Shahrastani on the Indian Religions 3110800993, 9783110800999

Citation preview

Shahrastani on the Indian Religions

Religion and Society 4

GENERAL EDITORS Leo Laeyendecker, University of Leyden Jacques Waardenburg, University of Utrecht

M O U T O N · T H E H A G U E . PARIS

Shahrastan! on the Indian Religions

B R U C E B. L A W R E N C E Duke University

Preface by FRANZ ROSENTHAL Yale University

M O U T O N · THE H A G U E . PARIS

ISBN: 9 0 - 2 7 9 - 7 6 8 1 - 3 © 1976, Mouton & Co Designed by Antoon van Vliet Printed in Hungary

Preface

The comparative study of religions has been rightly acclaimed as one of the great contributions of Muslim civilization to mankind's intellectual progress. Bestriding the middle zone of the oikoumene, medieval Islam had contact with many religions and probably all conceivable types of religious experience. In its own house, it was faced with a constant struggle to preserve its religious purity (something that was variously defined by different groups). There were only two possible ways to confront the challenge arising out of the multiplicity of competing religions. It could either be blandly ignored or it could be met head-on. Greatly to our benefit, Muslim intellectuals chose the second alternative. Numerous disputations, in oral or written form, were the result, and quite a few books were written, preserving for posterity a kaleidoscopic picture of religious life and thought as perceived by well situated and well qualified observers. Much of this important material has by now become accessible through bibliographical research, through text editions and translations. A good deal of work remains yet to be done also in this respect. But behind that there looms a major question which is rarely raised: What did individual scholars have in mind when they gathered all this information? What did it mean to each one of them personally, so that he would go to all the trouble and travail that are the ineluctable lot of scholarly labor? No doubt there were a few compilers here and there who just threw information together without caring for what they were doing, merely for the glory of authorship or other external considerations. However, for the vast majority of scholars, the principal motivation must have been a deep desire to know and, above all, to understand, and this meant intellectual and emotional involvement, the making of choices and the application of thought. When Muslims whose lives centered around religion wrote on other religions, it touched their own existence in a very real sense. We may expect that everything an author put down on paper had meaning for him and was the result of honest and prolonged mind and soul searching.

6

Preface

Thus, the accomplishments of medieval Muslims in comparative religion have to be taken seriously and evaluated on their own terms, and not merely exploited as sources of haphazard data. This is what Bruce Lawrence has set out to do in the present work by discussing as an example the chapter on Indian religions in the famous Milal wan-nihal of Shahrastani. The Milal wan-nihal was used as a handy compendium in the Muslim world for centuries; translated into German already in the middle of the nineteenth century, it became the main source of information on the Muslims' knowledge of religions and religious philosophy for Western scholars and was in a way degraded by them to the status of a source book, often used superficially with little understanding. Whatever value as a source of factual information other chapters of the Milal wan-nihal may have, the Indian chapter is rather unprepossessing. If we knew nothing else about Indian religions, it would not tell us very much. Moreover, as Lawrence shows, the data it contains can usually be traced back to earlier preserved Arabic and Persian works. Unlike Birûnï, who was profoundly disturbed not so much by the nature of Indian views but by the fact that he was face to face with a different civilization which he felt he had to reconcile in its totality with his own, Shahrastäni's personal situation was not such that it exposed him to a similar severe culture shock. Yet, we can now see that far from leaving him unaffected, the little he was able to learn about Indian religions became a matter of personal concern to him and challenged his powers of interpretation. There is room, and, in fact, a need for many similar detailed studies of the approach of the comparative religious historians of medieval Islam to their work. Not all of them will be as demanding as this one in requiring a knowledge of two large civilizations. The results of such studies cannot always be as definitive as, for instance, the edition of a text. They are likely to call for revision when some new overall point of view changes the scholarly perspective. But the time for them has come. They will help us to gain a better insight into the intellectual life of Islam and also bring us closer to a general understanding of the interaction between analytic scholarship and religious phenomena. FRANZ ROSENTHAL Yale

University

Author's Preface

The study which follows is an effort to examine the mind and methodology of a medieval Muslim theologian as he approaches the depiction of religions that are alien to his own background and culture. Shahrastäni's Kitäb al-milal wan-nihal, written circa 1125 A.D., has long been esteemed among those who pursue the scholarly investigation of Islamic thought. The work is a monumental, though not unique, attempt to sketch and assess the several religious sects (milal) and philosophical groups (nihal) - non-Muslim as well as Muslim - known to its author. It is in the final, slim section of Part II of the Milal wan-nihal, entitled 'Ara' al-hind', that Shahrastânï sets forth his estimate of Indian religious traditions. As Professor Rosenthal has indicated in his Preface, were we to rely on the Milal wan-nihal as the sole source of our information on Indian religions, we would have a thin fare from the ample selection that we know to exist in this area. Only the sub-chapter on Buddhism offers a factual contribution that cannot be located elsewhere in medieval Islamic literature. What is singular about Shahrastânï is not his reportorial scope as an historian but his analytic skill as a theologian. To determine what is authentically the contribution of Shahrastânï, as distinct from his numerous predecessors, we have had to devote much energy and space to source-critical problems. Charts, together with appendices, have been introduced into several sections of the commentaries. They are intended to summarize findings about Shahrastäni's core material, as well as to verify or, in some cases, question the Indian character of the groups described in 'Ära' alhind'. The resulting picture of Shahrastânï as a theologian of religions is highly favorable. He draws on diverse material, ranging from Classical sources to the notable report of an anonymous ninth-century Muslim traveler. He sifts his data, expanding in some areas, excising in others, in order to make sense out of the disparate aspects of the Indian tradition. Shahrastânï presents to his readers a typology; he allows them to compare Indians not

8

Author's Preface

with the rankest heathen or the most grotesque idolaters but with the most sophisticated non-Muslim group which he treats in the Milal wan-nihal, namely, the Säbians. Though the Säbians are extinct as a religious group, Hindus are not, and the hopeful tone of Shahrastäni's 'Ärä' a¡-hind' offers support to those who continue to seek historical evidence for the possibility of inter-religious communication between Muslims and Hindus. This study becomes a book under my name, and for its contents I am solely responsible. Yet in its genesis and elaboration there were many contributing parties. Franz Rosenthal, Norvin Hein, Stanley Insler, Joel Kramer, Willard Oxtoby and others at Yale University have aided me in innumerable ways. It was to Professors Rosenthal and Hein that the present work was initially submitted as a dissertation, and it was through their encouragement and unstinting assistance that I am now able to share the results of my labor with the general readership on Medieval Islamic thought. To Jack Sasson of the University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill) for ancillary aid and to Jacques Waardenburg of the University of Utrecht for his interest in the manuscript as well as his supervision of its publication in the RELIGION AND SOCIETY Series of which he is co-editor, I am particularly grateful. To my family I owe a personal debt for the completion of this study. They have good-naturedly tolerated my frequent preoccupation with Shahrastäni and concomitant neglect of them. My wife, Barbara, has even submitted to the seemingly trivial but essential task of proof-reading - without pay and with few complaints. Her diligence has allowed me to avoid, at least temporarily, the haunting Arabic proverb which Professor Rosenthal once quoted to me (in English) : A scholar who gets married is like a man who goes on a trip; A scholar who gets married and has children [we have five] is like a man who goes on a trip and gets shipwrecked. BRUCE B . LAWRENCE

Contents

Preface by Franz Rosenthal, Yale University

5

Author's Preface

7

Abbreviations

11

PART 1 : INTRODUCTION

1. The life and theology of ShahrastanI 2. Muslim sources on Indian religion 3. Methodological principles applied to lÀrS al-hind'

PART 2 : TRANSLATION OF SHAHRASTÂNÎ'S

13 17 29

Kitab al-milal wan-nihal

PART I I , BOOK I I I , SECTION Β :

'Ärä' al-hind' The views of the Indians 1. Introduction to the translation 2. Translation of Ärä' al-hind Introduction Chapter One Chapter Two Chapter Three Chapter Four Chapter Five

33 38 38 38 47 50 52 56

PART 3 : COMMENTARIES

Introduction to 'Ärä' al-hind'' I. The Säbians

63

10

Contents

Chapter One II. The Barähima / Brahmans III. Ashäb al-bidada / Followers of the Buddhas IV. Ashäb al-fikra wal-wahm / Proponents of Meditation and Imagination IVA. The Bakrantiniya V. Ashäb at-tanäsukh / Proponents of Metempsychosis or Transference

75 100 114 118 126

Chapter Two VI. Ashäb ar-rühäniyät / Proponents of Spiritual Beings VII. The Bâsawïya VIII. The Bahuwadiya and Käballya IX. The Bahädüniya

146 148 162 178

Chapter Three X. 'Abadat al-kawäkib / Star-worshippers XI. The Dinakitlya / Sun-worshippers XII. The Jandrïkanïya / Moon-worshippers

188 189 200

Chapter Four XIII. 'Abadat al-asnäm / Idol-worshippers XIV. The Mahäkäliya XV. The Barkashikiya / Tree-worshippers XVI. The Dahkiniya XVII. The Jalahakiya / Water-worshippers XVIII. The Akniwatrlya / Fire-worshippers

210 212 223 226 238 247

Chapter Five XIX. Hukamä' al-hind / Indian Philosophers

251

PART 4 : CONCLUSION

265

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Primary sources 2. Secondary sources

279 284

INDEX

293

Abbreviations

ABORI ASI ASI-AR BSOAS/BSOS EI EI'1 Epln ERE

GAL

GAS IA IC JA JAOS JASB JBBRAS MIQ PIHC

Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute Archaeological Survey of India Archaeological Survey of India - Annual Reports Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies !Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies Encyclopaedia of Islam. 4 vols. Leyden-London, E. J. Brill. 1913-37 Encyclopaedia of Islam. New edition. Leyden-London, E. J. Brill. 1954Epigraphia Indica Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics. 13 vols. Edited by J. Hastings. Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark; New York, C. Scribner's & Sons. 1908-28. Brockelmann, C., Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur. Zweite den Supplementbänden angepasste Auflage. 2 vols. Leyden, E. J. Brill. 1943-49. Supplement. 3 vols. 1937-42 Sezgin, F., Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, I. Leyden, E. J. Brill. 1967 Indian Antiquary Islamic Culture Journal Asiatique Journal of the American Oriental Society Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Medieval India Quarterly Proceedings of the Indian Historical Congress

12

Abbreviations

RHR RSO ZDMG

Revue de Γ Histoire des Religions Rivista degli studi orientali Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft

PART ONE

Introduction

1. THE LIFE AND THEOLOGY OF SHAHRASTANÍ

The known facts about the life of Abu'l-Fath Muhammad b. 'Abd alKarim ash-Shahrastäni are few.1 According to his own statement, if transmitted correctly, he was born in 1086 A.D. in the town of Shahrastän in the province of Khuräsän. He studied fiqh under Abu'l-Muzaffar Ahmad al-Khawäfi and Abu Nasr b. al-Qushayri.2 In kaläm his principal instructor was Abu'l-Qäsim al-Ansäri, a student of the illustrious Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni (d. 1085 A.D.). Shahrastaní adhered to the Ash'arite school of kaläm and was one of its most noted exponents, though he possessed 'a sturdy intellectual independence'3 which prompted him to point up the defects as well as the contributions of al-Ash'ari's thought. 4 He made the pilgrimage to Mecca in 1116 A.D. and on his return resided three years in Baghdad, where he furthered his theological training. He subsequently studied in Jurjäniya and Nisäbür, but it was in Shahrastän that he spent most of his life and did the bulk of his teaching and writing. He died in his native city in 1153 A.D. 1

2

3 4

Cf. Brockelmann, GAL, Suppl. I, p. 762, for the sources on Shahrastaní s life. Most of the facts are gleaned from the account of Ibn Khallikân (M. de Slane, trans., Ibn Khallikäris Biographical Dictionary, II, pp. 675-76, which, in turn, is based on the account of Sam'äni). The latter is evidently a son of the famous Qushayrl. Cf. Brockelmann, GAL, Suppl. I, p. 772. A. Guillaume, trans., The Summa Philosophiae of al-Shahrastânî, p. x. In the sub-chapter on the Ash'arlya, for instance, Shahrastän! remarks that Ash'arl, in defining hearing and seeing as two attributes of God, allows the possibility of metaphoric interpretation. Cf. W. Cureton, edit., Kitäb al-milal wan-nifial, pp. 72-3; and T. Haarbriicker, trans., Schahrastäni's Religionspartheien und • Philosophen-Schulen, I, pp. 108-9.

14

Introduction

The Baghdad stay was the single most formative period in the development of Shahrastäni as an Ash'arite theologian. I. Goldziher, rating Shahrastânî as the most influential scholar of the Baghdad Nizämiya, notes that 'the great representatives of Ash'arite kaläm had [at Nisäbür and Baghdad] a place for asserting themselves, for gathering round them a large and intelligent audience, for elaborating their system and expounding it in an extensive literature'.5 D. Chwolsohn attaches significance to the Baghdad stay for an additional reason. In his opinion, it allowed Shahrastäni to develop and deepen his interest in the Säbians through exposure to the religious/philosophical writings of the Harränians there.6 Little has been recorded or preserved about Shahrastäni's stature among his fellow Muslims, but A. Guillaume uncovered one noteworthy item which casts more doubt on Shahrastäni's contemporaries than on Shahrastäni himself: [In his Tabaqät al-kubrä] Subkí (d. 1370) says that it is stated in Dhahabi's (d. 1348) History that Ibn al-Sam'ani says that Shahrastäni was suspected of Ismä'ili leanings; and that in Ibn al-Sam'äni's Tahbïr Shahrastäni is said to have been suspected of heresy and undue fondness for the Shi'as. Subki goes on to say that he cannot think where Ibn al-Sam'äni got his information, as his Dhail says nothing about these heretical tendencies of Shahrastäni, and all Shahrastäni's writings give the lie to such a belief. In his view, Ibn al-Sam'äni never made the statement at all, but the libel is probably due to the author of K ä f f , who wrote that Shahrastäni would have been the Imam, had he not dealt with matters of faith in an uncertain spirit and inclined towards heresy and controversy. Further, it was felt that Shahrastäni went too 5

I. Goldziher, A Short History of Classical Arabic Literature, p. 54. D. Chwolsohn, Die Ssabier und der Ssabismus, I, p. 683. If Chwolsohn's hypothesis is correct, then Hermes, the prophet/philosopher of Çâbianism, may have been the pivotal figure for Shahrastäni's understanding and exposition of Çâbian categories. On the prevalence of Hermetic writings in Baghdad, cf. A. E. Affifi, 'The Influence of Hermetic Literature on Moslem Thought', BSOAS XIII (1950), p. 844. This matter is pursued in the commentary, infra, pp. 75-6. 7 Guillaume (op. cit., p. xi, fn. 2) states that the author of Käß was probably Muwaffiq ad-DIn al-Maqdisi (d. 1223).

β

The life and theology of Shahrastänl

15

far in supporting and defending the tenets of the philosophers whenever conferences and discussions were held - at least so said al-Khwârizmï.8 Notwithstanding such charges, the intense piety of Shahrastäni is manifest in his writings. In both Nihäyat al-iqdäm fi'ilm al-kaläm and Milal wan-nihal, he surveys the full range of beliefs within Islam in order to make clear for others the nature of sectarian differences and their deviation from the sunna of Islam. If he restrains himself from flailing at the weaknesses or excesses of sectarians, as does, for instance, his predecessor Baghdad!,9 it is only because he has an implicit faith in the ability of his fellow Muslims to respond to fair, even-handed treatment of those who diifer from them. The charge that he was preoccupied with philosophy may be admitted, but at the same time he was a child of Ghazzäli in making philosophy the hand-maid of religion. It is no exaggeration to assert that for Shahrastäni, the best of philosophy is expressed in religion, the best of religion in prophecy,10 the best of prophecy in Muhammad, and of Muslims only the ahi as-sunna correctly interpret the revelation delivered to Muhammad. 11 Several writings have been credited to Shahrastäni,12 but the major source of his fame is the monumental treatise on religious sects and philosophical 8

Ibid, p. xi. Khwàrizmï, though Guillaume does not identify him, was probably the author of a history of Khwärizm, Maljmüd b. Muljammad al-Khwarizml, a contemporary of Shahrastäni. Yäqüt (Mu'jam al-buldän, III, pp. 343-44) reports the views of Khwàrizmï on Shahrastäni. 9 Κ. Seelye (Moslem Schisms and Sects, I, p. 12) states that a comparison of Shahrastäni and Baghdädi indicates that the former 'merely gives the account of the various sects', while the latter 'cannot refrain from challenging and criticizing these heretical views - '. 10 Shahrastäni (Milal wan-nifial, Part II, Book II, introduction) illustrates both points in a single phrase: the best philosophers 'derived their wisdom from the niche of prophecy (mishkäti'l-nubuwway; Cureton, op. cit., p. 253; Haarbrücker, op. cit., II, p. 80. 11 At the outset of Part I of Milal wan-nihal, Shahrastäni cites S. 3.17 (inna ad-dina 'inda ΊΙαΙιί al-islämu), and then describes the components of what came to be viewed as normative Muslim doctrine: milla (the community), minhäj (the revealed way), shir'a (the revealed law), and sunna (the traditions of the Prophet). For Shahrastäni concurrence on the last three provides the inalterable basis of jamä'a, i.e., the consensus community of Muslims. Cureton, op. cit., p. 26; Haarbrücker, op. cit., I, p. 35. 12 For a listing of titles, cf. Brockelmann, GAL I2, pp. 428-29 and Suppl. I2, pp. 762-63. Only Kitäb nihäyat al-iqdam fi'ilm al-kaläm has been critically edited and translated into English; cf. supra, fn. 2.

16

Introduction

groups, Kitäb al-milal wan-nihal. Its popularity in the medieval period is amply attested by the existence of numerous codices in many libraries all over the world.13 It is still cited as the best known of several Muslim heresiographies,14 and the publication of other, important heresiographies in this century,15 together with analyses of Shahrastäni's source dependencies,16 have not decreased the fame of Milal wan-nihal but heightened respect for the integrity of its author. The treatment of all sects - non-Muslim as well as Muslim - and several philosophical positions is balanced and free of vituperation to such an extent that 'the charge of excessive objectivity - has justly been preferred against him more than once'.17 The treatment of non-Muslim religions is of particular interest for the present study. Since Shahrastäni ranks each religion according to its proximity to Islam, he devises four general categories which encompass all the religious and quasi-religious groups known to him : (1) those who possess a revealed book {kitäb munzal), i.e., Jews and Christians; (2) those who possess something like a revealed book, i.e., 13

According to H. Ritter ('Philologika III. Muhammadanische Häresiographen', Der Islam XVIII (1929), p. 49), practically every library in Istanbul has a codex of Milal wan-nihal. 11 Cf., e.g., L Friedlander, 'The Heterodoxies of the Shiites in the Presentation of Ibn IJazm', J AOS 28/1 (1907), p. 5; and S. H. Nasr, 'Islam and the Encounter of Religions', The Islamic Quarterly XI (1967), p. 63. 15 Among the most prominent are Baghdad! (d. 1040 A.D.), Farq bayn al-firaq (translated into English by K. Seelye and A. Halkin, Moslem Schisms and Sects); Isfara'inI (d. 1078 A.D.), Tabflrfi ad-din; and Ibn IJazm (d. 1064 A.D.), Fifal fil-milal (translated into Spanish, with commentary, by M. Asín Palacios, Abenhazam de Cordoba y su historia de las ideas religosas). 16 Cureton's opinions about Shahrastäni's sources for Milal wan-nihal were, unfortunately, never published (cf. op. cit., p. iv). On the other hand, P. Kraus ('The Controversies of Fakhr al-DIn Râzî', IC XII (1938), pp. 146 f.) approvingly sets forth Ràzï's criticism of Milal wan-nihal as a work dependent on Baghdädi (for the material on Muslim sects), Sijistäni (for the material on ancient philosophers), and Jähiz (for the material on ancient Arabs). F. E. Peters (Aristotle and the Arabs, p. 286) also repeats Ràzï's criticism. The question of sources, however, is complex in the extreme, as our investigation of Shahrastäni's possible antecedents for the Indian material will make clear. It remains to be proven that Shahrastäni either chose his sources randomly or used them uncritically and (according to Räzi) surreptitiously. 17 Guillaume, op. cit., p. ix.

Muslim sources on Indian religion

17

Magians and Manichaeans; (3) those who subscribe to laws and binding judgments without benefit of a revealed book, i.e., the ancient Säbians; and (4) those who have neither a revealed book nor fixed laws, i.e., the ancient as well as the materialist philosophers, the starand idol-worshippers, and the Brahmans.18 Within this structure Shahrastäni presents a vast range of data, as variant in quality as it is broad in scope. Excellent critical studies of Shahrastäni's contribution to our knowledge have already been made in certain areas, e.g., ancient philosophy19 and Magianism.20 However, the final section of Milal wan-nihal, which purports to set out the views of Indians (Brahmans), has not been critically translated or examined up till now. The present writer, therefore, intends to provide a translation as well as a study of 'Ära1 al-hind\ after first presenting the source problem and methodological principles involved in such an undertaking.

2 . MUSLIM SOURCES ON INDIAN RELIGION

In Muslim scholarship which preceded Shahrastäni it is possible to isolate and identify three general categories of information on Indian religion : the 'ajä'ib literature dealing with the wonders of the world, the incidental testimony of Muslim travelers and geographers, and the data provided in encyclopaedic works and digests. There was, in addition, an independent tradition which existed prior to Birüní and has been mentioned only by him.

18

Cureton, op. cit., p. 24; Haarbriicker, op. cit., The significance of 'a revealed book' for evaluating Shahrastäni's treatment of Indian religionists is critical ; for further discussion, cf. infra, pp. 66-7. 19 Cf., in particular, F. Rosenthal, 'Ash-Shaykh al-Yûnânï and the Arabic Plotinus Source', Orientalia X X I (1952), pp. 461-92; XXII (1953), pp. 370-400; XXIV (1954), pp. 42-66. 20 Cf. J. de Menasce, 'Le témoignage de Jayhäni sur le mazdéisme', Orientalia Suecana III (1954), pp. 50-9.

18

Introduction

The 'ajä'ib writings21 were produced by such scholars as Suhräb (fl. in 10th cent. A.D.), 22 Ibrahim b. Wäsif Shäh (d. ca. 1000 A.D), 23 and most notably Buzurg b. Shahriyar (d. 1009 A.D.). 24 Their chief interest in India, as the titles of their respective works indicate, centered on marvelous happenings which allegedly could be produced on the spur of a moment, often through manipulations pertaining to the occult sciences. Muslim writers whose works extended beyond the topic matter of 'ajä'ib also showed a fascination with this facet of Indian culture. For instance, Abü Zayd Hasan as-Sirâfi, a noted traveler who flourished in the beginning of the tenth century A.D., referred to Indian magicians and others who created marvelous illusions,25 as did Jayhäni and Gardizi, both of whom will be discussed in detail below. In Milal wan-nihal, the 'ajä'ib influence appears in one instance: Shahrastäni, together with the parallel sources, describes a group known as the proponents of thought and imagination (ashäb al-fikra walwahm);28 they are clearly practitioners of the occult sciences.27 A different body of information on Indian religion is provided by the Arab travelers and geographers. Chief among them were: the merchant Sulaymän, whose travelogue, Akhbär as-sin wal-hind, completed around 851 A.D., was included in the Silsilat at-tawärikh by the above-mentioned Abü Zayd; 28

21

On the development of 'ajä'ib as a distinctive Arabic literary form, cf. C. E. Dubler, ' 'Ajä'ib', EP,1, pp. 203-4. 22 H. von Mzik, ed., Das Kitäb 'ajä'ib al-aqälim as-sab'a des Suhräb. 23 The work attributed to him, Mukhtasar al-'ajä'ib, has been translated into French by B. Carra de Vaux (L'Abrégé des merveilles). According to C Brockelmann (GAL I, p. 145), this same work has sometimes been falsely ascribed to Mas'üdí. 24 His Kitäb 'ajä'ib al-hind has been translated into both German (M. Devic) and French (J. Sauvaget). It is the classic of this literary genre. For further discussion of both the work and its author, cf. J. Fiick, 'Buzurg b. Shahriyar', EI-, I, p. 1358, and S. Maqbul Ahmad, 'Djughräfiyä', EP, II, p. 583. 25 G. Ferrand, trans., Voyage du marchand arabe Sulaymän en Inde et en Chine, p. 123. Abu Zayd's account is also cited in S. M. H. Nainar, The Knowledge of India Possessed by Arab Geographers, p. 114. 26 V. Minorsky ('Gardizi on India', BSOAS XII/3 (1948), p. 628.3) makes the connection with occultism transparent when he freely translates 'vahm va-fikra' as 'telepathy'. 27 For an extended discussion of this group, cf. infra, pp. 114 f. 28 An estimate of Abu Zayd and Sulaymän as accurate observers may be found in S. Maqbul Ahmad, 'Djughräfiyä', EP, II, p. 583b top.

Muslim sources on Indian religion

19

'Ubaydalläh b. Khurradädhbih (d. 894), whose Kitäb al-masälik walmamälik, in its expanded version, may be crucial for a source analysis of Shahrastäni's Indian material, if Minorsky's hypothesis is correct;29 Abü Ishäq al-Istakhrï (d. 951) and Abul-Qäsim b. Hawqal (fl. till 977 A.D.), who may be considered together because they both are principally renowned for works of the same title (Kitäb al-masälik wal-mamälik) and both belonged to the geographical school of Balkhï;30 Mas'ûdi (d. 957 A.D.), whose Murüj adh-dhahab wa-ma'ädin al-jawähir contains an important chapter on Indian religion based on first-hand observation supplemented by now lost literary sources;31 and finally, Idrïsï (d. 1166 A.D.). 32 Though a contemporary of Shahrastânï, Idrïsï is included in this group because his principal geographical work, Nuzhat al-mushtäq fi ikhtiräq al-äfäq,33 has an oft-cited depic2S

Minorsky (Marvazî, pp. 6-7) argues that there were two versions of Ibn Khurradädhbih's Kitäb al-masälik wal-mamälik, the text published by de Goeje in Bibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum VI being only a compendium (completed ca. 885 A.D.?) of the original (completed in 846 A.D.). M. Hadj-Sadok ('Ibn Khurradädhbih', EI-, III, pp. 839-40) only briefly alludes to the controversy about two (or more) versions of Kitäb al-masälik wal-mamälik, as does S. Maqbul Ahmad ('Djughräfiya', pp. 579-80). Minorsky, however, hypothesizes the necessary existence of the larger version of Ibn Khurradädhbih's work, and we will examine his arguments in detail later in this chapter; cf. infra, pp. 23 f. 30 For a comparison of Istakhrï and Ibn Hawqal as geographers, cf. A. Miquel, 'Ibn Hawqal', EI2, III, pp. 766-68. Of the two English translations of their respective writings on India, R. Jafri ('Description of India (Hind and Sind) in the works of al-Istakhrï, Ibn Hawqal, and al-Maqdisï', Bulletin of the Institute of Islamic Studies V (1961), pp. 1-67) is preferable to H. Eliot's now dated work (The History of India as told by its Own Historians, vol. 1, London, 1867; pp. 26-40). Further information on Istakhrï and Ibn Hawqal may be found in the relevant works by R. Blachère and A. Miquel, cited in the bibliography. 31 Specifically, chapter 7. The several translations of this monumental production are cited in the bibliography under 'al-Mas'ûdï'. The difficult material on the kings of India in chapter 7 has been translated and commented on by S. Maqbul Ahmad ('Al-Mas'ûdï on the Kings of India', Al-Mas'üdi Millenary Commemoration Volume, pp. 97-112). Cf. also, idem, 'Travels of Abu'I Hasan 'Alï b. al-Husayn al-Mas'ûdï', IC XXVIII (1954), pp. 509-24. 32 The background of Idrïsï and the extensive modern scholarship on him are summed up by G. Oman in 'al-Idrisi', EI2, III, pp. 1032-35. 33 S. Maqbul Ahmad has edited, translated and commented on the Arabic text of Idrïsï's work. In the introduction to the translation (India, pp. 12-18), Ahmad sets forth a valuable description of Idrïsï's possible sources, including Jayhânï.

