Ḥikmat Al-Ilāhiyyah and Kalām

8/10/2019 ikmat Al-Ilhiyyah and Kalm

1/12

Maisonneuve & Larose

Al-ikmat Al-Ilhiyyah and KalmAuthor(s): Seyyed Hossein NasrSource: Studia Islamica, No. 34 (1971), pp. 139-149Published by: Maisonneuve & LaroseStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1595329.

Accessed: 19/11/2013 23:55

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Maisonneuve & Laroseis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studia Islamica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Tue, 19 Nov 2013 23:55:03 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=malhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1595329?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1595329?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mal


2/12

AL-HIKMA

T

AL-ILAHIYYAH

AND

KALAM*

When

we

speak

of

al-hikmat

l-ildhiyyah

we

do

not

mean

simply

the

ildhiyyat

f

the works

of

Muslim

Peripatetics

uch

as

Ibn

Sind

and

Ibn

Rushd,

nor

the Hikmah

that some ofthe

theologians

ike Fakhr

al-DIn

RFzi

refer o

as

being

ynonymous

with Kaldm.

Rather,

we mean that blend

of

rational

philo-

sophy, illumination nd gnosis and the tenets of revelation

that

formed

nto

a

synthesis

after Suhrawardi and

mostly

thanks

to

him,

and that

reached

its

peak

with

Sadr

al-Din

Shirfzi

nd

his

students.(1)

In

this

paper

we wish to

examine

the relation between

the

followers

f

the

school

of

al-Hikmat

al-ildhiyyah,

r

IHikmat-i

ldh(

(especially

that

part

concerned

with

"the

general principles"

(al-umar

al-'dmmah))

and

Kalam. Although

he view of

all

the

hukamd'

of

this school

concerningKalam is not the same, thereis enoughunityof

view to

warrant

uch

a

study,

n

the

same

way

that

one

can

speak

of

the relationbetweenmashshd'T

hilosophy

nd

Kaldm

even

though

all of

the

Muslim

Peripatetic

philosophers

have

not

held the same

views

concerning alam.

*

Text of

a

paper

delivered

at the

Conference

on

Early

Islamic

Thought

in

honor

of

Harry

A. Wolfson at Harvard

University,

April,

1971.

(1) See S. H. Nasr, ThreeMuslim Sages, Cambridge (U.S.A.), 1964, chapter II;

S. H.

Nasr,

"Suhrawardi" and

"Mulli

Sadrd"

in

A

History

of

Muslim

Philosophy,

ed.

by

M.

M.

Sharif,Wiesbaden,

vol.

I,

1963 and vol.

II,

1966. See also

H.

Corbin,

"La

place

de

Molli Sadri Shirfzi

(ob.

1050/1640)

dans

la

philosophie

iranienne,"

Studia

Islamica,

vol.

18, 1963,

pp.

81-113.

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/12

140

SEYYED

HOSSEIN

NASR

In

the

history

f

the

struggle

nd

reciprocal

nfluence etween

Falsafah

and

Kaldm

in

Islam,

we

can,

for he sake

of

he

present

discussion, istinguish ourperiods:

1. The

earliest

period,

from

he

beginning

o

the

third/ninth

century,

when the

Mu'tazilite school was

dominant

n

Kaldm,

and

Falsafah

was

passing through

ts

period

of

genesis

and

early

development

with

such

figures

s

Irinshahri

nd

al-Kindi

and his

students. This

period

was

one of

distinct

ut

parallel

development

of

and close association

between

Falsafah

and

Kaldm

in

an

atmosphere

moreor

ess of relative

mutual

respect,

at least in the case of al-Kindihimself,lthoughfrom he side

of

Kaldm

certain

of its

branchessuch

as

the

school

of Basra

opposed

Falsafah

violently

ven

during

his

early period.

2.

The

period

from

the

third/ninth

o

the

fifth/eleventh

century,

rom

he rise of

Ash'arite

heology

nd

its elaboration

to

the

beginning

f the

gradual

ncorporation

f certain

philoso-

phical

arguments

nto

Kaldm

by

Imim

al-.Haramayn

al-Juwayni

and

his

student

Ghazzali.

