THE ORIGINS OF FAZLUR RAHMAN S THEORY OF REVELATION

Transcription

1 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization THE ORIGINS OF FAZLUR RAHMAN S THEORY OF REVELATION Ali Akbar Faculty of Arts (Asia Institute) Melbourne University, Australia akbara@student.unimelb.edu.au ABSTRACT In the past few decades, a number of Muslim scholars have attempted to challenge various aspects of the traditional views on revelation. Prominent among them is the Pakistani Muslim scholar and reformer Fazlur Rahman ( ). The main purpose of this paper is to examine the extent to which Rahman s account of revelation is influenced by theories of revelation proposed by medieval Muslim philosophers. Among medieval philosophers, the paper focuses on al-kindi (d.873), Farabi (d.950) and Ibn Sina (d.1037). The paper argues that the core features of Rahman s theory of revelation are found in the writings of the above-mentioned Muslim philosophers. In this respect, the paper shows that the commonality between the thoughts of Rahman and some medieval Muslim intellectuals illustrates the potential of certain ideas found in past generations Islamic thought for their incorporation into the modern Islamic discourse Introduction The concept of revelation has always been an important issue for Muslim scholars in the course of Islamic history. The majority of Muslim scholars in the past fourteenth century have maintained that the Prophet Muhammad received God s Words through the mediation of the Angel Gabriel, and thus he played no participatory role in the process of the revelation. Fazlur Rahman, the well-known Pakistani scholar and reformer of the twentieth century, is one of the scholars who challenged this traditional theory of revelation, as a result of which he faced anger from Pakistani theological circles and was gradually enforced to leave his hometown. Rahman often defended his views as being consistent with those proposed by some medieval Muslim philosophers. However, there are no academic studies that compare his theory of revelation with medieval prophetic thought. In this paper, I will attempt to address this issue by undertaking a detailed comparison between Rahman s theory of revelation on the one hand and that of the medieval Muslim philosophers on the other hand, namely al-kindi, Farabi and Ibn Sina. The central argument of the paper is that the main features of Rahman s account of revelation are found in the writings of these medieval Muslim philosophers. These commonalities show that certain ideas within the past generations of Islamic thought have the potentials to get incorporated into the modern Islamic discourse. Organized by 91

2 2. Background Studies and Methodology A number of scholars have acknowledged that Fazlur Rahman has been under the influence of some medieval Muslim philosophers when developing his account of revelation. Forough Jahanbakhash holds that Rahman s theory of revelation is more or less of the same nature that characterized medieval philosophical debates over the nature of kalam-e Bari (Jahanbakhsh 2009: xxix). Mary Catherine Jesse asserts that Rahman s understanding of Muhammad s role in the process of revelation bears the influences of Avicenna s theory of prophecy (Jesse 1991: 13). Jahanbakhsh and Jesse do not explain the extent to which Rahman s theory of revelation is influenced by medieval Muslim philosophers. Katharina Völker, however, has recently attempted to find some aspects of Rahman s theory of revelation in Ibn Sina s understanding of imagination or intellectualization in more details. According to her, Rahman s idea that the Prophet received emanation from the ultimate source of all beings is similar to Ibn Sina s (Völker 2015: ). Although Völker briefly explains the influence of some aspects of Ibn Sina s ideas on Rahman s, she does not fully deal with the impact of other medieval philosophers ideas such as the nature of revelation and the Prophet s role in revelation on Rahman s thoughts. This paper aims to address this lacuna and thus discusses the realm and extent of the influences of medieval Islamic philosophical thoughts on Rahman s theory of revelation in details. The methodology of this paper is as follows: I first extract the main features of Rahman s account of revelation from his writings, attempting to piece together his ideas on revelation to establish a coherent picture. Therefore, in the first part of this paper, I will analyze Rahman s views on various aspects of revelation, namely the nature of revelation, the role of the Prophet Muhammad in the process of revelation and in the wording of his revelatory experience. Then, I attempt to discover the main features of Farabi s, Ibn Sina s and al-kindi s account of revelation about similar issues. Finally, the paper gives a picture of how each aspect of Rahman s theory of revelation is influenced by the accounts of revelation proposed by above-mentioned Muslim philosophers. The paper focuses on five aspects of the theories of revelation proposed by medieval philosophers and Rahman: (1) the nature of revelation (2) the Prophet s preparation for receiving revelation (3) the involvement of the Prophet and the angelic figure in the process of revelation (4) the potentiality of the Prophet in receiving revelation and (5) the Prophet s power of transmitting God s Words to his audiences. 