the sense of taste and the sense of seeing, his opinion is incorrect. He likens al-Razi to a wild uncouth man who has never seen and tasted a fruit. By chance he gets grapes, dates, figs, melons and walnuts. He cats the walnut along with its crust and finds it unpalatable. He therefore hastily comes to the conclusion that all fruits are tasteless. Obviously this conclusion was wrong. Similarly al-Razt holds that the pleasures which can be felt only through the sense of touch predetermine the exis- tence of pain. He, therefore, is inclined to bring the sense of seeing, the sense of hearing, the sense of smelling and the sense of taste in line with the sense of touch, which is obviously a wrong premise. After this general refutation Nasir-i Khusraw refutes the arguments of al-Razi seriatum. Referring to the sense of sight he quotes al-Razi as maintaining that by looking at ugly people a person leaves his natural state. But when he sees beautiful people he returns to his natural state and this is what is meant by calling a thing of beauty as a joy for ever. Nasir-i Khusraw contradicting al-R4zi says that supposing a person has never seen a beautiful thing or an ugly one, he is in his natural state. If thereafter he sees a beautiful person or thing he should feel pain because he has left his natural state. Conversely speaking, he should feel pleasure when he comes across an ugly looking hideous object because he has now returned to his natural state. This is, however, against the established truth as ex- perienced daily. AlRazi further maintains that a harsh and jarring sound disturbs and pains a person, so when he hears the soft and sweet sound of certain musical instruments he feels at ease and satisfied. However, Nasir-i Khusraw contends that in his natural state a person is not supposed to hear any voice or sound. Later if one hears the sweet and charming sound of a guitar or a violin he slips out of his natural state and according to al-Razi he should feel pain. It is, however, strange that instead he enjoys the instrumental music. He should feel pleased, if al-Razi is to be fol- lowed at the terribly repulsive braying of a donkey because on hearing it bray he returns to his natural state while he actually feels pain and dis- comfort when he hears the donkey braying. The same is the case with the sense of smelling. If a person’s brain is free from smell and odour he is considered to be in his natural state, Now, if some one applies otto to his clothes, he would, according to the Principles laid down by al-Razi, get out of his natural state and invitetrouble and pain while the fact is that he enjoys the sweet fragrance of the perfume. Similarly if a person is unaware of every kind of taste, both bitter and sweet, and some one gives him honey to eat he would, according to al- Razi, get out of the natural state and feel pain while actually he enjoys and relishes the sweet and pleasant taste of honey. Practically the same is the case with the sense of touch wherein also al-Razi’s theory stands disproved. If a person is habituated to remain naked he is in the natural state according to al-Razi but if he is provided with acoat of fur or some other dress he would leave the state of nature and feel pain. But this is not the case as is our daily experience, and a naked person would feel comfortable after wearing clothes according to the weather. Nasir-i Khusraw then proceeds to give his own definition of pain and pleasure. In short al-Razi regards pleasure as something non-per- ceptible or the absence of pain while Nasir-i Khusraw and other thinkers maintain that pleasure exists all alone, is something eternal and tangible at the same time. A person does not enjoy looking at a thing of beauty because he has been plagued with looking at ugly and unscemly things but because the sense of aesthetics is innate with him. Nagir-i Khusraw writes:- 8} Oye O22 STL Ole OL Bored Gh Be Gk SS jl pop a ci5S wed peg KS ce se ols A ot aya (H) Sy And he (al-R4zi) also said that people derive pleasure by looking at a beautiful woman just as by looking at an ugly woman they feel unhappy and miserable. This remark of his is extremely absurd and meaningless. Even in the case of animals and reptiles this observation stands dis- proved as for instance a snake is swayed by the melodious music of the snake-charmer’s gourd pipe. Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi has taken strong exception to these views of his town-fellow in his al Mabahith al-Mashrigiyya and has pointed out the errors made by al-Razi. Nevertheless Imam al-Razi admits that pain and misery far exceed pleasure and joy in this world. And pleasure and joy mostly follow the disappearance of pain and misery. Therefore,cause perceptible pain, but returning to the natural state all of a sudden does bring in pleasure and satisfaction. Similarly leaving the natural state suddenly causes pain and discomfort. For instance, if a healthy person suddenly falls ill he will feel pain and discomfort but recovering slowly will afford him a sort of satisfaction and comfort. It clearly means that going out of the natural state all of a sudden brings pain and likewise returning to the natural state all of a sudden brings pleasure. Therefore, there is no pleasure without pain. It is as the Qur’an says (XCIV : 5): Fane peal go OI Trg pmsl Go Ob Or what the Arabic expression so clearly exclaims: Fall de gill The exposition offered by al-Razi of ecstasy and pain is the same as given by the modern science of psychology. Quoting Le Bonn, (The Book of Views and Beliefs olazaty <1Vts) ‘Abd al-Salam Nadwi says in the Hukama’-i Islam (i:196) that both pain and pleasure cannot last long, their very nature demands that these should be ephemeral, for the simple reason that if pleasure becomes constant it will cease to be pleasure, similarly if pain comes to stay it will cease to be pain. Continuing Nadwi says that pleasure remains pleasure only till such