Interests of Europeans in the Early 1900s

Posted on by leyoucis

Originally posted 4/8/22, Revised 6/14/22

     Philosophically, along with the newly developed logical positivism, British and Continental idealism as well as phenomenology were very popular. Early 1900s Europe was a period of spiritual experimentation, and the enlightenment had for the most part completely left (existing in a semi state throughout German idealism). The early 1900s had developments in not only the esoteric organizations but there was also an interest in alternative religions. Rather than the familiar Greek philosophy, they were more interested in philosophy from other continents. The general consensus is that there is uncharted philosophy from other continents, so it is a good idea to come to understand that philosophy. The early 1900s were still coming off of the heavy critiques of paganism from late antiquity, so rather than getting absorbed in this, it was considered much more tasteful for the spiritually adventurous to get absorbed in Indology, sinology, and Islamology. And European paganism (especially the Greek variant) and also Satanism have a very hard edge to them. It is true that Hinduism is pagan, but the pagan of the Hindus is much more relaxed than the European (especially the Greek) variants.

     The distinguishing feature of the European exposure to alternative religions was its trend (through Indology, sinology, and Islamology) to treat the religion exactly in the state it was developed in its philosophical state, treating alternative issues such as history and Western philosophy. This is in contrast to the esoteric approaches of the Americas and adoptions to popular audiences which was popular with American spirituality. Thus the three main trends among Europeans in the early 1900s were Indology, Islamology, and sinology. It is true that the English tend to the Indologists, the Germans tend to be the sinologists, and the Italians tended to be the Islamologists. Right in the middle of everything was France, which participated extensively in all three. And some of the greatest of these can be found among the French. However, Indology, for example, can be found in both Germany with, for example, Heinrich Zimmer, and in Italy with the works of Julius Evola (technically, Julius Evola located his work on Hinduism half way between the Indological approach and the esoteric approach). Also produced in the early 1900s were such juggernauts as the massive Romanian historian of religion Mircea Eliade.

Hermeneutics of the Qur’an according to Ibn Al-Arabi

Posted on by leyoucis

     Although Wujud can also be interpreted as being/existence, the Sufis use the term wujud to stand for the opening up to the inrushes of knowledge and awareness. Thus, wujud means an ecstatic discovering of the truth. Ibn al-Arabi sees the two senses of wujud (being/existence and “listening”) as essentially identical; in short, we find the existence of God through listening to the divine speech. Gods reveals himself as light, to which he assigns whomsoever he wills. Like wujud, light is both ontological and epistemological. the receiving of light by the individual is called by many names, self-disclosure being the most common one. Since knowledge is intrinsic to light, God gives knowledge through light. Self-disclosure is of many types such as that from light with rays and light without rays. Ibn al-Arabi uses a number of terms to refer to perception of gods self-disclosure, the most general being “unveiling” (kashf). One of the words that is used as a virtual synonym for unveiling is “tasting” (dhawq). Unveiling usually means something that one sees outside of himself, while tasting usually means something one sees inside oneself. That which comes from God is always colored by the receptacle that receives it which is important from ibn al-Arabi’s perspective since this explains the diversity of views found within Islam and religions in general. This explains why every gnostic has a different description of Islam- i.e. each person that has travelled the path to God speaks from his own viewpoint and recalls his own experience. The forms in which the Real shows Himself are not the real Himself but the veils that hide the essence.

     The ideal rational faculty is used to accept unveiling and not to try to go beyond its limitations by reflection. Hence the virtue of reason is to accept unveiling and revelation. The only goal of rational reflection is to recognize the existence and unity of God. This is important because if one fails to use reason, he can risk associating other gods with God. The Arabic word qur’an means to gather together everything in an all comprehensive way. The Qur’an thus gathers together all other scriptures that were sent down before it and therefore all knowledge of God. Muhammad is seen as the perfect and all comprehensive prophet. Ibn al-Arabi gives long and frequent commentaries to show his superiority over all other messengers, prophets, and friends of God. Muhammad was a prophet even when Adam had not yet been created.  the law of the qur’an has been set down through him. Many commentators will describes ibn al-Arabi’s interpretation of the Qur’an as out of context given that modern scholars interpret the Qur’an through historical and literary contexts and traditional Muslims interpret it as the speech of God, escaping all attempts to delimit and define it. However contemporary rational faculties cannot be described as sound since they are the products of a materialistic age. A sound rational faculty would at least have faith in the divine origin of the Qur’an. Once the divine origin is accepted, there it is a question of debate what god meant by certain passages. 

    Ibn al-Arabi sees major differences between the tasfir performed by the folk of Allah and the ta’wil of the men of reason.  Since the philosophers and theologians do not have unveiling, they try to pass from the inward esoteric sense to the outward exoteric sense. But in this crossover, they let go of the inward sense. God created no one more troublesome for the folk of Allah than the exoteric scholar. Yet the folk of Allah are the gnostics.  Every verse has a sense from within and a sense from without. The sense from within is called an “allusion,” by which they can defend themselves against the jurists and exoteric scholars with their unbelief. The exoteric scholars should take things into account when they interpret a verse with an outward sense. Some of these interpretations are better than others yet all of them walk the same path. Although the denounce the folk of Allah, the folk of Allah are the inheritors of the truth. The exoteric scholar believes he is one of the folk of Allah because of that which they know that surpasses the common people. However what god intends in his book is a type of mystical understanding. He is ignorant of those who say “god has given for me to understand.” Thus, a special place is reserved for the exoteric scholar along side the community where they can perform their calculations. He does not disrupt the folk of Allah but he can inform them from time to time.