This

was

a

period

of ntense

pposi-

tion and often nmitybetweenFalsafah and Kaldm, a period

whose

phases

have

been so

ably

studied

along

with those of

the

first

period by

many

western

scholars,

from

Munk,

Steinschneider,

orovitz

and

Horten

to

Gardet

and of

course

H. A.

Wolfson,

he

person

whom we

are assembled

here

to

honor

nd

a

scholar

whose

studies

n

the

domain

of

the

relation

between

Falsafah

and Kaldm

during

he

early

period

ofIslamic

history

mark

one of

the

highlights

f

Occidental

scholarship

on Islam.

3.

The

period

from

Juwayni

nd

Ghazzill

to

Fakhr

al-Din

al-Razi,

that

is from

bout the

fifth/eleventh

o the

seventh/

thirteenth

centuries

when,

while the

opposition

between

Falsafah

and

Kaldm

continued,

ach

began

to

incorporate

nto

itself

more and more of

the elements

of

the

other.

Falsafah

began

to

discuss

more than

ever

before

problems

uch

as

the

meaning

of

the

Word

of

God,

the relation

between

human

and

Divinewill,the DivineAttributes, tc.,whichhad alwaysbeen

the central

concern

of

Kaldm,

while Kaldm became

ever

more

"philosophical",

employing

both

ideas and

arguments

drawn



4/12

Al-hikmat

l-ildhiyyah

ND

Kalam

141

from

alsafah.

As

a result t

the

end

of

this

period,

s

already

noted

by

Ibn

Khaldfin,

men

appeared

whom it

is

difficult

o

classify xactlyeither n the category ffaylasaf rmutakallim

and who could be

legitimately

onsidered

as

belonging

to

either

or

to both

groups.

4.

From the

seventh/thirteenth

entury

onward,

when

the

school of

al-Hikmat

al-ildhiyyah

r

Hikmat-i

ldhi

developed

fully

nd

a new

type

of

relation

ame into

being

based

on

the

trends stablished

during

he third

period.

Since the

Hikmat-i

ildhT

egan

to

develop particularly

n

Persia where

Shi'ism

was

also on the rise,naturallymuch of the interreaction etween

Hikmah and

Kaldm

involved Shi'ite

Kaldm,

although

Sunni

Kaldm

must

not

by any

means be

forgotten,

or

even

if

most

of

the

hakims

were

Shi'ite,

they

were neverthelesswell

versed

in

and

fully

ware

of the

arguments

f Sunni

Kaldm,

to

which

they

often

addressed

themselves.

During

the

last

two

periods

in

question

the

opposition

of

the

followers f

al-Hikmat

l-ildhiyyah

o

Kaldm,

and

especially

to the Kaldm of theAsh'arite chool,continued nd in a sense

grew,

while

from the

point

of

view of the

subject

matter

discussed

and the

arguments resented

hat were

based

upon

the traditional

sources

of

Islam,

there

was

an ever

greater

rapprochement

etween the two. Ash'arite

theology

s

too

often aken

as

representing

slamic

theology

s

such,

although

recent

cholarship

has shown

that even

in

Sunni circles

t

has

never

represented

ll

religious

thought

or

"theology"

in its

Christian ense and has always been opposedby a segmentof

the

Sunni

religious

ommunity.(1)

The

Quran

and the Sunnah

on the one hand

and

the

pure

metaphysics

nd

gnosis

derived

from

he

esoteric

teachings

of

Islam

and contained

n Sufism

on the other

hand

were

there

to show

some

of

the innate

hort-

comings

of the whole

Ash'arite pproach.(2)

(1) See forexample G. Makdisi,"Ash'ari and the Ash'aritesin Islamic Religious

History,"

Studia

Islamica,

vol.

17, 1962,

pp.

37-80,

and

vol.

18, 1963,

pp.

19-39.

(2)

See F.

Schuon,

"Dilemmas of

Theological

Speculation,"

Studies

in

Compara-

tive

Religion, Spring,

1969,

pp.

66-93.



5/12

142

SEYYED

HOSSEIN NASR

The followers f

al-H.ikmal

al-ildhiyyah

onsidered he method

of

Kaldm

as

illegitimate

ut its

problems

s of vital

importance.