time as it does not come to stay, and pleasure cannot be felt unless it is contrasted with pain, and eternal pleasure, according to Plato, is meaning- less, as against the view of certain thinkers. The reasons which prompted al-Razi to propound his theory of pain and pleasure are not precisely known but it is clear that his views reflect on the eternal pleasure of the Hereafter. On this point Nasir-i Khusraw refuted al-Razi on the ground that one of the fundamental beliefs of Islam is the existence of Paradise which is a mine of pleasure for those who perform virtuous deeds, because there is nothing like pain therein. On the other hand, for the sinners and evil- doers there is Hell, a place of extreme misery and pain without any pleasure worth the name. (cf. Zad al-Musdfirin, p. 229). While refuting al-Razi, Nasir-i Khusraw uses very strong language and says that the basis of al-Razi’s theory is the sense of touch only, while with regard to the other senses, i.e., the sense of smell, the sense of hearing,b. Ifa factor puts a man or animal out of the natural state it pro- duces both ecstasy and pain and when the object returns to the natural state it brings ure in its wake. c. This means that if a person or animal is afflicted with pain after getting out of the natural state he or it cannot return to the original natural state, Therefore, ecstasy in this case means to enjoy pleasure after suffer- ing pain. d. The effect of two intra-contradictory factors produce ecstasy and it lasts only till such time as the effect of the first factor lasts and the object affected returns to its natural state. If this pleasure-producing factor itself comes to stay it is the cause of pain and sorrow because it drives the subject out of its natural state. And to come out of the natural state means in fact pain and suffering. e. We may, therefore, conclude that constancy of ecstasy causes pain and suffering in the ultimate analysis. In order to prove his point al-Razi gives a concrete example. He says: Suppose a man stays in a house which is neither hot nor cold then he is in the natural state which is free from all feelings of ecstasy and pain. If later on this house suddenly becomes hot the man will begin to feel the heat causing uneasiness. However, if a cool breeze begins to blow slowly, the man will begin to enjoy it. Why? Simply for the reason that he had gone out of the natural state due to the oppressive heat and is now return- ing to the original state because of the cool breeze. The pleasure that he feels would only last till such time as he returns to the natural state, which neither knows heat nor cold. On the other hand if this cold comes to stay it will also be the cause of subsequent pain because now the person concerned will go out of the natural state. If later the house again bec- comes hot the subject will feel comfort and pleasure. This means that the comfort which a person feels after suffering pain is in fact pleasure, and pain means getting out of the natural state. The natural state in itself is neither the cause of pain nor of pleasure. Similarly, when a person comes out of the natural state slowly he does not feel much pain. For instance, when one begins to feel hunger slowly one does not feel much pain. But when hunger or thirst become acute and one either takes food or drinks water one feels satisfaction and pleasure. It shows that getting out of the natural state by degrees does notthe dead, whose bones even have been reduced to ashes, of rising and com- ing to life again. (1X:30, and various commentaries on the Jewish belief that Ezra was the son of God). Being a natural philosopher and a follower of Thales of Miletus he firmly believed in Matter and unfortunately com- pletely ignored the clear stand of Muslim theologians on the point. It was due to his individualistic ethics that he came to adopt a critical attitude towards established religion. In many writings he refuted the Mu‘tazila theologians like al-Jahiz, Abii’l Qasim al-Balkhi, Ibn Akhi Zurhan alias Misma‘iy, who attempted to introduce scientific arguments in theology. ALRazi wrote a book in his refutation called Kitab al-Radd ‘ala’ l-Misma‘ty al-Mutakallim ft Raddiht ‘ala Ashab al-Hayila. He also criticized and re- futed the Shi‘a and the Manicheans. Among his adversaries are included the the Dahrite Abi Bakr Husayn al-Tammar al Mutatabbib, the Sabean Thabit ibn Qurra, the historian al-Mas‘idi and Abmad ibn al-Tayyib al-Sarakhsi, a pupil of Ya‘qib ibn Ishaq al-Kindi, the philosopher of the Arabs. Unlike the Muslim Aristotelians like Averroes al-RazI denies the possibility of a reconciliation between philosophy and religion. Unfor- tunately al-Razi ’s religious views were either heretical or in direct opposi- tion to the teachings of orthodoxy. These have been partly dealt with by the late Paul Kraus and S. Pines (presently of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) as co-authors of the artcle “al-Razi” in the first edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam (vol. i:315 ff.). One of the philosophical problems dealt with by al-Razi is that of ecstasy (<) and pain (p) or inclination and disinclination. His theory is expounded in his Tafdil Ladhdhat al-Nafs from which Abi Sulayman al-Mantiqi al-Sijistani gives some extracts in his stil] un-pub- lished Siwan al-Hikma (MS. in Muhammad Murad in Istanbul, No. 1408). As against the generality of philosophers al-Razi has taken his own pecu- liar stand on this problem and Nasir-i Khusraw in the Zad al-Musdfirin and Fakhr al-pin al-Razi in his al-Mabahith al-Mashrigiyya and Sharh Isharat have severely criticised him. The gist of what al-Razi has written in this context is as follows:-— a. Both ecstasy and pain are perceptibles; therefore there is neither pleasure nor pain when some one is in the natural state because the natural state is not tangible,YOM CeLeM Neh? im trouble and pain while the fact is that he enjoys the sweet fragrance