3. Fazlur Rahman s Account of Revelation According to Rahman, revelation in its very nature consisted of some words that the Prophet Muhammad heard although these words were not words in an ordinary sense. Revelation consisted of an actual mental sound, not a physical sound (Rahman 1980: 99). For Rahman, the word that the Prophet receives in the process of revelation is an idea-word, not a physically acoustic word (Ibid). What is also important in Rahman s account is that revelation also consisted of some sorts of feelings, having been created in the Prophet s heart. Therefore, what shaped the nature of the revelation was the combination of feelings, ideas and words (non-acoustic words), so during the process of revelation they were all born in the heart and mind of the Prophet (Rahman 2002: 33). Organized by 92

3 Another theme in Rahman s theory of revelation is the idea that the Prophet was not a passive recipient of revelation and had a role in the divine revelation he received. Rather than being an outsider, the Prophet was an integral agent of the revelation. Rahman believes that the Prophet s deeper personality played a central role in his recipient of revelation: there is no doubt that whereas on the one hand, the Revelation emanated from God, on the other, it was also intimately connected with his deeper personality (Rahman 1980: 100). In fact, Rahman rejected the externality of the Quranic revelations vis-à-vis the Prophet (Rahman 1982: 2; Rahman 2002: 31). In order to prove so, Rahman deals with the issue of the beginning of the Prophet s revelatory experience. According to him, the Prophet had an acute sensitivity for moral problems of his society from his earliest age. Muhammad s deeper personality as well as the certain problems that tormented his mind led him to pray to God in the cave of Hira for a solution. It was in this stage of his life that the divine guidance burst upon his heart (Rahman 1994: 11). Indeed, Muhammad s contemplation in the cave of Hira prepared its potential intellect for the emanation of the Active Intellect. Rahman concludes that although Muhammad did not consciously seek out prophethood, he had to possess some potentials before the stage in which he received his first revelation. These potentials were acquired by natural endowments given to the Prophet by God as well as his personal efforts. Indeed, Muhammad s participation prior to the recipient of revelation is that he did prepare himself for Prophethood (Rahman 1980: 91). According to Rahman, the Prophet s heart and mind were actively involved in the process of revelation. Some passages of the Quran indicate that revelation was directly sent down to the heart of the Prophet (Rahman 1980: 97; Rahman 2002: 31). 1 Rahman identifies the heart of the Prophet as the lowest heaven (Rahman 1980: 97), the idea well-known in medieval Islamic philosophical texts. In addition to the Prophet s heart, revelation flowed through his mind, so Muhammad s mind was another faculty which played an important role in revelation. Muhammad indeed received revelation as mental words (the ideas) that had become closely tied with his heart (the feelings) (For details of this idea see: Saeed 2014: 54). In his account of revelation, Rahman rejects the externality of the angelic figure. For Rahman, the agent of revelation is not an angel as is traditionally understood; rather, it is the Spirit (Rahman 1980: 96). Muhammad, like other prophets preceding him, had the benefit of God s Spirit, but the Spirit was internal to him. Rahman suggests that the Spirit is a faculty or an agency that develops in the heart of the Prophet (Ibid, 97), and that God infuses a Spirit in the Prophet s mind (Ibid, 99) in the actual revelatory process. Rahman concludes that Muslim theologians increased Gabriel s role as the transmitter of revelation in order to preserve the otherness and transcendence of the revelation, and to abandon the Prophet s role in revelation (Ibid, 95; See also Rahman 1994: 11). Although Rahman considers the Prophet s role in revelation as central, he is of the idea that revelation emanated from God and thus its ultimate source is God: the divine messages broke through the consciousness of the Prophet from an agency whose source is God (Rahman 1988: 24) and thus the true revealing subject always remains God (Rahman 1980: 99). He asserts that the source and the origin of the psychology of the creative process of Muhammad s mind lies beyond the ordinary reach of human agency (Rahman 1978: 111). Rahman sought to distinguish between 1 The Quranic verses which supports such idea, according to Rahman, is 26:194; 42:24; 2:92 Organized by 93

