In the Journal Asiatique, 4me Serie, tome 11, a curious account is given of the voyage of Mirza Muhammad 'Ali Khan, some time Persian Amba.s.sador in Paris. This gentleman states that in one of his voyages from Persia to India he met with a Wahhabi, who had in his possession a tract written by the founder of the sect. This small pamphlet he allowed Mirza Muhammad to copy. I give the substance of the pamphlet in this note. The original Arabic will be found in the Journal Asiatique.

It is of considerable interest as a protest against idolatry. It is as follows:--I know that G.o.d is merciful, that the sect of Abu Hanifa is orthodox and identical with the religion of Abraham. After thou hast known that G.o.d has created His servants for the purpose of being served by them, know also that this service or devotion is to worship G.o.d, One and alone; just as prayer (Salat) is not prayer (Salat), unless it is accompanied with the legal purification. G.o.d Most High has said: "It is not for the votaries of other G.o.ds with G.o.d, witnesses against themselves of infidelity, to visit the temples of G.o.d. These! vain their works: and in the fire shall they abide for ever!" (Sura ix. 17.)

Those who in their prayers, address any other than G.o.d, in the hope of obtaining by them that which G.o.d alone can give--those bring unto their prayers the leaven of idolatry and make them of none effect, "and who erreth more than he who, beside G.o.d, calleth upon that which shall not answer him until the day of resurrection." (Sura xlvi. 4) On the contrary, when the day of resurrection comes, they will become their enemies and treat them as infidels for having served others than G.o.d.

"But the G.o.ds whom ye call on beside Him have no power over the husk of a date-stone! If ye cry to them they will not hear your cry; and if they heard they would not answer you, and in the day of resurrection they will disown your joining them with G.o.d." (Sura x.x.xv. 14,15.)

He who says: "O thou Prophet of G.o.d! O 'Ibn 'Abbas! O 'Abd-ul-Qadir!"

&c. with the persuasion that the souls of these blessed ones can obtain from G.o.d that of which the suppliant has need, or that they can protect him, is an infidel whose blood any one may shed, and whose goods any one may appropriate with impunity unless he repent. There are four different cla.s.ses of idolaters.

{115}

First, the infidels against whom the Prophet made war. These acknowledge that G.o.d is the creator of the world, that He supports all living creatures, that in wisdom He rules over all. "Say: who supplieth you from the heavens and the earth? who hath power over hearing and sight? and who bringeth forth the living from the dead, and bringeth forth the dead from the living? who ruleth all things? they will surely say: 'G.o.d,' then say: 'What! will ye not therefore fear Him.'" (Sura x.

32.) It is difficult to distinguish idolatry of this kind; but under an outwardly orthodox appearance they go astray; for they have recourse to divinities of their own choosing and pray to them.

Secondly, there are idolaters who say that they only call upon these intermediary powers to intercede in their favour with G.o.d, and that what they desire they seek from G.o.d. The Quran furnishes a proof against them. "They worship beside G.o.d what cannot hurt or help them, and say, these are our advocates with G.o.d! say: will ye inform G.o.d of aught in the heavens and in the earth which He knoweth not?" (Sura x.

19.)

Thirdly, those are idolaters who choose one idol as their patron, or rather those who, renouncing the worship of idols, become attached to one saint, as Jesus or His Mother, and put themselves under the protection of Guardian Angels. Against them we cite the verse: "Those whom ye call on, themselves desire union with their Lord, striving which of them shall be nearest to Him; they also hope for His mercy, and fear His chastis.e.m.e.nt." (Sura xvii. 59.) We see here that the Prophet drew no distinction between the worship of an idol and the worship of such and such a saint; on the contrary, he treated them all as infidels, and made war upon them in order to consolidate the religion of G.o.d upon a firm basis.

Fourthly, those who worship G.o.d sincerely in the time of trouble, but at other times call on other G.o.ds are idolaters. Thus: "Lo! when they embark on board a ship, they call upon G.o.d, vowing Him sincere worship, but when He bringeth them safe to land, behold they join partners with Him." (Sura xxix. 65.)

