Literary History of Persia
Yüklə 1,57 Mb.
|
| Baḥru’l-‘Ulúm (“the Ocean of Learning”) (No. 27), was born in 1155/1742-3, and appears to have died about 1240/1824-5.
22. Sayyid Muḥammad Báqir ibn Sayyid Muḥammad Taqí of Rasht, entitled Ḥujjatu’l-Islám (No. 26), has been already mentioned for his severity in inflicting punishments for infractions of the Sharí‘at. He was wealthy as well as influential, and, according to the Rawḍátu’l-Jannát (p. 125), spent 100,000 “legal dinars733” in building a great mosque in the Bídábád quarter of Iṣfahán. He was born about 1180/1766-7, went to ‘Iráq to pursue his studies at the age of sixteen or seventeen, returned to Iṣfahán in 1216 or 1217 (1801-3), and died on Sunday the 2nd of Rabí‘ i, 1260 (March 23, 1844). According to his namesake, the author of the Rawḍátu’l-Jannát, his death was mourned for a whole year by the people (presumably the devout and orthodox only!), because none after him dared or was able to enforce the rigours of the Ecclesiastical Law to the same extent. By a strange coincidence, the “Manifestation” of Mírzá ‘Alí the Báb, and the subsequent rise of that heresy which did so much to weaken the power of the orthodox Shí‘a faith, took place just two months after his death. 23. Shaykh Aḥmad ibn Zaynu’d-Dín ibn Ibráhím al-Aḥsá’í, the founder of the Shaykhí school or sect, spent most of his life at Yazd, whence he went by way of Iṣfahán to Kirmánsháh. There he remained until the death of the [page 411] governor of that city, Prince Muḥammad ‘Alí Mírzá, son of Fatḥ-‘Alí Sháh, who favoured him and invited him to make his abode there. He then retired to the Holy Shrines of ‘Iráq, where he composed most of his numerous works, of which the most famous are the Sharḥu’z-Ziyárati’l-Kabíra and the Sharḥu’l-Fawá’id. He vehemently opposed Mullá Ṣadrá, Mullá Muḥsin-i-Fayḍ, and the Ṣúfís, but was himself denounced as a heretic by Ḥájji Mullá Muḥammad Taqí of Qazwín, whose death at the hands of a Bábí assassin about A.D. 1847 earned for him the title of “the Third Martyr” (Shahíd-i-Thálith). Shaykh Aḥmad died in 1243/1827-8, being then nearly ninety years of age734. 24. Mullá Aḥmad-i-Niráqí, who died of cholera in 1244/1828-9, was a poet as well as a theologian, and composed a Persian poem entitled Ṭáqdís in imitation of the Mathnawí of Jalálu’d-Dín Rúmí. His poetical name was Ṣafá’í, and an article is consecrated to him in the Majma‘u’l-Fuṣaḥá (vol. ii, p. 330). 25. Ḥájji Mullá Hádí of Sabzawár735, the last great Persian philosopher, also wrote poetry under the nom de guerre of Asrár. He was born in 1212/1797-8 and died in 1295/1878. 
CHAPTER IX. PROSE WRITERS UNTIL A.D. 1850. Oriental writers on the art of rhetoric classify prose writings, according to their form, into three varieties, plain (‘árí), rhymed (muqaffá), and cadenced (musajja‘). We may divide them more simply into natural and artificial. To us, though not always to our ancestors, as witness the Euphuists of Elizabethan days, artificial prose is, as a rule, distasteful; and if we can pardon it in a work like the Arabic Maqámát of al-Ḥarírí or the Persian Anwár-i-Suhaylí, written merely to please the ear and display the writer’s command of the language, we resent it in a serious work containing information of which we have need. It is a question how far style can be described absolutely as good or bad, for tastes differ not only in different countries but in the same country at different periods, and a writer deemed admirable by one generation is often lightly esteemed by the next, since, as the Arab proverb says, “Men resemble their age more than they do their fathers736.” But when a serious historian takes a page to say what could be easily expressed in one or two lines, we have a right to resent the wilful waste of time inflicted upon us by his misdirected ingenuity. Before the Mongol Invasion in the thirteenth century Persian prose was generally simple and direct, and nothing could be more concise and compact than such books as Bal‘amí’s Persian version of Ṭabarí’ s great history, the Siyásat-náma of the Niẓámu’l-Mulk, the Safar-náma of Náṣir-i-Khusraw, the Qábús-náma, or the Chahár Maqála. Mongol, Tartar and Turkish influences [page 413] seem to have been uniformly bad, favouring as they did flattery and bombast. The historian Waṣṣáf, whose chronicle was presented to Úljáytú in A.D. 1312737, was the first great offender, and unhappily served as a model to many of his successors. In recent times there has been a great improvement, partly due to the tendency, already remarked in the case of verse, to take as models the older writers who possessed a sounder and simpler taste than those of the post-Mongol period, and partly to the recent development of journalism, which, if not necessarily conducive to good style, at least requires a certain concision and directness. In point of style, arrangement, and, above all, documentation the quite recent but little-known “History of the Awakening of the Persians” (Ta’ríkh-i-Bídárí-yi-Írániyán) of the Náẓimu’l-Islám of Kirmán (1328/1910), unfortunately never completed, is incomparably superior to the more ambitious general histories of Riḍá-qulí Khán and the Lisánu’l-Mulk (the Supplement to Mírkhwánd’s Rawḍatu’ṣ-Ṣafá and the Násikhu’t-Tawáríkh) compiled some fifty years earlier. Of prose works written simply to display the linguistic attainments and rhetorical ingenuities of the authors I do not propose to perpetuate the memory, or to say more than that, when they embody historical and other matter of sufficient value to render them worth translating, they should, in my opinion, if they are to be made tolerable to European readers, be ruthlessly pruned of these flowers of eloquence. As an instance I will take one passage from that very useful and by no means very florid history of the early Ṣafawí period the Aḥsanu’t-Tawáríkh (985/1577-8), of which I have made such extensive use in the first part of this volume. It describes the war [page 414] waged on the blind Sháhrukh Dhu’l-Qadar by Muḥammad Khán Ustájlú in the spring of 914/1508-9, and begins thus738:  739
“In the spring, when the Rose-king with pomp and splendour turned his face to attack the tribes of the Basil, and, with thrusts of his thorn-spear, drove in rout from the Rose-garden the hibernal hosts — A roar740 arose from the cloud-drums, the army of the basils was stirred; The cloud contracted its brows, and drew Rustam-bows741 for the contest; The flowering branches raised their standards, the basils prepared their cavalry and their hosts; The cloud in its skirts bore in every direction hail-stones for the head of Afrásiyáb — Khán Muḥammad Ustájlú encamped in summer quarters at Márdín.” [page 415] All this could much better be said in one line: 
“In the spring Khán Muḥammad Ustájlú encamped in summer quarters at Márdín.” Graceful poetic fancies are all very well in their proper place, but in a serious history they are inappropriate and irritating. The trouble is that, as has been remarked already, nearly all literary Persians, and consequently historians, are poets or poetasters, and they unhappily find it easier and more entertaining to mix poetry with their history than history with their poetry, even their professedly historical poetry. In discussing the later prose literature of Persia I shall therefore confine myself to what has substantial value apart from mere formal elegance, and shall treat of it, according to subject, under the five following headings: (1) Theology. (2) Philosophy. (3) The Sciences — mathematical, natural and occult. (4) History — general, special and local. (5) Biography and autobiography. including travels. 1. Theology.
