In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. On the Nature of the Man in Islam and the West in the Context of World History Being a Summary of the CASIS Saturday Night Lecture by Prof. Dr. Syed Muhammad Naquib Al-Attas on 26th October 20131 Prepared by Muhammad Syafiq Bin Borhannuddin, Master of Philosophy Candidate, CASIS I On 26th October 2013, Professor Dr. Syed Muhammad Naquib Al-Attas continued his illuminating exposition on the nature of man.2 He began by stating that we have to understand world history or history of man in the world in order to understand properly the context of his discussions. First, when he speaks about world history, we must realize there are only two main civilizations that have influenced a great deal of world history: Christianity and Islam. He noted that other religions such Hinduism and Buddishm have influence too but remain insulated in their own region and did not have a mission that caused it to spread all over the world as Christianity and Islam did. He points out however that Islam has the idea of spreading throughout the world not just for political reason but for spreading the Truth, for Prophet Muhammad (may God bless and give him peace!) was sent to spread the Truth and to correct the errors of the past. He stresses that in order to understand a lot problems we face today, we have to know something about how the ideas of today emerged—which is derived primarily from the experience and consciousness of Western man. For example, today Muslims are confused about the meaning of man. The usage of the term Homo referring to the ancient skeletons of the past indicates this. This idea already implies that as far as the West is concerned, the idea of evolution is implied in history from the very beginning, which we can find in the mythology of the Western nations. The ancient Greeks (represented by the likes of Plato, Aristotle and others) on the otherhand did not think in terms of evolution. They did not conceive their ideas aligned with the state of nature theory or transition to human (Homo sapiens). This was something the later philosophers and thinkers of the West have developed. Prof Al-Attas then proceeded to explain what happened in the history of the West stating that from the time of the Greeks, there was a lacuna—nothing seemed to be happening in the West. The Romans emphasized a lot on law, order and administration, whereas the earlier Greeks talked a lot about the soul, education and 1
The next lecture is scheduled on 9th November 2013. For more information, please contact Syafiq Borhannuddin, Public Relations Head of the CASIS Students Society: +60193488050 or visit our website: www.utm.my/casis 2 To read further on his exposition, see Chapter IV from his Prolegomena to the Metaphysics of Islam: An Exposition on the Fundamental Elements of the Worldview of Islam, ISTAC, 1995.
1
ethics. This was later adopted by the Romans themselves, but because of their empire, they dealt with more statemanly matters. From that time until the rise of Christianity, nothing very much seemed to be happening except the spread of Christianity. They were occupied with the problems on answering how to define their religion, how to understand the nature of God, of Jesus. They called this period of time as the dark ages because there were no discussions on the soul, on man, etc. They emphasized more on explaining the trinity. Then they established the Council of Nicaea, which is about 350 years after Jesus, where they had to discuss these things and come to a consensus, as there were so many interpretations. This was how Catholicism gradually came to existence.3 Hence explains Prof. Al-Attas, there were no great changes happening in the West at that time. It was only in the 7th century when the Roman Empire was overcome by the Germanic peoples who came down into their empire and destroyed them. However, the Germans themselves did not have a high culture—they did not bring anything superior to what the Romans had. Thus they themselves converted to the Roman way of life. They brought about their national tradition—the Celtic, Nordic peoples—from their mythology, and so we can see that they have a more less similar worldview—as in how they understood the world around them. It was only after the rise of Islam that they became acquainted again with the Greek philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus and the others. Because of that, gradually they begin to include into Christianity these ideas from the philosophers i.e. about the soul, education, and governments. Prof. Al-Attas reiterates what he said two weeks ago that the Bible, Gospels and even the Jewish interpretation of sacred scriptures, did not mention much about the soul and about spiritual matters. There is nothing very much there about the nature of man, discussions about the soul, etc, whereas the Quran talks about this and everything about our life here. The Jewish scriptures did mention something about the creation in the Book of Genesis (which is part of the Bible), but it did not explain many things about God, about the soul, about how creation comes into existence; and who is He. The Quran, on the otherhand, clarifies about matters on the universe, science, knowledge, soul, justice, virtues, ethics, governments, etc. II There was a time when the Muslims were discussing about these matters and the discovery of Greek works was mainly through the Muslims. Some of the Muslims were very much impressed by the intelligence of the Greeks in terms of how they interpreted things, how they employed their minds and intellects to the understanding of this world, life and nature. Citing al-Kindī (d. circa 873), Prof Al-Attas maintains that the early Muslim philosophers acknowledged the Greeks while at the same time recognized there are errors in their views. 4 Prof. Al-Attas holds that the Greeks (i.e. philsophers) must have been influenced by the followers of the Prophet Musa, who 3
There were 500 interpretations of what they call the Gospel. Thus they had to determine a consensus on what they considered to be the real interpretation or what lead to be the orthodox or catholic one. 4 According to Al-Attas, this statement was was from Al-Kindi‟s letter to the Abbasid Caliph, alMaʾmūn (d. 833), which is not published and not known very much. I have not been able to locate this text myself.