20

Introduction

tion of Indian religion and because a group of water-worshippers (Jalahaktxya) whom he mentions partially correspond to a group of the same name in Milal wan-nihal.M Of the aforementioned Arab travelers and geographers, only Mas'üdí had an extensive, first-hand acquaintance with Indians, though even his exposure to their religion and culture was far exceeded by the subsequent investigations of Birüni (d. 1049 A.D.). Nonetheless, the information on Indian religion in Murüj adh-dhahab - because it is, in part, derived from direct contact with the area controlled by the Rästrakütas 35 - bears little relation either to the accounts of other Arab geographers or to the essay of Shahrastäni. The religious data in most geographical works, including Nuzhat al-mushtäq, amount to little more than a miscellaneous assortment of minor items. Abü Zayd mentions bayrägis (vairäginsJ,36 Sulaymän sanyäsisP Ibn Khurradädhbih - who is followed in this respect by Idrisi numbers forty-two sects among the people of India. He divides them into three categories : those who believe in God and His apostles, those who deny the apostles, and those who deny everything.38 Additionally, there is some information on castes.39 Istakhrï and Ibn Hawqal, however, recorded no item of major significance other than the shrine at Mültän, which attracted several Muslim writers because of its prominent idol.40

34

Ahmad's translation (India, p. 73) brings out certain similarities; a comparison of the respective Arabic texts suggests still further correspondences and differences; cf. Commentary XVII, infra, pp. 238 f. 35 S. Maqbul Ahmad, 'Arabic Source Materials on Indo-Arab Relations', MIQ III (1957), p. 101. 36 Ferrand, op. cit., pp. 123-24 and Nainar, op. cit., pp. 117 and 121. 37 Ferrand, op. cit., p. 66 and Nainar, op. cit., p. 119. 38 On Ibn Khurradädhbih, consult Eliot, op. cit., p. 17 and Nainar, op. cit., p. 122. On Idrïsï, compare Nainar (op. cit., pp. 122-23) with Ahmad (India, pp. 147-51). 39 Ibn Khurradädhbih lists seven castes (Eliot, op. cit., pp. 16-7), as does Idrisi. The latter expands his account, however, probably drawing on another source, such as Jayhäni (Ahmad, India, pp. 146-47). Abu Zayd, for his part, includes a passing reference to Brahmans as pious people and scholars (Ferrand, op. cit., p. 123). 40 Muslim accounts on Mültän are so vast and varied that a separate monograph would be required to cite them accurately and fully. For Istakhri's account, consult Jafri,

Muslim sources on Indian religion

21

The third category of information on Indian religion prior to Shahrastän. consists of the extant works of Muslim encyclopaedists and compilers! They provide a wealth of data on Indian sects, and it is to them that the Milal wan-nihal material on sects relates most directly and frequently. The Muslim writings in this category, therefore, provide the key to understanding the source problem arising from Shahrastäni's material on the sects (principally chapters 2-4 of 'Ärä' al-hind' ; the source problem for chapters 1 and 5 has distinctive features which will become clear in the respective commentaries on these chapters). The major authors to be considered are: (1) Ibn an-Nadim (d. 995 A.D.). His Fihrist, completed in 987 A.D., contains a reference to a now lost work of al-Kindi (d. 873 A.D.), which, in turn, was produced from the report of an anonymous emissary from the 'Abbäsid wazir Yahyä b. Khälid al-Barmakl. The emissary traveled to India around 800 A.D. 41 in order to collect medicinal plants ('aqäqir) and to describe the religions of India. Kindi claimed that he saw the completed report and copied from it. Its contents, as set forth in the Fihrist, are combined with other information on India available to Ibn an-Nadim and presented as a continuous discourse in Book IX. Section 2.42 The Indian sects, of which Ibn an-Nadim cites eight, are described last. The material on them provides the starting point for all discussions about sources available to Shahrastânï on the Indian sects.

op. cit., pp. 9-10. Ibn Hawqal varies little from Içtakhri in his depiction of the Multan idol (Jafri, op. cit., pp. 20-1). Other accounts of note in later Muslim writers include: Ibn an-Nadïm (B. Dodge, trans., The Fihrist of al-Nadlm, II, p. 828); Birüní (E. Sachau, trans., AlbërûnVsIndia, I, pp. 116-7); Marvazï (Minorsky, Marvazí, pp. 48 and 148-49); and IdrisI (Ahmad, India, pp. 50-51 and 149-50). 41 As Minorsky has pointed out (Marvazi, p. 126 bot.), Yahyä b. Khälid was the effective ruler of the 'Abbäsid empire from 786-803 A.D., and we can, therefore, tentatively date the original report at circa 800 A.D. 42 Minorsky (ibid, pp. 125-26) has presented a source analysis of this section which, on slim evidence, assigns Abü Dulaf the role of principal source for Ibn an-Nadlm's material on Indian temples. The material on sects, which is our principal concern, clearly derives from Kindi.

22

Introduction

(2) Maqdisï (d. 985 A.D.?). His Kitäb al-bad' wat-ta'rikhls contains a chapter on the religion of the Brahmans.44 A number of Indian sects are mentioned in that chapter. Some parallel the Indian sects described in the Fihrist; others are new. The sole reference to the source of this information comes near the end of the report: Maqdisï mentions a Kitäb al-masälik as the specific source of his data on Buddhist factionalism. Since numerous works entitled Kitäb al-masälik are known from the classical period, it is not certain which work Maqdisi had in mind. It appears likely, however, that he is citing either the lost travelogue of Jayhâni45 or the expanded version of Ibn Khurradädhbih, which is also lost.46 (3) Gardizi (d. ca. 1060 A.D.). His Zayn al-akhbär, which was written in Ghazna ca. 1050 A.D., contains an appendix on India. The work is extant in only two manuscripts. Minorsky has collated and translated them, and inspite of frequent textual conundrums, 47 they provide a wealth of detail on Indian sects and help to illumine several difficult passages in chapters 2-4 of lÄrä' al-hind'. Gardizi refers to Jayhâni as the source for his information on the Indians,48 and Minorsky argues convincingly that Jayhâni, who flourished from 913 to 925 A.D. or possibly later, was the immediate source for both Gardizi and Marvazi.49

43

44

45

46 47

48 49

The authorship of this work is a long-standing problem. Cl. Huart ('Le Véritable auteur du Livre de la création et de l'histoire', HA 18 (1901), pp. 16-21) examined the evidence and concluded that because very little was known about Mutahhar b. Tähir al-MaqdisI, the work attributed to him in the fifth century A. H., was subsequently attributed to the philosopher/geographer Balkhï in the seventh century A.H. One would expect subsequent scholars to affirm, deny, or at least discuss Huart's conjecture. However, D. M. Dunlop ('al-Balkhï', EI 2 ,1, p. 1003) throws no light on the problem, and Minorsky, though he cites Maqdisi in his own work (e.g., Marvazi, pp. 9 and 127), does not allude to the question of authorship. CI. Huart, ed. and trans., Le Livre de la création, IV, Arabie: pp. 9-19; French: pp. 9-17. Minorsky (Marvazi, pp. 6-11) cites all extent references to Jayhäni's work; mistakenly, however, he omits Shahrastânï. Cf. infra, p. 28. See ibid, pp. 6-7, for the argument in support of an expanded version. Minorsky ('Gardizi on India', pp. 615-17) elaborates on the difficulty of the Zayn alakhbär codices. Ibid, pp. 627 and 629. Minorsky, Marvazi, p. 127.

Muslim sources on Indian religion

23

(4) Marvazi (d. ca. 1125 A.D.). His Tabä'i' al-hayawän, completed toward the end of the eleventh century A.D., closely parallels the Indian material in the earlier work of GardizI, though enough of the details vary to suggest a different recension of the common source, Jayhäni. With respect to analyzing the information on Indian sects in Milal wan-nihal, Marvazi is less valuable than GardizI but more helpful than Maqdisi. All three overlap with Ibn an-Nadim, as does Shahrastäni. Related to the above works but different in character are the surviving fragments of the Kitäb al-ärä' wad-diyänät allegedly written by Nawbakhti (d. ca. 922 A.D.).50 In the two extant passages of that work which relate to Indian religious practises, one describes the followers of Väsudeva and is pertinent to analyzing Shahrastäni's account of the Bäsawiya; the other describes austerities practised by Indians and bears a direct resemblance to Maqdisi's exposition of the same topic.51 Within the classical period of Islam the three channels of information on Indian religion just described were perhaps supplemented by a fourth. The postulation of such a fourth channel is tenuous, since it would have to be traced from Zurqän through Irânshahrï to Birüni. The first two scholars, due to Birüni's references to them in the Indica, have long been the subject of speculation. Their contribution to the Muslim understanding ofBuddhism is their most significant, if not only, point of residual influence on later writers; it will subsequently be examined in the commentary on ashäb albidada.52 Their independent position, however, is undermined in Minorsky's scheme, where Zurqän - and by extension Irânshahrï - are related to the

50

H. Ritter has published the Arabic text of these fragments in the preface to Die Sekten der Shi'a von al-Hasan ibn Müsä an-Naubahti, pp. KJ and KD. According to H. Roemer (Oriens VII (1954), p. 204 mid.), who cites the authority of 'Abbas Iqbäl, not Nawbakhti but Abu'l-Qäsim Sa'd b. 'Abdallah Ash'ari Qummi is the author of Firaq ash-shi'a. For our purposes, the question of authorship is secondary to the content of these passages. For their translation into English, cf. D. Margoliouth, 'The Devil's Delusion', IC, IX (1935), pp. 202-3 and 207-8, where they are cited in the Talbis Iblis of Ibn al-JawzI. 51 Compare Maqdisï (Arabic: pp. 16 f.; French: pp. 14 f.) with Nawbakhti (H. Ritter, op. cit., p. KD; D. Margoliouth, op. cit., pp. 207-8). Minorsky (Marvazi, p. 127) makes a similar point. 52 Cf. infra, pp. 102-3.

24

Introduction

original report on Indian religions made by the anonymous emissary of Yahyä b. Khälid al-Barmaki.53 Since Minorsky has compiled more biographical information on both Zurqän and Irânshahrï than was heretofore known, his opinions merit respectful consideration. Moreover, if he is correct, then there would be no need to postulate a fourth channel of information on Indian religion. It would suffice to state that Zurqän, Irânshahrï, and Birüni - to the extent that he (Birüni) utilized the data of his predecessors - constitute a minor branch of the encyclopaedist writings and complilations already cited. Nonetheless, it is difficult to accept Minorsky's conclusions concerning the relationship of Zurqän and Irânshahrï to the original report on Indian religions. Birüni makes a single reference to the kutub al-maqälät, which Minorsky renders 'books of controversies',54 Sachau 'books about religious sects'.55 On the basis of such meagre evidence, Minorsky reasons that the reference to the maqälät apparently has in view Zurqän, which makes it probable that this worthy's book contained the same details from the original report that are reproduced (with very slight differences) in Naubakhti (v. 1), Mutahhar, p. 19, Gardizi, #36, Marvazi, #41, and even the books of marvels [i.e., 'aja'ib works].56 Yet the information on the Hindu tortures at Prayäga set forth by Maqdisi and Nawbakhti suggests that either one of them or another writer in their circle could have merited the reference of Birüni rather than Zurqän. Furthermore, the quotations in the Indica where Zurqän and Irânshahrï are mentioned by name principally concern otherwise unknown information on Buddhism57 and point to a conclusion opposite to that which Minorsky draws, viz., that in classical Islam there were several channels of information on Indian religion and that the tradition of Zurqän and Irânshahrï to which Birüni reluctantly alludes probably did not stem from the original report of Yahyä b. Khälid's emissary to the sub-continent. 53 51 55 56 57

Marvazi, pp. 128-29. Ibid, p. 129. Sachau, trans., AlbërûnVs India, I, p. 200. Minorsky, Marvazi, p. 129. Cf. Sachau, op. cit., I, pp. 7, 21 and 40.

Muslim sources on Indian religion

25

It must also be clearly stated that Birüní's minimal references to Zurqän and Iränshahri were deliberate: he wanted to eliminate the approach to Hinduism which they exposited. There is ample testimony that he saw himself as the initiator of a new tradition, with the Indica serving as a handbook for Muslims curious about Hinduism: Abü Sahl [he wrote] incited me to write down what I know of the Hindus as a help to those who want to discuss religious questions with them, and as a repertory of information to those who want to associate with them.58 Strangely enough, no important Muslim scholar dealt with Birüní's analysis of Indian religion or continued his investigations until Rashid ad-Din (fl. ca. 1300 A.D.), 59 and by that time the content of the Indica was no longer pertinent to the world of Muslim scholarship.60 Notwithstanding the vicissitudes of history, Birüni - considered by himself without reference to Zurqän or Iränshahri - represents a significant, fourth channel of information on Indian religion. Indeed, the erudition of Birüni initially defies comparison of his works with any other Muslim writing on India before or after his time. Insofar as the Indica and Chronology provide insights into otherwise opaque passages in Milal wan-nihal, references to them have been included in footnotes throughout the commentary. Furthermore, the sections on religious doctrine in the Indica also invite an occasional theological comparison with Shahrastäni, especially on the topic of idol worship, which is explored in the commentary. Returning to the possible sources for chapters 2-4 of 'Ärä' al-hind\ we are confronted with the need to re-examine Minorsky's proposed scheme 58 59

60

Ibid, I, p. 7. K. Jahn (Rashid ad-Din's History of India) has detailed the importance of Rashid as one who both continued and enlarged the tradition of Muslim research into Indian thought initiated by Birüni. Prior to Rashid, Abu'1-Ma'äll in his Bayän al-adyän (written in Ghazna ca. 1050 A.D.) reveals a dependency on Birüní's Indica, but as A. Christensen {Le Monde Oriental 5-6 (1911-12), pp. 205-16) has made clear in his review of that work, the dependency is more a superficial summary than an accurate reflection of Birüní's investigations into Indian religion. Aziz Ahmad, Studies in Islamic Culture in the Indian Environment, p. 113.

26

Introduction

of source dependency for all the early Muslim writings on India. In Marvazi he presents a chart with three primary lines of dependency to the original report of the Barmakid emissary:" 1 Yahyä b. Khälid's envoy

The line of dependency which appears on the far left is the only one expressly attested: it is Ibn an-Nadim who, in the Fihrist, refers to al-Kindi's copy of the report on Indian medicines and religions made by the anonymous envoy of Yahyä b. Khâlid al-Barmaki. In the middle line of dependency, the expanded version of Ibn Khurradädhbih's Kitäb al-masälik wal-mamälik and the homonymous work of Jayhäni are now lost. It is only by inference - i.e., the citation of Jayhäni in Gardizi (and implicitly in Marvazi and possibly in MaqdisI), together with references to forty-two Indian creeds in Gardizi, Marvazi, and Maqdisi, which correspond to a similar reference in Ibn Khurradädhbih's extant version - that Minorsky connects Jayhäni and Ibn Khurradädhbih with Yahyä b. Khälid's envoy. In the line of dependency 61

Minorsky, Marvazi, p. 125; Ahmad, op. cit., p. 39 (with addition of Idrïsï). Only the positions of Marvazi and Shahrastäni have been changed to reflect more accurately their chronological relationship to the other sources. 62 Minorsky (Marvazi, p. 127, fn. 1) mentions the reproduction of Mutahhar's report on India in Tha'älibfs Ghurar al-akhbär. Rosenthal (History of Muslim Historiography, p. 92) also notes the relationship of Tha'âlibî's work to Mutahhar, citing an Arabic manuscript in the Paris Museum as his source, but no published edition of Ghurar alakhbär contains the passage in question.

Muslim sources on Indian religion

27

on the far right, the relationship of Zurqän to the original report is questionable, as has already been noted, while the secondary relationship of Nawbakhti and Shahrastäni to Zurqän cannot be verified. Concerning Nawbakhti, Minorsky simply states that he belongs to Zurqän's tradition without offering supportive evidence. As was earlier pointed out, and as Minorsky also recognized,03 Nawbakhti - to the limited extent that his work is known - seems to be linked with Mutahhar (Maqdisi) who, in turn, may have utilized the expanded version of Ibn Khurradädhbih's Kitäb al-masälik wal-mamälik for his information on Indian sects. Why, then, should Nawbakhti and Maqdisi be placed in two separate lines of dependency, especially since they have more in common with each other than with any of the extent sources to which they are linked in Minorsky's scheme? It is the case of Shahrastäni, however, which particularly concerns us in the present study, and according to Minorsky, Shahrastäni may be linked to Zurqän because 'it is likely that a writer on purely religious matters should have looked for information in the maqälät rather than in a geographical work [i.e., Jayhäni]'. 64 Yet it now seems likely that Shahrastäni both knew of Jayhäni and used him as a source. In his edition of Milal wan-nihal, Muhammad Badrän 65 includes a section on Zoroastrianism in which Shahrastäni ascribes the information he reports to Jayhäni. Though not found in the Cureton edition or Haarbriicker translation, this additional passage on the Magians has sound textual support. 66 If Shahrastäni did, therefore, quote the industrious tenth century Persian statesman and scholar on Zoroastrianism, it is further possible that he quoted him - though without ascription - in the section on Indian views.67

63

Minorsky, Marvazi, p. 129. Ibid, p. 129. 65 Cairo, 1370/1950 I, pp. 601-16. 66 Cf. J. de Menasce, 'Le témoignage de Jayhäni sur le mazdéisme', Orientalia Suecana III (1954), pp. 50-51. Muhammad Badrän consulted two manuscripts at Al-Azhar (Tawljïd 431 and 474) and two at the Bibliothèque Nationale du Caire (Nos. 1390 and 1977). A manuscript at the Freer Art Gallery, Washington, D. C., is also cited. 67 An indirect ascription to some source may be surmised in the concluding sentence to the introduction of 'Arä' al-hind : 'We will now examine the opinions of these groups as we have found them expressed in the best known of their books' {infra, translation, p. 38). M

28

Introduction

However, at least one alternative scheme of source dependency for Shahrastânï must be cited. It is possible that what was written down by al-Kindi or what Ibn an-Nadlm copied from al-Kind! represented only a part of the original report on Indian religions. In this case, the full report from which Ibn an-Nadlm derived his material would have been but a variant of the same material reproduced in Ibn Khurradädhbih's expanded version of Jayhâni. Therefore, Shahrastânï, together with Jayhânï and Ibn Khurradädhbih, may have derived their material on Indian sects from al-Kindi's report, though in such an eventuality it is likely that Shahrastânï depended on a now incomplete chain of intermediaries. In brief, a revised scheme tracing the dissemination of information on Indian sects to Muslim authors must address itself to the basic question: how was it possible for parallel sources to report different data about the same sects while also including new data about sects and practises not mentioned in the Fihrist? The monumental service which Minorsky has performed in editing and translating the sections from Gardizi and Marvazi on India has raised the question of dependency in a sharper form than ever before. Both authors clearly relate to Ibn an-Nadim's source, as do Maqdisi, Nawbakhti, and Shahrastânï. The question remains: how? The following chart attempts to indicate the likely channels of dissemination to Shahrastânï and others : Yahyä b. Khälid's envoy abbreviated* Ibn an-Nadim

al-Kindi's copy· (lost intermediary?)

(lost intermediary?)

Shahrastânï (or his immediate source?)

• expanded Ibn Khurradadhbih

Jayhâni

Methodological principles applied to 'Ara' al-hind'

29

It is apparent that either Shahrastäni or one of his intermediary sources condensed the material which was known to him on Indian sects. It remains to determine which of two alternative routes of dissementation - viz., via Jayhäni or another, now lost intermediary also traceable to al-Kindi Shahrastäni actually used. In the conclusion, this question will again beraised, and the evidence suggested by the commentary on individual Indian sects will be examined and weighed in order to arrive at a tentative answer.

3 . METHODOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES APPLIED TO

'Ärä' al-hind'

There are three levels at which the content of Shahrastäni's essay on Indian views will be considered in this study. It is first necessary to establish what information on the religions of India was available to Shahrastäni, and then one must ask : how reliable was this information, and how did Shahrastäni as a Muslim theologian use it? The preceding chapter suggested the probable background for the material on sects in 'Ärä' al-hind'. Whether it is finally determined that the intermediate source was Jayhäni or another author also dependent on the expanded version of al-Kindi's text, either source would, in turn, be linked to the information gathered by an earlier, anonymous reporter whose visit to India remains shrouded in mystery. Whatever Shahrastäni's source may have contained about India was, therefore, derivative, and Shahrastäni himself did not supplement its data though conversation with Hindus or Buddhists nor did he consult with Muslim travelers who had gone to India and been exposed to the beliefs and practises of Indians. Though he wrote in the first half of the twelfth century A.D., Shahrastäni obtained the bulk of his information on Indian sects from a report compiled at the beginning of the ninth century A.D. With two exceptions,68 the content of Chapters 1 and 5 (Brahmans and philosophers, respectively) appears to have a different chain of literary antecedents than Chapters 2, 3 and 4 (the Indian sects). In the former instance, the material did not originate from a single report nor is it attributa68

The exceptions are Chapters 1A and B, both of which relate to the source material used in Chapters 2, 3 and 4. Cf. infra, pp. 100 f. and pp. 114 f.

30

Introduction

ble to a specific period. It is as true for Chapters 1 and 5, however, as it is for Chapters 2, 3 and 4 that Shahrastäni did not gather the reported data from personal travel, observation, experience or enquiry; instead, he relied on the information known to him through the works of earlier Muslim authors. His attestation that what he reports was derived 'from the best known of their (Indian) books' 69 must be interpreted either as an elliptical reference to Jayhäni or an awkward effort to impute to 'Ärff al-hind' an authority which it does not merit. To answer the question of Shahrastäni's reliability concerning the information he provides on Indian religions is, therefore, tantamount to asking a second question : how reliable were his sources ? With respect to the sects enumerated, that question focuses on the original source, the anonymous emissary of Yahyä b. Khälid. Did the latter travel extensively in India? Where did he go and what did he see? With whom did he talk and in what language?70 Since the original report has been lost, it is impossible to answer these questions directly, but the content of the report, in the fragmentaryversions which have survived, can and ought to be tested against the available evidence from Indian history. Such evidence might indicate, for instance, whether or not Sanskrit protoforms exist for the Arabic terms which appear as names of the various sects. Hence, the commentary which follows the translation has been partially based on the data about particular sects which Hindu religious, iconographie and epigraphic literature has provided.71 At the same time, however, it would be false to claim that the information contained in this vast body of literature has been exhausted. Further study will undoubtedly disclose more evidence than is contained in the present work, but at the least the use of this literature now makes it possible to fi9

Infra, translation, p. 38 bottom. Astonishing as it may seem, these questions have never been candidly asked in the studies to date which have directly or indirectly involved the data provided by the Barmakid envoy. Minorsky alone touches upon the questions, speculating that the envoy may have gone to Northern India, viz., the Punjab, if the geographical and medical information reported by those dependent on Jayhäni goes back to the original report. Such an hypothesis is thin on facts, however, since we know nothing directly of the medical plants ('aqäqir) observed by the envoy. 71 The records of Hsiian-tsang, the renowned Chinese pilgrim to India (ca. 629-645 A.D.), have also been used to supplement the data in Indian sources.

70

Methodological principles applied to 'Arä' al-hind'

31

grasp for the first time the extent to which the Indian sects and their features, as reported in Milal wan-nihal and parallel sources, may be identified as verifiably Indian. Conversely, it will be possible to judge what one Muslim author, together with his predecessors, has concretely added to the total body of knowledge about Hindu religious practises in the early ninth century A.D. From the fact that Shahrastäni depends completely on literary sources, it follows that the reliability of his information on India depends on the reliability of his sources, but the final question on 'Ära' al-hind' involves Shahrastäni alone: how did he use whatever information was at his disposal? There are three aspects to the question : (a) How did he select the sects he included? Did he know of more groups than he described? (b) How did he present the sects he included? Did he relate all the information available to him? Did he delete or add material, and on what basis? and (c) How did he arrange the sects he included? What was his organizing principle? All the above questions, but especially the final question, point to the need to examine Shahrastäni's theological evaluation of adherents to the Indian religions. The present study will put forth the thesis that chapters 2, 3 and 4 were, in fact, organized on the basis of Säbian categories which Shahrastäni described earlier in Milal wan-nihal and, further, that it was the same Säbian categories which determined both the choice of sects and the manner in which they were presented. Minorsky earlier noted that Shahrastäni radically altered the common body of material on Indian sects, and in his opinion, such alterations were a whimsical exercise lacking historical purpose or theological validity : The details (in Shahrastäni) are explained in a clumsy and naive style . . . Shahrastäni's personal views throw considerable confusion into the scheme . . . Under Shahrastäni's pen the data of the original lose much of their liveliness and benefit little by being pushed into new pigeonholes.72 Minorsky's study focused primarily on Marvazi's text, its sources and parallels, and so his harsh judgments may be partially excused, if not condoned. By contrast, the present study will focus on Shahrastäni, beginning with a translation of 'Am' al-hind' and proceeding to a series of commentaries on "Minorsky,

Marvazi,

pp. 130-31.

32

Introduction

each of its chapters and sub-chapters. It is hoped that the extended examination of Shahrastäni's work may indicate that what Minorsky dismisses as 'personal views' are, in fact, the product of several factors, including the extended application ofSäbian categories, which contributed to Shahrastäni's distinctive use of the material on India available to him.

PART TWO

Translation of Shahrastânï's Kitäb al-milal wan-nihal Part II, Book III, Section Β 'Ära al-hind'lThe Views of the Indians

1. INTRODUCTION TO THE TRANSLATION

The translation which follows is an effort to produce an accurate English rendition of Shahrastäni's 'Ara' al-hind', based on a critical examination of the extant manuscripts of Milal wan-nihal available to me. Indian proper names, especially those mentioned in connection with the sub-sects of chapters 2-4, have confounded previous scholars working on Shahrastäni's text. After he collated several manuscripts of Milal wan-nihal and produced the only critical edition so far of Shahrastäni's magnum opus,™ W. Cureton declared: the great carelessness of transcribers in omitting the diacritical points, by which alone several different letters can be distinguished, and in confounding similar letters with each other in the names of persons or places, concerning which they have been ignorant, and where the context would furnish no guide, have often so completely corrupted and transformed the word, that it has become almost impossible to restore it. This I have found to be especially the case in the account of the religions of India.74 Subsequent scholarship has not invalidated Cureton's views or improved the quality of his edition of the final section on Indian religions. T. Haarbriicker, who rendered Milal wan-nihtal into German shortly after the appearance of Cureton's edition,75 stated his intention to remove some of the ambiguities in the Cureton text by utilizing variant readings.76 In the section 'Ärä' 73

W. Cureton, ed., Kitäb al-milal wan-nihal, 2 vols., London, 1846. Ibid, Introduction, p. viii. 75 T. Haarbriicker, trans., Schahrastäni's Religionspartheien und 2 Parts, Halle, 1850-1. 76 Ibid, Introduction, pp. xiii f. 74

33

Philosophen-Schulen,

34

Introduction to the translation

al-hind', however, the only variants Haarbriicker cites are from Codex # 6 in Cureton's list.77 Even these citations are few, and none of them applies to the difficult names of the Indian sub-sects.7 8 The shortcomings of Haarbriicker's work are minimal in comparison with his achievement: since his time no one else has translated the entire Milal wan-nihal into a European language, though just recently two Australian-based Orientalists have begun publishing a serialized English translation of Part I/Book I. 79 The section '/ira' al-hind' was earlier translated into English by E. Rehatsek, 80 but his prose, which is archaic by present-day standards, is frequently clumsy and incomprehensible. For the names of Indian sub-sects, Rehatsek relied entirely on Cureton and Haarbriicker. Subsequently, S. Nadvi has produced two articles on early Muslim perceptions of Indian religions.81 Though he states at the outset that Shahrastäni's Milal wan-nihal was 'the most important book' for his essay,82 he only quotes from the sub-chapter on Buddhists and does not provide a complete translation of even that portion of 'Ära al-hind'.83 Recently, R. K. Chaube, who seems to have been unaware of Rehatsek's article though he frequently cited Nadvi's essay, has stated that he is offering English translations of chapters of 'Ärä' al-hind' for the first time.84 Utilizing 77

Cf. Cureton, op. cit., pp. vi and vii. To unravel the possible Sanskrit referents for the cited Indian sub-sects, Haarbriicker did rely on the counsel of A. Holtzmann (d. 1870), a German Orientalist renowned for his editorial, grammatical, and translation work on the Indian epics; cf. the acknowledgment in Haarbriicker, op. cit., II, fn. to p. 354, 1. 4. Holtzmann's conjectures will be cited in the appropriate sections of the commentaries. 79 Cf. A. Nazi and J. Flynn, 'The Mu'tazilites', Abr-Nahrain VIII (1968-9), pp. 36-68 and idem, 'The Jabarites and the Sifätiya', Abr-Nahrain IX (1969-70), pp. 81-107. In the introduction to the first article, the authors state their intention 'to translate the whole section of Milal wan-nihal which treats of Muslim sects' (p. 36). Apparently they follow Cureton's edition without providing variant readings from codices. 80 E. Rehatsek, 'Early Moslem Accounts of Hinduism', JBBRAS XIV (1887), pp. 55-70. 81 S. Nadvi, 'Religious Relations between Arabia and India', IC VIII/1 (1934), pp. 120-39 and VIII/2 (1934), pp. 200-11. 82 Ibid, p. 120. 83 Ibid, p. 136. 84 R. Chaube, India as Told by the Muslims, Varanasi, 1969. Cf. the author's statements which precede his translations of the accounts of particular sub-sects; e.g., pp. 130, 158, 179 and 182.

