinted on its surface but by pervading it. totality so that the wax & burned into an image as eg. of 2 hone ‘When th potential intllerdhus becomes one with the abstracted inteligiles and becomes actoal, declares al-Farabi, ie and these inelgiles become an actual exetent in the world, a new part of the ineligible faritare of realty: this he calls the ‘actual intellect. Beloce the potential intellect and the potential intelligible. became actual, thelr existzce was in matte not separate, but once acral aed, they take on a new career, assume a new ontological status sa ceparate ently.” Andeince, he angus, every ineligible thing can becontemplated by the actual intllec by receiving ts form and since the actual inlet i elf now an intelligible thing, it can therefore now ive When thus our intellect becomes both saoteligible and seiFintelecive, becomes a form of form, it becomes in alFaeabts * terminology, ‘acquired intellect’ (‘aql‘mustafid)* This view of the ‘og! muafad enables a-Fazabt to go on to compare it with the ‘Active Eatelligenc, since both are Norm of fora’—self intellective ‘and selPinteligile; aly, eins, chat the intelligible: contained {a them are in an iovere onde” and that the Active Ineligence is higher in raak than the muted, being sbuolucy separate! and containing intelgbls in a simple way, aot asa plurality ‘Before going any further, it worth while noting thatthe doctrine that once the inteligibler have been sbriracted fom the mater, they begin to have a new career of cheir own os separate and im Inatecal ene is mot Aristotle's or Alesander's doctrine, and this ‘eauly set problem for the hirorian of philosophy. According to Alexander (De dn, p. 85, 253], when the intligibles have been : ‘we DocTaiNe o¥ INTELLECT 13 beracted from matter by the potential intellect, they reach a stage of has (Ze) where they lie in a dormant state. The intellect ft habit can then contemplate these intelligibles which are now no Toager ia matter but are in a dormant sate in the mind ise When it actully contemplates them it becomes intlect iz atv and at thisstage can aio know fuel, not qua intllecs but qua intligible.* Bt Alexander says quite decidedly that these inteligibler—whether {hey are of material things or of mathematical objects—even when sbitracted, ae desuuctbic for they have no ral being except ix individual destructible object: there i therefore no question of new, separate career for them. Further, he seems undecided whether tour intellect can know the Active Intellect or not. Somesimes he says ‘har the human intellect x Aabity, when it become operative and in action does contemplate the separate Tntellgibles and becomes ‘one with them.** But again we hear thatthe intellect in us which oncemplates the Eternal Inlet comes into us fom ouside and not a pare of our mind. It flows that our soul is completely destructible The pseudo-Alevander, on the other hand, while ‘Giron thac the iteligibles abstracted fiom matter ae desta {bint declare unequivocally that iti the human mind oF our mind which ean contemplate God and that by doing #0 it attains {fe utmoee perfection and bli, gaining immorality, and alo be- ‘coming, ike Ged, selinullectve.* “The concusion, then, seems inescapable that although the basic framework of al-Farabts doctine i that of Alexander, there are other infusnces at work, Platonic and, more specifically, neo- Platonic, about the star of the human ind and that of the in- telgibles. The asximption, cleary ie that when tre buman intellect caiss is proper being, fe Becomes seltoperaive, pure activity (capt evpyee) and, correspondingly, these inelligbls, after the sbaracton fom matter, assume their proper statst as pure intali- ‘ples and se ouch are contemplated by the human itellect—both ‘hese intalligbles and the intellect being in an intermediary stage beeen the separate Active Intelligence and the abstracted material forms. Now this exacdy the teaching of the nco-latonic Simplicio Aecording to Simplicius, the potential intellect, when sctualized, returns through the intllect ie habit, co i proper activity (oouline bdpren) where it finds ts proper Myes t0 come template and ine> which ie absozbed. These Myo, however, are ‘ot pure vet But are intelligible ofthe phenomenal world and in& PROPRECY IN HizaM ‘order to become pure and individble intleet the human mind Ihas to nse one step i “According to al-Fersb, then, the ordinary thinking human mind reaches its perfection when it becomes ‘ay! mati at above der- caibed. “And, although the 'agh muted is lower in rank than the separate Active Inteligence which has prodaced i, i ie neverthe- Je pare activity in its own way no longer needing the fculies of the lower sal for its operations. Ie is, therefore, comparable from this point of view with the Active Ineeligence. Moreover, at thie stage, it is capable of contemplating the Active Intelligence ital ‘which had so far been only itr productive agent.” In afew smique Sa hp apres Ae falas bene en Of the “op! muta nd the perfect plulosopie, or the Tina (or ‘the Prophet) comes into exsteace.™" Only, even in these cates, certain part or degree of the Aedve Inteigence (called the Holy Ghost = Serena) Ge involved, a part remaining completely ‘beyond and tanscendent to mad.’ ALFarabis clasifcation of the intellect (excleding those above the Active Intelligence) is Sve fold 25 fllows:— mamas 12, Asien (in Sind) According to Avicenna, the poten) intellect, hough st comes into existence (and is, theretare, goraed) ne eocnething personal to euch individual, & nevertheles, an immaterial and’ immortal substance." Is actalization begins when man conceives the general ruths which are the Bass of all demonstration (Ariat? mpi, Anal. Potty I, 2,71 b 20 04) eg. that the whole i greater ‘than its part and that bwo things equal to the same thing are equal cach other—truths, thats which we do not aequie either by induc- Son or by deduction. This stage i called “al B°Umalake (tel. fnfabity). Whe, by meaas of thse primary taths, we acquire alo he secondary onts and when, onthe whole, our mind can operate By iself without any more help ftom the sensitive and imaginative ‘rms pocramr oF mvreuuect 5 faculiewe reach the stage of development called by Avicenna the “acral ntlet” (ntl, i act)". And when we do actualy operate with this newiy acquired power, our mind becomes ‘a Fi ae sudlag Gotll i actu bias) of "agl matgftd (nel. eepisias of siete). For Avicenna, however, as distinguished fom this respect holds Alecander’s view), the intelli ‘he hunt rational faculty estes are not proiced by abataction fiom mater but emanate dreedy fom the Active latligence, ot oaly_antesedest_manputation- being Iie fenddefation and: Ge ‘ofthe imaginative forms, Weread i the Sf, Pipe. Pi. VI, pe ge 5? ese boa ely ete te aad forms which aie in the representative faculty, andi iuminated by the light ofthe Active Intelligence whichis in ur and which we have seationed before, these imaginative (fenible) forms become sb fact fom matier and is tachment aad are imprinted in the rational culty min the sense that the imaginative fore thentelves ‘move fom the imaginative faculty into our rational faculty, nor in the sense thatthe ineligible shrouded in (material) atachinents— while itelf being abstract—produces iw like (in our mind), but only in the sense that its consideration prepares the soul 40 that the abstract form should emanate upon fe fom the Active Tnelic gence’ Avicenna draws 2 qualifed comparison betveen the ‘con Sderaio’ of the image and the conception of the premises ia ‘yllogim and between the emanation ofthe form spd the emergence of the contusion fom the syllogism. The ‘astracton” ofthe form, Aherefre, for Avicenna i any af de pares) ‘When’ the intellective soul becomes scWilly operant, it alo Snows fuel and it sulPlnowledge render i both fnteect and Inteligibles* But Aviceana ace the extreme. interpretation, tributed by him to Pompiyry, ofthe doctrine thatthe mind Bones ‘the Forms wich it receives, Hes truc thatthe subjee, in the act of lowledge, becomes its object in some sense ™ for all Inowiedge ‘consis inthe fact thatthe cognzer takes on alkenes o form of te object but it is absurd to say that the soul absolutely becomes the forms, becaste it took one frm and Became iy t could not take conanothe (SEP, De dn V8): “The sou! knows itself and this seltknowledge makes it intellect, fntelghble and (acrual) intellecdon, But ite aowledge of the6 PROFRECY 1 TEAM Sotligbes docs not make itso, For the sou 0 lng at sis in the boty, always only a potenal ater eventhough i becomes actual with regard to sme ineligible, The view that the soul elt becom ntligibl according to me, someting imponabe. Forif this beeswse i divards one form and takes on another and with the ie form tis oe thing and withthe second another thing, {en the St hing doesnot eli Become the second thing, but 5 Atstoyed aod only ie subratum or a part oft survives. Phe soul does wot become in Wis way then let us see ow olerwise this xn ‘appen So we say chat if something becomes someting ee then, wen i becomes that something, ioe either extent or nore ‘nen. Hes exon, then the sean thing to (which ie bosoms) ‘ester exient or not Ifthe second tng exis to, then there ae fo existent not one, Buti the second thing doe bot ex hen the Sin thing has become something non-eistent en not someting Che etene™and ts abmurd Bue ifthe int thing as become Sum-cusent, chen it hat not become something ee, but has xed tox and something ce ia come ino existence ‘Flow thall the au then, Some forms of things? The man who Ins minguided people torn thirregerd isthe one wo has composed tbe lagi for then. True, the forms of tings come to le fn the sol and decorate it andthe sul i ike a place™ for them, ‘Gans to the material atl Ifthe soul became the form of at cual tent then, since he frm il, being acreay, cance Sceep anything ele (e-any other form)». follows necesarly ‘hat he soul canoe scepe any othe form» But we do ia ct fez tha the sul aceeps another form diferent Hom the one already ‘cepted, fort would be srange Sndocd hi seo form does not {iGer Som the Sst one, for then acceptance aad on-acceptance woul be the same thing! have quoted this pasage in xe in onder to show what Avicenna, hhimsef saye his reasons are for denying that the soul abzoltsly becomes the intelligible and what his dectine precsely He says teplicly that the human sou, lng ari iin the bods, cannot become there forms absolutely because ft cannot seeive them all atonce and indivibly (pipuree), and, therefore, if became one ‘of the forms, it could not receive another form. If t were posible for the human oul t accept all the forme at one stoke thea ‘obviously its relation co the forms would qualitavely change. Sach rue Docrame op IKTELLECT y a posibliy exits, then, acording to Avicenna for the sol afer J bepuraton fom the body. But we see at Avicenna, not sopping ven ahs pout ors frtber and indeed dears tat here say be Shd in fact shee are human tou, namely the prophetic sols ‘Thich acopt the scparateintligiles either at once or almor Sronce sod that teeire da reladon to thee ineligible not dhetaine ar tht of sn ordinary intel to them,>-—SH/@ (Dee V9 ‘So long as the ordnen® (al‘ammiya, commen) Human soul renin the body, ite imposble for itt acompe the Active tele fence all at once. and when ft it aaid that a certain person is Sogaizant of inelgfbles (or forms), it only menas that he can Dreeat in his mind a cerain Orm when he wishes, and this mesas {hat whenever he wishes he cam have some sore of contact with the ‘Active Ineigencs, so that the intelligible will be releted (or {imprinted} in his soul emanating ftom she Active Tntligence. .» ‘Bat when the (rdinary) human soul quits the body and its accidenis, itis then posible for it to have a perfect contact (or union) with the Active Ineligence” Ths nig ee be eo acing fe bs nage aes Ls Shar ae SL ae SL ee Sienna oh pie act Seta omega cob on PEON aS rahi iauhente dome sey Sek Gir be apd etateet oc a EC RATireaes miletont co Sear Siesta Teme minis Page nuetna son oec fun fea sae Ale seater eres snes emt ecigee a sa hegtcans onda mas moe St ot {intellect woold “become” this form, Hence, for Avicenna our actual intellect i not intellect proper (mplor vt), for proper intellect clemally thinks and becomes its object, but is rather like a mitror fn which each form, emanating fom the Active Inteligence, is Imprinted or elected and then withdrawa as we turn our attention ‘o fomething ele. ** ae visits‘The intellectual Inowledge ofthe human sou, then, isnot some- ‘thing simple and undivided but piecemeal and discrete where not only i there an infinite multipiciy of propositions but even each Dropostion is composed of part, viz, subject and predicate. But ‘even jn our ordinary cognitive experience we are aware that this discrete mde of owed isnot the only mode but that there isa higher Tever at wich the-inelece i According to Avicenna, whenever we ext the concep in propeidon alto imple a dme-order. The come cepts making up a proposition are cain univer and Sch igi unten aninatn inne butions Seduce ies made p of ier conespe ener tine laine. Pars tc ode in wich te socepe se rsd in any given propason i ot unique and cuenta, but can be evened any Given proostion caa be tasted into an equivalent [ropesion ia which the subjeceprdicte onder may be reversed. see owes, tot fn the Fower of our min o etertin Al propodtians at oncr i lows thatthe propositions we are not dctlly entering cist notin scaly Eur a wate of abs oF sxondconder pony. Thee two sorthods ef kaowldge omespond repectvely to itll sean neler abi ‘Thee, however ayn Avicenna 2 rd mace of Knowidge veh identi wth er the two but regarded by ie 1 ther crear (Safe, De dm V, 6): An calc of tis ‘when you are sae a queaion about what you have known (Le Ina dimple manner) previoulyor wast you afe ging to know 2900 and w the answer presen itl tw you presenti. (Ihis knowledge ens inthe fat that) you area that you wil be able to answer the question o the base whet you areal know though tere ts yet no deta fn your knowledge On the contary, you oein to deal and order tis Eowicdge in your and when you begin to {Gre the nowerwbich proceeds om ta sarance that you know Sy {his simple avursae beng antecedent wo the (ensuing) deel and order.» Tis mode (of knowledge) ot something ordered and explicit is your thought busi the principle ofthis expt kxew- ledge, dng conjoined with an surance «If soineone yt ‘hae hr nly potetal Enowiedge bs pena very ae to acuity, tis lb for the man hasan atl ssurance wich 5 not wala to be elized throughs near or remote potently. Fae DocrRINE oF nerELLTCT 9 ‘The eistence of this surance means that its pesesor is sure ‘hati (Lethe knowledge) already sits... Since the actual cone ‘etn on the part of the man thatthe answer already lies in him tut point to something actually known," itis there already ow to him in this simple manner. Then he wishes to make it own in a diferent way. The strange thing is that the man who fnower the quertiony, when be begins to teach the other man the ‘eras of what hat suddenly occurred to him, himsel ears atthe me tine and aoquies lnowledge im the second sense. And that (Gimple) form begins to order and explicate itself in his ind simul encouly with the words, “One ofthese swo modes then isthe discursive knowledge which becomes actual only by an onder and a composition (of concept), Ile the second is the rimple knowledge which dows not have sco {ive concepts but is one aad from whet (euccesve) forms fw into this recipient (ce. the human soul). This isthe producer and pein- {ple of what we call peyehie (@iscursve) knowledge and belongs 19 ‘hat sbuolute intllectael power of the soul which resembles the Acive Intoligences. But as regards order and cxpictnes, they ‘elon tothe (rational) soul as such... As for how docs the rational sou have a principle which i not soal and which posesss « know Tedge which the soul does not poues is 2 queston deserving of thought and you mut find its azswer from youre” ven the ordinary egutve posed, then shows, azzordig to Avicenna, the Sibienct of ereatve agency whic bestows onthe ‘GaN aucutee tooleage when atualy thnks THE crete FRG OnE pe toucioncin oan loagheiroe parrots Tar We thal cua in the nwt chapter ie manner of castence in {Ent Now it ts cove ely wiih Avicenna cals mtd (aequbed doce t son cnanation ina of te otra Active {telignce wich al called tae Univesl Ivclese © But we dst is noe of te fc that Aces tciolgy rales Sifiag: ein Us sesso of muna hat eae desir Kdentadon of the onary humus (phenomenal) soul wid Fe tod wi the Ave Intcigtae Bate ao tes the tr el, ‘ill for thse forms wien Bow into se human soul fom ts Sipe creative poner saconsbey and cry: el maf i ‘ey ior for ch ows Gately fom he crave powerfon it amma intr oak oe ees) QS Pretec oey tit e pe icone na oka Se eg SEE Seer ee eabeerm ote popes ike i $e cle Sameera fel Bootes emia iat ae esa oe Seas he dass tn ene fo Se rig bores ee onder sone ee NOTES ¥, Rida fda (ed. M. Bouyges, Beirut, 1996), p22 2, AbMading catia (ed. F. Dieter, Leiden, 1898) p. 4, 1 Tie ‘et ie afl to the teaching of Alcander of Aphrodisia (Dein p. 0, peg). Ieee da ina reac, Fury abitom, serbated to Man (8 (Goap ity 52) he potensalintclee # spoken of (Pipe Abba leg, oy Fe Dieters, Leiden 1692, p. 76, ection 49) as something imomtierl and aguin ta another eects "Cyan above (Phe dbl Of; thi Weashe was alo published ip Hydaribid nder thease bet al Qa in 49 ALL) Seis decribed a simple material ‘abaaace, but share ae many points which rave grave doubters 10 ‘wheter the areibution of hae