الباب الخامس: في لواحق الفوائدBab 05 — Supplementary Benefits

Chapter Five: On Supplementary Benefits

Section: The Necessity of the Arabic Sciences

...

Chapter Five: On Supplementary Benefits

It contains sections

Section: The Necessity of the Arabic Sciences

Know that the investigations of the sciences concern mental and imaginative meanings. Among the religious sciences, most of whose investigations concern expressions and their materials, and the rational sciences, which concern the mind, languages serve only as a translation of the meanings contained in the inner selves. At their outset, it is therefore necessary to know the verbal and written indications of their expressions. When the habit of indicating meanings has become firmly established, so that meanings immediately arise in the mind from the expressions, the barrier between meanings and understanding is removed, and nothing remains except to engage with the investigations contained in the meanings.

Such is the relation of meanings to expressions and writing in every language. Then, when the Islamic polity expanded and, through its prophecy and Book, effaced the sciences of the ancients, Muslims transformed their religious sciences into a discipline after they had been transmitted reports; habits were thereby formed in them, and they yearned for the sciences of other nations, translating them into their own sciences. Those books that had come to them in foreign languages were left forgotten, and all the sciences became expressed in the language of the Arabs. Those engaged in the sciences consequently needed knowledge of the verbal and written indications in their own tongue, to the exclusion of other tongues, because those other tongues had fallen into disuse and the concern devoted to them had disappeared. It has been established that language is a habit of the tongue, while writing is a craft whose habit resides in the hand. If the habit of a foreign language has preceded that of the tongue, a person is deficient in the Arabic language, because when a habit in another craft has preceded it, the habit does not become firmly established1—unless it is the prior habit of a foreign language, which has not become firmly established, as is the case with the younger sons of foreigners.

The same applies to one who has previously learned foreign writing before Arabic writing. Thus you see some foreign scholars, in their lessons, refrain from transmitting an obscure text from books and instead read it plainly; by this they lighten for themselves the burden of some barriers, whereas one who possesses the habit of expression and writing has no need of this.

1 In the margin of the original: “It is inconceivable that its possessor should excel in the habit of a craft.”

* * *

Volume: 1 ¦ Page: 143

* * *

Section: The Rational Sciences and Their Classes 1

As for the rational sciences, which are natural to human beings insofar as they possess thought, they are not specific to any religious community. Rather, inquiry into them is found among the people of all religious communities, who are equal in their capacities and investigations. They have existed among the human species since the settlement of creation began. These sciences are called the sciences of philosophy and wisdom, and they comprise four sciences:

The first is the science of logic, which is a science that protects the mind from error in extracting unknown propositions from existing, known matters. Its benefit is to distinguish error from correctness in what the investigator seeks concerning existing things and their accidents, so that, by the utmost exercise of his thought, he may arrive at the verification of truth in created beings. The second is natural science. Inquiry thereafter, in their view, is either into perceptible things, namely, elemental bodies and those composed from them—minerals, plants, animals, and celestial bodies—natural motions, the soul from which motions emanate, and other such matters. This discipline is called natural science, and it is the second of them. The third is divine science. Or inquiry may be into matters beyond nature, namely, spiritual beings; this they call divine science, and it is the third of them.

The fourth science is that which investigates quantities, and it comprises four sciences called the mathematical disciplines:

The first is geometry, namely, inquiry into quantities in general. These are either discrete, insofar as they are counted, or continuous; and the latter are either one-dimensional, namely, the line, two-dimensional, namely, the surface, or three-dimensional, namely, the mathematical body. It investigates these quantities and what occurs to them, either with respect to their essence or with respect to the relation of some of them to others. The second is arithmetic, namely, knowledge of what occurs to discrete quantity, which is number, and of the properties and concomitant accidents that are ascribed to it.

The third is music, namely, knowledge of the relations among sounds and tones and their measurement by number.

Its fruit is knowledge of the melodies of singing.

The fourth is astronomy, namely, the determination of the configurations of the celestial spheres, the restriction and enumeration of their arrangements for each of the planets, and the acquisition of knowledge of this through the observed celestial motions existing for each of them, as well as through their retrogradation and direct motion, their approach and recession.

These, then, are the foundations of the philosophical sciences, which are seven:

1 - Logic, which is the first among them, followed by the mathematical disciplines.

2 - Arithmetic first.

3 - Then geometry.

4 - Then astronomy.

5 - Then music.

6 - Then natural sciences.

7 - Then divine sciences.

1 See the chapter in Ibn Khaldun's Introduction, pp. 1219–1225.

* * *

Volume: 1 ¦ Page: 144

* * *

Each of these has branches that derive from it. Among the branches of natural science is medicine; among the branches of the science of number are arithmetic, inheritance law, and transactions; among the branches of astronomy are the zeejes, which are rules for calculating the motions of the planets and correcting them in order to determine their positions whenever that is intended; and among the branches of inquiry into the stars is astrology.

Know that the two great nations in the polity before Islam whose reports we know, and who devoted the greatest attention to these sciences, were Persia and Rome. The markets of the sciences were thriving among them—as far as has reached us—because civilization was flourishing among them, and because before Islam and during its age the state and sovereignty belonged to them. These sciences therefore had mighty seas throughout their horizons and cities.

The Chaldeans, their Syriac predecessors, and the Copts who were their contemporaries devoted attention to magic, astrology, and the practices associated with them, such as talismans. The nations of Persia and Greece took this from them, and the Copts became especially associated with it, its sea overflowing among them, as is related in the transmitted account of Haaroot and Maaroot and the affair of the magicians, and as the learned have transmitted concerning the temples in Upper Egypt.

Then the religious communities successively recognized the danger of this and prohibited it. Its sciences consequently fell into disuse and vanished as though they had never existed, except for remnants transmitted by those who claimed these crafts—God knows best whether they are sound—even though the swords of the Law stand drawn against them, preventing their being put to the test.

As for the Persians, these rational sciences were of great importance to them and their scope was broad, owing to the vastness of their polity and the continuity of their sovereignty. It is even said that these sciences reached the Greeks from them when Alexander killed Darius and overcame the kingdom of the Kayanids, whereupon he seized such of their books and sciences as cannot be encompassed.

