THE RELEVANCE OF THE KHALDUNIAN DISCOURSE TO THE MODERN AGE*
BY
MUHAMMAD ‘UTHMAN EL-MUHAMMADY
The present paper suggests, with caution, that
the Khaldunian intellectual discourse is of utmost importance-among
other discourses of this category of universality- in helping Muslims in
maintaining their civilizational and spiritual-cum-intellectual
identity and authenticity while grappling with some of the present
issues in the intellectual, cultural and civilizational fields. This is
relevant especially in matters pertaining to Islamic tawhidic
world-view, epistemology, axiology, education, culture and
socio-political exigencies. Hence in in-depth and serious study of this
discourse is intellectually and absolutely necessary.
His Life:
Before going to his ideas it may be pertinent
for us, at least to refresh our memory with the salient features of his
life, educational background, and activities, in the age and the
environment in which he lived. He is- Allah has mercy on him- Wali
al-Din ‘Abd al-Rahman bin Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Muhammad bin
al-Hasan bin Jabir bin Muhammad bin Ibrahim bin ‘Abd al-Rahman bin
Khaldun. According to his own account his ancestors originated from
Hadramaut, Yemen. And through another line, his ancestor is traced,
based on the record of Ibn Hazm, through his grandfather, who was the
first to enter Andalusia, back to Wail bin Hajar, one of the oldest
Yemeni tribes; he is undoubtedly of Arab origin. (1)
He was born in Tunis on the 27th of
May 1332 (Ramadan 1, 732), started his traditional education befitting
his family situation and status, first at the hands of his won father,
memorising the Qur’an, learning grammar, sacred law, tradition of the
Prophet, rhetoric, philology, and poetry; he mentions his teachers in
his autobiography. He continued with his education until the time of the
great plague which swept over countries from Mauritania to Samarkand,
causing him to lose his parents and his professors; then he had occasion
to enter public life when ibn Tarafkin, the king of Tunis made him the
seal bearer of Sultan Abu Ishaq, who was his captive. He was then a
youth under twenty. (2) With this appointment he came to know the inner
workings of court politics and the weaknesses of governments. Then he
had the opportunity to leave Tunis.
When Tunis was attacked by Abu Zaid the Emir of
Constantine in 1352 A.D. (713 A.H.), the city was defeated, and ibn
Khaldun escaped to Aba where he lived with the al-Muwahhidin; then he
went to live in Biskra. Then in Morocco Sultan Abu Enan who had recently
settled on the throne of his father was on his way to conquer Algeria,
hence ibn Khaldun went to Tlemcen to meet him, and he noted that was so
honoured by ruler; later he was appointed by the Sultan as a member of
his Council of the ‘Ulama, and later he was made one of his secretaries
and seal bearers. He could resume his studies during his stay at Fez
with some of the principal scholars who came to the city from Andalusia
and other cities of North Africa. At that time he was twenty-two years
old, and his intelligence, force of character, great ambition,
determination and sense of honour of belong to a prominent family
spurred him to seek success in life; hence he was involved in active
political life for about thirty years. He was imprisoned for his
intrigues, and then he was released.
The political situation was tense and ibn
Khaldun was involved in intrigues, and later he was appointed as Chief
Justice and he proved great ability in his duties; unfortunately he lost
favour with the Sultan because of rivalry with high officials of state.
Ibn Khaldun was involved in a number of intrigues, and finally he
requested that he would go to Andalusia.
In Andalusia ibn Khaldun established cordial
relationship with Sultan Muhammad of Granada; among Sultan Muhammad’s
party was Ibn al-Khatib who developed close friendship with ibn Khaldun,
and in his attempt to restore his throne in Granada through an
agreement with the Christian King Pedro the Cruel, when the latter
delayed the fulfillment of the agreement Sultan Muhammad appealed to ibn
Khaldun for assistance from Wazir Omar, and ibn Khaldun assisted him;
ibn Khaldun was even entrusted to care for Sultan Muhammad’s family in
Fez. The wazir then granted Sultan Muhammad Ronda and the surrounding
country, and Sultan Muhammad continued to make efforts to recapture his
throne in 1361 A.D. (763 A.H.) and then recalled his wazir ibn
al-Khatib.
The mission of ibn Khaldun to Pedro the Cruel
was successful, and Pedro offered ibn Khaldun a position for his
service, and the return of his family’s former estate at Castile, but
the latter refused the offer. (3). Then ibn Khaldun asked the permission
of Sultan Muhammad and went to his friend Abu Abdullah when he
recaptured his at Bougie. Thus ibn Khaldun became the Hajib of Sultan of
Bougie, involving the “management of all the affairs of the state and
the exclusive organization of the relations between the Sultan and hius
subjects”(4). When the city was defeated by Abul ‘Abbas in 767, ibn
Khaldun submitted the city to him; then he went to live in Biskra.
Finally he retired to a far outpost south of Constantine, Fort Salama.
Here, at the ripe age of forty-five with peaceful life, he started to
write his famous masterpiece al-Muqaddimah. Then when Sultan Abul ‘Abbas
went to capture Tunis, he took the opportunity to return to his native
city looking for reference works. Then when political intrigues were not
in his favour, he left North Africa (1382 A.D./784 A.H.) never to
return. (5)
After a difficult sea voyage He arrived in
Alexandria in October 1382 A.D. (Shaaban 784 A.H.) when he was fifty
years old; in Cairo, then the center of Muslim learning of the east and
the West, he was welcomed by students and scholars; his fame had already
preceded his arrival in the city; he lectured at Al-Azhar and other
established institutions. In this period he had the opportunity to meet
Sultan Zahir Barquq who appointed him to a teaching post, as a
professor, at the Kamhiah school.(6)He was also appointed as a Maliki
judge and tried to fight against corruption and favouritism, and then
because of conspiracies against him he was relieved from his post, and
this coincided with disaster in which his family and his wealth all
perished in the storm before reaching the port. Then after his
pilgrimage, he was appointed to the teaching post, lecturing on hadith,
especially on the Muwatta’ of Imam Malik. During this time ibn Khaldun
spent his time lecturing, studying and finishing his book on universal
history. Then fourteen years after leaving the post of Maliki judge he
was again appointed to the post because of the death of the judge, then
again he was relieved of his position because of intrigues.
When ibn Khaldun was in Damascus, while
following the company of the Sultan of Egypt, and when the Sultan had to
return to Egypt, ibn Khaldun had to meet Tamerlane; Tamerlane was so
impressed by him that he asked him to join his court, but ibn Khaldun
left him on good terms, after getting favourable terms for the people of
Damascus.