weston to al-Fartbt & genuine. The Case aguas their genuine auchonhip of al-FSribt cannot, ise tome, etmerly oa the ct that they uphold dsinedon between exence sod (citence fr this thes not pecalaly Avietaniaa and ladeed appears IB omer works of alParabr (eg Spat ch-Matna, Hyderabad, 1945 ABE). Amoag the chief point to be considered ae (ot perhape the ct {Sat they are tot mentioned in al-Qifs Ist Averors, eg De at, Camb, ‘ass 1958, p49 meations 2 De Ge ef Gor by alFaria, not mentioned bbyakOU) that ther doewine that the pave sateen san mater rubsance isin palpable cootradicion wich the teaching of both the ‘Mates andthe FV dgh. aio, are Sal sce a the newt chapter, he Becount given inthe former treats f the propic revelation and ee DPeslly fu tacing oa the appearance f the Ange! lize completes ‘with he account ofthe SU rather than with SL-FSrSh!s doctrine and the depron givea in de same wea (Pi Bh, p75) ofthe actual ‘tin ofthe pus intlece a forms reeted in amie ali wi he leaching of he Sif and the lds and is not even consent with SHiabrs teaching eoowhere, Tes w be noted that itis only in hee ‘bo tenties hata menton ofthe faalty of Walshe intersalseases ‘teu whereas the Mdina and the Sue? (Hydarabad, 1999, where (op. 4,26 ce percpton ofthe harm and the welu—the peculiar ‘incon of Whm-i atbuted to imagination not to Wadi) gare gue devoid of any such category. Averocs (Talift e-Taidhe ed Souyges,p. 545 10) sas att Avicenna alone who inuoduced 1h term Ta the ‘jae alin occas the term “apt 1 malas (ict i ses) of which there eno trac ether inthe Masina or i the fit-t. Te, of coune, pomible thats thee eaten were al-Fiedhis wor, Avicenna might Rave allowed dhem a, indeed, be does a large exert, ‘but he eliely ir that docuine are eqresed here which are not (©be found in al-FUrSbzcuewhere where they could have Deen expected, ad farther, shat they are inom with what he holds ekewhere 3 RATA p. 15365 ebMatina al Fil, p. 45, 12:! Wha fom the Aosivetntligence there comm ito the ratonal aly tis something ‘which is vented to the latter ae light ie rlted to (the facly ef) sgh {hen the seals, i (Dieter hat “an which Ihave fead at a owe tones which are Stored up i the memorave (mitakhayyis) fae, ‘Guerin che rational rly ar inelgibes' Te doce obese, ‘zs tat de univenal emerge fom sicemive sets inprenons ses Inte in memory as experiance’ i Aristotelian (Anal Pot, 1,1, 100 04) fsbo Alex Aphrod. De dr, p 3,5. the emergence, whieh needs the ght the Active neiget, © deed a a prt = ag 4 R fPAgl p. 19-14, Arsole (De, 429 b 30) Skene the poten TEuatize to a tblet; Alesander insow (Br dm. 85, 1 2@) that the potential inallec i not ie the tale elf but ke the capacity or di postion which Ie pescwes fr receiving writen words. Arias (De 4242 18) te the example of wax wih regard to the sexe feu it speas only ofthe impression which wast eclves inf sure eg ‘om a sgnesing. 5 RPTL p17, 98 65, id p 2, 1 (ao p18, 99g) I i ene that the gl maf fal "Firabi nothing but te developed snd Sal form ofthe human into (ve shall ee farther on tat for Avicenna ie prsely something die xt ffom the uaa intellect iis nt only not iented by him wih the ‘Zparate Active Intligence but indeed comes lta exitce belore i ten begins to contemplate that Intelligence: Prot, Gon thet (Arch Hist. Dat Ti de Mine dg, pa, 1) that al Fett came 0 ently the angered intelct withthe Active Intelignce because tae Arabic wandaton of Alexanders De_dnina had rendered the Greek Sipabr by the Arabic mustad is invalidated by what al-F&3Bhiswell sy, Farber, this translation f which the elered Hebrew verona ‘quot by I. Bran (is German) in his edton of Aland De dni ‘Svoraer to make comparion withthe Greek copinal, sen Aleanders voor wnt fr Gall. Beit) appears at masa (sce his Deny, the HEcbeow venion fr p. 9%, 5 quoted on po) The development ofthe human intelct may chme to have bom Gaiod musta by alassbi Simply becaae the marce of thie evelopenent ie outside the potential fnalloce by whichis acquired, (See hus Shah, p. 13, 4-5 whe she rue pocrame oF nvesiuzer 23 ecb afi is ed fr its acquision of actuality; io Alexandecs De diy p80; Sip. De dn, p-296, 27 where the words furrow Epa ae ue). 7 REARS p27, 8a 8, i, pt, 4-5, ALPS ay thatthe aogled tlc she neret Gi the GobtGSa thing io anblance tothe Arve Tntligenee {ip ag 0-25 «1B 3% 4-3, Bf dow not santo be sep Gc tie ange wasugh ts he prensa, he Bae operate Iseliseoes i ony the Acie Ttligenc, and wil cntinus oe Nesbit co mater (iy. 2424) Thus Whe he sys (Md, {5 -) hatte buen sl Becomes one of thn separate ‘Sth Mad on fant ubeaneer and (fag gy a1) Site eed etn dom nv tect he ly rs tr bodily gan fr Se operation, he probably mama oly tat fnttees chads wi fllny does aot Gopend or boily eater aod ‘batisca, ae dat, have 4B oe owt 9 RfPtSAgh p29, 6. 10, De dnp. 85, 152g. Tn the Mantis (p. 109) Alesander maintains dat ‘his inclee cannot know Sac, qu intllct but only gua italic, thee int nota pare fntlloc, Le abunacely im ace, whieh i were, 3 ‘would know cl ine and nothing ee. Ths why, he sas, the Active Tovaleet (whieh, asoring to him, Se God) knows fulf both gua Sse {elipile (wheria it resales the human inteloc) and qua ‘selec (wherein S differs ‘fom the Inman inter and ie Werle simple, wing only tae) 1, De Ae, p. 88, 10-26; P96, 450 12, iid p. 88, 5-10; p. gt, > 1, De Any p. 90, 19s. & pote pad rato (Le. the separate intel) vejensSfbepér tov, tng 8 broncos el Dabs (econ iv 9p oo ba, eon, cue, deep dcp. Svan Srdtpane te ta the renal § Sane el wean ait $d Bite pe yon wat 1 PrsAlesander, Mt. p 5, 4-7 15. tik, p 698, 165553. 704 1549% PROPHECY 28 ISLAM 16, The mott comprehensive single statement of Simple on the subject is De da (08. Haye), pp. 217, past, 34 Simplicas i tinction of the ntelect steel 1) she unparpated intelee? wh tompleely transcends the human sl and ie God; (2) the “celect partcipated in by the wu whieh she absolute and orginal rate ofthe tian intllectbeing indviible—and which is the higher sage to hich i esas afer fe cape fom the mated word; (3) the névon ‘ets: thls not the indivi intlect ut sof the order of the oyerh (Gor and is relation to te former ithe relation ofthe discaunive reson fo ‘the pure intulive reason; (4) the poteatial ieteoce wach mor probably, for Simpiis e imagination {g) the inelct i hobie wc Bee potential inte becomes by the action of (3) abore aad shen svallowed up ito it ALFIsabt, however, does sot share Simplicius ‘presupposition that th lumen ines ie generated by the snag ato the body of « pare smaller which i then senurered by dagrech even ‘Bough be speaks of te hierarchy of ineligible form ine Platonic term of descent (eplates) and anent (nungnp) Be fil gt p. a2 (abFarsbrs Gveala cameason ls seventies singly analoghes Fon Be (aera) who cel ap Aver Tale tah alg de alAkwanl, Cel, i99o, pe #12), ser expounding tie oct in a Farabie fahion (thst the ‘naturale fee abstracts felie ble fom mater and then abstracts iteligiles fom thee snd reaches bis highest development, continaes: “Thos, man (ue the natural paler soph) fs paseaes the imaginative then the (Et) inteligile frm and then flows ic up wit the seed (highet) nteligibe erm ‘Ts upward procs.» zeambies an scension: Buti in say Se smatier bund to bein opponte dirton it would be a decent That's ‘why the aatraist' contact ids naligiblar eprsemts 9 idle pon {el Simpl account of ) 20a necdr). 17. R JPEG p 2a, as Maan, p. 98 15 sq. Averoes tle us (De Ah, 499, 4h, 45, 502) at al-FiabY had not always maintained the Dossy of the Active Tataligence being Inown by the ua snd End tat in his commentary onthe Vchamarhn Ei ead argued shat Se tig wold eve the inion ats gerd thing would % necasary an, further that adopting ruc a poston dhe ad exprenty appened to Alexinders opinion Ie appears then Gat LFicibi bad developed the doctrine of op! matador taking posible {he contact ofthe human mind with te Avive Inelignce, 18, These toms are interchangeable, acorn to aL-Facsbt (Tobe! sisSead, Hyderabad, 1345 AR, pp. 40-43) but of this more in the ‘box chapeer, ‘rue pocreixg oF ixrettzct 25 1g, the ditaction made by Simplicius beeen the ‘unpertipated Ile” and the Sater pardipated ia by the woul in the Inet bat two noten For alFlrib's ditincen between the wo degre of the eve Tnteisce ee Sm dah, 1g AM, p 5 pee rn so, That the pot nlc someting that oes nto ctnse 22 EaLgal Gatm, sos pts soe wore voretooqs aes ‘Sen naps pe Sey Son om SENS concponiing cine ef E.G) Toe setae ea wile cdabenel rss of pogo tnt ters thing Yeural ad ungensned cei & ements ome EEE Soph barb diate Avttan docrine heron SO'Ene Sista sad acared the pret coo Sean Tete cnc ons tral mast atongh cove wih SXnivin “ALE a we ive sem hold hi nec 10 be a carapie atl pes, les scaled Coicey telly rat Tate BSc Thoms! bangs ia rom tl penal eer doer Snes srual perth wik‘he ath of he bay. Tn he sae eg Dieton rec oso! he mene efit (or underepe) Scba tnpericed sod ee sreanly need fener for ‘Skee eee hoc ate pany eelgirhve Seen speed Se them Sr wes tener bigeye at tow dere Sp wkch tnt wich hn dred ws ain? See abo i, PS soan aed the creping tet of te Spa p35 de (20 Tete So Spr eben dol tteor yeeros ne of “in iPr ha ree decte of be oe afer doth ‘Geet axel tht ofthe tes (rts). Toe doing, moweve it ‘SPST oar blog ve snarl Sor amino ene bar Gres Dogeow Enea bl ip) so Sa Connon mur ht oy al ef da Wie Sania ie boliy: Sa tbe ped and Pocch (ies Pay')ystine whores thes fe waned wiv and daze only af Sent nly howe oe We Spell Ge Cocgsoe Tete he bowen, scoring ra TEA wen isin fee expel inopoen of ae omar Avicenna’s | a for the individual survivial (Najat, p. 18% 14 59.) Sten dom Ueraahe ean pp ip I ie iy beans Eotreatatrmgeamt) 2 Aritule nowheré states what thee primary truths are, Some com feovlaton of Arno Inter Identiied thee fit premises with the Active neler (eee Themis, Dem, ps 103, 9254, 189, 1794) Avicenna6 PRopittey sw 1Laxt ‘cramples ofthe primary iteligibles sre identical withthe of aE (sin, p 4, t4-13) but whereas for Avicenna thee fw creoy fom the Active Intligence without any manipalon on our par fr a FFAG thee to are alevacted from mater le all other mligies, ‘only they are porto the thes sar the latter condition 22. Nejat,p. 160, qu1 (The reading for abme'gle -walpa i 10 be orecied according to my diene’: Poetlogy Oxi, 195%, Be 2, ‘Gh ns This sage conaponde to te roby mal abe of Alceander of Aphrodidas folowing whom Avicenna desctibe the new inelertal ‘Power asa treasure in which ineligible le bared or dormant. 24. Thi pe 165, 12 9, this conespond to the ves war? pyc of ‘Hiernder * = ‘2 This account apparently not shat of Aritote, Alesander or al ‘Fiabi, woud be quite at me in the nen-latonie elite ef eg Be accvunt fen above of Simplicius dove ef the incles according {o which the dye ave not relly abevacte fom matter bt ate ened om he potabalitlet by de gh lca ei which aot fered in matter and: whlch by doing » resurrects de pocensal elect fim air Ito Te proper being. Ths general procedure, which Simplicus deg By the tenn dyeipcfor to be awakened or 1 sunected, applied by im aso pion and i indeed, = “univeral Ghracteraagfeatire ofthe neo-Matneke doctrine ofall Low Tedge. We tur see that whereas a-Furia ie peripatetic in sepect the gues of intligble forms but ie neo-platonie as regards the sts Of toe forms, the revere the cae with Aviowna, “Hium thee aad ‘Salar other considerations ic emerges tha soot fee fom danger 0 Garaceie generally the individual Maslin Philopopbers and 12, Sg S88 SHEET 8 toe Aone wide Avon re eo Pavoni. 25, For Alexander, os we have see, the human mind when in faite ‘eoames an intl ron, by idensving ios with it cbject, Dut itnever becomes intr (ns). Simplicius, however eect (Dex, 290, 1234) Alemnder’s view and sae thatthe mind knows isel a ‘oa aot ar Being dental with i oor 6, Neji, p. 248, 2 So Alexander of Apbrodia (Den, p- gt, 20-21) Seder pb «1- noe pers (ante the qualisesion war) 27. The doctine thatthe knower besees the known objec a the sense ‘War ie becomes ike (posed) Se uiveral Greek doctine of cogiion ‘THE poctame oF INTELLECT 2 attr Asinode. But this admits of varying degrees. Thus Alesander (De ‘hey pe, 286, 16) dsinglsbes between (1) the sense in Which ‘Baier object becomes like another (a) hat fa which the teatient Secomes like the sesatum, (3) dnt in which the neloc: becomes ike the inclgibes whieh i abate and (4) hat in which the flee Becomes [ie the pers ineligible. Ofen, however, a simple "becoming is subse ‘uted for becoming ie and the highest frm ofthis becoming” in man i ‘wien he ows Gad, Tes, thereore, somewhat arbizary when P. Lous (Gare (La Pate Ralinut D-Animn, Pare, 1951, pp 1g) ines on 3 ‘indamentl snd carp diincton betceen the pepssre acre which Ins als a purely ‘peythological unity or breoming and the neo-Patonic wiles he femme az “ontlopal unity or becoming. Fo t war Artlle wi taught (Mt. XI, 7 ro72b, 14) that when Jacwing God, we temporally Live and shave Divine life 28, cf Aisote'sdeseiption of the woul ae place of forme (De Ae, TH, 29527) 25, For te reasons oulined hee, seems to me that Pée L. Garde Aoant ofthe subject (op. ct. pp. 158-7 not meray exis but out ‘fkarmony with Avioeana'r own teaching, Garde belaboured argument ‘esto etablish dat Avicenna deni the deny ofthe huzean woul wits the separate intligihc in the cognve act beeaue he id nor wh "0 ‘deny se oman soul with God in higher religious xpaience He aye (b: 155, 38) ‘Ces bie In theorie de In connaiennoe qu em jes. Oda ‘Buti! cone une union sygue ul sera! ttle fasion? Cee, Is {oe cher Aviceane In connaisance masque vara do meme mode que ‘bute connaisance intelectuele’ This ea seme ofthe general poly of {Garde inthe book to sow hat Aviceaa was asdous to Kep Bie fey ‘9 traditional Islam and indeed athe tied to integrate te ne wad ‘Sonal laze with hs ples. We sal say someting abou in Sesion IV of he and Ehapter for tisubjece cs clear that Avicenna Genie the identiy of the intllec and the ineligible only ia 9 Sr the soli in the boy ad even le inthe body sme sul may Bae, crordng to him, pri, total contac: withthe Acie Itligeace. The ‘Teton, he give atthe eran human sou, whe inthe body, mst ‘eit thee foems i sucenion and ploveal For Avian, thre cannot, of coume, be a tot mergeace of the huaman peronalty im God (or, more sey in the Active Inaligence) isc, bth for im and fr al eabt he Bumaa survival i inal ‘2nd povoral: And this shows thatthe docrne ofthe incellae’s Bcoing Te object or nts a plorphicl dccine of cognition aod noteo much = religces doctine. It however, imposible to keep a sharp ditneson ‘etwoen the two. IFP, Gardet were igh, why shoul Avicenna alow the8 PRopancy mn 19LAM easy ofthe fate apd te Snell in the ese of he Gf te denied sols andy indeol ofthe spurte Ietigenca? Soden owe hat he rene lp ‘Acta’ thought on he bj abd be soars te ase veloped sateaent of hs poston. Vex, we And te fara (Cale, togh Vol il, p. 217) the flowing! When (ater Godhead boag ‘elcid i tin te teen) in tach sane ato at ‘emia dint fom the (nowing) nivantfand we id (id, VoL, Br. autega) along (and enprobate) agua cea soe meer, Relig dentsy nthe pate Tatligencss Bat hese Ineligenet ‘tot Spparenty Bene ented wate Gok 49, The ordinary human soul ete obviously means the piosmphica Bind of which, as we shall see iter, the higher poate Feached ia 3 ‘ystic cntemplaon, bat which to be sadiely dsdnguished mn {he prope mind, i This way of representing the mater does not stem tobe peripatetic Jn'the next chapser we shall ty to show how f ould have sees. For the presen: it must sulise to quotes passage fom Plutarch (De Gos ‘Sie, XID): 78 pbs oly Grebe to nG ocuare deniuorce Sorh Déyeratn3 i Hope had, ol moet Node notre, dois tet rgd ‘itn, Gove & ee firme ri auenemar”deradyuar ot 8 Spl Srevoches te dards Sor) dalawe aporoyopetoone According w Bs usage intcect proper emai outage the phenomenal maa, although ome people inappropriately designate intellect what is noting tore ‘San a mletion na tlrr ia the oul of man {3% Se. Conviction isnot a purely peycologel occurence faa nd ‘but implies a relation and ar such premppose something of wich the subject's convinced, and this smebong fr this sexe sandy known, ‘An ilastration of this dactise could be wnt is known ae the “profeinal mafdence’ aequived trough the liming and eqerce ofa pera hl, ferart (eg. theart of medicine) onthe analogy of which the doceine ofthe Ince based and developed both by Aros and his commentators snd Avicenna Binet. Bat obviowly Avcena’s doce of confidence ‘ee rece ta sequel bu need fr » much ver tse. Tadeed, tis coaidene, according to hm, owes being not. the learning of aia such boo the peacace ofa Simic, ove Know ledge which grant ts 5 ‘peyehi dicunive inowiedge ‘Cerainty and asurase, ie should be noted, do aot by tenses constitute knowledge; te point that they cbsld not ose without the presence of some simple and creative frm of knowledge toma which we nocraie oF inrELtzeT Po ‘scientific’ Imowledge, The eaptasis on certainty and eon ‘non is of coun of Sole origin; fr the Stelescertaty was a hid of Enowdedge: Et 52 nari) to gorancr (does) earns dperérrerar S28 hej dort daow rary nal Bends (je exe) and (SCE, Esl, Tf, 1a8). Neverdclen, Aviceam's theory bas obviouly a very aifeen orientation from the Stoic one Or here certainty creative of lagwledge and not someting attached to iti tbe mind a6 a cterion ft wut, although the face that te Sse could cal thie mare mental seseule knowledge, Se sgniican. It seems that the Stale docuine of fering in relation t lnowleige played» progrenivy. increasing partin the early Chrtasan centuries st Sticum came to be leaded more End mare with Platonian (and seo-Pykagoreaniem).Ta one dierton 2 it the Cleronan-Stie docaine ofthe immediate cerainey of all cowie band on the noton of the natn or drt lige ‘Thsother recon, more clzely skin to Avious'stheoryofknowiedge, isthe doctrine ofthe Hermes According © this doce, the tsi Wich aspires to gute mat inilly pone a dupostion which the Hemesse duce by the terms Sojur and slows See especialy Hanae (68. W. Scot, Vol 1) Ubelias XI, Ui 208-2tb, where great Caaphass i lid on th indus and confidence as pro-vequce of all, Krowledge: x6 8¢Bévotecyranc «et ion ir fore OY ‘Accodiag to the same doctine, owever, is wiore or confidence Aeady implies some form of lnowledge: ony an doer can Nave tons (op. ce Hb, X, to), and ib. TV, 10b cis state of mind is described as fn eye ofthe mind (& nadia 2480)uds) or an insight which fuel leads ‘oiowledge (ef. Aupunine's enous Coceine: recast copnoramss). ‘The formal charseeice of Avicenna’ doerine are tercore Stoic: Hermetie The cme ofthe doctrine, however, wx that the dacanive lowledge is preceded by a simple, total creative knowledge is moore cxliidy a Plstnan doctrine. Soe below, cap. Il, noe 2 15: Soe Rf it abba in Tis Rail (Cairo, 1908), pe 188, 2. 