When the land of Persia was conquered and many books were found there, Sa'd ibn Abee Waqqaas wrote to 'Umar ibn al-Khattaab—may God be pleased with him—seeking his permission regarding them and their instruction to the Muslims. 'Umar—may God be pleased with him—wrote to him: “Throw them into the water. If what they contain is guidance, God has guided us by something more rightly guiding than it; and if it is error, God has spared us from it.” They therefore threw them into the water or into the fire, and the sciences of the Persians contained in them disappeared, never reaching us.

As for the Romans, their polity was originally that of the Greeks. These sciences had broad scope among them, and prominent men among them carried them, such as the pillars of wisdom and others. Among them, the Peripatetics—along with the Stoics—distinguished themselves by a sound method of instruction: they studied in a portico that shaded them from the sun and cold, or so they claimed. The chain of their instruction was connected, as they claimed, from the sage Luqmaan through his student Hippocrates, then to his student Plato, then to his student Aristotle, then to his student Alexander of Aphrodisias, Themistius1, and others. Aristotle was the teacher of Alexander, their king, who overcame the Persians in their kingdom and wrested sovereignty from their hands. He was the most firmly grounded among them in these sciences and the most renowned in them, and he was called the First Teacher; thus his reputation spread throughout the world.

When the affair of the Greeks came to an end, and power passed to the Caesars, who adopted the Christian religion, they abandoned these sciences, as its requirements dictate

1 Alexander of Aphrodisias was one of Aristotle's commentators, not one of his direct students, as Ibn Khaldun's wording might suggest, for approximately six centuries separate him from Aristotle. He flourished in the late second and early third centuries after Christ, whereas Aristotle was born in 384 and died in 322 before Christ.

As for Themistius, he was born between 310 and 320 CE and died in Constantinople in 395 CE. He is one of Aristotle's most renowned commentators.

* * *

Volume: 1 ¦ Page: 145

* * *

Their religions and laws remained there, preserved in their scriptures and registers, immortalized and enduring in their treasuries. Then they conquered Syria, and these sciences remained among them in written form. Thereafter God brought Islam, whose adherents attained an unmatched supremacy; they wrested from the Romans their dominion, as they had wrested it from other nations. At first, their affairs were characterized by simplicity and ignorance of the crafts. But once their rule and state had expanded, and they had acquired a share of civilization such as no other nation had possessed, and had refined the crafts and sciences, they yearned to gain access to these philosophical sciences, having heard some mention of them from the bishops and priests with whom they maintained relations, and having been drawn by what human thought aspires to discover in them. Thus Aboo Ja'far al-Mansoor wrote to the Byzantine king, asking him to send books of the sciences in translation. He sent him Euclid's book and some books on natural philosophy. The Muslims read them, learned what they contained, and grew more eager to obtain what remained of them. Then al-Ma'moon came to power. He had an inclination toward knowledge, in accordance with the doctrine he followed, and so he became intensely devoted to these sciences. He dispatched envoys to the Byzantine kings to recover the Greeks' sciences and have them copied in Arabic script, and he sent translators for this purpose. He gathered and mastered a great deal of them. The scholars among the Muslims devoted themselves to them, became proficient in their branches, and carried their investigations in them to the utmost limit. They differed from the opinions of the First Teacher in many matters, and subjected them to acceptance or rejection, since renown had come to rest upon him. They compiled books on the subject and surpassed those who had preceded them in these sciences. Among the leading figures in the religious community were Aboo Nasr al-Faaraabee and Aboo 'Alee ibn Seenaa in the East, and the judge Aboo al-Waleed ibn Rushd and the vizier Aboo Bakr ibn al-Saa'igh in al-Andalus, together with others who reached the pinnacle in these sciences. These men alone acquired renown and distinction. Many others merely adopted the mathematical sciences and the disciplines associated with them, such as astrology, magic, and talismans. In this field, renown came to rest upon Maslama ibn Ahmad al-Majreetee of al-Andalus and his pupil. These sciences and their practitioners entered the religious community, and they captivated many people, who inclined toward them and imitated their opinions. The blame for this rests with whoever committed it; had God willed otherwise, they would not have done so.

Then, when the winds of civilization in the Maghrib and al-Andalus grew still and the sciences declined along with it, this learning disappeared from those lands except for a few remnants, found scattered among certain people and under the supervision of a small number of Sunnee scholars. We are told that the people of the East still possess abundant stores of these sciences, especially in Persian Iraq and beyond it, in Transoxiana, and that they are immersed in the rational sciences because of the abundance of their civilization and the solidity of their culture. In Egypt I came upon several works by a scholar from Herat in Khurasan, known as Sa'd al-Deen al-Taftaazaanee, on theology, the principles of jurisprudence, and rhetoric. They testify that he possessed a firmly rooted mastery of these sciences, and contain passages indicating that he was conversant with the philosophical sciences and had achieved a high rank in all the rational disciplines. God supports with His victory whomsoever He wills. We have likewise been told in our own time that these philosophical sciences are flourishing in the lands of the Franks, in the territory of Rome and the regions adjoining it on the northern shore; that their traditions there are being renewed, their teaching circles are numerous, their compendia comprehensive and plentiful, and their students numerous. God knows best what is there; He creates and chooses whatever He wills.¹ End.

I say:

1 See the Introduction to Ibn Khaldoon, p. 1225.

* * *

Volume: 1 ¦ Page: 146

* * *

Then those years and their people passed away ...

As though they—and the years themselves—were dreams.

Today, in the East or the West—or indeed in any of the four regions, with their cities, towns, and villages—nothing of knowledge remains except its name, and nothing of religion except its outward trace. Time has annihilated its people, as though they had not flourished yesterday. Knowledge has departed in its entirety, and ignorance has arrived in its entirety. The command of God was a decree determined.

