2020-04-04T09:35:00-13:00
Why did Muslims and Arabs not care about Ibn Khaldun’s thought?!
I remember that I read this question for the first time in an article by an Arab thinker in the Kuwaiti Al-Arabi magazine, and I think it was Jaber Al-Ansari… and the magazine contained a complete file on Ibn Khaldun as a celebration of this personality.
The truth is… I always find this question asked in cultural magazines, on the Internet, in newspapers, or as the title of seminars or research papers… But I have come to find this question provocative for me and for the average reader, and the reason is because it is a question that tries to hide an aspect… Important information about this material that has reached us from this character.
Because this question is supposed to be preceded by asking many questions, including how did this material reach us, and how can we be sure of the existence of this character, because it may be a fake character (such as fake Facebook accounts) that assume fake names. But the most important reason is because this question is always asked by Arab thinkers.
The questions may seem funny and ridiculous to some people, and I really do not want to present a result and impose it as a reality without proof, and we are not here in an arena of heroics, claims, and belittlement of anyone.
No…..but because before asking this question, logical questions must be asked by these thinkers.
For example… I will ask the thinker Jaber Al-Ansari, and I do not know if he is still alive or if Allah has passed away:
What is the scientific and logical evidence that confirms that the texts that have reached us from Ibn Khaldun’s book were written in the year 1350 AD, that is, 650 years ago?! ……A very legitimate scientific and logical question…from an ordinary reader.
This is not the only question, but there are other logical questions:
Why did Ibn Khaldun write this encyclopedic book?!
Did he write this encyclopedia because he wanted to make financial profits from the sales of his book?! Or did he write it not for a material purpose, but rather for the sake of science and knowledge, and this characteristic is found among scholars… Or did he write it at the request of a governmental body (the ruler of a country)?!
If it is for the sake of the material….. Is it possible that this encyclopedia will be accessible to every Muslim or Arab person, so that our thinkers will ask their usual question: Why did Arabs and Muslims ignore Ibn Khaldun’s thought?!
Because if Ibn Khaldun wrote for financial profit…that is, he was waiting for people to copy his encyclopedia, then it would be distributed and sold everywhere in Misr or in the entire region, for example.
But how much time would a scribe need to write his encyclopedia?!
The first copyist will need time to copy the original author, and he needs a known time, then a second copyist will come and copy from the first copy while the first copyist copies from the original author, then a third copyist will come and copy from the second copy, and so on.
How much time does a copyist need?!
Let’s say every copyist needs a month to be able to copy Ibn Khaldun’s work.
The duration of writing 20 copies will be one year… If the number of copyists was 100… then they would need 5 years, so that the total number of copies would be 5000 copies.
5000 copies after 5 years.
5,000 copies will be sold in Misr and the region.
Does the topic seem logical?!
If we distribute 5,000 copies in Misr and the region, we will have 5,000 people in the region who own the Ibn Khaldun Encyclopedia.
Is 5,000 people in the entire region a measure that creates general awareness in the region, making us ask such a question: Why did the Arabs ignore Ibn Khaldun’s thought?!
But what is interesting and strange about the matter is that there is only one manuscript of Ibn Khaldun’s book, according to what is said in France, and there is no complete copy of this manuscript available on the Internet.
Where are the rest of the 5,000 manuscripts of the Ibn Khaldun Encyclopedia, which scribes wrote and distributed in the region when we asked this question: Why did the Arabs and Muslims ignore Ibn Khaldun?!
Imagine, out of 5,000 copies written a relatively recent period of 600 years ago, only one copy remains in the region and it is in France… The logical question then is: Why is this question always asked when we only have one existing manuscript? in France?!
But if Ibn Khaldun had written his encyclopedia for the sake of knowledge only and not for the sake of financial return, which seems the closest to logic… then I think that the encyclopedia would be just one copy, or let’s say ten copies, present in the state’s libraries, especially since the subject of financial return. The profit from writing books in the past was not like today. Writing is linked to the efforts of a state and its revenue comes from the ruler.
The logical question is: Will the presence of a copy or ten copies of Ibn Khaldun’s work available in the libraries of the state or the ruler and not within the reach of the ordinary citizen…make asking such a question (Why ignore the Arabs and Muslims) a logical matter? !
Knowing that only one manuscript of Ibn Khaldun’s work has reached us, and we have not seen it and it is not available to anyone, but rather it is in France. This makes asking such a question provocative.
Note: One copy of Ibn Khaldun’s book makes it legally binding for the manuscript to be uploaded to the Internet, and it is copied into a PDF file…and has an approved stamp from the Ministry of Culture in France…so that it becomes the approved copy of the manuscript and is accessible to everyone to be a guarantee until A copy of Ibn Khaldun’s book is not printed with new additions, so that no party can forge it.