The great achievement of the Shí‘a doctors of the later Ṣafawí period, such as the Majlisís, was their popularization of the Shí‘a doctrine and historical Anschauung in the vernacular. They realized that to reach the people they must employ the language of [page 417] the people, and that in a simple form, and they reaped their reward in the intense and widespread enthusiasm for the Shí‘a cause which they succeeded in creating. We have already seen742 how few Shí‘a books were available when Sháh Isma‘íl first established that doctrine as the national faith of Persia, and, according to the Rawḍátu’l-Jannát743, Mullá Muḥammad Taqí Majlisí was “the first to publish the Shí‘a traditions after the appearance of the Ṣafawí dynasty.” His even more eminent son Mullá Muḥammad Báqir compiled on this subject the immense Biḥáru’l-Anwár (“Oceans of Light”) in Arabic, and in Persian the following works744: ‘Aynu’l-Ḥayát (“the Fountain of Life”), containing exhortations to renunciation of the world; Mishkátu’l-Anwár (“the Lamp of Lights”); Ḥilyatu’l-Muttaqín (“the Ornament of the Pious”), on example and conduct; Ḥayátu’l-Qulúb (“the Life of Hearts”) in three parts, the first on the Prophets before Muḥammad, the second on the Prophet Muḥammad, and the third on the Twelve Imáms, but only part of it was written and it was never completed; Tuḥfatu’z-Zá’irín (“the Pilgrims’ Present”); Jalá’u’l-‘Uyún (“the Clearing of the Eyes”); Miqbásu’l-Maṣábíḥ, on the daily prayers; Rabí‘u’l-Asábí‘ (“the Spring of Weeks”); Zádu’l-Ma‘ád (“Provision for the Hereafter and numerous smaller treatises. Oddly enough one of the most notable of his Persian theological works, the Ḥaqqu’l-Yaqín (“Certain Truth”), which was compiled in 1109/1698, and beautifully printed at Ṭihrán so early as 1241/1825, is omitted from this list. The late M. A. de Biberstein Kazimirski began to translate this book into French, but abandoned his idea, sent his manuscript translation to me, and urged me to continue and complete the work he had begun; [page 418] a task which, unfortunately, I have never had leisure to accomplish, though it would be well worth the doing, since we still possess no comprehensive and authoritative statement of Shí‘a doctrine in any European language. The basic works of the Shí‘a faith, namely the Qur’án (the Word of God) and the Traditions (the sayings and deeds of the Prophet and the Imáms), are naturally in Arabic. The numerous Persian religious treatises may be roughly classified in three groups — the doctrinal, the historical, and the legal. In practice doctrine and history are almost inevitably intermixed, especially in the sections dealing with the Imámate, where attempts are made to prove that the Prophet intended ‘Alí to succeed him; that Abú Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmán were usurpers of his rights; that the Imáms were twelve in number, no more and no less, and that they were the twelve recognized by the “Sect of the Twelve” (Ithná-‘Ashariyya) and none other. Thus while the earlier sections of these doctrinal works dealing with God and His Attributes border on Metaphysics, the later sections are largely composed of historical or quasi-historical matter, while the concluding portions, dealing with Heaven, Hell, the Last Judgement, and the like, are eschatological. The style of these books is generally very simple and direct, and totally devoid of rhetorical adornment, but commonly affects an imitation of the Arabic idiom and order of words, not only in passages translated from that language, but throughout, as though these theologians had so steeped their minds in the Qur’án and the Traditions that even when using the Persian language the thought must follow Arabic lines. The following example, taken from the beginning of the second volume of the Ḥaqqu’l-Yaqín745, will suffice to illustrate this peculiarity:
Another class of Shí‘a theological writings consists of polemical works directed against the Sunnis, the Ṣúfís, the Shaykhís, the Bábís and Bahá’ís, and the Christians. The Sunnís are naturally attacked in all manuals of doctrine with varying degrees of violence, for from Nádir Sháh downwards to Abu’l-Ḥasan Mírzá (“Ḥájji Shaykhu’r-Ra’ís”), an eager contemporary advocate of Islamic unity747, no one has been able to effect an appeasement between these two great divisions of Islám, and a more tolerant attitude in the younger generation of Persians, so far as it exists, is due rather to a growing indifference to Islám itself than to a religious reconciliation. Attacks on the Ṣúfís, especially on their Pantheism (Waḥdatu’l-Wujúd), are also often met with in general manuals of Shí‘a doctrine, but several independent denunciations of their doctrines exist, such as Áqá Muḥammad ‘Alí Bihbihání’s Risála-i-Khayrátiyya748, which led to a violent persecution of the Ṣúfís and the death of several of their leaders, such as Mír Ma’ṣúm, Mushtáq ‘Alí and Núr ‘Alí Sháh749; and the Maṭá‘inu’ṣ-Ṣúfiyya of Muḥammad Rafí‘ ibn Muḥammad Shafí‘ of Tabríz, composed in 1221/1806750. The latter even has recourse to the Gospels to prove his case, quoting Christ’s saying “Beware [page 421] of them which come to you in sheep’s clothing (ṣuf, wool), but within they are ravening wolves.” The Islamo-Christian controversy has also produced a considerable literature in Persian, which has been discussed by Professor Samuel Lee in his Controversial Tracts on Christianity and Mohammedanism (Cambridge, 1824). Several such works were written in the first quarter of the seventeenth century by Sayyid Aḥmad ibn Zaynu’l-‘Ábidín al-‘Alawí, one in refutation of Xavier’s Á’ína-i-Ḥaqq-numá (“Truth-revealing Mirror”), and another directed against the Jews. Later the proselytizing activities of Henry Martyn the missionary called forth replies from Mírzá Ibráhím and others751. The Shaykhí sect or school derived its origin and its name from Shaykh Aḥmad ibn Zaynu’d-Dín al-Aḥsá’í, a native not of Persia but of Baḥrayn, who died, according to the Rawḍátu’l-Jannát752, at the advanced age of ninety in 1243/1827-8, and was succeeded by Sayyid Káẓim of Rasht, who numbered amongst his disciples both Sayyid ‘Alí Muḥammad the Báb, the originator of the Bábí sect, and many of those who subsequently became his leading disciples, and Ḥájji Muḥammad Karím Khán of Kirmán, who continued and developed the Shaykhí doctrine. This doctrine, essentially a rather extreme form of the Shí‘a faith, was accounted heterodox by several eminent mujtahids, such as Ḥájji Mullá Muḥammad Taqí of Qazwín, the uncle and father-in-law of the celebrated Bábí heroine Qurratu’l-‘Ayn, whose hostility to the Shaykhís and Bábís ultimately cost him his life, but earned for him from the orthodox Shí‘a the title of the “Third Martyr” (Shahíd-i-Thálith)753. Some account of the
The Bábí-Bahá’í movement, of which the effects have now extended far beyond the Persian frontiers even to America, has naturally given rise to a far more extensive literature, which forms a study in itself, and which I have discussed elsewhere756. Of the Báb’s own writings the Persian Bayán and the Dalá’il-i-sab‘a (“Seven Proofs”) are the most important of those composed in Persian757. Bahá’u’lláh’s Íqán (“Assurance”) [page 423] is the earliest reasoned apology, and was written before he advanced his claim to be “He whom God shall manifest.” His later “Tablets” (Alwáḥ), many of which are in Persian, are innumerable; amongst them the “Epistles to the Kings” (Alwáḥ-i-Saláṭín) are the most interesting and important. There is also an abundant Azalí literature, and each dichotomous schism has given rise to a fresh crop of controversial pamphlets. Of systematic refutations of the Bábí and Bahá’í doctrines in Persian the most elaborate are the Iḥqáqu’l-Ḥaqq (“Verification of the Truth”) of Áqá Muḥammad Taqí of Hamadán758, composed about 1326/1908; and the Minháju’ṭ-Ṭálibín759 of Ḥájji Ḥusayn-qulí, an Armenian convert to Islám, lithographed at Bombay in 1320/1902. The Bábís and Bahá’ís have developed a somewhat distinctive style of their own in Persian which possesses considerable merits. Some of Bahá’u’lláh’s “Tablets” (Alwáḥ) addressed to Zoroastrian enquirers are even written in pure Persian without admixture of Arabic. Their most important works, like the Kitáb-i-Aqdas (“Most Holy Book”), are, however, written in Arabic. From the point of view of style, both in Persian and Arabic, an immense improvement was effected by Bahá’u’lláh, for the style of Mírzá ‘Alí Muḥammad the Báb was, as Gobineau says, “terne, raide, et sans éclat,” “dull, stiff, and devoid of brilliance.” 