* * *

Volume: 1 ¦ Page: 147

* * *

* * *

Section: On the language of the Arabs in our time as an independent language differing from the languages of Mudhar and Himyar¹

This is because we find it capable of expressing purposes and fully conveying meaning according to the norms of the Mudharee tongue. It has lost only the indication supplied by vowel endings for distinguishing the subject from the object; they compensated for this through word order and contextual indicators that reveal the particularities of the intended meanings. Yet expression and eloquence in the Mudharee tongue are more abundant and familiar, because the words themselves indicate the meanings themselves, while what circumstances require—what is called the situational context—still needs something to indicate it. Every meaning must be surrounded by circumstances peculiar to it, and those circumstances must therefore be taken into account when conveying the intention, since they are its attributes. In all languages other than Arabic, such circumstances are most often indicated by words specifically assigned to them. In the Arabic tongue, however, they are indicated by states and modes in the arrangement and composition of words: placing one before another, omission, or inflectional vowel endings. They may also be indicated by non-independent particles. The levels of speech in Arabic therefore vary according to the variation in indicating these modes. Consequently, Arabic speech is more concise and uses fewer words and expressions than all other tongues. This is the meaning of the Prophet's statement—peace and blessings be upon him—“I was given the comprehensive expressions, and speech was abridged for me.” Consider this in light of what is related about 'Eesaa ibn 'Umar,² when a grammarian said to him: “I find repetition in the Arabs' speech in their saying, 'Zayd is standing,' 'Indeed Zayd is standing,' and 'Indeed Zayd is surely standing,' although the meaning is one.” He replied: “Their meanings differ. The first informs one whose mind is empty of knowledge that Zayd is standing; the second addresses one who has heard it and hesitated over it; and the third addresses one known to persist in denying it.” The indication thus differs according to the circumstances.

This eloquence and clarity have remained the Arabs' customary practice and manner to the present day. Do not heed the confused talk of grammarians, the practitioners of the science of inflection, whose understanding is too limited for investigation, when they claim that eloquence has now vanished and that the Arabic tongue has been corrupted, citing the corruption of the inflectional endings that occur at the ends of words and whose rules they study. This is an assertion that sectarian bias has implanted in their dispositions and intellectual inadequacy has cast into their hearts. Otherwise, we find today that many Arab words remain in their original usages; expression of purposes and variation in it according to variation in clarity are present in their speech today; and the styles and arts of the tongue, in both verse and prose, are present in their addresses. The accomplished orator is understood in their assemblies and gatherings, the masterful poet follows the styles of their language, and sound taste and a healthy natural disposition bear witness to this. The only feature missing from the conditions of the codified tongue is the inflectional vowels at the ends of words, which, in the Mudharee tongue, had followed one consistent and familiar path—inflection. That is only one part of the rules of the tongue. Attention came to focus on the tongue of Mudhar because it was corrupted through their mingling with foreigners after they had taken control of the kingdoms of Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and the Maghrib, and its habit became unlike the form it had originally possessed, so that it turned into another language. The Qur'aan had been revealed in it and the Prophetic hadeeth transmitted in its language; these two are the foundations of religion and the religious community. It was therefore feared that they would be forgotten and that understanding of them would become closed off through the loss of the tongue in which they had been revealed and transmitted. It became necessary to codify its rules, establish its measures, and derive its laws, and it became a discipline with sections, chapters, and preliminaries.

1 The chapter in Ibn Khaldoon's Introduction, pp. 1390–1394.

2 He was Aboo Sulaymaan 'Eesaa ibn 'Umar al-Thaqafee, one of the leading authorities of language from Basra. He was the teacher of al-Khaleel ibn Ahmad al-Faraaheedee, Seebawayhi, and Ibn al-'Alaa'. All his works on language and grammar have been lost. He died in 149 AH = 766 CE.

* * *

Volume: 1 ¦ Page: 148

* * *

and problems. Its practitioners called it the science of grammar and the craft of Arabic. It became a preserved discipline, a written science, and a ladder to understanding the Book of God and the Sunna of His Messenger. Perhaps, were we to devote attention to this Arabic tongue as it exists today and investigate its rules, we could replace the inflectional vowels in their indicative function with other features present within it, assigning them particular rules; perhaps these would occur at the ends of words according to a method other than the original one in the language of Mudhar.

Languages and their habits do not arise without cause. The Mudharee tongue and the Himyaree tongue were once in this position. Many of the usages and word formations of the Himyaree tongue changed among Mudhar, as the transmitted reports available to us attest, contrary to those whom inadequacy leads to claim that the two were one language and to seek to apply the Himyaree language to the measures and rules of the Mudharee language. Some, for example, claim that qayl in the Himyaree tongue is derived from qawl, “speech,” and offer many similar examples. This is not correct. The language of Himyar is another language, differing from the language of Mudhar in many of its usages, word formations, and inflectional vowels, just as the language of the Arabs in our time differs from the Mudharee language. Attention was devoted to the Mudharee tongue for the sake of the religious law—as we have said—and this led to deduction and investigation. At present, we have nothing that would impel us toward a similar undertaking or call us to it.

Among the features that occurred in the Arabic language of this generation, wherever they may be found, is their manner of pronouncing qaaf. They do not pronounce it from the point of articulation of qaaf as described by the city-dwellers in the books of Arabic: the farthest part of the tongue and the region of the upper palate above it. Nor do they pronounce it from the point of articulation of kaaf, although that lies lower than the point of qaaf and the adjacent part of the upper palate. Rather, they produce it midway between kaaf and qaaf. This is found throughout the generation, wherever they are, in the West or the East, until it has become a mark distinguishing them from other nations and generations and an attribute peculiar to them, in which no one else shares. Indeed, whoever wishes to adopt the Arab identity, affiliate himself with this generation, and enter into it imitates them in this pronunciation. In their view, the genuine Arab is distinguished from the intruder into Arabness and from the settled urbanite by pronouncing this qaaf. This shows that it is precisely the language of Mudhar, for the majority and leaders of this remaining generation, in East and West, descend from Mansoor ibn 'Ikrima ibn Khasafa ibn Qays 'Aylaan: from Sulaym ibn Mansoor and from Banoo 'Aamir ibn Sa'sa'a ibn Mu'aawiya ibn Bakr ibn Hawaazin ibn Mansoor. In our time they are the most numerous and dominant of all peoples in the inhabited world, and they descend from Mudhar. The rest of the generation likewise follows them in pronouncing this qaaf.