78

Introduction to the translation

35

two primary divisions of material, i.e., philosophy and religion, he intersperses nearly all of Shahrastäni's account throughout the numerous topical categories of his book. 85 Like Rehatsek, Chaube appears to have followed Cureton's edition of Milal wan-niljal uncritically. Moreover, his translations, which are loose and often inaccurate, are further marred by recurring printing errors. 86 The accompanying commentaries are not without interest, though they too suffer from an inattention to detail. In sum, there still exists a need for a critical rendition of 'Ärä' al-hind' into English. In attempting to meet this need, the translation which follows ought ideally to be based on a collation of all the extant maniscripts of Shahrastäni's magnum opus. The manuscripts of Milal wan-nihal, however, are legion.87 Even if Escorial Ms. 1515 is a questionable autograph copy, as Brockelmann indicates,88 the large number of manuscripts in Istanbul, where the work is represented in practically every collection, includes one written in 547 A.H., 89 the year before Shahrastäni's death, and several others dating from the sixth century of the hijra. Much to my regret I have been unable to make use of any of these manuscripts. I have, however, checked five of the codices used by Cureton as well as one in the Beinecke Collection at Yale University, and I have indicated their variant readings with respect to the problematic passages. It is possible that, especially with respect to the writing of Indian proper names, some of the manuscripts which I did not consult may have preserved a better reading than those I 85

The breakdown is as follows: pp. 25-30 for Ch. 5 oí'Ärä'al-hind' on Indian philosophers; pp. 31-3 for Ch. 1, Brahmans;pp.95-7forCh. lb, proponents of meditation; pp. 99 and 101-2 for Ch. le, proponents of transference; pp. 133-35 for Ch. la, Buddhists; pp. 179-81 for Ch. 4a, Mahäkäliya; pp. 182-84 for Ch. 3, sun- and moon-worshippers; pp. 186-88 for Ch. lb.l, Bakrantlniya; pp. 190-91 for Ch. 2b, Bahuwadiya; p. 191 for Ch. 4d, water-worshippers; p. 192 for Ch. 4e, fire-worshippers; p. 194 for Ch. 2c, Kàbalïya; p. 194-95 for Ch. 2d, Bahädünlya; pp. 195-96 for Ch. 4c, Dahkinlya; pp. 196-97 for Ch. 2a on Bâsawîya; pp. 197-98 for ch. 4b, tree-worshippers. 86 Some of the fault may lie with the author s text; he probably used one of the frequent popular editions of Milal wan-niftal, the most recent of which was produced by'Abd alΆζϊζ Muhammad al-Wakll, Cairo, 1968. The bibliographic entry simply says: Abul Karim Shahrastänl: Al Milal wan Nahal (sic). Egypt & Bombay. 87 Cf. Brockelmann, op. cit., Suppl. I, pp. 762-63. 88 Ibid, p. 762. 89 H. Ritter, 'Philologika III. Muhammedanische Häresiographen', Der Islam XVIII (1929), p. 49.

36

Introduction to the translation

used, but even if this is the case, the chance that it would alter the principal findings of this study appears to be small enough to take the risk of relying upon the limited textual material at hand. In the translation which follows, I have adopted the Cureton edition as the primary text and given all variants to it in the footnotes. The specific codices I used which provide variants to Cureton are, with the exception of C, those already known to the nineteenth century British Orientalist.90 They are : A · Pococke # 83. Mentioned briefly by Cureton, its description in Uri's Catalogue 91 makes it the oldest extant manuscript of Milal wan-nihal available to me: it is said to have been written in the year 602 A.H. (1205 A.D.). It consists of 288 pages. The names of the Indian sub-sects are written in large letters and invariably pointed ; at times they are the clearest indication of what may have been the original name of the sub-sects being described. Β · University of Leyden # 447. According to Cureton, it was copied before 1217 A.D., but 'this MS. is not very correct: the diacritical points are frequently omitted,especially in such passages as are otherwise obscure.'92 The earliness of this codex, however, makes it a valuable source with which to compare other readings of the difficult Indian names. C · Yale University, Beinecke # 6 1 5 . According to Nemoy, 93 this codex was written before 1299 A.D. There are numerous errors and inconsistencies in the section 'Ärä' al-hind\ It appears that the scribe did not understand what he was writing. The names of the Indian sub-sects in this manuscript, however, offer valuable confirmation of readings found in other codices. D · Huntington # 158. Also cited in Cureton, it is described in detail in Nicoll's Catalogue.94 Most of it is traceable to the fourteenth century 90

Cureton himself, however, rarely consulted A and D (cf. op. cit., p. iv, fn. 1), even though A's antiquity ought to have commended it to him for the difficult task of determining the names of Indian sub-sects. S1 Joannes Uri, Bibliothecae Bodlianae Codicum Manuscriptorum Orientalium Catalogus, 1/1, Oxford, 1787; p. 57. 92 Cureton, op. cit., p. v. 83 L. Nemoy, Arabic Manuscripts in the Yale University Library, New Haven, 1956; p. 66, # 515 and p. 148, # 1392. 44 A. Nicoli, Bibliothecae Bodlianae Codicum Manuscriptorum Orientalum Catalogi, Oxford, 1821-35; 1/2, pp. 75 f.

Introduction to the translation

37

A.D., but the first forty pages, together with the last fourteen (including the section 'Ara' al-hind'), may have been completed at a later date. 95 Nicoli has already noted the discrepancies between Huntington and Pococke on the names of the Indian sub-sects.96 Huntington comes out worse in the comparison ; some of its variants are so bizarre that they cannot be reasonably correlated with any Sanskrit protoform. 97 E · British Museum # 7250. According to Cureton, 98 it is said to have been copied in the year 1448 A.D. He further notes that this is the most carefully transcribed of the copies he used, and in some troublesome passages he chooses the reading of this ms. 'as generally being the most correct'. F · British Museum # 7251. Though undated, it is, in Cureton's view, 'tolerably correct'. 99 As earlier noted, it provides the basis for most of Haarbrücker's alternate readings to Cureton's edition of the section 'Arc? al-hind'. With respect to the names of Indian subsects, it is textually less accurate than E. The translation which follows includes two features not present in earlier efforts to provide an English rendition of the difficult names and often obscure practises of the cited Indian groups. First, all the variants in Indian proper names from the British codices, together with the Yale codex, have been cited in the footnotes to each sub-chapter. In cases where the features of a group are unclear, the variant codices are also cited. Secondly, comparative evidence from the parallel texts of Ibn an-Nadim, Gardîzl, Marvazï, and occasionally Maqdisi and Nawbakhti, is utilized whenever appropriate. As a result of this procedure, some names in Shahrastäni's account which have up till now been a mystery can be ascertained with reasonable certainty. Others remain under a cloud of doubt, and in such cases one can deduce the original name only from an estimate of the data pertaining to the leader and practises of the group in question.

95

Ibid, p. 75. Ibid, p. 77, fn. i. 97 Cf. translation, infra, p. 45, fn. 114, where D has Karahadu for Bakrantïnîya and p. 52, fn. 138, where D has Häkäna for Mahäkäla. 98 Cureton, op. cit., p. vi. 99 Ibid, p. vi. 96

38

Translation of 'Ara' al-hind''

2 . TRANSLATION OF

'Ära al-hind1

Introduction We have already mentioned that the Indian people constitute a large nation and sizable religious community. They vary in their views. Among their members are: the Barähima (Brahmans), who deny prophecies altogether; quasi-materialists ; and quasi-dualists. The group also count themselves among the community of Abraham. The majority of Indians adhere to the doctrine and methods of the Säbians, so that some of them accept spiritual beings, others heavenly bodies, and still others idols. But they differ in the external form of the methods which they have invented and in the quality of the forms which they have established. Also among them are philosophers who adhere to the Greek tradition both in theory and practise. As for those whose ways may be categorized as materialist, dualist, or Säbian, we have already reported their views in the previous discussion of these doctrines and can therefore dispense with reporting them here.100 The groups which differ from these groups in outlook and doctrine number five : the Barähima, the followers of spiritual beings, the proponents of heavenly bodies, the idol-worshippers, and the philosophers. We will now examine the opinions of these groups as we have found them expressed in the best known of their books.

Chapter One: The Barähima I Brahmans There are some who maintain that they are called Barähima because they named themselves after Ibrahim (Abraham) - may peace be upon him. That is an error: since these people are characterized by their total denial of prophetic gifts, how can they attest to Abraham? Indeed, there are a group of Indians who do believe in the prophecy of Abraham, but they are dualists, 100

Ar.: faqad aghnänä hikäyatu madhähibihim qablu 'an hikäyati madhhabihi; lit.,'hence the accounting of their doctrines before makes us dispense with the accounting of each doctrine (here)'.

Chapter One

39

professing light and darkness (as the two fundamental principles), as did the dualists whose doctrines we have already cited; however, the Barähima meant here101 have been named after a man among them called Barhäm. It was he who explained to them the grounds for denying prophetic gifts totally, and in several ways attempted to prove the irrationality of prophecy : 1. For instance, he said that whatever an apostle proclaims102 can only be of two kinds: it is either rational or irrational. If it is rational, then the full use of our intellect would suffice for us to grasp it, and what need is there for a prophet? If, on the other hand, the prophetic proclamation is irrational, then it is not acceptable, for the acceptance of what is irrational is a departure from humanity and an entrance into the forbidden realm of bestiality. 2. Further, reason indicates that God is wise, and the Wise One does not require His creatures to accept anything which their intellects cannot prove. It is rational proofs which have demonstrated that the world has an omniscient, omnipotent and wise Creator, and that the Creator has bestowed benefits upon His creatures which require thanks, so that we, through our intellects, may speculate concerning the wonders of His creation and offer Him thanks for His benefits to us. Furthermore, if we acknowledge Him and give Him thanks, we make it obligatory for Him to reward us. But if we deny Him and do not believe in Him, we make it obligatory for Him to punish us. Why, then, should we follow a man like ourselves? For if he commands us to observe what we have just cited about our recognition of God and gratitude to Him, then we can dispense with him through (the simple operation of) our own intellects. On the other hand, if he commands us to accept another outlook than that which we have just cited, then his own words are an obvious proof that he is lying. 3. Reason, moreover, indicates that the world has a wise Creator, and the Wise One would not oblige His creatures to do that which is abhorrent to their intellects. Yet the proponents of religious laws have laid down requirements which are, in fact, abhorrent to reason. Consider, for example, (the ritualistic actions of the Muslim pilgrimage) : turning to a specific house of worship (the Ka'ba) and circling it; running (seven times between Safä 101

ΑΓ.: hä'ulä'i Ί-barähima, 'these Brahmans'.

102

Ar.:

ycCtlbihi, 'brings with

him'.

40

Translation

of 'Arä'

al-hind'

and Marwa); throwing stones; purifying oneself; uttering the prescribed call (labbaika), and kissing the inanimate stone (the Black Rock of Ka'ba). Consider, further, the slaying of animals for sacrifice and the forbidding of what it is possible for man to have as food while at the same time permitting the consumption of that which may be harmful to one's physical well-being. All these things contradict the dictates of reason. 4. The greatest offense implicit in accepting the concept of a divine messenger is the necessity of obeying a man who is like yourself in form, soul and intellect, who eats what you eat and drinks what you drink. And yet you are in the same relationship to him as an inanimate object - he either picks you up or puts you down - , or as an animal - he either urges you or holds you in check - , or as a servant - he either issues you an order or lays down a prohibition. In what way is the apostle different from you or better than you, so that you are obliged to serve him? And what is his proof for the truth of his claims? If you are deluded merely by his assertions, (then know that) there is no distinction between one assertion and another. And if you are overpowered by his proofs and the inimitability of his revelation, (remember that) we (humans) have numerous physical substances which cannot be calculated, just as we have informants about supernatural powers whose information cannot be equalled.103 [Refutation of the Brahmanical theses]104 Their messengers said to them, 'We are nothing but men like yourselves, yet God is gracious to whomever He wishes to be gracious.' S. 14.11

103

104

The final line of the so-called Brahmanical theses has three principal variants in the texts consulted: 1) wa ('indanä) min al-muxabbirin 'an mughayyabät al-umür man lä yusäwä xabaruhü (Α, Β, & F; C is identical with the substitution of mä for man). 2) wa ('indanà) min al-muxabbirin 'an m.h.y.t al-umür man lä yusäwä (D). 3) wa ('indanä) min al-muxabbirin 'an mughayyabät al-umur man lä y.s.m. (suggest : yusäwä) çhairuhû (E). Cureton follows A, Β and F. The variations and doubtful terms in D and E seem to reflect scribal judgments and are, in any case, too minor to alter the above translation, which tries to reflect the sense of these cryptic phrases. The abruptness with which the exposition of the Brahmanical theses ends and their rebuttal begins is a troublesome point taken up in the commentary; cf. infra, p. 99.

Chapter One

41

If you acknowledge that the world has a wise and creative Maker, you must also acknowledge that this same Being provides commandments, prohibitions and authority for His creation ; indeed, it is clear that with respect to all that we undertake and omit to undertake and know and think, He exercises authority and issues commandments. Yet every human intellect is not ready to receive His commandment, nor is every human soul able to accept His authority. The very nature of God's grace, therefore, has necessitated an order among intellects and souls, and His own decree has required that some of them (be elevated) above others in rank, that some of them may be subservient to others, and the grace of your Lord is better than what they amass. S. 43.32 And the supreme mark of God's grace is prophecy and the commissioning of an apostle.105 That is better than what they amass with their haughty minds.

Sub-categories of the Barähima The Barähima (Brahnjans) may be categorized as : those who belong to the followers of the Buddhas ;106 the proponents of meditation ; and the adherents to metempsychosis (or transference).

105

Nubüwa may mean 'prophecy' or 'the prophetic gift', cf. supra, p. 39, Risala, similarly, may mean 'the state of apostleship', i.e., 'apostleship', or 'the commissioning of an apostle'. The latter sense of risàia applies in most cases where the word is found in 'Ära' al-hind'. Whether used together, as in the present context, or separately, risàia and nubüwa are complementary but not synonymous terms, ios Variants: budada or bidada (Α-E); burada (F). By the time of Shahrastânî bidada had become the standard plural form of budda (Buddha). However, its use in the phrase a?(iab al-bidada to apply to the Buddhist community is distinctive to Shahrastânî. For the problem of Muslim nomenclature for Buddha(s) and Buddhists, cf. the commentary, infra, pp. 105 f.

42

Translation of 'Arä' al-hind'

Chapter 1A : The Followers of the Buddhas The Buddha, in their opinion, means a person who is not born, who never marries nor eats food nor drinks nor grows old nor dies. The first Buddha appearing in the world was named Shäkamin (Shäkyamuni),107 which means 'the noble master'. Five thousand years elapsed from the time of his appearance to the time of the hij'ra (622 A.D.). They assert that below the rank of the Buddha is the rank of the Büdísa'iya (Bodhisattva),108 the latter term meaning 'the one who seeks the way of truth'. Indeed, one arrives at this rank only by [following certain measures for attaining moral discipline] : (a) patience and alms-giving; (b) seeking after that which ought to be sought; (c) abstinence and withdrawal from the world, and aloofness from its desires and pleasures; (d) abstinence from what is forbidden; (e) compassion for all created beings; (f) avoidance of the ten offenses, which are: 1. to kill any living creature 2. to consider it lawful (to seize) human property 3. to commit adultery 4. to lie 5. to utter calumnies 6. to use obscene language 7. to vilify 8. to slander 9. to say a stupid word 10. to deny reward (and punishment) in the after life; and (g) adherence to the ten virtues, which are : 1. to demonstrate goodness and generosity 2. to pardon those who offend and to overcome anger through patience 3. to abstain from worldly desires 4. to meditate on the delivrance of the soul from this transitory world to that eternal world 107

ios

Variants: shäkamin (A & Β), sakamin (C), mu'alliq or mu'Iin (D), säkiman (E) and säkamln (F). Variants: bürisa'íya (A), büdísa'iya (Β & C), al-sabqi wa-shi'atihi(X>), bürisa'iya (E) and nürisa'iya (F).

Chapter One

43

5. to exercise the intellect through knowledge and culture and much thought about the consequences of worldly things 6. to exert control over the direction of the soul, that it may seek after higher things 7. to be soft-spoken and courteous in speaking with everyone 8. to be kind in dealing with other men, so that their wishes become more important than one's own 9. to turn away totally from created beings and turn totally toward the truth and 10. to dedicate the soul to seeking and attaining the truth. This group maintains that the Buddhas came to them according to the number (of branches) of the Kil River,109 bringing them knowledge of the sciences and appearing to them in different kinds and as different individuals. Further, on account of the nobility of their substances, the Buddhas appeared only in the families of kings. They claim that there is no difference among the Buddhas with respect to what has been reported of them about the eternity of the world and about their assertion concerning reward already noted.110 The appearance of the Buddhas has been limited to India, however, due both to the wide variety of its creatures and climates and also to the many Indians who are intent on spiritual exercises and exertion. There is no one comparable to the Buddha as they have described him - if they are right in that - except al-Khidr, 111 whom Muslims recognize.

109

Variants: Kil (A & B), Kabal (C), Kasl (D), Khabal (E) and Kay I (F). Minorsky {Marvazi, p. 142) is probably right in assuming that the river referred to is the Ganges, in which case the number of Buddhas would be seven. At the end of the 'Ära' al-hind' account on the Bäsawiya, however, the Ganges is clearly the basis of Arabic Kanka (cf. infra, p. 48), and both Ibn an-Nadïm and Marvazi describe a Hindu sect entitled Kankäbätriya (*GangäyätrIya), and it is, therefore, puzzling that such a well-attested and logical form for the name of this river in Arabic would not be used in the present instance. Probably a compounded scribal error produced : f or

110 111

Cf. the tenth offense, mentioned on the previous page. Al-Khidr is an important figure in Muslim legend, and the comparison of the Buddha to him will be discussed in the commentary, infra, pp. 113-14.

44

Translation of'Arä' al-hind'

Chapter IB: The proponents of Meditation and Imagination112 They are the Indians who are well versed in the science of celestial orbits and stars and the astrological judgments connected with them. Their method differs from that of Greek and Persian astronomers. The method of the Indians predicates the calculation of most astrological judgments on the conjunction of the fixed stars rather than the planets; they derive astrological judgments from the propreties of the stars, not from their natures. Hence they reckon Saturn as the most felicitous celestial body on account of its high position and large size. It is Saturn, in their opinion, which dispenses general benefits as well as partial misfortunes. The other stars are similarly said to have both natures and properties. The Greeks derive their astrological judgments from the natures of the stars, the Indians from their properties. The procedure is the same with respect to medical knowledge, since the Indians, as against the Greeks, observe the properties of medicines rather than their natures. The proponents of meditation attach great importance to thought. They uphold it as the intermediary between the sense world and the intelligible world, since the forms of the sensibilia and the essences of the intelligibilia alike go back to it. Thought, therefore, constitutes the meeting place of the combined wisdom of both worlds. The proponents of meditation exert every effort to divert imagination and thought from sense objects. They engage in intense exercises and make the utmost exertions so that when their thought is freed from this world, the other world is revealed to it. Sometimes meditation unlocks supernatural circumstances; sometimes it is able to hold back rains; and sometimes it directs the imagination on a living man and kills him instantly. Even this [last-mentioned possibility] is not far-fetched, since the imagination has a remarkable ability to influence both the movements of bodies and the behavior of souls. Is not the pollution in sleep an effect of the imagination within the body? And is not the effect of the evil eye the result of the activity of the imagination within an individual? Does not a man, if 112

Variants: Afhäb al-fikra (B, D, & E);Af(iäb al-fikra wal-wahm (A, C, & F). It is possible that wal-wahm was added in A, C, & F as a gloss, since the next words are wahum

ahlu Ί-'iIm etc. Cf. commentary, infra, pp. 114-15.

Chapter One

45

he is walking on a high wall, fall instantly, even if he takes a step no bigger than he would take on the ground? If the imagination alone is active, it produces wondrous deeds. Hence the Indians keep their eyes closed for days, lest their thought and imagination be preoccupied with sense objects, and at the point of separation, if another (liberated) imagination is united with it, they share (their) activities, especially if the two of them are agreed on a single purpose. It is their custom, therefore, when something happens suddenly to them to bring together forty educated and morally irreproachable men who share a common viewpoint. Together they perceive clearly the important matter, the burden of which was oppressing them, and the great affliction, the weight of which was causing them difficulties, is removed from them.113

Chapter IB.I : The Bakrantiniya [Among the proponents of meditation and imagination are] the B A K R A N T I NYA,U4 that is, those who are bound with iron. Their custom is to shave the head and face, to bare the body, except for the privy parts, and then to bind the body with a piece of iron from the waistline to the chest. In this way they hope to prevent their bellies from splitting open under the abundance of knowledge, the force of imagination and the power of meditation.115 113

114 115

This sentence is awkward to translate. In Arabic, the subjects of the two main and the two relative clauses are neatly paralleled; hence al-muhimmu is balanced by al-mulimmu, himluhu by thiqluhü. According to Cureton, the entire sentence reads: fayatajallä lahum al-muhimmu alladh iyahdimuhum himluhü wayandafi'u 'anhum al-balä'u' l-mulimmu alladhiyakaduhum thiqluhü. In English, the two relative clauses are especially difficult to unravel, and the final relative clause is impossible unless yataka'aduhum replaces yakäduhum, as Professor Franz Rosenthal first suggested to me. In subsequent examination of the manuscripts I discovered that one codex (E) does, in fact, support Professor Rosenthal's perceptive emendation of the Cureton text. The variants are as follows: al-balä'u 'l-mulimmu alladhi yakäduhum thiqluhü (A, Β, C & F); al-balä'u ' l-mulimmu alladhi kadähum thiqluhü (D); and al-balä'u Ί-mulìmmu alladhi yataka'aduhum thiqluhü (E). Variants: Bakrantaniniya (A), Bakrantiniya (B,C& F), Karahadu (D) and Bakrisiya (E). The last two phrases, shiddati Ί-wahmi and ghalabati 'l-fikri, hark back to the title of the umbrella group: ashäb al-fikra wal-wahm.

46

Translation of'Arn' al-hind'

Perhaps they perceive in iron a peculiar quality which corresponds to the imagination. If not, how would a piece of iron prevent the belly from bursting open? And how would that become necessary [i.e., the bursting open of the belly] as the result of the abundance of knowledge? Chapter 1C: The Proponents of Metempsychosis or Transference116 We have already mentioned the doctrines of those who attest to metempsychosis. There is no religious community in which metempsychosis does not occupy a firm place. Only the methods of describing it differ. As for the Indian adherents to metempsychosis, their conviction became very strong when they observed a bird appearing at a given time and alighting on a given tree, where it laid and hatched an egg. After it continued its species through hatching, the bird rubbed its beak and claw together, creating a fire which burned so hot that it consumed the bird. Oil then flowed from the fire and collected in a cave at the foot of the tree. When a year had elapsed and the time for the appearance of the bird arrived, a bird like the other bird was formed from the oil. Flying up, it alighted on the same tree, etc., etc. They say : To what can one compare the world and its inhabitants, in their various revolutions and cycles, if not to this [avian myth] ? They continue : If the movements of the celestial bodies are circular, with the top of the circle arriving at the point where it began, then tracing a second circle on the circumference of the first, the second undoubtedly shows what the first has shown, there being no difference between them sufficient to justify the depiction of a difference between their effects. Since the influencing agents also return as they began, and since the stars and the celestial orbits revolve around the first center, with no difference in their distances, conjunctions, aspects and relationships, there can be absolutely no difference in the effects which proceed from them. This is termed 'the transference (tanäsukh) of revolutions and cycles'. 116

Ar.: Afhäb at-tanäsukh. Including its occurrence in the title, the word tanäsukh is used five times in this brief passage. In the first paragraph it may mean 'metempsychosis', i.e., the movement of the soul from one body to another at death, while in the second paragraph it clearly means 'transference' i.e., the cyclical recurrence of similar phenomenal patterns. For further discussion of tanäsukh, cf. commentary, infra, pp. 126 f.

Chapter Two

Al

The proponents of this (doctrine) differ, however, as to the length of the largest revolution. Most of them maintain that it is 30,000 years; others, however, say 360,000 years. The only celestial orbits they consider, moreover, are those of the fixed stars and not those of the planets. Most Indians also maintain that each celestial orbit is composed of water, fire and wind, the stars in it being fiery and airy. The higher existences lack only the earthy element.

Chapter Two : The Followers of Spiritual Beings Among the Indians is a group who attest to spiritual intermediaries. These come to them with a commissioning from God - He is mighty and great ! as divine messengers in human form (though) without a written testimony.117 Commanding some things while prohibiting others, the spiritual intermediaries establish laws and clarify norms for their followers. They recognize the authenticity of each intermediary by his abstention from temporal weaknesses as well as his ability to dispense with food, drink, sexual intercourse and other things.

Chapter 2A :118 The Bäsawiya119 They believe that their apostle is a mediating angel120 who descended from heaven in human form for the following purposes : (a) to command them to 117

118

119

120

For the translation of risala ('commissioning - as apostles or divine messengers'), cf. infra, pp. 147-48. The order in which the four sects comprising the açhâb ar-rüfiäniyät are presented varies in the codices. The two patterns are: Bäsawiya, Bahuwadiya, Käbaliya and Bahädüniya (A & F); and Käbaliya, Bahädüniya, Bäsawiya and Bähuwadiya (Β, C, D & E). Cureton follows the authority of A & F, although it is worth noting that there are good attestations to the alternate order. As for the names of the particular groups, variations in them will be cited in footnotes as they occur in the translation. Variants: Bäsawiya (A), Näsawiya (Β & C), Näsawatiya (D), Näsanawiya (E) and Bäsawiya (F). Ar. : malak rüfiäni. This seemingly redundant phrase is unique to Shahrastânî and will be treated at length in the commentary; cf. infra, pp. 146 f.

