{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_58977/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_58977","id":"gutenberg_58977","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/58977","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Biographies","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Ghazzali, 1058-1111","Islamic philosophy -- Early works to 1800","Sufism -- Early works to 1800"],"text":"Produced by Fritz Ohrenschall and the Online Distributed\nProofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was\nproduced from images generously made available by The\nInternet Archive)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n    The Wisdom of the East Series\n\n    EDITED BY\n    L. CRANMER-BYNG\n    Dr. S. A. KAPADIA\n\n    THE CONFESSIONS OF AL GHAZZALI\n\n\n\n    \u201cHe who knows himself knows God.\u201d\n\n                     SAYINGS OF MUHAMMED.\n\n\n\n\n                           WISDOM OF THE EAST\n\n                           THE CONFESSIONS OF\n                               AL GHAZZALI\n\n                      TRANSLATED FOR THE FIRST TIME\n                              INTO ENGLISH\n\n                          BY CLAUD FIELD, M.A.\n\n                             [Illustration]\n\n                                 LONDON\n                    JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET, W.\n                                  1909\n\n                               PRINTED BY\n                      HAZELL, WATSON AND VINEY, LD.\n                          LONDON AND AYLESBURY.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n                                                                      PAGE\n\n    INTRODUCTION                                                         7\n\n    Ghazzali\u2019s Search for Truth                                         11\n\n    The Subterfuges of the Sophists                                     15\n\n    The Different Kinds of Seekers after Truth                          20\n\n    The Aim of Scholastic Theology and its Results                      21\n\n    Concerning the Philosophical Sects and the Stigma of Infidelity\n      which attaches to them all                                        25\n\n    Divisions of the Philosophic Sciences                               27\n\n    Sufism                                                              41\n\n    The Reality of Inspiration: its Importance for the Human Race       50\n\n\n\n\nEDITORIAL NOTE\n\n\nThe object of the Editors of this series is a very definite one. They\ndesire above all things that, in their humble way, these books shall be\nthe ambassadors of good-will and understanding between East and West\u2014the\nold world of Thought and the new of Action. In this endeavour, and in\ntheir own sphere, they are but followers of the highest example in the\nland. They are confident that a deeper knowledge of the great ideals and\nlofty philosophy of Oriental thought may help to a revival of that true\nspirit of Charity which neither despises nor fears the nations of another\ncreed and colour. Finally, in thanking press and public for the very\ncordial reception given to the \u201cWisdom of the East\u201d Series, they wish to\nstate that no pains have been spared to secure the best specialists for\nthe treatment of the various subjects at hand.\n\n                                                         L. CRANMER-BYNG.\n                                                         S. A. KAPADIA.\n\nNORTHBROOK SOCIETY, 185 PICCADILLY, W.\n\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\nBIRTH OF GHAZZALI\n\n\nAbo\u00fb H\u00e2mid Muhammed Ibn Muhammad Al Ghazzali was born in the city of Tus\nin Khorassan, A.D. 1058, one year after the great poet and freethinker\nAbu\u2019 l\u2019 Al\u0101 died. He was the son of a dealer in cotton thread (Gazz\u00e2l),\nwhence his name. Losing his father in early life, he was confided to the\ncare of a Sufi, whose influence extended through his subsequent career.\nOn finishing his studies he was appointed professor of theology at\nBagdad. Here he achieved such splendid success that all the Im\u0101ms became\nhis zealous partisans. So great, indeed, was his renown, so ardent the\nadmiration he inspired, that the Muhammedans sometimes said: \u201cIf all the\nbooks of Islam were destroyed, it would be but a slight loss, provided Al\nGhazzali\u2019s work on the Revivification of the Sciences of Religion were\npreserved.\u201d The following short treatise gives the history of the mind\nof this remarkable man in his pursuit of truth. It might not inaptly\nbear the title \u201cConfessions of an Inquiring Spirit.\u201d In its intellectual\nsubtlety it bears a certain resemblance to Newman\u2019s _Grammar of Assent_,\nand in its almost Puritanical sense of the terrors of the world to come,\nit is akin to Bunyan\u2019s _Grace Abounding_. It is also interesting as being\none of the very few specimens of genuine Eastern autobiography.\n\nAfter describing the difficulty with which he escaped from an almost\nPyrrhonic scepticism, \u201cnot by systematic reasoning and accumulation of\nproofs, but by a flash of light which God sent into my soul,\u201d he reviews\nthe various sects whom he encountered in his search for truth.\n\nI. The scholastic theologians, who profess to follow reason and\nspeculation.\n\nII. The philosophers, who call themselves masters of Logic and\nDemonstration.\n\nIII. The Sufis, who claim an immediate intuition, and who perceive the\nreal manifestation of truth as common men perceive material phenomena.\n\nAfter mastering the first two systems and still finding the great problem\nunsolved, he was forced to pronounce philosophy incompetent, and to\nseek in some higher faculty than reason the solution of his doubts.\nThe intuition or ecstasy (\u201cwajd\u201d) of the Sufis was to him a sort of\nrevelation. His search for truth occupied several years, in the course of\nwhich he renounced his professorship of theology at Bagdad and went into\ndevotional retirement at Jerusalem and Damascus, and also performed the\npilgrimage to Mecca.\n\nHe returned for a short time to Nishapur, the birthplace of Omar Khayy\u0101m,\nhis elder contemporary, whom, as Professor Browne tells us in his\n_History of Persian Literature_, he met and disliked. He finally went\nback to Tus, his native place, where he died, A.D. 1111. Professor D.\nB. Macdonald, in an article on Ghazzali in the _Journal of the American\nOriental Society_, quotes the following account of his death as related\nby his brother Ahmad: \u201cOn Monday at dawn my brother performed the\nablution and prayed. Then he said, \u2018Bring me my grave-clothes,\u2019 and he\ntook them and kissed them, and laid them on his eyes and said, \u2018I hear\nand obey the command to go into the King.\u2019 And he stretched out his feet\nand went to meet Him and was taken to the good-will of God Most High.\u201d\n\nThe great service which Al Ghazzali rendered to the Sufis was, as Mr.\nWhinfield has pointed out, in the preface to his translation of the\nMasnavi, to provide them with a metaphysical terminology which he had\nderived from the writings of Plotinus the Neo-Platonist. He also gave\nthem a secure position in the Church of Islam.\n\nIn his _Development of Muslim Theology_ Professor Macdonald calls\nGhazzali \u201cthe greatest, certainly the most sympathetic figure in the\nhistory of Islam, and the only teacher of the after generations ever put\nby a Muslim on a level with the four great Im\u0101ms.\u201d He further says of\nhim: \u201cIslam has never outgrown him, has never fully understood him. In\nthe renaissance of Islam which is now rising to view, his time will come,\nand the new life will proceed from a renewed study of his works.\u201d\n\n                                                                    C. F.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CONFESSIONS OF AL GHAZZALI\n\n\n\n\nGHAZZALI\u2019S SEARCH FOR TRUTH\n\n\u201c_In the name of the most merciful God._\u201d\n\n\nQuoth the Im\u0101m Ghazzali:\n\nGlory be to God, Whose praise should precede every writing and every\nspeech! May the blessings of God rest on Muhammed His Prophet and His\nApostle, on his family and companions, by whose guidance error is escaped!\n\nYou have asked me, O brother in the faith, to expound the aim and the\nmysteries of religious sciences, the boundaries and depths of theological\ndoctrines. You wish to know my experiences while disentangling truth lost\nin the medley of sects and divergencies of thought, and how I have dared\nto climb from the low levels of traditional belief to the topmost summit\nof assurance. You desire to learn what I have borrowed, first of all from\nscholastic theology; and secondly from the method of the Ta\u2019limites,\nwho, in seeking truth, rest upon the authority of a leader; and why,\nthirdly, I have been led to reject philosophic systems; and finally, what\nI have accepted of the doctrine of the Sufis, and the sum total of truth\nwhich I have gathered in studying every variety of opinion. You ask me\nwhy, after resigning at Bagdad a teaching post which attracted a number\nof hearers, I have, long afterwards, accepted a similar one at Nishapur.\nConvinced as I am of the sincerity which prompts your inquiries, I\nproceed to answer them, invoking the help and protection of God.\n\nKnow then, my brothers (may God direct you in the right way), that the\ndiversity in beliefs and religions, and the variety of doctrines and\nsects which divide men, are like a deep ocean strewn with shipwrecks,\nfrom which very few escape safe and sound. Each sect, it is true,\nbelieves itself in possession of the truth and of salvation, \u201ceach\nparty,\u201d as the Koran saith, \u201crejoices in its own creed\u201d; but as the\nchief of the apostles, whose word is always truthful, has told us, \u201cMy\npeople will be divided into more than seventy sects, of whom only one\nwill be saved.\u201d This prediction, like all others of the Prophet, must be\nfulfilled.\n\nFrom the period of adolescence, that is to say, previous to reaching my\ntwentieth year to the present time when I have passed my fiftieth, I\nhave ventured into this vast ocean; I have fearlessly sounded its depths,\nand, like a resolute diver, I have penetrated its darkness and dared its\ndangers and abysses. I have interrogated the beliefs of each sect and\nscrutinised the mysteries of each doctrine, in order to disentangle truth\nfrom error and orthodoxy from heresy. I have never met one who maintained\nthe hidden meaning of the Koran without investigating the nature of his\nbelief, nor a partisan of its exterior sense without inquiring into the\nresults of his doctrine. There is no philosopher whose system I have not\nfathomed, nor theologian the intricacies of whose doctrine I have not\nfollowed out.