THE IMAGE OF THE PROPHET
rNIBNsrxA'srHoucHT Fatimah Husein Abstrak Anikel ini menganalisagambaran tentangNabi Muhammaddalam pandangansalahseorangfilosof Muslim terbesar,Ibn Sina.
tidak dimaksudkan untuk mendiskusikan pemikiran tersebut secara menyeluruh sebagaimana yang dapatkita temukandalam karya-karyalbn Sina, tetapi hanyadibatasipadadua karyanya,yaitu FTrthbat ar-Nubuwwat dan Metaphysics x .
l-Ilahiyya.
dalam at-shif7',dengan merujuk padabeberapatulisannyayang terkait.
Kedua karya tersebutmenyajikandua ekspresiyang berbedaatas Nabi.
Dalam karyanyayang pertama,Ibn sina menggunakanterma-terma yang sangatfilosofis untuk menggambarkan sosokMuhammad,walaupun dia juga tidak menafikan bahasanagamis.
Memangbenarbahwatujuan ditulisnya risalah ini adalah untuk menjawabpertanyaanseseorangtentang argumentasi logis dan bukti dialektis ataseksistensiNabi, sehingga terkesan bahwa bisa jadi Ibn Slnasendiritidak percayaakanbukti atas kenabian secara filosofis.
Tetapi jika kita cermatilebihjauh, kondisi Ibn Sina sendiri sebagai Muslim yang sekaligusseorangfilosof sebenarnya ikut membentuknyauntuk menghadirkangambarantentangMuhammad secarafilosofis sekaligusIslamis.
Gambaran Nabi sebagai seorangmanusia biasa yang memiliki kelebihan yang diberikan oleh ruhan kepadanyadan sebagaipemelihara hukum Allah bagi kesejahteraan manusianampaksecarajelas dalam karyanya yang kedua.
Dengan merujuk pada kehidupan sosial.
Ibn Slna menggambarkanbahwa Muhammad harus menentukanhukuman dan larangan untuk mencegahketidaktaatanterhadap hukum Tuhan, serta membina kehidupanmoral.
Jelaslahbahwafigur Nabi di sini digambarkan secaralebih relijius.
Pertanyaanyang mungkin timbul adalahmengapasosokMuhammad muncul secaraberbedapadadua risalahtersebut.
Kita melihat bahwa Al-lam.
No.
60/1997
Thought TheImrye of TheProphetin lbn Srrn6's definisi tradisional tentang peranNabi tidak dapatmemuaskanIbn Sina sebagai seorang filoso{, sehingga dalam tulisan yang pertama ia lebih menghadirkan figur Mu.
mmad secara filosofis.
Dalam tulisan kedua" nampak bahwa sebenarnyaIbn Sina tidak dapat melepaskandiri dari kenyataannya sebagai seorangMuslim, sehinggaia perlu menjelaskanpada dirinya sendiri dan pada ummat Islam padaumumnyatentang peranNabi sebagai seorangpemimpin sosial.
Terlebih lagi lingkungan Islamnya "memaksa" Ibn Sina untuk mengharmoniskanantarapenyelidikanrasionalnya denganajaran-ajaranIslam.
iJtill Si si Jlil dll e.
o gc iJliJl 511,',-r'i iJtiJl o11 r.
i'r Y .
Ui- u l Oi^L"^ll oJlsii "6'l ll drtij" ut' ,qd3.
,! ,',- ll _*i! ll iiti.
L:13 c"o:iSllr3lil3,^.
rje,ll ill 4 ES,.
,t'i.
g"ll "6!gJYl"_9 ,r tll d.
c |-t llilt-i.
J-.
ilL-$ i iJiJl drt-.
}J}-:J
f f-9.
lJ#i: U.
ll tr-n l.
( iJt-jl orra ct' - l ,J.
n"j .
q1r!t il3,^ ,U ui c/ *ulY .
i$rJl L.
,J JrCrg Y uls lra L] ,! e.
r ill U l c1c ,Jill $Jr!l-l c.
rLr-xllcJ:'.
Utk l$ dlli pc'_.
lli^-li o"3$ll u# peL-, ri ,-i s.
,l*i3 .
""S 4j!i &til 'i*tft-l :ti"'li iil i s ijl 6J "- trl-rtJ dll k r U-r 61 6.
rLc 6ljlS .
raill 6-1_9.
dll als-i .
LilJytJ J"J.
- cipt"3 yl .
lt-ll ,rfc, lJ,.
:cl .
Sl .
ilL-l d.
o"till i-l' .
J r"l tlS.
:'l ilil-=.
J u/lClr fK-!l .
Ui :.
,rle d Ur- d' l ggJl iFU O.
-i.
i JJ.
- lj.
lt Ot -,.
-,#'3ll h .
JIll Al-lami'ah.
No.
FatimahHusein i Fr-i ctJFeJi lilJ : dlFjl _HJ o$ll*,.
1'll gd:La tJ.
- .
-iji.
i:f*"Dlsll q3li, .
-'rgOl LjsJr .
iri\i$i.
rlt{ rt L(Ji r.
J3ilt ii!L-,_l ! r dl-l$i,1r.
Or-t,ar.
Xll eft y .
, .
-,1.
r{Jh -r l c4Jjtill .
,iJ .
?Ji.
li i*.
,r.
}-- r i rJ*a Li*.
Ul trp il_1,--aOl rd elj.
i cp-yl u-j,.
E C Oi OS,or.
"- Jl l j .
drfI-JlJ *ir eUil L: l 'Jt-,Yl el .
Jl ,_.
"Jr i =UJl0- id-,yl dBl_l iillJl r3 o=l ,-.
rjl:t d*- t$ uite IBN SINA was born in 980 in the town of AfshanahnearBukhara.
His father worked as an administratorduring N.
ibn Mansfir's reign .
Througi his father andhis brother,who were Isma.
nn sjna was introduced to "the accountof the soul andthe intellect," althoughin his own words, his soul "would not accept it.
"l His youth was spent studying metaphysiscs,logical,natural,and mathematicalsciences.
When his father died in 1002,Ibn Sinaenteredthe Sultan'spalace and left Bukharafor Gurganjto work under'AIi ibn Ma'mun .
After a few other sporadicmoves,Ibn Sina servedthe Buwayhid prince Shams al-Dawla until 1021.