of the perfume. Similarly if a person is unaware of every kind of taste, both bitter and sweet, and some one gives him honey to eat he would, according to al- Razi, get out of the natural state and feel pain while actually he enjoys and relishes the sweet and pleasant taste of honey. Practically the same is the case with the sense of touch wherein also al-Razi’s theory stands disproved. If a person is habituated to remain naked he is in the natural state according to al-Razi but if he is provided with acoat of fur or some other dress he would leave the state of nature and feel pain. But this is not the case as is our daily experience, and a naked person would feel comfortable after wearing clothes according to the weather. Nasir-i Khusraw then proceeds to give his own definition of pain and pleasure. In short al-Razi regards pleasure as something non-per- ceptible or the absence of pain while Nasir-i Khusraw and other thinkers maintain that pleasure exists all alone, is something eternal and tangible at the same time. A person does not enjoy looking at a thing of beauty because he has been plagued with looking at ugly and unscemly things but because the sense of aesthetics is innate with him. Nasir-i Khusraw writes:- eadj Ojee Od TL Gb OA a nsd Bj Soe Glen SI jl pop aed, weed gee Ty Coe ee Cal ys AL ot ay (4) By And he (al-Razi) also said that people derive pleasure by looking at a beautiful woman just as by looking at an ugly woman they feel unhappy and miserable. This remark of his is extremely absurd and meaningless. Even in the case of animals and reptiles this observation stands dis- proved as for instance a snake is swayed by the melodious music of the snake-charmer’s gourd pipe. Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi has taken strong exception to these views of his town-fellow in his al Mabdhith al-Mashrigiyya and has pointed out the errors made by al-Razi. Nevertheless Imam al-Razi admits that pain and misery far exceed pleasure and joy in this world. And pleasure and joy mostly follow the disappearance of pain and misery. Therefore,Download Now commonly speaking pleasure and joy are mostly subjective phenomena. If logically speaking there are some pleasures which are not subject to the total disappearance of pain and misery these are practically negligible or in the words of Fakhr al-Din al-Razi these are like ‘a drop in the ocean’. It cannot, however, be gainsaid that practically speaking the theory of pain and pleasure as propounded by al-Razi is faithfully reflective of our every day experience. May be al-RazI came round to this view due to his being afflicted with pain and misery throughout his life or perhaps he was an Epicurean who finds it extremely disagreeable to taste pain and bitterness after enjoying the good and beautiful things in life and that he was seeking undiluted and pure pleasure like the Platonic love. Alluding to this aspect of al-Razi’s theory Dr. T. de Boer writes:- The precepts of Muslim law, like the prohibition of wine, and so on, gave him no concern, but his freethinking seems to have led him into pessimism. In fact he found more evil than good in the world, and described inclination as the absence of disinclination. (History of Muslim Philosophy, p. 78). Ibn Abi Usaybi‘a and al-Qifti both mention a book Kitéb ma Yud‘a min ‘Uyiib al-Awliya’ by al-Razi which dealt with the defects and short- comings of pious and holymen, regarded by the Muslims as the “friends of God.” However, Ibn Abi Usaybi‘a is of the opinion that this objection- able book is the work of one of the avowed enemies of al-R4zi who has attributed it to him in order to defame him or lower him in the eyes of the Muslim masses as otherwise al-Razi was far above such things and it would be unfair to imagine that he would even pen a polemical, rather heretical, work like this one (Tabagat al Atibba’, p. 315). Ibn Abi Usaybi‘a even goes to the length of saying that those, like ‘Ali ibn Ridwan al-Misri, who denounce or condemn al-Razi, nay even say that he was an arch- heretic and had gone out of the pale of Islam, name this book as Makhdriq al-Anbiya or Hiyal al-Mutanabbiyin. Al-Qifti, however, does not men- tion this book among the numerous works composed by al-Razi. This book was very popular with the heretical circles in Islam, notably the Qar- matis. “It seems”, observe Paul Kraus and Pines, “even to have influenced the famous theme of the De Tribus Impostoribus (ed. J. Presser, Amsterdam 1926), so dear to Western rationalists from the time of Frederick II. Another book by him styled fi Nagd al-Adyan, which is partly preserved in a refutation - the Kitab A‘lam al-Nubuwwa of the Isma‘lli WDownload Now the sense of taste and the sense of seeing, his opinion is incorrect. He likens al-Razi to a wild uncouth man who has never seen and tasted a fruit. By chance he gets grapes, dates, figs, melons and walnuts. He cats the walnut along with its crust and finds it unpalatable. He therefore hastily comes to the conclusion that all fruits are tasteless. Obviously this conclusion was wrong. Similarly al-Razi holds that the pleasures which can be felt only through the sense of touch predetermine the exis- tence of pain. He, therefore, is inclined to bring the sense of seeing, the sense of hearing, the sense of smelling and the sense of taste in line with the sense of touch, which is obviously a wrong premise. After this general refutation Nagir-i K husraw refutes the arguments of al-Razi seriatum. Referring to the sense of sight he quotes al-Razi as maintaining that by looking at ugly people a person leaves his natural state. But when he sees beautiful people he returns to his natural state and this is what is meant by calling a thing of beauty as a joy for ever. Nasir-i Khusraw contradicting al-R4zi says that supposing a person has never seen a beautiful thing or an ugly one, he is in his natural state. If thereafter he sees a beautiful person or thing he should feel