According to Walter Fischel there were six topics discussed between ibn Khaldun and the conqueror:
1. The Maghrib and ibn Khaldun’s land of origin;
2. Heroes in history;
3. Predictions about future events;
4. The Abbaside Caliphate;
5. Amnesty and security ‘for ibn Khaldun and his companions’
6. Ibn Khaldun’s intention of staying with Tamerlane. (7)
When Ibn Khaldun returned to Egypt he was
restored to his post as the Maliki judge, and because of the stormy
situation he was dismissed and reinstalled three times in five years. He
died on Wednesday, 17th March 1406 A.D.(25th Ramadan 808 A.H.), and was buried in the sufi cemetery outside bab an-Nasr while he was at the age of seventy-four years.(8)
His Works:
Concerning his works, it is suggested that they
can be categorized into the historical and the religious; into the
historical category of course is to be included the Kitab al-‘Ibar or
universal History which has survived until the present day. Another one
is lost, that is history work written specifically for Tamerlane, as
mentioned in his autobiography. Then his religious works are Lubab
al-Mahsul (Summary of the Result), a commentary on usul al-fiqh poem,
and a few which, among others is Shifa’ al-Sa’il (Healing of the
Inquirer). (9)
His masterpiece, the Muqaddimah which is the
introduction to his universal history can be divided can be divided into
six parts; and this division is clear from the division of the work
itself. In the translation of F. Rosenthal, in volume one the chapters
covered are: introduction, dealing with excellence of historiography,
appreciation of various approaches to history, different errors made by
previous historians, something about why these errors do occur.
Book One of the Kitab al-’Ibar about the nature
of civilization, Bedouin and settled life, the achievements of
superiority, gainful occupational, ways of making a living, the
sciences, crafts, and all the other things that affect civilization, the
causes and reasons thereof. Then preliminary remarks.
The scope of the discussion of the masterpiece
of ibn Khaldun-with the chapter headings dealing with the various
subjects – is put as an appendix at the end of this essay.
Relevance of Khaldunian Discourse in the Views of Some Scholars:
James Kalb, is of the view that the seminal work, al-Muqaddimah, was composed by Ibn Khaldun
“…as a thinker who grappled with circumstances
similar in important ways to the social and political situation now
evolving in the West. He was superbly qualified for his task, with a
vigorous and unconventional mind and a knowledge of politics and history
that came from descent from an ancient family with distinguished
political and scholarly traditions, profound study, and a varied life of
public service and a political adventure as a courtier, jurist, and
statesman in Islamic centers from Spain to Damascus. He was admired by
scholars and by the most ruthlessly practical of men; Pedro the Cruel
and Tamerlane wished to make uses of him, while Granada’s greatest
writer, ibn al-Khatib, wrote his life and honoured his learning and
literary skill”. (10).
The same writer gives an evaluation of ibn Khaldun’s intellectual discourse in the following words:
His work reflects a mind attracted to practical
politics, to scholarship, and to mysticism. After failing in efforts to
promote public good, he turned to scholarship in an attempt to
understand the past and explain the necessity that seemed to govern
events. As an intense participation in the affairs of a great
civilization irreversibly in decline, he was acutely aware of what was
and what should be, and neither confused the two, or attempted to
encompass one in the other. (11)
Further, seeing the relevance of Khaldunian
intellectual discourse in illuminating the cultural and social changes
taking place, he says:
To-day’s mixing of peoples, cultures and
ideologies, whether resulting from world trade and immigration or
improved communication and social fission, is moving our world closer in
important ways to the one Ibn Khaldun knew than the more cohesive one
with which we have long been familiar. Such changes will affect our
politics profoundly in ways his writings can illuminate for us (12).
Apart from this he adds:
The gifts of the past may not be ours forever.
Common loyalties make a people, and the common culture and history that
support a people’s identity are needed to make loyalties endure. Success
in transplanting a British society to America and absorbing European
immigrants into it is no sign that the American civic order will survive
abandonment of a common or at least dominant identity; a social setting
like the one ibn Khaldun knew will be the more likely consequence.
Immigration and the end of national boundaries could bring about similar
results within the European Union by replacing ordered diversity with
bureaucratically – administered chaos. While such things are not
inevitable, powerful tendencies favour them, and a clearer understanding
of what the resulting society would be like and how it could come about
may be useful. Ibn Khaldun’s thought is an aid to such understanding.
(13)
Another recent estimation of Khaldunian
intellectual discourse is from an American writer, Jude Wanniski from
Supply -Side University; he states in his web-site:
When I learned Arnold Toynbee believed that ibn
Khaldun had produced the greatest work on social science to come from
the mind of man, I had to assume his was at least in the top five.
Toynbee is of course is one of this century’s giants in historiography.
After reading through a small piece of Khaldun’s work, I have to admit I
awed by the man’s genius. How could I have spent so much of my life in
politics without being led to him before? Ronald Reagan like to quote
Khaldun on the issue of taxation-that they are low at the beginning of
empires and high at their end … Ibn Khaldun is not an Arab neo-Platonist
as his world view subsumes theirs and is an original one not previously
expressed in the world. This singular breakthrough not only is awesome,
but practically evidence of divine inspiration … What we will consider …
are selected fragments from the sixth book (of the Muqaddimah-uem) of
his philosophy of history. My aim simply is to allow you to be impressed
with him and have you appreciate the foundation he presents, on which
you can build your won designs of the way the world works. The following
passages are presented with what at first seems almost childlike
simplicity, until you realize he is building this foundation brick by
brick, with seamless logic (followed by the passages dealing on the
origins of society) (14)
At the of the several pages containing
quotations from the Muqaddimah in the F. Rosenthal translation
concerning such topics as “Origins of Society” (Book I Chapter I
p.181), “Origins of State”, “State and Society”, Vol. II p. 264),
“Political Sanctions” (vol. I, p. 345), “Social Solidarity is based on
Kinship” (vol. I. p. 235, vol. I. p. 236), “Proximity and a Common Life
as the Basis of Solidarity” (vol. I. p. 332), “Solidarity in Tribes”
(vol. I. p. 223), “Transition From Tribal To Village and City Life and
Consequent Weakening of Solidarity” (vol. I. p. 237), “Solidarity in
Cities”, (vol. II. p. 267), “Solidarity is the Basis of Sovereignty”
(vol. I. p. 252), “Solidarity is the basis of Kingship” (vol. I. p.
278), “Once State is Established Solidarity Becomes Superfluous” (vol.
I. p. 279) he states clearly:
In 700 years, nothing has really changed in how
societies are continuously being shaped, about the nature of solidarity
and sovereignty.
Then straightaway he applies this to the US situation vis-à-vis the rest of the world; he states:
Now that the United States is solely at the top
of the global power pyramid, we can almost imagine the dynamics that
will flow from this fact into the next century. The US is the global
sovereign power .All other heads of state are as chieftains (Ar.
