#'Ancient' about a culture that has living descendants and adherents to its religion | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

didanawisgi · 5 years

Text

THE EGYPTIAN SUFI DHU'L NUN AL-MISRI by Kevin R. D. Shepherd

Source: https://www.independentphilosophy.net/Egyptian_Sufi_Dhu'l_Nun_al-Misri.html

Dhu'l Nun al-Misri was born at Akhmim in Upper Egypt and died at Giza, near Cairo. After his death he became a celebrated Sufi (of the ninth century CE). There are also reports of his link with Hermetic philosophy and alchemy, revived by early Muslims in a distinctive variant. Dhu'l Nun has been mentioned over the centuries in various formats and interpretations, including those of modern scholars.

Map centre: Akhmim (Panopolis) in Upper Egypt

CONTENTS KEY

1. The Heretic of Akhmim

2. A Reader of Hieroglyphs

3. The Hermetic Alchemist

4. Egyptology Debate about the Hieroglyphs

5. The Sufi Gnostic

6. Canonical Annals of Sufism

7. Theory of Christian Neoplatonist Influence

8. R. A. Nicholson's Neoplatonist Theory

9. The Palacios Version

10. Leaven of the Pythagoreans

11. Conclusion

Annotations

1. The Heretic of Akhmim

The ninth century figure of Dhu'l Nun, known as al-Misri ("the Egyptian"), is attended by the typically fragmented reporting found in the annals of early Sufism. Other Islamic commentators are also involved in the record. The following remarks are an attempt to penetrate the complexities and obscurities, and to probe accompanying data.

The full name of the subject is Abu'l Faiz Thauban ibn Ibrahim al-Misri (ca. 791/796 - ca. 860 CE). He was born at Akhmim (Ikhmim) in Upper Egypt, an ancient town on the east bank of the Nile. In Pharaonic times, Akhmim was a cult centre of the fertility god Min. Local governors were buried in the extensive necropolis at Akhmim from the third millenium BC onwards. The New Kingdom Pharaoh Ramesses II is associated with the building of a large temple in the vicinity. Very little of the original architecture at Akhmim survives today, though the necropolis complex is a different matter, exhibiting hundreds of rock-cut tombs.

The Egyptian Muslim Dhu'l Nun travelled as an ascetic in Arabia, Palestine, and Syria. Different aspects of his career are reflected in the sources, a factor which has caused some uncertainty. Via intermediaries, he is reported to have transmitted hadith (traditions of the prophet) possessing the authority of Malik ibn Anas (d. 795) of Medina, founder of the Maliki law school which remained influential in Egypt and North Africa. Yet Dhu'l Nun was opposed by the Maliki jurists of Egypt prior to 829 CE, being condemned as a heretic for teaching on the subject of mystical experience. He appears to have survived the trial successfully.

At a later date, Dhu'l Nun was also in trouble with the Mutazilite theologians, then in power at Baghdad and elsewhere. That inquisitorial party forced him to depart from Egypt, apparently in 843 CE. He is reported to have visited Sufi circles in Baghdad, and subsequently to have preached in Samarra at the court of the Abbasid Caliph al-Mutawakkil (rgd 847-861). From 836, the new city of Samarra, north of Baghdad, was the military headquarters of the Caliphate for over thirty years, though Baghdad remained the cultural centre of Iraq.There are stories in the Sufi annals of Dhu'l Nun being imprisoned at Baghdad, though he was released on the orders of the Caliph and then returned to Egypt, where he spent his last years free of persecution.

One interpretation is that the imprisonment was caused by a friction with the Mutazili theological doctrine favoured by the Abbasid Caliphate at that period. (1) The Mutazili doctrine became harnessed to monarchical interests of the Abbasid dynasty, and was prone to a policy of inquisition (mihna) favoured by the Caliph, and assisted by wealthy Mutazili courtiers. That inquisition has been dated to 833-851 CE. See further Early Sufism in Iran, section 8, on this website. Many traditionists opposed the Mutazili system because of the doctrine that the Quran was created. The orthodox standpoint maintained the "uncreatedness" of the Quran.

Turning to other aspects of the record, there are apparently conflicting components in the profile of Dhu'l Nun as a Sufi gnostic and alchemist. He is credited with an insight into the meaning of the Egyptian hieroglyphs. "A number of poems and short treatises are attributed to him, but these are for the most part apocryphal." (2)

One modern commentary states:

"He was accused of being a philosopher and an alchemist, and the genuineness of his mystical state was sometimes doubted; Ibn an-Nadim's Fihrist (2: 862) in the tenth century mentions two of his works among alchemistic scriptures.... According to the tradition [of Sufism], Dhu'n Nun [Dhu'l Nun] formulated for the first time a theory of marifa, intuitive knowledge of God, or gnosis....Nicholson was inclined to accept Neoplatonic influences upon Dhu'n Nun. Since this mystic lived in Egypt, where Neoplatonic and hermetic traditions were in the air, and was regarded by some of his contemporaries as a 'philosopher,' he may well have been acquainted with some Neoplatonic ideas." (3)

There was a big difference between the outlook of a Maliki traditionist and a Neoplatonist/Hermetic philosopher. Views on this matter have been divided, due to the strong factor of early Islamic Sufism in the career of Dhu'l Nun al-Misri. One argument goes that the Sufi identity rules out the Hermetic associations. Other analysts have been more flexible in approach.

2. A Reader of Hieroglyphs

The traditional profile of Dhu'l Nun as a reader of hieroglyphs has generally been dismissed, though with some concessions to attendant factors. "Accounts of his ability to read hieroglyphs, though untenable, may function as a topos expressing his links with an Egyptian Hellenistic wisdom tradition." The quote is from Gerhard Bowering, "Du'l-Nun Mesri, Abu'l-Fayz Tawban" (1996), Encyclopaedia Iranica online. Professor Bowering here refers to both the Islamic historian Masudi and the traditionist (and annalist of Sufism) Abu Nuaym al-Isfahani (d. 1038) as mediators of the hieroglyphicist lore. An alternative view of the "reader of hieroglyphs" has emerged from Egyptology (see section 4 below).

Another factor is potentially significant. Some scholars have described the subject as a Nubian. In an earlier book, the present writer described Dhu'l Nun as "a Nubian or half-Nubian" (4) According to Professor R. A. Nicholson, the subject "was a Copt or Nubian" (5) His father Ibrahim was a Nubian slave who had converted to Islam, becoming a client (mawla) of the Quraysh tribe of Arabs closely associated with Mecca. In brief, Dhu'l Nun was one of the Egyptian mawali, an unprivileged native of the Nile valley who learnt Arabic culture and language under Quraysh auspices. He was probably black-skinned. His maternal line of descent is not clear.

Whatever the precise details of his parentage, his background milieu was substantially Coptic, and also featured architecture from the pre-Christian period. Akhmim had a history going back to the Pharaonic Old Kingdom era some three thousand years before. (6) It is possible that Dhu'l Nun spoke Coptic in addition to Arabic. The Coptic language represented the final stage of Old Egyptian, being written in the Greek alphabet, to which were added seven characters from the late demotic script deriving from Pharaonic times. The Copts were descendants of the dynastic Egyptians and had long since become converts to Christianity. They were tolerated by Islam as "people of a Book."

Thus, the Akhmim milieu of Dhu'l Nun was more complex than might appear. Attendant speculations about Neoplatonism require due clarification. The Cambridge scholar Edward Glanville Browne was rather enthusiastic in that direction (at the same time admitting ignorance of Sassanian undercurrents). Professor Browne favoured Neoplatonism as the strongest influence upon Sufism, and commented that both Plotinus and Porphyry are mentioned in the Fihrist (7) of Al-Nadim. (8)

Browne's pupil Reynold Alleyne Nicholson (1868-1945) adopted the "Neoplatonist theory," and controversially asserted that "the immediate source of the sufi theosophy is to be sought in Greek and Syrian speculation." The clarification followed that he here meant Iraq, Syria, and Egypt, territories which are more open to such an interpretation, though deductions of this type have been considered misleading. Nicholson made an improvement over certain other orientalists in specifying the Sabaean "heathens" of Harran rather than the Christian Neoplatonists. Though Nicholson clearly favoured Hellenism, he conceded that the "Greek" influence did not answer everything. "Sufism has always been thoroughly eclectic," he observed, "absorbing and transmuting whatever 'broken lights' fell across its path, and consequently it gained adherents amongst men of the most opposite views." (9)

Conventional Sufi sources tend to depict Dhu'l Nun as a pious Muslim and a Sufi gnostic. A complement is afforded by the report of the historian Masudi (d. 957), the "Herodotus of the Arabs." Born in Baghdad, Masudi travelled for many years before settling in Egypt at Fustat (Old Cairo). His extensive Muruj al-Dhahab provides the first extant historical account of Dhu'l Nun, deriving information from the inhabitants of Akhmim during a visit made by the historian to this township. Masudi wrote:

"Dhu'l Nun al-Misri al-Akhmimi, the ascetic, was a philosopher who pursued a course of his own in religion. He was one of those who elucidate the history of these temple-ruins (barabi). He roamed among them [the temples] and examined a great quantity of figures and inscriptions." (10)

Masudi offered a version of some inscriptions which Dhu'l Nun claimed to have deciphered. This report confirms the early fame of the subject as a "hieroglyphicist." Modern scholars are inclined to be incredulous of ninth century archaeology, though there is no need to doubt that Dhu'l Nun was interested in the meaning of the ruins that were so visible in his environment. His "deciphering" would have been reported in accordance with local memory, which is not always the best guide at thirdhand. The subject was apparently not content with the conventional Arab disdain for the ancient idol-worshippers. It is evident that the inscriptions on ancient monuments were believed by "Hermetic" enthusiasts to be an index to the sciences of antiquity.

Egyptian hieroglyphs

The theme of barabi (Egyptian tombs and temples) probably reflects a form of hearsay of the kind which infiltrated to the Caliph al-Mamun (rgd 813-833). Circa 820 that Abbasid ruler of Iraq assembled a large group of engineers and stonemasons for the purpose of forcing an entry into the Great Pyramid at Giza. The cupidity of the Caliph had evidently been aroused by rumours of buried treasure, though objects of learning were also rumoured to be concealed within this gigantic edifice. Al-Mamun genuinely patronised learning, and he perhaps wished to gaze upon the fabulous maps of celestial spheres said to exist in a secret chamber. Though his danger men were able to force their way into the "King's Chamber," the monarch was evidently disappointed with the result. Dhu'l Nun was perhaps thirty years old at that time, and doubtless heard of the event.

Archaeologists have viewed al-Mamun as commencing the habit of pillaging the Pyramids. Ancient monuments became a source for quarried stone, and the Giza Pyramids eventually lost their protective casing of limestone blocks, after an earthquake loosened the blocks. Those architectural components at Giza were appropriated by subsequent regimes and reused to construct the palaces of Mamluk and Ottoman Cairo. However, that was far in the future in the time of Dhu'l Nun, and he appears to have been genuinely concerned to understand the meaning of the resplendent architectural survivals visible along the banks of the Nile. The Pharaohs and their religion had blurred in the Coptic memory since the fifth century CE.

The Arabic word barba (plural barabi) was applied not merely to ancient tombs, but to temples and ancient monuments of Egypt. That term was apparently a transcription of the Coptic word p'erpe (temple). Arabic writers give various explanations of the function of barabi. The craftsmanship of the monuments was much admired. One explanation was that the barabi had been built in order to reproduce or display techniques of the ancient crafts. The tenth century Fihrist of Al-Nadim implies that the barabi were made for the practice of alchemy.

The ubiqitous hieroglyphs were believed to hold the key to ancient sciences, which the Fihrist associates with Hermes; a legend developed that Hermes had become the king of Egypt. Hermes Trismegistus was a complex figure in Greek texts, being identified with revelation and initiatory significances. Some modern commentators have dwelt on parallels with the Egyptian god Thoth, patron of learning and lord of wisdom, an association deriving from the era when the Egyptian priesthood were still in existence (until the fourth century CE), prior to the ban on all pagan cults by the Emperor Theodosius.

Akhmim, the birthplace of Dhu'l Nun, had the Egyptian name of Khent-min (or Ipu). The Greeks identified the ithyphallic god Min with Pan, and this was the reason why Greek settlers applied the name of Panopolis to the ancient town. The early Coptic Christians subsequently employed the name of Khmin (from which Akhmim apparently derived). During the Christian Coptic era, a number of monasteries appeared in the area, and the mood was then strongly against the pagan monuments, which were subject to destruction. The early Muslims were far less iconoclastic, and the literati identified such monuments with Hermes Trismegistus.

In the time of Dhu'l Nun, an ancient temple (apparently devoted to Min) still existed at Akhmim. That edifice seems to have been of substantial size and in a good state of preservation; the twelfth century Arab geographer Ibn Jubayr recorded his visit and testifies to many hieroglyphic inscriptions in evidence. The Akhmim temple may even have been as large as the Karnak temple complex so famous today. The Akhmim temple was not destroyed until the fourteenth century, the stone being used for local buildings. Archaeologists have recently confirmed that a significant temple did exist at Akhmim, though findings and reports are still regarded as preliminary. The Graeco-Roman era and earlier periods have been stipulated. The discovery of two large statues of Ramessid association caused widespread interest. Much excavation work remains to be done.

The Akhmim temple is likely to have provided a major focus for the ruminations of Dhu'l Nun about antiquity. He may have heard about Greek alchemists of the "Hermetic tradition," men who had lived in Akhmim and elsewhere in earlier centuries. The most famous of these alchemists is now Zosimos of Panopolis (fl. c. 300 CE), whose writings were known to the Arabic alchemical tradition, though very little is known about the life of Zosimos. (11)

3. The Hermetic Alchemist

Confirmation of Dhul Nun's "dual" background is found in the accounts given by the bibliographer of science Said al-Andalusi (d. 1070) and by Ibn al-Qifti (1172-1248). The former composed the Tabaqat al-Umam, which surveys the sciences amongst the Greeks and other nations. Al-Qifti is more well known and was born in Egypt, later becoming a wazir (minister) to the Ayyubid rulers of Aleppo. The Tarikh al-Hukama (History of the Philosophers) is a compendium of Al-Qifti, and this states:

"He [Dhu'l Nun] professed the art of alchemy and belongs to the same class as Jabir ibn Hayyan. He devoted himself to the science of esoterics (ilm u'l batin) and became proficient in many branches of philosophy. He used to frequent the ruined temple (barba) in Akhmim. And it is said that knowledge of the mysteries therein was revealed to him by the way of saintship." (12)

The indications are that the esoteric knowledge referred to in this passage was convergent with the Sufi path of saintship. The association with Jabir ibn Hayyan is of interest, the latter having the name of al-Sufi, as we know from the Fihrist of Al-Nadim, who urged the authenticity of Jabir in the face of some contemporary criticism of the rather prolific Jabir Corpus. The full title of Al-Nadim's book is Fihrist al-Ulum (Index of Sciences), and the author was a bibliophile of some standing.