pain because he has left his natural state. Conversely speaking, he should feel pleasure when he comes across an ugly looking hideous object because he has now returned to his natural state. This is, however, against the established truth as ex- perienced daily. Al-Razi further maintains that a harsh and jarring sound disturbs and pains a person, so when he hears the soft and sweet sound of certain musical instruments he feels at ease and satisfied. However, Nasir-i Khusraw contends that in his natural state a person is not supposed to hear any voice or sound. Later if one hears the sweet and charming sound of a guitar or a violin he slips out of his natural state and according to al-Razi he should feel pain. It is, however, strange that instead he enjoys the instrumental music. He should feel pleased, if al-Razi is to be fol- lowed at the terribly repulsive braying of a donkey because on hearing it bray he returns to his natural state while he actually feels pain and dis- comfort when he hears the donkey braying. The same is the case with the sense of smelling. If a person’s brain is free from smell and odour he is considered to be in his natural state. Now, if some one applies otto to his clothes, he would, according to the Principles laid down by al-Razi, get out of his natural state and inviteYOM CeLeM Neh? im cause perceptible pain, but returning to the natural state all of a sudden does bring in pleasure and satisfaction. Similarly leaving the natural state suddenly causes pain and discomfort. For instance, if a healthy person suddenly falls ill he will feel pain and discomfort but recovering slowly will afford him a sort of satisfaction and comfort. It clearly means that going out of the natural state all of a sudden brings pain and likewise returning to the natural state all of a sudden brings pleasure. Therefore, there is no pleasure without pain. It is as the Qur’an says (XCIV : 5): Deal ee Ot Le all @ a Or what the Arabic expression so clearly exclaims: Fas se gill The exposition offered by al-Razi of ecstasy and pain is the same as given by the modern science of psychology. Quoting Le Bonn, (The Book of Views and Beliefs latastty 21,'Y1 ts) ‘Abd al-Salam Nadwi says in the Hukama’-i Islam (i:196) that both pain and pleasure cannot last long, their very nature demands that these should be ephemeral, for the simple reason that if pleasure becomes constant it will cease to be pleasure, similarly if pain comes to stay it will cease to be pain. Continuing Nadwi says that pleasure remains pleasure only till such time as it does not come to stay, and pleasure cannot be felt unless it is contrasted with pain, and eternal pleasure, according to Plato, is meaning- less, as against the view of certain thinkers. The reasons which prompted al-R4zi to propound his theory of pain and pleasure are not precisely known but it is clear that his views reflect on the eternal pleasure of the Hereafter. On this point Nagir-i Khusraw refuted al-Razi on the ground that one of the fundamental beliefs of Islam is the existence of Paradise which is a mine of pleasure for those who perform virtuous deeds, because there is nothing like pain therein. On the other hand, for the sinners and evil- doers there is Hell, a place of extreme misery and pain without any pleasure worth the name. (cf. Zdd al-Musédfirin, p. 229). While refuting al-Razi, Nasir-i Khusraw uses very strong language and says that the basis of al-Razi’s theory is the sense of touch only, while with regard to the other senses, i.e., the sense of smell, the sense of hearing,YOM CeLeM Neh? im b. Ifa factor puts a man or animal out of the natural state it pro- duces both ecstasy and pain and when the object returns to the natural state it brings pleasure in its wake. c, This means that if a person or animal is afflicted with pain after getting out of the natural state he or it cannot return to the original natural state. Therefore, ecstasy in this case means to enjoy pleasure after suffer- ing pain. d. The effect of two intra-contradictory factors produce ecstasy and it lasts only till such time as the effect of the first factor lasts and the object affected returns to its natural state. If this pleasure-producing factor itself comes to stay it is the cause of pain and sorrow because it drives the subject out of its natural state. And to come out of the natural state means in fact pain and suffering. e. We may, therefore, conclude that constancy of ecstasy causes pain and suffering in the ultimate analysis. In order to prove his point al-Razi gives a concrete example. He says: Suppose a man stays in a house which is neither hot nor cold then he is in the natural state which is free from all feelings of ecstasy and pain. If later on this house suddenly becomes hot the man will begin to feel the heat causing uneasiness. However, if a cool breeze begins to blow slowly, the man will begin to enjoy it. Why? Simply for the reason that he had gone out of the natural state due to the oppressive heat and is now return- ing to the original state because of the cool breeze. The pleasure that he feels would only last till such time as he returns to the natural state, which neither knows heat nor cold. On the other hand if this cold comes to stay it will also be the cause of subsequent pain because now the person concerned will go out of the natural state. If later the house again bec- comes hot the subject will feel comfort and pleasure. This means that the comfort which a person feels after suffering pain is in fact pleasure, and pain means getting out of the natural state. The natural state in itself is neither the cause of pain nor of pleasure. Similarly, when a person comes out of the natural state slowly he does not feel much pain. For instance, when one begins to feel hunger slowly one does not feel much pain. But when hunger or thirst become acute and one either takes food or drinks water one feels satisfaction and pleasure. It shows