Whiletheyheld the same reverence or he Quranand Sunnah

as the followers

f Kaldm and

drew from hese sourcesfor heir

doctrines,

hey

refused

to

accept

the

methods of Kaldm

as

sufficient

r

even

legitimate

n

solving

the more

profound

questions

of

religion

and their

metaphysical implications.

In fact

it can

be said that the

IHukamd'-i

ldh(,

as

they

are

usually

called

in

Persian,

believed themselvesto be

exactly

that

class of

religious

scholars who

possessed

the

necessary

intellectualmeansto explainthe ntellectual ontent freligion

and answer

the

questions

posed

for

religion

by

the

discursive

mind,

or

in

other

words

to

accomplish

hose

very

goals

which

the

mutakallimiin

ttempted

o

accomplish

but failed to

do so

in

a

satisfactory

manner

n

the

eyes

of the

hukamd'.

The

change

from

pposition

o

Kaldm

to

replacing

ts

very

role

and

function,

t

least

in

the culturalorbit

of

Persia

where

IHikmal-i

ldhT

flourished,

an

be seen

in

the

intermediary

figuresbetween Suhrawardi and Mull5 Sadr5. Suhrawardi

himself

makes

singularly

ittle reference

o Kaldm

while

at

the

same time

he

discusses the

most

essential

problems

f

Kaldm

such as the Divine

Attributes,

od's

knowledge

fthe

world, tc.,

in the

light

of his own

ishradq

octrines.

Nasir

al-Din

al-Tilsi,

who

followed

im

by

a

century,

as

both

hakim

nd

mutakallim

and

in

fact the

founder

f

Shi'ite

systematic

heology

hanks

mostly

to his

Tajrrd.(

His

student,

Qutb

al-Din

Shirizi,

thecommentatorfSuhrawardi nd at the same time Peripate-

tic

philosopher,

howed

ess

interest

n

Kaldm than

his

master

while

being

aware of

its

arguments.

But

another

of

Nasir

al-Din's

students,

Allamah

Hilli,

was

again

both

a

foremost

theologian

nd

a

hakrm.

The

tendency

toward

a

synthesis

between

H.ikmat-i

ildhr

and Kaldm became

even more

accentuated

in

the

eighth/

fourteenth

nd

ninth/fifteenth

enturies. While

specifically

(1)

The

study

of

the

numerous

commentaries and

glosses

written

upon

this

major

work

during

the

past

seven

centuries

would

be a

major

contribution

to

the

history

of both

Shi'ite

Kaldm

and

.Hikmat-i

ildhi.



6/12

Al-hikmat

l-ildhiyyah

ND

Kalam

143

Shi'ite

theologians

uch as Ibn

Abi Jumhfir hsd'i

and

Sayyid

.Iaydar

Amuli

were well

versed

in

the

doctrines

of

H.ikmat-ildhi, ome ofthe best knownhakimsof the age, such as Jalil

al-Din

Dawini, Sadr

al-Din and

Ghiyfth

al-Din

Mansiir

Dashtaki

and

Mir

Sayyid

Sharif

JurjanI

were

as

much t

home

with Kaldm as

Hikmah.

It

is

hardlypossible

to

say

whether

DawanI

was

a

hakfm-i

ldhT

or

a mulakallim.

While

Tilsi

was

well versed

in

both schools but

expressed

the

view-point

of

each

in

separate

works nd did not combine

heir

rguments

in

a

single

book or a

single

doctrinal

ynthesis,

awini

combined

argumentsnd methods fboth schools

n his

exposition fthe

nature of

things

and

attempted

a

synthesis

between

them.

In his

method

he

typifies

many

of

the

figures

f his

day.

With

Mulli

Sadrfi

the new relation between Kaldm

and

al-IHikmal

l-ildhiyyah

which

had been

developing

since the

seventh/thirteenthentury

eaches

a

new

peak

and the

summit

of

its

development.(')

Mull

.Sadra

knew

well the

important

Mu'tazilite

and Ash'arite

theologians, specially

Ghazzfli

and

Fakhr

al-Din

RJzi,

and

also

the most

mportant hi'ite

theolo-

gians

before

himself.