One copy of Ibn Khaldun’s manuscript… makes it logical to believe… that there is a high probability that the people of the region did not know Ibn Khaldun’s ideas at that time… but rather a high probability that this person was not known in the region. .
Yes, the possibility is high……..Ibn Khaldun was not known in the region 650 years ago. From this possibility, posing our question became scientifically and logically legitimate.
What is the scientific and logical evidence that confirms that the texts that have reached us from Ibn Khaldun’s book were written in the year 1350 AD, that is, 650 years ago?!
If we look at the history that talks about the first appearance of Ibn Khaldun’s book, we will find the following:
Ibn Khaldun was not discovered until the nineteenth century by Westerners and not by Arabs. As soon as Ibn Khaldun’s name appeared, many Western historians considered Ibn Khaldun to be considered “the greatest theorist of the philosophy of history of all time, the author of famous theories about the course and movement of human history, and one of the founders of political sociology.”
His book (Introduction), the first part of his book (Lessons), forms the basis for a new science, which is “the science of urbanization,” and is concerned with the development of human societies. Ibn Khaldun’s theories were used by sociologists, economists, historians, philosophers, and history experts.
■ The first attempts to benefit from Ibn Khaldun’s legacy were made by the Turkish historian Mustafa Naima in 1609, who is one of the most famous historians of the Ottoman Empire.
■ In 1818, the Austrian historian and philosopher Hammer Borstival translated Ibn Khaldun’s works into Greek. He greatly admired Ibn Khaldun and called him “the Montesquieu of the Arabs.”
■ However, the first version of Ibn Khaldun’s Introduction consisted of 3 volumes, edited by the French orientalist Ellen Marc Cartemer. This version was published in 1858 in Paris, France.
■ After the first version……… the introduction was quickly translated into more than twenty languages, in addition to publishing hundreds of books, research and articles about it, and scientific and research centers still rely on this introduction in developing curricula in education, sociology, history, and other topics. the sciences.
This story and this history really raises suspicion, and increases the logic of our question about what is the evidence, what is the scientific evidence that confirms that those texts that have reached us from Ibn Khaldun’s book were written in the year 1350 AD, that is, 650 years ago, and what is the evidence that they are A real person who lived in the year 1350?!
These doubts make us search and investigate the history that we have reached around that era, and try to find this character in the writings of writers of that era in Misr and the region.
In fact, the personality of Ibn Khaldun is not my topic today. My topic is related to another aspect related to the issue, which I found while researching this personality.
What is the matter then?!
When I decided to research in the beginning……. I did not think of searching for Ibn Khaldun by studying the manuscript and the material traces left behind. Rather, the beginning was to search for Ibn Khaldun in the writings of those who lived with Ibn Khaldun in Misr and the region or those who came. After him.
But the truth is… I encountered during the research a very strange feeling. I did not know what it was… The strange feeling was coming while I was reading the books of Al-Maqrizi, who lived in the same period as Ibn Khaldun, and whoever does not know Al-Maqrizi is considered the mayor. Historians in Misr in that period.
I did not realize the reasons for that feeling until I stopped and contemplated for a long time, trying to understand the reasons for that feeling.
Al-Maqrizi’s style of writing, his language, his methodology, and his way of thinking are very similar to Ibn Khaldun…even in their scientific, humanistic and economic theories with which they preceded Western scholars in the nineteenth century.
Al-Maqrizi is an exact copy of Ibn Khaldun.
Weird and strange
At that time, I had not researched Al-Maqrizi’s matter……..but at that point I forgot Ibn Khaldun and stopped focusing on his matter, and I continued reading Al-Maqrizi’s books, writings, ideas, and general view of things for a period of time.
Something really strange, the same mentality… Ibn Khaldun and Al-Maqrizi.
I searched through articles and research to hope I would find someone who would notice my observation.
It is true that this observation was not made by any researcher directly before, but many researchers have said it, but indirectly, and they talk about the methodological characteristics of the two men, which are identical characteristics.
Is it possible that the two men are the product of a societal awareness that was dominant at that period and that created this similarity between the two mentalities?!
It may be a logical answer, but their writing style is also similar, but it may also be the result of a writing style that was dominant in that period.
Is there another explanation?!
I developed another different hypothesis to explain this correspondence, and I tried to see…whether the hypothesis’s prediction would come true accurately…if it is correct, then I believe that the issue is approaching the theory.
I have hypothesized that the author of Al-Maqrizi’s books is the same as the author of Ibn Khaldun’s book.