4 the source of revelation and the process of revelation. For him, insofar as its source is concerned, the revelation was external to the Prophet, but it was internal to him in regards with its actual process. In fact, revelation consists of an emanation from an external source, i.e. God, as well as an internal process in which the Prophet played a role. Rahman also says that although the Prophet s mind had to go through various stages of development before the recipient of revelation, his extraordinary mind and personality were God s endowment. This is to say that although Muhammad had to prepare himself for his prophetic career, he had a potential revelation in him bestowed by God (Rahman 1980: 101). Another role of the Prophet in revelation is to release the Spirit as well as the mental words and visions, and to clothe them in acoustic words during the circumstances to which they apply. Rahman suggests that the Quran was first brought down to the lowest heaven (i.e. the Prophet s heart) and then relevant verbal passages produced when needed (Rahman 1980: 97). He argues that the Prophet has a powerful ability which enables him to propel his feeling automatically into an idea, and the idea expresses itself automatically in words (Rahman 1994: 10). In Rahman s project, the nature of the Words the Prophet hears in revelation is distinguished from the words he uses for his audiences since the former consists of non-physical words whereas the latter includes physical words. The Prophet used his own words (in acoustic and physical forms) for his audiences but these words were in conformity with the mental words (or visions) received in the process of revelation. Therefore, in addition to the central role the Prophet plays in the actual process of revelation, he performed the task of transformation of the mental Words (or what he identifies as idea-words ) into acoustic words (or what he identifies as sound-words ). In this sense, for Rahman, the Quran becomes a part of Muhammad s speech: the Quran is entirely the Word of God and, in an ordinary sense, also entirely the word of Muhammad (Rahman 2002: 31). He elaborates that the Quran is the Word of God insofar as it is infallible and absolutely free from falsehood, but, insofar as it comes to the Prophet s heart and then his tongue, it was entirely his word (Rahman 1976: 299). Therefore, Rahman believes that the Quran holds both the verbal character of revelation and its intimate connection with the religious personality of the Prophet; it has both divine and human characters. 4. Some Evidences on the Influences of Medieval Philosophical Thoughts on Fazlur Rahman As shown, Rahman s theory stands in sharp contrast to the established traditional understanding of revelation which asserts that revelation occurred verbally and the Prophet had to repeat what he had received by the angelic figure. The author of Lisan al-arab, Ibn Manzur (d.1312), reflects the views of the majority of classical Muslim scholars when he defines the Quran as the inimitable revelation, the Speech of God revealed to the Prophet Muhammad through the Angel Gabriel literally and orally in the exact wording of the purest Arabic (cited in Esack 1998: 53). This shows that Rahman s understanding of revelation has no supports among most Muslim scholars of premodern era. However, one could ask whether Rahman s account had its origin on any medieval Muslim sources. One could instantly point to the influence of the Muʿtazilis, a rational medieval school of Islamic thought, on Rahman. The main influence of the Muʿtazilis on Rahman lies in the idea that the Quran is not eternal speech of God and was not a book given to the Prophet at one time. Rahman indeed has advocated the Muʿtazili position on the temporal nature of revelation (for details see: Martin 1997: 77, Saeed 2006: 42). Like Muʿtazili thinkers, Rahman believes in the createdness of the Quran and defends the historicity of the text, or what the Muʿtazilis had Organized by 94

5 recognized as the humanization of the Word of God (Martin 1997: 203). It is also important to note that Rahman, like Muʿtazilis, has stressed the Quranic principle of naskh (abrogation) throughout his writings in order to defend the idea that the Quran is created (For details of Rahman s view on naskh see: Sonn 1998: ). In addition to the Muʿtazilis, Rahman has been heavily under the influence of a number of medieval Muslim philosopher s account of revelation as I will argue in the next section. To me, the fact that Rahman wrote his PhD thesis on Avicenna s psychology at Oxford University gives some indication that he was under the influence of medieval philosophical teachings while developing his theory of revelation (his thesis was published later as a book, Rahman 1952). Furthermore, the teaching career of Rahman that began at Durham University, where he lectured in Islamic philosophy from 1950 until 1958, reveals his interests in medieval philosophical ideas (Berry 2003: 43). His interests in philosophy continued later since he wrote a book entitled Prophecy in Islam in which he explained theories of revelation developed by medieval Muslim philosophers such as Farabi and Ibn Sina (Rahman 1958). In terms of the influence of philosophical teachings on his ideas, Rahman himself asserted from the later forties to the mid-fifties I experienced an acute skepticism brought about by the study of philosophy. I shattered my traditional beliefs. (Rahman 1985: ) In addition, his interest in philosophical teachings is evident when he maintained why philosophical rationalism was a necessary instrument of religion. Although philosophy had been effectively banned from the Islamic curriculum since the twelfth century (except for Shiite Iran), Rahman considered it as a perennial intellectual need, indispensible for installing analytical attitude in future generations of Muslim intellectuals (for details of Rahman s interest on philosophy see: Kersten 2011: 71). As a result, given that Rahman was interested in philosophy and wrote extensively on medieval Muslim philosophers, it is not unreasonable to assume that he developed his theory of revelation under the influence of Islamic philosophical thought. 