With the latter'sdeath,Ibn Sinawas offered the post of vizier by al-Dawla'sson andsuccessor Amir al-Dawla,but he refused, correspondinginstead with 'Ale' al-DawlaAb[ Ja'far Muhammad .
3to whom he dedicatedseveralworks and serveduntil his death in 1037.
Abu 'Ubayd al-Juzjanlattributes someforty works to Ibn Sina's authorship.
Father Anawati addsanother236 works in his bibliography, while some of them cannotbe attributedto Ibn Sinawith any degree of certainty.
a These works include philosophicaland medical treatises,as well as narrativewritings.
One cannot trace the history of Islamic philosophy without acknowledging the debt owed by Muslim philosophersto Greek philosophy.
The doctrine of emanationin Ibn Sina'sthought, for example,is derived, in the main, from Neoplatonic concepts.
As somescholarshave pointed Al-Jami'ah.
No.
60/1997
The Image of The Prophet in lbn Sind's Thought out, however, this cannot be takento imply that all of Muslim philosopher's doctrines are rooted in Hellenic sources.
Fazlur Rahmanarguesthat some Muslim philosophersdisplayedoriginalthinking, anddevisednew concepts,one ofthem beingthe conceptofprophecy:
This processhas revealed that the basicelementsin the philosophical doctrine are all Greek, but that the Muslim philosophers have elaboratedthem,in somecaseshaverefinedthem, and,above all, have woven them, together-for the first time in the history of religious thought- in orderto suit the imageof the prophet.
Indeed, in order to make the traditionalimageintelligibleto themselves, they amplifiedit by addingthe elementof intellectualperfectionism andby making it the highestof all elements.
The discussionof prophecyin lbn Sina'sworks is found in his political discourse.
One might wonder as to why it is put in his political In fact, it is very clearthat, for Ibn Sina,the prophet'scentral role is as a lawgiver, and legislationfirmly belongswithin the realm of This paper will not providea completediscussionof Ibn Sina's thought on prophecy as foundin all his worlls,but will limit the discussion to two of his treatises,namely Fi fthbet al-Nubuwwat,6 andthe Metaphysics X .
t-Itahiyya.
of al-ShifT'(The Healin.
,7with reference to some of his relatedworks.
sThesetwo works proffer divergentexpressions of the image of the prophet,and are,therefore,interestingfrom a This paper will providea two part discussion.
Part A analyzes the imageof the prophetin Fi lthbat al-Nubuwwat.
The image of the prophetas a lawgiver,which is different from what we will see in the part A of the discussion,is dealtwith in Part B, and is basedon the secondtreatise,al-Ilahiyyat.
An analysiswhich accountsfor thesedivergingdepictionswill be provided.
The Proof of Prophecies(Based on Fi lthbat al-Nubuwwa.
In this treatise Ibn Sina provides a sumationof an oral dishis misgivings cussion he had sharedwith a personwho had expressed about acceptingprophecy.
This personwas confirmedin thesemisgivings "demonstrativearas "the claims of the advocatesofprophecy"lackof gument" and of "dialecticalproof.
"eThe treatiseis madeup of two parts.
the proofofprophecy anddescribesits essence.
The first part establishes Part two offers an interpretation of certain symbols derived from the Qur'an.
AI-lami'ah,No.
FatimahHusein Ibn sina outlines four premisesto his argument.
He statesthat anything that exists in anotheressentially,is actualas long as the latter and anything that exists in another accidentally, exists in it at times potentially, at times actually.
The third premiseis that whatever exists in anotheressentially,is alwaysin act and is the cause.
that changesothersfrom potentiality into actuality,mediatelyor without The last premise is that anythingwhich is composedof two things, if either of the two can exist without the other.
the other can exist without it.
Having established the aforementionedpremises.
Ibn Sjna launchesinto a discussionof the humansoul and its capacityto receive intelligibles from the active intellect.
He arguesthat everyhumanbeing posessesa rational soul .
l-nafs al-naliqa.
which differentiates them from other living creatures.
He dividesthe powersof the rational soul into three categoriessince they vary amonghumanbeings.
Thefirst power is called the materialintellect .
l-'aql al-hayila.
which has the porenriality to becomeinformedwith the universalforms,but has no form in itsef .
aysa laha fi dhatiha sira.
The second power, the intellect by positive disposition .
l-'aql bi al-malak.
,is an intellect in potentiality.
It has the capacity and the positive disposition to apprehendthe universalforms.
The acquired intellect .
l-'aql al-mustafr.
is the third power which is actually informed with the universalforms.
rl Marmurarightly points out that, with regardsto this theory of the intellect,Ibn slna merelypresented its summationwithout attemptingto proveor justiff its premises.
Ibn Sinamoveson to statethat the acquiredintellect doesnot exist actually in the materialintellectandhencedoesnot exist in the latter Its existence,therefore,is due to somethingin which it exists essentially and throughwhich the potentialintellect is actualized.
This is called the universal intellect .
l-'aql alkull.
, the universal soul .
l-nafs al-kull.
, and the world soul.
l-nafs al-'ala.
tt In short, he arguesthat the acquiredintellect must exist essentiallyin the universalintellect.
In his conclusion to the proofofprophecy.
Ibn Sina assesses capability of the .
human soul to receiveintelligiblesfrom the universal active intellect.
According to him the intelligiblesmay be receivedin two ways, directly and indirectly:
Now the rational soul, as we have shown,receivesat times directly and at others indirectly.
hence the capacityto receivedirectly does not belongto it essentiallybut accidentally.
This capacity, therefore, must exist essentiallyin somethingelsewhence Al-Jqni' ah.
N o.
60/1997
TheInage of The Prophet in lbn Sind's Thought the rational soul acquiresit.
This is the angelicintellect,which receivesessentiallywithout mediation andby its very reception causesthe powers of the soulto receive.
We havealsoseenthat there aredifferentdegreesofstrength andweakness,easeanddifficulty, in that which receivesandthat which is received.
Now, it is impossiblefor the capacityto receiveto be infinite.
For thereis finitude in the directionofweakness.
which consistsof the inability of the power to receiveevenoneintelligible,directly or indirectly.
and there is finitude in the directionof strength,which consistsin the ability of the powerto receivedirectly.
In short.
Ibn Sinaarguesthat the capacityto receiveintelligibles directly in the ordinary humansoulmust exist essentiallyin the angelic intellect .
l-'aql al-malaE.
,which receiveemanationsfrom the active intellect without mediation .
aqabbalakullu al-ilE.
ti al-'aqliyyati bighairi This is called the prophet .
l-naf.