“sheikhs” -uem) of their national tribes. It is an intricate maze to
organize, though, with many hundreds of languages and myriad religions,
sects, ethnicities, national identities. It will take great skill to
organize these over the next several centuries. (15)
The same writer (“unofficial adviser to the
Bush administration” as mentioned in his web-site) goes on citing
passages from the Muqaddimah like passages on “Opposition of Tribes and
bands” (vol. I, p.295), “Nature of Kingship”, (vol. I, p.337),
“Concentration of Authority” (vol. I. p.299), “Need of the King for A
Bureaucracy” (vol.II.p.1), “Changes in the Composition of the
Bureaucracy” (vol.vol.II.p.40), “Natural Ages of the State”
(vol.I.p.306), “Transition From Nomadic To Sedentary Forms”
(vol.I.p.309), “Growth of Luxury” (vol.I.p.300), “Luxury and Power”
(vol.I.313), “Growth of Docility” (vol.I.p.301).
In relation to these passages cited, he comments as follows:
(After mentioning the past lectures on
sovereignty, kinghip) Think now of the United States as the Global
Sovereign, pondering how to manage 180 or more separate nations. Think
each (country in the world now-uem) as a tribe or band, some of whom
will always be trying to outwit the sovereign, all of whom will resist
being stripped off some measure of independence. It becomes clear we
have barely begun to think through the architecture of a new world order
built around our kingship. Remember, the following was written six
centuries ago. (16)
In relation to the passage about “The Need of
the King for Bureaucracy” since the King cannot act alone but has to act
and govern through a bureaucracy he says:
In this passage think of the United States
needing a bureaucracy (to dominate the world-uem) which obviously
suggests the United Nations-JW (17)
And in relation to the Khaldunian quotation (vol.II.p.1):
He whom God has chosen as a ruler must protect
his community from external aggression, preserve order, and enforce the
laws, in order to prevent the encroachment by any one on the rights of
others. He must protect property by making the highways secure .He must
seek to promote the interest of his subjects and hence, in order to
facilitate transactions and make it easier for his subjects to earn
their livelihood, inspect foodstuffs, weights, and measures, to prevent
adulteration or fraud. He must, too, test the coinage which they use, in
order to prevent counterfeiting…
He adds the remarks:
It is the United States which must set the unit of account…JW (18)
Then in relation to the following directive in
Khaldunian discourse necessitating bureaucratic and military actions of
the sovereign:
Know then, that the ruler requires both a
civilian and a military establishment to aid him in carrying on with the
affairs of the state. At the beginning of the dynasty, when the rulers
are consolidating their power, the need for military power is greater
than that for a civilian bureaucracy ; for the civilians are mere
servants, carrying out the orders of the king, whereas the military are
his partners and fellow workers .The same is also true of the period of
decline of a dynasty , when old age has weakened social solidarity and
caused the population to decrease , as we said before; in such a case
too, the need for soldiers , for the purposes of defence, makes itself
as urgently felt as it had been during the period of consolidation of
the state. In both those stages, then, the sword plays a more important
part than the pen, and the military enjoy more prestige and wealth, and
are granted richer fiefs than the civilians..
He notes revealingly:
In the period ahead, perhaps for a decade or
two, while the world is getting used to U.S. sovereignty. We must bear
the expense of maintaining the military, until it is clear the “tribes”
will accept our sovereignty. JW (19)
We can see this at present (2003) happening in the world in the global scene.
In relation to the validity and relevance of Ibn Khaldun’s discourse in theorizing about culture, John W. Bennet states:
“(In citing the impressive development of
‘anthropological’ ideas outside the publicized European channels he
states after mentioning ibn Battutah and al-Muguaddisi (al-Maqdisi))
…Ibn Khaldun is probably the best known, due to one complete translation
of his major work (Rosenthal 1958) and an excellent contemporary
analytical presentation of his theories (Mahdi 1957). Khaldun is the
only scholar with a modern view to antedate the 19th century;-there are some intimidations in Vico for the early 18th century (Bergin & Fisch 1960, pp. xxiii, iiii; 47), but they do not approach the clarity and modernity of Khaldun…(20)
And in appreciating the views of ibn Khaldun on
theorizing about culture and civilization, and their relevance in
discourse he states:
Khaldun had a word for culture; he recognized
and theorized about cultural differences; he distinguished culture from
society and primitive culture from civilization; and had a clear theory
of the roots of culture in human biological needs and engagement with
the environment…
Of equal relevance are the circumstances out of which Khaldun’s theory emerged. He lived most of his life as a kind of 14th
century Harry Hopkins – an intellectual attached to rulers of various
sections of the Western Muslim Empire. He had observed the disparity
between Islamic orthodoxy and the social realities of the empire, and
became deeply critical of the failure of Islamic history to portray this
disparity, and to present reasons for the cultural differences existing
between the many peoples of the empire. He developed a theory of what
he called, in direct translation, ‘the science of culture’ as the
explanatory element in historical scholarship…This objective led him, as
already noted, to an exposition of a theory of culture with both
historical and functional orientations. (21)
Hamou Amrouche in “Algeria’s Islamic Revolution
People Versus Democracy?” (22) mentions the relevance and accuracy of
the observations of Ibn Khaldun – mentioning the idea adopted from him
by Albert Hourani – concerning the stability of regime depending upon
the combination of three factors. He states:
To understand fully “the apparent paradox of
stable and enduring regimes in deeply disturbed societies” Albert
Hourani adapted an idea from ibn Khaldun and suggested that the
stability of a regime depended upon a combination of three factors. It
was stable when cohesive ruling group was able to link its interests
with those of powerful elements in society, and when that alliance of
interests was expressed in a political idea which made the power of the
rulers legitimate in the eyes of society or at least a significant part
of it.
Then he goes on to show how it materialized during the Boumedienne regime. He says:
These three major ingredients undoubtedly
sustained Boumedienne’s regime, since a monolithic army allied itself
with the peasants and the workers —the forces vives of the nation— and
expressed this alliance with Arabo-Islamism, the ‘national constants’,
and socialist ideology…
Then in relation to one proposed Graduate
Seminar in 2003, Prof Ronald Judy explains the relevance of Khaldunian
discourse in the current political climate in the Muslim World related
to the emergence of two types of movements. He says about the Seminar
(23):
Our focus will be on how specific moments in
the institution of knowledge afford a glance at the dialectic between
the state and what might be designated as civil society. This dialectic
was most thoroughly theorized by Ibn Khaldun in the fourteenth century..