And when I went to search for Al-Maqrizi and the first copy of Matthew’s writing that appeared… I actually found that the investigator of Al-Maqrizi’s books was the same person who verified the book of Ibn Khaldun.
He is the French orientalist Catermire.
————————
Who is Catermere?!
Cartemir (1782 AD – 1857 AD) was a French orientalist concerned with Islamic history. He was also interested in publishing many Arabic manuscripts. He was fluent in Greek, and he also mastered most Semitic languages.
He was born in Paris on July 12, 1782. His genius appeared very early, as he knew how to read at the age of three. When he was five years old, he had read many books. After the tragic death of his father, he continued his studies. After he completed high school, he began studying science, especially botany, mineralogy, and mathematics. He thought about going to engineering school.
But his true inclinations were soon revealed, so he began to study oriental languages, starting with Hebrew, and from there he moved to the Arabic language, so he followed the lessons of Sylvester de Sacy at the Collège de France.
He was appointed in the Manuscripts Department of the National Library in Paris for a period of time, then left this job to become a professor of Greek language and literature at the Faculty of Arts at the University of Rouen (in northern France).
He returned to Paris in 1811, and remained there until the end of his life.
In 1815, he was elected a member of the Academy of Inscriptions and Letters.
In 1819, he was appointed professor at the Collège de France, with the chair of Hebrew, Syriac, and Chaldean languages.
In 1832, he succeeded Professor Chèzy in the chair of the Persian language at the School of Oriental Languages in Paris, in addition to being a professor at the Collège de France, where he remained until the end of his life.
He died in October 1857 in Paris.
His first production in Oriental Studies was a study entitled: “Critical and Historical Research on Language and Literature in Misr,” which he published in 1808. In these studies, he proved that the language of ancient Misr must be researched in the Coptic language. This was an assumption that Jablonski had previously made, but without evidence. Katermer came and presented conclusive proof of the validity of this assumption.
Katermer’s research was the starting point for research that led, a few years later, to solving the problem of hieroglyphic writing. However, he stopped at this first step, and did not see that it was possible to follow this path any further, to the point that he never believed in what Champollion later discovered in deciphering hieroglyphic writing – based on the Rosetta Stone inscriptions – and what he wrote on that subject. In three books that appeared between 1821 and 1828.
Since he was appointed professor of “Hebrew, Syriac, and Chaldean languages” at the Collège de France – and he held this chair for nearly forty years – he focused on studies related to the Old Testament of the Bible.
In the field of the Phoenician language, Catermir is credited with discovering the exact form of the relative noun in the Phoenician language. His discovery was supported by reading the long inscriptions that were later discovered in Marseille (France) and Sidon (Lebanon).
In the field of Aramaic studies, Katermer was the first to highlight the importance of the book “Nabataean Farming,” a book of Syriac origin, of which only its Arabic translation, which was completed in the third century AH, remains. Katermer explained that this book is a book on agriculture that was written in Babylon during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. Research subsequently continued on this book, due to the strong disagreement among researchers in determining the time of its writing.
In the field of Arab and Islamic studies:
1 – The second part of the book “Conduct to Know the Countries of Kings” by Al-Maqrizi (Paris, 1837-1845) was published in two volumes, with a translation into French and his linguistic, historical, and geographical comments, and an introduction containing a translation of Al-Maqrizi’s life.
2 – He thought about translating Al-Maqrizi’s “plans” into French, and he actually translated a large portion of them.
3 – The first part of the History of the Mongols of Persia, written by Rashid al-Din, was published, with a French translation and abundant comments, 1836.
4 – He wrote several articles about: Abdullah bin Al-Zubair, the Umayyads, the Abbasids, and the Fatimids, as well as about the book “Proverbs” by Al-Maydani, the book “Songs” by Abu Al-Faraj Al-Isfahani, and about the life and writings of Al-Masoudi.
5 – More importantly than all of this, the critical reviewer of Ibn Khaldun’s “Introduction” was published in three volumes, in Paris 1858.
————————
Did Katermeier write historical books for us, create two virtual characters for us (or two fake Facebook accounts) and attribute these writings to them to create a new historical memory for us?!
The truth cannot be determined with certainty on this point.
But I believe………that the intellectual structure existing in the West does not exclude anything from them……..Deception, trickery, lying, forgery and filth are inherent in their history and they occupy the world…… …… They have a project based on obliterating the knowledge of others by various means and methods, and they are trying to make their knowledge and texts the only human knowledge.
For me………..I find the two characters from the imagination of this orientalist who was on an official mission for the French government to write a new history and memory for Arabs and Muslims that would serve their project in the region.