Al-Nadim (c. 935- 990) may have been a government secretary at Baghdad, and was certainly the son of a warraq(book dealer and copyist scribe), to whom he served an apprenticeship. In that era, bookshops were major meeting places for scholars. The Fihrist was originally written as a catalogue for his family bookshop at Baghdad, but developed into an "erudite encyclopaedia of Islamic culture" to employ a description by the modern translator Bayard Dodge. Al-Nadim seems to have gained his name from being a "court companion" (nadim), probably in the capacity of a secretary or librarian. (13) He was definitely one of the more erudite Shi'i Muslims, and was evidently in sympathy with the Hermetic art, to which he devoted a separate chapter at the end of his tome. (14)

Al-Nadim names Dhu'l Nun al-Misri as one of the philosophers who spoke of the Hermetic art (i.e., alchemy), and further states that Dhu'l Nun applied himself to ascetic practices and also "left a tradition related to the Art," concerning which he wrote books. (15) Again, there is the same dual connotation: ascetic Sufism and philosophy in a Hermetic version.

Hermeticism is currently a strange word in popular usage, and has too often been employed undiscerningly. The Hermetic "mysteries" are celebrated in the Greek texts now known as Corpus Hermeticum, dating back to the early centuries of the Christian era, and perhaps earlier. The rather credulous Neoplatonist Iamblichus, in his Mysteries of Egypt, stated circa 300 CE that Hermes had written twenty thousand or thirty-six thousand books, (16) though the Corpus contains less than twenty. These are sometimes called the "philosophical" Hermetica (in the revelatory sense), being distinct from a larger body of more diverse "occultist" texts. This literature was produced by a Greek-speaking milieu in Egypt with syncretistic tendencies, and some native elements have been credited. The "occultist" texts include alchemical and astrological Hermetica. A more notorious category of writings, known as the Greek and Demotic Magical Papyri, are obsessed with spells. These various texts represent trends of popular Graeco-Egyptian religious thought during the Ptolemaic, Roman, and early Christian periods.

Hermeticism was closely related to alchemy, which was a favoured "art" amongst the Greeks. Both Arab and Iranian Muslims took up this "art," though some differing approaches were involved. The discovery of the "elixir" was associated by some with a spiritual achievement, though interpreted by others as a quest for tangible objectives, including literal gold. It seems that Dhu'l Nun was in the former category. He was highly esteemed by other alchemists who belonged to the same Egyptian milieu. Uthman ibn Suwaid Abu Hari al-Akhmimi was perhaps a younger contemporary, and described by Al-Nadim as "a leader in the art of alchemy." Amongst the books of al-Akhmimi was one entitled "Clearing Dhu'l Nun al-Misri of False Charges." (17) This was possibly a reference to the accusations of heresy (see section 1 above).

Dhu'l Nun is also quoted as an alchemical authority in the Ma' al-Waraqi of Abu Abdulla Muhammad ibn Umayl al-Tamimi, known as al-Hakim (the sage, or loosely "philosopher" in some translations). This Egyptian alchemist (known as Ibn Umayl) probably lived during the first half of the tenth century. Ibn Umayl was one of those who had an interest in the ancient temples and their wall-paintings, demonstrated by his description of two "quasi-archaeological expeditions" to a temple at Busir al-Sidr with the purported intention of finding documents of alchemical wisdom. (18) This follows a common theme in Hermetic literature, and one apparently not intended to be taken literally, though it has been pointed out that the details supplied in the Ma' al-Waraqi prove that Ibn Umayl must actually have visited the temple specified, where he saw a statue of Imhotep, though without recognising the archaeological significance. (19) Whatever the interpretation here, some "sayings" of Hermes Trismegistus quoted by Ibn Umayl were taken from Greek originals, though others are considered to be of tenth century Arabic origin. (20)

Early Islamic alchemy was evidently in close affinity with the Hermetic tradition inherited from the Greeks. The hieroglyphs were associated with a complex lore considered esoteric by the Muslim Hermeticists, a grouping who came into existence during the ninth century. These men were "philosophers" (hukama) in a "neoPythagorean" or "Neoplatonist" sense associated with Iamblichus rather than Plotinus, who was revived during the ninth century in a translation confused with Aristotle (i.e., the so-called Theology of Aristotle).

There was a strong Islamisation of Hermetic lore by the tenth century. Masudi and Al-Nadim identified the Quranic prophet Idris with Hermes, a figure then associated with the evocative "Sabaeans" of Harran (in Mesopotamia), who in the early ninth century claimed their prophet as Idris/Hermes, thus gaining "protected people" (dhimmi) status under the Caliph al-Mamun. According to Shahrastani (1086-1153), the pagan people of Harran claimed to be the Sabaeans named in the Quran (surah 2 verse 62).

Idris became assimilated to a threefold Hermes. Muslim scholars tried to make sense of antique lore by concluding that there were three ancient sages named Hermes, whom they called Hirmis. Hermes Trismegistus became known in Arabic as Hirmis al-muthallath bi'l-hikma, meaning "Hermes, threefold in wisdom." A more common rendition was Hirmis al-Haramisah or "Hermes of the Hermai." This theme underwent various adventures, an influential version being contributed by the Muslim astrologer Abu Mashar al-Balkhi (787-886), who wrote the Book of Thousands, now lost, though the section on Hermes was reproduced in other sources. The first Hermes (the prophet Idris) is here depicted as living in Egypt and building the Pyramids and temples. Because he feared that all knowledge would be lost in the pending flood, he built the temple of Akhmim, whose walls were reputedly inscribed with the secrets of all sciences and arts. The second Hermes was believed to have lived in Babylon and to have taught Pythagoras, being skilled in philosophy and medicine and reviving the sciences lost in the flood. The second Hermes also represented the Zoroastrian tradition of wisdom. The third Hermes was associated with Egypt, as a master of philosophy and alchemy.

This elaborate lore notably acted as an index to ancient religions and Greek philosophy for the Arabic-speaking literati. Preoccupation with Hermetic wisdom and "secrets" was a means of negotiating the orthodox Islamic disapproval of the alien traditions. In view of the Akhmim legend, the threefold Hermes lore could easily have fascinated Dhu'l Nun al-Misri.

Al-Nadim records that he had read a work by Ibn Wahshiyah (fl. 900 CE), which gave a transcription of the alphabets (or "calligraphies") in which books on alchemy and related subjects were written. Amongst these alphabets were the Faqitus and the Musnad. The former has been suggested to mean Coptic, while the latter could be a reference to the esteemed hieroglyphs. Al-Nadim adds that these scripts could be found in books relating to "the Art, magic, and charms, in the languages with which people originated science." (21) The confusion between science and the sector of magic and talismans was still rife during the European renaissance. Ibn Wahshiyah (who is said to have translated from Syriac into Arabic) was an alchemist and "a magician who made talismans" according to Al-Nadim, who also referred to this alchemist by the epithet of al-Sufi. In these early days of Islam, the title of al-Sufi was used rather loosely, it would seem; the later "orthodox" connotations of the word sufi effectively restricted application of the terminology to a much more closely defined religious format. The Sufi teachings eschewed magic and talismans.

4. Egyptology Debate about the Hieroglyphs

The preoccupation with hieroglyphs has to be seen in due perspective, and was evidently related to a minority trend in which Hermetic "philosophers" of Islam, and other scholars, investigated "ancient sciences" in the available languages of Arabic, Syriac, Coptic, and Greek. Most Islamic alchemists were probably limited to the Arabic tongue.

Dhu'l Nun's birthplace of Akhmim (Panopolis) has been described as "a Christian town with a noteworthy scientific tradition, where a great many people knew Greek, Coptic, and Arabic." (22) Dhu'l Nun might therefore have acquired a knowledge of Greek in his native town, in addition to his Arabic education. However, most scholars would consider this unlikely; even the philosopher Al-Farabi does not appear to have been familiar with Greek.

A recent (and controversial) contribution from an Egyptologist, Dr. Okasha El Daly (see egyptology), has served to highlight the issue of medieval Arab interest in ancient Egyptian remains. That interest was extensive, more so than has generally been credited. The El Daly thesis has emphasised the Arabic interest in ancient Egypt as being inspired by Quranic reference to Pharaoh, reports of early Muslim travellers, and the Copts. Forms of archaeology occurred, though manuals for treasure hunting were a blight, leading to destruction and stone quarries, developments lamented by some Arab scholars. Attempted decipherments of ancient Egyptian scripts were made with the assistance of Copts; some Muslim scholars are said to have been familiar with Coptic. (23)

The El Daly coverage mentions many medieval Egyptian writers such as the ninth century Ayub Ibn Maslama, who is said to have deciphered various texts for the Caliph al-Mamun during the latter's visit to Egypt. However, a major importance attaches to Dhu'l Nun al-Misri, and attention is given to a manual attributed to him that was located in Turkey, being an eighteenth century manuscript copy. This manual was a guide to deciphering many scripts, including the hieroglyphs. A familiarity with Coptic is here indicated. The basic implication is that Dhu'l Nun was a scholar in this subject who was able to decipher the hieroglyphs, however partially. (24)

This achievement is viewed as being facilitated by recourse to the contemporary Coptic language, preserved by Christian priests. Dr. El Daly has also stressed the significance of the alchemist Ibn Wahshiyah, who was not an Egyptian but an Iraqi (or Iraqi Aramaean), and who has long been the subject of specialist probes and disagreements. (25) The latter's Kitab Shawq al-Mustaham profiles ancient scripts, including the Egyptian hieroglyphs. El Daly implies that some of the hieroglyphs had been deciphered by Ibn Wahshiyah.

A critical response to the El Daly research acknowledged the "wealth of medieval Arabic extracts from manuscripts, many of which have never been published before." The concession was made that Egyptologists "usually completely ignore Egypt's Islamic period." However, "the author [El Daly] clearly believes that the Arabic writers knew the meaning of some hieroglyphs, due either through transmitted knowledge or via bilingual texts, though this is not shown convincingly." The critic implies that Arabic writers merely "paired hieroglyphs with their own alphabet." Furthermore, the claim of El Daly that Ibn Wahshiyah "correctly identified determinatives, which he distinguishes from alphabetical letters" is not accepted by the reviewer, who objects that "what seems rather to be the case is that Ibn Wahshiyah suggested that hieroglyphs might represent sounds as well as ideas, a notion which does not have much to do with an accurate knowledge of ideograms versus phonograms, let alone determinatives."

The critical reviewer expressed the conclusion that an Arabic decipherment of the hieroglyphs did not occur, and that the presumed "knowledge of ancient Egypt" was inseparable from the more rudimentary observation of surviving monuments or derivation from Graeco-Roman and Coptic written sources. However, the critic also stated that "the book [of El Daly] has convinced me that the Arabic writers had a serious historical interest in ancient Egypt, an interest which has been undervalued considerably." Further, "the work of some medieval Arabic scholars may well have inspired, via Kircher, the work of Champollion." (The quotations are from theegyptologyforum.org book review, dated June 2005, by A.K. Eyma.)

Amongst the varied Arabic writers portrayed by Dr. El Daly is Ibn Abd Al-Hakam (803-871), a contemporary of Dhu'l Nun. This Egyptian historian was born at Fustat (Old Cairo); his orally transmitted Futuh Misr is described as the first book written by a native Egyptian of the Islamic era. That work reveals the author as a nationalist historian, possibly in reaction to the harsh treatment of his family by the Abbasid Caliph al-Mutawakkil. Ibn Abd Al-Hakam praises the Copts, and displays "a good knowledge of native traditions and of the ancient history and monuments of Egypt." (26) Such undercurrents of native reaction to the distant Abbasid rule may have been one of the influences at work in the career of Dhu'l Nun al-Misri.

5. The Sufi Gnostic

Some Arabic sources say that Dhu'l Nun early visited Fustat (Old Cairo), a garrison town of the Delta which replaced Alexandria as the capital of Egypt.

A report that the Alexandrian library was burned by the Arab invaders during the 640s has been regarded as spurious by modern scholars. The fiction cannot be traced earlier than circa 1200, at a time when the trends in Islamic learning were changing for the worse, and the anti-scientific and anti-philosophical tendencies were mounting. The early administration of Islamic Egypt preserved the literary heritage of the country, including what had survived from the Alexandrian library, whose contents had been committed to the flames centuries before the coming of Islam. In reality, the medical literature of Alexandria was made available to later translators and practitioners, as confirmed by the number of notable native physicians among the Copts during the pre-Fatimid era. The Greek medical compendia of Alexandria were translated into Arabic during the ninth century, being incorporated into new medical encyclopaedias. (27)

In the time of Dhu'l Nun, scientific acumen was increasing amongst liberal Muslims; he himself is reputed to have studied medicine in addition to the Quran and hadith. At some point he adopted an ascetic life; he is reported to have travelled in Arabia, Syria, and Palestine. He is said to have visited the Muslim ascetics on Mount Lukkam, near Antioch. According to the early (tenth century) report of Kalabadhi, he encountered a female ascetic in Syria who criticised the lifestyle of affluent town-dwellers. A later variant of this episode (possibly relating to the same entity) is found in Hujwiri's Kashf al-Mahjub, which describes an encounter occurring during a journey from Jerusalem to Egypt. The matriarch carried a staff and wore a woollen garment of the type that became closely associated with Sufis.

(28)

Key events were the two stigmatisations of Dhu'l Nun as a heretic (section 1 above), though the information is sparse, and also inflated with regard to the intervention of the Caliph al-Mutawakkil (rgd 847-861). (29) The historian Al-Khatib, in his History of Baghdad, reports that Mutawakkil gained respect for the Egyptian, acquitted him, and asked him to describe sainthood. The speech that is put into the mouth of Dhu'l Nun (30) has been regarded as an embellishment.

The Caliph al-Mutawakkil reversed the policies of his predecessors, dispensing with the Mutazili doctrine and the associated inquisition, a situation which had buttressed "the religious importance of the Caliph" by implying that the Quran was "subject to authoritative Caliphal interpretation" (31) This situation dated back to the reign of al- Mamun (813-833), who enforced the Mutazili doctrines and initiated the inquisition. Al- Mamun's calculating support for the Mutazili right wing coincided with his crushing of the revolt that occurred in Egypt amongst the discontented peasantry. The less privileged Arab settlers made common cause with the subordinated Copts at that time, but lost to the imperial regime, which diverted Egyptian revenue to Baghdad, a disastrous policy which encompassed the ruin of agriculture in the Nile valley. (32)

The orthodox reporting of Al-Dhahabi (d. c. 1350), an Arab historian and theologian of Damascus, reiterated the conventional version of Dhu'l Nun's heresy in terms of upholding the conservative religious view that the Quranwas uncreated. In view of other details, one suspects that the "second" heresy possessed a deeper content which escaped memory. This question is independent of the queries relating to an esoteric commentary on the Quran ascribed to Jafar Sadiq, a book with which Dhu'l Nun is associated in an editorial capacity. That commentary (tafsir) was accommodated to a Shi'i perspective. (33)

Upon his return to Egypt from Iraq, Dhu'l Nun apparently settled (or resettled) in the Fustat (Old Cairo) area. Fustat was the first Islamic capital of Egypt. Cairo was built to the north in the late tenth century, and eventually absorbed Fustat (today Old Cairo). The Abbasid Caliphs moved the capital to the closely adjacent city of Al-Askar during the period 750-868, which encompasses the life of Dhu'l Nun.

