Chapter XVI: Section III: ――of the Successors of These Philosophers, and the Chief

FOLLOWERS OF THIS CREED.

Of this class, several learned men were personally known to the author of this book, but he will give an account of those only who were well founded and skilled in this creed. First, the doctor in theology, Hírbed, whom the author visited in Lahore. This doctor was a descendant from the family of Zardúsht, the prophet of God; he was conversant with Persian, showed great proficiency in Arabic, and in other sciences, in Shiraz, and held intercourse with learned Frangis. At last he came to India; always devoted to austerity, he led a pure and holy life. He composed hymns in Persian, Hindi, and Arabic, to the majesty of the light of lights, the powerful luminaries, and the stars. He acknowledged as a Kiblah the splendor-shedding bodies, and made his own, in spirit and word, the work of the lord Shaikh Maktul. Secondly, the doctor Manír was met by the writer of this work, in the year of the Hejira 1053 (A. D. 1643-4), in Kabul; he was one of the Sáíds of Shiraz, but entered the elemental world in Irâk Ajem; he was skilful in sciences, and lived as a chaste independent and pious man; like Hirbed, he abstained from all sorts of animal food, and sang the hymns which go under the name of Shaikh Maktul, in praise of the luminaries, and venerated the stars; and both these persons paid homage with the sun, refulgent with light. The third was _Hakím dostúr_, who in 1054 of the Hejira (A. D. 1644-5) came to Lahore. He drew his origin from Ispáhan, but was born in Balkh; he studied in the service of the followers of Mulla Mírza Khan; then, having gone to Iran, he held intercourse with Mír Muhammed Báker dámád, with Shaikh Baháv-ed-din Muhammed, with Mír Abúl Kásem Kandersaki, and with other learned men and Ulamá of Shiraz, not without great profit to himself; he attached himself to the rule of the _Masháyín_, “peripatetics,” and repeated the prayers which were written by the chief of this persuasion in praise of the self-existent Being, the intelligences, and spirits, and stars; and he was very zealously addicted to the worship of the heavenly bodies; although without pious austerity, yet he abstained from wickedness, and kept the way of moderation; according to the custom of merchants, he travelled a great deal. A fourth was _Kámrán_, of Shíraz. He also followed the creed of the Masháyín; he possessed the natural and revealed sciences; and after having acquired excellence, he happened to find himself at the mountain which is near the sea-ports of the Frangis; he took a great liking to their society, and was attracted by the religion of the Nasáreans: on that account he studied the Gospel, and derived great profit from their doctrines. Afterwards he went to India, where he contracted friendship with some Rájas; he became fond of their religion; read, with learned Brahmans, the sástras of the Hindús, that is, their scientific books, and in these also he became a master of art among the learned of India. Although ostensibly he adopted the said faith, yet he remained attached to the religion of the ancient philosophers. He showed great aversion to lying, thieving, debauchery, and unnatural love; and, according to the custom of the wise, forbore from killing animals; but now and then he indulged in a draught of wine, saying that it is very salutary. He was wont to sing hymns, which are in use among the Yúnian philosophers, and are now translated, in praise of God, the high intelligences and spirits, and the stars. He accepted no gift from any body; he was employed in trade, but he contented himself with a competent capital. Mír Abú ’l Kásem Kandarsakí called him “a brother dear as life,” nay, wrote to him as to an “elder brother.” In the year of the Hejira 1050 (A. D. 1640-1) he retired to solitude at the _Serai Fargh_, “the fortunate palace,” near the heaven-built town of _Akbarabad_. It is said that, in his malady, he bestowed all he possessed in gift upon the Durvishes, and the ready money upon the Brahmans of Vichnu, and the like, who never hurt a living being. He delivered garments into the care of one named Muhammed, that this man might distribute them among the poor upon the road of Kachmir and Kabul, where the cold is severe, which Muhammed did; he there collected forage and provisions, which were given to cows, asses, to travellers, and the indigent, because they carry loads; he also confided scientific books to one called Húshíar, that he might give them to doctors devoted to science, and Húshíar so disposed in Agra of the works which he had received, and sent them to his friends. During his mortal malady he was constantly engaged in reading the _Alhíyát shafá_, “the hymns of recovery,” and in translating the _Asúlújía_,[148] “Theologia,” and he sang cheerfully: “I believe in the divinity of the most high Creator, the prophecy of intelligence, the Imámet of the spirit, the heaven as a Kiblah, and the liberation of philosophy, and I detest the free-thinkers, and other religions.” At the moment of death, he pronounced the names of the self-existent Being, of the intelligence and spirit, and of the stars, and the by-standers also joined him in chorus, until he had left the mortal garment. His life exceeded one hundred years, and he had preserved his strength and his faculties entire. He gave these directions to Húshíar, that after death to be burnt would be preferable, but, if the people prevented it, Húshíar should bury him with his feet to the West, as all distinguished personages, such as Aristotle and his followers, repose in the same way. Húshíar executed his will, and also, according to his direction, burnt at the head of his tomb, during a whole week, every day and every night, a lamp to the honor of the star which at that time ruled over him, and distributed the food and raiment which are appropriated to that star among the Brahmans and necessitous, who all prayed to render the star propitious, in order that the soul of Hakím Kámrán might be united with the pure spirits. Húshíar went afterwards to Agra, and I saw a book in the hand-writing of Húshíár, in which was stated, that he, after Kámrán’s death, saw him in a dream clothed in a fine garment, and sitting by the side of the lord _Mashterí_, “Jupiter.” Húshíar asked him: “How camest thou to this place?” He answered: “The pure spirits, when they saw me free from worldly desires, drew me to them, and by the aid of their intercession, I was made one of the angels.”