, and to him belongsthe highest degreeof excellencein the realmof materialforms.
He concludes that since everything which excels rules over that which is inferior, it follows that the prophet rules over all speciesabovewhich he excels.
Here lies the basis of lbn Sina's formulations asto the positionof the prophetin his discourse.
Shifting the discussionto the interpretationof the prophet'ssymbols and metaphors,Ibn Sina arguesthat the prophet'swords shouldbe symbolor secretsign.
andhis expressionshints .
Moreover, the foremost Greek philosophersand prophetsmade use in their booksof symbolsandsignsin which they hid their secret doctrine-menlike Pythagoras,Socrates,and Plato.
Moreover, how could the prophetMuhammad.
ay God'sprayersand peace be on hi.
bring knowledgeto the uncouthnomad,not to say to the whole humanrace consideringthat he was sent a messengerto all? Politicalguidance,on the other hand,comeseasily to prophets.
alsothe impositionof obligationson people.
Accordingly, he quotes certain Qut'anic passageswhich have symbolic and metaphoricsignificanceto expoundupon what the prophet conveyed from his Lord.
An exampleof theseis verse24:35 "God is the light of the heavensandthe earth.
The likenessof His light is as a niche wherein is a lamp .
he lamp is in a glass,the glassis as it were a brilliant sta.
kindled from a blessedtree, an olive neither from the eastnor from the west.
" Ibn Sina interpretsthe term "niche" .
to imply the material intellect .
l-'aql al-hayulan.
and the rational soul .
l-nafs alnayiqa.
,while the term "lamp" .
l-nufi denotesthe acquiredintellect .
/- AI-lami'ah.
No, 60/1997 Fatimah Husin 'aql mustaf&d\tt It i.
, however, beyond the scopeof this paper to treat 'sina's Ibn interpretation of these verseswhich he employed only as a meansof illustrating the prophet'stask to speakin symbolic language.
Analysis In this treatise the imageof the prophetis depictedin more philosophic terms which Ibn sina usesto prove the existenceof the prophet.
His reasons for depicting the prophet and his role in this way are very Ibn Sina himself introducesthis work by stating that it was written in responseto a particular person'sneedfor a logical argumentand dialectical proof of the existenceof the prophet.
Nevertheless,one cannot simply conclude that this work was a mere response to the needsof one individual for this kind of explanation, or that Ibn Sina himself did not necessarilybelievein the proof of the existence of the prophet in a philosophical way.
On the contrary, it is highly probablethat, being a Muslim, and at the sametime a philosopher, he neededthis kind of proof to satisff his own rational inquiries.
This argument is supportedby FazlurRahmanwho statesthat:
Avicenna himself tells us in the prefaceto his epistleon Pophecy .
Tif Rasa'i.
of the 'doubts'of his correspondentregardingthe Faith, and he has rebukedin more than one place the'irreligious so-called philosophers',just as he has rebukedthe'common herd' and its leaders.
This crisis is similar to that of the Hellenistic paganism which the Stoics tried to avert.
But quite apart from this crisis, the philosophers too had a desperateneed for understandingIslam thernselves in termsof theif rationalism.
Moreover, it is noteworthythat the ninth and the tenth centuries were the most productiveperiod of the translationmovementin the intellectual history of Islam.
On the one hand,Baghdadwas a "heaven"for this philosophicaltradition, but on the other, it was a placewhere its proponents "were forced to defend their teachings before a sceptical,and somewhat threatened, traditionally minded Muslim intelligentsia.
"20
Thus, the environmentitself shapedIbn Sina'sphilosophicalimageof the 2l In fact, it has been arguedthat the Muslim philosophers,including Ibn Sina,who lived in an Islamic environment,tried to harmonize their belief in "the supremacyof reason with the absoluteclaim of Islar.
"22
As Strausspoints out:
The medium through which God reveals Himself to man is a prophet, i.
, a human being.
The falasifa attemptedtherefore to AI-Jami'ah.
No.
60/1997
The Image of The Prophet in lbn Sind's Thought understandthe processof Revelationas essentiallyrelatedto, or as identical with, a peculiar"connatural"perfection,and in fact, the supremeperfection, of man.
Being loyal philosophers,the falasifa were compelled to justiff their pursuit of philosophybefore the tribunal of the Divine Law.
Consideringthe importance which they attachedto philosophy,they were thus driven to interpret Revelation as the perfectpolitical orderwhich is perfectprecisely because it lays upon all suSpiently equippedmen the duty to devotetheir lives to philosophy.
In readingIbn Sina'sconceptofprophecy,one is struck by the fact that it is similar to that of Farabi's.
In fact, it is important to note that the latter was the first to formulatea theoryof prophecy.
Hence,Ibn Sina's basic concepts are bonowed from Farabi,eventhough the former Addielaboratedit "in a fuller accountof the intellectualrevelation.
"24
tionally, in his autobiographyIbn Sina acknowledgesthat it was only' 'a.
, with the help of Farabi's Metaphysics (Kitab Ma Ba'da al-Tabi could he understandAristotle.
2sMore importantly.
Hajji Khatifah .
asserts that al:Shif is basedon Farabi'sbook The Second Teachi ng .
I- Ta' im aI- Thai.
In discussingthe perfectruler andthe perfectassociation,Farabl ln order to preservehimself and to attain his highestperfections every human being is by his very naturein need.
of many things which he cannotprovide all by himself.
he is indeed in need of peoplewho eachsupplyhim with someparticularneed of his.
Everybodyfindshimself in the samerelation to everybody elsein this respect.
After describing the excellent city and the ranksof peoplewho live there,Farablgoeson to list the qualitiesof the ruler of that city:
The ruler of the excellent city cannol just be any man, because rulership requirestwo conditions: .
he should be predisposedfor it by his inborn nature, .
he shouldhave acquiredthe attitude and habit of will for rulershipwhich will develop in a man whose inborn nature is predisposedfor it.
That man is a personover whom nobody has any sovereignitywhatsoever.
He is a man who has reachedhis perfection andhasbecomeactually intellect and actually being thought .
, his rePresentativefaculty having by nature reachedits utmost perfectionin the way stated bv us.
Al-Jami'ah.
No.
60/1997
FatimahHusein It is clear, however, that for Farabi this ruler has to go through stagesto attain proximity to the active intellect:
There are thus two stagesbetweenthe first stageof being a man and the Active Intellect.