His death occurred at nearby Giza (then a village), in the shadow of the Old Kingdom Pyramids and the Sphinx. The unknown views of Dhu'l Nun about those monuments might have been more convincing than some fantasies of Western occultists in recent times. His tombstone has been commemorated, located in one of the cemeteries at Old Cairo. (34)

The Giza Pyramids

The sources credit Dhu'l Nun with a large number of disciples in tasawwuf (Sufism). It seems unlikely that he trained all of them in an exclusively ascetic lifestyle.The tenth century Sufi annalist Kalabadhi early reported the Egyptian's answer to a question concerning the gnostic ideal: "He [the gnostic] is a man who, being with them, is yet apart from them." (35) This Arabic reflection is reminiscent of a Persian phrase later favoured by some Sufis: "Be in the world but not of the world."

Some Sufi annalists (including Sulami and Qushayri) affirm that one of his disciples was Sahl al-Tustari (d. 896), an Iranian from Ahwaz who also became celebrated in Sufism. Another early source reported that Tustari visited Egypt, (36) though the details are fragmentary.

The late medieval monograph attributed to the Egyptian polymath al-Suyuti (d. 1505) is a compilation of earlier materials. That memorial breaks down into seven sections which reveal the circumscribed emphases attendant upon the canonisation of Dhu'l Nun in Sufism. The presentation comprises 1) the miracles of Dhu'l Nun 2) his mystical career 3) his sayings 4) his prayers 5) his encounter with the Caliph Mutawakkil 6) his poems 7) a collection of the hadith (traditions of the prophet) transmitted by him.

The religio-mystical poetry ascribed to the subject has been judged authentic by some scholars. Yet the attributed alchemical writings have been considered discrepant with the practice of Sufism. The French scholar Louis Massignon was influential, via his "Islamic theory" of Sufism, in casting doubt upon the accounts of Dhu'l Nun by Islamic historians and bibliographers, instead favouring the canonical annals of Sufism. (37) This subject of the relegated "Hermetic" Dhu'l Nun is capable of evoking disagreement, though it is necessary to be realistic in deciphering the profile.

Maliki jurists and right wing Mutazili theologians would probably have been indifferent and uncomprehending even if Dhu'l Nun had succeeded in deciphering the Egyptian hieroglyphs, though any suggestion of a ninth century Rosetta Stone merely seems preposterous to modern sceptics of antique ingenuity. He would have needed to know Coptic, and a multilingual artefact would have been a priority. According to the El Daly theory (section 4 above), Dhu'l Nun was familiar with Coptic, and there were numerous surviving objects that displayed two or three languages translating the same hieroglyphic text. The same innovative Egyptologist has emphasised that Champollion benefited from study of the book on Coptic grammar by Athanasius Kircher (1602-80), a seminal work relating to Arabic manuscripts. El Daly has also stressed that Champollion was at some pains to study Arabic.

Kircher was a German Jesuit who established the link between hieroglyphics and Coptic, and he has been considered the founder of Egyptology. However, his efforts to decipher the hieroglyphs were misfounded. The French scholar Jean Francois Champollion (1790-1832) is celebrated as the first man to decipher the hieroglyphic system. He achieved this feat as a consequence of studying a granodiorite slab only four feet high, found near Alexandria in 1799 by the French army of Napoleon. That Ptolemaic era stele was subsequently known as the Rosetta Stone, and acquired a new home in the British Museum. The stele bears the same inscription in three scripts: classical Greek, demotic Egyptian, and hieroglyphs. The knowledge of Coptic possessed by Champollion has been deemed the key factor in penetrating the phonetics of ancient Egyptian. He grasped that the hieroglyphs had to be read as a phonetic script, and not as a symbolic script.

Champollion could read Coptic and Greek, and by investigating the seven demotic signs in Coptic, he was able to trace the significances in some of the hieroglyphs. Afterwards he ingeniously created an alphabet to decipher the remaining hieroglyphs. There was nothing esoteric in the stele hieroglyphs, as the contents were concerned with a taxation benefit awarded to the temple priests of the day by Ptolemy V, who restored their economic privileges of earlier times. The stele dates to the early second century BC.

El Daly has argued that ninth century Arabic-speaking literati had plumbed the fact that sounds were crucial to the decipherment of hieroglyphs. He has made the accusation that a Eurocentric view subsequently ignored the findings of Arabic scholarship (more especially in the case of Ibn Wahshiya).

In relation to other linguistic matters, there have been conjectures about a basic appellation. The Arabic name Dhu'l Nun can mean "Lord of the Fish," (nun can mean "fish" or the letter nun, i.e., n). The sobriquet is found in the Quran, (38) and referring to the Biblical entity Jonah and his adventure with the whale (= fish). Jonah is acknowledged by the Quran as a prophet. According to one suggestion, the associative name may have been bestowed upon Abu'l Faiz Thauban as a title of some gnostic significance. Others merely read "he of the letternun," though that alternative involves a further conjecture as to the meaning intended. Certainly, some Persian Sufi sources awarded associations of mystical achievement to the "fish" theme denoted. In his discourses known as Fihi Ma Fihi, Jalal al-Din Rumi (d. 1273) cites a tradition of Muhammad: "Do not prefer me above Jonah son of Matthew, in that his ascension was in the belly of the whale while my ascension was in heaven upon the Throne." (39)

The gulf between religiosity and gnostic (arif) psychology is indicated in a reported Sufi saying of Dhu'l Nun: "Ordinary men repent of their sins, but the elect repent of their heedlessness." (40) The Arabic term ghafla(heedlessness) was inverse to sincerity (sidq), which was a key term in early Sufi texts. Many heedless people imagine they are sincere, including presumed mystics. According to the Dhu'l Nun transmission: "Sincerity (sidq) is a divine sword which cuts all bonds." (41) A related emphasis of this Egyptian mystic was that of avoiding any pretension to gnosis, a pretension nowadays too frequently visible in diverse cults and sects.

6. Canonical Annals of Sufism

Orthodox annalists of Sufism tend to report the career of Dhu'l Nun in an unsatisfactory manner, despite the more exemplary contribution of Abu Nuaym al-Isfahani (d. 1038). The latter was a traditionist of Iran who devoted a substantial section to Dhu'l Nun in his lengthy Hilyat al-Awliya, and who did not neglect to include the belief in the prowess of the Egyptian gnostic with hieroglyphs. Abu Nuaym is associated with transmission of the Syrian and Iraqi traditions, as distinct from the less prolific Egyptian reports of the subject. Abu Nuaym was writing as a traditionist and not as a Sufi. (42)

Upon close inspection, it is mainly the sayings of Dhu'l Nun which receive attention in the annals of canonical Sufism. Many of his sayings were relayed by the Iranian exegetes Abu Nasr Sarraj, Sulami, Qushayri, and Ansari. The biographical complement is very anecdotal, and attended by presumed miracles (karamat). The twelfth century Iranian poet Attar of Nishapur typically embellished anecdotes in his Tazkhirat al-Awliya (Memorial of the Saints).

Some of these reports give the subject a high rating, apparently because he was regarded as an innovator in gnosis. Hujwiri (eleventh century) comments that this "son of a Nubian" was "one of the best" Sufi exemplars; Hujwiri appears to be influenced here by the belief that Dhu'l Nun followed the path of "blame" or malamat (a term closely associated with Khurasan, though not with Egypt). Hujwiri adds that the people of Egypt did not believe in Dhu'l Nun until after his death, a realistic detail, but then proceeds to give a rather pious explanation for the change in public opinion, including the claim that religiously significant words were found inscribed on the forehead of his corpse. (43) There is no reference to hieroglyphs, alchemy, or the Akhmim environment.

Long after, in distant Herat, Jami (fifteenth century) gave high praise to Dhu'l Nun in his Nafahat al-Uns. The Persian writer describes the Egyptian as "the head of this sect (Sufism): they (the Sufis) all descend from, and are related to, him." (44) The few pages which Jami devotes to Dhu'l Nun are in the standard idiom of hagiography; the anecdotes and dicta do not convincingly profile ninth century events. Dhu'l Nun is stipulated by Hujwiri and others to have been an exponent of marifa (gnosis) and the Sufi path. Kalabadhi (tenth century) reported the Egyptian being asked: "What is the end [objective] of the gnostic ?" The enigmatic answer came: "When he is as he was where he was before he was." (45)

The philosophical reader begins to suspect that the esoteric language of Dhu'l Nun al-Misri was not an open book to his contemporaries. However, quite apart from that prospect, the "orthodox Sufi" sources had evidently lost contact with a largely forgotten Egyptian milieu. This is perhaps understandable in that the early annalists of Sufism were Iranians and Iraqis.

7. Theory of Christian Neoplatonist Influence

The "Christian Neoplatonist" interpretation was not excluded by the "Islamic" theory (relating to Sufism) associated with Louis Massignon. Since the nineteenth century, the influence upon early Sufism of Dionysius Areopagiticus has been emphasised by Christian investigators, and more recently urged in relation to Dhu'l Nun by the versatile Roman Catholic scholars Louis Gardet and Georges Anawati.

The Pseudo-Dionysius was composing circa 500 CE, and is often identified as a monastic writer, possibly living in Syria. He ascribed his output to Dionysius the Areopagite, an Athenian converted by the apostle Paul. His real identity is unknown. Different scholarly theories about his exposition can be confusing. His corpus has been considered idiosyncratic. The myth of apostolic authenticity was demolished by the discovery that Pseudo-Dionysius substantially employed Neoplatonist sources, especially Proclus. Some analysts concluded that he preserved Neoplatonist influences in the face of official Christian intolerance, and the suggestion appeared that he was effectively a pupil of Proclus, the fifth century pagan Neoplatonist. However, another form of exegesis argues that Pseudo-Dionysius was a Christian theologian disguised as a Neoplatonist, having the intention of mastering the pagan sources and thus defeating the rival sector. (46) See also Damascius.

Some commentators have referred to the less prominent Stephen Bar Sudaili, who has been described as a Syrian Christian monk of Origenist views, an obscure figure dating to the early sixth century CE. He is credited with the work in Syriac known as The Book of the Holy Hierotheos. Some Christian scholars have described this document rather disparagingly as a "quasi-Gnostic" treatise. However, a translator assessed the treatise as "one of the most amazing mystical books ever written by a Christian," and adding that "no other Christian writer ever accepted so completely, or stated with such audacity, the pantheistic philosophy." The same scholar concluded that the Book of Hierotheos was directly or indirectly indebted to Pseudo-Dionysius. (47)

The mystics amongst the Eastern Christians were much nearer pagan and Oriental heresies than the Latin church. A degree of compatibility with some early Sufi exponents is not difficult to concede. However, in the case of Dhu'l Nun, it is very questionable to attribute his formulation of the "stages, stations and states" of the Sufi path to Christian sources, "perhaps under the influence of the ascetic and mystical spirituality of the Oriental monks (we think of the Ladder to Paradise by St. John Climacus)." (48) Climacus (523-606) wrote in his ScalaParadisi about an ascent leading by gradual stages to the perfection of mystical life. Other commentators have attributed to Plotinus the influence for such conceptions, which are notoriously difficult to ascertain in terms of textual and ideological preferences. Furthermore, the traditional idea that Dhu'l Nun was the innovator of Sufi gnostic concepts does not stand the test of due analysis. To quote a relatively early assessment of Professor Arberry:

"He [Dhu'l Nun] is generally credited with having introduced the idea of gnosis (marifa) into Sufism, but this would appear to be incorrect since the conception certainly occurs in the fragments of earlier ascetics. Dhu'l Nun is ... said to have known the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs, and to have been familiar with the Hermetic wisdom. A number of short treatises of extremely doubtful authenticity are attributed to him; his poems and prayers, so much as are preserved of them, give a truer impression of his mode of thought, which is marked by distinctly pantheistic tendencies." (49)

8. R. A. Nicholson's Neoplatonist Theory

The "purist" Neoplatonist interpretation of Professor Reynold A. Nicholson argued for the influence of Plotinus, though not implying any direct textual influence as a necessity for this theory. Rather, Greek Neoplatonism was "in the air" such Sufis breathed. (50) That theme is open-ended, and does evoke significant complexities, though not of a definitive kind.

From the early ninth century onwards, Muslim thinkers gained familiarity with Greek philosophy, often via Christian scholars and translators. Aristotle came to be the most well known authority in the Islamic world, though to some extent mutated by the teachings of Proclus and Plotinus, which passed as Aristotelian. Circa 830 CE, the so-called Theology of Aristotle was translated into Arabic by the Syrian Christian Ibn Na'imah al-Himsi; though believed to be a work by Aristotle, the Theologia Aristotelis was actually a version of books IV-VI of the Enneads of Plotinus; this redaction proved influential amongst Muslim philosophers from the time of Al-Kindi (d. c. 866), who was active in Baghdad.

It is not known whether Dhu'l Nun al-Misri was familiar with Greek. Certainly, the Coptic language had adopted the Greek alphabet. There was an unusual degree of linguistic overlap in certain aspects of the Egyptian culture at this period. Although the official language of the Islamic administration in Egypt had been changed from Greek to Arabic at the order of the Caliph in 694 CE, the Byzantine administrative system survived in Egypt for a further two centuries. No radical change seems to have occurred in the land of the Nile prior to the early eighth century, when the new Arabisation was implemented. The Caliphal objective was to have the Arab settlers take over the administration, which then formed a Christian majority. Fiscal documents reveal that during the latter half of the eighth century, Coptic and Greek were equally as prevalent as Arabic. Further, and more surprisingly, Coptic and Greek phrases, and also Greek numbers, were used in official documents three centuries after the administrative reform was commenced. (51)

A relevant point is that the non-Sufi Arabic sources describe Dhu'l Nun as a philosopher and alchemist; this factor prompted Nicholson to interpret him as a student of Hellenistic science rather than the more selective sources involved in Christian Neoplatonism. (52)

One of the Arabic sources is Ibn Khallikan (d. 1282), a qazi (legist) of Damascus who produced a large collection of biographies in his Wafayat al-Ayan. The entry on Dhu'l Nun here describes him as a philosopher (hakim) and learned man who spoke elegant Arabic. (53) A polymathic range is deducible. Some analysts of Sufism have been liberal in their assessment of such sources. It has even been asserted that Dhu'l Nun was "well versed in philosophy, law, literature, alchemy, ancient Egyptian history, and hieroglyphics," and furthermore that he was "the model of a renaissance man." (54) Others are more stringent in assessment. "It is impossible to be certain whether or not Dhu'l Nun studied medicine, alchemy, and magic, though he is cited as the author of alchemical writings from the 9th century onward" (G. Bowering, "Du'l Nun Mesri, Abu'l Fayz Tauban," Encyclopaedia Iranica online).