2
some of them lived in Athens, those of the Bani Israel. How then can Aristotle, who was a pagan, yet talked about One God and tried to interpret the nature of that Onennes? This is because these ideas were already floating about in the air due to the followers of Prophet Musa who lived in Athens. However, when these philosophers talked about the One God, they couldn‟t practice their lives in accordance to this conception, as they were not properly guided by revelation. Thus their idea of ethics is only related to politics and government i.e. how to behave as citizens, how to behave in a society, etc. The Revelation comes to the ancient civilisation in the Middle East: Prof. Al-Attas reminded the audience that when he said last year that civilizations seemed to have begun in the Middle East, in Egypt—what they call “Mesopotamia”, where the ancient excavations reveal the way of life of the Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Assyrians and the Sumerians. As far as the study of archaelogy is concerned, the most ancient are these. Other civilizations such as the Chinese, Persian, and others came later. In addition, the Prophets as far as we know—as reported in the Qur‟an, Bible—they all seemed to be coming from that region. And since civilisation began in that part of the world, Al-Attas arrived to the conclusion that it is religion that causes the rise of civilisation. He argues further that we cannot relegate religion into the background, as if discovery of agriculture is the cause of civilisation as opposed to religion. Furthermore, the Quran did mention about God created certain animal so that we can domesticate, about the creation of Sun and Moon for our use; the seas, the ships that float on the seas; God speaks to the children of Adam that these are for their use and control with justice. But gradually, with the introduction of Greek Thought through Islam through Western/Christian world—this has caused great changes. Their great Imam—St. Thomas Aquinas (d.1274) introduced Aristotle into Christianity (hence Aristotleian Christianity): he talked about ethics, the soul, nature of God, etc. following mainly Aristotle.5 III Then, Prof Al-Attas reminded the audience that in the medieval era, the Muslims defeated the Romans, which was a very vast empire, and went on to conquer North Africa, Spain, Europe, Russia as well as the Malay world—all in the span of 150 years after the rise of Islam. Islam spread very fast which was a big shock for the West. The rise of Islam had challenged their hegemony and soverienty over the world.6 The Muslims also tried to correct their intellectual findings and their religion. These challenges are something very traumatic that has happened to Western man and his consciousness. The idea of Europe was also not something ancient. It has been written in the history books as if Europe have been all the time existing. Even at the time of first crusade, when the Pope encouraged the crusade, he refers to the people as the Franks. There was no idea of Europe. This came later. It was because of Islam, which made them gradually unite. Many of their leaders tried to create a Europe: there was Napoleon who tried to conquer; Hitler tried to do the same—to try to create a 5
See for example his Summa Theologica. For a discussion on the rise and spread of Islam and its influence on the West and world history, see his Islam and Secularism, ISTAC (1993) 6
3
Europa. But looked at how they created the name Europe—they took it from some ancient Goddess—giving us the impression that it existed since ancient times. Even in Arabic, the idea of „urubba‟ is something new. In their history, in their case, they talked about the Classical Period in which they mean the Greeks and the Romans. Then there was the Dark Period and then Medieval, and the Modern. Some are now talking about post-modern. Between the Medieval and Modern, they had the Renaissance and Enlightenment. Renaissance in Latin means to be born again—it means in their experience and concsiousness, they are now new, they are born again, they are trying to rediscover the classical. Then the enlightenment—comes the idea, the philosophers of the West—this is where the idea of man today orginated. This is not the case with earlier Western scholars like Plato, Aristotle when they discuss on the soul. Later especially in the time of German philosopher Immanuel Kant (d. 1804) started to imply that man is not soul. Because of that, this psychology, which is what the Greeks call “the science of the soul” should be changed to anthropology. Gradually the conception changed and the soul part was suppresed. After the Enlightenment, the Western scholars began to study man as a man of flesh and blood, as an animal. When they define man as rational, they interpret rational as the mind—how he can understand nature, how