This language was not invented by the present generation; it has been inherited and passed down among them. This suggests that it is the language of the earlier Mudharites, and perhaps it is the very language of the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him. The jurists of the Prophet's household have claimed this, asserting that whoever recites in the Opening Sura, {Guide us upon the straight path}, without the qaaf used by this generation has committed a grammatical error and invalidated his prayer. I do not know where this came from. The language of the city-dwellers was not invented by them either; they transmitted it from their forebears, most of whom were Mudharites when they settled in the cities from the time of the conquest. Nor did the people of the generation invent their language; they were simply less exposed to foreign influence than the city-dwellers. This gives greater weight to the view that what is found of the language among them derives from the language of their forebears. This is reinforced by the agreement of the entire generation, in East and West, in pronouncing it, and by its being the distinctive feature by which the Arab is distinguished from the hybrid and the settled urbanite. Understand this. God is the manifest Guide; He guides whom He wills to a straight path.¹

1 The end of Ibn Khaldoon's statement.

* * *

Volume: 1 ¦ Page: 149

* * *

* * *

Section: On the language of the settled urban populations and cities as an independent language differing from the language of Mudhar¹

Know that the convention of speech in the cities and among urban populations is neither the ancient language of Mudhar nor the language of the people of this age. Rather, it is another language standing on its own, distant both from the language of Mudhar and from the Arabic language of this present generation, and farther removed from the language of Mudhar. As for its being a language standing on its own, this is evident from the variation found in it, which, according to the discipline of the grammarians, is considered grammatical error. It also differs from one city to another in their usages. The language of the people of the East differs somewhat from that of the people of the West, as does the language of the Andalusians from both. Yet each of them is able, through its own language, to convey its intended meaning and to make clear what lies within it. This is the meaning of speech and language. The absence of inflection does not harm them, as we have said concerning the language of the Arabs in this present age. As for its being farther removed from the original tongue than the language of this generation, if distance from the tongue results only from intermixture with foreign speech, then whoever mixes more with foreigners will have a language farther removed from that original tongue, because the linguistic habit is acquired through instruction—as we have said. This habit is a mixture of the original habit that belonged to the Arabs and the second habit belonging to foreigners. Thus, in proportion to the amount of foreign speech they hear and upon which they are raised, they move farther from the original habit. Consider this in the cities of Ifreeqiya, the Maghrib, al-Andalus, and the East. In Ifreeqiya and the Maghrib, the Arabs mixed with the Berbers, a foreign people, because of the abundance of their settlement among them; scarcely any city or region was free of them. Foreign speech therefore prevailed over the Arabic tongue they had possessed, and it became another mixed language, in which foreign elements were predominant—for the reason we have mentioned—and so it was farther removed from the original tongue. The same applies to the East, when the Arabs prevailed over the Persians and Turks among its peoples, mixed with them, and their languages circulated between them among the farmers and peasants, as well as among the captives whom they employed as servants, nurses, wet nurses, and foster mothers. Their language was corrupted through the corruption of the linguistic habit until it became another language. The same applies to the people of al-Andalus in their dealings with the foreign Galicians and Franks. Thus all the urban populations of these regions became people of another language peculiar to them, differing from the language of Mudhar; and these languages also differ from one another, as we shall mention. It is as though each were another language, on account of the strength with which its habit has become established among their generations. And God creates and determines what He wills.2

1 The fasl in Ibn Khaldoon's Muqaddima, pp. 1394–1395.

2 End of Ibn Khaldoon's words.

* * *

Part: 1 ¦ Page: 150

* * *

Section: On the instruction of the Mudharee tongue 1

Know that the linguistic habit of the Mudharee tongue has, in this age, disappeared and become corrupt. The language of all the people of this generation differs from the language of Mudhar in which the Qur'aan was revealed. Rather, it is another language resulting from the intermixture of foreign speech with it—as we have explained above. Yet since languages are habits, as has been stated, learning them is possible, just as it is possible to learn all other habits. The method of instruction for one who seeks this habit and wishes to acquire it is to undertake memorizing their ancient speech, which follows their established patterns: the Qur'aan, the hadeeth, the speech of the early generations, the addresses of the eloquent Arab masters in their rhymed prose and poetry, and also the words of the later-born writers in all their literary genres. Through extensive memorization of their verse and prose, he will come to occupy the position of one who grew up among them and was taught by them how to express intended meanings. Thereafter, he will express what is in his mind according to their manner of expression and the arrangement of their words, and according to the patterns of their speech that he has absorbed and memorized.

1 The fasl from Ibn Khaldoon's Muqaddima, pp. 1395–1396.

* * *

The ordering of their words will thereby enable him to acquire this habit through memorization and use; and the more he memorizes and employs it, the more firmly and powerfully it will take root. Alongside this, he requires sound natural disposition and a good understanding of the Arabs' modes and patterns in composition, together with attention to the correspondence between them and the requirements of circumstances. Taste bears witness to this, and it arises between this habit and sound natural disposition in the two of them—as we shall mention. The quality of an utterance, whether composed in verse or prose, corresponds to the extent of what has been memorized and the frequency of use. Whoever acquires these habits has acquired the language of Mudhar and is a discerning and perceptive critic of its eloquence. This, then, is how it ought to be learned. And God guides whom He wills through His favor and boundless generosity.