When the perfectPassiveIntellect and the natural disposition become one thing in the way the compound of matter and form is one-andwhen the form of the humanity of this man is taken as identical with the PassiveIntellect which has become actually intellect, there will be betweenthis man and the Active lntellect only one stage.
And when the natural disposition is made the matter of the Irassivelntellect which has become actually intellect, and the PassiveIntellect the matter of the Acquired Intellect, and the AcquiredIntellect the matter of the Active Intellect, andwhen this is taken as one and the samething, then this man is the man on whom the Active Intellect has descended.
When this occurs in both parts of his rational faculty, namely the theoreticaland the practical rational faculties,and also in his representativefaculty, then it is this man who receivesDivine Revelation, and God Almighty grants him Revelation through the mediationof the Active Intellect.
Thus he is, through the emanation from the Active Intellect to his PassiveIntellect.
wise man and a philosopher and an accomplishedthinker who employs an intellect of divine quality, and through the emanation from the Active lntellect to his faculty of representationa visionary prophet: who warns of things to come and tells of particular things which exist at present.
This man holds the most perfect rank of humanity and has reachedthe highestdegreeof felicity.
His soul is united as it were with the Active intellect, in the way statedby us.
The above quotation of Farabj'srevealsimportant similarities as well as differences between Farabl's and Ibn Slna'sconceptionsof prophecy.
Ibn Sina, for instance,highlights the needfor partnershipwithin the framework of law, legislation,and prophecy,while Farabi situateshis notion of association within the context of the perfect state and the discourse on the ruler of that state.
Moreover.
the sirnilaritiesbetweenIbn Sina's prophet and Farabi'sphilosopher-king,as a link betweenthe terrestrial and celestialworld, are evident.
There is further similarity betweenIbn Sina and Farabi'sconceptions of the relation betweenthe active intellect and the prophethimself.
In Farabi's understanding,when the prophetreceivesa revelationthere is no intermediary between him and the active intellect .
a al-muttahiddat Al-lami'ah,N o.
60/1997
The Image of The Prophet in lbn SIn6's Thought hi al-'aqli al-fa-'aD.
to In line with this argument,Ibn Sina reasonsthat revelation is the emanation .
l-wafyu hadhihi al-ifadal.
which the prophet receivesfrom the active intellect without mediation.
3tSom" scholars go even further to arguethat in Ibn Sinils scheme,the prophet is identical with the active intellect.
Nevertheless,there are some differencesbetween the two concepts.
First, for Farabl the ruler must be both philosopher.
and prophet .
3t For Ibn Sin4 however,the prophetis a man who lives in the real world, even though his explanationon the proof of prophecyin this treatise is very philosophical.
Second,in spite of the similarities in their conceptions of the relationshipbetweenthe active intellect and the prophet.
Ibn Sina's differs from Farabi's in that the latter's schemerequires the prophet to go through stagesofordinary philosophical thought while in the former's,propheticrevelationis before attaining revelation,3a something which happens"all at once" .
af ata.
One may conclude from the above explanation that Ibn Sina's proof of prophecy is presentedin a philosophical,yet Islamic m"nner''u Even while addressingthe concept of philosophy in general,he is also making specific referenceto the prophecyof Mullammad.
Commentingon the authenticity of Muhammad'sprophethood,he statesthat it is clear for the reasonable rnan .
l-'aqill to graspwhen he compareshim with other 3TFaraUi, on the other hand, does not make direct referenceto the prophet Muhammad.
One doesfind, however,that his conceptionof the prophet and revelation is Islamic, a.
she doesnot separatethe role of the ruler of the virtuous city from the prophet who is the recipient of Ibn Sina'sapproachto the philosophicalinterpretationof Qur'anic verses, also owes much to Farabi'stheory which assertsthat religion is the symbolic accountof philosophicaltruth.
"the foremostGreekphilosophers and prophetsmadeusein their booksof symbolsand signs in which FarAbienunciatesthe conceptualrelathey hid their secret doctrine.
"3e tion between philosophy and religion in his masterpiece Ara' Ahl al' Madinah.
It is the philosopher,in Farabi'sconception,who is chosento be the lawgiver.
and religion is describedin the context of imitation of the abstract truth.
Al-lami' ah.
No.
60/1997
FatimahHusein The Prophet as a Lawgiver (Based on The Metaphysics XIAI' Ilahiyya tl of al-Shifa' [Tbe Heali ngf,) Ibn Sina beginshis explanationby laying down the preceptof man as a "social being," who cannot exist in isolation.
He goeson to argue that partnership can only be achievedthrough mutual exchangess.
t amala.
, which are regulated through law andjustice.
Accordingly, law and justice demanda lawgiver .
,and a disposerofjustice .
t addill, who is in a position to addressthe peopleand authoritatively make them obey to the law.
Ibn Sina proceeds with the discussionon the logical proof of the needfor the existenceofthe prophet,to state:
Thus, with respect to the survival and actual existenceof the human species,the needfor this humanbeing is far greaterthan the need for suchbenefitsas the growing ol'the hair on the eyebrow.
Now the existenceof the righteousman to legislateand to dispense justice is a possibility.
It becomes impossible,therefore, that divine providenceshouldordain the existenceof those former benefits and not the latter, which aretheir bases.
Nor is it possible that the First Principle and the angelsafter Him should know the former and not the latter.
Nor yet is it possiblethat that which He knows to be in itself within the realm of possibility but whose realization is necessaryforintroducing the good order,should not And how can it not exist, when that which dependsand is constructedon its existence.
exisis?a2 Based on this reason.
Ibn Slna arguesthat a prophet must exist .
awajibun idhan an yijada nabiyyu.
,and he must be a human .
He must possesscharacteristicswhich are not possessed by others such that he may be recognized,and he will perform the miracles.
t iza.
is then obligatedto establishlaws for human'saffairs with God'spermission, by His command.
His revelation,and the descentof the holy spirit upon the prophet.
Regarding the prophet's role.
Ibn Sin[ arguesthat he should only teach people about the onessof God.
His Truth and His unique essence.
Beyond that, a more complex knowledgeof God would simply confuse religious masses sinceit is very rare for peopleto understandthe truth of the divine unity .
l-tauhi.
, and divine remoteness .
l-tanzi.
The prophet, then, must instill in them the belief in the return .
l-ma'adyin a way they can understand.
AI-lami'ah.
N o.