\n\nSufism has no secrets into which I have not penetrated; the devout adorer\nof Deity has revealed to me the aim of his austerities; the atheist has\nnot been able to conceal from me the real reason of his unbelief. The\nthirst for knowledge was innate in me from an early age; it was like a\nsecond nature implanted by God, without any will on my part. No sooner\nhad I emerged from boyhood than I had already broken the fetters of\ntradition and freed myself from hereditary beliefs.\n\nHaving noticed how easily the children of Christians become Christians,\nand the children of Moslems embrace Islam, and remembering also the\ntraditional saying ascribed to the Prophet, \u201cEvery child has in him\nthe germ of Islam, then his parents make him Jew, Christian, or\nZoroastrian,\u201d I was moved by a keen desire to learn what was this innate\ndisposition in the child, the nature of the accidental beliefs imposed\non him by the authority of his parents and his masters, and finally the\nunreasoned convictions which he derives from their instructions.\n\nStruck with the contradictions which I encountered in endeavouring to\ndisentangle the truth and falsehood of these opinions, I was led to make\nthe following reflection: \u201cThe search after truth being the aim which I\npropose to myself, I ought in the first place to ascertain what are the\nbases of certitude.\u201d In the next place I recognised that certitude is the\nclear and complete knowledge of things, such knowledge as leaves no room\nfor doubt nor possibility of error and conjecture, so that there remains\nno room in the mind for error to find an entrance. In such a case it\nis necessary that the mind, fortified against all possibility of going\nastray, should embrace such a strong conviction that, if, for example,\nany one possessing the power of changing a stone into gold, or a stick\ninto a serpent, should seek to shake the bases of this certitude, it\nwould remain firm and immovable. Suppose, for instance, a man should come\nand say to me, who am firmly convinced that ten is more than three, \u201cNo;\non the contrary, three is more than ten, and, to prove it, I change this\nrod into a serpent,\u201d and supposing that he actually did so, I should\nremain none the less convinced of the falsity of his assertion, and\nalthough his miracle might arouse my astonishment, it would not instil\nany doubt into my belief.\n\nI then understood that all forms of knowledge which do not unite these\nconditions (imperviousness to doubt, etc.) do not deserve any confidence,\nbecause they are not beyond the reach of doubt, and what is not\nimpregnable to doubt cannot constitute certitude.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SUBTERFUGES OF THE SOPHISTS\n\n\nI then examined what knowledge I possessed, and discovered that in none\nof it, with the exception of sense-perceptions and necessary principles,\ndid I enjoy that degree of certitude which I have just described. I\nthen sadly reflected as follows: \u201cWe cannot hope to find truth except\nin matters which carry their evidence in themselves\u2014that is to say, in\nsense-perceptions and necessary principles; we must therefore establish\nthese on a firm basis. Is my absolute confidence in sense-perceptions and\non the infallibility of necessary principles analogous to the confidence\nwhich I formerly possessed in matters believed on the authority of\nothers? Is it only analogous to the reliance most people place on their\norgans of vision, or is it rigorously true without admixture of illusion\nor doubt?\u201d\n\nI then set myself earnestly to examine the notions we derive from the\nevidence of the senses and from sight in order to see if they could be\ncalled in question. The result of a careful examination was that my\nconfidence in them was shaken. Our sight for instance, perhaps the best\npractised of all our senses, observes a shadow, and finding it apparently\nstationary pronounces it devoid of movement. Observation and experience,\nhowever, show subsequently that a shadow moves not suddenly, it is true,\nbut gradually and imperceptibly, so that it is never really motionless.\n\nAgain, the eye sees a star and believes it as large as a piece of gold,\nbut mathematical calculations prove, on the contrary, that it is larger\nthan the earth. These notions, and all others which the senses declare\ntrue, are subsequently contradicted and convicted of falsity in an\nirrefragable manner by the verdict of reason.\n\nThen I reflected in myself: \u201cSince I cannot trust to the evidence of my\nsenses, I must rely only on intellectual notions based on fundamental\nprinciples, such as the following axioms: \u2018Ten is more than three.\nAffirmation and negation cannot coexist together. A thing cannot both\nbe created and also existent from eternity, living and annihilated\nsimultaneously, at once necessary and impossible.\u2019\u201d To this the\nnotions I derived from my senses made the following objections: \u201cWho\ncan guarantee you that you can trust to the evidence of reason more\nthan to that of the senses? You believed in our testimony till it was\ncontradicted by the verdict of reason, otherwise you would have continued\nto believe it to this day. Well, perhaps, there is above reason another\njudge who, if he appeared, would convict reason of falsehood, just as\nreason has confuted us. And if such a third arbiter is not yet apparent,\nit does not follow that he does not exist.\u201d\n\nTo this argument I remained some time without reply; a reflection drawn\nfrom the phenomena of sleep deepened my doubt. \u201cDo you not see,\u201d I\nreflected, \u201cthat while asleep you assume your dreams to be indisputably\nreal? Once awake, you recognise them for what they are\u2014baseless chimeras.\nWho can assure you, then, of the reliability of notions which, when\nawake, you derive from the senses and from reason? In relation to your\npresent state they may be real; but it is possible also that you may\nenter upon another state of being which will bear the same relation to\nyour present state as this does to your condition when asleep. In that\nnew sphere you will recognise that the conclusions of reason are only\nchimeras.\u201d\n\nThis possible condition is, perhaps, that which the Sufis call \u201cecstasy\u201d\n(\u201ch\u0101l\u201d), that is to say, according to them, a state in which, absorbed\nin themselves and in the suspension of sense-perceptions, they have\nvisions beyond the reach of intellect. Perhaps also Death is that state,\naccording to that saying of the Prince of prophets: \u201cMen are asleep;\nwhen they die, they wake.\u201d Our present life in relation to the future\nis perhaps only a dream, and man, once dead, will see things in direct\nopposition to those now before his eyes; he will then understand that\nword of the Koran, \u201cTo-day we have removed the veil from thine eyes and\nthy sight is keen.\u201d\n\nSuch thoughts as these threatened to shake my reason, and I sought to\nfind an escape from them. But how? In order to disentangle the knot of\nthis difficulty, a proof was necessary. Now a proof must be based on\nprimary assumptions, and it was precisely these of which I was in doubt.\nThis unhappy state lasted about two months, during which I was, not,\nit is true, explicitly or by profession, but morally and essentially a\nthoroughgoing sceptic.\n\nGod at last deigned to heal me of this mental malady; my mind recovered\nsanity and equilibrium, the primary assumptions of reason recovered\nwith me all their stringency and force. I owed my deliverance, not to a\nconcatenation of proofs and arguments, but to the light which God caused\nto penetrate into my heart\u2014the light which illuminates the threshold of\nall knowledge. To suppose that certitude can be only based upon formal\narguments is to limit the boundless mercy of God. Some one asked the\nProphet the explanation of this passage in the Divine Book: \u201cGod opens\nto Islam the heart of him whom He chooses to direct.\u201d \u201cThat is spoken,\u201d\nreplied the Prophet, \u201cof the light which God sheds in the heart.\u201d \u201cAnd\nhow can man recognise that light?\u201d he was asked. \u201cBy his detachment\nfrom this world of illusion and by a secret drawing towards the eternal\nworld,\u201d the Prophet replied.\n\nOn another occasion he said: \u201cGod has created His creatures in darkness,\nand then has shed upon them His light.\u201d It is by the help of this light\nthat the search for truth must be carried on. As by His mercy this light\ndescends from time to time among men, we must ceaselessly be on the watch\nfor it. This is also corroborated by another saying of the Apostle: \u201cGod\nsends upon you, at certain times, breathings of His grace; be prepared\nfor them.\u201d\n\nMy object in this account is to make others understand with what\nearnestness we should search for truth, since it leads to results we\nnever dreamt of. Primary assumptions have not got to be sought for, since\nthey are always present to our minds; if we engage in such a search, we\nonly find them persistently elude our grasp. But those who push their\ninvestigation beyond ordinary limits are safe from the suspicion of\nnegligence in pursuing what is within their reach.\n\n\n\n\nTHE DIFFERENT KINDS OF SEEKERS AFTER TRUTH\n\n\nWhen God in the abundance of His mercy had healed me of this malady, I\nascertained that those who are engaged in the search for truth may be\ndivided into three groups.\n\nI. Scholastic theologians, who profess to follow theory and speculation.\n\nII. The Philosophers, who profess to rely upon formal logic.\n\nIII. The Sufis, who call themselves the elect of God and possessors of\nintuition and knowledge of the truth by means of ecstasy.\n\n\u201cThe truth,\u201d I said to myself, \u201cmust be found among these three classes\nof men who devote themselves to the search for it. If it escapes them,\none must give up all hope of attaining it. Having once surrendered blind\nbelief, it is impossible to return to it, for the essence of such belief\nis to be unconscious of itself. As soon as this unconsciousness ceases\nit is shattered like a glass whose fragments cannot be again reunited\nexcept by being cast again into the furnace and refashioned.