* * *

Part: 1 ¦ Page: 150

Part: 1 ¦ Page: 151

* * *

Section: On the fact that the habit of this tongue is other than the science of Arabic and does not require it for instruction 1

The reason for this is that the science of Arabic consists only in knowing the laws and measures of this habit in particular. It is knowledge of how something is done, not the thing itself; it is not the habit itself. It is comparable to someone who knows a craft intellectually without mastering it in practice. For example, a person versed in sewing but lacking mastery of its habit might say, in explaining one of its forms: sewing is to insert the thread through the eye of the needle, then pierce the two joined pieces of cloth with it and bring it out on the other side by such-and-such a measure; then return it to where it began and bring it out in front of its first exit, at a distance equal to that between the first two holes; then continue in this manner until the work is complete, giving the form of weaving, quilting,2 opening, and all the other types and operations of sewing. Yet if he were asked to perform this with his own hands, he would master none of it. Similarly, if a scholar of carpentry were asked about cutting wood, he might say: it is to place the saw upon the end of the plank, hold one end of it while another person opposite you holds the other end, and alternate it between you; its toothed and pointed edges cut whatever they pass over, moving back and forth, until they reach the end of the plank. Yet if he were required to perform this work, or any part of it, he would not master it. Such, then, is knowledge of the laws of inflection alongside the habit itself: knowledge of the laws of inflection is knowledge of how the work is done, not the work itself. Thus you find many of the leading grammarians and masters of the science of Arabic, who possess comprehensive knowledge of those laws, making mistakes when asked to write two lines to a brother, a beloved friend, a complaint of an injustice, or some other purpose; they commit abundant grammatical errors and cannot properly compose the words or express their intention according to the patterns of the Arabic tongue. Likewise, you find many who possess this habit and excel in both genres, verse and prose, yet do not know the inflection of the subject from that of the object, the nominative from the genitive, or any of the laws of the science of Arabic.

From this you learn that this habit is other than the science of Arabic and is entirely independent of it. We may find some masters of the science of inflection perceptive regarding the state of this habit, but such cases are few and accidental. This occurs most often among those who engage deeply with the Book of Seebawayhi, for he did not restrict himself to the laws of inflection; rather, he filled his book with Arab proverbs and examples from their poetry and speech. It therefore contained a substantial portion devoted to teaching this habit. You find that one who devotes himself to it and masters it has acquired a share of the Arabs' speech, which becomes incorporated into his store of memorized material at the places and junctures where his needs arise, and through it he becomes alert to the nature of the habit and fulfills its instruction.

1 See the fasl in Ibn Khaldoon's Muqaddima, pp. 1396–1399.

2 Written above it between the lines: “That is, tajneed.”

* * *

Part: 1 ¦ Page: 151

* * *

Among those who engage deeply with the Book of Seebawayhi, there are some who fail to notice this point. They acquire knowledge of the tongue as a science but do not acquire it as a habit. As for those who engage with the books of later authors, which are devoid of this material except for the grammatical laws presented in isolation from the poetry and speech of the Arabs, they rarely sense the matter of this habit or become aware of its importance. You find them imagining that they have attained a rank in the language of the Arabs, while they are in fact the farthest of people from it.

The people devoted to the Arabic discipline in al-Andalus, and its teachers, are closer than others to acquiring and imparting this faculty, because in their instruction they rely upon the attestations and examples of the Arabs and upon gaining a sound understanding of the many constructions in their teaching sessions. Thus much of the faculty comes to the beginner during instruction; his mind becomes accustomed to it and prepared to acquire and accept it. As for those besides them—the people of the Maghrib, Ifreeqiya, and others—they treated the Arabic discipline as they treated the sciences: as an object of investigation. They abandoned the effort to gain a sound understanding of the constructions of Arab speech, except when they parsed an attestation or preferred one doctrine to another on the basis of intellectual necessity, rather than on the basis of the possible meanings and constructions of the language. Consequently, the Arabic discipline became as though it were one of the purely rational rules of logic or dialectic, and it moved away from the ways of the language and its faculty. This resulted only from their turning away from investigation of the attestations and constructions of the language and from distinguishing its styles, and from their neglect of practice in this by the learner. Such practice is the finest means by which the faculty of language is imparted. These rules are merely means of instruction, but they employed them contrary to the purpose for which they were intended, turning them into a purely theoretical science and distancing them from their fruit. From what we have established in this discussion, you may learn that acquisition of the faculty of the Arabic language comes only through extensive memorization of the speech of the Arabs, until the model according to which they formed their constructions is impressed upon the learner's imagination; then he forms his own speech according to it and thereby assumes the position of one who grew up among them and mingled with their expressions in their speech, until he acquired the established faculty of expressing intended meanings in the manner of their speech. God determines all affairs, and God knows the unseen and the witnessed.¹

¹ End of Ibn Khaldoon's statement.

* * *

Part: 1 ¦ Page: 152

* * *

Part: On explaining taste in the terminology of the people of eloquence, establishing its meaning, and showing that it is generally not acquired by non-Arab foreigners who have entered the Arabic language¹

Know that the term “taste” is used by those concerned with the arts of eloquence to mean the acquisition by the tongue of the faculty of eloquence.

Eloquence is the conformity of speech to meaning in all its aspects, through particular qualities that occur in constructions and enable them to convey that meaning. A speaker of Arabic who is eloquent in it seeks the form that conveys the intended meaning according to the Arabs' styles and modes of address, and strives to arrange speech in that manner. When his circumstances are continuously connected with familiarity with the speech of the Arabs, he acquires the faculty of arranging speech in that manner, and composition becomes easy for him, so that he scarcely adopts any course in it other than the course of eloquence belonging to the Arabs. If he hears a construction that does not proceed according to that course, his hearing rejects it and recoils from it with the slightest reflection—or even without reflection—except insofar as he has benefited from acquiring this faculty. For when faculties become established and firmly rooted in their loci, they appear as though they were the nature and innate disposition of that locus. For this reason, many heedless people who do not understand the nature of faculties suppose that correctness in the Arabs' language, in parsing and eloquence, is a natural matter, and say: “The Arabs spoke naturally.” This is not so. Rather, it is a linguistic faculty in the arrangement of speech that became firmly established and deeply rooted, so that at first glance it appeared to be innate nature and natural disposition.

¹ See the chapter in Ibn Khaldoon's Muqaddimah, pp. 1399–1402.