Its importance for us to-day, however, stems from the fact that the
Khaldunian model of agency has come to be a touchstone for two
contemporary movements of Islamic resistance to transnational capitalism
.On the one hand, Khaldun’s principle on entropy has been utilized by
such “integrationist” as Sayyid Qutb, at-Turabi, al-Madani, and a
Ghanoushi to explain the failure of Pan-Arab secularism and legitimate
their projects of social reforms based on sharia (discourse of
jurisprudence). On the other hand, Khaldun’s theory of religion as
ideology has enabled thinkers like Muhammad al-Jabarti, Fatima Mernissi,
and Ibrahim Shukry to engage in a legitimate reformulation of Islam
that retains the project of social justice, in the broadest sense,
without relying on a theory of law based on a homogeneous collective
identity. Both these applications of Khaldun presuppose a concept of
civil society as a space of resistance between domination and
subjugation, and that the possibility of successful resistance lies in
this difference’s being institutionalized as a revolutionary mode of
knowledge production …
In the essay entitled “The Future of the Social
Sciences”, Renate Holub writes about Ibn Khaldun’s discourse in history
and the science of society and culture, and its relevance, while
discussing the role of Vico and others:
No doubt Vico was not the first thinker to
reflect on social facts that pattern order and disorder. For one, ibn
Khaldun (1332-1406), the fourteenth century historian, statesman, and
jurist, in the tradition of the Islamic enlightenment from the Tunisian
shore of the Mediterranean, studied the history of dynastic regimes
since the inception of Islam.The regions he covered ranged from the Oxus
to the Nile, and from the Tigris to the Guadalquivir. He detected
patterns of behaviour which either added to social cohesion, or
participated in its disintegration .In his Muqaddimah (1377), he
concluded trhat ruling groups sustain their power by a sense of
solidarity, or ‘asabiyyah, which unites both rulers and ruled.
Asabiyyah, both a structure of consciousness and a structure of feeling,
which via education and socialization assumes the power of a habitus,
or a spontaneous common sense, obtains as long as the ruling groups
refrain from attempting to gain exclusive control over all sources of
power and wealth. However, as soon as the ruling groups gain such
exclusive control, conflict breaks out. The old regime will soon be
displaced by a new dynastic regime. Order, followed by disorder,
produces new orders in ibn Khaldun’s cyclical understanding of the
political histories of regions under Muslim majority control. (24)
Then he mentions Nicolo Machavelli (1469-1527)
who appeared about a century after ibn Khaldun who “studied the role of
social facts in patterns of order and disorder…”(25).
In relation to the situation in Turkey and the
question of facing Western civilization among the intellectuals, the use
of certain aspects of the Khaldunian discourse has its relevance in
providing certain elements of the intellectual constructs for such an
engagement. The situation is portrayed in the following terms:
“(Concerning the intellectual movement in
Turkey which sees Islam not only as a religion but also as a
civilizational apparatus to be discovered and applied)…Necip Fazil
Kisakurck, founder of the Great Oriental Movement and the monthly
journal of the same name, is the forerunner of this group. Since 1943,
and in more than 80 books, notably Bab-I Ali and the Ideological Web, he
has argued that both the scholastic structure of the madrasa education
which produced the type of ulama which could not meet the challenge of
westernization during the late Ottoman period, and modern secularistic
educational establishments set up after the tanzimat reforms and the
Young Turk revolution are incapable of meeting the need of a
contemporary dynamic Turkey. Only when Islam is seen as a civilization
and its parameters rejuvenated in a contemporary form in their totality
can Turkey really progress. Cemil Meric taking cue from Kisakurck,
analysed the notion of civilization with profound sophistication and
dissected the western civilization with the ability of a master surgeon.
In From Civilization to Umran he uses ibn Khaldun’s notion of umran to
argue for the reconstruction of the physical and intellectual apparatus
of Islamic civilization…. (26)
In Turkey also, there is Dr Fahri Kayadibi who
appreciates the discourse of education in its various aspects. In the
short but important essay he argues that in matters of education the
views of Ibn Khaldun are relevant for our age. (27)
He agrees with a number of points in the
Muqaddimah about education, namely: the importance of imparting
information to students according to their level of comprehension; he
says this is done by teaching them the main principles of the
information and the sciences involved in a brief manner, taking into
consideration the capacity of the students. As time goes on more
elaborations are made gradually, so that the students will mature in the
subjects taught. According to him the revision should be done three
times over. To ibn Khaldun this is the correct method.
Then he stresses the importance of not forcing
the students to memorise their lessons; otherwise they will be lazy.
Other points mentioned are: that the subjects should not be taught in
broken sequence because the integrated nature of the subject will not be
understood, and the mastery of the subject will take a longer time than
otherwise the case.
Other points touched are: two subjects should
not be taught at the same time, because this will lead to confusion; the
necessity of not being too strict with students; the usefulness of
traveling to meet authoritative scholars for furthering one’s education;
the importance of practical education as opposed to mere theorization;
the importance of cultivating high degree of skill in education; ibn
Khaldun uses the term ‘malakah’ for this high degree of skill in
education, knowledge and crafts.
In his conclusion he states:
Ibn Khaldun has emphasized the importance of
science, education and teaching. He foresees science and education as an
inseparable part of prosperity. According to him, the real difference
between mankind and other beings is the power of thought. Science and
art are born from open–minded thought and the intricate learning of the
principles of all issues. Ideas emerge from those who have the curiosity
and the desire to investigate what is unknown. From this situation, the
issues of education and teaching arise.
He advises teachers to teach in a comprehensive
manner and to gradually teach subjects in stages, moving from easier to
the more difficult. Memorisation should be avoided (except in the
relevant cases which are unavoidable – uem). He emphasizes that teaching
methods should be simple and not complicated. He states that the
teaching of subjects should not be in broken sequences or else the
subject .He states that the teaching of subjects should not be in
broken sequence or else the subject will become scattered and forgotten.
Also, aggressive behaviour towards children will turn them off from
lessons, create laziness, making them unwilling learners as well as
negatively affecting their behaviour.
Education should consist of theory and
practice. Education should be revised and repeated until a good level is
attained. He also declares that learning and teaching sciences require
skill and that the teachers of these sciences should be knowledgeable in
their fields. These clearly defined issues of ibn Khaldun are still
relevant for educational issues of contemporary times. (28).
Addessalam Cheddadi in his important essay “Ibn
Khaldun”, originally published in Prospects: the Quarterly Review of
Comparative Education, (Paris UNESCO, International Bureau of Education,
vol. XXIV, no1/2.1994, p. 7-19 discusses a number of important issues
related to education, based on the Muqaddimah. The points mentioned are:
the life-long nature of Islamic education; the all-important issue of
the reproduction of values in the individual; the concept of the
‘asabiyyah, and its role in social cohesion, and how it relates to
education; and then the necessity of man to learn from tradition,
otherwise it will take too long a time to learn on one’s own developing
the ‘empirical intelligence’ from experience; the inculcation of values
through education and socialization; the importance of reputation in
doing things so that ‘coloration of the soul’ will take place,
engendering ‘habitus’ (‘malakah’) in knowledge, values, attitudes, and
acts, including skills in crafts and learning, intellectual and
linguistic skills, or even ‘malakah’ in spirituality and faith.
