Islamic Civilization

Faith, Faiths and Islamic Learning

The Prophet is quoted as saying:

‘Acquire knowledge because he who acquires it in the way of the Lord performs an act of piety; who speaks of it praises the Lord; who seeks it, adores God; who dispenses instruction in it, bestow alms; and who imparts it to its fitting objects, performs an act of devotion to God. Knowledge enables its possessor to distinguish what is forbidden from what is not; it lights the way to heaven; it is our friend in the desert, our society in solitude, our companion when bereft of friends; it guides us to happiness, it sustains us in misery; it is our ornament in the company of friends; it serves as an armour against the enemies. With knowledge, the servant of God rises to the heights of goodness and to a noble position, associates with sovereigns in this world, and attains to the perfection of happiness in the next.'[1]

The Prophet reiterates this message in countless circumstances:

‘There is nothing greater in the eyes of God than a man who has learned a science and who has taught it to people.’

‘The bearers of knowledge are the successors to the prophets in this world and the martyrs in the Hereafter.’

‘Scholars and teachers are partners in reward, and there are no better people than they.’

‘The knowledge that is not used is like a treasure from which nothing is spent. Its possessor laboured in collecting it, but never benefited from it.’

‘And if God directs you to one single man [who is learned], it is better for you than the whole world and all in it.’[2] 

The acquisition of knowledge, thus, Kramers notes, was in the first place a compliance with a religious command, but at the same time it had to serve the transmission of knowledge to others, and the complete fulfilment of the divine command of ‘exhorting to good and admonishing against evil.’[3] So the scholar was at the same time a teacher, a ‘doctor’, and his school was that original centre of political and religious life in Islam: the mosque.[4] There is no branch of Muslim intellectual life, of Muslim religious and political life, of the daily life of the average Muslim that remained untouched by the all pervasive attitude towards ‘knowledge' as something of supreme value for the Muslim.[5]

‘Ilm (science/learning/knowledge),’ says Rosenthal, ‘is Islam.'[6]

Religion dominated learning in the Christian world, too: all aspects of society were permeated by religion, the emphasis clearly seen in the intellectual and cultural life of the period.[7] But there were fundamental differences with Islam.

First, Western education was almost the exclusive province of the clergy. Devons outlines how Grosseteste's disciple, Roger Bacon was the Franciscan ‘Dr Mirabilis' of Oxford and Paris; the renowned Albertus Magnus  ‘Dr Universalis' of Cologne, Provincial of the German Dominican Order and Bishop of Ratisbon.  Albertus’ disciple, Witelo, was a Silesian Dominican at the Papal court at Viterbo; John of Peckham was Archbishop of Canterbury; Theodoric of Freiberg a Dominican leader of German preachers, etc.[8] In Islam, in contrast, it was not just that other faiths and groups were part of the intellectual upsurge, but also, and most importantly, the scholars of Islam, with rare exceptions, had no official links with the faith (e.g as Imams, or religious scholars.)[9]

Secondly, in the Christian West, medieval education, music, art, and architecture were motivated by, permeated with, or channelled into religious goals, and the most highly regarded branch of learning ‘the Queen of the Sciences,' as it was called-was theology, the study of doctrines concerning God.[10] Painting and sculpture dealt mainly with religious subjects; the most magnificent, most costly buildings constructed were churches and cathedrals, and for the medieval period, then, the Latin  phrase ad maiorem Dei gloriam (to the greater glory of God) was meaningful and relevant for all activities, notes Geanakoplos.[11] The opposite was the case of Islam. Although God’s guidance was always sought, and each and every work opened with the customary ‘In the name of God the gracious and merciful,’ matters addressed were remarkably endless in scope and diversity. They included all the sciences, as will be extensively shown in the next part, and more importantly, they applied to very practical, earthly matters. Moreover, although faith driven, Islamic learning was not restricted by the faith. It provided absolute freedom to study, a boon which was enjoyed only by those who lived under the shadow of ‘the Arab empire.’[12] Even the Greeks did not accord such freedom as did the Muslims. Did not the Greeks condemn Socrates to drain a lethal draught on the grounds that he was corrupting youth by training them to think? asks Farukh. [13]

Profoundly affecting the civilisation of Islam is its multi ethnic and multi faith character.