60/1997
The Inrage of The Prophet in lbn Sfn6's Thought Ibn Sina reasonsthat being a preserverof legislation,the prophet must preservethe law he establishesconcerningmantswelfare .
l-masalih al-insaniyyal.
To do that, he must guide the peopleto repeatcenain acts at frequentspecifiedintervals.
The noblestof this act of worship is, in Ibn Sina's view, prayer .
l-sala.
,for which the prophet commandsgood manners for eachtime ofprayer.
asThe proplretis orderedby God to command people to His worship, and to serve as caretakerof men'saffairs, their lives in this world and their well-being in the hereafter.
He is distinguished from the rest of mankind by virtue of his godliness.
i ta'alluhihD.
Ibn Sina maintains that the legislator'sfirst aim in laying down the laws and organizing the city can be categorizedinto threegroups:
l-mudahbiru.
, artisans .
, and guardians .
IbnSinathen providesa detailedexplanationof how the legislator should lead the city's affairs,to mentiona few, prohibit idleness,unemployment,gambling,and usury.
The legislatormust also urgepeopleto the institution of marriage,by which the continuity of the speciesis prea7 served,and the proof of the existenceof God is revealed.
It is worth noting Ibn Slna'sperceptionof womenin relation to the legislator's role as a caretaker.
In his scheme,women,as irrational .
ahiyat al-'aqll human beings,arenot permittedto make any decisions with respect to separation.
He goes evenfr.
rrtherto makethe claim that the legislatormust veil and secludewomen.
n yasunna 'alaiha fr babiha al-tasatturu wa al-takhadur.
from men since,in reality, women run the risk of sharing their sexualdesireswith many men.
Unlike their male counterparts,women cannot go to work, and the legislatormust, therefore, ordainthat men areresponsiblefor meetingher needs.
ln short.
Ibn Sina maintains that men must own women,but not vice versa.
a huwa annahuyumlikuha wa hiya la tamlikuh.
Concerningthe issueofsuccession,Ibn Sinareasonsthat the legislator should impose compliancefor whosoeversucceedshim.
and the of the eldsuccessorscan eitherbe chosenby himselfor by the consensus ers (Dr ijma' min ahli al-sabiqa.
He must decreein his law that in the event of a disagreementand fighting, or the designationof someoneother than the virtuous individual,the communitywould be guilty of an act of unbelief .
afaru bi T-llah\.
Furthermore,Ibn Sina arguesthat the legislator should makethe responsibilityfor fighting and killing anyonewho claims the caliphate basedon lrcwer or wealth, incumbentupon every citizen.
Al-lami'ah,No,60fl997 FatimahHusein With referenceto communallife.
Ibn Slna reasonsthat the legislator must also legislate that peopleareenjoinedto help otherswith their properties and lives.
The legislator must also impose punishments ('uqiba.
, penalties .
udid1, and prohibitions .
azajifl to preventdisobedienceto the divine law for fear of the afterlife.
It is important to note that Ibn Sina stressesthe moderate.
t tadi.
natureof the laws concerning worship, marriage,and prohibition.
To conclude,Ibn Sina arguesthat it is necessaryfor the legislator to "prescribe laws regarding morals fal-akhlai.
and customs.
l-' adall that advocatejustice, which is the mean.
"t' Whoroenercombinestheoretical wisdom .
l-hikma.
with justice .
l-nazariyya.
is the happy man.
In addition to thesequalities,whosoeveracquiresthe propheticqualities .
l-khawass al-nabawiyya.
, becomes almost a human god .
abban insaniyya.
, whom it is almost permissibleto worship, after the worship of God.
He is indeedthe world's earthly king and God'sdeputy in it .
ultan al-'alam al-ardi wa khalifat at-allah frhil.
Analysis In this worlg Ibn Sina depictsthe prophetas lawgiver, and provides a very detailed explanation of the role of the prophetin the social While the first sectionin this treatiseengagesin a logical, abstract argument on the necessityof the prophet'sexistence,Ibn Sina neverloses sight of the prophet as a religiousand practicalfigure in the community.
Hence, in this particular work, as well as in fi ltltbat, onefinds that the image of the prophetis depictedin both philosophicaland religiousterms.
ln al-Ilahiyyat, however, the emphasis is on the prophet's role as a religious figure.
It is of coursevery hard, if not impossible,to determinewhy Ibn Slna chose to depict the imageof the prophetin the mannercited above.
Ibn SInahimself provided no explanationas to why he wrote this treatise as he did in Fi Ithbat al-Nubuwwat.
One can,nevertheless, approach in an attempt to arrive at an answerby tracing lbn Sina's life.
Being a Muslim and, at the sametime, a philosopher,it is most likely that he has internalizedtwo imagesof the prophet:one, a religiousfigure, and the other, a philosophicalfigure.
As a Muslim, he could not but adhereto the Islamic belief that the prophetdoesexist.
As a philosopher,his intellect strove to assimilatethis faith in the existenceof the prophetwith rational premises.
AI-lami'ah,N o.
60/1997
Thehnage ofThe Prophet in lbn Sind's Thought Again, in this treatise oriefinds somesimilarities as well as differences between Ibn Sina'sconceptof prophecyand that of Farabi.
The premise that men aresocialbeingsappearsin both of their argumentsas an opinion which holds that everyhumanbeing is in needof other people.
Moreover, in al-Ilahiyyat.
Ibn Sina employsFirabi's concept of the state to be definedin Islamic teachings,rituals, and institutions.
The obligation of prayer, pilgrimage, holy war, prohibitionsof gamblingand usury,the laws of marriage and divorce,andthe institution of the caliphateare all discussedwithin Farabi'sframework.
Ibn Sina's argument that "whoever wins the propheticqualities becomesalmost a humangod,"54yields the assumptionthat anyonecan be a prophetif they fulfil the qualitiesmentionedabove.
Upon closerexamithat it is only nation, however,one finds in anotherpart of his argumentss a few people who have these qualities.
Therefore,he suggeststhat not everybodycan be a prophet.
In this treatise, as well as in FI lthhit,Ibn Sina statesthat prophecy is a necessity.
s6Marmuraprovidesan interestingana-lysis of this notion of the necessityof prophecyin the light of Ash'arite theology.
tt Taking Ghazafi's argument as a representativeof the Ash'arite position.
Ibn Slna's conception of prophecy is brought to question.
Ghazali states that while it is true that the falasifabelievein God .