5. A Brief Explanation of Farabi s and Ibn Sina s Account of Revelation Farabi and Ibn Sina provided a detailed theory of revelation in their writings as I will discuss in this section. Al-Kindi s contribution to this field, however, is not as detailed as that provided by Farabi and Ibn Sina. In his writings, al-kindi points out to issues concerning revelation and prophecy in scattered places. It should be noted that in Islamic Neo-platonic ideas adopted by a number of medieval Muslim philosophers such as Farabi and Ibn Sina, a descending series of immaterial intellects emanates from God (or the First Cause), until the tenth intellects. From the tenth Intellect, which governs the terrestrial world, emanates the human souls. Therefore, neo-platonism in general rejects the traditional Islamic belief of creation ex nihilio (creation out of nothing and in time) (for a general overview of Islamic form of neo-platonism see: Leaman 2007: 3-5). According to neo- Platonism, the Active Intellect, which is the ultimate source of knowledge, is responsible for establishing the link between the spiritual realm and the physical world and thus is the conduit for prophetic revelation to human beings. It is in this context that Farabi and Ibn Sina believe that any form of knowledge including the content of revelation is brought about via a process of emanation from the Active Intellect to human beings. Organized by 95

6 Central to Farabi s account of revelation is the idea that prior to the stage in which the Prophet receives revelation his intellect must go through various stages of development. At the end of this development the Prophet acquires contact with the Active Intellect. The Active Intellect emanates knowledge to the soul of every human being, but only those who are intellectually and spiritually developed are capable of receiving it. Farabi further asserts that human beings including prophets also possess the faculty of imagination through which they receive abstract knowledge. This faculty must be developed to its perfection in the prophets in order to receive revelation: the man (the prophet) who has that sight comes to enjoy overwhelming and wonderful pleasure, and he sees wonderful things which can in no way whatever be found in other existents. (Farabi 1985: 225) Farabi indeed argues that the rational as well as the imaginative faculties are highly developed in the prophets. This is a special ability gifted by God to His prophets which enables them to receive abstract knowledge from the Active Intellect and to transform it into figurative images. In a similar vein, Ibn Sina believes that there are three faculties which are essential to the prophets, i.e. the rational power, the imaginative power and the effective power (Ibn Sina 1968: 3-5). The Prophetic revelation involves the reception of particular images from the celestial souls by the Prophet s imaginative faculty, gifted by God. It also involves the reception of the abstract intelligibilities from the Active Intelligent. Representations of the invisible worlds are imprinted in the soul, which then flows to the world of the imagination and are then imprinted in the common sense. (Ibn Sina 1958: Vol.4: 100) According to Ibn Sina, the Prophet is also blessed with a strong capacity for intuition. 2 The prophet s intuition excels the intuition possessed by ordinary human beings. This enables the Prophet to receive the enlightenment of the Active Intellect in all matters. (Cited in Fakhri 1970: 164) Ibn Sina, unlike Farabi, concludes that the prophetic revelation does not occur at the end of the various stages of actualization. Rather, it could occur as something sudden. As Deborah Black noticed, for Ibn Sina, the prophet s intuition does not come in episodic flashes; rather, he receives all intelligible from the agent intellect in a single instant. The prophet does not lack in comprehension of the intelligible truths that he receives. since they are already rationally ordered and logically arranged. (Black 2010: 320) My analysis of Farabi s and Ibn Sina s theories of revelation is that they both insist the idea that the Prophet is different from other ordinary human beings since his power of imagination and his extraordinary intellectual capacities are endowed by God. Such capabilities, according to both philosophers, are grown in the prophet without the help of external instructors; rather, they are selfthought in the mind of the Prophet. Only a prophet possesses powerful rational and imaginative faculties to receive abstract knowledge and also to transform it into a form which everyone can comprehend. This is to say that, for both Farabi and Ibn Sina, the text of the Quran consists of figurative images created by the Prophet s faculty of imagination. In this sense, they believed in both the divine and human characters of the Quran. The main difference between their ideas is that for Farabi, the level in which the Prophet receives revelation is gained after he has gone through a long process of intellectual comprehension whereas Ibn Sina believes that a prophet does not need to go through the entire process and may arrive at such level at once through intuition. This is why some 2 This is what he calls a holy intellect. Ibn Sina constantly refers to the intuitive power of the Prophet as well as his rational and imaginative power throughout his works. (see: Ibn Sina 1935: 28-30; Ibn Sina 1952: ) Organized by 96

