[Sidenote: The _Hazar Afsan_.]

"The first who composed fables and made books of them and put them by in treasuries and sometimes introduced animals as speaking them were the Ancient Persians. Afterwards the Parthian kings, who form the third dynasty of the kings of Persia, showed the utmost zeal in this matter. Then in the days of the Sasanian kings such books became numerous and abundant, and the Arabs translated them into the Arabic tongue, and they soon reached the hands of philologists and rhetoricians, who corrected and embellished them and composed other books in the same style. Now the first book ever made on this subject was the Book of the Thousand Tales (_Hazar Afsan_), on the following occasion: A certain king of Persia used to marry a woman for one night and kill her the next morning. And he wedded a wise and clever princess, called Shahrazad, who began to tell him stories and brought the tale at daybreak to a point that induced the king to spare her life and ask her on the second night to finish her tale.

So she continued until a thousand nights had pa.s.sed, and she was blessed with a son by him.... And the king had a stewardess (_qahramana_) named Dinarzad, who was in league with the queen. It is also said that this book was composed for ?umani, the daughter of Bahman, and there are various traditions concerning it. The truth, if G.o.d will, is that Alexander (the Great) was the first who heard stories by night, and he had people to make him laugh and divert him with tales; although he did not seek amus.e.m.e.nt therein, but only to store and preserve them (in his memory). The kings who came after him used the 'Thousand Tales' (_Hazar Afsan_) for this purpose. It covers a s.p.a.ce of one thousand nights, but contains less than two hundred stories, because the telling of a single story often takes several nights. I have seen the complete work more than once, and it is indeed a vulgar, insipid book (_kitabun ghaththun baridu 'l-hadith_).[845]

Abu 'Abdallah Mu?ammad b. 'Abdus al-Jahshiyari ( 942-943 A.D.), the author of the 'Book of Viziers,' began to compile a book in which he selected one thousand stories of the Arabs, the Persians, the Greeks, and other peoples, every piece being independent and unconnected with the rest. He gathered the story-tellers round him and took from them the best of what they knew and were able to tell, and he chose out of the fable and story-books whatever pleased him.

He was a skilful craftsman, so he put together from this material 480 nights, each night an entire story of fifty pages, more or less, but death surprised him before he completed the thousand tales as he had intended."

[Sidenote: Different sources of the collection.]

Evidently, then, the _Hazar Afsan_ was the kernel of the 'Arabian Nights,' and it is probable that this Persian archetype included the most finely imaginative tales in the existing collection, _e.g._, the 'Fisherman and the Genie,' 'Camaralzaman and Budur,' and the 'Enchanted Horse.' As time went on, the original stock received large additions which may be divided into two princ.i.p.al groups, both Semitic in character: the one belonging to Baghdad and consisting mainly of humorous anecdotes and love romances in which the famous Caliph 'Haroun Alraschid' frequently comes on the scene; the other having its centre in Cairo, and marked by a roguish, ironical pleasantry as well as by the mechanic supernaturalism which is perfectly ill.u.s.trated in 'Aladdin and the Wonderful Lamp.' But, apart from these three sources, the 'Arabian Nights' has in the course of centuries acc.u.mulated and absorbed an immense number of Oriental folk-tales of every description, equally various in origin and style. The oldest translation by Galland (Paris, 1704-1717) is a charming paraphrase, which in some respects is more true to the spirit of the original than are the scholarly renderings of Lane and Burton.

[Sidenote: The 'Romance of 'Antar.']