Allah willing, we will have a comprehensive comparison between Al-Maqrizi and Ibn Khaldun from all aspects, so that we can notice the great similarity in the mentality of the two and their writing style.
But let me…… In this article, I give you one simple example of the view of both Al-Maqrizi and Ibn Khaldun towards a scientific and historical issue. Sorry, not Al-Maqrizi and not Ibn Khaldun, but the view of Catermere himself on this scientific issue.
The issue is the handwriting
But before reviewing the opinions, we must remember very important observations related to Catermere that we mentioned in our conversation about this person, and these observations are:
1- Catermer lived during the French campaign against Misr, which led to the decoding of the inscriptions of ancient Misr.
2- He wrote a study on the language of Misr and published it in 1808. He proved in these studies that the language of ancient Misr must be researched in the Coptic language. He provided conclusive proof of the validity of this assumption.
3- Catermeyer was interested in the history of Misr in the Middle Ages, the era of the Mamluk state in Misr, and the Egyptian language of the Egyptians in Misr in the Mamluk era.
4- Pay attention to the works of Ibn Wahshiyah, who is considered the first to write a book about pens and calligraphy.
5- He was fluent and mastered many ancient Eastern languages.
Now, what do Al-Maqrizi and Ibn Khaldun say about writing?!
■ Taqi al-Din al-Maqrizi says: “The Musnad pen is the first pen of the pens of Himyar and the kings of Ad.”
Ibn Khaldun says in his introduction in a chapter that calligraphy and writing are among human crafts:
The Arabic calligraphy was as great as it was in terms of precision, mastery, and quality in the Tuba`a state, with its civilization and luxury. It is called the Himyari script, and it moved from there to al-Hira, because it had in it the state of the Al-Mundhir family, the Tuba`a’s relatives in tribalism and the innovators of the Arab kingship in the land of Iraq, and it was not Their calligraphy is as proficient as it was during the succession, due to the shortcomings between the two countries, and civilization and its related industries and other things were deficient in that. From Al-Hira, the people of Taif and Quraysh taught him what was mentioned. It is said that the one who learned writing from Al-Hira was Sufyan bin Umayyah, and it is said that Harb bin Umayyah, and he took it from Aslam bin Sidra, which is a possible statement. The closest of those who said that they learned it from the hands of the people of Iraq is the saying of their poet: A people who will have the arena of Iraq if…they all walk, with the calligraphy and the pen. This is a far-fetched statement, because even if the Iyads came to Iraq, they were still nomads, and calligraphy is an urban craft. The saying that the people of Hijaz were taught it by Al-Hira, and the people of Al-Hira were taught by the Taaba’a and Himyar, is the most appropriate statement.
Himyar had a script called Musnad, with separate letters, and they were forbidden from learning it without their permission. From Himyar, Misr learned Arabic writing, but they were not proficient in it like the crafts that were done by the Bedouins, so they were not of strict doctrine nor inclined to mastery. The writing of the Arabs was Bedouin, similar to or close to their writing for this era, or we say that their writing for this era was better crafted, because they were closer to civilization and mixed with regions and countries. As for Mudar, they were more ancient among the Bedouins and farther away from urban areas than the people of Yemen, the people of Iraq, the people of the Levant, and Misr, so the script was The Arab at the beginning of Islam did not reach the goal of precision, mastery, and proficiency, nor did he reach the level of mediation in the place of the Arabs in terms of nomadism, savagery, and distance from crafts.”
I finish .
Note that the two men were interested in one subject and that they lived in the same era and in Misr, but the first spoke briefly and the other spoke at length, but the two spoke in a stupid, constructive style about a scientific subject, and they were the authors of scientific theories that preceded Western scientists.
But the important question
How did Al-Maqrizi know the Musnad script?! How did Ibn Khaldun know that Himyar had a script called Musnad, with separate letters?!
Did Al-Maqrizi or Ibn Khaldun travel to Yemen and see it, or did he read it from books that came to him, and how did he know that the Musnad was the beginning of the pen?!
But the inscriptions and writings found in Yemen do not compare at all to the size of the inscriptions and writings found in Misr… It is true that the inscriptions in Yemen are many, but the ones in Misr are much more prominent and very clear, and are not buried in the ground, but rather It is very prominent inside very large temples and it is impossible for it to be buried… Rather, it is in places that indicate the presence of very continuous care and interest in it… And it is impossible to believe that these huge temples were buried under the sand in the era of Ibn Khaldun. And Al-Maqrizi, even if any ordinary person in Misr digs a place with his own hand, he will find ancient ruins.