\u201d Determined\nto follow these paths and to search out these systems to the bottom,\nI proceeded with my investigations in the following order: Scholastic\ntheology; philosophical systems; and, finally Sufism.\n\n\n\n\nTHE AIM OF SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY AND ITS RESULTS\n\n\nCommencing with theological science, I carefully studied and meditated\nupon it. I read the writings of the authorities in this department and\nmyself composed several treatises. I recognised that this science, while\nsufficing its own requirements, could not assist me in arriving at the\ndesired goal. In short, its object is to preserve the purity of orthodox\nbeliefs from all heretical innovation. God, by means of His Apostle,\nhas revealed to His creatures a belief which is true as regards their\ntemporal and eternal interests; the chief articles of it are laid down\nin the Koran and in the traditions. Subsequently, Satan suggested to\ninnovators principles contrary to those of orthodoxy; they listened\ngreedily to his suggestions, and the purity of the faith was menaced. God\nthen raised up a school of theologians and inspired them with the desire\nto defend orthodoxy by means of a system of proofs adapted to unveil the\ndevices of the heretics and to foil the attacks which they made on the\ndoctrines established by tradition.\n\nSuch is the origin of scholastic theology. Many of its adepts, worthy of\ntheir high calling, valiantly defended the orthodox faith by proving the\nreality of prophecy and the falsity of heretical innovations. But, in\norder to do so, they had to rely upon a certain number of premises, which\nthey accepted in common with their adversaries, and which authority and\nuniversal consent or simply the Koran and the traditions obliged them\nto accept. Their principal effort was to expose the self-contradictions\nof their opponents and to confute them by means of the premises which\nthey had professed to accept. Now a method of argumentation like this\nhas little value for one who only admits self-evident truths. Scholastic\ntheology could not consequently satisfy me nor heal the malady from which\nI suffered.\n\nIt is true that in its later development theology was not content merely\nto defend dogma; it betook itself to the study of first principles,\nof substances, accidents and the laws which govern them; but through\nwant of a thoroughly scientific basis, it could not advance far in its\nresearches, nor succeed in dispelling entirely the overhanging obscurity\nwhich springs from diversities of belief.\n\nI do not, however, deny that it has had a more satisfactory result for\nothers; on the contrary, I admit that it has; but it is by introducing\nthe principle of authority in matters which are not self-evident.\nMoreover, my object is to explain my own mental attitude and not to\ndispute with those who have found healing for themselves. Remedies vary\naccording to the nature of the disease; those which benefit some may\ninjure others.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nPHILOSOPHY.\u2014How far it is open to censure or not\u2014On what points its\nadherents may be considered believers or unbelievers, orthodox or\nheretical\u2014What they have borrowed from the true doctrine to render their\nchimerical theories acceptable\u2014Why the minds of men swerve from the\ntruth\u2014What criteria are available wherewith to separate the pure gold\nfrom the alloy in their systems.\n\nI proceeded from the study of scholastic theology to that of philosophy.\nIt was plain to me that, in order to discover where the professors of\nany branch of knowledge have erred, one must make a profound study of\nthat science; must equal, nay surpass, those who know most of it, so as\nto penetrate into secrets of it unknown to them. Only by this method\ncan they be completely answered, and of this method I can find no trace\nin the theologians of Islam. In theological writings devoted to the\nrefutation of philosophy I have only found a tangled mass of phrases full\nof contradictions and mistakes, and incapable of deceiving, I will not\nsay a critical mind, but even the common crowd. Convinced that to dream\nof refuting a doctrine before having thoroughly comprehended it was like\nshooting at an object in the dark, I devoted myself zealously to the\nstudy of philosophy; but in books only and without the aid of a teacher.\nI gave up to this work all the leisure remaining from teaching and from\ncomposing works on law. There were then attending my lectures three\nhundred of the students of Bagdad. With the help of God, these studies,\ncarried on in secret, so to speak, put me in a condition to thoroughly\ncomprehend philosophical systems within a space of two years. I then\nspent about a year in meditating on these systems after having thoroughly\nunderstood them. I turned them over and over in my mind till they were\nthoroughly clear of all obscurity. In this manner I acquired a complete\nknowledge of all their subterfuges and subtleties, of what was truth and\nwhat was illusion in them.\n\nI now proceed to give a resum\u00e9 of these doctrines. I ascertained that\nthey were divided into different varieties, and that their adherents\nmight be ranged under diverse heads. All, in spite of their diversity,\nare marked with the stamp of infidelity and irreligion, although there\nis a considerable difference between the ancient and modern, between the\nfirst and last of these philosophers, according as they have missed or\napproximated to the truth in a greater or less degree.\n\n\n\n\nCONCERNING THE PHILOSOPHICAL SECTS AND THE STIGMA OF INFIDELITY WHICH\nATTACHES TO THEM ALL\n\n\nThe philosophical systems, in spite of their number and variety, may be\nreduced to three: (1) The Materialists; (2) The Naturalists; (3) The\nTheists.\n\n(1) _The Materialists._ They reject an intelligent and omnipotent Creator\nand Disposer of the Universe. In their view the world exists from all\neternity and had no author. The animal comes from semen and semen from\nthe animal; so it has always been and will always be; those who maintain\nthis doctrine are atheists.\n\n(2) _The Naturalists._ These devote themselves to the study of nature and\nof the marvellous phenomena of the animal and vegetable world. Having\ncarefully analysed animal organs with the help of anatomy, struck with\nthe wonders of God\u2019s work and with the wisdom therein revealed, they are\nforced to admit the existence of a wise Creator Who knows the end and\npurpose of everything. And certainly no one can study anatomy and the\nwonderful mechanism of living things without being obliged to confess\nthe profound wisdom of Him Who has framed the bodies of animals and\nespecially of man. But carried away by their natural researches they\nbelieved that the existence of a being absolutely depended upon the\nproper equilibrium of its organism. According to them, as the latter\nperishes and is destroyed, so is the thinking faculty which is bound\nup with it; and as they assert that the restoration of a thing once\ndestroyed to existence is unthinkable, they deny the immortality of the\nsoul. Consequently they deny heaven, hell, resurrection, and judgment.\nAcknowledging neither a recompense for good deeds nor a punishment for\nevil ones, they fling off all authority and plunge into sensual pleasures\nwith the avidity of brutes. These also ought to be called atheists, for\nthe true faith depends not only on the acknowledgment of God, but of His\nApostle and of the Day of Judgment. And although they acknowledge God and\nHis attributes, they deny a judgment to come.\n\n(3) Next come the _Theists_. Among them should be reckoned Socrates, who\nwas the teacher of Plato as Plato was of Aristotle. This latter drew up\nfor his disciples the rules of logic, organised the sciences, elucidated\nwhat was formerly obscure, and expounded what had not been understood.\nThis school refuted the systems of the two others, i.e. the Materialists\nand Naturalists; but in exposing their mistaken and perverse beliefs,\nthey made use of arguments which they should not. \u201cGod suffices to\nprotect the faithful in war\u201d (_Koran_, xxxiii. 25).\n\nAristotle also contended with success against the theories of Plato,\nSocrates, and the theists who had preceded him, and separated himself\nentirely from them; but he could not eliminate from his doctrine the\nstains of infidelity and heresy which disfigure the teaching of his\npredecessors. We should therefore consider them all as unbelievers, as\nwell as the so-called Mussulman philosophers, such as Ibn Sina (Avicenna)\nand Farabi, who have adopted their systems.\n\nLet us, however, acknowledge that among Mussulman philosophers none\nhave better interpreted the doctrine of Aristotle than the latter. What\nothers have handed down as his teaching is full of error, confusion,\nand obscurity adapted to disconcert the reader. The unintelligible can\nneither be accepted nor rejected. The philosophy of Aristotle, all\nserious knowledge of which we owe to the translation of these two learned\nmen, may be divided into three portions: the first contains matter justly\nchargeable with impiety, the second is tainted with heresy, and the third\nwe are obliged to reject absolutely. We proceed to details:\n\n\n\n\nDIVISIONS OF THE PHILOSOPHIC SCIENCES\n\n\nThese sciences, in relation to the aim we have set before us, may be\ndivided into six sections: (1) Mathematics; (2) Logic; (3) Physics; (4)\nMetaphysics; (5) Politics; (6) Moral Philosophy.\n\nMathematics comprises the knowledge of calculation, geometry, and\ncosmography: it has no connection with the religious sciences, and proves\nnothing for or against religion; it rests on a foundation of proofs\nwhich, once known and understood, cannot be refuted. Mathematics tend,\nhowever, to produce two bad results.\n\nThe first is this: Whoever studies this science admires the subtlety and\nclearness of its proofs. His confidence in philosophy increases, and he\nthinks that all its departments are capable of the same clearness and\nsolidity of proof as mathematics. But when he hears people speak of the\nunbelief and impiety of mathematicians, of their professed disregard for\nthe Divine Law, which is notorious, it is true that, out of regard for\nauthority, he echoes these accusations, but he says to himself at the\nsame time that, if there was truth in religion, it would not have escaped\nthose who have displayed so much keenness of intellect in the study of\nmathematics.