The 'Romance of 'Antar' (_Siratu 'Antar_) is traditionally ascribed to the great philologist, A?ma'i,[846] who flourished in the reign of Harun al-Rashid, but this must be considered as an invention of the professional reciters who sit in front of Oriental cafes and entertain the public with their lively declamations.[847] According to Brockelmann, the work in its present form apparently dates from the time of the Crusades.[848] Its hero is the celebrated heathen poet and warrior, 'Antara b. Shaddad, of whom we have already given an account as author of one of the seven _Mu'allaqat_. Though the Romance exhibits all the anachronisms and exaggerations of popular legend, it does nevertheless portray the unchanging features of Bedouin life with admirable fidelity and picturesqueness. Von Hammer, whose notice in the _Mines de l'Orient_ (1802) was the means of introducing the _Siratu 'Antar_ to European readers, justly remarks that it cannot be translated in full owing to its portentous length. It exists in two recensions called respectively the Arabian (_?ijaziyya_) and the Syrian (_Shamiyya_), the latter being very much curtailed.[849]

[Sidenote: Orthodoxy and mysticism.]

While the decadent state of Arabic literature during all these centuries was immediately caused by unfavourable social and political conditions, the real source of the malady lay deeper, and must, I think, be referred to the spiritual paralysis which had long been creeping over Islam and which manifested itself by the complete victory of the Ash'arites or Scholastic Theologians about 1200 A.D. Philosophy and Rationalism were henceforth as good as dead. Two parties remained in possession of the field--the orthodox and the mystics. The former were naturally intolerant of anything approaching to free-thought, and in their principle of _ijma'_, _i.e._, the consensus of public opinion (which was practically controlled by themselves), they found a potent weapon against heresy. How ruthlessly they sometimes used it we may see from the following pa.s.sage in the _Yawaqit_ of Sha'rani. After giving instances of the persecution to which the ?ufis of old--Bayazid, Dhu 'l-Nun, and others--were subjected by their implacable enemies, the _'Ulama_, he goes on to speak of what had happened more recently[850]:--

[Sidenote: Persecution of heretics.]

"They brought the Imam Abu Bakr al-Nabulusi, notwithstanding his merit and profound learning and rect.i.tude in religion, from the Maghrib to Egypt and testified that he was a heretic (_zindiq_). The Sultan gave orders that he should be suspended by his feet and flayed alive. While the sentence was being carried out, he began to recite the Koran with such an attentive and humble demeanour that he moved the hearts of the people, and they were near making a riot.

And likewise they caused Nasimi to be flayed at Aleppo.[851] When he silenced them by his arguments, they devised a plan for his destruction, thus: They wrote the _Suratu 'l-Ikhla?_[852] on a piece of paper and bribed a cobbler of shoes, saying to him, 'It contains only love and pleasantness, so place it inside the sole of the shoe.' Then they took that shoe and sent it from a far distance as a gift to the Shaykh (Nasimi), who put it on, for he knew not.

His adversaries went to the governor of Aleppo and said: 'We have sure information that Nasimi has written, _Say, G.o.d is One_, and has placed the writing in the sole of his shoe. If you do not believe us, send for him and see!' The governor did as they wished. On the production of the paper, the Shaykh resigned himself to the will of G.o.d and made no answer to the charge, knowing well that he would be killed on that pretext. I was told by one who studied under his disciples that all the time when he was being flayed Nasimi was reciting _muwashsha?s_ in praise of the Unity of G.o.d, until he composed five hundred verses, and that he was looking at his executioners and smiling. And likewise they brought Shaykh Abu 'l-?asan al-Shadhili[853] from the West to Egypt and bore witness that he was a heretic, but G.o.d delivered him from their plots. And they accused Shaykh 'Izzu 'l-Din b. 'Abd al-Salam[854] of infidelity and sat in judgment over him on account of some expressions in his _'Aqida_ (Articles of Faith) and urged the Sultan to punish him; afterwards, however, he was restored to favour. They denounced Shaykh Taju 'l-Din al-Subki[855] on the same charge, a.s.serting that he held it lawful to drink wine and that he wore at night the badge (_ghiyar_) of the unbelievers and the zone (_zunnar_)[856]; and they brought him, manacled and in chains, from Syria to Egypt."