4 op it (p. 122, 1) thie mei ao calle the Active Intelligence Sr Active Tatas Actually the acguced intl sping But te ‘Active Intelignce fn ofr a projec flfita ms. 35: SUIT (De Any Vy 6), Tt abo abundantly clear that in whatever ‘Asiznnian sense f the ‘aq! mastfad wee the term, iti radially tierent fom the ‘gl mutafed of Paci.PROPHECY 1 The Inlet Relation Avicenna’s doctrine of the intellect har introduced us even i ordinary cognitive experieace,* to a form of knowledge where the soul begins to receive knowlege from above instead of looking fo PRorurce st lation comes to a man when hie has reached this rank, Le. when ‘htermediary remains between him and the Active Inteligence. 4S the actual intellect lke mater and substratum unto the red intellect which isl slike mater and substratum unto the Sve Tntaligence* “This is all that & to be found in l-FSrabts extant treatises about ae prophetic revelation at che intellectual level. The three points [ode by him are (j) that the prophet, unlike an ordinary mind, endowed with an extraordinary intellectual git, (@Ftbat the 1 the “natural” world below ior rather, where th soul receives a aleve ower whereby it creates knowledge. This power or faculty which ‘creates knowledge inthe soul, is nota part of the soul fel, and ifwth the aid of divine power even f previous to its final Uinminaton, Segured wnt af kcnlge ee eb snopes trance and cant an fete a higher ond snplcrmodeetfordnary itllet pss, ang) that atthe eng of tis deveon~ Sie ce Wave the ital a decane Lewis neat e pgs me tn coc te Ase nse the soul? gence from which it receives the specifically prophetic faculty The prophet, then, is 2 person of extraordinary intellectual ex-| Avicenna has taken up in his doctrine the Férsbian basis, but oe et by oe cad © a med snd dered it ler sate oe lee Seer lace Laporte fe al ing [ee pro he rope mi Soest sed eel ‘ough buh LTMaM serosa Soc ie Gl abet he coe tthe popes fran set a Sere an todo acca an enna Hane xd as nie coop bo omeing Seton or ean spend by anny suite tink [ty Inpenng wi «ep. leo sow he pony See prophet sas esgn as ce ute [es en, bcm ac ona bd ‘Sr ws ay Sn ee Selon a ont ns ont geo vege by Peano? Ginny Smee en rr and ony hen oO lan th cine of he ean gf te mae ordinary person being tha che former is s-taughts— “The sau it i (oh good ate) oe ws ot dicted by ay ther tan Su syng On he coy, be at Scala al knows sod gues fy hal) Zod be fetta toed of eyo ode Lim in ny mater Tsk Cale cn of an wo endowed wih cpu et Site Spot a Wal pe ina he Ae lignes Ths sage ie rechod tny Ser say has At dered the stl inet ad then te argued ile For ity teainmen of te soped inate ars coma i he ‘ets lcligens faced ahs nen ho fete el on he traits ehtman vio ely the Ring wring oe ances hd ib about hs that ei ld tht oan coms to, ose kor, enna lo ta ele flr he poet Tmvalon, Le ting ara trot with consconly formulating a login in this mint and thereore witout ime. Since there sce ioscan devi oft owe he eae othe Mio poses i again, some Sn greater others in i [lowe tat thie may be a mean natrally so gifted that he ints al chings at a stoke or dares upBPwith an inuitve iimination, oS Avion pos ie Tue AcSre itelignce depots the forms of Sr cing ploe present and fina into the propbet’ soul and Avieenns adds hat hs depoion ist mere rational acceptance nthe part ofthe prophet but hes a retonal order of caure and ‘fic for a mere acceptance (as of chance bappeaings, 2s it were) {Bie ream of things wich are known only through ther exes des not pots cern and rationality= PROPHECY IN I8LAM Al ntellecsnal knowledge, according to Avicenna, comes fom the Active Ineligence and aot from perceptual experience, 38 we ‘rin the last chapter, But there ae ova ways in whieh the prophetic fntlecedifers Som ordinary philosophical or mystical cognition. {nthe fist place, the ordinary mind has first to exercise itelf on the data of pereepual experience. This because the human mind Uke s mirror or like sn eye. This mirror, in an ordinary person, fs rung, through it contact with the body, or thie eye is diseased. ‘In thi cave the teniive and cogitative process are necesary ‘which constitute the polishing of the mirror or the treatment of the tye Bat in the case of the prophetic mind this & not accesary ‘ince itis by nature pare and can therefore direely contact the ‘Aetive Intligance:— “(The prophetic intellect) possesses a strong capacity for this (ie: for contact with the Active Intelligence) as though it alzeady the recond capacity (ie. the intallect i hale), may, 38 Shoagh it knows everything from within itl. Ths degree i the [ighet point of this capacity and this state ofthe matenal intellect should be called Divine Intellect. eis of che Kind ofthe intellect, i hie except that it of a very high order and not all human Doings partake of (Nat p 187, 25) Secondly—and Avicenna is most insistent on this—the ordinary sind, even when it has risen to inellectual cognition, receives inelgibles only partially and one after another: one reflection has tbe removed ftom the mirror ia order to give place to the succeed- lng one. The prophets mind, on the other hand, receives all know ledge at once. ‘Why i thir diderence between the prophetic and the ordinary intellect? This sa major problem for Avinna’s higher or religious ‘epistemology, Duties also a problem to which he has left no clear stuswer. We should be geting nesrer to giving an answer, ie knew the rature ofthe Active latelligence and is precise relation to the ‘human mind, a question which Avicenna has rased in the SAE (Pips. Vi, 5, 6) but which he has made no dizect attempt to solve anywhere’ “This creative knowledge (Le. the active intellect) belongs to the absolutely poetic farly of te seal resembling the (external) prorusey 7 ‘Active Intelligences, whereas the explication and detail belong to {he aad as such s0 that one who doce not peses this latter Kind of Enowledge, docs not powesr peychic knowledge. As 1 how the ational soul has principle whizh is other than the soul itelf and ‘ehich has knowlege diferent from that of te sou isa dificult . oetdon and you must try 0 understand this by yoursell? In fact the doctine of the certainty and of the immediate and aazect quality of lative religious cognition demands that the ‘reatve principe of knowledge be in the mind as a part of it and ‘Asicenad indeed calle fim dhe above quotation asa part or facalty ofthe rational human soul. On the other band, the seruple, that if fede part ofthe soul thea all mea sbould equally participate ini, fd the sruple of absolutely identifying the Giver of Revelation —the ‘zectve principle of hamanisy—with man himely, tend towards Cemalidng and tanecendentalising it~ Both these tendencies Sper in the following pamage which i the mest detailed om this ‘bjet Avicenna bas let us “(tbe human soul, besides the material ineect and the intellect tn falta) has a third faculty (ws should be read for ow in the last lseofp. ran) which (ares) “informed” with the forms of actual tuniveral inteligibles and by which the previous wo faculties (Ge. the material intllece and dhe inal. Habit) were (wa co be comised) aeralized (alto be read for al'agl}: this is called the ‘Active Totllect. “The Active Intellect does not actually exist in the material in- telleet; hence it doce not exist inthe later exentally and therefore it comes to exist in it from (enother) which gives it and in which it cats coentilly and through which (akmately) che potendal (intellect) was actalized: tho called the Univeral Intellect, the Universal Soul or the World Soul. “Now since everything that exentlly receives a ficuley receives it in two ways, viz, indireety or creed, siailarly, (a should be ‘omited) reeepion (by the human soul) ftom the Univeral Active nteligence is im two modes: either direcly, a5 the reception of common notions and sefevideat truths or indirectly, as the Teception of secondary itellgbles through instrument and material, things lke external sense, sans commas, the estimative faculty, snd the imaginative deliberative feculty.Ey PROPHECY 18 tezast ee ele get ir ee rai Se edie tL ae a pee eeepc p anger SER PSEC Se meets oA Solna "Se are orgie ented ee Seca tet es de cod Sores Goer er es So Untacarceeer erie Sees coin ae ceca ame re eS accept (all knowledge) directl . Ree Ey ua ots wig ene oty ens urs a rae be Sis anes Sy eh tee see tg mon bt eerie i nee ee Sa ass et ore eh SSE SEE pin at wnt co eget Be at at Be bine ona a i therale overall tespece wach hesaecss anna Sr Ar es mas ne 1¢ prophet's soul) and the Angel is this extra) faculty or power** Site cian Aen ce Se ceases Sees ieee ce be Se po ‘not essentially but accidentally’.1* ania Inte vere ie Agi (censor / (on) ye me graeme emu acmere rian Def aceneiceas ribs Hn eee he Pg Senay alan ae eens React sree cele sce ae eat Sea emi erm Be et oe Dra a ahaha geraeepaceeans Zine ie cons Siem pees gree SAS: Sse ose paorurer 3 extra in ration to the exence, althongh not as an extra clement PU ividaal existent, a0 here, since not all human beings 1a ee cenative prophetic faculty but some rare exeeptios do, BG Mejarded as something . The trideace which they brought to prove this thesis was physical, eg. the covariation: in the ebb and flow of seacddes corresponding to the varias in the waning and vesing of the moon ete. In fener, they divided the pomible relatohip of bodies to one ‘dbother into being (1) united or (2) contiguous or (3) discrete, and ‘oneloded that dhe srueture of the body ofthe universe i of the fst ‘ind. Thanks so this union, Sympathy existed ia all parts of che ‘We ssid in the St tecion of this chapter** that the Stoics believed in a rigorous causal determinism. The concepts, however, of Love, Agreement and Sympathy," by which the Stoics desrbe ‘he order of the univers, make their world-view eventally very diferent fom that of modem materialise deteminisms, Things fn ther universe were not purely mechanically moved but sympa- ‘hetialy, and in s living organism, as they believed the word wo Be,6 PROPHECY IN ELAN sere pat ata ge pie a mts Sipe hearerebeer get eta Sale eS neh ae ne tors ae Se Sona eRe Regen oe Sear auc eee oe Pane uch Ss oy es apy a a espe od we a Sr one oe cei Soci ppachas merce as Ses eat ee en ee Secs me nie Sony ea a Soa ee Se He pe Sti A pee pes tines Sg dais Ngee eee SoS mraate cmos eee a Satan etaronermeset nec Soe olen a oc ice ae Ree ee Menai o meonr eh ele See Pikes ae ea ee ee Stor ame ae, See Seep rs ocie ert Siete pee cent pare ie or All thee StricenensPlatonic wncts of Sympathy constioue the bass of Aviecun's doctrine of revesdans payer oat aise Indoet jun aF prophetic revelton—as we saw before the Seite See ace eae Soares Ciera Chae a stan Tape bonamene aeede pac Posh ye aie goers toile ei vet ry pedo ter Ace ee Sah elie pan eel goede a Soa Sat Boge ge Seay See reyes ae meee oa ms i, haar tne, be abi ts ra Some Bd of Ge Love TES Sn cde et orig a os Sco SES Ss co vg ag 7 fe pif Se Sahay a eee been, Te i 1 PROPHECY "7 Visto of Strinesto explain the benefits which accrue from pile When several bodies mect together, we are tol in the [Proximity ofthe body ofa ain ora prophet) or, yenerally speaking, Ia sacred place, they become powerfl in sympathedcally moving the frees of the Superal Realm. Tn this work, Aviceana faye that {his physical communion in plgimages results act only in purely ‘atrial but alo spiritual beneia forthe pilgrims. Tn fis chird treatie, On Proj, however, he diinguthes lowing Plotinos* snd Porphyey” between aa inner spiritual prayer and the outer physical ritual eg. ablations chanting cerain formulae, making Ertan bodily movements. What, he aks, canbe the benct ofthe Jnser? And he answer that thereby dhe human body receives fom the heavenly. bodies or the Active Intellect certain influences whereby ii concrved and kept in heats o, ia ther words the Body and physical ie wy, fn his way, to sedmilatethemelves to the heavenly bodies insofar as their mature allows them t do wo" "should be pointed out at this stage that although Avicenna aceptsa Hind of theugie magic in connection with the ritualistic part of prayer and. alo in connection with certain occult and ‘Sbicure Fappenings both in the souls of men and in nature, hs igrneral tendency to avoid the extravagant mysterpmongering of {iter Halleitie magic and theargy for which he subiate ae satuilsing and sober explanations ab posible. The so-called ‘heurgic rituals by which the ancient aimed to charm and even tind their gods in order to achieve revelation and prophecy, he plains, not by saying that such procedares influence the Divine but the human soul Suef" And he clearly states tat siracies and ‘magia feats are accomplished by the power ofthe mind ise which 1S capable of directly afecting matter, not through any magical ‘terial, thus seeing t restct the domain ofthe occult. Tn the ‘bit (HI, pp. 54-55) he say ‘Strange occurrences which take place in-the natural wor'd are du to the causes (1) the (powerful) quality ofthe soul mentioned before (a) matural properties of the elemental bodies like the teraction of iron by magaet due tothe late's peculiar power (3) influences of the heavenly bodiss on certain earthly bodies which hhave certain defnte relations of situation with the former, and on certain minds, which are endowed with cevain peculiar active and Dasive states and qualities, these influence belng due to similarese PRoPuncy mr ILM citing berween the heavenly bodier and earthly exists ‘The fst group i that of magic and miracles, the second of natural, ‘wonders (aairan), the third of talismans” ‘This iterp-eation ofthe doctrine of Sympathy, which subeseutes ‘the soul itself for the theurgie magic of later Hellen, is based ‘on the esental divisiy ofthe human soul. This Ss what guarantees ‘the Influence of the soul on the body and on matter ia general. ‘Avicenna, who has spoken on the subject fequenty, has described ‘this influence at diferent level. The soul i a substance which ‘organizes is own body, preserves and contol it: "Tes because of the domination of the soul on its body that the vegetative fealty becomes either weak or strong when che soul ‘becomes conscious of certain judgraents which it likes or disikes— Doth this lke and dislike not being physical at all. This happens when 2 judgment takes place in the soul: the judgment does not influence the body as a pure belief but rather when this belie i {allowed by an action of joy or grief” Now, joy and grief too ‘are something perceived by the soul and do not affect the body 38 ‘uch but influence the vegetative faculty. Thus joy, which f am ‘currence in the rational soul, intensifies the action ofthe vegetative faculty, while the opposie affection of grief, which also occurs ia, the rational soul and is not a bodily pain, weakens and destroys ‘he action of the vegetative faculty indeed it can sometimes shatter ‘the very temperament ofthe body (Sh2", Poelaligy, J, 3). ‘The mest common form ofthe influence ofthe soul 2 the body isin th phere of voluntary movement of th body which Avieeooa sesenbes in Avitotelan ters at the begianing of (SAVE Pgchaogy, 1V4)s when one wishes or wil to mows the body in certain dire tion of towards certain object, the body fates, i 2080 health, obey fordiwith, The metaphyseal explanation cf this ‘tdinary phenomenon too must rex on the rubeequendy formu Inted principle that eis ofthe nature of mater to obey the higher panpl, the mind From tis ort common mode o weluatary movement, Avctona fon to the indusnce of the unrefeting emotions, a robject “ich seems to have itersted Gruekphicropher, mere espedaly perhaps the Pconsing Sti, Poseidonious™ and hs succes. We prormrey 2 have already noticed in the Inst section the power of soggertion ‘crereived by imagination whereby emotions are strzed up and bodlly tember moved: We do not regard it imposible that something thould occur to the sul int fara ti in the body and ie then followed by aeons peculiar to the body itself. Imagination, too, in as mach as itis Knowiedge, snot in iself bodily affection, butt may happen that aris result certain bodily (Ze. sexual) organs should expand. This 55 not through any physical cause which necesitates a change in the temperament »., and so causes the expansion of the organ. ndeed, hen a form (Le. idea) obtains in the imagination, neces state a change in the temperament resulting in heat humidity and {r, which, but for that (meatal form, theres nothing te produce Avicenna gocs on: ‘We say Uhaton the whole it