The creed of the Hakíms Hírbed and Manír, with regard to the reality of inspired persons, was, that these celebrated men were perfect sages, and masters of an excellent condition; by their words and deeds they reached the state of perfection, on which account they treated mysterious questions relative to theoretical and practical wisdom with the confidence of pure truth; but for the sake of the vulgar, they used a typical and allegorical language, leaving it to other sages, the able chiefs and saints of their persuasion, to explain the law and the religion: this is the creed of philosophers.

The prophets of Persia, such as Abád, Zardusht, and the like, are called _Vakhshúr_; the apostles of the _Yonán_ and of Rome are _Aghásá daimún_ (Agatho demon);[149] _Hermes_, and the like, whom they name “possessors of fame;” the prophets of the Hindus, such as Ráma, Krishna, and the like, are entitled _Ava társ_; and the prophets of the Turks, such as _Aghríres_ and _Aghúrkhan_, are distinguished by the name of _Abulmas_. The prophets of Islám, from Adam, the father of mankind, to Muhammed, are called _resul_. In like manner the prophets of other nations were distinguished by titles such as _buzerg_, “great,” or _sádik_, “pure.” They said: it is right that no other prophet should come after the one: which is signified by the _seal of the prophetic mission_, that is, “the utmost dignity of mankind.” _Ibn Makanâ Sáheb-i-Mah Kashgher_,[150] also was reckoned among the prophets, and such was the controversy which arose about the head-khaláfet, the distinction, precedence, and rejection of the lords among each other, that it has not yet been brought to a satisfactory conclusion. They said that there were four celebrated doctors; if a controversy arose, this is nothing less than what is proper to mankind, as no man can be free from the attributes of his race; on that account they abstained from reviling the case of Môávíah, but they said that he was a great personage. But the creed of the Hakím Dostur was, that the prophets of the Persians, Hindus, Yonans, Turks, and Arabs, and such people, were promoting the establishment of a sort of knowledge and of some sorts of sciences; the philosophers, exerting themselves by the aid of the reasoning faculty, become founders of theoretical schools, and also lend their assistance with respect to theology. The scope of an _Hakím_ is, that his reason may direct its laborious efforts towards all quarters, and, inasmuch as may be in its power, to bear a resemblance to the Lord God, the self-existent Being. The utmost endeavor of the prophets is, that the order of the world may be evident to them, so that they may, according to this order, arrange the affairs of society. But this order of affairs cannot be exempt from the excitement of desire, terror, and dubiousness; although, certainly, whatever the masters of law and religion have combined into a system, may be explained by what certain eminent philosophers have exhibited. Among other things it is said, that the world is very ancient, and its eternity without beginning and end indubitable. In the sequel, a learned Hakím raises pretensions to inspiration, excites others to the adoption of a creed which he endeavors to render firm. But Hakím Kámzán assented to no inspiration, he said:――In ancient times, sages established customs and regulations for the order of the world, and, as long as the inhabitants conformed to them, there was not the least oppression in their doings; until finally they collected into a nation, worshipping pleasure and bent upon worldliness; then arose concealment of truth from the people, union by the strength of parentage, combination by fraud, and enveigling by means of enchantment and the like, by which idiots were drawn into a net. When those who implored protection were seized by the oppressors, helpless, the prudent among them bent down their heads; because when the strong become masters of the day, men submit to them on account of their being superior to the weak people, who have timid souls; thus they accepted their dominion by force, and contention ensued in the world. Moises was held to be an enchanter, and called _rabí Moises_; rabí being the name given by the Jews to the learned; Jesus was accounted a physician, and entitled _Hakím Jesus_, son of Joseph, the carpenter; Muhammed bore the name of “the prophet of God, the king of the Arabian poets;”[151] Krishna went under the name of _Avátar chahnál_,[152] that is, the “incarnation of the lewd, and devoted to women.” And thus the celebrated prophets were distinguished. The intelligent know well that the most high Creator does not articulate words, but the sacred dictates which the vulgar receive are to be thus considered――that, if those books which they call “heavenly,” such as the Koran, were really the words of God, which were delivered in time past to our ancestors, such as to Adam and Noah, it would be right that they should be also communicated in time to come to future generations, expressing, viz.: that in such a time and year, and month and week, on such a day, at such an hour, a person shall appear, in such a town and such a street, tribe sprung from such a one, with such a name, and such an aspect. But such an account is not to be found in the Koran; it is only by the interpretation of his followers that many traditions about Muhammed are current. The same may be said of other prophets. For if it were stated in the book of Jesus, that at the determined time, as we have just shown, there shall appear a person whose name in Arabia shall be Muhammed, sprung from the father Abd ’ulla and the mother Amíná, from the children Hashem and Korésh, inhabitants of Mecca; and he shall be the last prophet of the age; all the Christians should acknowledge and believe in him. And in the same manner there should have been, in the book of Moses, a prediction of Jesus, and a further account of events which took place at his appearance. But this is not the case, except that the followers of Jesus seize, in figurative language, on whatever may suit their persuasion. Thus it happened that one of the Afgháns applied the words: “Say, there is but one God,” to himself.