* * *

This faculty, as stated above, is acquired through practicing the speech of the Arabs, repeatedly hearing it, and attending to the particular qualities of its constructions. It is not acquired through knowledge of the theoretical rules concerning it that the scholars of the language have deduced. These rules merely impart knowledge of that language; they do not produce the actual acquisition of the faculty in its locus. This has already been discussed. Once this is established, the faculty of eloquence in the language guides the eloquent speaker toward finding the arrangement and the fine composition that accord with the Arabs' constructions in their language and the arrangement of their speech. If the possessor of this faculty attempted to deviate from this specified path and these particular constructions, he would be unable to do so, nor would his tongue assist him, because he is unaccustomed to it and his firmly rooted faculty does not guide him toward it. If speech that deviates from the Arabs' style and eloquence in the arrangement of their speech is presented to him, he turns away from it, rejects it, and recognizes that it is not the speech of the Arabs whose language he has practiced. He may even be unable to argue for this judgment, as the people of grammatical and rhetorical rules do, because their argument is an inference from the rules obtained through induction. This, however, is an inwardly apprehended matter acquired by practicing the speech of the Arabs until one becomes like one of them.

For example, suppose that a boy from among them grew up and was raised within their generation. He would learn their language and master its grammatical parsing and eloquence until he attained their utmost limit; yet this would have nothing to do with theoretical knowledge of rules. It would result only from the acquisition of this faculty in his tongue and speech. In the same way, those who came after that generation acquire this faculty by memorizing their speech, poetry, and sermons, and by persistently doing so until the faculty is acquired and one becomes like a person who grew up in their generation and was raised among their generations. The rules stand apart from this. When this faculty becomes firmly rooted and established, the term “taste,” which the people of the eloquence discipline have adopted, is borrowed for it. Properly, the term designates the apprehension of flavors; but since the locus of this faculty is the tongue, insofar as it pronounces speech, just as the tongue is the locus for apprehending flavors, its name was borrowed for the faculty. Moreover, it is an inward apprehension of the tongue, just as flavors are sensory apprehensions for it; hence it was called “taste.”

Once this is clear to you, you will understand that non-Arabs who enter the Arabic language, arrive as outsiders to it, and are compelled to speak it because they associate with its speakers—such as the Persians, Romans, and Turks in the East, and the Berbers in the West—do not acquire this taste. Their share in the faculty whose nature we have established is deficient, because, after a period of their lives has passed and another faculty has preceded it in the locus, namely their own languages, their utmost effort is to attend to the isolated and compound expressions exchanged in conversation by the people of the region where they live, since circumstances compel them to do so. This faculty has disappeared from the people of the cities and they have moved far away from it, as previously stated. They possess only another faculty in this matter, and it is not the faculty of language that is sought. Whoever knows that faculty through the rules recorded in books has acquired none of the faculty itself; he has acquired only knowledge of its judgments, as you have learned. This faculty is acquired only through practicing, becoming accustomed to, and repeatedly hearing the speech of the Arabs. If you encounter the claim that Seebawayh, al-Faarisee, al-Zamakhsharee, and others like them, those champions of speech, were non-Arabs while possessing this faculty, know that the men of whom you hear were non-Arab only in lineage. As for their upbringing and formation, they took place among the Arabs who possessed this faculty and among those who learned it from them. They thereby mastered speech to a degree beyond which there is none—as though, at the beginning of their upbringing, they had been Arabs who grew up within their generations, until they grasped the essence of the language and became its people. Thus, although non-Arab in lineage, they were not non-Arab in language and speech, because they encountered the religion in its vigor and the language in its youth, before the traces of the faculty had disappeared from them or from the people of the cities. They then devoted themselves to practicing and studying the speech of the Arabs until they mastered its utmost limit.¹

* * *

¹ End of Ibn Khaldoon's statement.

* * *

Part: On the fact that the people of the cities, without exception, fall short in acquiring this linguistic faculty, which is acquired through instruction¹

Among them, whoever was farther removed from the Arabic tongue found its acquisition more difficult and arduous. The reason is that the learner first acquires a habitus contrary to the habitus sought, through the urban speech imparted to him by foreignness, which lowers the tongue from its original habitus to another habitus—namely, the language of the urban population of this age. Hence we find teachers hastening to teach speech to boys, while grammarians suppose that this precedence is due to their own discipline. That is not so; rather, it is due to teaching this habitus through contact with the tongue and speech of the Arabs.

Indeed, the grammatical discipline comes closer to such contact. The more deeply the languages of the inhabitants of the cities are rooted in foreignness and the farther they are removed from the tongue of Mudhar, the less capable their speakers are of learning the Mudharee language and acquiring its habitus, because the contrary habitus is more firmly established.

Consider this in the case of the inhabitants of the cities. Since the people of Ifreeqiya and the Maghrib were more deeply rooted in foreignness and farther removed from the original tongue, they were altogether deficient in acquiring its habitus through instruction.

Ibn al-Raqeeq2 related that one of the scribes of Qayrawaan wrote to a friend: “My brother—may I never be deprived of your presence—Aboo Sa'eed informed me that you had said you would be with those who are coming. We were prevented today, however, and were unable to go out. As for the people of the house—the dogs, regarding the matter of the sheen—they have lied; not a single letter of this is true. I write to you while longing for you, God willing.”

Such, then, was their habitus in the Mudharee tongue, resembling what we have described. Their poetry likewise stood far from the habitus and below the level, and it has remained so to the present age. For this reason, Ifreeqiya had no celebrated poets apart from Ibn Rasheeq3.

1 The chapter in Ibn Khaldoon's Muqaddimah, pp. 1402–1405.

2 He is Aboo Ishaaq Ibraaheem ibn al-Qaasim, known as al-Raqeeq or Ibn al-Raqeeq, a historian and man of letters from Qayrawaan. He authored works on history and died after 417 AH / 1076 CE.

3 He is al-Hasan ibn Rasheeq al-Qayrawaanee, author of al-'Umdah fee Sinaa'at al-Shi'r wa-Naqdih. He was a man of letters, critic, and researcher; he composed poetry and had a deewaan, and he wrote books on criticism, language, and biographies. He lived from 390–463 AH / 1000–1071 CE.

* * *

Part: On explaining taste in the terminology of the people of eloquence, establishing its meaning, and showing that it is generally not acquired by non-Arab foreigners who have entered the Arabic language¹

Know that the term “taste” is used by those concerned with the arts of eloquence to mean the acquisition by the tongue of the faculty of eloquence.

