INDIVIDUAL

The purpose of this chapter is to investigate Afg̲h̲āni’s views on the individual and society and their mutual relationship. It also includes a study of the rights and responsibilities of the individual towards society and the nature of education preparing him for the service of society. It would be noticed that the method which he adopts to tackle these issues is more empirical than idealistic. Even when he offers a purely theoretical treatment he endeavors to refrain from applying any philosophical analysis. His chief emphasis is upon those human sentiments, dispositions and intellectual aptitudes which form the basis of social structure and are instrumental in the realization of its objectives.

As we shall see in the study of Afg̲h̲āni’s ethical ideas, he places social values above everything else while judging individual conduct. Individual, for Afg̲h̲āni, is the foundation stone upon which the whole structure of society rests. Man is not superior to other animals as far as the basic instincts are concerned; it is only the urge for a nobler and civilized life that gives shape to his social personality.1 Explaining the position of the individual in society he gives primary importance to human emotions which, being natural, play an essential role in deciding the direction of human conduct. A psychological study shows that man is a born artisan (ṣannā‘). All his comforts and luxuries are his thoughts in material from.2 Man is not nature but he is everywhere bound to nature. Nature is generous to the man of action and it ignores one who just begs for her generosity. For all his social necessities man needs nature as an artisan requires his instruments.3 The object around which all individual activities revolve is man’s own good. The impetus for human will to develop into action is derived from the purpose which provides the greatest benefit to oneself.4 The impetus is ever present in all social relations. Afg̲h̲āni points out that even blood ties find strength from one’s urge to remain in close contact with those who are indispensable for the fulfillment of one’s immediate needs. Thus, existence of family institutions is directly a result of social necessity.5 Therefore, such ties operate only so long as the necessities are there. No sooner do they disappear than the binding force of such ties is weakened. It is the same with other ties. Social necessities govern all human relations which by incessant practice, under constant social pressure, are transformed into deep-rooted habits. Once free of such pressure they lose their color and are reduced to obscure ideas.6 Whatever be their basis, institutions like family, tribe or nation exert great influence on the making of individual personality and outlook. As a psychic being, man’s thought, morals and outlook, whether physical or metaphysical, are to a large extent influenced by his parents and the members of his tribe or community.7 However, Afg̲h̲āni points out, such influences are less effective upon human mind which is chiefly governed by rational faculties. Man learns more from his teachers and his experiences in life.8 We shall study later9 his views on individual conduct, the nature of human emotions and the need of controlling them for the sake of social welfare. As a whole he regards all individuals blessed equally with physical and mental capacity for highest attainments. The faculty of reason is the most powerful and noble means to achieve that aim. While all human instincts should be satisfied fully they must not exceed limits set down by reason. For the maintenance of society and individual livelihood they should function under the guidance of the intellect.10 All individual struggles revolve round the goal of attaining an honorable life and the rest is a means to reach that end.11 The nature of this honor (sharaf) is such that when achieved by an individual it is shared by all around him, that is, by his family, tribe, community and his country. He struggles for respectable positions by acquiring those noble qualities which help in establishing himself as a trustworthy person in society.12 While acting for his own benefit he serves society, as well. He is conscious of the importance of collective functioning of a social group. Unity is the basic condition of social progress. However, Afg̲h̲āni points out, this desire for unity is not born of abstract thinking. It is produced by a deep insight into the inner meanings of social intercourse.13 Consequently, the actions of such socially conscious individuals are determined by the maximum benefits which they attempt to provide to society.14 In view of this fact the individual refrains from pursuing aims other than social welfare. Each individual functions in a society as a part of a big machine. The weakness of any single part, howsoever small, means the breakdown of the whole system.15 Since the actions of individuals have their effect on society, the strength of the society depends on the unity of the individuals.16 Again, there are several branches of knowledge which help in the fulfillment of social needs and it is not possible for a single individual to cover all sciences. Therefore, persons working in different fields of knowledge have to co-operate with each other.17 Having common aims makes individuals realize their responsibilities and obligations regarding common good.18

Society

A thorough analysis of society is found in the essay, “al-ṣanā‘ah” (craftsmanship)19 where Afg̲h̲āni has discussed the evolution of man from a self-centered individualist to a coordinated social personality. Emphasizing the social nature of human beings, he remarks that man has not descended from heaven; he is one of the creatures living on earth. The primitive man led a wild life living under trees or taking shelter in the caves. There were no traces of civilization or arts and crafts. He had no education (tarbiyah) of any kind. He had no idea that the universe was created for human beings. In support of this thesis, Afg̲h̲āni cites the wild tribes still residing in the South African forests who are far from civilization notwithstanding their long history. It was the faculty of reason which helped man to take a step forward towards civilization. Afg̲h̲āni explains that God had made man in such a way that his needs could not be fulfilled without struggle. At the same time, man had been endowed with the power of thinking and acquiring knowledge. He attained wisdom from actions and reactions. Sometimes his activity was checked by natural obstacles and, at times, truth was revealed to him by chance happenings. Through this process he entered the era of civilization. He marched forward with the help of arts and crafts towards which he was led by his power of thinking. Arts served him as a substitute for those faculties and organs with which the animals have been provided by nature. For instance weaving is equivalent to the animals’ ability of growing hair and man-made weapons to animal claws and nails, etc.