In the age in which we live, I could cite still worse heresies. The idolaters, our contemporaries, pray to and invoke the lower divinities when they are in distress. The idolaters of the Prophet's time were less culpable than those of the present age are. They, at least, had recourse to G.o.d in time of great evil; these in good and evil states, seek the aid of their patrons, other than G.o.d, and pray to them.

{116}

CHAPTER IV.

THE CREED OF ISLaM.[99]

Faith is defined by Muslim theologians as: "Confession with the tongue and belief with the heart."[100] It is said to "stand midway between hope and fear." It is sub-divided into Iman-i-mujmal and Iman-i-mufa.s.sal. The former is an expression of the following faith: "I believe in G.o.d, His names and attributes, and accept all His commands."[101] The latter is the acceptance of the following dogmas: "I believe in G.o.d, Angels, Books, Prophets, the Last Day, the Predestination by the Most High G.o.d of good and evil and the Resurrection after death."[102] These form the articles of faith which every Muslim must believe, to which belief, in order to render it perfect, he must add the performance of the "acts of practice," _viz._: (1) "The recital of the Kalima or creed:--'There is no deity but G.o.d, and Muhammad is the Apostle of G.o.d.' (2) Sulat. The five daily prayers. (3) Roza. The thirty days fast of Ramazan. (4) Zakat. The legal alms. (5) Hajj, or the pilgrimage to Mecca." This chapter will contain an account of the Iman--the dogmas of Islam. An account of the Din--the practical duties, will be given in the next chapter. {117}

1. G.o.d.--This article of the faith includes a belief in the existence of G.o.d, His unity and attributes, and has given rise to a large number of sects. Some acquaintance with the various controversies which have thus arisen is necessary to a correct knowledge of Islam. I commence the consideration of this subject by giving the substance of a Sunni, or orthodox treatise known as the Risala-i-Berkevi. The learned orientalist M.

Garcin de Ta.s.sy, considered it to be of such authority that in his "L'Islamisme d'apres le Coran" he has inserted a translation of the Risala.[103] Muhammad Al-Berkevi, speaking of the Divine attributes, says:--

(1). Life. (Hyat). G.o.d Most High is alone to be adored. He has neither a.s.sociate nor equal. He is free from the imperfections of humanity. He is neither begotten nor does He beget. He is invisible. He is without figure, form, colour or parts. His existence has neither beginning nor end. He is immutable. If He so wills, He can annihilate the world in a moment of time and, if it seem good to Him, recreate it in an instant.

Nothing is difficult to Him, whether it be the creation of a fly or that of the seven heavens. He receives neither profit nor loss from whatever may happen. If all the Infidels became Believers and all the irreligious pious, He would gain no advantage. On the other hand, if all Believers became Infidels, He would suffer no loss.

(2). Knowledge. ('Ilm). He has knowledge of all things hidden or manifest, whether in heaven or on earth. He knows the number of the leaves of the trees, of the grains of wheat and of sand. Events past and future are known to Him. He knows what enters into the heart of man and what he utters with his mouth. He alone, except those to whom He has revealed them, knows the invisible things. He is free from forgetfulness, negligence and error. His knowledge is eternal: it is not posterior to His essence.

(3). Power. (Qudrat). He is Almighty. If He wills, He can raise the dead, make stones talk, trees walk, annihilate the heavens and the earth and recreate of gold or of silver thousands similar to those destroyed. He can transport a man in a moment of time from the east to the west, or from the west to the east, or to the seventh heaven. His power is eternal a priori and a posteriori. It is not posterior to His essence.

{118}

(4). Will (Iradah). He can do what He wills, and whatever He wills comes to pa.s.s. He is not obliged to act. Everything, good or evil, in this world exists by His will. He wills the faith of the believer and the piety of the religious. If He were to change His will there would be neither a true believer nor a pious man. He willeth also the unbelief of the unbeliever and the irreligion of the wicked and, without that will, there would neither be unbelief nor irreligion. All we do we do by His will: what He willeth not does not come to pa.s.s. If one should ask why G.o.d does not will that all men should believe we answer: "We have no right to enquire about what G.o.d wills and does. He is perfectly free to will and to do what He pleases." In creating unbelievers, in willing that they should remain in that state; in making serpents, scorpions and pigs: in willing, in short, all that is evil G.o.d has wise ends in view which it is not necessary that we should know. We must acknowledge that the will of G.o.d is eternal and that it is not posterior to His essence.