He dwells also on the development of the
various ‘intellects’ in the person, the ‘empirical intellect’ developed
by experience and experimenting,, the ‘theoretical intellect’ developed
by theorization, the ‘discerning intellect’ for discerning the
differences in things. (29) In this essay author leaves out the
discussion on the importance of ‘added intellect’ (‘al-‘aqlul mazid’)
which marks the superiority of a civilization in terms of intellectual
worth.
Then in relation to economic life and the
relevance of Khaldunian discourse in the issue of taxation, among
others, there is a discussion on it in “Rise and Fall: ibn Khaldun and
the Ethics of Taxation”, Chapter 15 in: the topic of “Advancing Economic
Thought” (See http://www.ryerson.ca/~lovewell/khaldun.html).
Reflecting on his later years in Cairo, then the wealthiest city, the writer states:
In his later years ibn Khaldun returned to
public life with a move to Cairo. Here, in what was then the Arab
world’s largest and wealthiest city, he performed the occasional
services for the Egyptian sultan, while also working as a professor and a
judge. He died just as a new political power – Ottoman Turkey – was
establishing its dominance throughoutt the Arab world in ways that his
own historical theory had predicted. (30)
Concerning the sharp observation of human
economic life and the resulting “division of labour” and
“specialization”, he quotes with approval the statement of ibn Khaldun,
which, to him has ‘a surprisingly modern flavour’. This:
…a single individual is incapable of satisfying
his needs by himself, but must cooperate with other members of society.
The product of such cooperative labour will exceed by far the needs of
the group. Thus, in the production of wheat, for example, we do not see
each individual providing for his own needs; rather we see six or ten
persons cooperating: a blacksmith, a carpenter to repair tools; an
ox-tender, a man to plough the soil, and another to reap the grain; and
so forth for the different kinds of agricultural work, each man
specializing in one operation…. Thus the inhabitants of a more populous
city are more prosperous than their counterparts in a less populous one.
(Cited from Charles Issawi, An Arab Philosophy of History, (London:John
Murray, 1950) p.92-93.)(31).
Then while mentioning the fact that other
writers had already touched on the issue of specialization of labour,
like the Greek writer Xenophon, yet he states that “…no one before ibn
Khaldun had appreciated the central importance of labour specialization
in determining living standards. This realization allowed him to make
yet another striking insight. A dynasty’s wealth, he noted, cannot be
identified solely with money, since gold and silver ‘are only minerals
and products having exchange value’. It would take several centuries
before Ibn Khaldun’s realization would be fully incorporated in
conventional economic thought.”(32)
In relation to taxation he quotes the views of ibn Khaldun with approval. He quotes:
In the early stages of the state, taxes are
light in their incidence, but fetch in a large revenue … As time passes
and kings succeed each other, they lose their tribal habits in favour of
more civilized ones. Their needs and exigencies grow…owing to the
luxury in which they have been brought up. Hence they impose fresh taxes
on their subjects…[and] sharply raise the rate of old taxes to increase
their yield…But the effect on business of this rise in taxation make
themselves felt. For business men are soon discouraged by the comparison
of their profits with the burden of their taxes…Consequently production
falls off, and with it the yield of taxation…(33)
After discussing the mechanism of taxation and
describing what he calls as “The Laffer Curve” using the Khaldunian
theory, and assessing it, he gives his view about the relevance of the
Khaldunian theory. He states:
Ibn Khaldun’s view of taxation offers a useful
example of how an economic concept can be reapplied in an entirely
different setting. As insightful as this view undoubtedly was for the
times he lived in, it might not seem to be applicable to the modern age
of democratic governments. After all no elected government would ever
raise tax rates beyond the point where tax revenues would fall. Or would
they? In fact, this question was part of a recent controversy in
economics, which had important practical ramifications. During the
1970s, a group of economists developed a theory known as supply-side
economics, which concentrates on the ways in which government actions
can affect incentives for private citizens to work, save, and invest….
(34)
In giving his final view defending the Khaldunian theory on taxation, the writer states:
…But the modern version of Ibn Khaldun’s theory
is far from fully discredited. All economists recognize its potential
validity; with empirical studies suggesting that tax revenues and tax
rates begin to move inversely in the range of a 70 percent tax rate.
Also, recent debates over tax rates have brought a greater awareness of
how public policy can affect private economic incentives. In a world
where national borders are becoming less important, governments must
keep tax rates relatively low or face loss of investment, jobs, and tax
revenues to other countries. Ibn Khaldun’s original insight – made over
600 years ago – therefore continues to act as an important constraint on
governments, in a world far different from his own. (35)
Further Aspects of the Relevance of The Khaldunian Discourse:
Without going into the intricate philosophical
implications of modernity or post-modernity, the present paper would
like to argue for the relevance of the Khaldunian intellectual
discourse, in relation to the Muslim world in general and the Malay
World in particular, in a brief manner, on a number of accounts:
Firstly, this intellectual discourse is of the
utmost importance in relation to the act of maintaining our identity as
Muslim civilization, with our world-view, epistemology, and axiology, in
relation to education, politico-social order, and civilizational and
ummatic identity, all based on the tawhidic paradigm.
Secondly, in building our strength in the
spiritual, intellectual, technological and scientific domains so that we
are not only on the receiving side, but we are also the creators of all
these in our own way in the global scene.
Thirdly, in facing the process of
globalization, and maintaining our identity, at the same time we can
present the tawhidic image of compassion, the really ‘insani’ image of
civilization and culture, with the strong culture in its aspects as a
function of ummatic compassion, not divorced from it.
Fourthly, this Khaldunian discourse is of
utmost importance in helping us to regain again the solidarity based on
the correct understanding of the ‘asabiyyah principle within the ummatic
ambiance and its function in the ummatic brotherhood-not a substitute
for it- so that we can overcome and solve this ‘asabiyyah crisis as
mentioned by Prof. Akbar Ahmed (36). Inadequate understanding of this
principle and confusing it with secular nationalism, with the attending
consequences in social and political action and conflicts, has brought
and is bringing catastrophe in the Muslim Community. The late Said Nursi
of Turkey-May Allah shower His mercy on him- has called it “positive
nationalism”. (37):
Positive nationalism arises from an inner need
of social life and is the cause of mutual assistance and solidarity; it
ensures a beneficial strength; it is a means for further strengthening
Islamic brotherhood.
This idea of positive nationalism must serve
Islam, it must be its citadel and armour; it must not take the place of
it. For there is a hundredfold brotherhood within the brotherhood of
Islam which persists in the Intermediate Realm and World of Eternity.
(38)
In all these-with Allah’s grace- the Khaldunian
intellectual discourse can help us abundantly provided we are prepared
to let the intellectual flow of the discourse to have an impact on us-
giving us “al-tadhakkur” as the Qur’an teaches it.