Islamic Theology

Posted on by leyoucis

     Many think that the Islamic world is not a place for rationalistic metaphysics and that the rationalism came only from Arabic philosophy, and there has since been a shift into mysticism and a sole interest in Islamic law. However, there has been much work on the Qur’an concerning both the philosophical nature of the work (Falsafa) and issues concerning revelation and the nature of God (Kalam). There is also work that analyzes the ethics, rituals, and law of the Qur’an, and often relies on metaphysical issues (Fiqh). Many Islamic thinkers, Ibn Qudāma included, believe that rationalism cannot be substituted for the mystical illumination of the Qur’an. One of the main issues of Islam is the recognition of how to synthesize reason (‘aql) and revelation (naql). It is genreally thought that certain issues of metaphysics belong to reason, while issues of prophetic authority and other issues in metaphysics such as the features of the afterlife and the nature of Jinn belong to revelation. Personally, I believe much of the Qu’ran can turned into reason or transcendentalized, since for example the features of the afterlife such as Heaven and Hell, the extremity of these places, and so forth, can be seen as the optimal ways of inducing moral completeness in this life and be tied to other issues such as the existence of the soul and self, and the mathematical structures of the Qu’ran, which seem to be central to metaphysics. This is indeed the approach Indians use to transcendentalize their conceptions of the afterlife. However, the specific features might be left to revelation. Ghazālī initiated an approach that synthesized law, scripture, Sufism, and Kalam. There eventually was a decline in Falsafa in the 12th century due the works Avicenna and Ghazālī, and a shift into the negative theology of Kalam.

     I now give a brief introduction to the analysis of revelation and God in Kalam. The issue of the essence and attributes of God takes a central role in Kalam, with the two extremist positions being the anthropomorphists (mushabbiha) and the corporealists (mujassima). Anthropomorphism means that the qualities of God in the Qur’an are simply a fictitious representation of the true God, and coporealism means that God truly is a corporeal being. In between these positions, there are the positions of the Mu’tazilites, the Anabalites, and the Ash’arites. The Mu’talizites place an emphasis on transcendence while retaining some of the qualities and avoiding anthro-pomorphism, which leads them to believe that the Qu’ran is created. Various qualities are retained or refuted, for instance most Mu’taliza believe that power, omniscience, life, will, sight, and hearing, and speech are true qualities of God. Other qualities such as face and hands are anthropomorphic. The Anabalites believe that the qualities of God ultimately remain hidden and the words are there to be recited. In this sense they are against rationalistic speculation about the qualities of God, as this can lead to errors in your understanding of the Qur’an. These words are meant to be recited but not speculated about. The Ash’arites view places less of an emphasis on transcendence than the Mu’tazilites. The qualities of the Mu’tazilites as well as his actions are attributable to him. When it comes to face and hands, at times they take a neutral stance and regard them as neither corporeal or anthropomorphic, and at other times they ascribe face and hands to God and believe he will be seen in the afterlife.

     . . . Although the Qur’an is one revelation among many throughout history, it is probably an epistemological fact that all revelations are not equally valid. There are several factors that lead to believing the Qur’an was a revelation of importance. According to the Sunnis, the speech of the Qur’an seems to be of divine origin and is written in a particular style that suggests divine speech. From the people that observed Muhammad, there was obviously something extraordinary going on. Often, when he was getting a revelation, we would become stiff and shake his head and  sweat would drip from his forehead. Often he would enter a trance. As mentioned earlier, the Qur’anm was initially said to be created by the Mu’talizites, and later the role of Muhammad was downgraded and the rights were given to their God. . . . A person also should judge something revealed in the ways they would judge any metaphysical theory, such as whether it is internally consistent and whether it leads to proper ethical behavior. . .

     That being said, I have developed a number of arguments that would more appropriately be entitled Falsafa than Kalam. Firstly, I believe Hegel’s argument where he gives the precise relationship between how the physical world interacts with the absolute spirit can be generalized to account for the Islamic God. As the argument as to how this God creates natural disasters would need this argument to translate how this God’s actions interacts with the physical world. Additionally, I believe the Qur’an mentions a fictional ontological viewpoint in which the God’s the individuals worship are subjective creations and they are told not to worship them. This can be generalized to account for a generalized fictional ontological viewpoint. Thirdly, I believe Hegel’s argument can be extended to include the two structures of the Qur’an with both self-reference and unresolvable contradiction as the two fundamental structures of the Universe with one self-referential pole placed in the Unitred States and one self-referential pole placed in the Middle-East. We must remember, however, that this is simply metaphyisi9cs and none of this is provable. It must be remembered that most Muslims view their God as transcendent and not immanent, but there is certainly an immanent component. These results rely on the interplay of German idealism and the Qur’an.