9. The Palacios Version

A contemporary of the British scholar Reynold A. Nicholson was the Spanish Arabist Miguel Asin Palacios. The latter wrote an appendix on Dhu'l Nun in his book about Ibn Masarra (d. 931) of Spain. Though brief, this appendix was sufficiently evocative to be influential.

A Christianising accent is discernible in some interpretations of Palacios, who viewed the Nubian (and non-Arab) ethnicity of Dhu'l Nun, and the Thebaid environment (of Akhmim), in terms of explaining "how the introduction of Christian monastic asceticism and of the traditional theosophical occultism of Egypt into Islam was due to him." (55) Both Christian and Hermetic influences were here being discussed as operative.

Palacios observes that Akhmim was in the vicinity of an event in which the hermit Palamon had taught the Coptic saint Pachomius (Pakhom) several centuries before, the latter founding a monastery at Tabennesis (some distance to the south) in the fourth century CE. That is indeed an interesting geographical juxtaposition, though one which does not prove Christian influence from the monks of the Thebaid. Another Pachomian monastery was in the close proximity of Akhmim (Panopolis). However, the same town has also been viewed as the originating milieu for the Hermetic cult of the Graeco-Roman period, and this had nothing to do with Christianity. The outlook of Palacios may be gleaned from the following:

"All the biographers of Dhu'l Nun agree that he was a very austere ascetic who submitted his body to the most rigorous mortifications. He lived continually in imitation of the Christian 'vagabonds,' wandering through the deserts of Nitria, beside the banks of the Nile, on the beaches of Egypt, and through the mountains of Lebanon. He searched everywhere for teachers.... But more than an ascetic, he is pictured as a mystic or ecstatic Sufi, the first (together with the Persian Abu Yazid al-Bistami) to be considered as such." (56)

The same scholar mentions the brief reference of Ibn Khallikan to the Sufi teacher of Dhu'l Nun, an obscure entity named as Shaqran al-Abid, meaning Shaqran the ascetic. Palacios suggests that Shaqran might have been "an ascetic of Christian lineage." Again, that is speculation. (Elsewhere, there is an earlier reference to a Maliki ascetic as a teacher of Dhu'l Nun, though with chronological and other contextual difficulties.)

Via Said al-Andalusi and Al-Qifti, Palacios acknowledges that Akhmim had the repute of being an "ancient centre of the esoteric sciences," the Arabic tradition attributing to Dhu'l Nun a knowledge of alchemy and magic, "the Hermetic art of deciphering the hieroglyphs," and the interpretation of dreams.

Citing Ibn Khallikan and others, Palacios construes that the subject's teaching and fame as a saint provoked the envy of legists and aroused fear in the civil authorities. His "ideas about the ecstatic union" were condemned as heretical, though he was acquitted in a trial before the ruler of Egypt. Palacios tends to conflate the first and second frictions with orthodoxy (section 1 above), saying that the subject was afterwards sent to a prison in Baghdad, and subsequently vindicated by the Caliph al-Mutawakkil. (57)

10. Leaven of the Pythagoreans

The "Islamic Neoplatonist" interpretation of Dhu'l Nun al-Misri was briefly and allusively expressed by the ishraqi philosopher Shihab al-Din Yahya Suhrawardi (d. 1191). In his Arabic work Kitab al-mashari wa'l mutarahat, Suhrawardi refers to a spiritual genealogy including Empedocles, Pythagoras, and Plato, though ultimately linked to Hermes, the "father of philosophers" (walid al-hukama). The "leaven of the Pythagoreans" devolved upon the "brother of Ikhmim," Dhu'l Nun (and, via him, to Sahl al-Tustari). The Arabic works of Suhrawardi refer to two lines of transmission, the other being the Iranian branch of the "leaven" associated with the Sufis Abu Bazid Bistami, Hallaj, and Kharaqani. Dhu'l Nun is here an Islamic NeoPythagoran or Hermeticist, linking to Pythagoras and the ancient Egyptians in the rather complex "philosophical genealogy" emphasised by Suhrawardi in terms of a continuing ancient wisdom spread amongst different nations. (58) The theme of "the eternal leaven" (al-hamirat al-azaliyya) referred to a wisdom tradition which Suhrawardi claimed to inherit.

Investigating this claim of Suhrawardi, Professor John Walbridge has stated that "Dhu'l Nun was as much an alchemist as a Sufi." (59) The persistent tradition of alchemy at Akhmim is difficult to ignore. The same American scholar cites the suggestion of Garth Fowden that Panopolis was the centre of a cult which produced the Corpus Hermeticum during the early Christian era. Whether or not that suggestion is accurate, the so-called "Hermetica Belt" geographically features Panopolis in between Nag Hammadi and Hermopolis. At Nag Hammadi was discovered the now celebrated gnostic library (including three Hermetic texts), while Hermopolis was the pilgrimage setting for the supposed tomb of Hermes Trismegistus, who was associated with Thoth.

The early Islamic phase of alchemy is strongly associated with Akhmim due to the output of Uthman ibn Suwayd al-Akhmimi and Butrus al-Hakim al-Akhmimi, both of them apparently ninth century figures. Some scholars have deduced that Uthman ibn Suwayd was almost certainly the author of the original Turba Philosophorum, a well known work featuring alchemical views attributed to a gathering of early Greek philosophers over whom Pythagoras presided. That work was translated from Arabic into Latin. Butrus al-Hakim composed works citing Hermes and Zosimos of Panopolis (Akhmim). (60)

The strong convergence between mysticism and magic in the pre-Islamic Hermetic mindset is disconcerting. The famous Hermetic text Asclepius has been criticised for theurgistic passages in which the objective was to manipulate a god into a statue. Such ideas doubtless reflected tendencies of the ancient Egyptian priesthoods. Professor Brian P. Copenhaver has observed:

"Oddly enough, it was the alchemist Zosimos (circa 300 CE) who took the strongest stand against magic of any Hermetic author, describing it as a blunt tool useless for purposes that need immaterial instruments." (61)

Zosimos has earned approval for his dismissal of the undiscerning Hermetic conflations (now rampant amongst modern occultists). "Hermes accuses even magic, saying that the spiritual man who has come to know himself has no need to direct anything through magic, even if it is regarded as good." (62)

Alchemists varied in their outlook. Insofar as Dhu'l Nun is concerned, the Suhrawardi ascription of a Hermetic genealogy has been endorsed by Professor Walbridge in terms of:

"Al-Qifti mentions that Dhu'l Nun also knew philosophy and that he acquired his knowledge from study of the signs and pictures in the ancient temples and tombs. Thus, in all likelihood, Suhrawardi's claim about Dhu'l Nun being the bearer of 'the leaven of the Pythagoreans' represents a tradition of the Egyptian alchemists about their own origins and that this tradition has some historical validity." (63)

11. Conclusion

Dhu'l Nun al-Misri is likely to remain one of the most fascinating figures in early Sufism. Categorical answers to dilemmas concerning his environmental context are elusive, though it is not convincing to annul the "Hermetic" component of his semi-legendary biography, as some commentators have done. Even if none of the attributed "Hermetic" texts are his own, his role at the intersection of formative Sufism and pre-Islamic Egyptian associations is evocative. An underlying question relates to whether a Sufi gnostic could be a philosopher. The Hermetic version of philosophy amounted to revelation, and not the rational thought which non-Hermetic Greek philosophers pursued in addition to the mystical legacies. There were thus different kinds of antique philosopher. The extent of Dhu'l Nun's polymathy is unknown, though it is not difficult to concede his familiarity with scripts, including the Coptic.

As an extension to these considerations, one could envisage that the subject started life as a Maliki traditionist, transited to the ambience of a neo-Hermetic alchemist, and ended up as a Sufi gnostic by 829 (though quite conceivably having been a Sufi or proto-Sufi ascetic at an earlier period). His profile as a heretic was duplicated in relation to the Egyptian Malikis and the right wing Mutazilis, and perhaps the same basic reasons were underlying. The conventional view that he was upholding Maliki literalism is not convincing. His local "Hermetic" reputation, apparently gained during his early years at Akhmim, may have continued as an aspect of his mature mystical career. He appears to have spent many years in the Fustat area of Lower Egypt, but that factor in itself is no guide to his mentation.

Kevin R. D. Shepherd

May 2010

ANNOTATIONS

(1) See T. Mayer, "Theology and Sufism" (258-287) in T. Winter, ed., The Cambridge Companion to ClassicalIslamic Theology (Cambridge University Press, 2008).

(2) A. J. Arberry, trans., Muslim Saints and Mystics: Episodes from the Tadhkirat al-Auliya by Farid al-Din Attar(London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966), p. 87.

(3) A. Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam (University of North Carolina Press, 1975), pp. 42-3.

(4) Shepherd, Meaning in Anthropos (Cambridge: Anthropographia, 1991, p. 109, deferring to possible Coptic (or Arab) maternal ancestry, and in a context of polymathy furthermore resistant to some European racial biases, a context which included the comment: "I maintain that very few Europeans of the nineteenth century equalled the polymath acuity of the ninth century dissenter Dhu'l Nun al-Misri" (ibid.). This strong statement was made in response to the aspersion of Comte de Gobineau that "the European cannot hope to civilise the negro."

(5) R. A. Nicholson, A Literary History of the Arabs (second edn, Cambridge University Press, 1930), p. 389. Nicholson had arrived at this conclusion in "A Historical Enquiry Concerning the Origin and Development of Sufism," Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1906), 303-348, where he describes the father of Dhu'l Nun as a native of Nubia or of Akhmim, and adopted by the Quraysh.

(6) N. Grimal, A History of Ancient Egypt, trans. I. Shaw (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992), p. 89, and referring to the wealth of local rulers being "apparent in the provincial necropolises at Cusae, Akhmim, Abydos, Edfu and Elephantine."

(7) E. G. Browne, A Literary History of Persia Vol. 1 (1902; repr. Cambridge University Press, 1928), pp. 419-20.

(8) While there are several references to Porphyry in the Fihrist, Plotinus is merely mentioned once by name in the translation of Dodge. See B. Dodge, The Fihrist of Al-Nadim Vol. 2 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1970), p. 614.

(9) Nicholson, A Literary Hist. of the Arabs, pp. 389-90, observing that "no single cause will account for a phenomenon so widely spread." However, Nicholson failed to extend due analysis to the eastern sectors involved. He did state that "the Perso-Indian elements are not to be ignored," though he did not effectively separate the two traditions here conflated. Certain other influential scholars were preoccupied with the "Indian" theory at that date, and this situation tended to eclipse the Iranian factor.

(10) This is the translation of Nicholson in "A Historical Enquiry Concerning the Origin and Development of Sufism" (1906).

(11) Cf. Nicholson, art. cit., p. 313; G. Wiet, "Barba," Encyclopaedia of Islam Vol. 1 (new edn), pp. 1038-9; idem, "Akhmim," Ency. Islam Vol. 1, p. 330; Grimal, A Hist. of Ancient Egypt, p. 3, observing that "the Hermetic Corpus... was later to be the main means of access to a civilisation that had become incomprehensible to Christians." The closure of Egyptian temples during the fourth century CE ended with the massacre of the Serapeum priests at Memphis (ibid.).

(12) The translation is from Nicholson, art. cit., who comments that the true character of Dhu'l Nun appears distinctly in this account. There are complexities in the transmission of Tarikh al-Hukama, which has been described in terms of being "not the author's original work but a compendium compiled about a year after he died by Muhammad b. Ali al-Zawzani." See J. L. Kraemer, Philosophy in the Renaissance of Islam (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1986), pp. 100-1. See also A. Dietrich, "Ibn al-Kifti," Encyclopaedia of Islam Vol. 3 (new edn), p. 840.

(13) B. Dodge, trans., The Fihrist of Al-Nadim Vol. 1 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1970), p. xv, who also infers that the author was a Mutazili sympathiser. Al-Nadim is known to have attended an Ismaili meeting, but Dodge says that this does not imply sectarianism.

(14) In some of my books, I referred in notes to my Survey of the Sufi Phenomenon, an unpublished manuscript composed during the 1980s. Dhu'l Nun al-Misri was entry no. 23 in that ms., an entry which has since been edited and expanded for the current article. Entries 24 and 25 of that ms. related to Jabir ibn Hayyan and Ibn Wahshiya. The ms. was unfinished, but included thirteenth century figures; an earlier version described Indian Sufism until the nineteenth century.

(15) Dodge, trans., The Fihrist of Al-Nadim Vol. 2, pp. 850. 862.

(16) B. P. Copenhaver, Hermetica (Cambridge University Press, 1992), p. xvi, and referring to the inflated listings of Seleucus and Manetho.

(17) Dodge, trans., The Fihrist Vol. 2, p. 865.

(18) G. Strohmaier, "Ibn Umayl," Encyclopaedia of Islam Vol. 3 (new edn), pp. 961-2.

(19) B. H. Stricker, "La Prison de Joseph," Acta Orientalia (1943) 19:101-137, decoding the description of Ibn Umayl's barba as a temple of Imhotep, though more a simple chapel rather than any elaborate edifice. Imhotep was a Third Dynasty courtier and priest who became deified as a local god of Memphis; he was known to the Greeks as Imouthes "and even survived the pharaonic civilisation itself by finding a place in Arab tradition, especially at Saqqara, where his tomb was supposed to be located" (Grimal, A Hist. of Ancient Egypt, p. 66).

(20) H. E. Stapleton et al, "The Sayings of Hermes Quoted in the Ma'al-Waraqi," Ambix (1949) 3:69ff.

(21) Dodge, trans., The Fihrist Vol. 2, pp. 864-5. Dodge says that Faqitus may mean Quftus, equivalent to Coptos. On Abu Mashar al-Balkhi and the threefold Hermes lore, see J. Walbridge, The Wisdom of the Mystic East: Suhrawardi and Platonic Orientalism (State University of New York Press, 2001), pp. 20-1.

(22) E. J. Holmyard, Alchemy (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1957), p. 83.

(23) See O. El Daly, Egyptology: The Missing Millenium - Ancient Egypt in Medieval Arabic Writings (London: UCL Press, 2005).

(24) Ibid., pp. 57ff., 163ff.