He further said: “If I agree to their prophetic mission, whence was it shown that this people were prophets? for, if pursuant to their claim to prophetic office and legislation, we adopt what at every time is held out as legal, why are their fundamental articles of faith in contradiction to each other with respect to the knowledge of the self-existent Being? Thus, in the Pentateuch of the Jews, God has a body, and corporeity; and the Christians believe Jesus a son of God, and the Muhammedans according to the Koran believe God to be without an equal, and not to be described. If God be similar to what he is represented in all these books, he is not unlike a man who does not know himself, and at each time gives an account of himself, which he varies, and of which he repents. If they say, the real sense is the same, the figurative expression and interpretation only change, it is not less evident, that the books and the prophets have been sent for the purpose of leading men to God, and not to instigate them to rebel; or, after having proclaimed his word, to combat each other by controversy. He commands the sacrifice of their blood and property for the common good. And if they say, the servants cannot disagree about the knowledge of God, why then is it written in the books that they must know him in that, and in no other way? and why do we perceive such a contradiction in the deeds, and frequently in the words, of the celebrated prophets? The intelligent man can no longer recognise them by their noble actions.

Somebody said to the Hakím Kámrán: “Give me in substance the belief of the Sonnites and the Shíâhs.” He replied: “The creed of the Sonnites is, after the praise of God the most high, and the attributes of the prophet, blessing and mercy of God upon all transgressors and sinners, men, and women; and the creed of the Shíâhs is after the praise of God, and the attributes of the prophet, the curse of God upon all believers, men and women; and Muselmans, men and women.” And he had much to say about this subject.