This picture is too highly coloured. It must be admitted for the credit of the _'Ulama_, that they seldom resorted to violence. Islam was happily spared the horrors of an organised Inquisition. On the other hand, their authority was now so firmly established that all progress towards moral and intellectual liberty had apparently ceased, or at any rate only betrayed itself in spasmodic outbursts. ?ufiism in some degree represented such a movement, but the mystics shared the triumph of Scholasticism and contributed to the reaction which ensued. No longer an oppressed minority struggling for toleration, they found themselves side by side with reverend doctors on a platform broad enough to accommodate all parties, and they saw their own popular heroes turned into Saints of the orthodox Church. The compromise did not always work smoothly--in fact, there was continual friction--but on the whole it seems to have borne the strain wonderfully well. If pious souls were shocked by the lawlessness of the Dervishes, and if bigots would fain have burned the books of Ibnu 'l-'Arabi and Ibnu 'l-Fari?, the divines in general showed a disposition to suspend judgment in matters touching holy men and to regard them as standing above human criticism.

As typical representatives of the religious life of this period we may take two men belonging to widely opposite camps--Taqiyyu 'l-Din Ibn Taymiyya and 'Abdu 'l-Wahhab al-Sha'rani.

[Sidenote: Ibn Taymiyya (1263-1328 A.D.).]

Ibn Taymiyya was born at ?arran in 1263 A.D. A few years later his father, fleeing before the Mongols, brought him to Damascus, where in due course he received an excellent education. It is said that he never forgot anything which he had once learned, and his knowledge of theology and law was so extensive as almost to justify the saying, "A tradition that Ibn Taymiyya does not recognise is no tradition." Himself a ?anbalite of the deepest dye--holding, in other words, that the Koran must be interpreted according to its letter and not by the light of reason--he devoted his life with rare courage to the work of religious reform. His aim, in short, was to restore the primitive monotheism taught by the Prophet and to purge Islam of the heresies and corruptions which threatened to destroy it. One may imagine what a hornet's nest he was attacking. Mystics, philosophers, and scholastic theologians, all fell alike under the lash of his denunciation. Bowing to no authority, but drawing his arguments from the traditions and practice of the early Church, he expressed his convictions in the most forcible terms, without regard to consequences. Although several times thrown into prison, he could not be muzzled for long. The climax was reached when he lifted up his voice against the superst.i.tions of the popular faith--saint-worship, pilgrimage to holy shrines, vows, offerings, and invocations. These things, which the zealous puritan condemned as sheer idolatry, were part of a venerable cult that was hallowed by ancient custom, and had engrafted itself in luxuriant overgrowth upon Islam. The ma.s.s of Moslems believed, and still believe implicitly in the saints, accept their miracles, adore their relics, visit their tombs, and pray for their intercession. Ibn Taymiyya even declared that it was wrong to implore the aid of the Prophet or to make a pilgrimage to his sepulchre. It was a vain protest. He ended his days in captivity at Damascus. The vast crowds who attended his funeral--we are told that there were present 200,000 men and 15,000 women--bore witness to the profound respect which was universally felt for the intrepid reformer. Oddly enough, he was buried in the Cemetery of the ?ufis, whose doctrines he had so bitterly opposed, and the mult.i.tude revered his memory--as a saint! The principles which inspired Ibn Taymiyya did not fall to the ground, although their immediate effect was confined to a very small circle. We shall see them reappearing victoriously in the Wahhabite movement of the eighteenth century.

[Sidenote: Sha'rani ( 1565 A.D.).]

Notwithstanding the brilliant effort of Ghazali to harmonise dogmatic theology with mysticism, it soon became clear that the two parties were in essence irreconcilable. The orthodox clergy who held fast by the authority of the Koran and the Traditions saw a grave danger to themselves in the esoteric revelation which the mystics claimed to possess; while the latter, though externally conforming to the law of Islam, looked down with contempt on the idea that true knowledge of G.o.d could be derived from theology, or from any source except the inner light of heavenly inspiration. Hence the ant.i.thesis of _faqih_ (theologian) and _faqir_ (dervish), the one cla.s.s forming a powerful official hierarchy in close alliance with the Government, whereas the ?ufis found their chief support among the people at large, and especially among the poor. We need not dwell further on the natural antagonism which has always existed between these rival corporations, and which is a marked feature in the modern history of Islam. It will be more instructive to spend a few moments with the last great Mu?ammadan theosophist, 'Abdu 'l-Wahhab al-Sha'rani, a man who, with all his weaknesses, was an original thinker, and exerted an influence strongly felt to this day, as is shown by the steady demand for his books. He was born about the beginning of the sixteenth century.

