Nonviolence and Rationalism: a Crypto-Buddhist Influence

Appendix Nonviolence and Rationalism: A Crypto-Buddhist Influence It is important to recognize the significance of a rationalist, nonviolent, and at times nontheist position held by a number of medieval literary figures in Iran and its neighbors. Even though it is difficult to establish with certainty whether the ini- tial inspiration for it was drawn from Indian, particularly Buddhist, sources, there are similarities to the Buddhist approach. The interpretations of nonviolence or Indian ahimsā (nonkilling) among medieval ascetics and philosophers ranged from taking positions against shedding human blood and slaughtering animals to prac- ticing vegetarianism. Their adoption of rationalist discourse in this context meant the rejection of supernatural intervention in human life, as well as of the whole notion of revelation and even the need for prophecy. Both the neo-Platonists and the Pythagoreans as secular advocates of nonviolence may have influenced the intelligentsia of the Islamic era. Mānī (d. 274), with his Gnostic views and endorsement of nonviolence and nontheism, may have been another source of influence on literary figures such as Ibn al-Muqaffa’ (d. ca.760). As it is noted, the discourses of Ibn al-Muqaffa’ attempted to demystify God, prophecy, and the revelation. 1 The main proponents of spreading nonviolent and nontheistic views were Mānī and later Manichaeans who had been partly influenced by Buddhism, as discussed in chapter 3. The ninth-century argument of Barāhima was first put forward by ‘Issā ibn al-Warrāq (d. 861) and then by Ibn Rāwandī (d. 910), who argued against blood sacrifice as well as against the necessity of revelation and prophecy so long as human intellect remains intact and in control of its destiny. 2 Behind the fictitious and Indian Barāhima schism lay various ideas expressed in opposition to dogmatic views; the true nonviolent and antimetaphysical inspirations of these views may have origi- nated from Buddhist (or perhaps Manichaean) sources and perspectives.3 Sometimes Barāhima adherents are mentioned as rejecting even the existence of God. 4 170 Buddhism in Iran Interestingly, the term Barāhima sounds similar to the Indian Brahma . Regarding the perception of Brahma by the Muslims in medieval times, Shahrastānī (d.1153) considers the followers of the Buddha to be a subsect of Brahma (Brahman), who attempted to prove the irrationality of prophecy. 5 Although not all the medieval texts are accurate about Indian religions, the connection between the term Brahma and Buddha’s nontheistic doctrine, as well as the usage of Barāhima by al-Warrāq and Ibn Rāwandī to disprove revelation, may, at least from the terminological stand- point, have the same origin and objective. Ibn Rāwandī, seemingly a Manichaean, repudiated the supernatural power of revelation and prophecy. Ibn Rāwandī’s well-known work Dāmigh (other than his Kitāb az-Zumūrrūd ) was a literary prototype and parody designed to discredit the miraculous style and content of the Koran, since the Koran was held in high regard by Muslims for its supposedly inimitable Arabic literary perfection, argued to be unintelligible for those whose mother tongue was not Arabic. 6 The eleventh-century Abul ‘Alā Ma‘arrī’s book of al-Qifrān is another parody of the belief in heaven and hell and of people’s gullible religious beliefs.7 Nonviolence and rationalist views from the ninth and tenth centuries were passed on to the next generation, represented by the rationalist and strict vegetarian Syrian poet Abul ‘Alā al-Ma‘arrī (d.1058). Al-Ma‘arrī’s ideas and practices are also presumed to have stemmed from Indian origins (or at least from outside of Islam). 8 H e m a d e it his goal to revive rationalism even though it was defeated again by the powerful Sufi and theologian al-Ghazzālī (d.1111). 9 In many ways al-Ma‘arrī was similar to the famous tenth-century chemist Rāzī, who supported the idea of human autonomy with the power of reason as the only savior of man by rejecting the revelation and prophecy. 10 Al-Ma‘arrī was an inheritor of the trend of rebelling against the dogmatic theism and religious claims that had already left its imprint with the groundbreaking works of thinkers such as Ibn Warrāq, an-Nazzām (d.ca.845) 11 , and al-Rāwandī, who were accused of defaming God, the Koran, and the tenets of Islam. 12 Al-Ma‘arrī was depicted by nineteenth-century Orientalists as a “philosopher poet” and a “free thinker” like similar personalities before and after him. 13 M a n y believe that al-Ma‘arrī with his radical poetry is believed to be the source of inspiration and daring for Omar Khayyam (d. 1131) of Neishābur to compose in Persian what al-Ma‘arrī composed in Arabic. 14 Both poets were accused of holding anti-Islamic views. 