Afg̲h̲āni believes that human actions are generally performed under the guidance of reason. Reason, as against sense (ḥiss), moves from universal to particular. God has made it the axis of human betterment. If man confines the use of intellect to his personal requirements it means that he wastes his abilities and degenerates to the level of animals and plants.

Afg̲h̲āni, explaining the need of society, points out that a social organization is indispensable to mankind in view of the fact that individual requirements are so numerous that it is not possible for an individual to meet them single-handed even during a long span of time and, hence, the need of an organization where different individuals, in their own ways, could help each other in fulfilling the requirements of all. A man receives the cost of his labor in the form of the results emanating from the works of others.20

Afg̲h̲āni describes society in terms of human body. Each organ functions for the maintenance of the whole body so that the benefit received by it from the organs returns again to each of them. If an organ or individual acts in isolation from the organization, it means that he is unconsciously destroying himself. That is why each man should act as a strong member of society and perform actions beneficial to all. Afg̲h̲āni states that individuals not working for society should be discarded, since such men exercise a harmful influence on others.21 In this connection, Afg̲h̲āni condemns people who do not make full use of their talents and give themselves up to tawakkal, wrongly interpreted as absolute reliance upon God. He describes it as going against natural laws.22

According to the above analysis individual necessities have urged men towards the formation of society. Social organization has manifested itself in different kinds of units at different stages, such as family, tribe and community. Each unit has a binding force which gives it the shape it possesses. Afg̲h̲āni calls it the ‘spirit of life’ (r~uḥ-i ḥayāt). This ‘spirit of life’ controls each unit and by coordinating its energies pushes it forward towards progress.23

First, there is a human being composed of elements having qualities quite different from each other and organs with different shapes performing various actions. Human soul unifies these different elements and organs to function for the maintenance of the whole human body and thus ensures the existence of the individual.

The second unit is that of the family (vaḥdat-i baitīyah). Its ‘life spirit’ is close relationship which unites men of different temperaments, aims and ambitions to act for a common objective – maintenance of the whole family.

The third unit is that of clan (vaḥdat-i ‘ashīrah) which is formed by the coming together of several families. The ‘life-spirit’ of such a group is described by Afg̲h̲āni as absolute relationship (qarābat-i mut̤laqah). It harmonizes the thoughts and actions of the members of all families to support the common cause of that tribe.

The final unit is that of nationality/ citizenship (jinsiyah) which is composed of several tribes. The basic elements on the basis of which a group of people may be called a community are unity of language, thought or religion. Language is the broadest basis upon which people following different religions may form a community.24 However, it is the unity of thought and action without which no kind of grouping can be possible – a point often emphasized by Afg̲h̲āni. He calls this urge for unity as the ‘life-spirit’ of a community. Among the peoples who possess this spirit all classes will function in full coordination having the same moving force (quvvah-yi muḥrikah). The individuals may move in different directions but they still serve a common purpose. They may proceed in opposite directions as upon a circumference and will inevitably come nearer to each other. By this illustration, Afg̲h̲āni endeavors to emphasize individual freedom of actions as well as social responsibilities. Besides, he states that human actions, customs and manners, modes of livelihood, and the pattern of a nation’s working depend on rational thoughts and spiritual qualities of that nation. So, the harmony of action implies harmony in thought and qualities. As it is, base dispositions and false thoughts are outwardly in harmony, but are actually quite opposed to each other. Persons having such thoughts and habits tend to disagree with one another. Therefore, Afg̲h̲āni suggests, there should be certain thoughts and qualities which could maintain balance among the base and the noble thoughts and qualities. Afg̲h̲āni points out that the thought and qualities having a balancing force are only those which create unity and harmony among individuals and aim at the good of the whole.

Hence, they are called noble dispositions and sublime thoughts.25 They are also described as virtues. Virtues are those qualities which, when acquired and nurtured, can produce the required harmony and unity of thought. They develop a sense of social justice in individuals, help them in avoiding conflicts and transform them into one cohesive whole moving by one single will and advancing towards one common goal.26 Individual interests should give way to the common cause of society. Again, besides observance of moral values, a rational outlook is also a basic condition for smooth working of society. Harmony in people’s actions depends upon moral purity which cannot be achieved without the help of reason. Therefore, for the happiness of a nation both moral and rational pattern of thinking and action are necessary.27 As such, the main point of emphasis is always the unity of thought and action among the nation-builders, scholars, teachers, jurists, artists, craftsmen farmers, traders, soldiers, men of letters, etc. Society’s material and intellectual life, thus, depends upon the smooth functioning of all these classes (t̤abaqāt) in complete cooperation. On the other hand, a nation is ruined when the unity of thought weakens affecting the unity of the whole organization and cooperation among its classes.28

