Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni holds that it is knowledge which is responsible for man\u2019s 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 \u201cThe 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.
\nHowever, this real king has always changed its capital \u2013 sometimes it has traveled from the East to the West and sometimes from the West to the East.\u201d46
\nOn the relationship between knowledge and the progress of a nation he says that, \u201cIf 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.\u201d47 At another occasion, addressing the peoples of the East, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni says:
\n\u201cO sons of the East, don\u2019t 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.\u201d48
\nAfg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni believes that the ideas and trends of a nation largely reflect the thoughts of its philosophers and \u2018ulama\u0304. The progress of a nation mostly depends upon the potentialities of the \u2018ulama\u0304 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<\/p>\n
The \u2018Ulama:<\/strong><\/p>\n According to Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni, a person deserves to be called an \u2018a\u0304lim 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 \u2018ulama\u0304, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni points out that the \u2018ulama\u0304 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. Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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-g\u0332h\u0332aza\u0304li\u2019s contention in al-Munqiz\u0332 min al-z\u0324ala\u0304l, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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 Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni complains that the \u2018ulama\u0304 pay no attention even to those sciences which are in daily use. He expresses surprise at the ignorance of these \u2018ulama\u0304 who merely read the works of Mulla\u0304 s\u0323adra\u0304 and Shams-i Ba\u0304zi__g\u0332h\u0332ah 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 Ba\u0304zig\u0332h\u0332ah 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.\u201d53 He compares such \u2018ulama\u0304 to a wick having a feeble flame which lightens neither its own surroundings nor gives light to others.54<\/p>\n Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni, while in India, appeals to the \u2018ulama\u0304 to study modern sciences and inventions like electricity, magnetism, steam power, wireless, gramophone, photography, telescope and microscope. He asks the \u2018ulama\u0304: \u201cIs it proper on your part to abandon discussion of these modern inventions simply because they are not mentioned in Ibn Sina\u0304\u2019s Shifa\u0304 or h\u0323ikmat al-Ishra\u0304q of Shiha\u0304b al-Di\u0304n Maqt~ul? Is it not your duty to serve new generation by your valuable thoughts as your predecessors have done in your case?\u201d55<\/p>\n Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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 Criticism of Muslim Philosophers<\/p>\n It is to be noted that Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni\u2019s emphasis is on cultivating the \u201cspirit of philosophy\u2019 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 Fava\u0304\u2018id-i Falsafah,62 Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni charges that the works of Muslim philosophers are neither original nor comprehensive. Language<\/p>\n Among the basic features underlying the unity of human groups, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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 \u2018nationalism\u2019\/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 \u2018linguistic unity\u2019 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 Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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. Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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. Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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 Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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 \u2013 a thing necessary in order to achieve perfection in all professions. Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni, 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. Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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<\/p>\n Educational Reforms<\/p>\n Besides the theoretical aspect of education and language, the issue of educational reforms in the Muslim countries has also invited penetrating criticism of Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni. 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 Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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. Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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. Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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 Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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 <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Status of Women<\/p>\n Regarding women\u2019s status, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni advocated for their educational and social uplift. In a lecture delivered in 1879 in Egypt he said: \u201cI am warning you, gentlemen, against thinking that you will attain the qualities of civilization, acquire knowledge and advance toward progress and happiness\u2026 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\u2019s 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\u2019s 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.\u201d79 References<\/p>\n 1 Cf. pp. 68 below ff. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni holds that it is knowledge which is responsible for man\u2019s 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 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-73","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.anwarmoazzam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/73","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.anwarmoazzam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.anwarmoazzam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.anwarmoazzam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.anwarmoazzam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=73"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.anwarmoazzam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/73\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":77,"href":"https:\/\/www.anwarmoazzam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/73\/revisions\/77"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.anwarmoazzam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Philosophy:<\/h3>\n
\nTherefore, learning of philosophy is extremely necessary, especially in order to create in a nation what Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni describes as the \u2018spirit of philosophy\u2019 (r~uh\u0323-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, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni points out, shows itself first in the corruption of the \u2018spirit of philosophy\u2019 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<\/p>\n
\nAccording 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 Si\u0304na\u0304 was not courageous enough to refute the views of his teacher Aristotle on the problem of nuf~us-i falaki\u0304yah (celestial souls) but merely contented himself by casually expressing his disagreement. Mulla\u0304 s\u0323adra\u0304 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\u2019s existence. Shiha\u0304b al-Di\u0304n Maqt~ul extended the sphere of taqli\u0304d by accepting the utterances of Zoroaster without logical and rational arguments and thus revived the theory of dualism.
\nThis blind faith, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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. Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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.
\nFurther, according to Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni, 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, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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.
\nDescribing the works of the early Muslim philosophers as incomplete and defective, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni urges upon the \u2018ulama\u0304 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<\/p>\n
\nAfg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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<\/p>\n
\nIn fact, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni points out, all the failures in the reformation of the Muslims are due to Muslim reformers\u2019 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<\/p>\n
\n2 \u2018Urvah, i, p. 86
\n3 Ibid., ii, p. 87
\n4 Ibid., ii, p. 66
\n5 Ibid., ii, p. 116
\n6 Ibid.