7 commentators consider Ibn Sina s theory revelation much more consistent than Farabi s with the dignity of the prophetic office in Islam. (Fakhri 1970: 163) 5. A Comparison between Rahman s and Medieval Philosophers Account of Revelation In this section, I will attempt to address the extent to which Rahman s theory of revelation is influenced by a number of medieval Muslim philosophers, namely al-kindi, Farabi and Ibn Sina. To do so, I will undertake a detailed comparison between these two accounts of revelation in five aspects: (1) the nature of revelation (2) the Prophet s preparation for receiving revelation (3) the involvement of the Prophet and the angelic figure in the process of revelation (4) the potentiality of the Prophet in receiving revelation and (5) the Prophet s power of transmitting God s Words to his audiences. 5.1 The Nature of Revelation As discussed, Farabi and Ibn Sina are of the idea that the connection between the Prophet and the Active Intellect is established through the process of emanation. Farabi says that revelation in its nature is the emanation from the Active Intellect into the Prophet: there emanates from the Active Intellect into the passive (human) intellect a faculty by which the Prophet understands the morallegal values of things and can correctly put them in the service of ultimate happiness, thanks to this emanation.which is Revelation. (Farabi 1927: 49 cited in Rahman 1958: 68) Ibn Sina similarly believes that there takes place an emanation process of knowledge from the Active Intellect to the Prophet. The Active Intellect, according to Ibn Sina, creates knowledge and values through the act of emanation in the Prophet s mind (Qadir 1990: 84). In these accounts of revelation, God does not simply send His message to His prophets; rather, the act of revelation takes place through emanation from the Active Intellect to the elites. In addition to Farabi and Ibn Sina, al-kindi believes that any relation between God and human beings takes place through emanation: As the First Cause, Most High, is connected with us through His emanation and as we are not connected with Him in any way except through His emanation, it is, therefore, possible for the receiver of His emanation to apprehend Him only to the extent of the powers bestowed on him. (Atiyeh 2006: 220) Like Farabi and Ibn Sina, Rahman frequently uses the term emanation in his writings when speaking about revelation. Revelation, for Rahman, emanates from God. In Rahman s account, God does not simply send His message to His Prophet; rather, revelation emanates from the ultimate source of all beings into the Prophet. Rahman says God s prophets or human messengers are recipients of some special or extraordinary power which emanates from the ultimate source of all being (Rahman Organized by 97

8 1980: 98). In another passage in his The Major Themes of the Quran, Rahman states that on the one hand, the Revelation emanated from God on the other hand, it was also intimately connected with his deeper personality (Rahman 1980: 100). There is another similarity between Rahman s understanding of the nature of revelation and that of some medieval philosophers. Rahman s idea that revelation consists of non-physical and nonacoustic words seems to have been rooted in the writings of some medieval philosophers. From the theory of revelation proposed by Farabi and Ibn Sina, one can conclude that revelation consists of images, symbols and visions and does not include words in their acoustic and physical forms. They believe that the prophetic revelation involves the reception of particular images and mental sounds from the celestial souls by the Prophet s imaginative faculty, gifted by God. Farabi says that the Prophet can receive an overflow of intelligibilities into his imagination, where they become subject to symbolic imitation. These intelligibilities consist of symbols and images (Black, 2010: 313). Ibn Sina also argues that, the concepts and intellectual ideas become images and symbols of deeper reality as well as creative insights for the Prophet (Qadir 1990: 84). Similar to Farabi and Ibn Sina, Al-Kindi argues that associated with every prophet is the faculty of imagination, gifted by God, which enables him to receive sounds, forms and images (for details of Kindi s view in relation to this issue see: Atiyeh 2006: 99; Adamson 2010: 47). Therefore, Rahman s idea that Prophetic revelations include the reception of non-physical and non-acoustic words is also rooted in the writings of some medieval philosophers. 