2. Philosophy. Philosophy (Ḥikmat, Filsafa) is defined by the Muslims as “a knowledge of the true essence of things, as they really are, so far as is possible to human capacity.” It is divided into two branches, the theoretical (naẓarí), and the practical (‘amalí). The former comprises Mathematics (Riyáḍiyyát), Natural Science (‘Ilmu’ṭ-Ṭabí‘at), and Metaphysics (Má wará’ba‘d or fawq [page 424] aṭ-Ṭabí‘at); the latter Ethics (Tahdhíbu’l-Akhláq), Economics (Tadbíru’l-Manzil), and Politics (Siyasatu’l-Mudun). The three best-known Persian treatises on Practical Philosophy, namely the Akhláq-i-Náṣirí, Akhláq-i-Jalálí, and Akhláq-i-Muḥsiní760, all belong to the period preceding that which we are now discussing, and I do not recollect any important Persian work on the subject which has appeared since. We may therefore confine our attention here to the first, or theoretical, branch of Philosophy, and in this section to Metaphysics, which on the one hand borders on Theology, and on the other on Science. It is generally admitted that a very close connection existed between the Shí‘a and the Mu‘tazila761 in early ‘Abbásid times, and it is well known that the latter were the most enlightened and philosophic of the theological schools of Islám, and that in particular they were the champions of Free Will against the rigid Determinism which subsequently triumphed, to the great detriment of the intellectual development of the Muhammadan world. Those sections of Shí‘ite theological works which treat of the Nature and Attributes of God are, therefore, of a more philosophical character than is commonly the case in Sunní books of a similar type. Muslim Philosophy, like Muslim Science, admittedly and avowedly owes almost everything to the Greeks. Its development from the middle of the eighth century of the Christian era, when under the early ‘Abbásid Caliphs the work of translating into Arabic the works of the most eminent and celebrated Greek thinkers began, down to the deadly blow inflicted on Islamic civilization by the Mongol Invasion and the destruction of [page 425] Baghdád and the ‘Abbásid Caliphate in the middle of the thirteenth century, has been repeatedly traced by European scholars. For a broad general view, characterizing the chief exponents of the different schools of Islamic thought, Dr T J de Boer’s History of Philosophy in Islam, translated into English by E. R. Jones, may be recommended to the general reader. It will be observed that only one of the thinkers mentioned in that book, Ibn Khaldún (b. A.D. 1332 at Tunis, d. A.D. 1406 at Cairo), flourished after the fall of the ‘Abbásid Caliphate, and he was a unique and isolated phenomenon, “without forerunners and without successors762.” The question we have to answer here is, has Persia, which in earlier times produced so large a proportion of the so-called “Arabian Philosophers763,” produced any metaphysician of note since the beginning of the sixteenth century? To answer this question one would need to combine with a competent knowledge of Arabic and Persian a grasp of the history and subject-matter not only of “Arabian” but of Greek Philosophy (and, indeed, of Philosophy in general) to which I cannot lay claim. This, indeed, constitutes the difficulty of judging the value of the scientific literature of Islám. How many of those who admire the Persian quatrains of ‘Umar Khayyám can follow M. Woepcke in the appreciation of his Arabic algebraical treatises? A knowledge of Arabic does not suffice to enable us to decide whether ar-Rází or Ibn Síná (Avicenna) was the greater physician. Much valuable work of this technical character has been done in Germany, by Dr E. Wiedemann of Erlangen (Optics, Physics, etc.), Dr Julius Hirschberg of Berlin (Ophthalmology), Dr Max Simon (Anatomy), and others, but very much remains to [page 426] be done, and few scholars are competent to undertake it. As regards Philosophy in Persia during the last three or four centuries, all one can say is that half a dozen thinkers have established a great reputation amongst their countrymen, but how far this reputation is deserved is a question which has not yet received a satisfactory answer, These thinkers are, in chronological order, as follows: (1) Shaykh Bahá’u’d-Dín al- ‘Ámilí (d. 1031/1622); (2) Mír Dámád (d. 1041/1631-2); (3) Mullá Ṣadrá (d. 1050/1640-1; (4) Mullá Muḥsin-i-Fayḍ (d. after 1091/1680); (5) Mullá ‘Abdu’r-Razzáq al-Láhijí; and, in quite modern times, (6) Ḥájji Mullá Hádí of Sabzawár (d. 1295/1878). Now Muslim philosophers are of two sorts, those whose philosophy is conditioned by and subordinated to revealed Religion, and those whose speculations are not so limited. The former are the Mutakallimún or Ahl-i-Kalám, the Schoolmen or Dialecticians764; the latter the Ḥukamá (pl. of Ḥakím) or Falásifa (pl. of Faylasúf), the Philosophers proper. Of the six persons mentioned above, Mullá Ṣadrá certainly and Ḥájji Mullá Hádí possibly belong to the second class, but the four others to the first. These four, however, if less important from the point of view of Philosophy, were in other ways notable men of letters. Biographies of all of them except Mullá Hádí, who is too modern, are given in the Rawḍátu’l-Jannát, or the Qiṣaṣu’l-‘Ulamá, from which, unless otherwise stated, the following particulars are taken. The first five were more or less contemporary, and are, to a certain extent, interrelated. Shaykh Bahá’u’d-Dín and Mír Dámád both enjoyed considerable influence and stood in high favour at the court of Sháh ‘Abbás the Great, yet there was no jealousy between them, if we may believe the pleasing anecdote about them and the Sháh related by Sir
1. Shaykh Bahá’u’d-Dín al-‘Ámilí. Shaykh Bahá’u’d-Dín Muḥammad ibn Ḥusayn ibn ‘Abdu’ṣ-Ṣamad al-Ḥárithí al-‘Ámilí al-Hamdání al-Jab‘í was one of the numerous Shí‘a doctors who came to Persia from Jabal ‘Ámil in Syria, whence he derived the nisba by which he is commonly known, though by the Persians he is most often spoken of as “Shaykh-i-Bahá'í.” His father Shaykh Ḥusayn, a disciple of Shaykh Zaynu’d-Dín “the Second Martyr” (Shahíd-i-Thání), came to Persia after his master had been put to death by the Turks for his Shí‘ite proclivities, bringing with him the young Bahá’u’d-Dín, who applied himself diligently to the study of Theology in all its branches, Mathematics and Medicine. His teachers included, besides his father, Mullá ‘Abdu’lláh of Yazd, a pupil of Jalálu’d-Dín-i-Dawání, the author of the Akhláq-i-Jalálí, who was in turn a pupil of the celebrated Sayyid-i-Sharíf-i-Jurjání. In Mathematics he studied with Mullá ‘Alí Mudhahhib (“the Gilder”) and Mullá Afḍal of Qá’in, while in Medicine he was the pupil of ‘Alí’u’d-Dín Maḥmúd767. In due course he attained great celebrity as a theologian and jurist, and became Ṣadr or Shaykhu’l-Islám of Iṣfahán. After a while he was possessed with the desire to make the pilgrimage to Mecca, and on his homeward journey visited, in the guise of a darwísh, Mesopotamia, Egypt, the Ḥijáz [page 428] and Palestine, and made the acquaintance of many learned men and eminent doctors and mystics. Shaykh-i-Bahá'í was born at Ba‘labakk in Syria on Muḥarram 17, 953 (March 20, 1546), and died on Shawwál 12,1031 (August 20, 1622). His principal works are the Jámí‘-i-‘Abbásí, containing legal decisions(fatáwá); the Zubda; the Miftaḥu’l-Faláh; the Tashríhu’l-Aflák (“Anatomy of the Heavens”); the Khuláṣatu’l-Ḥisáb on Arithmetic; the Kashkúl (“Beggars’ Bowl”), a large miscellany of stories and verses, the latter partly in Persian768; a similar work called the Mikhlát; also a Persian mathnawí poem entitled Nán u Ḥalwá (“Bread and Sweetmeats”) describing his adventures during the pilgrimage to Mecca, and another entitled Shír u Shakar (“Milk and Sugar”). Extracts from these poems, as well as from his ghazals, are given in the Majma‘u’l-Fuṣaḥá (vol. ii, pp. 8-10). 2. Mír Dámád.