he can associate similars, associate and connect the meanings—they try to interpret this idea of rational as use of the mind or reason—for the purpose of understanding, discovering, association of similars by analogy—gradually 200 hundred years earlier, psychologist like William James and Sigmund Freud began to talk about psychoanalysis: the soul is no longer something spiritual—it has something to do with the physical which they call consciousness. Thus for Freud, psychology is the study of the action that has come out of men—how men act, how he understands. And gradually, the discpline of psychology has become secularized. A group of philosophers such represented by the likes of August Comte—long before Darwin, have already been talking about something like evolution—it is their experience and consciousness. They are the ones who experience enlightenment and renaissance. It is not what the Muslims and Islam experience. In other words, what Darwin is saying—although he brought a lot of scientific details, this idea of evolution was with them from before minus the scientific interpretations of Darwin. IV Today, the Western man‟s experience have impinged and surreptitiously infused into our experience. As a result, the Muslims today are confused. In Aristotle‟s conception of man being a rational animal for example, Prof. Al-Attas clarified that what Aristotle meant by “animal” or “anima” is not in the sense of binating (Malay word for an animal). Rather, it means animal as a soul, as far as the Greek is concerned. With regards to the word “rational” in Western history, it gradually suffered what Prof Al-Attas calls “the loss of original integrity”. It gradually refers only to the neuro-biological mind. But if one refers to the early Muslim thinkers, sufis, theologians (mutakallimūn), jurists (fuqaha‟), their definition is: al-insān hayawān alNāṭiq—meaning man is a living being that speaks. According to Prof. Al-Attas, the representatives of Muslim thought have defined
4
rationality based on a certain idea of a power in man that was given originally by God given to man—the power to communicate, to formulate words in meaningful pattern, to make symbols, and make sounds, which is innate in the power of language. Based on the Quran, the definition of man is the fact that he has language, in contrary to animals. Rationality is the intellect becoming audible by sounds, be seen by symbols. It is this language (the very concept of language: power to formulate meaning) that makes man different from animals. This is originally given when the souls were made to witness into themselves who God is, citing the Primordial Covenant verse: “alastu birabbikum? Qālū balā shahidnā” (al-A`rāf, 172). The fact the soul can answer—that is a gift of God. It shows that they understood the meaning and they can answer. Prof. Al-Attas warned that we are faced with a very great problem today—it is not right for us to relegate religion. Some of the early Malaysian leaders said that peace is the highest value. However, the professor argues that Truth is higher than peace—in fact it is one of Allah‟s name. One can‟t have peace, if there is no Truth. One can‟t compromise the truth in order to achieve peace. What will happen here will depend on the wisdom of the Muslims. And so he appealed to the wisdom of the intellectuals, those in important positions as well as the mass media to ensure that our language is spoken properly and not be corrupted. The key terms related to the worldview must not be curtailed and made vague or restricted in meaning. To make sure that this matter is not compromised, we therefore must understand these issues. And this entails understanding the religion and the Qur‟an properly. This is why Prof. Al-Attas has been emphasizing on education throughout his career—the correct kind of education. 7 In 1966 to begin with, Prof. Al-Attas suggested that ethics should be taught in our education system. But it was not done because the leaders then did not understand what ethics means—it is not just a list of words i.e. trustworthy, etc—one has to explain these things. Even in the list, they put justice last—not realizing that it should come first, for it is one of the names of Allah SWT. Prepared by: Muhammad Syafiq Bin Borhannuddin, Master‟s Candidate at CASIS
[email protected] November 6, 2013
7
To read more about his philosophy of education, see his monograph, The Concept of Education in Islam (ISTAC). See also Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud‟s The Educational Philosophy and Practice of Syed Muhammad Naquib Al-Attas, ISTAC (1998)
5
Additional: This is Al-Attas‟ paraphrase of Abu Yūsuf Yaʻqūb ibn ʼIsḥāq aṣ-Ṣabbāḥ al-Kindī: “The Greeks were right in some views but it is not complete and there are some things in error. It is up to us to complete it and correct the errors.”