_Abu ’l Hassan Taheraní_, surnamed _Isfahán_, son of _Gháib báig_, surnamed _Iâtimad eddoulah_, became a follower of Kámrán, by the persuasion of the friends of the latter, as the author of this book perceived in a letter, written by _Rafiâ ’l Kader_ to Hakím Kámrán, in which the former declared himself the disciple of Kámrán, whom he called his master, and addressed in a suitable style. Thus was also Zemán Baig born, in Arghún, his father, a native of Kabul, was surnamed Mahábet Khán, who, by his gravity, bravery, and wisdom, acquired a high rank among the Omras of the Indian Sultans. He was in a friendly connection with Kámrán, and in the letters which the mighty khan wrote to Hakím Kámrán, he showed him great respect, and professed himself his disciple. It is said that, at a banquet, Mahábet Khan declared the saying of the prophetic asylum――

“I was a prophet, and Adam in water and mud――”

to be without sense. Further, whoever acknowledges the prophetic mission of Muhammed accounts it to begin after the prophet’s fortieth year, and whoever does not acknowledge it, is free in this opinion. Muhammed said: “_I was a prophet, and Adam in water and mud._” Kámrán went seldom into the houses of this sect, and kept himself at a distance from them. When, yielding to a thousand entreaties, he visited them, he changed his usual dress, sat only a moment with them, and rose immediately; he never ate with them, nor accepted he any thing from one of this sect. When asked upon his keeping himself at a distance from them, he said: “The spirit of brutishness and savagery holds its mastership over you, and I cannot always associate with brutes and beasts of prey.” He remained even a long time without seeing them. But _Abd ul rasul_ frequented him, and, conformably to Kámrán’s advice, detached himself from worldly desires, and crushed anger and lust in his mind. On that account Hakím Kámrán, having conceived friendship for him, taught him first the rules of grammar and etymology, then the _Sherah Shamsíyah_, “Commentary upon Shamsiyah;”[153] besides the physiological part of the Commentary upon _Hedáyah al hikmet_, “the Guide to Science,” composed by _Hossain_, son of _Mâyin eddin Maibedí_;[154] further, matters relating to the Commentary upon _Hikmet al âin_, “the Science of what is “essential,”[155] and afterwards the Commentary upon _Tajeríd_,[156] “Divestment of what is accessory,” with marginal notes; also the physiological part of the Commentary upon _Isháret_,[157] “Indications (allegorical, symbolical, and others);” and, finally, the _Ilahyat shafa_, “the Hymns of Recovery.” Thus also, Mulla Yacúb read with him the _Taherir_, “Writings” of Euclid, and a Commentary upon _Tazkerah_,[158] “Commemoration;” and was attached to him. Likewise Mír Sheríf, having read the _Mutavel_,[159] “Development,” and the _Tafsir_, “Explanation,” of Baízavi,[160] resolved to follow his school; and, what is more astonishing, Mulla Usám read with him the illustrations and demonstrations which are in the fundamentals of Hanifa’s religious law, and adopted his faith. But Mulla Sultan, although he acknowledged his high rank of excellence, never adhered to him. And Hakím Kámrán said: “What is not understood, becomes a subject of dispute.” Thus Mulla Sultán followed with intense application the study of the soul, and the chain of demonstrations relative to it, but he said: “I am not able to understand its nature, and am, in that respect, like a parrot.” Among the able disciples of Hakím Kámrán was Hakím Mershed, who passed through all degrees of science before him, and possessed his entire confidence.[161] Hakím Kámrán was wont at that time, when he gave lessons of science, to wash his head, hands, and feet, to burn sweet perfumes, and to turn his face towards the sun, in which his disciples imitated him. He did not confer his instruction upon every body, but refused it to the depraved, the oppressors, and the voluptuous; nor did he hold intercourse with low persons.

[148] اسو لوجي is supposed to be one of Aristotle’s works,
which is said to have been translated by _Abenama_, a
Saracen, from Greek into Arabic. This translation was found
in the library of Damascus, by _Franciscus Roseus_, and at
his request rendered into Latin, by _Moses Koras_, a Jew,
but in a very barbarous style. This interpretation has
perhaps never been published. Soon after, or about the same
time, _Petrus Nicolaus ex Castellaneis Faventinus_, a
medical man and philosopher, translated the same work from
Arabic into Latin; this new version was published with a
dedication to Leo X., in 1718, by the above-said Franciscus
Roseus. As it did not appear a sufficiently neat
composition, _Jacobus Carpentarius Claromontanus
Bellovacus_, a Parisian philosopher, who was ignorant of
Arabic, published, in 1571, an emendated edition, or rather
a meta-phrase of this work, under the title: _Aristotelis
libri XIV de secretiore parte divinæ sapientiæ secundum
Ægyptios_. Some preferred to the latter the more exact
although less elegant version of Petrus Nicolaus, new
editions of which appeared in 1591 and 1593――(see upon this
subject the _Bibliotheca Græca_ of _Fabricius_, edit. of
Harles, vol. III. pp. 278-279, and the preface of the
edition of Carpentarius). The Arabic text of the work is in
the Royal library of Paris, under the title ثيو لوجيا.