Concerning his outward life we have little information beyond the facts that he was a weaver by trade and resided in Cairo. At this time Egypt was a province of the Ottoman Empire. Sha'rani contrasts the miserable lot of the peasantry under the new _regime_ with their comparative prosperity under the Mamelukes. So terrible were the exactions of the tax-gatherers that the fellah was forced to sell the whole produce of his land, and sometimes even the ox which ploughed it, in order to save himself and his family from imprisonment; and every lucrative business was crushed by confiscation. It is not to be supposed, however, that Sha'rani gave serious attention to such sublunary matters. He lived in a world of visions and wonderful experiences. He conversed with angels and prophets, like his more famous predecessor, Mu?yi 'l-Din Ibnu 'l-'Arabi, whose _Meccan Revelations_ he studied and epitomised. His autobiography ent.i.tled _La?a'ifu 'l-Minan_ displays the hierophant in full dress. It is a record of the singular spiritual gifts and virtues with which he was endowed, and would rank as a masterpiece of shameless self-laudation, did not the author repeatedly a.s.sure us that all his extraordinary qualities are Divine blessings and are gratefully set forth by their recipient _ad majorem Dei gloriam_. We should be treating Sha'rani very unfairly if we judged him by this work alone. The arrogant miracle-monger was one of the most learned men of his day, and could beat the scholastic theologians with their own weapons. Indeed, he regarded theology (_fiqh_) as the first step towards ?ufiism, and endeavoured to show that in reality they are different aspects of the same science. He also sought to harmonise the four great schools of law, whose disagreement was consecrated by the well-known saying ascribed to the Prophet: "The variance of my people is an act of Divine mercy"

(_ikhtilafu ummati ra?matun_). Like the Arabian ?ufis generally, Sha'rani kept his mysticism within narrow bounds, and declared himself an adherent of the moderate section which follows Junayd of Baghdad ( 909-910 A.D.). For all his extravagant pretensions and childish belief in the supernatural, he never lost touch with the Mu?ammadan Church.

In the thirteenth century Ibn Taymiyya had tried to eradicate the abuses which obscured the simple creed of Islam. He failed, but his work was carried on by others and was crowned, after a long interval, by the Wahhabite Reformation.[857]

[Sidenote: Mu?ammad b. 'Abd al-Wahhab and his successors.]

Mu?ammad b. 'Abd al-Wahhab,[858] from whom its name is derived, was born about 1720 A.D. in Najd, the Highlands of Arabia. In his youth he visited the princ.i.p.al cities of the East, "as is much the practice with his countrymen even now,"[859] and what he observed in the course of his travels convinced him that Islam was thoroughly corrupt. Fired by the example of Ibn Taymiyya, whose writings he copied with his own hand,[860] Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab determined to re-establish the pure religion of Mu?ammad in its primitive form. Accordingly he returned home and retired with his family to ?ira'iyya at the time when Mu?ammad b. Sa'ud was the chief personage of the town. This man became his first convert and soon after married his daughter. But it was not until the end of the eighteenth century that the Wahhabis, under 'Abdu 'l-'Aziz, son of Mu?ammad b. Sa'ud, gained their first great successes. In 1801 they sacked Imam-?usayn,[861] a town in the vicinity of Baghdad, ma.s.sacred five thousand persons, and destroyed the cupola of ?usayn's tomb; the veneration paid by all Shi'ites to that shrine being, as Burckhardt says, a sufficient cause to attract the Wahhabi fury against it. Two years later they made themselves masters of the whole ?ijaz, including Mecca and Medina. On the death of 'Abdu 'l-'Aziz, who was a.s.sa.s.sinated in the same year, his eldest son, Sa'ud, continued the work of conquest and brought the greater part of Arabia under Wahhabite rule. At last, in 1811, Turkey despatched a fleet and army to recover the Holy Cities. This task was accomplished by Mu?ammad 'Ali, the Pasha of Egypt (1812-13), and after five years'