In

fact

among

the Islamic

philosophers

probably

none

was as

well

acquainted

with

Kaldm

as

he.

Kaldm

represents,

long

with

Peripatetic philosophy,

shraqi

theosophy

and

'irfdn,

one of the basic elements

from

which

he created

his

vast

synthesis.

He

turns

to

the

arguments

f

Kaldm

again

and

again especially

n

the

Asfar

and he confirms

and

praises

ome

of

he

arguments

f

the

mutakalliman

n

certain

places(2)

while

rejecting

hem

violently

n

others.(")

(1) Concerning

Mulli Sadri's

teachings

as the

synthesis

of the different chools

preceding

him see S. H.

Nasr,

Islamic

Studies,

Beirut, 1966,

chapter

X;

and

H.

Corbin,

prolegomena

to Mulli

Sadri's

Le

livre

des

pdndtrationsmdtaphysiques,

Tehran-Paris,

1964.

We have

dealt

fully

with

this

subject

in

our

forth-coming

Sadr

al-Din Shirdzi

and His

Transcendent

Theosophy.

(2)

For

example

in

the

Asfdr,

ithographed

edition, Tehran,

1222

(A.

H.

lunar),

p.

147,

he

confirms

he

arguments

of the

mutakallimiim

gainst

the

possiblity

of

a

series

that

continues

ad

infinitum,

nd in the section on

proofs

for

the existence of

God, p. 548, he confirms heirargumentsforHis existence based on motion.

(3)

For

example,

on

p.

345 where

their views about

time

are

rejected,

and the

whole last section

of the fourth

afar,

vol. IV of the

Asfdr,

where their views on

eschatology

are

completely

refuted.



7/12

144

SEYYED

HOSSEIN NASR

What

is,

however,

most

interesting

n

Mull

Sadr5's views

about

Kaldm

is

not

his

acceptance

of

some

of

their

beliefs

nd

arguments orthe fact that everysingle problemdiscussedby

Kalam

is also

considered

y

him n his

"transcendent

heosophy"

(al-hikmat

l-muta'dliyah).

Rather,

t

is

his

views

concerning

the

very

nature

of

Kaldm

and the

shortcomings

f

he

knowledge

acquired

through

ts

methods.

According

o

him the mula-

kalliman

in

general

have not

purified

heir nner

being

so as

to enable the intellect

within

them to

perceive

directly

he

Divine Realities

without

the

dimming

nd

obscuring

nfluence

ofthecarnal soul. In the Si asl he says in bitterwordswhich

reflect he

hardship

he has

suffered

t

the hands

of

some of the

superficial

ulamd'

and

mutakalliman

who

opposed

his

gnostic

teachings,

Some of

those

who

pretend

o be scholars and are

full

of evil

and

corruption

nd some

of

the

mutakalliman

ho

have

no

logic

or

reason... have

made

opposition

to

the

Sufis

their

slogan."(')

And

he

continues,

Oh

dear

scholar and oh

conceited

mutakallim

Until when and forhow

long

will

you

mark the face of intimacywiththe mole of fearand cast the

earth

ofdarkness

upon

the

eye

offaithfulness

hrough

istress

and be

busy

with

admonition nd

oppression

f

the

people

of

purity

and

faithfulness? Until

when and

for how

long

will

you

wear

the dress

of

deception

and

hypocrisy

nd the robe

of

trickery

nd

imposture,

nd

drink he

cup

of

conceit

from

he

hands

of the

fiend hat

appears

as an

angel,

and use

your

effort

in

destroying

he truth nd

spreading

alsehood,

n

vilifying

he

man ofknowledge nd praising he

ignorant?..."(2)

In

his Kasr

asndm

al-jdhiliyyah,

Mull~

Sadri

makes clearer

the reason

why

Kaldm cannotreach the

heart

of

religious

ruth.