5.2 Prophet s preparation in receiving the revelation Rahman s idea that the Prophet had to improve his potentials before the stage in which he received his first revelatory experience is rooted in Farabi s writings more than Ibn Sina s. As discussed in the last section, for Ibn Sina, the Prophet does not need to go through various stages of actualization prior to receiving knowledge from the Active Intellect. Farabi, however, asserts that a human mind must prepare its potential intellect for the emanation of the Active Intellect. Such idea is also found in al-kindi s writings: man does not become a recipient of God s favors until he comes to possess a number of excellent qualities such as virtue, grace, generosity, justice, wisdom and favor, with which he adorns himself, and which he comes to acquire and which (ultimately) dominates him (Atiyeh 2006: 221). However, it should be noted that Rahman s account of how the Prophet had to prepare himself for receiving revelation is not as detailed as that given by Farabi and Kindi. Rahman only asserts that the Prophet had an intense, natural, inborn sensitivity for moral problems confronting man (Rahman 1980: 91) and that these problems made him think deeply. But, it seems that in both philosophers and Rahman s writings, Muhammad s contribution in revelation could have been his preparation of the human potential intellect, mind and soul. Organized by 98

9 5.3 The Prophet s and the Angel s Involvement in the Process of Revelation As discussed, the central point in Farabi s and Ibn Sina s argument is their emphasis on the inner psychological process of revelation. They both share the idea that prophecy is an office that the Prophet acquired through his rational agency and power of imagination. As a result, in addition to the Prophet s involvement in preparation of his human potential intellect, Muhammad s contribution could have been the involvement of his faculty of imagination and intellect in the actual process of revelation. Like Farabi and Ibn Sina, Rahman places an emphasis in his writings on the active role of the Prophet s mind in the process of revelation. As a result, one idea that medieval philosophers and Rahman have in common is an active participation of the human mind in the process of gaining knowledge or Prophetic revelations. Indeed, both Rahman and medieval philosophers considered the role of the Prophet in revelation as central. Rahman s view about the role of the angelic figure in revelation is also similar to the ideas of medieval philosophers. Rahman s idea that the angelic figure was not a physical and external being in relation to the Prophet is found in the ideas of Farabi and Ibn Sina. Farabi says that revelation is the emanation from the Universal Intellect into the Prophet s soul and the Angel is this (extra) faculty or power (Farabi 1927: 181 cited in Rahman 1958: 34). Farabi is also of the idea that the Prophet is able to reach a stage in which there is no mediation between him and the Active Intellect (Farabi 1927: 79-80). In a similar vein, Ibn Sina regards the appearance of the angel and the hearing of his voice in the imagination faculty of the Prophet and thus considers it as purely mental phenomena The Potentiality of the Prophet in Receiving Revelation In Rahman s project, the prophets are identified as possessing extraordinary power, gifted by God, which enables them to receive divine messages from ultimate source of beings. This idea leads Rahman to argue that although the Prophet had to improve his potentialities in order to receive divine revelations, he had a potential revelation in him. Such ideas are also held by medieval Muslim philosophers since they constantly emphasized the Prophetic potentials for receiving revelation. According to Farabi, the prophet s mind is endowed with an extraordinary intellectual gift. He further asserts that the prophet s intellect is not in any need of an external instructor such as a human teacher; rather, his intellect with the aid of divine power develops by itself. Ibn Sina similarly asserts that the Prophet has an extraordinary power of imagination and intellectual capacities; both of which are endowed to him by God (for details of this issue in Farabi s and Ibn Sina s though see: Qadir 1990: 82-84). Rahman likens the revelatory experience of the Prophet to poetic and mystic inspirations, arguing that the prophetic experience is of divine origin, but poetical and mystical experiences do not have divine origins. Rahman sought to argue that while the revelatory experience of the Prophet is expandable in some aspects to other people such as poets and mystics, nevertheless it is unique and thus has to be differentiated from other forms of human experiences. This idea has also its origin in 3 some commentators argue that in Farabi s and Ibn Sina s writings, the Prophet is portrayed as being capable of seeing the angel of revelation and hearing his voice, but within his faculty of imagination (see: Malayeri 2005: 61) Rahman himself has acknowledged this issue (1958: 38) Organized by 99