3. Mullá Ṣadrá of Shíráz. Ṣadru’d-Dín Muḥammad ibn Ibráhím of Shíráz, commonly known as Mullá Ṣadrá, was the only son of an aged and otherwise childless father. On his father’s death he left Shíráz and went to Iṣfahán, where, as we have seen, he studied with Shaykh-i-Bahá'í and Mír Dámád, from both of whom he held ijázas, or authorizations to expound their works. He subsequently retired to a village near Qum, where he lived a secluded and austere life, engaged in profound meditations on Philosophy. He is said to have made the Pilgrimage to Mecca on foot seven times, and to have died at Baṣra on his return from his seventh journey in 1050/1640-1, leaving a son named Ibráhím who did not follow his father’s doctrine but denounced and controverted it, boasting that “his belief was that of the common people.” To these meagre particulars of Mullá Ṣadrá’s life, derived from the Rawḍátu’l-Jannát (pp. 331-2) and the Qiṣaṣu’l-‘Ulamá, I can only add that it is clear from some expressions in the Preface to his Asfár that he suffered a good deal at the hands of the orthodox divines, and that Shaykh Aḥmad Aḥsá’í, the founder of the Shaykhí school, wrote commentaries on two of his works, the Ḥik- [page 430] matu’l-‘Arshiyya and the Mashá‘ir. Shaykh Muḥammad Iqbál is therefore probably right when he says769 that “the Philosophy of Ṣadrá is the source of the metaphysics of early Bábíism,” and that770 “the origin of the philosophy of this wonderful sect must be sought in the Shí‘a sect of the Shaykhís, the founder of which, Shaykh Aḥmad, was an enthusiastic student of Mullá Ṣadrá’s philosophy, on which he had written several commentaries.” The two most celebrated of Mullá Ṣadrá’s works, all of which, so far as I know, are in Arabic, are the Asfár-i-Arba‘a, or “Four Books771,” and the Shawáhidu’r-Rubúbiyya, or “Evidences of Divinity.” Both have been lithographed at Ṭihrán, the first in two folio volumes in 1282/1865, the second, accompanied by the commentary of Ḥájji Mullá Hádí of Sabzawár, without indication of date or place of publication. Amongst his other works which I have not seen the Rawḍátu’l-Jannát (p. 331) enumerates a Commentary on the Uṣúlu’l-Káfí, the Kitábu’l-Hidáya, notes on the metaphysical portion of Avicenna’s Shifá, a Commentary on the Ḥikmatu’l-Ishráq (presumably that of the celebrated and unfortunate Shaykh Shihábu’d-Dín-Suhrawardí, known, on account of his execution for heresy, as al-Maqtúl), the Kitábu’l-Wáridáti’l-Qalbiyya, the Kasru Aṣnámi’l-Jáhiliyya, or “Breaking of the Idols of Ignorance,” several commentaries on various portions of the (Qur’án, etc. Of Mullá Ṣadrá’s philosophical doctrines, in spite of their
The other shorter but more serious account of Mullá Ṣadrá’s doctrine is given by Shaykh Muḥammad Iqbál, formerly a pupil of Dr McTaggart in this University of Cambridge, and now himself a notable and original thinker in India, in his excellent little book entitled Development of Metaphysics in Persia: a contribution to the History of Muslim Philosophy774, p. 175, but he devotes much more space (pp. 175-95) to the modern Ḥájji Mullá Hádí of Sabzawár, whom he regards as Mullá Ṣadrá’s spiritual successor, and who, unlike his master, condescended, as we shall presently see, to expound his ideas in Persian instead of in Arabic. It may be added [page 432] that Mullá Ṣadrá speaks with great respect of that eminent Maghribí Shaykh Muḥyi’d-Dín ibnu’l-‘Arabí, whose influence, non-Persian though he was, was probably greater than that of any other thinker on the development of the extremer forms of Persian philosophical-mystical speculation. 4. Mullá Muḥsin-i-Fayḍ of Káshán. Muḥammad ibn Murtaḍá of Káshán, commonly called Muḥsin with the poetical pen-name of Fayḍ, was a native of Káshán, and, as already said, the favourite pupil and son-in-law of Mullá Ṣadrá. In the Rawḍátu’l-Jannát (pp. 542-9) and the Qiṣaṣu’l-‘Ulamá much fuller notices of him are given than of his master, and, since he was not only a theologian and a philosopher but likewise a poet of some note, he is also mentioned in the Riyáḍu’l-‘Árifín (pp. 225-6) and the Majma’u’l-Fuṣaḥá (ii, 25-6). His literary activity was enormous: according to the Qiṣaṣu’l-‘Ulamá he wrote nearly two hundred books and treatises, and was surpassed in productivity by hardly any of his contemporaries or predecessors except Mullá Muḥammad Báqir-i-Majlisí. Sixty-nine of these works, of which the last, entitled Sharḥu’s-Ṣadr775, is autobiographical, are enumerated in the Qiṣaṣ, but fuller details of them are given in the Rawḍát (pp. 545-6), where the dates of composition (which range between 1029/1620 and 1090/1680) are in most cases recorded. His age at this latter date, which is also notified as the year of his death, is stated as eighty-four776, so that he must have been born about 1006/1597-8. Of one of his works, the Mafátíḥu’sh-Sharáyi‘, I possess 
Autograph of Mullá Muḥsin-i-Fayḍ Or. 4937 (Brit. Mus.), p. 84 [page 433] what appears to be an autograph copy, made in 1042/1632-3, now bearing the class-mark C. 18. When Mullá Muḥsin wished to leave his home in Káshán and go to Shíráz to study under the celebrated theologian Sayyid Májid of Baḥrayn, his father opposed this project, and it was finally agreed to take an augury (tafa’ul) from the Qur’án, and from the poems ascribed to the first Imám ‘Alí ibn Abí Ṭálib. The former yielded the verse (ix, 123) “if a part of every band of them go not forth, it is that they may diligently instruct themselves in Religion”; the latter the following lines rendered particularly apposite by the words ṣuḥbatu Májidi, “the society of some noble one,” which might in this case be taken as referring particularly to the above-mentioned Sayyid Májid: 
“Go abroad from the home-lands in search of eminence, and travel, for in travel are five advantages: The dissipation of anxiety, the acquisition of a livelihood, knowledge, culture, and the society of some noble one (májid). And if it be said, ‘In travels are humiliation and trouble, the traversing of deserts and the encountering of hardships,’ Yet the death of a brave man is better for him than his continuance in the mansion of abasement, between humiliation and an envious rival.” [page 434] After these clear indications, Mullá Muḥsin’s father no longer opposed his desire to go to Shíráz, where he pursued his studies not only with the aforesaid Sayyid Májid, but also with Mullá Ṣadrá. It is difficult to accept the statement of the Qiṣaṣ that this took place in 1065/1654-5, for this would make him nearly sixty years of age before he began his serious studies with Mullá Ṣadrá or married his daughter. Mullá Muḥsin is described in the Qiṣaṣ as a “pure Akhbárí” (Akhbárí-yi-Ṣirf), a Ṣúfí, and an admirer of Shaykh Muḥyi’d-Dín ibnu’l-‘Arabí. Shaykh Aḥmad Aḥsá’í, who, as we have seen777, wrote commentaries on two of the books of his master Mullá Ṣadrá, detested him, and used to call him Musí’ (“the ill-doer”) instead of Muḥsin (“the well-doer”), and to speak of the great Shaykh as Mumítu’d-Dín (“the Slayer of Religion”) instead of Muḥyi’d-Dín (“the Quickener of Religion”). According to an absurd story in the Qiṣaṣ, Mullá Muḥsin was chosen by Sháh ‘Abbás to confute a Christian missionary sent by the “King of the Franks” to convert the Persians. The sign offered by this missionary was that he would specify any article held in the closed hand of his opponent778. Mullá Muḥsin chose a rosary (tasbíḥ) made of clay taken from the tomb of the Imám Ḥusayn. The Christian hesitated to speak, but, when pressed, said, “It is not that I cannot say, but, according to the rule I observe, I see that in thy hand is a portion of the earth of Paradise, and I am wondering how this can have come into thy possession.” “Thou speakest truly,” replied Mullá Muḥsin, and then informed him what he held, and bade him abandon his own faith and accept Islám, which, [page 435] according to the narrator, he was constrained to do. Though extremely pious in most respects, Mullá Muḥsin scandalized the orthodox by his approval and sanction of singing. His best-known Persian compilation is probably the Abwábu’l-Janán (“Gates of Paradise”) composed in 1055/1645, on prayer and its necessity779, but few of his numerous writings have been published or are now read and at the present day, at any rate, his name is more familiar than his works. 