48

Translation of 'Arä' al-hind'

magnify fire and to approach it through incense, perfumes, oils and sacrifices; and (b) to forbid them to kill or slaugher anything except that which is consecrated to the fire. He also introduced them to the custom of girding oneself with a halter extending from the right to under the left shoulder. Moreover, he forbade them to lie and to drink wine. They were not to eat the food or sacrifices of outsiders.121 Adultery was permitted, in order to prevent the severance of their lineage. He, furthermore, ordered them to make a statue of himself, to worship it and to walk around it three times a day with musical instruments, incense, singing and dancing. He also enjoined them to honor cows and to bow down before any cow which they saw. Stroking a cow, moreover, was a means to seeking repentance. He forbade them to cross the Ganges River.

Chapter 2B: The Bahuwadiya122 They assert that their apostle is a mediating angel in human form whose name is Bähuwadih.123 He came to them riding on a bull, adorned with a crown of skull bones on his head and a matching necklace. In one of his hands was a human skull and in the other a trident. He commanded them to worship the Creator - He is mighty and great! as well as himself, to make a statue in his own likeness and to venerate it. Further, they were ordered to hate nothing and to accept all things as alike since the Creator made them all. He required that they make ornaments of human skulls to decorate themselves and crowns to place upon their heads. They also were to rub their bodies and their heads with ashes. 121

Ar. : là ya'kulü min at '¡mati ghaira millatihim walä min dhabä' ihihim. The final pronominal suffix is ambiguous, and the clause could be alternatively translated: 'they were not to eat the food of those who were not of their religion, nor (were they to eat) their own sacrifices'. 122 Variants: Bahuwadiya (Α-E), Bahuwadiya (F). 123 Variants: Bahuwadiya (A), Mähuwadih (Β, C & D) Yähuwadih (E) and Bähuwadhiya (F). This is the first of several instances where the name of the leader of a group seems to be directly related to the name of the group itself; yet in the majority of the codices (B, C, D & E), the scribes overlooked or ignored this relationship.

Chapter Two

49

At the same time he forbade them to make sacrifices124 or to hold any possessions. It was their duty to renounce the world and to have no means of subsistence other than that provided through alms.

Chapter 2C: The Käballya125 They claim that their apostle is a mediating angel called Sh.ba,126 who came to them in human form strewn with ashes and wearing on his head a top cap of red felt three spans high and surrounded with pieces of human skulls. In addition, he wore a necklace as big as could be, a girdle, bracelets and anklets - all of the same material. He was (otherwise) naked. He commanded his followers to decorate themselves after his example,127 and to dress as he dressed.128 He established laws and norms for them.

Chapter 2D: The Bahädüniya129 They assert that Bahädün130 was a great angel who came to us in the form of a huge man. He had two brothers who killed him and made out of his skin the earth, out of his bones the mountains, and out of his blood the ocean. It has been said that this story is an allegory, since the human body could not have sufficed for this purpose.131 Bahädün has also been depicted riding on a horse, with much hair on his head. Sometimes he let his hair

124

A, C & F add: wan-nikäfi, 'or to marry'. 125 Variants: Käballya (A-E), Kämallya (F). 126 Variants: Shaba (A & E), Sh.ba (B), S.ba ( C & D ) , Shab (F). The mediating angel of this sect was undoubtedly Siva. Cf. Commentary VIII, infra, pp. 170-71. 127 Ar. : bizinatihi, 'with his embellishment' (Β, E & F). A, C & D, together with Cureton, omit the final pronominal suffix, resulting in an awkward indefinite, bizinatin. 128 This last phrase (Ar., wayatazayyaw biziyihi) sounds redundant, and in some codices (A, D & E) it is omitted. 129 Variants: Bahädüdniya (A), Bahädüdlya (Β), Bahädüniya (C & D), Bahädhüniya (E) and Yahadurinayya (F). 130 Variants: Bahädün (Α-D), Bahädhün (E) and Bahädüna (F). 131 Ar. : lä tablughu ilä hädhih Ί-darajati, 'it will not reach to this degree'.

50

Translation of 'Arä' al-hind'

hang down over his face. At other times he parted it evenly on both sides, so that if fell evenly in front and in back. He commanded his followers to do as he did and laid down the following rules: not drink wine; if they see a woman, to flee from her; and to make a pilgrimage to Mount Jür'an. 132 On this mountain stands a large temple, which is the statue of Bahädün. Only its door-keepers have the key to the temple, and no one enters it except with their permission. And whenever they open the door, they close their mouths, lest their breath reach the statue. They slaughter and make sacrifices to Bahädün and bring him gifts. On their return from the pilgrimage they do not enter any inhabited region on their way nor do they see any forbidden thing nor do they do evil and harm to anyone either by word or deed.

Chapter Three: 'Abadat al-kawäkib j Star-worshippers No doctrine of star worship has been attributed to the Indians, except in the case of two sécts ; both are oriented to the two lights, the sun and the moon. Their doctrine in that regard is the doctrine of the Säbians: they are oriented to133 the heavenly bodies without restricting lordship and divinity to them.

Chapter 3A : The Dinakltlya / Sun-worshippers They assert that the sun is one of the angels, possessing both soul and intellect. From him comes the light of the stars, the enlightenment of the world and the generation of lower beings. He is the king of the celestial orbits and merits veneration, prostration, incense-burning and supplication. This group is called dinakltlya,134 that is, sun-worshippers. Part of their tradition is to acknowledge a statue as god. It has in its hand a precious stone 132

Variants: Jawr'an (Α, Β, E & F), Hawr'an (C) and Hawi (D). Ar.: f i tawajjuhihim ilä etc., 'in their orientation to'. 134 Variants: dinakiniya (A), dikiya (B), dinakitiya (C), dinakiya (D), dhandhakiniya (E) and dinakitiya 133

Chapter Three

51

of fiery color, and it has a special temple which they have built in its name. They set up farms and villages for it as foundations. It has custodians and caretakers. Hence the sun-worshippers come there to pray three times (a day). The sick and infirm also come there. They fast and pray to the idol, seeking to be healed through its power.

Chapter 3B: The Jandrikanlya / Moon-worshippers They assert that the moon is one of the angels and merits adoration and worship. It is in charge of the lower world and the particular matters in it. From the moon derives the maturation of generated things and their attainment to perfection. By its increase and decrease are reckoned the periods of time and hours. The moon also follows the sun and is its companion, deriving light from it and increasing and decreasing with respect to it. This group is called Jandrikanlya,135 i. e., moon-worshippers. Part of their tradition is to construct an idol (seated) on a cart drawn by four (ducks).130 In the hand of the idol there is a precious stone. Part of their religious duties are: a) to prostrate themselves before this idol and worship it; and b) to fast half of each month and not break fast till the moon rises. Then they come to the moon with food and drink and milk. They pray to it and look to the moon and request it to fulfill their needs. As the new moon begins to appear, they mount on roof tops and burn incense. When they see it, they call out and pray to it. Then they descend from the rooftops to indulge in food, drink, pleasure and amusements. They do not look at it except with resplendent countenances, and in the middle of the months after they have finished fasting, they begin dancing, playing games and making music before the moon idol and the moon.

135 Variants: Jandrabakniya (A), Hadrabakiya (B), Jandrikiya (C), Hadrabaktïya (D), Hidrikiya (E) and Hindarikatiya (F). It is not clear what codex Cureton used to arrive at the reading Jandrikaniya. 136

For the textual variants and historical significance of this phrase, cf. Commentary ΧΠ, infra, pp. 202-5.

52

Translation of'Arn' al-hind'

Chapter Four: 'Abadat al-asnam / Idol-worshippers Know that those sects whose doctrines we have just cited revert in the last analysis to idolatry, since there is no other way for them to worship except in the presence of a person to whom they look up and to whom they devote themselves. Hence the followers of spiritual beings and star-worshippers erect idols which they claim represent the beings actually worshipped. In short, the relation of the idols - wherever it is determined - is to a hidden object of worship. The constructed idol consequently assumes the form, shape and figure of the other being, becomes its representative and takes its place. At the same time, however, we are absolutely certain that a rational person cannot put his hand to a piece of wood and chisel it into a form and then believe that it is both his God and his Creator and the God of all; for its existence was preceded by the existence of its maker, and its form created by the craft of its chiseler. But when people are intent upon orienting themselves to idols and link their needs with idols, without permission or authority or proof or power from Almighty God, then their devotion to idols and their request (for the fulfillment) of needs from them is tantamount to asserting the divinity of such idols. Concerning this practise, they used to say, 'We serve them only that they may bring us closer to Allah'. (S. 39.3) But if they did restrict themselves to the forms of idols in ascribing lordship and divinity, then they would not go beyond them to the Lord of lords.

Chapter 4A : The Mahäkällya137 They have an idol known as Mahäkäla, 138 who has four hands and a great head of hair, which he lets hang down. In one of his hands he has a huge 137

138

Variants: Mahäkälanakniya (A), Mahäkälabaka (Β), Mahäkälikitiya (C), Mahäkälabakta (D), Mahäkäniya (E) and Mahäkäkika (F). Variants: Mahäkäka (A & F), Mahäkäla (B & C), Häkäna (D) and Mahäkäna (E). Again, some of the scribes (A & D most notably) seem to have overlooked the relationship between the name of the group and its principal deity or leader.

Chapter Four

53

snake with its mouth wide open ; in another hand a staff; in the third a human skull; and with the fourth 139 he pushes it back.140 In both his ears, like two earrings, are snakes, and on his body are two large snakes, which have twisted themselves around him. On his head he wears a crown of skullbones, together with a matching collar. They believe that Mahäkäla is a malicious being who nonetheless merits adoration due both to the greatness of his power and to the praiseworthy and lovable as well as the objectionable qualities he possesses, e. g., giving and holding back, doing good and doing evil. He is a refuge for them in time of need. Moreover, great temples have been dedicated to him in India. The people who worship him come to them three times a day. They prostrate themselves before him and circumambulate him. At a place named Akhtar 141 there is a large idol in the form of this deity. From everywhere people come to this idol and worship it there. They petition it for worldly needs, so that whoever wants something says to it : 'let me marry so-and-so', or 'give me such-and-such'. There are, too, some who remain by this idol day and night eating nothing. Continuously they beseech it and ask it for what they need, until perhaps it happens.

139

140

141

The manuscripts vary only in the adjective they use, Β & F having wabil-yadi Ί-uxrä, A, C, D & E wabil-yadi Ί-räbi'ati. Comparative evidence, though, suggests dropping the preposition 'bV (with); cf. the commentary, infra, fn. 625. All the codices support this awkward phrase, but comparison with the parallel Muslim sources indicates that dafa'ahä ought to be replaced with rafa'ahä, 'he uplifts it, i.e., the fourth hand'; cf. the commentary, infra, fn. 625. Variants : Ahir (A & C), Akhir (B), Akhar (D), Akhtar (E) and Akhair (F). Most modern scholars (e.g., Haarbrücker, Reinaud and Minorsky) restore this form to Ujjayini or Ujjain without further question. Yet it poses a linguistic problem similar to that cited in fn. 109, supra concerning the acceptance of Kil as one Arabic transliteration of Ganges. Kil is a less adequate rendition of Ganges than Kank, and Akhtar, together with its variants, is less adequate than Ujain, the expected and well attested form for Ujjayini. The question must be sharply put: why is Ujain not used in the present instance? The commentary on the Mahâkâlïya attempts to answer this question; cf. infra, pp. 217-19.

54

Translation of'Ära1 al-hind'

Chapter 4B: The Barkashikïya1*2 / Tree-worshippers Part of their tradition is to erect for themselves an idol which they worship and to which they bring gifts. With respect to their place of worship, they look for the highest and thickest trees, such as the trees which grow on mountain sides. Finding the most beautiful and tallest among them, they make that place their place of worship. Then they make their idol and, coming to a huge tree among those trees, hollow out a place within it, where they insert the idol. All their subsequent prostrations and circumambulations are oriented to that tree.

Chapter 4C: The Danklniya143 Part of their tradition is to erect an idol in the form of a many-handed woman with a crown on her head. Furthermore, they have a feast on the day of the year coinciding with the fall equinox. On that day they construct a huge booth before the idol; they bring sheep and other animal sacrifices to it. But they do not slaughter these animals; they strike their necks with swords in front of the idols. Moreover, people whom they entrap through deceit they kill as a sacrifice, until their feast has ended. Because of (their) deceit, all the people of India reckon them as evildoers.

Chapter 4D: The JalahakiyaiAA / Water-worshippers Worshippers of water, they believe that water is an angel and that angels accompany it. It is the basis of all things, and through it takes place the birth of all things as well as sprouting forth, growth, continuance, purification and cultivation. Every activity in the world requires water.

142

143 144

Variants: Barkashankina (A), Raksahkasa (B), Rakshahatiya (C) Rakshaliya (D), Barkashiklya (E) and Barlashikiya (F). Variants: Dahkiniya (A, C, D, E & F); Dahkatu (Β). Variants: Jalahakaniya (A), Halahakiya (B &F), Jalahakiya (C), Jalahaliya (D) and Hakahakiya (E).

Chapter Four

55

When a man wishes to worship water, he disrobes and covers his privy parts before wading into water up to his waist. Remaining there an hour or two or longer, he takes some aromatic plants and cuts them up into small pieces, which he then throws into the water one after another while he praises God and recites (prayers). When he is ready to leave, he stirs the water with his hand and, taking some water, pours it over his head and face and the rest of his body as he exits. Prostrating himself, he departs.

Chapter 4E: The Akniwâtrîyali& / Fire-worshippers Worshippers of fire, they assert that it is the greatest element in body, the widest in scope, the highest in place, the noblest in substance, the most luminous in brightness and splendor, and the finest in body and nature. Fire is also needed more than are other natural substances, for no light exists in the world except through it, nor is there any light or growth or mixture or combination except through mixture with it. They worship it by digging a square trench in the ground and lighting a fire in it. Then, whatever savory food, fine drink, expensive garment, fragrant perfume or precious stone they have - they throw them all into the fire, drawing near and seeking its blessing. Unlike another group of Indian ascetics, however, they forbid throwing living people into the fire and immolating human bodies in it. According to this doctrine, most of the Indian kings and nobles revere fire greatly because of its substance, preferring it to all other existing things. Also among them are ascetics and worshippers who, while fasting, sit around the fire and hold their nostrils lest any breath emanating from the breast of an evildoer146 reach the fire. It is their tradition to promote the good qualities in man while holding in check their opposites, i. e., lying, envy, hate, quarrelsomeness, unrighteousness, desire and impertinence. Once a man is freed from them, he approaches the fire and finds easy access to it.

145

Variants: Akmwâtrîya (A, B, C, E & F); Aknirätrlya (D).

140

Following A, B, C & F : 'an fadri mujrimin. D & E , together with Cureton, read 'an fadrín mufiarramin, 'from a forbidden breast'.

56

Translation of'Ara

al-hind'

Chapter Five: Hukama' al-hind / Indian Philosophers147 Pythagoras, the Greek sage, had a student named Qalänüs who, after he had learned wisdom from Pythagoras and studied under him, went to one of the cities of India and there promulgated the Pythagorean viewpoint. N o w there was one Brahmanan, 148 a man of intellectual refinement, incisive judgment and unerring reason, who was also eager to know about the upper worlds. He learned wisdom from Qalänüs the Wise and appropriated the latter's knowledge and skill. 149 After the death of Qalänüs, Brahmanan came to rule over all India. He spurred the people to purify their bodies and to purge their souls. 'Whoever purges the soul', he said, 'and speeds up his departure from this impure world and cleanses his body from its defilements - that man perceives everything, seeing what had been hidden and mastering every difficult situation. He experiences pleasure, joy, bliss and love and does not experience boredom or fatigue or illness or exhaustion.' 150 After Brahmanan had shown Indians the path (to enlightenment) and 147

148

149

150

The contents of this chapter are closely paralleled in the earlier work 'Arä' al-faläsifä' attributed to Ammonius (cf. F. Peters, op. cit., p. 123 for a brief discussion of Ammonius). The critical differences between the extant (and quite late) codex of Ammonius' work and ShahrastänI's text will be cited in the footnotes of the translation which follows. On thefurther question of source dependency, cf. the commentary, infra, pp. 251 f. Variants: Brahmanin (A & E), Tarhamin (B), Brahmanan (C), Brämin (D) and Barxasln (F). Ammonius ('Ärä' al-faläsifa'): Another student of Pythagoras named Falänüs who belonged to the people of Antioch (text: antäkiya; one would expect anfäkiya), entered the Indian city And promulgated the Pythagorean viewpoint and doctrine on simple spirituality. A native Indian named Bazaxmash was (his) student for seven years. Then Faläyus died. When (his) teacher had passed away, he (Bazaxmash) deviated from his viewpoint a little. He (Bazaxmash) translated the teaching of Faläyüs, and it was the former who proclaimed the latter's viewpoint in the Indian city, (as) I will mention subsequently. After references to the sayings of Pythagoras (compare Aya Sofya 2450, 121a 11. 9-13 with Bírünl's Indica I, p. 85), Ammonius repeats in summary form the above account of Faläyus and goes on to describe the character and teaching of Bazaxmash/ When the student of Pythagoras named Faläyus came to India, he promulgated the Pythagorean doctrine, and Bazaxmash was a man of intellectual refinement, eager to know about the upper worlds. Now when Faläyus died [the ms. here has a dittography]. Bazaxmash came to rule over the Indian people. He supervised the people in purifying

Chapter Five

57

justified it to them with convincing arguments, they exerted themselves greatly. 'The abandonment of the pleasures of this world', Brahmanan added, 'is what will attach you to that (other) world, so that you may join it and enter its community and be bound to its pleasures and its comfort.' The people of India studied this dictum, and it became fixed in their minds. Though Brahmanan was subsequently removed from them by death, his dictum was lodged in their minds, due both to their great zeal and to their speed in attaching themselves to that (other) world.151 They then divided into two groups. One group asserted that procreation in this world is the most transparent sin since it is the result of sensual pleasure and the fruit of semen drops spawned by passion. Hence procreation is forbidden, and whatever leads to it of pleasurable food and pure drink and all that arouses passion and beastly sensuality and stimulates the animal drive - this, too, is forbidden. They restrict themselves to the least food possible to stay alive. Some of them do not even consider that little in order to reach the higher world faster. One of them, if he sees his life tainted, may throw himself into the fire to purify his soul, cleanse his body and release his spirit. Another among them may collect the pleasures of this world - food, drink and clothing - to set them before his eye and to perceive them clearly and fully, so that his animal soul is attracted to them, desires them and lusts after them. But he then re-

151

their bodies and improving their souls. 'Whoever improves (his) soul,' he said, 'and speeds up (his) departure from this impure world and cleanses (his) body from the defilements of the world [read al-älam for al-'awälim of the ms.] - that man experiences everything which he had seen in this world (without difficulty) in that world. He experiences joy, pleasure and love without experiencing boredom or exhaustion in that upper world with respect to things which cause pleasure, since these are permanent and he does not need to become unhappy in seeking them. In that world one experiences neither fatigue nor exhaustion.' Ammonius: After Bazaxmash had shown the Indians the path (to enlightenment) and justified it to them with convincing, logical arguments they exerted themselves greatly. 'The abandonment of the pleasures of this world,' Bazaxmash added, '** is what will attach you to that (other) world, so that you may join it; whoever leaves the pleasures of this world** [**-** ms. in margin] will be eternally in that (other) world'. Then the people of India studied this dictum, and it became fixed in their minds. Though Bazaxmash was subsequently removed from them by death, his dictum was lodged in their minds, due both to their great zeal and to their speed in attaching themselves

to that [read hädhä for bihädhih i of the ms.] world.

58

Translation of'Ara

al-hind'

strains himself from them by the power of his rational soul, until his body wilts and his soul weakens. The soul then departs (from the body), due to the weakness of the bond which holds them together.152 As for the other group, they viewed procreation, eating, drinking and other pleasures, to the extent that they were consonant with they way of truth, as permissible. Moreover, only a few of them exceeded the way (of truth) and desired more.153 Some of the members of both groups adhered to the doctrine of Pythagosas as reflected in his judgement and knowledge. They were courteous until they perceived what was good and what was evil in the souls of their colleagues. They informed them (the colleagues) about it, and it made them become increasingly enthusiastic about meditative exercises, the subjugation of 'the baser self of man that incites to evil' (S. 12:35) and the attainment of what their contemporaries had attained.154 Their doctrine concerning the Almighty Creator is that He is pure light, but He takes on some bodily shape for concealment so that He is seen only by those fit and suitable to see Him. Indeed, the Creator is like one who puts lè

- Ammonius: (One group) asserted, 'You see that procreation in this world is the most transparent sin since it is the greatest pleasure in this world. Moreover, the leaving of food and drink, which gives rise to the passions and activates the urge of the animal souls, is desirable [ms. reads: ailadhl talabta?] in this world. Hence they restrict themselves to the least food possible to stay alive. Some of them do not even consider that little in order to reach the higher world quickly. One of them, if he sees his life tainted (text: qattäl), may throw himself into the fire, thinking that he is thereby purifying his soul and cleansing his body. Another among them may collect the pleasures and desires of this world - food, drink, clothing and everything else which comprises the totality of the world's pleasures. He sets them before himself that he might see them and excite his animal soul to its passions; as a result, he is attracted (to them) and greatly craves (them). Then he holds the animal soul in check through what he thinks by the power of the rational soul, until his body wilts [read yadhbulu (Shah.) for ms. ya-z-y-lu] and his soul weakens. Then the soul departs from the body due to the weakness [read li-du'fi (Shah.) for ms. ad-da'if] of the bond which holds them together. 153 Ammonius: As for the other group, they viewed procreation, drinking and (other) pleasures, insofar as they were consonant with the way, that is, the way of truth (as permissible), and (only) a few of them departed from the way. [Ms. omits halalan and

has qalilun wa-minhum instead of wa-qalllun minhum (Shah.).] 154

Some of the members of both groups adhered to the doctrine of Pythagoras among (the views of) the ancients (text: ahi an-nazar wal'ilm). They were courteous until they

Chapter Five

59

on the hide of an animal in this world ; then when he takes it off, someone whose glance falls on him can look at him, but if he does not put it on, no one is able to see him. 155 They further believe that they are like captives in this world and that whoever fights the concupiscent soul until he restrains the base pleasures that man remains a prisoner in their hand. Whoever wishes to fight all this is empowered to carry on the fight against the powers of sensuality by removing pride and conceit, by suppressing lust and passion and by staying far away from what indicates and leads to them. 156

155

158

perceived what was hidden in the souls of their colleagues, and in that way they informed (the colleagues) [read yuxbirünahum (Shah.) for ms. yajburmahum]. When it became known that one of them was concerned with the pleasures of this world, then they increased (their) enthusiasm and mortified themselves in order that (the delinquent colleagues) might be joined to those who have informed them about their secret feelings [read alladhlna axbarühum bi-sarä'ir mä 'indahum; the text is otherwise incomprehensible.] Ammonius: With respect to their doctrine concerning the Creator, they say that the Creator is pure light, but He takes on some bodily form for concealment so that He is seen only by those who are fit and suitable to see Him. Indeed, the Creator is like one who puts on a sheep's hide in this world ; then when he takes it off [read xala'ahu for ms. xala'u], someone whose glance falls on him can look at him, but when he puts it on, no one is able to see him. Ammonius uses clearer imagery here than does Shahrastânï. The latter mistakenly includes the negative particle in the final subordinate clause (Ar., wa-idhä lam yalbishu etc.). The analogy of the animal/sheep hide, moreover, raises questions which are not answered in either text. Does the Creator remove the hide in this world or the next? What removes the hide? Is it the perception of the enlightened soul or the whim of the Creator? The context for exploring these questions is not immediately clear, and the commentary attempts to provide tentative answers on the basis of the few clues which the texts make available; cf. infra, pp. 257—58. Ammonius: They further believe that everything in this world which pertains to food, drink, merriment and joy as well as all the passions which exist in this world, are to be avoided, and whoever fights this fierce, difficult battle until he defeats the passions - that man is rescued from them, but whoever is weakened [read man da'ajufa for ms. mä inda'afa] in battling them - that man remains a prisoner in this world and is not able to rise [read annuhüd for ms. an-nuhüs] from it to this realm of true peace and sovereignty. Whoever wishes to fight all this is empowered to carry on the fight by removing pride and conceit and hypocrisy [read al-muräyäh for ms. m-r'y'] from himself and by staying far away from connection with this world and its passions and, instead, desiring to leave this world and its pleasures.

60

Translation

of ' Arä'

al-hìnd'

When Alexander the Great arrived in India and wished to do battle with the Indian people, it was difficult for him to conquer one of their cities. Its inhabitants belonged to one of the two philosophical parties, i. e., the party which accepted the enjoyment of pleasures in this world insofar as that activity did not result in the corruption of the body. Alexander persisted till he conquered that city. He killed a number of its wise men, and the inhabitants witnessed the corpses of their slain being discarded as if they were the bodies of clean, pure fish which were in pure water. When they saw that, they regretted their action and refrained from (harming) the others.157 But the other philosophical group among the Indians, i. e., those who held that there is nothing good in marriage nor in the desire to procreate nor in anything related to bodily passions - this group wrote to Alexander and praised him for his love of wisdom, his attainment of knowledge and his respect for the supporters of insight and reason. They requested that he select a sage and send him to dispute with them. Alexander agreed, sending them a sage to whom they showed themselves superior both in speculation and action. Alexander then went away from them, sending them costly treasures and generous gifts. They said: 'If wisdom affects kings in this world in this way, then how would it be if we clothe ourselves with wisdom to the

157

Ammonius: (lacuna) They have mortified themselves since Alexander attacked them and did battle with them at a place where it was difficult for him to conquer a city belonging to one of the two groups, viz., those who advocated the enjoyment of pleasures in this world insofar as it did not lead to the corruption or defilement of their bodies. When Alexander fought them and many of their wise men were killed, the inhabitants witnessed their slain being discarded as if they were the clean, pure bodies of fish which were in pure water and then were thrown into the air, the sun showing them (to be) pure and clean [the text: idhä l-q-t-y-h lil-hawdi wa-r--t ashshamsu çâfiyatan naqiyatan is corrupt, and the preceding translation is a conjecture as to its meaning], (The Greeks) then saw them in that form, and when they perceived the refinement of those bodies and their purity, they came to regret having done what I have just described. The Ammonius text is defective in this section. Notwithstanding the author's assertion that the Greeks regretted what they had done, we learn nothing further about their conduct in this incident. Shahrastânï gives the tale an air of completeness by adding the detail: wa-amsakü 'art al-bäqiyin, 'they refrained from (harming) the others'. But his recapitulation of the fish analogy is partial and, therefore, inadequate, as comparison with Ammonius makes clear.