Investigating the cause behind the lack of coordination among classes and individuals, Afg̲h̲āni reverts to morality holding that personal ambitions often throw the individuals into a state of constant conflicts and struggle with one another.29 He agrees that pursuit of pleasure is the soul of human activities. However, the main point is that men do not know what is pleasure and where does it reside. All men have their own ways. There are people who aspire for wealth, some hope to build palaces and gardens, and other love high offices. In these blind pursuits, greed and selfishness they ignore the comforts and peace of thousands of other people and do not hesitate to deprive the weak and the poor of their livelihood.30 This selfish attitude of seeking one’s own comforts at the cost of others is the result of ignorance as to the real meaning of pleasure. He believes that an individual’s pleasure and comfort reside in the pleasures and comforts of the whole society. The main trouble, he points out, is that man desires to confine pleasures and comforts absolutely to himself. Afg̲h̲āni asserts that a man who usurps the properties and wealth of others cannot live happily. He warns that the mass of people whose rights and comforts are snatched away would not always remain passive. Their hatred would always be a danger to the safety of such usurpers.31 In his characteristic style, Afg̲h̲āni points out the contradictions of such an unbalanced society:

“What comfort is there in a grand palace which is erected in a country full of sufferings?. . . . What happiness is there for those in high posts who have nothing around them but a mass of shabbily dressed poor people?… Of what use is the wealth from which no benefit can be derived by anyone? How can one take a morsel of food while he is listening to the cries of thousands of hungry wretches all around him?”32

Afg̲h̲āni declares that man could attain comfort and pleasure only in a country where each class of society enjoys all things equally.33

It should be noted that while denouncing exploitation of the lower classes by the upper classes, Afg̲h̲āni has departed from an exclusively theological approach in the judgment of social evils. His insistence upon equal distribution of comforts among all the classes of a society, though expressed rather vaguely, shows that he was inclined to interpret social issues not exclusively from a purely religious standpoint but also in a way which reminds us of the socialistic thinking which was getting firm ground in Europe towards the middle of 19th century. However, it will be wrong to conclude that he subscribed to the theories of socialism or communism which he condemned vehemently as we shall see later.34 It only shows that he was realistic enough to take into account facts besides religion in his evaluation of society.

Education (Tarbiyah)

In Afg̲h̲āni’s view the purpose of education is to prepare the individual for the service of the nation. Afg̲h̲āni states that education amounts to struggle with and resistance to human nature (t̤abī‘at). It does not imply, however, that he advocates the suppression of nature; what he means is that such desires and ambitions should be resisted as may lead a person astray. This point he makes clear by stating that a good education lifts one’s nature from imperfection to excellence and from baseness to nobility.35 It is only through education that man acquires the character of a human being.
Afg̲h̲āni regards the spirit of nationality (jinsiyah/qaumīyat) as the chief purpose towards which education should be directed. Nationality is a state of mind which is produced in the individual by regular schooling. Once this mental attitude is built up, the individual regards the prestige of his nation as his own.36 Such education helps in the harmonious functioning of different groups and classes which is a primary condition for the progress of society. A nation, thus unified, produces great philosophers, religious scholars, artists, agriculturists, traders, etc. In view of the fact that the interest of the individual is connected with that of society, Afg̲h̲āni holds that the former should be prepared for the service of the latter and that individual aims should not take precedence over social objectives. All loyalties should be to one’s own country and people.37 In brief, Afg̲h̲āni lays down three objectives for education: (a) individuals should be prepared for the noblest deeds and worldly positions; (b) their beliefs should have a rational basis: and (c) they should act for the whole society.

Development of Sciences:

Afg̲h̲āni’s educational ideas are also reflected in his discussion on knowledge and sciences. In his conception of knowledge and his views on the origin and development of sciences he does not follow the early Muslim thinkers according to whom no knowledge is possible beyond what is contained in the Qur‘ān or the teachings of the Messenger. As Ibn ḥazm says, “Any fact whatsoever which can be proved by reasoning is in the Qur‘ān or in the words of the Messenger, clearly set out.”38 In course of time, this point of view developed into a prejudice against all rational sciences which seemed to defy religious authority. However, such an outlook was adopted only at a comparatively later stage in the history of Muslims when the predominant influence of the ‘ulamā made religion dogmatic and exclusive. For, had it been otherwise how can we explain the encouragement extended to the studies of Greek sciences under the Abbasid Caliphs at Baghdad, or at the courts of the Persian rulers, or in Egypt under several Fatimid Caliphs, or in Spain under the Umayyad? The hardening of dogmatic feeling in various schools disapproved the philosophers. It was a common belief of the rigid orthodoxy that all philosophers had no faith in the basic tenets of Islam. The antagonistic outlook adopted by the orthodoxy towards rational and social sciences continued during the subsequent centuries and was more active in the latter half of the 19th century when Afg̲h̲āni was criticized by the ‘ulamā of al-Azhar for teaching philosophy to the students.39

In a totally unorthodox manner Afg̲h̲āni studies the issue of the origin and development of sciences. He believes that knowledge progresses in accordance with social needs. He traces the development of all sciences along with the exigencies during different stages of social development. He bases this theory upon the assumption that perfection in livelihood (ma‘īshat) and betterment of life are the basic objectives of rational and spiritual excellence. It is material prosperity which urges human reason to act. In order to achieve prosperity man rose from the level of wild life to the heights of civilization and culture.40 The yearning for perfection in life made men discover different arts and crafts, sciences and industries. He had to know the methods of cultivation, construction of canals, wells, bridges, buildings, etc. For maintaining good health, knowledge of the influence of different climates, chemical compositions of various drugs and their effects upon human physique was acquired. As it was practically difficult for each man to learn all these sciences it became more obligatory for those who had mastered a particular science to cooperate with others so that the needs of all could be fulfilled satisfactorily. Thus, with the increasing needs new sciences came into existence and were developed. Afg̲h̲āni enumerates in this regard nearly all natural, physical and social sciences such as physics, chemistry, botany, zoology, physiology, surgery, geography, mathematics, geometry, algebra, coordinate geometry, archaeology, mineralogy, navigation, sociology, civics, and political science.41