5. Mullá ‘Abdu’r-Razzáq-i-Láhijí. The subject of this notice resembled Mullá Muḥsin in being a pupil and son-in-law of Mullá Ṣadrá and a poet, who wrote under the pen-name of Fayyáḍ, but his writings, though much fewer in number, are more read at the present day. The best known are, perhaps, the philosophical treatise in Persian entitled Gawhar-i-Murád (“the Pearl of Desire”), and the Sar-máya-i-Ímán (“Substance of Faith”), also in Persian, both of which have been lithographed. The notices of him in the Rawḍátu’l-Jannát (pp. 352-3) and the Qiṣaṣu’l-‘Ulamá are short and unsatisfactory. The latter grudgingly admits that his writings were fairly orthodox, but evidently doubts how far they express his real convictions and how far they were designed from prudential motives to disguise them, thus bearing out to some extent the opinion expressed by Gobineau780. I have been obliged to omit any further notice than that already given781 of the somewhat elusive figure of Mír Abu’l-Qásim-i-Findariskí, mentioned by Gobineau782 as one of the three teachers of Mullá Ṣadrá, because, apart from the brief notices of him [page 436] contained in the Riyáḍu’l-‘Árifín783 and the Majma‘u’l-Fuṣaḥá, in both of which the same poem is cited, and the passing reference in the Dabistán784 to his association with the disciples of Kaywán and adoption of sun-worship, I have been unable to discover any particulars about his life or doctrines. He appears to have been more of a qalandar than a philosopher, and probably felt ill at ease in the atmosphere of Shí‘a orthodoxy which prevailed at Iṣfahán, and hence felt impelled to undertake the journey to India. He must, however, have subsequently returned to Persia if the statement in the Riyáḍu’l-‘Árifín that his tomb is well known in Iṣfahán be correct. Gobineau (op. laud., pp. 91-110) enumerates a number of philosophers who succeeded Mullá Ṣadrá down to the time of his own sojourn in Persia, but most of them have little importance or originality, and we need only mention one more, who was still living when Gobineau wrote, and whom he describes as “personnage absolument incomparable.” 6. Ḥájji Mullá Hádí of Sabzawár.
3. The Sciences — Mathematical, Natural and Occult. As stated above787, Mathematics (Riyáḍiyyát) “the Disciplinary” and Ṭabí‘iyyát the Natural Sciences, in conjunction with Metaphysics (Má wará or Má ba‘da’ṭ-Ṭabí‘at), constitute the subject-matter of the theoretical or speculative branch of Philosophy, of which, therefore, they form a part. It is probable that to this manner of regarding them is partly due the unfortunate tendency noticeable in most Muslim thinkers to take an a priori view of all natural phenomena instead of submitting them to direct critical observation. The so-called “Arabian,” i.e. Islamic, Science was in the main inherited from the Greeks; its Golden Age was the first century of the ‘Abbásid Caliphate (A.D. 750- [page 438] 850), when so much trouble and expense was incurred by the Caliphs, especially al-Manṣúr, Hárúnu’r-Rashíd and al-Ma’mún, to procure good and faithful Arabic translations of the great Greek philosophers, naturalists and physicians; and the great service it rendered to mankind was to carry on the Greek tradition of learning through the Dark Ages of Europe down to the Renaissance. So much is generally admitted, but there remains the more difficult and still unsolved question whether the Arabs were mere transmitters of Greek learning, or whether they modified or added to it, and, in this case, whether these modifications or additions were or were not improvements on the original. This question I have endeavoured to answer in the case of medical science in my Arabian Medicine788, but I was greatly hampered by insufficient acquaintance with the original Greek sources. For such investigation, whether in the Medicine, Mathematics, Physics, Astronomy or Chemistry of the Muslims, three qualifications not often combined are required in the investigator, o wit, knowledge of the science or art in question, knowledge of Arabic (and, for later writers, of Persian and even Turkish), and knowledge of Greek. In the case of the “Arabian” (i.e. Muslim) physicians the conclusion at which I arrived (already reached by Dr Max Neuburger in his monumental Geschichte der Medizin789) was that Rhazes (Abú Bakr Muḥammad ibn Zakariyyá ar-Rází, i.e. a native of Ray in Persia) was, as a physician, far superior to the more celebrated and popular Avicenna (Ibn Síná), and was, indeed, probably the greatest clinical observer who ever existed amongst the Muslims. The notes of actual cases which came under his observation, as recorded in parts of his great “Continens” [page 439] (al-Ḥáwí), have an actual and not merely a historical or literary value; and even from his methods of treatment it is possible that here and there a hint might be obtained. Avicenna was more logical, more systematic, and more philosophical, but he lacked the Hippocratic insight possessed by his great predecessor. In my Arabian Medicine I sketched the history of the art amongst the Muslims from its beginnings in the eighth century of our era down to the twelfth, but made no attempt to follow it down to the period which we are now considering. The Mongol Invasion of the thirteenth century, as I have repeatedly and emphatically stated, dealt a death-blow to Muslim learning from which it has not yet recovered. Medical and other quasi-scientific books continued, of course, to be written, but it is doubtful if they ever approached the level attained under the early ‘Abbásid Caliphs and maintained until the eleventh, and, to some extent, until the thirteenth century of our era. That they added anything which was both new and true is in the highest degree improbable, though I cannot claim to have carefully investigated the matter. A long list of these books is given by Dr Adolf Fonahn in his most useful work entitled Zur Quellenkunde der Persischen Medizin790, which has pointed the way for future investigators. Of these later works the most celebrated is probably the Tuḥfatu’-Mú’minín, compiled for Sháh Sulaymán the Ṣafawí by Muḥammad Mú’min-i-Ḥusayní in A.D. 1669. It deals chiefly with Materia Medica, and there are numerous editions and manuscripts, besides translations into Turkish and Arabic791. What has been said about Medicine holds good also of Zoology, Botany, Chemistry, etc., and in a lesser degree of Mathematics, Astronomy and Mineralogy. Fine work
In each of the “Arabian” sciences the same question arises and demands an answer which only one thoroughly versed in the scientific literature of the ancients can give. Does Ibnu’l-Bayṭár’s great Arabic work on medicinal plants, for example, contain any information not to be found in Dioscorides? Be the answer what it may, it is doubtful whether the later Muslim writers on these various sciences ever surpassed, or even equalled, their predecessors. In quite recent times, especially since the foundation of the Dáru’l-Funún, or Polytechnic College, at Ṭihrán early in the reign of Náṣiru’d-Dín Sháh, numerous Persian translations or adaptations of European scientific works have been made, but these are entirely exotic, and can hardly claim to be noticed in a work on Persian Literature. A number of them are mentioned in my Press and Poetry of Modern Persia, pp. 154-66, under the heading “Modernising Influences in the Persian Press other than Magazines and Journals.” But of those Persians who since the middle of the nineteenth century have successfully graduated in the European schools of science, I know of none who has hitherto made a reputation for original research. In conclusion a few words must be said about the Occult Sciences, excluding Astrology and Alchemy, which are in the East hardly to be separated from Astronomy and Chemistry. Alchemy is called in Arabic and Persian Kímiyá, and the names of four other Occult Sciences, dealing with Talismans, Necromancy, and the like, are formed on the same model, Límiyá, Hímiyá, Símiyá, and Rímiyá, the initial letters