In the Malay World, apart from the above, the
seminal idea and principle of ‘asabiyyah is of paramount importance in
dispelling popular rejection of ‘asabiyyah based on inadequate
understanding, hence affecting national, even regional unity and
strength. In the long run, this understanding is for the relative
homogenization of the region, much needed for the intellectual and
cultural stability of the area for ummatic development and progress in
future. (39)
Now to the evidences of the above positions from the discourse in the Muqaddimah.
First the relevance of the discourse in
relation to our world view, epistemology, axiology, education,
intellectual development, politico-social order and ummatic identity in
the discourse, which are not out of date in the fundamentals.
In relation to the tawhidic word-view and
thinking about the causes to the ultimate, of which the human mind is
incapable, harming itself, he states:
If this is clear, it is possible that the
ascending sequence of causes reaches the point where it transcends the
realm of human perception and existence and thus ceases to be perceived.
The intellect would here become lost, confused, and cut off in the
wilderness of conjectures. Thus, (recognition of the) oneness of God is
identical with inability to perceive the causes and ways in which they
exercise their influence, and with reliance in this respect upon the
Creator of the causes who comprises them. There is no maker but Him. All
(causes) lead up to Him and go back to His Power. We know about Him
only in as much as we have issued from Him. This is the meaning of the
statement on the authority of a certain truthful person (al-siddiq) “The
inability to perceive is perception”.
Then talking about tawhidic world-view relating to the “state” of soul, he states in the continuing passage:
Such (declaration of the) oneness of God does
not merely refer to faith, which is affirmation based upon judgment. It
belongs to the talk of the soul. Its perfection lies in its acquisition
in a form that becomes an attribute of the soul. In the same way, the
object of (all human) actions and divine worship (‘al-ibadat’) is
acquisition of the habit of obedience (‘malakah al-ta’ah’) (note the
word: ‘malakah’-uem) and submissiveness and the freeing of the heart
from all occupations save the Worshipped Master, until the novice on the
path of God becomes a holy person (‘rabbani’) (40)
Then he talks about the difference between “state” of the soul and knowledge; he says:
The difference between ‘state’ and knowledge in
question of dogma (‘al-‘aqa’id’) is the same as that between talking
(about attributes) and having them. This may be explained as follows:
many people know that mercy to the orphans and the poor brings (a human
being) close to God and is recommendable. They say so and acknowledge
the fact. They quote the sources for it from the religious law. But if
they were to see an orphan or a poor person of the destitute classes
they would run away from him and disdain to touch him, let alone show
mercy to him, or any of the higher ‘stations’ of sympathy, affection,
and charity. Their mercy for the orphan was the result of having reached
the station of knowledge. It was not the result of the station of
‘state’ nor of an attribute of theirs. Now, there are people who, in
addition to the station of knowledge, and the realization of the fact
that mercy to the poor brings (a human being) close to God, having
attained another, higher ‘station’, they have attained the attribute and
habit of mercy (‘ittisaf bir-rahmah wa malakatiha) (note the wording
“malakah of rahmah” – uem). When they see an orphan or a poor person,
they approach him and show him (mercy)…(41)
Then concerning divine worship and the question of getting the noble qualities, he states:
It should be known that in the opinion of the
Law Giver (Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.) perfection with regards to any of
the obligations he has imposed (upon Muslims) requires this
(distinction) (between knowing something as knowledge only and the
higher station of possessing the quality involved – uem). Perfection in
matters of belief depends on the other knowledge, that which results
from the possession of (the se matters) as an attribute. Perfection in
matters of divine worship depends on acquisition of (these matters) as
an attribute, on real (knowledge) of them.
Divine worship and its continuous practice
leads to this noble result. Muhammad says concerning the principal act
of divine worship “My consolation lies in prayer…Prayer for Muhammad was
an attribute and ‘state’ in which he found his ultimate pleasure and
consolation. How different is the prayer of the people! …
It is clear from all the statements we have
made that the object of all (religious) obligations is the acquisition
of a habit (‘malakah’) firmly rooted in the soul, from which a necessary
knowledge results for the soul. It is the (recognition of the) oneness
of God, which is the (principal) article of faith and the thing through
which happiness is attained. There is no difference whether the
obligations of the heart or those of the body are concerned in this
respect. (42)
Then he elucidates the other articles of belief; he says:
It should be known that the Lawgiver (Muhammad
s.a.w.) described to us this first degree of faith which is affirmation.
He specified particular matters he charged us to affirm with our hearts
and to believe in our souls, while at the same time acknowledging them
with our tongues. They are the established articles of the Muslim faith.
When Muhamnmad was asked about faith he said: “(Faith is) the belief in
God, His angels, His scriptures, His messengers, the Last day, and the
belief in predestination, be it good or bad”. (43)
Such are the articles of faith in ilm al-kalam, and he endorses this.
Thus, in this way he relates the tawhidic
worldview with its impact on human belief, divine worship, character,
soul, and actions, as well as values. This discourse is very logical,
persuasive and convincing. It is relevant now just as it was relevant
before. And from his discourse we know that he defends mainstream
tawhidic Islamic world-view with all that it implies, and not the
divergent views of the innovators which had appeared in Islamic history.
This is a position which is the conviction of the majority of the
Muslims throughout history until to-day, and this is the world-view
which will be the intellectual defence against the intellectual
deformity of modernity and post-modernity, apart from the intellectual
innovations within the Community itself.
Concerning matters relating to the concept of
knowledge and matters of like nature, including the development of
knowledge in human civilization, we can briefly say that he endorses
knowledge which are related to religion and that which is of
intellectual nature. He begins the 6th Chapter of the
Muqaddimah with the discussion on human capability to think. Concerning
man’s ability to think and its relationship to perception, he states
(44):
It should be known that God distinguished man
from all the other animals by an ability to think which He made the
beginning of human perfection and the end of man’s noble superiority
over existing things.
This comes about as follows: Perception, – that
is consciousness, on the part of the person who perceives, in his
essence of things that are outside his essence-is something peculiar to
living beings to the exclusion of other being and existent things.
Living beings may obtain consciousness of things that are outside their
essence through the external senses God has given them that is, the
sense of hearing, vision, smell, taste, and touch. Man has this
advantage over the other beings that he may perceive things outside his
essence through his ability to think, which is something beyond his
senses. It is the result of (special) powers placed in the cavities of
his brain. With the help of these powers, man takes the pictures of the
sensibilia, applies his mind to them, and thus abstracts from them other
pictures. The ability to think is the occupation with pictures that are
beyond sense perception, and the application of the mind to them for
analysis and synthesis. This is what is meant by af’idah “hearts” in the
Qur’an: ‘he gave you hearing and vision and hearts’ Af’idah ‘hearts’ is
the plural of fu’ad .It means here the ability to think (45).