After having developed sciences man turned his attention to the problems of human soul. This was necessary in view of the fact that material prosperity, accompanied by the corruption of morals and abuse of spiritual talents, was disastrous for the well-being of society. A coward, greedy, jealous, short-tempered, and miserly person could not be at peace with his environment notwithstanding all material comforts. With the aid of philosophy man was able to distinguish between moral and immoral acts so that he may refrain from the latter and acquire virtues which could help him in attaining spiritual perfection. Thus, for the purification of the soul the art of ‘refinement of dispositions’ (tahz̲ib al-ak̲h̲lāq) was developed.42
Thereafter, man studied problems like the origin and reality of human life, the foundations of consciousness, nature of perception and its relation with physical sensations, the origin of matter, its attributes and accidents, the elements of the universe and the reactions therein, the production of germs in plants and animals and their evolution through different states to a permanent form, the ethical attitudes of different nations and their legal systems and the phenomenon of the rise and fall of world cultures. All these studies brought forth several new sciences like philosophy, ethics, history, jurisprudence, theology, etc.4

Concept of Knowledge:

Afg̲h̲āni holds that it is knowledge which is responsible for man’s success. Even military victories were brought about by nations by means of superior knowledge.44 He supports this view by citing the triumphs of the Chaldeans, Egyptian, Phoenicians, Greeks and Christians who established empires by dint of their mastery over sciences. The political penetration of the English and the French in Afghanistan and Tunisia was in fact the triumph of knowledge over ignorance.45 “The king of the world is knowledge and without it kingship has never existed, does not exist and will not exist. The Chaldeans, Egyptians, Phoenicians, Greeks and the Europeans of modern age have conquered lands and dominated the world not because of their military power but because of their knowledge. The military conquests are not of the Europeans or the English but it is knowledge projecting its magnificence and glory and ignorance has no other way except to admit its inferiority and servitude to knowledge. Thus in reality, kingship has never deserted the house of knowledge.

However, this real king has always changed its capital – sometimes it has traveled from the East to the West and sometimes from the West to the East.”46
On the relationship between knowledge and the progress of a nation he says that, “If we ponder over the wealth and prosperity of the world, we would find that it is the result of trade, industry and agriculture. Agriculture is not attainable without the science of crafts, chemistry, biology and geometry; industry cannot be achieved without the sciences of physics, chemistry, geometry and arithmetic, and trade depends on industry and agriculture. Thus all prosperity and wealth are the result of science.”47 At another occasion, addressing the peoples of the East, Afg̲h̲āni says:
“O sons of the East, don’t you know that the power of the Westerners and their domination over you came about through their advance in learning and education, and your decline in these domains?… Make the effort to obtain knowledge and become enlightened with the light of truth so as to recoup glory and obtain true independence.”48

Afg̲h̲āni believes that the ideas and trends of a nation largely reflect the thoughts of its philosophers and ‘ulamā. The progress of a nation mostly depends upon the potentialities of the ‘ulamā and the strength of their thoughts. If they possess good thoughts, pure souls and refined dispositions, they would succeed in creating among the people the qualities of love, spiritual dignity and unity.49

The ‘Ulama:

According to Afg̲h̲āni, a person deserves to be called an ‘ālim only when he is capable of performing the sacred duty of educating and reforming the national character and leading the nation towards supreme happiness.50 However, the Muslim ‘ulamā, Afg̲h̲āni points out, do not come up to this standard. They pay no attention to modern sciences nor have they any desire to study them. Regarding their prejudiced attitude towards modern sciences, Afg̲h̲āni points out that the ‘ulamā have classified knowledge into two groups: Muslim sciences, on the one hand, and European sciences, on the other. They are ignorant of the fact that knowledge cannot be exclusively ascribed to any particular group of people. Knowledge should not be judged by men, but men should be tested by their knowledge. Afg̲h̲āni points out a paradox in the attitude of the Muslims towards sciences by stating that they study Aristotle with great pleasure as if Aristotle was a Muslim thinker while the things attributed to Galileo, Newton or Kepler are declared as heresy (kufr). In fact, the originators of knowledge are proof and argument and not Aristotle or Galileo.51 Referring to al-g̲h̲azāli’s contention in al-Munqiz̲ min al-z̤alāl, Afg̲h̲āni states that whosoever holds that Islam is against learning mathematical arguments, philosophical proofs, and physical theories is an enemy of Islam. By holding his religion as opposed to universal truths, he refutes his own religion.52 Afg̲h̲āni complains that the ‘ulamā pay no attention even to those sciences which are in daily use. He expresses surprise at the ignorance of these ‘ulamā who merely read the works of Mullā ṣadrā and Shams-i Bāzi__g̲h̲ah and take pride in calling themselves philosophers. They do not enquire into their real worth. They do not want to know the principles of the wireless, ships, and railways. The most curious thing about them is that they go on reading Shams-i Bāzig̲h̲ah throughout the night by the light of a lamp and not for once think why the lamp starts giving smoke when the chimney of the lamp is taken off and ceases to do so when it is put back.”53 He compares such ‘ulamā to a wick having a feeble flame which lightens neither its own surroundings nor gives light to others.54