4. History — General, Special and Local. It must be admitted, with whatever unwillingness and regret, that in the art of historical compilation the Persians [page 443] fall far short of the Arabs, who, indeed, excel in this branch of literature. The earlier Muslim annalists like Ṭabarí, with their verbatim narratives by eye-witnesses of the events recorded transmitted orally through carefully scrutinized chains of traditionists, are not only singularly graphic but furnish us, even at this distance of time, with materials for history of which, thanks to these isnáds, it is still possible to estimate the authenticity, even if our judgement as to the strength of the respective links in the chain does not always agree with that of Muslim critics. The later Arab historians selected, condensed, and discarded these somewhat wearisome if valuable isnáds, but their narrative, as a rule, continues to be crisp, concise, graphic and convincing. The best of the earlier Persian historians, down to the thirteenth century, though lacking the charm of the Arabian chroniclers, are meritorious and trustworthy. The bad taste of their Tartar and Turkish rulers and patrons gradually brought about a deterioration both of style and substance, very noticeable between Juwayní’s Ta’ríkh-i-Jahán-gusháy (completed about 658/1260) and its continuation, the Ta’ríkh-i-Waṣṣáf (completed in 712/1312), which, as already observed798, exercised an enduring evil influence on subsequent historians in Persia. Of later Persian histories I have met with few equal to a history of the Caliphate by Hindúsháh ibn Sanjar ibn ‘Abdu’lláh aṣ-Ṣáḥibí al-Kírání, composed in 724/1324 for Nuṣratu’d-Dín Aḥmad the Atábak of Luristán, and entitled Tajáribu’s-Salaf (“Experiences of Yore”). This, however, is entirely and avowedly based on the delightful Arabic history of Ṣafiyyu’d-Dín Muḥammad ibn ‘Alí al-‘Alawí aṭ-Ṭiqtaqí, composed in 701/1302, commonly known [page 444] as the Kitábu’l-Fakhrí799, but here entitled Munyatu’l-Fuḍalá fí Tawáríkhi’l-Khulafá wa’l-Wuzará (“the Desire of Scholars on the History of the Caliphs and their Ministers”). That it never appealed to the debased taste which we are here deploring is sufficiently shown by the fact that not only has it never been published, but, so far as I know, it is represented only by my manuscript, G. 3 (copied in 1286/1870), and one other (dated 1304/1886-7) in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris800. It would be a wearisome and unprofitable task to enumerate the many Persian historical works composed during the last four centuries. Of the histories of special periods the most important have been not only described but freely quoted in the first part of this volume, notably the Ṣafwatu’ṣ-Ṣafá for the life of Shaykh Ṣafiyyu’d-Dín from whom the Ṣafawí kings were descended; the monograph on Sháh Isma‘íl described by Sir E. Denison Ross in the J. R.A.S. for 1896, pp. 264-83; the Aḥsanu’t-Tawáríkh, completed in 985/1577-9 by Ḥasan-i-Rúmlú; and the Ta’ríkh-i-‘Álam-árá-yi-‘Abbásí of Iskandar Munshi, composed in 1025/1616. There are other monographs on the later Ṣafawí period such as the Fawá’id-i-Ṣafawiyya (1211/1796-7) and the Tadhkira-i-Ál-i-Dáwúd (1218/1803-4), which I would fain have consulted had they been accessible to me. For the post-Ṣafawí period we have several excellent European accounts which render us less dependent on the native historians, some of whose works moreover (e.g. the Ta’ríkh- [page 445] i-Zandiyya801 and the Mujmalu’t-Ta’ríkh-i-Ba‘d-Nádiriyya802) have been published in Europe, while others, such as the Durra-i-Nádirí of Mírzá Mahdí Khán of Astarábád, are easily accessible in Oriental lithographed editions. These monographs contain valuable material and are indispensable to the student of this period, but they are generally badly arranged and dully written, and further marred by the florid and verbose style of which we have just been complaining. For the general histories of our present period, from Khwándamír’s Ḥabíbu’s-Siyar (929/1523) at the beginning to Riḍá-qulí Khán’s Supplement to the Rawḍatu’ṣ-Ṣafá and Lisánu’l-Mulk’s Násikhu’t-Tawáríkh at the end, with the very rare Khuld-i-Barín (1071/1660-1) in the middle, there is even less to be said, since, though for events contemporary with their authors they have the same value as the monographs just mentioned, for the earlier periods they are not even good or judicious abstracts of the carelessly selected authorities from whom they derive their information. They are, moreover, histories not of the Persian people but of the kings, princes and nobles who tyrannized over them and contended with one another for the spoils; wearisome records of bloodshed, violence and rapine from which it is hard to derive any general concepts of value803. Only by diligent and patient study can we extract from them facts capable of throwing any real light on the religious, political and social problems which a historian like Ibn Khaldún would have handled in so masterly a manner. There are, however, hopeful signs of improvement in
5. Biography, Autobiography and Travel. Muslim writers have always evinced a great partiality for biography, which may be general, dealing with the lives of eminent men of all sorts, like Ibn Khallikán’s Wafayátu’l-A‘yán (“Obituaries of Notable Men”) and the Rawḍátu’l-Jannát, of which I have made such extensive use in the latter part of this volume, the former composed in the thirteenth, the latter in the late nineteenth century, and both in Arabic; and the ambitious but unfinished modern Persian Náma-i-Dánish-warán (“Book of Learned Men”) compiled by a committee [page 447] of some half a dozen scholars, of which the first volume was lithographed at Ṭihrán in 1296/1879 and the second in 1312/1904-5806. More often such works treat of the biographies of some particular class of men, such as Ministers, Physicians, Poets or Theologians; or they follow a geographical or a chronological arrangement, merging on the one hand into geography and on the other into history. Khwándamír’s Dastúru’l-Wuzará (“Models for Ministers”)807, composed, according to the chronogram implicit in the title, in 915/1509-10, affords us a Persian example of the first type falling at the beginning of the period reviewed in this volume. For the Physicians and Philosophers no Persian work approaches the level of al-Qifṭí’s Ta’ríkhu’l-Ḥukamá808 and Ibn Abí Uṣaybi‘a’s ‘Uyúnu’l-Anbá fí Ṭabaqáti’l-Aṭibbá809 both composed in the thirteenth century of our era, a period so rich in Arabic biographical works. Biographies of poets, on the other hand, abound in Persian, especially in the later period, since Sháh Isma‘íl’s son Sám Mírzá set the fashion with his Tuḥfa-i-Sámí (a continuation of Dawlatsháh’s “Memoirs of the Poets”) compiled in 957/1550. Eminent representatives of the Shí‘a sect, both Arabs and Persians of every category from kings to poets, form the subject-matter of the very useful Majálisu’l-Mú’minín (“Assemblies of Believers”), the author of which, Sayyid Núru’lláh of Shúshtar, was flogged to death in 1019/1610-11 by order of Jahángír at the instigation of the Sunnís, and who is therefore called by his fellow-believers the “Third Martyr” (Shahíd-i-Thálith)810. [page 448] Of the older geographico-biographical works the Átháru’l-Bilád (“Monuments of the Lands”) of Zakariyyá ibn Muḥammad ibn Maḥmúd al-Qazwíní811, and the Persian Haft Iqlím (“Seven Climes”), composed in 1028/1619 by Amín Aḥmad-i-Rází, are typical specimens812. Monographs on different provinces or cities of Persia are also fairly common, and generally include notices of the more eminent natives of the region discussed. Of modern biographical works produced in Persia I have made extensive use, especially in the chapter on the Theologians, of the Arabic Rawḍátu’l-Jannát fí Aḥwáli’l-‘Ulamá wa’s-Sádát (“Gardens of Paradise, on the circumstances of Men of Learning and Leading”). This comprehensive work, which deserves to be better known, contains some 742 notices of eminent Muslim scholars, saints and poets, ancient and modern, and was compiled by Muḥammad Báqir ibn Ḥájji Amír Zaynu’l-‘Ábidín al-Músawí of Khwánsár in the latter half of the nineteenth century. A good lithographed edition (except that, as usual, it has no Index) appeared at Ṭihrán in 1306/1888. The notices are arranged in alphabetical order, not very strictly observed, under personal names, such as Aḥmad, ‘Alí, Muḥammad, etc., which, of course, are seldom the names by which those who bear them are commonly known. Thus the Muḥammads, who fill the greater part of the fourth and last volume and comprise a hundred and forty-three articles, include the great