of the nature “f the soul that through it changes occur in the temperament of the bodily matter whithout any bodily action or affecion. ‘Thus Iaeat and cold are produced without there being & hot or cold body. ‘To besure, when an image becomes strong and frm inthe soul the ‘bodily matter is aot slow to accept a carerponding form or quality. "This is Because the substance of the woul i (derived fom) certain (Qigher) principles (ie. Active Intellect) which clothe matter with forms contained ia them, such that these forms actually con tute matter... IF there principles can beow upon matter forms constintve of natural species «it x not improbable that they can ako betow qualities, without there being amy need of physical contact, action or afection.... The form existing in the zeal isthe cause of what occur in matter. The form of health ex fing in 2 doctor's mind, produces cure and the form of chair siting in a carpenter’ mind (produces an actual chai), Dut sock forms eannot translate themtelves into actuality except by means af tools and other media: they need thes instruments Because of their weakness and (relative) ietieacy’1 ‘Next Avicenna giver » medical eample Som abnormal peycho- Jogys "Consider the ease ofa really sick man who iraly believes he bas Dbocome well and of a (phyicall) healthy man who is obsessed by the idea that he iil, Tt often happens that in ch cars, when {he idea becomes firmly fxed in the imagination, the bodily matter 5s accordingly affected and health or lines exsue. Indeed, in such= PROPubeY a8 1eLAst ceases, the efcacy of imagination is greater than any doctor could achieve by instruments and media.” "This ig the reson, he goat fo, ‘that 4 man can run fast on a plank of wood when iti put across a welltodden path, but when it put lke a bridge over 3 ‘chasm, he would hardly be able to creep over it. This e because he pictures to himeaf a (pesdble ill eo vividly that the natural power Ofhis Hebe seconds with ft. 272 Aer depicting the influence othe sul on ts own body by pointing to ordinary emotional experiences ant! medical evidence, Avicenna announces the poaibilty of miracles; "When, therefore, ideas tnd beliefs in them become fry fixed in the tos, they neseaariy come to exist in actuality... . In the case of the Universal Soul, these ideas may influence the eatixe Nature, while fa the case of Tndividual souls, they may affect a particular part of Nature. (50), often 2 soul ean influence other bodies lke its owa body ae in the ase ofthe eil eye and “suggestion by concentration of imagination (@hwahm al“amil)”. Indeed, whea a soul s powerfal and noble resembling the higher principles, matter throughout the world obeys it, i affected by Ht and actually receives forms which exist, Jn such & soul. This is because, s we shall show later, the Boman soul (unlike the animal soul) i not imprinted in the body but ie ‘elated to it oaly ino far as it cates for it and controls. If this kind of relationship gives the soul the possibilty to change the ‘bodily mater from what ie nator require, it is nothing wonderfil that a powerfol and noble" soul should exert itt influence beyond its own body, if ti not deeply immersed ins incinaton to thie body and has at the same time both a dominating nature and powerful Aabiu (acqized through practice)” ‘ur philosopher, however, tls us, while speaking of the soul- body relationship in general (Shia", Poelaogy, V, 3): ‘The or inated body is the soal’s Kingdom and instrament and in the fubstance of the sul which originates dimultancomsly with che body “a'body whose existence has called forth the soul's onigination fom ‘he primary principles—there is a natural impulse to occupy isell ith the body, to sei, to care for ft and to be attracted towards it These conditions become pecalar t the soul and tura it away ‘rom all other bodies’, and the coresponding passage of the Najst ds ‘excupe through is ow. In the cae of ordinary homan being, then, the direct influence ofthe soul i rstcted t i own body, ‘while the exceptional suls of the prophets and the sxint,”* by 1 PROPHECY st becoming "World souls as it were’ become operative throughout Nature. They can ‘eure the sick and make evil pemone scl disite- gate and integrate organisms . . and by their will ruins and Prosperity, the sinking of the earth and plagues occur” This ‘aspect is in ict, parallel to the cognitive sapect? just 4 the propheile revelation i eb ine independent of the body aad ‘ense-perception, whereas ordinary cognition is necesarly condi- ‘ioned by them, similarly in ation, Ube prophetic souls independent ofits body. Despite his insistence on the virtuosity of the mirale-working ‘oul, Avicenna affirms the realty of black magic, although he ade that the black magician uldmately lees the power fie souls When 2 tn posses tis (peychie power of inuendag other bodies) but i cal and miremploy iin working mbchich hea oi magician By his excesve indulgence in thi, the power quality of sul ras (gradually) aad be has no infuence whee Were ae sage (idee Tp 54) Although Avicea's account of miracles (os well as hit of prophetic inspiration) is for the mest par, founded spon sore neds ‘bas than the craer heugy of Inter Hellenism, encambered by mythology and supemion, chee are nevertheles, eo seciows motiscations The fart of hese we have tacounteed above were Aviceana seals ofthe talimanic ocr Fences due to occult ssuelogieal inficnces The second is he Yl of {00d and evil demons in producing mircuous evens, lcbough a Eppes fom the fllowing, thee demonis sous ate not super ‘itural powers but the latina ou of departed oman being Dacubing the opsion of some philewphen ™ Avicena toys (R Adtexise, pp. 123, 12-24, 10): “The imaginative faculty ean be separated fom mate (at doth) through the rational facly. Sock 2 oul ean then contemplate all the images cxrtng in the cate ‘cule nature (but not the parely icligle Hew) since the whole ‘these world Became body ait were ia which becomes lnprioned, aot being able corse Migher to the opto realm. Fe 2 then Know all te pardclar eats inthe words none of thse i ented w be more Inown than the other-—end 20 forelnows the events reuling fom particular movement (of the sar), Ta this way de (loves) bodily oul ith which fn contac abo comes to have a foeiknowledgeoffeare en. “Tlise phovpher say che evil soul among tee are thn= PRorurey 1 Ista ‘ore powerful to do evil, since, being ri of their particular body ‘which restricted their movement, the wile material realm becomes Uniformly cheirfeld of action, and similarly, good souls are able to do more good. These people unanimowsly call the evil souls ‘demons (@evils) and the good one of this imperfect (since they are Irrational) clase of souls, he fin. They alo post for the finn and forthe devils a contact with men and certain sptitual ations Som ‘hich certain (occult) natural occurrences result! “The contact of rch departed sole with Hving people i described in the previour scton of the same work (p. 123). The deceased ‘oul catmot inkere in a living body because the transmigration of touls has been shown to be imposible on other grounds (llovcing ‘Aristode). Tae demonic soul, therefore, makes = spiriual contact th a Hing person and induenoss his character, aspirations ete ‘whereby wicked persons ean become more potently wicked and goed {nen move potently good.” tw The Mision an the Law (Dawe ond Shr"e) I is an integral function of the propher’s office that he, as we ‘have already sen in the Socond Section, should come forth to his people or t9 humanity at large with a relgiowocial mision and Should legalate. The proper is, ehus, not a mere ‘thinker oF “nyse, but an actor moulding acral history on 2 definite patirn. ‘Belore we deseribe the Muslim philosopher’ doctrine on this subject fad trace historially the ideas which make it up, it should be Femaried at the outicr—and we aball revert this later—that this apece of the philosophical doctrine of prophecy comes nearest to expresing the epi of the historic Muslim community. Sviceana's accowut of dhe geass ofthe moral order in the sociey is baed on the conception of a Kind of ‘Socal contract as dire Decesity to contol the aggresive excesses of selfinteret and provide a modus saend.. This type of morality exiss, and must ‘Eike for the masse; iti only 2 few good men who can transcend fhe Confit of individual ineress and for whom the Law is not tnerely pi aller but a preparation for true spiritual levation and bis ‘Tvs clear that man differ fom other animals in that if he were pRoPErcr 53 soe, managing all his affairs by himself without someone e's co- ‘penton in falling bis needs bis fe will not be elegant. Te is {lerfore ezential that human life be based on co-operation.» « ‘Keg, for this reaon, people have been fored to esablish ces {nd contract societies Those who are unwize enough not w establish ‘Sues with laws bot aze content t have a mere gregatious lif, srithout legal and contraceal bases, only remotely resemble men Jas being clear, ts necesary for man to live by cooperation; Cooperation entails contracts and transactions... which themselves Src ponible without lw and jurdce. Law and justice are imposible ‘without a lay-piver and 3 determinator of justice. "Now, sich & being most be a man for he must be expable of| addreming peopl and enforcing aw. He cannot eave people to argue fmong themselves 20 that everyone of them may egsrd his own sel [terest s justice and the oppasite a injustice. Aficr these introductory remaris, T propose to describe the plilosophers theory in order to elicit some sort of answer t0 the following quesions:— (0) Why prptet nesded forthe foundation of the law? Or, why bas te Iw to have a religions bass? (2) Why must the prophet bea lawgiver? {g) What's the terion for recogizing a truclawgiver? (@} What is the relation of the moral-legal values to truth-values? ‘This brief outline would thea, its hoped enable ws to determine to what extent, any, the Musim philesophers were influenced by traditional lam and effected, or attempted to effec, an adjustment between it and their philosophy. ‘The law, asthe above quotation has indicated, must be founded by a prophet ‘This is because the function oflaw sto check the excessive ‘elfinerets of people and pedagogiclly to lead them, or the more (Bfted among them, to the real intention of the Iaw-giver which Ea vison of the higher truth Tt is therefore, ewential for the liwegiver that he himself be im possession of the religio-philosopieal truth and, further, that he be capable of expresing himself in legal and formal terms and doctinee which can aogotiate and are sceeptable tp the common Sateligence. Now, as has been shown3 PROPHECY IN ISLAM previously, only a propet by the acuteness of his intellect, and the ower of his imagination is able to achiewe this: “Iu is obvious that when the inteligibles conéerning voluntary actions, which it isthe function ofthe practical philosophy to yal, ‘re actually formulated, they must be. accompanied by certain ‘conditions through which alone they can become actual... Thus, the law-giver ie a tan who bas the power © deduce, through the ‘ccellence of his cogitation, the conditions through which these ‘pracisal intelgibles can be actually realized for the attainment ‘bf utinate Happines... . Now, i i not posible to deduce these Contisons and, indeed, it 2 not pomble even to conceive the [practical eligibles by which the lawegiver oooupes the position Bf the Fint Ruler, unlew he has previowly passed philosophy (dhrough hs eoetact with che Acsve Intelligence)" Further, the law must be such that it continues to be acepted by people after th law-giver's death Indeed thie why law ienecesary, Reif prophets frequented thie world, their authority being greater ‘han that ofthe law the ater coald be suitably altered and adjusted fcoonding to the nowds of the time: ‘Just as the founder ofa teligios Taw eaa alter bis own law if he thinks this more suitable at a later date, aimilaly succeeding lavegiver can alter bis predecesor’s law, for if thi predecessor wore ave at this later date he himselt would bave changed it. At Himes, Roweves, whea such a law-giver [Einot presen, the lave presribed by the (erie) lawegiver must be recorded and adopted and the State governed according to them"* ‘Now, in onder thatthe law continue to be efiective after the prophets death in the sense that the prophets real intentions and ES background meaning is not forgotten and so the law not reduced toa moribund formalism, iris necesary thatthe law-giver establish Covtain definite religioasnstittons, serving a2 constant reminders of {he reel purpose of the Inw—and tis only a propbet, recipient of ‘eligiousrevelation—thankstohisstrong imaginative facley—cando: ‘Now sach a man who i « prophet, does not recur at all times for matter recipient of such a perfction rarely constnites such temperament Ie is thus necesary thatthe prophet establish certain (felis) insttutions for the perpetuation of the law he has pro- tmulgated for human welfare. Undoubtedly, the benefits of this are pRormEcy 55 the perpenation of people in ther continued knowledge of the Maker tnd of the hereafier and the removal ofthe cause of forgetfulness (cn their par) after the end of the generation immediately succeeding the prophet: It i therefore necosary that the prophet should Insttate certain acts which he makes incumbent pom people to perform constantly.» so that they should remind them sffesh (of fhe purpose of the law). . - These acts must be such as keep in ‘people's hearts the memory of God the Exalted and af the hereafter, Fie they would be wie. Now, “reminder” can be either words tttered or intentions made in one's mind. Teshould be said vo people, “these ations would bring you sear unto God and would cause the Dlewed good t0 come tw jou"-—and indeed, they should be really ‘pon peop We shall now ary to give a historical analysis of the ideas con tained ia the above answer to our fist quertion. So far asthe quo- tasons ffom alFirsbi are concerned, if we leave out their ident- Feston ofthe law-giver withthe prophet, they are purely Platonic. That ideally the Inwegiver or the King tust be = plulosopher is too famous 2 Platonie doctrine to need documentation. ‘That of the woth law and the lawgiver-the more important factor the law-gier who, if need be, cam and must change the lai, but that the formulation of the law ig nevertheles, necenary since the tae lawegiver i rarity, Paws teaching in the Plt 297 (B): "That no great number of men... could ever aoqute the ingly scence and be able to administer @ state with wisdom, Dut ‘our one right form of government must be sought in some small Sumber or one person, and all other forms are, merely, a8 we sid before, more or les succesful iitatons ofthat» (D) ‘Tell me this: Anuming thatthe form of goverameat we have 2 pencgl eich may well have diately come hom the Stn doctrine | er Sympathe sy. ALPES, Media, pp. 40-50; Avicenna, Sift, Poslogy, TV, 2 For filler account of tab Action of sggesdon se Below, section 3. 2g, ALFESSH, Modis, p49. 25. ALLL, op ot, Avicenna, op dt 136. Greak philosophers had insistently held that prophecy oomured in dreams bechure of the withdrmval of the soul foes the world of see, tee eg, Gineo, De is, 4g; 57 ets Purch, Def. Ora, 2; De Pk Ore, ar-agh already Plate erophasiow nthe last book that the Revelation f = product of the interac of two fctom, the divine and ‘he human, and represents the human sul asa fimitng factor: the su,2 PROPMEGY In sta besays, isthe organ and medium of divine Revelation and as such cannot {lt colour it; noe filly, sue blow, the queaton of verbal Revelation 29. Phan, de Gar, OF wre we ae dat he Deon obit devvarne otis bnae we ee taprasdis etme eel nr Purch ya many pone Bee He Dns eso meee pee tat tis could omar twang hide He coca tnt our Poca te ‘cindy. pc tod qe at coon of widened hed evsnton Ent Come tcneny wie they meavale’ oat Be er Be rire Sater pas goto, Spin tuo Save hgh rare bs Shed 8 ypppsis sa eore 7p te ttar be Sree Spee a Sac ep el tenn ee tir bap nl ge nae Beds ns ee Sees 28, This acount ofthis peculiar cae of vison nts formal characte rest on the Platonic typeof the theory ofvidon ae Gevelope! by For desis on ie bs ofthe ration of tmpahy that hla betwee the ‘ind and the ouside world in ll pereptual experience According to this theory, what we peresve we steady postin oursves abo tnd ‘ereeption tke place on the bas of thir conaturalnes (enfea) (tte inner snd the outer words, For Poveda theory se, op ee Engin, Adsors Math, VIL, ga-tog, 126-139 and 28-5. For the ‘sulstanes of de theory se below Pear’ account 3, 29, ALFab, Masts, pp. 515 14-52, 12. 