‘Of all world religions, Islam has been most successful in overriding barriers of colour and nationality. No line is drawn except between believers and unbelievers,’ [says Artz.][14]

Islamic thinking made for a greater mingling of races; there was in it no conception of nationhood as distinct from the religious community.[15]

‘For the first time in history,’ [says Sabra] ‘science became international on a really wide scale and one language, Arabic, became its vehicle. A large number of scholars belonging to different nations and professing different beliefs collaborated in the process of moulding into this one language materials which had previously existed in Greek, Syriac, Persian or Sanskrit. It is this enduring character of the scientific enterprise in medieval Islam which is being emphasised when the phrase ‘Arabic science' is used.’[16]

Arabic science is a misnomer. Indeed, its scholars were mostly non Arabs: Turks , Berbers , Iranians, Spanish Muslims and non Muslims, white and black, and Chinese, too. Even the ‘great masters’ of the Arabic language were not of Arab ancestry.[17] Thus, ‘Arabic civilisation becomes Muslim civilisation.’[18] 

Islamic civilisation, in its glory centuries, brought together Muslims, Christians and Jews,[19] all under the mantle of Islam. The Great virtue of the Arabs, Hyams points out, was that they gave the diverse people under their aegis a chance to do their best.[20] Sarton’s prolific Introduction to the History of Science is an excellent window on this amalgam of ethnic groups, but most of all on all faiths that met on the Muslim scientific ground.[21] Commenting on this, he observes:

‘The great racial and cultural complexity of Islam, even in those early days, is a very curious spectacle. How strong must the religious bond have been to keep together such disparate elements! to begin with, the Abbasid court was entirely permeated with foreign influences-Persian, Jewish, and Nestorians.’ [22]

Again, this tradition of opening up to other faiths goes back to the early example set by the Prophet, and in Islam, Sunni Islam above all, the Qur’an, and the example set by the Prophet are the two guiding principles. Hence, the first Muslim physician we have any record of is Harith Ibn Kalada al-Thakeshi, born near Makkah, who, after practicing medicine for many years in Persia , returned to his native Arabia , and became the friend and physician of the Prophet.[23] Harith, although the physician of the Prophet, never embraced Islam, and may have been a Christian. This act of the Prophet, Major points out, in selecting an unbeliever as his physician, was doubtless a powerful example to his followers.

Indeed. Islam earliest and most prominent scientists at the Abbasid court, Ishaq Ibn Hunayn and Hunayn Ibn Ishaq were Nestorian Christians. Thabit Ibn Qurrah, the astronomer, was a Sabean. The Bakhishtu family who held most prominent positions in the court in the 9^th century were Christians, too, and so was the historian-physicist Abu’l Faraj. So were others of the same profession: Ali Ibn Ridwan, Ibn Djazla of Baghdad , and Isa Ibn Ali. Yaqut al-Hamawi, one of Islam’s greatest geographer-historians, was of Greek antecedents, and so was Al-Khazini (the author of the Balance of Wisdom). The Jews, as obvious in Sarton’s introduction,[24] in hundreds, had the most glorious pages of their civilisation under Islam, too. From Maimonides to Hasdai Ibn Shaprut, to Petrus Alfonsi, to the Ben-Tibbons, all reached fame and prominence under Islam. Draper observes that in Cordova, Granada and other large cities, the universities were frequently under the superintendence of Jews because, for the Muslims, the maxim was that ‘the real learning of a man is of more public importance than any particular religious opinion he may entertain,' a liberality, Draper notes, in striking contrast with intolerant Europe.[25]

There seems to be a major deficiency in the multi-ethnic character of Islamic civilisation, though, as Sarton points out:

‘Although the Persians had introduced into the Caliphate a greater love of beauty, urbanity, intellectual curiosity, and much fondness for discussion, all favourable to the progress of science, free thought was often followed by libertinage and immorality. No wonder that the genuine Arabs looked down upon the Persian intruders even as the old Romans looked down upon the Greeks. The fact is that every civilisation acts as a poison upon those who have not been properly inoculated; it would act that way even were it perfectly pure and did not contain (as it always does) evil elements. The Arabic strength and virtue were gradually undermined by Persian urbanity.’[26]

Sarton’s point, that the Persians undermined Arabic strength, somehow runs against the opinions of those who grant the Persians all good part in the Islamic civilisation. In response to Sarton’s point, the undermining of Arabic strength lies not in this Persian intrusion nor in the so called Turkish  intrusion nor in the Berber intrusion (all sorts of intrusions and their impact will be examined in the final part of this work). All these ethnic groups, Persians, Turks , Berbers  etc, had their points of strengths and weaknesses. They gave Islam and Islamic civilisation a huge amount, but not everything. The Muslims became corrupt in urbanity, their harems and the like, not just where the Persians had an influence, but all over the Muslim world, even in Muslim Spain, which had little Persian influence in its midst. As for the maligned Berbers and Turks, it was they who fought the most decisive battles that saved the Islamic world from the crusaders and Mongols. The real, the true intrusion that truly destroyed Islamic civilisation was the 13^th century combined Crusade-Mongol concerted push, one from the east and the other from the west.[27] This assault did not just cause destruction, slaughter and mayhem; it led above all the Islamic realm to alter its priorities: fighting for survival, instead of scholarly creativity. This matter will be returned to in great detail in the final part of this work.