/San.
and the prophecy of Muhammad,they, however,hold someargu'ah .
upig al-shaf.
They believe,in ments which contradict the Shari Ghazafi'sunderstanding,that the prophetis unableto explain "The Truth" because the lack of human's understandingof "The Truth" itself.
Ghazali's condemnationcan be tracedback to the Ash'arite doctrineson In Ash'afi's Maqalat,for example,one finds the conceptof predetermination which holds that God determineseverythingwithout interference from humanbeings.
As a logical extensionof this premise,it can be arguedthat there is no necessityfor God to makethe prophetexist.
Marmura notes two sensesof Ibn Sina'sprophecythat contradict the Ash'arite view.
The prophet, as one seesin Ibn Sina'sargument,is needed for introducinggood order.
This carriestwo implications:first, it means that the majority of humanbeingsneedto be guidedby divine law, and Ibn Slna takes this further to arguethat God could not have created all men virtuous, an obviousnegationof Ash'arism.
second,the good order, which requires prophets,must be devisedby God, and this alsocontradicts the Ash'arites.
60Marmurabelievesthat while Ibn Slna'spolitical Al-lami'ah,No.
Fatimah Husin state is Platonic,the institutions he conceivesfor it are Islamic.
The quesrion arises, therefore, as to why Ghazalicondemnedhim as ineligious.
Marmura arguesthat the answer lies in the fact that lbn Slna's prophecy is devisedwithin a "metaphysicalframeworkof necessaryernanation" which can never be acceptedby the Ash'arites.
Moreover,Ibn sina's insistenceon the acceptanceof certain kinds of miracleswas indiametrical contrast to the Ash'arite position.
6l Hence.
Marmuraconcludes that "Avicenna is not accusedby al-Ghazaliof giving merely lip service to this fundamentaltenet of Islam.
Rather,what is at stakeis the conceptionof the diety andprophethood.
"62
It is ofcourse beyondthe scopeofthis paperto judge the dispute between Ibn sina and Ghazafi.
one might, however,concludethat Ibn Sina's pronouncementson the necessity of prophecystemsfrom his rational belief in the needfor a lawgiveron the onehand,and from his religious belief in the prophets' existence,on the other.
Ibn Sjna,scareful avoidanceof the word rasil in any referenceto the prophetthroughouthis works, does, however, raise some interesting questions.
6'on.
speculatethat it betrayshis ineligiousity.
Nevertheless, if one fully understandsthe setting in which Ibn Slnaworked and lived, one may come to the conclusion that his conceptionson prophecyhad to have a philosophical formula in orderto adaptand speakto the prevailingintellectual Erwin Rosenthal maintains that there is not enoushevidenceto show "whetherAl-Farabi and Ibn slna and Ibn Rushd-"un-t by prophecy what the Muslim theologiansmeant, or rather what plotinus, and porphyry meant.
"64It is true, he argues,that "the revealedraw of Ibn sina's God" is similar to "the law of Plato'sGod.
" This resemblance, however,is not total as the conceptofthe Shari 'a is extendedto the discussionon the hereafter,but is not in Plato'sNomos.
6sRosenthalreachesthe conclusion that Ibn Sina and other Muslim philosophersregardedtheir faith in God and His revelationas their building premisesor "starting-point.
"66
Rahman also points out that the adoptionof "the peripateticdoctrine of the Intellect, the later neo-Platonicdoctrineof the Law of symbolization, the Stoic doctrineof the inner inspirationand of externalparaperceptual experience,and the equally stoic doctrineof the'civil theology' instituted by the sage-Law-giver,"was meantto evokean adequate image of the Prophet and his actualperformance.
The doctrineof Intel- Al-lami'ah,No.
60/1997
The Image of The Prophet in lbn Sind's Thought lect, argues Rahman,was introducedas "the necessarybase without which the whole superstructurewould collapse.
"Hence.
Rahmanconcludes that the philosophersare justifably called 'the defendersof the Faith'.
Concluding Remarks In the history of lslamic philosophy,it is a matterof fact that the falasifaowe muchto Greekphilosophy.
This, however,cannotbe taken to areHellenic.
In his docmean that all Muslim philosophers'conceptions a systematicand, trine of the Ibn Sinaelaborated in a way, original conception,which had not beenseenpreviouslyin the history of religiousthought.
In both Fi lthbat and al-Ilahiyyat,Ibn Sina depicts the image of the prophetin philosophicalaswell asreligious,sociologicalandpolitical In the first treatise, howeveq the image is more "philosophic" since the traditional definition andthe role of the prophetdid not satisfy Moreover, it is important to note that Ibn Sina'ssettingitself led him to have this philosophicalimageof theprophet.
In al-Ilahiyyat.
image of the prophet is drawnin a morereligiousstyle because,being a Muslim.
Ibn Sina neededto understandandexplainto himself,and to the as the socialleader.
masses,what the role of the prophet encompassed Furthermore,living in an Islamicmilieu.
Ibn Sinawas forcedto harmonize his rationalinquireswith the Islamicdoctrines.
The similarities and differences betweenIbn Sina'sand Farabl's In spiteof the fact that conceptions of prophecyhavebeendemonstrated.
of the latter.
Ibn the former bases much of his thought as the moresystematicof the two.
Sina'sapproachmust be acknowledged End Notes Ibn Sina.
Sint al-Shaykhat-Rafs.
Completedby al-Juzajani,edited and translated into English by William E.
Gohlman.
The life oflba Siaa(Albany: SUNY Press,1.
, | 8-9.
'hia.
t mia.
l-sr.
'Ibia.
Fazlur Rahman, hophecy in Islan: Philosophy and Ofihodoxy.
Allen and Unwi.
, 1958,vi.
Al-l ami'ah,No.
George Fqtimah Husein Ibn SinA.
Fi lthbat al-Nubuwwit Edited with lntroduction and Notes by Michael Marmura (Beirut: Dar Al-Nahar, 1.
,41.
Marmurabasedthis edition on I text printed in Cairo Fi lthbat al-Nubuwwat in Ti! Rasa'il .
He translated this treatise into English as: Avicenna, "On the Proof of Propheciesand the Interpretation of the Prophet's Symbols and Metaphors," Medieval Political Philosophy, edited byR.
Mahdi (Ithaca:Cornell University Press,1.
,ll2-21.
Ibn SioA, at-Shifa: at-IlahiSyat The critical edition of the Arabic original was ntade The Englishtranslationby M.