Shí‘a theologians generally referred to as al-Kulayní, Ibn Bábawayhi and [page 449] Shaykh-i-Mufíd; the historians Ṭabarí and Shahristání; the scientists Rází and Bírúní; the thinkers Fárábí, Ghazálí and Muḥyi’d-Dín ibnu’l-‘Arabí; and the Persian poets Saná’í, Farídu’d-Dín ‘Aṭṭár and Jalálu’d-Dín Rúmí, nor is any subordinate plan, chronological or other, discernible within these sections, so that the owner of the book who wishes to consult it regularly is compelled to make his own Index or Table of Contents. The other book which I have constantly consulted as to the lives of the theologians is the Persian Qiṣaṣu’l-‘Ulamá (“Stories of the Doctors”) of Muḥammad ibn Sulaymán of Tanakábun, who wrote it in 1290/1873813. It contains about a hundred and fifty biographies of Shí‘a divines, and is more readable, if less accurate, than the work previously mentioned. Another useful Persian book on the same subject is the Nujúmu’s-Samá (“Stars of Heaven”) composed by Mírzá Muḥammad ‘Alí in 1286/1869-70814, dealing with the Shí‘a doctors of the eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth centuries of the hijra (seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth of the Christian era). There exist also two special monographs in Arabic on the Shí‘a divines of Baḥrayn and Jabal ‘Ámil, the Lú’lú’atu’l-Baḥrayn (“Pearl of Baḥrayn”) of Shaykh Yúsuf ibn Aḥmad al-Baḥrání, who flourished in the eighteenth century; and the Amalu’l-Ámil fí ‘Ulamá’i Jabal ‘Ámil (“the Hoper’s Hope, on the Doctors of Mount ‘Ámil”), by Muḥammad ibn Ḥasan ibn ‘Alí...al-Ḥurr al-‘Ámilí, who belongs to the previous century. Mention must also be made of another modern biographical work of a somewhat special character, which,
These are but a selection of the more useful or less known biographical works, of which many more will be found described in Rieu’s, Ethé’s, and other catalogues of Persian manuscripts. Of autobiographies the most notable is that of Shaykh ‘Alí Ḥazín, which contains one of the few first-hand Persian accounts of the Afghán Invasion and fall of Iṣfahán in A.D. 1722. Travels are a special form of autobiography, in which His late Majesty Náṣiru’d-Dín Sháh indulged freely. An account of the mission of Farrukh Khán Amínu’l-Mulk to London and Paris at the close of the Anglo-Persian War in 1857-8 was written by one of his staff, Mírzá Ḥusayn ibn ‘Abdu’lláh, but has never been published816. It concludes with a description of the French Departments of State and Public Institutions. More valuable and varied in its contents is the Bustánu’s-Siyáḥat (“Garden of Travel”) of Ḥájji Zaynu’l-‘Ábidín of Shírwán817, who wrote it in 1247/1831-2. In a brief autobiography under the heading Shamákhí he tells us that he was born in mid- [page 451] Sha‘bán, 1194 (August 15, 1780), and was taken to Karbalá, where he thenceforth made his home, when only five years old. He travelled extensively in ‘Iráq, Gílán, the Caucasus, Ádharbáyján, Khurásán, Afghánistán, India, Kashmír, Badakhshán, Turkistán, Transoxiana, the Persian Gulf, Yaman, the Ḥijáz, Egypt, Syria, Turkey in Asia and Armenia, and in Persia also visited Ṭihrán, Hamadán, Iṣfahán, Shíráz and Kirmán. He ‘was a Shí‘ite and a darwísh of the Order of Sháh Ni’matu’lláh, and in this double capacity made the acquaintance and enjoyed the friendship of many eminent doctors (‘ulamá) and “gnostics” (‘urafá). The author, a man of intelligence and a keen observer, does not give a continuous narrative of his travels, but arranges his materials under the following heads: Chapter I. Account of the Prophet, his daughter Fáṭima, and the Twelve Imáms. Chapter II. Account of certain doctors, gnostics, philosophers, poets and learned men. Chapter III. On sundry sects and doctrines. Chapter IV. Geographical account of towns and villages visited by the author in Persia, Turkistán, Afghánistán, India, parts of Europe and China, Turkey, Syria and Egypt, the names of these places being arranged alphabetically. Promenade (Sayr). Prolegomena on the arrangement of this Garden, and on certain matters connected therewith. Rose-bed (Gulshan). Countries and persons to describe which is the ultimate object of the book, arranged alphabetically in twenty-eight sections, corresponding with the letters of the Arabic alphabet. Spring (Bahár), containing four Rose-bowers (Gulzár): (i) On the interpretation of dreams; (ii) Names of certain halting-places of the author on his travels; (iii) Various anecdotes; (iv) Conclusion.
European students of Persian are, as a rule, unless they have lived in that country, accustomed to think in terms of [page 453] manuscripts, and to turn to Dr Rieu’s admirable catalogues of the British Museum mss. for information as to literary history. But since the introduction into Persia of printing and lithography, especially since about 1880, the importance of the manuscript literature has steadily diminished, the more important books written being either transferred to stone or set up in type from the original copy. This printed and lithographed literature has not hitherto received nearly so much attention as the older manuscript literature, and it is often impossible to obtain ready and trustworthy information as to the authors and contents of these modern books. The recent publication of Mr Edwards’s Catalogue of the Persian printed books in the British Museum819 marks a great step in advance of anything previously accomplished, but the notices are necessarily very brief, and contain, as a rule, no particulars about the authors and only the most general indication of the character of their works. What is needed is a catalogue raisonné of Persian books composed during the last century and lithographed or printed in Persia, for it is much easier, for reasons which will be stated immediately, to ascertain what has been published in Persian in Turkey, Egypt and India. The fact is that the Persian book trade is in the most chaotic condition. There are no publishers or booksellers of substance, and no book-catalogues are issued. Most books have no fixed price or place of sale; many have no pagination; hardly any have indexes or tables of contents. Often books comprising several volumes change their size and shape, their plan, and even their nature, as they proceed, while the author not unfrequently changes his title. Let us take as an illustration a few of the numerous works of reference published under the name of Mírzá Muḥammad Ḥasan Khán, who successively bore the titles of Ṣaní‘u’d- [page 454] Dawla, Mú’tamanu’s-Sulṭán, and I‘timádu’d-Dawla, and was the son of Ḥájji ‘Alí Khán of Marágha, originally entitled Ḥájibu’d-Dawla and later I‘timádu’s-Salṭana. Now first of all it is very doubtful whether these books were really written by Ṣaní‘u’d-Dawla at all; at any rate it is commonly asserted that he coerced various poor scholars to write them, and ascribed the authorship to himself820, proceedings of which the latter must be regarded as wholly reprehensible, whatever may be said in extenuation of the former. In 1293/1876 he published the first volume of the Mirátu’l-Buldán (“Mirror of the Lands”), a geographical dictionary of Persian towns and villages, largely based on Yáqút’s well-known Arabic Mu‘jamu’l-Buldán, containing the first four letters of the alphabet (ا to ت). Of this volume, however, there appear to have been two editions, the first ending with the notice of Tabríz and containing 388 pages, the second, published a year later (1294/1877), extending to Ṭihrán, and containing 606 pages. Having reached Ṭihrán, however, the author, growing tired, apparently, of geography, decided to continue his work as a history of the reigning king Náṣiru’d-Dín Sháh, and to add at the end of each remaining volume a Calendar and Court Directory for the current year. Vol. ii, therefore, comprises the first fifteen years of the Sháh’s reign (298 pp.) and the Calendar (45 pp.) for the year of publication (1295/1878). Vol. iii continues on the same lines, and contains the years xvi-xxxii of the current reign (264 pp.) and the Calendar (50 pp.). At this point, however, the author seems to have remembered his original plan, and in vol. iv he continues the geographical dictionary with the next two letters of the alphabet (ث and ج), at which point he reverts to history, and gives an account of the events of the year of publication (1296/1879), followed by the annual Calendar. More- [page 455] over, in order to celebrate this reconciliation of geography and history, the size of this fourth volume is suddenly enlarged from 10½ x 6¾ inches to 13½ x 8¼ inches. By this time the author appears to have grown weary of the “Mirror of the Lands,” for after a year’s rest he began the publication of a new book entitled Muntaẓam-i-Náṣirí, of which also three volumes appeared in the years 1298-1300/1881-3. Of these three volumes I possess only the first and the third. The first contains an outline of Islamic history from A.H. 1-656 (A.D. 622-1258), that is, of the history of the Caliphate (pp. 3-239), followed by an account of the chief events of the solar year beginning in March, 1880, both in Persia and Europe (pp. 239-57), and the usual Calendar and Court Directory (42 pp.). The third volume contains a history of the reigning Qájár dynasty from 1194/1779 to 1300/1882 (pp. 32-387), followed again by the Calendar for the last mentioned year. Next year the author began the publication of a new work in three volumes entitled Maṭla‘u’sh-Shams (“the Dawning-place of the Sun”). This opens with a perfunctory apology for the incomplete condition in which the “Mirror of the Lands” was left. However, says he, since the next two letters of the alphabet are ḥá (ح) and khá (خ), and since Khurásán is the most important province beginning with the latter, and since His Majesty Náṣiru’d-Dín Sháh, whose faithful servant he is, and to whom this and his other works are dedicated, had recently made the journey thither in order to visit the holy shrine of the Imám ‘Alí Riḍá at Mashhad, he has decided to devote this book to an account of that province, which, since it lies to the East, is hinted at in the title. In the first volume (published in 1301/1884) he accordingly describes the route to Mashhad by way of Damáwand, Fírúzkúh, Bisṭám, Bujnúrd and Qúchán, giving a full account of each of these places and the intervening stations.
Henceforward most of Muḥammad Ḥasan Khán’s numerous works included a Sál-náma, or “Year Book” for the current year, placed at the end of each volume and having a separate pagination. His biographies of eminent Muslim women, entitled Khayrátun Ḥisánun, published in three volumes in the years 1304-7/1887-90, lacks this addition, which is, however, found in the Kitábu’l-Ma‘áthir wa’l-Áthár (published in 1306/1888-9), on the Memorabilia of forty years of the reign of Náṣiru’d-Dín Sháh, an invaluable book of reference for students of the history, biography and evolution of modern Persia down to the date of publication. The plan of a geographical dictionary was taken up by another writer, Muḥammad Taqí Khán called Ḥakím, who in 1305/1887-8 published, under the title of Ganj-i-Dánish (“the Treasure of Learning”), a com- [page 457] plete Encyclopaedia of Persian place-names comprising 574 large pages. One welcome feature of this book is that the author prefixes a long list of the authorities and books of which he made use in his compilation. This includes a number of European (including ancient Greek) works. These Persian lithographed books, notwithstanding their shortcomings, are, as a rule, pleasant to handle, well written, well bound, and printed on good paper. Some of them, like the Khaṭṭ u Khaṭṭáṭán (“Calligraphy and Calligraphists”) of Mírzá-yi-Sanglákh, and the excellent edition of the Mathnawí with Concordance of Verses (Kashfu’l-Abyát) associated with the name of ‘Alá’u’d-Dawla, are really beautiful books, while almost all are far superior to the Indian lithographs. They are, however, hard to obtain in Europe, and indeed anywhere outside Ṭihrán, Tabríz and perhaps Iṣfahán. Even the British Museum collection is very far from complete, while my own collection, originally formed by purchase in Persia822, owes much to the fact that I was able to add to it a number of volumes from two very notable Persian libraries, those of the late M. Charles Schefer and of the late Sir A. Houtum-Schindler. As has been already said, few greater services could be rendered to Persian scholarship than the proper cataloguing and describing of these lithographs, and the devising of means to place them on the European book-market. Since lithography can be carried on with simple apparatus and without any great technical skill or outlay of money, it is often practised by comparatively poor scholars and bibliophiles, who print very small editions which are soon exhausted, so that many books of this class rank rather with manuscripts than with printed books in rarity and desirability823.
CHAPTER X. THE MOST MODERN DEVELOPMENTS (A.D. 1850 ONWARDS). I have endeavoured to show that under the Qájár Dynasty, especially since the middle of the nineteenth century, the old forms of literature, both prose and verse, took on a fresh lease of life, and, so far from deteriorating, rose to a higher level than they had hitherto reached during the four centuries (roughly speaking A.D. 1500-1900) with which we are dealing in this volume. We must now consider three or four quite recent developments due in the first instance to what Mírzá Muḥammad ‘Alí Khán “Tarbiyat,” the real author of my Press and Poetry in Modern Persia (pp. 154-66), calls “Modernizing Influences in the Persian Press other than Magazines and journals.” Amongst these he assigns an important place to the various scientific text-books compiled by, or under the supervision of, the numerous Europeans appointed as teachers in the Dáru’l-Funún and the Military and Political Colleges in Ṭihrán from A.D. 1851 onwards, and the Persian translations of European (especially French) books of a more general character,, such as some of Molière’s plays and Jules Verne’s novels, which resulted from an increased interest in Europe and knowledge of European languages. Of such books, and of others originally written in Persian in this atmosphere, he gives a list containing one hundred and sixty-two entries, which should be consulted by those who are interested in this matter. The Revolution of A.D. 1906, with the remarkable development of journalism which it brought about, and the increase of facilities for printing resulting from this, gave a fresh [page 459] impulse to this movement, which, checked by the difficulties and miseries imposed on Persia by the Great War, seems now again to be gathering fresh impetus. What we have to say falls under three heads, the Drama, Fiction and the Press, of which the first two need not detain us long. Yüklə 1,57 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|
“All of it is a Mystery.” The book entitled Asrár-i-Qásimí (“Secrets of Qásim”)793 in Persian, and the Shamsu’l-Ma‘árif (“Sun of Knowledges”)794 of the celebrated Shaykh al-Búní in Arabic, may be regarded as typical of this class of literature, but to the uninitiated they make but arid and unprofitable reading. Ibn Khaldún is the only Muslim writer I know of who has sought to discover a philosophical and rational basis for these so-called sciences, and his ideas have been collated with the theories of modern Psychical Research in a most masterly manner by Professor Duncan Black Macdonald in his interesting and suggestive book entitled The Religious Attitude and Life in Islam795. I have always kept an open mind as to the reality of the powers claimed by Occultists, and, when opportunity offered, have always gone out of my way to investigate such manifestations. Disappointment has invariably been my portion, save in two cases: a “magician” whom I met in Kirmán in the summer of 1888, who, amidst much vain boasting, did accomplish one feat which baffled my comprehension796; and the late Shaykh Ḥabíb Aḥmad, author of an astonishing work in English entitled The Mysteries of Sound and Number797, who, if nothing more, was an amazingly skilful thought-reader.
818 and with whom he became acquainted at ‘Aẓímábád. He also cultivated the society of the Austrian ambassador at Constantinople, who invited him to visit his country, “but,” he concludes, “since there was no great spiritual advantage to be gained by travelling in that country, I declined.” More valuable is his account of the various religions and sects of Asia, in which he treats, amongst other matters, of the Zoroastrians, Mazdakites, Jews, Christians, Hindu’s, Ṣúfís and Ghulát (extreme Shí‘a).