that getting out of the natural state by degrees does notYM CeLe Meh? IW the dead, whose bones even have been reduced to ashes, of rising and com- ing to life again. (IX:30, and various commentaries on the Jewish belief that Ezra was the son of God). Being a natural philosopher and a follower of Thales of Miletus he firmly believed in Matter and unfortunately com- pletely ignored the clear stand of Muslim theologians on the point. It was due to his individualistic ethics that he came to adopt a critical attitude towards established religion. In many writings he refuted the Mu‘tazila theologians like al-Jahiz, Abi’] Qasim al-Balkhi, Ibn Akhi Zurhan alias Misma‘ly, who attempted to introduce scientific arguments in theology. AI-R4zi wrote a book in his refutation called Kitab al-Radd ‘ala’ I-Misma‘iy al-Mutakallim ft Raddiht ‘ala Ashab al-Hayila. He also criticized and re- futed the Shi‘a and the Manicheans. Among his adversaries are included the the Dahrite Abi Bakr Husayn al-Tammar al Mutatabbib, the Sabean Thabit ibn Qurra, the historian al-Mas‘idi and Ahmad ibn al-Tayyib al-Sarakhsi, a pupil of Ya‘qib ibn Ishaq al-Kindi, the philosopher of the Arabs. Unlike the Muslim Aristotelians like Averroes al-Razi denies the Possibility of a reconciliation between philosophy and religion. Unfor- tunately al-Razi ’s religious views were either heretical or in direct opposi- tion to the teachings of orthodoxy. These have been partly dealt with by the late Paul Kraus and S. Pines (presently of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) as co-authors of the artcle “al-Razi” in the first edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam (vol. i:315 ff.). One of the philosophical problems dealt with by al-Razi is that of ecstasy (oW) and pain (#) or inclination and disinclination. His theory is expounded in his Taf¢il Ladhdhat al-Nafs from which Abi Sulayman al-Mantiqi al-Sijistani gives some extracts in his still un-pub- lished Siwan al-Hikma (MS. in Muhammad Murad in Istanbul, No. 1408). As against the generality of philosophers al-R4zi has taken his own pecu- liar stand on this problem and Nasir-i Khusraw in the Zad al-Musdfirin and Fakhr al-pin al-Razi in his al-Mabahith al-Mashrigiyya and Sharh Isharat have severely criticised him. The gist of what al-Razi has written in this context is as follows:— a. Both ecstasy and pain are perceptibles; therefore there is neither pleasure nor pain when some one is in the natural state because the natural state is not tangible.lath © M100 S [search SY YOM CeLeM Neh? im Razi preferred his country-man to Aristotle whom he accused of having corrupted pure philosophy and having altered many of its basic principles. Qagi Ibn $a‘id al-Andalust remarks that the refutations of Aristotle as these appear in the works of al-Razi, namely, his Kitab al-Saghtr ft ‘Iim al-aht and Spiritual Physic (al - Tibb al-Rihdnt) show that he had a liking for the views of the. Dualists insofar as polytheism is concerned; in the matter of disbelief in prophecy he had a leaning towards the Brah- mins i.e., the Vedas, and as regards the transmigration of souls he sided with the Sabeans (of Harran). (Jabagdt al-Umam, p. 33). This in all probability was the philosophy preached and propounded by Pythagoras, Thales of Miletus and the Sabeans of Greece and ancient Egypt or was akin to it and it is why al-Razi preferred to follow and adopt the philosophical system of the ancients rather than that of Aristotle. Al-Razi, as has been stated above, had takena fancy for his country-man Iranshahti who, according to Nasir-i Khusraw, regarded Matter as the Eternal substance and al-Razi, in his trun, has established that there are Five Eternal Princi- ples - Matter, Space, Time, Universal Soul and the Creator, the First Cause. (cf. Zad al-Musdfirin, p. 73). A little further (on p. 98 of the same work) Nasir-i khusraw has indulged in an exposition of what he said earlier. He, however, accuses al-Razi of corrupting the texts of Iranshahri by using atheistic expressions and interpolating wild, weird and uncanny passages inasmuch as that one who has not read or studied the works of ancient philosophers is likely to be misled into believing that al-Razi was the original author of these ideas. Talking of space Iranshabri is quoted to have said that one of the Eternal Principles is Space because it has been said that space is the out- ward manifestation of Divine Power and the proof of its being a correct assumption is that all predetermined events lie within the orbit of God’s Power and that their images appear within Space and hence these cannot go out of Absolute Space (ls os.). Nasir-i Khusraw deplores al-Razi’s stand that he considered the Creator and the Created as one genre. wre Se sail Gye by GY» as a a oT LF BSF otis. ..). (1A? = Grplaatlolj2 3 The assumption of the eternity of the world and of an uncreated matter in motion from all eternity, as we said before, was readily combined with Astronomy.Download Now Among other Muslim philosophers al-Razi dealt at considerable length with Plato’s Timaeus which exercised a vast influence in late anti- quity. Its Arabic translation made around 205/820 by Yahya ibn Bitriq (dc. 215/830) was available to Muslim thinkers and philosophers. Galen’s Compendium of the Timaeus was put into Arabic by the well-known trans- lator Hunayo ibn Ishaq (d. 264/877) around 246/860. Al-Razi was so much impressed with this work of Plato that he even adopted its teaching that creation of an orderly world, a Cosmos, was not ex nihilo, but from Pre-existing, indeed eternal matter. The neo-Platonic tradition upon which al-Razi relied viewed the Timaeus as Plato’s most important work. Tt was, in fact, considered to be of great importance for understanding Greek philosophy and it excited great interest when it was first made available to Muslim philosophers in its Arabic version along with Galen’s Commentary upon it, extensive parts of which had been