He

writes,

The

differenceshat

occur

among

cholars

f

Kaldm

and

jurisprudence

Fiqh)

in

the

important uestions

and

the

generalprinciples

f

religious njunctions,

nd not

in

secondary

details where

differences

an

exist,

originate

n the failure

of

their

fforto seek the truth

f

things

nd

in

the fact

that

they

do notpenetratentoall oftheaspectsofthetruth. The way

(1)

Si

asl,

ed.

by

S. H.

Nasr,

Tehran,

1340

(A.

H.

solar), pp.

5-6.

(2) Ibid., p.

7.



8/12

Al-hikmai

l-ildhiyyah

ND

Kaldm

145

to reach

certainty yaqrn)

in

the

inquiry

nto

religious

ruths

and the inner

meaning

of the

teachings

of the

Prophet

s

not

throughdiscussionsof Kalam and disputations. Rather, it

is

through

he

acquiring

of

inner and

intuitive

knowledge,

he

abandoning

f

what

one's

nature

s

accustomed

o,

the

rejection

of

worldy

nd base

things

nd

the

disregarding

f

the

opinions

of

creatures,

he

praise

of

men

and the

attention

of

rulers.

In

summary,

t is

through

the

realization

of

real asceticism

before

he

world,

ts

children,

ts wealth and its

glory.

"Worldly glory

s

a

greater

emptation

han wealth.

And

worldly glory deriving from a social status based upon

[pretended]

knowledge

nd

righteousness

s

a

worse

corruption

in

the hearts

[of men]

than the

worldly

glory

derived

from

authority

ver

their

bodies and

based

upon might

and

power.

For

from

he

former

riginate

most

disputations

nd discussions

of Kaldm and

the

rivalries

nd

controversies f

Fiqh,

whose

origin

s

the

desire

for

fame

and social

prestige

hroughout

he

land,

the love

to

rule

and to control

he

servantsof

God,

great

hope in what is desirablephysically, he wish to continueto

subsist

on

this earth

and

to

cling

o

it,

satisfaction

withthe ife

of

this world

nd

being

removed

from he

good

pleasure

of

God,

the

Exalted,

on the

Day

of

Resurrection."(')

With this stern

udgment,

which

concernsnot the result

but

the

very origin

f

the

thoughts

nd words of the

mutakalliman,

Mulld

SadrZ

attacks Kaldm

at

the same time

that he

integrates

so much of its

heritage

nto his own

intellectual

synthesis.

The studentof MulliSadrZ, 'Abd al-Razziq LUhiji,(2) ived

at

a

time when

the attacks

against

both

the

hukamd'

nd

the

'urafd'

had increased

greatly.

He therefore

overed

his more

esoteric

eachings

under the

veil

of

Kaldm,

but

a

Kaldm

that

was

impregnated

with

Ijikmat

and

'Irfdn,

while he

expressed

his more

purely metaphysical

eachings

n

poems

and other

writings

hat have not

become

as

well-known

s

his

famous

(1) Kasr asndm al-jdhiliyyah,ed. by M. T. Danechepazhuh, Tehran, 1340

(A.

H.

solar), pp.

91-92.

(2)

Concerning

ihiji

see

Nasr,

"The School of

Ispahan"

in A

History f

Muslim

Philosophy,

vol.

II,

p.

926.

10



9/12

146

SEYYED

HOSSEIN

NASR

Gawhar-murad.(1)

Nevertheless

n

the

Gawhar-murddihiji

shows

a

profound

knowledge

of the relation

between

Hikmat

and

Kaldm

in both

principle

and

history

and

expresses

his

views

in

a

passage

which,

coming

from

one

of

the foremost

intellectual

figures

n

the

history

of

al-Ijikmat

al-ildhiyyah

in

Persia,

s

a

most

revealing

estimony

oncerning

he

relation

involved.

He

writes,

"Know that the

types

of

differences

xisting

among

the

ulamd'

in

matters

pertaining

o

the

divine sciences

(ma'drif-i

ildhf)

are limited

to

the differences etween

the

schools of Hikmatand Kaldm...

"The difference

etween

Kaldm

and Hikmat

lies

in

the

following

acts It must

first

f

all

be

known hat the intellect

('aql)

possesses

complete ndependence

n

the

acquiring

of the

divine sciences and

other

intellectual

matters,

and

in

these

matters

t

does

not

depend upon

the

Sharf'ah.