1. Without understanding that and of how the world has changed, we will never understand all the things that Prof talks about / the background of these discourses. 2. The CASIS Saturday Night Lecture on 26th October 2013 saw the return of the Director and Professor of CASIS, Prof. Dr. Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud—who was on a three week hiatus to Turkey and Bosnia and Herzegovina for a series of official visits on behalf of CASIS—at the side of his distinguished teacher and friend, the Distinguished Visiting Professor of CASIS, Tan Sri Prof. Dr. Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas. 3. Before commencing, following the pedagogical method of great Muslim scholars of the past, Prof. Al-Attas stressed the need to continually repeat on matters like these and to clarify8. He needs to repeat and to clarify, exclaims the Professor. To clarify. Things needs to be continually repeated. 4. As if man is just a different from the past, from ancient past. They used the word Homo, which means the „same‟. The skulls they found a million years ago, as if they are also human and the same as us (insan) 5. This idea, according to Prof. Al-Attas, already implies that as far as the West is concerned, the idea of evolution is already implied in (their) history from very beginning and that we can find in the mythology of the Western nation the same kind of things—an idea reflecting something like evolution in their worldview. 6. they speak of ratnaro; then the emergence of new things. 7. At the time of first crusade, the Pope encouraged this crusade; in his speech, he was referring to the Franks: “you are fighting with each other… let us unite to fight our common enemey…” 8. They disagreed among themselves. Those who agree with Darwin say we went through evolution from animals; our difference from animals is a matter of degree— some others say it is a matter of kind; man is not evolved from the animals. Animals cannot conceive, cannot put ideas together into a grand conception into the interpretation of nature, cannot understand the meaning of beauty, cannot relate association/similar into knowledge. Whereas man by looking at things, they look at
8
According to the students of Prof. Al-Attas, he has been practicing this method consistently throughout his career. Read for example, The Educational Philosophy and Practice of Syed Muhammad Naquib Al-Attas, by Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, ISTAC, 1998.
6
nature, compare certain similars, its characteristics—how the development in their minds i.e. species, genus, etc. 9. Although they know their identity as Arabs—which is based on geneology. The Jews were originally like that but they have made it something ethnic/peculiar only to them. He recounts a story while doing research at Beserah, Kuantan in 1956. in which a French orientalist visited Malaysia and made remarks that Muslims don‟t understand the Quran, their religion and that they are just like parrots. As a result it was reported in the newspapers. In that village as he was doing some research, they were discussing this in the coffee shops—he would attend the Isha‟ prayers at the masjid and he would talk about Islam. On that occasion he said: You have heard what the French orientalist said, maybe there is some truth in what he said but nevermind because repition is something important—the words in the solat are not your words, they are God‟s words—God understands, He knows—he is praising Himself through you. Don‟t compare your prayer with their prayer. There is no solat in other religions. Ultimately only God praises Himself. Prophet said: I really cannot praise you… So what he said to that man in Baserah: Ofcourse you don‟t understand but you do understand what this language is talking about. For example I said, there is that verse: Allahu nur sama wa ti wa-l ard [Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth (Surat An-Nūr 24:35)]—is it that light? (pointing to a bulb)—they said no—shows they are not confused. Christianity have become confused on the nature of Jesus—that‟s why they have this problem with trinity—about his nature. When Quran say it‟s a word from God. The orientalists have studied Islam for hundreds of years—they begin to try to make use of Quranic terms. Some things Muslims don‟t answer properly that they are not becoming more bold i.e. wanting to take the word Allah. We used that word a lot, its not just a word—that name that we say hundreds of times a day, in prayer 5 times at least—because the Quran says remember; therefore we remember the 99names; this means we love Allah swt; love also includes fear--fear of being absent from the Beloved—fear in the sense of being absent—that‟s why the hadith of the prophet: death is a bridge between the lover and the Beloved. Because of that we feel hurt when ppl want to take it and put it somewhere it does not belong—they must understand this by us giving proper arguments. Its not derived from any other word; it is a name expressed in a word. On this matter, it should not be brought into the paper—spread to idiots—written by everybody—it means we have thrown the pearl to the swines. It is interesting how those symbols become sounds—must be great intellectual step. Ancient Egyptians used symbols—how did it become sound? Only recent western philo that language is the root of what makes man rational. It is language that conceived idea. How can you relate this and that without language? Some of them do accept that. We have to understand because I talked about how important language is; about the concept of nation—in our context, as far as we are concerned, it is language that can