rendered into Arabic (cf. N. Rescher, Studies in Arabic Philosophy, University of Pitts- burgh Press, 1967, p. 17). Salah al-Din Aybek al-Safadi in Nakt al-Himydn (Cairo 1910, ‘p. 250) quotes the following two verses of al-Razi which he had heard in Damascus: Jes gl UE des dele UI OT sy Gl L Bw UI sadly Gest Sal oe ana te coll de ely This clearly shows that al-Razi in clear contradiction of the teach- ings of Islam did not believe in the Life Hereafter (2+!) or the Resurrec- tion. Paradoxically enough al-Razi is reported to have composed a book (Kitab al-Radd ‘ala’ Suhayl fi ithbat al-Ma‘ad) in support of Ma‘ad and has tefuted the arguments of those who do not believe in the Last Day or com- ing to life again after having remained dead for billions and billions of years. (cf. Tabagat al Atibba’, i:315). While he does not believe in the resurrection of the dead he did believe that the sciences of anatomy and physiology proved that the creation of man was not the result of whim or caprice or even chance. He was created by a very wise and intelligent Creator. In fact there is a book by him styled Kitab ft inna ’!-Insan lahu Khaliqun Hakimun. It is, however, strange that while admitting the existence of a Creator he conveniently forgot that He who can Create can also annihilate and re-create. Implicit belief in hashr wa nashr is the cor- ner-stone of Muslim theology, and the Qur’an at several places speaks ofYOM CeLeM Neh? im Referring to space (Os) he says that as matter should occupy space, therefore, space is also eternal as a co-existent. Space, according to him, is infinite and what is infinite is eternal. Further he says that vacuum is inside space, it cannot exist independently, and consequently it is inside matter. It has the power of attracting bodies and it is why a sealed bottle sumberged in water, with the opening downwards, does not sink. He distinguishes between vacuum and space. Therefore it is wrong to translate space as («%+), Space is either absolute (42+) or universal (US), partial (5+) or relative (ts.) and a spatialized thing cannot exist without space, though space may exist without spatialized things. The last of the Five Eternals i.e. Time (Stj), according to al-Razi, is an independent substance that flows; it is eternal. He also distinguishes between two kinds of time: absolute (s+) and limited (s+). Time, according to him, has existed before the creation of the world and will continue to exist after its dissolution. Absolute time, al-Razi maintains, is duration (.!) which is eternal and moving. In a hadith qudst the Muslims have been exhorted not to blame the duration (.*+) because God has identified the Dahr with Him- self. (G)by - srl ~wly.7 Y). This very doctrine of Dahr exercised the mind of Muhammad Iqbal, the Poet of the East, who carried on an extensive correspondence on the subject with S. Sulayman Nadwi, co- author of ‘Allama Shibli Nu‘mani’s standard Urdii work on the biography of the Prophet, the voluminous Sirat al-Nabt. Both time and space attracted the close attention of Muslim thinkers and philosophers because these two eternals are closely interlinked with the miraculous event, unprecedented in religious history, of the Mi‘raj of the Prophet when, according to Muslim belief, Time and Space were both suspended. The Prophet is described as having returned to Mecca, after his extensive nocturnal heavenly visit, while the bed on which he lay was still warm. Here we must refer to a small treatise containing 8 folios only attributed to al-Razi on the subject: Magdla li Abt Bakr Muhammad Ibn Zakariyya al-Razi fi ma ba‘d al-Tabi‘a (Raghib, Istanbul MS. No. 1463, fols. 90a-98b). Its authenticity has been doubted as its contents do not entirely agree with the otherwise known doctrines of al-Razi. In this treatise he refutes the idea of nature as principle of movement put forwardYOM CeLeM Neh? im by philosophers like Aristotle and his followers: John Philiponos, Alex- ander of Aphrodisias, and Prophry. On the question of eternity of movement al-Razi discusses and critically examines the ideas of Aristotle and Proclus. The general trend, says A.R. al Badawi, of this treatise is polemical and dialectical and it cannot be reconciled with al-Razi’s ideas on time, space and Deity (cf. A History of Muslim Philosophy, i:441). The late Paulus Kraus published in Paris in 1939 fragments or exposé of the Magala fi ma ba‘d al-Tabt‘a. The main points treated in this exposé are (i) nature (2) foetus, and (3) eternity of movement. It seems that in this treatise al-Razi wants to refute all doctrines which pretend that nature is the principle of movement and creation, by showing the contra- dictiones to which these doctrines necessarily lead. His stand-point is that there is no place for admitting the existence of nature as principle of action and movement. As a consequence al-Razi could not please the Muslim thinkers and philosophers and Nasir-i Khusraw in spite of al-Razi’s belief in the exis- tence of God, hotly refuted his ideas and even went to the length of declar- ing him an atheist. Nasir-i Khusraw says: Oh Oke ATS) ae yn aay ath aed adel eas yo aS arely obj UAT OT ol = Chae Ce = Gp stleallalj) = cat ac” (allan) (He who calls the Time the substance might call God as the Creator and in the case of Muhammad ibn Zakariyya it is all the more surprising that he has made some (atheistic) observations in this respect). It is widely knowa that the natural philosophers believed in the general principle of mortality. They derived this inference from the fact that all creatures, including animals, plants and other things mect with annihilation and cannot come to life again. Similarly Man is mortal and cannot be resurrected or resuscitated. These people, therefore, refuse to believe in the Resurrection and the Last Day. They are consequently known as Zindiq (heretics). According to Nasir-i Khusraw al-Razi derived his philosophical views from the system of Iranshahri, about