(5). Hearing. (Sama'). He hears all sounds whether low or loud. He hears without an ear for His attributes are not like those of men.

(6). Seeing. (Basr). He sees all things, even the steps of a black ant on a black stone in a dark night; yet He has no eye as men have.

(7). Speech. (Kalam). He speaks, but not with a tongue as men do. He speaks to some of His servants without the intervention of another, even as He spoke to Moses, and to Muhammad on the night of the ascension to heaven. He speaks to others by the instrumentality of Gabriel, and this is the usual way in which He communicates His will to the prophets. It follows from this that the Quran is the word of G.o.d, and is eternal and uncreated.

These are the "haft sifat," or seven attributes of G.o.d. There is unanimity of opinion as to the number of attributes, but not as regards their nature and the extent of the knowledge concerning them to which men can attain.

Thus some say that the knowledge of G.o.d is the first thing to acquire; but Imam Shafa'i and the Mutazilites say that a man must first attain to the _idea_ of the knowledge of G.o.d. The meaning of the expression "Knowledge of G.o.d" is the ascertaining the truth of His existence, and of His positive and privative attributes, as far as the human understanding can enter into these matters. The unity is not a mere numerical unity but absolute, for the number one is the first of a series and implies a second, but G.o.d has not a {119} second. He is "singular without anything like Him, separate having no equal;" for, "had there been either in heaven or earth G.o.ds beside G.o.d, both surely had gone to ruin." (Sura xxi. 22). G.o.d is not a substance, for substance has accidents, but G.o.d has none: otherwise His nature would be that of "dependent existence." G.o.d is without parts, for otherwise he would not exist till all the parts were formed, and His existence would depend on the parts, that is, on something beside Himself.

The orthodox strictly prohibit the discussion of minute particulars, for say they, "just as the eye turning to the brightness of the sun finds darkness intervene to prevent all observation, so the understanding finds itself bewildered if it attempts to pry into the nature of G.o.d." The Prophet said: "We did not know the reality of the knowledge of Thee;" and to his followers he gave this advice: "Think of G.o.d's gifts, not of His nature: certainly you have no power for that." The Khalif Akbar is reported to have said: "to be helpless in the search of knowledge is knowledge and to enquire into the nature of G.o.d is Shirk (infidelity)."[104] A moderate acquaintance with Muslim theology shows that neither the injunction of the Prophet nor the warning of the Khalif has been heeded.

According to the early Muslims, the Companions and their followers, enquiries into the nature of G.o.d and His attributes were not lawful. The Prophet knowing what was good for men, had plainly revealed the way of salvation and had taught them:--

"Say: He is G.o.d alone: G.o.d the eternal!

He begetteth not, and He is not begotten; And there is none like unto Him." (Sura cxii)

This was sufficient for them to know of the mystery of the G.o.dhead. G.o.d is far beyond the reach of the human {120} understanding. He alone embraces all in His comprehension. Men should therefore mistrust their own perceptive faculties and notions and should obey the inspired legislator Muhammad, who loving them better than they love themselves, and knowing better than they do what is truly useful, has revealed both what they ought to believe and what they ought to do. It is true that men must exercise their reason, but they must not do so with regard to the divine attributes.[105]

Dogma is divided into two portions, usul and faru'--(_i.e._, roots and branches.) The former include the doctrine about G.o.d; the latter, as the name implies, consist of truths which result from the acceptance of the former. The orthodox belief is that reason has only to do with the "faru',"

for the usul being founded on the Quran and Sunnat have an objective basis.

Differences of opinion about various branches of the "faru'," led to discussions which did not stop there but went on to the "usul," and so paved the way for the rise of scholastic theology ('Ilm-i-kalam.) I have already in the chapter on the exegesis of the Quran explained the difference in meaning between muhkam (obvious) verses and mutashabih (intricate) ones. This difference lies at the very foundation of the present subject. It is, therefore, necessary to enter a little into detail.