Marby G.
Anawati and others(Cairo:1.
,435-455.
mura: Avicenna, "Healing: MetaphysicsX," Medieval Political Philosophy, edited by R.
krner and M.
Mahdi (Ithaca:Cornell UniversityPrcss,1.
,98-l | |.
Actually Ibn Sinl's commentary on prophecyis scatteredthroughout his mauy treatises, and this makes the effort to understandhis comprehensiveapproachto prophecy This paper, however, ouly concentrateson the two treatises mentioned above, with referencesto his other works where they relate to the content of both books.
'Ibn Sini.
Ei lthbat ,42.
Avicenna,"ou the Proof," I 13.
lbn Sini.
Fi lthbat,42.
Avicenna,"On the Proof," I13.
" Ibn Sine, ibid.
A3.
Avicenna,ibid.
I 134.
In someother works.
Ibn Sina divides the powers of intellect into four kinds, the material .
l-'aql bayilan.
, the habitual .
l-'aql bi al-ntalak.
, the actual .
t-'aql bi al-Ii'I), andthe acquiredintellect .
l-'aql al-ntustald.
See al-ShilT' : al-labi'i1yat.
Fa 6: al-Nafs.
Edited byG.
Anawati and S.
YazedPreface and revisions by Ibrahirn Madkour (Cairo: al-Hai'a al-Misriyya al-'arna li alkiteb, 1.
, 38-40.
-Ishant wa al-Tanbihal(Cairo:Dlr al-Ma'arif, 1.
,vol.
2, 38896.
al-Najat (Beirut: Dar al-Jili, 1.
,vol.
2,434.
Seealso P.
Heath.
Philosopltyaad Allegotyia Aviceana(Philadelphia: University of PhiladelphiaPress,1.
, 65.
M"t-ura.
"Avicenna's PsychologicatProof of Prophecy," Iournal of Near East' em Studies,22.
:52.
In this article Mamrrua analyzrs Ibu Sina's proof of prophecy in detail, trying to show that the latter presentsthe proof in a descriptive rather than argumentativemanner,sespeciallyp.
This debate,however,is beyoudthe scopeof this paper.
lbn Sine,Ei lthbat,434.
Avicenna,"On the Proof," I14.
Avice"t'a, "On the Proof," I l4.
Ibn Sna.
Fi lihbat,44.
It shouldbe noted herethat for lbn Sina the intelligibles include two kinds: primary and secondary.
The first are "the self evident tnlths" and the second are "truths deducedfrom the primary.
" Almost all men receive the primary intelligibles, and i.
rra direct way.
On the contrary, only a small class of men receive the secondaryintelligiblCs.
The latter are those who capableof abstract thought.
However, most of men in this classdid not receive these intelligibles directly.
Here lies the category of the prophet, who receivesthe secondaryintelligibles in a direct way.
See Ibn Sirn6,Avicenna's De AtLna: Being the Psychological Pad of Kitab al-Shifa, edited by Fazlur Rahman .
nudon: Oxford University Press, 1.
,46.
See also Mannura, "Avicenna'sPsychological,"51.
Ibn Sina.
Fi lthbat,45-7.
Avicenna,"On the Proof," I l4-5.
Ibn Sin", ibid.
,48.
Avicer,rra,"Onthe Proof," I l6.
Ibn Sint, ibid.
Ibn sint.
Fi lthbat,49-50.
Rahman.
Pmphecyin Islu463.
Al-Jami'ah,No.
TheImageofThe Prophetin lbn Sind'sThought Alfred lvry, "Al-Farabi ," The Canbridge Histoty of Anbic Litentue: Religion.
Leaming and Scieacein the'Abbesid Period.
Edited by M.
Youug, et.
(Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press,1.
, 380.
J"r".
Morris argues that it is lbn Siua who brought out rnost forcefirlly the need for plrilosophy to understand"the historically establishedfomrs of prophecy" iu hts Kitab al-Nafs of al-Shili'.
Rahmau's edition, anqelah4, chapter 2, 169-82.
See Morris, "The Philosopher-Prophet iu Avicelna's Political Philosophy," The Political Aspects of IsIantc Philosophy.
Charles E.
Butterworth, ed.
(Massachusetts:Harvard University Press, 1.
,187-8.
Joel.
Kraemer, "The Jihad of the Falasifa," Ierusalent Studies in Anbic and IsIan, lO .
: 290.
It is a rnatter of fact that Aviceura lived at the tinre when "the couquering power of religion meets the restraining discipline of rational aualysis and explanation, and active minds are inrmediately engagediu altempts at reconciliation or syuthesis.
" However one should differentiate between his tirue and that of Kindi and FaraUi, for the latter were "the products of the goldeu era of Arabic.
and Aviceula belouged, iu time if not in sentinrent,to au hislorical period aud a uatioual phenornenonklown as the Persian Renaissance.
"Soheil M.
Afiran.
Avicenna: His Life and Works(London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
, 1.
,38-9.
l-o Strauss.
Penecution aad tbe Afl of Writiag!{(}hicago:The Uuiversity of Chicago Press, 1.
, 10.
Strauss, however, does uot specificallyreferto lbn Sina iu this discussion, rather he discussesthe situatiou and couditiou ofthe falasifa in geueral.
Rahman,Prcphecyin Islaq3l.
Seealso Afiran.
Aviceu426.
Ibn sine, $reh,32.
Ma.
lid Fakhry.
A History of Islarnic Philosophy, secondedition (Ne*'York: Columbia University Press,1.
,128.
Farabi.
An'Ahl al-Madiaa at-FndilE.
Translated by Richard Walzer as AI-Fanbi on the Perfect Stale (Oxford: Clareudon Press,1.
, 228-9.
"2nFarAbi.
Ara'Ahl "I-M"daa,238-41 .
,24z-s.
Farebi, *a'lhl al-M"ilna,2M-5.
Ibn Sina,Fi lthbat,45,47.
Rahman.
Prcphecyin Islan,3l.
However, one might think that this argument goes too far since Ibn Sina himself doesnol clenrly statethat tlte two are identical.
" Farabi.
Ara'Ahl al-Mailn4 250-1.
3'See note 27 above.
Ibn Sint dictates tbat the human soul, so long as it is in the body, cannot receive the intelligibles all at once.
It is possible forthem to receive them only ifthe soul separates from the body, and only the prophetic souls can accept the intelligibles either at once .
af ata.
or almost at once .
adban nin daf ati.