(25) Still regarded as a curiosity is the translation by Joseph Hammer of Ibn Wahshiya's Kitab Shawq al-Mustaham. This bore the elaborate title of Ancient Alphabets and Hieroglyphic Characters Explained; with an Account of the Egyptian Priests, their Classes, Initiation, and Sacrifices in the Arabic Language by Ahmad Bin Abubekr Bin Wahishih (London 1806). The reference to Egyptian priests is misleading, as Ibn Wahshiya was referring to a Hermetic theme. This work is a distinctive, if idiosyncratic, catalogue of 93 cryptic alphabets (or ciphers) attributed to various ancient peoples and traditions, including the Egyptians, Greeks, and Hindus. Hammer gave what now reads as a very antiquated translation of a manuscript found at Cairo, the text of which is reproduced. It is apparent that Al-Nadim was referring to the same treatise.The ensuing European cycle of commentary on Ibn Wahshiya was varied, and resulted in accusations that one of his works was a forgery, namely the controversial Kitab al-falaha al-nabatiya (Book of Nabataean Agriculture). This disputed Arabic text exalts the ancient "Babylonian" civilisation; supposedly translated from "Babylonian" sources, the Nabataean Agriculture discusses "Sabaean" beliefs and superstitions, including magic. According to some scholars, Ibn Wahshiya was not a Muslim, though others have disagreed. A recent analysis is J. Hameen-Anttila, The Last Pagans of Iraq: Ibn Wahshiyya and his Nabatean Agriculture (Leiden, 2006), which dates the text in question at circa 600 AD, and describing that text as a translation from a Syriac version of an obscure Greek source.

(26) O. El Daly, Egyptology: The Missing Millenium, p. 165.

(27) S. K. Hamarneh, "Medicine and Pharmacy under the Fatimids" (143-185) in S. H. Nasr, ed., Ismaili Contributions to Islamic Culture (Tehran: Iranian Academy of Philosophy, 1977), pp. 143-4.

(28) A. J. Arberry, trans., The Doctrine of the Sufis (Cambridge University Press, 1935), p. 11; R. A. Nicholson, trans., The Kashf al-Mahjub (London: Luzac, 1936), pp. 101-2. These encounters are amongst those tending to support the conclusion of Ignaz Goldziher that, contrary to some assumptions, much is heard in Sufi and Islamic literature of female saints from the earliest to the most recent times. See Goldziher, Muslim Studies Vol. 2, ed. S.M. Stern (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1971), pp. 270ff., and observing that in the earlier centuries of Islam, women had a much larger share in religious scholarship than is usually appreciated.

(29) Arberry, Muslim Saints and Mystics, p. 87, does not differentiate between the two phases of censure. He states 829 (AH 214) as the year of Dhu'l Nun's arrest in relation to imprisonment at Baghdad. Others think that this was much too early, and that the subsequent problem in 843 (AH 228) amounted to an exile. See also J. Van Ess, "Der Kreis des Dhu'l-Nun," Die Welt des Orients 12 (1981):99-105.

(30) For a translation of this speech, see M. Smith, An Early Mystic of Baghdad (London, 1935), pp. 81-2. Cf. idem, "Dhu'l Nun," Encyclopaedia of Islam Vol. 2 (1965), p. 242.

(31) I. M. Lapidus, A History of Islamic Societies (Cambridge University Press, 1988), p. 124, and adding that "despite the reversal, the damage done to Caliphal authority was irreparable" (ibid.).

(32) See B. Lewis, "Egypt and Syria" (175-230) in The Cambridge History of Islam Vol. 1 (Cambridge University Press, 1970), pp. 177-8.

(33) Cf. L. Massignon, Essai sur les origines du lexique technique de la mystique musulmane (second edn, Paris 1954), pp. 206-7, who treats Dhahabi's report as authoritative. Al-Dhahabi was professor of hadith at a madrasa (religious college) in Damascus. Cf. ibid., pp. 201 ff., emphasising the issue of Dhul Nun's editing of the tafsir.

(34) See L. Massignon, Recueil de textes inedits concernant l'histoire de la mystique en pays d'Islam (Paris 1929), pp. 15-17.

(35) Arberry, The Doctrine of the Sufis, p. 140.

(36) This detail comes from a lost work of Ibn Bakuyah (d. 1037) that is mentioned in the Al-Sirr al-maknun fi manaqib Dhu'l Nun attributed to Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (d. 1505), an Egyptian polymath of the Mamluk era. The Suyuti monograph on the life and sayings of Dhu'l Nun is covered in A. J. Arberry, "A Biography of Dhu'l Nun al-Misri" (11-27) in M. Ram and M. D. Ahmad, eds., 'Arshi Presentation Volume (New Delhi: Majlis-i Nasr-i 'Arshi, 1965). Arberry described this monograph as "a characteristic and not particularly accurate compilation of extracts from earlier sources, hardly worthy of being dignified with the name of a biography; its only claim to originality lies in his (Suyuti's) reclassification under distinct headings of the raw materials available to him. However, the extracts from lost or unpublished sources do merit bringing to light" (ibid., p. 16). Professor Arberry accordingly supplies those parts of the Arabic text which consist of quotations from Ibn Bakuyah's Akhbar al-Arifin. On the relationship between Dhu'l Nun and Sahl al-Tustari, see G. Bowering, The Mystical Vision of Existence in Classical Islam: The Quranic Hermeneutics of the Sufi Sahl at-Tustari (Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, 1980), pp. 50ff.

(37) Massignon, Essai sur les origines (first edn, Paris 1922, pp. 184ff.; second edn, 1954, pp. 206-13), esp. p. 207, who urged that the alchemical and "cabbalistic" works of Dhu'l Nun are apocryphal, and that the traditions pertaining to the hieroglyphs are erroneous. Massignon believed that the authentic teaching of Dhu'l Nun is preserved in his sayings and anecdotes as relayed via his Egyptian disciples and Baghdad admirers in the Sufi sources. The French scholar made no attempt to reconstruct the native Egyptian milieu. His views were closely followed by Dr. Margaret Smith, whose entry in The Encyclopaedia of Islam Vol. 2 (1965), p. 242, omits relevant Arabic sources on Dhu'l Nun such as Masudi, Al-Nadim, Said al-Andalusi, and Al-Qifti. She did, however, concede that Dhu'l Nun must have been influenced by Hellenistic teaching. Smith duly observed : "A few books on magic and alchemy, attributed to him, have survived, but his mystical teaching is found only in what has been transmitted by other writers, including his great contemporary Muhasibi" (ibid.). Cf. M. Asin Palacios, The Mystical Philosophy of Ibn Masarra (1978 trans.), pp. 165ff., whose account of Dhu'l Nun recognises the Hermetic background provided by Said al-Andalusi and others, though asserting a Christian influence. Cf. C. Brockelmann, Geschichte der Arabischen Litteratur Vol. 1 (second edn, Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1943), p. 214, who lists the works attributed to Dhu'l Nun, including the Mujarrabat, an extant manuscript on medicine, alchemy, talisman, and other subjects. On the alchemy of Dhu'l Nun, see also F. Sezgin, Geschichte Des Arabischen Schrifttums Vol. 4 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1971), p. 273.

(38) Quran, surah 21 verse 87. The Pickthall translation says that Dhu'n Nun here means "Lord of the Fish," meaning Jonah. See M. M. Pickthall, The Meaning of the Glorious Koran (New York: Mentor, 1953), p. 239.

(39) A. J. Arberry, Discourses of Rumi (London: John Murray, 1961), p. 114; A. Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam (1975), p. 416.

(40) R. A. Nicholson, trans., The Kashf al-Mahjub, p. 298.

(41) Cf. ibid., p. 101, who renders: "Sincerity (sidq) is the sword of God on the earth: it cuts everything that it touches."

(42) Abu Nuaym included over six hundred biographies in his Hilyat, though the majority of these are devoted to pious men and traditionists of early Islam. Rather than being a Sufi, "it is more plausible to view him (Abu Nuaym) as a hadith transmitter who incorporated the Sufis into his traditionist vision of piety." See A. T. Karamustafa, Sufism: The Formative Period (Edinburgh University Press, 2007), p. 90.

(43) Nicholson, trans., Kashf al-Mahjub, p. 100.

(44) Nicholson, A Literary History of the Arabs (1930), p. 386.

(45) Arberry, The Doctrine of the Sufis, p. 138.

(46) See H. D. Saffrey, "New Objective Links between the Pseudo-Dionysius and Proclus" (64-74) in D. J. O'Meara, ed., Neoplatonism and Christian Thought (State University of New York Press, 1982). See also B. McGinn, The Presence of God: A History of Western Christian Mysticism Vol. 1 - The Foundations of Mysticism (London: SCM Press, 1992), pp. 157ff.

(47) F. S. Marsh, trans., The Book of the Holy Hierotheos (London: Williams & Norgate, 1927), pp. 242ff. For other references see, e. g., C. Stewart, 'Working the Earth of the Heart': The Messalian Controversy in History, Texts, and Language to AD 431 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991), p. 198, stating that "the Origenist monk Stephen Bar Sudaili (early sixth century) in The Book of the Holy Hierotheos uses the verb hbk to describe the eventual 'commingling' of the perfect mind (hawna) with the Good; here, however, the emphasis is on absorption or merger, for 'commingling' is a step beyond unification (hdayuta) and Stephen insists that all distinctions cease when the final 'commingling' occurs."

(48) G. C. Anawati, "Philosophy, Theology, and Mysticism" (350-391) in J. Schacht and C.E. Bosworth, eds., The Legacy of Islam (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974), p. 371.

(49) A. J. Arberry, Sufism: An Account of the Mystics of Islam (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1950), p. 52.

(50) Nicholson, "A Historical Enquiry Concerning the Origin and Development of Sufism," Jnl of the Royal Asiatic Society (1906), 309ff., also allowing some credit to Gnosticism and conceding a possibility of "Persian and Indian ideas" having influenced Sufism. Nicholson had earlier drawn parallels between Plotinus and Rumi, though without insisting on any direct influence. However, he did assert that "sufi metaphysics are cast throughout in the mould which Alexandria aptly contrived." See idem, Selected Poems from the Divani Shamsi Tabriz (1898; repr. Cambridge University Press, 1977), pp. xxxff. The preoccupation of Professor Nicholson with Neoplatonism reflects his training in classicism, prior to his transition to Islamic studies.

(51) A. M. Mukhtar, "On the Survival of the Byzantine Administration in Egypt during the First Century of the Arab Rule," Acta Orientalia: Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae (Budapest 1973) 27:309-19, pp. 311-12, 316.

(52) Nicholson, The Mystics of Islam (London 1914), pp. 12-13.

(53) A translation has long been available in M. de Slane, trans., Ibn Khallikan's Biographical Dictionary Vol. 1(Paris: Oriental Translation Fund of Great Britain and Ireland, 1842), pp. 291ff.

(54) These quotations come from the article by N.S. Fatemi in L. F. Rushbrook Williams, ed., Sufi Studies: East and West (London: Octagon Press, 1973), p. 51.

(55) M. A. Palacios, The Mystical Philosophy of Ibn Masarra and his Followers, trans. E. H. Douglas and H. W. Yoder (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1978), p. 165. This book was first published at Madrid in 1914.

(56) Ibid., p. 166. The Spanish scholar also cited an interpretation that the Sufi meaning of the name Dhu'l Nun is "one endowed with the universal knowledge by divine illumination" (ibid., p. 165 note 2).

(57) Ibid., pp. 165-6, 167-8.

(58) See further H. Ziai, Knowledge and Illumination: A Study of Suhrawardi's Hikmat al-Ishraq (Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, 1990), p. 21 note 4; J. Walbridge, The Leaven of the Ancients: Suhrawardi and the Heritage of the Greeks (State University of New York Press, 2000), pp. 29ff., and referring to Suhrawardi as "a Sufi of sorts" (ibid., p. 30), though the main emphasis relates to Islamic Neoplatonism.

(59) J. Walbridge, The Wisdom of the Mystic East: Suhrawardi and Platonic Orientalism (State University of New York Press, 2001), p. 44.

(60) Walbridge, Wisdom of the Mystic East, pp. 44-5. See also G. Fowden, The Egyptian Hermes: A Historical Approach to the Late Pagan Mind (Cambridge University Press, 1986). See also P. Kingsley, Ancient Philosophy, Mystery, and Magic: Empedocles and Pythagorean Tradition (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), pp. 389-90, stating that "writing little more, and perhaps even less, than a generation after Dhu'l Nun himself, either in the late ninth or the very early tenth century, his [Ibn Suwaid's] list of published works - all of them on the subject of alchemy, as their titles clearly show - includes a 'Book of Refutation of the Accusation Against Dhu'l Nun al-Misri' (Kitab sarf al-tawahhum 'an dhi-al-nun al-misri). It was this same Ibn Suwaid who... was almost certainly the author of the Mushaf al-jama'a: the Arabic prototype of the Turba Philosophorum." On the Turba, see ibid., pp. 56ff. Concerning Egyptian alchemy, Kingsley interprets the evidence in terms of "very strongly implies the existence of a continuing and unbroken tradition in the place (Akhmim) from the third and fourth centuries AD down into the early Islamic period" (ibid., p. 59).

(61) B. P. Copenhaver, Hermetica (Cambridge University Press, 1992), p. xxxviii.

(62) Ibid.. In the same quoted passage, Zosimos refers to Zoroaster as an advocate of magic. This is a typical error of the Greek transmission concerning the Iranian prophet Zarathushtra, who was misrepresented in Greek lore as a magician.

(63) Walbridge, Wisdom of the Mystic East, p. 46.

#Resources #Sufi #sufism #DHU'L NUN AL-MISRI #Dhul-Nun al-Misri #alchemy #egyptian mysticism #islam

4 notes · View notes

pamphletstoinspire · 6 years

Photo

A LANDSCAPE WITH DRAGONS - The Battle for Your Child’s Mind - Part 3

A story written by: Michael D. O’Brien

________

Chapter III

A Child’s Garden of Paganism

Culture and the Search for Truth

Traditionally, the arts of man have been the medium in which his ideas about life are enfleshed, so as to be examined and understood more fully. In practically all cultures throughout human history, art has been intimately allied with religion, asking the great questions about existence:

“What is Man? Who am I? Why am I? Where am I? And where am I going?”

These questions may be expressed overtly or subconsciously but no one can gaze upon the works of an amazing variety of peoples and civilizations without recognizing that in depictions ranging from the primitive to highly sophisticated, the human soul strains toward an understanding of its ultimate meaning.