Chapter Five

61

extent necessary and wholeheartedly seek union with it?' Their disputations are set forth in the writings of Aristotle.158 It is part of their tradition to watch for the sun to rise and (when they see it) to worship it, saying, 'Howbeautiful is your light! How splendid! How luminous! Human eyes cannot enjoy the view of you. If you are the first light, above which there is no light, then you merit praise and glory. We seek you and hasten to live near you, that we may contemplate your highest creation. If, however, there is another light above you, through which you were caused, it merits this praise and glory. But for ourselves, we strive to leave all the pleasures of this world in order to become like you, to reach 158

Ammonius: As for the other city, (the inhabitants o f ) which asserted that there is nothing good in marriage nor in the desire to procreate nor in anything related to bodily passions, their philosophers, when news reached them about Alexander - that he had arrived among them and done what he did in the (first) city and caused what he caused to happen there - wrote to him and sent him messages together with someone to dispute with him after they praised him. What made them praise him was that they had learned that Alexander was a lover of wisdom, that wisdom was his cloak and his garment, and that his minister was the servant of wisdom as well as the intermediary between them and him. After disputing (with them), Alexander gave them gifts and departed from them. When they saw how Alexander acted toward them when they referred to wisdom and (considered) what Aristotle wrote to them, they increased in their desire for wisdom and their enthusiasm for it, saying, 'If wisdom affects kings in this way, as happened to us with Alexander, and enriches kings who are joined to it, even if they [read wa-in for ms. wal-ladhina] are not fully joined to it, then it is not

impossible [read fa-lä mahälata for ms. falamma maftäl-] that it may make us in this world nobler than kings and other men who are devoid of it'. Aristotle's disputes with them about Alexander are set down in his writings. In this section Ammonius provides two emphases that differ from Shahrastänl: (a) According to the former, Alexander extols his own wisdom, and the Indians - whether out of courtesy or fear - support his platitudes. In the resulting debates there is no winner or loser. Shahrastänl, however, asserts that the Indians did excel Alexander's representative, (b) Ammonius assigns a larger role to Aristotle than does Shahrastänl. The philosopher appears as an apologist on behalf of Alexander before the Indians; the text implies that Aristotle wrote to the Eastern sages several times in defense of his king's wisdom. The one quotation given from these alleged correspondences is fuller in Ammonius than Shahrastänl, suggesting that the latter would be improved by adding after kaifa the clause from Ammonius: tusharrífu¡aná fi 'älaminä 'ala Ίmuluk, giving a translation: 'If wisdom affects kings in this world in this way, then how much nobler than kings would it make us if we clothe ourselves with wisdom to the extent necessary and wholeheartedly seek union with it.'

62

Translation

of Arä'

al-hind

your world and to unite with your mansions. 1 5 9 If the thing caused is characterized by such lordship and majesty, then h o w great must be the splendor and majesty, the glory and perfection of the cause ! It is incumbent on every seeker to flee all pleasures, to seek to attain proximity and nearness to H i m (the Creator) and to enter the community of His companions and followers'. [Summary conclusion to Kitäb

159

al-milal

wan-nihal;

invocation]

Ammonius: In their worship, they watch for the light of the sun to shine forth (in the morning), and (when they see it) they worship it, saying, 'How beautiful is your light! How splendid! How luminous! Human eyes cannot enjoy the view of you. If you are the first light, above which there is no light, then you merit praise and glory. We seek and strive to live near you, that we may contemplate your highest creation. If, however, there is another light above you, through which you were caused, then it merits this praise and glory. But for ourselves, we hasten to leave all the pleasures of this world in order to reach your world and your abode. The Ammonius' text does not include the remainder of Shahrastanï's version of this paean to the sun.

PART THREE

Commentaries

INTRODUCTION TO 'Ära' Commentary

I: The

al-hind'

Säbians

The Säbians are a widely attested and puzzling group. There are the Säbians of the Qur'än160 and the later Säbians who Islamic sources suggest represented a conglomerate of various views, comprising, for instance, remnants of sects who were oriented to cultic practises, sects who were ancient heathen of several nationalities (principally Greeks, Persians and Indians) and sects who were neo-Platonic in their origin and character.161 Shahrastäni probably understood Säbianism mainly in terms of its neo-Platonic variety, 162 but for the purposes of the present commentary the critical question is : 160

Mentioned in three passages: S . 2 : 59, 5 : 73 and 2 2 : 17. According to B. Dodge (Fihrist II, p. 922), who summarizes the findings of other scholars, the Qur'änic Säbians definitely originated in the marshlands of S. Iraq and were forerunners of the Mandaeans. The etymology of their name, however, remains uncertain; though probably Syriac in derivation, fäbi cannot be linked to mughtasila, as the pre-Islamic religionists of the S. Iraq marshlands were sometimes called. F o r a valuable summary of the etymological possibilities, see J. B. Segal, 'Pagan Syriac Monuments in the Vilayet of Urfa', Anatolian Studies III (1953), p. 111.

161

See D. Chwolsohn, Die Ssabier und der Ssabismus, I, p. 169 for the exposition of this three-fold analysis of later Çâbianism. Mas'üdí offers a similar though four-fold division in his description of the Säbians (Kitäb at-tanbih; cf. ibid, I, pp. 213-14andII, pp. 378-79). Concerning bibliographic items on thecomplex issue of later Çâbianism, Chwolsohn's study, though dated in some of its textual references, is still the classic work. Segal (op. cit., p. 109) decribes it as 'brilliant and erudite'. B. Dodge (op. cit., II, p. 922) cites much of the secondary literature since Chwolsohn. Of particular value are the following items: J. Pedersen, 'The Säbians', E.G. Browne Festschrift, pp. 383-91; J. B. Segal, op. cit., pp. 97-119; and F. Rosenthal, 'The Prophecies of Bäbä the Harrânian', A Locust's Leg, pp. 220-32. 63

64

Commentary I: The Säbians

what did Shahrastäni think of the Säbians - whatever their origin or destiny - in relation to orthodox Islam? Were they bona fide religionists whose status, in the opinion of Shahrastäni, was acceptable to Muslims even though not on a par with the sunna ? The question is as difficult as it is central. Shahrastäni contributes to the difficulty by using compound phrases such as 'ancient Säbians', 'first Säbians', 'Greek Säbians' and 'Indian Säbians' without further qualification. To proceed beyond the terminological maze and unravel the theological issues at stake, we must first examine the relevant passages from Milal wan-nihal. (In each case the critical phrases are in italics.) 1. In the first preface Shahrastäni states that he has arranged the book according to beliefs and doctrines, and then clarifies the arrangement: And they (the beliefs and doctrines) are divided in the primary, true division according to those who profess religious beliefs and adhere to religious communities, and those who respond to their passions and are linked to philosophical schools. Included in the former, i. e., those who profess religious beliefs in the broadest sense, are Magians, Jews, Christians and Muslims. Included in the latter, i. e., those who respond to passions and have their own views, are fatalist philosophers, Säbians, star- and idol-worshippers and Brahmans.163 2. Taking up again the doctrines of mankind, Shahrastäni specifies: There are the adherents of various religious beliefs and religious communities and those who follow their passions and philosophical views both among Muslim and non-Muslim groups. The non-Muslim groups comprise those who possess a revealed book, i. e., Jews and Christians ; those who possess something like a revealed book, i. e., Magians and Manichaeans; and those who subscribe to laws and binding judgments without benefit of a revealed book, i. e., the ancient Säbians; and those who have neither a revealed book nor fixed laws, i. e., the ancient as well as the materialist philosophers, the star- and idol-worshippers and the Brahmans.16*

162 163 1,4

Chwolsohn, op. cit., I, p. 171. Cureton, op. cit., p. 2; Haarbrücker, op. cit., I, p. 3; Chwolsohn, op. cit., II, pp. 415-6 Cureton, op. cit., p. 24; Haarbrücker, op. cit., I, p. 32; Chwolsohn, op. cit., II, p. 416.

Introduction

65

3. One paragraph after the just cited passage, Shahrastäni outlines the religious groupings of mankind in such a way that prophecy becomes the central feature of 'true' religion : The true division revolving between denial and affirmation is set forth in our statement that the people of the world are doctrinally divided into those who profess religious beliefs and those who respond to passions, so if a man believes or asserts something, he must either make use of the teaching of another than himself or else rely on his own reason alone. Everyone who makes use of the teaching of another than himself is submissive (muslim) and obedient, and religion is obedience, so that he who is submissive and obedient is religious. But he who follows only his own judgment creates and innovates . . . (and he is doomed to false belief). Those who follow only their own judgments are (also) those who deny prophecies, such as the philosophers, Säbians and Brahmans; they do not accept ordained (amriya) laws and statutes. (On the other hand,) those who utilize the teaching of others also accept prophecies. And those who accept divine ordinances also subscribe to rational statutes, and not vice versa,165 4. In the preceding quotation, philosophers, Säbians and Brahmans are lumped together as 'deniers of prophecies'. Concerning the Brahmans, we will see in the commentary on the Barähima how the label 'prophetic deniers' came to be attached to them during the development of kaläm. Within the framework of post-Ghazzâlï orthodoxy, it is also understandable how the philosophers became categorized as 'deniers of prophecies'. What is puzzling, however, is the inclusion of Säbians in this category. Bïrûnï, for instance, had noted that the Säbians had many prophets, including one Bäbä, 166 and F. Rosenthal has now translated what may be 'a rare survival of Harränian 'Säbian' literature relating the prophecies of Bäbä the Harränian'. 167 Fortunately, Shahrastäni partially rectifies his own error in a further appraisal of Säbianism which he sets forth later in Milal wan-nihal.

165 166 167

Cureton, op. cit., p. 24; Haarbriicker, op. cit., II, p. 32; Chwolsohn, op. cit., II, p. 416. E. Sachau, trans., The Chronology of Ancient Nations, p. 188. Rosenthal, 'Bäbä the Harränian', p. 232.

66

Commentary I: The Säbians

Introducing the second part of his work, Shahrastânï explains that this portion is restricted to those who in classical times were materialists, imbibers of hashish, naturalists and theists. They were beguiled by their own judgments and clung to their own passions and innovations. Succeeding and approaching them (doctrinally) was a group wh o attested to rational (aqliya) statutes and ordinances, though sometimes they posited their governing principles and laws on a support provided through revelation, limiting themselves, however, to the first of them (i.e., the revelatory supports) while not considering the others. They are known as the first Säbians; they accepted 'Ädhimün and Hermes, i.e., Seth and Idris, but did not accept the other prophets.168 The last statement seems to explain how Shahrastânï could assert that the Säbians were both deniers of prophecies and upholders of a limited - and, by assumption, inadequate - prophetic tradition. While they rejected the real prophets, from Adam through Muhammad, they did revere 'Ädhimün and Hermes as prophets. It was their loyalty to some prophets which required Shahrastânï to adjust his depiction of their attitude toward law: unlike other heathen, the first Säbians had 'rational statutes and ordinances' as well as 'governing principles and laws . . . provided through revelation'. As if to reinforce the law-giving character of the Säbians as a point of distinction between them and other non-Muslims, Shahrastânï then rates them fourth on an ascending scale of six religious groupings which he includes at the end of his introduction to Part II of Milal wan-nihal. While Magians and Manichaeans cited earlier169 are here omitted from mention, Säbians are listed just after Muslims (6) and Jews and Christians (5) as 'those who accept both sensibilia and intelligibilia, statutes and ordinances, but no revealed law (sharVa) or religious devotion (isläm)\llü Unfortunately, the argument concerning the first Säbians rests on a terminological ambiguity which must be examined in detail. It is the atti168

1,9 170

Cureton, op. cit., pp. 201-2; Haarbriicker, op. cit., II, pp. 1-3; Chwolsohn, op. cit., II, p. 419. Cf. supra, n. 164. Cureton, op. cit., p. 202; Haarbriicker, op. cit., II, p. 3; Chwolsohn, op. cit., II, p. 419.

Introduction

67

tude of non-Muslim groups toward the law which seems to be the linchpin for distinguishing between them. In the third quotation given above, Shahrastäni notes that Säbians, together with Brahmans and philosophers, deny not only prophecies but also ordained (amriya) laws and statutes. Yet in the fourth quotation he declares that the first Säbians do have rational ('aqllya) statutes and ordinances. Such a distinction between 'ordained' and 'rational' statutes raises the question : how are revelation and law related to one another? The question becomes unavoidable when Shahrastäni goes on to say in the fourth quotation that the first Säbians not only had rational statues and ordinances but also posited 'their governing principles and laws on a support provided through revelation'. A blatant contradiction is avoided by using different terms for 'governing principles and laws' (usui wa-qawänin) than for 'statutes and ordinances' (hudüd wa-ahkäm), but the theological issue is thinly veiled by such terminological juggling. If the laws of the Säbians are not ordained (by God) but are somehow still related to revelation, then to what extent are they bona fide laws from a Muslim viewpoint? Apart from a developed doctrine of natural law, which is not present in Milal wan-nihal,171 there is only one criterion for evaluating Säbian laws: their relation to the prophets who allegedly were media for revelation and thereby legitimated the laws themselves. From a Muslim viewpoint, therefore, the authenticity of Säbian heathendom is directly contingent upon the status of 'Ädhimün and Hermes as bona fide prophets. Shahrastäni resolves the issue primarily with reference to Hermes. His interpretation of Hermes vis-à-vis Säbianism is akin to the orthodox Muslim interpretation of Jesus vis-à-vis Christianity. The Church misunderstood what Jesus intended to say, and Säbians - at least those whom Shahrastäni is refuting in Milal wan-nihal, i.e., both Harränians and heathen in general - distorted the message of Hermes. In Shahrastäni's view, Hermes was a legitimate prophet, but Säbians proved to be unfaithful interpreters of his prophecy.

171

Nor is such a doctrine to be found in Nihâyat al-iqdâm. A. Guillaume, further, excludes natural law from consideration in an article the title of which invites at least the mention of this vital category: 'Christian and Muslim Theology as Represented by AshShahrastânî and St. Thomas Aquinas', BSOAS 13 (1950), pp. 551-80.

68

Commentary I: The Sabians

The organization of the Sabían material in Milal wan-nihal further reflects the author's viewpoint. 'The Maxims of Hermes' are conveniently wedged into the section on Säbians after the dialogue-like encounter of Säbians and hunafff and before the depiction of depiction of two Säbian sub-sects : the adherents to heavenly abodes and personal forms and the Harräniya. 'The Maxims of Hermes' effectively serve both as an appendix to the refutation of Säbianism and as a proleptic judgment on the two most notable Säbian sub-sects. To underscore the distinction between Hermes and his followers, Shahrastäni notes at the end of the prologue to the Maxims that what Hermes taught was clearly contrary to what the Säbians supposed him to have taught. 172 In spite of the Milal wan-nihal testimony against Säbianism, its passages on the Säbians and their patron saint Hermes bear out Chwolsohn's observation that Shahrastäni, more than any other medieval Muslim writer, treats the philosophical tenets of Säbianism with the gentleness of an admiring foe.173 The section depicting the dispute between Säbians and hunafä' illustrates not only the differences between the two groups but also their common orientation to inspiration and revelation outside the realm of reason. They disagree principally on the media for truth; are stars and planets included among the spiritual intermediaries, as Säbians maintain, or are human beings the sole suitable vehicles of revelation, as Muslims maintain? To uphold the priority of prophecy on the basis of prophecy would have involved Shahrastäni in a transparent form of circular reasoning. He attacked Säbians via Hermes to undermine their argument and thereby advance his own. For was not Hermes a prophet? And was it not his prophetic authority which preceded, and indeed legitimated, the authority of spiritual intermediaries (viz., stars and planets) as objects worthy of worship? The fact that Shahrastäni's reading audience was aware of both the antiquity of Hermes174 and his identity with Idris (Enoch) undoubtedly added force to his roundabout defense of prophecy. Yet it was the proximity of Säbianism to 172

173 174

Cureton, op. cit., p. 240; Haarbriicker, op. cit., II, p. 61. For the sizable number of Muslim works relating philosophical and ethical sayings attributed to Hermes, see the bibliographic items in M. Plessner, 'Hirmis', EI-, III, p. 464b (III Β 2). Chwolsohn, op. cit., I, p. 684. The antiquity of Hermes adds weight to the Çâbian arguments but also supports the ¡jutiafä' in their refutation of those arguments. As Guillaume noted (op. cit., p. 137,

Introduction

69

Islam in the legal175 as well as the doctrinal realm which challenged the author of Milal wan-nihal to adopt such a defense and prompted his lengthiest and most earnest sectarian rebuttal. There is, in effect, no simple answer to the question : were the Säbians bona fide religionists in the view of Shahrastânï? A poll of references in Milal wan-nihal indicates that Shahrastânï answers the question obliquely and in terms of categories of belief. To the extent that Säbians do not accept the full scope of prophetic testimony or distort the testimony of prophets whom they acknowledge, viz., Hermes and 'Ädhimün (but mostly Hermes), they are condemned as unbelievers, even though they rate next to the People of the Book on an ascending scale from Sophists to Muslims.176 On the other hand, to the extent that Säbians abide by governing principles and laws which they ascribe to legitimate prophets, they are extolled for their good sense and rated above the materialist philosophers who, though they accept both sensibilia and intelligibilia, neither recognize nor abide by divine governing principles and laws.177 In short, Shahrastânï evaluates the Säbians as 'good pagans'. Pejoratively, one can emphasize their substantive definition as 'pagans'; in a complimentary vein, one can underscore their high sense of morality and partial acceptance of prophecy which justifies the adjectival modifier 'good'. Säbianism is a mixed category occupying a mixed status among the religions of mankind. Its chief benefit is to allow Shahrastânï a certain subtlety in interpreting and evaluating non-Muslim religionists. It is not suprising, therefore, that Indians, as a major, non-Muslim religious grouping, come within the pale of Säbianism in Milal wan-nihal. The delicate, further question is: to what extent were the Indians Säbian in Shahrastäni's view? The relevant testimony of the text is again essential

175

1,6 177

fn. 2), Shahrastäni's choice of hanifas a title for the opponents of Çâbianism is probably a conscious tribute to the antiquity of the religion of the Çâbians. 'He (Shahrastânï) implicitly claims for Islam an ancestry equal to that of Çâbianism.' Bïrflnï describes aspects of their affinity with Islam in the Chronology (Sachau, trans., p. 188): 'most of their regulations about women and their penal law are similar to those of Muslims, whilst others, relating to pollution caused by touching dead bodies, are similar to those of the Torah.' Cf. supra, fn. 164. Cf. supra, fn. 168.

70

Commentary 1: The Säbians

and, unlike the material for defining the theological content of Sâbianism, it is uniform, with one exception. In general, the Indians, often referred to simply as the Brahmans, are theologically lumped together with the philosophers and Säbians : 1. In the first preface to Milal wan-nihal, Shahrastäni tags as those who follow their passions 'the fatalist philosophers, Säbians, star- and idol-worshippers and Brahmans.' 178 2. Later, giving examples of those who deny prophecies and accept no ordained statutes and laws, he cites 'the philosophers, Säbians and Brahmans'. 179 3. Again, illustrating the fact that the doctrine of metempsychosis exists in one sect of every religious community, Shahrastäni points out that among the Indians the sect is the Barahmiya,180 while similar sects (not further identified) are said to exist among the philosophers and Säbians. 4. Finally, he mentions a group of Indian Säbians oriented to the fixed stars; they are compared and contrasted with their Greek and Magian counterparts. 181 It is uncertain what point of resemblance between the Säbians and Indians (Barähima) prompted Shahrastäni to link the two groups together. One possibility is the connection of Säbians and Barähima as those who reject prophecies (cited in quotation # 2 on the previous page). It may have been the failure of both groups to accept the Qur'änic line of prophets which initially prompted the author of Milal wan-nihal to join them with the philosophers as those who merit the label 'deniers of prophecy'. The label does not fully apply to the first Säbians, however, since, as we have seen, they acknowledge both 'Ädhimün and Hermes as legitimate prophets. A more likely point of connection between the Säbians and Barähima for Shahrastäni was their common orientation to the stars and star-worship (partially alluded to in quotation # 4 above). Further, in describing the proponents of meditation and imagination, a sub-sect of the Barähima in iÀrS al-hind\ 178 179 180

181

Supra, fn. 163. Supra, fn. 165. The term is a hapax legomenon and appears to be a variant of Barähima, used elsewhere in Milal wan-nibal to signify 'Brahmans'. Cureton, op. cit., p. 133; and Haarbriicker, op. cit., I, p. 201. Cureton, op. cit., p. 180; Haarbriicker, op. cit., I, p. 273.

Introduction

71

Shahrastâni includes an unrelated discourse on Indian, Persian and Greek astrology which is, in effect, an elaboration of quotation # 4.182 Though the word Säbian is not used in this latter passage, it is later included in the introduction to Indian star-worshippers, and its usage there leaves no doubt that Shahrastâni linked the star-worshippers in India to the star-worshipping Säbians.183 Also, the proponents of spiritual beings, the subject of chapter 2 in 'Ärä' al-hind\ are unmistakably related to celestial spheres, and, through them, to Säbianism.184 Whatever Shahrastäni's initial motive for conjoining Säbianism and Brahmanism - star-worship, rejection of prophecy, or mere intuition - he accords them an equal footing in most instances (vide the four just cited references from Milal wan-nihal), with one exception. In introducing the doctrines of mankind, Shahrastâni places the ancient Säbians on a rung above the Brahmans. The former are said to have statutes and ordinances in place of a revealed book ; the latter - together with ancient and materialist philosophers as well as star- and idol-worshippers - are described as those who have neither a revealed book nor legal statutes and ordinances.185 A few lines later, however, the author cites the philosophers and Brahmans, together with the Säbians, as those who follow only their own judgments, denying prophecies and rejecting ordained laws and statutes.186 The juxtaposition of the two passages allows alternative conclusions about Shahrastäni's intention: either he is introducing a cleavage between first or ancient Säbians and other Säbians - a conclusion for which there is no direct evidence in Milal wan-nihal - or he is permitting a fluid and sometimes contradictory definition of Säbianism. The latter conclusion is supported by the quotation from the introduction to Part II in which the Säbian laws are said to have 'a support provided through revelation' ; 18? as a result, in the scale of believers set forth in the same introduction, Säbians are ranked just behind the People of the Book. 182 183 184

185 186 187

Cf. supra, p. 44. Supra, p. 50. The relationship of the Afhäb ar-rühäniyät (proponents of spiritual beings) to Säbianism is pursued below; cf. Commentary VI, pp. 146 f. Cureton, op. cit, p. 24; Haarbriicker, op. cit., I, p. 32. Cureton, op. cit., p. 24; Haarbriicker, op. cit., I, p. 32. Supra, fn. 168.

72

Commentary I: The Säbians

Unfortunately, the Brahmans are omitted from the scale of believers. The oversight is startling, since the Brahmans as well as the Säbians are doctrinally reviewed in Part II of Milal wan-nihal. Nowhere prior to 'Ära' al-hincT is mention made of the relationship of Brahmans to Säbians.188 In 'Ära' al-hind' itself the majority of Indians are depicted as 'adherents to the doctrine and methods of the Säbians',189 but the harsh judgment leveled at both Brahmans and Säbians in Part I of Milal wan-nihal makes it difficult to deduce that Brahmans are, by implication, benefactors of the upgraded status accorded to Säbians in the introduction to Part II. One would expect the introduction to Part II, which offers a progressive analysis and redefinition of Säbianism, to demonstrate a similar subtlety in detailing the status of Indians qua Säbians. Such is not the case, and the limited references to the Indians throughout Milal wan-nihal require a two-fold interpretation of their status as Säbians. In the most general sense, all Indians are Säbians, i.e., heathen, since for Shahrastäni Säbianism broadly defined connotes heathendom. The partial reason for this identification is a mistaken etymological exercise, which leads the author to define sabä as 'deviate or err'. 190 In introducing the section on Säbians, for instance, he suggests that säbV(ün) may mean either 'those who fell away from the precepts of truth and deviated from the path of the prophets' 191 or 'whoever displays affection and desire'.192 The second, blanket definition covers Indians along with all other non-Muslims. In a more particular sense, however, only some Indians are Säbian, i.e., those whose practises correspond to the features of Säbianism observable 188

189 190

At the beginning of Part II, Book 2, Shahrastäni does state that 'among the philosophers are the sages of India, who belong to the Barähima, who deny prophecies altogether' (Cureton, op. cit., p. 253; Haarbriicker, op. cit., II, p. 80). In the introduction to 'Ara' al-hind', however, the Indian sages are related to the Säbians and not to the Barähima (supra, p. 38). Taken together, the two passages suggest that philosophers, Çâbians and Barähima are tangentially associated with each other, but the nature of their common beliefs remains unexplained. Supra, p. 38. The actual derivation of çabâ remains uncertain, and the forced explanation of Arab philologists seems to indicate a foreign (possibly Syriac) derivation; see J. Segal, op.cit.,

p. 110. 191 192

Cureton, op. cit., p. 203; Haarbriicker, op. cit., II, p. 4. Ibid. At. : fab'a ar-rajalu idhä 'ashiqa wa-hawä.

Introduction

73

in other religious groups (especially the Harränians) whom Shahrastani describes in Milal wan-nihal. The extent of this cross-cultural identification is most apparent in the second paragraph of 'Ära' al-hind' : The majority of Indians adhere to the doctrine and methods of the Säbians, so that some of them accept spiritual beings, others heavenly abodes, and still others idols... also among them are philosophers who adhere to the Greek tradition both in theory and practise.193 In the next paragraph, Shahrastani cites by name the five groups whom he is to discuss in 'Ärä' al-hind'' : the Brahmans, followers of spiritual beings, proponents of heavenly abodes (i.e., stars),194 idol-worshippers and philosophers. Three of the five Indian groups, therefore, are explicitly related to Säbianism : they derive both their names and order from the earlier material in Milal wan-nihal on Harränian Säbians. The order is significant. The followers of spiritual beings are the first and preferred group. As will be demonstrated in the commentary on Ashäb ar-rühäniyät, they come close to exemplifying a non-Muslim apprehension of the prophetic principle.195 Star- and idol-worshippers are treated after the followers of spiritual beings. As represented by their Harränian adherents, these two groups made planets and personal forms respectively their mediators. Whatever their other merits, they must, therefore, be adjudged idolaters, though the latter are more explicitly idolatrous than the former. The order of all three groups, in effect, constitutes a theological ranking which, like the names themselves, was transferred from the Harränian Säbians to their Indian counterparts. The first and fifth groups, the Barähima and the Indian philosophers, do not readily correspond to the organization of Säbian material extrapolated from the Säbian section of Milal wan-nihal. As the most recent quotation indicates, Shahrastani describes Indian philosophers as Säbian probably because Greek philosophy was thought to have been the progenitor of Indian speculation just as it had been the catalyst for the development of Harränian Säbianism.196 The Barähima, on the other hand, are explicitly not related 193 194

195 m

Supra, p. 38. Shahrastani himself defines the proponents of heavenly abodes as star-worshippers in the section on §äbianism. Cureton, op. cit., p. 247; Haarbriicker, op. cit., II, p. 69. Cf. infra, pp. 146-47. Shahrastani, for instance, mentions Solon, the grandfather of Plato, as one of the pro-

74

Commentary I: The Säbians

to 'the doctrine and methods of the Säbians.' Indeed, the Barähima who are, in any case, far removed from Indian Brahmans 197 - contrast with the Säbians, since the former denied prophecies totally while the latter affirmed certain prophets, viz., 'Ädhimün and Hermes. Shahrastäni, therefore, is moderately consistent with his own testimony in excluding Brahmans from the list of Indian Säbians who are compared with Säbians of the same genre in different cultural contexts.198 The Barähima sub-sects, however, muddle this conclusion. The proponents of meditation and imagination, for instance, extend their practises to astrology, an activity in which Indian Säbians also engage.199 Likewise, the ashäb at-tanäsukh, another Barähima sub-sect, echo doctrines earlier associated with Harränian proponents of tanäsukh,20ü The reason for such a seeming inconsistency is not hard to find : the chapter on the Barähima is, in fact, an untidy amalgam of Indian groups some real, some fictional - which Shahrastäni cannot conveniently include in the other categories he has established for 'Ârff al-hind'. None of the three Barähima sub-sects, viz., the Buddhists, the proponents of thought and imagination, or the adherents to tanäsukh, is explicitly related either to each other or to the Barähima of whom each is presumably an off-shoot. As a consequence, the Barähima are the most strikingly pseudo-Indian group; the possible source for the bizarre doctrines ascribed to them will be examined in the next chapter. In brief, Säbianism provides the organizing principle as well as the theological impetus for 'Ârâ' al-hind'. All the groups which Shahrastäni cites and all the data which he has gathered are related to the categories transposed from the earlier section on the Harränian Säbians. The allowances for what is genuinely Indian occur in the details (and there only partially), not in the structure of 'Ära' al-hind'.

