|
The
Autochthonous Epoch
|
By
Chandra Muzaffar**
|
July
04, 2005
|
|
|
|
Muslim savants such as Ibn Al-Nadim and As-Shahrastani in the 10th and 11th centuries wrote with much warmth about the exemplary qualities of the Buddhists living in their midst in parts of what is today’s Iran and Afghanistan.
|
The
autochthonous epoch is the epoch of indigenous, independent kingdoms and
empires, which spanned long centuries of Asian history. During this period,
there were both positive and negative elements in the interaction between
civilizations on the continent. Chinese scholars traveled to India to study
Buddhism, just as Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese literati journeyed to China
to imbibe Confucian ethics. Muslim rulers dialogued with Christian and Jewish
notables in parts of West Asia in the eighth and ninth centuries while Muslim
savants such as Ibn-a-Nadim and as-Shahrastani in the 10th and 11th centuries
wrote with much warmth about the exemplary qualities of the Buddhists living in
their midst in parts of what is today Iran and Afghanistan. [1]
An even more outstanding example of an Islamic scholar reaching out to the Other
was Abu Rayhan Muhammad ibn Ahmad Al-Biruni (973-1051 CE). He not only studied
Hinduism, Christianity, and Judaism but also developed principles for the
comparative analysis of religions. It is remarkable that he tried to be as
objective and unbiased as possible in examining the tenets and practices of
religions other than his own. Al-Biruni’s Kitab al-Hind, which probes
Hinduism and Hindu society is a brilliant testimony to this. By studying the
religion and civilization of the Hindus, Al-Biruni hoped it would be easier for
the Muslims to dialogue with them. As he put it, “The
flow of religious and cultural ideas across civilizational boundaries was part
and parcel of a larger flow involving ideas on science, technology,
architecture, and art.”
“We
think now that what we have related in this book (Kitab al-Hind) will be
sufficient for anyone who wants to converse with the Hindus, and to discuss with
them questions of religion, science, or literature on the very basis of their
own civilization.” [2]
Through the scientific study of other religions and civilizations, Al-Biruni, in
a sense, paved the way for the dialogue of civilizations. At a time when the
world is beginning to recognize the vital importance of civilizational
dialogue—as reflected in the United Nations’ proclamation of 2001 as the
year of the dialogue of civilizations—it behooves us to remember the
pioneering role of that celebrated interlocutor, Al-Biruni.
The flow of religious and cultural ideas across civilizational boundaries was
part and parcel of a larger flow involving ideas on science, technology,
architecture, and art. Between China and the Arab world, the Arab world and
India, and India and South-East Asia, there was an active exchange of knowledge
and information which, though restricted to a small elite, was nonetheless
significant. It was through such creative interaction that Islamic civilization,
which absorbed ideas in both the sciences and the humanities from every
conceivable source, became the storehouse of knowledge for the whole of
humankind between the 8th and 13th centuries (Kramer).
In this transmission and synthesis of ideas, trade between different states and
empires in Asia played a major role. The famous silk route, for instance, not
only facilitated the exchange of goods but also enabled illustrious cities to
flourish in what is today central Asia—cities such as Samarkand and Bokhara,
which became homes to great libraries and museums. Likewise, trade between China
and Southeast Asia brought with it ideas on public administration, town
planning, architecture, and aesthetics from the former to the latter. [3]
 |
|
The Muslim scholar Al-Biruni profoundly studied the religions of Asia and published a historical work about Hindu civilization.
|
It should be emphasized, however, that while there was intellectual and cultural
exchange among an infinitesimal few at the apex of the different civilizations,
the vast majority of people lived within their own geographical and social
spheres, hardly interacting with outside elements. Needless to say, communities
in the distant past, bound by kinship ties and ethnic relationships, were much
more culturally homogenous and physically insulated than they are today. “The
cultural or religious Other” just did not exist in their thinking. To put it
in another way, communities of antiquity were simply oblivious of other cultures
and civilizations. This was understandable, given the nature of political
organizations, the type of economic activities, and the modes of communication
in what were largely agrarian societies.
Even when communities and cultures came into contact with one another, it was
not always peaceful. The history of Asia is littered with tales of wars and
conflicts, sometimes between adherents of different faiths and sects. The
underlying causes of these conflagrations might not have been linked to
religious doctrines or religious practices but they undoubtedly exacerbated
intercommunity relations (Muzaffar). The victor would be subjected to ethnic
stereotyping just as the vanquished would be the victim of communal prejudice.
Of course in some instances, after a generation or two, adverse sentiments about
the Other were gradually eradicated. This had happened in a number of Muslim
societies where the more all encompassing Muslim identity appears to have been
successful in at least minimizing communal consciousness. Even in their
treatment of non-Muslim communities, Muslim states often ensured that their
religious and cultural rights were protected, and that they had the freedom to
participate in the economic and social life of the larger society in which these
minorities were domiciled. [4]
Sources:
-
Kramer,
Martine. “Islam’s Sober Millennium,” Commentary in Petaling Jaya:
International Movement for a Just World, No. 43, New Series, December 2000.
-
Muzaffar,
Chandra. “Religious Conflict in Asia in Rights,” Religion & Reform,
London: Curzon, 2001.
Endnotes
[1]
For Shahrastani’s thinking see Bruce Lawrence Shahrastani on the Indian
Religions, Moulton, Moulton & Co. 1976
[2]
Quoted in Kamar Oniah Kamaruzaman “Early Muslim Scholarship in
Religionswissenschaft: A case study of the Works and Contributions of Abu
Rayhan,” Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Al-Biruni, Dissertation for the Degree of Doctor
of Philosophy, Kuala Lumpur, International Institute of Islamic Thought and
Civilisation (ISTAC), 1996 p 58.
[3]
For an analysis of trade between China and Southeast Asia see Wang Gungwu, Community
and Nation: Essays on Southeast Asia and the Chinese, Kuala Lumpur/Hong
Kong: Heinemann Educational Books (Asia) Ltd., especially the chapters on Early
Ming Relations with Southeast Asia, China and Southeast Asia 1402-1424 and The
Opening of Relations between China and Malacca 1403-1405.
[4]
The philosophical and ideological basis of universalism and pluralism in Islam
is discussed in Farid Esack’s Quran Liberation and Pluralism, Oxford:
One World 1997, and Muddathir ‘Abd a-Rahim’s Islam and Non-Muslim
Minorities, Monograph, Penang: Just World Trust, 1997.
Read
Also:
**
Chandra
Muzaffar is the
President of the International Movement for a Just World, which seeks to raise
public awareness of the moral and intellectual basis of global justice. A
political scientist, he was the first Director of the Centre for Civilisational
Dialogue at the University of Malaya and has also written numerous books on
religion, human rights, Malaysian politics, and international relations,
including most recently, Rights, Religion, and Reform (Routledge Curzon, 2002.)
Additionally, he sits on the boards of several international non-governmental
organizations concerned with social justice and civilizational dialogue.
|
