death upon any criminal; he left this painful office to his deputies. He possessed so great a degree of self-command and patient lenity, that, when one of his enemies, in the midst of a public discourse, sent a servant to him to whisper some abusive language in his ear, he took no other notice of what passed than if it had been a secret message of business. The next day, the servant returned, and publicly begged pardon of Averroes for the affront he had offered him; upon which Averroës only appeared displeased, that his patient endurance of injuries should be brought into public notice, and dismissed the servant with a gentle caution, never to offer that insult to another, which had in the present instance passed unpunished. Averroës spent a great part of his wealth in liberal donations to learned men, without making any distinction between his friends and his enemies; for which his apology was, that, in giving to his friends and relations, he only followed the dictates of Nature; but, in giving to his enemies, he obeyed the commands of Virtue. With uncommon abilities and learning, Averroës united great affability and urbanity of manners. In fine, he may justly be reckoned one of the greatest men of his age." In philosophy, however, Averroës partook of the enthusiasm of the times with respect to Aristotle, and paid a superstitious deference to his authority. Of this his preface to the Physics of Aristotle 58 affords a singular proof. "The writings of Aristotle," says he, " are so perfect, that none of his followers, through a space of fifteen hundred years, have been able to make the smallest improvement upon them, or to discover the least error in them; a degree of perfection, which is truly miraculous, and proves him to have been rather a Divine than a human being." In another place he says,59 "Let us bless God, who has raised this man above all others in perfection, and appropriated to him the highest degree of human excellence." And again; "The doctrine of Aristotle is the perfection of truth, and his understanding attained the utmost limit of human ability; so that it might be truly said of him, that st Leo, l. c. 58 Ap. Malebranche Recherche, &c. 1. ii. p. ii. c. 7. 5o Ap. Lips. Manud. Stoic. I. i. Diss. 3, 4. he was created, and given to the world, by Divine Providence, that we might see in him, how much it is possible for man to know." Extravagant, however, as Averroës was in his admiration of Aristotle, it is unquestionably true, that he was unacquainted with the Greek language, and read the writings of his oracle in wretched Arabic translations, taken immediately from Latin or Syriac versions. The necessary consequence was, that his Commentaries on Aristotle were nothing better than a confused mass of error and misrepresentation. Yet such is the power of prejudice, that many learned men, since the revival of letters, have passed high encomiums upon Averroës as an excellent commentator. His writings of this kind were exceedingly numerous, and were so much admired by the Jews, that many of them were translated into Hebrew. Besides these, Averroes wrote a paraphrase of Plato's Republic; and a treatise in defence of philosophy against Al-Gazel, entitled Happalath hahappalah, commonly cited under the name of Destructorium destructorii ; and many other treatises, in theology, jurisprudence, and medicine. He took great pains to improve the theory of medicine by the help of philosophy, and, particularly, to reconcile Aristotle and Galen; but it does not appear that he practised physic. Few of his writings are to be met with, except in Hebrew or Latin translations.co Much has been asserted concerning the impiety of Averroës, but without sufficient proof. It is probable, however, that he adhered with more devotion to his philosopher than to Mahomet, or any other legislator; for it appears, that, after Aristotle, he held the eternity of the world, and the existence of one Universal Intellect, inferior to Deity, the external source of all human intelligence,61 and consequently denied the distinct existence and immortality of the human soul. Besides the Arabian philosophers which have been enumerated, there were others of inferior note, who acquired 60 Leo 1. c. Pococke ad Portam Mosis, p. 112. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 111, &c. Aver. Resp. Plat. ed. Venet. p. 1552. N. Anton. Bibl. Hisp. t. ii. p. 240. Huet. de claris Interp. p. 229. Renov. p. i. p. 94. Bayle. Conf. Rhodogin. Ant. Lect. l. iii. c. 2. Merck lin. Lind. some degree of celebrity by their commentaries upon Ariștotle, and other philosophical works, but which it is wholly unnecessary particularly to mention. There are also many great Arabian names, in astronomy, mathematics, chemistry, medicine, and other sciences; but for a distinct account of these we must refer to those writers, who have traced the rise and progress of the several branches of science through the Arabian schools.* CHAP. II. OF THE NATURE AND SPIRIT OF THE SARACENIC THE historical view we have taken of the rise and progress of philosophy among the Arabians, and of the lives and characters of their more celebrated philosophers, will enable us to form an accurate idea of the nature and spirit of their philosophy. This subject will not, however, require a prolix discussion; for it is very evident, from the facts which have been related, that the Arabians did not frame a new system, but merely revived the Peripatetic doctrine, the features of which have been already delineated. In what manner this doctrine, and the general state of philosophy, were affected by their connexion with Islamism, and by the peculiar circumstances of the Saracen nations, it may be of some importance to remark, and we shall in this chapter endeavour to explain. * Vidend. Leo Africanus de Viris illustr. ap. Arabos. Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. xiii. p. 96. 259. Goll. de Medic. et Phil. Arab. Dormius ad Jons. de Script. Hist. Ph. 1. iii. c. 28. § 5. Hottinger Bibl. Quadripart. 1. iii. p. ii. c. 2. Abulfar. Hist. Oxon. 1663. 4to. Elmacini Hist. Saracen. Lugd. Bat. 1625. fol. Eutychii Annales. Ox. 1658. 4to. Hottinger. Hist. Orient. et Bibl. Orient. Herbelot. Biblioth. Orient. Par. 1697. Ludewig. Hist. rationalis Phil. apud Turcas. Lackemaker de Fatis Studiorum inter Arabos. Horn. Hist. Phil. 1. 5. Bayle. Conring. Antiq. Acad. Suppl. xix. xx. Friend's History of Medicine. Voss de Scient. Toletan. Hist. Arab. Avicen. Vit. et Op. Ed. Massæ. Venet. 1608. Merklin. Linden. Renov. Carm. Thograi Ed. Pococke. Ox. 1661. 8vo. Mod. Univ. Hist. v. xix. Assemanni Bibl. Or. Bibliander. de Orig. et Mor. Turcarum. Bas. 1550. Before the introduction of the Mahometan religion among the Arabians (which happened in the year 622) their manner of living was unfavourable to the progress of knowledge. Leading an unsettled and roving life, in which they were chiefly employed in the care of their flocks and herds, they had little opportunity, or inducement, to apply to any kind of learning; and it does not appear, that they had among them any other proofs of advancement in knowledge, than that kind of poetry and eloquence, which are commonly found in the early stages of civilization, and that attention to astronomy, which was common in the Eastern nations, and is natural in pastoral life. About the second or third century (for there is no sufficient authority for an earlier date) we find, indeed, that a sect arose in Arabia under the name of the Zabii, who derived their notions from the ancient religion of the Persians, and from the dreams of the Oriental philosophy concerning the Divine nature. This sect supposed human nature connected with the Supreme Deity by intermediate beings of various orders, Powers, Virtues, Spirits, whom they conceived to be instruments of communication between the first being and man, and to whom their religious worship was wholly addressed. They believed the bodies of the planets to be the habitations, or temples, of intelligent natures; and this notion became the basis of a fanciful and superstitious system of star-worship. The Zabian sect probably derived their opinions immediately from the Cabbalistic philosophy of the Jews, and from the tenets of certain Christian heretics, who, about the time when this sect appears to have arisen, resided in Arabia and its vicinity. But, whatever was the origin of this sect, it deserves little attention; for it was no better than a nursery of idle tales and puerile superstitions. Of the latter, Abulfarius furnishes the following example. The Zabii, believing in the resurrection of the dead, at the funeral of a departed friend killed a camel upon his tomb, that at the resurrection he might not be without a beast to ride upon.1 Such was the state of philosophical knowledge in Arabia at the time when Mahomet appeared. This bold adventurer seized the opportunity, which the general prevalence of ignorance and superstition among his countrymen af ! Abulf. apud Pococke, l. c. p. 139. Maim. Mor. Nebh. l. iii. c. 29. forded him, for passing himself upon the world as a Divine prophet. Himself wholly illiterate, and assisted by men who were better able to practise the arts of imposture than to teach the doctrine of truth and wisdom, it is no wonder that the law which this new prophet instituted, and to which he enjoined implicit obedience on pain of death, breathed little of the spirit of philosophy. The great object of the artificers of this law was, to suit it to the feeble understandings and gross passions of the ignorant multitude. For this purpose they filled it with vulgar notions, and romantic fables, as remote as possible from every thing rational. They who contend, upon the authority of certain Mahometan theologians, that whatever may be thought irrational in the Koran is to be taken figuratively, and explained in a philosophical sense, do not recollect, that the unlearned founder of the Islamitic law was a stranger to such refinements, and that it was not till long after the establishment of Islamism, that the necessity of introducing them was discovered. And even when the unphilosophical ideas and language of the Koran obliged the teachers of Islamism, as they became more enlightened, to adopt the figurative and allegorical mode of interpretation, and produced the sects of the Asharites and Motazalitæ, there still remained other sects, particularly the Moshabbehi and Cerami, who adhered to the vulgar notions, or chose rather to impute their apparent absurdity to human ignorance, than to abandon ancient errors. The truth is, nothing could be more inimical to science, than the blind assent which Mahomet required to the doctrines of the Koran; the violent means which, as soon as he had acquired sufficient strength, he employed in propagating his religion; and the barbarous edict by which he prohibited among his followers the study of literature and philosophy. So successful was this impostor in his attempts to prevent inquiry, and to bind his vassals in the chains of ignorance, that it became a common opinion among them, that the Koran was a complete summary of every thing necessary and useful to be known; and, consequently, that all other learning might be safely neglected. They believed that the book itself was immediately sent down from heaven; and vioPococke, 1. c. p. 226. Port. Mos. Diss, vii. 2 G VOL. II. |