Once

this

is

realized

t can be

concluded

hat

the

way

of the

hukamd'

s

the

acquiring

of

true science

and the

proving

of the definite

principles hat governover the essences of things n a way

that is

in

accordance

with

the nature

of

reality.

And

this

way

is based

upon

reasoning

nd

purely

ntellectual emonstra-

tion

leading

to

self-evident

remisses

that

no

intellect

can

refuse

r

resist o

accept

and

in

which

he

agreement

r

disagree-

ment

of

any

particular

circumstances

r

peoples

or

religious

communities

does

not have

any

effect.

The

knowledge

acquired

in

this

way

is called

in

the

terminology

f

learned

men 'the scienceof IHikmat'. Of necessity his science is in

conformity

ith authenticrevealed

laws,

for

the

truth

of the

Shart'ah

is

ascertainable

in its

reality

through

intellectual

demonstration,

ut this

agreement

does

not

enter

into the

proof

of

the

problems

of

.Hikmat,

which do not

depend upon

the Sharr'ah

for

their

proof...

(1) In his forthcomingMuntakhabdt-ifalsafah,which he is preparing with

H.

Corbin,

J.

Ashtiydni

has

published

selections

from

hitherto

neglected

works of

Ldhiji

which

depict

him

more as a

pure

hakim

n

the

line

of

Mulli

Sadrd

than the

Gawhar-murdd

nd the

Shawdriq,

n which

VIikmat

nd

Kaldm

are

combined,

would

reveal.



10/12

Al-hikmal

l-ildhiyyah

ND

Kaldm

147

"As

for the

term

Kaldm it has two

meanings:

the Kaldm

of

the ancients

and

the

Kalam

of the moderns. The

Kaldm

of the ancients is an art which enables man to defendthe

statutes

of

the

Sharf'ah

through

demonstration

omposed

of

well-known

remisses

hat are

established

with

certainty

mong

the followers

of

religion

whether

they

lead

to

self-evident

premisses

or

not.

This

art

has

nothing

in

common

with

HIikmal,

ither n

subject-matter,

n

reasoning

r n ts

usefulness.

The

subject

of

Hikmat s

the

real nature of

things

not

circum-

stances. Its

reasoning

s

composed

f truths hat are

established

with certaintyresultingfrom elf-evident remisses,whether

these

are

uncontested nd

well-known

r not. Its

usefulness

is in

the

acquiring

of

knowledge

and

the

perfection

f

the

theoretical

faculty

f the

mind

and not

in

the

preservation

f

statutes.

Thus

it is

clear that this

art

[Kalam]

can not

be

one

of

the

means

of

acquiring

knowledge ma'rifal).

"The ancients

among

the Muslims

needed

this art for two

reasons: one

was to

protect

he doctrines

f

the

Sharf'ah

from

the people of opposition [to it] among followersof other

denominations

nd

religions.

This

need

concerned

he

general

public

among

Muslims. The otherwas

to

prove

the

particular

aims of

each schooland

sect of slam and

to

protect

he

condition

of

each

school from he attacks of the other Islamic schools.

Naturally

the

relationship

created

by

the

type

of defense

given]

to each

school

is

different.

"What

we have

said concerns

the

origin

of

Kaldm

among

Muslims. But

gradually

he borders f

Kaldm

wereextended.

People

were

no

longer

atisfied

with

guarding

he situationbut

began

to

document

nd

explain

the

arguments

or he

principles

and

foundations

of

religion, basing

their

arguments

upon

well-known

and evident

premisses. They

left the

straight

path

of

the

most

perfect

mong

the

Companions

(sahabah)

and

theirfollowers

tdbi'(n),

which

consisted

of

contemplation

and

meditation

s

well

as

reference o

the scholars

('ulama')

among

the

Companions

and

leaders

(imdms) among

their

followers.

They

consideredtheir own

way

as the

way

to

acquire

knowledge

nd

even considered

t

as

the

only possible

way...



11/12

148

SEYYED

HOSSEIN

NASR

"This

then is the

Kaldm

of

the

'moderns',

which

is

the

counterpart

f HIikmat. It

shares

the

same

subject

and aim

withHikmal but differsrom t in theprimary rguments nd

reasoning.