The question turns very much on the interpretation of the 5th verse of the 3rd Sura: "He it is who hath sent down to thee 'the Book.' Some of its signs are of themselves perspicuous (muhkam): these are the basis of the {121} Book--and others are figurative (mutashabih.) But they whose hearts are given to err, follow its figures, craving discord, craving an interpretation; yet none knoweth its interpretation but G.o.d. And the stable in knowledge say, 'We believe in it: it is all from our Lord.' But none will bear this in mind, save men endued with understanding." Here it is clearly stated (1) that no one except G.o.d can know the interpretation of mutashabih verses, and (2) that wise men though they know not their interpretation, yet believe them all. Many learned men, however, say that the full stop should not be placed after the word "G.o.d" but after "knowledge," and so this portion of the verse would read thus: "None knoweth its interpretation but G.o.d and the stable in knowledge. They say: 'we believe, &c.'" On this slight change in punctuation, which shows that the 'stable in knowledge' can interpret the mutashabih verses, opposite schools of theology have arisen in Islam.

The latter reading opens the way to a fearless investigation of subjects which all the early Muslims avoided as beyond their province. In the early days of Islam it was held that all parts of the Quran, except the muhkam verses and the purely narrative portions, were mutashabih; that is, all verses which related to the attributes of G.o.d, to the existence of angels and genii, to the appearance of Antichrist, the period and signs of the day of judgment, and generally all matters which are beyond the daily experience of mankind. It was strongly felt that not only must there be no discussion on them,[106] but no attempt should be made to understand or act on them. Ibn 'Abbas, a Companion, says: "One must believe the mutashabih verses, but not take them for a rule of conduct." Ibn Jubair was once {122} asked to put the meaning of the Quran into writing. He became angry and said: "I should rather be palsied in one-half of my body than do so."[107]

'Ayesha said: "Avoid those persons who dispute about the meaning of the Quran, for they are those whom G.o.d has referred to in the words, 'whose hearts are given to err.'"

The first reading is the one adopted by the Ashab, the Tabi'in and the Taba-i-Tabi'in and the great majority of Commentators. The Sunnis generally, and, according to the testimony of Fakr-ud-din Razi (A.H.

544-606), the Shafa'i sect are of the same opinion.

Those who take the opposite view are the Commentators Mujahid (died A.H.

101), Rabi' bin Ans and others. The scholastic theologians[108]

(Mutakalliman) generally adopt the latter reading.[109] They argued thus: how could men believe what they did not know; to which their opponents answered, that the act of belief in the unknown is the very thing here praised by G.o.d. The scholastics then enquired why, since the Quran was sent to be a guide and direction to men, were not all its verses muhkam? The answer was, that the Arabs acknowledged two kinds of eloquence. One kind was to arrange words and ideas in a plain and simple style so that the meaning might be at once apparent, the other was to speak in figurative language. Now, if the Quran had not contained both these styles of composition, it could not have claimed the position it does as a book absolutely perfect in form as well as in matter.[110]

Bearing in mind this fundamental difference of opinion, we can now pa.s.s on to the consideration of the attributes.

{123} The essential attributes are Life, Knowledge, Power, Will, for without these the others could not exist. Then the attributes of Hearing, Seeing, Speech give us a further idea of perfection. These are the "Sifat-i-Sabutiah," or affirmative attributes, the privation of which would imply loss; there are also Sifat-i-Salbiah, or privative attributes, such as--G.o.d has no form, is not limited by place, has no equal, &c. The acts of sitting, rising, descending, the possession of face, hands, eyes, &c., being connected with the idea of corporeal existences imply imperfection and apparently contradict the doctrine of "exemption" (tenzih) according to which G.o.d is, in virtue of His essence, in no way like the creatures He has made. This was a difficulty, but the four great Imams all taught that it was impious to enquire into these matters for all such allusions were mutashabih. "The Imam Hanbal and other early divines followed in the path of the early Muslims and said: 'We believe in the Book and the Sunnat, and do not desire explanations. We know that the High G.o.d is not to be compared to any created object: nor any creature with Him.'"[111] Imam As-Shafa'i said that a man who enquired into such matters should be tied to a stake, and carried about, and that the following proclamation should be made before him: "This is the reward of him who left the Quran and the Traditions for the study of scholastic theology." Imam Hanbal says: "Whosoever moves his hand when he reads in the Quran the words, 'I have created with my hand,' ought to have his hand cut off; and whoever stretches forth his finger in repeating the saying of Muhammad, 'The heart of the believer is between two fingers of the Merciful,' deserves to have his finger cut off." At-Tirmizi when consulted about the statement of the Prophet that G.o.d had descended to the lowest of the seven heavens, said: "The descent is intelligible, the manner how is unknown; the belief therein {124} is obligatory; and the asking about it is a blameable innovation."