hard fighting the war ended in favour of the Turks, who in 1818 inflicted a severe defeat on the Wahhabis and took their capital, ?ira'iyya, by storm. The sect, however, still maintains its power in Central Arabia, and in recent times has acquired political importance.

[Sidenote: The Wahhabite Reformation.]

The Wahhabis were regarded by the Turks as infidels and authors of a new religion. It was natural that they should appear in this light, for they interrupted the pilgrim-caravans, demolished the domes and ornamented tombs of the most venerable Saints (not excepting that of the Prophet himself), and broke to pieces the Black Stone in the Ka'ba. All this they did not as innovators, but as reformers. They resembled the Carmathians only in their acts. Burckhardt says very truly: "Not a single new precept was to be found in the Wahaby code. Abd el Wahab took as his sole guide the Koran and the Sunne (or the laws formed upon the traditions of Mohammed); and the only difference between his sect and the orthodox Turks, however improperly so termed, is, that the Wahabys rigidly follow the same laws which the others neglect, or have ceased altogether to observe."[862] "The Wahhabites," says Dozy, "attacked the idolatrous worship of Mahomet; although he was in their eyes a Prophet sent to declare the will of G.o.d, he was no less a man like others, and his mortal sh.e.l.l, far from having mounted to heaven, rested in the tomb at Medina. Saint-worship they combated just as strongly. They proclaimed that all men are equal before G.o.d; that even the most virtuous and devout cannot intercede with Him; and that, consequently, it is a sin to invoke the Saints and to adore their relics."[863] In the same puritan spirit they forbade the smoking of tobacco, the wearing of gaudy robes, and praying over the rosary. "It has been stated that they likewise prohibited the drinking of coffee; this, however, is not the fact: they have always used it to an immoderate degree."[864]

[Sidenote: The Sa.n.u.sis in Africa.]

The Wahhabite movement has been compared with the Protestant Reformation in Europe; but while the latter was followed by the English and French Revolutions, the former has not yet produced any great political results. It has borne fruit in a general religious revival throughout the world of Islam and particularly in the mysterious Sa.n.u.siyya Brotherhood, whose influence is supreme in Tripoli, the Sahara, and the whole North African Hinterland, and whose members are reckoned by millions. Mu?ammad b. 'Ali b. Sa.n.u.si, the founder of this vast and formidable organisation, was born at Algiers in 1791, lived for many years at Mecca, and died at Jaghbub in the Libyan desert, midway between Egypt and Tripoli, in 1859. Concerning the real aims of the Sa.n.u.sis I must refer the reader to an interesting paper by the Rev. E. Sell (_Essays on Islam_, p. 127 sqq.). There is no doubt that they are utterly opposed to all Western and modern civilisation, and seek to regenerate Islam by establishing an independent theocratic State on the model of that which the Prophet and his successors called into being at Medina in the seventh century after Christ.

[Sidenote: Islam and modern civilisation.]

Since Napoleon showed the way by his expedition to Egypt in 1798, the Moslems in that country, as likewise in Syria and North Africa, have come more and more under European influence.[865] The above-mentioned Mu?ammad 'Ali, who founded the Khedivial dynasty, and his successors were fully alive to the practical benefits which might be obtained from the superior culture of the West, and although their policy in this respect was marked by greater zeal than discretion, they did not exert themselves altogether in vain. The introduction of the printing-press in 1821 was an epoch-making measure. If, on the one hand, the publication of many cla.s.sical works, which had well-nigh fallen into oblivion, rekindled the enthusiasm of the Arabs for their national literature, the cause of progress--I use the word without prejudice--has been furthered by the numerous political, literary, and scientific journals which are now regularly issued in every country where Arabic is spoken.[866]