10 the writings of medieval philosophers, namely Farabi, Ibn Sina and al-kindi. But, while Rahman likens the revelatory experience of prophets to poetic and mystic inspirations, medieval philosophers liken the prophetic experience to philosophical experiences. Like Rahman, philosophers sought to differentiate the revelation that the Prophet receives from that the philosophers receive. To Muslim philosophers, revelatory experience of the Prophet is of divine origin, considering God as its ultimate source. According to Farabi, the main difference between philosophers and prophets is that the former, like other ordinary human beings, reaches that level through reflection and meditation and with the aid of external sources, but the latter arrives at such level through his extraordinary power of imagination gifted by God and without the need of an instructor (Qadir 1990: 83). The Prophet s intellect, unlike philosophers intellect, develops by itself with the aid of divine power. Ibn Sina also acknowledges that ordinary human beings including philosophers experience lesser forms of intuitive ability, but are unable to receive the intellect s emanation without the prior aid of a human teacher or the sense faculties. Likewise, al-kindi argues that philosophers must engage in long study and may intend to answer questions put to them about true matters with great efforts by using their own devices and by delving into introductory sciences such as logic and mathematics (Adamson 2010: 46). Prophets, on the other hand, are inspired by God: God inspires the prophet and enlighten his soul without restoring to the use of any first principles. (Atiyeh 2006: 99) As a result, what Rahman and medieval Muslim philosophers have in common is the idea that the Prophetic experience is expandable to other human beings, such as philosophers, poets and mystics, but only insofar as the psychological process concerns. In both projects, the ultimate source of prophet s revelatory experience, unlike that of poets, mystics and philosophers, is God. In addition, Rahman and medieval Muslim philosophers are both of the idea that prophets, unlike other human beings, had a potential to receive revelation since such potentialities have been bestowed to them by God. 5.5 The Prophet s Power of Transmitting his Revelatory Experiences As shown, according to Rahman, the Prophet has the power of transferring his revelatory experience into the words, which is familiar for his immediate audiences. This is an essential characteristic of prophets; they have to do everything to get their message across (Rahman 1980: 80). Rahman goes on to say that this power determines them upon a course of action that changes the lives of whole peoples (Ibid, 98). In this sense, prophets shook people s consciousness from a state of traditionally placidity and hypomoral tension into one of alertness (Ibid, 80). Therefore, for Rahman, one of the main characteristics of the Prophet is that he was able to change the ideawords into words in an ordinary sense through which the life and the worldview of people radically changed. Such idea is also held by medieval Muslim philosophers. Medieval philosophers often believe that prophets, in contrast with philosophers, are able to transfer their message to other humans in a clear, simple and succinct ways. Ibn Sina and Farabi believe in the Prophet s effective power which includes his capabilities of transforming his potentials into practice. A prophet must revolutionize his society with his dynamic personality and with his effective power. This is one of the main differences between prophets and philosophers. As Ibn Sina asserts, the concepts and intellectual ideas become images and symbols of deeper personality and so gain strength to move people to act in a specified manner. (Qadir 1990: 84) Likewise, al-kindi asserts that prophets have Organized by 100

11 the power of presenting their message, which is briefer and clearer, to ordinary humans (Atiyeh 2006: 28). This is to say that medieval Muslim philosophers, namely Farabi, Ibn Sina and Kindi, believed that prophets must be able to formulate his revelatory experience into a definite pattern of life for people to follow. As a result, what Rahman and medieval philosophers have in common in regards to this issue is that (1) the Prophet has the power of transferring the images and visions he received in revelation and that (2) the words the Prophet expresses is so effective that change the lives of people. This is to say that, for both Rahman and the medieval Muslim philosophers whose ideas were examined, revelation is not only dependent upon its initiator, but is also dependent upon its immediate recipient, i.e. the Prophet Muhammad. Both groups of scholars approach revelation not only from the perspective of God, but also from that of its human recipient. In this sense, I believe that the Quran, i.e. the product of revelation, has both divine and human character for them. 6 Conclusion I have shown in this paper that by incorporating the ideas of a number of medieval Muslim philosophers, Fazlur Rahman developed a theory in which the established traditional account of revelation is challenged. The paper has argued that five features of Rahman s theory of revelation are influenced by that proposed by three medieval Muslim philosophers, namely Farabi, Ibn Sina and Kindi. Both Rahman and the three above-mentioned philosophers argue that 1- Revelation does not include physical and acoustic words, rather, consists of visions, images and mental words. In addition, revelation came into existence through a process of emanation from the Active Intellect to prophets. 