Eloquence is the conformity of speech to meaning in all its aspects, through particular qualities that occur in constructions and enable them to convey that meaning. A speaker of Arabic who is eloquent in it seeks the form that conveys the intended meaning according to the Arabs' styles and modes of address, and strives to arrange speech in that manner. When his circumstances are continuously connected with familiarity with the speech of the Arabs, he acquires the faculty of arranging speech in that manner, and composition becomes easy for him, so that he scarcely adopts any course in it other than the course of eloquence belonging to the Arabs. If he hears a construction that does not proceed according to that course, his hearing rejects it and recoils from it with the slightest reflection—or even without reflection—except insofar as he has benefited from acquiring this faculty. For when faculties become established and firmly rooted in their loci, they appear as though they were the nature and innate disposition of that locus. For this reason, many heedless people who do not understand the nature of faculties suppose that correctness in the Arabs' language, in parsing and eloquence, is a natural matter, and say: “The Arabs spoke naturally.” This is not so. Rather, it is a linguistic faculty in the arrangement of speech that became firmly established and deeply rooted, so that at first glance it appeared to be innate nature and natural disposition.

¹ See the chapter in Ibn Khaldoon's Muqaddimah, pp. 1399–1402.

* * *

This faculty, as stated above, is acquired through practicing the speech of the Arabs, repeatedly hearing it, and attending to the particular qualities of its constructions. It is not acquired through knowledge of the theoretical rules concerning it that the scholars of the language have deduced. These rules merely impart knowledge of that language; they do not produce the actual acquisition of the faculty in its locus. This has already been discussed. Once this is established, the faculty of eloquence in the language guides the eloquent speaker toward finding the arrangement and the fine composition that accord with the Arabs' constructions in their language and the arrangement of their speech. If the possessor of this faculty attempted to deviate from this specified path and these particular constructions, he would be unable to do so, nor would his tongue assist him, because he is unaccustomed to it and his firmly rooted faculty does not guide him toward it. If speech that deviates from the Arabs' style and eloquence in the arrangement of their speech is presented to him, he turns away from it, rejects it, and recognizes that it is not the speech of the Arabs whose language he has practiced. He may even be unable to argue for this judgment, as the people of grammatical and rhetorical rules do, because their argument is an inference from the rules obtained through induction. This, however, is an inwardly apprehended matter acquired by practicing the speech of the Arabs until one becomes like one of them.

For example, suppose that a boy from among them grew up and was raised within their generation. He would learn their language and master its grammatical parsing and eloquence until he attained their utmost limit; yet this would have nothing to do with theoretical knowledge of rules. It would result only from the acquisition of this faculty in his tongue and speech. In the same way, those who came after that generation acquire this faculty by memorizing their speech, poetry, and sermons, and by persistently doing so until the faculty is acquired and one becomes like a person who grew up in their generation and was raised among their generations. The rules stand apart from this. When this faculty becomes firmly rooted and established, the term “taste,” which the people of the eloquence discipline have adopted, is borrowed for it. Properly, the term designates the apprehension of flavors; but since the locus of this faculty is the tongue, insofar as it pronounces speech, just as the tongue is the locus for apprehending flavors, its name was borrowed for the faculty. Moreover, it is an inward apprehension of the tongue, just as flavors are sensory apprehensions for it; hence it was called “taste.”

Once this is clear to you, you will understand that non-Arabs who enter the Arabic language, arrive as outsiders to it, and are compelled to speak it because they associate with its speakers—such as the Persians, Romans, and Turks in the East, and the Berbers in the West—do not acquire this taste. Their share in the faculty whose nature we have established is deficient, because, after a period of their lives has passed and another faculty has preceded it in the locus, namely their own languages, their utmost effort is to attend to the isolated and compound expressions exchanged in conversation by the people of the region where they live, since circumstances compel them to do so. This faculty has disappeared from the people of the cities and they have moved far away from it, as previously stated. They possess only another faculty in this matter, and it is not the faculty of language that is sought. Whoever knows that faculty through the rules recorded in books has acquired none of the faculty itself; he has acquired only knowledge of its judgments, as you have learned. This faculty is acquired only through practicing, becoming accustomed to, and repeatedly hearing the speech of the Arabs. If you encounter the claim that Seebawayh, al-Faarisee, al-Zamakhsharee, and others like them, those champions of speech, were non-Arabs while possessing this faculty, know that the men of whom you hear were non-Arab only in lineage. As for their upbringing and formation, they took place among the Arabs who possessed this faculty and among those who learned it from them. They thereby mastered speech to a degree beyond which there is none—as though, at the beginning of their upbringing, they had been Arabs who grew up within their generations, until they grasped the essence of the language and became its people. Thus, although non-Arab in lineage, they were not non-Arab in language and speech, because they encountered the religion in its vigor and the language in its youth, before the traces of the faculty had disappeared from them or from the people of the cities. They then devoted themselves to practicing and studying the speech of the Arabs until they mastered its utmost limit.¹

* * *

¹ End of Ibn Khaldoon's statement.

* * *

Part: 1 ¦ Page: 152

* * *

Part: 1 ¦ Page: 153

* * *

The non-Arab who today mixes with speakers of Arabic in the cities first encounters the disappearance of the faculty sought in the Arabic tongue, while finding in its place the distinct faculty of his own people, contrary to the faculty of the Arabic tongue. If he then turns to practicing the speech and poetry of the Arabs through study and memorization, he may acquire it, but rarely: as we have explained, when one faculty has preceded another in the same locus, the later faculty is acquired only deficiently and with impairment. If we suppose a man non-Arab in lineage who was entirely spared contact with a foreign tongue and went to learn this faculty through study, he might acquire it, but so rarely that the fact is unmistakable. Many who study the rhetorical rules claim that they have acquired this taste through them; this is an error or self-deception. If they have acquired a faculty, it is a faculty in those rhetorical rules, not the faculty of expression. God guides whomever He wills to a straight path.¹

¹ End of Ibn Khaldoon's statement.