3 Avicenns, ft, Poeay, V, 6 (ad the commending txt ofthe Hija Tes oe improbable at home of ee eka stot Soe Holy Spit overdow, boise of thar cated and overwhetning feet, 0 the imagoasie uly wisch then Aguas thes fo vnc aod ‘coustc symbols in the manner indicted Sbove’ The passage to which WS quotaton sles SB/e, Poel, IV, a: ‘Ofen an apprtion rsensiul o the ahd thoy aginst wat they ae (eer {Bently persing san aetal adres fom that apposition in verbal forms scully bar, prowrved aod ected Thre he propery oeline to the imaginative fealty” {Ot chould be tnedenaly ted Gat the words “in te manoer indicated above’ aio occur in the corresponding Dasage ofthe even though the puange to wih thy reer not [Ee tound in chat work Ths tf somnecommunton the manner of the ‘compotion of the Ng). paormecy 8 a of the lst of the ro quotations in the preceding note. More fall, ‘Bia: When ic bappene through some cause or atuer—elther ough the actvty of the agitation of the intellect (Sc) or the contgurtens (thal) of the beavenly bodies—that 2 form impress tel on the faealy of representation (mutawwira), while the mind at taking nce fis it can impres fuel (decd) inthe sma commun alt Then he fubjecthear oie and sexs colour (Le. jess) whch have no esence {nthe exeral world nor are shir cates fom the outa? 4. The phenomena of apparions and wices were common part of ‘rosbery'in Greco Roman plosopy. Ser eg. Ci. op cy XLV; Hin Plotarch, dr Dif Oren, fp, wre eb related how the divine voice {darened wan Egyptian plot was bend by allo he boa, Pan he Gest E'GGa" Plasschy however, Keds tat normally verbal cevlaton at Foch dou a oce: thatthe words ae oot the production of fer ine {ezncy which oaly suppl te lnpiradon whlch thea the prope hime SS chan into votal Orn: ‘Let not bale thatthe God Bas ‘Somposed thee (prophetic uterancs): he only provises the origin of ‘sts ad the he popes pte re ved cach i aca She with ber narra cuise, Corbin, it were aurea to wi (Grice intend of devering them orally, To aot tink tat we should lee ee hasding tobe the God's. Av amatier offic the vice EEnot tat ofa god, nor the uteraace off nor the dleuoa, nor the fcr, but all the are the womans; he pus into er mind eel the nage (Geracan) and crete light in bes oul. ds Byth Or, 7 Plusrch rere to this theme nguin and sgain, cf id 03 de Dg Ore, Cera, would be fn and chilis i the extreme to syne ects of pial er te manor of wate en ‘he bodies of ie prophets and prompts their arterances, rploying ‘Dovths aod vice tr intractnt The verbal rerdaton, hem, 2 {be of calaboation beworn the Gvne and the buman agence: Ths Dtdoa wi gard tothe verbal Teveadon sands im dice opposition {that of Pil (ee above =. 17). The Maslin philosopher” coctrine host the verbal revelson seems 6 be midway between tase two views Tats Gee Ser EX, agin, Plutarch, afer ating tat thenpiaton aren Society hs dston was ot something val but audible, Sir ral nal Srv ob fore or, Royor 5 rv Bikar nab rojout JaaRlvonen sioner $Beyontuettntlen” Thus jar a5 fm dress ont it no cli car vices but thinks tat oe Se, 0 in aking reve: Indoa, he demon doesnot scaly speak tothe prophet but witout Sound souchr ir ince and depata the "menting (78 Spompéw) therein. This is based on the sympathy among the pure soul: Bvea ia binary hams communication, Putarch goo on, the words rally ealy eS: |m PROPHECY IN I8LAM sevens ow make te nid ance (hy fe i) ra hen, ‘Set nereane cng oly berwensl s'© e npay tcily bern tans Nowe prev wich eso oe Se boliy rum dose ntl th ow ‘vero, Pach se poi of verbal evel a cpa ome tae wh gs ie Hs Scot of ie pres ‘Tah or gute enn wih a cab acts ogy aa ‘The tl hes iad? by cara arate sn (yp thes eso cna in Fo, De 98), nd ange etal no te, pomanzt te ugha tote tent is cee hr'o te wendgol tif rts reo, he ar fone ey Freslosbi de tough ofa pure Genoa) iad, sal ag Bie rat by tes) repre hose a and enantio? ‘eG id cae he veal bob val be chs ie edt oft die sgeacy whe ia pene (ampere with hs doaleupest pial td pocep) asunt of seria what Aveo sy (7 Raposo) Angst ‘ere end site bag ttn blew ua ee Tha tal ing in the tavern and concep SSI, San jl hen te wove a gs eh osorintnal ted cease aed spre ad oa ‘mid ttn ip azrdanc wi pw oe a woe Eng ot in he abcloe bate fe fms He Hea te nets Spec pn ara ie even though atau pa Semana aly) pial eran te td of {Sem ofthe tg to ebm tins est snesand 0 ‘Seve pec Hr poh ney Sa wich nig Smee ing of ieadrccrs nd te sre in) teat asd Bie be me “Wine te aden cannot hte mind ofthe aden dicey fae manner inch ssa aches pee so cma dee Eke el i te ee cera una commana), ake ‘er andor va, wing or estos "Barubere the scenes in fue lad tt thon el eseen icand the sdenors mind nce pone fometa ‘hing spon ca water #58 mid infest by ts tron ‘HIG le cero abo the tral se (gina) and ‘ey very ang, pre ou eo tat perce (sy and sob) rs te repens veaton cna he age Sp herr (nt) and vers reves italy hut he sg the spp on «vn om and sper kona le fem vay te gel and th eee comet hs eve Anite (spinal Snag pene) ‘Se wen of Acs Gos wh ie qoton kc oe pr paoruecy % the reat Fasy abit atte to alFSrSb (Die, pp. 72, 13- go. si)ssee chap, 8.2, also p85 10. Nat: Tce ein ich ly le g.lttagyscnen siemens Erashioeisvern ah varesy ce Se, batten enue near eee Eire aren eae eg ected na acaba ot Se nee iret cae neat ce Sore eee te enone ogee SSeS iat amine ney sprancalsreremey ars Genie (at Sica eve wt dere aes SO teens lor re eee ee) re sete ies earn ne Smunieres Si Mees secretory tea oo eta mabe Ae She Seer erate ceptually) experienced or quasi (perceptually) experienced. The heavenly cele pews ee ee odmicyres te a) at acl orice a SNR RAL Aree Seaton an Bboaserr "iit ye Sent fm crt at Aron so png wa oe Sn dene Beat resi eae erime ake ea Sea tas pyar at Bt, asin Sh Ply, TV, ms inoece ted scoop apes "Yar ea “eae orc Bnd SBP Ee beak Bees EE Ree (oe Oe ean a ware ee ee eta viernes are e oie oka Sate Pt eS are tees 2 Be alt Sate tay nme spam De nbetor eee eee ta any see Be ey ee ope TT Sune Set oy a ‘3 This the theory which a1-Ghazal aac in the 16% ducusion of* PROPHECY 18 ISLAM is Reftation of Pipl to which Averoes replied by saying that this theory of prophecy i peclaly Avienninn, sg. There seems oman through all he account of imaginative prophecy 2 {seuadieion, vis hat on the one hand, the prope srquird fo have ‘ich a svong imagination atthe inelare & unable to convol fy and tn the other, tat imagination shouldbe st rest or conti by reason Sh ceder to tcordeav UMily as It can—the higher truth. Ths com teadicon i irendy i Phar, sone compares his wo accounts given Shove im notes go and 39 reper, fr fa the one aoe he account point to n satoal propbeny, in the other to 2 prfevedly fatal ne, This contadieon Sppeare more giving in Aviceana because his ‘Sescunt i more deed but would be equally appeable to. al-Farti, ‘Reisen eso come to tera with hes ie ater in She same chapter sre hey Athong thors who ne tee things in waking le, some do 12 Dense ofthe exlednes of te souls and shee rong maginaive aod ‘iemorative powers while shore do so beeuse of hee nck of rail (Ercronmt mo tat thi ington le very song an they ca Fosve the ‘Uses in waking lle” But forher ca inthe same passage he revers to [Bs contention that a cation both of perceptual ana intellectual acy [Enecesury in onde to recive imaginative revlasoo. Te 8 qute dear that dee men actualy have concrete caus ef beth types in mind, oaly they ave uaable to deve theory which would jusie to ther ies. {H. Avienna, Shir, Pplalogy IV2; aloo al-Fastby, Matin p25 s7- IF Ws line of though ie pared alone i often done by all the ‘Be great piloophen of Ilam—the doouine covaialy ress on the ‘usumpton (Ro, bowerer conscious asd cetaaly not adaited expres) fa pow bau, ke polteal mannewe of mankind fra good nd By fklend apd good man trough delberate pious lex When, however, {hs approach f combined wih the ompaliey Law of Symbolzadon, Ulncrtbed bene the pictare is considersbly modes, Inde, isppeas {the compulsory Law of Symbolsaton i seriously taken, fr it would then scan that the prophet Rimuef beeen the fndh of symbol Just hoch se boven the rut of the spistual inspiration. Aca, owever, there pilrophers do not often dso: "Whee tesecontemplatve oa praia vrucr come 20 xt by damsel (not Giguraive) is the mind of the Lawgiver, ey consti 7 wil the minds Sf dhe mass they Se religion (ala ould be read hroughout fr, Golaiay cf below gg). Ja the mind of the Lawgiver Simslf foo, thee Bigrizaions ex But nota mages and persuasions. «18s {Baed he who has dad thee images and peruse symbole mt it (vets anda His he higher relies ar religin bt ys xd pnornscr ” nage for ti (ah BSsibs, TebalSeads, p. 41). align, ten, BEET chy fr the sem, for the proper hae? ony the higher prise Epic. See so Avicenna, Ti Rare. 19452, 38 ALEaDS, Suet, pp. 99°96. sp. Sr eg. Nala, p 505,22 og. “The prophets mesage may, indeed, ‘Saat ellsdon dad huts to vite theee capable by suture to deve {ino decper wadom concerning the ways of worip od thee bones [be ths Lie and the hereafier” See also Avervoes Tat cb Taka, p. fom 11 sq, The doctrine ofthe Nasi phiewophes tat apart ofthe ‘Holy Book sonld be alegorcally interpreted becuse i contains certain ‘ex saggestons ofthe spear, ts tmmeately onthe Kean IT, SF itis He who bas sent own the Book tthe containing vere which are frm and ae the Mosher ofthe Book, snd other which are amiga ‘Thos in whove hearer there & pervety flow the ambiguous part ‘eeting (0 se) sndison and tp bknwrpret; bat fu interpreaion 30 he knows eacept All and these fr in nowiedge? There is a come ‘Seeny in leis, however, whether the later Hod of vee are to be iEitgetied or nts the eee orthodox wing of Tam dillows dang Into te interpretation of thee ‘amblguo verses and they put a fil op ster the word Allain the shove quotation oo ato exlode "hose fa {i Leoweage’ fom uadestanding thom. The more Eserl, however, Including many moderate orthodox ulema, alow interpretation and do ‘ot stp atthe word “Allah 30 arto include “our fam in Inowiedge ‘isoag te extgory of these who can understand, The doctrine mast have ‘ren ont of an stempt fo jusly so many ava allege incr preston Sit the mira an the philsophial. The praces of legorzadon on ths ind of bas, of couse, very old. The Greeks ‘ven thr interpresng Homer, sve fa hie poetry apart whieh tld he Dre truth wie the sther part concealed tis ruth under the ise of Dopular imagery (Stas Ve Pap. 1, £3, 9 94): 432 Zip ofber row roo Graves Boe, dos, Snyotuver nel Sbdocan’ funk te nord Be, 3d Bia DP yhypetn Faun ph daira: eirée ory phe. 4.21 Myer oboe “Amnoticer dem splrpay in rs ey Bp, a 82 3 ‘pide. Right in the wake ofthis procedure, then, flowed the Jewish (ce. Plle, Hromat i, Sorm, 1, 40), the Chris ond she Malin Slsgecse |. This iver with regard to the spt of rigons Sines the ‘Stic deduced the ide of commopaiaaian direc fom this docwine of "Common Nesom. See eg. Meat duee TV, 47 1d 3 reply hae sot, non na B Dayne dou, oa. ere, nal rpmranriey8 PROPHECY IN ISLAM sr ror fp Mpor mois. alvoal-FEcSi, Sp, p 0, lat parse eae. 4, See ako Aveo, op. ct, p. 98g where he enjoins that one must {blow the tee religion of is nes Sd says tha this fe why the teachers of pilowphy at Alcandrn became Muli, just ain othr places they fad become Christians, ALPaaby and Aveo, wile maintaining the fupereiy of Ida in slit symbian, do not, to my knowledge, Gerogate any other religion by name. Aviceans, however, has atacked Magianion and Minicheaiza (R dikarpe, pu 54) 203 Chieaanty (ig, p. 62): The former are arcued of producing an wnintligtle symbol (ight and darines). Against Christianity urged that is Symbolism i ineeclve. Tae querton conceras the neurrecton of the ‘ody I Avicenna sas, you rpard the body as man or as part of man, then of course, you mst believe inthe rxumetion othe body but then ‘wy aot speak of Bediy bappines snd onbappines? If om the ober band, happines and ushappines are purely spiitual, what the seme Bo aficmtag body ronmecton? 42 The procedure of the aleguica itrpitation of the matric ‘nls of poplar bebe gee fa back ines Helena bot fe whole ‘pplestion was made inthe Soe Scho). ie Ste poopy ander {RE uae of interpretation aod protcson ofthe popular region bused on Homer and Holes. Thee pocs, inthe cour of me, bat come t0 be Iaoked upon deputies ofthe veligous trath and were venerated Ste above 2-39 sboat Zens exit of Homer. Indo Homer was ‘eseratl ata mora goa we Basie, Pap. eng, V3). ven [osey in general ame tobe rgarded by the Stes a an terbute of the Roget A Watsons stempe (och Pun Vol 1, 190-3) 9 aires {ate radically beeen te Greek approach to the poplar region st Eat of Pilot the Joi Soptres dow tot eco me ured a sands Of eoune a2 we have sid already, Philo fala upon Sedpture {tthe teal Word of God (and this characteade extends, secording {him even 10 their Grek veron), bat ar mensoeed bef, ths dou Sot prevent Non fom saying that God's word tos anropemorpic ‘pmol forthe ze of the tans and cones the higher ett. So GG ts Grena wth Homer and Hod (een. 99) Aguin, Wolson ays (ep. cy Il, #28), "Trem, agua, fn Oreck region, the objecont > ‘SRiscpimetpins on pbopile grounds ed ether toa rdertn oe “Edt alge ort Sunfomaion, by the algerie Eikbod, of the popear dete nto philwophic enides or concept” ‘Fis obvnealy al soe happen with Judai fo he objections to anre~ pomorphiaus meray led che gencial explaaton tat anhropomorptic PRormey 9 expreions are not tobe taken tral and that they ae sed in Scripture (aly ar practical, pedagogial device «On the cntary, the Sais ‘Soi to heep the popular eligi at the popular level: wines, eg. [Eplscts, Dit, Th, Soy 92) ogy where be accues those who challenge ‘of cast doubt ch popale die, of robbing the common man of te oxly ‘Gece which berpe him trom eve Welles approach Shroughout the {ok sre tome imbued with s naonalstiesencinent which, ifmot duly epein cece Hable to sway the Sneed honesty and same of pro prion, Tndesd, fa the opening Tins of his book Welton declares that Rift a sngle exception, none of the peoples who after the conquests of ‘lerander began to parispate in Gres pidesophy consbuted anything ‘rdieally new to i¢'iscluding te founder of tbe Stoic school. Weldon ‘Balsaite op. it, 1,143 2g) tat the subjugation of philosophy to ‘Geclogy was a uniquely original take of Pilomand Be ignores the ‘ote rliour wend of Sa sd post Stale los. | 4g: Seo the reference to picet in the lat note So Philo, de Abr, 29, $B gece: seers Became very promiaent in neo-Patosien and Soon. 4 Sex owever 2.99 above 4g, Avena i refering here to sich vers ‘Noting is like Him! (fier, 1) oo which the Masi ralonaiste and phitceophers base thet dligoreatons, and on the OL! Terament equivalent of which Plo bad base his Var 9)- 46: og; the rervecion of the bodien a Bena, 200. Bid, 6, 159. 45. Winds sa figure in Arabic shetori meaning the seppeesion of a ‘Nord ora phrase (eo that che speaker eps it in hs ear) om the asamp ‘Son tht i wil be understood by the addrenes. 50. Ker 8, 10 st Td, 30 58. se EBS, TI, pasa, 1 aes% PRoPHEcy ax rsLane 58. Sextus Empview, Aéh Math IX, 79. st Abowe pp. 85 67. 35, See ea Moras Auris, VI, 98, where the words $00, efpmou {thd rove} aos Ste ed to doce tae mute rtouship of ngs 96. Seeabove p.73, 95, quotation from Plutce; Cem, De Diny Th, 14, Be Se Zee St (Pa Gren 1, 9 ey 1 ‘bie 2) thatthe Stic conception of Synpaty did ot really go Beyond ‘natural, pysel eonneedon would noe seem quite cect 7 See the reference w Sex. Emp, in note $3 above; abo Epictetus, Diy T, 14: emusabdy 78 tripe ves wipaiog 0b Bact ons; dane fe, 38, Een, IV, 92: omnis 3} nbs roto 13 by, nal Se Sef mal vo ‘Mipebly yp «DAE balelnoror vob perkh nak waive ity Erode 28 ob Sis. ob yde that viv futur meting BE ergs prabis of 88 yoni ouunaonioran, ned v8 pp pacts dnp 78 rap vob wh sapamenon Spine, Fa ve Bers fal ele & rebar ab odea niga ings oh ype ces 1 08 (ou ape vb nebo fore 59-Be, TV 96 4844 Go, Sid, TV, y 43: min ip 8 wpe Do yonretenas ta? Bo ape 3 yy dors, tatoo yonreta at eyes abn. not nian pir Fo Dofperac eel ne 3708 mpacrt Ben 6. i, TV, 44 2, When Plotinus speak of prayer in Eat, IV, 26 aq hes thinkin of exeraal seals payers which operasesroagh Syapathy. In Vee 6, however fe disguises beween an eters prayer of word? ad 2h inner, spi prayer of Eats: doe ofr hepoda Peer aire & eteapioe ob oyb reyerd, Did rh og deroany tavrole ec ‘pie diver, ciehas Tr tpn robes Bobo Meee ap3s ple. 6, According to Porphyry, sialic prayers and theurple pro ceees are of bo intelleceal and pinta! Benefit although they Bring ‘he tational and physial fpr in contact with demons and shige ‘Asgutise, De Gita De 3g, nace ee Perphyess quandam des pPugationem animae per theurgam, cuncanter tamen et pudibunds PRorurey Br ‘quodammodo disputaione promisit; revesonem vero ad Deum hane ‘Stem prastare cuquam negat mune eutem Velut gus laudatorbus ‘iden, uulem dict ese mundandac purd enimae, aoa quidem intellect: 64, This line of though, if purued vigorouly, might concevably have Jel Avieona fo make tis exhly body worthy ofan afer at let fers ceria ac of people vz. those whore holy pantons bad come ‘enfbrm with sisi demands and he mught not have given a went ‘Sout ts orthodox Iam. But is Gren legacy ofa radial netted Sed morl anthers between the body andthe soa) according 19 wise tater inherendy noting and ev, prevented hin frm doing 20 ‘The nearest of the philosophies opisios tote orthodox view concerns the pal torsus and pleas of aes the one decribed by Aviceaua towards the end of R. dfhauyis (pp. 124-25). Undeveloped ‘uly he stats thee a Being the opinion of sta piloopher, without Tau coutming ov Genyitg in cavive with ther iratonal pyseal ‘impubsand immgination and vo ia, alts death, experience the pleasures ‘and pass which they would experience the boy he seal rurvived ‘Some scolar say that whea the foul leaves the body and caries the Smaginaive faculty along with i itis mpeuble fr feo be abeoluely [Ee rom the body. «Ht then Sstagine thats experiencing paisa by way of uaa physical chastsement, and, all that itused tm beleve dung early, would happen tit after death... Thse scholar sa that [isnot impontble chat the sol shoal (alo) imagine an agreeable nate fairs and that it sould experience in afer, all hat mentioned {the prophe? Revelations Gardens and hours, ete’ (waca'taaide ‘hg a he la but one lin ofthis pasageshould be read ae waaqndab, ince Avicensa only reporting somebody elas opinion). The iden, weve, that at lest in he ease of unceveloped soul the ination) pare rurviver and pin sad plarure (or only pain?) llow a chaw ‘Semen (and sevande?), i almed by Plots; wee Bom 20, 6)1¥, 134 (here aid sha onlyin te ae of enparised oul the ratinal ipales survive). The decrine is alo in Porphyry according fo whom the woul leaves he physical body in a pomumatie encasement whi fe slowly cards during sscent—an idea which Avicenna, who ataibater ito Tanti Ques, rejects i the last eatence of ts work, 65, kaa TU, p. 250, 1-251, 5: ‘People of certain natural dispose ‘otk te ald of Cartain action (inthe production of prophet knowledge) ‘rough which ther pereepeal uly sruck wih 2 sense of wondera PRormgcy 16 sstAae (pairs) and thei imagination with sttonishment 0 that their feuly of ‘eeiing the Unseen becomes ready fo rete i wel (ke. because of the ‘hdratal ofc sul Eom the extemal world)» For example, it TOated shout 2 Turcoman tbe that when they go to conle heir fotisaye fr some prophecy, he begin to rn around vey sapily and ‘Sepe ou gaping wal he hint In Bat ste then he wer what comes [ne hs mind; he uteranoe ar recorded by he hearer in thes memory fl they erect thls future pam socording t thm. Again, some people ‘Bom whom prophecies ars sught gare constantly at something bight and {Gulvecing 2 hat tei eyes are overpowered bat by rapid quivering ard Spicccceling brghnes: Thais an artical compulsion (of the senses to itairnp) it order to eta brief opportunity so comtact the Unseen, People epornly menace nducement are thors who are by atare usgesble toa sate of awe and astonshment and wh can easly accept Gneligible tatementy Ite supid people and children” Tats such Coumvances do aot infoence the Divine Realm, but the buman sou Seat by inducing Kind af hypnotic stats, 65, This idea would bein pefect harmony with he teachings of Potnus, ft it is noe oan in Pods who ie ne inerested im miracles. ster Beo-Piswamy, however he satis of te Bama soal as such declined Consdereby andy in propordon % es, the importance of theurgic prseion grews fm. 71 below. 