Cro-Magnon man crouching in the caves of Lascaux knew that he was something more than just a talking beast, though he would not have been able to articulate this awareness in modern terms. When he smeared charcoal and pigment on the stone walls, depicting the heaving gallop of deer and bison, he was performing a task that has rarely been surpassed for sheer style, beauty and purity of perception. This is a meeting between the knowable and the mysterious unknown, dramatized in the hunt—one creature wrestling for the life he would extract from the death of another. This is more than a news item about food gathering. This is more than a tale about filling the stomach. This portrait speaks to us across thousands of years with an immediacy that communicates the rush of adrenaline, terror, exultation, feasting, power, gratitude, and longing. Depicted here is the search for permanence, and also a witness to the incompleteness that greets us again each morning. This is a probing of the sensitive, mysterious roots of life itself. And the little stick men chasing the galloping herds across the wall are a message about where prehistoric man placed himself in the hierarchy of creation. That he could paint his marvellous quarry, that he could thus obtain a mastery over the dangerous miracle, must have been a great joy and: a puzzle to him. That he portrayed his quarry as beautiful is another message. The tale is only superficially about an encounter with raw animal power. The artist’s deeper tale is about the discovery of the power within himself—man the maker, man the artist! This was not prehistoric man watching primitive television. This was religion.

But primitive religion never stops at the borderlands of mute intuitions about mystery That mythical figure of the “noble savage” never existed, never was innocent. Because man is fallen land the world inhabited with evil spirits that wrestle for his soul, terror and falsehood have always played central roles in pagan religions. It would be impossible here to attempt even a rough outline of the horrors of early pagan cults, to describe their viciousness, the despair of their sacrificial victims, and their shocking synthesis of all that is dehumanizing and degrading in unredeemed human nature. We need mention only a few of the bloodthirsty deities — Moloch, Baal, Astarte, Quetzalcóatl, for example — to recall how very dark the pagan era was.

Man was created “in the image and likeness of God” (Gen. 1:26). Saint John Damascene once wrote that when man fell, he lost the likeness of God, but he did not lose the image of God. For this reason it remained possible, even before the corning of Christ, for man to search for the truth. Thus, as more complex civilizations arose and language and perceptions expanded, man began to reflect more upon the natural world and upon his own extraordinary nature. A kind of natural theology emerged, building upon what he perceived in the order of creation. In time he began to ask himself if the beauty and harmony he saw everywhere about him were pointing to something much higher than the things available to his senses. Thus was philosophy born—the search for truth, the search for wisdom. And though Greek religion never entirely shook off its “mystical” undercurrents (so similar to Indian mysticisms passion to escape the world of sense and suffering, the bodily existence that it saw as a wheel of torment), it gradually approached a less brutal though still imperfect reading of reality. Through Plato especially, the Greek mind turned away from the intoxicating world of appearance toward an other-world of idealized Forms. These eternal Forms, Plato taught, were the dwelling place of “the very Being with which true knowledge is concerned, the colorless, formless, intangible essence, visible only to the mind, the pilot of the soul” (Phaedrus). This was “true Beauty, pure and unalloyed, not clogged with the pollutions of mortality and all the colors and vanities of human life” (Symposium). A more idealized, more humane kind of paganism was emerging, though it still contained elements of life-denying escapism.

With only their intellects and imaginations to guide them, the classical Greeks arrived at an understanding that man does not create himself, nor does he create the world around him on which he depends. Life is a gift, and man owes a debt to the mysterious divine power responsible for it. They accepted that man is flawed and incapable of perfecting himself but believed that by adherence to the powers of reason and beauty he could approach the gods and share in their divine life. Thus, Greek art, preoccupied with embodying myths in harmonious forms, was the visual expression of Greek philosophy.

While the classical pagans were gradually coming closer to an approximate understanding of the shape of existence through natural law, God was drawing another people to that truth through pure revelation. The Hebrews, a small, despised race of Semitic nomads fully immersed in the hot spiritual swamps of the East, could: not yet avail themselves of the cool northern light of reason. They needed God’s direct intervention.

The sacrifice of Isaac was the seminal moment that inaugurated, and the image that represents, the rise of the Western world. It was a radical break with the perceptions of the old age of cultic paganism. When God led Abraham up the mountain of Moriah, he was building upon a well-established cultural pattern. Countless men were going up to the high places all around him and were carrying out their intentions to sacrifice their children. But God led Abraham by another way, through the narrow corridors of his thinking, his presumptions about the nature of reality This was not a typical pagan, greedy for power, for more sons, or for bigger flocks. This was an old man who by his act of obedience would lose everything. He obeyed. An angel stayed his hand, and a new world began. From then on, step by step, God detached him from his old ways of thinking and led him and recreated him, mind and soul. And thus, by losing everything; he gained all. God promised it. Abraham believed it. Upon this hinges everything that followed.

The Old Testament injunction against graven images was God’s long-term method of doing the same thing with a whole people tint: he had done in a short time with Abraham. Few if any were as pure as Abraham. It took about two thousand years to accomplish this abolition of idolatry, and then only roughly, with a predominance of failure. Idolatry was a very potent addiction. And like all addicts, ancient man thought he could not have life without the very thing that was killing him.

Idolatry tends in the direction of the diabolical because it never really comes to terms with original sin. It acknowledges man’s weakness in the face of creation, but it comes up with a solution that is worse than the problem. The idolater does not understand that man is so damaged at a fundamental level that occult power cannot heal him. Magic will not liberate him from his condition. It provides only the illusion of mastery over the unseen forces, the demons and the terrors, fertility and death. Ritual sex and human sacrifice are stolen moments of power over, a temporary relief from submission to. They are, we know by hindsight, a mimicry of divinity, but pagan man did not know that. He experienced it as power sharing, negotiating with the gods. To placate a god by burning his children on its altars was a potent drug. We who have lived with two thousand years of Christianity have difficulty understanding just how potent. God’s absolute position on the matter, his “harshness” in dealing with this universal obsession, is alien to us. We must reread the books of Genesis, Kings, and Chronicles. It is not an edifying portrait of human nature.

When God instructed Moses to raise up the bronze serpent on a staff, promising that all who looked upon it would be healed of serpent bites, he used the best thing at his disposal in an emergency situation, a thing that this half-converted people could easily understand. He tried to teach them that the image itself could not heal them, but by gazing upon it they could focus on its word, its message. The staff represented victory over the serpent, and their faith in the unseen Victor would permit the grace to triumph in their own flesh as well as in their souls. And yet, a few hundred years later we see the God-fearing King Hezekiah destroying Moses’ bronze serpent because it had degenerated into a cult object. The people of Israel were worshiping it and sacrificing to it. Falling into deep forgetfulness, they were once again mistaking the message for the One who sent it. The degree to which they were possessed by the tenacious spirit of idolatry is indicated by numerous passages in the Old Testament, but one of the more chilling ones tells of a king of Israel, a descendent of King Davids, who had returned to the practice of human sacrifice. The Old Testament injunction against images had to be as radical as it was because ancient man was in many ways a different kind of man from us. That late Western man, post-Christian man, is rapidly descending back into the world of the demonic, complete with human sacrifice on an unprecedented scale, is a warning to us about just how powerful is the impulse to idolatry.

The Incarnation and the Image

Jesus Christ was born into a people barely purified of their idolatry. Through a human womb God came forth into his creation. God revealed an image of himself, but so much more than an image—a person with a heart, a mind, a soul, and a face. To our shock and disbelief, it is a human face. It is our own face restored to the original image and likeness of God.

The Old Testament begins with the words, “In the beginning”. In the first chapter of John’s Gospel are the words of a new genesis.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

Here we should note not only the content but the style. The text tells us that Jesus is man and that he is God. But it does so in a form that is beautiful.

Because the Lord had given himself a human face, the old injunction against images could now be reconsidered. Yet it was some time before the New Covenant took hold and began to expand into the world of culture. Jewish Christians were now eating pork and abandoning circumcision. Paul in Athens had claimed for Christ the altar “to the unknown God”. Greek Christians were bringing the philosophical mind to bear upon the Christian mysteries. Roman converts were hiding in the catacombs and looking at the little funerary carvings of shepherds, seeing in them the image of the Good Shepherd. Natural theology began to flower into the theology of revelation. Doves, anchors, fish, and Gospel scenes were at first scratched crudely in the marble and mortar, then with more precision. Hints of visual realism evolved in this early graffiti, but it took some generations before these first buds of a visual art blossomed into a flowering culture. That it would do so was inevitable, because the Incarnation was Gods radical revelation about his divine purposes in creation. Christianity was the religion of the Eucharist, in which word, image, spirit, and flesh, God and man, are reconciled. It is the Eucharist that recreated the world, and yet for the first two centuries the full implications were compressed, like buried seed, waiting for spring.

When the Edict of Milan (A.D. 313) liberated the Church from the underground, an amazing thing happened: within a few years churches arose all over the civilized world. As that compressed energy was released, the seed burst and flowered and bore fruit with an astonishing luxuriance in art and architecture. The forms were dominated by the figure of Christ, whose image was painted on the interior of church domes—the architectural dome representing the dome of the sky, above which is “the waters of the universe”, above which is Paradise. This was no longer the little Roman shepherd boy but a strong Eastern man, dark, bearded, his imperial face set upon a wrestler’s neck, his arms circling around the dome to encompass all peoples, to teach and to rule “the entire cosmos. He is the “Pantocrator”, the Lord reigning over a hierarchical universe, enthroned as its head — one with the Father-Creator and the Holy Spirit. His hands reach out to man in a gesture of absolute love and absolute truth. And on these hands we see the wounds he bears for us.

This is religion. This is art. This is culture. It is a powerful expression of the Christian vision of the very structure of reality itself. Because of the Incarnation, man at last knows his place in the created order of the universe. Man is damaged, but he is a beloved child of the Father. Moreover, creation is good, very good. It is beautiful, suffused with a beauty that reflects back to him who is perfect beauty. It is permeated by grace, the gift of a loving Creator. From this time forward material creation can never again be viewed with the eyes of the old pagan age. It is Gods intention that matter is neither to be despised, on the one hand, nor worshiped, on the other. Neither is it to be ignored, suppressed, violated, or escaped. “All creation is groaning in one great act of giving birth”, says Saint Paul (Rom. 8:22). Everything is to be transfigured in Christ and restored to the Father. Man especially is to be restored to the original unity that he had “in the beginning”.

The New Gnosticism

Man is free to refuse grace. When he does so, he inevitably falls back into sin and error. But because he is a creature of flesh and spirit, he cannot survive long without a spiritual life. For that reason whenever he denies the whole truth of his being, and at the same time rejects the truth of the created order, he must construct his own “vision” to fill the gaping hole within himself. Thus, because the modern era by and large has rejected the Christian revelation and its moral constraints, we are seeing all around us the collapse back into paganism. There are countless false visions emerging, but among the more beguiling of them is the ancient heresy of Gnosticism, which in our times is enjoying something of a comeback. Its modern manifestation has many names and many variations, including a cold rationalist gnosticism (science without conscience) that claims to have no religious elements whatsoever.1 But the more cultic manifestations (their many shadings number in the thousands) can be loosely grouped under the title “New Age Movement”. In order to understand its power over the modern mind we need to examine its roots in ancient Gnosticism.

Gnostic cults predate Christianity, having their sources in Babylonian, Persian, and other Eastern religions, but they spread steadily throughout the Middle East and parts of Europe, corning to prominence during the second century A.D. By the latter half of the third century, their power was in sharp decline, due in no small part to the influence of the teachings of the early Church Fathers, notably Saint Irenaeus. Irenaeus links the Gnostics to the influence of the magician Simon Magus, mentioned in Acts 8:9, where Saint Luke says that Simon “used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria”. This same Simon offered money to the apostles in an attempt to buy the power of the Holy Spirit. When he was rebuked by Peter, he apparently repented, but second-century sources say that his repentance was short-lived and that he persisted in the practice of magic. Early Church writers refer to him as the first heretic; Irenaeus and others call him the father of Gnosticism.2

The Gnostics continued to have influence until the eighth century and never entirely disappeared from the life of the Western world. Strong traces of Gnosticism can be found in the great heresies that plagued the early Church, in Manichaenism (a cult to which Saint Augustine belonged before his conversion), in kabbalism, medieval witchcraft, occult sects, Theosophy, Freemasonry, and offshoots of the latter.

Gnosticism was in essence syncretistic, borrowing elements from various pagan mystery religions. Its beliefs were often wildly contradictory. For example, some Gnostic groups were pantheistic (worshiping nature as divine), and others, the majority, were more strongly influenced by Oriental dualism (that is, the belief that material creation is evil and the divine realm is good). Despite these confusing differences, they shared in common the belief that knowledge (from the Greek word gnosis) was the true saving force. Secret knowledge about the nature of the universe and about the origin and destiny of man would release a “divine spark” within certain enlightened souls and unite them to some distant, unknowable Supreme Being. This Being, they believed, had created the world through Seven Powers, sometimes called the Demiurge. The initiate in the secret knowledge possessed a kind of spiritual map that would guide him to the highest heaven, enabling the soul to navigate the realms of the powers, the demons, and the deities who opposed his ascent. If the initiate could master their names, repeat the magic formulas and rituals, he would by such knowledge (and sheer force of his will) penetrate to the realm of ultimate tight.

Superficially, Gnosticism resembles the Christian doctrine of salvation, but the spirit of Gnosticism is utterly alien to Christianity. The two are fundamentally different in their understanding of God, man’s identity, and the nature of salvation. Cultic gnosis was not, in fact, a pursuit of knowledge as such; it was not an intellectual or scientific pursuit, but rather a supposed “revelation” of hidden mysteries that could be understood only by a superior class of the enlightened. In a word, it was “mystical”. But this mysticism could never come to terms with material creation in the way the Christian faith had. Even the “Christian” Gnostics found it impossible to reconcile their concept of salvation with a historical redeemer, nor could they accept the resurrection of the body. They could only attempt a crude grafting of the figure of Christ into their mythology. In their thinking, Jesus was no more than a divine messenger who brought gnosis in a disguised, symbolic form to simple-minded Christians. The Gnostic Gospel, they believed, was the unveiling of the higher meaning. They were the first perpetrators of the idea that “all religions are merely misunderstood mythologies” — a catchphrase that in our own times has hooked large numbers of New Age devotees, agnostics, and even some naive Christians.

G. K. Chesterton, who was involved briefly with the occult during his youth and later became one of this century’s greatest apologists for the faith, understood the powerful seductions of counterfeit religion. The new heretics, he maintained, were not for the most part purveyors of bizarre sects; they were rather fugitives from a decaying Protestant liberalism or victims of the inroads made by Modernism into the Catholic Church. They were groping about in the dark trying to strike lights from their own supposed “divine spark”, and the effort could appear heroic. The exaltation of the rebel against organized religion, Chesterton knew, was really a romantic illusion. At the time he wrote his book Heretics (published in 1905), the illusion did not appear to be a widespread evil, but he foresaw that it would be the breeding ground for an apostasy that would spread throughout the entire Western world. Each succeeding generation would be fed by a large and growing cast of leading cultural figures who rejected Christianity and made disbelief credible, even admirable. Chesterton understood that culture is a primary instrument of forming a people’s concept of reality. And he warned that when shapers of culture slough off authentic faith, they are by no means freed to be objective. They merely open themselves to old and revamped mythologies. When men cease to believe in God, he observed, they do not then believe in nothing; they will then believe in anything.

