especially by the Nestorians who, as physicians, were in high favour with the liberal Khalífs of the 'Abbásside dynasty. In some cases the translation into Arabic was made from Syriac versions, for in the time of the Emperor Justinian many Greek works had been translated into the latter language. The most celebrated translator was the historian physician Honein-Ibn-Ishak (died 876 a.d.), a man profoundly acquainted with the Syriac, Greek and Arabic languages. He was at the head of a school of interpreters in Baghdád, to which his son Ishak-ben-Honein and his nephew HobeischAl-Asam also belonged. In the tenth century (A. D.) Yahya-benAdi and Isa-ben-Zara'a translated some works and corrected earlier translations of others. It is to these men that the Arabs owe their chief acquaintance with Plato.

The study of Aristotle spread rapidly amongst the Muslim people, especially amongst the heretical sects. The orthodox looked with grave suspicion on the movement, but could not for a while stay the impulse. The historian Makrizi says: "The doctrine of the Philosophers has worked amongst the Muslims evils most fatal. It serves only to augment the errors of the heretics and to increase their impiety." It came into contact with Muslim dogmas in such subjects as the creation of the world, the special providence of God and the nature of the divine attributes. To a certain extent the Mutazilites were supported by the philosophical theories they embraced, but this did not diminish the disfavour with which the orthodox looked upon the study of philosophy. Still it grew, and men in self defence had to adopt philosophic methods. Thus arose a later system of scholasticism. The earlier system was confined mainly to matters of religion; the later school occupied itself with the whole range of philosophic investigation, and thus went farther and farther away from orthodox Islám..

The Muslims themselves did not write books on philosophy in the earlier period. Men of liberal tendencies imbibed its teaching, but orthodoxy finally gained the day over the earlier scholastics, and in the form known as that of the Ash'arían School became again supreme.2 The great intellectual movement of the Philosophers proper, the later scholastics (Mutakallimán), lasted longer, but by the end of the twelfth century (A.D.) the whole Muhammadan world had again become orthodox. Saláh-ud-dín (Saladin) and his successors in Egypt were strong supporters of the Ash'aríans.

1. Mélanges de Philosophie Juive et Arabe, par S. Munk, p. 315. 2. For a statement of the Ash'arían doctrines see pp. 130. 131.

The period now under review was one prolific of authors on grammar, rhetoric, logic, exegesis, traditions and the various branches of philosophy; but the men who stand out most prominently as philosophers were then, and are now, considered heretics. 1

Al-Kendi, was born at Basra, on the Persian Gulf. He died about 870 A.D. He was a very scientific man, but a thorough rationalist in theology. He composed commentaries on the logic of Aristotle. In his great work on the unity of God he has strayed far away from Muslim dogmas.

Al Farabi, another philosopher patronized by the 'Abbássides, seems to have denied not only the rigid and formal Islámic view of inspiration, but any objective revelation at all. He held that intuition was a true inspiration, and that all who had acquired intuitive knowledge were real prophets. This is the only revelation he admits. He received his philosophical training at Baghdád, where for a while he taught; but finally he went to Damascus, where he died 950 a.d.

Ibn Sina, better known as Avicenna, a man of Persian origin, was a Philosopher of great note, but of him it is said that in spite of the concessions he made to the religious ideas of his age, he could not find favour for his opinions, which ill accord with the principles of Islám. He was born near Bukhárá, in the year 980 A.D. For a while he taught medicine and philosophy in Ispahán.

Ibn Badja, (Avempace) was one of the most celebrated Muslim Philosophers of Spain. He was born at Saragossa towards the end of the eleventh century. He is distinguished for having opposed the mystical tendencies of the teaching of Al-Ghazzálí, and for maintaining that speculative science alone was capable of leading man to a true conception of his own proper nature. He was violently attacked by the orthodox divines who declared that all philosophical teaching was a calamity for religion and an affliction to those who were in the good way."

66

He was a famous For a while he was He travelled much,

Al-Ghazzálí was born A.D. 1059 in Khorásán. Muslim divine. He adopted scholastic methods. President of the Nizámiah College at Baghdad. and wrote many books to prove the superiority of Islám over all other religions and over philosophy. The first result of his wide and extensive study of the writings of the philosophers, and of the heretics was that he fell into a state of scepticism with regard to religion and philosophy. From this he emerged into Súfíism, in

1. Strictly speaking, one should not speak of Arab but of Muslim philosophy, for curiously enough only one famous Philosopher, Al-Kendi, was an Arab.

which his restless spirit found satisfaction. On Súfíism, however, he exercised no very notable influence; but the scepticism which he still retained as regards philosophy rendered him a very formidable opponent to those who were trying to bring Islám into accord with philosophic theories. His works, "Tendency of Philosophers," and "Destruction of the Philosophers" had an immense influence. In the preface to the latter book, he speaks of "those who arrogate to themselves a superior intelligence, and who, in their pride, mistaking the precepts of religion, take as a guide the authority of certain great men, instead of revealed religion." It is, however, and with some show of reason supposed that Al-Ghazzálí did not really object to all that he condemned, but that to gain the orthodox he wrote what he did. Indeed, Moses of Narbonne states that Ghazzálí later on in life wrote a book, circulated only amongst a few select friends, in which he withdrew many of the objections he had raised in the "Destruction of Philosophers." Be that as it may, it is acknowledged that he dealt a blow to philosophy from which in the East it has never recovered; that is, as far as the Muslim world is concerned. His course marks a reaction of the exclusively religious principle of Islám against philosophical speculation, which in spite of all accommodation never made itself orthodox.