\n\nNext, when he becomes aware of the unbelief and rejection of religion\non the part of these learned men, he concludes that to reject religion\nis reasonable. How many of such men gone astray I have met whose sole\nargument was that just mentioned. And supposing one puts to them the\nfollowing objection: \u201cIt does not follow that a man who excels in one\nbranch of knowledge excels in all others, nor that he should be equally\nversed in jurisprudence, theology, and medicine. It is possible to be\nentirely ignorant of metaphysics, and yet to be an excellent grammarian.\nThere are past masters in every science who are entirely ignorant of\nother branches of knowledge. The arguments of the ancient philosophers\nare rigidly demonstrative in mathematics and only conjectural in\nreligious questions. In order to ascertain this one must proceed to a\nthorough examination of the matter.\u201d Supposing, I say, one makes the\nabove objection to these \u201capes of unbelief,\u201d they find it distasteful.\nFalling a prey to their passions, to a besotted vanity, and the wish to\npass for learned men, they persist in maintaining the pre-eminence of\nmathematicians in all branches of knowledge. This is a serious evil, and\nfor this reason those who study mathematics should be checked from going\ntoo far in their researches. For though far removed as it may be from the\nthings of religion, this study, serving as it does as an introduction to\nthe philosophic systems, casts over religion its malign influence. It is\nrarely that a man devotes himself to it without robbing himself of his\nfaith and casting off the restraints of religion.\n\nThe second evil comes from the sincere but ignorant Mussulman who thinks\nthe best way to defend religion is by rejecting all the exact sciences.\nAccusing their professors of being astray, he rejects their theories\nof the eclipses of the sun and moon, and condemns them in the name of\nreligion. These accusations are carried far and wide, they reach the\nears of the philosopher who knows that these theories rest on infallible\nproofs; far from losing confidence in them, he believes, on the contrary,\nthat Islam has ignorance and the denial of scientific proofs for its\nbasis, and his devotion to philosophy increases with his hatred to\nreligion.\n\nIt is therefore a great injury to religion to suppose that the defence of\nIslam involves the condemnation of the exact sciences. The religious law\ncontains nothing which approves them or condemns them, and in their turn\nthey make no attack on religion. The words of the Prophet, \u201cThe sun and\nthe moon are two signs of the power of God; they are not eclipsed for the\nbirth or the death of any one; when you see these signs take refuge in\nprayer and invoke the name of God\u201d\u2014these words, I say, do not in any way\ncondemn the astronomical calculations which define the orbits of these\ntwo bodies, their conjunction and opposition according to particular\nlaws. But as for the so-called tradition, \u201cWhen God reveals Himself in\nanything, He abases Himself thereto,\u201d it is unauthentic, and not found in\nany trustworthy collection of the traditions.\n\nSuch is the bearing and the possible danger of mathematics.\n\n(2) _Logic._ This science, in the same manner, contains nothing for or\nagainst religion. Its object is the study of different kinds of proofs\nand syllogisms, the conditions which should hold between the premises of\na proposition, the way to combine them, the rules of a good definition,\nand the art of formulating it. For knowledge consists of conceptions\nwhich spring from a definition or of convictions which arise from proofs.\nThere is therefore nothing censurable in this science, and it is laid\nunder contribution by theologians as well as by philosophers. The only\ndifference is that the latter use a particular set of technical formul\u00e6\nand that they push their divisions and subdivisions further.\n\nIt may be asked, What, then, this has to do with the grave questions\nof religion, and on what ground opposition should be offered to the\nmethods of logic? The objector, it will be said, can only inspire the\nlogician with an unfavourable opinion of the intelligence and faith of\nhis adversary, since the latter\u2019s faith seems to be based upon such\nobjections. But, it must be admitted, logic is liable to abuse. Logicians\ndemand in reasoning certain conditions which lead to absolute certainty,\nbut when they touch on religious questions, they can no longer postulate\nthese conditions, and ought therefore to relax their habitual rigour. It\nhappens, accordingly, that a student who is enamoured of the evidential\nmethods of logic, hearing his teachers accused of irreligion, believes\nthat this irreligion reposes on proofs as strong as those of logic, and\nimmediately, without attempting the study of metaphysics, shares their\nmistake. This is a serious disadvantage arising from the study of logic.\n\n(3) _Physics._ The object of this science is the study of the bodies\nwhich compose the universe: the sky and the stars, and, here below,\nsimple elements such as air, earth, water, fire, and compound\nbodies\u2014animals, plants and minerals; the reasons of their changes,\ndevelopments, and intermixture. By the nature of its researches it is\nclosely connected with the study of medicine, the object of which is\nthe human body, its principal and secondary organs, and the law which\ngoverns their changes. Religion having no fault to find with medical\nscience cannot justly do so with physical, except on some special\nmatters which we have mentioned in the work entitled _The Destruction\nof the Philosophers_. Besides these primary questions, there are some\nsubordinate ones depending on them, on which physical science is open\nto objection. But all physical science rests, as we believe, on the\nfollowing principle: Nature is entirely subject to God; incapable of\nacting by itself, it is an instrument in the hand of the Creator; sun,\nmoon, stars, and elements are subject to God and can produce nothing of\nthemselves. In a word, nothing in nature can act spontaneously and apart\nfrom God.\n\n(4) _Metaphysics._ This is the fruitful breeding-ground of the errors\nof philosophers. Here they can no longer satisfy the laws of rigorous\nargumentation such as logic demands, and this is what explains the\ndisputes which arise between them in the study of metaphysics. The system\nmost closely akin to the system of the Muhammedan doctors is that of\nAristotle as expounded to us by Farabi and Avicenna. The sum total of\ntheir errors can be reduced to twenty propositions: three of them are\nirreligious, and the other seventeen heretical. It was in order to combat\ntheir system that we wrote the work _Destruction of the Philosophers_.\nThe three propositions in which they are opposed to all the doctrines of\nIslam are the following:\n\n(1) Bodies do not rise again; spirits alone will be rewarded or punished;\nfuture punishments will be therefore spiritual and not physical. They are\nright in admitting spiritual punishments, for there will be such; but\nthey are wrong in rejecting physical punishments, and contradicting in\nthis manner the assertions of the Divine Law.\n\n(2) \u201cGod takes cognisance of universals, not of specials.\u201d This is\nmanifestly irreligious. The Koran asserts truly, \u201cNot an atom\u2019s weight in\nheaven or earth can escape His knowledge\u201d (x. 62).\n\n(3) They maintain that the universe exists from all eternity and will\nnever end.\n\nNone of these propositions have ever been admitted by Moslems.\n\nBesides this, they deny that God has attributes, and maintain that He\nknows by His essence only and not by means of any attribute accessory to\nHis essence. In this point they approach the doctrine of the Mutazilites,\ndoctrines which we are not obliged to condemn as irreligious. On the\ncontrary, in our work entitled _Criteria of the differences which divide\nIslam from Atheism_, we have proved the wrongness of those who accuse of\nirreligion everything which is opposed to their way of looking at things.\n\n(5) _Political Science._ The professors of this confine themselves to\ndrawing up the rules which regulate temporal matters and the royal power.\nThey have borrowed their theories on this point from the books which God\nhas revealed to His prophets and from the sentences of ancient sages,\ngathered by tradition.\n\n(6) _Moral Philosophy._ The professors of this occupy themselves with\ndefining the attributes and qualities of the soul, grouping them\naccording to genus and species, and pointing out the way to moderate\nand control them. They have borrowed this system from the Sufis. These\ndevout men, who are always engaged in invoking the name of God, in\ncombating concupiscence and following the way of God by renouncing the\npleasures of this world, have received, while in a state of ecstasy,\nrevelations regarding the qualities of the soul, its defects and its evil\ninclinations. These revelations they have published, and the philosophers\nmaking use of them have introduced them into their own systems in order\nto embellish and give currency to their falsehoods. In the times of the\nphilosophers, as at every other period, there existed some of these\nfervent mystics. God does not deprive this world of them, for they\nare its sustainers, and they draw down to it the blessings of heaven\naccording to the tradition: \u201cIt is by them that you obtain rain, it is\nby them that you receive your subsistence.\u201d Such were \u201cthe Companions of\nthe Cave,\u201d who lived in ancient times, as related by the Koran (xviii.).\nNow this mixture of moral and philosophic doctrine with the words of the\nProphet and those of the Sufis gives rise to two dangers, one for the\nupholder of those doctrines, the other for their opponent.\n\nThe danger for their opponent is serious. A narrow-minded man, finding in\ntheir writings moral philosophy mixed with unsupported theories, believes\nthat he ought to entirely reject them and to condemn those who profess\nthem. Having only heard them from their mouth he does not hesitate in\nhis ignorance to declare them false because those who teach them are in\nerror. It is as if some one was to reject the profession of faith made\nby Christians, \u201cThere is only one God and Jesus is His prophet,\u201d simply\nbecause it proceeds from Christians and without inquiring whether it\nis the profession of this creed or the denial of Muhammed\u2019s prophetic\nmission which makes Christians infidels. Now, if they are only infidels\nbecause of their rejection of our prophet, we are not entitled to reject\nthose of their doctrines which do not wear the stamp of infidelity. In\na word, truth does not cease to be true because it is found among them.