Chesterton prophesied that the last and, greatest battles of civilization would be fought against the religious doctrines of the East. This was an odd prophecy, because at the time the influence of both Hinduism and Buddhism was minor, and devotees of the European occult movements were few in number. Yet within a century we find a great many people in the arts, the universities, the communications media, psychology, and other “social sciences” exhibiting strong attraction to, and promoting pagan concepts of, the cosmos. During the past three decades these ideas have flowed with great force into the mainstream of Western culture, surfacing in all aspects of life and even invading Catholic spirituality. One now sees among professed religious, clerics, educators, and lay people a persistent fascination with Jungian psychology, which is based in no small part on Hinduism and ancient Gnosticism. Those who are in doubt of this should read Carl Jung’s autobiography, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, which includes a section of Gnostic reflections titled “Seven Sermons to the Dead”, written when he was in his early forties. Consider also the following passage from his later work The Practice of Psychotherapy: “The unconscious is not just evil by nature, it is also the source of the highest good: not only dark but also light, not only bestial, semihuman and demonic, but superhuman, spiritual, and in the classical sense of the word, ‘divine’.” That Christians give this pseudo-scientific theorizing credibility is symptomatic of grave spiritual confusion. We should not be surprised that many people immersed in Jungianism are also attracted to astrology, Enneagrams, and other “mystical” paths that promise self-discovery and enlightenment. That large numbers of Christians now seem unable to see the contradiction between these concepts and orthodox Christianity is an ominous sign. The new syncretism has been romanticized as the heroic quest for ultimate healing, ultimate unity, ultimate tight — in other words, esoteric “knowledge” as salvation.3

Many Christians are becoming Gnostics without realizing it. Falling to the primeval temptation in the garden of Eden: “You shall be as gods, knowing good and evil”, they succumb to the desire for godlike powers, deciding for themselves what is good and what is evil. The error of Gnosticism is that knowledge can be obtained and used to perfect oneself while circumventing the authority of Christ and his Church. Using a marketing technique that proves endlessly productive, Satan always packages this offer with the original deception, by proclaiming that God and the Church do not want man to have knowledge because it will threaten their power and by asserting that God is a liar (“You will not die”). Authentic Christianity has no quarrel with genuine science, with the pursuit of knowledge for good ends. But because the Church must maintain the whole truth about man, she warns that unless the pursuit of knowledge is in submission to the pursuit of wisdom, it will not lead to good; if it is divorced from God’s law, it will lead to death.

A people cut off from true spiritual vision is condemned to a desolation in which eventually any false spiritual vision will appear religious. Man cannot live long without a spiritual life. Robbed of his own story, he will now listen to any He that is spun in a flattering tale. This is one of the long-term effects of undermining our world of symbols. It is one of the effects of assuming that ideas are mere abstractions—a very dangerous misconception, as the tragic events of our century have proved so often.

Recently, a young artist showed me her new paintings. She is an intelligent and gifted person, and the work was of high quality, visually beautiful. With particular pleasure she pointed out a painting of a woman with dozens of snakes wriggling in her womb. It was a self-portrait, the artist explained. Judaism and Christianity, she went on to say, had unjustly maligned the serpent. And in order to rehabilitate this symbol, it was necessary to take the serpent into her womb, to gestate it, and eventually to bear it into the world as a “sacred feminine icon”. I pointed out thai the meanings of symbols are not merely the capricious choices of a limited culture. We cannot arbitrarily rearrange them like so much furniture in the living room of the psyche. To tamper with these fundamental types is spiritually and psychologically dangerous because they are keystones in the very structure of the mind. They are a language about the nature of good and evil; furthermore, they are points of contact with these two realities. To face evil without the spiritual equipment Christianity has given us is to put oneself in grave danger. But my arguments were useless. She had heard a more interesting story from a famous “theologian”.

This is one of the results of forgetting our past. The record of salvation history in the Old Testament is primarily about the Lord’s effort to wean man of idolatry and to form a people capable of receiving the revelation of Jesus Christ. It was a long, painfully slow process marked by brilliant moments and repeated backslides into paganism. It bears repeating: when Hezekiah inherited the throne, smashed the pagan shrines, and broke up the bronze serpent that Moses had made, the people of God had for centuries already seen abundant evidence of God’s authority and power. What had happened to them? Why did they have such short memories? Was Hezekiah overreacting? Was this a case of alarmism? Paranoia, perhaps?

The bronze serpent, after all, had been made at God’s command. Hezekiah’s act must be understood in the context of the fierce grip that the spirit of idolatry had over the whole world. The people had succumbed to the temptation to blend biblical faith with pagan spirituality. They had forgotten the lesson learned by their ancestors in the exodus from Egypt:

When the savage rage of wild animals overtook them, and they were perishing from the bites of writhing snakes, your wrath did not continue to the end. It was by way of reprimand, lasting a short time, that they were distressed, for they had a saving token to remind them of the commandment of your Law. Whoever turned to it was saved, not by what he looked at, but by you, the universal savior. . . . And by such means you proved to our enemies that it is you who deliver from every evil. . . . For your sons, not even the fangs of venomous serpents could bring them down; your mercy came to their help and cured them. . . . One sting — how quickly healed! — to remind them of your utterances, rather than, sinking into deep forgetfulness, they should be cut off from your kindness. - Wisdom 16: 5-12

What has happened to the people of our times? Why do we have such short memories? It is because over-familiarity and the passage of time blur the sharp edges of reality. Minds and hearts grow lax. Vigilance declines. Again and again man sinks into deep forgetfulness. Serpents and dragons are now tamed like pets by some, worshiped by others. The writer of the book of Revelation has something to say about this. He reminds us with a note of urgency that we are in a war zone. Every human soul is in peril; our every act has moral significance. Our danger increases to the degree that we do not understand the nature of our enemy. Saint John wrote us a tale drawn from a vision of what will come to pass on this earth and in our Church. It was given in a form that can be imparted to the soul of a child or to those who have become as little children, but not in a form that can be mastered by those who fail to approach it with reverence. In chapter 12, John tells us that a dragon has a passion to devour our child:

A great sign appeared in the sky a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. Because she was with child, she cried aloud in pain as she labored to give birth. Then another sign appeared in the sky: it was a huge dragon, flaming red, with seven heads and ten horns; on his head were seven crowns. His tail swept a third of the stars from the sky and hurled them down to the earth. Then the dragon stood before the woman about to give birth, ready to devour her child as soon as it was born.

The early Church Fathers taught that this passage has a twofold meaning: on one level it refers to the birth of Christ; on another it refers to the Church as she labors to bear salvation into the world. This child is, in a sense, every child. The Church is to carry this child as the image of God, transfigured in Christ, and to bring him forth into eternal life. She groans in agony, and the primeval serpent hates her, for he knows that her offspring, protected and grown in her womb, will crush his head.

________

1 This is a false claim, because some scientific theories exhibit the qualities of religious myth and Sanction that way in the thought of many supposedly objective minds, For those interested in learning more about this trend, I suggest five scholarly studies: Eric Voegelin’s Science, Politics, and Gnosticism and his The New Science of Politics, Thomas Molnar’s The New Paganism, Wolfgang Smith’s Cosmos and Transcendence and his Teilhardism and the New Religion, While all these books are a useful contribution to the study of Gnosticism, they are not of equal merit. The latter two tides are unencumbered by certain presumptions that mat the first three.

2 See A Dictionary of Biblical Tradition in English Literature, ed. David Lyle Jeffrey (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1992), p. 714.

3 Readers who wish to learn more about this tragic development should read Fr. Mitchell Pacwa’s Catholics and the New Age (Ann Arbor, Mich.: Servant Publications, 1992).

#landscape with dragons

1 note · View note

kkumarsatyam · 6 years

Text

Science, Religion and …..Hinduism ?

Much of the eastern civilization has not seen the discourse on Science vs. Religion in a similar modus operandi as the contemporary western civilization. Much of the speculation regarding the reason behind this asymmetry is centered around the differences between cultural and societal tendencies towards progress. Some times, it may be driven by prejudice and chauvinism, other times, it may just be a casual stereotyping. But it is existent nevertheless. “Our society is better than theirs, hence it is in their backwardness to stay religious“, this kind of mentality is not scarce. I may attempt to revive the fact that religion is not just another form of a comic-con like activity that we are obsessed with, while maintaining the subjectivity of a practicing Hindu.

It is very natural to romanticize some particular things, people or time. We develop a tendency to pronounce the merits of an entity and find excuses for its drawbacks. Cultural jingoism is merely an exaggerated phenomenon of the same. But often, negative ethnocentrism does emanate from cross cultural interactions and finally xenophobia perpetuates into the system to the extent that individuals develop low esteem towards their parent culture, which ends up being worryingly destructive for that particular culture. The game with religion, is not so simple however.

From an oversimplification of the thought process of major world religions like Christianity and Islam, it seems to me that there exists, a single story, from which most of their doctrines derive. From a scientific perspective, these stories in turn, deliver an impression of having their genesis in morality and intentions for an optimized societal growth.

For example, in ancient world, patriarchy was inevitable in order to achieve optimum economic growth, since states were war-centered and women were required to be the instruments to hold the house and raise the kids. And religion validated this subtle proffer. The examples can be very obviously noticed in Hindu narratives as well. The stories where women have given up their life to defend their husband’s honor, and stories where women have walked through fire to prove their fidelity. All religions have time and again, glorified man worshiping. Since the modern society needs more doctors and engineers, and other gender neutral professionals, there is no wonder that questioning this particular doctrine of all religions has become so obviously necessary.

Same goes with morality as well. To maintain order in the society, a system was needed where there had to be an all-mighty all-powerful God, who is all good and benevolent, and will punish the wrongdoers. The belief in heaven and hell and so many other fables actually led to a morally abiding civilization. Who knows for fact that even if a God exists, he/she may actually be apathetic towards his/her own creation ?

But there is a major difference between Abrahamic and non-Abrahamic religions. The stories and narratives in Abrahamic religions are existentially essential to themselves whereas religions like Greek, Norse and Hinduism do not even fit in the description of “religion” from certain perspective.

To make it clear, I am a Christian only if I wholly believe in the narrative of how Adam and Eve committed the original sin of disobedience by consuming the forbidden fruit in the garden of Eden. And how it damned their pro-genies for all eternity. And how God later incarnated as his own son Jesus, from virgin Mary, who then suffered to atone for the original sin. And how humans, children of Adam and Eve, who are originally sinners by birth, can only be “saved” from eternal damnation by believing in this narrative and believing that Jesus suffered for us. The people believing other wise will be damned to a christian hell for all eternity for the original sin committed by Adam and Eve.

Now, I might insult the sentiments of Christians if I say Jesus was a homosapien born of Mary and Joseph, and not from the divine father. Or if I say that we did not descend from Adam and Eve, but we have evolved from early primates, as suggested by scientific and empirical evidences. This is exactly the much popular discourse in the modern western world where scientific temperament asks for a boycott of religion.

The reason why this discourse is not as popular in pagan cultures is because of the relative importance of their narratives in the entire religion. The stories of Ramayana and Mahabharata have an imperative but non-paramount role in building Hinduism. The doctrines of Hinduism do not ask for an authority to validate someone as a Hindu. So, technically you can be a Hindu without actually believing that somebody really lifted an entire mountain on his pinkie. Or somebody had the power of replacing his decapitated head with a fresh one from the pool of ten heads he had received as a boon. A Hindu, unlike a Christian doesn’t need to believe in this story to call himself a Hindu.

Besides, the narratives themselves have a contrast. While Christianity teaches that we all are originally sinners, Hinduism teaches that we all are originally divine, and that the divine consciousness(Brahman) and the self(Atman) are only separated by illusion(Maya), but are actually all the same. Hinduism just tells us to realize the divinity within ourselves. Yet this description is non mandatory for a Hindu to affiliate to.

So what is Hinduism, or any other religion about? Is it just about God?

Actually, religion is much more than theology or mythology. Religion affects us in our daily lives more than we can imagine. It affects us directly if we let it and it affects us indirectly through the people around us. All religions have a role in fulfilling the necessity of constructing moral obligations. I fully agree with Sam Harris that science is enough as a guide towards morality. But the important thing to remember is that if A can replace or substitute B, it does not mean that A can also replace C. The Science vs Religion discourse makes sense only in a mutually contradicting scenario, where one strictly contradicts the other. It is impossible for Science and Religion to go hand in hand only if the religion is dogmatically resistant to science. But if the religion is resilient, instead of being resistant towards science, mutual co-existence is very much plausible. Religion can have a supernumerary role in determining moral values as it has done for centuries already. But it has to be non-dogmatic.

Now the question naturally arises, that if one does not believe in a creator God and one openly declares to be an agnostic or an atheist, how does religion then catch up? This can be answered by a very unique religion, you guessed it right, Hinduism.

There are six orthodox and three heterodox schools of Indian philosophy. You may be surprised to know that eight out of these nine schools of thought are actually atheistic. Not even agnostic, but strictly atheistic. Only one of these schools (Vedanta) leads way to worshiping a creator deity, and that too in various forms like monotheism, polytheism, pantheism, deism, pan-deism, etc.

Many notable and eminent personalities have identified themselves as Hindu Atheists, such as the eminent economist and Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen. The point to be noted here is that a Hindu Atheist is different from a regular Atheist. It should not be confused with an atheist who is culturally Hindu. For example, a person who does not believe in the existence of God but celebrates Holi and Diwali is not necessarily a Hindu Atheist. From this viewpoint, even Muslim atheists and Christian atheists can exist, which actually sounds nonsensical. Somebody who celebrates thanksgiving and Christmas, but does not believe in the divinity of Christ, can be called an Atheist, but who is culturally christian. But an Atheist cannot be Christian. A Hindu Atheist is somebody who uses specific methods and texts, to build his or her disbelief in the existence of God, just as how believers build their own belief. They adhere to a school of philosophy in the Indian thought, although it isn’t much popular in today’s world. Other atheists are usually the people who are presented with religious teachings, but decide not to consider them seriously.

I personally identify as Agnostic. The idea of confidently claiming that this is the ultimate physical realm, and it does not need an intelligent creator, when science can’t already answer all the questions of the universe, is simply too overwhelming for me. According to me, Atheism has a similar burden of proof to reach as Theism. And, God does need to show more often to take me to the side of strong believers.

So, now that it is clear that Hinduism is not dogmatic or perverse to new ideas, what has the scope reduced to?

It is actually unfair to say that the scope of Hinduism will be reduced. A religion in which the narratives are independent and not much embedded into the central thought will only metamorphose into a perfect pro-scientific culture. Stories will still play an important role. The concepts of Karma Yoga as mentioned in the Bhagvada Purana and the concept of Nyay and Mimasa can have no heresy. Somethings are simply highly objective.