, by intuition.
These intelligibles .
uwwah qudsilyah\ are then transformed into symbolic revelation to regulate human Ibn Siua.
Avicenaa's De Aainta, nnqalah 5, chapter 2,249-50.
See also Rahmau, hopbecy ia IslaU 16-7.
" On" might disagreewith the Islamic characterof tbn Sini's prophecy in this treatise: "Here lin Fi lthbetl Avicenna does not discussthe particular characteror ends of the lawgiver, law, or rcgrme.
Nor does he insists that such philosophically inspired prophecy is identical to the 'divine' sort of prophecy mentioned at the end of this passage,"Morris, "The Philosopher-Prophet,u | 69.
Upon closer scrutiny, however, one finds that this ar- Al-Jstri'oh.
No.
60/1997
FatimahHu*in gument cannot be substantiated,since the temrs usedin this treatise are Islamic, and Ibn Sina .
himself clearly refers to the prophethood of Muharnmad, sei lthbat,47.
Nasr even argues that Ibn Sina's prophecyis oue ofthe specialinterCsts il his religious philosophy.
In his theory.
Ibn Sina "seeksto fornrulate a philosophicaltheory in conformity with the teachings of the Quran and cousisteutat the sametime with his geueralworld " Thrce Muslin Sages: Aviceuta-Suhrawardi-Ibtt 'Ara6i (New York: Caravau Books, 1976\,42.
Ibn sine.
Fi lthbat, 47.
See note 3l above.
" Avicenna, "On the Proof," I 16 Ferebi.
Ara' Ahl al-Madina, 278-85.
Ibn Sina, al-IlChi1yat,44l.
Avicenua, "Healing," 99.
Ibn Sina also gives the same account on the necessityofhuman interaction, aud tbe need for a legislator .
lan') in his al-Isharat wa al-TaabihaT(Cairo: Dar al-Ma'irif, 1.
,vol.
4, 802-3.
For the English translation of this volume see Shams lnati.
Ihu Sina aod Mysticisnt: Reonrks and Admonitioas.
Part Four (London: Kegan Paul International, 1.
Ibn Sine, al-IlahiSyat,442.
Avicenna, "Healing," 100.
Ibn Sina,r'6rd,442.
Avicenna,ibid.
, 100.
Ibn Sina,ibid.
,442-3.
Avicenla ibid.
, 100-1.
lbn Sin", ibid.
,445.
Seealso al-Isharat,vol.
4,807.
lbn Sina, al-Ilahisyat,446.
Ibn Sioe, ibid, 447-8.
Marmura believes that the greatest legsslator.
fttala aIshan-i.
discussed by lbn Sina here refers to the prophet Muharnmad.
s fivissnrr6, "Healing," 106.
Marmura points out that Muhanmradis not usually referredto directly in Ibn Sina's treatises, however, in this particular part, he is positive that "the greatest of legislators" refers to Muharnmad.
see Marmura "Avicenna's Theory of prophecy in the Light of Ash'arite Theology," The Seed of Wisdon, edited by W.
McCullough (Toronto: University of Toronto Press,1.
,159.
Ibn sine, al-Ilehiwat, 450.
Ibn Sina, aI-IIChiWat,45l-2.
,4s34.
,454.
Avicenla, "Healing," I10.
Ibn sine, ibid.
,45s.
S"e the above explanation on both Ibn Sina'sand Farabi'sconceptionsofthe state, especially notes 27, 28, 45, 47, and49.
See also Mannura, "The Islarnic Philosophers' Conception of Islam, ' Islan's .
udenlaading of ltself, edttedby R.
Hovannisian and Vryonis.
Jr.
(California:UndenaPublications,1.
,99.
Seenole 52 above.
See, among others, al-Ilehiryal,443.
Mamrura argues that in most of his psychologicaltreatises,Ibu Srna is content to argue for the possibility ofprophecy.
He goeson stating that there seemsto be one psychological proof for the necessity of prophecyi\ Fi lthbat, 'Avicenna's Tbeory," 169.
This paper, however, finds that Ibn Sina arguesfor the necessityofprophecy iu both /T Ith bCt and al-Ilahilyat.
M"rm*", "Avicenna'sTheory," 159-78.
Ghaze[,' al-Iqtis.
aA fi et-t iiqaa lCairo, no dat.
I I I .
The text reads: w.
aktuilan yaqdiru 'ala al-taptifii fr al-laqqi Ii kalali ilhani al-khalqf aa darkihi, which, at lust Al-lami'ah,No.
60/1997
The luage of The Prophet in lbn Sfn6's Thought glance, suggests that the prophet lacks uuderstauding about "The Truth.
" One finds, however, that the text rcads Ii kalali ilhaili, aud uot t kalali ilhnnhi.
Irr this seuse, the texl rcens that it is the prophet who is unable to explain "The Truth" to his people.
Dul beceuseof the lack of humau'sunderstandingof "The Truthu itself.
Both meanings,however, suggestthe prophet's limitation, which is a clue to Ghazali's critique of the hlasifa.
See elso Marmura, "Avicenna's Theoryr" 160.
Actuely there is no direct statemeut frour Ash'ar-iwhere he states that there is uo rccessity for the prophet's existence.
He, however, holds tbe opidon that everything is predetermined by God, and that He cau changeevery law of the Qur'an .
a iuahu idha tmt,t li shai'atia thunnta sakhaha hianana dhalika liennahu badalahu frhV).
Maqalat (Cairo: Maktabat al-NahdiSlyatrl-Mi.
riyyah, 1.
, vol.
l, 109.
Forthe ,I-Isbnitin discrcsioo on the status of prophecy as thavah.
or ibtida'.
re-determiue.
, see 122,162t Mrrmura, "Avicenna'sTlreoryr" 170.
Mermura, "Avicenna's Theory," | 72-5.
,l78.
Morris arguesthat Ibn Sina's avoidanceof the word rasr7is related to his refusal to 'portny Islamic ethical teachings and religious practices as either necessaryor suftcieut to rttrin full hunan perfection.
" Morris, "The PhilosopherProphet," 166.
*Erwin Rosenthal .
Political Thoag:htin Medieval Islan: An Inlroductory Oulline (Crmbridge: Cambridge Uuiversity Press,1.
, 150.
"Ibid.
,r49.
,rso.
Rahman.
Prcphecy ia Islan,634.
BIBLIOGRAPHY