Then he goes on talking about the first degree
of thinking of the discerning intellect (al-‘aqlul al-tamyizi), the
second done by experimental intellect (‘al-‘aql al-tajribi) learning by
experience, the third the speculative intellect (‘al-‘aql al-nazari’)
giving out knowledge by thinking without practical application, and so
on in the theoretical plain, until man becomes perfect in his reality,
becoming pure intellect; this is human reality. (46) Then he goes on
talking about the thought process and how that relates to human actions,
and how that thinking leads man to perfection and success.
Then he talks about the emergence of the
traditional and the rational sciences in an integrated manner, giving
the summary of the sciences then available in human civilization in a
unified way, giving their strong points, features, and also weak points.
He speaks about the Qur’an ic sciences, the
traditions, fiqh, usul al-fiqh, Sufism, and Arabic studies; he speaks of
the various intellectual sciences like logic, philosophy, medicine,
astronomy, and the rest, as mentioned in the summary above.
All in all he speaks as representing the
Islamic intellectual tradition; even while giving his views which appear
as original, he is speaking on behalf of tradition and not going
against Islamic intellectual tradition.
His views about the appearance of intellectual
sciences and the crafts in urban settled civilization, and his concept
of ‘added intelligence’ (‘al-‘aqlul mazid’) is indeed interesting and
revealing, showing his grasp of the relationship between settled urban
civilization and the appearance of intellectual sciences and technical
skills, with the attending consequences in the development of culture.
He talks of ‘al-‘aqlul-mazid’ as developed in settled civilization
making some groups of people being so advanced intellectually and
artistically.
His emphasis of ‘malakah’ is another point of
importance in relation to intellectual culture and technical and
scientific and linguistic skills. The word ‘malakah’ is used by him to
mean established habit in the human personality; he applies it to
linguistic, intellectual and mechanical skills. That is why he speaks of
‘malakah’ in language, writing, doing things in the physical and
mechanical sense, as well as ‘malakah’ in spirituality and spiritual
devotions and ethical qualities in the personality and the soul. And
this ‘malakah’ is to be obtained by training, repetition, actual act of
doing things, thinking, in short by making intellectual, physical,
technical, linguistic and spiritual activities, repeating again and
again until these become established in the soul; it becomes, as it
were, in the expression of the present like “swimming in water for fish
and flying in the air for birds”. He even speaks of ‘malakah’ in ‘ibadah
and matters of faith.
This discourse about thinking and intellectual
culture, with the various modes of thinking, leading to various types of
intellectual capabilities, in advanced settled urban centers of
civilization, including fostering ‘al-‘aq al-mazid’, is indeed relevant
for the present day Muslims in uplifting them to the intellectual
awareness so urgently needed in facing the present global situation.
This is the text which will help them to develop this awareness leading
to the necessary action in remedying their situation in the intellectual
and technological fields.
And in relation to the importance of developing
strong well established customary practices in civilization which will
ensure stability and strength, he says:
Sedentary people observe (a) particular (code
of) manners (‘adab’) in everything they undertake and do or do not do,
and they thus acquire certain ways of making a living, finding
dwellings, building houses, and handling their religious and worldly
matters (‘wa umur al-din wa al-dunya’), including their customary
affairs, their dealings with others (wa ‘adatihim wa mu’amalatihim’),
and all the rest of their activities. Thesse manners (‘adab’) constitute
a kind of limitation which may not be transgressed, and at the same
time, they are crafts (‘sana’i’) (that) later generations take over from
the earlier ones. No doubt, each craft has a proper place within the
arrangement of the crafts, influences the soul and causes it to acquire
an additional intelligence (‘al ‘aql al-mazid’), which prepares the soul
for accepting still other crafts. The intellect is thus conditioned for
a quick reception of knowledge. (47)
Next, the present writer would like to comment
favourably on his contribution on the concept of ‘asabiyyah or group
feeling, which is originally based on blood relationship but later
extended to other lasting relationship making people loyal to one
another.
Of course this is not within the ‘asabiyyah
which is prohibited by the Prophet in the tradition meaning ‘Not among
us is he who calls people to ‘asabiyyah’ or ‘who dies in ‘asabiyyah’
(48). The ‘asabiyyah prohibited by the Prophet is defined in the
tradition as ‘you help your brother in injustice’ (49). And in Islamic
legal discourse, Imam al-Nawawi says that when a person loves his people
and his group and family, that is not ‘asabiyyah (prohibited by the
Prophet – uem) and hence if he is a witness his testimony for his people
and friend is accepted by the court and not rejected. (50) This
‘asabiyyah can be synonym for “positive nationalism” of Said Nursi – may
Allah shower His mercy on him – when he says: “Positive nationalism
arises from an inner need of social life and is the cause of mutual
assistance and solidarity, it ensures a beneficial strength; it means
for further strengthening Islamic brotherhood.” (51) Ibn Khaldun himself
cites in its support the tradition meaning “Allah has not sent a
prophet but he is under the protection of the strength of his people (fi
man’atin min qaumihi’)”. And he says when a prophet who is capable of
doing things with miracles is still supported by Allah with the
‘asabiyyah of his people then we all the more need this support.
Hence this positive nationalism or ‘asabiyyah
should be supported and encouraged so that effective reforms can be done
within the Muslim society as a basis for seriolus and planned
civilizational efforts.
Negative qualities:
Negative qualities which are likely to cause
downfall of civilization should be avoided: loss of ‘asabiyyah by taking
the necessary steps to stem the tide, succumbing to excessive luxurious
life should be checked by invitation to life of moderation with
religious and spiritual education and exhortation, life of ease should
be checked by educating people in the life of discipline, intellectual
laxity is to be checked by encouraging intellectual activity and
excellence, life of immorality is to be checked by education,
exhortation, example, law enforcement, and improvement in family values
and neighbourly responsibility in the light of Islamic values. And
excessive entertainment culture should be checked by providing
alternative modules and education in healthy artistic activities.
Wallahu a’lam.
Conclusion:
In conclusion this paper argues that the
Khaldunian intellectual and civilizational discourse is of paramount
importance for the present times –together with other mainstream Islamic
discourses of that category-for helping Muslims to regenerate their
identity and civilization while coming to grips with the present
cultural and intellectual challenges of this age. The Khaldunian
discourse giving helpful suggestions in the domains of world-view,
epistemology, axiology, and civilizational guidance in the educational,
social, and cultural arena plus the all important emphasis on
intellectual culture and knowledge in an all-embracing view, nurtured in
the tawhidic vision will be most helpful in the efforts towards such a
goal of achieving “the most excellent” community.