\nSuch, however, is the tendency of weak minds: they judge the truth\naccording to its professors instead of judging its professors by the\nstandard of the truth. But a liberal spirit will take as its guide this\nmaxim of the Prince of believers, Ali the son of Abu Talib: \u201cDo not seek\nfor the truth by means of men; find first the truth and then you will\nrecognise those who follow it.\u201d This is the procedure followed by a wise\nman. Once in possession of the truth he examines the basis of various\ndoctrines which come before him, and when he has found them true, he\naccepts them without troubling himself whether the person who teaches\nthem is sincere or a deceiver. Much rather, remembering how gold is\nburied in the bowels of the earth, he endeavours to disengage the truth\nfrom the mass of errors in which it is engulfed. The skilled coin-assayer\nplunges without hesitation his hand into the purse of the coiner of false\nmoney, and, relying on experience, separates good coins from bad. It is\nthe ignorant rustic, and not the experienced assayer, who will ask why\nwe should have anything to do with a false coiner. The unskilled swimmer\nmust be kept away from the seashore, not the expert in diving. The child,\nnot the charmer, must be forbidden to handle serpents.\n\nAs a matter of fact, men have such a good opinion of themselves, of their\nmental superiority and intellectual depth; they believe themselves so\nskilled in discerning the true from the false, the path of safety from\nthose of error, that they should be forbidden as much as possible the\nperusal of philosophic writings, for though they sometimes escape the\ndanger just pointed out, they cannot avoid that which we are about to\nindicate.\n\nSome of the maxims found in my works regarding the mysteries of\nreligion have met with objectors of an inferior rank in science, whose\nintellectual penetration is insufficient to fathom such depths. They\nassert that these maxims are borrowed from the ancient philosophers,\nwhereas the truth is that they are the fruit of my own meditations, but\nas the proverb says, \u201cSandal follows the impress of sandal.\u201d[1] Some of\nthem are found in our books of religious law, but the greater part are\nderived from the writings of the Sufis.\n\nBut even if they were borrowed exclusively from the doctrines of the\nphilosophers, is it right to reject an opinion when it is reasonable in\nitself, supported by solid proofs, and contradicting neither the Koran\nnor the traditions? If we adopt this method and reject every truth which\nhas chanced to have been proclaimed by an impostor, how many truths we\nshould have to reject! How many verses of the Koran and traditions of the\nprophets and Sufi discourses and maxims of sages we must close our ears\nto because the author of the _Treatise of the Brothers of Purity_ has\ninserted them in his writings in order to further his cause, and in order\nto lead minds gradually astray in the paths of error! The consequence of\nthis procedure would be that impostors would snatch truths out of our\nhands in order to embellish their own works. The wise man, at least,\nshould not make common cause with the bigot blinded by ignorance.\n\nHoney does not become impure because it may happen to have been placed in\nthe glass which the surgeon uses for cupping purposes. The impurity of\nblood is due, not to its contact with this glass, but to a peculiarity\ninherent in its own nature; this peculiarity, not existing in honey,\ncannot be communicated to it by its being placed in the cupping glass;\nit is therefore wrong to regard it as impure. Such is, however, the\nwhimsical way of looking at things found in nearly all men. Every word\nproceeding from an authority which they approve is accepted by them,\neven were it false; every word proceeding from one whom they suspect\nis rejected, even were it true. In every case they judge of the truth\naccording to its professors and not of men according to the truth which\nthey profess, a _ne plus ultra_ of error. Such is the peril in which\nphilosophy involves its opponents.\n\nThe second danger threatens those who accept the opinions of the\nphilosophers. When, for instance, we read the treatises of the \u201cBrothers\nof purity\u201d and other works of the same kind, we find in them sentences\nspoken by the Prophet and quotations from the Sufis. We approve these\nworks; we give them our confidence; and we finish by accepting the errors\nwhich they contain, because of the good opinion of them with which they\nhave inspired us at the outset. Thus, by insensible degrees, we are\nled astray. In view of this danger the reading of philosophic writings\nso full of vain and delusive utopias should be forbidden, just as the\nslippery banks of a river are forbidden to one who knows not how to\nswim. The perusal of these false teachings must be prevented just as one\nprevents children from touching serpents. A snake-charmer himself will\nabstain from touching snakes in the presence of his young child, because\nhe knows that the child, believing himself as clever as his father,\nwill not fail to imitate him; and in order to lend more weight to his\nprohibition the charmer will not touch a serpent under the eyes of his\nson.\n\nSuch should be the conduct of a learned man who is also wise. But the\nsnake-charmer, after having taken the serpent and separated the venom\nfrom the antidote, having put the latter on one side and destroyed the\nvenom, ought not to withhold the antidote from those who need it. In the\nsame way the skilled coin-assayer, after having put his hand in the bag\nof the false coiner, taken out the good coins and thrown away the bad\nones, ought not to refuse the good to those who need and ask for it.\nSuch should be the conduct of the learned man. If the patient feels a\ncertain dislike of the antidote because he knows that it is taken from\na snake whose body is the receptacle of poison, he should be disabused\nof his fallacy. If a beggar hesitates to take a piece of gold which he\nknows comes from the purse of a false coiner, he should be told that his\nhesitation is a pure mistake which would deprive him of the advantage\nwhich he seeks. It should be proved to him that the contact of the good\ncoins with the bad does not injure the former and does not improve the\nlatter. In the same way the contact of truth with falsehood does not\nchange truth into falsehood, any more than it changes falsehood into\ntruth.\n\nThus much, then, we have to say regarding the inconveniences and dangers\nwhich spring from the study of philosophy.\n\n\n\n\nSUFISM\n\n\nWhen I had finished my examination of these doctrines I applied myself\nto the study of Sufism. I saw that in order to understand it thoroughly\none must combine theory with practice. The aim which the Sufis set before\nthem is as follows: To free the soul from the tyrannical yoke of the\npassions, to deliver it from its wrong inclinations and evil instincts,\nin order that in the purified heart there should only remain room for God\nand for the invocation of His holy name.\n\nAs it was more easy to learn their doctrine than to practise it, I\nstudied first of all those of their books which contain it: _The\nNourishment of Hearts_, by Abu Talib of Mecca, the works of Hareth\nel Muhasibi, and the fragments which still remain of Junaid, Shibli,\nAbu Yezid Bustami and other leaders (whose souls may God sanctify). I\nacquired a thorough knowledge of their researches, and I learned all\nthat was possible to learn of their methods by study and oral teaching.\nIt became clear to me that the last stage could not be reached by mere\ninstruction, but only by transport, ecstasy, and the transformation of\nthe moral being.\n\nTo define health and satiety, to penetrate their causes and conditions,\nis quite another thing from being well and satisfied. To define\ndrunkenness, to know that it is caused by vapours which rise from the\nstomach and cloud the seat of intelligence, is quite a different thing to\nbeing drunk. The drunken man has no idea of the nature of drunkenness,\njust because he is drunk and not in a condition to understand anything,\nwhile the doctor, not being under the influence of drunkenness, knows\nits character and laws. Or if the doctor fall ill, he has a theoretical\nknowledge of the health of which he is deprived.\n\nIn the same way there is a considerable difference between knowing\nrenouncement, comprehending its conditions and causes, and practising\nrenouncement and detachment from the things of this world. I saw that\nSufism consists in experiences rather than in definitions, and that what\nI was lacking belonged to the domain, not of instruction, but of ecstasy\nand initiation.\n\nThe researches to which I had devoted myself, the path which I had\ntraversed in studying religious and speculative branches of knowledge,\nhad given me a firm faith in three things\u2014God, Inspiration, and the Last\nJudgment. These three fundamental articles of belief were confirmed\nin me, not merely by definite arguments, but by a chain of causes,\ncircumstances, and proofs which it is impossible to recount. I saw that\none can only hope for salvation by devotion and the conquest of one\u2019s\npassions, a procedure which presupposes renouncement and detachment\nfrom this world of falsehood in order to turn towards eternity and\nmeditation on God. Finally, I saw that the only condition of success was\nto sacrifice honours and riches and to sever the ties and attachments of\nworldly life.\n\nComing seriously to consider my state, I found myself bound down on all\nsides by these trammels. Examining my actions, the most fair-seeming\nof which were my lecturing and professorial occupations, I found to my\nsurprise that I was engrossed in several studies of little value, and\nprofitless as regards my salvation. I probed the motives of my teaching\nand found that, in place of being sincerely consecrated to God, it was\nonly actuated by a vain desire of honour and reputation. I perceived\nthat I was on the edge of an abyss, and that without an immediate\nconversion I should be doomed to eternal fire. In these reflections\nI spent a long time. Still a prey to uncertainty, one day I decided\nto leave Bagdad and to give up everything; the next day I gave up my\nresolution. I advanced one step and immediately relapsed. In the morning\nI was sincerely resolved only to occupy myself with the future life;\nin the evening a crowd of carnal thoughts assailed and dispersed my\nresolutions. On the one side the world kept me bound to my post in the\nchains of covetousness, on the other side the voice of religion cried to\nme, \u201cUp! Up! thy life is nearing its end, and thou hast a long journey to\nmake. All thy pretended knowledge is nought but falsehood and fantasy.