67. This account ofthe genes of emotions like joy, anger, et. grounds om ulimtly in copation and Stoic. The Stocs define anges, ¢ [Ee eace to avenge Cnet upon someone whom one believes to have commited an owtage sgaint one. Tile the usual tne flowed by ‘Reiceana although Be note, Sh/', Povilay, TH, 4 that sometnes ‘uni body ste when oe ica t remove thir tee, generate Bogue process Plots ai, Baw IV, 426, weatsof anger om hee Eins rs ecnue of the ft ine of ought hat Avioena regard all hosons ae parelyspistual sts. 69, Te ould be wemembered tha the infuence of the emotional states che body, even thong sezed by Avicenna because they are more reresing. act he only form of inuence of. hlsGtation of the example Stan ll poe who by aster wil-powrer Becomes wel. Also, nthe sphere Sede ude indeace on ciber bode, whereas some are emotional eaucnce ie jealoury operating fe the case ofthe vl ee’, thers are ‘oluntay, eg suggesson ox bypaodi by concentration of the wil TOSSES tasty Wael required by Avacana for ach aniniunce SGISTES or delerminaon (ayatal‘aqa) inte soul (hia, TT, 252, prormrcy 8 tas ae). For the Stoic to, the Sympathy was not rested to im ‘nay eaodonal casey but soothe voluntary rational cas of body IDovement or conto are included; Putareh, De irate Mera 4 “Foc to be nur, even our breathing ou siaews and Dont and the ther pars ofthe boey, though they ae wratonal, yet whoa sa ipube ‘men wth season sang the ring as were, they all grow taut and Seite eet redhat Sena min rpc 1 fc ae eyed for scone parpose wo throw orto Grasp is ar Ew thei buiness And most excellently doer the poet (omer) to oack = Gp, See Plutarch, De Litt, ot Agr. 6, the reference to Poseidon! (Bone of the inucace of the soul on the body. Aritods, De dy ‘Eccuses the cortespondence of the meatal and the physical, especialy {i emotonal phesomena, but doe not speak of the inutnce ofthe ind tn the body. For him, foes plunomens show that mind ead body are Sor to substances bu only one and, according to him, the pByscal Counterpart must be inde in the deinen ofeach emotion, 4p. See Pusch, Qnaet. Cons. V, 73 (quoted by Van dex Berth, op Be IE papa) where te lafuence of Emagnason on the extn of ‘gunk mustioned cata, 68 above fr de oppo influence ot reson sts of Proces in Tim, Gem. (ed. Die) I, p- 395,19 (ihe pasage Bas feen mggeted to me by R. Walers aricle “ALFarshs Thoary of Prophec) and Diviaton in idle Seas 1957), where wast to sow {he padoeal posit of the creative acu of the Deluge, which {scan andnéeds no lnstuonentes eal yop of regetrax Bowral spin. rv Mier Sern 8 ch de apart is Dg, Spoor 38 wa ares so lppdoe pds wpe "beep woos vp gy arb B85 Nes Tyee tek Oe Tere sapaynerse 19 tmoweing, neon depcérran ee Gfoobae al dh pple mal rea Ganiuor, 76 cee Span Bing lip nportyen nl Soydvon ote Dh def Byoor, Proc goes 08.19 fy tine ee coe of cna like shame and fear imagination i= ‘Rusocs the bedy without any physi manipulation: wal py mab Govvacla sod miel sb Ope sable Srappdiess roger wie elas bipyacs mel wpb nly ep 13 oon, afar Broan TE sora Soe Gece at peau yppoduows, G2 79 mapasa PROPHECY IN ISLAM vor, depron He continues that certalasupe-humas, demonic power, Sbprdetoe of thir power imagioation, can work changes Ja nature wo they kes te #8 a8 wardrobe Roliyeer eu! ree nal operon Sue Sonuarypondur Spaorplan garracta wal Suan youaton rors, 3 aatdten Tes to be noted tat, according o rocks this racle- ‘working ellcky belongs only wo supernaearel powers mich demons, ‘he hana soul can wots dicey oaly oa ite Own Body snd on othet bodies through is body and other snerument According to Aviceana, fn tieothr and, mirace-working, eventhough require an abnormally rong scl ie neverdhles dase by the soul iuely when Te becomes ‘= Lind of wookt-oul? ‘2, For hein ence of this mage on Medieval nd even medeen thought Zig Van den Bergh, op. ct, Unpp 17-5 ‘7, This pasage lays down that in onder tbe able to inlueace other baie ized, a sou should not only poses a powerful costtion na wwalrpower, it tate should be posted of song moral virtue. Never= elas, as we shall se below, aa ell goul can equally infuence things beyond is ewa body eg in the eve of ack magic and the evil eye ‘rk Avicenna mkes no intrinsic diference berveen the miracle of ‘tophess and shore of caine the aly diference is that the prophets have "oles power to perform maces while the mins scquare ts power by effrs (tay, Isp 974) The general adit of am, however, ‘of lye dowa the fellowing dnetone Eki Rasp abifatih: (2) Te prophet delbertely aad voluntary Devforas miracles se evidence of te sath of bir mision, wheres the ine, soe he har ao sctolegl mizion, doesnot need such evdience nd ‘therfore doer not perorm mimcis voluntary And parpoly. {G) Hence te prope ows tht he bs pvfarmed a miracle whereas Se ‘Sint may aot have tis knowledge Indeed, the sin somedznes doesnot ‘even know whether 2 genuine miracle hus been performed by hin or ‘Ghether he has been imperceptibly deceived. (3) The funcion of the ‘ints miracle subsidiary to chose of We prophet and they are oaly ‘adnaatry of the laters trae minion (Nichobo's tasleton, pp. srees9) 15. idea IT, p. 254. This mart apparendy happen when the prophets ug without loung individalty, becomes somhow identified vith the ‘Roti Intlect—the ‘Giver of Form’ to Nature ar well art te hua PROPHECY 85 soul, That the whole create world obeys the prophets wil sce the ‘Whole erenlon Desotes his body a fe were snd ect Sympathy comer {o exit between the two. Thi explains Aviccna's sttement in hs ‘Susnetary om the peendo-Aroteian Thelp (od. A. Bada ia he “Grand erly, popes Ue not imposible tat He cal Sodee shoul in some way be employed by souls other than thir own, Especially, ‘when a soal Bar pereted is power in fs oa body, It ma, wea need Cr expediency so demand, employ, in is place, » higher and more noble "haa io own ‘eis oe noted that thi explanation of miracles occurs aso in Fuss alse (Hovaabad pg) striboted to al-Farab, who has aot spoken SFr anjebere the in hs extant work 'Penaar to the prophet {luli te Divine Facaley which obeyed by the natural dpostion of {be created macreconm jus as your sali obeyed by the created mico- ncn (ie- your body) and 29 the prophet pecfomss extaocdinary Since. 1 Sift, Pebtegy, Ws 17r- According to Plots the higher, contemplative mind of the sage act vunerse 10 the infenoe of maple but his iratonal soul Audough even hee magie cannot exces his amoroasnes, (1V; # 49) 131 erodae nos twa porrelar mat dapgcans 9 7§ uty Gord Coahis SS yofrone, nal ohm do v0 Dope eltod nd 08" dy perboféoe BEd Digernard rote nebo Sn, = 20 abe pre de ypc: eS cn a a Bl 8 Be 1 Here demons appear as depasted cantly souls of men. In his B Fiigadsa (a Tie Rest p. go), however, he dexribes = demon 3s ‘tn anry anna, poomiing fasta and > tanspazent body and capable of ehanging forms and be adds “ics the easing ofthe word, not Sinkions Theve let worde may perhaps suggest tbat demon 20 ened ot es fv Aenay ce Ae nl. Pt) we we Se told thar only exng thing have a deGaton, nomenon (6. ‘cnar) cannot bave an eience Hut io thir cae onl the meaning of the ord cas be given, ALFEribt (Rf Mail MutaGiga, Hoysoated, "4g Ait) deine demon a iratonal, immoral sna” "Sten, as ual names no phlowpher. The doce 5, however ‘used on eval elements taken Som Porpbyry and Inmblchus, alhougi Deir of thee afr that demons aze sole of deceased men (how ree, Proch in Tem 4, D, where he repre that Porphyry csingished {Bice clnees of demoas’ ane of which i te preeng soul of human% PRopmEey tx HAM Déings). Plotinas arms (Em, IIL, 4, 6; TH, 56) that demons are ‘wicket, reid, and have bodes of fit and ai; Tambllehus hes (De. ‘Mut I, 6) tae the demons are rational and cannot be See fom sae: Dereption, Both Poryry and Tamblchus inast on disiagulhing Beoween good and ba demons; according to Porphyry (De Abst He sa roa. opt 9, 544) good demons role matt wile she bad ons ate fled by matter assed s them and hey also change thet foes (De abs. TH, 97, ee.)indeed, according to Porphyry (Sent. $8) even he Human Sel, ica they Inve ther body ix am sery enemomest (params) can change forms acooding ts they are lnueneed by thes Eagiaaton. 7p. 1 interaing tm note that cern contemporary philosophers have ied w explais abvoraa! mental phenomena Oo ines reeniing ‘eos, ef, 2g. C.D. Broad (Th Mind end sr ple Nate, Pe 340), Seeking 9 explain ceria abnormal phenomena of nowadge though ‘elas, "Now «we ean suppae the the pret factor may penis for 2 time a let afer the cescton of the organism with which fe wae United © form the compound called John Joe's mind” This peyeie ‘Bet aot feel? s und, bot fe may carry modifcadont doe to cx: ‘evinces which happened fo John Jones while he was alive. And it may ‘ecome temporary ualted seth the organo of an entranced mein” Teemerges here (although, as we sa previously, Avicenna rejects aay od of soy survival, even in the forse of potamatc bods) thae at lesen the cate of ome undeveloped sul thers ost be 8 Kad of body sural 0 Bat they can have senspercepion, 80. Naja, pp $03, 28-904, 05 ako lek IE, pp. aa6-7. Tee perhaps Intererting tha a-Paab, tho in hi Madan peg aloo wares by dee fcibing the socal nature of man, prseeeds directly to devribe what 5 odor Heal at ie and doce not refer to the exe epee genesis, ftoraliey "by convention". ALFarss, who has ween much on the state, ‘coms to me more ofan ideale and his constrocsone of he good and the ‘Ded sates ave rather thenredal exten, altaough se weal ce Inte, this ical docs not prevent kim fom lying down pragmatic ters {or the recoguon ofthe wus law-giver "Te idea of man at social snisal is of course baed on Plato and Arisode who say hat socal life the peculiarity of man aloe; only God or anual can do without i, The doctrine that man's nature terentallyegitic snd iti only perforce that he recopsisns othe ighs gaint hime—the contractual theory put forward in modern times by Hobe, sr expounded and defended fp Piat's Raeile by 2 character ‘alled Giauson, PRoPuEeY 87 “The speccally weigious turn which the Muslin philosopher: give to th dicrae in mabing the faction of wring that of prophet liter Greck The Greeks, witen they Dogan to explain rationally and ‘BStodcally the populat cals of ladety ststecies, lawegives. aad fenton of culwal amenities developed the doctrine of 2 theesold tDeslogy. Most probably the erigiar of this dovene was the Stole oe of he, te ea ple a3 wea see De (Vi, 8) "Aan old lsat of wae ya {his would Be unnecemary. Since, however, he mases are thought nd Ful of impales contrary to ln, of rational anger and aggre fx loatons, noting cle remains bu hat they should be controled trough She far ofthe Unseen. Hence it sens to me, the Anceat have, with ged thought and not purpostiesly and haphazardly, itrodured into fe masse the idea about gods and belef in the Hades Te will Ss be nodced that che sccmunt given in thie pasge ofthe origin of ‘morally and law isthe vane a at of Avicena 81. AFLGR, ToltlalSé'ada pp. 41, 12-42, 9} alo I. Syst, 49; Media p. 57,1609; Aviceana, Nai p. 90410, When sucha man foe ei ts necessary that he sould promulgate Ine among people by the command and peraision of God, Coup His reveladon aad HIS Seading dows upon him the Haly Spi” 82, AMPA, Spd, p. gp, 20-5, 5; ste al Maing, po. 85, Avioanas, Neth pp. 505, 22-996, 10. Avseana then procteds to cre she phils bead the several religous inane of lam, Including Jaa 8 Tam 8, 85 See fare on the cultural aspect, Chapter I, section on ba liz’ bundation of the docine of prophecy on cultural inventions. 8%, Te should be noted that thee three forms broadly corespond tothe thvee specs of die Moulin phloeophen” conception of prophecy: the phlccopical with the itllecnal revelation; he “mytical’ wilh the Tmaginaive’ revelation, apd the legal (ls) wih the Shae’. That raodlicatons of etal (gi the ple of pga gods appear angel, ete) ‘ould have oosured i undertandabie and war, inden, ineiabl Undentandatle again, at, indeod, natural i the face chat the ated ofJewish, Coistan an Moti allegoristpilonphers to tel wadional ‘lgions is cevaialy ‘sot as radiel and severe as that of the Greekee propmncy tm ISLAM rationalist to ter popular religion (a fct on which H. A. Wolion scks {2 buld co mach of P's orginally). For the pagan popula eligion, compared to thse thee religions was, after alla cre network of ‘Bythobgy. 87. The Mastin plilospter do not explisily. diinguish benseen ‘ational of local eeligns nd iver reigns, They donot, therefore, cats fn this pone of view, eg. Judai and Lm. For hem, 3 ‘lig sytem would have the bt daime fr universality, which ute ‘Coymboti ar near che higher rath as posible, and such religion for ‘hea lther imple o explicisy, Idam 88. Naja 904 1g, The teaching that there i an inner compulsion fa philwopby and. wodom 1 een a wat snot Platonic but Acton. “A felicitous or ‘row individual an in for Acute, an pers caeep, since ral Thoval situe cam be realised oniy im 2 community: ef pap nal ravér Sov (8 rile) 8 nal he, per ye mad racecar 78 we maker Gebers xe Mair wai alee" Syaryrie pir yop nok St pve, ae Sich fetrepr tet wal Ble (Eth Nr % toagb 7). Plate, om the ‘ther tnd Sep. VIL, sro ogy) sys at Pilon whe ave caught the vison of the good would prefer to remasa ia Ue parade and would be on to come downto the pizner of he eave’ but woul be com= ited to dose nthe interests of the pie weal, But hs compulsion mot Ei ianes accu of thir knowledge and widom but an extemal oe. Tio nog thelore think A. E Taylor quite corece when be sys “TBE Phlleopber i the oan who har und the wey which lends to entales Ar the stone tine, mv man ler to Mima ond the man ah it loging rade hinaif inetaty animated Uy the rt of «monary tet cmimay at rg (Pa, he Man and His Wok, 326, p- 265), ge, Mato and Pythagoras came, according to the Maslin pilosphers, Reaver wo cst tan Avot or they didnot expres the bare tru Ure puble but couched it in spnbole Emre hs ben ald that the prope must we his worcs ae parable and allusions = «= And 90 che Gre plulowphers, Mle Pythagoras, Socrates and Pao, eed ie their sworks ioe fume wherdin sey entombed ther secret, Plato, indeed, ‘baked Aritote for publicizing Se (pcre) phicophy so hat Aritode [Ed tat sibough he ad dowbdes done his, he ad neverhceslft ‘gs in ho works, which only the wee could understand.” (Aviceans, {Ta Rast, 9p 124, 25-25, 3) ts This a substansally changed version of Piato's Pllc (290 Bs.) paormzcr &% ‘Seems... For the man who poset the ingly sence, whether he Rivwassaut wae lege Seanger: And in agree with thi we mur T supp, look soe te ght nd of rue one orto ex very fw en, where ech Fyht fle oer And the mem whee they tle over ling of helng geet, wih o witout wen lay sod whether they are Ha ee fore mets acording © our promot Gpaion, be suppenad © ‘Seer er nei acordanee with vom ar or ene. And eyes ‘GE = parla good cample of ts pia of ew: Whether they Sire guint ou wl or ith Gur wil. and wheter they are sicher fom, we eal them phyicans just he sine, a long wey cere Sithody by ar or chee tks then @Sesenary consequence tht ‘Soong fos of grvemmens tat one a procmneny right end he ‘sya govern wih the le af found be rly pomesed of ‘Stic sot meray 1. aoe ocobeep™pansbum inte above quomson Eom alanine poss fe whcther fey rae by lnw or wit a wether thee mjc ae willing or uvling and wheter hey ‘Bem’ Uh se ch or pooe-nne ofthe things cn be a ll ken no ‘Sune on any Tigh method? (Cao the bli i aq sere he ‘sep lan t ale eal oebued So he Charney oF depen). ‘ic gic on to modi this standin te following and scp the sscniy of aw i the alone of the esl hing. The pst as Rowevey i tt al ric regrée as an exenal Gtron fr rele Spe es tht te ruler aly ann obaining the support and cooperation of pegle a promlging te regiopetoe Smt Sgr Ths i a quneprapuane cieth, where dvording Play ‘Be real ulenip i Gotaglsable fom fo Staton nly DY the Poss ofthe ieee of aterae "Arce, regan the popes sce in eng wide acceptance ast te of Cota haporae sad iim is coanecton that he Svcs is corse of mincles ie acosary tat fe prope: shold ives special Guarsce dtingsshne him fom people wo become Sate ef something in hin wih hey sot pone There be po sSiS sacle whith we have peken 0 (jeep a, 17 29). Male Sy hcmelvs eset She sient ean of bir sca bt sly ior 2 hy can poi the divine minion of the prope Tse wy the Ee hue of be Ayal ye, "And hes Saat who i diinguhed fom he wt fhe people by vty (a, od che sentence (fake SG even tend be i anes worthy f ng workippes. (Ghee ag tems Min lg he ny ree mide) 92. The disincion berween thee two types af Inowledge is PlatonicAiton, but there ian important difezence which, a weshal show, ‘premuppons later developete in Greco-Roman regow pileophy. Whertiy for Plato and Arete, rational Inowledge aad opinion, ruvieion snd perwaton (or Sinagnation’) have deren us of object, lr ab Fabs inthis pamage they have the same objects and sre diferent sway of Enowng them. Tn this pasage the word wod ia the Hylarabad eon forthe Sixt, ‘Bar tones it malls, but mle sud thnee ter afer le meas & telpiaaly organized community, which ib the vending { have adopted bere and which squares pefocly with the account f organized state- religion (Cheologa ils) of ltr Greek pilwoptys the word mals Treannot understand in this ene. ‘9 As show in Section IIL of this chapter, the Mastin philsophess 25 again tis pe of religion since ie not rue piesophy but nether dow it succeed i inspiring people to goodnes which w the eaeatal ‘Eisen of ecligon. 