15 There was even a belief among certain traditional Muslims that both Abul ‘Alā Ma‘arrī and Omar Khayyam were atheists or revivers of some ancient tradition, and the suspicious among the Muslims labeled both poets as zindīq (non-Muslim, Manichaean). 16 Whether Khayyam received his poetical and nonreligious inspirations from the nonconformist al-Ma‘arrī cannot be established with certainty, but both poets were strict vegetarians 17 and rationalist thinkers, and the similarities of the messages in their poetical metaphors are striking. Khayyam used poetic license to provide relief for those in the troubled journey of life. Aminrazavi confirms that “Khayyam’s approach is fundamentally a Buddhist one . solving the problem of suffering is strikingly similar to the Buddhist path.” 18 Khayyam’s refraining from exces- siveness, his suspension of metaphysical speculation and relinquishing of the effort to solve the mystery of Creation, his renouncing of suffering independent of God—all without denouncing the world—recall the Buddha’s Four Noble Truths. 19 Khayyam Nonviolence and Rationalism 171 emphasizes empiricism and shares his doubts about metaphysical speculations and a religious imagery of after-life by cautioning people to rely on rational reasoning: One lot cogitates on the way of religion, Another ponders on the path of mystical certainty; But I fear one day the cry will go up, ‘Oh you fools, neither this nor that is the way!’ 20 I saw a waster sitting on a patch of ground, Heedless of belief and unbelief, the world and the faith— No God, no Truth, no Divine Law, no Certitude: Who in either of the worlds has the courage of this man? 21 Rationalism and nonviolence in its spiritual context were equally well respected by the proponents of early asceticism and philosophy in Iran. Ibn Sīnā (d.1037) and Mīr Fendereskī (d.1640) are just two of those who adopted nonviolence and vegetarianism and held views that challenged the conformist Islamic dogma. Another representative of rationalism and nonviolence was Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Zakariyyā al-Rāzī (d. 925 or 932) from Rayy. A chemist, poet, musician, and singer, Rāzi was also the greatest clinical genius among the physicians in the Islamic world. His most celebrated works were on smallpox and measles. The former disease was unknown to Greek medicine; consequently, his work was translated and printed more than 40 times between 1498 and 1866 in Europe. 22 Rāzi’s work in philosophy is less known, partly because of the disappearance of his philosophical writings. But what did survive is uniquely revealing. Rāzi refused to believe that philosophy and religion could ever be united. Rāzi was against not only animal suffering and slaughtering, 23 but also any unverifiable assertions about revelation and prophecy. To the shock of Muslim believers, he rejected the concept of revelation and argued that there is no need for prophecy, since everyone is given enough reason and intelligence and should be able to salvage himself in this world. 24 According to him the revelation was the source of much bloodshed, and he considered it unnecessary to have one people who claimed to possess the knowledge of divine revelation attacking the less fortunate who did not. To this effect Rāzi dedicated two works: On the Devices of the False Prophets and On the Repudiation of the Prophecy.25 Rāzi’s rejection of prophecy has also been associated with Brahmanism (perhaps what al-Warrāq called Barāhima ) in Islamic sources, even though any influence of Pythagorean ideas on Rāzi is speculation. 26 Rāzi is believed to have learned his free-thinking rationalism from another medieval scholar, Abul ‘Abbās Irānshahrī. 27 Irānshahrī’s work on Buddhism 28 (n o w l o s t ) a n d his knowledge of Buddhist philosophy may have been the source of Rāzi’s positions against slaughtering animals and against the necessity of revelation and prophecy. Masu‘dī (d. 965), however, in his Mūrūj ul-Dhahab, refers to Rāzi adhering to the doctrine of the Sabians of Harran, 29 who also rejected prophecy. 30 Masu‘dī mentions that the Sabian doctrine was founded by Budāsef (Buddha or bodhisattva ),31 s u g - gesting a connection with India and Buddhist ideas among the Sabians. Shahrastānī has much detail on the Sabians and their lack of a divine book, subscribing to phi- losophies of rationalism and materialism, worshipping idols, and being of Indian origin. 32 Whether Rāzi had come under direct or indirect Buddhist influences and 172 Buddhism in Iran through what means cannot be confirmed with certainty, although circumstantial evidence seems to perhaps point in that direction. In any case, Rāzi adopted the principle of ahimsā and took an empirical view of human existence that deemed no room necessary for any intervention of divine forces in human affairs. During those early periods of Islam, atheism did not have the same interpretation as in modern times, but Rāzi’s theism was not sufficient and thus was denounced and never gained any systematic following.

Load more