197 198

199 200

phets revered by the Harränlya. Cureton, op. cit., p. 250; Haarbriicker, op. cit., II, p. 76. The distance between them is surveyed in the next chapter; infra, pp. 100-1. Only in the quotation cited supra, p. 65 does Shahrastäni decry both Çàbians and Brahmans as those who deny prophecies. In this instance, the reference must be to the traditional, Qur'änic prophets; no other interpretation makes sense. Supra, fn. 181. Supra, p. 38.

Chapter One

75

CHAPTER O N E

Commentary II: The Barähima / Brahmans The Barähima are the first of five major groups in 'Ara' al-hind'. Shahrastânï's depiction of them seems to have as its background a history of doctrinal discussions between Muslims and Hindus, and possibly also between Muslims and Buddhists. Unfortunately, the actual content of these discussions is now lost to us, and lacking specific data, present-day scholars sometimes romanticize what might have taken place, as the following account indicates : (During the ninth and tenth centuries A. D.) Baghdad was the arena of cults and beliefs. The courts of the Abbasid Khalifahs and some philosophically minded Amirs rang with hot religious controversies. Day and time used to be fixed for convening such meetings and representatives of every religion had a right to have their say as to the merits of their religion, to criticize Islam and hear their criticisms answered. Muslim theologians took a leading part in these conventions and the Barmakids patronized them. It would be no wonder if this fashion caused the need of acquaintance with Indian religions.201 One widely known Muslim scholar, al-Murtadä, who is quite late,202 does allude to actual debates between Hindus and Muslims as well as Buddhists and Muslims, which, he says, took place at Baghdad, the seat of the 'Abbäsid Caliphate. As his date indicates, however, he flourished well after the period under consideration, and there is, moreover, a fictional tone in his narration of alleged debates between Muslim theologians and their Buddhist/ Hindu counterparts.203 201 202

203

S. Nadvi, 'Religious Relations between Arabia and India', IC 8 (1934), p. 128. Aljmad b. Yaljyä b. al-Murtadä, d. 1437 A.D. A Zaidi, he wrote a voluminous commentary, Ghäyät al-afkär, on his opus magnum, al-Bahr az-zakhkhär al-jämi' li madhähib 'ulamä' al-am$är. The commentary had nine parts, only the first of which Munya wal-'amal, concerns us in the present context. S. Nadvi (op. cit., pp. 205-6) translates the cited debates. S. Diwald-Wilzer (Die Klassen der Mu'taziliten, pp. 34-5 and 54-6) provides the Arabic texts for them. Only two encounters between Mu'tazilites and Buddhists are said to have taken place, both showing the supremacy of the former over the latter. In neither case is the substance of the Buddhist arguments narrated.

76

Commentary II: The Barähima

What has been transmitted to us, instead, is a rather heavily stylized portrait of the Barähima as one of the groups against which medieval Muslim writers polemicized. It is not clear precisely how and when this derivative conception of the Barähima arose within Islam, but we have enough information to allow us to trace its development prior to Shahrastäni and tentatively to appraise the sources on whom the author of Milal wan-nihal was, in part, dependent for his own estimate of this so-called Indian group. The earliest references to the Barähima in Arabic literature appear to come from thinkers whom 'orthodox' Muslims considered to have held 'heretical' views. Hence the illustrious Mu'tazilite an-Nazzäm (d. ca. 845 A.D.) is said to have had as one of the sources for his speculations the doctrine of the Barähima, which 'pointed up the falsity of the prophets. It made a great impression on him, though he did not dare to cite it openly out of fear of the sword. ' 204 Since the views of an-Nazzäm have been preserved only in the citations of his critics, however, we have no way of authenticating or disproving the charge that it was Brahmanism which contributed to the novel theological formulations associated with his name. Another, early reference to the Barähima in Arabic literature comes not from a Muslim but a Christian source; it is attributed to a Nestorian Christian who bore the name al-Kindi and possibly flourished about the time of the famous Muslim philosopher by the same name.205 One passage from The Apology provides a model for the depiction of the Barähima as rationalists in Muslim literature. It concerns the Muslim pilgrimage and the reasonableness of God: That you invite me to make the pilgrimage to the House of God in Mecca, to throw stones, to call the labbaika, to kiss the Black Stone 201

205

al-Baghdädl (d. 1037 A.D.), al-Farq bayn al-firaq, p. 114; K. Seelye, trans., Moslem Schisms and Sects, p. 136. Scholarly estimates on the date of the author vary. W. Muir (The Apology of al-Kindi, pp. 24-36) cites internal evidence to support the author's statement that he lived under the shadow of the court of al-Ma'mün (fl. 813-833 A.D.). P. Kraus ('Beiträge zur islamischen Ketzergeschichte: Das Kitäb az-zumurrudh des Ibn ar-Räwandl', RSO XIV (1934), pp. 340-1) argues for a later date (the beginning of the tenth century A.D.). For the purposes of the present commentary the precise dating is less important than the fact that The Apology was a well known early source of polemicism against orthodox Islam and included a significant reference to Brahmanism.

Chapter One

77

and the Place of Abraham - is really an unheard of thing . . . Do you not know then that this is precisely what the Buddhists206 and Brahmans in India do and what they indicate as worship of their Gods? They maintain it (this practise) up to the present day in their country as do contemporary Muslims, since they shave their hair and undress themselves - which they call a holy custom - and circle the temple of their Gods . . . The only difference is that you undertake it (the pilgrimage) once a year while they (the Buddhists and Brahmans) do it twice . . . What is blameworthy with one who shaves his head, undresses himself, runs and throws stones is that only someone who has abandoned his reason and denied his intellect acts in that way . . . God is wise and thus Hecannot command His creatures to worship Him according to detestable and harmful rules, which oppose the natural capacities and horrify the human intellect. Rather, God commands that He be worshipped only according to rules which are agreeable to the human intellect.207 The practises attributed to the Barähima and Buddhists in connection with pilgrimage rites are not repeated in subsequent Muslim literature. The Buddhists are also excluded from mention, and it is the Barähima who allegedly use arguments, such as the one just cited, to point up the irrationality of Muslim observances. Al-Kindi alone depicts the Barähima and Sumaniya as sects self-consciously adhering to cultic regulations similar to those of Muslims.208 From an early date the Barähima are tagged as 'deniers of prophecies'. Ibn ar-Räwandi, a Mu'tazilite, is the probable author of this tradition, and since his work on the supposed criticism of prophecy by the Barähima (Kitab az-zumurrudh) 'is already mentioned in an unpublished fragment by the Jewish mutakallim Däwüd b. Marwän al-Raqqï, otherwise known as alMuqammis, whose literary activity was not later than the last third of the

206 aj. . shamsiya (Kraus: sun-worshippers), read sumaniya, the customary term for Buddhists. On other Muslim names for Buddhists, cf. infra, pp. 105-6. 207 paraphrased from Kraus' excerpts (op. cit., pp. 337-38). The English translation by W. Muir is now archaic. - 08 Kraus op. cit., p. 339 makes a similar point in abbreviated form.

78

Commentary II: The Barähima

3rd/9th century', 209 it is imperative to examine Zumurrudh in order to determine Shahrastäni's sources. P. Kraus has offered an annotated translation of this work, which will now be critically reviewed because of its intricate character and unique significance.210 Kraus makes four major points relative to Milal wan-nihal: 1. There is no bridge between the depiction of the Brahmanical theses in Zumurrudh and the actual doctrines of the Indian Brahmans. a. Nawbakhtï, in the surviving fragments of Kitäb al-ärff wad-diyänät, comes closer to the truth concerning Brahmanism than does Ibn arRâwandï.211 b. Birüni alone provides a factual yardstick by which the real nature of Brahmanism in the medieval period can be gauged. 2. The four arguments against prophecy attributed by Shahrastäni to the Indian sage Barhäm go back - at least indirectly - to the Brahmanical theses set forth in Zumurrudh. a. Milal wan-nihal 1 corresponds exactly to the statements in Zumurrudh 3 ; b. Milal wan-nihal 2 also corresponds to Zumurrudh 3; c. Milal wan-nihal 3 recollects the same examples found in Zumurrudh 5; and d. Milal wan-nihal 4 beg. is discussed in part in Zumurrudh 16, while 4 end reflects the entire body of the preserved excerpts from Zumurrudh, but especially 17. 3. The tradition of the Barähima as deniers of prophecy goes back to Ibn ar-Räwandi. a. The citations concerning the Barähima from Talbls Iblis of Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 1200 A.D.) go back to Ibn 'Aqil (d. 1119), who, in turn,

209

210

211

P. Kraus [G. Vajda], 'Ibn ar-Râwandï', EI2, III, pp. 905-6. There is no indication whether the reference was favorable or unfavorable, but later Jewish scholars, such as Saadia Gaon, recognized the Barähima as convenient mouthpieces for provocative doctrinal views within Islam; see Kraus, op. cit., pp. 354-56. Excluded from mention in the following discussion is F. Rahman's too brief article 'Barähima', EP, I, p. 1031. See Commentary VI: Αφάό ar-rüfiäniyäl, especially the Bäsawlya, for both a description and an appraisal of the work by Nawbakhtï (d. 912-922 A.D.).

Chapter One

79

cites Ibn ar-Räwandi and the poet Abu'l-'Alä' al-Ma'arri (d. 1057-8 A.D.) as the principal proponents of the denial of prophecy.212 4. Ibn 'Aqil has a textual source for his refutation of the Brahmanical theses, and he dealt with this source no less frequently than he dealt with the theses themselves. a. Ibn 'Aqil provides a logical link for explaining the discrepancy between the portrayal of the Barähima in Zumurrudh and the quite different portrayal of them in Talbls Iblis approximately three hundred years later. b. The most immediate sources of information for Ibn 'Aqil, according to Ibn al-Jawzi in al-Muntazam fi't-ta'rikh, were the Mu'tazilite mutakallimün, Abu'l-Husain al-Khayyät and Abü 'Ali al-Jubbä'i.2™ Kraus' detailed investigation provides a valuable focus for studying the evolution of the concept of the Barähima in medieval Muslim theology. His first point, however, seems to overestimate the importance of both Nawbakhti and Birüni for understanding the actual Brahmans, while the third and fourth points ascribe to Ibn 'Aqil a central role of questionable validity. Leaving aside the contribution of Ibn al-Jawzi {supra, 4 b.) - since, for the most part,214 it falls outside the chronological focus of this study - we will examine the pivotal second point in Kraus' article : the seeming relatedness of the Barähima material in Shahrastäni's Milal wan-nihal and Ibn

212

213

The basis for such a theory is a single literary reference. According to Ibn al-Jawzi (Margoliouth, trans., op. cit., p. 200 top), Ibn 'Aqil once said: 'The hearts of the heretics were vexed at the spread of truth and the establishment of the Codes among mankind and their obedience to their ordinances; this was the case with such as Ibn ar-Räwandi and those like him like Abu'l-'Alâ'...'. No mention is made of the Barähima in this passage, and Maqdisï (Ibn 'Aqil et la résurgence de l'Isiàm traditionaliste au XV siècle, p. 457) cites Ibn ar-Râwandï only once and omits reference to lbn 'Aqïl's views on the Barähima. Kraus' third point is thus highly speculative. On the celebrated Mu'tazilite al-Jubbä'I (d. 915-6 A.D.), see L. Gardet, 'al-Djubbä'f, EP, II, pp. 569-70. Al-Khayyät (fl. ca. mid-3rd cent. A.H.) and his relationship to Ibn ar-Râwandï are described in Nyberg's preface to Kitäb al-intisär (A. Nader, trans.), p. XX.

214

The only exceptions are the two quotations from Nawbakhti discussed in Commentary VII: Bäsawlya, infra, pp. 148 f.

80

Commentary II: The Barähima

ar-Räwandi's Zumurrudh. The relevant portions of the latter work to which Kraus alludes are : Zumurrudh 3. (Ibn ar-Râwandï says:) 'The Barähima say that it is a firm conviction for them and for their opponents (i.e., the defenders of prophecy) that the intellect is the greatest gift of God - may He be praised! - to His creation and it is that by which the Lord and His graciousness are known and on account of it commandment and prohibition, encouragement and warning are verified, and if the messenger comes to confirm what is beneficial and detestable, and obligatory and forbidden, according to what is (already known) through it (the intellect), then we may disregard his proof and refrain from responding to his call, since we may do without him on account of what is (already known) through the intellect, and the commissioning of a messenger on that basis is false, And if it (his message) is different from what is (already known) through the intellect concerning what is beneficial and detestable and mandatory and prohibited, then we may refrain from acknowledging his prophetic power.' This is the text of his statement.215 Zumurrudh 5 & 6. He also says: 'The messenger - may peace be upon Him! - brought what was incompatible with human intellects, such as prayer, washing after intercourse with a woman, throwing stones, circling a house which neither hears nor sees, running between two stones which are intrinsically neither useful nor harmful. All this consists of what an intellect does not require. What are the differences between Safä and Marwa, except the (same) differences (that exist) between Abü Qubays and Hira'; and how is the circling of the house (in Mecca) any different from the circling of other houses?216 And he adds : 'If the messenger testified to the intellect in its loftiness and nobility, then why, if he was sincere,217 did he bring that which is incompatible with it (the intellect)?' 215

216 217

In the following translations from Zumurrudh, references will be given to both the Arabic text and German rendition found in Kraus' article. For Zumurrudh 3, cf. Kraus, op. cit., p. 97 top (Ar.), p. I l l (Germ.). Ibid, p. 99 1.18f. (Ar.), p. 112 (Germ.). On sidq (truthfulness) as the critical test to determine genuine prophecy for Ash'arites, cf. L. Gardet, Dieu et la destinée de l'homme, pp. 181-82, 187-88, etc.

Chapter One

81

Zumurrudh 16. He says to each one who claims prophetic powers: 'tell us about the messenger, how does he understand what the community does not understand? And if you say that it is through inspiration, then the community also understands through inspiration, and if you say (it is) through supernatural instruction, then (know that) there is no supernatural instruction (which takes place) in the intellect.'218 Zumurrudh 17. He says concerning the stars: 'It is the people who make observations (on the basis) of the stars, so that they know their ascending and descending (trajectories) and, on account of them, have no need of the prophets in that (respect).'219 A comparison of these translations with Milal wan-nihal testimony of the Barähima makes it appear that Kraus exaggerated the correspondence between Shahrastäni and Ibn ar-Räwandi. Zumurrudh 3, for instance, and Milal wan-nihal 1 are similar but also different. Not only does Shahrastäni add a new conclusion - 'the acceptance of what is irrational is a departure from humanity and an entrance into the forbidden realm of bestiality (according to Barhäm)'220 - but he also suggests a variant role for the intellect as the total usurper of the alleged prophetic function: according to Ibn arRäwandi, 'what is essential221 is (already known) through the intellect', while Barhäm argues that 'the full use of our intellect would suffice for us to grasp it (i.e., what is essential).'222 Nor is there a direct correspondence between Milal wan-nihal 2 and Zumurrudh 3. In the former Shahrastäni imputes to Barhäm's teaching a dual requirement: on the one hand, human beings through the exercise of their intellects are to recognize God and to give thanks to Him for His benefits; and on the other hand, God is obliged to reward or punish His creatures accordingly. The obligatory nature of God's compensatory actions toward mankind is certainly a point of Mu'tazilite doctrine, but it is not set forth in the excerpts from Zumurrudh.

218 219 220 221 222

Kraus, op. cit., p. 106 1. 25 f. (Ar.), p. 117 (Germ.). Ibid, p. 107 1. 4 f. (Ar.), p. 117 (Germ.). Supra, p. 39. Lit., 'beneficial and detestable, obligatory and forbidden'. Supra, p. 39.

82

Commentary II: The Barähima

Further, the examples of Milal wan-nihal 3 and Zumurrudh 5 are not identical, though some of the examples cited by both authors do overlap. Ibn ar-Räwandi mentions five : prayer, purification after intercourse, throwing stones, circling a house and running between two stones. Shahrastânï mentions nine: turning to a specific house of worship and circling it, running, throwing stones, purifying oneself, uttering the prescribed call, kissing the inanimate stone, slaying animals for sacrifice, forbidding certain permissible foods and allowing other harmful foods. The first five in Shahrastäni's list correspond to the five cited by Ibn ar-Räwandi - if we accept the identification of'prayer' (Zumurrudh) and 'uttering the prescribed call' (Milal wannihal), and if we recognize that Shahrastäni's modesty would have caused him to omit any reference to the sexual members or their functions,223 so that 'purfication after intercourse' (Zumurrudh) and 'purifying oneself' (Milal wan-nihal) are probably parallel. But it is still necessary to account for the four additional examples cited in Milal wan-nihal, none of which appear in the extant fragments of Zumurrudh. The 'slaying of animals' in particular, is a phrase which indicates that Shahrastânï, even if he did use an enlarged version of Ibn ar-Räwandi's work, supplemented it with other sources in drafting this section of Milal wan-nihal.22i The final point of Kraus' attempt to relate Zumurrudh specifically to Shahrastäni's material on the Barähima is also cast into doubt by an examination of the respective texts. Milal wan-nihal 4 beg. refutes the concept of apostleship on the basis of the apostle's mere humanity; there is no reference to the intellect as a canon of judgment for or against apostleship, as is the case with the preceding three arguments (Milal wan-nihal 1, 2 and 3). Yet Zumurrudh 16, which Kraus cites as a related text, declares that the community possesses the same 'inspiration' as the prophet, and that any other basis for prophecy - viz., 'divine instruction' - is not found in the intellect (and therefore is refuted by the intellect). At the same time, Milal wan-nihal 4 end denies that any special power accrues to the prophet on account of 'his proofs or SS8

224

The nature of Shahrastäni's selection of for his choices, not leastly modesty, are ar-rüfiäniyäl, infra, pp. 146-48. Though the expression iläm al-ifayawän Zumurrudh (Kraus, op. cit., p. 350), it later Muslim authors.

phrases from his sources and the motivations further discussed in Commentary VI: Afhäb ('causing pain to animals') does not occur in is found in the writings of Abu'l-'Alä' and

Chapter One

83

the inimitability of his revelation' ; human beings already have 'countless physical substances' and 'unequalled informants about supernatural matters'.225 Kraus must have assumed that 'supernatural matters' referred to 'the stars' (Zumurrudh 17), but Shahrastäni probably intend to describe the rühtäniyät (spiritual beings) in using phrases like 'unequalled informants' possessing 'countless physical substances'. While the rüljäniyät are associated with the stars, they also exist apart from them in human form, 226 and so the correspondence between Milal wan-nihal and Zumurrudh on this point also is incomplete. In sum, the strongest points of relationship between the two Muslim sources are: (1) their similar denial of prophecy on the grounds of intellectual self-sufficiency {Milal wan-nihal 1 and Zumurrudh 3); and (2) their joint citation of the same five acts of the Muslim pilgrimage as abhorrent to the human intellect (Milal wan-nihal 3 and Zumurrudh 5). The second point is diminished, however, by the fact that al-Kindl, the Christian apologist who was probably contemporaneous with Ibn ar-Räwandi, also provided a philosophical basis for objecting to specific acts of the Muslim pilgrimage. Moreover, after Ibn ar-Räwandi, other Muslim writers, some of whom do not appear to be related to him, cited some of the same pilgrimage acts as targets of the Barähima's rationalist criticism. It is, therefore, difficult to argue convincingly that even the particular examples cited by Ibn ar-Räwandi in Zumurrudh 5 were transmitted to Shahrastäni as part of his fund of information on the Barähima. Nonetheless, the principal point which Kraus makes concerning Ibn ar-Räwandi's depiction of the Barähima does stand out indisputably as an influence both on Shahrastäni and on later Muslim authors. Ibn ar-Räwandi, according to Kraus, was the first Muslim writer to put into the mouths of the Barähima the arguments against prophecy which were shared by numerous theologians in the Mu'taliza camp. The core of such arguments was the denial of apostleship, on the grounds that it was a gratuitous substitute for the operation of the human intellect. The obvious related question is: why did Ibn ar-Räwandi choose the Barähima for the delicate role of disclaiming prophecy? Kraus enumerates 226

Supra, p. 40.

226 cf. Commentary VI: Ashäb ar-rühäniyät, infra, p. 146.

84

Commentary II: The Barähima

several possibilities.227 He himself surmises that the choice of the Barähima was by default, since the Samaneans,228 a sect related to the Barähima and better known than they in classical sources, allegedly propounded a doctrine of sensualism and skepticism incompatible with reliance on the human intellect which, according to the Mu'tazila, was the basis for rejecting prophetic powers. Such a line of reasoning seems strained, however. It is more plausible that Ibn ar-Räwandi's selection of the Barähima evolved out of the now unrecoverable reports of discussions between Muslim theologians and their Eastern counterparts which took place in Baghdad during the ninth century A. D. 229 Although the opinions of the Barähima, as set forth by Ibn arRäwandi, do not correspond to the information about Brahmans in Indian sources, the tag of 'rationalists' is not as far-fetched as Kraus would have us believe;230 for to Muslims upholding the primitive, early Qur'änic orthodoxy - based, as it was, on the unquestionable superiority of the relevation given to Muhammad 231 - Indian Brahmans would, indeed, have seemed like stark rationalists. Even superficial debates or minimal discussions between ninth-century Muslims and their foreign guests might have left the former with the impression that the latter were hopelessly deluded by the power of reason. At the same time, the substantive information about India known to Muslim intellectuals of that era was largely limited to nonreligious data filtered through Sind: Sind became the main channel of Indian studies in the early 'Abbäsid times, especially through the active interest of Yahyä al-Barmaki. The fragmentary renderings of Hindu scientific works touched, however, merely the periphery of the external Arab equipment of learning; their influence on the Arab lexique technique was slight; and the movement of translations from Sanskrit, which in any case completely ignored the 227 228

229 230

231

Kraus, op. cit., pp. 356-57. On the Arabic terminology for Samaneans, Sumanïya, etc., cf. Commentary III, Afhâb al-bidada, infra, pp. 106-8. Supra, pp. 75-6. Kraus, op. cit., pp. 343-44: 'There is no bridge between Ibn ar-Räwandi's Brahmans and the actual Indian Brahmans.' M. M. Sharif, ed., A History of Muslim Philosophy I, p. 221 : 'The whole of the third/ ninth century was a time of reaction. The orthodox -refused to admit any "innovation" (bid'a) in the Sharia. Any theological discussion was considered an innovation.'

Chapter One

85

total corpus of Hindu scriptural and speculative literature, came to an end as the political grip of the 'Abbäsids over Sind loosened (toward the end of the ninth century A.D.)· 232 It was thus possible for Ibn ar-Räwandi - or his anonymous predecessor(s) to use the title Barähima rather freely as a front for expressing the total denial of the concept of prophecy.233 What is surprising is that the intellectual label 'Barähima', once introduced by Ibn ar-Räwandi, was never discarded but continued in use through successive generations of Muslim scholars up to and beyond the time of Shahrastäni. A few of the most important theologians between Ibn ar-Räwandi and Shahrastäni will now be considered, in order to exhaust the major, possible sources for the Barähima material in Milal wan-nihal. Abü Bakr al-Bäqilläni (d. 1012-3 A.D.), a noted exponent of Ash'arite theology, represents a different approach to the Barähima than that put forth by Ibn ar-Räwandi. While the latter introduced the Barähima to Muslims as rationalist opponents of prophecy, Bäqilläni was among the first to provide a full-scale refutation of the so-called Brahmanical theses.234 232 233

231

Aziz Ahmad, 'Hind (Islamic Culture)', EI2, III, p. 438 col. 2. There were no doubt few Mu'taliza theologians who went so far as to deny prophecy completely. Shahrastäni, for instance, distinguishes the Mu'tazila from the Barähima on this point: 'Brahmans and Çâbians hold that prophecy is impossible intellectually. Mu'tazila and Shï'a hold that a rational view of divine grace makes prophecy a necessity.' Both views contrast with the orthodox position that 'prophecy is an intellectual possibility and an actual phenomenon' (A. Guillaume, trans., Nihäyat al-iqdäm, p. 133). 'Abd al-Jabbär (d. 1025 A.D.), a contemporary of Bäqilläni and a renowned Mu'tazilite, also includes references to the Barähima in his writings. On his life and work, see GAL, Suppl. 1, p. 343 ; GAS, pp. 624-26; and S. M. Stern, ' *Abd al-Jabbär b. Ahmad', EI2, I, pp. 59-60. Unlike Ibn ar-Räwandi, 'Abd al-Jabbär refutes the doubts of the Barähima and defends both the necessity and the validity of revelation. Of the fifteen doubts he attributes to the Barähima, some resemble the substance of Shahrastäni's four arguments (compare, e.g., Mughni 2-5 and Milal wan-nihal 3), but the character and the format of 'Abd al-Jabbär's material (see Mughni, vol. XV, pp. 113 f.) are so different that it may be ruled out as a possible source for the theses in Milal wannihal. The thirteenth century Jewish theologian, Sa'd b. MançQr b. Kammüna, for instance, more accurately reflects the list of doubts on prophecy found in Mughni than does Shahrastäni; see M. Perlmann, Ibn Kammüna's Examination of the Three Faiths, pp. 33 f.

86

Commentary II: The Barahima

In Kitab at-tamhid, he presents each of the theses and then systematically rebuts them. While these rebuttals are of interest as a progressive exposition of the Ash'arite system, we will focus on the theses themselves, since they relate the supposed teaching of the Barähima which may have been transmitted to ShahrastänI. Bäqilläni devotes an entire chapter to the Barähima. In it he lists the following main points as their alleged objections to Islam : 1. The apostle cannot be of the same species as those to whom he is sent. 2. It is impossible for God to accept the notion of apostleship. 3. There is no way to authenticate the sincerity of the claimant to apostleship. 4. Every claimant to apostleship reports from God the permissibility of what human intellects forbid. 5. The divine commissioning of apostles is foolishness. 6. Running between Safä and Marwa is detestable. 7. Human intellects are sufficient. The possible relationship of Bäqilläni's material to Shahrastäni's depiction of the Barähima, already apparent in the chapter summary, becomes clear in examining particular passages from Tamhid. The introduction sets the tone of Bäqilläni's exposition of this seemingly Indian group : The Barähima are divided on the basis of two doctrinal assertions.One group among them deny apostleship and assert that it is not permissible in the wisdom of the Creator and His character to send an apostle to His creation, and there is no proper way on his (an apostle's) part to receive apostleship from the Creator. And the other group says : 'God did not send an apostle to His creation save Adam,' and they deny every claimant to prophecy except him. And another group among them say : 'God did not send any apostle save Abraham alone', and they deny the prophetic gift to anyone other than him. And this is the sum total of their teaching.235 Most of the chapter is devoted to a refutation of the views of the first group, i.e., those who deny apostleship altogether. The subsections relevant to

235

Bäqilläni, Kitâb at-tamhid, chap. 9, sect. 184, p. 104.

Chapter One

87

Milal wan-nihal elaborate the first, fourth, sixth and seventh points to the alleged Barähima objections to Islam. 1. [The impossibility of the apostle's identification with the species to whom he is sent] Then it is said to those who consider absurd on the part of God - may He be praised! - the dispatch of an apostle to His creation: why do you say that and what is your proof for that? And if they say: because of my knowledge that the apostle is of the same species as those to whom he is sent, and their substance is the same, and that showing preference for one of the two over (the other who is) his like and of the same species and has the same attributes is injustice, bias, wrong, partiality and deviation from wisdom and thus not permissible to the Eternal One, then one replies to them : - 236 4. [The anti-rational character of the so-called prophetic pronouncements] The proof that every claimant to apostleship gives the lie to his Lord is that we find every claimant thereto reports from God the permissibility of what (human) intellects forbid, namely, the harming of animals, their slaughter, their skinning, their exploitation and other analogous acts. It is impossible that the Wise One would permit what (human) intellects forbid nor would He send someone who would give the lie to Him in uttering that (policy) and permitting it. Hence it is proven what we have set forth concerning the fact that they are not from God. 237 6. [Running between Safä and Marwa] Then they say that the proof that the commissioning of apostles is false is the detestability of running between Safä and Marwa, circumambulating the house, kissing the stone, hunger and thirst in the days of fasting and the prohibition against doing pleasurable things which benefit human bodies. There is no difference between Bayt al-Haräm and other houses, nor between Safä and Marwa and other places, nor between 'Arafat (i.e., Mount 'Arafat) and other mountains. Thus, it is certain that all that is not (derived) from the orders of the Wise One.238

2:16 237 238

Ibid, sect. 185, p. 104. Ibid, sect. 202, p. 114. Ibid, sect. 211, pp. 119-20.