\n7 \u2018Urvah, I, p. 87
\n8 Ibid., p. 88
\n9 Cf. Chapter iv
\n10 M, pp. 122-23
\n11 \u2018Urvah, ii, p. 32
\n12 Ibid., p. 30
\n13 Ibid., pp. 7-8
\n14 \u2018Urvah, 1, p. 194
\n15 Ibid.
\n16 Ibid., ii, pp. 161-62
\n17 Ibid., p. 164
\n18 Ibid., pp. 41-42
\n19 Ta\u2018ri\u0304k\u0332h\u0332, ii, pp. 7-14
\n20 Ibid., p. 11: A striking resemblance exists between these views and that of Ibn Miskawaih. He, in his philosophical work al-Fauz al-As\u0323g\u0332h\u0332ar (i.e. \u2018the smaller work on salvation\u2019), while discussing the perfection and degradation of soul has elaborated on the social aspects of human life. He states that \u201cman 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 \u2018divine inspiration\u2019 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.\u201d Khwajah Abdul Hamid, Ibn Miskawaih, A Study of His Al-Fauz\u0324 al-Asg\u0332h\u0332ar (Lahore, 1946), pp. 50-51
\n21 Ibid., pp. 11-12
\n22 Ibid., p. 13
\n23 M, pp. 75-76 ff.
\n24 M, pp. 37-38
\n25 M, pp. 38-39
\n26 \u2018Urvah, I, p. 191. See also pp. 70 below ff.
\n27 M, pp. 106-7
\n28 Ibid., pp. 78-79
\n29 \u2018Urvah, ii, p. 34
\n30 M, p. 149
\n31 Ibid., p. 150
\n32 Ibid.
\n33 Ibid.
\n34 Cf. pp. 93 below ff. Also compare his views discussed above, pp. 33
\n35 M, p. 97
\n36 Ibid., p. 33
\n37 H, pp. 74-79 ff.
\n38 R. Levy, The Social Structure of Islam ,(Cambridge, 1957), p. 459
\n39 Ta\u2018ri\u0304k_h, i, p. 51
\n40 M., p. 135
\n41 M, p. 136
\n42 M, pp. 136-137
\n43 Ibid., p. 137
\n44 Ibid., p. 89
\n45 Ibid., p. 90
\n46 Ibid., pp. 89-90
\n47 Ibid.,
\n48 Review of But\u0324rus Busta\u0304ni\u2019s new Arabic Encyclopedia, Mis\u0323r, ii, no. 43, April 25, 1870. Eng. Tr. Biography, pp. 106-07
\n49 Ibid., pp. 114-15
\n50 Ibid., p. 118
\n51 Ibid., p. 95. A similar criticism is found in al-g\u0332h\u0332aza\u0304li\u2019s, al-Munqiz\u0332| min al-~z\u0324ala\u0304l, 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: \u201cWherever 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.\u201d Ibid., p. 42
\n52 M, p. 95. Al-g\u0332h\u0332aza\u0304li, in Munqiz\u0332, states: \u201cA 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.\u201d Watt, op. cit., pp. 34-35; See also Levy, op. cit., pp. 503-04
\n53 M, p. 94
\n54 Ibid.
\n55 Ibid., pp. 147-48
\n56 Ibid., pp. 91-92
\n57 Ibid., pp. 134-35
\n58 Ibid., p. 92
\n59 Ibid., pp. 91-92
\n60 Ibid., p. 93
\n61 Ibid., pp. 92-93
\n62 Ibid., pp. 134-48
\n63 Ibid., pp. 29-30
\n64 M, art., \u201cFalsafah-yi Vah\u0323dat-i Jinsiyah wa h\u0323aqi\u0304qat-i Ittih\u0323a\u0304d-i Lug\u0332h\u0332at,\u201d p. 77. See also Mah\u0323m~ud Qa\u0304sim, op. cit., p. 26
\n65 M, Ibid.
\n66 Ibid.
\n67 Ibid., p. 70. In India, Afg\u0332h\u0332a\u0304ni 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
\n68 Ibid., pp. 78-80
\n69 Ibid., pp. 80-82
\n70 Ibid.
\n71 \u2018Urvah, I, p. 65
\n72 Ibid., p. 66
\n73 Ibid., pp. 66-67
\n74 Ibid., pp. 67-68
\n75 Ibid., pp. 68-89
\n76 M, p. 92
\n77 Mag\u0332h\u0332ribi, op. cit., pp. 95-96
\n78 M, p. 93
\n79 h\u0323aki\u0304m al-Sharq, Mis\u0323r, 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. k\u0332h\u0332a\u0304t\u0324ira\u0304t (Arabic), pp. 67-74
\n80
\n81 \u2018Urvah, I, p. 64<\/p>\n