95. ‘Water is probably an allusion to a Sue tradition according to ‘Bich Go's the before creation was om water rim whieh, as materia, The word wa made ‘6. An allusion to the eligios aecoune of material paralse g7- An allusion wo che meigious account of temporal cestion which $e plowpter: of lam deny. @. Augustine, De Gi Dei, TV, 27: Reatam ert in Kites, oct Bondiicem Seaevolam dspitave tia genera wade deorimy unum & oct ster «plosph tertum s principis cits... Secundu Thc gems) non congrurce cvtatibus, quod babestsigua supervac, ‘Higul edu quae obs popols nome: De supervacis nom agua caus Se. Que sunt ute ila quae prolate in mulieedinem nocent? kes ingot, nom exe dese ereden, Aweulapium . « «; prodicr im s doe quod homines fuernt et humana condone deecerat {Quid atiad? Qhod earam qué st alton Rabeantcvtates (comp. al Fisabt abors the underined words) vere mulacray quod veros Des fon secim habeas ner aetsem ec detaita corporis membra. Hate pontine. expedie sista fil eligione cts? Augustine ads Ezuialiy, Pracclars relgo, quo coufugiat Iberandr infirmus, ee ‘ottet qua iberetr nguias credatr el expedite quod falc! "Te tere of te eles tn question are, of eure, not ll denial, but many ar parallel, pxormsey o 99- Augustine op. cit, Vis. soo. ALFirbt's shar le eign eae, iydarabad, 1349 A ‘The teatie has Sehing sire wtb Avioona rather than with af Fuabrs docrne as we know fom hs gensne worl. See og p.: “te divine peophede soul i scarlet sage receives the emotion al Hone witb the ned of alge ormlaion 0? rot id, p. 8 son, B Garde, Le Pak Rage Paves, 205, wes exepon 103, ibid, p. 120, as paragraph. tof, This accord i important and, az Ihave sid, explains why the lowphen were aot au severe towards onbedony af the Stoic pile: nphert were fo tir egin, Teas thay, ot becaee of plosphy Be ‘orton, withthe acsceadence of God ati central tame, ast God GEd'not appear ia Liamie ealsure in the snowy and Snep-hnelled Sigures ae dis Apolo and ister on Chit. These were the real reasons (ad ‘Bs riysnes and syns) for the Koranierejecuan of posy and the SEsuav seligion wich 1 ineperable fom all anthropomorphic and polvheiie pagans.‘THE PHILOSOPHICAL DOCTRINE AND THE ORTHODOXY tis not the purpose of this chapter to state in detail the history of the doctrine of prophecy in orthodox Islam, but rather to indicate how the ptloropieal doctrine was received by i, how far accepted sod how far rejected: the dicusions of the non-pilesophical ‘Most thinker are full of scholatde ditinctons and rublleter ‘which the seope of this work does not allow us to indulge in. It {leo tobe admitted atthe outct that it dificult to define orthor oxy in this field of doctrine. There is fst the main body of the ‘sholasc theologians called mutakalimin who are dogmatic but nevertheless allow the limfed tee of reason to explain and support ‘he dogma. Then there isthe acute form of dogmatim which breshes seston teverely aide and wes it only and sometimes very acutely to Shatter rationale podtons. Having baniihed reason altogether, ‘his typeof thought ot very common in Ida, seeks support for tt dlogmatiem from the factual experience in history. The former school ‘whichis te Irget, ie admirably represented by alSahrastanl, the {econd by Iba Hania In between these two, admiting some Kind of ‘reason’, but rejecting the philosophers alogesher, rejecting alo Sufem but affirming spiritual values within the ramework of am, stand: the infuental Sgure of Ibn Taymiya who has contsbuted langely t the resurgence of Islamic antidasicism and Tamic ‘Modernism’. All thee schools of thought agree in rejecting the ‘parlyintelleetualist approach of the philosophers to the phenomenon {Sf prophecy; although the mutailiimin are perhape less averse to Secepe the inelectaal perfection of the prophet, ey acvertheles ‘emphasize the Shar'a-values more than the intellectual ones; and all fof them spend mort of their ingenuity in discussing the posit, ‘the nature and the value of miracle. "But these schools do not poses any privileged claim to being ‘exclusively ‘orthodow. There are equally eminent and prominent figures for who the ‘orthodox? commonity har exceptonal re vverence! and would not allow them to be sejected as ‘unorthodox, ‘who have accepted the eseatial of the philowphieal docvine it tet, and ave then tried fo weave it ato an ‘otepral Islam’. These PUNLOSOFHICAL DOCTRINE AND THE ORTHODORY 98 ze alGhsaill and Tbo Khaldon, the historian. I shall now give a ‘ary biel watement of the views of thee five authors a chronological order, 1 Dba Ham (8.456 AHL) In the case of Iba Hazm, iowa ar the ‘itera’ (3l-Zahi), the possibilty of prophecy in both its aspect—supernatural cog” nit and miracles—depends immediately on his conception of God ‘Sbeiag absolute and beyond the categorie of human undentanding. ‘An omaipoteat God who is beyond our moral categories of jut and lunjr, intentions and purpouss and equally beyoad our categories of understanding in tems of causation and ‘natures’ of things can flo anything. In this doctrine our author fllows the aver smuta- kalimtn who denied estsaton and ‘nature’ of things and according to whom God does not do the good and the jst but whatever God doo isthe just and the good. On this principle be denis the view Upheld by te Musasla and Avicenna that God mut send propbew {Br the guidance of hamanity®, He thus defines (posible) prophecy a¢ ‘Sending by God of a group of people (to humanity) whom He hat favoured by Bestowing exellene upon them-—throug: no other reson but His oon wil-and to whom He hae commnntcated know Idge without their going through the stages of leaming itor their seking it" Propncey, therefore, is posible. But how do we kaow thar ie daa actualy occured? Tha Hazm bases his proof on the cultural and sentise development of mankind which ald not have come about ‘xcept through God's communication of knowledge miraculously toa series of prophets (p. 7, 134)! “We know with certainty that none among ws, by dint of is own nature, can disover sciences and arts without being taught, 6g. Medicine, the knowledge of natural properties (Le. the uniform behaviour of natural objects by God's commane), of diseases and their various cautes and their treatment by berbe which can never be experimented in ther totality... Again, eg, the science of ‘azconomy, how the stam rotate averse space and return to their spherer—o performance which akes tens of thousands of years. 6, again, og language without which not only trainings impossible ‘bot on the wale any acvity of if; nor could it have been createdof pmopmey ix thas. by convention for that aleady presupposes thé ure of language’ Tha Harm goes on to enumerate other ar ke agriculture weaving, building and navigation and concludes (72, 16 sq.) ‘None of thee an be known without learning. Its then necesarly the cate that there be one or more persons whom God initlly taught these things, without a teacher, trough revelation” On the same principle ofthe exteme absolution of God which denies real esences oF natural powers (nce, & creations of God, {hey can be changed by him), Ton Mazm grounds the posibiity of miracles (09, Gt. p. 73, 17 19). His distnerion berween genuine siracles and sorcery if made t ret on the doctrine that ssoreere an only change (or make believe that be ean change) the external, ron exential qualities of things, whereas God, at the hands of a true prophet, does not only change the exentsl qualities of things ‘but can being new subveance into exstence (p. 76, 424) Soreary ‘san art which any man can learn whereas prophecy and mirades are divinely bestowed. ® Bath, the actualy of the propher's miracle: nd the Goality of prophecy with Muhammad's mission, are bared fon the principle of the absolute credibility of an overwhelming, widespread tradition (pp. 74 77) ‘Ton Hlazm’s position is that of exreme dogmatian, allowing no appeal t reason oven at a subsidiary level. zo far as he would fot admit any divine purpose (since purpose for him is a purely ‘human category) in prophesic misions, e is certainly not Sypical oflslamic thought on the subject. One cannot speak ia his dogmatic ‘System of any ‘denaturalaaton’ of the phenomenon of prophecy noe he admit: no nature. Like Tertallan, he would gladly sy ‘credo quia absurdum’ and ike Tamblichus (ice above p. 67, 29) Be smight wel have sid that God ean create knowledge in a fol 2 ALGhacal (8.505 AHL) ‘AL-Ghozi isa mos dificult author, notan ounightimpoasbleone, to understand in any coherent manner. This s because in his early youth he bad an acite criss which destroyed his traditional form ot ‘Bich then in his search far uth he had a series of disllusionmens with various disipline: Hke Kalim and philosophy calminating fn another crisis untl, as he profases in his Mang, he found quiende in Safin. However, although he was diated with PRILOSOFRICAL DOCTRINE AND THE ORTHODOXY 95, Talim and ploy, both seem to have let indelible ines Sahin. Wik Kelana he wos distiiedescems noe ees of the SGeappal bb which sgh tcicte bat wih the prey EroU Glecdeal meted it cployea. Agsontplwopber Be for in reyol chil becuse of the thesogeal Bl to We [bead of wich he devoted the geste part this Tea. Never ‘Slog in pte of tn open ov, 2 impomble to gge Se Seti wileh be valy renounced th dctars of the pilnopben Farhe bogen to-wit ootre eatie im wish he série pl feplna dosrine which he jee in works meant fr the pbc lp qulte daar at tee ute testba tar have born write tier he became ily colo ofthe cord beeen pepoy Sal Sunn crolony Sad there ster We pred an Tpent with piesophy, Tha precolywhy the eablsiment of {Ee chrmdlagedl tose of is works G2 coud be dove sod Menge ty dows cteia Or demining ‘gens’ works truth to cay hs pion, bs a way, te qucsion abost it {Tal belie ota genuine quation, arty is genuine be {Erthusecomtaied he cote wots? Even be that the men Sho ls citcoed in from both sides ofthe fine, al of tem Wed hin of deublomingeinss® shows that no ents wheter ined fom he chromalgy of works or oer, ar ser posible Sina Bat eve the qurion of direst metins—cintaic a exter pre one fade in one andthe sane work uoconectled contr ‘don Th can only be Breas he ha ceey adopted seat ‘tue doctines bots fon lsaieerhedany tod fom palsy STREL ave not rernced bur sapere” Uader thee conaitons T propos tog his views on propery ax he Mies sated ches Beebe tient wot’ the i arta which i potency Coie! and te Mg) olan (ony tpeq AL) which ctviwsy mean forthe poe and in whic he tak the ne ofthe Teh ‘AGisstts account of prophecy in the Maal Onds sexs to mee lito two ly dsc par in he St he gies area SSens to wath prophesy sud fo the scond he expounds 6 wotkng at tre lev of tannin, of intellect and of miracle Dering powers The fs part mated by an alent come Frome ti mainte dovtine of phlowpy wit te super rturton ofthe ogra helogys i the fezond part he bomo¥s we i96 PROPHECY IN ISLAM entirely and almost Hteraly Som Avicenna’s account. He offers three arguments for propbecy:— (0) The fist argument seeks to put the class of prophets as 2 distnet species above man: Jost ar the human specie i distinguished for other animale by the rational soul «.- Sinilaly che soul of prophets are distinguished fom men’s souls by a guiding and guided Enalet which is above all (normal) iateligence, rules and governs it though divine oxcellencs. Just at the movements of a human Deing are miraculous for the rst of animals «50 are all the mover ‘meni of prophet miraculous for human being (pp. 144, 15-452) ‘We are alo old that ‘prophecy is a divine fvour and gik which canaot be aoquied by elfort—although efbrt and acquaison are fecesary to prepare the sul for dhe reception of revelation by acte of worship accompanied by exercke in thinking and by pure and Sinoere desde Thus prophecy ie neither a pure chance (without a natural deer) so that every creeping chufling creature may be is ‘ecpien, nor it attained by pure efortso that everyone who thinks nay have it... Just as humanity is not aoquized by individual Inumans nor sngenese by mexbers ofthe “specie” ‘angel, but thelr sleds which flow from ther specie natures will depend on their fHfort and choice... 20 prophecy which is the specific nature ofthe prophets not acquired by them but thir actions which flow from ber specific form depend on their acquison and choice in order to [prepare themecves for revelation” (pp. 142, 8-149, 12). AL-Gaazall then goes on to portray the sound constition and excellent natural ‘moral character of such being. ‘What doce ths passage tek e» periorm? It obviously attempts to ‘deraaturalize” prophecy, so that not every plalesopher or mystic ray become a prophet, by posting a species of prophets. But once {hE species has been posted, prophecy becomes af necessary and ‘natura’ for each of is members 2s bumanity for « human. The ‘Givne favour and gi tums out to be ultimately nothing but ceria prophede capacities which must be realized. Nor had the philosophers said that any human can be a prophet, eventhough he ‘bea pulocopher ora mystic. Far from ths, they say that the propiets soul i endowed with certain intelleetal, imaginative and tele [Kinetic capacities which cannot be acquired either by learning oF myrie purseation, "Al-Ghazali calle chic argument the (general argument’ for the ‘eeablitiment of prophecy: it depends on the positing of = prophetic PRILOFOPHICAL DOCTRINE AND THE ORTHODOEY 97 Intellectual power formally and specifically different ftom ordinary thought® Wha reatns ae thereto baliore that sachs specs 3 Schul an, indeed, necessary? To prove this al‘ Ghasat af wo ‘rguments the one staring fom maa, the other staring fom God 1) The argument whic ais it point of departure ftom man's aghin, tlt, the one setly orl, the ober based on “wll- ‘Sit! or ‘conventional morality. ‘The moral argument Mas a {Blowss"The act which man can perform contain bots good and Pad one, Some acy therefore, mut be perormed others must be boidad: Not everybody Knows where the good ends and the bad gine Nery the mat eset fw te its hi) ‘hse are the prope, the promolgator of religious lave, As fo Seger al ict at ora Che seedon IV): = lgblstor requed to Geermine te rights and ‘oie ot eid pas Oke tsar insane nearly Alpendent on co-operation but whersn individuals are ptt regard ScEinteet asthe ony inne goveming principle ‘Where al Ghali agua dif Gom the phlowphen isin is religous imple whi leads him to regard the angels of rveaton ott quad autonomous being, a tae pilowpher do, but ‘png under the direct order of God w communicate svlation © the peophets The fomuladon ofthe Shar als ot pale ‘excep there be 8 (propheds) intellestsmited by fevelaton, destined «0 prophecy, and Growing Belp om spiita! beings (angst) which Ue deermined (by God) to preserve the World-order, ace according {o His Command, conduct themscves ends His Creation accord ing to i pattern of behaviour, and rule aoording o His judgment. ‘The comands regarding the law-deerminaio! come to them fom Goa and fom then tothe povon charged withthe wut (ue the Prophet) 9. 47, 18-48 CQ) This Hae of ought Ich aL. Ghazar to his hid argument wie be dedares to be the be one. This srk to show God 1 be the Fint and, inded, the ole Commander. Brryog that ‘over har a uver ference ‘sara movement mean tha tbe ‘hover bas wily aad, finally i the movements are for the go0d, the mover 4 Commander. This Command, when. aecesanly ‘bey ait is bythe Heavens ithe Command cf rogmentation ot Seamagenent Car altadbs) but when aced witha beng capable (Gaobolience as ran-—who stands the reso of good and el— {tits moral Command (amiealait) Tefolows that there mast8 PROPECY Ix ISLAM ‘be human media of tranmitting God's Command to humanity. ‘Those who accept God only as creator, deay Him Commands which they attribute ‘only to the climer of prophecy as their sole author, ot going beyond him (to God). Thus (according to these people . 