66

In Spain philosophy still found an ardent defender in Ibn Rashid, better known as Averhoes. This celebrated man was born at Cordova in the year 1126 A.D., or about 520 of the Muhammadan era. He came of a noble and learned family, whilst he himself must ever occupy a distinguished place amongst the Muslim Philosophers. Without dispute he was one of the most learned men of the Muslim world, and one of the profoundest commentators of Aristotle. He knew all the sciences then accessible to the Muslims and was a most prolific writer." 1 One of his most famous works was the "Refutation of the destruction of Philosophers." Notwithstanding his philosophical opinions Averhoes claimed to pass for a good Muslim. He held that the philosophic truths are the highest object of research; but that only a few men could by speculation arrive at them, and that, therefore, a divine revelation through the medium of prophets was necessary for spreading amongst men the eternal verities which are proclaimed alike by philosophy and religion. He held, it is true, that the orthodox had paid too much attention to the letter, and too little to the spirit, and that false interpretations had educed principles not really to be found in religion. This profes

1. Mélanges de Philosophie Juive et Arabe, par S. Munk, p. 429.

sion and a rigid adherence to outward forms of worship, however, did not save him from suspicion. He was accused of preaching philosophy and the ancient sciences to the detriment of religion. He was deprived of his honours and banished by the Khalíf Al-Mansúr to Lucena, near Cordova. In his disgrace he had to suffer many insults from the orthodox. One day on entering the mosque with his son he was forcibly expelled by the people. He died at Morocco in 1198 A.D. Thus passed away in disgrace the last of the Muslim Philosophers worthy of the name.1 In Spain a strict prohibition was issued against the study of Greek philosophy, and many valuable works were committed to the flames. Soon after the rule of the Moors in Spain began to decline. The study of philosophy came to an end, and liberal culture sank under the pressure of the hard and fast dogmatic system of Islám. In Spain, 2 as in Baghdád, orthodoxy gained the day. There was much of doubtful value in the speculations of the Muslim Philosophers, but they were Muslims, and if they went too far in their efforts to rationalize Islám, they also tried to cast off what to them seemed accretions, added on by the Traditionalists and the Canonical Legists. They failed because like the earlier scholastics they had no gospel to proclaim to men, no tidings to give of a new life which could enable wearied humanity to bear the ills to which it was subject. Another strong reason was that the orthodoxy against which they strove was a logical development of the foundations of Islám, and these foundations are too strongly laid for any power other than a spiritual one to uproot. They were men of good position in life, voluminous writers, profound admirers of Aristotle, and more or less devoted to science, especially to medicine." Yet they did not advance philosophy, and science they left much as they found it. They preserved something of what Grecian thought had achieved, and so far their labour is not lost.

66

Thus Islám has, as a religion, no right to claim any of the glory which Muslim philosophers are supposed to have shed around it.

1. Aprés lui, nous ne trouvons plus chez les Arabes aucun philosophe véritablement digne de ce nom." Mélanges de Philosophie Juive et Arabe, par S. Munk, p. 458.

2. Muslim rule in Spain is often referred to as an instance of the height of culture and the liberality of sentiment which may exist in a Muhammadan state. I have shown that the culture was not due to the teaching of the Arab Prophet and his Companions, and with regard to the liberality it is well to remember the words of G. H. Lewes. He says: The Arabs, though they conquered Spain, were too weak in numbers to hold that country in subjection otherwise than by politic concessions to the opinion and customs of the people." History of Philosophy, vol. i. p. 36.

The founders of Islám, the Arabs, produced but one philosopher of note. The first impetus to the study was given by heretical Khalífs employing Christians at Baghdád to translate Greek books; whilst in Spain, where philosophy most flourished, it was due largely to the contact of intelligent Muslims with learned Jews. Even there, the philosophers were, as a rule, the objects of bitter persecution. Now and again, a liberal minded Khalif arose, but a system such as Islám survives the liberal tendencies of a generation. From the close of the twelfth century (A.D.) downwards it would be difficult to point to any Muslim Philosopher, much more to an Arab one, whose work is of any real value to the human race. For four hundred years the contest raged, a contest such as Islám has never since seen. This great effort to bring it into accordance with the main stream of human thought, to introduce into it some element of progress utterly failed. The lesson is plain. Any project of reform in Islám which admits in any degree its fundamental principles must fail. Revolution, not reform, is the only hope for the permanence of an independent Muslim state when it enters into the circle of civilized nations.

1. "There never was any Arabian science, strictly speaking. In the first place, all the Philosophy and Science of the Muhammadans was Greek, Jewish, and Persian....... It really designates a reaction against Islámism, which arose in the distant parts of the Empire, in Samarcand, Bokhara, Morocco, and Cordova. The Arabian language having become the language of the Empire, this Philosophy is written in that language; but the ideas are not Arabian; the spirit is not Arabian." History of Philosophy, by G. H. Lewes, vol. ii. p. 34.