\nIf thou dost not think now of thy salvation, when wilt thou think of it?\nIf thou dost not break thy chains to-day, when wilt thou break them?\u201d\nThen my resolve was strengthened, I wished to give up all and flee; but\nthe Tempter, returning to the attack, said, \u201cYou are suffering from a\ntransitory feeling; don\u2019t give way to it, for it will soon pass. If you\nobey it, if you give up this fine position, this honourable post exempt\nfrom trouble and rivalry, this seat of authority safe from attack, you\nwill regret it later on without being able to recover it.\u201d\n\nThus I remained, torn asunder by the opposite forces of earthly passions\nand religious aspirations, for about six months from the month Rajab\nof the year A.D. 1096. At the close of them my will yielded and I gave\nmyself up to destiny. God caused an impediment to chain my tongue and\nprevented me from lecturing. Vainly I desired, in the interest of my\npupils, to go on with my teaching, but my mouth became dumb. The silence\nto which I was condemned cast me into a violent despair; my stomach\nbecame weak; I lost all appetite; I could neither swallow a morsel of\nbread nor drink a drop of water.\n\nThe enfeeblement of my physical powers was such that the doctors,\ndespairing of saving me, said, \u201cThe mischief is in the heart, and has\ncommunicated itself to the whole organism; there is no hope unless the\ncause of his grievous sadness be arrested.\u201d\n\nFinally, conscious of my weakness and the prostration of my soul, I took\nrefuge in God as a man at the end of himself and without resources. \u201cHe\nwho hears the wretched when they cry\u201d (_Koran_, xxvii. 63) deigned to\nhear me; He made easy to me the sacrifice of honours, wealth, and family.\nI gave out publicly that I intended to make the pilgrimage to Mecca,\nwhile I secretly resolved to go to Syria, not wishing that the Caliph\n(may God magnify him) or my friends should know my intention of settling\nin that country. I made all kinds of clever excuses for leaving Bagdad\nwith the fixed intention of not returning thither. The Im\u0101ms of Irak\ncriticised me with one accord. Not one of them could admit that this\nsacrifice had a religious motive, because they considered my position\nas the highest attainable in the religious community. \u201cBehold how far\ntheir knowledge goes!\u201d (_Koran_, liii. 31). All kinds of explanations of\nmy conduct were forthcoming. Those who were outside the limits of Irak\nattributed it to the fear with which the Government inspired me. Those\nwho were on the spot and saw how the authorities wished to detain me,\ntheir displeasure at my resolution and my refusal of their request, said\nto themselves, \u201cIt is a calamity which one can only impute to a fate\nwhich has befallen the Faithful and Learning!\u201d\n\nAt last I left Bagdad, giving up all my fortune. Only, as lands and\nproperty in Irak can afford an endowment for pious purposes, I obtained a\nlegal authorisation to preserve as much as was necessary for my support\nand that of my children; for there is surely nothing more lawful in the\nworld than that a learned man should provide sufficient to support his\nfamily. I then betook myself to Syria, where I remained for two years,\nwhich I devoted to retirement, meditation, and devout exercises. I only\nthought of self-improvement and discipline and of purification of the\nheart by prayer in going through the forms of devotion which the Sufis\nhad taught me. I used to live a solitary life in the Mosque of Damascus,\nand was in the habit of spending my days on the minaret after closing the\ndoor behind me.\n\nFrom thence I proceeded to Jerusalem, and every day secluded myself in\nthe Sanctuary of the Rock.[2] After that I felt a desire to accomplish\nthe Pilgrimage, and to receive a full effusion of grace by visiting\nMecca, Medina, and the Tomb of the Prophet. After visiting the shrine of\nthe Friend of God (Abraham), I went to the Hedj\u0101z. Finally, the longings\nof my heart and the prayers of my children brought me back to my country,\nalthough I was so firmly resolved at first never to revisit it. At any\nrate I meant, if I did return, to live there solitary and in religious\nmeditation; but events, family cares, and vicissitudes of life changed\nmy resolutions and troubled my meditative calm. However irregular the\nintervals which I could give to devotional ecstasy, my confidence in it\ndid not diminish; and the more I was diverted by hindrances, the more\nsteadfastly I returned to it.\n\nTen years passed in this manner. During my successive periods of\nmeditation there were revealed to me things impossible to recount. All\nthat I shall say for the edification of the reader is this: I learnt\nfrom a sure source that the Sufis are the true pioneers on the path of\nGod; that there is nothing more beautiful than their life, nor more\npraiseworthy than their rule of conduct, nor purer than their morality.\nThe intelligence of thinkers, the wisdom of philosophers, the knowledge\nof the most learned doctors of the law would in vain combine their\nefforts in order to modify or improve their doctrine and morals; it would\nbe impossible. With the Sufis, repose and movement, exterior or interior,\nare illumined with the light which proceeds from the Central Radiance of\nInspiration. And what other light could shine on the face of the earth?\nIn a word, what can one criticise in them? To purge the heart of all\nthat does not belong to God is the first step in their cathartic method.\nThe drawing up of the heart by prayer is the keystone of it, as the cry\n\u201cAllahu Akbar\u201d (God is great) is the keystone of prayer, and the last\nstage is the being lost in God. I say the last stage, with reference to\nwhat may be reached by an effort of will; but, to tell the truth, it is\nonly the first stage in the life of contemplation, the vestibule by which\nthe initiated enter.\n\nFrom the time that they set out on this path, revelations commence for\nthem. They come to see in the waking state angels and souls of prophets;\nthey hear their voices and wise counsels. By means of this contemplation\nof heavenly forms and images they rise by degrees to heights which human\nlanguage cannot reach, which one cannot even indicate without falling\ninto great and inevitable errors. The degree of proximity to Deity which\nthey attain is regarded by some as intermixture of being (_haloul_),\nby others as identification (_ittih\u0101d_), by others as intimate union\n(_wasl_). But all these expressions are wrong, as we have explained in\nour work entitled _The Chief Aim_. Those who have reached that stage\nshould confine themselves to repeating the verse\u2014\n\n    What I experience I shall not try to say;\n    Call me happy, but ask me no more.\n\nIn short, he who does not arrive at the intuition of these truths by\nmeans of ecstasy, knows only the _name_ of inspiration. The miracles\nwrought by the saints are, in fact, merely the earliest forms of\nprophetic manifestation. Such was the state of the Apostle of God when,\nbefore receiving his commission, he retired to Mount Hira to give himself\nup to such intensity of prayer and meditation that the Arabs said:\n\u201cMuhammed is become enamoured of God.\u201d\n\nThis state, then, can be revealed to the initiated in ecstasy, and to him\nwho is incapable of ecstasy, by obedience and attention, on condition\nthat he frequents the society of Sufis till he arrives, so to speak,\nat an imitative initiation. Such is the faith which one can obtain by\nremaining among them, and intercourse with them is never painful.\n\nBut even when we are deprived of the advantage of their society, we can\ncomprehend the possibility of this state (revelation by means of ecstasy)\nby a chain of manifest proofs. We have explained this in the treatise\nentitled _Marvels of the Heart_, which forms part of our work, _The\nRevival of the Religious Sciences_. The certitude derived from proofs\nis called \u201cknowledge\u201d; passing into the state we describe is called\n\u201ctransport\u201d; believing the experience of others and oral transmission is\n\u201cfaith.\u201d Such are the three degrees of knowledge, as it is written, \u201cThe\nLord will raise to different ranks those among you who have believed and\nthose who have received knowledge from Him\u201d (_Koran_, lviii. 12).\n\nBut behind those who believe comes a crowd of ignorant people who deny\nthe reality of Sufism, hear discourses on it with incredulous irony, and\ntreat as charlatans those who profess it. To this ignorant crowd the\nverse applies: \u201cThere are those among them who come to listen to thee,\nand when they leave thee, ask of those who have received knowledge, \u2018What\nhas he just said?\u2019 These are they whose hearts God has sealed up with\nblindness and who only follow their passions.\u201d\n\nAmong the number of convictions which I owe to the practice of the Sufi\nrule is the knowledge of the true nature of inspiration. This knowledge\nis of such great importance that I proceed to expound it in detail.\n\n\n\n\nTHE REALITY OF INSPIRATION: ITS IMPORTANCE FOR THE HUMAN RACE\n\n\nThe substance of man at the moment of its creation is a simple monad,\ndevoid of knowledge of the worlds subject to the Creator, worlds whose\ninfinite number is only known to Him, as the Koran says: \u201cOnly thy Lord\nknoweth the number of His armies.\u201d\n\nMan arrives at this knowledge by the aid of his perceptions; each of his\nsenses is given him that he may comprehend the world of created things,\nand by the term \u201cworld\u201d we understand the different species of creatures.\nThe first sense revealed to man is touch, by means of which he perceives\na certain group of qualities\u2014heat, cold, moist, dry. The sense of touch\ndoes not perceive colours and forms, which are for it as though they did\nnot exist. Next comes the sense of sight, which makes him acquainted with\ncolours and forms; that is to say, with that which occupies the highest\nrank in the world of sensation. The sense of hearing succeeds, and then\nthe senses of smell and taste.