whom we know very little and who had explained his philosophy from the religious point of view. Al-YOM CeLeM Neh? im AL-Razi maintains that God did not create the world either out of necessity or wilfully. In fact it was another eternal, the soul, which deter- mined the Creator to do so, for he wanted to aid the soul vis-a-vis matter, another eternal, which was rebellious to forms. It was precisely to accom- modate the soul that the world was created with strong forms wherein the soul could find corporeal pleasures. ‘God then created man and from the substance of His Divinity He created the intelligence of man to awaken the soul and to show to it that this world is not its real world’. (cf. “Abd al-Rahman al-Badawl in A History of Muslim Philosophy, Wiesbaden 1963, i: 443). Al-Razi thinks that the acquisition of philosophy is a pre-requisite for man to attain the real world. Because, according to him, souls remain dormant in this world till they are awakened and quickened by philosophy to the mystery and directed towards the real world. Of matter he says it is composed of atoms and each atom has volume. Matter is eternal because it is impossible to admit that a thing comes from nothing. Compact matter becomes the earth; more rarefied than the substance of the earth becomes water; still more rarefied becomes air; and what is more rarefied than air turns into fire. This is the definition al- Razi gives of the four elements (44;¥Lu«!! ). Qualities such as heaviness, levity, darkness, and luminosity are to be explained by the more or less vacuity which is within matter. Quality is an accident which is attributed to substance, and substance is matter. (Zad al-Mus@firin, p. 73). Al-Razi gives two proofs to establish the eternity of matter. He says that creation is manifest, there must be ipso facto a Creator and what is Created is nothing but formed matter: therefore, the existence of matter is co-eternal with the existence of the Creator. The second proof which he adduces is the impossibility of creatio ex nihilo. He maintains that it is far easier for the Creator to creat than to compose. Here he is nearer to the Qur’anic doctrine of oJ o*. But unfortunately he believes that all things in this world are produced by com- position and not by creation. It necessarily follows, says he, that the Creator is (4593) incapable of creatio ex nihilo and the cosmos came into being by the composition of things the origin of which is matter. True to the cult of the natural scientists, al-R4zI was an inveterate mate- rialist,Download Now IW It is, however, clear that al-Razi did not deny the existence of God, al-| though, like the Sabeans of Harran whom Louis Massignon, followed by P. Kraus, thinks are “fictitious persons”, he believed in the eternity of Soul} Matter, Absolute Space and Absolute Time. Therefore his system was opposed to Islam and Materialism both. De Boer remarks: Razi had to maintain a polemical attitude in two directions. On | the one side he impugned the Muslim Unity of God, which could not bear to be associated with any eternal soul, matter, space or time; and on the other side he attacked the Dahrite System, which does not acknowledge any Creator of the world. The adherents of the Dahr are represented as Materialists, Sensualists, Atheists, | Believers in the transmigration of souls, and so on. The Dahrites had no need to trace all that exists to a principle which was of spiri- | tual essence and creative efficiency. On the other hand Muslim philosophy did stand in need of such a principle, if it should only conform in some degree to the teaching of the faith. Natural Philosophy was not suited for the furtherance of his object, as it showed more interest in the manifold and often contrary operations of Nature than in the One Cause of all. (cf. de Boer, ap. cit., p. 80). A fuller discussion of his ideas on Time, Space, Duration (4), Eternity of the Universe etc. is given in the next few pages. His theory on Time was refuted especially by Abi’l Qasim al-Balkhi (d. 319/931), the chief of the Mu‘tazila of Baghdad and a contemporary of al-Razi. He also criticized and refuted al-Razi’s book on ‘Iim al-Iaht. We may now proceed to give a brief account of the Five Eternals which chiefly characterize the philosophy of al-Razi. Out of these Five Eternals two are living and acting: God, and soul; one is passive and not living; matter from which all bodies are made; and two are neither living and acting, nor passive; vacuum and duration. God’s wisdom is perfect. Life flows from Him as He creates every- thing and is incapable of nothing. Nothing can be contrary to His Will. While He knows all things perfectly well, the soul knows only what it ex- periences and not what is either hidden from it or not accessible to it. | God ordinarily has not endowed human beings with the knowledge of the future or the Unseen. Nevertheless His Power is immense and He can endow anyone, especially His chosen Servants, the Prophets, with such knowledge.Download Now IW According to al-Qifll, ai-Razi was deadly opposed to Aristotle as against the general trend of his times. He says: (er cereal ash) aly OF Gas FEI QI gh! ge Gl al) yas Ob On account of a weak argument he was opposed to Aristotle). He, therefore, turned to the natural philosophy as propounded by Pythagoras and Thales of Miletus, who had preceded Aristotle. It must be remembered that in the pre-Aristotelian era, almost a century back, natural philosophy was very much in vogue in Greece, although this ancient system could not take firm roots in Greek culture. However, a number of authors wrote a number of books on the philosophy of Pythagoras and in support of the natural philosophy as propounded by the ancients and al- Razi was one of them. (cf. Ta’rikh al-Hukama’, p. 171). Al-Razi believed in the progress of scientific and philosophical knowledge. He claims to have advanced beyond most of the ancient philosophers and even thinks himself