88

Commentary II: The Barähima

7. [The sufficiency of human intellects and the superfluousness of apostles] Then they say that the proof which precludes the (divine) commissioning of apostles and underscores their dispensability is the fact that God perfected (human) intellects and made good in them what is good and made evil in them what is evil.239 Thus he made them guides to what is desirable and beneficial for mankind, and he precluded wrong-doing through them. He made them guides and means to the knowledge of all that is needed, and it is impossible that apostles bring anything other than that which is placed in the (human) intellect. And that indicates their dispensability and the lack of the need of humanity for them.240 The final paragraph of the chapter simply reiterates the introductory remark that some of the Barähima do subscribe to a doctrine of limited prophecy focused on Adam and Abraham respectively. Nothing further is said about the content of this doctrine.241 Two principal points emerge from Bäqilläni's treatment of the Barähima. He is one of the earliest known Muslim scholars to link this group explicitly to a non-orthodox group within the ranks of Islam. Sometimes he speaks of the Barähima and the Mu'tazila.242 At other times he alludes to the Barähima and 'their brethren among the Mu'tazila'.243 And in one instance he goes still further and describes the Mu'tazila as 'those who are the followers of the Magians and Brahmans'.244 The thrust of all these cross-identifications is to link the Mu'tazila to foreign, non-Muslim groups and thereby underscore their deviation from orthodoxy. It is impossible to say whether or not Bäqilläni was aware that the Barähima were introduced into kaläm by a previous generation of Mu'tazila merely as a guise for setting forth Mu'tazila doctrine. The similarity of the tenets ascribed to each group, however, especially their mutual emphasis on the intellect and denial of prophecy, has not been lost on him. Indeed, Bäqilläni's primary point of

239 210 241 242 243 244

I.e., 'God indicated through them what is good and what is evil.' Bäqilläni, op. cit., sect. 211, pp. 119-20. Ibid, sect. 230, p. 141. Ibid, pp. 122-23. Ibid, pp. 116 and 121. Ibid, p. 124.

Chapter One

89

contention with the Barähima is the rationalism which informs their objections to Islam. In the above translations, it is clear that he deliberately uses the term Hakim ('the Wise One') for God in reiterating the Brahmanical theses,245 just as he also states that the Barähima object to the humanity of an apostle because 'it may be in his (the apostle's) capacity to do harm and to digress - from Wisdom.'246 Further, Bäqilläni appears as one of the earliest Muslim scholars to acknowledge that some of the Barähima do subscribe to prophecy, albeit on a limited and illogical basis. His contention that there exists this second doctrinal position, along with its adherents, is a puzzle. It has no corresponding basis in the actual practise of Hindus, and it detracts from the major purpose for which the Barähima were introduced into Muslim polemics, viz., to deny prophecy totally. Moreover, subsequent citations from Baghdädi and Ibn Hazm will indicate that prominent Muslim theologians were frequently not aware of, or else did not bother to cite, the fictitious existence of this second group of Barähima, the so-called proponents of limited prophetic power.247 How then does this second group come within the scope of kaläm? It has been suggested that 'by Adam, one is without doubt to understand Manu'. 248 If that were the case, then one would have to acknowledge that popular Muslim consciousness, as reflected in theological writings of the eleventh and twelfth centuries A.D., was at least aware of the significance of Manu for Hindus, even if his function was misunderstood as a result of his appropriation into a viable Muslim category, viz., prophecy. On the other

245 246 247 248

Cf. points 4 and 6 supra on p. 87. Cf. point 1 supra on p. 87. On Baghdädi and Ibn Hazm, see infra, pp. 93-6. A. Christensen, 'Remarques critiques sur le Kitäb bayäni-l-adyän d'Abü'l-Ma'äll', Le Monde Oriental V (1911), p. 213. The remark is in the form of a commentary on the Persion text, which reads : 'And they (the Indians) believe that Adam was a prophet, and some of them look on Ibrahim as a prophet.' For the original text, see C. Schefer, Chrestomathie persane, I, p. 147 11. 20-1. Bayän al-adyän is an old treatise on various religions, completed in Ghazna ca. 1092 A.D. H. Massé (Revue de l'Histoire des Religions 94 (1926), pp. 17-75) has provided a French translation entitled 'L'Exposé des religions'. Though tangentially related to Bîrûnl's Indica, the work includes no primary data on Indian religions.

90

Commentary II: The Barahima

hand, the inclusion of Ibrahim as a further prophet to whom a particular Indian group reportedly professed allegiance must be ruled out as an etymological error that originated and persisted in the popular Muslim understanding of Hinduism. The first written attestation to this misunderstanding appears in Bäqilläni, but its existence in a more graphic form derives from Abu'1-Ma'äll. Not only does the pioneer Persian heresiographer note that certain Indians accept Ibrâhïm as prophet, 249 but he also transcribes Brahma as Ibrahim in another portion of the same work. This revealing error occurs in the author's attempt to reproduce a summarized - but unfortunately disjointed - rendition of Biruni's Arabic version of the Yogasütra of Patañjali. According to Abu'l-Ma'äli's text, the nature of the Hindu deity was partially disclosed in the following exchange : Q. : Is this divinity endowed with knowledge or not? A. : It has been, is and always will be endowed with knowledge. It is this divinity which said to Abraham: 'Praise!'250 The actual exchange, as translated from Birüni's recovered text, reads as follows : Q. 17: Whence does He (God) have this (pre-eternal) knowledge? Α.: His knowledge remains in the same state throughout eternity. Inasmuch as He is never ignorant, His essence is full of knowledge and does not (need to) acquire knowledge which He did not have. According to what he says in the Veda which he revealed to Brahma: 'Praise and eulogize Him who spoke the Veda and was before the Veda.'251 As Christensen has already noted, 'for Abü'1-Ma'äli, Brahma became Ibrahim,' and it is 'this popular etymology which gave rise to the idea that Abraham had been considered as a prophet by some Indian sects'.252 Returning to Shahrastäni, we can see that the first part of the Milal wan-nihal essay on the Barähima reflects two problems most cogently set

249 250 251

252

Christensen, op. cit., p. 213; Massé, op. cit., p. 39. Schefer, op. cit., p. 139 1. 3; Massé, op. cit., p. 27 top. S. Pines and T. Gelblum, 'Al-BIrüni's Arabic Version of Patañjali's Yogasütra\ Oriens 2u (1967), p. 321. For the Arabic text, see H. Ritter, 'Al-Birüni's Übersetzung des yogasütra des Patañjali', Oriens 9 (1956), p. 174. Christensen, op. cit., p. 213.

Chapter One

91

forth in Muslim theological circles by Bäqilläni :253 1. the popular etymological confusion concerning Barähima/Ibrähim; and 2. the ambiguous dual role of the Barähima as both total deniers of prophecy and proponents of limited prophecy. With respect to the first problem, Shahrastäni rejects the popular etymology for Barähima, and S. Nadvi adds : he 'tracked this word down to its origin, "Brahma".' 254 It is not entirely clear from the available texts, however, that Shahrastäni was such a shrewd investigator: after citing the etymological error, he goes on to mention 'a group of Indians who did believe in the prophecy of Abraham but were dualists' (thereby implying that they were Brahmans ?) while the Barähima, in his opinion, 'were named (not after Ibrähim but) after a man among them called Barhäm.' 255 Nadvi must have misread 'Brahma' for 'Barhäm', which is a hopeful error but still an error. With respect to the second point of Shahrastäni's possible dependency on Bäqilläni or a source related to him, we can see that the author of Milal wan-nihal attempts to conceal the extent of the division in Muslim attitudes toward the Barähima since a) he ignores any tradition regarding Adam as a prophet, and b) he portrays those who uphold the prophetic power of Abraham as essentially dualists and therefore neither peculiarly Indian nor worthy of further analysis in this, the final section of Milal wan-nihal,25G These so-called Abrahamic dualists must have had some obscure origins outside India, perhaps in Afghanistan, Turkestan or even Khorasan, where Manichaean elements were prominent up to and after the time of Shahrastäni. It is difficult to determine to what extent Shahrastäni was further dependent on Bäqilläni or a writer within his school or a later scribe who reproduced the doxographical treatises bearing the influence but not using the

253

254 255 256

There is little likelihood that Shahrastäni was either acquainted with the Bayän aladyän or in any way depended upon it in writing Milal wan-nihal. (See Schefer, op. cit., p. 207 for a brief comparison of the respective heresiographies.) Hence, Bäqilläni is the most likely source for the etymological confusion under discussion. Nadvi, op. cit., p. 134. Supra, p. 39. Supra, p. 38 (paraphrased): 'We have already reported the views of those who are dualists, and can therefore dispense with reporting them here.'

92

Commentary II: The Barähima

exact phraseology of Bäqilläni. One point is certain : the attempt to relate the Barähima doctrinally to other heretical groups, expressed at an early date by Bäqilläni, was continued by later Muslim authors, including Shahrastäni. In Nihäyat al-iqdäm, the Barähima are specifically coupled with the Säbians.257 While Bäqilläni in Tamhid does not link these groups to each other, at least one Muslim author prior to Shahrastäni does. Qâdï Sä'id ai-Andalusi (d. 1070 A.D.) notes in Tabaqäi al-umam that the Hindus have two sects : some are followers of Brahma, the others are Säbians. The former comprises a sect which is small but renowned in the eyes of Hindus. Some of the former believe in the transience of the world, others believe in the permanence of the world. All of them concur on the non-existence of prophetic laws and the prohibition against slaughtering animals or using them as food. 258 It is doubtful that Shahrastäni knew of Sä'id's work or utilized his brief but clever reporting of Indian concepts. Sä'id, for instance, seems to link the Barähima and Säbians together in a way not dissimilar from the classical reports on Indians, where only two sects are mentioned: Brahmans and Sramanas.259 Shahrastäni, however, perceives the Säbian influence in a number of Hindu sects, including sub-sects of the Barähima. He and Sä'id may have a common, ultimate source for such information as is expressed in chapter 5 of 'Ärä'al-hind' (where only two sects of Indian philosophers are described), but that link is hardly a major dependency. It seems most probable to conclude that Shahrastäni interrelated Säbians and Barähima on his own initiative, as explained in the previous commentary.260 With respect to the list of examples in the third Brahmanical thesis, Shahrastäni may also be dependent on a source which shares common characteristics with Bäqilläni in reporting the Barähima. Thesis # 4 of Tamhid sets forth the objection to harming or slaying animals.261 Thesis # 6 257

258 259 260 261

See A. Guillaume, trans., op. cit., pp. 133-34 and 136. For reasons already discussed (supra, pp. 84-5), Säbians and Barähima are only tangentially linked to each other in Milal wan-nihal. R. Blachère, trans., Le Livre des catégories des nations, p. 45. Discussed in Commentary XIX: Indian philosophers, infra, pp. 251 f. Supra, pp. 87 f. Ibid, p. 87.

Chapter One

93

includes 'the necessity of hunger and thirst in the days of fasting and the prohibition against doing pleasurable things which benefit (human) bodies'.262 The other examples in Tamhld # 6, however, come less close to Milal wannihal 3 than do the examples of Ibn ar-Räwandi already reviewed.263 Hence no rigid conclusions of dependency may be drawn in this case, though the partial parallelism of Bâqillânï and Shahrastäni is as apparent here as in the other instances just cited. 'Abd al-Qähir al-Baghdädl (d. 1037) is yet another notable Muslim theologian who presents a variant profile of the Barähima in his extant works. A renowned heresiographer, he is often compared with Shahrastäni.264 Citations from his writings on the Barähima, however, indicate that he and Shahrastäni held widely divergent views on this group. In Farq bayn al-firaq, Baghdädi makes three substantive references to the Barähima: 1. In Section 5, Chapter 3, he exposits the twelve fundamental doctrines upon which orthodox Muslims are in mutual agreement; the seventh of these doctrines is the knowledge of Allah's messengers and His prophets. 'They (the orthodox) aver the veracity of messengers from God to His creatures, contrary to the opinion of the Barähima who disacknowledge them, despite their belief in the unity of the Maker.' Baghdädi further cites the Barähima denial of Moses and Jesus.265 2. Later in the same chapter, commenting on the tenth essential for orthodoxy, concerning what is allowed and forbidden, Baghdädi states that for the orthodox, 'if the command or interdiction had not come from God to His worshippers, nothing would be obligatory on them, and nothing would be forbidden to them. This is contrary to the opinion of those among the Barähima and Qadariya who maintain that the charge is imparted to the intelligent person by two inclinations which stir in his heart. One of them emanates from God Who exhorts him by means of it to apply reasoning and logic; the other comes from Satan who urges him through it to disobey, and prevents him thereby 262 263 264 265

Ibid, p. 87. Ibid, pp. 77 f. E.g., K. Seelye, trans., Moslem Schisms and Sects, I, pp. 11-13. A. Halkin, trans., Moslem Schisms and Sects, II, pp. 199-200.

94

Commentary II: The Barähima

from following the first inclination. This forces them to the conclusion that Satan was a also a Mukallaf by two inclinations, one of which emanated from God and the other from another Satan. Thereupon the argument regarding the second Satan will be like that about the first, so that an infinite series of Satans will be premised. But this is absurd, and what leads to absurdity is itself absurd. 266 3. The third and final reference of note concerns the legal status of the Barähima. 'As regards the Barähima, who disacknowledge all the prophets and apostles, the followers of al-Shafi'i are agreed that, although they conform to the Muslims in their belief in the creation of the Universe and the unity of its Maker, their meats may not be eaten nor may their women be taken as wives. The controversy about taking tribute from them follows the same lines as in the case of the idol-worshippers.267 In Usui ad-dirt Baghdädi elaborates the fifteen essentials on which orthodox Muslims concur. The seventh essential is the same as in the Farq: the knowledge of the prophets, but Usül ad-din clarifies this essential with respect to fifteen related propositions. The second answers objections concerning the permissibility of sending apostles and the responsibility of believers. It is on this point that Baghdädi elaborates the nature of the Brahmanical heresy, and goes beyond his statements in the Farq by comparing the doctrinal aberrations of the Barähima with those of the Qadariya. The relevant passages are three: The difference on this matter (i.e., the permissibility of sending apostles) is with the Barähima, who maintain that the basis of human responsibility (taklif) is derived from rational insights ('uqül) and mental impulses (khawätir). They deny the traditional legal obligations and assert that the mind of each rational being has two impulses : one of them from God advises him concerning what his intellect requires, and the other from Satan prods him to disobey the first impulse. And they

266

Ibid, pp. 207-8. ' Ibid, p. 222. The Shàfi'ï view on the position of idolaters with respect to the Sharï'a is expounded on p. 220: 'Whoever takes poll-tax from idolaters takes it from (the Barähima); whoever does not take poll-tax from idolaters does not take it from (the Barähima).'

2e

Chapter One

95

say that God enabled Satan to implant the impulse inciting to evil in the mind of the rational being in order to balance thereby his proddings, and legitimize the choice of one of the two impulses... And they also assert that the apostles revealed the permissibility of what the intellect forbids, viz., the slaughter of animals, the injury of animals without (fear of) sin and the imposition of the blood price on the family. And for that reason they denounce them (i.e., the apostles). The Qadariya support the Barähima in the matter of establishing the basis of human responsibility on mental impulses, but they differ from them concerning the permissibility of sending apostles . . . If the Barähima say that He is not wise Who sends an apostle to those whom He knows consider His apostles a liar, the reply is : 'If it is possible that God creates one whom He knows considers Him a liar and denies Him and disbelieves in Him, then it is possible that He sends an apostle to those whom He knows will consider His apostle a liar.' All their arguments for the futility of traditional human responsibility can be used against them with respect to their permitting rational human responsibility.268 Baghdädi's observations concerning the Barähima are incisive, but they bear little resemblance to the Brahmanical theses of Milal wan-nihal. For instance, in the above quotation, he does not interconnect the assertions of the Barähima with those of the Säbians (as do Sä'id and Shahrastäni), but instead chooses to compare the Barähima with the Qadariya (as does Bäqilläni). The concern with explaining the two impulses, which dominates his passages on the Barähima, is, moreover, absent from the pages of Milal wan-nihal. Baghdad! does make one contribution to the identity of the Barähima which is worthy of brief comment. He leaves no doubt that the Barähima are more than a fictitious name for expositing doctrinal views in kaläm circles. The third citation from the Farq deals with legal prescriptions for an existing community of people known as the Barähima, illustrating again the need to revise Kraus' assertion that the theological Barähima and actual Brahmans are unrelated.269 268

The preceding translations were based on Baghdäld's

269

Cf. supra, p. 84 and fn. 230.

Usül ad-dln,

pp. 154-56.

96

Commentary II: The Barähima

'Ali b. Ahmad b. Hazm (d. 1064 A.D.) also includes an essay on the Barähima in his polemical manual, Fisal fll-milal wal-ahwä' wan-nihal. Its independent character is typical of Ibn Hazm and shows clearly that Shahrastän! could not have relied on him for the Barähima material which appears in Milal wan-nihal. The central passage is here translated mainly for its intrinsic interest as a still further Muslim reflection on this seemingly Indian group: The Barähima hold this view (viz., the denial of prophecy and the existence of angels). They are a tribe in India among whom are (included) the noblest of the people of India. They assert that they are descendants of Brahmä, an ancient king of theirs, and they possess a sign by which they are distinguished, viz., red- and yellow-colored threads which they wear like swords. They attest to the unity of God about as we do, except that they deny the occurrence of prophecies. The crux of their argument in rejecting them is that they say: 'Since it is certain that God - He is mighty and great! - is Wise, and if it was He Who sent an apostle to whomever He perceived did not believe in Him, then there would be no doubt thatHe was a wanton zealot. Thus it is necessary to repudiate the sending of apostles from God - He is mighty and great ! - in order to repudiate (the existence of) zealotry and wantonness on His part.' They also say: 'If God Almighty sent apostles to people in order to lead people through them from error to faith, then it was more appropriate for Him in His wisdom and more completely according to His will to compel the minds (of men) to faith in Him. Hence they say: 'The commissioning of apostles is also useless on this basis,' and the commissioning of apostles, according to them, is in the category of the impossible.270 It is notable that Ibn Hazm's essay resembles Baghdädi's references to the Barähima in one, critical aspect: both authors describe the group historically as well as doctrinally, Ibn Hazm including accurate references to their caste supremacy and their sacred thread. Like Baghdädi, too, Ibn Hazm makes no mention of a group of Barähima who acknowledge a limited concept of prophecy. In his opinion, 'they deny the occurrence of prophecies'. 270

Ibn Hazm, FifaI fil-milal wal-ahwä' wan-nihal, I, p. 55; M. Asín Palacios, trans., Abenhazam de Cordoba y su historia critica de las ideas religiosas, II, p. 182.

Chapter One

97

The final Muslim writer prior to Shahrastäni whose depiction of the Barähima needs to be considered is Imäm al-Haramayn al-Juwayni (d. 1085 A.D.). He was perhaps the most illustrious Ash'arite theologian of his age, and we will, therefore, review his two substantive and somewhat parallel assertions concerning the Barähima. In al-Aqida an-nizamiya,211 Juwayni describes the Barähima as a group who deny prophecy even though they believe in the Creator . . . Among other things they say that on the one hand, one must deny prophets since they bring things which run counter to the human intellect, and on the other hand, if their message is in accord with reason, then indeed on account of reason one must not turn to them, since their commissioning is pointless . . . They also assert that one finds in the codes of the apostles things which, though they are made known by them and are clearly binding, are nonetheless disapproved by the standard of reason . . . They cite (for example) the slaughtering of harmless animals, the importance of prostration and the running back and forth seven times between Safä and Marwa, together with the quick gait and purposeless stone throwing.272 Kitäb al-irshäd also depicts the Barähima as deniers of prophecy on rationalist grounds : 1. They deny the occurrences of prophecy and oppose them with reference to the intellect, and they view as absurd the commissioning of a man to be an apostle . . . they say: If we were to assume the arrival of a prophet, his message would either be rectifiable by intellectual reasoning or not be rectifiable by it. If his message is something to which the intellect may lead, there is no value in his commissioning, and what is void of true purpose is wantonness and folly. If, on the other hand, his message is something the intellect does not prove, it does not meet with acceptance since what is accepted is what is proven by the intellect.273 2,1

272 273

What follows is a secondary translation from H. Klopfer, Das Dogma Imam alHaramain al-Djuwaini und sein Werk al-Aqidat (sic) an-Nizämiya. The original Arabic text was not available to me. Ibid, pp. 78-9. Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni, Kitäb al-irshäd ilä qawäfi' al-adillafí usui al-i'tiqäd, pp. 302-3.

98

Commentary II: The Barähima

2. They say: 'We find that the law, as you perceive it, contains things which are offensive to the intellect, even though we know that the Wise One does not order abominations, nor does He urge the commission of detestable deeds. Among such things contained in (your laws) are the slaughter of animals and their subjugation ; and the intellect specifies the detestability of that practise.'274 3. They say: 'Among your laws are things which the (human) intellect blocks, such as bowing in assuming the prayer posture, and falling over on one's face in prostration, and unveiling, and disrobing, and walking (at a quick gait), and going back and forth between two mountains and throwing pebbles at an object purposelessly' ; (these are) among the things which they ridicule.275 The information about the Barähima which Juwaynl cites does not add anything new to the composite picture already gleaned from other Muslim sources. What is of interest is his preoccupation with two arguments which the Barähima allegedly advanced against prophecy: the sufficiency of the intellect, and the irrational character of certain practises prescribed by apostles, such as slaughtering animals, bowing in prayer, etc. Both arguments relate to theses 1 and 3 in Milal wan-nihal, though Juwaynï and Shahrastäni differ in phraseology and choice of examples.

Conclusion From the above presentation of the major Muslim reflections on the Barähima, we may now hazard a collation of the possible or most likely sources of dependency for Shahrastänl's information on them : The Introduction Awareness of the etymological error in identifying Barähima/Ibrähim may be attributed to the popular Muslim consciousness of Hinduism (see Bayân al-adyäri).

271 275

Ibid, pp. 304-5. Ibid, p. 305.

Chapter One

99

Correction of that error, citation of Abrahamic dualists and depiction of Barhäm as rationalist critic of prophecy. No known source prior to Shahrastänl, and except for the name Barhäm (a misreading of Brahma - Ibn Hazm), may be the author's additions. Brahmanical Theses 1. First stated in Zumurrudh but also mentioned by Juwaynï and (briefly) Bäqilläni. It could have come from any popularized edition of Ash'arite maqälät. 2. An obviously Mu'tazilite proposition put into the mouth of Barhäm. It has no antecedent among the cited works; specific source in kalam unknown. 3. The most complex of the four theses in terms of literary antecedents. Many of the examples are cited by earlier Muslim authors : Ibn ar-Räwandi, Bäqilläni, 'Abd al-Jabbär and Juwaynï. Examples 6-9 indicate a source later than Ibn ar-Räwandi and possibly related to Bäqilläni. The terse conclusion is common to Ibn ar-Räwandi and Bäqilläni. 4. The opening sentence is a stock phrase extrapolated from earlier sections of Milal wan-nihalP6 The rest is Shahrastani's contribution, though the arguments cease in an abrupt and inconclusive manner. The Rebuttal The introductory quotation from the Qur'än (S. 14.11) is echoed in another verse (S. 23.34) cited by Ibn al-Jawzi in a different context as part of the Brahmanical arguments. 2 ' 7 Kraus contends that Shahrastäni is here quoting from an earlier source,278 but he himself does not indicate the source and none is apparent. It is worth noting that there are two parts to the conclusion : the first (up to 'Yet') dealing with theses 1, 2 and 3, the second ('Yet', etc.) with thesis 4 alone. The evidence suggests, therefore, that Shahrastäni's exposition of the Brahmanical theses clearly reflects the influence of his theological predeces276 277

278

Cureton, op. cit., pp. 180 and 204; Haarbrücker, op. cit., I, p. 273 and II, p. 6. Margoliouth, op. cit., p. 203; it is the first of six Brahmanical fallacies which Ibn alJawzï cites. Kraus, op. cit., p. 347. His argument is based on the lack of an antecedent for rusuluhum ('their apostles'). Cf. supra, p. 41.

100

Commentary III: Ashäb al bidada

sors, while both the introduction and the rebuttal, as well as the fourth thesis, were probably his own work. The earlier references to the Barähima also suggest the possible reasons for including an essay on this group in 'Ara' al-hind\ Shahrastäni, together with other expositors of kaläm in the Ash'arite tradition, felt the Barähima to be an actual, historical group whose principal doctrinal stance was their denial of prophecy on rationalist grounds. He undoubtedly did not realize the extent to which the arguments of the Barähima had been Islamicized in the early Mu'tazila environment. As a result, the material of chapter 1 says more about the convolutions of Muslim theology than about the nature of Brahmanical thought in the medieval period. The sub-categories of the Barähima, however, present a different picture. Not only do they partially relate to the pattern of Säbian analysis which characterizes 'Ära' al-hind\ but two of the groups, viz., the Buddhists and *Rsis, include in their depiction a modicum of historical data. The contrasting nature of Shahrastäni's material becomes immediately clear in examining the first Barähima sub-category : the Buddhists.

Commentary III: Ashäb al-bidada / Followers of the Buddhas The content of this essay has significance beyond the theological format of Milal wan-nihal. The nature of Shahrastäni's contribution as a medieval Muslim source on Buddhism may best be perceived in the context of references to the Buddha and Buddhism found in Arabic writings prior to Milal wan-nihal. We will, therefore, briefly consider the principal Muslim sources on Buddhism, together with the recurrent problem of nomenclature, and then proceed to an examination of Shahrastäni's text. A. The Buddha and Buddhism prior to Milal wan-nihal The earliest references are traceable to the period of great translation activity which peaked under 'Abbäsid rule during the eighth and ninth centuries A.D. 279 It has been suggested that 279

For a summary list of the translated Indian works from this period, cf. Aziz Ahmad, Islamic Culture in the Indian Environment, pp. 108-13.

Chapter One

101

through the translation of the Pancha Tantra into Arabic from Pahlavi as well as through other literary sources and oral traditions, something was known of the personality of the Buddha as a wise man, and he was often identified with the figure of Hermes as the origin of wisdom.280 In addition, the tale of Büdäsaf and Balahwar was rendered into Arabic from the Pahlavi and provided a legendary account of the Buddha's renunciation of the world.281 No other Pahlavi works translated into Arabic which dealt with the life and teaching of the Buddha have survived, though some are cited by Ibn an-Nadim. 282 After this translation activity ceased in the mid-ninth century A.D., five centuries intervene before one discovers another extant work which can be described as a substantial Muslim interpretation of Buddhism. Rashïd adDin's Tdrikh al-hind was written in the early fourteenth century A.D. It includes a penetrating study of Buddhism, part of which depicts the Indian view of time from a Buddhist perspective and part of which presents a life of the Buddha unique among Muslim sources. The account is ultimately traceable to Mongolian Buddhism; its immediate source is the Kashmiri monk, Bakshi Kamalshri, whom Rashid ad-Din openly acknowledges as his source.283 Rashid ad-Din's work represents the terminus ad quem of a period during which there are scant references to Buddhism in Muslim sources. Most striking is the absence of information about the Buddha or Buddhism in Birüni's writings.284 The few references which do occur in the Indica are cited from earlier Muslim treatises of dubious quality. Speaking of Mt. Meru, for instance, Birüni says :

280

281

282

283

284

S. H. Nasr, 'Islam and the Encounter of the Religions', The Islamic Quarterly XI (1967), p. 61 ; and also idem, Islamic Studies, pp. 64 and 78-9. For a full discussion of this complex literary piece, cf. D.M. Lang, The Wisdom of Balahvar, and idem, 'Bilawhar wa-Yüdäsaf', EI2, I, pp. 1215-17. The titles are given in B. Dodge, trans., op. cit., II, p. 717; some are also mentioned in Aziz Ahmad, op. cit., p. 109. K. Jahn has done a valuable study of Rashid ad-DIn's section on Buddhism; see his Rashid al-Din's History of India, pp. xx-lxxvii and xcii-ci. The sum total of references to the Buddha or Buddhism in the Indica are eight; see E. Sachau, trans., AlberünVs India, I, pp. 7, 21, 40,158, 249, 326 and 340; II, p. 169.