Besides these ephemeral sheets, books of all sorts, old and new, have been multiplied by the native and European presses of Cairo, Bulaq, and Beyrout. The science and culture of Europe have been rendered accessible in translations and adaptations of which the complete list would form a volume in itself. Thus, an Arab may read in his own language the tragedies of Racine, the comedies of Moliere,[867] the fables of La Fontaine, 'Paul and Virginia,' the 'Talisman,' 'Monte Cristo' (not to mention scores of minor romances), and even the Iliad of Homer.[868]

Parallel to this imitative activity, we see a vigorous and growing movement away from the literary models of the past. "Neo-Arabic literature is only to a limited extent the heir of the old 'cla.s.sical'

Arabic literature, and even shows a tendency to repudiate its inheritance entirely. Its leaders are for the most part men who have drunk from other springs and look at the world with different eyes. Yet the past still plays a part in their intellectual background, and there is a section amongst them upon whom that past retains a hold scarcely shaken by newer influences. For many decades the partisans of the 'old'

and the 'new' have engaged in a struggle for the soul of the Arabic world, a struggle in which the victory of one side over the other is even yet not a.s.sured. The protagonists are (to cla.s.sify them roughly for practical purposes) the European-educated cla.s.ses of Egyptians and Syrians on the one hand, and those in Egypt and the less advanced Arabic lands whose education has followed traditional lines on the other.

Whatever the ultimate result may be, there can be no question that the conflict has torn the Arabic world from its ancient moorings, and that the contemporary literature of Egypt and Syria breathes in its more recent developments a spirit foreign to the old traditions."[869]

Hitherto Western culture has only touched the surface of Islam. Whether it will eventually strike deeper and penetrate the inmost barriers of that scholastic discipline and literary tradition which are so firmly rooted in the affections of the Moslem peoples, or whether it will always remain an exotic and highly-prized accomplishment of the enlightened and emanc.i.p.ated few, but an object of scorn and detestation to Mu?ammadans in general--these are questions that may not be fully solved for centuries to come.

Meanwhile the Past affords an ample and splendid field of study.

"_Man lam ya'i 'l-ta'rikha fi ?adrihi Lam yadri ?ulwa 'l-'ayshi min murrihi Wa-man wa'a akhbara man qad ma?a A?afa a'maran ila 'umrihi._"

"He in whose heart no History is enscrolled Cannot discern in life's alloy the gold.

But he that keeps the records of the Dead Adds to his life new lives a hundredfold."

FOOTNOTES:

[1] H. Grimme, _Weltgeschichte in Karakterbildern: Mohammed_ (Munich, 1904), p. 6 sqq.

[2] _Cf._ Noldeke, _Die Semitischen Sprachen_ (Leipzig, 1899), or the same scholar's article, 'Semitic Languages,' in the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_, 11th edition. Renan's _Histoire generale des langues semitiques_ (1855) is now antiquated. An interesting essay on the importance of the Semites in the history of civilisation was published by F. Hommel as an introduction to his _Semitischen Volker und Sprachen_, vol. i (Leipzig, 1883). The dates in this table are of course only approximate.

[3] Ibn Qutayba, _Kitabu 'l-Ma'arij_, ed. by Wustenfeld, p. 18.

[4] Full information concerning the genealogy of the Arabs will be found in Wustenfeld's _Genealogische Tabellen der Arabischen Stamme und Familien_ with its excellent _Register_ (Gottingen, 1852-1853).

[5] The tribes ?abba, Tamim, Khuzayma, Hudhayl, Asad, Kinana, and Quraysh together formed a group which is known as Khindif, and is often distinguished from Qays 'Aylan.

[6] Goldziher, _Muhammedanische Studien_, Part I, p. 133 sqq., 177 sqq.

[7] Noldeke in _Z.D.M.G._, vol. 40, p. 177.

[8] See Margoliouth, _Mohammed and the Rise of Islam_, p. 4.