\n\nWhen the human being can elevate himself above the world of sense,\ntowards the age of seven, he receives the faculty of discrimination; he\nenters then upon a new phase of existence and can experience, thanks to\nthis faculty, impressions, superior to those of the senses, which do not\noccur in the sphere of sensation.\n\nHe then passes to another phase and receives reason, by which he discerns\nthings necessary, possible, and impossible; in a word, all the notions\nwhich he could not combine in the former stages of his existence. But\nbeyond reason and at a higher level a new faculty of vision is bestowed\nupon him, by which he perceives invisible things, the secrets of the\nfuture and other concepts as inaccessible to reason as the concepts of\nreason are inaccessible to mere discrimination and what is perceived\nby discrimination to the senses. Just as the man possessed only of\ndiscrimination rejects and denies the notions acquired by reason, so do\ncertain rationalists reject and deny the notion of inspiration. It is a\nproof of their profound ignorance; for, instead of argument, they merely\ndeny inspiration as a sphere unknown and possessing no real existence. In\nthe same way, a man blind from birth, who knows neither by experience nor\nby information what colours and forms are, neither knows nor understands\nthem when some one speaks of them to him for the first time.\n\nGod, wishing to render intelligible to men the idea of inspiration, has\ngiven them a kind of glimpse of it in sleep. In fact, man perceives\nwhile asleep the things of the invisible world either clearly manifest\nor under the veil of allegory to be subsequently lifted by divination.\nIf, however, one was to say to a person who had never himself experienced\nthese dreams that, in a state of lethargy resembling death and during\nthe complete suspension of sight, hearing, and all the senses, a man can\nsee the things of the invisible world, this person would exclaim, and\nseek to prove the impossibility of these visions by some such argument\nas the following: \u201cThe sensitive faculties are the causes of perception.\nNow, if one can perceive certain things when one is in full possession of\nthese faculties, how much more is their perception impossible when these\nfaculties are suspended.\u201d\n\nThe falsity of such an argument is shown by evidence and experience. For\nin the same way as reason constitutes a particular phase of existence\nin which intellectual concepts are perceived which are hidden from the\nsenses, similarly, inspiration is a special state in which the inner eye\ndiscovers, revealed by a celestial light, mysteries out of the reach of\nreason. The doubts which are raised regarding inspiration relate (1)\nto its possibility, (2) to its real and actual existence, (3) to its\nmanifestation in this or that person.\n\nTo prove the possibility of inspiration is to prove that it belongs to a\ncategory of branches of knowledge which cannot be attained by reason. It\nis the same with medical science and astronomy. He who studies them is\nobliged to recognise that they are derived solely from the revelation and\nspecial grace of God. Some astronomical phenomena only occur once in a\nthousand years; how then can we know them by experience?\n\nWe may say the same of inspiration, which is one of the branches of\nintuitional knowledge. Further, the perception of things which are\nbeyond the attainment of reason is only one of the features peculiar to\ninspiration, which possesses a great number of others. The characteristic\nwhich we have mentioned is only, as it were, a drop of water in the\nocean, and we have mentioned it because people experience what is\nanalogous to it in dreams and in the sciences of medicine and astronomy.\nThese branches of knowledge belong to the domain of prophetic miracles,\nand reason cannot attain to them.\n\nAs to the other characteristics of inspiration, they are only revealed\nto adepts in Sufism and in a state of ecstatic transport. The little\nthat we know of the nature of inspiration we owe to the kind of likeness\nto it which we find in sleep; without that we should be incapable of\ncomprehending it, and consequently of believing in it, for conviction\nresults from comprehension. The process of initiation into Sufism\nexhibits this likeness to inspiration from the first. There is in it a\nkind of ecstasy proportioned to the condition of the person initiated,\nand a degree of certitude and conviction which cannot be attained by\nreason. This single fact is sufficient to make us believe in inspiration.\n\nWe now come to deal with doubts relative to the inspiration of a\nparticular prophet. We shall not arrive at certitude on this point except\nby ascertaining, either by ocular evidence or by reliable tradition, the\nfacts relating to that prophet. When we have ascertained the real nature\nof inspiration and proceed to the serious study of the Koran and the\ntraditions, we shall then know certainly that Muhammed is the greatest\nof prophets. After that we should fortify our conviction by verifying\nthe truth of his preaching and the salutary effect which it has upon the\nsoul. We should verify in experience the truth of sentences such as the\nfollowing: \u201cHe who makes his conduct accord with his knowledge receives\nfrom God more knowledge\u201d; or this, \u201cGod delivers to the oppressor him\nwho favours injustice\u201d; or again, \u201cWhosoever when rising in the morning\nhas only one anxiety (to please God), God will preserve him from all\nanxiety in this world and the next.\u201d\n\nWhen we have verified these sayings in experience thousands of times,\nwe shall be in possession of a certitude on which doubt can obtain no\nhold. Such is the path we must traverse in order to realise the truth\nof inspiration. It is not a question of finding out whether a rod has\nbeen changed into a serpent, or whether the moon has been split in\ntwo.[3] If we regard miracles in isolation, without their countless\nattendant circumstances, we shall be liable to confound them with magic\nand falsehood, or to regard them as a means of leading men astray, as\nit is written, \u201cGod misleads and directs as He chooses\u201d (_Koran_, xxxv.\n9); we shall find ourselves involved in all the difficulties which the\nquestion of miracles raises. If, for instance, we believe that eloquence\nof style is a proof of inspiration, it is possible that an eloquent style\ncomposed with this object may inspire us with a false belief in the\ninspiration of him who wields it. The supernatural should be only one of\nthe constituents which go to form our belief, without our placing too\nmuch reliance on this or that detail. We should rather resemble a person\nwho, learning a fact from a group of people, cannot point to this or that\nparticular man as his informant, and who, not distinguishing between\nthem, cannot explain precisely how his conviction regarding the fact has\nbeen formed.\n\nSuch are the characteristics of scientific certitude. As to the transport\nwhich permits men to see the truth and, so to speak, to handle it, it is\nonly known to the Sufis. What I have just said regarding the true nature\nof inspiration is sufficient for the aim which I have proposed to myself.\nI may return to the subject later, if necessary.\n\nI pass now to the causes of the decay of faith and show the means\nof bringing back those who have erred and of preserving them from\nthe dangers which threaten them. To those who doubt because they are\ntinctured with the doctrine of the Ta\u2019limites, my treatise entitled _The\nJust Balance_ affords a sufficient guide; therefore it is unnecessary to\nreturn to the subject here.\n\nAs to the vain theories of the Ibahat, I have grouped them in seven\nclasses, and explained them in the work entitled _Alchemy of Happiness_.\nFor those whose faith has been undermined by philosophy, so far that they\ndeny the reality of inspiration, we have proved the truth and necessity\nof it, seeking our proofs in the hidden properties of medicines and of\nthe heavenly bodies. It is for them that we have written this treatise,\nand the reason for our seeking for proofs in the sciences of medicine\nand of astronomy is because these sciences belong to the domain of\nphilosophy. All those branches of knowledge which our opponents boast\nof\u2014astronomy, medicine, physics, and divination\u2014provide us with arguments\nin favour of the Prophet.\n\nAs to those who, professing a lip-faith in the Prophet, adulterate\nreligion with philosophy, they really deny inspiration, since in their\nview the Prophet is only a sage whom a superior destiny has appointed as\nguide to men, and this view belies the true nature of inspiration. To\nbelieve in the Prophet is to admit that there is above intelligence a\nsphere in which are revealed to the inner vision truths beyond the grasp\nof intelligence, just as things seen are not apprehended by the sense of\nhearing, nor things understood by that of touch. If our opponent denies\nthe existence of such a higher region, we can prove to him, not only\nits possibility, but its actuality. If, on the contrary, he admits its\nexistence, he recognises at the same time that there are in that sphere\nthings which reason cannot grasp; nay, which reason rejects as false and\nabsurd. Suppose, for instance, that the fact of dreams occurring in sleep\nwere not so common and notorious as it is, our wise men would not fail to\nrepudiate the assertion that the secrets of the invisible world can be\nrevealed while the senses are, so to speak, suspended.\n\nAgain, if it were to be said to one of them, \u201cIs it possible that there\nis in the world a thing as small as a grain, which being carried into a\ncity can destroy it and afterwards destroy itself so that nothing remains\neither of the city or of itself?\u201d \u201cCertainly,\u201d he would exclaim, \u201cit is\nimpossible and ridiculous.\u201d Such, however, is the effect of fire, which\nwould certainly be disputed by one who had not witnessed it with his own\neyes. Now, the refusal to believe in the mysteries of the other life is\nof the same kind.\n\nAs to the fourth cause of the spread of unbelief\u2014the decay of faith owing\nto the bad example set by learned men\u2014there are three ways of checking it.