102

Commentary III: Ashäb al bidada

I have never found a Buddhistic book, and never knew a Buddhist from whom I might have learned their theories on this subject. All I relate on them I relate only on the authority of Alërânshahrï, though to my mind, his report has no claim to scientific exactness, nor is it the report of a man who has a scientific knowledge of the subject.285 The content of Iränshahri's writings are known only through Bïrûnï; 286 according to the latter, Iränshahri authored a general work on the history of religions, into which he incorporated a treatise on Buddhism by one Zurqän. 287 Zurqän, in turn, was a mediocre theologian, and never traveled to India, depending on others for his data on Indian religions.288 In sum, it appears that Bïrûnï knew nothing of Buddhism first-hand,289 and what little he does report in the Indica comes third-hand from Zurqân's source(s) through Zurqän to Iränshahri. With respect to the Muslim sources which frequently parallel Shahrastäni in their accounts of Indian sects, most of them contain only brief notices on the tenets of Buddhism. Three - Gardïzi, Maqdisï and Ibn an-Nadim include enough information to merit further examination. Gardïzi describes Buddhists in only one passage, although even there it is not certain that he is speaking of Buddhists, especially since the doctrinal

î85

Ibid, I, p. 249. ΐββ According to Minorsky (Marvazi, p. 129), the brief references to Iränshahri in Nâçir-i Khusrau's Zäd al-mufäfirin indicate that he flourished around the beginning of the tenth century A.D. 287 Bïrûnï deprecates Zurqân's work repeatedly, even while quoting from Iränshahri who relied on Zurqän for his own knowledge of Buddhism. See Indica, pp. 7, 21 and 40; also, supra, pp. 24 f. 288 The sum total of current knowledge of Zurqän has been summarized by Minorsky CMarvazi, p. 128). 289 The fact that Buddhism had declined throughout most of Northern India by the time of Bïrûnï (Sachau, op. cit., p. xlv) does not fully account for the meagre references to Buddhist views in the Indica. From his wide-ranging study of Sanskrit literature and conversations with Brahmans, Bïrûnï undoubtedly sensed the historical importance of Buddhism. In all likelihood, it was his lack ofexposure to a Buddhist scholar, together with his distaste for earlier, 'non-scientific' Muslim works on the subject, which caused Bïrûnï to bypass this major stream of Indian thought.

Chapter One

103

content of his essay in part relates to the Milal wan-nihal depiction of the Barähima: 290 [The Buddhists (?) are] those who believe in the Creator and in rewards and punishments, but reject prophets, say (ing) that God called upon His creatures wishing - them to have no need of anybody else, because he has placed in their minds inclination to Good and hatred of Evil, and he taught them not to accept anything from another person which would be unacceptable to Reason, and to oppose the nature of their bodies. - As God has no need of His creatures, or of their worship, they say that Paradise can be reached (only) through mental exertions - and through opposition to the nature of the body, for - this is a matter difficult to attain and especially to persevere until the goal is reached. Some others say that the way to reach God in truth is through the annihilation - of the body and the elimination of the coarse - soul which leads the body into sin and makes sin appear pleasant to the eye.291 Maqdisi is briefer and more to the point than Gardizi. He declares that the Buddhists (sumaniya) are theologically deficient (mu'aitila) ; 292 they 'form two parties : that which affirms that He was a prophet commissioned as an apostle, and another which affirms that the Buddha is the Creator Himself -.' 293 This latter quotation may be an elliptical reference to the distinction between Hinayäna and Mahäyäna Buddhism; it is, however, too brief to allow a conclusive judgment. The most detailed exposition of the Buddha himself in any Muslim source prior to Milal wan-nihal is found in the Fihrist: The people of India disagree about this (subject). One party asserted that he (the Buddha) was the likeness of the Creator, may His greatness be exalted. Another group said that he was the likeness of his apostle (sent) to them. Then they disagreed at this point. One sect (party) said

290

291 292 293

Cf. Minorsky, 'Gardizi on India', p. 627, espec. fn. 1 and 3, for additional, possible references to Buddhists in Gardizi's account. In the translation which follows, the extant text is poor, and even the name of this group has not been preserved. Ibid, p. 630 top and p. 633 # 15 and 16. Huart, trans., op. cit., IV, p. 9 (Arabic text and French translation). Ibid, p. 17 (text), p. 19 (trans.).

104

Commentary III: Asfjäb al bidada

that the apostle was one of the angels. Another sect stated that the apostle was a human being. Then a group said that he was a demon among the demons, while (another) sect stated that he was a likeness of the Büdäsaf, the wise, who came to them from Allah, may His name be glorified. Each sect among them has a ritual for worshipping and exalting him. Some of their trustworthy people have said that each one of their communities has an image to which people go so as to worship and exalt it. Al-Budd (the Buddha) is a generic term, while al-asnäm (idols) signifies different 'species'. The description of the greatest Buddha is that of a man seated on a throne, with no hair on his face and with his chin and mouth sunk (close) together. He is not covered by a robe and and he is as though smiling. With his hand he is stringing thirty-two (beads). A trustworthy person has said that there is an image of him in every house. These are made of all kinds of materials, according to the status of the individual. They are of gold adorned with different jewels, or of silver, brass, stone or wood. They exalt him as he receives them, facing either from east to west, or from west to east, but for the most part they turn his back to the east, so that they face themselves toward the east. It is said that they have his image with four faces, so fashioned by engineering and accurate craftsmanship that from whatever place they approach it, they see the full face and the profile perfectly, without any part of it (being) hidden from them.. , 294 The iconographie and liturgical details in the above account are unique among Muslim sources on Buddhism and suggest an independent source for the last two paragraphs. The first paragraph, on the other hand, seems related to the brief notice in Maqdisi, especially as the Buddha's relation to the Creator is the primary concern in both cases. Since Maqdisi openly cites Kitäb al-masälik as his authority, 295 it is likely that Jayhäni, whose Kitäb al-masälik is unfortunately lost, was the common source for both authors. Possible sources for the other material on Buddhism, i.e., the last two para-

294 295

Dodge, trans., op. cit., II, pp. 831-32. Huart, trans., op. cit., IV, p. 17, fn. 1.

Chapter One

105

graphs of the above citation from Ibn an-Nadim and the allusions in Gardizi, are more difficult to determine and must await further investigation.296 Though few and brief, the references to Buddhism in the Muslim accounts prior to Shahrastäni raise the question of nomenclature: how did Arabic authors refer to the Buddha and Buddhists? Budd, the most frequently used name for the Buddha, had several levels of meaning, and it is difficult to ascertain which was primary. Ibn an-Nadim, as noted above, attempted to offer an etymological derivation of budd as a generic term for idol, distinguishing it from asnäm,297 Balädhuri, however, equates budd with sanam, and uses it to refer both to idol(s) and the temple of idol(s).298 For Qädi Sä'id al-Andalusi, on the other hand, budd describes the astral forms worshipped by Indian Säbians.299 As might be expected, there are also several Muslim authors who use budd to refer chiefly to the Buddha, prominent among them being al-Jähiz,300 al-Mas'üdi301 and al-Birüni.302 Indeed, common sense as well as historical usage support Reinaud's suggestion that budd 'is probably a derivation from the Buddha itself, (since) it is equally plausible to believe that it came from the name Buddha as to believe that it came from the Persian word but, signifying "idol" \ 3 0 3 Another name commonly used to refer to the Buddha in Arabic is Büdäsaf. Its textual variants are too numerous to list; they chiefly concern variants in the first and second consonants which can easily be restored to Büdäsaf.304 2ββ

297 298

299 300 301 302 303

304

Minorsky ('Gardïzï in India', p. 626) argues that Jayhânïwas the immediate source for Gardïzî's chapter on India. His case is tenuous, however, with respect to the material on Buddhism, for Gardïzî's references are hardly consonant with those found in Maqdisî. Gardïzï, for instance, presents Buddhism without any mention of the Buddha as Creator or apostle, a topic heatedly disputed by Buddhist sects, according to Jayhânï, Maqdisî and Ibn an-Nadïm. Ar. text: wa-anna Ί-budd ismun lil-finsi wal-asnämu kal-anwä'i. Ahmad b. Yahyä al-Balädhurl (d. 892-3 A.D.), Kitäbfutüh al-buldän, pp. 545 f. Balädhuri does not use the plural form of budd (bidada), though it appears in the Fihrist (Dodge, trans., op. cit., II, p. 827). R. Blachère, trans., op. cit., p. 45. al-Jähiz, Kitäb at-tarbi' wat-tadwir, p. 76. al-Mas'üdi, Kitäb at-tanbih, p. 201. Sachau, trans., AlbërûnVs India, I, pp. 119, 121, 158 and 243; II, p. 169. Reinaud, op. cit. p. 90. Cf. also B. Carra de Vaux, 'Budd',.E/ 2 ,1, pp. 1283-84 and S. Nadvi, ip. cit., p. 202. A list of most of these variants is provided in Chwolsohn, op. cit., I, pp. 798-99.

ί 06

Commentary III: Ashäb al bidada

Apart from the Pahlavi-to-Arabic translations of the tale of Büdäsaf and Balahwar, the locus classicus in Muslim literature for the depiction of Büdäsaf is Mas'üdi's Murüj adh-dhahab. According to the author, Yüdäsaf/ Büdäsaf was born in India but crossed the Indus River and penetrated into Sijistan and Zabulistan, then into Kirman and Fars. Calling himself the messenger of God and claiming to be the mediator between the Creator and his creatures, Büdäsaf founded the Säbian religion.305 Elsewhere, in Kitäb at-tanblh, Mas'üdi makes it clear that by Büdäsaf he means the Buddha.306 His interpretation of the Buddha is echoed in Tabaqät al-umam, where Qädi Sä'id also describes Büdäsaf as an apostle of Säbianism to the Iranians.307 Other authors are less explicit in their use of Büdäsaf as a referrent to the Buddha, but it is interesting that Ibn an-Nadim, in the second of his two references to Büdäsaf, does not equate him with the Buddha, qualifying his name instead with the epithet al-hakim.30S The latter term strengthens the possibility that for Ibn an-Nadim as well as for Mas'üdi, Qädi Sä'id and Birüni, Büdäsaf was linked with Säbianism through his identification with Hermes the Wise.309 While both budd and büdäsaf in its variant forms were used to describe the Buddha in Muslim writing prior to Milal wan-nihal, there was only one term for Buddhists as a group : samaniya, which also appears as shamani(ya) and sumaniya.310 The clearest definition of Buddhism prior to Shahrastäni is set forth in the Fihrist as the 'doctrines of the Shamaniya' : I have read (what was written) in the handwriting of a man among the people of Khuräsän, who composed an account of Khuräsän in ancient times and of what has recently come to pass there, this passage being 305

306 307

308

309

310

C. Barbier de Meynard and Pavet de Courteille, trans., Les Prairies d'or, II, pp. 111-12; IV, pp. 44-5. Mas'üdi, Tanbih, p. 201. R. Blachère, trans., op. cit., p. 51. Cf. also D.M. Lang, 'Bilawhar wa-Yüdäsaf', EI2, I, p. 1216. Dodge, trans., op. cit., II, p. 831. The Arabic text reads: hädhihi süratu büdäsaf alhaklm. E. Sachau, trans., The Chronology of Ancient Nations, p. 188 11. 24-5. Cf. also, S. H. Nasr, Islamic Studies, pp. 78-9. Gardizi (Minorsky, 'Gardizi on India', p. 630) refers to the shamani, as does Ibn an-Nadim. Maqdisi (Huart, trans., op. cit., IV, p. 19) describes the adherents to Buddhism as sumaniya.

Chapter One

107

similar to the original report. He said, 'The prophet of the Shamanlyah is the Buddha311 and the majority of the people of the Land beyond the River (Transoxiana) were in accord with this doctrine before Islam, in ancient times. The meaning of the Shamanlyah is related to shamani, and these were the most exalted people of the earth and the religions. That was because the Buddha prophesied to them, teaching them that the principal thing which is illegal and forbidden for a man to believe in and practise is the saying of lä, in connection with all things. They are in accord with this both in speaking and acting, for the saying of lä with them is an act of Satan - \ 3 1 2 Though Ibn an-Nadim indicates that the Buddha is the prophet of the Shamaniya/Samaniya, there persists the problem of whether that name was applied solely to Buddhists or whether the Buddhists were merely one group of Shamaniya/Samaniya. Dodge suggests that the Shamaniya were 'idolaters of Central Asia who became somewhat influenced by Buddhism'. The heresiographical works, however, indicate that they were an Indian group (vocalised as sumaniya313) and that their tenets, in particular, takäfiC aladilla,31t reflect Jain rather than Buddhist views.315 The etymology of samanlya¡sumanlya¡shamanlya is more certain than its historical application; it is derived from transliteration into Arabic of the Pali samana (Skt., sramana), meaning 'monk'. 316 In sum, the vocabulary which Muslim writers prior to Shahrastani used

311 312

313

314

315

:!l6

Ar.: buwäsaf or budäsaf; Dodge, op. cit., II, p. 824, fn. 478. Ibid, II, pp. 824-25. There is a hiatus in the manuscripts at the end of the passage, indicating that part of the original text has been lost. M. Horten, Die philosophischen Systeme der spekulativen Theologen im Islam, pp. 89 f. Baghdad! (Halkin, trans., op. cit., pp. 91, 174 and 219) also uses the vocalisation sumaniya. Literally, 'the equivalence of proofs' for suggesting that divine acts are either good or evil. S. Nadvi, op. cit., p. 136. Nadvi's entire article (pp. 120 f.) presents a checkered picture of early Muslim perceptions of Buddhism. Eliot (op. cit., I, p. 506, fn. 1) also mentions several citations of samanl in classical literature; in this connection, cf. infra, p. 313. Reinaud (op. cit., p. 89) was probably the first to guess this derivation, though he wrongly suggested that Arabs rather than Buddhists dropped the 'r' and modified the sibilant of Skt., sramana.

108

Commentary III: Ashäb al bidada

to refer to Buddhism was restricted, as was the treatment of the subject itself. Though there were some problems with the referents of particular terms, the terms themselves were loosely standardized: budd, büdäsaf and samanlya.

B. Shahrastäni's Presentation of the Buddha(s) and Buddhism In the context of previous Muslim literature on Buddhism, the ΆrS al-hind'' essay on 'Followers of the Buddhas' immediátely presents some surprising terminological shifts. The plural (bidada) is used as frequently as the singular budd, both terms clearly referring to the Buddha and not to some representation of him or an idol in general. The term büdäsaf, which, according to Dodge, may be a corruption of Bodhisattva,317 is not used at all. Instead, we find the status of Bodhisattva expressed by the term bûdïsa'ïya. Samanlya, as a designation for the Buddhist community, is also omitted, and in its place Shahrastäni employs the more lucid construct ashäb al-bidada. In vocabulary alone, therefore, Shahrastäni's sub-chapter represents a near total break from earlier Muslim depictions of the Buddha(s) and Buddhists, as they are known to us. The composition is also novel in its content. It depicts the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas in moderate detail, though saying nothing about Buddhists as a community. The overall impression is of an essay which juxtaposes accurate observations with gawky errors. For instance, the initial categorization of the followers of the Buddhas as a sub-group of the Barähima is wrong. Though, in the opinion of one scholar, 'Buddhism never cut itself asunder from the parent stock of Brahmanism', 318 the Buddhist faith initially and continuously posed a frontal assault on the doctrinal views of Brahmanism; hence it is almost a caricature of Buddhist self-understanding to present Buddhism as a Brahmanical sect. Shahrastäni's motive for including the followers of the Buddhas in this category may have been partially based on a widespread notion - expressed, for 317 318

Dodge, op. cit., II, p. 908. R. C. Mitra, 'The Decline of Buddhism in India', Visva-bharati Annals VI (1954), p. 150.

Chapter One

109

instance, by Gardizi319 - that the Buddhists rejected the prophets. Since the Barâhima, as interpreted within kaläm, were also charged with the denial of prophecy, it is not inconceivable that Shahrastânï assumed an historical as well as ideological tie between Buddhists and Brahmans. At the same time, the depiction of the Buddha himself is moderately accurate. The initial string of attributes ('the one who is not born', etc.) corresponds to the Dharmakäya of the Buddha, i.e., his existence 'beyond all personal limitations, and "empty" of any definable properties'.320 What follows in the next two sentences is a depiction of the Nirmäaakäya of the Buddha, i.e., the magical but partial transformation of the supernatural Buddha 'adopted out of compassion in order to lead beings to liberation'.321 Säkyamuni was not, however, the first Buddha appearing in the present cycle. There were a number of Buddhas who preceded him, estimates ranging from three (Theravädins) to infinite (Abhidharmakosa) .322 Nonetheless, there is a circuitous support within Buddhist literature for Shahrastäni's assertion that Säkyamuni was the first Buddha: according to the Abhidharmakosa, the name of the first Buddha worshipped by Säkyamuni and before whom he vowed to become a Buddha was also named Säkyamuni.323 The next two points of information in Milal wan-nihal, however, are wide of the mark. Säkyamuni does not mean as-sayyid ash-sharlf ('the noble master'), but since 'the sage (muni) of the Säkya clan' was highly esteemed, as-sayyid ash-sharlf is at least a fitting epithet. There can be no escape, on the other hand, from admitting that ca. 4400 B.C. is an erroneous date for the appearance of Gautama Buddha in the present cycle. There have been and still are differences as to the time of the death of the Buddha, but no estimates range as far back as Shahrastäni's conjecture.324 It is small consolation that Shahrastäni's predecessor, Mas'üdi, was equally confused

319 320 321 322 323 324

Minorsky, 'Gardïzï on India', p. 630 top. H. von Glasenapp, Buddhism, p. 82; also, R. C. Chaube, op. cit., p. 133. Von Glasenapp, op. cit., p. 81. Ibid, p. 78. Ibid, p. 78. The earliest is 543 B. C., the date which South East Asian Buddhists maintain, though historical evidence favors 486 B. C; É. Lamotte, Histoire du bouddhisme indien, p. 14.

110

Commentary III: Ashäb al bidada

about the appearance of the first Buddha, dating him back 12,000 times 33,000 years.325 The next series of observations concern the Büdisa'iya (Bodhisattva). Not only are they accurate in a more consistent manner than the preceding remarks about the Buddha(s), but they comprise the principal value of Shahrastäni's contribution to the Muslim understanding of Buddhism. The term büdisa'iya, as already noted, is unique to Milal wan-nihal. As with shäkamin, the etymology is spurious, since Bodhisattva is usually rendered as 'the enlightened being' or 'the one whose essence is illumination'.326 Nonetheless, the migrant nature of the Bodhisattva is accurately reflected in the phrase al-insänu'l-tälibu sabila Ί-haqq, 'the man who seeks the path of truth'. 327 Furthermore, in describing the Bodhisattva as occupying a rank beneath that of the Buddha, Shahrastäni reiterates a viewpoint that was prevalent during the early phase of Mahäyäna when 'the Bodhisattvas were held to be inferior and subordinate to the Buddhas'.328 The remainder of this section is devoted to explaining how difficult it is to attain the status of Bodhisattva. (It is assumed that the attainment of Buddhahood is unthinkable and, therefore, indescribable.) There are five general dicta, followed by two lists of ten specific actions, the second being allegedly the positive form of the ten prohibitions set forth in the first. If it were possible to trace the historical background of this information, one could learn much about a unique Muslim appreciation of Buddhism; but lacking even a shred of evidence about the historical antecedents of the passage, one can only offer a form critical portrait of its contents.

325

326

327

328

Mas'üdi, Tanbih, p. 201. 12,000 divine years completes a mahäyuga, but 33,000 is puzzling and without correspondence in Indian calculations. The variety of definitions for Bodhisattva offered in the major Western sources on Buddhism are summarized by H. Dayal (The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature, pp. 4-9). It is difficult to explain this 'translation' etymologically. Boctti'-rendered as sabila Ί-haqq is plausible, even though bodhi-, in Buddhist terms, is identified with the truth itself rather than the means to its achievement, al-fälib has no relationship to -sattva, but it would correspond to -sakta 'devoted to or attached to', suggesting an antecedent bodhisakta rather than bodhisattva for Arabic, büdisa'iya; yet no linguistic principle would support such a shift. Dayal, op. cit., p. 44.

Chapter One

111

There is considerable repetition and expansion of the cited virtues. Even the five general statements are more closely related to each other than the author implies. Hence, [a] ksänti ('patience') däna ('alms-giving') ought to be matched with [e] karuaä ('compassion'). The latter quality, renowned as the 'attribute of a perfect Buddha and of a budding Bodhisattva', is actually more 'intimately associated with the dänä-päramitä'.329 At the same time, [b] 'seeking after what ought to be sought' is simply the positive statement of what immediately follows it, i.e., [c] 'abstinence from the world, etc.' and [d] 'abstinence from what is forbidden'. There are some unusual features in the two lists [f] and [g]. The ten offenses cited in [f] ought to be the ten virtues of [g] placed in the negative form by having viratih ('abstention') prefixed to each of them. Such is not the case; the lists [f] and [g] differ substantially from each other. Moreover, [f] only partially corresponds to the ten karma-pathäh ('ways of action') cited in Buddhist literature. The first four offenses which the Bodhisattva must avoid, according to Milal wan-nihal, do correspond accurately to the Buddhist requirements, as a citation of their Sanskrit equivalents makes clear :330 1. präaätipätäd viratih - 'abstention from killing living beings' 2. adattädänäd viratih - 'abstention from taking what is not given' 3. kämamithyäcäräd viratih - 'abstention from false conduct with regard to sensual pleasures' 4. mrsävädäd viratih - 'abstention from telling lies'. However, the fifth karma-pathah in the Buddhist lists is paisunyäd viratih, 'abstention from slander', which seems to fit best with # 8A on Shahrastäni's list. On close examination, moreover, it is apparent that 4? 5A, # 7A, and # 8A all belong together, and that the problem is not to match # 5A with its Sanskrit equivalent, but to explain the expansion of # 5 A into # 7 A and # 8A. # 6A on Shahrastäni's list poses a different kind of problem : Ar., badhä' means 'foul, disgusting, and obscene (in one's language)', while # 6 in the Buddhist lists, pärusyad viratih, means 'abstention from harsh, bitter, 329 330

Ibid, p. 178. On the däna-päramitä, cf. ibid, p. 209f. I am indebted to ibid, pp. 199-204, for much of the information, including the citation and rendition of Sanskrit terms, set forth in the next two paragraphs. His principal Buddhist source was the Dasabhümika Sütra, a copy of which was not available to me.

112

Commentary III: Ashäb al bidada

offensive, vulgar and angry speech'. The correspondence is not exact, since the Arabic word has lewder overtones that the Buddhist precept suggests, and yet the two are not markedly different. # 7A and # 8A have no equivalent in the karma-pathah except insofar as they are combined with #5A. Shahrastânï's #9A, Ar., safah, may refer to anything foolish, and here is best rendered as 'foolish conversation'; it then corresponds to # 7 in the Buddhist lists: sambhinnapraläpäd viratili ('abstention from frivolous and senseless talk'). Milal wan-nihal # 10A, 'to deny reward in the next life', is an accurate reflection of the tenth karma-pathah, since the latter enjoins abstention from false views (mithyädrster viratih), one of which is unbelief in the existence of the next life. In sum, the entire list of offenses found in Milal wan-nihal, with two exceptions, corresponds almost exactly to the negative form of 'the Ways of Action' incumbent upon the Bodhisattva. The two Buddhist precepts omitted from Shahrastânï's list are # 7, abhidhäya viratih ('abstention from covetousness') and # 8, vyäpädäd viratih ('abstention from malevolence'). Nowhere in extant Muslim literature from the medieval period is there a list of comparable detail and accuracy concerning the Bodhisattva offenses; by itself it is a valuable instruction on the ethical ideals of a significant nonMuslim group. The list of Bodhisattva virtues which follows is not, however, the positive statement of the list of offenses which one would expect. The first three virtues (#1B, #2B, and #3B) might be interpreted as the equivalent opposite of the first three offenses just cited; all three of the former and the latter relate to acts of the body, and all three underscore the ideal of karunä ('compassion'), which is at the heart of the Bodhisattva ethic. However, #4B, #5B, #6B, # 9 B and #10B all stress the importance of mind control, which in the list of offenses was represented only once, i.e., in # 10A. Furthermore, the aberrations of speech, which dominated the list of offenses, viz., # 4 A - # 9 A , are explicitly noted only in #7B; #8B, which might supplement #7B, could also reinforce # IB. In short, there is not the complementary pattern between lists [f] and [g] which Buddhist ethics suggests, and without knowledge of the historical antecedents for Shahrastânï's report, it is impossible to say why the Milal wan-nihal enumeration of offenses differs from that of the Buddhist texts. Following the discourse on Bodhisattvas, Shahrastânï returns to his

Chapter One

113

depiction of the Buddhas and provides further information of mixed accuracy about their appearances in the Nirmäaakäya. The tradition that there are seven Buddhas is ancient, but the reason for seven is usually given as the existence of seven planets, with the Buddhas corresponding to the seven rsis.331 While the number of Buddhas is linked with the Ganges River in some traditions, it is the banks rather than the branches of the sacred river which are deemed important: 'the Buddhas,' it is said, 'are like the sands on the banks of the Ganges.'332 The restriction of the Buddhas to families of kings is also well attested and derives from the fact that Gautama's father Suddhodana was a ksatriya king. No less widely known is the tradition that the Buddhas are born only in India or Jambudvipa.333 The last two assertions in Shahrastani's essay, however, illustrate once again its uneven factual content. Neither can be understood on the basis of Buddhist sources alone. The notion that all the Buddhas concur on the eternity (Ar., azalíya) of the world may reflect the Indian concept of eternal or cyclical time, but the world, in the sense of this phenomenal world, was considered unreal by the Buddhists as well as by a number of Hindus (e.g., the Advaitans). It seems likely that Shahrastäni is here referring to the view which earlier Muslim heresiographers, e.g., Baghdädi, had falsely ascribed to the sumanlya: 'they teach the pre-existence of the world'.334 The final line in the Milal wan-nihal portrayal of the Buddhas also requires interpretation from Muslim sources. Shahrastäni compares the Buddha with al-Khidr. The comparison is suggestive. Both the Buddha and al-Khidr are closely linked with the quest for enlightenment. Al-Khidr or al-Khadir, moreover, is widely revered in both Qur'änic and mystical traditions.335

331

Ibid, p. 24. Ibid, p. 25. 333 yon Glasenapp, op. cit., p. 77, where reference is made to Abhidharmakosa 7, 30a, V, p. 71. 334 Halkin, op. cit., p. 219. Neither the eternity nor the creation of the world is asserted in Theravädin Buddhist writings; both contradict the central tenet of conditioned coarising (Skt., pratityasamutpäda) which dominates early Buddhist speculations. 335 C. Huart ('al-Khadir', £"/, II, pp. 861-65) discusses both traditions. The critical Qur'änic passage is S. 18.59-81. The development of al-Khi