Afg̲h̲āni, while in India, appeals to the ‘ulamā to study modern sciences and inventions like electricity, magnetism, steam power, wireless, gramophone, photography, telescope and microscope. He asks the ‘ulamā: “Is it proper on your part to abandon discussion of these modern inventions simply because they are not mentioned in Ibn Sinā’s Shifā or ḥikmat al-Ishrāq of Shihāb al-Dīn Maqt~ul? Is it not your duty to serve new generation by your valuable thoughts as your predecessors have done in your case?”55

Philosophy:

Afg̲h̲āni maintains this unprejudiced outlook on knowledge in discussion on the need of learning philosophy. Contrary to the orthodox practice of condemning the study of philosophy, he strongly advocates its learning and acquiring a philosophical attitude on life. Among all the branches of knowledge, Afg̲h̲āni believes, philosophy is the most comprehensive and essential for building up the character of a nation.56 Explaining the reasons for the lack of interest shown by the Muslims for philosophy, he states that the real character of philosophy was obscured by numerous definitions, queer words, strange phraseology, and especially by that mental pleasure which the solutions of logical problems provided. In fact, philosophy is a branch of knowledge which realizes the transition from the narrow animal perception to the wide world of human consciousness, exterminates the darkness of false notions by the radiance of intellect, liberates minds from the shackles of ignorance and stupidity and blesses it with culture, wisdom and enlightenment. In short, human life rests on rational behavior aiming at human perfection.57 Philosophy teaches man his duties, explains the needs of science and assigns each science its proper fucction.58

Therefore, learning of philosophy is extremely necessary, especially in order to create in a nation what Afg̲h̲āni describes as the ‘spirit of philosophy’ (r~uḥ-i falsafah). This spirit produces an intellectual outlook which is competent to make full use of different sciences. Scholars without the spirit of philosophy are useless for a nation. No results would accrue from science if they are not coordinated to each other.59 Again, it is philosophy which helps men to understand each other, explains human nobility and guides them to their proper destinations. The decay of a nation, Afg̲h̲āni points out, shows itself first in the corruption of the ‘spirit of philosophy’ after which all its sciences, manners and ways of living are vitiated.60 Emphasizing the importance of this spirit, he remarks that if a nation possessed this outlook it would be forced to learn sciences even though it has none of its own. Citing Muslim history he points out that the early Muslims had no sciences but moved by the philosophical spirit which was created by their religion they learned all that was necessary to deal with natural laws and human duties.61

Criticism of Muslim Philosophers

It is to be noted that Afg̲h̲āni’s emphasis is on cultivating the “spirit of philosophy’ and not on studying and following works of Muslim philosophers. In fact, he treats studies in philosophy by the Muslim philosophers as a major factor responsible for vitiating the Islamic concept of knowledge. In his article Favā‘id-i Falsafah,62 Afg̲h̲āni charges that the works of Muslim philosophers are neither original nor comprehensive.
According to him, the issues discussed in those books do not faithfully conform to the Greek originals and theMuslim scholars have did not bother to point out the mistakes in them. Instead, they were either concealed or adopted in a way that closed the doors of enquiry upon the thinking people. This blind faith in Greek and Roman philosophers was due to the fact that the Muslim thinkers regarded all of them as people of pure intellect, holy talents, and true revelations and believed that the truth and authenticity of their views could not be questioned. Therefore, Muslim writers accepted the arguments of the Greek philosophers in the same way as people follow the opinions of their leaders. For instance, Ibn Sīnā was not courageous enough to refute the views of his teacher Aristotle on the problem of nuf~us-i falakīyah (celestial souls) but merely contented himself by casually expressing his disagreement. Mullā ṣadrā was so much overawed by the Greeks as to feel convinced that atheism or heresy could not be expected from them. He actually supported the views of Democritus, Empedocles and Epicurus and tried to explain and give lame excuses in favor of their opinions which totally refuted God’s existence. Shihāb al-Dīn Maqt~ul extended the sphere of taqlīd by accepting the utterances of Zoroaster without logical and rational arguments and thus revived the theory of dualism.

This blind faith, Afg̲h̲āni thinks, was probably due to their presupposition that the views of the Greek and Roman philosophers were exclusively original. They overlooked the fact that like all other sciences philosophy had also achieved its present form by going through the process of coordination and harmonization of different thoughts and ideas. Afg̲h̲āni holds that the philosophical sciences, in fact, originated in India and then traveled through Babylonia and Egypt to Greece and Rome acquiring a different form at each stage. What the Greek and Roman philosophers could claim as their own contribution are not more than a few observations and axioms. Since they did not mention the sources of their thoughts, the Muslim thinkers treated all Greek and Roman philosophical ideas as original and did not submit them to a critical scrutiny.
Further, according to Afg̲h̲āni, the discussion in the books of Muslim scholars is very much confused and mixed up. Issues concerning physics have not been discussed satisfactorily. Among them, Afg̲h̲āni mentions the nature of matter, form, attributes, extensions, void, existence, time and space, the four elements, universe, thunder, lightning, windstorms, earthquakes, plants and animals, the beginning of human life on earth, stars, planets, sun, moon, body, mind, sense, perception, soul, God, causation, creation and purpose of creation, etc. All these subjects that needed exhaustive discussion were lost in confused argumentation.