It

has

been

said

concerning

he

definition f the

Kaldm of the 'moderns'

that it is a

knowledge

f

the state

of

creatures

according

to the

mode

of

the

injunctions

of the

Sharf'ah. By

adding

this last

condition

the definition

f

Hikmat

has

been

avoided,

for

agreement

with the

injunctions

of

the

Sharf'ah

means

basing

one's

arguments pon

premisses

that are well-known

nd evident

among

the followers f the

Sharf'ah. And this is not acceptable in the definition f

Hikmat,

or

t

is

not

necessary

or

premisses

hat are well-known

and evident o be

among

truths hat are known

with

certainty.

Therefore

f

by

chance

the

premisses

are

truths

possessing

certainty

hey

[the

followers f

Hikmat]

use

them as

such,

and

if

not,

they

do not

consider

premisses

ased

upon

opinion

as

valid

in

scientificmatters

masd'il-i

ilmiyyah).

"A

group

of

the

ignorant,

who have

appeared

in

the

guise

of learnedmen,have been in errorconcerning his condition

(qayd)

[about

the

definition

f

Kaldm

and its

difference

ith

Hikmalt]

r

have

on

purpose

made

simple

souls fall

into

the

errorof

thinking

hat in

the

concept

of

HIikmal

pposition

o

the

injunctions

f the

Sharf'ah

s

considered

valid.

For

this

reason

the condemnation f Hikmat

nd

its followers

as become

prevalent

among

Muslims.

Whereas,

from

what

we have said

it has

become clear

that the

acquiring

of

knowledge ma'rifat)

in a

way

that is not

dependentupon simple

mitation

taqlid)is limited o the

way

ofdemonstration

burhan)

and the

basing

of

argumentsupon

premisses

that are

certain,

whetherthis

knowledge

be called

Hikmat

or

Kaldm.

"It is

not

right

to

condemn

Hikmat

because

some of the

hakims

have committed

rrors n certain

problems.

Rather,

that

group

s

condemnable

hat

extends ts

prejudice

oncerning

particular

well-known

ersonalities

o

HIikmat

tself,

onsidering

their

the

haklms']

mitation

s

necessary

nd

believing very

singleword they have uttered to be the truth. He who is

satisfied

with

mere

imitation,

why

should

he not

imitate the

prophets

and

imdms?-which

act

would

of

course

bring

him

salvation,

specially

f

he is not

among

those

possessing

apabi-



12/12

Al-hikmal

l-ildhiyyah

ND

Kaldm

149

lity

[for

ntellectual

penetration]

nd

is

not

able

to conceive

of

real

perfection.(')

It is certain that

simply

to

imitate

philosophersand to consider perfection o reside solely in

transmitting

heir words

and

guidance

to reside

solely

in

following

hem

s

pure

rror nd the

very

ssence

ofwretchedness.

Rather,

the

sure

way

of

acquiringknowledge

ma'arif)

is

pure

demonstration

nd

the

simple

cquiring

f

certainty.

Therefore

it is neither

necessary

to

be a mulakallimnor

a

philosopher.

Rather,

one

must

be

a

believer

(mu'min)

who has

faith

in

Divine

Unity

(muwahhid)

and

one

must have confidence

n

correct ction,begging ssistance n one's actionfrom he true

Sharr'ah.

And if

a

person

is

not

capable

of

achieving

true

perfection

he

must never

cease

to imitate the

truly perfect

men.'"(2)

In this

comparison

between

Hikmat

nd

Kaldm,

which

s

at

once

principial

nd

historical,

dhiji

expresses

he view

of hose

later

haktms

who

were

also mulakallims

nd above all

gnostics

and Sufis.

He therefore

lludes

to a

knowledge

ranscending

both Hikmat and

Kaldm

-

that

of the

muwahhid

while

insisting

on

the

superiority

f

Hikmat

over

Kaldm on

their

own

proper

plane.

L5hiji

was

to

be

followed

by

many

men

like

Q

Documents

Ḥikmat Al-Ilāhiyyah and Kalām