[149] See pp. 105-106.

[150] See pp. 3 and 80.

[151] ملک اشعرای عرب. This is not quite correct: Muhammed
introduces in his Koran (ch. XXXVI. v. 69) the Lord saying:
“We have not taught Muhammed the art of poetry; nor is it
expedient for him to be a poet. This book is no other than
an admonition from God, and a perspicuous Koran.” The
Arabian prophet, according to the best accounts, liked to
hear poetry read, but never perused any himself, although he
frequently spoke in the metre called رجز _rijez_. The only
Arabic verse which he often repeated was the celebrated one
from the poem of Lebid:

_Is not every thing, except God vain?_

Aisha, his favorite consort, declares in the traditions,
that he hated verses, and never recited one correctly. One
day he attempted to quote the known verse of an Arabian
poet:

_The days bring to thee news that thou dost not know;
And some man brings news the spirit of which he doth not
understand._

But he altered somewhat the order of the last words.
“Prophet of God!” said Abu bekr, “the verse runs not so.”
Muhammed answered: “I am no poet.”――(_Gemäldesaal Mosl.
Herrscher, I^{ter} Band, Seite 230._)

[152] छलन _chhalana_, “tricking, deceiving.”

[153] _Shamsiyah_, “the sun’s course, ecliptic,” is the
title of a treatise composed upon logic by _Nagmeddin Ali
Ben Omar al Kazvíní_, who was a disciple of Nusir-eddin
al-Túsí. The said work is dedicated to _Khogiah Shams-eddîn
Muhammed_, perhaps one of the twelve princes called
_Sarbedarian_, who reigned thirty-five years in the town of
_Sebzvar_, in Khorassan, and in other places which they had
conquered.――(Herbelot.)

[154] _Maibed_ is a town of Persia, the native place of
_Kází Mir Hossaín Ibn Mâyin eddin_, above-mentioned. He is
one of the commentators of the work above quoted, which is
divided into three parts, comprising logic, physiology, and
theology, and was composed by the Shaikh _Asir eddin
Mifazzel_, son of _Omar al Abheri_. The author died in the
year of the Hejira 660 (A. D. 1261).

[155] The author of _Hikmet al âin_ was _Najem eddin Abu ’l
Hassan Ali_, son of _Muhammed_, surnamed _Dabiran al Katebí
al Kazvíni_. He was a disciple of the celebrated Nasir-eddin
Tusi, and died in the year of the Hejira 675 (A. D. 1276).

[156] We find, in the Bibliographical Dictionary of _Haji
Khalfa_, several titles of books beginning by the word
_Tajerid_.

[157] There exists a work entitled _Isháret_, composed by
_Asir-eddin Mifazzel_, before-mentioned.

[158] The _Tazkerah_ was written by Nasir-eddin Tusi.

[159] The _Mutavel_ denotes a Commentary, the author of
which is _Sâad-eddin Taftarani_ (or “Tagtarani,” according
to Herbelot), upon the work _Meftah al alúm_, “the Key of
Sciences,” and which is entitled _Talkhís al Meftah_,
“Explanation of the Key.”

[160] Baizaví is the surname of _Nasir eddin Abu Said
Abdalla Ben Omar_, a native of the town _Baizah_, in the
province of _Fars_, about forty-five miles distant from
_Shiraz_. He was a _Kází_, “judge,” of the last-named town,
from which he passed to _Tauris_, where he died in the year
of the Hejira 685 or 692 (A. D. 1286 or 1292). He composed a
literal Commentary in two volumes upon the Koran.

[161] Here a play upon a name is omitted: جون كامران بہ تجرد
کامران است: as Kámrán, in business, is _Kámrán_,“fortunate.”

CHAPTER XII.

OF THE RELIGION OF THE SUFIAHS,[162] CONTAINED IN THREE SECTIONS.

SECTION I.――Some of their tenets.
SECTION II.――The open interpretation of their open confessions.
SECTION III.――Some individuals among them.