Describing the works of the early Muslim philosophers as incomplete and defective, Afg̲h̲āni urges upon the ‘ulamā to put all these useless books aside and acquire a rational outlook, learn modern sciences and direct their wisdom to the reformation and uplift of the Muslims.63

Language

Among the basic features underlying the unity of human groups, Afg̲h̲āni singles out language as the most prominent unifying factor. There are two major forces which give shape to such unities. They are language and religion.64 Language unifies people belonging to different groups having different aims, inculcates in them the spirit of ‘nationalism’/jinsiyah in order to weld divergent social groups into a single cohesive nation pursuing a common goal.65 He considers the bond of language more effective and lasting than that of religion; for, a nation changes its religion more than once in, say, a thousand years while its language remains the same. Regarding the range of influence, this ‘linguistic unity’ has an important advantage over religion. While a religion is confined only to its followers, language may include in its sphere of influence believers in various religions. Hence a Greek Christian is justified in being proud of Plato, Aristotle and Socrates on the ground of common language, while an Indian Christian could claim no such right over Newton or Galileo on religious grounds.66 Afg̲h̲āni holds that a national language must be rich with vocabulary fulfilling the needs of different professional classes. As discussed above, a nation is constituted of different classes. For the existence and functioning of these classes the national language should include all the words and terms which are used in the arts and crafts and all the professions. Therefore, the first duty of those who have an insight into the different factors of nationalism is to extend the scope of the national language. It is incumbent upon them to use words according to the needs of different arts and crafts, in different contexts, keeping in mind their real meanings. Sometimes they should combine two or three words to convey certain meaning. Afg̲h̲āni suggests that words may be borrowed from those languages which closely resemble the national language. In case there is no other alternative, help may be taken according to necessity even from foreign languages.67 Such borrowed vocabulary should be absorbed in a way that it should not appear alien. If this is done it would inevitably result in establishing the arts and crafts and all professions on firm foundations. Afg̲h̲āni emphasizes that education, sciences, arts and crafts followed by all the classes of a nation should be in the national language in order to build up the character of a nation and to provide happiness and blessings of nationalism to all. He elaborates this statement by pointing out that if the sciences, arts and crafts are in the national language their foundation in a nation would be firm and they would remain intact for a long time. The succeeding generations could derive benefit from the works of their predecessors, enliven their nation and gain fresh honors. On the contrary, if their sciences and arts are in some foreign language, there is every possibility of their being extinct in a short time.68 Afg̲h̲āni supports this argument by referring to Greek history. The Greeks are still benefiting from the books of their ancestors for the simple reason that they are preserved in their own language. Whereas, the Persians could make no use of those sciences although under the reign of the Parthians, for three hundred years, all their sciences and literature were in the Greek language.69 Further, if the sciences are in the national language they are easily accessible for the people to learn and are more deeply absorbed by them. Besides, a national language makes it possible for each professional class to attain some knowledge of the sciences used in other professions – a thing necessary in order to achieve perfection in all professions. Afg̲h̲āni, also, emphasizes that all modern sciences should be translated in the national language. One should not be proud of having piles of books written in the foreign languages and none in his own. Afg̲h̲āni summarizes his arguments in the statement that a nation could be proud only of its honor which could not be achieved except through sciences and literature; sciences and literature could be a matter of honor for a nation when they are popular among the people and this is not possible unless they are in the national language.70