2- The Prophet s contribution in revelation has been his preparation of his human intellect, mind and soul. In this respect, the Prophet s mind had to be in its highest receptive stage in order to be illuminated through revelation. 3- The Prophet has gone through an internal psychological process during his revelatory experiences. In this sense, an attempt is made to reduce the externality of revelation and its agent vis-à-vis the Prophet. 4- The Prophet, due to the extraordinary power of his rational and imaginative faculties has the potentiality of receiving revelation. These extraordinary powers were bestowed upon him by God. 5- The Prophet due to his effective power was capable of transferring his revelatory experience in a clear and succinct way. In sum, I believe that both Rahman and the above-mentioned philosophers believed in the twofold character of the Quran, i.e. its human and divine characters, because, for them, the Quran could not have come into existence without the human involvement of the Prophet in the process of revelation. 7) Acknowledgment This paper is funded by the University of Melbourne. Organized by 101

12 References Adamson P. (2010). Al-Kindi and the Reception of Greek Philosophy, The Cambridge Companion to Arabic Philosophy, ed. Peter Adamson, Richard C. Taylor, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Atiyeh G. N. (2006). Al-Kindi: The Philosopher of the Arabs, New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan Berry D. L. (2003). Islam and Modernity through the Writings of Islamic Modernist Fazlur Rahman, New York: The Edwin Mellon Press Black D. B. (2010). Psychology: Soul and Intellect, in The Cambridge Companion to Arabic Philosophy, ed. Peter Adamson, Richard C. Taylor, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Farabi A. (1927), Siyasat al-madina, Heydarabad Farabi A. (1985). On the Perfect State, trans. Richard Walzer, Oxford: Clarendon Press Esack F. (1998). Quran, Liberation and Pluralism: An Islamic Perspective of Interreligious Solidarity against Oppression, Oxford: OneWorld Publication Fakhri M. (1970). A History of Islamic Philosophy, New York: Columbia University Press Ibn Sina. (1935), Treatise on Psychology, ed. Mahmud Shahabi, Tehran: Khayam Publication Ibn Sina. (1952). Tabiiyat Daneshnaameh Alayee, ed. Muhammad Meshkat, Tehran, Melli Publication Ibn Sina. (1958). Kitab al-isharat wa l-tanbihat, Translation under the title: Ibn Sina: Remarks and Admonitions. Part One: Logic, trans. C. Inati, Vol.4, Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies Ibn Sina. (1968). Risala fı Ithbat al-nubuwwa, ed. by Michael Marmura, Beirut: Dar al_nahr Jahanbakhsh F. (2009). Introduction: Abdolkarim Soroush s Neo-Rationalist Approach to Islam, in The Expansion of Prophetic Experience: Essays on Historicity, Contingency and Plurality in Religion, Abdolkarim Soroush, trans. Nilou Mobasser, Leiden: Brill, xv-xlix Jesse M. C. (1991). A Modern Muslim Intellectual: The Thought of Fazlur Rahman with Special Reference to Reason, Master Thesis, Regina: Regina University Press Kersten C. (2011), Cosmopolitans and Heretics: New Muslim Intellectuals and the Study of Islam, New York: Colombia University Press Leaman O. (2007). A Brief Introduction to Islamic Philosophy, Cambridge: Polity Press Martin R., et al. (1997). Defenders of Reason in Islam: Mutazilism from Medieval School to Modern Symbol, Oxford: Oneworld Publication Organized by 102

13 Malayeri M. (2005). The Philosophical Explanation of Revelation from Farabi to Mulla Sadra, Qum, Taha Publication Qadir C. A. (1990). Philosophy and Science in the Islamic World, London: Routledge Rahman F. (1952). Avicenna s psychology, London, Oxford University Press Rahman F. (1976). Some Islamic Issues in the Ayyub Khan Era, in Essays on Islamic Civilization: Presented to Niyazi Berkes, ed. Donald P. Little, Leiden: E. J. Brill, Rahman F. (1978). Divine Revelation and the Prophet, Hamdard Islamicus, 1(2), Rahman F. (1980). The Major Themes of the Quran, Chicago: Bibliotheca Islamica Rahman F. (1982). Islam & Modernity: Transformation of an Intellectual Tradition, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press Rahman F. (1985). My Belief-in-Action, in The Courage of Conviction, ed. Phillip L. Berman, Santa Barbara: Dodd, Mead & Company Rahman F. (1988). Translating the Quran, Religion and Literature, 20(1), Rahman F. (1994). Muhammad and the Quran, in Commitment and Commemoration: Jews, Christians and Muslims in Dialogue, ed. Andre LaCocque, Chicago: Exploration Press, 9-15 Rahman F. (2002). Islam, second ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press Saeed A. (2006). Fazlur Rahman: a Framework for Interpreting the Ethico-legal Content of the Quran, in Modern Muslim Intellectuals and the Quran, ed. Suha Taji-Farouki, Oxford: Oxford University Press, Saeed A. (2014). Reading the Quran in the Twenty-First Century: A Contextualist Approach, New York: Routledge Sonn T. (1998). Fazlur Rahman and Islamic Feminism, in The Shaping of an American Islamic Discourses: A Memorial to Fazlur Rahman, ed. Earle H. Waugh and Frederick M. Denny, Atlanta: Scholars Press Völker K. (2015). Two Accounts of Qurʾānic Revelation, Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations, 26 (3), Organized by 103