So how do the two talk about writing in Yemen and the Musnad script that exists in a place very far away from them, while the two completely and clearly ignore the writing that exists in Misr, when they have lived in Misr for nearly 30 years?!
I mean, throughout the life of Al-Maqrizi and Ibn Khaldun, they did not notice any ancient inscriptions in Misr?! Is it possible that the two men never encountered any archaeological discovery in their lives, nor did they see the temples of Misr or visit one of those temples that are very, very high above the surface of the earth and that it is impossible for them to be buried underground?!
Is it possible that Al-Maqrizi talked about the Musnad calligraphy that was far away from him, and he saw it and said that it was the first pen, but at the same time he was present in Misr and did not talk about the calligraphy that existed in Misr and did not see the correspondence between the Musnad calligraphy and the calligraphy in Misr and the fact that the calligraphy was in Misr? Is it the first pen?!
Is it possible that Ibn Khaldun talks about the Musnad script as an Arabic script, but he calls it the Himyarite script and the Musnad script, and he saw it and knew that its letters are separate, and he did not visit Yemen, but at the same time he lived in Misr for 25 years, and he never saw the script that exists in Misr. He did not see its separate letters either…. He did not see the correspondence between the Musnad pen and the pen in Misr and the clear origins between the two, to make him tell us a magical fantasy story in imaginary worlds and talk about the pen’s first journey?!
How does Ibn Khaldun talk about the Musnad script in such detail, which indicates that it comes from an informed person who is well acquainted with this issue? He says that it is the Musnad script with separate letters and gives us information as a fact that says (and from Himyar Misr learned Arabic writing) and he never visited Yemen at all. But he lived in Misr for about 25 years and never talks about Egyptian inscriptions, nor does he see the reality that exists around him in Misr, and Ibn Khaldun did not compare the Musnad script that he talked about with the script that exists in Misr….. until he realized Ibn Khaldun according to his rational, scientific and realistic approach… This approach, which Western and Arab thinkers always talk about in lengthy articles, created for him a great aura and cognitive authority over the minds of our Arab thinkers… until Ibn Khaldun realized that the Musnad and script in Misr are identical. And that the Musnad script was born from the womb of calligraphy in Misr, and that the Musnad script came from Misr, and that Himyar was the one who learned Arabic writing from Misr….. and not the opposite, according to the words of Ibn Khaldun, the owner of the scientific, realistic and rational approach. ..until he realizes that the first book exists in Misr and all the pens in the region came out of the pen in Misr.
Strange, strange, unrealistic and illogical
Were Al-Maqrizi and Ibn Khaldun… working for the benefit of the West, Napoleon, and the French military campaign against Misr and the region, which destroyed the inscriptions of Misr and the region? Did Al-Maqrizi and Ibn Khaldun not want any Egyptian, Arab or Muslim to approach Egyptian inscriptions at all, and did they not want to talk about the pen in Misr and alert the reader to its presence in the ancient world… and did they not want to provide any knowledge about that pen? What do the Egyptian inscriptions contain and the truth about the Rosetta Stone that France brought, and they want to leave the task of talking about calligraphy in Misr to other figures of Greek nationalities working for the French campaign?!
This strange, unnatural and unrealistic style, which does not want to talk about the inscriptions of Misr, confirms that we are actually facing a mind that writes for us an imaginary virtual world and is drawing a picture of this world in which the inscriptions of Misr are completely hidden from the reality that is connected to us today….. This mind is nothing but the mind of a very malicious and cunning European colonialist… and he is trying to carry out a process of knowledge obliteration and write a new memory for the people of Misr and the people of the region.
This was done after the West succeeded in creating a new time for the region through the Ottomans… and it is now writing a history for this new calendar… so that it becomes people’s new memory instead of their original memories… …a project to remove people from reality and bring them into a virtual, imaginary fantasy space…to remove them from their connection to the Earth and make it disconnected from their reality, and to make the Earth not belong to them.
Actually, he is Catermere… and he was working within the project that came with the West and Napoleon… who came with armies to occupy Misr and the region… and Catermere created two fake accounts on Facebook, the first in the name of Al-Maqrizi and the second in the name of Ibn Khaldun… ..on the basis that they are two Arab and Muslim accounts who lived in ancient Misr…while it is an account of one of the descendants of Shaytan………and he published historical information about an imaginary world in the account, so that it is the origin and reality of the world. From which the Muslim and the Arab emerged, so that it would be the new memory, which erases the original memory, so as to prevent any Muslim and Arab from reaching the first pen with which the sacred text they hold was written.
{And they plotted their plot, and with Allah is their plot, even though it was their plot, the mountains would move away from it.}
.
.