Educational Reforms

Besides the theoretical aspect of education and language, the issue of educational reforms in the Muslim countries has also invited penetrating criticism of Afg̲h̲āni. He states that the utility of modern sciences and the urgency to popularize them among the Muslims is indisputable. However, no real advantage from modern sciences can be drawn unless they are used properly according to the actual needs of the nation and by keeping up its integrity. He concedes that there is nothing wrong in the argument that one of the chief causes of the backwardness of the Muslims is that they lack modern sciences and, therefore, there should be an all out effort to popularize these sciences by setting up schools all over the Muslim countries on the pattern of European institutions.71 Afg̲h̲āni accepts this theory in principle but he is not sure of its being practicable. He points out that this task, great as it is, cannot be accomplished unless it is supported, first, by a sovereign political power and, second, by sound finance. The Muslims, however, lack both these provisions.72 Besides, educational reforms need time and peace which are not at their disposal in face of the political designs of the foreign powers who are bent upon taking full advantage of the weaknesses of the Muslims. Therefore, Afg̲h̲āni holds that those who argue that by sustained struggle we would gradually succeed in achieving that goal are miscalculating the trends of the prevailing conditions. If they at all succeeded in educating a few individuals on the modern pattern the nation would gain no real benefit from them. A few educated persons could not reduce the deep rooted grievances of a nation nor would their knowledge transform the whole national outlook and prepare them for rapid advances in the field of modern knowledge. The Muslims, Afg̲h̲āni points out, have no idea of the origin, development, advantages, and objects of modern sciences and they are not intellectually prepared to appreciate the real values of modern knowledge.73 Such persons would pass on the sciences to other people in exactly the same manner and form as they have learnt them, without taking into account the prevailing thoughts, trends, and manners of their people according to which the education should be adjusted. It is more probable that they would confuse the major problems with the minor ones and, thus, produce wrong results. Afg̲h̲āni expected no real advantage from the establishment of modern schools, since the ideas inherent in such education were the product of European society and did not suit the conditions of Muslim countries. He describes the persons educated on the modern pattern not as the masters of modern sciences but simply as imitators who have no idea of national needs and objectives. The supporters of modern education are like a mother who, out of love, feeds her baby with delicious meat. Naturally, it would prove harmful for the baby who is unable to digest anything other than milk. Such people may act in good faith but the consequences may prove harmful to the nation. They unintentionally become a cause of disintegration among the people and invite the foreigners to intervene in the internal affairs in the name of friendship and help. The unpatriotic outlook of such people who describe themselves as the upholders of freedom, nationalism and patriotism is apparent from the manner of their living. They eat, drink, dress, and live in their homes in Western style. All the articles of their daily use are imported from the Western countries.74 Thus, in exchange of the wealth of their country they obtain those articles which are of cheap quality. By doing so, they have destroyed their own industries and deprived their craftsmen and laborers of their bread. For, those artisans and craftsmen could not afford to run their factories with modern equipment, nor do they have enough capital to finance such projects. Afg̲h̲āni believes that this situation was the result of the fact that modern sciences were carried to the Muslim countries without having prepared the intellectual foundations among the Muslim people. People who fall a prey to the Western mode of living and forsake their own customs and manners are described by Afg̲h̲āni as enemies of the country. Their reason is overpowered by the love of foreign elements, which use them as tools to carry out their own designs. Criticizing the governments of Egypt and Turkey which set up modern schools and sent educational delegations to Europe, he stated that such attempts yielded no result. He asks what benefit the Turks and the Egyptians have drawn from their modern institutions. They have proved a total failure as far as political, economic and social objectives are concerned. These countries are as poor as they were before. They have not become powerful enough to defend themselves against their foes.75 Another reason of the failure of such attempts in the educational field is that the schools opened in Egypt and Turkey have no provision for the teaching of philosophical sciences. Since their outlook was devoid of philosophical spirit, the Muslims could not gain any benefit from modern sciences. They were obliged to send their youths to Europe for education and invite the European teachers to teach in their schools.76 The progress of the Muslims, according to him, is possible only if the reforms are based on religion. The West and the means of its progress should not become mere objects of imitation and if they become so it would degenerate in to submission to the West. He appears to suggest that Islam as a dominating faith must take advantage of the successful experience of the West and use it for its own strength.77

Afg̲h̲āni was deeply grieved at the poor educational standards of the Muslims, as a whole. They do not possess sufficient knowledge of the subjects they are taught. For instance, the object of Arabic grammar is to learn reading, speaking and writing of Arabic language. The Muslims have made grammar their object of study and spent years and years in useless philosophical discussions over the subject, and, still, they are not competent even to understand, speak or write Arabic.78

Status of Women

Regarding women’s status, Afg̲h̲āni advocated for their educational and social uplift. In a lecture delivered in 1879 in Egypt he said: “I am warning you, gentlemen, against thinking that you will attain the qualities of civilization, acquire knowledge and advance toward progress and happiness… if knowledge among you is confined only to men; I am warning you that you should not ignore that it is impossible for us to emerge from stupidity, from the prison of humiliation and distress, and from the depths of weakness and ignominy as long as women are deprived of rights and ignorant of their duties, for, they are the mothers from whom will come elementary education and primary morality. No doubt the first thing carved on the tablet of a man’s mind is the strongest and hardest to erase. It has been said that what one learns in childhood is like something carved in stone. I say that this image is the basic cause of the differences of beliefs and the variety of tenets. . . .If the mothers are educated, know human rights, and what the precepts of honor and civilization require, there is no doubt that their children will adopt their characters and will acquire from them these virtues. I think that when women’s education is neglected, then even if all the males of a nation are learned and high-minded, still the nation would be able to survive in its acquired stage only for that generation. When they disappear, their children, who have the character and educational deficiencies of their mothers, betray them, and their nation returns to the state of ignorance and distress.”79

In fact, Afg̲h̲āni points out, all the failures in the reformation of the Muslims are due to Muslim reformers’ ignorance of the real nature of the problems. Reforms need a close study of several social, political, religious and historical processes which a nation has gone through. Only then could effective solutions of the problems which have arisen in a certain period be thought out and given a practical shape.80