* * *

Part: 1 ¦ Page: 154

* * *

Part: 1 ¦ Page: 154

* * *

And Ibn Sharaf1. Most of the poets found there were newcomers, and their level of eloquence has continued to fall short to the present day.

The people of al-Andalus were closer than they to acquiring this habitus, owing to their extensive practice and their abundance of preserved linguistic material, both verse and prose. Among them was the historian Ibn Hayyaan2, the leading authority among the practitioners of this art and the standard-bearer of its habitus; and Ibn 'Abd Rabbih3, al-Qustallee4, and their like among the poets of the party-kingdoms, when the seas of language and belles-lettres there had swelled and thishad circulated among them for hundreds of years, until dispersal and exile took place during the days of Christian domination, and they became preoccupied with learning it.

Civilization declined, and with it all the crafts declined; their habitus consequently fell short of its former condition until it reached the lowest point.

Among the last of them were Saalih ibn Shareef and Maalik ibn al-Marhal5, pupils of the Seville school of the period, who were in Ceuta and served as scribes of the Nasrid state at its beginning. al-Andalus cast out the very best of its people who possessed that habitus through exile to the opposite shore: from Seville to Ceuta, and from eastern al-Andalus to Ifreeqiya. Before long, they died out, and the chain of instruction in this discipline was severed, because the opposite shore found it difficult to accept it and found it arduous, owing to the crookedness of their tongues and their deep-rooted Berber foreignness—which is contrary to what we have stated. After that, the habitus returned to al-Andalus as it had been. There emerged there Ibn Bashreen, Ibn Jaabir6, Ibn al-Jayyaab, and their contemporaries, followed by Ibraaheem al-Saahilee al-Tareehee and his contemporaries. After them came Ibn al-Khateeb7, who in this age perished as a martyr through the machinations of his enemies. He possessed an incomparable habitus in the tongue, and his disciple followed in his footsteps thereafter.

In general, this habitus was more prevalent in al-Andalus, and its instruction was easier and more accessible, because—as we have stated above—their people in this age practiced the sciences of language, preserved them, preserved the sciences of belles-lettres, and maintained the chain of their instruction. Moreover, the foreign-speaking people whose habitus was corrupted were newcomers among them; their foreignness was not native to the language of the people of al-Andalus and the Berbers in this

1 He is Muhammad ibn Sa'eed ibn Ahmad ibn Sharaf al-Judhaamee al-Qayrawaanee, Aboo 'Abd Allaah, a secretary, epistolary writer, and poet. He was born in Qayrawaan and died in Seville. He had a deewaan of poetry and other works. He lived from 390–460 AH / 1000–1068 CE.

2 He is Hayyaan ibn Khalaf ibn Husayn ibn Hayyaan al-Umawee by clientage, from Córdoba, a scholarly and investigative historian. His works on history and biographies include al-Muqtabis fee Taareekh Ahl al-Andalus. He lived from 377–469 AH / 987–1076 CE.

3 He is Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abd Rabbih ibn Habeeb ibn Hudayr ibn Saalim, a man of letters and leading scholar from Córdoba, author of al-'Iqd al-Fareed, and a poet with a deewaan. He lived from 246–328 AH / 860–940 CE.

4 He is Ibn Darraaj, Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Qaadhee ibn Darraaj al-Qustallee al-Andalusee, a poet and secretary with a deewaan of poetry. He lived from 347–421 AH / 958–1030 CE.

5 He is Maalik ibn 'Abd al-Rahmaan ibn 'Alee, known as Ibn al-Marhal, from Málaga, a man of letters and poet with a deewaan and other works. He lived from 604–699 AH / 1207–1300 CE.

6 He is Muhammad ibn Jaabir ibn Muhammad ibn Qaasim, originally from Waadee Aash, and Tunisian by residence; a jurist, traditionist, grammarian, linguist, and Qur'aan reciter, among those from whom Lisaan al-Deen ibn al-Khateeb learned. He had many works and a deewaan of poetry. He lived from 673–749 AH / 1274–1348 CE.

7 He is Lisaan al-Deen Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allaah ibn Sa'eed al-Salaamaanee, originally from Loja, the Andalusian Granadan known as Lisaan al-Deen Ibn al-Khateeb, a prominent minister, historian, and man of letters with very numerous works. He lived from 713–776 AH / 1313–1374 CE.

* * *

Part: 1 ¦ Page: 155

* * *

opposite shore, whose people and whose tongue belong to it, except in the cities, where they are immersed in a sea of their Berber foreignness and barbarous speech. Thus it is difficult for them to acquire the linguistic habitus through instruction, unlike the people of al-Andalus.

Consider this also in the case of the people of the East during the Umayyad and 'Abbaasid dynasties. Their condition regarding the perfection and mastery of this habitus resembled that of the people of al-Andalus, because at that time they were far from foreigners and mixed with them only rarely. This habitus was therefore more firmly established in that age, and the outstanding poets and scribes were more numerous, because Arabs and their descendants were abundant in the East. Look at what the Kitaab al-Aghaanee contains of their verse and prose; that book is the book and deewaan of the Arabs. It contains their language, histories, battles, Arab religion, biographies, the deeds of their caliphs and kings, their poetry, singing, and all their songs. No book is more comprehensive concerning the conditions of the Arabs. This habitus remained firmly established in the East under both dynasties, and perhaps it was more eloquent among them than among those who had lived in the pre-Islamic period—as is well known—until the condition of the Arabs deteriorated, their language was effaced, their speech became corrupt, and their dominion and state came to an end. Authority then passed to foreigners, the kingdom fell into their hands, and domination belonged to them. This occurred under the Daylamite and Seljuk dynasties. They mixed with the inhabitants of the cities and urban centers until they became distant from the Arabic tongue and its habitus, and those among them who learned it fell short of acquiring it. Accordingly, one finds that their tongue in this age, in both poetry and prose, is as it is, even though they produce much of it. “God creates what He wills and chooses.” And God, Glorious and Exalted, knows best; from Him comes success; there is no lord but Him.1

1 The end of Ibn Khaldoon's statement.

* * *

Part: 1 ¦ Page: 156

* * *