Wallahu a’lam
———————————————————————————
Notes:
*Paper presented
at the Conference on Ibn Khaldun organized by the Department of History
at the International Islamic University Malaysia, 23rd July 2003.
(1) Concerning his life and
thought, the following are useful: Mohammad Abdullah Enan, Ibn Khaldun
His Life and Work, Muhammad Aqshraf, Lahore; Walter J. Fischel, Ibn
Khaldun in Egypt, His Public Functions and Historical Research,
1382-1406, in A Study in Islamic Historiography, Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1967; Charles Issawi, An Arab Philosophy of History:
Selections from the prolegomena of Ibn Khaldun 0f Tunis (1332-140-6,
Wisdom of the East Series, London, John Murray, 1950; Muhsin Mahdi, Ibn
Khaldun’s Philosophy of History; A Study in the philosophic Foundations
of the Science of Culture, London, George Allen and Unwin, 1957; Franz
Rosenthal, trans. The Muqaddimah, An Introduction to History, By Ibn
Khaldun, Bollingen Series, XLIII. Princeton, Princeton University Press,
1958;also see “Ibn Khaldun and Thucydides”, in Journal of the American
Oriental Society, vol.92/Number 2/April-June 1972, pp. 250-270 (for
which the present writer is grateful to Dr Muhammad Zainy Uthman of
ISTAC UIAM); “Abd al-Rahman bin Muhammad ibn Khaldun (1332-1406/732-808)
in http://cis-org/voices/k/khaldun_mn.htm; Dr A Zahoor, “Ibn Khaldun”, http://www.salam.muslimonline.com/~azahoor/khaldun.html; also in http://www.ummah_org.uk/history/Scholars/KHALDUN.html; Ibrahim M.Oweiss, “Ibn Khaldun the father of Economics”, http://georgetown.edu/oweiss/ibn.htm;”ibn Khaldun” in www.//britannica.com “home-philosophers-ibn khaldun”, http://www.989.com/Philosophers/Khaldun_ibn.htm; “Letter from Cairo”, http://www.sis.gov.eg/public/letter/htm1/text153.htm; “Economics of Ibn Khaldun”, http://www.uwplatt.edu/~soofi/IBN.html;”History of Economic Thought”, http://www.ecohistory.Amg.com/khaldun .htm; “Political Science”, Prof.R.w.Cox, http://heiwww.unigue.ch/~Krause/gnet/cox.htm;”muslim-1;Great Muslim Scientists”, on ibn Khaldun http://www.//students.missouri.edu/ists/muslim-1/0324htm;Abd al-rahman ibn Khaldun the historian, http://www.islamicresources.com/Prominent_Muslims/others/abdur-rehman-ibn-khaldun-histori.htm; “Lessons from ibn khaldun”, http://www.freepublic.com/forum/a3ac4cb4243a9.htm;”ibn Khaldun’s Contribution to Social Thought”, http://www.build-a-webpage.com/society/aziz6/;ibn Khaldun’s observation on history, empires, http://www.humanistictexts.org.ibn_khaldun.htm; “Ibn Khaldun His Life and Work”, by Muhammad Hozien – http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/klf.htm; Hassan Ali Jamsheer,”Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406). The Muqaddimah – History…”, http://www.ibidem.infocentrum.com/ksiazki/83-907031-3-Osum.html; ”Rise and Fall Ibn Khaldun and the Effects of Taxation Chapter 15”, http://www.ryerson.ca/~lovewell/khaldun.html.
(2) Mohammad Abdullah Enan, Ibn Khaldun His Liufe and Work, pp.9-10.
(3) ibid., p.34.
(4) ibid,p.38.
(5) “Abd al-Rahman bin Muhammad ibn Khaldun…”, (http://www.cis-ca.org/voices/k/khaldun_mn.htm )
(6) Mohammad Abdullah Enan, op. cit., p.67.
(7) Walter J.Fischel, Ibn Khaldun in Egypt…, pp.46- 49
(8) ibid., 67-68.
(9) Abderrahmane Lakhassi, “Ibn
Khaldun” in History of Islamic Philosophy, edited by S.H.Nasr, and O.
Leaman (London:Routledge , 353.cf “Abd al-Rahman bin Muhammad ibn
Khaldun, http://www.cis-ca.org/voices/k/khaldun_mn.htm footnote 26.
(10) James Kalb, “Ibn Khaldun and Our Age”. http://www.counterrevolution.net/kalb_texts/khaldun.html
(11) ibid.
(12) ibid.
(13) ibid.
(14) From Jude Wanniski, “Ibn Khaldun and the Origins of Society”, Supply–Side University Economics Lesson #8 (http://www.polyconomics.com/searchbase/11-12-99.html)
(15) Ibid …
(16) ibid. (11-19-99.html.)
(18) ibid.
(19) ibid.
(20) John W. Bennet “Comments on
‘Renaissance Foundations of Anthropology’, originally appeared in
American Anthropology, 68:215-226, 1991, then in www.eaanet.org/gad/history/Ollrowecomment.pdf.
(21) ibid.
(23) “Graduate Seminars in Cultural and Critical Studies Fall 2003” in http://www.english.pitt.edu/graduate /Seminars.htm
(25) ibid.
(26) In “INQUIRY. Refloating the Intellectual Enterprise of Islam”, in http://www.salaam.co.uk/knowledge/inquiry3.php
(27) in “Ibn Khaldun and Education”, in http://www.renaissance.com.pk/novrefl2y1.html
(28) ibid.
(30) ibid.
(32) ibid.
(33) Cited in Issawi, op.cit, cf.ibid.
(34) ibid.
(35) ibid.
(36) Akbar Ahmed, “Ibn Khaldun’s Understanding of Civilizations and the Dilemmas of Islam and the West To-Day” (http://www.mideasti.org/pdf/ibnKhaldun20-45.pdf)
(38) ibid.
(39)
Incidentally the “Malay” concept in the present understanding is not
racist but rather cultural and civilizational, because being “Melayu”
is: being a Muslim, speaking Malay and practicing Malay customs. This is
very much asking to ‘asabiyyah principle of ibn Khaldun, even though
originally concerned with blood relationship then later extended to
other relationships of long standing in life.
(40) Al-Muqaddimah, tr Rosenthal vol. 3, pp. 38-39.
(41) ibid., p. 40.
(42) ibid. p. 41.
(43) ibid.p. 43.
(44) Muqaddimah, tr. F. Rosenthal, vol. 2, pp. 411ff.
(45) ibid. vol.2. p. 412.
(46) ibid.2. p. 413.
(47) ibid.2. p. 432.
(48) hadith no. 7657 in the Kanz al-‘Ummal of Muttaqi al-Hindi.
(49) ibid. hadith no. 7654.
(50) See Raud al-talibin vol.IV on witnesses and their conditions.
(51) http://www.risale-inur.com.tr/rnk/eng/letters/26letter.html