Maybe there was no eighteen day long bloody battle which reddened the soil of Kurukshetra but the strong character developments of the people in the epic of Mahabharata have left behind more lessons than a dozen teachers in our real life. Making the point to argue about the authenticity of the stories is injustice to the composers of these stories. It doesn’t matter if they are true or not, what matters is the way they have dealt with intricate concepts and complex problems of philosophy, and the tremendous teachings they have left behind.

Same cannot be said about the narratives of other major world religions though, since their narratives are binding to their doctrines. And in such a case it is not irrelevant to argue about the authenticity of such a narrative, since logic may be compromised with such an approach. The mythology shall have a greater chance of survival in such religions which do not dogmatize their narratives, as the scientific age augments further. Religion is supposed to be a guide instead of a rule-book.

Hinduism has always been a great tool of worship for believers through the concept of personalized Gods and Goddesses but it is no doubt that it shall remain as great a tool for skeptics and rationals too. It shall provide discipline to skeptics (what religions mostly do), and provide both hope and discipline to believers. And to people like me, it shall continue to be a source of mysterious admiration. It is no doubt, that one can be religious without being spiritual.

Kumar Satyam July 11th 2018

0 notes

janowbi · 7 years

Text

Then God said, “Kill.”

THEN GOD SAID, “KILL.”: A Christian Justification for the Slaughter of the Canaanites by Jose Manuel V. Obmerga BTh

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

Abstract

I. Introduction.

II. In Light of the Ancient Near East Rhetoric.

III. In Light of the Attributes of God.

A. The Sovereign God.

B. The Just God.

1. The Depravity of the Canaanite Culture.

2. In God’s Time.

3. Genocide/Ethnic Cleansing?.

IV. In Light of the Bigger Picture.

V. Conclusion.

VI. Bibliography.

Bible Passage:

Thus Joshua struck all the land, the hill country and the Negev and the lowland and the slopes and all their kings. He left no survivor, but he utterly destroyed all who breathed, just as the Lord, the God of Israel, had commanded.

- Joshua 10:40 (NASB)

ABSTRACT

This paper sought to defend and justify God’s command to slaughter the Canaanites found in Joshua 10:40. Through a careful examination of the language of the Ancient Near East and the scriptural clues that can be gleaned from the entire biblical conquest narrative, this paper showed that the obliteration language used by the writer of Joshua is most likely hyperbolic. This paper also demonstrated that the divine sanction is not incompatible with God’s perfect character by appealing to the divine attributes of sovereignty and justice and by looking at the incorrigible depravity of the Canaanites. This paper also attempted to interpret Joshua 10:40 in light of the biblical metanarrative - the outworking of God’s plan for universal redemption through the Israelites – to further strengthen the defense.

I. INTRODUCTION

In the beginning of the 21st Century, the world was welcomed by a horrendous act of terror in the name of religion – the attack on World Trade Center in New York. Since then, religious adherents, including Christians, have been receiving a barrage of aggressive criticisms, one being perpetrators of violence.[1] Some of these criticisms are being galvanized by the seemingly repugnant character of God revealed in some Old Testament passages, particularly those that talk about the Israelites’ taking of the Promised Land. This prompted prominent atheist Richard Dawkins to vituperatively describe the Judeo-Christian God as a “genocidal” maniac.[2] Theologian-turned-atheist Gerd Ludeman branded the divine command as “extremely offensive.”[3]

Undeniably, the rise of atheism and militant Islam has made the question of the Bible’s textual and moral authority loud in this postmodern culture. Christians may try to give excellent philosophical arguments for God’s existence but ultimately the challenge comes back to them - given the divine command to kill, can God’s moral portrait still be considered a positive one?

It is the purpose of this article to try to justify and defend God’s command to slaughter the Canaanites, focusing on one passage, Joshua 10:40, but interpreting it in light of the entire biblical metanarrative.

II. IN LIGHT OF THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST RHETORIC

Prima facie, Joshua 10:40 seems to describe a very harsh, literal and overly dramatic conquest, a picture of prodigious violence and blood. “Was this really sanctioned by the God I worship?,” a shocked and puzzled fresh convert may validly ask. However, a careful inspection of the entire biblical conquest narrative and the ancient Near East (ANE) military rhetoric can give light to this conundrum.

First, the Bible clearly shows that the process of taking the land would be a gradual one.

The Lord your God will clear away these nations before you little by little; you will not be able to put an end to them quickly, for the wild beasts would grow too numerous for you. – Deuteronomy 7:22

Also, if the Canaanites were completely obliterated in Joshua 10, why would one read warnings to the Israelites about intermarriage and forming treaties with them a few chapters later?

For if you ever go back and cling to the rest of these nations, these which remain among you, and intermarry with them, so that you associate with them and they with you, know with certainty that the Lord your God will not continue to drive these nations out from before you; but they will be a snare and a trap to you, and a whip on your sides and thorns in your eyes, until you perish from off this good land which the Lord your God has given you. – Joshua 23:12-13

Furthermore, the early chapters of Judges reveal that the conquest is far from complete. The Canaanites assumed to be “utterly destroyed” were still around when all was said and done.

Afterward the sons of Judah went down to fight against the Canaanites living in the hill country and in the Negev and in the lowland. - Judges 1:9

So the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and He said, “Because this nation has transgressed My covenant which I commanded their fathers and has not listened to My voice, I also will no longer drive out before them any of the nations which Joshua left when he died, in order to test Israel by them, whether they will keep the way of the Lord to walk in it as their fathers [a]did, or not.” So the Lord allowed those nations to remain, not driving them out quickly; and He did not give them into the hand of Joshua. – Judges 2:20-23

With these observations, Gordon McConville concluded that Joshua “is not offering a simple conquest model, but rather a mixed picture of success and failure, sudden victory and slow, compromising progress.”[4] The conquest was not a one-time-big-time event where the all-consuming Israelites descended upon Canaan and destroyed literally everything in its wake. Rather, it was a process of slow infiltration. Therefore, the phrases “left no survivor” and “utterly destroyed all who breathed” are clearly an exaggeration and ought not to be taken literally.

Now, one might accuse Joshua of being deceptive but is it? No. Paul Copan argued that the writer of Joshua used the language of conventional warfare rhetoric.[5] According to him, ANE military accounts readily used obliteration languages even when the event did not literally happen that way. As with other ANE warfare literatures, Joshua’s ostensible purpose is to demonstrate the magnitude of the military success.[6] In fact, this methodology is still in use today. A sports news anchor may report that the West Coast Eagles “completely slaughtered” the other football team. Surely, his/her watchers will not interpret the phrase as actually physically killing the opposing team. Rather, they understand that he/she is reporting an overwhelming victory. Similarly, the writer of Joshua utilized the language that his contemporaries would have understood as hyperbole.

Now, even if the exaggerated rhetoric explanation makes the emotional weight of the passage lighter, one would still be troubled enough to ask why the all-loving God would command such atrocity. The following section will deal with this question.

III. IN LIGHT OF THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD

A. The Sovereign God

Fundamental to a right theologizing of Joshua 10:40 is the realization of the sovereignty of God over life. Since God is the author of life, He is the only one who has the right to take it. In fact, one tends to forget that God takes human lives every day. It is called death. Since humans cannot create life, they do not have the right to take it. Indeed, without the command of God (who determines objective moral values and duties), the Israelites would not have been justified to kill.[7]

B. The Just God

It is also important to highlight the fact that God judges evil. Precisely because He is good, loving and holy, He will not allow a perpetrator to go unpunished. Even if that perpetrator escaped human justice, divine justice will stand. God can bring judgment through natural disasters[8] or diseases[9] but He can also judge by means of war.

Having emphasized that God is just, it is timely to ask, “Did He act justly in His treatment of the Canaanites?”

1. The Depravity of the Canaanite Culture

A close examination of the Canaanite culture reveals that the Canaanites were far from innocent. Clay Jones argued that idolatry, incest, adultery, homosexuality, bestiality and even child sacrifice were rampantly promoted in Canaan.[10] Their idolatrous worldview heavily influenced their sinful practices for whatever their gods do, they do.[11] No wonder God sanctioned their extermination for this will not only protect His chosen people from being contaminated by their abominable practices[12] (supposedly) but also judge them for their wickedness. They already reached the point of no return - an irredeemable state of moral corruption.[13] They were ripe for divine judgment.[14]

2. In God’s Time

Did God deal with them impatiently? No. In fact, Scripture reveals that God had given them hundreds of years to repent.[15] During this waiting period, the Canaanites were given ample evidence of God’s power and greatness[16] but they still did not submit to His authority. The Old Testament does not reveal an impatient God but rather a merciful, loving and long-suffering God[17] who “takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked.”[18] Judgment was His last resort and it is unfortunate that He had to come to that point with the Canaanites.

3. Genocide/Ethnic Cleansing?

Did God or the Israelites committed genocide or ethnic cleansing? Is Dawkins right to call them xenophobes?[19] No. Ethnic cleansing, by definition, is driven by racial hatred.[20] However, from the beginning, God promised Abraham that all the earth will be blessed through his offspring.[21] And then in Exodus, a “mixed multitude” left with Israel from Egypt.[22] In Numbers, Moses married a dark-skinned Ethiopian/Cushite.[23] In Leviticus, God commanded to show concern for non-Israelites.[24] The rules of war given in Deuteronomy required the Israelite army to grant a city an opportunity to surrender without bloodshed.[25] Also, whenever they attack a city, women and children should be spared and must be cared for.[26] Indeed, Rahab, a Gentile, and her family were spared from judgment[27] and even got included in Jesus’ genealogy.[28] Clearly, God and the Israelites were not racists! Also note that throughout the Old Testament, the Israelites were often on the receiving end of God’s judgment. The conquest was not an act of genocide stemming from arrogant ethnocentrism but rather an act of a just God who shows no partiality.[29]

Given the generous amount of time given for them to repent, the Canaanites’ absolutely hopeless decadence, and the serious threat they bring to thwart God’s grand plan of universal redemption, God definitely acted justly in commanding the purge.

IV. IN LIGHT OF THE BIGGER PICTURE

God’s overarching goal is to bring universal salvation through His chosen people. With this in mind, He was overly protective of the Israelites. His difficult command to kill and bring judgment to the Canaanites in order to protect His people and establish them as a nation was a unique situation that happened only within a limited time frame. In fact, Copan noted that post-Joshua (except 1 Samuel 15:3), all God-sanctioned battles were defensive[30] (some offensive battles took place but these were not commanded). Now that salvation is readily available to all nations through Jesus, Christians are now to follow Christ’s command to love their neighbors[31], including their enemies,[32] leaving judgment up to God when He returns the second and final time.[33]

V. CONCLUSION

It has been demonstrated that a simple face value reading of Joshua 10:40 is insufficient to correctly interpret its meaning. A careful consideration of the ANE warfare rhetoric is needed to understand the real gravity of the passage’s content. It is also crucial for 21st century readers to interpret it in light of the entire biblical metanarrative in order to have a deeper and, indeed, right understanding of why the sovereign God of love and justice did what He did.

“…Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” – Genesis 18:25

VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Chamberlain, Paul. Why People Don't Believe: Confronting Seven Challenges to Christian Faith. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2011

Copan, Paul. Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2011.

Copan, Paul. “Yahweh Wars and the Canaanites: Divinely-Mandated Genocide or Corporate Capital Punishment?.” Philosophia Christi Vol. 11, No. 1 (2009): 73 – 90.

Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2006.

Fouts, David M. “A Defense of the Hyperbolic Interpretation of Large Numbers in the Old Testament.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40/3 (September 1997): 377 – 387.

Jones, Clay. “We Don’t Hate Sin So We Don’t Understand What Happened to the Canaanites: An Addendum to ‘Divine Genocide’ Arguments.” Philosophia Christi Vol. 11, No. 1 (2009): 53 – 72.

McConville, Gordon. “Joshua.” In The Oxford Bible Commentary, ed. John Barton and John Muddiman, 158 - 176. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Moreland, James Porter, and William Lane Craig. Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003. Kindle Electronic Edition.

Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries. “Ethnic Cleansing.” http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/ethnic- cleansing?q=ethnic+cleansing [accessed August 20, 2015].

Rae, Scott B. Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Pub. House, 2009.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] For a detailed discussion of the various accusations being thrown at Christianity and at religion in general, see Paul Chamberlain, Why People Don't Believe: Confronting Seven Challenges to Christian Faith (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2011), 19 – 45.

[2] Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2006), 31.

[3] Gerd Ludemann quoted in Paul Copan, Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2011), 158.

[4] Gordon McConville, “Joshua,” in The Oxford Bible Commentary, ed. John Barton and John Muddiman (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 159.

[5] Paul Copan, Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2011), 171.

[6] The same purpose has been defended by David Fouts on his interpretation of large numbers in the Old Testament. See David M. Fouts, “A Defense of the Hyperbolic Interpretation of Large Numbers in the Old Testament,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40/3 (September 1997): 377 – 387.

[7] For an in-depth philosophical defense of God’s goodness and the divine command theory, see J.P. Moreland and William Lane Craig, Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), Kindle Electronic Edition: Chapter 26, p529 – 532.

[8] Numbers 16:30-34

[9] 2 Chronicles 26:19-20

[10] Clay Jones, “We Don’t Hate Sin So We Don’t Understand What Happened to the Canaanites: An Addendum to ‘Divine Genocide’ Arguments,” Philosophia Christi Vol. 11, No. 1 (2009): 55-66.

[11] Ibid, 57.

[12] Deuteronomy 12:29-31; Deuteronomy 20:16-18; Leviticus 18

[13] Paul Copan, “Yahweh Wars and the Canaanites: Divinely-Mandated Genocide or Corporate Capital Punishment?,” Philosophia Christi Vol. 11, No. 1 (2009): 76.

[14] Genesis 15:16

[15] Exodus 12:41

[16] Joshua 2:10-11, Joshua 9:9-10, Romans 1:19-20.

[17] Psalm 103:8; See also Psalm 145:8; Joel 2:13; Jonah 4:2-3.

[18] Ezekiel 33:11

[19] Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2006), 247.

[20] Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries, “Ethnic Cleansing,” http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/ethnic-cleansing?q=ethnic+cleansing [accessed August 20, 2015].

[21] Genesis 12:3

[22] Exodus 12:38

[23] Numbers 12:1

[24] Leviticus 19:34

[25] Deuteronomy 20:10

[26] Deuteronomy 20:14

[27] Joshua 6:23

[28] Matthew 1:5

[29] Romans 2:11

[30] Paul Copan, “Yahweh Wars and the Canaanites: Divinely-Mandated Genocide or Corporate Capital Punishment?,” Philosophia Christi Vol. 11, No. 1 (2009): 83.

[31] Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27

[32] Luke 6:27, Mark 11:25

[33] For a more thorough explanation of why Christians cannot use the conquest narratives to justify mass killing and war in the 21st Century, see Scott B. Rae, Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics, 3rd ed (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Pub. House, 2009), 304 – 305.

#apologetics

0 notes