superior to Aristotle and Plato but feels close to Socrates, As already stated, al-Razi was a great admirer of the natural phi- losophy of antiquity whose founder was Thales who denied the existence of God, the Creator, but firmly believed in the eternity of the world. The followers of Thales are, therefore, known as the Dahrites and Zanddiq (heretics). The second school of natural philosophers dealt with and debated the activity and passivity of matter, and their reactions and results. They, at the same time, believed in the existence of God and his attributes of Omnipotence, Omniscience, Will and Power from the wonderful mani- festations they observed in the composition, properties and anatomy of animals (hayawandt), plants (nabatat) and the limbs of the body (al-a‘da’). This sect was born in Harran and Basra. They confined their elementary discourses to Matter and Perception. They later on discussed the Soul, Spirit and Divine Power, for human curiosity and piety would fain to read the secrets of Deity in the book of His Creation. In fact this was a popular philosophy which found acceptance with the Shi'ites and other sects of the Muslims chiefly through the instru- mentality of the Sabeans of Harran and in due course impressed not only court circles, but also a Jarge body of educated and half-educated people. This system of philosophy is mainly derived from the works of EuclidWhatsApp 11:09 AM I 645 messages from 15 chats Download Now im and Ptolemy, Hippocrates and Galen, partly from Aristotle’s and in addi- tion an abundant Neo-Platonic literature. Stray portions of it were taken from the writings of the “Logician”- Aristotle - e.g. from his “Meteorology”, from the work “On the Universe” (pWly ct. ET), which has been attributed to him, from the “Book of Animals” (64J! 5), from the “Psychology” (.-#!! +t) and so on; but its general character was determined by Pythagorean - Platonic teach- ing, by Stoics, and by subsequent astrologers and alchemists. The assumption by the natural philosophers of the eternity of the world (wl ¢48), and of an uncreated matter in motion from all eternity, - was readily combined with Astronomy. They believed that if the move- ment of the Heavens is eternal, so too are, no doubt, the changes which take place on earth. Al! the kingdoms of nature then, being eternal, the race of man is eternal also, wheeling round and round in an orbit of its own. There is, therefore, nothing new in the world: the views and ideas of men repeat themsevles like everything else. All that can possibly be done, maintained or known, has already been and will again be (cf. T. de Boer, The History of Philosophy in Islam, London, 1933, p. 76)., This natural philosophy actually stood for Philosophy with most of the Muslim Scholars of the 9th century, as contrasted with theological dialectic, and was styled Pythagorean. It lasted into the tenth century when its most important representative was al-Razi (T. de Boer, op. cit. p. 77). He was averse to dialectic and was only acquainted with Logic as far as the categorical figures of First Analytics (Us¥! Wb ,) Ul), “Al-Razi’s metaphysics start from old doctrines, which his contem- poraries ascribed to Anaxagoras, Empedocles, Mani and others,” observes Professor T. de Boer. At the apex of his system stand five co-eternal principles - the Creator, the Universal Soul, the First or Primeval Matter, Absolute Space (34+ O&.) and Absolute Time (Glh+ 0b) or Eternal Dura- tion (+), As has already been said the Natural Philosophers recognised God as the Creator, and the First Cause (ds/s¥! Zw), Notwithstanding the eternity of his five principles al-Razi speaks of a Creator and even gives a story of Creation. At the same time following Thales he believed in the eternity of the Universe and the antiquity of Matter, as opposed to Form. After recounting his arguments on the pre-existence of Matter Nagir-i Khusraw, the Isma‘ili philosopher, has refuted them in great detail.cl ath OS 11.07 00 S [search SQ Dyes Cee-Lo Ces? TW PHILOSOPHICAL AND RELIGIOUS VIEWS OF MUHAMMAD IBN ZAKARIYYA AL-RAZI A.S. BAZMEE ANSARI In our article published in the autumn 1976 issue of this journal we discussed briefly the contribution of Muhammad ibn Zakariyya ibn Yahya at-Razi to the science of medicine with particular reference to his work al-Judart wa'l Hisba on measles and small-pox and his magnum opus, al- Hawi ft'l Tibb. We also outlined the universal character of his scholar- ship and briefly alluded to those disciplines and sciences in which he left a number of works. The list of his works as given by Jamal al-Din Abii’! Hasan ‘All ibn Yusuf al-Qiftl in his Ta’rikh al-Hukama’ (ed. G. Lippert, Leipzig 1320/1903) covers 133 titles and still is neither exhaustive nor complete, A natural philosopher, an al-chemist and a practising physician his compositions include such disparate titles as Risdla ft Tadbir al-Ma’ wa'l-Thalaj, Risala fi Ghurith al-Shams wa’l Kawakib, Risala fi’l ‘Atash wa Ziyadat al-Harara li dhalika; Kitab Aft‘ima al-Marda; Kitab fi Qidam al-Ajsim wa Hudiithiha; Risala fi Tlal al-Mushkila; Kitab fi '1 Awham wa’l Harakat wa'l ‘Ishq. This will give an idea of his multi-faceted and versatile genius and his academic pursuits. The present is an age of specialization but the time of al-Razi was an age of specialization-cum- generalization. Imagine a medical man, an al-chemist writing a book like Kitab ma Yud‘a min ‘Uyib al-Awliya’, or Kitab ft wujab al-Ad'‘iyya. But al-Razi did so. In this article we briefly propose to discuss and examine his religious and metaphysical views. According to Ibn Abi Usaybi‘a, al-Razi was fond of studying rational sciences from a very young age, even before he took up medicine (cf. al-Qifti, Ta’rikh al-Hukama’, p. 178). He studied philosophy with Abi Zayd al-Balkhi, counted by Shahraziiri among the wise men (Hukama’) of Islam. Al-Balkhi partly annotated the Arabic translation of Aristotle’s Kitab al-Sama’ wa'l ‘Alam.