References

1 Cf. pp. 68 below ff.
2 ‘Urvah, i, p. 86
3 Ibid., ii, p. 87
4 Ibid., ii, p. 66
5 Ibid., ii, p. 116
6 Ibid.
7 ‘Urvah, I, p. 87
8 Ibid., p. 88
9 Cf. Chapter iv
10 M, pp. 122-23
11 ‘Urvah, ii, p. 32
12 Ibid., p. 30
13 Ibid., pp. 7-8
14 ‘Urvah, 1, p. 194
15 Ibid.
16 Ibid., ii, pp. 161-62
17 Ibid., p. 164
18 Ibid., pp. 41-42
19 Ta‘rīk̲h̲, ii, pp. 7-14
20 Ibid., p. 11: A striking resemblance exists between these views and that of Ibn Miskawaih. He, in his philosophical work al-Fauz al-Aṣg̲h̲ar (i.e. ‘the smaller work on salvation’), while discussing the perfection and degradation of soul has elaborated on the social aspects of human life. He states that “man is by nature a social being. He cannot live without assistance from his fellows. Consider, for instance, how he differs from the animals. Every animal has been endowed by his Maker with the necessary means of survival. There are the organs of offence and of defense, organs to secure food, and so forth. They have (i) an appropriate physical structure and (ii) they have also a natural instinct which is for them ‘divine inspiration’ and guidance. But man is different. He is born helpless in every sense of the term. A life-long dependence upon others is ordained for him. But he has reason which animals are without. Hence, he soon learns to supply his wants. He lives through rational cooperation with others. They serve and support him in his period of helplessness. He must do likewise. He must serve others just as they serve him. And this is but just. Only rational cooperation with others can ensure a just arrangement and continuity of human society.” Khwajah Abdul Hamid, Ibn Miskawaih, A Study of His Al-Fauz̤ al-Asg̲h̲ar (Lahore, 1946), pp. 50-51
21 Ibid., pp. 11-12
22 Ibid., p. 13
23 M, pp. 75-76 ff.
24 M, pp. 37-38
25 M, pp. 38-39
26 ‘Urvah, I, p. 191. See also pp. 70 below ff.
27 M, pp. 106-7
28 Ibid., pp. 78-79
29 ‘Urvah, ii, p. 34
30 M, p. 149
31 Ibid., p. 150
32 Ibid.
33 Ibid.
34 Cf. pp. 93 below ff. Also compare his views discussed above, pp. 33
35 M, p. 97
36 Ibid., p. 33
37 H, pp. 74-79 ff.
38 R. Levy, The Social Structure of Islam ,(Cambridge, 1957), p. 459
39 Ta‘rīk_h, i, p. 51
40 M., p. 135
41 M, p. 136
42 M, pp. 136-137
43 Ibid., p. 137
44 Ibid., p. 89
45 Ibid., p. 90
46 Ibid., pp. 89-90
47 Ibid.,
48 Review of But̤rus Bustāni’s new Arabic Encyclopedia, Miṣr, ii, no. 43, April 25, 1870. Eng. Tr. Biography, pp. 106-07
49 Ibid., pp. 114-15
50 Ibid., p. 118
51 Ibid., p. 95. A similar criticism is found in al-g̲h̲azāli’s, al-Munqiz̲| min al-~z̤alāl, where he states that it is customary with weaker intellect to take men as criterion of the truth and not the truth as criterion of man. W. Montgomery Watt, The Faith and Practice of Al-Ghazali (Cambridge, 1957), pp. 39-40. At another place he says: “Wherever one ascribes a statement to an author whom they approve they accept it, even though it is false; wherever one ascribes it to an author of whom they disapprove, they reject it even though it is true. They always make the man the criterion of truth and not truth the criterion of the man; and that is erroneous in the extreme.” Ibid., p. 42
52 M, p. 95. Al-g̲h̲azāli, in Munqiz̲, states: “A grievous crime indeed against religion has been committed by the man who imagines that Islam is defended by the denial of mathematical sciences, seeing that there is nothing in revealed truth opposed to these sciences by way of either negation or affirmation, and nothing in these sciences opposed to the truths of religion.” Watt, op. cit., pp. 34-35; See also Levy, op. cit., pp. 503-04
53 M, p. 94
54 Ibid.
55 Ibid., pp. 147-48
56 Ibid., pp. 91-92
57 Ibid., pp. 134-35
58 Ibid., p. 92
59 Ibid., pp. 91-92
60 Ibid., p. 93
61 Ibid., pp. 92-93
62 Ibid., pp. 134-48
63 Ibid., pp. 29-30
64 M, art., “Falsafah-yi Vaḥdat-i Jinsiyah wa ḥaqīqat-i Ittiḥād-i Lug̲h̲at,” p. 77. See also Maḥm~ud Qāsim, op. cit., p. 26
65 M, Ibid.
66 Ibid.
67 Ibid., p. 70. In India, Afg̲h̲āni described Urdu as the common language and advised the people to enrich it with words taken from Sanskrit, Marathi, and Bengali, and even English if necessary. Ibid., p. 80
68 Ibid., pp. 78-80
69 Ibid., pp. 80-82
70 Ibid.
71 ‘Urvah, I, p. 65
72 Ibid., p. 66
73 Ibid., pp. 66-67
74 Ibid., pp. 67-68
75 Ibid., pp. 68-89
76 M, p. 92
77 Mag̲h̲ribi, op. cit., pp. 95-96
78 M, p. 93
79 ḥakīm al-Sharq, Miṣr, 11, No. 47, May 24, 1879, quoted, Biography, pp. 110-11. Nevertheless, he was not in favour of unveiling of women for fear of moral degeneration in view of the existing social conditions of the Muslims. k̲h̲āt̤irāt (Arabic), pp. 67-74
80
81 ‘Urvah, I, p. 64