7
be the basis what you call the malaysian nation—because malaysia is composed of different races, religions etc—how can there be a nation from that? How there arise a sentiment of solidarity—that was the problem that I was talking about after the independence 1957. As far as our situation is concerned, this can only be if you have language as the basis of the nation. You can‟t use religion, history—takes hundreds even thousands to create culture; Ibn Khaldun said at least 100 years for culture to be transmitted; that also based on education; have to be plan it in the way that is agreeable to everyone. We have a serious problem because we want to make sure language is used in a proper way—you cannot change that. —you cannot speak of the development of Islam; its already developed. Western civilisation have already been thinking about things like that—what they called dialectic; thesis—what is established/understood/accepted; then there is anti-thesis— what contradicts it; when both joined together it becomes synthesis; then it becomes a thesis again—we don‟t subcribe to an idea like this. If we use terms like that, we have already reached the synthsis. Adding things/innovation in knowledge, govt, etc is good, but not in religion. He was told that people in the government (of Malaysia) do not talk about Islam. Rather, they are encouraged to talk about patriotism. Thus Prof Al-Attas argues: If we ask what is this partriotism? They may answer national identity—if you come to that, how can a Muslim not connect that to Islam? Yes they are important, but if we talk about Islam doesn‟t mean we are not patriotic. Muslims are looking for a scapegoat for their predicaments; therefore they chose al ghazali as the scapegoat; these ppl who study maths, science etc must not think that only science, etc is the only avenue to knowledge. Ultimately as far as we are concerned we are putting our trust in the Quran. That is why religion is a trust. Muslims must keep the truth and be worthy of the trust and not betray the trust. There is a tendency to make the ones who are not of the same station in their intelligence, experience, knowledge—you cannot put ibn khaldun in the level of ibn sina, al-ghazali; ibn khaldun was only known to Muslim very recently. Al Ghazali was heard since he was alive. Must not talk about ibn khaldun as if he is a savior. Muslims known him as a historian—it is the west who regard him as a sociologist. Ibn Khaldun is not saying what the modern sociologist among the muslims are saying. Ibn khaldun also said that you cannot change the integrity of the language. Prof AlAttas gave the example of the word „pedas‟, he asked Winsted and he refers to it as hot i.e. hot temper—pedas doesn‟t have that—if you use hot as pedas then it doesn‟t really capture the meaning. The method of tafsir, ta‟wil—it is a highly intellectual method; tafsir means simply interpreting what is immediately obvious, whereas ta‟wil interpreting what is not immediately obvious. We end this summary with a particular statement by the Professor which is of importance for the relevant parties to take heed: “We are hoping the wise amongst us
8
must not allow deviations from correct usage. How? The mass media must not spread all kinds of confusion, they must be responsible, must not be arrogant.” He ends with a: “I thank you very much for being patient listening to me.” Main theme: Connected theme: Quran Main purpose: Significance:
verses
cited:
Citing evidence from the Quran, even Jesus was sent to Bani Israel to correct what was deviating from the teachings of Prophet Musa and to bring glad tidings. Jesus said there will be someone who come after him, whose name is Ahmad. Even in theological terms, God has planned it in that way: gradually, according to stages. For the nature of God or Tawhid cannot be understood by man without being properly educated. Therefore stage by stage He sent Prophets to their own people: Nuh to his own ppl; Musa to Bani Israel; other prophets to Bani Israel also; Yunus was sent to his own ppl; Isa was also sent to his own ppl—this is what mentioned in the Quran. The Prophet Muhammad (may God bless and give him peace), whom Prophet Isa (A.S) predicted would come, was not sent to his own people—but to mankind as a whole. Hence the Quranic expression: Ya Ayyuhā al-ladhīna Āmanu.
9