\n\n(1) One can answer thus: \u201cThe learned man whom you accuse of disobeying\nthe divine law knows that he disobeys, as you do when you drink wine or\nexact usury or allow yourself in evil-speaking, lying, and slander. You\nknow your sin and yield to it, not through ignorance, but because you\nare mastered by concupiscence. The same is the case with the learned\nman. How many believe in doctors who do not abstain from fruit and cold\nwater when strictly forbidden them by a doctor! That does not prove that\nthose things are not dangerous, or that their faith in the doctor was not\nsolidly established. Similar errors on the part of learned men are to be\nimputed solely to their weakness.\u201d\n\n(2) Or again, one may say to a simple and ignorant man: \u201cThe learned man\nreckons upon his knowledge as a viaticum for the next life. He believes\nthat his knowledge will save him and plead in his favour, and that his\nintellectual superiority will entitle him to indulgence; lastly, that if\nhis knowledge increases his responsibility, it may also entitle him to\na higher degree of consideration. All that is possible; and even if the\nlearned man has neglected practice, he can at any rate produce proofs\nof his knowledge. But you, poor, witless one, if, like him, you neglect\npractice, destitute as you are of knowledge, you will perish without\nanything to plead in your favour.\u201d\n\n(3) Or one may answer, and this reason is the true one: \u201cThe truly\nlearned man only sins through carelessness, and does not remain in a\nstate of impenitence. For real knowledge shows sin to be a deadly poison,\nand the other world to be superior to this. Convinced of this truth, man\nought not to exchange the precious for the vile. But the knowledge of\nwhich we speak is not derived from sources accessible to human diligence,\nand that is why progress in mere worldly knowledge renders the sinner\nmore hardened in his revolt against God.\n\nTrue knowledge, on the contrary, inspires in him who is initiate in it\nmore fear and more reverence, and raises a barrier of defence between\nhim and sin. He may slip and stumble, it is true, as is inevitable with\none encompassed by human infirmity, but these slips and stumbles will not\nweaken his faith. The true Moslem succumbs occasionally to temptation,\nbut he repents and will not persevere obstinately in the path of error.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nI pray God the Omnipotent to place us in the ranks of His chosen, among\nthe number of those whom He directs in the path of safety, in whom\nHe inspires fervour lest they forget Him; whom He cleanses from all\ndefilement, that nothing may remain in them except Himself; yea, of those\nwhom He indwells completely, that they may adore none beside Him.\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES\n\n\n[1] _I.e._ There is nothing new under the sun.\n\n[2] In the Mosque of Omar.\n\n[3] A miracle ascribed to Muhammed.\n\n\n_Printed by Hazell, Watson & Viney, Ld., London and Aylesbury._\n\n\n\n\nTHE ORIENT LIBRARY\n\n[Illustration]\n\nTHE WISDOM OF THE EAST SERIES\n\n=Edited by L. CRANMER-BYNG and Dr. S. A. KAPADIA=\n\n\nTHE HON. ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE ORIENT LIBRARY (WISDOM OF THE EAST\nSERIES)\n\nLord REAY, G.C.S.I., _President_.\n\nSir ARTHUR WOLLASTON, K.C.I.E., _Chairman_.\n\nL. CRANMER-BYNG and S. A. KAPADIA, _Hon. Secs._\n\n    Prof. T. W. ARNOLD (London University College).\n    Prof. L. D. BARNETT (London University College).\n    Miss G. BELL.\n    SYED HOSAIN BILGRAMI, C.S.I.\n    Prof. J. F. BLUMHARDT (Cambridge University).\n    Prof. E. G. BROWNE (Cambridge University).\n    L. CRANMER-BYNG, Esq.\n    Dr. J. ESTLIN CARPENTER (Oxford University).\n    A. G. ELLIS, Esq.\n    Prof. GREGORY FOSTER (Provost, London University College).\n    Dr. M. GASTER.\n    Prof. H. A. GILES (Cambridge University).\n    LIONEL GILES, Esq., M.A.\n    Prof. IGNAZ GOLDZIHER (Budapest University).\n    Dr. G. A. GRIERSON, C.I.E.\n    Sir HENRY HOWORTH, K.C.I.E.\n    Dr. S. A. KAPADIA (London University College).\n    Sir ALFRED LYALL, G.C.I.E.\n    Sir CHARLES LYALL, K.C.S.I.\n    Prof. D. S. MARGOLIOUTH (Oxford University).\n    Mrs. D. S. MARGOLIOUTH.\n    Prof. A. A. MACDONELL (Oxford University).\n    THEODOR MORISON, Esq., M.A.\n    J. MORRIS, Esq. (Japan).\n    A. H. HALLAM MURRAY, Esq.\n    Prof. REGINALD A. NICHOLSON (Cambridge University).\n    Prof. RAPSON (Cambridge University).\n    Miss RIDDING.\n    SYED AMEER ALI, C.I.E.\n    F. W. THOMAS, Esq., M.A.\n    Prof. ANTON TIEN.\n    Don M. DE WICKREMASINGHE (Oxford University).\n\n\nWISDOM OF THE EAST SERIES\n\nThe Diwan of Abu\u2019l-Ala\n\n    By HENRY BAERLEIN. 1/- net.\n\nBrahma-Knowledge: An Outline of the Philosophy of the Ved\u0101nta\n\n    As set forth by the Upanishads and by \u015aankara. By L. D.\n    BARNETT, M.A., LITT.D., Professor of Sanskrit at University\n    College, London. 2/- net.\n\nThe Conduct of Life; or, The Universal Order of Confucius\n\n    A Translation of one of the four Confucian Books, hitherto\n    known as the Doctrine of the Mean. By KU HUNG MING, M.A.\n    (Edin.). 1/- net.\n\nThe Teachings of Zoroaster and the Philosophy of the Parsi Religion\n\n    Translated with Introduction by Dr. S. A. KAPADIA, Lecturer,\n    University College, London. 2/- net.\n\nThe Persian Mystics\n\nI. Jal\u00e1lu\u2019d-d\u00edn R\u00fam\u00ed\n\n    By F. HADLAND DAVIS. 2/- net.\n\nII. J\u00e1m\u00ed.\n\n    By F. HADLAND DAVIS. 2/- net.\n\nThe Way of the Buddha\n\n    Selections from the Buddhist texts, together with the original\n    Pali, with Introduction by HERBERT BAYNES, M.R.A.S. 2/- net.\n\nThe Sayings of Confucius\n\n    A new Translation of the greater part of the Confucian\n    Analects, with Introduction and Notes by LIONEL GILES, M.A.\n    (Oxon.), Assistant in the Department of Oriental Books and\n    Manuscripts of the British Museum. 2/- net.\n\nMusings of a Chinese Mystic\n\n    Selections from the Philosophy of Chuang Tz\u016d. With Introduction\n    by LIONEL GILES, M.A. (Oxon.), Assistant at the British Museum.\n    2/- net.\n\nThe Awakening of the Soul\n\n    From the Arabic of IBN TUFAIL. Translated with Introduction by\n    PAUL BR\u00d6NNLE, Ph.D. 1/6 net.\n\nThe Religion of the Koran\n\n    With Introduction by SIR ARTHUR N. WOLLASTON, K.C.I.E. 1/- net.\n\nThe Wisdom of Israel: Being Extracts from the Babylonian Talmud and\nMidrash Rabboth\n\n    Translated from the Aramaic with an Introduction by EDWIN\n    COLLINS. 1/- net.\n\nSadi\u2019s Scroll of Wisdom\n\n    By SHAIKH SA\u2019DI. With Introduction by SIR ARTHUR N. WOLLASTON,\n    K.C.I.E. 1/- net.\n\nThe Instruction of Ptah-Hotep and the Instruction of Ke\u2019gemni\n\n    The Oldest Books in the World. Translated from the Egyptian\n    with Introduction and Appendix by BATTISCOMBE G. GUNN. 1/- net.\n\nThe Rose Garden of Sa\u2019di\n\n    Selected and Rendered from the Persian with Introduction by L.\n    CRANMER-BYNG. 1/- net.\n\nThe Classics of Confucius\n\nI. The Book of History (Shu-King)\n\n    By W. GORN OLD. 1/- net.\n\nII. The Book of Odes (Shi-King)\n\n    By L. CRANMER-BYNG. 1/- net.\n\nThe Sayings of Lao Tz\u016d\n\n    From the Chinese. Translated with Introduction by LIONEL GILES,\n    of the British Museum. 1/- net.\n\nWomen and Wisdom of Japan\n\n    With Introduction by S. TAKAISHI. 1/- net.\n\nArabian Wisdom\n\n    Selections and Translations from the Arabic by JOHN WORTABET,\n    M.D. 1/- net.\n\nThe Duties of the Heart\n\n    By RABBI BACHYE. Translated from the Hebrew with Introduction\n    by EDWIN COLLINS, Hollier Hebrew Scholar, U.C.L. 1/- net.\n\n_All literary communications to be addressed to the Editors of_\n\nTHE ORIENT LIBRARY, c/o DR. S. A. KAPADIA, ORIENTAL SECRETARY, NORTHBROOK\nSOCIETY, 185 PICCADILLY, LONDON, W.\n\nThe object of the Editors of this Series is a very definite one. They\ndesire above all things that, in their humble way, these books shall be\nthe ambassadors of good-will and understanding between East and West, the\nold world of Thought and the new of Action. In this endeavour, and in\ntheir own sphere, they are but followers of the highest example in the\nland. They are confident that a deeper knowledge of the great ideals and\nlofty philosophy of Oriental thought may help to a revival of that true\nspirit of Charity which neither despises nor fears the nations of another\ncreed and colour. Finally, in thanking press and public for the very\ncordial reception given to the \u201cWisdom of the East\u201d Series, they wish to\nstate that no pains have been spared to secure the best specialists for\nthe treatment of the various subjects at hand.\n\n    SOME OPINIONS OF THE PRESS\n\n    =The Athen\u00e6um.=\u2014\u201cWe wish that there were more of them; they are\n    dreamy, lifelike, and fascinating.\u201d\n\n    =Pall Mall Gazette.=\u2014\u201cNo translation of this important work has\n    been made since the beginning of the eighteenth century.\u201d\n\n    =Manchester Courier.=\u2014\u201cWorthy of close study by all who would\n    penetrate to the depth of Eastern thought and feeling.\u201d\n\n    =Literary Guide.=\u2014\u201cWe wish success to this little series of\n    books.\u201d\n\n    =Outlook.=\u2014\u201cThis Series is published to help in the process of\n    renewing the spiritual and moral life of the West.\u201d\n\n    =The Scotsman.=\u2014\u201cThis Series should not fail to please readers\n    of the more studious sort.\u201d\n\n    =Southport Guardian.=\u2014\u201cThis Series will find considerable\n    favour with all Students of Eastern Literature and Eastern\n    Philosophy.\u201d\n\n    =Bristol Mercury.=\u2014\u201cWe commend these little books to all who\n    imagine that there is no knowledge worth having outside Europe\n    and America.\u201d\n\n    =Glasgow Herald.=\u2014\u201cThis new Series has a definite and lofty\n    aim, and is deserving of support. The books are small, cheap,\n    and well adapted for the pocket. Every page is regularly\n    refreshing and stimulating.\u201d\n\n    =Field.=\u2014\u201cSuch books are valuable aids to the understanding of\n    a far-off age and people, and have a great interest for the\n    student of literature.\u201d\n\n    =Irish Times.=\u2014\u201cThe volumes are charming in form, low in price,\n    and excellent in matter.\u201d\n\nLONDON: JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET, W.","title":"The Confessions of Al Ghazzali","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":13612}