169 1459, to them, what the prophet poses of ftution and eal revelation i of te sume Hn s use which magicians and Semeated fol have, the only difreace beng that te one com ‘ands good while the oter commands ed andthe emested have 230 inteligene. This amount of diftrence cus even among Ord "ary peolz and thos the prophet bas ao cuenta divcneSon fom the magidan and the demented” (Soe 29) The a mater ise of Avion’ sgacry. When be war infrmed of sange in the word (ke prophecy aad rage) which he coud ot deny, he atempted to inepre theron hlesophial pniples ar hesays expres in i hse” Toa Taymiya holds that neither soreery and soothssying depend fon the power of the soul ner the prophetic revelation: the former depends on evil spists and devi the other on God and the angel. “The philosophers have, therefore, not given to prophecy iis duc place and thus many so-called Suse. «ke Ton ‘Arabl and Iba, Sabin have been misled by them, who accepted this philosophical theory and operated upen it with this own matic. That = why Ton" Arabi says that saints are better than prophet (p. 172, 12-15). ‘This & because Tbn "Arabi thooght that he had dlzect acces to the intellectual source of which the angel which iepires the prophet is only a symbol created by the imaginative faculty. “The author then defines (p. 172, 23) a prophet (Nabi) as & man whom God sends a message. The ordinary prophet is a reformer: be Togs mesg t0 8 people who do ot conte the uth ofthe amessage but are simply morally not living up to what they recognize 4 roe. The prophets function is t elorm hem morally. But ‘when a people refuses to accept the very truth, the tack of the prophet & of a revolutionary character. His funexin it that of a fecio-moral crasder (ike Moos and Mohammad) and very often such a Kind of prophet (called Rasil) brings with him a new Shari'a a sociomoral code to establish a acw order of society (P-*78)- in passages lke those quoted above Iba Taymiya breaks through ‘the scholastic formalinm ofthe Kalim and grapples with what are the basic isues between the invlleetualse ether of Heleniom and the PRILOSOPHICAL DOCTRINE AND THE ORTHODOXY 105 ‘moral dynamism of the Semitic tradition. He rejecs the concept of the purely cognitive goal of human life because be thinks that, espe the efor of the Muslim philosophers to safeguard the ‘wanscendence of God and of truth the intellect approach to ‘ality & cently humanist and desvoys the absolute character ‘of the moral imperative. Te isto be noted chat hs reaction is not ‘only againte philosophy but i even more severely dizected agaist iiyticim. He wither to destroy the intellewualsm of Avioeana ‘beeaute it hat prepared the way for Ibn ‘Arabs doctrine of the Unity of Being (Wabdatal-wujad). v Ihe Khalai (d. 808 AL) Ton Kibaldtts views ia the last section ofthe fist chapter of bis ‘Magadia, are very interesing dhs docason ofthe dierent inowa type of occlt knowledge i fall of se distinction, Bur bis ‘ows on the subject have not been studied 0 fr, is account of propery lst recone the orthodox andthe eatioale Ee" cans and attempts to rationalize the supernatural of the cortodor kali a ‘According to Tom Khaldaa, the whole created nature represents a stom or sucrre composé of hierarchic grado level. Each fovel bas to lil (fag) whereby it is distinguished fez the innmedately lower snd superior level. The level ze not, howeves, Absolutely Clowod fom one another but have inrmediate Eas (ics), Thos there are cerain hing which are ater pore Iincals nor pure plans and silly here aze thing ke the jeli-is, which are bot plan and anima, The levels run in ‘oe anther aod, Tin-Rhadinasers, at thse Knits ci posible ic cotain members of one specie progress tothe higher species tr deve to the lower spades "The messing ofthe Hnkage += that te upper ead of + corn level has a pected eapaciy [aid olga, as oppored to the “remote capacity") of sbelate Drepareines to beoome the fim pat of the higher lee This Tolsom not made in connecdon wi any doewine of evolution oto explain the knows face in the Selde of atonal and socal {ences sd religion ‘Mass analy reveals double nature: corporeal and spiel By visto of bis spinal nature man sands st the treo of 2d some Tare men cad, trough thar endowment of immense106 PRormzcy i TEAM. spivitual power, ceterinto, the sublime angelic realm: “This argument necessitates that (some human) souls have a (perfected) capacity 19 jump out of (inslakh or ings’) humannes into angelicnes: and actualy become f the species of angels at some moment of ime afer the perfecdon of ther own epsftal character. Init Hnkage, therefore, the sol has an upperside and a lower tide; by its lower Side it Hnked to the body whereby it acquires sense knowledge ‘which gives it the capacity to acquire actual intellection, while on its upper end iti linked with the angelic level whereby t aequizes (higher) Inowiedge of the Unseen’ * Tha Khaldi then proceed to describe three types of human soul ‘The frat is dependent in fs cognitive functions entirely on psycho- physical functions of sense perception, imagination and memory ‘Phese people can ‘only combine concepts (acquired through sense. perception) according to certain definite and limited (logical) sw “The movement of their thought is dependent on the body and thos limited. These, the common run of scholars and thinkers, are, therefore csenially unoriginal The tecond claw of men turn the movement of ther thought sway from the clomed crcl of primary and ssevident (al-avrvalyst)tuthe to purely sptital knowledge, Since their mental and spiieual powers are greate. These men, Deing ginal thinker, not only rexon by the combinations of concepts and judgments, but direedly inmtg, and, not being fetered by the necesarily limited range of the fst catagory, have walimited scope of knowledge. These are people of genuine mystic experience. ‘Bar whereas even the second category mover only within the confines of the human soul fue although touching it highest and purely spiritual Timi, it is only in the case of the prophet that ‘the human soul i trandormed into a higher, angelic selfhood, as we ‘have leamt before. While the perfection avained by the mystic in this life may be atesined by many good sous in the life beyond, ‘the prophetic perfection is imited to the prophets, not attainable by say cde oF soquiison."" Again, the prophet revelation 5 of two types. Biter the prophet hears a kind of inarticulate internal sound, or he visibly perceives the angel. In both caves, ‘the mesage having been received, the prophet ‘retam t0 the Ihuman set and the mesage transforms feelf in terms of human ‘undentanding, so that humanity at large may be able w understand i. But wheres in the Set cate the prophets undemtanding of the revelation is not concurrent with th revelatory proces, but suddenly outils PRILOSOPRICAL DOCTRINE AND THE ORTHODOXY 107 vas upon Bim atthe end (pehaps the prophets interpretation ‘Sinvloed nhs) 5d farthest inesiably takes the form ofspeceh 2th aman lvl, the second form of revelation sleaze, i ame Tecously uadentood and hence the prophet ses the angel, since ESgheis the dearest of ll ene cs obviow that Tim Khaldie bas devised this heme in order to meet the requirement both of pinoy and of ochodox Kalam, Repoeated, eg by alShsbrarsni. He adm cerain natural Spastic (on the base of which be also enabishes the docrine lima or impeccably of the prophes) by which the prophet is ‘blew idea himself aabininal sig and yethemovesstiey “Witin the formal deGnotons of the enhodox thealogy. Actually, {Ee doctne is fndamentally she same a that ofthe philosopher ‘uly thee had:notexpresed teks Gnetions formally, and aden (a te subject of mes they found themselves uaable to make sty Ghsncdon Bot on his subjece Ton Khalson i able to make a x {ncdon ony by adopting the Kalisedoctrne i to and by ging ‘pal talc ofnataral fale of the soul "The one Hiking pot on which Ton Khaldin dies fom the phlosophe snd the one rua peat in te pbiloophical doctrine perhaps mow repugaant fo orbodony concerms the seal verbal Fovdston and the whole satu ofthe Shac'a. The philosophers End held that thee are not the pure trth but were symbolic repre Sentatins of st cated by the song imaginative power of the ropber For Zbn Ktaldin, the actual recorded revelaGon—the Kotani certily the buman form ofthe purely sptel cvine ‘lor, but there sno suggerdon that itis only sybeli. He dows et alow even a poyolegieal gap Between’ she word andthe ual menage o0'Cat the former night e regarded asa inte {rciaton by the prophet Bim of the later atest inthe second the two ype of prophesereveation noted above The rbjece of imagination is introdaced in 2 eiferent context viz in order to explain dream bot marty to explain ceainothet eclt fons of eogaitoo, Bue sothaying (ain). Sothayen, GGrinees snd imagisaae, we ae 1d (p.8f 145) abo Gepend for thi permauce on te aaaral facies of ta souls. Bot nether ie they ableto trator (isl) shee soul ito subliminal sires lie the prophes, nor indeed, ate thir souls song enough for mysteal ahievenents They aze weaings with am ambition 0 Prcome propicrlie Since they have act much nateral capaci,108 PRoPuECY 1 18Lax. they take recourse to employing the aid of extancous elements, {ike mirrors, the hears of animal et, to derive inepzation, When ‘hey do ge inspiration, these external images, which have alzeady Decome finmly fixed in their suong imaginative faculty, become ‘xed up wih t and interfere. Thats why in their report truth and falechood are mixed:— “Since the vision of men has shown we tat there ets another ‘ype ct man whose inelacve uly ipeled by nature w move ‘mystical atsiade olf, life of religio-moral action is at best a ladder 1, One would ot be wrong, I shin in saying that the inftaence of ‘which ie to be transcended. The orthodox impulse i activist; it {-Ghaut and Toa Teyasvs, taken singly, on the Mase community toes not reject intellectuals but subordinates it 10 the ead of Soins ne been gree han that of the etal of eka theo ‘moral dynamism. The plilceophen’ realty is an immobile eteral Egan Pindoneal though 3 may sean, the communis concrete truth; he onthodony's alimate reality also certain eral tray ‘Slides have not sanded spivomionson aod fundamentalism at So- Dut being primarily 2 moral wuth, if must real in moral action, Compatible, although exremise lie che Wabhibts and exten Sus Es eth coecepine au areore nee ofiometiog 2 ‘Rave done 00. serly it encaly of ompting wich commune TEMS | ay gpd a tal (i 7 AH) 0-6: the orthodox Kalim, bat ie expliily formulated by Ton Tayziy a ‘and party by alGhesal. Trster, the otiodos fel that the toe imperaveaes of his a pe rere area eee cet eee smoral ruth cannot be auficienty guarded ales it i posted above felt aust. ors aes Oe Se ee ‘mumanity as such, And here we see the very diferent motives which Tee ad bake premizes (an Aristetan doctrine) and that these mast ‘have led both the philosophers and some of the orthodox to the {fave been dacovered by prophets by intaon. But whereas Avicennian appurentyidetical din is, hae the prophet identical with [inlene sa satus? eccmenc Ina Hum’ rocaton wean EP Sagal The ortiodox fe that the plone have brought [Eleni here canbe noting ‘stir in fim Hac low {he angel down to man; thei own son to ae man erin “AGhul uo tnpoyel ths agunent from Un scat elt fined cates up co the ange Ie is Ue motive, and not the phlo- event (is engi) whe Ti Taymiy rece ving (ee ‘ophical princinle ofthe theory of knowledge concerning the density eed, 22) sat ras wo the ares of propleny fam the ofthe intellect and the intligie, that bas led some ofthe orthodox ioc ote ste rang he eee of ete eS a i ee eens Pee “Fee cine Grins nga ofthe devpmeat of tuman eure is pice the—and cpectlly Aviotona's ellos to sneguard Be ie oe no vg fe dope clcag be ‘separateness’ of the Active Intelligence, the raison ¢'étve of the latter inventors or supposed inventors of cultural amenities, the mpaios eiperat_ is Yeally the ineleceal guidance of bumanity: i yery epithet {ihe cee of We cane las a Pay, dl VI, gto). Hs Greek ‘Acuve” shows that it centalnif deed not I endre~function Misiogy tase areand itr on Prodicur—al he investors of ‘eto create forms in matte and peal in man. And foe Aveo, Barware cede fae Protoss agent Dib), os bees od the sicmal eabtence of the Univeral Intelec and of tain Side Promcea and Feet, Dene sal Dicuss are celsied Sct dioucd as deeoera of tuum ee. In Bude (te, Vs ig stony me eign spoch endowed t= god ae itr’ doting, anvignon and ar of ooicying eth 1 FESy i The caloge cal dbeoveris nls of cou bamanity are covcates, as it were® This quasiimmanentim fd busi pechape seemed t9 orthodox Ielam even more daa- {gerous than the temporary identity ofthe prophet with the divine in seen te ere ey oer ee : ca ESicefenchies Foy ntimgiiieinhenecct ee | nw. Meeps rye Seances ast yw ccm de meng ot nent wee | SEMSL Steen ct Sie Darah wetter me a Se ce he ig of ae ee | Bee at ween = cine gc Ee ” than the emptying of man’s being in the divine. J Maslim popular bee! the Judaeo-Koranie prophet were hailed ss ‘ital bentao of mankind4 This dntneson isa changed venion ofthe distinction (ce above, B. 88) Denween the ‘natural? and “cultivated? frame of prophecy. The ‘nasaral form here appears ia Chinn acount asthe rect work of God. 6, Tha Taymiya, op ct, p88, quotes Averoes a syn of kim: ‘One day you area Yemenite when you meet a man fom Yee, ‘Butwhen youseesomeonefrom Matadd you aertyousre fom Ada! 1. Thus he as fimly adopted the doctine fom philosophy snd philo- ‘ophical msc tht mani the woul and not souand-body te body ‘as been given fo man par as an ell fo contend agus atest) and arly abn inital instrument. This docine which appeas ia bots pe ‘ttre, i coupled enpaccally a exterie teativa, withthe Tour ‘een, or rather recreation af the Body. In the cote wentans (ep MEG LO Cy gay, p10, td selena, i, #309 AY. p. sa) the resurrection of te boy & weakly and Gri) ‘seated and is accompanied by an secount of ewer deny whi ‘sien ode ftom Aviceana. Yad Tm Taymiya's dexiption (op. tes 179) of him (fered ofcourse, as a condemnation) very ape, Mis ate ‘ets aresai-ay between the Ming and he pilsophy ahem you ‘Shi'a mictre of pomphy sad Ian 8, Both inthe prefice and atthe end ofthis work (pp. ¢ and 216), al- (Ghazdt ses the expresin "tobe guarded agnmst tee who are ot ibe it (abmadnin bi ‘als ghayriallits)" wich abo the dde of other eoceie eae, 9, This isthe ine of though illowed alvin is Mung which he wrote ‘about the age of ity (prefice): Beyond reatn theres nother grade Jn which another eje is opened by wich ae som the Uncen aol the fase and other things as inacoesble to zeason a nteligbis ae t the dlscininatve (cogtatve) eal... et’ (Secon oa Fropney). Like Ton Hazm, alGhesat bo sayy hare tht sciences ike tedicne and sstonomy are 3 rel of pophete reveation. So far a the extatal ‘ature of prophecy gow, thee eau Lnle diderence between the ‘Mea aad he Mange 25 J is i ith hh Ghat, i Tae, opm A eana’s conception of iaginaive propbcy a an almrtnonate Sstonomusctac ofthe prophet nd vath th soo tn avesly ‘odes which consi all nowiedge ofthe fue in thenscives a2 mater Fnaural phenomenon sed ots being ader the direction of Ged LOSOPHICAL DOCTEINE AND THE ORTHODORY 115 11, Tn this work we Sod bo philsophy and oficial Im expresed pilbsopbically, bot virmally no mysttisa ae sucks May it hove been ‘writen before 488A. the year wena the ator say ia the Nii De adopted mysicea? 2, There i again te evidence arto the date of this work Alebough {he author sys (p74) This (eal) Shas Sie hundred yar ld’ ‘his x move probably not meant in a precis sense, I regard iy howeve, wey dey thatthe work wat writen inte inthe author lies later hat Me a eb-Qndn 15, AlShabrastnl, Nat clean fim aKa, 8. Guillaume, pees, 85a, Me Bi 85 ok 15 Bid a, ag 16.5, wp 25, 1806, 9 27. Bi, 29,60. ‘a onder tata ahowagh hey bs by Bebe aoe albstenhing on propery 19, Mapadin, Bulag p81, 8-6 20 i, p81, 272. 21 This three dasoaton on p 82, x54. 2. hid 85, 734 Sct pan’ es eben lel ned ated Be ies cmnibo hominiba et elas ox hoe van opens gud specie Humana es ater... et (According to Averoe, the active and the potent intllecs ae no ovo sibrances But One) | alINDEX Aioe Inligewe, Inlet: 15, ‘95 #5 8,50 92515, 22,16, 947 35,9, 161525, 10525) eh 28; X10, #5, 16,19) 367 38 38 Gempiod); ta, te Gaps, 16 (implied), 28 (enpid), 30, 355-2 75h 4 2 2552 8 9.31526 35, 983 25 41528, 352, 883 2695, 9h 95% 958 Gopi) 20, $8; ts 2, r . 585 902,15, 15,92 35755 26, 35, $5594 18 07, 92,38, 961, Sito, tes gpa gts3b3; 46, 25 eh 3554821; Betas 6, 7,19, 20 6B 8, 2, 25,347 8 35; 302, #205, 6 110 375 B55. Aztis 925. ‘Aloander of Aphrodias, 23) 95 25 98 405 1 718,255 37 2h 45 05 11 1527.90, 388 538, 34h a 36s 8 1, 13, 30, 38 455-27 1 Op 408 8, 34: Joh Alsen, 7%, 5. ‘Alla, 79,16 20,25 Antchenes, 7528 ‘Apollo 916. ‘Arab, 4 905x029. ‘Asis, hy 75 35 3515, 985 ae S85 2 10, te 175 2 40, aT 3519.28; 2763, 115525 905 3% 4 a 2s 513: SB ab, 365 6 39 375 8 10; 65 29; {8,385 70:29; 8y 16585 905 86, 98588 15, th 90,357 9 pats aA 6 27. ‘Angsing, 9527; 62 28; 8, 9.25598 1 Aveross, af 18 $45 24420, 315 35 185 4 75 Op 24576 15 7 8516 5.5 #00, 35 30m) 55 228. Avletana, 135 16; 46 27,28; 35, 16,25. 27,3011 315% 12, 20, $35 16,8, 93 395 25,26, 92 93:20, 4 93 2h 15,35 99 a 231 a5, 15, 37, 4252 2 9 25, 28; 29 19,2625 27, 3, $25 28 4 35 0), 16, 28,87 5475 38.17, 255 3% Be Se, Jer am 0, 17 38 15) 36,14 17, 315989, 20,9852 13544205 45,25 125 4595.90, S05 5 7 a8 234i 2p 35) 9 i ln 2, 18,35, 285 881 Sh 215 58 155 oy 285 Ben 5s 675 65.25 25,26 26) ht 36; Oy 1 293 75 a 253 Thy20, 9m 27 He Te 2 a7; The 18: Ths B15; 79,20; 84 8, 18 40: St 8 9:84 8 Bite 43 30,35; 88 20,18 25,88 377 yah on 93 98:17:96 1707 19598 10; tom 4; #05 16; 204, Tipe By x30)98) 501, 0510, ‘ —— mint