But all such attempts to restrain discussion and investigation failed.

The two main points in the discussion of this question are (1) whether the attributes of G.o.d are internal or external, whether they are part of His essence or not, and (2) whether they are eternal or not.

The two leading Sects were the Sifatians (or Attributists) and the Mutazilites. The Sifatians whom the early orthodox Muslims follow, taught that the attributes of G.o.d are eternally inherent in His essence without separation or change. Every attribute is conjoined with Him as life with knowledge, or knowledge with power. They also taught that the mutashabih verses were not to be explained, and such were those which seemed to show a resemblance between G.o.d and His creatures. So at first they did not attempt to give the meaning of the terms, "hands, eyes, face, &c.," when applied to G.o.d. They simply accepted them as they stood. In course of time, as will be seen, differences of opinion on this point led to some sub-divisions of this sect.

The Mutazilites were the great opponents of the Sifatians. They rejected the idea of eternal attributes, saying that eternity was the formal attribute of the essence of G.o.d. "If," said they, "we admit the eternal existence of an attribute then we must recognize the multiplicity of eternal existences." They also rejected the attributes of hearing, seeing and speech, as these were accidents proper to corporeal existences. They looked upon the divine attributes as mental abstractions, and not as having a real existence in the divine essence. The Mutazilites were emphatically the Free thinkers of Islam. The origin of the sect was as follows: Al Hasan, a famous divine, was one day seated in the Mosque at Basra when a discussion arose on the question whether a believer who committed a mortal sin became thereby an unbeliever. The Kharigites (Ante p. 76) {125} affirmed that it was so. The orthodox denied this, saying that, though guilty of sin, yet that as he believed rightly he was not an infidel.[112]

One of the scholars Wasil Ibn Ata, (who was born at Madina A.H. 80), then rose up and said: "I maintain that a Muslim who has committed a mortal sin should be regarded neither as a believer nor an unbeliever, but as occupying a middle station between the two." He then retired to another part of the Mosque where he was joined by his friend 'Umr Ibn Obaid and others. They resumed the discussion. A learned man, named Katada, entering the Mosque, went up to them, but on finding that they were not the party in which Al Hasan was, said 'these are the Seceders (Al-Mutazila).' Al Hasan soon expelled them from his school. Wasil then founded a school of his own of which, after the death of his master, 'Umr Ibn Obaid became the head.

Wasil felt that a believer, though sinful, did not merit the same degree of punishment as an infidel, and thus starting off on the question of _degrees_ of punishment, he soon opened up the whole subject of man's responsibility and the question of free-will. This soon brought him into conflict with the orthodox on the subject of predestination and that again to the subject of the inspiration, the interpretation and the eternity of the Quran, and of the divine attributes. His followers rejected the doctrine of the "divine right" of the Imam, and held that the entire body of the Faithful had the right to elect the most suitable person, who need not necessarily be a man of the Quraish tribe, to fill that office. The principles of logic and the teaching of philosophy were brought to bear on the precepts of religion. According to Shahrastani the Mutazilites hold:--

"That G.o.d is eternal; and that eternity is the peculiar property of His essence; but they deny the existence of any eternal attributes (as distinct from His nature). For they say, He is Omniscient as to {126} His nature; Living as to His nature; Almighty as to His nature; but not through any knowledge, power or life existing in Him as eternal attributes; for knowledge, power and life are part of His essence, otherwise, if they are to be looked upon as eternal attributes of the Deity, it will give rise to a multiplicity of eternal ent.i.ties."